<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Anthony M. Kennedy Recent C-SPAN Appearances</title>
    <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/person/1367</link>
    <description>Anthony M. Kennedy's recent appearances from the C-SPAN networks</description>
    <language>en-US</language>
    <copyright>Copyright 2013, National Cable Satellite Corporation</copyright>
    <managingEditor>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</webMaster>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 09:41:51 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <category>C-SPAN Person Recent Appearances</category>
    
    <item>
      <title>[United States v. Windsor] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [United States v. Windsor], the challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). At issue was whether the Court had jurisdiction to rule on the federal government's case, and whether the House Republican leaders as defenders of DOMA had Article III "standing" to pursue their appeal. After arguments on jurisdiction, issues of the constitutionality of section III of DOMA were addressed. Lawyers argued over the requirement in the law that limited the definition of marriage to a union between a man and woman, thus denying federal spousal rights to same-sex marriages conferred on couples in states where the practice had been made legal.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311686-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311686-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:04:15 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Hollingsworth v. Perry] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard arguments in [Hollingsworth v. Perry] on the constitutionality of California's proposition 8 law. Nearly 18,000 same-sex couples were married in California, but same-sex marriages came to a halt in November 2008, when the state's voters passed Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to get married. Questions by several justices focused on whether the central purpose of marriage was procreation, and on whether proponents of the ban had legal standing to bring the case after the state of California declined to do so when the referendum result was overturned by a federal court.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311637-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311637-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 17:13:01 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Fiscal Year 2014 Budget</title>
      <description>Supreme Court Justices Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer on the fiscal year 2014 budget for the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary system. The justices were requesting a total of $86.5 million, a 3 percent reduction from fiscal year 2013.
By law, the judicial branch assembles its own budget, which the president reviews then transmits to Congress without changes.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311494-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>House Committee</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311494-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 01:52:16 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Shelby County v. Holder] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [Shelby County v. Holder]. The case concerns Congress' 2006 re-authorization of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act under the pre-existing coverage formula of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act, and whether Congress exceeded its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and thus violated the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the United States Constitution. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act says that states and localities with a history of disenfranchising minorities, mainly in the South, must get federal approval before changing their voting procedures. Justice Scalia stated that congressional support for the Voting Rights Act is due to the "perpetuation of racial entitlement." He then went on to say, "Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes."
This program contained audio with still images of participants as they spoke.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311193-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311193-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 02:01:26 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Missouri v. McNeely] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [Missouri v. McNeely] to weigh the public's interest in driving and highway safety against the privacy rights of the individual in deciding if police officers can force suspected drunk drivers to give a blood sample without first obtaining a warrant. 
This case was on appeal from the Missouri Supreme Court, which sided with the motorist McNeely in agreeing that the taking of his blood without a search warrant was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment's ban against unreasonable searches and seizures. Missouri prosecutors and the government were asking the Court to set aside the requirement for a search warrant arguing that since alcohol dissipates in the blood, a police officer should not take the time to get a warrant from a judge.
Audio of the arguments was presented with visual still images of participants. Justice Thomas did not speak.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/310306-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/310306-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:03:23 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Florida v. Jardines] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Court heard oral argument in [Florida v. Jardines], which addressed the use of drug-sniffing dogs on the exterior of a home. The case was one of two cases during the 2012-13 term focused on privacy rights and the reliability of drug-sniffing dogs and working animals in law enforcement efforts to obtain search warrants.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309284-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309284-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:00:24 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Florida v. Harris] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [Florida v. Harris]. The case addressed the circumstances under which an alert from a narcotics-sniffing dog was sufficient to establish probable cause for a subsequent search.
[Florida v. Harris] was one of two Supreme Court cases during the 2012-13 term that focused on privacy rights and the reliability of drug-sniffing dogs and working animals in law enforcement efforts to obtain search warrants.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309366-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309366-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 00:05:01 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Constitution and Its Promise</title>
      <description>Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy spoke at the Heritage Foundation's Center for Legal and Judicial Studies as part of the foundation's lecture series "Preserve the Constitution." He said it's the duty of every American, not just public servants, to preserve, protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. Justice Kennedy also stressed the importance of educating children on how the Constitution was formed, and what is in it and why. He said that you can not preserve what you do not comprehend. 
	President Ronald Reagan nominated Justice Kennedy to the high court in 1987. He took his seat in 1988.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309029-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309029-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2012 01:00:49 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Fisher v. University of Texas] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Court heard oral argument on [Fisher v. University of Texas].</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/308726-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/308726-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2012 03:54:24 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The U.S. Supreme Court heard a second oral argument in [Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum], on the reach of a 1789 law, the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), that seeks to impose liability in U.S. courts on those who commit human rights violations in foreign countries. In the first oral argument The Court heard argument on the case in the 2011-12 term on the aspect of the case pertaining solely to the question of suing corporations under the ATS.
Audio of the arguments was presented with visual still images of participants.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/308614-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/308614-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2012 17:11:16 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Arizona v. United States] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [Arizona v. U.S.]. The case involves the issue of whether the federal government or states have the right to enforce immigration law. Arizona's law includes provisions requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone detained or suspected of being in the country illegally. Immigrants must carry their papers at all times. Illegal immigrants are banned from soliciting for work in public places and police can arrest immigrants without a warrant if an officer believes they have committed a crime that would make them deportable.
Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the Supreme Court oral argument as she was President Obama's solicitor general when the federal government filed the lawsuit against Arizona.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305611-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305611-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 00:02:10 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Health Care Law Oral Argument, Day 3, Medicaid Expansion</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the fourth of the four cases challenging the 2010 health care law. The fourth case, [Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services], focused on whether the law's proposed Medicaid expansion violates the federal-state partnership.
The Court heard a total of 6 hours of argument over March 26, 27, and 28, 2012.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305134-2</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305134-2</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 05:39:28 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Health Care Law Oral Argument, Day 3, Severability</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the third of the four cases challenging the 2010 health care law. The focus of the third case, [National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius], was severability; whether the remainder of the health care law could stand if the individual mandate provision is found unconstitutional. This argument was unusual in that the Court debated the consequences of a decision that it had not yet made.
The Court heard a total of 6 hours of argument over March 26, 27, and 28, 2012.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305134-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305134-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Health Care Law Oral Argument, Day 2</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the second of the four cases challenging the 2010 health care law law. The case, [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida], focused on the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the Affordable Care Act which required that citizens purchase health care coverage by 2014 or face a financial penalty.
The Court heard a total of 6 hours of argument over March 26, 27, and 28, 2012.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305077-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305077-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:25:08 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Health Care Law Oral Argument, Day 1</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the first of the four cases challenging the 2010 health care law. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida] examined the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA), a law that prohibited courts from striking down tax laws before they take effect. Attorney Robert Long was appointed by the Court to argue that the AIA applied in this case, as none of the parties to the case was arguing that the AIA barred the Court from reviewing the challenges.
The Court heard a total of 6 hours of argument over March 26, 27, and 28, 2012.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305055-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305055-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:58:29 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[U.S. v. Alvarez] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [ U.S. v. Alvarez]. The case involves the constitutionality of a federal law that makes lying about receiving military medals or honors a crime.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/304540-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/304540-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 00:02:36 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[FCC vs. FOX Television]</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [FCC vs. FOX Television]. The case examines the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) tougher enforcement protocol announced in 2004 in reaction to separate instances of foul language and nudity on both FOX and ABC television networks. The Court will decide if the FCC has the constitutional right to enforce rules prohibiting indecent language and nudity on broadcast television and radio.
Both the attorneys and judges use language during this oral argument that some may find offensive.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303631-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303631-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 01:16:06 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Knox vs. Service Employees]</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [Knox vs. Service Employees]. The case deals with the question of the First Amendment giving state employees the right to decline to pay union dues used for political advocacy by the union.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303630-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303630-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 04:19:18 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Perry v. Perez] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on [Perry v. Perez], a case involving new districts created by the Texas legislature for the state house and senate, and the U.S. House of Representatives.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303582-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303582-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 03:46:36 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[U.S. v. Jones] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on [United States v. Jones], which questions the notion that advances in technology alter a person's reasonable expectation of privacy. The case specifically involves the question of the necessity of police needing a warrant before secretly attaching a Global Positioning System (GPS) device to a suspect's car. Antoine Jones, a nightclub owner in Washington, D.C., challenged his conviction for drug trafficking, asserting that the police violated his Fourth Amendment rights when, without a valid warrant or his consent, officers placed a GPS device on his car to track his movements on public streets.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/302576-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/302576-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2011 07:14:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Zivotofsky vs. Clinton] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [Zivotofsky vs. Clinton], a case dealing with executive power and Congress, and whether Jerusalem, Israel, can be listed as a birthplace in a passport.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/302564-2</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/302564-2</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 02:09:42 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders - Burlington]</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on [Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington]. The involves the privacy rights and the strip search policies of jails. Albert Florence was wrongfully arrested in 2005 for an unpaid fine and taken to two different jails and strip searched at each one and released six days later after all charges were dropped.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/302034-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/302034-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:28:42 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC]</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC]. The case focused on on whether a teacher at a religious elementary school who teaches the full secular curriculum, but also teaches daily religion classes, can bring employment discrimination suits against the school, if fired.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/301939-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/301939-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 02:04:23 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Maples v. Thomas] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on [Maples v. Thomas]. The case involves the right of defendants to argue the constitutionality of their death sentence when their lawyer misses a state court filing deadline.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/301938-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/301938-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:00:24 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut]. The case focused on the ability of states and private parties to sue utilities for contributing to global warming, and how federal law would be applied.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/299147-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/299147-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2011 22:59:30 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court 2012 Budget</title>
      <description>Justices Stephen Breyer and Anthony Kennedy testified on the proposed U.S. Supreme Court 2012 budget. Topics included the winding down of renovations to the Supreme Court building and changes to visitor access, as well as security for the high court and federal judges in general.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/299037-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>House Committee</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/299037-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 01:22:48 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Wal-mart v. Dukes] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [Wal-Mart v. Dukes], a gender discrimination case against Wal-Mart over pay and promotions for as many as 1.5 million current and former women employees. The issue is whether a large group should be allowed to band together in a lawsuit.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298761-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298761-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 22:58:36 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on [Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd]. The case involves whether former Attorney General John Ashcroft could be held personally liable for the detention of an American Muslim. Abdullah Al-Kidd, a U.S. citizen, alleges he was detained as part of a plan approved by John Ashcroft to arrest Muslim men suspected, but not proved, of having terrorist ties. A lower court rejected Ashcroft's assertion that in his role as attorney general he is immune from lawsuits. Justice Kagan did not participate in this case.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298288-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298288-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 05:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Bond v. U.S.] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case [Bond v. United States]. The issue in the case was whether a defendant may challenge the constitutionality of a federal criminal statute on 10th Amendment grounds, with plaintiffs arguing that Congress exceeded its constitutional powers in attempting to regulate something the Constitution leaves to the states.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298145-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298145-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:59:12 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[FCC v. AT&amp;T] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on [FCC v. AT&amp;T]. The case involves AT&amp;T's right to invoke a personal privacy exemption under the Freedom of Information Act to keep secret information gathered by the government during a federal investigation.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297609-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297609-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:10:06 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General Dynamics v. United States] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [General Dynamics v. United States], a case on the "state secrets" doctrine. The doctrine prevents the disclosure in litigation of state secrets.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297581-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297581-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 23 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Kentucky v. King] Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument on [Kentucky v. King]. The case could give the police greater authority to forcibly enter a person's home without a search warrant. The Fourth Amendment's ban against unreasonable search and seizures bars the police from entering a home without a warrant unless there is an emergency situation or exigent circumstances.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297533-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297533-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 23:59:36 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[The Supreme Court:  Home to America's Highest Court], 2010 Edition</title>
      <description>[The Supreme Court: Home to America's Highest Court] takes an unprecedented look into the Supreme Court, its role, traditions and history of the Court featuring interviews with all the sitting and retired Justices. 
This is a second version of the original documentary in high definition and includes an interview with Justice Elena Kagan. The original on-air version of the documentary is program ID 289229-1.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297213-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>C-SPAN Specials</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297213-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 05:00:24 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in [Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting], involving an Arizona immigration law that imposes sanctions on businesses for hiring illegal immigrants and requires the verification of prospective employees' immigration status against a federal database.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296991-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296991-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2010 21:57:48 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Schwarzenegger v. Plata] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [Schwarzenegger v. Plata], a case centering on prison health care and overcrowding. The appeal centered on a ruling by a three-judge panel at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to release 36,000 to 45,000 California inmates to remedy constitutional deficiencies in the health care provided to prisoners.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296849-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296849-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 23:27:48 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Flores-Villar v. United States] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [Flores-Villar v. the United States]. The case addressed the treatment of unwed mothers and fathers when passing on citizenship to children born abroad. Currently, a foreign-born child of an unwed America mother is a U.S. citizen if the mother has lived in the U.S. for at least one year, but an unwed America father cannot pass citizenship to the child unless he has lived in the U.S. for at least 10 years, 5 after the age of 14.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296621-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296621-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Nov 2010 18:17:48 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>Lawyers presented oral arguments before the nine justices of the Supreme Court in the case of [Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn]. The case addressed the constitutionality of tax credits for tuition at private schools when the schools are often for institutions. Audio of court proceedings were played with still images of the participants.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296545-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296545-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:34:36 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants]</title>
      <description>Justices heard oral arguments in the case [Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants], which focused on the state's ability to restrict the sale of violent video games and manufacturers free speech rights. Audio of the arguments played while still photographs of the participants were shown. Justice Thomas did not question the attorneys.
The name of the case was changed to [Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association] in January 2011, when Jerry Brown replaced Arnold Schwarzenegger as the governor of California.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296438-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296438-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 06 Nov 2010 00:00:12 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Snyder v. Phelps] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>Lawyers presented oral arguments before the nine justices of the Supreme Court in the case of [Snyder v. Phelps]. The case centered on First Amendment rights and public protests at military funerals. At issue was whether a church had the legal right to stage anti-gay protests at U.S. military funerals to promote its claim that God is angry at America for tolerance toward homosexuals. Albert Snyder, the father of a Marine killed in Iraq in 2006, appealed to the Supreme Court after the family's funeral service at a Roman Catholic church in Westminster, Maryland, drew unwanted protests by members of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas.
Audio of the arguments was presented with visual still images of participants.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/295901-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/295901-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 10 Oct 2010 14:34:12 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Conversation with Justice Kennedy</title>
      <description>Justice Kennedy spoke at the annual Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Conference. Among the issues he addressed were the federal case load, the federal appeals process, and the qualifications of judges. Following his prepared remarks he answered questions from a panel and the audience.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/295166-2</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/295166-2</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:43:42 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Justice Kennedy Remarks on the Supreme Court</title>
      <description>Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy spoke at the Forum Club of the Palm Beaches. In his remarks he said he was against a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees. His remarks, at times both humorous and serious, also touched on the nation's overcrowded prison system and the rule of law in the developing world.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/293521-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/293521-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2010 23:00:42 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Office of the Solicitor General</title>
      <description>A panel of former U.S. solicitors general discussed the role of the solicitor general, the duties associated with the job, and arguing before the Supreme Court. The moderator was former Deputy Solicitor General Kenneth Geller.
Justice Anthony Kennedy made opening remarks.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/290512-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/290512-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:34:31 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Scalia, and O'Connor</title>
      <description>Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia, and Sandra Day O'Connor were interviewed as part of C-SPAN's Supreme Court Week. 
Justice Kennedy gave his impressions on the role of the Supreme Court, the process that the Justices follow in reaching a decision, and the importance of the building in which they do their work. Justice Kennedy was interviewed in the West Conference Room of the Supreme Court. 
Justice Ginsburg gave a tour of her temporary chambers on the second floor of the Supreme Court building. During the tour, she talked about her career before coming to the court, her family, and her friendship with Justice Antonin Scalia. She also showed her judicial robes and talked about the lighter side of life at the court.
Justice Scalia spoke about a number of topics, ranging from the role of the court, the job of a Supreme Court justice, the process that justices follow in reaching a decision, and his thoughts on the quality of the attorneys who come before the court for oral argument. He was interviewed in the East Conference Room at the Supreme Court.
Former Justice O'Connor talked about the role the Founding Fathers envisioned for the Supreme Court. She also talked about the judicial collars that female justices wear, the Robing Room, and oral argument. The interview took place in the West Conference Room of the Supreme Court.
[Interviews with Justices Sotomayor, Thomas, Breyer and Alito can be viewed and purchased in program 7537-1.]  
[Interviews with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Stevens can be viewed and purchased in program 7654-1.]</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/7716-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>C-SPAN Specials</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/7716-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 10 Oct 2009 01:02:05 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[The Supreme Court:  Home to America's Highest Court], 2009 Edition</title>
      <description>[The Supreme Court: Home to America's Highest Court] takes an unprecedented look into the Supreme Court, its role, traditions and history of the Court featuring interviews with all the sitting and retired Justices. 
This program is available to purchase on DVD at c-span.org/store
This is the original version of the program which aired in 2009. A later edition with an interview with Justice Elena Kagan was produced in 2010. Program ID 297213-1.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/289229-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>C-SPAN Specials</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/289229-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:00:11 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission] Oral Argument</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission]. The case arose from a political documentary called [Hillary: The Movie.] The film's producers lost a Federal Election Commission and lower court decision that prohibited them from distributing it on a video-on-demand service on grounds that it violated a McCain-Feingold ban on corporate money being used for electioneering.
The court originally heard arguments of this case in March 2009 and asked the attorneys involved to provide additional briefs. The Court held this rehearing in a special session before the official start of the term on Monday, October 5, 2009. It was the first oral argument heard by Justice Sotomayor. 
This program contained the audio recording released by the court immediately after the arguments were presented. Still images of participants were shown on the screen as they spoke. Justice Thomas did not speak.
Included in program 288797-3</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/288797-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/288797-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:50:11 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Justice Kennedy</title>
      <description>Justice Anthony Kennedy was interviewed as part of C-SPAN's Supreme Court Week. Justice Kennedy, sitting in the West Conference Room of the Supreme Court, gave his impressions on the role of the Supreme Court, the process that the justices follow in reaching a decision, and the importance of the building in which they do their work.
Justice Anthony Kennedy was nominated to the bench by President Ronald Reagan. He has been serving as a Supreme Court associate justice since 1988. He was preceded by Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. 
This program is available for online viewing only. 
This interview, along with Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, and retired Justice O'Connor interviews, can be purchased and viewed in program 7716-1.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/286076-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>C-SPAN Specials</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/286076-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:32:53 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Stanford University  Commencement Address</title>
      <description>Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy delivered the commencement address to graduating students of Stanford University in the Stanford Stadium in Palo Alto, California.
 
 
 Included in program ID 287038-1.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/287010-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/287010-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2009 06:01:35 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Challenge to Voting Rights Act of 1965 Oral Arguments</title>
      <description>The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of [Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder]. At issue were provisions of the 1965 federal Voting Rights Act which ban all states from voting discrimination based on "race or color," but targets states and areas with a history of racial discrimination in voting. Currently eight states and parts of eight other states are required to seek permission from the U.S. Justice Department or the federal court in Washington before making changes in the voting process such as changing voting districts, polling locations, or other election procedures. 
 
 This program contained the audio recording released by the court immediately after the arguments were presented. Still images of participants were shown on the screen as they spoke. Justice Thomas did not speak.</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/285573-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/285573-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:37:40 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Conversation with Supreme Court Justice Kennedy</title>
      <description>Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/280355-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/280355-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Conversation with Supreme Court Justice Kennedy</title>
      <description>U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy talked about international law and how other nations view America's Constitution.
 
 
 The "Conversation with the Justice" features an informal conversation with Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy of the Supreme Court, who is the designated justice for the Ninth Circuit. The segment was introduced by Circuit Judge Richard R. Clifton of Honolulu, who chairs the conference.
 
 
 SEE program 280355</description>
      <link>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/280185-1</link>
      <author>info@c-spanarchives.org (National Cable Satellite Corporation)</author>
      <category>Public Affairs Event</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/280185-1</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
