court sided with business the chief justice rehnquist was head of the court up until two thousand and five they sided with business forty five percent of the time he court sided with business forty three percent as if they were they were in the court until one thousand nine hundred eight in addition of those the u.s. chamber of commerce's started filing briefs with the supreme court it just started three decades ago thirty years ago and you can see here the burger court forty three percent of time the u.s. chamber of commerce big business interests won their cases from eighty one eighty six when they went to rank was the court became more conservative fifty six percent of the time from ninety four to two thousand and five now here with the roberts court with sixty four percent of the time the u.s. chamber of commerce as they did today from two thousand and six to two thousand and one are winning their cases exactly the way they were on this is judicial activism on steroids john roberts and sam alito both in their hearings said roberts famously said he's not going to be an end. activis

as justice rehnquist said, sure think there can be no more important, fundamental constitution question than that as to how authority should be allocated between the national and state governments. that's the battle with which we still fight and struggle here. and it's the one in which we cannot afford for the future of this country to lose or to fail. if sometimes when i was teaching school my students didn't quite understand the significance of the follow the aztecs or the incas, that was an annoyance. but if we as members of congress fail to reck his the distinction between centralization of power and decentralization of power that was the foundation of this country, that's not an annoyance. that becomes a tragedy. i'm very grate to feel chairman garrett of new jersey, representative stutzman of indiana for your leadership in organizing this, i'm proud to join my good friend from colorado, hopefully my good friend from new mexico, as long as he does not try to change any of my story about the apaches, that's my story and i'm sticking to it. but this is important. this is one of those

and a little bit conference on world affairs seven devotee, i was the law clerk to judge william rehnquist during some of the years that you described and i want to say that the situation in east texas particularly as it pertained to people of color is exactly as him to become he described it. >> and what a judge. >> what a judge. i miss him very much just like i miss small iain i think the two of them are probably joking and laughing together. >> richard mack? >> it's a pleasure to be here and on this panel with of these distinguished panelists. first i would like to add these to pumas equals doesn't grant supreme power to the federal government. it's something that is in my lawsuit and justice scalia addressed this issue. it only makes the law supreme of the federal government that are made in pursuit of the constitution. so you can look at the federal government and not see any supremacy because they don't do anything that's constitutional and that's the way that it's been for a number of decades now. so there's nothing supreme about degrading the constitution were going or making the l

and a little bit conference on world affairs seven devotee, i was the law clerk to judge william rehnquist during some of the years that you described and i want to say that the situation in east texas particularly as it pertained to people of color is exactly as him to become he described it. >> and what a judge. >> what a judge. i miss him very much just like i miss small iain i think the two of them are probably joking and laughing together. >> richard mack? >> it's a pleasure to be here and on this panel with of these distinguished panelists. first i would like to add these to pumas equals doesn't grant supreme power to the federal government. it's something that is in my lawsuit and justice scalia addressed this issue. it only makes the law supreme of the federal government that are made in pursuit of the constitution. so you can look at the federal government and not see any supremacy because they don't do anything that's constitutional and that's the way that it's been for a number of decades now. so there's nothing supreme about degrading the constitution were going or making the l