the of their foot in with the american people deserve they deserved an opportunity and responsibility to do it right instead of rushing to a judgment. to have a reasonable justice to make the right decisions. as the american people are voting for their presidential election you face the choice. >>guest: another justice to apply their own ethics when deciding important for every american?

merger they wanted justice like justice scalia to which years to the constitution and rule of law to decide cases based wherever the text will take them? we cannot overstate how critical is for the american people to render stand what is at stake in this debate. take up little bit of time to discuss the impact these two visions would have with every day americans. to have they added another liberal justice to the court from the constitutional text would lead to major changes and jurisprudence a recent your times article as an

added another liberal to the supreme court would be the most consequential ideological -- ideological shift that a majority would almost certainly reshape american law in american life. '' so it will impact all of us. according to the same argument with freedom of religion the right to keeping and bear arms and abortion would be overturned. it speculates abortion rights because more secure the rights less snow and

those first amendment arguments with commercial speech would reach a more skeptical reception''. while in law school dean noted with another liberal on the court that judicial debate of that fundamental possibility of obamacare will likely come to an end. ''. and it would be overturned with another liberal justice on the court. and those that would fall squarely within the liberal sites. authored by justice scalia to recognize based on the

intent of the framers that those guarantees and the individual constitutional right. as one law professor noted in "the new york times" and another in the court that it would narrow to the point of irrelevance. if we had a fifth liberal the pendulum will swing pretty quickly. with the gun-control laws in another words the constitutional rights those guarantees without any

practical limit the effect on the government's infringement of the constitutional right of an individual but once this happens in that first amendment right to the american people to make their voices heard would simply be curtailed if it overturn citizens united for :end of the chicago law professor. with the citizens united is on every list of opinion. and they would not be far behind. and other the growth justice

-- liberal justice to hold their deeply held religious view. to provide that his hope to recognize the right of the odors as a corporation such as obamacare contraception mandate. but that free-speech protection and on college campuses across the country because of the speaker's view point to many people today want to shut down or

anybody that disagrees. it is an incredibly important precedent to be at risk. we're looking forward to the supreme court cases of town hall meetings for parents to receive public school vouchers for the cost of the child's private school including religious groups and of course, another liberal justices agreed nearly that he or she said they are not in the constitution at all.

and even reasonable restrictions on abortion is through the democratic process would be swept away. and those on the partial birth abortions but the partial birth abortion is that practice that the crashes the nine foreign baby school killing is still in the womb. a very small step of infanticide. during the presidential election in for those to replace justice leo. -- justice scalia. it without law professor one

from campaign finance with the race to religion to include a signature project such as an amendment somebody to go quickly like citizens united. >> your time is expired. >> i asked for five more? for more minutes. >> without objection. >> some will go slower in that leaves me to a broader point. to any particular case the american people need to consider if they won there justice to base the case on the text of the united --

constitution as it was understood at the time it was adopted where if they are free to update the constitution according to their own moral sam political philosophies. could day have those principles of new facts? where do back flips to reach their desired public policy goals? >> that is called a legalistic in justice scalia new that the rule of law was a lot of rules.

so if there is the constitution that is unclear it the empathy for their causes. to think that the constitution is not clear. into those them on the american people. they step up to a republic not day government by judiciary. into reflect the will of the people they are made by elected individuals the are accountable to the voters into play the role to keep the branches of the federal government to keep the federal and state governments within their

constitutional sphere. in to ensure that it complies but it's when the court reads the constitution with a view rather than the text it does not act legitimately it denies the people because justice scalia understood this better than anyone. to reach out and grab power the more it legislates from the branch in from the american people as a direct result, a step-by-step in inch by inch liberty is lost. it as john adams has observed, liberty once lost is lost forever.

this is a liberal justices have done into the guise of interpretation to impose liberalism on the american people in ways that they could not achieve through the ballot box. this is the decision facing the american people with this presidential election and. if the american people elect a liberal as an ex-president if he or she dominates to replace justice scalia liberalism will be imposed on the american people to a degree this country has never before witnessed. anyone who cares about these important issues need to syria's help. i yield.

>> kenny river the first time your interested in the news business? >> and high-school i was ted paris suburb immigrants and interested in this country and what was happening and what was happening around the world. so with the reading of

newspapers to watch local and national news i got interested in myself. >> where did your parents come from? >> they came from israel. they came to the united states they believed the american dream they stopped in paris and came to the united states. >> when did you understand what journalism is supposed to be? >> id with the profession i was pretty sure i wanted to make my career at an early age. to read about a head to observe that i tried to be as professional as possible i don't think it was terribly professional but in