d.c. circuit. you have to be able to look at a history of contact, the relationship, before a terrorist act or before a designation. would not make any sense otherwise. for example, this executive order, as i recall, was promulgated on september 17, 2001. al qaeda was not designated before this time. but, clearly, the president needs to be able to self- designate or designate an entity for dealing with al qaeda in al qaeda committing terrorist acts. the point is not that you are simply designating something that they are doing right now. it is part of a whole record. is this entity tied in with global terrorism? i may have misspoken -- this agent. here, it is absolutely clear. the evidence is overwhelming. at no point does the professor attempt to prove otherwise. al harmain has been one of the key financial supporters or groups such as al qaeda. much of the material he protests against that we provided to him was about the activities of al harmain. we wanted to show that al harmain is clearly tied

d.c. circuit court of appeals so this for sure. you know it's certainly the d.c. circuit ok agree ginger thanks so much for what you're doing for coming on the show today thank you so much for having me. these sure i call them to the church of porno scanners and other trappings of the modern security theater or more ways to shovel taxpayer money into the military industrial security complex that awards million dollar contracts to former government officials like michael chertoff to build useless machines on top of that most of these machines are built in malaysia so they're not even helping our economy it's time for us to kick the habit. it's the good the bad in the very painfully oddly first the good of the twenty eight members of congress is signed onto a letter being circulated by democratic representatives pete stark and john dingell asking republican chairman of the homeland security committee peter king to not want you to visit investigations into american muslim communities letter stated we believe that the tone and focus of these hearings runs contrary to o

d.c. circuit u.s. court of appeals could have major effects on the rights of current one time of a detainee's the court heard the case of thirty one year old who may not do all right he mohammad was not a yemeni detainee who's been held at gitmo for the past nine years his case but he's never been convicted of a crime then was captured on the afghan pakistan border back in two thousand and one and since he's been held without being accused so he filed an appeal requesting to be released but the court of appeals determined this week that was men although there is no evidence that he was a member of the terrorist group al qaida should not be released just because he was originally found in the same location as other members of al qaeda it's just another disturbing example not only of how our laws and justice system are twisted to make up for our wrongdoings but that obama's promise of closing gitmo is nowhere near close to becoming a reality joining me to discuss this is shah had director of the bill of

d.c. circuit court of appeals has said unanimously that they do not have the authority or statutory authorization to oppose that. they went ahead anyway. they're trying round two on that. i am nervous that there may be a tendency to go beyond what is allowed under study. that is why we have the judiciary and article 3 of the constitution. my hope is the the fcc will act in accordance with what they have said publicly in that they do not have the statutory authority to impose binding arbitration or some new system that puts the government's, on the negotiations and tries to force a particular outcome. they are rightly concerned, as we are, about making sure there is notice, a good faith, that the parties are earnestly engaged in resolving what the market price ought to be. i hope they abide by their comments of the past and stick to the wall and produce regulations consistent with the law. >> in a recent letter to the chairman of the committees in charge of the issues that you face, the energy and commerce committee, and the commerce committee in the senate, you talked about spectrum quarters -- h

d.c. circuit court of appeals, which has no specialization in immigration. thank you for your time. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please? >> geeping, commissioners. my name is bar tholmue murphy. i am the chairman for the year national immigration reform. that brings an irish voice to the immigration reform bedate. as other speakers here, the irish are in real terms a minority in this debate. there are approximately 50,000 undocumented irish throughout the united states. but we are a very vocal minority, and i thought i would share with you some of the things that has worked for us in lobbying on this issue. and to my colleagues who are here tonight on their issues, there is no substitute for direct lobbying of officials on this. do not leave it to the mayor or even this commission tonight to lobby on your behalf. take it up and go after it yourselves. one of the wolf things about american politics, whether you are legal, illegal, in status or out of status, you can walk through the doors of federal government, and knock on those doors, and f

d.c. circuit court of appeals has said a unanimously without respect to party, they don't have the authority, the statutory authorization, to impose that. but they went ahead anyway, and they're trying round two on that. so when i see that, yes, i'm nervous that there may be a tendency to go beyond what is allowed under statute. but that's why we have a judiciary under article iii of the constitution. but my hope is that the fcc will act in accordance what they have already said publicly and that they don't have the statutory authority to impose binding arbitration or some new system that puts the government's thumb on the negotiation and tries to force a particular outcome. they are rightly concerned, as we are, about making sure there's notice, that there's good faith, that the parties are earnestly engaged in resolving what the market price ought to be. and so i hope that they abide their own comments in the past and stick to the law and produce regulations consistent with the law. >> host: in a recent letter to the chairman of the committees who were in charge of the issues that you face

d.c. circuit you're not required or you are required to have a warrant in the ninth circuit which includes california you're not required to have a warrant and so there's a difference in the laws and you know it really is our assertion that the constitution here would require a search warrant and also an important case the important point that you bring up is that the california case is actually an older case right and involves another community it was an american muslim and so it's really important for us to highlight that the civil rights concessions. issues that are at stake here don't just impact american muslims right that if the law is bad it impacts everyone in need of the civil rights that we have certainly we've talked to our you know our client is american muslim but really the impact is much larger but how are you looking at perhaps some of the greater moves not even you know rulings like this one in california but the fact that there has been a lot of protest over simply building mosques in america the fact that now we have muslim radicalization hearings coming to your congress

d.c. circuit, by the second circuit. there is a balancing that must take place here, and the circuits have all rejected the very argument that prof. cole is making. prof. cole mentioned the recent supreme court decision on the structural error point. that decision does not support mr. kohl at all. the supreme court does not use the term structural error. the supreme court felt there was a violation of due process because this was a situation where the judge was an elected judge and had received donations from one of the parties in the case. the supreme court held that this was a due process violation that infected the whole legal proceeding. it is not an example of a structural error. the supreme court does not even use that term. we are still with the situation where as this court has noted, the structural error analysis has never been used in the civil case. the types of situations where this court and the supreme court have said there is not a structural error goes way beyond this case. this is all discussed in our br

d.c. circuit comcast case where it has failed to show its authority in this space. i yield the balance of my time. >> thank you. you gave an excellent explanation of why we should all support hj37. tibias system does possible, the internet has thrived, i think, in large part because this congress repeatedly has stated that we did not want it to be regulated and the fcc keeps attempting to get some nose under the tent, so to speak, so that, in the future, they can come back with really heavy-handed regulation. the 3-2 vote is simply an effort to establish the principle that the fcc can regulate the internet. it is not as important what they do now. but the fact they have the authority to do it -- hj37 would specifically say they do not have the authority. it is happening in l.a. the regulated and are met and we should keep it that way. -- it is happening in a deregulated way and we should keep it that way. >> thank you. thank you for being here. given the significance of the resolution under consideration today, i want to thank chairman walton for respecting the requ

d.c. circuit comcast case where it has failed to show its authority in this space. i yield the balance of my time. >> thank you. you gave an excellent explanation of why we should all support hj37. tibias system does possible, the internet has thrived, i think, in large part because this congress repeatedly has stated that we did not want it to be regulated and the fcc keeps attempting to get some nose under the tent, so to speak, so that, in the future, they can come back with really heavy- handed regulation. the 3-2 vote is simply an effort to establish the principle that the fcc can regulate the internet. it is not as important what they do now. but the fact they have the authority to do it -- hj37 would specifically say they do not have the authority. in l.a. thening an regulated and are met and we should keep it that way. -- it is happening in a deregulated way and we should keep it that way. >> thank you. thank you for being here. given the significance of the resolution under consideration today, i want to thank chairman walton for respecting the request of r

d.c. circuit court opinions.but we think it's important to put into law and make it clear and that is what this legislation will do. >> ayn rand the forbes from the virginias fourth congressional district. as the chairman mr. thornberry said this piece of legislation is important because it's time that we move on. one of the things the executive order mr. president has issued shows us is the difficulty we have when we introduce politics and the national security and also it showed the importance of having a consistency when we are dealing with guantanamo. when the president issued his first executive order it didn't just delete the action so we could think about it in contemplating but one of the serious effects it had is if you went down to guantanamo and talk to the chief prosecutor, he had one of the best teams this country had ever seen to prosecute the worst terrorists that ever hit the united states to defend the 9/11 terrorist attacks. the prosecutor told us and would have told the president, would have to

d.c. circuit court opinions.but we think it's important to put into law and make it clear and that is what this legislation will do. >> ayn rand the forbes from the virginias fourth congressional district. as the chairman mr. thornberry said this piece of legislation is important because it's time that we move on. one of the things the executive order mr. president has issued shows us is the difficulty we have when we introduce politics and the national security and also it showed the importance of having a consistency when we are dealing with guantanamo. when the president issued his first executive order it didn't just delete the action so we could think about it in contemplating but one of the serious effects it had is if you went down to guantanamo and talk to the chief prosecutor, he had one of the best teams this country had ever seen to prosecute the worst terrorists that ever hit the united states to defend the 9/11 terrorist attacks. the prosecutor told us and would have told the president, would have to

d.c. circuit is to is to not be assigned the supreme court is happily had ordered but there is a lot of press but that's not really true as they move up and take "the new yorker" cartoon at the east coast. the thought was, how could we do some thing that was of value to the press with the shrinking press, they don't have time to send reporters to the court room reporters from louisville and not necessarily going to be covering case in the thick circuit, for example. so we were trying to figure out a way to use the new media to advances. and what we came up with was the media alerts on the federal courts of appeals. and what this says is essentially a daily service, circuit by circuit that includes short summaries of key cases coming out of the circuit on that particular day. and it includes contact information for the lawyers and then a summary. so how do we do this? is a huge undertaking. we did it through the good graces of law schools and their students. there are now -- the project was started in late 2009, so really it's been up and running just over one year and we now have nine circuit

d.c. circuit is to is to not be assigned the supreme court is happily had ordered but there is a lot of press but that's not really true as they move up and take "the new yorker" cartoon at the east coast. the thought was, how could we do some thing that was of value to the press with the shrinking press, they don't have time to send reporters to the court room reporters from louisville and not necessarily going to be covering case in the thick circuit, for example. so we were trying to figure out a way to use the new media to advances. and what we came up with was the media alerts on the federal courts of appeals. and what this says is essentially a daily service, circuit by circuit that includes short summaries of key cases coming out of the circuit on that particular day. and it includes contact information for the lawyers and then a summary. so how do we do this? is a huge undertaking. we did it through the good graces of law schools and their students. there are now -- the project was started in late 2009, so really it's been up and running just over one year and we now have nine circuit

d.c. circuit for the second circuit or got 20 out of the 36 from those two circuits. and 20 of the 36 came from eight specific retro court judges so you will see that the justices and the clerks and the lawmaking in the supreme court is all coming from the same place. as you may like that if you are from harvard or yale and you may not think it is so good if you are from the west coast. three women on the supreme court all from new york city. isn't that amazing? and then one more final fact and i will quit boring you with statistics. the supreme court has issued 22 opinion so far this term. as is sometimes the case earlier in the term, you see these five five-4 decisions at the end of the term and more unanimity because it is easier to write opinions when everybody is in agreement. but it seems to be even more remarkable is here. only 10 dissents, 22 times nine or eight in many cases because justice kagan has been recused in 15 of the 22 but only 10 of 22 cases. all the justices have written two or three opinions for the court except justice thomas. he hasn't written

d.c. circuit, a longtime court administrator and also has first hand experience in the frontlines of several high visibility cases, including the terrorism case where she was the clerk in the eastern district of virginia. to my immediate left we had judge john jones, u.s. district court for the middle district of pennsylvania. he was confirmed back in july july 2002. he has had several notable cases, the best known for the landmark case kitzmiller versus dover area school district, where he found it on comp additional to require teaching intelligent design in public schools. we have judge walker with a gui heard firm and with a great presentation. judge walker interceded recently retired. is that correct? [laughter] recently retired. >> not quite. [inaudible] >> well, that's a good thing. i will. i'll be on my guard. judge walker is the reputation of being media friendly. we heard his presentation. most notably he had the property case that we heard about. and finally, pete wade sues the justice news correspondent since the early 90s was press official in various capacities for a number of y

d.c. circuit, a longtime court administrator and also has first hand experience in the frontlines of several high visibility cases, including the terrorism case where she was the clerk in the eastern district of virginia. to my immediate left we had judge john jones, u.s. district court for the middle district of pennsylvania. he was confirmed back in july july 2002. he has had several notable cases, the best known for the landmark case kitzmiller versus dover area school district, where he found it on comp additional to require teaching intelligent design in public schools. we have judge walker with a gui heard firm and with a great presentation. judge walker interceded recently retired. is that correct? [laughter] recently retired. >> not quite. [inaudible] >> well, that's a good thing. i will. i'll be on my guard. judge walker is the reputation of being media friendly. we heard his presentation. most notably he had the property case that we heard about. and finally, pete wade sues the justice news correspondent since the early 90s was press official in various capacities for a number of y

d.c. circuit on economic.hey both came out afterwards on that and it was a classic battle between the two sides. but that's an issue that i myself have been working on a long with bernie segan as early as the mid to late '70s when i was doing my doctorate at the university of chicago. and so there has been just struggle all along, and since the early 90s when we here at cato, especially when other joints -- others joined us along the way started with the revival of the doctrine of enumerated powers, not simply the attack on liberal judicial activism, we have seen this yet on the jurisprudence of the right. there are many more people today who are calling for this fundamental return to first principles. and to the idea of reviving the doctrine of enumerated powers on one hand, and securing rights both enumerated and unenumerated on the other. so this is why you haven't seen the changes yet in the supreme court, except for outliers like lopez and morrison. but i predict that we will see more of this, justice tho

d.c. circuit or the second circuit. 20 of the 36 came from eight specific federal court judges.tices and the clerks and the lawmaking in the supreme court are all coming from the same place. you may like that if you are from harvard or yale, or you may not think it is so good if your from the west coast. three women on the supreme court, all from new york city. one more final fact, the supreme court has issued 22 opinion so far this term. as is sometimes the case earlier in the term, you see more unanimity at the earlier part of the term because it is easier to write opinions when everybody is in agreement. it seems even more remarkable this year, out of 22 opinions, there were only 10 this sense. -- only 10 dissents. of the justices have written to are three opinions for the court except justice thomas. he has not written a single opinion for the court and here we are in the middle of march. so there are some demographic on the supreme court that tell us a little bit about what the court is or is not. >> the fact that the last for justice and to step down had served an average

d.c. circuit, a vacancy in oregon and two vacancies in virginia. let's debate them then vote them up or down. i consider the fact that they all came out of the judiciary committee with a solid vote, we ought to be working to confirm them before the upcoming recess. we should be working to clear the calendar before that recess. that's what a return to regular order entails. the real parties paying for these unnecessary delays -- and we had one here recently that was confirmed unanimously but had to wait for a year on the calendar to be voted on. if you have these unnecessary delays, you mean that judges remain overburdened, the american people who depend upon them are denied hearings and justice in a timely fashionmen fashionment -- fashion. when the chief judge wrote to senator reid and senator mcconnell last november, he noted senate action to fill the vacancies in d.c. was needed so that the citizens of the district of columbia and the federal government and other litigants who rely on the court could receive the high-quality justice they deserve