professor dershowitz can't remember a single instance't . what does that mean if somebody would leak what is only a draft, it's notno a completed document to potentially alter court tome of a supreme case.o ht well, i've got to imagine laws might apply there for the person responsible. now we'll certainly the ethicsho rules for lawyers if this is, a lawyer who did this , a cleric or anyone who practices law, who is currently a member of the bar, at. sthould be disbarredbe and iic have to say i think the chief justice tomorrow morning is going to have a lot of work to do on this courtju tomorrow morning.st the chief justice of the united states is going to have toonve convene the justices. he's going to havee to convene the clerks and all employees of the courtt and he's going to have to say that the leaker needs to come forward. and this is very, very i serious.n itun is an unprecedented breach of the court's confidentiality and it is t plainly meant too corrupthin the process within the court. i it's an assault on the courts, john, and it's

professor dershowitz can't remember a single instance.t does that mean if somebody would leak what is only a draft, not a completed document to potentially alter the outcome of a supreme court case? i've got to laws might apply their to the person responsible, no? >> certainly the ethics rule for lawyers. if this was a lawyer who did this, clerk, or anyone who practices law, who is currently a member of the bar, they should be disbarred. at have to say, i think the chief justice tomorrow morning is going to have a lot of work to do on this court. tomorrow morning the chief justice of the united states is going to have to convene the justices, is going to have to convene the clerks and all employees of the court it is going to have to say that the leaker needs to come forward. this is very, very serious, this is an unprecedented breach of the courts confidentiality and it is plainly meant to corrupt the process within a court. it's an assault on the court, sean, and it's got to be taken seriously in the chief justice is now going to be the

my thanks to anita and alan dershowitz.anita, it is so important young people here her message because we are so many decades removed from the holocaust, from world war ii. it hits differently when you see the person in front of you who experienced these atrocities. you can't get that from a history book. dan: i talked with anita about that today. years ago i went with holocaust survivors to auschwitz. when that generation dies off, it does fade into the history books for a lot of people so it is important to hear them. larry: coming up, day two of deliberations in the johnny depp-amber heard defamation trial wrapping up this afternoon. liz: introducing the new 3-for-1 bundle. only from xfinity. it's unlimited internet, streaming, and xfinity mobile all for what you could pay wireless companies for just one 5g unlimited line! boomshakalaka! and now, also with xfinity internet, you can get unlimited data, wifi equipment, and a free streaming box included with a 2-year rate guarantee, and no contract. all for just $30 per mon

in the countryes alan dershowitz, harvard professor, said you one of his best students he's ever hadd the opportunity tohe teach. you guys don't agree on a whole. lot. all right. let's go to this case specifically. >> why is this such a big wet? well, listen, if you look at federal campaign finance law, what what congress has done, p the number one priority for congress is to prevent anyonegrs from beating them. and so this law, it limits the ability of a candidate to make a loan to his or her campaign and then pay himself back . and the reasont that incumbent politicians want to do that is they don't want anyone to challenge them. they don't want some pesky challenge or let's saysi some small business owner to a make a loan to put their life savings in and toif knock out the career politiciann. g soap they put this cap in place that said, all right, if you loan money, your campaign, o you're out of luck. we're goingut to limit how much you can pay yourself back andin everything above that tough luck. it's a gift to the american people and what the supreme court said in this caseein s

alan dershowitz said -- >> some of the biggest cases in the country. >> sean: harvard professor saide best students that he is ever had the opportunity to teach. you guys don't agree on a whole lot. let's go to this case, specifically why is it such a big win? >> if you look at federal campaign finance law, what congress has done, the number one priority for congress is to prevent anyone from beating them. so this law limits the ability of the candidate to make a loan it to his or her campaign and pay himself back. the reason that incumbent politicians want to do that if they don't want anyone to challenge them. they don't want some pesky challenger, let's say some small business owner government to make a loan, to put their life savings and come and knock at the career politician. they put this gap in place that set all right, if you loan money to your campaign, you are out of luck, we will limit how much you can pay yourself back. and everything about that, tough luck. and what the supreme court said in this case, 6-3. i brought a lawsuit challenging this and 6-3, the supreme court

one of alan dershowitz best. in his own words.ically what they did in the case of roe was they granted a right, not granted in the constitution, so i would argue does rather than go forward and give that a right to individuals, they basically send it back to the states. there is a whole bunch of states that allow abortion up until the hour before birth. for crying out loud. that will still continue in some states. abortion is not going anywhere. >> that's right. if you look at our nation's history for the first 185 years of our nation's history, abortion was decided by elected legislatures, primarily at the state level. and listen, we all recognize that abortion is an issue that is deeply emotional, it's personal, people feel very strongly and have sharply divided views. when roe v. wade was handed down, it was seven unelected lawyers in black drove said to the american people, you pesky voters. your views don't matter. we know better than you do. we are philosopher kings and we are going to decree the rule. and i will tell you, i

i actually suspect that professor dershowitz theory that he offered last night will be correct. time will tell. this leak is likely a result of a self-serving far left court employee that is attempting to coerce the court's decision or maybe make the case for court packing, whatever the case may be. chief justice roberts called the leak a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the court. he said to the extent this betrayal of the confidence of the court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. the work of the court will not be affected in any way. good answer from him. an investigation is underway to identify the leaker and bring the perpetraor to justice. but if justice alito's decision stands, let me separate fact from fiction. abortion in america does not become america does not become illegal. instead, individual states, state legislators, they and the voters of course, they will decide the rules and regulations regarding abortion. by the way, views on abortion are split right down the middle. look at this gal

one of alan dershowitz is best in his own words and basically what they did in the case of roe is they granted a right not granted in the constitution and so that would, i would argue, trigger the tenthth amendment and then rather than go forward and give that right to individuals, they basically send it back to the states, new york , california, new jersey, there are a whole bunch of states that allow abortion up until, you know, the hour beforertioil birth for crying out loud. that will still continuenu in some statese on it. so abortion is not going anywhere. no, that's that'ser right. and ifhi you look at our nations history for the first hundred and eighty five years of our nation's history, abortion was decided by elected legislatures primarily at the state level.sl and listen, we all recognize that abortion is an issue that is deeply emotional iy . pe it's personal. people feel very strongly and have sharply divided views. what happened in 1973 when roede versus wade was handed down with seven unelected lawyers in blackt robes said to the american people, you pesky voters, your

i actually suspect that professor dershowitz, this theory that he offered last night on this program will be correct. but time will tell this leak is likely, he said, as a result of a self-serving far left court employee who perhaps is attempting to coerce the court's decision or maybe make the case for court packing, whatever the case may be , we'll find out hopefully sooner or later. chief justice roberts called the leak a quote, a singular and egregious breach of that trust. that is an affront to the court . he continued to the extent this betrayal of the confidence of the court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operation. it will not succeed. the work of the court will not be affected in any way. good answer from him. now an investigation is underway to identify the leaker and by the way, bring this perpetrator to justice. but make no mistake if justice alito's decision stands in roe v. wade is in fact overturned. let me also separate again fact from fiction abortion in america does not become illegal. instead, individual states, state legislators, they and the voter