. >> ifill: for more on the recurring debate over gun laws and gun ownership, we turn now to marcia coylewshour regular and chief washington correspondent for the "national law journal." evan osnos, whose extensive report on concealed carry laws appears in this week's "new yorker" magazine. and newshour correspondent lisa desjardins, who's been following the action on capitol hill. >> as of now this time 6:00 p.m. eastern time tonight do we have -- is there any possibility any of the four gun bills that were up for a vote today might pass? >> realistically, no. we already know one has failed. something feels innocuous. background checking, received 60 votes, republican amendment that did not clear, we do not expect the others to clear there that bar either. >> ifill: public opinion? >> not just americans as a whole gwen supporting things like background checks, moderate restrictions you could say but republicans as a group. recently pew and many other groups find 80% support background checks but republicans are going the other directions. >> ifill: marcia the court decided not to take up

we dig into both cases now with newshour regular marcia coyle, chief washington correspondent of the l law journal." marcia. >> judy. >> woodruff: we need you here on days like this, especially on days like this. let's talk about the affirmative action case first. what was it that the university of texas case was about? >> well, actually this was the second time the supreme court had looked at how the university of texas uses race as a factor in its admissions policy. back in 2013, the case came to the supreme court by abigail fisher, a student who was denied admission to the university in 2008. and she claimed that the use of race as factor was why she was denied admission and that it violated the constitution. the supreme court in 2013, led by justice kennedy, a 7-1 court, sent it back to the lower federal court saying you gave too much deference to the university's explanation. you have to give the tougher scrutiny we have under the constitution, and the university has to show there are no workable race-neutral alternatives. well, that lower federal appellate court held hearings, b

for more on end-of-term decision, we turn to newshour regular marcia coyle, chief washington correspondentthe "national law journal." just to be clear, we're talking about two different anti-restrictive laws that were returned today. >> right. >> ifill: how did this case get to the dismownchts a group of abortion clinics in texas challenged the two texas regulations that were contained in a law now noun as h.b.2 enacted in 2013. the two regulations required clinic doctors to have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles to have the clinic. the second regulation required the clinics to meet the building safety and other standards of ambulatory surgical centers that are almost hospital-like. >> ifill: what was the practical effect of the law as it stood before the court waited? >> when the admitting privileges requirement went into effect, roughly 20 of the 40 existing texas abortion clinics closed. the clinics estimated that when the ambulatory surgical center requirement would go into effect which it hadn't, that the 20 remaining clinics would go down to seven or eight. >> ifill: