>> ANOTHER CONGRESSIONAL SEAT GOES SOUTH.

CHEERLEADING ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT.

THE PROMISE OF 40 ACRES AND A MULE.

STAY TUNED.

"IVORY TOWER" IS NEXT.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO "IVORY TOWER."

WE ARE SO GRATEFUL THAT YOU ARE JOINING US.

I'M NINA MOORE OF COLGATE UNIVERSITY.

HERE WITH ME TO DISCUSS THIS WEEK'S NEWS ARE BOB SPITZER OF SUNY CORTLAND, TARA ROSS OF ONONDAGA COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND RICK FENNER OF UTICA COLLEGE.

WELL, FOLKS, LET ME BEGIN BY SAYING I'M NOT SURE WHAT STINGS MOST, THE FACT THAT NEW YORK LOST ANOTHER CONGRESSIONAL SEAT OR THAT THE LOSS IS DUE TO A SHORTFALL OF ONLY 8 9 RESIDENTS.

EITHER WAY, STATE LAWMAKERS HAVE THEIR WORK CUT OUT FOR THEM.

SO, RICK, YOU SAY THAT THIS ISN'T EXACTLY A SURPRISE AND THAT YOU EXPECTED GREATER LOSSES.

TELL US, RICK, WHY YOU THINK THAT?

>> WELL, FIRST, WE HAVE BEEN LOSING POPULATION HERE IN THE NORTHEAST TO THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

BUT WHAT WAS REALLY SURPRISING IS THAT THE LOSSES WERE NOT WORSE THAN THEY TURNED OUT TO BE.

TEXAS WAS ESTIMATED TO GAIN THREE SEATS WHEN IN REALITY, THEY ONLY GAINED TWO.

FLORIDA WAS EXPECTED TO SEE AN ADDITIONAL TWO SEATS BUT ONLY RECEIVED ONE.

AND ARIZONA, WHICH MANY PEOPLE BELIEVE IS THE FASTEST GROWING STATE IN THE NATION, ISN'T GOING TO HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL SEATS.

AND THE RFN IS, I THINK YOU CAN LOOK TO THE STATE GOVERNMENTS, ALL REPUBLICANS, IN THAT THEY APPARENTLY DID NOT TAKE THE CENSUS COUNT SERIOUSLY.

CALIFORNIA ALLOCATED $185 MILLION TO GET OUT THE CENSUS COUNT IN THAT STATE.

TEXAS SPENT LESS THAN ONE TENTH THAT, ONLY $15 MILLION AND ARIZONA ONLY 1.5 MILLION.

AND TEXAS AND ARIZONA HAD MUCH LOWER RESPONSE RATES THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE.

NOW THE CENSUS DOES TRY TO DO FOLLOWUPS AND FILL IN THE GAPS HERE, BUT CLEARLY THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY OF MAKING SURE THAT EVERY RESIDENT IS COUNTED IS TO GET THEM TO FILL OUT THOSE FORMS.

AND IT APPEARS THAT MANY IN TEXAS AND ARIZONA DID NOT DO THIS.

NOW WE ARE GOING TO GET TO THE SPECIFICS A LITTLE BIT LATER ON IN THE YEAR, BUT IT APPEARS THAT HISPANICS, ESPECIALLY, WERE UNDERCOUNTED.

I THINK THE LESSON HERE, BOTH IN SEEING THAT NEW YORK LOST A SEAT BY ONLY 89 VOTES AND WHAT HAPPENED IN TEXAS, FLORIDA AND ARIZONA, IS THAT A CORRECT COUNT IN THE CENSUS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

>> IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, RICK, BUT LET ME FOLLOW UP AND SAY THIS.

THAT EVEN THOUGH THE GAINS IN THOSE SOUTHERN STATES WEREN'T AS GREAT AS YOU WERE EXPECTING, THEY'RE GAINS NONETHELESS.

SO IS IT YOUR SENSE THAT THIS STRENGTHENS THE REPUBLICAN STRONG HOLD IN THOSE STATES?

IN OTHER WORDS, DOES IT MAKE THESE STATES REDDER STATES?

>> NOT NECESSARILY JUST BECAUSE POPULATION IS GOING UP IN A RED STATE AND THEY GET ADDITIONAL CONGRESSIONAL SEATS, DOESN'T MEAN THAT OVERALL THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BECOME REDDER.

IT DEPENDS WHO IS MOVING IN AND OUT OF THESE STATES.

AND SO IF YOUNGER PEOPLE ARE GOING FROM THE NORTHEAST TO THESE STATES AND WITH HIGHER LEVELS OF EDUCATION, YOU KNOW, THEY TEND TO BE MORE MODERATE, AND SO IT ISN'T CLEAR THAT OVERALL, SAY THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO LOSE THEIR CLOUT BECAUSE SOME OF THESE STATES ARE GETTING ADDITIONAL SEATS.

IN FACT, YOU KNOW, DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN MAKING INROADS IN A NUMBER OF THESE STATES.

SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT, AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL ELECTION LEVEL, THAT THERE COULD BE A BENEFIT TO THE DEMOCRATS IN GETTING INROADS IN THESE STATES.

>> I'M NOT SURE I AGREE WITH THAT.

POPULATION DISTRIBUTION CHANGES ARE CORRECT THE WAY YOU DESCRIBED THEM, BUT THE OTHER FACTOR IS REAPPORTIONMENT BY STATE LEGISLATURES AND MOST OF THE STATES RECEIVING ADDITIONAL SEATS ARE SEATS FIRMLY CONTROLLED BY THE REPUBLICANS AND THEY HAVE REALLY MASTERED THE ART OF GERRYMANDERED MALAPPORTIONED, APPORTIONED DISTRICTS AND IF YOU LOOK AT STATES LIKE NORTH CAROLINA AND WISCONSIN AND OTHERS, YOU CAN SEE HOW GREAT THE DISPARITY IS BETWEEN CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATION VERSUS THE PARTISAN LEANINGS OF THE PUBLIC AND THEY'RE AT WIDE ODDS SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ESPECIALLY FOR A STATE LIKE FLORIDA, I MEAN AND TEXAS FOR THAT MATTER, THEY'RE GOING TO MALAPPORTION THE HECK OUT OF THE DISTRICTS GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL SEATS AND I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT TO THE REPUBLICANS BENEFIT.

AND NEW YORK STATE HAS BEEN LOSING CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT SEATS SINGS THE 19 SFOWRTS.

IN THE 1940S, NEW YORK STATE HAD 45 REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS, WHICH WAS THE HIGHEST NUMBER IN THE COUNTRY.

WE WERE THE HIGHEST POPULATION STATE BACK IN THE 1940S, AND WE HAVE LOST REPRESENTATIVES EVERY DECADE SINCE THE 19 FOURTH 1940S AND IT IS STILL STUNNING TO ME THAT WE CAME WITHIN 89 INDIVIDUALS WHO DIDN'T FILL OUT THEIR CENSUS FORMS, AND LET'S HOPE THAT GOVERNOR CUOMO FINDS A DESK DRAWER WITH A COUPLE HUNDRED MORE CENSUS FORMS IT IN, RIGHT, THAT SOMEBODY DIDN'T COUNT.

I DOUBT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO WE HAVE LOST-- AND I WAS FRANKLY GLAD WE ONLY LOST ONE SEAT AND I DIDN'T REALIZE WE CAME SO CLOSE TO NOT LOSING ANY.

BUT WE HAVE SOMETHING ELSE GOING ON IN NEW YORK, WHICH IS THAT BOTH HOUSES OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE ARE CONTROLLED BY THE DEMOCRATS IN THE FIRST YEAR IN MORE DECADES THAN I CAN EVEN COUNT.

SO THE DEMOCRATS ARE IN CONTROL OF REAPPORTIONMENT IN NEW YORK AND THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT TO THE DEMOCRATS ADVANTAGE.

>> THAT'S WAS I WANT TO PICK UP ON BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THAT IN THE RED STATES YOU ANTICIPATE THEY'RE GOING TO USE THE APPORTIONMENT PROCESS AND RESTRICTING PROCESS TO THEIR PARTY'S ADVANTAGE.

SO TURNING TO NEW YORK, IS IT YOUR EXPECTATION THAT THE LEGISLATURE WILL ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE INDEPENDENT RESCHOOL DISTRICT-- REDISTRICTING COMMISSION.

>> I WOULD HAVE TO PUT QUOTE PARTS AROUND THE PHASE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION.

WE KNOW IT IS NOT PURELY INDEPENDENT IN THE WAY THAT IOWA HAS A PURELY NON-PARTISAN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION THE DRIVE TO WANT TO HELP YOUR PARTY IS INEXORABLE AND THE DEMOCRATS-- THERE IS BOUND TO BE SOME TINKERING IN SOME RESPECT OR ANOTHER.

IT WILL BE TO THE DEMOCRATS ADVANTAGE BUT I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE THE SAME MALAPPORTIONMENT AS IN WISCONSIN, NORTH CAROLINA AND OTHER PLACES.

>> BOB, I WANT TO FOLLOW UP BECAUSE YOU PUT SOME IMPORTANT THINGS ON THE TABLE.

DO YOU EXPECT THAT, AS IF, IN FACT, THE LEGISLATURE DOESN'T ACCEPT THE REP RECOMMENDATION AND THEY DO THE THINGS YOU ARE THINKING ABOUT, DO YOU THINK THEY WILL BE CONSIDERING WHAT IS HAPPENING ON CAPITOL HILL, THAT THEY'LL THINK ABOUT THE BALANCE OF POWER IN THE HOUSE AND THE FACT THAT YOU THE HAS GOTTEN CLOSER AND CLOSER?

>> SURE, THAT'S VERY MUCH ON THE TABLE AND I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO REDRAW SFRICTS IN A WAY THAT WILL BE DISADVANTAGE US FOR CLAUDIA TENNEY WHO REPRESENTS ONEIDA COUNTY AND UP THAT WAY.

SHE WON BY A HAIR'S BREATH LAST TIME, LOST TWO YEARS EARLIER.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO BET MONEY AND I'M NOT A BETTING MAP, ON THE IDEA THAT THEY'LL REDRAW THAT DISTRICT LINE TO PROVIDE MORE DEMOCRATS TO MAKE IT MORE LIKELY SHE WILL LOSE NEXT YEAR TO ANTHONY BRINDISI WHO ANNOUNCED HE IS GOING TO RUN AGAIN IN 2022.

AND WHY WOULDN'T HE RUN.

BUT OF COURSE THE NUMBER OF DISTRICTS WILL GO FROM 27 TO 26 COME WHAT MAY.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE SLOW POPULATION GROWTH THAT ACCOUNTED FOR THIS.

IT'S NOT SO MUCH THAT NEW YORK LOST POPULATION BUT THE GROWTH WAS SLOWER THAN THE OTHER STATES SOMETHING LIKE 4.2%.

WHAT DO YOU ATTRIBUTE THIS TO?

WHY DO YOU THINK NEW YORK IS NOT GROWING AS QUICKLY OR TO THE EXTENT THAT THE OTHER LARGE STATES ARE?

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS AN IMPACT ON THIS IS THE FACT THAT INCREASINGLY INDIVIDUALS ARE WORKING VIA THE INTERNET AND SO WHEREAS MANY PEOPLE WOULD COME TO NEW YORK FOR JOBS, ET CETERA, THEY DON'T NEED TO COME TO NEW YORK ANYMORE.

AND ONE OF THE REALITIES OF WHEN THIS CENSUS WAS TAKEN IS THAT REMEMBER THE CENSUS WAS TAKEN DURING THE MIDDLE OF THE PANDEMIC AND MANY, MANY PEOPLE WERE WORKING FROM HOME, MANY PEOPLE CONTINUE TO WORK AND BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO COME INTO WORK, YOU KNOW, I KNOW OF A NUMBER OF CASES WHERE PEOPLE DECIDED, OKAY, I DON'T NEED TO LIVE IN THE EXPENSIVE, FOR EXAMPLE, NEW YORK CITY OR NEW YORK STATE I CAN COULD MY JOB EFFECTIVELY IN A CHEAPER STATE WHERE IT DOESN'T COST AS MUCH AND I CAN HAVE A NICER HOME, ET CETERA.

THAT'S ONE OF THE FACTORS SLOWING THE GROWTH IS THE IMPACTED OF THE INTERNET.

SOMETHING ELSE THAT IS AN IMPACT, A NEBULOUS IMPACT, NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN IMMEDIATELY SAY WE CAN LOOK AT A POLL OR SOMETHING SPECIFIC ON THE CENSUS IS MANY PEOPLE SEE NEW YORK STATE AS BECOMING EXTREMELY ULTRALIBERAL.

>> SHOCKING.

BUT IF YOU THINK OF SOME OF OUR LEGISLATION, MARIJUANA, SAME-SEX MARRIAGE, ET CETERA.

MANY PEOPLE INCREASINGLY IDENTIFY NEW YORK STATE, THEY FORGET ABOUT UPSTATE NEW YORK, THEY IDENTIFY NEW YORK STATE AS BEING EVERYTHING DOWNSTATE AND VIEWS DOWNSTATE SO MANY PEOPLE ARE RETHINKING DO I REALLY WANT TO COME TO THIS STATE WHERE MAYBE MY VALUES ARE NOT REFLECTED.

AND OF COURSE THERE ALWAYS IS THAT LOVELY IMPACT OF THE WEATHER.

NOW INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, OUR WEATHER SEEMS TO BE GETTING BETTER IN THE WINTER TIME, BUT STILL THAT HAS AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE.

>> AND I NEVER EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

I DO SUSPECT THAT WE ARE GOING TO RETURN TO THIS TOPIC AS THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS UNFOLDS.

BUT NOW WE TURN FROM DRAWING LINES ACROSS NEW YORK STATE TO DRAWING THE LINE BETWEEN WHERE THE AUTHORITY OF LOCAL SCHOOLS BEGINS AND WHERE IT ENDS.

ON WEDNESDAY, THE SUPREME COURT HEARD ARGUMENTS ON A CASE INVOLVING A HIGH SCHOOL CHEERLEADER WHO WROTE SOME UNKIND THINGS AND A FEW EXPLETIVES ON A SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM.

SHE WAS BOOTED OFF THE CHEERLEADING SQUAD AS PUNISHMENT.

THE KEY QUESTION BEFORE THE COURT IS WHETHER THE STUDENT'S FREE SPEECH RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED.

SO LET'S PICK UP ON THAT POINT, TARA.

DO HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SWEAR WHEN THEY ARE OFF CAMPUS?

>> BASICALLY, FROM EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE READ, INCLUDING THE TINKER VERSUS DES MOINES CASE, YES, THEY DO.

IN THE CASE OF THIS STUDENT, SHE WAS SPEAKING TO QUOTE UNQUOTE, 250 FRIENDS, SHE WAS NOT ON CAMPUS.

SHE DID NOT THREATEN ANYONE.

NOTHING SHE SAID INTERFERED IN TERMS OF WHAT THE SCHOOL COULD SHOW.

NOTHING SHE SAID INTERFERED WITH, YOU KNOW, ANY ACTIVITY OF THE SCHOOL, SO, YES, BASED ON EVERYTHING THAT I CAN SEE, SHE DOES HAVE A RIGHT TO SWEAR WHEN SHE IS OFF SCHOOL GROUNDS.

>> YEAH, LET ME GET YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS.

SO IS THIS A CASE OF BRANDY LEVY, WHO WAS THEN A 14-YEAR-OLD NINTH GRADER, IS THIS A CASE OF HER SIMPLY BEING A 14-YEAR-OLD NINTH GRADER?

>> YES, IT IS.

HAD SHE THREATENED ANYONE ON THE TEAM, HAD SHE THREATENED THE COACH, THEN IT MIGHT HAVE GONE BEYOND THAT.

SHE DIDN'T DO ANY OF THOSE THINGS.

SHE BASICALLY WAS A 14-YEAR-OLD HAVING A RESISTANT.

>> YES, SHE WAS HAVING A RANT.

A COUPLE THINGS WERE INTERESTING.

IF SHE HAD THE RANT WHILE ON CAMPUS, SAY SHE SAW THE LIST OF CHEERLEADERS AND HAD REACTED THAT WAY, WOULD SHE HAVE BEEN PUNISHED?

AND IF SO IN WHAT WAY?

WHAT COMPLICATES THIS, IS SHE IS NOT BEING PUNISHED ACADEMICALLY, NONE OF HER COURSE ARE BEING AFFECTED.

SHE IS NOT BEING ALLOWED TO TAKE PART IN AN EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITY AND THERE IS A LONG HISTORY OF ATHLETES BEING HELD TO HIGHER STANDARDS THAN NON-AT LEADS ATHLETES EVEN FOR OFF CAMPUS BEHAVIORS.

I'M REALLY CURIOUS HOW THE COURTS ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES.

FROM WHAT I HEAR, THEY'RE VERY UNCOMFORTABLE IN TRYING TO DRAW THE LINE BETWEEN WHEN SPEECH AND BEHAVIOR IS DISRUPTIVE AND WHEN IT'S NOT.

IN THIS CASE THEY TRIED TO STRETCH THINGS TO SAY THAT, MORALE ON THE CHEERLEADING SQUAD WAS GOING TO BE AFFECTED.

I THINK IF IT WAS JUDGED ON THE VERY NARROW BASIS, I THINK MOST OF THE JUSTICES WOULD BACK HER, BUT THIS IS BEING MADE INTO A MUCH, MUCH BIGGER DEAL, WHICH IS GOING TO MAKE IT DIFFICULT ON THEM.

>> THERE IS AN OLD EXPRESSION THAT BAD CASES MAKE BAD LAW.

THIS CASE IS KIND OF A MESS BECAUSE IT BRINGS IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT FACTORS.

IT'S NOT PURELY A SPEECH CASE.

AND THE SUPREME COURT DID SAY BACK IN 1969 THAT ESSENTIALLY THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T STOP AT THE SCHOOLHOUSE GATE.

BUT THE FACT IS, SINCE 1969, THE COURT HAS SLOWLY TURNED AWAY FROM THAT PRINCIPLE.

IN THE 1980s IT SAID STUDENTS IN STUDENT NEWSPAPER DON'T HAVE FREE PRESS RIGHTS.

THE BONG HITS FOR JESUS CASE IN ALASKA INVOLVED AN OFF CAMPUS DEMONSTRATION, A STUDENT HOLDING A SIGN THAT SAID BONG HIT FOR JESUS.

THE STUDENT WAS SANCTIONED AND THE COURT UPHELD THE SANCTION.

YOU HAVE THE COMPLEXITY OF THE INTERNET, THE COMPLEXITY OF THE FACT LIKE YOU POINTED OUT, RICK, THIS IS AN EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITY.

IF SHE HAD BEEN SUSPENDED FROM CLASSES FOR THIS BEHAVIOR, I WOULD BE 100% SAYING NO, THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

BUT FOR AN EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITY, WHICH IS NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.

THE RIGHT TO BE ON A CHEERLEADING TEAM AND TO BE SUSPENDED FOR A YEAR BECAUSE OF WHAT SHE SAID IN CONNECTION WITH THAT, F THIS AND F THAT AND SENDING THAT TO 2 R50-- 250 FRIENDS.

I HAVE A LOT MORE SYMPATHY FOR THE SCHOOL UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES AND I'LL SAY ONE OTHER THING.

SETTING ASIDE THE LAW FOR A MINUTE AND OF COURSE IT'S BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT.

IF THIS WAS MY DAUGHTER AND I'VE RAISED DAUGHTERS AND SHE IS 14 AND SHE DID WHAT THIS GIRL DID, AND THE SCHOOL DIDN'T TAKE ANY ACTION, I WOULD BE PERFECTLY COMFORTABLE TELLING HER, YOU ARE OFF THE TEAM FOR A YEAR BECAUSE YOU NEED TO RETHINK THE KIND OF PERSON YOU ARE.

THIS IS CHEERLEADING AND THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS BEHAVIOR.

AND HER EXCUSE THAT THIS IS THE WAY EVERYONE TALKS.

THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE AS A STANDARD 50 YEARS AGO AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED AND IT'S NOT ACCESSIBLE TODAY.

THAT'S JUST MY FEELING TODAY.

>> WHY DO YOU THINK THIS STUDENT'S PARENTS ARE LITIGATING THIS ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT.

OF COURSE WITH THE HELP OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION.

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING ON IN THEIR HEAD?

>> TWO PARTS TO THIS.

ONE OF COURSE IS THAT IT IS SUCH A BIG ISSUE AND THE SUPREME COURT IS THE HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND, I CAN SEE THE LOGIC OF BRINGING THE CASE BECAUSE OF ITS LEGAL CONSEQUENCES BUT IT STRIKES ME AS A CASE THAT THE PARENTS ARE STANDING BEHIND THEIR GIRL AND ARE UNWILLING TO ADMIT THAT THEIR GIRL IS NARCISSISTIC AND IMMATURE AND WAS A 14-YEAR-OLD AND SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SAYING AND DOING WHAT SHE WAS DOING.

NOW THE PARENTS SAY, IT'S OKAY, YOU KNOW, THAT I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND.

BUT THERE ARE PLENTY OF CASES WHERE THE PARENTS STAND BEHIND THEIR CHILDREN DESPITE THE BIZARRE AND HEINOUS THINGS THAT THEY DO.

BUT THIS REALLY-- >> I UNDERSTAND THIS VIEW, BUT THIS REALLY IS GETTING AT AN ISSUE THAT I THINK NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

I MEAN WHERE DO YOU DRAW THAT LINE?

IF YOU, FOR INSTANCE, CLARENCE THOMAS, WHO HAS BEEN A STRONG SUPPORTER OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS ACTUALLY HAS WRITTEN THAT HE BELIEVES THAT IN THE ORIGINAL 1969 CASE THAT THE COURT GOT IT WRONG.

THAT STUDENTS DON'T HAVE RIGHTS OF FREE SPEECH, AT LEAST WHEN THEY'RE ON CAMPUS.

SO I THINK THAT WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE?

THE APPEALS COURT ACTUALLY STATED EMPHATICALLY THAT THEY DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS ANY RIGHT TO SANCTION BUT ALMOST EVERYBODY DISAGREES WITH THAT BECAUSE OF BULLYING AND OTHER THINGS.

I THINK THIS IS AN ISSUE WHOSE TIME HAS COME AND THIS MAY NOT BE THE BEST CASE TO BRING IT FORWARD, BUT IT'S BEING BROUGHT FORWARD.

>> IT'S BROUGHT FORWARD THE JUSTICES ON BOTH SIDES HAVE SAID THAT THIS IS A NIGHTMARE IS WHAT BREYER SAID, HOW TO FIGURE OUT WHERE TO SET THE STANDARD.

UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE TO MOVE ON.

AND I'LL BEGIN BY SAYING THAT FOR THE FIRST TYPE IN HISTORY, A HOUSE COMMITTEE TOOK ACTION ON A BILL THAT WOULD CONSIDER PROVIDING BLACK AMERICANS WITH REPARATIONS FOR SLAVERY AND A NATIONAL APOLOGY FOR CENTURIES OF DISCRIMINATION.

ONE OF THE ADVOCATES EXPLAINED THE RATIONALE THIS WAY "IF YOU, THROUGH YOUR HISTORY, BENEFITED FROM THAT WRONG THAT WAS DONE, THEN YOU MUST BE WILLING TO COMMIT YOURSELF TO RIGHTING THAT WRONG."

SO, BOB, LET'S START WITH THE BASIC QUESTION OF WHETHER IT'S IMPORTANT TO COMPENSATE DESCENDANTS OF BLACK SLAVES IN ANY WAY.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> I THINK IT IS.

I THINK IT'S A QUESTION THAT NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED.

THERE HAS BEEN IMPORTANT WRITING ON THE WHOLE IDEA OF REPARATIONS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS NOW.

AND THE COUNTRY OWES A SPECIAL DEBT TO BLACK AMERICANS.

PART OF THE COMPLICATION FOR THE PROGRAM THAT I THINK WAS THE PROPER REMEDY FOR SLAVERY, WHICH IS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HAS RUN AFOUL OF THE FACT AS SOME OF YOU HAVE POINTED OUT IN THE PAST THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HAVE NOT PROVIDED THE BEST BENEFIT FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS BUT MORE FOR FEMALES, WHITE FEMALES, ET CETERA.

AND THERE ARE MANY-- WOMEN HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO DISCRIMINATION AND ASIAN AMERICANS AND SO HAVE MANY GROUPS, AND THEY HAVE ALL MADE CLAIMS WITH RESPECT TO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.

AND THOSE CLAIMS ARE VALID.

BUT AFRICAN-AMERICANS ARE IN A DIFFERENT CATEGORY BECAUSE OF INSTITUTIONALIZED SLAVERY BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE CONSTITUTION, BECAUSE IT WAS THE PRACTICE.

HAVING SAID THAT, I CONTINUE TO HAVE A LOT OF DOUBTS ABOUT THE REPARATIONS ROOT.

PARTLY BECAUSE OF THE DEFINITIONAL PROBLEM.

HOW DO YOU IDENTIFY-- FIRST OF ALL, DO YOU MAKE THE DECISION THAT ONLY BLACK AMERICANS WHO CAN TRACE ANCESTORS TO BEFORE 1866 SHOULD BE ENTITLED AND IF SO, HOW DO YOU DO THAT BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THOSE, IF ANY OF YOU WATCH ANCESTRY TYPE PROGRAMS OR RESEARCH, YOU KNOW THAT THE RECORDS OF ENSLAVED PEOPLE ARE MINISCULE FROM THE CENSUS, FROM EVERYTHING ELSE.

IT'S EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO TRACE.

MANY PEOPLE WOULD MAKE THE DECISION BASED ON FAMILY FOLKLORE, BUT IS THAT GOOD ENOUGH EVIDENCE?

MY GREAT, GREAT AUNT TOLD ME THAT WE, YOU KNOW, HAD ENSLAVED PEOPLE.

AND THEN THE COST, WHAT KIND OF MIEF HIVE.

>> $$20 TRILLION, RIGHT?

>> >> IT'S A MIND BOGGLING NUMBER.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GO FROM THERE.

>> HOW DO YOU TRACE IT BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE OF AFRICAN DESCENT.

YOU KNOW, AND I'M GOING TO USE MYSELF AS AN EXAMPLE.

JUST LOOKING AT ME, YOU KNOW THAT I'M NOT PURE AFRICAN.

I'M MIXED WITH AMERICAN EUROPEAN SOMEWHERE.

DOES THAT MEAN I'M EXCLUDED BECAUSE I'M PARTIALLY EUROPEAN AMERICAN SOMEWHERE IN MY ANCESTRY?

WHAT DO YOU DO ABOUT THE INCREASING NUMBER OF MIXED RACE?

>> INTERESTING.

FASCINATING POINT.

>> WHAT DO YOU DO ABOUT THAT?

AND THEN THERE IS ALSO THE ISSUE OF, YOU KNOW, BLACK SLAVE OWNERS.

NATIVE AMERICAN SLAVE OWNERS.

AS YOU POINTED OUT, NATIVE AMERICANS ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST IN OUR COUNTRY.

YOU ARE PITTING TWO DISCRIMINATED PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER AND SO FOR ME, THIS IS A REAL CONUNDRUM BECAUSE ON THE ONE HAND, I THINK MAYBE REPARATIONS WILL BRING SOME CLOSURE, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I WORRY ABOUT REPARATIONS BRINGING SOME CLOSURE.

>> I WANT TO PICK UP ON THAT SECOND POINT.

I FIND IT SOMEWHAT CONFUSING THAT WE ARE GOING TO SPEND TIME AND ENERGY DEALING WITH PAST INJUSTICES AT A TIME WHEN OUR PLATE IS REALLY FULL WITH INJUSTICES RIGHT NOW.

WE TALK ABOUT POLICING.

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM.

WE'VE GOT STATES THAT ARE TRYING TO PASS LAWS AIMED AT RESTRICTING VOTING OF MINORITIES.

WE STILL HAVE DISCRIMINATION IN HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT, SO I WONDER IF THIS IS WHERE WE SHOULD BE PUTTING OUR TIME AND EFFORT ON THIS.

I ALSO WORRY ABOUT AND DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT ANY WHITES SAYING, OKAY, WE WANT OUR CHECK... >> EXACTLY THE SAME... >> THAT HAS TO BE THE DISCUSSION FOR NEXT TIME BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TO MOVE ON.

WE ARE MOVING ON TO THE GRADE BOOKS.

THANKS FOR THAT GREAT DISCUSSION.

WE'LL START WITH BOB, YOUR F. >> TO THE TRAIN WRECK THAT WAS LAST SUNDAY NIGHT'S ACADEMY AWARDS.

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?

YOU WOULD THINK THAT A PROGRAM BROADCAST TO CELEBRATE MOVIES WOULD INCLUDE MOVIE CLIPS; ESPECIALLY WHEN THE TOP FILMS OF THE YEAR ARE SO LITTLE KNOWN AND LITTLE SEEN.

WHY GIVE THE BUM'S RUSH TO THE IN MEMORIUM SEGMENT DEVOTED TO HONORING MOVIE PEOPLE WHO DIED IN THIS PAST YEAR WHICH THEY DIPPED THROUGH SO RAPIDLY, WHY USE AN UP TEMPO SONG INSTEAD OF A BALLAD, WHY DROP IN THE LAME NAME JUST BEFORE THE FINAL AWARDS?

I COULD GO ON BUT OUR DIRECTOR DOUG ONLY GIVE ME 10 MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT THIS.

HAVE I USED UP MY 10 MINUTES?

>> YOU HAVE.

WE ARE GOING TO TURN NOW TO RICK, YOUR F?

>> MY F TO SENATOR TEDISCO CRUZ OF TEXAS.

HEED OF OF SNEARD TED CRUZ.

HE MADE FUN OF VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS, HE SAID HER GPS MUST BE CONFUSED BECAUSE SHE GAVE A SPEECH IN NEW HAMPSHIRE BEFORE HEADING DOWN TO P MEXICAN BORDER TO SEE THE PROBLEMS THERE.

THIS IS THE SAME TED CRUZ WHOSE GPS LANDED HIM IN CANCUN MEXICO AT THE SAME TIME MILLIONS OF TEXANS WERE WITHOUT POWER AND WATER DURING THE LATEST WINTER STORM.

>> SO I'M SORRY, TARA, BUT YOU'VE GOT JUST A FEW SECONDS.

>> I'M GIVING AN F TO ALL OF THOSE VACCINATORS WHO HAVEN'T MENTIONED TO THE VACCINATED THAT THERE IS THE CDC BE SAFE AFTER VACCINATION WHICH IS A SMART PHONE APP WHICH WILL CHECK UP ON YOU.

>> WE HAVE TO GO REALLY QUICKLY TO THE AS.

QUICKLY.

>> A TO WEST VIRGINIA FOR OFFERING $100 SAVINGS BONDS TO ANYBODY UNDER 35 WHO GETS THE COVID VACCINE.

>> A TO THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION FOR FAIRLY SUCCESSFUL FIRST 100 DAYS.

>> MY A GOES TO ALL OF THE HARD WORKING COLLEGE STUDENTS WHO HAVE PERSEVERED THROUGH COVID-19 AND ITS DISRUPTIONS AND ARE MOVING TOWARDS GRADUATION.

>> OKAY.

THAT WENT REALLY QUICKLY.

WHY DON'T WE TALK ABOUT OUR GRADUATES.

SO WHAT ARE YOU GUYS-- ARE ANY OF YOU HAVING ON CAMPUS GRADUATION RECEPTIONS?

>> NO RECEPTIONS.

>> WE ARE HAVE AN IN-PERSON ONE BY SCHOOL BUT UNFORTUNATELY WITHOUT ANY GUESTS.

>> WITHOUT ANY GUESTS.

JUST THE GRADUATING SENIORS.

>> STREAMED.

>> THAT'S WHAT WE ARE DOING TOO, BASICALLY.

>> ROUGHLY, YOU GUYS PROBABLY HAVE A LOT MORE P MOST.

>> PROBABLY NUMBERS BIGGER THAN YOUR ALL INSTITUTIONS, IT WILL BE IN TWO GROUPS ON TWO DIFFERENT DAYS.

>> WE ARE DOING THE GROUPINGS, TOO, BUT THEY'RE ASKING FACULTY AND STAFF TO COME OUT AND SORT OF RING THE CIRCLE THAT GOES AROUND THE CAMPUS TO CONGRATULATE THEM.

>> THAT'S FANTASTIC.

WELL, CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL OF OUR GRADUATES.

THAT'S AL FOR ALL FOR TONIGHT WE ARE SO GLAD YOU JOINED US AND WOULD REALLY LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU.

WRITE TO THE ADDRESS ON YOUR SCREEN.

TO WATCH THE SHOW AGAIN, GO TO WCNY.ORG.

I'M NINA MOORE.

FOR ALL OF US AT "IVORY TOWER," GOOD NIGHT.