state affair. this now moves into federal jurisdiction and scott will appeal in 1854, to the federal courts. and of course the ultimate court of appeal in the federal system is the united states supreme court. and his freedom suit comes to the united states supreme court by dred scott versus sanford. nina spelled it any official dock hitting of the case. so, sanford. john sanford acquires de that he did not really had in his name. never mind. dred scott versus stanford. what is the supreme court going to do with this? you have to think. what body, what governmental body past the northwest ordinance? ian? >> was it the british? no. >> the confederation? >> the confederation congress. right? so the assumption is that congress has the authority to make rules for the northwest territories. fast forward to the kansas nebraska act. the kansas nebraska act lays down rules governing slavery, or the possibility of slavery in kansas and nebraska. congress does that. congress adopts the kansas nebraska act. so the assumption from the northwest ordinance all the way up to the kansas nebraska act is that the united states congress is vested with the authority to make determinations about the stat

a persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united states please give their attention. landmark cases c-span special history series produced in partner with the national constitution center. exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 historic supreme court decisions. >> mr. chief justice make please please the court. very often some of our most famous decisions. are ones that the court made very unpopular decisions. >> let's go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of different people who help stuck together because they believe in a rule of law. >> good evening and welcome to landmark cases. tonight's case is gideon versus wayne. wreck 55 years ago this month, the supreme court ruled that the right to counsel was so fundamental to our dove governmental system. that states must provide lawyers for defendants who cannot afford. one the hero of tonight's story is a bit of an unlikely. one clarence gideon was adrift her from florida was accused of breaking a pool. as we begin tonight, we'

the federal courts, and of course the ultimate court of appeals in the federal system the united states supreme court. and his freedom suit comes to the united states supreme court as dred scott vs. sandrud. what is the supreme court going to do with this? you have to think what governmental body passed the northwest ordinance? >> was it the british? >> no. lexi? >> the confederation? >> the confederation of congress. so the assumption is congress has the authority to make rules for the northwest territory. fast forward to the kansas-nebraska act. the kansas-nebraska act lays down rules governing slavery or the possibility of slavery in kansas or nebraska. okay? congress does that. congress adopts the kansas-nebraska act. so the assumption from the northwest ordinance all the way up to the kansas-#act is that the united states congress is vested with the authority to make determinations about the status of slavery in the territories. i mean, no matter what decision it makes the northwest ordinance was no slavery, kansas-#it's, well, slavery if you can get a popular majority. but it's congress that's

we were testing a decision of the united states supreme court, trying to make it real. >> join us sundayt 8 p.m. eastern on q&a as we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. >> during the summer months reached out to your elected officials with c-span's congressional directory. it contains all the contact information you need to stay in touch with members of congress, federal agencies and state governors. order your copy online today at cspanstore.org. >> coming up, nancy pelosi will speak about extending coronavirus unemployment benefits which are set to expire. later, jill biden at the wife of democratic presidential candidate joe biden will take part in a discussion of the pandemic. she is joined by texas democrats eddie bernice johnson and marc veasey. that will be live at 2:45 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> host: dan coats is a research fellow with the american enterprise institute and joins us now to talk about latest report looking at topics regarding parenting. dan cox, good morning and welcome to "washington journal." >> guest: thanks ravi.us i know there

case because he gets lochner's original attorney, he asks him to file an appeal to the united states supreme courte interesting thing is that he filed a document, entitled an intention to appeal to the united states supreme court, and filed a $100 fee. he did not file a motion for a writ of error. for those of you who are not lawyers, or early 20th century lawyers, that was the way a file got to the supreme court. it was in order to send it to the supreme court. if that had been where we stood, this case would have never happened. it would have been deep in the dungeons of the new york courts of appeal. just laying away with its $100 filing fee. what happened was that weismann took on another attorney. he was not a very famous attorney, either. although he had argued before the supreme court. frank harvey field saw the error and he actually got a justice to agree to let the writ of error go through. when i was alerted to the fact that weismann had been charged with practicing law without a license, i tried to find out when he got the license. i wrote to the court of appeals charged with determinin

we are waiting on the decision of the united states supreme court and we are hopeful that we will have a decision by the end of next month. based on the decision of the united states supreme court, it will tell or imply what the congress may or may not do. >> good morning. i am a junior here at eastern high school. my question is -- i know you are very big on civil rights. so how do feel about that segregation scandal in your own state? rep. lewis: it is a very good question. it made me very sad. that in 2003, in the state of georgia or in any place in america but in my home state of georgia that we have segregated , prom. you have a one integrated prom and then come back and have a segregated one. it doesn't make sense. we have to learn to live together as dr. luther king would say as brothers and sisters. or we will perish as fools. we have to learn to live here in america before we tell the world we have to learn to live together. we are one people, one family. we are the american family. we are the world's family. >> good morning. my name is kevin and i am a senior here. congressma

they're testing a decision of the united states supreme court trying to make it real.ject join us sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on q and a as we look back to our conversation for representative john lewis. >> here is what's ahead on cspan2. first a hearing on u.s. china relations. in fema administrator talks about disaster preparedness during the pandemic. and later ncaa president mark emmert testifies at a senate hearing on integrity in college athletics including compensation for athletes. >> the senate foreign relations committee held a hearing on u.s. china relations. chinese actions in the south china sea and human rights abuse in chinese midland. deputy secretary of state steven begin testifies this is two hours and 15 minutes. >> thank you all for coming today. i want to thank all of you for being here it is o

it tested the decision of the united states supreme court. sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on q&a as we look act to our conversation with representative john lewis. >> joe biden was interviewed by former president obama on the coronavirus pandemic and the federal response to the virus in the u.s. the former vice president and president work seated in the -- were in the same room but distanceed at a because of the coronavirus pandemic. the video was produced and released on social media channels by mr. biden's presidential campaign. ♪ >> ♪ ♪ ♪ when we came into office, even before inauguration, we had seen a historic financial crisis, irresponsibility on wall street had spread out to main street prayed we had to move fast not just in 100 days we had to move in the first month to get the recovery act passed. we are now in a situation were not only driven economic crisis, we also have a public health crisis to boot. tell me a little bit about how you are seeing the current economic crisis and how you are think about the economy right now. so well mr. president there's

the united states supreme court as a highest duty of a police officer -- has quoted that the highest of a police officer is to know that to follow the law. a thorough understanding of state and municipal law is vital to every officer. the federal constitution is the supreme law of the land. it secures the blessings of liberty for all united states citizens. every provision of the constitution is aimed at the preservation of the basic freedoms of the individual. it restricts governmental to go overr citizens processes, and severely limits police powers. law enforcement officers should be aware of these limitations to avoid violating the rights of citizens. a good knowledge of the law is part of the professional preparation expected of every officer. for -- about over 8:00 for a little bridge or poker. >> your faces dirty. -- your face is dirty. i will see you. >> by, bill. bill., >> and officer is almost constantly under public scrutiny. his appearance and conduct publicly and privately often shapes the public's attitude towards the entire police organization. >> good afternoon. may i

we were testing a decision of the united states supreme court, trying to make it real. >> join us sundayas we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. live coverage of two key hearings next week. amazon's jeff bezos. cook appear before the subcommittee as they examine dominance of online power. and william barr appears before the judiciary committee general oversight of the justice department. monday on coverage c-span two. watch any time c-span.org. >> carlos jimenez is the mayor of miami-dade county. he spoke to the washington

well, according to the framers of the united states constitution, the supreme court was not supposed above the partisan fray. but, of course, so many issues are politically fraught in the united states that that when they do percolate up to the court, they are bound to have some kind of political valence, and the court being as evenly pitched as it is right now, it's obviously going to be viewed as a political animal. of course, the chiefjustice is at great pains to avoid that appearance, and in a number of decisions this term, including a decision on abortion, he sided with the liberals — i think in part to avoid the appearance of partisanship. just finally, the idea that you carry on working, despite this treatment that you are going through, despite your age — i mean, we should just pause for a second and say that's a pretty remarkable achievement in itself. well, she is remarkable, just in terms of her longevity and her time on the court, but she has been absolutely clear that she will continue to do this job while she's fully able to do it and she says she's still fully able to

we have a responsibility to protect the united states and protect the citizens of the united states and i'm telling you, to the supreme courtdon't let this happen because it will cause great harm. he's really putting it to them at that point. >> and that's a very strong argument to make, even if it isn't much supported, i don't want to say by the facts, but even if he can't cite much in support of it, and this is what the united states was saying from the moment the cases began, the word that they kept using was irreparable, irreparable harm to the united states. their problem was, when they got in front of judges who asked them hard questions, sort of where is the thing, show -- give me a document, show me a document which will really do great harm, they could not do it. >> before we get on to the court's 6-3 decision, we have to get one more step in this, which you said, additionally the papers were entered into the record of the senate by senator mike gravel. what happens when we bring the record of the united states congress into this, floyd abrams, what did that do to the information? >> well, first, we don't know what

we were testing a decision of the united states supreme court, trying to make it real. >> join us sunday, at 8 p.m. backrn on "q&a" as we look to our conversation with, -- with representative john lewis. night on "the communicators" -- oregon republican congressman greg walden. >> there's great admiration for the innovation and brilliance that pulses in silicon valley. i've been out there and toward a lot of companies and met a lot of leaders and it's exciting to see what's being developed and what the future holds. i will be careful how i say this and i will probably offend somebody, but there is an arrogance that comes with that incredible productivity and innovation that tends to downplay the effect that they people public policy and who are engaged in public policy. when you are that good, that big, that strong, that innovative, sometimes you think you can discard public reaction or political reaction. >> monday night at 8:00 eastern on "the communicators" on c-span2. on friday, house majority leader steny hoyer and minority whip steve scalise came to the

the united states supreme court hands the trump administration to major victories. president trump claims a huge drop in mortality from the coronavirus. dr. anthony fauci says wait just a minute. why some on the left are concerned about how joe biden might do in the presidential debates. this is "special report." ♪ good evening and welcome to washington. i am john roberts in for bret baier tonight. the president is celebrating two major victories in the united states supreme court. the first allows more employers to opt out of providing no cost birth control over religious and moral objections. the other sides with two catholic schools that certain employees cannot sue for employment discrimination. fox news chief legal correspondent and anchor of ""fox news @ night"" shannon bream is here with details. >> you're right, a pair of decisions today that were big wins for the trump administration. they are tied to religious liberty. we await a pair of additional decisions that could impact enormously this year's presidential election. it's taken seven years and two trip

donald trump's lawyers, who lost very badly in the united states supreme court last week, told a federal judge in new york city today that they plan to try a new set of arguments to prevent the manhattan district attorney from obtaining trump's tax returns. donald trump and his lawyers are going to lose once again with federal judge who found their original argument about blocking the subpoena, quote, repugnant to the nation's governmental structure and constitutional values. joyce vance will join us at the end of this hour to consider just how much more time donald trump can delay in the courts before he is ultimately ordered to hand over his tax returns to the manhattan district attorney who, remember, wants those tax returns in a criminal investigation that could lead to donald trump being the first president in history to face criminal prosecution after leaving office, if those tax returns contain any evidence of criminal conduct by donald trump. the white house press secretary reissued donald trump's now five-year-old lie, that he has not released his tax returns like all presidenti

to decide who will up serving lifetime appointments on the federal courts, including the united states supreme courtere's a tremendous amount of in who has the majority in the senate. so you are right. we are now in the minority, we don't have t control over these things. and we need to flip the senate in the majority so we can have legislation on the loor for a vote that is about meaningful police reform, so that we can have legislation up or a vote that is about addressing the climate crisis, so we can have legislation that is on the floor for a vote the passage of creating a athway to citizenship for our immigrants. these are the things that we need to do. how do we do it? we , one of the things that need to do is we need to support he senate candidates who are going to turn red states blue. i have a list of who they are. theve been hosting a lot of new candidates who are challenging incurvents as a incumbents as a way to introduce them because the challenge that the new andidates are having, they're campaigning without planning for it in the midst of a pandemic so they can't travel. so it's impo

what the supreme court does today is an unambiguous rejection of the president who late last year talked about having an expansive second amendment to the united states constitution that gave him unlimited power. today the supreme court, including two people that donald trump nominated for their roles of supreme court justices, today that court rejected that notion that presidential power is not constrained in any way. he's subject just like any other citizen to investigation by a state court grand jury. sure he has the ability to argue that cy vance needs to narrow his subpoena. that is something that could happen relatively quickly. then we have this notion of congressional oversight which the president has also maintained he should not be subject to. again, the supreme court rejects that with clarity and tells him -- i think, nicolle, this is the most interesting part. the supreme court talks about how normally this sort of request from congress to the executive would be worked out in what the court calls the hurley birly, the back and forth of politics. donald trump has engaged in no negotiation with congress. the court references it. they tell t

. >> for the honorable supreme court the united states. >> >> landmark cases produced in partnership with the national constitution center. exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 historic supreme court decisions. >> mr chief justice. good evening, welcome to see spencer's landmark cases. tonight's case is the new york times company versus the united states, in this 1971 case, the supreme court ruled six to three against the knicks this nixon administration in a big win for journalism. the decision upheld the new york times in the washington post, which you just saw depicted in this recent movie, the right to project published classified information on the history of the vietnam war over significant objections from the pentagon and the white house. we have to terrific guests at the table tonight, to help us understand how this case unfolded. and what it means for us today in our society. let me introduce you to flloyd abrams, the best-known first amendment lawyer" counsel in the new york times case and he is the attorney in new york city where he focuses on fir

we were testing a decision of the united states supreme court. trying to make it real. >> join us sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "q&a" as we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. >> president trump presented the presidential medal of freedom to three-time olympic runner and former u.s. congressman jim ryun earlier today. mr. ryun was the first high school student to break a four-minute mile and the youngest american male track athlete to qualify for the olympics. in 1968 he won the silver medal at the summer olympics in mexico city. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states accompanied by jim ryun. [applause] pres. trump: thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] pres. trump: thank you very much. please. let's enjoy ourselves. this is a tremendous moment for jim and your family and let's just enjoy ourselveses for a little while. we'll ask jim to say a few words. i want to hear what he has to say about his great talent, his great running ability. i find athletics to be ext

in a whole series of other issues, here is my favorite, she argued two cases before the united states supreme court and i am hoping if this idea ever becomes a reality and gets challenged in court, brenda wright will be there to defend it before the justice and she will have a lot to tell us about how she will back that defense. cornell william books, professor of the practice of nonprofit organizations and professor of the practice of public leadership and social justice at harvard's kennedy school. that is a wonderful title. public leadership in social justice, that has been his life and a visiting professor at the divinity school and a great preacher that you will see, former president and ceo of the national association for the advancement of colored people, the civil rights attorney and the reverend an ordained minister. he will pronounce on our work. last but not least, who very kindly came to me about two years ago and said let's do this. he's a advocate in the state of connecticut and ran elections, knows what he is talking about and also a member of the state legislature and he was preside

we were tested a decision other united states supreme court trying to make it real. >> join a sundayt 8 p.m. eastern on q&a as a look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. >> presidential candidate joe biden sat down with former president obama this week and talked about the a number of is including president trump's handling of the coronavirus pandemic. ♪ ♪ >> when we came into office, even before inauguration, we had seen a historic financial crisis, irresponsibility on wall street had spread out to main street. we had to move fast not just in 100 days. we we had to move in the first month to get the recovery act passed. we are now in a situation where not only we have an economic crisis but we also have a public health crisis to boot. tell me a little bit about how you were seeing the current economic crisis and how you are thinking about the economy brightness. >> well, there's three pieces i see. one, we've got to sustain and keep people from going under forever. there's only 10,000 businesses are not likely to open again, significant number of small business

because he gets mackie, lochner's original attorney, he asks him to file appeal to the united states supreme court. the interesting thing is that mackie files a document titled, i wrote this down, he says an intention to appeal to the united states supreme court and filed $100 fee. the thing he didn't do is he did not file a motion for a writ of or. now for those of you who are not lawyers in the early 20th century, that was the way the file got to the supreme court. there was an order to send the file to the supreme court. so if that had been where we stood this case never would have happened. the case would have been deep in the basements of the new york court of appeals, just laying around with the $100 filing fee. wiseman took on another attorney. he was not a very famous attorney either. although he had argued the court before the supreme court. frank harvey fields saw the error, and he actually got justice peckham to degree to let the writ of error go through and get the case to the supreme court. well, when i was alerted to the fact that wiseman had been charged with practicing without a li

we were testing a decision of the united states supreme court. trying to make it real. >> join us sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "q&a" as we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. > we'll go live now -- >> good afternoon. it's been two months, i believe, and 10 days since we passed the heroes act on the democratic side. that was our position. it had been carefully vetted in the democratic caucus and moved through the ways and means committee. and we took the position that it was a challenge that we needed to get out immediately, the

it has been 55 years and is that act was passed but in 2013, the united states supreme court struck elements of it was struck down, john lewis was still fighting, every year he brings people to selma to observe the anniversary of the march. this has been going on for a number of years, over 25 years, he led those demonstrations. the fact is the work is not done. if we want to pay tribute to john lewis, we need to be engaged in voting, organising, mobilising or registering and voting. we need to re—enact the voting rights act, congress needs to pass legislation, don't just talk that he was such a great man and he did great work. the work has to become action now and that is what he would want to see happen in the united states. i can recall being in georgia in the run—up to the presidential election in 2008 and seeing long queues of black voters stretching around and down the street in some towns, inspired by the prospect of getting ba rack 0bama elected. more than a decade on, others challenges still there ahead of this us presidential election? there are challenges and maybe to some degree

united states government was not a party. in those days, it was relatively less frequent than it is today for the united states to enter into a case with the permission of the supreme courtexpress the views of the united states. and so archibald cox was doing that. he was advocating on behalf of the united states citizens saying this is wrong. the second point i thought i'd make is that we're -- we've been talking about the 114th amendment without emphasizing the point that what the 14th amendment provides is that citizens shall not be denied equal protection of the laws. and so the argument here ultimately was treating people's votes differently depending upon where they lived was a violation of equal protection of the laws. but the third point was that to doug's point that archibald cox was making an incremental step. i think that he felt -- he did feel that if we asked the court to go all the way, to say we can handle this case, we can take this case and decide whether the constitutional principle was involved and then also decide what the constitutional principle was was pushing it a little bit too far in terms of getting the necessary five votes to win the case. if

and, so, we are holding in our hands tonight a historic ruling by the united states supreme court on what is a relatively small and simple body of law governing subpoenas involving the president of the united states, and we have this new supreme court ruling tonight thanks entirely to a person whose name does not appear anywhere in the supreme court case. the name of the case is donald j. trump versus cyrus vance jr. to subpoena donald trump's tax returns in a criminal investigation of donald trump. the district attorney and the grand jury are investigating whether donald trump committed tax fraud in the closing weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign when he used business accounts instead of personal funds to purchase the silence of the person who created this supreme court case. stormy daniels. the legal case may be named donald j. trump versus cyrus vance jr. donald trump paid stormy daniels $130,000 for her silence in what federal prosecutors have called his intent quote intent to influence the 2016 presidential election in a conspiracy against the united states. the prosecuting d

the united states supreme court trying to make it real. >> join us sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on q&a as we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. ♪ unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public events. you can watch all of the programming on television, online, or listen on our free radio app and be part of the national conversation through the daily washington journal program or through our social media feeds. created by america's cable television companies as a public service and brought to you today by your television provider. peter: joining us on "the communicators" this week is representative greg walden, a republican from oregon, former chairman of the energy and commerce committee. now, the top republican on that committee which sees a lot of telecommunications legislation. our guest reporter, chris mills rodrigo of the hill. congressman, you're retiring. why? rep. walden: i have had a great run. i have been at this 22 years in the u.s. house, the oregon legislature. i'm not one of those members leaving c

-- that is from a 1980 supreme court opinion that ruled that the place donald trump is going to on friday is stolen land. in 1980, the supreme court ruled that the united states own 1868 treaty with the sioux nation when it seized the land where mt. rushmore now sits in north dakota. that supreme court case carries the title that could be the title in a history book. united states versus sioux nation of indians. the opinion's 67 pages contain a short history of the federal government's treatment of the tribes, including an expedition of 1,000 soldiers led by lieutenant colonel george armstrong custer that, quote, confirmed the presence of gold fields in that region. and as soon as gold was discovered in the sioux nation, the united states violated its own treaty with the sioux just like this country violated every single treaty with every single tribe at that time. the president of the oglala sioux tribe, julian bear runner, told "the guardian" that donald trump does not have permission to enter their territory. he said, the lands on which that mountain is carved and the lands he's about to visit belong to the great sioux nation under the treaty signed in 185

today is also the last day of this term of the supreme court of the united states and it saved some of the biggest decisions for last, two involving president trump, whether people can get access to his private financial representative -- his private financial records. our supreme court reporter is here to give us what is more or less a split decision. start with the new york grand jury subpoena for his tax records in possession of his accounting. what did the court say? was a pretty clear rejection of the president. trump was arguing for absolute immunity for president while in office from critical data from criminal investigations. the subpoenas went to his accounting firm and the president was arguing while i am in office that is too distracting for me to deal with. the supreme court rejected that. they also rejected the notion the grand jury would have to meet a heightened standard to get the presidents records. they did not allow the case to go forward in the lower court. the president may have other arguments to make but it was a complete rejection of the president's position and

and it turns out, thank you, united states supreme court, that these are trump scandals that have long tails. these ones haven't gone away after all. the supreme court in the normal course of events would leave this ruling effectively sort of simmering until it's cleared off its docket now. they'd leave it simmering for 25 days before anybody could act on it, before those new york prosecutors could get this thing going again in the new york courts, to fight the president over the terms of the subpoena once and for all. the prosecutors hoping to prevail whereupon they'd get the documents. under the normal course of events, they're supposed to wait 25 days before they start moving. but they might try to go faster if they want to. for example, they could file a motion to accelerate the entry of this supreme court opinion into the docket to try to get that trip to the lower courts fast tracked. that will be the first thing to watch here. watch to see if they do that. other elements of this are live as well. to the extent that there may have been inappropriate pressure brought to bear on th

it tested the decision of the united states supreme court. sunday at 8:00 p.m.iewed by former president obama on the coronavirus pandemic and the federal response to the virus in the u.s. the former vice president and president work seated in the -- were in the same room but distanceed at a because of the coronavirus pandemic. the video was produced and released on social media channels by mr. biden's presidential campaign. ♪ >> ♪ ♪ ♪ when we came into

i long an african american woman to sit on the united states supreme court. same we've had three women to sit on the united states supreme consideration due to african american woman. that to mis pority. the vp is good ono style bun substance, give me an africanom american on the supreme court. that's where wdetermine how our democracy will be preserved. this supreme court has muted thc voting rightof 1965. i am very concerned about the mposition of theted states supreme court. >> woodruff: hou majority whip, representative james clyburn of south carolina. thank you very mu. >> thanks for having me. >> woodruff: this evening >> woodruff: this evening, there are reports that joe biden will announce his pick for running mate the week of august 10. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, the surge of covid infections in much of th world has hit new highs-- rd 292,000 cases in the last 24 hours. india alone ported 55,000 cases-- its most yet. meanwhile, btish prime minister boris johnson abruptly imposed new restrictions in northern england. and, in vietnam, thousan

supreme court's most significant landmark cases. when the stories of we the people become cases before the united states supreme court and when these cases result in the opinions of the court, history turns. the ways in which we think about and live under the constitution are reflected in the court's interpretations in both their historical context and their legacies. some cases and the court's opinions in them so profoundly alter our constitutional understandings that they can only be rightly be called landmark cases, markers of where we have traveled as a nation. as a part of an initiative begun in 2015, the national constitution center partnered with c-span to create a 12-part series illustrating the history, issues and people involved in monumental landmark cases. through the resulting online videos and other classroom resources available at landmarkcases.cspan. org, students and educators can analyze some of the most famous and infamous cases. last year we continued this initiative through a series of town hall discussions. in depth articles on our constitution daily blog and the publication of our 2017 popular civic calendar w

ofwere testing a decision the united states supreme court, trying to make it real. >> join us sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern as we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. next, marco rubio talks about u.s.-china relations and the coronavirus pandemic. this was hosted by the hoover institution.

protesting a decision of the united states supreme court. trying to make it real. >> join us tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern as we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis. next, secretary of state mike pompeo talked abut the future of u.s. china relations. this was held at the richard nixon presidential library in california. esidential library in california. this is just over one hour. >> ladies and gentlemen, the honorable michael pompeo. the honorable pete wilson, christopher nixon cox and hugh hewitt. [applause] ♪ ♪ ♪ good afternoon. i'm christopher nixon cox, grandson of richard nixon and on behalf of my family and the board of directors of the foundation i want to welcome you to another important event and the museum is right behind me here. today we are honored to have secretary of state michael pompeo to have chosen the nixon library to make a major speech about u.s. china relations. like we do so often at the library, we are going to begin the program with a prayer. would you please remain standing and welcome greg

protesting a decision of the united states supreme court. make it real. >> join us tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern as we look back to our conversation with representative john lewis.

both congressional investigators and new york prosecutors have just been cleared by the united states supreme court to pursue financial records and tax records for both the president, himself, and his businesses. just today, new york prosecute s ers and the president's lawyers were in court arguing about how quickly a subpoena for his financial records can now be served now that the supreme court says he can't evade that subpoena just because he's president. i should say the prosecutors were making the case to that judge today for how quickly they'd like to get those records from the president the president i's lawyers were arguing to the judge how much more slowly they'd like the judge to go, please, because tick tock, election's in november also, tick tock, mary trump's book about her lifelong knowledge of the conduct and scams of the president, well, that book is out now and it has sold a million copies and there's a weeks-long waiting list right now to get a physical copy of this book at some major booksellers. that said, you have an advantage because you are here and mary trump joins us here t

we have supreme court justice stephen breyer. justice breyer is on the united states supreme court and one of ascendedpeople to have in our nation. jews have done18 so before. for our purposes, he was a professor at harvard law school and at the harvard kennedy school of government. chief judge of the unites states court of appeals for the first circuit. justice breyer, it has been a delight to speak with you over the past few weeks. you have been very kind, generous, so i thank you. kid i was asked to memorize, as an assignment, the nine justices and yours was the easiest to remember because my home was filled with breyer's ice cream. in my mind you were just as i cream. a friend came to visit me last year and he started calling me rabbi ice cream. maybe after this we can gets my screen. relationreyer: no unfortunately. moderator: talia is my very good friend and is currently endures lung. she earned a degree from oxford and completed her doctorate at harvard law school and is finishing up a phd in business economics of the department of economics at harvard and harv