35 Burst results for "Justice John Roberts"
"justice john roberts" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"From Bloomberg radio. This is Kagan? I'm wondering if you would just comment on the ancient legal principle of if it ain't broke, don't fix it. There was laughter in the courtroom as joust as Elena Kagan suggested there's no need to change the scope of the attorney client privilege which protects the confidentiality of communications. The question that justices are deciding is what tests should courts use when communications between a lawyer and a client involve both business and legal advice. I mean, we've had the attorney client privilege for a long time, and until 2014, nobody ever suggested that the test that you are proposing is the right one. Everybody instead used the primary purpose test. Should communications be protected only if the primary purpose was to obtain legal advice or also if a significant purpose was to obtain legal advice. It sounds like semantics and many of the justices seem to agree with justice Kagan that there's no need to fix what ain't broke. Here's chief justice John Roberts and justice Amy Coney Barrett. To a certain extent, you know, I think we're talking about labels rather than analysis. Because we can't really say ty goes to the runner, right? When the burden is on, the person invoking the privilege, we can't get into this whole put a percentage on it for the reasons that we've already talked about. So maybe it's best to say nothing. Joining me is MC sangala, head of the appellate practice at buck altar. This case involves a grand jury subpoena in connection with a criminal tax investigation and the law firm and the client invoked the attorney client privilege to withhold documents, and the case is shrouded in mystery in a lot of ways. The petitioner isn't even named. Oh gosh, yes. Well, there's the mystery having to do with the parties and the fact that things are under seal and, you know, which law firms involved and which companies involved, I think there was some reference in the government's brief that the company involved with the privileges involved in the cryptocurrency or something like that. But yeah, there's a little bit of mysterious to the individual participants, but the larger she's not a mystery and it's definitely one that is of interest. I would say particularly to in-house consult who often are in the position where they're communication could be seen as dual purpose. So the question here is, what is the task to apply to communications that have both a legal purpose and a business purpose? And is the test the single primary purpose is legal and therefore it's subject to turning client privilege or is it sufficient that a significant purpose is enough? So that's the question I think particularly given that there are so many circumstances, especially when you're talking about in-house chemical in companies, they're often business strategy questions and legal strategy questions that are really and so they're paying a lot of attention to this case. So MC, you filed an amicus brief on behalf of the federation of defense and corporate counsel, supporting a broad application of the privilege, is the concern that a narrower test might chill a client's communications with their attorney. Yeah, I mean, you want people to be forthcoming so that you can give the best legal advice you also in the course of providing legal advice in terms need to get a lot of other peripheral information. So one of the examples that came up in the argument was, well, if you're asking for advice about property or the family home or something like that and you need to get some valuation information or factual information about the property in order to offer Google advice about it, you want as much information as possible and you want it as broad as possible in doing that so you can get the full information you need to offer the best advice and also can ask a lot of different factual questions that you need to render about advice. And sometimes do clients don't know, they think there might be a legal issue, but they don't know and they think they're asking a business question, but it's really also a legal question. So if you had this test of a single primary purpose being seeking legal advice, they might say as the client where we didn't really know at the time we were asking questions that it was actually legal advice that we really should be asking about. On the other side, the government argues that having that kind of broad test would allow companies to shield documents about accounting and business development without a compelling justification, and in this case the government says the vast majority of the documents in dispute are communications between the client and a non lawyer accountant that was employed by the law firm to prepare tax returns, so the government says that the broader test, the significant purpose is too broad. It's really interesting there was a lot of stock and forth about what each side's position was, whether there really was some significant disagreement by the parties about what the test should in fact be. At one point, justice Gorsuch said, oh, I think both of you might be adjusting your definition of the test and might actually be coming to the same test, which is not primary purpose, but is significant purpose and the government
"justice john roberts" Discussed on WTOP
"The Supreme Court's chief justice is out with his annual yearend report on the federal judiciary. In his report, chief justice John Roberts praised programs that protect judges, noting recent security threats to justices and their families. The chief justice and other conservatives of the nation's highest court faced protests some of them at their own homes during 2022. The protests followed the leak back in May of the court's decision to roll back the roe V wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. Another justice on the court, Samuel Alito has said the leak made conservative justices in his words, targets for assassination. Linda canyon, CBS News, Washington. New York is now the 6th state in the nation to legalize human composting, technically known as natural organic reduction. Democratic governor Kathy hochul signed legislation on the last day of the year to allow human composting. Considered an environmentally conscious method of burial, the body is placed in a reusable vessel along with plant material, such as wood chips alfalfa and straw, the organic mix breaks the body down in about a month, the end result a cubic yard of nutrient dense soil or about 36 bags of it. The New York State Catholic conference calls it inappropriate and says human bodies are not household waste, Washington state Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, and California also allow human composting. Julie Walker, New York. Maybe you want to live better in 2023. A doctor offers some advice. Do you think you need more vitamin D? Maybe, especially during the winter when we're covered up and don't get the benefit of sunshine on our skin. A deficiency can be linked to brittle bones and fractures, but don't rush out for supplements in a recent well plus being column in The Washington Post, clinical trials are cited that have shown most Americans get all the vitamin D they need from
"justice john roberts" Discussed on WJR 760
"Of the Great Lakes, 7 60 W JR, Detroit, a cumulus media station. A new year's order from the North Korean leader. I'm Jessica stone. Kim Jong-un says his country will exponentially expand its arsenal of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. Kim says the move is justified to combat South Korea's own military build up. More information now about the 28 year old criminology student charged in connection with the murders of four university of Idaho students last month. Fox's Matt Finn has more. There's a Reddit post online from earlier this year that has surfaced, revealing kolberger was apparently looking to speak with people who committed crimes as part of research for school. And the unconfirmed post he wrote in part, quote I am inviting you to participate in a research project that seeks to understand how emotions and psychological traits influence decision making when committing a crime. Since the story of these heinous murders first broke last month, speculators online have been making comparisons of this case to Ted Bundy. People are drawing comparisons about how Bundy also sucked and killed college students and that Bundy and coburger both went to universities in the state of Washington. Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts is calling for more protection for judges. Fox's Laura Cantor with more. With the recent threats to Supreme Court Justices safety, chief justice John Roberts set on Saturday that we must ensure their protection. In his annual federal judiciary yearend report, he wrote, quote, a judicial system can not, and should not live in fear. Following the May leak of the Supreme Court's decision to reverse roe versus wade, Roberts and other conservative justices were the subjects of protests. Some in front of their homes, a man was arrested near justice Brett Kavanaugh's House in June after threatening to kill him. A gun knife and zip ties were found in his possession. The Supreme Court will be back hearing arguments starting January 9th. Laura Cantor
"justice john roberts" Discussed on WGN Radio
"For families that need a little extra holiday cheer. The bags are full of the toys for the kids in town. Toys and then we'll provide a dinner for each of the families and a gift card for the parents this week. Niles police department says this will continue in 2023 and be an annual event moving forward. The CTA's holiday bus made a special stop at stag elementary school in englewood today this year, the bus is decorated with artwork created by students at the school, kids were able to get on board and check out their creations as well as get a special thank you from Santa and some of his elves, CPS says these students here at the CPS school have created the artwork for the holiday bus since its debut back in 2014. If you're out drinking and payload park this New Year's Eve, the payload park police department says you can call them for a ride home no questions asked in their release sent today. They are also offering officer offering to send officers to families who are leaving underage children at home between the hours of 7 p.m. and 4 a.m. to check on them. With title 42 set to end this week, Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts has issued an administrative state which temporarily pauses the expiration of the controversial border restriction policy. It's a response now a response by the Biden administration to the temporary hold must be filed by tomorrow. News station, Stephanie Haynes. In El Paso, data from the city shows there are more than 3000 migrants in border patrol custody right now. Officials there say by Wednesday, they could see up to 6000 crossings per day. And hundreds are already getting released to the streets of El Paso each day because there isn't enough capacity to process and shelter them. And that's why the mayor declared an emergency over the weekend. Officials say by Wednesday they could see up to 6000 migrants crossing per day just in El Paso, hundreds are released to the streets each day because there just isn't enough capacity to process or house them. The Lake county coroner has identified two people killed by a train in north suburban ingleside Sunday as grandmother and grandson, 75 year old Patricia schoenberger of Antioch in 13 year old Noah Kaczynski of lockport were killed. The Lake county sheriff's department says a deputy was nearby when a train hit the car just after noon still not clear why that train was on the tracks. WGN sports time, 1105, the Blackhawks host the predators on Wednesday, Joe brands pregame is at 7. The face off at 7 30, which on wideman and killy chelios, right here on 7 20 WGN and WGN radio dot com. Packers playoff hopes still alive, they get a win on Monday Night Football 24 to 12 over the Los
Chief Justice Roberts grants Trump temporary hold in dispute over tax returns
"The chief justice of the Supreme Court has put a temporary hold on the handover of former president Donald Trump's tax returns to a congressional committee The order by chief justice John Roberts gets a Supreme Court time to weigh the legal issues in Donald Trump's emergency appeal to the high court which was filed Monday without court intervention the tax returns could have been provided as early as Thursday by the Treasury Department to the democratic controlled House ways and means committee Roberts gave that committee until November 10th to respond
"justice john roberts" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"And we will do that with Amy Mars. All right, thank you, Paul, Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts has delayed the handover of Donald Trump's tax returns to a Democrat led congressional committee to happen just minutes ago. The former president filed the emergency appeal with the court yesterday. Now, his argument is that the House ways and means committees just trying to see the records for political purposes. Robert says the house panel has until November 10th to respond. We're seeing record profits from ExxonMobil and Chevron amassing more than $30 billion in combined net income last quarter and then as President Biden calling on Congress to impose higher taxes on oil companies if they are not reinvesting in production. The profits are a windfall of war. The wind fall from the brutal conflict that's ravaging Ukraine and hurting tens of millions of people around the globe. Now, President Biden's promise to impose this higher taxes is going to be kind of hard to deliver Democrats have unsuccessfully sought a so called windfall profit tax for more than a decade, such a proposal would have a hard time passing the Senate the way it's currently made up. House speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband is recovering from those serious injuries suffered when an intruder broke into their home and attacked Paul Pelosi with a hammer. The incident put lawmakers on edge focusing attention on the potential for violence in a politically polarized nation and we talked about that with democratic congresswoman Debbie dingell of Michigan. What should really worry all of us is how we're normalizing this in our community and little and big ways every day and that we all have to stand up to hate wherever and whenever we see it. Dingell was on sound on which you can hear weekday afternoons at 5 Wall Street time on Bloomberg radio. Global news 24 hours a day on air and on Bloomberg quicktake powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts
"justice john roberts" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"To out of state residents does open this can of worms and the court I think is may try to, if can avoid it, it may just say that it has to be that the state can take legitimate measures, but it has to be based on something else than sort of looking at scans at the morals or values of what takes place in a different state. So chief justice John Roberts said, but under your analysis, it's California's view of morality that prevails over the views of people in other states because of the market power that they have. Well, that's what America is about, isn't it market power? Well, it is. And it may seem to be a fine line to say that market power can affect, let's say, emissions of cars. As opposed to humane treatment of pigs, but I think there is a line there. And that's where this issue has been so controversial before is for California's regulation of car emissions and other kinds of carbon emissions because California has been far more strict in the rest of the country and the rest of the country says, well, we want to do business in California. Therefore, we have to adopt stricter measures. And there, though, the tie between those kinds of pro environmental measures and the health and welfare of California citizens is relatively clearly established. When you're just talking about feeling better knowing that pigs were slaughtered in a more humane fashion or at least kept in the market humane fashion. That's probably more difficult pill to swallow. Thanks, Hal. That's professor Harold kran to the Chicago Kent college of law. Coming up will take a look at President Biden's judicial nominations and where they stand. This is Bloomberg. Burden LLP
What Would the Late Judge Robert Bork Think of Justice John Roberts?
"Your father's reaction with John Roberts is? A little bit of an anomaly on the court to be honest. I think it's a horrible job being chief. You know, you are in the middle. And you're trying to guide things. And I think John Roberts was a big fan of my dad's at his memorial service he gave most beautiful toast. About my father. So I don't want to be critical of him. I understand. And I can't be critical of somebody who's in that job trying to hold a bunch of radical leftists and a bunch of conservatives together and thinking, look, and he's thinking about not just the law, but the larger society. The body politic. So, but I think my dad probably would have had different view of his chief judge, chief justice ship, as it were, then some people would, I think you would have wanted him to have a little more stiffness of spine.
Who Would Make a Great Supreme Court Advocate?
"Just because you've watched so many Supreme Court arguments, you know, so many of the justices, you know, so many of the legal people. If you had to recommend a Supreme Court advocate today, someone called you up and their company is on the line, they have to argue before the Supreme Court, who would it be? I guess it would probably be Paul Clement. You and I said the same thing. I got asked that question a couple of years ago. And I've never met Paul Clement or spoken to him, but I hit Paul Clement. Tell people why. Well, because he's just if he weren't such a nice and intelligent and good guy, I would say that he was an idiot savant of an advocate. I mean by that, I don't mean that he's an idiot. I mean that even when he was a baby advocate, he came to the Justice Department with John ashcroft for whom he had worked on the Senate Judiciary Committee, I think. And he was in his young 30s and Ted Olson was the solicitor general and had just won Bush versus gore for president Bush by then president Bush and ashcroft, I think, actually wanted Paul to be solicitor general and the compromise was that he would be deputy, which he was for four years, and then he became solicitor general on his own. But as Ted also would say, Paul is just an amazing advocate. And he is not a, you know, when he worked for the government, he represented the government. When he worked for the Catholic Church, he represents the Catholic Church. Do I think that is closer to an approximation of his views? Yes, I do. But he was a just a bang up advocate for the government. And so was Ted Olson. They both represented they both defended the McCain feingold law. And one in the Supreme Court, and it fell apart years later, and they represent different interests now that they're in private practice, but that didn't stop them from being the best advocates possible for their client at the time and their client at the time was the United States government. You just named two of the four of the greatest Supreme Court advocates of my generation, the other two being the now chief justice John Roberts, and the fourth being an it'll come to me. I just forgot his name. And there are four. And they were always, I get calls, and when the chief justice was in private practice at Hogan, I would say go get him. And now when I get calls, I say go get Paul Clement because Ken Starr judge Starr is no longer practicing. They work great Supreme Court advocates because they just are at ease and I bring that up because of your Walter dellinger story on page one 30 and God bless the late Walter dellinger, who is a great man in the law, with whom I disagreed often. But he mixed up the names of justices, O'Connor and Ginsburg in his first argument. That's over practicing. Nina, that's don't you think that's what it was. He was overprepared he had thought about it so much. I'm not going to mix them up. I'm not going to mix them up. I'm not going to mix them up, and he mixed them up, and they were not happy. I don't even know if it was that. First his first argument, it just was maybe the first time he faced the two of them on the court. You're right. You're right. And he said, I mean, I've done this. I've said North Carolina when my script says South Carolina, I don't know what happens. In a less than ladylike expression, it's a brain fart. Yeah. Happens to me like on a daily basis. Nina totenberg. I mean, on a daily basis, three hours of radio you're going to do it, your buddy Steve never makes a mistake inscape. And I really hate that. But I make mistakes every day. Let me go on now to what the essence of dinners with Ruth is. And I remind you of the Frank luntz role, we've got to say the title of dinners with rouge 7 times for people to remember dinners with Ruth and order dinners with Ruth. And I want to tell my Friends on the center right in the right, this book will charm you and inform you and you'll be better for having read it. I said that most recently about Evan Thomas's one, Evan is a friend, one is about justice O'Connor and as dinners with Ruth does for justice Ginsburg one did for justice O'Connor and together they do what is only very infrequently done they give you a glimpse of the real world of the Supreme Court. And you know what? So much better than I do. I know some of the justices, but not as friends. I mean, colleague, John Roberts, an old colleague, chief just a justice Thomas and Stephen Breyer sat for interviews. And justice Gorsuch had been spent time with, but I don't know them like you know them. And you are a great storyteller. And you humanize them, but especially judge justice Ginsburg. Did you intend that when you began?
"justice john roberts" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Now a legal story where watching this morning the Supreme Court will take up three O three creative versus a lettuce and its upcoming term. A case that pits a Colorado state anti discrimination law meant to protect same sex couples against free speech rights. The case which is similar to a 2018 dispute involving a bakery is about a web designer who says she can create wedding websites for same sex couples because of her religious beliefs. For more Bloomberg Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler spoke with former federal judge Michael McConnell. As I mentioned this case is very similar to masterpiece cake shop which the justices decided in 2018, but it differs in one really important way. And that's that this dispute is framed as one about free speech instead of religious liberty. What, if any difference is that going to make this time around? Well, I think it greatly simplifies and narrows the case because of free exercise claim might be brought by anyone whose beliefs prevent them working with a sandwich wedding. As a speech case, this is combined just to people whose activities are expressed in nature. People are actually speaking. So it's a much narrower case. This didn't start out as just a free speech case, though, in the beginning, the web designer asked the justices to consider whether the state's anti discrimination law violated her religious freedom. But the justice is actually changed the question they were asked to decide and honed in exclusively on this speech right. So I'm curious how often do you see the court do something like that where they rewrite the question and what does that signal? So it doesn't happen very often. I mean, this is not a unicorn. It happens from time to time, but this is somewhat unusual, and it indicates that the court really wants to focus in on the speech claim, which, as I say, is narrower and not the broader free exercise claim. So we've seen the Roberts court under chief justice John Roberts issue ruling after ruling that a pretty protective of religious rights, particularly the right to freely exercise your religion. And that was so just this last term in cases involving educational funding and school prayer. I'm wondering, does the courts reframing of this case as one involving only speech signal that the court is kind of shifting away from robustly protecting religious rights? Have we reached the high water mark there? I don't think so. I don't think it indicates anything of the sort. It indicates that the facts of this case seem to map more clearly onto free speech doctrine than anything else. And as former federal judge, Michael McConnell, speaking
Jackson sworn in, becomes 1st Black woman on Supreme Court
"Katangi Brown Jackson has shattered a glass ceiling at the Supreme Court Are you prepared to take the oath I am There were two oaths one administered by chief justice John Roberts Brown Jackson do solemnly swear The other by Stephen Breyer minutes after his retirement That I will administer justice That I will administer justice Jackson is now the first black woman to sit on the high court which for the first time now has four female justices She will not change the court's 6 three conservative tilt one that ended this term with several contentious rulings on abortion and guns last week and today on climate change limiting the EPA's ability to curb power plant emissions Sagar Meghani Washington
Politico: What a Roberts Compromise on Abortion Could Look Like
"Be prepared because as I have told you, I don't trust Roberts and here's the headline that I dreaded from Politico what a Roberts compromise on abortion could look like. When the two sides in the abortion debate squared off at the Supreme Court last fall, they agreed on one thing. There was no middle ground. Now any hope abortion rights supporters have of avoiding a historic loss before the court lies with chief justice John Roberts crafting an unlikely compromise rights Politico. Can Robert thread that needle, how would he do it? A deep dive into Robert's public speeches and commentary at court arguments may offer somewhat of a road map to what a Roberts compromise might be on row if he's able to find one at the 11th hour.
The White House Ignores Harrassment of Supreme Court Justices
"Passion, a lot of fear, a lot of sadness, for many, many people across this country, about what they saw in that leaked document suck, he said. I don't have an official U.S. government position on where people protest. There's no official government position on where people protest. The government is mom is quiet on the issue of going to justice's homes and screaming, nobody screams like left the screen. This was a question asked by Fox News channels Peter doocy. Doocy was signing a Fox News report that said pro choice activists under the moniker Ruth sent us. After the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg a proponent of roe, published what are likely the home addresses of justices Amy Coney Barrett, Samuel Alito Brett Kavanaugh, clarence Thomas Neil Gorsuch, and chief justice John Roberts. During the briefing she also suggested conservatives were making too big of a fuss about the leak. I think what is happening here and what we think is happening here is there is an effort to distract from what the actual issue here, which is the fundamental rights, so an abortion. You know?
"justice john roberts" Discussed on WGN Radio
"Chicago Governor J B pritzker made them a promise Abortion will continue to be safe and legal here in Illinois as long as I'm governor He joined members of the SEIU healthcare union Abortion is healthcare Blasting the Supreme Court's draft opinion that would overturn roe versus wade This will disproportionately affect low income black and brown women Women who have some financial resources like a middle class job have better access to healthcare including reproductive health If roe versus wade is overturned it would then be up to individual states to decide their own abortion laws The U.S. Supreme Court is investigating the source of that very leak WGN's Dana Rebecca is more Politico obtained the opinion which would strike down the 1973 Supreme Court decision guaranteeing abortion rights and the 1992 subsequent ruling that largely maintained those rights Chief justice John Roberts confirmed the authenticity of the draft opinion but he says it's not final calling the leak and egregious breach of trust and opening an investigation into the source Abortion is legal here in Illinois while Texas for example has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country The controversial commander of the Chicago police department narcotics division has been demoted and reassigned WGN Jordan burnfield has that story Jason Brown has been demoted to lieutenant and reassigned to the deering district which covers Bridgeport McKinley park Chinatown and back of the yards He's currently facing three separate lawsuits brought against him by subordinate officers Two alleged he retaliated against two CPD sergeants when they voiced concerns over his misallocation of CPD resources during the unrest and looting in the summer of 2020 The other says Brown pressured an officer to lie about a public records inquiry Jordan burnfield WGN news South Africa is dealing with another surge in COVID cases and health officials say the spike is linked to the BA four and BA 5 two sub variants that are part of the omicron family Health officials have identified BA four and BA 5 circulating in the U.S. at low levels But doctor Jeffrey copper with northwestern medicine tells WG and John Williams people should not be worried Nobody panic hopefully this will just fizzle out We'll see we'll follow this nice and closely But I know it's gotten a lot of publicity jam but nothing for people to get panicked about Currently omicron sub variant BA two is the dominant strain in the U.S. And the bit for a Chicago casino bally's could be the likely winner WGN's bob Kessler It's proposed casino would be located at the Chicago Tribune printing plant site at Chicago avenue and halsted aside owned by WGN parent company next star media The sun times reports valleys will win out in part because it offered $25 million up front putting it ahead of the hard rock proposal near soldier field in the river 78 plan for the south loop There's also a signed agreement with organized labor something demanded by union leaders and Alder persons at a city council casino committee meeting last week The sun times also reports an official decision from mayor lightfoot could come Thursday Bob Kessler WGN news And dozens gathered on the south side yesterday to honor WG and TV legend Mary D who passed away last month These friends family and former colleagues gathered at Christ universal temple to share And here's stories about a life full of lived Dee broke down race barriers becoming one of the first new black anchors in a major market She also served as a mentor to many inspiring young women who hope to follow in her footsteps and touching so many lives Pastor Dan Willis This lady had a heart that was bigger than this room She had a commitment to do that if she said she was going to do something You could take it to the bank Mary you fought your fight You finished your course You kept the faith Good night soldier Good night soldier Mary D who was known for her distinctive voice was 85 years old WGN sports the Chicago sky held their pre season media day yesterday as they prepared to defend their WNBA championship They'll begin the season Friday at wintrust arena against Candace Parker's former team the LA sparks they'll receive their 2021 championship brings on May 24th With more WGN sports there's Dan roan Game one of the crosstown series went to the White Sox Tuesday night three one over the cubs at Wrigley Michael kopech pitched four shutout innings to Anderson homered and Liam Hendricks got the save The final game of the two game set is tonight Match up of opening day starters as Lucas G Alito faces Kyle Hendricks Dan roan.
Chaos Amid a Massive Security Breach at the Supreme Court
"Chief justice John Roberts has confirmed the authenticity of a Supreme Court draft opinion that would overrule roe versus wade. Though he admits it may not have been the final resolution. I just want to state that while I'm all about transparency and I'm all about getting information to the public. This particular case is highly unusual. It's an extraordinary breach of privacy. And threatening, frankly, to the institution that is the Supreme Court and to our country. Now the chief justice has ordered an investigation into the leak of the draft just to get you up to speed, you should know that on Monday evening a 67 page opinion by just a Samuel Alito was published in its entirety by Politico, it had been circulated within the court according to the date stamped on it of February 10th, and it was to be ruled on at the end of June. This has never happened before. I mean, this is never happened. There's a sanctity, right? If you would to the court that someone there in the halls of justice clearly does not respect, now regardless of what side of the political aisle you are on. Think about what just went down. Regardless of how you feel about the issue of abortion, you got to think about how this happened and how it was done so deliberately in an attempt to undermine the justices to intimidate them potentially and clearly to create a major political issue. That is what we are going to have right now. You know, law clerks, they will be examined heavily in this because they typically see these opinions as drafts before they're signed by the justices. So they have to pledge all kinds of confidentiality. They have to avoid journalists, but someone, and we don't know, we're just speculating on the possibility of a law clerk, one would hope it's not higher up in the food chain. Someone chose not to respect that confidentiality. Someone chose to give this to a journalist. There's going to be a whole lot more to come on this investigation,
"justice john roberts" Discussed on WTOP
"Following the aftermath of the leaked draft of a Supreme Court opinion that would overturn the 1973 roe versus wade decision that guarantees abortion rights Chief justice John Roberts confirms the draft published by Politico is authentic though he emphasizes it's not a final decision Roberts has ordered an investigation into the league He calls it an egregious breach of trust CBS News legal analyst thane Rosenbaum joined us a little earlier to talk about it and we started with the breach in protocol and why someone would risk their career by leaking this document One thought is how to get a Hollywood agent to do a movie the week about you Because if you are if you were a left wing law clerk and you were prepared to give up your entire career because you would be disbarred on the theory that you'll end up being a Joan of Arc or a whistleblower or Thomas more become sort of the face of a movement to preserve rights of reproductive freedom That's one way of looking at it It's a big risk that someone would give up a career as a Supreme Court law clerk you're at the highest of your level and then you give it up on what again Thomas more principles The other thought is that it comes from the right wing right What's the thinking there Well maybe some of the justices in the majority were soft and they might move back to the other side And someone strategically thought if we make it public they're going to have a very hard time doing that because it's only a 5 four decision anyone who leaves it changes the outcome radically It seems to me whether it comes from the left or the right It is those 5 conservative justices and whether as you put it they're soft or maybe a little movable Do you think one of them might be I think so I mean remember I think there's also another way of looking at it that they're trying to push Roberts to join them right So that by leaking this it makes him feel like well you know what I might as well join the majority in this case because the legitimacy of the court has now been undermined The confidence in the court We can't even keep our secrets right We're subject to the betrayal of our clerks So he might because he's so sensitive about the political ramifications of decisions of the court The chief might join the majority But yes there was always the thought that who would be movable would be Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett And one of them might be movable to the other side but right now they're part of this majority in this draft opinion And there are those who obviously are opposed to what this would do who claimed that it isn't just about abortion that there could be other rights that Americans have right now that could be in jeopardy down the road Do you buy that argument Well here's what they're saying They're saying that the conservatives always say hey there's no right to an abortion in the constitution There's no enumerated right At the same time there's no numerator right for contraception or the right to marry or same sex marriage or same or homosexual relationships All of those rights were read into the constitution pursuant to a sort of what the right wing would say a mythical right to privacy So now you have a House of Cards right This mythical right to privacy if you're conservative says well all those unenumerated rights were justified by a right to privacy that was written into the constitution that does not exist If you pull one out the rest of them could fall as well So there is a legitimate concern there CBS News legal analyst thane Rosenbaum Stay with us here on WTO It's playoff time starting tonight with the caps in Florida will preview game one 5 14 For 60 years LMI is focused on delivering the solutions federal agencies need to achieve mission success LMI has been a proud consulting partner for many agencies within the Department of Homeland Security including customs and border protection The federal emergency management agency and immigration and customs enforcement Elam is vice president for Homeland Security Scott racinos.
Supreme Court Confirms Leaked Abortion Draft Is Authentic
"Breaking now on the Mike Gallagher show, while the Supreme Court has issued a response to the report of this draft opinion, chief justice John Roberts strongly condemning the leak to the press in a brief message, the court acknowledged that the leaked document is real. So so much for my buddy Mark Davis theory that it was fake. By but noting that it is just a draft, the court has not issued a final decision on the matter. The court said, just quote, justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the court's confidential deliberative work, although the document described in yesterday's reports is authentic. It does not represent a decision by the court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case. Roberts also issued a statement, he announced that he has called upon the marshal of the court to investigate the situation and find the source who leaked the document to Politico. Justice Roberts also spoke out against the notion that the leak could succeed as a political maneuver to influence the court. Roberts said to the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed the work of the court will not be affected in any
"justice john roberts" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
"What's justice Roberts's game? I asked us because there's a new decision just out from the Supreme Court. Our side wins 5 to four, but why 5 to four? Shouldn't it be 63? It turns out that I've laid were winning a lot of these decisions 5 to four. And what that means is that justice Roberts is for whatever reason and we'll look at the reason in a moment, tilting on the liberal side almost as if to sort of balance out the scales. And this latest decision is not a very important decision on its merits, but it's just important for what it shows about the court. The court is actually making an emergency ruling here. In other words, it's operating out of what's called its emergency docket. And the issue here is whether states and we're talking mainly about democratic states. Can restrict projects, these are actually water projects under the clean water act because they claim that these projects are environmentally risky and unhelpful. So in other words, what we're dealing with here is the authority of democratic states to have their own in a de facto veto of federal projects by saying, yeah, we're not going to take that one because that one is going to create too many strip malls in California or this one is going to this hydroelectric project or this oil and gas pipeline is going to be bad for our state. So normally when there are federal laws, the states don't get to override them. And in this case, the states want to have that power. And so Republicans in those democratic states filed lawsuits. And those lawsuits were crawling their way up the courts and so they appealed to the Supreme Court to issue an emergency ruling that basically blocks these democratic states from having this kind of override. In other words, for reinstating a Trump administration rule that basically said the states do have to conform in this respect to federal law under the clean water act. So a Trump rule is now back in effect. But the issue I really want to think about here is the behavior of Roberts. Roberts kind of jumps in here. And he doesn't really rule. He doesn't really comment on the merits. What he says is that the Supreme Court here should not have used its emergency power. The Supreme Court should not have put this case on the emergency docket. Why? Because the case is not an emergency. So what Robert seems to be saying is this could have been something that could have been considered in the normal process rather than the Supreme Court taking this precipitous step. Now, there's a lot of speculation by court watchers on why Roberts is doing what he does. And I think some people think that Roberts has somehow he's kind of under the control, maybe they've got something on him. And I don't think this is it. I think the two factors here are number one, Robert is very eager to preserve his own respectability. And in Washington D.C., that means a certain kind of liberal respectability, a certain kind of prestige within the liberal quarters of Washington D.C.. That's very important to Roberts. I think the second factor is that Roberts seems to think that the way to protect the integrity and independence of the court is to is to balance out the scales. Now, there's not really good reason for him to do that. He's a Republican nominee. He has a judicial philosophy that I think bends to the right, but it seems like what he's doing is imposing a kind of restraint to Prudential restraint on himself. In order to make these decisions come out close, so the left doesn't think, oh man, we got to pack the court because we really lost the court. We're losing 6 to three. And putting cantoni Brown Jackson isn't really going to make a difference. She's replacing Breyer. And so there's no change in the real balance of power. So it looks like what justice Roberts is trying to do is give the liberals a certain kind of hope. Maybe somewhat illusory, but nevertheless, a sense of hope that look these decisions are pretty close. It's 5 to four. Yeah, you lost this one and you lost the last one in the one before that, but there could be decisions that go your way because this is just really a one vote issue. If you're really persuasive maybe with the next case, you might win that one. So I look at Roberts in a little more benign light thinking that what he's doing is a certain kind of jurisprudential balancing combined with a certain all to human desire for prestige and respectability. It doesn't make him a highly admirable character, but I think this is actually what he's trying to do to tilt the scales in these close decisions. 60% of U.S. pork production comes from one company owned by the Chinese and their hogs are given something called ractopamine, which is banned in a 160 countries, including China, yet you find it in your grocery aisle every day. Well, there's a better way. I'd like to tell you about moin that's mood plus oink moin. I'm going to.
What Is Chief Justice John Roberts's Endgame Here?
"What's justice Roberts's game? I asked us because there's a new decision just out from the Supreme Court. Our side wins 5 to four, but why 5 to four? Shouldn't it be 63? It turns out that I've laid were winning a lot of these decisions 5 to four. And what that means is that justice Roberts is for whatever reason and we'll look at the reason in a moment, tilting on the liberal side almost as if to sort of balance out the scales. And this latest decision is not a very important decision on its merits, but it's just important for what it shows about the court. The court is actually making an emergency ruling here. In other words, it's operating out of what's called its emergency docket. And the issue here is whether states and we're talking mainly about democratic states. Can restrict projects, these are actually water projects under the clean water act because they claim that these projects are environmentally risky and unhelpful. So in other words, what we're dealing with here is the authority of democratic states to have their own in a de facto veto of federal projects by saying, yeah, we're not going to take that one because that one is going to create too many strip malls in California or this one is going to this hydroelectric project or this oil and gas pipeline is going to be bad for our state. So normally when there are federal laws, the states don't get to override them. And in this case, the states want to have that power. And so Republicans in those democratic states filed lawsuits. And those lawsuits were crawling their way up the courts and so they appealed to the Supreme Court to issue an emergency ruling that basically blocks these democratic states from having this kind of override. In other words, for reinstating a Trump administration rule that basically said the states do have to conform in this respect to federal law under the clean water act.
Chief Justice John Roberts Is 'Hollywood John'
"The fact is that John Roberts the chief of the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court is a phony and a fraud He posed as an originalist But he has become suit orized So He believes that he is leading something bigger than a court and he is interested in his legacy And he's become mush absolute mush His opinions are incoherent There's no coherent pattern to anything he's written and this is what happens when you're on board from the constitution itself I call him Hollywood John because that's what he wants He wants publicity As a moderating force you see on the courtesy really profound chief justice He's not a profound chief justice He's a profoundly idiotic chief justice
"justice john roberts" Discussed on Today, Explained
"Like they really hit the gas on this. So I just don't understand how they could have done it quicker. And even if they could have done it quicker, like, if 9 months is too long of a window, why is it Ted bonds? Why is it 15 months? I mean, I just don't understand what we're doing here. And did any of the other justices? You know, break out their counters and go wait a second, Brett, we've got 9 months here. Well, the liberal justices and Roberts disagreed. It was a 5 to four decision. Roberts. Yeah, Robert, and Roberts is not a fan of the Voting Rights Act. No. Chief justice John Roberts asked if the government believed the citizens in the south are more racist than the citizens in the north. You know, he wrote that Shelby county decision. In the nearly a year since the Supreme Court struck down a key portion of the Voting Rights Act, 5 states have tightened access to voting. And even he said this went too far. But to answer your question, only one other justice joined Kavanaugh's opinion that was justice Alito. But Kavanaugh is the median justice on the Supreme Court. Like in these sorts of politically charged cases, they're typically for justice to his right, they're typically forge justices to his left. So if Kavanaugh says something, like, it's just really hard to find 5 votes to say, no, no dude, I'm sorry. You don't get what you want. And this is apparently what he wants is this extraordinarily wide per cell window. And I should say that Kavanaugh did have one caveat in his opinion. He did say, well, even if it's close to the election, if the answer is really clear cut. Like if it's just obvious that the plane if should win, then maybe this like you can't do anything close to an election rule doesn't apply. The problem is even Roberts wrote it. Like Roberts's descent said, dude, this one's clear cut. Under existing law, there's really no question here that the plaintiff should win. And no Alabama's argument that you can't take account of race when you're drawing the maps where you have to engage in a race conscious inquiry in order to draw the maps. I hope I'm not being a charitable here, but this opinion this decision makes no sense. Does this mean that the Supreme Court basically doesn't have a bar when it comes to voting rights or if it doesn't, where is the bar now? I'm struggling to understand it. Well, this is what scares me. So the Supreme Court in the last ten years has handed down before this Alabama case. They handed down three major decisions, Shelby county, Abbott V Perez and and C each one took a massive chunk out of the Voting Rights Act. I mean, after the last of those three decisions, I mentioned a lot of voting rights scholars whose work I really respect said, yeah, I don't think there's much of a Voting Rights Act left. If there is any Voting Rights Act left. The Supreme Court allowed partisan gerrymandering to happen without any check by the federal government, chief justice John Roberts, writing the opinion, saying there is no way to properly test and decide whether district lines have been drawn for partisan reasons. They've said that states can pass walls to attack imaginary problems. You could pass a law, claim it exists to fight voter fraud, even if you can't even prove that there's any voter fraud in your state. By a 6 to three vote, the conservative majority on the court upheld two election laws in Arizona. One criminalizes the collection of ballots by third parties. The other requires election officials to throw out ballots cast at the wrong precinct. The Supreme Court has been extraordinarily hostile to voting rights and part of the reason I keep bringing up how weak Alabama's legal arguments were in this case, is because this would have been a good opportunity for this court, which is catching a lot of flak because people think they're being too partisan to say, okay, Republican Party. You're asking for too much here. This lawsuit is too silly. And if they're not willing to say that in this case, I've just really.
Chief Justice Roberts Receives Highest Approval Rating Among Federal Leaders: Poll
"Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts holds the highest approval rating of all senior leaders in the U.S. this according to a new Gallup poll that was released yesterday. More than half of Americans hold a favorable view of Roberts, Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell, and director, get this now. You ready? Director of the national Institutes of allergy and infectious disease, doctor Anthony Fauci. That was a surprise he Fauci is even more popular. Than Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
Let Us Not Forget Joy Reid’s Homophobic Blog Posts and Subsequent Hacking Lies
"No joy Reid had a blog. 2007, 2008, 2009, before she became a hostel innocent behead. And in her blog, she made a number of posts smearing, mocking, attacking, gaze. She implied that Tom Cruise was gay. Karl rove. She said was gay. The then senator of Florida. Chris Christie. Charlie Christie. Charlie Chris weaver. She's called him miss Charlie, miss charley, stop pretending brother, it's okay, you don't go for the ladies. And another one she wrote, now he's married to a girl, Charlie Chris is being sought for all kinds of good stuff. Quote, I can just see poor Charlie on the honeymoon, ogling the male waiters and taking to himself, God, do I actually have to see her naked? It included a joke with Chris having sex with senator John McCain? She implied that chief justice John Roberts son is gay. She also said this, quote, most straight people cringe at the sight of two men kissing. She also said quote, adult gay men tend to be attracted to very young post pubescent types. And in one post, she said, quote, does that make me homophobic? Probably close quote. Now these posts emerged after she got a job as a host on MSNBC. And guess what, she denied making them. She said she'd been hacked. She was a victim of a homophobic hate crime. NBC hired a forensic specialist to determine whether or not she'd been hacked. She wasn't. She lied. And later on, she acknowledged she'd posted them.
Justices Blast Texas Abortion Ruling
"All four dissenting judges justices filed opinions. Some scathing against the majority's refusal to block that texas law that virtually bands abortion chief justice. John roberts who joined the court's three liberals wrote quote the statutory scheme before the court is not only unusual but unprecedented end quote justice. Sonia so to my order was much more direct quote saying quote a majority of justices have opted to bury their heads in the sand. She goes on to say it cannot be the case that a state can evade federal judicial scrutiny. By outsourcing the enforcement of unconstitutional laws to its citizenry with us again. I kneel cocktail department of justice veteran and former acting solicitor general during the obama administration. He argued dozens of cases before the united states supreme court. Neil good to see you. Thank you for being with us. We need your clarity on this. What did chief justice john roberts in describing this as unusual and unprecedented the bottom line is the supreme court basically gave a thumbs up to the overruling of roe versus wade so abortion clinics as of yesterday in texas are essentially closed to all patients. And what the court west texas yesterday can be enacted tomorrow in other states in deed will other states Code already Said they're gonna try to enact such legislation and so with the chief justice was referring to was. This is a really weird. Texas scheme outlawed abortion after six weeks effectively. But it said the state isn't gonna enforced instead. It created vigilante justice. Any private citizen could sue anyone. Who's helping anyone get an abortion so if you'd like take an uber to the ocean clinic this law said you can the uber driver and sue them anywhere in texas including far away from their homes and seek ten thousand dollars in damages against them plus attorneys
High court halts Calif. virus rules limiting home worship
"The Supreme Court is telling California it can't enforce corona virus related restrictions that have limited home based religious worship the case involved two residents of Santa Clara county who wanted to host small in person Bible study sessions in their homes the California rules limit indoor social gatherings across most of the state to no more than three households and require attendees to wear masks and physically distance the supreme court's five conservative justices agreed restrictions limiting home based worship should be lifted the courts three liberals and Chief Justice John Roberts would not have done so however California has already announced significant changes loosening restrictions on social gatherings does go into effect April fifteenth Ben Thomas Washington
Google Ultimately Prevails Over Oracle in Java API Case
"The. Us supreme court has ruled in google's favor in that big. Copyright dispute with oracle over the use of java api is basically with a six two two vote the justices overturn what had been a big oracle lawsuit victory coating cnbc. The case concerned about twelve thousand lines of code that google us to build android that were copied from the java. Application programming interface developed by sun microsystems which oracle acquired in two thousand. Ten oracle sued google over the use of its code and one. Its case twice before the specialized. Us court of appeals for the federal circuit the supreme court reversed. the federal. circuit's decision justice steven brier. Who wrote the majority opinion. In the case reason that google's use of the code was protected under the copyright doctrine of fair use quote. We reached the conclusion that in this case where a user interface taking only what was needed to allow users to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program google's copying of the sun java. api was a fair use of that material. As a matter of law brier wrote brier was joined by chief. Justice john roberts and justices sonia yar elena kagan neal gorsuch and brett cavenaugh justices clarence thomas and alito descended and quote so this is huge huge news in terms of software and coding law basically. Api's to some degree are now fair. Use and therefore not copyright -able
Supreme Court hears arguments in voting rights case out of Arizona
"So i just wanna know the supreme court case this week because it's one of the biggest election cases in the decade it's about section two of the voting rights act which is the main provisions. And how what the test should be for having to prove a violation of this part of the voting rights act and this is a big question because we lost the other part of voting rights. Act that had the justice department and the role of pre approving things like closing polling places. And so now what's left. After a fact ability to sue if the vote has been abridged or deny two african american spanich or language community voters like native americans in the supreme court arguments. This week in some ways. It seemed like the party's weren't that far away from each other for what the test should be some kind of substantial effect on a minority group. Except i should say the republican party of arizona which wanted the standard to be that basically any race neutral voting regulation would pass muster no matter what discredit on those groups. But what. I think really is very likely to come from this. Conservative majority a ruling. That makes it much harder to sue that you're going to have to show a substantial effect. That has nothing to do with socio economics. For example that they're just gonna really raise the bar here. And i should note that chief justice john roberts has been a longtime interest of his since he was court clerk. He's the author of shelby county which gutted the other part of voting rights act in two thousand thirteen. And so this is one where it looks like the liberals on the court are probably going to lose and it's going to be quite a big deal so one to watch
California resumes in-person church services after Supreme Court ruling
"Partial victory for california churches fighting the state's covid nineteen restrictions. Fox's sean land joe's in washington with more a new supreme court ruling. A splintered supreme court has granted partial relief to california churches that were fighting the state to resume indoor worship services. Some churches are allowed to reopen indoor services. Thanks to the ruling. Chief justice john roberts voted with majority writing the capacity limits quote appears to reflect on an expertise or discretion but instead insufficient appreciation or consideration of the interests at stake. The order does not lift a twenty five percent capacity restrictions nor allow for singing and chanting measures churches. Were also seeking the high court's three liberal justices dissented
"justice john roberts" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"The Senate set to begin on February 8th. So Chief Justice John Roberts is mandated to preside over that trial in the Senate, but a judge Roberts says, no, I'm not going to do it. I don't want any part of it. So I'm not showing up. Now the Constitution is kind of murky here. Because Donald Trump is no longer president. And chief Justice, Roberts says. Well, he's not president so I don't have to show up. And he's not gonna show up. So that means that Senator Leahy, 80 years old, a progressive from Vermont will preside. Well, Senator Rand. Paul isn't like that is unlike any of this impeachment stuff, so he forced the full vote on whether the impeachment trial is constitutional. And It is, according to the Senate, 55 45, But that shouldn't be a surprise because 50 Democrats plus five Republican senators said the trial's constitutional 45 senators on the Republican side said it isn't Now the five Republicans Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Ben Sasse and Pat Toomey all despise Donald Trump, With the exception of Miss Collins. In Maine, but she's always been a very liberal Republican. Now you need 67 senators to convict Donald Trump. Of whatever they're going to charge him with inciting terrorism and citing insurrection, whatever. Maybe you need 67 Senators. Right now. They have 55. And they're not going to get 12 others because the Republicans would not have voted that the entire impeachment trial was unconstitutional if they were going to vote to convict Donald Trump. So this is not gonna happen. And Chuck Schumer's furious He is absolutely livid. Because he wants to put a stake through Donald Trump's heart. Now I'm saying that in a proverbial vampire Analogy. For all you media matter is kooks out there. I'm not advocating violence, but they want to kill President Trump's political future. But it's not gonna happen. Americans. They know this is just political stuff. You may think that Donald Trump did something heinous. Regarding the capital insurrection, and you have a right to your opinion. Have produced exculpatory evidence. I would not vote to convict Donald Trump if I were senator, and I'm not doing that on political grounds. I mean, I don't think that he did want Any violence. He's not that kind of God, as I write in the United States of Trump anyway. What will likely happen is the Senate will vote to censure Donald Trump. It doesn't mean anything. Donald Trump doesn't care about that. And it all go away, just like the first impeachment went away. Remember that? It was only a year ago. And you think that people Hate politics. Yeah, they do. I'm Bill O'Reilly and I approve the message by writing it disagree. I'd like to hear from you, Bill it, Bill O'Reilly calm in a moment, something you might Not know.
"justice john roberts" Discussed on WCBM 680 AM
"The country will have to be patient. We're taking action to increase supply and increased capacity. But even so, it will be months before everyone who wants a vaccine will be able to get one with case is still at high levels. The CDC predicts that US covert debts could reach 514,000 by the middle of next month. Red Clugston Washington. Senator Patrick Leahy will preside over the upcoming impeachment trial of former President Trump Despite a health scare on Tuesday, Senator Leahy is back on Capitol Hill after checking into a local hospital Tuesday out of what his staff called an abundance of caution. The senator had reported feeling muscle spasms earlier in the day at age 80. Leahy is the longest serving Democrat in the Senate conferring upon him. The honor of serving is Senate Pro TEM. He'll preside over the upcoming impeachment trial in lieu of Chief Justice John Roberts. Absent as the Constitution on Lee calls for the chief justice to preside over such a trial for a sitting U. S president But Magna reporting that reserve is pledging to keep its low interest rate policies in place even well after the economy of sustained a recovery for the coronavirus. Chairman Jerome Powell says the spread of the virus has affected household spending in different ways. Household spending on services remains low, especially in sectors that typically require people to gather closely, including traveling hospitality. Household spending on goods has moderated following earlier large gains. More of these stories, a town hall dot com Tell me why really factor is so successful in lowering or eliminating pain? I'm often asked that question. Beatings have child but the father and son, founders of relief actor tell me they believe our bodies were designed.
Roberts will not preside over impeachment trial
"Court Chief Justice John Roberts will not preside over the trial. Instead, that job will fall to Senate President pro tempore A Patrick Leahy. Lead impeachment manager Congress and Jamie Raskin, who read the article in the Senate chamber, says former president Trump betrayed the trust of the American people. He threatened the integrity of the Democratic system interfered with the peaceful transition of power and imperil coequal branch of government. Arguments are set to begin the week of February. 8th. Senator Leahy says he will take a special oath to do impartial justice
"justice john roberts" Discussed on KOMO
"From earlier today, Here's co MOST Taylor Vance Ice House impeachment managers deliver the article of impeachment against former President Donald Trump. The Senate covering this for ABC News is and as delicate terror who joins us on the coma news line in As what happens once the article of Impeachment for Incitement of insurrection is physically delivered to the Senate. What action does that trigger? So that triggers the beginning of the Senate trial? The trial then has to start you know, by 1 P.m. the following day, so We know the actual trial arguments won't begin until February 9th, but it'll kick start the process. So we're going to see the house impeachment managers bringing the physically bringing that article of impeachment from the house, walking through the rotunda into the Senate chamber, then they're gonna Read that article of impeachment to the Senators present, But like I said, they won't actually start. They're gonna be sending me the summons over to the president and his team tomorrow, but they won't actually start the trial arguments until February night. We've seen this process before with President Trump and then before that, with President Clinton, but we've never seen it happened when the president is no longer in office. There's some wondering if that makes a difference. Or if it's indeed constitutional. At this point. That's one of the big points of debate today in D. C. We're seeing a number of Republicans and I should point out the the Republican to initially had come out to condemn the violence at the Capitol, and some had condemned the president and blame the president for the violence. A number of them are coming out now, too. Question whether it would be constitutional to even hold this trial, given that the president is no longer in office, and then whether it would be constitutional to convict me. Part of the effort. Here, of course, is to ensure that President Trump doesn't run again. That's the argument. The Democrats are making that he needs to be convicted and then they be to decide not to let him run again. But we are hearing a growing number of Republicans kind of question. Whether this is constitutional has been interesting to see how how Republicans there are, you know they're they're stances is changing as time goes by. Last time around. It was Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who presided over the impeachment trial. It wasn't it was not a very active role for him. Is he gonna be back? He wasn't will not be back. We actually found out today It'll be Senator Leahy, Democratic Senator Leahy, who will be presiding over the trial, because this is a trial for a president who is no longer in office. So He is going to be treated as if it were, for instance, a judge being impeached. That process would be overseen by by by Senator Leahy. So the same kind of rules they're gonna apply to President Trump because he is no longer in office. And at this point, I know it hasn't even begun yet. But it's there an idea of how long the Senate trial might take. Compared to last time. There's a census is that that is one of the big questions. I think everybody's curious to know, but I think there's a sense that it won't take as long because First of all, we are just looking at the one article of impeachment versus the two last time around, and I think because it's a much more clear cut issue as well. You know, last time around, they had to deal with Ukraine and brought in a ton of witnesses. We saw even the house process dragging on for weeks and weeks. There were our long hearings and we saw how quickly they the house moved this time around it. It was a much more. I think it is. It's just easier to understand what the president was being charged with this time around. So I think there's an expectation that it won't be as long Last time around. It did take 21 days, I think did the expectation is that will be shorter Temper up baby season is delicate area with us on coma news and as thanks very much. That's Taylor van sites with the interview your money at 20 and 50 past the hour on coma News. With your propel insurance money Update. Here's Jim Chess. Coco's a mixed session for US stocks to begin the new week, with blue chips losing ground for a third straight session. But both the S and P 500 NASDAQ composite edging higher to notch fresh closing highs. The Dow Jones industrial average slipped 37 points while the S and P moved up 13 and the tech heavy NASDAQ gained and 92. We're getting closer to the day when you won't have to worry about where your car keys are. Tech companies, including Apple, and, as I owe me are planning to upgrade their phones with ultra wideband which would unlock your car door. Samsung announced that U W B support on the galaxy s 21 earlier this month. That's your money now. Jim Chess Cho reporting An MBA team is going to try a new tool to detect the coronavirus covert 19 detection dogs similar to the canines on patrol at airports around the world. Later this week, the Miami Heat will station specially trained dogs at entrances to the American Airlines arena to try to sniff out the virus that causes covert 19. Here's the plan. Dogs will sniff fans before entering by walking past them. If the dog sits that signals they may have detected covert 19 and not fan will be asked to leave along with their group and give it a full refund. That's really really interesting. Dogs are amazing creatures and their noses are way more powerful than ours. Medical specialist point out that research done in this area is exciting, but preliminary No study has been scrutinized by peer review or tried in a public place like the arena where the heat play, and the FDA has not signed off on this method of screening dogs have been used to sniff out possible bombs. Some have even detected early stages of ovarian cancer. They have a 300 million smell receptors. While humans only have about six million, making dogs uniquely equipped to detect sense humans can't. What we're trying to do is find if there is an odor of volatile organic compound. Basically, that is telling us that there is a difference. What we're hoping is that the dogs can figure that out, but infectious disease experts Warned that a traditional covert tests is more reliable and our concern that these dogs could give people false comfort. Adding innovative tools like dogs sniffing, of course, is really exciting, but it shouldn't give this false sense of security. And truthfully, you should be still relying on widespread testing to fully get this pandemic under control. The heat will have rapid test available for anyone who is either allergic or afraid of dogs. Most importantly, though, all other covert protocols remain in place. There's a limited number of fans to ensure social distancing. Everyone will have to wear a mask at all times. These dogs are just an added layer. That's ABC. Is Victor. Okay, no reporting. Homo traffic.
"justice john roberts" Discussed on WTOP
"Belson is our producer Coming up. The stage is now set for the second Senate impeachment trial of former President Trump. On Capitol Hill. I'm Mitchell Miller, President Biden's Treasury secretaries confirmed Janet Yellen, the first woman to hold that cabinet position. Corona virus Variant Force detected in the UK has been found in Northern Virginia. I'm particularly Jano policing through change. Officers say they fear prosecution, not lawmakers. Reforms. I'm making flowered it's 9 31. CBS News Brief Having impeach Donald Trump a second time the U. S House has now formally presented its single charge on the floor of the Senate, Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin, lead House prosecutor John Trump engaged in high crimes and misdemeanors by inciting violence against the government of the United States and picking it up their evening news anchor correspondent Norah O'Donnell. House managers will be the ones to present the evidence at the trial, which is expected to begin the week of February. Eight, and CBS News has confirmed that Senator Patrick Leahy is expected to preside over the trial. Not Chief Justice John Roberts. Because Mr Trump is no longer president ahead of all of that tomorrow, the senators will take a special oath as jurors and the impeachment trial. And then they'll be essentially a two week pause as the House managers and the Trump defense team prepare. CBS News White House correspondent Stephen Portnoy CBS News Special Report. I'm Tom 49 32 former assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clarke, accused of plotting with former President Trump to dispute George's 2020 election results. The New York Times reporting Friday that the two were discussing a plan to oust the acting attorney general and replace him with somebody willing to change the outcome. And today, the Justice Department's inspector general says he plans to investigate whether any former or current DOJ officials engaged in an improper attempt to overturn the results. IG Michael Horowitz says his probe will be limited in scope and will not extend to other parts of the government's president. Biden kicked off the week signing Morrell executive orders to undo former President Trump's key policies. One of them directs federal agencies to strengthen requirements about buying products and services from US workers and businesses. As this pandemic has made clear, we could never again be in a position We have to rely on a foreign country that doesn't share interest in order to protect our people during a national emergency. We need to make our own protective equipment, essential products and supplies. The new directive echoes President Biden's campaign promise to dedicate $400 billion to increase government purchases of American goods. 9 34 President Biden today all serene stating covert 19 travel restrictions on non U. S. Travelers from Brazil Island, the United Kingdom and 26 other European countries that allowed travel across open borders. He also added South Africa to the list because of concerns about a variant of Cove ID that has spread beyond that nation. The action reverses in order from former President Trump in his final days in office that called for relaxing those travel restrictions also signed by President Biden said. An executive order reversing a ban on transgender members of the military. It's a complete policy reversal, allowing untold numbers of transgender people to enlist or remain in the service. I'm doing this naming all qualified American conservative country in uniforms. The president's order scraps the Pentagon's insistence that the direction of the previous commander in chief Permitting transgender people to serve poses substantial risks to the military. A 2016 study commissioned by the Obama administration suggested more than 10,000 transgender people might have then been serving in the active duty Forces National Guard and Reserve. Stephen Portnoy CBS News The U. S. Is facing many global security challenges and with a new president in office. There is a key objective for the intelligence community. You've got to tell people the truth, Senator Mark Warner, incoming chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he said There was concern about what was coming out of the intelligence community over the last four years. Unfortunately, think there were too many times that the intelligence product started to become shaded because of fear of offending Donald Trump. This isn't a new test for the intelligence community. Surface too many times in the past under other presidents, But seeing the assault on truth in recent years here in the U..
"justice john roberts" Discussed on KOMO
"Impeachment managers have delivered the article of impeachment against former President Donald Trump to the Senate and as delicate terra watching closely for ABC News and talked about it with Cuomo's Taylor van size it as what happens once the article of impeachment for Incitement of insurrection is physically delivered to the Senate. What action does that trigger? You bet triggers the beginning of the Senate trial. The trial then has to start you know, by 1 P.m. the following day, So we know the actual trial arguments won't begin until February nights, but it'll kick start the process, so we're going to see the House impeachment managers. Bringing the physically bringing that article of impeachment from the house, walking through the rotunda into the Senate chamber. Then they're gonna read that article of impeachment to the senators present, But like I said, they won't actually start. They're gonna be sending me the summons over to the president and his team tomorrow, but they won't actually start the trial arguments until February night. We've seen this process before with President Trump and then before that, with President Clinton, but we've never seen it happen when the president is no longer in office. There's some wondering if that makes a difference or if it's indeed constitutional. At this point. That's one of the big points of debate today in D. C. We're seeing a number of Republicans and I should point out he's a Republican to initially had come out to condemn the violence at the Capitol, and some had condemned the president and blamed the president for the violence. A number of them are coming out now, too. Question whether it would be constitutional to even hold this trial, given that the president is no longer in office, and then whether it would be constitutional to convict me. Part of the effort. Here, of course, is to ensure that President Trump doesn't run again. That's the argument the Democrats are making that he needs to be convicted and then maybe to decide not to let him run again. But we are hearing a growing number of Republicans kind of question that whether this is constitutional has been interesting to see how how Republicans there are You know their stances is changing as time goes By last time around. It was Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who presided over the impeachment trial. It wasn't It was not a very active role for him. Is he gonna be back will not be back. We actually found out today It'll be Senator Leahy, Democratic Senator Leahy, who will be presiding over the trial, because this is a trial for a president who is no longer in office. So He is going to be treated as if it were, for instance, a judge being impeached. That process would be overseen by by by Senator Leahy. So the same kind of rule they're gonna apply to President Trump because he is no longer in office. And at this point I know it hasn't even begun yet. But it's there an idea of how long the Senate trial might take. Compared to last time. There's a census is that that is one of the big questions. I think everybody's curious to know, but I think there's a sense that it won't take as long because First of all, we are just looking at the one article of impeachment versus the two last 10 around, and I think, because it's a much more clear cut issue as well. You know, last time around, they had to deal with Ukraine and brought in a ton of witnesses. We saw even the house process dragging on for weeks and weeks. There were our long hearings and we saw how quickly they the house moved. This time around it. It was a much more e think you It's just easier to understand what the president was being charged with this time around, So I think there's an expectation that it won't be as long last time around. It did take 21 days. I think the expectation is that it will Shorter. It's never act. Maybe season is delicate Terry with us on common news, and as thanks very much, and that's cool. Most Taylor van sized latest on the impeachment proceedings coming up on camo news from ABC in just 20 Minutes of Washington Man has filed a lawsuit demanding the restoration of public access to the state capital and surrounding grounds. The kid, Sampson reports. Tyler Miller's lawsuit seeks a court order for the state to remove temporary chain link fences around the Capitol campus in Olympia. And restore public access to viewing galleries in the legislative building. Democratic Governor Jay Inslee in Department of Enterprise Services director named as the defendant, Alright, it 5 40 let US talk sports Bill Swartz of the Beacon Plumbing sports desk over 19 concerns could delay the start of baseball spring training games. Seattle Mariners plan to play Cactus League ball games in Arizona, February 27th. But Maricopa County, including the city of Peoria, continue to see a high number of coronavirus cases. Mayors and city managers from 10 Phoenix area cities have signed a letter saying they'll be ready to host if it's safe. Super Bowl 55 matchup is all set. Patrick Mahomes in the Kansas City Chiefs won another trophy. We're talking about winning in again, and we're trying to run it back, and we mean that I'm excited the opportunity to go out there and play against a great football team and try to do that. Tom Brady in Tampa Bay stand in the way they'll be the first NFL team toe host the big game in their own home stadium. Seattle Sounders and head coach Brian Schmidt sir, have agreed to a multi year contract extension. Schmidt sir, has led the rave green 23 MLS finals winning two cups. Major league soccer camps could start February 22nd they hoped the season will kick off April 3rd. Washington Husky men's basketball is 12 straight games junior guard Jamal Bay today named Pac 12 Player of the Week. Sorry, So Holly Southern Hills of Tulsa, Oklahoma, selected as the site for the 2022 PGA Championship sports updates attended 40 after the hour, Bill Swartz Come on, Ines, come on news time 5 41 traffic and weather coming up, then a.
"justice john roberts" Discussed on Newsradio 970 WFLA
"W x TV HD to Clearwater. I'm Reid Shepherd. Our top story at three o'clock. A warning is going out to those who work at the state Capitol. The FBI says armed protests or possible this weekend in Tallahassee and all other state capitals ahead of Joe Biden's inauguration in a YouTube video. Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen has a warning for those who might be considering violence. We will have no tolerance whatsoever for any attempts to disrupt The peaceful transfer of power on January 20th that our Constitution calls for an emergency management official says Tallahassee is prepared governor to Santa's has said action will be taken very quickly if anything is disorderly. At the same time, A Haines City man has been Baker acted after police say he threatened violence in Washington 53 year old Shen and budget was picked up Tuesday by Haines City police who say he posted on Facebook about going to a target rich environment in Washington, D. C. If President Trump didn't declare martial law, adding the words Pew Pew pew to imitate gunfire. Badgett, a former police officer in Ohio, also said a lot of good people would die if Roberts didn't resign, presumably referring to US Chief Justice John Roberts badge it's family said he had mental health issues. Police say he'll get an evaluation. Gordon Byrd NEWS radio W F L A. Some big budget cuts could be on the way and soon in the Hillsborough County school system. Superintendent Addison Davis told board members. The district is facing a budget shortfall of over $100 million, he warns they may have to reduce staff by about 2000 close schools and find ways to save money on electives and sports. Board members like Henry Washington say need a long term solution. What I don't want to happen is we make all these cuts and we do the things we have to do. Then we come back the next two years. We got to do something else. Davis warned that the financial situation is so dire. The district's general fund could run dry by June. I'm Reid Shepherd News, radio W F L A This is a bloom bark money minute, some disappointing news on the vaccine front. Johnson and Johnson is now saying it's vaccine might not be cleared for use until March, US. Officials in Operation Warp Speed had suggested that the J and J vaccine would be available next month. It requires only one shot and doesn't need to be frozen. But J and J says it's still analyzing late stage data. On Wall Street stocks are higher. The Dow is up 77 points a quarter of a percent, the S and P s up half a percent and the NASDAQ's up 770.7%. Intel is among the biggest gainers. It's up 7.5% on word of a change in leadership, Intel has been struggling with production delays and the loss of be customers like Apple. Mega deal in the digital fitness market..