on the public side was justice brandeis. brandeis understood the public/private framework, but unlike mcreynolds, he valued public rights over private rights. he voted for the government in carroll because he appreciated the government need for motor vehicles, which are really dangerous -- they are dangerous now too -- at that time. a national movement on street and highways for what is going on at the same time of the government are the supreme court deciding the case. i want to note here that scholars had been confused or puzzled by brandeis's carroll vote in light of his vote in olmsted. his dissent was the very first time that the supreme court opinion mentioned the right to be left alone, that is, the right to privacy. so the question that is asked is why did brandeis appreciate the privacy when the government eavesdropped on a phone conversation, but not when it search a car? his famous article provides a clue. he wrote that the right to privacy was not absolute and did not prohibit regulations that were in the public'

the bottom line is as louis brandeis said before he went on the supreme court, in ethics sunlight isency, disclosure is a fundamental principle in ethics and when the white house buys into a plan to keep hunter biden's art secret, the white house is endorsing the opposite approach of that urged by louis brandeis and others who urge transparency. we already find out hunter biden will meet the prospect of buyers of his art. it doesn't work. this plan doesn't work. the white house should have nothing to do with it. >> here is jen psaki. >> he will not have any conversations related to the selling of art. this is a reasonable system that has been established that allows hunter biden to work in his profession in safeguards. >> when all is said and done how important is transparency and to you think we will get full transparency out of the white house or will they stay the course? >> i hope they don't stay the course because it will be clear with people in the know who buys hunter biden's art. he's meeting prospect of buyers and will get around and the question is are the american people g

. >> justice brandeis said sunlight is the best disin disinfectant.ernal facebook document. this is what facebook says about their algorithm and how they make money off hate. facebook's memo says our algorithm exploit the human brain's attraction to decisiveness and left on check it will feed users more and more divisive content to gain user attention and increase time on the platform. facebook makes more money if they can divide us against each other and feed misinformation, they make more money still. they got to stop. that's what i hope our president and everyone will start talking about. >> scott, i'm not going to quote justice brandeis because i couldn't think of one off the top of my head but no matter what words biden uses, this is a real problem. millions of people get their news that they seem to trust from facebook and the misinformation and straight up lies about vaccines, it is perv pervasive. speak to people where they get the information and why they decided they don't want to get the vaccine, a lot is from facebook. if something has got

response as the us tradition is that holocaust denial would have to be protected because as just as brandeis said in the whitney case as long as there's time enough for deliberation the best response to evil councils is a good and we have faith that counter speech is better than suppression. do you believe that the us should resist efforts to adopt more european style provisions of hate speech and why? so i do believe that we should resist that and i think the supreme court would certainly agree with that proposition. the reason why is simply that i don't trust our government. with the power to decide what ideas to suppress. again, looking back at our own experience that's been abused repeatedly. over time and being able to define, you know, what is what is hate speech right is hate speech criticizing african-american's, you know latinas asian americans jews poles gaze straits married people on married people and maybe it goes on and on and i think that in the end we are better off allowing that kind of speech to be spoken and responding to it and looking for education and truth and i think

with brandeis and ucla and cornell. and then to join the hoover institution and that is where he has been ever since so with the mainstream university have hired him? >> he could ever do any college that he wanted to. and the university of wisconsin. and then to get tenure and to work and was quite talented. and then talking about racial controversies then to surpass most people in the field. then with the faculty around and those who want to interfere with the teaching style that this was the 19 sixties and then to have women's rights movement and all these things were coming together through this sort of thing in time was of a different generation intended to teach that way. and that is very difficult to do. and then to be much more indulgent so he just would not bend. so then at cornell in the late sixties and was on faculty at the time and he stuck it out through the seventies and to be put in the think tank world already but then decided to leave teaching altogether. but not even research he wanted to be a teacher.

i mean, i would say things like how said brandeis football team during this year. he had very clever way to get to get a lot of people don't know what he's talking to. you know, there was a pro life crowd that had a lot of that they got to get along with their own pro life position. it's donald trump, a patriot no. the great thing our country has going for it has been, has been the much miraculous marriage, honest elections every 2 years for congress going back to 1789. and president election every 4 years. this absolute belief in our electoral system, electric college, to the point where hillary clinton would lose by when by 404000000 votes the project. but just next morning now she lost with great grace, said with gore. same with jack with the nixon that i can 60 when he met with jack kennedy up. you're very tricky. elation in chicago over there are questions about dead people voting, instill he's new for the go to the country. how you should meet with kennedy did that following monday. they drag, coax, they go down the key miss game, this game hotel. and my god,

university of chicago and received his phd and then he spent the 60s and 70s teaching various schools, brandeis, ucla and cornell. then in 1980 he joined the hoover institution and that's where he's been ever since. >> if there were no hoover institutions with the mainstream university have hired him? [laughter] >> tom could have worked at any college or university he wanted to. he turned down offers at places like dartmouth, university of wisconsin. he could have gotten tenure and worked at any economics department in the country. he was quite talented in his discipline before he ever began writing about racial controversy and the number of academic publications. he had trouble with the faculty lounge. i think part of the problem was this was the 1960s and higher education was changing. you had the women's rights movement,h antiwar movement, all these things coming together. college campuses were being used as platforms for this sort of thing and tom was of a different generation. i think that he intended to teach the way that he was taught and that was hard starting in the 1960s. it became ve

kennedy's assassination and charted these researchers brandeis and they scoured across the united states of every instance of violence not just black rebellions, but also student protests, labor disputes. i mean, this is an incredibly rich archive and because the local newspaper sources are hard to resource, but these are papers you can't get on newspapers.com. we had met a lot of those, so when i went into christian's office and i encountered this pressure trove of story after story, that was just stunning to me and i was just like, i cannot believe that we have missed all of this. and the archives, you know, newspaper sources are difficult to work with, limited inment ways, search rich stories and coined within them. christian as part of the radical information that he has won has been quantifying this violence, not only the counts, but put together the timeline and i know that christian is in the process of digitizing this, but the archives could have been public decades ago and it's been passed around among the group of political scientists and i happened to get access to it and you

as justice brandeis once said, sunlight is the best disinfectant and wanting you don't want to do in table and if he is going to sell the art which i don't think he should be doing, people should know who the buyers are to make sure senior administration officials aren't doing any favors for those buyers so this entire situation doesn't look good. i was hoping the white house would persuade him to stand down and not sell his artwork at this price certainly not at those prices. carley: the white house has apparently come up with a plan where no one, not even hunter biden will know who is buying his artwork and they say that will alleviate any ethics issues but the concern is people will find out who is buying his paintings and then they can use that to carry some sort of favors or influence among the biden administration. how likely do you think that is that that could happen? >> somebody paying that kind of money for artwork are likely to hang on the wall in the living room. they are not going to put it in the closet. people have parties and invite other people over, a purchase by so

. >> it's like -- remember that brandeis university that lifted all those words that they said were oppressive is basically pressing him for his beliefs. when you look at the balance of harm and all of those, you have to take into account that he didn't say this at the school. he said this to adults at a school board meeting. and certainly going to far, but i do think it's only a matter of time before we were all caught up in this. >> greg: absolutely. >> greg: absolutely. >> like when jesse starts getting us to call him "they." it will be hard for us, because we are older. >> greg: i'm sticking to calling jesse "it." >> jim was my favorite subject in school. i have a great affinity for gym teachers. i like the fact that they can just wear shorts and a t-shirt to work. and get summers off. my gym teacher at school was named mr. quackenbush and he used to miss gender me all the time for it he is dl, "run faster you little girl." i've been miss gender lot. my face wasn't on camera, and you just heard my voice and at the end of the day we get emails and it was my job to go through the emails. you

and received his phd, anthony spent most of the '60s and '70s teaching various schools, amherst, brandeisucla and cornell, and then in 1980 he joined the hoover institution which is at stanford university and that's what he's been ever since. >> host: if there were no hoover institution, with an mainstream university have hired him? >> guest: tom could have worked at any college, any university wanted to. this is man, he turned down offers from places like dartmouth, university of wisconsin. he could've gotten tenure and worked at any economics department in the country. it's quite clear he was a quite talented scholar in his discipline. writinge ever began about racial controversies and so forth, there's been a number of academic publications of so forth that surpassed most people in the field. what tom ran into trouble was with the faculty lounge. the college administrators and so forth. part of the problem was this was the 1960s, , dennis, and higher education was changing. you had women's rights movement, a gay-rights movement, andth antiwar movement, all these things are coming toget

and i do believe, chris, the solution -- i'm a justice brandeis fan.more speech and not to necessarily quiet the misinformation but to overwhelm it with the positive information. and we need to do that in a bipartisan way. and people like me, i would argue the surgeon general, the former surgeon general, jerome adams, together with the current surgeon general all need to get together to provide that because the information is overwhelming that vaccines are safe and effective. it is a political issue. but as you pointed out, really it is still an issue of african-americans being horribly underrepresented in those who are vaccinated. at least 30% or 40% less. and also looking at the new cdc data, people in areas of high social vulnerability. so we still have a equity issue that i believe is independent of politics. we've got to do both. >> you are not a politician. but i want your take on this. >> no. >> how powerful do you think it would be if president biden would reach out to former president trump and say these are predominantly your people and you w

warren takes that it makes it modern in the 20th century and he does it by quoting justice brandeis.e was a teacher and he thought the court has to be a shining emblem for human dignity. susan: you are suggesting it is time for us as a society to rethink some of these changes based on technology. >> i think maranda could be updated, could be more effective. as jeff has mentioned, there are a lot of people thinking about this, and hopefully we can all come together and try to think about body cameras, videotaping interrogation, other things that would update and perhaps not overrule miranda. susan thank you so much for : being in our audience tonight for your great questions and comments. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

. >> reporter: bert foer was a classmate of mine at brandeis university, became a lawyer, founded then antitrust institute. >> when it came time to get jobs in college, the government was hiring and there were jobs in the government. we had that advantage because of a growing economy, a booming economy, if you will. >> reporter: norma mackay from the chicago suburbs, a retired software engineer. >> i had five job offers without me doing any bit of work. i got offers from ibm, bell laboratories, rockwell international, sun microsystems and dell computing. i got to reject ibm. that was really something. >> reporter: alison adderly, a 62-year-old community college professor in orlando florida. >> i bought my first house when i was 24. >> reporter: how much did it cost? >> 51,000. >> reporter: that home has about tripled in value. by contrast: >> you have to lower your expectations. it's not viable. >> reporter: when we were their age: there was less inequality, homes were cheaper; the middle class, stronger, taxes on the wealthy higher;. climate? outsourcing? off-shoring? no issue. so, d

about her life and in another speech she talks about jewish women who were role models and justice brandeisdvocate and as a justice and she talks magnificently in her and beautifully about her family and the child of immigrants and how proudud she was of that and how much sheer loved her country and that her family that had fled in nazi germany and all that was happening to jews in europe found a country that welcome them and gave them an opportunity to build a good life and she celebrated in that speech and elsewhere she was the daughter of an immigrant but somehow wound up on the supreme court. and that was something she loved about our country. the family's history gives you a window why she was so devoted to serving this country in that speech and alsoal talks about two more things. each is special in its own right. when talking about the united states she says de tocqueville was right. we are not special because we are more enlightened than other countries but what makes america special is we face up to our faults and address them and try to do better. that is a big component to what s

she talks about the influence of justice brandeis is in advocate andti justice and on this speech she talks magnificently about herr family and about being the child of immigrants and how proud she was of that and how much she loved her country., how much she loved that her family. she was the daughter of an immigrant and yet had somehow ywound up on the supreme court and that was something that she loved about the country and i think her families history shows you why shey loved this country so much and why she was devoted to m serving this country. in that speech she also talks about two more things each special in its own right. first is when talking about the united states, she quotes de stocqueville and says de tocqueville was right. we are not special because we are more enlightened but what makes america special is that we face up to our faults and address them and try to learn from them andnd that we try to o better. she tried constantly to use her talents to make the siding more justur and equal. but here's the special part of the speech and why i particularly wanted it to be

speech, she talks about jewish women role models for her growing up the influence of her justice brandeis on her as a justice. in this speech she talks beautifully about her family the child of immigrants and how proud she was of that. and i can't emphasize how much she loved her country. how much she loved that her family that had fled nazi germany, had fled all that was happening in europe, found a country that welcomed them and gave them opportunities to build a good life and she celebrated in that speech and elsewhere that she was the daughter of an immigrant and yet, had somehow wound up on the supreme court and that was something that she loved about our country, and i think her family's history gives you a window into why she loved this country so much, why she was so devoted to serving this country. in that speech she also talks about two more things, each is special in its own right. so the first is, when talking about the united states she quotes tokville was right, we're not special because we're more enlightened than other countries, but what makes america special we address o

appointment to the supreme court of sonya sotomayor, sandra day o'connor, thurgood marshall, and louis brandeis -- even at the lower court level, the confirmation of a judge from a particular background is often a source of great pride for the community. politics, whether partisan or ethnic, will always influence judicial nominations to some degree. our constitution anticipates this. by allowing politicians to pick judges of their choosing from constituencies of their choosing, but neither politics or diversity should be the primary factor in selecting judges who serve for life. the primary factor in judge should not be raised or ethnicity or sex or even an elite that agreed, but rather a judicial philosophy. to understand that they resolve specific disputes according to the law. good judges act with humility and with restraint, tethering their rulings to the law's original meaning. from a qualified pool of nominees made it to originalism and strength and impartiality, politicians can consider diversity a plus. how are we doing with respect to judicial diversity? statistics never tell the whole

supreme court of sonya sotomayor, sandra day o'connor, anthony scalia thurgood , marshall and louis brandeisas special meaning. even at the lower court level, the confirmation of a judge from a particular background is often a source of great pride for the community. politics, whether partisan or ethnic, will always influence judicial nominations to some degree. our constitution anticipates this by allowing politicians to pick judges of their choosing from constituencies of their choosing, but neither politics nor diversity should be the primary factor in selecting judges who serve for life. the primary factor in selecting a judge should not be race, ethnicity or sex or even an elite judicial pedigree, but rather a judicial philosophy. the best judges understand that their role is to resolve specific disputes according to the law. good judges act with humility and with restraint, tethering their rulings to the law's original meaning. not the political winds of the moment. from a qualified pool of nominees committed to originalism, restraint and impartiality, politicians can consider diversit