The most recent programs for the Supreme Court Cases - 1992 Tag http://www.c-spanvideo.org/browse?topic=628 en-US Copyright 2013, National Cable Satellite Corporation info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Sun, 19 May 2013 07:23:21 GMT The panelists talked about recent noteworthy U.S. Supreme Court cases that they had covered for their respective media outlets. They all contributed to the book co-edited by Timothy Johnson, [A Good Quarrel: America's Top Legal Reporters Share Stories from Inside the Supreme Court], published by the University of Michigan Press. Each panelist presented the case that he had contributed to the book, which included [Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow] about the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, [Planned Parenthood v. Casey] about abortion rights, [Bush v. Gore] about Florida's recount process, and [Glickman v Wileman Brothers and Elliot, Inc.] about produce growers being forced to pay a federally backed entity that markets their goods. They included audio clips of the oral arguments. Then they discussed topics including the manner, behavior, and questioning of justices, the importance and role of oral argument, and cameras in the courtroom. Paul Wahlbeck moderated. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/287035-2 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/287035-2 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Attorneys made oral arguments in the case of [Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania v. Casey]. Robert P. Casey was the governor of Pennsylvania. Ernest Preate argued the cause for the respondents. Kathryn Kolbert argued the cause for the petitioners. Kenneth Starr argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae. The Pennsylvania legislature amended its abortion control law in 1988 and 1989. Among the new provisions, the law required informed consent and a 24-hour waiting period prior to the procedure. A minor seeking an abortion required the consent of one parent (the law allows for a judicial bypass procedure). A married woman seeking an abortion had to indicate that she notified her husband of her intention to abort the fetus. These provisions were challenged by several abortion clinics and physicians. A federal appeals court upheld all the provisions except for the husband notification requirement. The question being argued was if a state can require women who want an abortion to obtain informed consent, wait 24 hours, and, if minors, obtain parental consent, without violating their right to abortions as guaranteed by Roe v. Wade. This program contains audio of the court with still images of participants as they spoke. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/185880-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/185880-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Professors Alvare and Pillard participated in a roundtable discussion to examine the history of the U.S. Supreme Court's abortion decisions. They discussed the effect the first new justices on the bench since 1994 would have on future decisions and the confirmation hearing for appeals court Judge Samuel Alito. The program included audio clips from the oral arguments in four Supreme Court cases with still pictures of the participants: [Roe v. Wade, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, Planned Parenthood v. Casey], and [Stenberg v. Carhart]. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/190565-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/190565-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT During its 20th annual convention entitled, "Life: The First Right," the National Right to Life Committee sponsored a workshop entitled, "When Roe Is Reversed: How You Can Help Enforce Protective Laws." The participants in the workshop spoke on methods pro-life supporters could use to prevent violations of state abortion regulations that may take effect if and when the Supreme Court reverses its decision in [Roe v. Wade], which struck down states' regulation of abortion. Mr. Bopp spoke specifically on the Supreme Court case [Roe v. Wade], which he said was an incorrect decision on legal, moral, and social grounds. Following their prepared remarks, the speakers responded to questions from the audience. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/26555-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/26555-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT The National Right to Life Committee held its 20th annual convention, entitled, "Life: The First Right," in Washington, DC. In the panel discussion held during the convention entitled, "State Development: Preparing for Life After [Roe]," panelists discussed the political consequences of a Supreme Court decision overturning [Roe v. Wade], the Supreme Court decision that made abortion an available option for pregnant women in the United States. Panelists responded to questions from members of the audience following their prepared remarks. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/26548-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/26548-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT The opening session of the 20th annual convention of the National Right to Life Committee, the nation's largest grass-roots pro-life organization, featured a number of speakers advocating the pro-life position on abortion. Vice President Quayle assailed the critics of his previous statement that the television program "Murphy Brown" glorified single motherhood as a preferred lifestyle, and lauded the moral righteousness of the members of the National Right to Life Committee. The vice president singled out a "cultural elite" who promote anti-social and anti-family values, and absolved the government for all responsibility for the social problems facing the United States. He claimed an "overwhelmingly favorable" response to his remarks by the American people, and claimed the scorn of the "cultural elite" as a "badge of honor." http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/26544-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/26544-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Ms. Gorney discussed abortion and her recent article regarding [Roe v. Wade], in [The Washington Post]. She also answered questions from viewers. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/25737-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/25737-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/25717-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/25717-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Kate Michelman is an abortion rights advocate. She discussed Planned Parenthood v. Casey and the impact on U.S. public policy. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/25735-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/25735-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT In separate interviews, guests discussed the upcoming decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which they will further define the taking clause established within [Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council]. The Court will decide if landowners are entitled to compensation when state governments prohibit development for reasons of public health and safety. Video clips were also shown of news conferences outside the Supreme Court building. Mr. Lewis is attorney for David Lucas. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/24830-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/24830-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT The guests discussed the Proposition 13 California property tax law based on a property's value when purchased and not on current value which has led to a wide variety of tax laws. The discussion is based upon [Nordlinger v. Hahn], in which the Supreme Court is being asked to rule on whether California's property tax system violates equal protection rights. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/24733-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/24733-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Three participants in argumentation before the Supreme Court in the case of [Cipollone v. Liggett Group] responded to questions from reporters outside the Supreme Court shortly after the case was heard by the court. The case involves whether tobacco products manufacturers may be held liable for injuries sustained by the use of their product despite prominent warning labels on the product's packaging. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/23841-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/23841-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT The National Abortion Rights Action League talked with reporters about the status of abortion legislation in the fifty states. The League released a report that ranks each of the states according to the availability of abortion there. The report was prepared in anticipation of the Supreme Court overturning [Roe v. Wade], the case that prohibits states from restricting abortions in the first trimester. This year the court is expected to rule on a case from Pennsylvania, which challenges [Roe v. Wade]. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/23675-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/23675-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Participants in the proceedings of the Supreme Court case Lee v. Weisman responded to reporters' questions outside the Supreme Court shortly after the court heard arguments on the case. The lawsuit involves a high-school student bringing action against her school corporation for having an explicitly religious and sectarian prayer during her graduation ceremony. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22609-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22609-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Mr. Cooper, who is the counsel for plaintiff Robert Lee in the case Lee v. Weisman, explained the establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment. He also talked about how he would prepare to present the case to the Supreme Court and the arguments he would make. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22704-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22704-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Mr. Rotella explained how the case, Lee v. Weisman, came about. He discussed the reasons why the school board took the case to the Supreme Court. The school board is named as a co-plaintiff in the case. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22703-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22703-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Ms. Blanding outlined the salient features of the case Lee v. Weisman. She discussed how the Supreme Court has ruled on school prayer issues previously. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22702-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22702-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Mr. Lee explained the reasons why he appealed his case to the Supreme Court. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22701-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22701-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT In the case Lee v. Weisman, the defendant, Daniel Weisman, argued that the use of a religious benediction in the graduation ceremony of his daughter was a violation of the First Amendment, which prohibits the establishment of an official religion. A lower court ruled in favor of Mr. Weisman and Mr. Lee, who was the principal of the school where the ceremony took place, appealed it to the Supreme Court. Mr. Weisman and his daughter Deborah talk about the reasons why they filed the case. They also discussed how the case has affected their lives at home and in the community. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22507-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22507-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Mr. Hansen and Mr. Lee, attorneys in the Supreme Court case Freeman v. Pitts discussed the issues behind the school desegregation case. The case involved a request by a school board in Georgia to remove judicial supervision of their desegregation program. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22057-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22057-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Attorneys in the civil rights case Freeman v. Pitts spoke with reporters outside the Supreme Court shortly after the Court heard arguments in the case. The case hinges on a DeKalb County, Georgia, school board appeal of a federal court decision mandating continuation of a school desegregation program. The school board maintained that racial balance had been achieved in the schools, but the courts held other factors than racial balance determined whether the program would continue. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22056-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/22056-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT Mr. Hager talked about the issues facing the court in the coming year. The cases before the court were previewed, including Freeman v. Pitts and Cipollone v. The Liggett Group. Mr. Hager also answered viewer questions on a variety of topics related to the court. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/21845-1 info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/21845-1 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT