"I've led a school whose faculty and students examine and discuss and debate every aspect of our law and legal system. And what I've learned most is that no one has a monopoly on truth or wisdom. I've learned that we make progress by listening to each other, across every apparent political or ideological divide"
About this Quote
Kagan’s line reads like a civics lesson, but it’s also a strategic self-portrait: the judge as referee, not crusader. Coming from a former law school dean and now a Supreme Court justice, the “faculty and students” setup quietly borrows the legitimacy of an institution built on argument. She’s not just describing a workplace; she’s establishing a credentialed intimacy with conflict. Debate isn’t a symptom of dysfunction in her telling, it’s the engine of competence.
The phrase “no one has a monopoly on truth or wisdom” does double work. On its face, it’s humble and democratic. Underneath, it’s a preemptive strike against the accusation that elites - judges, professors, lawyers - hoard authority and moral certainty. She concedes fallibility without surrendering the idea of expertise. That’s the tightrope modern judicial legitimacy demands: sound authoritative, but not imperial.
Then comes the key shift: “we make progress by listening.” In a polarized era, “listening” is a coded rebuke to performative outrage and ideological purity tests, but it’s also a defense of the deliberative model of law itself. Courts are supposed to be where disagreement is disciplined into reasons. “Across every apparent political or ideological divide” hints that many divides are theatrical or inflated - “apparent” is doing quiet, lawyerly work there - while still acknowledging that people experience them as real.
The intent isn’t to lecture the public so much as to reassure it: the system can still metabolize conflict without turning it into warfare, if we treat opposing views as inputs rather than enemies.
The phrase “no one has a monopoly on truth or wisdom” does double work. On its face, it’s humble and democratic. Underneath, it’s a preemptive strike against the accusation that elites - judges, professors, lawyers - hoard authority and moral certainty. She concedes fallibility without surrendering the idea of expertise. That’s the tightrope modern judicial legitimacy demands: sound authoritative, but not imperial.
Then comes the key shift: “we make progress by listening.” In a polarized era, “listening” is a coded rebuke to performative outrage and ideological purity tests, but it’s also a defense of the deliberative model of law itself. Courts are supposed to be where disagreement is disciplined into reasons. “Across every apparent political or ideological divide” hints that many divides are theatrical or inflated - “apparent” is doing quiet, lawyerly work there - while still acknowledging that people experience them as real.
The intent isn’t to lecture the public so much as to reassure it: the system can still metabolize conflict without turning it into warfare, if we treat opposing views as inputs rather than enemies.
Quote Details
| Topic | Wisdom |
|---|
More Quotes by Elena
Add to List
