while the appellant acknowledges the first condition was satisfied, the appellant has a have thed the second has not been satisfied. the site permit that was approved properly pro voids for a permanent, fixed wood planner that will function as an effective privacy screen and is fully consistent with the ruling. the correct dimensions of the planter are contained in the permit drawing which is attached to our brief and provides with a planter of a height of 16 inches. our architect who is here with me today in consultation with the structural engineer, worked tirelessly with the planning department to come up with the drawings that were consistent with the d.r. and this required a very comprehensive design modification. it's a permanent wood structure built into the width of the railing. it provides a benefit to the appellant because we have maintained the planter more than three feet away from her property. thus avoiding the need for any sort of fire wall and it utilizes and while it does, it utilizes that whole width of the railing for a planter that can provide a full privacy screen

we can hear from the appellant as well. some feedback from them. >> i will ask whether the appellant would find that to be a satisfactory condition. please answer that question. >> what do you want? [indiscernable] >> i don't know. i am thinking. issue no permit? [indiscernable] >> can he answer this tomorrow to talk about it? can we talk about it and answer it tomorrow? >> this matter would get continued for two weeks at least. we have no meeting next week. the meeting will conclude tonight. >> they are going to move it three feet. not going to be closed. >> you know what? we are waiting at the end. [indiscernable] the answer is not right. i think. [indiscernable] do we make sure they do the right thing? >> i honestly think that the appellant is correct putting this position is awkward. two week continuance will result in an opportunity for all parties to think, revision of plans, a clear and concise direction to make everybody comfortable or hopefully make people more comfortable. i don't believe a two week continuance an

we will hear from the appellant first. welcome let me just confirm that he is with us. >> you are owned muted. >> can you hear me -- okay. i will begin. good evening, president honda and others. a copy of these slides can be found on our website. did you get the first slide up there okay? >> no. i will restart. >> all right. is it running yet? >> he is just getting it set up. >> can you see the slide now? >> i can't. we can just do it by slide number. >> the thing is, your video is on a second link. let me know. >> oh,, really? >> what you might want to do is if you look in the upper right under view, if you do standard of you, then the whole screen will show and your video -- i don't know what you are on right now. maybe that is preventing you from seeing it. >> i on my spare computer which i'm not good at using. >> on zoom there is an icon at the top. it says the view if you put the cursor up at the top. if you are on standard, you will see the full-screen. if you know the number, we can show them. >> let me just do it t

in addition, contrary to the appellant's contention, the appellant is not required to answer the question whiches and when the project results in a significant impact due to a conflict with a land use policy for categorically exempt projects. >> clerk: two minutes remaining. >> thank you. stated in guideline 1550, state secretary resources found that the classes and products in article 19 do not have a significant effect on the environment. and that are categorically exempt. none of those exceptions apply to the proposed product. even if the proposed product was not categorically exempt, it still would not result in significant impact. there are no laws, policies or regulations that prohibit in any way on the library's solar panel. finally, i'd like to know the correspondence from the san francisco public city library stating that san francisco public library has no concerns regarding the library's solar panels. therefore, the department correctly issued the second categorical exemption. the appellant has not demonstrated that the january 2021 with the guidelines. therefore, the planning

i'm here representing the appellant. i'm an attorney who practices with the california environmental quality act. i like to begin with just a few minutes talking about the framework for your decision here today. ceqa from the very beginning, 50 years ago, [indiscernible] it's protected just like water and air and natural resources. actually, one of the few parts of ceqa that has increased protections to certain resources since then. the historic resources is one of the few areas of ceqa that received additional protections over the last 50 years. there's specific guidelines and statutory provisions for historic resources. this item is challenged for the categorical exemption that was approved. the idea behind categorical exemptions there are certain things that need discretionary government approval. it doesn't matter. there's an exception to the exemption for historic resource. if there's a project that may have a significant impact on a historic resource, a categorical exemption cannot be used. that's what's going on h

the appellant's pointed to small wireless facility. i want to make sure the point is made that small cells serve different purposes. we need this site to close this gap. this is the best available least intrusive use. i request that you deny the appeal, affirm the planning commission unanimous approval and approve the application. thank you very much. >> president walton: thank you so much ms. blackstone and mr. shank. i don't see any questions from any of my colleagues. >> supervisor safai: thank you president walton. just a general question from ms. how do these delays impact the overall service in cost and the ability for the regular citizens in san francisco to access service and how does that impact our digital divide in san francisco? >> well, i know we spoke about this. there's definitely quite bit of attention on the digital divide in neighborhoods more moderately income neighborhoods. you will be surprised that inner rich common -- richmond, it's tough to get a site located. sometimes those are areas that actually have the wor

what as an appellate judge, do you get to do at that point regarding facts?well, thank you, senator, for that question. let me just say that my training was similar to yours in terms of the judges for whom i clerked at the appellate level and the way in which at least i was taught to think about the role of the appellate court in terms of the facts. i don't, as i sit here, know what the practice is in the district of columbia. and i will say that we have4■bm little bit of an unusual docket insofar as so many of our cases come through the administrative process where even at the district court level, we're not looking at trials very much, and we're not developing a factual record very much. there is already an administrative record that travels with the case. so, i think, you know -- >> but let's say whether it's the congressional whether or whether it's the administrative agency record or whether it's the trial court record, those are three sources that an appellate court can draw from to determine what the facts are in the case and to support or overrule the

i'm here representing the appellant. i'm an attorney who practices with the california environmental quality act. i like to begin with just a few minutes talking about the framework for your decision here today. ceqa from the very beginning, 50 years ago, [indiscernible] it's protected just like water and air and natural resources. actually, one of the few parts of ceqa that has increased protections to certain resources since then. the historic resources is one of the few areas of ceqa that received additional protections over the last 50 years. there's specific guidelines and statutory provisions for historic resources. this item is challenged for the categorical exemption that was approved. the idea behind categorical exemptions there are certain things that need discretionary government approval. it doesn't matter. there's an exception to the exemption for historic resource. if there's a project that may have a significant impact on a historic resource, a categorical exemption cannot be used. that's what's going on h

and not a great avenue of the appellate advocacy. and the judicial notice could be taken that christmas fell on ain wednesday in a particular year. what are your thoughts about the role of appellate courts engaging in fact-finding that is outside of the record either by congress with the statute that is the subject of the challenge as it assembled the record. >> for those judges that i clerked at the appellate level and that's way i was taught to think about the role of the appellate court. and to know what the practices in the district of columbia and we have an unusual docket insofar as many of the cases even at the district court level not looking at trials very much for developing records very much. there is already the administrative record that travels with the case. >> whether a congressional record or trial court record or administrative agency record. those are three sources that the appellate court can determine the facts in the case. and overruled the finding of the district court. what happens when they go out find the fa

i want to ask you questions both about fact finding at the appellate level. we have an interesting hearing in my courts sub committee yesterday on this very question. it was my training in law school, my training when mentored by experience appellate advocates and my mentoring when i was trying to bring along other appellate advocates, to stay the hell away from the facts because really the only two ways that an appellate court gets to look at facts is either to be asked to overturn a factual determination by the court below which is heavily defended by clearly erroneous standard therefore not usually a great avenue for appellate advocacy. or facts that are not really in dispute, facts of which judicial notice can be taken. that christmas fellch on a wednesday in a particular year, or whatever -- what are your thoughts about the role of appellate courts engaging in fact finding that is outside of the record that is presented to the court either by congress as i put together the statute that is subject of the challenge, or by the court below as assemble record

issuewise the shadow docket are related to the court's appellate jurisdiction. meaning its supervisory function over the lower courts. and congress has done so before both altering the cases the supreme court reviews such as capital cases. accordingly there's a path for legislation if congress deems it appropriate. thank you for the opportunity and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, general alli khan. i'll proceed with the questions and begin with recognizing myself. professor, you mention in your testimony that there is a traditional four-factor test that the court has historically applied in deciding to grant emergency relief. how has the court's application of this test shifted in recent years, and what impact has that had on the types of emergency relief the court has decided to grant? >> it's a great question, mr. chairman. the traditional four factors really quickly are first the likelihood the supreme court would grant when the case came before it on a proper appeal. second, that the court would actually side with the applying party on the li

we can hear from the appellant as well. some feedback from them. >> i will ask whether the appellant would find that to be a satisfactory condition. please answer that question. >> what do you want? [indiscernable] >> i don't know. i am thinking. issue no permit? [indiscernable] >> can he answer this tomorrow to talk about it? can we talk about it and answer it tomorrow? >> this matter would get continued for two weeks at least. we have no meeting next week. the meeting will conclude tonight. >> they are going to move it three feet. not going to be closed. >> you know what? we are waiting at the end. [indiscernable] the answer is not right. i think. [indiscernable] do we make sure they do the right thing? >> i honestly think that the appellant is correct putting this position is awkward. two week continuance will result in an opportunity for all parties to think, revision of plans, a clear and concise direction to make everybody comfortable or hopefully make people more comfortable. i don't believe a two week continuance an

i wanted to ask you both questions about fact finding at the appellate level. we had an interesting hearing in my subcommittee yesterday on this very question. it was my training in law school , my training when meant toward by appellate advocates and my mentoring when i was trying to bring along other appellate advocates to stay the hell away from the facts, because the only two ways an appellate court gets to look at facts is either to be asked to overturn a factual determination by the court low, which is heavily defended by the clearly erroneous standard, therefore not usually a great avenue for appellate advocacy, or facts that are not in dispute. facts which judicial notice can be taken, that christmas fell on a wednesday in a particular year, or whatever. what are your thoughts about the role of appellate courts engaging in fact-finding that is outside of the record that is presented to the court either by congress as it put together the statute that is the subject of the challenge, or by the court below as it assembled the record to support its decision

on the right appellants property with the light well. you can see to the left the permit holder's property. large light well square. you can see the firewall, that light line between the two properties. you can see the shade structure overhead. going back to 1938 aerial photo, this is where i am saying with shadows and resolution it is hard to tell if there is anything in the area. if there had been a firewall up to the roof it would have at least shown as white line in that area but it looks like there is probably some shade structure here which is where the door is into that light well. there are stairs that go to the ground level, this doesn't, you know, indicate to me there is a deck in that area. that is the best that we have on that. >> no permit history that indicates prior to 2002 there were any other permits issued for something that might impact that area? >> no, a permit from 1991, no other permit for work in that area. >> there was a claim and this may be a joe duffy question as opposed to yourself. you are referring to a fir

this is a log of our attempts to dialogue with the appellant.don't understand what their concern is. the tenant has also comfort with an extortion letter for $2.5 million buyout of tenancy which we do not wish to entertain. we wish to keep them as a tenant. >> that is time. >> you will have three minutes in rebuttal. thank you. we will hear from the planning department. >> thank you. good evening. congratulations to vice president swig on his elevation to that position. i look forward to working with you in your new role. the subject property 24/7 2 vallejo is rh-2 zoning. only case on the agenda tonight so it is easy one for the board. it is unique in the scope of work. we don't often see a shared light well filled in with the property line firewall which the permit holder's property has. when we reviewed this application to do work in the light well to add that office area on the second level, we were evaluating it on infilling that 6 by 10 opening. it was more like window opening getting filled in rather than new mask in that area. any impact

appellant to come up and you have up to ten minutes. >> am i seen and heard?t walton: yes, you are. >> good afternoon supervisors. thank you for the opportunity to present our appeal. my name is david green. my wife and i grew up in san francisco and lived at 590 second avenue since 1987. we are retired and hope to remain in our home as long as possible. we are not opposed to mobile phone networks. we use cell phone ourselves and recognize cell phones are part of life at this time. we have four points to make. the first point is that this cell site is more visible and introducive to residents than any other cell site we can find in san francisco. the site will have 40 feet on 8a street. that will be longer and more visible to the residential building than any other cell site i can find in san francisco. i will try to show slides. this is just a quick shot of the area looking north. my cursor which i hope you can see, is pointing at the apartment building. >> clerk: i'm celebrating and pausing your time. if you're showing a presentation, i don't believe we can

issues, in this case, there are dozens of appellate issues he should be released on bail. no reason he should be remanded. he's not going to flee. he wants to have an appeal. he's not going to endanger anybody. his face is well-known. what if his conviction is reversed? will he get two years back? solitary confinement has been used by many in the international community as cruel and unusual punishment. in violation of international humanitarian law. i think that his lawyers if possible under minnesota law make an application for bail, he could be wearing a bracelet, he could be monitored but the presumption of innocence have been overcome. there is an appellate process with three possible appeals, in the united states supreme court. i think he should not be in solitary at this point unless he wants it for his own protection and like all people should be released on bail, unless they pose a risk for danger of life. laura: this story enraged me, lieutenant william kelly, a police officer in virginia was fired from his job in internal affairs for the norfolk police department

they can keep you in prison even when a three-judge appellate panel concludes that there is no reason to be in prison. that's probably why prosecutors still have not as of tonight released a p man called jacob chandler, otherwise known as the chewbacca guy. jacob santilli is o not accused of breakingany. so what exactly did he do? we can actually answer that question because it's on video. >> hey! [bleep], man. glad to see you guys. look at this guy. do you need medical attention? >> i got shot. >> are either? >> some kind of plastic bullet. >> any chance i can get you to leave the senate wing? just want to let you guys know. >> no, no. >> tucker: yeah. he's a threat to the republic, the american flag and all. chewbacca guy is still in jail,n will be in there indefinitely. think about what the facts are really like. you don't want to think about it. and that we learned that a number of people arrested on january 6 are still rotting in the adc jail, municipal lockup. that's one of the foulest places in this country. it's a truly repulsive and mismanaged place. ask anyone from washingto

for example -- and the appellation states you mentioned for example. so it has been a challenge for the governors to offer up economic policies that increase jobs. i would say to you, what with those states, including your home state of georgia, look like without the legislation since the 1950's -- 1950's that included industrial. what would be the marginal impact? i think the right to work increases the industrialization of the south, increased job opportunities, increased wages, and did increase business profits you outlined. i see that and i look at the economic development in the south. i was just in mobile, alabama, where amazon was unionized, and the folks who work fo amazon voted three to one not to immunize. and i noted how robust the economy is with boeing moving there, and walmart, and significant business announcement. i think that is a constant process in our rule, mountainous areas where people have migrated to the cities. those counties struggle with poverty. arkansas -- we and arkansas have been working to tackle it. host: let me ask you

it will fail as an appellate issue primarily because jurors are presumed to follow the instructions of judges and when judges say do not listen to outside media accounts and if you inadvertently come into contact with some, tell me and then you have to assure me you can put it out of your mind and continue to decide the case based only on the evidence you hear during the trial so it doesn't surprise me that the defense makes what i view as some frivolous motions, regarding the case the prosecution was finishing up today, it got more and more powerful because now you have expert witnesses that are not only forensic pathologists, medical examiners, we saw a powerful pulmonologist in dr. tobin. today we saw a cardiologist, guy that specializes in heart transplants, and they all say the same thing, which is that cardiopulmonary from low oxygen from police restraint and it is asphyxiation. there's no getting around that. i look forward to seeing how the defense can attack those findings in their case. >> this was use of force expert, seth stawton, arguing continued use of force was not reas

>> i think it would not be much of an appellate issue if it were only yet another unhinged comment by maxine waters. not surprising there. but this was not a one off. it was isolated, effectual contact were chauvin claim from the beginning he could not get a fair trial in hennepin county. minneapolis which was obliged to ensure he got due process waited until the judge was selecting the jury to announce that it reach a $27 million settlement with floyd's family which was really prejudicial timing and hard to believe it would not be deliberate. and then, about a week ago when the tragic event happened in brooklyn center were daunte wright was killed accidentally by a police officer, the defense pleaded with the judge to sequester the jury. the timing seemed to be right for that because there right at the end of the evidence the jury was going to be sequestered when they started deliberating anyway. so you could have gotten them insulated from all of the publicity and the craziness that was going on in the vicinity of the courthouse. instead the judge sent them home for the weekend to m

. >> appel resutaura una aplicación que causó controversia, les cuento de qué se trata. >> el presidente a las 5 de la tarde. >> a. >> apple tomó una medida de poner de nuevo una aplicación que había sacado anteriormente y que causó controversia. >> unas 700 ovejas y unos mil corderos para evitar de alguna manera posible. >> les comento que los animalitos comen pastos secos y las ovejas eliminan el 80% de la población anual y ellas no están solas, las acompañan perros guardianes para protegerlas. >> muchas gracias por estar con nosotros feliz lunes recuerde que desde las 5:00 más información que pase con el noticiero nacional. >> jo argumentos finales en el caso de george floyd minneapolis se blindan por incidentes en la calle. >>> todo los mayores de 16 aÑos pueden vacunarse contra el covid-19

>> i think they are throwing everything they have into the appellate side of this, they knew what wasit and their fight may be at the appellate level. this was a horrific crime that occurred. second-degree, third-degree, those are difficult decisions but we knew something was wrong here but what we don't like to see is the pressure of politicians and the rhetoric and the mob to influence our rule of law in this country. todd: you really explain how it goes down. >> chicago police officers may soon require permission from a supervisor before chasing a suspect. according to local fox affiliate mayor lori lightfoot promising to disclose details about a policy change. city councilman revealed police need supervisors permission to engage in vehicle support pursuit. that change would apply to all changes. todd: democrat henry ainsley: says migrants replaced -- cuellar were released from custody before president biden took off of the congressman saying, quote, just an honor system as they are given at this is not the way to do it. 71% increase in illegal encounters. jillian: it is 34 after t

but there is an appellate process and he has three possible appeals. two courts in minnesota and the united states supreme court. so i think he should not be in solitary at this point unless he wants it for his own protection. he should be released on bail, like all people released on bail pending appeal. >> laura: i want to get this reaction. this story from earlier in reach me. lieutenant william calley, police officer in virginia, he was fired from his job in internal affairs for the norfolk police department after it was discovered he sent 25 bucks and honestly to the defense fund of fund of kyle rittenhouse, your quick response. >> i'm sorry, i didn't hear the last. >> laura: he was being fired for having donated to a cause that apparently the mob doesn't think is worthy. a virginia cop. >> people are being fired today for so many reasons. the city manager brooklyn center was fired because he said that kim potter should get due process. people are being fired today simply for following the constitution. that's what's so dangerous. that's what the

she said she is being completely misinterpreted. >> let me borrow joyce vance's appellate hat. as a prosecutor, the less noise from the outside, the better. did congresswoman waters raise an issue? she did. is it merit torous? and will it be a meritorious issue? i don't see any chance of that happening. but the less noise the better. when juries are sequestered, they are not hermedically sealed. does that mean they are living in a room and getting room service? does that mean someone took away their iphone? i doubt it. does that mean they can have no contact with family members or loved ones? >> so sequestration is not hermedically sealed. the comments from president biden, will that present in a meritorious issue on appeal? i don't see that. >> watching communities in minnesota and chicago rocked by deaths, like wright and floyd, how does the nation prepare itself for this verdict? >> andrea, we have a long history of communities and circumstances and families in the circumstance being profoundly disappointed at what our criminal legal system delivers. i am hopeful that given

the oregon appellate four oh four. shackman versus democratic organization of cook county 920. it is pretty clear from those cases. the invocation of the fifth amendmentn right is on a question by question basis and legitimacy should be determined by the court. otherwise someone who just didn't want to testify to just say fifth amendment right. >> i agree with the concept. there is a case they talk about a large air process. it is a substitute but he will invoke the fifth amendment about the very area she discussed. there is no legitimate way. no question that all of the matters that council identified are tied intimately to his interactions with mr. floyd that day and in the previous weeks. and it ties him. weer are not perhaps in those cases maybe it was just invoking because they don't want to testify, here there is a legitimate link in the chain for what he will be asked about and quite a few potential crimes not just the third-degree murder. that is the most important. we talk about the sense almost an alternative perpetrator but also drug charges, counterfeiting, false in

oregon versus rodriguez, 301 oregon appellate, 404, shackman versus democratic organization of cook county. it's pretty clear from those cases and created their not minnesota, that the invocation of the fifth amendment right is on a question by question basis and a legitimacy of that invocation is to be determined by the court which makes sense. otherwise some of you who just didn't want to testify could say i'm asserting my fifth amendment right. >> i agree with that concept, your honor. we cited the case with the talked about for dear process and essentially this hearing is a substitute for the process because we know from his counsel that he is going to invoke the fifth amendment about the dirt areas she discussed and are just is no legitimate way. it isn't really any question that all of the matters that counsel identified and mr. nelson identified are tied intimately to his interactions with mr. floyd that day and in the previous weeks, and it ties empirics we're not facing a question like brats in most cases where it might just be invoking because you don't want to testify. here ther

>> i think, obviously, they are trying to get it into the appellate record. didn't -- from what i understand, the judge didn't make any effort to voir dire the jurors to see if they had heard those comments. and the only way that it potentially could have impacted the jury is if one of the jurors had raised the issue that they had heard it. or if -- if the court had voir dired them about that. but, i think it was smart of them to raise it. i think that's one of the things they have to do, is try and protect that appellate record in case of a conviction. so, i thought it was a good idea to raise it. >> chief ramsey, i mean, obviously, we don't know what the outcome's going to be. nor does law enforcement but they have to prepare for, really, any eventuality. what are they doing now that things have gone to deliberations? >> well, the preparation actually started a few weeks ago, when this trial first kicked off. i know that, friday, the u.s. conference of mayors and major city chiefs had a conference call to talk about preparation, along with the police-execut

they may have a window that opens up to an appellate review.d with this very point, kaut. the kate. they want to have their ducks in a row of how they can seek an appeal to overturn based on prosecutoral misconduct or any allegations based on. that appellate courts have no tolerance for prosecutors who do not disclose information and n. a timely fashion. and try to get it through rebuttal witness. seen this prosecution team is going to have to be extraordinarily prudent. and i hope this witness as informative as he can stay ton that leash. >> let's listen. >> dr. tobin, as you prepare to tell us why the results in your opinion are not reliable, could you please help the jury to understand something about oxygen saturation testing in the blood. >> right. so if you have, like was done in mr. floyd, when he went to hennepin county, he had an arterial blood gas obtained. that is sticking a needle into the artery at the wrist. you take out the blood. and then on the blood gas measurements, you measure a number of different items on that like the pre

intermediate -- in their individual roles as supreme court justices, they were the intermediate appellaterts in the united states. now, they are not. they are only focused on the ultimate court of appeals, to which all these majors move up through, district courts to the regional appellate courts to the d.c. circuit, and then ultimately, to the supreme court. so there is no need -- and johnson is just out to lunch on this. >> lawrence: go ahead, tammy. >> maybe not just on this thing, but look, this shows you the democrats see everything as a bureaucracy. the supreme court deals with ideas, and the constitution. so you don't need more people to deal with the singularity of the nature of the idea and the value and the virtue of the constitution and the bill of rights. you can have this as a debate with nine people with different sorts of opinions. i mean, again, should we have four copresidents now, because the country is so much bigger than when george washington took over? if you think about these kind of arguments -- >> lawrence: they are all democrats, tammy, then why not? >> right, it

>> well, they did and look appellate issues are what the defense is now focusing on. whole idea of protecting jurors from outside influences whether the media or politicians or both is a hot topic in terms of courts of law. i mean look at the dzhokhar tsarnaev case, the bomber death penalty sentence was reversed years later. we don't like the judge asked enough questions whether pretrial publicity was affecting him. this maxine waters part is not the whole iceberg. it was a the final point. you had a civil settlement of $27 million as the trial was gearing up. police interracial shooting before the trial. there is maxine waters. the whole bunch of moments the defense created a record, judge you can't trust the jurors are not absorbing any of this. a lot of judges would bring the jurors to come in to ask questions make sure they didn't happen. that discretion on behalf of the judge will be a center piece of an appeal based on all the outside the court influences that may have come into play. liz: sounds like you're saying yes, derek chauvin lawyers could appeal this? >

if i was were the appellate later for chauvin and he gets convicted in terms of the issue he's been raising about whether he could get a fair trial and all of the explosive rhetoric that's gone on outside the courtroom, in terms of the colorability of that claim, the quicker the verdict, the better for the appellate claim because they will be able to make a strong argument that the jury was powerfully influenced by these enstrain use things going on outside the courtroom. >> neil: yeah, eric nelson the defense lawyer mentioned that maxine waterscomments, that it -- even the judge agreed it might make the trial one that could be overturned. your thoughts on that. just curious. >> here's the difference. i think if the jury was out four days and they asked a lot of questions and you could therefore make a record that they were making a discriminating appraisal of the evidence and got to the end, you could make a good argument that they tuned out the noise and focused on the evidence and the judge's instructions. whereas they have been out less than a day. so far as we know there were no notes

issue, looking at what can be done domestically, all the way from training to reform to aspects of appellationen you are talking about defunding the police. you find that in this report. but there is also conversations and findings around the issue of how we take this in international context, what are international rules about law enforcement and the use of force, and the commission found again and again that police in the united states don't only not follow the laws in the united states with impunity, but violate international law. in fact, the commissioners found , importantly and uniquely in this report, that systemic police violence in the united states against black people constitutes a crime against humanity under the rome statute, that it is a widespread attack on a civilian population, in this case, black folks in the united states, accomplished through murder, torture and other qualifying me. it is one of the main highlights of the report. steve: i want to underscore this point, i found it so fascinating. thank you for letting me take a look at the report early, but you basically say

appellate filings have increased by 40% since 1990, the last time we expanded lower courts. as more recent clerk myself, i'd is a seventh district of new york, i know how overworked those judges are. additionally, in addition to the practicality of needing more people to adjudicate, we have the opportunity to have a judiciary that reflects the lived experiences of what the speaker calls "the beautiful diversity of the united states of america." leveraging those lived experiences so people understand how the law operates in people's lives as critical to doing one's job better on the bench. and of course, we can also talk about advocating to advance the cause of supreme court expansion, which continues to be a necessity. we do not have the luxury of waiting when it comes to this. in fact, i would submit we have waited way too long. chris: i will also say, congressman jones is vice president of the court subcommittee, they already how to committee about lower court expansion in february. this is something on their radar and continuing. one of the questions is not only whether i

disappointed people of color so many talents so i was actually relieved and and then fearful about the appellate part of this trial perhaps but i moment to be grateful for the outcome you know professor documenting a crime is critical to making that crime seem real in a court of law you know they say you can't see what you've already seen would we be talking about reforming police and policing if we did not have smartphones with cameras if we had not been able to videotape the death of george floyd. well remember we had a video for their rights we had a video for land of the steel and well it just got up and yet dull instances in which the officers were acquitted we need to understand that there was more than the video here it was finally the coming together of communities it wasn't just the african-american community talking about racism in policing other communities thought it well enough with funnily enough not to say the international pressure was very important here as well and it has been over the history of i did say african-americans that reached across the atlantic and hoped that we wou

disappointed people of color so many talents so i was actually relieved and and then fearful about the appellate part of this trial perhaps but i moment to be grateful for the outcome you know professor documenting a crime is critical to making that crime seem real in a court of law you know they say you can't see what you've already seen would we be talking about reforming police and policing if we did not have smartphones with cameras if we had not been able to videotape the death of george floyd. well remember we had a video for their rights we had a video for land of the steel and well just got up and yet though instances in which the officers were acquitted we need to understand that there was more than the video here it was finally the coming together of communities it wasn't just the african-american community talking about racism and policing other communities thought it well enough with funnily enough not to say the international pressure was very important here as well and it has been over the history of i did say african-americans that reached across the atlantic in the hope that we w

there was a whole lot of appellate process going on about whether that particular charge should apply to a police officer or anybody frankly who had one particular victim in mind per se, and so i suspect that over the course of this particular verdict, if third-degree murder is in fact one of the convictions, if any, it won't end there. there will be an appellate battle because the supreme court of minnesota did not weigh in on that issue. >> it's complex what they have to decide. i had to read it several time and quickly for our viewers, second-degree unintentional that chauvin caused floyd's death without intent and third-degree assault is the intinksal infliction of bodily harm, right? >> yes. >> and then there's perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to other with a depraved heart without regard for life and then then there's death by culp negligence where the person creates an unreasonable risk and takes chances of causing bodily death or harm. >> for every word you have to find the jury has to find beyond a reasonable doubt. it wasn't just, we talked about this, elie, wasn't ju