d.c. circuit court now hawk watchers you may be excused for assuming that conclusion is simply a feverish fantasy headlined willed into existence by sean hannity but evidence that something isn't quite right in the flynn case appears to be mounting by the day and all of it carries some rather grave implications for the future of robert miller's investigation try to get today to examine the facts in this legal of side down is not other than our own legal and media analyst lionel of lionel really had spent too long welcome thank you but always was so what's interesting about this is this may have gone unnoticed by many but the judge who first accepted blame is guilty plea and who is also one of three fires a court judges in d.c. overseeing wiretap applications like the ones at target a you know donald trump's campaign now he for some reason we don't know recused himself from the case within days of the guilty plea deal the new judge in the case ended so of an order of the b.o.j. to hand over any potentially exonerating evidence to flynn's legal team lionel why is that order so important and

d.c. circuit court now hawk watchers you may be excused for assuming that conclusion is simply a feverish fantasy headline willed into existence by sean hannity but evidence that something isn't quite right in the flynn case appears to be mounting by the day and all of it carries some rather grave implications for the future of robert miller's investigation trying us today to examine the facts and this legal i've cited down is none other than our own legal and media analyst i know loveline alleviate spent too long welcome thank you but always was so what's interesting about this is this may have gone unnoticed by many but the judge who first accept the blame is guilty plea and who is also one of three fires a court judges in d.c. overseeing wiretap applications like the ones at target a you know donald trump's campaign now he for some reason we don't know recused himself from the case within days of the guilty plea deal the new judge in the case emmett sullivan order of the b.o.j. to hand over any potentially exonerating evidence to flynn's legal team lionel why is that order so important

d.c. circuit court. that decision fundamentally changed reporting requirements under the comprehensive environmental response compensation and liability act. and the emergency planning and community right to know act. the ruling meant up to 100,000 farmers and ranchers who had never been required to report under these laws were suddenly required to comply. even though they wanted to comply with the ruling, the process and the implications of compliance were unclear. because they both were not written with the intent of regulating these farms and ranches. the requirement to report emissions from animal waste came without context and largely without any agency guidance. let me now turn to the -- nepa, the national environmental policy act. and their impact on agriculture operations without mentions nepa. nepa is at the core of every decision in each land use plan, resource management proposal, trailing acrossing permit and grazing allotment that farmers and ranchers need. nepa is not limited to agriculture

d.c. circuit court now hawk watchers you may be excused for assuming that conclusion is simply a feverish fantasy headlined will the dogs. by sean hannity but evidence that something isn't quite right in the flynn case appears to be mounting by the day and all of it carries some rather grave implications for the future of robert miller's investigation try to us today to examine the facts in this legal i've cited down is not other than our own legal and media analyst i know loveline alleviate spent too long welcome. thank you oh it was so what's interesting about this is this may have gone unnoticed by many but the judge who first accepted flynn's guilty plea and who is also one of three pfizer court judges in d.c. overseeing wiretap applications like the ones at target a you know donald trump's campaign now he for some reason we don't know recused himself from the case within days of the guilty plea deal the new judge in the case emmett sullivan ordered the b.o.j. to hand over any potentially exonerating evidence to flynn's legal team lionel why is that order so important and why would a

d.c. circuit court now hawk watchers you may be excused for assuming that conclusion is simply a feverish fantasy headlined willed into existence by sean hannity but evidence that something isn't quite right in the flynn case appears to be mounting by the day and all of it carries some rather grave implications for the future of robert miller's rush to get investigation try to get today to examine the facts of this legal of side down is not other than our own legal and media analyst line of law and already it's been too long welcome. thank you oh it was so what's interesting about this is this may have gone unnoticed by many but the judge who first accepted a guilty plea and who is also one of three pfizer court judges in d.c. overseeing wiretap applications like the ones the target of a you know donald trump's campaign now he for some reason we don't know recused himself from the case within days of the guilty plea deal the new judge in the case emmett sullivan ordered the b.o.j. to hand over any potentially exonerating evidence to flynn's legal team lionel why is that order so important

d.c. circuit court.ee how that comes down, but the bottom line is that this is an agency created in the wake of the financial crisis to stand on the consumer side. that is not easy for people battling large financial institutions to get their attention and get things fixed. this agency has that a great job doing that and i can -- and i think it is doing its part. shery: can the agency as a whole remain reboulet -- relevant under president trump? >> i think it is important that the laws of the country be forced vigorously. they have been enforced, and we enforce them vigorously. discrimination, lending, credit cards -- i think that work needs to continue, and if it is pulled back, i will be vocally critical of that, but we will see how these things play out over the longer term, especially with the new director who will have to go through confirmation. david: when mick mulvaney said we don't need to incorporate them and pay them any money, he said they have 177 million in the reserve fund and should use t

d.c. circuit court judge, a spiritual mentor of mine, and rob porter taught at brigham young university as well. professionally, it's clear -- all these professional successes for rob porter happened while he was reportedly abusing both his wives, so this was a problem that she had not reported to their bishops at the time, both women, and unfortunately, the systemic problems of the mormon church are not equipped to deal with domestic abuse. the mormon charge has a lei priesthood. they are not a psychotherapist or dealt -- they don't in many cases report this to, you know, public officials. this is a huge problem that in the personal life of someone like rob porter, it needs to be managed more carefully, and the mormon church has been failing. >> not just the mormon church, but society, this is an issue, you know, across the spectrum in which women are saying our voices are not heard. i've done a number of stories that have to do with abuse including on college campuses up to nursing homesing and the women who are victims are survivors tell me they were afraid to tell their story to speak

court of appeals d.c. circuit now the decision has to stay and the farmers to know where they are. i do notice that mr. scuse said we need a legislative fix i would suggest long -- assume that you agree with that. we cannot keep putting farmers on notice wondering where they are hit with legal liability or inaccurate reporting so toin have bipartisan support and consensus we need a legislative fix so we tell the members of the panel that senator fischer and a republican and and a democrat to introduce legislation this week with the agricultural reporting method would clarify this rule to exempt all animal feeding operations from reporting so if you could speak to that doctor hill and mr. do fall but also finish a thought that could give reassurance to our friends in north carolina they don't have to experience what was described from my friend from new jersey. >> first of all we would support that bill 100%. we need clarity. what producers fear now is they will use inadequate tools to estimate these omissions then if they are wrong they will have huge penalties. so that bill would

court is the most collegial place i've ever worked. post really -- host: really? justice ginsburg: on any law faculty, on the d.c. circuit. we all respect and in most cases [laughter] >> i probably can't ask you to -- [laughter] >> let me tell you the way it was in the not so good old days. justice brandeis coming on the court, the second wilson appointee. the first was justice mcreynolds. justice mcreynolds was an out and out anti-semite and when brandeis, brilliant man who was sometimes full of isaiah, when brandeis got up to speak in conference, mcreynolds would leave the room. >> really? wow. did anyone object? did anyone say, this is wrong? justice ginsberg: i guess in time he overcame his difficulties. >> wow. so, you had a very warm and loving and quite unusual partnership with your late husband, marty. i understand that he was much more socially gregarious than you were for many years. he was a great cook and a raconteur. it does seem that since his passing, your public persona has grown, and i wonder if that's a coincidence or whether there is some connection there. >> marty was my biggest booster all my life. we

d.c. circuit where the court sits in panels of three judges, and he would whisper something to me in the middle of an oral argument that would totally cracked me up and it was all i could do to avoid bursting out in hilarious laughter. he was brought up in queens. , ins brought up in brooklyn roughly similar neighborhoods where people were either irish or tie-in or jewish. we both really cared about families. we had an annual new year's party where the affair would be whatever -- so usually it was bambi, and my husband, who is a great chef, made venison and whatever children were around came. and then we shared a love of opera. in fact, there is an opera, a comic opera, called "scalia-ginsburg" and it does a wonderful job of explaining our friendship. it starts out with scalia's rage aria and it goes like this: the . the justices are blind. how can they possibly spout this ? the constitution says absolutely nothing about this. and then i respond that he is searching for bright light solutions to problems that don't have easy answers, but the great thing about how our constitution is that, like

the reason that is important is because the lower court on the d.c. circuit, a quite conservative judge in washington, d.c., wrote an opinion they came to this commonsense conclusion that we, as a community, a self-governing community, get to draw close lines with respect to political participation that was based on earlier supreme court precedent that was about foreign activities in the state and what states could do to regulate foreign activities. a long line of cases about when states were able to, not generally discriminate against aliens -- that is still suspect, but when they could regulate the presence of foreigners in politically sensitive roles. by upholding the federal law and relying on the state law, it left open the field for states to come in and take various measures. perhaps mimicking the federal ban, but certainly other lesser measures like disclosure, not disclosure for friends and neighbors but the disclosure of $150,000 of purchases. they can do that. they can do lobbying. they can use the public contracting power. states are major players

>> pointing to two cases the supreme court decision and the d.c. circuit decision both of those recognize that talking about a statutory claim the restriction oftr aliens abroad is a fundamental and foreign policy doctorate not reviewable unless congress is provided otherwise and that is the rule clearly officers restrict the aliens abroad though that is simply not reviewable. >> that congress made it clear even with 1182 several times that sole discretion with other parts of the statute. >> so i think 1182 has language itself because it is phrased in the national interest but by using that phrasing. >> if it has to find something then it is reviewable? >> i don't think so your honor. >> those statutory constraints webster with the government official. >> so who are the findings for? >> is it a substantive constraint? >> how is it a constraint spent the president takes an oath of office. >> who reviews that constraint? >> that doesn't mean the president doesn't have to follow that. >> where do they say that he can't? you say the courts can't that third bra

court. cf d.c. circuit tees up the pb for constitutional review. host: are you doing better?aller: yes, i am. everything is looking up. businesses are thinking about expanding. gettingre raises. obamacare has stagnated all of the wages. for years we have not had raises except for health insurance going up. secondly, everyone blames the banks for the housing crisis collapse in the early 2000's. the democratsy under bill clinton that liberalized the mortgage qualification rates to allow people to do the lending. they made the law so they could do that subprime lending. a person working at the time was telling everyone how he was their first house. they were renters. they are buying a new house. i took them aside and said, kent, you cannot afford this house. my house payment was 1/3 of what they were telling him it would be after subprime lending was. a year later he was moving out house and to his apartment house minus his lifetime savings that he had put aside. the stockout how market has not improved and increased anyone's livelihoods, people do not have government or union p

d.c. circuit, i found that job absolutely fabulous. the people there were fabulous and to the supreme court after going through all those difficulties, the members of the court were just wonderful people to a person. it was a fabulous place to work. you were there. it was a lot of work and very difficult, but in retrospect, it was an exciting time. just the ideas and learning and everybody who have made it as decent a place as it possibly could be. the court is quite different than the ordeal it's almost the opposite of the ordeal it took to get there. judge maggs: what are the worse nd best things about being a supreme court justice. justice thomas: interacting with my kids, the clerks, watching you all. that's the best part. i would have to say to my wife is now a former law clerk. she is emeritus. we gave her an honorary law clerk degree. my wife is 34 years old when i got to the court. watching her enjoy the clerks and the kids, it is such a joy. i remember when nicholas was born. and what is he doing? judge maggs: graduate school. justice thomas: watching all of that. and then when janices got married. he worst part is loss of anone

court of appeals for the d.c. circuit, serving as special counsel for the senate committee on the judiciary, and as deputy assistant attorney general in the department of justice, environment, and natural resources division. the department of justice he worked to defend vital federal programs and oversaw many complex cases involving our natural resources, wildlife, and our environment. he also compelled polluters to limit harmful emissions into the air and worked with then-solicitor of the department of interior david ber bernhard n the listing decision for the polar bear. like mr. bernhard, ryan is capable of upholding the law and the science even when that's not easy. if you want someone who values conservation, who knows the appropriate use of laws like the antiquities act and endangered species act, then ryan is your guy. the department of interior needs ryan's expertise to help make the best decisions possible for benefit of our natural resources and the people and the wildlife living around them. his confirmation mu

my very first year on the court, i was served by a law clerk who had been with me on the d.c. circuit, and his application was tremendously attractive to me. why? because he wrote that he was studying law at night at georgetown and the reason was, that his wife, an economist, had a good job at the world bank. that and one other thing. he submitted as his writing sample his first year of law school writing exercise, and it was the theory of contract as illustrated in wagner's ring cycle. rosen: how is the theory -- i was going tog: say about that, i asked the chief, this is way back, in 1993 and 1994, if he could have access to west law lexus at home. and the chief said no, the law clerks were expected to stay however long it was necessary on the premises. the next year, after that, all of the law clerks had access to west law and lexus at home. rosen: we'll save the wagner question. i know the audience is burning. this is from 1986. i say this because it's a golden time and it's very important that the audience understands how far you think you've come from when you started off and wh

i point the court to emphasize in the d.c. decision and the first circuit involved this sort of record under the ina the was a visa inadmissibility ground that required the alien's activities went the country be harmful, not just entry. they're activities. >> the president -- i'm just trying figure out the outer limits. the president can treat immigrants more harshly than he treats other aliens. is that correct? under 11.82f. >> i if he had a reason why it's detrimental to the national interests. >> in the proclamation he says it's detrimental to the out because they have more rights when they get here. is that sufficient. >> that is exactly what the supreme court held in fayl, the issue was if the haitian immigrant that got into to the showers they would have had asylum protection. >> fails said that opposite they got, they had to show they had a right to be there isn't that correct? >> no your honor, the key point is that sale -- if the immigrants got here they would have had asylum from protection, and to stop them from invoking the protections they set

more common than at this was.once court,y first year on the i was served by a law clerk who ad been with me on the d.c. circuit, and his application was attractive to me. why? because he wrote that he was at night at georgetown and the reason was, economist, had an bank.d job at the world that and one other thing. he submitted as his writing first year of law exercise, and it of contract as llustrated in vogna's ring cycle. rosen: how is the theory -- >> i was going to say about that, i asked the chief, this is 1993 and 1994, if could have access to west law lexus at home. law he chief said no, the clerks were expected to stay long it was necessary on the premises. that, all ar, after of the law clerks had access to law and lexus at home. vogner e'll save the vog question, this is from 1986. i say this because it's a golden ime and it's very important that the audience understands how far you think you've come from when you started off and go.e you have to this said in 1986, in piece, some thought on the debate between special versus treatment feminism, where i claim my principle affirmative action plan would