every day, litigaters in san francisco are running over to the public library because sometimes has come up that they suddenly need a resource for, a case for, a form for, and it is absolutely essential for the practice of law. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker please? >> good morning. my name is ad win enseln and i am a attorney and practice with a small boutique tax firm. the library serves a valuable purpose and i don't think that anybody disputes that. for our purpose as a small firm in the city we depend on the library for access to legal volumes. many of these are not available on-line and if the library does not have adequate space to house the collection we lose access to those volumes not only us but the members of the public as well. this will negatively impact our ability to practice law in san francisco, and people in san francisco ability to access the law, space is critical. in addition, to using the law library to access specific volumes, i and other members of my firm often visit to research topics by also studying other volumes in the same subject matter

whether or not people's moral objection to another person -- the person, their existence, should be litigatableeither in court or in congress. putting that aside, is it possible that the supreme court could succeed in pushing this back, either to congress or even to president obama. >> in what sense? >> in the sense that it's president obama should be the one to have to decide not to enforce doma? it's he that should make that decision? >> sure, anything is possible. i don't think the court ultimately -- and this is the thing i would urge us to pull back, we're all focused on what's happening with the court but ultimately i don't think this is the future of same-sex marriage. >> you've written that its inevitable that the court's ruling doesn't matter. >> the trend line only goes in one direction. it's most striking when you look at the people in the 20 to 30 year range, as they become the voters, these only headed in one direction. i'm just surprised at the amount of discomfort that the court seems to feel, because given how much progress has been made, given this is what, 17 years after doma?

because our government proclaiming to care so much has -- overzell you regulators and greedy litigaterscaring. it is time we care. [applause] we don't need a big government to develop these cures. what we need is big innovation, big growth, big ideas, that's america. we have smartphones today. reach in your pocket you have it right there. that can double as your personal medical bud. you can have an app on our phone and have your fission and d -- physician and your pharmacist as close as your phone. can anyone tell me why it is that the people who call themselves progressives are the last people who want to have progress? they are the people who fear progress. [applause] you see, we are the movement that embraces change. we are the people who care about people. because we care about people, we love people. this debate has to be more about just cutting budgets versus raising taxes. when we adopt a strategy of caring about people, then we'll legalize american energy production. then we'll get gas at $2 a gallon. we will make sure your sister has the second amendment rights to keep herself

at the legal defense fund we're civil rights litigaters. we were founded by thurgood marshall in 1940. since 1963, we have worked side by side in the courts in the streets with the lawyers committee for civil rights. you know, you can alltel why you why youbara -- all tell want barbara on your side. if it is trying to get an african american woman considered to be the next supreme court justice -- [applause] ally. an we appreciate having her leadership. i want to talk about the future of the judiciary. teed up m's comments this brief discussion. we saw with the voting rights case that the supreme court heard a couple weeks ago. you know civil rights law are only as strong as the judges who enforce them. at the legal defense fund because of our litigation experience we get very much that who is on the court is very important. for years, for decades we have been involved in trying to monitor judicial appointment, making sure that judicial appointments are diverse and they are nominees that respect the progress we've made in civil rights. one