A crucial supreme Court Ruling on Affirmative Action could come tomorrow, as colleges and universities grapple with the possibility that race might no longer be a factor in admissions. The Central Question being decided this time is should Affirmative Action continue forever In The Name Of diversity, and are the gains achieved worth the harms allegedly inflicted on Asian American students . This is the most important civil Rights Case of our era. I dont think its an overstatement to say theyre freaking out right now. One admissions official told me, some colleges are so worried about being sued in the wake of this decision that theyre thinking about scrubbing racial and ethnic data from their websites. There has to be some discrimination here. There has to be something against Asian Americans specifically. This case is going to be something more than just about admissions. The notion that noticing race is per se unconstitutional could be devastating for a number of areas of the law. An
Down 1. 6 yesterday, off of session lows. The dow industrials down 650 650 points, that was 2 and a quarter percent lower at 4 00 on wall street. Investors rattled over no progress on stimulus and a rise in covid cases. Its a big day for earnings, dow components merck, 3m. Caterpillar all reporting quarterly numbers this morning. We will get a snapshot of the airlines when jetblue reports and a look at big pharma when pfizer reports. The road to the white house, we hit the one week to go mark, americans are headed th to the polls in seven short days. President trump and joe biden begin the final push before election day. Stimulus negotiations losing momentum, time is running out for lawmakers to make a deal before november 3rd. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she remains opt my particular over talks optimistic over talks. Congressman tom reed told me yesterday if we dont have a deal by election day, we may not have one until february. Todays the day, my new book, the cost, trump, china
Valid and the president appealed and now the case is before the appeals court. Thank you, judge. Oyea oyea oyea, all person having business before the United States court of appeals for the District Of Columbia circuit are admonished to draw near and give attention, god save the United States and Honorable Courts. 195142, donald j. Trump,et al, and [inaudible] mr. Norris. Good morning. Good morning, your honor. May it please the court. In april of 2019 when the Oversight Committee issued this subpoena to mazars it had an extraordinarily broad view of its own investigative authority. According to the committee, the power to subpoena the president s personal papers was could he extensive with the power to legislate and did not have to give any reasons or explanation with what legislative goals its pursuing and had no duty to meaningful narrow or tailor its request. That view of its own authority is reflected in the subpoena which is drafted in incredibly broad terms and substantiated wit
Supreme court. The justices remanded the case back to the lower courts for additional consideration, including separation of powers concerns. Oyea oyea oyea, all person having business before the United States court of a good morning. Good morning, your honor. May it please the court. In april of 2019 when the Oversight Committee issued this subpoena to mazars it had an extraordinarily broad view of its own investigative authority. According to the committee, the power to subpoena the president s personal papers was could he extensive with the power to legislate and did not have to give any reasons or explanation with what legislative goals its pursuing and had no duty to meaningful narrow or tailor its request. That view of its own authority is reflected in the subpoena which is drafted in incredibly broad terms and substantiated with little more than a sentence, a vague sentence in a memo about legislation. But the committees view of its own authority was rejected by the Supreme Cour
May it please the court. In april of 2019 when the Oversight Committee issued this subpoena to mazars it had an extraordinarily broad view of its own investigative authority. According to the committee, the power to subpoena the president s personal papers was could he extensive with the power to legislate and did not have to give any reasons or explanation with what legislative goals its pursuing and had no duty to meaningful narrow or tailor its request. That view of its own authority is reflected in the subpoena which is drafted in incredibly broad terms and substantiated with little more than a sentence, a vague sentence in a memo about legislation. But the committees view of its own authority was rejected by the Supreme Court in this case 90. The Court Announced a new test that substantially restricts congresss power to subpoena the personal papers. In response to that decision the complete did not withdraw, narrow or even reissue the subpoena. It instead attaches a 25,000 word me