Well, i think the court by citing loving in windsor thinks that there is not much difference between marriage by a samesex couple and marriage by an interracial couple. They didnt decide the case but they cited it. The trend is certainly in that direction. I think the court its different from saying what loving stands for. Isnt the answer to my question about what happened in 1968 pretty obvious because we have baker in 1973. I think that lawrence, excuse me, that Justice Kennedy tells us something about how the court may be viewing these cases. I think what he is saying and i think you see it in lawrence and you see it in windsor. The court is saying that back decades ago, certain practices were accepted. Now we understand more about these things and we now understand that these are now going to be framed as discriminatory. We didnt know anything about samesex couples back at the at the time of loving. These were hiding because their conduct was criminalized. I think to say that this
So transportation ballot measures were a mixed bag. Like youre talking about earlier, the federal gas tax has not been raised in about 20 years. Most states have raised theirs in about 20 years, and states are constantly worried about finding money for infrastructure to pay for road repair and bridge repair. It is an issue that voters really care about. There was good news on tuesday in texas, wisconsin and maryland. Voters approved measures either to increase or protect transportation funding. In texas they are not going to put a part of the revenues from oil and gas taxes toward paying for transportation. Texas particularly as big traffic problems there. Never brought on by the oil boom and all the workers that came there. So its a big issue that voters care about there. And in both wisconsin and maryland they voted to basically lock up their transportation funds so they can no longer be used for general purposes which is something that often happened in the past and he pleaded their
James deluc. I want to start with a question and i and inspired by a couple presentations. What it has to do with for the purposes of working on kyushus like protective equipment, disinfection, waste disposal, has any thought been given to what is an appropriate surrogate for beat ebola virus in terms of the behavior of survival under various conditions yet does not require being in a Laboratory Facilities in order to run an experiment. To people have any ideas . Dr. Peters . There is the species of ebola which is not pathogenic for humans and can be downgraded from 4. In addition to that, colleagues have produced an ebola virus by genetic engineering to ward off interference which ebola has and that is probably not pathogenic, institution or review board giving permission to use it. Any ideas about that . There are various viruses, and the question, you do those experiments and say is does that react the same way as the real virus but that would be another idea. From the point of view
There are few marred huge margins for white voters. Hard to win statewide, even in a state with a strong minority population. The democratic chair of the white vote was down share of the white vote was down since 2008. That is a problem for the problem. For the party. There are still a lot of white voters here. Back to your point about the specific candidate you cant take anything for granted. We want to talk about statelevel Ballot Initiatives as well as some a local elections, and measures at local levels, but i want to make sure we have time for a couple of questions right now. As far as the gubernatorial elections or the state elections, yes . As far as the demographics, the republicans were mores bread out the republicans were more spread out, what is the distribution . How did the distribution affect this years races . One reason is we thought that this year was not going to be a wave of election is because republicans would have the rural vote and places like kansas. We talk abo
So, unfortunately im constrained in what i can say, of course, about it. But what i can say is as in the Amnesty International case and in the Supreme Court, its plaintiffs burden to demonstrate and they failed to do so here, not only because their theory as subscribers of Verizon Wireless, which they cannot substantiate the District Court acknowledged theres no evidence that Verizon Wireless participated, but also because the injury that they assert is not based on the mere collection of metadata itself but the possibility that the government metadata to that compile information about the acvities of these particular plaintiffs. If there is an invasion of privacy by the collection of the metadata and the Supreme Court in jones recognizes even in the opinion of the court that it is the protected interest under the Fourth Amendment, then is it necessary that they show any misuse against them or is the collection by itself an invasion of privacy sufficient to meet that element of standin