laws on its own is it. well you better quote palling then why did the bar association did not support the trough national security legislation i championed back in 200 to try very hard to help hong kong to an act national security laws on our own why did they object to that and in the course of the public scrutiny i gave then many concessions now the awful trade you 3 imposes a constitutional duty on the us to prohibit certain national security over answers but it does not preclude the p.r.c. of origins from acting under their constitution the problem with our parcels here is that it ignores the laws of china only focuses on the basic law of hong kong which is really what she sets out a constitution or arrangements for hong kong but the national people's congress is the highest of already in mainland china and the pa is so haitian have persisted in persisted in ignoring these realities so the national people's congress can just sweep aside the basic laws it feels like the bar association says it would appea

the major law firms? [laughter] justice ginsburg: i had three strikes against me. david: after 13 years, did you think you had a chance to be on the supreme court? justice ginsburg: no one thinks, "my aim in life is to be a supreme court justice." david: when you first got on the court, were other justices saying, "we're happy to see you here, let's go have dinner together"? justice ginsburg: justice o'connor was the most welcoming. she gave me some very good advice. >> would you fix your tie, please? david: well, people wouldn't recognize me if my tie was fixed, but ok. just leave it this way. all right. i don't consider myself a journalist. and nobody else would consider myself a journalist. i began to take on the life of being an interviewer, even though i have a day job of running a private equity firm. how do you define leadership? what is it that makes somebody tick? when you went to cornell, your grades were obviously very good. you applied to law school at harvard. you got into harvard law school.

the laws. in october of 2019, the president established the first commission on law enforcement since the 1960's, and i am meeting with them later this month and i've been talking with law enforcement leaders around the country. in the weeks and months ahead, we will be working with community leaders to find constructive solutions so that mr. floyd's death will not have been in vain. we will work hard to bring good out of bad. unfortunately, the aftermath of george floyd's death has produced a second challenge to the rule of law. while many have peacefully expressed their anger and grief, others have hijacked protests to engage in lawlessness, violent rioting, arson, looting of businesses, and public property, assaults on law enforcement officers and innocent people, and even the murder of a federal agent. -- such senseless acts of anarchy are not exercises of first amendment rights. they are crimes designed to terrify fellow citizens and intimidate communities. as i told the governors on monda

and law enforcement has, too. that's one thing i understand from being attorney general 30 years ago. what makes me very optimistic today is that the law enforcement leaders that we deal with, and you all know this, no one is more committed to reforming the criminal justice system and the profession of policing today. there hasn't been a president recently who has been more committed. he didn't require the crisis we have today to get started with the first step act, and with establishing a condition which has been -- commission that has been looking at the very issues we are dealing with today. i know there's a lot of interest among police leaders for clarity and guidance on the use of force and some of the issues you were just talking about, sheriff. making sure the standards are out there, making sure they are trained, and making sure they are adhered to. we are looking forward to working with you to get that done. the time for waiting is over. it's now incumbent on us to bring good and bad -- to bring good back

before that, there were no such laws other than a brief chicago law -- around 1908. it didn't stay in the books very long. that law is really important because new york at that time was the epicenter of the united states in terms of population. new york city -- number 50 to 100. if you take those cities and you had a mola, that population still did not add up to new york city. that's what central new york was. we gotta remember that the nra has organizing short charter -- that is where the most of the members are in the headquarters. that is when they really start talking about talking about the second amendment. >> of course, the auspices of these weapons crossing borders in the 19th century where you had the robert parents than. the 20th century you had the mob violence and the gang violence. how did all of that effect the debate in this country? >> there is an interesting thing about -- i think everybody knew united states agree that there is a problem. the only disagreement is more or less in terms of, how do you solve that problem? there was a movement and the u

so those were the early gun laws. those evolved mostly into carry laws, and it was around the mid to late 19th century things really start to become those modern laws you're talking about firearms, dealers, you know, minors, dangerous people, things of that nature that should not have guns. that's really the modern beginning of gun control as we know it. >> can you elaborate how it has evolved over the last 2 plus years? >> yeah, the original right isn't what we know it is today. if you look at all the founding documents and everything all of it hints to the idea of the federalized militia debate which was the arguments between state rights and individuals. well, the constitution and states. george washington obviously wanted more power of state malaysias to control them during war. when it came to the states they were like no, we want full control. the concern of the full constitution was the federal government may have too much control of the state's militia emphasis the second amendment is more or less a reflection

it was the laws -- this law and laws like the gun control act that many people at the time that was not really designed to control guns, but to control urban blacks who were writing in 1967, the worst race riots in the history -- committing a lot of crime. increasing crime rates especially in urban areas in the 1960s. these laws that were designed to restrict access to black radicals in urban areas, like the black panthers, and ended up sparking a backlash among white rural conservatives who are convinced that the government was coming to get their guns next. >> i want to take you forward from there to the debates over gun control and gun rights that we have seen in the last five or ten years. why do you think the advocates of the second amendment rights, the rate bear arms have become so dominant? there is just about zero chance of passing in any state legislature or in congress, anything that would smack of gun control today. what has changed politically over the past decade or two to put us in that situation? >> i think the major push for gun control in the 1960s, especially in the n

or hong kong law you don't know do you well know no it's in the basic law they must obey hong kong law whether i said this it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for it could simply be responsible for public education publicized here and promotion you know you cannot come to the conclusion that they are they will be enforcing hong kong law that's what they broke that's what they do when they bring in their national security organs of the central police government does it it was sent to people's government that's what they are looking for education is it you don't know that again you aren't me. and you have no no factual basis for making those sort of statements you are simply making are sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias when there's no assumptions and bias when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when they're in on the mainland we're not talking about mainland we're talking about one country 2 systems let's come back to hong kong. it doesn't look as though it's one coun

come up with criminal law. slowly but surely, virtually every state law recognized some right to arms. that right was severely limited by what was called the state police power which gives the state the power to legislate in health safety and well fare. that means preventing people being shot by bullets. that continues to hold sway. the nra napds that kind of interception as well. in 1939, the are supreme court first weighs on the 2nd amendment in detail. they had talked about it in passing in two state supreme court decisions in the 19th century but nothing in depth. the united states military is different because they addressed more the part heart of the issue. it's cryptic. but courts issued that decision all intercepted as the 2nd amendment for groups but not individually. but legally speaking until district of columbia recognized the right to keep arms dissing stikt from the militia and that right extends to self-defense. >> in the 1920s and 30s is when we saw the start of gun control legislation in this c

the louisiana law, 620 is identical to the texas law and was expressly modeled on it. after trial the district court ruled 620 is unconstitutional finding no material differences between this case and women's health. unburdened it found act 620 would leave louisiana with just one clinic and one doctor providing abortions. at the same time it found act 620 would do nothing for women's health. in reversing the district court decision the fifth circuit committed two fundamental errors. first, it usurped the role of the district court and disregarded all of its factual findings. second the fifth circuit accepted legal arguments that this court rejected four years ago. nothing has changed that would justify such a legal about-face. even more medical organizations joined the a and 8 is admitting privileges impose barriers to abortion with no benefit patients and this impact -- the state's eleventh hour objection to third-party standing runs up against still more binding precedent. the court squarely held that it is waivable in the state liberally and strategically waived the

they have enforced the laws. numbersamong the best we have ever had in terms of recorded history certainly, but this has been a very strong year for less crime, let's put it that way. reason for less crime. we had great law enforcement. i am proud of them. crime. we had great law enforcement. i am proud of them. there won't be defunding or dismantling of our police. there will not be any disbanding of our police. the police have been letting us live in peace, we want to ensure sure we don't have any bad actors in there. sometimes we see horrible things, but i say 99% are great people. they have done jobs that are record-setting. so our crime statistics are at a level that they have not been at. i want to go around the room and just ask each one of the folks to say hello in say a little bit about themselves and the success they have had, then we will go and have a meeting as to where we go from here. ok? thank you. >> mr. president, thank you. thank you for hosting this meeting, for the ability to talk about impor

we are funded by private donors and we provide information to law enforcement and to the public on law enforcement matters. we are also able as resources permit to provide grants to law enforcement agencies across the country. are funded by private donors and we provide information to law enforcement and to the public on law enforcement matters. as resourcesble permit to provide grants to law enforcement agencies across the country. host: what is your foundation's position on policing? thenews we have seen, protests reacting to what has happened to african-americans, and what do you think should be done? guest: there are a lot of things that can be done and we always need to be willing and open to making reforms to law enforcement. i am a strong supporter of law enforcement as a former u.s. attorney, however i note that from time to time and we see this recently as well, that there are problems that manifest themselves that we see in law enforcement. are thees i think these result of poor training and poor resources available to police departments. one of the things or a couple of the

as a way to make the laws uniform.and to do it in a way that if i was traveling interstate from indiana to ohio, if ohio had stricter laws and i was traveling by car back i would not be affected by that. their uniforms firearms act, that they convinced the new york assembly, by an overwhelming majority to enact the legislation. he then governor roosevelt decided to veto the legislation. he vetoed it, and the nra really ramped up its efforts, and they start putting advertisement for recruitment, that were expressly targeted at the fire arms laws. they head objectives, and the first three are related to firearms legislation. i think that's the genesis of what the nra becomes, but for many decades let me caution and say, the 1930s the attorney general of the united states, knew who the nra was. and they became very well aware what the nra was doing. the general american public wasn't though. so they continue to do this for decades, and it's not until jfk gets its fascinated, that the american public gets a wake up call. a

and not just find ways that working with law enforcement and community leaders to improve law enforcement, we want to improve the lives of african-american families in every city in this country just as president trump has been doing, as you said, every step of the way with record unemployment, opportunity zones, educational choice that criminal justice reform and a whole range of issues that were in the process of achieving real are results which is what we're about at this white house.

the law. i do not pretend even for a moment to speak for the other leaders here, but i am certain that we are -- we all want local leaders to have the confidence and the conviction to request and utilize all available resources to fight violence and to protect our communities. the u.s. marshals service is your partner, too. in summary, the u.s. marshals service will continue to perform our many day-to-day missions and we will also assist our federal, state, and local partners during this emergency. we will work urgently to keep citizens and law enforcement safe. i thank our concerned citizens for their patience and continuing support and i look forward to any questions you might have. and for the continuing support, and i lookk forward to any questions you might have. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is regina lombardo, the acting director of atf. for many special agents one of the proudest moments is when you raise your righte hand to take the oath of office to support and defend the tre

and we would by law -- we would follow the law and submit it to the director. the director has the option, i think, of disagreeing. if the director were to disagree and not want to forward the urgent concern, and we had determined it was an urgent concern and we found it to be credible, then i think at that point we would still forward that complaint to this committee with an explanation of why we made that determination. the cia director would, i am sure, also be able to provide comments and an explanation as to why or she felt that it was not an urgent concern. >> so you would, and my time is up, you would send it to the committee, though? in the example i gave, because these are -- >> if we determine something was an urgent concern and was reportable to this committee as an urgent concern, but the director of the cia disagreed, it is my understanding under the law that we then are obliged or should provide that to this committee. and, you know, with comments, with an explanation. >> all right. >> sorry. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chair. >> senator risch. >

so i -- i believe that law enforcement has a lot of great people that work in and around law enforcement, but they need the equipment, they need the cameras. they need to have the real-time evidence and the real-time evidence of wrongdoing and evidence of doing it right. it's a protective device. we should have everybody have the availability of that in law enforcement. we also require that law enforcement agencies retain disciplinary records on officers and make sure that they check an officer's record from other agencies before making a hiring decision. i kind of thought that was going on anyway, i sort of did, but we need to make sure and make clear that that's what we absolutely want to do. the bill incentivizes state and local police agencies to ban the choke holds. as i mentioned earlier, i'm for even more definitive language on that. it also provides much training in all kinds of areas of de-escalation or if an officer is in a situation where another officer is using overwhelming force improperly, that that officer is trained on how to interdict that situation. we saw that happen

so those were the early gun laws.hose evolved mostly into carry laws and then as around the mid to late 90th century things become the modern laws that we talk about, firearms dealers, minors, dangerous people, things of that nature that should not have guns, that is really the modern beginning of gun control as we know it. >> which goes dprekt wli to your book, you could elaborate how it has evolved over the last 200 plus years. >> yeah. the original write isn't what we know it today. if you look at the founding documents if you look at everything, all of it hints to the idea of the federalized militia debate which was the arguments between states rights and individuals, well the constitution and states, who is the power of the militia. the federal government and george washington wanted more power to control them during war. when it came to the states, they're like, no, we want full control. so the concern in the constitution when it came in 1787 and then ratified in 1789, there was too much control. and there are p

whether this law will come of. hong kong local legislature as well as the basic long so that means future is very uncertain although some people say that this legislature we're only at fact a small number of people but you can see that under the definition of a national security in china it covers a very very wide range of specs for example light economies education as well as religion so i really don't know what's what will happen in even tomorrow so it's very much a pence on whether ministration will exercise self-restraint very briefly then i want to ask you about your reaction to news that joshua longer nates in law are stepping down some you might say the high profile role they played in pro in the pro-democracy movement in hong kong what's your reaction to that and do you expect the international community to take you might say the mantle of criticism of the way beijing have handled this to protect the likes of joshua long and nathan law. well by passing this law within such a short period of time i do believ

law enforcement and african americans over the centuries. he joined into that tour and his statement to me was, i wish every police department could get that kind how do we break it afraid and raised interesting question this past weekend and to find out for metro police they go to the museum of african-american history to get an understanding from the law enforcement perspective and to see what has happened in those relationships between law enforcement and african-americans over the centuries. every police department to get that training and context we do that from the holocaust museum it does tours and is designing a curriculum to train trainers and work on anti-semitism across the country why don't we do that with the museum of african-american history and law enforcement? take the program they already have and then get that out across the entire country and multiply that out. why can't police week every year when that occurs set a large contingency of law enforcement go to the african-american history and get the training there then tak

the law. among our basic functions is the absolute duty to protect people who are exercising constitutional rights. however, rioters, arsonists, thieves, looters, and their protagonists are criminals. they have undermined peaceful and lawful demonstrations and protests. these criminals threaten our basic constitutional rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and they must be brought to justice. since the earliest days just after our nation's birth, u.s. marshals have worked to ensure the rule of law by making sure that the federal judiciary and the federal judicial process operate unfettered and unintimidated. we have also worked tirelessly over the years to bring thousands and thousands of and today,o justice one of our primary missions is to find and protect endangered children. in the last week, u.s. marshals have coordinated with u.s. attorneys and state and local partners to protect protesters and to address the criminal acts of others. deputy u.s. marshals are assisting wi

is no law. without law, there is no civilization. inally, i strongly condemn the sentiments expressed in so many forms in america is systemically racists. racists of every color in every society. nature. side of human but no nation has struggled harder to transcend that nature ostracize its racists than have americans. the american founders placed the declaration of independence that they believe would someday produce a nation of all men and women races and religions together blessings of liberty under the equal laws.tion of our lincoln said, quote, having an vil tendency, if not an evil design. an evil tendency and evil design are exactly what the radical introduced into our society, and it is tearing our country apart. back.d the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. now yield one minute to the distinguished the mrs. lady from florida, demings. mrs. demings: madam speaker, i joined the police department in 1984. can describe the fe

he making a law. this is about coming together and getting an outcome. we showed we could do that on the c.a.r.e.s. act. we have sewn hown it on the gre american outdoors act and we need to show it on the scott bill. >> this is about making a law, not just make ag point. this is not messaging. this is trying to be able to work in the most bipartisan way we can work. get it on the floor, have amendments, talk to the process. equal justice under the law shouldn't be a partisan issue. a friend and i talked. it's not our founding principles are off. founding principles are right. we're still working trying to be a more perfect union and we have a ways to go on that and wrb we find areas we don't have a more perfect union we should engage. examples. senator scott gone through multiple areas in the bill. a section on the bill, a black officer in oklahoma city, what's the possibility putting out grants to help more departments hire black recruiters and help individuals that are coming through the training in

if we don't have law and order we don't have a country. so we need law and order. ok. ho's next? >> governor pritzker gave an update to his state's response at a news conservatives in chicago. while taking questions, the governor was asked about the exchange with president trump ver the phone. governor pritzker: good afternoon i'm here with brigadier jenrry charde neiley and illinois state police lieutenant colonel david burn and margaret mcgreel to provide an update for our state support for communities across illinois. esterday into today, 375 members of the illinois national guard joined local law enforcement in chicago to assist with street closures. we implemented stringent parameters on their mission and use of force including no interference with peaceful protestors expressing their first amendment rights. since that deployment, we have received additional reports of escalating situations and" for assistance from communities around the state. we have now called up an additional 250 members of the illinois national guard to be ready to assist other cities across the state t

as a law enforcement, i am ashamed that this type of lawful act that occurred on that day towards mr. george floyd by one of a law enforcement officer that i hold dearly has also hurt me extremely. the i.s.p. supports the peaceful protest that are occurring across the nation and across the state of illinois for members of our communities who want their voices heard. we are also committed to protect in a fundamental right of life and property. over the course of the past few days, the i.s.p. has been working in conjunction with the chicago police department, illinois law enforcement alarm systems, the illinois national guard, and the illinois department of transportation to ensure that the safety of the public is a first priority. over the weekend, and into today, the i.s.p. has proudly assisted our various law firm partners across the state who also share our mission of public safety, including the chicago police department, our aurora police department, oak lawn police department, north riverside police department, evergreen park police department, joliet police department, calumet c

all over the nation to give up on law school at least for now. marin is a pretty good window or has one into people are studying for law school. his company test max makes a study app and he's talked to some of those students so you did a poll of these students, and you found about a third of them were thinking about quitting. >> yeah, that's correct. so we did a survey with our users, our one l users and bar max users so across the spectrum from prelaw to law students and recent graduates to get a sense of what they were thinking with the forced chance litransition and harvard law students this will remain online because obviously, i think students are reconsidering the value proposition of $50,000 a year for zoom videos. >> yes, i would imagine so. i'll get to that in a second. says.me through what the bar i assume this is different sta w school over a video link. >> historically, that has been the case. there is a rule that they have, i want to say it's rule 306 where in 46 of the states, you cannot sit for the bar exam if you got your legal e

billion's of dollars over the course of the last 20 years have gone to law enforcement, civilian lawment agencies in the form of military equipment. much of this is really not needed by local police departments. most police departments do not need armored vehicles, armored cars. they have an only limited need for fully automated weapons into the whole notion that every time a law enforcement officer or group goes to serve a warrant, that they need a swat backing thisup, that leads to notion and perspective on the part of some law enforcement that they are not bound by what traditionally should be the standards for police officers. that is within the bounds of the constitution including the fourth amendment, which does not apply to our military overseas. i think that dramatically trimming back on the military equipment given to police departments will help in that regard. host: how long are police officers trained for the job and what changes would you like to see to that training to address the concerns that you have spoken about this morning? guest: as with most things in our societ

before that, there were no such laws other than a brief chicago law. i believe chicago enacted their law in 1908 but it didn't stay on the books very long. that law's really important because new york at that time was the epicenter of the united states in terms of population, new york city, i think cities number 50 to 100, if you take the 50 to 100th city at that time and you add them up, the populations, they still didn't equal new york city. that's how central new york was to the united states at that time. obviously they had a big fear. plus you've got to remember that the nra is organized chartered out of new york and that's where most of their members are and their headquarters is at. that's when they start talking about the second amendment, more so in passing than in depth though. >> on the auspices of the weapons crossing the borders. we had robert bareson in the 20th century, the mob violence and gang violence. how did that affect the debate in this country? >> well, there's an interesting thing about the mob. i think everybody in the united s

order and that is what it is, one law, we have one beautiful law. once that is restored and fully restored, we will help you and your business and your family. america is founded upon the rule of law. it is the foundation of our prosperity, our freedom, and our way of life. where there is no law, there is no opportunity. where there is no justice, there is no liberty. where there is no safety, there is no future. we must never give into anger or hatred. ns,malice or violence reighn none of us is free. i take these actions today with resolve and a passionate love for our country, by far our ahead.t days lie now i'm going to pay my respects to a special place. thank you very much. questions]with >> next, minnesota governor holds a news conference on the protests and riots in response to the death of george floyd in police custody. extending the curfew in the twin he announced he wasextending the curfew in the twin cities for two more days, but would be shortening the length of the curfew. this is one hour. >> tonight, three democrats fine for the part

do we maintain respect for the rule of law or do we return to the law of the jungle by surrendering to the beams. outlaw billy. in just 2 weeks the iran nuclear deal agreed in vienna in 2015 will be 5 years old many predicted it wouldn't survive when 2 years ago president trump said he was pulling out of the code the deal is under strain with iran breaching its restrictions on your a new enrichment or though it's still not anywhere near the levels for weapons grade production it seems highly unlikely that the arms embargo on iran which expires in october will be extended as the u.s. is demanding both russia and china permanent members of the security council of firmly opposed the us is then threatening to invoke what might be called the nuclear clause of the nuclear deal what's known as snap back which would trigger again all the international sanctions on iran but most others on the security council says the u.s. pulled out of the deal and no longer has the right to trigger anything he could create fresh divisions pitting the u.s. against its main allies james zira at the united natio

enforcement is not the law in georgia the law in georgia happens in courtrooms you cannot use. non you cannot use lethal force to match a non lethal force there is a case of tennessee versus gardner united states free in court cases stands for their opposition so i think that this case is going to end up in the superior court of johnny with murder charges against both officers. who also took to see ben swan investigative journalist and co-host of artie's boom bust to explain why the use of force by police sparked such outrage in ireland. in almost every case where we're seeing black lives matter protests it comes down to use of force and it really seems to be the overwhelming theme that we see over and over and again so the point you're making here it's critically important that some people will say yes why do you should and like others will say you came across a man who was asleep in a drive through and he wasn't moving his car and that when the drive through you gave him a sobriety test he resisted being handcuffed so at what point is it incumbent upon an officer to finish th

in state law?evedo: the problem is that state laws are different across the cin texas under our statute, the only time that we can put out information on discipline is if it is we are kind of a sunshine state. very proud of that fact. is written reprimand suspension, ndefinite suspension, which is the equivalent of a fire in, a charging document available to the public. sen.testified in sqdport of implementing a national use of force policy including the prohibition of chokeholds and neck restraint. panel do not agree with that. that is why i am cosponsor of that bill. having seen what happened if you don't have those standards in place. for instance, a case in minnesota in the neighboring jurisdiction to minneapolis, the philando castile case, where a good prosecutor was assigned and the jury came back non part because of the standards in law. can you talk about the standards? i think there varying opinions about chokeholds. manybanned chokeholds. the issue is that police officers are trained in s

one law and order and that is what it is, one law, one beautiful law, and once that is restored and fully restored, we will help you, help your business, and we will help your family. america is founded upon the rule of law. it is the foundation of our prosperity, but where there is no law, there is no opportunity. where there is no justice there is no liberty. where there is no safety there is no future. we must never give in to anger or hatred. if malice or violence reigns then none of us is free. i take these actions today with firm resolve and with a true and passionate love for our country. by far our greatest days lie ahead. thank you very much, and now i'm going to pay my respects to a very, very special place. thank you very much. >> there was the president of it united states making a 6 or 7 minute statement declaring he is the president of law and order and he will stop what's going on right now. as he was speaking right across the street from the white house there was a peaceful demonstration in lafayette park by protesters who were simply shouting, making statements, but they