so my question then would he part of what you are talking about oliver wendell holmes was sort of mentally above it all in a sense of like that. is that a major area to freedom of speech across the world like you know this dictator, we don't like this that a good thing because they seem to be above it all and we can bring it down to our level by physical force as we can talk like oliver wendell holmes. we can ring it down to our level by physical force so was that a great narrative to freedom of speech back then and now? >> the detachment and the difficulty breaking through to people. i suppose it could be. on the one hand it seems like your question gets at, should we be engaged in more aggressive diplomacy is supposed to force as a country clacks on the other hand, the question might be taken to ask you now is what it takes to advance free speech or for free speech to become personal to people? to the extent that that is what you're asking i think that is kind of the case. i think that's the case with lots of -- lots of legal issues. the justices of the supreme court are people i suppose

the book is "the great dissent" how oliver wendell holmes changed his mind - and changed the historyof free speech in america. as robin mentioned thomas will be signing books downstairs in the lobby and i hope you will join him there in getting a copy. >> thanks so much. [applause] [inaudible conversations]s bravn booktv. he discusses the challenges facing prosecutors as they work to prosecute suspected terrorists in our military courts. this is about an hour and teen minutes. >> so i would like to begin by welcoming everyone to the first constitutional conversation of 2013 put on by the constitutional law center here at stanford and it's my special pleasure to introduce our guests for tonight, jess bravin of "the wall street journal" and author of the recent book, the terror courts on sale i should add that better bookstores everywhere and even the stanford bookstore. so you may want to grab that. this is probably the most serious account of what has actually happened in the court system in guantÁnamo in a series of trials that have been taking place there. i'm not going to trespass

that our entire first amendment tradition started out as a issent of all over wendell holmes -- all over wendell holmes -- oliver wendell holmes and louis brandeis over what the first amendment all about. not every dissent will be like that. maybe one design your entire life will be like that. if you are lucky. i think there are dissents were you are saying, this is the wrong road. they're going to be other cases that will involve other issues. i'm telling you why this is the wrong approach to this entire line of cases. in terms of -- president is very important of course. usually, you need a lot more precedent to overrule a case. if you could overrule a case every time you thought it was wrong, there would not be that much to precedent. it is important to a functioning legal system. it usually means other things. it is unworkable or the legs have been cut out from under it. it is inconsistent with a whole pack of other presidents. -- presidents -- precedents. it is rare to a justice will ay, we got it wrong. the fact you've descended in a case does not mean that you would reverse the case. it is the exact that

is that our entire first amendment tradition started out as a ofcendent of -- as a dissent oliver wendell holmes and louis brandeis over what the first amendment all about. not every dissent will be like that. maybe one dissent in your entire life will be like that. if you are lucky. i think there are dissents were you are saying, this is the wrong road. they're going to be other cases that will involve other issues. i'm telling you why this is the wrong approach to this entire line of cases. in terms of -- president -- precedent is really important to the court. usually, you need a lot more precedent to overrule a case. if you could overrule a case every time you thought it was wrong, there would not be that much to precedent. it is important to a functioning legal system. you usually need other things. it is unworkable or the legs have been cut out from under it. it is inconsistent with a whole pack of our other precedents. it is rare that justices or a court will say just, we got it wrong and we are overturning it. dissentedhat you have in a case does not mean that you would reverse the case.

look, oliver wendell holmes, great supreme court justice said jokingly, even a dog can tell the difference between being kicked and stumbled over. the point being, was he shoved or was it an accident. >> in the court of law is there such thing as consciousness of guilt? >> absolutely. >> can the juries hear that? can they make a decision about murder based on what they think was going on in her mind? >> like making up different stories -- >> can you really pull the trigger on a first degree murder just because somebody lied? i'm not sure. that's a good point. >> gretchen's question, will she be convicted of something. maybe not premeditated. but of something. >> i think that's right. >> you feel better now, doug? >> you guys beat me up here pretty good today. i'll go lick my wounds. >> we love you. >> it's so much better when we have a variety of opinions. >> exactly. fair and balance ebalanced. >>> he became famous for his courage after amputating his own arm during a hiking accident. remember aron ralston? he was arrest. we now have breaking news on the case in a live report coming up ne

so my question then would he part of what you are talking about oliver wendell holmes was sort of mentallyt all in a sense of like that. is that a major area to freedom of speech across the world like you know this dictator, we don't like this that a good thing because they seem to be above it all and we can bring it down to our level by physical force as we can talk like oliver wendell holmes. we can ring it down to our level by physical force so was that a great narrative to freedom of speech back then and now? >> the detachment and the difficulty breaking through to people. i suppose it could be. on the one hand it seems like your question gets at, should we be engaged in more aggressive diplomacy is supposed to force as a country clacks on the other hand, the question might be taken to ask you now is what it takes to advance free speech or for free speech to become personal to people? to the extent that that is what you're asking i think that is kind of the case. i think that's the case with lots of -- lots of legal issues. the justices of the supreme court are people i suppose but the

that our entire first amendment tradition started out as a dissent of all over wendell -- oliver wendell holmes and louis brandeis over what the first amendment all about. not every dissent will be like that. maybe one dissent if you are your entire life will be like that. lucky. i think there are dissents were you are saying, this is the wrong road. they're going to be other cases that will involve other issues. i'm telling you why this is the wrong approach to this entire line of cases. in terms of -- president is very importantnt is very to the courts. usually, you need a lot more if you could overrule a case every time you thought it was wrong, there would not be that much to precedent. it is important to a functioning legal system. it usually means other things. it is unworkable or the legs have been cut out from under it. it is inconsistent with a whole pack of our other precedents. it is read at a justice or the rare will -- it is

the book is "the great dissent" how oliver wendell holmes changed his mind - and changed the history of free speech in america. as robin mentioned thomas will be signing books downstairs in the lobby and i hope you will join him there in getting a copy. >> thanks so much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> tomorrow night and booktv, biographies and books on booktv. first, april that stood up for education were shot by the taliban. then the author of ben franklin's youngest sister and jasmine ward with her book about growing up in poverty in rule mississippi. >> i have been involved in politics for four years in one way or another. i worked in the administration and i have never seen so many people quoting and waving around the declaration of independence and the constitution. many of you never gave it a second thought and i bet not it is at the front of your mind and it is with tens of millions of us. and the fact of the matter is that tens of millions of us love this country and we don't have fundamentally transformed and we have to get to as many people as we can and wake them

his thomas healy discusses book, "the great dissent" about oliver wendell holmes. a look at guantÁnamo bay and the book "the terror courts ." watch book tv all week in prime time on c-span two. rex i think they are moving extremely fast. mine expires after five to 10 years. the cloud is new, facebook is new, twitter is new -- historically what we have done is slice human life into four slices. the play phase and then they learn phase, a work phase and then a resting phase afterwards and maybe eventually dying. what i think we should be doing is interweave these and have them all at the same time. we should play, learn, work and rest at the same time. the world moves so fast. we have to stay up to date. >> new year's day on c-span, just before 1:00 eastern and throughout the afternoon, ceos of several companies on the future of higher education, robotics, and data as the new industrial revolution as book tv -- kay bailey hutchison on the women who helped shape texas at eight: 45. on c-span three, "daughters of civil rights leaders share their memories of the civil r

then thomas healy discusses his book about oliver wendell holmes.hen a look at "the terror courts." watch book tv all week on c-span 2. host: author and presidential historian richard norton smith joins us now discussion on second term presidencies as as president obama is about to turn the page on the first year of his second term. mr. smith, at this point what can we say yet whether or not present obama's going to fall into a certain mold of a second term president? guest: it is amazing how people are in a rush to get beyond the next three years, there's a large part of the media that cannot wait for the next campaign horserace. they forget that that we have a president for the next three years. it is true that he has been experiencing what one might call the second term jinx. it is something that goes back to the very beginning. with rare exceptions. george washington had a very stormy second term. largely over foreign policy. americans were sharply divided over the french revolution and the impact upon this country. thomas jefferson, who in his

this goes back to oliver wendell holmes and his theory but we will have to evaluate that. now that we have much better evidence that some people can't live by that reasonable person standard should it matter to us and it goes too what's the theory of punishment and why do we punish people? is it because it's free utility for safeguarding society? we will have to figure it out and the shades of gray that science is making a parent now are things people have to think about and address. >> thank you, nita. [applause] gives give me 15 minutes. our last speaker needs an introduction but is not going to get one. that's me. so far you have her teeth people talk about science in a courtroom context. i want to open up the frame some and talk about how genetics and genomic technologies in particular are going to change our world in ways that will have some effects in courtrooms and in law offices so those of you who are here as judges or lawyers with spouses or partners of judges or lawyers will see some of this professionally first-hand or secondhand but it's also going to have eno

at 9:30 it's thomas healy and the great dissent: how oliver wendell holmes changed his mind and changed the history of free speech in america. and at 10:30, jess braven talks about his book, "the terror courts." again, our booktv prime programming gets under way at 8:30 this evening here on c-span2. meanwhile, tonight on c-span3 it's more from american history tv. tonight's topic will be george washington. at 8 p.m., george washington as an intellectual. from our lectures and history series, the speaker is denver brounsman of george washington university who talks about the first president's lifelong interest in learning and commitment to education. at 9:15 p.m., it's washington's presidency. also from lectures in history, george fox university professor carrie irish exam examines the presidency of george washington who was inaugurated in 1789. and at 1025 p.m., washington's defeat in brandywine. author bruce modet talks about a lesser known battle which p ended in a british victory over general george washington at chazz ford, pennsylvania. in what was the largest land battle of the co