'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. Call it unauthorized law if you must, a regulatory wrong, but it was fraud and theft well beyond that, a seeming crime! "In three specific cases, the hearing officer found that Westerfield did little to no work for her clients but only issued a partial refund or no refund at all." That is theft by deception, folks. "In its decision to suspend Westerfield, the Supreme Court noted that she already had a long disciplinary history dating back to 1996 and had previously been suspended in 2004 and indefinitely suspended in 2005. She was reinstated in 2009 after finally giving the commission a response to the grievance for which she was suspended in 2004." WOW -- was the Indiana Supreme Court complicit in her fraud? Talk about being on notice of a real bad actor .... "Further, the justices noted that during her testimony, Westerfield was “disingenuous and evasive” about her relationship with Tope and attempted to distance herself from him. They also wrote that other aggravating factors existed in Westerfield’s case, such as her lack of remorse." WOW, and yet she only got 18 months on the bench, and if she shows up and cries for them in a year and a half, and pays money to JLAP for group therapy ... back in to ride roughshod over hapless clients (or are they "marks") once again! Aint Hoosier lawyering a great money making adventure!!! Just live for the bucks, even if filthy lucre, and come out a-ok. ME on the other hand??? Lifetime banishment for blowing the whistle on unconstitutional governance. Yes, had I ripped off clients or had ANY disciplinary history for doing that I would have fared better, most likely, as that it would have revealed me motivated by Mammon and not Faith. Check it out if you doubt my reading of this, compare and contrast the above 18 months with my lifetime banishment from court, see appendix for Bar Examiners report which the ISC adopted without substantive review:

  2. Wow, over a quarter million dollars? That is a a lot of commissary money! Over what time frame? Years I would guess. Anyone ever try to blow the whistle? Probably not, since most Hoosiers who take notice of such things realize that Hoosier whistleblowers are almost always pilloried. If someone did blow the whistle, they were likely fired. The persecution of whistleblowers is a sure sign of far too much government corruption. Details of my own personal experience at the top of Hoosier governance available upon request ... maybe a "fake news" media outlet will have the courage to tell the stories of Hoosier whistleblowers that the "real" Hoosier media (cough) will not deign to touch. (They are part of the problem.)

  3. So if I am reading it right, only if and when African American college students agree to receive checks labeling them as "Negroes" do they receive aid from the UNCF or the Quaker's Educational Fund? In other words, to borrow from the Indiana Appellate Court, "the [nonprofit] supposed to be [their] advocate, refers to [students] in a racially offensive manner. While there is no evidence that [the nonprofits] intended harm to [African American students], the harm was nonetheless inflicted. [Black students are] presented to [academia and future employers] in a racially offensive manner. For these reasons, [such] performance [is] deficient and also prejudice[ial]." Maybe even DEPLORABLE???

  4. I'm the poor soul who spent over 10 years in prison with many many other prisoners trying to kill me for being charged with a sex offense THAT I DID NOT COMMIT i was in jail for a battery charge for helping a friend leave a boyfriend who beat her I've been saying for over 28 years that i did not and would never hurt a child like that mine or anybody's child but NOBODY wants to believe that i might not be guilty of this horrible crime or think that when i say that ALL the paperwork concerning my conviction has strangely DISAPPEARED or even when the long beach judge re-sentenced me over 14 months on a already filed plea bargain out of another districts court then had it filed under a fake name so i could not find while trying to fight my conviction on appeal in a nut shell people are ALWAYS quick to believe the worst about some one well I DID NOT HURT ANY CHILD EVER IN MY LIFE AND HAVE SAID THIS FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS please if anybody can me get some kind of justice it would be greatly appreciated respectfully written wrongly accused Brian Valenti

  5. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: