if congress can do that then we would have lost the judicial branches there for marbury v. madison created. let me mention, i'd want to skip over that you mentioned possible of budget-cutting. just yesterday the kansas legislature passed a law that said if the kansas supreme court decides any particular way the funny for the kansas issue with the stupid if you think is a violation of separation of powers it has to be that. >> i want to jumping. if you have a simpleminded i'm not going to simpleminded, i hate when people do that that we think about these matters were looking in the past. again the idea with these devices is once the threat is realistic you seldom need them. because the court is acutely conscious of how far it can do. go. what happens, jurisdiction stripping proposal were introduced in the 19 -- almost never passed the that was not because of judicial subsidy. it's because the core ethical by the responsibility responsibly actually is an 800-pound gorilla in politics. they play the judicial role in the judicial way but there is a difference between, i did a t

they don't envision, if they had envisioned marbury versus madison which by the way doesn't really make a difference. the big decision that does this is dred scott in 1957 that they would conceive of a supreme court that is the ultimate arbiter of the constitution is the ultimate source of tyranny and fear. madison later in his career in 18282 to 32 during the notification crisis suggest that he thinks that's the proper place to ultimately resolve issues peacefully. in 1787, 88 the notion that the supreme court would serve that crucial function is inadmissible with the political culture that exists. >> thank you. >> hello professor alice. it's good to have you here. i read somewhere a long time ago that the french pays the salaries of the americans. any truth to that? >> robert morris paid the salaries that the french the french troops won the battle of york. the french had engineers. we don't have any engineers and they won the battle and washington was a commander. now what we have on the war without the french? >> i that it would have taken a lot longer. by the way the french bankrup

didn't this court decide marbury versus madison? >> absolutely. >> this court has never decided this issue. it is just that lower courts have decided it in a uniform fashion. have we ever before reversed uniform holdings of courts of appeals? even those that have lasted 30 years? the answer is yes. >> you have rejected the overwhelming consensus of the courts of appeals. that is why i asked the question. >> why? i'm not saying you couldn't do it. i'm simply saying, why? i don't want to repeat my question for the fourth time. you began to answer. the answer he began to give was based on the constitutional problem that has arisen. i have taken that in. you have other answers? >> the plaintext of the statute is clear. constitutional avoidance compels that interpretation. the purposes of the fair housing act would be undermined by extending disparate impact liability to this degree. >> you are now talking about application. let's go back. you made a statement earlier that this is going to inhibit development of blighted areas. that has

if we do that, then we have lost the supreme court that marbury v. madison created. you talked about the possibility of budget cutting, and if the kansas supreme court decides in a particular way that the if anything is a violation of the separation of powers, it has to be that. >> i am not calling you simpleminded, i hate it when people do that, but this is a way of thinking about these matters. again, the idea with these devices is once it israel's stick, you sell them, because the court is acutely aware -- and once it happens you have them, because the court is acutely aware of it. it is actually an 800 pound gorilla in politics. they play a judicial role in a judicial way, but there is a difference between -- i had a talk with justice buyer. it was clear that he took pride, with pride in it, and that struck me that, yes, we want your independent judgment,, so the way democratic politics actually works is these things become the point of engagement where these issues are fleshed out. when i think about the manifesto, you did not end wrong. it provided the ground w

look at this pocket down through southern maryland right now, brandywine, marbury, la plata it's all going to be heading north-northwest just into areas like alexandria, arlington and passing right over 66. your evening forecast, take a look at it. wre expecting to hang onto the umbrellas for a while longer. we'll drop to 63 by 9:00 showers in the offing, even some scattered fog just a couple of minutes i'll be back with your road impacts for tomorrow morning and an hourly forecast for the first part of your weekend. >>> well, police shot and killed a terror suspect in boston, and his family is still skeptical about his death. they've hired lawyers and plan to watch video of the shooting. nbc's chris clackum reports on what investigators are now uncovering about the suspects. >> reporter: boston police first showed security camera video of tuesday's shooting death of 26-year-old usaamah rahim to a group of community leaders, to dispute the claim by rahim's brother that he was shot three times in the back. after wednesday's viewing, those leaders agreed rahim was shot in the front aft

which does not say we shouldn't criticize the court, i do think that's the way -- when march -- marbury was decided, it wasn't a given the court's ruling would be followed t goes into one of my reasons for saying the court as an institution is another failure. mr. lund: it doesn't mean enforcement power because it has the lower courts to enforce these things. >> all the departmental debates. always has been a general assumption we'll enforce the judgment in a particular case. lincoln ignores dred scott. in every other context. i would enforce the judgment in the particular case, i don't have to follow it as a rule. it will force the debate back into politics and you get in every other context. i would enforce the judgment in the particular the public deliberation that the constitution is designed to create. >> going to leave this forum on the supreme court at this point. can you see the last few minutes on our website. go to c-span.org. live now as the u.s. house about to gavel in. members will be returning for brief speeches this afternoon. legislative work will start at 4:00 eastern t

which is not to say we should criticize the court but i do think that is sort of the way when marbury was decided, it wasn't a given that the court ruling would be followed. and we have it today. i think it's it goes into one of my reasons for saying the court as an institution is not a failure. >> i think it doesn't need any more enforcement power because of his the lower courts to enforce these things. >> and essentially all of the department of defense have taken place, always have been a general assumption of we will enforce the judgment any particular case. so lincoln ignored dred scott in every the context but enforce the judgment in a particular case. i just had to follow the rule. it will force the debate back into politics and you get the kind of public deliberation the constitution is designed to create so that we make a decision. >> here's a question that is really inside the court but maybe were strung out. should the circle be reform? it's a different justices pool their clerks to do the initial vetting of 8000 or so therefore petitions the coming every year and to make r

one chooses marbury woods to set up an image that will not topple.ys the holy one? lift up your eyes on high and see. who created thee? he, who brings out the host an numbers them, calling them all by names, because he is great in strength mighty in power? not one is missing. why do you say, oh jacob and speak, oh israel? my way is hidden and my right is disregarded by my god. have you not known? have you not heard? the lord is the everlasting god the creator of the ends of the earth. his powers give to the faint and strength then the powerless. even youth will be weary and the young will fall exhausteded but those who wait for the lord shall renew their strength. they shall mount up with wings like eagles. they run and not be weary. they shall walk and not faint. the wore of god. >> the reading of the epistle lifted up from paul's first letter to the church in core inth the 15th chapter. begin reading in verse 50. now, this i say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of god. behold, a mystery. we shall not all sleep but we shall

if congress can do that, we really have lost what the judicial branch is therefore and what marbury versuson created. i do not want to skip over jurisdiction. the kansas legislature passed a law saying if the supreme court decides a certain way, the funding will be stripped. if anything is a violation of the separation of powers, it has to be that. >> if you have a really simpleminded -- i am not calling you simpleminded -- but a simplistic idea of how democracy works. this is how looking in the past is helpful. idea with these devices. you seldom need them because the court is acutely conscious of how far it can go. what happens when jurisdiction stripping proposals were routinely introduced, they never passed. that was not because of judicial supremacy. that was because the court, if they go about their responsibilities responsibly, it is an 800 pound gorilla in politics. they play the ball in the judicial way but there is a difference between -- i did a talk and it was clear that the justice was proud when he said, i am doing what everyone else in the country thinks is bad and wrong. it

as a gift one chooses marbury woods.pple. have you not known? have you not heard? has it not been told you from the beginning? have you not understood from the foundation of the earth? it is he who sits above the circle of -- and its inhabit tants are like grasshoppers who stretches out to heavens like a curtain and spread down like a tent to live in, who brings princes to knots and make the rurals of the earth -- rulers of the earth as nothing. he has taken the flat the earth when he blows upon them and they wither and they carry them off like stubbles. so whom then will you compare me? who is my equal? says the holy one. lift up your eyes. who created thee? who -- he who brings out a host and numbers them calling them all by names, because he is great in strength, mighty in power, not one is missing. why do you say, oh jacob, and speak of israel, my -- is hiden from the lord and my right is disregarded by my guard. have you not known? have you not heard? the lord is the ever-lasting god. the creator of the ends of the

our role is confined -- more confined, then quotes from marbury vs. madison, quote, to say what the law is, unquote. the court today goes on to say that is easier in some kashiwadas than in others, but in every case we must respect the role of the legislature and take care not to undo what it has done. a fair reading of legislation demands a fair understanding of the legislative plan. congress passed the affordable care act to emprove health insurance markets not to destroy them. if at all possible we must interpret the act in a way that is consess tent with the former and avoids the latter. section 36-b can fairly be read consistent with what we see as congress' plan, and that is the reading we adopt. the judgment of the united states court of appeals, fourth circuit, is affirmed. that majority opinion is an indictment of the majority. the constitution is worthless absolutely worthless when we have a majority of the supreme court that makes up law or in this case says, you know what, we know what congress passed, we have read it. we get it. it makes