>> dana: less than two months away now from the debate. that's happening and we had the breaking news, affirmative action cases for -- affirmative action as a practice is now ruled unconstitutional. it will no longer happen at higher ed.. >> we'll find out about student loan relief tomorrow. >> dana: it is happening tomorrow. "the faulkner focus" is next. julie banderas is in for harris, hi, julie. >> julie: thank you so much. fox news alert. a much-anticipated decision as you have just heard from the high court. the supreme court rejecting affirmative action and outlawing the use of race as a factor in college admissions. "the faulkner focus", i'm julie banderas in for harris today. the decision is coming out of two cases, one against the university of north carolina, and the other against harvard. the vote break down 6-3 in the unc case and 6-2 in the harvard

case after liberal justice brown jackson recused herself. all conservative justices siding with the majority. they decided both programs do violate the 14th amendment equal protection clause and therefore unlawful. shannon bream, chief legal correspondent is watching it for us. this is a big day. we look back 19 years ago. in 2003 justice sandra day o'connor was the swing or deciding vote in what was a landmark supreme court case over race. perhaps the most divisive social, political and cultural issue in the country's history. fast forward to today. tell us about the conservative court majorities blocking colleges using race as part of the admissions process. >> this case came from a group of asian-american students part of the emphasis saying we're being harmed by the way the race is being used in admissions processes. justice gorsuch during the

arguments about this policy said what are you supposed to tell asian american applicants who have coaches telling them try to hide your ethnicity? it will hurt you on the application. in trying to help other races you are disadvantaging other races. today the chief justice writing said both of the programs unc and harvard lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives. the use of race in a negative manner lacking meaningful endpoints and racial stereotyping. it doesn't meet with constitutional muster and it is hurting students in reverse. justice thomas wrote a connecticut curens. i am aware that ravages from my race and all who suffer discrimination. i hope the country will live up to its principles in the declaration of independence and constitution and all people must be treated equally before the law. numerous dissenters including

sotomayor. she says the devastating impact of today's decision cannot be overstated and says that the court is not listening to the face of america crying for equality. so a very sharp divide. a number of justices read their decisions from the bench, which is unusual. tomorrow we get the rest of the heated decisions we're waiting for. >> julie: how do you hold these universities moving forward accountable? because if you think about it, a lot of universities such as harvard, predominantly white university. most students are wealthy or come from affluent backgrounds and liberal universities. how do you hold these universities moving forward from not continuing this sort of ideology that they will look at people's race when a student applies to their school and make a decision based on that? how do you prove they are not continuing to do that? >> what it will be is a plaintiff who comes forward and

says i have perfect test scores and gpa and i had everything needed and try to prove the case. one of the issues in these cases the plaintiffs wanted to get to the behind the scenes information and wanted data to show how many people applied, what was considered, how their files came together. that's a really tough thing to get. so they hadn't been able to get their hands on it before the case got to the supreme court. that's the kind of thing that a plaintiff would have to try to put together. what will happen is personal essays will -- the court makes clear be able to include anything that impacts background, how you got to where you were. whether an issue of racial injustice or economic disparity. whatever struggles. students will clearly and wisely weave it into their personal stories as these come forward. it would take somebody probing a decision saying i didn't get in and make the cut because of race. the attempt to prove that could be really difficult. >> julie: i feel so sorry for some of the highly intelligent

asian students who are part of this whole decision where one asian student in particular had perfect test scores, applied to harvard, didn't get in and you know about this. he ended up going to another university. his dream was to go to harvard his whole life. does harvard have to reverse decision where they rejected a student that was absolutely ready and able and qualified to be a harvard student and was rejected due to the fact he was asian? >> the court doesn't get to any of that or other litigation that may follow. folks are talking about this saying will there be applicants denied who could show that potentially they had the perfect scores and race might have worked against them? i don't know if they will try to go back and say the supreme court was right about this, i can prove in some way or let me get to discovery to prove that what is happened in my case. i shouldn't re wouldn't be surprised with that type of litigation. the court doesn't discuss whether it's possible.

>> julie: shattering a lot of dreams. a lot of kids who went to high school and college and had incredible test scores and you have to feel sorry for them. as a parent raising children knowing they can get into a university and they don't because of race. frustrating and sad but good to see a turnaround. thank you so much. always great to have you explain it for us and make it all make sense. we'll turn to leo terrell, attorney and fox news contributor. a groundbreaking decision by the supreme court reversing a decision made 19 years ago that was so divisive and so controversial. it is amazing it took 19 years to get to where we are this afternoon. >> i'll tell you right now a landmark decision, historic. basically what it says is the race card is dead when it comes to college admission. if you look at the six justices who ruled in favor of invalidating the harvard and unc law, they are looking at the

constitution plain and simple. you can't discriminate. an easy case. the dissenter are playing the political race card. if you ask the dissenters who ruled in favor of harvard, you ask them when do we want the affirmative action to end? never. it's political. i think this was the correct decision and i think it will have a rippling effect in not only colleges, but in commerce and in businesses. >> julie: absolutely. we're talking amongst a very woke time in this country where schools in particular are super woke and the universities and their professors and it just trickles down from there. how might this turn the tide when it comes to this issue in the country? >> it is a tremendous impact on what will happen in the future. will have a chilling effect on those who want to play the race card. let me be clear about this.

this is not 1965. we have minorities on the supreme court. we have a black president. we have people of color throughout the entire government. so what will happen now is that now litigants will have the supreme court ruling in their hands and say you can't play the race card here. if you do i'll sue you. you asked shannon a question. numerous private lawsuits will stop this wokeness and stop putting one race against another. this ruling will have a powerful effect on minimizing wokeness throughout this country. >> julie: do the kids that were rejected from these universities that have perfect test scores and perfect candidates as university students, do they have any repercussions? any chance in them now going after the schools? do they have to hire attorneys to try to get them to reverse their decisions? >> i think the key here is the current plaintiff i think he is at georgia tech right now. he will have some form of

damages to go back but some of these cases that occurred prior to this ruling i think their opportunities have been lost because they have no standing to go back and reopen those cases. i will tell you right now from this point forward, from this point forward, this supreme court ruling, i cannot stress this enough. i have been a civil rights attorney for 30 years. this is a great day for equality in this country. a great day for the equal protection clause under the 14th amendment. >> julie: civil rights means equal rights. equal opportunity for all no matter your skin color, race or creed. leo terrell, thank you for talking to us on this groundbreaking day. jonathan turley joins me now. george washington university law professor and constitutional law attorney. i want your take on this. chief justice roberts writing that colleges now need to find non-raced-based ways to promote

diversity. what will that look like? >> first of all, this is a capstone ruling for chief justice roberts. he has said for years that the only way to end racial discrimination is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. and he has been a consistent voice in that regard. i expect that this will be likely at the top of his cases when we look back at his legacy. the question going forward is that the colleges and universities are not going to give up the ghost. they didn't in the 1970s when the court ruled in bakke when the court said you can't use affirmative action. they used an exception to achieve precisely that. now they'll have to come up with an alternative. i expect they will. the chief justice has said that you can still consider an

individual students's struggle with racial discrimination. i wouldn't be surprised if universities prompt students in essays to share their experiences including a past struggle with racial or other forms of discrimination. that will put into play the same types of racial elements. but it is important not to downplay the significance of the ruling. back in 2003, the court came close to issuing this very ruling in a case called gruder. the only reason it didn't sandra day o'connor ruled with the majority but she said that we don't believe that this type of consideration of race will be acceptable in 25 years. this is almost 25 years later and that expiration date was reached with this court. they said enough. so they are essentially banning the box.

don't have a box that you can check on race to pigeon hole these students. it is allowing them to have a larger box, to allow the student to explain how race has affected them. >> julie: i will move on to another big decision in a moments. i want to read chief justice roberts' opinion saying. many universities have for too long done just the opposite and in doing so have concluded wrongly the touch stone of an individual's identity is not challenged skills built or lessons learned but the color of their skin. our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice. and that choice was made today. let's move on to another big decision in a religious liberty case. the court deciding for a christian postal worker. he objected to working on sunday saying his religion observes the sabbath on that day. what are your thoughts on this one? >> well, this is a victory for

the postal worker. the court essentially sent it back for further decisions under the standard laid out in the opinion. that will balance -- have a greater balance of needs. but it is a victory for this postal worker. and the court will now most certainly be issuing the remaining decisions, including what is my favorite of the year which is 303 creative. that decision could rewrite a lot of our law on the first amendment and the right of people to refuse jobs, in this case a web designer who did not want to do a design for a same-sex marriage. that case has all the makings of a blockbuster decision. we also have the loan forgiveness case that comes down tomorrow. and there are some really major questions there that have political implications. >> julie: i have to ask. if it comes down to religious

freedom. you know of the case where a website owner, who develops websites didn't want to develop a website for an lgbtq couple. despite the fact they don't support that whether you are obligated to do that business based on religious freedom. where do you think the decision will go? >> i think it will go in favor of the web designer. i think it should. the court was taking the wrong track in these cases in the past, in cases like masterpiece cake shop, a previous case where you had a baker refusing a job to deal with same sex wedding. the court too an off ramp and disappointed a lot of people. these cases are free speech cases not religious cases. it is the right to refuse to

speak through these creative products. what is interesting about 303 creative when it went to the court it had religion and free speech clause claim. the court took it on free speech. they're ready to make a momentous decision. >> julie: i'm glad you brought up free speech. that is under attack in this country and so is religious freedom. it addresses both of those issues. thank you for talking to us. we appreciate your expertise and we'll talk much more about the huge affirmative action landmark decision today. senator tim scott, republican of south carolina and presidential candidate will join me a bit later in the hour. meantime more breaking news, the first son's troubles piling up this week. hunter biden arriving at wilmington, delaware at a courthouse there this morning. lawyers are deposing him today as part of a civil defamation case. he is being sued by the owner of the computer repair shop. the one where he dropped off his

infamous laptop in 2019 and just left it there and never picked it up? that case on top of what many are calling hunter's sweetheart plea deal reached after a year's long tax and gun probe. brand-new fox polling shows that voters are almost eight times as likely to say the justice department is treating hunter with kid gloves. 55% say they aren't being tough enough. only 7% say it is being too tough. one of the i.r.s. agents on hunter's case revealing nor damning information. he claims the main prosecutor knew about allegations that went far beyond tax fraud and a handgun. watch. >> as an i.r.s. criminal investigator we need to understand all the financial flows of money. whether it's president biden or elsewhere we need to follow the investigative steps to insure that happens and they were just not allowed in this particular

investigation. that's the crux of one of the issues here is we weren't allowed to ask questions about dad, we weren't allowed to ask about the big guy. we were precluded from following that line of questioning. >> julie: president biden strongly denies being involved in any of his son's business dealings. he had previously claimed that he never even talked business with hunter. new information making that harder and harder to believe, though. whatsapp messages from hunter show him using president biden and the biden family name. he texts bidens are the best. bidens plural. not talking just about himself. who could that other biden be? congressman james comer chairs one of the committees investigating. watch. >> we think there are several more but again -- we're going to request phone records, we'll do a lot of subpoenas with respect to credit card receipts. there is a lot of information out there that no one has tried to get. one thing we've learned from all

the whistleblowers the federal government never investigated the bidens for bribery. >> julie: mark meredith has more. >> good morning. first want to mention we're awaiting official white house reaction to today's developments with the supreme court and let you know when it comes in. pressure is building on the justice department and u.s. attorney in delaware to clarify how decisions were made when it came to the case involving the president's son, hunter biden. as you mentioned we're talking about the claims made by an i.r.s. whistleblower, special advisor there who said the government took special steps to avoid certain issues and people like the president himself when investigating tax fraud claims against hunter. >> throughout the investigation i was documenting various issues as they arose to include the search warrants that weren't allowed to be done. prosecutors at the time stated that probable cause had been achieved but as we moved closer to the election they put it on

the back burner and didn't allow us to do the search warrant. even though the legal requirements were met. >> republicans are seething mad over the allocations. today south carolina senator lindsey graham sent a scathing letter to garland saying two whistleblowers allege u.s. attorney weiss wanted a special counsel designation and was denied. efforts to bring a stronger case in d.c. and california were rejected. allegations are corroborated by email. it is imperative these allegations are addressed head on. top house republicans feel the same way. >> somebody is lying here. i don't think it's the whistleblower or mr. shapley who put together a timeline, all the things he has done in the course of this investigation. >> president biden continues to deny any involvement in his son's business dealings and even shouted no at a reporter just yesterday. >> president biden how involved were you in your son's chinese

shakedown text message? were you sitting there? were you involved? >> president biden: no, i wasn't. >> were you? >> president biden: no. >> the same response we heard from him a few different times. see if it changes today. set to new york city to go there to campaign fundraiser and may have more to say on the supreme court decision. we are awaiting the official white house reaction. >> julie: president biden delivering a new batch of gaffes this week as he gets into re-election mode. he refers to india prime minister modi as prime minister china. it didn't end there. >> president biden: we've appointed more african-american women to the executive -- to the -- to the federal bench than any other -- every other president combined. and he got the first --

[applause] first and brightest justice brown. >> to what extent has vladimir putin been weakened by recent events. >> he is clearly losing the war in iraq and at home. >> julie: msnbc host tweeted is it great that the democratic president is running for president and forgets the words? he has a commanding lead in the poll. 64% support with democratic primary voters still. challengers robert kennedy junior at just 17%. marianne williamson 10%. sir michael singleton former deputy chief of staff at housing at urban development as well as kevin walling biden campaign

surrogate. kevin, the prime minister of china is not modi. he is the prime minister of the india. also putin is not in a war against iraq. that would be ukraine. these are not just gaffes. these are concerning mess-ups that something is not firing. something is not firing. you don't make these mistakes. these aren't mistakes, these are concerning medical issues. do you not see it that way? >> julie, nothing is new about the president and these gaffes. he has made them since he was in the united states senate. >> julie: gaffes are funny, this isn't funny. this is worrisome. >> we all lived through eight years of the george w. bush. every other day he was mixing up people's names and gaffes. nothing new about gaffes in the presidency. you saw tapes of former president trump sitting across

from rudy giuliani and where is rudy? he mixed up people's names. this is not concerning to me. the president is firing on all cylinders as we head into the re-election and crisscross the country bringing the message of bidenomics to the american people and full faith he can win this election and beat whoever the republicans put out. >> julie: firing an ole cylinders. is that an accurate description? >> of course not. i have love and respect for my friend kevin but i disagree. the president's work hours compared to presidents of the past including donald trump. significantly short. he doesn't work beyond 6:00 p.m. a reason why in this country the retirement age is 66. when people around 70, 75, an increased propensity to suffer from memory loss issues. they don't have the keels to the nuclear codes, right? so i think there is a reason why

when you look at individuals such as robert kennedy junior or marianne williamson they represent a third of democrat voters saying they are open to voting for someone else other than the sitting president because they have concerns about his age and his mental and physical faculties. >> julie: i want to read this quote. basically saying that experts pointing to the youth vote as a possible danger sign for biden's re-election campaign. one long-time polling expert with harvard says in the "washington examiner" nearly every sign that made me confident in historic levels of youth participation in 2018, 2020, and 2022 is flashing red. so basically in the most simple terms when the democratic nominee for president garners 60% of the youth vote democrats win or otherwise it's ugly for them. not just ugly. i would think the youth would be the most scared of this. maybe the older voters might look at biden and relate with

him. the younger voters must be a bit concerned, no? >> certainly we have a lot of work to do with young voters. they helped deliver the presidency to the president just two years ago in 2020. and also beat back this republican red wave in 2022. a key base of the democratic party and why i think you see the president campaigning so hard talking about issues relating to young people whether it is climate change or college affordability or the great jobs market a lot of young people enter into when they graduate college. i think that will be a critical component as it always has been of the democratic base and the president is focused on the youth vote certainly. >> julie, really quickly. most younger voters cannot purchase first homes, graduating from college with a significant debt. a difficult time getting jobs. biden promised he would -- forgive student loans was a

campaign promise we all warned was not going to happen. there are significant disappointment with younger voters as they are the first group in this country's history that have things far worse than what they were in the past. they are not excited about joe biden or democrats. >> julie: all right, gentlemen. that's all the time we have for now. bidenomics trying to tout an economy when people can't afford groceries. >> wages are up and inflation is going down. >> julie: the wages are up. i would like to see prices come down. we're waiting for that. >> amen. >> julie: thank you very much. new jersey parents are vowing to fight back after the state sued three school districts over their transgender student policies. parents say they have a right to know what is happening with their own kids. of course they do. they accuse the governor of suing his taxpayers and much more on the landmark supreme court decision striking down race-based college admissions. we have just learned the president will be making remarks

on this at 12:30 eastern. fox will carry it for you live. meantime south carolina senator and presidential candidate tim scott is here to weigh in on the court's decision today. that new neighbor is hot! that's my husband... it's the inspire implant. he's not struggling with cpap anymore. all that rest is working wonders for him. inspire. learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com. veteran homeowners to combat today's rising prices. lower your monthly payments with the three c's: pay down your credit cards, pay off your car loan, consolidate your debt with a va home loan from from newday.

generalized myasthenia gravis made my life a lot harder. but the picture started changing when i started on vyvgart. vyvgart is for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis who are anti-achr antibody positive. in a clinical trial, vyvgart significantly improved most participants' ability to do daily activities when added to their current gmg treatment. most participants taking vyvgart also had less muscle weakness. and your vyvgart treatment schedule is designed just for you. in a clinical study, the most common side effects included urinary and respiratory tract infections, and headache. vyvgart may increase the risk of infection. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or symptoms of an infection. vyvgart can cause allergic reactions. i have gmg and this is how vyvgart works for me. [camera shutter] picture your life in motion. talk to your neurologist about vyvgart.

>> julie: former president and presidential candidate mike pence visiting ukraine. moments ago he met with ukrainian president zelensky in an unannounced visit. the first presidential candidate to meet with zelensky during the 2024 campaign. here is his message. >> i have every confidence the day will come when ukraine's sovereignty is restored and territorial integrity is restored. now more than ever we need to make sure that we provide the ukrainian military what they need to push back on and defeat

russian aggression here. we will make it clear to russia, china and any other nations in the world to seek to redraw international lines by force the world will stand together for freedom. >> julie: he made stops at three different cities and villages and visited the country back in march of last year when he went to the ukraine border to meet with displaced refugees. we'll monitor his trip for any developments. stay tuned for that. fox news alert now. president biden speaking in just about an hour from now reacting to the supreme court decision deciding against affirmative action, a huge blow. programs at harvard and the university of north carolina effectively putting an end to the consideration of race in college admissions. all conservative justices sided in the majority in that decision. liberal justice sotomayor in her dissent wrote i'm quoting. despite the court's unjustified

exercise of power the opinion today will serve only to highlight the court's own impotence in the face of an america whose cries for equality resound. senator tim scott of south carolina, republican candidate for president joins me now. this is a monumental decision that has reversed a decision that has been in place for 19 years. what is your reaction today? >> i think this is a good day for america honestly. this is a day where we understand that being judged by the content of our character, not the color of our skin, is what our constitution wants. we are continuing to work on performing this more perfect union. today is better than yesterday. this year better than last year, this decade better than the last decade. the progress we see in the nation is palpable. that's good news for every single corridor of this nation and one that we should celebrate. i thank god almighty that america continues to work

towards that concept of a more perfect union. >> julie: how do these universities such as the university of north carolina and harvard in this case now move on and continue to fulfill their diverse campus as they both want? prominent schools say their standards have a larger societal goal. one endorsed for decades by the courts to promote a robust, diverse campus for future leaders. is it safe to say that they aren't going to want to continue that mission since they've been on the mission for 19 years? how will the court ruling prevent them from continuing down that path? >> i think the question is how do you continue to create a culture where education is the goal for every single part of our community. one of the things that harvard could do to make that even better is to eliminate any legacy programs where they have preferential treatment for legacy kids.

not allow the professor eva's kids to come to harvard as well. let's make sure all admissions are based on academic scores. let's look at the legacy programs. let's look at the fact that the professors' kids get to go there as well. the good news for america, though, is that anyone from anywhere at any time can rise beyond their circumstances and live out their american dream. whether it is going to harvard, if you can't get into charleston southern university. maybe that's a better option. i don't know. i choose the university of south carolina or clemson. our education system is the marvel of the world. thank god we're americans and thank god today we continue to see signs of progress in every aspect of american life. >> julie: we certainly are. today is a monumental today. a statement on the decision from former president obama and former first lady. it reads in part my heart breaks for any young person out there

who is wondering what their future holds and what kinds of chances will be open to them. today is a reminder that we have to do the work. not just to enact policies but to make those values real in all of our schools, workplaces and neighborhoods. now, what is that saying to african-americans in this country coming from a former african-american president in our very first african-american president. it is saying to me that african-americans, if you apply to a college you'll have a harder time. not a positive message to send to the american people. that's not the case in this landmark decision. >> the good news is we'll have another african-american president. his name will be tim scott and this is january of 2025. here is what i would say to america today. i'm excited about who we are as

a nation and the progress we've seen in the rearview mirror. what excites me the most about america when you look at the windshield of our future, it is bright for all of our kids. unfortunately the radical left have been co-oped by the teachers unions. get back to providing quality education in every single zip code in this nation, k-12 means that with quality education k-12, your child can go to the mostly elite colleges in america if we fix public education, we'll make sure that every generation going forward will have access to opportunities. and oh by the way, i'm not sure that going to an elite university is the path to prosperity. it is actually going as high as your character, your grit, and your talent will take you. that means whether you go to

harvard, charleston southern or whether you want to be a plumber or welder, you, too, can experience your version of the american dream. i'm running for president because i know america can do for anyone what she has done for me. sending the message that somehow the color of your skin means that you will not be able to achieve your goals from an educational perspective and income perspective or family formation, that's a lie from the pit of hell. we will not be judged solely by the color of our skin. that's what the ruling said today. that is the story of america. that's the story of american progress and we can all celebrate that today. >> julie: the president will come out and speak. i hope his words are more encouraging than president biden. that this is about freedoms. we have been given these freedoms under the civil rights to be equal.

that should be the admissions process based on merit, not on color. i need to switch gears for a moment. president biden speaking of giving himself a big pat on the back in economic speech. bidenomics, you have to love it as he goes all in on bidenomics. a push to bolster his terrible polling on the issue. watch. >> president biden: i'm not here to declare victory on the economy. we have a plan turning things around quickly. it's no accident, it's bidenomics in action. it's building an economy from the middle out and bottom up. it's about the future. bidenomics is another way of saying restore the american dream. because it worked before. >> julie: republicans quick to call him out, though. house speaker kevin mccarthy tweeting that biden's policies have been an economic disaster. inflation reaches 40 years high. bidenomics, folks. we are not in a place where you

can be bragging about this economy. democrats love to talk about how wages are up. let's talk about inflation. let's talk about interest rates. let's talk about the fact that young people can't buy new homes and can't get mortgages because the interest rates are astronomical. that's not a positive economy to be bragging about. >> julie, it is exactly the opposite. what we need to do is fire joe biden and hire tim scott. let's talk about joe biden's economy. $10,000 is the amount of money the average family has lost since joe biden has taken office. why? because when inflation hit 16% since he has taken office, that means the average family today is experiencing a crisis. when your gas price goes up 40% and your food is up 20%, your electricity costs $2 thousand 200 more this year than last year it is a crisis.

last thing we need to hear is joe biden doing anything other than saying to the american people, i'm sorry, i have no clue how to run this economy. i'll resign. he won't say that. the american people have to kick him out, put me in. vote tim scott.com and let's get it started. >> julie: thank you for talking to us. we appreciate it. more questions swirling over whether restrictions on transition care for minors can with stand legal challenges after federal judges strike down bans in arkansas, kentucky, and tennessee. as another state prepares to enact a ban of its own. will cain in "focus" next. me lon benefit allowed me to keep my money in my pocket. in my pocket. and my service was my down payment. i talked with newday on a thursday, put a contract on this house on saturday. 30 days later, we were moving in. i would tell other vets out there who are dreaming of getting into a home to stop dreaming. pick up the phone. call newday.

you served your country. allow newday to serve you. hi, i'm jason. i've lost 228 pounds on golo. so when my doctor told me i needed weight loss surgery, i knew i had to make a change. golo's helped me transition to a healthier, sustainable lifestyle. i'm so surprised just how crazy my metabolism has fired up. i have a trust in golo 'cause i know it works. golo isn't like every other program out there, and i'm living proof of it. (announcer) change your life at golo.com. that's golo.com.

way back in 1982 we took care of about forty kids and had to turn away over two hundred and fifty. it's the emotion of that moment that said man that just isn't fair, and i think it was at that moment that operation smile was born. every three minutes a child is born with a cleft condition. thousands are waiting for the cleft surgery and care your support gives. they need you. give joy and a new smile. scan the code or go online to give today.

>> julie: new jersey parents are firing back. democratic governor sued school districts in his own state over their new transgender policies. many say he is actually going after taxpayers and taking away parents' rights. the three targeted districts decided to notify parents if their child begins identifying differently from their biological gender. you would think parents should know that. critics say it puts children at risk if parents aren't supportive. nate foye has more.

>> one of the three school districts is trying to avoid going to court. instead calling for a meeting with new jersey attorney general. now some parents are middletown, new jersey appear more willing to fight back against governor murphy's administration. one father saying it appears the governor is targeting parents and bringing about action against parents who disagree with him. he says, people are worried about the cost. you see here activists protested outside the school board meeting in middletown last week saying teachers communicating with parents will put trans kids' lives at risk. >> when trans youth are rejected by their parents they are eight times more likely to attempt suicide than other students. >> governor phil murphy's office put out a statement saying these

policies pose a serious risk to the mental health and well-being of our lgbtq plus students. this administration will not stand for any organize that marginalize our students. superior court judge will rule on a possible injunction to block the implementation of these policies. another school district voted to delay a similar decision or delay a decision about a similar policy while these three separate cases play out. we'll send it back to you. >> julie: thank you. federal judges in two states have temporarily blocked laws that would essentially ban gender transition care for minors. the rulings in kentucky and tennessee coming just days before key provisions of the laws were set to go into effect. kentucky's attorney general calling it a misguided decision. the tennessee a.g. office says it plans to appeal. arkansas governor sarah sanders plans to fight the ruling there

as well. she spoke to us in april about the importance of this legislation. watch. >> i have three kids, harris. most days they can't decide what they want for breakfast. the idea they're capable at that age of making some of those life altering permanent decisions, they aren't prepared and ready to make that. the parents have to be involved. not just involved, but they have to be the decision makers. that's their responsibility and their role. >> julie: laws banning trans care for minors have been enacted by at least 17 other states. similar proposal passed both state chambers in north carolina. democratic governor is threatening to votto veto. we'll head to will cain, fox new contributor to talk more about this. will, thank you so much for coming on.

as parents, you and i both, to think of a minor making any major decisions just like sarah just mentioned there, they can't decide cereal. my kids can't decide what toothpaste to use in the morning. i have to hand it to them. i can't understand why a child would have the power to make such an important decision that is first of all irreversible in some cases and life long. >> yeah, and the power that would require the deference of their parents or even further remove a doctor and even another step removed a judge. the argument being made is that if you create these laws and step in and stop this procedure from taking place before someone is 18, you are somehow harming these minors. you heard that in nate foye's report, the statement from governor murphy of new jersey. it is as nine. if you applied this to any other aspect of health, i have to remove my arm or i'm at higher risk of use side, or i am going

to be dealing with mental illness and depression, if you do not allow me to have this extremely dangerous, life-altering procedure is beyond absurdity. only allowed because of medical capture and social contagion affecting our medical community. i don't think that if a parent endorses this doctors should allow this procedure to take place. it is crazy you allow surgery and puberty blockers to take place on children because they or their parents think it's the best thing for their life. this is a real sickness in society that we think that it's the moral and righteous thing to allow children to do this to themselves. once they turn 18 it's a different debate. we can have that debate and it deserves a debate. it is nuts that judges are stepping in and saying no, no, you can't pass laws to stop this atrocity.

>> julie: what is nuts is some schools think parents don't deserve the right to know what's going on with their children. they would go to the parent if the child says i think of taking my life or i think i might identify as a different gener, you are not to tell the parent. the child's mental health is what's important to the parent as parents. >> another step you are talking about. the argument even if a parent knows and says i think you need to remove my daughter's breasts we should talk about laws about stopping that parent as well. the parent here is being kept in the dark. changes else in choices of identity. we have moved into the place where this is the moral good and will hide from everybody doctors, parents, everyone. the pursuit of what they see.

>> julie: i have to get your take on this. supreme court decision today. we're waiting to hear from the president on the supreme court's landmark decision striking down race-based factors in college admissions. one of the cases before the court involved harvard's reject channel of an asian student with perfect grades and test scores. harvard responded. it reads, we write today to reaffirm the fundamental principle that deep and transform active teaching, learning and research depend on a community of people of many backgrounds and lived experiences. quickly take a reaction to first of all their statement and today's huge decision. >> let's address harvard's statement. we'll look for ways to be racist even though the supreme court says it is unconstitutional to be racist. no doubt that harvard and other higher education institutions will continue to game the system to take people's race into

account. the supreme court of the united states regented critical race theory. some race many is okay and some isn't okay. they said under the 14th amendment you cannot enact racist policies against anyone regardless of their race. >> julie: that's the concern is how are you going to hold these universities accountable to know they don't continue the wrongs of the past. love talking to you always. thank you for coming on with us today. thank you at home for watching "the faulkner focus." "outnumbered" is after the break.

>> we are awaiting reaction from president biden, justices ruling 6-3 colleges and universities must stop considering race in admission and deem affirm if i have action policy. hello, this is "outnumbered," i'm emily compagno, here with my co-host kayleigh mcenany, also joining is martha ma