de radio un abogado conservador criticÓ a santorum por votar por la confirmaciÓn de la jueza sonia sotomayorado que represento en el congreso y paul en alaska. >>> el vicepresidente joe biden iniciÓ una gira por latinoamÉrica. hoy en mÉxico ademÁs de reunirse con el presidente calderÓn conociÓ a los tres candidatos a la presidencia. paulia gÓmez nos cuenta de quÉ hablaron. >>> el vicepresidente de eados unidos llegÓ a mÉxico para entrevistarse con felipe calderÓn para revisar la agenda bilateral, la amenaza de los carteles es un tema preocupante, y la presidencia de mÉxico informÓ que el presidente calderÓn pidio que se combata el lavado de dinero. y esta peticiÓn se da a semanas que el presidente calderÓn develara este anuncio en ciudad juÁrez. >>> no mÁs armas hacia mÉxico. >>> durante esta visita el vicepresidente buscÓ asegurar la relaciÓn bilateral. >>> es importante que en la relaciÓn bilateral se l de prioridad a la cooperaciÓn para el desarrollo. que haya crecimiento econÓmico en mÉxico. que haya empleo. y para que haya bienestar. >>> una tarea irrenunciable de combatir al crimen org

anti-inmigrante, en esta contienda de hoy, habían anuncis contra rick santorum por votar a favor de sonia sotomayorn la contienda general de noviembre, para los votantes de la primarias republicanas, el tema sigue siendo la economía, según las encds. >>> pero no hablan de ela economía, hablan de anticonceptivos, cuando miras los discursos, se enfocan en un tema social. >>> esta noche cuando habló mitt romney, habló solamente de economía, él habló de economía en ohio, en los últimos semanas habló del fracaso del presidente, sobre la economía de los trabajos que hemos perdido, no creo que ningún republicano sea anti-inmigrante. >>> pero sí es contra de una reforma migratoria, también cualquier tipo de negociación para los 11 millones de indocumentados. >>> el presidente bush. >>> pero no estamos hablando del 2006, estamos hablando del 2012. >>> estamos hablando, ahora de las cosas que el presidente ha tenido mayorías y se ha dedicado a deportar, y es cierto que el presidente prometió una reforma migratoria en sus años y no lo hizo, y casi medio millón de personas han sido deportados. >>> lory, mugtr

anti-inmigrante, porque habían anuncios y propagandas, contra rick santorum que decían que apoyaba a sonia sotomayorstra. >>> pero para los votantes en la primarias republicanas, el tema sigue siendo la economía. >>> pero no hablan de la economía, hablan de anticonceptivos, cuando miras los debates republicanos y miras los discursos, se enfocanen temas sociales, más que la economía. >>> esta noche, mitt romney habló solamente de economía, también en ohio, en las últimas 3 o 4 semanas, también habló del fracaso de este presidente, del índice de desempleo, que es más del 8%, así que mitt romney está principalmente enfocado en la economía. >>> pero los republicanos están en contra de una reforma migratoria también en contra de cualquier tipo de negociación que incluya ciudadanía para los inmigrantes indocumentados. >>> pero le presidente bush. >>> pero estamos hablando del 2012, no del ex presidente bush. >>> es que en varias ocasiones se han dado políticas comprensivas, con demócratas en contra, también el presidente ha tenido mayorías y se ha dedicado a deportar, el presidente prometió una reforma mi

y sonia sotomayor y tiene que ver con todo el mundo.> bueno, exactamente. pero o sea, ser lÍder de activistas que piensan que son muy buenos. >> no es un asunto de ser conservador liberal demÓcrata y republicano es el asunto que ella representa para todos los puertorriqueÑos. >> para la maÑana las primarias y se trasladan a illinois. >> y crÍtico al presidente obama antes en santorum el conservador angie sandoval y desde chicago. >> ¿quÉ tal? jose muy buenas tardes, los dos candidatos del territorio de obama tratar de eludir es la mejor opciÓn. >> lo que sucede en la maÑana. >> mitt romney se decidiÓ atacar a al presidente de los estados unidos y ha expandido. y judith estÁ de acuerdo por eso hizo filas durante horas para ver por primera vez en persona a quiÉn le darÁ su voto maÑana y en noviembre. >> las expectativas de que tal vez saque al paÍs del problema econÓmi econÓmi econÓmico en que estamos. >> y con 19 consultas lo lleva 15 puntos a rick santorum. >> lo crÍtico por llamarle un economista sin peso. >> ustedes creen que el paÍs

i want to play this romney ad from february where he's criticizing sonia sotomayor. rick santorum ready to be president? he's never run a business, he's never run a state. a washington politician who proudly voted for the bridge to nowhere and for liberal judge sonia society maetomayosotomayo. >> now, vilifying sonia sotomayor, who is a heroine to many in fact latino community, would be a guilding of the lily, would it not, ari melber? >> there you see it stacked up right after immigration language, right afterward. that's a choice they made. they didn't have to present the issues that way. it draws attention to the ethnicity of the justice in ways that otherwise won't come up. secondly, we have a tradition in this country as discussing the court. it's recently that we've seen this level of vitriol directed at justices. so i think that aspect of it also is unfortunate. >> and jose, let's talk about boetd sides here. we have this fox news poll that shows among latino voters, obama's getting 69%. santorum's way down at 14. romney's at 14. the president's doing solid tw

what is the parade of horribles asks justice sonia sotomayor. if they are not attacks and the health care case goes forward. long suggested, that's the attorney that was one of the three attorneys arguing, suggested it could encourage more challenges to the long standing system in which the general rule is the tax payers must pay a disputed tax before they can go to court. the law referred to as robert long, appointed by the supreme court itself to argue that the challenges to the health care law are premature, representing all those with that point of view because the law known as the anti-injunction act prevents the court taking up the challenge until the individual mandate goes into effect. we have word that mr. long has decided not to come before the microphones in front of the supreme court. and also donald, the solicitor general will not be before the cameras and the supreme court so we heard from just one, gregory katsas. that vehicle is rick santorum, republican presidential candidate who is arriving at the supreme court. to be involved

this is sonia sotomayor speaking today.ten. >> why should we be striking down a cost-saver when if what your argument is was that congress was concerned about costs rising? why should we assume they wouldn't have passed that information? >> i think a couple things. i would think you sort of have to take the bitter with the sweet. if you're going to look at congress' goal of providing patient protection but also affordable care, we can't -- i don't think it works to just take the things that save money and cut out the things that are going to make premiums more expense -- >> i just want to bottom line this, why don't we let congress fix it? >> let me answer the bottom line question, no matter what you do, if you strike down the mandate, there's going to be something for congress to do. the question is really what task do you want to give congress? >> okay. after a quick break though, we're going to hear from antonin scalia as well. in the meantime, we're going to talk some politics here. after slashing his staff, everyone wa

and then finally, there was a very interesting concurring opinion by judge sonia sotomayor who said in the future the real problem is this notion that the court has bought into in the past that when i surrender data to a third party for one purpose, i abandon all expectation of privacy for it and other purposes. this, as you know, is called the third party doctrine, and it basically means we have no privacy in our private papers or locational data, all of which are stored either in cell phone databases or in distributed third party servers owned by google and yahoo! and the digital crowd. that means anytime i store my data outside a locked desk drawer in my home, i abandon expectation of privacy, and sotomayor says the court has to rethink that notion. >> and also this idea that privacy interests are determined by our reasonable expectations, i mean, that's too manipulative, don't you think? we can change your expectation. here's your expectation of privacy, mr. rosen. zero. >> it makes no sense. the government by announcing you may be monitored at all times could lore our expectations

but the difficulty if you look at romney's upon the dream act and immigration reform, sonia sotomayors to warm up. i got to tell you the odd part for me, if you look at hispanics in the attitude toward america, toward entrepreneurship. toward religion. family. they should be easy pickings. kilthey will be. that is the move. that is -- >> kimberly: and they will be. that will continue to happen if we get jobs going anytime around here. they will gravitate toward the conservative movement and republicans. >> juan: i'm saying that the republican attitude toward them is not warm. >> andrea: they can do a better job in terms of outreach. if you deal with core value, it's not a hard sell. we want to say free market, conservative value, religion, family, all of that. the natural fit. yet, if the message is translated they will come. >> andrea: i agree with you on this. i think romney has run to the right on immigration. and newt gingrich has a position that was more flexible i agreed with. i think the republicans are split on this. they concede ground to the democrats on this. george bush di

you had justice sonia sotomayor who was nominated by president obama asking tough questions.tice kennedy who is often the swing vote. he was asked tough questions. it really raises real questions about whether or not maybe this is some kind of home run for the right. jon: to be fair there are also observers, keen court observers who say the chief justice roberts was asking questions suggesting he might vote to improve this thing. >> that is a very important point, jon. chief justice roberts made it onto the bench by talking about humility in the supreme court. that has been the biggest question going into this. is whether or not justice roberts would make the argument that, you know what, congress has spoken, and maybe it was sort of through hook or crook and by the narrowest of margin, but they spoke and it's not our right to smack them down and say they can't do this. his questions focused on larger questions about the limits of the federal government and suggests he might be leaning in the conservative direction on that. jon: there are so many moving parts to this bill, i

for a while, sonia sotomayor, the supreme court justice, mitt romney has been critical of her. she's obviously a puerto rican -- inspires pride among a lot of puerto ricans. couple this issue, this english only issue with the other issues that people feel like republicans are taking hard lines against issues that latinos care about, and it could be a problem in terms of attracting or maintaining latino voters in a general election. fred? >> shannon, something else santorum has been spending a whole lot of time on social issues like pornography, he spoke about it on his website, and contraception. so while that may help him or at least resonate in the primaries, how will those same issues play in the general election regardless of who the nominee is? >> yeah, i mean, fred, rick santorum may have a problem keeping independent voters if he plays up those kinds of issues. we have seen numerous polling that show that those kinds of issues, those kind of hot button red meat issues turn to turn independents off. it plays very well in a primary. you mentioned pornography. the recent br

we had sonya sonia sotomayor, te wonderful personal story and a person of high achievement, 17 yearsas a federal judge, i think more federal judicial experience, i believe, than just about anybody else ever nominated to the supreme court. and, you know, what happened in her confirmation hearing? of course, she was confirmed, so at the end of the day it was a happy story for her. but all that garbage about one speech she had made and the wise la latina remark. you probably remember this. kind of wrenched out of context of what actually had been a speech that was very thoughtful and heartfelt, not a sound bite. you know, opposition research that turns up something like that and dominated her confirmation process and be just the merest handful of republicans ended up voting for her. elena kagan, former dean of harvard law school, as you know, highly accomplished, mainstream nominee for sure, you know, was bedeviled by that whole business about harvard law school having not allowed military recruiters on its campus to recruit students to be lawyers in the military. well, as if elena kaga

president obama would be like for sonia sotomayor. romney would put a scalia on the court. that's what's important not what's said over years of their careers. >> i'll hit pause on that. i don't know that i fully agree but a whole lot of what's out there but we'll talk about that later on in the show. thank you very much. >>> and now, should minors who commit murder be sentenced to life without parole? the supreme court will consider this tomorrow because they're considering two cases in which 14-year-old boys were convicted and sentenced to life behind bars. the supreme court has ruled minors convicted of murder cannot receive the death penalty and there are more than 2500 people serving life without parole for crimes they committed as juveniles. 38 states allow life without parole for minors who commit murder, but is it constitutional? it's a crucial question. jeffrey toobin is our chief legal analyst and he is outfront tonight. good to see you, sir. >> hello. >> we're switching in and out here like crazy on our set. so what is really at stake here. this is a pretty fasci

let's listen to part of the exchange between justice sonia sotomayor, ande paul clement, about this very issue. >> the uninsured are a problem for states, only because they, too, politically, just like the federal government, can't let the poor die. and so, to th extent they don't want to do that, it's because fth eyel accountability to the saturdayry, and so if they want to do it this wear, they have to spend money to do it their way. if they don't want to do it the federal way. so i just don't understand the logic of saying states, you-- you're not entitled to our money. but once you start taking it, the more you take, the more power you have. >> we're not here to tell you this is going to be an area where it's going to be very easy to draw the line. ju' rest telling you it's exceptionally important to draw that line, and this is a case where it ought to be e syasyto o establish ach, beaadhe say that ioadercn matters, say there's three factors of this particular statute that make it as obviously coercive as any piece of legislation that you've ever seen, and then you will have effectiv

the four democrats on the court-- breyer, ginsburg, sonia sotomayor and kagan-- are virtually certain votes to uphold l. clarence thomas has expressed a view of the commerce clause that is really contrary to... that would really require them to strike down the law. so i think those five votes are set in stone. the other four votes i think are up for grabs. i think anthony kennedy has expressed a view of the commerce clause that would subject he uphold this is law. so has chief justice roberts in certain cases. i think... a 5-4 bet is usually the safe bet in this case but i think 6-3 or 7-2 upholding the lawis also possible. >> rose: stuart, do you think that's right? >> i do think that's right. both chief justice roberts and justice scalia, believe it or not, have written opinions that endorsed a very broad vision of federal power in other cases. the cases are different enough from this one so that they can go the other way in this one but i think it's not an accident that the obama administration quoted one of scalia's broader statements five times in one of its briefs. they're hopg

the language, he backed english only here on the mainland, plus, romney's attacks on voting for sonia sotomayorgingrich you would think might have an opportunity, but one of his daughters is going to campaign in puerto rico. where's the kcomeback plan? tell me on the map where we're going to have a day where we say oh, there it is. >> john, i don't know quite honestly how any of the candidates get to 1144 before the convention and i think newt can make a plausible argument to stay in the race in the resources are there. >> can you stay in picking up delegates, especially for now, propor proportional states, can you stay in picking up delegates in second and third or do you have to win? you have to win five, six, eight to be possible? >> i personally think there has to be some wins and not just places in shows. the speaker probably feels the same thing. these delegates, i think, i don't think newt gingrich is the issue. i think mitt romney is the issue. probably 150, $200 million and haven't closed the deal. that's been the narrative all along. nobody wants to believe that. i think newt's still

i sonia sotomayor do slunly swear -- >> just white always used to say when the court gets a new member, it changes everything, it changes everything. simple changes, we move the seats around in the courtroom. there will be a shift there in seen i don't recall. the same in the conference room. more fundamentally, i think it can cause you to take a pressure look at how things are decided. the new member is going to have a particular view about issues should be addressed that are very different from what we have been following for some time. so it's an exciting part of life at the court. >> oh, the institution doesn't change at all. i think the relationships change. you lose a friend and hopefully acquire another one. i miss a lot of my former colleagues on the court from byron white to bill brennan, but that's the process. they go and new people come on. >> it's different. it's different today than what it was when i first got here. and i have to admit you grow very fond of the court that you spend a long time on. there was a period there with chief justice rehnquist and justice o'connor

mitt romney is in illinois today defending statements that he made about supreme court justice sonia sotomayorerday romney told reporters he does not support her as a justice because of their differing philosophies. the controversy stems from sotomayor being of puerto rican dissent. almost the entire country supports the justice including the governor who is a romney supporter. >>> romney's main competitor, rick santorum, is traveling all over illinois stumping for last-minute votes in homes of another big win on tuesday. he told supporters to shake up the race and that he has a unique duty to correct a wrong referring to president obama. the former pennsylvania senator hopes to do well in southern parts of illinois in order to carry the state to tuesday. >>> president obama also spent time in illinois raising big bucks for his re-election campaign. while in the land of lincoln, the president pointed out the candidates do not change the same values as the 16th commander in chief. his fund-raiser in chicago was apparently successful with reports coming in that he raised at least $5 million from

intensity of the surveillance and finally it was an interesting concurring opinion by justice sonia sotomayor who said in the future the real problem is this notion that the court has bought into in the past that when i surrender data to a third party for one congress i abandoned privacy for it for other purposes because you know it's called the third party doctrine. is this doctrine that basically means we have no privacy in our private papers or vocational data all of which are stored either in cell phone databases for distributed third-party like google or digital cloud. i abandoned expectation of privacy and sotomayor said the court has to rethink that notion. >> also this idea that privacy interests art determined by a reasonable expectations and that is manipulable don't you think? here's your expectation of privacy. >> the government by announcing you have no expectation of privacy and you may be monitored at all times may lower expectations. here's a hypothetical i began one of the chapters with bud gets less and less hypothetical in light of this case. i was at a conference at google

elena kagan and sonia sotomayor and ruth ginsberg bader, but the supreme court is not just these folksvery court before it means that the court is the whole history of the court going back to the first courts which were all of course male, white and presumably heterosexual, so let me suggest this that in order to get balance on the court, you'd have to have an entirely female court for say 100 years. and do that thought experiment with me, and keep pushing. imagine that every member of the court is not only a woman, but a woman of color, and imagine that not only every person on the supreme court is not only a woman, and a woman of color, but a woman, a woman of color and is gay, a lesbian. you would think they would all choose the same laws and they would always rule the same way, but my bet is in a court of all women of color who are identified gay, each decision of the court would contain the same complexity that behave seen with all white male supreme courts. talk about this, and other possibilities of how our identifies intersect with the structures i'm back with jessica vicente,