Epstein Secrets

others, we managed to get the whole family out. We have remained close friends since that time. Another close friend who started out as a client is Natan Sharansky, now a cabinet member of the Israeli government. When I represented him his name was Anatoly Sharansky and he was an imprisoned Soviet refusenick. Hi

rely possible in a heterogeneous and divided democracy. A similar process is today underway with regard to equality for gays. Abortion is different. The Supreme Court’s decision, now more half a century old, changed few minds on this issue, because those who believe that abortion — or certain kinds of abortion — is t

r going to be neatly resolved in a pluralistic democracy; it is an ongoing tight rope walk that requires sensitivity from all sides. It also requires a Supreme Court willing to buck popular pressures in this highly sensitive area that the framers of our Constitution deliberately removed from majoritarian politics.

t that case. Later in my career, I was a lawyer in the Bill Clinton impeachment, the Bush v. Gore election case, the efforts to free Nelson Mandela, Natan Sharansky and other political prisoners. I participated in the Senate censure of California Senator Alan Cranston, the Frank Snepp CIA censorship case, prosecu

The Supreme Court had a small basketball court on the fifth floor. The clerks called it “The Highest Court in the Land,” since it was directly above the Supreme Courtroom itself. Rumor had it that in previous years the clerks used to play basketball while the Justices were hearing arguments, and the sound of the bounci

sonally. He was a Soviet Jew who I never even met during the years I was fighting to save his life. His name (at the time) was Anatoly Sharansky (now Natan Sharansky). Sharansky was a prominent and vocal defender of human rights, not only of his fellow Soviet Jews but of all victims of Soviet oppression. He worke

basis of race or ethnicity and so structure its selection process as to admit an essentially predetermined proportion of members of certain groups. The Supreme Court’s decision in Bakke accepted our argument against the sort of racial quotas employed by the medical school at issue, but it approved affirmative action