to answer justice alito's question it's rare . in tre case where there's a rehearing and the rehearing leads to a different decision whh en imposes an unconstitutional conviction of som, that will be the accrual date. very uomn but at least that will be a defined order which would have changed the rights and obligations of mister rd d any other litigant like him. >> but that suggti that changing the accrual date, without the accrual date was this but now we think it's that, why isn't the simpler rule just to say we don't know what the authoritative construct of e urt of appeals is until the court of appeals process ccluded, the end . >> first of all i think the hypothetical you describe is just an ordinary application whereas somethg legedly inrvw and then everything changed in a fundamental way, your fir pnt but may have on . answer your question regarding what's easiest fidelity line that doesn't work is the matter of administrative ability it's simple . mister reed did not articulate any prcie that was to sort out his petition

toanswer justice alito's question it's rare . in the rare caswhe there's a rehearing and the rehearing leads to a different decision which then imposes an unconstitutional conviction of some kind, that will be the accrual date. very uncommon but lst that will be a defined order rights and obligations of h mister reid and any he litigant like him. >> but that suggestion that changing the accrual date, without the accrual da this but now we think it's that, why isn't the simpler rule just to say we don't knowhathe authoritative construct of the court of appeals is until the court of pes processis concluded the end . >> first of all i think the hypothetical you describe is ju aordinary application whereas something alleged interview and enverything changed in a fundamental way, your first point butayave on . to answeyo question regarding what's easiest delity line that doesn't work is the matter of ministrative ability it's simple . misteredid not articulate any principle that was to sort out his petition from any hepetition for cer

of cour, e court denied review. >> justice alito?>> ts case can be viewed as having been drastically narrowed, as esult of the brieng so ou have clarified that the particular you are presngs an itative construction claim. u're challenging ay the statute was interpreted by the court of criminal appeals, and ououldn't know that hat would be the interpretation ntil the court of criminal appeals isedhat decision, gh >> that's right, your nor. >> and so, the question then, there a oer armes and they may be meritorious, but if we just look at that, the difference what's an issue, really, it's kind of se specific and really quite arw. whether in this patilar type of case, involving an authoritative construction due process la, the statute begs run whenha constructon is announced by t cca, or whether it does not begin to run until the time for petition for re-hearing has elapsed, or the petitn for rheing has been denied, right? >> i think that's the only question courtney's answer, your honor. i tnkou're calling to ask some other questions t

justice alito? justice alito: well, the secretary d at he did, so presumably, he had and has a view about the fairness question thathehief justice posed to you, do, what is that view? . prelogar: so, the secretary understood the statutory authority and mandate here, to focus on whether this national emergency was gointoeave borrowers 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 o the -- program and i don't thin there's any part of the statutory analysis, this is ngress's judgment that borrowers should be able to get relief if the secretary makes ese determinations. but no suggestion that t relief should turn on or off based on the possible impacts on those outside the stenloan program. congress obviously knew when it was giving this authority to take care of borrowers who are heise going to be worse off that might have otherwise impacts tse the program. wanted to make sure the secretary could provi

justice alito? justice alito: well, the secretary did what he did, so presumably, he h a has a view about the fairness question that the chief justice posed to you, do, what is that view? ms. prelogar: so, the secretary undeto the statutory authority and mandate here, to focus on whether this national emgency was going to leave borrowers words off because the pandemic. this is congress deciding that the government should be in a position to provide benefits solely wh the context of the -- program a ion't think there's any part of the statutory analys, is is congress's judgment that borrowers shlde able to get relief if the secretary makes these determinations. but sgestion that the relief should turn on or off based on the possible impacts on osoutside the student loan program. congress obviously knew when it was giving this authority to take care of borrowershore otherwise going to be worse off that might have otherwise impacts outside the program. wanted to make sure the secretary could provide re

either justice alito's method, where there's dta between when you can bring a claim and when the stateflimitation clock starts running or, i would suggesting, maybe tre ought not to be a delta? maybe the caue of action is -- at the same timehathe statute of limitation starts running? and both are wh the state prossas come to an end, including the opportunity for re-hearing? >> i just want to say, a few things your honor. it'sot that i don't care what the rationale is, i think they're mutually supporting rationales. one thing i do want to point out, we don't think there's an exhaustion, requirement of this court should say there's an exuson requirement. ifyou were to say the harm is not complete, isuch a way that someone cannot bring a suit earlier, i think that might be problematic dn e road. >> an exhausti requirement is justa requirement that says even once you've suffered harm you have to go through certain processes rather than bring suit. this would be a statement that the harm doesn't occ? untilthe time when the opportunity for re-hearing has gone by? >> i think i would say, this

justice alito with this question, could any reasonable person think that jack daniels had approved this use of the mark. but justice kagan with this statement, this is not, um political t shirt. it's not a film. it's not a artistic photograph. it's nothing of those things. it's a standard commercial product. i don't see the parody. but you know whatever. jack daniels argued the toy will mislead consumers. profit from jack daniels hard earned goodwill and associate jack daniels whiskey with excrement, but dozens of trademark experts are siding with v. i p claiming it's speech is non commercial. there was no apparent consensus among the judges as to which company should prevail. a ruling is expected by the end of june. andrew rhiannon andrea. thank you five year old cuban refugee elian gonzalez, who became the poster boy for extreme child custody cases is all grown up and set to become a legislator in cuba after his mother drowned on their way to the u. s gonzales ended up in miami with relatives. they wanted him to stay, but his father wanted him back home in cuba. so back, he went now g

justice alito.ou went to law school and have hindsight bias. >> i went to law school where iidt learn any law. >> it's rich to say you know what the average purchasing public knows about. i just -- i had a dog. i know something about dogs. the qstion isn't what the average person would think but a reasonable person standard. simplify the thing. >> since 1976 you had this substantial number of confusion. the best example is a rule that says likelihood of confusion or deception. if you think that'she average reasonable judge, okay. i'm not se how you do a survey onhat. if you think something is wrong you have to say careful design and reading. >> i'm concerned about the first amendment implication of your position and you began by stressing that rogers is made up. you know, there is a text that says. congress shall make no law inif i tnking on freedom of speech. your answer to the justice's hypothetical tells me there are importan constitutional issues. >> trademarks have been around since the 1600. s

justice alito all trademarks are exprsive. they have speech rights and every time you infringe them it's gng to implicate speech by definion. what the other side, and i don't hear you talking about is the half of speech no one likes, the pornography and the poison and it'sard for me to see how you can say that the trademark owner doesn't have an interesin something that approach is compelled speech if it's been used inor films and sex toys and people are proti off of that. in terms of where we are going with the message versus the product, the t-shirt example, there is very entertaining case on pe5 rejecting parody and itnvves the miami vice t-shirt that's turned into miami vice. ve funny, no one wouldhink it's confusing because they are cartoon mice so there'slenty of t-shirts tt don't meet that confusion. the first,eventh, tenth dc circuit have notdopted rogers. there's a case we cited on page 11 on the seventh circuit and it's a case saying it's completely implausible the clean slate program in the dark knight movie could b

who's the better alito ? who is this guy? so let's alito? who is this guy?let's have stormy daniels, who's obviously say one last thing, though. the only thing it seems to have done is it seems to have confused a sentence into attacking trump. and most people think sort of that think that on the sort of that side that that a mistake. it side that that was a mistake. it may done a little bit of may have done a little bit of work and confusing and his campaign a little bit. they're playing against playing them off against each other anyway, let's to the other anyway, let's go to the actual pages. what does other anyway, let's go to the acthuardianiages. what does other anyway, let's go to the acthuardian ones. what does other anyway, let's go to the acthuardian one run hat does other anyway, let's go to the acthuardian one run withioes other anyway, let's go to the acthuardian one run with nick? the guardian one run with nick? well, got a £700 well, they've got face a £700 hit wave tax and price hit with a wave of tax and price rises. and this is just it's goi

who's the better alito ? who is this guy? so let's alito? who is this guy?let's have stormy daniels, who's obviously say one last thing, though. the only thing it seems to have done is it seems to have confused a sentence into attacking trump. and most people think that the sort of that think that on the sort of that side was mistake. it side that that was a mistake. it may done a little bit of may have done a little bit of work and confusing and his campaign a little bit. they're playing against playing them off against each other anyway, let's to the other anyway, let's go to the actual pages. what does actual front pages. what does the guardian run nick? the guardian one run with nick? well, £700 well, they've got face a £700 hit a of tax and price hit with a wave of tax and price rises. and this is just it's going to hit families around 50 on 50,000 income and they're talking about it's going to cost £700 a year. council tax bills would increase by £99 as well from people first, this from cbi economic consultancy and economic consultancy. and it has gone

>> i agree tily justice alito.ld only add that thli between vacature and declaratory relief, that my friend on the other side suggest here. they suggest that the unit states's position might be somethi ee in a subsequent case. and the reas w their interpretaonhould be rejected. >> like jti gorsuch, i did not have the benefitf serving many years on the d. ccuit. and vacating regulatio three times before breakfast or however -- five times before bakst. this does seem to me le pretty big issue. as justic kavanaugh mentioned, we had three pag, have three pages from the governmen on this. it is opening brief. the argument is based primarily on the review article, innovative law review article. that appeared in 2020 and you came back with three pages. the government expanded their argument to four pag in the replybrief. now, what we do with this? we left to do all of the scholarship that would be requid figure out whth this new interpretation is the correct interpretation it. but you say, and you are right, that this is

i'm going to need an oxygen tank christie alito faced the boothbay liz nagy. and elizabeth schultz. and nascar for best supporting anchor goes to faith abou bay. just want to thank god, of course, want to thank my wonderful team without them, i am thing. nothing at all. next up the award for most iconic guest and the nominees are coach cal perks in many motivator. for me every day and you could be one of the great janet el khatib in mom goals. i kind of know what foods they like. but that's why if you saw they have options in there and birkin. ticktock tipper is going through a rough time, so i really just want to put a smile on someone's face. and the winner is coach cal perks in many motivator. incredible honor. this is thank you. i want to thank will gand keeping me up past my bedtime and put awesome interview. keep getting the w. everybody the final award of the night the coveted best acting anchor. and you timber in interview with the empire. welcome welcome. i hope i didn't frighten you just getting used to these overnight hours. will ganson insomniac games has been submitted

justice alito? justice sotomayor? >> this is ssttially different because the secretary is authorized to cancel loans under hda, so this is not an ti as a moratorium on eviction, which had never occurred previously before or was not in the wheelhouse of the agency. at least thaishat the court said. i had a diffen of opinion. putting that asideth is not an action that could come as a rprise because it i expressly permitted under the hea act and nothing in the heroes act says that the secretary cannot do something that is in the normal course of its business in circumstances that juifit like a school shooting -- closing or like a location. the are exceptions that are permitted under ha to cancel a debt. why would i have a view that congress did not understand at in a proper emergency, that cancellation would be right? >> i wouldo ck to my prior answer, which is there is a difference between modifying an existingoaforgiveness program in light of the national emergency, which is appropriate. an example o

justice alito: i was quite surprised by the aumt based on alamonte gonzalez. i do not have a propriety interest in the opinion. i understood the issue to be the meaning of the operation of the statute, not the meaning of n -- an injunction. have i misread that? general stone: no,arof that is what is meant by an order that enjoinsr strains. juste alito: i also see this , is not a slip of thenid states report, but the supreme urt reporter. probably, this is accurate. there is a footnote which says an oral argument, the government suggested 1252 f1 not only bars classwide injunctive relief, but also prohibits any other form of relief that is "practically similar to an injunction." including declararyelief. according to the footnotes, we specifically reserved decision on that question. is it your understanding that is an accurate footnote, d took pains in this decision, to reserve this decision on whether injunction means mething that is not formally an injunction, but might have the effecton injunction? general stone: i agree entirely. i would only add that line

but just a few months before that, justice samuel alito's draft opinion was leaked. made an interesting observation, you write, quote the justices who joined the lido before the 98 page document became public never wavered after the leak. perhaps they never wavered because of the disclosure. do you think it's possible that the person who leaked it? was a conservative who wanted to make sure that these people stuck with where they were at that moment. well i can tell you what the effect was the effect. was it locked in those votes once the 54 was out there with the league once the tone of that alito pin opinion was out there , it made the chiefs efforts at compromise negotiating between both sides nearly impossible. i do wonder if he ever was going to make headway with someone like brett kavanaugh and justice amy coney barrett, but it became impossible just because everything was so public, so i know it looks then that it was a conservative who did it, but i still have no evidence of that. but i don't know who did it, but i know the effect of it. and you know who i th

justice alito with this question, could any reasonable person think that jack daniels had approved this use of the mark. but justice kagan with this statement, this is not, um political t shirt. it's not a film. it's not a artistic photograph. it's nothing of those things. it's a standard commercial product. i don't see the parody. but you know whatever. jack daniels argued the toy will mislead consumers. profit from jack daniels hard earned goodwill and associate jack daniels whiskey with excrement, but dozens of trademark experts are siding with v. i p claiming it's speech is non commercial. there was no apparent consensus among the judges as to which company should prevail. a ruling is expected by the end of june. andrew rhiannon. what happens? thank you, andrea. coming up nearly 200. years later, a beethoven mystery is solved first what the doctor said on sometimes, the lows of bipolar depression first what the doctor said on the stand at the gwyneth palt feel darkest before dawn. with caplyta, there's a chance to let in the lyte. caplyta is proven to deliver significant relief acro

beginning of what we see is a full—scale attack against abortion rights, despite the fact thatjustice alitoaid that there were other concerns that one did not need to find connected to that case. first we will see now these abortion pills and then next it will be matters of contraception and access to contraceptive medications that will come under attack.— come under attack. what is it that is bein: come under attack. what is it that is being argued — come under attack. what is it that is being argued by _ come under attack. what is it that is being argued by anti-abortion l is being argued by anti—abortion campaigners tojustify is being argued by anti—abortion campaigners to justify what is happening here?— campaigners to justify what is happening here? campaigners to justify what is hauenina here? ~ ., , , happening here? well, what is being araued, at happening here? well, what is being argued. at least _ happening here? well, what is being argued, at least in _ happening here? well, what is being argued, at least in the _ happening here? well, what is being argued, at least in the litig

some of the justices, the chief justice, justice alito, justice kavanaugh spoke about, i think the chieftice gave the best hypothetical talking about two students who graduate from high school, one takes out a loan to go to college, another takes out a loan to crte a lawn service. why should the student who goes to college you will probably make more than the lawn service student in a lifetime, why should that student have a debt forgiven but not the lawn service? the government said that this act involved student loans, not other types of loans and there are other types of aid available to the lawn service student who has that loan. there is that concern and they were asking whether they should factor into their analysis the idea of fairness here. >> if this program were to go away, what kind of student loan borrower would be most heavily affected? >> because student loan debt is disproportionately shouldered by black borrowers and borrowers of color, they would be the ones most likely impacted. i think it is telling that the administration chose to add a pell grant bonus, allowing for

justice alito doesn't deal with that in his decision. after dobbs, one of the first calls i received was from a woman who once served as a senior officer in the air force. she immediately grasped how dobbs was going to affect our military readiness, and that's what this is about, our military readiness. she understood as i would say thousands of women in this country understood, how disruptive it is to force women in uniform to travel from their duty station to access care, to say nothing of the cost to her privacy when every single person in her unit finds out about it. knows about it. unlike any other -- any other medical procedure that we give people leave for, that people can get paid travel for. the privacy issues here are seismic and the military readiness issues as a result are seismic, too. women are the fastest growing part of our military. they are about a fifth of our total force. and over a third of our civilian workforce. it is not hard to see why they might think twice before enlisting about they know they're going to be st

and so that is about clarence thomas or sam alito. going forward, this is what you're signing up for, of course, when you are confirms to the court. these are the rules that are in place. but just again, to repeat in general, we have not changed the nature of the supreme court office. we are not making you ineffective side nuclear launch codes or something like that. we are not taking a judicial office and turning it into secretary of defense. we're just tweaking the office as we have done for 200 years, changing jurisdictions all the time. retroactively. >> are we making them ride horses again? >> again, any specific part of the duty, if you think it is actually adding too much to what the justices are doing or changing the nature of the job, you could take that off the list and i would actually welcome in the hearing, the congressional hearing we will have, testimony from existing justices as to whether or not they think this is too much or too little for existing justices and future emeritus justices. >> final question to roger. >>

states congress at the state of the union and went after the citizens united decision while judge alito right there in the house chamber. they didn't need the specific thing. they got marching orders as you said from the broader, broader message coming from the administration. liz: it's dog whistle. irs is brutal bureaucracy to work under. there is also treasury employees federal union. they routinely, majority, 90% or more of donations go to democrat politicians. get your reaction to attorney general garland testifying today about the biden white house getting the doj and fbi to target school board parents as domestic terrorists. he appeared to not know key details. watch this. >> internal communications show the doj and the national school boards association extensively colluded prior to your memorandum back on october 4th of 2021 which inserted federal law enforcement into local school board meetings. do you know how many citizens were tagged with this threat? >> i don't know. i think the fbi returned that there were, in their own subpoena response to mr. jordan i think there were ar

the other interesting back and forth i think we heard yesterday was between justice alito and solicitorquestion on the major questions doctrine which essentially says questions of such broad and economic political significance should be really left to congress and the courts to decide. that is something that i agree on, right? like you said, this is $400 billion of federal aid being allocated to the program. i think on fairness grounds there is a lot of scrutiny that needs to be applied to this. i argued last time this being regressive policy. on that ground scope and fairness a lot of scrutiny needs to be looked on this. neil: if they support when the president wants to do, seems unlikely, initial reading from their question, what do you fear happens? >> well in that case, neil, i think this is, this is a situation that congress needs to take action on, right? one of the topics touched on in yesterday's oral arguments was, inaction from the legislative branch. this has become an issue of real national importance. and you know i think more attention needs to be drawn to what are the tra

i'm going to need an oxygen tank christie alito faced the boob a liz nagy. and elizabeth schultz. and nascar for best supporting anchor goes to faith abou bay wow. hmm of course, want to thank our wonderful team without them, i am thing. nothing at all next up the award for most iconic guest and the nominees are coach cal perks in many motivator. for me every day and you could be one of the great janet el khatib in mom goals. i kind of know what foods they like. but that's why if you saw they have options in there and like she, birkin, ticktock tipper going through a rough time, so i really just want to put a smile on someone's face. and the winner is coach cal perks in many motivated. with incredible water. this is thank you. i want to thank will gand keeping me up past my bedtime and put awesome interview. keep getting the w. everybody the final award of the night. the coveted best acting anger. and you timber in interview with the empire. welcome welcome. i hope i didn't frighten you. i'm just getting used to these overnight hours. will ganson insomniac games has been submitted

and international sf and will be playing elk bear alito in the first round of the u.n cup tomorrow afternoon at 2 30 at alani college in fremont. if you can't get there, you can watch it on our live stream for free. we'll fight post a link on our website just go to ktvu .com. alrighty picture is worth 1000 words. so we've got this picture of the golden gate bridge, which is going to show us a lot in terms of wind and whether and what's happening. first thing you look at the flag before the internet. that's what we used to do. you know you had flags and ship to shore radio is now we can look at this and say, ok, that's still a south wind. essentially the flag is that that flag right there is blowing maybe 10, miles 12 miles an hour tops on a sustained basis. you can tell that by how it's moving now it's hanging down on the bridge. you see a lot less wet. you see some clear skies overhead, so things appear to be winding down a little bit, but that don't let your guard down because we are still seeing some strong wind gusts. we have that wind warning in effect until nine

wade an planned parenthood despite the fact that justic alito and justice kavanaugh in the concurring opinion said, there are guardrails in place. other areas of privacy will no be affected. this is an issue that is jus about the states what we see in this litigation is that it is not just about the states because what we hav our lead against that ar seeking this particular judg to issue a nationwide ban on the distribution of this particular drug and as you hav already noted, this is a ver safe drug and what they ar using is unfounded rhetoric. for example, that this was a rushed approval process throug the fda, when in fact it too over 54 months of fda review when by comparison, the year that this drug came to the market, other drugs were under review for about 15 months so there is a lot of sophistry here and a lot of strategy >> yeah. so, it's technically about wha they say is the rush process i think there's good reason to think that is pre-textural there's also deform shopping we should say this is somethin that both sides do, people see out judges in jurisdiction they think are

wade, justic alito's majority opinion sai that the issue should go to th states then how come if thisexas, makes decision, it could impact al 50 of us >> exactly and that is why this decisio is bigger than dobbs because it can affect all of us and he said that, and the othe thing that they said, that the court said, that this is reall going to neutralize things and sort of lower the temperatur of all the litigation going on around the country and i think we can save it als did not pan out. >> yes, none of this has bee neutralized. not in the last year tylee, you always make u smarter, i don't feel safer, but i feel smarter tonight thank you for being with here, tali farhadian weinstein when we come back, ron desanti dividing the gop over hi ukraine comments bringing an already there rift in the republican party to the surface. our political panel weighs i when the 11th hour continues there is a better way to manage diabetes. the dexcom g7 continuous glucose monitoring system eliminates painful finger sticks, helps lower a1c, and it's covered by medicare. before using the dexcom g7, i

would clear the way for your favorite supreme court majority led by anti-woke political crusader sam alitogut the first amendment and make journalists even outside florida stop reporting anything that makes conservatives mad. i'll explain after the break. ar? - if i would've used kayak to book our car, we could have saved on our trip instead of during our trip. ughh - kayak. search one and done. for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis who are positive for acetylcholine receptor antibodies, it may feel like the world is moving without you. but the picture is changing, with vyvgart. in a clinical trial, participants achieved improved daily abilities with vyvgart added to their current treatment. and vyvgart helped clinical trial participants achieve reduced muscle weakness. vyvgart may increase the risk of infection. in a clinical study, the most common infections were urinary tract and respiratory tract infections. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or if you have symptoms of an infection. vyvgart can cause allergic reactions. the most common side effects include res

hear what the arguments sound like what do you make of the fact that people like him, people like alito feel that they have a right to take women's bodily autonomy away and we don't get to listen to them do it they feel that they are -- i don't know a sense of superiority over us, i guess. >> well, it's power and control over women let's be -- that's what all of this is about. and i do think it's really interesting, joy, that they -- the right wing now, the republicans, are using the judicial system, a supreme court that they stacked, the federal judiciary that they stacked, because they can't win at the ballot box because as we know, when ever voters have the chance to actually vote on whether they believe abortion should be a decision that pregnant person makes, not the government, we win. and we saw that in kansas, overwhelmingly defeated. montana, kentucky, conservative republican states. so, it is really -- it's being done under secrecy, cloak of secrecy. but also because it's against what the american people want. poll after poll showing that and it's -- but i don't think the repu

justice clarence thomas encouraged his colleagues to go back and revisit obergefell now , justice samuel alitosaid. it's not going to happen. what we did. at least it's not going to happen based on what they did in dabs, but i say all bets are off now and you know that's the kind of thing that could occur down the road. i'm definitely not predicting it. but i did once upon a time say that they would never touch row. yeah a lot of people did. joan biskupic , author of nine black robes inside the supreme court's drive to the right and its historic consequences. can't wait to read it. thank you, joan. thanks and we are just hours away from wolf blitzer's big interview with the former vice president. mike pence right here on cnn. wolf joins us now, if you're gonna be setting the stage for this conversation up next in the situation room and laying out what's at stake for pence, and it's a lot it certainly is. pamela the stakes really are enormous for the former vice president of the united states. right now he's just been ordered by a federal judge to comply with the special counsel's subpoena. the

in terms of the discussions alito and sotomayor who were very much on your take being like, come on,me on, really. jack daniels. seriously and then you had gorsuch and kagan who are like you don't get involved in this more like i see, but like, can we keep this to a lower court? but you had this interesting conservative liberal matchups you again. you you could hear in their tone, not just the transcript. and so it's hard to predict how this will go. but it seemed like i don't know. generally speaking ill. i'll be surprised by scs ruling comes into effect agree that it was interesting to hear them because we got to hear some supreme court humor there. they were really yucking it up, congressman so first off one owner of a dog named baxter tells me that they received this to toys specifically and the dog hated it. i thought that that was just it's an important data point. secondly i would agree with that. see on the legal analysis. it's a lot of work to go through. you know the trademark. there's a reason why we have this trademark. law in place. there is an impact on the brand new an

a point of clarification, there was a concurrent in the dismissal by justice thomas and justice alito explaining that they would accept a bill of complaint because i think it is a matter of procedure. the supreme court can't refuse jurisdiction, but then they went out of their way to say that they would grant no other relief which is to say they would reject the claim. >> the allegations in the lawsuit range from claims of illegal voting to accusations of dominion voting machines. now the subject of civil defamation case with fox news, even fox news reporters called the claims contained in the lawsuit dangerously insane. why might fox news reporters call this kind of lawsuit dangerously insane? >> the factual allegations they were referring to our incorrect and have no basis in reality whatsoever. and it was apparent at the time. it wasn't something that just became apparent in the months and years after the allegations came >> to light. >>it's comforting to know that we have a panel that includes three people who are involved in a lawsuit that has been declared dangerously insane by

there was a concurrence in the dismissal by justice thomas and justice alito they would accept the bill of complaint because the supreme court can't refuse jurisdiction and went out of their way to say they would grant no other relief and reject the claim on the merits. mr.connolly: the allegations in the lawsuit ranked from dominion now the subject of a fox news and fox news reporters called the claims contained in the lawsuit dangerously insane. why might fox news reporters call this kind of lawsuit dangerously insane? >> the factual allegations that they were referring to are incorrect and have no basis in reality whatsoever. and it was apparent at the time and not something that became apparent in the months and years after those allegations came to light. mr.connolly: comforting to know we have a panel that includes three panel in a lawsuit that has been declared dangerously insane by none other fox news reporters. that is a comfort. and i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back the balance of his time the gentleman from utah. >> i'm curious as a side bar by were you embarrassed w

national archives and some here you could find segments of the diary from vietnam the confirmation with alito and judge roberts about confirmation to the supreme court and several other things. the bangladesh, which we're celebrating this week. so it was skullduggery that was taught to me by some of the people in this room who would be embarrassed if i was to their name, steve curtin. but it out well, but vicki did not choose to share that perhaps because there's not a unanimous feeling in the family about what to do them yet i'm furious at the united states congress for the piddling amount of money that they give the archivists here and so the process is so slow on processing ted kennedy's senate papers. so know in about 20 or 30 years, which is usually the gap between great biographies of somebody, somebody is going to actually write a biography that's close to definitive but as helpful as vicki. she did not supply stuff to me and eventually somebody will get it and write hell of a book and maybe they'll maybe they'll publish as ted kennedy's diary and it'll sell a million copies. right. la

sense if you remember all the way back to june when dobbs was decided, we were promised both just alito's majority opinion and in justice kavanaugh g's concurrence this was going to go back to the states, the courts were going to get out of the way and the problem would kind of disappear because it would all be decided as it should be properly in the states and sudden li suddenly we have a nationwide ban that could happen. medication abortion count for about 54% of abortions, so this is really i think in some sense puts to the lie the notion that it was going to be enough to send this back to the states it was never enough. we are heading inexorably personh personhood amendments and earlier bans and it's also worth saying we are heading towards more and more cruelty and punitive measures toward the pregnant people who will suffer and so this is not a kind of a clinical dispassionate the court somehow asserting a principle about state rights that doesn't affect anybody people were start enough to see then and certainly smart enough to see now that the end game here is not just abortion but