in which it says no state can force to you go to public schools because no state has the right to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. and that s a very short step from establishing a mental right to home schooling. why would the administration invest this much time to stop this family s appeal? well, that s use of discretion. this is administration that has exempted millions of young illegal immigrants at its discretion because it thinks that the policy is bad. here it could easily have not appealed the decision that would have allowed them to stay. so, i agree with that but, on the principle, the reason that conservatives on the court wouldn t hear the case, is because you have got to be very careful how much sympathy you have for the family. and i would look for another way in which you let them say. you don t want to expand the idea of asylum to the point where anybody can get in because of an idiosyncratic
of innocence, which is nonsensical, because, of course, if a trial court were to look at the dna evidence but then only consider all the evidence of guilt, the court wouldn t be considering everything that makes a compelling case for innocence. let me ask you a question, mr. riordan. let s focus on the evidence situation. and let s say that i agree with you, that maybe the trial judge was in error with respect to just limiting the evidence to evidence of guilt. what evidence then would be considered? would it be the evidence that was presented at the trial or everything that has occurrd over the last 17 years? i don t think that it can be rationally read other than to say the court must consider, that is placing the scale not only the evidence of guilt, but also all other evidence, whether or not admitted at the first trial. the court will recognize
this is why gun free zones are stupid. and the thing about him wanting the death penalty now, he admitted in the courtroom he played dead so people would stop shooting him so he could stand trial. he is a coward for allowing that to happen and coming back, saying i am not going to put on defense and and he wanted to plead guilty, the court wouldn t accept the guilty plea. now we have to go through this mockery, where he has added insult of questioning the victims and making them relive the terror all over again. meanwhile, we don t classify it appropriately. you know has to be reclassified? if we find out look, he stood up, blows away 14 people greg says it, i keep repeating my jokes, i have to repeat a question i had yesterday. how is it that with all this guy they knew about this guy, how did he get away with this so long? this is the big issue.
this is why gun free zones are stupid. and the thing about him wanting the death penalty now, he admitted in the courtroom he played dead so people would stop shooting him so he could stand trial. he is a coward for allowing that to happen and coming back, saying i am not going to put on defense and and he wanted to plead guilty, the court wouldn t accept the guilty plea. now we have to go through this mockery, where he has added insult of questioning the victims and making them relive the terror all over again. meanwhile, we don t classify it appropriately. you know has to be reclassified? if we find out look, he stood up, blows away 14 people greg says it, i keep repeating my jokes, i have to repeat a question i had yesterday. how is it that with all this guy they knew about this guy, how did he get away with this so long? this is the big issue.
federal government. so this is a challenge to that. what the challengers say is, well, that may have been true in 65 and in the four times that congress has renewed it, but the law hasn t changed and times have. we have an african-american re-elected. we have more african-americans in congress and state houses. they say that the times have moved on, the burdens under this law are unconstitutional. and again, the court wouldn t take up this case unless they were there wasn t at least some movement to try to potentially change it. the supreme court gave congress a homework assignment four years ago when they came very close to strike being the constitutionality down of the voting rights act. they said we don t think the coverage map for congress has for what areas has to do this matches anymore what the problem is. some areas in the north have worse than the south and it is out of balance with the times. so congress, attention, please, make the change. congress of course has done