constitution. he is also a professor at george washington university law school and a contributing editor of "atlantic magazine." professor rosen is an absolutely prolific scholar and a writer. and i think it is fair to say, he is one of our country's most compelling analysts and commentators on legal matters, if not perhaps the most compelling. you all have probably read the description of this panel in the program for the day. rule of man or rule of law? society without checks and balances. what is the role of constitutions in making the rule of law take hold in emerging representative systems? and what makes a constitution last? you cannot build a free society without the rule of law being paramount. the question is how to make the rule of law stick. now, when it comes to the rule of law, it seems to me that past experience makes pretty clear that it is often easier for a country to talk the talk than to walk the walk. constitutions are written and adopted around the globe with provisions for th

answered by state constitutions.prior to the court's decision in 2008 in heller there's a lot of litigation throughout two centuries under state constitutional provisions, which in one way or another protected our right to keep and bear arms. there is been recently moved to an end-state end state constitn some places to specifically protect the right to hunt. whether the right to hunt alone would be considered the same kind of core as self-defense is to me at least not quite as convincing, but that doesn't mean it's not part of the second amendment right. he could be on the fringes, in the shadows as we say. it's also interesting to note that what there said is right that hunting and recreation were probably the most common uses for guns in the late 1700s. that was true in this country until just a few years ago. that hunting and recreation were the primary reasons that gun owners gave, the most, the most prominent reasons gun owners gave for why they own their guns. it wasn't until 2013 was the first poll that showe

or that precipitated his constitutional brilliance. the war for independence did not progress swiftly. as england oppressive force became national policy, for the colonies mason met we put a resolution no less text and expressed in forceful language. when he wrote that though we are england's subjects, we will use every means which heaven have given us to prevent our becoming its slaves. we put mason's commanding strengths of intellect, when he became aroused the emotional appeal and bigger aboard. all is at stake when he wrote to washington and little conveniences and comforts of life, will set in competition we put our liberty it also be rejected not we put reluctance but we put pleasure. mason was not a bold commander. nor a fiery like patrick hendry. but again his chief aim as the draftsman of the virginia declaration of rights. when he rarely had a national audience outside of his country, virginia, and only the outside revealed whole significance of his proposed. in mason did not rest once his work for his words were written for

it is superfluous to the constitution. they thought of anything that wasn'anything thatwasn't in then reverted back to the states and they did not need a document to say that there was individual liberty. they believed that it was superfluous. mason completely disagree and so did patrick henry. he wanted an individual document amended to the constitution, integrating the bill of rights. the rights to a jury trial, the right to a free press, the right to free expression. he believed th believed that the written out. washington andad madison thought that was superfluous and was already inherent in the institution. >> you may have given answer to this question just now, but in virginia politics at the time, was mason more closely aligned with jefferson and madison were with patrick henry? >> jefferson was a colleague of patrick henry, patrick henry and he teamed up in the virginia ratifying convention to try to defeat or at least get a bill of rights amended to the new constitution. succumbinconstitution. subcommittee wasuccu

constitution? tore have been 27 amendments the u.s. constitution.he first 10 compromise the bill of rights. the 21st amendment repealed the the sale ofbanned alcohol in the united states and the 27th amendment permits members of congress from receiving a pay raise until the next election had been held. how would you amend it? start dialing in now. it joining us on the phonies jeffrey rosen. let's begin with what was happening on this day in 1787 and the history of marking this day with constitution day. 87, september 17 in independence hall was the day the constitution was formerly -- formally approved and proposed. it was not the day it was ratified. the convention authorized president washington to send out the approved constitution to the states for ratification. after months of deliberation between may 20 fifth and september 17, the constitutional convention proposed the constitution. congress passed a law requiring public school kids to learn about the constitution on constitution day. that is why it is the biggest day of the year here in phila

constitutional electors perform a federal function, a constitutional function. when they cast their vote for president and vice president and that is not subject to control or interference by the state. >> they are controlled, how they are selected? isn't that opportunity given to the states? mr. harrow: the opportunity to appoint electors is, but that is where it ends. >> if they appoint them, why can't they impose conditions on the appointment? mr. harrow: they can. >> one of those could be that you have to follow. mr. harrow: what they can't do is come after that voting begins, they can't intervene. the constitution specifies four things the electors can do and must do themselves. vote, make lists, sign and certify, and send to the president of the senate. onyou are placing a lot silence. because it doesn't say something , doesn't mean you can't do it. constitutionhe commits electors to a constitutional function. ray is made very clear in v. blair, in burrows. chooser,elector means presidential elector means chooser. it doesn't say in the constitution that le

we observed the constitution. the word broke of the president's betrayal of that constitution. o it is heartbreaking, but nonetheless, it's our responsibility, because the beauty of the constitution, system of checks and balances, co-equal branches of government are a check on each other and the president declaring article 2, the executive branch says i can do whatever i want. that's not what the constitution says. perhaps he is ill advised and perhaps he doesn't know, but we do. but the article 2 doesn't make anyone -- that is exactly what our founders avoided. and benjamin franklin said dr. franklin, what do we have a monarchy or a republic? he said a republic, if we can keep it. if you heard me say, our founders as thomas be payne said of our founders, he said that done. but in a time of urgency to protect and defend he constitution for the dem -- democracy they fought to win to defend the constitution of the united states. reporter: just to go back to db you said you would like this process, have you given the committee chairmen deadline? ms. pelosi: no. the facts will dete

day as part is constitution week. we mark the special celebration by connecting the constitution in citizenship and reflecting on what it means to become a united states citizen. too officially begin the ceremony i like to ask everyone to rise. leisurplace your right hand over heart for the national anthem by the u.s. navy. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [applause] >> thank you that was beautiful. please be seated. now i have the privilege of the turalization candidates. candidates when you hear your country nationally called, please stand and remain standing for the ministration of oath. afghanistan, bangladesh, bolivia, china, croatia, ecuador, el salvador, ethiopia, france, germany, ghana, guatemala, india, iraq, israel, kenya, malawi, voracious, pakistan, peru, philippines, syria, pakistan, and vietnam. i present to you 28 candidates representing 26 countries who applied to become citizens of the united states. each of the candidates has been interviewed by an officer of u.s. eis and exempted by law hasn't demonstrated the abi

ur constitution truly is a miracle. aside from its genius, its helps us appreciate the blessing it is. colleague, congressman chris stewart, and judge ted stewart, wonderful book, "seven miracles that saved america." it they offer three reasons to believe god had a hand in the crafting of the constitution, and for the remainder of my time on constitution day, i'd like to quote them." timing. the window of opportunity for the writing and ratification of small.stitution was very every effort to make the articles of confederation 1776 and 1787 n had already failed. in may of ddenly 1787, a group of 55 patriots together with both the wisdom of the ages and enough energetically fight for the ratification of the constitution. a attempt to create constitution later than 1787 would have almost certainly failure as well. just two years after the work, ution finished its france became embroiled in its own revolution, which lasted a decade, and degenerated into a bloody, violent affair. example of failure would have frightened the

when i saw the title of the : constitutional crisis, it made me think about the potential constitutional theis that could come at time of our next elections. i have been working on a book entitled "election meltdown." i want to think about what donald trump is doing now that could affect the legitimacy and the ability to have acceptance of election results by the losers of the election. thatoing to make a claim donald trump has been unprecedented it least in what he says out loud about election integrity. i can't income another president -- donald trump made certain claims about election integrity that were unsupported by the facts and outlandish. after losing the popular vote by 3 million votes, he claimed millions of fraudulent votes were cast in the 2016 election saying every single one of them was cast for hillary clinton. he said there were millions of illegal votes cast. and that they were cast by noncitizens. he claims there were millions of these votes. in fact, there have been investigations about 30 votes. nothing on the scale of what we are talking about. people inid that stat

he wanted individual documents appended to the constitution.the right to a jury trial, right to a free press, right to free expression. he believed that should be written out. washington and madison thought it was superfluous and those are the inherent in the constitution. yes sir. >> you may have given the answer to this question just now but virginia policy was more closely aligned with jefferson and madison or with patrick henry. >> jefferson, he closely mentored jefferson a colleague of patrick henry. patrick henry and he had teamed up at the virginia ratifying convention to try to seek or at least get the bill of rights to the constitution so he was a mentor to jefferson but he was a political ally of patrick henry at the ratifying convention and with him one of the most vociferous object there's to the constitution. he came within i think three or four votes at the virginia ratifying convention in defeating the constitution. >> yes sir. >> thank you. in the bill of rights and the compromise that probably took place past that were there an

the constitutional issues at stake at this debate.history will stand in judgment of all of us h whether we have spoken up. ... to withhold security funds that were to be given by the united states to his country in order to pursue and promote his own political agenda, we have reached a new low in the united states. and if this whistle-blower's claim goes into detail, it is only right and appropriate under the statute that this information be shared with the appropriate committees of the united states senate and the aa the whistleblowers claim meas to be released in the appropriate congressional approe congressional committees and evaluated according to the law. not this president, no president can solicit a foreign country to further his own campaign. that is unacceptable under the constitution of the united states which i would remind my colleagues that we have sworn to uphold and defend. mr. president, i would yield the floor.

when the note was no constitution let alone an amendment to the constitution. the colonial side is really deceptive. everything is all to us so we don't realize how far apart this work but jamestown was 180 years before the constitutional convention. my phone is for sinners is closer to the constitutional convention in jamestown was. talking about the founding of colonies was nothing useful. the declaration of independence, an amazing document. i encourage everybody to read it. i've two chapters on this. his severed our political connection with great britain. they do do two things relating out philosophy. this infers that power comes from the people. second the declaration we have a right to rebel which christianity prohibits. those authorities had been into duty. is this christian idea and then connected to the founding. yes to show where the founders relied on that thing. sunup to show that the owners were christian. i would concede that for the sake of argument even though it's not true. fascinating conversation. especially if you want to buy me a glass of

day as part of constitution week. we mark this special celebration by connecting the constitution and citizenship and reflecting on what it means to become a united states citizen. to officially begin the ceremony, i would like to ask everyone to rise. place your right hand over your heart for the singing of the national anthem by musician first class u.s. navy danley kwanka. ♪ o say, can you see by the dawn's early light ♪ ♪ what so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming? ♪ ♪ whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight ♪ ♪ o'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming? ♪ ♪ and the rockets' red glare the bombs bursting in air ♪ ♪ gave proof through the night that our flag was still there ♪ ♪ oh, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave ♪ ♪ o'er the land of the free ♪ ♪ and the home of the brave? ♪ >> thank you. that was beautiful. everyone, please be seated. >> now i have the privilege of calling the country's of naturalization candidates. candidates when you hear your cou

who wants a dead constitution? a lasting constitution. here's what happens when the judges do the living, they dissolve the rights and some go away and some new one appear. if you doubt me, hear the examples. here the examples. the sixth amendment to the constitution says you have the right to a trial when you are accused of a crime. you have the right to confront the witnesses against you in that proceeding. but the supreme court and the living constitution decisions have saithat sometimes you don'a right to a jury. sometimes other things are more important so we are going to give you a judge. you are rights are balanced away. how about the right to confrontation you usually get it, but sometimes it is another press of business so that piece of paper written by a police officer out of court you cannot cross-examine by 20 sufficient evidence to send you away for 20 years or more. one of the most infamous decisions in the united states anin the supreme court, japanese american citizens rounded up and detained. how do you square that away w

lasting constitution. your constitution. not mine. who does living? here's what happened when judges do the living they take all of your rights they go away in some new ones appear. now take the sixth amendment it says you have a right to a trial by jury of your peers if you are accused by a crime and a right to confront the witnesses against you in that proceeding. if the supreme court and living constitution decisions said sometimes you don't have a right to a jury sometimes other things are more important than your rights are balanced away with a confrontation you usually get it but sometimes there is other pressing business and we need to move on so that piece of paper written by a police officer out-of-court, you cannot cross-examine could be sufficient evidence to send you away 20 years or more. your rights are taken away. the most infamous decisions of the united states supreme court japanese american citizens rounded up and detained. how do you square that with the original meaning of due process? that is due process. before your life liberty

the first three words of the constitution. in the process some people think the judges are just like politicians. that we wear capes rather than robes. when we rule is certain way we must like the person that we rule before or dislike the person that we ruled again. and all of that was just so foreign to my experience as a lawyer and a judge. lawyers i admired and judges i admired note that j the law is t politics. and judges are not supposed to be politician. .. a little peek in my life in the court, to how the judge thanks. you can see how your self how different it is than a politician. politicians are elected to do your will, judges are not elected to exercise legal judgment, not will. it's right there in the federalist papers number 78. when i dug into it, i came to learn that we do have a problem, 30% of americans can name the three branches of government. you know her as judge judy. [laughter] i respect judge judy. i like judge judy, but she is not one of my colleagues. [laughter] i was joyfully able to do it with one o

they have raised serious r and great constitutional questions.i must say in the two and half and three years donald trump has been president of the united statesit i think our nation has been rocked by this presidents approach to the highest office in the land.s he has set things and done things with no other president has ever done members of his own clinical party have been uncharacteristically silent when it comes to criticizing this president for his wrong doing. it's a litany of things he's done is long and troubling. there is one thinge, that both political parties need to maintain is the bedrock of this democracy and the bedrock of our commitment to this constitution and that is in this nation of the united states the people governed. ultimately, the people of the united states have the last worv in our elections and in the selections they make their choices, whether you like them or not and i wasn't particularly enamored with the presidential choice of 2016 but i accepted it as the constitutional verdict of the american people. it really

he is the one who has been pushing the envelope of our constitution to the envelope of our constitutioned to preach it, it was perfectly obvious that the reasoning and the motivation for the prorogation, suspending parliament, was bogus and untrue and the reasons given and i'm delighted that the supreme court has stopped this unconstitutional act in its tracks. and what he should not be doing, the prime minister, is pausing and reflecting on the untold damage he's to our institutions by his reckless and relentless desire to achieve brexit on the 31st of october and actually start engaging with dialogue with the house of commons about how we get out of the hole into which we have succeeded into digging ourselves as a country. julian murraylands, qc, how do you react to this unanimous decision?” don't think this is particularly a brexit or not brexit issue, it's a huge constitutional change. i don't wa nt huge constitutional change. i don't want to re—argue the case but i'm astonished that the supreme court has decided that this is not cove red court has decided that this is not covered b

constitution. and of course that includes the president and all members of the administration and all of us in congress. second, the constitution can change to files in our topic today. one prevents an elected official from receiving and i quote any president or to mining key branch of our stay without the consent of congress and today, congress has given this resident of such consent and a second and related clause is accepting any federal or state dollars beyond its presidential salary. a lot of people may not be committed to the monument but our founding fathers have any payment that included in the constitution to have officials from accepting bribes from foreign governments and from part of our own government that maybe trying to at least agree that this is the practiced from the public and members of this congress. third, a government released the d.c. hotel explicitly states that they may not use the premise to violate federal law or vote again for any concern in any way and that concludes t

constitution itself. my people believe that jesus meant what he said we need said swear not at all that you aba and aba. quakers do not swear that we don't mind affirming it. u.s. constitution article two prisons, gives the president the choice to swear or affirm similarly james madison or what would become the second amendment had a religious accommodation to predict religious. he didn't make it into the constitution but you run a backup when militia act was debated. in terms of the election of donald trump, i think there are many factors that go into that. i will begin to try to sort them out. or evaluate them. >> i do think it's very powerful to use religious arguments. andrew: i cite the bible all of the time. one of my favorite passages is in six chapter of matthew which says if this is jesus sermon on the mountain he condemns those who pray public as hypocrites, so we use this line we write to government officials who are doing the national day of preferences. very effective. the rise of christian n

this does not mean that there is an absence of a constitution, or constitutional law.orm of constitutional law as recognised in each of the jurisdictions of the four constituent nations. some of it is written in the form of statutes which have particular constitutional importance, some of it is reflected in fundamental rules of law. i emphasise of law. recognised by both parliament and the courts. there are established and well recognised legal rules, which govern the exercise of public power and which distribute decision making authority between different entities in the state to define the extent of their respective powers. the uk as a constitutional democracy, framed by legal rules and subject to the rule of law. the courts have a constitutional duty, fundamental to the rule of law, in a democratic state to enforce rules of constitutional law in the same way as the courts enforce other laws. and in this court, at paragraph 45, which is on page 138... at the bottom of page 138, paragraph 45, we are told, the crown's administrative powers are now exercised by the exec

is bringing the government and the opposition together to try and change the constitution could it be the start of a few political solution to the 8 year conflict this is inside story. hello and welcome to the program i'm debbie apollo and 80 years of war have devastated syria and estimated half a 1000000 war dead millions more living as refugees and a country in ruins now signs of food agreement to words what happens next. after 2 years of negotiations the united nations says the syrian government and the opposition will sit down to rewrite the constitution the un hopes it's the 1st step towards restarting political talks to end the fighting with syria's largest ethnic minority the kurds is angry at being excluded all that's happening as government forces backed by russian airstrikes continue months of onslaught in italy that's the last remaining rebel held province i strongly believe that the launch of the syrian gnomes and syrian lands constitutional committee can and must be the beginning of the political process out of the treasure the towards a solution in line with the resoluti

nadler is a master of the constitution. congress woman waters is a strategic thinker and has her case before the court's now. the deutsche bank case. with his case on the president's taxes. the form affairs committee which has jurisdiction in terms of this telephone call as well. it is an intelligence matter and is focused in the intelligence committee. are important in the intelligence community specifically, publicly recognize the importance of whistleblowing in pointing out wrongdoing and the importance of protection of whistleblowers. here we are with another example of violations of the constitution on the part of the president. a continuing discussion we have been having with him, i was pleased that the senate voted to takese their decision to $3.6 billion from military construction and spend it on his wall. we will have that vote today and our caucus for the reversal of that decision. continueforward and with our day-to-day work, we had toig rally, we wore black mourn those lost to gun violence. we asked the presiden

but when is it being used and what is the constitutional background, what are theissues constitutionalhis case, it's the potential for leaving the european union on exit date with or without a deal. we know that the intention of parliament in the 2018 withdrawal act clearly in terms of section nine and 13 of that, say that parliament has to be involved in those decisions, in the decision as to the terms upon which we might properly leave the european union, this is not a matterforforeign affairs prerogative or the like, for the crown to enter into such treaties, international agreements as it thinks best. parliament is involved and parliament is involved in part because of this court ‘s decision in miller. picking up on what was done in miller which we affirmed the constitutional principle that the crown has no power to attenuate, modify, principle that the crown has no powerto attenuate, modify, remove individuals rights and that included eu law rights and that therefore, at the very least, there needed to be parliamentary authority for any such action which did impact upon individual

it is a users manual for the interpretation of our constitution and if they stray too far from the constitutional principles. the title of his book is a republic if you can keep it. that phrase is how franklin was said to answer questions of how it was created at the constitutional convention he was trying to convey just how fragile our liberties are and how vigilant the citizens must be to preserve them. is never more than one generation away from extinction. and then to preserve the constitutional freedom for the next generation please welcome justice gorsuch. [applause] >> justice we are honored to have you here on the day of publication of your book. >> i am still happy to be west of the mississippi. [laughter] thank you for having me it's been something i have been looking forward to so thank you for a wonderful tour. >> your book opens with an interesting series of events with washington on your announcement of your nomination to the supreme court and reminds me of the screenplay of an action novel can you share that with us quick. >> to say it was unexpected doesn't begin to capture how it

constitution.ution. the words either, but feeling that congress right now, in many ways they not willing their power whether that is to pass legislation or civil depository account. absolutely, we are same tests on both sides of the parliament of written constitution and of unwritten constitution. ce rtainly and of unwritten constitution. certainly there are benefits to having a written constitution, the words are there for the people to read, peruzzi debate exactly what those words mean and importantly there are some rights, equality, equal citizenship, write celebrity that output in the constitution so that output in the constitution so that they are not up for a boat in the next election. they are too important for that. that being said, it does require, just as we're seeing right now in the uk, a commitment from the people and from those in power to really be faithful to the constitution, whether it is written or not and we're seeing right now in the us a real problem. when you have a leader he

nadler's a master of the constitution. congresswoman waters, a strategic thinker, and has her case before the courts now, the deutsche bank case, along with mr. schiff in that case. chairman neal with his case in the courts on the president's taxes. mr. engel, part of the foreign affairs committee which has jurisdiction in terms of this telephone call, as well. but it is an intelligence matter and it is focused in the intelligence committee. i just want to say again on whistleblowers. whistleblowers are important and intelligence communities specifically have publicly recognized the importance of whistleblowing in pointing out wrongdoing and the importance of protection of whistleblowers. so here we are with another example of violations of the constitution on the part of the president, of continuing discussion that we've been having with him. and i was very pleased that the senate voted to reverse their decision to take $3.6 billion from military construction and spending it on his wall. we will have that vote today in ou

amendment to becoming part of the constitution. and these three documents here really helped tell that story. the first record is the joint resolution proposing amendment to the constitution extending the right of suffrage to women. and when we say the 19th amendment this is the document that we're talking about. it's a joint resolution that passed congress on june 4th of 1919. it doesn't become a constitutional amendment, however, until it's been ratified by three quarters of the states, which was 36 states at that period of time. a requirement that the 19th amendment met when tennessee became the 36th state to ratify the proposed amendment on august 18th of 1920. and then here we have a ceremonial copy of the secretary of state's certification that the 19th amendment had, indeed, met the constitutional requirements for it to become a constitutional amendment. and with that women have secured the right to vote in the united states constitution. so here we have this story of the 19th amendment's journey to becoming part of the cons

is not talking there about the constitution itself. is talking about the standing rules of the senate and the standing rules of the senate strongly imply an actual trial is required. the caveat is that those rules could big north with a majority vote -- could be ignored with a majority vote and could be changed by majority vote in the senate.question for mitch mcconnell is what is his best play politically at that moment? he's got some vulnerable in purple states like cory gardner, susanthe mosi suspect to mitch mcconnell is to guard his majority in the senate so he can remain majority leader. he will be looking to his vulnerable republicans to see what it is they want to do. thorough,tent, how what will that look like? he will be looking at them to understand how it is the vulnerable republicans will be able to make the case to their constituents about how they voted. thank you. i have a couple more questions and then i will open it up to the audience. i wanted to ask, you have done an extraordinary amount of work our intelligence ser

on the final day of the constitutional convention in $787.00 when our constitution was adopted americans gather on the steps of independence hall to wait the news of the government our founders had crafted they asked benjamin franklin what do we have a republic or a monarchy franklin replied a republic if you can keep it our responsibility is to keep it. our public indoors because of the wisdom of our constitution and shined in 3 co-equal branches of government serving as checks and balances on each other the actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution especially when the president says article 2 says i can do whatever i want for the past several months we have been investigating in our committees and litigating in the courts so the house can gather all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise its for article one powers including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity approval of articles of impeachment and this week the president has admitted to asking the president ukraine to take actions which would benefit him politically the actio

is bringing the government and the opposition together to try and change the constitution could it be the start of a political solution to the 8 year conflict this is inside story. hello and welcome to the program pollen 80 years of war have devastated syria an estimated half a 1000000 war dead millions more living as refugees and a country in ruins now signs if an agreement to words what happens next after 2 years of negotiations the united nations says the syrian government and the opposition will sit down to rewrite the constitution the u.n. hopes it's the 1st step towards restarting political talks to end the fighting with syria's largest ethnic minority the kurds is angry at being excluded all that's happening as government forces backed by russian airstrikes continue months of onslaught and that's the last remaining rebel held province. i strongly believe that the launch of the cd unknowns and cd and left constitutional committee can and must be the beginning of the political path out of the treasury the towards a solution in line with the resolution 2254 that meets the legitima

we talked about constitutional law. after all, he was a constitutional law professor. we talked about family. we talked about many things. i found the experience with some men that they have certain discomfort talking to a woman. that was not that way with president clinton. [laughter] [applause] ms. totenberg: i was told after that interview by a number of white house aides that he just fell for you hook, line and , sinker. when we were talking, he said in five minutes, i had just fallen for her hook line and sinker. [laughter] when did you get the word, do i recall that you got a call from bernie nussbaum when you were in the bathtub or something like that, that night? justice ginsburg: [laughter] it was rather late on sunday it was one of the happiest moments of my life. i was absolutely on cloud nine. and then the president said, and tomorrow morning, we will have a little ceremony in the rose garden and we would like you to make a few remarks. so i had to come down from the cloud, sit at my writing table. i liked the remarks. it was the only time in that entire ep

constitution and civics.litical climate becomes more and more ated, it's become more and more difficult to teach students the basics of how our government works. a survey finds that 22% of americans could not name the three branches of government. and the center for american progress says only nine states in the district of columbia have a year-long mandatory civics class for high school students. a new initiative is being launched with online platforms on the constitution. it also has commentary by top scholars. we rely on you and the constitution center in particular to help us navigate some of the issues we've been talking about in the news for the last couple of years, but it is a challenge to discuss civics and want people to be more engaged with the constitution and defacto in the history of this country in a world where we always seems to put a political lens on everything. >> it really is, ali. you've done such a good job as an antidote to that. and i'm so excited about this new online tool, the inter

i lower courts and a liver constitution. then, if i'm looking particularly forlorn that day in the line of starbucks they might tell me a joke. but the one moment that really captured it for me was i was taking planes back and forth to meet all the senators in washington, i didn't know about that i didn't bring enough clothing i had to have a buddy go out and buy me some more shirts. i caught pneumonia on the way back and forth it was so much. i'm feeling sorry for myself and for no good reason, i'm the luckiest guy i know. but we were in the plane and a bit of turbulence and i was seated next to a little girl probably six years old. she didn't know or care who i was but she was scared and she wanted to hold someone's hand and she asked, may i hold your hand. and i said, over course. he reminded me of my girls that age and then the flight smoothed out and she said, would you like to draw? [laughter] and we spent the next 2 and a half hours drawing and coloring. and i think those are my favorite 2 and a half hours the entire

reform show interest and body in the constitution and constitution and practices of the country the letter and spirit of the living interest syrian essential principles that emerge in the geneva process and very affirmed. the commenting may review the 20th constitution including in the context of all the syrian constitutional experiences and amend the current constitution or draft a new constitution because that usually reform adopted by the constitutional committee must be popularly approved and transposed into the national legal order by any means that will be need to be agreed upon. there is a clear balance and i believe workable structure there will be 2 equal cultures from the government and the opposition who proceed in consensus and they exert their prerogative necessary to ensure the calm it is smooth functioning there is a small boarding of 4515 government nominees 15 opposition nominees 15 from civil society to prepare and draft proposals and there is a large body of 15050 government nominees 50 opposition nominees and 50 from the civil society to discuss an adopt proposal

so many say you can't do that it was not a concern but with the constitutional convention so this washe same concern that madison said the problem with the national popularul vote and those that are permanently vested with those big populations so in theory i might like that but in theory it might look good but in theory if it works in practice. it would be a disaster but it was entrenched with the executive branch and the biggest population centers. and also providing those benefits to say it's even better than i thought it would. and by those who want to abolish the electoral college and for those who don't that is certainly part because that it leaves them in place to manipulate that and then to say we want to get with the electoral college so let's come up with the interstate compact and then to do what we want as the founder of the national popular vote a very smart computer scientist in california has lots of winnings and then the run around the constitutional amendment process with the state-by-state waiver process of the united statesre it keeps controlee of elections at the s

our constitutional point.decisions of the court, there is nothing codified, some people have said this week maybe it is time for a written constitution, but when they try to codify things like the fixed—term parliaments act it causes more problems than it solves and we end up with more court cases. it is good news for lawyers, the same lawyers are head—to—head once again, similar justices lawyers are head—to—head once again, similarjustices on the bench, all to play for. i think alison has my guess is as good as mine. it was interesting listening to lord sumption who was a judge not so long ago, and he was saying what the government did in suspending parliament was disgraceful, that they took a hammer and sickle to the political culture, but even so, he said this was a political decision and not a matterfor the said this was a political decision and not a matter for the courts. said this was a political decision and not a matter for the courtsm gets back to this understanding of if we are just talking about wh

plans to get a new constitutional committee together 50 syrians to draw for a new constitution for syria they've been arguing over the lists of who should take part 50 from the government 50 from the opposition and 50 names from the u.n. been arguing over that for months and months and months but this project has taken some 18 months does now look like it's going to take place why that's important is because the authority to set up this committee comes from the u.n. resolution 2254 that also says there should be free and fair elections in syria that hasn't happened since half is but shell assad's father seized power after back in 1970 so i put it to the u.n. special envoy does see he think now with a new constitution he can guarantee proper free and fair elections. what i can guarantee is the verdict of the constitution will be based on the aspirations of the syrian people you know this is syrian sitting together for the 1st time update on the half years of working on their own constitution and as you rightly pointed out the security council has risen and. pursuant to the new constitutio

the word equal is not in the original constitution. many people think the man in the streets thinks the constitution says all men are created equal. that is a noble idea but that is in a different famous document, of course. in thed equal is not original constitution except a provision about what happens of candidates for president get an equal number of electoral votes. the 14th amendment makes the constitution what it is today, a aggrievedich citizens, who lack equality or feel they lack equality, can take their claims to federal court. since the language is raised neutral, it does not mention black or white, in our own time, the courts have used the 14th amendment, as you know, to expand the legal rights of many groups. most recently, medically, the rights of gay men and women and lesbians in this country with regard to the right to marry. that was of course a 14th amendment decision, the gay marriage decision. the first section of the 14th amendment transformed american relationships to our government and the definition of citizens

this is the reality of the constitution.hese things come all these checks and balances work together. it's a political ecosystem. i often use this analogy because a way to school in seattle and the chocolate ecosystem. they drove into our heads. if you go out and to make some change in ecosystem can you get to say that animal is gone, so too bad nothing else is going to change. the whole thing will reorder itself. to the 17th amendment, the 17th amendment created a direct election of use senators fundamentally change our constitutional system. the best example of that is if you go to washington, d.c. now and you walk out at union station toward the united states senate, as a couple of building on your right and in those buildings on lobbyists for the state. i'm sure colorado has some lobbyists. those people are lobbying for state governments because, in 1913 the power of the state governments in washington, d.c. that was in our constitution from the beginning was taken away. it made possible things like the new deal which wa