Saturday afternoon, Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer addressed the new inductees of Phi Beta Kappa (PBK). After his speech, Breyer broke tradition and allowed the audience members, students and parents, an opportunity to ask him any questions they had. In his speech, Breyer discussed change."I would like to suggest to you, what we who are a little older know to be true. Change is possible and change for the better is possible," he said.

President of Phi Beta Kappa Andreas Teuber (PHIL) was responsible for inviting Breyer to speak. He said he did know Breyer prior to this and that they had a mutual friend. Teuber said Breyer speaking at PBK fit in "nicely" with him being an honorary degree recipient this year.

Breyer told the audience that when his son graduated, he compared his own graduation to his son's, and to his fathers.

"I remember when my father went to Stanford, he could not join a fraternity . he knew it . he was Jewish. It was clear at that time, there were no Jews in fraternities," said Breyer.

Breyer continued by mentioning that, while growing up in San Francisco, he remembered his mother and an African American friend discussing where they would go for lunch. He said that they could not go to certain places because it was unaccepted for blacks to eat there at that time. He also mentioned how his fellow female justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Ginsberg told him of their problems of finding a job other than secretarial work.

"Now those problems, of which I speak of, are not yet cured, but they are better," Breyer said.

Breyer was the second Jewish person in two years to be appointed to the Supreme Court, when President Clinton nominated him in 1994. When asked what he thought about this achievement, he answered, "Fine, fine."

"I was glad to be appointed and its normal, not something unusual. Why not? What is changed?" Breyer said.

"If I go back to my grandfather and had he been alive and been told that his grandson would be appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States, he'd think that would be an impossibility. But, if I'd told him there'd be two Jews then he'd say, 'I know you're lying,'" Breyer said.

"Change. Not perfection yet by any means, but change. You think those things happen by accident? Of course not . they happened because those who graduated from college, and others who didn't, decided it was time to bring about the change," he said.

"It happened . slowly . methodically . and certainly," Breyer said.

Breyer then used three examples from American history to show this societal change. He first mentioned that Americans in Georgia found gold on land that belonged to the Cherokee Indians - through a treaty the United States had signed. He then established that both the Cherokee and the Georgians were equally "civilized." Breyer explained Georgians invaded the Cherokee land and took the gold. The Cherokee challenged these actions and the Supreme Court ruled in the Cherokee's favor. The president, however, sent troops to that land anyway.

"Unfortunately those troops were not sent to enforce the law. They were sent to evict the Indians. And, the Indians were marched off to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears. Thousands died along the way. President Andrew Jackson referred to Chief Justice Marshal opinion as 'well he has written and given his opinion, now let him enforce it,'" Breyer said.

Next, Breyer talked about another case in which an Arkansas governor did not let black students into a school after the Supreme Court ordered him to allow them to attend.

"But, if there had been nine justices or nine-thousand justices, it still wouldn't of mattered if there hadn't been someone to enforce the decision. President Dwight Eisenhower, very much to his credit, read the decision and . sent paratroopers to Arkansas. This time not defy the law, this time to enforce the law. I suspect he might have learned something from the history of the Cherokee," Breyer said.

"Do you see the change? Now think of last year . Bush vs. Gore. There was lots of fighting and there was lots of disagreement about that case, but the fighting was in the form of argument and doesn't take the form of not following the law," Breyer said.

"And, if you look at the term before, you see decision in the most controversial decisions. We have a society now, I think for the better, who resolve the many contentious issues in court; the decisions are absolutely not clearly right, there are always two sides to the story. But, once the decision is made, no matter how much people disagree with them, we don't have to go to paratroopers, and we certainly don't have what happened to the Cherokee. Rather, people are willing to follow them (court decisions)," Breyer said.

"That's such an asset. It reflects such important change. And, it's a change that the people learned slow at the price of the civil war and 80 years of segregation," he said.

"Change, it occurs, it's not perfect, and it doesn't happen through magic. It doesn't happen unless people are willing to take on the problems that need to change," Breyer said.

Breyer used as an example, something his friend told him about a general who, through special favors and not merits, received a high position of authority. His message to the honorees was that now that they have made it this far, it is not important what they did before, but important what they will do thereafter.

"What matters is not how you get there, what matters is what you do with it once you are there. Therefore, you have gotten this award. You are fabulous, you have achieved a lot. Now, what matters is what you do with it," he said.

"Without saying it, he communicated that any person needs to decide what he wants to do and go out and do it. Because (people saw today) that if this guy can be a Supreme Court Justice, I can be a Supreme Court Justice," Professor Teuber said.

"Looking around I have tremendous confidence. When I hear your names I have double confidence . Alright, I have confidence I congratulate you on that as well," Breyer said.

Breyer took time to answer questions after his speech. Questions ranged from what Breyer thought about the ramifications of Bush vs. Gore to his opinions on other cases such as copyright law, and even some international issues. A student also asked how Breyer selects his clerks.

Teuber thinks that in the future part of receiving an honorary degree should involve spending some time answering students' questions.

To answer one question, Breyer explained the procedures of the Supreme Court and how his time on the job is spent. After a lengthy explanation of procedure, Breyer jokingly asked the student if he had properly avoided answering his question.

"Want to make a difference in the world? Run for your city council, we only hear two percent of the cases that are appealed," he told one student.

Breyer was then questioned by an audience member about a paper he had written a while back. "The matter appears not to appear to be now what it appeared to appear to be then (sic)," Breyer said.

Another asked his opinion on an international court, Breyer told the questioner he "doesn't want to make headlines" by supporting the current proposal because it is not perfect but that he does support an international court.

Teuber pointed out that Breyer is a strong supporter of Nuremberg-type trials. Teuber said that while some people believe it to be victor's justice, it is Breyer's view that if that were the case why would the judges write out such detailed opinions.

Breyer said he thought the students' questions were "excellent."

"They were thoughtful, and they definitely did not let me off any hook," Breyer told the Justice.

"I was invited. It was a marvelous opportunity. I like the students, and I like the school," Breyer told the Justice about why he had decided to speak at Brandeis.

Breyer said he hoped that his view of social justice was similar to Justice Brandeis's view.

"He saw a connection between the Jewish tradition, democracy, social justice, and what he called the love for the truth that underlined science and university life as well. He saw that as having made a major contribution to American law," he said.

"I think that it is becoming much better over the course of my life in terms of judging people as individuals and not as members of groups. I think that's a very good thing, but we have a ways to go," he told the Justice.

"He has almost no guile, he didn't trumpet where he was, extraordinary humility and people really appreciated that," Teuber said about Breyer's speech.

After praising the students on their achievement, Breyer also congratulated the families.

"I want to congratulate the families in particular. They knew you were geniuses all along. They did, however, have their moments of doubt. Nonetheless, their work has paid off and you are graduating in Phi Beta Kappa, which is really a remarkable achievement," he said.

Teuber introduced Breyer as an "independent thinker and person in his own right." Breyer jokingly disagreed saying that both his wife, a clinical psychologist, and his children think they are the independent thinkers of the family. He thus concluded he is "the least independent thinker in the family."

"Teuber also cautioned me to speak briefly. That's because I've taught for many years and a not necessarily true story is that I received an exam . and it said, 'Dear professor Breyer: If I had one hour left to live, I would like to spend it in your class.' Then it said, 'please turn over,'" Breyer said.

"'That's because, you are the only professor I've ever had that can make one hour seem like an eternity,'" he said.