united states. the 19th terrorist was captured in the united states and therefore he was entitled to constitutional protection because he was in the united states. but the only thing standing between barack obama giving these terrorists and killers constitutional rights is this language in this appropriations bill which says, none of the money of the united states can be used to transfer these killers into the united states. as soon as they touch our soil, they will be given constitutional rights and that is exactly what mr. nadler wants to do with this amendment. these precious constitutional rights, that these killsers and cowards have been captured on foreign battlefields, these foreign na nationals have thank have never been given the protections of the constitution, that are reserved for the united states. they're lucky to be alive and in guantanamo bay. i urge members to vote against this amendment to ensure that these people are give what they deserve and that is whether it be life in prison or whatever lies ahead, that they will never again threaten the people of the united states. i urge me

in "national review" saying this, a proposal he is making i propose a amendment to the united states constitution that would subject the justices of the supreme court to periodic retention elections and every justice beginning after the second election after his or her appointment will answer to the american people and states in a retention election every eight years. have you heard anything like this? guest: i haven't heard -- heard it on the federal level but that is similar to the way many states operate their own judiciarys where judges are appointed by the governor and then they stand for retention, you know, sometime thereafter. i believe it was retention election in iowa that cost several justices on that state supreme court their seats after they found that their own state constitution required recognition of same-sex marriage and so it's not an unheard of practice and there are -- it really plays to the question of the benefits and disadvantages of an appointed life tenured judiciary versus a elected one or one that's more democratically responsive. that's an issue that has, you know sor

united states constitution is a foundation on which we have built this nation's freedom liberty.ack. what better candidate can articulate a message. bill: governor christie is going to enter the race in some time very soon. is this a direct going after governor christie? how does ted cruz appeal with new jersey? will it be a buildup or take down? >> it will be a buildup. this is all about the best candidate. the governors policy for new jersey has failed miserably. losing. teesix chris christie was out there for you. we've seen the video of him standing there endorsing you for the u.s. senate. senate. you think the governor is feeling a bit of a slight? >> rand paul ulrich perry and many others. >> a state that is going to vote its pocketbooks and wallets in the upcoming presidential election. election. how will be overcome new jersey's own self from stability? >> that's a great question. at the heart of his campaign is a gross message of true economic growth. 5 percent gdp growth not this mediocre growth. so when you return to the constitution and true economic growth, growth th

of the armed forces of the united states on a foreign battlefield, we're never going to house them in a prison of the united states, we're not going to give them constitutional rights. those rights are reserved to the people of the united states and to people who commit crimes within the boundaries of the united states the 19th terrorist who didn't quite make it that day was captured in the

. >> good afternoon i'd like to call the order of general meeting of the united states constitution today9, 2015, roll call. >> commissioner president caen commissioner vietor

harry: the said we have a right to guns under california state constitution and the second amendment of the uniteds constitution. so they went to sacramento to press that. peter: that indelible image of panthers openly carrying weapons up the steps of the state capitol turned public opinion against them. harry: you talk about making--turning allies into adversaries, when you walk up into the assembly chamber of the california state government with guns, you're going to make a few adversaries. harry: where this generation of young black people in particular are not going to accept this crock of garbage that the older generation of blacks and negroes--of whites and negroes seem determined to pass onto us. peter: disenchanted with the panthers' tactics, edwards turned his focus to segregation at san jose state. harry: we couldn't join the fraternities. they had literal, up front no negroes and jews need apply. if you wanted to major in drama, you could forget it. why? because if you majored in drama, you had an obligation to participate in the school theatre productions, and the last thing they wante

. >> good afternoon i'd like to call the order of general meeting of the united states constitution todaytuesday, june 9, 2015, roll call. >> commissioner president caen commissioner vietor commissioner moran kwoon the president is excused. >> commissioners before you have the minutes of may 26th additions, deletions, or changes. >> i'll move approval. >> second. >> any public comment on the minutes of may 26th hearing none i'll call for the vote. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? the motion carries next item, please. >> item 4 general public comment. >> i have one speaker cards david. >> good afternoon david pill pal two items related to power i believe the commission had the first workshop on the plan at the end of april what happened to the scheduling of the success workshop. >> would you like for me to answer we're working on it several efforts right now the team is in michael and barbara hale are in washington, d.c. so dealing with the, i.e., extension we're planning to have it probably next month so we're trying to schedule the june 23rd meeting. >> next meeting. >> we're ta

2015, we wanted to clarify that there was a special joint meeting on january 30th between united states constitution and lafco they took no action on the report second action of interest on june 1st a proposed ballot was proposed their press release is a measure circulated for signatures on the ballot and finally to our kind of blurry timeline i apologize for that so to begin with i'd like to note a couple of milestones we've accomplished in the month of may the first is on may 28th the mayor signed the new power contracting legislation into law that that legislation helps the sfpuc for the long term energy facilities for sf clean power and other power consumers on may 29th we issued the rfp for cca customer care and administrative services this will cover the data exchange and accounting and billing and call center operation services at program launch proposals under the rfp are due june 25th and hope to be before i for authorization to execute an agreement on august 11th. >> looking forward the thirty day period for the board of supervisors to provide february open the adopted not to exceed rate r

in fact, the seventh amendment to the united states constitution provides for a jury trial in a civil case over $20 in value. that is enshrined in our constitution. and to actual -- close the courthouse doors to make it impossible for someone to go to court, have a jury of their peers decide the facts, and award any damages that may or may not be due, i mean, if we close the door, then we are closing our way of life. so i fight myself to make sure that we keep those courthouse doors open. the third coital branch of government be a-- the third co-equal branch of government can act as the third branch of government. host: thank you. rep. johnson: thank you for having me. host: nutritionix asks if your brand is fda compliant? daniel zadoff is one of the cofounders of the company. what does nutritionix do? daniel: we help restaurants comply with the fda. and helping customers see the full attrition breakdown on interactive calculators at different devices. host: why are you sure your wares at ces? what kind of technology do you use to do that? daniel: we have nutrition tracker later that

i am therefore proposing an amendment to the united states constitution that would subject each aefrvery justice of the supreme court to periodic judicial retention. >> other republicans were less interested in carrying on the same-sex marriage fight. scott walker issued a statement against the ruling but didn't mention it in any other appearances. senator rand paul wrote an op-ed calling for the federal government to get out of the marriage business all together. jeb bush and lindsey graham react thd way. >> i'm informed by my faith about this and i believe in traditional marriage. i think now we need to focus on two things. how do we create an environment where people aren't discriminated against, where we respect people's commitment to long term loving relationships and where we also allow people to act on their religious conscious. >> i believe in traditional marriage but the supreme court has ruled and it's the law of the land and we'll abide by it. >> i agree with jeb. in my view put anytime the platform but it will in my view hurt us in 2016 because it's a process that's not g

he say was the state breaking the rules and senior water rights are protected under the united states constitution when a hand full of landowners here came together and they pledged their properties. they agreed to tax themselves and they bought water rights. a property right. they developed diversing facilities. they developed canals. >> reporter: that first time state has forced a large number of holders of senior water rights. many farmers say the state has no authorities to cut the rights. some irrigation tricks have contacted legal council. and the farm bureau you says it's -- says it's not surprise. >> it creates chaos. >> the recent move show the water regulators are sparing fewer and fewer users. >>> where can you dine in style? may us the meat? coming up, we'll take you to a vega's dish. now that there's foster farms simply raised, it's tougher than ever to be a foster farms chicken. but foster farms simply raised chicken is 100 percent natural with no antibiotics. well you're an herbalist. help us to be natural. will those herbs do it? those? one grows hair, the other increases energy. g

the opening words of the united states constitution are we the people of the united states.o there is a reference to god in the declaration of independence from 1776 and essentially is saying that we're enentitled to rebel against the british crown because he's taken away certain rights. but in fact, the united states constitution is a godless document. it has no reference to god. it does say that congress cannot pass a law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting free exercise of religion. that's it. the rest of it is not concerned about religion. host: here is josephine from wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you're on. go ahead. caller: i support the decision to an extent if lesbians and gays want to marry, sure. call it a union of perhaps the rainbow cohabitation or rainbow union. but according to the dictionary , i don't know if anybody reads that lately but it's been defined as marriage between a man and a woman. so i don't know how we can redo the dictionary. are we going to go through the dictionary changing all these things however we

public officer, as a public clerk, in her public capacity she is required to follow the united states constitutionithout any doubt that the constitution protects the liberty and equality rights of same-sex couples to get a license when they want to enter the institution of marriage just like any of us just like any other texan. and so while she does certainly unquestionably have the right to go to her church and have a different belief and her church has the -- as justice kennedy noted in his opinion, her church has the right to refuse to perform same-sex marriages, when she was acting as it's public county clerk, she does not have the right to treat people unequally when the constitution says they must be treated the same as everyone else. >> you're saying because the clerk is acting in an official capacity that's different, that changes things. really interesting to hear both of your perspectives. ryan nobles elizabeth wydra, thank you. appreciate it. the next hour of cnn "newsroom" begins right now. >>> happening now in the "newsroom," prison break plans revealed. >> so the plan was to head to

to understand the case, we need to start with the united states constitution. to look at article one, section four, which says the way we elect people to congress is up to the legislature. now, based on this, the state legislature has traditionally drawn the lines of congressional districts. it was always assumed that will drawing the lines was a job for the legislature because of this provision. a few years ago in california and in arizona, voters decided that we did not like politicians drawing those ticket lines. we think regular people, citizens should be drawing the lines. both california and arizona created systems that cut the politicians out. ins, the state legislature sued basically saying you cannot cut us out. it is in the constitution that we the legislature get to draw the districts and that is the case that is at the supreme court. if the court agrees with the arizona state legislature, and gives them back the power to draw districts, the same thing will happen in california. in arizona's system is unconstitutional, so is ours. >> if it's in the co

did not give them the freedom to marry, so today all 50 states have been required by the united states constitution and upheld by our supreme court that all people should be treated equally. those 13 states and all 50 states have to marry and recognize marriages between same sex couples and opposite gender couples. >> reporter: how will this change area life? >> um, it is not ting to change it much. we have been legally married for the past seven -- it is not going to change it much. we have been legally married for the past seven years and have had all the legal benefits. >> but now we can travel to the 13 states that still had discrimination. if frank had mining rights in one of those states he could leave them to me and i could go to that state and accept those mining right. prior to a few minutes ago we could not do that. now we can travel there and have our marriage recognized. until a few minutes ago the states could deny legal recognition and dignity to our family by not recognizing our marriage. >> reporter: well, congratulations on your seven year anniversary. do you have anything planned

purporting to strike down the marriage laws of every state, it has no connection to the united states constitutionimply making it up. it is lawless, and in doing so they have undermined the fundamental legitimacy of the united states supreme court. >> mike huckabee said i will not acquiesce to an imperial court any more than our founders eye quee esed to a british monarch. but paul is following the country's lead here. 57% of americans back same-sex unions up from 27% in 1996. and it fits a pattern in this country. "the new york times" points out a dominant theme in american history is over time civil rights do expand and discrimination ebbs. back in 1958 for example, only 4% of the country then in the late '50s approved of interracial marriage. that number in 2013 isas recent as that 87%. in the past decades people have grown more and more comfortable with someone being president that is not a white male. in 1937 only a third said they would vote for a woman. on civil rights issues the country marches forward not backward. that's my argument. i'm joined by "washington post" opinion writer jonatha

justice sotomayor: do solumnly swear that i will support and defend the constitution of the united stateslynch: that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states. justice sotomayor: against all enemies. lynch: against all enemies. justice sotomayor: foreign and domestic. lynch: foreign and domestic. lynch: that i will bear truth faith and allegiance to the cause. that i take this obligation freely. justice sotomayor: that i take this obligation freely. without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion. and that lynch: lynch: and that i will well and safely discharge the duties of the office on which i am about to enter. so help me god. [applause] [cheering] [no audio] [applause] [cheering] lynch: well, so much to say. so many people who mean so much to me. everyone here means something very special to me. and i thank you all. mr. president, thank you so much for your words, and your presence here today. to say that my heart is full is such an understatement. one does not get to this place, to this department, to this theater or this podium alone and i am no differen

we are bound by the united states constitution of which we are given oversight of the xrve branch. and we are not bound by hippa laws and other information to receive that information for us to be able to do our oversight in this. and this is not political. again, we are trying to get to the bottom of a very tragic event. we are trying to partner with the va, as well. and right now, they are not being as open as they should be. there are documents that are clearly missing from the file. documents that i believe are [ expletive ] documents and would put va in a very negative light. i understand that. but you can't remove those documents from the file just because it makes you look bad. and that is what we're trying to get at at this point. but, again i thank every member of this subcommittee for the job that you have been doing. and look forward to continuing the good work. thank you, ms. kuster. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i ask all other members wave their opening remarks as per the committee's cuts tom. hearing no objection, so ordered. i would like to introduce our panel with th

states of the southeast. the constitution of the united states came under debate as to whether it prohibited or acknowledged suchwas made clear by the supreme court that the constitution guarantees equality for all. and so, the great tests were met. tests that brought mob disorder and violence to the south, and that required federal troops to ensure the admittance of negro students into those other than those reserved for negroes only. although the vast majority of the united states was in sympathy with the negro, but some citizens were not. the u.s. government supported the negro, some of the separate state governments did not. and now, the test of tuscaloosa, alabama, the last state of the deep south to resist integration of schools. once again, the governor of the southern states said -- no negro shall be admitted to an otherwise white enrollment. and with the entire world as witness, judge and jury, tuscaloosa and history met on june 11 when two american negroes expressed desire to enroll at the university of alabama. it was in effect a single, defiant man holding up the weak morals of the past. against the

of the armed forces of the united states on a foreign battlefield, we're never going to house them in a prison of the united states, we're not going to give them constitutional rights. those rights are reserved to the people of the united states and to people who commit crimes within the boundaries of the united states the 19th terrorist who didn't quite make it that day was captured in the united states, he was given a trial as he should be. the constitution extends protections to persons within the united states. these people are again, who we are at war with, have never been afforded constitutional protections and you're right, nazis captured on long island and in florida were given due process in a military tribunal as these individuals have been given due process and military tribunals at guantanamo bay and that's the way it always has been and always should be and certainly the members of this house have voted repeat lid in the past and i'm confident they will vote again tonight to defeat this amendment, to reaffirm that these precious rights in the united states constitution are reserved for the people of the united states and will never be extended t

the united states constitution vests specifically power over your international commerce especially sanctions or particularly sanctions in the united states congress. the administration has recognized that congress is the primary arbiter and has asked us to pass a statute providing limitations and structure. but i want to make sure that the administration will follow article one of the constitution when it comes to sanctions on iran. we've got this review process. i would hope that you negotiate a deal in switzerland so good that congress, universally supports it but that may not be the case to imagine a situation in which there is a deal that is cut, the administration supports it but less than one-third of either house has indicated support for the deal. they are news reports that you will prevent a lifting of u.n. sanctions at least for a month to give congress a chance to go through the process of review. will you be allowing lifting of u.n. sanctions during the statutory review process? >> thank you. i thought you're going to another hypothetical but you went directly to an issue i know

i would remind you that we are a federal body not the state body to we are bound by the united states constitution of which we are given oversight of the executive branch and we are not bound by many of the laws, the hippa laws and other information they received information or us to be able to do our oversight in this, it is not a political. i didn't come we are trying to get to the bottom of a very tragic event, and we're trying to partner with the va as well. and right now they are not being as open as they should be. that our documents that are clearly missing from the file. documents i believe are damning documents and put it in a very negative light. i understand that but you can't remove those documents from the file just because it makes you look bad. and that's what we're trying to get at this point. but again i think every member of this subcommittee for the job that you have been doing, and look forward to continuing the good work. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i ask that all other all of the members waved their opening remarks, ask for the committees custom, hear no objections so ordered

the united states constitution vest specifically power over other national converse, especially sanctionsn or particularly sanctions in the united states congress. the administration has recognized that congress is the primary arbiter and has asked us to pass a statute providing limitations and structure. i want to make sure that the administration will follow article one of the constitution when it comes to sanctions on iran. we have got this review process. i would hope that you negotiate a deal so in switzerland, so good that congress universally supports it, but that may not be the case. imagine a situation in which there is a deal that is cut and the administration supports it but less than one third of either house has indicated support for the deal. there are news reports about you will prevent a lifting of the u.n. sanctions at least for one month to give congress a chance to go through the process of review. will you be allowing a lifting of u.n. sanctions during the statutory review process? power: i thought you were going to another hypothetical, but he went directly to an issu

at this time my baby is a vulnerable united states citizen being denied his constitutional rights undertunisian law from international law, and us law and despite the extensive efforts of the various representative state my united states senators and representatives of the fbi, and legal counsel the government continues its opening pockets to the ever-increasing financial allotments the state provides the republic annually. clearly every american child illegally retained abroad state must redouble its efforts to account for every abducted child in its report and apply every actionable remedy provided for to ensure the return. as you well know there is so much more that can be said about this very important topic. i thank you. >> thank you. they will try to have an additional hearing in july. as a window. hopefully they will be significant. it's the hope they will revisit japan. japan absolutely has to be on the list. i would like to yield to the ranking member of the full committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to make a brief statement and then i think we are being called for vot

united states. while the things alike to finish with this this idea that we are still using that same constitution, the same government. it has also allowed us to improve because ultimately slavery in the united states doesn't end by the civil war, it is the -- 15th amendment will give equality in voting by color. the 19th amendment would give equality in voting by gender. so through the years and again maybe slowly, we have faced every issue that came up in our constitution has allowed us to solve things and continue to move forward. so this home will room is everything that the united states has been and will be, it will grow from the events that happen over about 10 or 11 years in this room. it's amazing when you think of this humble place in the men who sat here and the things they did , it's really incredible the things that have grown from the space. >> all weekend, american history tv's joining our comcast cable partners to showcase the history of key west, florida. to learn more about the city, visit www.c-span.org/cities tour. we continue with our look at key west. charles blevin: welcome t

for in the united states constitution it clearly says that it is the united states congress shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations. and in this rule is a clear violation of that. we already voted down overwhelmingly 302-126. republicans and democrats. it was the foremost bipartisan vote in this 2112 century -- 21st century. the very thing that the american people are crying for. now, why? why did hamilton, alexander hamilton and thomas jefferson and james madison all agree very strong very independent minds. alexander hamilton and thomas jefferson could hardly bear to be in the same room with each other but they agreed on this. because they knew that every state had representatives in congress to look out for jobs that could be shipped overseas. this is the primary reason, ladies and gentlemen, look at every trade agreement. this country has lost over two million manufacturing jobs to china. as a result of the china deal. over 150,000 jobs to mexico. yeah, it created jobs. not in the united states. what kind of jobs? these are jobs that impacted at the lower and

portion of the remedy for their crimes against the united states came in a place where we m might never expect. that is in the 14th amendment of the constitution of the united states. this would be a good time to remind you to make sure you, if you don't have one, reach for it, we will need it in 15 minutes. i'm going to do something first before we get there, but i will be leading us through the 14th amendment in a way that i think never has been done before. before i get there and before i go further, i just want to ask yourself to put yourself in the place of those northerners those men and women who had lost parents, spouses children, and again, we want to be forgiving and should be forgiving. i need you to get back to the mindset of the people who were mad as hell and as what could you do to the rebels. what are your choices? a lot of this comes from letters who went to andrew johnson and are in the national archives today. i have already said execution. that is obvious. you can hold them up on treason hang a few, and make a statement about secession. how would you do it? hanging was obviously the method of choice, but simple hanging just

to recognize the oversight responsibility given to the senate given to congress by the united states constitution. by their absence i take it the administration is saying they are not subject to oversight. and yet at the end of the day the american people provide the ultimate oversight. given that the administration refused to cooperate in this hearing, it's my hope that the full committee will take it to the next level. of invoking compulsory process. so that members of the executive branch will be made to answer whether they tried to follow the law or whether they were instructed by political operatives to disregard the law in the interests of a political outcome. that's a question the executive needs to answer. and the purpose of this hearing is to begin getting to the bottom of it. now, can understand why the administration is reluctant to engage in this discussion. i can understand why both in substance, after over five years of obama barack barack hussein -- -- the american people were assureds if you like your plan you can keep your plan. millions of people discovered the promise was false

we're bound by the united states constitution of which we are given oversight of the executive branchmany of the laws, the hipaa laws and other information to receive that information for us to be able to do our oversight in this. and it's not political. we are trying to get to the bottom of a very tragic event. and we're trying to partner with the v.a., as well. and right now they are not being as open as they should be. there are documents that are clearly missing from the file. documents that i believe are damning documents. that would put v.a. in a negative light. i understand that. but you can't remove those documents from the file just because it makes you look bad. and that's what we're trying to get at at this point. but again i thank every member of this subcommittee for the job that you have been doing. and look forward to continuing the good works. thank you. >> all right mr. chairman, i ask that all other members waive their opening remarks as per the committee's custom. hearing no objection, so ordered. with that i would now like to introduce our panel. on the panel we ha

proposition, but because a federal court said that it is unconstitutional according to the united states constitutionat means that that initial ruling is in question. >> we saw a lot of people on the steps of the supreme court today. i am sure that crowd will grow on friday and huge on monday if we haven't heard since then. >> the that's right. >> all right. got up early. drove in from menlo park. we appreciate your time and expertise. >>> we will get reaction on today's ruling on air and online. make sure you check out our website. ktvu.com. or download our ktvu app. >>> our time is 8:49. in other news this morning, a brushfire, one that was fanned by strong winds, it's fully contained this morning in eastern contra costa county. it was a quick moving fire. it made a lot of people nervous and prompted evacuations by people living near contra loma park in antioch. alex savidge has been out there all morning. you are back now. the firefighters haven't let up on their work? >> reporter: no. people living on this cul-de-sac, they were right in the thick of it yesterday afternoon. and take a look behind

speaker, article 1, section 8 of the united states constitution is clear. congress alone shall have the power to declare war and make no mistake, the current campaign against isis is a war. mr. speaker, our esteemed colleague from texas made a very cogent argument about why we need clarity. the inability to have a clear plan is based upon the fact that congress has not yet articulated an authorization to use force that would lay out the parameters and the extent of what we would expect the president to do. now the president says he's -- he has the authorization under the 2001 and 2002. ambiguity clearly, is present. i disagree with the president on those as an authorization. i've argued for more than 10 months that our military operations against isis need their own authorization. the president did his part he, submitted a draft to us in february. since then, we've had a few committee hearings but no real action. leadership in both houses of the senate, both houses have refused to schedule votes on this issue either in committee or on the floor. that is una

united states. one of the things i like to finish with is this idea that we are still using the same constitution. we are still using the same government. it is also allowed us, not quickly, but a lot is to improve because ultimately slavery in united states did not really in by the civil war. it's the 13th amendment. the 15th amendment will give equality in voting. the 19th amendment would give equality of voting by gender. maybe slowly, we have faced every issue that is come up in our constitution has allowed us to solve things and continue to move forward. this little humble room is really everything that the united states has been and will be. it will grow from the events that happened over about a 10 or 11 your. -- year period. the methods set here in the things they did, it is really incredible the things that have grown from this place. >> each week, american history tv's real america rings you archival films that help tell the story of the 20th century. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of united states. >> if we as a people act wisely our annual national output can rise within a decad

the big principle as i am passionate about the united states constitution and have spent almost my entire life fighting badge but the very first amendment protects free speech. campaign finance reform unfortunately is an issue people misunderstand because sinn played with our lot of truth from politicians everytime campaign finance reform laws are passed, it is by incumbent politicians and their intended effect is to help incumbent politicians. right now the current system you have strict limits on how much can be given to a particular candidate but that benefits those who are incumbents without massive apparatus it hurts the challengers for toward interesting story from ed rollins and describes how reagin at the time was in california they're a small businessmen, not like bill gates tightness but successful and they sat down with him to say you share our principles what will it take for you to be elected of governor of california? he said between two and three a million dollars. those businessmen wrote checks for 300,000 each year and raised money in one city and though small-business be

same sex marriage he wrote, must be allowed under the united states constitution. >> jan, as you were saying this is where justice kennedy was expected to go. it's significant he gave the 5-4 majority. >> that's true. you never know with justice kennedy. on the issue of gay rights he's also seen it as one it was can demeanor -- was demeaning for gays and lesbians to be treated different. there was some question would he go this far? most believed and it was proven today justice kennedy would continue the path he started in 2003. i was in the courtroom back then when he ruled gays and lesbians could not be prosecuted for con sensual sex that air bedtheir bedrooms. people in the room were leaping at such a historic ruling then. this is the explanation point, final point for this nation. same sex marriage is the law of the land. >> let's talk about the practical implications of people in america. 37 states recognize same sex marriage. what does it mean for people in the other 13 states? >> when this decision is implemented, thooirley'll be allowed to marry. in states where they said you

the democratic party has violated the constitution of the united states by holding midnight votes. the usa freedom act is just the end of what they are doing. benjamin franklin stated that under the constitution, we have freedom from government. host: i have to leave it there. the congressman needs to get going. what are your final thoughts? guest: we were having amendments on the house floor last night until 1:00 in the morning. nobody hates late-night sessions more than i do. i think these are anonymously important issues. they are at the heart of the fourth amendment debate we have been having for a couple of hundred years and they are not going away anytime soon. i think i hope we are reaching an equilibrium where we recognize the national security imperatives. we are reminded of them every week but at the same time, we want to cherish and ollanta these freedoms that are at the foundation of our republic we have to find a way to balance both. there is never going to be a right line on these issues. we need a functional congress i can do the best job possible. with usa freedom, i

congress to protect this nation from terrorism and also from our unwavering fidelity to the united states constitution. first, section 302 of the underlying legislation provides that the authorization of appropriations by this act shall not be deemed to institute authority for the conduct of any -- coninstitute authority for the conduct that is not otherwise authorized by the constitution or the laws of the united states. section 303 and 304 requires specific elements of the executive branch to provide congress a timely notification requirement on key intelligence activities. congressional notification requirements generally remain a vital important mechanism to ensure that congress' able to conduct robust oversight. notification requirements specific to the intelligence community are even more essential given the classified and delicate nature of the situation of our intelligence agencies face every day. the classification of documents and the decisionmaking factors that go into such classification have historically been an area of great interest and are concerned by members of this body and the citi

the united states constitution vests specifically power over all international commerce especially sanctions, or particularly sanctions, in the united states congress. the administration has the area of trade recognized that the congress is the primary arbiter and has asked us to pass a statute providing limitations and structure. but i want to make sure that the administration will follow article one of the constitution when it comes to sanctions on iran. we've got this review process. i would hope that you would negotiate a deal -- in switzerland, so good that congress universally supports it but that may not be the case. imagine a situation in which there is a deal that is cut, the administration supports it but less than one-third of either house has indicated support for the deal. there are news reports that you will prevent a lifting of u.n. sanctions, at least for a month, to give congress a chance to go through the process of review. will you be -- allowing a lifting of u.n. sanctions during the statutory review process? >> um thank you. i thought you were going to another hypothetic

in fact, the seventh amendment to the united states constitution provides for a jury trial in a civil case at expense in over 20 tuesday -- $20 in value and that's the procedural hurdle and close the courthouse door to make it impossible for someone to go to court and have a jury of their peers decide the facts. and award any damages that may or may not be due -- we close that door, then we're closing our way of life. so i'll fight myself to make sure we keep those courthouse doors open, that the third coequal branch of government in fact be adequately restored so it can act as the third coequal branch of government, joining us, halfway johnson member of the judiciary committee. >> nutritionix asks if your brand is fda compliant? daniel sadoff, what do you 0. >> we help restaurants reply if fda regular legislation is by showing calorie counts on the menu boards. >> why are you showing your wares here at cef? what kind of technology? >> we have nutrition calculators we contribute for the different restaurants, and recently there was a patent troll going after any company that had any f

to recognize the oversight responsibility given to the senate, given to congress by the united states constitutiond yet, at the end of the day the american people provide the ultimate oversight. given that the administration refused to cooperate in this hearing, it is my hope that the full committee will take it to the next level. of invoking compulsory process, so that members of the executive branch will be made to answer, whether they tried to follow the law or whether they were instructed by political operatives to disregard the law in the interest of a political outcome. that's a question the executive needs to answer. and the purpose of this hearing is to begin getting to the bottom of it. now, i can understand why the administration is reluctant to engage in this discussion. i can understand why both in substance, after over five years of obamacare, we have seen that millions of people are hurting under it. the american people were promised by the president, if you like your health insurance plan, you can keep your health insurance plan. well, millions of people discovered that promise was