Decisions. Number 759, bernies miranda, Petitioner Versus arizona. Number 218, roe v. Wade. The most famous decisions are once that the court took were 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 helped stick together because they believe in the rule of law. Good evening. Welcome to cspan in the National Constitution centers landmark cases. Our 12 part series looks at some of the Supreme Courts most interesting and impactful historical decisions over the course of our countrys history. We are going to be talking about a case you might not know much about, but by the and you understand why it is on our last. Its called the slaughterhouse cases, it was the first time that the Supreme Court reviewed the newly enacted 14th amendment to the constitution. Let me introduce you to our two guests, here to tell you about the history and importance of these cases. Paul clement s
troops to the border. president biden deploying an additional 1,500 active duty personnel to the southern border as states brace for a possible flood of migrants next week. a tight timeline and a big problem. the debt ceiling fight heating up as the treasury secretary says the money runs out june 1st. what does that mean for your wallet? a default could have a huge impact on all of us. we ll look at the states. and then late night shows could be the first to shutdown but maybe not the last. why the two sides are fighting and have not yet reached a deal. we are following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to cnn news central. we begin with the biden administration moving to bolster the southern border. sources telling cnn that 1,500 active-duty troops are being sent in anticipation of a flood of migrants starting next week, and that s when the trump era title 42 expires. natasha has more from the pentagon. the troops being sent in,
Stock exchange. It was a tough day, deirdre. The dow was down 128 points, the s p down 12, the nasdaq down 48 points. Longest losing streak basically all year in. And testing the moving day average closing at 12 im sorry 2067. So really watch that s p breaks before that selling here in the pickup in the future sessions. To the investor taking a cue from china, the shanghai index if he will 8. 5 overnight, china couldnt support a stock market, not without a Ripple Effect around the world. We saw oil prices come down because of that and the Energy Sectors were the weakest in the session today. A lot of household names with exposure to china. Apple share is down 1. 3 . Yum1. 3 . And each have Significant Properties there so we saw shares in those companies down as well. You look at some of the energy losers. Again, energy among some of the weakest sectors in energy. Down 3. 3 as a whole. Youve got a new low for phillips, that was 2. 7 decline. So this is where we are right now. Earnings w
You think what were talking but here is the end of capitalism . That the Banking System is gotten to the point where we cant accept a market economy with banks that are privately owned . Mr. Kashkari not at all. The market economy is still the key to our future. We just need to have a market economy where you can have a prosperity, and innovation, and take up some of the risk of collapse of the table. Pretty briefly, why now . Yourhy you in terms of leading on this issue . I just started, so im going as fast as i can. I feel at what i bring to this is a unique perspective. Of few people on the front line responding to financial crisis. That really colors my thinking and my views as i look at what has been implemented. Does have a the fed lot of expertise in large banks. I think bringing these things together to say i think we can do more, lets go do more, the last thing i would say im repeating myself there are a lot of experts around the country that have strong ideas about this. Have
United states, and we are grateful not only for his service, but for his family service. About what is supposed to happen now. When there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, the president of the United States nominates someone. The senate is to consider that nomination. Either they disapprove of that nominee or that nominee is validated to the Supreme Court. Historically, this has not been viewed as a question. Theres no unwritten law that says it can only be done on off years. That is not in the constitutional text. Im amused when i hear people who claim to be strict interpreters of the constitution suddenly reading into it a whole series of provisions that are not there. Theres more than enough time for the senate to consider, in a thoughtful way, the record of a nominee that i present, and to make a decision. With respect to our process, we will do the same thing we did with respect to justice kagans nomination and Justice Sotomayor s nomination. We will find someone who was an outst