representatives of the legislative, judicial and executive authorities, because these three phrases contain officials who perform the duties of the chairman of the constitutional court of the supreme court and deputies, judging by representing this institution. these are the chairmen of the regional executive committees and the minsk city committee. this is the chairman of the district executive committee. besides, this is government guidance. led by the prime minister. these are members of the council of ministers , uh, officials representing the deputies, including the district level, who will be drawn up on the basis of the proposal. and uh, the data to be presented by the regional. uh, the councils of the deputy, these are representatives of civil society. well, around this special, a lot of copies were broken. those who break the copy, they refer more to e, in fact. and e desire, on the one hand, to make some kind of pr-code, and on the other hand, does not fulfill those functions that really enterprising people perform. for some reason, such a copy does not fly, from the side of the federation of trade unions in belarus they do not fly. uh, from the side of the white russia republ

of the legislative, judicial and executive branches. after all, these three phrases contain officials who perform the duties of the chairman of the constitutional court of the supreme court by representing this institution. these are the chairmen of the regional executive committees and the minsk city committee. this is the chairman. and he's their executive committee, besides that's the guide government led by the prime minister. these are the members of the council of ministers, uh, the officials representing the deputy corps including the district level, which will be drawn up on the basis of the proposal. and uh, the data to be presented by the regional. uh, the councils of the deputy, these are representatives of civil society. around this special, many spears have been broken. those who break the copy, they refer more to uh, actually static and uh, the desire, on the one hand, to make some kind of pr-code, and on the other hand, does not perform those functions, which are carried out by really enterprising people. for some reason, such copies do not fly from the side of the federation of trade unions in belarus, they do not fly from the side of the association. bel

representatives of the legislative, judicial and executive authorities, because these three phrases contain officials who perform the duties of the chairman of the constitutional court of the supreme court and deputies, judging by representing this institution. these are the chairmen of the regional executive committees and the minsk city committee. this is the chairman regional executive committees. in addition, it is the leadership of the government. led by the prime minister. these are the members of the council of ministers, these are, uh, officials representing the deputy corps. including the districts of the level, which will be compiled on the basis of the proposal, and, uh, the data that will be presented by the regional ones. e councils of deputies. these are representatives of civil society. around this special, many spears have been broken. those who break the copy, they refer more to e, in fact. practicality and uh, desire on the one hand make some kind of pr move, but on the other hand , it does not perform the functions that really enterprising people perform. for some reason , such a copy does not fly from the federation of trade unions in belarus, they do not fly. uh, fr

of the president, he is the representatives of the legislative, judicial and executive branches. after all, these three phrases contain officials who perform the duties of the chairman of the constitutional court of the supreme courtuty judging by representing this institution. these are the chairmen of the regional executive committees and the minsk city committee. this is the chairman of the district executive committees. in addition, it is the leadership of the government. led by the prime minister. these are the members of the council of ministers, these are, uh, officials persons representing the deputy corps , including the district level, which will be drawn up on the basis of the proposal. and uh, the data to be presented by the regional. uh, the councils of the deputy, these are representatives of civil society. uh, a lot of spears have been broken around this special one. who breaks spears, they refer more to e, actually static and e desire, on the one hand, to make some kind of pr move, and on the other hand, does not perform the functions that really enterprising people perform. somehow similar copy do not fly from the side of the federation of trade unions in belarus, they do not fly from the side of

representatives of the legislative, judicial and executive authorities, because these three phrases contain officials, who perform the duties of the president of the constitutional court of the supreme court deputies, judging representing this institution. these are the chairmen of the regional executive committees and the minsk city committee. this is the chairman of the district executive committee. in addition, it is the leadership of the government. led by the prime minister. these are the members of the council of ministers , these are, uh, officials representing the deputies including district level, which will be compiled on the basis of the proposal, and uh, data, which will be represented by the regions. e councils of deputies. these are representatives of civil society. around this special, many spears have been broken. those who break the copy, they refer more to e, in fact. and the desire, on the one hand, to make some kind of pr move, and on the other hand, does not fulfill the functions that truly enterprising people perform. for some reason, such copies do not fly from the federation of trade unions in belarus, they do not fly. uh, from the side of the white russia republic

yes, it's only only judges of the supreme court, judges of the highest courts and constitutional. and of course. i for us it is very important and honorable, but i say prestigiously, we are very responsible. the judges understand this and we will prepare for this very seriously in every sense. you touched upon the topic of the entire belarusian national assembly. how do you rate the role? wns, here in consolidation of the belarusian society. you know , i'm hmm here is a person of interest you can say, because i was a participant in all six, if belarusian people's meetings, but at the first people's meeting. i even acted as minister of reality. here and there he substantiated the role of necessity. uh, all the people's meetings at the first meeting. that's why, in general, i said that it is very important. well, this is a forum. its status in the role of value is very important and in the future it is necessary to give it the legislative status of a permanent legislative status, and i was still minister of justice then. here, and now as the chairman of the supreme court. i'm proud

the supreme court and. now they don't come in quite as idealistic about the supreme court and the constitution. but, you know, of what i had to tell them was, look, the supreme court actually been kind of reactionary historically. and there's a brief where it seems like it's on the side of progress. don't expect that to continue forever. now, they're sort of that, i guess, but i still believe in the future i believe in future generations. i believe that we're getting better as a people. so i believe that the american story is a story of progress and not decline. yeah, and i agree. if you look at poverty and if you look we've made we have made worldwide a lot of progress and. i'm also someone who don't doesn't believe we're on the verge of a civil war. i think that i think that the this will pass i mean, if you look at historic history, we've had a lot of contentious periods, including the civil, obviously, first and foremost. and we've gotten through them. so i think we'll we'll we'll get through it. well, on that positive note kermit has been such an honor to have you at the commonwealth club. i hope you i hope

of the roe decision in the past tense. because last june the united states supreme court took away that constitutional right, a fundamental right, a basic freedom, from the people of america, from the women of america. the court'sction has meant already that many dedicated doctors and nurses now lose their ability to care for their patients. that providers go to jail just for doing their job. and that patients are denied critical care and even fear that they will be punished simply for seeking care. it has meant that a 10-year-old child who was sexually assaulted and became pregnant had to leave her home state and travel to another to get care. the doctor that treated her faced death threats and to take away her medical license. to amanda, a 30 five-year-old woman in texas, it meant in the midst of a miscarriage, she was denied treatment three times, in three days at an emergency room because of that state's abortion ban. only after she developed sepsis, an infection that almost killed her, did the hospital finally admit her. thank god amanda survived and she, with her husband josh is here today. [cheers & applause] i want to thank them both for having the courage to tell their story in a way that will inspire

the matter of enforcement. the responsibility and the authority of the supreme court to interpret the constitution. our very clear local, federal courts were instructed by the supreme court to issue such orders and decrees as might be necessary to achieve admission to public schools without regard to race. and with all deliberate speed, during the past several years, many communities in our southern states have instituted public school plans for gradual progress in enrollment and attendance of schoolchildren of all races in order to bring them into compliance with the law of the land. thus, they to the world that we are a nation in which law, not men, are supreme. i regret to say that this truth, the cornerstone of our liberties, was not observed in this instance. it was my hope that this localized situation would be brought under control by citizens state authorities. if the use of local police powers had been sufficient, our method of leaving the problem in those hands would have been pursued. but when large gatherings of obstructionists made it impossible for the decrees of the court to be carried out, both the law and the national

or somehow burned the coat of arms of the united states, then for many years if not decades there were huge discussions that reached the supreme court and this is the constitutional courtltimately the constitutional the court said that this is freedom of speech. if i burned, we, i am an american , i burned the american flag, then it was me who expressed myself, and if we have freedom of speech, then i have the right to express myself. as i want and i am protected by the constitution of the united states, therefore i am convinced that someone likes it someone does not like it, someone will drink javeline beer, someone will not drink beer because it is someone will eat hot dogs such or some kombucha and someone will not like them, but you know well this is the situation , yes, in general, it seems to me that we need to adjust ourselves somehow to pluralism . someone thinks like this. as i said, and as our opponent said, then everyone should think as we , the opponent, said. and it is simple to prove, if you shut up and listen, and for now, not in the sense of agreement, in the sense of understanding, the opponent's position is still such a widespread practice, it is such

the u.s. supreme court. chris: even if the oregon supre court says this is ok under the oregon ste constitution, i think the question ofent is lingering behind a lot of these challenges. the supreme court's pretty expansive reading of the second amendment suggests that the court is not going to be very receptive to a lot of regulations that previously had been upheld. william: shortell says 114's passage shows that, even in a state with strong gun traditions, people are open to putting greater regulation gun -- on gun owners. but without a go-ahead from the courts, oregonians may never see its effects. for the “pbs newshour,” i'm william brangham in portland, oregon. geoff: today marks 20 years since the space shuttle columbia disintegrated on its way home. the tragedy killed all seven astronauts on board. and it was the beginning of the end for the space shuttle program, ultimately changing how we explore space now. miles o'brien was there that day and has our look. miles: so, where were you when it happened? there are moments in time that trigger that question. >> columbia, houston, comm check. miles: the loss of the

the u.s. supreme cour >> even if the oregon supreme court says this is okay under the oregon state constitution, i think the question of the second amendment is lingering behind a lot of these challenges. the supreme court'sests the court will not be very receptive to a lot of the regulations that previously had been upheld. reporter: shortell says 114's passage shows that, even in a state with strong gun traditions, people are open to putting greater regulation on gun owners. but without a go-ahead from the courts, oregonians may never see its effects. for the "pbs newshour," i'm william brangham in portland, oregon. ♪ geoff: today marks 20 years since the space shuttle columbia disintegrated on its way home. the tragedy killed all seven astronauts on board, and it was the beginning of the end for the space shuttle program, ultimately changing how we ask for space now. miles o'brien was there that day , and he has overlooked. >> where you what happened? there are moments in time the trigger that question. >> columbia-houston, tom's check. >> the loss of the space shuttle columbia is one of those occasions. it happened the first day of february 2003. we remember as if it were yesterday. the junior senator

the supreme court's authority to review israel's basic laws which function as the country's constitution. reforms will also change how supreme court justices are selected, giving theovernment more sy. >> tens of of protesters are here for the seventh week outside of the knesset to show solidarity against the judicial reforms with -- which the new government is trying to bring in. we have many people, a cross-section of society from young told, mothers with babies, teachers, all here because they say this reform plan is undemocratic. we have one protester here. what brings you here? >> democracy. i am scared for my country. i do not have anywhere else. >> what is it that scares you with these reforms? >> i am scared there will be no one who will protect our human rights, the minority rights. i am terrified. i am coming here out of fear. i have no idea where my country is going. i am here because i have nowhere else and i feel like i need to do something. i can't sit and do nothing. >> what would you like the current government to do? they are going through several rounds of votes to bring a new judicial reform. what would you like to see? >> i hope the coalition will be able to communicate. so

court because it's basically unconstitutional. do you think the supreme court is going to uphold it? >> unfortunately the supreme court has become a political vessel as opposed to interpreters of the constitutionho knows. but this is just more stimulus, and if you look at today's inflation report, you have got to ask yourself why is this administration trying to continue to stimulate the demands out of the economy. liz: he used the heroes act for this. that's for soldiers at war. biden cites the pandemic as an emergency. if it was an emergency why did he wait three years to do this emergency bailout. everybody knows it was for student voter turnout in the mid-terms for a campaign promise. >> what does this have to do with covid, by the way. he asserted covid emergency powers to bail out student loans. i will do a quick shout-out to my friend at job creators' network po who brought this case and i think they are going to win. liz: they are saying what biden is doing is totally unfair. >> i keep thinking about a all e people who paid their loan back and all of a sudden there is this gift to other people. for myself who had student loans before. in some way i will be like damn, i wish i had it in

constitutional. >> this is compliant. it is designed to comply with the supreme court's dictates and direction. >> there are parts of it that may be constitutional, but, overall, i think this is going to get challenged and defeated in the courts. liz: rick face legal challenges. he believes it unfairly targets law-abiding gun owners, instead of criminals. >> it is targeting a group of people who own firearms that are not the problem, and claiming that it is the problem. liz: he expects a federal judge will overturn california's ban on assault rifles. this will almost certainly be challenged in court. litigation could take years. in the newsroom, liz kreutz, abc 7 news. ama: it's interesting about these sensitive areas lawmakers want to create where guns would be banned. how would it work if someone wanted a gun at one of those sites? liz: let's say a known area didn't want to allow firearms. they would -- tsay a did want to allow firearms. they would have to post signs. there would have to be a certain size for the sign. dan: a mass shooting in washington. one person is dead and three others injured during the morning commute. a man followed someone off a metro bus, shooting them in the leg. a second person was shot in the le

the supreme court. that's not one of the hard questions. recite the constitution from memory that might be a challenge. what is a woman? she is on the supreme court just had a federal judge in a hearing in the congress who did not know what was in the constitution. but shut up, she was a first. vote yes! joe biden apparently is trying to convince us that not only are his nominees diverse, they are firsts. he himself is diverse. watch this. >> i want to acknowledge someone else who means a great deal to our family. rabbi michael from delaware. that's where i received my education. i went to shoal more than many of you did. they think i am kidding. we have a large puerto rico population in delaware. i was raised in the puerto rico community at home. i got my education for real in a black church. that's not hyperbole. that's a fact. >> tucker: [laughing]. joe biden spent his young years and hitting the torah that was part of the black church. you may look at joe biden and say you are incompetent. you have dementia. you can barely walk. you mistake your sister for your wife. you can't run the most powerful country in the world. shut up! i studied in

supreme court decisions with a simple majority $61.00 out of $120.00 votes. the 2nd proposal takes away the supreme court's authority to review israel's basic laws which functions as the country's constitution reforms will also change house supreme court justices all selected and giving the government far more sway on selecting judges for the badge. so hurricane has more from the process in west jerusalem. 10000 for the 7 week outside of the show. it's on the against the control room which mon you, because trying to bring in and we have many people across section 5 from the young to be all the babies. teachers, people from the i see that are all here because they say that they were full time on across the can we have one protest say hey what, what, what, what brings you here for them? i guess i'm like on the i don't have any way. why is it your, what is it that you with her phone will be no one will protect our human that. i don't know. what do you mean? like i'm i'm coming out of feel i have no idea. oh, well my country is going and i'm, you know, i feel like i need to do something i can do nothing. i'm what would you like the current government to do there? obviously, going through severa

the parliament - this is the constitutional court, otherwise in case of some extraordinary situations. this is how we remember in 2004-5, so what role for example, the supreme court that is, there must be institutions that can stabilize the situation, because god forbid something would happen there. well, i wanted to ask mr. yaroslav now another story about poltava. look , i told you, mr. yaroslavovych, about this case. i agree and that is what we are saying that the new majority should be an appropriate pact on the main conceptual conditions for achieving victory. by the way, how should one recognize and what is victory for ukraine? each speaker did not say what he thought was the doctrine, how do we achieve it and what we consider victory, we can talk about it separately and accordingly on this factor, if we form such a majority, accordingly, it is our task with you, yaroslav, to increase the weight of the verkhovna rada and to influence these processes on the condition that we lend a helping hand to the state and the president and so on . that is, it should be cooperation and it will work like this. this is an extremely important history of its time. yushchenk

of the supreme council in accordance with the constitution, if a deputy receives a decision of a higher anti-corruption court , such a deputy is automatically deprived of his mandate if he pleads guilty, this means no more courtsions is not necessary, which means that he should automatically be deprived of it, therefore the verkhovna rada adopted a resolution in accordance with the current constitution collective agreements according to european by rules, the parliament as a whole adopted the government draft of the law that will contribute to the qualitative development of the field of collection

of the supreme council . according to the constitution, if a deputy receives a decision of a higher anti-corruption court, such a deputy is automatically deprived of his mandate , if he pleaded guilty, this means that no more court decisions are needed, and this means that he should automatically be deprived of that, the verkhovna rada adopted a resolution in accordance with the current constitution on collective agreements according to european rules, the parliament as a whole adopted the government draft law that will contribute to the qualitative development of the sphere of collective contractual regulation of labor relations, documents from the package of european integration and is part of our obligations under the association agreement this draft law was the result of a serious compromise between both trade unions and employers, one of the main reasons for achieving this compromise was that the verkhovna rada will retain the right for trade unions to receive 0:3, and primary interest-bearing organizations will receive 0.3% of wages for employee rehabilitation before the law does not contradict ukraine's international legal obligations in the field of european integration and the law of the ukrainian union

the supreme court and the u.s. constitution who were tightly served on the presidential commission on the supreme court. previously, she served for ten years as the president ofthe american constitution society. professor fredrickson used to be a from yale and her j.d. from columbia law school. mark paoletta is a partner at schaerr mirabel jaffe llp, representing clients and hearings and investigations. before entering private practice, mr. paoletta served as general counsel for the office of management and budget under the trump administration. he has counseled the former president mike prince. he received a spy -- [inaudible] donald sherman is a senior vice president, chief counselor of citizen responsibility and ethics in washington, or crew. he has a distinguished resume across the federal government, including time working in the white house, in both the house and the senate, and in federal agencies. mr. sherman earned his undergraduate and law degree from georgetown university. we welcome our distinguished witnesses. we thank them for participating today. i will begin by swearing in our witnesses. i ask that you please rise and raise your right hand. do

court decisions with a simple majority. that's just 61 out of 120 votes. the 2nd proposal takes away the supreme court. so authority to review israel's basic laws which functions as a country's constitution. forms also change has supreme court justices selected, giving the government far more sway on selecting judges for the bench. going to fax everyone. it doesn't make a difference if there's, there's no way to do the government to make whatever policies it wants without limitations. it could be policies against going against just doesn't make a difference to everyone to be so hi. art has more from the protests in west jerusalem. 10007 wing outside of the show on the, against the new cars trying to bring in and we have many people across section by the have from the young to the old mothers. the babies, teachers, people from the i see that are all have because they say that this recall time on them across the can we have one protest say hey what, what, what, what brings you here for them? i guess on my kindly i don't have any way. why is it your skin? what does it do with her will be no one will protect our human rights and we know what you mean. like i'm i'm coming out of i have no idea. oh, well my country is going and i

court decisions with a simple majority, that's just $61.00 out of $120.00 votes. the 2nd proposal takes away the supreme court's authority to review israel's basic laws which functions as the country's constitution. their forms will also change how supreme court justices selected, giving the government far more sway on selecting judges for the bench. so congress has more from the purchased in west jerusalem. tens of thousands have for the 7 wing outside of the show on the, against the new cars and trying to bring in. and we have many people across section by from the young to be old mother. the babies teaches people for not like the fact that are all here because they say that this recall time on the across the can we have one protest say, hey, why, what, what, what brings you here? put a mark, gets on my kindly, i don't have any way. why is it your, what is it that you with her phone, will be no one will protect our human rights and we know what you mean. like i'm side, i'm coming out of. i have no idea. oh, well my country is going and you cuz i have no i have, i feel like i need to do something. i can do nothing. i'm what would you like the current government to do there? obviously going through several rounds of both to bring in this new

constitutional. >> this is compliant. it is designed to comply with the supreme court dictates and direction. >> there are parts of it that may be constitutional but overall i think this is going to get challenged and defeated in the courts. director for the california rifle and pistol association. he says the bill will face legal challenges. he also believes it unfairly targets law-abiding gun owners instead of criminals. >> it is targeting a group of people who own firearms who are not the problem and claiming it is the problem. >> governor newsom also said he expects a federal judge will overturn california's assault weapons ban. this could happen in the coming weeks. the california way for and pistol association say they are expecting this. they point out if it does happen it would likely be challenged in court. litigation that could take years. ways you can help people impacted by the half moon bay shooting. good abc7news/take action. >> still cold and the rain is coming back. >> sandhya patel is here with the latest. >> the temperatures are going to come up overnight and in the afternoon. we're going to see the numbers drop as the rain moves in. let's take a look at the reservoir levels. some of the major reservoir

court decisions with a simple majority. that's just 61 out of 120 votes. the 2nd proposal takes away the supreme court. so authority to review israel's basic laws which function as the countries constitution. the reforms will also change how supreme court justices is selected, giving the government far more sway on selecting judges for the bench. it's going to affect everyone, it doesn't make a difference if there is no. are you the government to make? what recalls is it once without and limitations? it also is against against the logistical legally. so everyone will be. meanwhile, un security council has issued a full statement expressing deep concern and dismay with israel's announcement last week of the expansion of illegal supplements in the occupied west bank. it says such settlement impeded peace. a security council held a special meeting on monday to discuss the issue of the tensions continue to escalate between israelis and palestinians. benjamin netanyahu is office as described, the statement as one sided, and criticized the united states for supporting it. she were tansy as more from the united nations over the weekend when one source called frantic negotiations took place between a raft of us diplomats and the israelis and t

court decisions with a simple majority as to $61.00 out of a 120 votes. the 2nd proposal takes away the supreme court's authority to review as rails basic laws which functions as the country's constitution reforms will also change how supreme court justices selected, giving the government fall most way on, selecting judges for the bench. so carrots has more from the protest in west jewish oh, thousands of protest this all have for the 7 wing outside of the country to show solidarity against the judicial reform, which the new is randy cod government is trying to bring in and we have many people across section of side to hear from the young to the old mother that baby teaches people from the i see that are all here because they say that they were full time on the requests. again, we have one protest say, hey, why, what, what, what brings you here? well, this protest, i'm scared from my country. i don't have any way. and why is that your scale? what is it that gets you with these reform? i'm scared to be no one who will perfect our human rights, then we know it is human. like i'm terrified. i'm coming out of feel. i have no idea. well, my country is going and i'm here because i have no, i feel like i need to do something i can see

the supreme court and she i mean, that's not one of the hard questions, right? like recite the constitution from memory. that might be a challenge. what's a woman? and she's on the supreme court. but whether she's not alone, we just had a federal judge. >> we think lindsey graham voted for in a hearing in the congress who didn't know what was in the constitution. but shut up. she was a first. we're going to judge that book by its cover and vote yes. >> now, joe biden apparently is trying to convince us that not only are his nominees diverse, they're firsts. he himself is diverse. watch this. >> i also want to acknowledge someone else who means a great deal to our family. rabbi michael beals, the congregation beth shalom in wilmington, delaware. that's where i received my education. i probably went to show more than many of you did you all think i'm kidding? we have a very in relative terms, large puerto rican population in delaware. i was sort of raised in the puerto community at home. >> i got my education for real in the black church. that's how i firmly in fact, joe biden spent his young years in a yeshiva. >> i had ear locks at the time hitting the torah and the talmud. >

constitution -- regardless of how the court interprets the constitution. nobody in the past -- of course the state legislature could pass an unconstitutional state law. from the oral arguments, we do not know for sure what the u.s. supreme court do. there may be some compromise. but now they are trying to go back, get the supreme court to knock down the decision that was made. republican leadership had been admitting that these districts were partisan. it was 10-3. they said in an even state, why is it 10-3? they clearly were trying to do this through fair methods. what happened and even a bad year for democrats in north carolina? -- what happened in even a bad year for democrats in north carolina? an everyday person would say we need an independent redistricting commission. when democrats get the court back -- you heard it here. elena: democrats have played a huge role in redistricting in north carolina. you go back to the 1990's. kevin was a democratic legislature -- there was a democratic legislature. gov. cooper: we are so much more technologically diabolical today with redistricting. we do not go house by house and being able to gerrymander. it was bad then. it has been bad throughout. we are better off with an independe

of california. >> proposition eight and same-sex marriage in the united states, it was overturned in supreme court. when it was ruled unconstitutional, it was struck down. >> it is still in our constitution, evaporated when the supreme court struck it down but it is still there. >> something brought to the attention of many after the overturning of roe v. wade, and the opinion clarence thomas wrote after it suggesting those cases should be visited. >> those opinions sugge same-sex marriage case, it was a clear signal that this area of the law is far from settled. reporter: the mm into a repeal prop -- amendment to repeal prop 8 would have to pass with two thirds of the legislator. they say the legislation has bipartisan support. not everyone is in favor of repealing opposition 8. >> for billions of people around the world, marriage is a sacred bond created by god. >> he has confidence the amendment will prevail. >> there are still some people in san francisco who do not support lgbtq equality. that is very set in this day and age. ultimately, i am confident a large majority get it, and want lgbt q people to be treated equally. >> chances are you paid extra and hidden fees and now state lawmakers are trying to better prote

the supreme court. the supreme court but in gsa versus nixon cited with the presidential records and materials preservation act. it's a constitutional act. he's actually a class of one. he's not a bill of -- yes you can do this. the country has a compelling interest in controlling these records. that laid the basis for rethinking presidential records. congress said this is crazy, why do we let this happen? this is when people -- watergate, the country began to investigate misdeeds by the intelligence community. of course, there had been watergate and vietnam, i should mention vietnam. congress then -- i will let my colleagues continue the story -- passed at the presidential records act. it was signed by jimmy carter. the process begins earlier. it's a way of codifying the lessons learned in the nixon story to cover all future presidents, starting with whoever was elected in 1980. jimmy carter signs of a lot. he does not have a retroactive effect. jimmy carter thought it would govern him because he expected to win the election. but he doesn't. ronald reagan, the very first president, governed by the presidential records act. >> first, i want to speak into the mic

the supreme court and the supreme court in gsa versus nixon sided with presidential records amateurs preservation act and said it's a constitutional actor residence very special. he's actually a class ofone. it's not a bill of a teenager she can do this. country has a compelling interest in controlling these records. so that laid the basis for rethinking presidential records because congress vincent this is crazy. why did we let this happen? this is a time when people be, the country bitter watergate, the country began to investigate misdeeds by the intelligence community and, of course, there had been watergate and vietnam i mean, i should've mentioned vietnam. answer congressman, and i level up my colleagues continue the story, past the presidential records act. it was fun but jimmy carter but the process begins earlier. and it's a way of codifying the lessons learned in the nixon story to cover all future presidents, starting with whoever was elected in 1980. jimmy carter signed the law. it doesn't have retroactive effect. jimmy carter thought it would come because he expected to win the 1980 election but it doesn't. ronald reagan is a very first president governed by the president

of the constitution trumps those unconstitutional statutes. and i've studied the supreme court very carefully, and i believe we want that to go to the supreme court so that we have precedent saying that this is how you run the show. while i'm pushing congress in parallel to repeal civil service protections. while putting a pause on most bureaucratic protections. and of the agencies that we keep, we will take the majority of them and spread them out across the country. get them out of washington dc. make them more accountable to the people they are supposed to serve. that is probably why you are applauding. thank you for that. but i have a more tactical reason. i think that the government will work better if they are physically closer to the people they serve. but also, it's a tactic because even the ones that they would say you can't fire, we are knocking to do a remote work environment, they are so stuck in the swamp that they won't leave, you will -- you won't have to pay severance payments. this is first six months stuff. i don't think you can wait much longer. because they will swallow you. i'm worried that donald trump wanted to drain the sw

supreme court. the bill would also give power to override the supreme court ruling with a simple majority, which critics say threatens the countries constitution. let's hear now from some ofn: toda . ~ demonstrating today. we came here toda to demonstrating today. we came here today to join — demonstrating today. we came here today to join in _ demonstrating today. we came here today to join in the _ demonstrating today. we came here today to join in the demonstration i today to join in the demonstration in the hope of saving the israeli democracy from draconian measures that would curtail each and every one of our basic human rights and civil rights. one of our basic human rights and civil rights-— one of our basic human rights and civil riahts. �* ,, . ., , civil rights. translation: and very worried. civil rights. translation: and very worried- i'm — civil rights. translation: and very worried. i'm not— civil rights. translation: and very worried. i'm not sure _ civil rights. translation: and very worried. i'm not sure the _ civil rights. translation: and very worried. i'm not sure the changes i worried. i'm not sure the changes presented — worried. i'm not sure the ch

constitution has been interpreted so many different ways and is ever expanding. you trained in the development of fourth amendment law to the courts, and i mean the supreme court'soncern about the police and the ability of the police to conduct investigations and police work. i do not know, when i look at the fourth amendment i do not see the word police there. that is just me. prof. schwartz: it is not there. prof. burkhalter: you kind of look at terry v. ohio and the occurrences with detective as a watershed moment. tell us a bit about that. why do see that as a watershed moment and tell us about the case? prof. burkhalter: -- prof. schwartz: sure, you are right. i do not see the word police in the fourth amendment either and the protection against unreasonable search and seizures does seem focused on the subject of those searches, the victims of that overreach, but the supreme court as repeatedly interpreted the fourth amendment not in terms of what we the people are entitled to in terms of the sanctity of our homes and possessions and our bodies but in terms of what the police are authorized to do in light of their need to prevent and control crime. and that

constitutional. even some members of the president's ruling coalition have questioned the constitutionality of the reform, so it would go to the supreme court. i'm not going to try to guess what the mexican supreme courtde. it is possible they would try to defer action. note -- no changes can take place within 90 days of the electoral process which starts in september. go back 90 days, it is about june, so the process is fairly short. in terms of some of the actions, not only have there been a number of attempts to reform or reduce its budget and change the way it works, there have also been other efforts to reduce the free flow of conversation and debate in mexico. attacks on the press, pressure on think tanks in mexico, as well as efforts to reduce the independence of other agencies, other parts of the government. i think if you combine all that this proposed reform, you see the possibility of a situation in which lot of mexicavoters are disenfranchised because they cannot run enough polling places, given the reductions in budget and personnel. sort of combine the actual -- the efforts to make it harder for the institution to do its job with efforts to suppress democratic conversation. >> thank you