they can enforce murder laws, child sex laws, kidnapping laws, they can participate in federal task forces of terrorism and narcotics trafficking but god forgive they lift a finger to insist in the enforcement of federal immigration laws but to go as far as a consent degree to inhibit the ability of the federal government to enforce federal law is stunning. even for a department of justice that has unfortunately become increasingly points higher lit sized. the consent degree to require the officers to actually violate federal law. let me repeat that one more time. this administration's department of justice is actually requiring new orleans police officers to break the law in an effort to further their political agenda. and this is not a theoretical conversation. and real life with real victims and fwrooefing family members. illegal immigration is not a victimless crime. once you weaken the law you weaken it forever and once you do it is done forever and once you decide state and local law enforcement are good enough to protect us when we're back home in our districts but not good enough t

or. -- laws of war. but what about an offender like the famous clement elva landy, who gave public speeches and disaffected areas of the midwest, where the majority of the people were really critical of the war. he gave public speeches that are bitterly attacking the administration, and saying the war was both wrong and hopeless. what about people arrested on the order that one of the innumerable marshals for even less significant criticisms of the war, and criticisms of the infringement of civil liberty that were saying all around them. that punishable interferes with the war effort. could those are arrestees be tried by military commission? lincoln's war department decided that the requirement of the habeas corpus act -- if nothing else, if those sorts of people were arrested and held and unable to get out of jail with a writ of habeas corpus, i could only be held on the habeas corpus act of 1863 for a limited amount of time. if the government did not bring an indictment to them, bring them a trial in

they transferred me from the harvard law review to the columbia law review. columbia was very good to me. >> rose: and harvard didn't give you a degree. and marty comes to uh you, though, and says, don't go back and accept anything from harvard unless they're willing to give you an honorary degree. >> well, like he said, when my dear colleague elena kagan became dean of the harvard law school, every year while she was dean, she would say, ruth, we would love to have you at harvard law school, and marty said hold out for an honorary degree which i received in 2011. >> rose: and there's a picture of you in your chambers of you and domingo. >> yes. >> rose: and he's singing to you in the red harvard graduation robes. >> yes. >> rose: and your title for that picture is what? >> woman in ecstasy. that's me. ( laughter ) i had no idea. it was a thrill enough to know that we would be seated next to each other because they lined us up in alphabetical order. so domingo was just one -- but then when they called me to receive my honorary degree and he stood up and goes

there's in rape shield law. i've sat in the room before when faculty has asked students were you a virgin, how many times have you had sex before, what did you wear that night, are you on birth control. irrelevant questions that you're asking a teenager to explain. half of what i do for students when i prepare them is remind them they are the right to say i respectfully choose not to answer that question. a lot of them don't realize that going in. so i think preparing them for that. you know really preparing them to have to educate the panel if necessary, if the panel is not already atanel is not already educated. obviously representing survivors in hearings. if you have an attorney that's representing you we that can do so in all of the overlapping systems, not just the campus system but if it actually goes to criminal court, which very few of my cases do but when they do we have the ability to go in and fight for privacy, fight to prevent the counseling records from being subpoenaed to keep the safety and priv

what is the law that it is what he cared about.it wasn't that he didn't care about the human consequences of cases he thought that the people of the united states had established a way in which the legal system would resolve these questions about people's legal rights and duties. no one had given him the power to decide who should win, except so far as the law dictated that answer. for him that was the law i wasn't the person that matter and that's who he was. he would've no more thought that it was his role to decide winners and losers in a legal case in terms of his consequence of the outcome then he would've thought it was his role to go across the street to congress and urge them to pass or not pass a law which will have consequences for people. . . >> >> where she could spend time with his family and it wouldn't be as frenetic but back then he said jones day was a term that recognize the importance of balancing work and family and throughout his career even though he was extraordinarily busy with being a lawyer and academic an

which in this constitution is law, the highest law that you apply. so maybe it helps, would help if it could be educational for the other students to ask students from abroad what is their system, what is the place of the constitution in their system. who has the last word on whether legislation is constitutional. you know, that was a brilliant thing that our very first supreme court did and that chief justice marshall developed, judicial review for constitutionality. it didn't exist in the world with rare exceptions until after world war ii. so our system is unique, and if you can -- one idea that i have for you is you ask your foreign students to compare their system with ours. and that will enlighten your students who are from the united states. >> thank you. >> madam justice, thank you so much for spending time with us today. i'm particularly interested in your view of how the in-house counsel role has evolved over the last ten or twenty years, and where would you like to see it go? >> perhaps ted would be a better person to comment on that. i, w

he used to tell law students, take the real law courses. take intellectual property, take tax, you know, take the courses. learn how to be a real lawyer and learn real law. can take a seminar on law and philosophy but take the other real law courses because that's what you're going to need and he used to express regret not taking enough of those in law school. bill: he would often say that wrote his why he separate opinions was for the and for the future lawyers.ns of he was -- given the rest of his personality, he was surprisingly optimistic in the sense that he actually felt that reason would should prevail. make the cased and he would say, you know, i didn't persuade people this time maybe next time. and sometimes that happened. hishe also wanted to make separate opinions, especially opinions, more fun to read. because law students have short attention spans, i guess. and so part of that was his educational mindset was, i want can't persuade people today, i'm thinking about 10 years from now. justice kagan: and he succeeded that. i was a

this law, the laws that we have, the immigration laws we have, are here to be enforced. if it has to be -- if we have to lay out the standard that it's going to be 100% f we have to put the resources out there to do that, this congress, i believe, and the next congress will be prepared to do that. we need to restore the respect for the rule of law. americans are dying every single day because of our failure to do so and because of turning people loose on the streets that don't return back again, and i see face after face of grieving americans in the thousands over the time that if i've watched this tragedy. i'm glad you recognize the names and i appreciate the personal part of this. we need a fresh start on this immigration law in this country. thank you very much. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. king. director saldanha, before i recognize the gentlewoman from texas you know that fewer than 10% of the criminal immigrations released back into our communities are the zabbada cases. don't try to give the impression you don't have a choice, you a choice on over 90%. >> no, s

international law is a law that governs relations among nations.e a nation of the world, therefore we are governed by what our constitution calls the "law of nations," or international law. what we are not governed by is the law or constitutional decisions of some other court, say in israel or britain or south africa. foreign law is not an authoritative source, but it can be something of persuasive value. good minds thinking about hard problems common to humanity, we look at courts from all over the world. charlie rose: one thing i'm going to ask you about and then i am going to close this. you have been wonderful. televising the court. seeing justices write more books, speak out more about the conversation of america. where do you come down on that? televising the court. justice ginsburg: i am neutral on that question. as long as any one of my colleagues is apprehensive about it, i would not push. charlie rose: meaning it might affect the way they would conduct themselves? justice ginsburg: i think the most weighty objection is it gives the public

criminal justice is about respecting the law and being respected by the law. there is a fundamental respect issue here. i want to talk about the tone. donald trump has called mexicans rapists and criminals. he is called women dogs, pigs, disgusting. he said the judge was unqualified to. federal lawsuit because his parents were mexican. he went after tom mccain, a pow, and said he was not a hero because he had been captured. if you want to have a society where people are respected and respect laws, you cannot have someone at the top who demeans every groupie talks about. i cannot believe that governor pence would defend the insult driven campaign that donald trump has run. elaine: immigration. your running mates have both said that undocumented immigrants who have committed violent crimes should be deported. what would you tell the millions of undocumented immigrants who have not committed violent crimes. governor pence. gov. pence: donald trump has made a plan to end illegal immigration once and for all in this country. we have been talking it to death for 20

it's known as the far east one hectare law. the new law states that all russian citizens will be able to borrow one hectare of land in the far east free of charge. if they make effective use of the land, the law says it is theirs to keep after five yeas.s russia's far east region covers 6.2 million square kilometers, accounting for one third of the nation's territory. the land is rich in natural resources, above and below ground. but human resources are scarce. the region's population has been in decline ever since the collapse of the soviet union. the number stands at around 6 million people today. and is projected to fall to just over 5 million by 2050. the land grant law is designed to stem the outflow of people, and contribute to new development in the region. local residents began applying on june 1st. >> i will apply, i intend to farm and grow berries. >> this is a good law. it's a great opportunity for people with initiative. >> i have a project i want to begin. the problem is, it will cost a lot of money to get started.

in law, so the idea people in this position of great power i delegating to law clerks fresh out of law school, fresh out of law school, sometimes it troubles me, what has been happening the last 35 years is circuit judges with a few exceptions have gone on to become supreme court justices which is to say, a circuit justice judge and politicians like that, a paper trail, usually doesn't have anything in it which defeats the whole purpose of having hearings to determine who that person is. the thing that allows us as readers to know what a person is or who a person is, what they write, in the dark almost completely when it comes to who they are, what they think and more important how they plan to do their jobs. it is not a scandal but something that should be looked at more critically. >> you think we should relax constraints on clerk confidentiality, great breach of norms and one's own role? >> the only thing i don't impose confidentiality, the only thing, there is a rule, a sensible rule, you are not supposed to discuss the case with someone outside the judiciary, once it is decided as

that is exactly what this new law does. i think it is a perfect law. we are going to see some possible gaps, but it is a vast improvement. we had no rules before, and i am pleased it got bipartisan support. more democrats voted for it than anything -- chuck todd: thank you. roy cooper: i am grateful to the men and women of law enforcement who served honorably and risk their lives every day to keep us safe. i'm also mindful that there are so many committees out there who feel targeted and they yearn to be heard, and they yearn for respect. what we need is a governor who is going to work to make sure we have that mutual respect. and part of mutual respect is transparency. we need to make sure that the community trusts what law enforcement is doing. said there were significant problems with this law, because i believe that the records in these videotapes should be open. clearly, there are sometimes when it should be kept confidential, but the presumption should be that it is public, because the more transparency you have, the more mutual respect you are g

so, the issue of whether or not, for example, law enforcement deaths, deaths of law ians at the handsforcement, are they on the rise? have tent with where they been before? is this simply revealing the same problem, seeing it more increase in this this? similarly, when a situation in death, those type of situations lead to mistrust also. a lot of issues that i talk in the th people community, people talk about, it comes down to issue of respect acknowledgment of individuals and so, nun lethal of force, finding ways to track that, how are people interacting? how is law enforcement interacting with the community? allows us to collect data, we're working on a logistics of getting that up and running. it this rted reporting year with the federal government. when it comes to nonlethal use can rce, the things that have just a corrosive effect, no statute requiring collection of data. we've spent a lot of time through the f.b.i. working enforcement and tribal law enforcement, i would ay, to come up with national consistent standards to gather this nonlethal use of force so look at all the ty

law of women have said that. but, still that is fantastic to go up to the supreme court denies states to say i represent united states of america on extremely important legal issues. >> of course, that was the job you had for your. >> i would have liked to have had that for longer. >> it's not like you can say callback and if you years laugh laugh. >> kea were confirmed in record time you had your hearing june 28 confirmed august 6. >> it was really good time. second felt like it took forever. yes, it was great that happened so quickly. >> there was a law to do anything pretty much every senator 757 officers at the same time you were trying to prepare for your confirmation hearings there was a law. >> >> it didn't mind the process. >> there is one pending right now also you're not in the same time frame. so now the court is left for / four with is the impact? >> there is a reason why courts to not usually have an even number of members they're adjusting is because if you had even number you have the possibility o

i announced today the grants we're doing to talk about gender bias in law enforcement. we also have a grant program that helps departments hire police officers. but we also provide training in very specific areas. the other things -- some of the other things we try and do is use the c.o.p.s. office, for example, to not only spread best practices but provide that training, that direct hands-on training. departments will come to us, and they will say, for example, you know, i don't know if my use of force policy is really reflective of where it should be. or they may say, we are looking around the country and we're concerned that departments my size with policies similar to mine are not weathering these events very well. can you give us some guidance? and we do that as well. so we have a number of ways to do that. of course, through our civil rights division we work on constitutional policing. there are times when we'll do an investigation or also do what's called collaborative reform. a lot of these are not seen visibly, but when we're involved with the department, we al

not state law. can you talk about some of the work that has gone in the past in terms of children's privacy or online privacy that might be a model or a lesson as we think about moving forward here. >> that is interesting. so we have actually supported the legislation at the state level over a dozen states but we also saw the need to support federal legislation as we've done here. i think if you look at children's online privacy, we have federal legislation, to deal with these type of issues, koppa is a way to deal with children under the age of 13 in particular, i do think it provides additional piece of arsenal for going after people who are committing the crimes which is extraordinarily important, especially in places where you are in victims in states without protection. >> and mark, the ftc has been involved in this as well. could you share with us about what the ftc has been involved. >> i'm mark ieichorn. i'm speaking for myself today or not for the commission or any commissioner. and probabl

-- pass a law to punish it. and that had to be enforced in ordinary civil court. the inability of the government turned to military court makes it much easier -- i should say it makes it much harder for the federal government to enforce federal laws against local intransigence, and makes it much easier to resist. as a self jury reconstruction or the civil rights movement demonstrates. price worth be a paying. thank you. [applause] >> excuse me, i think we are not to take questions? -- now to take questions? i will bring you the microphone. talk.derful historians aren't good at "what if's?" so i am tempted to ask, but what is lincoln had not been assassinated? changed my help the politics that might've ensued after the war? not only do we not like to do that, that is a tough wh at-if. lincoln was certainly not andrew johnson, and he certainly understood constitutional politics. nt to make arguments that would be persuasive to the public. he was going to be faced with this opinion. andrew johnson somehow conduct a

law school. he teaches and writes in the areas of business associations, corporate finance, law and economics, securities regulations, mergers and acquisitions, contracts and legislation. and perhaps he thinks the reason he's here with us today is an article he wrote just last year in the "arizona law review" that is called the liberal case for hobby lobby. and then finally we have garnette cadogan, visiting fellow at the university of virginia. he's editor at large for "nonstop metropolis" a new york city atlas. his current research explores the promise and perils of urban life, vitality and unequinequalf cities and challenges of pluralism. his article, "walking while black" has been widely read and discussed. so, welcome to you all. i wanted to start with a little bit of diagnostics so that we're all on the same page. can we diagnose the problem a little more clearly? when we talk about problems with pluralism and religious liberty, can each of you describe perhaps a particular contemporary iss

that is exactly what this new law does. i think it is a perfect law. we are going to see some possible gaps, but it is a vast improvement. we had no rules before, and i am pleased it got bipartisan support. more democrats voted for it than anything -- chuck todd: thank you. roy cooper: i am grateful to the men and women of law enforcement who served honorably and risk their lives every day to keep us safe. i'm also mindful that there are so many committees out there who feel targeted and they yearn to be heard, and they yearn for respect. what we need is a governor who is going to work to make sure we have that mutual respect. and part of mutual respect is transparency. we need to make sure that the community trusts what law enforcement is doing. said there were significant problems with this law, because i believe that the records in these videotapes should be open. clearly, there are sometimes when it should be kept confidential, but the presumption should be that it is public, because the more transparency you have, the more mutual respect you are g

he certainly looked to or law. -- to foreign law.hat i am trying to show here is that there are many cases in many different fields. you can't avoid it. if you are going to decide that case correctly, i am going to give you case after case. you have to look beyond our shores. charlie: i want to come back to justice scalia and your opinion. is the best opinion you ever wrote a dissenting opinion or a majority opinion or a concurring opinion? justice breyer: i don't think that's up to me to say. i would say i am not necessarily -- i don't know. i have written some majorities that i was very pleased with. one of them was in a case involving a student from thailand who goes to cornell, and he discovers the same textbooks in bangkok half the price. says to his parents, send me a few. they sent more than a few. he began to sell them. the publishers got into it. -- got annoyed. can he do it or not? lawsuit in our court. they answer lies in a few obscure words in the statute that no one can really understand. we received briefs from all over

the law. and the way they did it was, you know, there were a set of d.c. circuit opinions about this exemption written by really superb judges at a time -- since the time when bill and i both went to law school in the 1980's. and they didn't really mention the text of the exemption until like page 18 of the opinion. and they just talked about allp. and they talked about all things they found in the legislative let -- redcord and how it made sense for the exemption to exist. , ashether the exemption was interpreted by the d.c. circuit in a way that was going on for decades, by the time it got to the court. and i remember going to conference one morning and i in.t nina on the way he was down the hall. and he would come out of his office door and looked down the hall to see if anybody was just me.d it was and he would wait for you to come. and i always felt like a teenage girl, like somebody was waiting for me to walk to school together. and anyway, so he waited for me to come down the hall and w

officers phone -- for enforcing the law. are being professional. i get very few complaints against my officers for lack of professionalism and i receive very well in that, i absolutely relish it because i think there is proof in training and support and the mechanism that we have in place to make sure we have good officers doing the right things, so from a law enforcement perspective, to have people scrutinious is expected. to have people downright belig advertise counter productive too. i think most citizens recognize the fact that we do a pregz job here. we -- pretty good-looking day job here. we enforce every day the aspect of being guardians. not warriors, not combatants, but guardians and guarding those public safety freedoms and i think it's illustrative of the problem we have in officers from dallas, texas, getting shot while supporting people work to do the job that i've been tasked to do. my deputies come to work the same way. they're focused on not being oppressive, not beating somebody up tonight, not -- we're out

clerks freshwater law school -- fresh out of law school, but what happens 30 or 35 years with a circuit court judges with a few exceptions the line to become supreme court justices and the reason of politicians like that paper trail that has nothing in it which defeats the of all purpose to determine who that person is. to know who a person is. and to be kept from us when it comes to food they are or what they think or how they plan to do their jobs. mission billet data little more critical. >> should be relaxed the strength of clark confidentiality is seems like even the role of an opinion? >> i tell my clerks i don't impose confidentiality but there is a sensible rule which is you're not supposed to discuss a case outside their judiciary before it is decided. once it is decided, as far as i'm concerned they can say whatever they want. but just as they don't repeat my critical comments to my colleagues. [laughter] but i don't impose. the courts are very badly managed and of all the other judges to subscribe to the slogan i hate these old terms so we have office suites. and it goes back

the federal law sets a standard and states can make more strict parity laws which california does. states are responsible in law part for making the rules for their own medicaid law. >> i'll pick up and repeat a little bit about what i was just speaking of. there's a patchwork of enforcement agencies that enforce the parity law. the federal government enforces the law for self-insured plans directly. each state has division of insurance and an office of medicaid that enforces the laws for those respective plans. so, there are -- there are several different agencies that have responsibility for making sure the parity laws are implemented and enforced. >> okay, well, because much of the enforcement tends to be at the state level especially for medicaid, about best practices to ensure consistency for consumers. samsa put out a practice from seven states. california worked closely with california exchange covering california to design benefits under the parity law. ms. greenberg, is the samsa report helpful to your companies? >> yes, the samsa document released recently is very helpful

c-span3, attorney general loretta lynch talks to howard university students about diversity in the law. then remarks by british prime minister theresa may. that's followed by a hearing on immigration enforcement in new orleans. later, treasure secretary jack lew on economics and low-income neighborhoods. >> next, attorney general loretta lynch speaks to howard university students about community partnerships and policing. her remarks are 25 minutes. >> good day, and welcome. as many of you may recall, the last time the attorney general visited, there were a few more secret service officers on our campus because she was here on the same day we celebrated our 140th commencement convocation and her boss, our oriter, the 44th president of the united states, the honorable barack obama, was here as well. i had the distinct pleasure of being able to sit in on her commencement address. and while we paid, obviously, a lot of attention to our main ceremony, that law school commencement address that the attorney general gave was one that we will all remember on this campus. her presence here toda

law enforcement needs training. law enforcement needs support. and resources. law enforcement needs to look like the communities that they protect and serve. and as governor, i'm going to be a strong law enforcement governor, but we also need to make sure that our communities are respected and that they work with law enforcement with community policing i to make sure our communities are safe. >> thank you. all of these will be 30 second follows for all of you. mr. cooper, i'll start with you. in the first presidential debate hillary clinton said i think implicit bias is a problem for everyone, including police. do you agree with her? >> well, i think that police definitely needs more training. i think all of us have biases that sometimes conflict with our jobs. we need training. that it needs, and we also need to emphasize community policing. i think when law enforcement officers work with communities, get to know communities, i think you have safer law enforcement and better law enforcement all the way around. >> okay. do you accept the idea that there's impli

refugee law to u.s. refugee status as a humanitarian law, the u.s. refugee act in 1980 and national foreign policy. this is miguel. his name i have changed. he is a dear end of my. he is, i would argue, the best citizen in north carolina. i have never met a better citizen. fled el salvador in 1983. he was forced to fight at the age of 12 for the marxist guerrillas. his parents were killed. he came into the united states at the age of 14, made his way to north carolina. he worked all kinds of jobs. he describes his first weeks in america as the most beautiful days of his life because he could sleep without bombs waking him at night. of a horrificee civil war. by any definition he should be a refugee. he applied, finally, when he came to north carolina for -- under asylum law for refugee status. his case was pending for 17 years. what happened? after 17 years, the ruling finally came down. the civil war is over. you no longer have an asylum claim. you are going to be deported. been ourantime, he had legal resident and asylum seeker . miguel, however, a

and yet that court shut down one federal law after another, one state law after another, on the ground that they discriminateed arbitrarily on the basis of gender. >> rose: so what does that say about the way the court works? you know, and time. >> well, there's a great-- there was a great constitutional law professor who said the courts should never be influenced by the weather of the day. but inevitably it will be influenced by the climate of the era. and that's what the court of the '70s was influenced by. >> rose: and is that what the court of the 21st century has been with respect to marriage, equality, and same-sex marriage, influenced by what was happening in the larger community? the climate. >> i am wondering whether i should answer it or-- . >> why are you wondering. >> she gets more cover than i do >> rose: that is an interesting expression in itself. she gets more cover than i do. meaning-- she's given more what? >> latitude? >> well, i think so. and rightfully so. she's earned it. no, no, no. she has fully earned it. >> it's only because i'm old enough to be her mother. (l

either law enforcement - - you know, you would think that by now every law enforcement official in the country would think the last thing is firing their gun. they're well-trained. they're armed, and i keep asking myself did you see what happened six months ago? what is it we're not here? i'm just baffled by it. >> this is a systemic problem. it's not just looking at - - . >> they can't help themselves? >> i think it involves something that we've written about is our inherent biases that all of us have. i think that's the point for police officers a man of force that they use should be commensurate with the perceived threat, and i think we have to get at why in certain - - in particularly a black man, the perceived threat is greater than in other situations. i mean, the situation in tulsa, we could hear the police officer in the chopper - - . >> her husband - - . >> say that look like a bad dude. >> her husband. >> say what he could see. >> a man with his hands in the air walking slowly he was deem ad bad dude f. i think that gets to the heart of what we're talking about. >> where does

when i did go to law school for not such great reasons but i was very lucky because when i got to law school, i realized right away that i loved it. it was the place for me. i think the reason had to do with the combination of two things. on the one hand i found it really intellectually exciting. there's a lot of law that is like a big puzzle. that you have to work out and in some of the most puzzle type classes were among my favorite classes. i loved tax and things like that. judge williams: those of you who love tax, there is hope for you. [laughter] justice kagan: things were you had to know stuff and put it together and figure stuff out. but at the same time, what was true was it was immediately clear that you can use this to make a real difference in people's lives. i think that is what was, for me, separated it from being a academic historian or something like that which was, this was not only intellectually thrilling but you could take that and make a difference and do something that would help people and that mattered in the world. there was that combination of the two things

if you want an example of unenforceable law is the current law telling adults you cannot -- it is true that when you make something legal, people will be able to buy and sell it. people buy and sell it now. marijuana is a commercial product today in massachusetts. statute. if the senator seriously said, ok, let's make marijuana not a crime, but allow people to get it regally and change the rule, it can be changed. the people who don't want the for legalization will find specific objections. as i am aware, there is no effort in washington or colorado to undo it. senator lewis appears to be much more worried about colorado. sen. lewis: that is not true. encrypt low county -- mr. frank: that is one county. sen. lewis: there are more pot shots in colorado then starbucks is that they are the state we can learn from. the are the model right now. we should learn from their mistakes. mr. frank: senator, please, again, this is an example of the weakness of the argument. you mentioned one county were people are trying to appeal it -- are trying to repeal it. you're talkibo for smoking, but for b

the law reflected this pattern.the breadwinners and represented the family outside of the home. women took care of the home and children. the common-law rule and civil rule were identical in this respect. the man was the head of the household and could choose any mode of living and she was obliged to conform. in civil law, the states in the united states that have their inheritance based on french law, based in spanish and french law, it was called the head and master rule. ♪ mark: i'm mark crumpton, you are watching "bloomberg technology." in an attempt to appeal to millennial voters, hillary clinton campaign with former vice president, al gore, saying clinton would make climate change a top priority. mr. gore: the choice in this election is extremely clear. hillary clinton will make solving the climate crisis a top national priority. mark: he warns that donald trump would "take us toward a climate catastrophe." mr. pence: when he takes residence in the white house, he

we pass laws, anti-discrimination laws.we encourage policies and practices from corporations to open up, to be more inclusive of women and racial minority. many families have been impacted by this. progress doesn't mean post-racial. i recognize the progress but it doesn't mean post-racial. when you look at what is going on today, the going on today, the inequities that exist today they are widespread, 18 - 1 in terms of wealth accumulation between black and white families today, 18 - 1 and that is worse than what existed in south africa. i know you want to interrupt me. >> thank you. thank you. will come back to you because will have audience questions and will now let's go to you at a. talk to me about the long arc of issues of justice when it comes to the department of justice. they have been issuing pattern and practice statements and studies, talks to me about what we're seeing and how it relates historically and to today as it relates to policing. >> let me first thank politics and prose and thank you april for this im

they follow the law.ollowed the law and, again, the only person in this race that's had any hand in creating or passing any legislation is hillary clinton. if there's any person that we could blame in this process, she's the only one. it certainly isn't donald trump. he's followed laws that hillary clinton frankly has helped create and pass. >> first of all, you do sound like mr. trump when he sort of -- when hillary said in the debate, let's just blame me for everything. he said, okay. i mean, come on. let's be reasonable. >> she's been in government for 30 years and has nothing to show for it. >> she was secretary of state. i mean, she wasn't passing laws for the last -- but separate point from that. let's go back. first of all, there are questions as to the legality of what donald trump has done. his private foundation, which you start a private foundation in order to make charitable donations with your own money and, therefore, get a tax donation. well, he was raising money, according to the attorney

i think when law enforcement you have safer law enforcement and better law enforcement all the way around. >> okay. do you accept the idea that there's implicit bias? >> i think there's bias in all of us. it's not always racial bias. it may be bias of how we dress, how we look, the environment we might be in. and those are also tools for our police officers to determine what action to take. and what we have to do -- i agree with the attorney general. we need more training for our police officers. there's never enough years, i helped institute community policing. community policing is vital, that our police officers get out of their cars, walk the nabs neighborhoods. but to attack the police officers the way ms. clinton did and our president has done in his first year in office was totally inappropriate. >> let me ask you both the same term black lives matter mean to you? i'll start with you, mr. cooper. 30 seconds. >> well, i think it's a statement that is true. i think what we need to do is to make sure we continue this effort to understand that many communities of color feel targeted. t

when law enforcement officers work with communities, get to know communities, safer law enforcement andr law enforcement all the way around. >> you accept there is bias? >> there is bias in all of us. it is not necessarily racial bias, might be bias how we drink, look, the environment we might be in and those are tools for our police officers for what action to take and what we have to do, we need more training, there is never enough training. as mayor of charlotte i helped with the chairman of public safety. community policing is vital that police officers walk the neighborhood's and become problem solvers and i am a firm believer in that but police officers, the way mrs. clinton did and our president has done in his first year in office is inappropriate. >> let me ask you both the same question, the term black lives matter. 30 seconds. >> the statement is true. we need to make sure we continue this effort to understand that many communities of color feel targeted, they feel discriminated against. they want to be heard and respected. there are many in law enforcement who would agree th

the hands of law enforcement. are they on the rise? are they consistent with where they have been before? does this simply reviewing the same problem, you get more clearly, or is there really an increase? the validity, when a situation does not result in death, those types of situations lead to mistrust also. a lot of the issues that i talk to anple about come down issue of respect, acknowledgment of and vigils. nonlethal use of force also, finding ways to track that, to ask how people are interacting, how law enforcement is interacting with the community. there is a statute that requires us to collect data on deaths in custody and where working on the format and the logistics of getting that up and running. we have started reporting it here with the federal government. but when it comes to nonlethal use of force, the things that can have just as corrosive and effect, there is no statute requiring the collection of that data. we spent a lot of time working visibly with law enforcement and tribal law enforcement, i

it goes over the laws, federal laws, state laws. a wide variety of things that you need to know and a background in it. what we find is that a lot of election administrators in some cases they run for office. but in others, they're appointed and or are hired on as a job. and maybe don't have any experience whatsoever. i speak from personal experience of having no experience in it. and it's quite a learning curve. so, having an established way for someone to educate themselves on the job, what's necessary, because i will tell you most people do not wake up when they're 5 or 6 and be i want to be an election administrator. that's too bad because it's an exciting profession and once elections get in your blood, you don't turn back. it's a career path that runs the gamut of every possible thing to imagine, good and bad, there's never a dull day. no two days are the same. and it's an exciting and very, very fulfilling and rewarding position. so that's for the election official. but we also recommended to make sure that there are procedur

, too. >> i have tried to clarify that international law is not foreign law. what does it mean? international law is a law that governs relations among nations. we are a nation of the world. therefore, we are governed by what our constitution calls the law of nations which is international law. what we are not governed by is the law or the constitutional decision of some other court -- say in israel or in britain or south africa. so foreign law is not an authoritative source for us, but it can be something of persuasive value. there are good minds thinking about hard problems coming to huanity. there are good minds on courts all across the world. >> rose: you have been wonderful. one thing, televising the court, seeing justices write more books, speak out more about the conversation of america? where do you come down on that? televising the court? >> i am neutral on that question. >> rose: okay. i will say as long as any one of my colleagues is apprehensive about it, i would not push. >> rose: meaning it might effect the way they conduct themselves? >> yes. i

there's no rape shield law. i've sat in the room before when faculty has asked students were you a virgin, how many times have you had sex before, what did you wear that night, are you on birth control. all of these wildly inappropriate and nonrelevant questions that you're asking a teenager to explain. half of what i do for students when i prepare them is remind them they are the right to say i respectfully choose not to answer that question. a lot of them don't realize that going in. so i think preparing them for that. you know really preparing them to have to educate the panel if necessary, if the panel is not already educated. obviously representing survivors in hearings. if you have an attorney that's representing you we that can do so in all of the overlapping systems, not just the campus system but if it actually goes to criminal court, which very few of my cases do but when they do we have the ability to go in and fight for privacy, fight to prevent the counseling records from being subpoenaed to keep th

that is the law school aptitude test.you were at cornell 54.m 1950-19 there was another student there. justice ginsberg: my dear husband. we decided that whatever we do, we do it together. he started out as a chemistry major, but his true major was golf. was for business school or law school. 1950's, for some reason he determined that harvard was the place for us, but harvard at that time did not admit women. so the law school. i was very pleased because that was my number one choice. charlie: so you set out for harvard law school. justice ginsberg: not immediately. we were married, and we had a gap. .- cap period were on a base. justice ginsberg: he became -- .harlie: he became a great chefg he cooked until he died. was he cooking then? was he a great chef then? justice ginsberg: he was learning then. i had a cousin who sent him a translation english , and he treated it like a chemistry text. he started with page one, the basic stocks and moved on to sauces. in the course of two years, he became an excellent cook. i stil