well, as i say, the sun's associate editor, former political editor trevor kavanagh joins me now., let's just go through some of the highlights just so that people can catch up, because i appreciate not everybody's drilled into the manifesto. there's not that much in there that we didn't know already. it's a bit like a repeat of the tory manifesto where nothing's much of a surprise, to be honest. votes for 16 year olds, no increase to vat, income tax or national insurance. although the thresholds are still frozen and 8.6 billion in tax rises have been identified with regard to charging people extra for their school fees, non—doms and overseas property investors look to be being taxed more . to be being taxed more. scrapping of the hereditary lords have lords retire at 80, build 1.5 million new homes, reduce net migration. we've had the institute for fiscal studies saying, well, you've given us some costings, but only for the final year. so they've sort of suggested it's slightly smoke and mirrors. what's your reaction to it, trevor? >> well, i think that it raises many more questi

in the tax case that justice kavanagh said, we don't have to decide congress's power to tax. all we have to say in this case is this precise tax is constitutional. they could do something very similar in the immunity case, saying we don't have to decide the precise scope of immunity. all we need to do is say that what is alleged in this indictment does not fall within the bounds of presidential immunity. >> there's this other case we're dealing with that applies to january 6th and a defendant, the fisher versus u.s. case, and this defendant is trying to throw out the obstruction of an official proceeding charge. and, lisa, that's a charge trump faces, right, so will that decision also have implications on trump's legal fate, potentially? >> yes, and no. because the argument that the defendant is making in that case is that the meaning of the statute has to be interpreted in light of some of the clauses that come before it that have to do with, essentially, destroying paper work and impeding or obstructing, it has to do with, for example, destroying records or falsifying recor

and so, this legal standing was summed up by justice kavanagh who wrote this opinion using a doctorateu and the plaintiffs had no argument to make against that. so, basically, the merit of the case won't even looked at. having said that, anti—abortion activists are likely to regroup and find another way to bring the case of the supreme court. it's important to note that this ruling change anything so, these abortion pills are still illegal in the 1a states that have near total abortion bounce and that's where there is a ban through on the procedure or on the pills. we know that abortion is very potent issue going into the presidential election, we have seen that the petition that democrats have taken is in line with the public opinion two years on sense ray v wade was overturned so paul suggest that most americans do believe in abortion rights, that you believe in medicated abortion rights, broadly speaking. i think for republicans, they dodged a slightly toxic issue, if the ruling had gone another way given that we are heading in towards a very tight presidential race. the general ele

and so, this legal standing was summed up byjustice kavanagh who wrote this opinion using a doctorate you and the plaintiffs had no argument to make against that. so, basically, the merit of the case won't even looked at. having said that, anti—abortion activists are likely to regroup and find another way to bring the case of the supreme court. it's important to note that this ruling change anything so, these abortion pills are still illegal in the 1a states that have near total abortion bounce and that's where there is a ban through on the procedure or on the pills. we know that abortion is very potent issue going into the presidential election, we have seen that the petition that democrats have taken is in line with the public opinion two years on sense roe v wade was overturned so poll suggest that most americans do believe in abortion rights, that you believe in medicated abortion rights, broadly speaking. i think for republicans, they dodged a slightly toxic issue, if the ruling had gone another way given that we are heading in towards a very tight presidential race. we heard tha

well, here to talk about all of that, i've got dennis kavanagh , director at the dennis kavanagh, directore show. thank you very much, dennis. welcome back. thank you. this is a story that we've spoken about quite a lot. i think there's still a lot of confusion about it. what is so wrong with a ban on conversion therapy? >> well, it's the orwellian language game, isn't it? it sounds like a good thing when people talk about conversion therapy. most people think about horrific practices that occurred in the 50s and 60s, electrocute or corrective rape, and most people would naturally be against conversion therapy. but what a trans inclusive ban means is quite different. and what it amounts to, strangely, is this. it says that any doctor at a gender clinic who doesn't affirm a child's self—diagnosis, their cross—sex ideation, their belief they're in the wrong body is guilty of a conversion practice. they've been pushed globally by trans activists as a way of fettering clinical inquiry and furthering the objectives of medical organisation called w path . and that organisation path. and that org

tradition to have these outside counsel come in and conduct investigations, who said that, brett kavanagh, so even a judge who is new to this, knows they've got to follow the supreme court. i come back to like what is actually going on here. we've had about a year of judge cannon and seeing what she's up to and it seems like she has a playbook. the first is distract, take these very simple legal issues and make them seem really complicated, so we are not talking about donald trump willfully retaining classified documents, step two is use these complications, use the suppose it complications to delay and say i need roofing, argument, bring an outside party, everybody come in and say what you need to say and after that we will have more breathing and i don't have to set a trial date because i've got so much i need to deal with and step three is disparage the prosecutors along the way, take every opportunity you can to school them and every time she runs this book, donald trump wins, i've been one of the people that gave for the benefit of the doubt and said maybe she's just incompetent or i

single example of that ever happening or a number of the other possibilities they raised and is rick kavanaghed, we have punches lost somebody protected. verse and so, if you cannot show that there has been a great injury, that all these hypotheticals are moved and they didn't get past that her and hurled you had nine — zero arguing that are agreeing to that i think that it showed that despite all of the flapping around about this very controversial issue, the judges are looking for the most part, at the law. paul: and dan, the cassidy into the concrete injury that is re- addressable by the courts the conservative justices and brett kavanaugh decision wrote, they did did not show that in a sum of the justices who knows i don't know what they think about abortion, but is reasonable to infer that maybe some of them are opposed and is a policy man, they were looked at that to focus on the lloyd what is it tell you about the court itself. dan: will tell us something positive certainly the conservative side of the court is been trying to emphasize the importance of reading the law correctly in the

bunch of high-ranking officials were dragged into federal court and now, you have barrett, joined by kavanaghd three liberal saying they should not have been in federal court in first plate -- place. barrett is policing that line, she's still very conservative but when she sees nonsense like this, she will absolutely call it out. >> george, we are also seeing more and more judges current and retired, call out the supreme court. they are not happy with them. what does that tell you about the status of things? >> these are difficult times in the judiciary because people have been attacking the judiciary because of the instability -- >> and sometimes for good reason. >> absolutely, some of these ethics issues are significant but i think, a decision like the one that mark was just talking about it shows you that there is a corrective capacity in the supreme court. i think the fifth circuit is becoming the conservative version of what the ninth circuit used to be worth something wacky would come out and he would say it must be the ninth circuit will that's what's happening now with the fifth circu

but let's just say that either those justices who were in the majority, the chief justice is kavanagh, amy coney barrett, a elana kagan, sonia sotomayor justice ketanji brown jackson. that would be the liberals, and then key conservatives, they're the ones who believed that this case should have been in prominently granted. that means accepted on appeal and they might they might be writing some extra phonation. as i said normally, you just get that one sentence dismiss dozen prominently granted. but in this case, since according to bloomberg, we know who the three dissenters are from that justices clarence thomas neil gorsuch, and samuel alito they likely, under most circumstances would have wanted to say something about that. they would have been this case was argued the last week in april and i presume that the reason we didn't get this order dismissing this case is in prevalently granted soon after. is that those three dissenters had something to say about it. there's something probably quite angrily to say about why the justices should have actually handle this case and probably g

embraces and which, nigel farage is ferociously, ferociously critical of. >> so you observe trevor kavanagh. always a pleasure to have you on the show. thank you very much for joining have you on the show. thank you very much forjoining us. now, later in the show, i'll be paying later in the show, i'll be paying tribute to the good old british piint, which is exactly 200 years old today . but 200 years old today. but unfortunately, lots of pubs are currently struggling. and let's join our south west of england reporter, jeff moody. jeff just to give you some idea of the problem, 239 pubs have shut already this year. >> that's an average of 80 per month. well i've come to the bell month. well i've come to the beuinn month. well i've come to the bell inn in chittlehampton in devon. >> no sign of closing here. it's nearly always packed every time i come here, mark. >> but why do you think so many pubs are closing . it's just the pubs are closing. it's just the perfect storm. it's the cost of living , the cost of energy living, the cost of energy prices, the cost of from the suppliers . the wag

. >> justice kavanagh. >> iant to focus on the actual dispute as it exists now, today between governmes vw of emtala an idaho law because idaho has changed since the time of the dtrict court's injunction both from the idaho supreme court and with the ifying change by the idaho legislature. you say in your reply brief in so to the r -- reply. identified by the solicitor general wear u their viewf emtala and abortion must be available. you say in reply briefdaho law and fact allows an abortion in each of those circumstances and to go through them onage nine of the reply brief each of the conditions. is there any condition that you are aware of the solicitor general says emtala requires that an abortion be available in an eme circumstance for idaho law isntly stated does not. >> is certainly demonstration maintains that there is such a condition. >> what is your view? >> my view is that yes the mental health condition situation the administration abortion is the only stabilizing care required and i'm not sure where that construct of only stabilizing care comes from because their view at th

also, a top political commentator , trevor political commentator, trevor kavanagh of the sun, says it'stlining, nigel farage nipping at his heels. sir keir starmer is snoozing his way into downing street. is boris the tories last stitch secret weapon? bring back the big dog and finally the pint. the great british pint is 200 years old today, a great british institution that no politician has ever dared to meddle with. not even the european union will be raising a glass to the great british pint. >> well, cheers to that , martin. >> well, cheers to that, martin. this is actually full of beer. always has been, but thanks for thanks for joining us. always has been, but thanks for thanks forjoining us. and see you at three. >> well, there you go. sounds like a great show, but tiktok, it's become a bit of a fevered battleground this election. all parties are competing for the youth vote. >> yes. suella braverman launched her campaign on the app tiktok over the weekend to much ridicule with this question for everybody who wants to go to the four seasons, orlando . four seasons, orlando. >> we