Like people are married to their work or whatever but they destroy the word. Host anne is waiting in greenville, carolina. Good morning. Caller good morning. I think it is interesting that to say ishis topic the Supreme Court becoming too political. When the Supreme Court made decisions that say the andblicans disagreed with they are very vocal about it, the Affordable Care act and samesex marriage and those things, they were not vocal or had any concern when the Supreme Court took away part of the Voting Rights act. There was no protest about that or when the Supreme Court decided that corporations were people and not all of this money could come into the system without any question. Those are two cases that republicans had no concern about and were very happy with the Supreme Court wri. Host do you think democrats have brought this up . It has become an issue on the campaign trail that Bernie Sanders has talked about hillary as talked about that Hillary Clinton has talked about. Caller we probably do need to speak out more about that. Happenedxactly what democrats do need to speak out more about the concerns that they have. Host our last caller in this segment of the washington journal as we continue to show you live pictures of the Supreme Court. We will show you those throughout this mornings show. Up next, we will be joined by adam liptak, the Supreme Court correspondent for the new york. Mes we will hear from him about some of the major cases before the Supreme Court. We will discuss the Roberts Court and how that term is being used. Joined be that will be by the policy director for the Judicial Crisis Network later on today show. We will be right back. As the Supreme Court starts the new term, cspan debuts its new series, landmark cases, historic Supreme Court decisions. We take a look at the real story of the marbury versus madison case delving into the heated political battles between john adams, thomas jefferson, and john marshall. John marshall established the court as the interpreter of the constitution. The famous decision he wrote in marbury versus madison is probably the most famous case this court ever decided. Decision. Of the great landmark cases exploring 12 historic Supreme Court rulings by revealing the life and times of the people who were the plaintiffs, lawyers, and justices in these cases. It premieres live at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, cspan3, and cspan radio. For background on each case while you watch, order your copy of landmark cases companion book available for 8. 95 was shipping at cspan. Org. Washington journal continues. Host adam liptak of the New York Times joins us on this opening day of the new term of the Supreme Court. How much is one term influence by the other . In your wrapup of the last Supreme Court, you said it disciplined liberal wings. Can we expect some pendulum swing the other way . Do. T i kind of they happened to decide 70 or so each time and it is artificial artificial where you draw the line. Cases inthis year has it that suggest the pendulum will swing the other way. The right side may have a better year. Host politically charged cases await the Supreme Court is a new your lead on this will set the scene for today and the Supreme Court. If you want to continue guppies, you can go to the New York Times. We will preview this next term. Guest i like having my prose written to me read to me. Host there is a chart that went with one of your life stories on this talking about martin quinn scores on ideology to get a visual of this. Tell me what a martin quinn score is as we show the chart. Guest it is a data analysis. What you see on the chart is that the liberals are ideologically very close. There is much more of a gap among the conservatives. They often approach faces from a different point of view. One thing the chart shows is the two george w. Bush appointees started essentially identically the same place. Roberts drifts slightly to the a liberal. Is not he is still a conservative justice because he is the chief justice and also influenced by his responsibilities to the institution. That may cause him in some cases to take a more moderate take. Host we will see that some of the big cases coming up this term. Be more going to divided and big cases this term . Guest it is a little hard to predict. Usually, there are about 20 cases decided by 54 votes. I think this term will be no different. Maybe 15 or 20 are that closely divided. Of those 54s, they are not always the same five or four. Justice kennedy in the middle swinging one way or the other. Host i imagine one of those close cases will be if the Supreme Court takes up the issue of abortion. It could become a highprofile issue this term. What are the cases here that issue could involve . Guest the leading case comes out of texas. They have not taken it yet. They have not had an Abortion Case since 2007. This is a case where texas in acts a law that it says was meant to protect Womens Health but has the effect of closing 30 of the states 40 Abortion Clinics because it cannot comply with rigorous requirements. Whether that law imposes what the Supreme Court has called an undue burden on the constitutional right to abortion is a live question and one that as you suggest will closely divided this justices the justices. Host what is the process by which they pick the cases . Guest 7000 times a year, people ask the court to take the case. Host 7000. Guest 7000 times and they take maybe 1 of those, 70 of them. The justices sit down in private and whenever a case against four votes, it goes on the docket. Four could take a case, five to win a case. Some maneuvering. There is a case you might be interested in what you do not want to put it on the docket unless you are sure to win. It decides which cases it will take. The texas case has all kinds of reasons i think they will take it in part because they have already intervened after an Appeals Court allowed the clinics to close. The court stepped in temporarily itan emergency basis and said let us put a freeze on it for now and let the clinics stay open until we decide whether to take the case. It makes it that much more likely the court does take the case. Host what is the name of that case . Guest i think it is whole Womens Health versus cole, but i could be wrong. Host we preview this term of the Supreme Court with adam liptak. John is up first from montana on the line for independents. Caller good morning, guys. My question is the supreme itrts actions last time seems like it is closer to the legislation from the bench. What is the counter to it . Is there any kind of judicial review or should we just make them political and elect them every four years . Is there a counter where the people feel like legislation is coming from the bench . I would like your comments please. Guest the constitution does make the Supreme Court independent. It does not make it politically accountable. Et gives justices life tenur and it is meant to be a counter majoritarian institution. Bear in mind there are two kinds of cases. Constitutional cases where the court has the last word and statutory cases where it is just interpreting what congressman. The Affordable Care act case, the court said we believe that the congressmen to have nationwide subsidies for of insurance. If congress has a different view, congress is read to pass a different law. They are analyzing with the words of a statute means. It gets it wrong in the congresss view, they can pass a law. As a potentialts politicization of the Supreme Court. What is the argument for and against that . Guest it is an academic argument because you need a constitutional amendment, and that is not likely to happen. Most Supreme Courts around the world and constitutional courts around the world have term limits. They often have a single 18 year term. I do not know that it makes them any less political, and i am not right that that is the right word that i am not sure that is the right word. In the modern era, people stay on the court for a long time. Justice stevens was 90 when he retired. In the current court, three of them are pushing 80. One is 78. Host al in chicago, illinois. Good morning. Caller you hit on a lot of what i was wanting to say. I wonder why in the private sector a lot of times you have to retire at a certain age and you still might be effective. It seems like when you are making decisions that they are making, i would think you would want a change in terms of age. Some of these are out of step with the american public. I just do not know why we are at the point now where we decide that there should be a certain time that you are on the Supreme Court. Guest you make a very good point. It is a policy that may well be a good idea to read it does that Ronald Reagan has appointees on this court who are still to some extent reflecting his views. You may ask the question of in the obama era, why do we have the influence of justices from another cultural and political era entirely decisions . Host affiliate kennedy appointed by Ronald Reagan. Clarence thomas appointed by bush. Ginsburg and breyer appointed by bill clinton. Appointed bylito george w. Bush. Mayor and kagan appointed by president obama. I want to give back to our case preview. Racebasedlving entrance to college. Guest it asks the question of whether public universities can take account of race in deciding who to admit. This is an issue where the case has been quite engaged. Case is on his second trip to the Supreme Court. There is some reason to think that affirmative action will emerge from this case bruised and damaged. Maybe not destroyed but cut back on. Host what happened the first time . Guest the court kind of punted. It says there is a hybrid plan partly raised in neutral and partly raised conscious. They felt like they did a good enough job to look at whether or not it was constitutional. The Court Decides to hear it again, and that is an ominous sign for supporters of affirmative action. I do not think with the Appeals Court had done if it was adequate would return. Host good morning, rick. Caller the subject is like any there are fiveou states that control all of our media. There are two states on the east and that is where your five Media Outlets are headquartered. When you look at the daily activity today, you see this o t that the last five words have been started by texans. Host stick to the Supreme Court. Caller i am if you would let me finish because the Supreme Court is nothing but a slave to the south. A slaveslave for war, for the manipulation of oil, a slave for illegal immigration. When you get to new york and connecticut and this is where you always hang up on me to protect the billionaires in the juice from new york and connecticut. Host i want to ask you about the candidate backgrounds or im. Orry the justice background in there been any movement the circles that what the Supreme Court to try to get that to extend beyond just the three institutions . Guest i think the justices themselves are a little weary of what a narrowband of american legal culture they represent. In the last goround, it seemed one of the candidates who have ,ot to the university of texas and that seemed to be in her favor. The next time around, president s will look broadly and not just go to you in the the few elite schools. It sends the wrong message. Host what is a school that has a chance the next time around . Guest there are lots of good law schools. Columbia by the way barely squeaks in because every single one of the justices went to harvard or yell Justice Ginsburg followed her husband to new york city and ended up graduating columbia, but she has a serious also. Re components there are a great public universities. Berkeley, virginia, michigan. I am sure i am leaving things out and i do not want to offend anybody. There are many good law schools in the United States. Host andy is up next from maryland on the line for democrats. Good morning. Caller good morning. I wanted to make two comments. I find it very funny that people complain about the Supreme Court often fall right with the definition of the Supreme Court that they are not elected, that they are interpreting the constitution, which is exactly what the cost to ship what the constitution says they should do. The number of justices on the Supreme Court is not set on the constitution and that can change. I was wondering if you could talk about the process for that anything would be likely at all future. Guest that is a good question and it has bounced around a bit but ever since the are trying to pack the court, it seems to have fallen off the political agenda. I find a horribly to believe we will have anything but nine justices for a long time to come. Host how does the process work in a president or congress in the future wanted to do that . Guest it is set by congress. The president can proposing congress can pass a law grazing or decreasing the number of justices. It has been done quite a few times in our history. Host when you mentioned the pack the court effort by fdr, can you briefly touch on the history . Guest he was unhappy with some of the decisions the court was making on the new deal. He said controversial he that. He court was going to help out every time a justice reached a certain age, he would an additional justice on the court. Therefore, we would have a cord of 13 or Something Like that. Host we are talking with adam liptak of the New York Times. Taking your questions on the opening day of the new term of the Supreme Court. It is officially the 2016 term that starts today, right . Guest they call it the october term. Host arlington, virginia. Ruth on the line for democrats, good morning. Caller thank you cspan. You have a Wonderful Program i do know how you sit and listen to some of the callers. I am glad you are discussing this and i am glad mr. Liptak is giving some of the history of the Supreme Court because i do nothing people understand why it is not elected and the danger if it were elected by the people. The federalists call popular elections which they were concerned about allowing. I think you can see in the congress what you get sometimes when you have a popular election. Even know it might disagree with some of the things that the Supreme Court has that, i think if the people would look at it with a narrow focus of the decisions, they can see with a result in the way they do. I appreciate your comments on that. Guest that is an excellent question. Many state Supreme Court are elected. When political scientists look at those courts, they find that they are more politically accountable, but i am not sure you want little accountability. You see justices running for reelection more likely to impose that sentences. You see them more likely to vote along with their political point of view. You have more politically accountable dust with that is a good question about whether that is a good idea. Host going back to some of the cases going before the court this term. Case about union fees for nonunion members. Guest it is a big case that could deal a blow to organized labor. The question in the case is whether people who our members of the public unions whether they can opt out a participating in the union. If the Court Says Yes you can opt out and you dont have to be a member of the Teachers Union but you have to pay the equivalent of dues for collective bargaining. The court has said that is true. Collective bargaining you have to pay for. But if the same union is engaged in Political Activities like putting up as to somds for that to support a candidate, then you dont have to pay for that. This challenge is that. It violates amendment rights to be paid to force for collective bargaining because it itself is political. Collective bargaining involves things like seniority and classsize and public spending on education. Those are political issues. Do not make me pay for that. That is an interesting First Amendment argument. Should the court agree with it, it will mean a lot of people might stop paying the union due equivalents. It might spend with the economic power of unions and change the landscape organized labor. For organized labor. The court has twice indicated that it is very unhappy with this old arrangement they came up with in 1977. There are four or maybe five votes to overturn the arrangement. Unions have some good reas