the biden administration has appealed that the supreme court. have find out whether the court will take that case. for now it remains available at least until the supreme court deal with the appeal. host: marcus arndt was it could -- one concern was a kid go to the fda and regulatory power and impact. is that still a concern? guest: it is a concern for supporters among the fda. this unusual case where the federal court essentially second-guess scientific judgment of the fda. said it did not give enough treatise of the arguments -- credence to the arguments that the drug was dangerous. concern is if a court can do that, it can do that with all manner of drugs the fda has approved. host: one of the topics debated on capitol hill frequently is social media and it looks like the justice may have to take a look at a couple cases concerning that. from texas and florida. guest: there is that bucket and another bucket. texas and florida laws both conservatives run states would restrict the discretion of social media companies when they say take down mis

former president of the supreme court and grand chamber of the supreme court and elect new supreme courtjudges to fill vacancies through a transparent process involving independent experts and civil society. and while the supreme the court is waiting for the next reform, its judges make dubious and even absurd decisions, which concern, in particular, the national security of ukraine. the panel of judges of the first judicial chamber of cassation. the members of the criminal court , including vyacheslav marynych, volodymyr korol and alla makarovets, decided to help the odious ex-reginal and treason suspect oleksandr shepelev, who was involved in high-profile criminal crimes, avoid responsibility. former people's deputy oleksandr shepelev is accused of involvement in four contract killings and the organization of an attempted murder, and is also suspected of embezzling more than 200 million hryvnias from a bank pedigree and high treason. he is not an entirely simple character, and is related to a number of other criminal processes that have been investigated, there is a contract killing on

now, it's not a surprise that the supreme court picked up these cases. the united states asked the court to take up of cases and today, whether the content moderation restrictions violate the first amendment and two, whether the disclosure requirement violate the first amendment. as i mentioned, before the case, the 11th circuit decided that -- in joining the law and it would likely violate the first amendment because it discriminates based on the content, viewpoint and the speaker. in the great line, it is an instance of burning down the house. the 11th circuit found that that was largely right, but basically the first amendment text platform moderation decisions because a private entity decision -- and that is what this is, private entity decisions about whether a website and in what manner can they disseminate third-party content of the public are editorial decisions that are protected by the first amendment, and then long-standing supreme court precedent going back to the miami herald case. that establishes that the right of publishers to exercise edi

the supreme court's decision in the case will have far-reaching implications beyond just alabama. indeed, issuing its decision, the court said loudly and clearly that the voting rights act of 1965 is not only alive, but it's enforceable. yay! however, while we were thrilled that the court upheld section 2, without the full protections of the voting rights act at section 4 and 5, states remain free to pass discriminatory laws to restrict voter access. on tuesday i was proud to lead every house democrat who signed on by introducing once again the john robert lewis voting rights advancement act. [cheers and applause] into the 118th congress. our bill will fully restore the voting rights act and ensure that every american, every eligible american, can make their voice heard at the ballot box. we urge our colleagues to give it their full support and to have all 224 democrats sign on to the bill is a big feat. we're so excited about that. we're introducing it on the senate side by senator warnock and we're excited about that. above all, the battle over redistricting is about fairness. fa

with decisions of the supreme court from the sixth. july 2023, to consider oleksandr oleksandrovych shepelyev as having fully served his sentence according to the sentence of the desnyan district court of the city of kyiv dated august 7, 2020. how did it happen? judges of the supreme court vyacheslav marynych, volodymyr korol and alla makarovets decided to apply the savchenko law to shepelev, and to add a double term of imprisonment to the sentence imposed by the dysnian court. the odious ex-deputy in the pre-trial detention center and went further, credited the term of stay in sizo in russia. by by law, this rule can only be applied to persons who have been officially extradited. let us remind you that the russian federation did not extradite shepeleva to ukraine. co-author of the savchenko law, former people 's deputy mykola palamarchuk, claims that the supreme court should not have applied this rule regarding the term on the territory of russia, if. there was no extradition, the law provides that citizens of ukraine who are in prison

in many cases, this is all an indicator of the huge problems that exist in the supreme court, wild the situation is there, we called the judges of the criminal court of cassation, to ask why they decided to zero out one of the terms awarded to oleksandr shepelev, it is indisputable that the party noted in the study, and all the participants in the process did not deny, that this person was detained on the territory of the russian federation, precisely to fulfill the request of ukraine in this criminal proceeding, and the prosecutor personally confirmed this, therefore, in order not to the rights of the person were violated, which will be established by the european court later, and so that the state does not reimburse the funds, we followed the law, however, the decision of the panel of judges states that the mandate of the ukrainian side was specifically related to the extradition of shepelev to ukraine, which, we will remind, did not take place due to the refusal of the russian side to extradite the suspect, so this is very similar to the manipulation of the savchenko law. sh

that's actually going to be before the minnesota supreme court in early november. so that may be a way that tees up a case that the court might have trouble avoiding. >> and i have one, too, with the case out of the 5th circuit where judge kaczmarak entered a pi against the producers of the abortion drug. it wound up be narrowed in the 5th circuit. basically what the 5th circuit did, invalidated much of what judge kaczmarek did. the real bite there to say basically the restrictions on dispensation of the drug have been ramped up to what they were beginning, in 2016. they've been loosened since then. it also changes the dosage, oddly, now the dosage has to be tripled again because that's what the dosage was back before 2016. and in any event, it's the government and the branded manufacturer, they did it in less than a month. and so they really used break-neck speed to try to get it on for the term. and if granted, it's on kind of a glide path potentially to be granted or denied in january, but if it's granted in january, it will be argued in april. >> so, while we're

cases involving the former heads the supreme court and the grand chamber of the supreme court and electeme court judges to fill vacancies through a transparent process involving independent experts and civil society. and while the supreme court is waiting for another reform, its judges make dubious and even absurd decisions concerning, in particular, the national security of ukraine. board of judges of the first court chamber, the criminal court of cassation. the team consists of vyacheslav marynych, volodymyr korol and alla makarovets decided to help the odious ex-regional leader and treason suspect oleksandr shepelev, who was involved in high-profile crimes, avoid responsibility. former people's deputy oleksandr shepelev is accused of involvement in four contract killings and the organization of an attempted murder, and is also suspected of embezzling over uah 200 million from a family bank and treason. he is not an entirely simple character, and is connected to a number of other criminal processes, which... were investigated, he is wanted murder, there is a businessman there, this is

out and out defiance of the supreme court and the constitution which makes decisions of the supreme court the supreme law of the land. they are defiant. we look at january 6 you look at this as a totality of the situation we have a battle in this country right now which is between democracy and autocracy. we better understand the 24 election is not a test of personality. it ain't about age. wake up. state awoke, it being awoken be aware of the work we have to do next year. [applause] >> i want to come to you. the supreme court case in the last session and first i just want to say thank you. because the lawyers need the people on the ground who are doing the work to stand up and say i'm going to put my name on this. i want to bring suit we are going to sue and then there's the victor. the numbers in alabama i know we did the session before you all have been in the states alabama's black populace is 27% of the 14% of the representation. the black residents not just alabama we can say louisiana, windsor florida, leaving for georgia, we could say minnesota. black people in nebraska come on i

because even after losing -- before this supreme court, before this conservative supreme court, republicans in alabama are doing everything that they can to avoid creating a map with two opportunity districts for black voters. now, asked if it was ok for alabama to disobey, to disobey federal court orders, one alabama congressman responded with three simple, unequivocal words. quote, by all means. by all means. now, you don't have to look too hard to see the shameful similarities between george walz refuse -- wallace refusing 60 years ago to admit my late sister-in-law to the university of alabama in the wake of the brown v. board of education decision and today's refuse albie the state of alabama to grant all citizens basic voting rights and equal representation. despite these challenges, i'm confident that at the end of the day, alabamans will soon see a fair map. and alabama is just a preview, it's just a preview of what's to come. as a result of this landmark decision, many of our ongoing lawsuits, including all of our section 2 challenges, are moving forward with renewed momentum. in o

a partner where he has a the supreme court practice in ten cases before the supreme court and appeared before nearly every court in the country. he writes the popular watch and i hope you'll bring back this holiday season. a fellow at the national review institute. a recovering litigator and politics, law and facebook appeared in a variety of outlets. dan is a long-suffering fan so perhaps we can ask for your world series productions. last but not least, an attorney and vice president of litigation the foundation for litigation rights and expression. before joining, more than ten years litigating the constitutional l cases with the institute for justice. she has her wedding reception of the national constitution center. i like to start with the big news of the day, the supreme court is going to hear two cases in the upcoming term. >> both of these places the stakes are very high. i would argue the most important cases on the internet since about two decades ago when these laws closer one in texas and one in florida that regulate the major social media platforms. facebook, youtube, twit

up to the supreme court for living within his face. they called his beliefs despicable and thought they were analogous to nazis. thankfully, the u.s. supreme court recognized the impermissible religious hostility of the state of colorado towards jack and people like him. they recognize this violated the guarantee of freedom of religion and rolled in his favor with a resounding win. unfortunately, attacks on him have not stopped. before he even won his first supreme court case, an attorney asked for a custom cake. he specified he wanted it blew on the outside and pink on the inside. he explained that was to celebrate the attorney's gender transition from male to female. jack respectfully inclined that request because he could not, in good conscience, create the artwork celebrating that message. the attorney took legal action against him not once but twice. this was a targeted attack. the latest lawsuit he is currently facing six monetary damages and attorneys fees from jack. if successful, it would bring about financial ruin for jack an

cases involving the former president of the supreme court and the grand chamber of the supreme courtw judges of the supreme court to fill vacancies through a transparent process involving independent experts and civil society. and while the supreme court is waiting for the next reform, its judges are making dubious and even absurd decisions that concern, in particular, the national security of ukraine. the panel of judges of the first court chamber, the criminal court of cassation of the supreme court. in the composition of vyacheslav marynych, volodymyr korol and alla makarovets decided to help avoid responsibility to the odious ex-regional and suspect in state treason to oleksandr shepelev, involved in high-profile criminal offenses. former people's deputy oleksandr shepelev is accused of involvement in four contract killings and the organization of an attempted murder, and is also suspected of embezzling over 200 hryvnias from a genealogical bank and treason. he is not an entirely simple character, and is connected to a number of other criminal processes that have been investigate

john elwood is a partner where he heads up the appellate and supreme court practice before the supreme court and also every appeals court in the country. john also writes the popular watch i hope you will bring back the released carols the holiday season. the dan mcglaughlin is a senior writer at the national review online and fill up with thein national review institute. a recovering litigator, his writing on politics, law and baseball appeared in a variety leof outlets. perhaps during q-and-a we can ask for your predictions. last butwo not least, attorney d vice president of litigation for the foundation forn individual rights and expression. before joining, more than ten years litigating the constitutional cases with the institute c for justice. such a lover of the constitution's he had her wedding reception at the national constitution center. with that i'd likef to start wh the big news of the day the supreme court is going to hear two cases in the upcoming term including regulating social media companies. that's right. both of the cases involve the future of internet freedom and

up to the supreme court for living within his face. they called his beliefs despicable and thought they were analogous to nazis. thankfully, the u.s. supreme court recognized the impermissible religious hostility of the state of colorado towards jack and people like him. they recognize this violated the guarantee of freedom of religion and rolled in his favor with a resounding win. unfortunately, attacks on him have not stopped. before he even won his first supreme court case, an attorney asked for a custom cake. he specified he wanted it blew on the outside and pink on the inside. he explained that was to celebrate the attorney's gender transition from male to female. jack respectfully inclined that request because he could not, in good conscience, create the artwork celebrating that message. the attorney took legal action against him not once but twice. this was a targeted attack. the latest lawsuit he is currently facing six monetary damages and attorneys fees from jack. if successful, it would bring about financial ruin for jack an

supreme court and numerous federal and appellate courts. she earned her juris doctor in 2010 from frees neglect california and graduated first in her class. she's been married for a year and a half. she's pregnant with her first child, due in the spring. she's been in dc for about 8 years new and she's heavily involved especially in women's sports issues. following today's talk and some questions and answers, i hope you join for some lunch. please join me now in welcoming christiania keeper. [applause] >> all right, well, it is a pleasure to be with you this afternoon. i'm going to have this over -- have this over here, but again thank you so much for having me and spending time with us today. it's my pleasure to talk you this afternoon about religious liberty cases and especially a number of cases that intersect at the point of gender identity and becoming conflict across today and aiming but before we get started there, religious liberty is our first freedom and it's for good reason, it's the foundation on which a thriving pluralistic soc

well, look, the supreme court, probably all ukrainians understand the importance of the supreme court 2004, when yanukovych was not elected, but according to the results of the second round of elections, yanukovych should have become the president, and here in the court the supreme court, actually such a court of courts, appointed the so-called third round, and even then, did not allow a state traitor to seize power in the country in an illegal way, and citizens should understand that this court currently has a large chamber, and this large chamber is very important, this is real, it is a court within a court, this is the pinnacle of our judicial system, and when , for example, we tried to remove from office the judges of the maidanites who tried the maidanites then, in fact, the grand chamber put a decisive point in many issues, that is, the grand chamber, it can end the career of a non-virtuous judge, and this is very important, and of course, if we are talking about the protection of coastal strips, the natural resource fund, forests, so here they themselves put the final point, bu

the supreme court right fully struck them.y say this for asian americans as all children should no longer be treated as second-class citizens. all americans with the mayor trust -- also in advance america towards the counter plan society as martin luther king dreamed of 60 years ago. equity and inclusion have not given up. they have issued guidance that advocates as a program. this guidance is important. college enrollment is a failure of the k-12 education preparing black and hispanic children for colleges. improving the constitutional ways in higher education. further all k-12 education is behind other indoctrination's that they are responsible further of the legal operation standard. a plaintiff speed where they urge stopping the race race proxies in college admissions. by hiding students name disclose the rate make students inaccessible to what is evaluated. the criteria on the needs of the program for the equity. restore standardized testing. the factor is 81% have made standardized testing possible. the entrance exam in

well the next stop in our tour was the supreme court building. this is where they decide whether our laws follow the meaning of the constitution. uncle jim told me to notice the inscription over the entrance equal justice under law. he said that this pretty well sums up the purpose of the supreme court then he went on to explain what it meant. the supreme court is the judicial branch of the federal government here. the law itself is on trial. it is judged according to whether it violates our constitutional rights. the court is composed of nine justices who hold office for life members are nominated by the president, but their appointments must be confirmed by the senate. now you should have a good idea of how the constitution sets up the three main branches of our government. the legislature which is congress. the executive branch which is the president. and the judiciary which is the supreme court. the legislature is charged with making policies. that is it passes the laws. the executive is responsible for carrying out policies. and the judiciar

congress funds the supreme court. congress historically has made changes to the court structure and composition. congress historically has made changes to the courts appellate jurisdiction. there is a provision in the constitution that says something like the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction under regulations that congress provides. i am missing the exact words. definitely talks about congress having a role in our jurisdiction. talks about congress regulating the jurisdiction of the supreme court. and generally, this is not surprising. our whole cyst them is one of check and balance is. usually, when the court talks about that, we are talking about other actors, the way they check and balance each other or the way we check and balance them. if you just can't see that the court is the only institution somehow not subject to checks and balances from anybody else he looked at us we are not imperial. we, too, are part of a checking and balancing system in various ways. can congress do various things to regul

the supreme court ruled that the temple is the owner of the statue according to japanese civil law. in 2017 a district court had ruled in favor of the temple, but a high court stated that the statue belongs to the japanese temple. officials in tokyo plan to call on their counter parts in seoul to return the statue as early as possible. >>> china has sent three astronauts to its space station to replace the current crew. it blasted off from north western china. it's set to dock at the space station. the new crew are scheduled to stay at the station for about six months and do experiments but also expected to do some due maintenance outside for the first time. china completed the space station last year. it plans to launch two crewed spacecraft per year. the chinese space agency has invited astronauts from other countries to take part in the missions, but observers say china's goal is to surpass the united states in space development. >>> in a landmark ruling, japan's supreme court says it's unconstitutional to require a surgery to officially change a gender. this comes after the court

this sums up the purposes of the supreme court".ional ri. >> the supreme court is the judicial branch of the federal government. here, the law itself is on trial. it is judged according to whether it violates the constitutional rights of the people. record is composed of nine offices who hold office for life , members are nominated by the president, but the appointment must be confirmed by the senate. now, you should have a good idea of how the constitution sets up the three main branches of the government. the legislature, which is congress, the executive branch, which is the president, and the judiciary, which is the supreme court. the legislature is charged with making policies, that is, passing the law. the executive is responsible for carrying it out. and the judiciary is charged with reviewing and judging policy. but while each of these branches of government have it's only clearly defined duties, they were together as a team, three system of checks and balances. here are some examples of what i mean. the president appoints ju

from the resolution of the supreme court of july 6, 2023 . consider oleksandr shepelyev. such that he has fully served his sentence according to the sentence of the desnyan district court of the city of kyiv dated august 7, 2020. how did it happen? supreme court judges vyacheslav marynych, volodymyr korol and alla makarovets decided to apply to shepelev the savchenko law and count the double term of stay of the odious ex-people's deputy in the pre-trial detention center to the term of punishment imposed by the odesnyan court . next, the term of stay in sizo in russia was counted. by law, this rule can only be applied to persons who have been officially extradited. let us remind you that the russian federation did not extradite shepeleva to ukraine. the co-author of the savchenko law, former people's deputy mykola palamarchuk, claims that the supreme court should not have applied this rule regarding the term on the territory of russia, if the official extradition was not. the law provides. that citizens of ukraine who are in prison on the terri

involving the former chief justice and grand chamber of the supreme court, and select new supreme court to fill vacancies through a transparent process involving independent experts and civil society. and while the supreme court is waiting for another reform, its judges make dubious and even absurd decisions concerning, in particular, nations

, the supreme court of ukraine, but there is an interesting background, the background of thisy. and now i will briefly explain it to you, so the judge of the supreme court, even recently retired, former head of the council of judges valentina simonenko, turns out to be a citizen of the russian federation . this was learned by journalists from the scheme program. so, how did it happen that a person who has citizenship of the russian federation, obtained in occupied sevastopol in the 15th year. in which my sister works there in the bodies of the occupation authorities, which disrupted the first stage of judicial reform in the 15th year, has a russian passport, so the question is that all these data, many others, in addition to citizenship, were established by the public integrity council back in the 17th year , when simonenko went to the supreme court, but it did not make a proper impression on anyone, there was a question about her removal , she was not removed, actually volodymyr zelenskyi, people who care about him are turning to him, so to speak... it was from the legal fiel

there is a big debate on the supreme court right now about when you look at history and tradition shouldou just look backward as the court did in overturning roe and saying that the right to abortion was not deeply rooted in tradition for most of american history order you also look forward and ask what you people today think of early term abortions for example. and just making this up but he might have been moved by evidence today that most people in most states don't restrict abortions before fetal quickening as it is called or at least a certain point in pregnancy. and all of these considerations which combine history, tradition, law, pragmatism and imperial evidence that possibly have gone into his complicated deliberations. peter: some of the issues that oliver wendell holmes worked on when he was on the supreme court included labor rights, free speech, i.e. fire in a crowded theater atement which we will get to, illegal searches and the espionage act. let's go to free speech mr. rosen. jeff: dear c-span friends watching. give yourself a treat and after the show is over because we h

are disagreeing with one another or state supreme court disagree with federal court of appeal, you don't want to have different law applicable and say, california than oklahoma. or in minnesota than in louisiana. so the court will step in and resolve the split this probably the most common situation in which we step in and we get involved and i think there are fewer splits than they used to be. so one thing you know it we say some people are surprised to hear, that we do not take cases just to correct errors. just error correction we have not historically done that the supreme court rules identify the factors that we apply in deciding whether to take the case and there's a circuit split or is this an issue of national importance of really kinda demands supreme court intervention instant act of congress has not entered been held unconstitutional, if the federal government asked us to take a case in state governments ask us to take a case as are all things we take into an account that weigh heavily in favor of renting this will save out i think that it would be good probably to h

is, as my colleague has put it, the spider in the middle of a dark web of money influencing the supreme courtd politics, that's an important debate. money in the court system, really? but that's what we have here when billionaires are entertaining supreme court justices on their private planes, you know, at these expensive resorts on these exotic fishing expeditions. they have so much at stake with the questions before the supreme court, when it comes to taxation and when it comes to their livelihood. there's a clear conflict of interest that needs to be spelled out for supreme court justices. rules for when they need to recuse themselves and explain to the public why they need to recuse themselves and so much more. so again, not a trick. this is not a treat. this is serious. >> we appreciate the halloween reference. happy halloween to you, too. senator alex padilla, thank you. >>> coming up next on "the reidout," next week's elections in ohio and virginia are shaping up as bellwethers on the fate of abortion rights. that's next. with cirkul, your water is deliciously flavored at the turn of

i mean, congress funds the supreme court. congress historically has made changes to the court's structure and composition. congress historically has made changes to the court's appellate jurisdiction. and indeed there's a provision in the constitution that says something like, the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction under regulations that congress provides. or -- i'm mission the exact words, but -- missing the exact words, but it actually talks about congress having a role in our jurisdiction. talks about congress regulating the jurisdiction of the supreme court. and i think more generally, this is not surprising. our whole system is one of checks and balances. and usually when the court talks about that, we're talking about other actors and the way they check and balance each oregon or the way we -- each other or the way we check and balance them. but it can't be that the court is the only institution that somehow is not subject to any checks and balances from anybody else. i mean, we're not imperial. and we too a

circuit judge and for justice -- justice scalia on the supreme court. you expressed great respect for both of them, particularly you have talked about justice scalia, and i think after your appointment to the court you were quoted as saying justice scalia is judgmental -- justice scalia's judicial philosophy was your philosophy. how would you describe that philosophy? >> justice scalia was very well-known for his commitment to originalism and constitutional interpretations. and some of that is in statute. and you can boil these down to the proposition that the text is the law and the text controls. i share that philosophy and i share that commitment. i think that there would be very little difference between us if you asked about the potential role of the judge to adhere to the text when it has a clear answer. and not impose one's own -- own views on the law with respect to the law. we certainly have some differences and styles, for example, he's a fantastic writer, very well known for being fantastic. and he was -- he could become a like i'm saying, whe

what is the difference between a bookkeeper and a supreme court justice she famously asked? other living legacy. she would have been i think a little surprised by today's honor but so please the stamp is a fitting tribute to a person who believed deeply in our country and its institution on whose pen we shaped our world. [applause] >> thank you so much. >> we have reached the grand finale this evening. and it is a special one for our final speaker this evening is a lawyer, she practices a trial and appellate litigation. she focuses her pro bono practice of reproductive rights the negation and advising family law and criminal defense. she is a a lecturer at the harvard law school and just happens to be the granddaughter of ruth bader ginsburg. we are decided delighted to present to you clara. >> on behalf of the family of my grandmother justice ruth bader ginsburg thank you to the nine states postal service for this great honor. both during her life and after her death my grandmother has been honored with the several inspiring and wonderful awards and recognitions. but this on

and i think as i have been a judge both on the court of appeals and the supreme court. st see how important it is on multi-member of the court to be able to work toward consensus. so i have that in my mind as something that has really influenced me. >> i think this will be the final question we have asked. take you very much, students, these have been terrific questions that you wrote. in your opinion, how can the legal profession become a more inclusive place for people from historically underrepresented communities? justice barrett: i think law school should be doing everything that they can to make first-generation students feel welcome and give them the help that they need, and the legal profession as well. that should not end in law school with mentoring on that kind of advice. the legal profession, and i encourage all of you who are law students, once you get into the bar, to give your time to mentoring young lawyers and young lawyers who are new to the profession who may not come from families who have lawyers in them or from historically underrepresented communit