inaudible] statutory positions did not necessarily cut to improve versus wade. >> if this court was to change -- [inaudible] that will undercut roe versus wade, to abandon -- [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> as you can see, the pattern set early continued. i should mention to be fair there were two other lawyers arguing in this case in the chapter that i wrote to deals briefly with them, but the performance of catherine i think ultimately proved worth of her choice because she did shape the conversation thereafter occurred on long the justices. finally in the and justices kennedy and o'connor and david souter got together and fashioned the way by which the court could sustain roe versus wade at least in substantial part and they did indeed strike down only the one part of the requirement a woman contemplating abortion notify her husband that she was doing so. it is to my mind a classic demonstration of deciding what you want to argue, going in to make that argument and no matter how hard the resistance is in to making the argument and to holding to rate, sticking to it on till the bitter end and hoping for the best, and it

abortion, roe versus wade, 1973, sex discrimination under the heightened scrutiny of the 14th amendment, commercial speech is now under the umbrella of the first amendment. a remedy in school desegregation, recently gave rights. quite a list of areas in which the court has steadily expanded its reach of what it takes to be a constitutional matter. in addition, where have been revival's or expansions made before that point. federalism. sliced back into the 10th amendment and 11th amendment, finding the commerce power. i used to tell students they would never have that happen. i was proved wrong. finding limits on congress's power by the 14th amendment at one time seemed unlikely, but the court has done that. the extraordinary expansion subject to due process seem to be attenuated in the 1960's ended has flared to life. property protection -- the second amendment. that was a list of areas in which the court has rediscovered constitutional protections. i could add to that list, but i think you get the point. we remember the warren court for activism. we should remember how much has happene