Page 37 - Heller Case News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Originalism where both justices sought to explain the reasoning by looking at the original public meaning of the second amendment. which decision did you agree with, and why? >> well, senator, i think we've alluded my difficulty here. i do think everything you just said is accurate. both justice scalia and justice stephens wrote excellent opinions in that case. i am not here, though, to grade my boss' work. that would be kind of impertinent of me and i am sure they would think so. i also worry that saying i agree with one or the other will indicate to clients or to litigants in future cases --...

The facts law. those are some of the things judicial independence means to me. it means to me the judicial oath that i took to administer justice without respect to persons. to do equal right to the poor and rich and discharge dutifully the oath of my office. it's a beautiful oath and statutory oath written by this body. that's what judicial independence means to me. happy to talk about the separation of powers too if you'd like, mr. chairman or answer another question. up to you. >> you're record made clear you're not afraid to fulfill your role in depend -- independently and gave order for a...

A car. modern technology. how do you apply the original constitution written 200 years ago to that? and the court went back and looked at the law 200 years ago. and one of the things it found was that attaching something to someone else's property is a trespass. and would be considered a search. and the court held that if that's a trespass and a search 247bd years ago, it has to be today, though the technology is obviously different. so the technology changes but the principles don't. and it can't be the case that the united states constitution is any less protective of the people's liberties ...

Contested issue. we move forward. senator, the value of that is and the united states supreme court takes 70 or 80 case as a year. that's a tiny fraction of all the disputes in our federal legal system. and they're unanimous in cases when have divided judge that's why the supreme court takes the case and it's a rare case where we disagree. they're unanimous 40% of the time. >> one other question. >> sure. >> do you view roe as having super precedent? >> senator, super precedent -- >> in numbers? >> it's been reaffirmed many times. i can say that, yes. >> yes, dozens. all right. i would like no...

National origin, religion and other factors. vance v. ball which made it more difficult for workers to prove plain discrimination claims. as senator whitehouse pointed, each of these cases was 5-4 and justice scalia voted with the majority against the employee in every case. president trump and others have said you are the next scalia. so i think it's only fair to ask you, do you disagree with any of the mairjority opinions that jue scalia joined in these cases? if so, which ones do you especially disagree with, and why? these have already been decided. >> i understand, senator. again, if i in...