justice gorsuch, tell us about madison and civility at the constitutional convention? >> okay. well, wett live in a time where people are pretty tough, don't you think? and you think that's unique to our time and place but it really isn't and i'm not saying things couldn't be better now. i'm not saying that. they could be a lot better but the same sort of disagreements going on in 1776 and 1789, in 1789 when the constitution convention gathered, about 50 people from all over the -- states, they weren't sure they were going to beto able to comeo agreement. most people thought it was bugle, that itng wasn't going to work.d big statesl versus small states, southern states versus northern states, you had commercial interests versus rural interests. big differences in those states. they may seem small to us today but they were very big then and one way making sure they were going to reach success was being kind to one another, those people who gathered. they made sure t that they had dinner, it wasn't just one quick. and so this is some of the messages that we t need, i thin, for ou

no, i think justice gorsuch really said it so well. to reiterate that when they first gathered in that room, really no one thought they would come to a success. and the only reason they were able to was because they were civil to each other. and i do think that has a great, you know, great message for our times. and i think sometimes it's easy today to forget that our country has gone through great upheaval in the past and has seen enormous disagreements on a very public stage. and professor steven carter, who writes a lot on us for civility, has wrote our entire book on arguing that, you know, we had very few matters for much of our american history. frances trollop, a british author who visited the country in the mid 1800s, wrote a whole book that we had no manners at all. and there were very famous disagreements in the past. jefferson and hamilton, a duel between hamilton and a sitting vice president that you may know ended fatally. and so we always overcome it as a country, which i think is a great message for today, where it does

in thanking justice gorsuch and janie nitze.

>> i think justice neil gorsuch said it well. when neighbors gathered in that room, no one thought they would come to success. the only reason they were able to his they were so good to each other. that has a great message for our times and sometimes it is easy to forget that our country has gone through greater peoples in the past that has seen enormous disagreements on the public stage, professor stephen carter who writes a lot has written an entire book on arguing we have very few manners for much of american history, the british author in the country in the mid 1800s wrote a book that we had no manners at all and very famous disagreements in the past, jefferson and hamilton. a dual between hamilton at a sitting vice president, as you may know, fatally. we always come back as a country, it does seem our differences are unique to our times, particularly acute, remember we have seen such differences in the past and have overcome them. >> that's important to learn from history and to remember how close we have come to violence an

neil gorsuch. one of the people who turned over roe v. wade. and what do we know about neil gorsuch at the time the vote came up? we knew that as lower court judge she had done the hobby lobby opinion which restricted access to contraception. we knew he had come from a list of prescreened people who would be antiabortion and we knew that 50 groups that support access to abortion had opposed neil gorsuch and yet john deaton says i would have voted for him. and now john deaton gives us the big defense of the filibuster that keeps us from making roe v. wade law of the land. that's the problem. we can't pass it with 52 votes because the republicans filibuster us. so here's the deal. if republicans are in control of the senate, there will be no bill to make roe v. wade law of the land. it doesn't matter where the we have 50 votes for it, 51 or 52. with republican control of the senate, we will have no bill to codify roe v. wade and that means when they are coming for us in massachusetts, we have no defense. mr. deaton: i get 30 seconds based on the

and gorsuch, in his mcgirt decision, really wrote about how that's wrong. and one of the things he says is, he says, wouldn't allow this in any other area of the law. so why do we allow it here? and another really good line he has is he said that's would be the rule of the strong, the rule of the law to basically oklahoma for acting as there wasn't a reservation for a hundred years. by then after century saying, you know what, you're right. like it would be crazy to say there's a reservation now. so that's gorsuch's legacy far on the supreme court. so we'll see how. that works out. but i think it did have a lot to do with him having. more experience with tribes like he got on to the bench, but i think also his i think has a very clear view of if the law says the tribe has this right. we we follow the law and it's not our place is the court to rewrite the law which not every justice. i think i saw a question up here. oh well i felt colorado. i remember having seen some articles regarding a a trail called the cherokee trace that was named after people who wer

so with that, ladies and gentlemen, all rise, please, and welcome justice gorsuch for. your honor. welcome to the nixon library. it is a real honor to have any justice of the supreme court with us, but particularly you, sir. and i want to welcome you back. so thank you for being here. well. it is so great to be in the western united states again, though i have to say, this replica of the east room brings back a little ptsd. when i was introduced to the country and my nomination, it was in the east room and i think i was photographed in more in one minute than i had been in my entire life time. but that's not surprising. your book overruled is timely, and it is refreshing because it talks about a lot of stories. you use it to highlight stories of regular americans who are just trying to live their lives, but they find themselves dealing with the government. your honor, don't take this. the wrong way, but i can't say that the stories or the circumstances in overruled make me particularly optimistic about our long term priorities of several of our country's institutions. so am i wrong

at 5:30 pm, supreme court justice neil gorsuch and his former law clerk talk about america's foundingals of democracy, liberty and equality. and then at 6 p.m., the congressional gold medal ceremony honoring the them african-american women who worked in nasa's computer pull. -- computer pool. among their achievements was sending men to the moon. at 7 p.m. watch american history tv series, historic presidential elections, exploring what made these elections historic. the issues of different eras and their lasting impact on the nation for this week the election of 1948 and what was considered a major upset. harry truman defeated republican new york governor thomas dewey in 1948 to win a full term in the white house. then at 8 p.m. on lectures in history, university of north carolina history professor janie myers on southeast native american tribes in the 18 century and the impacts of colonialism, the american revolution, and the emergence of the united states. at 9:30 p.m. on the presidency, an autho looksr at how eleanor roosevelt used television to promote her political and social cau

we've got the former clerk to supreme court justice neil gorsuch, he's mike davis.to take it on on the. also this -- the. >> ever since iran has been exporting terror all over the world, it's been just unraveling. the whole middle east has been unraveling. but, of course, the whole world has been unraveling since we left office. russia would have never attacked ukraine. this would have never if happened in the middle east. there wouldn't have been is an october 7th. you wouldn't have had inflation. none of these things would have happened. elizabeth: -- and, you know, multiple new october surprises hitting the 2024 race. and tonight's vp debate, it's iran, hurricane helene, the port strike. my panel is here to react. let's check in first with my buddies dagen and sean. it's good to see you guys. sean: welcome back. good to see you. we're going to do a debate preview with lara trump as well as the man who prepped tim walz for the debate for j.d. vance, tom tom emmer. dagen: we've got two hours coming up including all-around bad ass cory mills, congressman. he is on t

the secretary of state there unilaterally changed the rules, which is why justice gorsuch referencedther court opinion, dealing with the same issue, and said the state unilaterally changed the rules of the game after the fact. >> after the fact. >> that's right. this is unusual for a justice to do this, page numbers to another court opinion. justice gorsuch was trying to tell the world, let me tell you why this exactly a problem. >> lancaster county, this is another partisan thing, not filed by republican or democrat. this is the county that says we believe that there's a problem with about 2500 new voter registrations done during the canvass in the summer. some of this stuff does not pass the smell test. >> that's right. lancaster county said athey believe 60% of the voter registrations and mail-in ballot requests are fraudulent them. fraudulent, fraudulent operations. they said we will leave it to those counties to tell you who they are. the federalist broke who some of those counties were. they had officials telling them, yes, in fact they've received suspicious requests, separate

during the hearings for gorsuch, actually gorsuch, barrett, and cavanaugh, all three of them said thatoing to honor stasis -- what is it? starry on roe v. wade. they turned around and they voted in favor of getting rid of it. isn't it perjury when they say one thing and go the other way? i thought there was some kind of law or rule against that? i wondered if that was ever brought up the way that they answer their questions to a senate hearing? i thought that you weren't allowed to lie in a senate hearing? guest: that is something that has come up since i've covered the court, the question about if a justice says one thing during confirmation hearings but rules differently if that is some way to prosecute them for perjury. in my recollection in recent history that hasn't happened, but it is something that the justices are aware of. there was an interesting back and forth between justice alito and justice sotomayor. he said something about when he was on a lower court that he would salute the victim and justice sotomayor said not anymore. there was a little bit of laughter between the t

justice gorsuch will be interviewed by the president and ceo of the richard nixon foundation. with that, ladies and gentlemen, all rise, please, and welcome justice gorsuch. >> [ applause ] your honor. welcome to the nixon >> your honor, welcome to the nixon library. it is a real honor to have any justice of the supreme court with us, but particularly you, sir. i want to welcome you back. thank you for being here. >> [ applause ] >> it is so great to be in the western united states again. >> [ laughter ] >> i have to say, this replica of the east room rings back a little ptsd. >> [ laughter ] >> when i was introduced to the country, my nomination was in the east room and i think i was photographed more in one minute then i had in my entire lifetime. >> not surprising. your book, over ruled, is timely. use it to highlight stories of regular americans just trying to live their lives but they find themselves dealing with the government. your honor, don't take this the wrong way, but i can't say the stories or circumstances in over ruled make me optimistic about our long-term prio

interestingly justice gorsuch alluded to this.hen the supreme court decided not to get involved yesterday. which is not surprising given the fact that i think they are loath to get involved in the election a week before the election. the last position they want to be in. i would expect more decisions like this in other cases as well. gorsuch did something called he wrote something called a dissent from denial. in that he expressed his displeasure that the court had not gotten involved and he did so very clearly. what he ended up doing is referencing another court decision about this same case in michigan. he gave the page number so people would know where he stood on this. one of the things that's referenced in that decision is the secretary of state in michigan did change the rules. something rfk junior has been arguing. he said i filed in time to get my name off the ballot. the secretary of state turned around and changed the rules and how is that fair? it is complicated situation. not surprised the supreme court didn't get invo

eastern, supreme court justice neil gorsuch and his former law clerk talk about america's founding ideas of democracy, liberty and equality. at 6:00, the congressional gold medal ceremony honoring the african-american women with their contributions to space exploration. at seven :00 p.m. eastern, watch american history tv series historic presidential elections, exploring what may -- made these elections historic and the lasting impact on the nation. this week, the election of 1948 and what was considered a major upset, harry truman defeating new york governor thomas dewey in 1948 to win a full term in the white house. at eight :00 p.m. eastern, university of north carolina at pembroke history of that history professor jamie myers on southeast native american tribes in the 18th century and the impacts of colonialism, the revolution and the emergence of the united states. and at 930 p.m. eastern, author angela beauchamp looks at how eleanor roosevelt used film and television to promote her political and social causes. exploring the american story, watch american history tv saturdays on c-s

in thanking justice gorsuch and janie nitze. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome our guests. speaker mike, leader. senator christopher --, senator shelley moore capito, chairman frank lucas nasa. administrator bill nelson. ms. margaret lee. ms. sondra mosey and the families of katherine johnson, dr. kristin darden, mary jackson and dorothy von. ladies and gentlemen, the honorable mike johnson. speaker of the united states house of representatives thank you all for here. my colleagues in congress, administrator nelson ambassador greenfield, ms. shetterly, our distinguished guests, and to dr. christine darden, watching at her home in connecticut as speaker of the house. i have the great privilege of welcoming you to the capitol, the congressional gold medal is the highest honor. the congress bestow upon any group or and we give it to show our national appreciation for the achievements and contributions of great americans. today, pursuant to h.r. 1396, we have the great pleasure of finally awarding medal to the hidden figures figures. as you all know, this has been a long time c

eastern, supreme court justice neil gorsuch and his former law clerk talk about america's founding ideals of democracy, liberty and equality. at 6:00, the congressional gold medal ceremony honoring african-american women who worked in nasa's computer pool for their contributions to space exploration and helping calculate the 1969 apollo mission. watch historic presidential elections exploring what made these elections historic. the issues of different eras and their lasting impact on the nation. this week, the election of 1948. i have a major upset, democratic president harry truman defeated dewey to win a full term in the white house. at 8:00 p.m., a university of north carolina history professor on native american tribes during the 18th century and the impact of colonialism, the revolution and the emergence of united states. at 9:30 p.m. eastern, an author looks at how eleanor roosevelt used film to promote her political and social causes. the american story. watch "american history tv" saturdays on c-span2. ♪ >> attention, middle and high school students across america. time to make yo

during the hearings for gorsuch, actually gorsuch, barrett, and cavanaugh, all three of them said that to honor stasis -- what is it? starry on roe v. wade. they turned around and they voted in favor of getting rid of it. isn't it perjury when they say one thing and go the other way? i thought there was some kind of law or rule against that? i wondered if that was ever brought up the way that they answer their questions to a senate hearing? i thought that you weren't allowed to lie in a senate hearing? guest: that is something that has come up since i've covered the court, the question about if a justice says one thing during confirmation hearings but rules differently if that is some way to prosecute them for perjury. in my recollection in recent history that hasn't happened, but it is something that the justices are aware of. there was an interesting back and forth between justice alito and justice sotomayor. he said something about when he was on a lower court that he would salute the victim and justice sotomayor said not anymore. there was a little bit of laughter between the two o

welcome supreme court justice neil gorsuch and author of this project mike davis. pros are saying it's election interference and trump's trial are being violated and constitutional rights. >> senator tom cotton is exactly right. what biden/harris special council jack smith has done here is a direct violation of the department of justices. a manual for the federal prosecutors and agents that makes sense unlawful for them to take action piling 165 middle age political document out of order highly irregular and this obama judge and in is a political assassination attempt by jack smith. liz: should he request de-pate baiting and be disbarred and cnn top legal analyst and el lee honen said these are president trump and ellie calling it a cheep shot and violated ordinary justice department procedures and principles to get trump before the election. he says there's no defending the conduct and legally and politically prejudicial of trump and another judge on the hot seat for doing this before the election. this grand jury testimony is yet to be adjudicated and it's outsid

paul: will neil gorsuch be decisive? he will be important in this argument i assume?ou are probably referencing his opinion a few years ago which had protections for gender identity into employment antidiscrimination law. you can't read anything from that into this case because it is a statutory case, defining consistent terms. he may or may not the on one side or the other but i don't think at least for him that case will be deposited. paul: tell us about the ghost running case, what are ghost guns and what is the dispute? >> we are in the month of halloween but this doesn't have anything to do with paranormal firearms or anything like that. the court throughout a regulation redefining bumps stocks to be machine guns. here, similarly, the same agency bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms redefined special kits, or parts, that can be manufactured, the doesn't have a serial number, it is hard to teresa. and regulating that sort of thing, we have the same sort of result here and there is no indication mind you that it is these kinds of guns that are prevalent, used in

i talked one-on-one with stephen breyer and current justice neil gorsuch. my in-depth conversations with them are available on my living the bream podcast that drops today. the check them out. you'll hear stories on and off the bench. hanks for joining us. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪. mark: hello america i am marco levin and this is "life, liberty & levin" son dav sunday but we o great guests senator "life, liberty & levin" and bernie moreno so i hope to call senator in the state of ohio he's run against the marxist socialist. we will get to that in a moment. you know, folks, there are leaders and there are leaders. there are statesmen and there are statesmen. mark, what are you talking about? we have people in this country who are absently fabulous. we have had fabulous presidency. what makes them so remarkable as they think out-of-the-box. donald trump thanks out of the box. donald trump is and will be a historic and iconic figure. not from america's media today and today the authors, 20, 50, 100 years from now he will get the acclaim that he deserves. it will not do him a

. >> i feel sorry for justices kavanaugh and gorsuch.hat their demand to see the goods has turned up, they will feel rather stupid and they should. because it turns out most of what they said in that dissertation about the possible immunity of the president an and the way he uses the veto power or the pardon power, how he really has to have a vigorous ability to use his core powers. none of that has anything to do with this case. it could have decided all of this stuff. from the election, they did succeed in making sure that the trial that i believe is going to take place unless he wins, that the trial will ultimately hold him accountable. so all of our worries about timing, better happen sooner or it won't happen until after the election. we were right to worry. the court had its way. it has cleared the path for the president. and if result of that he wins with or without all kinds of legal meek mechinations. he picks a lackey attorney general who dismisses the charges but if it is kamala harris and not donald trump who takes the oath o

i talked one-on-one with stephen breyer and current justice neil gorsuch. my in-depth conversations with them are available on my living the bream podcast that drops today. the check them out. you'll hear stories on and off the bench. hanks for joining us. i'm shannon bream. have a wonderful week.ra see you next week. will: that's . do you want to say good bye? ♪ maria: good sunday morning, everyone. well come to "sunday morning futures." thanks so much for joining us this morning, i'm maria bartiromo. today, negligence and dereliction of couth. fema running out of money after the white house shelled out billions to house and care for illegals as american citizens get walloped by hurricane helene with a little help from biden and harris. former hawaii congresswoman tulsi gabbard on the ground in north carolina and georgia with relief efforts for hard-hit communities. plus, florida congressman byron donalds and pennsylvania senate candidate david mccormick on the race that could change everything now 30 days away. then, president trump returns to the scene o

the two he appointed, having and gorsuch and thomas alito, who even further right of those two those four would probably give him immunity. but roberts is going to be in the middle and now, course, if trump wins the election, then the case will be done because he he will as the incoming president direct the department of justice to drop the case and if they refuse for some reason the attorney general he picks will agree. and if he for some reason was trump may even pardon himself if no president is granted himself a pardon but that part and the power to pardon is clearly a core official act. so presumably he has immunity. if he does it. and i don't think that the supreme court would take the case if it were challenged so my point is that if trump the election the case is over all the cases in the federal courts against him are over. that's my prediction. if trump i think case will continue. i think the odds are very high that judge chuck finds no immunity for the four counts that are in the revised department justice indictment or if some of them viewed as official acts that the pres

court by former justice stephen breyer is opposite of legal formalism embodied by a justice neil gorsuch that the law should be strictly construed in light of its text and original understanding regardless of practical consequences. in at that sense holmes was also the center of a debate that continues to this day. >> what was the

circuit this summer pooh-poohed the over concurring concurs as perhaps a bit of a side-eye to justice gorsuch. we are now seeing more concurrences per opinion than ever before. i believe this past term was just over three concurrences per term. for people like me and you in the media balcony, that is a real treat. you get to hear more, no more, dig in more. if you are a lower court judge, i would think concurrences could be pretty annoying. it muddies the water rather than clearing it up. jonathan, what do you think of this great concurring court? >> trend and sign -- it is a bad trend and do not have enough to work on. [laughter] >> the proliferation of concurrences, are they good for the rule of law? >> it is difficult for judges to try to apply what the court is saying. we are also seeing it at some agencies like at the cftc. p commissioners are coming out with many concurrences. that gives you an insight into what they are thinking, and is it really helpful ultimately for what they are trying to do? i see the same things. hopefully, it is not developing like that on the high court. >> and