having been inside a law school, not only my school but targeting law schools. it's a serious issue to flout the convention and your alumni is students and applicants can be easily drawn into a tailspin if you dropped 10 points in the rankings. i am a believer in there are ways to vent the law schools in gpa in various ways -- i know one school with folks of the employment outcomes admits people with lower lsat is because they know their more employable, but that is very early where we are added and i would love to break out of that. >> almost impossible for an individual school to do that because you get killed in the marketplace changing the discounting, for example it's darn near fatal. john mayer from the ohio state university school country and state law school important to tease out a few of the options that might exist for collaborative work. she's gained some attention rightly because of that. >> we have another question here in the middle. >> nine by noah al-assad is any gpa. are you talking about it breaks my first test and if so, does the law firm or

>> now, to the world of law. former judges from the colorado and indiana supreme court joined at indiana university law school professor to discuss the future of law schools. this panel is part of the seventh circuit bar association annual meeting held in indianapolis in may. [applause] >> things and things from making time on the program for this conversation about the future of our profession is brainwash side, and randy shepherd could end up spending most of my life as chief justice of the indiana supreme court. he now doing senior service in the intermediate court and i have an appointment over at the indiana university mckinney school of law. to my right is for backup kourlis -- rebecca kourlis who spent more than a decade on the colorado supreme court. she left there perhaps 10 or 11 years ago to be the founding director of the institute for the advancement of the american legal system. she does all sorts of research and programmatic work on the improvement of the court and the improvements of legal educati

in times of war, the law of necessity trumped civil and constitutional law. it was an argument guaranteed to alienate a court, but especially davis. davis, like lincoln, had been a whig lawyer. the whigs prided themselves on their respect for law and for the judiciary. they had blasted democrats for pandering to the masses, he disregarded the supreme court decision goes he disagreed with like the one protecting cherokee indians from the state of georgia's claims they could take over their land. it is not true, but it was rumored that jackson had said john marshal had given his opinion on that cherokee subject, let him enforce it. he might as well have said it because the court was unable to enforce it. when they were young whigs both davis and lincoln had observed the great debate in congress from 1842 to 1844. andrew jackson as military commander in new orleans in 1814 had pronounced martial law and instituted military commission to prosecute people he thought was dangerous. he ban issu he banished people from the town and one of the victims petitioned the l

law fair. it used to be this obscure law log and now all of a sudden is at the center of american politics. if you don't know it, just google it and you'll see what i mean. during the bush administration he served as assistant attorney general in the office of legal counsel from 2003 to 2004. his publications include the book -- which i think is a model, sort of inside memory of how things work especially in regard to law in a presidential administration. and finally rosa brooks, someone who writes with as much wit as she does brilliance. she's professor of law at georgetown and also a senior fellow at the new american foundation and is most recently the author of "how everything became war and the military became everything." she served as counselor under secretary of defense for policy in the obama administration. and was awarded the medal for out standing service in 2011. okay, now is john witt. [ applause ] >> thank you, mary, for that really generous introduction. it's a real pleasure to b

law. >>> welcome to landmark cases, our series is looking at 12 of the most important cases in the supreme court history. we learn more about the people and issues behind them. tonight, we're going to talk about the case of lochner versus new york, 1905. and it is one of the more controversial cases of the supreme court. and the case from uttica, new york, that brought about case law. tell us more about why it's important. randy barnett is at georgetown university, thank you for joining us. >> paul kens actually wrote the book on lochner, and his home bases texas state university where he teaches political science, paul kens, thank you. i'm telling people they should be interested in this, why don't you both displexplain why it is important. >> well, the case is a political symbol, made into a political symbol when it was made by teddy roosevelt, he claimed the court had overreached and overstepped its bounds. ever since then it's been a political flash point because it was made a politica

law. >> welcome to landmark cases. our seary ises looking at 12 of the most important cases in the supreme court's history. we learn more about the people and the issues behind them. tonight, we're going to be talking about lockner versus new york 1905 and it is one of the most controversial cases of the supreme court and the story of of a baker in new york whose case gave rise to an era that gave rise over 34 years approximately let me introduce you to the guest this will tell us more about this important keynes and why it's been important for the supreme court in our country's history. randy barnett is at georgetown university law school and the auth are on of a book called "restoring the lost constitution," the presumption of liberty. randy barnett. thank you for being with us. >> paul kens wrote the bock on lochner. his home base is texas state university where he teaches political science. paul, thanks. i'm telling people they should be interested in this, why don't you explain why, b

who were not being subjected to a maximum hours law. that would make the law arbitra arbitrary. the due process of law requires the law not be irrational and not arbitrary. >> how long did it take for the court to return its opinion? >> i have no idea. >> it didn't take as long in those days as it does now. very quickly, we talked earlier about how justice peckham recently started out as a descent. >> perhaps. >> he ultimately was chosen to write the majority opinion. here's a little bit of what, on this 5-4 decision that justice peckham wrote in his majority opinion. there's no reasonable ground for interfering with the liberty of person or the right of free contract by determining the hours of labor in in the occupation of a baker. they're not equal in intelligence or capacity, or that they are not able to assert their rights and care for themselves without the protecting arm of the state interfering with their independence of judgment and of action. what's he appealing to there? >> he's appealing to the standard of arbitrariness. there's no reason to single out the bakers. an

she's a professor of law at the georgetown university law center. she's the author of "in reckless hands and the near triumph of american neugenics. " and a fourth coming book. please join me in welcoming professors kens, barnett and norse. [ applause ] >> well, on behalf of the panel, thank you very much justice breyer for that wonderful introduction. and i am delighted to be here. hopefully i'm one of the last moderates in washington to moderate a debate between two of the most distinguished lochner scholars in the country. if you've seen their earlier c-span performance, you will find it entrancing about the facts of the progressive era, the nature of the case, how teddy roosevelt made the bake shop case famous. but you won't hear much about the key legal concepts that drove the case and differ in many respects than our current constitutional law. so i hope today having written a bit myself on lochner in the course of my book on skinner, that we will hear from these distinguished scholars something about these concepts. and they include the very

how many law graduates find it for which you have to have a law license. the answer to that has been last year it was 59 percent. of all of the people who turned out the school, people found ongoing work full-time for which you have to have a lot license. the answer to that is 59 percent. that number has stabilized and has been as low as 57% but the number has stabilized over the last couple of years it still means that a lot of people don't find work the other reason it has stabilized of course is that the number of a the new law grads keeps declining. the way in which you calculate the percentage is altered. the fact is over the last five or six years the number of jobs full-time license required type jobs has continued to decline. as recently as five years ago attended to be something like 20,000 mind you we were graduating with the 40 to 45,000. that number has fallen to 23,700. a slower decline perhaps than earlier in the decade. the college seniors into second-generation and college law advisors are no dummies. they can read those. it has been a dram

it was the law of the land.you can't just go round up brown folks because you think they might be illegal aliens, as joe arpaio would call them. you have to be enforcing another law. you can ask for immigration papers. the law was clear. there was a standard -- >> we should remember -- >> he flouted it. >> sb-1070 specifically prohibited targeting people because of race or ethnicity, specifically prohibited that. but president obama made the statement that you could be a hispanic mother and presumably be going out for ice cream, be pulled over, stopped, and have them demand your papers. >> do you like that? >> i don't like it at all but the language in sb-1070 prohibited that there be anyone targeted because of race or ethnicity for that specific purpose. as long as it is part of a list of other things, profiling is necessary for law enforcement. racial profiling set by itself is wrong. >> you say racial profiling as if that wouldn't capture what was happening here. obviously if you were targeting a group of peo

in addition to teaching at georgetown, he has taught at boston university school of law, harvard law school, the universe of pennsylvania law school and other universities. his latest work, "our republican constitution, securing sovereignty of the people" will be published in 2016 by harvard columns. in 2009 professor barnett was awarded by the foundation, a fellowship sponsored by the society's vice president darthy tapper goldman, a dear friend of ours. i could continue with professor barnett's many accomplishments, but it would leave you little time to hear his insights into the slaughterhouse cases. i hope you will join me in welcoming professor randy barnett. [ applause ] >> well, thank you justice thomas for that most grajs s introduction and for hosting tonight's lecture. no sitting justice appreciates the significance of our topic tonight more than you. and i appreciate all you've done to get the court to take seriously the original meaning of the privileges and immunities clause. i also want to think jim o'hara and the society for inviting me to participate in this important

law firm leaders. there are folks out there that are using them. there's also other tests that were in the initial judgment, the biographical inventories which are kind of like a moneyball type instrument, all of these things predicted way better. some of the academic predictors were negatively correlated with those factors. the higher the sat the slightly lower the ability to develop business. there is a huge amount of effort that can be put into the law firm to begin to think thoughtfully about who's successful in the practice and why. you can't bill self reflection and they dramatically underinvest in thinking through the development, but there's tremendous research that's been done and i'm happy to go off-line and equate somebody with where to begin on that inquiry. those tests are being used. >> talk a little bit about the role of the bar exam and what that place, the correlation between bar exam passage and else that and the extent that we have built in our own piece of this puzzle that we may ne

of those laws. a rock concert in rotterdam has been cancelled and a van containing gas cannisters reported to have been found nearby after a tip off from spanish police. and containing gas canisters was found nearby. a cyclist who killed a woman on the road has been cleared of manslaughter, but convicted of a lesser charge. the husband of kim briggs has now called for a change in the law, and paid this tribute. for us to remember kim, not through the lens of this trail, but for being the beautiful, fun—loving woman who adored her children. us president donald trump has called for national unity in the wake of violence in charlottesville following an earlier rally at which he'd attacked his critics. and on newsnight tonight, never has america's motto of e pluribus unum, from many come one, felt less relevant. is the usa's increasingly fractious politics healthy or harmful? good evening and welcome to bbc news. in the latest of its proposals on brexit, the government has published plans on how it want

, administrative law, federal courts, anti-trust, commercial law. since i didn't take admiralty law, i cannot testify if he was there as well but i would not be surprised if he were. the next thing i will look at is the art of dissent. last fall i publish a book on dissent and what i called the constitutional dialogue, the give and taken between the majority and dissenting opinions. brandeis, of course, led me to undertake that project, and in my biassed eyes he will always be the great dissenter. in terms of dissenting, over the course of his tenure brandeis wrote 454 opinions for the court and only 74 dissents, an average of a little more than three dissents a term, but, oh, what dissents they are. in a minute we will look at two areas where brandeis' dissents determined the future course of constitutional jurisprudence. when speaking for the court, brandeis, like all justices, had to tailor his opinions to reflect the views of the majority. here his work as an attorney played an important role. he had the ability, the skill to marshal the facts a

law, and holding sanctuary cities accountable. we facilitate faster and more efficient ports of entry so trade can continue to flourish. and if you think about it if you , are talking about controlling the borders, facilitating the free trade is important so you can focus on the problems that exist through illegality. this bill causes the department of homeland security and law enforcement to consult with local officials at each step of the way. a point i just made. the folks who live in the communities know them best and must be part of any successful border security effort. it is important to note that border security is not a one-size-fits-all proposition. we need an approach that will work at each unique place along our u.s.-mexico border. with this legislation is a guide. we aren't just securing our borders for tomorrow, but we are looking ahead and locking in a frame work that will last into the future. we're happy to have the support already of the national law enforcement agencies like the national border patrol council, t

the american law not subject to the british law.sking is this citizens can stay but they cannot be outside the law. theresa may says fine but we are not going to accept your court and the eu is saying, that is not possible. what it is is a new bunch of laws. really, really interesting, you should write a piece about a... i have. you have! laughter let's move on to the sunday times. a wonderful picture of the queen. she does not smile often. it is a proper front—page picture. does not smile often. it is a proper front-page picture. she knows this. a picture to delight you. the sunday times readers get the queen. this is an interesting story and a key story that the queen despite all the i’uitioui's are that the queen despite all the i’uitioui’s are running that the queen despite all the rumours are running around, is not going to stand down and turn prince charles into the regent. there will be more sharing of the responsibilities but she is going to stay true to the promises she made when she took the crown, when she was made queen,

the bill steps up enforcement of the current laws by ending catch and release, by enacting kate's law, and holding sanctuary cit ies accountable. we facilitate faster and more efficient ports of entry so trade can continue to flourish. if you are talking about control ling the borders, fa till tatinging the free trade can important so you can focus on the robs that exist through illegality. the bill ires the department of homeland security and law enforcement to consult with local officials at each step of the way. a point i just made. the folks who live in the communities know them best and must be part of any successful border security effort. it is important to know that border security is not a one- size-fits-all proposition. we need an approach that will work at each unique place along our u.s.-mexico border. with this legislation is a guide , we aren't just securing our borders for tomorrow, but berlacking ahead and locking in a frame work that will last into the future. we're happy to have the support already of the national law enforcement agencies like the national border pat

so, i can draw a relationship to the understanding of jewish law to our civil law. your comment rabbi. >> okay i think there seven is a relationship in the case of kor doze zoe, who did, although he wouldn't a practicing talmud implicate the -- bran diaz didn't have that jewish knowledge or implication. he later became interested in judaism but i'm not sure one can draw a connection between his decisions in these areas and his -- maybe they have been implicated subconsciously but he did not have the knowledge and understanding of jewish teaches and biblical teaches such as kor doze sew did. although he didn't step foot in the temple on several occasions but he had the knowledge. but you're right on those decisions, because we have a progressive performer also and he was one of the leading, you know progressive voices in america at that point. >> bran diazs name stays alive with the university of louisville's law school. >> which is a wonderful, yeah really is, yeah. and then was changed i guess in the past 20 or 30 years. >> okay. we had one from the left and now we

he also couldn't get a job at a law firm in a big-city, blue chip law firm, blue shoe law firm, so he went to work on the new deal. and of course, as i said before, that's when he meets lbj. he eventually forms a new law firm in washington -- what is the first name? >> arnold fortas and porter. >> arnold fortas and porter, which is today arnold and porter, which i'll make mention about at the end. okay, his wife eventually -- who is a tax specialist, becomes a partner at the same firm. they have a combined salary in the middle 1950s of over $400,000. he would have to take a 90% salary cut to join the court. they drove -- >> so, was he going to schule? >> never. and his wife discouraged him tremendously in that area, although when he visited, they never had children. his jewish nephews and nieces in memphis, he talked to -- i mean, they told him about what it was like to live a jewish life, which he knew very little about, except for one -- >> so -- >> can i say one thing? he was very pro israel. his closest friend in washington for many years was avrin harman, the former israeli ambas

laws arer civil rights also the law of the land. hadhe justice department, i a job to enforce the civil rights laws. it was something we took very seriously. law enforcement officials and police chief's understand the need to balance the mission and engage with alex a few well respecting people's constitutional and civil rights. that makes us proud to be americans in the first place. we respect civil rights. we can promote public safety at the same time. it has been a feature of our values since the beginning. guest: those transgender who serve in the millet area, what faces them? >> i thought it was interesting that the military had such a swift response. they were caught unaware about banning transgender people from the military. i thought it was a shameful move on the part of the president area there is a real question about how it will be implemented. military have said this is an point to happen any time soon. there is a question about how it would the implemented. once amazing to me as these are individuals with given their li

local law enforcement agencies with excess military equipment. south carolina congressman chair to the hearing. it is about an hour. good morning. this hearing will come to order. i welcome you are today and call this hearing of the house arms services subcommittee of readiness -- of the house arms services committee on the continued oversight of the transfer of access really terry equipment to civilian law enforcement agencies to order -- excess military equipment to civilian law enforcement agencies to order. this will be jodey's lost efficient -- last official event and i want to personally thank her for her contributions to our efforts during the past year and i wish her the best of luck as she moves forward in future endeavors. thank you. [applause] one of the objectives of this subcommittee is to bring attention to matters that impact the overall readiness of the department of defense. this includes programs or activities which face management challenges, present budget implications, or could be administrated more efficiently. it is our goa

law school. decade, the normal number, and it was the highest theer seen in the county, high was 100,600 applicants. applications is a funnier number so it seems to me more important to focus on applicants. likenumber was something 100 thousand, 90 8000, for quite a long time. dramatically and in 2016, the number was 2006 -- 206 -- 200-6000. 206,00. 0. down from last year about 1%. i think that number today has probably stabilized. but there are things happening inside that number that are attractive. for instance, for people who actually get into school, those who come into school with stats are half of what they were five years ago. a number of people who come in under 150 is up 80% from where it was. there is a noticeable shift in .he metric, the easiest word others might say talent or suitability for law school. the other thing that has happened inside the number is a change in student legal aid. as the competition for law increases,, changing the numbers, as would like to ine the smartest st

we will be able to make our own laws. parliament will make our laws. but asjudges will laws. parliament will make our laws. but as judges will interpret those laws. and the british supreme court will be the ultimate arbiter of those laws. we'll have the latest on the government proposals. also this lunchtime... princes william and harry have spoken about the days following their mother's death — harry spoke of the anger he feels towards the photographers who chased. she had had quite a severe head injury but she was still very much alive. those people that caused the accident, instead of helping, were taking photographs of her dying on the back—seat. president trump launches a lengthy tirade against the media, saying mostjournalists are bad people who hate america. 18 members of two rival gangs have been banned from parts of birmingham, after leaving a trail of murders and stabbings. and how well are you protecting your identity? a warning that identity theft has reached a record high. and coming up in the sport on bbc news, conor mcgregor arrives in las vegas ahead of what c

into the georgia law. it allowed abortion to save the life of the mother, but are abortion forlowed rape, for indications of fetal deformity, for mental health reasons, and those three exceptions were put in in july of 1968. it was a recent law and it was not in effect for long to tell what happened. in doe v bolton that was decided without any trial or expert testimony. it was also decided on motions to dismiss. again it went straight up to the supreme court without any appellate review. host: we learn that the supreme court heard the arguments in tandem and they meant for the decisions to be read as conjoined decisions. melissa: correct. host: the case of the name of row. melissa: it is worth noting that the doe was a reform statute inspired by the penal code of the model abortion statute. it had tension between reform a repeal. by the time the statute and doe was promulgated, there was an appetite for something that did more. this did not accommodate women and only made a modest impact for women who wan

even legal residents, lawful, u.s.-born citizens who may have undocumented family members, are starting to not want to cooperate because they are afraid to be deported. the numbers speak for themselves. it is not just rapes not being reported, it is all by the crime. through the second quarter we are seeing the same trend. the debate has been very mean-spirited and people are running scared. juan: could you go over some of the numbers? you have seen an increase in reported rapes, crimes by non-hispanics, but when it comes to hispanics, there has been a sharp drop. rapes a and sexual assaults alone, the reduction has been 42.8%, while the rest of the community, the numbers have gone up. the same holds true to a lesser extent, 13%, for all by the crime. that is the consequence, when you create the perception that frontline law enforcement officers should be focused on public safety. you cannot argue with the fact that it is going to have an impact. perception matters. the perception that sb4 has created is that we are go

this law, because they weren't harmed by this law. the people that were harmed by this law were very small set of people. and they were accused of having extremely filthy and dirty and horrible conditions, which would have been addressed and some of them would have been put out of business by the regulations that were not challenged in the case. but they were the ones at whom this law was aimed. and then getting back to victoria's point about labor, it's not labor per se, it's labor unions. that's what you meant to say. that's what you actually meant, right? >> yes. >> but labor sounds like it's everybody, but it's not, it's labor unions. in fact, the progressives were part of a very strong unionist movement. unions didn't represent everybody. they represented themselves. in particular they didn't represent african-americans. they were generally racially exclusionary. they did not represent women. they were white male dominated unions. and that is who the progressives strongly supported. and that was who promoted this particular legis

the due process of law require that laws not be irrational and not be arbitrary. >> how long after the case was argued did it take for the court to return its opinion? >> oh, i have no idea how long. it didn't take as long in those days as it takes now. there's no question about that. it was very quickly. >> and we talked earlier about how justice peckham originally started out as a dissent -- >> perhaps. it's speculated. >> it's in conference where the justices begin to argue their opinions. he ultimately was chosen to write the majority opinion. here's a little bit in this 5-4 decision on the lochner case that justice peckham wrote. there's no reasonable ground for interfering with the liberty of person or the right of free contract by determining the hours of labor in the occupation of a baker. there's no contention that bakers as a class do not have equal intention or capacity to man other trades and occupations or they're not able to assert their rights and care for themselves without the protecting arm of the state interfering with their independence of judgment and action. what'

he was emancipated by law and then disfranchised and segregated by law. i submit the history of the negro in this country demonstrates the importance of getting rid of hostile laws and seeking the security of new friendly laws, federal, state and local. >> other civil rights activists would chose different methods to make the case, thurgood marshal chose the law, can you talk more about that? >> sure, well as jeff said the strategy that was implimented by thurgood marshal it was granted and brilliant ultimately. it also was daring and risky in the minds of others at that time who were equally committed to black freedom. people like randolph, ralph bunch were sceptical of using the courts and the law to achieve emancipation, social change for african-americans. partly this was because people like randolph were interested in an sbe racial movement. those were other people who thought the courts were only as good as the personnel on the court and it would be republicaned that the judges would reflect the racial attitudes of the majority of the population. th

of those laws. a cyclist who killed a woman on the road has been cleared of manslaughter, but convicted of a lesser charge. the husband of kim briggs has now called for a change in the law, and paid this tribute. for us to remember kim, not through the lens of this trail, but for being the beautiful, fun—loving woman who adored her children. a man has beenjailed for 18 years after trying to smuggle a pipe bomb onto a plane at manchester airport. princes william and harry have been speaking of the days following the death of their mother, princess diana, and the role of the paparazzi in the car crash. she had quite a severe head injury but was very much still live on the back seat and those people that caused the accident... also on the programme, in the next hour we'll be live in nevada where donald trump is holding another rally and the media, once again, is sure to get a thumping. this is the scene in reno where supporters are waiting to hear from president trump. wayne rooney — england's record g

so he's visiting with his own con law professor at his law program in d.c. what drove him to see his old professor was a new letter from mrs. loving, dear mr. cohen, hope you hadn't featherweighten us. this has been a year since her first letter. so he's fairly desperate. but he's hopeful. the professor is a wizard. maybe he's got the solution. and maybe he does. maybe he doesn't, but what happens that day is very different. another even younger law student from the same professor, the same program who had been off doing battle with the forces the civil rights movement in the deep south, he was in federal court all the time. he was on the frontlines of the movement. he knew immediately what to do. you go into federal court. the two of them teamed up. cohen made the case possible to that point. hersch cough makes it possible to carry it to a successful conclusion. but we don't know that yet. all we know is, it's summer 1964 now. and we found new possible way forward. sl now, if we fast forward to the case itself, we'll wrap back to it, they win, right? we kno

school how do you look at the state of our law schools well. as of last year as a result of really pioneering work we did in defining. competency for graduate lawyers every law school in the country now has to provide at least six units of clinical legal education for its students now one semester doesn't really give you that competence but it means they are at least exposed to something called building a relationship of trust with a client talking to a client beginning to formulate a hypothesis as to what rights might be available maybe educating that client at's their rights so i think cut and release sensitizing we're not when i went to law school. we didn't even have professional responsibility as a required course after watergate it became a required course i think that the issue of but in no laws school in the country except the one that we started and that became the u.d.c. david a clock school of law is system change itself a subject matter and we're talking about system changed as complex and that involves looking at you know no laws e

he is a law student. and a brilliant one i would say. >> i think it is fair to say that it would be more challenging to pick somebody here without legal change than with legal training. >> but let me answer the other question. one of the ironies is that we know now that woodrow wilson was a racist. he introduced segregation into the capitol. when he was the president of -- and in addition besides brandice, who he was stuck with, he appointed several jews to one of his close advisers -- the brain child of one of the walbergs and he had many jewish advisers, so no record of him being anti semitic. there was an effort now to take off the woodrow name from the woodrow school, et cetera. and that would be my answer. and it seems to be a paradox that he was really not anti semitic from any record that we have, but he was certainly a southern racist. >> yeah. thank you. >> okay. last question from the left -- >> my friend. >> you talked a lot about harvard. >> i am tevi troy. we now that all the supreme court ju

it did not address prenatal injury law, fetal homicide law, wrongful death law.ndeft it to the states to hence legal protection in those areas, and the states have done so. have half of the states with fetal homicide laws that extend protection from conception. you've got this supreme court edict across all 50 states allowing virtually abortion on demand at any time for any reason. that has created -- because there is such a tension -- that has kept the issue simmering for for two years. host: as one of our callers mentioned, this issue is simmering in the presidential campaign this year. as we heard the court is hearing another case. the congress itself over the issue of planned parenthood funding. up until recently there was the front of the government shutdown that hinged on funding for planned parenthood. s continuess -- thi to be debated in american society. two senators on the floor of the senate on the anniversary of roe v. wade in january this year. >> even before america's founding the law was on a steady march toward protecting the human beings before b

the law. sheriff arpaio was of course an early and resolute supporter of donald trump politically back from during the campaign. and then this week, the president went to phoenix, arizona for that very controversial campaign-style rally amidst other calls of unity. then he did something that now, in the midst of this hurricane, takes on a very different light. he spoke directly with his political crowd in that campaign setting about what appears to have been, we know tonight, a use of his presidential power, his authority to potentially pardon sheriff arpaio. >> do the people in this room like sheriff joe? [ cheers and applause ] so was sheriff joe convicted for doing his job? he should have had a jury. but you know what? i'll make a prediction. i think he's going to be just fine, okay? [ applause ] >> that is what apparently the pardon power looks like when turned into "american idol." that night the president said through aides that he wasn't going to pardon sheriff arpaio, he didn't want to

violation of law. state officials conducted, as was the case at the time, a warrantless search of the office, seized hiss appointment books and later interrogated the physicians patients. in wolf a unanimous supreme kofrt determined the search and seizure was unconstitutional, but more importantly, determined that the fourth amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizures should be applied to the states as well as the federal government through the due process clause of the 14th amend. of the it was a landmark decision in its observe right because the court signalled and did so for the first time that rights not in the first amendment were incorporated to apply to state and local governments as well as the federal government. as you know, under the doctrine of selective incorporation previously the court had incorporated and applied first amendment rights of press, speech, assembly and also religion to apply against the states. so it was significant. and the court's rational for doing so

and i think it was a single opinion but later became the law of the land it is now the law of the land that you can take race into account in deciding how to construct your student body, and factors span that it is made american institutions have learned in far nor diverse than otherwise would to put another way we should think about diversity as in some way the vehicle or affirmative action precisely as vehicle for carrying forward if and a browns commitment integration because without affirmative action, the sad truth is that american institutions would be close to racially segregated. >> has it been challenged over the years? >> it's been challenged a number of times, and there will be litigation on affirmative action that trying to particular i won't get into it buzz it is technical but i think since there's been ongoing litigation challenging the constitutionality of affirmative action the way we are now is with the place we are is that it is still a constitutional supreme court is not said otherwise. but that doesn't mean that he won't continue to be challenged. >> professor is a