we are supposed to pick your word over justice alito?we are supposed to take your word over a lady who donated to your cause, miss gail wright, you are disparaging her name, justice alito's name, and the court? and you have this, which obviously did not happen. we've got the transcript, we've got the audio, but you made it a big deal in your book. one thing i have learned, people who mislead folks on small things mislead them on big things. and you know what? you can light in the book, it's not a crime. you can lie to the new york times, it's not a crime, but when you come in front of congress and you say things that are not true, you are not allowed to do that. you are not supposed to do that. we have seen it. you are not supposed to do that. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. at this time, the time is expired, so i will therefore recognize myself for five minutes of questions. reverend schenck, i have been in congress now for 16 years. never have i witnessed the kind of savage attack that has been levied against you today. i'v

justice alito? >> ms. blatt, it seems c1 is an distinction between interactive computer services as an internet content providers. when we flip over to f, the distinction i glean from that is that if you are picking and choosing, analyzing and digesting content, the bulk of how you described google's activity in search engine context. are protected and the content must be something more than that, providing content must be something more than that. is that right? >> you are correct. some of the amicus briefs do this. in terms of looking at what is information being created or developed, there is that distinction. it can be by sorting, you develop partial information. i got a little upset when you talked about a remand that somehow the ninth circuit got it wrong. >> let's go there next. it seems under that understanding of the statute there is some residual content for which an interactive computer service can be liable. you would agree that that is possible? >> not on this complaint. >> no, not on this com

chief justice roberts: justice alito. justice alito: i'm afraid i'm completely confused by whatever argument you're making at the present time. if someone goes on youtube and puts in, isis videos, and they show thunas of isis videos -- don't tell me anything about the substantive underlying tortla. if the person is -- ifoutube is sued for doing that, is it acting as a publisher simply by displaying these thumbnails of isis videos after a search for isis videos? mr. schnapper: it's acting as a publisher butomhing they helped to create because the thumbnail is a jnt creation. it involves third party and the u.r.l. and some other things. if youtube uses thumbnails at all, it is acting as a publisher with respect to every thumbnail that it displays. mr. schnapper: yes. yes. they'rpuishing the thumbnails. the question is are they third-party content or -- looelt looet if that's your -- justicalo: if that's your argument you're arguing that the statute does not provide protection against a suit that is in substance based on th

justice alito: forget intent. what are the results when you do a computer simulation that takes into account all race neutral distctg factors accepted by this court and the result is, not thentent, this is a computer, it does not veny intent, the result is you do not get the second majority minority district. ms. khanna: the reason that does not answer the question is because the simulation is gerating more questions than they answer. en if you were to charge it wi ting into account race neutral criteria, there is a lot of subjectivity going into how you co that. alabama's expert below acknowledged thaturaps were not reasonably compact and there is no bright line rule. even putting those criteria into our comper algorithm requires coming up with bright line rules that do not currently exist. instead what we have is a reasonablessn great -- inquiry to determine whether the ngs one test is satisfied. >> justice alito gave the game away when he said race neutral means do not look at community of interest because it i

it's another decision offered by justice alito. justice alito denied disclosing the decision.ne actually pressing the justices. last year, justice clarence thomas was the lone dissent against a supreme court decision to let the house january 6th committee obtained trump's presidential record records. months later, the washington post -- thomas's wife, ginni thomas, had texted trump trump's chief of staff, mark meadows, in the lead up to january 6th, urging trump to overturn the election results. any lower court judge would be forced to recuse. clarence thomas? the lone dissent. none of this is, shall we say, a good look. nor is it normal for our country's justice system. and that is why today, democratic senator chris murphy and democratic congressman hank johnson introduced bills to make ethics rules for the highest court in this land. joining us now is the man himself, chris murphy, senator from the great state of connecticut. senator murphy, thank you for being here with us tonight. can you tell me what you want to do in this bill? >> what we want to do is very simple. we w

justice alito? >> i have two questions. if this were a criminal case, i think it's clear that there would not be aiding and abetting liabilities. the elements, and we've addressed aiding and abetting and criminal cases directly. the intention -- it requires the intention of the crime being committed. that's not alleged here. we need to decide this case theoretically, under the case that has a statutory status and according to the preamble of the statute. that makes it somewhat difficult. the second, the second -- the first sides -- the first factor is satisfied. >> correct. the second, timmy has little meaning, maybe you can tell me how we read into it. he must be generally aware of his role in a torch's activity. if twitter knows that isis is a terrorist organization and isis members are communicating with the purpose of furthering their terrorist activity, then twitter is aware of its role. it is a major role, it is just a role. what substances is there to that? for purposes of this case, we are n

. >> counsel, you have, justice alito? counselyou have made a number of argument, some of them are quite far reaching, and you've been questioned about some of those. already, in the argument toda let me make sure i derstand your basic gument. your least far rehing arguments, and as i understood it's, the argument is that the first gingo's precondition requires thshowing that there n a reasonably nfigured majority minority district. it's n just any old majority minority diricts. it has to be reasonably configured, and reonably configuredea something more than just compact. it means a strict that is the type of dirict that would be drawn bynd unbiased mapmaker. no a plaintiff in ca like this can attempt to satisfy at firscoition simply by coming foard with a district ats majority noty. but, that doesn't enthe inquiry, becsef it can be shown,s u claim, the computer simulations inhis case show that that is not the kind of district that an unbiased mapmaker ulever draw. then, the rsjingles precondition ino satisfied. that's h

the one little adventure that they made into an investigative process went into the alito draft opinion that was because they had the assumption that this was going to be some clerk, and probably some liberal clerk. in fact, in there you described the investigation very well. it is pretty much botched, if not outright flubbed. they lead with, even though they couldn't find in individual to recuse, they lead with the indication of what the individuals motive was. it just happened to be him that focused the blame on the liberal chambers of the court. clearly they went into that thinking they would tag some liberal clerk, but when it got a little bit hairy or, when it become apparent that there was actually pretty strong motive from the conservative justices, in order to backstop this decision. trying to make everyone see it, and nobody could go get squishy on it. that's when the investigation went awry, and it hasn't been the same since. >> what is the chief empowered to do, looking at the situation? he could say, okay, i'm going to open up a complaint department here. this is what i'm go

wade, which was authored by justice samuel alito.required to sign affidavits, swearing that in like the decision. that the justices themselves or not. that investigation led to a whistleblower coming forward, alleging that way back in 2014, he received an early heads up about the landmark hobby lobby, contraceptive decision. another -- now justice alito denied disclosing the decision, and that seems to be how that story. ends with no one pressing the justices. last, year clarence thomas was the lone dissent against a supreme court decision -- obtain trump's presidential records. months, later the washington post -- jimmy, had texted with trump's chief of staff, mark meadows in the lead up to january six. urging trump to overturn the election results. any lower court judge would be forced to recuse. clarence thomas, -- none of this is shall we say a good look. nor is it normal for our country's justice system. that's why today, democratic senator, chris murphy and hank johnson, introduced bills to make ethics rules for the highest cou

we are not seeing, obviously, justice -- we did not see him nor justice thomas, or justice alito.orrect me if i'm wrong, it has not attended a supreme court since he was caught on camera sneering at, and sort of shouting at president obama during one of his state of the union addresses. >> i think that is correct. that was president obama attacking the citizens united ruling, and alito saying, no exaggeratedly. it sets the context for what president biden might say tonight about the court at large. >> and we were talking about the court before, but the other thing going on is unpopular decisions, and also some of this pile public dialogue between justice kagan and miss roberts there, competing events. they've talked about the perceived legitimacy of the court, and then the very difficult public recording about ethics issues, just for justice thomas, in terms of not recusing from cases in which his wife was playing a material role, but also recently about justice roberts. his wife, having a job in which effectively the first lady, jill biden, trying to take her seat in the visiting

justice alito gave away, he said race neutral iis a proxy for race.regrettably, that is what it is my situations. that's why they are together. no matter eyalk about being around the river, that has little to wh anything other than race, that they come genetis later from france or spain. but the point that he ming turns section two on his head, doesn't it? it is explicitly saying that a protected group must be given equapaicipation, correct? >> yes you are. >> indifference to racial eqlity is exactly what section two is prohibiting, corrt? >> yes your honor. >> having said that, assuming that you could get a racially neutral map that did take into account true community of interests, do you believe that the maps don't make that portable? >> i don't believe that question was ever asked, it is never been posed to plfs, or courts that they required a race line. the question is a demographic one about where is that minority population. it certainly read the first time this court has instrucat plaintiffs actually have to tie one hand behind thck and -- >>

justice alito? >> if you questions. if this were a criminal case i think it would be clear it was not aiding and abetting. we have addressed aiding and abetting directly and it requires the intention of a crime to be committed and that is not alleged here. but we have to decide this case presumably under halberstam, which has sort of a statutory status as a result of the preamble to this statute. and that makes it somewhat difficult. the second, there is no dispute i take it that the first halberstam factor is satisfied. the second one, to me, is -- has very little meaning. maybe you can explain how we can read some meaning into it. a defendant must be generally aware of his role as part of an illegal or tortious activity. if twitter knows that isis is a terrorist organization and isis members are communicating for the purpose of furthering their terrorist activity, then twitter is aware of its role. it would be an important role. major role. it is just a role. >> for the purpose of this case, we ar

justice alito? miss kagan? >> wt to ask on a completely different question.one notable thing about the argument here is that on both sides there s en very little discussion of what originalism suggests about this question. so, i just want to ask, what would it committed originalist think about the kind of race consciousness th'st issue here? >> i think that an orinast would think this is clearly consistent with the origal understanding of the 14th amendment, uveities have come for with powerful evidee that surrounding the time of an action of the 14th ameme there were federal and state laws that took race into account for purposes of trying to achieve the central premi of the 14th amendment to bring african american citizens a point of equality in our society. and i think what is so notable, if the court is focused on history here, is that a petitioner has come forward with essentially no history to support this color blind interpretation of the constitution that make all racial classifications automatically unconstitutional. th nothing in history to supporth

the real danger here is that could also describe samuel alito and the other five members of the extreme right supreme court. so it feels like there are now two powerful federal courts that women, that could put women's health and lives in jeopardy. >> that's right. there have been over 200 judges appointed by -- nominated by trump, and so many of them like judge kaczmarek have an idealogical ax to grind, and they're very busy with that ax and that is why all these cases are going before him. when we think about the chaos that was created by the supreme court's overturning of roe v. wade, that is going to be completely compounded, and i know wendy knows this because she comes from the state where so much of this is happening. it's going to be even more compounded if this judge with his right-wing agenda does away with the medication abortion pill, and that is going to affect millions and millions of women in every state, even a state like hawaii which was the first state in the nation to decriminalize abortion. >> you know, wendy davis, you obviously stood up and we remember your pink sn

justice alito? justice sotomayor? ust to finish that point, we do know when numbers decrease in schools like thenirsity of california and michigan, the upper tier schools ith oklahoma school st, that blacks have reported feeling isolated and having their voices stifled. >> yes, although the correti offered in the briefs breaks down, if you look the underlying information, just to take california for example, at uc davis which african-american representation several poiner than uc merced, there are less reports of isolation. you n e that at unc, native -- there are some studentr the policy who report feelings of racial isolation. na americans who have a small percentage of presentation on campus compared africancans report feeling less racially isolated. the suggesti that that can be the standard is insufficient. >> justice k >> this ishe track. but you made a reference earlier in your remarks about gender difference there's a lot of statistical evidence that suggests colleges now when they pl gender-neutral criteria g

justice alito wasn't having it right. he certainly did not agree with president assessment of what the supreme court had decided in the citizens case. right. what was his reaction. to not stand up and shake his head? well, he didn't stand up. he did shake his head ever so slightly. that kind of. look, i sometimes give you and i'm like, really neat, really. all right. that ever so slight shake of the head maybe you mouth something he's mouthing not true. if you if you slow it down right. you can see what he's saying. but what do we notice what the supreme court does? you have a president, the united states, who says, in all due deference, he does launch a broadside the supreme court and the decision they had just handed down. and what does the supreme do in response to. they don't stand up. they don't stand up. they actually never stand up. presidents know this. right now they do. when when it is a completely unobjectionable point. right so at the outset, presidents introduced and everyone stands and applauds for them out

justice alito? justice sotomayor? >> just to finish that point, we do know when numbers decrease in hos like the university of califoia and michigan, the uppeti schools in the lama school system, that blacks have repoedeeling isolated and having their voices stifled. >> yes, al the correlation offered in the briefs breaks do you look at the underlying information to take california for example, at ucavis which has african-american representation veral points lower than uc merced, there are lessts of isolation. you can see that at unc, native -- there areom students under the policy who report feelings of racial isolatio native americans who have a small percengef representation on campus mped african-americans report feeling less racially isolated. e suggestion that that can be the standard is insufficient. justice kagan? >> this is off the track. but you made a reference earlier in your remarks about gender differences. there's a lot of statistical evidence that suggests college nowhen they apply gender-neutral crite

alito's see what we completely lost the road so the photo on the left shows the damage. you can see that powerful slid right down into the middle of the channel there. um and so many, many houses above this were blocked off, so obviously we wanted to get on this as quickly as possible. they are also assessing the damage to those critical utilities that often take a hit at the same time, including electricity, water, sewer and gas lines. we have an update tonight to a story we have been following from los angeles on the seizure of a large cache of weapons and hollywood high rise. will investigators now say that there is no evidence that the 25 year old man arrested had plans for a mass shooting. yesterday the lapd seized a sniper rifle to assault rifles and thousands of rounds of ammo from the 18th floor apartment on sunset boulevard, along with the shotgun and three pistols. the suspects bail was set at $500,000, a sweeping federal report on guns and crime is finding a shorter period of time. between one a gun was bought. and when law enforcement retrieved it from the sc

>>usce alito? just let? >> we are turning to the anng question. the states basically say we're gog lose money in taxation. one way or another. inheexas case, you argue that we shlde looking at the cost-benefit. some of th-- there will be a emdous benefit to thetas from this cancellation. because that extra money will result in increased consumer spending andeease housing insecurity. less to falls on about loans those borrowers may have, et cetera. doou agree with those that the ecom benefits outweigh any alleged financial harm in this case? >> it's a factual matter, we do not disagree. as a legal matter, we haven't asked the court ry on that as a basis for standing. we tnkhat the invocation of these harms to tax reveesre so easily answered under this chorus precedent. iou point the court of the pesylvania persecutors the case. it is on all four wars for this one. precisely idtil. what we think you need to go down the road of thinking about some of the broader arguments about tax injury in this case. it's so clear that this court is already jeed at

said to your eight colleagues, there are only nine of them, this isn't working for anybody, justice alitoly. he could go testify before the house and the senate and say he supports the legislation. and i'm sure it would pass. i mean, there are not a lot of institutions that can do anything to help themselves at this point. supreme court can. >> well, and the idea that they've been wrangling over this notion of a code of ethics for months and months and months -- it's not that complicated. they grew up as baby lawyers and judges in the lower courts where they had to abide by the same. and so, i think that you're right, if the court, these nine justices, wanted this to happen, all they have to do is ask. >> brian, where do you put the odds of that happening? >> i don't think it's going to happen right away, but i think -- i think there's a change happening even if it's happening in slow motion, in terms of the culture around the court. we've talked about this before. it is remarkable and worth noting that this "washington post" story was published at all. these discussions that the justices

four justices, clarence thomas, samuel alito, sonia sotomayor and gorsuch were absent last night. brown jackson -- george santos after the speech. the frernman congressman is under investigation for lies. you can see the two talking on the screen. according to reports, romney told santos, you don't belong here, santos is a sick puppy and shouldn't have been there, he should be sitting in the back row and being quiet instead of parading in front of the president. santos said, reminoritieder you will never be president. >> ashley: did you see this, first lady jill biden getting caught kissing vice president kamala harris husband. the interesting moment going viral ahead of president biden's address. all eyes on the first lady as she entered the house chamber to a standing ovation and she planted a big one on doug emhoff. and another viral moment from last night, people on social media are loving this reaction from utah senator mike lee when biden addressed the debt ceiling. >> the idea that we're not going to be moved into being threatened to default on the debt if we don't respond.

. >> thank justice alito? >> well, the secrardid what he did, so presumably, he had and has a vi about the fairness question that e chief justice whose, so you, what is that view? >> so, the secrety derstood the statutory authority and mandate here, to focus o whether this national emergency was going to leave borrower words off because of the pandemic. this is congre diding that the government should be in a position to provide benefits solely with of the context of the -- program and i don't think there'anpart of the statutory analysisth is congress's judgment that borrowers should be able to ge relief if the secretary makes these determinatio. but no suggestion that the relief should turn on or off based on the possible impacts on those outside the student loan program. congress obviously knew when it was giving this authority to take care of borrerwho are otherwise going to be worse off that might have otherwise impacts outside the program. wanted to make sure the secretary could provide relief to borrower

the justices that were not there, sotomayor, gorsuch, alito who hasn't attended since 2010, and justice comments. some folks may have also noticed that former supreme court justices were in attendance tonight. stephen breyer, the supreme court's biggest state of the union fan, is back in the capital tonight. this is a tweet. the first time a retired justice has been in attendance in 26 years. anthony kennedy is here as well as five sitting justices. the designated survivor tonight, it was labor secretary marty welsh. this keeps the succession of power intact as the president, the vice president, and those after him in the line of succession are all inside the house chamber. howard morton going into the c-span archives to note this. joe biden is the fourth president to deliver both the state of the union address and a response to a state of the union address. the other three were gerald ford, george h w bush, and bill clinton. on march 1, 2020 two and january 25, 1983, delivering the democratic response. here's a quote from 40 years ago from joe biden. we think it's time we put up or shu

here is funny one from justice samuel alito, confused by whatever argument you are making at the time you are creating -- it is a serious topic and heartbroken parents and other inparents, do these companies, does youtube, twitter, facebook, should they be held responsible for the content on their site leading to things like the death of this young girl? it is section 230, and this is the bigger story. they have protection under section 230 from liability. we didn't create the video, they throw up their hands. this is one of the biggest legal cases we've seen when it comes to the internet, technology and social media and why it is getting so much attention. i have to say, how they present and arrange the content, in particular, on youtube, i think the lawyers have a very intriguing case and this could change section 230. republicans and democrats both have complained about section 230, too much protection, different political reasons, but this reason again -- >> ashley: they do get a lot of protection. gavin newsom predict budget deficits for california, turns out the reality was wors

speaking of health, ever since sam alito and the bench bunch overturned roe v. wade, republicans all across the country have been looking for ways to track and restrict abortion. it being private, that's not an easy task. but one thing they've been targeting is apps that help track menstrual cycles. virginia state senate passed a bipartisan be able to access these apps which seems reasonable which is why it's being opposed by seen here not realizing he forgot to take off his picnic napkin before the speech. yesterday, youngkin blocked the bill that would ban police from seeking menstrual histories. that's a clear invasion of privacy. the only person who should know when someone is menstruating is that person and the woman she makes discreet eye contact with before exchanging a tampon, and then going on to win the lacrosse game! i only know what i see in commercials. staffers for the governor claim he killed the bill because it threatened the ability of law enforcement to investigate crime. oh, yes, there is a lot of menstrual crime in this country. you can see i

love to get your take on the confusion that so many of these justices expressed and you have justice alito'm confused by whatever argument you're making. justice thomas saying i'm still confused. what does it say to you when you have that many justices just confused about the very essence of the case? >> well, i guess maybe it's a good thing that they're admitting what they don't know. i mean, one of the justices hit it on the kid and these are not -- that changes our lives and what the court should do about it. of course, they have clerks and they can learn and they're very smart people. we don't understand what's happening on the tech side, but also this isn't our job. just like jessica said it, this is congress' job. you have an old law that now is not taking account of how these platforms actually work and the way the users interact with them and it's congress' job to fix that. they're confused by it, but more than that, they want no part of it. they want congress to fix this problem. >> they took the case. they don't have to take the case. what was the point? was the point to punt the

tomorrow samuel alito's supreme court that overturned roe v wade in the first place will hear argumentsen's student loan cancellation plan. joining me is democratic senator elizabeth warren of massachusetts. with this one judge's ruling, more than half of women who need this care would lose access to it. are you hopeful, are you worried? >> i'm very worried. i'm not worried because of the law. i'm worried about one extremist judge. as you know, a little over half of all abortions now are medication abortions with this drug called mifepristone. it's been out for over a decade, it's very, very safe. now we've got one judge down in texas. he thinks somehow he can override the fda on its scientific judgment about mifepristone. what we're all worried about is he's going to take it off the market. keep in mind, remember how a lot of us said back when dobbs came down that they're going after abortion nationwide. so this is about taking mifepristone, access to medication abortion off the market everywhere, not just in states. it's blue states as well. it's everywhere. >> the thing that worries

so important for the future of the internet and i mean listening to oral arguments you have justice alitoaking. that was to the lawyer opposed google. explain what happened and why this matters. >> yeah. in the brief the plaintiff didn't mention small things like whether or not a thumbnail institutes being a publisher of content. when it came to the courtroom that, type of argument was stuff he used at length. i think that google's lawyers and the justices were confused about the argument he was trying to make here. let's zoom out a little bit for the viewers of cnn. why this matters is that for the past three decades we have used the internet and been able to upload whatever i want. if i want to put up a picture of a health condition that i have, upload comments on yelp so i can warn people from a bad restaurant, all of that stuff has been fair game. if you were to change this law, suddenly all of these tech platforms like google, like meta, yelp would be held liable for content i post. because of that they would be unlikely to let me post at all. so the question then becomes should we c

. - is is r first s alitos cpetiti .but 're defitely nna do o b estto me our seors pr d. goa be jus aserverack ing the chaionshipfootba g ame. nerveright no th're pret mel lo i've beetryingo brthe and sbut abt two mites fore we' on st e, i'm goa be lika wired ose. - ur collas kindmessed p. - ank yo - detail details.- nestlyi'm feelg a d bit sentimen l. i me, i was ly inere threye ars d it wasrobably be three yrs of my ife. it'slown by d li, seeing the g uy peciallyhem cking a sket ll ev thougthat's n whatou're suosed t do with a bketbal i'm nna misst honestly. i'm an oy child d theseare thclosest in torothers at i've er h ad - tonighs gonna probly one omy happiest but ddest nits of the pastour ye s. th is prty muchwhat iorked rand hoi becamee to dai made mbest frids in this.the treling, iever nt out omississippi befo attachénd i'vebeen a across e wo rl we wi i'm gna be relied, anstand up and huthe peop besideme, hashak es if wlose, i'gonna std upnd cheeror the w ners th they woed just as hard. biggescompition, john bur ughs isn stage orming now. and . fehr i actuly watchg

justice alito saying, quote, i'm completely confused by whatever argument you're making, and new justice jackson, i guess i'm thoroughly confused. timothy wu, a colombia professor, said on twitter, the family's lawyer was way out of his league and threw away every lifeline thrown to him. painful to watch such an issue be argued. >> i guess it was good for the clients because the lawyer, not his first time up. >> it's surprising he did so poorly because he's been in front of the supreme court dozens of times. doesn't normally try tech cases. i think part of the other problem, and other reporters see this, too, is that the family had trouble finding a tech lawyer because google and facebook and twitter employ so many lawyers in washington, conflict of interest, they can't even use that whole office. so that same lawyer, by the way, who argued yesterday's case, is arguing the twitter case today. >> we'll take a look at that and other business and tech news coming up at 5:15. >> thanks, scott. >>> right now let's take a live look at the golden gate bridge this morning. nice and clear. not to

some of the justices, the chief justice, justice alito, justice kavanaugh, they spoke about how, i thinkwas the chief justice gave the best hypothetical. he talked about two students who graduate from high school, one takes out a loan to go to college, another takes out a loan to create a lawn service. why should the student who goes to college who will probably make more than the lawn service student in a lifetime, why should that student have a deb forgiven but not the lawn service? the government said clearly that this act involves student loans. it does not involve other types of loans. there are other types of aid available to the lawn service student who has that loan. there is that concern. they were asking whether they should factor into their analysis the idea of fairness. john: danielle, if this program were to go away, what kind of student loan borrower would be most heavily affected? danielle: because it student loan debt is disproportionately shouldered by black borrowers and borrowers of color, they would be the ones who would most likely be impacted. i think it is telling

you have sam alito and five other justices who are ideologues on this issue as well. for me to see the vice president of the united states being the spokesperson for this issue in the administration. that is a smart way to use her as she was a former prosecutor, because they're also talking about putting women in prison and maybe giving people the death penalty for doing abortions in states. >> right, joy. i think this is why you again see her taking the lead, as she has been for the administration on this issue, because of her many identities, as a black woman, black women leading on the conversation around reproductive rights, also as a prosecutor, as this heads to the legal realm and we continue to see the real-life implications of a post dobbs reality that are happening in real time. i think you saw the vice president speaking today with a sense of urgency because even as we sit here, a ruling could come even as we're sitting here, out of texas. this is, as you mentioned, the most effective, one of the most common ways of terminating a pregnancy for many people wh

samuel alito blankets or clothing. we have those, but we have nowhere to shelter nowhere to sleep. there are also growing concerns about gaining access to hard hit parts. hard hit is the hardest hit parts of northern syria, which is still split between rebel and government controlled areas due to the ongoing civil war and from shelter to medical supplies. the list of needs is drawing for earthquake victims there in turkey. ktvu is jesse gary reports on the support coming from right here in the bay area. bean bags for him, but the boar wednesday's lunch break is no break at all. she's one of many people shuttling earthquake relief supplies to this 2500 square foot warehouse in north san jose, me and my friends, we all there's not really much we could do from out here in terms of like helping people on on the ground, and so we just we really needed to figure out what we could do. continued course of action has people donating items to a trio of turkish relief groups around the bay area that whaddaya foundation is staffing this site from 10 am to two pm wednesday and thursday. we're g