it's an exchange between justice scalia and justice alito, all right, who pretty much saw things the same way a lot but a number of years ago we had a case involving the prohibition of the sale of certain video games to children without their parents' consent. and justice alito in questioning one of the lawyers basically said do you really think our founding fathers ever imagined the day when a video could represent a killing of someone in in such realistic terms that as exist today? because some of these animated cartoons seemed life like and one of the lawyers said no , justice, i don't think so and justice scalia said that our founding fathers knew about violence. they didn't permit the control of violent media and so a strict originalist, as he was, would say since they didn't control violence, this may be a more extreme violence today, but it's still at its core a violent. -- at its core violence. so i am not going to vote to permit the suppression of this kind of information. justice alito dissented in that case and i think you would describe himself as an originalist, but in a

it's an exchange between justice scalia and justice alito, all right, who pretty much saw things the same way a lot but a number of years ago we had a case involving the prohibition of the sale of certain video games to children without their parents consent. and justice alito in questioning one of the lawyers basically said do you really think our founding fathers ever imagined the day when a video could represent killing of someone in such realistic terms that it is today because some of these animated cartoons seemed life like through the lawyers said no justice, i don't think so and justice scalia said that our founding fathers knew about violence. they didn't permit the control of violence, and so a strict originalist as he was would say since they didn't control violence, this may be a more extreme violence today but it's still at its core a violent. so i am not going to vote to permit the suppression of this kind of information. justice alito dissented in that case and i think you would describe himself as an originalist buts in a slightly different way. on the other side is w

. >> very serious legal scholar who clerked for now justice alito when justice alito was judge alito on the united states coast a peels for the third circuit. alongside president-elect trump's sister who sat then and still sits on that court. senator lee also comes from a family of legal scholars. his brother is a justice of the supreme court of utah, his father was solicitor general for ronald reagan that represents the government before the supreme court. kennedy: we heard mike lee's brother's name was one of the first north as potential supreme court nominees. how important is originalism? >> originalism is the theory that the constitution today ought to be interpreted as it was understood to have amendments publicly in 1789 when it was ratified. so originalism would bar the concept of a living constitution typically embraced by progressives and liberals who will take phrase and stretch them to their own meaning. originalism has never captured a majority in the court. but you follow the literal meaning of the text as they wrote it when they ratified it, if the literal meaning is a

it's an exchange between justice scalia and justice alito, all right, who pretty much saw things they a lot but a number of years ago we had a case involving the prohibition of the sale of certain video games to children without their parents' consent. and justice alito in questioning one of the lawyers basically said do you really think our founding fathers ever imagined the day when a video could represent a killing of someone in in such realistic terms that as exist today? because some of these animated cartoons seemed life like and one of the lawyers said no , justice, i don't think so and justice scalia said that our founding fathers knew about violence. they didn't permit the control of violent media and so a strict originalist, as he was, would say since they didn't control violence, this may be a more extreme violence today, but it's still at its core a violent. -- at its core violence. so i am not going to vote to permit the suppression of this kind of information. justice alito dissented in that case and i think you would describe himself as an originalist, but in a slightl

alito who are here. [applause] i'm not running for office. these are important people in my life. [laughter] starting with that beautiful film and so much of what is going on here, much has been said about my friend, justice scalia. since his untimely and very sad passing this february. and much more will be said during this convention. the convention appropriately dedicated to his legacy. though much may be said about him, little needs to be said for him. his opinions, books, articles, speeches, lectures, and countless other exchanges of ideas leave his voice forever with us. many of you may recall but not so fondly the heady days of the , 1970's when the emphasis in constitutional law was on rights. there was also a focus on the use of judicial power. in those days, we began the study of law with marbury vs. madison. the constitution, though, it was set out at the beginning of our case books, was but an afterthought. rarely to be consulted or disturbed. this state of affairs did not sit well with justi

and everything to do with the prevailing and evolving societal mores. >> justice alito yesterday gave interesting speech at the federalist society which viewed one way could be thought to be kind of in agenda setting for what the supreme court ought to be look at, one of the interests that a court dominated by concerns justices might want to address. he raised three or four things. he seemed to think that first amendment values are under attack in two different settings, in resistance to citizens united. he was unhappy with the fact that some 40 senators he said a proposed a constitutional amendment to the first amendment to come as he said, privilege the press over other kinds of corporations. he was deeply concerned about what he would call clinical practice on college campuses. i'm not sure mostly how those, but you can imagine public university. he seemed to suggest second amendment rights have not really been followed even after the heller decision, and he said that religious liberty continues to be under attack in conflicts between pharmacists and people who make cakes and saw.

. >> so let's imagine ourselves back in that era that existed since justice alito joined in '06. justice can be in the middle. are kind of cases on the docket now or on the horizon where we might see some movement in major cases because we are back in that area? >> so i mean the most obvious candidate will be mooted which is attention to case out of north carolina. which is all about a department of education interpretation of the regulars which the new department of education can simply rescind. i do think there are some hot button issues on the way to the court, folks who live in my national security universe there are a couple of recent decisions in guantanamo cases that will put guantanamo back on the courts radar. i don't know looking at this from their obvious standout examples. >> trinity lutheran, not scheduled, by the case where the -- >> although on not sure it's 5-4. spirit last you read a couple major 4-4. when an immigration. i take another case with a top administration doesn't need to go to court because they can just change the regulation. >> right. i assume that

nicole: medically once clerked for justice alito.eeks ago brushing off the discussions said he was busy can get it to be reelected. this morning he congratulated trump hoping to repeal by mccarrick and reduce regulation and confirm conservative judges. another name on the list texas supreme court john wood )-right-paren twitter he is not trump's number one fan. he went to the bush 43 administration is prolific on social media and that includes some jabs at trial. diane sykes is a conservative favorite who serves on the seventh circuit one step further supreme court. she's been in private practice at the county judge in wisconsin superb court before taking her current post. tuesday night after additional exit polling before results started coming in i spoke with one senator who said there is growing support for the possibility of moving forward in president obama's nominee judge merrick garland, president-elect quit and was elected. lorinda nicoll, back to you. nicole: coming up in sports, curry versus curry. the nba warrior stars set

justice alito's presence on the court would change this long-standing practice. just a few months after justice scalia was elevated from the d.c. circuit he wrote a concurrence in a case called -- that would ultimately change the framework for statutory interpretation. justice scalia agreed with the majority conclusion that the ninth circuit for once had acted right in its interpretation of an immigration statute but he refused to join the majority's opinion because that included the concept that compelling legislative history could overrule the plain statutory language. then he said the language of the law is clear we are not free to replace it with on enacted legislative intent. this pattern that justice scalia started in cardozo fonseca continued the rest of his career and i don't mean with the ninth circuit of course. according to allow review article published in 1990, during the period from 1987 when he first wrote cordozo fonseca until 1989, just two years later justice scalia wrote more opinions for the majority for relying on legislative history. the 199

john, mun alito feel so badly. give him -- mun alito feels so badly. give him a chance to redeem himself. >> except what? >> it seems to me you may be cutting your nose to spite your face. >> what you mean by that? >> you have said many times that manolito is the best tracker on the ranch. you have even said that he can track across water. >> i said that? >> you said that. >> i must have been fe >> are you going to stay here, holding up the post, mano, or >> via con dios! >> no track in town. she may not be a part of this. >> you try asking those signs. >> there are three of them. >> you said three? >> yeah, yeah, yeah. juanita, she must have gone with them. >> how much of a star? and >> the border. >> looks like you could track anything, mano. even across water. >> i may have to, unless we stop them before they cross the rio. >> no sirree. i never thought we would get a because she knows me. besides, tomorrow we will be in mexico and done with her. >> it doesn't matter to me none. i am just glad she is here. little lady, let me help you down? >> get a

and, of course, alito wanted to i don't know if it was affirming or reversing.hatever it was, he wanted to uphold -- oh, yeah. what texas had done, we had that in wisconsin, and we invalidated it. so we had them done, what they've done is they did two things. the first was to say that an abortion clinic had to be within 30 miles of a hospital so in the event of an emergency during the abortion, the woman could be quickly transported to a hospital. wait, i left out something important. it had to be within 30 minutes of a hospital in which the abortion doctor had visiting privileges. he could admit a patient. and the notion was the abortion doctors would not get, would not be granted visiting privileges by the hospital because hospital doesn't want to be associated with abortionists. and also most of the abortion doctors are not qualified for privilege, because all they do is abortions. they don't do hospital work. if there is an emergency involving an abortion, what you do is you call 911, and an balance are take the -- an ambulance will take the woman to the nea

and justice alito's hyper conservative, wrote a very long dissent, 40 pages. but the only thing he said in his dissent was that the case should have been dismissed on the basis of the res judicata, because some of the plaintiffs attacking the texas law had filed a previous similar case which had been dismissed. and you're not supposed to, you know, relitigating the identical case. and justice breyer in his majority opinion discussed this and pointed out, there was some overlap in some of the plaintiffs, loads of other places in the case had nothing to do with the earlier case you're what the also should've said but he did say his wrist judy codding is this common law rule about -- raise judy codding, litigation which is fine, but it's not part of the constitution or anything. this is an important issue. you want to get it settled. by which a fuss about that? especially for 40 pages? >> this'll be the last question. >> so judge posner given your feelings about some of the members of the judiciary and the opinions about the right, what is the role that you think

and a colleague, just advertise stevenson in the beginning, even justice the alito, would lean over and say, sonia, don't worry about it. he brings it up in everything. all right. it give me some confidence. or practicing about things like -- the i'm trying to think of something simple because i can't breach confidences. when do i grant stat the us to the an applicant and when don't we? and go straight to things like that. things like that aren't written down anywhere. so you have to live in the experience until you get to know those processes. so it is more surprising than i think the public would understand. and not infrequently we'll turn in the middle of a conversation and say to the chief, can you find out what the court has done in the past? it might be helpful some day if we had a justice who started taking notes. >> thank you. >> i'm not one of them, but it would be helpful. >> if i could take a picture. >> absolutely. thank you. i offered a picture to the two young girls. come o. are you related or no? if you're not, i'll take separate pictures. they are related? okay. do you a

. >> i would just say on that, justice alito said he was actually changing on that, one. two, roger mentioned post new deal, didn't specifically articulate it this way, once you have the 17th amendment, it changes. the senate is no longer a protector of the states. that's what built the administrative state. he's trying to figure out how do you deal with this? how do you draw lines? will the courts then end up replacing the administrative agencies and running everything? what most people don't understand, especially populists is that that was a real structural protection. it is the driver behind the administrative state and the uncontrollable budgets. that is just not widely known. he understood that. with that, it is very difficult to reverse the dynamic. he didn't think the courts were in the business of reversing that dynamic. >> roger. >> yes. [ inaudible ] inaudible [ inaudible ]. >> this is breaking down fast. i think we'll start with questions from the floor. i'll begin with my usual admonition. these are the panelists, they were invited to be our speakers. we appr

i was told that yesterday at this conference justice alito gave very good advice. when those times come, we should always ask yourselves, what would scalia do? perhaps we should even get wristbands made. after all, justice scalia was always the academy of the happy warrior. always hopeful, always good-natured, even when the republic was hanging in the balance. his joy for life was evident for all. everyone of us could do very, very well to find inspiration in his worthy example. above all, we must keep up the fight and never ever, ever give in. our nation, our people, our constitution is worthy of our utmost devotion. thank you. [applause] senator cruz: now i am happy to answer or dodge any question you like. [laughter] >> thank you very much. i would like to thank the federalist party for posting this wonderful convention. and to your comments during the referendum campaign, indeed you mentioned referendum, we had one earlier this year to leave the european union, and historic vote. i wondered what your thoughts were now that you all have a new president for the n

i think history is going to look back at the appointment of john roberts sam alito and conclude that those words president bush's final two decisions. >> you have. some different reviews of your book and i have my own review that i will share with you. there is a lot about everything in the book any talk about a couple of cases, your job is not a game of being perfect and the java present is not a game of being perfect but if you had to do it over again if anything you would do different or different recommendation what you talk about the steps. >> i'm often asked those questions what would you do differently and you need to appreciate how the heart these jobs are in people at the highest level will make mistakes. these are the most difficult decision you can possibly imagine. it would be great in hindsight to be able to change those decisions and wouldn't life be great if we had two overs that life isn't that way. when i was back or example to the extent that gave recommendations to the president about his authority ask commander in chief being with american citizens on the war on t

i think history will look back and i believe in the appointments of john robertson alito and i think those are two of the finest appointments. >> you were different reviews of your book and i have my own review which i shared with you. there is a lot of candor about everything in the book. you talk in a couple cases about things that you know your job and how it's not perfect but if you had to do it over again there'd be a couple of things you'd probably do differently. why don't you talk about give a sense of -- >> i'm often asked to have any grandson what would you do differently. i think you need to appreciate how hard these jobs are. net people at the highest levels are going to make mistakes. these are the most difficult decisions you could possibly imagine. it would be great in hindsight to be able to change those decisions and what it might be great if we had do overs but life isn't that way. when i was back to the extent that we gave recommendations to the president about his authority as commander-in-chief, being with american citizens issuing a decision now the president as

-- i think history is going to look back, i firmly believe at the appointment for john roberts and alitod represent president bush's finest decisions. >> i have read different revies of your book and had my ownad review which i have shared with you and there's a lot of pander about everything in the book and you talk in a couple of occasions of things that you know your job is not a game of perfect, but if you had to do it all over again there are a couple of things that you would would probably do differently or make recommendation, why don't you talk about, give a sense -- pick one. >> yeah, i'm often asked this question. do you have any regrets, whatt things would you do differently, you need to appreciate how hard the jobs are and people at the highest levels are going to make mistakes because these are the a most difficult decisions you can possibly imagine. it would be great in hindsight to be able to change those decisions and gee, wouldn't life be great if we had do-overs but life isn't that way. to the extent we gave recommendations to the president about authorities as commande

i was a spokesperson for chief justice roberts and justice alito when their confirmations were being through the sad. i was deputy press secretary at the time and learned more about the quarter because of that work. here's what i think about the justices. he saw this after antonin scully had died that you find out behind the scenes they are actually very good friends. doesn't matter their politics. the court has a way of simmering things down and i don't think it will be as political. the process is super political. i think one of the reasons donald trump is able to convince so many republicans to go attend if they had reservations because they blew the supreme court would be a better hand if there was more conservative court. i hear your point of view it should not be political. president obama has suffered several executive action to feed by nine to zero and the supreme court now do we get someone else concerned. i don't think it's as political when it finally gets to the court, but the process is super political. your other questions about dogs. they spoke to companions for heroes

[laughter] but i think that history will look back at the appointment of john roberts and samuel alito conclude the decisions. >> you have read different reviews of the boat and there is a lot of candor about everything in the book and you talk in a couple of cases that you know your job isn't a game of perfect but if you had to do it all over again, there's a couple things you would probably do differently. why don't you talk about in the sense -- >> i'm often asked if i have any regrets in things i would do differently. you need to appreciate how hard these jobs are and people at the highest levels are going to make mistakes as these are the most difficult decisions you could possibly imagine. it would be great to be able to change the decisions and wouldn't life be great if we had do overs. i was back and we gave recommendations about the authority and commander of chief dealing with american citizens in the war on terror and the supreme court issued decisions that said the president's authority as commander in chief doesn't extend that far. obviously we would provide different advi

appoint supreme court justices that are approved by the federal society so we'll see more justices like alitond roberts and i agree with the former speaker about repatriation of overseas tax money to pay for that. also, use part of that for tax reform. so i don't know if he's an ideologue but in terms of philosophy, the initial things he's talking about are things that i am very, very much supportive of and excited about. >> and what do you think of rudy giuliani as a possible secretary of state? >> well, i think rudy giuliani is very capable and i would support him if he was nominated for an important position. >> thank you very much, senator wicker. >> always good to be with you. >>> and coming up, remembering a pioneer in broadcasting and journalism, gwen ifill. "attention: are you eligible for medicare?" the medicare enrollment deadline is just a few weeks away. now is the time to find the coverage that's right for you ... at the right price. the way to do that is to explore your options. you can spend hours doing that yourself ... or you can call healthmarkets ... and let us do the legwo

both justice alito and the judge briefly alluded to the fact that justice scalia did not believe in the proposed interpretation. i will dissent from that. i think justice scalia said repeatedly that interpreting the searchf the text, the for the a subjective intention of the legislation, he said you always have to take into account the context in which the words .re used basically you had to take into account the obvious purpose for which the words are being used. as he wrote in his lecture in princeton, which i think is his most the preprepared and saidht-out exposition, he the import of the language andnds on its context enhances the purpose of its utterance. regard justice scalia with not only disagree with the proposed interpretation for disagreeing with the use of legislative history and trying to ascertain the text and the meaning of the statute. justicers described how scalia joined the court. justice scalia, once he joined the court a relentless criticism had an approach and anonymous effect on reducing the use of legislative history. it appears in apologetics are of way. to hav

question you asked nergs just imposed the 4.5 city wage tax an they were going to impose it on the ath alitos coming into town. i had no idea. what wage tax. the you were never intemperature dated. >> reggie white, i used to call him big cat toodie robins had my number. after the interview, he put his arm around. the oh guy is pete rose. one of the greatest tranl dis in sports ris history. this should have been nipped in the bud. baseball knew u about it, 1976, they let him slide and slide until all hell broke loose in 1989 and baseball had egg on their face. >> try to keep your language clean. this is a family show. >> i always keep it clean. you know what happened. once again, the book is called no curveball. that's your start up book, bill. fascinating story about how you got the radio job in san diego. >> easy to get. easy as one, two, three. >> thank you very much. >> appreciate you. you're doing a great job, pal. hall of fame broadcaster. >> there you go heard it from him. zblmpblt now, your nbc 10 first alert weather. >> yeah, he needs to open up a little bit. a little on the shy side.

. >> i would just say on that, as justice alito said he was actually changing on that. roger also mentioned the post-deal of original as him. although although he didn't specifically articulated this way, once you have the 17th amendment, it changes. the senate is no longer a protector of the state. that's what built the administrative space. he's trying to figure out how do you deal with this. how do you draw lines. will the courts and up replacing the administrative agencies and run everything. what most people don't understand is that was a real structural protection that is the driver behind the administrative state and the uncontrollable budget that is just not widely known. he understood that. with that, it is very difficult to reverse the dynamic, and he didn't think the courts were in the business of reversing that dynamic. [inaudible] >> that would require an 18. [inaudible] [laughter] >> while this is breaking down fast. [laughter] i will begin with my usual admonition. these are the panelist, they were invited to be our speakers. we appreciate your presence h

served as the solicitor general before the nation's highest court and lee himself clerked for justice alito. white his team brushed aside the idea when his name was floated back in september, he has congratulated trump on his white house win and vowed to work with him to get conservative judges confirmed. there have been whispers about names not on the list like paul klement, senator ayotte and senator ted cruz, who was seen at trump headquarters tuesday. but kellyanne conway said this today. >> he is committed to choosing from the left of 21. >> reporter: some are urging president obama to name garland to the supreme court via a recess appointment. it's a risky move and a long shot. if it worked, garland would be on the bench for nearly two years before the senate would have to formally vote for his nomination. >> we will follow it. >>> senators have selected their respected leadership teams. republicans are maintaining a status quo. mike emanuel is on capitol hill to tell white house is in. >> good evening. chuck schumer says his party needed a much stronger economic message. schumer will

served as the solicitor general before the nation's highest court and lee himself clerked for justice alito. white his team brushed aside the idea when his name was floated back in september, he has congratulated trump on his white house win and vowed to work with him to get conservative judges confirmed. there have been whispers about names not on the list like paul klement, senator ayotte and senator ted cruz, who was seen at trump headquarters tuesday. but kellyanne conway said this today. >> he is committed to choosing from the left of 21. >> reporter: some are urging president obama to name garland to the supreme court via a recess appointment. it's a risky move and a long shot. if it worked, garland would be on the bench for nearly two years before the senate would have to formally vote for his nomination. >> we will follow it. >>> senators have selected their respected leadership teams. republicans are maintaining a status quo. mike emanuel is on capitol hill to tell white house is in. >> good evening. chuck schumer says his party needed a much stronger economic message. schumer will

didn't mention that case and the colleague justice stevens in the beginning and justice breyer and alito would lean over and say, don't worry about it. he brings it up in everything. [laughter] >> it gave me some comfort or things like, i'm trying to think of something simple because i can't breach confidences. when do we grant improper status to an applicant and when don't we and go straight to the merits, when do we deny a form of practice, things like that, they're not written down anywhere so we have -- you have to live in the experience till you get the know those processes. so it is more surprising than i think the public would understand and not infrequently turn into the middle of a conversation and tell the chief, can you find out what the court has done in the past? it might be helpful some day if we had a justice who started taking notes. >> thank you. [laughter] >> i'm not one of them but it would be helpful. >> if i can take a picture. >> absolutely. >> thank you so much. >> i offered a picture to the two young girls. come on. are you related or no. if you're related i will

the last republican appointee came on in 2006, that was samuel alito and my experience is there's a loteting interest, intraparty. so he'll hear from conservatives who want individuals on that lais state or federal court judges but we'll hear from people who think go with a real power hitter who would be like justice scalia himself. i think he'll hear from the federalist society and mitch mcconnell who engineered this moment by stalling on merrick garland and i think there are some on the list who have good chances, for example judge thomas lee of u.tah. >> let me ask you and i think i know what your answer will be, but president obama's pick of judge merrick garland, is that a b bye-bye, go back to private life? >> yes, go back to the appeals court in d.c., no way, no how. >> amanda, to you. ted cruz, i look at you and i think ted cruz, he tweeted essentially that trump has made big promises to the republican party, will he deliver. what do you think? >> there are two discussions happening right now among republicans that make me wonder, mitch mcconnell is saying they won't keep the pr

mike lee who once clerked for justice alito.hen his name was floated, this name was brushed off saying he was too busy campaigning. well this morning lee congratulated trump saying he looked forward to helping him repeal obamacare, reduce regulation, and confirm conservative judges. that's not a spot you want to turn down. >> yeah, well another interesting name on the list, texas supreme court don willett who's made clear he's not trump's number one fan. worked in the bush 43 administration. he's prolific including pointed jabs at trump. and we have diane sykes, a conservative favorite. she serves on the seventh circuit right now. she's been in private practice, served both as a county judge and on the wisconsin supreme court for before taking her current post. of course disappointment is going to be one of the trump's first concrete tests, especially for conservatives who said this was one of the only reasons they were comfortable voting for him. >> and talking to voters in wisconsin yet who were voting for donald trump, they s

he clerked for senator alito. a lot of people expected because lee is close to ted cruz and it was more about trump reaching out to cruz through lee. this morning lee said he looked forward to working together with trump at least in the senate to repeal obamacare and other matters. justice don willett another interesting name. a texas supreme court justice. he's made very clear on twitter he's very active on social media that he's not trump's number one fan and judge diane sykes now serves on the seventh circuit one step below the supreme court. trump made it clear during the campaign he's going to try to move the court to the right. as i mentioned, democrats have a voice in this and are going to try to block him from that. >> ed henry on capitol hill. ed, thank you. >>> some of those who may be disheartened by donald trump's victory can now show some solace in weed. a string of states legalized marijuana last night. could this mark the moment that marijuana starts heading down the road to national legalization? j

. >> i take it that the thrust of justice alito's question is what is the remedy if we level up then it's easier for both, if we level down then it's harder for both. mr. kneedler: we think the court clearly should not apply to the u.s. citizen fathers the one-year limitation. the general rule, 1409-c is an exception to the general rule that governs the vast majority, the three categories of cases. married fathers, married mothers, and unmarried fathers. there is no reason to think that congress would have wanted married fathers to have a -- >> i'd like your opinion about it. how many do you think unmarried thers there were in 1952 who couldn't qualify under the long period of time, eight years, and that's not so hard to do if you're in the army because all your active duty counts. but they would have qualified at the one year. i used the numbers in your brief which are brilliant of you. i don't know how you found those. but that 4,000 number kept coming back. i thought maybe there were a couple thousand a year. but do we know there are more than a couple thousand? >> i thought you s

i have to shave, take a bath, clean my clothes, and steal a dress from victoria -- >> met alito -- manolito, maybe i can be of service. i can meet the youngady, make excuses for you. gracias. just take my horse. pearlita will meet me. >> don't you worry, i will ke care of it. >> spanish] >> [singing] senorita pearlita. >> yes. who are you? >> patrick flanagan, at your i am waiting here for -- >> manolito. i am sorry he did not get to see the vision of loveliness that you are. >> where is manolito? >> unfortunately he is detained. i have served the seven seas. i have seen the sun set. i have seen the moon over-the-top mahal, but never have i seen such beauty as shines in your eyes, my love. >> you move too fast, senor. but you speak very well, patrick >> that was nice of patrick, huh? [singing] >> [speaking >> pearlita! >> don't bother me. can't you see i'm busy? >> [indiscernible] >> you think you only have to whistle e d pearlita comes runn ing? >> let's be reasonable. >> shut up! it is only between us. >> you shut up, se?or flanigan. if it wasa't for him, i would still be alone in the woo

my colleague sam alito here.applause] justice thomas: i'm not running for office. these are important people in my life. [laughter] justice thomas: and that -- starting with that beautiful film and so much of what is going on here, much has been said about my friend, justice scalia. since his untimely and very sad passing this february. and much more will be said during this convention. the convention appropriately dedicated to his legacy. though much may be said about him, little needs to be said for him. his opinions, books, articles, speeches, lectures, and countless other exchanges of ideas leave his voice forever with us. many of you may recall but not so fondly, the heady days of the 1970's when the emphasis in constitutional law was on rights. there was also a focus on the use of judicial power. in those days, we began the study of law with marbury vs. madison. the constitution, though, it was set out at the beginning of our case books, was but an afterthought. rarely to be consulted or disturbed. this sta

so i don't think that i'm departing from the way -- >> so you're going to let the guy -- justice alito, then, the guy on the street that looks dejected is not my friend or a close relative. >> yes. >> but i give him a tip and say go trade on this, it will make you a i lot of money, that person -- that tipper would not be liable? >> he would, justice sotomayor, for the very reason that you yourself articulated. in that situation there is a gift of information to someone with the intent that the person trade. >> so it's irrelevant whether it's a friend or family member? >> my submission is that the best way to understand dirks is that it goes to a breach of fiduciary duty which would not be limited to two categories like that and i don't think that justice powell in articulating this species of personal benefit was attempting to rely on it. i was trying to explain this before to justice breyer. at the end of the opinion where the court precisely says that seecrist is not liable because he didn't make any financial advantage, it goes on to say nor did he make a gift of valuable informatio

i was told yesterday that justice of the dough -- justice alito said but would justice to the duplex after all he was always the epitome of the happy warrior even when the republic was hanging in the balance, his joy for life was evident to all. and everyone of us could do very very well to find inspiration in his worthy example. and above all, we must keep up the fight and never ever ever give up. for our nation or are people , our constitution is worthy of our utmost devotion. [applause] and now i am happy to answer or dodge any question. >> i am from the united kingdom and also wonderful hosting of this convention and your comments are in the referendum campaign since you mentioned that as we voted to leave the european union as a historic vote so what are your thoughts now you will have a new president and we have a new prime minister about that relationship? >> that relationship is vital and i think a sad aspect of the last eight years is how poorly it was starting at the outset of the obama administration and then with winston churchill it is my hope that the churchill bus will

the dissent was justice breyer from the left, chief justice roberts, alito. that is the context of commercial advertising. we also have from the court the decision where the court struck down -- a complicated case -- but for relevant purposes, struck down billboard advertising of tobacco. basically made it impossible to advertise tobacco in virtually any area of this jurisdiction. the rationale for it was, you put it on a billboard as opposed to the pages of some adult magazine -- does not mean the same thing, a magazine aimed at adults. lots of kids can see it, but lots of adults can see it. you cannot restrict the speech available to adults in any broadway -- broad way simply to shield the children. that is something the court had developed before. it applied it to commercial advertising as well. that is an important point because a lot of the kinds of restrictions in advertising to children i have seen, whether it has to do with food, violent video games, and the like, you look at the restrictions in advertising to children and things like advertising in a

sam alito here.stice thomas: i'm not running for office. these are important people in my life. justice thomas: and that -- starting with that beautiful film and so much of what is going on here, much has been said about my friend, justice scalia. since his untimely and very sad passing this february. and much more will be said during this convention. the convention appropriately dedicated to his legacy. though much may be said about him, little needs to be said for him. his opinions, books, articles, speeches, lectures, and countless other exchanges of ideas leave his voice forever with us. many of you may recall but not so fondly, the heady days of the 1970's when the emphasis in constitutional law was on rights. there was also a focus on the use of judicial power. in those days, we began the study of law with marbury vs. madison. the constitution, though, it was set out at the beginning of our case books, was but an afterthought. rarely to be consulted or disturbed. this state of affairs did not s

it is no surprise to people when she critiques alito. and makes no bones about it.have been in the habit of publishing a list of who is voting for whom before election day on the theory you should know where we are coming from. >> i don't think we will ever escape allegations we suffer from political bias because that is the nature of the environment at the moment. we do have layers of editing where people act as eternal checks on others. if they detect a bias, we endeavored to guide against it. that is part of our code of ethics. our mission, we need to be honest, honorable, and fair. fairness involves being involved to what people are saying. listening to them. giving them a hearing. a fair hearing. ultimately, we do the reporting. we have an obligation to tell people in a straightforward way when we have found. with the evidence shows. not to pussyfoot around it. show them what the evidence shows and tell them straight. when we talk about fairness, my view is, let's be fair to the public, too. that is telling them in a straightforward way what the results of our

adopt favorable termination element and that that's why this makes an ideal vehicle to answer justice alito's earlier question, which is what are the elements of this claim. >> i didn't think that was a difficult question. i thought that everyone agrees that if a policeman wrongly arrests you, you know, maliciously arrests you, et cetera, and there you are in his custody, and he brings you over to the jail, puts you into the jail, up until the point you see the magistrate, you have a claim for false arrest. >> correct. >> and we said that that claim for false arrest is a constitutional claim. >> yes, sir. >> violates the fourth amendment. what time limit applies? the false arrest time limit because that's the most analogous. >> yes, your honor. >> then we get into the next stage. now we're in front of a magistrate. and the magistrate says, stay in jail for two more months. does that violate the fourth amendment? not malicious prosecution. does it violate the fourth amendment? the reason that we tend to think it does is because all the circuits have said it does. that is, judge higgen botheren

if the question is speech it's not obvious to me that more nominees of the ilk of trump or samuel alito will move the needle that radically but the other side is religion. i think that is where there is a real potential ground shift in a court where john roberts is the center seat and where i think the missouri case of the courthouse this term is a very small and modest flashpoint compared to the tension between the -- so i think that could be a very big sensitive topic in the coming years. >> we will turn to your questions in just a second. let me ask one more follow-up question along those lines. so we talked about the eight-member court in the number of times it was deadlocked and not a particularly large number but they did issue some quite muddled decisions and one of them -- well even by their standards and i'm thinking in particular of the case sometimes called the rules court case where there was a clash between the regulations under the affordable care act guaranteeing free gift coverage to women and religiously-based groups objecting to that on religious grounds and the court

as you heard from justice alito this morning, using the word uncompromising in a very praise worthy sense in talking about justice scalia. what the usual detractors do not understand is that justice scalia was able to be pressurent, far-sighted, prophetic, precisely because he was uncompromising in looking backwards. now, of course, virtually everyone knows that justice scalia looked back to the public meaning of the words of the constitution as understood at the time they were drafted. also, most here in this convention will know that justice scalia's originalism was tied to constitutional structure as judge pryor just talked about. but how many of you even here realize that his understanding of structure came largely from the federalist papers? that's what i want to discuss and i'll make three pionts. hopefully i'll get to the third one. the importance of justice scalia's place on the federalist papers to how justice scalia's understanding of the constitutional structure, primarily separation of powers, as explained in the federalist, undergurged his approach to the text of the constitu

they have been able to move prior whether it is justice alito or roberts with the democratic party not supporting bush's nominee. i think that is always a heavy lift to get your supreme court nominee in. that is something that is likely going to happen. host: we go back to calls from florida. david on the republican line. caller: good morning, america. how about that trump? awesome, i love it. theve been saying for years only way this country is going to turn around is it a billionaire comes in with no ties to special interest and gets things done. that is what he is going to do. everybody in the media was wrong about this guy from day one. you guys are a bunch of backstreet -- ask the drivers sitting back and watch and do his magic. that is all i have to say. host: we will let you tend to your dogs. guest: the media was wrong, pollsters were is wrong that were wrong. -- pollsters were wrong. we interviewed donald trump four times. he is very media savvy. he knows what his message is. i think he had a very good slogan. it was controversial to some but making america great again. hillar

it is no surprise to people when she critiques alito. habit ofeen in the publishing a list of who is voting for whom before election day on the theory we should know -- you should know where we are coming from. everdon't think we will escape allegations we suffer from political bias because that is the nature of the environment at the moment. we do have layers of editing where people act as eternal checks on others. if they detect a bias, we endeavored to guide against it. that is part of our code of ethics. our mission, we need to be honest, honorable, and fair. involves being involved to what people are saying. listening to them. giving them a hearing. a fair hearing. ultimately, we do the reporting. we have an obligation to tell people in a straightforward way when we have found. with the evidence shows. not toproceed -- pussyfoot about it. show them what the evidence straight.tell them when we talk about fairness, my view is, let's be fair to the public, too. them in alling straightforward way what the results of our reporting were.

. >> i take it the thrust of justice alito's question, what is the remedy, if we level up, it is easier for both, if we level down, then the -- it is harder for both. >> we think that the court the general rule, 1409 c is an exception to a general rule that governs the vast majority. the three categories of cases. married mothers, marry ried fathers and unmarried fathers. there's no reason that congress would have wanted unmarried fathers. >> one i could think of and i'd like your opinion about it is how many do you think unmarried fathers there were in 1952 who couldn't qualify under the long period of time, 8 years, and that's not so hard to do if you're in the army. but they would have qualified under the one year. now i use the numbers in your brief which were brilliant of you to rye to find. i don't know how you found those but that 4,000 number kept coming back and i thought maybe there were a couple of thousand a year but do we know that there's more than a couple of thousand. >> i thought you said they're untold numbers. >> no, they're untold numbers but that is true. they're un