justices sonia sotomayor and clarence thomas have written biographers now. here's justice sonia sotomayor from 2013, followed by justice thomas from 2007. >> greatings. welcome. [applause] >> greatings, walk, progressive forum. i'm randall morton, founder and president of the progressive forum, america's only civic speaker organization exposely dedicated progressive values and the largest speaker organization in texas. [applause] >> thank you. [cheers and applause] >> we are excited tonight to present supreme court justice sonia sotomayor, who is

justice sotomayor: is that the ordinary case? i thought that most of the pornography cases that we're seeing are children not being physically forced into sex but being tricked into it by caretakers or -- or talked into it, et cetera? mr. kneedler: but -- but -- justice sotomayor: one may have personal views about whether an adult can ever not be using improper -- mr. kneedler: but -- but -- but the point is, in that -- in that encounter, the potential for the use of force, the risk for the use of force is always -- the same -- the same risk. and -- and whether or not force is used in 50 percent of the cases or 25 percent of the cases -- justice sotomayor: so it doesn't surprise you -- mr. kneedler: -- in that context is not the relevant -- justice sotomayor: it doesn't surprise you that the courts below are split on this question, just the way they were under acca. mr. kneedler: well, the -- as we point out in our brief, the distinctions in the lower courts on this question and on a number of them have to do with the particular

after justice sotomayor's presentation, she'll join me for a q & a. should say that supreme court rules don't allow to us discuss court cases of the past, present or future, but we will delve deeply into her fascinating story. justice sotomayor will sign books and greet fans in the grand foyer. i cried when i read my beloved world. and i also laughed. it is a good book. i believe it will be more than a best seller. it will become a classic american success story, and required reading at high schools and colleges. i i'm amazed at the e-mails we have been get frog houston students fill with exclamation points, young people connect with sonia sotomayor. in her book, i was especially impressed by the scene of sewn sonia and her brother, junior, as kid, doing their homework with their mother who was also doing hers, studying to become a registered nurse. two generations encouraging each other. to me, justice sotomayor's american success story should replace the narrow horatio algier myth of getting rich in america through individual determination. yes, her

justice sotomayor: no. the -- the nature of a plea shouldn't be to automatically say you've lost all rights because you pled guilty. that's basically what your position is today. mr. feigin: may i answer, your honor? your honor, you don't lose all rights. there is a procedure -- justice sotomayor: to -- to the appeal. mr. feigin: -- that was draft -- that was crafted for entering a conditional plea. and if a defendant does not believe that a case is ended by his plea, he should -- it's incumbent upon him to tell the district court and tell the government that that's what he means when he pleads. thank you. chief justice roberts: thank you, counsel. ms. amunson, four minutes. ms. amunson: thank you, your honor. i'll begin with mr. -- one of mr. feigin's last points, which was whether the error must be clear on the face of the indictment. and, in fact, the claim must be clear on the face of the record at the time of pleading guilty, and that is clear from this court's opinion in broce. and then if i can just

justice sotomayor: i'm sorry. they're estimates where you haven't put any social scientist to say that the estimates are wrong. you've poked holes, but every single social science metric points in the same direction. so there are five of them. your map drawer is one of them, by the way, the person who actually drew these maps, and what we know is that they started out with the court plan, they created three or four different maps, they weren't partisan enough. they created three or four more maps, they weren't partisan enough. and they finally got to the final map, after maybe 10 different tries of making it more partisan, and they achieved a map that was the most partisan on the s-curve. and it worked. it worked better than they even expected, so the estimate wasn't wrong. the estimate was pretty right. so, if it's the most extreme map they could make, why isn't that enough to prove partisan asymmetry and unconstitutional gerrymandering? mr. tseytlin: well -- well, your honor, i think the facts in this case, whic

--tice sotomayor mark: sotomayor: and in some jurisdictions, the judges use that to deny an acceptance of responsibility. mr. feigin: your honor, that is specifically addressed in the sentencing guidelines and the commentary to 3e1.1. and it says that a judge may give the acceptance of responsibility reduction to a defendant who insists on a trial solely for the purpose precisely of preserving a challenge to the statute. justice sotomayor: and "may" doesn't "should." and "may" is discretionary, because the sentencing reduction is discretionary. and i know of many prosecutors' offices who routinely tell judges if a defendant seeks to preserve an appeal right, they have not accepted responsibility. and many judges, just like many judges won't accept the appeal waiver for that reason, don't give the acceptance of responsibility. >> your honor, i think the points that you're raising are the kinds of things that are best considered through the kind of process that produced rule 11(a)(2). and i think if we're going to decide that their is going to be a particular exception to rule 11(a)(2) t

that, to me, is a little odd, particularly when justice sotomayor says, we give ax murderers, bail hearings. are they dangerous? the people in the first category might have relatives in los angeles, they might have a green card somebody decides is no longer valid. what's the basis for reading the word "detained"? sometimes to allow bail hearings at the discretion of the agency. other times, not to allow bill hearings. and keeping the people possibly for a year? a year and a half in a jail cell? sorry, i don't mean my voice to rise, but without even a bail hearing, where -- where -- i meany the word "detain" doesn't say that. it just doesn't say. >> sections 1225 and 1226 have traditionally been understood to get at different categories of aliens. 1226 is the provision we use when we arrest somebody who has entered the united states. 1225 is the one we use when dealing with aliens who arrive at our shores. there is a tweak to that principle, you alloweded to aliens within 100 miles of the border or within the country more than furnish days. in most cases those are people who just arrived. th

mismo una de las personas que interpreta la ley dentro esta naciÓn es una portorriqueÑa, la jueza sotomayor que regresamos con mÁs informaciÓn tras la breve pausa. julio: en repÚblica dominicana mÉdicos suspenden si el gobierno se sienta dialogar. eduardo: las temperaturas se continuaron frescas entre 63 y 67, gran parte de las estaciones el pronÓsticos el fin de semana, en segundos. julio: la labor periodÍstica el descubrimiento de recientes desastres, la cobertura del huracÁn marÍa no comparaciÓn, una de sus periodistas dejÓ sus cÁmaras para ayudar de una manera diferente. marÍa nos cuenta. marÍa: sus abuelos perdieron casi todo con el paso del huracÁn marÍa. >> mi corazÓn tiene la condiciÓn de diabetes. yo estoy embarazada. durante el paso del huracÁn, tuve que y la sala de emergencia y me diagnosticaron con una amenaza de aborto, porque estaba sangrando. marÍa: mÁs de dos semanas despuÉs de vivir prÁcticamente sin comida y agua, se fueron al aeropuerto privado de isla grande buscando salir como fuera de puerto rico. >> estoy desesperada y loco por salir del paÍs para poderme atender mej

cherished circuit justice ruth bader ginsburg, our beloved colleague, former colleague, justice sonia sotomayor form many years was a member of this court.

mismo una de las personas que interpreta la ley dentro esta naciÓn es una portorriqueÑa, la jueza sotomayorhan continuado frescas. gran parte de las estaciones, el pronÓstico hacia el fin de semana, en segundos. julio: gracias por continuar con nosotros el momento de abrir la ventana al tiempo con nuestro meteorÓlogo, que nos presenta el informe y los pronÓsticos para el fin de semana. buenas noches. eduardo: muchas gracias, amigos, hola. finalmente un poco de fresco, 65 grados, deberÍamos estar en 68. llevamos dos dÍas en condiciones normales hemos tenido nublados, algÚn sector registrÓ algunas lloviznas. la mÁxima hoy 63 en alain town. atlantic city 67, en la ciudad de filadelfia con 65 grados. brisa, no mucha la que hemos tenido ha estado del este, moderada, 6 millas por hora, lo principal es que la humedad tambiÉn ha estado muy elevada entre 80 hasta 100% en sectores costeros. nublados noten los reportes de llovizna. que ha estado afectando algunos sectores en especial queremos ofelia que a para estar en esta situaciÓn, y en esta latitud acÁ están la azores. con esta trayectoria que pud

. >> maria sotomayor-giacomutci and the philadelphia immigration and citizenship coalition are doing their best to answer those questions. >> we work to educate and train our community members um what's going on with immigration and also how they can defend their rights being here. >> maria was also a daca recipient and came to the u-s from ecuador in 2002 she is familiar with the struggles undocumented philadelphians face. >> we were actually denied access to a public school um and the woman who was helping my mom told her that she had all our information they were going to call immigration on us. so that made us really scared so we had to move around a lot. >> many undocumented immigrants flee to the united states because there are no other options in their home country. >> because of economics, crime, and even, the ecology. >> which was the case for both maria and olivia. >> as long as there's necessity people will risk their lives knowing that there's a risk of losing them, out of love for their families. >> congress has 6 months before the current daca policy expires in march, a

justiceished circuit ruth bader ginsburg, our beloved colleague, former colleague, formce sonia sotomayor who many years was a member of this court. and, justice elena kagan a great friend of the second circuit who participated in our 125th anniversary program on thurgood marshall. judicial colleagues, staff, members of the board, and friends of the second circuit it is an honor to welcome you here this afternoon to this special session of court as we bring to a close our courts your long retrospective marking 125 years of the u.s. court of appeals the second circuit. us, it is exciting to soin this historic room were many noteworthy cases have been adjudicated. itchief judge, i serve first. all are committed to the effective administration of justice. we have been fortunate to have the great advocacy of those who have argued in this courtroom. when i proposed a project for the 100 25th year anniversary of our core, i did so not for any-celebration but because institution, if it is to do its work well should from time to past tolect on its better resolve the present in to meet the challen

circuit and she is now clerking tor justice sotomayor and has a remarkable story how she got there as well. to answer your question, i agree it feels strange to give prisoners educational opportunities and job training considering they have committed crimes. t that view is also very short-sighted if what we want is that while people are serving punishment is for them change their lives around and have job skills and job training, so that when they come out they aren't commiting new crimes of endangering the public safety. we want, eally what spending a little bit of money on the front end help those people when they get out. it's going to save a high we wa spending a little number on the back end when we don't have to reprosecute and reincarcerate that person. the institution has done several studies on this. of incarcerating one person for one year in prison is anywhere from 30,000 to 80,000 a year. of it's very expensive and dangerous when you just warehouse people for decades, kick them out to the streets and then wonder why a miracle doesn't happen and they don't have success. ost

and for sharrie williams and sonia sotomayor i'm brian taff. and every night for a full hour of "action news" at 10:00 on phl 17. >>> "action news" delaware valley's leading news program. with jaime apody, meteorologist, cecily tynan, rick williams and monica malpass. >>> how do you get into the mind of a person capable of shooting five people, co-workers, i get chills thinking about it. >> a multistate manhunt is over after an accused murderer was captured in delaware county. the suspect is held on 2.1 million there's bail. thursday night and the big story is the first appearance in cord for radee prince. >> it all began yesterday morning at 9:00 a.m. when officials say that prince opened fire at an office complex where he worked in suburban baltimore. and two hours later prince allegedly shot a man twice in wilmington and was captured in newark near glasgow high school. we are learning about prince and his criminal past. chad pradelli is live with that part of the story. >> reporter: yes, radee prince was well known to authorities, he has a l

justice sotomayor: why didn't they take one of the earlier maps? mr. tseytlin: there was no constitutional requirement that they do so. they complied with all traditional districting runcible's. >> let me take you back to justice kagan's question about legislators using these techniques. are all the techniques that are used by politicians in order to try to maximize their chances of electoral success scientific? i think they rely a lot on polls. how scientific have a proven to be? mr. tseytlin: legislatures can very much rest on conjunction, where courts cannot. i reserve the balance of my time. >> mr. murphy? mr. chief justice in may it please the court, plaintiffs have not identified a workable standard for determining when the inherently political task of districting becomes too political for the constitution to tolerate. the only thing plaintiffs and added to the mix is a wasted votes test identifies court drawn maps and enduring partisan gerrymander's and favors their own political party. >> you probably considered the hypo many times. suppose a s

it all depends upon the ordinary case analysis which goes back to justice sotomayor's question early on. the heart of this problem is this ordinary case approach and none of the statry differences help you figure out what the ordinary case is. >> and mr. rosenkrans, just to tie in this ordinary case problem about during the commission of the crime, does the government in all of this briefing and all of argument ever come up with a single crime in which the ordinary case of that crime, the injury would be occurring after the commission of the crime? if the commission of the crime is taken to mean not just elements, but a more general view of what the crime is. i'm government has never come up with a single case under aca in which -- remember, aca requires you to look at the ordinary case. in the ordinary case, what crime has injury that occurs after the commission of the crime? the government has not told us of any. >> that's correct. after the crime is over, i mean conspiracy or solicitation to murder. the crime is done, it occurs after -- i think the government's current position wa

is ten thousand plus when you're dealing with the likes of this is there because he's a big judge sotomayor and then takes us to the house of justice there this is just as derry and this is made up but here is me or given the money to just is there it was a very quick meeting because mayor did you want anything to be discussed there was a follow up meeting and the more unconventional bribe and this was the goods that we went to give him on that fateful day. one of and that is investigate is it doing the deal either under god. he was going to do car meanwhile the crane took down the conversation we first had the judges fix our mayor who has been handling the deal yet and. i think don't nine thousand to lose you under five dollar implies there's one thousand no doubt but the it. with the it in no you know you get the no order thank you my lawyer you know so there has just realized now that he's there ripped off by his clack. you know the system and then he put it. on his. investigated i want to know whether the bribe will get the accused off but this is going to thirty three years although no

justice sotomayor: why didn't they take one of the earlier maps? mr. tseytlin: there was no constitutional requirement that they do so. they complied with all traditional districting runcible's. >> let me take you back to justice kagan's question about legislators using these techniques. are all the techniques that are used by politicians in order to try to maximize their chances of electoral success scientific? i think they rely a lot on polls. how scientific have a proven to be? mr. tseytlin: legislatures can very much rest on conjunction, where courts cannot. i reserve the balance of my time. >> mr. murphy? mr. chief justice in may it please the court, plaintiffs have not identified a workable standard for determining when the inherently political task of districting becomes too political for the constitution to tolerate. the only thing plaintiffs and added to the mix is a wasted votes test identifies court drawn maps and enduring partisan gerrymander's and favors their own political party. >> you probably considered the hypo many times. suppose a s

progression of thinking when the native community that you fought in your dissent that your agreement of sotomayor dissent, was that your moving forward to rectify something of the past? >> when you're on the losing side, you have to remain hopeful in this way. it's maybe the court didn't get it right today. but they will have another opportunity. when i think of the history of the u.s. supreme court. think back to the time around world war i. opposed to the draft and expressing their views were arrested and charged with some criminal offense. there were two justices at the time. who said, free speech. these people have a right to speak their mind. the law shouldn't touch them for doing just that. they spoke just for themselves. but in the fullness of time, those first amendment free speech discepts are the law of the land. the hope is that, i think it was chief justice who said, dissent is writing for a future day. future day when the majority will understand something they misperceived at an earlier time. >> the issue gay rights has been something that has seen evolution as well with the court.

it depends upon the ordinary case analysis which goes back to justice sotomayor's question early on. the heart of the problem is this ordinary case approach and none of the statutory differences that the government pointed to help you figure out what the ordinary case is. >> just a to tie in this ordinary case problem with this phrase about during the commission of the crime, has the government in the briefing and all of the argument ever come up with a single crime in which the ordinary case of that crime the injury would be occurring after the commission of the crime? if the commission of the crime is taken to me in not just elements but a general view of what the crime is. >> in this case. >> i'm suggesting the government has never come up with a single case under aka in which, remember it requires you to look at the ordinary case. in the ordinary case, what crime has injury that occurs after the commission of the crime? the government hasn't told us of any. >> that is correct. after the crime is over. the conspiracy or solicitation to murder. the crime is done. it occurs after i

by answering a little bit more fully justice sotomayor's question at the end. approximately 55% of non-union contractsployees have that are covered by mandatory arbitration agreements, and that about 60 million people. employees have non-individual -- i'm sorry, non-class, non-collective restrictions which represents about 25 million employees. am i may -- >> so this decision in your ther would invalidate agreements covering 25 million employees? honor. your if i may respond to a few points of mr. wall's. seems to be a belief on the employer's side that employees to waive section23, rule 20 and 16b rights under the fair labor act, except when the section 7 of the nlra is in the picture somehow creates an anomaly, but that's not the case, your honors. rulehese others, rule 20, 23 and section 16 create remedial mechanisms, but they substantive rights. section 7 of the nlra, section laguardia actris create substantive rights, but they create no procedural mechanisms. nothing really odd about not allowing employees covered section 7 or coercing them in this way. su

second, a justice sotomayor if you said is there anything comparable? wide world immigration be unique? and with that doctor and/or the idea of the political branches and even also think of it as the application and it is often the case the government house to provide and then the lady individual already has as a benefit to the individual. >> with respect to the 1225 to have an executive with the intelsat member. servo magistrate of any kind that looks at that executive decision to make sure it isn't arbitrary. >>. >> that is the case as the constitution is concerned and what congress specified. and then to make a decision by the congress did not provide for zero a judicial review and that answer what you would have notes due process clause. >>. >> justice eliot talked about in to to a total of saluting answer to that is north. with respect to the determination sub-index of the do have a constitutional right to not to be tortured ed is pretty close to that in an arbitrary confinement. but arbitrary means nobody gave him the individual hearings so we don

today, justice sotomayor powerfully asked what value does gerrymandering have on our democracy? gerrymandering has no value in our democracy. [applause] it is time for the supreme court to adopt an overdue rule making clear what constitutes unlawful gerrymandering and it is time for the supreme court to put in place rules that would yield fair maps. fair maps in which the voices of all voters will be heard. thank you. [applause] >> we're tired of your tampering! stop the gerrymandering! we're tired of your tampering! stop the gerrymandering! we're tired of your tampering! stop the gerrymandering! we're tired of your tampering! stop your gerrymandering! >> please join me in welcoming our next speaker from the fair elections project of wisconsin, sachin chheda. [applause] sachin: ladies and gentlemen, are you ready to take back our democracy? are you ready to take back our country? are you ready to say that everybody's vote counts? >> yes! sachin: this case started because citizens got together, five of us in a tea room in milwaukee after the 2012 election when we turned around an

circuit and she is now clerking tor justice sotomayor and has a remarkable story how she got there as well. to answer your question, i agree it feels strange to give prisoners educational opportunities and job training considering they have committed crimes. t that view is also very short-sighted if what we want is that while people are serving punishment is for them change their lives around and have job skills and job training, so that when they come out they aren't commiting new crimes of endangering the public safety. we want, eally what spending a little bit of money on the front end help those people when they get out. it's going to save a high we wa spending a little number on the back end when we don't have to reprosecute and reincarcerate that person. the institution has done several studies on this. of incarcerating one person for one year in prison is anywhere from 30,000 to 80,000 a year. of it's very expensive and dangerous when you just warehouse people for decades, kick them out to the streets and then wonder why a miracle doesn't happen and they don't have success. ost