the american bar association. give them the situation now at the elections going on and the money going into campaigns what can judges and courts do to, batch work overcome the public perception and judicial perception that money buys decisions? >> good question. i think if i had the answer i might still be a judge. it is a tremendous problem we have got to do something with. you always have someone who wants to be a judge not fighting by the same rules. the bar association, we have greater control by bar association and judicial elections. public financing rather than open financing from public at large but then you get back into the free-speech issue of independence campaign. there is no easy solution. >> sometimes it is easier to get people excited about a solution that is bigger than smaller. in sir ways we think about getting agreement on marginal change. if you look at polling on the political side and not just the judicial side almost nobody agreeing with the conservative argument. 80% of people generally be

the american bar association had looked at his record and gave him one of the lowest ratings that it there were a number of individuals from civil rights organizations who had come forward to testify that this was not a good nomination, that this was a nomination that was going to set us all back as a country. so that was there. but then, as you say, nothing really like what happened once my testimony took place. and i stand by that testimony. it was the right thing to do. and i'll tell you why. people say, well, it was a sexual harassment claim against him. but really it was testimony about the integrity of the individual who was going to be appointed for a lifetime position. >> what was interesting to me at the time was the way in which the black community largely closed ranks around clarence thomas as opposed to you. they said, you know, why not allow this man to go to the highest, you know, bench in the land? why is this woman stopping this black man from succeeding? how did that feel? >> it to me was just a testament to how powerful racism has been in this country. and i've expe

he's christopher carani, patent attorney at mcandrews, held & malloy, and chairman of the american bar association's design rights committee. so christopher, how long do you think it's going to be before we see new designs other than the apple iphones that we've gotten so used to seeing? >>. >> typically these things will take about a product cycle or two cycles before we'll see something. remember, in this case there are two types of patents that are implicated. utility patents which protect the way things work and design patents which protect the way things look. in other words, their aesthetic. here companies competitors of apple are going to be challenged that they are going to now need to come up with new, different, exciting looking designs in order to catch the customer's interest. >> susie: but what about consumer choices. as you heard in our report app sell trying to get certain samsung gadgets off the market. what does this mean for consumers? >> yeah, this, when you have a design-- where we have that the jury decided that these particular device of samsung infringe the apple patent, one o

women's rights and peacemaking and the center for american progress releases a report on education and global competitiveness. >> from the american bar association's annual meeting. a comparison of the constitutional legal systems of the united states, canada, and israel. the panel includes a former canadian justice minister, judges sitting on the canadian and israeli supreme courts and u.s. supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. this is an hour and a half. >> good afternoon. my name is michael trace, and welcome to our panel today. on comparative constitutional law. north america and the middle east. to all of you, welcome on this very auspicious day when we have an august pane of supreme court justice, members of parliament, former attorney general and professors of law. our format today will be that we'll give each of our panelists an opportunity if they wish to say a few words and make a few observations, and then we have encouraged them to enter act with one another in a conversational style, posing questions and back and forth, and then we will take questions and answer back and forth with the audience as well. we're working on a schedul

the american bar association has also spoken on this issue. he has been recommended unanimously as "qualified" for the federal bench by the anding committee on the federal judiciary of the american bar association. so we're in a position here where we have a judicial emergency on the eastern district court. we have a situation where the delays which result deprive americans of what they are entitled to. we have a nominee who's been recommended by a broadly based commission, which senator stabenow and i have appointed. he's been given a numerating of "qualified -- he's been given a unanimous rating of "qualified." he said and he believes and he has shown in practice that -- quote -- "my personal beliefs, both past and present, have no bearing on the decisions that i make in court." the notion, he said, that he would place his own personal judgment in place of the law is contradicted by not just his testimony, but it's by a record of decisions that indicate that he abides by the concept of a judge as an impartial arbiter. so senator stabenow unde

. >> from the american bar association's american meeting, a comparison of the constitutional legal systems of the united states, canada, and israel. it includes a former canadian justice minister. judges sitting on the canadian and israeli supreme court and u.s. supreme court justice, ruth bader ginsburg. this is an hour and a half. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon, my name is michael traison. welcome to our discussion on constitutional law in north america and the middle east grid to all of you, welcome on this very auspicious day when we haven't addressed the panel of supreme court justices andembero members of thisations, program. we will say a few words and then get observations and encourage them to interact with onen another in a conversationalal sy style.le posing questions back and forths and then we will take questionsh and answers back and forth withl the audience as well. 3:3 we are working on a schedule to finish at 330, and i think that will work out fine.e at many of the programs we have attended here at this 2012 aba o meeting y in these times win the rule of law

even the left-leaning american bar association called him not qualified.led in 2005 when hamilton was a federal district court judge, he banned a prayer used in the p indiana legislature that mentioned jesus christ, and he ordered the indiana legislature to refrain from using christ'sle name or title or any denominational appeal. however, at the same time hamilton said, it is permissible for the legislature to use the word "allah."word fortunately, that decision was overturned on appeal. however, president obama then promoted david hamilton to a lifetime judgeship on the u.s.nt court of appeals for the seventh circuit. federal judge michael urbanski is another judicial appointment made by president obama.he urbanski must take the cake forr having the most extraordinary, exalted notion of his own power. youurbanski suggested in the con that the ten commandments be censored down to six commandments in order to make te the posting legal under the first commandment. obama's most outrageous attack on religious liberty is his executive order in obamacareba that thema requirements -- thato i

he has spoken at seminars sponsored by the american bar association, the state bar of georgia, the atlantaociation, and the university of georgia cle on topics including antitrust law, banking law, criminal antitrust problems, as evidence, ethics, practice and procedure, georgia civil procedure, and uniform commercial code. he is no stranger to constitutional litigation. he argued in front of the supreme court and prevailed in the case of westbury versus sanders, when the supreme court held that congressional districts must be apportioned based on population. this overruled the previous case, where the supreme court held that the apportioning of congressional districts was a political question beyond the jurisdiction of federal courts. on the topic of the constitutionality of the senate filibuster, he published an article in the summer of 2011 of the "harvard journal on legislation," titled "the senate filibuster, the politics of obstruction." copies of the article are available outside for reference after the program. further, as he discussed today, on may 14, 2012, he filed a complaint i

. >> thanks, tom, with the american bar association. given the situation now, the elections that are going on, the money going into the campaigns, what can judges and courts do to try to combat or overcome the public perception and the judicial perception, that money buys decisions? >> it's a good question. i think if i had the answer, i might be still a judge. but, no. it's a tremendous problem that we have got to do something with can judges self-police? the problem is, you've always got somebody wanting to be a judge who is not going to play by the same rules. and bar associations should -- we have greater control by bar associations in judicial elections. public financing rather than just this open financing from the public at large. then you get back into the free speech issues of independent campaigns. there's no easy solution. >> i can just quickly say, i think sometimes it's easier to get people excited about a solution that's bigger than smaller. in certain areas we think about needing to get agreement on marginal change. if you

constitutional law and local governmental issues and has spoken at seminars sponsored by the american bar association, the state bar of georgia, the atlanta bar association and the university of georgia cles on topics including antitrust law, appellate practice, banking law, evidence, criminal antitrust problems, ethics, federal practice and procedure, georgia civil procedure and the uniform commercial code. mr. bondurant is no stranger to constitutional litigation. in 1963 at the anal of 26 -- age of 26, he argued in front of the supreme court and prevailed in the case of west bury v. sanders where the supreme court held that congressional districts -- like state legislative districts -- must be apportioned within a state based on population. overruling the previous case of colgrove v. green where the supreme court had held that the apportion. of congressional direction -- districts was beyond the jurisdiction of federal courts. on the topic of the constitutionality of the senate filibuster, mr. bondurant published an article in the summer 2010 edition titled the senate filibuster, the politics of o

the american bar association's past president had established an organization called world peace through law. they had a first convention in 1965 in washington, d.c. there was a big reception. i had been teaching for a year. i met the chief justice of the supreme court of colorado, who was a particularly impressed with the fact that i spoke six languages. things past. the next day, that speakers throughout all of the washington hilton -- "professor bassiouni, please urgently report to the desk." i was troubled and surprised to find him, who looked at me and said, "is it true, he speaks six languages?" "yes." "tell me, what are they?" "french, german, italian --" "but enough." he took me to a huge room with 50 chief justices of the supreme courts of the world, with the late chief justice warren sitting in the middle. to his right was the chief justice of the supreme court of saudi arabia, who never said that he did not speak english, and he didn't. across him was the chief justice of the supreme court of france, who would never admit to not speaking english -- [laughter] next to him was t

. >> tom with the american bar association. iven the situation now, and the elections that are going on, the money that's going into campaigns, what can judges and courts do to try to combat old overcome the public perception of the judicial perception that money buys decisions? >> it's a good question. i think if i had the answer i might be still a judge. but no, it's a tremendous problem that we've got to do something with. can judges self police the police? you know, the problem is you've always got somebody wanting to be a judge is not going to play by the same rules. you know, bar associations, we have greater control by bar associations than judicial elections. i just -- public financing rather than just open financing from the public at large. but can you get back into the free speech issues of independent campaigns. there is no solution. >> i can just quickly say, i think sometimes it's easier to get people excited about a solution that is bigger than smaller. in certain areas we think about maybe getting to get agreemen

he's christopher carani, patent attorney at mcandrews, held & malloy, and chairman of the american bar association'sity patents which protect the way things work and design patents which protect the way things look. in other words, their aesthetic. here companies competitors of apple are going to be challenged that they are going to now need to come up with new, different, exciting looking designs in order to catch the customer's interest. >> susie: but what about consumer choices. as you heard in our report app sell trying to get certain samsung gadgets off the market. what does this mean for consumers? >> yeah, this, when you have a design-- where we have that the jury decided that these particular device of samsung infringe the apple patent, one of the remedies is damages which here they've assessed a $1 billion damage award, but also a determination regarding an injunction, in other words, a ban of the products from sale and importation to the united states. this decision is left up to the hands of the presigning judge. so in september 20, she will hold a hearing at that time, and hear the argum

. >> next, from the american bar association's annual meeting, supreme court

the league of united latin american citizens, speaking with the coalition with the hispanic federation. the national hispanic coalition on aging. the hispanic colleges and universities. the national hispanic media coalition. the national hispanic bar association a national conference on per uerto rican women. i will ask the representatives to come and answer some of the questions when we are done with the presentation, please. and the importance of timing is unique. the latino community has been under constant attack that has been making lives unbearable. in unity and solidarity to say enough. and of to the constant violations of human rights and civil rights of the latino community. enough to all the pieces of legislation in the nation. enough to borders oppression and that is excluding latinos from the democratic process. enough to an educational system that excludes latino children. enough to the crimes. hate crimes. [speaking spanish] it is more important than ever. it will leave us accountable for their actions and the impact that they may have in the community. it is very clear that the latino vote has become decisive for national elections and we only keep growing. both parties need to earn the latino vote. both parties need to earn th

. >> thanks, tom, with the american bar association. given the situation now, the elections that are going on, the money going into the campaigns, what can judges and courts do to try to combat or overcome the public perception and the judicial perception, that money buys decisions? >> it's a good question. i think if i had the answer, i might be still a judge. but, no. it's a tremendous problem that we have got to do something with can judges self-police? the problem is, you've always got somebody wanting to be a judge who is not going to play by the same rules. and bar associations should -- we have greater control by bar associations in judicial elections. public financing rather than just this open financing from the public at large. then you get back into the free speech issues of independent campaigns. there's no easy solution. >> i can just quickly say, i think sometimes it's easier to get people excited about a solution that's bigger than smaller. in certain areas we think about needing to get agreement on marginal change. if you