sotomayor was a wonderful artist. he did paintings and drawings as well as pen and ink including this wonderful fountain. please help us put this fountain back together on the island. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. are there other speakers? >> good morning. i'm retired admiral john biddulph. i had the honor of living in nimitz house on yerba buena island. i am here today in my capacity as a member of the treasure island museum advisory council. following the 1989 loma prieta earthquake and in the process of inspecting the island for damage, i came across a fenced-in area containing colorful ceramic tiles, and their beauty caught my eye. research revealed they were part of the pacific basin fountain from the 1939 world's fair. as a history buff and an art aficionado, i wanted to preserve these facts and have the terra cotta tiles repaired and installed in front of building number one. i like to see myself as the stepfather of this fountain. i requested special funding to make this happened, but i retired

and just to put sotomayor in the context of art, on the left is lucien laboe, sotomayor, and other people involved in the art in the fair in 1939 and 1940. the fair ended in 1940. the navy moved onto treasure island, demolished pacific house and relocated the fountain to a remote area of the island. unfortunately, the navy also cemented the pieces together. it removed there for almost 50 years, where it was a source of enjoyment to people on the island. when the navy aunited statnnou 80s that it had other plans for the location, the navy and the island moved it to museum in district one. during this, sotomayor passed away. he died believing that the fountain was under restoration. in his obituary, the paper called him san francisco's novel laureate. this was the last photograph taken of the fountain before it was dismantled. engineers determined rather than moving it in one place, the fountain would have to be cut along mortared joints. tida is

>> so let me give you three responses, justice sotomayor. the first is it hass the same right to make a contract, if you ask an english speaker regardless of her race, whether that person was denied the same right to make that contract, i think people would say no. >> the dictionary says definition of making is just, quote, the process of being made. so it's the process, it's not just the entering into the contract. there are different words in the statute. >> so i'm happy it address the making point. >> but i want to go back to the broader point which is how can you say that you have the same right and eliminating all vestiges of discrimination and are not using a motivating factor, but a but for standard. >> justice sotomayor, there is a lot baked in there. to the extent that you think there's some ambiguity in the language, the next place to look is a textural clue in the 1866 act so when congress originally enacted this provision, section 1 was the general declaration of right of the 1866 act and that's now become section 1881 and congre

[applause] justice sotomayor: welcome everyone. good evening. i am always pleased to come to the supreme court. i am so delighted many of you are joining us this evening for the third of the society's four-part 2019 leon silverman lecture series on dissent in the supreme court and new perspectives. during my tenure on the court, i have observed and appreciated and participated in many of the extensive efforts the society undertakes to engage its members on the greater world in the history of this institution. lectures such as this one are just one example. i along with my colleagues, so grateful for the work the society does to educate the nation and the ways of the supreme court, the constitution, and that judiciary. from teacher training programs and middle schools and high schools, to publications like the journal of supreme court history, the society's efforts deeply and rich americans in their search for civic education. tonight's lecture is on dissent. jester just justice bradley in the slaughterhouse cases, is a topic of particular intere

justice sotomayor: i believe that the city has foresworn any future prosecution for past violations. i thought that that's the representation they made to this court. >> in their latest letter they were very careful about what they represented. they represented that they wouldn't try to prosecute somebody from past conduct if the past conduct didn't violate current regulations. so if the past conduct happened to involve a stop for coffee and not continuous uninterrupted justice sotomayor: the business to do with the current law hasn't been decided by the court below. that is a complaint about the limits of the current law and not the limits of the old law. you're asking us to mix apples and oranges now. >> i don't think so. i think what i'm asking you to do is exactly what this court did in the knox case. justice sotomayor: no, what you are asking us to do is to take a case in which the other side has thrown in the towel and completely given you every single thing you demanded in your complaint for relief and you are asking us to opine on a law that's not on the books anymore. and on

. >> it absolutel is, justice sotomayor. >> and the u.s. of force is on u.s. land and it's unreasonable because the claim is that this young man was doing nothing but standing on the other side of the border. >> and i think this might be sort of a more convincing answer, i hope, to justice gorsuch. i do believe it's relevant to the claim and strength of our claim in this case that the respondent was, according to the plausible allegations in the plainti plaintiff's complaint violating not just the constitution but his own departmental regulations, that we have not just a. law enforcementer i h g justice gorsuch, but acting -- a >> are we suppose to decide just this? i thought --onstit i wrote a de iw guess. i thought this is special.>> a it'sre american law enforcement americanth soil and he thought might be shooting an american. cours and thee border in this case i rather special. it's not just a line. it was the river. and it's administered by an international commission, duh, j duh, duh. that persuaded only me.ul now i thought we were taking wer thise case

she's also a pulitzer prize finalist and the author of books on sandra day o'connor and sonya sotomayor. her book is the turbulent times of chief justice roberts. and as i said, it's available for purchase. back to the new york historical and moderated this evening she's the chief washington correspondent for the journal and for the u.s. supreme court for more than 30 years. she's a regular contributor to the supreme court in ... to the news hour and she has written for publications such as though, ms. magazine and the roberts court. make sure anything that makes noise like cell phones or switched off and now please join me in welcoming our guests this evening. thank you. [applause] good evening. it's wonderful to be back with all of you tonight and especially wonderful to be here with my friends, my colleague, supreme court watcher as i am to talk about jones terrific new book about the chief justice of the united states john roberts junior. i'm going to start tonight by giving all of us a sense of john roberts the man before we talk about john roberts the justice on the supreme court.

the court had only one woman on it, the year before justice sotomayor arrived. it was only justice ginsburg. there was a case about a 13-year-old girl in a junior high school who was strip-searched because she was thought to have marijuana or some other kind of drug on her. she was strip-searched by these middle school administrators. i would say that it was not the greatest day on the bench for the supreme court. you can see justice ginsburg in the questions that she asked, she could have a picture in her head of what this was like and what it would feel like if you were that 13-year-old girl. but she was really the only one. some of the men on the court were not having their finest hour. they were joking, not appreciating what this would have seemed like with 13-year-old girl. there was a lot of commentary on it at the time, all deserved, i think. then they went back into the conference room. i don't know what happened there. they came out and justice ginsburg's view, that it was an unconstitutional search, it prevailed by a lopsided vote. in the end, she was

[laughter] set -- sit on the left and justice sotomayor sits on the right. justice ginsburg sits on the middle. there are voices coming from all over. i think, this is fantastic. these girls are listening to this. and all these boys are listening to this. it says something how women can be in the legal profession and society. us serve assome of role models for people who have children. teenagers and even you guys. court and seee somebody who they can relate to. [applause] >> i want to turn to an issue which you have written about. the confirmation process. in the past you have criticized ae confirmation process as " vapid and hollow charade." [laughter] those are your words. what are your thoughts now? what do you think are some of the most important attributes of a supreme court justice? perspectivegive you about when i said those words. [laughter] before i went through the process -- [laughter] quite a bit before. i wrote the article when i was a professor at the university of chicago. i was a young professor in my early 30's. i had just come back from a s

and the fact that these were artists, sotomayor and covarrubias showed the diversity of artists that were working on the island, as well, and that whole theme of peace which was working with the fair, and was the start of the united nations. thank you for that part of history in which san francisco played a role. i think it's something that we need to look at. as we build a new island, there always has to be a look back, a tie back to the past. i think we can't forget the past. and i appreciate the work you do as a museum to keep that history alive. really appreciate. i think there's two major questions that we have to ask. first of all how much, and whe where? those are the questions that we have to ask to see what we can do with this mountain and refurbishing it. and my understanding from the presentation and under -- you make certainly some assumptions with that. it was approximately in today's dollars $1.6 million to restore and another $1 million to site. is that correct? yeah, $2.6 million. so it's not an insignificant amount. in fact it's more than any individual piece of artw

also a surprise finalist and books on author sandra day o'connor and in tone and scully and sonja sotomayor. release book is robert jeffress and as i said, it is available for purchase. we are also very pleased indeed to welcome jared kushner back to new york historical. she is the chief washington correspondent for national law journal and covered the us supreme court for 130 years and is a regular contributor to the newshour and she has written for publications like vogue, ms. magazine and the new york times and is the author of the roberts court, and hours before we begin i would like to make sure anything that makes noise like a cell phone is shut off. thank you for welcome at our guests this evening, thank you. [applause] >> it is wonderful to be back with all of you tonight and wonderful to be here with my friend, my colleague, my supreme court watcher as i am to talk about joan's terrific new book about the chief justice of the united states, john roberts junior. i want to start by giving all of us a sense of john roberts the man before we talk about john roberts for justice on the s

able to appoint the kind of judges that we see right now that i admire like elena kagan and sonya sotomayor and justice ginsburg. barack obama took every suggestion i made have been excellent, excellent judges. that's what you look at as well as my experience. when justice kavanaugh, then nominee kavanaugh took me on i didn't back down. i strongly opposed him and made a point to the american people. >> we've been talking about the debate and what happened there. looking ahead to the debate in january, you say you've already qualified for that debate. so far only -- >> yes. >> -- five white candidates have qualified. why do you think that is? >> you have to look at each individual campaign. i am hopeful that that won't be the end. my friend cory booker's out here in iowa campaigning as well. i know that andrew yang has qualified, at least partway, toward making that debate. we will see what happens as this campaign keeps going. there's been a lot of twists and turns. all i know is this, dahna, we have a huge momentum going on right now. every one of our events in tiny, tiny towns, we've just

all that they sought in the initial lawsuit that they had filed, and you had, for example, justice sotomayoring this cityhe through inowel here and what are we to do with this? you're asking us to op on the old law when there's the new one in place. then you had t other side justices gorsuch and alito who pushed back, their questions were geared more to see were there still issues left unresolved. justice gorsuch was -- the court doesn't like it when, after they grant review, one of the parties takes an act to get rid of the case.so ustice gorsuch called this a herculn late-breaking attem to moot the case. and justice alito also called this an extraordinary step to keep the case from gettg to the merits of the constitutional challenge. so they continued to probe the still something that they could decide. >> yang: why was ito significant that the court took this case in the first place? porter: first of all, it was the first case in almost a decade in which they were going to take up theme second ame. gun rights organizations have been very frustrated with how the lowerourts have been applyi

she pivoted immediately to take a shot i president trump just as sonia sotomayor is sitting on the supreme she didn't make president obama's short list to replace david souter, now she is auditioning for a job at msnbc. >> she probably scolded president obama. listen i have a resting i am going to chew nails phase and i know you have to work on it. you can say biting tough things but you have to at least look in a way that people are going to listen to you. >> we know everybody has an agenda commits how you make it more palatable. >> president trump speaking out about his relation with world leaders in that hot mike moment about canada's prime minister, justin trudeau. what the president is sank now and what all this says about his role in the global stage we made usaa insurance for members like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his nei

and if you don't move fast, then sotomayor a proble it's a problem. >> she could say republicans areng well making these process arguments. advisers of the president said the importance is for us to keep it at 35,000 feet and not to engage in the actual substance. just keep decrying the process. keep trashing the pros. maybe that's what nancy pelosi wants to do here. i'm with maggie. i think mcconnell looks at this and says, fine. we'll move on and you'll look completely craven and political and they'll be ready for that attack. >> can they move on without the articles of impeachment? very quickly, jeffrey? >> they can't have a trial. but the point maggie is making is mcconnell will say, if you don't want to do your job nancy pelosi, i can't force you. and we're going to go on about our business. that's the risk she's taking by raising this subject. >> yeah. i don't know if it's that big of a risk to her. she's saying if you don't want to do your job, mitch mcconnell, then we're not going to move ahead either. >> i know. but i think that we're getting into the territory where the dem

sonya sotomayor came in and said i have a particularly good one. and we are in the room getting ready to walk out and do some of my art like is she going to walk out of there like that? somebody says you are really going to go out there. we have a tradition of the junior justice had dinner for the next new justice, the supreme court, and through a fabulous dinner she knew that the least loves indian food and happened to know the great indian chef and came in and cooked. it was fantastic. we had a tough road when they came on board and i know and admire justice kavanagh and wanted to throw -- but i knew he was a meat and potatoes kind of guy and at the dinner was going to be boring so i have to do something in the entertainment department. after dinner i asked everybody to please get up from the dinner table and come to the supreme court of the united states for a little entertainment sees a huge baseball fan and there were mascots that had giant foam hands by 12 feet tall or something. it's crazy. my wonderful assistant went online. we hired two of

i wrote but justice scalia and justice sonia sotomayor and i found elements elements of distd resentment with him. frankly, sets himself above the others, just as you read in that letter. and i didn't know how much to make of it. so i mention it. at little points in the book but what i say is that it doesn't really affect the law in the end. might affect how they navigate on cases, how they -- who picks the phone to work on a compromise, who might feel like backing off of a concurrence that the chief might not want to have stated, but in the end it's more a human dynamic element than something that affects the law we all live under. >> all of those authored have appeared on booktv and you can find their programs in their entirety at booktv.org. type the author's name in the search bar at the top of the page. >> this sunday, booktv features three new books. at 5:30 p.m. eastern, author and kole umist am my sh lass compares the economic debates of the 1960s to those happening today in her book "great society: a new history." >> generally speaking a terrible morning after effect of the fall

lining up after handshakes and justice sotomayor comes in and she is not wearing her beautiful robe,ut this one has pinstripes on it and the new york yankees emblem across her chest. [laughter] justice gorsuch: i guess the yankees have done well recently, she was pretty excited. a few of my colleagues were nervous about this, and we are lining to go up into the courtroom and one of them says, are you really going to wear that on the bench? and she says, no, i was just waiting for someone to ask. [laughter] when a newsuch: justice arrives, the most junior justice, everything is done by seniority in the courts. the most junior justice has to throw a party for the new justice. justice kagan treated us to a wonderful evening in which she made sure we had indian food because she knew louise loves indian food and she got a chef she knew and washington to come and cook for us, and it was magnificent. cavanaugh arrived, i knew he was a meat and potatoes guy. dinner was going to be kind of boring and i had to come up with something to liven up the evening. i said after dinner, everybody follo

administrative purposes over federal circuits with some justices picking up two, justice alito, sotomayornd roberts each supervise a couple of the federal circuits. it happens to be that justice ginsberg oversees really for administrative purposes the second circuit court of appeals and that's where this case is coming up from. it's important to go back to the second circuit court of appeals opinion in this case because what they said about this litigation and i will quote, they said, quote, there is a clear and substantial public interest, closed quote, in the people seeing the financial documents and information sought by these congressional subpoenas from deutsche bank and capitol hill one. when we think about the fact that deutsche bank loaned $2 billion to president trump or to then donald trump or candidate trump, that doesn't make president trump a billionaire, what it does is it puts him deeply in debt. i think when we finally see these financials, and we will, we're going to see that donald trump is not a billionaire. he may not even be a millionaire. at the end of the day when w

before i chose justice roberts as a subject that emerged in the research i was doing with justice sotomayord the more approved the more i found allison -- elements frankly why he sets himself above the others as you read in that letter and i didn't know how much to make of it so i mention it at little points in the book is that i end up saying is it doesn't really affect the law in the end. it i'd affect how they navigate changes in who picks up the phone to work on a compromise, who might feel like hacking off if the chief might not want it. in the end it's more human dynamic element than something that affects the law we all lived under. generally speaking there is a terrible morning after effect following the great society binge. the economy began to flail as it never had before. we know that unemployment went towards 10% and we know that interest rates went past 15%. the high cost of labor under policies backed by the government did drive for american companies to leave town the grass that grew in pittsfield. >> to my mind a picture of what happens as this was actually. clear. i get the

weissmann, nyu law professor melissa murray, also a former law clerk to supreme court justice sonia sotomayor, and msnbc's own chief legal correspondent ari melber, who happens to be the anchor of "the beat" on this broadcast. garrett haake is on capitol hill. and garrett, if we can, i'd like to start with you. set the scene for us there. and how, perhaps, today feels different from the last time we did this, the last time we set up what we knew were going to be days of coverage on the hill. >> reporter: yeah, brian, today the surprises won't come from the witnesses. the actual testimony we expect to hear today will be part history lesson, part legal seminar. if that's not very exciting to folks, the fireworks today could come from the members themselves. the judiciary committee in the house is historically the most partisan committee in the house, and this body is no exception. you'll see some of the president's top defenders here, doug collins, ranking member on the republican side jim jordan is back. matt gaetz will likely introduce himself as one of the president's more vocal defenders he

. >> that's right justice sotomayor but if we go to the complaint i think we should look at paragraph 41, joint appendix 36 where we ask for a unrestricted access to gun ranges and second homes. unrestricted. i don't think at this late stage we are being offered unrestricted access and i think . >> but justice alito said stopping it from others, when you sayunrestricted that that mean i can carry my gun for three days ? do you think that a court actually would have crafted an injunction at all with hypothetical situations? it would have said you can carry your gun to the range and then would have left for further litigation specific applications of that general rule. >> i don't think so your honor. i think what would have happened is the parties would have had their proposed injunctions, there would have been a huge delta and we would have disputed the same type of questions. here we wouldn't have to rely on the city's representation of state law because we could have an injunction that enforced thesecond amendment . it's important to understand how state law city law -- >> i'd be del

. >> so two point, justice sotomayor. the first is i understand manner restrictions and i understand the requirement that you carry the gun unloaded or do it in a locked container, but a ban is not a time, place or manner restriction and determining what cat gore te finds under and what's permissible. heller said you start with history, text and tradition and the court commonly does that, and the first amendment for search and the serventh amendmet and heller said you start here and there is no historical analog in a contrary tradition. >> thank you, counsel. >> mr. dearing? >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court. contrary to how they're framing it now, they frame it narrowly. a premises license specifically must allow certain limited transport of the licensed handgun to effectuate its possession and use in the premises and they sought only injunctive and declare toa decl relief and that has two implications now. first, the case is moot because the case in state and city law have given petitioners all that they'

president obama's short list to replace -- to replace david sutter that was in 2009 instead sonia sotomayor court, she was too far left for president obama. >> the only one that wasn't antitrump, he ended up getting death threats to his home, people coming after him and attacking him because he didn't fall in line with everybody else. maria: more shaming, more shaming from the left. >> turley's position is you guys might have a case, but you have to do the work, do the investigation, so he's not dismissing the possibility that -- maria: he didn't vote for president trump. he made that very clear but they want to speed this through. they are trying to get him impeached within 2-week period, dagen. dagen: can i ask andy, one thing that jonathan turley said, core witnesses an documents that have not been through the courts is moving forward -- the house moving forward based on conjecture, why aren't democrats pursuing in the court, they can wait for final ruling on don mcgahn, you would want to wait for don mcgahn to testify but they are not waiting? >> i think, dagen, one reason is they don't

would appoint judges that are in the vein of people like elena kagan and justice breyer and sonia sotomayort's not forget the notorious rbg. that's what i would do. [applause] and if you look at my record as a lawyer and a member of the judiciary committee, look at the judges that i recommended to president obama, people like mimi wright, who is a superstar, and susan richard nelson. look who i've put in as the first openly gay marshal in the history of the united states. i did that because i knew they were qualified people to take those jobs. and you need to do it not only with the right judges and have that know-how, but you also have to do it right away. that is one thing that we all learned from when president obama was in, and that was that he was dealing with an economic crisis and it was hard to do it right away, but we have to immediately start putting judges on the bench to fill vacancies so that we can reverse the horrific nature of these trump judges. [applause] judy: a follow-up to mayor buttigieg. beyond a pledge not to overturn roe v. wade, which i believe all of you have said

i think my favorite one is sewn a sotomayor came in one day after the yankees had a good run and sheg to wear that on the bench? and but nobody said anything and we're lining up to go into the courtroom, and finally one of my colleagues said sonja, are you really really going to wear that and she said no, i was just waiting for someone to ask. ainsley: [laughter] that's great. your wife is precious. your family. i'm curious to know how has it been living in washington? you're from colorado, big fly fisherman? >> i am. and i miss colorado just about every day. i think i realized that life was going to change maybe the day i was nominated, and the president xied us to come to washington but to do it quietly. he wanted to surprise the announcement and how do you get into the white house without anybody knowing? and it turns out it's through the kitchen door, and so louise and i snuck in through the kitchen and the president graciously allowed us to use the lincoln bedroom as my office for the day and i got to write my remarks for the evening next to the gettysburg address, it was a movi

would appoint judges that are in the vein of people like elena kagan and justice breyer and sonia sotomayor let's not forget the notorious rbg. that's what i would do. if you look at my record as a lawyer and a member of the judiciary committee, look at the judgmen judges that i recommended to president obama. people like mimi wright who is a superstar, and susan richard nelson. look who i've put in as the first openly gay marshal in the history of the united states. i did that because i knew they were qualified people to take those jobs. and you need to do it not only with the right judges and have that know-how, but you also have to do it right away. that is one thing that we all learned from when president obama was in, and that was the that he was dealing with an economic crisis and it was hard to do it right away, but we have to immediately start putting judges on the bench to fill vacancies so that we can reverse the horrific nature of these trump judges. >> a followup to mayor buttigieg. beyond a pledge not to overturn roe v. wade, which i believe all of us have said would be part of