john, let's have a look at this ruling from the constitutional court.t kind of an impact that have on the german government's ability to act in this crisis? >> i do not think it will have any influence at all. because if you look at the constitution of parliament, it is made up of the fdp, chancellor merkel's on conservatives, the conservative party in bavaria, the green party, the social democrat -- all those parties are fundamentally in agreement with a large majority at the moment that it is sensible to continue making these payments to greece. that could change when the permanent stability fund, the fire wall, if you like, for the euro is in place. for the moment, they all think there is no reasonable sensible alternative to that. so that although the fast tracking that merkel wanted will not be happening, the parliament will be called into the constitutional court ruled that that was just as easy and could be done just as quickly. >> but there could be some problems, because in this vote yesterday, angela merkel suffered rebellion from within her s

california decided we're going to bring it back to the place that is required by the federal constitution, and the court said in a state like california, where the people retain the ultimate power of the government -- >> of course, generally, you can amend the constitution. that's true. it depends on the subject and what you're amending. i think that's what judge hawkins was talking about earlier. what is it that you are amending, and can you amend that? nobody had suggested you can't amend the california constitution no matter how the court had interpreted it, as a general rule. the question is, can you amend something -- i'm not suggesting it's a fundamental right for purposes of this discussion, but is there a valid reason to amend this constitution under the standard that we follow? >> well, your honor, i believe that the point of crawford is that the people are free, essentially, to disagree and reverse -- >> well, not anything, as judge hawkins is pointing out. could you say, we're going to have segregated education? we couldn't say yes to that. >> no, your honor, but that's because the federal co

court legislates. he replied, i think it's clear under the constitution that the legislative power is not vested in the supreme court. it is vested in the congress. and i feel the major instrument for change of laws in this country is the congress of the united states. the business of the congress is that of changing the law. afterward, a reporter asked white to define the constitutional role of the court. his reply was chilly. to decide cases. a bystander later recalled the statement was both a brushoff and a statement of philosophy. you could tell by the way he said it that it carried a fundamental belief for him. byron white cleaves to the view he had at the threshold of his career, which spanned 31 years, one of the longest in the history of the court. he served with 20 justices, including three chief justices. during his career, he wrote more than 1300 opinions, 495 opinions of the court, 249 concurring opinions, and 572 dissents. in posing as they are, numbers are hardly the measure of his contribution to the operation of the institution. at white's memorial service, the chief justice rehnquist k

of the supremes court of russia again it builds up to two laws party he's appealing to the constitutional court not the supreme court again but the it's you know it's a legal procedure it's a little it's a difficult legal procedure well they're trying to make life after you're in a position of this is not ok but i wasn't there one of the actions after the next elections and i can't but the support the lections life last five years and i again can't participate elections because minister of justice is still trying to break this is one of european court insuperable. it's a bad signal that means that russian state russian government says he'll. repressively think in the both political opposition well iraq received iraq receives always sort of it's not just rhetoric decision it's a little this is a bit of fighting against a position as well it was the last five years what do they tell you you do have contacts with with people behind the kremlin walls of course yes they do they say started to do they explain their decision it's interesting no one takes the responsibility here no one everyone says th

the french constitutional court ruled the original law was unconstitutional because it infringed on freedom of expression. now to japan, where years since the tsunami and earthquake took place, new information about the disaster. >> it was revealed the danger posed by the radiation leak at the nuclear power plant was so serious officials considered evacuating tokyo. the news comes for the first time since we have been allowed back on the site. >> getting ready to face the radiation at fukushima. suits and masks, protection against contamination. we were being taken to the power station. the first group of foreign journalists allowed in, through the exclusion zone, 12 miles of overgrown fields, abandoned homes, into the heart of the nuclear disaster, the source of fear for the japanese people for almost a year now. this is where the fight back is being coordinated, the control room at a power station. minute by minute they are monitoring the reactors. and that's what we have in mind is to prevent the release of radioactive gases -- >> what we have in mind is to prevent the release of radioac

the constitutional court ruled the president could stand for a third term. >> street protests in cynical are growing violent. west africa's most stable democracy is suddenly on edge. this is in the capital, dakar. protesters' demand the president stepped down after serving a maximum two terms in office. the 85-year-old is using a constitutional loophole to run for a third term. his critics are calling it a constitutional coup. >> everybody knows he does not have the right to a third term, not because the council delegates it. we are even more determined to see the law is respected in our country. the law is the constitution. >> the demonstrations have been fuelled by high unemployment and science of growing authoritarianism. -- signs of growing authoritarianism. his opponent had his eyes on the presidency, but was disqualified from running by five constitutional judges. for now, the protests are relatively small, but it is not clear how much momentum they will game. the united states and united nations sound were read. some are talking of the sub- saharan version of the arab spring. bbc

. >> that here in germany, the country's constitutional court has partially struck down a law giving authorities access to people's private data. the high court ruled that in the future, telecom companies will only be allowed to pass on consumer passwords and thin coats -- pin codes to the police in exceptional cases. germany's government has until summer next year to amend the laws. >> israeli police have stormed jerusalem's dome of the rock holy site after violence flared on friday. an israeli police spokesman said that palestinian youths started throwing stones at police after friday prayers. security forces broke up the protests with stun grenades and arrested four palestinians. 11 police officers were also injured. the site, which arabs call the noble sanctuary, is sacred to both islam and judaism and has arab-israeli conflict. gauze that is a place of desperate for the materials needed to run a society. on friday, the international red cross delivered 150,000 gallons of diesel to field hospitals. the fuel will last for only 10 days. emergency supplies like these are keeping gaz

the constitutional court ruled the president could stand for a third term. >> street protests in cynical are growing violent. west africa's most stable democracy is suddenly on edge. this is in the capital, dakar. protesters' demand the president stepped down after serving a maximum two terms in office. the 85-year-old is using a constitutional loophole to run for a third term. his critics are calling it a constitutional coup. >> everybody knows he does not have the right to a third term, not because the council delegates it. we are even more determined to see the law is respected in our country. the law is the constitution. >> the demonstrations have been fuelled by high unemployment and science of growing authoritarianism. -- signs of growing authoritarianism. his opponent had his eyes on the presidency, but was disqualified from running by five constitutional judges. for now, the protests are relatively small, but it is not clear how much momentum they will game. the united states and united nations sound were read. some are talking of the sub- saharan version of the arab spring. bbc

the constitution you mentioned the supreme court the constitution and and and the. opponents of gay marriage. it's against religion as a reason a lot of people do it's not usually the way i talk about it but ok well necking i do have a religion i'm roman catholic i can if you want well i'm not part of that but i'm just saying you know the idea that children need a mom and a dad chris is really the abraham marriage a sister and a kid with his has he has a right to do that. that's my question i mean you know david had multiple wives as well and what is the question you asked me if i believe in sister marriage because abraham didn't know it well you know if it's biblical it's i think i think you'd probably have to come some debate that was someone who had only a biblical foundation for their view i agree ok and clearly you're not just taking that point. don't you think that well actually i think we're pretty much out of time here. very much appreciate your coming by having a rational conversation but i appreciate your inviting me really thank you thank you so much. the

you know you call for an amendment to the supreme court or to the constitution to to basically say ok the supreme court doesn't you know they can they can no longer make these lewis powell like rulings because we're going to amend the constitution. how do we get to their. well we get there like americans have always gotten there so this isn't. i do propose as many others do this from great groups out there free speech for people move to amend public citizen many common cause people the american way a lot of americans are coming together to say this is not about tinkering this is not about a little legislative fix we are facing a fundamental structural problem that's been created by the corporate rights doctrine we need to overturn that doctrine with a fundamental structural reform which is a constitutional amendment and so it's no different it's no more difficult than it was in the progressive era when they passed and ratified four constitutional amendments one wasn't so smart that prohibition but the other three were really good and one things we take for granted now women get to vot

the voters amended the constitution, the state constitution to incorporate the measure after california supreme court rejected an on-state constitutional grounds, why? because it demeaned gay people, treated them as second class citizens, relegated them to inferior status. the voters, the campaign didn't say to the voters gee the court got that wrong. they said we have to put them in inferior status. if we don't -- we need children and everybody else to recognize that same-sex couples are different, they're not the same as opposite sex couples and they're not okay. and it portrayed opposite sex couples as traditional and ideal and it portrayed gay couples as a lifestyle that should be kind of kept in private, and the campaign leaders after the campaign wrote an article in which they said they deliberately tapped into voters' limited tolerance for gay people. the campaign went about portraying gay people -- >> i give you another 30 seconds. you're over, you voluntarily gave up some time. >> let me just say your honor close with this. proponents say in order to affirm the district court this court must

court over time anyway. and this is really important because this constitutional fight, this transformation of the court, is critically important for the presidency and the political history of the country. because it basically validates the notion that the government can adopt major social policy, like social security, like the wagner act, that fundamentally transforms the nation, and the supreme court is not now going to step in and stand in the way. so this really -- without, this you might, you know -- who knows how different the course of american history would have been. you might not have had some of the fundamental reforms of the new deal. and of later years. and ultimately, too, this new stance upon the court also allows latitude constitutionally for the civil rights laws of the 1960s. without this constitutional revolution, under old supreme court doctrines, the civil rights act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965 might well have been struck down by the court. so roosevelt loses the battle over the court, takes a big political bruising, but wins the war over the court. and we have this huge

every so often, we get a court ruling that reaffirms our faith in the judicial system and in our constitution. back with a supreme court struck down the abomination amendment out of colorado that would have made gay people and lgbt people second-class citizens. today, to have federal appeals court to recognize the basic humanity of lgbt people everywhere, it is a time for celebration and a time for all of us come together as a community. we have to get back to work because the fight is not done and we have to pass through to the very end where we have marriage equality for every single person in this country. [applause] >> i wanted to mention a supervisor david campos. he can't be here because he is ill. he wanted to send his greetings and he will be thrilled about this decision. it reminds me how wonderful it is to live in san francisco. i love san francisco, it is a great city. this is a civil rights victory but it is also a human rights victory. we have a right, just like everyone else, to be married, divorced, to walk down the middle of oklahoma openly queer in the middle of the day and n

court, they will decide by 10:00 a.m. whether or not california's gay marriage banned is constitutional. t is reviewing a 2010 ruling. and they struck down prop 8. now, whenever the way the ruling goes, they will be appealed t. they were ruled if they stepped down from the case because he is gay and in a long- term relationship. >> all right. now, check on the status of the storm. this is such afros straighting -- this is such a straight forward progress of the game. a drain in your neck of the wood and the area of the light green in the north bay. you're telling me that is vergas. that will be before hitting the land mass. but all of you, i have been listening to you. that's where we are seeing plenty of rainfall for you right now. also on twitter and on facebook, telling me that you have the gusty winds that are wrapping up now. we do have the wind advisory in most of effect for the pay area. there's your morning compute had. now, please give yourself ample apt of time tomorrow. leaving us with just the scattered showers afternoon. that's as they become that morning commute. over an inc

the san francisco federal appeals court will decide by ten whether california's gay marriage ban is constitutional. the court is reviewing a federal judge's 2010 rule that struck down proposition 8. whichever way the ruling goes the case will likely be appealed again. >>> two more attacks on william at stanford. police say about 1:45 yesterday morning a woman was walking home on campus when a man tackled her. 15 minutes later police say a man went into a woman's unlocked room and climbed into bed with her. she woke up when he tried to take her clothes off. she managed to get out of the room. police haven't said if they think the attacks are related. >>> banana sam is home. you remember the squirrel monday development he will turn to the exhibit on on a's he was found missing from his cage in december. visitors can bring him a special valentine and get a dollar off new admission all weekend long. >> coming up it's not your mange. they are everywhere. what has people all over the bay area looking up to the sky. >> and the bay area's tom brady didn't have a good game yesterday. tonight what his super

today we got the ruling from the circuit court, they found it do violate the constitution. the court found that proposition 8 served no purpose and had no effect other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in california. joining us now for an exclusive interview is one of those famous lawyers, former solicitor general ted olsen, congratulatio congratulations, thanks for your type, nice to see you. >> my measure to be here, thank you, rachel. >> i'm no expert on these matters compared to you, the ruling seems to me narrowly construed to apply to the situation in california, not try to assert a right to marriage equality more broadly. is that the way that you see it and did you expect it to come out that way? >> i think it's a very broad decision. let me explain that. in the first place the court said that california was somewhat unique in that proposition 8 took away the rights of sex persons to gmarr d married. the right exists in other states, this precedent stands for the proposition once you grant those rights, people have the right to get marri

am not the supreme court, but the supreme court ruled, and justice scalia wrote, as long as the law is neutral unequally applied to everybody, it is constitutional. the court has made rulings that if -- more recent rulings that give the catholic church's some hope that it might prevail. but this has been the law for over 10 years, in the federal government, in 28 states. but it comes up because of the affordable care act, what has to be offered as a basic service for women. >> charles krauthammer, md, is the obama administration's mandate medically sound? >> they make it into a medical issue. it is not a medical issue. the idea that women are denied contraceptives is preposterous. it is not illegal to get birth control. are you going to force the catholic church to distribute contraceptives free of charge because the federal government says so rather than exempted them on the ground that it offends their doctrines? i think that is a clear open- and-shut case. infringement of the federal government on the free exercise of religion. >> colby, you regularly grapple with matters of conscience and your columns. the cardinal archbishop of washington s

fitzgerald, minority leader miller, minority leader barca, members of the wisconsin supreme court, constitutional officers, tribal leaders, members of the cabinet, distinguished guests, members of the legislature, my wife and our family, tonette walker and our family. and most importantly, fellow citizens of the great state of wisconsin. it is an honor to appear before you tonight. next to my wife is the agitent general of wisconsin, major general don dunbar. i want to thank him and the more than 10,000 strong members of the wisconsin national guard. and tonight with him are the members of the 724th engineer battalion. stand up, gentlemen. [ applause ] >> i first spoke with them more than a year ago when they were deployed in iraq. i greeted them in the cold when they returned home, and i saw many of them again this summer, as they responded to the massive damage caused by storms in northwestern, wisconsin. their dedication to their country, to the state and yes, to their communities is a prime example of what we all know as the spirit of wisconsin. we thank them and all of the other men and wome