Was required eled with genderbased distinctions but they all operated benignly in womens favor. Like a woman didnt have to serve on a jury if she didnt want to. So that was a benefit. The eavesdropping reflected curiosity. And i think that that is what drew me as a lawyer. I mean i always tell people, and its not the perfect analogy. But being a lawyer is like being a voier in other peoples lives. You participate more than voiers do, thankfully, but in every case you get to learn how people or an industry or a Government Entity interacts in the world. What they do and what is important to them. And to be able to enjoy that process, i think you have to have curiosity. And so listening to others in their conversations was a way of teaching may self things that i would not have otherwise thought so easily. Rose an encore conversation of two Supreme Court justices when we continue. Funding for charlie rose is provided by the following kl and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and Information Services worldwide. Captioning sponsored by Rose Communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. Rose tonight a rare conversation with two Supreme Court justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg burg and sonia sotomayor. As you know the sprem court kicked off its term this month with only eight justices following the death of Supreme Court antonin scalia. Tonight we hear all about the court and the love of law from two justices. Let may just begin and take note of the fact that they both have written books, sotomayors book was called my beloved world. Justice ginsburgs book was called my own word which was a compilation of speeches and essays that she has written. And i want to start with this. Just looking back on your life, Justice Ginsburg and thinking even though it was incorporated in speeches, what was that like for you to put your own life in focus, and how was that . In my own words as you said is a collection of speeches, tributes to colleagues. Its not. Rose a biography. Its not a biography of me to the extent this my life is told, its in the introa ductory pass ages that my official biographers wrote. That biography will come out sometime in the distant future. laughter your book, my beloved world, you said i am my mother. What did you mean . As i tell her, good and bad. I am my mothers she aspired to be more than her sirks. She wanted to desperately go to college. And she lived in the poorest circumstances in her home community. And she would watch the College Girls walk by her house going to the post office cuz that was the center of the town social life at the time. And all she drement about is some day going to college and getting my brother and i into college was her living her dream. Now she wanted me to be a journalist. I dont think she was ever convinced that there was much value in law. Perhaps when i got out of Supreme Court she might have changed her mind. But i lived that dream for her. And i have lived all of her dreams because she set the example for me of strifing always to do better, to trying to be the best person that i humanly could be because that is what my mother, how my mother lived her life. So i try to emulate all of those things in my mother that are the best. And then when i do the things that are bad, i remind her that that is the problem with being a little you copy everything, you know. Rose you once said that watching childs listen in on adult conversation was an important aspect of growing up for you. Sure who doesnt like to eaves drop. But i think that the eavesdropping reflecting curiosity. And i think that that is what drove me as a lawyer. I always tell people, and its not the perfect analogy but being a lawyer is being like a voyer into other peoples lives. You participate a little more than voyures do, thankfully, but you get to in every case, you get to learn about how people or an industry or a Government Entity interacts in the world. What they do and whats important to them. And to be able to enji that process, i think you have to have curiosity. And so listening to others and their conversations was a way of teaching myself things this i would not have otherwise thought so easily. Rose Justice Ginsburg, when did you fall in love with the law . Was that. People sometimes ask me did you always want to be a judge, or more exorbitantly a Supreme Court justice. And when i think of what life was like in this city in the 40see, no girl, it would not be her wildest dream to be a judge because there simply werent any. And when franklin del ano roosevelt a poanted the first woman to a federal Appellate Court in 1934. She stepped down the year i graduated from huh school in 1959 and then there were none. And then john ston appointed shirley halfstet letter. She became the first ever secretary of education and then there were none again. So i didnt think about being a judge until jimmy carter became president of the United States. If you looked around at the federal bunch and you said you know, they all look like me. But thats not how the great United States looks. He was determined to appoint members of minority groups and women in numbers, not as one at a time curiosities. He pointed over 25 women to the Federal District court, the trial bench, and 11 to courts of appeals. And is with one of those lucky 11. No president , by the way, ever went back to the way it was. President reagan didnt want to be outdone so he made a nationwide search for the first woman. Rose Sandra Day Oconnor. And it was a brilliant choice. Rose in fact, you have said that when she left the court, retired, and alito came on it charge marked a change in the court. Yes. Rose because she was gone. Well, i have said more than once that when she left, whenever the court divided fivefour and i was one of the four, i would have been one. Five if she remained with us. So there was that enormous difference. Rose but pie question to going back it both of you have been influenced by people, your mom, your husband marty, your late husband had a huge influence. Yes. Rose what you have you have said to me that you would not have made it to the Supreme Court without him. People who observed at the time said when her name would have been on the list, maybe she would have been 22 or 23 but it was marty who made her number one. Rose how did he do that . He had a little book of people that he contacted. laughter mainly my academic colleagues. In those days i was teaching at well, this was before my first good job, he got in touch with academic colleagues, lawyers who knew me. The work that i the lawyering work that i ad done. And he had many letters sent to the president. And i think the most important thing of all, and this was almost out of the blue, my rabbi, my guide was senator moynihan, and how did that come about . Well, it was a connection that marty was very pleased to have. But it didnt come to him the president was on a plane with senator moynihan going to some democratic function in the city. And so tsh tsh would be good for the Supreme Court and senator moynihan said mr. President , im not a lawyer so you shouldnt be asking me that question. The president said i value your judgement, who would you pick . And senator moynihan said Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Why . Why, because gene griswald the long time dean of Harvard Law School thinks shes very good. And this is the dean that said i could not have a harvard law degree because i didnt stay with them a third year. Life is so many things occur and you dont know whether they are going to turn out to be good or bad. But this one was certainly good. There was a celebration at the court of the 50th anniversary of the building. So the building was completed in 1935 and this was 1985. Dean gris wald was then solicitier general. He was to make a speech about great advocates before the court. And by 1985, he realizes that he cant have a list that is all men. So thurgood marshal, the next person he mentions is Ruth Bader Ginsburg. When i went through my nomination process, i was told that every one should have had a marty ginsburg. He apparently came into the presentation session with folder the preparation session with folders including all of ruths speeches, her entire schedule for her entire life, and binders filled with tax information. Well, that part, the press reported inaccurately because the reason that begins wurg ginsburg had no problem was the taxes or the babysitters, is because marty was a tax lawyer. But you know, in our home, our personal lives, i did all the taxes. laughter . Rose yes and guess who did all the cooking . Oh yes, yes. When all. Rose marty. All the president s men and they were only men descended on my apartment to go through my papers, marty made a delicious lunch for everyone. Rose i mean it was at one point, he would do all the special occasions and you would do dinners for the kids during weekdays. And finally your daughter came to you and said maybe you should just give that up too. Well, in fact, my daughter who was an excellent cook herself, she learned from a master, i was the every day cook. So i had seven things that i made. And when i dpot to number seven we went back to number one. And they all came out of the 60 minute chef. That meant no more than 60 minutes from when you walked in the door until it is on the table. Marty, he was the weekend cook so my daughter jane, long in her high scal years realized that dad was cooking was more infinitely better than mommy and that mommy should be phased out of the kitchen. The result of that is that my wonderful daughter comes once a month. She cooks for me, she fills the freezer with individual dinners. And we do something nice together in the evening. She feels responsible for getting me out of the kitchen and doesnt think i should go back. The Supreme Court refrigerant certificate filled with some of the leftovers. Yes. Rose what is the best experience for a Supreme Court justice . Because you were on the court of. Oh, what an interesting question. Rose tell me. Well, im biased. I think being on the District Court was. And since almost all of my colleagues have only had court of appeals experience, with the exception of one elana kagan who was never a judge, and there have only been three Supreme Court justices in the history of the court with District Court experience. But i find it hard to understand how you can really appreciate the life of a case if you havent really sat in a court room to see that case develop. And to understand the dynamics that create a record, that create the discussions that end up coming bore the court on appellate review. In my judgement if i were ever privileged to be asked by a president what should he or she look for, i would probably say someone with District Court experience. Rose because it doing that you get to see not only the case but you get to see the stories of the people who make up the stories that are in conflict. It helps to be a lawyer as sonia said who knows the stories. Who probably knows more than the district judge. Rose we have a debate going. I should say, i started out my life in the law as a clerk to a district judge. So i was the clerk in the Southern District of new york for two years, from 5961. But ruth, do you see a private practice as being the same as trial practice . Excepting your premise which is being a lawyer is critical. But there is a dirves between trial and appellate lawyers. There is an enormous difference. The important thing is the trial level is to build a record. And to know how difficult that can be. Yes. Rose when you decide cases do you think about, i mean are you looking and saying we have to do what the law tells us . Looking at precedent and looking at the constitution . But do you also say to yourselves, what is going to be the impact on people, these decisions that were making. I think there is two entirely harmonious when the constitution nor shall any person be deprived of life, liberty or property, nor shall any person be denied the equal protections of the laws. The constitution tells us to think about the individual. And the device that the individual has. So i dont think there is anything. Rose but its not an abstract. Its a reality in terms of. Well, it is inescapable for us to be aware of the impact of our decision. In virtually every case of any significant social impact, we are receiving amicacu rai briefs, friends of the court briefs from virtually every impacted segment of society. So we cant decide a big issue case without hearing from all of the people who believe they will be impacted positively or negatively, whatever it really might be. So that is an inescapable part of our work. But i think ruth is talking more fundamentally which is obviously you cant rule, i dont think, without at least understanding what the consequences will be of your ruling. Not just in terms of the law but since the law is responsive to human development, you have to know whats going to happen more broadly to be able to understand the choices youre making. Theyre awesome cases where the law is clear and certain. It has to be a certain age to run for office. But the special thing about the preem court is for the most part we dont take cases where everybody agrees. We wait for what we call a split, and other judges disagrees about what the federal law is, whether constitutional provision, what it means in a particular context, or a statute passed by congress. So the wonderful input that we have, by the time a case gets to us we have the benefit of what other good minds on benches, state and federal have said. Rose there is a higher place that it can go, but if are you on the Supreme Court the buck stops here. This is it. And you then are making the decision that is the final decision. Not you. Rose the court is. The district judge is talking about they are the real power holders in the system because they sit alone in a court room. The day the complaint exis filed to the final judgement. And you go up to the court of appeals, he went to the Second Circuit because then are you not the lady of the manor any more. You had to carry at least one other mind to prevail. And then the Supreme Court, the magic number is five. Rose yes. So i have often said when i write for the court, its never as if i were queen. I have to take into account the views of my colleagues and reflect those in the opinion. Rose how much do you think your life as a litigator has influenced your sense of as a Supreme Court justice . Well, for one thing. Rose the historic role you play. Im sensitive to what its like to be on the receiving end of questions. I have a fantastic fortune in that i was alive and a lawyer when the Womens Movement was revived in this country. What we were saying in the 70s, successfully, winning case after case, exactly the same thing that women have said ever since Abigail Adams and even before, but society wasnt prepared to listen. In the 70s. Society had already moved so the changes in the law were catching up to the changes that had already occurred in peoples lives. So to be able to advocate for that course, to see results that could not have been achieved even in the 60s was a fantastic opportunity, totally exhilarating, also exhausting. Rose but if that argument that you made, those briefs that you wrote and those decisions that you had influenced, the proudest achievement of your life . Yes, i would say yes and i thought of myself in those days as a teacher. My parents thought the teaching would be a good occupation for me because women were welcomed there and they werent welcome as doctors, lawyers, engineers. I realized that i was facing an audience that didnt know what i was talking about. And to understand race discrimination, that was oddious but most men at that time thought that yes, the law was riddled with genderbased dises tinkses but they all operated benignly in womens favor. Like a woman didnt have to serve on a jury if she didnt want to. So that was a benefit. To get them to see that says something about a woman as citizen. Because a citizen has rights and obligationsment obligations as well as rights. Men know they are part of a central part of the citizenry because they cant but women are expendable. We really dont need them. To get across that message that this pedestal that many men thought women were on, and they were spared the necessity to earn a living, that was a myth because it was never true for poor women. To get them to see 245 what they regarded as favors in the wonderful ex, expression that Justin Brennan used, the pedestal much more often than not turned out to be a cage that confined women and limited what they could do. So to get the court to understand that there really was genderbased dises krim nation, that was a challenging a challengeing job. I was just going to say, i have the sense of Ground Breaking as your work as a litigator was, i think notorious notorious rbg go live on a lot longer. applause . Rose and what do you think of that . What . I think its absolutely amazing. That at 83 year old woman should be. Rose notorious. But have i said, i understand where it comes from. You know the famous rapper notorious big. Rose yes. Well, he and i were both born in brooklyn. So we have that in common. And more than that, i think that the nyu student who dreamed up the notorious rbg, it started with my dissenting opinion in Shelby County case. The decision that took the heart out of the Voting Rights act of 1965. She was angry. And then she thought well, thats not a very product ive motion. I want to do something positive. So she took my dissent in the