Anniversary of the appointment of John Marshall to the Supreme Court. The capstone of that particular evening was a rousing lecture by Justice Scalia about the importance of John Marshall to the history of the court and the history of the country. Justice scalia was a grand friend of both the Marshall Foundation and the Supreme Court Historical Society. I hope you will join me in just a moment of silence to remember Justice Scalia. Thank you. We are grateful this evening that the court, chief Justice Roberts and his colleagues, allow the Supreme Court Historical Society to continue using this courtroom for its programs. It is a gift to us, and we are grateful. At this juncture, normally, i would have a few remarks to introduce our distinguished host for the evening. But it seems that chief Justice Roberts is on a tight schedule this evening, we are lucky to get him here. He has asked that his introduction be as brief as possible. Since we are so grateful to chief Justice Roberts for hi
I hope you will join me in just a moment of silence to remember Justice Scalia. Thank you. We are grateful this evening that the court, chief Justice Roberts and his colleagues, allow the Supreme Court Historical Society to continue using this courtroom for its programs. It is a gift to us, and we are grateful. At this juncture, normally, i would have a few remarks introduce our distinguished host for the evening. But it seems that chief Justice Roberts is on a tight schedule this evening, we are lucky to get him here. He has asked that his introduction be as brief as possible. Since we are so grateful to chief Justice Roberts for his continuing support of the society, and since he is, after all, the chief justice, let me just say right now, it is my privilege and my owner to introduce our host for the evening, chief justice john roberts. [applause] Justice Roberts thank you. That is actually my preferred introduction even when i have lots of time. The memorialnote drapery we have on t
Good afternoon, everyone. I would like to thank everyone here for coming out. Another wonderful reading. I would like to take care of housekeeping firstperiod please silence your cell phones at this time and we have cspan with us this afternoon, so when you ask your questions please use our audience microphone. Lastly, this is not the last event today, so while we would usually ask you to fold up your chairs, today we ask you keep your chairs where they are. We welcome you today. We do over 500 events here in addition to events in this space we have different venues across the city and also hold book groups, classes and literary trips are at the year. I would like to begin by saying i am pleased to welcome Public Policy and a law professor, Melvin Urofsky, as he presents his new book, dissent and the Supreme Court. Its role in Court History and the nations constitutional dialogue. Melvin urofsky has written and edited 52 books and has devoted his career to studying americas legal histo
Things have changed a lot. I think its really impresentesive and i feel really good about that. Thank you. Thank you so much. Im with new rules for global finance. I wanted to pick up on the tax issues. I note in the g20 when they talk about tax and context of development they say we really have to do Capacity Building. Im wondering if the african finance ministers and Central Bank Governors and so on, tax administrators, if on a continental basis you have been able to get together and say, here is the Capacity Building we want and need and here are our preferred instructors. If not, ill work with you. One more. Im with the center for Global Development here in d. C. My question is, i was hoping would you touch on the measurability of some of these targets. I know one of the greatest strengths about the mbgs was they had these specific percentages and numbers that people could actually tangibly measure to varying degrees. Obviously, there is some discussion about the measurability of t
Now, one thing that strikes me is i dont think theres really, should be a large role for courts in dealing with the problem of surveillance at the largest area here. And the reason i dont think that is in the usual constitution case it is some kind of, someone is doing something very unpopular, minority often, some not you know with extreme ideas, and the function of Constitutional Rights is to protect these people from the majority, from state legislatures, some congress. But in the case of surveillance you really have a very good balance that allows this to be dealt with by the political process. Because everybody is very concerned about National Security and crime and cyber harassment and so on, all right . So if you have this kind of balance where people care about both sides, the arguments for surveillance, the arguments for limiting surveillance, i dont see why the courts have to get significantly involved. And it its related to the point that Justice Alito made in the jones case