justice kagan: c- sorry. finish. mr. schnapper: the respondent points to a number of algorithms, for example, to pic the cheapest fare or things like that. that's just outside the scope of the statute. the algoth is being used there to generate additional content. so the question ishayou do with the algorithm. the fact that youidt with an algorithm doesn't give -- yield a different result than if you had a lot of hardworking people in an oicsomewhere doing the same thing. justice kagan: well, seen -- if could take the point, if i could? a lot of algorithms that won't produce pro--isis conten that won't create a problem under this statute but mbe they'll produce defamatory contentr maybe they'll produce content that violates some he law. and your argument can't b limited to this one statute. it h to extend to any number of harms that can be done by -- by speech and so t organization of speech in ways that basically every provider uses. mr. schnapper: well, if i might turn to the example of what you rerred to, an algorithm

justice kagan? justice gorsuch? justice kavanaugh? justice barrett? justice barrett: i want to return to the questions about could pewter simulators -- about computer simulators. you said they were inher subjective because it depends what factors you put in. it seems to me if there no genera -- there is no limit how many mapsomputer simulator could generate, surely thativ them the option to ways. in all kinds of different seems to me that under alabama's view of the statute, the plaintiff sat gingles one by coming in with map that was drawn without taking ce into account. why, if there is no limit t number of maps you can generate the different factors you can weigh so long as race is not one, why would that be an reonable burden for a plaintiff to shoulder? ms. khanna: for several reasons. it is important to recognize there are a handful of college prrs to even have the expertise to run these simulations in the first place. if you are going to infuse what was supposed to be aobctive test out the ou

justice justice kagan? justice kagan: im going to ask you a question about alabama's argument and maybe i should've asked it to alabama's lawyer but he can listen and you are there. ms. prelogar: i wildohat i can. justice kagan: y understand why al should be satisfied with this ia that if you can produce one eutral map? if the theory is youan run millions of these programs and we care about race neutrality for any of the reass abama suggests we ought to at the first step of gingles come have the verse precondition, why woulonbe enough? if you ran o shouldn't the state meack and say you need more than one in a million? surely should have 100. surely should have 1000. surely it should be the di map. why one? ms. prelogar:hi is the under theorized aspect of alabama's approach they do not try to answer any of those questions about h y operationalize the standard and program the algorithm to take account of the complex redistricting criteria or how you inrpt the results along the lines you are sgesting. is one m

chief justice roberts: justice kagan. justice kagan: can i give you three kinds of practices and you tell me which gets 230 protection and which doesn't? so one is the youtube practices that you're complaining of, and we know you think that does not get 230 protection. a second would be facebook or twitter or any entity that essentially prioritizes items. so you're on facebook and certain items are prioritized on your newsfeed or certain tweets are prioritized on your twitter feed and there's some algorithm that's doing that and it's amplifying certain messages rather than other messages on your feed. that's the second. and then the third is just a regular search engine. you know, you put in a search and something comes back and some ways that's one giant recommendation system. here's the first item you should look at. here's the second item you should look at. so are all three of those not protected or what happens to my second and third? are they protected or not protected? and if they are protected, what's the differen

kagan: it all depends. it all depends? mr. lacour: it all depends on which section we are trying to get at. justice. kagan: trying to ensure equalolitical opportunities. let me use that as aeg to my last question. this is an importa statute. it is one of t gat achievement of the american democracy to achieve equal politicalpptunities regardless of re, to ensure that afrmericans could have as much political power as whiticans could. that is a pretty big dea it would strengthen e statute in 1982 when this court interpreted it too narrowly for congress to face. congress said it, we do not mean that overall. in recent yearsthstatute has notac well in this court. the county look at section five and it says, now, section five, we do not need that yme. one of the things it says is we have section two the court says that, section two they are dilution claims. all of these cases that are dilution claims, really what is section two is about. now here we are aa section two is a dilutn cla. you're asking us to cut back substantially on ou

. >> robert kagan has been writing about foreign affairs for most of his 64 years. the first book in his planned trilogy was published in 2006 and focused on u.s. history before the founding of to the spanish-american war. kagan has just completed the second book in the trilogy titled the ghost at the feast, america and the collapse of world order 1900-1941. he writes americans have complex attitudes toward power and morality. they have a sense of distinctiveness and a highly contested political system. >> robert kagan on this episode of book notes plus. available on the c-span now app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> the name of america, which will lungs to you in your national capacity, fourscore and seven years ago -- >> ask not what your country can do for you -- >> throughout american history presidents have delivered pivotal speeches from challenges and tragedies, wars and farewells. watch over 10 part series speeches that defined the present he -- presidency on saturday. john f. kennedy, ronald reagan, george w. bush and barack obama. this week will feat

. >> robert kagan has been writing about foreign affairs for many years. his first book was published in 2006 and focused on u.s. history before the founding up to the spanish-american war. he has just completed the second book in the trilogy titled the ghost at the feast, america and the collapse of world order 1900-1941. he writes americans have complex attitudes toward power and morality. they have a sense of distinctiveness and a highly contested political system. >> robert kagan on this episode of book notes plus. >> there are almost 80 new members in the 118th congress. and includes a record number of women and minorities. c-span interviewed more than half of them about their careers and political philosophy. hear from representatives nathan moran, kevin kiley, mccormick, and eli crane. watch members of the 118th congress on c-span or online at c-span.org. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government funded by these television companies and more including wow. >> the world is changed. today fast reliable internet connection is something no one can

. >> i want to make sure justice kagan's example, what if the criteria, the sorting mechanism was really defamatory or pro isis? i don't see analytically why your argument wouldn't say, 230 applies to this. >> similar to your 303 case, you can make distinction against content choices in terms of w you would organize or deal with any publication. a book, newspaper, television channel. that is inherent to all publis >> you are saying 230 does apply to that. >> incorrect. >> 230 gives product record -- gives protection regardless. whether it is wt people might consider more content neutral. >> hate speech, they more -- ey may be elevating more races speech. you might have a speech devoted to an interest of ceain community. an ethnic community. ey may be saying we don't want to put some other kind of coent. we may want to publisht t we are going to put it farther down on our algorithm. >> i cannot age. we are in a predicament. this is a statute written at a different time when the internet was completely different. the problem that the statute is trying to address is you are being held respo

justice kagan? >> a few times amongst the distinctions in cases you said that this is really a societal judgment about who counts as complicit and culpable. that seems right to me but this seems to suggest that should be a jury question. >> no, i think there is a big difference. juries decide facts. the law decides what consequences to attach to the facts of the alleged. this is a question of law. to be sure it's a question of law in terms of looking at the factors in halberstam but that's exactly what halberstam itself did after making those factual findings, going on to apply that the standards within the common law drawing on restatement of tort, there's a practical common sense judgment. something most people understand. when you run a business open to all customers, you are not signaling one person for favorable treatment. it's a service that we all benefit from. you look at that conduct differently from someone engaged in a face-to-face encounter. asking to lend money or give money, or give se

justice kagan, justice gorsuch, justice kavanaugh, justice?i want to return to t questions about the simulators. you are saying that they're inherentlysubjective because epends on how you weigh factors what factors you put in. i want to make sure that i understand what you mean by . it seems to me that if you can generate, if there is no limit on how many maps a computer stimulated can generate, surely that gives them the optionto weigh in all kinds ferent things. italso seems to me, maybe a misunderstanding, butalso seems to methat under alabama's statute, the plaintiffs satisfiesgingles one by coming in with one map that was drawn with taking race into account. why, if there is no limit to the number ofmaps you can rate and the different factors you can weigh, so long's races in one, why would that be anunreasonable burden for plaintiffs to accept? >>for several reasons. first,it is important to coize that there are a handful of college professors who even have the expertiseto run thesesimulations in the first place. if you'rg to infuse what

justice kagan? >> mr. waxman, suppose the set of facts that many terrorist organizations use social media services provided by your client, but they do so to recruit other members for purposes of enhancing their terrorist activities, that your client knows this because government officials, journalists, other people have pointed out. now i'm going to change one fact. i think so far we are pretty much in the real world. going to change one fact which is that instead of having a policy against this and trying to remove this terrorist content, that twitter had just said let 1000 flowers bloom, we are not going to touch a thing. but it knows that all of this is happening. but it does not have a policy of trying to remove. then do you fall within the language of the statute? >> i don't think so. it is very far from what the facts of the case are even as pled, and as the ninth circuit found. i don't think so. if they had said we don't want our platforms to be used to support terrorist groups or to support

. >> historian robert kagan had been writing about foreign affairs for most of his 64 years. the first book in his planned trilogy was published in 2006 and focused on u.s. history before the founding up to the spanish-american war. a senior fellow at the brookings institution has just competed -- completed his second book in the trilogy. robert keegan, in conclusion, writes that americans have complex attitudes toward power and morality. they have a sense of distinctiveness and remoteness in a two mulch and highly contested lyrical system. >> historian robert kagan on this episode of book notes plus. is available on the app or wherever you get your podct. >> house speaker kevin mccarthy led a delegation of new members to the u.s. and mexico border. the delegation urged immediate action to address border security issues, including fentanyl trafficking. >> this has all got to change, that is our commitment. i want to bring up the congressman newly elected who put this trip together. who brought in a hole from all sides of the issue to sit talk . when we can't control we can't

robert kagan, and conclusion, writes americans have complex attitudes towards power and morality. they have a sense of distinctiveness and remoteness and a tumultuous and highly contested political system. >> historian robert kagan on this episode of a book notes plus, it's available on the c-span now app or wherever you get your podcasts. announcer: there are almost 80 new members in the 118th congress, and a diverse group has a record number of women and minorities. but they're up an, careers and political philosophy. on monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern. , hear from nathan moran, aaron how chin, -- watch new members of the 118th congress at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span or online at c-span.org. announcer: republican senator josh hawley insists the u.s. should redirect its policy focus from ukraine to china, saying it proposed a immediate threat to the u.s.. his remarks commit of speech at the heritage foundation. >> welcome, china and ukraine, a time for truth. please welcome dr. kevin roberts. president of the heritage foundation. dr. roberts: it's great to see this theater. those of

i think it was don kagan who was one of the great certainly not left wing philosophers. he was the great, great ancient greek historian who died only recently, and he had been the dean of yale college, i believe it was professor kagan, who said something to the effect of years ago, a student could graduate yale with an education, didn't have to have an education to graduate yale, but it was possible. and today, i'm not sure it's even possible because so much of that university and really all of the universities has been taken over by grievance studies, the the pseudo academic departments that come out of critical theory. i'm thinking of women's sexual liberty and gender studies, black studies. this studies that studies american studies, which ironically is the only studies. where the teachers teach you to hate the thing that you were studying. it's not true. a black studies not true of women's studies. there was a great exchange with another yale professor, harold bloom, a great defender of the western canon, who said that he had a student walk into his class and say, pr

that's what kagan's was. and abrams was.special to be polite, but that's their job and and they are beating drums of war in ukraine now i it pains me to be here and agree with henry kissinger but in fact he was right on ukraine this is extremely dangerous and even the new york times wrote an editorial this idea that zelinsky is going to all of the territory in ukraine, including those parts that have the ethnic russians, is a fantasy. this is the new york times. so they wrote an editorial, i think in may saying this. and kissinger said of it correctly that, we we can't corner and humiliate putin. he's a major power. and there has to be it doesn't excuse what putin did because as i said before, it is a crime. but as george kennan said of the expansion of naito that it was the greatest. it took the exact quotes in the book. it was the greatest blunder of the post-cold war era and it was so there to be this war is not going to stop as long as we are pumping billions. i mean, we've given more in terms of military and economic as

. >> justice kagan? >> gener, want to change the subject a bit. your friends on the state side and also to the bar was on the other case have a nbeof statutory argument they frame the most arbitrary arguments. saying this wasn't necessar under the terms of the statute. saying that elise barr worries better off, not oversaw. again, pointing to statuty language. saying that the borrower was -- targets on warsaw bau of the pandemic. i'm not sure that i understa the really those arguments statutory arguments. as much as i understand them as arbitrary and capricious arguments. the essentially they are saying that the secretary interested nada say the right thgs did not make the right findings. did not properly justify what he did here. that there is no sense in which we read this memoranm and we come away thinking oh yes, these harms were caused by the pandemic. and there is no basis for this action. sufficient basis for this action. i wanted toivyou a chance to talk about that. essentiay, the tied to the pandemic of the sort harms that the srery said

this is justice elena kagan. >> everybody is trying their best to figure out how this statute, which-algorithm statute, applies in a post algorithm world. every time anybody looks at anything on the internet, there is an algorithm involved. does your position send us down the road such that 230 really can't mean anything at all? >> i don't think so, your honor. the question, algorithms are ubiquitous, but the question is what does the defendant do with the algorithm? >> what is going on there? >> the family's lawyer was responding to justice kagan trying to explain how he viewed these algorithmic recommendations. he also called them thumbnails that youtube puts on its website. he said if these thumbnails encourage access to information or videos, in this case to isis information, and the user has not requested that information, then it falls outside of the statute. because it is, in effect, he argues, in service to isis. john: on the other hand, there was some skepticism about google's argument. this is justice get good in due brown jackson. >> isn't it true that that statute had a m

this is justice kagan's point. i mea yes, redress ability gets relaxed t world it was procedural rights would otherwise exisd d you don't have to, as a plaintive, show that they would have made a different ulma determination, if th'd heard your comment. we understand th. what you're suggesting is that same principle of redress ability applies to whether or not they would shift to a entirely different legal base of authit to pursue this progra and i've never seen that before. >> and again, i think this exact, this program, they could've cited sectn ten 82 of the 88 to go under it they believe they can do, it they've set it in the brief that they could i the reason, my guess is the reason why they didn't do that is because it wod' had to go under negotiated ruleki, and notice and comment. if you look at the breadth of this program, it's notbo helping people who are uniquely suffering from the pandemic. it's helping 95% of all borrowers, except for the respondents here. and so, i think when you look the nature of the

you mentioned justice kagan, she also said this is an issue for congress to step in but the have to ruleit one way or the other and we will find out in the summer what their vision is. david: thank you. a british woman who traveled to syria as a teenager to join islamic state group has lost her appeal against the government's decision to strip her of her british citizenship. she was 15 years old when she left the u.k. and married an isis fighter. she remains barred from returning to the u.k. on the grounds that she is still thought to be a national security risk. our legal team insists she was a victim of child trafficking. reporter: in february 2015, she left gatwick airport with two schoolriends to join the group in syria. the three of them traveled through a bus station in turkey and were struggled -- smuggled across the border i am in who turned out was providing information to canadian intelligence. she spent the last four years and islamic state territory emerging in 2019 after the caliphate collapsed. she immediately had her british citizenship removed. her lawyers of challenge th

. >> robert kagan on this episode of book notes plus.s plus is available c-span now app over every you get your podcasts. >> c-span shop.org c-span online store. roster a latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. shop now or any time at c-span shop.org. >> washington journal continues. >> graduate now -- brian joined now. welcome to the program. remind our viewers what the renewing center for america is and how you are financially supported. guest: the america first policies and keep the country centered even though this town is not focus on these issues. we are funded privately from people across this country who care passionately about the direction of the country. host: close the approach to debt limit discussions? guest: debt limits for something the last administration needs to get across the finish line. and we are dealing with a divided government, how do you do -- get through to put those things back? host:

and we got confirmation of your headline from justice elena kagan who said these are not the nine bests on the internet. >> it's factoring in more than a lot of people in the tech vi thought it would. the court historically is not all that great at sort of anticipating technological advances, and to some extent, that's not really its job, right. like it tries to sort of solve problems by finding one principle that it could point to forever and ever and that's not really how technology works. that's something a lot of tech companies were concerned about going into this case. everybody that goes before the supreme court could lose but that they would lose in such a way that five, ten, 15 years from now, we could be dealing with a new problem or new question that can't be anticipated right now, and everybody's hands would be tied by a supreme court ruling from 2023, just because the court is not that skilled with that, and we saw some of the justices, justice kagan most of all, and others saying is this up to us or congress? >> i guess that's the question, isn't it, laura, and i'm curious

it was so interesting yesterday when justice kagan said it's not like we're the nine greatest expertsthe internet. what more do we hear about that and whether any of what they said yesterday could give us an inkling of what's going to happen today. >> it's something we should think about going into today, that basically, justices gorsuch and kagan actually agree that it probably isn't the supreme court's job to be weighing in here between these two extreme sides. yesterday you had the argument that these social media platforms, whether that be youtube or twitter shouldn't be responsible for content that outside users post on their platform. you have people arguing like the family of this one who was killed by isis that, look, they use algorithms, the twitter case similar to the you talk about case. in youtube they're using algorithms that would key useers to look at the same violent content. they are not the experts on the internet, and justice gorsuch or rather justice kavanaugh said yesterday, look, whatever we do here could have big impacts on commerce. think about how much the int

ah, then the song against homophobia, man kagan man, denied and a tongue in cheek song against imperialism and colonialism. called how slender with hello. ah. ok. the case for the difference arrests. are the many accusations ramstein have faced over the years it justified? it's up to you the jury to decide on the evidence present age. ramstein reputation rests with you. that covert pandemic was a hard time for fans of ramstein to truly spectacular life show. but in 2022, ramstein returned with a new studio album and a sold out tour in germany. it's spawn 5 hit singles, including the melancholic title track site. oh for then samson's 10. d. when should in so a lacroix to dietz. hi, emily. i or h been or was this evidence of a softer ramstein? there were some harder riffs and plenty of black humor on thick sack. but the grotesque critique of beauty, ideals, and plastic surgery, alistair miles controversy. with the final track on the album. you left many fans wondering if ramstein might be planning to cold a to day but the band have sought to reassure and will hit the road again. in 2023, the

ah, then the song against homophobia, man kagan man, denied and a tongue in cheek song against imperialism and colonialism called how slender with ah. ok. the case for the difference arrests. are the many accusations ramstein have faced over the years? it justified? it's up to you the jury to decide on the evidence presented. ramstein reputation rests with you. that covered pandemic was a hard time for fans of ramstein, truly spectacular life show. but in 2022, ramstein returned with a new studio album and a sold out torn in germany. it's spawn 5 hit singles, including the melancholic title track site. oh for then samson's 10, the number he benched in a lacroix to the time. oh, really for dog h been was this evidence of a softer ramstein? there were some harder riffs. am plenty of black humor on sick sack. but the grotesque critique of beauty, ideals, and plastic surgery, alistair miles, come from a safe with the final track on the album a year left. many fans wondering if ramstein might be planning to call day to day. but the band have sought to reassure and will hit the road again. in 20

marcia: justice kagan said the act that the department used to propagate this program is clear. said it could not be any clearer that congress gave the secretary the authority to waive for or modify student lobe -- student loan requirements. she said the court often gets statues -- statutes that are not clear. but this one, she said congress has made clear its intent. john: there was discussion about those two words, waive and modify. marcia: that's right, another issue in the case, justice thomas was saying waive and modify, how does that accounted cancellation as that can happen in some student loans that are being looked at? the government argues that w it isaive -- it is waive and modify the student loans and once he waved and modify them, he imposed new ones. once being challenged today. john: the conservative justices talked about fairness as well. marcia: that was a very interesting exchange. some of the justices, the chief justice, justice alito, justice kavanaugh, they spoke about how, i think it was the chief justice gave the best hypothetical. he talked about two stud

elena kagan. sonia sotomayor. and as i mentioned we live among legends like dr. hazel dukes, who is still, to this day, at 91, saying we still have that march toward justice. it is not finished yet. we are still working together. each of the women i mentioned redefined leadership in their own way and paved the way for others to follow. and to be clear it wasn't just because they are women they made their mark. they embod dwhrid courage and the character that still defines new yorkers to this day. and above all, they were fighters. and now as i stand before you, humbled by this honor i am ready to take on the fight. one of our former governor, teddy roos vel you've heard of the man in the arena, now there's a woman in the arena. that man and woman are willing to be mired by dust and sweat and blood to strive valiantly and spend herself in a worth -- herself in a worthy cause. the sign says, i didn't come here to make history, i cam here to make a difference and pursue the worthy causes, pursue them together. and as your governor i'll keep fighting for you every si

arguments in the first case, justices wrestled with the debate over section 2.30, with justice elena kagan joking about the court's online expertise where a court we really don't know about these things. >> it you know, these are not like the 9 greatest experts on the internet. >> and some are concerned that taking away the online immunity would damage the basic functions of the internet and open tech companies to a flood of legal battles. many, many times more than the defamation suits and discrimination suits. justice brett kavanaugh suggested any changes to section 2.30. should come from lawmakers. isn't it better to keep it the way it is? frost and congress put the burden on congress to change that. >> and congress has considered changing or even repealing section 2.30. but so far those efforts have stalled live in washington. i'm hannah brandt. all right, anne, thanks for that update. >> still to come on the kron morning news. have you seeing this product on your shelf? well, the fda is taking it off of shelves. we're going talk about what you need to know about this recall with the b

announcer: robert kagan has been writing about foreign affairs for most of his years.s book about american policy was focused on u.s. history before the founding up to the spanish-american war. the senior fellow at the brookings institution has just completed the second book in the trilogy, titled to the ghost at the feast. robert kagan, and conclusion, writes americans have complex attitudes towards power and morality. they have a sense of distinctiveness and remoteness and a tumultuous and highly contested political system. >> historian robert kagan on this episode of a book notes plus, it's available on the c-span now app or wherever you get your podcasts. announcer: there are almost 80 new members in the 118th congress, and a diverse group has a record number of women and minorities. but they're up an, careers and political philosophy. on monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern.

so by washington, kagan, i was just asking you was sort of precedent did call suppose declaration set for international law and j politics. why? well, so according to, according to its sponsors, the americans and their nato allies, it didn't set any precedent at all. it was an isolated case. everything is fine, we say so. and they even went through the trouble of twisting the arms at the international court of justice. to literally rephrase the question that serbia had asked that the you went through the proper channels and declared it because sir, we had asked if, if the provisional government declaring independence was in compliance with the owners. lucian governing the provinces status and the i. c. j. rephrase the question and said, oh, a group of citizens declared independence and that's not strictly speaking, not legal. and one of the descending judges from africa called the legislative judicial slight of hand. and was a pull that the sort of twisting of definitions. but you know, it was rammed through anyway. and so you've had moscow for years and years and years quoting, this

robert kagan writes americans have complex attitudes towards power and morality. a sense of distinctiveness and remoteness and a to moche and highly contested political system. >> historian robert kagan on this episode of book notes plus. book notes plus is available on the c-span now app or. wherever you get your podcasts. . ♪ preorder your copy of the congressional directory for the 118th congress. it's your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, important information for congressional -- on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. scan the code on the right to preorder your copy today.its $2d handling and every pe helps support our nonprofit operation at c-spanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: good morning. we are back with the executive director of environmental entrepreneurs, also known as e2, and he's going to be discussing green jobs created under the inflation reduction act and his new book, "climatenomics." good morning, bob. >> g