justice sotomayor: mr. bright, mr. linear answered yes when during the trial when he was act -- when he was asked -- if he had done the same extensive that brown checks on all of the jurors. did you find any evidence of that extensive background check? >> the race color-coded list. have first four lists you in which the blacks are marked with a b and highlighted in green. green designates black. >> your understanding of that statement was that he had only done an extensive search on the blacks on the list. stephen bright: it is clear that mr. linear had prepared a list, notes, where he just discussed the black jurors. the state can see in its brief that the focus was on the black jurors. justice sotomayor: during the trial, did defense counsel, when he made his batson challenge, at trial, did he again say that this was part and parcel of the prosecutor's pattern? stephen bright: he did not say that but i point this out. when they discussed the batson motion before trial, there was never a suggestion that th

justice sotomayor was the sole dissent vote. >> seattle's landmark getting a face lift. >>> legendary new orleans musician has died in spain, he was 77 years old. he suffered a heart attack in madrid last night. he was very long writer, producer, composer and performer. his hits include the song "southern nights." >> secretary of state john kerry saying climate change is a threat to u.s. national security. he was speaking today at old dominion university in virginia. he said people and society are threatened by rising sea levels and changing global temperatures. later he meets with students there in science and engineering fields that can help solve the problem of global warming. >> apple c.e.o. saying corporations need to take more responsibility to save the environment, tim cook saying businesses you arejectly need to address global warming, saying climate change can negative affect economic stability. >> a sticky clean up in seattle. it is a wall of gum 20 years in the making. we have a close up look. >> seattle's must-see tourist spots, space needle, fremont troll, bruce lee's gra

long enough to sit on the set at sesame street and share a coffee with supreme court justice sonia sotomayor. >> yes, yes. and i wrote that bit for her too. i have to pat myself on the back about that. >> and also a bronx girl, also a puerto rican, and someone that you could teach the audience a few words of spanish. >> right. the fact the she's noyurican just pleases me beyond belief. it's wonderful to be from the island, but that she's from here. and we refer to each other as the other sonia from the bronx whenever we get together to help initiate a bronx children's museum is when i see her once a year. and it's just wonderful. >> but isn't that a sign that america is a different place from the days when you and the other cast members thought that part of sesame street's brief was to change the world. >> well, sure, ray. i mean things are better. i'm an example of it. she's an example of it. you're an example of it. but certainly when african american boys are profiled and we see these horrible footage of what's happening to certain young men, i always wonder what about the footage that we

looking at the chart again, , sotomayor, in the single digits or 04 justice sotomayor are.ore senior justices expect to receive the more significant assignments on the court. andfact that kagan sotomayor are on the lower end is not raise any eyebrows. has zerothat sotomayor after about 20 opportunities or so, does raise an eyebrow. the most interesting thing to look at in terms of seniority is hell relatively low justice scalia is. after the chief, scalia is the seniormost justice. he does not receive a higher share that you would expect. in fact, justice alito, who is quite junior to scalia, who just got on the court in january of 2006 -- scalia was on 20 years earlier -- justice alito has as many as justice scalia. in many respects, i think it is significant to see the chief seems to like to assign opinions to alito and the shies away on a relative basis from assigning to justice scalia. host: is this radically different from how other chief justices have used the power to assign cases? guest: the numeric equality is quite different than in the past, certainly from 50 or

maria sotomayor is an undocumented immigrant from ecuador who lives outside the city. >> i'm always scaredparents are going to be picked up by immigration, either going to the store or going to work. >> reporter: she says philadelphia's policy has just made people more comfortable interacting with police, but that could now change. >> changing this again is going to make a lot of people nervous, really scared, and it's going to confuse the community. >> reporter: if mayor nutter does make a change, it might not last very long because mayor-elect jim kenney tells me he would change it back when he takes office. he also tells me that he has encouraged mayor nutter not to do anything on this right now. live in center city, i'm lauren mayk, nbc 10 news. >>> well, just minutes ago we found out we did hit 70 degrees officially. on november 16th, but for the rest of the week our temperatures are on a roller coaster ride and some heavy rain is coming. details in my first alert forecast next at 4:00. >>> it's a question that's been brewing for years, is coffee good for you or not? now after pulling

people ask me why not sotomayor or why not kagan?than happy to share the celebrity. she's been the firsts in a lot of her life but she's never been one to only -- to be the only one. she wants to bring other women along with her. she's taken an active role in mentoring the other female supreme court justices. she was very happy that obama appointed them. >> it is one of the questions of leadership when you are the first to trying to make sure that you are not the last. we got a little bit more. "the notorious rbg" co-authors even good the scoop on justice ginsburg's regular workout from her long-time personal trainer. here's the j us tis her back back in february throwing down a workout challenge. >> so, as you know, i met with your trainer. i interviewed him. lovely gentleman. >> he said you wouldn't try out my routine. >> some day. i can't keep up with you justice ginsburg because i heard you can do 20 pushups? >> yes. but we do ten at a time. and then i breathe for a bit. and do the second set. >> you can't just let something like

. >> justice sotomayor. i don't think there is substantive day light between .petitioner's use and ours. it meant in treating it as a category. i think sums up the reality of what is happening. we broke it out into its component parts because i think it facilitates the analysis of it to understand that miller does have a procedural component. sentencing courts must now consider the mitigating characteristics of age. but it also and more fundamentally, in our view, contains a substantive component that required a change in the law. now, the change here was expanding the range of outcomes. previously when this court has analyzed substantive changes in the law there have been changes that restricted the form of outcomes, say, for example, in justice breyer's hypothetical forbidding punishment at all. i think that, if you trace back the origins of the substantive category to justice harlan's opinion in mackie, this is still faithful to what justice harlan had in mind. justice harlan said the clearest case of an

you succeed in confirming a robert bork or a douglas -- makes a huge difference whether you have a sotomayor or a satin or a sessions but it makes a difference would have a justice kagan or a cavanaugh, or a cruz. ideology matters and to note the objectionable, like the back and forth with steve on it, that sometimes you can't really know in advance judicial philosophy. sometimes it's considered not proper to ask or that it is not politic to press the position. my answers are yes, you can no judicial ideology in advance fairly reliably, and just it is proper and necessary to ask. of course, you can know how these individuals will be as justices on the supreme court. i don't think it's bragging or any sort of special skill, but really give me 10 minutes with a prospective nominee and i will tell you they're likely to be on the supreme court. i will not have everything right but they will not disappoint well-settled expectations based upon an interview that put straightforward ideological questions to them. you can tell in advance the difference between a scalia and it justices. of course, is

when you have both come you can always have, as miller-el recognized -- >> in response to justice sotomayor's question, if the prosecutor argues a laundry list of reasons for striking the black juror and some of those are reasonable and some are implausible, how should the court approach that batson analysis? >> i think the court looks at which reasons are pretextual. the fact there is a laundry list suggests that the court should scrutinize the reasons very carefully, should be suspect of the reasons. otherwise wit what the court is going to do is just simply encourage prosecutors or any party in the case, since batson applies to everyone, is going to encourage a party to just get as many reasons as possible and hope that one will be acceptable. >> don't you think this is a case-by-case thing? supposes there's one reason particular reason? like this individuals numerous prior felony convictions, and the prosecutor says in addition, and this person, he looked down at the floor in answering the questions and didn't seem to cause it didn't seem to understand some of the questions. so under a ci

huge difference if you succeed to confirm and it makes a huge difference whether you have justice sotomayorrecessions or justice kagan or cavanaugh. ideology matters in the objection will come this sometimes you cannot know in the vance sometimes it is considered not proper to ask were not politics but my answers are yes you can know that in advance fairly reliable it is necessary and proper to ask for course you can know how they will be as justices on the supreme court i don't think it is bragging or a special skill but give me 10 minutes i will tell you how they are likely to be on the supreme court i will not have everything right but they will not disappoint well settled expectations to put its foreign debt questions to a then you can tell in advance the difference between scalia and justice souter. it is proper to ask these questions sometimes to look at judicial independence with the constitution is of function of salary guarantee of life tenure that should be the assurance of this additional autonomy. beside the gives the explicit political confirmation m process as part of the sepa

the supreme court where as soon as sotomayor is ready to retire, mary can take over.found out on friday that after waiting three months, marry passed the maryland bar, which is fantastic. she was out with her brother for dinner. there they are on capitol hill at a place called bull feathers. your mother and i karnt be there. peter, buy your sister and everybody in the bar a drink. just like in the movies. and he did. then saturday he told me how much that was. that was really -- there were a lot of people there. congratulations. >> found out she passed the bar. free drinks all around. >> congratulations. to anybody who did not pass the bar, it's the world's hardest test. there's always another one in february. >> do you know what she plans on doing? >> public service. >> over the weekend, i had a chance to go to mclean, virginia and over to -- that, i believe, is mclean, virginia and then of course, over to fredericksburg. the birth place of george washington. huge crowds. everybody was talking about the show. everybody had their own incident or something that they we

ginsburg instead of ending up with antony kennedy and makes a huge difference whether you have a sotomayorour session. makes a difference when you have a justice kagan or a cabinet or a cruz. ideology matters under the objection will calm and here i would like to get back and forth with steve on it. sometimes you get to know him as judicial philosophy. and sometimes it's considered not proper to ask or that it is not politic to present a position. my answers are yes, you can no judicial ideology in advance fairly reliable, and just it is proper and necessary to ask. of course, you cannot these individuals will be as justices on the supreme court. i don't think it's bragging or any sort of special skill but really give me 10 minutes with a prospective nominee and i will tell you how they're likely to be on the supreme court. i will not have everything right but they will not disappoint well-settled expectations based upon an interview that puts straightforward ideological questions to them. you can tell in advance a difference between a scalia and a souter. of course, is proper to ask these

succeed in confirming a robert or a douglas ginsburg and makes a huge difference whether you have a sotomayorr a sudden for a session. a big difference when you have a justice kagan or a kevin na or cruise. ideology matters and of the objection will come and tear up like to get back and forth with steve on it, sometimes you can't read note what is best judicial philosophy. and sometimes it's considered not proper to ask or that it is not politic to press the position. my answers are yes, you can no judicial ideology in advance fairly reliably and yes, it is proper and necessary to ask. of course, you can know how these individuals will be as justices on the supreme court. i don't think it's bragging or any sort of special skill but really give me 10 minutes with a prospective nominee and i will tell you how they're likely to be on the supreme court or i would not have everything right but they will not disappoint well-settled expectations based upon an interview that puts straightforward ideological questions to them. you can tell in advance the difference between a scalia at a david souter.

when you have both -- you can always have as zrñmillerel recognized -- >> in response to justice sotomayor'sstion, if the prosecutor argues a laundry list of reasons for striking the black juror and some of those are reasonable and some are implausible, how should the court approach the batson analysis? >> i think the court looks at which reasons are pretextural. i think the fact that there is a laundry list suggests in and of itself that the court should scrutinized but the reasons very carefully, should be suspect of the reasons because otherwise what the court is going to do is just simply encourage prosecutors or any party in a case since batson applies to everyone is going to encourage a party to give as many reasons as possible and hope that one will be acceptable. >> don't you think this is a case-by-case thing? suppose there's one reason that's a killer reason like this individual has numerous prior felony convictions. and then the prosecutor says in addition. and this person didn't -- looked down at the floor in answering the questions and didn't seem to pause and didn't seem to und