before and after that service. president obama will be delivering the eulogy there. that's it for "the last word" tonight. up next, hardball. victory for obamacare. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm steve kornacki in for chris matthews. a huge win for obama today. the court rejected a challenge to the president's signature legislative achievement, the affordable care act or obamacare. supporters of the law cheered outside the courthouse as the decision came down. a few blocks away at the white house, the president also celebrating. the white house photographer capturing these photos of the president's reaction after

hearing the ruling. and a few moments later, he spoke in the rose garden. >> today after more than 50 votes in congress to repeal or weaken this law, after a presidential election based in part on preserving or repealing this law, after multiple challenges to this law before the supreme court, the affordable care act is here to stay. >> the court rejected the argument brought by opponents of the law that the language in the bill dealing with subsidies to low income americans was meant only to apply to consumers in the 16 states that set up their open exchanges. that would have taken away the financial benefit to more than 6 million people in the other 34 states that are using the federal exchanges. supporters also argued that removing those subsidies would exceptionally cripple the law. now for the second time in three years, the supreme court has sided with the white house and saved obamacare. and once again, it was the conservative chief justice, john robert, appointed by george w.

bush who wrote that majority opinion. pete williams joins us now. the president says this is the law of land for good. is he right? >> that will be up in congress in part if there is a republican president and the congress decides to try to veto it or do away with it. there are other legal challenges pending. there is one whether the bill started on the wrong side of the congress given that the supreme court said three years ago that it's a tax. but this does certainly seem to have a different character than the decision that came out three years ago that bailed out obama care on constitutional grounds. you'll recall that decision was all over the place, every justice seemed to go off in a different direction. this one is different first of all it's a 6-3 instead of a 5-4 division with justice kennedy

joining last time. remember he was so strongly against the court's ruling three years ago. and secondly, the court seems to sort of accept the broad premise of obamacare here. doesn't really tinker with it. it's just this question of who is entitled to federal subsidies that make insurance cheaper. conservative opponents said they were only for people who bought the insurance in one of the 16 states that set up their own marketplace. but the court said today that is wrong, joined by justice kennedy and liberals. what he basically said three parts of the law are interlocking. insurance companies can't deny coverage for preexisting conditions, everybody has to get insurance to make sure there is enough risk, and then the subsidies to make it more affordable. if you take the subsidies away, the court said the system collapses and that can't be what congress meant. scolia said the court was twisting the law's word, that the phrase, "established by the state, "meant what it said.

>> pete williams, thank you for joining us. appreciate it. the president had two speeches prepared to go today. according to one white house official, the other version was returned to the speechwriter with a note attached to it from the president, it read "didn't need this one, brother." in his delivered remarks, the president said it is a good day it is a good day for america and the health care law is woven into the fabric of america. >> this law is now helping tens of millions of americans. and they have told me that it has changed their lives for the better. this law is working. and it will keep doing just that. five years in, this is no longer

about a law, this is not about the affordable care act as legislation or obamacare as a political football. this is health care in america. >> i'll joined now by david simas. david, let's talk about this in big picture terms here about the legacy of this president of this administration of this era of american history. i mean this is a president who ran for office in 2008 promising to do big things, who has been stymied by congress for so much of his presidency. but he did in year two manage to get this through and today with this court ruling, this is a statement about what his legacy will be, isn't it. >> steve, this is why we do the work that we do. this is why that after 100 years of trying and then a very tough legislative fight up here in washington the president made the decision to make sure that when he had this opportunity, he could finally deliver on the promise of health care as a right rather than a privilege.

and so as he said very eloquently today, steve, after 50 repeal votes, two supreme court opinions and a presidential election, it's time for us now to move on what is really important, which is the 6 million people who can rest a little bit easier, the 16 million people who have coverage, the lowest uninsurance rate ever recorded, the slowest health care cost growth in 50 years. and if you just look at 2014, employer based premiums rising at the lowest level that they have since 1999. at the end of the day, this is why the president ran is to make sure that he was helping people. and today's judgment by the court is another opportunity for us to now really move forward on this. >> this is an issue, too, we can think beyond his presidency, assuming this thing stays on the books for the future, obviously a legacy item, but within his presidency, you look at the political toll this has taken on this president and on his party,

you think of the 2010 midterm tsunami for republicans, 2014 just last fall you had republicans out there saying we want to repeal this thing, another beg year for them. you take polls now, you still find you just ask the question of obamacare, you still find a very polarizing issue. when you look back at the politics of the last five years and the fact this is still at least until today a contested issue in american politics, do you look at this and say there are things we could and should have done differently? >> steve, the reason it took 100 years to get this done is because it's hard. the president's got the sign on his desk that an old colleague david axelrod essentially was the muse for that said hard things are hard. and when you go into this debate to really fundamentally transform or help to transform the health care system, this is what you see. but here is the reality. as we now move into the next two years and as the 16 million

people who have coverage grow every single year, and as it becomes fully embedded into the fabric of american society, i think what you began to hear today with republicans up on capitol hill, some of them saying, well, maybe we should try a different approach while others are simply saying repeal and replace. steve, that is going -- the repeal and replace is going to become increasingly untenable as this really gets woven even deeper into the fabric of american society. so again, this is why we do the work that we do to make sure that we help as many people with a little time that we have here holding these positions. >> thanks for your time tonight. appreciate that. and one of the leading proponents of the law, head of families usa advocacy group ron pollock, was in the courtroom today. he later emerged with a triumphant fist pump. he's accompanied by gwenn

jackson, another supporter whose family has benefited from the law. and ron pollock joins us now along with dr. zeke emanuel who was an adviser to the white house on health care. so ron, let me start with you. you were joined today by somebody who has benefited directly from this law. this court ruling today in real terms to real people, what does it mean? >> it means that they now have the peace of mind that the health coverage they couldn't get before the affordable care act became law, now they know that they are getting significant help, they're get substantial subsidies that make health coverage affordable. and it won't be taken away. and so we have talked to countless people many of whom we've brought to washington to tell their own stories. gwenn was one of them. and they all say that if it wasn't for the affordable care act, they would be uninsured, many of them have major health care problems like gwenn's husband, he had a significant tumor. and if he did not have health

coverage, he could not have gotten the care he needed. he ultimately got the care he needed. if he paid for it out of pocket, it would have cost $195,000. but because the affordable care act was there and she was able to afford the premiums, she got -- the family got the help. and so there are lots of people who tonight i think can breathe a big sigh of relief. >> plenty of reaction today from opponents of the affordable care act. steve, john boehner vowing to continue to try to dismantle obamacare. >> the problem with obamacare is still fundamentally the same. the law is broken. it's raising costs for american families. it's raising costs for small businesses. and it's just fundamentally broken. >> zeke emanuel, is there anything to that critique? he's saying it's putting a burden on businesses. families with rising costs. is there anything to that

critique? >> i don't really think so. after five years of being in place, no matter what metric you measure, access, as you heard, 16 million more people getting coverage, the quality is improving in the system. the cost of the health care system actually are at historic lows. premium rises have been low. part of the problem is that employers are shifting more costs to workers and we do have to protect more employees. but the affordable care act itself has really been a tremendous positive influence on the system. when i travel the country and look at health system, they're trying to improve quality and reduce costs. there is plenty more work to do. but the affordable care act was a pivotal catalyst. i think boehner and the fact that he couldn't elaborate on what the problems were just tells that you there is really no factual basis behind that charge.

the affordable care act is good and now, you know, we know that it wouldn't be repealed. john roberts was pretty clear no more frivolous lawsuits. and no more fear that the administration might come in and change this rule because the irs was the source of the ruling in this ambiguous case. and i think he pretty much put to rest for good. >> ron, you were in the courtroom today. we don't have cameras in there unfortunately. but we had this very bitter vitrealic dissent read by anthony scolia, roberts more firm than people were thinking. what was the reaction like in that courtroom? paint the picture for us because we couldn't be there. >> well, first of all, it was a little surprising. most of us expected that the decision would come down tomorrow. the solicitor general who i

spoke to just before the court proceeding, he thought that it was going to come down tomorrow. but i have to say that the chief justice actually articulated the opinion exactly the way john verrilli wrote in the brief. you have to look at the entire statute. not just at a few words. what was really interesting is when justice scolia started reading his dissent, and he was sitting immediately next to the chief justice, you know, and it was a pretty scolding dissent, the chief justice was looking straight ahead until justice scolia called it scotuscare as opposed to obamacare. i have to say i thought the chief justice really nailed this opinion very well. he understood that there is what we call a three-legged stool. one leg is you protect people with preexisting health conditions so that insurers don't discriminate against them.

secondly to make sure that insurance pools are for the just made up of older sicker people so that premiums would rise. you have a requirement that people buy insurance. and the third part of the leg is you got to help people and you provide subsidies for them. so if you took one of those legs out from under the stool, the stool would collapse. and the chief justice really understood that. he went through the history of states around the country that tried to do this and they failed because they didn't have all three legs of the stool. >> ron pollock, zeke emanuel, thanks for your time tonight. and coming up, the politics of this landmark decision today besides cementing president obama's legacy. is this decision exactly what the republicans wanted heading into the 2016 election? they get to keep raling against obamacare. now they don't have to be responsible for having to fix it. plus the manhunt for the two convicted killers in the 20th day. and donald trump has shot up to second place not just in new

hampshire, but nationwide. and he's pushing for the top spot with new attacks on jeb bush. and finally, a sneak peek at the next big supreme court decision we're all waiting for, will same-sex couples have the constitutional right to marry. this is "hardball," the place for politics. automated voice: to file a claim, please state your name. carnie wilson. thank you. can you hold on? ♪ hold on for one more day ♪ really? hey, i know there's pain. why do you lock yourself up in these chains? ♪ ♪ this would be so easy if you had progressive. our mobile app would let you file a claim and help you find one of our service centers where we manage the entire repair process. things will go your way if you hold on. [ sighs ] someday somebody's gonna make you wanna turn around and say goodbye.

♪ say goodbye ♪ no, you just made it weird. take zzzquil and sleep like... you haven't seen your bed in days. no, like you haven't seen a bed in weeks! zzzquil. the non habit forming sleep-aid that helps you sleep easily and wake refreshed. because sleep is a beautiful thing. get ready for chris christie. sources with knowledge tell nbc news that christie will announce his presidential campaign this comes tuesday. he's expected to do so in his hometown of livingston, new jersey. christie is pressing ahead with a presidential campaign despite sinking poll numbers in his home state.

welcome back. democrat its are praising today's supreme court ruling.

hillary clinton said, yes, scotus affirm what is we know is true in our hearts and under the law, health insurance should be affordable and available to and you. meanwhile a crowded republican field finds itself in a shouting match over the decision where each statement seeming to get angrier than the last. jeb bush said he was disappointed by the ruling. ben carson said he was deeply disappointed. chris christie said this decision turns common language on its head. rand paul took it a step further even, this decision turns both the rule of law and common sense on its head. mike huckabee then slammed the rules as an out of control act of judicial tyranny. ted cruz called the court a bunch of robed houdinis who transmogrified a federal exchange. they are lawless. joan walsh is editor at large and msnbc political analyst, and

former policy director for mitt romney. lanny, is there no room for a republican running for president to say the court's spoken? >> i think all the republicans will have to continue to maintain that they want to repeal obamacare. i think the big question is who will come out and say i have a plan to replace obamacare with something. that's always been the challenge. >> repeal and replace has been the rallying cry since this thing was enacted in march of 2010. how come five years later we still haven't seen replace? we've had three elections since then. >> to be fair, we have seen replace. there are a number of different republican plans out there. people don't cover them. but these candidates have to specifically articulate the one they're for. >> i'm always struck trying to figure out is it going to be

that the humble court has upheld the constitution or the activist judges. it always seems to alternate. >> no, and i think they will outdo themselves destroying this decision, but will they move on to john roberts next. is that the next bar that you have to cross. i really position that this is incredible. and i also think -- i mean this is a rare bipartisan moment for the country, steve. i mean this is a 6-3 decision written by job roberts who consulted with jeb bush over the florida recount. his republican background is clear. and he went out of his way not merely to defer, but show all the ways it's clear it's right. and just to get to what lanny says, i don't know what the republican plans are besides a little bit more tax credits. and the final point i'll make about it, he talked about that three-legged stool and that is the problem with republican plans.

if you want to say, and every doesn't seem to want it say this, we won't exclude people with pre-existing conditions, you need the individual mandate and you need subsidies. so he's explained it brilliantly. >> that's always struck me at the heart of about this. what obamacare was, it was the old policy of the more intrusive government run anything like that. isn't that the essential problem republicans had? obama took their plan from 20 years ago. >> i don't think that's right. where obamacare jumped the shark was to put all sorts of requirements on for example what plans had to cover. that raised costs. i think there was concern about not giving people proper choice. that's been responsible for cost increases. i think that's really at the core of this is the question about what kind of plans can people choose and how does that

link up with health care costs. i think that's the question candidates will have to address. will there be elements of the plan that may look like obamacare? perhaps. but at the end of day, it's how prescriptive the plan is and it bothers a lot of republicans. >> today's ruling gave republican candidates another chance to sound the war cry to kill the law. here is senator lindsey graham on the floor of the senate. >> 2016 race, domestically will be centered on health care as the most dominant domestic issue in the country. >> and ted cruz said today that this decision makes the 2016 election a referendum on the full repeal of obamacare. rand paul went on fox news describing this as a wake-up call. >> i think people may wake up in the next election cycle and say we're tired of obamacare, we'd rather try freedom and competition and choice. >> today's ruling also saves the

republican party from the chaos that would ensue if they all had to agree on a replacement plan. rick santorum acknowledged today that we've seen circular firing squad after circular firing squad when there has been tough issues. however, the law's popularity we should note it does continue to struggle. according to a new apgfk poll, 27% of americans support the law, 38% oppose it. i think that is the complicated thing here when we talk about the politics of it. we've always said the individual components of obamacare are popular. in terms of it being in effect, people benefitting from it, they like it. but that term, obamacare, do you like obamacare, do you want to repeal it, still doesn't poll well. so is there an opportunity here for the republicans in 2016? they don't have to worry about fixing it. they can say i want to repeal obamacare. >> to say that the election will

be a referendum on obamacare in 2016, it was already in 2012. and so i agree with you, i think the court did the republican party a great favor by taking this off the table. there would have been a civil war inside the party if they had to come up with -- there were some responsible people who were at the least trying to put forward some kind of transitional thing for the people who would lose their subsidies. that would have fallen the part. and that's the other thing that would present a president bush or president cruz which is not going to happen, he could not go his own party to agree on an obamacare replacement. it's like o.j. searching for the real killers. we never find it, but they keep saying that they will do it without having to do it in the wake of this decision. >> you can envision a day in the future when the republican party makes the decision that obamacare is the law of the

land, they accept the basic framework and they move on from there, they stop saying they want to repeal it? >> you know, i disagree with the notion. i don't think obamacare will be the central issue of the 2016 campaign. i think joan is largely right in the sense that we had that discussion in 2012. i don't think that you will see people move on from the notion of getting rid of at least large swathes of the law and trying to replace it with something else because i do think fundamentally it's become a litmus test issue for a lot of candidates on the right. so while i don't think it will be the principal issue, i think it will be an issue. i think this election will focus on the economy and foreign policy. i think that's principally what this will be about. >> what people on the right find most offensive about the law is the idea of the mandate, but the than date is the glue that keeps the thing together. >> right. and that's the problem with republicans coming up with an alternative plan. they really have never been able to put it together. they don't like several of the legs. they don't like the subsidies either.

there is no way to replace it. this is a classic example of an issue where jeb bush said somebody has to be willing to loose the primary to win the general. we know that can't happen, but they are racing to the right to outdo themselves in describing the tyranny of this law and then they will have to race back to the senate, face hillary clinton who has championed the law for her whole career. so it's a terrible problem. it was solved for them temporarily, but it will be terrible for them in 2016. >> none of them losing the primary on this one today. that's for sure. thank you. appreciate the time. much more on the supreme court decision today and the big one still to come about gay marriage. but up next, another prison employee now facing charges in connection with that prison break as the manhunt enters its 20th day. welcome back to "hardball."

welcome back to "hardball." a second staff member of the prison in upstate new york has now been charged, this time for exchanged a screw driver and needle nose pliers. gene palmer said he let david sweat and richard matt have access to a catwalk and unknowingly passed tools through ground meat. he gave access to an electrical box and traded the tools for paintings made by richard matt. an attorney for palmer insists the veteran prison guard had no idea he was helping with an escape plan. >> he did not display special treatment towards specifically mr. sweat and mr. matt. if you talk to other prison guards, it's common practice to i don't want to say curry favors because it doesn't describe it appropriately, but they try to

get some level of trust from these individuals. >> court appearance scheduled for today was moved to monday after palmer notified the judge that he will be switching attorneys. palmer remains out on bail. joining me now to bring us the latest on the search is john yang. in terms of where this search stands right now, the last couple days seemed like we were hearing that it might be narrowing a little bit. dna found in cabins. where does it stand now as we hit day 20? >> reporter: they remain very focused on this area around that cabin where someone saw someone run out of the cabin and they found dna belonging to both of the escaped prisoners. and also they have no evidence that they moved on from this area. they still believe they're on foot. they don't believe they have left this area. so the focus remains here. the concern also is that they may have picked up weapons along the way and that they're now armed.

as that search remains fairly narrowly focused, the investigation into the help they got inside the prison is widening. we know now this gene palmer, this prison guard, now charged with giving them access to that catwalk as early as november 2014. this means that they would have had a lot of time to come up with this idea, this plan. we also know that several prison guards are under investigation as they look into what kind of help they got inside to get out, who gave it to them, and what kind of help they might have gotten from outside. >> all right. john yang live on the scene up there, thanks for the time. and joining me now is former commissioner of the new york city department of corrections. he was also police commissioner under rudy giuliani. and he's been on the other side of the cell block where he served time on tax charges.

he wrote about his time and he joins us now. so you've been on both sides of this. i'm curious what you make of what you are learning about what life in that prison was like and how it could have led to something like this. >> you know, what the reality is no matter what the woman, the supervisor, the civilian supervisor did or what this uniformed officer can it, if the security in the institution was working the way it should have been, the plan would have been discovered and these guys would have never gotten out. what is pretty scary to hear the reports today, these guys were given equipment, given tools, given things that helped them dating back to november of 2014. that means that this plan was in the works for several months. and that's pretty frightening considering they had, you know,

damage to the cells, they were digging through the cells, they had equipment in the cells, they were, you know, they were putting this whole thing together. you mean to telling me at a maximum security setting nobody searched those cells, nobody had any idea what was going on? and i think that's where you'll see the investigation spawn from this point to why didn't they. why wasn't those cells searched. what did it other officers know, what were the kind of relationships given -- what was given to these guys, you know, intentionally or unintentionally that may have helped them. >> so what this guy's lawyer is saying is basically you're dealing with the hardest of the hard criminals, a lot looking at never getting out. and if you're work in the prison, you need order, you need good behavior. you need some kind of incentive, some kind of carrot that you can offer these guys to get them to cooperate, to get them -- maybe

to earn their trust so they will tell you when something is up. how do you draw that line when it comes to things like cooking, allowing them to cook in the cell, maybe giving them a tour of the catwalk? in a way you could say maybe those were well intended carrots. >> you know what, there are carrots, there are things, incentives that you can give inmates within the guidelines of policies and procedures. and within the guidelines of the law. some of the stuff they gave these inmate, it's not within the guidelines of the law or policies and procedures. number two, these guys were placed in what i understand to be an honor dorm where they were allowed to wear civilian clothe, allowed unescorted moving in certain parts of the facility. i don't know whose idea that was, but given the classification of these inmates specifically, that's absurd. i mean it just should not have happened. the other thing like i said, for months nobody was checking these cells. and on the night these guys disappeared, they were last seen

at 10:30 at night discovered 5:30 in the morning missing. you mean to tell me over a seven hour period you had bed checks where you have to see a living breathing body, nobody saw them in a cell and it wasn't reported? i just -- the security of the institution has major flaws and failures. and i think that's the reason governor cuomo is assigning inspector general to look at it. and i think that investigation will be quite interesting. >> all right. bernard kerik, thanks for your time. appreciate that. and up next, don't look now, but donald trump is in second place in the latest polls. trump on the debate stage, should be jeb bush's worst nightmare. that's next with the round table.

kids are expensive. so i'm always looking to get more for my money. that's why i switched from u-verse to xfinity. they have the most free on demand tv shows and movies on all my devices. it's perfect for me because my kids are costing me a fortune. i'm going to cabo! [ music plays ] don't settle for u-verse.

xfinity is perfect for people who want more entertainment for their money.

i can't believe it. some people are thrilled. i'm not thrilled. how can bush be in first place? this guy can't negotiate his way out of a paper bag. so i'm in second place to bush. i hate it. >> welcome back to "hardball."

that was donald trump on tuesday night reacting to the poll out of new hampshire which shows him in second place in the granite state behind jeb bush. as you can see, it didn't take long for trump to train his fire at the man in that top spot. he didn't hold back from mocking bush on twitter either saying yesterday that, quote, the highly respected suffolk university poll just announced that i am alone in second place in new hampshire with jeb bust, and he puts in parentheses bush, in first. now, a new fox news poll finds trump has also jumped in to second place among republican voters nationwide. that's a gain of 7 percentage points since earlier this month. in an interview on telemundo today, trump projected he will soon replace bush as the gop front-runner. >> i'm number two and i don't think jeb bush can do the job. i'm not a big fan of jeb bush. frankly he's there because the

name bush has been away, but the last thing we need in this country is another bush and i think i'll supersede jeb bush in the not too distant future. >> in that same interview, trump also slammed jeb bush for supporting his brother's appointment of supreme court chief justice john roberts who wrote the court's majority person upholding the affordable care act. >> justice roberts is a disaster. he was put there by bush, jeb bush actually wanted him to get that position and justice roberts is the one that gave us obamacare. it should be called roberts obamacare. >> i'm joined by the round table. perry bacon, sabrina sadecki, and howard fineman. howard, i never thought i'd be saying this, but i'm looking ahead to that debate in august, that first republican debate, we know jeb bush will be on the stage. clearly donald trump will be on the stage. and of all those candidates, i think the one jeb bush has to worry about is donald trump.

how do you handle what he's throwing at him. >> donald trump is following a classic strategy which is to punch up. go after the guy who is it normally the frontrunner. although i must say somebody with 15% of vote is not exactly a scary frontrunner. donald trump can rampage through the field of pygmies because nobody is going anywhere. he's not a symbol of his own strength as a potential nominee. he's a symbol of the weakness of the entire field. and i must say also the unwillingness most of the field to talk straight and talk tough. and donald trump is doing it. the language that you saw there in those quotes, that is vivid fighting language. he's not beating around any bush, so to speak, and that's attractive to people who don't really know much about all these candidates and they don't like to hear familiar names.

>> it's bluster, but bluster is theater and theater can be compelling. sabrina, bush will not be able to ignore him in that debate. i talk to a lot of republicans who they would like to ignore the donald trump candidacy, but if he's up there on that stage in his face saying you're a wuss, jeb bush, you can't stand up to me, bush will have to come up with something to respond to that. >> he will. and i think that the best strategy for jeb bush is still at least for now to treat donald trump as a distraction. if you're jeb bush, you consider your main opponents to be the more credible opponents like marco rubio, maybe chris christie. voters don't like the mud slinging. i think jeb bush wants to stick to his message and not fall into the trap what happened in 2012 where you had a lot of republicans beating each other up. that had long lasting effects for mitt romney. we don't think republicans want

to repeat that mistake by giving too much credence to these fringe candidates like donald trump. they want to make sure that they express confidence and have a more coherent message rather than spending a lot of money and time attacking one another. >> perry, here's what i'm waiting for. i wonder if the key -- if you're the republican party and you don't want this to go too far out of control, republicans right now behind the scenes roll their eyes at donald trump. the question to me is when do they start coming forward. when do the fox news of the world you can when do the talk radio hosts, when do the bloggers train their fire on trump. i think back to 2012 when newt gingrich won south carolina, it wasn't the media, it was the republicans attacking newt gingrich. will we see that same thing. >> i position back to herman cain leading the polls and they began attacking him. so i think there will be a

moment when trump will be attacked. but i think it's too early for that now. if he goes in to a debate and says something really embarrassing about bush or rubio or walker, i think conservatives will say we want him in no more debates. trump has some popularity. it's still early. he's honestly saying things about bush other republicans agree with. a lot of republicans feel that way. so right now trump is punching bush and people like it. i think when it gets later on, if he says something much worse or if he's in two or three debate, then there will be a problem. if he keeps john kasich off the stage because he's ahead of him, then it becomes a problem because trump is not a plausible candidate. >> he might actually do some of those other candidate as favor eventually because if donald

trump spends all his time beating up on a potentially weakening or at least occupying jeb bush and if the media focuses a lot of its attention on donald trump who inevitably will fall, that gives a lot of advantages in many respects to a lot of those other candidates. >> creates the opening. turning to the other side, new polling from the democratic side shows some movement for bernie sanders. look at this, a new poll from wnur up in manchester, new hampshire has clinton at 43% and sanders right behind her at 35%. i look at those first two states, iowa, new hampshire, and it does strike me if you're bernie sanders, you're going to pick iowa, new hampshire because probably the most favorable venues. but is there something here that is bigger than just being the next door neighbor in new hampshire that is driving this? >> well, at this point in time,

there is still a lot of voters who need to be convinced by hillary clinton. a lot of people who will reluctantly support her. so i think it's not uncommon to see a surge for someone like bernie sanders who has his own built-in following. he's a social media superstar. he has a really core i think support within the base over the progressive base especially. but i also think it's very early. it's really early and the fact he's peaking this early means that hillary clinton is probably fine later down the road. she still has a sizable lead even if these states. so this could be one outlier. and nationally she's still at over 60%. so i don't think she has too much to be worried about and i think especially if she campaigns more, so far she was on a quiet listening tour, when we really see her drawing the same crowds at rally across these early voting states and up there of course on a debate stage, then i think the reaction to her will be a lot different. >> i don't know if she's swayed by this, but i'll tell you who you this is driving crazy. martin o'malley.

anyway, round table staying with us. when the moment's spontaneous, why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction and the urinary

symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a free 30-tablet trial. trump has some popularity.

everything, he's been very pro gay rights decisions up until now. everyone assumes he's going to be for gay marriage here as well. so the odds of a ruling that would not -- i think everyone will assume there will be some kind of declaration that there's a constitutional right to gay marriage. those who can't have a statewide ban on gay marriage. and on the politics of that, that means the republican candidates will figure this out. because the polling right now shows that even republicans, if you look at republicans under 50, are becoming more and more for gay marriage, pretty much every day. and you have to figure out, can you be elected president in 2016, and be opposed to gay marriage? jeb bush and rubio say right now they're opposed to gay marriage. i wonder if they'll have to modify their position some. >> howard, we only have a few seconds left, but is there an opening?

if the court says this is legal in all 50 states, is there an opening for a republican to say, you know what, it's settled, let's accept this? >> yes. and someone on that stage would be wise to take it, if it's open to them. because the demographics and the changes in history going on right now are historic. the republicans are behind on every issue, almost on every step. if they could get ahead or at least even on something, they darned well better try and this could be it. >> we will see how they respond, when we get that ruling again, tomorrow or monday. thank you to perry bacon, katrina, back with more after this.

i take prilosec otc each morning for my frequent heartburn. because it gives me... zero heartburn! prilosec otc. the number 1 doctor-recommended frequent heartburn medicine for 9 straight years. one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn.

soccer. top chef. soccer. top chef. [whistles] soccer! top chef! [shouting] disco! [singing] say it and see it. the x1 voice remote, only from xfinity.

that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. >> tonight on "all in." >> for the second time, the president has walked back from the cliff. >> the obamacare wars are over and the president has won. >> the affordable care act is here to stay. >> what today's supreme court decision means for america and the obama legacy. plus, the republican meltdown over justice roberts. justice scalia's colorful dissent. and today's most shocking supreme court decision that had nothing to do with obamacare. then, the ongoing fight about the south's confederate legacy. >> i certainly honor my ancestors. >> i have no respect for your ancestors. as far as your ancestors are concerned, i should be a slave. >> and as donald trump skyrockets in the polls -- >>