federal employees were central to this history. ironically, the outside militants had no ideal that harney county was recognized nationally as something of a poster child for collaborative approaches, including building positive relationship with federal workers. militants believed by vilifying and harassing federal employees they would rally support for their cause. the militants leader later said that he never met the bureau of land management or by implication, any federal employee who is a quote, good person, unquote. by 2016, most people in hardy county just did not see it that way. through a collaboration, federal employees were contributing to better problem solving, in large part by making themselves more integral parts of the community and above all, by listening. no longer just uniforms and badges, federal employees were friends and members of the community, and harney county does not like members of the community being harassed. when the occupation ended, rodgers on the national wildlife refuge hala dinner to honor the u

second, federal agencies -- building federal law enforcement entities. for instance, las vegas police kept a patrol car outside a field unit in nevada during a high-profile court case. agency officials noted factors that can affect their ability to protect employees such as those in remote locations. also, the number of field law enforcement officers at the four agencies has declined for fiscal years 2013 to '18 with forest service experiencing the largest decrease of 22%. third, the four land management agencies have not completed all facility security assessments required by federal standards developed by the interagency security committee or isc. agency officials cited various reasons for not doing so including a lack of resources, training and expertise. not complying with the requirements, to complete these assessments could leave agencies exposed to risk to protecting their employees and facilities. while the fish and wild life authority has the blm and the forest service and park service do not. the standard also requires that agencies conduct ass

what is federal deposit insurance federal insurance of deposits. in the late 20s in the early 20s, five or 6000 banks failed nor the country. mostly in the rural agriculture and wheat stays in the midwest and codices in the south and local banks are lending to farmers. we have been a big articles for depression. so those banks failed left and right and there's a public outcry for the federal government to ensure the deposits. the depositors got wiped out also from local communities, there's no source of money in these communities anymore. and also from small bakers. and they'll demand better depositaries. everybody in the country who has more than a high school degree at the time these federal deposit terms are the is the worst idea ever. president uber and governor franklin roosevelt from new york and glass and people in the federal reserve board, people of had to take banks, and if they thank that it is a crazy system to have all of the powerful well-run banks in the country pay premiums every year to shore up badly managed small makes it ought t

court keep the case, given the federal interest in both. that's not the case here. he brings this action as a private citizen, which is what the doj brief actually says. he's not bringing this in his official capacity on behalf of the u.s. government, which is why his private lawyers representing him in this. notwithstanding in his principal briefing, he maintains he is bringing this as a private person and as the sovereign, which i don't think you can do. i will point out, finally, that all this concern about staying in state court, not only is there a federal concern and the obligation of staying the course to hear constitutional claims, but also don't forget that at the end of the day if the opponent does not get the relief he seeks and what he sees itself, they can go to the supreme court. that is the backstop. >> the worst convicted, it doesn't imply that you can't bring criminal proceedings until after the impeachment process has played out. and there's a conviction. what is your response to that? >> i understand the language and the

started under the auspices of the federal writers project. part of the wpa which most people are very familiar with. at the time it was created, it was consider the ugly duckling of the federal arts project. that's because the public regarded with a great deal of skepticism and suspicion this idea, this ill-defined category of unemployed writers getting put on the relief roles to do who knows what. they were called boondoggle or's and slackers and not seen as pulling their weight during the great depression. it started off as a project that was not well received by the american public, but because of its legacy, the ex-slave narrative, it has become the most important of the federal arts projects of the time. in terms of how did it develop, some federal directors received some ex-slave narratives from states that had undertaken it early, and that was the state of florida. it was under the direction of a southern white woman who is very interested in african-american culture. she was a fan of zora neal hurston, as i think many of us are today.

requires federal agencies to cede most federal land to state control after 2014. a researchers at university of california san diego found that in the year after utah and other western state legislators made the demand for transfer they saw a decrease in violence directed the a public lands employees. in that context it's tis pointing to see my republican colleagues to invite a witness with little experience on the issues we're hear to discuss and written about giving away federal land to state and private control. former blm director bob abby said in 2014, the rhetoric today does lead to increased animosity and tension and there's a belief that it's okay to do certain things outside the law and some people believe they're going to get away with it. today, i hope we can examine this rhetoric and the danger that it creates. that we could consider how to protect public employees, promote collaboration and end the culture of threats and violence. with that i'd like to recognize ranking member cur sis-- curtis. >> thank you, madam chair. no one in this room condones v

in addition to research and share big federal users, with other federal users, the study the cbrs band will contribute enormously to our understanding of how to create a win for all spectrum users. this development process balances the interest and concerns of multiple stake holders an attracted early investment from licensed as well as unlicensed users. all while protecting federal interests. to meet our spectrum needs going forward we need to set aside our old feuds and embrace systems that accommodate everyone and maximize spectrum use. this cbrs process tells us we can do it and we should build on this success. importantly, we should not think about he share act as simply a means of bringing up more federal spectrum for commercial use. the technologies developed should be seen as the first step in rethinking federal spectrum management to move from the current stale and static system of specific assignments to a dynamic sharing system that allows the frft to levramming economies of scale and provide federal agencies with the spectrum they need to meet their responsibilities. nsis a

, federal, federal. but for an issue where there is a murder using a vehicle, a gun, or a weapon, states will prosecute that. >> there's no scenario involves an act of violence that's not going to at least violate general purpose state laws. so in our own most recent tragedy in el paso, here in texas, there is -- capital murder charges have been filed by the d.a. in el paso. it doesn't matter that we can't file a federal domestic terrorism charge in order to seek the death penalty in that case. it might matter for other reasons. >> going back to previous cases of mass violence in the united states, there's been a lot of talk after almost every one about what needs to be done and not much has happened because of it. lisa monaco you wrote recently regarding domestic terrorism it is time to turn from talk to action and confront this threat. what specifically do you have in mind? what should be done to fill some of these gaps that bobby mentioned or address other ents of domestic terrorism? >> thanks for men

we'll continue this whole question of federalism because western loud so we wanted the areas where federal government did extend a lot of power and authority western land illustrate the power of the law. why is crucial here. in fact you can see the law outwork in this whole issue of western law. western territory is made public through lost so first of all you have to turn this land out there into the property of the public. that is done through law. the law turnstile and it's a private property so wants to law makes it public it turns around and says we'll turn this into private property. we will hand this over two individuals. this process illustrates to legal power of the people. that obstruction that we have not defined yet. besides the context of the federal government, settlers who have legal standing within the good nation, they use "the people" to settle in and create a right to it. indians that did not have a standing to "the people" they cannot do that. this gives them a chance they can create land whereas indians who are blocked from using the law are not able to do that. this i

and be heard in federal court. they may not have a winning claim in federal court. it may be dismissed. but the court has been clear with two respects. one, there is no exhaustion requirement in the 1983. that is completely clear. and second, equally clear under mitcham, that the anti-injunction act do not require individuals to bring their 83 claim. so again -- >> what is the 1983 claim? >> it's the immunity claim. >> the president's rights are being violated by the district attorney's office? >> president's immunity -- the president's immunity is being breached. yes. >> well, immunity is usually asserted as a defense. i'm trying to understand what the cause of action is. what is the 1983 cause of action? >> 1983 by its text refers to immunities held by law. so it's a clear textual basis under the statute. moreover, supreme court has made clear these kinds of immunities are available under 1983. it's a right held under the constitution. the credit clause has been a basis. all of these are rights held under 1983. the supreme court and the dennis opinion, i think was

, federal, federal but for an issue where a murder is using a vehicle oregon or an edged weapon states will prosecute that. >> it's not domestic terrorists are running away because -- >> there is no scenario that will violate state laws so in our own most recent tragedy in all paso here and takes us there is capital word or charges filed, it doesn't matter that we can't file federal domestic charge in order to receive the penalty for that case, going back to previous cases of this in the united states, there is been a lot of talk about what needs to be done and not much has happened because of it. lisa you wrote recently that -- regarding domestic terrorism and confront this threat, what do you think should be done to address these elements of domestic terrorism? >> so thanks for mentioning that and at the white house of homeland security and for george w. bush and that piece to put aside political pride -- the partisanship in really do our duty to focus on the most urgent threats we have a nation domestic terrorism, gun, violence attacks on our democracy, all of those are things where

because, they are taking federal grants and federal subsidies. they are unable to go forward. >> thank you. >> thank you. first of all, let me say thank you to the chairman and ranking member for holding this hearing. this is something many of us have asked for, this is such an important issue, as we can see. >> let me just say this. as a former attorney general, i think there were 38 ag's that signed a letter in support of the banking act saying this was an issue that was important for me. i agree with you, i think there are concerns about the concentrations, public safety health risks. but i also know the people of the state of nevada voted a majority to go down this path, and i respect that. as a former attorney and in conjunction with my colleagues, i do think there is a concern because we do not have a financial system. these businesses are forced to operate on a cash basis. the resulting market makes it more difficult to track revenue for taxation and regulatory compliance purposes, contributing to a public safety trend in cash intensive bu

we did for federal employees. recognize the hardships that the shutdown caused these workers and their families and to add backpay to federal contractors, the bill that we're getting ready to vote on. this would be a step forward and a precedent. we haven't done this in the past. but just as the guarantee of backpay for federal employees i believe starts to build in a little bit of a fire wall against a schott-down, i actual -- against a shutdown, i actually think having a rule that we would provide backpay also starts to provide a little bit of a fire wall against a shutdown. i think we should all be anti-shutdown. having mechanisms that make it harder to shut the government down or less likely is something we should all support. without us doing right by these workers, many of them will take years to recover from a financial hole that the shutdown put them in. i would ask my colleagues to join together and support senator smith and her amendment. with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. the presiding o

a federal appeals court heard oral arguments in a case that determines whether an accounting firm must comply with the manhattan district attorney subpoena for certain financial records including president trumps tax returns berkeley three-judge panel with us court of appeals for the second circuit engaged with attorneys on both sides on legal issues prickle this is 50 minutes. >> good morning you may be seated. what the panel will do is hear the case then we will take a brief recess then hear the rest of the calendar. i will call the calendar as to the first case right now that i will call the calendar after the recess for the remaining cases per code donald j. trump versus silas vance. before i do that let me just read and you can stand there as a matter of housekeeping for all concerned, just to read into the record or the agreement that we understand is now in place. i am quoting from the joint letter to forbear enforcement of the subpoena between the oral argument in this matter october 23, 2019 and ten calendar days after the court issues its opinion on the following conditions.

here's diversity and issue on federal courts. advocacy lawyers and the dean of howard university law school take on that question. the center for american progress posted this discussion on how diversity impacts litigants. legal decisions and the justice system. >> good morning everyone i'm the executive vice president of external affairs for the center of american progress. among thank each and every one of you for joining this very important if it. on to discuss fundamental issue strikes at the heart of our democratic values. if we truly believe that all americans deserve equal to men in the eyes of the law. must ensure that our legal decisions made by judges who backgrounds and perspectives that represent the experiences of all americans. study after study has shown that diverse groups solve problems in a more thoughtful and innovative way and arrived at more efficient and effective decisions. and solutions. so it comes as no surprise that diversity among our federal judges, in terms of their race and ethnic city in the gender

murrah federal building in downtown oklahoma city which housed 14 federal agencies, including the secreta, and the atf. >> mcveigh believed that his bombing would be the opening salvo in a conflict against an illegitimate tyrannical federal government that needed to be brought down to its knees. she wanted a roommate to help with the cooking. but she wanted someone who loves cats. so, we got griswalda. dinner's almost ready. but one thing we could both agree on was getting geico to help with our renters insurance. yeah, switching and saving was really easy! drink it all up. good! could have used a little salt. visit geico.com and see how easy saving on renters insurance can be. t-mobile's newest signal reaches farther than ever before. with more engineers. more towers. more coverage! it's a network that gives you ♪freedom from big cities, to small towns, we're with you. because life can take you almost anywhere, t-mobile is with you. no signal goes farther or is more reliable in keeping you connected. in the human brain, billions of nefor people with parkinson's, some neurons change thei

it arises under the premise, the supremacy clause holds where federal and state law conflicts federal law is the essence of the federal system. the court applied the doctrine there are two ways to have a conflict. one is where compliance with the federal law and state law is literally impossible, state law requires you to do something and federal law precludes you doing something and impossible to comply with those. the other exemption is where state law creates an obstacle to achieving the federal policy. that is going to be the principal kind of preemption debated here. state law says broadband should be treated as a telecom service subject to common carrier rules, subject to know blocking, throttling and other mandates and federal law says the opposite of those things but there is a strong basis that state law and federal law cannot coexist so judge williams dissented from that aspect. he thought there was authority to exempt expressly and he thought the majority analysis might implicate the ability to invoke this exemption so that is a pretty detailed summary. i'm sure we will hav

and that's where the fight's going to be in a federal bill. does the fcc get to oversee the market, or are they left out of it? because if they're left out of it, they're not going to get any of the consumer groups that i work with supporting, and they're not going to get any democrats supporting. they may not get some republicans. >> host: is there any evidence of throttling? >> guest: so, no. i mean, this has continued to be a hypothetical concern that, you know, when the restoring internet freedom order was first proposed and then adopted, we heard this is the end of the internet as we know it. literally, headlines across, you know, cnn and other publications. the internet is over, essentially, right? gigi was on your show a week before the order was voted, and she said isps will start charging online providers for faster, smarter, better quality of services, what i call fast lanes. it will happen. it hasn't happened. and now there's this continuing theory, well, that's because you guys are on your best behavior because the court hasn't rul

there is no federal history the history of one state reglet in the region of a country. the states will have to establish what they are doing is in their state wheelhouse. we are talking about things like disclosure requirements, unfair business practice relations. even the restoring internet freedom order said, states can continue to use their general consumer protection authority. that has never been an issue. under the title to order or the restoring internet freedom order. the issue is, when a state like california attempt to impose common carrier regulation, on what is now an intrastate information service, as upheld by this court, i think that's going to be a difficult task for them to convince a federal district court that what they're doing, regular leading and intrastate information service, is not in conflict with the federal policy. patrick can keep calling broadband access and intrastate service. the fact of the matter is largely interest intrastate. the last mile is in-state. i could just as easily keep saying it is and intrastate service that states do have

all federal judges identify as lgbtq. now, it's true that some presidents in recent history took action to address these trends, most notably president barack obama and his administration, but since entering the white house, president donald trump has worked tirelessly to undermine and overturn such efforts. the trump administration enabled by mitch mcconnell and senate republicans have managed to confirm 152 of trump's judicial nominees who are overwhelmingly white and male. in fact, 73% of trump's appointees have been male and more than 80% have been white. and if progressives want to fully advance the causes we care so deeply about from protecting the rights of immigrants and people with disabilities to expanding affordable health care and reforming our criminal justice system, then we must improve the diversity of our federal courts. that's why cap is so proud to host today's event and to welcome an esteemed panel of experts who are committed to achieving this very mission. with that, i have the great pleasure of turn

and that created a mechanism inside the federal government by which we can have a federal acquisition security council and really look at the security of the equipment that we're bringing into the federal space. there's a lot of work ongoing with that. but this really is a tool for federal agencies to be able to have a bit of a vetting of the equipment that's coming into their enterprise. and be able to leverage both classified and unclassified information for making determinations they don't want to bring something into their environment. when we talk about protecting information commensurate with the risk of potential compromise or risk management, it really is all about risk management. we can't protect everything. we have to understand what is is the most critical and in order to best understand what's most critical, we updated our high value asset policy at the beginning of this year. and in addition to updating the high value policy, the department of homeland security updated guidance on high value assets. so we really tried to partner with dhs to be able to provide a more tact

for example, in 2014 federal 14 federal court ruled that louisiana had intentionally disseminated when it maintained at-large elections in louisiana . unfortunately, voting rights act litigation even when successful is slow it could cost dollars on average it cost to have in five years for the voting rights act to be completed . for example, in 2016 in texas the fifth circuit court of appeals found texas photo id law violated section two during the three years of litigation with hundreds of elected officials were voted in office and for the 500,000 voters who lacked id that when came too late . lds try to work to address the discount rate changes before they happen but often we have been stymied by the cost and time it takes to litigate these matters . given the myriad of issues congress must act first to build the investment act or amendment act progress should restore preclearance . progress should make it easier for plaintiffs to block this ministry voting before an election. as you prepare for the 2020 elections we need to fix our democracy and should not be up for debate . it's go

my best source for law clerks are other judges, other federal judges.s tend to write glowing letters of recommendation. everyone is the best and the brightest student that ever graduated from this law school. [laughter] jus. ginsberg: but, my colleagues in other federal courts will tell me the straight story. very often, i will get a call from another federal judge saying, i have a clerk this year who i think would be just right for you. those are my best recommendations. david: we have a few questions from people attending today. if you could change one thing about the constitution, what would it be and why? [laughter] david: i guess you probably, if you were a founding father, founding mother -- [laughter] david: what might you have put in the constitution that did not quite get in there? jus. ginsberg: i would add an equal rights amendment. [applause] jus. ginsberg: i explain it this way. when i take out my pocket constitution to show my granddaughters, i can show them the first amendment that guarantees freedom of speech and of the press. but i can'

issues need to be resolved by federal judge? >> as i look at it i think everything has been briefedal ad aired on the district court certainly did not rule as a preliminary injunction or full merit based injection relief. this court upheld that decision that there may be a trip to the supreme court but i don't think the district court has to look at anything -- >> was it permanent or preliminary? >> he dismissed the complaint and i believe in turning america's decision -- they contemplated the thursday going to be any proceedings in the district court. subpoena?out the neck >> what subpoena. >> the wonder public ticket about real. [laughter] did they file another in 1983 faction questioning. >> not if this court ruled in favor of the district court that would be a binding president. and indeed just to be clear to inquire about this as well we a are hamstrung by the lack of the documents were seeking or but it is indeed proceeding and there are in fact other subpoenas outstanding and no one should be surprised by that. we just do

i was treated very differently by my federal supervising office, both of us were in the federal systemi of course was subject to drug testing and check-ins, but they did not treat me with a heavy hand like they did cindy and we have to look very hard at what drives disparity in this system. it's unacceptable, it's illegal. that brings me back to your question of policy and the fact that criminology experts all over the country will point out the fact that it's policy decisions that drive incarceration, incarceration rise in this country does not map to crime rates. we began to incarcerate at a very high rate as crime rates were beginning to decline and crime rates continue to go up and up and up even as we now enjoy historically low crime rates, some of the lowest crime rates ever recorded since we started -- >> thank you so much. my five minutes go very quickly. thank you so much. >> you're very welcome. >> i want to thank the witnesses for being here today. i want to talk a little bit about the need for bail reform. despite overall decreases in incarceration pretrial detention since

with approximately 130 americans dying from an overdose every single day we have devoted a lot of federal resources to tackling the crisis and we look forward to hearing from the surgeon general on this administration's efforts to implement the support act and now it is the one year anniversary and i also command doctor adams for launching his own unique initiatives to help raise public awareness about the risk of the opioid misuse, challenges remain however because roughly 20 million americans still struggle with substance disorder, addiction to other drugs including a math and heroin, pose an equal or even greater challenge to some communities and this is especially true in our rural areas of america, another issue is that few battling addiction actually seek or receive treatment, another issue is that even those who do seek help lack the expertise to distinguish the good treatment providers from the bad in solving this issue, what is the second focus of our hearing, it is easier said than done, the treatment sector includes not just extremely good and extremely bad actors but those in

also my cousin is in federal prison. i want to thank you for the just society bill you just represented. my question to you for all of us young millennials out there in our 20's and 30's, and it just starting out from college, what can we do, not just on social media, which we can see a change from that. i mean look at what you've come play spray but what can we do in actions outside of social media that can help you. because we know it is a lot of work that you are doing in all areas of government. and all the things that we brought up today in the town hall meeting. but what can we do to help you and your platform to thrive and really helped change this government. rep. ocasio-cortez: thank you so much. that is a really great question. one of the things i think is , it is not is that just about helping me. a larger am part of grassroots movement. people, because critical mass of people have demanded justice in our criminal justice system, in environmental car'se, and education, d ration, et cetera. i think one of the b

we will see, but it actually would be really nice if we get federal law.ut where patrick and i disagree, and i hate to beat a dead horse, but where patrick and i disagree, and this is the most important part of net neutrality, is the authority part, whether the fcc will be able to oversee the broadband market. it is the place where the court told the fcc that the argument that antitrust law and the ftc can protect consumers. and with the court said was, you kind of laid it out that those tools are available. but you do not actually talk specifically about how they will protect consumers from blocking , throttling, so on and so forth. i don't believe the antitrust laws or the ftc are adequate. you need to have an expert agency and that is where the fight will be in a federal bill. the fight will be does the fcc will get to oversee the market, or are they left out of it? because if they are left out of it, they will not get any of the consumer groups i work with support him, and they will not get any democrat supporting. they may not get the republicans. is

the federal education department s also fined $100,000.en were separated from their families at the u.s. mexico border than previously known. that's according to a new count the trump administration submitted to the american civil liberties union. immigration authorities separated more than 1,500 additional children from their parents between july 2017 and june 2018 when a federal judge ordered an end to the practice. that brings the overall number of children separated since july 17 to more than 5,400. in iraq, securi fces clashed with anti-govement protesters in baghdad and across several southern provinces today,ll kig at least 23 people. thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of the capital city to protest the country's corruption and struggling economy. l police firede rounds, rubber bullets, and tear gas to try to disperse the crowd. we'll take a closer look at antiovernment protests in tw other countries, lebanon and chile, later in the program. despite president trump's recent decision to pull u.s. troops ou of northria, th

only 30 minutes with the first federal chief security officer and our current federal chief informationurity officer doing great work. general, i'll start with you. it was a pleasure to work with you then. what was the highest impact areas you are working on? >> we take a look at the cybersecurity in the federal government, it's at learning continuum. we try to get better and build upon the lessons learned from the past. we certainly tried doing that when i was in office. some of the more impactful things that we did, and i think grant is continuing with is first is changing the narrative and looking at cybersecurity as a risk management issue. previously not only in the public sector but the prevent sector we saw emphasis solely on just compliance. not necessarily taking a look at cybersecurity as a holistic risk management issue that involves people process and technology. so that's the first thing we've talked to paige for me. that was the narrative that we were trying to move forward on. i'm pleased to see that continuing. secondly, we were trying to make sure that we were in fact t

a federal judge in california has held u.s.retary ofde education betss in contempt of court for violatingr an ordating to student loans. the ruling said divorce continue to collect loans from students whode att corinthian colleges, a now-defunct chain of for-profit colleges, despite being ordered to stop. the feder education departmen was fined $100,000. a new count the trump administrationcio the american l liberties union says more childrenere separated from their families at the u.s. mexico border than previously known. immigration authorities separated more additional children from their parents between july 2017-june 2018 won a federal judge offered to end -- judge ordered an end to the practice. that brings the overall number of chiren separated since july 2017 to more than 5400. overseas in iraq, 30 people were killed in clashes in baghdad and .her provinces tod thousands are protesting the corruption and struggling economy in the country. police fired live rounds, rubber bullets and tear gas towdisperse the we take a cl

i mentioned to you that the federals did constructed fortifications. after atlanta fell on september 2, sherman wanted to make atlanta into a thoroughly military garrison. he ordered the evacuation of sympathizing visitors. they were forced to leave. he also ordered his engineer to construct a union earthworks to defend atlanta. they were inside the confederate perimeter. you can see those numbered lines, 14, 25, 16, 17, that is the union earthworks to defend atlanta. through the southern and western suburbs, they had to tear down lots of houses and everything like that. but they built one of the most impressive earthwork defensive will ever see, photographed by george barnard in november of 1862. we have several wonderful photographs, how neat they are, how well constructed according to scientific principles. and here is something you will not see any place else. this is a ditch in federal fort number seven. you see those things that look like corn stalks? they are not corn stalks. they are wooden stakes, six feet long with sharp ends, and they are pl

they have asked for if federal law, to bolster their efforts -- for this federal law, to bolster their efforts to target animal abusers, because they understand the direct link between animal abuse and violent crimes. this link is why the f.b.i. now collects data on acts of cruelty against be a mals for their -- animals for their criminal database, right alongside felony crimes. when i first came to congress, one of the first bills i voted on was the animal crush video prohibition act. a bill that nearly unanimously passed. it made it a crime to create or distribute animal crush videos, which depict horrific acts of violence. this bill today takes the next logical step and criminalizes those acts underlying that crime as well. the senate passed the pact act by unanimous consent in the last two congresses. and i am proud the house is finally doing its part to pass this important legislation. today anyone who inflicts serious bodily jerron animals will be committing an act for -- injury on animals will be committing an act for which they can be condemned. when this passes, they also will

federal, then incorporated against the states. four that said no unanimous requirement anywhere, four that said unanimous requirements in both federal and states. justice powell in the middle said only in federal, but not incorporated against the states. the question that has been presented is do we revisit that, and does that federal right get incorporated? the threshold question you could see the court going a different way on is whether there is a unanimity requirement at all, in federal or state cases. ramesh: all right, thank you for that whirlwind tour of different cases before the court. i was wondering if any of you wanted to add anything onto the cases that the other panelists discussed. mike? michael: actually, no, i think they were fairly presented. i intuitively disagree with tom, but this time i will be -- [laughter] elbert: i have one thought on the title vii cases. i think that just from the 30,000-foot level, and it sort of tees off of what mike said when he first started, the suggestion that sex had a particular m

court as they apply in -- in state court as a play federal court. he didn't type to disagree the court old holding. in a sense apodaca itself is born of a disregard for stare decisis. this case is almost singular in its, the compelling reasons right now to overrule apodaca. >> since you mention balzac, can ask a question about that could imagine this is assigned in your favor and then a defendant who has been convicted on and on unanimous verdict in puerto rico comes here and says, i'm a citizen of the united states, and the only reason why i was able to be convicted a nonunanimous verdict are these old insular cases that reflect attitudes of the day in the aftermath of the spanish-american war, and just as you brushed aside apodaca, you should brush aside the insular cases. >> i would say that would be different for all the reasons i just outlined. the insular cases where a majority decision from the court. they were based on a view that has not been disregarded or left behind in the courts jurisprudence. there may be arguments party can make an or

at the federal reserve live now. reporter: federal reserve cut the benchmark rate by a quarter of a percentage point. it is 1 1/2 to 1.75%. the rate cuts come on a global slow down they say. they say muted inflation. the fed does signal in the statement a pause for future rate cuts. the federal reserve statement changes words from act as appropriate, to assess. now the changes make, part of that sentence that makes that big change, says this, quote, it assesses the appropriate path of target range for the federal funds rate. that is going forward. the statement says that the labor market remains strong. consumer spending is rising at a strong pace. the fed also sees business investment and exports remain weak. in the two statements two fed precedents dissented, kansas city president esther george and boston president rosengren dissented that is the third time they both dissented. jim bullard did not dissent on decision. he thinks this is where the fed needs to be with the 25 basis point cut. he believes this is enoug

this staggering, stunning maintenance backlog on the federal land that we own, the federal land that's bigger than all of the -- a long list of european countries i mentioned just a minute ago. it can't continue. if we continue on this path, we will only do greater disservice to our citizens and to the lands themselves. that's why i've introduced an amendment that would stop the federal government's use of taxpayer dollars to acquire more lands in the next year. specifically, it would prevent the money currently going to the land and water conservation fund, the range improvements fund, the fish and parks service from being able to acquire new lands that the federal government cannot care for. it is important when describing a piece of legislation, in this case an amendment to another piece of legislation to explain both what it does and what it does not do. let me be very clear in telling you what this amendment does not do. this amendment would not refuse the dollar amount being given to any of these programs. not one of them. not by one dollar. it would simply reauthorize the money

let alone for a federal court hearing. right? that somebody working for a pro-putin oligarch who was under indictment in this country and who prosecutors say is an upper-echelon associate of russian organized crime, a person in that position working for that guy could also be part of the president's legal team? at his defense of the russia investigation? what? i mean, lev parnas in court is saying there's going to be executive privilege issues involved in some of the evidence against him because it has to do with the president's legal representation because he was on that team. i mean, in the wildest fantasies about this insanity that we are living through in the trump presidency, nobody would have ever claimed that a guy linked to the kremlin and to russian organized crime would somehow get installed on the president's legal defense team in the russia scandal. but apparently, that's where we are. i mean, "the wall street journal" did just publish picture from lev parnas' private instagram account, and in fact, there he is at the

i think preemption in federal privacy legislation would be important. and with respect to net neutrality my understanding is the ftc would be looking very closely at the issues on re-manned. >> host: what do you hear most, from american citizen? >> guest: we have a consumer complaint database, and we hear most about frustration with robocalls. that is the number one complaint, and so we and the fcc and industry are working diligently to try to eradicate the problem. >> i have a question about, when you talked about the privacy, legislation, you mention try to make sure competition is reserved and supported. i think today those legislation that would require social media companies to make their service of both interoperable and allow customers to remove the personal data on one platform to another. i'm curious what you think of that legislation and you think something like that will enhance competition? >> guest: i have not had a chance to take a look at the legislation and i look forward to reviewing it. i know a number of the companies in the space are