'Notorious RBG' Ginsburg delights and educates at Notre Dame

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the second woman to be appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States and recognized as being a driving force in advancing women’s rights, almost downplayed her importance while speaking at the University of Notre Dame Monday.

“I was very fortunate to be alive as a lawyer when change was occurring in society,” she said.

Ginsburg, known in popular culture as the Notorious R.B.G., appeared in South Bend Monday and spent two hours talking about her life and her work on the Supreme Court before a very appreciative audience of 7,500. Judge Ann Claire Williams of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals moderated the discussion that included a few questions from students and a performance of the habanera with special lyrics to honor Ginsburg from the opera “Carmen” by Giacomo Puccini.

The crowd was lining up around the Joyce Center where Ginsburg appeared at least an hour and a half before the evening event was scheduled to begin. Once inside, they filled the chairs set up on the main floor of the Purcell Pavilion and flowed into the bleachers.

When Ginsburg, wearing a gray jacket and black pants, walked onto the stage, the cheer from the audience sounded like something that would greet a rock star at the beginning of a concert. Undoubtedly the roar was in stark contrast to the silence and closed doors that marked the start of her legal career.

The diminutive Brooklyn native did not get one job offer after she graduated from Columbia Law School in 1959, despite being at the top of her class. Her law professor finally cajoled Judge Edmund Palmieri of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York into taking her on as a law clerk.

After her clerkship ended, she first joined the faculty of Rutgers Law School in 1963 and then moved to her alma mater, becoming the first woman to be granted tenure at Columbia Law School.

While teaching, she got involved in separate legal disputes between female employees and the universities over equal pay and treatment. Then she volunteered to write a brief for the landmark case, Reed v. Reed, 4040 U.S. 71, (1971), which is credited with pushing the Supreme Court to find that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender.

A year after that decision, Notre Dame officially became a coeducational college. Also, Ginsburg co-founded the Women’s Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. Through the 1970s, she argued a series of pivotal cases before the Supreme Court that helped advance equality for women.

At Notre Dame, Ginsburg talked about the importance of having women on the bench. She recalled the case, Safford Unified School District, et al. v. Redding, where the Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that a 13-year-old girl had her civil rights violated when school officials stripped searched her after finding two Advil pills in her possession.

Ginsburg said some of the male justices noted boys undress in front of each in locker rooms so they did not comprehend that the situation would be different for a girl. She explained that 13-year-old females have certain sensitivities and she encouraged them to consider how they would feel if their daughters were stripped searched. They then understood the experience was devastating for the teenage girl and ruled in favor of the young woman.

“The court is so much richer in experience because of the diversity of our backgrounds than it would be if we were all cut from the same mold,” Ginsburg said. “... So what we bring to the table are combined knowledge and life experience.”

Yet, Ginsburg maintained the courts do not take society in new directions. Rather, the judicial branch is reactionary, usually trailing behind where the people are going. And that is why she sees her success in the court in pushing back against gender discrimination as the direct result of women asserting themselves more.

“Courts don’t initiate change, people do,” she said. “… If people don’t care, the court will not save this society. If people do care, then the court may rethink some of its old decisions as it did in Brown v. Board of Education and put its stamp of approval on the side of change.”

In response to a question from Notre Dame law student Conor Maloney about how her faith has influenced her career, Ginsburg linked her personal traits to her Jewish upbringing. She noted Jews are sometimes called “people of the book” because they prize education and they are described as having an affinity to argue.

“I think the Jewish heritage is part of who I am,” she said. “It’s one of the reasons I love learning, I love trying to explain my position. I really enjoy a good engagement with a colleague who has a different point of view.”

At the conclusion of the event, Notre Dame President Rev.  John Jenkins made Ginsburg an honorary member of the Fighting Irish women’s basketball team. He presented her with a white jersey emblazoned with her name and the number one.

Ginsburg was scheduled to talk to law students from 12:30 to 1:30 p.m. Tuesday in the Patrick F. McCartan courtroom. Jennifer Mason, associate professor of law and director of the Center for Civil and Human Rights, moderated the discussion.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. My husband left me and the kids for 2 years, i did everything humanly possible to get him back i prayed i even fasted nothing worked out. i was so diver-stated, i was left with nothing no money to pay for kids up keep. my life was tearing apart. i head that he was trying to get married to another lady in Italy, i look for urgent help then i found Dr.Mack in the internet by accident, i was skeptical because i don’t really believe he can bring husband back because its too long we have contacted each other, we only comment on each other status on Facebook and when ever he come online he has never talks anything about coming back to me, i really had to give Dr.Mack a chance to help me out, luckily for me he was God sent and has made everything like a dream to me, Dr.Mack told me that everything will be fine, i called him and he assured me that my Husband will return, i was having so many doubt but now i am happy,i can’t believe it my husband broke up with his Italian lady and he is now back to me and he can’t even stay a minute without me, all he said to me was that he want me back, i am really happy and i cried so much because it was unbelievable, i am really happy and my entire family are happy for me but they never know whats the secret behind this…i want you all divorce lady or single mother, unhappy relationship to please contact this man for help and everything will be fine i really guarantee you….if you want to contact him you can reach him through dr.mac@yahoo. com..,

  2. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  3. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  4. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  5. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"