 Hello, I'm Javier Hernandez reporting from Washington. In September, the Georgetown University Law Center and the American Law Institute co-sponsored a conference to discuss the importance of judicial independence. Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts Jr. was there to give his thoughts on the state of our judiciary. The world recognizes the importance and the rarity of the judicial independence that we have established in our country, and I think it's important that we recognize it as well. Because, Roberts warned, even in our country, the judiciary's independence is constantly challenged by public outcry and politics. The long history of attack on judicial independence confirms that neither side in the political debate has a monopoly on the tactic. On the other hand, judicial independence does not mean that judges should be free from criticism, and while informed criticism is certainly welcome. But it should not degenerate into attack on individual judges for the decision as a means of intimidation, and it should not take the form of institutional retribution action against the judiciary as a whole that might inhibit the judges from performing their vital function. To maintain its autonomy, Roberts feels the judiciary has two responsibilities. The first is demonstrating the ability to manage itself. If the federal judiciary is to ward off dangerous intrusions by other branches, such as the Inspector General Bill that was passed by the House Judiciary Committee yesterday, we must show that we're capable of managing our own house. Now, in recent years, concerns have been raised about the judiciary in three significant areas, judges who are sitting on cases in which they have financial conflicts of interest, attendance by judges at educational seminars sponsored by private parties, and the failure of the judiciary to properly investigate charges of misconduct against its own. I'm very pleased to be able to report that last week we took responsive action in each of those areas. Roberts is referring to judicial conference policies that require judges to use conflict-checking software and disclose their attendance at privately funded seminars. Also, a report by an internal committee concluded that the judiciary is doing a good job of policing its own. In each of these important areas, we in the federal judiciary are taking responsive action to the criticism that has been raised. It turned out, I think, that the criticism was constructive in each of those areas, some of it was, and we took responsive action. Roberts said the second responsibility of an independent judiciary is restraint, that is, judges should judge according to the rule of law and not force their will or anyone else's in their decisions. He quoted the late President Ronald Reagan to illustrate his point. The judiciary's, quote, commitment to the preservation of our rights often requires the lonely courage of a patriot. He said President Reagan recognized that it is the job of judges to sometimes make unpopular decisions. But he also recognized that the courage required of them was the courage of a patriot, because in making those unpopular decisions, they were fulfilling the framers' vision of a society governed by the rule of law. Many parts of the world strive to develop judicial systems like ours. In fact, delegations from around the world regularly visit our courts to gain inspiration and knowledge of our third branch of government. Reporting from Washington, I'm Papier Hernandez.