alito says now, that's a reminder of how justice alito and certain members of the court have really given up any pretense of just hewing to the law and saying, this fits our precedent or this doesn't. because when you say you're stunned, you're just sharing your emotions based on what your preconceptions were. i guess he thought there would be at least one extra vote, and he is stunned that there's not. and but for him, being an important member of the supreme court, if any other lawyer said that, you'd go, well, that sounds like a you problem. that the events on the court aren't matching the perceptions and expectations you had, and you feel stunned. now, the context for this is a series of lower court losses. and we've been tracking this for you as the white house and president trump test power even more than in the first term, and basically dare the courts to do something about it. and we've seen five blows and one win this week alone. so we put that up here again. we're not going to go through every one of these, but we are tracking them for you. and we will bring you the key ones and

up on the screen, the dissent from justice clarence thomas, brett kavanaugh, neil gorsuch, justice alito. unchecked power to compel the government of the nine states to pay out and probably lose forevr dollars? the answer to that question should be an emphatic no. a majority of the court of hanley things otherwise, i am stunned. >> circular argument can answer the question is the question the supreme court gives and a supreme court majority says -- whether or not the argument in law, as alito put it, may be better, that is the decision. there are specific access to these cases, related to money, to work that has already been done. these are outstanding contracts that had to be paid. that might have had something. as kerri said, we do not know the details of the case, but i think the larger picture here -- and we have seen it repeatedly with a decision last month on one of these congressionally appointed where the majority of the court again with roberts and barrett siding with the liberals to support -- oppose with the administration is trying to do. the same ones, plus plus, actually, o

. >> one justice alito.ened. >> it's usually justice alito who's doing the. >> ominous music. and essentially he said that he found it really problematic that a single. >> district court judge that's the lowest level of federal. >> judge could issue a nationwide injunction and basically bring the entire administration to heel. he didn't. believe that the court had jurisdiction. he wanted the court to actually take up this issue on their merits. >> docket. >> so have full briefing, have. full oral argument, and then decide this ultimate question about the. >> scope of the power of the. >> purse and the president's authority to. limit the distribution and disbursement. >> of those. >> funds that. >> congress has already appropriated. >> i honestly did not know. the scope of the power of the purse was even up for debate, or. >> everything is up for grabs. >> right now. >> every single. >> thing is. >> maybe the. >> constitution is also up for. >> grabs because the justice department. is doing this, is suggestin

peter: justice alito -- jason: justice alito has been skipping this for a number of years, after a couple his motions and mouthing's kind of caught the cameras after one of his addresses. thomas has also skipped quite a few lately. and, you know, it's not surprising to me, because i do think some people are feeling like that they don't have to be there. [laughter] they've done this before. a lot of them have done this before, even for people who, you know, are relatively new. peter: but you don't necessarily see this as a protest by the democratic justices, brown-jackson and sotomayor? jason: it could be. the supreme court is a very tight group. they are very close. it's been a long time with one another pit whether or not it is a protest or whether it is just, i think i want to, you know, catch up on netflix, it could be that, too. jasmine: i had a reservation at the local eatery. [laughter] jason: it is mardi gras. peter: jasmine wright, you were talking about jd vance and mike johnson, and i asked the question before we got interrupted, which was come up would you consider the harris-j

and justice alito said he was stunned by what the majority did.e reserved most of his complaints for the lower court judge, who had, you know, just at this preliminary stage, said that the trump administration could not suddenly freeze this billions of dollars that had already been authorized and spent. and he used words against the lower court, the district court judge did had originally heard the case and will continue to be hearing the case because it's ongoing. uh, used phrases such as judicial hubris said that the lower court judge had, you know, kind of shrugged off administration arguments that had just plowed ahead. so what it shows, dan, and i think this is the thing we'll continue to see, is members of the supreme court being suspicious of what lower court judges are doing right now to put some sort of check on this trump administration and all the very bold actions that it's been taking since january 20th. so i think that that will hold. i think we'll still see a lot of scrutiny of what the lower court judges are doing. but one thing, d

. >> todd: conservative justices were furious with justice samuel alito writing in dissent today i'may the court makes most unfortunate misstep that awards uberous and imposes a $2 billion penalty on american taxpayers. rnc spokesperson danielle alvarez joins us now. justice alito goes on to question how a single district court can compel the entire government to make a payment like this. so, can doge ultimately succeed if activist judges in lower courts try to stop it? >> well, what the supreme court also said is that the district court needed to provide more clarity because they were abusing, as you said, weaponizing and using lawfare against a federal government. we know that democrat are going to try to sue up and down to prevent the mandate that president trump was delivered. really important thing to remember is exactly what these usaid dollars are going to, millions of dollars to promote tourism in egypt. millions of dollars for dei in serbia. millions of dollars for books and musicals promoting dei in south america. it's just not something that the american people will stand

justice samuel alito wrote the majority opinion, saying the federal government has plenty of tools to regulate water quality. he said in part, quote, if the epa does its work, our holdings should have no adverse effect on water quality. alito was joined by other conservatives in that view john roberts, neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh, clarence thomas, justice amy coney barrett sided with the court's three liberals. in the dissent, she writes this, quote, taking a tool away from epa may make it harder for the agency to issue permits that municipalities and businesses need in order for their discharges to be lawful. she's becoming more and more interesting as days go by. according to a local environmental group, the san francisco bay keeper, the city already dumps millions of gallons of combined sewer discharges every year, and big storms make that number higher. boating season right around the corner. all right. thanks so much to my panel for joining us today. really appreciate it. hope you all come back. thanks to all of you at home for watching as well. don't go anywhere. the lead with

, clarence thomas, neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh dissented from alito's dissent.le district court judg, who likely lacks jurisdiction, have the unchecked power to compel the government of the united states to pay out and probably lose forever, 2 billion taxpayer dollars? question mark. the answer to that question should be an emphatic no, but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. i am stunned. it is not the common tone and tenor of opinions. but as andrew pointed out, here we are. it's also very. different than justice alito's position back a few years. >> ago in the. >> united states versus texas. >> case, where. >> he dissented. >> from the supreme. >> court's refusal. >> to essentially. uphold and. >> uphold the decision of a. single district. >> court. judge in texas with respect to immigration. >> a statute. >> texas texas. >> had passed that. >> really would have encroached. >> on the. >> federal government's. >> immigration enforcement. >> in. >> that case. >> and i just want to read. you this. this was another case where the texas was chall

now, for the dissent, justice samuel alito was his usual brilliant self-writing does a sing quell districttion have the unchecked power to compel the government of the united states to pay out and probably lose forever 2 billion taxpayer dollars in the answer to that question should be an emphatic no. but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. i am stunned. well, again, that means part of the usaid slush fund is back, back on. and we deserve to know where that cash is going according to the white house the agency had spent 17.9 million to teachly is alan can journalists thousand avoid binary gendered language, 1.5 million to rebuild the cuban media ecosystem more than 1.5 information to kazakhstan and 2 million for sex changes and lgbtq activism in guatemala. so much more. joining me now someone hobby documenting all of this along with what doge has been doing as charlie kirk, founder of the great turning point u.s.a. charlie, now enshrine doge cuts which are going to continue to be racked up. continue their list building, congress needs to get involved here. what's your mes

[boos] samuel alito was saying will a e reget this much power where the judges are people to usurp thetive branch? i hopeic congress steps up on te cuts and senate realize is a disturbing trend to run out the clock on thihaves administratioe these judges to be able to havem a passion against the mandate given to them by the american people. >> laura: you have these district court judges usually charlie selected in areas where they know disproportionate number of democratic appointeesbo sost they go to the first circuw bostic, connecticut, d.c. or pacific northwest and they will findly a friendly judge. i the judge, k, the president has no authority. that is ludicrous! the administration has to go directly to the supreme court o. that question. there is a process for doing t that. but the doj and solicitors general office has to push against nationwide injunctions because i think that is reallyp going to be the only weapon in the first two years the democrats can deploy here.th >> it is only weapon.he it is the strategy of trying ton run out the clock. they are trying to flood the zone

votaciÓn de 5—4 contÓ con la disidencia de cuatro jueces conservadores, incluyendo al magistrado samuel alito ser responsable del incendio ocurrido en febrero pasado. el siniestro dejÓ saldo trÁgico de 17 muertos, miles de heridos en al cadena, una comunidad muy importante para nuestra comunidad hispana. reportero: como responsable de causar el fatal incendio que destruyÓ 9000 residencias y provocÓ la muerte de 17 personas, hoy el gobierno del condado de los Ángeles presentÓ esta demanda por negligencia y daÑos contra la compaÑÍa en california, cuyos equipos de transmisiÓn de electricidad supuestamente tuvieron las fallas que provocaron el histÓrico incendio. >> [habla en inglÉs] el abogado del condado seÑala que la demanda presenta videos y fotografÍas que son evidencias que demuestran cÓmo los chispazos registrados primero el cable de electricidad provocan equipos que caen en la base de la torre de transmisiÓn, iniciando el incendio de maleza que resultÓ en el destructivo eaton fire. >> lo recomendable comprobar que las lÍneas causaron el incendio. reportero: pedro rojas captÓ desde su kase

dissenters led by justice alito with thomas, and kavanot, which means chief justice roberts and justice barrett did side with the democrat appointees on the court. they have said they are dissenting pick let me redo a little bit a bit. the court makes the most unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on american taxpayers. they say the relief that has been ordered to pay this morning out is an extreme response tickets is a federal court has many tools to address a party's supposed malfeasance. self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them. in plain english, they think the lower court got it wrong and was way out-of-bounds to order this morning paid out. they say it is going to be the harm of the american taxpayer. they've now said to the lower court explained to the trump administration exec lee what they have to do. the order stands, the monies got to go out. >> bill: how big of a surprise is this? >> reporter: any time it is 5-4 you can't be sure exactly. it was a close decision. one vote flips either roberts or barrett t

>> written by justice alito, joined by thomas and kevin.said the district court judge overstepped his bounds. he wrote today the court makes a most unfortunate misstep that rewards an active judiciary hubris and opposes a $2 billion penalty on american taxpayers. >> in terms of the freezing or unfreezing of the funds, what happens now? >> it does not mean the money starts going out the door immediately. the justices and sent it back to the district court. back to judge ali for him to decide which programs get un frozen and when he said keep in mind the ability of the administration to carry out your order. and conceivably there will be another hearing about which programs get unfrozen. and the court, i'm sorry, the trump administration could go in and argue against some programs getting unfrozen, but i would note that in the latest pbs/npr poll 58% said they think that trump will ignore court rulings. >> 50%. what about the foreign groups, foreign aid groups that handle all of this finding, how are they reacting to this? >> they are a littl

. >> he's like, he's got justice alito. justice alito joined him in this dissent.g soil for a later challenge. it's going to upend the first amendment and also make it much harder for those, even in blue states, to get abortion care if they are choosing to do so. >> so he's on the losing side, but you want his his pursuit of these type of cases, almost this recruitment to fall back. >> i want that to. >> fall back. and i also want to note this is the strategy for the conservatives to challenge all kinds of things that they don't like, whether it's supreme court precedents or laws, to just continue chipping away, having 1 or 2 people talk about how this is bad, it's terrible, it's discredited. there's no majority here. he's citing himself over and over again, and eventually he's going to find some people to join him. and so this is just the strategy. just keep chipping away, play the long game and eventually you will actually manifest this. it is a jurisprudence of vibes bad aggrieved vibes, vibes. >> what is on your fallback list? >> my fallback list melissa. >> an

. >> what, like alito and thomas didn't show up. okay. this is not. but something they go sometimes. >> they leaves it open for interpretation. >> there's no need to get a dinner reservation in washington last night at any restaurant you want. >> scott jennings, what do you make of this conservative court doing this? >> okay, i generally like six of these people. i do not like this ruling. i, i respect the supreme court's decision. i do not care for this. i do not like the idea that an individual district court judge can compel the executive branch to spend $2 billion. i don't like the concept of that. i think that's going to have ramifications. i thought the dissent was appropriately apoplectic. so, you know, i guess we'll have to live with it. but we don't have to like it. >> elliot, this, of course, raises the question in the context of donald trump about defying the courts. we've had one judge say his order had been defied. and then i want to remind everyone what jd vance said about this. now, this was, of course, back in 2021 when he was in a dif

alito and thomas did not go last year either.but in these excerpts, one thing really stands out to you, which is a claim that the president is going to make about the right direction, wrong direction of the country. john king was just going through our numbers on that. 45% of americans say that it's going in the wrong direction, 39% say the right direction. but that's not what we're going

we remember the 2010 10 state of the union when justice alito responded to obama's criticism of a court true. anchor: so good to have you here. thank you so much. ♪ anchor: we will get some political perspective on the speech to congress and on what comes next. for that we are joined by a former u.s. senate candidate in washington state and the columnist for the new york times. thank you for being here. let's start with your reactions to the remarks last night. is he riding high? he has pushed through a staggering number of executive actions just 44 days into his second term. >> i saw bold leadership and strength. peace through strength on the world stage from president trump. very different from 2017. this is a different trump in the sense that he knows how to get things done now. he has been delivering for the american people. promises made, promises taft. he really painted a picture of the golden age of america. what we can be in terms of our economy. the number one thing he touched on, the reason he won the election, was securing the southern border. protecting families. he has alre

. >> at one point today, justice alito said there are many americans who think mexican officials areg to illegal conduct here within the u.s. he asked the attorney from mexico whether that country would be willing to face litigation from states suing mexico for, quote: aiding and abetting illegal conduct within a particular state's borders. a decision is due by june. in washington, shannon bream, fox news. >> bret: the trump administration is expected to drop a federal lawsuit pushing for emergency borings in idaho which has a strict ban on the procedure. court documents indicate the justice department outlined its plans to move for a dismissal of the lawsuit originally filed by the biden administration. dropping that case would represent a dramatic reversal from the previous administration in a state with one of the nation's most restrictive abortion laws. a bill that would ban transgender athletes from competing in women's sports is stalled tonight in the senate. a measure to break the democratic filibuster received just 51 votes last night far short of the 60 votes needed. the bil

it's a safe bet moving forward to count on elite justices alito and thomas and gorsuch basically being in favor of executive power. and so that leaves us, really, three justices in the middle, the chief justice kavanaugh and barrett, who are going to serve more or less as the middle of the swing. now, we know they're conservatives. but as you see in this case, if you can, if the liberals can win over two of those three, then they can actually pull out a decision here and there. >> all right, elie honig, as always, thank you so much. >> thanks, panel. >> and still ahead, we'll sit down with president trump's senior counselor for trade and manufacturing, peter navarro, on what a tariff compromise potentially would look like. >> and we'll speak to democratic senator chris on new reporting that the u.s. is pausing intelligence support to ukraine. stay with us. you're in the situation room. >> world. i like it, i got you. >> in. >> breaking news, the u.s. is pausing intelligence support to ukraine. cia director john ratcliffe says president trump has a, quote, real question about whether uk

ordering the white house to unfreeze $2 billion worth of foreign aid to usaid contractors, samuel alito writing i am stunned, today the court makes an unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on american taxpayers. peter morocco tasked to dismantle the agency, weighing criminal referrals over waste, fraud and abuse, arguing no one will argue with the nature of foreign assistance. is it the proper role of government to be in the business of philanthropy, if u.s. foreign aid is only reaching 10% of intended target and private sector is reaching the right people 87% of the time this is a fundamental age-old question, an internal memo shows an official saying this, the truth is, the american people have lost faith in foreign assistance. how can we not lose faith in foreign assistance when we saw the crazy things that this money was going to. >> scotus defenders will say this is only about the services already rendered, they have to pay that bill. and the fact is, congress can, should and probably has the political cover to line item veto al

. >> justice alito? >> i want to follow up on a point you were answering previously. i think it is an important point, when you say that some of to be concerned about can beared considered at a later stage as a mcdonnell douglas process, that does not mean the stereotypes are solely on the decision-makers race and a plaintiff' race. >> that is right, the court always needs to look the evidence on recorde th. we think when the court is confcted with parcular facts about a particular em, ofourse it is appropriate to consider, and the fact that a plaintiff was member of a grouphat this oyer has historically discriminated against, of course can be relevant, awoul not want the court to suggest otherwise on opin likewise, as we said in note one of our brief, ase es not have to do with the pacie case and a pattern or practice case. exacy the point. but theourthould not, based on its own independent sense of which groups experiences more discrimination or not draw its own conclusions absent. >> ok, so thist a pattern practice case. and you say tt would be permissible for a co

there was a very long, very meaty dissent written by justice alito saying this one judge has way oversteppednds to do this. this is hue -- it is hubris, it is not legit, so again the chief justice and justice barrett sided with the three democrat appointees. what they told this lower court judge is now the supreme court's sending it back saying, okay, you need to exactly spell out which of this foreign aid has to go out and when, so now the trump administration waits for that guidance. stuart: a bit more complex than i thought. we need a legal eagle to sort it out, and you did. shannon bream, thanks so much. >>> back to the markets, please. a very small gain for the dow, 50 points up. very small loss for the s&p and for the nasdaq, down 7 and 17 respectively. eddie ghabour watching the markets this morning. a couple of weeks ago you said what trump is trying to do to the economy is ronald reagan 2.0. same playbook. that would be beat inflation, get interest rates down and then look for prosperity later. is that what you think's happening now? >> our conviction on that base with case going in

well, the dissenters led by justice alito asked whether a single lower court judge has the, quote: uncheckedower to force the government pay out billions in money it would likely never be able to recover. quote the answer to that question should be an emphatic no. but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. he finished it "i many stunned. did lower court to clarify exactly what obligations the administration must pay out. the judge in that case has set a hearing for tomorrow. peter morocco now running usaid for the administration headed to capitol hill today for a briefing with lawmakers and staff that was behind closed doors. according to g.o.p. brian mast morocco expressed concerns about the ruling and didn't answer when he was asked whether he would comply. and in another legal disappointment for the trump team today, the chair of a federal civil service board ruled that thousands of probationary employees who were dismissed from the department of agriculture must be reinstated for 45 days that's while the board reviews the underlying actions. >> bret: the 5-4 is a little me

alito was joined by other conservatives in that view john roberts, neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh, clarence thomas, justice amy coney barrett sided with the court's three liberals. in the dissent, she writes this, quote, taking a tool away from epa may make it harder for the agency to issue permits that municipalities and businesses need in order for their discharges to be lawful. she's becoming more and more interesting as days go by. according to a local environmental group, the san francisco bay keeper, the city already dumps millions of gallons of combined sewer discharges every year, and big storms make that number higher. boating season right around the corner. all right. thanks so much to my panel for joining us today. really appreciate it. hope you all come back. thanks to all of you at home for watching as well. don't go anywhere. the lead with jake tapper starts right now. >> the. >> historic night ahead. >> on capitol hill. >> the lead starts. >> right now. >> tonight, the president's first. >> address to congress. >> for trump 2.0. >> what to expect, what. special guests. >> wil

but it's quite notable that alito very much would.a very intemperate dissent, joined in full by thomas gorsuch and even kavanaugh. so that is not a healthy margin of error. if you are supporting democracy and the rule of law and litigating at scotus. >> there was another big legal development today that came out of the speech last night, which i thought was interesting. elon musk, as a lot of people have argued, including my wife in a great op ed in the new york times today or yesterday, that is a flagrant violation of the appointments clause of the supreme court of the us constitution. he can't have the power he has without being actually appointed. and because it is, they've been lying essentially to courts about who is running doge in all these lawsuits. last night, trump said it's headed by musk, and today lawyers submitted new evidence in the case against doge using trump's own words. the lawyer pointed to trump saying during his joint address to congress. the department of government is headed by elon musk. this strikes me as po

justice alito, writing, does a single district court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked to compel the government of the united states to pay out and probably lose forever? 2 billion taxpayer dollars? the answer to that question should be an emphatic no. but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. i am stunned. the reason this is significant is because clearly these four justices felt so strongly about this relatively minor question. and this is important to note as we await these larger constitutional questions, to arrive at the supreme court. so we'll be watching, though. >> plenty to keep paula reid busy. paul, thanks so much. joining us now is loren bateman. she's the lead attorney on this case challenging the trump administration. i look we were talking about i'm a little bit stunned. $2 billion of taxpayer money that was appropriated and authorized by congress, which i think has something to do with this. but just to start, do you have any sense right now of timing for when these funds could be released, paid out? >> we'll be in court tomorrow to discu

katy, the judge, alito in dissent. to donald trump's expansive view of executive power. he thought that the judge exceeded his authority. but again, he said that only on behalf of himself and three other justices. >> let's talk a little bit more about how the federal workers who have been laid off are impacted and what they thought of last night's speech. my colleague jacob soboroff sat down with a few of them and watched donald trump deliver this joint address. here's what they said. >> part of it are legislative fixes, but the other part are really process and. tech improvements. and by getting. >> rid. >> of the subject matter experts that do this work for decades and the people who have the tech capabilities, and then more importantly, the trust that you build between agencies to actually align and prioritize this work is really, really difficult to see. you can get something in five minutes, but to get the apparatus back up and running, that might take five years. >> tyler, this is something that senator warner wa

but the four justices on the supreme court, justice alito, wrote the dissenting opinion, who say that the court erred by ordering the aid resumed, said this is really less like an early procedural stage in the case and more like a somewhat later stage, because the government is being forced to pay out money that it won't be able to regain after the fact. and their objection to this ruling hints at what comes next. there will, in fact be a re you know, there will be a re-up on these payments. they will go out. services will continue. that provides stability abroad for many of these important programs. but the point remains, and this is what the litigation will focus on in this next stage, the preliminary injunction, should the government have to continue to make payments while the litigation over whether trump's orders ending it are legal or not? should those payments continue to flow? >> joyce vance, thank you so much. appreciate it. up next, we'll speak with democratic congressman john garamendi of california about his party's response to the president's speech last night. plus, nbc

justice alito, you know, referred to that toward the end of the arguments when he when he said, i just thought i would ask you a question. and this is to the lawyer for mexico. i just thought i'd ask you a question that may be on the minds of ordinary americans who hear this argument and learn about this case. mexico says the u.s. gun manufacturers are contributing to illegal conduct in mexico. there are americans who think that the mexican government officials are contributing to a lot of illegal conduct here. now, there was a bit of a sideshow question, but it just kind of shows the atmosphere there. bottom line, though, i think that mexico is probably going to lose this case, and smith and wesson's appeal will succeed at the supreme court. and we will know by later this spring. >> yeah, it will be one of many cases you'll be watching. joan biskupic, thank you so much. thanks. still plenty more news to come on news central, including a violent storm with hurricane force winds moving across the united states. tens of millions at risk. we'll tell you where it's headed next. >> before t

four conservative justices did dissent from the denial of the application, though, and justice samuel alitothe lower court judge did not have, quote, unchecked power to compel the government to pay out 2 billion in taxpayer dollars. so, kelly, just one data point. but it's worth noting, because a lot of this stuff, in terms of doge and cutting federal spending is going to end up at the supreme court because of all the lawsuits we've seen filed around it. supreme court showing here they're willing to check the trump trump executive authority, at least in this case. >> there was a great piece, i think, in the journal over the weekend, eamon, that said, the administration expected lawsuits that there actually haven't been as many as they thought there would be, that they have prevailed in more of them than they thought they might. and so i wonder how this decision today might affect that sense. >> yeah. >> i mean. >> when you do something this big with the federal government, you're going to get lawsuits. it's just. >> you know, nature. >> of the thing. you know, it's like activist shareholder

and on a day when the supreme court, with that scathing dissent by alito, has told them that they have with the funding for us aid. >> it's amazing when you've got all this sort of sturm und drang, more german about all these cuts. it comes back to congress and the court. it's amazing what people might have thought about with the division of powers. thank you founders. they were pretty smart guys. >> and look at the markets, by the way, saying thank you for the delay in auto tariffs. dow's up 507. thank you for watching power lunch. >> closing bell starts right now. >> all right guys thanks so much. welcome to closing bell i'm scott wapner live from post nine here at the new york stock exchange. this make or break hour begins with a nice bounce for stocks clearly being driven still by tariff headlines. it's made for more volatility yet again today. let's show you the scorecard here with 60 to go in regulation. the major averages started moving a little bit higher midday on a headline that president trump spoke to canada's prime minister trudeau today that raise hopes of some sort of co

alito and thomas did not go last year either. but in these excerpts, one thing really stands out to you, which is a claim that the president is going to make about the right direction, wrong direction of the country. john king was just going through our numbers on that. 45% of americans say that it's going in the wrong direction, 39% say the right direction. but that's not what we're going a lot there's been dramatic gains among republicans. but the fact is, people are still struggling with the same problems that they've been struggling with. and you can see in later in the excerpts that he is, you know, pledging himself once again to deal with costs, sort of inferring that it's biden's fault. and that's what politicians do. it will only last so long. and one thing i'm wondering about is, are you going to address the budget that's coming up and the big fight where he wants a $4.5 trillion tax cut to be offset by $2 trillion in cuts, including 800 billion or so in medicaid, something that he said he wouldn't do that. that's what h

. >> i do have two speaker cards alito, dupri and theory you've been throughout ms. okay. >> if your close station doesn't include the the total by guts of any qr code the learning i could get three of your cell phones your soul under arrest is not going to be freed just one point of details to remind you something you and persons of san franciscans don't like when was the 20% remaining dissolved and then certified widow honored like jeffrey your predecessor judy you can't stop the revolution which i declared open last the 28th of january in front of the board of supervisors which consists in reuniting humanity with his fellow creatures all living spaces. everything else is about this business club is other. >> this is a chance of the cost of humanity with the precedent set in san francisco cisco incidence i'll be good 35 seconds i think for now it's all right. >> thank you next week for thank you good afternoon to all over the members alita to proof for the record she and her team folds as i speak on the matter of public employee appointment for a new director of tr

quoting from samuel alito's dissent. "i am stunned about this." that is the news out of the court this morning. the supreme court denying president trump's emergency bid to cancel $2 billion in spending from the u.s. agency for international development. host: robin in pennsylvania on the republican line. caller: there are so many people that said everything i was going to say. i am so happy with the speech donald trump gave. it was a wonderful speech. he told a lot of information. i'm appalled at the way the democrats sat there and acted like they did. we elected these people. they have to show respect. there was no respect for the american people or the president. what do other countries think about this? it's a disgrace. anybody that puts democrat has got to have a screw loose. i'm sorry. that is all i got. host: anne from new york state, democrats line. caller: good morning. i think there were many lies and misstatements but mostly lies out of trump last night. transgender operations in mice? no, it was trans genetic which is a way to do resea

and it was a closely divided 5 to 4 decision with justices alito, thomas gorsuch and kavanaugh dissenting justice department under president trump to ease off efforts to break up the company, according to bloomberg. in a meeting last week, representatives from parent company alphabet attempted to get the government to soften its stance on a breakup. a federal judge ruled last august that google holds a monopoly in online search after the department of justice, under then president biden, called for the company to divest its chrome internet browser. and the u.s. olympic and paralympic committee announced today a $100 million grant to give long term financial support to its athletes as part of the gift. every athlete who participates in the 2026 games in milan, and future games through at least 2032, will get $200,000 in benefits. the $100 million grant by ross stevens that's the founder and ceo of stoneridge holdings, is the largest donation in the organization's history. carl. >> silvana. thanks, silvana. now as we go to break watch bitcoin today trying to rebound a bit around 80 k revers

there, brett kavanaugh, the aforementioned brett kavanaugh, amy coney barrett i did not see justice alito, justice jackson. tonight, behind the president will be vice president jd vance and house speaker mike johnson. this will be donald trump's fifth address to congress. it will be the first time since 2018 that two republicans have been on that dais behind him. that is thanks to republicans very, very, very, very, very slender three vote majority in the house. otherwise, it would have been hakeem jeffries sitting there. but here he is, president trump at the podium. here we go with his presidential address to a joint session of congress. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> it's a great honor. thank you very much. speaker johnson, vice president vance, the first lady of the united states. >> members of. >> the united states congress, thank you very much. and to my fellow citizens, america is back. >> thank you. >> amen. >> six weeks. >> ago, i stood beneath the dome of this capitol and proclaimed the dawn of the golden age of america. from that

justice samuel alito dissented, joined by justices gorsuch, kavanaugh and thomas split five four decisionrning. let's just start there with your reaction to the breaking news here. supreme court putting some limits, it would seem, on what president trump and his adviser elon musk can do. >> yeah, it's i just found out about it as we were sitting here as well. and it's unfortunate. you know, i wish it would have went the other way. but at the end of the day, the supreme court is the law of the land, and we need to actually follow the law of the supreme court. so i'll take a look at it and see what the ruling is when, when we get done. but we still have to move forward. and that's exactly what we're going to do. >> yeah. and certainly the trump administration, you know, has suggested they will abide by court orders. donald trump other moments have suggested maybe not. we shall see what happens in the days ahead. let's now turn to the main event last night, the president's speech there in the building behind you. your reactions. do you think that he was able to communicate his vision for the