well, in the sense of directly administering justice, this supreme court is today the highest court, uh, on which u lies, the duty to consider complaints of protests against judicial decisions of lower courts , verifying the legality of the validity of these decisions. well, and, accordingly, uh, their adjustment, if necessary by law and circumstances, did uh, a whole series, uh category e of criminal civil economic cases. today is their consideration in the competence of the supreme court, as a court of first instance, but uh, directly the administration of justice. this is just a part of our complete. and i would say today that the main task of the supreme court is to perform such organizational coordinating and guiding functions in relation to courts of all levels, and in all areas of judicial activity, including, as i said, both personnel and logistical support. here is the 2013 reform, as we call it. she allowed. uh, well in practice very clearly implement the constitutional principle of separation of powers in our state and exclude even the potential for any interference in the

of the supreme court.l, and, accordingly, belpochta, uh, biotin, the radio company are preparing, uh, on the eve of anniversary events, the release of a film dedicated to the history of the supreme court. belarus separately, of course. this book follows, released in honor of the anniversary of the participation in its creation. uh, a whole team of professionals - these are scientists from the faculty of law of the belarusian state university and employees of the supreme court of professional historians when they worked on this book. here it may be new facts. it is very interesting that, for example, we asked a question. here, describing the history of the creation of the supreme court building. where was our building located? here, uh, in the twenties. uh, thanks to uh, a request from the national archives was able to find out that uh was the very first building located. e, at the address of karl marx 5 this is the current building of the state control committee, for example, the building was also located

supreme court. just last year. so, it's going nowhere. trump will try and use this for months of delay, i don't think it's gonna work. the nation's second highest court, the d. c. circuit, where this appeal is being lodged, just last week, gave trump about six hours, or the government about six hours, to respond to trump's appeal and denied the whole thing within 24 hours. i suspect, maybe not that fast of a timetable, but a very, very fast time table, lawrence, federal judges are getting increasingly upset by trump's delay tactics. >> so, this one maybe not measured in hours, more like days. still, very quick. they have become impatient. dan horowitz, speaking of impatient, i know the audience, i know i speak for them when i say, i have been waiting all day for you to explain to me what is going on on the calendar of the manhattan grand jury? >> i'll tell you, lawrence, this delay as you said in the intro as was playing for a while. also two things. first of all, the da's office wants to be careful and deliberate before they actually have

cases before the supreme court.hat was the job scalia wanted. he was passed over. then he was passover when president reagan named an individual to fill a vacancy on the pc circuit court of appeals, which is one rung below the supreme court, the second most powerful court in america some say. he was passed over in favor of his friend again. when the vacancy appeared on the supreme court, sandra day o'connor was named instead. scalia had been passed over three times in about seven months. i call this chapter bitterly disappointed, because he told his first biker for that he was bitterly disappointed at not being chosen to be solicitor general. and i quote from tom petty, the waiting is the hardest part. a vacancy opened up again on the pc circuit court and scully was nominated for it. before that happened, he was offered a seat on the seventh circuit court of appeals which operates out of the midwest. and scalia really had cut his teeth on the ministry of law, to most lawyers it is the dreary us the most dismal subje

supreme court model into closer alignment with the most admirable state supreme court systems. almost nine of which feature acts of service for life. the federal government can, and should learn from the lessons of states, the proverbial laboratories in the american democratic experimentation. this is what you see. number 12, ditto on the compared international front. almost no modern democracy and the world has a lifetime active service for their supreme court. america as a whole can learn from these experiences, and the roles of other notable democracies. i'm not taking a decision on supreme court cases, barring another side of the kingdom with passing laws, or amendments. we, as a society have lived to see what italy, france, india, germany, germany, israel, and so on, what they do. 13, unlike current reform proposals to pack the court, 18 year proposals are not partisan, and is unlikely to spiral out of control, and party control ships in washington, d.c., and some other future points. i think that as we try to do it today, the dems that, sextonville public concern controll

supreme court systems. almost none of which features active service for life. the federal government can and should learn from the lessons and their proverbial laboratories of the american democratic experimentation. tweleve, ditto on the comparative interaction front. almost no other modern democracy has a lifetime model of active service. america as a whole could learn from the experiences of the world and the democracy. and i am not taking the position on the supreme court cases from other agencies that were passing laws and thinking about amendments. we look to see what india, france, germany, injury -- england, israel, and so on do. 13, unlike current reform proposals to pack the court, 18 your proposals is not part -- not partisan. it is likely to spiral out of control of the party control shifts in washington dc in the future point. so i think the first court packing if we try to do it today, then it makes, and the republicans are in -- control, we have 16, then we have 26. and so this will not happe

the powers of the nation's supreme court. parts of the legislation have already passed the 1st reading in parliament simco hoffman from the far right village has signed his party is one of the main architects of the tradition reform. he states voters have given the government a monday to go ahead with a controversial overhaul in november. first. a lot of people went out of the whole homes and voted, and they voted on exactly this issue. so to listen to that, there is a lot of people with it is small minority israel said to says, is that this reform is not good for them. we have basically a court that is an unbalanced and uncheck on like the other entities in with the government, which are checked and balance. so we need to introduce checks and balances to services to the deponent disagree. they say the overhauled the give the government unchecked power and overrides israeli to dish or aris independence in little. and there's no constitution in the state of israel and no declaration of human rights. we do not have the 2 houses

the supreme court could not. this supreme court takes it as the case comes.ome of the other questions that the caller raised, the question of fundamental fairness. that's an important consideration. one that is debated in congress. it underscores the fact that by taking this out of the legislative branch and doing it through executive power, biden did not allow the people's representatives to debate it. elizabeth: the congress has already ran this discretion to the secretary. when they were coming up with targeted student debt relief they look particularly at data that along with the constraints of the heroes act, which show who would be worse off because of the covid-19 pandemic in relation to their student loan debt. so those because of their lower income would more likely be in default or delinquency with their student loan payments and targeted it through the heroes act. it doesn't matter what school you went to. if you have a federally held loan it applies to you. some of these questions are policy choices. there were people who wanted the heroes act to

will that matter to the supreme court? do facts still matter at all? t but to the country especially to women who are by and large the victims of domestic violence. brian. >> yeah, well, if you go back to the heller decision, the late antonin scalia in that case said there's a fundamental right to bear arms in the home for self-defense. but commonsense restrictions on that right from municipalities and states to pass statutes for their skate. the current supreme court don't believe in that. they're highly interested in drastically and dramatically expanding that second amendment well beyond any reasonable interpretation of it. we're poise to see the logical extrapolation of that idea with this case that's arising out of the 5th circuit. the supreme court could presumably side with domestic abusers to continue to have a gun. that will further shock the conscience of the country but it goes to show how much these justices act with impunity when it comes to ethics and with respect to far-reaching nature of the decisions. >> if you take their word for it it

but the supreme court will find a way, as the lower courts have done, to prevent the president, this president, from exercising that executive authority. it's another demonstration of why the public has lost confidence in the united states supreme court. and with that loss of confidence in the court comes a loss of confidence in the rule of law. justice and the rule of law are bedrocks of our democracy. and if the people lose confidence, it doesn't work. and so what is the solution to this dilemma that we face? i've got a couple that i have proposed. one would expand this united states supreme court, unpack it. they say that you're trying to pack it, but no, we're trying to unpack it. they packed it, republicans packed it. we're trying to unpack it. it's for the sake of our democracy that we need to pass legislation that unpacks the court and expands it with four additional seats. and something else we need to do, we've reached a point where lifetime tenure does not work anymore. we've got federalist society justices on the court and federalist society judges throughout the federal c

the supreme court has not cancelled it yet. | court has not cancelled it yet. here's some laws which are harderfor the supreme there's some laws which are harder for the supreme court to cancel and there are those, this law specific law, for example, which is going to allow him to appoint his own judges, let the government choose the next two judges which is absolutely against the system in israel. there were never any politicaljudges. suddenly, everyone unintelligible mr netanyahu judge and maybe the next one is not but two and then the president of the supreme court, the head of the supreme court, is also going to be political. and everybody will know that. how should people feel about this judicial system when they know that the judges are political? this is absolutely against the system here. fiifi against the system here. 0k, ishay hadas. .. _ against the system here. 0k, ishay hadas. .. thank - against the system here. 0k, ishay hadas... thank you very much for being with us. ishay hadas. .. thank you very much for being with us.- much for being with us. tha

, but the interesting thing is that we were told by the supreme court. our judges have been requested to be executed, this is the basis of this limited information that has been published by this court , there is no specific information at the moment, to be precise, the photo is a novel . the wahhabi sect is also destroying it, what do you think and what is its plan that even some wahhabi preachers opposed it? it is happening. that is not possible at all with this current state of society it doesn't mean that you are with an extremist fundamentalist who is known as the most stubborn opponent of modernism . they don't study women's education. from the principles of tourism and community development, you cannot tolerate such people who are not even willing to tolerate their opposition . they are busy and yes, because these people and this idea have made a request for them, who have not committed more crimes than this . they are the most notorious, bloodiest, and lightest intuitive metals. these are the ones who have requested the death sentence for you . th

we've already had over the last year reporting about a campaign to influence supreme court justices, buying buildings across from the court and now this. i mean if the public was already disenchanted with the court wondering if something's up with the court maybe this is not the neutral arbiter we thought it was, this is not going to help, and it's not going to make john roberts job as chief justice the steward of the court's institutional legitimacy any easier. >> $1.6 billion. thank you for your time tonight. thank you for your outrage with me. i need it. >>> coming up, i took a trip down to the sunshine state over the weekend and i'm going to give you a sneak peek coming up next. m going to give you a sneak peek coming up next or you could see, everything that could be. go. baker tilly. (male announcer) important information for viewers age 50 to 85. have you thought about getting life insurance to help your family with funeral expenses, but worried it would cost too much or that you wouldn't qualify? at colonial penn, we talk to men and women like you every day. and today i'd like

- are the two related cases in the supreme court? these are both challenges _ the supreme court?challenges to the - the supreme court? these are both challenges to the student debt programme, so one brought by several states as you noted at the beginning. the other is brought by two private individuals, both before the supreme court. the legal questions are whether the court can actually he the committees, whether it has jurisdiction, whether it has jurisdiction, whether the states were challenging at all the individuals who are injured by the programme and the second question is does the heroes act actually allow biden administration to get rid of student debt what is the crux of the republicans republicans argument against biden's debt relief plan? the crux on the merits is that the heroes act does not specifically say that the government can forgive student loan debt and allow the secretary of education to waive or modify things and they say it does not allow them to completely erase the student loan debt and they also rely on a very recent supreme court law called the major q

why is randi wine garth inch the supreme courts person. >> i have no idea.is eighth grade english teacher in rural virginia, randi could have gotten her fat ass on off supreme court and come here to see what here policies have done to teachers, and families, students whose lives are destroad because destroyed. every single turn randi has cared about two things. attention, and politics, and that is it. she is like the doctor who is not just bad at his job but intentionally trying to kill out operating table. she is a disgrace, i can not believe there is a si person in this country who would want to put her on a mega-phone. kennedy: lesley, i agree, i don't think she is doings movement any favor. >> as a feminist high lost me at fat and ass. i know randy randi. i saw tweets on line about them, what do they have to do with education. she is speaking about education, because of her position heading up american federations of teachers anding i all other groups are supportive of fight before the supreme court. to have this debt collection for students there were j

there are checks and balances on the part of the supreme court as it is today. what the government is seeking is absolute power. and this is of course, what the liberal democracy cannot hold when there is a complete power, absolute power for the government. now the architects of this overall, but of course a is not absolute power they're seeking, they're looking simply for a system to keep the supreme court in check. i want to ask you about the timing of this initiative and we have benjamin netanyahu. he's israel's longest serving prime minister for a total of over 15 years. what you think has changed that we are now seeing his government push forward this traditional overhaul plan? well, he says she thinks this agenda this a single getting more power or absolute power in my view for the government and for the majority, it's not just in it's, it's an agenda, populist agenda which empowers good people. let's take away the power of the safeguards. it is safe. the gatekeepers that you lease the judges. it's something which is not just in the israel. we see it in ot

in general, how does it become judge of the supreme court.hat are the requirements contained in the code of the judiciary and the status of judges of the republic of belarus, in principle, a candidate for the position of a judge here of general jurisdiction of any level can be a citizen of the republic of belarus who has reached the age of 25, who speaks the state languages, who have higher legal education with the qualification of a lawyer or a lawyer with a consciousness of economics is older than work in the specialty for at least three years; this is for first-time applicants for judicial work. well, of course, uh, not having committed discrediting his actions for the exam. here is such a long list of requirements by a judge of the supreme court of the republic of belarus for less than 5 years. the inclusion of the law makes for the composition of the judicial collegium for intellectual property of the supreme court in its composition , they may, however, be appointed. uh, some work experience in the field of patenting. but this is explai

they wish they could have had black on their supreme court. if we have arab judges in israel, who convicted israeli president and prime minister, it's as far away from a part time. ok. okay. go and i know i know the both gideon and sally shaking their heads, disagree, disagreeing with you there. but we're almost out of time and that's not the issue that we're discussing here. go, how serious is this political crisis? has it as israel faced a political crisis of this magnitude before? is it the biggest threat to israel since its foundation? so we have had many crises in israel politically, in the period of the oslo accords, in the withdrawal from gaza back in the 1950s when israel received reparations from germany after the holocaust in israel managed to make it through all those. and as you point out, there are distractions, and because of the fight being internal that's led to international issues like the fight against preventing the nuclear was ation of iran falling by the wayside. and that is definitely something that puts israel security

then as i feared the gun lobby working on a case before the supreme court the bruin case. last year the court's majority went further than necessary to decide the case and establish a new truly historical test for considering the constitutionality of gun laws. the gun lobby was thrilled. wayne lapierre of the national rifle association put out a press release. he called the bruin decision a landmark when for the nra. quote that unequivocally the position of the nra. that's the same wayne lapierre said in this room 10 years ago before this committee that we quote need to enforce the thousands of gun laws that are currently on the books. but the bruins -- didn't say that. said many gun control laws remain in america. the nra will continue to fight these laws. now after the bruin decision long-standing gun laws on the books are being challenged acrossec the country. morery than 100 cases so far in under the new bruin historical test judges decide not whether a law protects public safety. whether the lot resembles laws that were in place in 1791 or in 1868. in the beginning of

it is to the supreme court? it is important _ to the supreme court?important to recognise it's not just about protecting the independence and the power of the supreme court — there is a broader concern about israeli democracy, a fear that if you really weaken the supreme court and politicise the judicial appointments process you are basically giving all power to the government, to far—right government. beyond that there is a concern, really, what this government might do with that power. well it further weaken democracy? will it move israel towards becoming a theocracy? is there any sign of the israeli government budging? very little, there was an opportunity earlier in the week when the president proposed a kind of compromised package but the government immediately shot that down and i think in many ways prime minister netanyahu himself may want to stop this, may want to find some sort of compromise but he is really hemmed in by hardliners in his own party and particularly by the coalition partners. in many ways you can't stop this process and i than

not just identifying it was for the supreme court, but for the lower federal courts as well.eals judges in four years. barack obama in eight years nominated and confirmed 55. the trump administration basically get that in half the time and a lot of it was lettered leo. and a lot of it was a betting these individuals through their bonus fetus through letters legal federal society. >> yes! >> so all this is sort of deeply intertwined. the judicial crisis network which is now a concrete fund, which is also part of the letter toledo empire, is related to the federal society which letter leo was the chairman up for many years, but now has that back as we watch this for profit consulting c. it's a lot! and all again impeccably intertwined. there's all of these shadow organizations providing funding that no one really knows about, and again -- as you say, we don't understand with the funding stream is between these nonprofits and the for-profit consulted say that is immersed in recent years. >> and these price tags are massive! right? >> i mean that had raised red flags. >> yes! >>

so this is the supreme court is really one of the only checks on the government and the government. now trying to roll back some of those checks. and they're saying that, you know, that that's important to post opposition to opposes of the, of the bill changes rather as saying that it would, it would mean that minority rights are rejected. and that, you know, yeah, basically that, that a lot of support. there's a lot of personal within the government, the ultra orthodox factions of the government want to to push their changes ahead and that, that requires a weakening of the supreme court as well as the national religious. and of course, benjamin netanyahu, himself is existential for him. he's also facing trial so it could personally benefit him to have changes to the supreme court as well. so definitely something that is really is leaving the country apart, monica right. all right, her dw rebecca ritter's reporting introduce alom. rebecca, thank you. let's take a look now at some of the other news making headlines around the world. israel's military says its forces shot and killed 3

however, the supreme court is really not the correct avenue for that effectively. the plaintiffs in this case are asking the court to rewrite the law and overturn decades of precedent in a way that i think would effectively overturn the law. and it would throughout the baby with the bathwater. julie john says the supreme court is not the correct avenue for that. what do you make about that? that's an interesting take. it does highlight the fact that this, this, this case does raise issues that go way beyond recommender system that go way beyond just google and that really interrogate, can we hold companies liable for recommending terrorist content? extremely fascinating question in bright. now from our position, it would be difficult. first of all, it would require a very streets agreement on what terrorism means, because today we're talking about isis and in the likes. but we also know that they are very, there is an understanding of what terry's organizations are and this is very visible on another issue related to content moderation. because platforms do have lis

the united states supreme court -- roe v.ade and republicans are attacking reproductive rights at every angle at a high paced speed. my home state of florida republicans are pushing a six-week abortion ban that for most women even know they are pregnant. in idaho republican legislatures moving ahead to restrict travel between states to get abortion care. i mean come on that's blatantly unconstitutional. and that's not even the worst. south carolina republican lawmakers are considering a bill that will allow the death penalty for women who get an abortion. this is horrifying stuff and that's what republicans are fighting for. i'm very proud to lead the democratic women's caucus. we are 94 member strong. [applause] we love our male supporters too. thank you. we are fighting back, all of us to pass the women's health protection act legislation that creates legal protection for the right to apply access to abortion care free from medically -- restrictions. look at us here. my colleagues and i are mothers and fathers and grandpare

proposals, a threat to democracy. supporters said that the plans which reduce the influence of the supreme court and allow political influence in selecting court justices are the will of the people. others have grave concerns about the rule of law and minority rights. one of the many protest happening across israel, this time is really ami veterans and reserve is have invited the public to demonstrate against the government's plans to change to legal system across the street from prime minister benjamin netanyahu office sigma bessler. a physicist is addressing the rally. these were the scientists baris, that is rose. democracy is in danger. the new government trying to impose laws such that the government will be supreme to basically everything including justice. so while we are here to make sure that such a legislation will never bess, it will take us down below the hungary and poland and turkey and iran went before us. we just want to make sure that this is not happening here as well. just a few 100 meters away at is riskiness at the far right government is pushing through with its plans to tr

the supreme court's ruling will be issued in june . here in america, many women have student debts, among them, black and latino women have the most student debt. they receive less than others and the most. they also have debt i am heavy, i am from a low-income family, this is an opportunity for me at the same time as the supreme court meeting, the borrowers gathered in front of the building of this institution, the main challengers of this plan are republican fisheries, they are the daughter of an immigrant, and that's why i don't have a rich family, i had to study get a loan about $30,000 in student debt the high cost of living forced us to take out a loan today i'm telling the supreme court to listen to the millions of people in need middle class people who are drowning in debt cancel the debt opponents of this plan argue that govt. he must have exceeded his powers and wants to hear the congress in mr. england's attempt to open the only land route with europe. britain, which has left the european union during the previous prime mini

right to control our own bodies have been up for debate in the halls of congress muster when the supreme court ruled against the human right and the will of the people we were disappointed. certainly not surprise. the court claims that are human rights are invalidated by what is and what isn't rooted in our nation's history and traditions. well let me be clear this nations history and traditions denied my very personhood. by the way pass the era. this tradition bought and sold my ancestors in this history -- who look like me. our humanity and bodily autonomy are under attack and our legislation must meet the moment. the women's health protection act is essential. twice now twice we stood up to codify the fundamental human rights of abortion care and by we i mean democrats and the situation has only grown more dire. mothers denied necessary medical care during her pregnancy loss, 11-year-olds forced to bear a child? an abomination. and with the maternal morbidity crisis with women four times more likely to die in childbirth or birthing complications looking at the prospects of forced birth, thi

it was just made up by the supreme court justices. could you talk a little bit about the dangers of appellate fact-finding in terms of how it permits ambitious and activist courts to run a bit wild?what happens on appel especially if the court on appeal is doing historical fact finding that's subsequently determined to be erroneous. the lower court is then bound by that erroneous historical determination when ordinarily there would be appeal and challenges, so this is transforming the way this the litigation is looking. >> i think it needs to transform a good deal because if you have an appellate decision that stamps on what events have proven to be utterly. facts and the appellate court hasn't gone back and cleaned up its clean air or then it becomes incumbent on the lower courts to take a look at that and see if it really makes sense because marbury versus madison says it is the job of the supreme court to decide with the law is and has no expertise with regard to the fact in fact it is probably the worst part of government to make t

be appealed all the way to the supreme court's.that is the next step. the gig companies major victory for them mostof prop 22 and what that means is that of course they can keep classifying their workers as independent contractors instead of employees and what that could mean for california if the california supreme court upholds this ruling is that other companies could try to dignify their workers. they could try to adopt the huber model to try to save money and try to turn their employees into independent contractors. the other thing is that the companies have said that they want to spread the proposition 22 model elsewhere. so if they would in california, it is a big deal and they could try to expand that model everywhere. >> the california supreme court will be interesting because what started this was a b5 which was based on a california supreme court ruling. basically all of this is started by the supreme court's. we had a b5 and then we had -- >> the new labor law that required all of these companies to treat their drivers

the plants would allow israel's parliament to override supreme court rulings and permit the government to make judicial appointments with its representatives. supporters of the judicial reform say the changes are necessary to redress the balance of power. wow. wars of outrage rang out across israel. the demonstrations of almost become a weekly ritual. since prime minister benjamin netanyahu returned to power in january. critics fear his plans to reform the judiciary would. hollowell, the high courts, independence and good its ability to service, to check on the israel government, allowing a simple majority in parliament to reject this decision. we are protesting because if not, he said like compliance and we will never agree to have democracy. abolish in this country in a country that's long, prided itself and being the only democracy in the middle east. many is really see the legislation as an assault on the very soul of the country. i mean, to demonstrate them to sound my voice against the dictatorship of their stub this year in the name of the so called law judge called reform. it's

supreme court is expected to hear challenges to the gutting of the agency in the near future. the election agency is not perfect but it is a pillar of mexico's fledgling democracy after the armed forces and at tack has been part of his assault on ngo's and independent government agencies. in her article, shannon o'neill writes that he has raided the funds for artists and academics and atack those who criticize him. this is out of a text book claimed to speak for the poor, attack the elites and meanwhile run a shoddy and incompetent government. when a journalist reported on the lavish life the president's son lived in the united states, he released the journalist's alleged personal income information which the mexico bar association said violated the constitution and the tax code. he campaigned on a promise to fight corruption but according to the ngo mexico against government impunity, his government awards three out of four contracts using a no-bid system that does not ask for competing offers. mexico's biggest problem is not an economic one, but rather a political one. the s