35 Burst results for "Justice Antonin Scalia"
ToddCast Podcast with Todd Starnes
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on ToddCast Podcast with Todd Starnes
"Pastor Paul Chappell on the patriot mobile newsmaker line from California, brand new book out called the resilient life. Doctor chapel, let's talk about this book. I mean, you've had decades of ministry experience and you poured all of that into this project and really showing people how to maneuver through some very difficult things that especially during the Christmas season and the holiday season, I guess, for example, a lot of people go through depression and anxiety. This is not always a happy time for a lot of people. No, and a lot of times the emotions stem back to family trials and difficulties and it's not what they think others are experiencing and so this book really does deal with how to be resilient through seasons like this. And you mentioned the chapter on depression, for example. And we really talk about the life of Charles spurgeon probably one of the most well-known baptist preachers in history and how God so blessed his ministry in London and yet he struggled at times with depression and we talk in that same chapter about Elijah and how he had depression after even having a great victory. And how he just really felt like, okay, that's it. It's time to die. And so we give some real life and some biblical illustrations so that people can relate and understand. They're not alone. And then we talk in that chapter about the lord Jesus, who was tempted after 40 days of fasting. But there's always a solution in God's word. And so we take the second half of each chapter and we give scriptural helps and we talk about how to overcome these challenges, for example, through ephesian 6, 16 and 18. The sort of the spirit and the prayer and supplication in the spirit. And we give practical steps. And so this book, the resilient life is meant to bring some resilience into the spirits of those of us, probably who feel a little trampled down after the last few years, but want to keep on going for that. It does seem tough, and especially those of us who sort of work and operate in the political realm where you're just seeing all of this happen in real time and you can find yourself, not necessarily. And fearful, but you do sometimes get a little anxious when you see all these things that are coming out of Washington and knowing how they're going to have an impact. And do you address those kinds of things? I mean, not specifically, but in general terms with anxiety. Well, first of all, the fear that comes upon us is real, but the psalmist that at what time I am afraid, I will trust in thee. So what I tell our folks is, it's not a sin or unnatural to be caught with some fear over something that comes upon us, but the sin is when we stay in that mode. God says, I want you to trust me in those times. And that's where church can help us and God's word can help us. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once said devout Christians are destined to be regarded as fools in modern society. And so yesterday my message as I was talking about just the simple thought of Joseph and Mary going to the temple with Jesus for dedication. And I challenged the parents and I said, you know, this past week our president signed a bill that codified gay marriage while all of these set on the front and celebrated and many of them with their transition surgeries and so forth. And I just said, parents, we've got to be back to the basics like Joseph and Mary, bringing our children to the temple and being faithful. And so many parents walked out of church saying, thanks for these reminders because they're just wondering, what's going on in this world? And I'm telling you training young children today requires such vigilance and in fact in the book, we talked about overcoming injustice and we deal with living in a culture of oppression and we talk about the Jews in Egypt and how God brought deliverance. And so a lot of the themes of the resilient life deal with the modern day tragedies that we're facing. Fascinating stuff here, doctor Chappell, and we could just go on and on and on. The book, the resilient life, and we have a link directly in our live show blog, but you can also go to Paul chapel dot com that's Paul Chappell dot com chapel with two P's and two L's..
ToddCast Podcast with Todd Starnes
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on ToddCast Podcast with Todd Starnes
"You know, Panzer chapel, I don't want to get you in the embroiled in controversy, but I'm going to ask you a question that will probably get you embroiled in controversy. You know, it's funny. A lot of churches are debating whether or not to have church deck Sunday. I didn't realize that was a thing. I thought of all times you would want to go to church on Christmas Day. Yeah, I thought Jesus was the reason for the season, but you know, the fact of the matter is that there is oftentimes an idea of trying to be sensitive to families schedules and holiday travels. And I understand that, you know, as a pastor and as a senior pastor here at this church for 37 years, I've tried to think, first of all, scripturally, what is God's words say about assembling and what does God want us to do with respect to worship? Then I do think about people schedules and there's times when we have a flexible schedule. But I also think about a lot of people in our church that Christmas, their Christmas revolves around church. I'm thinking of widows, I'm thinking of the single parents, I'm thinking of people that this is the time of year when church means more than ever. And so for them and as well as for the lord, I look forward to our services next Sunday morning and will not have a service in the evening course miniatures don't do that most Sundays anyways, but we are making some flexibility some accommodation for the season, but I just can't think of a better Sunday to have church than the lord's birthday. We're going to have a big birthday party, bring the kids up to the platform, have some treats for them and then preach the gospel. I just think that's a wonderful thing. And of course, all of the church services here at Lancaster are broadcast online as well. I mean, you guys have been doing that for a long time, but I'm curious after the pandemic did you see that audience there stick around, post pandemic? Well, the larger audience that was just stuck because of the pandemic. Hopefully went back to their own searches and came back into our church. But there has been a residual. There's no doubt. There are thousands of folks that tune in will be live at 9 45 Pacific standard time. This Sunday. And it's going to be great music and we're going to be preaching a message right out of Matthew two and it's going to be a special day. Pastor Paul chapel on the patriot mobile newsmaker line from California, brand new book out called the resilient life. Doctor Chappell, let's talk about this book. I mean, you've had decades of ministry experience and you poured all of that into this project and really showing people how to maneuver through some very difficult things that, especially during the Christmas season, and the holiday season, I guess, you know, for example, a lot of people go through depression and anxiety. This is not always a happy time for a lot of people. No, and a lot of times the emotions stem back to family trials and difficulties and it's not what they think others are experiencing and so this book really does deal with how to be resilient through seasons like this and you mentioned the chapter on depression for example and we really talk about the life of Charles spurgeon probably one of the most well-known baptist preachers in history and how God so blessed his ministry in London and yet he struggled at times with depression and we talk in that same chapter about Elijah and how he had the pressure after even having a great victory. And how he just really felt like, okay, that's it. It's time to die. And so we give some real life and some biblical illustrations so that people can relate and understand. They're not alone. And then we talk in that chapter about the lord Jesus, who was tempted after 40 days of fasting. But there's always a solution in God's word. And so we take the second half of each chapter and we give scriptural helps and we talk about how to overcome these challenges, for example, through ephesian 6, 16 and 18. The sort of the spirit and the prayer and supplication in the spirit. And we give practical steps. And so this book, the resilient life is meant to bring some resilience into the spirits of those of us, probably who feel a little trampled down after the last few years, but want to keep on going for that. It does seem tough, and especially those of us who sort of work and operate in the political realm where you're just seeing all of this happen in real time and you can find yourself not necessarily I don't necessarily am fearful, but you do sometimes get a little anxious when you see all these things that are coming out of Washington and knowing how they're going to have an impact. And do you address those kinds of things? I mean, not specifically, but in general terms with anxiety. Well, first of all, the fear that comes upon us is real, but the promise that at what time I am afraid, I will trust in thee. So what I tell our folks is, it's not a sin or unnatural to be caught with some fear over something that comes upon us, but the sin is when we stay in that mode. God says, I want you to trust me in those times. And that's where church can help us and God's word can help us. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once said devout Christians are destined to be regarded as fools in modern society. And so yesterday in my message, as I was talking about just the simple thought of Joseph and Mary going to the temple with Jesus for dedication. And I challenged the parents and I said, you know, this past week, our president signed a bill that codified gay marriage while all of these set on the front and celebrated and many of them with their transition surgeries and so forth. And I just said, parents, we've got to be back to the day 6, like Joseph and Mary, bringing our children to the temple and being faithful. And so many parents walked out of church saying, thanks for these reminders, because they're just wondering, what's going on in this world? And I'm telling you, training young children today requires such vigilance and in fact in the book, we talked about overcoming injustice and we deal with living in a culture of oppression and we talk about the Jews in Egypt and how God brought deliverance. And so a lot of the themes of the resilient life deal with the modern day tragedies that we're facing. Fascinating stuff here, doctor Chappell, and we could just go on and on and on. The book, the resilient life, and we have a link directly in our live show blog, but you can also go to Paul Chappell dot com that's Paul Chappell dot com chapel with two P's and two L's, doctor Chappell, you've written a lot of books..
WNYC 93.9 FM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Firm. The resulting signature forms have to be super precise with signers listing the address they had used to register to vote, some get challenged, the matter got to Arizona's Supreme Court, which confirmed there were plenty enough to get this on the November ballot. I was dancing around the living room. My husband made fun of me. Crafting these initiatives takes legal advice, Patrick llewellyn at the campaign legal center in Washington believes this one will stand up. Prop two 11 would not stop anyone from speaking and would not limit the amount of money anyone could spend on elections. Instead, prop two 11 ensures that when big political spenders spend big money to influence Arizona voters, those voters have real transparency about where that money is really coming from. And the biggest ingredient may be persistence. I'm just a stubborn person. Terry Goddard is former Arizona attorney general and leader of the prop two 11 campaign to require that big corporate and individual donors, $5000 or more, disclose their names when giving campaign money through an intermediary, a type of nonprofit that does political work. Persistence, because this is the fourth time they've tried this. One time the money dried up. Ironically, the financial contributor that we were depending on, wrote us kind of sheepishly and said, well, I believe in dark money, I do a lot of it in 2018, too many signatures were invalidated and that was that. Again, two years later, but pandemic. You have to get a live signature. It has to be person to person. The circulator has to observe the signer in the process of signing. Now it's the fourth go around, and when they got the signatures verified, I felt like I could exhale. Becky daggett is helping with prop two 11, even as she runs for mayor, a Flagstaff, a nonpartisan post. And know that these years of organizing and collecting signatures had paid off. But now it's all eyes on November 8th. And even if voters go for this, it ain't over till it's over till it's over. Kathy Herod runs a conservative nonprofit in Arizona that's allowed to contribute to campaigns. If two 11 passes, I certainly expect a constitutional challenge. While the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once wrote that allowing anonymous donations isn't quote the home of the brave, justice clarence Thomas writes about cancel culture and is against disclosure. I think this current court is concerned about individual freedom
Bloomberg Radio New York
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"This is Bloomberg law with June grosso from Bloomberg radio. I've been talking to former U.S. lister general Gregory garr about the Supreme Court term starting on Monday. In light of the court's decision last year that curtailed the EPA's ability to fight climate change, many environmental experts think that the best case scenario for environmentalists would be that the court embraces the narrow reading of the clean water act that was proposed by the late justice Antonin Scalia. That certainly is one of the possibilities for the court in terms of outcome. Justice Scalia had proposed a test and ultimately only got, I think, three other votes for his test. So there was a plurality decision in that case and his rule didn't control. So I mean, there's certainly broader administrative doctrines, including the major questions doctor, which came out of the West Virginia case last year that could have implications here. So in that respect, that may be right that they ultimately would be best off with the standards that justice Scalia had proposed. Copyright law, which is my favorite area, Warhol, V goldsmith, involves a photograph of music icon prince, taken by photographer Lynn goldsmith, which another icon Andy Warhol used to create silkscreen paintings of prints. So tell us what the issue is here. So this is a really fascinating case, and I should disclose up front that my firm actually represents the Warhol foundation in this case. But ultimately the question in this case is, what is a transformative use for purposes of triggering the fair use defense under the copyright act? And it comes into play in this case where Andy Warhol took this photograph of prince and made certain changes to it in terms of cropping it and altering the photo in various ways to produce what is now I think iconic image of prints. And the question is whether or not Andy Warhol's changes were sufficiently transformative to trigger the fair use, doctrine, which is a defense to copyright, or if not, that effectively makes Andy Warhol a copyright violator. This case has huge implications for the art world for museums for publishers. And it's also just a really fascinating case for those who aren't maybe as enmeshed in the legal doctor and this would be an interesting case to follow just because of the arguments on both sides and the popular interest in the case. Absolutely. I know you're arguing a case. SEC V Cochrane tell us about that. Right. So SEC versus Cochrane is a case along with a ten case presents the general question of whether someone who's enmeshed in proceedings before an agency in our case we represent a woman who was alleged to engage in certain county violations and was sued by the SEC before one of their in-house judges, whether they can go to a federal district court and argue that the administrative decision maker is unconstitutional because that decision makers unconstitutionally insulated from removal by the president or whether that person instead has to sort of endure what can oftentimes be very lengthy costly and burdensome administrative proceedings and only then go to a federal court and review of the agency order and challenge the constitutionality of the decision maker. So this case is enormous consequence for the many individuals or companies that are enmeshed in agency proceedings and presents a basic question of the federal jurisdiction and the ability to go to federal court to challenge and constitutional agency action. It seems like you have a good argument here because of past decisions by the Supreme Court or recent decision by the Supreme Court. We hope we do, June. Certainly the court has been more skeptical of administrative overreach here and we do think that there are problems raised by the current scheme. But even more than that, we think this is a basic statutory question that Congress granted that will just records broad jurisdiction under the federal question statute. And never took that away, including with respect to agency proceedings here. So let me ask you a broad question. Polls show public approval of the court at historic lows after last term, which we've discussed some things there, the court overturned roe, and the repercussions are still playing out across the country throughout New York's century old gun law, further blurred the separation between church and state. We talked about curbing the EPA's ability to combat climate change. So the 6 conservatives seem to show that they were not afraid to overturn precedent. If the court continues along the path it's been on where, you know, it's making changes that affect society in controversial areas. If they do it with a 6 to three or 5 to four vote, what will the effect be on the court as an institution? Well, obviously this is a very important issue and this is all still unfolding. The fact that the justices have been out there at least some of them speaking about this publicly is interesting the court announced just the other day that it was reopening to the public for arguments, but it otherwise remains close to the public indicating that we're not fully back to normal. And I think all of this is going to shake out in ways that we're going to have to follow. I mean, this term itself presents many blockbuster cases. There are opportunities for the court to revisit precedent or decide cases narrowly. And if you look at the affirmative action cases in particular, that's one to follow early on in the term in terms of whether the court seems to be swinging broadly or perhaps focusing more narrowly. And we'll have to see how this plays out and whether the dust will ultimately settle over the course of the term. But it's something that the court and the country will have to work through and this term, of course, we also have a new justice justice Jackson. She is unlikely to change the basic ideological divide in the court, but as the saying goes, every new justice brings a new court, so we'll have to see how that plays out. Thanks so much for being here, Greg. That's former U.S. solicitor general Gregory garr, a partner at Latham and Watkins. Coming up, the electoral count act. This is Bloomberg. The drivers who switch and save with progressive save over $700 on average and those savings add up. Imagine what you could buy in the future. So I use the savings from switching to progressive 30 years ago to buy tickets to the championship game. You
The Charlie Kirk Show
Charlie Celebrates the Overturning of Roe From Legacy Church
"But you know what, we're going to get right into this chart. I just want to talk to you about the landmark decision, the biggest and over 50 years. We're going to stand for that. Got a good. We just gave God a standing ovation. Amen, and just praise God praise God praise God. And I just want to say, to those of you that have been prayer warriors on the issue of life, God bless you, that victory was for you. For those of you that have been fasting and praying for your nation, God bless you that victory is for you. For those of you that have seen someone that made a decision for life and you know how beautiful and precious life is and you prayed at the courts when one day make that decision, that victory was for you. And for those of you that work in the pregnancy crisis centers here in Albuquerque, God bless you. And I also want to thank so many of the Titans that came before that fought for this because this was a generational fight. There's so many people that are no longer here that fought so hard for this. God bless Billy Graham for his moral clarity for years on this issue. God bless Rush Limbaugh, who never gave an inch who sought on this issue. And ten years ago, justice Antonin Scalia, another warrior, passed away, and he passed away in 16, but ten years ago, he was saying, you know what? I think the court is just off the
The Charlie Kirk Show
The Pro-Life Warriors That Need to Be Honored Today
"Now, I would be remiss if I did not mention two, now passed away legend and heroes. That are largely responsible that helped us get where we are today. And that is justice Antonin Scalia and the great Rush Limbaugh. Rush Limbaugh was a pro life warrior. He would be so happy right now. He brought so many people into the pro life movement. Rush Limbaugh, for years, was one of the most articulate and courageous. And intense pro life leaders, unapologetically so. Rush Limbaugh was pro life before the pro life movement had the funding or the infrastructure or the kind of grassroots support. And rush would never lay off of that topic. Rush was on top of it for 30 years in the excellence in broadcasting. I remember time and time again when I was a senior in high school and I would be listening on local Chicago radio, rush would be going on and on and on about some pro life story about how Planned Parenthood was doing something illegal. And another person that I do want to mention that deserves a lot of credit as well is Billy Graham. Billy Graham, he would just be so ecstatic right now. Scalia, rush, Billy Graham. Billy Graham, who spoke moral clarity into our times. Billy Graham, who was, in my opinion, the most successful evangelist in the 20th century. Who at any pastor you turn to, they have nothing bad to say about Billy Graham. Verse by verse chapter by chapter, he preached the inner sea of scripture, but he was very clear about the moral truths of our country. Or that under undergird our country. And then finally, Trump brought all of this movement to fruition. And yes, I begrudgingly and reluctantly. Have to say, Mitch McConnell deserves credit for not putting Merrick Garland on the U.S. Supreme
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"Headline writers came up with the headline what the center wants after evolving. Now I do not presume to speak for the center. I am center right and there are many, many people to my right and 60% of the country that my left I'm probably in the 70% range on most issues. For example, I do not believe in constitutionalizing the status of the fetus in the womb. It's a matter of state law, the police power, it's not a matter of the constitution, that upsets many of my pro life allies. I believe as a Catholic that it's life at conception, but I don't believe it's in the constitution or within the federal government's authority to say so. And I always begin with the constitution, so I begin in this piece with the constitution. I quote. On what can conservatives and liberals agree in the aftermath of the massacre in Texas. Let's begin with justice Antonin Scalia, with what he wrote in 2008, D.C. versus Heller decision, a case affirming an individual's right to bear arms. Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms and sensitive places such as schools and government buildings or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. That's the majority of decision in Heller, that is our understanding of the Second Amendment, the majority understanding and the one that has endured. It's now been incorporated to be a different case to the states. That was about a federal law so it needed incorporation. It's an individual right. It may not be abridged, et cetera
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
Why the Constitution Still Matters on Guns
"Headline writers came up with the headline what the center wants after evolving. Now I do not presume to speak for the center. I am center right and there are many, many people to my right and 60% of the country that my left I'm probably in the 70% range on most issues. For example, I do not believe in constitutionalizing the status of the fetus in the womb. It's a matter of state law, the police power, it's not a matter of the constitution, that upsets many of my pro life allies. I believe as a Catholic that it's life at conception, but I don't believe it's in the constitution or within the federal government's authority to say so. And I always begin with the constitution, so I begin in this piece with the constitution. I quote. On what can conservatives and liberals agree in the aftermath of the massacre in Texas. Let's begin with justice Antonin Scalia, with what he wrote in 2008, D.C. versus Heller decision, a case affirming an individual's right to bear arms. Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms and sensitive places such as schools and government buildings or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. That's the majority of decision in Heller, that is our understanding of the Second Amendment, the majority understanding and the one that has endured. It's now been incorporated to be a different case to the states. That was about a federal law so it needed incorporation. It's an individual right. It may not be abridged, et cetera
WABE 90.1 FM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM
"The court were appointed by a former president Trump And McConnell was instrumental in getting those justices confirmed Their justices who in theory would be signing on to this draft opinion overturning roe V wade What did he say about that He really downplayed Trump's personal involvement and instead he pointed to sort of joining and coordinating with Trump's White House counsel's Don McGahn and pat cipollone and saying that they were really the key to the nominations and confirmations of those three now Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett and broader conservative justices on the lower courts McConnell suggested Trump really wasn't involved in the process Here's what he said Well I think he took good advice honestly he was not familiar with this issue at all But have said I'll repeat again He had two good White House counsels in a row who took recommendations into him of people of like mind who came out of the federal society network around the country And so it was like a farm team of potential judges And he deserves credit for signing off on him I don't think he fundamentally knew much about this before he got elected but I'll give him credit for signing off on good recommendations McConnell was criticized by Democrats for his decision back in 2016 to block president Obama's nominee Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court when then justice Antonin Scalia passed away I asked him if Republicans win back control of the Senate and he becomes majority leader again Would he hold a vote on any future nominees to the high court from President Biden But leader McConnell declined to answer that question A ten PR deirdre Walsh thanks Thank you And we'll have more of deirdre's interview with senator McConnell including what McConnell says Congress.
WABE 90.1 FM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM
"Reaction after the chief justice announced that He called this draft decision radical before taking off in Air Force One today If the rationale of the decision as released were to be sustained the whole range of rights are in question a whole range of rights and the idea we're levied to the states make those decision localities and I think the decision would be a fundamental shift in what we've done What do you make of that reaction Mara Well he talked about two things What's at stake meaning all these other things that would fall under the right to privacy which that draft questioned The right to marry gay marriage the right to use contraception That would also be in the balance So the president was focusing on what's at stake other than just the right to abortion And then he also talked about the remedy He said it's up to voters to elect pro abortion rights legislators at every level Senate House also state legislatures and this is the big question for Democrats They've never been seized with the importance of the courts by conservatives have who have focused for 50 years on overturning row Democrats haven't done that And now the question is does this ruling assuming it becomes a ruling have a boomerang effect will liberal voters feel like their rights are under threat Will they be more energized to come out to vote or will this take a second or third place behind inflation crime and immigration as issues for the midterms We don't know that yet Well Kelsey now that Democrats in Congress know that this draft opinion could become final in the coming months do they have any plans to act on abortion protections Well the vast majority of them said their outreach They say these are the kinds of actions Democrats have worn voters could happen since way back during the 2016 presidential election When Republicans held up former president Obama's nominee to replace justice Antonin Scalia after he died You know Democrats generally promise today to vote to fight to protect roe And Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer promised that there will be votes even if they fail It's a different world now The tectonic plates of our politics on women's choice and on rights in general are changing Every senator now under the real glare of roe V wade being repealed by the courts is going to have to show which side they're on But you know in reality Democrats do not have the votes to pass federal abortion protections right now and putting people on the record might be the best they can hope for They would need either 60 votes to overcome a filibuster or a feasible plan to end the filibuster I will note that senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia told reporters today that he still supports the filibuster Well that's Democrats I want to ask you about two Republican senators though Kelsey Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine They have both supported abortion rights in the past Right and they both said the decision would be inconsistent with what they were told by justices during their confirmation processes Colin specifically named justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh Murkowski went further and she told a group of reporters that a draft decision rocked her confidence in the court a little bit later she had this It was not the direction.
WNYC 93.9 FM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Over the years His district includes waspam And so the introduced me to a friend of his Jonathan S Mitchell former solar general for the state of Texas So they all hop on a conference call And as three looked at this together Jonathan is a powerful well connected attorney He clerked for late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia worked in the administration of George W. Bush and volunteered for Trump's transition team Abortion isn't his only issue He's fought unions affirmative action and same sex marriage He said he had an idea of how to allow for this wask a more debt to survive a legal challenge that make it safer for the city of wasco to pass This is where that strategy of private citizens enforcing abortion bans comes into play Jonathan's idea is to write the ordinance so that the government isn't responsible for enforcing the ban Instead private citizens would be able to sue anyone who quote aids or abets an abortion So the doctor clinic employees even the Lyft driver who take someone to an abortion clinic could all be sued And citizens would be awarded at least $2000 in damages It almost sounds like this ordinance would be creating a core of abortion bounty hunters What happened from there is the private enforcement was added to the ordinance And the rest is history.
The Charlie Kirk Show
Attorney General Merrick Garland Shows His True Colors
"Merrick Garland was supposed to be on the United States Supreme Court. Remember when justice Antonin Scalia passed away. The great Antonin Scalia. Then president Barack Hussein Obama proposed that we need to have kind of a healing and kind of coming together period, and we're going to have a moderate come on the U.S. Supreme Court. We're going to have Merrick Garland as he's not far to the left. He's not far to the right. He's kind of going to be like Anthony Kennedy. Now to his great credit, senator Mitch McConnell said no, that's not going to happen. We're going to wait to the election. We're going to see what happens. The election occurred, and Merrick Garland remained in limbo. And never got his appointment to the United States Supreme Court. Merrick Garland always kind of had the appearance. He always kind of had the disguise, the camouflage, the uniform of being a very moderate individual both in his temperament and also his politics. Merrick Garland always kind of had a way of saying, I don't want to bring the country too far in one direction, but my duty is to the rule of law. Now Merrick Garland has showed his true colors the last 6 or 7 months ever since becoming attorney general of the United States. He is without a doubt, one of the most radical, craven, one of the most dangerous attorney generals in American history, I will even say, in some ways Merrick Garland is doing things that Eric holder and Loretta lynch did not even do when they were attorney general of the United
WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch
"You can't sue because you haven't actually shown that you've been harmed by this just because there are inaccuracies in your credit file doesn't mean you've actually suffered any concrete harm. The courts longstanding a precedence or at least went back for last three three or four decades Dr have article three standing in federal court. You actually have to show a concrete and particularized in Har injury So image show that you've been personally harmed and the you have actually suffered some kind of tangible Intangible and it seems the plaintiffs. Couldn't brad kavanagh Row for them giorgis. That said you can't soup you know. Just because there is a private right of action Just because law says allows consumers to sue companies. Doesn't you can sue if he you aren't hurt The reason why this is directly or is applicable to texas is because that's essentially what texas is loud private citizens to do they are being directly harmed by these abortion providers Or personally harmed in any way but nonetheless it allows them to sue them and receive ten thousand dollars per abortion and legal costs if they prevail. It's interesting him for the conservatives because it suggests that the texas law if the substance comes up at the supreme court be conservatives on the court might not look favorably on it the conservatives. The republican appointed justices seemed to be able to distinguish between the political outcomes. They want and the constitutional privileges that play. Whereas would this sort of points to it. So many of the democratic appointees just have their policy outcome they adjuster constitutional law accordingly. But this was pretty principled. Stand that brad. Kavanagh took and we give see that very often despite all the complaints. We just went through this again. Recently with amy makoni barrett An all of the claims that you know if she was put on the court It would just terrible things that flow. i always remember. I think it was in an interview that that famous moment where The former justice antonin scalia talked about his decision To vote to allow american flag burning. And how painful. It was for his because his wife disagreed would wake up in the morning and whistle or saying it's a grand old flag during the mind of how much she didn't like that decision you know. And he made pretty clear. He didn't like having to make that decision either but that he felt it was correct on the law. And that's exactly what a leash is describing here And i think you saw it too in the last term Where you had this remarkable diversity of rulings six conservatives who who all have different takes on very important nuances in pieces within the legal world and so it's it's actually going to be really fascinating to see what happens with this texas law They obviously when they refused to enjoin they nonetheless said that was no statement on there. Be one its constitutionality. There's also as a lucia was just discussing other questions to that may come up in law about a more on procedural issues or other precedents for instance about standing etc And and we'll see where they end up but anyone who thinks that this is a slam dunk one way or the other for or against ra. Wade i would wager is going to be surprised right. Although it does it was interesting. There is a column in the washington. Post suggesting that the real answer to this texas law express. Some doubts about the texas law is just to get rid of roe because the law reflects an appetite among some states to put restrictions on abortion and has justice. Scalia used to complain..
710 WOR
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on 710 WOR
"1 809 100 to 687 or visit up walker dot com. A doctor's represent actual clients. I didn't know how much I get for my case. My attorneys know what the Barnes firm got me. $2 million after my truck accident. My attorney from the bars firm got me. $1.4 million. I'm rich Barnes. How much is your case worth? You might be surprised. Call the Barnes firm now and let us help you get the best results possible. These results don't predict future outcomes. Manhattan Long Island. WR News time is 10 04 and Senate confirmation hearings for Attorney general nominee Merrick Garland or set for next week, Ryan shook files. This report a veteran federal judges getting something he never got. When former president Obama nominated him for the Supreme Court in 2016. Republican leaders refused to schedule any hearings for Garland, arguing that Supreme Court vacancies should not be filled in presidential election years. Republican Donald Trump won the election and picked federal Judge Neil Gorsuch to fill the seat of the late Supreme Court. Justice Antonin Scalia. I'm Brian Shock and Sports The Islanders beat Buffalo three to ZIP. It was the devil's over the Rangers. Find two to tomorrow. The Knicks versus Orlando. The Steelers in the Cowboys will meet in the Hall of Fame game August 5th in Canton, Ohio, to kick off the NFL preseason. The Pro Football Hall of Fame announced the game on Twitter, the two word who have met in the game last year, but it was canceled because of the pandemic here. Sure, w what war Weather channel forecast Winter Storm Watch has been posted for the area from Thursday morning in the Thursday evening. During that time frame, we could be looking at 4 to 8 inches of snow tonight. Clear.
C-SPAN Radio
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio
"And he was followed by nominee Merrick Garland, who for the past two decades has been a federal judge on the U. S Court of Appeals for the District Columbia circuit and probably best remembered as President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Merrick Garland, never getting a vote in the U. S. Senate. Everyone who watched yesterday's events in Washington now understands if they did not understand before the rule of law is not just some lawyers turn a phrase. It is the very foundation of our democracy. The essence of the rule of law is that light cases are treated alike that there not be one rule for Democrats and another for republic. Kans. One rule for friends. Another propose one rule for the powerful another for the powerless, one rule for the rich and another for the poor or different rules, depending upon one's race or ethnicity and the essence of its great corollary. Equal justice under law is that all citizens are protected in the exercise. Their civil rights. Those ideals have animated the Department of Justice since the very moment of its inception as president elect Biden just recounted. The department was founded in the midst of reconstruction following the civil war with its first principal task to ensure compliance with the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments as historian. Ron sure, in all, wrote quote, the New Justice Department would forge its identity in the battle to slay the first incarnation of the Ku Klux Klan and its offshoots. In that battle, the department successfully deployed its considerable resource is to ensure its civil rights which were under militant attack Thies principles ensuring the rule of law. And making the promise of equal justice. Under law. Real are the great principles upon which the Department of Justice was founded, and for which it must always stand. They echo today in the priorities that lie before us from ensuring racial equity in our justice system to meeting the evolving threat. Of violent extremism. If confirmed, those are the principles to which I will be devoted as attorney general nominee Merrick Garland with President elect Joe Biden and Vice President Kamil Harrison. Wilmington, Delaware. The other nominees announced today include Lisa Monaco for Deputy Attorney General Benita Gupta for associate attorney general both served in the Obama administration. And Christian Clark for assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights division. She once worked as a trial attorney in that division and is currently president and executive director of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Fox News is reporting that President Biden expected to nominate Boston Mayor Marty Walsh as Labor secretary and Rhode Island governor, Gina Re Mondo As Commerce secretary and finally an update on the Corona virus pandemic from the nation's top infectious disease expert, Dr Anthony Fauci. Today he spoke to scientists and students at the University of Washington Medical School in Missouri. One of the issues of having been really gripped by this now for 11 months to almost a year is that the numbers are are so extraordinary that we've become numb to them. As of yesterday. There are 360,000 deaths. We have had a situation where we now are averaging between 203 100,000 new infections per day. Between two and 3000 deaths. Today every day is a new record for the number of people hospitalized with covert 19 138,000. As of yesterday, there was some regions of the country. That are really getting to the point of what we consider the unimaginable where you actually have the tree odds and determine who was going to get taken care of. And who was not the first specifically to the very difficult situation that's going on in California, particularly in L. A county where there are running out of beds, and they haven't exhausted staff working almost 24 hours a day. This is truly an extraordinary situation. We expected to get a bit worse as we get into the middle and end weeks of January because of the fact And after every single event that would bring people together in travel be at the Fourth of July. Memorial Day, Labor Day, Halloween, Thanksgiving, and now the Christmas Holidays. There's always a surge as people travel and congregate in social settings, so the numbers that I gave you Ah, very, very difficult to comprehend. They are extraordinary. And yet things could actually get Bit worse. On the other side of the coin. There is light at the end of the tunnel with regard to vaccinations. As you know another record. We've made records very, very difficult records with regard to illness and death, But we also have a record with regards to vaccine. Accomplishments. You might recall that the sequence of the virus was put on the public database on January the ninth and in less than a year in 11 months. We went from the sequence to actually having vaccines in the arms of individuals, vaccines that are not just any vaccine, but a vaccine. That's 94 to 95% efficacious. With a very good safety record. The challenge now and we can get into that, in the questions is to get the vaccine out and implemented in an efficient way so that we can get the overwhelming majority of our population vaccinated. Within a several month period, which will be the real gateway to the end of this terrible outbreak and would get us back to normal. Dr. Anthony Fauci directs the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases earlier today. On Wall Street, the Dow was.
KLBJ 590AM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on KLBJ 590AM
"They're coming to Washington from several states to help law enforcement after the Capitol attack, securing America. The Pentagon mobilized 350 D. C National Guard troops earlier this week at the request of Mayor Muriel Bowser ahead of expected protests. But when President Trump's supporters breached the Capitol building Wednesday, U S Capitol police requested extra help and had to wait. A lot of questions were asked. Little bit of confusion. Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy as we work through it, we Milton made that determination about a half hour later to mobilize the entire D. C. National Guard political reports. Defense officials initially denied the request because the original agreement between Mayor Bowser and the Pentagon stipulated that guardsmen would not have contact with civilians to avoid politicizing the military. Steve Rappaport, Fox News president elect, Biden called the mob lawless extremists the scenes of chaos in the capital. Do not reflect true America just before all that we found out, Biden made a key choice for his Cabinet. He's planning to nominate Merrick Garland to be attorney general. It looks like Judge Merrick Garland will finally get his congressional hearing. He earned the nod over other candidates. President elect Biden was considering including former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and ex Senator Don Jones. Garland is best remembered for being President Obama's pick to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Senate Republicans denied him any consideration. If Garland is confirmed he would lead a Justice Department facing racial tension in policing global cyber threats and perhaps an investigation of the incoming president's son. Going all. Scott Fox NEWS Wall Street stock futures are rising the day after the Dow surged to a record high despite the capital chaos rising more than 400 points..
KOMO
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on KOMO
"Call for a free legal consultation at 1 805 78 24 100. That's 1 805 78 24 101 805 78 24 100. Global leaders were reacting to the mob assault on the U. S. Capitol building around the world Shock induced stained for what's been unfolding. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson tweeting quote Disgraceful scenes in U. S. Congress the prime minister of Norway rotting, totally unacceptable attack on democracy. The Scottish first minister writing utterly horrifying Turkey, saying it is following with concern and asking all parties in the U. S to use moderation and common sense, telling its citizens to stay away from crowded places in the US Alex Stone. ABC News president elect Biden is expected to nominate a former Supreme Court nominee is the next attorney General Merrick Garland is chief judge of the U. S Court of Appeals for the Washington D C circuit and had been nominated to the U. S. Supreme Court by President Obama after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, a nomination scuttled by Republicans who held the vacancy for President Trump to fill Garland has long been praised by Democrats and Republicans. President elect Biden has said he wants to restore a wall of independence between the Justice Department in the White House following the controversial tenure of Bill Bar. ABC is Aaron Could Turkey in Louisville Tomb or police officers involved in the Briana Taylor killing had been fired The detective who it's believed fired the kill shot and another who saw the no. Not search warrant that led to the deadly raid. Louisville also hire the former Atlanta police chief to take over its department. This is ABC News Come on news time. 904 and traffic.
Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network
Biden to name former Obama Supreme Court pick Merrick Garland as his attorney general
"Today. President like biden bait and other cabinet looks like judge merrick garland will find we get his congressional hearing. He earned the nod over other candidates. President-elect biden was considering including former deputy attorney general. Sally yates and ex-senator don jones garland is best remembered for being president obama's pick to replace the late supreme court justice antonin scalia senate. Republicans denied him any consideration. If garland is confirmed he would lead a justice department facing racial tension policing global cyber threats and perhaps an investigation of the incoming president son
WIBC 93.1FM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM
"Your host, Trey Yingst 2020 also took Supreme Court Justice Ruth Better Ginsburg. In September, the Alien justice passed away in the midst of the presidential election. Contentious fight to fill her vacant seat in the Supreme Court began almost immediately. Eventually, Ginsburg would be replaced by President Trump's nominee, Amy Cockney. Barrett. While America was still mourning the feminist icon, we look back at Justice Ginsburg's deep decades long friendship with the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. Christopher Scalia, Justices, Scalia son told the Fox News rundowns Chris Foster how the inspiring bond between the two began. Their friendship went back really, to the early eighties, when they were Judges together on the D C circuit Court of Appeals, which is kind of like the second most important court in the country, and they had a good working relationship that which really started back then. They would help each other revised their drafts and their opinions that apparently the other judges on that court really didn't like getting advice about their writing and how Improved the clarity of what they were writing and the force of their arguments. But Justice Ginsburg liked getting and receiving that kind of advice, and so did my dad, and they formed what he called a mutual improvement society. During their time on the court there and The and they had other things in common. They were they had similar backgrounds that they were. Both New Yorkers grew up in New York around the same time, different boroughs but around the same time And shared a love of opera. Good wine. Uh, Eating good food. Both of their spouses were excellent cooks. Marty Ginsburg, in particular, is kind of a legendary cook, who would duct put together wonderful meals every New Year's Eve and they would celebrate New Year's every every years. Well, So you know, despite all their differences, and all the many things they disagreed about, including.
WIBC 93.1FM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM
"2020 also took Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In September, the ailing justice passed away in the midst of the presidential election. Contentious fight to fill her vacant seat in the Supreme Court began almost immediately. Eventually, Ginsburg would be replaced by President Trump's nominee, Amy Cockney. Barrett. While America was still mourning the feminist icon, we look back at Justice Ginsburg's deep decades long friendship with the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. Christopher Scalia, Justices, Scalia son told the Fox News rundowns Chris Foster how the inspiring bond between the two began. Their friendship went back really, to the early eighties, when they were Judges together on the D C circuit Court of Appeals, which is kind of like the second most important court in the country, and they had a good working relationship that which really started back then. They would help each other revised their drafts and their opinions that apparently the other judges on that court really didn't like getting advice about their writing and how Improved the clarity of what they were writing and the force of their arguments. But Justice Ginsburg liked getting and receiving that kind of advice, and so did my dad, and they formed what he called a mutual improvement society. During their time on the court there, and if they had other things in common, they were. They had similar backgrounds that they were. Both New Yorkers grew up in New York around the same time, different boroughs but around the same time And shared a love of opera. Good wine. Uh, Eating good food. Both of their spouses were excellent cooks. Marty Ginsburg, in particular, is kind of a legendary cook, who adopt put together wonderful meals every New Year's Eve and they would celebrate New Year's every every years. Well, So you know, despite all their differences, and all the many things they disagreed about, including a number of opinions in this collection, um They had a wonderful friendship were able to kind of focus on the things they had in common. Your dad and Justice Ginsburg. I don't know The statistics on how often they concur, dissented on cases, but I'd imagine that they disagreed. Maybe as much as any two Recent justices have my right. Yeah, I think that's that sounds right. I don't know the statistics, either. I think people would be surprised by how often they agreed with each other. But on the real hot button cultural cases, they often disagree. You know, One of her most important or most famous opinions was Virginia Military Institute case from the mid nineties, and my my father wrote a dissent. To that case, which is in this collection, the essential Scalia and it was hey actually gave her the draft of that dissent a little bit earlier than one usually does just so that she would have more time to kind of Deal with it, and gravel grapple with his arguments. And Yeah, some of his most, uh, stinging dissents were in response to opinions. She didn't necessarily right but but joined, And I think that's probably true. Vice versa tell the story about the big bouquet of roses she got from him. Well, my dad would get her roses for her birthday and I guess that, uh, I think the last time he did that, so the year before he died, one of the editors of the essential Scalia Judge Jeffrey Sutton was visiting my father in chambers on Justice Ginsburg's birthday. And he saw that my dad had two dozen roses for Justice Ginsburg And, uh, Judge sudden started teasing dad saying, you know, I haven't even gotten my wife two dozen roses over the course of our entire marriage. Um, why would you do this? And besides, when was the last time she sided with you on a really important 54 decision? You know he's poking fun, You know, not really being serious, but my dad did. The serious answer, which was some things are more important than votes, and I think I just kind of a great encapsulation of there. Of their relationship of their friendship they had they had Very different opinions of politics and of their jobs as judges and of what laws meant what the Constitution men but Uh, how they voted wasn't the biggest factor in their relationship. It wasn't that those opinions didn't matter. And it wasn't that they compromised their beliefs for each other. But they didn't let those very strongly held beliefs undermine their very deep friendship through a collection of Supreme Court justice incidents. Goalie is writing sort of like a greatest hits album. It's opinions and other writing about the law and the Constitution again called the Essential Scalia. Yeah, you must be awfully proud and happy just to have this stuff all collected in one place for posterity. This is really just a collection of his greatest legal writings, Opinions, speeches, essays and they, you know, collected together, give a really good Uh, sense of why exactly. He was such a significant Supreme Court justice on it's It's there, you know, having in one collection really makes it tangible for anybody toe understand that we'll just is illegal reference work. You've got to think it's gonna end up being bought by or four Ah lot of lawyers and judges. Yeah, no absolutely. And law students, I hope You know that? He he wrote. Clearly, he wrote, hey, had so many memorable phrases and his opinions. His logic was so strong and convincing. That people just kind of they often went to his opinions first. And so it's good for people to kind of have that as a resource first to keep going to those opinions, even even after Is passing a lot of times, if if he had a vote, a personal vote on how a case would turn out it may or may not. A lot of times did align with how he ruled, But sometimes it probably wouldn't have, right. Yeah, I think that's true. And that's that's especially true in one example is when he sided with the majority in the flag burning case. The majority ruled that Um, it was constitutional Sorry. Burning the flag was constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment so prohibiting that in the state law was unconstitutional. My father often explained that he did not like The idea of flag burning. If he were a king, he would ban it. But it clearly to him falls under the protection of the protection of the First Amendment, and a lot of conservatives to this day do not like that opinion. But my father thought the Constitution was clear about that. There are many examples in this collection, the essential Scalia of instances in which he stands up for the rights of the accused defendant's rights. There's a famous case in here where It's search and seizure cases as well there a couple of those in here where he just thought, you know the police did not have authority, for example, to use scans of houses, Tol identify Merrill who was growing marijuana without that was an illegal search examples like that s so if he could just pass a law that was one thing, but Um, you know, actually started there couldn't be even be lost for that because they so clearly violated the Constitution, even though obviously he wouldn't have approved of those particular actions. Sure, hey, was also notice a talker during oral arguments, he asked, asked a lot of questions. And clearly sometimes, though, they weren't really questions. They were just arguments he was making to his fellow justices. Now, do you think he went into most cases with his mind made up based on the briefs and the president? I'm not saying it's a bad thing. But is that usually the case? I think that the justices, you know, I can't say for certain But my hunch is that they often have go in with a pretty good idea..
WMAL 630AM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WMAL 630AM
"The Fox News run down a year in review continues with your host Trey Yanks. 2020 also took Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In September. The Alien Justice passed away in the midst of the presidential election. A contentious fight to fill her vacant seat in the Supreme Court began almost immediately. Eventually, Ginsburg would be replaced by President Trump's nominee, Amy Cockney. Barrett. While America was still mourning the feminist icon we look back at Justice Ginsburg's deep decades long friendship with the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. Christopher Scalia, Justice Scalia son. Well, the Fox News rundowns Chris Foster how the inspiring bond between the two began. Their friendship went back really, to the early eighties, when they were judges together on the D C circuit Court of Appeals, which is kind of like the second most important court in the country, and they had a good working relationship that which really started back then. They would help each other revised their drafts and their opinions that apparently the other judges on that court really didn't like getting advice about their writing and how the Improve the clarity of what they were writing and the force of their arguments. But justice Ginsburg liked getting and receiving that kind of advice, and so did my dad. And they formed what he called mutual improvement society during their time on the court there, and if they had other things in common, they were They had similar backgrounds that they were. Both New Yorkers grew up in New York around the same time, different boroughs but around the same time and shared a love of opera. Good wine eating good food. Both of their spouses were excellent cooks. Marty Ginsburg, in particular, is kind of a legendary cook, who would Put together wonderful meals every New Year's Eve, and they would celebrate New Year's Every every year is well..
WIBC 93.1FM
"justice antonin scalia" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM
"Host, Trey Yingst 2020 also took Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In September, the Alien justice passed away in the midst of the presidential election. Contentious fight to fill her vacant seat in the Supreme Court began almost immediately. Eventually, Ginsburg would be replaced by President Trump's nominee, Amy Cockney. Barrett. While America was still mourning the feminist icon, we look back at Justice Ginsburg's deep decades long friendship with the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. Christopher Scalia, Justices, Scalia son told the Fox News rundowns Chris Foster how the inspiring bond between the two began. Their friendship went back really, to the early eighties, when they were Judges together on the D C circuit Court of Appeals, which is kind of like the second most important court in the country, and they had a good working relationship that which really started back then. They would help each other revised their drafts and their opinions that apparently the other judges on that court really didn't like getting advice about their writing and how the Improved the clarity of what they were writing and the force of their arguments. But Justice Ginsburg liked getting and receiving that kind of advice, and so did my dad, and they formed what he called a mutual improvement society. During their time on the court there and It and they had other things in common. They were they had similar backgrounds that they were. Both New Yorkers grew up in in New York around the same time, different boroughs but around the same time. And shared a love of opera. Good wine. Uh, Eating good food. Both of their spouses were excellent cooks. Marty Ginsburg, in particular, is kind of a legendary cook, who would put together wonderful meals every New Year's Eve and they would celebrate New Year's every every years. Well, So you know, despite all their differences, and all the many things they disagreed about, including a number of opinions in this collection, um They had a wonderful friendship were able to kind of focus on the things they had in common. Your dad and Justice Ginsburg. I don't know the statistics on how often they concur, dissented on cases. But I imagine that they disagreed. Maybe as much as any two Recent justices have my right. Yeah, I think that's that sounds right. I don't know the statistics, either. I think people would be surprised by how often they agreed with each other. But on the real hot button cultural cases, they often disagreed. You know, One of her most important or most famous opinions was Virginia Military Institute case from the mid nineties, and my my father wrote a dissent. To that case, which is in this collection, the essential Scalia and it was hey actually gave her the draft of that dissent a little bit earlier than one usually does just so that you could have more time to kind of Deal with it, and gravel grapple with his arguments. And Yeah, some of his most, uh, stinging dissents were in response to opinions. She didn't necessarily right but but joined, And I think that's probably true vice versa until the story about the big bouquet of roses she got from him. Well, my dad would get her roses for her birthday and I guess the, uh, I think the last time he did that so the year before he died, one of the editors of the essential Scalia Judge Jeffrey Sutton was visiting my father in chambers on Justice Ginsburg's birthday. And he saw that my dad had two dozen roses for Justice Ginsburg And, uh, Judge sudden started teasing dad saying, you know, I haven't even gotten my wife two dozen roses over the course of our entire marriage. Um, why would you do this? And besides, when was the last time she sided with you on a really important 54 decision? You know, he's poking fun, You know, not not really being serious, but my dad Davis. Serious answer, which was some things are more important than votes, and I think I just kind of a great encapsulation of there. Of their relationship of their friendship they had they had Very different opinions of politics and of their jobs as judges and of what laws meant what the Constitution men but Uh, how they voted wasn't the biggest factor in their relationship. It wasn't that those opinions didn't matter. And it wasn't that they compromised their beliefs for each other. But they didn't let those very strongly held beliefs undermine their very deep friendship through a collection of Supreme Court justice incident. Scalia's writing sort of like a greatest hits album. It's opinions and other writing about the law and the Constitution again called the Essential Scalia. Yeah, you must be awfully proud and happy just to have this stuff all collected in one place for posterity. This is really just a collection of his greatest legal writings, Opinions, speeches, essays and they, you know, collected together, give a really good Uh, sense of why exactly. He was such a significant Supreme Court justice on it's It's there, you know, having in one collection really makes it tangible for anybody toe understand that we'll just is illegal reference work. You've got to think it's going to end up being bought by or four Ah lot of lawyers and judges. No absolutely and law students. I hope Uh, you know that he, he wrote Clearly, he wrote, Uh, hey, had so many memorable phrases and his opinions. His logic was so strong and convincing. That people just kind of they often went to his opinions first. And so it's good for people to kind of have that as a resource, Kristen to keep going to those opinions, even even after Is passing a lot of times, if if he had a vote of personal vote on how a case would turn out it may or may not. A lot of times did align with how he ruled, But sometimes it probably wouldn't have, right. Yeah, I think that's true. And that's that's especially true in one example is when he sided with the majority in the flag burning case. The majority ruled that Um, it was constitutional Sorry. Burning the flag was constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment so prohibiting that in the state law was unconstitutional. My father often explained that he did not like The idea of flag burning. If he were a king, he would ban it. But it clearly to him falls under the protection of the protection of the First Amendment, and a lot of conservatives to this day do not like that opinion. But my father thought the Constitution was clear about that. Very there. Many examples in this collection the essential Scalia of instances in which he stands up for the rights of the accused defendant's rights. There's a famous case in here where It's search and seizure cases as well there a couple of those in here where he just thought, you know the police do not have authority, for example, to use scans of houses, Tol identify Merrill who was growing marijuana without that was an illegal search examples like that s so if you could just pass a law that was one thing, but Um, you know, actually started there couldn't be even be lost for that because they so clearly violated the Constitution, even though obviously he wouldn't have approved of those particular actions. Sure, hey, was also notice a talker. During oral arguments, he asked as a lot of questions. And clearly. Sometimes, though, they weren't really questions. They were just arguments he was making to his fellow justices. Now, do you think he went into most cases with his mind made up based on the briefs and the president's? I'm not saying it's a bad thing. But is that usually the case? I think that the justices, you know, I can't say for certain, but my hunch is that they often have go in with a pretty good idea, but I think for the most part, they do ask questions, not just tow. Not just to be heard or not just to make arguments, but because they want to really engage with the arguments that the lawyers are making in the forward to this collection, Justice Kegan first of all, very happy that she agreed to write this beautiful forward, But she she says that she says just that. You know, Dad would ask these questions because he loved argument and kind of loved mixing it up. It wasn't just kind of wasn't just for show though he did. I think you're right. He was very kind of an engaging speaker and It was some study years ago that found he was he was the funniest justice By the standards of that he drew the most laugh right from from the courtroom during oral arguments, which you know, obviously isn't the most important thing to do, but just shows how much he he enjoyed that process..
Monocle 24: The Briefing
Senate to confirm Trump's Supreme Court nominee a week ahead of Election Day
"Later today if you Senate majority leader Mitch, McConnell's predictions proved accurate the US Senate will vote to confirm amy coming Barrett to the US Supreme Court Bar will be the judge that the Republican Party has been able to put on the bench during President Donald Trump's term, and while she may not be the controversial of these herself her. Confirmation is the Republicans have breezily disregarded the convention which they invoked for years go to keep a barrack Obama nominee from even having confirmation hearings on joined with more on this by Christian mcnichols news editor and Claude Harrington associate professor of American politics at Montfort University. Claude first of all is this now actually a done deal is they the remotest chance at all Barrett doesn't get put on the bench? I think it's. All bots jail she seems to be there I. IT's. It's quite staggering to see how fast. The process can move when people actually wanted to unlike 'em time round as you mentioned just a moment ago. So yeah, I would say unnecess- some unanticipated and catastrophe she's had. Chris, the Republicans hypocrisy here is mildly staggering MRIs, of course, the same Republican Party that four years ago clutched polls and affected vipers at the very idea of even holding confirmation hearings for Merrick. Garland who Barack Obama wished to put on the court in the last year of his presidency they going to do this about a week out from a presidential election. But this isn't what justifies the trump thing in the as far as the Republican establishment is concerned absolutely I mean I think the issue is if you look at this from a purely political perspective taking out the the hypocrisy argument if you will Mitch McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate have achieved. What they wanted to achieve and they have, they have given people who voted for Donald Trump essentially what they wanted I think you can divide those who voted for Donald Trump in two thousand sixteen obviously into many different camps. But there were there were those who voted for trump himself. But then there were many who simply voted for a Republican with this in mind with the idea in minded, they would be able. Influence. The Supreme Court for decades to come remember as you said at the beginning Obama was denied I'm nominee that meant that there was a vacant spot open right when Donald trump was elected president, which was then filled and that in itself would have been a dramatic swing in the other direction. So we shouldn't forget that it was a very conservative Justice Antonin Scalia who had passed away or shortly before the two thousand sixteen. Election. So we have seen a dramatic shift in the court compared to what would have happened if Hillary Clinton had been elected president and so in that sense. Yes. From a purely political perspective, the Senate Mitch McConnell who is a traditional Republican was You could argue very much power political individual who was willing to stomach donald trump and some of his politics because he knew that this is what he would be able to achieve. At once amy conybeare. At ease confirmed, that will give the Supreme Court, a six three conservative majority. Now, that's not absolutely set in stone Supreme Court justices have been known to have minds of their own from time to time, but is it possible from distance to assess what difference that could make to American politics for as Chris quite rightly points out potentially decades ahead of us. Yes I think that that's absolutely not an overstatement to to to to say how significant this is. You know what they did. There would be an ideological. Conservative majority from this point on and. There's a couple of things I suppose one is. What it might mean in terms of what's coming before the court you know in the short to medium term I mean there are. Big issues coming down the road to do you know things on climate change on immigration and other major. Political stumbling blocks the one that's coming soon as I really am the one that's going to get the most attention for the moment is a vote on the for care act and that is coming before the courtroom, November and it's about rather than the the. Statute in its entirety is to be deemed unconstitutional or can can parts of it be on picked now? Komi Bats. Take on. This is going to be enormously important because if there is a possibility that's M obamacare in its entirety could be undermined and that's that's a fairly enormous moment. I think for the country not least when it's in the the grip ave, a public health crisis. Chris at the top of the show, we did play a quote by senator. McConnell which struck me as slightly all I don't know whether he misspoke or just found himself saying the quiet out loud. But he said a lot of what we've done over the last four years. We'll be undone sooner or later by the next election is that Mitch McConnell assuming or perhaps even hoping that trump gets beaten next Tuesday It wasn't interesting remark wasn't it? It's it's hard to say I think there might be a little bit of that in in his remarks you can read into it I do think more importantly though his comment related to what I was saying earlier I would argue that he is making this case almost a gloating case to say you can undo whenever you win whether it is in November as the polls suggest. Currently or not you can. You can undo much of what we did in the four years in electoral terms in legislative terms I should say, but you cannot undo what we've done on the court that will remain that will remain something that stays for a long period of time. The one thing I just wanted to say on that as well. I think it will be interesting with this conservative majority To really see how aggressively they go after that to to Mitch McConnell's point if you will things like the affordable care act they were passed by Congress if there is a Democratic president with Joe Joe Biden becoming president, they will have an opportunity to pass laws to to to change laws as well. Of course. So the question really will be to what extent this cord goes after laws declaring things. Versus giving Congress an opportunity to sort of legislate when it comes to things like healthcare as well. There were some interesting remarks I just add for Amy Coney Barrett on this in the past, he's talked about the idea of precedent the idea of who legislates when when you overturn precedent and she did have a little bit of a line to say she will own the overturn precedence. If there is still controversy in a certain issue. So if it is something that is divisive and it has not been decided if there is an overwhelming public support for something, she also believes that it's not the courts job to overturn it, and so that I think will be a key thing to watch going forward if we have say a democratic President Democratic majority but a conservative court. Claude if next Tuesday is a big win for the democratic. Party. As Senator Mitch McConnell appears to think it's going to be the not completely without options are there is the possibility as has been floated off expanding the Supreme Court but do you think a democratic administration would be willing to spend political capital doing that? Yes. It's interesting to see how the the the kind of the tightrope that Biden has been walking in his language on this topic and you know any mention of packing the court does. Bays alarm bells, I think in causes some concern people start talking about FDR on his efforts back in the day. I would say, maybe there might be an possibly needs to be a conversation about reforming court gets in its current. Is. Having become such a punishment killed body and it's certainly not what the framers set out to be, and the does probably you know some serious conversations that need to be had I suppose as one other point as well. Maybe just more. And immediately, is that the last male liberal on the court Stephen Prayer is the HVAC too. So. I. Mean He seems in relatively good shape put. It's quite likely that whoever is President the next four years, we'll have the opportunity to put. A new justice on the court. So that's just something to think about in terms of the balance clothes. Harrington Christian. Thank you both for joining
Scott Sloan
Barrett faces questions on Day 2 of Senate hearings
"Day two of the confirmation hearings for Amy Cockney Barrett with the 10 o'clock report. I'm Sarah Elise Breaking. Now It's the second day in the confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Cockney bear it to the Supreme Court. But the first day of direct questioning Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, starting the questioning, asking if there it could clarify her beliefs. As an originalist. I interpret the Constitution as a law that I interpret it's Texas text, and I understand it tohave the meaning that it had. At the time People ratified it. That meaning doesn't change over time, and it's not up to me to update it or infused my own policy views into it. While Barry says she's an admirer of her mentor, Justice Antonin Scalia, If I'm confirmed, you would not be getting justice Scalia You would be getting justice Barritt. Pointing out that even originalist can disagree in their interpretation of the Constitution and of law. It's looking to be a long day in the committee room. Each of the 22 senators on the committee will get a half a hour of questioning time. Dave
Morning Edition
Amy Coney Barrett set for Day 2 of confirmation hearing
"The Senate Judiciary Committee returns this morning for day two of Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Cockney Barrett. On the first day. Yesterday, we heard opening statements from members of the committee. Republicans made the case for Barrett's confirmation. Here's Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham. There's nothing unconstitutional about this process. This is a vacancy that's occurred there tragic loss of a great woman. And we're going to feel that they could see with another great woman. Democrats, meanwhile, said they're Republican colleagues are rushing this effort, and they tried to paint Barrett as a threat to the affordable care act. Now today, members will get their chance to ask her questions directly. We've got NPR Congressional reporter client great solace with us this morning. Hi, Claudia. Hi, Rachel. So what did each party the members of the committee Democrats and Republicans? What did they try to accomplish in the first day hearings yesterday? This was an opportunity for senators to frame her nomination. They did most of the talking. After all, Republicans painted bared as a worthy successor to the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but in the mold of barrettes mentor and that's the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Democrats underscored the rush to confirm Barrett in the midst of a pandemic. Remember Two of the GOP members tested positive for the illness this month, and one Mike Lee of Utah, showed up yesterday, less than two weeks after his diagnosis. He also showcased what at what's at stake. Senator Kamala Harris, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, who also sits on the committee dialed in to participate. Let's take a listen By replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with someone who will undo her legacy. President Trump is attempting to roll that Americans rides the decades to come. So Democrats highlighted concerns that barrettes nomination is being rushed so she could be seated in time if there's a dispute tied to the presidential election and to rule on an affordable care act case that will come before the court next month. So they shared worries that she could limit the A or abortion rights tied to the landmark case. Roe v. Wade. Republicans, meanwhile, tried to portray Democrats is anti Catholic, even though not one raised the religious belief issue right so yesterday was all about opening statements, and Barrett herself gave her statement what we learned for that. She said. Although she was nominated to succeed Ginsberg, no one could ever take her place. She said she closely followed Scalia's judicial philosophy. She clerked for him. Let's take a listen. His judicial philosophy was straightforward. A judge must apply the law as it is written. Not as she wishes it worked. Sometimes that approach met reaching results that he did not like. But as he put it in one of his best known opinions, that is what it means to say that we have a government of laws and not of men. She also noted that the courts have a vital responsibility to enforce the rule of law, but that policy decisions are better left to the legislative branch. So today, the official questioning begins, right and presumably, we're going to hear a lot of what we heard yesterday on the affordable care act, but in the form of questions to Judge Barrett, yes, members will question Barrett on our position on a lot of these key issues such as health care, an abortion rights. Each senator will get 30 minutes to question Barrett. So with 22 members, this could prove to be a much longer day. Republicans will use this to highlight her conservative judicial record. While Democrats will grill Barrett on conflicts of interest and how she'd rule on future cases will press her again recused herself in some of these instances, such as the day or if there's a dispute with the election, But as she's done during private calls with Democrats, you'll likely declined to make such commitments or share how she might rule on these issues
THE NEWS with Anthony Davis
Amy Coney Barrett vows to interpret laws as they are written
"I'm Anthony Davis. Supreme Court nominee Amy Kuney Barrett's declared on Monday that Americans deserve an independent Supreme Court that interprets constitution and laws as they were written encapsulating her. Approach to the law that has Republicans excited about the prospect of her taking the place of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg before election day. Barrett spoke about her judicial philosophy, her experience and to launch family at the end of the first day of her fast tracked confirmation hearings that Senate Democrats are using to try and brand her a threat to Americans healthcare during the coronavirus pandemic. After sitting in silence through nearly four hours of opening statements for members of the Senate Judiciary Committee the forty eight year old federal appeals. Judge laid out her approach to the bench, which she has likened to that of her conservative mentor. The late Justice Antonin Scalia. Courts have a vital responsibility to the rule of law which is critical to a free society, but courts are not designed to solve every problem. All right. Every wrong. In our public life Barrett said in a statement she delivered after removing the protective she wore for most of the day. She told sentences that she is forever grateful for Ginsberg's trail-blazing path as a woman on the court. Yet said, it's coma Harris Democratic, presidential nominee Joe. Biden's running-mate said the courts often the last refuge for equal justice and the Barrett number seven puts in jeopardy. Everything GINSBURG fought to protect barring dramatic development Republicans appear to have the vote to confirm her a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court. If she is confirmed quickly, she could be on the court when it here's the latest challenge
WTOP 24 Hour News
High court nominee Barrett to tell senators courts 'should not try' to make policy decisions
"Supreme Court should not try to make policy. That's what Supreme Court nominee Amy Cockney. Barrett will tell senators in her opening remarks this week. She instead believes policy decision should be left. Political branches of government and opening remarks from her confirmation hearings obtained by The Associated Press Bear. It also says I have been nominated to fill Justice Ginsburg seat, but no one will ever take her place. She also says she plans to have the same perspective as her mentor, the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Who was in her words devoted to his family, resoluteness beliefs and fearless and criticism.
AP 24 Hour News
Who is Amy Coney Barrett, Trump's pick for the Supreme Court?
"Meanwhile, President Trump has announced his latest Supreme Court pick, She is a woman of unparalleled achievement. Towering intellect, sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution. Judge Amy Cockney Barrett. Correspondent Mark Sherman, says Amy Cockney. Barrett has been a federal appeals court judge for the past three years. She also served after her law school graduation as a clerk for a former Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. Barrett also has a compelling personal story. She's the mother of Seven Children, two of whom are adopted, and one who has special needs.
Fox News Rundown
The relationship between Justice Scalia and RBG
"Lies in state in the Capitol today, the first woman ever given that honor in the first Supreme Court justice since William Howard Taft and he'd also been the president. Justice. Ginsburg's casket was at the court for two days for people to pay their respects, including President Trump, and the first lady booed when they got there. The president has had nice things to say about Justice Ginsburg since her death, you may agree. You may not disagree with her, but he was an inspiration to a tremendous number of people. I say all Americans, and now, he says, it's his job to fill that seat on the court. I think it's very important that we have nine justices. And I think the system is going to go very quickly. The president plans to announce his nominee tomorrow. Joe Biden, and a lot of other Democrats say he should fill that seat if he wins the election in light of Republicans blocking President Obama from filling a seat in an election year, the seat President Obama would have filled incident. Scalia's went to Neil Gorsuch instead of Merrick Garland. For all the fighting. There's been over Justices Scalia and Ginsburg in life. They were very good friends. People always find it surprising that they were such good friends, Christopher Scully's the Eighth of Incident. Scalia's nine Children. There's a new collection published of his father's writing called The Essential Scalia. Their friendship went back. Really to the early eighties, when they were judges together on the D C circuit Court of Appeals, which is kind of like the second most important court in the country, and they they had a good working relationship that which really started back then they would help each other revised their drafts and their opinions. Apparently, the other judges on that court really didn't like getting advice about their writing and how to improve the clarity of what they're writing in the force of their arguments. But Justice Ginsburg liked getting and receiving that kind of advice, and so did my dad, and they formed what he called a mutual improvement society during their time on the court there. And And they had other things in common. They were they had similar backgrounds and that they were both New Yorkers grew up in New York around the same time, different boroughs but around the same time and shared a love of opera. Good wine eating good food. Both of their thousands were excellent cooks. Marty Ginsburg, in particular, is kind of a legendary cook, who would put together wonderful meals every New Year's Eve and they would celebrate New Year's Every every year is well. So you know, despite all their differences, and all the many things they disagreed about, including a number of opinions in this collection. They had a wonderful friendship were able to kind of focus on the things they had in common. Your dad in Justice Ginsburg, I don't know the statistics on how often they concurred or dissented on cases. But I imagine that they disagreed. Maybe as much as any two Recent justices have my right. Yeah, I think that that sounds right. I don't know the statistics, either. I think people would be surprised by how often they agreed with each other. But on the real hot button cultural cases, they often disagreed one of her most important, most famous opinions. Was Virginia Military Institute case from the mid nineties. And my My father wrote a dissent to that case, which is in this collection, the essentials, Scalia and it was hey actually gave her the draft of that descent a little bit earlier than one usually does just so that she would have more time to kind of Deal with it and grapple grapple with his arguments. And and, yeah, some of his most staying the sense we're in response to opinions. She didn't necessarily right but but joined, And I think that's probably true. Vice versa. Tell us very about the big bouquet of roses she got from him. My dad would get her roses for her birthday and I guess the Ah, I think the last time he did that. So the year before he died, one of the editors of the Essential Scalia Judge Jeffrey Sutton was visiting my father in chambers on on Justice Ginsburg's birthday. And he saw that my dad had two dozen roses for Justice Ginsburg and Judge Sutton started teasing Dad saying, You know, I haven't even gotten my wife two dozen roses over the course of our entire marriage. Why would you do this? And besides, When was the last time she cited with you on a really important 54 decision? You know, he's poking fun, You know, not not really being serious, but My dad gave a serious answer, which was some things are more important than votes. As I think I just kind of a great encapsulation of their of their relationship of their friendship they had they had Very different opinions of politics and of their jobs as a zoo judges and of what laws, men and with the Constitution, man. But, uh, how they voted wasn't the biggest factor in their relationship. It wasn't that those opinions didn't matter. And it wasn't that they compromised their beliefs for each other. But they didn't let those very strongly held beliefs undermine their very deep friendship collection of Supreme Court. Justice Antonin Scalia is writing sort of like a greatest hits album. It's opinions and other writing about the law and the Constitution again called the Essential Scalia. This is really just a collection of his greatest Legal writings, opinions, speeches, essays and they collected together give a really good sense of white. Exactly. He was such a significant Supreme Court justice on it. They're having in one collection really makes it tangible for anybody understand that we'll just as a legal reference work. You've got to think it's going to end up being bought by or four A lot of lawyers and judges know absolutely in law students. I hope you know that he he wrote. Clearly, he wrote, Hey, had so many memorable phrases and his opinions. His logic was so strong and convincing that people just kind of they often went to his opinions first. And so it's good for people to kind of have that as a resource to keep going to those opinions. Even you know, even after His passing is also besides the legal community. It's also like you said. It's very readable, even for non lawyers for just a general interest audience who might, but he was just simply a very, very good writer. Yeah, it's exactly right. He hey, wrote. For? I guess we would now call it out of transparency. You know, Even when he was writing Supreme court opinions, he understood that they should be understood themselves by everyday citizens, not just legal eagles and people with legal degrees. He kind of a recurring theme of his opinions. Is that people should know what the court courts are doing and people that the court should not usurp power that properly belongs to the people. And I think that kind of reverence for the Democratic order is is kind of manifest in his in the clarity of his writing a lot of times if he had a vote, a personal vote on how a case would turn out it may or may not a lot of times did a line with how he ruled, But sometimes it probably wouldn't have right. Yeah, I think that's true. And that's especially true in one example is when he sided with the majority in a flag burning case. The majority ruled that, um, it was constitutional sorry from burning the flag was constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment so prohibiting that in the state law was unconstitutional. My father often explained that he did not like Three idea of flag burning. If he were a king, he would ban it. But clearly to him falls under the protection of the protection of the First Amendment, and a lot of conservatives to this day do not like that opinion. My father thought the Constitution was clear about that. There are many examples in this collection, the essential Scalia of instances in which he stands up for the rights of the accused defendant's rights. There's a famous case in here where search and seizure cases as well there a couple of those in here where he just thought, you know the police do not have authority, for example, to use Scans of houses, Tio identify Marilou who was growing marijuana without that was an illegal search examples like that s so if he could just pass a law That was one thing, but actually sorry, there couldn't be even be lost for that because they so clearly violated the Constitution, even though obviously he wouldn't have approved of those particular actions. Sure. Hey, was also notice the talker during oral arguments. He has asked a lot of questions and clearly sometimes, though, they weren't really questions. They were just arguments he was making to his fellow justices. Do you think he went into most cases with his mind made up based on the briefs, and the president is a bad thing, but not usually the case. I think that the justices, you know, I can't say for certain, but my hunch is that they often have to go in with a pretty good idea, but I think for the most part, they do ask questions, not just Not just to be heard or not just to make arguments, but because they want to really engage with the arguments that the lawyers are making in the forward to this collection, Justice Kegan first of all, very happy that she agreed to write this beautiful forward, But she she says that she says just that, you know, Dad would ask these questions because he loved argument and kind of loved mixing it up. It wasn't just kind of wasn't just for show though he did. I think you're right. He was very kind of an engaging speaker and There was some study years ago that that found he was. He was the funniest justice by the standards of he drew the most laughter from the courtroom during oral arguments, which obviously isn't the most important thing to do, but just shows how much he he enjoyed that process that love for debate. Did it? Was it a two way street was? Was he persuadable? Absolutely. That's something justice Kagan mentions in her forward. She doesn't say when she ever changed his mind, but says They change each other's minds at times. Well, Christopher Scalia, It was great to talk, Teo, The book is called The Essential Scalia on the Constitution, the courts and the rule of law. Chris Scalia. Really good to talk to you. Thanks so much, Thanks so much appreciate your time.
Can We Talk?
RBG in Her Own Words
"Hi It's no rouse and Judith Rosenbaum. And this is, can we talk the podcast of the Jewish women's archive where gender history and Jewish culture meet in this episode we're honoring and mourning the loss of Supreme Court. Justice. Ruth Bader GINSBURG. The first Jewish woman to sit on the nation's highest court Justice Ginsburg died on the eve of Russia China after a long battle with pancreatic cancer. In the days and nights following her death the steps of the Supreme Court have become an impromptu memorial. Thousands of people have gathered to express both grief and gratitude leaving flowers, writing messages and chalk lighting yard site candles. Some have even blown show far in her honour Ruth Bader GINSBURG was not only unapologetically Jewish but she and her experience as a jewish-american really guided her work. The Biblical Dictum Setback Sabatier Dove Justice Justice. You shall pursue adorn the walls of her chamber and the Word Setback Justice was embroidered into one of the lace collar. She famously war with her robes though tiny person justice GINSBURG was larger than life a Jewish hero and an American and feminist icon she stood for gender equality and racial justice and modeled fighting steadily for what you believe in. Her famous friendship with Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia showed that you can disagree and still get along. She was a role model for so many people, but it's important to remember that she had role models to in two thousand and four justice Ginsburg spoke at a Jewish women's archive event marking three, hundred, fifty years of Jewish life in America. She talked about some of the Jewish women who inspired her. One of them was Henrietta sold. Zolt was born in eighteen sixty in Baltimore and like Ginsburg was both visionary a doer who faced in overcame many obstacles as a woman. She founded DASA and helped build the social service infrastructure of what became the state of Israel. So here's ruth. Bader. Ginsburg one of our heroes talking about one of her heroes, another inspiring Jewish woman from history. In my growing up years, my mother spoke of glowingly. Though new had to say no. Better than any other person whose words I have read. Sold had seven sisters. And brother. When her mother died the man well known for his community spirited endeavors. Hi, imperative. Offered to say the codfish. The mourners fair that Ancien customer instructed to be recited only by men. Zone responded to that carrying offer in a letter dated September sixteen. Nineteen sixteen here Kuenssberg reads the key passage of the letter Henrietta sold wrote in response. It is impossible for me to find words in which to tell you. How deeply I wish touched by your offer. To Act as. Well my dear, mother. What you offered to do is beautiful beyond thanks. I shall never forget it. You will wonder then that I cannot accept your offer. I know well and appreciate you say about. Jewish. Custom. That only male children recite the prayer and if there are no male survivors. A male stranger may act as substitute. And Jewish custom is very dear and sacred to me. Yet I cannot ask to say after my mother. The cottage means to me. That the survivor publicly manifest. His intention to assume their relationship to the Jewish community, which is parents had. So that the chain of tradition remains unbroken. From generation to generation. Each adding its own link you can do that for the generations of your family I must do that. For generations of my family. My. Mother had eight daughters and no sun. And yet never did I hear a word of regret. Past, the lips of either my mother or my father. That one of us. WAS NOT, a son. When my father died, my mother would not permit others to take our daughters place. In saying the cottage. Until I am sure. I am acting in her spirit. When I am moved to decline your offer. But beautiful you offer remains nevertheless. And I repeat I know full well. That it is much more in harmony with generally accepted Jewish tradition than his might while my family's conception. You understand me don't you. Flee or celebration of our common heritage while tolerating indeed appreciating the differences among us. Concerning religious practice. Is, captivating, don't you agree?
AP News Radio
Barrett emerges as court favorite; Trump to pick by weekend
"Hi Mike Rossi a reporting president trump plans to make a quick selection for the latest Supreme Court vacancy president Donald Trump wants possible Senate confirmation of his new Supreme Court nominee before election day let's say I make the announcement on Saturday there's a great deal of time before the election that'll be up to measure the Senate at the White House late Monday and later two stops in Ohio trump said he plans to put forward his nomination to replace justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Friday or Saturday but congressional Democrats like minority whip Dick Durbin are crying foul nation guided by the rule of law cannot have one set of rules under democratic presidents and another set under Republican presidents after the death of justice Antonin Scalia president Barack Obama's nomination of judge Merrick garland in March twenty sixteen was not brought to a vote by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell because it was an election year Mike Crossey up Washington
AP News Radio
The Latest: Manchin against high court vote before election
"The majority in the Senate is pushing for a quick vote on a replacement for the late Supreme Court justice Ruth pater Ginsburg president trump wants a vote by election day Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says he will get it we're gonna vote on this nomination on this floor McConnell brought up why there was no vote in twenty sixteen after the death of justice Antonin Scalia right on the wall is asking Senate Republican or non usual favor McConnell says the president now has the majority party in the Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer says it's an exercise in raw political power and nothing nothing more Schumer says this could have a long lasting impact if his Senate majority over the course of six years steals two Supreme Court seats using completely contradictory rationales how could we be how could we expect to trust the other side again and Donahue Washington
AP News Radio
The Latest: Manchin against high court vote before election
"The majority in the Senate is pushing for a quick vote on a replacement for the late Supreme Court justice Ruth pater Ginsburg president trump wants a vote by election day Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says he will get it we're gonna vote on this nomination on this floor McConnell brought up why there was no vote in twenty sixteen after the death of justice Antonin Scalia right on the wall is asking Senate Republican or non usual favor McConnell says the president now has the majority party in the Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer says it's an exercise in raw political power and nothing nothing more Schumer says this could have a long lasting impact if his Senate majority over the course of six years steals two Supreme Court seats using completely contradictory rationales how could we be how could we expect to trust the other side again and Donahue Washington
The Economist: The Intelligence
Judge dreadthe fight for Ruth Bader Ginsburgs seat
"On Friday US Supreme Court. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died of cancer at the age of eighty seven. A candlelit vigil was held the following day outside the Supreme Court. Justice. GINSBURG was only the second woman appointed to the Supreme Court after being nominated by Bill Clinton in one thousand, nine hundred. I. In. Solemnly swear he was a champion of women's rights, and later in life she achieved restore status especially among young women. Now her death has set the stage for a divisive battle to replace her on the court. She was born in Brooklyn to an immigrant Father Dad was from Odessa in in Russia and to a first generation mother she was Jewish John. Fascination is the economist Washington correspondent and she was a trailblazer throughout her life. She was one of only nine women among five hundred men at Harvard law school, and when she arrived. Erwin griswold, who was then the Dean asked women in the class to stand up and justify taking a spot that could have gone to a man. She said the reason she took the spot is it was important that she understood her husband's work that would've made her husband Marty last Mardi was tax attorney well known in his own right he predeceased her but they had a famously loving and productive and equal partnership. She had a relentless work ethic in. Twenty five years in the Supreme Court she never missed today she's arrived four bouts of cancer before this fifth one killed her it was only after she got sick that she called by phone to oral arguments. I. Think People often have this idea that Supreme Court justices are sort of Stentorian wizards ready to shout down lawyer who they disagree with justice. GINSBURG was not like that she spoke very slowly very deliberately, which mirrors I think how she wrote and how she argued and how she thought she was meticulous. She was precise she she was not a showy justice. She came onto the court actually considered a moderate. There are a lot of people on the left who were upset when she was appointed because she was considered sort of two centrist. But as the court steadily moved rightward during her tenure, she has found herself the de facto leader of the courts liberal wing. Junk she spent a long time on the court. What did she achieve? Well, she was on the Supreme Court for Twenty seven years, and before that was on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, which is widely considered the second most important court in America for for thirteen. So she was a judge for forty years I was age sixty when I was nominated in some people thought I was. Too Old for the job. Now I'm into my twenty-seventh starting my twenty-seventh year on the courts on one of the longest tenured. Justices. So if you worried about my age. It was unnecessary. Before that, she argued six cases before the Supreme Court and she was involved with thirty more as the first director of the US women's rights project. The first of those report court cases was in Reid versus Reid for which she wrote a brief arguing against the law in Ohio that preferred men to women in naming executive estates. She won that case in her first oral argument before the Supreme Court. She argued against the military policy that denied many husbands, officers, the same housing and medical benefits that automatically provided officers. Wise. The thinking was that women are somehow inherently more dependent on their husbands and husbands on their wise. Now, in that case, remember she effectively represented the husband she represented family but she represented the shoes argue in favor of the husband's benefits and she austin said that she was not arguing for women's rights she was arguing for the constitutional equality of men and women. Her death is come at a critical time in American politics. It's just six weeks away from the election. So what impact does that have? Well I think it's a little too early to say that definitively. It looks as though both sides are gearing up for battle, but they seem to be quietly circling each other in two thousand sixteen. The Supreme Court is central to Donald Trump's success I think because. There is an open seat in two thousand, Sixteen Justice Antonin Scalia died, and Mitch McConnell who is then the Senate minority leader rather than hold a hearing on Barack Obama's chosen replacement for Justice Scalia whose Merrick Garland he came up with a rationale disguises the principle which was that the causing election was coming up the speech beheld open. So the voters could decide now that had never been done before it was clearly a power play. It was a live sort of issue for Republicans impelled I think a lot of them who otherwise would have held donald trump at arm's length to decide that just had to vote for him this time I. Think Donald Trump is hoping for a similar effect this time, but he also wants to get the filled as quickly as possible. For Democrats donations had started pouring in, they have been pouring all weekend. Democrats seem riled up by this. I think in their view if Donald Trump managed to get a successor onto the court, this'll be the seconds effectively stolen seat right? The I was Neil Gorsuch. who was given the seat that was held open by Mitch McConnell, and the second would be whoever donald trump nominees to replace justice GINSBURG who gets the seat because Mitch McConnell did not follow the principle he set up in two thousand sixteen. John Do you think Senate. Republicans have the numbers to they have the votes to get in trump's nominee through before the election. Well this is the question on everyone's mind. Right so far Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski Republican senators from from Maine Alaska, had said that they will not vote for replacement before November third they have said that the president who wins on November third you choose the replacement now that only gets Democrats to forty nine and they need fifty one because in the case of a tie Mike. Pence cast the tiebreaking vote Lindsey Graham had previously said he would abide by Mitch McConnell's rule from twenty sixteen. He has now gone back on that apparently because he's angry Democrats didn't roll over for Brad Cavanaugh Chuck. Grassley, who's a senator from Iowa has also previously spoken in favor of McConnell's precedent. I, have a very hard time imagining that when push comes to shove, he'll stand by his. Word and so there really is nothing Democrats can do unless they can persuade two other Republicans to come join them, and if they can't persuade those Republicans and tip the balance what happens. Then what are the consequences for the years ahead on American politics? It's clear that what McConnell did in two thousand sixteen was a tremendous violation of norms I think it's not a good principal to. Uphold I think arguing that this is now how Supreme Court seats should be awarded that in an election year, you effectively have to hold the seat open until the end of the election is a bad precedent but I think there's a difference between saying Republicans should be consistent for the sake of consistency and Republicans should follow this principle because that's how court seat should be given out now. From the Democratic Base, there's been a tremendous push to threaten Republicans with repercussions if. Retake. The Senate and the president in that includes making Puerto Rico in Washington DC states, which would effectively at least in the near in medium-term Give Democrats four senators people have also been talking about expanding the court. So the reason they are Nice Ring Court justices is not constitutional legal. It's just a statute. So if they were minded and had a majority had a president who would sign it into law, they put eleven or thirteen justices on the supreme court. The problem with that for Democrats I think is that it sort of shifts the terms. Of the debate that they are now winning I think the way Joe, Biden has pitched. This campaign is on the one hand. You have the sort of chaotic destructive Donald Trump on the other. You have Joe Biden Palm known figure who will get us back to normal. If, he comes out and endorses expanding the court or State of DC in Puerto Rico, which to be clear he has not done. He is actually a opposed expanded from court but if he comes out if Democrats threaten this, then the debate becomes a lot murkier. Then it becomes the radical change that Joe Biden wants to do right take fifty, two states and putting thirteen on Supreme Court against Donald Trump will keep things as are I think that debate does not play out very well for Democrats. John Thank you very much time.
The Morgan Show with Morgan White, Jr.
Trump says he will nominate woman to the Supreme Court next week
"Trump Trump is is speaking speaking out out about about his his efforts efforts to to nominate nominate a a person person to to replace replace Justice Justice Ruth Ruth Bader Bader Ginsburg Ginsburg on on the Supreme Court. Your CBS is Steve Dorsey in Washington, President Trump told White House reporters will likely choose a woman as early as next week. I could see most likely it would be a woman. Yeah, I think I could say that it would be a woman. I would, uh If somebody were to ask me now, I would say that A woman would be In first place. The president is also defending his power to choose a Supreme Court nominee in an election year way have an obligation to the voters. All of the people the millions of people that put us here in the form of a victory. We have an obligation to them. All of those voters Democrats are reminding Republicans. They blocked President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court after Justice Antonin Scalia's death, arguing voters should decide in the 2016 election.