there wasn't until the were in court in the 60's that people started looking at what the supreme court had. >> there was no c-span, of course. so the arguments made on behalf of the laundry owners focused on what? what were the points they made? guest: the laundry owners tried to say that the warrants were not being enforced in a consistent manner. the key point is arbitrariness. generally, if you want to have a permit, you would say, you need to have upper ventilation for this laundry area it has to be clean, it has to have good equipment, right? the law had no standard. it just said, you apply for the permit. they said, there was no standard for which these standards could be enforced. and enforcement itself was unconstitutional. susan: next up. robert in middletown, new york. welcome, robert. robert: thank you for taking the time to share your insights. [indiscernible] scotus held the view that the 14th amendment applied to nance it is ends, however, it is not until much later that yick wo came to stand for equal government. however, the holding in your quote was no help in discrimi

s lawsuit does not have much chance of success. >> the supreme court has said that even though people have a right to bear arms, it can be limited. >> reporter: only 25% of florida house democrats voted for the bill, which provides new mental health programs for schools and allows some teachers to be armed. but florida legislators rejected a ban on all the-style rifles, something fought for by parkland shooting survivors. greene says florida's move could inspire legislators in other states. >> given the recent activism around this issue, i can very easily see a number of states that have age limits of 18, as florida did before, raising their age to 21. >> ninan: these students push so hard in parkland for new gun laws. what's next for them, nikki? >> reporter: they're leading a nationwide school walkout on wednesday which marks one month since the parkland school shooting. student will leave class to stand in solidarity for 17 minutes to honor the 17 lives lost at stoneman douglas. >> ninan: well, president trump said today that he believes north korea will stick to its pledge to suspend missile tests before and during his summit

legal framework was there, but what was life really like for people in this country in the 1950's and 1960's, even with these laws and supreme court decisions and acted -- and acted -- enacted? wasrom the time that plessy decided, and even before that in many respects, african-americans lived segregated lives in which they were treated as racial inferiors. when we think about the history of slavery in this country, we have to think about a continuum right on through jim crow up until the 1950's, brown v. board of education, but even beyond that. i think we have to talk about in through the 1960's. it was not until 1964 that the civil rights act was passed, and employment discrimination was illegal. discrimination in public accommodations, in federally funded programs, it was not until 19 65 that the voting rights act was passed. it was not until 1967 that the supreme court struck down laws that band interracial marriages. not until 1968, after the assassination of martin luther king, where 50 years out from that assassination, almost to the date soon. it was not until then that the fair housing act was enacted. people, and also fo

s spain's supreme court has ordered the secretary to be jailed along with four other separatist leaders. 25 leaders are now facing trial on charges of rebellion, embezzlement, or disobeying the state. peoples poland have been demonstrating against the draft law that would tighten the country's abortion regulations. the law would outlaw abortion except in cases of rape and insist. the council of europe has warned it is not in line with poland's human rights commitments. turning to the united states. the latest shakeup at the white house. last night, president trump fired his national security advisor, h.r. mcmaster. the men were known to disagree on key areas of u.s. foreign policy. in his place, trump has announced john bolton will be taking over the role. he will be trump's third national security advisor in just 14 months. >> even in a crowded field, john bolton's provocative views have long stood out. whether it is north korean frequent ship or iran's nuclear program, john bolton has long had one answer -- to fight fire with fire. for much of the past 10 years, he has been a fixture on u.s. talk shows. >> here is the headline. to stop iran's bomb, bomb iran. >> rarely missing a chance

the civil rights cases of 1883, the supreme court decision that down the civil rights act of 1975, a federal law that access tol people public accommodations like train s and theaters regardless of race. marshall known as the great dissenter cast the opposition.d his consent eucalypted the legacy of the decision. explore the state and high court s ruling with the dean of law schoolersity's and an attorney and u.s. member of civil rights. watch the landmark cases live on or listenspan.org with the free c-span radio app. order your copy of the landmark cases companion book. 8:95 pluslable for shipping and handling at c-span .org and for an additional resource, that's a link on the web site to the national constitution centers constitution. budget director mulvaney spoke. he also answered questions from the states attorneys general in attendance. this is 25 minutes. >> we're honored today to have mulvaney with us. he's the current director of the management and act ing director of the consumers financial protection bureau. appointments, director mulvaney served in south carolina. stranger to d

people wanted to move on to other subjects. that is a sense had an impact on how the supreme court viewed these questions. it was not until the 1960's that a secondwith reconstruction led by martin luther king, a vindication of the things bingham was trying to do. mr. rosen: there are some judges who say they believe in the original understanding of the constitution, who said the supreme court was correct not to apply the bill of rights against the states, because the fourth amendment was not supposed to do that. you say bingham intended the opposite. mr. magliocca: if you want to say bingham was this idiosyncratic person, so we should not pay attention to what we have to say -- no one would say that about james madison. so whyust one person, should we have to care about one act? there is no doubt as to bingham 's views with respect to the 14th amendment. unless you want to say he was someone who ought not to be paid legalion to, or his skills were not adequate, which is something someone who did not like the substance of what he did would say, you could not reach that conclusion legal skills were by a fair reading of the evidence.

the people that must be remembered, lincoln, forney, and others, who gloat with lavish delight over the admission of a negro to the bar of the supreme court, who have succeeded in commissioning negro s as officers in the army to mess, and associate with white officers and exercise the authority of the rank over white soldiers, who are patronizing --.ating -- orating they protested against the shameful attempt by mr. lincoln away from the inauguration ball. the republican organizers of the event, the world said "to seek any sense of shame in a more like pelting a rhinoceros with roses." that's a nice image. at the outset, professor kate was or has criticized the lincolns for enforcing the color line at the white house, but that seems hardly fair to the president. after all, the inaugural ball committee, not lincoln, imposed the ban at the march 6 event. ate president regretted th sojourner truth had been turned away on february 25, and vowed it would not happen again. through the washington chronicle, the president heartily invited all washingtonians, regardless of caller, to attend the 1865 new year's day reception. in addition, he overruled the guards that attempted to block freder

the u-s supreme court is set to hear arguments in a california abortion case. the hearing gets started tomorrow at 10 a.m. however today...peoplelready lining up to get a seat in the courtroom. anti - abortion folks will challenge a california law ...which they say is an unconstitutional violation of their free speech rights. the 2015 law requires licensed pregnancy centers... to inform clients about state-subsidized family planning services -- including abortion. california argues the law is a neutral regulation aimed at informing women of their health care options. but some religiously affiliated pregnancy centers.... say it forces them to deliver a message that is in direct conflict with their mission to encourage childbirth. (grant) president trump proposed imposing the death penalty for certain drug dealers today the president made the proposal during an event focused on the opioid epidemic in new hampshire. he says it is critical to "get tough" on combating the epidemic. president trump: "because we kind of all the blue ribbon committees we want. but if we don't get tough on the drug dealers, we're wasting our time. just

supreme court today for the oral arguments. >> sreenivasan: s the law in california said, if someone walks into ana crisis pry center, which have been accused of sometimes misleading people yes. >> brangham: into thinking you might be getting birth control or abortion-related services, the law saysou hav to say to people, "we don't have medical doctors here," or you have to tell them, "if you do want an abortion, there are services provided by the state of california," and that's what they object to. >> there are really two times of notices. one for unlicensed ceters. they simply have to say that they are not licensed medical facilities, and they have no licensed medical provider on the premises to supervise wh they're doing. if you are a licensed center, then you have to provide a notice that says there are low-cost, free family plannin abortion, prenatal care, contraception servicesnd available,nclude a phone number that would allow the woman to access those services. >> brangham: so the state of california is saying this is just, in essence, truth in advertising, that if you walk ngto a center, you should know what you're getwhen you walk into that place. >> absolutel

people alone. maybe what they're doing is just fine, too. you know, since the post 1960's. so it took a long time before the supreme court got around to talking about it but those laws were pretty much of a dead letter for a long time -- for several decades before the lawrence case came down. >> head in a slightly different direction, i have two questions about your articulation of the founders' view on the separation of church and state. it seems that in the race portion you separate out the ideological view of the founders from their pragmatic and personal policies. whereas it seems you don't necessarily make that separation when it comes to religion and so far as we do have the constitution, which has the establishment clause and we do have jefferson and madison articulating their desire for a separation of church and state but when you discuss their sort of capitulation to the existence of biblical readings in school and public prayer, you use that as evidence that they didn't firmly hold a true belief of separation of church and state. so i was wondering if you could explain sort of the operational difference that j