tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 9, 2016 10:00am-12:01pm EDT
course they say their country is first and americans should say the same thing. america first. that is a capitalistic society and that is what we are. host: go ahead as we wait for this event to start at the center for strategic and international settings. and we lost drew. but that is alright because the program is about to begin. kneller -- neller will talk about the outlook for the u.s. maritime forces. ort is beginning in a minute two. great tuesday.
this are live on c-span morning for a conversation about maritime security and the overall strategy and outlook for maritime forces, hosted by the center for strategic and international studies here in washington. the main speaker is general robert neller, and it should get underway in a moment. live coverage here on c-span. >> good morning, everyone. welcome.
i'm the director of the international security program here. have you alld to here for the latest in our series. on the marineing corps more generally. i will give you the announcement we give at all of our events. we want to make sure everyone knows where the restrooms are, directly behind you. i will direct you as to where to go. the maritime security dialogue csis induct of partnership to highlight to navalr challenges concept development and program design. we are delighted that the sponsor for the series have been so kind as to provide support to
make this possible and we are focusing in particular on the marine corps and who better to speak about this than his 37th, robertnder -- general neller. conversationa between the two of us and then open it up a bit. conversations, from china to russia to nonstate actors like isis, what do you see as the most salient series of challenges that you have on the horizon? gen. neller: first, thank you for allowing me to be year, and senator and other folks here, i guess there is not a lot going on in d.c. on a tuesday morning. [laughter] congress is on
recess and the ballgame is not until tonight. i guess i am the best show in town, which kind of makes me really nervous. [laughter] mean, when you put it in context, i came to the marine corps in 1975, the end of vietnam, and a country that was kind of dealing with that were still, the soviet union was a major threat. corps, verye engaged in vietnam, continue to have forces in the pacific, then againsted, they were the soviet union, but it was very simple. you are going to fight a directed military force, there
would be a line of engagement and you would be on one side and they would be on the other and we were going to go fight. warfare and fires, very traditional, the way we like to fight. out,ke football, lined goals on either and, refugees around the field to make sure people play by the rules. we like that, then you stop and call a play and make another play. soccer, there is one referee who does not seem to see anything and guys on around in different directions. they fought -- fall down and we think that is bad but everyone says that is part of the game. in military, that is called deception. got-forward the tape, we through desert shield, desert storm. the wall comes down. then 9/11 happens.
ourselves in a very different kind of fight, though it starts off traditionally, conventional force on force, twol conventional forces. the u.s. coalition against iraq, and for the last 15 years, we have done counter insurgencies, and we have trained and developed an organized a way of fighting that worked really well. now we fast forward to where we are today, we are still in that fight, in iraq and afghanistan but not to the degree that we were. but other countries have watched and observed what we have done and we have continued to develop capabilities, they have recapitalized a lot of the force through aviation, strategic forces, undersea forces, and now four potential threats
and one ongoing. how does the marine corps fit into that? believe there is a great opportunity to deter adversaries by having deployed forces. in line with the strategy that we want to build capacity with partners, and we do that using maneuver space, not having to violate the sovereignty of advantage, you have flexibility, and then none of the cans we play, hopefully, that we will not be playing a home game. we don't want to. when you show up, you have to be able to bring with you all of the things you need to sustain yourself for a certain time
before you can get a chain to support your efforts. so i think part of the naval force, and i've talked about i think the challenges and things we might face in the future are as we have done before but things we have not done recently. we are committed to developing a capability that allows combat and commanderwe are committed ta capability that allows to provis for forcible and shary and noncombatant evacuation and mandatory assistance, built capacity and do whatever we need to do. ishleen: the marine corps really known for being that crisis response force, the 911, ever ready, and general dempsey used to call it the new normal. i think we can call it normal now. about the marine
corps's ability to sustain its readiness in the ever crisis free response mode? the marine corps's abilityhaving a responso respond to crises from is asies, etc., distressing to the marine as it is currently constructed? gen. neller: if you talk to the people doing it, they would tell you it is as high today as it was when we had large numbers of forces in iraq and afghanistan. commitments have not gone down. at 9/11, we were 172 thousand 500 marines and we deployed at a rate of 3-1, normally gone six months and back for 18.
to 2-1hen, we grew because we wanted to get back to the 3-1. at 182,000 marines, which we will probably reach in the next themonths, that is kind of red line for us as a service. particularly -- particular kick ability sets that concern me, mostly about the stress on the force and the individuals and on the limit. but marines do not join to sit. they want to train but they want to go somewhere and do something. if we can stay at 2-1, and maintain a level of readiness force, the depth of the you are expected when you come back, even when we know there will be a degradation, we expect
that you will be ready to go. reduce resources or funding or training opportunities for units when they come back, they get a certain time, we reset them and they are back in the mix getting ready to go. 2-1, i thinkay at we would be able to sustain that . i watch it very closely, iwatch the surveys we do with marines and their families, is this too much? believe we can find and recruit the right kind of people, our center of gravity, those who will say they want to be a united states marine, i think we will be fine. but it is something we will watch all the time. kathleen: what parts of the marine corps are you -- which parts are you worried about most
in terms of readiness? a lagging indicator, you are likely to see it earlier than most of the public. where do you see the stress is coming? gen. neller: if you track readiness over time, before afghanistan after we left iraq in 2010, 2011, and we left afghanistan in 2013? colonel fairfield used to work for me so he knows the answers. ask the gentleman right there in that nice suit and tie. looking good. there was a time when you never will be when the forces are fully deployed and ready to go and have the best year and can do the mission. there was an increasing number of forces at the bottom meant that were staying at a lower level of readiness longer. down inmbers have gone
the people in the middle has gotten larger. want here we do not want anybody at the bottom. we want them bit -- we want them to stay for a short time. they deploy the highest levels of readiness. there are three groups, on the ground side, battalions, their readiness is in -- a good place. congress was good enough to obligate $5 billion to reset our equipment. we are about 75% through that. the ground readiness is really good. there are a number of ground units that deploy detachments or pieces of the unit. they are in a good place. thetimes the way we do algorithm or the policy, they might show their readiness to
slow but if they were re-aggregated together, they are low because pieces of them are gone. on the aviation side, we are in a more difficult place. i've talked about this and testimony. the general talked about it. we have flown our airplanes for a long time, every model type in series. we're trying to reset to the legacy aircraft we have, and we still have -- everyone is a little bit different. f 35 will replace three model type series. we thought we would get the airplane a little bit earlier. but we did not. squadron, wend will start to see the airplane deploy here overseas. with f-18some issues
because the harrier took longer than we thought and we had some issues. we are starting to see now, slow and that he improvement. i am not going to spike the ball because we have got to get more airplanes on the ramp. the second-most challenge is probably 53. we were going to buy a new 53. it is doing very well in test. but we have got to get what we have acted i think we made a mistake. i have told everybody this. when we were in iraq and not bringn, we do them back after redeployment we left them there and set up an intermediate maintenance thing. looking at that now, i would recommend to my successors to never do that again. the money was there to fly the airplane's back, and we should
have done that and they would have been in a better state than they are now. now we are having to do that. but it will take some time. are still filling the record, 360,rogram 287, replacing the cobra and that is happening. understand every time you transition, you have to stand them down for 18 to 24 months and they have to train and the mechanics have to be trained. so the rest of the force has to pick up that. we will work through all of this. it is not something you could watch on a daily basis. it would jive your staff crazy and you would not really see any ring. but on monthly basis, we are starting to see gradual, steady increases peer the match is how many airplanes are on the ramp that we can fly. that is the metric.
ready basic aircraft. the number of rba's going up, not as fast as we would like but it is going up. we are on a course and we will keep grinding on this. it is a combination of putting legacy aircraft on, getting them out, getting better parts on board and were racing the airplanes when the old airplane. you mentioned early on the threat or challenges posed by capable adversaries. environmentntinued we have operated but now also an environment potential concerns for the marine corps in terms of ring able to operate you mentio. can you talk a little bit about how your thinking in terms of requirements in the marine innovationsare the
you are looking at to be able to operate in that kind of environment and how you balance that against everything you just a marine corps that is engaged every day. gen. neller: we were in the process of looking at the overall structure we have. trying to project what the force will look like in 2020. have got a good idea based on what we have learned since 9/11. what we observed with other what wel competitors, have seen in other fights going ,n the world, in eastern europe and even stuff going on in syria and iraq and afghan in and around the world. we realize there is a certain set of capabilities for any sort
of fight that we have not had to deal with, which we do not have , and you have got to have the right people who understand how to do this. whether the capability sets we think we did involve more cyber, how electronic warfare, much counter mobility do we need to retain, do we have enough air defense, is that balanced collection,lligence so how do you make this all fit? we're in the process of doing that in one assumption we have is we will not get more people. are,ver the capabilities the question is how much of that and what will you take away, what marines doing
one tight mission will now be , what will that cost you to give up? everybody has got great ideas about what we need but there is not a lot of people at their offering up stuff. so that kind of falls on me. we're in the process. we brought in a couple hundred marines, they came up, we had kind of, what will that cost you to give up? the old persons and the young persons, andthey were somewhat similar but also somewhat different and then we push those into a hybrid and now we are trying to figure out how to make it work. great if we have the resources to have 190,000 marines. but we are not assuming that.
that is a decision not in my job . we will operate on the assumption we will have 182,000 marines because that is what we are resourced for peer we will figure out how to reshape the marine corps and we are going to reshape it here and one thing we will not do is we will not stake that were the same. i do not think we can. capabilities out there are changing too fast. it -- to be able to survive on the modern battlefield. kathleen: sticking with the leadership and training aspects, you have been vocal about your concern, a tongue-in-cheek way of putting it, marines getting familiar with a paper map again. can you talk a little bit about that aspect of leadership , quality you want to make sure the marine corps has to deal with, information
challenges, at the same time you are building up your own defense of the areas? a wholeler: we have got generation, everybody who came into the record after tonight 11th have grown up in an environment very different than are i grew up in, where you operating on single channel radio. it worked 50% of the time and you were ecstatically happy. they walk into the operations and they have got big screen tvs with picture, they know exactly where all of their tracker,e, they have vacancy the airplanes, they have perfect calm, multiple means digitally to chatter or to text, let alone voice. they do not have to worry about an adversary that has an air force, it did not happen.
today and were have got a system, we've developed a system of war fighting that is very dependent upon the internet, that network, and space. looking at potential adversaries, do we think that will be there, that network will be there if we were to engage with the folks? i would say i don't know. i do not think you can assume that. i would think our friendly center of gravity is that we have to protect the network. fact lose that, we are paper maps and hf radio that we daymber from back in the when we were underneath the poncho a day night with a flasht trying to read the map and figure a where the hell we were and hoping a sergeant could tell us. [laughter] gen. neller: so there is a
balance. balanceto leverage the we have come it gives us an advantage, but it makes training even harder here you have to be per. for when it is not there. i believe we are building that into our requirements and our training. we have started to train more force on force and we have given our at stores -- adversaries uav's. marines are in a built-up area and walking down the street, they look up in the sky and there is a small uav and they are like, what is that? they've never seen that before. those who have been deployed in the middle east, starting to see that more and more. but they've never seen that before. same thing you can
get on groupon or sam's club and by for $400. don't fly around here because it will be a federal offense and you will be arrested. but it is simple stuff like that, like jamming the radio or saying, gps does not work. it does not work. so what does that do? the server just crashed. look what happened with velti yesterday. they built an entire system a flight management based on the network. and it fails. because of a power surge. what if someone actually wanted to do that? we used to think about has now expanded to space, cyber, and information domain. i have no doubt in my mind our force will figure out they are much smarter and more capable
and more adaptive and we ever work because they have grown into this. they will adjust but we have got to put them in situations where they have to do with it. you train based on what you think will happen in the environment. i was talking to a commander on the west coast, they will go to the field. they did something smart. they set up the entire group, a and theye thing, reloaded all the communications gear and put up camouflaged setting, which used to be a very common thing. in the last 15 years, there was not a lot going on because there was no need. the enemy did not have airplanes. so we did not do it. up and they got on
google earth and took a picture of it. and it looked good. realized they put wire around certain facilities and the light from the sun reflected off of that wire and there was a big and anyoneone thing walked, would say, what is that, there is something outside the circle. fed is where the intel people work. so what will be do about that? fix. is a yourselfgot to look at you have got to change the way you are thinking that an adversary can see us just as we can see them, so how do we keep from being seen and still see them, and how do we protect
ourselves and put them at a disadvantage? ask one moreill question and turn it over to the audience. i want to talk about it to be his capability. this is an area where those of us who observed can see the evolution of thinking with to the challenges of being able to aggregate capability for wartime needs and the challenges of managing crisis response and more routine engagement. the marine corps has become very creative in how you have addressed that challenge in terms of moving to these shift based approaches. i wonder if you could talk about gore you think they need to in terms of managing the
challenge of the ready across this spectrum of challenges you are facing. one of the effectsen of the last 14 years being involved in a land-based insurgency is the number of marines, unless you are assigned the unit, not enough time to -- less and less. admirable -- admiral harvey in 2010 or 2011, the started to say, we need to get back and he started an exercise program that at first was just kind of sitting around and people getting themselves recommitted and re-understanding, a better understanding, getting back into books we have on how to conduct a landing. thiswill be assimilation
year. the reason is we did not want to do it with a small number. we wanted to continue to grow and increase complexity. we have done it every year. also on the west coast. recently.ne it then we did a very large exercise. there is a thing where with ouregate partners, we do a landing on the peninsula. we are child to continue to grow not just ourselves them in a. there is no way an insidious force will land unless conditions are set and they have to be set to the fleet.
capital ships and submarines will set the condition so you can put that a sure. we're also working hard with our allies this last fall and the largest amphibious exercise in where you had u.s., portuguese,tish, dutch, the italians were going to anticipate but they were tied up with another mission. about 35,000 individuals, u.k. marines on u.s. ships and spanish ships and vice versa. we continue to do that to develop a coalition capability. so, wee thing happened, trying to get our own skill set built back up and we are on path to do that and we are working more more with coalition partners and using every getrtunity we can to marines on alternative platforms, whether it be a high-speed vessel or mobile landing platform or just normal
ships where you have a flight deck where you can put marines onboard or they can use it again to position themselves to accomplish a mission. that is what we do, that is the mission. that is our job. been been the law. we can do a lot of things, but what we really do is provide a naval infantry capability as part of a fleet. kathleen: ok. we have microphones that will come around. give your name and affiliation if you have 1, 1 question, not a statement, or a monologue of any variety. let's begin right here in the third row. >> thank you.
[indiscernible] trying hard to thief up the capability [indiscernible] my question is do you think this will lead to reshaping the are,e corps [indiscernible] kathleen: great thanks. the japanese ground self-defense force is working very hard to develop an amphibious brigade capability. we are proud to be partners in the process to provide any
expertise and training that we can with them and to train with them. self-defense force has built some really nice ships and we certified our ability to land on the ships and we put marines on the ships. we will continue to train with the japanese ground self-defense force as they continue to grow this capability. whether that will affect the posture in the pacific, i think that is too early to say. a number of them on mental and political exert going on that are acting the current plan to put forced down in the popular -- proper position. it is too early to say that but for sure, we are totally committed, the japanese ground self-defense force, i know it is
expensive for them and we would like to find another place to do that. we will work with them and continued to be good partners to try to achieve the goal. i think that is a great capability, whether it is h adr or any other requirement that might exist to work with allies. kathleen: we have one right here in the front. >> thank you. you generally talked about how the marine corps is look at it structure. i know that is ongoing. can you say what your current thoughts are about what would make up an effort tree unit, how many rifleman? gen. neller: in the past when we change the force, we kind of left what was in the flag the same. time, we aree this
going to time, stay with these eventually the. what is inside will not fundamentally different. i am not ready to say exactly what it will look like because we do not know yet. a number of different models and options we want to look at and we want to make sure we maintain the capability and that any changes to that, first, do no harm. but it will be different. one thing we're looking at now is provide every squad leader. and the reason is he would be the marine that would fly the squad's upg periods in helping the leader manage the information, because the commands, we will find out, aird battalion murray is is
unit we're using for experimentations. they are still doing the deployment as part of the normal workout to the plate. met one of the squad leaders out there and he had a tablet that folded in and out of his battle rig and he had the ability to do messaging, has google earth map, talk to his higher ed -- headquarters. she had that and a 25-year-old guy was shown me the stuff that i would probably break if i touched but to him, he was like, i can do this and this and i am like, that is very cool. my job is to make sure that works when you need it. so there are going to be changes but i am not sure what it will all look like in the end. kathleen: second row here.
the microphone is coming. sorry. >> with military.com. i am very interested in your thoughts about making ground thems more analog, making able to function with very little technology. by contrast, the marine corps is about to get fifth-generation function on this very complex and custom-made network. i'm curious if you are looking working around and functionality technology. it is a great question. we can always go back to way the audience -- the pilot comes back and files a
report and we try to rapidly disseminate that information. that is an inherent thing we do. capability toe gather information and disseminated to the white where we have figure out if we can observe all of that. it is not that we will go back analog. we have to be prepared when it happens. we have to be able to continue to function. we have the idea of maneuver warfare, where there will be friction and is certainty and the commander has to deliver what they believe is their so in the absence of communication, that they have some idea what they're supposed to do even if they are not able to communicate. it is almost counterintuitive. we have got a system where we're
trying to develop as much yetainty as we can and based on our experiences, we know to some degree it will never work in 100%. if it does, great. we still have to have marines out there who understand they have to use their best judgment, the commander has to understand what they're trying to do, that they cannot stop and wait for something might not worth. have got to find people who have the aggressiveness and the intelligence to understand what they have to do in the absence of certainty. though we might try to achieve it, there is always something out there that you are never sure about. do you have concerns about building the cap -- the
skill sets you think you need? we have had recruiting problems before and we are right now. our recruiters are out there working really hard and we have to turn over and recruit about 34,000 people a year. 60% of the remaining -- the marine corps is under the age of 25. that is a huge operational advantage. being young is an advantage and we have to take advantage of their youth and enthusiasm and and then get to get them to grow up pretty fast here they have done a great job. it is incredible. time, it takes a little bit longer to do this.
be you can take someone out of training, they know how to fire a right lender refit and they can carry and function. i think we are beyond that. complexity at that level let alone the other levels, takes a certain level of intelligence and ability to be trained and we are there. the time itbout will take, the additional time take, and being able to retain enough of these who become sergeants and staff sergeants, because these are capable and qualified people and there are opportunities out there. we will train someone to work on a cyber domain, we invest in ofm and they get to the end their enlistment, they are going to have a huge number of opportunities, so how do we convince them in the same for the air force, how do we convince them to stick around and wear a uniform and do that
in some of your companies are out there offering two or three times as much money, and they get to sleep in their own bed at night and no one is trying to kill them? think about that for a minute. them takeough of pride and are willing to accept a challenge, but i worry about that. as the force becomes more technical and more capable, they have more options. we will go right here in front. >> thank you. john harper with national defense magazine. as you look at the future and prepare to fight more advanced adversaries come a what kinds of technologies are you looking for in terms of maneuverability or things like that? i did not talk
about recapitalization of the ground force, but there are two programs in particular, technical vehicle and the -- the combat vehicle where we will replace some number of humvees and we will replace some number of our vehicle. of those vehicles have better traffic ability and better survivability. they still can be beaten. you can always have a bigger areon or bomb, but there other technologies out there, we cannot keep hanging more armor trying toicles and have heavier transmission pair there are vehicle protection systems that are out there. there are electronic means to protect the vehicles and obviously if there are later means to armor them and give the firstr defense,
thing i am trying to give is the individual body armor. gear, theick up the body armor, the water and the ammo, without even talking -- you add some sort of tablet or radios were anything else you have got to carry. you're pushing 6280 pounds. that is before you put your pack on. so we are really looking hard for ways to lighten the load it anyway possible. make something that can clean water, so we do not have to carry as much clean water, even to the point where even if we could find this to do something that is not metal and this consumable, that would
reduce the weight of the boulevard 25%. -- the weight by 25%. .very pound counts i used to do that for a living and now i am just an old fat man. but i remember what it was like , along withmitted the general, we have talked about this. to figuringommitted out everywhere possible to increase the survivability and light in the load of everybody carrying their stuff across the .attlefield on the back the vehicle protection systems, there is a active protection systems out there. we will look at a couple of those. they are not really late but if you build it into the vehicle,
that certainly gives an advantage where you do not have to just keep hanging armor. about one of the areas we still need to work in the craft landing zone. we are still pre-much like we are with iud's, down to farm tools. we have got to do better. more survivable. iud'sare two ways to find or mines. the right way and then there is the wrong way. i prefer the first. i have a question way the back over here. >> defense news.
the unit construct has been around for a long time. but almost never -- they train as a unit but almost never do they operate as a unit once they are fully deployed. is that a construct that needs to be changed or can we reevaluate the continuance of that today. what else can we do? because the method of employment, i think the only survivable forcible entry capability would have at the , it is true, they train together and operate as one but they also trained to operate separate. have more we capabilities. so we end up being a multiple
places sometimes supporting at one time. i would not ever support unless there was a specific thing, unless we had excess capacity. we have done single deployers in the pacific. every year, there is a training exercise combined with assistance training was something like that. and sail around the pacific they do security cooperation and build capacity with allies. we do ship sometimes down and south america. it is now called something else. the three ship, the real discussion is duly buys -- by do we automatically by
just bynot happenstance, distribute ourselves across the battle space. we have got to be able to come back together because one way we are able to create a larger landing force is to bring multiple ships, coming from other units together and into a whole. they have got to be able to function together. they cannot come together and figure it out at that time. they have got to understand the entire landing plan. i do not see us, in order to meet our requirements, deploying from the continental united states, one or two ships by themselves. they will continue to go as a group. kathleen: one way in the back over here. >> good morning. general, my question is about special purpose marine task
force. honduras, american forces, it starts in a couple of months or right now actually. my question is, already there for two months, future, -- thank you. special-purpose based out of honduras, and now they are operating out of three or four different countries, i in another week or so, it was at the request of the commander and now admiral to provide marine forces to do it she said to work with allies and partners down there to provide a capability for the commander.
they have the most recent hurricane earl came through their peer they already went through that one. to engage with military partners down there. a year ago, in april, i met with the marine corps'. a lot of navies in the north and south america regions have marine corps. they have a lot of disaster relief. because of the ecological thing set of happened, they have had earthquakes and tsunamis and volcanicthey have a directions.
we have had because of the services they have had down there, we have worked with the mexican marines in the things they do. we are just down there to try to engage with them and maintain a relationship in any way we can. this will be during a hurricane season. it will be a six-month deployment. we will hopefully have resources to send another group down there next year. >> long ago, you mentioned a new battlefield. can you explain what that looks toe and how that relates calls to rebuild the military to feed -- to defeat the enemy? thank you.
gen. neller: when you look at even what is happening on the in iraq and afghanistan now, technology and the ability of vietnamese adversaries that we always considered low-tech, i thought it was a bad thing to underestimate the adversary, the use of information, the use of social media, not just the ideology but to communicate the their unmanned systems, ability to move and survive, the ability for the asymmetric capabilities. you take that and put it with a nationstate and you look at what a are doing and you look at what a number of countries around the
world are doing, you're kind of in a battlefield more similar to what we would have thought it would look like during a cold war. but i think much more complicated. the chief of the russian wrote a really good paper what -- about what he thought the battlefield would look like. i read it three times. callsks about what he fighting a war without fighting a war. the use of information and social media, disinformation, the use of special forces to engage with local forces that may have a political beef with , what we wouldry call conventional forces might somehow be involved in that.
you add to that and adversary that would have a capable air artillery,pable capable electronic warfare to find you or to jam you, who can was the last time an american military force byried about being bombed enemy air? by enemy air? world war ii? so what capability to we have to defend ourselves from enemy air or enemy unmanned air? can we mask our signature? i don't know what the battlefield will look like. i think all of the denials of capabilities or being able to something that if did not start talking or
thinking about that, i would not the earning my pay every day. and i would not be doing my job to make sure the young men and women that are the military, i know they feel is same way because we talked about it. just paying attention. i think everybody else understands that and we are on a path that is essentially going equipment andy partly training. they will help find solutions to the problems. kathleen: two last questions. equipment and partly training. i will do one back here and then we will come up front. >> my name is michael tucker with the u.s. border patrol. earlier, you mentioned you deployed observable forces, similar to our mission set. then you mentioned building partner capacity. my question is what are your
thoughts on how the training analysis is showing illegal immigration is shifting to -- environment -- to a maritime environment? guard,ller: the coast that is what they do. they're the ones, because of their authorities and permissions to do those things, imagineater, i would that the border patrol has a certain maritime capability at least in lakes and rivers around . we have had immigration come from syria and north africa. you seen militaries get involved in that. that is more of a law enforcement issue. , we render aid.
so that is something the navy does. we support him with that. as far as defending the united states against immigration, -- i cannot imagine how that would happen. defending the united states against the threat of the maritime-born weapon, or some type of capability that is coming here, that would fall under northern command of general robinson and she would work where u.s. military forces, air or sea, if they had to be involved david work the relationships with homeland security. ie whole interagency paying, -- interagency thing we have done better, but we have to work at it because it is complicated. when i was a j3 that was one of the most difficult things to understand. who could do what to who. at the end of the day i had to
say, who would pay for it? at the end the day we will do what we have to do to keep the homeland safe. i appreciate everything you and your guys do all across the country. breaking defense. press,, people are the like myself, focus on shiny hardware. you mentioned several times that there are some ways even basic 's or core can do a lot. putting wire around your intelligence zone, to help you survive the more intense battlefield. what are more examples that orple need to relearn, things may be to learn that they never did in the cold war, that could make a difference in a way that just buying a new piece of hardware perhaps could not?
i was talking to wereal davidson, and we talking about signature. in other words, how do you eliminate your signature. in the navy, they used to call r. operating in an amca electromagnetic spectrum reduction. it is still kind of important to be able to do some before and raise flags. they have been practicing. reducing, turning off your radar. celestial shoot navigation in case gps goes out. they are teaching that at the naval academy. they stopped teaching it. he admiral found out and they realized if they lost gps they would have no ways to navigate. no charts.
so admiral davidson says, we are degree wedo this realized we didn't have the hickssolution because decided she wanted to check her facebook page. two walks onto the weather deck at night with her phone. what does the phone got? gps. knowdy in the world will there is gps somewhere out floating across the ocean. hip.s probably on a s the same officer that did this in the headquarters group said, what do you think the largest electromagnetic signature emanated from? area.lleting why? everyone had their phone out. we have to take everyone's fun away from them. i know that that sounds silly, but it is not silly.
ok, marines, we are going to go in the field for 30 days, leave your phone in the car and tell your significant other, your mom, your aunt, your uncle that you will not get 75 texts every day and answer them. simple things like camouflage. i saw a marine -- when his last time you saw a marine or soldier operating in iraq or afghanistan when they camouflage their face or broke of the outline of their helmet with camouflage so they would not be seen? when is the last time you saw that? it has been a long time. a long time. the enemy was not worried about someone seeing us at night for our signature. they are in a defensive position, camouflaging that, living in the field, and not fog every night to check your e-mail. that is what we have been doing for the last 15 years. not everybody. we have an operating out of
fixed positions. we have not moved across the ground. we have not maneuvered, we have not lived off of the land. we have been eating in chow halls and drinking green bean coffee. that is pretty nice. we have done other stuff, do not get me wrong. when people think of going to is for the last 15 years what it has been. there were people out on the edge. do not get me wrong. there were soldiers and marines out there living hard, but it is different. that,at i'm suggesting is and i do not think it will be a problem. those marines, soldiers, sailors -- they did exactly what we trained him to do. we have to change. your living out of your pack. stop at night. dig a hole.
camouflage, turn off your stuff. you will sit there and try to sleep. you will be careful not to make any noise. you will try to have absolutely no signature. if you can be seen, you will be attacked. that is the difference. that is where we got to get. neller you where remembrance of a fallen marine. i wonder if you could tell us about him and what it means for you to have that. i never met this marine. the story goes like this. 2006. we were getting a bunch of jammers that we thought would the enemy's ability to use remote control devices to activate an ied it would defeat it. we anticipated that they would
go -- they have 2 choices. command wire, someone has to sit there and wait for you to drive by, or they would put pressure devices and they would wait for you to drive over. we started talking about how we might defeat the pressure device. not a newdea, it is idea, we said what if we put a roller in from of the vehicle? what if we push something in front of the the." i don't know, it would lower up, it would simply offset it. they were all well intended logical reasons. i was responsible for our counter id program in an bar at the time. i listen, one night i went into my office and i read about a young man that was killed by an ied from a pressure device. say that that motivated me to get off my
general officer backside and make a decision. we decided we would build rollers. we did. that was the first week of may. we had a bunch of the mechanics of the different logistical areas make monster garage rollers. they were out in the commercial world. in short order, we had rollers. were nohen, there rollers. you think of the pictures from iraq and afghanistan, they are all pushing rollers. it started because of him. you for yourhank time. senator warner, former secretary of the navy, thank you for joining us as well. please join me in a round of applause for our guests. [applause]
in under one hour we will be on capitol hill with consumerist examining free data plans. sourcesy inside starting at noon eastern. later, a panel on sustainable development goals for women and girls, including global implications. the woodrow wilson center is the host at 4:00 p.m. eastern. and clinton and jimmy carter discuss policy changes. it is part of the clinton global initiative conference hosted earlier this summer. here's a preview. have the answer to the question, but i don't mind. they know what i think about everything. i am boring. let me take another problem. a decreasing number of people that vote in america. there are a lot of efforts among
republicans and democratic legislatures. you have to get all the democrats to the legislature, all republicans, and the governor from the same party. they want to minimize any change in the electoral system. is on thest of it opposite party bill. that is an expression. it is something the republicans are doing. how you get young people registered to vote? i woulde my preference have everyone be automatically registered to vote when they are 18 years old. another idea that i tried and it worked well in georgia was we passed a law deputizing every high school principal to be a voting registrar. may as governor, i called the high schools to have a
contest among every high school in georgia of who could register them most of coming 18-year-olds to be registered voters. >> you can see that discussion with the former president starting at 8:00 eastern on c-span. vermont and wisconsin go to vote in primary races. here are the contest politico are writing about. the seventh district of minnesota has a choice between amanda hansen and dave hughes to take on house agriculture committee ranking democrat colin peterson. info not, five democratic into republicans face-off to replace the governor, who is retiring at the end of the term. from thering results wisconsin republican primary between house speaker paul ryan and a business executive. you could see those results after the polls close on c-span.
, you can watch our public affairs and political programming any time at your convenience. here is how you go to our home page and click on the video library search bar. you can type in the name of the speaker, sponsor of the bill, or topic. review the results and click on the program to watch, or refine your search with our trolls. if you are looking for the most current programs, our homepage has many current programs ready for your immediate viewing, such as today's "washington journal." c-span.org is the public service or satellite provider. if you are a c-span water, check out c-span.org. next, a discussion on the impact of the magna carta on the u.s. constitution with the former bar association president and
professor howard. this is part of a judicial conference held in west virginia. the 800thmark anniversary of the magna carta, where england's king james signed a document recognizing parliamentary locker c, human rights, in the supremacy of law. >> ladies and gentlemen, if we could get started. the next segment will deal with the magna carta. i will tell you last week, one
afternoon, i had a friend of mine and his wife come to my office to visit. the husband asked me questions about what would go on at this conference. what are you going to talk about? i said, one thing is celebrate the signing of the magna carta. he said, when was that? i said 1215. he said, honey, i told you we should've come before lunch. [laughter] that is not the 1215 we are talking about. we have a distinguished group led by professor a.e. dick howard. i will turn it over to you, professor. prof. howard: good morning, everybody. it is nice to see all of you. as you know, we are planning to say a few words on the 800
anniversary of the magna carta. i teach constitutional law at the university of virginia. i'm very happy to have with me 2 distinguished guests. embassy infrom the washington dc he is her majesty consul. he spent one year at the university of southern california in san diego doing a thesis of time off. the other panelist is william hubbard. of you as the president of the american bar association from columbia, south carolina. year, the 800 anniversary year, he was in london presiding
at the rededication of the american bar association's memorial to the magna carta. aba'ssided over the london meeting which attracted something like 1000 americans to england. we plan to divide our presentation into 2 major parts of equal length. first, i would like to undertake a sketch of the magna carta. the 800 years, what were its origins, how did it survive somehow didn't manage to get across the atlantic to america, what does it mean today? the second major part of the program will turn to a discussion, first david hunt, then william hubbard, giving you a sense of the contemporary modern applications of the magna carta. a few words, a little background, a little history. with the magna carta came from. it was an unwilling bargain
between a reluctant king john and the barenrons. it is clear that king john was not only a bad man, he was a bad thing. with thed a quarrel pope, the city of london, and with the barents. majoraged to lose a battle in france, resulting in the loss of the norman's possession of normandy. mate, magna carta was the result. we need not worry about the the details most of of the magna carta, having to do with what were then important issues. among the most important provisions was chapter 39 of the magna carta that guarantees proceedings according to the law of the land. what we today would call due process of law.
there is another companion provision in chapter 40 that said justice should not be delayed, denied, or sold. king john, a reluctant bargainer did not intend to keep the promise. he was going to turn his back on me magna carta and -- turn his back on the magna carta and have it null and void. he died. his successor was nine years old. how long would a nine-year-old king survive in the conditions of the middle ages. you have all seen game of thrones and know that the conditions were like. they hit upon what we would call a public relations device. thead henry iii reissue magna carta as a pledge of good faith to the english people. he started a tradition through the centuries of each monarch coming to the throne reissuing the magna carta. i will take over -- i will skip
over the tudor period. we do not think of henry viii being a great time of constitutional government. when thethe century stewards came to the english throne with the notion of the divine right of kings. the king was on a collision course with parliament. cook, the great commentator on the magna carta, was a leader in parliament against the pretensions of the stuart kings. , heaid the magna carta would have no sovereign. the magna carta was central to the argument against the stewart claims. it was verycentury turbulent with civil war come the execution of charles i, the restoration, and when the stuart 's without leave and mary came after theone
so-called glorious revolution. a chaotic time in english history resulting after 1689 and what you would call the foundations of modern british government. story.lish side of the what is interesting is that you can see why last year the english would be celebrating magna carta. why would americans care? how did it come to be part in partial of early american constitutional law? magna carta came to america with the very first colonial charters. the virginia company charter of 60had a provision, aside from commercial provisions. there was one that said those who emigrated to virginia would enjoy the privileges, franchises, and immunities they would have enjoyed in england. they pulled up fruits to come to this wilderness called virginia, they did not leave their rights behind.
werever those rights where not spelled out in the charter, but it included the protections of the common law, in particular, the magna carta. that was the origin. the other charters had very similar provisions. in the run-up to the revolution in the 18th century, the magna carta reappeared. many would have read about james otis' argument when he was retained by boston merchants to argue against the so-called writs of assistance. they were like general search warrants. you could go into a place or home and search for whatever you like without limitations. coke, the sir edward 17th century commentator. a 1610 case, dr. bonomo's case, where he said an act of parliament was against right and reason, it would be nolan boyd. but theine for sure,
idea that even parliament would be limited by the common law. that doctrine died out in england by the 18th century. leanne blackstone had written his famous commentary where he that parliament is sovereign. parliament calls the shots. there is no way for a judge to limit what parliament does. by the eve of the american revolution, that was the established doctrine in england. in america, you had people like arguments making the for constitutional supremacy. the americans and english were talking past each other at this white. you know the history after the seven years war. passed byact was parliament trying to impose a tax in america. americans rejected that this was representation. that the proceedings under the stamp act took place in admiralty court without right to
trial by jury. that was the american side. then the boston tea party. a famous event after which the british close the toward of boston, quartered british troops on the american populace, and closed down assembly in massachusetts. it became a common cause for the americans by hand large. when they met in the continental congress, 1774, they wanted to articulate aces for their claim of right. where did the rights come from, why did they exist? at the continental congress, various delegates said let's site the colonial charters. immunities, language. others said, let's cite the british constitution, the magna carta. others said, we think it is a law of god, the law of nature,
natural law is the foundation. congress didental was they took a typical american eclectic approach and swept that into the resolutions. they said it doesn't matter the label, we americans have rights which you the british are not respecting. that is what brought us to the eve of revolution. americans started writing their own cost to tensions. -- their own constitutions. 1776 instructed for's delegates in philadelphia to introduce the resolution for independence on the same day to work on a state constitution. they set 2 documents. a declaration of rights and a frame of government. it is interesting that they took those two steps. the theory was that first you hts, then yourig
write a frame of government, or the main body of the constitution. one person was not in williamsburg, thomas jefferson. he spent the next 50 years complaining about that constitution. my guess is he was complaining because he was not there. jefferson cannot imagine that anyone could do something like brighter constitution without him. contract atn into the university of virginia that i'm not allowed to make any public lecture without one mention of thomas jefferson. you just heard my obligatory jefferson reference. jefferson did not like the constitution. his argument was that the body of men in williamsburg who wrote the constitution was enacting ordinary laws for virginia. functionsonfusing 2 are you cannot have the same people write constitutions and laws, because then they are
ordinary laws and can be made and unmade like ordinary laws. would we did not do in virginia, massachusetts did in 1780. massachusetts had a convention elected by the people for the purpose of writing a constitution, which was put out in referendum and voted on why the people. ofy removed the constitution the ordinary ball making process. america invented the constitutional convention, something that had not been thought of in england or europe at that time. those early constitutions were infused with many provisions in the magna carta and other english liberty documents like the bill of rights. from the state constitutions, we get philadelphia, 17 87. we write the federal constitution. as far as i know, magna carta was never mentioned in philadelphia.
given the story of an telling, it is strange. why would it be after all of these years of staking their claims of rights on magna carta, why would the philadelphia delegates sweep the magna carta offstage? if i could ask the federalists, their first answer with the magna carta was a grant from the king to the people of england. we are writing a constitution based on popular sovereignty. we the people. the federalists might also say the magna carta was only a limit on royal or executive power. we are writing a constitution to limit all the branches of government. executive, legislative, judicial. it is not relevant, however useful it may have been in earlier days. federalistss -- made an almost fatal blunder. they refuse the notion of mason and others to add a bill of rights. they said we don't need one.
it was a hot summer in philadelphia and they wanted to go home. article, a an complaint, to the people who became the opponents of the new constitution, the antifederalists. they could say, look, they have written a constitution without providing for our rights. james madison and the others got the point. he was reluctant to have a bill of rights, but said we will add one. just ratify the constitution and we will oppose amendments to create a bill of rights.
how would i some of magna carta's legacy in setting the stage for my conversation with the colleagues here? first legacy would simply be the rule of law and something american lawyers love to talk about, the rule of law. i remember being in leningrad when they were writing the first post-soviet constitution, comparing notes with the drafters, back in the day when we thought russia would be a liberal democracy. phrase,ish language rule of law, as a socialist and -- i had to say, no, that is not quite what we americans. means, it is
something that clearly flows from magna carta and secondly, the restatement of fundamental rights through the centuries. thirdly, the idea being it in writing, from charters to other documents to american, state and federal constitutions, the notion that, it's that important, the written document. fourthly, the us additional supremacy. the notion that even parliament by constitutional principles. thinking about some documents being superior to others, the super statute, i think it flows from magna carta.
you may remember back to your first year law school when you first read marbury versus madison, he may have been struck by the fact that marshall began with statements of general principle, the idea of a constitution. he familyhe opinion, gets to the supremacy clause. but he talks as if it is self-evident. it write a constitution, bound to be a superior document. again magnahink supremacy, constitutional development. you can't really understand american constitutional law without thinking of its common-law back down, the notion that you were from precedent to precedent, from age to age. in the continent, they have the civil code. very different mode of legal
reasoning. the fact that we have this , it's anradition amazing protean effect to phrases like rule of law, cruel it unusual punishment, and brings to mind how that process has worked out in the american so you have some idea of how it was that magna carta served abdulla the centuries that have so much impact in modern time. so now we turn therefore to some thought of the contemporary scene, first in the united teen them, and then the united states with william harbin -- the united kingdom, and then the hunt. states with william if one follows events coming out of the united kingdom, change is
very much in the air. there's probably no time like it since the 17th century. about the transformation of the house of lords, the transformation of the the human rights act of 1998, scottish revolution, and recently the failed revolution -- referendum on scottish resolutions. there are proposals for any row to codify a written constitution . given all these ideas stirring about, what place does magna carta -- magna carta and is legacy have in this debate? course you are a very difficult at to follow, may i say. i want to say good morning to everyone here this morning.
thank you for welcoming me so warmly to this conference. it is a great pleasure for me to be here to talk about one of britain's greatest conversations -- contributions. i will stay for the record that i am not a judge or i have never pass any bar exams. offer,impressions that i being well versed in the legal language, will need from how spencer, watching the u.k. version of "law and order ."icket [laughter] i do have some first language or review of how this a hundred-year-old document we have been talking about as shaped the illegal dividend the cultural thinking of the nation where i am from, so i can give
you a view from across upon, if i will tell you a little bit about magna carta, the history. it translates into the great charter of liberties. it formed the foundation of our nations freedoms and the way that we thought of government, law and human rights. and for the first time in history, aid placed very clear limits on royal power and today, that our, this idea rulers cannot punish or dispossess us because they feel like it. placed aciple, it has
difficult situation between us -- no taxation without representation -- unless -- unless you live in washington, d.c. [laughter] [indiscernible] time, you did not need a key to sign off on those principles because they were held to be self-evident truths. and chances are the king would not have agreed to them anyway. connection of the magna consititution have unnoticed.
-- winstonurchill churchill noticed. over the years, we have had our disagreements, but we always held those founding documents in high regard. broke out in 1939, the magnan version of the carta was on display at the world fair. eventually, you gave the lincoln magna carta back. but our exchange as leaders and human rights continues to this day.
great privilege and a power for countries to be at the forefront of this conversation. we are two countries that have set the tone for the rest of the world to follow. when we say that magna carta is a crucial part of british culture, i think it would be a classic understatement. very much like saying the constitution is a moderately of what and american document. well magna carta [indiscernible] are other parts that show it's true age. so it's really up to us now on to reevaluate what magna carta means. a desk as the professor has said, the conversations of right and balances of power look much different in the u.k.. we don't have a written
constitution. that in fact, even that is of for debate among legal scholars. you can't really agree to the entirety of whether one exists or not i urge you to think of it --stitution with a lowercase a lowercase c. i want you to think about what is right and what is just. it is ingrained in our national care
it means our values are woven statutes and treaties. that has resulted in a constitution that is not supreme law that is both monarchical and democratic. this contradiction might seem more trouble than it's worth. but i would contend that it has provided us with a living, breathing and a quite accessible said laws. we in examining those laws, have a collection of legal instruments that we referred to constitutional conventions. i will give you an example of how the flexible system works. the prime minister of the united kingdom is the leader of the party with an absolute majority in the house of commons. this has not always been the case. government that i served before this one was in
fact the coalition. or another example, all legislation must originate in a house of commons. in the sitting monarch has a right to loyal dust to royal consent, giving consent to all legislation. hasver queen elizabeth ii only used her veto once, which was against a military action in iraq. we also have some very important documents that accompany our bill of rights which lays down the limits on power that the monarch sits requirements for free elections, free speech and morear element to
recently, we saw the european community act of 1972 which regulated our then [indiscernible] of the united kingdom with the european union. adding further layers to this was further devolution of powers , asin the european union well as scotland, northern wales and -- wales, and northern ireland. meant, rather than the herculean asset, laws can be amended and revised. but on occasion, that system has been called into question. recently, there has been
the human rights act of 1998. there would be little need for the human rights act. was nothuman rights act about the plight of the common man. it dealt morbid -- it dealt more with the relationship you to the parliament and the crown. democratic accountability, checks and balances favored in overall american south bill of rights. but in the 1960's in the 1970's, a more formal document picked up speed. the u.s. model of american rights have been -- has been rejected because it would mean a power.al i'm at the
it draws distinctions that contrast quite radically with the constitution here, especially in unqualified rights. for instance, the convention includes the right to life in the right to liberty and security. rightr, most includes the to free expression and religion and privacy must be balanced against the side interest, which is national security and public safety. when this act was passed, it was held as relevant and a thing of intellectual beauty, not just by those who drafted it. it was seen as particularly exceptional for the fact that it does not enjoy legal status and can be modified and amended with legalese. for instance, now there is a movement to replace the human rights act with the u.k. bill of rights. the aim is to restore commonsense, quote", to human rights.
quote/unquote, to human rights. interestingly, this has not been part of my government's legislative agenda for this year. rest assured, that kind of debate continues in the united kingdom. speech on the 800th anniversary of magna carta, my prime minister about to restore the reputation of human rights. and in 2015, the conservative government added it to its election manifesto and and efforts for continued reform has been led by michael gove. there are those who would argue that we should strengthen human rights instead of wasting time by starting over.
here of course, in the united states, a thing like the bill of rights would be attributable to heresy. but on the anniversary of the magna carta, a conversation around the u.k. written conversation continues. write a new.k. magna carta, or one that would bring the government together. this has been examined by the committee of the house of commons. verdict was, if we are to create a new magna carta and a written constitution, it should involve all of the people. it should be democratic and its process and not only did hated by legal experts and bureaucrats like myself, but by the young and the old, the rich and the poor, the god-fearing and the atheists the magic of the constitution is that it stands for a symbol of what we are and
what we believe in. and that is something i think we should all have a voice in. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. let me ask you a follow-up question. we are aware of this forthcoming referendum next month on whether or not the u.k. should exit the european union. suppose the vote is yes. suppose the voters of the u.k. decide to leave. what are the of occasions for some of these domestic us additional arrangements where some have to change because of that vote. a a think you've raised question which is on so many people's minds and the united kingdom. day.the topic of the ofarly, there is a lot discussion and debate about the very question you asked. my prime minister has been very safer,hat we would be stronger and better off in the european union.
for so many reasons. not least because we cooperate so closely on important security issues of the day, like counterterrorism, but also from a prosperity viewpoint, because it means we have access to a civil market of 500 million people, which is an important thing for the u.k. in commerce. i think the phrase most commonly used by the government which i wouldis to leave the eu in effect be a lead into the dark. so the way we govern ourselves and interact with our european partners, these are unanswered -- unasked questions would take some time to live through. the government is very much focused in making the argument the stay in the year in you because of the importance of the u.k. in doing so.
there's been speculation, but really, the debate is all around staying in. >> thank you so much. let me turn to william hubbard. we will turn from the english side to the american side to as a mentioned, you were in england last year connecting kellen's interviews. you were interviewed by bbc. they asked you questions about magna carta. aboutsked you questions scoring magna carta and the u.s. constitution with the detention practices at guantanamo. what did you tell bbc? william: yes, they did. the reporters were quite crafty and were well prepared for the various and reviews -- various interviews. as a general proposition, i engaged in a discussion about, you know, we have these words on a document and we have courts
and lawyers have to argue about what are the limits. how do you apply this particular document to specific facts question mark and that is why we have a court system to make those determinations. and fact, there have been four cases since 9/11 that deal with detainee rights that have been decided by the u.s. supreme court. in all for those cases, the court has held for the detainees good and into other cases, the magna carta was cited as authority. in a hunt d versus rumsfeld, justice souter in his concurrence in the case decided that due process must be made amde to make his defense. now he is an american.
in a second opinion, the median versus bush decided in 2008, justice kennedy wrote for the majority of that case, holding the detainees had the right to challenge the tension through habeas corpus. and in that decision, magna carta decreed that no man would be imprisoned contrary to the law of the land. important as the principal was, there was no prescribed legal process to enforce it. gradually, the writ of habeas corpus became the means of which magna carta was fulfilled. : chapter 40 of magna carta is the one that says that justice shall not be sold, the later denied. obviously an important principle. on the american scene, perhaps a
modern counterpart's questions about judicial independence, a phrase that we are very much concerned with. and what respects would you say that we in america are falling short with the promises of chapter? three david: let's go back to magna carta. -- william: let's go back to magna carta. justice shall be delayed. it specifically held the common pleas or not to follow our court, but are to be held in subjects place. this became the court of common pleas as opposed to the king's court, which while looking around for the purpose having confirmation of the king's decrees. so in chapter 17, we see the foundation eating late for separation of powers and physically separating courts from the king himself.
that separation from the king's court made it clear that judges were to operate independently of the king of and this led to the development of the concept of judicial independence. so we see the seeds of that there, aindependence combination of chapter 40 in chapter 17. looking, a man of some modern popularity and currency in the world today, placed a as reasonsdependence why he took up arms in the cause of independence and there wrote eloquently about the importance of judicial independence in the federalist papers. today, we cad discussion, an important discussion about judicial independence. justice ginsburg has written recently that come essential to the rule of law in any land, is an independent judiciary.
and it is vulnerable to assault, she says. it can be shattered in the society it exists to serve does not take care to ensure its preservation. justice breyer recently said society around us can undermine judicial independence, that is the rock upon which the judicial institution rests. justice o'connor, freed from the constraints of being an active justice on the court, has been even more forceful in her concerns of judicial independence. is aas dated that there crisis of confidence in the impartiality of court. she says it is real and growing. she noted that elected judges in many states are compelled to solicit money for their , and has noted, that polls have shown, three of four americans believe campaign contributions affected judicial decisions.
to give you aote isse to which she feels this a deep problem in our society. she says, into many states, elections are becoming political fights where partisan and electoral decisions seek judges that will answer to them instead of the law and the constitution. beenortunately, really has -- there is some relief and it stems from a decision that was issued on april 29, 2015, the the is william julie versus florida bar. dealt with the prohibition of the florida bar that limited the ability of judges to actively seek campaign contributions in support of a reelection campaign. chief justice roberts wrote in
favor of the court in deciding on -- in favor of the florida ban on solicitations. -- cannotred supplement campaign donors without diminishing public confidence in judicial integrity. he went on to say this principle dates back to at least eight centuries in magna carta, which proclaimed to no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay right or justice. so drawing explicitly upon chapter 40, he upheld the limitation on judges seeking it is ancontributions interesting time, as we discussed the separation of powers ended initial independence -- and judicial independence. remainingof the
presidential candidates have indicated that they will insist beforertain litmus tests they would seek to appoint someone to our supreme court and two other judgeships. it is a matter of some concern, rather than seeking those that are best qualified. all of the three remaining candidates are talking about this as an essential part of the process. chapter 39 is perhaps the most famous chapter of mattock -- magna carta. it is known as due process of law. . was a clerk to justice black black himself was a great student of the magna carta. most famousof his
opinions was gideon versus wainwright, the one that requires that if a state appointed counsel for defendants are to puerto -- to a 40 lawyer. i'm wondering whether in your judgment have we in our time fulfilled the promise of gideon? >> many would submit that we have not. who was ayoung lawyer major participant in that case and wrote the bulk of the brief, in a recent statement -- gideon was in 1963i believe. anniversary he stated very publicly and forcefully that many criminal are not adequately and confidently represented and he described this as the unfulfilled promise of gideon. in the last couple of months there has been another u.s. supreme court decision, the