WAVING THE FLAG AT THE SUPREME COURT.

A CONTROVERSIAL PLAN TO EXECUTE FEDERAL PRISONERS ON DEATH ROW.

AND BIDEN HITS CHINA WITH TARIFFS WHERE HAVE WE HEARD THAT BEFORE?

STAY TUNED, IVORY TOWER IS NEXT.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ GOOD EVENING, WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M DAVID CHANTRY, FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

I'M JOINED THIS WEEK BY NINA MOORE FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, SARAH PRALLE FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, MICHAEL TILLOTSON FROM SUNY CORTLAND AND BEN BAUGHMAN FROM GANNON UNIVERSITY.

QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ETHICAL STANDARDS OF THE SUPREME COURT BECAME SUPERCHARGED THIS WEEK WITH THE NEWS THAT JUSTICE SAM ALITO FLEW AN AMERICAN FLAG UPSIDE-DOWN AT HIS HOME.

FLAGS FLYING THIS WAY HAVE BEEN SEEN AS A SYMBOL OF SUPPORT FOR THEN PRESIDENT TRUMP'S STOP THE STEAL MOVEMENT.

THIS IS JUST THE LATEST OF A SERIES OF ETHICAL CONCERNS AT THE COURT--- JUSTICE THOMAS'S EXPENSIVE-PAID VACATIONS AND HIS WIFE GINNY'S POLITICAL ACTIVISM THE MOST NOTABLE.

NINA IS THE TIME FINALLY NOW WITH THE FLAG INCIDENT TO REFORM THE SUPREME COURT?

>> I DON'T THINK THAT WHAT WE NEED ARE MORE REFORMS BECAUSE CONGRESS ALREADY HAS MULTIPLE AVENUES BY WHICH TO CONTROL WHAT THE COURT DOES.

CONGRESS COULD ACTUALLY ENACT WHAT WE CALL LEGISLATIVE REVERSALS AND ALSO CONSTITUTIONAL REVERSALS.

SO IT COULD REVERT DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE BY THE SUPREME COURT IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT COULD ENGAGE, UNDER ITS ARTICLE 3 POWERS IN WHAT WE CALL JURISDICTION STRIPPING, WHICH MEANS IT CAN TAKE AWAY THE COURT'S POWER TO HEAR CERTAIN CASES THAT WOULD PERCOLATE UP THROUGH ITS APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

AT LEAST THOSE THAT ARE NOT SPELLED OUT IN ARTICLE 3.

AND THEN THERE IS ALSO THE POWER OF IMPEACHMENT, CONTROL OVER THE BUDGET, CONTROL OVER THE COURT'S RULE MAKING AUTHORITY.

SO THERE IS A LOT THAT IT CAN DO.

PILING ANOTHER FORM I DON'T THINK WILL WORK.

>> YOU SUGGEST THEY SHOULD IMPEACH SAMUEL ALITO?

>> IF WHAT CONGRESS FEELS THAT BOTH ALITO AND THOMAS ARE DOING ARE SO OUTRAGEOUS, THEN THAT IS AN AVENUE.

BUT AS FAR AS CONTROLLING THE POWER OF AN INDIVIDUAL JUSTICE SHORT OF IMPEACHMENT, THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T GIVE CONGRESS THAT POWER.

>> I NEED A LITTLE HISTORY LESSON.

HAS A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE EVER BEEN IMPEACHED?

>> NO, BUT SAMUEL CHASE IN 1804 CAME CLOSE TO BEING IMPEACHED.

BY THE WAY, THE GREAT CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN MARSHALL WAS ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK NEXT BUT HE MANAGED TO ESCAPE.

BUT THE ONLY OTHER JUSTICE DURING THE 1960S, FORTIS WHO WAS UNDER SCRUTINY FOR CERTAIN FINANCIAL IMPROPRIETIES BUT HE RESIGNED BEFOREHAND, SO NO, THERE IS NO HISTORY OF A SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT JUSTICE EVER HAVING BEEN IMPEACHED.

>> BUT WE ARE ON IMPEACHMENT ROW.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME A HOMELAND SECURITY DIRECTOR WAS UP FOR IMPEACHMENT?

THIS IS OUT OF CONTROL, THE IMPEACHMENT DIRECTION.

THIS IS THE HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND WITH THE LOWEST ETC.

ETHICAL STANDARDS AND THAT'S A PROBLEM.

>> WHAT YOU DO SUGGEST?

>> I SUGGEST THAT THEY HAVE A CODE OF ETHICS THAT THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY STICK TO TO MAINTAIN OBJECTIVITY AND ALSO TO REGAIN THE TRUST OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

>> BUT THEY HAVE ONE.

>> ONE THAT THEY CAN DECIDE TO FOLLOW OR NOT.

THEY'RE NOT FORCED TO FOLLOW IT.

>> UNDER BOTH THE FEDERAL RECUSAL LAW AS WELL, SO WE'VE GOT THEM BUT THERE IS NO ENFORCEMENT.

BUT AGAIN, THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T GIVE CONGRESS A LOT OF POWER TO ENFORCE.

>> COULD NOT CONGRESS PASS A LAW TO FORCE A BINDING CODE OF ETHICS THAT THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY PAY ATTENTION TO?

>> THEY ALREADY HAVE ONE THAT IS IN CONGRESS THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED BUT THERE IS JUST NOT THE VOTES TO PASS THAT REFORM.

THEY ALSO HAVE A BILL THAT WOULD IMPOSE 18-YEAR TERM LIMITS THAT WOULD ALLOW EACH PRESIDENT ABOUT TWO NOMINEES PER PRESIDENT.

THEY ALSO HAVE A COURT EXPANSION BILL, SO THAT WOULD EXPAND THE COURT FROM 9 TO 13.

CONGRESS HAS CHANGED THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ON THE SUPREME COURT OVER SEVEN TIMES IN OUR HISTORY.

SO THAT WOULD NOT BE UNUSUAL.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE ARE NO VOTES FOR ANY OF THESE, RIGHT?

SO WHAT CAN CONGRESS DO?

I THINK IT NEEDS TO DO WHAT IT CAN, WHICH IS DEMOCRATS ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE NEED TO AT LEAST HOLD HEARINGS ON THIS ISSUE.

NAME AND SHAME THE PEOPLE.

SUBPOENA THEM.

MAKE THEM COME UP AND ANSWER QUESTIONS.

KEEP THIS IN THE NEWS BECAUSE THIS SHOULD BE A MAJOR ISSUE FOR THE 2024 ELECTION.

IS THE SUPREME COURT AND HOW OUT OF CONTROL IT REALLY IS AND UNACCOUNTABLE IT REALLY IS AS BEN SUGGESTED.

>> MICHAEL, THE WORD SARAH USED, UNACCOUNTABLE, I THINK IMPUNITY, IT SHOWS THAT ALITO CAN DO THAT.

IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT HE IS BIASED OR NOT NEUTRAL BUT IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS A PERCEPTION THAT THAT IS THE CASE.

BUT THERE IS REALLY-- HE CAN JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, SO WHAT.

I'M GOING TO DO WHAT I WANT TO DO.

>> YEAH, IN ADDITION TO THE PUBLIC MORAL INDISCRETIONS OF ALITO AND THOMAS SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO THINK OF THE COURT AS A HUMAN ENTERPRISE.

THEY'RE HUMAN BEINGS.

THEY'RE NOT MADE OF STEEL, RUBBER AND PLASTIC.

THEY COME THROUGH A SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT MODEL.

ALL PRODUCTS OF OUR EXPOSURES, ENVIRONMENTS AND EXPERIENCES THAT SHAPE OUR PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE WHICH INFLUENCE OUR BEHAVIOR AND WORLD VIEW.

THEY BRING A WORLD VIEW TO THE COURT BUT AT THE SAME TIME THE OF PASSING OFF SUCH INSCRIPTIONS AS OBJECTIVE JURISPRUDENCE, RIGHT?

SO THIS BATCH OF SIX THAT THEY'RE CALLED, IT APPEARS THEY DON'T HAVE THE WILL OR THE DISCIPLINE TO BRIDLE THEIR IDEOLOGICAL INSTINCTS FOR THE COMMON GOOD LIKE SOME JUSTICES HAVE BEFORE THEM.

I THINK THAT NEITHER THOMAS NOR ALITO HAVE THE INTEGRITY OR CHARACTER TO RECUSE THEMSELVES.

WE HAVE A SUPREME COURT THAT IS THE MOST EGALITARIAN SINCE 1896.

THE COURT JUST STRUCK DOWN YESTERDAY THE END OF THE PEACE CHALLENGE TO SOUTH CAROLINA TO GERRYMANDER ALONG RACIAL LINES.

REFORM, YES, WE GO BACK TO 1803, DO WE START THERE AND GO FORWARD WITH UNDERSTANDING OF EVERYTHING THAT YOU GUYS HAVE JUST SAID.

THE COURT IS OUT OF ROLE CONTROL.

IT IS A PARTISAN INSTRUMENT OF AMERICA.

>> AND THIS IS NOTHING NEW.

IF WE GO BACK TO THE 19 30S DURING THE ROOSEVELT YEARS, INITIALLY THE COURT STRUCK DOWN THE NEW DEAL PROPOSALS UNTIL SOMETHING LIKE WHAT SARAH HAD MENTIONED WAS UNDERTAKEN, THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BEGAN THE COURT PACKING PLAN THAT HAD TO GO NOWHERE BECAUSE THE THREAT ALONE WAS ENOUGH.

BUT IF I COULD JUST SAY THIS ONE OTHER THING.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT THERE IS NOTHING TO SEE HERE WITH ALITO AND THOMAS, BUT I WILL SAY THERE IS NOTHING TO SEE HERE BECAUSE THEY WERE KNOWN QUANTITY WHEN THEY WERE APPOINTED AND THERE WAS A VERY CLOSE VOTE AND THE SENATE, FOR BOTH OF THEM.

AND THEY HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO ALWAYS HOLD DOWN THE RIGHT WITH SCALIA NOW, ALITO BY JUSTICE IDEOLOGICAL SCORES, IS FARTHEST TO THE RIGHT.

SO WE KNOW THEIR JURIES-- WE KNOW THEIR JURISPRUDENCE.

>> IT'S NOT JUST PARTISANSHIP AND KNOWING THEY HAVE POLITICAL PREFERENCES AND IDEOLOGIES.

HE IS SUPPORTING A PROVEN LIE AND A LIE THAT GOES TO THE HEART OF OUR DEMOCRACY, RIGHT?

HE IS SIDING WITH INSURRECTIONISTS WHO SAY THE ELECTION WAS NOT FREE AND FAIR.

I QUESTION HIS JUDGMENT.

HE IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRUTH AND FICTION, HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO WEIGH EVIDENCE, HE HAS ACCESS TO THE BEST INFORMATION IN THE WORLD AND YET HE BELIEVES THIS STUFF?

THAT'S ALARMING.

>> VERY BRIEFLY IN THE EARLY YEARS, THOMAS COMPLAINED ABOUT HIS SALARY IN THE EARLY YEARS.

WE SHOULD NOT BE SURPRISED HE IS A MONEY GUY.

>> OR WITH ALITO BECAUSE REMEMBER AT OBAMA'S STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS IN 2010, HE IS THE ONE WHO SAT THERE AND BROKE WITH TRADITION AND SHOOK HIS HEAD SAYING NO, THAT'S NOT SO, CITIZENS UNITED WAS NOT A TERRIBLE DECISION.

DURING THE FINAL SIX MONTHS OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, 13 FEDERAL INMATES WERE EXECUTED.

THAT ENDED A TWO-DECADE FEDERAL MORATORIUM ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

NOW, THE CONSERVATIVE HERITAGE FOUNDATION'S PROJECT 2025 PLAN FOR A SECOND TRUMP TERM INCLUDES A PLAN TO EXECUTE THE 44 FEDERAL INMATES ON DEATH ROW.

THE PLAN ALSO CALLS FOR EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF CRIMES PUNISHABLE BY DEATH.

THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN SAYS ANY POLICY PLANS ARE BEING DEVELOPED WITHIN THE CAMPAIGN, NOT BY HERITAGE, BUT PROJECT 2025 IS SEEN BY MANY TO BE A POLICY AND PERSONNEL BLUEPRINT.

SO, BEN, MANY OF THESE PRISONERS HAVE BEEN THERE FOR YEARS.

WHY SHOULDN'T THE GOVERNMENT MOVE MORE QUICKLY TO EXECUTE THEM?

>> BECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW THE GOVERNMENT WORKS WITH ANYTHING.

THEY'RE SLOW WITH EVERYTHING.

SO THERE'S THAT, RIGHT?

THE OTHER ISSUE, THOUGH, IS THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH AND HAVING THE DUE PROCESS THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL HAS.

SO ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT IN COURT, THEY DO STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPEAL.

NOW THE IDEA OF EXECUTIONS IS THIS WHOLE SWIFT AND CERTAIN ASPECT FOR IT TO BE PREVENTATIVE.

IT HAS NEVER BEEN SWIFT OR CERTAIN IN OUR RECENT HISTORY.

SO THEREFORE IT DOESN'T HAVE THE PREVENTATIVE COMPONENT.

ALL IT DOES HAVE IS GIVING JUSTICE TO PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE THAT THAT'S THE WAY TO DO IT.

TO EXPAND IT?

TO WHAT?

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE WOULD BE EXECUTING PEOPLE FOR.

THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING IF THAT WAS IN THE 900-PAGE DOCUMENT BY... >> AND I THINK THEY DID MENTION CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN WOULD BE SOMETHING, ALTHOUGH MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT RIGHT NOW THE DEATH PENALTY WOULD NOT APPLY TO SOMEONE WHO IS NOT ACTUALLY MURDERED.

NOT KILLED.

>> BUT DeSANTIS WANTS TO EXTEND THAT TO RAPISTS.

>> I GUESS I WOULD JUST SAY THE TREND OVER 300 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE OF THE DEATH PENALTY HAS BEEN TO NARROW ITS APPLICATION, RIGHT?

AND SO THIS WOULD BE A HUGE CHANGE IF THEY'RE TRYING TO NOW EXPAND THE APPLICATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY.

AND IT JUST GOES TO SHOW THE KIND OF BLOOD THIRSTY NATURE OF TRUMP, RIGHT?

HE JUST-- HE IS NOT INTERESTING IN PREVENTING CRIME.

HE IS INTERESTED IN PUNISHING PEOPLE.

THE CRUELTY TO HIM IS THE POINT.

THE HARSH PUNISHMENT DOES NOT DETER CRIME.

THE RESEARCH DOES NOT BACK THAT UP.

WHAT DETERS TIME IS THE CERTAINTY OF BEING CAUGHT.

AND SO IF WE WANT-- IF WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT PREVENTION, WE SHOULD TRY TO UP WHAT IS CALLED THE CLEARANCE RATE, RIGHT?

THIS IS THE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF CRIMES THAT POLICE ACTUALLY OR LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTUALLY SOLVE AND THAT NUMBER IS ABOUT 37%.

THAT'S NOT HIGH.

AND IT'S ACTUALLY GONE DOWN.

>> MICHAEL?

>> BLOOD THIRSTY, SARAH SAYS, RIGHT?

THE DEATH PENALTY, I THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE OLD WEST, HANG 'EM HIGH, LET 'EM DROP, THAT WHOLE DEAL.

THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN FLUCTUATING DATA ON THE DETERRENCE OF THE DEATH PENALTY.

TEXAS, THEY STILL TALK ABOUT OLD SPARKY.

THEY HAVE REFERENCE FOR OLD SPARKY IN PARTS OF TEXAS, RIGHT?

I GET IT.

AN EYE FOR AN EYE, TOOTH FOR A TOOTH, PENALTY SHOULD MATCH THE CRIME, BUT ALL THESE THINGS ARE HIGHLY SUSPECTED IN A DEVELOPED NATION.

WHEN YOU GO BACK AND READ THE DOCUMENTS, FOUNDERS OF THE NATION, JEFFERSON AND MADISON, THEY TALKED ABOUT THE ITALIAN JURIST WHO TALKED ABOUT THERE SHOULD BE NO PUNISHMENT THAT GOES BEYOND WHAT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS TYRANNICAL, RIGHT?

IN AMERICA WE HAVE MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISONS, WE HAVE LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE.

THERE ARE THOSE THAT WONDER WHY THE DEATH PENALTY IS AN OPTION FOR A COUNTRY THAT IS DEVELOPED.

THIS IS PEOPLE PLAYING JUDGE, JURY AND EXECUTIONERS OF HUMAN BEINGS IN THE 21st CENTURY UNDER THE GUISE OF DISCIPLINARY.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT AT ALL.

>> I UNDERSTAND IT TO BE WHAT BOTH YOU AND SARAH HAVE SUGGESTED IT IS AND THAT IT IS ABOUT RETRIBUTION.

THERE IS A BLOOD THIRSTINESS IN OUR POLITICS THAT IS SO DEEPLY DISTURBING TO ME AND I THINK WE HAVE ONLY SCRATCHED THE SURFACE IN TALKING ABOUT THE DEATH PENALTY.

BUT I WILL SAY THAT, IN FACT, IT WAS THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION WITH THE 1994 VIOLENCE CONTROL ACT THAT EXPANDED APPLICATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY TO AN ADDITIONAL 94 CRIMES, INCLUDING SOME OF WHICH HAD TO DO WITH DRUG TRAFFICKING.

AND REMEMBER, THIS IS THE SAME BILL THAT BIDEN WAS CRITICIZED FOR HAVING PUSHED THROUGH.

SO THIS IS A TRIED AND TRUE STRATEGY.

AND PART OF IT IS ABOUT SATISFYING THE PUBLIC THAT SOMETHING IS BEING DONE AND SORT OF FEEDING RED MEAT TO THE PUBLIC WITHOUT LAYING OUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT HERE, WHICH IS THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS DEFINITIVELY THAT THE DEATH PENALTY IS A DETERRENT AT ALL.

AND THE ONLY KIND OF DETERRENT THAT PUNISHMENT-- DETERRENCE IS ACCOMPLISHED BY WAY OF PUNISHMENT IS WITH RESPECT TO MINOR CRIMES AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO MURDER, NO.

WE DON'T HAVE PROOF.

SO WHAT THE HECK ARE WE DOING?

>> ACCOUNTABILITY AND JUSTICE FOR THE FAMILIES THAT HAVE A LOVED ONE TAKEN FROM THEM UNFAIRLY, ILLEGALLY, IT'S SERVING JUSTICE.

IT'S NOT JUST BLOOD THIRSTY.

AND I CAN GET HOW THAT COMES ACROSS AS BEING BLOOD THIRSTY, AND IT IS.

IT IS RETRIBUTION, BUT SO IS A LOT OF THE CRIMS.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM SO THAT ARGUMENT IS THERE.

THE RESEARCH IS EXTREMELY LIMITED IN SHOWING DETERRENCE WITH THE DEATH PENALTY, BUT AS FAR AS RETRIBUTION AND BEING BEYOND BEING BLOOD THIRSTY, THAT RESEARCH IS THERE.

>> YEAH, BUT THE THING IS, BEN, WITH THE DEATH PENALTY, THERE IS NO FIXING IT AND QUITE A FEW PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE INNOCENT WITH OTHER KINDS OF CRIMES WHERE RETRIBUTION IS IN PLACE THAT YOU CAN FIX THAT.

>> PRESIDENT BIDEN RECENTLY SLAPPED 100% TARIFFS ON ELECTRIC VEHICLES MADE IN CHINA.

BIDEN SAYS THAT TARIFFS ARE NEEDED TO PROTECT U.S. AUTOMAKERS SINCE CHINA UNFAIRLY SUBSIDIZES MANUFACTURING AND DUMPS EXCESS GOODS ON FOREIGN MARKETS.

THE TARIFFS ALSO COVER OTHER PRODUCTS INCLUDING SEMI-CONDUCTORS AND SOLAR PANELS.

HOW DOES THIS SQUARE WITH BIDEN'S CLIMATE GOALS AND PUSH SHOULDN'T WE WANT MORE ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES IN TO MEET THE GOALS.

>> ON THE SURFACE, IT DOES SEEM TO BE IN CONTRADICTION, RIGHT?

IN ORDER TO HAVE A RAPID ADOPTION OF GREEN TECHNOLOGIES LIKE E.V.s, SOLAR PANELS, WE NEED TO DRIVE DOWN THE PRICES, RIGHT BECAUSE THAT IS A BARRIER TO ADOPTION.

HOWEVER, IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM A SORT OF LONGER-TERP, MEDIUM AND LONGER TERM PERSPECTIVE, THESE GOALS ARE NOT NECESSARILY INCOMPATIBLE BECAUSE YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE SUPPORT FOR THE GREEN ECONOMY, RIGHT?

AND WHAT IS THE COALITION THAT WILL SUPPORT THAT PROJECT MOVING FORWARD, WHICH HAS TO BE A LONG-TERM PROJECT TO FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE.

AND YOU NEED LABOR.

YOU NEED PEOPLE ON THE GROUND TO SUPPORT THIS TRANSITION AND ONE WAY TO DO THAT IS TO MAKE IT WORK FOR ACTUAL PEOPLE ON THE GROUND.

THE GREEN TRANSITION CAN PRODUCE JOBS IN THE SOUTH IN E.V.

FACTORY, RIGHT?

GOOD LABOR UNION JOBS, SO WE NEED TO SOME EXTENT, TO ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC SEES THE BENEFITS OF THESE POLICIES, THESE SUBSIDIES THAT BIDEN HAS ENACTED UNDER THE I.R.A.

AND THESE POLITICIANS WILL SEE THE BENEFIT, TOO, BECAUSE THEIR CONSTITUENTS ARE GOING TO BE ARGUING FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THESE POLICIES.

SO OVER THE LONG-TERM, YOU CREATE A COALITION THAT WILL SUPPORT THE POLICIES GOING FORWARD.

SO I THINK TEMPORARY AND VERY TARGETED TARIFFS ON SOME OF THESE PRODUCTS COULD HELP US GET TO THOSE MEDIUM AND LONG-TERM GOALS.

>> I THINK IT'S MORE THAN TEMPORARY.

I THINK IT SUPPORTS A LONGER TERM STRATEGY OF BRINGING JOBS BACK TO AMERICA AND MAKING IT MORE ACCEPTABLE AND ABLE FOR THE BUSINESSES HERE TO RUN VERSUS PUTTING THEIR BUSINESSES SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO IT IS ABOUT BUILDING OFF OF WHAT TRUMP DID IN HIS ADMINISTRATION AND PUTTING TARIFFS IN PLACE AND THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION TOOK THAT PLAN AND THEY ADJUSTED IT TO HELP HIS AGENDA, WHICH WAS GREEN ENERGY.

AND IF WE ARE GOING TO GO GREEN ENERGY AND THEN GIVE ALL OUR JOBS OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

>> THAT IS ONE OF THE POINTS THAT IS A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF HEAD SLAPPING IN A WAY BECAUSE WE HAVE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME THAT A TRANSITION WAS GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN.

AND YET-- AND WE USED TO BE LEADERS IN SOME OF THE GREEN AREAS AND ARE NOT ANYMORE.

MICHAEL?

>> I MEAN TARIFFS HAVE HAD A VERY INTERESTING HISTORY IN THE AMERICAN CONTEXT.

GO BACK TO 1930, I THINK IT WAS HOOVER, THE HAWLEY TARIFF ACT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO PROTECT AMERICAN JOBS AND DIDN'T.

BUSH IN 2002 STEEL TARIFFS THAT LOST 250 MANUFACTURING JOBS.

OBAMA 2012 TAX ON CHINESE SOLAR THAT DIDN'T HELP AMERICAN JOBS.

WE ARE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE NOW, RIGHT?

WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT ISSUES OF NATIONAL SECURITY, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN.

WE HAVE OTHER NATIONS THAT SUBSIDIZE TARIFFS.

SO I MEAN ALL CAN I DO IS WISH THE PRESIDENT WELL AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS DOWN THE LINE.

BUT THESE ARE DEFINITELY BIG STAKES IN AN ELECTION YEAR FOR SURE.

>> IT'S NOT A FIX ALL.

IT'S ONE LEAVER THAT HE CAN PULL TO HELP NUDGE THINGS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR THE UNITED STATES.

>> SO NINA,IN MIAMI CAL'S SUGGEST-- MICHAEL IS SUGGESTING TARIFFS DON'T DO WHAT THEY SET OUT TO DO AND END UP HURTING US IN THE LONG RUN.

WHAT IS YOUR TAKE?

>> YEAH, WELL I CAN CERTAINLY SEE THAT THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY HELP WITH THE ENORMOUS TRADE IMBALANCE WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR QUITE SOMETIME WHEN IT COMES TO CHINA.

AND I CAN ALSO SEE ALTHOUGH MICHAEL WAS TALKING ABOUT MANUFACTURING AND JOBS, I CERTAINLY SEE THE IMPACT ON CONSUMER PRICES BECAUSE MOST OF US SEATED AT THE TABLE PROBABLY HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUFF IN OUR HOMES THAT IS MADE 234 CHINA.

AND WITH THE ADVENT OF AMAZON, A LOT OF THAT STUFF COMES FROM CHINA.

HOWEVER, MOST OF IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH ESSENTIAL GOODS.

SO I THINK WE CAN DO OKAY WITH THESE TARIFFS.

>> SO IT'S THE ESSENTIAL GOOD NATURE OF IT THAT MAKES IT ACCEPTABLE THN THEN, NOT TARIFFS IN PRINCIPLE.

>> RIGHT.

>> THEN WE SHOULD SAY BRIEFLY THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP-- IF HE BECOMES PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS PLANS FOR MUCH EVEN HIGHER TARIFF RATE, MORE OF A BLANKET APPROACH TO THE TARIFFS.

>> ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> BIDEN IS A LITTLE MORE TARGETED.

>> AS AND FS.

AND NINA, WE WILL BEGIN WITH YOUR F. >> AFTER LEGALIZING MARIJUANA, CANADA HAS SEEN A TRIPLING OF THE NUMBER OF OLDER ADULTS GOING TO THE E.R.

DUE TO MARIJUANA POISONING.

OLDER ADULTS ARE MORE AT RISK FOR CANNABIS POISONING BECAUSE THEY'RE LIKELY TO ALSO TAKE OTHER MEDICATIONS, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO SUFFER FROM DRUG INTERACTIONS.

IT'S BOTH OKAY FOR NOT ONLY CANADA BUT ALSO FOR AMERICA TO CONSIDER WHETHER WE MADE A MISTAKE IN LEGALIZING MARIJUANA.

>> SARAH.

>> SO MY F THIS WEEK GOES TO UNREGULATED LANDFILLS IN THE UNITED STATES THAT ARE LEAKING METHANE, A POTENT GREENHOUSE GAS.

LANDFILLS ARE ONE OF THE LARGEST SOURCES OF HUMAN CAUSED METHANE EMISSIONS IN THE UNITED STATES ACCOUNTING FOR A FIFTH OF THE EMISSIONS.

ALMOST HALF OF THE LANDFILLS HAVE NOT INSTALLED GAS CAPTURED SYSTEMS NOR ARE THEY REQUIRED TO.

THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS CRACKING DOWN ON METHANE LEAKS FROM THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY WHICH IS GREAT.

TIME TO DO THE SAME THING ON OUR NATION'S LANDFILLS.

>> MY F GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT FOR YESTERDAY REJECTING THE NAACP'S CLAIM THAT SOUTH CAROLINA'S MAP IS GERRYMANDERED.

I WISH AACHIEVE ROBERTS A LOT OF LUCK IN REELING IN THIS PARTISAN MAVERICK.

>> MY F GOES TO THE POLITICAL LEADERS CLAIMING THE FBI WAS AUTHORIZED TO SHOOT HIM AND INCITING DANGEROUS LEVELS OF RAGE TOWARDS OUR BODIES OF LAW AND ORDER.

FOR EXAMPLE, AN ACTION PLAN WAS RELEASED THIS WEEK FROM A RAID THAT TOOK PLACE WITH A SEARCH WARRANT IN AUGUST OF 2022, WHILE THAT POLITICIAN WAS NOT AT THAT RESIDENCE, IN FACT HIM, ALONG WITH HIS SECRET SERVICE DETAIL WAS IN ANOTHER STATE.

F. >> AND SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THERE IS THAT THE SEARCH ON MAR-A-LAGO WAS TIMED SO TRUMP WOULD NOT THERE BE.

>> ALONG WITH THE FACT THAT WHAT WAS IN THE PLAN WAS WHAT OFFICERS ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.

IF THERE IS AN IMMINENT THREAT FOR THEMSELVES OR SOMEBODY ELSE, THAT'S DEADLY FORCE.

>> NOW TIME FOR THE As.

LEANA.

>> THIS WEEK A PENNSYLVANIA FEDERAL JUDGE DISMISSED A LAWSUIT THAT CHALLENGED PRESIDENT BIDEN'S EFFORTS TO GET OUT THE VOTE.

THE LAWSUIT WAS A REACTION TO A MARCH 2021 EXECUTIVE ORDER TO PROMOTE ACCESS TO VOTING AND DIRECTED ALL FEDERAL AGENCIES TO EXPAND OPPORTUNITIES TO VOTE, THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, AND SO MANY AGENCIES ARE ON BOARD.

THE MORE WE CAN DO TO ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION IN ELECTIONS, THE MORE DEMOCRATIC.

>> SARAH.

>> MY A THIS WEEK GOES TO "SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE" FOR THE FAKE AD THAT THEY AIRED THIS WEEK THAT MADE LIGHT OF FAST FASHION COMPANIES AND THEIR CONSUMERS.

THE SKIT HIGHLIGHTED THE WAY E-COMMERCE CLOTHING COMPANIES LIKE SHEIN AND TEMU USE SLICK ADVERTISING TACTICS TO APPEAL TO AMERICAN SHOPPERS WHO WANT TRENDY FASHIONS AT CHEAP PRICES BUT DON'T WANT TO FEEL BAD ABOUT BUYING CLOTHES FROM COMPANIES WITH BAD LABOR PRACTICES.

>> GUARD RAILS TO MEDIATE THE IMPACT ON TEEN MPGHT MENTAL HEALTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

>> MY A GOES TO THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY FOR CAUTIOUSLY EMBRACING AND LEVERAGING A.I.

>> OKAY.

NOW I'M GOING ASK YOU A QUESTION AFTER I ASKED YOU TO SPEED UP.

CAUTIOUSLY EMBRACING A.I.?

>> SO THE CIA DIRECTOR OF TECHNOLOGY, HE IS THE FIRST ONE, SAID A.I.

IS LIKE YOUR DRUNK FRIEND.

NEEDS TO BE TREATED THAT WAY.

ALTHOUGH MAY HAVE SOME GREAT INFORMATION, DOES HALLUCINATE AND DOES COME UP WITH REALLY WEIRD STUFF.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

FOR COMMENTS YOU CAN WRITE TO THE ADDRESS ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THE SHOW AGAIN YOU CAN VIEW IT ONLINE AT WCNY.ORG.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FOR ALL OF US AT IVORY TOWER, HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.