Page 29 - Second Amendment Case News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Huge points of power that seems to square with the constitution of the framer's design. "maybe the time has come to face the behemoth." that sounds like again, you're going a step further and talking about overturning a major precedent. i want to know if that's what you mean, if you think it should be overturned and if you have considered the ramifications of that when justice scalia himself was the original champion of the chevron doctrine. >> senator, all i can do is explain to you why i was concerned about chevron in that case. and i was concerned because, again, we had an undocumented immi...

For, gosh, 50, 60 years. i could pointd point you to a case in which i have applied it and i think might give you what you are looking for senator in terms of comfort about how i apply it. boostos versus a and e network, it involved a prisoner who was concerned he had been misrepresented as a member of the aryan brother'd hao. claimed he wasn't a member, just a fellow traveler. and sought damages for that. our court declined to grant that relief saying that substantial truth is protected even if it's not strictly true, and much more is required by the first amendment in order to state a claim....

Should recognize a reporter's privilege? >> senator, i know those case come up from time to time, so i have to be very cave. but your description of the case is entirely accurate. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> before we recess i'd like to enter into the record a commentary in the chicago tribune called crying wolf over neil souch written by dennis hutchinson a life long registered delts. he talked about experience over chevron deference. he writes, quote, there are two sides to deference, my guess is that prochevron advocates will soon be begging federal courts not to deter to feder...

E-mail. no notes. justice kagan and justice scalia wrote a dissent saying fish? that's a tangible object, right? he had notice. you shouldn't have done it. these things don't divide along any kind of ordinary idealogical line. i'm confident who are justices in that case or heller or any of these cases who would as a matter of policy come out differently than they did as a matter of judging. that to me is all the difference in the world. notice doing what we would like, what we think the law is. >> let's turn to another topic. some of my colleagues on the democratic side have raised some questi...

And you were expected to have a view about pretty much anything, and everything, that he asked. and he would just sit there and chuckle at you. and he would laugh at you. and you are wondering what he thought. he never revealed his hand. and he would just walk out of the office. say oh, that's what justice gorsuch thinks. okay. and then he would go back and think about it himself. and then he would come back in again. the whole thing would repeat himself. as he was working through each case himself he would want to bounce ideas off of this know-nothing 20-something-year-old kid. that to me tau...