0
0.0
Feb 25, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
michele goodwin, mark joseph stern, thank you so much for being with us.use general gendered policy -- biden's administration response to the ivf ruling. be sure to follow the show on social media, our handle everywhere is at the weekend msnbc. s at the weekend msnbc. hellooo new apartment. one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours. every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting the kibble. and kicking the cans. and feeding their dogs dog food that's actually well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. get 50% off your first box at thefarmersdog.com/realfood rsv can severely affect the lungs and lower airways. but i'm protected with arexvy. arexvy is a vaccine used to prevent lower respiratory disease from rsv in people 60 years and older. rsv can be serious for those over 60, including those with asthma, diabetes, copd, and certain other conditio
michele goodwin, mark joseph stern, thank you so much for being with us.use general gendered policy -- biden's administration response to the ivf ruling. be sure to follow the show on social media, our handle everywhere is at the weekend msnbc. s at the weekend msnbc. hellooo new apartment. one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours. every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting the kibble. and...
0
0.0
Feb 24, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
mark joseph stern, i want you to come back.ing what happens with this decision and hopefully it doesn't have even more of a ripple effect. thanks for being here, i appreciate you. >> thanks, katie. >> coming up next, misspent millions. after a six -- week long civil corruption trial in new york, a jury found the nra and its former leader on the hook for millions of dollars. what the verdict could mean for gun safety across the united states. united states. now, save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus 10% off all bases. sara federico: at st. jude, we don't care who cures cancer. we just need to advance the cure. it's a bold initiative to try and bump cure rates all around the world, but we should. it is our commitment. we need to do this. to a child, this is what conflict looks like. children in ukraine are caught in the crossfire of war, forced to flee their homes. a steady stream of refugees has been coming across all day. it's basically cold. lacking clean water and sanitation. exposed to injury, hunger.
mark joseph stern, i want you to come back.ing what happens with this decision and hopefully it doesn't have even more of a ripple effect. thanks for being here, i appreciate you. >> thanks, katie. >> coming up next, misspent millions. after a six -- week long civil corruption trial in new york, a jury found the nra and its former leader on the hook for millions of dollars. what the verdict could mean for gun safety across the united states. united states. now, save 50% on the sleep...
0
0.0
Feb 28, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
now, the supreme court, mark joseph stern. mark, thank you for being here. arguments, did you get a sense of where the justice's stand. >> this is a photo finish. on one side you have four conservative justs very clearly against this bump stock ban. and ott other side three liberals for it. this comes down to john roberts and even more so amy coney barrett which shouldn't be a big surprise. because just last year they were the two swing votes on a case about the biden administration ban on ghost guns. both of them sided with the biden administration. so i think there is some hope that this ban could be upheld but it is a squeaker one way or other. >> what are the arguments for overturning it? >> so, the federal law here bans machine guns and it defines them as a weapon that fires automatically with a single function. when you use a ar with a bump stock, all do you is lean forward and the trigger moves back and forth far faster than any human figurer could on its own shooting off up to 800 rounds in a single minute. the question here is whether it is still te
now, the supreme court, mark joseph stern. mark, thank you for being here. arguments, did you get a sense of where the justice's stand. >> this is a photo finish. on one side you have four conservative justs very clearly against this bump stock ban. and ott other side three liberals for it. this comes down to john roberts and even more so amy coney barrett which shouldn't be a big surprise. because just last year they were the two swing votes on a case about the biden administration ban...
0
0.0
Feb 29, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
joining me now, mark joseph stern, senior writer for slate, covering courts and the law, and ali muste correspondent for the nation. elie, first let's talk about the optics of this order. it's unsigned, there are no dissents. i'm asking you to answer. maybe it's unanswerable. do you think it's possible that this was unanimous decision? but the liberal justices on the court cosigned, taking this case up? >> i highly doubt it. as you, said you only need four votes to take the case at all. most likely it was the four horsemen, it was thomas, alito, gorsuch, and kavanaugh, the four horsemen of the apocalypse, who decided to hear this case. i'm a little more interested about the fifth vote because there was an option. for the supreme court to take the case but not grant a stay, but allow justice to go forward, and they must have had a fifth vote to even come up that process so it looks like it came from roberts or barrett or both. i doubt highly than levels were in on it, but what i will say is that, dalio was talking about colorado earlier. so the liberals are apparently going to allow tr
joining me now, mark joseph stern, senior writer for slate, covering courts and the law, and ali muste correspondent for the nation. elie, first let's talk about the optics of this order. it's unsigned, there are no dissents. i'm asking you to answer. maybe it's unanswerable. do you think it's possible that this was unanimous decision? but the liberal justices on the court cosigned, taking this case up? >> i highly doubt it. as you, said you only need four votes to take the case at all....
0
0.0
Feb 11, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and mark joseph stern, a senior writer at slate where he covers the supreme court. thanks for joining us. i appreciate it. obviously the consensus is that the court will rule in favor of trump. that seems to be what everyone's saying. but i wonder what were your immediate, initial reactions following thursday. what came to your mind? >> i think that the big takeaway. we didn't know, going into this argument, where we thought the justices would line up. there was some thinking that might be a split along political lines. but it's seemed very clear there were seven, possibly even eight or nine, votes to reinstate trump onto colorado's ballot. interesting question is, what will they agree on? will they agree only on that result? will they agree on the reasoning that takes them there? there seemed to be some consensus forming around the notion that a single state like colorado shouldn't be able to sit eligibility guidelines for federal candidates. so perhaps they'll be some consensus there. but, you know, as you point out, different questions from different justices. ju
and mark joseph stern, a senior writer at slate where he covers the supreme court. thanks for joining us. i appreciate it. obviously the consensus is that the court will rule in favor of trump. that seems to be what everyone's saying. but i wonder what were your immediate, initial reactions following thursday. what came to your mind? >> i think that the big takeaway. we didn't know, going into this argument, where we thought the justices would line up. there was some thinking that might...
0
0.0
Feb 10, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
joining me now is mark joseph stern, senior writer for slate where he covers law and the courts. mark, i've been trying hard, it's a good liberal who would take my own shot in an argument, to not do the same that trump does. right? so the trump view is, this is a partisan, it's obama judges or trump judges. it's nonsense for anyone to think anyone is doing anything other than pure power politics when it comes to the law. that's a really cynical and destructive way of looking at all this. right? so i'm trying to avoid that. but in the case of cannon, it really does look like she is doing everything that the trump folks want. is that wrong? >> you know, old you respect, chris, i think that you are resistance to cynicism toward the judicial system is part of the problem. i think that progressives across the board have a tendency of very strong inclination to say we trust the courts, we trust the process, and the rule of law. and that even republican appointed justices have come through on the right side. think about after the 2020 election. all those trump appointed justices, tossin
joining me now is mark joseph stern, senior writer for slate where he covers law and the courts. mark, i've been trying hard, it's a good liberal who would take my own shot in an argument, to not do the same that trump does. right? so the trump view is, this is a partisan, it's obama judges or trump judges. it's nonsense for anyone to think anyone is doing anything other than pure power politics when it comes to the law. that's a really cynical and destructive way of looking at all this. right?...
0
0.0
Feb 29, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
joining us now, senior writer for slate who covers the supreme court, mark joseph stern. it's been a series of decisions from this particular court that have gone against popular public opinion, specifically on abortion rights, on voting rights, things that americans say they don't want touched. >> so i think that's obviously correct, and yet at the same time, i really think it's important to remember it could get so much worse. in conservative legal circles, justices barrett, kavanaugh and gorsuch, trump's three appointees in his first term are widely viewed as kind of mushy, if not outright flops. each in different areas has failed to deliver on trump's agenda. on the campaign trail, we had ron desantis saying i want alito and thomas. even though the decisions seem unpopular outside the mainstream and quite radical, it's really just a taste of what's to come if trump gets to replace even just one of the current liberals on the supreme court in a second term. >> so what else would be at stake here? what else could we see changed? >> so, look, we could run down the line.
joining us now, senior writer for slate who covers the supreme court, mark joseph stern. it's been a series of decisions from this particular court that have gone against popular public opinion, specifically on abortion rights, on voting rights, things that americans say they don't want touched. >> so i think that's obviously correct, and yet at the same time, i really think it's important to remember it could get so much worse. in conservative legal circles, justices barrett, kavanaugh...
0
0.0
Feb 29, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
joining me now is mark joseph sterne, and elie mccaul. first let's talk about the optics. it's unsigned, there are no dissents. i'm asking you to answer maybe the unanswerable, but do you think it's possible this was a unanimous decision, the liberal justices on the court cosigned taking this case up? >> i highly doubt it. as you said you only need four votes to take the case at all. it was probably the four horsemen of the apocalypse who decided to take this case. there was an option for the supreme court to take the case but not grant the stay but allow justice to keep forward, and they must have had a fifth vote to either gum up that process and that must have come from roberts or bauer or both. i will say dahlia was talking about colorado earlier, right? the liberals apparently are going to allow trump back on the ballot and they got nothing for that. they traded that away for nothing because the deal of letting trump be on the ballot but denying his immunity request, that obviously didn't happen. >> that seems to be up in smoke. i have to go back to revisit a conversa
joining me now is mark joseph sterne, and elie mccaul. first let's talk about the optics. it's unsigned, there are no dissents. i'm asking you to answer maybe the unanswerable, but do you think it's possible this was a unanimous decision, the liberal justices on the court cosigned taking this case up? >> i highly doubt it. as you said you only need four votes to take the case at all. it was probably the four horsemen of the apocalypse who decided to take this case. there was an option for...
0
0.0
Feb 15, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
attorney's office for the southern district of new york, also joining me is mark joseph stern, a senior writer for slate covering the courts and the law. thank you both for being here tonight. mark, first, i would like to get your opinion. i hear a quiet note of desperation in this filing. am i wrong to hear that? is this the sort of normal course of events when you're dealing with a high case federal elections case featuring a former president? >> so there certainly a little bit of desperation. but the main note that i detected here was urgency. but also, a sense that i think jack smith's team was trying to get across that these are trustworthy attorneys, and they are making these arguments in good faith. and they are the ones who deserve that presumption of good faith. they aren't rushing this. it's trump's side that is trying to run out the clock. and i will note that one of the signatories on this filing was michael driven. he was a deputy solicitor general for decades. he argued more than 100 cases before the supreme court. he's friends with chief justice john roberts. and i think
attorney's office for the southern district of new york, also joining me is mark joseph stern, a senior writer for slate covering the courts and the law. thank you both for being here tonight. mark, first, i would like to get your opinion. i hear a quiet note of desperation in this filing. am i wrong to hear that? is this the sort of normal course of events when you're dealing with a high case federal elections case featuring a former president? >> so there certainly a little bit of...
0
0.0
Feb 6, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
joining us now, senior writer for slate who covers the supreme court, mark joseph stern.et up thursday for us. >> so this is a major case that could effectively make or break trump's candidacy. one of just a few now at the supreme court it turns out and the question is did donald trump engage in insurrection on january 6th such that under section three of the 14th amendment he is no longer qualified to run for or serve as president of the united states. it's a very difficult case i think across the board. it poses a lot of tricky questions of law, but i'll say trump's lawyers have put almost all of their eggs in one very odd basket, which is that this provision doesn't even apply to him at all. and i do expect the justices to show a lot of skepticism toward that argument and others on thursday. >> after they hear these arguments, what's your prediction? i know we're not in the prediction business, but you follow this court and you report on them. what's your educated protection on how quickly they'll decide? >> i think pretty quickly, within one or two months. it's always
joining us now, senior writer for slate who covers the supreme court, mark joseph stern.et up thursday for us. >> so this is a major case that could effectively make or break trump's candidacy. one of just a few now at the supreme court it turns out and the question is did donald trump engage in insurrection on january 6th such that under section three of the 14th amendment he is no longer qualified to run for or serve as president of the united states. it's a very difficult case i think...
0
0.0
Feb 8, 2024
02/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
back with us is legal analyst lisa rubin and joining us is mark joseph stern.en't had a chance to weigh in on any of this yet. i'm going to give you the first bite of this aple. what did you see today? >> i saw trump winning at the supreme court, probably 9-0, possibly 8-1. it was really remarkable to see this consensus emerge across the ideological spectrum that somehow, some way, colorado had to lose this case. the only real debate was how. i will say some of the liberal justices, you played audio, she view this is case as a potential threat to democracy. she talks about how it's important for voters to be able to have their say in and courts not to take away that option prematurely, but some conservatives like kavanaugh said colorado's position would disenfranchise voters. it would be harmful to democracy. i'll just point out that in many others cases, justice kagan defended democracy, but brett kavanaugh and his conservative brethren have not. it was a little ironic hear justices like kavanaugh and roberts suddenly come out swinging for voting rights and de
back with us is legal analyst lisa rubin and joining us is mark joseph stern.en't had a chance to weigh in on any of this yet. i'm going to give you the first bite of this aple. what did you see today? >> i saw trump winning at the supreme court, probably 9-0, possibly 8-1. it was really remarkable to see this consensus emerge across the ideological spectrum that somehow, some way, colorado had to lose this case. the only real debate was how. i will say some of the liberal justices, you...