Massachusetts house of representatives. And he was also even while he was on the Supreme Court a professor at the harvard law school. Interestingly enough, he was also noted as one of the most successful authors of the first half of the 19th century. Matter of fact, when he was 65 years old, that particular year his book royalties gave him twice as much money as his salary as a justice of the Supreme Court. As many of you know, he became when he was appointed at that time, the youngest justice to serve on the Supreme Court. And one of the youngest ever to serve. He was appointed by president madison in 1811. And was actually took office the following year in february of 1812. As most of you you know, im sure, he made a significant mark on american law in his 33 years on the bench. But his greatest contribution to jurisprudence is his commentaries on the constitution in which he set forth a philosophy of judicial restraint. He was quite enamored by the philosophical approach to the law
Fortunate to have a military leader such as you serving in a time of great peril. I want i want to ask a question of you if the objective were to destroy isys, not to we cannot a great but utterly destroy what would be required militarily to accomplish that objective . It would not be possible to destroy. I do think the military aspect is critical. If the timeframe i suggested is not feasible feasible but let me ask you a followup question what will be required to destroy isys and what timeframe is necessary . If that were the objective what would be required to accomplish it . Clicks from my perspective today this is a longterm endeavor a longterm endeavor on the order of years, not months. And what would be required to do that in whatever timeframe is necessary . From military perspective we need to take action to deny sanctuary where everything takes root that will require us to build local forces in the Partnership Capacity with local forces that would be the defeat mechanism. Mech
Almost never his litigated in the this is an area of law and there is lots of learning based on opinions and the posturing of congress. These debates rarely it in the court. The george w. Bush administration. And both the administrations refuse to enforce the statute on the grounds they are constitutional power rendered that statute again person born in jerusalem commenced litigation that first went to the court three years ago. The court said no and direct the dc circuit to decided on the merits. Some some people thought the court was depriving itself an escape route. Would not be able to use the political question if they concluded it would have been desirable seem to be a lot disconcerting noises they were being forced to decide something that had a lot of Foreign Affairs and political visibility. Obviously obviously taking sides owns and controls yours is politically loaded question. In the court did address the merits and so he was right. Justice kennedy writing for the majority i
Until june 25th of this year when we had these two companion decisions that came down. King is precisely exactly like webber. The majority opinion said look you cant look at forward in isolation and give it a broader meaning because the broader purpose was to give subsidies to poor people. The precise facts in king were as follows the statute dealing with subsidies, said they are available for purchases made off an exchange established by the state under statute 131211 of the statute and the question was what if you made an exchange off of an exchange of the federal government under 1321 and does that qualify and in other words does state mean state. Which is not a question for the nonjudicial mind but was one that bee fuddled six members of the Supreme Court. And they analyzed it in precisely the way they had done in webber. Listen the broader purpose was to provide substance and were not going to be Fuddy Duddies and worry about language or exactly what congress has done. I wont walk
Courtrooms of the Thurgood Marshall u. S. Courthouse to celebrate an american hero. Thurgood marshall to whose memory this magnificent courthouse is dedicated to this courthouse where he served on the Second Circuit. We welcome our cspan audience to our proceedings, as well. Our gathering is at the intersection of two initiatives which engaged in the courts of the Second Circuit, and initiatives which i had the privilege of proposing which have taken life because of the creative and dedicated work of remarkable colleagues of the bench, bar and our court staff. The first, the 125th Anniversary Commemoration of the Second Circuit court of appeals wonderfully chaired by richard c. Wesley has several components including scholarly volumes and Public Events as we take stock of our past to better understand how our work has evolved so as to better meet the challenges of the present and the future. The second initiative, justice for all, courts and the community is a project of all of the cou