after striking down a law that in the senate the senate approved ninety eight to nothing justice antonin scalia now says that the supreme court has no business overturning laws passed by congress is the court's most conservative justice such a flop or talk about that more in tonight's lone liberal rumble and believe it or not it's time the american people started listening to george w. bush well at least when it comes to congressman darrell than gazi grand car theft i see tell you why and i'd still take. you need to know this twenty thirteen is starting to look a lot like eight hundred fifty eight and a new civil war awfully is time without guns could be on the horizon in the decade leading up to the civil war the united states was an increasingly divided country all northern states like new york pennsylvania massachusetts are experiencing rapid industrialization back then sudden states remain predominately agricultural and while the pre civil war north economy was based on free wage labor the southern economy depended on slavery and looked more like a feudal empire and part of a democratic rep

that you have a fundamental right to marry in whatever state you live in this nation. >> justice antonin scalia used his ruling to rail against a 2003 decision that struck down the sodomy law in texas. scalia wrote -- what exactly does this mean? justice scaliak mischaracterizes these cases. for hundreds of years, the supreme court has built case law based on precedent. what lawrence did was, it recognized that laws actually criminalize the physical expression of love between two people of the same gender, they violate the constitution. the physical relationship of two people of the same gender is indicative of an emotional bond that is far deeper. with the court did today was built upon a precedent, and it applied lawrence to our loving, committed same-sex couples marriages. so it was building on president, just like the supreme court does today. that is exactly what we expect the supreme court to do. i would note, justice scalia, it is in the sense, as the majority of the supreme court believes, that laws that openly discriminates against same-sex couples under federal law and to violate the

and i want to participate in that debate by saying as justin-- justice antonin scalia did just this monday, a hero of yours, a conservative. now he's my hero too because he said the framers of the fourth amendment would have been appalled by the idea that the government could seize information without particularly specifying the place to be searched or the person or things. >> stephen: but there is no expectation that your phone records are your records. it was settled in 1979 in a supreme court case that the phone company owns those records. the government is not subpoenaing your records. they're the phone company's records. that allows the phone company to share them with private industry but we were not aware that verizon, for example s sharing the mehtadata, the telephone numbers and duration of my calls with the government on an ongoing daily basis. >> stephen: what's the problem with that. what's wrong with getting together, as they say, the hey stake, okay, the haystack of information so they can then find the needle in it. are you anti-haystack or pro need snell. >> i am pro fourth

you're confusing jesus o with antonin scalia. comedy legend michele bachmann said marriage was created by the hand of god, no man, not even a supreme court can undo what a holy god has instituted. confidently, congresswoman, they just did. and you've got it backwards. american was created by man. gay people were created by god and he seems to have enjoyed creating them in every human civilization that's kept records in history. glenn beck who once appeared on bill o'reilly to say he had no problem with gay marriage now says the rulings will lead to polygamy and ask you to deny the bible and xenophobic right wing clown college dropout louie gohmert said this signaled the end of western civilization before returning to his job as lizard bird pet as jabba the hutt. antonin scalia released a dissent that said you're an anti-christian bigot. even chris christie said he's not that good at moderation like you knew that when he said the rules was wrong. chris christie only said that to cruise homophobic tea party voters. i'm chris. what

striking down a law that in the senate that the senate approved ninety eight to nothing justice antonin scalia now says that the supreme court has no business overturning laws passed by congress why is the court's most conservative justice such a flip flop or talk about that more in tonight's lone liberal rumble and believe it or not it's time the american people started listening to george w. bush at least when.

. >> reporter: in a blistering dissent, conservative antonin scalia, joined by three liberals, said the supreme court is breaking ground allowing a search without a warrant to see if a suspect has committed some other crime, too. summarizing aloud he said, solving crime is a noble objective but less important than protecting people from suspicionless law enforcement searches. your dna can be taken if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, for whatever reason. he said he doubted that the founding fathers, "would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection." >> we are headed to a world of much more dna testing for arrestees. it will probably be as common as fingerprinting has been for years now. >> reporter: defense lawyer barry schick who has used dna to free people wrongly convicted said the court is wrong to allow taking dna without a search warrant. >> this case is not about dna databases good or bad. this is about the warrant requirement and the protections that a neutral detached magistrate gives to the privacy of citizens. >> reporter: the court said today dna

typically people think of sclal antonin scalia and thomas being on the same side. >> it was just justicestice alito. they think the supreme court got it wrong. what the law says is that states must accept this federal form to be used in federal elections. arizona said, we accept it, but we just need more, just like the tsa accepts your driver's license to -- or the airlines accept your ticket to board a plane, but you also have to show some form of i.d. arizona was saying, we're just doing the same. we're accepting the form but we're asking for more. today the supreme court said no, that's not what "accept" means in the context of this law. it was actually an interpretation of federal law rather than a constitutional decision, but you're right, it was a somewhat unusual breakdown. not the usual 5-4 pattern. there will be time enough to see that. >> i want to bring the panel back in. it is interesting because arizona produced evidence that between 2005 and 2007 they could only show 19 non-citizens who had registered to vote out 26.7 million registered voters. arizona actually rejected 31,

writing for the majority, justice antonin scalia said: 6- justices clarence thomas and samuel alito filed separate dissents arguing states have the power to demand more proof of voter qualifications. the decision came a year after the court reined in arizona's efforts to crack down on illegal immigration, striking down a state law that, among other things, required immigrants to carry immigration papers. the court said then the arizona law conflicted with federal immigration law. and while the court now is reining in arizona's efforts to crack down on voting by illegal immigrants, it did leave the door open just a bit. the court said arizona could go to a federal commission and ask it to change that form and, scott, it's also emphasizing that states still have substantial power to set voting requirements. >> pelley: jan crawford on the steps of the supreme court. thank you, jan. in another courtroom today, federal prosecutors hope to send boston mobster whitey bulger to prison for the rest of his life. he's on trial for 19 murders. but an old hit man testified today that he believes bulge

but conservative justice antonin scalia and the three liberals said the court is breaking new ground in allowing a search without a warrant. in his dissent, scalia wrote this. your dna can be taken and entered into a national dna database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason, end quote. >>> to surprising details on the prison phone calls between dzhokhar tsarnaev and his family. channel 4 news aired a conversation the accused boston bomber had with his parents last week. when his mother asks him if he needs anything, tsarnaev says, quote, "mama, do not worry about me. i do have money. somebody opened an account for me, and people send me money here, and i do have lots of money." when his mother then asked him, "how much?" tsarnaev says, quote, thousands. meanwhile, the last victim of the boston marathon bombing is back home. 29-year-old erica brannic lost her left leg and has a long road to recovery, but she said she could not wait to get back home to maryland to have some steamed crab. boy, can she choose a good one there. >>> the sporting world has

antonin scalia said arizona could get what it wants if it goes through the elections assistance commission. the state would have to ask to vote it to voter registration forms. if the commission says no, arizona could go back to court and sue. >>> women may be able to start training as army rangers by m - mid-2015 and as navy s.e.a.l.s a year later. the details still being worked out, but they would require women and men to meet the same physical and mental standards to qualify for certain infantry, armor, commando and other front-line positions across the army, navy, air force and marines. >>> a new study found teens who suffer a concussion playing sports had similar symptoms of early alzheimer's disease. researchers at the university of pittsburgh found head injuries appear to trigger a series of degenerative processes in the brain in the areas that are also affected by alzheimer's. they also found patients who suffer a concussion, had trouble filtering out white noise and focus on important sounds. that is an early sign of alzheimer's. researchers looked at brain scans taken from 60 pati

it's widely believed the court's decision will be reason by justice anthony kennedy, possibly antonin scalia. neither has ever voted to uphold affirmative action. for "religion and ethics newsweekly," i'm tim o'brien, in washington. >>> we have a lucky severson story today about what seems like a countrywide failure to take care of the mentally ill. as a last resort, a huge number of them end up in jails and prisons, not homes or hospitals. but a program in washington, d.c. is helping. >> this is the largest institution for the mentally ill in the state of illinois, and the second largest in the nation. it's the cook county jail in chicago. on any given day, the complex holds with 10,000 inmates, and on average, one in four is suffering some kind of mental illness. cook county sheriff tom dart. >> i would tell people what in god's name do you think is going to happen? i mean, really when you think about it, the people who are horribly, horribly suffering from mental illness, who have exhausted all the opportunities with their families, who are on the street, where are they going to go? where

but in a separate dissent, justice antonin scalia said the majority clearly was signaling it will reach that point some day. "it is just a matter of listening and waiting for the other shoe." the second same-sex marriage case focused on california's proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in 2008 after the state supreme court had legalized it. supporters of same-sex marriage argued proposition 8's ban was unconstitutional, and federal courts in california agreed. supporters of the ban went to the supreme court, raising monumental constitutional issues that went to the heart of state laws banning same-sex marriage. but today, the justices declined to decide those constitutional issues. instead, the court said it lacked the jurisdiction to decide the case, a technical ruling that sent the issue back to california. it means the lower federal court ruling striking down proposition 8 as unconstitutional will remain in place. now, as the result, in the near future, same-sex marriage in california could resume. but this decision, unlike that first landmark ruling, will have no impact nat

but kennedy's grand opinion drew a blistering dissent from justice antonin scalia, who called today's ruling jaw-dropping and accused kennedy and the liberal justices of declaring anyone opposed to same sex marriage an enemy of human decency. millions of americans who cherish traditional marriage will agree. >> it's a sad day when unelected judges change the definition of marriage and turn their backs on the will of voters. >> reporter: but the court stopped short of declaring that every state must allow gay marriage, sending the challenge to california's proposition 8, which banned gay marriage, back to the lower courts on technical grounds, effectively legalizing gay marriage in california. so the couples that brought the case -- >> will you please marry me? >> reporter: will wed. >> we could not have imagined we would have to go on this journey to get married. i'm proud to be here and i am just thrilled that i actually get to marry the woman that i love. >> reporter: it was a day many supporters of gay marriage rights believed would never come. outside the court, the gay men's chor

conservative antonin scalia sided with the liberal minority which says it amounts to a warrantless search. there's trouble tonight for an important american ally. violent anti-government protests have exploded throughout turkey over the past four days. at least one person has been killed, more than 1,700 have been arrested. holly williams is in istanbul tonight. >> reporter: the streets of some of turkey's biggest cities have become battlefields. today in ankara, the nation's capital, the police tried to push back protesters with water cannons. and as the sun went down in istanbul, the authorities fired tear gas into a crowd of thousands. this started out as a small demonstration against the destruction of an istanbul park to make way for a shopping mall. now, as you can see, it's become something very different. >> reporter: izmet akca was one of the organizers in istanbul and told us the violent clashes are the government's fault. >> reporter: the target of their anger is the country's prime minister, erdogan, he's dismissed those demonstrating as extremists and looters and still has th

striking down a law that in the sense that the senate approved ninety eight to nothing justice antonin scalia now says that the supreme court has no business overturning laws passed by congress why is the court's most conservative justice such a poor flopper talk about that more in tonight's lone liberal rumble and believe it or not it's time the american people started listening to george w. bush well at least when it comes to congressman darrell than gazi grand car theft i see tell you why and i'd still take. you need to know this twenty thirteen is starting to look a lot like eight hundred fifty eight and a new civil war hopefully this time without guns could be on the horizon in the decade leading up to the civil war the united states was an increasingly divided country all northern states like new york pennsylvania massachusetts are experiencing rapid industrialization back then sudden states remain predominately agricultural and while the priest of a war north economy was based on free wage labor the southern economy depended on slavery and looked more like a feudal empire and part of a

after striking down a law that in the senate the senate approved ninety eight to nothing justice antonin scalia now says that the supreme court has no business overturning laws passed by congress was the court's most conservative justices report flopper talk about that more in tonight's liberal rumble and believe it or not it's time the american people started listening to george w. bush well.

the decision written by justice antonin scalia read this way . . . decision broke down in a rare 7-2 split with justices clarence thomas and samuel alito the only decenters. it upheld the national voter's right statute. it allows citizens to register to vote simply by checking a box saying they are u.s. citizens when getting a driver's license. the people of arizona passed the bill into law kicking off a round of laws around the country intended to limit access to the polls, which is what makes today's ruling so very important. the arizona law was used as model legislation by the american legislative exchange council or alex who then pedalled it to other states. as of today these laws have essentially been ruled unconstitutional. more than a dozen states have pending legislation to restrict rights in many different ways, including moving up registration for voters the deadlines for that eliminating election-day registration and limiting early voting. we'll see what impact today's ruling has on those efforts. joining us tonight is one of the plaintiff

there were three separate dissents, the most fiery from justice antonin scalia was second ads by theajority assurances that this particular decision was not passing judgment on the underlying issue of the legality same-sex marriage, therefore bypassing the will of individual states and voters. we might hav covered ourselves with honor today, but promising all sides of thisebate that it was theirs to settle in that we would respect their resolution. the court is cheated both sid. the original plaintiff cried when she heard the news. >> into the justices of the supreme court, thank you for affirming the principle oqual justice under the law. lou: former psident bill clinton who signed it into law after it passed congress with strong bipartisan majorities today applauded the court's decision along with president obama also had pivoted on the issue. defenseecretary place to immediately begin determining how the pentagon will rollout federal benefits for leglly marry me-sex couples. in the second ruling, the court found that supporters of california's pp. eight measure which amended the s

and antonin scalia says there are two parts to the majority's opinion, the first explaining why thisourt has jurisdiction to decide it, and the other is a ruling on it. both of them are wrong. and the error in both springs from the same diseased root. the second ruling handed down was on proposition 8. they decided that the petitioners didn't have standing. your take on both of these, stir. >> not shocked with either one, actually. i think in the defense of marriage act case, important to realize what was at stake was just the one provision, which is if a state allows the same-sex marriage, same-sex couples to marry, they are to be given benefi benefits under federal benefits rules. a federalist argument, it should be up to the states in the first place. section two of doma says if there is a same-sex marriage performed in new york state, it doesn't have to be recognized in texas. not a real shock there, and the federalist approach, justice scalia's defense, the first part, really says the court shouldn't have heard the case. the courts aren't to be the final arbiters of these decisi

in feverish dissent emperor palpatine's chief legal adviser justice antonin scalia warned marriage equalityhat by formerly declaring anyone opposed to the same-sex marriage an enemy of human december sent. the majority arms well very challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition. we'll talk about that in a moment. we'll talk about the widow whose case broke doma's back. here is some of what she had to say today. >> because of today's supreme court ruling the federal government can no longer dis discrime thought against the marriages of gay and lesbian americans. if i had to survive thea, what a glorious way to do it, and she would have been so breezed. thank you all. >> i think we should be thanking you. in a second ruling a different 5-4 court majority ruled challengers who had appealed a decision against california's gay marriage ban, of course prop 8 lacked a legal standing to proceed. the ruling allowed an earlier apellet decision that prop 8 was an constitution to stand. lacking back at lawrence versus texas that made same-sex activity legal, and said the

righting for thearchity, justice antonin scalia said the fairest -- not required by the federal forms inconsistent with the nvra, or federal laws man tate that states accept and use the federal form, so the rule requirements from arizona have been tossed. several other states, by our count four, that have a similar measure, 12 others have been considering it but all of that is now on hold. >> this may not be the end of the legal battle, right? >> yes. reporters at the -- passed by voter in 2004 saying the people out this average americans, should be worried about the ruling. here's the president of judicial watch. >> we need to have confidence that our elections are clean, and if we don't have any rules associated with the elections in terms of making sure citizens are only voting, and making sure that you are who you are when you turn up to vote, and all bets are off. >> i talked with the arizona attorney general and he said, hey, we're disappointed no, doubt, but he pointed to the portion of the opinion which justice scalia said, listen, arizona can goo the federal election admissi

however, there is a strong dissent led by the often fire brand justice antonin scalia, who called it among other things, a terrifying principle, ashley. >> so what if the person who gets swabbed ends up being completely innocent or even, better yet, doesn't end up getting charged or tried, what happens to that family? >> well, it's a function of state law and the state law in maryland was very carefully crafted. first of all, they say, you know, if you end up not convicted in the state of maryland, they actually throw the sample out. so now it's a little unclear whether the dna finger print that would go into the computer is thrown out as well. that's not made so clear in the decision at all. but generally speaking, at least in the state of maryland, that itself way the law is grafted. but remember, a bunch of other states, in fact, a majority of states have these laws. it's all a function of the way they wrote their laws, actually. in there john, i lost track of the person in the case, i lost track of that rape case, with i this all came down to ai assume it's maryland vs. king, doe

gay americans all over this country celebrate the defeat of doma and prop eight or knowing that antonin scalia has to watch them too. this is the war room. i am michael shure. ♪ theme ♪ >> today was a historic day in our long struggle to allow everyone an equal shot at life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. the supreme court issued a pair of major victories for gay rights. first it struck down the defense of marriage act or doma ruling that allows same sex couples saying they are entitled to federal benefits. it declined to decide on the prop eight case, allowing same-sex marriage in california. let's take a closer look at that first ruling on thoma. the court struck down the federal law in a 5-4 decision. this case was brought by 84-year-old edie windsor who married her wife in canada after 42 years together. their home state of new york recognized the union but under doma, the federal government did not. they told their story in a documentary, a very long engagement. >> just couldn't take it anymore. i called an old friend of mine and said please take my case. somebody brought cia over,

listen to how antonin scalia addressed bipartisan overwhelming reauthorization of the vra in 2006. >> i think it is attributive, very likely attributable to a phenomenon that is called per pet wags of racial entitlement. it's been written about. whenever a society adopts a racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes. i don't think there is anything to be gained by any senator to vote against continuation of this act. and i am fairly confident it will be re-enacted in p perpetuity, unless a court can say it does not comport with the constitution. >> so, translate, scalia said congress is too scared to vote against something called the voting rights act. so he dared the supreme court to do the dirty work for congress. four of scalia's legs, roberts, scalia, kennedy, joined him in doing just that. section 4 much the vra, the section that sets criteria for choosing which states and counties are subject to vra preclearance is gone. in a way this is an obvious win for the right, a republican party that more than ever before depends on

oral arguments between maryland's chief deputy attorney general katherine winfree and justice antonin scaliawho later wrote in his dissent that the law violates the for the mammoth protection against unreasonable search and seizure. >> may please the court, since 2009, when maryland began to collect dna samples from those charged with filing crimes and burglary, there have been 225 matches, 75 prosecutions, 42 convictions including that of respondent king. >> that is really good. i bet if he conducted a lot of unreasonable search and seizures, you get more convictions, too. that proves absolutely nothing. scalia, it justice does point out the fact the statute is working. in the state's few, the act is constitutional. >> ultimately, the court upheld maryland's law which lets police use a swab to collect dna from the cells inside a person's cheek. supporters of the method call it "the fingerprinting of the 21st century." so far 25 states have passed similar laws. some even allow dna swabs for misdemeanor arrests. but privacy advocates say the ruling is vague because it does not define what con

justice antonin scalia wrote -- some advocates for rape victims said dna evidence is the best tool available to prosecute sexual violence. in north carolina, roughly 140 people were arrested monday during a weekly protest against the agenda of the republican controlled legislature. the local naacp has been leading demonstrations on so-called moral monday's to protest cuts to social programs, restrictions on voting rights, and the forgoing of medicaid expansion under obama's health care law. monday's protest was the largest to date. hundreds of people protested today outside a chinese poultry plant where a least 120 people died in a fire on monday. the blaze in the country's northeast marked one of china's worst industrial disasters. survivors said they rushed to emergency exits that turned out to be locked, all the single exit was open. more than 300 workers, most of them women, were in the factory the time. scores were injured. local officials said the cause was in excess of ammonia gas. relatives of the victims blocked traffic, clashed with police, and called for answers about the deaths o

that's antonin scalia. the only african-american member, clarence thomas, had a long dissent in which he said this is a terrible idea. when you admit students under affirmative action programs it stamps them as inferior. they face long odds. they don't seem to do academically as well as if they went to a less selective school. >> let's bring in scotus blog co-founder tom goldstein. he's already had 28 caleses before the supreme court. before i leave this topic, tom and pete, what about all of the other special considerations that universities take in to consideration, like legacy, whether your parents or grandparents or uncles and aunts went to that school, whether you're a football or another athletic star, whether you've done volunteer work, whether you're a fabulous musician. what about all those other considerations, aside from affirmative action? >> i'll answer first and see what tommy says. i think had the court struck down affirmative action, then those things would be on much shakier legal footing.

antonin scalia says arizona could get what it wants if it goes through the u.s.election assist anticipate commission. the state would have to ask the commission to add the rule to voter registration forms. if the commission says no, arizona could go back to court and sue. >>> in the day ahead, vice president joe biden will talk about the administration's plan to lower gun violence. it will be the first time the vice president or the president has held a public event on gun control since the senate rejected a plan to expand background checks for gun purchases. that discussion will happen this afternoon at the white house. >>> this morning we are hearing from iran's new president-elect. in his first public comments since his victory, hasan rowhani said he wants to improve relations with the u.s. he said they are, quote, old wounds that must be healed. but he also refused to end the biggest source of those tensions, iran's nuclear enrichment program. rowhani will officially take office in august. >>> the national smoking rate has dropped to 18%. the rate has general

thing that was very interesting, ashleigh, and you haven't heard much about it, was justice antonin scalia's dissent, which was absolutely scathing from the bench. he really went after the proponents of gay marriage, and, in part, attacking the majority for the type of language it used and the proponents of gay marriage have used in this fight to get the defense of marriage act overturned. and as you know, ashleigh, that's very interesting simply because justice scalia, of all the nine on the bench, is the one who has the way with words and the sharp language he uses in his opinions. so just a fascinating day here at the united states supreme court, ashleigh. >> and yet another dissent from the bench. we're getting that all week long. this is a big, big week, and a lot of heat and energy. a great job reporting from out there, joe johns. a lot of information coming down the pike. we're not finished our coverage on this. i'm going to let joe go, and we'll check in with jeffrey toobin later on in the hour. more analysis to this decision, the reaction, and the future implications of the decision

the four discenters, antonin scalia, alito, clarence tom a, and the chief justice, john roberts. let's get reaction. eric schneiderman is joining us, the new york state attorney general, also joining us is kerry, the chief policy director of the judicial crisis network. attorney general, what's your reaction? >> great decision, completely consistent with lots of supreme court rulings holding that marriage is a fundamental right. it's good that they went this far. i think it makes -- look, for edith windsor, who is a new yorker, who was with her partner for over 40 years and has fought this through, congratulations to her. this is about equality. and this means that marriages of people in my state, new york, and all over america, between same-sex couples, will be treated equally under 1,100 provisions of federal law that use the term "marriage" or define benefits according to marriage. it's a great win, not just for the gay community or for edith. it's a great win for the american tradition of equal justice under law. and i must say, i did not count on them moving this far. i thin

he's like one of those athletes who goes, you know, antonin scalia is the kind of guy that antonin scalian the law he must allow -- >> page four of the roberts dissent talking about prop 8. we hold that we lack jurisdiction to consider it in the particular context. to be clear, the court has not yet released its decision on prop 8 but the language in windsor telegraphing the court will dismiss on standing. this is pulling out the way most people thought it would. >> what does dismiss on standing mean? >> hal: it doesn't hold water. the concept that it is based on isn't sound. >> not that it is going to kick it back down. it will rule prop 8. a. >> hal: i suppose it could dismiss on standing that they shouldn't be seeing it. >> okay. >> hal: but the equal protection clause aspect of doma would -- would argue that it's unconstitutional what california is doing to its own citizens by defining two different people as two different classes. there are gay people married in this state who are still married, who got married during the window and did not have their marriages nullified by prop 8 an

or progressive justices but then you've got anthony kennedy and john roberts chief justice and antonin scaliaizona. >> absolutely. >> bill: pretty solid rejection. >> absolutely. it is a major rejection. justice scalia wrote the opinion. >> bill: he's the author of the opinion. >> it is a very broad affirmation of the federal government's power under the constitution to displace state law whenever they act to regulate elections and the process of having elections under the constitution's grant of authority under the elections clause. >> bill: so that just also shows -- i'll say this. you don't have to say it. how extreme clarence thomas and samuel alito are in their opinions that they wouldn't even recognize this case. but what message -- is there a broader message than just the state of arizona here? on this decision? do you think? >> well, you know, i like -- >> bill: because there were 30 some states that had various forms, maybe two others, i think that had the same thing doing the same thing arizona was doing but there are po other states that have various ways, voter i.d. or shortening

representatives of the people and thus reflects the will of we the people we need to do it justice antonin scalia his fellow conservatives are always telling us to do return to the original intent of the authors of the constitution or in this case of the fifteenth amendment start enforcing article three section two of the constitution and pressure congress to do to the supreme court but the supreme court has done to congress since eighty three regulate it and restrict its power abraham lincoln tried to do it franklin roosevelt tried to do it but now more than ever we need a president and a congress to rein in the supreme court we are not a constitutional monarchy this issue goes deeper than just the voting rights act and pre-clearance this is about preserving the legacy of our founders and preserving the integrity of our democratic republic this is about making sure that we the people not want to be monarchs control our laws today's supreme court decision should be a wake up to anyone who calls themselves a believer in small democracy now is the time to act to protect the constitution before the