On your to join us to honor Sandra Day Oconnor. It turns out that Justice Ginsburg and Justice Oconnor sharon distinction that is interesting nicknames. When Justice Oconnor was confirmed she owned the moniker f w. Oh tsv for first women on the Supreme Court. Justice ginsburg meanwhile has been crowned the notorious rbg. Ill leave it to you to decide which one is catcher. The justices also share a lifelong commitment to expanding opportunities for women. So it makes sense that when Justice Ginsburg joins us Justice Oconnor on the bench in 1993 the two bonded over their historic role and current in transforming the Supreme Court. Both justices had to overcome discrimination and professional rejection but Justice Oconnor once put a helpful spin on it. If they had come of age when women could easily be lawyers she told Justice Ginsburg. They would probably have ended up has retired partners of some law firm. But because that round was not open to us Justice Oconnor explained, we had to fi
We know that from the kilo case where Justice Scalia said when cuttingedge technology is used in that case to invade the privacy of the home then a warrant was presumptively required and the jones case suggested that even outside the home you might have an expectation of privacy against cuttingedge technology. In the end, the government is limited in its ability to record our conversations in public by state and federal laws, but the expectation of privacy test would have protected you against the laser beam. James, welcome to landmark cases. Youre on. Hi. When Justice Stewart delivered the opinion in court he took issue with the way the petitioner act tomorrow lated the questions which included a, whether a public telephone booth was a publicly protected area and physical penetration was necessary before search and seizure could be said were violations to the Fourth Amendment to the United States constitution. He added a couple of words in there. One was in place of right to privacy.
Cspan3. All persons having persons before the honorable, Supreme Court of the United States who admonish to draw near and give their attention. Landmark cases, cspan special history series produced in partnership with the National Constitution center exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 historic Supreme Court decisions. Mr. Chief justice may it please the court. Quite often in many of the most famous decisions are ones that the court took that were quite unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of different people who help stick together because they believe in a rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspan landmark cases. Tonights case is katz versus the United States, it is a 1967 case and the person who gave his name to the case is somewhat of an unlikely hero. He was a bookmaker specializing in College Basketball games and he took his wiretapping case to the Supreme Court an
National conversation through cspans Daily Program or through our social media feeds. Cspan created by americas Cable Television companies as a Public Service and brought to you today by your television provider. All persons having business before the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States are admonished to draw near and give their attention. Landmark cases, cspans special history series produced in partnership with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 historic Supreme Court decisions. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court. Quite often in many of our most famous decisions are ones that the court took that were quite unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of different people who help stick together because they believe in a rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspan landmark cases. Tonights case is katz versus the United States,
Having business before the Supreme Court will want to draw near and give their attention. Announcer landmark cases, cspans special history series. Exploring the human story and constitutional dramas behind 12 Supreme Court decisions. Quite often, in our famous decisions, the Supreme Court was unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate what it means to live in a society of different people who help stick together because they believe in the believe in the rule of law. Tonights case is katz v. United states. It is a 1967 case. Charles katz was an unlikely hero. He took his wiretapping case to the Supreme Court and in a seven to one decision expanded our privacy rights. We will begin by listening to Justice Samuel alito in his constitution hearings where he talked about the importance of the kats case. I was talking about cats versus the United States this morning in relation to wiretapping. You had to look into property law in the interest of an invasion, and then with the de