. >> as petitioners, if it is just a center that counsels people on abortion in a general sense, no -- >> no, it doesn't. it's a center that helps women plan their families. that's what it is. now, it's not -- they don't have doctors who are performing abortions there. i'm just saying it's a family planning center. okay? it's an information center. my point is the same. there are millions of people in this country whoever views on this subject that are absolutely opposed one to the other. so that, to me, suggests the law should keep it as simple as possible. and that's why sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. i mean if, if the law is permissible which says, doctor, you must tell the woman about adoption, then why shouldn't the law say family planning center, you must tell the woman about abortion? sounds evenhanded, sounds as if everybody in the same business is under the same rules. you, the government and nifla, are trying to make a distinction there. and i need to know if you're right. the only distinction i hear so far is one has a doctor about to perform, and the other has

page 91 of the petitioner's appendix, their complaint describes medical care they provide to pregnant women. and so women go there -- >> so what additional, what, ultrasounds or discussion of family planning, what more would it take to require the adoption center to be covered? any one of the ones that you have listed for licensed centers? >> in other words, what would make it subjected to the same kind of requirements as a licensed center? >> yeah. at what point, you know, you say -- let's say that ultrasounds are out of it. disclosure still required for that facility? >> i don't think the ultrasounds, per se, make the difference. what would make the difference as a constitutional matter is, is it licensed as a medical facility, and does it provide medical care or to people -- >> pregnancy testing? if the adoption center also provided pregnancy testing, could you cover them? >> if it provided it as a licensed medical service through licensed medical providers, then the state would have to justify the sufficiently important state interest with the -- >> what's your, what's your answer

the petitioner argued some consumers associate chloride with chlorine bleach. the petitioner urged the fda consider how renaming might replacing sodium chloride with potassium chloride, which could provide health benefits. we need to finish our work on labeling. we recently issued a guidance document that provides flexibility on how labeling requirements can be implanted. it shows restaurants and establishments how to provide calorie information on menus in ways that meet various business models. it will soon be finalized. beginning on may 7, 2018, consumers who walk into these establishments across the country and know at a glance how many calories are in the food they order for themselves and their children. we are taking final steps on a new nutrition facts label. the first overhaul of that in 20 years. consumers are starting to have access to an updated label based on science that provides more information to empower them to choose healthful diets. we have proposed extending the compliance date to january 1, 2020. a uniqueon food is challenge because we are

the petitioner urged fda to consider donating might encourage industry to replace some of the potassium, some sodium chloride with potassium chloride which could provide public health benefits. in addition to the labeling work on modernizing claims and agree to live and we need to finish our work on manual labeling kit we issued a draft guidance document that provides flexibility on how requirements can be insulated ticket shows restaurants and cover establishments, how to five-calorie information on menus in ways that meets various business models. and will soon be finalized in that guidance. and beginning on may 72018 consumers can walk into these cover establishments, across the country and know at a glance how many calories in the foods that board for themselves and for their children. we are taking final steps on the new nutrition facts label, the first of all of the label in 20 years. consumers starting to access and update event that based on current science and provide, provides more information to empower them to choose healthful diets. we issued final regulations in may 2016 a

. >> we don't know what adds these petitioners or nifla members run. the court did not abuse its discretion with respect to. >> what about there were legislative findings about false and misleading representations, has california ever brought charges against think of these places for false and misleading advertising? >> i'm not aware the state has picked up with the city and county of san francisco has. in any case that doesn't address, such a procedure would not be superior. first, that kind of policing that kind of issue would not necessarily be more speech protective since it might involve undercover patients, record subpoenas, site visits and the rest. >> but it would have the virtue of applying evenly to all persons and all industries in a law that is very familiar. anti-fraud provisions in commercial speech are well known and don't post any of the problems we've been discussing today. why wouldn't that be a superior mechanism for addressing these concerns? >> so to the narrower concerns, which are not the only ones here, it could be significantly

a first amendment case which is what i work for, the liberty justice center is representing the petitionerether with the attorneys with the national right to work foundation. our client is mark janus. he is a man who works as a child support specialist for the state of illinois. when he started doing his job about ten years ago, he noticed that fees were coming out of every paycheck and going to a union asme council 31 even though he wasn't a union member and he didn't want anything to do with this particular union. and the reason illinois could take that money out of his check was because it has a law in the books that says that the state can enter into collective bargaining agreements with unions where they will take money from every worker regardless of whether the worker is a member of a union. in fact, there are 22 states across the country that have laws like this on the books, and as a result of those laws, there are at least 5 million government workers across the country who have to give money out of every paycheck to a union whether they want to or not. so our case challenges the

but we are told by the petitioner that you cannot wear a pin saying, me too. you can't wear a pin saying aclu defends free speech. >> your honor, the line that we have drawn his campaign material plus political material, with the definition of political material being a reasonable person would understand that the message being delivered is one regarding electoral choices in the polling place. >> where does that limitation come in? electoral choices in the polling place? >> it comes from the definition of political, which -- and the definition of political purpose, which uses the word political to mean influencing voting in an election. >> the problem is that so many things have political connotations, and the connotations are in the eye of the beholder. on election day you are going to have hundreds, maybe thousands of officials in minnesota, and everyone of them probably thinks he or she is the reasonable observer, and they are making a determination about whether something has political connotations. in one of your elections in 2016, i think the president wa

the petitioner urged fda to consider how naming might encourage industry replace some sodium chloridewith potassium chloride which could provide public health benefits. in addition to the new labeling work on claims and greet labeling we need to finish our work on manually. we issued a draft guidance document that provides flexibility on how requirements can be implement it. it shows restaurants and covered establishments how to provide calorie information on menus in ways that meets various business models and will soon be finalized that guidance. begin the may 7, 2018, consumers can walk into these covered establishments across the country and know at a glance how many calories in the foods they order for themselves and for their children. we are taking final steps on the new nutrition facts label, the first overall of that label in 20 years. consumers are starting to have access to an update a label that space on current science and provide more information to empower them to choose healthful diets. we issued final regulations in may 2016 and we propose extending for larger manufac

the petitioner the protest planned for later this week getting momentum online please not all studentsportive of the proposal. the school has refused to take the statue down. 10 years in jail and $130,000 fine for spreading fake news. considering a law that would punish those who post or spread false information. and outside malaysia if the post impact malaysian citizens was a vote could happen as soon as this week. the clown is running for congress but this is no laughing matter. former ringling brothers performer steve lowe throwing his hat in the ring for south carolina's fifth district. >> remember to vote for me. heather: the career clown sagan was bernie sanders's message for single-payer healthcare that expired him to run. he will challenge democrat archie pournelle and republican incumbent ralph norman. i believe all the jokes that you guys at home, a clown running for congress. that wraps up this hour. >> new threats and promises of retaliation from russia after donald trump kicks out 60 russian diplomats, the biggest expulsion in american history. >> is the military being tar

do look at issues like the sign language one, where we felt it would be really difficult for the petitionersreshold. and yet it was still a matter of great importance in the public interest. these debates are not binding on the government. the government doesn't have to do anything once these debates have been had. do you think that it perhaps gives people a bit of false hope because they think i've signed this petition, it's been debated, something has to change now. i think everything has to start somewhere, and for some people it starts on the campaign to raise awareness. but we have seen that some petitions do change the government's mind. maybe not on day one, but as we go through, for example the debate that was held on brain tumours a couple of years ago, has actually seen the government responding and putting some extra money in, £115 million into research. let's take a look at some of the other stories making the political news this week. here's ryan brown with this countdown. the uk's first purple plaque was unveiled at cardiff bay. the plaque commemorates notable women. this one o

garrettson criticized lincoln petitioner the the advertisementy. garrettson recognized what lincoln faced as president and according to garrett retson when lincoln changed his position he was also a step in advance. thank you. >> thank you. i know from my reading that all the incidents you talked about of lincoln not going along with ablish nichl are true but you also mentioned that lincoln said he was always opposed to slavery. so isn't it possible that owl of those incidents that you describe so well were simply being a politician? and he knew that if were an abolitionist he'd get nowhere but this was a way to finally lead to slavery in the united states. >> yeah he said i think in 1864 he's always been naturally opposed to slavery. but there are degrees in opposition to slavery. opposition to slavery expansion, opposition to the slave trade but not to slavery itself. and recognition of course of the constitution's clause protecting state rights over slavery. >> would you speak about the significance of lincoln's position as a young illinois lj l

we have petitioners, i'm not saying they are bad, they are really good, but there is an experience andpertise and the reality of the riskiness of this business, that has become more real than ever before. who are the right experts, who are the most likely to have success? the one the government does not like to work with because people like us, our work is risky. it is the same because this is risky business. let us get that clear, the prime minister and the home secretary need to understand that this is risky business and we have to ta ke this is risky business and we have to take risks when they are needed. what do you mean? risky that it may not work? no. risk means you must sit down with individuals prepared to go out and kill people. you know? prevent is a fantastic agenda, do not get me wrong, i think prevent is best thing since sliced bread. i have said that time and again, but when it works right, with people with knowledge on ground. the problem with our work at the moment is done two years ago, people move on and the career changes and you must re—establish another relationsh

the petitioners did it it and justices all glanced at each other and then respondents did it and we were stunned. we were all buzzing about it afterwards this the roving room. did your colleagues acknowledge that it was buff our book? well -- no. did you tell them? of course not. i didn't want to claim credit. it would have been immodest you and i know that's why the first thing i did in getting back here to chambers was call you. you and i know yes we know, congratulations. that's very typical of the kind of sheer exuberance that he would sometime it is share with the people close to him. now, the slip and fall that i'm going to share with you has to do with our wedding. justice scalia traveled the providence rhode island to marry caroline and me in 2010. and it was a wonderful wedding at one of those grand estates it is actually in newport where we were married but this happened in providence the morning of the wedding, and it was rather dramatic. it goes like this. a lot of dialogue. i wanted to bring the spirit of justice scalia -- what he was like as a man. it was slip and fall. the

. >> comes now the petitioner, clarence earl gideon, a citizen of that united states of america.t the time of the trial he asked the lower court for aid and counsel and the court counsel -- trial without the aid this a. the >> pencil butters were stamped 890 miscellaneous. the a hundred 90th case to go on the miscellaneous docket that had begun in october 1961. gideon's papers were placed in a large red folder and dispatched by a dumbwaiter to the file room. separate filen a card. this would be the docket. the history at a glance to everything that happened from that case and then on. on june 4, 19 62, the supreme court sent to mr. clarence earl gideon of copy of the order of the day, announcing he could --ceed in former poppers and court had decided to take up the case. panamae began here in city, florida. it is a county seat with motels and lodges, good fishing, some of the finest beaches in america. the man who was to lead such a lasting imprint on the lower left little imprint on this town. panama city was gideon's home and this was the scene of his alleged crime. the bay har

the petitioner's did it. the respondents did and we were stunned. we were all buzzing about it afterwards. did your colleagues acknowledge it was because of our book? know. did you tell them? of course not. i didn't want to claim credit. it would have been modest. you and i know. that is why the first thing i did was call you. you and i know. he as we do, congratulations. that is very typical of the kind of sheer exuberance he sometimes shared with people. the freudian slip and fall i will share with you has to do with our wedding.estates, actually in newport. the morning of the wedding, it was rather dramatic. it goes like went to a latin mass we found in providence and met to have lunch in the historic neighborhood known as federal hill, a beautiful sunny day. and we were joined by my father and his companion, my father admitted because of a kidney stone on a layover in denver on route to san francisco, they had taken an ambulance to the local hospital where he was in excruciating pain until he passed the stone. over lunch they recounted traumatic

he'll serve petitioner presidential prime minister for a quarter of a century in total.rd engle in moscow for us. >> reporter: even before the polls open it was already clear president haven vladimir putin putin would win six more years. voters were greeted at the poll by dancing and cookies. tiny enticements to lure the crowd. >> russia is the most very important country in the world and it is because of our president. >> reporter: the atmosphere here is relaxed. it feels like a holiday than election. zero expectation of political change. the only question is, how many people will bother to show up. turn-out is a mart of pride for putin to show that russians would still come out for a shoe in. it's also a focus of putin's rifles, an opposition leader wasn't allowed to run so he told his voters to head to the poll to observe looking for irregularities. in these videos, voters seem to insert multiple ballots. one official seems to stroll over to a box, stuff it while no one in the roam seem to mind. these would be vanity votes, putin don't need fraud to win he has deep su

. >> do you believe -- how to you petitioner sieve this as being received by our allies internationally, john? >> well, i think the allies are trying to figure out whose on first on these issues in it weres of revolving door that continues at they had senior government levels. i think our allies knew that rex tillerson had a good sense of international affairs and common sense approach to include all business related to russia and north korea. they're going to see pompeo as donald trump's spokesperson and i don't know whether or not they're going to have as much confidence if mike pompeo as they've had in rex tillerson. >> how do you think they'll handle theup coming discussions with north korea? >> well, the only benefit to this i think mike pompeo will reflect more accurately, donald trump's thinking. put i'm pot confidence that'll be the way to resolve some of those difficult foreign policies. >> let me ask you about somebody who i believe you know, gina haskell, stepping up to pic the new cia director to replace mike pompeo. it's my understanding she had run a secret black site in t

petitioners, and i'm filing for the building on leland avenue, the commercial storefront ncd-2. i've been in the community for 20 years, native san franciscan, and i'm very familiar with the area. so let me begin. every project should be evaluated on its own merits, but this one is not. it's being evaluated but what's happening behind it, completely by what's behind it. it's -- it wasn't -- if it wasn't for what's happening behind it, i wouldn't have a need to come here for this d.r. if it wasn't -- what's happening behind it, this would be a normal mixed use building ground floor retail, residential units above and no parking. this building fails because it's entirely subservient to what's behind it and it suffers greatly for that. so here's the problem. the building has an easement that runs right through it. as a result we have a building with a gaping hole at the street level. it's ill conceived. it's gigantic orif iice that y can literally drive a truck through. this opening is 12 feet wide and 15 feet tall. that's 18% of the -- 18% of the facade. can they zoom out on that?

resisted that no reason for it exists except hostility to the race and nationality to which the petitionerselong, and which, in the eye of the law, is not justified. the discrimination is, therefore, illegal and it is a violation of the 14th amendment of the constitution. " more of that is discrimination. it must be impartial on its appearance. yet it is administered with an uneven i end and an avon hand. unjustractically to make and illegal discriminations in similarsons circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the constitution." was this a big deal at that time? mae: i don't know. i don't think people remarked on it much at the time. the chinese were happy. the justice was happy because he had long pursued restraining inernment interference people's economic rights. but i do not think it got a lot of attention. susan: we found newspaper editorials in california which were not so happy about it. i guess that was the context of the paper that the time. mae: california had long been nursing discrimination against chinese. they ha

the petitioner wants to vault over all of the break points in this court's first amendment law with respect to public employees and go straight to strict scrutiny. and the fact is this court has never applied strict scrutiny to a condition of public employment that was backed by a bona fide interest that the state has as an employer. never, not once. and i'm happy to talk about the -- the political affiliation cases, because i don't think they are to the contrary. so, you know, implicit i think in your question, justice alito, was the distinction that my friend tried to draw between compulsion and restriction. but this court has said again and again in wooley, in riley, and elsewhere, that compulsion and restriction of speech are two sides of the same coin. justice alito: then why won't you answer my question about what the assistant district attorney could be required to do? throughout history, many people have drawn a line between a restriction on their speech and compelled speech. i'll give you an example that's only -- that's quite different given the nature of the -- of the subject fro

resisted that no reason for it exists except hostility to the race and nationality to which the petitioners belong, and which, in the eye of the law, is not justified. the discrimination is, therefore, illegal and it is a denial of equal protection of the law and a violation of the 14th amendment of the constitution's. more of that is discriminatory i enforcement. the law is impartial in its appearance, yet, it is administered with an uneven i -- uneven hand. so is practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the constitution." mae, what was the country's reaction to this decision? was it a deal at the time? mae: i don't know. i don't think people really remarked on it that much area the chinese were happy. i know that justice field was happy, because he had long pursued an agenda of economic and restraining government interference in people's economic rights. but i do not think it got a lot of attention. susan: we found newspaper editorials in califor

the attorneys, petitioner, and respondent would be in a lower recessed area. , and likely cold in february 1819, it would have been a daunting environment to present and an argument -- an argument. otheriel webster and the attorneys would argue their case before john marshall. the arguments and mccullough v maryland lasted nine days. in 1819, each of the council would've had a great deal of freedom to speak uninterrupted, and to lay out their case before the justices. the court convened at 11:00 a.m. that morning and would usually adjourn around 2:00 or 3:00 depending on how long the arguments went. was a restriction of two lawyers per side in a case, that the supreme court waived that so each attorney head -- each side had three attorneys and each attorney could speak three days. the supreme court of the time had seven justices. the chief justice was john marshall. he is often referred to as "the great chief justice." he was not the first. why does he get that description? >> when he became chief justice, he made a decision to put the court in what he viewed as its proper place. when oliv

resisted that no reason for it exists except hostility to the race and nationality to which the petitionerselong and which in the eye of the law is not justified or the discrimination is therefore illegal in the public administration which enforces it is a denial of equal protection of the laws and a violation of the 14th amendment of the cons to titian. more of that is discriminatory enforcement. the law itself be fair on its face and impartial in its appearance, yet if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and unequal hand. so to make unjust illegal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances material to the right, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the constitution. mae ngai, what was the country's reaction to this? was it a big deal at the time? >> guest: i'm not sure that it was. was it a big deal? i don't think people remarked on it that much. the chinese were happy and just as filled with happy because he had long pursued an agenda of economic right and restraining government interference in people's economic race