are really suffering and kind of opening the hood on the unemployment problem in this country. i am wrapping it up. >> she saw me doing the finger motion. >> thank you. that's me, bye. tonight: >> whatever the politics. [chanting] strike it down. strike t down. >> today's decision -- >> a healthcare for everyone is a human right. >> victory for people all over this country. >> laura: the supreme court upholds the president's healthcare law. is the victory for mr. obama a victory for you and your family? we'll have analysis with meg begin kelly and a special report from bill o'reilly. >> i disagree with the supreme court's decision. obama care was bad policy yesterday. it's bad policy today. >> laura: how will this ruling impact the presidential election? michele bachmann, dennis

kucinich and bobby will weigh in. >> both do the same. >> and eric holder becomes the first sitting attorney general held in contempt of congress for refusing to turn over fast and furious documents what happens next in this ongoing battle, we'll have a special report. >> it's good to be here and not in washington, d.c. right now. you know? [ laughter ] >> laura: caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone the factor begins right now. >> laura: hi, everyone, i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly who will be joining us in just a moment. thanks for watching us tonight. two huge stories. obama care upheld and congress finding eric holder in contempt let's get right to

it. the supreme court upholding most of president obama's healthcare law. this decision effects nearly every american requiring everyone to have health insurance or pay a fine. the court saying that fine is essentially a tax and the government has the power to impose this tax. but, republic lawmakers and mitt romney are vowing to repeal it if the law -- the law if they win in november making this a huge campaign issue in the presidential race. joining us now from north carolina where he is on vacation is bill o'reilly, no rest for the weary, bill, how does this effect the average american. >> everybody has to step back and take a deep breath from emotional analysis. and here's really what justice roberts did today. it's just roberts who did it because the four conservatives, i'm including kennedy in that they saw that this was an overreach by the government. and the four liberals they want the government to

overreach. and it was roberts who really stunned everybody. this basically says that the supreme court will allow the federal government to take over the healthcare system. all right? so up until now, the private sector ran the healthcare system. the insurance company. and they screwed t up because they kept making it more and more and more expensive and a lot of people can't afford it and then if you get really sick, can you lose every penny that you have if you don't have the right insurance. the government stepped in and said no we can do t better. this is what they do in canada. this is what they do in great britain and most european countries, all right? you can call it socialized medicine, you can call it whatever you want. but the government calls the shots, and the supreme court has said now that they're okay with the government running the american healthcare industry. all right. what does that mean? it means that for poorer americans, it's good. because the government is going to give them health insurance. just hand it to them for free. just like they give welfare,

food stamps and whatever. it's another entitlement. for more affluent americans and some working americans, it's bad because they their taxes are going to go up to pay for the free stuff, the free healthcare that's going to the poorer americans. and for business, it's bad, because now they don't know small business in particular how much the health insurance is going to cost them. because the government can charge whatever the government wants to charge. because justice roberts said it's a tax. so they can tax you as much as they want. he they can charge as much as they want. so, for business, it's bad. because the uncertainty continues, the hiring is going to be blunted. and the economy is going to be harmed. so that's across the board what it is for everybody. >> laura: well, bill, one thing for sure here, when you have the chief justice, of course, nominated by george w. bush, deciding this monumental case, he was the swing vote.

without a doubt erodes personal liberty. throws people's lives into question. people afford to buy the coverage they need or to pay for healthcare out of pocket. the middle class that barack obama said he was going to protect under this ruling written by the chief justice, they're really going to get shafted here because they are going to pay for this monstrosity one way or another through this, quote, taxation or through continued ramped up care that ends up being rationed in the end. >> bill: it's going to be rationed because there aren't going to be enough doctors to distribute the care. if you want a hip replacement you are going to wait a much longer time than you would now. you hit it right. the rich people are going to be able to pay a doctor to do it. a lot of doctors are going to opt out. they are not going to be involved with it they won't take medicare and medicaid and say i'm going to be a private person and that's what they do in great britain. here is the big rub here. americans have to decide what kind of country they want,

laura. because, in november, if americans go to the polls and say we don't want the government running everything because that's what barack obama. federal government, level the playing field and redistribute income. that's what the man wants. it's obvious this is another play on that. working americans, middle class americans have to decide do you want to be sweden or do you want to go back to the free marketplace? the problem with the republics, and this is huge. is they have to put forth something better. romney can't just say i hate obama care i'm going to repeal it if i'm president. number one, he can't repeal it unless the senate goes republic. all right? and number two, he is not going to win the presidency unless he says here's what i'm going to do that's better. because there is no -- there is no question that the private insurance companies have allowed it to get out of control. the cost, the medical costs to get out of control. >> laura: a lot of that is

because -- >> -- hospitals have done it. >> laura: competition is not in the insurance marketplace we know that. >> bill: medical malpractice it's all out of control. instead of the government saying we're going to fix the private system, we're going to fix it by setting up rules about lawsuits, by setting up rules about catastrophic insurance, instead of doing that they said no, we're going to run it all and this is a huge power grab. so now, under president obama, the federal government is becoming a huge colossal. you are right it intrudes on personal freedom because you don't have the right to do anything other than what the government tells you to do unless you have big bucks. >> laura: the bottom line is now that this is called a tax and this is not the way the statute was written, the court rewrote the statute to uphold it, but if you call this a tax, bill, that means that pretty much the government can make you do anything that's in the government interest and then call it a tax. >> bill: charge as much as it wants or as little as it

wants. >> exactly. romney, bill, before we let you go. romney raised about $2 million, since the decision came down, blowing sphere has been going crazy. >> bill: sure. but that has to translate into votes. you know, the conservatives don't want this because they want smaller government, not more powerful. but when romney has to do is put something better, very specific. this is what i'm going to do to make the healthcare system better in the private hands. if he does that he has got a chance. how much time we got? >> laura: we have time to do eric holder. eric holder contempt vote your take on it. >> this is -- what this is all about, ladies and gentlemen, the democratic party walking out on the family of the border patrol family brian terry who was killed. there is what this is all about. nancy pelosi and her ache lights who walked out of that chamber today instead of just casting a vote of conscience, all right, against -- because that's what they believe. they believe that eric holder

shouldn't have to explain what happened here. that's what the democratic party believes. they walked out on this family. this family has a right to know how their son was killed. who ordered the program? when the attorney general and the president knew about the program, and what the attorney general did after he knew. we have a right, but more importantly, the terry family has a right as americans to know how their son was killed. and the democratic party and the president of the united states says to the terry family blank you, we're not going to tell you. that's what it is all about. all of the other stuff is b.s. it's telling the family we're not going to tell you how your son was killed. we are not going t it. that's outrageous. instead, all of this stuff is being lost in the political morass. so i want to boil it all down.

reviewing, this decision by the supreme court heightens the power of the federal government. they take over the healthcare industry, period. walk out of the democrats and the executive privilege invoked by the president says to the terry family and every other american we are not accountable to you. we will not tell you how this border patrol agent and dozens of other people were killed we are not going to do it. it's outrageous, people have got to figure it out and go to the polls in november and decide what kind of country they want. period. lauer lauer bill o'reilly. great to talk to you. thanks so much. >> all right, lauer. have a good show. >> laura: we will. next on the run down, megyn kelly and i will break down the legal implications of today's incredible supreme court ruling. we will look at what's next for eric holder now that congress has held him in contempt. coming back. [ male announcer ] if a phone rings at your car insurance company

and no one's around to hear it, does it make a sound? [ meows ] or if a tree falls on your car and no one's around to answer your call, do you make a sound? the answer is probably "yes" [ growling ] and "like a howler monkey." unless you're calling esurance. they have live humans on the phones to help 24/7. so you might make different sounds, like happy human sounds. esurance. insurance for the modern world. click or call. >> laura: in the impact segment tonight, we continue with reaction on the supreme court ruling on obama care and the house voting to hold attorney general eric holder in contempt of congress over that fast and furious scandal. let's start with healthcare. >> the highest court in the land has now spoken. we will continue to implement this law. and we will work together to

improve on it where we can. but what we won't do, what the country can't afford to do is refight the political battles of two years ago or to go back to the way things were. >> i will act to repeal obama care. obama care was bad policy yesterday. it's bad policy today. obama care was bad law yesterday. it's bad law today. >> laura: the new fox news poll shows that 60% of registered voters believe the government forcing americans to buy health insurance is a violation of individual rights. just 36% say it's acceptable under the constitution. and with us now, i'm so happy, attorney and fox news anchor megyn kelly with her dog-eared copy of this decision. i mean, it's highlighted. >> been spending the afternoon. >> laura: color coded. got the colored tabs. megyn, this was quite interesting. when we had a majority decision handed down by this court. monumental case. people worried about justice

kennedy. justice kennedy goes with the conservatives. the chief justice votes with the more liberal oriented justices and rules on a statute that wasn't written. >> the amazing thing is money expected them to come down this way on the tax provision to justify this as a tax and as the dissent points out in this case, a previous version of obama care of the law was rejected by the democrats when it was creating a tax. we don't want to create a tax. it will never pass if we have a tax. so they created a penalty for misbehavior. not buying insurance. that's what wound up as obama care. then, the president goes out and tells the whole world it's not a tax, it's not a tax george stephanopoulos. anybody that would listen they said no it isn't. then when they went in court they did a 180 and said it's a tax. it's a tax. but don't tell the american public because we just had to sell it by saying it's not a tax. the justices said you're right it's a tax. >> laura: is that not frawj

lent for the congress to take up a piece of legislation that was so contentious on fraudulent grounds? justifying it this is a penalty just so we can assure that everybody is going to be covered. >> that's what michael car vin one. >> laura: brilliant. >> one of the two main guys who argued against the law high court. came out on afternoon show today said a major fraud has been per at perpetrated to the measure people. this never could have passed if they said americans we are going to impose a huge new tax on you and we want you to accept it because we need to help people who don't have health insurance. if that was honest presentation, they don't believe this could have passed. they had to sell it in a different way. americans signed on to it and then when they went before the court they argued something very different. >> laura: think about it john tester from. jim webb, ben nelson. these guys, taxing, like no way we are not going to do it. megyn, in your reviewing this case. what is the limiting prince principle, if there is any,

withholding this penalty to be a tax? because it's basically taxing people not buying something. we're going to tax you. they haven't purchased anything. >> i don't think there is a legal limiting principle. >> laura: it expands the power of the federal government, does it not. >> leading principle for them doing it now the government saying we are going to raise your taxes as follows. now you have to look at how else are they phrasing it? they may be taxing me without telling me they are taxing me. then they could go in court and argue it is a tax which i knew it was all along. i do want to say this though. there is -- having read the majority opinion which is written by justice roberts, chief justice roberts and two liberals. kagan and breyer. they hammered the government on its expansive notions about this commerce clause and all we heard from nancy pelosi and everybody else about how this had lots of precedent. this has been been done many times, it would be unprecedented for the court to strike down.

liberals, including kagan who worked for president obama. >> laura: 5-4 on the commerce issue. >> the language in the majority opinion, which she joined, was scathing for him. i mean they went on and said congress has never tried to go this far before. the commerce clause is not a general license to regulate any individual from cradle to grave. that -- there has been some limitation on the congress' power under that clause. >> i would say it's limited the congress clause but exploded the -- what it means to tax. that's great. but creates other problem. can we get to holder? i'm dying to know what you think about. this the holder vote went forward criminal and civil contempt. what next here. >> so now they are going to go before a u.s. attorney. the u.s. attorney will take the case before a grand jury. there won't be an indictment because there wasn't under president bush. the viewers should know that's expected and not going to be particularly shocking. then the criminal contempt is gone. then the congress will go into a civil court and sty a civil district judge, judge, make

him turn over the documents and it is at that point that the justice department is going to have to start logging the documents that they are withholding. they can tell issa, you are not getting it but they can't tell a judge you're not getting it. they have got to give a judge even a log saying these are the documents we don't want to turn over or they might have to it allow for in camera review a review of a judge in his chambers of the documents they are holding back and he or she will determine whether they get these things. >> laura: republicans think they are going to get some wiltd ride fast and furious issue. as we have seen with the supreme court, you never know what you're going to get with a judge. this is why robert bork so many times has raised the issue of limiting federal court jurisdiction. you just don't know how they are going to react on a particular case. >> they don't particularly love this privilege that's been asserted by this congress and they really don't love it where a coverup is alleged. it's going to it take a long time and probably get resolved after the presidential election. and this is more a political

matter at this point. maybe they will get an answer down the line but at this point it's more political matter. and the polls show that americans are about evenly split on whether they think this is a coverup by the doj or witch-hunt by the g.o.p. >> get back to that dog eye eared copy. >> i was going to pull t out and start quoting from it. >> laura: wouldn't that be great? that would be a ratings getter straight ahead. >> stand by. >> laura: republicans calling for repeal of the healthcare law. we will talk to congressman michele bachmann on one of the leaders of that movement in just a few moments.

>> laura: in the unresolved problem segment tonight, the political fallout from the supreme court ruling on the healthcare law. republics immediately vowed to repeal it if they take control in november. and one of the leading critics of the affordable care act.

former presidential candidate michele bachmann introduced a bill to repeal the law last year. congressman woman bachmann joins us now from washington, d.c. congresswoman first. i know you were in the chamber when this decision was read by the chief justice. just take us back there for a moment. >> well, at first we were you fork because it sounded like they were going to declare the individual mandate, the centerpiece of the bill unconstitutional. they went through two sections. they said it was unconstitutional. then they got to the third, the most implausible, which was the taxing session and it was like a knife was stuck in us and twisted. we were absolutely floored. and it went down hill from there. we were shocked and then, of course, we went out and talked to the public and to the media. and i think people were incredulous. >> laura: what has been the reaction coming into your office today congressman bachmann the calls and emails? >> people are angry and shocked. now what they recognize is that there is one option left.

it's a powerful option. it's the ballot box in november. more than ever, democrats and independents are going to be looking at a mitt romney for president because it's a psychiatry clear contrast. it's barack obama and you keep obama care or it's mitt romney and you repeal it. this was my signature issue when i ran for president but i will tell you that mitt romney has told me on more than one occasion looking in my eyes, michelle, i will repeal obama care. so we have to not only win the white house. we have to win the senate and the house. and people shouldn't be fooled into thinking we have to have 60 republic seats in the senate. we don't. we need 50 plus one. that's all we need. that's what the democrats had with the reconciliation bill. and we can repeal obama care. don't give up hope. we can get this done. more important than ever, we have to give money and we have to volunteer for candidates who are going to repeal obama care. as we said earlier. the romney campaign took in about $2 million after this decision was handed down. but at the same time, is it

not the case, that with the president trodding out all these sob story examples of people they can't get coverage they have a preexisting condition and tug at people's heart strings kids lose coverage or kids being thrown off their parent's plans. don't republicans need to have a clear and meaningful replacement option? is it enough just to it say we're going to repeal it? >> we never have. we have great options options that won't cost the taxpayers a dime. a very simple one is to let any american buy any health insurance policy they want in america with no minimum rimplets that cost zero but it brings down the price of healthcare. then we can let americans buy it with their own tax free money. you can't do that today. that brings down the price. then we can have true medical malpractice reform. that doesn't cost the taxpayers. three things that won't cost the taxpayers. that's just the beginning of reform. we have great ideas, lauer, what we know with obama care is that millions of people will lose their healthcare

coverage from their employer. they will be thrown off of it they won't have anything. and the black cloud that's over our economy will stay through this november because right now i'm telling you employers are meeting in their board rooms. they are saying we can't afford this government insurance. and so they are going to no longer offer it to their employees and then the employees have a decision to make. pay a fine to the government or buy this very expensive insurance. >> laura: it's a tax, congresswoman. >> according to john roberts. not according to barack obama or nancy pelosi or harry reid or the words of the actual obama care legislation. >> laura: that doesn't matter. >> but it is to john roberts. >> laura: it doesn't matter. >> court now thinks it's commerce. >> what do you say to alberto gonzalez who was in charge of the vetting of john roberts? where do we go to get recourse for that investigating? do you have anything to say to him tonight? >> i think we need to get some clear answers about do you believe in the constitution? do you believe in federalism? do you believe in

enumerated powers which is the limiting power of government? all that was thrown out the window today. that's why people are shocked by this decision. but, the bigger, more practical impact for the people watching the o'reilly show tonight and you, lauer, lauer, -- laura, for millions of people health insurance costs are going to skyrocket. we are going to get a lot less for it it's a very bad deal and a lot of people are going to lose their employer sponsored healthcare. >> laura: eric holder contempt vote, do you think there is a risk of this becoming a distraction from the economy from healthcare repeal and replace if this continues to domination the headlines as worthy an inquiry as it. >> no, not at all. this is a very important issue. no man is above the law including the president of the united states, including eric holder, their thumbing their nose at the rule of law, people won't stand for that. as bill o'reilly said earlier in the show, there is a border patrol agent who was killed. and this is a program where guns were put in the hands of

terrorists in mexico, clearly because the department of justice wanted to have gun control passed in congress. that's all this was about. they got found out, red handed, and they don't want to answer the charge. it's outrageous. so we can chew gum and tie our shoes at the same time. we can handle more than one issue. >> laura: congresswoman thanks so much. >> thank you. >> laura: plenty more ahead as the factor moves along this evening. we will continue our fair and balanced coverage of the healthcare ruling with democratic congressman dennis kucinich. later, we're going to talk to the family of murdered border patrol agent brian terry to get their reaction on the contempt vote against attorney general holder. we hope you stay tuned to those reports. [ male announcer ] eligible for medicare?

that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan,

insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today.

remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. >> laura: continuing with the political fallout on today's supreme court ruling on the healthcare law. the court found that the individual mandate which requires all americans to buy health insurance can be constitutionally justified as a tax. but, in 2009, president obama

insisted that it is not a tax. >> your kit particulars say it is a tax. >> my critics say everything is a tax increase. my critics say i'm taking over every sector of the economy. you know that. look, we can have a legitimate key bait about whether or not we are going to have an individual mandate or not. >> but you reject it's a tax. >> i absolutely reject that notion. >> laura: likes like -- looks like it's a tax after all. joining me is dennis kucinich congressman from ohio. okay, congressman. here is my straight-up question to you. if this had been written into the legislation and i know you read all 2700 pages, 2500. i lose track. if it had been written into the legislation that this, indeed, was not a penalty for not purchasing insurance, it was a tax, do you think that would have passed the house of representatives? >> could have been a different kind of debate. i think that interest there

are a lot of surprised people that the supreme court rejected a commerce clause and came down on validating it as a tax. is that a political issue? of course t is. but it's also going to be a matter of whether americans want to see millions more without healthcare, whether they want to set back the cause of those who are now covered preexisting conditions, lifetime caps. getting children covered. you recited that earlier. look, it's going to be a battle over healthcare all over again. and those who lined up on respective sides are going to be pretty much where they have been before. i think that it will result in probably a bigger turnout. and it's going to be a question it certainly is an issue in the election. no question about t. >> laura: congressman, what's curious about the healthcare issue is that when the president signed it into law, great fanfare. it was a big accomplishment for him undoubtedly. he assured the public that once the public started to get to know healthcare reform, they would really start to like healthcare reform. some provisions are fairly popular for sure. but, in general, the needle has not moved for the public's

approval of the healthcare reform law at all. it's never gotten above 50%. why do you think that is? >> healthcare is contentious for a lot of reasons. first of all it's economics. many people, even if they have healthcare they are so in trouble financially because their insurance doesn't cover everything. people are afraid. they are scared. you have so many people are losing everything they have ever worked for because they have an illness in the family. others who are healthy feel why should i pay for people who are ill? but the fact of the matter is in a nation, you know we have a common cause here of healthcare for everyone. now, i didn't want the healthcare bill at first because it was only reform. >> laura: you want it even more left wing. you wanted the universal deal. >> everyone would have been covered and it would have been cheaper, laura. it would have cost a lot less than this one. >> laura: you wanted that but you ultimately voted for the law as it was. >> right. >> laura: still has big problems with not being that popular with the american people after president obama did an enormous amount of p.r. and branding and ad campaigns

and it still hasn't moved the needle. i want to move to the eric holder issue because that was the other big news of course on capitol hill today. you walked out on the vote, the criminal contempt vote that was held today along with a number of your democratic colleagues. bill o'reilly earlier in the program said that in effect, you walked out on the terry family who suffered a horrible loss by losing their son that federal agent down in mexico because of that gun that was walked across the border. your response to bill? >> well, we certainly have to have compassion for the terry family. their loss was extraordinary. we also have to be very careful that we don't throw the constitution out the window on this. or to change congress wants role. congress has an obligation to investigate things. i support that. remember. you're looking at the one person who sued president obama over the war in libya saying it exceeded its powers. i'm not afraid to challenge the white house. the question here is whether or not congress had a complete eggs have a. i voted to refer it back to

committee. we needed to here from former attorney general mukasey and former head of the atf and get a full picture and make our decisions. i think congress was so interested in moving ahead. >> laura: why did you walk out? why don't you just stand on principle and say this is ridiculous i'm going to vote against it. >> i actually, my there were are over 100 members. >> laura: that doesn't mean it's not immature because there are 100 immature they could all be immature babies. >> moving ahead something so serious without having all the facts. >> laura: isn't that the rub, congressman in the congress doesn't have all the facts despite having asked time and again for the documents post february 2011 after the changearoo on the view whether they knew about this operation. they withdrew the document. now they want to know why. so, congress can't do its job because holder is holding back the information. >> laura, two things, first of all, the congress has a right to information. they provided -- justice

department provided over 7,000 documents. >> laura: redacted most of them. >> the goal post kept being moved back some cases they moved the whole stadium back. the problem is we didn't hear from mukasey and the atf, it's an incomplete investigation. criminal contempt way premature. we should have resolved this without a partisan battle. that's why i didn't vote on it. >> laura: is holder a net plus to this administration? he is worth keeping around. >> i think you can't make this like the nfl football where one side takes the other guy's top guy out and then they celebrate. no, this is about the constitution. >> laura: we will be following this. congressman, we appreciate it when we come back, we will talk to the governor of louisiana to get his reaction on the healthcare ruling. bobby jindal up next.

>> laura: that is the case that worked its way up to the supreme court and was ruled on today. louisiana was one of those states challenging the law and governor bobby jindal joins us now from baton rouge with reaction. governor jindal, i am sure you were shokdz when this case came down. the reaction in your office and louisiana in general? >> laura, not only shocked but extremely disappointed. the court ruling that this mandate is constitutional. think about the precedent they are setting. the federal government can tax us for not doing things as americans. where can that end. the federal government will tax us if we don't ito few. can they tax us if we don't buy a chevrolet volt? can they tax us for any must be number of things? this is ridiculous expansion of federal government power. the reality is we have a

chance in november. we have a clear choice, we have a president who wants the government now running almost a sixth of the economy. the government involved in healthcare and car companies and banks and we have got alternative. mitt romney saying enough is enough. this was an absurd ruling the only good thing out of this is that the court was more honest than the president. the court called it was what it is which is a tax. you played it tonight. the president bent over backwards saying it's not a tax. it's not a tax. no way this would have passed the congress if they had gone there and sold it as a tax. i'm also amazed by a couple of things. one the court would rule it constitutional but secondly, that the court would basically rewrite the statute, the federal government itself did not call it a tax yet they used it that to rule it constitutional. then when you get the medicaid piece again the court rewriting the statute to try to make it something it wasn't. scblont issue of the tax whether it's a tax or not, you have got to be a little careful there i think. it's not really a tax as justice kennedy wrote so persuasively because it's penalizing nonbehavior and non-purchasing. and that's a completely

different understanding of what the word tax means the law does have dozens of taxes embedded in t on medical devices and so forth. does expand that meaning of taxing power of congress to basically be limbless. you can do anything. if that's a tax can you tell people what temperature has to be set on thermostats. what kind of car you have to drive. as long as it's for the general welfare. so that's the sad and disturbing thing from a nominee of george w. bush who was put on this court with great fanfare and bobby jentledz, governor, jindal what do you say to the people who vetted chief justice john roberts? >> obviously, you know i don't know whether he was playing to the editorial pages of "the new york post." never would have predicted he would have been the to write the opinion. a, 4 about these 5 and those 4. getting back to the entire law. step back and realize what's

going on now. over the last five years, you have seen the growth 70% growth in enrollment in food stamps. you have seen now the federal government is advertising folks to get more folks to sign up for food stamps. we are creating an entitlement culture in this country. what i worry about is we are going to have more people in the cart that are pulling the cart and in the middle of the greatest recession since the great depression. >> it's already happening. >> yet another entitlement program that we can't afford. landfall a trillion dollars in tax increases, half a trillion dollars in medicare cuts. $1.7 trillion program. is he bending the healthcare costs upward, not downward. this is a ridiculous law. it needs to be repealed. you couldn't have a more stark choice come this election this november. a president doubling down on government expansion. >> laura: governor, you have said that you will not move forward with these healthcare exchanges. do you believe that you are legally justified in doing that, given what the supreme court said today? obviously there is the medicaid angle. they said that the federal government can't withdraw all of medicare -- medicaid

funding. if the rules aren't followed with the additional funding. so that stands. but on the healthcare exchanges, do you believe it is within your state an inherent authority to say no though those? a good weeky. for states right in the supreme court. absolute absolutely not moving forward exchanges. not implementing the obama care in the state of louisiana. instead do everything we can to defeat president obama and get rid of obama care. justice scalia said t very well earlier this week on immigration. what does it mean the court keeps calling sovereign states and keep taking away our abilities to enforce our laws and enforce our rights. tenth amendment of the constitution has to mean something. absolutely we are not implementing the exchanges and obama care. instead do everything we can to replace this president and replace obama care. we don't need this government bureaucracy and government intidgesment program. >> laura: governor jindal grade to see you. thanks so much. in the moment family of

murdered border patrol brian teary will. ann curry steps down from the anchor chair of "the today show." we will share the tapes with you. stay with us.

for the family of murdered patrol agent brian terry. the contempt vote against attorney general eric holder was personal. brian was killed in southern arizona when he and his team got into a gun fight with a crew of armed illegal immigrants. two of the guns recovered from the crime scene were ak 47 rifles that had been lost during the botched fast and furious gun walking operation and brian terry was just 40 years old. attorney general eric holder invoked brian's name today

while criticizing house republicans. >> instead of trying to correct the problems that led to a series of flawed law enforcement operations, and instead of helping us find ways to better protect the brave law enforcement agents like agent brian terry, who keep us safe, they have led us to this unnecessary and unwarranted outcome. >> joining me now from san diego, brian's cousin bob hare and from detroit brian's mother josephine terry. mrs. terry, first to you, your reaction? eric holder obviously mentioned brian, said he was, you know, bravely trying to defend this country and our interest but then went on to say, look, i did what i could. i shut this down. i saw that it was wrong. stopped this policy. and corrected what was obviously a botched situation. your reaction? >> well, i think maybe he should have made that

statement 18 months ago when brian was killed. and i think what happened today was very good and i was happy about it it i think it's a step forward to get justice for my son. >> the criminal contempt vote. 17 democrats ended up voting with the republicans but we had a number walk out, many democrats left without casting a vote for criminal contempt or against criminal contempt. bill o'reilly said they walked out on your son's memory. what's your reaction to those who walked out without voting? >> i was totally shocked but, you know what? i think it was a disgrace to them and not to my son. >> laura: let's go to bob. mr. hare, your cousin was, by all accounts, an amazing individual as are so many of these border patrol agents who get very little credit and don't get paid a lot.

put their lives on the line against well-funded and many times armed assailants who are better armed and better funded than they are. and now he is gone. and eric holder reacted today with, in my mind a little bit of arrogance and defiance. your reaction? >> well, you know, we thought over the last 18 months quite a bit about this. and our only desire, laura, is to get answers. the truth and justice for brian. but we have thought quite a bit, you know, is this just arrogance or is it incompetence? and sometimes i'm not sure what it is, but we are very dispointed that it's been 18 months since brian died and we still don't have the answers. there was a time that the only information that was being given to the family was through the news media, sharyl attkisson on television, your show on radio. and the house government and

reform committee. oversight and reform committee. that was the only source of information. you also have to know that when brian was killed, nobody, not one government official had the courage to come to the terry family and say we've got some additional bad news. the weapons found at the murder scene were part of this bigger gun trafficking operation known as fast and furious. it was an indignity to brian. it was an egregious decision not to come forward and share that critical information with the family to help us understand how brian died. brian and his team were out there that night in arizona 18 miles inside the u.s. border, defending this country, protecting u.s. citizens. they didn't even know that there was such a thing as operation fast and furious which was arming with state of the art military grade assault

weapons. the most dangerous criminals in north america. >> laura: i think a lot of people believe that operation was being done to really strike at the gun stores that were selling those weapons and that was really the motive there. not so much to track the cartels but really make a statement about gun purchasing in the united states. mrs. terry, what have you heard from the justice department, eric holder's office? >> i haven't heard anything. i received a letter a few days after the funeral and that was it and then we received the email from his office. >> laura: whoa, you received an email from his office? >> yes, from his office after it was mentioned on tv that he never contacted us. >> laura: so no phone call, no personal visit? >> no, ma'am. >> well, we have had a couple of letters sent from the attorney general to the terry family and they have been --

they have come in as email attachments. >> laura: lovely. >> we have also had a few phone calls from his office. >> laura: we have corrected that issue. my goodness the brian terry foundation obviously a worthy cause. josephine and bob thank you so much. we appreciate it brian terriy's family has launched that brian terry organization launch for other border patrol agents and for that want to go in law enforcement. visit the web site on the screen for more information. it is worthy. pinheads and patriots on deck. emotional goodbye for ann curry on "the today show." that's over two minutessf