but jeff toobin, back to specifically this ruling. where then does it go next?t go to a higher court? this notion of the fourth amendment and this being unconstitutional? >> that's exactly where it goes. to the u.s. court of appeals for the d.c. circuit, often described as the second most important court in the country. interestingly, this is the court where two judges were just confirmed after much controversy. obama appointees to this court. they may be among the judges who hear this case. so it just nunderlines how important this court is. this ruling could be overturned in its entirety, up held, or expanded to hold that eve know, justifications security wise. where does that play into all of this? >> you know, that's what the biggest problem for the program has been. is that it's very hard for the government to prove, you know, what exactly is the usefulness of it. this judge stated his ruling today to allow the government some time to appeal, but he also had very damning things to say about the government's argument so far for why this program is necessary.

but this, i think, to jeff toobin's point, this is like none other.ifferent. >> well, i personally have not listened to the tapes yet. i don't think i want to. i don't think i want to hear the entire tapes. but for example, cbc news tonight will play portions of the tapes. cnn later today will play portions of the tapes. by exercising that type of caution, hopefully it will be somewhat comfortable, and at least not extrucruciating to he what was happening. to jeffrey's point, you're not hearing the voices of children, thank god, in the tapes. abc has said they're not going to broadcast any audio at all. you can see how there are different decisions being made by different outlets about how to handle this. >> i think we will later on tonight, give in context and then move on. >> remember, this is the age of the internet. they're all out there for anyone who wants to listen to them. >> you're absolutely right. jeffrey and brian, thank you both very much. >>> let me move on and tell you about this man imprisoned for a crime he didn't commit. back in 1987

glen greenwald and jeff toobin face off next. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] own your obsession with the exceptionalues during the season of audi. visit audioffers.com today. ♪ visit audioffers.com today. life's an adventure and it always has been. but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if y

jeff toobin, do you think this makes sense? >> no, this is outrageous. every juvenile prosecuted in texas or anywhere else, the only golfs rehabilitation, then perhaps this would be justified but if you look at people, how people are sentenced and how the law is interpreted in the real world, of course, people are punished, young people are punished. they are kept separate from the rest of the people to protect the rest of society, and that's the rule for everybody else and what outrages so many people including me about this case is that this kid got special justice because he's rich. >> boyce watkins, do you think he got special treatment because he's rich? this rehab facility, he'll be there for a year and probation for ten years, but if you get sent to a juvenile justice facility, you can be there until you're 19 years old before you're actually released. >> anderson, just yesterday i talked to a man who received a 40 year prison sentence for possession of one gram of crack cocaine. he studied the law and he's as brilliant as any professor i know. wh

jeff toobin, cnn's senior legal analyst joining me to talk about what this means and what we do goingward. we were talking. there is minimum wage beginning with what she was paying her housekeeper. $3 or something an hour. minimum wage is minimum wage for an hour. if you're not paying that, it's against the law. >> that's one of the things she is charged with. >> also visa fraud. >> lying about what she's paying her and the circumstances of her employment. that's the criminal charge at the heart of what she's charged wi with. >> that said, learning about her being handcuffed in front of her child's school, apparently strip searched. does the punishment fit the crime? >> i think everyone who is arrested should be treated the same way as everyone else who is arrested. when you get arrested, you are often searched. what some people call a strip search may be somewhat different than what other people call a strip search. she was arrested. she was searched. how she was treated, i don't know, but the appropriate way to treat her is simply the same way as everyone else. if everyone else is s

jeff toobin, while he is a supreme court a beat reporter, he's not there very often at all. he drops in for specific arguments. so in a sense he's not, he's not a daily presence of the court and sometimes that gives you an advantage in gaining access to the justices. >> tony, do you think it has anything to do with just the distance, the time you get your three years out, people are more willing to talk? >> i think that helps. he has sometimes interviewed justices for some fairly real-time stories in "the new yorker." and sometimes the justices are not too happy about it. but, yeah, justices who do have -- feel the call of history to a degree. they do talk to scholars and authors about what's happened in the past. >> pete, any insight into toobin's source relationships? >> it's because of the book. remember, bob woodward was the first to do this with the brethren, which to shock the supreme court with a lot of inside stuff about how things happened there, and this is to woodward's standard operating agreement that he has with his sources in his several books is right about t

jeffrey toobin gets the job of trying to answer both. so break this down for us, jeff.s is really interesting. a couple weeks ago we have a judge down in washington appointed by or nominated by george w. bush who says this will not stand. we can't hoover up this meta data and keep it forever. this judge here in new york two weeks later appointed by clinton disappoi disappoigree disagrees. >> i've never seen something pre sicily like this. you have two judges, exactly the same legal issue inside a couple weeks deciding it completely differently. i think the big difference is that the judge here in new york said there's a supreme court president that controls this case. there is a supreme court 19779 said when you tile the phone, you're telling the phone company what number you're dialing. you'll see it on the bill. it's not something you have any right to expect privacy. >> but again 1979 when we had rotary phones and the founder of facebook was negative five. >> that's what the judge in washington said. that may be the president on the books, but it's obsolete now. so i

this with cnn senior legal analyst jeffrey toobin and ben weisner, director of the american civil liberties union speech, private situate and technology project. jeff the judge has ruled the plaintiff is likely to succeed in raising a constitutional challenge to the nsa methods of collecting phone records. what exactly does that mean? would that stop what the nsa is doing any time soon? >> no. this is a narrow ruling. it applies only to the two people who actually brought the case. the judge's opinion says one, stop collecting data on these two people and two, i'm going to put this whole issue on hold until an appeals court decides it. so nothing changes today except the legal landscape does really look different because now for the first time, someone has said what the nsa is doing is illegal and that's both politically and legally significant. >> ben, i want to read part of the judge's opinion. it reads like it could have been written by you to a degree. the government wants it both ways, virtually all the government's arguments to this court explain how the government acted in good faith to create a comprehensive meta data data base that serves

toobin and dr. drew pinsky. this is obviously a difficult decision. news companies around the country have been wrestling with this all day. where do you come down on it, jeff? >> i think they should certainly be released. i think they should be available to the news media to make a news judgment about whether we should play them or not. >> i agree with that. >> i agree with your decision that i didn't hear anything in those tapes that really advanced the story a great deal. certainly the 911 operators behaved very professionally. the custodian was certainly a very responsible person reporting it. but there is really nothing in the story that changes our understanding of what happened. and so i just didn't really see the news value in them. >> christiane? >> i agree. i've heard a few of them and seen written reports of some of them. it appears that the police reacted very very fast, were on the scene within four minutes. so the news value issue i believe has been laid to rest. that it's not massively newsworthy. but beyond that i do think it's a matter of taste, anderson. i think we are really grappling with something that we could make the case for playing