35 Burst results for "Nina Totenberg"
Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart
"nina totenberg" Discussed on Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart
"Have no basis for knowing that. Everybody knew he was sick. We wrote about the fact that he was sick. He was on television swearing in a new president with a tracheostomy for world could see he was sick, but nobody says, and he's dying. Right, because our profession would require this kind of ethical. The word I'm thinking of, I should not say on television. What does this start with? M, so this kind of ethical reveling in what could or should have maybe ought to have been, is the thing that academics spend an enormous amount of time on. And do not have the and they have the luxury of doing that because they're not at work actually covering a story covering the court and covering the important things that people want to know about. And sort of understanding how the court functions and what it's ruling on, and all that kind of thing. Whether Ruth Ginsburg or William H rehnquist died whether we reported that it looked like they were dying, or not, is unimportant. Everybody knew that she had cancer. For Christ's sake. Everybody knew he had a tracheostomy in. Right. This is not rocket science. What are you talking about? Is it important to know who these people are, who I covered? Yes, I think it's very important. And it's important to get to know them. And to the like and dislike them, both. We've got very little time, but I have to squeeze in two questions. One to get back to chief justice John Roberts. Is he chief entitled only especially now there's a 6 three conservative super majority on the court. Has he lost control of the court? No, his job isn't too control the court. It is his job if he can to get the court to reach a broad consensus. That's a little difficult when you don't have a center on the court anymore. And you have a 6 to three conservative majority. It would be the same for a liberal chief justice who had a 6 to three liberal majority. But I think because this is a court that's probably more conservative than any court in 90 years. And he's a conservative and agrees with them on many issues, but simply is not willing to go as far as they are. He may have, you know, I think he will see him stake out a position that is slightly more centrist a few times a term, but don't look for it to happen very often. Oh, yeah. Oh yeah. And Nina, the last question. I got to ask you this because I'm sure folks are wondering, does the court deserve deserve the public's trust and confidence when a justice's spouse presses lawmakers to overturn the results of a presidential election? As justice Thomas wife did? Well, I guess the question is not whether she has the right to do it, but whether he has the right to continue to rule in cases in which she was very active. And I guess I, you know, I think that for the first time ever, there seems to be some consensus among legal ethicists that justice Thomas perhaps should have recused himself from a couple of cases. But more than that, I think you can't really say. Oh, we still have a couple minutes left. Let me ask you put up this audience question from Robert Manning from the nation of Oman. Nina. Yes. Did RBG envision a structural reform of the Supreme Court like term limited term limits, timing of Senate confirmation votes before presidential elections or adding to the total number of justices real fast. She always said that she thought if you were going to add, if you were going to make a term limit, you would have to have a constitutional amendment. And that would be very unlikely to pass. She's also opposed the idea of adding justices, and I don't think anybody ever envisioned some sort of a law that said you couldn't add justices or nominate justices to the court in a certain time frame before an election. So I never asked her about that in public. Or private. I never encourage me. Um. Nina totenberg, legal affairs correspondent for national public radio and author of dinners with Ruth. Nina, thank you so much for coming to capehart on Washington Post live. Thank you, capehart, for having me. Thanks for listening to capehart. It's produced by Nick Roberts, will have new episodes for you every Tuesday. I'm Jonathan capehart. You can find me on Twitter at capehart J.
Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart
"nina totenberg" Discussed on Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart
"I'm Jonathan capehart, and welcome to capehart. A new session of the Supreme Court is upon us. There's a new justice, and, since the dob's decision that overturned roe V wade, questions about the legitimacy of the high court. Who better to talk to about all of this than legal affairs correspondent for national public radio, the legendary Nina totenberg. But we also talk about her new book, dinners with Ruth, as in the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In this conversation, first recorded for Washington Post live on September 29th, totenberg talks about their friendship that began decades ago, including why the liberal standard bearer didn't retire while democratic president Barack Obama was in The White House. Well, this would have given her something that not even a great Supreme Court Justice has. 2020 hindsight. She hoped very much to have the first woman president name her successor. And of course she, to some extent, that was a gamble. And she lost. We're going to dive into the book at the same time as we dive into the big issue. And that's abortion and the road decision. Because you write in dinners with Ruth that the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was wary if not critical of rose argument rather than simply a matter of personal privacy, you write that justice Ginsburg viewed abortion as a matter of freedom, which is rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. Explain her thinking on this a little further. Was she always thought that there was a better, a better argument? In addition to privacy, and that argument was, the liberty talked about in the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee to equal protection of the law. And that liberty includes having jurisdiction over one's personal body, that that should be a woman's prerogative to decide in terms of her own liberty. And that was what she always thought was a better argument. And she actually made that argument in an abortion case. She took to the Supreme Court on behalf of a woman when she was an advocate on behalf of a woman who didn't want to have an abortion when the military requires her to have one or be discharged. And that case went to the Supreme Court the same year as roe, but the government caved and changed its rule. And therefore, there was no case left. And she always thought that that was an enormous missed opportunity to, among other things, show that this is an argument that goes both ways. The choice to have a child or not have a child. So then what would she have made of the DOM's decision that overturned roe? Well, I think it's pretty clear that she would have strongly disagreed. She would have been appalled by the league. And she would have thought it was a real kick at the court itself. And it's integrity, that such a leak could occur. But, you know, even when she testified during her confirmation hearing, she was very clear about her views on row at that time too. Could we talk more about the leak so much has happened in the news? Can you believe I forgot about the leak of the Alito draft opinions? Where do we live in, huh? Gone tomorrow. Right. We need how corrosive on the culture of the court and in particular, the relationships between the justices was that leak, I think it was, it was bad. And it was, you know, I think those of us who cover the court have come to some sort of pretty much of a consensus view that the most likely was leaked by a conservative of some sort who was hoping to freeze the vote at the essentially 5 to four vote in some ways. And prevent the chief justice who had a middle ground from persuading justice Kavanaugh to join him. And if that was the case, it served its purpose. And it did budge. In fact, I thought it was really quite remarkable that a draft opinion that came out in February. I mean, that was drafted in February. Didn't change almost any word by the time it came out in June. That's to my understanding, almost unheard of. Yeah, it's extraordinary. And I want to talk to you more about chief justice Roberts in a little bit. I'm just wondering, you've been covering the court since the 1970s. I'm wondering if you ever expected to see the overturning of roe V wade. Just given how you know the court works. Well, it was possible earlier, you know, I think it was possible, and the 80s. When justice O'Connor was on the court and justice Kennedy came to be on the court. I think it was possible. And I thought it was possible at the time, but in the end, it turned out that the court writ large thought it was more important to preserve precedent and to stick with something that the court had a right that the court had said women had and not undo a right. I think nobody can recall a time when the court declared a constitutional fundamental right and then undid it. And that was sort of the view of the majority. Let's talk more about justice Ginsburg in particular in the run up to our conversation. We received a lot of audience questions about justice Ginsburg's decision not to retire. Her dying wish was, quote, that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed. But after her death, then president Donald Trump replaced her with the very conservative now justice Amy Coney Barrett. Do you think she would have chosen to retire while president Obama was in office, had she known the future impact of her decision to stay on the bench? Well, this would have given her something that not even a great Supreme Court Justice has. 2020 hindsight. And you know, at the time, she was at the top of her game. She was not sick. She was the senior liberal member of the court, so she assigned some opinions and wrote some important ones. And I think she also knew at the time, we never discussed this, other than on stage. So everything that I'm saying right now is inference. She certainly knew that the filibuster was still firmly in place. And I think she thought she would say in public. Who better than I? I think she thought that with the filibuster still in place, it was likely that nobody she considered to be a genuine successor to her legacy could get confirmed. And that she hoped very much to have the first woman president name her successor. And of course, she, to some extent, that was a gamble.
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"It's like, well, it's still $4 a gallon, it's still twice what it was when you guys took over. So, JD, let me close with resources. Your campaign website is about JD Vance dot com. That's right. JD Vance, do you have the resources to match my friend Tim in the last 50 days? You know, are we going to match him dollar for dollar? I don't know. I actually think it's a good chance that we will. We certainly have the resources necessary to get our message out. Really, the story of the summer here was that the Democrats overwhelmed the state with money in an effort to make the state competitive. And I think our task now is to make sure that we correct the record, tell the truth and tell the story over the next few months. We're certainly going to have the money we need to do that. I feel very good about where we are here. And I think we're going to win. And I don't think it's going to be that close. I look forward to seeing you inside the beltway, JD Vance. Always a pleasure. I appreciate it as well. JD agreed to my rules of the road, which they don't flag my friend Tim, but I do know he's going to win. JD is, and I appreciate your coming on. Thank you, JD. Let me remind everyone. My rules of the road are, if I've worked with you, I'm not going to flag you on the air. Whether it's been at Salem or NBC or the Washington I'm just not going to. And if you're my friend, I'm not going to run you over either. But I'll still talk about the race. And Jenny's going to win. That's why I can talk to Nina totenberg on a Monday and Donald Trump on a Thursday. And I'm just fine with that. Because there's basic courtesies that go with being in journalism, which unfortunately afraid online, but not on the air. From number one, New York Times bestselling author Vince Flynn comes oath of loyalty. Mitch wrap confronts a very different kind of killer in the explosive new thriller in the bestselling Vince Flynn series written by Kyle mills. In the game of politics, sometimes ties must be severed, but the oath of loyalty can never be broken. Oath of loyalty by Vince Flynn, now available wherever books are sold. Go buy it today. I had a chance to interview the author Kyle mills. So go to my podcast to listen to that full interview. A loyalty by Vince Flynn. Former president Trump says he, quote, can't imagine being indicted over his handling of classified documents after leaving office, and he warned of unrest if charges were brought. I think you'd have problems in this country, the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it. Today on a radio show, mister Trump warned that there would be quote big problems if he's indicted in the classified documents case. If it happened, I think you'd have problems in this country, the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it. What kind of problems, mister president? I think you'd have big problems. Big problems. You know that the legacy media will say you're attempting to incite violence with that statement. How do you respond to what will inevitably? That's not exciting. I'm just saying what my opinion is. I don't think the people of this country would stand for it. There was a statement today on a radio show with Hugh Hewitt. And listen to what Trump said there. If it happened, I think you'd have problems in this country, the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it. What kind of problems, mister president? I think they'd have big problems. Big problems. I just don't think that stands for it. They will not, they will not sit still and stand for this ultimate of hoaxes. So the former president went on the radio today and I just want to play what he said when I asked what he thought would happen if he was indicted. Here it is. I think if it happened, I think you'd have problems in this country, the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it. What kind of problems, mister president? I think you'd have big problems. Big problems. I just don't think that stand for it. So George, on another note, the former president was on Hugh Hewitt's radio show. Today. And I want to play a portion of what he said when asked, what would happen if he was indicted? And if it would deter him from running for president again, so listen to this. I think if it happened, I think you'd have problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it. What kind of problems, mister president? I think you'd have big problems. Big problems. I just don't think that stand for it. Senator Durbin there. Undoubtedly referring to statements made by the ex-president who just a few hours ago made this threat to radio host Hugh Hewitt, on what will happen if he's indicted. I think if it happened, I think you'd have problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it. What kind of problems, mister president? I think you'd have big problems. Big problems. Today, Trump in an interview was asked about the possibility he could get charged, and here's some of what he had to say. Do you feel like the Department of Justice is trying to indict you, mister president? Well, there is no reason that they can, I did absolutely. You've seen the legal purpose. Absolutely nothing wrong. I think if it happened, I think you'd have problems in this country, the likes of which perhaps we've never seen before. I don't think the people of the United States would stand for it. What kind of problems, mister president?.
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"That is a great life lesson Nina totenberg. Did the young journalists listen to you at all? I mean, do you hold court? You talk about having the couch over at NPR land. Do they come and listen to you still? Some dude, some think I'm a bit of a funny daddy because I actually do I actually do believe you that while I, that my opinions about the law are relatively unimportant. I'm a reporter. I don't have a column. I actually don't care about my opinions enough to have a column. So there are a lot of people these days who disagree with that. And those who do think I'm a bit of a fuddy daddy. Well, I think they ought to think you seek you out for not just the stories they'll want to hear about the Anita hill hearings or all the other controversies with which you have been involved. But for just some absolute fabulous advice on living life. And if you want to understand the court, I teach con law every other year. I'm tenured so they can't get rid of me. I'm senior man in the area. They now have to read one and dinners with Ruth because it's the real Supreme Court. And in a totenberg, thank you for joining me and giving me one of your first interviews. Congratulations on a fabulous book. Thank you so much for having me here. We shall meet in person someday. I hope so. After October, I'll be back in October. I hope to meet you then. Thank you. Bye bye. Hey, everyone. This is Duane Patterson, producer of the Hugh Hewitt show. I've known for a while now that there's been far too much of me here in the studio and I finally needed to do something about my weight. My excuse was always that I couldn't follow a plan with the crazy schedule that I keep. I heard about PhD weight loss and nutrition in how they customize their program for each client, and I decided to call. This was no problem for Rachel and the PhD team. They had me map out what my day looks like and created a plan to follow. And so far, I've lost 16 pounds already and I'm just two weeks in on the way to my goal of losing 45. Call PhD weight loss and nutrition at age 6 four 6 four four 1900 and make your appointment for your consultation..
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"It is Nina totenberg. This book, the subtitle, a memoir on the powers of friendships, is it could have been the title because it's a lot more than justice Ginsburg. It is about friendship and what you do and do not do, and it's about struggling with long and sometimes terminal illnesses, both your own. I mean, I didn't know you'd been run over by a motorboat. Honestly, you know, that's news to me. There aren't a lot of people running around D.C. have been run over by a motorboat on their honeymoon, who lived to tell about it. I'm jumping ahead of my interview outline here. But you're damn lucky to be alive. I am damned lucky to be alive and I'm damned lucky I married a trauma surgeon. Yes. Because he helped, he supervised the surgery. He watched and he scrubbed in. It's so good. And then you brought the fisherman and his boys in. The boys on the tire who saw it. I'm not going to give that story away. People have to read it. I'm back to my outline. What I love about this book, how D.C. works. I'm abroad and my wife of 40 years has a medical incident. And she gets care because Elena nachman, Ruth Marcus, Jamie gangl, and Tom cottonseed to it. It's just one of my favorite stories. This is how D.C. works. You're abroad. You're gone, and your book makes manifest. It's all about your Friends in D.C., right? It is absolutely about your Friends. But Hugh, that's not special to D.C.. It's your family and friends who make a life. Yes. You don't have one or the other, and if you're lucky both, you don't have much of a life. But you know who your Friends are when you're in trouble and you need you need help right away and you're not there. You know who they are and boy you were to cokie a friend and the word timers and the Robert, I mean, your dinners are remarkable. Cokie Roberts died in 2019 after her breast cancer return and she fought heart. Marty Ginsberg died in 2010. It was another long goodbye that you lived through. Justice Ginsburg died on September 18th, 2020 and it's touching. It's almost teary inducing to read about how you and David took care of her. And by the way, your husband's medical ethics, our second to none in the compartmentalization that he adopted Vis-à-vis his treatment of the justice in your friendship with her. I just think it's an amazing book, Nina. And kind. No. I will say this about David. I have had friends, friends who tell me, finally, they'll say, you know, well, my husband has whatever sort of cancer. And I'll call updated and I'll say, David, did you know that so and so has cancer and do you need to call me the answer is almost always Nina, I've known for the last year..
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
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?
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
"Visit sandy spring bank dot com slash real. Mortgage home equity and other credit products offered by sandy spring bank. I am joined now by Nina totenberg. The NPR legal affairs correspondent, who is the author of a brand new and a wonderful book, dinners with Ruth. A memoir of the power of friendships. I've never met Nina ton of her. I've never actually talked to Nina totenberg. So welcome, Nina totenberg, and congratulations, dinner with Ruth, is really fabulous. I don't know if you've ever met, but we have talked on the phone at least once that I remember. Obviously, you were more memorable to me than I was to you. Well, I forgot that I'm sorry. I must tell you, I think it's because I may have told you at the time, I've always been afraid of you because when I was a justice as the youngest of Bill Smith special assistant, Terry eastland, one of my closest friends in the world came in and warned us that be careful of Nina shall write everything down or she'll remember it. So Judy amusement Ron blunt Tex Lazar, we all had a healthy respect for you, Nina. And I just coward. I just stayed away from you. Well, that's very, that's very flattering. I was very young then, and probably a lot scarier than I am today. Oh, I think you're not scary at all after having dinners with Ruth. I must say, though, my favorite anecdote among crossover people, people that you know and I know, is when chuck Cooper spots you in the back of the room, you've infiltrated into a Brad Reynolds, a closed meeting. He escorts you out, and you give your phone number to all the assembled DoJ people. And let it be said that chartreuse Cooper and I have remained friends ever since. Well, you do seem to get along with all of my buddies. It's remarkable that people think that Washington walks around with knives hidden ready to plunge into the backsides of people with whom you disagree, your book is a great testament to the reality of Washington being or having been an amiable place where people could disagree agreeably. I think that's true. I tried to make it that way. One of the things I didn't want this ever to be was a score settling book. Anybody can write those, but you'd rather not live a life that way. And so my object here was to tell a little bit about the court to tell some about me to tell some of especially my women friends because people of my generation women of my generation came of age and started trying to have professional lives when we weren't we weren't trying to break a glass ceiling. We were just trying to get a foot in the door. And I think it's worth it for young women today and young men to know that it was unbelievably different that not that long ago. Yeah, Nina Turner, I was out on a boat last night with a Marine Corps colonel retired and HBS executive still working, and my wife of 40 years. I couldn't stop talking about dinners with Ruth. Because their world is not my world and your world. And I just couldn't stop telling them, and it's simply winsome. It's a winsome, wonderful, revealing look at not just justice Ginsburg, though that is the focus, but at a time and a place and actually the last 45 years in Washington, D.C., but I'm going to begin with a funny question..
The Christian Science Monitor Daily
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Christian Science Monitor Daily
"Conversation between monitor contributor Barbara spindel and Nina totenberg in today's issue. Now commentary from the monitor's editorial board on Dutch efforts to apologize for slavery. Dutch leaders do not often visit Suriname. Their presence stirs suspicions among local critics. That's because the South American country still bears legacies of colonial rule by the Netherlands. The legacy that includes Dutch ships, bringing enslaved Africans to Suriname and other parts of the new world. When prime minister Mark rutte arrived yesterday on the first state visit in 14 years, he came to discuss trade, public health, and agriculture. But his trip may have had a deeper import, a prelude to a government apology for the Dutch slave trade. Two years ago, mister ruta said that apologies form a risk that society will further polarize. At 2021 opinion poll showed that 55% of Dutch people opposed apologizing for slavery, yet a report by a national commission sharply disagreed. Apologies help heal historical suffering, but apologies help heal historical suffering. But apologies are mainly aimed at building a shared future. The report stated last year, helping to shift attitudes. Since then many Dutch institutions have apologized for their historical links to slavery. The Dutch are showing that official apologies need not be accusations. They can be pathways to common understanding and reconciliation. That's a wrap for the
WNYC 93.9 FM
"nina totenberg" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Us on the phones about finding treasures in what other people left out on the street as trash. The Brian Mayo show at 10 a.m. on WNYC. This is morning edition from NPR news. I'm Rachel Martin. And I'm Steve inskeep. Our colleague Nina totenberg has been covering the Supreme Court for decades. I was a young woman at a time when there were almost none of us in the workforce. And she has a memory of her early years of encountering another woman. I was a newly assigned very young reporter to cover the court. And I was reading a brief that said that the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed to equal protection was a law applied to women. And I really didn't understand that because it was passed after the Civil War for enslaved people to make sure that they were free. In a time when men alone had the vote. And when women didn't even have the vote. Totenberg called a little known lawyer in the case named Ruth Bader Ginsburg. They became friends, and remained so as Ginsburg became a Supreme Court Justice years later. Ginsburg is now one of the friends Nina discusses in a book called dinners with Ruth, a memoir of the power of friendships. We had a lot in common. I remember how distressed she was because she'd applied for a federal district court judgeship. She had been interviewed by this committee who told her she didn't have enough, securities law experience. And she muttered, she said something, I really wanted to say, how much experience do you have in sex discrimination cases or discrimination cases of any kind? Though ghinsberg is the star, totenberg's book talks of a generation of women and men who helped them, including some women known as founding mothers of this network. I was experiencing and Cokie Roberts was experiencing and Susan stamberg was experiencing and Linda wertheimer was experiencing all of the same kinds of things that Ruth Bader Ginsburg was. We were very lucky in our formative lives be together. And to be able to help each other and to learn from each other and to lean on each other. How did you keep your friendship separate from your work? When it became apparent that you were going to be covering Ruth Bader Ginsburg all the time. It was oddly easy. The Supreme Court is not the house, the Senate, The White House, where the lines are very blurred, and you can get a scoop any day of the week. It's very clear that justices aren't supposed to and don't discuss. Pending cases that are before them. You never asked. I never asked. I never tried to go over that line, and she conversely didn't try to do that with me. On reflection, she did once. Ginsburg got in trouble for criticizing then presidential candidate Donald Trump, days later she was interviewed on another subject by Nina totenberg, and the Supreme Court Justice asked Nina not to bring it up. And she said, oh, please don't do that. And I said, Ruth, it's my job, I have to. Totenberg did. Why did you
The Kicker
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Kicker
"And it was very clear then to me that it was going to be wrenching. And I kept telling people that in my stories, but pardon me, but this is what I do, and it's a hell of a good story. Maybe wrenching, but, you know, suck it up and report it because it's a very big and important story. What do you think is going to be the so play this forward into the next election? Well, for the first time, Democrats will actually be somewhat mobilized. I don't know whether they'll be mobilized as Republicans are, because there's such an important part of the Republican constituency that increasingly viewed abortion as their number one and often only, voting issue. And Democrats were more dispersed and they didn't really think it was going to happen anyway. And for literally, you know, 25 or 30 years I would do a story every election year saying, you know, this is a really big could be a really big deal at the in terms of how the Supreme Court turns out and people on the left would sort of take it for granted. And the rest of the public didn't see the court, at least in the air, they are not looking at it every day going crazy. It was very gradual. And that's sort of the way change the court was always in my era of covering it supposed to be. You're not supposed to have these wild twists and turns, but this is a very ideological chord. Some people will call it a partisan court. I would call it a very ideologically conservative court more conservative than any court since the late 20s and early 30s. And that's a very long time. And I don't know any time in our history, where we've seen such a group of idea logs on the court with a very huge agenda. On all manner of things, everything from abortion and guns to federal regulation and the ability of agencies to issue regulations and even the ability of Congress to pass laws that would allow such regulations. That's where we are, and that's a very big deal. And as big as this story is, and as much as you might think that it might to some people say, if you were on the court, there's a reason for gradualism, people have come to rely on rights and certain ways of doing things. And if we're going to change it, we need to change it over very gradual period of time, this court isn't like that. And there are 6 very conservative members of the court, and that means they can lose one vote and still prevail. And I just don't see the likes of clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch and others changing the way they have always thought that they would operate if they had the chance, and in.
The Kicker
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Kicker
"The court operates and how it how it. You don't know. I don't know. There was when roe was announced, there was a leak the week before. About the outcome. It didn't have the opinion or anything. And the roe had been before the court for two terms. It was re argued. It was argued a second time. So it was there for two terms. And apparently, as I recall, what we later learned was that at least the person who confessed to being the leaker, and it turned out there were many more people, but the person who thought it was his fault, had had a promise from the reporter that he talked to about it because they were, I guess, a law school colleagues or something like that. And the friend had promised him, and it was David beckwith from Time Magazine. It promised him that he wouldn't print anything until the opinion was announced, and then chief justice burger delayed the opinion announcement for a week, and time went with the story. Right. Oddly enough, it wasn't a huge, huge, huge story because among other things, I think president Johnson died and a lot of other things conspired to put it not to be the lead story. Chief justice burger was terribly upset. You know, wanted to take all kinds of very dire measures. But Larry Hammond, the young law clerk who went to his boss, Lewis Powell and confessed, and Powell just said, you know, don't worry about it. I mean, you did something stupid. You didn't think you were doing something damaging to the court. And we'll leave it at that. Don't do it again. And take this lesson. We were snookered. And there are members of the court who undoubtedly feel that way. They don't want to get into a swivel about this. It is falls in the category of I know this is a family program. It falls for them in the category of shit happens. And this is particularly bad shit, but it happens, and you don't want to change the nature of the institution by making it a police police state within the court. There are people who would resist that on the court, and I don't know how that shakes out. And I don't know how the chief justice feels about it. And since we're not there and this is not a beat like other beats where you're constantly talking to law clerks and members of the court, we don't. So clerks are not supposed to talk to us, really. So how do we know I read in the days following the leak that Roberts, for instance, was livid? How do we know that? Oh, I think you can. I know him well enough. Everybody knows him well enough in their people. The word gets out. I mean, but you don't, it's not like somebody in his chambers. Is likely to say to me, you can't imagine how bad it was..
The Kicker
"nina totenberg" Discussed on The Kicker
"Hi, welcome to the kicker. I'm Kyle Pope. Editor and publisher of the Columbia journalism review. This week, coverage of the Supreme Court and abortion. So as we all now know in early May, Politico broke a scoop on the Supreme Court that the court had decided to overturn roe versus wade. And actually published a draft decision and an opinion that laid out the reasoning for that. It was the biggest scoop on the biggest story on the Supreme Court B and as we were thinking about this, we immediately thought the person that we want to hear from on this is Nina totenberg. Nina has been covering the Supreme Court for NPR for 5 decades. And has a ton of thought about what this means for the court, what it says about the country and how both are going to move forward now with its in the background. Nina, thank you so much for joining us. It's my pleasure..
America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast
Will Chamberlain on the Identity of the SCOTUS Leaker
"He is senior counsel for the article three project formerly publisher of Ronald Reagan's favorite newspaper human events will Chamberlain. Welcome in studio. Obviously great to be here with you, sad. Well, now we have the luxury of a little bit longer to discuss. You were in recently because of a very powerful, long thread you published on Twitter on the possible identity of the Supreme Court leaker, an individual who in her past associations and writings is shown quite a radical bent towards a pro abortion. Since we last, let's just do a little update since we last spoke. Anything changed in that analysis is anything countered that I haven't seen anything? No, there hasn't been anything. There's been, I think, Nina totenberg tried to suggest that it was a conservative clerk, but her analysis didn't have any connections to the reporters. It was just speculation about, well, a conservative clerk would have seen the strategic value of doing it this way because it fixes the justices in their positions. Right, because conservatives are the ones who break the rules. That's what conservatives do. Right. And also what conservative clerk is going to subject their own justice to the kind of protests that we've been seeing at their houses. And they know that's coming. Clerks know what the left does, especially in this town. So I just don't see it. I think as my analysis was from the beginning, this is probably the work of a desperate liberal law clerk trying to preserve roe V wade, and then in that threat I showed how this one particular clerk for justice Breyer, Elizabeth deutsch, not only has an extensive record through her career in her academic work of trying to work on pro abortion and reproductive rights causes, and that Josh gerstein, the journalist who published the leak of Politico at Politico, went to her wedding, co wrote, was a shared bylines with her husband. I mean, these people know
Mike Gallagher Podcast
Caller Suspects Justice Roberts Is the Leaker
"I'm gonna be honest. I think Robert is the leaker. Who's gonna check the investigator? Right. He's done some really crazy stuff in the past who's to say that he's not floating this out there just to get an idea and say, yeah, I'm gonna investigate myself. Well, that's what Nina totenberg. We have the Nina tomberg cut guys. That's what she said on NPR will play that for you a little bit later. Nina totenberg veteran reporter over at national public radio, she thinks it's a conservative law clerk. Who knows? But again, of course, that would be a misnomer because no one would ever describe John Roberts as a conservative.
WABE 90.1 FM
"nina totenberg" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM
"Play I am All right let's do this then First up let's hear from Maeve Higgins Public radio attempts to reach younger audience have been cringey at best Who could forget that disastrous week when they made Nina totenberg report on the Supreme Court while writing a skateboard But recently Kim manager of Maine public radio dared to ask what if we just weren't going young enough saying if we could reach potential listeners before their brains were fully formed said maybe they didn't print on us like helpless baby docs So three days a week Maine public radio began programming directly to babies All things considered was done entirely in baby talk with stories on wising inflation weights and Gaga Their transportation reporter was tasked exclusively with informing listeners on what the wheels on the boss do Whether the strategy works is not yet known because no one in the target audience can get talk But link hopes to see results by the next fundraising drive quote that sweet sweet allowance money is ours A main public radio station provides programming directly to babies your next story of listenership outreach comes from Harry kondabolu We've all heard the phrase don't touch that dial but what if it didn't matter even if you did That's what Mazda drivers in Seattle are reporting Apparently regardless of what station you put on the only thing that comes out of the speakers is local public radio station KUOW The good news is that the volume dial still works which is useful since everyone on public radio talks so softly that you constantly have to raise the volume Some suspect that KUOW recently switching to a 5G signal meant Mars does with three G signals might be dealing with some bugs Others have no idea what that last sentence means Though unlikely if KUOW somehow was able to do this on purpose who could blame them It was either this or lose their war with Pacifica radio Subaru drivers have not reported any similar issues But that might be because they always have public radio on in their cars anyway Mazdas in Seattle can only listen to KUOW no matter what else they try to do your last story of aggressive outreach to grow an audience comes from bobcat goldthwaite In an effort to raise money and Syracuse New York has opened up the first public radio themed restaurant Move over world cafe Here comes the NPR bistro AKA the national pancake restaurant Unlike Hooters they're servers are tastefully attired and wear sensible shoes And like other restaurants it has books on the walls but here they're real and you're required to read one during your meal The restaurant's motto is it's not just our air that's fresh it's our produce too Nothing comes rare or well done It's all in the middle And the breast fixed menu the morning edition is filled with egg dishes that celebrate fry dumb.
WABE 90.1 FM
"nina totenberg" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM
"Supreme Court ruled today that the federal government can shield former government contractors from testifying about the torture of a post 9 11 detainee The decision will likely make it harder for victims to expose secret government misconduct in the future And pure legal affairs correspondent Nina totenberg reports Abu zubaydah was the first prisoner held by the CIA to undergo what was at the time euphemistically called enhanced interrogation He was water boarded slammed against walls put in a coffin like box for hours at a time and more Joseph margolis who would later become zubaydah's lawyer says the worst of it lasted for 20 days 24 hours a day He was water boarded 83 times in that period alone In the end two CIA contractors who supervise your betas interrogation concluded that the CIA had the wrong man that he was not a high level Al-Qaeda operative All of this was documented by the European court on human rights by widespread reports of the press and by a lengthy Senate intelligence committee report In fact the CIA did allow the now former contractors to write extensively and to testify in limited circumstances about the enhanced interrogation program But when lawyers for zubaydah subpoenaed them so that their testimony could be turned over to prosecutors in Poland where zubaydah was interrogated the U.S. government blocked the move The CIA director invoked the so called state secrets privilege a doctrine created by the Supreme Court in 1953 that allows the government to shield evidence harmful to national security In this case both the Trump and Biden administrations maintain that even though the information about the torture program was widely known if the former CIA contractors were allowed to testify it could jeopardize U.S. relationships with foreign intelligence services Today the Supreme Court in a very fractured opinion ruled in favor of the government There were a total of four opinions including a furious descent written by conservative justice Neil Gorsuch and joined by liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor Nina totenberg NPR news Washington Can a government shape popular culture China.
The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
The Larger Significance of the NPR-Sotomayor Story
"I'd like to talk about the larger significance of this NPR story about the Supreme Court and masking. I wasn't going to cover the story. I thought it was kind of dumb. But Debbie's like, no, people are talking about it. You should cover it, and I want to do it in a way that draws out. What's really going on here? Because you see the essence of fake news. And it started out with Nina totenberg, the kind of longtime court reporter of NPR. Saying the following, she said that according to sources at the court Sotomayor did not feel safe in proximity to people who were not masked. Nina told mug reported that justice Roberts, understanding that, quote, in some form as the other justices to mask up. And then says tort, they all did, except Gorsuch, who as it happens sits next to Sotomayor on the bench, is continued refusal to do so has meant that Sotomayor has not attended the justice weekly conference in person, joining by telephone. Now, this article was just picked up because it suggested this kind of, wow, even at the Supreme Court, you've got all this insider Garfield going on over masking. So right away, CNBC was all over at MSNBC, CNN, and then of course all the pundits began to weigh in. He has made a Hassan. Why is it that the public figures on the right who claim to be pious Christians and believers and morality and decency turn out to be awful awful people? So you got the statement and then all the speculations on top of the statement presuming, of course, the statement to be true. And then justice Roberts put out a statement basically saying I never asked the other justices to be masked, boom. And after that, this was even more unprecedented. There was a statement that came out from Sotomayor and Gorsuch. So what are my says? I never asked that gore such be masked. I never, I never made that requirement. Gorsuch said I never heard anything of this sort from the chief justice has never been any such rule. The whole story was made up. The whole story was lies. Now, the killer. Here's a Nina totenberg tweeting after all this after three statements think of the how unusual it is for three justices of the court to come out and directly dispute all of them, saying the same thing and say meeting Nina totenberg's reporting as follows. You think she'd be like eating crow, right? No. Quote, NPR stands by my reporting. In other words, the three justices are liars. Either that, or some analysts have tried to cover her by saying that in an original report, she said that the judge Roberts quote in some form as the justice system makeup as though in some form means he didn't really. He just sort of implied
Mike Gallagher Podcast
NPR Stands by Report as Three SCOTUS Justices Refute Gorsuch-Sotomayor Feud
"Do you see how NPR lied about the Supreme Court? NPR's Nina totenberg reported that justice Sotomayor is having to be forced to work remotely all because of the stubbornness of justice Gorsuch. Sotomayor, according to the report, has asked Gorsuch to put his mask on as the Supreme Court is in session. He is reportedly refusing forcing the. Immunocompromised Sonia Sotomayor to work from home. That's according to NPR. Turns out, they're all denied. All of the parties involved said it's absolutely false. It's a blatant lie. So to my or denied it, Gorsuch dyed it, denied it, they're all denying it. They're saying it isn't true. What an NPR do? Double down. They stand by their reporter, because after all, Nina totenberg has been around for a hundred years and she wouldn't make something like that up. Another reason to hate the mainstream media and to despise the fact that you and I help fund
NPR Politics Podcast
"nina totenberg" Discussed on NPR Politics Podcast
"I have to ask you what. The view is about justice steven brier. He's the oldest justice on the court. There's a lot of pressure coming from the left to have him step down. While joe biden is president and democrats control the senate to guarantee that they won't face a seven two possible conservative majority of joe biden. We're not to win reelection. And i wonder from the legal community view. Is this something that people are watching closely for possible retirement. Well yeah we're watching. We're not hearing much of anything as we tape this. There has been no indication that that the brier is going to retire. Of course he could retire anytime during the summer he could retire. He could announce a retirement next term at the beginning or in the middle or at the end He's about to turn eighty three but he's hired lock lurks. He's one of the most fit. Eighty three year olds. I've ever laid eyes on and If we can keep him off his bike because that's where he keeps getting hurt. If he falls off skiff falls off his bike or runs into somebody If you keep them on office bike he'll probably stay around but we you know the truth is maybe tom knows. But i don't know nobody knows. But i would say that justice briar. Is you know fighting against two different instincts. Number one is. He is politically sophisticated. He worked in the senate. He recognizes the prospect. The democrats will lose the senate in the next In twenty twenty two at the same time. He doesn't want the court to look political on that he is just getting out because we now have a democratic president in the balance between those two things almost certainly leads him to retiring next term in the summer before there is an election in which republicans could take back control of the senate. All right. we'll dunkeld seen thank you so much for joining the politics. Podcast really appreciate it. Thanks for having me. I'm susan davis. I cover congress. I'm nina totenberg. I covered the supreme court. And thanks for listening to the npr politics podcast..
WNYC 93.9 FM
"nina totenberg" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Just because voting may be inconvenient for some justice Samuel Alito wrote doesn't mean that access to voting is unequal. And he said that in evaluating with the Voting Rights Act requires courts should look to what the voting rules were in 1982 when the relevant provisions of the law was enacted. Back then, he observed, almost all voting was in person and on election Day. And the mere fact that there is some disparity and impact does not necessarily mean that the system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote. Justice. Alito is trying to turn back the clock on voting rights many decades. Richard Hasen is a leading expert on voting rights and a professor at the University of California, Irvine. I think it's fair to say that all of the major paths to challenging voting rules in federal court Have been severely cut back. Debo Adegbile, a A long time civil rights attorney, called the decision very troubling. It very much narrows the past. Of challenging these, um many, many voter obstacles that states are instituting across the country Election law expert Richard Pill This of NY U Law School adds that the court could have upheld the Arizona laws in a narrow way, as the Biden administration suggested. But the conservative court majority swung for the fences by saying that laws likely do not violate the Voting Rights Act. When they're like laws that existed 40 years ago, or laws that exist today. In many states, early voting really began in the mid two thousands and the move to no excuse absentee voting began kind of earlier on than that. That's a very significant development that's really made the process much more accessible to more people. That may be true, but it was not the baseline established by the court today. Writing for the dissent, Justice Elena Kagan accused the majority of yet again rewriting the Voting Rights Act, a law she noted that was designed to bring about the end of discrimination in voting. Never before has a statute done more to advance the nation's highest ideal, she said. Few laws are more vital in the current moment. Yet in the last decade, this court has treated no statute worse. The Voting Rights Act, confronted one of this country's most enduring wrongs, and pledged to give every American of every race and equal chance to participate in our democracy, she said. That law of all laws should not be diminished by this court. Election law experts said today's ruling will likely have an immediate impact in Georgia, making it much more difficult for the Biden administration to win its recent challenge to newly enacted voting restrictions in the Peach state. The ruling will also add pressure on Democrats in the Senate to try to find a way to enact a new voting rights law. Some version of bills already passed by the House and blocked by Republicans in the Senate. But voting rights advocates are caught between a Supreme Court hostile to voting rights and the Republican Party that has abandoned its one time support for voting rights again. Professor Hasen We've seen a sea change in the Republican Party's attitude towards the voting Rights Act as the Republican Party becomes more reliant on white voters. It has less of an incentive to support any renewed voting rights protection. Nina Totenberg NPR NEWS Washington This week, the title of Miss Nevada USA was won by a transgender woman for the first time in the pageant's history. Her new best. Nevada USA, Cataluna Enriquez. Catalona Enriquez grew up in the Philippines and moved to the U. S. When she was 10 in a live stream with interviewer Adam Francisco in April. She described limiting herself in order to please people and to stay safe. Being different itself. You've already a target for discrimination and bullying, and it's basically kind of like Battling just the moment that you were born. Now she uses her platform to advocate for gender equality and trans rights. Here's Henriquez during the Miss Nevada pageant at a.
WNYC 93.9 FM
"nina totenberg" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Represented by lawyer Gregory Gar. When you're talking about online speech, it really doesn't matter. You know where the student hit, send on his arrive phone or makes the post whether it's in the classroom or to Starbucks across the street from school. The impact of that post Is the same. No replies A C L U Lawyer V told Val Check that would give the school the right to curb student speech for too many reasons. Cultural, political and religious. You're essentially taking that diminished. Free speech rights that students have in sport and pushing them out to their entire lives. They would not have both First Amendment free speech rights anywhere and that would also interfere with Parent's ability and right to direct their Children's upbringing. Gar counters that online speech is the equivalent of a school message board except that online messages can go toe. Many more students, causing far more disruption at school schools are looking to pick fights. Schools aren't looking to police speech taking place at students homes. No matter where the speech happens to originate, schools have a burden to show that it's substantially disrupted and invades other rights of other students. But lawyer Val Check representing Brandy Levi maintains that the rules have become too fuzzy, and that gives schools too much power to censor student speech on important topics that concern them. Were it not for the F bombs that Brandy Levi let loose on social media that weekend. Her speech likely would not have caused such a furor at the school, and she doesn't think she did anything wrong. That's how 14 year old teenagers talk. That's how everyone talked. Then just how the Supreme Court will react is unclear. The conservative Court majority is pretty purist about First Amendment rights. It struck down laws meant to limit campaign contributions and laws that make lying about one's military medals, a crime and laws that make selling violent video games to kids a crime. The other hand, when it comes to kids, it's a more authoritarian court. At least one member of the conservative majority Justice Clarence Thomas, has said that, in his view student speech is not protected at all by the First Amendment. But his lawyer, Gar puts it. This case is basically mean Girls meets the First Amendment. Nina Totenberg. NPR NEWS Washington This'd.
Q
US Supreme Court Takes Major Case on Carrying Concealed Handguns
"Time in more than a decade, the U. S Supreme Court is headed for a major decision on gun rights. Court today, agreeing to take up a case testing how far a state may go in regulating whether an individual may carry a gun outside the home more from NPR's Nina Totenberg, 2000 and eight and 2010 the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Second Amendment right to bear arms guarantees the right to own a gun in one's home for self defense. But after that it was crickets on the subject of how far states may go in regulating guns now, with three trump appointees on the court and a new 6 to 3 conservative majority Long accepted gun regulations could be in real jeopardy For the first time. The case that the court has now granted will not be heard until the fall it tests in New York law that limits permits to carry a concealed gun outside the home. To those going hunting or to target practice and those who need protection like a bank messenger carrying cash
NPR News Now
Democrats to Introduce Bill to Expand Supreme Court From 9 to 13 Justices
"Has introduced a bill to expand the number of supreme court justices from nine to thirteen as npr's nina totenberg reports. The of justice has already been changed seven times but not since the civil war era. Progressive groups remain enraged at what they see as republican manipulation of the supreme court nomination process in order to give president trump to appointments to the court. I by blocking president obama's nominee to the supreme court for nearly a year and then by rushing through amy coney barrett's nomination just over a month after ruth bader ginsburg staff now faced with a six to three conservative majority on the court. Some liberal democrats are proposing a bill that would expand the court from nine to thirteen members but it has no chance of passage. Indeed house speaker. Nancy pelosi said she would not bring it up for a vote. She said she supports president. Biden's appointment of a commission to study the question nina totenberg. Npr news washington. This is npr news.
All Things Considered
Biden judicial nominees represent diverse professional backgrounds, identities
"Announced his first slate of judicial nominees, making clear he intends to fulfill his campaign pledge Ray more diverse federal bench. NPR's Nina Totenberg explains. Nine of the 11 nominees are women and nine are people of color. The nominees are also far more diverse in their professional experience, their public defenders as well as prosecutors with long experience in both civil and criminal law practice here in Washington, the president named Catan, G. Brown, Jackson and African American Trial Court Judge You feel the appeals court seat vacated by Attorney General Merrick Garland. She was on President Obama short list for the Supreme Court in 2016 and is often mentioned now as a contender should a vacancy occur. Nina Totenberg. NPR NEWS Washington Less than a
Morning Edition
Supreme Court Set To Hear Case Pitting Unions Against Agricultural Business
"U. S. Supreme Court hears arguments in a case that pits the rights of farm workers and labor unions against large agricultural employers in California. As NPR's Nina Totenberg reports. At issue was a state law enacted nearly half a century ago that allows union organizer's some limited access to farms to seek support for unionizing the workers. The growers who are challenging the law, contend that by giving union organizer's a limited right of access to workers on site during break times, The state is authorizing an unconscious tutu Schimmel trespass on the growers private property. This is not the first time the California law has reached the Supreme Court in 1976. After the state Supreme Court rejected a similar claim from the growers. The U. S Supreme Court declined to take up the case. But now, with a far more conservative high court in place, the growers are trying again, and it's significant that the justices have agreed to hear the case. Nina Totenberg, NPR NEWS Washington This
90.3 KAZU Programming
Supreme Court won't stop grand jury from getting Trump's tax returns
"At the Supreme Court today when Justice is in a one sentence order. Often places Syria's of grand jury subpoenas for his business and financial records, including 10. Years of tax returns more from NPR's Nina Totenberg in 2019. The New York D A. Convened a grand jury in Manhattan to investigate allegations that Trump paid off porn stars Stormy Daniels and other women to keep them quiet. During the 2016 presidential campaign, but the investigation soon morphed into much more a probe of Trump's personal and business finances. Now, for the second time, the Supreme Court has rebuffed Trump's effort to block the investigation. Courts. One sentence order means Trump will have to produce a wide swath of information that could lead to criminal or civil charges he blasted. The court's action is a continuation of what he called the greatest political witch hunt in the country's history. Nina Totenberg. NPR NEWS
KQED Radio
"nina totenberg" Discussed on KQED Radio
"Live from NPR news. I'm Shea Stevens. US House impeachment managers have sounded the opening round of the case they plan to present against Donald Trump next week when his Senate trial begins. NPR's Nina Totenberg has details. In an 80 page brief, the House managers wrote that beginning last July, Trump began laying the groundwork for trying to overturn the election results if he lost. For two months after the election. They allege he ignored vote counts and recounts that found he lost filed 61 losing cases in the courts and then some and his supporters to Washington, D C for a rally. There, he whipped the crowd into a frenzy and aim them at the Capitol to wreak havoc and prevent congressional certification of Joe Biden's election victory. Nina Totenberg. NPR NEWS Washington The remains of slain U. S Capitol Police officer Brian Sick, Nick lie in honor of the U. S. Capitol Rotunda sick Nick was fatally injured in last month's insurrection. President Biden. Congressional leaders sick. Nick's family and colleagues paid their respects at a memorial at the capital Wednesday evening. President Biden has offered condolences to the families of two FBI agents who were killed during a South Florida raid. On Wednesday morning. NPR's Aisha Roscoe reports that the agents We're serving a search warrant as part of a child pornography case. President Biden says the FBI is looking into the incident that left two agents dead and three other agents wounded, Biden said his heart goes out to their loved ones. Every family Yes..
WNYC Programming
Trump and 17 states back Texas bid to undo his election loss
"President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to let him join a widely scorned Texas election lawsuit that is seeking to throw out millions of votes in four states. Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania in Wisconsin, more from NPR's Nina Totenberg. When Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed his lawsuit directly in the Supreme Court seeking to prevent presidential electors from finalizing Joe Biden's electoral college victory. Officials from those four states. Both Republicans and Democrats derided it as nothing more than an unfounded publicity stunt. But now President Trump is seeking to join the lawsuit. Election experts say it's highly unlikely the court will come to the president's aide when lower courts have consistently thrown out his claims as baseless. As election law expert. Richard hasn't put it. This is a press release masquerading
Morning Edition
Wisconsin high court won't let Trump campaign bypass lower court
"Court has thrown out a lower court decision that upheld California's limits on the number of people who can attend religious services during the pandemic. NPR's Nina Totenberg reports, the high court has instructed the lower court to reexamine these limits. In previous cases from California. The court had upheld the state's rules. But that changed with the arrival of new Justice Amy Cockney Barrett, who tipped the court majority in the other direction. So now, the justices have told the lower courts to reexamine the rules limiting the number of congregants that indoor services in California religious groups complained that they're the victims of discrimination because the limits on the number of people permitted at worship services are more severe than they are for grocery stores and warehouses. The state counters that there's a far greater danger of covert spread at places where people sing, chant and gather for longer periods of time. Nina
Raul Campos
Supreme Court set to hear arguments on Trump plan to exclude undocumented immigrants from census
"Undocumented immigrants from the U. S census. He doesn't want them counted for the purposes of drawing new congressional District's next year. So far, three lower courts of blocked his attempt as NPR's Nina Totenberg reports. Now it's up to the high court. The Constitution requires that there be a count of the quote whole number of persons in the country every 10 years and that congressional districts be apportioned based on that population count. In July, President Trump issued a memorandum ordering the Census Bureau for the first time to send him two sets of numbers. One delineating the whole number of persons in each state and the other for apportioning congressional district was to subtract all undocumented immigrants from that count. 22 States challenged the Trump order in court, contending that it violates the Constitution, the census statute or both. Now the cases before the Supreme Court. Nina Totenberg NPR NEWS Washington Turkey is condemning the killing of Iran's top nuclear scientist, NPR's Peter
BBC World Service
The Affordable Care Act Faces Yet Another Supreme Court Test
"Washington that the U. S. Supreme Court Tuesday the Trump Administration and the state of Texas will lead arguments that Obama care should be struck down in its entirety. NPR's Nina Totenberg reports. It'll be the third attempt to invalidate the law since it was enacted a decade ago. Faced with earlier challenges to the law of the high Court upheld it. Buy votes of 5 to 4 and 6 to 3. But many of the lawyers who originally challenged the law in 2012 now say that the legal landscape has changed so much since then, that they think this challenge is a stretch. And many of the groups including major business groups that supported the original challenge are missing from the challenge. Now that said the court is far more conservative today than it was when previous challenges were brought. Among the three trump appointees. Now on the court is New Justice Amy Cockney Barrett, who's been highly critical of the court's previous decisions upholding
Morning Edition
The Affordable Care Act is on the line at court
"News. I'm Korver Coleman. This is the second day of confirmation hearings for Amy Cockney Barrett, President Trump's U S Supreme Court nominee. It's also the first day that senators can question her directly. NPR's Nina Totenberg reports, Democrats will play offense and Republicans will be playing defense. Even the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Lindsey Graham, acknowledged yesterday that the outcome of these hearings is a foregone conclusion. Republicans have a majority in the Senate and the votes to confirm Barrett. But the Democrats are walking in unusually disciplined lock step on their messaging. Barrett. This is potentially the deciding vote to strike down the affordable care act, known as Obama care if she's confirmed this month, as planned a week after the election bear it will be hearing a case seeking for a third time
BBC World Service
Amy Coney Barrett: Trump nominee testifies in Supreme Court hearing
"Court nominee Amy Cockney. Barrett is said to begin taking questions in the morning after only playing a bit part Monday when her confirmation hearings began. There was silent as members of the Senate Judiciary Committee made opening statements for five hours. NPR's Nina Totenberg reports When it was time for Barrett to speak. She again said her judicial philosophy was modeled after the late Justice Anton's Clia. Scalia was a conservative icon known for his fervent dissenting opinions when the Supreme Court upheld abortion rights, gay rights and obamacare But Barrett, in her opening statement, said courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong the policy decisions and value judgments of government. Must be made by the political branches elected by an accountable to the people. The public should not expect courts to do so. And courts should not try. That sounds easy. But as judges of all ideological stripes recognize one person's policy choice is another's UN constitutional law.
The Nicole Sandler Show
RIP Ruth Bader Ginsberg - A life lived for her community
"I was born. Under, very bright's stone. Solemnly. Swear that I will support and defend. The constitution of the United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on Friday. She was eighty seven the second woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court she was known for her fiery dissents often in cases involving civil rights or equal protections. GINSBURG was appointed to the court in Nineteen. Ninety three and was well known for Championing Gender Equality Abortion rights, affirmative action, and other progressive causes in our final years. Thanks to those dissents and well everything about her she earned the nickname, the notorious RPG and to put. An other worldly stamp on it sundown Friday marked the start of Russia Shana. One of the Jewish High Holy Days according to Jewish tradition a person who dies on Rosh Hashanah is a sad dijk, a person of great righteousness NPR reporter Nina Totenberg explained the tradition on twitter writing a Jewish teaching says those who died just before the Jewish new year are the ones God has held back until the last moment because they were needed most and where the most righteous if you wanted to be a true professional. You will do something outside yourself. Something to make life. A. Little better. So people less fortunate. than. You. A meaningful life. Is. One lives not test for oneself but for once community just days before her death Ginsburg said to her granddaughter. My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.
Forum
In nod to conservatives, Trump reveals new list of potential Supreme Court picks
"Supreme Court nominees. Using the tool that served him well and energized in the conservative base and the 2016 election campaign. NPR's Nina Totenberg has more on that story. Trump blasted Joe Biden for failing to issue a comparable list and issued a dark warning for the future if the Democrat is elected and has an opportunity to pick one or more justices Courts. Five conservative justices are all in good health on Ly One. Justice is fighting serious health problems. Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is being treated for a serious about with 1/5 cancer, her second cancer in less than two years. Nina Totenberg. NPR NEWS Washington A