In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court found that the fundamental right to privacy included the right to decide whether or not to have an abortion.

It improves both the public's confidence that there are judges from a variety of different backgrounds on the bench.

Ignoring things and saying, you know, it doesn't happen isn't an answer to a situation.

In short, I accept the proposition that difference will be made by the presence of women and people of color on the bench and that my experiences will affect the facts that I choose to see.

I share your view of the importance of property rights under the Constitution.

No, sir. In that case we were talking about, and deciding, an issue of whether the agency had followed its own procedures in changing policy.

Enough women and people of color in enough cases will make a difference in the process of judging.

the process of judging is a process of keeping an open mind

I wonder whether achieving the goal of impartiality is possible at all in even most cases, and I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women, men, or people of color we do a disservice to both the law and society.

Never their prejudices. I was talking about the very important goal of the justice system is to ensure that the personal biases and prejudices of a judge do not influence the outcome of a case.

You do not deserve this, sir. I am deeply sorry for you and your family, but I have no choice.

I do admire those parts of Justice Cardozo, which he was most famous for, and think that that is how I approach the law.