As he introduced Ninth Circuit Appeals Court judges Alex Kozinski and Stephen Reinhardt last night, Law School Dean Larry Kramer warned an audience of about 150 at the Law School that most federal judges cannot and often will not say anything controversial.

Reinhardt wasted no time in disproving Kramer’s theory.

“The Supreme Court is headed downhill,” Reinhardt said. “Where once the courts were a haven for those who were oppressed by government, now those people will have to look elsewhere.”

Reinhardt, one of the most liberal judges in the country’s most overruled circuit court, had views that stood in stark contrast to those of Kozinski, a strict constructionist who on Dec. 1 will become Chief Justice of the Ninth Circuit.

Kozinski responded to Reinhardt’s criticism of the Supreme Court by citing Justice Antonin Scalia’s theory that the political process will ultimately prevail. If you do not like the laws and the officials who draft them, Kozinski argued, “kick the rascals out.”

Reinhardt dismissed Kozinski’s argument, asserting that the composition of the Supreme Court is influenced more by luck of the draw than by public opinion. The judge’s renowned liberal wit was in full display as he emphasized the lack of control the public has over the court.

“The president is supposed to pick the Supreme Court; the Supreme Court is not supposed to pick the president,” Reinhardt said in reference to the infamous Bush v. Gore case during the 2000 election.

When the discussion turned from legal theory to specific cases, things only became more contentious. Reinhardt and Kozinksi were at odds in discussing two decisions from last year’s Supreme Court docket — the case in which the court banned one Seattle school district from trying to manufacture racial diversity in its high schools and the court’s overturning of a campaign finance reform act on the grounds of protecting free speech.

While Kozinski quickly labeled both decisions as “entirely defensible,” Reinhardt was not as supportive of the nation’s highest court. Reinhardt saw a double standard in the court’s application of the First Amendment to the campaign finance case, while it refused to extend freedom of speech to the Alaskan high school student who made a “bong hits for Jesus” sign.

“I think it depends on whose speech it is and whether they like who it is,” Reinhardt said.

The liberal judge was also deeply critical of the Seattle school district decision.

“Blacks don’t win in this court,” Reinhardt said.

The judges also discussed the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a ban on partial birth abortion.

Reinhardt argued that the decision was made simply because “five white males” were offended by partial birth abortion. He pointed out that the alternative — abortion when the fetus is still in the womb — is allowed, even though it may be more dangerous than partial birth abortion in some cases.

Reinhardt’s assertion prompted Kozinski’s most impassioned rebuttal of the night. Kozinksi pointed out that the court could have used the case as an opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade and ban abortion outright but instead chose to be more moderate.

“This is hardly the end of rights, as Judge Reinhardt would have us believe,” Kozinski said.

“I didn’t say it was a disaster that a small number of women would die as a result of the Supreme Court,” Reinhardt wryly countered.

When asked by The Daily why he was so unafraid to push the limits, Judge Reinhardt was blunt.

“I think it’s an obligation of all judges to be honest and inform students where the law is going,” he said.