former week, a panel of clerks to supreme court justice nominee brett kavanaugh discussed working with him on the dz circuit court of appeals. p.m.ve a hearing at 12:00 eastern on c-span. >> 1973 roe versus wade decision inlikely to be discussed confirmation hearings for supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. we will show you an episode of roe v. wade from c-span's landmark cases series. first david savage on the judge kavanaugh nomination. wrote justiceu kennedy's opinion had affirmed the right to an abortion "probably for all time." how does that statement hold up today? 1982,t i remember about when they decided the case in late june, it was the

the court of appeal ruling. her reaction to the court of appeal rulinglj been giving her reaction to the court of appeal ruling. i was gobsmacked. i could not believe the phone call i received. it is beyond belief. i am disgusted and devastated. i cannot understand how someone can devastated. i cannot understand how someone can be charged with gross negligence, manslaughter, struck off the register by the general medical council and then be reinstated. she has been in front of nine high court judges. what are the other three saying, that the other six did not do theirjobs right? it makes a mockery of the justice system. i will tell you what, it sets a precedent for the doctors to be able to do whatever they want. you might as give them a green card and say, go on. it she did not make one mistake, two mistakes or three m ista kes mistake, two mistakes or three mistakes can she made 21 mistakes that day. all human errors except the one which was a system error. people keep forgetting that. i cannot believe that no

the court of appeal said an earlier decision to suspend her for a year should stand. olutely gobsmacked. i could not believe the phone call i received. it's just beyond belief. i'm disgusted, i'm devastated. i just cannot understand how someone can be charged with gross negligence manslaughter, struck off the register by the general medical council, and then be reinstated. she's now been in front of nine high courtjudges. what are those otherjudges saying, that the other six didn't do theirjobs right? i think it is a mockery of the justice system. i tell you what, i also think it is a precedent to the doctors to be able to do whatever they want. might as well give them a green card and say, go on. she did not make one mistake, two mistakes or three mistakes — she made 21 mistakes that day. there were all human errors, except one, which was a system error. people keep forgetting that. ijust cannot believe that no one is interested in... the nhs — we are the people who had to go to these hospitals. everybody knows about this case, it is a high profile case. everyone will

in a statement, the general medical council said it fully accepted the court of appeal judgment. he court of appealjudgment. it said as a regulator responsible for patient safety often had to take difficult decisions. it added, we are sorry for the anguish and uncertainty to these proceedings may have caused the jack's family, doctor bawa—garba and divided medical profession. jack's mother who is currently abroad sergei was left devastated by the ruling. what she did that day i will never, ever forgive her for and i don't know how she can go back into this profession. she showed no remorse, she has no guilt and i don't know how she can live with herself. doctor bawa—garba says she is keen to practice again. sources have indicated subject to a technical review that could happen as soon as this autumn. hugh is here with me now — what are the ongoing implications of this case? there are some big unanswered questions. one of them is the very application in the first place of gross negligence manslaughter in a health setting, is it appropriate? there is an ongoing review involving the

circuit court of appeals. during that time, he authored more than 300 opinions and joined hundreds others. the supreme court has, and 13 separate cases, adopted a legal position advanced by judge kavanaugh's in his opinions on the d.c. circuit. that is a very impressive record. few people on the circuit court of appeals could claim that. the majority staff has already received more than 10000 pages of judicial opinions that judge kavanaugh wrote or joined. more than 17000 pages of materials that judge kavanaugh provided in response to the most robust questionnaire ever submitted to a supreme court nominee. more than 260 pages of e-mails and other records from judge kavanaugh's executive ranch legal service. this morning, the committee received close to 170,000 pages of additional records from judge kavanaugh's executive branch legal service. we now have more than 400 30,000 pages from judge kavanaugh's time in the executive branch. by far, the most ever received from a supreme court nominee. the majority staff

which she argued in the trial court and the california court of appeals. what is sag's position about you are required to get that? courtcifically, the trial and the court of appeal looked at this from a transformative use test perspective. that is not the right test to be looking at for the issue you are raising. believe it was clearly not transformative. >> i disagree. i think it was transformative. >> you said she was pretrade as she appeared in real life. it was not an attempt to transform her appearance. the actions were purportedly what occurred. what we think applies in this case is a public affairs public interest case. that is what protects the expressive use your companies are concerned about. that is why you don't have and should not have right of --licity claims described pertaining to the right of publicity cases. we think it ought to be correctly applied. , we thinkstooges case that was the right decision. it has not been highly criticized or challenged, in my view. some of the other cases have been. this is part of a developing jurisprudence.

theext, we take you to ninth circuit court of appeals annual judicial conference. a panel discussed part of the law known as right of publicity, for the right of an engine which anl to control -- right of individual to control aspects of their likeness or personality. >> good morning, everyone. thank you so much for being with us. we know it is early thursday morning, the final day of our conference, so we are so glad you are here with us for this panel. the title is "from human cannonballs to county fairs: how issues of rights of publicity law." our own formeris chair of this conference. she is clearly one of the nation's most prominent media attorneys. an appellateis lawyer representative. ben is a senior vice president and associate general counsel for the motion picture association of america. next to him, we are honored to have with us -- she is not only an attorney, but also an oscar-winning movie producer of spotlight. at all on the end, not east in this group, is the coo and general counsel of sag after. -- of sag-aftra. >> if you have any questions, we will

dismissed the grounds of appeal and dismissed the grounds of appeal and dismissed that application for permission to appeal will stop the bbc have the option to go directly to the courtefore that they took they say legal advice from experienced counsel and were told if they tried to appeal they would not be successful, even though they say the advice they got, the judge did get the central principle of the case wrong when he said people who are suspects in investigations have a reasonable expectation of privacy and the media will respect that privacy. having said that, they said overall if you look at it, they would not win. some might say, if you ran the story in the first place, why, if you thought, contested the case vigorously, why after the case you sounded bullish about an appeal are you now not going to try to appeal the case to the court of appeal? it seems the bbc‘s reason is they had legal advice and decided instead of going to the courts, they asked the attorney general to review the law with a view to parliament intervening and the bbc would hope legislating to preserve the rights to name suspects in police investigations and preserve that principle they

ofjustice, to fund her appeal here at the royal courts of here at the royal courts ofjustice, was because they we re very courts ofjustice, was because they were very concerned about the indications of this case as far as their own futures were concerned. they felt that she was being made something of a scapegoat for the wider failings something of a scapegoat for the widerfailings as they something of a scapegoat for the wider failings as they saw it within the nhs. they were concerned, too, that this could have a chilling effect on doctors' willingness to be open about their own clinical errors and allowing the nhs to learn from them in the future if they were co nsta ntly them in the future if they were constantly concerned that the general medical council might well pursue them. well,, of course, jake adcock‘s parents were very concerned about the fact that dr bawa—garba might be allowed to continue working asa might be allowed to continue working as a doctor in the uk. jack's mother has said she felt it was appropriate that she remained

the court of appeal said an earlier decision to suspend her for a year should stand. could not receive the facts i have received. it was beyond belief, i am disgusted and devastated. ijust cannot understand how someone can be charged with gross negligence manslaughter, struck off the register by the general medical council and then be reinstated. she has now been in front of nine high courtjudges so what are those three judges saying, that the others didn't do theirjob right? i think it makes a mockery of the justice system, and i also think it sets a precedent for doctors to be able to do whatever they want. you might as well give them a green card and see that, she did not make one or two or three mistakes, she made 21 mistakes that day. they were all human errors apart from one which was a system error, and people keep forgetting that. i just cannot error, and people keep forgetting that. ijust cannot believe that no one is interested. the nhs, we are the people who have to go to these hospitals and i can probably guarantee you know, that because of nvidia knows abo

circuit court of appeals, a court that many of us have called the second most important court in the nation. documentsre important to review, you have to ask the question of why did not they asked for them in 2006? for some fact is, is of our democratic colleagues, there will never be enough paper, we will never be able to produce enough to satisfy them, and that is because five of them made up their mind before the nominee was named that they would vote against anyone that this president nominated. come up and said they will oppose the nominee before meeting with the nominee or reviewing the documents that have already been produced. i can understand the disappointment of our democratic colleagues, and they were hoping that hillary clinton would fill this vacancy on the supreme court and that she would appoint somebody very different from brett kavanaugh. i think that they hoped for is that she would appoint somebody who would advance their political or policy or ideological agenda, wearing a black robe and acting essentially as a legislator. ironically, somebody i'm accountable to

would be .eplacing he served as the associate counsel of the white house, what many regard as the second highest court in the land, the court of appeals of the district of columbia. during his time on the bench, he has been called the judges judge , stunning 39 of his 48 clerks of gone on to clerk at the supreme court. his peers and see him as a thought leader, his opinions are cited by courts across the country, and the supreme court morendorsed his opinions than a dozen times. i think that for the round of applause. is -- is worth a round of applause. credibilityord of on the bench, he is 307 opinions , andy prove his intellect you can see he has a judicial philosophy. he is proven his support for forgious liberty, he is to the second amendment right to keep and bear arms, he's enforce the constitution's limits on government power, including the separation of the balance of checks and balances. is, he supports the principles of limited government enshrined by the constitution. he is a textual list, and he enjoys a broad degree of support of yale lawofessor school has praised him as a mentor for young lawyers, and particularly women.

court of appeals in the d.c. circuit, along with all ofmazing co-clerks, whom are here today. since her time in this courthouse, britt grant has risen quickly through the ranks of the legal profession, as solicitor general of georgia, as a justice on the georgia supreme court at age 38, and now at age 40, as a judge on the u.s. court of appeals for the 11th circuit. in our constitutional system, a judge must be independent, must keep an open mind in every case, and must decide cases based on the fact and the law, not based on personal or policy views. britt grant understands the role of a judge, she reveres the constitution, and she will work every day to preserve the american rule of law. just as importantly, she is an exceptionally good and decent person. britt grant is the neighbor you want next door, the loyal friend you want as you travel through the valleys and mountains of life, the colleague you want when you have a tough issue to crack, and an evenhanded judge you want when your life, liberty, or property is on the line. i'm very proud of britt grant, proud to be her c

of the decisions are going to end at the appellate court. they're not going to reach the supreme court of the united states. so a lot of important policy is being determined by the court of appeals. we think it's outrageous that the type of people that he is nominating with very little qualifications that are coming to him through outside groups that have an agenda rather than trying to appoint mainstream journalists -- jurists that will understand the importance of the checks and balances in the judicial branch of government. soledad: senator ben cardin, it's nice to have you with us. sen. cardin: thank you very

he served as the associate counsel of the white house, what many regard as the second highest court in the land, the court of appealsf the district of columbia. during his time on the bench, he has been called the judges judge, stunning 39 of his 48 clerks have gone on to clerk at the supreme court. his peers see him as a thought leader, his opinions are cited by courts across the country, on a regular basis, and the supreme court has endorsed his opinions more than a dozen times. i think that is worth a round of applause. [laughter] [applause] judge brett kavanaugh has established a record of enormous credibility on the bench, he is -- he has written 307 opinions, they prove his intellect, and you can see he has a judicial philosophy. crystal-clear judicial philosophy. he has proven his support for liberty, he has stood for the second amendment right to keep and bear arms, he's been forced the constitution's limits on government power, including the separation of the balance of checks and balances. the truth is, he supports the principles of limited government enshrined by the constitution. [applause] he enjoys a b

the court of appeal unanimously allows the appeal. s, subject to review. reasons for thejudgment. the months, subject to review. reasons for the judgment. the decision months, subject to review. reasons for thejudgment. the decision of... this related to her conviction for gross negligence manslaughter was not a decision of fact or law but an evaluative decision based on many factors. it is the type of decision which has been described as a kind of jewellery question about which has been described as a kind ofjewellery question about which reasonable people may reasonably disagree. an appeal court should generally be cautious before interfering with such a decision. that caution applies with particular force in the case of a specialist adjudicated body such as the tribunal. an appeal court should only interfere if such an evaluative decision if it is an error of principle in carrying out the evaluation orfor any principle in carrying out the evaluation or for any of reason the evaluation or for any of reason the evaluation was wrong, i

of the and the concern that we have is thatu the position that they seem to be taking in theis court of appeal which rejected both claims out of hand and in the california supreme court which declined to hear theca california supreme courtin did two things, he looked athi sarver and said this is plainly protected speech under the first amendment and they said you have to have a compelling interest and apply the strict constitutional tests, but the court alsoas said, even if you apply the transformative use test which had been highly criticized ever since it was adopted, and many courts have been confused on how it's supposed to be c applied including the court off appeals which led to later decisions but is not a good test. what some have said is that must mean you have to turn thepe person into something else like a monster or worm, otherwise it's not being transformed, but that's not the california supreme court said. they borrowed one aspect of copyright law in the case involving a tangible product, t-shirts and said when you'reth dealing with that kind ofy' thing, then it has to be somethi

next, from the ninth circuit court of appeals annual judicial conference, a discussion on a part of the law known as the right of publicity or the right of an individual to control the commercial use of their likeness or unique aspect of their identity. the conversation runs an hour and a half. >> good morning, everyone. thank you so much for being with us. we know it is early thursday morning and we are glad you are here with us for this panel which i'm excited to introduce. the title is from human cannibals to county fairs to lindsay lohan and olivia dehavilland, hot issues of publicity law. we are lucky to have this amazing panel.

the court of appeal is due to decide whether a doctor who was struck off following the death of a six—year—oldd to practise again. dr hadiza bawa—garba is fighting the decision, after being convicted of manslaughter due to gross negligence in 2015. a doctors' campaign group has argued that her lifetime ban is too punitive, and that nhs staffing pressures were partly to blame. our health editor hugh pym has more. six—year—olds jack adcock died in 2011 after developing sepsis at leicester royal infirmary, and a court later heard there was a catalogue of errors with his treatment. doctor hadiza bawa—garba, seen treatment. doctor hadiza bawa—garba, seenin treatment. doctor hadiza bawa—garba, seen in the middle, was convicted of gross negligence, manslaughter. later an independent medical tribunal ruled she should be suspended from practising as a doctorfor suspended from practising as a doctor for one suspended from practising as a doctorfor one year, but suspended from practising as a doctor for one year, but the general medical council appealed, arguing this was not sufficient to protect the pub

public record at all, just compare that to judge kavanaugh's serving on the district columbia court of appeals. he's got more than 300 written opinions for members to review and ascertain what kind of judge he would be if confirmed to the supreme court. i'm surprised that our democratic friends are asking for so many documents that are clearly immaterial, because during the nominee's 2006 confirmation hearing for the d.c. circuit court of appeals, our colleagues did not ask for any documents which they are now demanding, and specifically those that came across his desk when he served in the important function of white house staff secretary. this is perhaps a little understood office, but basically it's an administrative position where judge kavanaugh at the time as staff secretary at the white house was responsible for making sure that the documents presented to the president for review had been properly vetted and were in good form. that's the responsibility, not to provide input in terms of the policy or the content of those documents. so he really was more or less a traffic cop for the pape

circuit court of appeals. chuck grassley expects the hearing to last 3 - 4 days. we'll have live coverage on c-span three. also on c-span.org or listen to the hearings on our free radio app. >> last week i announced that the senate judiciary committee will hold a hearing on judge kavanaugh's nomination for the supreme court sure to september 4. the hearing will begin 57 days after president announced judge kavanaugh's nomination. more than a week longer from the announcements and hearings from the last three justices soto meyer kagan gorsuch. the senate has already received more documents from judge kavanaugh's time in the executive branch that we differ many previous supreme court nominee. we have so far received more than 184,000 pages of documents, which more than 124,000 are currently publicly available by anybody in the country going to a judiciary committee.senate.gov the team of lawyers who work for the majority have already reviewed 2000 pages of the 307 judicial opinions that judge kavanaugh will come

the court of appeals affirmed -- while applying this test the court of appeals affirmed the entry of summary judgment for the university. this court now holds that the court of appeals was correct to conclude that the university has met its burden given the state of the record and the data available to the university in 2008 when the petitioner's application was rejected. she was not denied equal treatment. the petitioner claims the university has not articulated its compelling interest with sufficient clarity. she argues the university has failed to say precisely what level of minorities it seeks. -- minority enrollment it seeks. the compelling interest of enrolling a certain number of minority students but rather an interest in obtaining educational benefits that flow -- it is an interest but rather -- an interest in obtaining educational benefits that flow from student body diversity. the record reveals the university articulated concrete goals with respect to its decisions which mirror the compelling interest which the court has approved in prior cases. greta: justice kennedy read

the former english defence league leader — tommy robinson — is to be freed on bail by the court of appealtially winning his legal challenge against a contempt of court finding. robinson, who appeared under his real name — stephen yaxley—lennon — had been sentenced to 13 months imprisionment in may. our news correspondent, tom burridge, joins me now from outside the court of appeal in central london. good morning tom. give us a bit of background to today's case, and tell its what happened 7 background to today's case, and tell its what happened? it is a significant development. tommy robinson has been partially released, but his appeal has partially succeeded and he will be released on bail. there was two incidents so one was last year, outside canterbury crown court, there was a trial ongoing, he was deemed to be in contempt of court. he was given a suspended sentences then, but in may he was outside leeds crown court, he was broadcasting via facebook, it was viewed by some 250,000 times, and that time, he was deemed again to be co nte m pt of that time, he was deemed again to be contempt

>> laura: the ninth circuit court of appeals of judicial activism branch. that's what he focused on. thanks so much. >>> and the left loves to claim it's the champion of inner city communities and prison reform. welcome to the xfinity store. thanks, janet. it's my happy place. you can learn how to switch to xfinity mobile, a new wireless network that saves you cash. and you can get 5 lines of talk and text included with your internet. and over here i'm having my birthday party. dj fluffernutter, hit it! ♪ dj fluffernutter simple. easy. awesome. ask how to get $300 back when you sign up for xfinity mobile, and purchase a new samsung phone. visit your local xfinity store today. >> laura: don't you notice how the left always claims to occupy the high ground when it comes to issues surrounding inner-city communities, issues like prison reform, but their words and policies rarely back up the claim. instead of offering reform, they offer rhetoric, poisonous rhetoric like this from elizabeth warren last friday. sorry, the hard truth about our criminal justice syst

. >>> the ninth circuit court of appeals has ruled that president trump's executive order aimed to withhold funding from sanctuary cities is unconstitutional. the ruling was part of a lawsuit from santa clara and san francisco counties. >> reporter: the mayors of san francisco, oakland and san jose were invited here today for a forum put on by next door to talk about issues and probleming soo solving in their own communities. the 2-1 decision by the ninth u.s. circuit court of appeals received this reaction from san francisco mayor london breed. >> we knew in san francisco that it was, which is why we used the courts to challenge this order by the president. and they have demonstrated clearly that it was unconstitutional. >> reporter: san francisco and santa clara counties sued concerned they would lose billions in federal dollars. today the court agreed with the lower courts that the order exceeded the president's authority. a law professor -- >> the argument was that the president is not allowed to provide or withdraw federal funds. that is precisely what he cannot do. >> reporter: it was

his career mister sullivan was a law clerk, david souter, supreme court of the united states, and clerk at the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit. a native of boston, massachusetts, mister sullivan is a graduate of brown university and earned his law degree from columbia university school of law. join me in welcoming deputy secretary sullivan. [applause] m >> thank you. it is a great honor for me to stand here today and a solemn day in which we gather. i have had the honor of speaking at events like this. i speak at our embassies when i travel around the world and i think all of those women and men including our locally employed staff. i always make point as my colleagues know of speaking to the locally employed staff and tell them how important it was to our mission. i also thank them for their service. i have said this many times, my colleagues get sick of me reminding everyone, but i have a personal connection, a family connection to some of what you and your loved ones went through. my family, my uncle was a career foreign service officer who served 32 years as our ambassador to iran. he and my cousins

>> laura: the ninth circuit court of appeals of judicial activism branch.hat he focused on. thanks so much. in the left loves to claim is the champion of inner-city communities and prison reform, so why is the reality proving to be just the opposite? coming up. bass pro shops and cabela's bring you the fall hunting classic with huge savings. like this cuddeback black flash game camera for only $75. and these keen men's waterproof hiking boots for under $90. >> laura: don't you notice how the left always claims to occupy the high ground when it comes to issues surrounding inner-city communities, issues like prison reform, but their words and policies rarely back up the claim. instead of offering reform, they offer rhetoric, poisonous rhetoric like this from elizabeth warren last friday. sorry, the hard truth about our criminal justice system, it's racist from front to back. that will move the debate forward, fantastic. she doesn't want prison reform, she wants the whole thing re-examined back to who gets arrested, when they get arrested, how they get arreste

circuit court of appeals. the best way to find out about his judicial philosophy, his temperament, and how he actually handles cases is how he's done exactly each of those things during the 12 years while serving on the d.c. circuit. and, yes, we've heard some of our colleagues on the other side, including the minority leader, and former judiciary chairman leahy, who actually used to agree with us that the best way to evaluate a nominee -- for example, during justice sotomayor's hearing -- was by looking at her judicial here but now they've changed their tune. what the rulings show is that judge kavanaugh is a diligent and thoughtful judge. his rulings are clear, impartial, and he strives to achieve justice in each one. yesterday i mentioned some of the cases in which judge kavanaugh's opinions, whether written as part of a majority opinion or a dissent, were vindicated by an adoption of that position and that opinion essentially by the supreme court on a 9-0 basis. but i'd like to talk about a couple of other

but the court of appeal has ruled that dr bawa—garba does not present a continuing risk to patients. ight... israel's prime minister accuses the labour leader of laying a wreath in memory of the palestinians suspected of being behind the munich olympics attack in 1972. thousands of people attend a mass funeral in yemen after saudi—led air strikes leave at least 29 children dead. the machines that have been taught to diagnose dozens of eye diseases as accurately as doctors. come on now, follow my lead. swansea, sing it loud! and ed sheeran‘s campaign against ticket touts is a hit as ticketmaster closes its secondary sites. and coming up on sportsday later in the hour on bbc news... more matches at wembley for tottenham. safety issues mean that they won't be able to play at their new stadium until at least the end of october. good evening. a doctor who was found guilty of manslaughter by gross negligence after the death of a six—year—old boy has won the right to practise medicine again. dr hadiza bawa—garba was convicted three years ago following the death of jack adcock, who died after

discussed working with him on the dz circuit court of appeals. p.m.ve a hearing at 12:00 eastern on c-span. >> 1973 roe versus wade decision inlikely to be discussed confirmation hearings for supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. we will show you an episode of roe v. wade from c-span's landmark cases series. first david savage on the judge kavanaugh nomination. wrote justiceu kennedy's opinion had affirmed the right to an abortion "probably for all time." how does that statement hold up today? 1982,t i remember about when they decided the case in late june, it was the most surprising decision i had seen in the 30 years i was doing it. i remember sitting and talking to justice scalia, and he was steamed up about what happened. remember i was trying to explain to the editors, this was not just another abortion decision, this was an earthquake. there is now a majority that upholds the right to abortion, and it is not going to change anytime soon. that was scalia's view as well. that was the phone where -- the fall where bill clinton was elected. you

surprisingly, he dismissed those grounds of appeal and he dismissed the application for permission to appeal. the bbc had one option, to go directly to the courtlegal advice they say, from a very experienced counsel and they were told that if they try and appeal, they won't be successful. even though they say that the advice they got is that the judge got a central principle of the case wrong, when he said that people who are suspects in police investigations have a reasonable expectation of privacy, that the media will respect that privacy. having said that, overall, they wouldn't win. now, you know, some might say, if you ran the story in the first place, if you fought the case so vigorously, why, if after the case you sounded so bullish about an appeal, are you now not going to try and appeal the case in the court of appeal? it seems that the bbc‘s reason is that they had legal advice so they decided, instead of going through the courts, to write to the attorney general to review the law, with a view to parliament intervening and legislating, the bbc hopes, to preserve the right to name suspects in police investigations and preserve that pr

of the most qualified nominees ever picked for the supreme court. he has contributed a great deal to his community and the legal profession besides being an on the d.c.judge circuit court of appeals. >> judge kavanaugh has a special obligation to make his views clear given the president's litmus test that he would only appoint judges who would overturn roe. on that obligation, judge kavanaugh failed spectacularly. >> i look forward to watching his confirmation hearing, and after conducting an objective review of his nomination, i am confident that judge kavanaugh will be an excellent addition to our nation's highest court. >> watch day one of the senate confirmation hearing for supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh, lived tuesday september 4, on c-span 3. orch anytime on c-span.org, listen on the free c-span radio app. jake tapper spoke recently at the american society of travel agents convention in washington about his novel and about the trump presidency. this is 45 minutes. ♪ ["my type" by saint motel plays] jake: her son's jason sedate is, but i think we all know who the real star of that family is -- is jason

circuit court of appeals. judiciary committee chair chuck grassley expects the confirmation hearing to last three to four days. watch it live on c-span3, c-span.org or listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> tom hazel, your new book is called the political -- "the political spectrum: the tumultuous liberation of wireless technology, from herbet hoover to the smartphone." is this written for the layman? >> guest: absolutely. it is not a hard read but it's a lot of stories about where we are now and how we got here in the wireless world. of course we're all in the wireless world now. it's part of our daily life and it's really quite fascinating how we got here, the politics of it and now the 1927 later act basically determined what would get into the market, what wouldn't and then how reforms overtime led to the pretty amazing new stuff we're dealing with today and we carry in our pocket. >> host: what is your expertise to write a book like this transit i'm an economist. i don't hold any patents in the mobi

circuit court of appeals. that is at the heritage foundation. live coverage begins at noon eastern on c-span. this week and on book tv, author interviews from the freedom fest conference in las vegas. there will be a discussion on the book "failure, the federal miseducation of america's children." "rethinking america's infrastructure." been a look at a north korean girl's journey to freedom. how humans will colonize planets, moons, and a streets. life after, the book " google, the fall of big data and the rise of the block chain economy." then a discussion on the book "automotive, what drives the things we do." this we can on c-span2's book tv. we do not live in the same part of the country or have the same vocation. .e don't have the same outlook but where we are all the same is , men of color, women of color, is the way we try to instill a at the sobering consequence of what could happen . >> sunday night the comedian and actor d.l. hughley shares his thoughts on race in america with his book "how not to get shot and other advice from white pe

courts? how much more of an impact can they have than the supreme court? >> well, so circuit courts are very important for a number of reasons. one is that they are the court of last appeal almost all litigants. the supreme court hears 75, 80 cases a year. everything else gets decided at the terminal stage by one or the other of the circuit courts. and so, number one, they are really important on that score. number two, they are the kind of testing ground for supreme court judges, justices, almost all whom come from prior circuit court service. and finally, they are important, and don't underestimate this, because interest groups and senators have decided they are important and that they are something we want to fight over. therefore, if you get a lot of them confirmed and the other side is angry about it, then that's a big win. >> let's talk about the supreme court and what you wrote in "the atlantic." we don't like acknowledging that the only real principle at issue in the senate's treatment of judicial confirmations boils down to power. who has it and who doesn't at any given moment in time. you are talking about partisanship when it comes to nominating someone like b

circuit court of appeals. judiciary committee chair, chuck grassley expects the confirmation hearing to last three or four days. watch it on c-span.org, or listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> tonight, but tv is in prime time with a look at recent books on america at war. susan dunn, humanities professor at -- college explains her book. sam on his book, the flying tigers. the untold story of the american pilots who waged a secret war against japan. for the 2018 book festival in maryland, philip reported on his book, advocating overload. the dth strategy in the atomic bomb. but tv this week on prime time on c-span2. sunday night on afterwards, the economist discusses her book, and of chaos. she's interviewed by jason furman, former chairman of the economic advisers during obama's administration. >> you wrote a book quite a lot about politics. why did you do that? >> the most important thing was that it's born out of frustration. after you write my interest in economic background but you think about the

going to be called in to we just got out of the habit as it became very easy and quick to take court of appeals but actually it's not very hard to change this very easy for individuals to do but i think you know people cumulatively making a difference.

i'm on the court of appeals for the sixth circuit. and thank you -- [ applause ] >> thank you for the book, thank you for the time of going through all of the resumes. you know, as i stand here -- and you know we are celebrating or commemorating the 150th anniversary of the 14th amendment. i was delighted to hear you talk about the role that the civil rights movement played really in the whole role of the achievements in the gender realm. i wondered if you were able to discern in the biographies any of the themes when it came to women of color? i understand that probably the stories of african-american women, while they will come somewhat after the role of women in the majority culture, but what about the women? were you able to look at any of the things from women who were asian american women or latinas or even native american women? and if those things paralleled the themes of the majority of people that you have put in the book, not necessarily the numbers because i know the numbers will be far less than, but simply the themes in t

a subpoena you file a motion to quash, that would be argued at the district court, then the court of appeals and the supreme court of the united states. >> stephanopoulos pressing him on statements about the president being involved in the statement for his son. >> i had bad information at that point. >> the president tweeting, a complete fabrication that i'm concerned about the meeting my son donald had in trump tower. that tweet contradicts the initial statement saying the meeting was to discuss a program of adoption of russian children. >>> a silicone valley city passed a new gun law. >>> a bird's eye view of the destruction after flames rush through a neighborhood. >>> i feel like i had a lot of luck along the way and a lot of help. >> a teacher breaks a rowing record across the atlantic. the less son he learned. >>> we have mild weather today but scorchi ♪ strummed guitar you can't experience the canadian rockies through a screen. you have to be here, with us. ♪ upbeat music travel through this natural wonder and get a glimpse of amazing, with a glass of wine in one hand, and a camera i

subject of a criminal investigation, this is critical, it will be very difficult to persuade the court of appealrinciple from the dutch's broader findings issue of principle from the dutch's broaderfindings in this issue of principle from the dutch's broader findings in this case. issue of principle from the dutch's broaderfindings in this case. and it's on that basis they have essentially taken legal advice and the legal advice is that if you did seek to appeal this to the court of appeal, you would not when. what the bbc adds to that is that given the advice that they received, they say if they were too then proceed, it would inevitably mean an expensive legal cul—de—sac and one that simply prolongs the distress of sir cliff richard. and they are very clear about acknowledging the distress that he has suffered. the bbc is writing today to the attorney general to ask the government to consider a review of the law in this important area to protect the rights to properly and fairly report criminal investigations and to name a person is under investigation. they say that there is a fundamental pri

what's called a motion to quash that will be argued at the district court then it would go to the court of appeals then it would go to the supreme court of the united states from the supreme court that states it goes back down to the lower.

let's go to the front page of the guardian, bbc faces bill for millions after dropping cliff richard appeal, bbc has decided it will not go to the courterturned. cliff richard won last month, his privacy case against the corporation. the bbcjust did not think it would win. there comes a point when you have to cut your losses, and the economist said this is an example here, there is a statement that any appeal at the expense of legal cul—de—sac, one that would simply prolong sir clifford's distress. this is the right decision, why will more taxpayers money be used to appeal this? it's more common sense breaking out, but we still have to pay lots of money to cliff richard. you make the point about taxpayers money, let's be quite clear about that, that is the first thing you make an assessment of the public mood, and the public mood is one my judgement, it is overwhelmingly that this has run its course. but the issue on the one hand, freedom of the press, but on the other hand, you're right to privacy. that remains, andi you're right to privacy. that remains, and i am not overwhelmingly confident that this government in its current state

the district court will decide it goes to the court of appeals, four different circuit courts and in estion is how quickly the court of appeals could decide. conceivably, massachusetts is in the first circuit and that court of appeals is a very fast, efficient court of appeals and conceivably they could decide it pretty quickly. it would get to the courts frequently. what is going to depend on how it levels the system. but it's important for courts to take the time to get it right, but i also like is important to the extent that we can make a countscy that actually everybody's votes equally, we should do that as quickly as possible. there is no excuse to delay the process of making every vote count equally and certainly not the excuse of courts not pursuing this diligently. host: joining us as lawrence lessig, professor at harvard law school and founder of the group equal citizens, thanks for your time this morning. guest: they give are having me. republicans, call (202) 748-8001, democrats, call independents, call (202) 748-8002. c-span,ht at 8 p.m. on "new york times," white house c