ruth bitter ginsberg wrote the dissent. in our view, this court does not comprehend or is indifferent to the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination. pretty straight forward and right to the point, but at least there were folks that understand what you are trying to do. >> with her dissent, i had many calls from all over the united states that she was right on. what justice aledo said, it didn't make sense. he said that my problem wasn't that i was not discriminated against, but that it was because i did not file a charge of the first time i got that discriminatory paycheck, even though i didn't know it. that is not what the law was, but justice ginsberg hit the nail on the head. >> with all respect to justice aledo, i hope i am never in front of him because i just called him crazy on tv. how can you miss the statute of limitations about something that you didn't even know? you got congress to pass this legislation and barack obama signed it as his first piece of legislation, how did you feel that

megyn: one thing that justice ginsberg said, here is how she phrase it. >> at the supreme court those who know don't talk and those who talk don't know. megyn: so that's true. nonetheless, people talk anyway. but she went on to say -- i wonder if you think this is a forecast of what this opinion will look like. she said as one may expect knowledge of the most controversial cases remain pending. so it is likely that the sharp disagreement rate will go up next week and the week after. is she telling us we are looking at a 5-4 decision on the healthcare law? >> she is telling us if we are talking about it we probably don't know. it's so impossible, megyn, to read between the tea leaves here. i think you can do naval -- i think you can do navel gazing between what ginsberg and scalia said. but i agree with wendy. for anyone, justices, any of the clerks, anyone else who would have any inside knowledge to be discussing it with anyone right now. i just think it's so difficult to begin to do this kind of thing. megyn: i think it many more illuminating than what j

ladies and gentlemen, justice ruth bader ginsberg. [ cheers and applause ] >> please, be seated. that was a splendid introduction but the truth is, i've had more than a little bit of luck in my life to be born when i was and to be a lawyer when the women's movement came alive in the late '60s and early '70s and could lend my whatever skills i had as a lawyer, to nudge that movement along. i think many of you know, it is now flood season at the court. so all i can offer this evening is an impressionistic view of what life has been like at the court in the 2011 to 2012 term. and in doing that, i will borrow heavily from the annual report i made to my circuit, 2nd circuit, at its judicial conference last week. some years ago, a former law clerk turned law professor, who, perhaps, is in this audience tonight. rank the justices by the number of laughs they provoked at oral argument. he rated me, his former boss, the least funny justice who talks. i remained in last place this term with only two laugh lines. a published tally for which i do not vouch, rated jaw city scalia first among

justice ginsberg discussed whether with the law could stand if the critical piece of, the individualandate was struck down. saying may the mandate be shopped like a head of broccoli, from the rest of the act? if you didn't catch it, that's a little justice humor. talking a jab at the conservative's so-called broccoli argument. she wasn't the only justice sending signals. antonin scalia, a reliably conservative vote released a new book this weekend in which he writes that he has "little use for central precedent the boom administration is using in its case. joining me now is noam scheiber, senior editor of the new reasonable and author of "the escape artists: how obama's team fumbled the recovery." he joins us from washington. thanks for being here. >> as we see ourselves here with 8.2% employment. if you read my book, it's mostly critical from the left. mitt romney is critical, but i think there were missed opportunities. the stimulus could have been far bigger. there was more fuss on deficit reduction and not economy. and there was emphasis on bipartisanship with republicans the sam

. >> one of the things that interested me with the notes we saw on the supreme court was justice ginsbergat congress' basis for this health care law was mitt romney's health care law. it just seemed like a political -- >> yeah, you know, it remind med, both scalia and ginsberg in decisions this week took little shots, or at least references to what's going on in the campaigns. which i don't think there's anything wrong with that. these guys are political actors, and they watch what's going on. scalia in his arizona dissent, i believe, mentioned president obama's recent decision on not deporting certain classes of illegal aliens, and ginsberg talked about how the idea for obama care originated in massachusetts. on the one hand, it's factually true. and on the other hand for us, she's being a little political there. >> a little bit of, we get it, folks, we're not really behind an ivory tower here. >> exactly. >> health care has not been a winning issue for the president. he hasn't talked about it on the campaign trail. is it more of a winning issue now? i sort of look at it and it's like he

>> eric: justice ginsberg and scalia both insinuated. but again, isn't that what they always do?t game? >> dana: not really. usually it's no comment. when they you can ma comment that will be sharp disagreement, can't say what happens it means you're on the losing end. >> eric: best line ever. as far as the supreme court goes, those who know, don't talk. those who talk, don't know. i agree. the bottom line is mitt romney said what he can do. obamacare or the individual mandate, he can give all 50 states exemption, or in case of obama 57, exemption. isn't that what obama is planning to do with immigration? he will say you want to do it on immigration. i'll do it on obamacare. >> bob: one thing is clear here. if they take the mandate out, it will destroy the bill. washington state had a similar bill, with mandate. republicans took over and did away from the mandate. washington state has no insurance in the state because they couldn't attract people who were able-bodied. that is what will happen with the bill. karl rove says we have to come together. republicans weren't willing to c

they forget to edit it and they say, the decent of justice ginsberg, and then apparently roberts switcheste that they handed in the wrong couple of pages. my god such a last-minute change. any idea why? >> there has been quite a lot of talk around the washington legal circles that chief justice roberts is under enormous political pressure not to overturn this law, and it appears that pressure has worked. i think there's an alternative explanation for why the decent is worded in the way it is. i think the four dissenting justices are so angry that they decided to leave that in as essentially a tell, letting everybody know that roberts stabbed them in the back at the last moment. otherwise they would have edited >> wow. >> and i think they can claim to not be breaking the confidentiality of the court but sending a dog whistle signal that we had this in the bag and at the last moment roberts essentially ratted us out. >> wow as ana would say, drum. that's some serious drama. all right. we'll come back to you later in the show and talk about chief justice roberts and how he has been reacting

friday, supreme court ruth bader ginsberg talked about the health care case. no case has attracted more attention in the press, and the academy. a line that formed three days before oral argument connectioned. some have described the controversy as unprecedented and they may be right if they mean the number of protested going on outside the court while oral argument was underway inside. she also spoke about press reports on the decision. and though our deliberations are private, that has not stopped the media from rumors and avounts. my favorite wisely observed at the supreme court, those who know, don't talk and those who talk don't know. >> watch the rest of her comments from the american constitution society online. at the c-span video library. >> the ceo of jp morgan chase is on capitol hill on friday. also at the hearing the heads of the securities and exchange commission and the fdic and the comptroller of currency. at 4:00 eastern tuesday afternoon. we are live here at the state department for the release of the 2012 human trafficking report. and whethe

. >> ruth bader ginsberg talked about the helmut case. >> no case has attracted more attention than the academy, the ticket line outside the supreme court. a line that formed three days before oral argument commenced. some have described the controversy as unprecedented and they may be right if they mean the number of press conferences, prayer circles, protests, counter protests going on outside the court while oral arguments was under way inside. >> she also spoke about press reports on the decision. >> and though our deliberations are private, that has not dissuaded the media from publishing a steady stream of rumors and fifth hand accounts. my favorite among press pieces at the court those who know don't talk and though who don't talk don't know. >> in a few moments on cspan 3, a senate financing -- stanford university and the federal ils society, a conversation on regulating technology. jamie dimon is -- also at the hearing, the heads of the securities and exchange commission, the commodity futures exchange commission, the fdic and the comp froler of the currency. the show is live s

reporter: long days and late nights at the supreme court as the justices rush to finish what justice ginsbergtly called the flood season. >> many of the most controversial cases remain pending so it is likely that the sharp disagreement rate will go up next week. >> reporter: the biggest case this session and the biggest in at least a decade -- the president's health care law. the election year blockbuster argued for more than six hours in march, has far-reaching implications from main street to the campaign trail. >> i'm actually continuing to be confident that the supreme court will uphold the law. >> if i'm elected president, i will repeal obama care and i'll stop it in its tracks on day one. >> reporter: the nine justices face four separate issues in this one case -- the centerpiece. will the individual mandate requiring nearly all americans to have health insurance stand or will it fall? and does the rest or any of the law survive if the mandate is struck down? does the law's expanded medicaid program unfairly step on state's rights? or will the court call for a legal time-out until the

supreme court justice ruth bader ginsberg will be speaking to the gathering at 6:00 p.m. eastern. and you can see it live on our companion network c-span. >>> kenya, indonesia, hawaii, kansas, chicago, and washington. this weekend on book tv, follow david on his journey walking in a president's footsteps. for barack obama the story. sunday starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern, a video record of his travels. then live at 7:30 he takes your calls and questions. also this weekend on afterwards, conservative commentator blames liberals for an ongoing war on ideas using the tyranny of cliches. >> american politics have been distorded by this idea that the further you move away from the left the closer you get to bad things. one of the bad things is fashist, another one is racist, homophobic, sexist. the best working definition is a conservative who's winning an argument. >> that's sunday night at 9:00 on book tv. this weekend on c-span2. >>> the story behind the star spangled banner. the invasion and burning of washington, d.c. this weekend on american history tv, mark the bicentennial of the

one thing we may want to call attention to is a quote from none other than justice ginsberg in yesterday's opinion. reading from her opinion, "a mandate to purchase a particular product would be unconstitutional if, for example, it abridged the freedom of speech, interfered with free exercise of religion or infringed on liberty interest protected by the due process clause." that is what we should be talking about that we are going to see collisions under the mandates and rules of this obama care law with our conscience only beginning with hhs mandate but not ending there. we are looking forward to continuing to celebrate the ft. night for freedom particularly ending with the fourth of july and bells ringing at noon eastern time across the country to celebrate our religious freedom on that day. finally, while the hhs mandate is being litigated in court, the broader fight for freedom now moves to congress. and policy makers must repeal obama care in order to replace it with health care that reduces costs, increasing access, respects religious liberty and leaves health care decisions where it

with that, we have filled ginsberg for recreation and parks. i would like to address items number three and four as part of the presentation, the legislation that follows your budget. item three, a golf course provision and fees. item four, professional tennis lesson rates. >> thank you. we will go through our budget presentation. then katy will what this through the two legislative items of that is ok. supervisor chu: you can do your presentation. then if she wants to speak to those items, that is good. >> terrific. thank you, supervisors. ripleys to be about to present our 2012-2013 budget -- we are pleased to be able to present our budget. this is after some pretty tough years, and this is a much healthier and happier budget, we're pleased to report. these are our proposed budgets for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. we have an operating budget and a capital budget. the capital budget fluctuates greatly depending upon resources in a given year. supervisor chu: that if we could go to the slide. the projector is not showing up. >> as we have noted in

with the republicans and justice souter voted -- voted with a dissenting democrat, i think justice ginsberg, so in effect you had a bipartisan decision on constitutionality and then they took up the question of remedy after they said that the scheme that the florida legislature has put in place for recount is -- is illegal, unconstitutional, and then they said the time has expired for further recount because by gore's own admission, the critical date was december 12th and this was december 11th. they said there's no longer any time to count. the gore campaign made a big mistake when they asked for recounts in only four counties, and they were pro-democratic counties, all of them, very heavy democratic counties, and they asked for a recount instead of a statewide recount that should have come in. when they did that, that gave us the high ground, and their mantra was count every vote, count every vote. our mantra was, look, we've counted them five times, six times, seven times, and every time we count them we win, and so finally the supreme court said, yeah, that's right. the supreme court al

ginsberg and sotomayor. so it was an extraordinary turn of events, because five minutes into chief justice roberts' opinion, you would have asked anyone in that room whether this law was constitutional -- was going to be held unconstitutional, we would all have said yes. but we had to sit to the end. and the turn of events surprised me, that's for sure. >> on the medicaid provision, he essentially helped them out saying, this way it's unconstitutional, but as long as states can opt out, we can leave it in. >> that's right. and this is going to be an administrative difficulty for the obama administration. the law had been, in most cases, he who pays the piper calls the tune. that if the federal government gives the states money, for anything, they can determine how that money is spent. but what the chief justice said in this opinion was the federal government went too far here. they commandeered -- that's the term he used -- commandeered money from poor people. and too coercivcoercive. so that part of the law

the other liberal justices, breyer, ginsberg, kagan, sotomayor.g is outside the supreme court. john, you've actually been going through this document, reading the decision. >> it's a fascinating decision. if you read it, wolf, there are always questions, people say can you find in the constitution the heritage, can you connect the dots back to the founding fathers for any decision issued by the supreme court. that's what the chief justice tried to do in his decision. one of the key arguments is can you penalize somebody, tax somebody, make them go out and tell them you must buy insurance even if they don't want to do it. here's what the chief justice says in the decision. the court holds that our constitution protects us from federal regulation under the commerce clause, so long as we abstain from the regulated activity, meaning insurance is regulated. if you don't buy it, under the commerce clause, the government can't force you, or penalize you. then he goes on to say, but from its creation, the constitution has made no such promise with respect

. >> the damage is amazing inlaid ginsberg. this all happened in just a matter of minutes. we understand at least 80 people are displaced this morning. many staying at the local high school up the street at bladensburg ice bowhigh school. county officials will decide today whether to ask for federal assistance. the amount of destruction caused within minutes is hard to comprehend. some residents salvage what they could from their homes. roofs sheered off completely in some cases. a microburst is capable of producing winds of more than 100 miles an hour. among those with severe damage was councilwoman trina brown. she fled into the bathroom and jumped into the bathtub. >> the rules exploded and -- roof exploded and cool oblew off. it was terrific. >> they have only a short while to gather belongings before mold and mildew upsets in -- sets in. police are patrolling. 80 people looking for new home this morning. john gonzalez reporting, abc 7 news. >> . we want to take you to northern > tropical storm debby could bring 15 inches of rain. -- we want to take you to northern flor

justice sotomeyer and ginsberg were scratching their heads. it meant he could then bifurcate the enforcement provisions of medicaid. because the social security act and provisions are subject to their own severed ability clause, it was possible to uphold the expansion while at the same time limiting enforcement of the provision. what we are left with is something that i would say we cannot call a state option today. it is something. it is an element of the program that is the new affordable care act. it is subject to different rules having to deal with enforcement. we await guidance from the secretary regarding how she plans to implement the decision superimposed on the statute. i am convinced 60 million poor children and adults will have their benefits because of what justice roberts did here. i think just in closing on this issue of implementation, january 1, 2014 comes around we will have a few states that had either not implemented in whole or in substantial part -- but i think the urgency of the problem is too great. the situation facing

and more time for route ruth bader ginsberg to work on "i'm sexy and i know it." justice and who doesn't want 50% more cash? ugh, the baby. huh! and then the baby bear said "i want 50% more cash in my bed!" phhht! 50% more cash is good ri... what's that. ♪ ♪ you can spell. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. what's in your wallet? ha ha. ♪ ♪ >> david: the effects of the supreme court decision on people who really matter, the candidates. but first bill maher wants americans to grow up. charlie sheen wants a drink and that age old question. what is drugs. when it doesn't fit anywhere else we put it in in the viewfinder. >> my point is to republican adults and it is this when 14-year-old boys sound exactly like you and can produce radio shows and quote speeches that sound exactly like yours maybe you should rethink what is coming out of your mouth. >> what is common sense? i can't hear. >> you you probably heard the rumors and they are true. i'm a democrat. [ sobbing ] >> i just want to help those who are

scholars continue to digest the opinion, some assert that the dissent many reference to ruth bader ginsberg'sissent is telling because she didn't write one per se. however, she did break from the majority opinion on key issues. so what she wrote could be characterized form of dissent, that she was in the minority at some point. law supports say the opinion proves that roberts is truly functioning at the umpire he promised to be in the come finmation hear -- confirmation hearings. calling only balls and strikes. >> the affordable care act opinion goes a long way toward saying that the roberts court is not just motivated by politics. at times they can put the law and good of the country above the personal political preferences and do what the constitution requires. >> plenty of pressure in play in the weeks the case was argued in march and release of the opinion on thursday. the president's april state in the the rose garden he was confident the court wouldn't take the "unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning the law." public lecture by bob le leaheyo put the brakes on what he calls po

and more time for route ruth bader ginsberg to work on "i'm sexy and i know it."tice alito to stay home, especially thursday, alito. and who doesn't want 50% more cash? huh! and then the baby bear said >> david: the effects of the supreme court decision on people who really matter, the candidates. but first bill maher wants americans to grow up. charlie sheen wants a drink and that age old question. what is drugs. when it doesn't fit anywhere else, we put it in in the viewfinder. >> my point is to republican adults, and it is this when 14-year-old boys sound exactly like you and can produce radio shows and quote speeches that sound exactly like yours maybe you should rethink what is coming out of your mouth. >> what is common sense? i can't hear. >> you you probably heard the rumors and they are true. i'm a democrat. [ sobbing ] >> i just want to help those who are less fortunate than i am. and i believe good affordable healthcare for everyone. >> why aren't you a democrat? it might not be as bad as you think. >> if i was your ♪ boyfriend ♪ never let you go ♪ keep

marc ginsberg. we should note, studio in d.c.r ginsberg, let me get your reaction to hearing that morsi is going to quit the muslim brotherhood. what too we make of that? >> i suspect what he is trying to do is differentiate his particular brand of politics from the brotherhood which is shall we say, less than overwhelmingly supported by the significant plurality of egyptians. this election was close, and he is trying to se ing send a sign national community and to egyptians that didn't vote for him, he won't necessarily be captive of the muslim brotherhood heedleadership. >> how will this shape the relationship between egypt and this country? >> the muslim brotherhood sweep, in the parliamentary elections, sends a very cold shiver up the spine of israel, and the future condition of the camp david accords. the brotherhood, an an t antagonistic group, how they deal with the brotherhood will have a great deal with what happens with the united states. >> what can we make of how they've dealt with the accord in the past? >> listening

ruth ginsberg would be considered the being if barack obama is president and theron made the same thingwith justice scalia adjust this kennedy would be more likely to leave under the mitt romney presidency. >> host: is there roberts court? >> absolutely. it is the story of american politics. the biggest development is the evolution of the republican party. republicans dominated for decades weather john marshall hahn out of -- holland, lewis powell, sandra day o'connor. justice alito and john roberts reflect the modern party. the polarization of congress winnow seat in the united states supreme court. that is the roberts court that is more conservative and wrote william rehnquist ever left. >> host: you describe john roberts as a radical? >> i do. the book begins with the story of the botched both that everybody remembers but nobody remembers why. it is interesting on its own but sets up the protagonist the paradox the man who claimed to be the candidate of change in the supreme court justice who claimed to be the baseball umpire who did not want to change rules who has reversed position

justice ruth bader ginsberg said a precise salvage job would be the more conservative way to go, versusescking operation." justice antonin scalia sounded doubtful it could be possible. >> when have we really struck down what was the main purpose of the act and left the rest in effect? >> reporter: regardless of the outcome, supporters and opponents are preparing for the fall-out. david plouffe maintaining the law's constitutionality acknowledging that contingency plans have been mapped out. capitol hill democrats say they are strategizing as well. >> one way or the other, on the democratic side, we are prepared to build on the landmark health reform to make sure more and more we have affordable quality healthcare for all americans. >> reporter: speaker john boehner warned republican not fight the ball. should the court's decision go in their favor. if it doesn't? >> if the court does not strike down the entire law the house will move to repeal what is left of it. obamacare is driving up the cost of healthcare and making it harder for small businesses to hire new workers. our focus has bee

you never hear the claim that justice ginsberg or breyer should have sided with the constitutional conservatives on the court to strike this down and that would protect the integrity as well. it is always to support big government and claims that the constitution doesn't limit power at all. again, look, the reason the court is independent that we don't have elections for the justices, that they serve life tenure or during good behavior are is so they can have the fortitude to withstand such political pressure. they didn't do their job here. that is quite clear and we need to fix that. >> he he thought could lead to basically a tyranny over the people and lots of conservativessed to in looking that the decision how peculiar the reasoning was on the commerce clause so strong and then coming around to rescue this statute, people are talking again about what judge talks about limiting the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. could that argument be seriously considered again? >> there is problems in terms of limiting the supreme court jurisdiction because then you might leave it to a bunch of liber

. >> bret: justice ginsberg said she thought the law was unscathed as she was leaving the courtroom.you are saying possibly not. paul? >> i think it's a big victory for obama. states cannot opt out of the mandatory buying of insurance. they can opt out of the expan expanded medicaid, but they are not going to because they get huge money if they opt in to it. unless they are foolishly and extremely political, they are going to take the money. i think this is a victory for obama. >> bret: last ten, ten seconds. what does this mean for john roberts as the chief justice? are people going to look at him saying as a conservative appointed by george w. bush, is he someone like suitor was for george h.w. bush? >> he is not a george suitor. but federalism, this is a moment he came off as brutus. this was a long-standing friend who came out of nowhere. i'm not sure what is left of federalism as a result. >> bret: last thing. >> he makes himself look like he is open-minded. not dock trinary and not political and not partisan. he makes the court look like to, too, to the extent he could. >> bret

. >> ruth bader ginsberg went to cairo and said there are many constitutions that are better than thehe is exactly right. >> that country in egypt, constitution. >> south africa constitution is better for south africa than hours is? >> absolutely. >> fine. indefer. i think we have the best system for everybody. >> sean: we have r out of time. we'll come back. won't take part of the neutral corners. time for a sneak peek what is coming up on the record in 18 short minutes. >> greta: dangerous there. >> sean: anytime that beck is here it's dangerous. you know that. >> greta: i love beckel. he knows that, too. we go way back. tonight we have the latest in "fast and furious." look at it. they put him up on the screen. did you see his head? i saw that. i saw that. beck is bored now. >> sean: temper tantrum. >> now i feel better. got to tell you that. >> greta: you weren't interested when i was telling you what we are doing tonight. i saw you put your head in your hands like you are bored. thanks a lot. >> no, no. go ahead. >> greta: the latest on "fast and furious." reince priebus is here

if you look at the statute, this is one piece and as justice ginsberg pointed out, it would have been important to enact this amendment. there are whole new eligibility groupings. they are all a matter of degree or certain dimensions of poverty and in the beginning, we only recognize a few dimensions of poverty. this is one piece and i view the implications of the coercion doctrine. i look at it as a practical lawyer who deals in health-care law. this thing has no legs beyond the remedy that the chief justice concocted in order to save these families with children and individuals from losing their money. there is a part of the statute that says that you must be given prompt access to medical assistance. there was a split about how to understand that provision, whether it is just the coverage or actually the services, congress clarified that all along it had meant the services and not just the coverage. access to care is the thing that we care about about law. financing is the means of access to care. the medicaid portion of this decision is the most shaky portion of the decision to at