we're going to get into the law and the details of the law. but first, what does this moment mean to you personally? >> my life changed on that day in december 2012. i will never forget it. there's lots of days i wish i could forget it. but i established a bond with those families. and weeks later, with families i met in hartford, new haven, that was angry that i was showing up, caring about this issue when 20 white children had died when black children die every day in my state. that bond is something i never had before in my professional career. and i made a commitment to them that i was not going to give up until we passed legislation that made it less likely that those shootings and murders would happen. and there were a lot of days during the last ten years, where i wasn't sure whether we would ever be able to break the back of the gun lobby. whether we would ever be strong enough to pass laws that would save the lives of kids in this country. so, to be on the senate floor, delivering the passage of a bill that will save lives, it means s

law-abiding, americans. i vow, if i am given the privilege of serving as director, to partner with others to advance the cause of public safety and to approach that task, especially now here now, with an open heart, with open ears, and always with an open mind. thank you. >> thank you, mister dettelbach. the chair has returned but with his permission i will make a very brief statement announcing questions. mr. dettelbach, i want to join you in thanking the extraordinary professionals of atf, the agency that you have been nominated to lead, having been a federal prosecutor, the united states can in connecticut for four and a half years i have worked with his agency. i have all of their work over the years. there is no more dedicated and brave group of professionals. what we have seen over the last 24 hours, again, we have seen it repeatedly over these years is the devotion of local law enforcement and state police to stopping gun violence and rescuing the victims and survivors of gun violence in this country.

the law itself is on trial. it is judged according to whether it violates our constitutional rights. the court is composed of nine justices who hold office for life members are nominated by the president, but their appointments must be confirmed by the senate. now you should have a good idea of how the constitution sets up the three main branches of our government. the legislature which is congress. the executive branch which is the president. and the judiciary which is the supreme court. the legislature is charged with making policies. that is it passes the laws. the executive is responsible for carrying out policies. and the judiciary is charged with reviewing and judging policies. but while each of these branches of government has its own clearly defined duties they all work together as a team through a system of checks and balances. here are some examples of what i mean. the president appoints justices to the supreme court executive balances judicial. congress determines the size of the supreme court legisla

it is the law of the land. there are measures we can take that are consistent with the second amendment that will separate people from firearms if they are dangerous to themselves to a red flag statutes, baked -- background checks. ghost guns. and others. when it comes to tackling these kinds of problems, we need an agency that is not only independent but will be perceived as independent beyond the influence and grip of the gun lobby which all too often has been perceived as having undue impact on the atf. that perception itself can undermine an agency's effectiveness. as much as i feel will bring new leadership, i think it is important we move forward to give you that opportunity as quickly as possible particularly seizing this moment of extraordinary challenge to make sure you have a mandate from the united states congress to do your job. let me ask you how you will draw on your background as a prosecutor to make sure that you are effective in this job. >> senator, i have spent the vast majority of my career

mobilization, there are restrictions in the law on legal the regime of martial law.refore, it is necessary to see how far these restrictions are currently expedient, and if they are not expedient , then of course comprehensive changes should be made and in accordance with the legislative procedure. thank you. another interesting and debatable topic for you is from october 1. at the same time, this does not automatically mean mobilization, they say there, because it is carried out on the basis of another law. our colleagues ilona and victoria are confidently holding their weapons, now they are in the ranks of the 112th brigade of the kyiv tereo, they have collected things and are ready to meet the enemy at any moment. ilona felt that there would be a full-scale russian offensive and began to overcome the trio even before february 24 that day already at seven in the morning she was at the door of the warlord with her things, she says that she was scared only on the first day, and when i was 16 years old there in the 14th year, of course, it was probably the most i coul

of law clerks.n the justice began to talk about the term and how it was going and how he felt he was doing. he told us that unlike prior years he was not planning on hiring his full complement of four law clerks and that instead he was going to hire just one. it was time. and even though we knew we were witnessing a significant moment in history, every think about it was classic justice stevens. low-key, plainspoken, humble, even when closing the final chapter in his service to this nation, a body of service that consistently sought to preserve and protect the rule of law. now, the rule of law and the supremacy of the law were uncontested for much of the justices life. they were just assumed to be true. it animated so much of his personal story, his rise to this court, and his work on the court. and even though the justice passed away at less than three years ago, you cannot possibly measure the distance between then and now in years. so much has happened. so much is now up for debate. and so much o

to the law on national minorities, this is an issue related to the law on media, well, this is one ofhe important ones , this is the main plan of the verkhovna rada, which we have to implement in the near future, which laws will cause even more debate among deputies on your i am asking for an opinion. i think that the discussion will be sensitive. it will be necessary to explain why some of the tv channels were closed, including espresso , depriving them of access to the broadcast network. so, i think that it will be very uncomfortable for them to enter into the discussion of this topic, in principle, because, trust me, ask them questions on tv channels not only this is heard publicly, do we write somewhere on social networks or do we also ask about it on the air, international partners also ask about it, but i am also very worried about the fate of the draft law on national minorities, that's why that we know how actively russia will be involved in this discussion and how actively putin's friends will be involved , including orban, who has obviously lost his sense of reality after ye

it is not unusual for people to argue, to resist arrest rate lawful orders, lawful commands for that's when they get super important to collect the data per your proposed legislation so it can better inform the public and our training. but also that we again speak with that voice the place to fight criminal charges or the police is in a courtroom. everyone seems to think it's okay these days to argue or fight on the street. there is no good outcome that comes from that. >> sgt penny, you spoke about the online radicalization of individuals who target the police and organize targeting of a police. what is the relationship between defend the police movement and the targeted violence against law enforcement? >> think a center for the question. you could have something as benign as defend the police, like it was just a logo. once you take that on social media, the message of proliferates with the #. i thanks that's we have lost so much discussion because we think of it being benign. but the reality is it radical, individuals use the same content to incite violence against police rivets thi

our gun law does allow states to make their red flag laws work better.ade a d difference here. and alert law enforcement any time somebody under 21 is trying to buy a weapon. local law enforcement. in this case whether things might have gone differently if local law enforcement had been alerted when this young man was trying to buy assault weapons. we need to go further. but i don't think anything in the supreme court ruling invalidates the law that congress passed and there are elements of that law that could have made a difference here. >> senator murphy, good luck on the rest of the walk. thank you for joining us. >>>> thank you. >>> back next with high land park's mayor. ugh-stipated... feeling weighed down by a backedup gut" miralax is different. it works naturally with the water in your body to unblock your gut. ...free ur gut. and your mood will follow. my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... the tightness, stinging... the pain. emerge tremfyant®. with tremfya®, most people saw 90% clearer skin at 16 weeks. the majority of people saw 90% clearer

that one carvato is the honorable harry pregerson professor of law at ucla school of law. the author of numerous articles and edited volumes. he's also the co-author of acting white. we're thinking race in post-racial america. he lives in los angeles. he will be in conversation with paul butler a former federal prosecutor who provides legal commentary for ms. and bc and npr and has been featured in 60 minutes and profile washington post. a love professor at georgetown university. he is the author of let's get free a hip-hop theory of justice winner of the harry shopping media award and showcold policing black men both from the new press. he has published numerous op-eds and book reviews including the new york times the washington post the boston globe and the los angeles time. so, please let's welcome them. thank you for being here. good evening, everyone. thank you so much for coming out. it really is my pleasure to have the opportunity to engage you in this way. i'm looking forward to your comments your reactions your questions and before we get to all of that i would of

i'll follow the law. you're watching american history tv on c-span as we look back at what the current justices said about roby way during their confirmation hearings justice neil gorsuch was asked about the 1973 decision as well. senator again, i would tell you that roe versus wade decided in 1973. the president united states supreme court it has been reaffirmed. the reliance interest considerations are important there. and all the other factors that go into analyzing precedent. to be considered it is a precedent of the united states supreme court. is reaffirmed in casey in 1992. in several other cases so a good judge will consider it as precedent of the united states supreme court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other what about griswold which was decided a few years before row the case where the court found constitutional right to privacy? can you tell me your views on griswold? center it's a precedent. it's now. 50 years old griswold involved the right of married couples to use contraceptive

joseph is a professor and codirector of the center for firearms law at duke universityd school of lawhe's taught at duke since 2009 and a scholarship focuses on the issues of gun rights and regulation. before joining the faculty, he clerked for the second circuit and practiced law at myers where he assisted with the merits briefing for the district of columbiad versus heller. now i will turn to senator grassley to introduce his witnesses. >> i wanted to tell you i have time on the floor to speak so i will come back and ask my questions later on. russell bentley who is a senior analyst was a safe haven haven international, the world's largest nonprofit k-12 school safety center. he has over 20 years of law enforcement experience with 15 years in executive positions. .. >>a . welcome to you. >> first we will recognize our first witness. >> good morning truman ranking member and distinguish members of the senate judiciary committee thank you for inviting me to discuss stopping mass shootings and the mayor of highland park illinois and all-american midwestern town. was that the highland p

it's not unusual for people to argue, to resist arrest, lawful orders, lawful commands and that is why it is important we collect data per your proposed legislation to better inform the public and our training but also that we again speak with that voice that the place to fight criminal charges were the police is in a court room. everyone seems to think it is okay these days to argue or fight on the street and there is no good outcome that comes from that. >> demetrick pennie come you spoke about the online radical organization of individuals who target the police and organize targeting of police officers, what is the relationship between the d fund the police movement and the targeted violence against law enforcement. >> thank you for the question. you have something as benign as defund the police like it was just a logo but once you take on social media, the message proliferates with the hashtag and that is what we lost so much, so much in discussion because we think of it as just being benign but the reality is radical groups, individuals use this same content to incite violence aga

federal law prohibits it. so it's very difficult to track who owns which guns and how many they have including prohibited offenders who are barred from having firearms. the other key here is that our country as a wash in guns and for private gun transfers, there is no requirement that people undergo a background check and you talk about the background check and in our country or the, the us being a wash with guns. i should say we have a twitter common from 10 di talking about the culture of guns if you will. if truth be told, the horse has already bolted in the u. s. as far as gun violence is concerned, as long as americans continue to glorify guns and violence in their movies and entertainment, as well as believing that guns are a necessary tool for protection. and it's a lost cause. so quite pass mistake their shannon, but i'm curious. the culture itself, how big a role does that play? you know, we know that there's the 2nd amendment. we know that, you know, we hear americans love their guns and their statis

after law, after law, after law. you can throw 100 laws on that wall right there. i can fill this room up was a whole bunch of folks who back my fifth position. we need to look at what is going to really solve the issue, that is looking at the human condition, that is what we are all failing to do in this room right now. people are hurting and scared, people are in trouble. >> you are familiar with the fact that 60% of the gun deaths in america are suicides? are you aware of that? >> yes i am, sir. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> senator feinstein. >> thank you, mister chairman, for me this is a very emotional hearing need. on may 14th, an 18 year old was killed, killed ten people in a grocery store in buffalo new york, using an assault weapon. a week later, an 18 year old killed 19 children, and two teachers, at an elementary school in uvalde, texas. using an assault weapon. on a fourth of july, a 21-year-old killed seven people and injured dozens more at a community parade in highland park, illinois, using an assaul

, july 16 for e-e it will already be new an era in the history of ukrainian media, according to the law on the ukrainian language, from tomorrow administrative responsibility is provided for violation of certain informational nuances, for example, for websites, the start page must be in ukrainian, all social studies and news must also be presented in ukrainian in the mass media, but soon the nearest sometimes i understand that the ukrainian mass media is waiting for a serious update with a new law. let's talk now with olha gerasimyuk, the head of the national council of ukraine on television and radio broadcasting ms. olya, i congratulate you good evening, i specifically called this law on mass media very painful because its history began at the end of the 19th year and we still do not have a new law on mass media and now it seems that we have to adopt it in general with all the european nuances. since we are synchronizing our legislation with the european one. development can i add to the word a lot of suffering that you have experienced just these days is actually a decade since our c

law. it is about two hours. that history is so clear that new york no longer contests that carrying a handgun outside of the home for purposes of self-defense is constitutionally protected activity. but that concession dooms new >> which makes it a crime for a typical law-abiding new yorker to exercise that constitutional right. this court in heller labeled the very few comparable laws that restricted all outlets for carrying firearms outside the home outliers that were rightly condemned. none against georgia. new york likens it slow to a restriction on weapons and sensitive places. but the difference between a sensitive place law and new york is fundamental. it is the difference between regulating constitutionally protected activity and attempting to convert a fundamental constitutional right into a privilege that can only be enjoyed by those who can demonstrate to the satisfaction of a government official that they have an atypical need for the exercise of that right. that is not how con

even 150 years ago, the common law in many state laws did not criminalize abortion early in pregnancy. that is very similar to the viability line draw by row. the dobbs majority ignores that fact. the dobbs majority ignores that many laws are enacted to protect women at the time. they were dying from unsafe abortions. this is a historic -- a horrific reality that rosoff and. the practice of medicine should not be frozen in the 19th century. what happened? a dissenting opinion said as clear as you can possibly say it, and here's the. either law nor facts nor attitudes provided any new reason to reach a different result than row did. that is changing -- and all that has changed on this court. all of this change is the court. nothing about the constitution or the law. it was about a deep, long seated antipathy towards row and the right to privacy. as the justices wrote, the majority is overruling roe and casey for one and only one reason. there is always a reason to despise them, and they now have the votes to discard them. so, what we are witnessing is not a constitutional judgment. it

she earned her -- law degree at georgetown university law center.ters in french from the university of south florida in a b. a. in history and french from that college. our third speaker, alexandra desanctis, we'll be speaking on her new book. have it there, hold it up. >> i don't. sorry. >> it's a great book. she go authors with bryant he endorsed an. it's called tearing us apart. how abortion harms everything and solves nothing. she'll be discussing how the pro-life movement can make the best case against abortion by explaining it's harmed every aspect of our society. alexander is a stafford of the national review and regularly publishes reports and commentary for both the national review print magazine and national review online. she's hosted many national review podcasts. speaks often on campus colleges, campus -- college campuses in conferences yesterday she spoke at the young americans foundation high school conference along with -- from our staff. many conservative events across the country. her works been published in the new york times, the

mykola, look in general as the authors of the bill and then the law.u satisfied with how ukraine has progressed along the path of ukrainian- centricity over the years? and it moves faster, maybe on the contrary it moves more slowly without today they said about the ukrainian language in ukraine i am satisfied that the law has been adopted i am satisfied that the ukrainians are implementing it i am not satisfied that, for example, the government is contrary to the law i still have not accepted the program for supporting the ukrainian language. although the law requires it, i have a lot of complaints against the government. i am dissatisfied that there are channels in our country that should speak abroad in any language, including russian, but they speak russian on the territory there are such and such things in ukraine that i am categorically not satisfied with, but in general with the law and what is happening with ukrainization. armenian sites, some information, what is it all of a sudden , with such a secret or semi-secret visit, the head of the cia

our gun law does allow states to make their red flag laws work better.d have made a difference here. and alert law enforcement any time somebody under 21 is trying to buy a weapon. local law enforcement. in this case whether things might have gone differently if local law enforcement had been alerted when this young man was trying to buy assault weapons. we need to go further. but i don't think anything in the supreme court ruling invalidates the law that congress passed and there are elements of that law that could have made a difference here. >> senator murphy, good luck on the rest of the walk. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >>> back next with highland park's mayor. more ahead. wait 'til you see me on the downhill... [laughs] see you at home. enjoy advanced safety at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. ♪ is this where your grandparents cut a rug, with a jitterbug? or returned from war, dreaming of the possibilities ahead. ♪ where your dad waited for his dad to come home from the factory. is this where they gathered on their front steps,

the law stipulates that there is no need for any changes or additions.about changing the place of residence , because changing the place of residence is impossible because it is done or the acts are done by state bodies. it is unconstitutional and no one has the right to forbid a person who is engaged in volunteering or business to drive, this is the first thing that concerns accounting, it seems to me that more logistics should work here , such as military commissariats and assembly centers. because sometimes we have another company under that company. well, how it is organized, it goes illogically, and now , in principle, we are reaping some fruits because there are a lot of issues that are being settled on the go by the general staff of the armed forces of ukraine. in this case, i believe that the problem is only in the following, for example, this happened in kyiv, i somewhat coordinate the activities of volunteer battalions who are trying or want to serve on the front lines, but do not have such an opportunity because they are not accepted, and such

what we need is an ensemble of laws. the red flag law is a good tool. kind of like a swiss army knife. it is it is a nimble tool because we don't have to decide why somebody is dangerous at the time, but they have to pose a risk at a very particular timeframe. reg -- red flag laws can work better if we get universal background checks, if we did something about the illegal gun market in this country, and the fact that young people -- or anybody, for that matter can buy a weapon of war designed to kill a lot of people in a short period of time with little physical effort. this is a real puzzle. red flag laws i maintain are a very important tool if people know about them and if they are widely used. we have evidence from connecticut and indiana, the first two states that enacted similar laws, that for every 10, 20 of these legal actions, one life is saved by averting a suicide. that is what many of them are used for. we have emerging evidence to show in many cases like california and other states that a significant proportion of these are used when there i

there are other state red flag laws that don't so what we need to do is take the state laws and create a quick process by which you can remove weapons from people who are a danger to themselves or others model that. or somewhat ironically it's an example of a state that has a red flag law that works . in fact there are 8000 different people in florida just over the last few years since the law was passed that have had their weapons taken away from them who were either threatening suicide or threatening violence against others. there are other laws across this country that don't work well so we got todo a better job of sharing the experience of states like florida . and we're not going to the same question again. >> my second question is aboutthe second amendment . >> i do this in my book and i've done this in my speeches. i do believe that our founding fathers believed that the common law right of privategun ownership . i don't think second amendment is most likely about the privateright of gun ownership . that is mostly about the army of militias at our founding fathers did believe th

these laws are protective. laws is to communicate that to the public. in this case there is a long series of studies that have found that these laws are associated with increases in violence. these have used different methods that have been checked and repeated by other people. they have been peer-reviewed by others in the field. there has been strong evidence associated with these laws. host: karen is next in alabaster, alabama. caller: i am confused whether this guest wants us to have more gun laws or he opposes them. i oppose stricter gun laws specifically those red flag laws because they are not enforcing them and everyone is worried about mass shootings right now. most of those people were on antidepressant so it is more of a mental health issue. but new york is outrageous with their gun laws and they are putting in all of these laws where they decide whether you should be allowed to carry a gun. they will look at your social media account. it will not be an objective process. it will be subjective, if the

law. didn't really affect the keep right the way the effect the cure right and left you trying to say entirety of manhattan is a sensitive place but in general, the analysis will be slightly different but i would say that i don't think those differences are material here. i think the district instead of just banning handguns inside the home, if it adapted a permanent regime that required district residents to show that they had an atypical need to possess a handgun inside the home, i'm not sure anything and heller would have been different because it is just inconsistent with a constitutional right to either ban the exercise of it or say that it is a privilege you can only exercise if you show your atypical from the rest of the people who are equally protected by the constitutional right. >> and some of you have asked us to provide further guidance. putting aside your case for the moment, they are pointing out that some lower court have refused to apply the history test so they will not ex

wade with law professor michele goodwin, chancellor's professor of law at the university of california. it was on the eve of the court's oral arguments in the case in november that michele goodwin wrote a guest essay in "the new york times." it was headlined "i was raped by my father. an abortion saved my life." i interviewed michele goodwin in may after the court's opinion was leaked. i began by quoting from her article. a warning to our viewers and listeners, this segment includes descriptions of sexual violence. "on wednesday, the supreme court will hear oral arguments on the constitutionality of a 15-week abortion ban in mississippi that provides no exceptions in cases of rape or incest. what's at stake in this case matters to the countless girls and women who have been raped -- including those who, like me, were raped by a father, an uncle or another family member. "it was the early morning of my 10th birthday the first time that i was raped by my father. it would not be the last. the shock was so severe that i temporarily went blind before i began the fifth grade a few weeks late

>> hi, bloomberg law. has hhs instructed the fda to speed up the process to get pharmacies to spend -- you also mentioned access to medication abortion. will that include sponsoring the ongoing lawsuit in mississippi, the manufacturing arguing with the fda to prevent additional restrictions? sec. becerra: medication abortion is available. drugs have been shown to be safe and effective. i will let the fda respond to what it will do and what it is in the process of doing. i will tell you we are working with the fda to make sure they have every opportunity to continue to provide americans with access to safe and effective treatments. we will continue to work with partners, whether public or private to make sure women have access to the reproductive care services and payments they need. >> my involvement with modern health -- maia goldman with modern health care. you mentioned your directing -- to help with patients and collaborators. can you describe what that will look like? sec. becerra: under federal law t

my organization writes these laws that get past. when it comes to going and testifying for the laws and getting that good policy advanced, when it comes to sharing the truth about abortion and abortion law -- which the mainstream media does not always do spectacularly well and that is why we really reply -- really rely upon you. also because i think when you look across the spectrum of a life, there are certain moments that stand out. there is just times when the american story truly changes over the course of our lives. for most of us, it is just a couple few times in our lives. berlin wall, 1989. i wasn't really old enough to remember that but a lot of people weren't even here yet but that would be one of those times. berlin wall post september 11 attacks. the covid pandemic the last two years. but on june 24, we had another one of those moments and he was the day that roe finally fell, the day roe finally relegated, tossed out on the ash heap of history. after nearly 50 years constitutionalist abortion and after 50 years the unsp

she earned her doctorate and law degree at georgetown university law center. her masters in french from the university of south florida and a ba in history and french from mary college. our third speaker alexandria desantis will be speaking on her new book you have it here to hold it up? >> i do not. >> ok. she co-authored the book called tearing us apart how abortion harms everything and solves nothing. she will discuss how the pro-life movement can make the best case against abortion by explaining it is hard -- that it has harmed every aspect of our site society. -- commentary for this national review online. she has hosted many national review podcasts and speaks often on campus colleges -- college campuses and conferences. yesterday she spoke at a foundation high school conference along with carolyn from our staff. in many conservative events across the country. her work has been published in the new york times, wall street journal, the atlantic, washington post, washington salmon, and the human life view. she is a 2016 graduate of the university of notre