and sunday at 9:00 a.m., talkitutional scholars about how the united states constitution defined in peach will offenses for the president. -- impeachable offenses for the president. president trump and first lady melania trump took part in the annual thanksgiving turkey pardoning ceremony at the white house rose garden. this is just under 10 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and mrs. trump. [laughter] [applause] >> thank you very much. be seated. good afternoon, everyone. a very special day at the white house. we are thrilled to be joined today by our great first lady, melania. on behalf of the entire trump family, i want to will -- to wish all americans a happy thanksgiving. at this time of the year, we reflect on all of the many blessings in our lives. we are very glad to be joined by the chairman of the national turkey federation, along with sonsife, his father, his and their very beautiful families. thank you very much for being here. thank you. thank you. jeff. thank you. thanksgiving is a time of great american traditions and today we continue a ve

in a patronizing tone, but he goes on to pay a supreme complement to the founders of the united states constitution. he said, the english constitution was grown, the american constitution was made. and just as english constitution is the most subtle organism ever to proceed from the womb and gestation of a long progressive history, so is the american constitution, the single most wonderful work, ever struck off at a given time for the brain and purpose of man. winston churchill was of course a great admirer of the american constitution. and one of the greatest offenders in history of his own. churchill, of course, new history, studied history, love history, made history, embodied history. and he would be so proud to know that you have met here, where the history of freedom was reborn. it seems that most speakers have the beginning to establish their credentials. in my case, given the distinguished church hellion scholar up here, it seems appropriate to establish my lack of credentials to speak to you. and, i can convey that by this story. in post too chilly and -- church hill times, margaret asked

but he goes on to pay a supreme complement to the founders of the united states constitution. he says the english constitution was grown, and the american constitution was made. just as the english constitution is the most subtle organism in which to proceed on the womb of a long progressive history, so is the american constitution the single most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time from the brain and purpose of man.[ applause ] >> winston churchill, he was a great admirer of the american constitution and one of the greatest defenders in history of his own. church hill of course that smack was to church hill new history and studied history and loved history, and also made history and embodied history and would have been so proud to know that you have met here were the history of freedom was reborn. it seems that most speakers at the beginning established their credentials and in my case, given the distinguished winston churchill scholar here, it seems appropriate to establish my lack of credentials. [ laughter ] >> i can convey that by the story and in the 1980s, mar

adventurism, and it is a vote, as senator lee just mentioned, that says that the united states senate respects the constitution of the united states and understands that the issue of war making, of going to war, putting our young men and women's lives at stake, is something determined by the u.s. congress, not the president of the united states. it is a congressional decision, not a presidential decision, whether that president is a democrat or a republican. mr. president, in march of 2015, under the leadership of mohammed bin salman, then saudi defense minister and now the crown prince, saudi arabia and the united arab emirates intervened in yemen's ongoing civil war. let us be clear, yemen has been a poor and struggling country for many years, but as a result of the saudi-led intervention, yemen is now experiencing the worst humanitarian disaster in the entire world. and one of the poorest countries on earth as a result of this war, according to the save the children organization, some 85,000 children have already starved to death. 85,000 children already dead and millions more face death, face starvation if

his voters, that donald trump with the stroke of a pen can get rid of a provision of the united states constitution. it is an out and out lie told by a man who is running scared. running scared about what happens to him when the votes are counted on tuesday night, especially those final votes in california that will determine who will control the house of representatives. and now donald trump is adding another lie to his big invasion lie because donald trump's voters don't feel like they're winning. and the new lie is that he is going to send 5,000 troops to the southern border to stop the invasion. but the trump voters don't know that federal law prevents the u.s. military from enforcing domestic law on u.s. soil. and, yes, they're going to stand on u.s. soil if they go down there, where they will not be able to do anything. military can't do any law enforcement inside the united states. that's why we have and pay for 17,000 police departments in this country. that's why we have federal law enforcement agents. the united states military is not allowed to do the job of domestic law enforcement, and

. >> that was the president of the united states slamming the 14th amendment of the constitution, an citizenship to children born in the united states regardless of their parents' nationality. so could president trump amend this amendment and what could it mean if it is to happen? let's bring in avery freeman, civil rights attorney and law professor in cleveland, and defense attorney richard herman joining us from new orleans. good to see you both. richard, you first. can a president unilaterally amend an amendment? >> the crazy lunacy is he's talking about is the constitution of the united states, that he swore an oath to uphold and defend. people forgot that. he does not have the inherent power to issue an executive order to modify the united states constitution. i don't care what legal scholars he claims are advising him. if they are, they don't know what they're talking about. he does not have that inherent power. it's a constitutional process that has to take place, fred. now, the issue has never been determined by the united states supreme court. >> it has. >> of whether a chil

reasonable and i don't think one life is reasonable at all and mean in any case according to the united states constitution we should be giving people fair and free trials in front of juries and we're sitting there just demolishing an entire nation or britain's exporting arms of course but sharing intelligence with the united states for the targeting of these drones. given perhaps what you are saying is an outlier if well should britain be sharing intelligence well i mean this is where secret compartmentalised information kind of gets needs to be brought to the table because this is where people who should be men and take responsibility for their own action and if britain is giving intelligence for the consummation of these people's lives then yes they're held responsible for it there's no question about it they've they've they've participated to it and so if britain is going to do something then they need to restore their honor then they need to fess up to it on the other hand as our report that britain which it's denying that they are being linked to the development all fully automated drones you might h

reasonable and i don't think one life is reasonable at all and mean in any case according to the united states constitution we should be giving people fair and free trials in front of juries and we're sitting there just demolishing an entire nation or britain exporting arms of course but sharing intelligence with the united states for the targeting of these drones. given perhaps what you are saying is an outlier if well should britain be sharing intelligence well i mean this is where such secret compartmentalised information kind it gets needs to be brought to the table because this is where people who should be men and take responsibility for their own action and if britain is getting intelligence for the consummation of these people's lives then yes they're held responsible for it there's no question.

reasonable and i don't think one life is reasonable at all and mean in any case according to the united states constitution we should be giving people fair and free trials in front of juries and we're sitting there just demolishing an entire nation or britain exporting arms of course but sharing intelligence with the united states for the targeting of these drones. given perhaps what you are saying is an outlier if well should britain be sharing intelligence well i mean this is where six secret compartmentalised information kind of gets needs to be brought to the table because this is where people who should be men and take responsibility for their own action and if britain is getting intelligence for the consummation of these people's lives then yes they're held responsible for it there's no question about it they've they've they've participated to it and so if britain is going to do something then they need to restore their honor then they need to fess up to it on the other hand as our report that britain which it's denying that they are linked to the development all fully automated drones you might have

it is the united states congress, not the president of the united states who under our constitution has more lawmaking responsibilities. today i say to my conservative friends respect the constitution,ti the claim congrs is rightful role on the issues of war and peace and has not authorized the war for yemen and therefore it is unconstitutiona, and that must change and must change now. mr. president, we are going in a few minutes to undertake a very, very important vote, and i hope that all of my colleagues, democrats, republicans, independents will vote to discharge on this resolution. thank you and i yield the floor. >> mr. president i rise today to speak to the senate resolution

united states supreme court. because there is no question that the highest law of the land, the united states constitution applies the supreme court has an obligation to apply it, and make no mistake, what's at stake here is not just matt whittaker, but all of the decisions of the department of justice, the special council investigation. he's shown himself to be hostile to that investigation, he's provided a blueprint for strangling and stifling it. >> yes. >> and the stakes here are very high. >> he has, he said he thinks it's not worth anything. that he could starve it from money or someone in the role he now has, could starve it from money, it no longer exists. you're right about that, but lindsey graham tells us, whittaker has used all that harsh language. do you think graham is right? you know, you say a lots of things but then you're given a position of great power and authority, and you're going to do the right thing, is it possible that that is true? and that he's not a threat? >> that's exactly the kind of question that needs to be answered in a senate hearing. in a vote, in meetings with whitaker, that'

here's the issue -- under the appointments clause in the united states constitution, principal officers such as the attorney general have to be appointed and approved in a certain way. and mr. whitaker, acting attorney general whitaker, his appointment has clearly violated the appointments clause and kellyanne conway's husband, george, hit the nail on the head. it violates the constitution. so you're going to have defendants who are convicted or go to trial or indictments that are returned by the grand jury, and you know what's going to happen? while he's in office and even when he leaves, a lot of people in the criminal division and the civil division of the department of justice are going to be burning the midnight oil because you're going to have motions to dismiss, habeas petitions, 2255s. it's going to be a mess. >> why? why? >> because the authority of the attorney general to approve indictments -- >> would be in question? >> absolutely. >> i got you. explain this to me. i want to come back to the federal vacancy reform act, which is what the trump administration is citing. we kno

the attorney general's ascension act, as well as as well as the annulments clause of the united states constitution. argued over whether president trump has the ability to appoint whitaker as a principal officer who is not senate confirmed. >> yes, within certain limits. the question is if he also qualifies under the constitution. that's a much closer call. the justice department is going to take action that affects maryland, it's got to be done in a constitutionally dependent way. they don't get to pick who the attorney general is. >> the administration says the appointment is proper. >> he has the full and legal authority under the vacancy reform act of 1998, where it someone who has been a senior official as well who has been there for more than 90 days can serve as acting attorney general. >> returning to capitol hill, democrats ramped up the attacks. >> no significant actions under whitaker's authority should be taken up under the department. >> the judiciary committee's ranking democrat dianne feinstein called for emergency hearings under "the story with martha maccallum" " , and -- who contr

our census is a foundation for our democracy every ten years and is mandated by the united states constitution. to be counted is to have power and voice in our country. the census ensures representation for governments and all levels. it is used to draw congressional districts and local voting precincts. determines the level of state and federal funding to the city and provides the most reliable and complete data for research, decision making and policy planning in the private and public sector. we rely on the census to define who we are and how we can better care for our community. given our population growth since 2010 and the racist, sexist, and antiwrinkle immigrant rents from the white house, it is imperative our san francisco 2020 census count is accurate and gives voice to each of our residents. the u.s. census have a history of under counting certain populations. typically people of color and vulnerable residents. in 1970, over six% of blacks were uncounted, whereas only two % of whites went uncounted. and the last one in 2,010 did not count approximately 400,000 latino children and to

. >> so, brian, you don't need to look much farther than the united states constitution to find the answer to that question. it says right there in article 1 the senate is the sole judge of its members and their elections. so let's play this out in a scenario that i don't think is unlikely given the tenor of the conversation around voter fraud and irregularity and alleged malfeasance by the democrats, which, of course, as you pointed out, are totally unfounded and there's no proof of any of that. let's say bill nelson pulls ahead in the recount and he wins. the republicans in in the senate could then decide not to seat nelson and vote instead to seat rick scott because the constitution allows them to do just that. and they would likely do so using the argument of widespread voter fraud, which you have seen president trump and rick scott, himself, lay the groundwork for as they have claimed over and over again that the ballots are infected and that the forgery is rampant. no proof whatsoever, not offering any evidence, but they're just saying this and i think you have to contemplate for a m

go back to your point about the vacancies act, which is an important one, you know, the united states constitutionhe highest law of the land. it trumps the vacancies reform act and even if you go by statutes, there is a more specific one that says the deputy attorney general, rod rosenstein, should take over. so there is really no crisis, no kind of exigent circumstance that would justify going around rod rosenstein. >> let me about a story in the news this morning which is ivanka trump was using her personal e-mail for government business inside the white house. obviously when hillary clinton was at the state department and used her personal e-mail that became a big story which was covered by everyone for a long time. what do you make of this today? >> mark short had the right word for it, hypocrisy. there is no way that she had no knowledge of the rules. but really there is a larger story here which is the mixing of public and private as with her clothing brand and her public position, the blending and mixing of e-mails on her private account, her public account. it raises the issue of whether t

adventurism, and it is a vote, as senator lee just mentioned, that says that the united states senate respects the constitution of the united states and understands that the issue of war making, of going to war, putting our young men and women's lives at stake, is something determined by the u.s. congress, not the president of the united states. it is a congressional decision, not a presidential decision, whether that president is a democrat or a republican. mr. president, in march of 2015, under the leadership of mohammed bin salman, then saudi defense minister and now the crown prince, saudi arabia and the united arab emirates intervened in yemen's ongoing civil war. let us be clear, yemen has been a poor and struggling country for many years, but as a result of the saudi-led intervention, yemen is now experiencing the worst humanitarian disaster in the entire world. and one of the poorest countries on earth as a result of this war, according to the save the children organization, some 85,000 children have already starved to death. 85,000 children already dead and millions more face death, face starvation if

center for the constitution, james madison montpelier, present a panel discussion about the united states constitution in a program entitled for us, bias, america's trust in an expectation of the constitution. moderated judy woodruff will lead the discussion of the results of a national survey conducted by james madison montpelier grade with the goal of better understand how americans relate to our government and founding document. document. on wednesday september 26 at noon mark leave of which will be here to tell us that his latest book, big game, the nfl in dangerous times and it looks i will follow the program. you may think a sports book is strange fodder for the national archives what we're getting ready for a big exhibit in 2020 on all american, sports in the united states. so check our website, archives.gov our site of outside the theater because fema updates, , you'll find informatn about other national archives programs and activities. another would get more involved in the national archives is to become a member of the national archives foundation, the foundation support all of our activiti

relationship with the unborn human being and that the relationship enjoys protections under the united states constitution and under the laws of south dakota. end quote. that is not the associate of the law, by the way. mr. farr and mr. kobes are two of the worst of mr. trump's judicial nominees and that is saying a lot. they are two more examples of president trump's relentless pursuit to pack the courts with ideologs who will rule in favor of conservative causes. truly donald trump does not believe in the judiciary written by the framers of our constitution. we see in his single-minded indifference, that he is nominating judges whom he believes will be his political allies. he tells us as much. he believes judges he appoints are trump judges and will be loyal to him and protect him and his policies when the time comes. chief justice john roberts could not have been clearer in his response last week to donald trump's criticism of judges who don't rule his way. chief justice told the a.p., quote, we do not have obama judges or trump judges, bush judges or clinton judges. what we have is an extraordinary g

except for the next election, which was the original method that the founders of the united states enshrined in the constitutionremoval. there is once successful case that we did not list, which was richard nixon. he was not formally impeached and removed, but he was well on his way to that, and he only resigned to avoid the inevitable impeachment that was coming. in fact, as i write any book, we did have a successful case. bearing in mind how generally it isa case. bearing in mind how generally it is a political decision, how dangerous is it to go down that road? it is, as in certain conditions. 0ne road? it is, as in certain conditions. one of the conditions has got to be that the president is demonstrably and fit for office, not just unpopular, because the next unpopular president can be removed at the next election. being and fit means “— at the next election. being and fit means —— unfit the leadership means. . . means —— unfit the leadership means... nelson ecb the political will to say we would be better off with whatever is coming next.” suppose, you have got a good back to the beginning of this, and un

constitutional muster. judge wayne justice in tyler, texas, invalidated this law in a heroic decision and wonder was ultimately upheld by the supreme court of the united states. some constitutional law professors have suggested this case was relatively an important because texas was the only state in the nation that had such a law they see only those cowboys down to texas would be attracted to this sort of rule. but we know today that anxieties about unauthorized immigration are far from confined to texas. it's possible to see that case as prohibiting other states from adopting similar measures and into california tried to adopt a measure. alabama tried to adopt the same measure and in many of the stas around the country doubtless would have had the supreme court issued this decision in 1982. that decision is not trivial but is incredibly momentous in shaping our constitutional order in that it allows millions of childrenen to receive an educatn who otherwise would been prohibited from doing so. >> i titled my book "little soldiers" because one day my son came home and he was singing a song roughly translated i am a little soldier, i work hard every day, i l

united states because of its constitution has this decision two senators per state and what we've seen is there's an enormous urban rural divide so the rural parts of the united states are disproportionately represented in the united states senate this is a structural issue this will not go away through demographic changes the only thing that could change that would be in fact constitutional change which is just something that beyond the horizon that i see so that's one part the other part the gerrymandering of congressional districts which concentrates democratic voters into particular regions so they do less damage to the republican majorities this is something that's not given forever democratic majorities in state legislatures. democratic governors in the states will make a difference for possible gerrymandering in the future and as far as governorships . the democrats have done very well last night as far as running and flipping government governors now they're still behind. being where their popular vote would indicate they should be but this combination of gerrymandering and two

there is one other factor that -- that we're not paying enough attention to which is the constitution of the united statesrding to constitutional scholars including george conway, the husband of kellyanne conway, top presidential adviser, that an attorney general, the person leading the department of justice article two, section two, clause two must be confirm by the united states senate. so the question is not whether mark whitaker is biassed. we know that he is. it's not against the investigation. it's not whether or not he's biassed against the justice department and the supreme court. we know he is. it's not just or whether or not he was part of some failed business that was shut down by the ftv just last year. we know he was. the question is not whether he is republican or democrat. the question is he there constitutionally? legally? and constitutional scholars say no. >> now, as we understand it, there are various people including mr. manafort and cohen and the others either with the mueller investigators or southern district new york. and it is around the whole contention that the mueller investiga

the first amendment and i mean the press is protected in the very first amendment of the united states constitutione calls us the enemy of the people, it makes me feel like he doesn't understand us. having gone around and interviewed trump supporters, you know, i often at last, i have great conversations and you know they'll seem to like me and say they like me. i'll say do you think we're the enemy of the people if do you think i am? they'll smile at me and say yes. it's very -- it throws me off. >> self serving. >> i'm a little small town guy, journalism is a big job. you work a lot. you don't get paid a lot most of the time and everyone hates you. >> deaneandre, what concerns yo the most about where we are right now as a country? >> oh, polarization. i think the president donald john has done a pretty bad job of bringing the country together. i mean, this is the united states of america. you know, i'm very, very careful to use the word racism because i'm a political scientist. i associate a meaning with racism. when you use words like low iq that goes to eugenics when you use words like low inte

to a constitutional governance you know the whole world right now are take is taking major steps to remove female genital mutilation and so the for the very fact that this judge in the united states would make a decision like this really does fly into in the face of human rights as we know it in our western culture and in our constitutional governance here in the united states former you can't ignore some of the facts that. that we have here and also gina has mentioned that it's banned in twenty five african countries nineteen western countries according to unicef sixty seven percent of girls and women who've undergone it say they want the practice end and i've got more you know pretty horrendous statistics here that don't support the bill gentlemen mutilation i mean you're even arguing the point that the terminology is wrong. you have to kind of explain why you were pro this and why you think that this court case has been so important for your cause well. so i want to make it clear that i am not pro mutilation i would never support the mutilation of anybody boy or girl what i'm saying is that there are a set of practices that supporters like myself refer to as female circum. and

we believe in the united states constitution. >> yeah. >> not we believe in the rule of law unless itre going to call our attorney. florida never ceases to provide entertainment, not entertainment that's fun, sometimes enterta entertainment that is frightening. rick scott who the only thing most people know about rick scott is medicare fraud. his company -- he says he knew nothing about it even though he was ceo. i didn't know about medicare fraud. he's been alleged to have maybe enriched himself being governor of florida. and here he is it on fox news, of course, earlier today saying that fraught is afoot. here it is. >> senator nelson is clearly trying to find -- to -- trying to commit fraud to win this election. that's all this is. >> i want to say, i want to pick up on that. you're accusing bill nelson of trying to commit fraud? >> his lawyer said that a non-citizen should vote, that's one. number two, he's gone to trial and said that fraudulent ballots should be counted. ballots have already been thrown out because they were not done properly. he said those should be counted. >>

that this judge in the united states would make a decision like this really does fly into in the face of human rights as we know it in our western culture and in our constitutional governance here in the united states. leonardo da vinci's been dragged into a route between the french president and its least deputy prime minister who have been trading insults online now reconsidering learning the most is priceless works for a major exhibition in paris. we need to renegotiate everything the french cannot have it all their murder is a term in human guard in france to give the louvre all these paintings would put italy on the margins of a major cultural event paris is free now and live the museum was hoping to borrow some of the vinci is notable works for a big show in twenty nineteen marking five hundred years since his death also stressed that frank should ban in return something equally important like the mona lisa. and so the arctic remains the louvre is juice alone works by another italian renaissance master raphael for twenty twentieth's a bishan marking the anniversary of his death although most of his masterpieces are already in italy we talked to people in b

>> there is clear precedent in the united states under constitutional law around the first amendment shows that journalists provided that they're not involved in any way, that if they receive information, they are not implicated in whatever the criminal act is by anybody else in disclosing the information. if there is a government official, for example, who decides to breach their obligations to the government to provide information in the public interest, that source has separate obligations to a journalist and a publisher. that is precisely the situation with wikileaks. if they receive information from someone and publish it in the public interest, that is protected by the first amendment. and that is an important protection which protects all journalists and new organizations who publish classified information all the time. this is a very important protection. and if put in the hands of the trump administration, put in the hand of president trump who has called the mainstream media in the u.s. the enemy of the people, this is a very dangerous precedent and one the entire media oug

educate themselves about the principles of freedom and preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the united statesnational constitution center's honor to award you the 2018 liberty medal. [applause] and it's now my honor to invite to the podium the first of our 2018 liberty medal winners, mrs. laura bush. [applause] mrs. bush: thank you, all. thank you so much. thanks, everyone. thanks very much, jeffrey. and thank you, vice president biden, thank you very much, dr. voss,, and thank you for posting george and me at the national constitution center today. thanks to rob rodriguez, and to leslie zimmerman, and all the veterans and active military here today. thank you for your distinguished service to our country. [applause] president bush and i are retired now, so we want to spend our time dedicated to the george w. bush institute including our military service initiative. the military service initiative honors the men and women who served our country. we are working with them to develop the leadership skills and the tools they need to transition successfully to civilian life. since 2011, president

that this judge in the united states would make a decision like this really does fly into in the face of human rights as we know it in our western culture and in our constitutional governance here in the united states. palestinians facing eviction and losing their livelihoods have condemned the demolition of dozens of buildings in east jerusalem owners say they were delivered notices concerning more than twenty palestinian and shops and lead to be built without official permission locals say they will be left with no other option but to tend to refugee camps. the fate of many palestinians has been tracking on since may this year when israel decided to remove residents from the west bank village so their properties could be bulldozed some they're giving up hope and are continuing to fight for their homes. and if we know that israel wants to destroy our home and wonder to happen it's a shame we were born here we do a good piece. and look at it we're afraid for our families for our children how we're living is very hard psychologically. to get a lot of what did we feel much stronger than netanyahu stronger than anyone in the world because we're fighting for the rig

the constitutional rights do not apply to noncitizens outside the united states. tional protections that apply to people in the united states but there is no law -- >> shannon: we will see how this court rules on those. thank you both for joining us. "snl" under fire for joking about her wounded g.o.p.ne congressional candidate. more on that next. ♪ but you got this! rocket mortgage by quicken loans makes the complex simple. understand the details and get approved in as few as eight minutes. by america's largest mortgage lender. so did you gkind of. car? thanks to navy federal it only took 5 minutes. so vets can join? oh yeah. how do you kind of buy a new car? it's used. it's for mikey. you know he's gonna have girls in that car. yeah. he's gonna have two of them. great benefits for veterans from navy federal credit union... our members are the mission. first, it continues to pay paramedics while we're on break. second, it ensures the closest ambulance can respond if you call 9-1-1. vote yes on 11. gavin newsom has lived the rich made him powerful. but he's done no

hayden wrote a book where he talked about the government of the united states, the constitution and congress limits what the intelligence agencies can do, and it is their job to play out to the line. they have been you could talking -- sometimes the best defense is a good offense. we have done things in the past which of changed the way cyber is done. we are still the only country in the world that had a cyberattack that had physical damage. >> is also more complicated. , theyon't run the banks don't run the article. this is not like previous national security challenges. in the 50's, nuclear was very dangerous and we divided for capability. they fix a problem. you have to get your tech companies in with cyber. cyber is a weird situation in the sense -- and this isn't a bad things. i don't think we want the government controlling all these things. vulnerabilities in the private sector are vulnerabilities for the country as a whole. it is not obvious how the government orders facebook to do a, b or c. >> thank you, panel. great job. >> thanks, greg. [captions copyright national cable satellit

and they talk about the government of the united states, the constitution, congress, limits what theintel defense agencies can do and it's up to them to play up to the edge line. if you want to spread out the field and take the gloves off, the conversation has been lately about doing this and sometimes the best defense is a good offense, whatever you want to say we've done things-- we're the only country that had cyber damage that had physical damage to it. >> and it's more come plated. nsa doesn't run google, facebook, et cetera and it's not like the past security challenges. in the 50's many people thought it was dangerous and thought first strike, adventurism and stuff. so the government controls, the government said you have to look at cyber security and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera and fix a problem. it's not that easy to do that in cyber. you've got to have your tech companies in and financial companies in and so cyber is a weird situation in the sense-- this isn't a bad thing, i don't think we want the government to control all of these things. the private sector-- vulnerab

"the constitution of the united states is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men at all times and under all circumstances. the suspension of constitutional limitations during times of great exigencies leads directly --anarchy or depositions him or despotism." in the next great one, this view commended a majority of the court, and led to the constitutional crisis of 1937. although all but two states eventually ratified the 18th amendment, there was a great deal of anti-prohibition sentiment in the country. in to court not only to challenge the implementing legislation, but the amendment itself. in 1920, a distinguished battery of lawyers, including william guthrie and the venerable ella horoot attacked the amendment on two grounds. first, they claimed the constitution had not created an unlimited amending power. and the 18th amendment involved subject matter that should not be reached in the constitution. a view, by the way, that is now widely held. enforcement provision of section 2, giving both congress

do you solemnly swear that will you support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that you will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which you are about to enter, so help you god? congratulations. you are members of the 115th ongress. without objection, the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, is recognized for one minute. he house will be in order. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. as co-dean of the new york delegation, along with my colleague, congresswoman lowey, the new york delegation is pleased to welcome our newest colleague, joe morelle, representing new york's 2525 -- 25th district in upstate new york. joe has been elected to the seat of our beloved and departed colleague, louise slaughter. joe hails from -- i know i butchered. that and like myself served in the new york state assembly. he was lectsed -- elected to that body in 1990 and became majori

constitutional footprint on american history. the decisions that came before the high court would have a lasting influence. with the united states had to prepare itself for the second world war, nobody questioned the constitutional legitimacy of the draft or the huge expansion of governmental powers exercised by the administration. although we tend to think of the 1920s as a reactionary period, with the taft court striking down one reform measure after another, the picture is not entirely true. it needs refinement. although other conservatives wanted to treat the war as a constitutional anomaly, the court majority upheld the expansion of federal powers even in peace times and certainly privileged federal authority over that. in addition, the supreme court in the 1920s soley began the incorporation of the bill of rights to the 14th amendment due process calls -- calls -- clause. that date began with the wartime speech cases in 1919. during the great war, one person paying very close attention to how the government's authority expanded to meet the devices was a young assistant secretary of the navy franklin delano roosevelt. the n