i was being addressed. >> if you're the appellant court on behalf of the appellant you have 7 minutes>> thank you, very much. commission i appreciated you're hearing this appeal okay. i with my wife are the owners ever this cottage on potrero hill only 8 hundred and 50 square feet the dispute is with the neighbor to the left on the screen in the greenhouse that is a 72 hour ours with first story our house has two virtues one 3 and soon hopefully four grandchildren living within 10 minutes walk, and, secondly, it has a gorgeous view sitting as it does on a bedrock doom of the bay with the ships that anchor and the east bay house windows gleaming into the sunset so - i'll fast forward we - the neighbors built this fence they did that without all opposed by the same sign us and consulting us we knew a fence needed to be replaced or redone of the two events were bolted together and i had asked specifically that when that came time to build a fence we would work on it together but, in fact, over in the late summer or early fall we were absent for a long period they went ahead and built thi

of the appellant we understand why in this yard area 15 to 20 feet between appellant and our client is response time on the property and it is falling down a good i think four or five feet from the property line that is about here what's being done to make it simple is this is at evacuation that will be done the back of my clients property is here and the front of my clients property it here this is a brick garden wall appellants property is represented by the line in the backward what my client does digs down 4 feet and a foot slab and by deciding down right here but we don't understand the remark the appellant the appellant saying we're filling up against this window she points out we're actually going down not up this is at window and we're building down what is created is a retaining wall parallel to this wall only my clients property here that will serve as a wall of the patio that is going in and the patio is going in from here to where my clients building starts over here it will not come near this retaining wall and i'm glad that appellant showed you that report because the

of the appellant we understand why in this yard area 15 to 20 feet between appellant and our client is response time on the property and it is falling down a good i think four or five feet from the property line that is about here what's being done to make it simple is this is at evacuation that will be done the back of my clients property is here and the front of my clients property it here this is a brick garden wall appellants property is represented by the line in the backward what my client does digs down 4 feet and a foot slab and by deciding down right here but we don't understand the remark the appellant the appellant saying we're filling up against this window she points out we're actually going down not up this is at window and we're building down what is created is a retaining wall parallel to this wall only my clients property here that will serve as a wall of the patio that is going in and the patio is going in from here to where my clients building starts over here it will not come near this retaining wall and i'm glad that appellant showed you that report because the

i was being addressed. >> if you're the appellant court on behalf of the appellant you have 7 minutes>> thank you, very much. commission i appreciated you're hearing this appeal okay. i with my wife are the owners ever this cottage on potrero hill only 8 hundred and 50 square feet the dispute is with the neighbor to the left on the screen in the greenhouse that is a 72 hour ours with first story our house has two virtues one 3 and soon hopefully four grandchildren living within 10 minutes walk, and, secondly, it has a gorgeous view sitting as it does on a bedrock doom of the bay with the ships that anchor and the east bay house windows gleaming into the sunset so - i'll fast forward we - the neighbors built this fence they did that without all opposed by the same sign us and consulting us we knew a fence needed to be replaced or redone of the two events were bolted together and i had asked specifically that when that came time to build a fence we would work on it together but, in fact, over in the late summer or early fall we were absent for a long period they went ahead and built thi

on the appellate court.ome were pickled and flattered that there is a book that is kind of about us, and the genre of supreme court books is always growing. the genre of books about the intermediate appellate court, probably not. a number of them were pleased, and the judge even hosted an event in pasadena, ninth circuit court house where i and other authors got to talk about work. i was pleasantly surprised. he and the judge had a mini book club. a number of the law clerks got together. i was very pleased by how they took it well, you know as if he was saying, got all the judges in this book behaved wonderfully. nobody really seems to take offense. >> i had a similar experience with my 1st book. and it was called the last justice. the character took a bribe, had an inappropriate relationship with a subordinate,a subordinate, did all kinds of inappropriate things, and i was surprised. i had a former solicitor general introduce me an event and.out all those things. so it was nice. i had a similar experience,

fact that are not true ear rebutting that with the declarations under oath from the two of the appellants and our request permission it be submitted into the record so sarah. >> no, we don't need to take these do we. >> it is up to you the board. >> what do you guys think. >> it is relevant. >> i'm sorry. >> if it is relevant to what i think is relevant to accept the assistance. >> we'll not have time to read the material nor the permit holder had access to that at this point. >> i'm sorry, i'm sorry please sit down. >> not at that time go ahead and start you're a - >> i indicated my name is donald i represented the tenants on 22 street two brought the appeal i'm the neighbor and also 0 a long time homeowners that lives 4 doors down i took the case an pro bono i'm disgusted of the new owner and the project manager that disregard the rights of tenants and the two united their seeking to tramp on the laws and the insistence that you are less able to defend themselves in cashing out on the real estate boom in san francisco as we noted in our belief this appeal epitomize the one that is socia

supreme court -- they don't get quite as much attention on the appellate courts. so i think some of them were sort of tickled and flattered that, wow, there's a book that's kind of about us. and the genre of supreme court books is always growing, the genre of books about the intermediate appellate courts is probably not. so i think a number of them were pleased. and judge kaczynski, then chief judge of the 9th circuit, even hosted an event in pasadena at the 9th circuit courthouse where i and a number of other authors got to talk about our works. my own judge, justice scanlon up in portland, he and judge graver had a mini book club where he and a number of the law clerks got together and i flew out there for it. i was very pleased by how they took it well even though, as anthony was saying, not all of the judges in this book behave wonderfully. but nobody really seemed to take offense, so that was good. >> i had a similar experience with my first book which the main character was the solicitor general. and it was called "the last justice." and the character took a

in the north to bay why he was moved from where he was police in the east to bear on the hunt for appellate gunbattle the man had door when the attack cells thus how lucky he is to be alive problems continue at bart stations a look at when services are expected to go back to normal. >>male announcer:this is the bay area news station,kron 4 morning news starts now. >>will tran: thank you for joining us this tuesday and. >>terisa estacio: good morning everyone. >>anny hong: definitely you need to spf for in the next couple of days we have clear skies starting up on this tuesday morning all across the bay area living more 4547 in pleasanton 53 in san francisco of the forties to low 50s our friends in the south and temperatures are warming up this afternoon here is a look at the future past for the currency by the lunch hour we will have lots of sunshine and temperatures at noon and will be generally in the seventh is for much of the bay area the close to see some sixties but by 3:00 today and temperatures will be generally in the '70s. >>anny hong: the warmer spot will be out for antioch consi

it's unfortunate we are just now getting federal appellate judges. if i had to guess i would say i think the most important quality for supreme court justice are being open-minded and willing to learn and also i was a genuinely humble. nutty buddy tells you they are humble is, in fact, humble. but justices who do have a sense of humility about the role and understand that they are one branch and they were reviewing the actions of other branches and sometimes state government. sometimes the views of these other government actors deserve respect. sometimes they do sometimes they don't. it's good to have a theory about why that is so. >> pretty sure i've never read a biography of a supreme court justice. maybe if more of them had syphilis i would read more. [laughter] >> justice douglass. >> can't libel the dead. [laughter] [inaudible] i've read -- i just ordered my second, third and fourth copies of notorious rbg and i enjoyed all of them. >> thank you. >> there was a historical novel published for two years ago in which the lead character's name is ke

ended in the early 21st century, the president was repeated again and again on the appellate court level. it led to substantial aggravation that have led to the possibility in 2005 of the nuclear option. to lead to the senate going to the brink and then having again a 14 the grid which i personally endorsed and said thank god they did it because it brought the senate away from the brink. and then finally the brink was crossed in 2013. i cannot say because he has not told me why senator reid excluded the supreme court from that, although some might conjecture that it was because you only get to vote for the nuclear option if you exclude the supreme court found out. but you may know better. >> i actually have an unorthodox view about this, which is the think about it, justice scalia was absent that it was asked what provision of the constitution did he like the least? he said it is too hard to amend the constitution. it takes -- why do i bring this up? a justice can change fundamentally the interpretation of the constitution. and the degree of consensus required, 51 votes, is really not co

>> in the federal appellate court decision, if it stands -- then the federal appellate court decision stands and the obama issue is canceled. i think it is an easy question and easy call. i think they do because it will take considerable amount of resources. does the president of the united states have the authority to do what he did? and i think at least four justices of the supreme court are going to say no. he did not have the authority. that this is a question in which clearly the congress of the united states has got to be engaged, cannot be an executive decision, and president obama in previous -- before he took his executive decision was saying i don't have the authority. i don't have the authority. so they're probably going to be reading the president's statements. >> this is very narrow. this is very narrow. and previous presidents eisenhower, george h.w. bush, george w. bush, ronald reagan, have all taken similar actions to apply to classes of people that have been caught up in our immigration system. the standing texas is claiming that it would cost money to give driver's l

and, who chief justice roberts served with on the appellate court and before hundred -- befriended. he embodies and models what it is we want to see in our jurisprudence. > let me pick up on that. as you know, some people on the left were disappointed with chiefe of two just -- justice garland. what i want to say is those of us who knew you back then could bee said, you should not surprised. if i remember correctly, when you were teaching constitutional law, there were people in that eld thatwork that model. you are skeptical of the philosopher said. president obama: i think you are right. in common law. you are familiar with this. the students are too. terrific shield, not always an effective sword. what i mean is to have been moments in history, brown versus board of education being the best example, and on the other end of the spectrum, a decision like dred scott, which was antithetical to what we want to do. a court there are certain moments where the democracy has broken down in a fundamental way. the majority has shut down petitions for redress from a minority group. anre are

appel on these efforts congress needs to pass the paycheck fairness act to put sensible rules in place. [applause] to make sure that employees who discuss their salaries don't face retaliation by their employers but i am not here just to say we should close the wage gap. i'm here to say we will close the wage gap and if you don't believe me, if you don't believe that we are going to close at wage gap you don't need to come to this house because this house has -- [applause] this is the story of the national women's party whose members are to have their voices heard. these women first organized in 1912 with little money, with big hopes for equality for women all around the world. they want an equal say over their children come over their property, their earnings their inheritance, equal rights for citizenship equal opportunities of schools and universities, workplaces, public service and yes equal pay for equal work. they understood that the power of their voice and our democracy was the first step in achieving these broader goals. their leader alice paul was a brilliant community organi

in a similar case involving a worker for fiction, an appellate judge rebuked his fellow appellate panel as for allowing the school to punish the writer. he said after today, students will have to hide their artwork. they lost their speech rights. if someone finds there are disturbing, they can be punished. school officials may now support the students freedom of expression to a policy of making high schools cozy places like day care centers where no one may be made to feel uncomfortable by the knowledge that others have dark sides in all the arches of hearts and smiley faces. so if you are wondering about the connection between the book which stop senior year of high school in some of what has been going on in today's college campuses about students to think that their comfort level is more than the expressive rights of their peers, this is part of a connection that i see though i have not read about it, but it's part of the cato and found discussion that john mentioned earlier. and this brings us to disparaging speech addressed to groups or individuals. many schools have speech codes.

before the act, the court was primarily tribunal, it was the highest and last source of appellate review, whose chief function was prickly to discern -- correctly to discern and protect the rights of litigants. constriction rp completely overrode this obstinate conception of the court was to be the vindicator of all federal rights, and acts extrude enlargement of the courts discretionary appellate jurisdiction express the profound recharacterization of the court's function. marshall died in 1835, having outlived jefferson by nine years. according to justice story, his final words were a prayer for the union. his strength in death, his cover , story wrote in marshals eulogy, it would be difficult to name his superior. even the gimlet-eyed justice holmes remarked of american law -- remarked that if american law were to be represented by a -- by a single alone, it could be one john marshall. as michael gerhardt, national constitution center's supreme scholar in residence has written, marshall seems to have keenly understood the importance of treating one's enemies as well as one could. it's

or qualifications, it was fairly routine at every level -- both at the district court level, the appellateourt level, and the supreme court -- that the person would be confirmed in short order. there would be a hearing. people would ask the potential judge a question or two or five or 10. there would be questionnaires. and once they had satisfactorily performed that process, then the senate would vote. and it was presumed -- it was understood that just as the president had a constitutional duty to make the appointment that the senate had a onstitutional duty to at least make a determination as to whether this person should be on the bench. what has been unique in this process has been the growing attitude inside of the senate that every nomination, no matter how well-qualified a judge, is a subject of contention. in some cases, it's simply because one party or the other wants to gum up the works and so they will drag out confirmation longer and longer. even if, ultimately, the judge gets confirmed by voice vote, by unanimous consent in the senate, they'll drag it out for two or three month

the appellate court in pennsylvania rejected the pre-trial appeal.t address cosby's argument that a former district attorney promised not to charge him in the case. cosby is accused of drugging and assaulting andrea constand in 2004. >>> erin andrews settled with the hotel owner and operator. she sued nashville marriott after a stalker recorded her a nude in a peephole in 2008. she was awarded the jury verdict last month. the settlement terms are now confidential. >>> tom brady's four-game suspension back on the table. the federal appeals court ruled in the deflategate case. it was thrown out by a district court judge. brady is said to be mulling his legal options. >>> there is severe weather risk out there for parts of the coup country. let's bring in meteorologist pedram javaheri. >> here in kansas and st. louis from daybreak to the afternoon hours between 2:00 and 4:00 p.m., we could have severe weather. the main concern is what we have set up to the south. take a look at this. a negative tilt in the jet stream. you know your storm is reaching ful

there's been either mixed decisions at the district court level, not a lot of appellate court rulings but they have -- as the eeoc is starting to bring more litigation -- last week they filed their first two cases allege that sexual orientation discrimination is sex discrimination so there's a lot of activity in that area. that's, i think -- and just the one other thing i'll mention. there's been a couple of bad supreme court rulings on the issue of liability for sexual harassment, which you have to show for it, and i think there are a lot of decisions being made under the new standard that are kind of all over the place, and so that's what -- not the only thing that will make the supreme court look at an issue but general he when there's a lot of disagreement among the circuits. >> thank you, gillian, for writing this book. >> thank you. [applause] >> remember to buy multiple books. you can always find a friend who might want one. thank you. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> when i tune into on the weekend, usually it's authors sharing new releases.

there was no intermediate appellate review because three-judge district courts could go straight to the supreme court. this is one of the points, one of the ironies about roe vs. wade. there was no factual record. all of the details we might play out about norma mccorvey's life were not in the opinion. there was no trial. there were no expert witnesses. there was no presentation of evidence. so in the decision written by justice blackmun, you get only the bare bones that she was a single woman who was not married and got pregnant and sought an abortion. then the decision is so sweeping that her particular factual circumstances are not really significant to the outcome of the decision. that is part of how roe vs. wade is different from all of the other cases you have discussed. when you think of maranda or marbury, those are very factual-laden decisions, and the courts go through the facts in a great deal of detail. there was no fact or trial in this case. that isolates it and highlights it as an unusual decision. host: who was wade? ms. murray: henry wade was the prosecutor, interesting

>> it depends, the will you will be different depending where she lives because the appellate courtsre not entirely in agreement. but there are -- there are some limits to what public employees including toamps teachers can say about their work so a lot would depend whether this is a matter of public concern or o not. and hypothetically if she were attacked by a student or by the school principal that probably to me would seem like a matter of public concern, but if it was something else, then she probably could be. but it's very is hard to say without knowing both more and where this took place. >> gentleman right here. be our last question. >> dr. mccluskey to your point isn't this whole issue really more not about -- free expression but property rights. isn't public property the original sin in this whole debate where if you, you know, if you don't have public property, public school wouldn't be in the situation to be an arbiter of speech? >> i've never put it that way, and i'm not an exfor the on property law or or anything like that. i do think that that is certainly a root prob

if the filibuster conceived as -- succeeded, as the filibuster have on the bush appellate appointments in 2003-2004 combat itself within a disposition of the nomination. senator reid said he should not have done that. the president shouldn't have done that because the successful filibuster of the nomination in the previous congress was a disposition of that nominee. so at the end of the day there are many ways the senate can exercise that power of advice and consent of certainly voting the nominee up or down is one of them. but as has been amply established throughout history, there are other ways of exercising it. you get to a situation, this is not the madison situation where the president, nomination goes through unless the senate disapproves it. this is a completion power. this is like taking the example of a treaty, for example. the president opposes the treaty treaty but the treaty cannot be ratified by the president unless the senate consents. the senate can just leave the situation sitting there for years, as it has with the number of the treaties. so it's the same exact kind o

department of energy the army corps of engineers the bureau of reclamation in the appellation regional commission backup the corps of engineers by 1.4 billion of new mandatory funding with the department ofof energy. in negotiating the support of though waterways to bring one step closer to energy research to resolve the nuclear waste stalemate one of the hazardous material to maintain a nuclear weapons stockpile. we also conducted extensive oversight with the department of energy and eliminated the program to reduce waste saving $125 million. bil that was the experimental nuclear reactor in france with 1.$1 billion as i mentioned earlier we keep the projects on time and on budget. 90% desirable and also working with the facility in new mexico. man 77 senators submitted a request and we worked hard to accommodate for we had many other senators but most have something that they think is important so they decide to send us letters suggesting what they would like to take out of thee bill., under the the last time the unitedwa states senate passed thisions pe bill under the regular order w

this combined with some cold air, expanding down through the appellations, pennsylvania, new york, you're going to be looking at more snowfall as well. spring, it is still holding off. eventually it will get there, hopefully in the next week or two. you'll finally see the temperatures warm back up. meanwhile, back towards the west, los angeles, you've been seeing above average temperatures this week, but now down to 21. in fact, across a large swath of southern california, new mexico and arizona, 20, 30 millimeters of rainfall. talking about some rain, though, let's move here towards the mediterranean. that's pulling off the north parts of the peninsula, southern germany, already seeing gusty winds, the isobars in this region. plus the chance of the large hail, two to three centimeters in diameter. maybe the threat of tornadoes could linger in here. the separate low is coming in right behind it, there in southern italy, looking at heavy showers coming up with that, and extending in algeria, heading into the weekend. a rough one along that line. paris, showers, london, partly cloudy skies.

government appellate attorney saying, look, i don't believe the president has the authority or the power to do this. justice anthony kennedy saying the same thing. meantime, outside, the children of undocumented immigrants say this is not a political issue, but if human issue. >> i think they should give -- it will help many people. it would give them a better life. it would help them get a better job. >> i think the greatest thing greatest fear right now is not to complete your life with your parents. your family is everything. it's what's holding you together. it's what carries you through life. sam: you can see how emotional those children are, fearing everyday might be deported. we do expect a decision to come down on this case sometime in late june. reporting live outside the supreme court, sam sweeney. back to you. autria: thank you, sam. our other big story today, we are heating things up with temperatures heading into the 80's. meteorologist jacqui jeras is here with a look at your forecast. just get outu can for even three minutes, it would be great to get out and breathe a litt

level, does anybody get another bite of the apple because it wasn't decided at the chief appellate level>> i think the parties in that case probably wouldn't. the decision below is affirmed by a divide court and no opinion from the supreme court issues. there may be further proceedings in that case in lower courts on other issues, but unlikely that the issue that went to the supreme court would be relitigated in that case. the fact that the court chose to take the case in the first instance kind of sends a signal to everybody else that in the future once the seat is filled on the supreme court they may want to take it up >>> they may see an issue that they take in the first place >> that's right >>> you've been over seeing amicus briefs siding with various petitioners in various cases. the ones that have already been heard by the court, know there is someone who won't be able to vote. do they freeze the game at that point or they just go ahead with the missing man formation? >> there are a few options. they could decide the case notwithstanding and if it's a unanimous decision great r or

seeing in 2016 is the impact of not only citizens united but also speech now and another case at the appellatewhat we have is secret money, no shareholder protection and we have single candidate superpacs. none of those were supposedly talked about in citizens united but are the results that we have. so we have a decision that was wrongly decided in the sense that it created the court went beyond and created a right for corporate free speech, if you will, in elections. but we are not given getting what the court promised. we are getting none of the disclosure that the court voted for 8-1. we do not have the ability of shareholders to know what is being spent by the corporations they have shares in and we have single candidate superpacs coordinating closely only in the legal definition are they somehow independent so we really have a wild west of money and we, of course, then have the dark money groups. it's hard to lay that necessarily totally at the feet of citizens united. i think that the internal revenue service has to claim a lot of credit for these groups that could have foreign money in

in a very strict way, scientist to ones what one thing appellate additions to another. the sociologist of science i understand these things to be intertwined to all of the time. in many ways. funding decisions, questions people choose to ask. but when weinberg among other things offers the important point that we think science and we know science is so powerful that we put our most important questions to it. these may not be the questions that science can answer. so he says that the trans scientific their questions in the world that can be asked of science that which cannot be answered by science. these are questions of fact and can be stated in the language of science. they they are on answerable by science, they transcend science. what i want to suggest is that these are well-meaning efforts, these reconciliation projects to help us do the work of having a conversation and acknowledgment which this sort of grieving, difficult conversation that might look something more of a truth and reconciliation process than the civil bullet of a genetic test. so i think the reconc

said we're ending the ability for senate members to filibuster when it comes to district court and appellateituation, after judge scalia's passing, in which it's not just that the republican majority in the senate intend to vote against a highly qualified judge, we now have a situation where they're saying we simply will not consider the nomination itself. we're just going to shut down the process. and as a consequence, we have a 4-4 tie on the supreme court and potentially at least two supreme court terms in which this vacancy will remain. that is unprecedented. not only are they not willing to hold a vote at this point, they have refused to hold hearings on judge garland, and in some cases, mitch mcconnell and others have said we will not even show the courtesy of meeting with the judge to find out what he thinks. i think what's important for all of you to understand, because you're going to be not just lawyers appearing in court potentially but custodians of our legal system and our democracy, is if you start getting into a situation in which the process of appointing judges is so broken,

he's a respected former prosecutor and is well regarded as an appellate judge. he was confirmed to his present position in 1997 by a vote of 76-23. a majority of republicans voting in favor. mr. speaker, madam speaker, in fact, notwithstanding the opposition of some republicans, they articulated, in particular, mr. grass lee, now chairman of the judiciary committee, that judge garland was eminently qualified and would be good for an appointment to another court but that he was not for expanding the circuit court of the district of columbia. and it was for that reason alone he voted against mr. garland. mr. speaker, madam speaker, today is the 21st anniversary of the oklahoma city bombing. judge garland as deputy assistant attorney general in the clinton administration oversaw the successful investigation into the bombing and the prosecution of its perpetrator. his insistence on traveling to see the remains of the murrah building in the days after the attack and his hands on attack to the investigation and prosecution won him praise across the political spectrum.

. >> reporter: the appellate court today said goodell did, in fact, have the power to suspend brady, power giving to him by the collective bargaining agreement with the players' the court said goodell properly exercised his broad discretion and did not deprive brady of fundamental fairness. in response, the players' union said today it is disappointed and would carefully review the decision and consider all of our options. all along brady has maintained he had nothing to do with the deflated footballs. today's decision leaves it up to him whether to appeal. >> it's a hit to his reputation. he's the greatest quarterback of our time certainly. the man's been in six super bowls. so you can't take that away from him, but at this point, it's a setback because this goes... this is a mark on his resume that nobody wants. >> reporter: this decision means the patriots will have to rely on a back-up quarterback for one quarter of their regular-season games. scott, unless the suspension is overturned yet again, the next big question is: can they win without tom brady? >> pelley: don dahler at g

a member of the university of chicago but have argued in appellate courts and taught courses in constitutional law. part of the culture of university of chicago law school faculty is to maintain a sense of collegiality with people who hold different views. what engenders respect is the intellectual rigor and honesty of which he or she arrives at a decision. given that background, i am sorely tempted to vote for judge roberts based on my studies of his resume, his conduct during the hearing and a conversation that i had with him yesterday afternoon. there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that judge roberts is qualified to serve on the highest court in the land. moreover, he seems to have the temperament that makes for a good judge. decent,mble, personally and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. that is absolutely clear that judge roberts truly loves the law. he could not have achieved his excellent record, as an advocate for the supreme court without that passion for the law. it became apparent to me in our conversation that he does in fact deeply respect the basic precept

issue of coverage there's been either makes decisions at the district court level, not a lot of the appellate court ruling but they have started to bring more litigation just last week they filed the first two cases alleging that the discrimination so there's a lot of activity in that area and that a couple bad rulings on the issue of liability for harassment and just to show i think there are a lot of decisions being made under the new standard that are kind of all over the place. and so that's not the only thing that generally it's when there's a lot of disagreement among the circuit. >> thank you, joann, for writing this book. plus the [applause] >> remember to buy multiple books. you can always find a friend that might want one. thank you. >> [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] good afternoon and welcome to the auditorium at the cato institute. appreciate you coming out today. this is a really important topic. i have the book for him here for the human cost of welfare by phil harvey and lisa conyers. for those of you following us online you can follow on twitter at cato ev

a man is supposed to be presenting in that kind of thing has had a great deal of success for the appellate court found that it is discrimination. it will come along with lgb t. but my organization and a lot of others enforce title vii and take the position that it's encompassed in the provision for that reason. he was trying to help women who might be disadvantaged because if they were protected by the statute where did these women so i'm sure he wasn't thinking about those that were dressing in men's clothes. that is the point is that it has been expanded. they were groundbreaking and important. can you tell us a little bit about how much is involved? >> when you have a statute about men and women being equal in the workplace and you are dealing with a very real physical difference between men and women, what does the quality look like, does it mean treating men and women the same or does it mean taking account and that is caused at one point that caused a very serious risk in the community that is covered in the chapter five case but in the early years after it was enacted, they didn't k

you're taking more reflexes there are lock ups you're feeling 3 percent is here on behalf of the appellant. >> yeah. that's annualized this is compounded. >> that's the money art and i have had conversations about a year nature with cambridge we need to bring it down to 250 or three hundred easily. >> so the class is much more competitive than it used to be evaluations are higher and 11.2 that is a priori peek since 2008 way above the 6.3 in 2000 observing liquidity premium is justified but the 5 hundred would have been applicable so because i want to think about this the 5 years how many years looking ahead can you provide a bulletin point we should be looking were the s&p plus 3 and the reasons why they are that way. >> sure. sure. >> okay. >> we vafrnt officially changed our benchmarking we've the - the long percent we if i think about shorter percent it is a high bar. >> 250 and three hundred is the amortization. >> moving to the next page page 5 this is breaks out the program returns by your sub classes and as you can see we've compared it to the cambridge benchmark in the middle sect

this side would've been the appellant, joseph lochner's people sitting here. the respondent, being the attorney general, sitting here. the lawyer for joseph lochner would have begun right here, facing the bench, and would have begun with words something like, "may it please the court. i am the attorney for joseph lochner and him asking the court to reverse his conviction because my client was denied due process in that he was denied the right to enter into a contract to purchase labor and to set whatever working hours he, my client, had with the employee." he would have made that argument right here. the judges would undoubtedly have engaged him in questions, following which, the attorney for the state, the attorney general, would have presented the state's viewpoint, and the argument would've been whether the police power of the state trump, the right of someone to purchase labor and the right of someone to contract freely with labor. these were the two considerations that were in the balance. ms. swain: so that is the court that joe lochner faced and lost hi

. >> reporter: the appellate court said goodell had the power to suspend brady, power by the collectivebargaining unit with the union. goodell properly exercised broad discretion and did not deprive brady of fairness. the players union said to date is disappointed and would carefully review the decision and consider all of our options. all along brady maintained he had nothing to do with the deflated footballs to. day's decision leaves it up to him whether to appeal. >> it is a hit to his reputation. the greatest quarterback of our times certainly. the man has been in six super bowl s. you can't take that away from him. at this point it is a set back because this goes, this is a mark on his resume that nobody wants. >> reporter: this decision means the patriots will have to rely on a backup quarterback for one quarter of their regular season games. scott, unless the suspension is overturned yet again, the next big question is, can they win without tom brady? >> don dahler at gillette for us tonight. don, thank you very much. with potentially dangerous storms on the horizon, how forecast

apparentraw-hill is an that is fairly a country that appellate a company of -- it is marketing the asian services unit from $1.1 billion. you may have gotten some surveys from the company in auto. they were pretty influential in that space. for $1.1the u.k. billion. let's get to a recap of u.s. stocks today. indicate a modest decline. 2% and theed almost s&p still holding its four-month high. >> and very quiet day, but quite an impressive week for the market. >> today was all about apple. were going to cut production of the iphone 6 and six as own. apple wade overall on markets. scrubbing alix steel won't upgrade her phone. scarlet: alix steel won't upgrade her phone. alix: accordant people with knowledge of the effort, the firm is firing more support unless they are directly tied to serving clients. goldman is also said to be relying more on junior bankers. investors -- reassured investors he is keeping an eagle eye on expenses and the firm has more flexibility to reduce them. joining us by phone from arizona to discuss the cost cuts across he industry is former cfo of lehman brothers,

a similar case involving a work of fiction and appellate judge rebuked his fellow appellate panelists for allowing the school to punish the writer saying after today students will have to either our work. if someone finds there are disturbing they can be punished. school officials may now support make students freedom of expression to a policy of making high schools cozy places like day care centers where no one may be made to feel uncomfortable by the knowledge that others and all the hours of heart and smiley faces. so if you're wondering about the connection between my book and some of what has been going on in today's college campuses, students who think that their comfort level is more important than the expressive rights appears, this is part of a connection that i see. it is part of the discussion and this brings us to disparaging speech addressed to groups or individuals. many schools have speech codes, simply school rules that prohibit students from disparaging people based on categories like race, ethnicity, sexual identity, and some go much further talking about physical ap