Justice and the associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. All persons having business for the honorable Supreme Court of the United States are advised to give their attention for the court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear argument first this morning in case trump vs. New york. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court, this case should be over. Thatistrict court held illegal aliens would be shielded from her dissipating in the enumeration. But that is now over, and whatever existed has thawed. They pivoted therefore to possible future injuries but as of this very morning, career experts at the Census Bureau confirmed with me that they still dont know even roughly how many illegal aliens they would be able to identify, let alone how their number and geographic concentration might affect the course of it. And if they dont know, certainly the other parties in this case do not. The court therefore should follow the co
Hughes. The issues were large. They included the problems of a peoples industry, its people, its agriculture, its agriculture, its resources. But the immediate battlefield of the struggle was the constitution with its checks and balances. Its division of power between executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. This is the struggle known as the Court Packing fight. On august 14th 1935, president franklin d. Roosevelt signed the Social Security act. Its provisions included old age benefits and payroll taxes to help finance them. The president made a brief statement. Pres. Roosevelt to millions of our citizens who will reap direct benefits and unemployment age pensions old and increased services for the protection of children narrator the payroll taxes were to start in 1937. But months before that in boston, massachusetts, in Federal District court, an action was begun for attorneys for george davis, a shareholder in the Edison Company in boston. He was suing for an injun
Let me start by saying that as i indicated yesterday, ill think it is extremely important here in the next couple of months not to have any earthshaking changes with regard to defense and foreign policy. I think a precipitous drawdown in either afghanistan or iraq would be a mistake. I have so said publicly yesterday. And i hope that is precisely where these discussions end up. It is hard not to be really excited about the two new vaccines. Senator blunt was very much involved in that part of the cares act. If you look at the effectiveness of the cares act, it has to be one of the most dramatic and effective pieces of legislation ever passed by congress. And i would remind everyone that it passed first in the Republican Senate and then was approved on a voice vote by the house. I am focusing on the next couple of months. We hope to get on with the appropriation. I believe the speaker would like to do that. I would like to do that. Hopefully that will be the view of the administration a
Fulton versus city of philadelphia. Ms. Windham. Mr. Chief justice and may it please theourt, the court below made a simple error. They failed to understand where emplment division versus sth controls and where it doesnt. Ith doesnt control when the government uses the system of individualized exemptions. Orem when it makes other exceptions that underminets rules or when it changes the rules to phibit a religious practice. Philadelphia made all threefe those errors here and the city still cant identify a neutral genelly applicable law even ter six attempts and in our knowledge is its decisions are subjective and individualized. The courts belowtill apply to smith and even said smith would be a dea letter if petitioners prevailed a that demonstrates the confusion and instability smith has csed. Respondents rather than defendansmith asked the court for a newly minted nstitutional standard that is even less protective of religious exercise and that approa has no basis in the text, history
Attention to where the court is sitting god save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear arguments this morning case number 19123 fulton versus city of philadelphia. Mr. Chief justice and mia please the court, and failing to understand where the controls and where it doesnt smith it doesnt control when the government uses a system ofndividualized exemptions or when it makes other exceptns to undermine the rule or when it changes the rules to prohibit a religious practice philadelphia made all three of those errors here. U can identify and apicable law even after six tempts and our kwledge is the decisions are subjective d individualized. The courts bel said smith would be a dead letter if petitioners prevailed and respondents asked the cou for a newly minted constitutional standard that approach has no basis in the traditions of the free exercise clause. The city has no compelling reason that is exercised by harris children in philadelphia for two centuries nor does it