ask me another question in relation to the supreme court's precedents, the supreme court's presidents that access to abortion as part of the liberty guaranteed i -- >> that was just -- amy: that 1993 confirmation hearing, betsy west, how unusual, especially in light of now in 2018, imagine your supreme court justice being so open about her support for freedom to choose for women, about her support for abortion. talk about the significance of this. >> she was extremely forthright about this. she's a very principled person. she was not going to pull her punches on this. the amazing thing is, after that, she was confirmed 96-3. 96-3. and you heard, i mean, orrin hatch basically saying, look, we disagree but i think you are well-qualified to serve on the supreme court and you have been nominated by our president, who happens to be a democrat, that is the way this system works. it is kind of poignant and extraordinary to hear that today. amy: you both interviewed orrin hatch. you interviewed him for the film. did he say he would support her today? he was very lot a jury of her. >> he was.

it is denied to-one and goes to the supreme court. -- 2-1 and goes to the supreme court. it is a very different case. it will be interesting to see how the court response to these theories. challengeeach -- the is district 6 in maryland, a district for many years apublican-controlled, elected congressman named ross bartlett. in 2011, the democrats being in control of mallon, decided in their wisdom to take some of the control of-- maryland, decided in their wisdom to take some of the rural area out. you ended up a delegation from maryland that was seven democrats and one republican. the argument they are making is not that the 7-1 is unconstitutional. that the change of a republican district to a democratic district in the circumstances of this case was a violation of the first amendment rights of the republican voters in that district. the claim is that the state acted with specific intent to retaliate against them because of their decision to exercise their rights to vote for republicans in the past and the retaliation took the form of change in the districts those peop

supreme court. >> and she dissented.ustice scalia was one of the architects of the majority decision saying, having george bush become the president and ruth ginsburg wrote one of several -- i think our number in that case, but one of the dissenters in the case. amy: and this issue of ruth bader ginsburg being the the center. young people who are following her now, that is all they would think about. but that actually wasn't always the case. you are really interesting sort of image that you have in the you show her right in the center there, much closer to the conservatives, and then how she moves to the left. betsy west? >> as one of our interviewees said, she was never meant to be a great dissenter. consensus.won a and she still wants consensus. she has a very practical view of the law. she is always trying to bring people over to her side. it is a very -- it is very important to her that she had collegial relationships with her fellow justices, and that she makes reasoned arguments. she is not a bomb thrower. however,

our analysis is when the supreme court wrote as follows. congress had found that case-by-case litigation was inadequate to combat widespread discrimination and voting because of the inordinate amount of time and energy required to tactics the obstruction encountered in these lawsuits. systematicing resistance, congress might well the advantage of time and inertia -- this is their language, from the perpetrators of the evil to its victims. thequestion remains whether specific remedies described in the act were an appropriate means of combating the able. and the question we shall address ourselves is this. supremes hear the talking about perpetrators of evil often. -- holmes he and bad men holmesian bad men, indeed. if you lack standing to him a you lack the ability to have the .ourt determine your dispute constitutional standing is thus a prerequisite -- isn't a prerequisite to a federal courts hearing at all. knows the dread scott case. everybody says powerful language, some people say horrible language, some people say interesting language

supreme court. to janice case is designed remove what has already been established as the constitutionality of public to ce unions to be able their fees and dues for membership. which will be a catastrophic threat to the survival of these unions. and so we want to explain that. we want to also share the greatness of this. and so this is where we are. and i want to ask those who are listening over c-span tonight, all across this country, call a neighbor, call a friend, tell them to tune in and listen to these members of congress pour ut the truth about what's at stake with this janice court case that will be coming up before the supreme court. the first union that will be is ask me. but it's far more than just ask me. it's the public sector unions that will be ruled as whether it's constitutional or not for them to have dues. to be able to pay. this case comes from an individual, mr. janice in illinois, who disagreed with the political endorsements. well, what's important to understand going forward,

and until now, the supreme leader has been quiet, and it is up to the supreme leader to make any changesyar, we have not seen willingness from the supreme leader to make any changers -- changes. en: it started as being about falling living standards. it has now become clearly political. anger directed at the clerics and the supreme leader, as well. how will the clay arcs and the supreme leader be feeling about this? clerics -- the the supreme leader be feeling about this? will they be troubled about it at all? guest: it started as a demonstration, a manifestation of anger, frustration of people across iran, across the clerical four decades.st they have to be able to satisfy people, because if they want to satisfy people, they have to be overthrown, and they do not want that to happen, so, of course, the supreme leader is trying to appease people to a certain extent, but when people come to the streets, and they have come to the streets in the last five days, and chant death to the supreme leader, that means they do not want them to be in power so the supreme leader asking the , revolutio

the president is just the prime minister to the supreme just the prime minister to the supreme leaderand until now the supreme leader has been quiet and it is up to the supreme been quiet and it is up to the supreme leader to make any changes. but so far we have not seen any willingness from the supreme leader to make changes. all this started as an economic protest against falling living standards and has now clearly become political, a lot of anger directed at the all powerful clerics, the supreme at the all powerful clerics, the supreme leader as well. how do you think the leader and clerics will be filling about all this, will they be trouble at all? the protest started as a demonstration manifestation of angen demonstration manifestation of anger, frustration of people across iran against the clerical rule in the past four decades. as such, the clerics and the supreme leader will not be able to satisfy people because if they want to satisfy people they have to be overthrown and they do not want that. so of course the supreme leader is trying to appease people to a certain extent

sitting supreme the supreme leadership, the sitting supreme leader —— when the sitting supreme supremesitting supreme leader —— when the sitting supreme leader passes on, president rouhani would like to get thatjob. in this process, he totally forgot the people, he forgot the painful economic conditions of the country and what we are witnessing right now ina and what we are witnessing right now in a violent is a result of that neglect by president rouhani, but let me say it this, this is not really about president rouhani, this is about the system and about a0 yea rs of is about the system and about a0 years of grievances, in many ways, having built up. and the people are simply, as we are watching now on oui’ simply, as we are watching now on our tv screens, saying that the only way that seems to work with this regime is it so they can see you in the streets. otherwise, they do not pay attention to you. in the past, the romanian authorities have always blamed outsiders for some of the fate that has befallen them. —— iranians. in no, the iranians have a lwa ys iranians. in no, the iran

that appeared to be illegal. through to the supreme court with his appeals.d you feel? because it was literally his life in the hands of your court. of a very troublesome case. as well as before, which is a pointless thing to do. some of them do, yes. yes. that case was, again, parliament was clear. to be imprisoned for 14 years. would be committing a crime. his right to determine his own fate under the human rights convention. and the morality involved in the case? had personal view. you are retired, now. the right to commit suicide? i think morally right is not... i think that i would have fashioned it to enable this to happen. but, um... many of whom had views, too, that i would not have decided... you must have been very dissatisfied with the outcome... touching on, here. it to parliament. for individual countries. was appropriate to tell the parliament what to do. about this — to brexit. that the uk ship of state is sailing into choppy waters. you did. brexit in your mind. in the future, after brexit. the british government appears to have fudged the rel

supreme leader ayatollah ali how many accuses enemies of iran of stirring up the unrest. bushmen. enemy is poised for an opportunity a breach to penetrate through look at the incidents in the past few days all those who are against the islamic republic of iran those with cash and politics weapons and intelligence operators you can join hands to create trouble that opposition leaders say the demonstrators are demanding far reaching reforms. changes even radical changes. they want to change pretty much everything in short they want to live differently. it's true that improving the economic situation is very important for them. but it's not only about that citizen economy it is impossible but soon the only thing also. has the protests widen iran's president rouhani has expressed sympathy for peaceful demonstrators worried about making ends meet that's unlikely to satisfy their demands. i did only a correspondent. monitoring events and joins us from our studios in the bone welcome now this seems to be a process without any particular leadership or coordination so there do seem to be l

the supreme court of the united states as well as the supreme court of elyria. into the new situation of law. everybody thought the issues solved and resolved and the law of the land was. is that right, where are we today? >> i think we are halfway through. it was only 2003 that the supreme court outlawed sodomy prohibition. a little more than a decade where we have gone from that to same-sex marriage. every territory in the united states you can get married if you are gay or lesbian. but at the same time, we don't have employment protections. only about half of the states have employment protection. we have challenges to that, like the recent case that the supreme court heard about the baker in colorado who refused to provide a wedding cake to a same-sex couple. so we are halfway through this development. the law has caught up in some places, provides for a protections, but even just today the supreme court refused to hear the evans case on sexual orientation and whether the 11th circuit sexual discrimination protects people. we are seeing circuit split their w

. >>> and now the supreme court oral argument for collins v. virginia a case about warrantless searches. now allows police to search a vehicle without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe that it's been involved in illegal activities. this is just under an hour. >>> we'll hear argument next in case 161027 collins versus virginia. >> the warrant requirement for the home cannot be overthrown by the automobile exception. under the commonwealth's argument, on probable cause alone, an officer may search a vehicle anywhere that he finds it, and may go anywhere that he needs to in order to access that vehicle. that rule cannot survive foundational fourth amendment principles. searches of the home in curtilage without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable as this court has often recognized. the rule we ask this court to adopt is that the automobile exception does not apply to a vehicle found in the curtilage of the home. >> suppose the police have probable cause to believe that the vehicle is stolen, and they even get a warrant to inspec

the supreme court is affirming the separation of the races. larry s gibson:at the time of the civil war, baltimore had the largest free black population of any american city. and through a combination of laws, and in practices, the city became much more racially segregated around about the time when thurgood marshall was born. narrator: marshall grew up a short distance from downtown baltimore on the west side in an african-american neighborhood scattered with european immigrants. his father william worked as a waiter on the railroad. a man with a sharp wit who was sometimes described as cantankerous, he would visit the baltimore city courthouse and then argue the cases with his son over dinner. his mother norma was an educated articulate woman who taught in baltimore's segregated schools where her son thurgood graduated from high school in june of 1925. in the fall of that same year he left for lincoln university in oxford pennsylvania. in his senior year at lincoln thurgood married vivian bure, a university of pennsylvania student known to h

supreme court. and 12 to the circuit court of appeals. by comparison, in president obama's first year in office, the senate only confirmed 13 judges. three to the circuit courts. this administration has been aggressive in naming nominees, often without complication from senators, bucking long standing practice. they have been embarrassed by some of the symptoms of their rushed process, having to reconsider moving forward, for example, with three incredibly troubling nominees. however, the concerning trends that we have seen in these nominees remain in is some of the others. nominees, for example, who lack legal experience, lack experience in the jurisdiction which they've been nominated, come from strong ideological backgrounds, have made deeply troubling public, sometimes unanimous, statements. they may have not received a qualified rating from the a.b.a. standing committee on the federal judiciary. or are not fully forth coming in their senate judiciary committee questionnaire or in their hearing.

i think they are thinking more about a supreme cour the suprems decisions they don't like.the day-to-day workings of the federal courts of appeals are well regarded and the judges are well regarded in the communities, so i think it's okay and there are efforts made to go out into the community and educate the public about what it is the courts are doing. there'there is a huge program gn in the city of new york to try to educate the public about what it is that they do. i hope the book made a slight contribution. >> host: they should know it before they become the party used the law. that education would make a big difference. >> guest: i think so, yes. >> host: i want to thank you for this conversation and again recommend this book. it is full of insights and anecdotes and stories that are absolutely fascinating and entertaining. you might think that is an oxymoron when it comes to a judge and a memoir but it is full of interesting stuff on amazon.com. i look forward to many more gears of your service on the bench. >> guest: thank you very much, senator. .. >> >> good eveni

supreme court, yeah. >> if the decision doesn't go sadiq's way, what would happen to him?t then they try to make it unvoluntarily. >> by force. >> by force, yeah. then the person can be sent back. ♪ (people chanting) (people chanti) (people shouting) ♪ (people chanting) >> "send them home. send them home," they chant. (people chanting) >> right wing nationalist parties have boomed in popularity on the continent. (cheering) >> anti-islam, anti-immigrant, anti-euro. its leader recently suggested german border guards shoot refugees. (cheering) ♪ >> hello. (chuckles) (lateef): (crying softly) ♪ >> supreme court took my case, and gave me another chance to be interviewed by immigration office. and i call that interview of my life. (lawyer): ♪ >> i am waiting for my fate to be told. europe either gave me a life or death. i hope they give me life. ♪ ♪ (nazifa): ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> go to pbs.org/frontline to watch our first "exodus" film which aired in 2016. then, find out more about europe's response to the migrant and refugee crisis... >> "send them home", they chant. >> and more about

when the current supreme the supreme leadership.preme leader passes on, rouhani would like to take on his job. he goes to hardline elements and in this process he forgot the people, the painful economic conditions of the country and what we are witnessing run out is a result of that neglect by rob one this is not about what one, it is about the supreme leader. —— the president. as we are watching on our tv screens, the people are saying the only way that seems to work with this regime is it they can see you on the street otherwise they do not pay attention to us. in the past outsiders have been blamed for the fate befalling the country. people now weary of that as an excuse? iranians have always been worried about what happens in what is happening in the neighbourhood, in places like iraq and syria, happening to them. iran is a large multi ethnic country. there has was being that worry that such conditions as seen elsewhere could come to iran if the stability of the country is put at risk but, at the same time, they are asking thems

the supreme court justice sotomayor: yes, but the the supreme court mr. cox: that's right. and they didn't justice sotomayor: -- which is the court we're reviewing mr. cox: that's right. and they didn't make -- they didn't make its own exigency analysis. that is another ground on which we win. we would rather win on the categorical exception, but we clearly think that there are exigent circumstances here beyond the categorical exigency in the automobile exception that justice ginsburg: that would be a question for remand because it wasn't reached by the virginia supreme court. mr. cox: we would -- we would be confident if it were remanded that we would prevail on that, yes, your honor. officer rhodes had probable cause before he ever stepped foot on the driveway to know that this vehicle was stolen. the supreme court of virginia in its opinion, pet. app 15, said officer rhodes had probable cause to believe it was stolen and there was testimony in the record by officer rhodes to support the fact that he did know it was stolen. and justice ginsburg: you say if there is probab

particularly the supreme court.i think the robert for curing with sort of a a watershed heag as far as that goes -- robert bork hearing -- it has become very partisan, the party of the president, the senators tend to ask very favorable question any opposition party tends to be a bit hostile. either way the matter whether it's republican or democratic, it works either way. that's unfortunate. i think it's gotten, i think probing is useful but i think there's a line between legitimate probing and excessive pushing. i think with supreme court hearing, historically there were no hearings. the first hearing was way back, i think 20, stone might've had a brief hearing. frankfurter came in 1939, showed up, wasn't asked a single question. potter stewart i think was the first to be seriously asked counsel is a modern development but its uses day, at least at the supreme court level. court of appeal hearings are usually non-events, non-newsworthy events the supreme court hearing is very contentious as you know. you are a memb

jeremy: it is not just ayatollah khamenei, the supreme leader, who is blaming foreigners. the former president, a reformist, says iranians have the right to protest, but he blamed iran's enemies, led by the united states, for inciting people to destroy public buildings and insult religious values. president obama in 2009 was careful not to give the last big protests his backing. but president trump has tweeted his support. the people of iran, he declared, "are finally acting against the brutal and corrupt iranian regime." the americans are encouraging to protests, but they denied they are behind them. ambassador haley: we all know that is complete nonsense. the demonstrations are completely spontaneous. they are virtually in every city in iran. this is the precise picture of a long-oppressed people rising up against their dictators. jeremy: the last big protests in iran were in 2009 at for a -- after a disputed presidential election. back then, they were defeated by the power of the state, even though they were led by top politicians and faced a badly divided islamic leade

that is because the supreme court at the time was a conservative libertarian majority supreme court.nkfurter objected to the way that supreme court was blocking progressive legislation. he developed the idea of restraint to try to block them. years, roosevelt managed to appoint a majority of them to the court. frankfurter believed they should still exercise restraint. they came to see him as a judicial conservative, having come to the bench as a liberal. ultimately, he ended his career being seen as very conservative and dissenting from some of the great liberal judgments. there were exceptions, he was an active majority in the brown versus the board of education case. he was prepared to be an activist. he is left with academics and people like me who value the fact that he was committed to what i would like to think of as objective as he could be in terms of the values he took. no one is a objective. we are all human. he tried to stick with the philosophy that he believed was true and he was perceived as a liberal. he never gave that up. that is a great model, to hold the professors

supreme leader ayatollah ali how many accuses enemies of iran of stirring up the unrest. bushmen montazeri iqbal the anime is poised for an opportunity to reach to penetrate through look at the incidents in the past few days all those who are against the islamic republic of iran those with cash and politics weapons and intelligence operators you can join hands to create trouble. how many didn't name any specific enemies but a senior official said britain saudi arabia and the u.s. were behind the riots president donald trump had this to say on twitter the people of iran are finally acting against the brutal and corrupt iranian regime all of the money that president obama so foolishly gave them went into terrorism and into their pockets the people have little food big inflation and no human rights the u.s. is watching. some dramatic unverified footage from inside iran has reached georgia vella through the messaging service telegram one apparently shows a protest the chasing a cleric. the crisis which has been raging for the past few days shows no signs of easing. there to s

. >>> the supreme court heard oral argument for collins v virginia. a case about warrantless searches. talking about how far the automobile exception extend. in 2013, police investigated an unidentified motorcyclist who had been abating them in high-speed chases. law enforcement officials believed ryan collins was involved. during their investigation, they were led to mr. collins' girlfriend's house where a motorcycle covered by a tarp was parked in the drive way. an officer lifted the tarp and ran the number on the motorcycle. it showed up as stolen. and mr. collins was charged. mr. collins' legal team. >> says the officer trespassed on to private property and the went beyond the limits of the fourth amendment. this oral argument is about an hour. >>> we'll hear argument next in case 161027 collins versus virginia. >> the warrant requirement for the home cannot be overthrown by the automobile exception. under the commonwealth's argument, on probable cause alone, an officer may search a vehicle anywhere that he finds it, and may go anywhere that he ne

so we're not going to hear anything out of the supreme court for at least well over a month. meantime, the original deadline on which daca was supposed to expire, march 5th, will have passed. and the lower court ruling remains in effect. blocking the government from stopping daca. now interestingly, david, the trump administration did not ask the supreme court as it did in all the travel ban cases for a stay. to stay the effect, block the effect of the lower court order here and let the government go ahead and continue to shut daca down. what they say in their filing in the supreme court is they try to do this in an orderly way and stopping and starting and turning it on and off doesn't do anybody any good. daca will be around for at least another month, maybe a little more than that. even if the supreme court agrees to hear this case, the earliest it could decide it is several months from now. so at least as it appears right now, daca isn't going anywhere. >> pete williams, thank you very much. our justice correspondent on that latest wrinkle with regard to daca. >>> right n

years at least twenty people have been killed in nearly a week of protests around the country iran supreme leader accuses the enemy of the country of meddling in its affairs also coming up. with just over a month to go until the winter olympics south korea off first to hold talks with the north to discuss letting pyongyang's athletes participate in the games. and have a cost and it's good to have you with us the violent demonstrations rocking iran show no sign of easing after nearly a week of anti-government protests at least twenty people have been killed and hundreds of others have been arrested a protest began over economic woes and rising food prices but have since turned into political rallies against the country's brillig just leadership iran's supreme leader has accused the country's enemies of stirring unrest. let's take a closer look at the major players in iran and what they want for their country. he is the most powerful man in iran right after god the supreme leader ayatollah ali khamenei has the final say in all state matters and it's the highest ranking political and religiou

that get hurt an heard resolved by the supreme court. there are tens of thousands of cases that move through the federal district and circuit courts that touch every aspect of our lives and i think that historically we have seen the president respect the integrity of the courts and sometimes they invite and debate nominees who sometimes are polarizing that historically we've seen presidents but with nominees who can garner some degree of bipartisan support and that hasn't been the case with president trump's nominees, and i think that is because he has been so focused on putting forth radical ideologues who call far from outside th of the mainstre. there are people of low caliber we saw with matthew peterson and he's been relentless in putting forth young white men for vacancies that exist across the federal court and i think that is a shame. white men make up about 31% of the u.s. population but have represented the lion's share more than 80% of the president's nominations. so i think that sends a really dangerous message to americans,

supreme leader ayatollah ali how many accuses enemies of iran of stirring up the unrest. bushmen. for the anime is poised for an opportunity a breach to penetrate through that look at the incidents in the past few days all those who are against the islamic republic of iran those with cash and politics weapons and intelligence operators you can join hands to create trouble that opposition leaders say the demonstrators are demanding far reaching reforms or your mom has changes even radical changes they want to change pretty much everything in short. they want to live differently if. it's true that improving the economic situation is very important for them. but it's not only about that citizen economy it is impossible but soon the only thing also has the protests widen iran's president rouhani has expressed sympathy for peaceful demonstrators worried about making ends meet that's unlikely to satisfy the demands . of correspondent. monitoring events and joins us from our studios in the bone welcome now this seems to be a process without any particular leadership or coordination so th

. >>> the supreme court heard oral argument in collins v virginia, the case about warrantless searches, which addressed how far the fourth amendments automobile exception extends. in 2013 police investigate an unidentified motorcyclists who had been evading them in high-speed chases. they believed will be ryan collins was involved. they were lead to his girlfriend's house where a tarp was there. they lifted the tarp and a motorcycle was underneath it and it was stolen. they say collins trespassed the property and went beyond the limits. this oral argument lasts about an hour. >> we'll hear case 16-1027 in the case of collins versus virginia. mr. fitzgerald? >> thank you. may it please the court, it cannot be overthrown by the automobile exception. under the commonwealth's argument on propable cause alone, an officer maicer. a vehicle anywhere that he finds it and may go anywhere that he needs to in order to access that vehicle. that rule cannot survive foundational fourth amendment principles. searches of the home in curtilage without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable as this co

the supreme court will challenge the validity of it. the rights to privacy, a fundamental constitutional rights in india. they are also challenging the way biometric data is collected and the use of it by government agencies. there are pros and cons, but when will the supreme court make a decision? if it is scrapped, what will happen next? well, the supreme court is only resuming hearings today. there have been a lot of protests. there are many concerns around digital privacy and surveillance, as i mentioned. and also around privacy. so, the problem is that it is being used and is being linked to many bank accounts and phone numbers, but people are saying it is voluntary, why should we have to do it if it is not required? thank you so much for updating us. joining us from mumbai. mcdonald's. they say all packaging worldwide will come from sustainable sources and sources by 2025. they wa nt sources and sources by 2025. they want all items like bags and cuts to come from recycled or renewable materials. so, what is behind this new green g

leader death to dictator which is another code for a supreme leader who is seen as the symbol of the mismanagement in the political and economic situation of the system not just in this administration over decades and this is something that few people feel angry about and now have a platform to vent it out professor professor. to run it go ahead. yet if i can add to that i think we should really distinguish between the protesters and the rioters when the protesters first started. about ten days ago in mashhad for the first few days they were very very peaceful and i think there was a lot of normal people than what regard this so you know if the conservatives were involved or not but after a while we had some sort of riots in it especially smaller cities the burning of banks the building of shops the attempted takeover of the station and this is the time when the number of protesters started to decline because of the violence and at the same time the number of casualties started to eat and perhaps i think because of that what i meant is that was one of the reasons why the protests die

and we have a companion guide written by a veteran supreme court journalist. landmark cases: volume 2. to get your copy, go to c-span.org/landmarkcases. ♪

court advocates and the kind of father of the modern supreme court bar is there an influence from him in this book? >> guest: without question. we talked about things like federalism. it certainly made for an interesting dinner conversation. my dad used to say there are two structural protections that are as important as any other feature. one is vertical and the other is horizontal and we call that separation of power. it prevents any one group of people from getting too much cover and abusing thospower ande government. >> host: tell everybody what federalism and how they are different. >> guest: it organizes the balance of power on the one hand and the states or people on the other. it sets up the default princip principal. a default proposition that most congress will be at the state and local level and they are invested in congress so it articulates those enumerated powers that are federal most are found in section one of the constitution and some are not reasonably linked to that accomplishment and by that i refer to the powers. it provides clearly for the congress to have the po

now that case is before the supreme court.talk to him about finding out he could not cast a ballot after serving his country. >> i broke down crying. i'm proud to say, because i'm -- it devastated me. it crushed me to hear somebody in my home state say, your service wasn't good enough to come home and continue voting. . to progress. to not just accept what you see, but imagine something new. at invisalign®, we use the most advanced teeth straightening technology to help you find the next amazing version of yourself. it's time to unleash your secret weapon. it's there, right under your nose. get to your best smile up to 50% faster. visit invisalign.com to get started today. i own my own company. i had some severe fatigue, some funny rashes. finally, listening to my wife, went to a doctor. and i became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma... that diagnosis was tough. i had to put my trust in somebody. when i first met steve, we recommended chemotherapy, and then we did high dose therapy and then autologous stem cell transplant. unf

and the supreme court is poised for one or two more appointments to that supreme court. nd those appointments being, i expect consistent with president trump's pledge that he will make those nominations out of the list that was produced by the federalist society and confirmed and supported by the heritage foundation and by me and other pro-life activists. the selection that the president made out of those 21 potential justices to the supreme court was excellent. justice gorsuch, no better choice in my view. and one of the important things that goes into the congressional record is very solidly back channel information is this, the white house interviewed all 21 of those potential or candidates for the supreme court. out of those, they asked the same question, this same question of each one of them and it was this, mr. speaker. if it's not going to be you as the supreme court, who shall it be? every other candidate, every other judge under consideration for appointment to become a supreme court justice, every other one, if it's not to be me, it needs to be neil gorsuch. y

the case was heard at the missouri supreme courts.y say the law violates the constitution's establishment claus and the constitution's restoration act. we have our legal eagles here. he has volunteered and been good enough to represent the state so don't blast him on twitter and a former criminal defense attorney and former federal attorney will represent missouri state. welcome to you both. >> good to be here, shannon. >> shannon: here's the state of the argument. even if they alleged a restriction on free exercise of religion because she said her religion, a satanist tells her no life begins at conception. there's a compelling state understand and not unduly restrict ond her asserted exercise of religion. how do you respond? >> so to the jury. first, these people are not devil worshippers. they use the title for branding what they are is anti-government intrusion and individual liberty people and go around trying to make sure government doesn't interfere with the individual liberties. the irony is catholic church and satan temple an

we look at the upcoming supreme with georgetown university law center. bob schaffer will join the panel to break down the president's address last night. and vermont senator bernie sanders called for reversing policies on climate change and the fossil fuel industry. collins and the house minority whip, along with representative added shift, -- adam schiff