Cspan2. Confirmation hearings for amy coney barre Amy Coney Barrett president trumps nominee to the supreme court, and spoke about the first president ial debate. Here is a look. This week the senators who are sitting down with judge Amy Coney Barrett are meeting an incredibly impressive jurist and highly qualified nominee. Theyre hearing from the professor whom former colleagues call quote, mind blowingly intelligent. One of the most humble people youre going to meet and the complete package. Theyre meeting a law school valedictorian, an Award Winning academic whom peers praise for her lucid elegant pros, piercing legal analysis and absolute dedication to the rule of law and senators are meeting the distinguished circuit judge, liberal law professor feldman says is a brilliant and conscientious lawyer who is highly qualified to serve on the supreme court. Some of our democratic colleagues have decided they will refuse to meet with judge barrett. Several interest volunteered that their
Keynote speaker at the Democratic National convention joins us to talk about campaign 2020. Join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, Text Messages and tweets. Host good morning, its monday, september 14, 2020, meaning there are just now if the days until election date. This morning we begin by hearing from just those voters who will be casting ballots for the first time this election cycle. Whether you are newly eligible or just newly engaged after never voting in the past, we want to hear from you this morning. Firsttime voters only, give us a call, let us know which issues are driving your choices this election cycle. Supporters of joe biden, the number is 202 7488000. Firsttime voters supporting President Trump, 202 7488001. If you are a firsttime voter who is undecided or supports someone else, 202 7488002. Send us a text this morning, 202 7488003. If you do, include your name and where you are from. Otherwise, catch up with us on social media, twitter and face
The honorable, the chief justice and associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Oh yea, oh yea, oh yea, all persons having business before the honorable, the Supreme Court of the United States are admonished to give their attention for the court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. Chief Justice Roberts we will hear argument first this morning in case 19465, chiafalo and others versus the state of washington. Mr. Lessig may it please this court. The question in these cases is straightforward. Do states have the power to control, through law how an elector may vote . They do not. The expected meaning of the words of the constitution against the background of the framers deliberation make it clear that the states have no such power. But what is also clear is that washington does not like the constitutions design. It declares that the votes cast are not, as the constitution expressly describes them, their votes, meaning the electors votes
Engages in a rebellion or one who would perpetrate a bait and switch on the people of their state by voting contrary to a binding pledge. By contrast, if a state wishes to treat electors as free agents rather than as proxy voters, it is free to do so. In short, states determine how to select electors and ensure that they meet the relative requirements and perform their duties as assigned. This means under green that states can oversee bribery as an incident as a power to appoint. This must include the power to remove and elector without requiring a full criminal trial. Under my friend mr. Lessigs position, as a practicality bribed electors would cast ballots and illegal notes. The state prevented mr. Baca from casting an illegal ballot. Just like its an illegal ballot if you dont sign it. As this course explained, the purpose of the 12th amendment reflected the reality that the states actors acted as pledge agents. As for Justice Ginsburg point about the enforcing of a pledge requireme
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. This oral argument from may is just over an hour and a half. The honorable, the chief justice and the associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Oh yea, oh yea, all persons having business before the Supreme Court of the United States are admonished to give their attention as the court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear arguments in case 19431 Little Sisters of the poor v. Pennsylvania in the consolidated case. General francisco. Mr. Chief justice, may it please the court. In 2011, the government required employers to provide Insurance Coverage for all fda approved contraception, including many religious employers who objected to the coverage, sparking years of litigation. In 2017, in the best traditions of this countrys commitment to religious liberty, the government sought to resolve the issue by promulgating new rules, excepting those employers who objected t