that is what occurred with dobbs. dobbs corrected a prior error. it's difficult to injure hearing people say that they worry about the credibility of the court when sometimes those words are uttered by people who are themselves actively, willfully, deliberately attacking the credibility of the court. sometimes as officers of the court. we are seeing this through an unfair attack on justice thomas and other members of the u.s. supreme court. it has got to stop. look, dobbs was right, as a matter of constitutional law, this is a matter not for this courts to decide, but from elected lawmakers, typically in state legislatures, not our national legislature. so, if you don't like the policy outcome, go to your state legislator, but this is not an issue in which the federal judiciary is somehow -- there is no reproductive rights cause of the u.s. constitution. so, let's not pretend that we're worried about the credibility of the court. if we're simultaneously attacking the credibility of the court, and its ability to do its job. now, a lot of these issue

that is what occurred with dobbs. dobbs corrected a prior error. it's difficult to injure hearing people say that they worry about the credibility of the court when sometimes those words are uttered by people who are themselves actively, willfully, deliberately attacking the credibility of the court. sometimes as officers of the court. we are seeing this through an unfair attack on justice thomas and other members of the u.s. supreme court. it has got to stop. look, dobbs was right, as a matter of constitutional law, this is a matter not for this courts to decide, but from elected lawmakers, typically in state legislatures, not our national legislature. so, if you don't like the policy outcome, go to your state legislator, but this is not an issue in which the federal judiciary is somehow -- there is no reproductive rights cause of the u.s. constitution. so, let's not pretend that we're worried about the credibility of the court. if we're simultaneously attacking the credibility of the court, and its ability to do its job. now, a lot of these issue

that is what occurred with dobbs. jobs are. to cult to endure hearing people say they are worried about the could ability of the court when those words are uttered by people who are actively, deliver really attacking the credibly of the court sometimes as officers of the court. we are seeing this through an unfair attack on justice thomas and other members of the us supreme court and it has got to stop. jobs was right. as a matter of constitutional law this is a matter not for the court to decide but for lawmakers typically in state legislatures, not national legislature. if you don't like the policy outcome go to your state legislature. this is not an issue in which the federal judiciary is empowered, there's no reproductive rights clause of the u.s. constitution so let's not pretend we are worried about the credibly of the court. if we are simultaneously attacking the credibility of the court and its ability to do its job. a lot of these issues relate to this legislation that has been introduced, in the wake of the dobbs deci

dobbs corrected a prior error.s difficult to endure hearing people say the word about the credibility of the courts when sometimes as words are uttered by people who are themselves actively woefully deliberately attacking the credibility of the court. sometimes us officers of theor court. we are seeing this through an unfair tax on justice thomas and other members of the u.s. supreme court and it has got to stop. look, dobbs lewis writes a matter of constitutional law this estate matter not for the courts to decide but for elected lawmakers typically in state legislatures that are national legislatures. if you do not like b the policy outcome go to your state legislature. this is not an issue which the federal judiciary there is no reproductive rights clause of the u.s. constitution. so let's not pretend or about the credibility of the court we are simultaneously attacking the credibility of the court in its ability to do itsts job. now, a lot of these issues relate to the legislation that is beenac introduced in t

quick let's move on to dobbs. surely the culmination of this book. dobbs briefly explained but this was about. >> attested a ban on abortions that legislators had passed that said after 15 weeks of presidency, a woman could not get an abortion. this is so intertwined. with the timing of justice ginsburg's death. even conservative judges in the lower court struck down saying that this conference with roe v. wade. at first i come up in early september to the supreme court. that is where all the filings were in. they probably would have rejected the appeal just based on roe v. wade which said the government could not interfere with a woman's choice of ending a pregnancy before viability. that is generally about 23 weeks. mississippi gets its filing in and it comes right as justice ginsburg died and amy coney barrett 60's her. the justices put on hold the petition for months after month after month. in may of 2021, once she settles in, they agree to take this case over they say is -- the question presented is only whether the viability standard should pe

you can also just roe casey and dobbs. finally love reading commission reports or reports by special of congress. i know that sounds weird, but these reports are often of america in moments of enormous stress and trauma. think about it. the 911 commission report, the warren commission report on kennedy on the kennedy assassination, the kerner report in 68 on on the riots, the january six committee report and the assault on our capitol together they form an unofficial historical of america in its most broken moments. and they deserve scrutiny. they deserve to be read not just discussed. so i recently read the house's january six report, for example. it's almost journalistic in its style, unlike the very dry, sort of legalistic of, say, the mueller report, it's more than hundred pages in length. if you include the executive summary, which showed and it offers a very -- assessment of president trump's actions, not just on january six, but in the weeks leading up to it. but there's one particular passage that i just can't stop

>> what can i say, direction feels a lot like dobbs. not a shock or surprise but you still feel the gut punch. i think that is what we felt on friday evening, on good friday evening, this judge, the singular servant activist judge to lay dow this decision to block decades of approval of mifespristone that is clearly used for over 23 years in more than 60 countries, more than 5 million patients, and to dare challenge the fda not just on mifespristone, but also the implications that are far-reaching for other medications. amy: if you could explain, alexis, mifespristone, it might surprise people, part of a to drug cocktail, that is used in most of the abortions in united states most of how widespread this is and what exactly does it mean? the judge said it would go into effect in seven days. so it is not in effect yet. but what this also means for planned parenthood? >> thank you for that opportunity to offer some patient reassurance for the next seven days, that there are people who are waking up toy, tomorrow will have appointments that

even before the dobbs decision was issued, abortion access was limited in many states. the dobbs decision allowed states to ban abortion and 13 states have fully with very limited exceptions, and these are in areas that voters now, when we have seen in many recent elections have in many cases cited -- sided with the support of abortion rights and allowed individuals to make their decisions. host: is the attempt to permanently shut down fda approval of mifepristone? guest: that was the original request which was to overturn the approval, that is correct. that would limit its distribution across the country. the fifth circuit has said that the approval cannot really be question because the statute of limitations has passed. it was approved in 2000. they said that the ability to limit the fda's deceptions -- decisions to limit abortion, they basically have merit. as a result, they are basically applying the limits from originally in 2000. host: brenda from manchester, washington -- manchester, massachusetts. go ahead. caller: i just want to say on the broad spectrum of the

i've already said what i think the lie of dobbs is. think dobbs is a weigh station to fetal person hood and the total abolition of fetal abortion in this country this weekend various member of the pro-life coalition were like that's exact lewhat we're doing. they're explicit about it. if you're the court and standing by this decision as a principled return of a democratic process you can't abide by thisone judge in amarillo, texas, doing this i think this is going to present a real challenge for justice kavanaugh who wrote in his very pained concurrence that the constitution is neutral on the question of abortion it's neither pro-choice or pro-life and we've got to be neutral, too women have the right to make this choice and they can do so at the state level they can persuade their legislators and urpersuade congress >> and they have been. >> and they have been. again, is scotus a pro-democracy scotus is is it not interested in democracy is democracy unconstitutional at this point those are the broader questions that underlie this case

dobbs and this decision cannot coexist. i think that offers the suprem court and off ramp as well i they are willing and brave enough to take it. >> the governor of washingto state is very worried abou this, there's a stockpile of three years for women who live in states like california or new york or the places where abortion remains illegal they don't think there was any threat for them. more than half of women us this to drug combination t have an abortion should people be buying this >> let me say this in the washington litigation we see that the court has said that the fda should do nothing to decrease access t mifepristone nationwide. i would imagine that the attorneys who filed that litigation wants to make sur that access to this medication is available in their states and for very good reasons, as mentioned before, whether it i to help patients manag miscarriages, to be able t have abortions for other reasons wh mifepristone is on the market, there are other health car reasons that people us mifepristone one of the

since the dobbs decision las june, the antiabortion's right movement has set its sights on expanding abortion restriction across this country. despite those policies being deeply unpopular following the dobbs ruling kaiser family foundation surve found 65%, 65% of american disapprove of the courts decision to rollback reproductive freedom despite the courts pledge that abortion policy would now be i the hands of state legislature or congress, the antiabortio movement continues workshop in new legal theories to help bring the case in front of far-right judges who are sympathetic to their cause slim godfrey writes, the atlantic, quote, even as the anti-abortion movement lacks a next big objective, a ne generation of antiabortion leaders is ascendant, when there's arguably bolder an more uncompromising than its predecessors this cohort, still high on the fumes of last summer's victory is determined to construct its ideal post roe america and it's forging ahead, compel high-water, or publi discussed. with me now to discuss, msnb chris gardner, an editor of la broquerie's, also with, us m

by judge kacsmaryk'srder, th basically flies in the face of the dobbs decision, meaning if his loaderorderere allod to and in stas like calirnia, illins, new york, mifespristone would no longer be available for this use. therefore, making hash of what the supreme court issued just last year. amy: michele goodwin, what you think of congressmember's like aoc saying that the biden administration should simply ignore this ruling? what are the grounds for this? >> right now -- she is not alone. there are doctors that are articulating just how distressing this happens to be. so if we set the ground a bit more, which i think is really important, the united states is the deadliest place in all of the industrialized world to be pregnant. i know for many americans, that is shocking. but we rank somewhere around 55th in the world in terms of maternal safety. that means if someone were to be pregnant have a child with dignity and countries that have been war-torn. in the united states, the pre-court conceded in 2016 that a woman is 14 times more likely in the united states to die by carrying a pr

here is the issue around thi entire issue the data shows us a sense dobb is that coming out of dobbs, the nation pivoted to different conversation on this issue. it was no longer are you pro-life or pro-choice, it was do you support the role, framework or not while the data shows us is tha over 70% of the country, including many republicans support the role framework it is possible to be both pr life and pro roe republicans have missed that entirely let's be, honest the 30 year the pro-life community has bee asking for this. donald trump delivered a court that provided to them, but donald trump does not want t talk about it ron desantis just provide them a six-week, banned becaus it six - this really hurts republican candidates >> okay, josh allen, i'm going to ask you this. rather than cater to the minority for a primary why wouldn't the party simpl encourage a whole lot of other republicans that represent mor consensus thinking just encourage them to go ou and vote >> i think you are going to se some - you saw from christen uno, the governor of new hampshir today. but really you are

so, look, what's going on here is this notion we all knew that this woul follow after dobbs, after rode was reversed, that dobbs was not the low wate mark in abortion rights in thi country, that it will continue to get worse, that the goal is in fact a nationwide ban o abortion, even though unde dobbs, the standard is to le each state decide for itself >> not the low water mark, indeed joyce vance, as always, than you so much for your expertise i want to bring in senator mazie hirono, a democrat fro hawaii senator hirono, it seems lik republicans are moving their argument that this should be a state issue. what does this ruling out of texas reveal to you about th antiabortion movement scheme plant moving forward >> it's never a -- an issu that's gonna be left up to the states and in fact, there is nationwide abortion ban in the senate, as you know. so, this is not an issue tha is going to be decided state b state, clearly not the move to try and impose a nationwide abortion ban is wha we are looking at with thi particular judge in texas an his decision >> talk to me about that las thi

the references to dobbs, the decision that overturned roe and what the supreme court would do.rt has left access to the abortion pill in place that is procedurally, a smackdown against some of the lower court judges who seized on that ruling to try to do otherwise. we have this procedural decision what we don't have yet is, of course, a final decision we'll keep that in our minds as we cover this docket thank you for spending time with us have a great weekend you have been watching "the beat" with ari melber. joy reid takes over our coverage now. >>> good evening, everyone we have breaking news from the supreme court moments ago, the high court blocked in full a decision by texas based u.s. district judge matthew kacsmaryk on april 7th that invalidated the food and drug administration's long time approval of the abortion pill mifepristone conservative justices clarence thomas and samuel alito publicly dissented from the decision. this means the supreme court has allowed the pill to stay on the market and remain widely available at least for now people can still obtain mifeprist

>> first, i think that the dobbs decision is the correct decision.e me theoreticals all day long. i am pro-life, the fact is you will need 60 votes to get something through the senate. what tammy baldwin was talking about that there will be no restrictions on the states upon abortion meaning the child can come through the birth canal and still be aborted? no. that's wrong. most americans think that's wrong. tammy will not get it through the senate and there are not 60 votes for allowing that and on a bipartisan basis it's been rejected and i reject giving me theoretical after theoretical just because -- if that's what you do if you want to fill air time and get people buzzing and it's not how we govern. >> i hear you, but there seems too a real debate on this front. i want to touch on something that you've decided to touch which is the third rail of american politics and social security. i want to play this ad that donald trump is running against ron desantis on this issue. take a look. >> desantis has his dirty fingers all over senior entitlements l

the dobbs ruling didn't resolve anything. it merely paved the way for activist judges, like judge kacsmaryk, to impose their radical agenda on everyone else, even in states which have voted to protect the right to abortion. earlier this month that's what happened. judge kacsmaryk in amarillo, texas, defied decades of scientific evidence to revoke the fda's approval of the drug mifepristone. the medication is used in more than half of the abortions in america. it is safe, it is extremely effective. in fact, studies show that it's safer than tylenol and presents fewer risks than routine medical procedures like colonoscopy. in in the past 20 years, millions of american women have used this drug to terminate an early pregnancy or to help manage a miscarriage with minimal complications. so this attempt to ban this medication isn't grounded in science, and it certainly isn't grounded in any concern about the safety of women. you see, judge kacsmaryk is a long-standing, outspoken critic of abortion. just this weekend "the washington

, that is not the case the dobbs decision is not popular with the public.le 61% of voters disapprove of the decision to overturn roe, 65% of republicans approved of it republican elected leaders are well aware of what abortion presents they've struggled to answer simple questions about where they stand on abortion rights and access this week florida governor ron desantis quickly signed a ron desantis six-week abortion ban before an evangelical group and he did it behind closed doors, and he never mentioned what he did in his speech donald trump has repeatedly refused to say if he would support a law that would restrict abortion, mike pence and nikki haley are struggling to define their views on this issue. >> is it difficult to get a penalty for abortions? >> i must tell you that i don't. i'm not familiar with those proposals and i don't -- i don't -- i don't have a way of responding to that or confirming it. >> i would literally sign the most conservative pro-life legislation that they can get through congress. >> even if it was six weeks. >> i'm not going

where dobbs asked what evidence she has a fraud on the 2020 elections. let's listen to her answer. we will just fast-forward it once again. >> your reaction? >> i can hardly wait to put forward all the evidence we have collected on dominion, starting with the fact it was created to produce altered voting results in venezuela for hugo chavez and then shipped internationally to manipulate votes for purchase in other countries, including this one. it was funded by money -- >> here we have sidney powell claiming that they have proof that dominion was created to produce altered voting results in venezuela for hugo chavez, another false venezuela tie allegation against dominion voting systems. well-deserved lawsuit indeed as fox news braces for yet another 2.7 billion voting lawsuit -- voting system lawsuit coming up. his it's not over yet. >> thanks very much. that is it for the moment. more news coming up. >> albania has become a haven for afghans fleeing the taliban. >> from the day we came here, every single promise made has been broken. >> they hope to come to america but are still

the fnnthing about the dobbs thinis it threw it back to the court and states but the texas judge said that, i am imposing this denial across the nation so in a funny way the dobbs decision has yielded exactly the opposite of what some people thought could happen, which is put this issue in a precarious situation for everybody. it is a mess and holding people hostage on both sides of the issue. >> on a separate issue, you look sitting in front of the nation's capital and there is something about it that just goes. >> it is the place to be and it is my disneyland. >> all right. thank you so much for evything. >>> one of the tennessee state legislators kicked out of office last week is now back on the job and he has bay area ties. we are talking about justin jones, originally from oakland. a few hours ago the council voted to put them back in office and he was once again you could remember that he was one of two black state lawmakers voted out of their positions by republican colleagues on thursday all because they interrupted the legislature with a bullhorn in the state house calling fo

know the chief justic can do investigations becaus he did - called for that botched on into the alito dobbs opinion >> senator, we know clarence thomas was forced to issue a written statement in respons to his first round o investigative revelations abou him, which we're all about o the travel, the private je travel, the travel audience, all at the same billionaire. and clarence thomas writte statement was, you know, i jus ask people around the office i this was okay and he never eve indicated that he read a singl line of law or have anything i making his decision about no to disclose any of that. i'm sorry, this is written i law. >> - where he could go and ge actual advice from people wh are experts and who do this as part of their responsibilities he appears not to have asked the responsible body within th judiciary. >> this one that we are talkin about tonight's right there in federal law, which i read to this audience. he cannot possibly pretend tha there was any other way to dea with us, other than a suprem court justice actually looking at the simplest sentence o federal law that any

i think the dobbs leak really hurt. i also think some of the ethics, some of the disclosures, even if they don't involve technically violating the rules, in other words, the hospitality exemption that allows you to do things like take private jet rides with friends or whatever, that's something that might not technically violate the rules, but to average americans, that's not what they want to see supreme court justices doing. - after the dobbs decision, you wrote, quote, "the pro-life movement should greet the reversal of roe v wade with a spirit of gratitude. but the movement should also show a profound humility and absence of malice toward their political opponents." do you feel they've heeded your advice? - oh, you know, i think that there has been an element of, what's the old saying, the dog that caught the car? that there was a lot of unanimity in the pro-life movement around overturning roe. but then as soon as roe was overturned, you exposed an enormous amount of division within the pro-life movement itself, so

i have already said what i think the lie of dobbs's and then dobbs is merely a weigh station.e road to feta personhood and a complete an total abolition of abortion in this country this weekend many variou members of the pro-lif coalition were like, yeah, that's exactly what we'r doing. >> there explicit >> their explicit if you're in the court new standing by this position ever return to democratic process o the vexed and fraught issue, you can't abide by this on judge in amarillo, texas, doin this this will present a real challenge for justice kavanaugh, who wrote in his very pained concurrence that the constitution is neutral on the question of abortion it's either it's neither pro-choice nor pro-life an we've got to be neutral. two women have the right t make this choice and they ca do so in the state level it can persuade their stat legislatures, they can persuad their congress >> and they have been. [laughter] >> and they have been. so again, it's coach is a pr democracy scotus is it not interest it in democracy? those are the broader question that underlie this case as

the supreme court in the dobbs decision last june gave the american people a new beginning for life and returned to the question of abortion to the states and to the american people but didn't just return it exclusively to the states. this isn't a state's only decision. we have elected representatives in the congress of the united states and we'll elect a president again in 2024 and i think the american people would welcome a minimu national standard in washington, d.c. 15 weeks. >> is former president trump in retreat on the abortion front? >> i would leave that to others. >> what's your take? >> you can ask him. >> your top aide mark short has said on the record former president trump is in retreat? >> that's a great question for him. i couldn't be more proud to have been vice president in the administration that appointed three justices to the supreme court. sent roe versus wade to the ash heap of history. we're in a new season and i think millions of pro life americans want to see every opportunity to put the interest of the unborn first and in deeper measure to demonstrate the gene

the dobbs opinion is merel anesthetizing us to th prospect of this slow an incremental removal of all abortion accessibility in th united states. we are seeing that movin quickly to its outcome we saw this last week when there was that case filed in texas about the wrongful death for a termination of a pregnancy. again, the idea that onl persons get to have wrongful death suits, again equating th fetus with a person. now in black and white, in the pages and the united state federal supplement reporter, that this judge is telling u where this is going. this is moving toward feta personhood it's the only place it can g unless there is a response fro the people >> melissa, you talk about what's happening in texas an washington state you talk about what's happenin in idaho, you talk about what' happening in tennessee and the effects of gerrymandering, which you've often flagged for us in the theoretical context. we are seeing them play out in very realtime. all of it goes back to the supreme court. you've made that point over an over again last year, polling found the trust in the supreme

we will go off the wall because it has been one year since the dobbs draft opinion was leaked. rachel: since the draft opinion was leaked, not only were justices lives put in danger but we have had 80 pro-life senders that give away free diapers, milk, and all kinds of services to people who have a pregnancy and need help, 80 of them have been terrorized. they've had molotov cocktails thrown at them. they are not identified, not a priority for the fbi. they don't care about the mystic terrorist attacks in america. pete: the cut ability of the court is at stake. keeping a lid on it doesn't help that credibility, you can only do it by finding out who it is, punishing them and restoring credibility to the courts. pete: to the southern border the border crisis continues, 51 illegal immigrants located in a single stackhouse has border patrol teams in el paso uncover 165 stash houses in the region. that is the front line of what is happening when it comes to the crisis. once you are over the line, there's the question of what happens to everybody in the country specifically when it c

so as dahlia mentioned, it is bit of a wild west tha resulted in the wake of th dobbs decision, and perhaps did not eve predict would happen, and that is the kind of lawlessness tha dahlia wrote about back in jun of 2022 after the dobb decision it is a wild west, dee inconsistency across the country. >> dolly, it changes day t day. we just saw florida today, passing a new abortion ban i florida. so, the answer to this questio in florida is different than what it was a week ago >> that is right, i think that it is exactly right. it is the wild west. and one of the things that i really disturbing both about judge because mark's decisio from last week in texas and th fifth circuit decision fro midnight last night, reaffirming most or much of it is that there is a quality i you look at this important question of standing who has a right to marchmont a court and demand relief? the plaintiffs in this case ar a bunch of doctors who are saying we have a in to mak sure that of this drug is on available nationwide because w may someday have to treat some patients somewhere who hav adverse effects fr

widely available in states where abortion access is legal as all this plays out in court since the dobbsion las june, anti-abortion rights movement has set its sights on expanding abortion restriction across the country despite the policies being deeply unpopular following the dobbs ruling, kaiser foundation survey found that that 65% of americans disapproved the courts decisio to rollback reproductive freedom. despite the courts pledge that abortion policy would be in th hands of state legislators o congress, the antiabortion movement continues workshop in new legal theories in hopes of and think a case in front of far-right judges who are sympathetic to their cause as they write in the atlantic, quote, even at the antiabortio movement lacks the next bi objective, a new generation of antiabortion leaders i ascendant, one that is arguabl bolder and more uncompromising than its predecessors. this cohort still high on th fumes of last summer's victory is determined to construct its ideal post roe america, and it is forging ahead, to help, hig water or public discussed. with me now to discu

but then this abortion issue came up with the dobbs ruling.vating, it is a broader-than-the-base-motivating issue. and so, as a woman, as a woman of color, she is in a unique position to be able to talk about this in a way that an 80-year-old male president can't talk about as comfortably. and that's setting aside the fact that he's catholic, and has sort of challenges with that. amna: meanwhile, we are speaking in a week that we do expect him to make his reelection official announcement, we believe. that's as polls show that some 70% of americans don't want him to run. that includes 51% of democrats. why announce now? what changes when he announces officially? amy: well, i think it goes directly to that piece right there, which is, you have a democratic base that isn't very excited about the upcoming election. and they are not feeling very emboldened by their sitting precedent, right? they want to feel like they can own this race. he needs to, hopefully by announcing, hopefully for -- when -- the way his campaign thinks about it, what it will

post dobbs the court's credibility has plummeted.e the court as idealogical on conservative issues as possible then after dobbs they throw a banquet. you have supreme court justices who ruled against 65 or 70% of where americans were on the issue of choice. they go there and have this huge celebration and they're laughing and joking about it. richard, like everything else conservatives are doing, they're setting up the left's best argument for expanding the court. because usually you'd say oh but that will take away with the credibility of the court no they're doing that right now they're opening a door and they're going to allow the left to walk through it like they did in wisconsin and michigan and in 2 2022 they're only going to have themselves to blame. >> i also think we're going to see more and more people say let's ignore the courts, almost a 21st century version of nullification. where does that leave us it just worries me that american democracy is going to be the big loser here >> we have to look at the state houses and obv

he also says this was part of an effort to prevent the dobbs draft from becoming law. intimidate them to change it or if you assassinate one of them a democratic president nominates to a democratic senate a democratic justice, and then there's no dobbs decision reversal. this is a real thing. he also said, you could pound us daily. you could be critical. but you went after our legitimacy. that's a problem for the country, and no one defended us. final thought? >> well, he's right, in that we had an attempted assassination of one of the justices. if he's correct, this was an effort to try to prevent this opinion from being published. >> yeah. >> it may have backfired. the justices may have decided they were not going to yield to this type of unethical conduct. >> i know. it's just amazing. the impact of this and the leak, not getting somebody, i think, is terrible. we'll see where it goes. justice alito did want to come forward. he didn't have to give this interview and the quotes to the "wall street journal" today. jonathan, thanks. appreciate it. meanwhile it's hard t

as he supreme court said in dobbs they want to leave those decisions the state legislatures.bviously when we have issues of interstate comments they are going to have to weigh in. but i think they can leave it essentially to a decision of the fda ultimately and whether the court defers to the fda's actions is really the bigger question here in my mind. neil: are presently women who want to get this drug, even in states that crackdown on abortions, ken? >> if your state has really cracked down on abortion than many of those doctors cannot prescribed this medication in the first place. but with these supreme court holding a yesterday this does open up accessor reopens access to everybody in states where there was access to abortion. so generally speaking the limitations on abortion access in states that restrict remains the case. for other folks where it is open for now that remains the same as it was before all of these courts are ruling on the issue. thirty-six is more a political than legal question you have covered the supreme court quite well. we are told they go in with b

it is absolute madness but what we saw with dobbs is once the dobbs decision came down, you could no longer have this conversation in extremes because previously there had always been a back stop, so republicans could use rhetoric that was extreme because they knew there was always the protection but once dobbs came down and the protection went away, what we saw here in michigan is a republican-airs, democratic areas, rule areas, women were having real conversations about all the many ways that a pregnancy can go wrong, that your birth control can fail and you could no longer just message based on fear because this was suddenly real. in michigan we had an abortion ban about to go into effect if we didn't act. republicans are on the losing side of this issue, and the same is true for lgbtq issues once we reveal the reality and we connect it to the facts that they're just distracting, again, from running more anti- transads about inflation, we've got to show people this is just to make you so angry and hateful and fearful about something you may never live through or never experience t

dobbs is not originalist.obbs is doing weird historical analysis that is not unless you think that's what the due clause tells you to do. use the attitudes of 1868. i don't think does, and i don't think the equal protection does that either. sort of more. i think the equal protection tells you that governments cannot in a way that is arbitrary, oppressive or unjustified. and if you're trying to figure out whether something arbitrary, oppressive or unjustified, look at contemporary attitudes, look at what we know to be true now and what we believe to be morally correct. and that actually gives you the kind of expansive of propulsive doctrine that historically had with equal protection, where social movements, people's minds, and then their victories are sort of ratified by supreme court decisions, recognizing equal status. and i think you do have that with respect to, say, women's political rights through the idea of democracy with the gettysburg address, according the declaration of independence, there nothing

it was rational for people to believe that they might be able to stop the decision in dobbs by killing one of us. chief justice roberts ordered an internal investigation led by the court's marshall and released a report in january concluding the team has been to date unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence. earlier this week, roberts turned down an invitation from the senate judiciary committee to appear in person on the leak anniversary to talk about another topic of concern, ethics questions over the justices and the refusal to adopt a formal code of conduct. by the way, we have a special panel of former clerks, experts to break this down on "fox news sunday" this week. trace? >> trace: shannon, see you on "fox news sunday." thank you. >> shannon: see you then. >> trace: also breaking tonight, a potential economic blow for president biden as he tries to get his re-election campaign off to a good start. federal officials are attempting to rescue another major bank in trouble. this comes as we learn more about the failure of a northern california inst

prior to dobbs, i don't know how many folks would have thought that was a realistic proposal, but hereare. >>> jim, we are bracing for serious flooding in the midwest. the winter's heavy snows have melted. they are pushing the upper mississippi river beyond its banks, and experts are warning that the snow melt could cause some of the worst flooding we've seen in 20 years. in iowa, flood waters have already swallowed much of the river front area. here is the view from the ground just a short time ago. so far the flood waters are not deep, but they are widespread. and the threat along the river, it's going to linger for weeks. another danger today, tornados. let's turn to chad myers, who's following all of this from our weather center. we're looking at two threats, different parts of the country here. what are you tracking? >> right now i'm tracking the tornados that are likely on the ground just a few minutes ago near hamilton, texas. we have our first two watches of the day. severe thunderstorm watch for dallas and a tornado watch south of there, including waco. this storm right here t

from the dobbs decision doing away with roe v. wade to now consistent approach if they take it up, assuming they do would be to strike down this ruling because they argued before and jobs that this is a states rights issue. we don't know what what and if they're going to do, but that is a very interesting notion separate from the politics of this. can i just get to your that interview? i mean, the whole show yesterday was fascinating, particularly the point you made to representative gonzales about when he answered you and he said , look, this is about states. this is states' rights. you said then isn't and i'm paraphrasing here. you said it much more eloquently. but isn't this essentially a federal judge. sweeping federal power over those states' rights. i mean, the argument wasn't even consistent. no it's not consistent. and you know, because you you've been doing a lot of discussion about the legal realities here and the problems and the challenges on all sides. i think it is important to talk about the politics and part of the