only opop they wantarar hard right, they said d th don't want titivi judges, butut what they seem to meepout thisreverse scrimination case? you've got o oof thewitnesseses he's a firirefhtht, white fifireghghte at the heart of this. homuch back and forth doou ticipate will be there tomorrow? homuch will she be alalleed ononhahat cision in tatat case s this. . >> well, se'e' be challenged because theyon't havee much else to bring againinst her, b onhihis case, i actually lslsrs thee case t thashshe' rurule of law. t theecond ircuit, at the time s she ruled, t tis is befo th change, teyey we twowo case. which said the judges haddo dededede othe side o the city ofew haven. that had ben established law r 38 years that when aity decided theyeyananteto do a ww tetestoo it might be more racicial ballceced,hat they re allowed tdodo that.t. w,w,he supreme court cngnged the e law. thlala is dfefere tay. my gueue i is etty certainly that i i judge sototoyoyor t th case tododayhe'davave to dide the other way because she decides the case onhe law, not ththe sympathy. >> it wawas a fantasticearning exp