Landmark cases, cspan special history series produced in cooperation with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas between 12 Historic Supreme Court decisions. Number 759, earnest hernandez, Petitioner Versus roe v. Wade. The quite often, and many of our famous decisions, there once that the court took quite unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of 310 million different people who have helped skip world together because they believe in the rule of law. Good evening. Welcome to cnns new series, landmark cases. Tonight, and for the next 11 weeks, will be looking at 12 cases that have affected the country and affected the development of the horton society. Now we focus on marbury v. Madison, one of the earliest cases, and its interesting because it came about between the two Founding Fathers who developed and empathy after the election of 1800 and different vie
I would suggest only under those circumstances anticipated by this resolution can we continue work on behalf of the american public. I yield back. There is no constitutional issues revolving around whether or not committees can meet virtually. But congress creates the committees so hopefully we can all agree on that. Mr. Chairman i want to make a comment on the suggestion the Public Health people are making policy. They are not the governors cares one mayors and policymakers seek advice during a crisis from experienced scientist and Public Health officials, they can take that advice are not. All over the country there isic evidence some people take the advice and some are not. But all scientist that i know and the Public Health people in this country and many of whom i have worked with for years are very careful not to be policymakers they are particularly careful to present the evidence and not substitute for the policymakers. This country which has invested hundreds of billions of do
Bill providing an additional 3 trillion in coronavirus economic stimulus. We expect to see that bill on the floor tomorrow. Also to discuss promoting voting and Committee Work. And now back to the start of todays hearing, this is cspan3. [inaudible conversations] the rules committee will come to order. Before i give my Opening Statement i just want to read a guidance from the attending physician, doctor monahan. We asked him specifically about the use of face coverings during proceedings like these and while he has not mandated their use he did share that and i quote, my preferences that members retain their face coverings when speaking as an activity which can release virus particles. Especially if the speaking is of a highspirited nature. S ive never had a meeting in the rules committee that hasnt been of a highspirited nature so we will leave it up to individual members to decide but i think to be cautious here i will keep mine on and i hope that everybody else will be mindful of th
Is not we dont need to be captives or hostage to the idea that in an earlier age there was no physical way, there was no technological way for us to come together and i would suggest that only under the very narrow circumstances anticipated by this resolution could we continue to work on behalf of the american public. I appreciate and yield back you also raised are the point. I dont think theres any constitutional issues revolving revolving around whether or not committees can meet virtually. I mean, the constitution the commit constitution creates the committees. We all agree on that. Miss shalala. Mr. Chairman, i want to make a comment about the suggestion that scientists and Public Health people are making policy in this country. They are not. Were the policymakers. The governors, the mayors are the policymakers. They seek advice during a crisis like this one with a vicious virus from experienced scientists and Public Health officials, and they can take that advice or not take that
Okay, the rules committee will come to order. Before i give my opening statement, i just want to read a guidance from the attending physician. And we asked him specifically about the use of face coverings during proceedings like these. And while he is not mandated their use, he did share that, and i quote, my preference is that members retain their face covers when speaking as speaking is an activity which can release virus particles, especially if the speaking is of high spirited nature. And ive never had a meeting in the rules committee that hasnt been of a high spirited nature. So were going to leave it up to individual members to decide. But i think i will to be cautious here, im going to keep mine on. Others will be mindful of the reason why there is guidance on this issue. It has been roughly three months since the First Community transmission of covid19 was discovered in the United States. Since that time, our world has changed dramatically. There are now more than 1. 3 million