Reached another devastating and unthinkable moment in a pandemic that continues to change our country and our way of life. As we come on the air tonight, more than 200,000 people in the u. S. Have now been killed by the virus. 200,000 lives lost, 200,000 stories left unfinished. And tonight, theres some breaking news that the crisis may once again be getting worse. One of the leading models used by the white house now projects that by the end of the year, the death toll nationwide may nearly double to 378,000. Tonight, confirmed cases in the u. S. Are also increasing, now growing at the fastest rate they have in two months. And the f. D. A. Is reportedly tightening its standards for approving a coronavirus vaccine, dimming hopes that there will be one widely available this year. Once again, thrusting the pandemic into the forefront of this years president ial campaign. Tonight, theres also been another Seismic Shift here in washington with major implications for this years election. Se
This philosophy that some historians have called right related liberalism. The idea that liberalism was primarily devoted to the protection of individual rights. As a result, the Supreme Court became an important mechanism for this. One problem, which is that if you are going to govern, you have to be able to appoint Supreme Court justices. This becomes an increasingly fraught prospect for liberals. So the backdrop. Lbj. After 1964 with the Civil Rights Act, 1965 with the Voting Rights act, he has a sense that the Supreme Court will be significant. Unlike with kennedy, there are no openings on the court. Johnson essentially creates one. The first one comes in 1965. It is a custom which dates back to the wilson administration. There was one jewish member on the court. The jewish member on the court in the early 1960s was arthur goldberg. He had been appointed by jfk. Johnson however wants to appoint this man, his longtime lawyer and fairly close personal friend and advisor, abe fortas.
The idea that it was a particular job of the Supreme Court to stand up on behalf of people who may not have majority support. Whether it was atheists or Civil Rights Activist or criminal defendants throughout the 1960s. Second was the emergence of this philosophy that some historians have called right related liberalism. The idea that liberalism was protected individual rights. As a result, the Supreme Court became an important mechanism for this. One problem, which is that if you are going to govern, you have to be able to appoint Supreme Court justices. This becomes an increasingly fraught prospect for liberals. Lyndon b. Johnson, after 1964 with the Civil Rights Act, 1965 with the Voting Rights act, he has a sense that the Supreme Court will be significant. Unlike with kennedy, there are no openings on the court. Johnson essentially creates one. He first comes in 1965. It is a custom which dates back to the wilson administration. There was one jewish member on the court. The jewish
Landmark cases produced in partnership with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 Historic Supreme Court decisions. Mr chief justice. Good evening, welcome to see spencers landmark cases. Tonights case is the New York Times Company Versus the United States, in this 1971 case, the Supreme Court ruled six to three against the knicks this Nixon Administration in a big win for journalism. The decision upheld the New York Times in the Washington Post, which you just saw depicted in this recent movie, the right to project published classified information on the history of the vietnam war over significant objections from the pentagon and the white house. We have to terrific guests at the table tonight, to help us understand how this case unfolded. And what it means for us today in our society. Let me introduce you to flloyd abrams, the bestknown First Amendment lawyer counsel in the New York Times case and he is the attorney in new y
Captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2008 they followed your lead, published the papers. At least were not alone. I have to tell the audience just a small eye roll here, because the New York Times was the first to publish the papers, but thats drama, after all. I wanted to ask both of you from a legal strategy standpoint, Daniel Ellsberg sending it out to so many papers, how does that change the governments ability to prosecute the case . Well, floyd should be the one to answer that first because he was directly involved. Right. Well, it did make it harder to prosecute the prior restraint case, the case that weve been talking about, against the times and then other papers. They did bring actions against the post, and the Christian Science monitor and other papers, you know, who got the papers from elsberg, to stop them as well. But one judge in the District Of Columbia board of appeals put it very well when lawyers were in front of him on this case. He said, youre asking u