. >> host: john roberts has been chief justice seven years and william rehnquist was chief 17 years? we are early in what we anticipate to be a tenure of 25 years' use the it youngest chief justice ever name since the great john marshall at age 50. did you ever have be thought this was too soon to judge or offer it take? >> guest: i did and i point* out in the book and i tried to make it clear i do consider this a young court and now that i did wonder about that. how the book came about is i was covering the alani taken confirmation hearing in the summer when i received to extraordinary e-mail's. one was from an editor at simon & schuster who was very interested the other a very faithful pbs van who asked me to marry them. [laughter] >> host: and marcia is already taken. >> guest: i did not show it to my husband it was a beautifully written proposal and mike has been proposed to me in a parking lot in downtown baltimore. [laughter] but there was no nothing with that proposal but she convinced me that it was a good time to look at the supreme court because even though it was young and

of thing actually and although fox news turned that into all but this is this is this is how did rehnquist brings sandra day o'connor along on this i mean was he because he was it was all but really was was this decision as chief justice lou. first off the response of the new york times their own recount or their assessment of what a recount was memory if memory serves about a dozen independent publications went out and tried to do the same thing in each case bush won it but a case there well there's a cat to that actually and this was the headline of the new york times and the caviar was if the three counties that gore had originally sued to have recounted which was dade broward and one other if those three counties had only been recounted bush would have won and in fact that was the headline of the new york times article what i just read he was buried in paragraph seventeen and when and when the publisher of the new york times was asked why did you bury the story he said because it was three weeks after nine eleven and we did not want our president to be viewed as illegitimate even thoug

it is more conservative than its predecessor, the rehnquist court.t court was more conservative than the berger court. i think it is more conservative. studies say it is slightly more conservative than the rehnquist court -- >> bill: is that because of alito and roberts being at it? >> mainly justice alito. he's more conservative than the person he succeeded justice sandra day o'connor. >> bill: by far. >> she moderated in a number of areas like abortion, church and state. campaign finance. that has changed with justice alito coming on the bench. >> bill: you mention sandra day o'connor, i was stubbed a week or so ago when she said looking back at bush v. gore, not that they shouldn't have voted the way they did they shouldn't have even taken the case she believes now. it is kind of too late. >> it's long late. but it's not unusual that justices will have second thoughts. you remember, bill, justice powell, last year, he left the bench. he said he regretted what he did in bowers versus hardlick, the case where the court upheld georgia's sodomy law an

skeptical of corporations and it wasn't until the 1800s that corporations took off and even then william rehnquist said don't give corporations political power. they're not natural persons. >> so i want to talk about another breaking -- bit of breaking news today that looks like at first blush an abuse of power. and i find deeply troubling. the a.p. has reported that the department of justice notified them on friday that the doj had secretly obtained phone records from more than 20 separate phone lines assigned to "a.p." journalists. this was pursuant to a story the "a.p." ran in may of last year about a foiled plot on the part of al qaeda in yemen to blow up a more high-tech version of the underwear bomb that unsuccessfully sent. after that reporting, there was a leak investigation that was initiated by the attorney general. this is really, david, you're someone who -- i think you're president of the investigative reporters organization. this is really -- >> investigative reporters and editors. >> this is really deeply troubling. >> this is what police states do. you know, congress, we created th

chief justice rehnquist had a marvelous little book about this called all the laws but one, and he talked about the fact that if there is a presidential authority that is constitutional, that might collide with the congressional authority that's constitutional and congress has done nothing about it, the president is pretty capable pixel i think these are tough questions. i just don't want to look, therefore i don't think it's fair not to state what has been the clear way in which presidents have responded, at least during the 20th century, the exercise at appropriate times of national security their power to defend the country. and that included surveillance power. and whether or not that's a just about the foreign intelligence surveillance act i think has yet to be, has yet to be litigated. i'm just, i'm not willing to leap to the conclusion. i think, i think it would be, it's important, i like fisa because we use it extensively, and in defense of the country. it's not a laughing matter. as far as i'm concerned to use it extensively, and it was important to it was supervised by the court

chief justice rehnquist had a marvelous book about this called all along but one. he talked about if there's a constitutional ban might collide with the congressional authority of this constitutional and congress has done nothing about it, the president is pretty capable. .. i am not willing to up we to the conclusion. i think -- i think it would be -- it is important. we used it extensively in defense of the country. and i'd -- it is not a laughing matter as far as i am concerned to use it extensively. it was important. it was supervised by the court, and it certainly is an arena which gives the president's safe, if you will, even a cyclical haven. it gives them the comfort of doing things the way that congress is told in to, not the way that he might have decided that he had the authority to dubai looking at the constitution, even if he had legal scholars saying, you have the authority. you might prefer to do we have 435 congressmen 100 senators would you. >> we will have questions. those of you who are thinking of questions and would like to ask him, we will be

you clerked for chief justice william rehnquist.citor general down in texas meaning the top appellate arguer. and then you worked for the department of justice under president bush. you were the deputy attorney general. you know a thing or two about being attorney general and about the law. how unusual is it in your experience for the doj to be going after reporters, their records and so on? is this something that would likely stand out in eric holder's mind? >> it's unprecedented. and the degree of willingness of this administration to target, to target a reporter for this network as an unindicted coconspirator? i mean, that is without precedent. and, unfortunately, i think it's part and parcel of a pattern from this administration of not respecting the bill of rights. north respecting the first amendment. not respecting the second amendment. not respecting our fourth and fifth amendment rights regarding drone strikes. regarding the irs. over and over again the pattern we have seen is unfortunate willingness to use the machinery of

. >> our study looks at three suggestionsive courts, the burg burger court, the rehnquist court and the roberts court. what we see is a steady progress where the chamber is becoming more successful before the supreme court over time and that the highest number is the roberts court. >> so the chamber of commerce interceding as a friend of the court. >> exactly. >> in case after case after case? >> exactly. >> the roberts court, basically, open arms to almost anything they want to be part of? >> well, i mean in the end over the course of john roberts' time as chief justice and when sam alito am joined, the chamber winze wins the vast majority of the cases. if you are to look at >> bill: so it wins 69% of the cases in which it intervenes? >> yes. >> whoa. 69. who else comes close? >> i am not sure. we haven't looked at sort of every group. >> that's a staggering number. the other thing to understand, bill. the period before justice scalia joined the court, they were participating in about 4% of the cases per term whereas now this particular term, soo whatever we are see something a busy he