Page 12 - Balancing Test News Today

Loophole to get around existing u.s. supreme court law. >> shannon: this is how the family lawyer responded. this quote is in the tampa bay times. i respectfully suggest this is a bold assertion to made by teachers and a governmental institution vested about teaching about the u.s. constitution. the six-year-old doesnt have this unqualified right to take a knee. >> right. that was a sensational reaction to what was an interrogatory answer. i do understand brians point. that being said, the statu...

It has to away the con -- when the presidents lawyers have asserted this broad, sweeping, unfettered power, the supreme court it really comes down to a balancing test. on the one hand of the calculus, you have the office of legal council memos. there were two of them. one published in 1973 and one published in 2000. they say essentially the same thing. they say that we strike the balance in favor of not dragging the president into court, whereas when the supreme court engages in that same balanc...

>> cosby is a bad guy. they have an appeal. couple things they dont teach you, bad facts make bad law. the guy is a despicable character. what they dont teach you in law school, the majority in the supreme court are woman and they run for election. nobody will let mr. cosby get reversed on appeal. >> jon: sounds like mercedes says he has of an appeal because of to testify that was allowed in. >> that would be one basis, absolutely. rulings like this where the judge is presented with this type of...

Example, allowing these witnesses to testify. in order for evidence to be admissible in trial, there has to be a probative value of that evidence. it has to be relevant to the allegations in that trial. but also there has to be a balancing test. that evidence cannot be overly prejudicial to the defendant. if you have four, five or 60 women testifying that bill cosby drugged them, assaulted them, very similar to the allegations in the criminal trial. one would say that is overly prejudicial. yet ...

Bravo. bra brava in this point. this airline has had a similar problem in the past. so what do you do now to make sure this isnt repeated without this type of heroic ending? >> its a great question. i did speak to c he eo of southwest last night, gary kelly about 8:15. he did tell me southwest will begin an aggressive ultrasonic inspection campaign for their entire fleet. so is that will be something that will be important. we want to look at this very carefully and see if theres other things th...

You dont find crimes, this will wind up fueling a counter narrative that this was a witch-hunt. it is a balancing test even for t them. >> god forbid we have fishing expeditions in presidential investigations. we have seen that move before. the u.s. attorney. this is rudy giulianis former -- >> right. why is this a basis of reaccusal? he worked with rudy giuliani in a law firm. >> he was a lawyer on the campaign is and may have known cohen in that context. >> thats enough to step away? >> it was...

Stop. richard, finish. >> each incident needs to look at individual can he should not have had that rifle. and there are other 18 to 21-year-old that use rifles properly. not everyone should be punished because one child did something wrong they should have been prevented from doing that under current law. >> go ahead rachel. >> i think the issue here is that we need to, it is a balancing test. we need to balance compelling state interest. we need to balance public safety against this. i dont th...

Legally, its a simple balancing test which is obviously privacy, you know, medical privacy, hi hippa to some extent versus the publics right to know. you can debate that and argue it any way you want. in my opinion, as i have stated it, i could be incricket. i feel as though it should be kept private for now. because its going to track into obviously the insanity defense. arthel: right. >> and the death penalty. arthel: you mentioned something a little bit earlier, doug, that we were hearing rep...

That hes going to have to talk to trump and he didnt have to talk to the house in the same way her cant exert executive privilege here because thats been settled. thats what u.s. v nixon was about. executive privilege is a balancing test. it has to yield to a criminal investigation, and here mueller has the cards that the house didnt have. but, yes, theyll be poring through it and theyll be loaded for bear an all the specific allegations. and one thing that the wolfebook shows is bannon had all ...

Reading and underlining? >> i think so. and its not whether bannon thinks that a meeting is treasonous. its not his legal conclusions. but there are facts in there. the one you just mentioned, lawrence, about did trump jr. take the russians up to visit and see trump, which would be devastating evidence on collusion. discreet facts like that that he can question him on. and i did want to mention based on your last segment the reason that hes going to have to talk to trump and he didnt have to tal...