john roberts dissented in that case. john roberts said that texas law was constitutional, but he lost that case because anthony kennedy was still on the court, and he voted with the liberals in that 5-4 decision. louisiana passes a law that's almost identical to the texas law, and here roberts switched places because, he says, the rule of precedent requires that we honor the decision of a couple of years ago even though i disagreed with it at the time. what that suggests is that "roe v. wade" may need one more justice from president trump in order to win because if john roberts feels this precedent needs to honored, "roe v. wade" is an even more well-established precedent, so, i mean, this is an extremely important decision to the lives of women in louisiana most importantly because it means that louisiana will not effectively have abortion ban, but it also is a message to other states that don't think there are five votes on the supreme court now to uphold overturning abortion laws. so it is a major decision. it is a ma

senator ted cruz slamming the chief justice for his recent murder -- movement. >> john roberts was on the wrong side, roberts wrote the opinion, john roberts and the four liberals in the opinion is it is a joke. he is playing games. >> and the victory made possible by the courage and resilience of hundreds of thousands of daca recipients who refused to be ignored and as president i will get to work immediately to make it permanent. daca recipients celebrating the ruling. >> one day, built a home in the community, and look forward to the graduation. >> justice clarence thomas objected, the court's decision to provide a politically controversial, legally correct decision. jillian: we will have more on this later, thank you. rob: the court siding against the president has some conservatives pretty concerned, worried about checks and balances and whether the highest court overstepped on a policy that should have been debated in congress to begin with. >> i was stunned. i don't think you can lose this one. what do i know? i think clarence thomas said it right, the daca program created by p

i still have to go through that, but we do know that at oral argument chief justice john roberts, he said that while the trump administration may have been able to do this, perhaps it if it was done in the right way there, also needed to be some humanitarian concerns here because these people, these daca recipients have relied on this program for the past eight years. they have set up their life here. they work here. they pay taxes. they have had children here, so to all of a sudden roll this back really seems like an inhumane injustice and that was something that it seemed at the time of oral arguments in november that chief justice roberts was trying to balance to really look to that humanitarian response that we got, you know. i spoke with some of those dreamers. they marched here to the steps of the supreme court from new york city. they marched for days in oftentimes bad weather. it was raining actually the morning of oral arguments here. they were committed to this. they were passionate about this, and today the supreme court handing them a win saying that the trump administrat

john roberts sided with the liberals in three of the biggest cases of the year. it is a major decision, a major message that chief justice roberts may not be who we thought he was. >> let's discuss with political analyst britt hume, good to have you. okay, the washington examiner writing a commentary says this, the headline is john roberts supports conservative jurisprudence yet again, chief justice john roberts put another shiv in the ribs of judicial conservatives abandoning intellectual consistency while doing the bidding of social liberals. what do you make of his decision? >> you can make the case for his decision based on the fact the court had ruled against the pro-life movement in a comparable case a few years ago thereby creating a precedent which john roberts argued he was bound to uphold, notice in the clarence thomas to send what he quibbled with most strongly was the line of cases that got us here. i think it was horrible just - going back to roe versus wade in 1973, the basis of it was flimsy, almost laughable but it is now enshrined in law and has b

john roberts is live outside the white house with some details. >> good morning. spute between the white house and a john bolton. the justice seeking an emergency injunction and temporary restraining order. the doj is insisting in its filing saying "to be clear, and in the book bolting claims president trump's foreign policy was mostly based around his reelection and saying they missed the mark and focusing solely on the ukraine and turkey among others. bolton writes democrats could have wrote a broader pattern of his behavior including its pressure campaign involving hulk bank, cte and what way among others. he said that could have led to a greater chance to persuade others that higher crimes and privileged comic misdemeanors had been perpetrated. and bolton says president trump cut a deal with president xi jinping to cut a deal with u.s. agricultural goods. they are saying absolutely untrue. it never happened, i was there and i have no recollection of that ever happening. i don't believe it's true and i don't believe it ever happened. they dismiss the entire prem

well john roberts has been on the court for a long time and he's that very practical man and he also has an eye on history at so i think that roberts is. in the running needles very carefully and as i said today's case wasn't the grass case abhor anti-abortion advocates in his position was particularly good on the l.d.p. . case that came out earlier in june by the in that case as well. l g b t q rights have been fairly established in the united states and there are not too many people other than that say the catholic church you are opposed to l. he writes so i don't think roberts went out on a big limb in that case either add there's still a case coming down the pike i meet a ca or otherwise known as obama a bomb i care of. and how he rules out now will be very instructive so it's really i would say that overall roberts is not a liberal but he has made some very pragmatic decisions that made people suspect he's a liberal but he's just simply not as far right as some of the other justices we really appreciate you giving us your thoughts on this melanie sloan thank you very much and the

but john roberts and the four liberals are going to strike it down because they say it wasn't explained clearly enough. mr. president, this is a charade. last year they pretended it was just about the agency could go back and do it again. they knew full well there wasn't time to do it again. that they had to start the census, and so they got the results they wanted. they didn't like as a policy matter asking this. no legal reason, no legal authority to strike it down, so play a little game. go back and start over. of course now we're doing the census without asking that question. that's the same game here today in daca. they don't like the policy, so they say just go back and do it over. just give a little more explanation. just start over. everyone knows the game they are playing. they are hoping that in november in the election that there's a different result in the election, that there's a new administration that comes in that decides amnesty is a good thing. and so this slight of hand is all about playing policy. five justices today held that it was illegal for the trump administrat

john roberts has sided with the liberals now in three of the biggest cases of the year. a major decision and major message. chief justice roberts may not be full he thought he was. >> shannon: let's discuss with brit hume. good to have you. >> thank you. >> shannon: the "washington examiner" writing saying "the headline is john roberts aborts conservative jurisprudence." chief justice john roberts has put shiv in the ribs of judicial conservatives. doing the bidding of social liberals. what you make of his decision? >> i do think you can make a case for his decision based on the fact that the court had ruled against the pro-life movement and a comparable case just a few years ago there by creating a precedent which john roberts argued he was bound to vote to uphold and you'll notice that in the clarence thomas dissent, a ringing dissent, will he crippled with most strongly was the whole line of cases that got us here. i think the supreme court has made a horrible mess of its jurisprudence on abortion going back to roe vs. wade in 1973. the basis was flimsy and almost lau

that is the view that john roberts takes.onsolation to the pro-choice folks who feared a gradual wearing away, whittling away of roe vs. wade. i don't think that is going to happen while john roberts is the chief and that court has the makeup that it has now. but it is very disheartening to the pro-life folks of whom i am one that this justice voted differently than he voted on the same said statute when another state introduced it, taxes and the abortion crowd wins again. so there you have it. it is not a surprise. >> neil: i'm sorry, sir. completing that conservative for some that finds this decision justifiable. is this court what we think it is on the issue of abortion? because, you know, we have not had to stand -- >> the court is not what we think it is on the issue of abortion of whether the civil rights act of 1964 used language conveying its application to the lgbt cute community which didn't even exist as a political force in that area. sometimes judges, i can tell you from having a lifetime appointment, obviously n

for john roberts, it's all about john roberts. this was a real legacy move with some classic john roberts touches. first of all, i should mention that back in november during oral arguments, he did drop some hints that he was reluctant to have the supreme court be part of a massive rollback of a program that has benefited 700,000 young immigrants. you know, people who could experience hardships that maybe the administration did not consider when it started its phaseout program. we had those hints. today, what he did, brooke, two things. first of all, bring down the temperature in a battle between, you know, president trump, the judiciary, these challengers, trying to sort of bring a certain kind of steadiness to the court and to this dispute and say, neither side is going to win big time. obviously, there's a big win for these daca recipients who can breathe a sigh of relief, but john roberts didn't say this cannot be phased out. just said you have to do it properly. his ruling recalled two priper rulings that you know. one from l

the chief justice john roberts siding with the four liberals on the bench. let's get perspective now from our sunshine legal analyst. joan, the chief justice is your wheelhouse. you are a biographer and the like. it's a very interesting decision here, and you get the sense from it in the clarence dissent, clarence thomas essentially saying, you know, deal with the politics. the chief justice saying the administration gave me a reason not to because they didn't follow the rules. >> yeah. there are a couple of messages here from the chief justice and one is do it right. do it right. we're not against you. we would be with you if you would just follow the procedures here and do it correctly. the other thing that you have, john, is sort of a message of when the chief justice is going to flip over to join with the liberals, and in this case it was another one of those politically charged disputes involving tensions between two administrations, the obama administration and the trump administration, and it's in his interest to defuse those tensions and that's where

what does john roberts to one year ago? of course. they have done it since 1820. that is 200 yearss ago. and steadily since then (-left-parenthesis over but john roberts a twist of hand. and then didn't explain that reasoning but you look at that memo to announce that. and with that legal authority. and that bill clinton had asked that question, the clinton administration but john roberts will strike it down. because they say it wasn't explained clearly enough. this is a charade. and this is just about to go back and do it again they know full well it wasn't time to do it again. but they had to start the senses so they got the result they wanted. they didn't like it as a policy matter. and then to play a little game. go back and start overitha and w we do the census without asking that question that's the same game here today with doctor. and i like the policy everyone knows the game they are playing that in november in the election if there is a different result or a new administration that comes and to decide. it's all about playing policy. five justices today h

john roberts voted against the law based on precedent. hn heilemann, i know the legal piece of this is complicated, but the result is profound. is this going to -- i feel like this could cut both ways. it could sort of wake democrats up the way republicans are always on heightened alert before elections about how important the supreme court is to a woman's right to choose and a woman's health, or could get trump base agitated that they're not there yet on locking down the court around reproductive health. >> yeah, i think it does cut a little bit both ways, nicole. and i think this ruling, i think, is less problematic for, in a way, less problematic for trump than the gorsuch ruling in the gay rights case, however many days ago that was, partly because that was trump's appointment, right? and so the urgency -- trump was going -- among some arguments that he still had, he was going to say, we're going to get two more supreme court appointments. you can trust me to get people to vote our way. and gorsuch siding with the lir liberals was a bi

. >> harris: chief white house correspondent john roberts outside the white house. john?> harris, good afternoon to you. we've heard the allegations from john bolton, know the story is to turning to white house pushback. criticism from democrats as to why both and waited to reveal these revelations in a book instead of presenting them before the house intelligence or the house judiciary committee during the impeachment process. what has democrats really incensed is the fact that, in the book, bolton charges the democrats committed impeachment malpractice by a narrowly focusing impeachment on ukraine, both in writing the president is willing to intervene into investigations of other countries like turkey and china, to give personal fears the dictates he likes. adding that a pattern of destructive justice is a way of life which we couldn't accept. democrats are furious that bolton didn't come forward with that information during the impeachment process. nancy pelosi saying this earlier today. >> it didn't seem to matter to john bolton. he chose loyalty over patrioti patriot

john roberts' decision in both cases, john roberts was on the wrong side. the decision today on obama's executive amnesty as you noted, roberts wrote the opinion and it was john roberts and the four liberals and the opinion is, it's a joke, it is -- he's playing games because as you noted, not a single justice, none of the nine disputed that what obama did was illegal, it was contrary to federal immigration law and they all agreed that trump has the authority to reverse it and nevertheless what they held today is that trump is prevented from stopping breaking the law. because obama broke the law and the game roberts played, yes, of course trump has the authority to stop breaking the law buddy didn't explain it well enough and it's exactly the same thing, a year ago, roberts did the same thing, joining with the four liberals in a case striking down the census where th the trump administration wanted to ask as part of the census, the questi question, "are you a u.s. citizen?" we've asked a version of that question in every sense since 1820. he said of course

talk us through this most recent decision and john roberts deciding -- justice john roberts siding with liberal judges? >> this is a case where've when you have a conservative supreme court, you have precedence on the other side with roe v. wade and even a case four years ago which involved a substantially identical texas law. the issue here really is, as states whittle away and put little obstacles in front of people who want to have an abortion, for example, requiring doctors to have admitting privileges to a hospital within 30 miles, does that create an undue burden by placing a substantial obstacle in the way of women who want to get abortions, and what's interesting here is that justice roberts -- this should not be viewed as a shift from justice roberts to the liberal side. quite the opposite. as you said, he would have voted against the prior case, but now that that prior case is precedent, he's constrained to vote with the majority. you could say if justice roberts were king, he would not have voted this way, but because he's a supreme court justice, he must follow precedent. th

wade" may need one more justice from president trump in order to win because if john roberts feels this precedent needs to honored, "roe v. wade" is an even more well-established precedent, so, i mean, this is an extremely important decision to the lives of women in louisiana most importantly because it means that louisiana will not effectively have abortion ban, but it also is a message to other states that

but the crucial vote in this case came from chief justice john roberts, who wrote he joined the liberals only out of respect for precedent, citing a 2016 ruling striking down a nearly identical law in texas. a ruling which roberts originally disagreed with. for abortion rights advocates, a close call. >> you know, i think it's just a sigh of relief. >> reporter: both justices appointed by president trump, neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh, voted to uphold the louisiana law and limit abortion access, but once again, it was chief justice john roberts, who declined to go with the conservatives, choosing stability and precedent and caution in the law, rather than rapid change made by this court. tom? >> terry moran from the supreme court tonight. terry, thank you. >>> now to the chilling confessions of a serial killer in california. the golden state killer today pleading guilty to more than a dozen murders and admitting to dozens of sex assaults. families and surviving victims face-to-face with the now frail killer as he claimed responsibility for the attacks that began four decades ago. here

chief justice john roberts joining the court's more liberal justices in the 5-4 decision, saying the president has the right to dismantle the program, but that the administration failed to provide, quote, a reasoned explanation for its action. on the steps of the supreme court today, there were celebrations, banners says "america is home." it was a blow to the president, ending daca was a top campaign promise. and it was the second time this week the high court has ruled against him, after tuesday's decision protecting lgbtq workers from discrimination in the workplace. tonight, the president responding, taking on the court and making it clear this will be a key issue come november. but for now, a major victory for the dreamers. and abc's terry moran, who covers the court, leading us off tonight. >> reporter: across america, for hundreds of thousands of dreamers, there was relief, for now. >> surprised, to be honest. i was expecting the worst. >> reporter: for many, the ruling keeps hope alive. >> still feels very sure raem. >> reporter: this woman came to our country from el salvado

. >> senator john kennedy slamming supreme court chief justice john roberts who sided with liberals to strike down a louisiana abortion law. >> the chief justice today joined with four liberals on the court to strike down louisiana's statute, four years ago in a case out of texas, the same statute, same issue the chief justice voted with the conservatives, he flip-flopped like a banked catfish. >> the ruling blocking a louisiana law that requires doctors performing abortions to have visiting privileges a nearby hospital, the vacation two weeks was a george w. bush the side with the liberal judges in the majority. >> the judge presiding over the case of the former officers charged in george floyd's death is the trial may have to move out of minneapolis. all four officers face the judge monday is the trial date was set for next year. the judge threatening a gag order and said he would move the trial altogether public officials don't stop talking about the case. one of the ex-cops, j alexander king plans to plead not guilty. 's attorney says he was acting in self-defense. >> the city of l

howie: president speaking in fox news john roberts. ben, i don't see any classified documents or intelligence, but the president said the conversations they had should be considered classified. does it go too far to call john bolton's actions treasonous? >> i think it goes too far. my big question about this book, is the better position to take with this is to put forward people refuting the claims he makes in the book. there's factual problems in the book, spelling of congressional members' name that would have gone over with fine-tooth comb. howie: the book is number 1 on amazon. capri, i think it's aimed at the president trying to make sure that the proceeds from the book are frozen and john bolton doesn't make a time on this, your take? >> capri: i totally agree with that howard. that individual had to give the proceeds back, and i think that by in large a lot of people democrats and republicans alike see this john bolton book as essentially as a cash cow for john bolton or else he would have testified if he was this concerned and h

matters about this firstly that the swing voter has a 54 decision was made by the chief justice john roberts now very significantly 4 years ago there was a virtually identical case before the supreme court roberts voted in favor of that case in other words that the physician should have visited writes he reversed his decision in this case giving that pliable majority for one very important reason that he believed he had to follow the precedent of a decision taken by the court before what this means is that in the future when you have got such a cunt department divided case the chief justice is going to go with precedent very significant the world health organization has warned the crown of our spend they make us far from under control and the worst is yet to come it's sending a team to china next week to investigate the origins of the disease which are still are. we on one this to be over we all want to get on with our lives but the hard reality is this is not even close to being over although many countries have made some progress globally the pundit is actually speeding up. the u.n. securi

who was joined by the chief justice john roberts and the courts four liberal justices. the president calling it a powerful decision. >> they ruled and we live with the decision. that's what it's all about. we live with the decision of the supreme court. >> former president obama tweeting this tonight. today remind us progress might be slow or take decades. no matter what things might look like today, it is always possible. happy pride month, everybody. right on. happy pride month everybody. for years the president has used a tax on his opponents. opponents health, unfounded against them. remember the whole hillary clinton thing. she was on her death bed, not true. now questions are raised about the president's health. so take a look at this. he walks slowly. and cautiously down a ramp at west point on saturday. and needed two hands to steady a glass of water. remember that? president tweeting the ramp that i descended after my west point commencement speech was very long and steep. no handrail and most importantly was slippery. the last thing i was going today is fall f

once again chief justice john roberts to side with the court's liberal. he rode a concurring opinion with the feeble conclusion that the louisiana law with abortionn is just as severe as thatib imposed by the texas law for the same reason. now, he is now relying on that deeply flawed decision in another judicial slap in the face to pro-lifers. as usual, my former boss justice clarence thomas absolutely leveled the majority opinion in his own dissent writing "the plurality and the chief justice concludes that louisiana law is unconstitutional under our president, but those decisions createed the right to abortion out of full cloth without a shred of support from the texton the abortion precedent is egregiously wrong and should be overruled." originalists and all conservatives in america should take this moment to remember how john roberts was sold to republicans when he was nominated by president george w. bush. >> in my meetings with john roberts, i have been deeply impressed. he has a good heart, a quality americans expect in a judge. experience, wisdom,

. >> laura: chief justice john roberts latest trail. charlie hurt come he reveals the political leftist of the g.o.p. and trump and you get his thoughts on the rumors ridiculous that trump would drop out of the race, absurd ♪ >> laura: the supreme court striking down a landmark pro-life in louisiana at a 5-4 decision. once again chief justice john roberts to side with the court's liberal. he rode a concurring opinion with the feeble conclusion that, the louisiana law with abortion is just as severe as that imposed by the texas law for the same reason. now, he is now relying on that deeply flawed decision in another judicial slap in the face to pro-lifers. as usual, my former boss, justice clarence thomas absolutely leveled the majority opinion in his own dissent riding "the polity and the chief justice concludes that louisiana law is unconstitutional under our president, but those decisions create at the to abortion out of faux cloth without a shred of support from the text, the abortion precedent is egregiously wrong and should be over

how do you explain how john roberts comes down here after being nominated by george w. bush? >> reporter: that's right. this was a very important moment for him choosing the integrity of the court over his personal ideology. you know, just can a made that point, that he's always voted for abortion regulations, that those kind of stinkts go back to the time of the ronald reagan administration, but here at this moment with a trump administration, an election year, it was important for him to say four years ago we struck down identical abortion restrictions and there was no going back. now i think at a different time and era with him not being a swing vote justice he might not have voted this way, but this is a very big stand he took for some sort of stability in the law, public expectations and the integrity of the court and his personal legacy over his own ideology that has been very conservative, especially on social issues. >> that's why this roberts aspect of this is so fascinating, because if people are sitting here thinking and wondering saying are we looking at a transfo

and what john roberts did in this case was a precedent should hold and at the same time he also took something away to which is he said that in future cases that there are many many of course in case it's still in the pipeline at the appellate courts right now he is changing the burden somewhat from previously looking at whether a restriction causes an undue burden to now considering whether there are substantial obstacles so it may be that in your haste says i he's paving the way for it to be easier than the supreme her to holder's strict abortion laws there are several other cases in the pipeline coming in the next couple of years and they do have more states and cavanagh who have staked out very clear and hard line positions on abortion and roberts has never been a friend of abortion he's anti-abortion so i think in a different a different case with a different road map we could see an entirely different decision and worse and roe versus wade is still a great. indian government has banned 15000000 mobile phone applications most to forge a chinese phone companies have been ordered

what happened to you, john roberts? also senator tom cotton and crowds already lining up in oklahoma to see the president this weekend. we will compare that to forgetful joe. for veterans and active-duty service people. some of them are giving their lives right now, today, for the freedoms that we have here in this country. so for us, at newday to help those people at this point in time. it's a labor of love, it's a noble service, and that's what we're all about. i geh. common bird.e. ooh look! over here! something much better. there it is. peacock, included with xfinity x1. remarkable. fascinating. -very. it streams tons of your favorite shows and movies, plus the latest in sports news and... huh - run! the newest streaming app has landed on xfinity x1. now that's... simple. easy. awesome. xfinity x1 just got even better with peacock premium included at no additional cost. no strings attached. just say "peacock" into your voice remote to start watching today. >> sean: an outrageous decision out of the u.s. supreme cour

john yang reports that chief justice john roberts was the swing vote. rowd chanting] john: jubilant daca recipients gathering outside the supreme court. >> i'm thrilled the supreme court made the decision for me and the hundreds of thousands that are out there. john: chief justice john roberts provided the decisive vote, citing with his 4 consistently liberal colleagues and writing the majority opinion. he stressed that the court was not making a judgment on the policy itself, which he said is none of our concern. "we address only if the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation of its action." he acknowledged the department of homeland security had the legal ability to end deferred action for childhood arrivals or daca when it acted in 2017, but it concluded the agency was arbitrary and capricious in the way it did it, especially for failing to consider the effect it would have on daca recipients. justice clarence thomas joined by samuel alito and neil gorsuch called the decision and effort to avoid a politic

comes after fair supposition from conservative justices the vote was 5 to 4 with chief justice john roberts voting with the court's 4 member liberal wing it's the 1st big abortion case since trump appointed 2 new justices shifting the court to the right. egypt has told the united nations it faces an existential threat from ethiopia's construction of a hydroelectric dam on the blue nile river ethiopia began construction of the ground in a sense than 9 years ago and is expected to start filling it next month egypt which is almost entirely dependent on the nile for its fresh water supplies is the plea concerned that wants the u.n. to intervene earlier the security council discussed the project at a virtual meeting convened by the united states of the brotherhood and healy of the vengeful proportions of the murdered but google groups on both single source of livelihood over $100000000.00 egyptians ground with you would be rid of those that . it got off the project but if you're look at the growth of the blue nile good in britain you have to think europe and very survivable nation by imperiling

what happened to you, john roberts? also senator tom cotton and crowds already lining up in oklahoma to see the president this weekend. we will compare that to forgetful joe. ♪ so what's going on? i'm a talking dog. the other issue. oh... i'm scratching like crazy. you've got some allergic itch with skin inflammation. apoquel can work on that itch in as little as 4 hours, whether it's a new or chronic problem. and apoquel's treated over 7 million dogs. nice. and... the talking dog thing? is it bothering you? no... itching like a dog is bothering me. until dogs can speak for themselves, you have to. when allergic itch is a problem, ask for apoquel. apoquel is for the control of itch associated with allergic dermatitis and the control of atopic dermatitis in dogs. do not use apoquel in dogs less than 12 months old or those with serious infections. apoquel may increase the chance of developing serious infections and may cause existing parasitic skin infestations or pre-existing cancers to worsen. do not use in breeding, pr

i respect the court, i like john roberts, he is a smart guy the politics change dramatically. the court was arbitrary and capricious in deciding whether or not the trump administration was arbitrary and capricious. rob: up massive hotel fire in new orleans's french border, flames erupting in a hotel overnight, crews on the scene right now. the injured firefighter suffering smoking relation, one found in a stairwell. crews using a ladder to pull him from the fifth floor window. both are expected to be okay. everyone else got out of the hotel safely, no word on the cause of that fire. jillian: amy klobuchar withdraws herself from consideration as joe biden's running mate. >> america must seize on this moment and i truly believe this is a moment to put a woman of color on that ticket and there are so many incredibly qualified women. jillian: biden tweeting in response amy, the moment you were running for president in a snowstorm it wasn't hard to see you had the grit and determination to do anything you set your mind to. you know how to get things done. with your help we are goin

bret. >> bret: quickly about chief justice john roberts, i have talked to some legal watchers and court waters who say he has kind of -- he is becoming a kennedy swing vote even on the issue of abortion which surprised people. >> yeah. one longtime court follower said he was becoming anthony kennedy on steroids. he is a critical swing vote and today he said i've got to stick with the precedent that we decided in 2016. then he was a dissenter to that opinion. a lot of conservatives today are saying why didn't you step up and dissent in this opinion and that would've turned it into majority 5-4 opinion to uphold the law. >> bret: almost lost in the shuffle today, and other big decision, this one dealing with a key federal agency and the president's power over it. >> the consumer financial protection bureau was created out of the obama administration. this was back in response 2008 financial crisis. critics claimed there's too much unchecked power. the supreme court upheld a framework of the agency but recognized the president's power to fire the director. "the structure of it violates the

john roberts is obviously figured in huge in these decision. one of the justices who switched sides on monday to vote that lesbian gay transgenders are covered by rule 7. i think this is not some sign that john roberts is a closet regressive or he's had some change of heart. i think it's that the trump administration's arguments and the moves it has made and some of the policies it has adopted really are you know significantly different to the right and in some ways more procedurally fraught than arguments that prior republican administrations have made in the conservative justices. so i think the real bottom line here is, if it's a bridge too far, for a life long conservative like john roberts, i guess that says a lot more about the policies, we have anna, than it does about the court. >> all right. thank you both for coming on. steve, we appreciate your legal perspective. jesus, thank you for your service there on the front lines against the coronavirus. we really appreciate your perspective. >> thank you, breana. >> all right. you guy versus

the showdowns into dc, the administration facing off the 2 perceived opponents, chief justice john roberts and former national security adviser john bolton, lindsey graham joins us to weigh in on both. welcome to fox news at night. kevin cork start us off with a look at what has the president fired up tonight. >> it is safe to say the decision by the supreme court on daca left him frustrated but also resolute that despite that setback the fight over da ca isn't over yet. it was just 12 words with the tweet spoke volumes. after another high court setback, this time on the fate of dreamers in the legality of dac donald trump tweeted his displeasure and his strategy to prevail in the long run writing as president of the united states i'm asking for a legal solution on the aca, not a political one consistent with rule of law, the supreme court is not willing to give us one so we have to start this process all over again and then he added the recent supreme court decision not only on the aca, century city, census and others tell you only one thing, we need new justices of the supreme court, tha

chief justice john roberts sided with liberal justices in the 5-4 decision. he indicated this was solely to respect court precedent. in 2016, the s supreme c court struck down a near identical law in texas. in that case, roberts dissented. this is plananned parenthohood president and ceo alexis mcgill johnson respondingng to the ruling. sigh ofnk it is just a relief. i had the pleasure of beieing in the courtroom to hear the arargument being heard. g give creditit for the center f for reproductive rightsts and their work with jue medical anand how brilliantly ad beauautifully argued it was. itit means that wowon in louisia have access to abortition. i do think the couourt was takig a stanand and i think particulay being in the room and listening to the questions b by justices sosoda mayor and ginsburg and kagan, how they were actually make plain the burden would be cured by people seeking abortion. amy: she is the new permanent head of the planned parenthooood federation of america. for more, we're going to louisiana where we are joined dy lakekeesha harris,

john roberts was the swing vote. roberts said the department of homeland security did not follow the law or give adequate justification for ending the program. roberts called the administration's total rescission of the program arbitrary and capricious but the justice justices did not rule on whether the program itself is legal. it's the second defeat for trump just this week. on monday the court's majority ruled the 1964 civil rights act protects gay and transgender employees from workplace discrimination. as usual, trump isn't taking it well and a classic twitter melt down writing these horrible and politically charged decisions coming out of the supreme court are shotgun blasts into the face of people proud to call themselves republicans or conservatives. we need more justices. later he asked, do you get the impression that the supreme court doesn't like me? because the court's decision, of course, is all about him. not the 800,000 people able to avoid deportation. former president barack obama on the other hand w

what is sort of emblematic of john roberts is that when he can, he strives to find consensus. and sometimes that consensus requires a narrow opinion. john roberts cares very much about how the court is perceived by the public, the institution's reputation and credibility. and that's all part of how i think he-- he weighs, you know, trying to get consensus and trying to get a cross ideological balance on the court whenever he can. >> yang: president obama created daca eight years ago this week by executive order. it protects young immigrants, brought to the country without proper documentation as children, from being deported, and allows them to work legally. since then, daca recipients, known as dreamers, have jumped into the workforce. today, an estimated 27,000 are health care workers on the frontlines in the fight against the coronavirus. jose aguiluz is a baltimore surgical nurse who has been volunteering at a field hospital testing patients for covid-19. >> my patients really don't care about my immigration status. they just care that i'm a competent health care provider

the court by a 5-4 vote, with chief justice john roberts providing the fifth vote for the majority, has held that a state law that required that there be -- requiring that there be admissions privileges for abortion providers is unconstitutional, on the ground that the supreme court had already invalidated a very similar texas law, just a few years ago. the chief justice with that fifth vote having said that i think that that texas decision is incorrect, but we have decided and therefore as a matter of stare decisis, once we decided things, we leave them decided, i'm going to rule in favor of those challengers to the law. >> that's a pretty significant development. and we'll get into it in a moment, contrasting what the decision was in 2016 with what we just heard today. this was the case known as june medical services llc versus russo. at issue was the -- as we heard there from tom goldstein, a louisiana law that required doctors who performed abortions to have admitting pri inting pr nearby hospitals. this was upheld by the lower 4th circuit court of appeals. the significance of this

everyone except john roberts is behaving the way we all thought. john roberts is a george w.h appointee appointed to the court twice, first to replace justice o'connor when she retired and then to replace chief justice rehnquist when he died. so he was twice scrutinized, twice appointed by george w. bush, he has been chief justice since he's been on the court in day one. but he does look at these things from the standpoint of generations from now. did his court change the law of the land because of the political wings blooming in an different direction than when -- or did they stick to the law of the land with what we call stare decisis. there's any consistency in the chief justice is thinking, it has been that. you will remember his famous statement at the confirmation hearings, i'm just an umpire. i don't throw the pitch and i don't swing the bat. i just call balls and strikes. you are calling balls and strikes or is he putting his own ideology into here? that's what we will all be debating in the next 24 hours until the next case comes down. >> trace: is interesting becaus

chief justice john roberts sided with the majority. >>> breaking news in san jose.ing the story all morning long and live at the scene with the very latest for us. kris? >> good morning, laura. two more suspects are in custody in addition to one suspect that was taken into custody just before 1:00 this morning. san jose police got a call from someone who said that people broke into their home and beat up several family members. four people managed to escape, however, several people remained inside that home for almost seven hours. we just saw the merge unit truck leave and the roadway is now open again on center road. this part is open, however, we know that vta is still rerouting buss for the next hour, hour and a half because the perimeter has just gotten a little smaller. once we're done here, we'll wrap up and head closer to the scene and see what we can find out. >> sounds good. we'll look for more on the midday news today. >>> in the meantime, speaking of today, it's going to be a hot one. vianey is in for kari. how hot are we going to get? >> upper 90s, laura

the same is true for chief justice john roberts. this is a fairly narrow case of interpretation. it has huge locations. >> samuel alito wrote that there is one word for the card has done today, legislation. the ruling comes days after the trump administration reversed and obama policy banning discrimination in healthcare for patients who identify as transgender. >>> the time is 4: 25. a vendor no longer plans to do business at the farmers market after the management told him to stop passing out pride flags. dan floyd, the owner of dan good cookies says he distributes the flags at his store. last sunday, he passed them out of the farmers market. on sunday, the management told him that passing out pride flags from his booth violates the vendor agreement. >> we are neutral on everything. there is a place for each activity within the market. i'm sorry he felt singled out. that was not our intent. it's the same rules for everybody. >> it's definitely the worst experience i've had in livermore, unfortunately, because our community is so accepting. >> the manager of the farmers market a

this is the second time that john roberts has joined the court's more liberal members. what if anything is this signal to you? >> the signal is not as much as we might think. chief justice john roberts to join the liberals that being as far away from them he concurred in the judgment and only because the court had heard another abortion restriction case that was almost identical. four years ago in 2016 there was another restriction from texas just like the case coming out of louisiana. texas said if you want to perform an abortion, you have to have admitting privileges to a local hospital, the same as louisiana. chief justice would have upheld that restriction in texas that he was outvoted. today he said i would still uphold that restriction but i have to adhere to the four-year- old case and i have to adhere to a past president. the court is still it just happens to be in a narrow situation with the chief justice who says i care about past president. >> justice roberts was not about to backtrack on what the court had so recently decided. >> absolutely. and he said in h

the same is true for john roberts. this is just a fairly narrow case of interpretation.>> reporter: the court considered several cases.>> i did nothing wrong and i now have validation from the united states supreme court. but we share this victory together as a community.>> reporter: in the dissent he wrote there's only one word for what the court has done today, legislation. rolling comes just days after the trumpet ministration reversed and obama policy prohibiting discrimination and healthcare for patients who identify as transgender.>> there ruled and we live with the decision. we live with the decision of the supreme court, very powerful decision. >>> the san francisco district attorney says his office will no longer prosecute cases that solely rely on the testimony of officers with a history of serious misconduct. the new policy directive is to ensure that nobody is falsely prosecuted based on the words or actions of officers with a known history of excessive force, dishonesty or racial bias. the da office says i

chief justice john roberts said the administration's paperwork was insufficient, and it failed to give an adequate justification for ending the federal program. >> and besidesotti fma opened the doors for recipients to have a normal life. they can get a driver's lice dreamers to find out what daca has meant for them. >> hi, i was brought to the u.s. when i was 6 years old. for a long time the thought of even getting like a license sounded like insane to all of us. in 2012 when president obama signed daca i was able to consider going to a university as a possibility because before then my sisters had gone to community college, but that's all they even think about doing. >> you pretend that you're just like everybody else. all the daca recipients that i've met in my life are among the most ambitious, hardworking individuals i have ever met in my life. and they have so many dreams. they're compassionate, they're ambitious. you know, they've suffered so much, and they're so resilient. >> there's a lot of fear in our community. a lot of us have our goals and our dreams that we want to do, a

in fact, john roberts more or less gives a roadmap.this back to dhs and they were to do these things, i would have no problem under the administrative procedures act. it's just that those things weren't done. that's a huge worry for dreamers because it's a signal that do it correctly next time, and he might be more receptive. on the political question, do i think he's really going to -- you know, donald trump is going to say, i'm going to prioritize doing this again in an election year when it is so unpopular, part of the reason, rachel, that the trump administration got into trouble was no one wanted to own this. congress didn't want to own t. the white house didn't want to own it. i think they were hoping that the supreme court would do away with daca. so asking trump to own it when it's wildly unpopular in an election year when he's sinking fast, it's a political question, but i don't think it's smart. >> dahlia, is there something else that's going to help before the end of the erm, which is going to bring this week crashing down o

the 5-4 decision saw chief justice john roberts side with his liberal colleagues for the third time this. they ruled the louisiana law requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges in nearby hospitals violated rights granted in roe v. wade. roberts said he was upholding precedent set in a 2016 case concerning a similar law in texas. >>> little cesar's is apologizing for a pizza that carried a message of hate. the pepperoni slices on it were arranged in a backward swastika. the cleveland couple who bought it didn't notice it until they brought it home. the teenage workers who made it apparently intended it as a prank not to be sold. they have been fired. >>> in connecticut a couple has a right to say no the next time a friend asks for moving help. >> yes, with a capital n-o. chris and angie were setting up a new home for a friend near new haven when chris took a tumble into a well inside the 177-year-old house. he fell at least 20 feet right into the hole, which was filled with seven feet of water. >> i hear a crack, and i look down and the floor is giving way underneath me. and