justice kagan: but, general -- please finish. general francisco: they told him that if he actually asked the question for 22.2 million people for whom no administrative records existed, he would have got actual answers at 98 percent accuracy. and that the alternative, their preferred alternative, was to use a statistical model to estimate citizenship, not just for the 22.2 million, but for 35 million, but they had not yet constructed that model and didn't know what the error rate in that model would be. justice kagan: i think, general, i mean, 98 percent sounds awfully high, but it's kind of irrelevant too. the question is whether, if you used the model, it would be greater than 98 percent. it would be 99.5 percent. general francisco: right. justice kagan: because then the secretary would have no basis for saying that you should use the question rather than the model. and as to that, as i think my colleagues are suggesting, there is a bottom line conclusion from the census bureau, and the bottom line conclusion is that alternativ

i'm happy to welcome tonight to the day robert kagan who joins us from washington mr kagan it's good to have you on the program i want to ask you what is the purpose of mr stilton baird's address to congress is he strengthening the ties that bind or is he trying to save those ties that trump has not already sever. well i suppose you could say he's doing both i think it's a very strong statement by i parson majority in congress that they support and to support and then an alliance that served american interests so well for over seventy seven hears and i do think they are sending a clear signal to president truman who has raised doubts about the american and it's a nato in a way that we've not seen since that alliance was first organized the worries at nato are they a symptom of a greater unraveling. well i think so i mean that look at the heart of this security alliance is the american commitment it was an extraordinary commitment it was an unusual commitment it was certainly a product of circumstances post world war two the dawn of the cold war and i think it even before donald trump

justice kagan: but, if i understand what you're saying, mr. stewart, you're essentially saying we should uphold the statute on the basis of various commitments that the government is now making to apply this statute to only a small subset of the things that it could apply to, if you look at it on its face as to just the words used. and -- and that's a strange thing for us to do, isn't it, to basically, you know, take your commitment that, look, these are very broad words, but we're going to pretend that they say something much narrower than they do? mr. stewart: well, i think even up to this point, the core of the provision as the pto has applied it has been profane, vulgar, vulgar words, sexually explicit images, offensive excretory references, things that were regarded as offensive. justice ginsburg: how can -- how can one say that when many of these marks have been refused registration on dual grounds, and one ground is that they're scandalous and the other ground is that they resemble a mark that is already registered, so if the mark is al

we see him consistently kicked up stairs and maintain influence in both parties figures like robert kagan who initiated the project for a new american century henry kissinger who advised both hillary clinton and nikki haley these figures are still revered in washington and zbigniew brzezinski elite a . man and we have a date at this very top we have john bolton all right gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion of american foreign policy stay with r.p. . you know world big. lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door. and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the troops the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. do good is an outstanding person because he took on the most powerful agency in this county for you'll be to stay if you look at it from the analogy. marc was the day that when he was five. do going to be in the she

them consistently kicked up stairs and maintain our influence in both parties figures like robert kagan who initiated the project for a new american century henry kissinger who advised both hillary clinton and nikki haley these figures are still revered in washington and zbigniew brzezinski elliott abrams. and we have this very top we have john bolton all right gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion of american foreign policy stay with r.p. . news but i think. if you do. you notice that there's one of the purest we're just going forward for the. voters. believe. that you'll see just what to do and. people think it was national. league. that's what led the play to. the. lead. it's a look what you're going to pull from. their capital supports with one of these critics one of these with you because the. machine you don't want to be smeared. you. oppose someone. as we. call it you at least you. welcome to maximize or it is a song. looking forward to your. yanks this is what happens to pensions in britain. you watch kaiser report

we see him consistently kicked up stairs and maintain influence in both parties figures like robert kagan who initiated the project for a new american century henry kissinger who had vised both hillary clinton and nikki haley these figures are still revered in washington and zbigniew brzezinski elite a . man and we have this very top we have john bolton all right gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion of american foreign policy stay with r.p. . what hopes and you should. put themselves on the line to get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president and she. wanted. to go to the pros this is what the three of them would be good. interested in the. question. welcome back to cross talk where all things are considered on peter trying to be discussing american foreign policy. ok i want to go back to max in washington you said you started your book basically with the mujahideen ok that's a good starting point here max chronicle the involvement in the culpability of the media in all of this nonsense that we're experiencing

them consistently kicked up stairs and maintain our influence in both parties figures like robert kagan who initiated the project for a new american century henry kissinger who advised both hillary clinton and nikki haley these figures are still revered in washington and zbigniew brzezinski elliott abrams. down and we have this very top we have john bolton all right gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion of american foreign policy stay with r.p. . we came here where you were before you came here when you live well. in many u.s. states capital punishment is still practiced convicted prisoners can spend years waiting for execution but most of the time the victims' families they are very much in favor of the death penalty there are some people because of what they do have given up their rights as live among us some even proven innocent years on death row and how many more races is it going to take before we as a society realize that this is not working and we actually do something about. i think the number. they've matter to us

we see him consistently kicked up stairs and maintain influence in both parties figures like robert kagan who initiated the project for a new american century henry kissinger who had both hillary clinton and nikki haley these figures are still revered in washington and zbigniew brzezinski elite a. man and we have a date at this very top we have john bolton all right gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion of american foreign policy stay with r.p. . moats this edition. of the first one you open your bible from the hundreds. that's also useful to the class. thing i was national guard coming off. the plane. a little. bit some of it was from the difficulties. school board of these clinics one of the least musical nobody knew the least because between. the fishing and don't lie for the smear. all of us you. know post someone to be a name it doesn't us up on style if you please but eighty. i do think the numbers mean something they matter to us with over one trillion dollars in debt more than ten white collar crimes happen each day.

we see him consistently kicked up stairs and maintain influence in both parties figures like robert kagan who initiated the project for a new american century henry kissinger who advised both hillary clinton and nikki haley these figures are still revered in washington and zbigniew brzezinski elite a . man and we have this very top we have john bolton all right gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion of american foreign policy stayed with r.p. . i think more do good is an outstanding person because. he took on the most powerful agency in this county for your leader state if you look at it from the analogy. was the day that when he was. going to has been the most contentious critic for the first time i noticed something wasn't in fleece. pretty much when he first started the corruption in palm beach county is not something that you can smell. it's. a wink. we've had. in this county. that. you know we should stop then you should say and i'm left with stuff i believe what i'm doing ok you know it's your funeral. critic. of the uni

we see him consistently kicked up stairs and maintain influence in both parties figures like robert kagan who initiated the project for a new american century henry kissinger who had both hillary clinton and nikki haley these figures are still revered in washington and zbigniew brzezinski. and we have this very top we have john bolton all right gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion of american foreign policy stay with r.p. . capitalism relies on competition so competition means that if you have winning ideas or winning companies you survive if you don't you don't survive just survival of the fittest as competition privia a corrupt social bank who's willing to finance dodgy deals and it crowds out the good company and end up with a lot of bad companies and it crowds out of competition and you end up with a with a with a crony capitalism growing. then you should look into. this you do. you have to show the first one to the finished goods conform. to the truth. as you listen to this who do believe that. if it was national guard

associate justices stephen breyer and elena kagan switched their votes to go with him on that. brian: explain what happened behind the scenes. joan: you have an unusual three days of oral arguments in late march of 2012. and they meet for the first time in their conference that friday. and they vote. it is 5-4 to strike down the individual mandate. chief justice roberts was leading the way. and then they also vote on medicaid. they vote to uphold that, which is what lower courts had done. they don't vote at all on congress's taxing power. i mention that because, in the end, the whole decision becomes hinged on congress' taxing power. in 2012 in the first conference together, they don't vote on that at all. it does not seem to matter. and then slowly behind the scenes, chief justice roberts has a change of heart. he does not want to strike down the individual mandate and have the whole thing fall. brian: for those who have not paid close attention to it, when you say individual mandate? joan: that is a requirement where everybody has health insurance either through their employe

elena kagan 58. mr. gorsuch its 51. brett kavanaugh is 54. joan: you got them exactly right.rian: what does that say? joan:it says the younger ones are the conservatives the two in their 80's are the liberals. depending on what happens to any of these 9 and president trump gets another appointee, the court could move further to the right. so much hangs on who is going to be -- so much hangs on for the nation and for the supreme court of will becomes president in 2020 because of these ages. brian: how many years have you covered the court? joan: full-time, since 1989. when i started at the washington post as a supreme court reporter it was 1992. brian: your first appearance on this network. 1990. we are going to show a little bit of it right now. joan: this is my punishment for coming on. brian: no punishment. joan: all right. [video clip] >> the headline with justice scalia. what is he like? joan: very argumentative. very engaging. he will go after with -- a awyer with real vigor. very entertaining. he seems to be one of the more vocal ones. sometimes certain hypotheticals ju

in response to kagan's letter the softball league suggested katyn start his own coed softball league. >>but his family worries that kind of misses the whole point to that of a 9 year-old boy whether it's my worry other boy of we really didn't like sports. >>just to get the house and be part of a team include the sisters names in 3rd and 4th grade what happens when. >>the kids get bigger 5th and 6th and 7th in stone before the sea arts in a couple of weeks. >>but even if they don't own learning that. >>2 men who handled that push you have to get back up and you have to keep trying. >>kate and will as we take a peek outside. ning here is staging for the job this happy class. the average a little happy sunshine we would love a little while the things get an active out there again tonight to see of the sierra nevada we're going to the rain they're getting a lot of snow how about this. >>thursday and friday winter storm watches go up again we're talking another 2 maybe 2 and a half feet of snow across the higher peaks of the sierra nevada so if you're headed up there a plan on some stormy

justice kagan pointed out that the secretary has the aut not to agree with the census bureau experts, under federal law, he has to gie reasons, and she said as she looked at the record a th ididence, she found no reasons. justice sotomayor t appeared to be he had a solution in search of a problem. and then on the other side of the bench, the more conservative side, you had chief justice roberts saying to new york solicitor general barbara underwood -- >> woodruff: who is a critic, one of the many critics. >> they had sued the government, of said, well, you know, the census asks a louestions. it asks your age, your sex, your marital status. why not citizenship? and general underwood responded, but for those questions, there is no evidence that they result in an undercount, and there is ample evidence that the citizenship question will result in an undercount. >> woodruff: go ahead. >> i was also going to add justes gorsuch andavanaugh also pressed her. they noted that the united nations recommends that countries clude a citizenship question and that there are many english-speaking coun

now, so i vote for sotomayor and kagan, get the crap beat out of me at home but that's ok. i thought that's what should be. i'm trying to do it the way it used to be. senator thurmond voted for justice ginsburg. not because he agreed with her, because he thought she was a qualified person. how could you say she's not? senator hollings, the longest-serving junior senator in the history of the country, and class you are watching. he voted for justice scalia convinceyou will never me he agreed with justice scalia, but he was highly qualified. i think one got 96 votes and one got 97. what happened? a complete interior ration of the confirmation process. why is it always our people? now kavanaugh. i don't know why it is always our people but things have changed enough for the better. one person has not mentioned kavanaugh yet, and that is susan collins. of all the people who really mattered, i would put her at the top of the list. senator collins gave an explanation of her vote that is the epitome of what the founders had in mind when it came to advise and consent. it was logica

basically also a very positive servant of all the conservative judges dissenting you had sort of my or kagan is just a good burger. who has continued to and justice breyer was also as well i'm outside so you know that's basically wow this kind of shape but it's interesting when you look at you know the arguments that this is because of the big argument is was this torture was this an exciting extraneous amount of torture that was put on this guy right so right and one of the issues is that this wasn't this wasn't a. case about sort of the broader issues of the use of lethal injection and it wasn't even a broader issue of just lethal injection and it's specific or the death penalty although if you watch the show you know it's like no we should be really having this conversation my god my and what a lot of our opinions is this is just silly to begin with we shouldn't it's just so cruel and barbaric but what it's doing is it's challenging the methods in relation to that exit particular prisoner. as sort of my you are pointed out we do make. exceptions we make exceptions when someone is incapabl

justices kagan and sotomayor have explicitly said they think that heller is wrong, they sided with the opportunity to overturn it. do you think that is still in flux? butconstitutional law is, do see that as something that adam: it is very hard to say what is going to happen in the short term. i don't think it will be overturned. you never know what happens with judicial appointments. heller was a 5-4 decision. a subsequent decision in 2010 that said the second amendment applied equally to the local and state governments. that case was also 5-4. any type of judicial appointment may change that. i don't think the democrats have a big, a lot to gain by pushing for nominees that will be hostile to the right to bear arms. i think republicans in the senate and gun rights supporters on the democratic side are going to be very unlikely to support nominees that could change that vote from 5-4. i'm hopeful that in the long run, this is the kind of decision that is seen as something that helps american politics move forward and will be accepted by both sides of the issue. today, there was a pane

justice sotomayor saying if the solution is sort of a justice kagan said you cannot read this withouthundreds gathered to protest the plan seemingly unaware that it is illegal for the census bureau to disclose or publish any private information that identifies any individuals. more businesses. >> well, you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to be concerned that if the data is out there it could pose a risk to you.we've seen administrations that in picking people up in sensitive places like courthouses, schools, going to the office. >> they say many people may not participate in the census and it determines a number of electoral votes, congressman and assistance anyone state receives. expect a decision in the month of june. back to you.lou: thank you very much, doug mckelway from the supreme court. join us tonight former regal -- megan white house -- new york post columnist, fox business contributor, michael goodwin. great to have you here. let's turn to first the issue of citizenship as congressman jordan said, only democrats in washington seem opposed to the idea that the governm

justices kagan and sotomayor have explicitly said they think wrongly was heller decided, but given the opportunity, they would repeal it. do you think this would be something that would be , or frequently go by the wayside? adam: it is very hard to say what is going to happen in the short term. i don't think it will be overturned. you never know what happens with additional appointments. decision, and-4 there was a subsequent decision in 2010 that also reaffirmed it, 5-4. so in a kind of judicial appointment might change that. i don't think democrats really have a big, a lot to gain by pushing for nominees that would be hostile to the right to bear arms, especially because of those decisions were 5-4, republicans in the senate and gun rights supporters on the democratic side will be more unlikely to support nominees that could change that both from 5-4 best change that vote from 5-4. i am hopeful that this is the kind of decision but helps american politics move forward and thus will be accepted by both sides of the issue. >> earlier today there was a panel on the norco drug wars. part

kagan for soda meyer and and get the crappy and out of me beaten -- crapp beaten out of me at home. senator hollings, the longest-serving junior senator in the country, happy recent birthday for him. he voted for justice scalia. you will never convince me that he agreed with justice scalia. he was highly qualified. 97.got 96 votes, one got what the hell happened? why is it always our people? kavanaugh. i don't know why it is always our people but things have changed and not for the better. there is one person not mentioned yet and that is susan collins. of all the people who really mattered, i would put her at the top of the list. senator collins gave an explanation of her vote that is the opinion me of what the founders had in mind when it came to advising consent. it was logical, well researched, she took the allegations seriously. she thoroughly vetted him personally. looked at every case he authored . acquired a law professor to advisor. spent in norma's amount of time looking through brett kavanaugh's record. came to the conclusion that the accusations against him were unfounde

elena kagan you can't read the record without sensing this need is con tried one.otesters gathered outside to protest the plan, seeming unaware it is illegal for the census bureau to disclose or pun like any private information that identifies any individual or businesses. >> well, you don't have to be conspiracy theorist to be concerned that if that date is out there, it could pose a risk to you. we've seen an administration is picking people up in sensitive places like courthouses, schools, going to the doctor's office. reporter: both sides in this debate acknowledge that if the question is included in the census, as many as 6.5 million people may not participate in the census. that translates into probable losses for democrats because the census determineses the number of electoral votes that every state has the number of congressional representatives and how federal fund are allocated. we do expect a decision sometime in the month of june. melissa, back to you. melissa: doug mckelway, thank you. connell: let's get to the judge on this, andrew napolitano senior

justice kagan weighed in saying you can't read this record without sensing this need was a contrived hundreds of immigrant rights supporter pros tested saying that it's illegal for the census bureau to disclose or publish private information that identifies any individuals or businesses. >> you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to be concerned that if that data is out there, it could pose a risk to you. we've seen it in administration that is picking people up in sensitive places like courthouses, schools, going to the doctor's office. >> both sides in this debate acknowledge that if the question is included in the 2020 sen shoes as many as 6.5 million people may not participate in the census that translates into probable losses for the democrats. the census determines the number of electoral votes, the number of congress people and also the allocation of federal funds to each and every state. we're expecting a decision this coming june. neil? >> neil: thanks very much. judge andrew napolitano peer. i guess not being a lawyer, i don't know what the debate is here. what is wrong

important for voting rights information which is the government's asserted reason and just as elana kagan sounds like post hoc rationalization. wasn't in the original record but what you've come to deliver now. >> one of the plaintiffs the new york state attorney general, again to joan's point, new york saying, look, federal aid programs, a lot of money here. this would be a huge undercount is their argument. >> states all across this country will lose resources, federal recourses as a result of an undercount. in addition to that, we will lose representation here in washington, d.c. >> and it appears that the issue of determining one's citizenship took priority over a constitutional obligation to get this count correct, and it's really critically important that we not do anything, add any question that will undermine that count. >> it's a giant legal question at the moment but when you hear the arguments play out, we were just talking about in the context of the mueller report, but you hear the president's re-election campaign playing out as well saying the democrats want to count people

i had the privilege of being elena kagan's deputy.alth care case came up before the obamacare case, she ruled against president obama on a key piece of it. so, you know, and that's a long tradition. it goes back to our founding of justices doing that. so i think it's absolutely wrong for the president to think that the supreme court is in his pocket, particularly on something like impeachment. i mean, there is no sitting justice who would even entertain these arguments that he is trying to advance in that tweet. >> i need a little supreme court education. i know you argued a case this month. what happens now? give me the technicals. how do the judges come to a decision? what goes on behind closed doors? >> the cool thing about the supreme court. >> everything? >> everything too. after you argue the case, the justices will meet in a conference. it's a very collegial group of people. they all shake each other's hands, and that's a lot of handshakes. it's nike factorial or something. it's a lot of handshakes. and then afterwards, they go

>> kagan maybe. i think she's sort of in that mold. she could be. or roberts.andra day o'connor. here's the question, would she get nominated by this republican president in this republican field today? >> not a chance. when she came on the court, ronald reagan loved her and was proud of her, but she had no judicial track record. he wasn't even -- she was a state appeals judge. no chance trump or any modern republican president would appoint here. >> let's get back to pete buttigieg. great book. first, great title. >> thank you. >> let me ask you about this, buttigieg, when he goes after people in their 70s, was he taking a little shot at biden? >> it's biden, it's that whole generation. look, he's the millennial guy. >> he's half as old. >> exactly. he's half as old. he wants to capture that youth vote. again, i don't know if that's going to be enough, but right now it makes him the most engaging person. >> are they picking a nominee to beat trump or just somebody they like? >> the great thing about trump is that he changed all the rules. there are no rules. a

tom: i want to go to robert kagan's piece out of brookings. in europe, is that your opportunity to acquire e.u. banking assets? to thearo has commitment e.u. banking model with addictive dividends. can you participate? michael: it has been a terrible place to be. a client asked me about the european banks yesterday. they may have bottomed. it is a difficult industry with a lot of structural headwinds, a central bank committed to negative interest rates which everyone understands does not help. i guess if you like clipping coupons, i don't think they are dangerous. tom: this goes back to richard haass' theory, if you do not have your act together at home it is difficult to project foreign policy. we can state unequivocally that europe does not have its act together. do they have a foreign policy or a selection of photo opportunities? michael: i do not think any of them have a particularly interesting foreign policy. tom: it is not just trump. michael: the united kingdom removed itself from global the united gideon: kingdom removed itself from g

and the decision by justice kagan, as i mentioned, written by justice kagan will serve as a guide for decades on how land are to be regulated by the federal government in alaska according to federal law. in the decision, justice kagan begins with some history. by the way, i highly recommend all my fellow alaskans should read the decision. pages, you guys should read it, too. anyone who is watching who cares about alaska, take a read of this decision. it's quite a big one, but she goes to great pains to try to explain a very complicated topic and writes it in very plain language, and it's quite, quite a good opinion. she begins by talking about some alaskan history. the federal government, as most know, bought alaska from russia in 1867, 365 million acres of land. that's well over twice the size of texas. sorry, senator cruz and senator cornyn. i know you guys like to talk about the size of texas, but we're way, way bigger. for the first 90 years, all of the land was owned and controlled by the federal government, which completely neglected the land and the people in it, which was most

i also had a note about justice kagan and her comment. i think, although the law professors will know this significantly better than i do. i think the comment was out of the dual sovereignty double jeopardy case that was argued last fall and i think it's right. i think what she said was here we are deciding whether to overrule this doctrine and 30 justices before us have ruled in favor of it. i think the point she was making is all 30 of those justices, all 110 prior justices were all selected pursuant to the same constitution, to the same oath of office and as five or nine that we are considering this case and that the justices had to have some sense of humility why is it that there is such a better view of what the const attention wires that somehow their view of what's wrong or clearly wrong should prevail over the votes of 30 justices. again, nominated by a president confirmed by a senate sworn in and i think that in a fundamental sense is the humility she's talking about of that humility of thinking to yourself i can conclude this is