so on time are going to washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture. i've been talking about it for more than a decade and now the rest of america is talking about it but again tonight with the truth about judicial review and how the only way to save america is to rein in the power of the supreme court and later mitt romney might have sealed up the republican nomination he's also gearing up for another flip flop was a guy who has a history of changing his position for political expediency really the best the republicans can do finally in tonight's daily take what movement is really more

dangerous to america i claim movement or the tea party movement. a you need to know this a constitutional crisis may be brewing in america on tuesday a fifth circuit court of appeals judge jerry smith republican appointee demanded the president obama's justice department write a three page single spaced report i doubt the administration feels about judicial review it is your review is the idea that judges can strike down laws that have been passed by congress and signed by the president a partner justice is likely to ignore this partisan judges request even though the obama administration agrees that courts should have the power of judicial review

and that's the problem here is the bigger picture pretty straightforward actually the constitution does not give the supreme court the power to strike down laws it's nowhere in the constitution that would make america a kingdom with nine unelected judges as kings it would mean that the nine kings and queens could override the will of we the people and our elected representatives as well as the president the power of veto laws is explicitly given in the constitution but to the president not the supreme court. many americans think that it's better for nine and buys elders to run our country determine our laws then we the people through elected representatives we can vote in or throw out this doctrine is called judicial review and as i said it's not in the constitution and one hundred fifty eight in the cooper versus aaron case the supreme court even came out and said this is one of the cases where they affirmed their own right to judicial review they said the basic principle of the federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the law because it was real and that this notion has ever

since the eighteen zero three marbury vs madison decision and the court grabbed his power beter a spec that by this court and the country as a permanent indispensable feature of our constitutional system but in fact as the dean of the stanford law school larry kramer wrote in his book the people themselves about this we are doctrine of judicial review this of course he's talking about the cooper decision by the supreme court this of course was bluster and puff as we've seen marbury said no such thing and judicial supremacy was not sure fully embraced in the years after marbury was decided the justices in cooper were not reporting a fact so much as trying to manufacture one and now the supreme court increasingly all the federal courts are taking out of themselves a power to strike down laws that they don't like often for political reasons and claiming that they have that power most exhibit recent example is you know being called out on this actually was when president obama said this. ultimately i'm

confident that the supreme court. will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by. a strong majority of. a democratically elected congress. republican judge jerry smith on the first fifth circuit court freaked out when president obama said that in effect pointing out that the judges in on the supreme court are not elected a lowly lawyer for the justice department before his court and smith demanded that this guy produce within forty eight hours a letter at least three pages long single spaced saying the president recognizes this right to strike down laws that smith doesn't like actually the president does recognize that but you know setting aside scalia calls himself a regional saying he's only reflecting the original intent of the founders but the entire eighteenth century the first century of this nation's existence the supreme

court never once struct out a law or even claimed to have the power to do that based on the constitution the courts have clearly overreached turning to the dictators of our nation throwing out the will of we the people of marbury in eight hundred three the citizens united in twenty ten to this week strip search decision they're both throwing out laws and making laws powers only given in the constitution to the president and congress respectively a lot of other countries are not that crazy the united kingdom the supreme court has no power to overturn laws just like in our constitution there are only the final appeals court in disputes between parties in switzerland the supreme court advises the parliament about what's constitutional what's not in their opinion but the parliament can ignore them and frequently does in canada the supreme court and try to strike down a law at the parliament and prime minister can ignore them and often do. andrew jackson actually did the same thing here in the united states back in eight hundred thirty two i think it was when he said you know the chief justice has bade his

decision let him and force it and jackson refused to enforce this law that had to the indian land grab a whole nother story disagree just judicial activism by the rehnquist courts the roberts courts and arguably all the way back to eighteen zero three is tearing america apart from bush v gore which blocked the recount in florida that it was ultimately done by the newspapers found that al gore actually won the two thousand election to citizens united to turn corporations in super persons and handed our entire political system over to a handful of billionaires and this week strip search decision which created a new law say in the local cop his buddies in strip search and humiliated occupy protesters or for that matter a tea party or to the roberts court socialist scalia thomas showing up at right wing fundraisers and going duck hunting with defendants before the court behavior that would get them impeached and any other court in america or in any other developed country in the world this roberts supreme court is out of control article

three section two of the constitution explicitly says that the supreme court shall have jurisdiction quote with such exceptions and under such regulations as congress shall make and quote the supreme court of subordinate to congress it's the third among equals not the first among equals it's time for congress to require the supreme court to conform at least to the federal court a code of judicial conduct and it's time for congress to pass a law saying that one exception of the rulings that the supreme court could rule on has to do with regulating money in politics it is within their ability only congress can make laws only the president can be to them it's time to return to our real original founding principles not the phony one scully uses as an excuse for his bad behavior and partisan lines. it's wednesday which means it's time for the lone liberal ronnell joining me on the panel tonight chris solomon conservative commentator and activist and laughlin mark

a reporter investigative reporter with the heritage foundation great to see you both again and for the record you just heard my rant on the supreme court and i agree i disagree with the supreme court in roe v wade i think that they made law they came up with this whole thing about three trimesters they should have they should have said it's up to the legislature make this law brown v board it had now been decided the congress would have i mean they did eleven years later and people say oh the supreme court does wonderful stuff look at those decisions for example and i say if they haven't had one dred scott in nine hundred fifty six we wouldn't have the civil war if they hadn't done plessy versus ferguson in one thousand nine hundred nine we wouldn't have had a half a century of of legalized. what he called apartheid so any out ever since brown v board and roe v wade conservatives have been yelling the same thing that i'm yelling a new congress still is about judicial activism and putting an end to it but all of a sudden they're silent other than newt gingrich nobody's talking and i don't hear

anybody on the conservative side which surprises me frankly talking about citizens united which is clearly judicial activism the strip search law decision last week obviously judicial activism they could they could have simply said you know it's up to the counties and the cities the states to decide what they want to do with their jails class action lawsuits obama care all this stuff is judicial activism where conservatives well i'm glad that you're consistent and you can see that roe v wade is an example of judicial activism absolutely but there's a difference between the way which creates right out of a plethora out there i think something that rights are created law i know it says that there is a right to privacy that is nowhere articulated in a concert. and therefore abortion is legal that's different then using as you said the marbury vs madison judicial review to strike down a law passed by congress and say that that does not conform how it's our constitution we have ways away was all over the country exactly the same exactly

but it based it not on an existing right but it needed a new right now based on the fourth amendment on their interpretation the fourth amendment and this is going to be on their interpretation the commerce clause and my point is they don't have the right to interpret either one it doesn't say so in the constitution is that the final appeals court i thought that the comments the president made regarding the supreme court being unelected were particularly telling because yes they are an elected and a you know we technically live in a democratic system of government but it is not strictly a democracy it is not majority rule so the notion that simply whatever in this case you know if you one percent of the senate and fifty one percent of the house passes is beyond reproach by you that is why this year becomes law barrino towards the notion that that is because it becomes law it is it's so facto it was illegitimate for the supreme court to strike it down is a majority in tyranny of the worst kind and there is you believe that we should have nine people in black robes sitting about ten blocks from here who should be

the wise olders of the sword for all the rest of the stupid people and all those stupid people over in congress what's right and what's wrong you know i think that was the rationale for aristocracy and kingdoms that was used. when you think about our system of the three branches of government kind of like rock paper scissors one check the other is the other one checks one so you and everyone is being checked along along the way i think the supreme court's got a president has the right to veto a law right but you also have the story's not very why would you have three branches it make one branch totally not i mean our should have been wrote about it in the federalist papers instead that this is going to be the role of the court it was not in the ted rule seventy. alexander hamilton said that the supreme court is the least likely to inflict damage so they do not have the power of the sword which is the executive branch they don't have to not have the power of the purse but he also said that their primary duty not just the powers that were that are given to them but their duty is to strike down laws that are contrary to the congo to

redrill a seventy eight i'd read it with a yes and so not only this when you think about the affordable care act and you think about what the left wants they want the nine justices to go through twenty seven hundred pages and pick out and fashion a new health care law and what scalia said is you know it's only our job to determine whether it's constitutional or not but it's been obvious that even the congress needs to go back and rewrite the law not the supreme court but congress have to be the one to rewrite the health care law well if the left says well what we can salvage out of here maybe the court can can piece together whatever's left and then i think that's ron from the from the severability issue this is what justice kennedy was saying which is that if we were to strike down the mandate and not the rest of the law we would essentially be leaving the country with a law that congress never even saw both of you continue to fund judicial activism you know i don't see judicial activism exactly judicial activism would be leaving the country with a system of laws that was never even considered in the first place i think it's

higher law is struck down it goes back to detroit fans additional activists. would we come back and run these big win last night was overshadowed by another campaign if so is this guy really the best republicans going to the rumble coming up.

emission free accreditation free lunch for chargers free. arrangement for free. or free. to child free. download free blog just plug in video for your media projects for free media gone to our teeth dot com. download the official r.t.f. acacias joe i phone or ipod touch from the i choose option to. watch on t.v. life on the go. video on demand r.t.s. mind broadcasts and already has features now in the palm of your. question on the call.

i imagine low level on a lot of panels and i chris all my conservative commentator and activist in laughlin mark ai investigative reporter with the heritage foundation let's get back to it sounds like the proverbial fat lady is to not mitt romney swept the field last night. going at first i was just watching reruns of psych but it was it was so

predictable what was going to happen i mean he was he was spending outspending santorum what fifty to one or something in one of these states in his mind or wisconsin maryland washington d.c. and here's what one romney surrogate had to say last night about how he's going to win back female voters. general election again when you have one online general election and they see again a reminded of governor romney's real views that gender gap will dissipate rather quickly so they're going to shape the sketch. before and he was for a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers before he was against it he believed in manmade global warming and want to stop greenhouse gases before he didn't believe it he was in favor of gays being openly in the military before he became opposed to it he opposed to ban on same sex marriage before supporting a ban on same sex marriage imposed themselves research before her support of him for opposing it he supported the individual mandate for being against it he

supported limits on money in politics before opposing them and he was pro-choice and now he's anti-abortion so how many more flip flops we see between now and november why i would lead governor romney speak for himself in terms of how and why his views are appalling but i do think the keyword in the segment that you showed was reminding voters will be reminded of governor romney's views and you know that we close the gender gap so the issue you know it's not really an etch a sketch comment that his views will change and senator yet from new hampshire was out saying the same thing today so you know they're staying on message in terms of once the general comes. which of his views that women appreciate will people be reminded of that he was pro-choice or or and so i think that they are going to in order as a choose to the economic issues that are dominating the national agenda certainly as are two does anyone else in the country i think help her with it considering they consume seventy to seventy five percent of the nation's health care so i think what's what's important for women is important that we're sitting next to you as

well you know i know romney fan. but i. just go to your nominee he is going to be our nominee and you know i think what might happen is that he will lose because people wanted nothing to candidate more than anything else and you know although i do have. three that the economic issues are fundamentally important and health on the issue of health care. again the republican position not always the romney position the republican position is that individuals should have control over their health care dollars and make their health care decisions not kathleen sebelius or whoever mitt romney should put in it h.s. is the one who should make it is this is how can i have control over my health care decisions and dollars if i have cancer and i know it's going to cost a quarter million bucks to fix me and i don't have a quarter million bucks and i could buy my health insurance from a company that pays its c.e.o. a billion dollars and has one hundred employees and make over million dollars

they're making those decisions united health care is making those decisions how how do i have any that's why we need to fundamentally change the health care system your company shouldn't own your health care you should own your health care you should be no going to so much as it should have and what they're trying to millions of pounds and there are republicans in the house and senate and in the white house we will be able to have a health care system that respects the decisions of individuals not corporations because take it why does your company own your health care but not your i don't you give me an example an example of any country in the world where you have the system we have a for profit health banking system basically health insurance companies are just banks they don't they don't give shots to little kids and they don't work or people's throats their health health insurance banking for profit industry it works . but i can't find a government run health care system anywhere else in the world that works either without long waits and so while what we have might not be great the alternative is

so much we're we're seeing women only men you know we've all of these are the countries people live longer than most they have a better quality of life the most they have better recovery rat is every disease except for president has been right about the need sure it's an issue you know the number one issue should be you know what the rate of increase for health care costs is just it's astronomical so i wouldn't want to she shouldn't. these guys are skimming thirty percent off what i pointed out and by the know they let me see if you want to use a mediator each you know allow individuals to control their own health care dollars and just like every other sector of the economy you don't go in when you introduce a bit of competition into it you will see the price come to you i don't believe any case minimum wage workers are screwed new data shows that america is woefully the minimum wage americans will flee inadequate it's currently seven twenty five if it was inflation adjusted for one hundred sixty eight what the minimum wage was then it would be about ten bucks and even at that the new study came out from the center for economic policy research found that if you had

a person who was earning that ten dollar minimum wage in the course of an entire year after they pay their federal taxes because they are pay payroll taxes and pay whatever state taxes and everything else whatever's left over is just about enough to pay for a health insurance policy for a family of four that's assuming that they eat nothing during the entire year they don't live anywhere during the entire year they don't buy any gasoline they don't own a car they don't have anything else they just have enough to buy health insurance policy isn't as screwed up. you know there is a ten dollar minimum wage in super cisco for instance and the there was a bit of a specious story last week but i think with serious implications that subway can no longer offer five dollar footlong as in the bay area because we are because the minimum wage it's because it's great they cited to me anyway i know and that's and that's a nice you know thing for conservatives to jump all over but i don't know if you've looked at property prices in san francisco there's a little bit of a difference in in portland i was living in portland oregon when they changed the law from two twenty five an hour to seven fifty or eight dollars whatever it is for

servers and they actually saw economic activity go up will be made more money you spend more money we're talking about here with minimum wage workers is we're talking about those people who are paid by the hour not paid a salary we're talking about ninety four percent of the people who are paid by the hour. more than the minimum wage ninety four percent of americans raise the mortgage you are paid right but minimum wage jobs are the stepping stone jobs they were in the cervix than yours to be you cannot get a use you cannot get a job unless you have experience the best way to get experience is to get a minimum wage job most people who want a minimal are going to do a year or two move on. chris you know that sixty percent of people in minimum wage jobs don't have a high school degree you're talking about jobs for high school kids it ninety four percent of the disc you just take your isn't always six percent of americans are actually working at the minimum wage and then they have talked about sixty percent of the i don't go to judge people as those he made you know i'm saying that but the

teenagers of teenagers seventy five percent of those aged sixteen to nineteen make more than the minimum wage only twenty five percent from the bureau of labor statistics in two thousand and ten why do you want to deny young people an opportunity to get an experience or you know you raise the minimum wage you know what happens to those jobs disappear young people don't get you know very into a new do you do or what happened when i was sixteen years old i had to get a work permit in michigan michigan was a heavily unionized state the minimum wage was was very rigorously enforced i wanted to work in recent numbers when i was in fact i think i was fifteen and i had a good idea permits on my parents side by my school and i was able to get a job for two dollars twenty cents an hour flipping burgers and that was my introduction of the workplace but that's and when i was very late it was it was either that or slightly higher than that i mean they were they were hiring but my recollection is they were below the minimum wage but that is the the the the the time in america when minimum wage jobs or close to you know within

a dollar of the minimum wage or within three dollars of minimum wage which is a large number of jobs in america the time of that was about entry level is it's not it's only six percent of the jobs that it would not add seven dollars twenty five cents an hour if you take it up to ten dollars an hour you're looking at the largest employer in america that's roughly one. their pain signal goes on largest employer in america so you're old a business and you're looking to hire an employee and you calculate that what they want to show employee is worth to you is eight dollars an hour what they will add to your business is worth eight dollars an hour for the minimum wage goes up to ten dollars an hour you're not going to hire that employee so you because you're not getting done here's or here's the question then and first of all i disagree because typically labor is a very very small part of the cost of any product but that said whether you know whether we agree or disagree on that isn't the essential question should we as a society decide whether businesses should even operate if they don't operate in a way that allows people to these you know businesses operate to make a profit not to help with the people we're not there we don't give limitations of

why you would incorporate you because there's a benefit if you require some way to pay ten dollars an hour and they're no longer able to stay in business saturday elsewhere everybody else loses their jobs and come on minimum wage isn't all that the business has to pay you have the taxes that the business have to pay you have benefits you have everything else my point all the actual meaning of the actual cost of the business is way above the minimum wage because of what government and the liberals have done to make it so expensive that a horrible forty hour work week it's terrible it seems grover norquist is losing his clout yesterday congressman steve king became the latest to start walking back from grover here's what he had to say. it was. i told you this and i say this but what are we going to get answers down to where the some point we're going to do much less answer there. other republicans to walk back from norquist spoilage

representatives timothy johnson john fortenberry charles standing over you said mike simpson frank wolf so the question is norquist losing his political mojo i don't think he ever had good mojo that a lot of potential oil had where's yours is now going to be walker bush i think that republicans are you asking him to sign a piece of paper i should say conservatives do not need to sign a piece of paper to be told that cutting taxes it is a good thing or to be told the government needs enough revenue to satisfy its basic functions and services and that you know there is a happy medium there that can be achieved so it's an ok thing that very can raise taxes a lot of times but i think what latin said is right voters care about what their members of congress do not about pieces of paper that they signed george herbert walker last because he said he wasn't going to raise taxes and then he did and it wasn't because grover norquist who most people outside the beltway have no idea who he is told them to vote against him it's because people know when someone tells you one thing it's like this the american people are smart enough to say you know what

that's not somebody that i want to vote for again so i support members of congress who who articulate what their position is and then keep with it and let the voters decide whether that person was going to stay at least with george w. bush as much as you may have disagreed or hated what he was standing for you know where he stood it's. ok last question quick for one sons already we're seen states like vermont montana try to create their own single payer health care systems if the supreme court strikes down obamacare which will make me crazy creating a crisis in the private health insurance market does that mean single payer inevitableness stance it depends on who's in control in washington i think that's what the liberals would love that hopefully we'll have a conservative controlled government and we'll be able to avoid that and horrible fate health insurance corporations can make more billions no i think the entire law will be struck down and it will have to go back to the drawing board in congress and when there was a sixty vote. majority in the in the senate for democrats they were able to do

a public option i don't think they'll be able to take you now that extends you know i have coverage with presenting conditions are just going to have a mystery. and that's not go you guys are a bit of a false dichotomy i think it's going to open my personal thing is going to open a huge hole for single payer just drop the medicare eligibility age to zero but we'll see what else any of thank you both for being here thank you appreciate it. objects to americas the wealthiest nation on the planet and also has the most powerful military but none of the stuff makes us happy the secret to national happiness unlocked after the break. wealthy british style sun. rise.

market why not. find out what's really happening to the global economy with much stronger or a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines kaiser reports. more news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. trying to corporations rule the day. so.