and senator moyahan said ruth bader ginsberg. why? because dean griswold, the long-time dean of harvard law school thinks she's very good. ( laughter ) and this is the dean that said i could not have a harvard law degree because i didn't stay there for my third year. >> reporteryear. >> rose: right. so many chance things occur in life and you don't know if they turn out to be good or bad. but this certainly was good. there was a celebration at the court of the 50th anniversary of the building, so the building was completed in 1935, and this was 1985. dean griswold was then solicitor general. he was to make a speech about great advocates before the court. and by 1985, he realizes that he can't have a list that's all men. so after he finishes with thurgood marshall, the next person he mentions is ruth bader ginsberg. >> rose: yes. when i went through my nomination process, i was told that everyone should have a marty ginsburg as a muse. ( laughter ) he apparently came into the preparation session with folders, including all of ruth's sp

and then you have these key figures like ginsberg but then you also have the great bands of the era and great musicians. i think that people were drawn to the messages that were departed in the challenging of the probing of the provocative cast and sometimes of a radical nature contrasting the verities that were in place. they are enactin interacting wie another the way people behave. there is a very radical facet that i realized there are revolutionary possibilities. we think inherently in some of this which is why it is perceived to be as dangerous as it was considered by some of the powers that were, and it was treated accordingly. there are other avenues into the setting up of the underground syndicates of the papers cropped up. there is a new kind of comic that are in place. we think of gilbert and others as the underground newspaper in the 60s and i talk about that in the chapter on in texas capital city and it was this incredible compendium of how publication wise. you can go back and look at the issues and get these snapshots looks of so much was going on in the other movements

justice ginsburg: well, the press reported inaccurately, because they said the reason that ginsberg hadproblem with the taxes or the babysitter is because marty was a tax lawyer. [laughter] but in our home, in our personal life, i did all the taxes. [laughter] [applause] charlie: yes, and guess who did all the cooking? marty. justice ginsburg: yes. when all the presidents men, and they were men, descended on my apartment to go through the papers, marty made a delicious lunch. [laughter] charlie: and at one point he would do all the special occasions, and you would do dinners for the kids during weekdays. i know your daughter came to you and said maybe you should give that up, too. [laughter] justice ginsburg: in fact, my daughter who is an excellent cook herself, she learned from the master. i was the everyday cook. i had seven things i made. when it got back to number seven, we went back to number one, and they all came out of the 60 minute chef. no more than 60 minutes from when you walked in the door to when it is on the table. marty would never allow me to cook for company. he was t

but only after being told about all this by leoca and ginsberg say it should be the responsibility -- i dream one day the u.s. will have passenger rights as generous and as human as the european counterparts do. >> reporter: federal regulators have a website dedicated to passenger complaints, that doesn't cost anything. chris clackum, nbc news. >>> the eclipse forecast, everybody worried about these clouds. >> i know, i know, and we are going to have some clouds moving through, but we'll be in the transition phase. what's has is clouds are building in, we did start off with a good amount of sunshine. we do even have a, eclipse at 2:42, and we make get a break in the clouds. i know that thunderstorm looks ominous, do not freak out, temperatures in the mid 80s around the time of the eclipse. it peaks at 2:42, and we're expecting that chance for isolated showers and storms to roll through. a few people will see some rain, but overall we're going to get some breaks in the cloud, as long as you have your glasses on you you can look up to the sky. let's look at the radar. we're actually ver

other justices like ginsberg, breyer. much more predictable. yes, sir?[inaudible question] >> i did not say that. >> do think it is possible for sometime in the future an executive to simply ignore a supreme court decision and what will be the implications? because the president has you know, executive function, not just military but policing, state department, homeland security, all of those things with control. would it just be like them to do something that is countering a judicial decision? >> i think if one present agenda, actually andrew jackson did that. and he said that john marshall has made his decision i will let him try to enforce it. but eventually that was in one of the cherokee indian cases but i think eventually they came around and jackson came around and he did enforce the decision. we have had a respect, a deep respect for the rule of law in this country. which demands certain things of the president. demands things of all of us. and no one, neil gorsuch said this many times. no one, including the president. no one means no one is abov

what did i think it meant and john stephens and ruth bader ginsberg and several we thought of what it meant. in article one of the constitution, it gives to the congress the power to call up and regulate state militias. this was a lot of concern, if you read the federalist papers you will just get a feeling or it. >> rose: right. there was a lot of concern and fear that congress might do that and disband them and replace the state militias after they had disbanded them with a federal army, and that, many people said, vote no on the constitution because if they can do that, then the federal government can destroy your freedom. well, said madison, in a sense -- if i paraphrase him -- never fear. we will put in the constitution an amendment which says congress can't do that. it cannot call up and disband the state militiat. why? because a well-armed militia is necessary for the security of a free state, i.e. a state militia, therefore the right to keep and bear arms will not be infringed. in other words, that's what i thought they were talking about, which is not the right of an individu

but another ginsberg, douglas ginsberg who had to withdraw his candidacy when it was revealed that he had smoked marijuana not only while a law student but also while a law professor at harvard. >> shocking no one but the political establishment. >> in 1994, bill clinton appoints ruth bader ginsburg to the court. these were the only supreme court appointments that bill clinton had. he appointed two jews. ruth bader ginsburg -- they did not confront any anti-semitism either in their legal careers. their religion was almost not mentioned in the hearings at all, the confirmation hearings. ruth bader ginsburg did face a lot of obstacles on being a woman in a legal profession that was still predominantly male. when she entered harvard law school in 1956, she was only one of nine students in a class of over 500. she became the first -- the second woman after sandra day o'connor and the first jewish woman on the court. now a year later steven briar who i'm proud to say is from san francisco. technically he didn't live in san francisco. and he is appointed and both of them still serve on the

but after robtd bork, oh, another ginsberg. douglas ginsberg, who had to withdraw his candidacy when it was revealed that he had smoked marijuana, not only while a lawsuit but also while a law professor at harvard. any way. >> shocking no one, but scandalizing the political establishment. >> and especially the reagan family and reagan's vifrz. so we wait a few more years. in 1994 bill clinton appoints ruth bader ginsburg to the court and a year later steven briar to the court. these were the only supreme court appointments that bill clinton had. he appointed two jews. now, none of these -- they and alana kagan thereafter did not confront any antisemiticism either on the acents to their legal careers to the court or their religion was not mentioned in the hearings at all. the confirmation hearings. ruth bader ginsburg who we could talk about later did face a lot of obstacles being a woman in a legal profession that was still predominantly male. when she entered harvard law school in 1956, she was only one of nine students in a c

ruth bader ginsberg went to harvard and columbia. she followed her husband. when he moved to new york to get a job, is she went to columbia. and she's the only -- not only woman, i think one of the few people in history who was on two law reviews for harvard and columbia. steven brier went to stanford as an under graduate and harvard law school. you know, alaina kagan went to princeton and harvard. it does say that once again, the decline of anti-semitism in the legal profession. it was -- you'll read about it in my books, hopefully. the president of harvard, later achieved much more notoriety trying to introduce a quarter of jewish admissions to harvard in the 1920s. it was through these jewish students who grew up -- frankfurter, fordice were the first members of their families to go to college. they went to these prestigious law schools. so it was part of the greater acceptance in the law school than helped the -- change -- helped bring about a decrease of anti-semitism in the legal profession. just to end this on one story that's very interesting, i think

justice can think of ginsberg's reference in the case in her dissent, the umbrella because you are not getting wet, you need the protections. the spotlight t to voting rights act and try to loretta lynch: this also in unusual and broad perspective. first, the subtitle of the rights act i think is something we have to sort of keep in mind. subtitle is act of force the 15th amendment. 5th amendment had been on the books for a century when the act was passed to enforce it. the voting rights act is not legislation that is dealing with problem, it is dealing with a problem that was old.east a century the idea of passing a federal aw that would throw the weight of the government behind in forcing the 15th amendment was new. here, let me mention things, history, note to some, the voting rights act had a recursor, called the federal election bill of 1890. it looked a lot like the voting act, okay. nd it was also known by opponents as the large force bill. it was passed by the house and was killed in the senate, it owly by a filibuster, would have sent marshalls to the south, a lot of what the

. >> reporter: partnering with the state, ginsberg founded careerwise, an apprenticeship program that links colorado industries and school districts. >> reporter: starting this year, high school juniors and seniors can spend three school days a week as on-the-job apprentices, earning classroom credit and a paycheck. >> we'd like to have 230 career paths that will, in ten years, serve 20,000 young people in a whole host of careers, from banking and finance to advanced manufacturing. >> reporter: colorado leaders believe they are in the forefront of addressing what economists call a middle skills gap-- unfilled jobs that require more than high school, but less than a four-year college degree. >> for more than 30 years, we took on this challenge that we were going to make sure every kid went to college, and this was the only solution. but we've barely nudged the needle in terms of how many kids actually go to college and graduate. and in that sense, i think it's been a failure. >> i was part of that mantra, saying "everybody should go to college." the reality of it is, that's never going

and here, one can think of justice ginsberg's reference in the shelby case in her dissent to, you know, it's like getting rid of the umbrella because you're not getting wet. you need the protections. now, let me shift the spotlight to the voting rights act and try to locate this also in maybe somewhat of an unusual and broad perspective. first, the subtitle of the voting rights act i think is something we always have to sort of keep in mind. the subtitle is an act to enforce the 15th amendment. the 15th amendment had been on the books for a century when the act was passed to enforce it. so the voting rights act is not legislation that's dealing with a new problem. it's dealing with a problem that was at least a century old. and the idea of passing a federal law that would throw the weight of the government behind enforcing the 15th amendment was not new. and here, let me mention arcane history, again, maybe known to some, not to others. the voting rights act had a precursor. it was called the federal elections bill of 1890. it looked a lot like the voting rights act, okay. it was also

creeds and classism in genders with reducing taxes where necessary giving the regulation the al ginsberg. so that interprets roosevelt's new deal rather than oppose is set and put america on the path will over a century to accommodate competition of modern life while maintaining american freedom. but i believe we can do it because in our hearts they said in the 2016 primary with debris ejected the high priest and the candidates on the platform that was adopted. i just want to ask you a question so what they continue to do what has been doing. if it continues for the next tenures then we will be better off. will that be lower and regulations smaller? do you think traditional values would be more respected? do you think we would be more respected? do you thing we will have attracted the first time since 1932 more people will tell pollsters that the it to say they're democrats over -- republicans over democrats? and if we follow that course and we would the columbus day audience in one of the last political speeches speaking to a tight americans. will whole party of of harry truman though l

. >> i have no doubt that if justice kennedy or justice ginsberg or justice breyer is president trump there would be another conservative vote and row vs. wade would be overruled. maybe we can have a discussion about john roberts, i don't think anybody has a doubt about thomas or alito and now gorsuch. i challenge anyone to find anything in john roberts' entire history as a justice on the supreme court, as a justice on the d.c. circuit that leads one to believe he might be a vote to reaffirm row vs. wade. i don't think in an area where justices care deeply that precedence is going to matter. >> that supreme court review hosted -- hosted by the university of california irvine. that airs tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. defense secretary mattis said novert korea's pursuit of a nuclear arsenal is taking the regime down a path that will end with the death of of its people. "the washington times" writes that the former four-star general said the size and scope of the arsenal in conventional and nuclear capabilities will leave north korea, quote, grossly overmatched,

all clerks he's very circumspect about his work there but he contributed to the first draft of the ginsberg -- excuse me, griswold versus connecticut case which is a case that recognized the right of marital privacy. he worked in the antitrust division of the department of justice. he taught at harvard both in the law school and kennedy school of government. he was chief counsel to the senate judiciary committee from 1978 to 1980 and he was nominated by president carter to the first circuit nine days after carter had lost the 1980 election. he had so impressed senators on both sides of the aisle for his work on the judiciary committee he was confirmed 80-10. he then served for 14 years on the first circuit, the last four years as chief judge when he was nominated to replace justice blackman in 1994 and he assumed the oath of office in august of 1994, so we're coming up on the 22nd anniversary. so if you'll all please join me in giving a welcome to our lecturer, whom we're very lucky to have. thank you, justice. [ applause ] >> thank you. very nice introduction. this is a formidable group. i

tonight justice ruth bader ginsberg and justice sonia sotomayor taped at the new york city bar association. >> i thought of myself in those days as a teacher. my parents thought teaching would be a good occupation for me because women were welcomed there and they weren't welcomed as doctors, lawyers, engineers. i realize that i was facing an audience that didn't know what i was talking about. they understood race discrimination, that was odious, but most men at that time

about the idea of the court interjecting itself into decisions of economic policy, and that would be ginsberg. i think that's where we're going now with this. >> charles from new jersey. thanks for watching. you're on the air. >> yes, i really don't have too much to add. except my uncle joe, my father's uncle joe lochner. and i don't know too much about the case itself, but uncle joel of course ran that bakery. and from what my father told me, used to employ a lot of german immigrants. they would come over and they would have a place to work. >> so charles, your family is joe lochner well-known for his place in history? >> oh, yes, yes. my sister's an attorney and my nephew is also an attorney. and my niece is an attorney. they're in washington where you guys are. and yeah, we're all kind of like -- >> does the family say anything about the relationship of uncle joe with the employee that was trying to work more hours than he could under the statute? because we got some sense earlier they were actually pretty close to each other. and i think there's some indication it was actually a set up ca

and that would be ginsberg. that's where i think we're going now with this. >> let me take some calls, if you don't mind. >> sure. >> charles in new jersey, you're on the air. >> i don't have too much to add, except my uncle joe, joe lachner. i don't know too much about the case itself but uncle joe ran that bakery, and from what my father told me, he used to employ a lot of german immigrants, they would come over and have a place to work. >> so charles in your family, is joe lachner well known for his place in history? >> oh, yes, yes, my sister is an attorney, and my nephew is also an attorney, and my niece is an attorney there in washington where you guys are, and yeah, we're all kind of like legal. >> does the family say anything about the relationship with the employee who was trying to work more hours. i think there's some indication it was a setup case between the two of them to try to challenge the law. is there anything in your family history about that? >> i don't know too much. except that there was a

. >> judge ginsberg. >> one more. i'm sorry. forgive me. go ahead. >> thank you. i didn't mean to prolong things, but i think we should be grateful to the judges for bringing us together today for this opportunity. i just wanted to make two observations about the judge. >> sir, may i ask you just to introduce yourself? >> i'm sorry. doug ginsburg. '74 term. i think that's after i read before greg, if i'm not mistaken. two points. one about -- they've all been glancingly referred to, the point about rule formalism a little more directly. but i think it's important to keep in perspective that the judge really was a great believer in american institutions, starting with the courts. i think the title of ron williams' very excellent book "american radical" is entirely misplaced. he had disdain for radicals and for all of the different movements that had arisen out of the plight of the american n negro, all except the use of the law and ordinary procedures. second, of all of the stories that he told, you've heard a sample, there are more in gilbert king's book. there ar

working together albeit as their younger selves with cameos from supreme court justice ruth bader ginsbergmore about humanity as the greater evil. but read isn't shying away from calling his show left as fan fiction mixed with sci-fi and bro man tick comedy vibes. very much a parody not inn tendonned to be an anti rights statement. >> not a villain but a gold plated helicopter or p hard to tell from the drawing good bro man tick. we have to use that. >> that's a good phrase. i like it. >> justin beiber in the middle of wrongful termination lawsuit by a new york hospital worker. here's what happened. back in may, justin beiber had an emergency visit to north well health on long island to have his lower regions scammed after he was injured while playing soccer. >> his testicles. >> a worker named kelly lombardo allegedly had a peek of justin beiber's medical files after hearing that he was being treated for an std. she says that she was fired by the hospital for what they said was illegal access to medical files. the lawsuit says lombardo was an immoral employee this is according to tmz. lom