it is not my opinion or justice gorsuch's opinion, it is the opinion of the court. we work together in common enterprise. when the opinion is announced and dissent is there and you read it and it is really sharp. but those two people come back and go into the dining room and have lunch where we talk about all sorts of things. we don't talk about work. it does create a bond. that's how i work. that is something i would like people to know. they may think that there are some harsh views if they listen to commentary back and forth. but we have a common colleague. >> what is something you are looking forward to in the upcoming term? >> it's what i'm hoping not to find. i'm hoping to have a court without barricades. we have a nice batch of cases. we have to start getting ready for those. nothing special, i think. >> before you were elevated to the supreme court, the case discussions versus the supreme court and the kind of differences in the decision-making or drafting process or consensusbuilding process between the smaller three-judge court. >> three is easier than nin

fourth amendment claim was an unlawful extension and it came up in a new factual scenario and justics gorsuch is in the middle saying we should get more reconsideration in the three justices are in defense on the denial of the first amendment claim, i think this case illustrates the events is not in the foreseeable future going to be a form of relief for litigants congress probably perhaps will have to or should to the extent there was not only claims against officers constitutionally permissible but something constitutionally required because of the need for accountability in the previous history congress perhaps should be a place to i revisit this, certainly i think the court has demonstrated the doors are going to be close to the release in the future. if this is not going to be an avenue for reconsideration in the court moving forward how will accountability and structure continue to arise i think the current court is going to continue to take more and more cases with the more grand article two related constitutional accountability theme i think it's going to be cases that look more simil

so, as you said, he was advising president trump on who should be apted to the supreme court, justices gorsuchvanaugh, and barrett, the three most recent supreme court justices on the republican appointed side all came through the federalist society, which is an organization that he helped to lead for many years. t he's also got a financial side where he's helping to back republican candidates for the unit states senate, for the house, in state court races, and state legislative races. and he just got $1.6 billion in a new trust that he's going to be able to use to further his activity. so he's both pursuing legal and political strategies that work with each other to kind of bootstrap the way towards changing american politics and law. geoff: and this legal strategy is known as the independent state legislature theory. this has been described as a fringe legal theory, yet you have three supreme court justices, alito, thomas, and gorsuch, who have seemingly signaled support for it. and justice kavanaugh seems very interested. so tell us more about that, how this theory works. rick: and the ques

and then justice gorsuch is in the middle concurring saying there should be more reconsideration to givenshen the three justices are in denial of the fourth amendment claim that this case shows that givens is not in the foreseeable future going to be a form of relief for litigants. congress should not only were claims against officers that were constitutionally permissible that some think constitutionally required because of the need for accountability was not in the previous history. congress will need to or should revisit this. the court has demonstrated it will be close to this relief in the future. it will not be an avenue for accountability with the court moving forward how accountability and structure arise? the current court will continue to take more and more cases with the more grand article two themes it will be cases that are more similar. perhaps in the near-term we will see more reconsideration and then they had two cases this year dealing with administrative agencies. but dealing with jurisdictional components and how those actor should be held accountable by their supervisor

and also as justice gorsuch points out, may be the best way to look at the question is a tool for enforcing nondelegation the idea that congress cannot delegate the legislative powers to the branch and in principle to go straight to the constitutional issue of nondelegation and not use the major questions doctrine in the imperfect world that we have to go as far as they should while nonetheless giving congress the ability if it's clear enough. so i think therefore the osha case came out correctly but for the wrong reasons for why this is not within the provision of the statute. the other vaccination mandates the biden versus missouri which is a noted before was the mandate that healthcare workers at facilities receiving federal funds must be vaccinated against covid. and this case the court actually upheld the mandate by a five / four vote with the justice and justice kavanaugh joining the three liberal justice while one is pro- mandate the other is anti- mandate but it is consistent because here the legislative authorization what the administration did was much clearer. the relevant provis

look at the church closing cases one of the most powerful pro religious liberty voices has been justice gorsuch. >> thank you. >> let me just say you for the best defense of the supreme court which in my view sometimes is indefensible. it is very persuasive and this is a very persuasive man. join me in thanking. on about books. we delve into the latest news about the publishing industry with interesting insider interviews with publishing industry experts. we'll also give you updates on current nonfiction authors and books. the latest book reviews. and we'll talk about the current nonfiction and books featured on c-span's book tv. and welcome to about books. this is book tv's program and podcast that looks at the business of publishing. now, in just a few minutes, we'll talk to the author of one of the bestselling memoirs of all time. mih

and then have the opportunity to appoint three justices justice gorsuch on —- and cavanagh and justicearrett and on may 3rd 2022 saying that the court was about to overrule roe it did not substantially change from draft to final. the opinion closest resembles justice scalia kc defense in the tone and tradition. that analysis with the summary of a dismissal to violate the equal protection clause pronouncing this is by presidents he does take note of an amicus brief which documented how arguments in favor of late 19th century abortion laws but declined to give way to the evidence. those based on legislative motives and pointing outut the evidence only in statements supporters. and then was substantive due process that liberty it was abortion rates. he dives into abortion history and common law and founding history. indicating the abortion was a common law crime. not that it was ever a legal right and by the time the 14th amendment was ratified many band pre- quickening abortion. he doesn't say the right to marry a part of the same sex use contraceptives but he does say they don't indicat

look at the church closing cases one of the most powerful pro religious liberty voices has been justice gorsuch. >> thank you. >> let me just say you for the best defense of the supreme court which in my view sometimes is indefensible. it is very persuasive and this is a very persuasive man. join me in thanking. >> julio rosas, steven writer for town hall, talked about his events he covered during the summer of 2020 protests. here's a portion of the program. >> when i got, when i got to minneapolis, i mean, this was after they had set fire to some buildings surrounding the 3rd precinct, because hay couldn't -- derek chauvin and the other officers -- [inaudible] >> yeah. >> and i get down there, and it was, i mean, it was unlike anything i had ever seen before. i'm is so used to protests not affecting the blocks surrounding the incident, you know? things can get rowdy, but i can go over and get something at mcdonald's. [laughter] i mean, this -- nothing was open. every place, especially in south minneapolis, was either closed, or they were being looted, actively looted. so i get there, and acros

. >> so you were the junior associate justice for seven years prior to the confirmation of justice gorsuch. leaving aside individual cases, how do new personalities joining a court change the way the court operates? if they do at all? >> there is this very famous line that justice white once used and he said, when any new justice comes in it creates a new court is what he said. so when i came in, i started thinking about that a little bit and i thought, he is really wrong because there was nothing about that first year that i was on the court that made it like a new court, the kagan court. [laughter] and that is true for most junior justices. sometimes there can be very exceptional circumstances, in which a new justice has sort of outsized influence but for the most part, it is not the new justice that creates the new court. so i thought ok, justice white is wrong even though literally every journalist pulls out this line when there is any new justice. but then i started thinking, maybe i should have realized this in the first place, but it took me a while, i realized there was another sen

to hear from justice gorsuch speaking at a judicial conference last night here is what he says. he said the chief justice appointed internal committee to oversee the investigation. that committee has been busy and we are looking forward to their report, i hope, soon. that's really the only on the record comment we have gotten. he said he was very worried about the pressure that was placed on justices trying to sway votes in those kinds of things. he said it doesn't matter which side is doing it it's very dangerous. the chief justice speak tonight 8:00 at that same conference. we will be watching to see if he has anything to say. >> bret: maybe a little prep to say maybe you should address this. >> maybe. >> bret: let's talk about the big show. "fox news sunday" the inaugural run there who do you have? >> shannon: it's a busy week as you know. of course we will cover everything regarding the queen and legacy. we have the u.s. ambassador to the u.k. jane hartley. martha mccallum is there on the ground for that part of the coverage. we have senators from both sides of the aisle jon

i do not think any of the panel has covered this, but the praying coach case last term where justice gorsuch and the majority opinion announced -- we have long ago abandoned another 70's throwback and eventually said that all of the jews has been squeezed out of the lemon and we now throw away the right -- juic e has been squeezed out of the lemon and we now throw away the rind. we will turn to general questions now and fees will come from the live audience and online -- these will come from the live audience and online. you can join the conversation and submit questions on the webpage or on facebook, youtube. use the hashtag, #catoscotus. for those of you in person, we will have a microphone. when the microphone comes to you, please speak directly into it so we can get to all of the questions, but if you could announce your name first. we have someone back there with the first question. >> i am bill watkins. my question is on the google case and section 230. the way that you phrase the ninth circuit decision, say that however strict google was being striking down, limiting censoring videos

>> under some versions of the theory and justice gorsuch suggested he might be open to that in one of the north carolina cases in 2020. >> the legislature under the state under this more expansive notion must act as a legislature and as an administrative agency and as its own court, interpretation near the state constitution, although the state constitution may be irrelevant here. it's as if they are saying the state legislature act in a completely different capacity and exists as a different kind of beast when it governs election law. and state election law, or state constitution law is just irrelevant. am i over reading that? >> no, that's exactly right. the logical extension of this theory is, there's no separation of powers the. judiciary doesn't get to say what the law is and the constitution has no bearing on what the legislature can do nor'easters the governor but only in the instance of regulating federal exam elections. and that exception makes no sense. >> it seems to me, given that there is no historical basis for this, given that there is no real academic support for it, i

at the conference also speaking was chief justice roberts and gorsuch. he attacks of the integrity of the court. we're having a crisis of faith. that's being fueled by a crisis of leadership. these attacks on the integrity of not just the court but on your own colleagues that are implied in these remarks. >> all right. we appreciate your time. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> up next, we're going to bring in our sunday group about the issues voters say will motivate them the most in november. (vo) while you may not be running an architectural firm, tending hives of honeybees, and mentoring a teenager — your life is just as unique. your raymond james financial advisor gets to know you, your passions, and the way you help others. so you can live your life. that's life well planned. ♪ keep it comin' love ♪ ♪ keep it comin' love ♪ ♪ don't stop it now, don't stop it no ♪ ♪ don't stop it now, don't stop ♪ ♪ keep it comin' ♪ it's back america. applebee's all you can eat boneless wings. just $12.99. with xfinity internet, you get advanced security that helps p

supreme court justice neil gorsuch says a report stemming from an internal supreme court investigatione leak of that draft opinion of the high-profile dobbs case will be released "soon." correspondent christina coleman has details for us tonight in los angeles. >> as for an update on the investigation to this matter, just as neil gorsuch said we are looking forward to the report i hope soon, it is terribly important to identify who leaked the draft opinion. he made the comments at a judicial conference in colorado springs yesterday. chief justice john roberts also spoke at this event tonight though he did not mention a leak or the courts landmark decision to overturn roe v. wade. on may 2nd, political published in the leak of justice samuel alito's draft opinion suggesting the court would make this decision and it was followed almost immediately by protests nationwide including in front of the homes of some supreme court justices. justice roberts released a statement a day after that leak was published, to the extent this betrayal of the competence of the court was intended to undermin

justices. neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett. dobbs rose from a challenge to a mississippi ban on abortion after 15 weeks, well beyond the -- before the point of viability. and on may 3, 2022, "politico" published a leaked draft opinion indicating the court was about to overrule roe. it did not substantially change from draft to final. justice alito's opinion closely resembles justice scalia's casey dissent in bothity tone and traditionalism. justice -- both its tone and traditionalism. it begins with his summary dismissal ofen argument that -- of an argument that abortion restriction violates a clause. he takes note of an am cuss brief which documented how arguments in favor of late 19th century abortion laws were -- [indiscernible] -- but he declined to give way to this evidence -- weight to this evidence, stating the court has long disfavored arguments based on legislative motives and pointing out that the evidence in this brief consisted only in statements from supporters of the laws, not legislators. then the main event, sub

as president he had the opportunity to appoint three justices neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coneyarrett. dobbs arose from a challenge to mississippi ban on abortion after 15 weeks well beyond before the point of viability. on may 3, 2020 of of political published a leaked draft opinion. it t did not substantially chane from draft to file. justice alito's opinion in dobbs closely resemble justice scalia's casey dissent in both its tone and tradition. justice alito's analysis begins not with substantive due process but with the summary dismissal of an argument that abortion restrictions violate the equal protection clause by discounted on the basis of sex. he pronounces his argument squarely my president. he does take note of an amicus brief by the american historical association which document how arguments in favor of late 19th century abortion laws are saturated with sexism but he's -- stating this court has longest they would arguments based onlo legislative motives d pointing out the evidence in this brief was in statement from supporters of the law. then we get the main event,

joining us now is mike davis, president of the article three project and former clerk for justice neil gorsuch with me is julie kelly , a senior writer at american greatness and author of january six how democrats use the capitol protests to launch a war on terror against a political right. mike , it's almost as if they are seizing phones of anyone who might have communicated with the president or anyone who's close with the president out on a limb here or what? >> this is scary. stuff, laura . >> we started out where they were going after trump for non crimes of keeping his presidential records at more long ago. now they're going after his his his supporters. they're going after supporters for apparently the non crime of questioning an election. you have to have a predicate crime in order to have grand jury subpoenas and warrants. what's the crime? they're investigating, questioning the election. we're not a third world marxist yet. i'm not understanding how the biden justice department thinks that they can investigate these crimes. >> obviously, this january six hearings have totally gotten

she reported that justice neil gorsuch had defied sonia sotomayor's supreme court. mascomy soa mandate and was immediately fact checked by the supreme court and even twitterdh acknowledged that she was making that up. >> pretty embarrassing. soup it's kind of a mixedd bl blessing to report tonight thaet nina totenberg has finally decided to stop pretendingdeci she's noded t a reporter.she is >> she's a show she is a shill for the democratic party, longic married to a democratice ha senator . she couldn't say it, but now she has a new memoir out, the memoir is called dinners with ruth. and of course, ruth would be our recently beatified former supreme court justice, now deceased ruth bader ginsb ginsburg. and it turns outur that ruth bader ginsburg and nina totenberg were incredibly close friends. the e they talked on the phone allnd the time. and at the end of one ofe on thl calls, the tone of totenberg writes in this repulsive new memoir, she felt like a mere quoting a goose that had just been stuffed in preparation for foie gras. it's like the perfect npr sentence

joining me now, mike davis, president of article three project, former clerk to justice neil gorsuch. washlie hurt, washington times opinion editor of fox newsx news contributor mike . now we're talking aboutight's tonight's leaks. were these more of what we would expect is kind of the dodgers revenge or preemptive strike against the special master here? >> so this is part of a patternt of illegalte by the biden justie department. they leaked out to "newsweek" early on that attorney general merrick garland did notat personally approve this raid. that was a lie.that w they leaked out that trump hadas america's nucular documents. that was a lie.nuclea they leaked out that president biden, the bidenhousei white house, did not have any r. involvement with this raid. that was a lie. we saw that jonathan hsu,we saw deputy white house counsel to president biden, wave president trump's assertion of executive privilegione on behalf of president biden. so it's just a series of liesrio and leakf s. remember judge cannon, when she ordered this special master? t h she talked about, quote, the swir

to tv ads to stop the confirmation of justice garland and to push through the confirmation of justices gorsuch, kavanaugh, and barrett. so dark money flows into all these other areas. if you like climate denial, you love dark money. if you like voters having their votes suppressed by partisan legislators, you love dark money. and if you like a captured court that dances to the tune of the dark money donors who stocked it, you love dark money. and that's before we even get to its pernicious is insidious, clandestined effect in our elections. with that, i see that my time has expired. with senator grassley here for his time, so i yield the floor to my friend, senator grassley. mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: today roughly 175 americans will die from fentanyl poisoning. many of them won't even know that they've taken the fentanyl. they'll think they've taken xanax for anxiety or oxycodone for pain. that's what deven anderson -- you'll see his picture here in a minute -- of shelby, iowa, thought when he took a fentanyl pill marked like an ox

justices. neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett.obbs rose from a challenge to a mississippi ban on abortion after 15 weeks, well beyond the -- before the point of viability. and on may 3, 2022, "politico" published a leaked draft opinion indicating the court was about to overrule roe. it did not substantially change from draft to final. justice alito's opinion closely resembles justice scalia's casey dissent in bothity tone and traditionalism. justice -- both its tone and traditionalism. it begins with his summary dismissal ofen argument that -- of an argument that abortion restriction violates a clause. he takes note of an am cuss brief which documented how arguments in favor of late 19th century abortion laws were -- [indiscernible] -- but he declined to give way to this evidence -- weight to this evidence, stating the court has long disfavored arguments based on legislative motives and pointing out that the evidence in this brief consisted only in statements from supporters of the laws, not legislators. then the main event, subst

justice neil gorsuch said it is important to identify the leaker and said he expects a report on the ogress of the leak investigation soon. he condemned the leak, as have other justices, as improper efforts to influence judicial decision-making from whatever side are a threat to the judicial decision-making process, he said at the conference, the one that chief justice john roberts spoke at friday. let's try to get in greg in chicago. thanks for waiting. caller: i have to give credit to the vice president. this is an activist court. i know these conservative heart flakeswhen you hear someone say original list that just means i love the constitution as long as the constitution serves me. we have justices that when they were nominees raised their hands under oath and they lied. they lied in their senate confirmation hearings and that is a dealbreaker. you only trust the court as long as you trust the people that are there. only 15% of democrats agree with the court. it's not just women it's meant of conscience. the only thing amy coney barrett shares with sandra day o'connor is a gender

justice neil gorsuch said that there is an investigation going in, that chief justice john roberts hashe outside at the very least, it seems a lack of interest or, at the minimum, a lack of accountability. what's going on with identifying the dobbs' case's supreme court leaker? >> well, there are a couple of problems. i've never been convinced that chief justice john roberts really wants to know who the leaker is, to get to the bottom of it. i think he would prefer that everybody just move on and overlook it. the such a humiliation and embarrassment for the court. if they do identify the leaker, yeah, those are crimes. i mean, it's -- that's the theft of government property, and it's obstruction the of justice, interfering with a legal proceeding. and whoever the leaker is not only should lose their license to practice law, but should be criminally prosecuted. will: right. >> but, you know, because the supreme court didn't bring in the fbi or federal marshals, instead had their own investigation, you know, i'm not sure they're confident to accomplish it. will: yeah. you would think, by

there are those who assert and apparently we now have three justices, thomas, alito, and gorsuch who appear to accept this theory that nothing can override and they can do anything they want whenever they want. mr. bauer, let me start with you since you are a graduate of the same law school that i am. i will give you the privilege of beginning. what do you think of this theory and is this a concern in the context of what we are discussing her today? mr. bauer: i don't believe it is. there has been a lot of different meanings to the term but i think one thing is very clear, which is whatever state legislatures may do in appointing electors they cannot violate other constitutional provisions. they are still faced with the requirements of their actions. with the right to vote under the first amendment, so there are constraints and i don't think in the most extreme form somebody might subject that one might understand i don't think that would be an accurate statement of what is available under our constitution. >> mr. muller? mr. muller: if congress has the power to determine the choosin

which this was raised in some of the postelection litigation in which three justices, i believe it was alito, thomas, and gorsuch interest in this. how do you see the relativity of this court? >> so, the three of them expressed great interest in. i would be surprised if they didn't take on a maximalist few. justice kavanaugh is what i would call very curious about intended state legislator. -- justice kavanaugh. so there, you know, it's not just about the text in a public meeting, it's all about the burden that is probably court in what undermining confidence in election incontinence and negotiate. remember, they just eerie to keep big hit after the dobbs case came out. so there is a lot of institutional legitimacy riding on the line here in terms of how this case goes. >> all right, rick, thank, you that was really clarifying. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> still to come, after spending half of a century working to overturn roe v. wade, to criminalize abortion make it illegal and unlawful suddenly some republicans can't wait to talk about anything but the latest candidate attempting a political future. next. n

alito wanted to take it and gorsuch and thomas but that is all they could get it takes 4 justices to up. the election in pennsylvania was conducted under processees that had been changed by the democrats on the supreme court of pennsylvania at the behist of the governor and these democrat litigators. so many people in pennsylvania were furious about this, including republicans of the state legislature. including i guess, president president trump and lawyers working for president trump. they decided you know we'll send an alternate group of electors to the national archives, they couldn't get the republican legislature to vote for that alternate list it would always fail, the republican legislature can send an alternate group but members don't have much of a constitutional leg to stand on. but they gave it a shot. they also added when they sent their list. they added a a. >> document, sending them in case legal challenges were successful, they wanted a 6 gsecurity -- second group there. does this sound like obstruction of justice to you? of congress? and the electoral college vote to

justices. i don't think that it's crazy. i mean they stole a supreme court seat. you know i mean the the gorsuchthe merrick garland was went up in the exact same way that the that amy coney barrett he did. and so i don't think over the long term that's good for the country and for the democratic republic. there's a big part of the country that rightly thinks that that state was stolen from them because it was so i don't like a lot of their tactics, but i understand that the people that i'm that are in this book are not true. believing pro-life people, true believing. you know, milton friedman trying, people write like i get it? i mean, the people that i'm talking about are the operatives who on balance, like lower taxes and on balance are for for, you know, abortion restrictions, you know, that are reasonable. but who know about all of the other damage that's being caused by him and who see it. and that's not their driving motivation. their driving motivation is winning a game. those are the people that i'm that i'm condemning. thank you. this is a bit of a switch. i wondered if you could reflec