in oklahoma, the federal judge similarly cites scalia's masterpiece. in utah, judge shelby wrote the court agrees with the interpretation of windsor. congratulations justice scalia in your attempt to skewer the legal reasoning of your colleagues, you made yourself the unlikely hero of gay rights. joining me now is camilla taylor, marriage product director in the midwest regional office of land of legal. so camilla, after windsor was handed down, there was a real open question as to how lower courts would interpret the decision. would they interment it narrowly which is part of what the majority opinion seemed to be suggesting about itself? or would they interpret it in the way justice scalia did which was to throw the barn door open for marriage equality everywhere? are you surprised with the unanimity has been to confirm scalia's interpretation? >> no, chris, i'm not surprised. i'd like to join you in offering my heartfelt thanks to justice scalia for his useful words. the majority opinion, itself, was very clear that the opinion was grounded in princ

a really dramatic increase in the power sure was what's that all that well you have you have the scalia mentality and right now is the new idea of the supreme court judge it absolutely effects judges below them when you have scalia out front trying to tell us he's a rock star this new judicial rock star who has an opinion about everything that act really flies in the face of what we used to how we used to regard the supreme court scalia has done huge harm massive harm to the image of the supreme court right now public opinion is showing that he's a loud mouth he talks about issues he should not be talking about his judicial temperament is almost nonexistent and it's causing harm to the court and he goes you know i don't know did he go dick duck hunting with dick cheney he survived must have been they were drinking or something but if you want someplace that dick cheney does it just before he. ruled in favor of dick cheney right after that well yes that's right he needs not to want to get shot a face that no dick cheney shot somebody else in the district. who knows a lot of dogs or is. i

happens outside the courtroom there's this thing called the federal code of judicial conduct and scalia and thomas we know for sure the two of them by going out and hanging out with the koch brothers and others and taking big fees for speaking gigs and things and scalia hanging out with dick cheney just before he decides a case that cheney's in and that's that's one of several these guys had they been federal judges they would have been impeached fired or in jail by now but they have said rules of judicial conduct for all other federal judges don't apply to us we're special we've made a terrible mistake in the united states we've made something magical and mystical and mysterious about these ideologues in robes this is what you have right now you have a republican majority on this court that are completely ideologues anyway you analyze what they do you know i can tell what's going to happen before they make their decision if it's a corporation versus a consumer consumer loses all the time if it's a drug company versus a consumer consumer loses if it's the environment versus government t

justice ginsburg faced a vigorous dissent by justice scalia. an experience that can be like facing down the locomotive. justice ginsburg says the dissent written in justice scalia's powerful style ruined her weekend. [laughter] but she also said it made her opinion better. one is struck by how elegantly and effectively she responds to the many objections justice scalia raises, maintaining the flow and structure of her opinion without ever getting bogged down in squabbling. it has been 18 years since the vmi case and some kinds of victories are harder to come by. the law of gender equality has not changed much in the interim. they are still the constitutional touchdowns. title vii of the civil rights act still bars employers from discriminating on the basis of gender. the court has somehow found reason to cut back on certain antidiscrimination protections. i want to conclude with two of her dissents. they show how she has remained steady on the law and reality of gender discrimination even when the courts turned in the opposite direction. it ill

queens native and conservative supreme court justice scalia said recently that, quote, it's very tastynot pizza. and then on the left you've got daly show anchor and new york city-born jon stewart who went on a big rant about his hatred for chicago pizza. >> this is not pizza. this is toe mateow soup in a bread bowl -- tomato soup in a bread bowl. this is an above ground marinara swimming pool for rats. >> all right. with us now to defend chicago-style pizza is a chicago native. emmettburg is part of today's right place at the right time segment. good to have you here. folks are saying on the left and the right this isn't pizza. >> yeah. that's what they're saying. but they haven't had this pizza. >> that's your strongest argument? >> well, i mean, it's good pizza. >> i come from chicago. they know how to do pizza, right? >> they do. you have to consider that new yorker's kind of have -- new yorkers kind of have a superiority complex. we have michael jordan, they have patrick ewe wing. >> you have folks like supreme court justice scalia and jon stewart, you have to love this kind of at

speaking to a crowd in chicago, no less, justice scalia made his views on pizza clear saying deep dish's very tasty but it's not pizza." >> and earlier he said it should be called tomato pie. skah lia believes pizza must be thin crust and crunch like the pizza here in new york. here at home, you're a deep dish fan. >> like all pizza. there's not a pizza i don't like. >> i wouldn't say this isn't pizza but i'm going to stick with my favorite. >> i like them both. >>> pope francis now ready for his next trip. >> the pope, his passport was about to expire. the new picture minus a smile was taken at the argentine consulate. it's likely a gesture to his home country, after all, the pope automatically becomes a citizen of the vatican. he did get a little special treatment, he was picked up and taken to the consulate for the photo and digital fingerprints. >> the pope insisted on paying for the $55 passport fee out of his own pocket. >> the pope really is a pr master, isn't he? >> really is. and i don't know that's the intention. you no -- it's just a good -- >> good man. >> can we enjoy this

supreme court justice antonin scalia, told chicago, home of the deep dish it should not be called pizzaasty, but it's not pizza. he said it really is tomato pie. scalia believes pizza should be thin and crusty, have a crunch like the pizza in his old home, new york. >>> and tonight, mystery solved. ♪ mama mia now i really know >> reporter: how did abba really come up with those costume, spandex, sparkle? fashion or a tax write-off? a former band member revealed under swedish law, wild costumes are tax deductible because they can never be confused with street clothes, hence the flashy suits which ensured a nice tax-savings for the group. >>> and up next tonight, ticklish best friends. >> it tickles. >> the magical boy, the magical dog who never leaves his side, changing both their lives, coming up. coming up. or treat gas with these after you get it. now that's like sunblock before or sun burn cream later. oh, somebody out there's saying, now i get it! take beano before and there'll be no gas. take beano before if yand you're talking toevere rheuyour rheumatologistike me, about trying or

justice ginsburg faced a vigorous dissent by justice scalia. an experience that can be like facing down the locomotive. justice ginsburg says the dissent written in justice scalia's powerful style ruined her weekend. [laughter] but she also said it made your opinion better. one is struck by how elegantly and effectively she response to the many objections justice scalia raises, maintaining the flow and structure of her opinion without ever getting bogged down in squabbling. it has been 18 years since the vmi case and some kinds of victories are harder to come by. the law of gender equality has not changed much in the interim. they are still the constitutional touchdowns. title vii of the civil rights act still bars employers from discriminating on the basis of gender. the court has somehow found reason to cut back on certain antidiscrimination protections. with two ofnclude her dissents. they show how she has remained steady right on the law and reality of gender discrimination even when the courts turned in the opposite direction. it illustrat

under the tutelage is of justice scalia, she became a fearless hunter. the personal trainer with whom she boxes has been my physical 1999ss already and since -- fitness guardian since 1999. folk cross best job combination on the federal bench. elena accomplished in a made -- an amazing feat at harvard law school. didn't -- students once discontent began to like the place. how did she manage the transformation? not so much by fundraising and constructing new buildings, although she was champion at both. in her own words, i looked around for little things i could do, things that don't cost much money, don't take too much time that you don't have to have a faculty meeting to do. among things that fit that bill, she discovered you can buy more students happiness per dollar by giving people free coffee than anything else. justice, she heads the cafeteria committee, a truly disheartening assignment. not much one can do to make it better, but she found something she could fix even on a slim budget. a frozen yogurt machine dispenses sustenance all can enjoy. i l

according to "the chicago sun times," scalia said, real pizza is thin, it is chewy and crispy.word yet on the decision of this important national debate. >>> up next, if you are a "house of cards" fan, you are probably just now resurfacing from a weekend full of binge watching and if you thought the d.c.-based drama seems all too real, you are not alone. the show's star, kevin spacey, thinks that the story lines hit close to home for politicos. >> we can get done shooting on a day and i'll turn on the news and think our stoilline story lines are not that crazy, they are really not. >> they are really not. >>> could your music tastes reveal your political meanings? pandora thinks so. this weekend it's going to start trying to make money off that idea, matching political advertising to listeners based on music preferences and zip codes. former first lady eleanor roosevelt topping the lists of the best first ladies. the findings based on a interview with some 242 historians, political scientists, and scholars. this poll rounds out the top five with abigail adams, jacqueline kenned

according to justice scalia, real pizza is thin, chewy, and crispy.some constitutional humor. here's some nice news in presidential social media. bill clinton went to twitter. in a tweet, he wished happy presidents' day to president obama, carter, and both bushes and poked fun at bush 43, asking, hey, how come you're not on twitter? he is the only president since reagan to not join that kind of social media, but you know what, it's a personal decision. >>> that wraps up this hour of "jansing and co." i'm ari melber in for chris jansing, and up next, craig melvin. it says here that a woman's sex drive increases at the age of 80. helps reduce the risk of heart disease. keep heart-healthy. live long. eat the 100% goodness of post shredded wheat. doctors recommend it. and a life of purpose and meaning was infused into a corporate culture. there was a commitment to creating new jobs out of recycled metals, right here in america. and a bank that helped carolyn rafaelian's business grow from a rhode island storefront into a global sensation. that's the beaut

yeah i mean this is this is this is mind boggling and and not only that they're proud of being in scalia and thomas going off to dinner with the koch brothers and fancy about some and thomas' wife making a hundred grand and the he forgot to mention it by the way it's a federal crime excuse me yeah and what's interesting about the right this roberts court is you know i know school league. and alito and clarence thomas get a lot of attention from progressives because they're sort of easy to hate figures but john roberts is a brilliant scholar i mean not disagree with him but he's clearly got a plan for the united states and it's working i mean the health care decision that everybody celebrated because it upheld the supreme court's mandate also placed severe limits on the federal government's ability to do things a state that's not talking about the medicaid expansion so they've got a plan for the united states and using the power of the supreme court they pretty has no cheney has throughout his career i mean you know as might happen tonio talks about reza two thousand dollars an hour or so

kennedy probably but it was five four there are four no votes on a case are still on the court thomas scalia alito and chief justice john roberts so the four nos before we said no d.p.a. shouldn't regulate greenhouse gas emissions are still there so we have to get all the rest of the five kennedy was there ginsburg was there prior since then souter and john paul stevens have retired they were replaced by sotomayor and kagan and listening to the arguments today i don't believe that their their votes will be any different than if david souter and. still there so we're looking at again in a five four we still have we have it was so we still have basically four fairly solid progress of. not as conservative yet not not as conservative but actually a ruth bader ginsburg is oh shit yes solid so but. then briar can be as well yeah but briar. is kind of more of a little the road come together but given that this whole shift of the court is sort of the right i read lawyers book a couple years ago as fascinated with some of those arguments we're going to write without humans. so this takes us back to j

we are thinking and i should practicing with the scalia official have to see something like when this guy have a look next olympics that is livid about the current medal standings on one journey still remains on top at like eight gold medals and the second phrase actually has been changing each day at nineteen ninety having norway and the second spot with seven gold medals in the netherlands. that and that the us with the score at all. i remained in the top five and three at the end how would you call it an a total of four olympic medals wanting to catch some gains after disney's past the answer to the back tomorrow with more will thank you so much for coming in and keeping us up to date it so one man army job in getting the bang up job to do so much that the elites. now let's shift our attention to other sports outside of the winter games starting with football to commit a player's every toy in the south korean men's national team for that and more on their upcoming friendly. we have steven shed joining us and the sports center. hello there. the ice manager for millwall and built his

you could have the official blog and then there is a brief that it filed in the case and justice scalia would only raise the brief on the court. [laughter] you can imagine others would say if i want to know the extended version of the argument or i'm interested in a specific issue of the book there are a series of blog posts on this issue you can go to that if you want to know more. i don't know if we will have the official post from the case or if there will be like the doj blog where they have their own version, but i wonder if they would actually play in this role. in my mind ultimately that would be a good thing because if you don't want to access of course the briefs will always be there but another voice out there with more information which hopefully would be better opinions by the court. >> reports president washington aware of the precedent he was setting gained ever lied power e despite the constitutional limits. this is about 40 minutes. [applause] >> thank you very much ladies and gentlemen. if you have turned off your cell phone -- i will leave mine on and take messages for

colored coin project where you're assigning valuations to individual coins again huge benefit for scalia and other we're just not it's not a it's not a problem that they've been under the rule of the corrupt city of london for all these top all the time it's an opportunity it's the unity not just of a generation but of a century or more and if they don't please take it because there hasn't are intersecting with cryptocurrency which is this real confluence of factors of the tides who the tail winds about and how do we get these jocks to wake up to this we have to go up there to edinburgh have it suddenly go and shout that we don't have an open forum i think so so it's not one no at first because no way of course you compare that with the. ok and the oil wealth because you mentioned that the part of the equation the triple play of scum out of the oil the the other two things you mention which i've already forgot size regulatory action to size zero oil regularly has no weight has these the size and the oil the regulatory options bit dicey very large states you know right here state how they

the way justice kennedy wrote the decision and justice scalia in the dissent saying, you're making statesalidate their states constitutions. when a legally married same sex couple or goes and says, we were married in california and then we've moved back home to texas or louisiana or alabama and suddenly we're no longer married, well, we should enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexually married couples. we're asking for civil rights because we are legally married if we just crossed the border to go some place else. because those couples are asking for fairness, the argument for special rights goes out the window. any right thinking judge will pull in the supreme court opinion from june 2013 and say, well, you know what? these folks have a point. you might be pointing to this in a second,but there's a "slate" piece out that talks about all the challenges since the supreme court decision have won. >> this is a really important piece of this. since the u.s. versus windsor decision, 32 different judges have considered the case of whether it is about the relationship between s

essentially engage in legislation functions, an argument that didn't seem to sit well to justice antonin scalia who asked quote, are you compelled where there is ambiguity to work with the statute that do not be aproduce absurdity and adopt the legislation that produces absurdity and alter the decisions of statutes? supreme court precedenteighs heavily referring to federal agcies when statutory language is ambiguous. justice kagan why this dispute is not classic case to deference tohe agency. the agency gs to choose how to make tng work as best it can? when the change makes it not work entirely as congress foretold. >> the epa chose to try timely meant the broad protective goals of the statute by bending a little bit on the implementation side. i think tt's a choice that agencies have to be able to make. >> scores ever businesses, states, led by texas and several gop lawmars are characterizing what happened as an unprecedented power grab and calling on the justices to restore what they argue is the rightful balan between the branches. >> from a constitutional perspective this is a wholly troubl

so now -- and as we all know, justice scalia in his dissent said, oh, great, look what you have done now. you've basically given states the ability to opt them out, and that's exactly what's happening they're taking the sort of facetious remark in court papers and saying, you know what? he's actually right. and what the attorney general has said in that speech, you really have to read to find the wink wink and nod nod in there, but he's bakley saying, hey, if you think that heightened scrutiny applies to the laws in your state, go right ahead. other states have done it, we did it, and we won. >> you know, speaking of the supreme court, josh, before we wrap this up, the supreme court is expected to decide next month whether companies like hobby lobby have to provide coverage if a private business has a religious or moral objection to it. that fits into this context insofar as we're talking about the concept of corporate personhood, and they should be entitled to the same -- that plays like the catholic church is entitled to. >> we see what is happening on these style of laws, but wher

scalia said, shouldn't be called pizza. it's very tasty but it's not pe pizza. facebook question of the day. >> do you think deep dish pizza should be called pizza? logon to our facebook page wnnfans.com and tell us what you think. >> i'm going to have a bite and see -- >> see if you think it should be called pizza or tomato pie. what do you think? >> i love new york. i love new york pizza. but i've never met a pizza i don't like. it's deep dish pizza and awesome. >> i could see it being called -- >> we all get along. >> i can see it being called tomato pie if it wasn't so much crust. the only difference is how thick the crust is between the two, right? >> absolutely. we got some good comments from our twitter. as a chew away. forgive me, folks. michael says thin is the way it's supposed to be. of course it's pizza, another person says, come on, better than flipping a slice in half and eating it. amanda says what makes him so knowledgeable about pizza? >> wendy says, something tells me he isn't going to be welcome in any chicago pizza place again. maybe just fac

led to absurd results, leaving it no choice, an argument that didn't seem to sit well with antonin scalia who asked, quote,erant you compelled where there's ambiguity to adopt the interpretation of the statue that does not produce absurdity, rather than adopting the interpretation that produced absurdity and then going around the rules. it weighs heavy in deferring to federal agencies when language is ambiguous. elena kagan avlged why this isn't a classic case for deference to the agency, that the agency gets to choose how to make the thing work as best it can when a chain circumstance makes it work not entirely the way congress had foretold. >> epa chose to try to implement the broad protective goals of the statute by bending a little bit on the implementation side. i think that's a choice that agencies have to be able to make. >> scores of businesses, states led by texas, and several gop lawmakers are characterizing what happened as an unprecedented power grab and calling on the justices to restore what they argue is the rightful balance between the branches. >> from a constitutional pe

justice anthony scalia speaking at an event in the windy city telling an audience while he enjoys chicago-style pizza it should not be called pizza. talk about a controversial ruling. and now it's your turn to hash it out with us. just use #greta on all your tweets and posts. straight ahead. is your toilet working? start flushing. and throw $800 billion right down the toilet. that's what many people accuse the obama administration of doing. why is the white house celebrating? former mayor rudy giuliani goes "on the record" next. and also, was targeting the tea party just a warm-up act? apparently the irs could have a few new targets in mind. "on the record" investigates coming up. honestly? this deal was way too good to believe. instead of paying too much for an ipad, i got the surface 2. first of all, it comes with office and outlook. then, with free skype calls to phones in over 60 countries, i can talk to my cousins any time. and then, i got 200 gigs of cloud storage -- free -- so i can get my photos and stuff almost anywhere. others charge for that. surface is such a great deal. i feel like

essentially engage in legislation functions, an argument that didn't seem to sit well to justice antonin scalia who asked quote, are you compelled where there is ambiguity to work with the statute that does not be aproduce absurdity and adopt the legislation that produces absurdity and alter the decisions of statutes? supreme court precedent weighs heavily referring to federal agencies when statutory language is ambiguous. justice kagan why this dispute is not classic case to deference to the agency. the agency gets to choose how to make the thing work as best it can? when the change makes it not work entirely as congress foretold. >> the epa chose to try timely meant the broad protective goals of the statute by bending a little bit on the implementation side. i think that's a choice that agencies have to be able to make. >> scores ever businesses, states, led by texas and several gop lawmakers are characterizing what happened as an unprecedented power grab and calling on the justices to restore what they argue is the rightful balance between the branches. >> from a constitutional perspective t

. >> that ruling, as justice scalia said after it happened, really opened the door to all of this happening. kentucky, ohio now recognize marriages from other states. so this is just the latest. and what's really important about this, you know, a lot of southerners might quibble as to whether kentucky is part of the south. virginia would be the first state in the old soukth, old confederacy, to recognize same-sex marriage. a big deal. >> let's talk about the politics of this. this has been an issue in the past, same-sex marriage. is it no longer an issue that the left and the right will debate? has it just sort of lost all of its -- i guess emphasis, whether it's democrats or republicans? they don't really want to talk about it. >> the left would love to talk about -- >> sure. >> again, in the wake of the ruling last -- the supreme court ruling last summer, i remember e. mailing a bunch of republican strategists asking for some sort of comment. how do you think this plays out in the 2014 midterm elections. >> don't want to touch it. >> someone e-mailed me and said i have no interest in weig

and i agree with justice scalia when he said, and i quote, you are requiring people to stand up in public for their political act fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed. so madam chair, for these two reasons, first the finance committee is the committee of jurisdiction that ought to have the opportunity to address these questions, and i want to assure my friend from arizona who i have worked with many, many times on issues that having just become the chair, i intend to work very expeditiously on this matter, particularly with senator hatch, and i would also like to point out to colleagues on the floor there is a bipartisan opportunity in the days ahead to address many of these issues, and it is embodied very eloquently by senator murkowski who says if we're going to be serious about promoting the widest possible debate in this country and treating everyone fairly, we do it in accord with that even steven principle, and for those reasons, madam chair, i would object at this time to the unanimous consent request, and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: objection is h

you could have the official blog and then there is a brief that it filed in the case and justice scalia would only raise the brief on the court. [laughter] you can imagine others would say if i want to know the extended version of the argument or i'm interested in a specific issue of the book there are a series of blog posts on this issue you can go to that if you want to know more. i don't know if we will have the official post from the case or if there will be like the doj blog where they have their own version, but i wonder if they would actually play in this role. in my mind ultimately that would be a good thing because if you don't want

guest: justice scalia was pretty clear in heller saying this is not say, i mean, the biggest decision and there is that you have the individual, the right to bear arms. then he said we have not looked at -- they left it open, these two big issues that have to be decided. what are the limits to what you can carry and bear? all of the assault weapons bans and high-capacity magazine bans that have spread across the country in the last year, that is all going to have to be dealt with by the supreme court at some point. that is a little further down the road. the more reporting one of the carry right, the very issue, because you are taking the gun outside of the home. and some laws make it virtually impossible to carry guns. in fact, where i live, they just ignore the bear rights completely. the reason they get to the supreme court level is when the circuit courts and appeals courts are split, and we see there is a big case out of maryland last year, woolard v. sheridan, and the fourth circuit overturned a comment that maryland's laws, similar to san diego, nobody can get a carry permit vi

i think if you look at justice scalia's dissent in the windsor opinion which was the 2013 opinion handed last summer, he called the majority opinion's reasoning rootless and shifting were terms he used. what he meant it was up in the air as to whether or not this was a state's power decision or whether it was a gay rights decision. because if you interpret it as the problem with the federal defense of marriage act was that it failed to recognize marriages for federal purposes. that the states, themselves, had recognized. that would be a state's powers issue because marriage has traditionally been as all family law is a matter of state law. this is a presumptive matter. so if that had been the ground of the ruling, that wouldn't have had that much effect on state bans because it's a state prerogative to define marriage, they can define it how they will. on the other hand, if you read it as a gay rights decisions, that means restrictions on him sex marriage are just as obnoxious to the constitution as the federal denial of benefits was. of these two interpretations, we don't know which one

he gets a lot of unfair criticism, i think, for being kind of a -- someone who just copies justice scalia independent thinker. he is far more conservative. >> he's brilliant. it's good to discuss it. he's very capable. very, very smart man. clearly, if you read his opinions, you know, he is -- >> but opinions are not the whole job. >> i'm glad you brought it up. it's worthy of discussion. you're way smarter at this than i am, too. however, i think everyone has a different style. >> that is true. >> i talk way too much. jeffrey toobin, thank you. >>> and the producers are all saying, god, are you kidding me? amen, does she. thank you, jeff. >>> the state of arizona has passed a bill that would allow businesses to discriminate against gay people on religious grounds. what-what? is this 2014? is the governor actually going to sign that thing? she talked about it today and we're going to have what she had to say, right after this break. [ tires screech ] [ car alarm chirps ] ♪ [ male announcer ] we don't just certify our pre-owned vehicles. we inspect, analyze, and recondition each one, until

here i would quote the words of the great justice scalia in a debate he had with justice breyer, he said france is a country with 300 cheeses an two religions and we're the opposite, 300 religions and two cheeses. opens the question of what the other cheese is, right? but who wants to negotiate and live live in a world like this, we have 300 religions including say the satanists who can say i sincerely hold this belief and you're substantially burdening it. it's very hard for an individual whether gay or unwed mother to navigate that world. >> representative cavanaugh, do you think jan brewer is going to sign this? >> absolutely. she was concerned about vagueness in the law last time. that language was tightened up. we used an arizona supreme court standard that tightened the law even further that explains how a bogus claim can't be done. a guy tried to claim he could smoke marijuana because of his religion. the court said that's not a sincerely held belief. that's ridiculous. they say you can be prosecuted and we used the same language so that we don't have bogus charges used as protect

. >> because all of the other justices, including anthony scalia, you'll hear their questions when peopleome before the supreme court to offer their analysis of what is going on. we only get to hear it on audiotape. we don't see it. and that's a serious problem and there's a group now saying that there should be tv cameras. the american public have a right to see these justices, the q & a going on during the oral arguments. listen to this ad. >> supreme court's decisions impact the lives of americans everywhere. but only a privileged few get to see justice in action. republicans, democrats, and a large majority of american support a simple fix. putting cameras in the supreme court. >> why don't they have cameras there so we can watch these justices go about their business? >> wolf, i can answer that question in two words. jon stewart. they don't want to be made fun of on the daily show. they don't want to have their behavior, their questions, their public performance open to public scrutiny. i think it's disgraceful. i think it's terrible. but it's their candy store and they get to decide

anthony scalia said the pisa is good but does not taste lie pizza. it should be called tomato pie.ow her name but chances are you heard her songs. darlene love is behind thousands of tracks but because she's a backup singer, she didn't get much fame until she entered into the hall of fachl before we meet her, a look back. "be my baby," do run run," and "the boy i'm going marry." they're some of the biggest hits of the 1960s and darlene love sang all of them. born darlene wright she sang in her father's church before joining a local group called the blossoms. the women grieng sang as backup singers for singers like sam cooke and bobby darryn. they wanted to use the roof-raising voice to capture the sound of the times. and in 1962 specter asked love and the blos oms to sing for "he's a rebel." though the song was number one, she never got credit. that wasn't unusual for darlene love. her job was to sing backup for other singers and she diddet for the best of them including elvis presley, frank sinatra, and dionne warwick. despite decades of chart-topping songs, she never knew fame. s

judge napolitano: justice antonin scalia was with the majority. they go against the old way of looking at the fourth amendment? judge napolitano: without a person there to say no they only have one person to hear from and that person is saying yes. i don't buy this at all but at the time the police sought to enter this house there was only one occupant present, the female. don't remember if they were married or not and she said by all means come in. her husband or boyfriend or friend who are originally said no had been arrested or an act of violence which they witnessed. was a legitimate arrest so at the time they sought to enter there was no one there to say no even though before he had been arrested he said no. stuart: what about a property owner? should that person? judge napolitano: records usually sadies are often negligence second stances and the police don't have time nor could they be expected to have the time to ascertain who the owner is. these people may have been tense. they may have been overnight visitors. the police don't know. the

she mansion to be universally admired and beloved by me, by justice scalia, by everyone in between. [laughter] without sacrificing and iota of her principles or convictions. she told me once that her secret comes in part from something her mother-in-law told her back when she and marty were young. what's the secret to a successful marriage she asked? sometimes her mother-in-law says, it pays to be a little deaf. sometimes it pays to be a little deaf around the court too. [laughter] and justice ginsburg knows just when to do that. i've seen justice ginsburg maintain those values of collegiality even when it's toughest. our tradition at the court and it's usually a lovely, lovely tradition. is to have lunch together after the conferences in which we discuss and vote on cases. the rule at those lunches is no more court talk just friendly conversation about sports and movies and music and things like that. now without giving any specifics, i can tell you that i once left a difficult conference, maybe the most difficult since i joined the court. and i found it almost impossible to imagin

under the tutelage is of justice scalia, she became a fearless hunter.the personal trainer with whom she boxes has been my physical 1999ss already and since -- fitness guardian since 1999. folk cross best job combination on the federal bench.

scalia says chicago's in deep dish when it comes to pizza. he issued this controversial ruling.tasty, but it's not real pizza. >>> a south florida artist is facing criminal miss chef charges this morning for intentionally breaking a $1 million vase. it was all caught on tape. maximo caminero tells police he did it as a protest. oh, yeah, he was arrested and later released on bond. the vase he destroyed was from chinese artist, ai weiwei. it was 7,000 years old. >>> off and running for jimmy fallon. he hosted his first tonight's show from rockefeller center in new york. >> i'm jimmy fallon and i'll be your host, for now. >>. >>> the u.s. men's hockey team beat russia on saturday in a very dramatic shootout. that was exciting. that was great. the merp team said that they're thrilled with the win while the russia team is missing. >> star-studied night included sebties coming out to give fallon a hundred bucks. will smith joined fallon for the evolution of hip-hop dancing. i know i'm not the only one who wore overal alls with one side hanging down. >> actually -- i justed to -- i ha

scalia wasice pretty clear in heller saying this is not say, i mean, the biggest decision and there ist you have the individual, the right to bear arms. then he said we have not looked at -- they left it open, these two big issues that have to be decided. what are the limits to what you can carry and bear? all of the assault weapons bans and high-capacity magazine bans that have spread across the country in the last year, that is all going to have to be dealt with by the supreme court at some point. that is a little further down the road. the more reporting one of the carry right, the very issue, because you are taking bthe gun outside of the home. and some laws make it virtually impossible to carry guns. in fact, where i live, they just ignore the bear rights completely. the reason they get to the supreme court level is when the circuit courts and appeals courts are split, and we see there is a big case out of maryland last year, woolard versus sheridan, and the fourth circuit overturned a comment tot maryland's laws, similar san diego, nobody can get a carry permit virtually, is ille