National Constitution Center President and CEO Jeffrey Rosen leads a special panel discussion with Federal Judges Association President Judge J. Michelle Childs of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; Judge M. Margaret McKeown of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and past president of the Federal Judges Association; Judge Beth Bloom of the U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida; and Judge Stephen R. Bough of the U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri. The judges explore threats to the judicial branch and the importance of judicial independence and civic education in maintaining the rule of law. This program was presented in partnership with the Federal Judges Association.
Please follow We the People and Live at the National Constitution Center on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.
This episode was produced by Samson Mostashari and Bill Pollock. It was engineered by Bill Pollock, Kevin Kilbourne, and Greg Scheckler. Research was provided by Samson Mostashari.
Participants
Judge J. Michelle Childs serves on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. She is also the president of the Federal Judges Association. Judge Childs previously served on the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina from 2010 to 2022.
Judge M. Margaret McKeown is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. She serves on the board of the World Justice Project and was the chair of the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative. She has worked with judiciaries around the world on ethics, transitional justice, equal rights, human trafficking, and intellectual property. She is the chair of the Ninth Circuit Pacific Islands Committee, which provides judicial education to U.S. territories and former trust territories.
Judge Stephen Bough serves on the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Bough served in the Missouri National Guard from 1989 to 1995, attaining the rank of sergeant. He received a Juris Doctor from the University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law in 1997. Bough served as a law clerk to Judge Scott Olin Wright of the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. From 1999 to 2002, he practiced law at Shamberg, Johnson & Bergman and from 2002 to 2006, he practiced at Henning & Bough. From 2006 to 2014, he owned a private law practice. From 2011 to 2014, Bough served on the board of governors of Missouri State University. Bough was nominated to the Western District of Missouri by President Obama in 2015.
Judge Beth Bloom has served as a United States District Judge in the Southern District of Florida since 2014. Judge Bloom is past chair of the judiciary division board of the Federal Bar Association, previously serving as chairperson of the Article III Trial Judges Committee. She serves as the 11th Circuit representative to the board of directors of the Federal Judges Association and is a board member of the South Florida chapter of the Federal Bar Association. She chairs the Southern District of Florida’s Local Rules Committee and is an active member of the Southern District’s Ad Hoc Committee on Rules and Procedure.
Jeffrey Rosen is the president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization devoted to educating the public about the U.S. Constitution. Rosen is also professor of law at The George Washington University Law School and a contributing editor of The Atlantic.
Additional Resources
- Michelle Childs, Justice Jackson Lecture: “The Republic is Safe as Long as the Courts Remain Open” (April 1, 2025)
- Code of Conduct for United States Judges
- John Roberts, 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary (December 2024)
- Federal Judges Association Civics Challenge
Excerpt from interview: Judge Bough highlights fairness in justice, advocates for civic education, and affirms judicial independence from political influence.
Judge Stephen R. Bough: As it comes to the education front, sign me up, put me in a red coat. Put me in front of some kids, knock them out of their bed. Eat all the food out of the refrigerator, spend the night, and then get up and walk off. Because that was 1775. And everyone understands that's not fair. And at our core, our justice system is really based upon fairness. And I think there's an enormous lack of empathy in the world, and maybe in this time. But all the problems that we see now are not that much different than what we saw in 1775 and why we needed to do certain things and why our country. And let me tell you, the world was not perfect based upon just the 1776 events. And we had a long way to go. And we're still trying to bend that arc of the moral universe. We're still pulling on that thing. But to step back and say, I don't want that guy in the red coat knocking me out of my bed, and eating all my food. And then walking out and not paying me a dime.
Well, that's the very core of what we're talking about. And it may not be what we're all just sitting around thinking about. Well, the US attorney charges somebody, and then the judge calculates the guidelines, and then we use 18 USC 3553 to come up with the sentencing factors. And now US v. Booker says they're advisory guidelines, not mandatory. We're not going to get people to talk about that, and that's okay. I was nominated by President Obama. I don't think President Obama should ever call me, and he should never have any input on any sentencing decision I've ever made. And for the record, he hasn't. I haven't talked to him during the nomination process and never talked to him since. I think the same is true for President Trump and President Bush and go through the whole list. That's not how our process works. And I've never known any of the judges that I've ever met to think that's the way it should work. And I think our kids when given that opportunity to do the things that Judge Bloom is talking about and doing the things that the National Constitution Center are talking about. Americans are great. We've got a great spirit and we've got a great heart, and we can do it.
Excerpt from interview: Judge McKeown warns of global attacks on judicial independence and urges public support to uphold the rule of law.
Judge M. Margaret McKeown: We've seen this incremental erosion of democracies. We've seen the rise of authoritarianism. And a lot of this we've been able to document. There's an organization, The World Justice Project. Puts out a report every year, does a rule of law index in 142 countries and they've been able to document this slide. The countries that come out on top would probably not surprise you. Denmark, Norway, Finland. The United States is not in the top 10. We're in the top 26. Countries at the bottom also probably would not surprise you. That would be Venezuela, Afghanistan, and Cambodia. But we've seen these attacks on judiciaries worldwide, whether it's in Guatemala and firing of the judges or judges fleeing because of security concerns. Or in Turkey where they imprisoned thousands of judges and prosecutors. We've also seen some positive signs. Poland, for example, has had a resurgence and it's now on the uptick in terms of rule of law and judicial independence. So I think we have a worldwide landscape. We've worked with judges and lawyers worldwide. We can learn a lot from them. We can look to see what are the indicators when there are incursions into an independent judiciary.
And of course, it often comes from the executive. It can also come from the executive branch. And sometimes it comes because the public has lost trust. So you ask, what can the public do? I think it's really important for the public to express what we all know. And that's this bedrock principle of separation of powers. That's how we were founded. That's how we've continued to operate. And I think that the judiciary being an independent branch, it's just not something we say, but it's something that I think we all believe in from the foundation of the Constitution. Just sort of our sentiment of who we are and what we stand for.
Excerpt from interview: Judge Childs warns that rising threats against judges undermine judicial independence and safety, stressing they must rule without fear.
Judge J. Michelle Childs: Federal judges have come out with their own statement supporting Chief Justice Roberts' 2024 Year End Report with respect to any threats. Judges are fair and neutral arbitrators of the law. That's our job to just adjudicate the facts of the law with respect to any case. We need to be able to do so without fear or favor, without any bias, without any concern for political expediency. Anything of that nature. And to do so with respect to physical threats to ourselves, to our families, is just unacceptable. And unfortunately, we've had that experience. Years ago there were experiences in that regard and many of you might recall our dear friend Esther Salas out of New Jersey whose son was killed right in her front door and then whose husband was seriously injured as well, having over 15 surgeries. Luckily, she is out there constantly with all her will and might, still talking about this and helping us with respect to getting things done. We have been supported by various groups in that regard. We've got the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act passed so that we can have our personally identifiable information scrubbed from the internet because she had that happen to her just as a result of a litigant finding her information on the internet and coming to her home because of them being upset about a decision.
And that has happened in other instances, but at least we got that passed. We're working through the states to also get that done, because as you realize, once something's on the internet, it just carries on and on and on, and you have to kind of trace yourself through the various states to get that done. We've also had other situations where recently you all might have heard about Domino's Pizza coming to judges' houses who have ruled against the current administration. And that happened to me. Just being home on a Saturday night, my husband goes to the door and said, did you order Domino's Pizza? And I really am not one who orders food at home. My daughter does from time to time when she says, well, you didn't have anything in the refrigerator, and she just happened to be away at the beach with some of her friends. So we called her to say, did you order something? And you forgot to change something on the app about the address. It wasn't her. Then I go into a federal judges' meeting later on in that week, and I just kind of mention it, just thinking something felt odd about it. I didn't know why. And then a couple of weeks later, we get some information from the marshals service saying pizzas are being delivered to federal judges home.
And then maybe a couple of weeks later, there's a national news article that says, we know where you live. And so it's very alarming to think that all we're doing is our job and that we have to fear that. And it goes back to your original statements about judicial independence. We should not have to fear that. We don't want judges worried about the decisions that they'll make in any particular case. It's not fair to the litigants. It's not fair to the system. And again, we are a co-equal branch of government and should never have to do our jobs with any sense of intimidation.
Judge Bloom stresses that judges aren't political, public distrust stems from misunderstanding, and it's vital to educate people about the judiciary’s role and neutrality.
Judge Beth Bloom: What Judge McKeown said that judges speak through their opinions is so important. Because we can't go out, and we should never go out and speak about issues that are before the court. But when it comes to social media, the internet, even conventional news. Sometimes there's information that's provided that is either misinformation and sometimes, unfortunately, disinformation. Misinformation in the sense that the public doesn't understand that we are a co-equal branch of government and there should be that healthy tension. But statements that are made need a response and need a response from partners throughout our country because we're all invested in our government. We all believe in our Constitution, our form of government, and the challenges to our government now. And I'll speak of the judiciary. Is because sometimes there's misinformation that becomes the narrative. For example, a judge handpicks cases and the public doesn't truly understand how a judge receives a particular case in order to handle that case. Or with regard to judges being partisan. And I think a lot of that is a misunderstanding of the public that we have state and federal judges and there are some states that have partisan races.
The Supreme Court election that just took place in Wisconsin is actually a nonpartisan race, but it became partisan. And the public believes that we're political and we're not. The process of becoming a federal judge may be political because we need the nomination from the president and we need the advice and consent from the Senate. But the job of judging is not political. And the lack of confidence in our court system is due to the public not understanding. And I must say that we also live in a country where 30%, less than 30% of our legislators went to law school. So there is a true misunderstanding of how our court works. And that's our job. Our job is to educate the public. And those that know should go out and be an ambassador and educate those that may not understand. So they truly understand that we're not political. We speak through our opinions. We certainly can't respond to cases that are before us. And we don't hand-pick cases. Cases are blind filed. And sometimes we have a case that is a run-of-the-mill case, and sometimes we have a case that may be a high-profile case. But we handle it the same way that we would in any other case.
Full Transcript
View Transcript (PDF)
This transcript may not be in its final form, accuracy may vary, and it may be updated or revised in the future.
Stay Connected and Learn More:
- Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected]
- Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr.
- Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.
- Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen.
- Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube.
- Support our important work.
