an as justice breyer said isn't that a sufficient government intert to justify thisan?> lehrer: o course we're al watching-- in our case stening to orlistening for-- justice somayor, the muest mber of the court, whoumps right into t argume today, and is-- soundea lot like on defining whether thiwas a constitutial issue or something congress cou hand. let's take a listen to jud sotomayor. >> mr. olson, are u givi up on your earlier argumes that there are ways to avoid the constitional queson to resolvthis case? i know that we asked forurther briefing on this particur issue of overtning two of our court's ecedents. but aryou giving up on your earliearguments that there are atutory interpretations that would avoid the constutional question? >> no, justice sotomor. what... what there arell kinds of lines tt the court could draw which would provide a victory toy client. there e so many reasons why the feral government did not have the right to crimalize this 90-minute documenta that had to do with electionsbut what the court addreed specificly in the washington right to life

but in sponsor just in furtherance of justice breyer's point, you have two cases. one in which officeholder goes to a corporation, says, will you please give me money? they said we can't do that. the other is in which a corporation takes out an ad for the -- for the candidate which relieves that candidatecorporatu please give me money? they said we can't do that. the other is in which a corporation takes out an if there's any -- >> and i think buckley says no. >> buckley -- >> but as a practical matter, is that always true? >> well, it may not always be true. in the infinite potential applications of something like that, justice kennedy, anything might possibly be true. and justice breyer said, well, what if congress thought or what if congress thought the people might think that that was kind of somehow suspect? that is not a basis for prohibiting speech by a whole class of -- >> well, of course, it did, was a basis for prohibiting speech by in the sense of giving contributions above $2,400, by 300 million people in the united states. but the point, which i think

but in sponsor just in furtherance of justice breyer's point, you have two cases. one in which officeholder goes to a corporation, says, will you please give me money? they said we can't do that. the other is in which a corporation takes out an ad for the -- for the candidate which relieves that candidatecorporatu please give me money? they said we can't do that. the other is in which a corporation takes out an if there's any -- >> and i think buckley says no. >> buckley -- >> but as a practical matter, is that always true? >> well, it may not always be true. in the infinite potential applications of something like that, justice kennedy, anything might possibly be true. and justice breyer said, well, what if congress thought or what if congress thought the people might think that that was kind of somehow suspect? that is not a basis for prohibiting speech by a whole class of -- >> well, of course, it did, was a basis for prohibiting speech by in the sense of giving contributions above $2,400, by 300 million people in the united states. but the point, which i think

but in sponsor just in furtherance of justice breyer's point, you have two cases.holder goes to a corporation, says, will you please give me money? they said we can't do that. the other is in which a corporation takes out an ad for the -- for the candidate which relieves that candidatecorporatu please give me money? they said we can't do that. the other is in which a corporation takes out an if there's any -- >> and i think buckley says no. >> buckley -- >> but as a practical matter, is that always true? >> well, it may not always be true. in the infinite potential applications of something like that, justice kennedy, anything might possibly be true. and justice breyer said, well, what if congress thought or what if congress thought the people might think that that was kind of somehow suspect? that is not a basis for prohibiting speech by a whole class of -- >> well, of course, it did, was a basis for prohibiting speech by in the sense of giving contributions above $2,400, by 300 million people in the united states. but the point, which i think is the one justice k

then chief justice john roberts, steven breyer, antonin scalia, sonia sotomayor, and clarence thomas. off the coast of south america, newly released video shows the british navy on the attack. the brits opened fire on a boat operated by drug runners and sent it to the bottom of the sea but not before the navy seized a record six tons of cocaine valued at $384 million. coming up next, the push to get drivers' hands-- both of them-- back on the wheel. (announcer) don't let your migraine become someone else's pain. excedrin migraine. clinically proven to relieve your migraine in just one dose. excedrin. what ache? can tell you something about osteoporosis you don't already know. it runs in families - my mother has it, and now i have it. so even though i tried to keep my bones strong, it wasn't enough. now, once-monthly boniva is helping me do more. it didn't just stop my bone loss. boniva worked with my body to stop and reverse my bone loss. and studies show, after one year on boniva, nine out of ten women stopped and reversed theirs, too. (announcer) don't take boniva if you have low bl

manyf them have gone on to have distinguished carriers including now justice stephen breyer. dr.larry horowitz, who manages health care right up until the end of long can't tennessee -- tedennedy. he was an advisor right up until the time senator kennedyassed away. and course michael myers just to name four with no intention leaving lt other senator kennedy will be the rst to recognize how their efforts contributed to his success. i want to salute them for the hard work over the years. i cannot exactly say that i have always been totally plsed with alof the kennedy staff of the time, but as is true of their boss or was true of their boss, while we might haveeen fruent adversaries, we were never enemies. madamresident, i am sadded by the loss of my deafriend, senator kennedy. i will miss him personally. i will miss the flights in public. i ll miss his sense of humor in private. and publi and perhaps more significantly, i believe this chamber ll miss his talents as a legislator most of all, his leadership. i can't say i hope more of our llgues will adopt his views on policy, i hope