Download Magazine - Levin College of Law - University of Florida

NEWS BRIEFSU.S. Supreme CourtAssociate Justice JohnPaul Stevens (right)and U.S. District CourtJudge Jose A. GonzalezJr. (left) discussed abroad range of legaltopics during theinaugural MarshalCriser Lecture Series.Stevens is the fourthSupreme Court Justiceto visit UF Law inthree years, followingvisits by Chief Justiceof the United StatesJohn G. Roberts Jr. andassociate justices RuthBader Ginsberg andSandra Day O’Connor.To view a video of theconversation, visitwww.law.ufl.edu/uflawLet’s talk: A conversation withJustice Stevens and Judge GonzalezIn an intimate and very personalconversational setting,U.S. Supreme Court AssociateJustice John Paul Stevens andhis close friend and colleagueU.S. District Court Judge Jose A.Gonzalez Jr. (JD 57), a judge inthe Southern District of Florida,shared their judicial philosophies,insights and inside jokes with anaudience of 700 UF Law studentsand faculty.The two old friends were oncampus as part of the InauguralMarshall M. Criser DistinguishedLecture at the University ofFlorida Curtis M. Phillips Centerfor the Performing Arts onNov. 17. The lecture series wasestablished with a gift from LewisSchott (LLB 46) as a tribute toformer UF President MarshallCriser (LLB 51).During the conversation, Stevensand Gonzalez interactedwith Professor Sharon Rush,Professor MichaelWolf and FloridaLaw ReviewEditor in ChiefLarry Dougherty,who posed questionspreviouslysubmitted by studentsand faculty.The answers ofthe two juristsrevealed a deep devotion to thelaw and offered unique perspectiveson the finer points oflegal advocacy that only judgescan impart.“Oral argument is, if not themost important, one of the mostimportant parts of the case,”Gonzalez said, “because thefirst thing you have to do as anadvocate is gain the attention ofyour audience and you can dothat orally much easier than youcan with the written word.”Wolf asked about Stevens’perspective onstare decisis,“Oral argumentis, if not themost important,one of the mostimportant partsof the case.”the doctrineof allowingprecedent tostand in courtdecisions.Stevens saidhe gives strongdeference toprecedence,even if he disagrees with thedecision, as he did in Texas v.Johnson, a 1989 Supreme Courtcase which protected flag burningas a form of free speech.8 UF LAW