justice breyer: oh, boy. i mean i say personally, because having now grandchildren, i mean the cost of this stuff is amazing. and what are we going to do about that? i don't know. i don't know. it's a problem. rep. womack: finally, mr. chairman, i think i say this every year, these two gentlemen are before us with be but having a wife that's been a trial court assistant at the state level for 30 -- gosh, i don't know, 34, 35 years now, i have a great amount of respect for the enterprise that these gentlemen represent and once again, it is a great honor to have you back before us here today. i yield back. chairman crenshaw: thank you. mr. rigell? rep. rigell: thank you, mr. chairman. my final question, i'm going to take us back just a little bit. justice kennedy, i was intrigued by your remarks early on and you referenced -- i'm not sure if it is an organization or a process like a dinner that has been -- it's really had an impact perhaps on the staff, on the court itself or those who are around the court. and

justice breyer: i have two things. with axis to the volumes of the judicial -- we all have access to the volumes of the code of judicial ethics. it has been there for some time now -- 20 years. i have not seen an instance of the problem is consistent. it is -- compulsory is words and doesn't make a difference in practice. why not? i am nervous about this. the supreme court is different from the court of appeals and the district court. that is true with television, too? why is it different here? if i recuse myself, they can get another judge. judges are fungible. they are not in the supreme court. you cannot get a substitute. a lawyer might sometime think of the idea of ringing up an issue to get a panel that is more favorable. it is conceivable. therefore i think we should be careful. unlike those in the lower courts, i cannot think, in case of doubt just recuse yourself. i have a duty to said and -- to sit and a duty not to sit. in trying to make this into a big issue, i would prefer not. i would think no is the answe

justice scalia saw this a more sweeping decision than justice breyer presented it.dn't say exactly how it played out but felt it had serious implication force the one man one person one vote fundamental principle in the constitution. justice thomas felt -- he actually criticized the department of justice and special interest groups like the aclu saying they had hijacked the voting rights act, that this was simply a quest for the best racial quota. >> ifill: the second decision which also justice breyer wrote, this time 7-2 decision, had to do with whether an employee of ups was discriminated against because of her pregnancy when they were making special accommodations for other employees. in fact, justice breyer wrote why when the employer accommodated so many could it not accommodate pregnant women as well? how did the court reason this through? >> ups had three categories of employees who could get accommodations if they were not able to do their regular jobs, and pregnant workers were not one of the three categories. justice breyer said today that pregnant worker

and my colleague, justice breyer and i, are pleased to answer your questions. >> justice breyer, you're recognized. >> i would simply reinforce what my colleague justice kennedy said and what you said, mr. chairman. and you're here. and i think that's a very good thing. so are we because i think our biggest problem is not necessarily the budget, it's right similar to yours which is how do you get the american people to understand what their institutions are about? in our case that we're not up in some heaven somewhere where we decree things from on high communicating directly with some mysterious source. that we're part of the government of the united states. and you're actually interested in the mechanics of how we bring this about. good. it means we're not totally off on our own. and try to explain to people what we do as you try to explain what you do. and you say, we're part of you. you know, you're part of us. and that's talking to people of the united states. so, i'm glad to have even a little opportunity to talk about our institution and how it works. and i'm glad you're interest

justice breyer: yes or no? no, why not?ral lindstrom: the reason is that costs are not directly relevant is to the first one is what i was expecting about a 12%. in other words, the example you gave it shows that some might be able to have the lower cost effective approach just because they are not near a waterfall. justice breyer: into the imaginary situation i have imagined, 20% of the generators for whatever reason, can meet this pretty easily. the next 80% will require the entire gross national product to meet it. supposing that were the situation. you could supposedly go to the epa nsa, create a second class, a separate type. four that is the reason it is so expensive. and therefore, the 12% does not apply to them because they are in a separate class. my question is -- can you legally make that argument? and will they take it into account? edit that is what i want a yes or no answer to. general lindstrom: the answer might be yes in the future, but now we can't do it because -- justice breyer: why are you make the argum

. >> reporter: in the hills of central virginia, sweet breyer college has been educating young women for more than a century but for students likes sophomore joydyn elliott, that will end this week when the school shutters its campus for good. >> i have a half-finished scrapbook of memories and just knowing that it's not going to be there is devastating. >> number 7. >> reporter: for the school's nearly 700 students, there was no warning before president jimmy jones announced that the college of their dreams was running out of money. >> other than the funerals i've had to officiate at, this was by far the hardest thing i could ever imagine myself doing as a president. >> reporter: there's nothing you could have done? >> there's nothing anyone could have done. >> reporter: the school's endowment is $85 million, but jones says it would take closer to $250 million to keep the doors open. he cites the growing cost of awarding financial aid tens of millions needed to maintain the 3200-acre campus and paying down the school's debt. since 2008, 25 other colleges have faced clar difficulties

if i could just make one point and then address justice breyer's question.would be deeply inconsistent with the enterprise in philadelphia to harbor and to effectuate the notion that our framers intended to set aside both a cornerstone principle of federalism and their aim to bind the people as closely as possible to the national house of representatives. yes, it is true that that related to the second part giving congress authority. that is because no one questioned the fundamental principles that the sovereign states could choose to allocate their legislative power as they wanted. if there is any suggestion, the anti-federalists would be screaming bloody murder that the states could not do so. smiley specifically said that -- i am quoting from page 367 -- as the authority is confirmed for the purpose of making laws for the state, it follows in the absence of an indication of a contrary intent that the exercise of the authority must be in accordance with the method the state has chosen as prescribed for legislated enactments. ginsberg: what he has addicted

as justice breyer pointed out, the statutory definition of exchange is a 1311 exchange. so they're only talking about state exchanges, not these hhs exchanges, and it is in section 1312, which immediately follows 1311, before 1321. number two, "qualified individual" doesn't mean that means you're guaranteed access. it doesn't mean if you're not qualified, you're absolutely denied access. we know that from the illegal alien provision, which says illegal aliens are neither qualified individuals nor eligible for subsidies. >> ah, but look at the look at the prisoner provision, which says prisoners shouldn't be treated as qualified individuals. so under your theory, this statute effectively said that prisoners should be able to enroll on federal exchanges? that makes no sense. >> it makes perfect sense to say the states get a choice. think about somebody who's in prison in february, they're getting out in april, they've got to buy insurance under the individual mandate. so if you said nobody who's incarcerated can buy insurance that means they wouldn't be able to buy insuran

sweet breyer college announced it's shutting down this summer because of financial issues. the private women's college is located a few miles north of lynchburg, virginia. suzanne kennedy has reaction from some of the alumni. >> there is no easy way to share this with you. >> the announcement came via a message on the sweet breyer college website and through e-mail. after more than a century, the rural all women's school is forced to close due to insurmountable financial challenges. >> from the time i set foot on the campus, i loved it. >> rachel was in the class of 1990. she says the news is heartbreaking. >> i'm not sure it needs to happen. that's i think, the biggest question. that has not been answered yet. >> the school outside of lynchburg still has a $94 million endowment but declining enrollment is forcing the all women's college to take this drastic step. virginia lyon works in the field of human resource certification. she credits the school for helping her to find confidence as a young woman. >> i think that sweet breyer really elevated my sense of self and my ab

justice breyer: which i'm rather selfish about. i have to write what this statute means for a lot of cases and writing the words, what it means is if you give a lot of benefits to a lot of employees, but not to the pregnant women and you don't give it to some employees and not to the pregnant women and the employer says the pregnant women are employer, you lose. but by the time i have written that into the u.s. code nobody knows what i'm talking about. i need to know how to interpret the words such that they would do, in your view what you want them to do, which is -- mr. bagenstos: and i think the important point is, if an employer provides accommodations as a matter of policy to a class of employees who are not pregnant, who are similar in their ability or nanlt to work and does not provide a benefit, it is violating the text -- and justice: that makes sense. you can write that down. just just the fact that you are giving in to a lot of employees. including those who only worked there for four years. seniority. so those are the w

justice breyer to address some the other interest that texas has. texas wants to prevent offensiveness and vulgar speech and wants to prevent confusion and misrepresentation, promote safety, celebrate the diverse interest the state has. uri that even if this is hybrid speech and it does take two to tango in the situation you need both the motors and the state propagating the message that that is so government speech. all of this court's cases under the speech had been at posture. all of our sites in our reply brief and our opening brief to title fortitude of the texas admission of code those have been renumbered since the founding of our reply brief, but the substance is all the same. and that base this is not just about texas making money although texas does make money. this is about the state of texas not wanted to place its stamp of approval on certain messages. and a speaker is not entitled to the imprimatur of the state of texas on whatever message it wished to put on a license plate. thank you, mr. chief justice. >> thank you, counsel. the cas

>> my guess is and justice breyer is more well versed in this than i am. my comparison with other agencies is our problems is predictable. we know there is going to be a trial with a plaintiff and defendant and an appeal with an appellant and appealee and so we don't have to project for uncertainties -- nearly to the extent that other agencies do. and our legal system lends itself very well to the electronic technology. >> in my own mind i classify three different things that technology can do. one of it you heard about, the budgeting and there they have made advantages with other agencies. and the second is the ability to file briefs and opinions and other things electronically and it is helpful to the lawyers and public because they can get it instantaneously and that takes time and i think it is going along fantastically. and most of the other courts can plug into ours easily. but can we use our technology to inform the public through our website. and i was talking to people from scotus and if we put that in, will people find out. will school teachers b

as justice breyer pointed out, the statutory definition of exchange is a 1311 exchange. so they're only talking about state exchanges, not these hhs exchanges, and it is in section 1312, which immediately follows 1311, before 1321. number two, "qualified individual" doesn't mean that means you're guaranteed access. it doesn't mean if you're not qualified, you're absolutely denied access. we know that from the illegal alien provision, which says illegal aliens are neither qualified individuals nor eligible for subsidies. >> ah, but look at the look at the prisoner provision, which says prisoners shouldn't be treated as qualified individuals. so under your theory, this statute effectively said that prisoners should be able to enroll on federal exchanges? that makes no sense. >> it makes perfect sense to say the states get a choice. think about somebody who's in prison in february, they're getting out in april, they've got to buy insurance under the individual mandate. so if you said nobody who's incarcerated can buy insurance that means they wouldn't be able to buy insuran

breyer: the dictionary can be used as to determine how they word is used. but the power of the legislates the power that legislates in arizona is the people in the capital plus the referendum. feigin: one thing is for sure, -- waxman: one thing's for sure if there was any other definition, but the framers on recent term, if i may, charles tiffany, in pages 39 in our brief, who wanted to do away with the second part of the clause that gave congress any power because he thought it was an impairment on the states rights said, "america is a republic where the people at large either collectively or by representation form the legislature." madison made clear in discussing the constitution that, when he referred to "the legislatures of the state," he meant the existing authorities in the state that comprise the legislative branch of government. james wilson repeatedly interspersed legislature, state, and the people acting -- scalia: let's say the legislature means the body we normally can think of as the legislature. however, at the time there was no such thing as

breyer: the dictionary can be used as to determine how they word is used. but the power of the legislates, the power that legislates in arizona is the people in the capital plus the referendum. feigin: one thing is for sure, -- waxman: one thing's for sure if there was any other definition, but the framers on recent term, if i may, charles tiffany, in pages 39 in our brief, who wanted to do away with the second part of the clause that gave congress any power because he thought it was an impairment on the states rights said, "america is a republic where the people at large either collectively or by representation form the legislature." madison made clear in discussing the constitution that, when he referred to "the legislatures of the state," he meant the existing authorities in the state that comprise the legislative branch of government. james wilson repeatedly interspersed legislature, state, and the people acting -- scalia: let's say the legislature means the body we normally can think of as the legislature. however, at the time there was no such thing a

why would you -- >> justice breyer, i'll use the dps trooper foundation plate that was denied. texas didn't want that on he license plate because it was concerned if a motorist were pulled over, that then the the police would see -- >> look, i can think of many reasons i could make up. man they want to keep controversial political messages off? i'd say they have an interest in that in suggesting to people, texas doesn't sponsor this -- i just want to know what they really are and now you have said one. what was the one you just said? >> the transportation -- texas dps troopers foundation. >> you're on the license plate approval board. what standard do you follow? when do you grant a request and when do you deny? what is the rule. that's what justice breyer is asking. >> in texas regulations provide the board can deny those that might be offensive or for any reason established by a rule -- >> then i think they lose. the reason they lose is because i don't see the state can come in and say we keep off a private message and we'll tell you the reason later. we can do it for any --

any insight, justice breyer? >> you have to ask the dean of the law school. judging from my law clerks there's no deterioration of quality. they're great. the -- i hear the same complaints from the deans, that justice kennedy does, money. suddenly maybe in certain areas they price themselves out of the market and maybe that means that you have fewer people who are applying and overall things like that adjust over time. specialization? major problem. major. it's so complicated. when my dad went to law school he studied contracts, torts properties five traditional subjects subjects and they added tax and cohn law when i got there and now there's everything under the sun because there's demand for everything under the sun. i have an easier job than being the dean of a law school. >> one thing that is happening in law schools they do have almost custommade programs so you can take your degree in law and astronomy. law and medicine. law and the press. law and music. law and the performing arts. and this is good. this enables other disciplines to influence what is

>> justice breyer, i think what you just described is a rule for all cases and one that is entirely on administer all for courts and employers and applicants -- unadministerable forecourts and employers and applicants. >> if they think they need the accommodation and they are right, do something unless you have an excuse. >> i believe that is unadministerable because -- >> you have to prove they have a belief. we have probably in 235 federal cases a year of the 80,000 that go to trial, proving a belief is an issue and 90%. -- in 90%. i am making that up but nonetheless it is not uncommon so we say that the standard of proof in you believe is like in any other case -- proving a belief is not like any other case. >> i do not believe it is like other cases because religious belief is personal. to charge employers with title vii liability and require them to come to an understanding of whether a particular practice is religious -- >> suppose an employer just does not want to hire any jews. somebody watson and his name is no one goldberg and he looks kind -- somebody walks in and his name i

but let's go back to what justice breyer was talking about. in those states that don't -- the citizens don't receive subsidies, we're going to have the death spiral that this system was created to avoid. states are obligated, insurers are obligated make sure in their states, whether they are part of this program or not, that they have guaranteed coverage, that -- that children are covered until they are 26 and that they base their costs on community ratings. so if they have to do that then costs are going to rise on every insurance -- every insurance plan offered in the country, in those 34 states. three or six -- or nine of your states will have tightened their medicaid eligibility requirements in convention of the act so they are taking money by breaking their compacts. they would have to lose all of their medicaid money. tell me how that is not coercive in an unconstitutional way? and if it is coercive in an unconstitutional way, in bond -- i think it was last term we said that is a primary statutory command, that we read a statute in a way

why would you -- >> justice breyer, i'll use the dps trooper foundation plate that was denied. texas didn't want that on he license plate because it was concerned if a motorist were pulled over, that then the the police would see -- >> look, i can think of many reasons i could make up. man they want to keep controversial political messages off? i'd say they have an interest in that, in suggesting to people, texas doesn't sponsor this -- i just want to know what they really are, and now you have said one. what was the one you just said? >> the transportation -- texas dps troopers foundation. >> you're on the license plate approval board. what standard do you follow? when do you grant a request and when do you deny? what is the rule. that's what justice breyer is asking. >> in texas regulations provide the board can deny those that might be offensive or for any reason established by a rule -- >> then i think they lose. the reason they lose is because i don't see the state can come in and say we keep off a private message and we'll tell you the reason later. we can do it for any -

. >> justice breyer, i think that hildebrand smiley, hawk, and also this court's -- a case that thiscourt decided a few months after smiley and that was block quoted in the court's opinion last week in yates, the atlantic cleaners and dyers case, all strongly support the reading of the -- the meaning of the words legislature that we advocate and that was in fact the consensus definition of legislature. and i agree with you that -- the consensus definition, although you cannot give us a single instance in the constitution in which the consensus definition is clearly used. i don't think it was a consensus definition at all. you pluck that out of a couple of dictionaries. it was referring to -- >> the dictionaries i take it are your support. they say how the word is used. and they define the dictionary definition of legislature as the power -- we don't use that word power in the sense much anymore. but the power that legislates. the power that legislates in arizona is the people in the capital plus the referendums. >> i will address the cases, justice breyer, if i may, just first respon

i think justice breyer said why don't you google it. and i said, i already did. but, when you think about that statement, i think bob dylan might have said it differently. he wrote a song called, things of change. i can understand that a little better. but the good news is that because of the cooperation of you two gentlemen i now know that felix frankfurter said that, he said that in a case called weiner versus u.s. or u.s. versus weiner. that was interesting because i think president eisenhower was the president. he wasn't supposed to do something but he did it anyway. therefore felix frankfurter said, very tilt of circumstance often mocks natural desire. did what he wasn't supposed to do and justice frankfurter said it very well. things have changed. so i always learn something. we thank you so much. it is an honor for us to have you before us. thank you for the work that you do for this country and this meeting is now adjourned. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations]. >> homeland security secretary jeh johnson appears before a house appropriations subcommitt

>> ity breyer -- >> a general rule. i think thity is asking you for a specific -- the justice is asking you for a specific. why would you -- >> i'll use an example of the texas dps troopers foundation plate that was denied there texas didn't want that on the license plate because it was concerned if a moat his pulled over -- >> go through this -- look i can think of many reasons i could make up. maybe they want to keep controversial political messages off. identity said they have an interest in that, in assaulting to people texas doesn't sponsor this -- i just want to know what they really are. and now you have said one. what is the one yao just said. >> the texas dps troopers foundation plate. >> i'm interested in justice breyer's question. you're on the license plate approval board. what standard do you follow? when do you grant a request and when do you desunny? what is the smile think that's what justice breyer is asking. >> in texas regular layings provide that the -- regulations provide that the boardening deny me

>> i'd like to make two points in response, justice breyer.e first about the nature of the title 7 claim, and second about the nature of this type of anti-discrimination provision. with respect to the first i think it's helpful to differentiate between a direct claim of íksemq ñdiscrimination disparate treatment, such as a claim in the donald douglas framework. without going through the donald douglas analysis, you have to show an employer offers an accommodation to a significant class of employees, and that that accommodation fails the test i described earlier. it's got to be a significant class. we think this case, we think that's going to be most cases, but in the kinds of examples that your honor identified the one guy driving across the mountain, for example, i think you would have two issues there. first, when it's one person, you're not going to be able to make a direct case. you go through mcdonald douglas, and the employer may well have an explanation for that accommodation that would take it outside the source of the disability limit

to respond to justice breyer's point, he says such exchange connotes that it's the same person doing it. but look at the provision on territorial exchanges. it says, territories can establish such exchanges and then it says, "and shall be treated as a state." so -- >> yes, it does. but you say connote. no, it's not a question of connotation. it is a question of denotation. now what does that mean? it means that the federal government, the secretary, is establishing a thing for the state. and what is the thing? the thing that it is establishing for the state is defined as an exchange established by the state. >> to -- >> now, that person from mars, who's literal, which i usually am not, but a literalist, i think would have to read it that way. but if you're not a literalist, well, at least you could read it that way. now you want to go into the context if you want to go into the context, at that point it seems to me your argument really is weaker. >> well, two points. >> the exchanges fall apart, nobody can buy anything on them. you know the arguments. you've read the briefs. nobody c

he is reading a poem called "i protect thee." ♪ >> "i protect thee," by jim breyer. that is wrong. i protect thee because i am strong. no man too large, no woman too small. i protect them, protect them all. protecting the earth, moon, and heaven above. but who protects me from falling in love? [ cheers and applause ] >> seth: thank you, jim. i'll protect you, buddy. next, we have tom yusofari. he won the 2004 nobel prize in literature for his poetry, but we know him first as our stage manager. tom is reading a poem entitled "backstage dreamers." ♪ >> "backstage dreamer" by tom yusofari. behind the scenes i toil. behind the scenes i lurk. ushering stars to the spotlight is what i do for work. but i'm a man with a secret. a man with a dream. to be in front of the camera acting up a scene. singing, dancing, twirling around. wearing beautiful dresses, not a frown to be found. i'd be a silver screen sweetie. my production is a hit, winning tonys and oscars. julie andrews ain't [ bleep ]. [ laughter ] [ cheers and applause ] >> seth: thank you, tom. thank you. you really h

breyers gelato indulgences... it's way beyond ice cream.ng for the fighters. just any college students. the focused. and formidable. ones whose extracurriculars are working and parenting and working some more. with gpas that include grit. perseverance. ambition. the strongest people in america. with full-time jobs, full-on commutes, full hearts, who want professors who'll know them by name, see who they can be, believe in what they can do. students who've already found themselves. who're going to college to find a better job. make a better life. the kind who want more than a degree on graduation day... they want a career. if you're this kind of student, you're our kind of different. devry university. different. on purpose. ♪ [ cheers and applause ] >> seth: welcome back to "late night," everybody. you know, in this day and age, we know celebrities better than ever, whether it's through twitter, instagram or reading about them online. but we were wondering, how well do people actually know how to spell their names? let's find out by playing

breyers gelato indulgences... it's way beyond ice cream.ur customers, every day. you'll get things like rewards bonuses on credit cards... extra interest on a savings account... preferred pricing on merrill edge online trades and more... across your banking and investing get used to getting more. that's the power of more rewarding connections. that's preferred rewards from bank of america. when you take advil you get relief right at the site of pain. wherever it is. advil stops pain right where it starts. relief doesn't get any better than this. advil. gotta get that bacon! yummy, crunchy, bacon bacon bacon there in that bag! who wants a beggin' strip? me! i'd get it myself, but i don't have thumbs! mmm mmm mmm mmm mmm it's beggin'! mmm, i love you. (announcer) beggin' strips...there's no time like beggin' time. we aren't looking for just any we're looking for the fighters. the focused. and formidable. with gpas that include grit. perseverance. ambition. who want professors who'll know them by name, see who they can be... students who want

, but i want to hear the answer why they're not good enough. >> the reason they're not -- justice breyer the reason that they're not good enough is that there is no way that the employer can know about a religious practice unless it either -- unless that information is traceable to the employee. and having that kind of a correct belief standard will inevitably lead employers to stereotype because a fact finder might later -- >> well, isn't that, isn't that what ms. cook says she did? she said she saw her in a scarf and that she assumed that it was worn because of religious beliefs. so she acted on a stereotype that some i guess if you wear a black scarf of, it's because of a religious belief. >> your honor, i don't believe that she acted on that stereotype. i believe that johnson instructed her not to hire ms. elaf because she was noncompliant with the work policy. >> no, he hired her because under the look policy, he believed you could not accommodate that religious belief. >> i think -- >> or that religious practice. >> i mean, that just seems very very unlikely. >> the case that the g

that's reinforced, as justice breyer suggested earlier, by the definition which says that an exchange is an exchange established under section 1311. 1311, again, has 1311(b)(1) which says each state shall establish an exchange. and it has to be that way because petitioners have conceded, and it's at page 22 of their brief, that an exchange that hhs sets up is supposed to be the same exchange that petitioners say function just like an exchange that the state sets up for itself. >> well, you're putting a lot of weight on the one word, such such exchange. such it seems to me the most unrealistic interpretation of "such" to mean the federal government shall establish a state exchange. rather, it seems to me "such" means an exchange for the state rather than an exchange of the state. how can the government federal government establish a state exchange? that is gobbledygook. you know, "such" must mean something different. >> it isn't gobbledygook justice scalia. and i think about it and i go back to something that justice alito asked earlier. if the language of 36b were exactly the same as

justice breyer: you confirm it was not made up in my chambers. [laughter] mr. smith: they did a wonderful job. this -- justice breyer: the congress -- the brief said unambiguously required epa to consider costs at the second stage of the process. that is what it said. i read the statutes. reading that leads me to think it works along the lines you just said. if he did at the most expensive set of generators in the world you would ask epa to create a separate category in which case the top 12% would no longer be in your category and you wouldn't have to do it. when asking is, if you think it is the system, that is what i read in the statute. is there a treatise? an explanation that the epa has put out so it is clear it was not made up and it is clear the system is following that? mr. smith: the only thing i can supply you with is the notice proposed rulemaking in the final rule. the process is laid out in detail. justice sotomayor: i think justice -- chief justice roberts: is there something in the administrative record where the epa. that, when somebody says yo

sweet breyer college, a private liberal arts school announced today the class graduating this may will be the final one. they are saying the decision is because of insurmountable financial challenges. they are down from about 800 two years ago. next on abc 7 news at 6:00 -- >> you believe the v.a. is partially responsible for your husband's death? >> yes! >> a war widow irate over how her husband was treated before he died. i'm chris pabst. coming up we'll tell you what she is now demanding. >> and we'll get the latest on meteorologist steve rudin on a system that could bring quite a about the -- bit of snow to our area. >> the caps and wizards are on the wet. the terps have headed north to play rutgers. i have the previews as abc 7 news at 6:00 continues! >> new at 6:00 the department of justice reportedly found evidence of widespread discrimination in the ferguson, missouri police department. that department was at the center of last summer's protests after the deadly police shooting of an unarmed black teenager. the d.o.j. alleges that ferguson police used excessive force more often

live now to house appropriations subcommittee, supreme court justices anthony kennedy and stephen breyer seated before this subcommittee to testify on the supreme court's budget on everything from salaries and expenses to how much it costs to maintain the building and the grountsdz. andrew crenshaw of florida chairing this committee.

. >>> supreme court justices anthony kennedy and stephen breyer were on capitol hill monday to testify about the court's 2016 budget request. they also took questions on other topics, including this one posed to justice kennedy about cameras in the courtroom. >> people suggest that maybe the court should televise oral arguments, that people could see firsthand what goes on and i know the court has historically rejected that. i think it was justice sotomayor before she went on the bench thought it would be a good idea to televise oral arguments and then once she was on the bench, she changed her mind and thinks it's not a good idea. so i just wondered is any -- do you sense any change -- do you think there will be a day when oral arguments will be on television? do you think that's good or that's not good in the context of education. could you all comment on that? >> the question do i think there will be the day it sounds as if we're more or less behind the times. if you had english-style debating and you were handed the topic and you had to be either pro or con, could you make a lot of

later, a look at the supreme court's budget request with anthony kennedy and stephen breyer testifying in front of house appropriations subcommittee at 3:00 p.m. eastern live coverage on c-span3. chinese premier li keqiang held a news conference after the closing of the national people's conference. he answered questions on both domestic and foreign policy, including environmental protection u.s.-china relations and the ukraine conflict. this portion is courtesy of china central television. >> with huffington post, in under the dome, a documentary the filmmakers complain about big oil companies like petrol china have been a block to the introduction of policies on environmental protection and law enforcement in this field. for example, in the subject -- setting of quality standards of gasoline consumed as well as introduction of wider use of natural gas. my question is, if it is, it is it true that these companies are posing an obstacle to enforcing environmental protection laws and policies? if so, what steps will the chinese government take to remove such an obstacle? premier li: [sp

they're not tied to current -- >> i thought you agreed with justice breyer.ou're saying you cannot use race as a proxy for political affiliation. but that was his hypothetical. that these people were moved because blacks overwhelmingly vote democrat. >> your honor -- >> you're saying that's bad if that's the reason they move them. i don't think he thinks that's bad. >> i understood justice breyer to be describing a situation in which you're moving people because they're democrats who have voting voting behavior data, you look at data -- >> you're moving them because they're black and you think blacks will overwhelmingly vote democrat. that's why you're moving them. because they're black. because we assume th

breyers gelato indulgences. creamy gelato, rich caramel topped with crunchy curls.ew indulgent flavors. you are loved in so many ways that's why you're wrapped in the blanket-like softness and protection of pampers swaddlers so all you feel is love. pampers ♪ no other scents feel like glade. uplift your attitude with our clean linen fragrance. feel fresh and new. feel glade. did you use the loo paper in there? i did. how was it? it was good! why do you think that the ripples work? because it gets it all clean. are you so clean that you would go commando? ok! how do you feel? i feel awesome! only cottonelle has cleanripple texture, so you can go commando. advanced design makes it easy to protect your dog or cat from fleas and ticks. discover seresto. with the performance you expect from topicals in a non-greasy collar seresto provides protection against fleas and ticks for 8 months. seresto. introducing new flonase allergy relief nasal spray, now available over the counter in full prescription strength. when we breathe in allergens our bodies react by over-producing

justice breyer in his dissent said the reason when a class actions in situations like this where a large number of people each lose a small amount of money no one is going to sue or go to arbitration for $32.80 so why does it matter to all of us? arbitration clauses are increasingly ubiquitous. they were found in employment contracts, consumer contracts and even in medical contracts. not that long ago i went to see a new eye doctor for the first time to the receptionist gave me a big stack of papers to fill out in the middle there was a former is asked to sign that if i had any dispute with the doctor arising out of the treatment i could not see the doctor didn't have to go to our -- arbitration. i asked the receptionist at the doctor would still seem if i didn't sign the form and she said she didn't know. nobody ever asked her that question before. that doctor did see me but i know many physicians will not see patients unless they sign arbitration agreements come in other words unless they give up their right to sue in court. around the same time i bought a new dell computer. as you kno

his plain language argument immediately drew fire from justices breyer, kagan and sotomayor. said it's not fair you focus on just a few words in the phrase. the court looks at the phrase in the context of the entire statute to see if it's harmonious, if it makes sense. justice sotomayor claimed under the act there would have been consequences congress could not have intended and, in fact, the law was designed to avoid. would federal subsidies on federal exchanges those exchanges would have no customers. there would be a death spiemplet healthy people wouldn't buy insurance and insurance costs would skyrocket. >> woodruff: what was the government's response? >> the government represented by solicitor general vonl varilli and he agreed with the more liberal justices that the traditional way to interpret a statute is to look alt the phrase at issue in the context of the entire statute. he said the consequences that justice sotomayor enunciated clearly show that this was -- that the challenges interpretation was not the statute congress intended, but he faced his toughest questio