. >> how was economy haul related to plessy versus ferguson? > the members of the economy society were probably one of the first -- they were among the first maybe one of two black mutual aid societies started in the 1830s. plessy versus ferguson was in 1890. they were many more, hundreds of mutual aid associations by that time. many of them supported the case. the president of the economy society he was also a member of the citizens committee who were involved in taking the case to court. so the economy raised money for it and he says that i know many of you are in support of the legislation of the jim crow law. they were very much against the jim crow law. and the plessy versus ferguson for those who do not know was a case of a stake into united states supreme court to separate but equal. spent okay i want to ask omar question and then maybe we will end fairly soon. i just wondered if you could talk for a minute about music. so many of us associate new orleans with music, with jazz in particular. you write a lot about music in the book. can yo

plessy versus ferguson was in the 1890s. were hundreds of mutual aid associations by that time and many of them supported the plessy versus ferguson case. the press and of the economy society was a member of the citizens community who were involved in taking the plessy piece to corporate economy raise money for them. i know many of you are in support of the emancipation proclamation. they were very much against that. for those of you who don't know the decision was a case that was taken to the united states csupreme court. >> host: i wanted to ask one more question and then maybe we'll endit fairly soon but i wondered if you could talk for a minute about music. so many of us associate new orleans with music and jazz in particular and you write a lot about music in the book. can you talk a little bit about the economy and its relationship to music over time? >> sure. >> guest: it is based on this particular hall because the economy had music all the way through. all of these things in the early world and this last incarnation

plessy versus ferguson was in the 1890s. many more, hundreds of associations by that time and thmany of them supported the plessy versus ferguson case. merchant was the president of the economy society and also a member of the citizens committee. this clan who were involved in taking the plessy case to court. so the economy raised money for them. they had in the minutes the president said i know many of you are in support of the legislation. so it was, they were very much against the jim crow law and the for those of you who don't know it was a case that was taken to the united states supreme court to prevent separate but equal. >> okay, i wanted to ask one more question and then maybe will go ahead but i just wondered if you could talk about music. with so many of us associate new orleans withmusic . with jazz in particular you write a lot about music in the book. can you talk about the economy and its relationship to music over time? >> sure. if you go to the new orleans acid and heritage festival you'll see a text called

. >> how is that related to plessy versus ferguson? f two black mutual aid societies plessy versus ferguson was in the 18 nineties there were hundreds of mutual aid associations at thatny time with the citizens committee but the president is saying in support of the legislation and something that they are very much against the jim crow law. and for those of you that don't know the case that was taken to the united states supreme court for separate but equal. >> but i just wanted to know if you can talk for a minute about music so many associate new orleans with music and jazz in particular can you talk about the economy and its relationship to music over time? >> but it is based with the music all the way through. all of these things in the early years but the last and when they were driven out of jobs and legislation one of the places they played music was economy homes. and then the money that they raise goes to the poor people and that was circulated in the community. then you will see that was armstrong those were the first people o

i am thinking about those notorious cases such as the dred scott ruling and also plessy versus ferguson rulings that were agreed upon, that were decided, specifically to hold people from the group that she disk -- hold them in a loneliest cast and those rulings were designed to keep today from happening, interestingly enough. and she's virus into this moment, descended upon slave people. she's risen to this moment in a way that allows us to see what the potential of our country actually can be. and i think about the reality of the court that she is joining. and how she will be inheriting the same restrictions that her predecessor, justice breyer was dealing with. and managing somehow. in other words, her role is going to be one of being in the minority. and that she has the potential to be the person who can inspire, the person who can use moral sway xin persuasion, and moral courage, and just the symbol of her presence can put [inaudible] in the conscience of the court. i think she is the one who can hold that is accountable. she's the one who can use her obvious brilliance, grace and

reversing the separate but equal plessy versus ferguson decision. i think this is exactly the opposite. host: it will show that. host:host: let's see what zach thinks. guest: i have to disagree with most of what she said. she is exactly right about one thing. the word fortune is not found in the constitution. we are applying other constitutional provisions like the equal protection clause of the 14th them,, how can courts decide whether rights are fundamental and protected in the 14th amendment or other constitutional provisions? as laid out in the majority opinion, we look to whether those rights are implicit in the concept of liberty of our nation. whether they have deep historical roots. then we proceed to go through the history of abortion in the united states. prior to 1973, roe v. wade came down. there was not a long historical tradition of states protecting abortion. in fact many states, up until the day rosenstein -- roe was decided, they actively discourage abortion in their states. justice alito, this widely decided -- has widely decided t

yamiche: i saw senator cornyn tweet, now do plessy versus ferguson, brown b board of education. those are seminal decisions that dealt with integration of schools. i thought it was a fake tweet. pete: i have no idea what he's talking about. yamiche: i want to bring up the latest poll. more than half o americans oppose the decision to overturn roe v. wade. 88% of democrats, 20% of republicans, 15% of independents . what might those numbers mean for democrats and midterms as they are trying to focus voters attention on abortion when there are so many other issues like inflation and other things, but polls are showing that in some ways, public opinion might be on our side? tia: that is what i found interesting about what pete just said, that the supreme court knew that abortion is not even something the public is clamoring for. it is coming from the right but not necessarily the majority of all americans, and that did not preclude -- that did not preclude them from makin this ruling, so there's other things that other things might come along that might be politically unpopular. wha

the supreme court passed plessy versus ferguson which that black people would never be citizens of this country, get they reversed it with amendments to the constitution. but they can always go back. my other comment is about the border. all of these organizations that start these riots every year, if they worked with the government maybe we could get some control over this immigration stuff. it is going to have to be at the grassroots level to keep people under control. that is all i have to say. host: sean is up next, republican line. caller: out here in colorado we can barely afford to put cattle on our land, we can put gas in our tanks. this biden crime family has destroyed the country in 18 months. i do not get what is going on at the border. it is an deliberate attempt to destroy this country. trump was the greatest president we ever had. anybody who says they are a democrat, you have to be out of your mind. you pull up to the gas tank now, people are putting two or three dollars in their team. in the mediacom iq are complicit in this whole climate hoax. host: the washington post

justice john marshall harlan, the only member of the supreme court to dissent in the case of plessy versus ferguson in 1896, which ruled that segregation was constitutional. justice harlan was born into a slave owning family. that family included a half brother, robert james harlan, who was black and who was born into slavery. he was raised in the harlan family along with the rest of the harlan brothers and went on to become a successful businessman. justice jackson took to oaths -- a constitutional oath, administered by chief justice john roberts. and a judicial oath administered by justice stephen brier, whose retirement from the court created the opening for justice jackson. >> are you prepared to take the oath? >> i am. >> please raise your right hand and repeat after me -- i, ketanji brown jackson, do solemnly swear -- >> i, ketanji brown jackson do solemnly swear -- >> that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies foreign and domestic. >> that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic. >

that has to be paid obviously brown versus board of education is leading example overruling plessy versus ferguson the west coast hotel case over ruling the lochner era decisions those those were to a certain extent jolts to the legal system and the arguments against them had a lot to do with stability and predictability, but the other arguments that intervening precedence had eroded the authority of those cases that those precedents that they were that were overruled had proved unworkable carrying the day in those cases. one final citation from the joint opinion in row quote after nearly 20 years of litigation in rose wake we are satisfied that the immediate question is not the soundness of rose resolution of the issue. but the presidential force that must be accorded. to it's holding. do you think the court the joint opinion is correct? an elevating precedential force even above the specific holding of the case. that is the general approach when you're considering starry decisis. it's the the notion that it's not enough that you might think that the precedent is flawed that there are other consi

the majority says no, just like plessy versus ferguson should have been overruled to the day after it had been decided, same thing here. the court overrules roe and casey in their entirety. and they hold that the rational basis test applies to determine the constitutionality of abortion regulations under which any conceivable rational basis is sufficient to sustain a regulation of abortion. under that standard, it is hard to conceive of any mainstream abortion regulation that would be held unconstitutional bull unless -- on -- that leads us into the concurrences. justice thomas concurs fully with the majority opinion, rights separately to say that the court should reevaluate its substantive new process of jurisprudence including the privacy cases that had been distinguished either court earlier in its opinion. that of course is seized upon by the defense to say that -- threatening the rest of these casey it's, but the concurrences by the chief justice and justice kavanaugh shows the court is probably not going to touch those right to privacy cases in the near future. indeed justice ka

since roe and casey there was no basis for overruling end of the majorityty said no just like plessy versus fergusonshould have been overruled the deity it wased decided, same thing here. so the court overrules roe and casey and holds that the rational basis test to determine the constitutionality of the regulations which any conceivable rational basisat sufficient to sustain regulation of abortion under that standard is hard to conceive of any mainstream abortion regulation that would be held unconstitutional unless it violates another independent constitutional provision and that leads us into the conference. justice thomas concurs in the majority opinion but right separately to say the court should reevaluate its due process jurisprudence including the privacy cases that have been distinguished by the court earlier in its opinion. that of course is seized upon by the dissent to say we see it as threatening the rest of the cases, the right to privacy cases that i think the congregants is by the chief justice show the court iska probably not going to touch the right to privacy cases in the near fut

do you think plessy versus ferguson is not an brown made it right? >> i think plessy versus ferguson the separate but equal whatever antithetical to the principles. >> but the question is, do you agree with justice kagan in her confirmation proceeding there are two ways to amend the constitution article five or through the courts in the judiciary. do you agree with that statement? >> that is typically how we haven't the constitution in the past. >> so it can be amended through judicial action as justice marshall said do what you think is right and let the law catch up. but when we talk about judicial activism we talk about the court creating law. the court making the decision the whole question is who gets to decide? and that is what is fundamental. do you think the heller decision is settled law? >> i think the heller decision is one was decided. >> yes or no? >> it is settled law. >> is mcdonald versus chicago settled law quick. >> that incorporate the reminders of the second amendment to the state. >> the question is simple. shall they be settled q

. >> suppose plessy versus ferguson was we argued in 1897 so nothing had changed. would it not be sufficient to say that was egregiously wrong on the day it was handed down and now it should be overruled? >> it was egregiously long. what the court said in analyzing passey to brown and casey was that what had become clear is that the factual premise that undulated the decision, this idea that segregation created a badge of inferiority had been entirely mistaken. >> is it your answer that we need all the experience to realize that plessy was wrongly decided? had it come before the court in 1897, should it have been overruled or not? >> i think it should have been overruled but i think the factual premise was wrong in the moment it was decided and the court realized that and clarified that. >> there are times when the decision maybe properly overruled simply because it was egregiously wrong. >> i think every factor likewise would adjust overruling in that interest. it would fly counter to reasonable alliance that it was not a workable rule, it had become an outlier an

plessy versus ferguson, lots of those decisions that tragically discriminated in some cases almost violently against groups of americans. in this case, half the population. ruth bader ginsburg, she said she questioned roe v wade. she did what she questioned the basis of it. it was compared to inequality that men and women have the same controls of their own body and should end by the way for the record, it may be true that ruth bader ginsburg played cards with and went to the opera with antonin scalia but got up in the morning and voted against them in every single case involving the rights of women to have choice and she upheld roe v wade during the entirety of her time in the court. is that not correct? >> that is absolutely correct. >> so, do men have restrictions? here are some limitations on what control you have over your own body, any of them? i can't recall. >> i don't know of any. >> so, let's just for the sake of argument say that there are none. it is a pretty fundamental restriction on their bodies and what they can doth with them. is that correct? >> for sure. >> we've heard a l

reversed it with amendments -- date reversed it with amendments but they can always go back on plessy versus fergusonis about the border. all these organizations that started these -- maybe we could get some control over immigration. congress does not want to do it but it has to be at a grassroots level to keep people under control and stop violating the border. host: don in colorado --shawn in colorado? caller: we can barely afford to put out on our land. the biting crime family has destroyed everything in 18 months? trump was the greatest president we have ever had. we have january 6 political prisoners. if he can follow political prisoners for age so trial, -- for a show trial, people are putting two dollars in the tanks, this is a joke. the media is complicit in the climate host --hox. host: the washington post reporting that a pennsylvania room with -- woman -- reporting that she wanted to shoot nancy pelosi has been sentenced to 60 days. she is among the a hundred plus people who were arrested and charged with seizing the capitol building to contest the will -- rull. he is over 200 people -- sh

versus board of education? >> i do. >> do you think plessy was not set a law, and brown righted it. >> i think plessy versus ferguson espoused a document separate but equal that was absolutely antithetical to the principles -- . the question is, do you agree when justice kagan said, there are two ways to amend the constitution, article five or through the judiciary, through the courts. do you agree with that? >> that is typically how we have amended the constitution in the past. >> in other words, it can in fact be amended through judicial action as just as marshall said, do what you think is right and let the law catch up. when i'm trying to get at is, when we're talking about judicial activism, we're talking about the court creating law. the court made the decision. the whole question, is who gets to decide? and, i think that's what's fundamental. all ask you a question before i ran out of time. do you think the decision, d.c. versus heller it is settled law. >> i think the heller decision is one that was decided -- . yes or no, is it settled? >> it is settled. but it seems to have been -- >> mcdonald the chicago incorpora

>> i think plessy versus ferguson's file the doctrine of separate but equal, that was absolutely at that delta the principles of the -- >> but, but the question is, do you agree when justice kagan, her confirmation proceedings, she said there are two ways to amend the constitution. throughout her five or through the judges just carry through. the courts. do you agree that statement? >> that is typically how we have in the past. >> in other words, so it can in fact be amended through judicial action. as jeff as marshall said, do what you think is right, let the law ketchup. when i'm trying to get at here, we were talking about judicial activism, we're talking about the court creating law. the court making the decision. the whole question here who gets to the side. i think that is fundamental. let me ask you, going to run out of time. do you think that the heller decision, the district of columbia versus hillary settled law? >> i think the heller decision is one that was decided -- >> yes or no, is it settled law? >> it is settled law. it seems to have been -- >> as mcdonald beast the cogn