Want to listen to some of country's foremost legal scholars discuss RBG's legacy and the fight she leaves behind?

We're live at the link below. We'll also be live tweeting the discussion here. Join us using the hashtag #UnderTheBlacklight

Kimberlé Crenshaw begins the discussion by asking "how can the law be marshalled to serve the historically marginalized?"

Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of @BerkeleyLaw, notes that even when Justice Ginsburg couldn't convince he colleagues, her dissents mattered because they rallied people and served as a basis for the Court to do something different and better in the future. #UnderTheBlacklight

Dean Chemerinsky notes that the Supreme Court isn't an inherently liberal or progressive institution: "There's rarely been a liberal court in American history. It was only between about 1962 and 1969 that the Warren Court was a liberal court in the way we remember it."

Kimberlé Crenshaw ( @sandylocks) points out that when Trump bragged about how many judicial vacancies there were when he took office, he failed to mention that those judicial vacancies existed because Mitch McConnell and the GOP refused to confirm President Obama's appointees.

"The Republicans base has cared much more about judges than the Democratic base. In 2016, exit polls showed that the #1 reason people gave for voting Trump was the Supreme Court." -Dean Chemerinsky explains why judicial politics has often been asymmetrical. #UnderTheBlacklight

. @NAACP_LDF director-counsel @Sifill_LDF talks about Justice Ginsburg's dissents in Ledbetter v. Goodyear and Shelby County v. Holder. In each dissent, Justice Ginsburg carefully goes through the facts and masterfully applies the facts to the law.

"We don't have any civil rights lawyers left on the bench ... I think we should reimagine what the Court should look like." - @Sifill_LDF on the current makeup of the Supreme Court

"Almost all of the justice on the Supreme Court are former federal appellate judges. ... Most of them have backgrounds as former prosecutors. ... That's a very skewed lens for a profession that actually is quite broad." As Sherrilyn Ifill notes, this is deeply problematic.

When almost every Supreme Court justice has a background in prosecution as opposed to civil rights or criminal defense, their understanding of the world, of the law, and of all the cases before them are necessarily going to be different from ours. #UnderTheBlacklight

Devon Carbado, a professor at @UCLA_Law, disusses Justice Ginsburg in Florida v. J.L., where she held that reasonable suspicion doesn't mean you get to stop people based on an anonymous tip that there's a Black man out there in a plaid shirt.

Prof. Crenshaw explains that we need to recognize how racial advantages are embedded in systems that distribute social opportunities and try to interrupt those processes. Yet working toward greater equity is exactly what President Trump would call "reverse racism."

. @ProfMMurray discusses Coker v. Georgia, in which Justice Ginsburg filed a brief arguing against a Georgia law authorizing the death penalty in cases of rape, and argued that it served to highlight the degree to which women were seen historically as the property of men.

. @ProfMMurray and @sandylocks talk about Pauli Murray, one of the pre-eminent civil rights activists and lawyers of her time who worked with Justice Thurgood Marshall and deeply influenced Justice Ginsburg. #UnderTheBlacklight

Suzanne Goldberg, Executive Vice President of @Columbia, discusses her role in litigating Romer v. Evans, in which the Court held that civil rights are not special rights. They are laws that enable people to access basic protections and fully participate in our society.

"There is a part of the profession that has been reserved in particularly elite ways and that actually fails to reach out and include all of the people who ought to be part of this aspect of the profession." - @Sifill_LDF on the lack of diversity in certain prestigious legal jobs.