The wall street journal calculates that icahn will make 400 million if hes right. More on that in a moment. Lets get to the market. Down yesterday, and probably opening a little lower this morning. President trump says if china doesnt make a trade deal, he might raise tariffs even more. He also said hes very happy with china because the treasury has taken in almost 100 billion from tariffs. All right. The dow is going to open down about 80, s p down about 9, nasdaq down about 32. But all of them still right at record highs. In a couple of hours, really big meeting in texas. Apple meets the president. Tim cook meets donald trump. This is at the new mac pro factory in austin. Pivotal meeting. Its about building apple products in america. Its about tariffs on apple products. Its about china trade negotiations. It is a big deal meeting. Just as important, what will the president say to reporters when he leaves the white house . We will certainly tell you. Varney company is about to begin.
Believes would better protect and empower citizens. The program is about an hour. Host welcome, justice stevens. On behalf of the National Constitution center, its so great to see you. You honored the National Constitution center a few weeks ago by visiting us. The Constitution Center, as you know, is the only institution in america that has a congressional charter to disseminate information about the constitution on a nonpartisan basis, and i cant think of a better book to discuss in connection with that mission than your wonderful new book, six amendments how and why we should change the constitution. Youve proposed six constitutional amendments on topics ranging from Campaign Finance and sovereign immunity and political gerrymandering to gun control and the Death Penalty. All of these are cases where the Supreme Court ruled differently, and you dissented in many of these cases. Tell me why you decided to write the book and propose these six constitutional amendments. Guest well, its
A look at this weeks list of nonfiction bestsellers according to the New York Times. Next on booktv, after words with guest host jeffrey rosen, president and ceo of the National Constitution center. This week Justice John Paul stevens and his latest book six amendments how and why we should change the constitution. The retired u. S. Supreme Court Justice targets gun violence, the Death Penalty, gerrymandering, and Campaign Finance in amendments he believes would better protect and empower citizens. The program is about one hour. Host welcome, justice stevens. On behalf of the National Constitution center its so great to see you. Are you honored the National Constitution center a few weeks ago by visiting us. The Constitution Center israel institutions and in americas congressional charter consuming information about the constitution on a nonpartisan basis. I can think of a better book to discuss in connection with that mission than your wonderful new book six amendments how and why we
You have proposed six constitutional amendments on topics ranging from Campaign Finance and sovereign immunity and political gerrymandering to gun control and the Death Penalty and the anticommandeering principle. All of these are cases where the Supreme Court ruled differently and you dissented in many of these cases. Tell me why he decided to write a book and why he decided to propose the six constitutional amendments . Guest well its sort of a project that just kind of grew to tell you the truth. The immediate cause was the killing of the schoolchildren in connecticut and the New York Times story about the fact that the anticommandeering rule places an obstacle in the way of the governments total information on background checks to precede the purchase of guns. I had not actually realize before i read that New York Times story that rule does in fact increase the likelihood that a person wont be eligible who would be allowed to purchase guns who shouldnt. That did not cause that part
The federal government that used state officials to help get the army drafted, and i think its more important than people realize. Host you said the court misconstrued previous precedents. Guest thats true, although its interesting enough that the majority opinion did not cite either of the two cases that would have been provided better support for its holding than any case they did cite. One was precivil war case that had basically held there was an rule and Justice Marshal in a later opinion overruled that case and said it was the product of an other part of our history that has long gone by. It is precivil war and pre14th pre14th amendment. Host this is a big theme that runs throughout the book in your view the civil war and reconstruction amendments that followed it transformed the relation between federal and state power and gave the federal government broad power to protect minorities and so of national problems. You object in many of these cases that some of your colleagues on t