justice breyer: okay. mr. rosenkranz: first, sykes, vehicular flight. okay. how do we -- the court was -- was mired in controversy about how you figure out whether vehicular flight is going to give rise to the right sort of risk and how do you -- how did the court do it? it was looking at the moments or the long time frame after the elements were satisfied. the moment you pull out, you are in vehicular flight. so "in the course of" certainly doesn't help. and the distinction between physical force and physical injury doesn't help. and the distinction between property and personal injury doesn't help. you're still always imagining what is happening after you pull out? okay, next one, residential trespass. it all depends upon, first, what do you imagine the ordinary case to be of residential trespass and then figure out how it plays out. or car burglary, same exact problem. or to take one example directly out of acca, extortion. it all depends upon the ordinary case analysis, which -- which goes back to justice sotomayor's question early on. the heart of this p

hi justice breyer: all right. so can i do this? because i think the hard issue in this case is are there standards manageable by a court, not by some group of social science political ex -- you know, computer experts. i understand that, and i am quite sympathetic to that. so let me spend exactly 30 seconds, if i can, giving you, as you've read all these briefs, i have too, this is -- this is where i am at the moment -- not that i'm for this, react to this as you wish, and if you wish to say nothing, say nothing, and it's for everybody because it's a little complicated. when i read all that social science stuff and the computer stuff, i said, well, what -- is there a way of reducing it to something that's manageable? so i'd have step one. the judge says, was there one party control of the redistricting? if the answer to that is no, say there was a bipartisan commission, end of case. okay? step two, is there partisan asymmetry? in other words, does the map treat the political parties differently? and a good evidence of that is a part

and that's exactly what fits with justice gorsuch's and justice breyer's theory. three -- three times we've said it. mr. feigin: well, let me say a couple of things. first of all, i don't think -- i think, as the colloquy with opposing counsel demonstrates, that does not produce a clear rule, and a clear rule is important in these circumstances. second, i don't even think the author of blackledge, justice stewart, viewed his opinion that way, and i think that's clear if you look at the dissent, he joined in ellis against dyson. and, third, i don't think anything that this court said in blackledge and menna reflects that they're really the tip of the iceberg that would allow claims by all sorts of defendants. in those cases, you had the court outside the context of any sort of conditional plea procedure asking whether there's any recourse for a defendant who wanted on the one hand to plead guilty and on the other hand to preserve a claim that he was charged under he was charged for primary conduct for which he'd already been charged and convicted. and the court all

justice breyer: no. that cannot be right because if you are admitting they can convict you and put you in prison we would not have blackledge and menna, because in blackledge and menna, they admitted they did what the statute forbids, but still they could claim that it's double jeopardy or vindictive prosecution. mr. fagan: your honor, let me give you one more counter-example. and then let me please address blackledge against menna and why i don't think they stand for what you say. but i think actually the closest analogue we have to this case is brady against united states, which, unlike blackledge and menna, was a challenge to the act of the legislature, not the act of bringing the prosecution. in brady against united states, you had a statute where a defendant was only exposed to the death penalty if the jury recommended the death penalty. and the court held in brady, as explained by tollett, that once a defendant pleads guilty, he cannot claim that his conviction is invalid because of structural defe

among those attending, chief justice john roberts, stephen alito, stephen breyer, and anthony kennedy. outside theok church after the service. ♪ announcer: is supreme court begins its new term with the newest judge, and neil gorsuch, joining the bench. deal withhe docket gay rights, religious freedom, and whether some gerrymandering voting districts violate the constitution. c-spanere on the networks. tomorrow, a new america discussion on whether the growth of isis was inevitable and how different american choices might have prevented the rise of the islamic state. on c-span, online at to spend.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. monday night on the communicators -- of5g will open up a new line innovation. it will change what you use on your smartphone or tablet. >> verizon president kathy grillo talks about 5g deployment. a politicorviewed by reporter. >> do you think the u.s. has the framework to the make sure verizon is first getting it out? >> the fcc issued an order last year. we have done a pretty good job one fiber. getting fiber out where it needs to be. we could do so

>> i would go with the screens that justice breyer mentioned. it would have to be a one-party state. that ignores the fact that the number of the maps were by commissions or courts are divided legislators. with all this taken off the table from the very beginning. you have a one-party states, you have to measure if it is unusually asymmetrical, pretty asked her in -- pretty extreme -- >> how? >> you can use any of the three tests. ould suggest you apply all of them and if they disagree i would say that is something that is unconstitutional. >> just on that, isn't it true e.g.you can get very high based on factors that have nothing to do with gerrymandering? the political geography can lead to it, protection of incumbents, which has been said to be a legitimate factor, can lead to a high e.g. compliance with voting rights acts. factors thatother can only do to draw a map that does not have a zero e.g.. requirements, all of those problems are taken care of either of the intense stage or the justification stage. >> how are you taking care of it at

>> i would go with the screens that justice breyer mentioned. it would have to be a one-party state. that ignores the fact that the number of the maps were by commissions or courts are divided legislators. with all this taken off the table from the very beginning. you have a one-party states, you have to measure if it is unusually asymmetrical, pretty asked her in -- pretty extreme -- >> how? >> you can use any of the three tests. ould suggest you apply all of them and if they disagree i would say that is something that is unconstitutional. >> just on that, isn't it true e.g.you can get very high based on factors that have nothing to do with gerrymandering? the political geography can lead to it, protection of incumbents, which has been said to be a legitimate factor, can lead to a high e.g. compliance with voting rights acts. factors thatother can only do to draw a map that does not have a zero e.g.. requirements, all of those problems are taken care of either of the intense stage or the justification stage. >> how are you taking care of it at

[applause] [inaudible] justice breyer. [applause] i don't know if you've heard by now that justice has written a n about. [laughter] my grandfather signed. it is a pleasure for me to introduce my friend and mentor of 25 years and when i continue to respect and admire that exemplifies the meaning of a man and i want to welcome you to my home and start first book, >> my last book. [laughter] justice clarence thomas. [applause] >> first of all let me think armstrong for hosting this wonderful event and the vice president and mrs. cheney. sorry to put you through all that trouble, and my colleagues who've been a source of comfort over the past 16 years it is hard i think for people to realize just how wonderful the court family is. even with exasperation and sometimes we might get frustrated with each other, it is a family and when we see court family, it's been a wonderful oasis of constructive disagreements an in the place of common endeavor and wonderful place of respect and friendship. they've been extremely supportive ove

another thing that justice breyer doesn't always turned everything into proportionality test which i think it's good. he would have a jurisprudence and everything will be weighed and then he rejected the mechanical use of categories but justice breyer came on and said were gonna protect this not have a balancing test. in the court did not fall to political correctness which is a big thing we talk about now but i think it's important because i didn't feel the redskin case hanging over them in this question of a heated time where people don't like what others are saying and they get upset. that did not the government speech doctrine is another porton part. one of the arguments the government made was that somehow trademarks were government speech. now, you know the texas license plate that's what the court ruled in that case, the strange association of justice thomas and license plates are government speech. now, this could push a free speech doctrine because government speech is allowed to be discriminatory. it's one thing if the government is putting it up that the government was put

. >> justice breyer? >> the statute doesn't say about whether there'll be bail hearings or not, it just says arrest and detain. we detain people when ever we stop them for miranda, briefly, you know, stop and search, frisk and search, et cetera. we detain them when we arrest them. normally, if you were to say detain somebody most cases, you give them a bail hearing. all right. why is the statute different here? in xk, i think, the agency said we'll give some of the people, those found within 100 miles of the border, we'll give some bail hearings. of course, if they're found within 100 miles of the border aall get bail hearings but at l.a.x. or lg or jfk, who have a credible claim of prosecution, they don't get bail hearings. that, to me, is a little odd, particularly when justice sotomayor says, we give ax murderers, bail hearings. are they dangerous? the people in the first category might have relatives in los angeles, they might have a green card somebody decides is no longer valid. what's the basis for

justice breyer cited one of david's pieces in one of his opinions. please welcome david grann. [applause] >> thank you all, truly. my first book and i don't know if you're familiar with it is the lost city of the about an explorer who trekked through the amazon searching for an ancient civilization and i did something foolish to follow in the steps of finding that lincoln city and after leaving nashua at 9:00 a.m. this morning to get to kansas is a lot easier to track through the jungle than it is to fly today. but i did come. [laughter] to see you all waiting here is amazing. thank you. i am here to talk about my new book killers of the flower moon, the osage indians murder in the birth of the fbi. the project began more than five years ago when i made a visit to the osage indians nation in oklahoma and i visited the osage indians nation and saw a panoramic photograph and this is a fraction of it with an enormous picture. it went all across the wall and you can see the portrait on the title page of the book. it was taken in 1924 in seems innocent and it shows them members of t

tanya breyer went under the hood with jamie oliver. we know about the food truck scene. all sorts of convenience food, but making food in a car, does that work? >> according to jamie it does. he showed me around the car, and it does work if you have land rover make it like they had for him. he did this for an upcoming series that he's doing you sit in the driving seat, suddenly toast is appearing on the left-hand side you open up the glove compartment, there's jams there. all sorts of things that they've incorporated in this jamie oliver car they won't roll them out quite yet. you can see him there demonstrating all sorts of things there are the jams it could come in handy, maybe a more simplistic form >> seems like a sticky situation if some of that jam finds its way into parts where it shouldn't be go. >> your children, if you have children and you're driving with them that could be it. what are some of your favorite recipes? >> pasta, but pasta i'm sure you could make in a car like that, no a couple herbs, garlic >> he has sort of an herb garden in the car as well as

another thing in the case, justice breyer doesn't always turn everything into a balancing proportionality test i think is good, everything has to be weighed, a free form balancing case and case like reed v gilbert and he rejected categories for a basic multi-factor balancing test hard to predict but justice breyer said we will protect this and not have a multi-justice balancing test and the court did not fall to political correctness a big thing we talk about now. i felt this was very important because i didn't feel the redskins case hanging over them in a heated time people don't like what a lot of people are saying and get very upset, that didn't upset this decision and wasn't unconstitutional. we have the government speech doctrine i think is very important about this. one of the arguments the government said, hard to say it with a straight face, somehow trademarks returning government speech. the united states license case is what the court ruled strange association of justice thomas and four liberals saying license plates are government speech. this could push a very free speech thou

the doctor and the vet tech no longer work at breyer wood. monmouth county prosecutors have not decided what if any charges have been filed. >>> when you buy chicken fingers, you're expected to get something better than from a fast food store. the owner served up popeye's spicy tenders. customers complaining about the markup on the men sue and the fact they were they were not eating locally. >> popeyes is good chicken. it's not worth $13. >> if you're going to warm it up, i can do it at home. >> a young girl's quick action helped save her family from a fire. >>> a local 6-year-old is safe from a frightening ordeal. he jumped out in time as somebody carjacked his mother's car. start your day with a new hash brown scramble bowl from chick-fil-a. when you're a double-dipping like steve sweeney, it's important to maintain a certain... lifestyle. that's why sweeney spent over a hundred grand of his campaign funds on high-priced meals and other gifts. we're talking fine cigars, fancy watches, pricey restaurants, and expensive wines - all to charm t

in theaters right now and if you can't take their word or line about supreme court justice stephen breyer who cited one of the pieces in his opinions so please, welcome david. [applause] my first book was the loss of the v. and it was about an explorer that did something foolish to following the steps in to find ancient city and i can see that after leaving at 9 a.m. this morning it's a lot easier to trek through the jungle but i did come to look at it as just amazing. i'm here to talk about my new book killers of the flower mound, the osage murders and the birth of the fbi. the project began four to five years ago when i made a visit out to a donation in northeast oklahoma. when i was there, i visited the museum and i saw a panoramic photograph this is just a fraction of it. it went all across the wall and you can see the portrait on the title page of the book. it has taken in 1924 and it shows the members gather that i noticed on a portion of the photograph off to the left being cut out if it clicks and that he had taken scissors to it and i asked the director what had happened to have

thank you anya i'm joined today by mark breyer historian of human rights terrorism and political radicalism in modern europe was one of the organizers of occupy wall street and he's the author of empty for the anti fascist handbook as well as a lecture at dartmouth college so let's open by talking a little bit about. which you do in the book the history of the movement what its aims are right and what its tactics are and we should be clear that i've been very critical of the black bloc just from the start. but go ahead i mean you you spent a lot of time kind of building. the genesis of this movement right so anti fascism can be traced back one hundred years we can look at the pople in italy who fought against mussolini's blackshirts all the different communist and socialist factions that fought against hitler in germany that we can take a look at the international brigades joining from around the world to fight in the spanish civil war but really what people miss is that after world war two despite the defeat of the axis powers militant anti-fascism didn't entirely go away in britain it con

charge of investigation is actually doing thins to break the law in a way to shape public opinion breyerprior to the fact, that leak of grand jury information justifies removal of mueller, whether he knew it or not, he is captain of the ship. he needs to be mov moved out, bi don't think that there is anything there, they seem so desperate to get it out. lou: we'll see, tony shaver. >> thank you, sir. lou: vote in our poll, do you believe that obama, clinton and dnc payments to fusion gps make special counsel look especially silly as he avoids obvious. cast your vote on twitter, and follow he on twitter, and like my on facebook and instagram. wall street stocks closer lower, dow down 85. volume 3.6 billion shares, consumer spending with big of gain in 8 years. as americans replace cars, and trucks, durable goods, destroyed by the hurricanes. a reminder to listen to my reports 3 times a day coast-to-coast as well on salem radio network. radio network. up next, nfl ratings my "business" was going nowhere... so i built this kickin' new website with godaddy. building a website in under an hou

and that's what fits with justice gorsuch an justice breyer's theory. >> first of all, i think as a colloquy it does not produce a clear rule. in a clear rule is important in the circumstances i don't even think the author of blackledge views his up opinion that way. and third, i don't think anything this court said reflects that there the tip of the iceberg. they are the loud points by all sorts of dependence. you had the court outside plea procedures asking if there's any recourse for defendants those who wanted to plead guilty or preserve a claim that he was charged with primary conduct for which she had already been charged and convicted. the court allowed the defendant to do that but as the brady example illustrates legislative claims are looked at differently. i think i heard opposing counsel say that under their rule they interpret this in the contours are not clear and i would caution that we need clear rules. the air has to be clear on the face of the indictment. the court looks at that it will not find anything that relates to has applied the second amendment challenge. the claim s

>> justice breyer teed this up to kennedy, setting out a test he could potentially use, one of those, tests whether it was done by one party, which is kind of steering kennedy, could potentially say, that a commission would not, would not be subject to judicial review. >> still ahead as president trump visits hurricane ravaged puerto rico, just what will it take for the island to recover? and are promises of debt relief realistic? realistic? ♪ ♪ ♪ you nervous? ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> we're going to work something out. we have to look at their whole debt structure. they owe a lot of money to your friend on wall street. we'll have to wipe that out that will have to be, you can say good-bye to that. i don't know if it is goldman sachs but you can wave good-bye to that. >> that was president trump tuesday in puerto rico telling fox's geraldo rivera that they might have to wipe out puerto rico's debt to recover after a direct hit by the hurricane maria. the territory already owes creditors $70 billion, suffered 10 of billions of dollars more when the category 4 storm came ashore on september 20th. we

>> justice breyer teed this up to kennedy, setting out a test he could potentially use, one of those, tests whether it was done by one party, which is kind of steering kennedy, could potentially say, that a commission would not, would not be subject to judicial review. >> still ahead as president trump visits hurricane ravaged puerto rico, just what will it take for the island to recover? and are promises of debt relief realistic? realistic? ♪ listen up, heart disease. you too, unnecessary er visits. and hey, unmanaged depression, don't get too comfortable. we're talking to you, cost inefficiencies, and data without insights. and fragmented care, stop getting in the way of patient recovery and pay attention. every single one of you is on our list. at optum, we're partnering across the health system to tackle its biggest challenges. or a little internet machine? at optum, we're partnering across the health system it makes you wonder: shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you get up to 5 lines of talk and text

of them was me, some of them lower court judges said, why hasn't -- sentencing commission justice breyer: why don't they go out and find out, what is the typical way in which -- the other provision -- case after case, nobody ever had the statistics. think, well they cannot get them. otherwise they would. so, what is the story? i think it is a similar question to what is being asked. mr. kneedler: maybe general categories of offenses were that -- >> in other words, we never had a case that i remember under that other provision were some became up with statistics despite what i call -- >> and other words -- >> and there were some flightics dealing with -- >> not -- nottatistics, but probably as good as a legislative committee. >> i think it is important to recognize what we have here is a legislative in a in which congress chose to identify crimes covered by categories and type of offense and there's only so much one can expect from the legislature in identifying a category and here congress identified a category in 16-be that is very closely tied to 16-8. 16-a involve situations in which

justice breyer in the 1980s articulated something like this. and then like i said, the supreme court adopted it in the late 1990s, there are cases that appeared in some form before that. i think that's a really important doctrine right now for broad delegations to agencies. if you're concerned about agencies taking vague delegations and doing massive agency rules. this doctrine is critical. two things on this. how major is major? money, people affected, what? i threw out some things in a dissent i wrote last year. i think it was last year, that should be considered. that's an important debate, some rules are obviously major. so that's one issue. that is difficult. but that is a piece of the nondelegation story. the nondelegation doctrine does not have much teeth. the major question doctrine is broad delegations that is putting the brakes on some of what some agencies have done with limited and vague delegations to issue massive rules. >> there's a certain popular perception that the other branches of government, executive and legislative branch

>> justice breyer teed this up to kennedy, setting out a test he could potentially use, one of those,her it was done by one party, which is kind of steering kennedy, could potentially say, that a commission would not, would not be subject to judicial review. >> still ahead as president trump visits hurricane ravaged puerto rico, just what will it take for the island to recover? and are promises of debt relief realistic? ♪ stuff. do you know how to use those? nope. get those kids some new capri sun! dale! oh, hey, rob. what's with the minivan? it's not mine. i don't -- dale, honey, is your tummy still hurting, or are you feeling better to ride in the front seat? oh! is this one of your motorcycling friends? hey, chin up there, dale. lots of bikers also drive cars. in fact, you can save big if you bundle them both with progressive. i'd like that. great. whoo. you've got soft hands. he uses my moisturizer. see you, dale. bye, rob. ♪ >> we're going to work something out. we have to look at their whole debt structure. they owe a lot of money to your friend on wall street. we'll have to wip

in the 1980's first articulated something like in the justice breyer 1980's articulated something like this. the supreme court adopted it in the late 1990's. even justice rehnquist articulated it. i think that is an important broadne right now for delegation to agencies. about are concerned agencies taking vague delegations and doing massive this majors, questions doctrine is critical. you see it in king versus burwell after the you a rg opinion. -- uarg opinion. how major is major? money, people, what? i threw out some things in a dissent i wrote last year that should be considered, but that is an important debate. some rules are obviously made he major. that isis one issue difficult, the major rules doctrine. but that is a piece of the nondelegation story. the nondelegation doctrine does not have much teeth, but the major question doctrine is for broad delegations in a way that is putting a break on some -- what some agencies have done with broad and limited delegations to issue rules. there is a certain popular precession that other branches of the government do what they want to do

>> justice breyer teed this up to kennedy, setting out a test he could potentially use, one of those,done by one party, which is kind of steering kennedy, could potentially say, that a commission would not, would not be subject to judicial review. >> still ahead as president trump visits hurricane ravaged puerto rico, just what will it take for the island to recover? and are promises of debt relief realistic? ♪ it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. ♪ can i kick it? ♪ yes you can ♪ can i kick it? ♪ yes you can ♪ can i kick it? ♪ yes you can ♪ well i'm gone i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nig

that interview and viewed how rex tillerson is now handling -- trying to soft-pedal through this breyer patch? >> i suspect the president probably viewed that interview favorably. he didn't respond to the accusations and the rumors that tillerson had called the president a moron. and i suspect throughout history there have been plenty of cabinet members that have called their presidents they have served under names. it's just that this white house sort of is like a fire hose in a colander when it comes to leaks, right? >> right. >> and so looking at that, i think he danced around it effectively. he came out strong on the points he wanted to make, and he was able to dance around the ones that he didn't want to answer. >> dance around, to say the least. lynn, it's going to be an interesting look at this table. because not just sitting -- won't just be the secretary of state. it will be the attorney general who the president had a back and forth with over the summer, calling him beleaguered. there will be an empty seat for tom price, health and human services secretary, who had to quit bec

and justice in massachusetts indicated quite clearly almost with justice breyer -- suggest that not only is it, you are not admitting even two of the statute says, you're admitting to what is in indictment. it is not maybe the most natural and historically consistent understanding of what a guilty plea is? i plead guilty to that which i am charged. >> well -- your honor i also believe that there is an aspect of it that admit that the court can convict you and impose punishment. it is particularly apparent -- >> what do i do about this 150 years of history? what's your honor, i think that would be a better argument if this case was seen before the court in 1982, before the enactment of rule 11a2. >> putting aside rule 11, have some of the difficulties that have not been addressed yet as were already expressed. but understand what a guilty plea means. >> your honor, i do not think that haynes reflects this court's consideration of what a guilty plea means. judgment and conviction being entered against you and the sons because that's directly what the court goes and does following a guilty

answer, justice breyer, and i would like to get out along answer, is for 77 years the board did not find anything incompatible about section seven and bilateral arbitration agreements. 2010 when thein general counsel looked at this precise issue. the longer answer is from the very beginning, the most that is been protected is the resort to the forum. when you get there you are subject to the rules of the forum. decides hecal worker wants to bring a class action on behalf of a handful of fellow employees, he has the right to resort to the courts. when he gets there, if he is confronted by an employer that says wait a second, you do not satisfy numeral city, the employer does not commit an unfair labor practice by raising that argument. you conceding that in these contracts in front of us that they do not forbid two or four fromree going together, approaching a judicial forum, asking the judge to hear their case and an arbitration, and of course if it violates some rule of civil procedure other than that, it will be thrown out. are you conceding that that is the issue? >> just as the emplo

. >> the short answer, justice breyer is that for 77 years, the board did not find anything incompatible about section seven and bilateral arbitration agreements and that includes in general council at this precise issue. the longer issue is, from the very beginning, the most that has been protected is the resort to the forum, and when you i get there you are subject to the rules of the forum. for example, if an atypical workers decides he wants to bring a class action on behalf of of a handful of fellow employees, he has the right to resort to the courts, but when he gets there, he's confronted by a employer that says, you don't satisfy numeral city or typicality, then the employer does not commit an unfairly the practice by raising that argument. >> of course not, but are you conceding that based on his contract in front of us, they do not forbid two workers or three or four from coming together, approaching a judicial fourm, asking the judge to hear their case and of course if it violates some rule of civil procedure other than that it will be thrown out. are you conceding that is the

among those attending chief justice john roberts, justices clarence thomas and samuel alito, stephen breyer, and anthony kennedy. here's a look outside the church after the service. >> the supreme court begins its midterm tomorrow, with neil gorsuch joining the bench. will begin hearing for argument on a number of high-profile cases. deal with term immigration, evidence collection, search and seizure, religious freedom, and whether some gerrymandered voting districts violated the constitution. andh more selected re-airs announced decisions here on the c-span networks. >> tuesday, we are live in charleston, west virginia for the next stop on c-span bus. governor jim justice and lieutenant governor mitch carmichael will be our guests during washington journal starting at 8:15 a.m. eastern. join us tuesday for the entire washington journal, starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> paul song this is jinx the a boston massachusetts accent. massachusetts accent. plan, we do not have a plan. i have a book. that's it. >> for the past 30 years, the video library is it your free resource for polit