>> EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION.

IN SUPPORT FOR THE GOVERNOR, IN COVID RESTRICTIONS AND IN VOTING RIGHTS.

THAT'S NEXT ON "IVORY TOWER."

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> WELCOME TO "IVORY TOWER."

I'M BARBARA FOUGHT FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY.

ON THE PANEL TONIGHT TO DISCUSS THE NEWS, ARE TARA ROSS, FROM ONONDAGA COMMUNITY COLLEGE, KRISTI ANDERSON FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, NINA MOORE FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, AND JAMILA MICHENER FROM CORNELL.

WELL, VOTING RIGHTS WAS A BIG TOPIC IN THE NEWS THIS WEEK, PANEL.

THE HOUSE PASSED A BILL LATE WEDNESDAY THAT EXPANDED RIGHTS AND THE SUPREME COURT ALSO THIS WEEK REVIEWED AN ARIZONA LAW WHICH SOME THINK RESTRICTSZ VOTING.

MEANWHILE THERE IS MORE THAN 200 BILLS PENDING IN STATE LEGISLATURES RELATING TO VOTER RIGHTS AND VOTER SECURITY.

AND I'M WONDERING, JAMILA, WHO SHOULD BE SETTING STANDARDS?

IS THAT THE ROLLING OF THE STATES, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, BOTH?

>> I'LL JUMP IN AND SAY THAT HISTORICALLY IT IS THE ROLE OF BOTH, WHILE A LOT OF POWER IS GIVEN TO STATES IN THIS REGARD AND STATES AND LOCALITIES ARE SORT OF UNDERSTOODING TO THE PRIMARY ARBITERS OF ELECTIONS, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS SOME DEGREE OF OVERSIGHT AND STEPPING IN WHEN NECESSARY, WHEN IT IS CLEAR THERE ARE VIOLATIONS ON THE STATE OR LOCAL LEVEL.

SO THIS ISN'T BEYOND THE PALE OF WHAT WE HAVE SEEN HISTORICALLY.

AND I THINK PARTICULARLY GIVEN THAT THIS IS BEING DONE IN THE WAKE OF CONTROVERSIAL ELECTIONS WHERE THERE WERE CLAIMS OF VOTER FRAUD THAT WERE UNPROVEN AND IN THE COURTS AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, IT BECAME CLEAR THERE WASN'T SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE FOR THOSE CLAIMS.

BUT IN RESPONSE TO THE UNPROVEN CLAIMS FOR VOTER FRAUD, STATES HAVE BEEN TRYING TO PASS HUNDREDS OF LAWS TO RESTRICT VOTING RIGHTS IN A VARIETY OF WAYS.

AND SO IT'S CLEAR THAT WE ARE IN A MOMENT WHERE THERE IS A BIT OF A CRISIS.

AND IF THERE IS NOT SOME LEVEL OF INTERVENTION FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, IT'S GOING TO BE THE WILD, WILD WEST AND THEY ARE GOING TO BE DOING WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO IN THE STATES.

I WAS STRUCK BY SOMEONE ASKING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IN ARIZONA WHERE THAT REALLY CONTROVERSIAL DECISION WAS BEING MADE ABOUT A LAW BY THE COURT EARLIER, WHAT THE POINT OF THE LAW WAS.

AND HE SAID OUT LOUD, BECAUSE IT GIVES US A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE RELATIVE TO DEMOCRATS.

NOT EVERYBODY IS SAYING THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD BUT ELECTIONS ARE BEING USED AS A BLUDGEON TO BEAT THE OPPOSITION OVER THE HEAD AND I THINK THIS IS THE FEDERAL INTERVENTION TO STOP THAT AND PROTECT PEOPLE'S VOTING RIGHTS.

>> NINA, WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THIS?

>> PART OF THE REASON THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING THE SORTS OF THINGS THAT JAMILA HAS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT IS BECAUSE OF A VERY SERIOUS FLAW IN THE CONSTITUTION, WHICH REALLY AUTHORIZES STATES TO DECIDE WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO VOTE.

AND THE ONLY THING THE CONSTITUTION DOES IS PRESCRIBE THE BASES UPON WHICH THE RIGHT TO VOTE CANNOT BE DENIED.

BUT ANOTHER IMPORTANT POINT HERE IS THAT THAT REALLY LEAVES WIDE OPEN THE POSSIBILITY FOR STATES TO POLITICIZE THE RIGHT TO VOTE.

WE HAVE SEEN THAT HAPPEN.

SO IN ADDITION TO THE THINGS THAT JAMILA POINTED OUT, THERE IS ALSO THE ISSUE OF EQUITY, SO THAT A VOTER IN GEORGIA DOES NOT HAVE EQUAL VOTING RIGHTS TO THE VOTERS IN NEW YORK CITY DO.

SO THIS BILL THAT'S MAKE CAN ITS WAY THROUGH THE HOUSE IS TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE, RIGHT, TO NOT NATIONALIZE, BUT TO STANDARDIZE THE RIGHT TO VOTE THROUGH THE VARIOUS PROVISIONS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN IT.

AND AGAIN, ANOTHER IMPORTANT POINT IS THAT IT'S NOT THAT DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO MAKE A POWER GRAB AS REPUBLICANS HAVE SAID.

BUT, INSTEAD, THEY'RE REACTING TO REAL TIME EFFORTS IN 43 STATES ACROSS 250 BILLS, SOME OF THOSE BILLS, AS IN THE CASE OF GEORGIA, THAT WERE ORIGINALLY PASSED BY REPUBLICANS.

SO REPUBLICANS INSTEAD OF TRYING TO WIN MORE VOTERS ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO SHED THE VOTER ROLES OF MORE VOTERS SO THIS BILL HAS TO ADDRESS THAT.

>> WELL, BUT ALSO A SCARY THING IS HAPPENING IN THE SUPREME COURT RIGHT NOW WHERE ONE WAY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS TRIED TO STANDARDIZE VOTING RIGHTS IS THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT AND THE COURT IN 2013 HAS ALREADY NEUTERS THAT IN A LOT OF WAYS BY SAYING THAT SOUTHERN STATES WHICH HAD A HISTORY OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MINORITIES, HAD TO GET PRECLEARANCE BEFORE THEY ENACTED ANY VOTING LAWS.

SO THAT'S GONE.

AND NOW THE ARIZONA LAW THAT IS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT NOW THEY'RE NOT A PRECLEARANCE STATE BUT THE QUESTION IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT IS WHETHER THESE VERY RESTRICTIVE VOTING LAWS IN ARIZONA, FOR EXAMPLE, NO THIRD PARTY COLLECTION OF BALLOTS, WHETHER THAT DISCRIMINATES AGAINST PEOPLE.

AND IT CERTAINLY DISCRIMINATES AGAINST NATIVE AMERICANS.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE DISTANCE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO TRAVEL TO VOTE AND THE DIFFICULTY OF VOTING.

BUT THE SUPREME COURT, I WOULD DOUBT, IS GOING TO OVERTURN THAT LAW, WHICH FURTHER WEAKENS THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT AND FURTHER WEAKENS, YOU KNOW, FEDERAL CONTROL OVER VOTING.

>> ONE OF THE OTHER PROBLEMS HERE IS THAT YOU HAVE ALSO SEEN CASES SUCH AS WHAT HAPPENED IN FLORIDA, WHERE THE CITIZENS OF FLORIDA ACTUALLY WENT AHEAD AND RETURNED VOTING RIGHTS TO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD SERVED THEIR TIME AND DONE EVERYTHING THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO, WERE IN GOOD STANDING.

AND THE CITIZENS VOTED ON THIS AND THEN BASICALLY NOW YOU ARE SEEING THE EFFORTS BASICALLY, YOU SAW THE EFFORT, RATHER, FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO BASICALLY JUST OVERRULE WHAT THE CITIZENS THEMSELVES HAD SAID.

AND SO IN FAIRNESS TO THE DEMOCRATS, I THINK PART OF THE REASON THAT THE DEMOCRATS AND CERTAINLY SOME REPUBLICANS ARE SUPPORTING THIS FEDERAL LEGISLATION IS BECAUSE LITERALLY THEY FEEL LIKE THERE IS NO CHOICE; THAT IF STATE LEGISLATURES ARE NOT GOING TO STOP USING, AS BOTH NINA AND JAMILA REFERRED TO, IF THEY'RE GOING TO STOP USING VOTING AS A POLITICAL TOOL TO ENSURE THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY RETAIN POWER, THEN THE DEMOCRATS AND OTHERS IN CONGRESS FEEL THAT THEY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO PASS FEDERAL LEGISLATION TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES.

>> AND PART OF WHAT IS ALSO GOING TO HAPPEN, WHAT WE CALL THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

SO THAT BY LIMITING EARLY VOTING AND ALSO MAIL-IN BALLOTS AND NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTS, THAT'S GOING TO ALSO HAVE A DISPROPORTIONAL IMPACT ON RURAL VOTERS WHO ARE SORT OF A STRONG HOLD FOR REPUBLICANS.

>> KRISTI, SOME OF THE PROVISIONS IN THIS VOTING BILL, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, RELATE TO CAMPAIGN FINANCING.

AND I KNOW YOU HAVE SAID MANY TIMES WE NEED MORE CAMPAIGN FINANCING RULES.

DO YOU LIKE WHAT IS IN THERE ON CAMPAIGN FINANCING?

>> WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DO LIKE, AND I THINK IT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN PLACES THAT HAVE IMPLEMENTED IT, ARE THESE MATCHING FUNDS FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RUNNING FOR OFFICE.

NEW YORK CITY IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THIS, WHERE IT HAS HAD A GOOD EFFECT ON BRINGING MORE PEOPLE OUT TO VOTE, ALLOWING MORE DIVERSE PEOPLE TO RUN FOR OFFICE, PEOPLE WHO MAY NOT HAVE A LOT OF MONEY.

SO IF YOU CAN RAISE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY FROM A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PEOPLE SPREAD OUT, THEN YOU GET FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS.

SO THAT'S ONE WAY OF DOING IT.

I THINK IT ALSO-- AND I MAY BE WRONG ABOUT THIS-- HAS SOME PROVISIONS ABOUT MORE OPENNESS, LESS DARK MONEY KIND OF IN POLITICS OR MORE TRANSPARENCY.

OTHER PEOPLE MAY-- JAMILA LOOKS LIKE SHE KNOWS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

>> WELL LET ME MOVE US TO OUR SECOND TOPIC, BUT I DO THINK YOU ARE RIGHT.

THERE IS SOME STUFF ABOUT POLITICAL ADVERTISING AND INDEPENDENT COMMISSIONS AND STANDARDS.

AND THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, TO HAVE AN UNEQUAL NUMBER OF MEMBERS.

BUT LET ME MOVE US TO OUR SECOND TOPIC AND THAT IS THAT GOVERNOR ANDREW CUOMO IS IN TROUBLE IN THIS STATE, ON TOP OF THE PROBLEMS OF REPORTING NURSING HOME DEATHS, NOW HE FACES AN INVESTIGATION INTO WHETHER HE SEXUALLY HARASSED THREE WOMEN.

WEDNESDAY THE GOVERNOR APOLOGIZED, SAID HE INTENDED NO HARM AND THAT HE HAD LEARNED FROM THIS.

BUT MANY ARE CALLING FOR HIS RESIGNATION.

AND KRISTI, SHOULD HE RESIGN?

>> I NOW THINK YES.

I WAS HOPING HIS APOLOGY WOULD, HE WOULD AVOID THIS, I APOLOGIZE IF ANYONE FELT OFFENDED KIND OF THING.

BUT NO, HE DIDN'T.

HE DIDN'T SAY I'M SORRY FOR WHAT I DID.

HE SAID, I DIDN'T REALLY MEAN ANYTHING.

AND HAD HOW DOES HE NOT GET THIS AFTER ME TOO?

WHERE HAS HE BEEN FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS?

THE FACT THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH GUTS TO ACTUALLY APOLOGIZE MAKES ME THINK HE IS NOT REALLY APOLOGIZING.

AND THEN THIS LATEST RELEASE OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE NURSING HOMES REALLY DOES TAKE IT TO A NEW LEVEL, I THINK.

IT WASN'T JUST THAT HE WAS SORT OF PUTTING NUMBERS IN DIFFERENT COLUMNS.

HE WAS HIDING THINGS.

MEANWHILE HEALTH OFFICIALS WERE RESIGNING BECAUSE OF HIM.

SO, YES.

I SORT OF THINK HE SHOULD RESIGN.

AND WE HAVE A PERFECTLY GOOD LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, KATHY HOCHUL, WHOM I WOULD BE PROUD TO HAVE AS A GOVERNOR FOR THE NEXT YEAR AND A HALF.

L.A. SPITZER HAD TO RESIGN WHEN HE VISITED PROSTITUTES.

I MEAN IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S WHAT HE SHOULD DO AND IF DAVID RUBEN WERE HERE WITH US, HE WOULD DEFINITELY BE SUPPORTING MY POINT.

>> TARA, SHOULD HE RESIGN?

>> WELL, I HAVE BEEN TORN ABOUT THIS BECAUSE, AS YOU KNOW, I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE BASICALLY HOLD PEOPLE TO BE GUILTY UNTIL THEY CAN PROVE THEMSELVES INNOCENT, WHICH IS NOT WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT.

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT TREND HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR WAY TOO LONG.

AND I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, KRISTI IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT IN THAT HIS APOLOGY REALLY WAS ALMOST A NON-APOLOGY.

WHERE HAS HE BEEN FOR LAST 10 YEARS?

BUT ALSO I WANT TO POINT OUT SOMETHING ELSE ABOUT THIS.

IF HE DOES RESIGN, HE WILL BE THE SACRIFICIAL LAMB FOR THE TRUMP IMPEACHMENT.

HAD WE NOT HAD THE TRUMP IMPEACHMENT TRIALS, I DON'T THINK WE WOULD BE QUITE SO QUICK TO HAVE HEARD THE CALLS FOR IMPEACHMENT.

BUT BECAUSE OF TRUMP BEING IMPEACHED TWICE, THERE WAS GOING TO BE A DEMOCRATIC SACRIFICIAL LAMB.

AND CUOMO PUT A BIG BULL'S EYE ON HIS BACK AND SAID COME GET ME AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED.

SO AGAIN, I'M TORN, BUT DEFINITELY HE IS ON THE ROAD TO RESIGNING, I THINK.

UNLESS SOMETHING MAJOR CHANGES IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO.

>> I'M NOT ACTUALLY TORN ON WHETHER HE SHOULD RESIGN BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE.

I AM THOROUGHLY CONVINCED THAT THERE IS ENOUGH INFORMATION HERE FOR A FULL INVESTIGATION BECAUSE OF A COUPLE OF REASONS.

YOU HAVE WHAT WE CALL CONTEMPORANEOUS OUTCRIES, MEANING THESE ARE NOT WOMEN WHO DECIDED TO COME TWO, THREE, FOUR YEARS AFTER THE FACT, BUT THEY COMPLAINED IN REAL TIME AND WERE ACTUALLY TRANSFERRED ELSEWHERE, WHICH SUGGESTS TO ME, THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH REASON FOR THAT TO OCCUR.

ALSO THERE APPEARS TO BE WITNESSES WHO CAN CORROBORATE WHAT HAPPENED AND SHAME ON THEM FOR NOT COMING OUT BEFORE THIS OCCURRED.

BUT I WILL SAY AS TO THE GOVERNOR'S HALF APOLOGY, THAT JOKINGLY HARASSING SOMEONE IS NO LESS PROBLEMATIC THAN SERIOUSLY HARASSING SOMEONE.

AND THERE IS SOMETHING I FIND VERY VILE ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE PUT HIS HANDS ON YOUNG WOMEN WHO WERE IN THEIR 20s, THE AGE OF HIS DAUGHTERS, AND WOULD I ASK HIM, HOW COMFORTABLE WOULD YOU FEEL WITH SOMEONE WHO IS IN HIS 60s AT YOUR DAUGHTER'S WORKPLACE, DOING THE SAME THING THAT YOU DID.

SO WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE HAS TO BE GOOD FOR THE GANDER.

THERE HAS TO BE A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE IS ENOUGH THERE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.

BUT I WOULD RATHER WAIT FOR THE FACTS BEFORE WE START CONDEMNING PEOPLE.

THE OLD WISDOM OF DEMOCRATS TO FIND THEM GUILTY BEFORE THERE WAS A TRIAL WAS THE MOSTID ON THETIC INSANE-- IDIOTIC INSANE WAY OF THINKING ABOUT SEXUAL ALLEGATIONS, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE HISTORY OF FALSE ALLEGATIONS OF RAPE AGAINST BLACK MEN.

BUT IN THIS CASE, THERE IS ENOUGH FOR AN INVESTIGATION.

>> I THINK THIS IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

IT IS CLEAR THERE NEEDS TO BE AN INVESTIGATION AND THE INVESTIGATION NEEDS TO BE THOROUGH AND IT NEEDS TO BE INDEPENDENT AND OBJECTIVE AND I THINK WE ARE ON THE ROAD TO SEEING THAT HAPPEN.

AND DEPENDING WHAT GETS REVEALED IN THAT INVESTIGATION, AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO TAKE THESE WOMEN SERIOUSLY.

WE OUGHT TO BE RESPONSIVE TO WHAT THEY'RE SAYING.

IT IS ABSOLUTELY ON THE TABLE FOR CUOMO TO RESIGN.

I'M A BIT ON THE FENCE ABOUT RESIGN NOW AT THIS MOMENT.

IT'S NOT AS IF I WOULD BE HEART BROKEN IF THAT HAPPENS BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT THE PRECEDENT THAT WE SET.

AND I'M THINKING IN PARTICULAR ABOUT WHAT NINA MENTIONED.

AND THERE IS PRECEDENT, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF BLACK MEN IN PARTICULAR, AND THAT'S ONE THING THAT CROSSED MY MIND, RIGHT?

AND THERE IS A TENSION WE HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE ABOUT BELIEVING WOMEN, WHICH IS IMPORTANT, RIGHT, AND UPHOLDING A DUE SENSE OF-- A SENSE OF DUE PROCESS WHICH IS IMPORTANT.

AND DUE PROCESS IS USED AS AN EXCUSE TO BELIEVING WOMEN.

THAT GIVES US THE IMPETUS TO SAY RESIGN NOW.

WE BELIEVE THE WOMEN.

I'M TOTALLY ON THAT PAGE, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT PRECEDENT WE SET BECAUSE THESE SAME PROPHECIES CAN BE USED AGAINST OTHER FOLKS WHO ARE MARGINALIZED.

>> I DO THINK THATLEY TISCH AJAMES IS-- LETITIA JAMES IS A GOOD PERSON TO LEAD THIS.

I WORRY THE INVESTIGATION WILL TAKE TOO LONG.

BUT I ALSO THINK THAT IT WILL TURN UP OTHER INCIDENCES OF CUOMO'S BEHAVIOR THAT DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD, REALLY.

AND IN THAT SENSE, I THINK, YEAH, JUST RESIGN.

BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.

>> THE GOVERNOR ALSO HAD A SETBACK IN COURT THIS WEEK.

THAT'S RELATED TO THE COVID RESTRICTIONS.

THE STATE HAD SAID BARS AND RESTAURANTS HAD TO CLOSE AT 11:00 P.M.

ARGUING THAT THE VIRUS CASE LOADS ARE STILL HIGH IN WESTERN NEW YORK AND CUSTOMERS INEBRIATED MAY NOT FOLLOW THE RULES.

BUT THE JUDGE PUT A HOLD ON THAT AND SAID THE NUMBERS ARE DOWN AND IF 7,000 CAN WATCH THE BILLS PLAY, THEN THE BARS SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE LATE GUESTS.

JAMILA, WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THIS?

>> I THINK THIS IS VERY MUCH TO BE EXPECTED.

WE ARE IN NEW TERRAIN HERE.

WE HAVE NEVER WHO TO FACE FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS ON END, THE SCOURGE OF A PANDEMIC THAT REQUIRES US TO MAKE REALLY CAREFUL DECISIONS ABOUT SOCIAL DISTANCING.

SO I'M NOT SURPRISED THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF CONFLICT HERE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE ARE SAYING AND WHAT THE COURTS ARE SAYING.

AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK SOME OF THE COURT'S LOGIC IS ON A SHAKY BASIS.

I THINK THAT THE COMPARISON TO THE BILLS GAME IS APPLES AND ORANGES.

THERE WERE DIFFERENT PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES THERE.

IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT THE PROCESSES OR PROCEDURES WOULD BE OR IF THEY WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED AND FOLLOWED THROUGH IN BARS THAT ARE OPEN LATE AT NIGHT, RIGHT?

I ALSO THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT FISHY TO FIGHT DECREASE CITE DECREASING COVID NUMBERS FOR LOWERING RESTRICTIONS.

THE NUMBERS ARE LOW BECAUSE WE HAVE RESTRICTIONS.

IF WE LIFT THE RESTRICTIONS AND IT GOES BACK UP, IT'S LIKE AIO YO' YO' AND AS WE GO BACK AND FORTH TRYING TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THE NUMBERS, PEOPLE ARE DYING AND GETTING SICK.

I THINK THE CONCERN ABOUT BUSINESSES, WE NEED TO FOCUS HOW TO SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES, BUT HOW TO DO THAT WITHOUT PUTTING PEOPLE'S LIVES AT RISK I'M NOT SURPRISED BUT IT IS BASED ON RISKY LOGIC.

>> PART OF THE RISKINESS OF THE LOGIC IS THAT JUDGES SHOULD NOT BE MAKING THESE DECISIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

JUDGES SHOULD ONLY INTERJECT WHERE THERE ARE CLEAR CONSTITUTIONAL OR STATUTORY VIOLATIONS OR DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS.

THAT DID NOT HAPPEN HERE.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE THIS JUDGE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY ONE OF 300 TRIAL COURT JUDGES IN NEW YORK, THE REST OF WHOM COULD CHIME IN AND SAY THE SAME THING, THIS JUDGE DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME SORT OF INFORMATION THAT ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE.

THEY'RE NOT AS CLOSE TO THE PROBLEM AS ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, THEY WERE NOT ELECTED TO DO THE JOB THAT ELECTED OFFICIALS WERE; NAMELY TO RESPOND TO CRISES SUCH AS THE PANDEMIC.

>> TARA, THE RESTAURANTS AND BARS ARE ARGUING THAT CONTACT TRACING SHOWS THAT MANY MORE PEOPLE ARE GETTING THE VIRUS BY BEING IN OTHER PEOPLE'S HOMES THAN AT RESTAURANTS.

SO WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS 11:00 P.M.

DEADLINE?

>> I THOUGHT THE CURFEW, AT THIS POINT, WAS A LITTLE BIT EARLY.

BUT I ALSO DON'T AGREE WITH BASICALLY WHERE IT HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO NOW THEY CAN BE OPEN TO 4:00 A.M. BECAUSE I THINK THE LATER IN THE EVENING, QUITE FRANKLY, THE INDIVIDUALS WHO SAY VITDS IN A PAR PAST, 12 CLOCK BASICALLY ARE THERE GETTING DRUNK AND AND ONCE THAT HAPPENS, YOU DO PUT MORE INDIVIDUALS, THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO WORK THERE, THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE THERE, WHO MAY ALSO BE INEBRIATED, YOU PUT THEM MORE AT RISK BECAUSE THE MORE YOU DRINK, OBVIOUSLY THE LESS CONTROL YOU TYPICALLY HAVE.

SO I DO THINK THAT CURFEW NEEDED TO BE EXTENDED TO MIDNIGHT.

BUT 4:00 A.M., I JUST DON'T REALLY SEE THE POINT FOR THAT.

AND I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE RESTAURANTS AS WELL BECAUSE THIS PUTS THEM AT GREAT RISK.

THE MORE A PERSON DRINKS, THE LESS MOTOR CONTROL THEY HAVE, ET CETERA, AND YOU PUT AN EMPLOYEE IN THE POSITION OF SAYING, OKAY, I'M CONCERNED BUT I ALSO NEED MY JOB AND I BARELY WORKED OVER THE LAST SIX TO NINE MONTHS.

WHAT DO I DO?

AND I THINK RESTAURATEURS IN PURE UNDERSTANDING, THEY'RE IN FINANCIAL STRAIGHTS, THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT PRESSURE ON THEIR EMPLOYEES TO BE VERY, VERY LENIENT ABOUT THOSE WHO DO NOT FOLLOW THE RULES.

THAT'S MY BIG TERN.

I THINK 4:00 A.M. IS WAY TOO LONG.

>> KRISTI, WHAT IS YOUR THOUGHT?

>> I AGREEY WITH NINA.

I THINK THAT THIS IS NOT WHAT COURTS SHOULD BE DOING.

THERE IS NO SORT OF CASE LAW OR SETTLED SCIENTIFIC ADVICE ABOUT WHETHER 4:00 A.M. IS DIFFERENT THAN 11:00 P.M. AND SO FORTH AND UNFORTUNATELY THIS SHOWS, A BAD CASE OF OUR BEING A VERY LITIGIOUS SOCIETY WHEN, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE AND STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENTS OR GOVERNORS MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT THIS TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY, ONE HOPES THE FIRST REACTION OF EVERYBODY IS TO SUE THEM AND THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST REACTION.

>> I TELL YOU, THE TIME GOES TOO FAST IN THIS SHOW.

IT IS TIME TO MOVE TO THE GRADEBOOK AND TARA, HOW ABOUT YOUR F?

>> MY F TO ARMY GENERALS WHO HAD THE DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY TO AUTHORIZE DEPLOYMENT OF THE NATIONAL GUARD TO SUPPORT THE CAPITOL POLICE.

THE GENERALS WERE ALLEGEDLY MORE CONCERNED WITH THE APPEARANCE OF NATIONAL GUARDS MEN ON THE STEPS OF THE CAPITOL THAN THE NEEDS.

CAPITOL POLICE AND WE SAW THE RESULT.

>> KRISTI.

>> I'M GIVING AN F TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.

WHICH REGULATE PESTICIDES AND OTHER THINGS.

SINCE 2012, THERE HAS BEEN A FLEA COLLAR MADE BY SOLD BY SORESTO WHICH HAS RESULTED IN 1600 DEATHS OF PETS AND MANY MORE,000S OF INJURIES, EVEN HUMANS NEAR THE PETS WHO HAVE HAD SEIZURES AND SO FORTH.

THE E.P.A.

SAYS ONLY THAT IT IS CONTINUING TO MONITOR THE SITUATION.

>> MEAN THEY OORKS, YOUR F. >> A POLICE OFFICER WAS KILLED BY THE CAPITOL MOB, TWO LATER COMMITTED SUICIDE.

ONE HAD HIS EYES GOUGED OUT, ANOTHER HEART ATTACK, ONE LOST THREE FINGERS.

ALL TOGETHER 140 OFFICERS WERE INJURED.

WHEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE LARGEST POLICE UNION ENDORSED TRUMP LAST FALL, HE SAID "THE FOP IS PROUD TO ENDORSE A CANDIDATE WHO CALLS FOR LAW AND ORDER ACROSS OUR NATION."

I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO HEAR WHAT THIS UNION PRESIDENT SAYS NOW ON BEHALF OF THE THREE OFFICERS WHO DIED BECAUSE OF THAT LAW AND ORDER PRESIDENT.

>> AND JAMILA, YOUR F?

>> MY F GOES TO TEXAS GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT WHO UNDID THE MASK MANDATE IN TEXAS THIS WEEK AND GAVE BUSINESSES PERMISSION TO OPEN AT 100% CAPACITY.

THIS CAME AT A MOMENT WHEN HEALTH OFFICIALS WERE WARNING THAT A NEW MORE TRANSMISSIBLE VIRUS WAS SPREADING AND WHEN CASES IN TEXAS WERE SLIGHTLY RISING.

AND WHEN THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WERE STILL BEING HOSPITALIZED FOR COVID-19 EVERY DAY, MANY IN ICU IN TEXAS HOSPITALS.

>> I AGREE.

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT SOMEBODY DOING SOMETHING WELL.

TARA, YOUR A.

>> I'M GIVING AN A TO THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVISM OF THE LATE VERNON JORDAN WHO DIED THIS WEEK.

CONTRARY TO HIS OBITUARIES IN THE MEDIA, JORDAN WAS MORE THAN JUST BILL CLINTON'S FRIEND.

HE WAS ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS WHOSE LEGAL EXPERTISE RESULTED IN THE DESEGREGATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA.

IN THE 1960s HE WAS THE GEORGIA FIELD DIRECTOR FOR THE NAACP AND PARTICIPATED IN THE VOTER EDUCATION PROJECT.

AND HE SERVED AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE FOR 10 YEARS.

BASICALLY, HE DID MORE THAN JUST BE BILL CLINTON'S FRIEND.

>> KRISTI, YOUR A.

A.

>> AS WE NOW KNOW, BEING ABLE TO GET A COVID VACCINE MAY REQUIRE A GOOD INTERNET CONNECTION, SOME TECHNOLOGICAL SAVVY AND PLENTY OF SPARE TIME, WHICH MANY PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE.

I'M GIVING AN A TO THE FACEBOOK GROUPS, THAT QUICKLY FORMED LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUAL VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE USING THEIR SKILLS TO BOOK APPOINTMENT FORCE FOR THEIR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS.

>> NINA QUICKLY YOUR A.

>> RESEARCHERS FROM FOUR COUNTRIES HAVE FOUND A WAY TO TALK WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE ASLEEP AND DREAMING, NOT ONLY DO THEY GET THEM TO ANSWER WHILE THEY ARE DREAMING, THEY ALSO HAVE PEOPLE CORRECTLY SOLVE MATH PROBLEMS.

I JUST WONDER WHERE WERE THESE PEOPLE WHEN I WAS DAY DREAMING IN MATH CLASS?

>> AMAZING.

JAMILA QUICKLY YOUR A.

>> MY A GOES TO THE EFFORTS OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

THIS WEEK THEY ANNOUNCED THEY MOVED UP THE EXPECTED TIMELINE FOR VACCINATING EVERY ADULT FROM JULY TO MAY AND ANNOUNCED THE PLAN TO VACCINATE ALL TEACHERS BY MARCH AND THEY'RE INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF VACCINE THAT STATES WILL GET WEEKLY.

>> THANKS FOR WATCHING.

WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU.

PLEASE WRITE US IF YOU HAVE ISSUES OR QUESTIONS FOR US AND THANKS FOR WATCHING.

GOOD NIGHT.