justice kagan: no.ughter] elizabeth: you have had a rare experience in working in the judiciary, now at the highest level of the judiciary. the white house as both a legal and policy advisor, and the -- in the department of justice representing the united states, and as a professor and academic leader in the legal academy. so where did you learn the most? elizabeth: -- justice kagan: it used to be that people would, get one of those introductions and list all these different -- and i would come out, my standard line was now you know, can't keep a job. i can't say that anymore. elizabeth: you've got some real longevity. [laughter] elizabeth: where did you learn most and maybe with attention to your current role as justice of the supreme court. justice kagan: that narrows it down some, because i learned something in all of those different places and mostly the reason i couldn't keep a job was because i have this view of when the learning curve flattens out, that is the time to start keeping your eyes open

maybe justice kagan, justice soda mar, chief justice roberts is a conservative on the court. justice thomas is not a conservative. he is a right wing justice. he is trying to move the court he owned up to it we need to say what we are doing. justice thomas owns up to what he is trying to do. or he said the court just overturned the precedent and acted like it didn't. he is speaking with honesty i wish the others would. it's not the matter of conservatism to overturn that six or seven years old that's not conservative that's the opposite. when you try to move the court just say i'm trying to move the court because that's wrong. and justice thomas is one that disagrees with his position is very clear he's trying to move the corporate does not try to hide it and say it's not a conservative position i want to move this because i believe this was wrong when it was decided. i honestly think good and the people also think justice should make their opinions on bigger issues accessible to the regular newspaper reading of the american public. >> you see that a little bit with gorgeous

i cleared for justice marshall -- i clerked for justice marshall.f you had asked us what his best job was in law, this is the person who is not only supreme court justice, but who is the head of the legal defense fund and that role has reshaped all of american society. if you asked justice marshall what the best job in law was he would say being solicitor general. in this idea for him had a special meaning and resignations -- and residents. a black man saying i am here to represent the united states when in his prior legal career, he was run out of town on a rail as he traversed different courtrooms across the southern united states. it meant an enormous amount to him from that perspective. also, he would tell you, it's just an awesome job. where you're making these big decisions. of course you have bosses. but things very rarely go up to the attorney general and presidency. you are making these big decisions about litigation strategies, about litigation positions across the government. one of my favorite parts of the job, the u.s. government is a b

justice barrett: thanks. chief justice roberts: justice jackson. justice jackson: yes, so on the merits it was very clarifying to me in your exchangewi justice sotomayor and justice kagan, that you said you're not challenging the removal determination, that you're saying this is really about detention, as thstute says in that you are interpreting section22c to require the detention of certain criminal noncitizens before dhs decides to iniatremoval proceedings. am i right about that? mr. stone: and arrest, which we think both of those come from take into custody. but, yes. justicjason: but it's before. mr. stone: yes. justice jackson: you said when they make the decision not to remove someone then that -- then their duty dissipates and they n t them go. mr. stone: it attaches once the individual is released and it dissipates as soon as th me a decision. justice jackson: the reason y that's troubling me so, and you mentioned the fothmendment at one point, the reason why that's troubling me so is that isn't it the executive branches authority to take

justice jackson: i would like to circle back to the concerns of the chief justice and justice kavanaugh rseabout wegener and the arguntoure making in this case. it seems to be a d.c. court issue. in particular, the conceptual problem that i am having with your argument. you point to context and history, i understand those thin. ordinarily, there is symmetry between thelaim that is being made in a case and the remedy that is provided to a successful point. your remedy, the way you are reing this, actually creates a disconnect from me. here is what i mean. it i clear that the claim under the apa isbo the manner in whichhe agency has exercised its discretion. we know, we know, that agencies have no inherent autri. they get all of thr power to make valid and legally binding poliesrom congress. congress has saiinhe apa that, in order to make valid and legally binding policies, agencies have to follow certain procedures. when a plaintiff is making a claim under the apa, they are complaining about the agency' failure to follow the procedures thatreecessary and order to reach a valianlegally bi

that's for a lot of different reasons and some justices, justices sotomayor and kagan suggested they would be willing not only to preserve the current diversity rationale for higher education but essentially even expand it to other areas which i thought was a little curious. there's also a lot of talk about race preferences or race consciousness being a small factor among many and admissions decisions. so why should we really care too much but it was a creates a strange tension when on the other hand there are suggestions that we get rid of it, then the sky is going to fall. there was a bizarre and interesting tension throughout the unc and the harder argument. and then we heard, i don't think we heard at all from justice jackson! but although he did in the oral argument what original as him leads to in terms of title vi as well in the context of the original is. i think at the end of the day we got to avoid going back and forth on curriculum that they history is mixed here. largely, the law that congress was passing at the time the 14th amendment was ratified that may have been race

justice involves a human relationship. injustice has been done -- human relationship has been damaged, wounded, and torn and the relationship needs healing. we will talk with a director of the archdiocese in ministry called restorative justice. his mission statement says we provide people affected by crime, victims, and offenders in the community's support to heal. that is through prayer, prevention, intervention, and guidance. after this brief break, we will learn about the meaning of restorative justice and what the archdiocese is doing to teach it and practice it. >>> welcome to mosaic. let me introduce my colleague, julio escobar. he is your title director of the office of restorative justice ministry. >> yes, i coordinate the ministry named restorative justice. >> you work at the archdiocese, the central office, the -- one, you told me that your ministry of restorative justice is called ministry. you do not call it an office or a bureau or a program. the second thing you insisted on informing me about this was it is a

perhaps then there can be no justice.t is, if we, if society we all do not protect the court in this sense, then the court will not protect us, our society, and i think that in disputes about law , it is the court that puts an end to it, because the court is power. thank you dear presidents of the russian federation dear valery dmitrievich dear delegates and guests of the tenth anniversary all-russian congress of judges in the history of the judicial system of the russian federation 2022 is associated with two important events that harmoniously complement each other with the centenary of the formation of the supreme court of the russian federation and the tenth anniversary all-russian congress of judges. 100 years ago, on november 11 , 1922, the all-russian central executive committee adopted a regulation on the judiciary p in accordance with which the highest judicial body, the supreme court of the ussr, was created, the law on creative and law enforcement the activities of the supreme court of the russian federation bec

justice alito: i remember vividly. i had been nominated -- interviewed numerous times but the president had nominated harriet miers. i was sitting at the island in my kitchen early one morning drinking coffee and got a call on the fan -- phone. it was debbie to cancel saying -- deputy counsel bill kelly saying the president wants to withdraw, and the president has decided he wants to nominate me. it was an incredible surprise. then they told me the president would call at a particular time. the president called and said i would like to nominate you for the supreme court. i said, mr. president, thank you very much. i am deeply honored, and then there was a pause. and he said, do you accept? [laughter] president bush was not a lawyer. [laughter] >> so you obviously spoken to them before, and i know when -- one thing you share is you are both passionate baseball fans. did you spend more time talking about law or baseball? justice alito: it was a bit of both, and to me i am trying to think back on the exact questions that

he had his justice and chief justice in supreme court.he embodies the adage luck is where preparation meets opportunity >> absolutely. >> i want to close with something that i hope i'd give people a little bit of hope for the supreme court going forward. one of the things that you ride in the prologue, the president nominated them not for a sense of loyalty, but rather because they agreed with his administration for questions on constitutional law. i wonder, how two is not today? people worry too much about advancing the republican agenda. democrat appointees are advancing a democrat agenda. is that the case? are these administrations just building laws and arguments around a constitutional theory that they share the justices they're going to support them? >> no. i think that it is this the result of a fact of the major parties, particularly the republican party, they are last ideologically diverse. even as recently as the 1970s, you had republicans, you had rockefeller republicans with different kinds of republicans. you had democrats wh

justice alito: justice stevens wrote a lengthy opinion. everybody can read it. i will say this about citizens united. citizens united was a narrow decision. it held that a little corporation had the right to talk about the qualifications of a candidate for high public office in the period shortly before the election. that goes to the very core of what the first amendment protects. the main popular criticism of the decision that you hear is that freedom of speech implies to human beings, does not apply to corporations. i think to ordinary people, it has immediate appeal. if you think about it, where do we get all of our news? the cable news networks owned by corporations. the broadcast networks owned by corporations. major newspapers all owned by corporations. popular entertainment is all provided by corporations. if corporations do not have free speech rights and the government could regulate all of it as it wished, who wants that regime? citizens united has become -- most people do not know exactly what was held. it has instead become a lightning rod for everyt

she wasn't insulting her fellow justices.bout the republicans and state legislators passing abortion bans because gorsuch, kavanaugh and coney barrett were now justices. she talked about the stench of the state legislative policy because of that. casey and roe were decided by justices nominated by republicans. we've never had these voting blocks before. how do you fix that? >> the groups around them aren't exactly subtle about declaring victory and pointing out what they want to achieve politically. they're degrading the court's authority as they do that, but they can't resist because it's stuff they failed at democratically for so long. now with a captured court they can get done what they wanted without democratic scrutiny and they can do it through people who have jobs for life and no consequences. the cheering section is an embarrassment to the court. the court actually contributes to this by allowing special interest groups to rush cases to them often upon the invitation of some of the justices. they've created a fast la

and this is the message of justice. i think it is key, it is key for our history, if we are talking about the belarusian people for the slavic peoples. yes, in principle, for any normal people in the world who do not want degeneration. unfortunately, the fact remains that it prevails back in the west to this day. here are these wildly generative values, which will introduce the degeneration of this western society. maybe something will change. it may be true, but in fact it is this message that is present and lies at the foundation of western values. if we are talking specifically about belarus, i, uh, have repeatedly repeated now, i can say that, in fact, all, if we look at belarus, this is the last sovereign state in europe that pursues its sovereign policy to defend its right to decide for ourselves. how can we live on this earth, with whom to be in union? in what way to develop that we will have the entire belarusian national assembly yes, it means that the law is being discussed now - this is a very important eleme

hanging justices in effigy.tice referred to the great depression as a temporary inconvenience. >> this is a conservative majority that really didn't care about the little guy. >> it's roosevelt again. >> roosevelt takes every state in the union. >> by the largest majority in history. >> in 1936, the nation responded. >> i will faithfully execute -- >> re-elected fdr with more than 60% of the vote. >> we can now march forward, all of us together. >> but the new deal still appeared to be doomed. >> we must take action to save the constitution from the court. >> so roosevelt declared war on the court. >> he tried to enlarge the court with justices of his own choosing. >> shocking congress with a bombshell bill. >> opponents denounce it as court packing. >> that would add as many as six new justices chosen by him. >> what he proposed is for every justice who is over age 70 and it ozthe older justices who were causing him so much trouble, he would be able to appoint a new justice. >> i am opposed to packing the court

i cannot do their memory justice. when you look on the facebook pages, you look at everyone on else, all the individual experiences people have had with these wonderful men, it tells an amazing story. and it is what the last 20 year of club q has been about. not just club q but they embody what this type of bar is.s what a community bar is. what community really is. they were amazing. >> i wanted to say what we're learning as a country learns 'r more about this story, what happened at club q and what happened saturday night. one of the things people are struck by. all sorts of different people were there.y. definitely gay people there, queer people there, transgender people there, straight people with their families.re people in multigenerational groups enjoying the show. it just felt like the most diverse imaginable group of people there. people who have come out in support of what happened there tonight.f and i wondered if you could speak to that a little bit? especially given how much political hate has been direct

joining me now is justice and intelligence correspondent ken dilanian.ing us up to speed. >> good afternoon, chris. that's right. a senior justice department official tells nbc news that attorney general merrick garland has appointed a special counsel to investigate the entire mar-a-lago case, into whether national defense information was improper retained, at former president donald trump's home in florida and key aspects of the january 6th investigation, specifically the elements that involve allegedly unlawful efforts to overturn the 2020 election and influence the certification of electoral college votes. in other words not the capitol riot cases but the aspect of the cases that involve former president donald trump. as you mentioned, merrick garland is expected to announce this move at 2:15 today and tell white house the special counsel will be. one of the interesting questions here is that we are at a very different place in these investigations than we were when robert mueller was appointed to oversee the so-called trump russia investigation. that

kind of ideology in russia which will not be built from this justice, only justice, and justice is justling the truth. uh, justice to punish the guilty encourage the hero to warn of the difficulties that lie ahead of us, they cover them up and this is justice. here is a massive request for justice. we had a big meeting of the meeting on the future of the entire belarusian people's assembly, the relevant legislation was being discussed now there is a public discussion on this score, and in i propose to recall the words of the president, that were said at this meeting to update the electoral code. we must approach systematically and competently. this is the most important legislative hell, according to which the electoral processes in the country are carried out, starting from the republican referendums. well, probably, ending with the village councils of this document, everything should be clear. for voters and for members of the commission, the need to change the code has been gradually brewing for several years. well, this will happen, but now life itself makes us promptly to work and

the operation of the court and the administration of justice. periodic question comes up. let's introduce the death penalty. i do not presume to say instead of politicians the place of sociologists from the offices of legislators, because this is their prerogative, but there is also a legal prerogative and including the constitutional court, this moratorium hmm is based on two decisions of the constitutional court in the ninety-ninth year, and we confirmed this in the 2000th year of the ninth.

taylor justice filed.f congress with a ton of swag, never listen activities around the stuff comes to light, they threw them out. it's sort of a surprising burton k wheeler is a leading lights of the progressive most everyone. timely leading lights of the democratic party. a presidential contender with 1940 when result was running for a start. terms said, this is a man who has obtained december legendary status. if he adapt perhaps a late 1930s, it might be an venerated figure today american politics. but because of what happens it around, he loses the cnn can 40. 60 democratic priority that mutations tanked. how do you square that in terms of accountability? obviously, this is the point that loves arch for us not given the challenges that we got. the sedition trial now. pending potential charges against president in the role for this. you get somebody like john rocky. the prospect that preceded him. million more only bring in these cases in court. they don't end up resulting in convictions. even though th

until and unless and we bring true justice, not a social justice but the true justice we will continue to have these kind of things happen because nobody is paying attention to it. >> let's take one more question. i see a hand over here. >> has the act ever been used to protect a church or center? >> i'm sorry could you repeat that. check the website of the list all their cases and i don't think you will find a single case on their. this has certainly been a robust discussion on an important issue. i'm gladly had the opportunity to highlight it. it's so far received. please take a moment to thank all of the panelists. [applause] >> thank you for being here.

they set up dark money front groups to help confirm handhicked justices. -- shandpicked justices. they swarmed the court with a. me key curiae to signal to the justices which way they wanted them to rule and they built dark money doctrine factories to pump out fringe legal theories for the justices to deploy. as they have. well, it turns out these weren't the only avenues the right-wing special interests used to influence the supreme court. two weeks ago, "the new york times," building on earlier reporting by "rolling stone" and "politico," reported that during a private dinner with justice alito and his wife in 23014, two far-right activists, received advance notice about the results of an important reproductive rights case. the hobby lobby case. this was not an ordinary social occasion. here's what we know. over more than two decades, a man named robert schenck invested more than $40 million in a private far manufacture right campaign to lobby the supreme court. according to schenk himself, the goal of this campaign was to embolden the justices to write unapologetically conserva

he's at the justice department. we have cnn justice correspondent jessica schneider, paula reid, and elie honig. they have all new reporting to share with us. evan, how did this decision come to pass? >> reporter: well, victor and allison, this was a decision that's been weeks in the making. it was clear certainly that the former president, donald trump, was going to announce that he was going to run for office once more, and that really put the pressure, frankly, on the justice department to try to figure out a way to insulate or at least try to insulate these important investigations from the political that we know is going to be coming. what the attorney general has done is he has appointed a special counsel. we're going to hear the name of that person in the next 15 minutes or so when he comes out to speak here at the justice department. but we already know what this special counsel is going to be looking at. they're going to be overseeing both the investigation, the mar-a-lago investigation, the investigation i

i'm for the equal administration of justice. attorney general if there's ever a reason to investigate someone for a crime, he'll do that. >> congresswoman zoe lofgren, thanks so much for joining us. >>> coming up, we are seeing now the first-ever images of kim jong un's daughter, the incite it gives us into the north korean leader. that's next. the hiring process used to be the death of me. but with upwork... with upwork the hiring process is fast and flexible. behold... all that talent! ♪ this is how we work now ♪ (vo) with verizon, you can now get a private 5g network. so you can do more than connect your business, you can make it even smarter. now ports can know where every piece of cargo is. and where it's going. (dock worker) right on time. (vo) robots can predict breakdowns and order their own replacement parts. (foreman) nice work. (vo) and retailers can get ahead of the fashion trend of the day with a new line tomorrow. with a verizon private 5g network, you can get more agility and security. giving you more control of y

justice and the american people. to be convicted of using force to overthrow the government to interfere with a lawful functions of government is very rare, it's a very serious charge, and we will have other recur percussion's beyond the public impression. as you point out, there's another trial coming up a, couple of trials ones that includes different white nationalist and violent group and the defendants in that case may be thinking, perhaps we ought to plead guilty considering how this trial went. so big impacts here. and maybe more people willing to cooperate and light of this jury decision. >> what do you think the implications are for president trump and his potential culpability for january 6th given the fact that people who were intact with his adversaries if you will have now been charged and found guilty of seditious conspiracy? >> -- [inaudible] it shows the departments not afraid to bring some of the most serious charges. now have to look at okay who was, involved in inciting, giving aid and comfort to t

if you think of justice in terms of perfect justice when there is only justice of the suspects are imprisonedhere will not be justice. but what the next of kin show us is that justice is so much more complex. there's so many more dimensions and there is a truth telling and accountability not only for the next of kin but also for ukraine, from 2014 has been saying to the world that russia was involved in the donbas. the court acknowledged that. it is also form of justice this court ruling can also contribute to future generations in trying to settle on a common historical and accurate historical account of what actually happened back then in 2014. >> samuel in oxford, your reaction, more than 10 different nationalities were on board mh 17 was is verdict a balanced one? >> i think the verdict is a balanced one. if you look at the details of this case it is important to keep in mind that one of the suspects, the other suspect actually communicated with each other on the day of the attack. that the missile had striked a ukrainian jet or foreign jet that was cutting forward, this was in the milita

minutes from now at the justice department. we are told to expect merrick garland to appoint a special counsel who would determine whether the former president, donald trump, would be facing federal charges in connection to a series of investigations, including the probe into whether he unlawfully kept classified information at his mar-a-lago resort in florida. that's a life look there about 14 minutes from now. we should be going live to the justice department for that announcement. sandra smith in new york. great to be with you on this friday. >> john: and in addition to the documents says, whether or not there was anything illegal heading into january 6th and what happened up on capitol hill. >> sandra: first, fox news alert on the biggest crypto meltdown in history. just moments ago, president biden making remarks on the economy. >> john: the party's second largest donor of the midterm elections faces intense scrutiny over the epic collapse of his crypto company. >> sandra: and concerns victims in the u.s. might never see t

department, they were removed from the justice department. it is the korean department that had been working on these cases. it was working on, likely, in some passion to work with jack. and, you also see the same investigators, who investigated teams. he can bring an outside counselor, sir prosecutors, pulling people from other u.s. attorneys offices, which we have seen in previous special counsel investigations including durham, and mueller, they can raise their hand to say, that they want to help, and could be approved to detail over. he will, likely, already have a bit of man power, and has the ability to ask the attorney general for more resources, and money, as needed. >> katie better, reporter for the justice department from the new york times. thank you for your time tonight, i greatly appreciate it. >> thank you. >> much more ahead tonight. just to is jack smith? the new special counsel. what can his career tell us about what to expect in his new role? matt miller, former chief justice department spokesperson under president obama jo

justice alito has now done something that clarence thomas has never done, justice alito is publicly denying the allegation against him, in a written statement to the new york times. samuel alito said, the allegation that the rights were told the outcome of the decision in the hobby lobby case, or the authorship of the opinion of the court, by me or my wife, is completely false. in his written statement, justice alito admits that the wrights bought their way into his home. my wife and i became acquainted with the wrights some years ago because of their strong support for the supreme court historical society, and since then, we have had a casual and purely social relationship. strong support for the supreme court historical society, in other words money. strong support is money. massive amounts of money pumped into the supreme court historical society by donald wright and his wife, gayle. that money is the only reason samuel alito knows those people. that money is the only reason those people got into samuel alito's home. while he is writing or finished writing the hobby lobby opinion but she

>> well, it wasn't just the department of justice. it was his way of managing the executive branch, and his way, really even before he became president, he would reach out and talk to a lot of people, and sort of take all the information in and test his own positions and ideas with other people. and so the whole running of the administration had this sort of free -- i compared it to a card game in my fraternity when i was in college, which is somehow as the card game kept on going, but the cast of characters changed almost imperceptibly, and you can never tell when something started and when something began. and that's how the oval office was, you know, people coming in and, "hey, bill, come on in." some meeting on trade. i was called into some meeting on trade. i didn't know anything about the topic. "what do you think about that?" i mean, that's the way he is. now, there's a good side to that. you know, it allows for internal debate. it allows the cabinet secretary to have his day in court with the president. and, you know, it adds

what is put out by the department of justice. know, there could be some sort of, and hallie, we're trying to, you know, forecast this in a very hypothetical sense, but the only real effort that congress could have to stand in the way of the department of justice investigation would be, for instance, to defund it, you know, congress has the power of the purse. but that is not realistic in any way, shape, or form, given the makeup of congress and the new year, because democrats in the senate are never going to, you know, stand in the way of a congressional, or i should say a department of justice investigation by trying to cut off the purse strings. basically what donald trump is calling, particularly on his house republican allies, is the power of the bully pulpit. he just wants them to hold hearings, to hold press conferences, to be vocal on twitter, to complain about this, through their official offices, to try and distract from the actual work of the department of justice, and try and undermine it from a public relations perspe

marcia: this was very much on the minds of some of those justices like justice elena kagan.ed out there has been experience in other universities where when they stopped considering race, there was a precipitous drop in underrepresented minorities on campus. that had a domino effect because you have the military wanting to recruit from campus. they have written and said that they want to build a diverse officer corps as the rank and file tend to be diverse. she also pointed out it could affect every area, corporate america, law, medical, scice. that all of these industries and institutions depend on diverse pipeline, so that they can be diverse as well. john: there was also a lot of discussion or debate over the meaning of brown versus board of education, the 1954 landmark ruling that ended desegregated public schools. marcia: it is hard to believe we are still talking about that in this day and age. the challengers to the university programs believe brown versus board of education said all racial classifications are unconstitutional. so this 2003 decision the court is looki

the supreme court, the nine justices of the supreme court, in a new york times quote, chief justice johnult those rules but are not bound by them. so i think that the essential thing here is to codify ethics rules, as barbara just said, that are applied to the supreme court justices, enforced against them, but more deeply, what the court needs to take seriously, their own popularity ratings, their own confidence in the institution is undermined when the justices do not care that the appearance of impropriety is in fact, being violated by them. so i would say in addition to transparency, in addition to meaningful, meaningful reform about disclosures, the most important thing is that the justices take seriously, when they look like they are in the tank with people who have vested interest in their cases, that undermines public confidence, and it needs to evolve. >> people need to understand objectively, the supreme court is the least transparent of our governing bodies, by leaps and bounds. barbara, could a revelation like this prompt an actual second look at the case law? obviously, it is

equal justice under the law. the job of the chief prosecutor is not to practice cute color, race or anymoring identifying aspect it is the practice cute behavior. that is what we do. as i mentioned in the prior answers earlier of the criminal justice system is broken. there are tools of oshg preparation guilt had as a civil right's attorney i have been work to fight that on the civil side. i was a member of the boy's club and paid for colleges as your next da i will do the adds using the authority the stature of the district attorney to call in the billion airs and give j.w.s to at risk youth. there is no reason we can't do temperature i forgot 5 years ago i started the national first responder's fund. and as a founder and executive director we are in 364 departments around the country and in 36 states we support first responders first responders the moral will come become when i become district attorney they know i have their become. skwoo thank you. the next question goes to maurice. govern newsome signed ab219

i would refer you to the department of justice on any questions on this. again, we we were not given advance notice. we were not aware of this investigation. >> any reaction from the president? >> no reaction. again, this will be up to the attorney general and department of justice, as it relates to a criminal investigation. i can tell you that the president was not aware, we were not aware. we were not given advance notice. i would refer to the department of justice. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government presented by these television companies and more including sparklight. >> the greatest town on earth is the place you call home. at sparklight it is our home, too. we are facing their greatest challenge. that is why sparklight is working around the clock to keep you connected. >> srklight supports c-span as a public service along with these television providers, even you a front row seat to democracy. >> c-span's washington journal, every day we take your calls live on the air on the news of the day. we will discuss policy issues that impact you

justice thomas. [laughter] a anything further? justice kagan? >> one question about how to think about the 25 year sentence in the surrounding discussion. >> absolutely. will people forget aboutge the 5 year mark with the four paragraphs you explainedl preferences will fail tir own test unless they make themselves unnecessary. so i think what justice o'connor that in 25 years if we still need a race it'sot that you get another 25 years. declarant racial preferences to be a failure and call it off because of race neutrality. >> justice barrett? >> we are not to the 25 your point yet, right? if it had s self-destruct mechanism it says with that to call it quits they're just notau working are we obligated to give re time? >> harvard certainly has neveric indicated in fiveea it will st using race. harvard of the 2ear span if not decreased its use of race at all and think the only legal standa t score is ever recognize for when you stop usace and education is an with all deliverance for the 25 year mark we do not sport it for the get go. but we do th

right and justice i don't i agree with you that justice is insecurity.velopment. we must move forward, and safety. we can each provide for ourselves in our own cocoon, we cannot provide for ourselves in one cocoon. and secondly, all international mechanisms developed after the second world war are under the control of the united states and international financial systems. ion understand these mechanisms. it is true justice to transfer the philosophical to the real search, you understand philosophy, it has and practically changes pleases, as the discussion goes law of the entire belarusian people's assembly. first of all, people, the idea is perceived almost non-existent, critical remarks are needed, this body is not needed. yes, it's easy to explain, but specific remarks are coming. uh, about that, uh, our people want uh to increase the role of work collectives. they understand the civil society of our patriotic civil society, which has been formed since the twentieth year, more widely than the authors of the law. they are behind. questions and this dest

. >> i nominate judge clarence thomas to serve as associate justice of the united states supreme court. >> that is when all heck broke loose. >> judge thomas began to use work situations to discuss sex. >> we know exactly what is going on. this is the black guy, he has to be destroyed. it really didn't matter. what mattered was what they wanted. >> you would still like to serve on the supreme court? >> i would rather die than withdraw from the process. >> i want to say i lived up to my oath and did my best. >> michael pack, what were we just watching? >> guest: the trailer to our film called "created equal: clarence thomas in his own words," same title as the book, it is a 2 hour film, released in january 2020 in 110 theaters. covid cut into it, it was broadcast nationally on cbs in may. and then was released digitally and is still available build digitally on amazon. viewers can go to our website, a full list of how to watch it and that film was based on a very long interview with clarence thomas. you can see he looked right at the camera and tells his story in his own words from the

justice kentaji brown, jackson and justice sonia sotomayor underscored race is just one of several factors considered by schools. when you give your race, you're not getting any special point since being treated just on par with other factors in the system. >> no one is automatically getting in because race is being used. but the court's 6 conservative justices expressed skepticism. justice samuel alito suggested the inclusion of race is innately unfair. if you give a plus 2 in person who falls within the category of underrepresented minority, but not to somebody else. you are disadvantaging the latter student and justice clarence thomas poked holes in the university's goals have heard the diversity quite a few times. i don't have a clue what it means seems to mean everything for everyone. >> now, although in 2016 we did see the supreme court of the hold of action with a new more conservative leaning court. it's unlikely they'll do the same. of course, we will not hear that decision until the spring for now in washington, raquel martin, back to you guys. so raquel justice ketanji brown jac

, securing justice for people.the justice department in its civil enforcement authority to seek these consent decrees. you see it in the civil rights context all the time. it's not uncommon to file a suit like this, use that as a negotiating tool to get everybody to come to the table, community, stakeholders, citizens and law enforcement, to come to some consensus. backing up paula's point, we focus on the political investigations and politicians being investigated. this is the very, very important work that the 115,000 people at the justice department do every day. they should be celebrating it. frankly, given all the criticism the attorney general took and has taken for being slow to the punch when it comes to the victory laps, this is the kind of work that they ought to be trumpeting much more. >> your thoughts on what we heard, sarah? >> it's important. we have been to jackson. we continue to go to jackson, mississippi. my producer and i have been going there to talk to some of the residents there. i will tell