President Barack Obama speaks with members of Congress after delivering a primetime speech on healthcare to a joint session on Wednesday, Sept. 9, 2009. (AP)

Post your comments below

It’s September 11, 2009. Eight years after the shocking morning that instantly consumed American hearts and minds.

U.S. troops are still in Afghanistan. New reports say Al Qaeda is sputtering, yet still dangerous.

But at home, this week was a marker of how much else has crowded onto the national stage. The president, front and center in an epic debate over health care. The Supreme Court, in an epic case over corporate money and political speech. We’ve got flu vaccine, deep space photos, and a new liver for Steve Jobs.

This hour, On Point: our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

From Washington, we’re joined by Doyle McManus, former Washington bureau chief and now columnist for The Los Angeles Times.

Also joining us from Washington is Jay Newton-Small, Congressional correspondent for Time magazine and contributor to Time.com’s Swampland blog.

And from Hanover, N.H., is Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst and senior editor at The Atlantic.

More links:

One of our favorite stories this week was the release of new deep space photos from NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope. This one in particular has a mysterious beauty:

NASA’s caption: Butterfly Emerges from Stellar Demise in Planetary Nebula NGC 6302.

The United States Supreme Court (AP)

Post your comments below

The Supreme Court comes back next week — a month early — to hear a case that could alter American campaign finance.

The case centers on “Hillary: The Movie,” an attack film made by a conservative not-for-profit group, which portrays 2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as a ruthless schemer. And that’s putting it gently.

Last year, a DC district court ruled that it violated campaign finance law. Now, the case the Supreme Court takes up next week is making for some awfully strange bedfellows.

This hour, On Point: unpacking the case that could change American politics.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Jacki Lyden, guest host

Guests:

Joan Biskupic, Supreme Court correspondent for USA Today. Her new book, “American Original: the Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia,” will be released in November.

Tara Malloy, associate legal council for the Campaign Legal Center and lead lawyer in drafting the Center’s amicus brief defending the constitutionality of federal restrictions on corporate campaign spending.

Allison Hayward, assistant professor of law at George Mason University. She filed an amicus brief supporting the makers of “Hillary: the Movie” on behalf of herself and several other campaign finance scholars.

Post your comments below

If what Republican senators wanted was a hot-tempered target to go after in Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayorthis week, what they’ve got so far is a cool customer. Low-key. Deliberate. And devoted, in her statements, to the law.

Is a judge’s heart important, asked Senator John Kyl?
“No, sir,” said Sotomayor. “It’s not the heart… It’s the law.”

And empathy? Feelings?
“We apply law to facts,” she said. “We don’t apply feelings to facts.”

And the hearings go on.

This hour, On Point: pro and con on US Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Dahlia Lithwick, senior editor and a legal affairs commentator at Slate.com. Her recent column about the Sotomayor hearings is “Honesty at Last!”

Stephen Carter, Professor of Law at Yale and best-selling novelist. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall. His latest novel, “Jericho’s Fall,” has just been published. He is also author of non-fiction books such as “The Confirmation Mess: Cleaning up the Federal Appointments Process” and “The Culture of Disbelief: How American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion.”

Wendy Long, legal counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network, a conservative organization opposed to the Sotomayor nomination. Formerly a litigation partner in the law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Long was a law clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and editor of the Northwestern University Law Review, where she graduated law cum laude.

Frank Ricci, left, lead plaintiff in the New Haven firefighters' reverse discrimination case, speaks to the media outside of Federal Court in New Haven, Conn., on Monday, June 29, 2009. The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the white firefighters were unfairly denied promotions because of their race. (AP)

Post your comments below

Yesterday the Supreme Court handed down the most anticipated decision of its term, finding that white firefighters denied promotion in New Haven, Connecticut, were the victims of racial discrimination.

In doing so, the justices overturned a ruling joined by Federal appeals court judge, and high court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor. That alone grabbed a lot of headlines.

But more profound are the questions raised about civil rights law and the future of affirmative action in the United States.

This hour, On Point: the Ricci case, civil rights law, and the future of affirmative action.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Jane Clayson, guest host

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is Jess Bravin, Supreme Court correspondent for The Wall Street Journal.

From Chicago we’re joined by Richard Epstein, professor of law at The University of Chicago and author of “Skepticism and Freedom: A Modern Case for Classic Liberalism” and “Principles for a Free Society: Reconciling Individual Liberty with the Common Good.”

And from San Francisco we’re joined by Richard Thompson Ford, professor of law at Stanford University and author of the books “The Race Card: How Bluffing About Bias Makes Race Relations Worse” and “Racial Culture: A Critique.”

President Obama introduces federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his nominee for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, May 26, 2009, at the White House. (AP)

Post your comments below

Big issues in the news this week. General Motors — GM — sliding into bankruptcy. Nuclear tests and missiles flying in North Korea. And an Obama Supreme Court pick named Sonia Sotomayor.

In North Asia, Chinese fishing boats have pulled back from the Korean coast and no one knows what comes next. Same in Detroit.

Across the country, Judge Sotomayor’s nomination has set off Hispanic celebration and a wild war of words over “wise Latina woman” and GOP charges of “racism.”

This hour, On Point: Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is Ron Brownstein, political director for Atlantic Media, columnist for National Journal, and author of “The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America.”

Also from Washington we’re joined by Margaret Talev, White House correspondent for McClatchy Newspapers. She’s headed out to cover the president next week as he travels to the Middle East.

And from Hanover, N.H., is Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst and senior editor at The Atlantic.

President Barack Obama announces federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor, right, as his nominee for the Supreme Court, Tuesday, May 26, 2009, in an East Room ceremony at the White House in Washington. (AP)

Post your comments below.

The headline of this morning: President Obama to name U.S. Court of Appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court.

Justice David Souter, headed out to retirement. Barack Obama’s first Supreme Court nominee headed before the Senate for confirmation hearings.

Sotomayor is 54. She famously grew up in a Bronx housing project, the daughter of Puerto Rican parents. She would be the court’s first Hispanic justice. The third female justice in the high court’s history.

This hour, On Point: We’ll hear the president’s announcement and look at Sonia Sotomayor.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Washington is David Savage, Supreme Court correspondent for the Los Angeles Times. Read his coverage here.

From South Bend, Ind., we’re joined by Richard Garnett, professor of law at the University of Notre Dame.

Dahlia Lithwick, legal affairs analyst and senior editor at Slate. Her latest piece is “The Bold Standard.”

President Obama is expected to nominate a woman to replace retiring Justice David Souter. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is currently the sole woman on the Supreme Court. (AP Photo)

Post your comments below

Any day now, Barack Obama will be announcing his choice for nominee to succeed David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court. Speculation is high that it will be a woman.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg has said she’s “lonely” on the court. And at one level, it seems obvious that the court should have another woman. The world is half female.

But does a woman bring a special kind of jurisprudence to the bench? Is it the “quality of empathy” Obama says he wants? And what kind of woman? Hispanic? Straight? Gay? Elected?

This hour, On Point: Women, justice, and the Supreme Court.

You can join the conversation. Tell us what you think — here on this page, on Twitter, and on Facebook.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Charlottesville, Va., is Dahlia Lithwick, senior editor and legal correspondent for Slate. She recently co-wrote  a piece with Hanna Rosin called “An Unnatural Woman,” looking at potential female nominees to the Supreme Court and issues of sexuality. She’s also written recently about the controversial idea of a female jurisprudence and the concept of judicial empathy.

From Washington, we’re joined by Hanna Rosin, a contributing editor at The Atlantic and a writer for Slate. She’s also a founding editor of “Double X,” a new women-focused Web magazine launching today.

And from Palo Alto, Calif., we’re joined by Deborah Rhode, professor at Stanford Law School. She’s a pioneering scholar on the field of gender and the law. She’s director of Stanford’s Center on the Legal Profession. Her latest book is “Women and Leadership: The State of Play and Strategies of Change.”

Security guards stand on the steps of the Supreme Court. (AP)

Post your comments below

While the U.S. financial crisis marches on, the country marches toward November 4th and a presidential election with consequences way beyond a buck — even seven hundred billion bucks.

High on the list: the make-up of the U.S. Supreme Court. The next President of the United States might name three new justices to the high court. Depending who does the naming, that could transform assumptions about life and death in this country.

After four years, or eight — or maybe a President Palin — the path of a McCain court could look very different from an Obama court’s. On abortion. On habeas corpus. On presidential powers. Clean air and water. Food and drug safety. Church and state. This could be a different country.

This hour, On Point: Imagining what a “McCain court” or “Obama court” would mean for America.

You can join the conversation. Who do you want putting new judges on that bench? The highest bench? And why? Share your thoughts.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Jan Crawford Greenburg, legal affairs correspondent for ABC News and author of “Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court.”

Laurence Tribe, professor at Harvard Law School. His new book is “The Invisible Constitution.” He has argued before the Supreme Court 35 times.

Richard Garnett, professor at the University of Notre Dame Law School. He contributes to the “Bench Memos” blog at National Review Online. He clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist.