Whether defendants received low level this runs an hour and 20 minutes. The honorable Chief Justices of the United States. All persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the United States are advised to give their attention where the court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. Chief justice roberts we will hear argument this morning in case 205904, terry versus United States. Mr. Adler. Mr. Adler mr. Chief justice, Senator History and common sense of the textual dispute here boils down to whether section 2 modified the statutory penalties for petitioners Crack Offense. It did. Because b 1 c Crossreferences B 1 a and b , when section 2 raised the crack quantities for b 1 a and b , section 2 also modified b 1 c . That modification expanded the scope of Conduct Subject only to b 1 c , and it changed the sentencing benchmarks by which b 1 c offenses are measured. Unable to dispute that modification, amicus argues that the phrase statutory p
We will argument this morning in case 20 dash 5904, Terry V. United states. Mr. Adler. Thank you, mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court. The training agreed the crack of thunder since under b1c have come defense under section 404. Section 404. Statutory Text History and common sense all compel that conclusion. The tactual dispute boils down to other section to modified the statutory penalties for petitioners Crack Offense. It did. Because b crossreferences the one a and b when section to raise the crack quantities, section two modified b1 c. That modification expanded the scope of Convict Subject only to b 1 C C Edit change the fencing benchmarks by which offenses are measured. Unable to dispute that Modification Amicus argues the price statutory penalties means a Sentencing Range but section two section two did not modify any sensing ranges at all. It merely raise the crack quantities and congress knew that. History confirmed the Wednesday Offenses are covered. Chilled after
President bidens agenda. Well have the latest from the white house. Plus well go one on one with adam schiff after the house votes to hold steve bannon in contempt after defying demands for documents and testimony. An update on a bizarre and tragic story from new mexico after alec baldwin discharged a prop firearm on a Movie Set Killing One Crew member and injuring another. What hes saying about the incident, ahead. Welcome to account meet the press daily. We start this hour with the two stories consuming capitol hill right now. One, the ever evolving talks over President Bidens ambitious domestic agenda. The other, the investigation into what led to the january 6th attack on the u. S. Capitol. Negotiators are continuing to progress on the president s social spending package with both House Speaker nancy pelosi and senator Chuck Schumer expressing optimism that a deal could soon be reached. Pelosi had breakfast at the white house this morning with schumer joining shirtly. Pelosi set an
Special agent in charge of the baltimore field office. First and foremost, i want to say that our hearts go out to everyone that is impacted by this tragedy. Especially the victims and their families. On behalf of the fbi, i would like to say that we are with you, we are with baltimore, and were with the partners every step of the way. The fbi, when very first looking at and assessing this matter from an investigative standpoint, i want to be clear that there is no specific or credible information to suggest that there are ties to terrorism in this incident. The fbi has been part of this response from the beginning. We came within one hour to the command post, and quickly latched up with our very strong partners, all along the way. We will bring whatever resources that the fbi has to bear. We have already brought our crisis response, our victim services, and just recently our underwater search evidence recovery teams are on site. And we will continue to provide all those resources as l
Organizations have been harmed, they have been forced to divert resources, and explaining the dangers of the harm from Abortion Drugs. One of the primary reasons thats required is in 2016, the fda took away the requirement that Abortion Providers report adverse events aside from that would be anybody who is aggressive or vigilant about bringing lawsuits, just simply by resources to advocate their position in court, you say now, causes an injury, and that seems easy to manufacture. I dont think thats true in this case, justice thomas. I realize the lower court talks about where they prelude to cases, and those cases dont count, and in this case they note they have performed studies and analyzed studies and several of those are in the record and they are not short, and they comb through medicare data and other data so they get a true nature of the adverse events and neither are prelude to litigation and would not have occurred but for the fdas conduct in the case. You talk about the none