laws are to support a law- abiding citizens. it is bad enough for an innocent person to find herself threatened by a criminal, but to then have to worry about whether she can retreat lest she faced lawsuits -- that is too much to ask. detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife. nearly a century later, we should not demand more. any self-defense rule bears the prospect of injustice. person altercation, one may be dead and the other may do be a sleek claim of defense. zimmerman was the aggressor, then he has no soft defense rights at all. if trayvon attack zimmerman, the only question is whether zimmerman believed he was in danger, not whether he could have retreated. if zimmerman provoked the not falltion, he does under stand your ground. while anti-gun lobbyists have used that tragedy and trayvon martin to pitch all sorts of gun control laws, what they really target is the right to armed self-defense. prosecutors need to show evidence to counter claims of self-defense, not simply argue that the s

and state gun permitting laws. while every state has concealed carry laws they differ on eligibility requirements. there must be a strong uniform standard to allow an individual to carry a deadly weapon. we concealed carry standards combined the "stand your ground" law's and racial profiling are a recipe for danger. we in congress must continue to work with the department of justice to monitor and evaluate the impact of these three issues and until these unjust and inherently biased laws are repealed we have a responsibility to advocate and to educate. our work will not a complete until we ensure that no one has to live with the fear of death based on his race or his age or a death that is justified by the "stand your ground" law's. i look forward to the day when every american can live knowing that the art of justice bends towards fair and unbiased laws. i yield back. >> thank you congresswoman. next up is my colleague congressman luis gutierrez. he is known as the 11th term representing the fourth congressional d

first, these laws remove the common law duty to retreat. this as the result of emboldening of individuals to escalate confrontation as opposed to an alternative rule which would deescalate confrontation and the duty to retreat implies a duty to safely retreat. second, these laws shift the legal presumptions regarding reasonableness of one's sphere. the actor is presumed to be reasonably in fear of imminent death if he's in his home or automobile, and this presumption abrogates the need for someone who is responsible for a homicide to affirm tyly demonstrate the messty of taking another -- the necessity of taking another human life. third, these laws provide immunity from l criminal arrest and civil liability. this has the unintended effect of encouraging the very sort of vigilantism that normal ordinary law prevents. in my written testimony, i discuss these issues at length. i also analyze the extent empirical evidence, and i conclude that the data is not sufficiently robust to make a causal claim in either direction. so to say that stand y

law that are not going. >>> last question. so, let's say this thing survived. crystal ball, what do you think now. question. what we do know now is that they are trying to predict what it's going to look like. they are trying to say lit go down in flames and destroy the health care system. it's a simple law and trying to make it sound like that everything is going to get covered and will be this great roll out. but ten years down the road, i hit the has to go back to what are those key markers. >> were running out of time. you think sit somewhere in the mid stph-l. >> maybe. >> thank you for all our guests tonight. we appreciate your questions. until our next show. i'll see you online. . ... >> welcome to al jazeera america. i'm del walter. here are the headlines. gred lock over the shownt. and sever storms are moving through parts of northeast and atlantic. seven days now after the government partially shut down, and still no end in sight to the stalemate. wall street starting to become very

law.t would reduce our deficits by nearly a trillion dollars. so this isn't just the right thing to do, it's the smart thing to do. securing our borders, modernizing our legal immigration system, providing a pathway to earned, legalized citizenship, growing our economy, strengthening our middle class, reducing our deficits, that's what common sense immigration reform will do. now, obviously, just because something is smart and fair and good for the economy and fiscally responsible and supported by business and labor and -- [laughter] evangelical community and many democrats and many republicans, that does not mean that it will actually get done. [laughter] this is washington, after all. [laughter] so everything tends to be viewed through a political prism. and everybody's been looking at the politics of this, and i know that there's some folks in this town who are prone to think, well, if obama's for it, then i'm against it. but i'd remind everybody that my republican predecessor was also

-- eight democratic governors have signed into law state your ground laws. it seems to be a pretty diverse mix of views about whether or not this is good public policy. federalivan, from the point of view, there are remedies available to the federal government if there has been an injustice at the state level. is that correct? like in any case, the trayvon intin case, the case here illinois, the justice department could, if they chose, pursue federal actions. is that correct? >> absolutely. >> you agree with attorney holder's decision not to pursue a federal civil rights case in the trayvon martin -- standardbased on the that needs to be satisfied in order to move forward with a case like that. the federal government would have to demonstrate that at the encounter -- pilot of the violent encounter, mr. zimmerman and behaved as he did as a function of racial animus, and i am not sure that the -- there is sufficient evidence there for the federal permit to go forward. i tend to agree with that case, and also on a more prudential basis, that the header governme

my experience is the respect for laws in these countries and the enforcement of laws. is that how you see it so people know where you stand? >> in the whole world there are so many legal systems, and in each legal system they are decided to be suitable for certain countries. but i think the basic principle on the law somehow should be jointly together and i'm here today to talk about the issue on the rule of law. the rule of law with an academy deem ya context and the u.n. context has been discussed for a very long time. i think it is very important because like you mentioned, in every country people have to live by the law. to understand this lawful and the educations to the rule of law, which especially are the basis of every human being's life is very important. >> what inspired you to do this? was it your work as a criminal prosecutor? >> it is also as my background, my education background, as well as my role as a prosecutor as well as a diplomat. i can see that the issue of rule of law is very important for every country, and it is very important for every countr

law that are not going. >>> last question. so, let's say this thing survived. crystal ball, what do you think now. question. what we do know now is that they are trying to predict what it's going to look like. they are trying to say lit go down in flames and destroy the health care system. it's a simple law and trying to make it sound like that everything is going to get covered and will be this great roll out. but ten years down the road, i hit the has to go back to what are those key markers. >> were running out of time. you think sit somewhere in the mid stph-l. >> maybe. >> thank you for all our guests tonight. we appreciate your questions. until our next show. i'll see you online. . ... >>> help for the starving in soar i can't. the u.n. asks for immediate access to send in aid. ♪ ♪ >> welcome to al jazerra live from our news center to doha. also ahead on the program. the leader of greece far right golder dawn party is jailed ahead of his trial accused of running a criminal organization. >> the police are merely shooting

law that are not going. >>> last question. so, let's say this thing survived. crystal ball, what do you think now. question. what we do know now is that they are trying to predict what it's going to look like. they are trying to say lit go down in flames and destroy the health care system. it's a simple law and trying to make it sound like that everything is going to get covered and will be this great roll out. but ten years down the road, i hit the has to go back to what are those key markers. >> were running out of time. you think sit somewhere in the mid stph-l. >> maybe. >> thank you for all our guests tonight. we appreciate your questions. until our next show. i'll see you online. . ... >> welcome to al jazeera america. i'm stephanie sy. here are the stories we're following for you. >> obama: they got what they wanted. now they're trying it figure out how to get out of it. >> president obama points the finger at the tea party for the government shutdown. now the shoutdown on a global scale. first iran and now north korea.

law, there is no obligation to obey such a law, of augusta,he words it is no law at all. now, story was in agreement with dr. king's description of the relationship between natural and positive law, and uses the to le of marriage illustrate his view. he says that marriage arises from the law of nature because it channels otherwise dangerous sexual appetites toward the mute twal good of the spouses, and the responsible co-creation and rearing of children. in -- from these premsiss story concludes, if marriage be a part of the natural law derived from nature, then whatever has a natural tendency to destroy it or discourage its value is by the same law prohibited. in other words, story believed that positive law must conform o natural law. remarkably for justice joseph story, positive law that conflicts with natural law is ot law at all. having examined story's philosophical statement, let us see how he applied his view. case, an admiralty american public armed vessel seized an allegedly french ship suspected of engaging in the trafficking of slaves. the american captain saw

natural law principles. thus it derives binding nature from the fact that they were promulgated by a recognized competent legal authority rather than being compelled by the natural law. acquainted says in the determination lawmakers should follow aristotle's advice and pay as much attention to the young demonstrated opinions of persons who surpass us in experience age and prudence as to their demonstrations. aristotle argued that law has no power to command obedience except that of habit. and so laws should not be likely changed. the digest incorporates this view of positive law when describing the enactment of campers cautioning that new laws must have some clear it adage in view such as to justify departing from a rule of law which has seemed fair since time immemorial. so then stories natural law philosophy fits comfortably with his work in approach to positive law. the crucial point of similarity between these two theories is this. both assume that mankind has a fixed nature. the modern idea of inalienab

in classic, natural law theory, positive law is derived from and implements the natural law. as the reverend martin luther king, jr. explained in the letter from a birmingham jail to the extent that a positive law conflicts with natural law, there is no obligation to obey such a law because in the words of agustus, there is no law at all. now, the story was an agreement with dr. king's description of the relationship between natural and positive law using the example of marriage to illustrate his view. he observed miernlg arrises from the law of nature because it channels otherwise dangerous sexual appetites towards the mutual good of the spouse, and the responsible procreation and raring of children. from these premises, story concludes if marriage be an institution derived from the law of nature, then whatever that ha natural tendency it discourage it, destroy its value is by the same law prohibited. in other words, story believes positive law must confo

b he went to howard law school. he's the white man went to howard law school. howard had white students all the way back. and she he was very influenced by ghandi nonviolence. after getting out of law school writing a memo to thurgood marshall saying you thought do it. marshall twhawnt sympathetic. so lots of people in the book were influenced. some people in the book were influenced by began i -- ghandi and ideas and others were not. who is next? >> hell -- hello what are the current civil rights issues facing african-americans today? >> i think civil rights -- i actually have a new book about this it's called "the new black; what is changing what is not, race of america." in the book i and a bunch of other people argue the civil rights issue of today are not the civil rights ideas of a generation -- excuse me the civil rights issues are not the civil rights issues are those of generation ago. in some ways they are, some ways they are not. i would think the biggest civil rights issue right now is the fact that an entire generation of african-american men are e

with in law school. never really spent any time in court, there's a certain thrill and it is sort of a unique position other than the folks at ackley become this themselves. and this is the one chance to have an inside look at the work and play a role with your law class and what might be. here you're actually doing it where it matters. so i think it's such a good opportunity for a law student. so it's not surprisingly law school. >> how does it prepare you for being a lawyer? >> a couple of ways. one is hard work. there's a tremendous volume volume of work that has to be often digested an incredibly short. back of time. sometimes this is the first experience having to formulate and make a recommendation and another is exposure to the pinnacle of written and oral advocacy. i think those who argue regularly are really top-notch and law clerks get to see those arguments. i went to every single one because even the humdrum cases could produce stellar advocacy. >> host: up next of next we will ask our viewer

, the law required me to be rachel maddow boehner. that was just the way you had to do it. and under texas law as of this week, that would mean that i would not be allowed to vote there. if i'm registered under the name rachel ann maddow or rachel maddow or rachel boehner, that would not exactly match what was on my i.d. because my i.d. by law had to say rachel maddow boehner. and therefore under the brand new texas voter i.d. law that has just gone into effect for the first time this week, as early voting starts for the november elections this year in texas, women in texas who have never done anything weirder under texas state law than get married and get the married lady i. that texas required them to get, women who have done nothing weirder than that in their lives are finding they are being blocked from voting because of this new texas voting. texas' new voting law makes you show documentation in order to vote that you never had to show before. and it's such a strict law that before it went into effect this week there was worries

is this a law or not? >> it is a law. and congress changes the law.. >> we can have different opinions. we have different facts. the fact is it's a law. now, tell me when in the history of this country have we ever shut down the government over a law? >> there have been 17 instances we had shutdowns. >> none over a law. >> they were all over a law because you have to pass a law to fund a government. >> no, that is a spending issue. that is not saying we want to stop as we want to stop the affordable care act. >> we're also spending a record amount on the biggest government program ever instituted which is obama care. and there's nothing wrong with helping people with health care. my family at times did not have health care. i think we should provide it. i think there are some good things that we should keep. pre-existing conditions, some of the younger people including them, we should do some of the exchanges but open it up to competition. look at the prices people who don't have money can't afford getting on obama care. >> absolutely. can i say this

. ♪ >>> attitudes and laws on marijuana are changing, creating a dizzying picture for smokers, law enforcementand the federal government. pot and policy, the inside story on al jazeera america. ♪ >>> hello, i'm libby casey. it's now legal to smoke pot if you live in washington state or colorado. some other states have decriminalized marijuana, so you won't get thrown in jail for having a small amount. but wait, smoking pot is still a federal crime, and that's a conflict that hasn't been solved. the debate over marijuana is now woven into layers of social policy. from local law enforcement to the courts, the prisons, and the global war on drugs. >> well, it definitely smells like freedom. >> and a large majority of americans agree. 72% say the cost to enforce marijuana laws just aren't worth it, but navigating the maze of laws on the state level is complicated. washington state and colorado are the only two states that have legalized pot for adults over 21. and while it's illegal to possess, use, buy, or grow marijuana in 26 states, silt approved for medical use in 16 where taking can any bus m

laws. the notion that somehow it's the benefit african-americans or minority in the country defies the stories we have been told by both of you. innocent children, children killed in the name of self-defense. when neither instance was there evidence of aggressive or violent conduct by the victims, the young men who were shot down. professor sullivan. you've heard the arguments made. two members of the panel and a member here. about the notion that somehow african-americans should strew as a positive thing on stand your ground. what would you respond? >> i would agree with your statements, senator durbin. it's not a positive thing for anyone where citizens of the united states are running around shooting each other. whether the perpetrator is african-american, whether the victim is african-american, it really doesn't matter. we not live in a wild, wild west era any longer. private law enforcement has an effect on the country and we should leave it to trained police officials to engage in thi

first, these laws remove the common law duty to retreat. result of emboldening individuals to escalate confrontation opposed to an alternative rule that deescalates confrontation and duty to retreat implies duty to faithfully retreat. the shift of the reasonable miss of one's fear. -under-par a florida-type law, the ag tore is presumed to be reasonably in fear of imminent death in his home or automobile, and this presumption aggregates the need for someone who is responsible for a homicide to affirmatively demonstrate the necessity of taking another human life. third, these laws provide immunity from criminal arrests and civil liability. this has an unintended effect of encouraging the very sort of vigil antiism that normal law presents. in the testimony, i discuss these issues as length, and also the empirical evil of -- evidence and conclude there's not a cause claim in either direction. to say stand your ground laws increases or decreases incidence of crime, the correlations there i have not found strong causal evidence, but the weight o

law. remarkably for the story as other natural law thinkers, positive law that conflicts with natural law is not law at all. having examined stories general philosophical work let us see how he applied his law in cases. in the case of the an american public armed vessel seized an allegedly french ship as suspected of engaging in the trafficking of slaves. the american captain asserted that the trafficking of slaves from africa to a foreign court violated the law of nations, and therefore, the con my accusation of the ship was the appropriate penalty. stories opinion begins by claiming the law of nations rests on the eternal law of nature. the law of nature he said is deduced by correct reasoning from the right and duties of nations and the nature of moral obligation. natural law for story is the basis for the law of nations. however, story is careful to note that he as a judge only has the authority to end force the law of nations if it has not been relaxed or waived by the concept of nati

he rewrote a law, he upheld a law that was never passed. but i will give him some credit because he has to think perspectively. he has a 30-year term ahead of him if he stays healthy. the president has three years and counting? i'm sure there's a countdown somewhere in this building. [laughter] a fairly short time left in this office. we have a lot of other cases coming up. just this past term voting rights was struck down. affirmative action's coming up, i'm sorry, that might be a better test case. so there are a lot of things the court has to do. randy, i'm sure, will talk about this, but what is the impact of nfib very sebelius on the constitution? well, doctrineally, i don't know how big it is x i'll caveat that. this law definitely said congress can't regulate inactivity. now, if congress had some sort of other purchase mandate, this would probably be there. the medicaid spending's probably more sail credibility. but i think what court recognizes is -- the rehnquist court is not over. the court said we are willing to police the bounds

so the law is ripe for reform. >> let's talk about aaron's law specifically. where does that stand now? >> well aaron's law has been introduced. it is a bipartisan bill, introduced by zoe lofgren and representative sensen brrvetion. proposals currently being considered by the house, we think there's strong support in the senate. there's a piece of aaron's law that was actually in a separate bill that was passed by the senate a couple of years ago by the senate judiciary committee. so the bill is i think fairly modest. it frankly doesn't go as far as i would like but it would make a huge step forward in terms of bringing the law into kind of what ordinary people would think ought to be illegal and not. and most importantly will really take the penalty scheme and make it a little less crazy. one of the problems that people have is that the law is really disproportionate in its penalties. >> you know i cannot help but think about the edward snowden disclosures and what that's taught us about the nsa and the kind of gathering there is. and i look at this sort of l

rationale behind that law. each law will be reviewed and will need to be improved to be compatible with time and i understand yo asians. talking about criticism, i think everybody has their own criticism on many, many things. when criticizing about something, maybe the truth and the ealthough would be very important. >> clearly, you're making a huge effort to improve matters not only at home but around the world. another big effort you made is to focus on female prisoners and women in prison systems around the world are growing at very -- are growing very quickly. what do you hope to accomplish there? you were the force behind these bangkok rules that are trying to ensure better treatment for women around the world. >> this is an issue very close to my heart, because like i said earlier, my background is law. i've been working in prosecution for quite a while, five to six years, and i experienced that firsthand, that the hardship of these women in prison that need to be improved. by improving it's maybe not thr

the law is to design to protect law-abiding citizens. that's how we have the castle doctrine fall stay to recognize print it extends the doctrine to public spaces as well. it is bad enough for an innocent person to find yourself threatened by a criminal but then to have to worry about whether she can retreat unless she faces lawsuits is too much to ask. "iver wendell holmes wrote detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife." we should not demand more of crime victims. any self-defense rule there's the potential for injustice. for example, in a two-person altercation, one may be dead and the other dubiously claimed self-defense. these cases, like trayvon implicate the self- defense justification generally. it's george zimmerman was the aggressor than he has no self- defense rights of all. if trayvon martin attacked them, the only question is whether zimmerman reasonably believed he was endangered not whether he could have retreated. if zimmerman provoked the confrontation, he lost the protection of the stan

does the law implode? what happens? >> it would be damage to the law. you have a republican like marco rubio saying he wants a six-month delay to the individual mandate. the white house has largely dismissed that. they have dismissed ted cruz, all of this as republican opposition. now you have democrats saying, let's tweak this thing maybe. that makes this bipartisan for the first time. some of the opposition. some of the changes. they are not saying to overhaul the law. they are saying to tweak it, change it. it's something the white house doesn't want to do. that's new pressure on the p president. >> brand new pressure coming from senators like mary landrieu. remember the louisiana purchase which critics said bought her vote in support of the law. she welcome was booted out of office on that vote. that was controversial for all of them to vote for health care in a competitive district. >> states like louisiana, arkansas. these are states that department vote for barack obama in 2008 or 2012. they have their butts on the line. >> we saw the fiery town

we say it's his own law. it's congress' law. it's a law that a president can't enact in and of himself and he can't change in and of himself. we don't have a line-item veto anywhere. the president can only change the law if it goes through congress first. so like you said, congressman, he arbitrarily changed the date in the law from one year to the next. and you can't do that. i've heard from the democrat party time and time again, the folks on the other side, that they can't support this pathway that we've been diagnose gue -- going through in the last week of putting bills up on funding various aspects of government. like funding for n.i.h. and kids with cancer or funding our veterans or funding our national parks. they say that that's a process of creating winners and losers and they can't have any part of that. well, what is president obama doing when he's giving breaks to big business and to congress but he's not giving them to every other american when it comes to obamacare? isn't that creating winners and losers? i think

your law was the model for the nation's law. so let's look at what's happened.oday the affordable care act requires insurance companies to abide by some of the strongest consumer protections this country has ever known. a true patients bill of rights. no more did he say crim naturing against kids with preexisting conditions.scriminating against kids with preexisting conditions. no more dropping your policy when you get sick and need it most. no more lifetime limits or restrictive annual limits. most plans now have to cover free preventive care, like mammograms and birth control. young people can stay on their parents' plans until they turn 26. all of this is in place right now. it is working right now. now, the last element of this began on october 1st. so when the affordable care act created a new marketplace for quality, private insurance plans for the 15% or so of americans who don't have health care. and for the 5% of americans who have to buy it on their own and they're not part of a group. which means they don't get as good a deal. and this new marketplace

c-span: have you studied the law? >> guest: well, i've studied it i--in--in the--in the way that reporters study matters, the way that foreign correspondents study foreign capitals or financial correspondents study financial markets. c-span: when did you start it--study? >> guest: well, it really started when i went to work for the christian science monitor in 1992, and i wrote some stories there about the civil justice system, about the supreme court, about various other legal issues. and i've continued writing a lot about those kinds of issues since coming to the wall street journal in 1994. c-span: why did you get into journalism in the first place? >> guest: well, i guess it beat working. it's--it's a--you--it's a--it's a job where you basically get paid to do and think interesting things. and i have--like a lot of journalists, i'm cursed with a short attention span, and--and i don't want to do something which is just pure drudgery. and i think that in journalism, you're constantly learning something new. you're c

positive law that conflicts with natural law is not law at all. having examined story's general philosophical framework, let us see how he applied his view in concrete cases. in the 1822 case, an american public armed vessel sees an allegedly french ship is suspected in engaging of the trafficking of slaves. the american captain asserted that the trafficking of slaves from africa to a foreign port violated the law of nations. and; therefore, the confiscation of the ship was the appropriate penalty. story's opinion begin by claiming that the law of nations rests on the eternal law of nature. the law of nature, he said, is deduced by correct reasoning from the right and duties of nations and the nature of moral obligations. natural law for story is the basis for the law of nations. however, story is careful to note that he, as a judge, only has the authority enforce the law of nations if it has not been relaxed or waved by the consent of nations as seen in their general practices and customs. indeed he was willing to enforce the fugitive slave act o

we don't care who makes the action, but the law will rule, and whoever is violent, he will face the law. >> reporter: tonight three police officers have been assigned as close protection to golden dawn mps was suspended for illegally possessing ammunition >> ifill: the rise of golden dawn has tracked greece's descent into financial crisis in recent years. the "new york times" reported today that a leaked al qaeda terror plot may have damaged counter-terror efforts more than disclosures by n.s.a. leaker edward snowden. the report found there's been a marked drop in al qaeda leaders' use of major communication channels since the plot became public in august. word of the plot led to temporary closures at 19 u.s. embassies and consulates. the 20th century's two most influential popes, john paul ii and john xxiii, will be canonized as saints next april 27. the vatican set the date today, and officials said retired pontiff benedict xvi may join pope francis in the ceremony. still ahead on the newshour, two takes on the possible shutdown, from the white house and a house republican. the push t

a law clerk, $75,000.ow does -- how are the salaries and and is caps on the high -- and is this on the high-end? thet: i think it is on high-end of government employees, but it is set by congress. it does not very often. -- it goes up and not very often. federal judges have not gotten many races over the years, which is quite an issue with them. is as far as how high it compared to private lawyers, private practice lawyers who ,ould be doing similar work though salaries are quite low. have often commented that as soon as their law clerks go to private practice in the very first year they make more than the justices themselves in salary. it is a good salary compared to forgeneral public, but highly talented lawyers it is not so high. host: tony mauro with "legal times," thank you, sir. appreciate it. guest: ok, thank you. host: here is a piece by amanda becker. it says that "a miniature versio -- a mediterranean island teaching stint and the $2 million book advance and trips around the world were among the

your law was the model for the nation's law. so, let's look what's happened. today the affordable care act requires insurance companies to abide by some of the strongest consumer protections this country has ever known. a true patients bill of rights. no more discriminating against kids with preexisting conditions. no more dropping your policy when you get sick and need it most. no more lifetime limits or restricted annual limits. most plans -- most plans now have to cover free preventive care like mammograms and birth control. young people can stay on their parents' plan until they turn 26. all of this is in place right now. it is working right now. now, the last element of this began on october 1st, when the affordable care act created a new marketplace for quality, private insurance plans, for the 15% or so of americans who don't have health care. and for the 5% of americans who have to buy it on their own and they're not part of a group. which means they don't get as good a deal. and this new marketplace was built on the massachusetts model. it allows thes

of isn'tthe question there a federal law that trumps state voter id laws?he votinge is rights act of 1965. . laws have been blocked under section v because they have been discriminatory department put a stop to them. as many of you know, the supreme court essentially invalidated section v earlier this year. that check, in many ways, is gone. nan from ohio on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i wish c-span would do a program on the american people. i cannot believe the ignorance in this country, that people have really been dummied down. please do a program on the american people and their intelligence. for the young lady -- i have moved from arizona to ohio. when i lived here before, i did not have any problem with voting. i had my married name. i campaigned for different elected officials. in arizona, i didn't have any problems. ien i moved back to ohio, misplaced my marriage license. so i had to go through the whole gamut of really trying to find it and then i had to tell the state i was married and for them to send my marriage l

but many farmers in the us are against changing the old child labor laws. we're going to meet one, a member of the farm bureua and a cattle rancher in montana. >> dennis rehberg, he's a former congressman who today works as a lobbyist here in washington dc. >> he served in congress for 12 years and sat on a house committee for us agriculture. he was given an award by the farm bureau for representing its interests while in office. >> we were in texas watching the onion picking process, and i just want to show you what that looked like, they're sharpening the sheers. gabriella, she's 9. so what's your reaction to seeing kids like that out in the field working on a... >> see i have no context. i could tell you that i have had my son or daughter out. >> so they're working on a farm. >> again i. >> it belongs to somebody who has no, it's a subcontractor that pays them is hired by the farmer. >> it can't speak to it because it just don't' know it. you've been there. i can speak to my own place, i wasn't necessarily a stay at home dad but i was the primary caretak

. >> the supreme law of the land.he greatest governing document the world has ever known. >> i carry a copy. >> just look at your constitution. which i keep in my pocket. somewhere deep inside my pocket. but i guarantee you it is in here. >> jon: hold on, hold on. i have got -- wait, that is my weed. i got my weed. i got a couple of rubbers here. ah. son of a bitch that's the monitor lizard i use to guard my copy of the constitution. i think i got some band-aids in there, son of a bitch, he bit me again! but you know what? perhaps we can look to the constitution for a solution to this crisis. let me get mine. son of a bitch! >> all right. here we go. all right. so in 2009 congress passed the affordable care act, were they allowed to do that? >> congress may determine the time of -- isn't there a cartoon that explains this? >> yes, i -- if they vote for me on capitol hill, well, then, i am off to the white house, where i wait in a line with a lot of other bills for the president to sign. and if he signs me then i will

thestate's new gun law will go into effect. last week, opponents filed a lawsuit saying it violates the second amendment . but today, it was argued that opponents waited too long to file that lawsuit. meanwhile,there have been reports that gun stores around the state have been selling out of guns. christian shaefer has that story tonight. >> reporter: jamie, you know, supporters of the law say it will keep people safer from gun violence. opponents say it's a push to take guns away from law abiding citizens. one thing for now the law has started a full on run on gun purchases in maryland. neal's job is to transfer weapons from one person to another legally in the state of maryland. >> the number of hours that i'm putting in per day are telling me that we're doing a lot more than we've ever done before. >> reporter: if you buy a gun online or from an out of state dealer, that gun will be shipped to someone like neal first to fill out paper work and schmitt it to the federal government. for the past 15 years, he's handled between

along with the new gun laws... several other laws take effect today. police now have the authority to pull drivers over... if they're spotted using a hand-held phone behind the wheel. adults traveling in the back set of a car are now required to wear their seat belts at all times... from now on. otherwise the driver gets a ticket. for a complete list... go to fox baltimore dot com. u-n chemical weapons inspectors leave syria, after investigating allegations of chemical and biological weapons use in the country. the inspectors left damascus on monday... after spending 5 days in the country. it was their second mission in two months. in august they confirmed the presence of the toxin sarin on the outskirts of damascus. the deadly nerve agent was used in an attack on august twenty-first that left hundreds of people dead. the inspectors are set to submit a report next month about seven chemical weapons attacks. a follow up to a story you saw first on fox. dozens of felons sentenced to life in prison... are released from jail. our cameras were rolling when

, what laws do i have? in the situation of revenge porn, which is horrible, but it's the term now, what else is going on in that relationship? is this one more act that might constitute stalking? are there other laws that might have been violated? use of computer to harass, and criminal laws that don't have to do with this one int. incident, but there was abuse going on in that relationship that we might know about, and there's a way to go after folks for ways this don't exist or protect our victims at this point. >> the privacy of an ex partner in such ways is appalling, what goes around comes around: becca, with a little bit of time left, what are your parting responses here? > >> i think it's a difficult issue, it's not just shutting yourself down online. that's not the issue. right now, the burden is on victims to communicate and law enforcement won't help them. i found a la lawsuit, and i thik that the ultimate is criminalization and for companies like google and internetter to get onboard, especially

and upheld the health care law.ial candidates had this debate on the campaign trail too. >> it's obama care. we're going to repeal it and replace it. >> don't worry, obama care covers pre-existing conditions. >> here is how you repeal obama care. >> we passed obama care. and it was the right thing to do. >> the candidates even debated the issue during the actual presidential debates. >> number one, i get rid of obama care. >> i have become fond of this term obama care. >> obama care was a central issue during the race. and on election night, the american people spoke loud and clear. president obama won the debate. so did senator rand paul think we wouldn't remember his selective memory on obama care? nice try, but remember this, we got you. ra. new max volume wire brush sweeps lashes up and out for bigger, longer, 3x the volume. new max volume flamed out mascara from easy breezy beautiful covergirl. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] build anything with the new toyota tundra. toyota. let's go places. see, i knew testosterone

their own hands since the stand-your-ground law was passed. really, when you think about it there was nothing wrong with self-defence. it's been around for over 200 years, based on the english common law. stand-your-ground was a solution looking for a problem. because the doctrine and self-defence was a perfectly good law in america. the doctrine says you have no duty to retreat if a person comes into your house and bring crime, or the threat of violence in your house. it was an active standard. were they in the house? yes, they have no duty to retreat. the stand-your-ground allowed people to be out in the middle of the street, out in the public and say, "i felt threatened" take out your gun, shoot and kill someone and saying, "i stood my ground", not called the police or retreat. no, just take the law into your hands and shoot someone. that doesn't make sense. last thing on the point, very important. when you think about what happened to marissa alexander, the young lady who fired the warning shot against her abusive husband and sentenced to

but the law is the law. probably 95% of obamacare is what is known as automatic spending or mandatory spending. so regrettably under the law -- no, we are not going to quit fighting for this, but at this point if the president turns down these other offers, all we're saying is at least apply the law equally. the president has already done 1100 special-interest carveouts. that should not be happening. there is a carveout for big business and labor unions. that should not be happening. there is a carveout for washington elites. why isn't the president the first to sign up for obamacare? he is not subject to it. >> i understand your frustration the senate will not accept the versions of the continuing resolutions the house passed. at least they voted on those. i am wondering why the house will not vote on a clean extension of the continuing resolution the senate has passed. >> they have voted on it. they have table a number of these measures. it is important to note that it is house republicans who passed legis

law.>> first, the three awesomest things on the internet. today we begin with the superfail by a neighborhood fast food restaurant. burger king is coming on strong with new french fries that are less horrible for you, and there is the runaway popularity of taco bell's tacos. so mcdonald's is hoping these things, dubbed mighty wings, will give them an edge in the fast-food wars. they're rolling them out for football season with a massive publicity punch. the mcdonald's franchise in california lists the enthusiasm for its promotion. a viewer posted this photo of the giant chicken wings on display outside of the laverne mcdonald's. who knows? if history has taught us anything, there are people who will eat anything. >>> it's no big deal! >> uh! >> the second awesomest thing on the internet today, the russians are coming! to hollywood. with russia co-opting much of the news cycle, it's no surprise you see a rush of russia-related high jinks on the site. the dog that looks like vladimir putin r