On October 22, Anthony Kennedy, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, visited Harvard Law School and sat down for a conversation with Dean Martha Minow.
This judge has a good quality that some of the present Supreme Court Judges appointed by Mr Trump are weak on : Judge Kennedy does NOT have “arrogance” !! RS. Canada
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners to learn a trade? It saves On the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy visits HLS Published on October 27, 2015 24:52 min ... "and in California, the cost per prisoner is about thirty five thousand a year per prisoner, and the prison guards association, the correctional officers association, is the strongest lobby in the state of California, and they have planned prisons to go up the central valley, in the northern valley, in small towns, so that the prison guards are a large part of the population and they can control who's legislator, who's elected and they are against shorter sentences and this is sick, this is sick, and we've got to do something about it ..." The Honorable Anthony M. Kennedy
Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy visits HLS Published on October 27, 2015 23: 40 min ... "and we don't pay any attention to it. Everybody thinks, well, we can leave it to the lawyers or the people in sociology or, but a), as you indicated, I think rightly, Dean, the thing is, I think it's everyones job, particularly, I think we have to step up ... and solitary confinement, is, people are in there for years. When I was in the Army, they gave us training, because I was in a unit that had combat ... training for it, and so they locked us up in a cell and some of us were tortured just very slightly, and after four hours in the cell I was going mad. These people have been, 40 days, 40 months, 20 years, in solitary confinement, it drives men mad, and we don't even think about it." The Honorable Anthony M. Kennedy
I thought it was interesting that Kennedy totally avoided the question. He pretty much called him out saying that if "new insight" was the reason why marriage between 2 men and 2 women had to become legal then why can't the Court use "new insight" into whether or not abortion is immoral.
:51 minute mark....how about you ask a question that makes sense and doesn't involve you trying to use every word in the English language in a pathetic attempt to project "intelligence"....gross.
sorry about the previous time, Dear Justice Kennedy, Perhaps, you weren't entirely privy to all of my concerns, since you could have had the opportunity to derive basic facts from David Rubenstein when you were preparing for the interview. You actually then knew more about myself, than I did, and some extent, this statement holds to this day. I was literally drowning in criminals, did you know? the fact is that catering to the wealthy businessmen of modernity is difficult. Most of them are utterly miserable people in their own lives. I think I ended up making too many exceptions over the misconduct of the prospecting family from seattle, which ultimately, caused others to consider them with authority, whereas, in reality they were just socially stratified celebrities.. they are arrogant, pathetic and obnoxious. I cannot tell you just how grateful I am of my own tendency towards rash-turbulent-reactions over perceived injustices and violations of freedoms, because today I am, once again, a free and successful... well almost, individual. And I will not make the same mistake again. I couldn't function properly unless I ordered my personal affairs with respect to my own interest, preferences and aspirations. It was meaningless to follow celebrities, ever since reality TV, social media and twitter, they are not very sensitive to morals and community. so I thought, hey I should do the same specially when they turned out to be ungrateful, unhelpful, disgusting, vague and fictitious characters.. I had to make a dash to the borders.. sham institutions, empty promises and appearances.. converted into an emotion, in summary, I am hurt. And it is not your fault, it is theirs.. and I should sue them. they are also selfish people, powered by corporate greed and in total disregard of their consumer's interest. they excel at transfer the cost of doing business to the public while pocketing profits, and practicing tyranny and I am very upset with them. Ali
Dúfam že doktory pracovali 75 rokov na príčinu choroby penieza dúfam že sa im to podarí dnes tak aby ne musel byť pred obraz dôchodca a choroba zostane stále na zemi
Yes, we on the American side of the argument are just tickled pink to have your man feted here. Would you like to explain why it is ever "necessary" to falsify transcripts in felony court cases? I noticed the topic never came up in this fawning love fest. Do any of you understand what this means?
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners to learn a trade? It saves the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners. It saves the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.fc
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners. It saves the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
50:41 I've always thought it was ridiculous that you have to turn your head to look at a speaker rather than just sitting there and listening. Always drives me crazy when I participate in forums like this.
Most people in the audience aren't paying attention nor are they smart enough to follow what the speakers are saying. Ergo, they feel the need to pretend that they're following what's being said by turning their head, watching the speaker, diverting attention away from themselves, and acting as if they know what's actually going on.
First year law student turned Kennedy's argument for gay marriage on the justice to make the case for life of the unborn. His question began with; "As I understand your Obergefell opinion you claim that new insights into the nature of marriage require states to issue marriage licenses in accord with this alternative version of marriage or understanding of marriage; and I can understand a similar case, probably more attractive to those of us who think that national norms guide the exercise of sexual autonomy like they do economic autonomy. That would be that be that new insights into the nature of human life require states to take steps to stop abortions. " His reference to "new insight" came from Kennedy's argument - “when new insight reveals discord between the Constitution’s central protections and a received legal stricture, a claim for liberty must be addressed.”
History will show him to be a judicially unmoored official, but in the totality he has been right more than he has been wrong. Having said that, when he is wrong, he is very, very wrong lol. CBZ
Mewtatus exactly lmao. How do you define “right” and wrong without any additional information or detail, things aren’t “wrong” if they aren’t progressive
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners. It saves the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners to learn a trade? It saves the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners. It saves the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners to learn a trade? It saves On the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
Did anyone ever consider vocational training for prisoners to learn a trade? It saves On the taxpayers a whole lot of money in taxes and teaches a trade and self-respect for the incarcerated.
+joavim The court used the "new insights" reason to persue their agenda. There are many new scientific insights into the development of the human fetus. Why do the court and States refuse to consider them and continue to rely on the old norms with regard to abortion?
+joavim The court used the "new insights" reason to pursue their agenda. There are many new scientific insights into the development of the human fetus. Why do the court and States refuse to consider them and continue to rely on the old norms with regard to abortion?
@@wilmaf906 How dare you try to use his own mental gymnastics against him. Another fun argument was his insistence that the Constitution is consistent with what the popular opinion is (what he calls the "little C constitution"). How convenient that he is the one who gets to interpret the Constitution. I think this is at least a tacit admission that they're just making shit up as they go along.
soon this morally corrupt judge has no more than 10 years to live, karma will catch up with him soon, of course he thinks there is no consequences, no karma - he will be very tragically wrong
Behold, the musings of an unimportant, ignorant, unknown, and self-appraised intellectual. As if you could survive 2 minutes in a legal argument with ANY Supreme Court Justice lol. Any of the SC Justices could take any position on any topic and obliterate you in minutes without using 10% of their brainpower. Keep voicing your idiotic, ideological, uninformed, and uneducated opinions with total unjustified confidence and see what you accomplish in life, or maybe develop some humility, listen to opposing viewpoints, and educate yourself for a change.
