of the government to do its job. >> i'm not familiar exactly with what i said, but i stand by what i said, whatever it was. >> it is the beginning of a big week at the supreme court with crucial decisions about the proper law and scope of government hanging in the balance, all coming at the crest of the 2012 presidential campaign and today, it was arizona's controversial immigration law rejected in large part by the high court, but allowing a key provision to stand. the justices ruled that federal law does not preempt arizona's instruction to police to check the immigration status of people they detain. that would be the so-called papers please provision. here's mine by the way. you can bet i'll be carrying this when i next visit the grand canyon state, which is where mitt romney touched down just hours ago. arriving in scottsdale for a

fund-raiser this afternoon and though mr. romney called arizona's immigration policy a model for the nation at a debate earlier this year, he managed to issue a statement full of words and fury, but signifying nothing earlier today. quote, president obama has failed to provide any leadership on immigration. this represents yet another broken promise by this president. i believe that each state has the duty and the right to secure our borders and preserve the rule of law, particularly when the federal government has failed to meet its responsibleties. that of course following romney's signature move from now on known as the mitt maneuver claiming the president has failed while always failing to give his own position. last time i checked, arizona was a well populated state with a nump local television affiliates, satellite trucks and radio studios, so just in case

you thought he couldn't get to a camera to explain, he just doesn't want to. instead, he sent a spokesman to the back of his plane to refuse to answer for him. >> does he have a reaction as to whether he agrees with this decision? states have the right to craft their immigration policies. i'll say it again and again and again for you. governor understanding that states have their own right, policies to secure their borders. >> last seen locking himself in the airplane lavatory. that went on for about seven minutes, by the way. as for the president, his statement was more explicit. quote, i am pleased the supreme court has struck down key provisions. at the same time, i remain concerned about the practical impact of the remaining provision that requires local

law enforcement officials to check the the immigration status of anyone they even suspect to be here illegally. no american should ever live f because of what they look ke dare to dream, mr. president. i'll be keeping my papers, as you've seen, close by at all times. let's get to our panel. in minneapolis, anna marie cox, in washington, karen finney, who's now a columnist for the hill and democratic strategist, julian epstein, former house council. julian, the president has welcomed the supreme court's decision and i'm quoting him, no american should ever live under a cloud of suspicion just because of what they look like. are you surprised that the one section of the law that appears to favor racial profiling has actually been allowed to stand by the court's ruling? >> no. and in fact, the court said that

one provision, if it was carried out in a way that would be discriminatory or encourage racial profiling that it could be challenged on that basis. i'm actually very pleased with what the court did. it's important for your viewers to understand what the arizona law was about. it was about creating a criminal law that made it illegal to fail to carry immigration papers, seek work and gave police broad ranging powers to have warrantless searchers. the supreme court said today they're going to throw that out. this new set to enforce immigration. what they left if place was a provision that said if the police stop somebody during the course of a customary law enforcement activity, they may inquire as to the immigration status, but even then, they cannot have, hold them for an extended period of time and all they can do is refer them to the federal authorities.

this was an old fashioned slap down of a law that is and should be preempted by federal laws and it is a huge victory for the obama administration and a huge victory for immigration advocates. >> but karen, from the point of view of mitt romney, isn't this a moment of revelation as far as his candidacy is concerned? he hasn't been able to say if he supports or opposes the president's decision. today, he's in arizona, but a strenuous strenuously avaded speaking to the media, only offering a written statement. is he simply confused or is this a man who just doesn't have any core convictions when it comes to immigration? >> yes, yes and yes, but here's the other thing it tells you. like we talked about gay marriage, that this issue is so sensitive, mitt romney recognizes in a general election, the stakes are very

high. he cannot afford for the tone of this conversation, which is part of why you have it seen in the kind of rhetoric we've previously seen from the republicans, he knows the tone of this immigration conversation, we talk about racial profiling, he's got to keep it mild because if we start to hear the kind of tom tancredo statements we've heard previously from some on the far right demonizing illegal immigrants, deeming people, brown people essentially, he cannot afford that. particularly not in states like arizona, new mexico, colorado, nevada where the expectation, you know, you've got president obama leads by huge margins in the latino population, so no. politically speaking, he has got to be very careful and stick to his policy of no comment on this issue. >> okay, anna marie, we've had the president's position, mitt romney's. how about governor jan brewer? she came out and declared this an absolute win saying arizona

was quote vindicated. did i miss something or did the court smack down three out of the four of her law provisions? >> perhaps she only read scalia's accident, which was a reading endorsement of the law. scalia can be relied upon to do a really sarcastic dissent. for the most part, i think the other two guests are right. this was a victory for the obama administration. because even that last provision, that fourth provision that the court left in tact, they basically said we're going to wait and see if this is enforced in a constitutional way, where as scalia said at the end, i see no problem with indefinite detention as long as it's blah, blah. >> julian, what are you thoughts about jan brewer characterizing

as a vindication? >> well, this is a marquee moment second only after she kind of, was ablele tetetete a thought.w words it was an incoherent thought. arizonans, they have lost, it's not just three out of four. even on that fourth provision, thebilitye teeth weree law. as for scalia, it's interesting he scalicaingl out

we want to get much more from althree of you. ch more is ahead. a home, there are thingm suppo.

like, keep one of these over your head. well, i wasn't "supposed" to need flood insurance, but i have it. do i look like i have a plan? female announcer ] onl flood insurance covers floods. for a free brochure, call the number on your screen.

there it is ! there it is ! where ? where ? it's getting away ! where is it ? it's gone. we'll find it. any day can be an adventure. that's why we got a subaru. love wherever the road takes you. wow, there it is.

a big day at the supreme court, justices handing down new rulings on immigration and political fund raising. we're back with our panel to examine. first, let's have a quick word with renowned constitutional scholar, jonathan turley of

george washington university law school, who joining us live from washington. good afternoon, sir. >> hi, martin. >> were there any tea leaves in the ruling which gives you a sense of how the court is likely to rule on health care? for example, is it more likely that the court will strike down certain provisions while leaving others in place? >> that's a good question. i know some are saying this is a hopeful sign for those that want to see the health care law upheld. the theory being that you have roberts here breaking away from the conservative wing with kennedy and joining the three most liberal justices. it's also an opinion to speaks to federal jurisdiction, federal power, the need to have national policies on immigration. i have to say that i don't subscribe to that view. i don't believe that this opinion really portended much in terms of health care. i still think that if you go by

the oral argument, it does not look good for the individual mandate. kennedy of course is the once again, the the swing vote here. he largely asks very skeptical questions of the government during oral argument and right now, at least, the good money is on the court overturning the mandate, but you never really know. what happens on this court is that drafts go back and forth. someone like kennedy, if he's not drafting the opinion himself, can be swayed. these justices are also quite cleaver. they can eke out of a jury by making small concessions, but on health care k it's pretty much a zero sum gain. when it comes to that individual mandate issue, ik i think the lines are pretty clear with the exception of kennedy. >> what about this as a speculation, that the chief

justice has gone as it were to that he can swing back to his conservative fellows on thursday? >> well, it's sort of like criminology. i think you can get lost in it. i think these justices really did vote what they thought was the right position and i have to caution that there are good faith reasons to side with arizona here. there's nothing due with immigration. underneath this issue was a question of what's called implied preemption. not because congress said they couldn't, but because the federal government occupies the field. there are good reasons to oppose that. i don't think it is necessarily purely id logical. i think roberts agreed with the liberal justices here. i don't think he's laying the ground work. we have to remember the stolen valor case is still coming down.

i've been really emphasizes for folks, that free speech case has equally sweeping potential for american citizens. it did have a significant impact on the first amendment and that is the first torpedo in the but the h health care. supreme court is meant to be nonpartisan and yet, we have a patent with the two decisions today plus past rulings like citizens united and bush v. gore. can we expect this court on the basis of that to strike down the health care law? >> i think it's very hard to tell. when we were reading the tea leaves -- >> you're an expert. >> of all the experts, including myself, misread where it was going on the arizona case.

i think that it's really impossible to tell at this point from kennedy's questions. kennedy himself has indicated questions, but it's very important for viewers to understand that if the mandate is declared unconstitutional, there are provisions, a fancy way of saying you can't be denied access to health insurance nor discriminated against for preexisting conditions. it's important to understand there are many other provisions. expansion of medicaid for the poor. there's prescription coverage for 5.1 billion seniors. there's 2.6 million kids that have coverage on their parent's program. those have absolutely nothing to do with the mandate and there's no way in the world i think the court strike slows down. so even if the mandate goes down, there are some important reforms. >> some really positive measures, absolutely.

>> if we think back to the old oral arguments the court held on health care, there were more questions aimed at the pro obama site. no less an authority than john roberts himself has written that the side that gets the most questions usually loses, so should we be expecting health care reform to fall on that basis? >> julian was right. people were wrong about where the court was going to go in the arizona case. let's not get too confident in our tea leaf readings. i think it does look bad for the obama administration for the visit mandate and provisions that rely on the individual mandate. i think it's really interesting, "the washington post" did a story canvassing a lot of law professors about this, who thought that the law was constitution allal, but that it

wouldn't be upheld any way. i think that speaks to where they are with this court. it's hard to call it a partisan court. i think it is idea logically driven, but that is something we have to look at when we're deciding how, when trying to predict which way they're going to go. i think they probably will strike the mandate now. >> purely as a question of political strategy, who do you think benefits the most if the court strikes down health care reform? is it the president or is it mitt romney? >> well, can i, two things. one, if we're going to go into tea leaf readings, the montana decision and immigration decision today, in both cases, the court essentially said the state can't preempt the federal government. that seems part of what's at the heart of the health care decision. can the federal government say this is a mandate?

that they can impose a mandate? we'll see. i think politically speaking, whatever happens if they play it right, benefits president obama for the following reason. if you look at the example in vermont with governor dean, they didn't have a mandate between community rating and guaranteed issue, they were able to essentially satisfy the elements that a mandate would have done and they were able to accomplish health care reform. i think there's still the opportunity for health care reform. number two, from a political perspective, it forces mitt romney to do the thing he does not want to do and that is he will have to give some kind of answer about what he would do. you will have the people already in the system and you have all of the people who are yet to be incorporated in the health care act that he will have to say what are you going to do about those people and he's not going to be able to get away with ooichl going to look for a long-term solution when push comes to shove. so politically, i think the

president is in a much stronger position on this. last thing, this is also where the law meets the reality of our country. we have millions of americans without health care insurance regardless of what the court decides, still going to have to do something to care for people. >> and karen finney there expecting a miracle from mitt romney. good luck with that. thank you so much and stay tuned to "hardball" tonight. chris matthews nailed mitt romney as the enemy of immigrants and the big pal of a junk bonder. stay with us. much more ahead. >> mean, with watergate, you had a second rate burglary and now you have a president who is using his executive privilege to keep that information from congress. if that's not knicks on-- >> where are you staying? it's called the hotel. >> no, no, no.

i know the much nicer hotel. it's brand new. very modern. i'll have my people take care of it for you. [ male announcer ] this is rudy. his morning starts with arthritis pain. and two pills. afternoon's overhaul starts with more pain. more pills. triple checking hydraulics. the evening brings more pain. so, back to more pills. almost done, when... hang on. stan's doctor recommended aleve. it can keep pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol. this is rudy. who switched to aleve. and two pills for a day free of pain.

♪ and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels. in your car. now count the number of buttons on your tablet. isn't it time the automobile advanced? introducing cue in the all-new cadillac xts. the simplicity of a tablet has come to your car. ♪

the all-new cadillac xts has arrived. and it's bringing the future forward.

the president is in boston this hour after a stop in new hampshire. kristen welker is traveling with him and joins us live from boston. kristen, the president has issued a statement today saying he's pleased with the court's decision, but didn't talk about it specifically during his stump speech today. is that because the white house is happy to sit back and watch the romney campaign scramble for a response from a candidate who's actually in arizona today but i believe hiding at the closed fund-raiser? >> reporter: make no mistake, republicans do not like the immigration issue. it is not a winning issue for them. having said that, both sides are trying to claim a victory here.

you have mitt romney coming out issuing a written statement and saying this is essentially proof that the president's immigration policy has failed. he will try to -- resognate with some of his core constituents, but you have president obama saying he's concerned about that part of the immigration law that was upheld, the part that requires law enforcement officials to check immigration status during traffic stops. they are concerned that could lead to racial profiling, a lot of latinos are going to be motivated by that to try to defeat the president's republican challenger. they were recently reinvigorated after the challenge that he would try to block the deportation of adults brought here illegally. it could mean you're going to see a larger turnout in the latino community in states like colorado, arizona and nevada and that could make a big

difference. >> thank you so much. stay with us. the day's top lines are coming up. [ groans ] [ marge ] psst. constipated? phillips' caplets use magnesium, an ingredient that works more naturally with your colon than stimulant laxatives, for effective relief of constipation without cramps. thanks. good morning, students. today we're gonna continue... is as much about getting there... ♪ ...as it is being there. ♪ [ birds chirping ] away is where the days are packed with wonder... ♪ [ wind whistles ] ...and the evenings are filled with familiar comforts. find your away. for a dealer and the rv that's right for you, visit gorving.com.

if three is the magic number, well, four is the great one. here are today's top lines. "the dark knight" rises. starting monday, this broadcast will be shifting one hour later. >> i should have yelled two. >> the undertaker. >> greatest hockey player in the world. number four. >> with watergate, you had a second rate burglary. and now, you have a president who is using his executive privilege to keep that information from congress. >> people have got to know whether or not their president

is a crook. >> if that's not nixonian, i don't know what is. >> one, hold people responsible. >> do you have any evidence white house officials were involved in these decisions, that they knowingly misled congre congress? >> no. >> we're hopeful there will be a full squal repeal of obamacare. >> if the law is overturned, republicans, hopefully we have the majority and president romney are going to have to come up with an alternative. >> did you arrest that little girl, to stick it to the president? >> locked up six more on my birthday. i should be thanked for saving this girl. >> we're pioneers in the outsourcing of american jobs to places like china and india. pioneers. we do not need an outsourcing pioneer in the oval office.

>> we fixed the glitch, so he won't be receiving a paycheck anymore so it will just work itself out naturally. >> we always like to avoid confrontation when ever possible. >> joy reed and ken vogel, welcome to both of you. joy, he, mitt romney, has been taking on the chin over bain. we've had "the washington post," "new york times," "boston globe," all revealing how bain always wins and makes money regardless of what happens to the company they've invested in and yet, he's nowhere to be seen. he's not even arguing his case anymore. is that because he doesn't think it matters? >> i think that the problem for mitt romney is number one, he centered his campaign around number one, the economy, number two, his being a business man. that this is his calling card. >> and not being a community organizer who knows nothing about business. >> exactly. i know business. this is what i've done. but that opens up the scrutiny

as to what his business was about. it wasn't about creating jobs. it was about reaping profits. the stories are pretty devastating. talks about bain extracting profess and then the second piece is about a outsourting part. i don't think he came up with an answer for that and i think maybe his staff is failing him. >> that's true. ken, romney spent today and the weekend raking in money and i think we have pictures of where he and his super pac donors say they weren't. meanwhile, the president is out there today hammering away at romney. this attack does seem to be working. what do you think? >> i think it has the potential to work and as joy said, we saw it work in the republican primary and if it worked in the republican primary, where voters and the republican activists are presumably less concerned with

so-called destructive capitalism and more an incentive on profits and free enterprise, then in the general election where you would think these concerns could be brought to the floor in a way that could be more harmful for romney, i think it's a problem for him and i agree with joy that he hasn't found a way to address it effectively. also as joy said, a problem of his own making. the fact he has centered so much of his political persona and his time at bain because a, president obama doesn't have a comparable private sector experience and b, he is to an extent, running away from part of his record in massachusetts. it makes it even more important for him to come up with an effective response. >> even rupert murdoch has said when is romney going to look like a challenger? seems to play everything safe. make no news except burn off

hispanics and then moments later, easy for romney to spell out restoration of the american dream and bash incompetent administration, but not a word. peggy noonan wrote about this on friday, making the point when is this man going to give us a constructive and sub stannive vision for our future in this country? when is it going to happen? >> i think that romney is not planning to do that. what he may do at the convention, maybe give a speech about -- >> the convention? >> right now, romney is being brand x. republicans, if you read even peggy noonan's column, they seem to be putting themselves in a win column, barring some big error on romney's part. he seems to be running more as a way to avoid unforced errors. offending as few new poem as possible and just being quiet and hoping for more bad economic news. >> ken, to joy's point, getting

back to peggy noonan, she writes about romney, he's got to give up the applause line speeches and deliver substance. but isn't today just a perfect encapsulation of his problem? he has nothing to say aside from routine attacks about the pressing issue of immigration. he knows he's down something like 63%. he conceded 63% advantage to the president on latino voters and yet today of all days, he says nothing on the issue apart from a written statement. >> it is a little puzzling. >> puzzling, ken, it's almost a failure of his duty as a candidate. >> yeah, and certainly you know, it would seem that if you were going to make the decision, a calculated decision that these are the issues, the executive order deportations of children

brought to the country illegally, to bring the case against arizona, the justice department, that you would have something specific to offer instead of the position taken by the maix. failure to come up with that is both problematic, but highlights the degree in which he wants the the selection to be a referendum on the president. however, when you see his own supporters and prominent people coming forward saying you need more than that, i would think there is probably a conversation going on about how to come up with more precise positions on these issues. >> and joy, one might have thought the conversation would take place today because mitt romney is in actually arizona. when four sections of this law have been struck off by the supreme court and yet a written statement nothing else. >> and remember, the part that

was not struck down is the papers please part. the part that is most offensive to hispanics because anyone who looks hispanic with probable cause could be detained. you have to have deep moorings to make an overarching speech. he wants to be generic, brand x. >> amazing and i wonder if the electorate's prepared to do that. thanks so much. stay with us. much more ahead. women control their own health care choices. that's up to you. [ mechanical humming ] [ male announcer ] we began with the rx. ♪ then we turned the page, creating the rx hybrid.

♪ now we've turned the page again with the all-new rx f sport. ♪ this is the next chapter for the rx. this is the next chapter for lexus. this is the pursuit of perfection. [ music plays, record skips ] hi, i'm new ensure clear. clear, huh? my nutritional standards are high. i'm not juice or fancy water, i'm different. i've got nine grams of protein. twist my lid. that's three times more than me! twenty-one vitamins and minerals and zero fat! hmmm. you'll bring a lot to the party. [ all ] yay! [ female announcer ] new ensure clear. nine grams protein. zero fat. twenty-one vitamins and minerals. in blueberry/pomegranate and peach. refreshing nutrition in charge! 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 help save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide. 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. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. 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. you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you wanted a firm bed you can lie on one of those. we provide the exact individualization that

your body needs. wow, that feels really good! once you experience it, there's no going back. hurry in now for our lowest prices of the season. save $300 to $1000 on selected sleep number bed sets. sale ends july 8th. only at the sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699. syou know, i've helped a lot off people save a lot of money. but today...( sfx: loud noise of large metal object hitting the ground) things have been a little strange. (sfx: sound of piano smashing) roadrunner: meep meep. meep meep? (sfx: loud thud sound) what a strange place. geico®. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. the supreme court having rejected most of arizona's

immigration law will soon rending its judgment of the president's health care reform. it's going to be an important week for the president and his challenger. peter welsh is a democrat from vermont and joins us now. he's also the deputy chief whip. good afternoon, sir. >> afternoon. >> may i ask what is your immediate reaction to the supreme court's ruling on the anthony a immigration law? >> you know, overall good. number one, it reasserted the authority of the federal government to make an immigration law. we won't have 50 separate states making immigration law. two, it struck down the most agre jous provisions, made it illegal for an immigrant to apply for a job and get a piece of paper. third, on the pr visiovision up to detain a person, that invited further challenge as that's implemented, so if governor brewer thinks this is a license to do racial profiling, the

court has come nowhere near saying that. >> in fact, governor brewer has called today's rulings vindication for her. >> that's right and she's overexcited about the ruling and lost three out of four and has got to claim some kind of victory. what the court made clear is that the implementation of which is going to be watched and is going to be challenged. if the reasonable basis turns out to be racial profiling, color of the person's skin, it's clear to me in this decision that the supreme court will review that. >> now, the court's ruling on health care is expected on thursday. john boehner says republicans have no intention of i'm quoting him, spiking the bawl, if the law is ruled unconstitutional. it's a bit unlike speaker boehner, isn't it? is this because he realizes the

president is likely to benefit either way? he wastes no time when the economic indicators are negative, but on this one, he's advising republicans not to do so. why? >> the reason i think is this. let's hope, i hope certainly that it's affirmed, but if it's reversed and people have been asking me what's our plan b. mine is to ask speaker boehner what's your plan a? the bottom line is they don't have a plan. if this is reversed, kids who are on their parents policies up to age 26, they're gone. if you have a preexisting condition and had health care, you're gone. if you are sick and wanted to renew your policy, insurance companies are throw you off. they do not have one and that's why they can't spike the ball because it's going to bounce up and hit them in the face when americans figure out we're back to the old ripped off system. >> a final question to you. you know your constituents well.

you're held highly in esteem by your constituents. what does it mean in practice for people in your area if it is ruled unconstitutional? i imagine it's going to have a devastating effect on people who were expegti ining to be covere this change in the law. >> this was going to extend coverage and the whole issue here is if everybody's going to be covered, all of us have to help pay. it's like social security where all of us have benefits from retirement, but we have to have a payroll tax deduction to fund it, but second, it's going to further -- political institution. in the bush v. gore decision elected bush by a 5-4 decision citizens united and now, in a fundamental legislation

decision, where health care has to be a debate, legislature not to the supreme court, so this will be a stamp of the third strike of activism in the supreme court that i think is damaging to their reputation. >> and so, if i were to ask you to hazard a question, which way do you think it's going to go on thursday? >> my guess is in expression of my hopes and my hopes are that they'll affirm it. but who knows with this supreme court? >> thank you so much for swroining us this afternoon. we'll be right back. ok! who gets occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas or bloating? get ahead of it! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap a day helps defend against digestive issues with three strains of good bacteria. hit me! [ female announcer ] live the regular life. phillips'.

at liberty mutual, we know how much you count on your car, and how much the people in your life count on you. that's why we offer accident forgiveness, where your price won't increase due to your first accident. we also offer a hassle-free lifetime repair guarantee, where the repairs made on your car are guaranteed for life, or they're on us. these are just two of the valuable features you can expect from liberty mutual. plus, when you insure both your home and car with us, it could save you time and money. at liberty mutual, we help you move on with your life, so get the insurance responsible drivers like you deserve. call us at... or visit your local liberty mutual office, where an agent can help you find the policy that's right for you. liberty mutual insurance, responsibility -- what's your policy?

egypt's first democratedly elected president has begun forming a government he's promised to be for all egyptians.

president obama called mr. morsi sunday evening urging him to continue along a path of reconciliation and democracy. egypt's ruling military has taken control of many of the president's powers and has dissolved parliament. the new president will be sworn in this saturday. joining us now, director of research and senior foreign policy fellow at the brookings institution. >> nice to be with you. >> morsi says he wants to restore ties with iran. but he also seemed to extend the olive branch toward egypt's christians. do you have any sense of what kind of leader the man will be or is he simply hedging his bets at all ends? >> i think it makes sense for him to try to reach out to iran. i have no particular objections to that as much as i think the iranian regime is heinous. the turks have tried to get

along with iran. the iraqis have tried to get along with iran. as long as morsi knows his own country's interests, i think he's okay. and that would be tough for iran to pull off. they're of course shia. he's in a sunni majority country. egypt is seen as the center of the arab world where as iran is the separate persian civilizati civilization. i'm not too worried if he's avoiding having a bad relationship with iran. >> now, morsi has enjoyed an education in this country, studying in engineering. he's tasted the fruits of democracy. how much do you think he's committed to democratic inclusion in a country like egypt, which has frankly been a dictat dictatorship for almost 40

years? >> if there's going to be a dictatorship in the future, i think it's more likely to be a military dictatorshidictatorshi. in order, the generals have so much power still that if morsi makes big mistakes or pushes his luck, i think he's as likely to see the kind of reaction we've seen in turkey and pakistan over the decades, where there was essentially a military coup against a leader who went too far. i'm not saying i want that, but i do think that's a certain check and overall, i think his tendencying look reasonably promising. i'm fairly encouraged. >> that's something coming from you, mike. what does this election do to u.s.-israel religions? does it become tougher for u.s. leaders to criticize aspects of israeli policy. >> they need us a wee bit more, but i think unbalanced our

interests generally overlap. not necessarily with any one leader or government, but certainly in general, israel needs to be secure. it needs peace to be secure and therefore, it sometimes need a little bit of a prod iding from the the united states about the terms of a peace deal that it might pursue. so i don't think there's any fundamental change here. the change would come if morsi just decided he didn't want the treaty anymore. >> okay, some conservatives in this country, as you know, have been complaining that since mubarak was forced out that president obama has quote lost egypt. i guess that undoubtly points to evidence of that. what do you make of those claims, the almost absurd notion that the president of the united states can control an arab yo upizing in egypt?

>> there is not obviously a big set of decisions we have to make in the future and i'm not sure this would be relevant soon, but say president obama's re-elected, but in the five years during which egypt is run by a post mubarak leader, the united states doesn't engage very well. doesn't offer much encouragement, provide the means to the new egyptian government. you could see the relationship atrophy over that period of time and that would be too bad. so what i'd like to see us do is find a way to incentivise dr. morsi to be as inclusive as he can be, and if he does that, give him a bit more economic aid. maybe debt relief, favorable trait terms. so far, he's done fine, but as you point out, the revolution was powers and forces beyond our control. >> indeed. although i have to assume it's unlikely people here will welcome the president actually offering some kind of incentive to this man.

is that really possible? >> it's a good point, but i think what you do is you separate out what might have been your past preferences from future policy and try to make it somewhat business like and matter of fact. if his regime can be inclusive, if he can keep the peace treaty with israel and if he can get egypt on the right path towards economic recovery, which is p t perhaps as important as anything else i just ticked off, then i think we should try to find ways. not billions and billions of dollars, but a half billion dollars a year maybe in debt relief primarily. egypt is so parent as a corner stone of the middle east that i think we have to expand our imaginations a little bit. >> thanks so much for joining us. and we'll be right back to clear the air. really? no. it comes with a hat. see, airline credit cards promise flights for 25,000 miles, but... [ man ] there's never any seats for 25,000 miles. frustrating, isn't it? but that won't happen with the capital one venture card. you can book any airline, anytime.

hey, i just said that. after all, isn't traveling hard enough? ow! [ male announcer ] to get the flights you want, sign up for a venture card at capitalone.com. what's in your wallet? uh, it's ok. i've played a pilot before. for a cookout with world champion grill master brett gallaway. he's serving his guests walmart choice premium steak. but they don't know it yet. they will. it's a steakover! the steak is excellent. very tender... melts in your mouth... so delicious... tonight you're eating walmart steak. what? it's good steak. two thumbs up. look, i ate all of mine. it matches any good steak house if not better. walmart choice premium steak in the black package... it's 100% money back guaranteed. try it for your fourth of july barbeque.

great! tyler here will show you everything. check out our new mobile app. now you can use your phone to scan your car's vin or take a picture of your license. it's an easy way to start a quote. watch this -- flo, can i see your license?

no. well, all right. thanks. okay, here we go. whoa! no one said "cheese." progressive mobile -- insurance has never been easier. get a free quote today. time to clear the air and today's supreme court ruling on arizona senate bill 1070 is not only a vitally important moment

for the laws of immigration, it's also a critical one for mitt romney. ever since the president decided the children would no longer be subject to deportation, mitt romney has staggering around the country incape l of giving a straight answer and today's ruling has made matters much worse because throughout the republican primaries, mr. romney presented himself as rabidly opposed to illegal immigration and a staunch supporter of arizona's law. >> i think you see a mod l here in arizona. they passed a law here that says people who come here and try and find work, that the employer is required to look them up. >> sadly for him, three quarters of that law has been struck down with the supreme court deciding it was not only ill advised, but also unconstitutional. this is a vital moment of exposure for mitt romney. on the economy, he hides