Kevin ’25 shares about the groups tour of the Supreme Court and their meeting with Justice Kavanaugh for the first part of day 1 in Washington.
We arrived at our first stop of the day, the Supreme Court, after a short bus ride. The grand facade appeared as we turned the corner, engraved with “Equal Justice Under Law.” Once inside, we first had a tour of the building, learning that it was built in the 1930s, before which the court operated in the basement of the Senate—so much for a co-equal branch of the government! We took a seat inside the only courtroom in the building, where we learned the Supreme Court’s history, and how the court came into being out of a few paragraphs in the short Article III of the Constitution. Above the main courtroom, we saw the Supreme Court library, with all of the court’s previous rulings and the federal, state, and even international laws. Above that, our tour guide brought us to the very special “highest court of the land”—a basketball court above the main courtroom.
We then met Associate Justice Kavanaugh. In his chambers, Justice Kavanaugh told us his story and perspective of the Supreme Court, and we discussed the court’s history, landmark rulings, and the day-to-day life of the justices. He recalled eating lunch together with the other justices and how to consistently work well with only eight other justices. Justice Kavanaugh taught us three essential factors in making a decision: the literal text of the law, legal precedent, and history. We discussed the importance of consistency, how to build trust in the court, and the necessary conditions for overruling, which happens when a new generation of justices views a past interpretation or principle inconsistent with the text of the law and Constitution. As a basketball coach, Kavanaugh constantly referred to the justices as referees. No one ever loses a game and then praises the refs, he quipped, and that’s akin to the criticism the Supreme Court faces. Kavanaugh stressed that the justices can’t consider the popularity of a decision; they just have to decide on what they think the law says. The law can have many interpretations; sometimes it’s intentionally vague, and modern technology simply didn’t exist at the founding. Freedom of speech on the Internet is complex and one of the most difficult interpretive problems with the First Amendment today. Finally, Kavanaugh left us on a positive note: it’s easy to see the problem in everything, but we have one of the best judicial and government systems, and we can be optimistic, as President George W. Bush had taught him.
Originally planned for an hour, the session went on for almost two, so we had lunch at the Supreme Court Café and hurried off to Meta. — Kevin ’25
