justice gorsuch: how? spinelli: i -- i think that -- justice gorsuch: any time we increase a sentence, a statutory maximum or otherwise, a sentence, we say: jury -- this court has said a jury has to make that finding. spinelli: there's a -- there's actually a split of authority -- justice gorsuch: there's no indication of any of that in montgomery or miller, is there? spinelli: agreed. there's a -- there's a split of authority on that. there's a pending cert petition that raises it. we don't have any position on it. justice gorsuch: well, the court has held several times if you increase the -- the -- the statutory permissible range of penalty, a jury has to be involved, right? i mean, that's not -- spinelli: yes. spinelli: it depends on how you conceptualize it, but, you know, that's clearly not one of the issues that's before the court in this case. and i'm not arguing, just to be clear, that there is a requirement of a specific factual finding. montgomery said there wasn't, but what it also said is there

justice gorsuch has people over. they come to thanksgiving, christmas if they are not flying home to be with their families.kannon: let me ask about the role of the law clerks because there has been a lot of writing with some criticizing the law clerk system for giving law clerks significant power and responsibility. having spent a year, more than a year at the court, what is your reaction? anyone can weigh in on this. justice kruger: my view may be a little bit colored by who i worked for but there was really a, sort of, no doubt that justice stevens, was such an independent thinker and so many ways, was going to make up his own mind. he was already a very experienced judge by the time i clerked for him. the value of the clerkship from his perspective, i think we tend to forget in the outside world that really conversations about these difficult cases are confined to a small number of people. a judge can only really talk about these difficult issues with the set of people who work in their chambers. for justice stev

gorsuch but you did not answer mine. about individuals and whether individuals are being treated differently because of his or her sex. it is not a statute about the aggregate. does this disadvantage, the statute uses the word individual twice and says there is a particular person being treated differently because of her sex. here ms. stevens was being treated to because of her sex. this was the judges point in that opinion. saying it is as simple as looking at the linkage of the statute, applying it to a particular individual which title vii insists you do and coming up with the obvious answer. had not been assigned at birth the sex that she was assigned at birth, she would have been treated differently. we agree with the individual treatment. ,ased on a male only workforce he was being treated differently than a woman in his position would have been. if there are no women on the site, you do not have that comparison. enforcingployer does a dress code applied mutually to everyone recognizes there are differences between

paul: i read that, the gorsuch statement the same way. you could see justice kag a an come on over here, justice gorsuch, the definition of sex in the act includes sexual orientation. >> i think that's a very broad reading of it. in 1964 they weren't contemplating these cases or these issues. i think they also said congress -- one of the argument is congress has considered every term since 1975, there's been a bill introduced to include sexual orientation under the law and kagan is like wait a sec, s, the court isn't supposed to consider the legislative history which is playing to gorsuch's argument. paul: he'll look at sex and think what did the court think about the definition of sex at the time and how can we read that. >>that's one.>> that's one of s that's an interesting change now that there are five conservatives on the court. a lot of the discussion was on those grounds. and what's interesting, though, is gorsuch made the point that the supreme court gavel is a blunt instrument so there was a lot of talk about whether the preceden

like you said, a lot of folks are going to be watching two new justices, brett kavanaugh and neil gorsuch. there were protests in washington, d.c. calling for kavanaugh's impeachment for the one-year anniversary of his appointment to the high court. people are watching the chief justice, john roberts. he's essentially a swing vote. he sided with the liberal judges keeping a citizenship question off of the 2020 census. ruth bader ginsberg back after her battle with cancer. our producer inside the courtroom said she seems to be in good health and asked the first question. now there are questions of another justice, clarence thomas. he was not on the bench today. the court says he's home likely recovering from the flu.

to appealthat seemed to justice gorsuch is it doesn't matttter what congress was thinking about. question is, the statute says no sex discrimination. sex is supposed to be irrelevant to people's ability to perform work, and that is what happening. amy: what about kavanaugh? >> justice kavanaugh asked one question that was not particularly illuminating. we are not -- i can't tell from that where he is going to come out. justice gorsuch seems to be wrestling with this, had questions for both sides, anandi think hehe thinks -- my sense is he thinks, yes, sex was one of the reasons that aimee stephens was fired and that the two gay men were fired. i think he is also wrestling with a separate question, which is, dress codes, restrooms, how does that all work out? they're worried about the consequences of ruling for the lgbt lantos. amy: we will continue to follow this. james esseks is director of the aclu lgbt &

please join me to welcome to the reagan library justice gorsuch. [applause] >> we are delighted to have you here on the day of publication of your book. >> i am so happy to be west of the mississippi. [laughter] thank you for having me. is something i have been looking forward to. it's a real treat. >> your book opens with an interesting series of events on the occasion of your announcement of your nomination to supreme court. in many ways it is like the screenplay of an action novel. >> to say it was unexpected doesn't begin to capture how it felt and i have a few stories to tell but i will share one with you so not only do we have to sneak out of our hometown in colorado, we had to sneak into the white house. and take us in through the kitchen. when you probably know this better but there are scars from the war of 1812, bullet holes and fire marks where it was burned. then it was gracious enough to lend me the lincoln bedroom as an office space. while. i sat writing my remarks that evening at the desk where the gettysburg address was written. the

so for each case they wanted a bench memo, sotomayor, just as justice gorsuch, let's talk it through. we had an extremely long discussion about it where even was sort of piping in. but they both were interested in what does the law say. you know, one was maybe more interested in what does the history say, one less so, but that's a little bit in the details. and so the process of doing the bench memos, talkings with justices, creating then opinions, it looked very similar. i would say that in terms of, you know, how would i feel if i differed with a justice, which happened with both justices, you know, i think i would say something that justice justice gorsuch always told me justice white told him when he clerked for him which was, you know, no one appointed me, and i wasn't confirmed by the senate. at the end of the day, it wasn't my job to push my view of the case. and i recall in particular one case where i disagreed quite strongly, and we talked about it for really weekes on end. and at the end of the day the justice said, thank you very much, i appreciate your views, i think i've

>> no, justice gorsuch. but we don't believe that it was right that was given to them in the sixth amendment. >> i understand that. i am talking about a reliance argument. doesn't that greatly diminish a single state's claim of reliance with respect to a subset of criminal convictions when we are talking about a constitution that's supposed to endure? >> no one, least of all me, is going to stand here and diminish anyone's liberty interests. i think that -- so i'm not -- i wouldn't take that position. but even in a long line this court's significant decisions related to criminal law and criminal procedure, the court has applied them in a forward fashion instead of retroactively. i mean, that's a concern for us. >> well, if the jury -- >> that's not -- the case of retroactivity to convictions that are already final is not before us. it would come before us in a case if you lose this one. but it -- that is not a question that we can properly address here. it hasn't been briefed. it hasn't been decided below. >

there are four justices, i believe, thomas, alito, gorsuch, , who from their writings and discussions in a strongm to favor reading of the second amendment. i think one might had roberts -- one might add roberts to that list as well. we have the new york state rifle and pistol association versus the city of new york. new york state has a highly restrictive pistol licensing scheme. has two types of licenses. one is a carry permit. these are highly restrictive. them if one has large sums of money, or is rich and famous. donald trump, as a citizen in new york had a carry permit. notables inof other the city. ordinary citizens, aside from people who are professional security guards, find it impossible. the other type of permit is somewhat more permissive, a premises permit. basically, the city exacts a high cost to allow you to own a pistol for protection in your own home. the fees run on the order of about $700. usually it takes several months wait before one is approved. at the end of the day, a citizen can get a premises permit. every effort is made to discourage that. previously, new

we are honored to have justice neil gorsuch. it is understood after you go through senate hearings to be confirmed to the supreme court, you never have to answer questions again but you don't want to. instead, you get to ask the questions. justice neil gorsuch, we appreciate your making an exception for the interview. i promise i will do my best to make it a better experience for the senate judiciary committee. that is a low bar, i know. [applause] if you see a copy of the book you will know they hav had to collaborators, the former clerks and we are pleased to have david in the audience with us tonight. we are honored david is trying to buy his grandmother who is very special to us who has been at the library for more than 20 years. [applause] served as a clerk to anthony kennedy who was the third and final appointment to the high court. he would become the first clerk to serve alongside her former boss as a former supreme court justice. i hope you are taking notes. the supreme court reflects the legacy and it's no secret he wa

you bring up justice gorsuch because of course he is on the more conservative wing of the court now.an transpire along the way. but from the companies you could infer some open mindness there. >> reporter: a previous ruling says a man can sue for sexual harassment even those he was harassed by other men on an all-men oil rig. and the justice who wrote that case said that may not be what congress had in mind, but he is treated differently than a woman in his situation, and that justice who wrote that was antonin scalia. >> fascinating. you're in for quite a ride this term. pete, thank you so much from the supreme court. that does it for this edition of andrea mitchell reports. our thanks to jimmy carter and habitat. and remember follow us on line on facebook and twitter. and here are ali velshi and recei step f stefan any ruhle. >> hello, everybody. there is news that ambassador gordon sondland who was supposed to testify today whom the 2rud said will not be testifying has been found to have been exchanging texts and encrypted texts on whatsapp which by the way may be in violation of

and it's telling because we have a new court with cavanaugh and gorsuch and we are still understanding where they are from. this is major that they took this out. so we can maybe get a resolution. >> absolutely, as gerald and brian mentioned. what the situation is screaming out for is a uniform interpretation of the federal law that protects lgtbq employees across the country. when states have not passed various laws, our position in congress has already done that. they have already protect workers like gerald saying don't discriminate on the basis of sex. many man is only a gay because he is a man attracted to other men, therefore when an employer asked on the basis of an employee's sexuality, that employer has acted on the basis theex to in terms of arguments today, we believe that they are firmly rooted into the plain language of title vii and as ryan mentioned, the court's interpretation of title vii so we believe our position is the correct one and it is fully consistent with the principles that any court looks at in interpreting a statute. it is fully consistent with those princi

and it's telling because we have a new court with cavanaugh and gorsuch and we are still gorsuchkavanaugh and and we are still understanding where they are from. this is major that they took this out. so we can maybe get a resolution. >> absolutely. what the situation is screaming out for is a uniform interpretation of the federal law that protects lgbtq employees across the country. when states have not passed laws, our position is congress has already done that, already protected workers like gerald by saying don't discriminate on the basis of sex. well, at the risk of stating the obvious, a gay man is only a gay man because he is a man who is attracted to other men. when an employer asks on the basis of an employee's sexuality, the employer has acted on the basis of sex. in terms of the argument we have advanced today, we believe they are firmly rooted in the plain language of title vii, the statute. as brian mentioned, the court's interpretation of title vii. we believe our position is the correct one. and is fully consistent with principles that any court looks at and interpreting a

what role could justice gorsuch play in this whole thing? news contributor richard fowler and -- concerned women for america. good to have you both here tonight. so the aclu was very involved in this case. david cole, who argued the case says -- one hard caught -- we're hoping the justices will not turn up the clock on the quality of justice. nobody should be fired because of who they are. what's the argument against that? >> certainly there isn't an argument against that. this is just a much broader issue. standing outside the supreme court today were conservative women, women with the women's liberation front who are self identified radical feminist, many of whom are lesbians who are concerned about changing the definition of what sex is the project and creates consequences. what happens to women in our safe spaces? our domestic violence shelters. our restrooms, locker rooms, women who are incarcerated. if we do away with recognizing biology, men and women, there are wide reaching consequences for women across the spectrum, so that's why y

justice gorsuch had just joined the court. last term, in a case challenging the presence of a piece cross on public land outside of washington, d.c. was also a 7-2 decision. justice alito wrote in that case that taking the cross down would actually be an act of aggressive hostility toward religion. allowing -- taking it down would not be a neutral. it would be aggressively hostile. it is a different case, but i think it says something about where the mindset of many of the justices is likely to be going in to this case. be can see that there would an majority of the justices be ready to read lock versus davey very narrowly. violate the free exercise clause to go and limit state funding beyond that. i'm going to be watching the dynamics on the court in this case. justices kagan and breyer joined the court opinion in the trinity lutheran case. they joined the result in the bladensburg cross case. it is harder to see where the compromise might be in this case. particularly, we will probably talk about the dynamics on the court. t

the question is which way will justice gorsuch vote.e is a textualist, believes in reading the words of the law. for a person like that, what congress had in mind when they passed it shouldn't count, only what the words say. he seemed sympathetic to this. >> pete williams at the supreme court. >>> we have breaking news. brand new polling that shows how divided americans are on whether congress should impeach the president and remove him from office. a quinnipiac national poll out minutes ago finds that 45% of registered voters say yes, donald trump should be impeached and removed from office, compared to last week's poll where voters were evenly split 47 for and 47 against. latest poll finds majority of registered voters approve of the impeachment inquiry. >>> coming up next, from blocked depositions to daily subpoenas, rudy giuliani signaling to nbc news he is not willing to cooperate with congress without a fight, looking at where the impeachment inquiry stands. >>> how he gave vladimir putin everything he wanted, making the kremlin t

>> i don't think you draw the line, justice gorsuch, as punishment. justice gorsuch: insanity defense is required with respect to any criminal complaint, even a regulatory strict liability misdemeanor? >> this court has never -- it's our position we are making -- it's our position it should be applied everywhere. but this court has never definitively ruled on the extent of strict liability terms. i think it could carve that out. what's important are two things. first of all this is a rarely used defense. it's invoked in less than 1% of the cases and successful in only a quarter of that. we are not talking about a huge number of people. for the people that really matters, there is no mechanism in these states to protect them. to let them be excused or to let the jury consider their actual culpability when they can't tap into their brains in the way other people can. i think jurors are able to decide that. they decide the term reasonness all the time. >> if a state adopt the the irresistible impulse defense is that unconstitutional? >> the court in leyl

there are 1 307b9 5 million of them in the world. >> just as gorsuch could play a pivotal role in thesehich allegedly come down sometime next june. >> kristen fisher live at the court thank you. a college professor accused now of including some extracurricular activity. dropping 10s of thousands of dollars at strip clubs. now the school is picking up the tab for that and off the court drama heing up between nba and china broadcasters refusing to air games fans refusing to attend what the nba commissioner is saying now about the spat next. with no income verification, ya no appraisal, and no points and save over 1,000 dollars a year. lower rates means lower payments. get the most of your va mortgage benefits. ... i have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now, there's skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months after just 2 doses. skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fevers, sweats,

guest: that's one thing that justice gorsuch said. what was interesting about especially that, what we he was referencing was a dissent that judge lynch issued. if you go back to the transcripts, these arguments were back to back, he mentioned this in the gender identity case. in the't mention it sexual orientation case. i think the reason why he talks about what is a closed case and what is not, here's what judge lynch was saying. he started talking about -- he's like, surely congress didn't attempt to prohibit all distinctions. if every single time you treat a man any woman differently, that is not a violation of title vii. it is an especially silly argument when it comes to sexual orientation. know, wehing we now don't have to decide whether every single distinction between a man any woman is abiding by title vii. here we are talking about a distinction based on their intimate relations or their marriage. we know for a certainty after the spring court ruling that that is a bad reason -- the supreme court ruling that that is a bad r

justice gorsuch has people over. they come to thanksgiving, christmas if they are not flying home to be with their families. they are fundamentally very good people and treat their clerks well. kannon: let me ask about the role of the law clerks because there has been a lot of writing with some criticizing the law clerk system for giving law clerks significant power and responsibility. having spent a year, more than a year at the court, what is your reaction? anyone can weigh in on this. justice kruger: my view may be a little bit colored by who i there was really thatrt of, no doubt justice stevens, was such an independent thinker and so many ways, was going to make up his own mind. he was already a very experienced judge by the time i clerked for him. the value of the clerkship from his perspective, i think we tend to forget in the outside world that really conversations about these difficult cases are confined to a small number of people. a judge can only really talk about these difficult issues with the set of pe

suggested that gay rights advocates had the chance to win the votes of conservative justice neil gorsuch along with the four liberal members. separately, the court is considering whether the main job bias law, known as title 7, outlines lgbt discrimination. global news, 24 hours a day on air and @tiktoc on twitter powered by more than 2,700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. i am mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. ♪ >> live from bloomberg world headquarters in new york, i am shery ahn. >> live in toronto, i'm amanda lange. we are joined by both our bloombergand bnm audiences. hear the stories we are following. blacklist backlash. the u.s. is taking aim at chinese tech firms and markets are taking notice. face-off in canada. just weeks until the federal election, main party leaders took the stage, and front runners traded blows, but was there a true knockout. and spotlight on fed chair jay powell. he is set to speak in colorado and just an hour's time. we will tell you what to expect. shery: let's get a quick check of the major averages, so trading in the afternoon session, we

--egging just as begging just as gorsuch -- ch's question, how do we differentiate the two? what is the legal test that you propose to say, this is discrimination because of sex, as you said, calling me one thing and your friend another is discriminatory, but it is ok because there is no harm. what is the test we apply to say when it is harm and when it isn't? >> let me try to be clear. it is not discrimination to call and mr. harris mr. harris. it is because of sex that we were treated differently, but as this court has made clear several times, discrimination consists with an injury the law is prepared to recognize. generally, across all statutes -- this is not only title seven, and this is why i am not begging the question here, the court said diminutive effects are exempted from statutes presumptively. so if this court thinks or another court -- >> why is a dress code for hooters that requires all women to wear a scant dress, is that discriminatory? >> yes, it is. >> is it discriminatory for the woman who just doesn't want to wear it, because it is demeaning? >> yes, it

we also rely on the courts, but we saw what gorsuch court did with respect to labor union rights and collective bargaining and collective vindication of rights, and we don't know how long kennedy will stay there. we cannot rely on anything other than we, the people, in a very large but hopefully peaceful uprising to make the ultimate difference. maybe i could and two very short additions to that. one point is i feel there are folks in the country whose attitude is, the president is terrible, and the only action equal to the depth of our situation is impeachment. and there's this idea that because we face a great problem, we must invoke an equally extreme and great power to meet it. part of what i worry about with that kind of thinking is it not only devalues other forms of political engagement and makes them feel beside the point against what really matters, but that it actually tends to accelerate and encourage this no-holds-barred existential view of politics in which people go from electoral loser to impeachment in waiting. both sides use the rhetoric and i think it is well justif

. >> i think maybe you answered justice gorsuch's question now. you didn't answer my. >> okay. >> title vii is a statute about individuals and whether individuals are being treated differently because of his or her sex. it's not a statute about, in the aggregate, does this act disadvantage of men versus women or women versus men? it's a statute that uses the word individual twice and says is a particular person being treated differently because of her sex? and here miss stevens was being treated differently because of her sex and this was judge flaum's point in that opinion, he said it's as simple as looking at the language of the statute, applying it to particular individual, which title vii is his that you do, and coming up with the obvious answer. yes, if she had not been assigned at birth the sex that she was assigned at birth, she would've been treated differently. >> we agree with the individual treatment. that's why in oncale this court said basically in the context of a male only workforce that the plaintiff had a cause of action because y

right on issues republican presidents have nominated find to the supreme court including justice neil gorsuch. >>our job is just to make sure the wall you that we the people. >>to our democratic processes. >>the remaining 4 were nominated by democratic presidents, including justice ruth bader ginsburg. >>i love my. the mess and the hardest job ever had. >>i'm john lawrence reporting. >>well coming up next on the kron 4 morning news friends and family are coming together to honor a teen killed in the shooting how they're remembering him and who's in custody for his death. and 3 teens to have been arrested in connection to a shooting that force a district-wide changes to football games, we'll have that latest development and sections of westbound 37 in the boleto know to get around this backup coming up. here's a live look outside at 92. it's our busiest bridge right now traffic is already crowded from the east bay to the peninsula. we'll check more bridges and drive times after the break. welcome back to the kron 4 morning news had recast now whi days this week. >>yeah, definitely a warmer tha

justice neil gorsuch did seem somewhat open to the idea that the words of the law might be read to covers kind of thscrimination, but then he worried about "massive social upheaval." l.rah. >> o'donnell: all right, jan, thank you. the trump administration's immigration crkdown on the southern border is expanding. all asylum seekers are now required to remain in mexico to dayt their day in u.s. immigration court. and as mireya villarreal in nuevo laredo, mexico, shows us, the wait is long and dangerous. eporeporter: the streets of nuevo laredo are often called los caminos de carteles, the "streets of the cartels." highly coveted smuggling routes, now a dumping ground for migrants. kensy medina and marvin torres arrived at the shelter two days ago as a part of the migrant protection protocols, or m.p.p. in this area right here, this is safety for them? them? bu but if you just walk out that door, it is not safe? that the cartels come by to pick them up, to kidnap them. they showed us a document agents gave them before leaving the u.s. "you should arrive at the port of entry listed above at

[laughter] i want to hear neil gorsuch as well, so that's awesome. i also want to thank hugh hewitt, the president of the foundation, who was indispensable to me in the writing of this book and had me on the radio last week to help promote it. you could not be in better hands with anybody else than hugh. i want to thank a couple of the archivists that worked with me on the book, greg couple us and pamela isenberg did great work -- greg cummings. so many people helped me along the way. sandy quinn that you all remember, ron walker, many of you remember, fred fielding. just a tremendous number of people helped make this possible. i also want to say hello to linda and larry sarlos who are right here. these are the parents of friends of ours in important worth, kirk and kristin. kirk is the pitching coach at tcu, and we live right around the corner from tcu and kirk and kristin. you guys get the award for traveling the farthest, two and a half hours, so thank you very much for being here. i hope the book is worth it. let me know. i'll be asking you. and

is the first abortion case that will be argued since conservative justice brett kavanaugh and neil gorsuch joined the bench. >>> now to new developments in the impeachment inquiry against president trump. according to a source filiar with the matterez planning to send a lesser to nancy pelosi saying he won't turn over documents until the full house officially votes on the issue. kristen welker reports from washington. >> reporter: president trump doubling down in the face of a widening impeachment probe. on thursday he publicly called on ukraine to investigate his political rival joe biden and then surprised many when he said china should do the same. >> and by the way, likewise, china should start an investigation into the bidens. because what happened in china is just about as bad as what happened with ukraine. >> reporter: house speaker nancy pelosi arguing the president's remarks amounting to a confession. >> the president has confessed his violation of his oath of office. so not too much inquiry. >> reporter: president trump calling hunter biden's business dealings in china crooked, p

[applause] honorary chairman of the national constitution center, the honorable neil gorsuch. [applause] >> and our 2019 liberty medal anthonyt, the honorable kennedy. [applause] ♪ >> we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness. >> the declaration of independence. >> 1776. 1787. >> the united states constitution is signed. >> 1787. 1860. abraham lincoln is elected president. divided against itself cannot stand. i believe this government cannot endure permanently, have slaves, half free. abraham lincoln. >> 1861. the southern states secede. >> 1861. >> the civil war begins. >> 1862. >> new year's eve. >> the life and times of frederick douglass. and -- an immense assembly forened in fremont temple the first blast of electric wires. >> we were met together to receive and celebrate the first governments of the proclamation. >> we were waiting and listing. >> we were watching by the dim light of the stars for the dawn of a new day.

about the recently released volume about abraham lincoln 1856 and at seven the associate justice gorsuch will tell us about his new book a republic if you can keep it with the importance of civic education and discourse and mutual respect. check out the website to get e-mail updates you will find other information to other archives and activities another way is to become a member of the national archives foundation and check out their website to learn more about the organization. those murals commemorate two founding documents of the nation of the declaration of independence and the central group represents those who play key roles in the creation of that document along with george washington and james madison and franklin is george mason one of the five most frequent speakers at the constitutional convention. at the conclusion september 1789 he did not sign the document. over the lack of individual rights but the creation of the third charter of the bill of rights in the rotunda. today we look forward to hear about george mason's formation from his biographer. a native of virginia for a

a nearly identical texas law in 2016, but that was before president trump appointed justices neil gorsuchtt kavanaugh to the court. tonight, buckingham palace confirms that britain's prince irmsy is suing the owners of the british tabloids "the sun" and "the daily mirror." erince harry is reportedly rocusing the tabloids of hacking his voice mails. this comes just days after the prince and his wife, meghan markle, sued another tabloid that published markle's private letter to her father. now, the slow, deliberate steps that may amount to one giant leap. a man in france, paralyzed from the shoulders down, is now able to walk using a robotic suit controlled by his mind. an's learned to send wireless eignals to sensors implanted in his brain that move his arms and legs. and over two years, he's walked about the length of a football field. that is progress. coming up, "on the road," with steve hartman. a dying man wanted to share his fortune, but there was one condition. seems like some are going at the speed of yesteryear. but not here. this is capital one. where banking moves at the speed o

during his first 100 days donald trump passed 28 laws and signed 30 borders and confirmed neil gorsuchthe supreme court. senator sanders's announcement comes a democrat in of the plan to discuss little justice reform, a major platform in donald trump's administration, sanders planning to expunge all past convictions and to use the money for legal sales to help communities he deems to be hardest hit by the war on drugs, 2020 candidates will flock to benedict college in south carolina to share their plan for criminal justice reform. at the 2019, second step presidential justice for him donald trump will be the keynote speaker. carley: thanks. the houston astros fire their assistant general manager in the middle of the world series. he directed an appropriate comments at female reporters after beating the yankees, used an expletive and said thank god -- defended 75 games after being accused of domestic violence. the astros deny the outburst happened but say we were wrong, releasing a statement that the astros in no way intended to minimize issues related to domestic violence. todd: kurt c

they will be heard by president trump's two nominees, neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh. on sunday, protesters marked kavanaugh's one-year anniversary. kavanaugh has always denied the allegations that came out during his process. liberals are upset because he took the seat of justice kennedy. and all eyes on chief justice john roberts. he's been trying to keep the court out of the political fray. but many of the cases will come down as the election gears up. >> thanks so much. >>> a stunning shift in u.s. policy with syria. the white house announcing that u.s. tr troops will leave syria. that's despite u.s. officials saying that should not happen. the latest on the ground, next. what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway? a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of. he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy... the my account app makes today's xfinity customer se

justice neil gorsuch did seem somewhat open to the idea that the words of the law might be read to coverthen he worried about "massive social upheaval." >> now, there are new concerns this morning about the widely used heartburn medication zantac. the food and drug administration found unacceptable levels of cancer-causing impurities, both in zantac and its generic version. some drugstores have already pulled it off the shelves. dr. jon lapook brings us the latest. >> we take the entire tablet, just as a patient would, and we dissolve it into the solvent. >> reporter: at this connecticut lab, called valisure, researchers test drugs from its own online pharmacy to check for purity and quality. last spring, they decided to analyze a few heartburn drugs to see if they contained a chemical called m.d.m.a., a probable carcinogen. last year, that same chemical had led to recalls of some blood pressure pills. >> so, we're going to crush this. >> reporter: okay. one medication stood out-- zantac and its generic version, ranitidine. it had levels of m.d.m.a. higher than considered acceptable. val