Page 13 - Second Amendment Case News Today

Strategist. good morning to all. i want to start with this investigation at the pentagon into potentially if russia was involved or attempted to cover up this chemical attack. is there any plausible explanation for that russian drone being over the hospital where some of the victims were being treated hours after the chemical attack beyond some involvement or attempt to cover this up with the information that we know that soon after the drone was there, there was a bomb that was dropped onto tha...

Reporters privilege? >> senator, i know those cases come up from time to time. your description of the case is accurate. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> before we recess, id like to enter into the record a commentary in the chicago tribune called "crying wolf over neil gorsuch." it turns around concerns over chevron deference. "theres two sides to deference. pro chevron executives will be begging federal courts not to interpret finding of agencies." enter that without objection. we will recess fo...

X concentrate federal power in a way that seems more unanimous a little difficult to square with the constitution of the framers design. quote, maybe the time has come to face the behemot. end quote. that sounds to me like again you are going a step further and talking about overturning a major precedent. i want to know if thats what you mean, if you think it should be overturned and if you considered the ramifications of that when justice scalia himself was the original champion of the chevron ...

Look back to the original understanding. that informs us. or in the fifth amendment, just stevens in aprendy, wrote a very fine examination of the original history of the constitution, and said its not right that an individual should be sentenced to prison, hand sentence on a base of facts a jury hasnt found. those are all originalist, if you want to put label on it, opinions. every one them. you could look at powell versus mccormick, that was written by chief justice warren. it was a very caref...

Originalists. how could the framers possibly imagine modern contraptions? thermal images didnt exist in the 1700s. the framers had no idea what it was. so under the caricature that the democrats have suggested, you would assume the originalists in the case would all line up on the side of saying, gosh, the fourth amendment doesnt cover that. yet the kilo case, the majority opinion, 5-4 was written by justice scalia. the leading originalist on the court. it was joined by justice thomas. indeed ju...

Times v. sullivan the first amendment would prevent public officials to sue the media under any standard left demanding actual malice and can you explain to the people here today in those watching on tv what that standard means to you? >> new york times versus sullivan was a landmark decision. it changed pretty dramatically the law of defamation libel in this country. rather than the common law definition of libel, applicable normally for a long time. the supreme court said the first amendment h...

Now. no. justice kagan and justice scalia wrote a dissent, saying fish, thats a tangible object. you shouldnt have done it. and so these things dont divide along any kind of ordinary ideological line. i am confident that there are justices who in that case or in heller or any of these cases would as a matter of policy have come out differently than they did as a matter of judging. and that to me is all the difference in the world. were not doing what we would like or what we think the law is. >>...

Understanding. that informs us. in the fifth amendment, justice stephens, wrote a very fine examination of the original history of the constitution and said, its not right that an individual should be sentenced to prison on the basis of facts a jury hasnt found. those are all originalists. if you want to put that label on it, every one of them. look at powell versus mccormack. its a very careful -- might agree or disagree -- a very careful examination of the original history and understanding of...

Gorsuch think about this one? and you were expected to have a view about pretty much anything and everything that he asked. he just would sit there and chuckle at you. he would laugh at you. youre wondering what he thought. he never reveal ed his hands. he would walk out of the office and say oh, thats what justice gorsuch thinks. okay. then he would go back and think about it himself. then he would come back in himself. the whole thing would repeat itself as he was working through each case him...

Originalist seemed to betray constitutional text and history, most notable brown versus board of education the case that struck down segregation. but its hard to reconcile with original understanding. judge gorsuch said i want to translate the original meaning into a world of new technologies. he kept citg the gps case the 19th century horse and buggy age. but the democrats are going to press him and say do you agree with the cases where justice scalia was a fatless originalist. >> do you see an...