a lot of people are surprised by neil gorsuch and amy coney barrett. i am not.i think barrett was positioning herself in the middle on this case. when i saw the opinion was authored by barrett, i had a sigh of relief with that news and then as i continued reading, i was even more relieved. we have had a lot of liberal justices that have sat on the bench that have not been friendly to tribal sovereignty because i think that they don't understand it. i think justice ginsburg is somebody that people point to a lot. i think it is good for tribes to have justices that really understand the law now that law relates to the constitution. i think what gorsuch did in his concurring opinion almost never see, we almost never see was that he talked about the long history of the was government removing native children from their families. the reason that is important is that he is talking about why icwa is important from the perspective of native people. i think often our perspective and our stories and our histories are not told, so to see that coming from a justice is reall

donald trump put three justices on the bench, neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh, and amy coney barrett. they have all ruled in the last two days to push the country right in ways that many of you will see and feel every single day. we want to start our coverage with cnn's jessica schneider at the court. so let's start with the student loan decision. walk us through that. >> reporter: yeah, the supreme court telling the biden administration that they cannot enact their student loan debt forgiveness program as they had planned, as they had tried to put in effect back in 2022. the justices here saying that the federal law that the biden administration had acted under, the heroes act, just wasn't broad enough, wasn't intended to cancel this massive amount of debt amounting to $400 billion-plus. this was a 6-3 decision, split along those conservative and liberal lines. the chief justice, john roberts, he wrote this opinion, and in it he invoked the former house speaker nancy pelosi writing this -- "as then-speaker of the house nancy pelosi explained, people think that the president of the un

i am nominating judge neil gorsuch of the united states supreme court. >> neil gorsuch was the firstp and he was taking a supreme court position that mcconnell had previously held open. >> the justices that i am going to appoint will be pro-life and they will have a conservative and. >> trump was married three times and linked to pornography stars. not the first logical choice for southern evangelicals. the most important thing that trump did to some of the allegiance of a cultural conservative vanguard of the republican party was to signal who he would pick for the supreme court. >> in both cases they get what they wanted. trump won the election . >> the president interviewing possible nominees for the supreme court seat that will come open when kennedy retires. >> brett kavanaugh was supposed to replace anthony kennedy and that was a big deal. he had always been the key swing vote so this would change the balance of the court. >> i think president trump for the honor of this. >> the hearing was going fine and it did not look like there was any way for the democrats to stop it. >> w

that sex as defined or referenced under that act includes in effect sexual orientation, i believe neil gorsuchember, wrote that decision. why are those consistent, right? if in effect the court is saying that sexual orientation is protected under the constitution, why is it consistency with this decision? >> obviously justice gorsuch himself who wrote it agrees that it is consistent. here's why -- because as i've been explaining, it's not about denying a service based on class, but it's about not wanting to bring a message. so there's a whole host of messages that lori smith is not willing to bring. and that other people might not want to give. i think the example that you alluded to before with christian wagner, if you are a pro-abortion photographer, you shouldn't be forced to do work for an organization that you disagree with. >> i get that narrow argument. but -- >> on different things -- >> as you know, being a close follower of the court, not as simple as that narrow argument because you also have religious freedom cases argued from a different direction in effect but with the same effec

but neil gorsuch writing for the majority, again, 6-3 you said says the first amendment envisions the united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish. he likep pd this case to cases such as school children being forced to say the pledge of allegiance or salute the fact. the dissenters said this is case discriminating against someone not because of expression but because of their status and said for the first time in history the court was allowing businesses to refuse to grant people services based on their identity. >> important information there, indeed. all right, standby. i also want to bring in more of our supreme court and legal experts right now. justice gorsuch as you know he wrote the majority opinion in the case limiting these lgbtq protections, but just three years ago he wrote an opinion protecting lgbtq rights from workplace discrimination. so what does that say to you? what's going on? >> so interesting because just three years ago he was the hero to the lgbtq community. he broke with his usual conservative side, and he

. >> reporter: writing for the court, justice neil gorsuch sites first amendment protection, saying colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscious about a matter of major significance. in her dissent, justice sonia sotomayor wrote for the first time in its history, the court grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. back to what is expected later this hour. we are expecting to hear from president biden. he said in a statement the fight is not over and he promised to detail his next steps, possible new executive action or other legal avenues he could pursue on student loan relief. >> lgbtq advocates worry the court's ruling in the web designers case paves the way for even larger rollbacks of rights. does the wording in this ruling amplify that concern? >> reporter: that is what the dissent discusses, that this could be a slippery slope . critics of this opened the door to discrimination against other groups based on race or religion. the colorado ag , who was defending t

justice neil gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion, "colorado seeks to force an individual to speak inat align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance." we start our coverage again tonight with "newshour" supreme court analyst marcia coyle. thank you for being with us. let's start with the student loan case, the supreme court voting 6-3 along ideological lines, tossed out president biden's plan to slash the student debt come on the grounds he had exceeded his power, but justice kagan wrote that congress had authorized the plan, and adds that, quote in every respect the court exceeds its proper role in our nations governments. break down this ruling. marcia: the chief justice wrote the majority opinion. he looked at what authority secretary of education had under the heroes act to waive or modify student loan provisions. he examined the meaning of waive or modify and he looked at how the department had use the authority in the past and concluded those words did not stretch far enough to encompass what the secretary did here. what he said was to create

justice neil gorsuch agreed writing for the majority, the first amendment envisions the united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands. colorado cannot deny that promise. >> art is my passion. >> reporter: lori smith lost in lower courts but prevail before a supreme court that has repeatedly ruled in favor of religious groups in recent years. >> i want to design in a way that's consistent with my faith, but colorado is censoring and compelling my speech and forcing me to create custom artwork, custom expression that goes against the core of who i am and what i believe. >> reporter: but justice sonia sotomayor warning this decision could also lead to other kinds of discrimination. today the court for the first time in its history grants a constitutional right for members to serve a protected class. a website designer could equally refuse to create a wedsing website for an interracial couple, for example. while a majority disputed that notion colorado's attorney general warned -- >> this case will have

[abby[ neil gorsuch was president trump's first supreme court nominee, and he was taking a supreme courtconnell has basically held open at the end of the obama administration for the next president. the justices that i'm going to appoint will be pro-life. they will have a conservative bent. donald trump was married three times. linked to porn stars. not the first logical choice for southern evangelicals. so the most important thing trump did to try to cement the allegiance of the cultural conservative vanguard of the republican party was to signal who he would pick for the supreme court. -so help me god. -congratulations. in both cases, they each got what they wanted. the conservative christian groups got the conservative supreme court. and donald trump got their votes to win the election. today, the president began interviewing possible nominees for the supreme court seat that will become open when justice anthony kennedy retires. president trump here nominates brett kavanaugh. [chris] brett kavanaugh was supposed to replace anthony kennedy. and that's a big deal because kennedy had alw

justice neil gorsuch writing this, tolerance, not coercion is our nation's answer.a blistering dissent, justice sotomayor calls the decision a grave error and goes on to say this, time and again, businesses and other commercial entities have claimed constitutional rights to discriminate, and time and again this court has courageously stood up to those claims until today. today the court shrinks. joining us now, nbc's julian ainsley outside the supreme court, lisa rubin joining us as well, mike memoli, thank you for joining us. appreciate you guys, julia let me just start with you, specifically on the student loan decision first, walk us through it and what you're hearing so far. >> reporter: well, it was a very loud striking down of the biden plan to eliminate up to $20,000 worth of student loan debt for over 43 million americans, and what they could have done is a softer approach where they could have even, first of all, said these people don't have standing or that the biden administration simply went about this the wrong way. instead, they're saying that the hero

neil gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, saying it quote, tolerance, not coercion is our nation's answere first amendment envisions the united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think as they wish and not as the government demands. i want to bring in marissa parra who spoke with the web designer, and vice president of the human rights campaign. sarah warbelow. i want to start with you on this one. give me your reaction, the last day of pride month today on the most recent supreme court decision. >> this decision is incredibly disappointing but not surprising given that we have a supreme court who has demonstrated willingness to overturn precedent on a fairly routine basis at this point. >> marissa, you spoke with lori smith, the colorado graphic designer in this case, what did she tell you? >> yeah, well, so we had a chance to speak with her first, as soon as that decision came down, and she said in part, simply put, that she and her team are thrilled that everyone should have the right to free speech, and i'll kind of explain some of what they were saying,

wedding website's designer first amendment rights, and so this is a 6-3 decision, and written by neil gorsuch, and the decision is just coming down, and at the time i have had glancing at it briefly is again a 6-3 split with the liberal justices lashing out against this decision. it is once again justice sonya sotomayor with the biting dissent where she is saying for the first time in the history, the court is interpreting the constitution to allow discrimination. because that is exactly what the liberal justices feared and voiced in the arguments in this case that once you open the door to this wedding website designer to refuse to service same sex couples on the basis of her free speech rights, what other businesses can claim they are creative artists or creative business owners that operate and the owners of free speech and expression, and they would take issue with servicing clients that they don't necessarily agree with. so i am just getting into the opinion a little bit more, but to take away here is that the wedding designer has proved victorious, and where she wasn't in the lower cour

they are all arrayed up there on the mahogany bench, and you had justice neil gorsuch begin by talk about the religious rights at issue here for a woman who said that her free speech was impinged because she felt that she would be forced to create a wedding website for same sex couples. what she stressed, she would not discriminate based on the status, but she wanted to foreclose that option based on the fact that she did not want to articulate speech. so everything that justice gorsuch drew out as he presented his side of the case, the winning side of the case had to do with free speech. he talked about instances when the court had said that, no, students could not be forced to say the pledge of allegiance or salute the flag, and no, government could not stop the nazis from marching in skokie, because it is part of their free speech right, and everything he referred to here including the veterans parade that wanted to keep out banners and marchers who were going to out the gay rights, and that is context that he drew here, and in part to get ahead of the dissenter sitting right next to h

neil gorsuch selling property in colorado to a law firm that argues in front of the cart, undisclosed. you think chief justice robert would tackle these issues but his wife takes millions of dollars from law firms in fees that argue in front of the court, undisclosed. what was samuel alito's response in the wall street journal? you can accept gifts and i'm paraphrasing, as long as it otherwise wouldn't go to use. can you imagine using that in a bribery case? my question to you is there's got to be away that we can lock this down. the supreme court is at an all-time low and there's got to be a way we can push back. host: joshua kaplan. guest: yeah, it's worth making the distinction between some of these things that have come out. john roberts'wife for instance, it's healthy that's being examined, scrutiny of public officials, spouses work has a long history in other branches of government and historically it has not happened at the supreme court. we don't get that type of sustained coverage. there is not really evidence of impropriety here. she has her own we are and she makes a lot of

justice neil gorsuch, writing for the court's conservatives, declaring, "the first amendment envisionshe united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands." upholding the colorado law in this case, gorsuch added, would mean that the government could force "an unwilling muslim movie director to make a film with a zionist message" or compel "an atheist muralist to accept a commission celebrating evangelical zeal." in dissent with her outnumbered liberal colleagues, justice sonia sotomayor called the ruling profoundly wrong, saying it endows certain public businesses with "a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class." and she offered her own examples of what might follow. a website designer could equally refuse to create a wedding website for an interracial couple, for example. a stationer could refuse to sell a birth announcement for a disabled couple because she opposes their having a child. for lori smith, who says her religious beliefs compel her refusal to serve gay couples wi

writing for the majority, justice neil gorsuch said, "colorado seeks to force an individual to speakws, but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance." >> nobody should be forced to crcreate a message that goes against the core of who they are and what they believe. >> reporter: justice otis sotomayor wrote an eta sense, "today, the court for the first time in its history grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. >> it sets precedent moving forward that it is okay to discriminate against lgbtq people in america. >> reporter: back to the student loan decision, it is worth noting the trump and biden administrations temporarily lifted payment requirements during the pandemic for all student debt holders and all penalties. quite separate from the court decided today, john, those parents are due to start in october. >> john: thank you, major. tonight's, tens of millions of americans are on the road and in the airports trying to get to their holiday weekend destinations. cbs's kris van cleave reports that sev

we appointed more than 300 conservatives to our federal courts at every level included justice neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett. that conservative majority gave america a new beginning and -- in the right to life in the last six months. [applause] to me, it was a privilege to be a part of it and i also appreciate the fact when something else i have tried to capture in "so help me god" was the hailstorm of opposition we faced from day one. i tell a story in the book about how i was with president trump on inauguration day in 2017 and we were at the oval office, just the two of us were there and we started walking back to the white house down the portico. and the bright lights were on the side wall, it was well lit. president trump looked at me and said, look at this. i said, it is humbling. he turned and looked at me and said, that's right it's humbling. [laughter] but as we walked into the residence, the end of that chapter i capture the fact that outside the oval office was a stack of newspapers. the headline in the washington post on january 20, 2017 was " the campaign

a striking and sweeping opinion of justice neil gorsuch didn't articulate the limiting principle, iftainly going to invite much more litigation down the line. >> as you mentioned, the lack of limits is that spelled out or not spell out your raises a lot of questions going forward. it is worth noting that what sonia sotomayor said in her view this allows the web designer to refuse to serve interracial couples if such a designer opposed interracial marriage. again, raising a lot of questions here going forward. let's bring back kate shaw. legally, but does this mean for businesses and customers? >> reporter: this bill is an enormous change. justice sotomayor is quite right in her dissent. the public accommodation laws have a lengthy historical pedigree, part of our federal laws for over 70 years and in most states and localities, there are signal loss. this if you are a business that you provide goods and services to the public, you can't discriminate and in recent years, destination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity has been permitted in many cases including color

justice neil gorsuch sold property to the head of a law firm who had business before the court and didn'tbuyer's identity. when propublica reached out to alito, he declined. instead he sent it to "the wall street journal" which in a journalistically confounding move ran it as a rebuttal op ed the day before the propublica report was published. in it he claimed he wasn't aware paul singer was involved despite the cases heavily covered and saying they spoke on no more than a handful of cases and never talked about any issue before the court, comments which i suppose were meant to take him at his word, right? alito defended his failure to have the standard prablg tis and justified accepting the ip be have i tags because the seat would otherwise have been vacant which are many airline passengers spotting an empty first class seat though no flight attendant would accept that argument. joining me now is senator cory booker from new jersey. senator, i want to read just a little bit of this report because alito claims in his prebut the tall that he never heard about these cases. this is about the

and she absolutely won today at the supreme court because justice neil gorsuch again for a 6-3 court said, look, this is on first amendment grounds. the government or colorado in this case can't basically force you, right, to give a message, create a custom product with a message that you disagree with. so that was really, again, closely divided opinion, a big win for her. >> jeremy diamond at the white house now. we have the president set to speak in just 30 minutes. this is a big day, a big day of defeat certainly for his agenda and his views. he's not happy, no doubt, about these decisions, but it seems perhaps he was prepared for them. >> reporter: yeah, no doubt about it. i mean, listen, this administration maintained publicly that they hoped the supreme court would uphold the president. they felt they were on solid legal ground, but behind the scenes officials were very much prepared for this outcome, which was in fact viewed as the most likely outcome and the conservative supreme court would strike this down. i'm told the president this morning shortly after the decision came

justice neil gorsuch wrote the majority opinion saying, quote, the first amendment in visions, the united states has a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish not as the government demands. now in her dissent, justice sonia sotomayor wrote, quote, today, the court for the first time in its history grants a business open to the public, a constitutional right to refuse to serve. members of a protected class. >> well, 2 major landmark decisions a huge groups of people this morning. so continue to follow reaction. yeah, comes out as that continues to come into the newsroom. >> it is 802. let's head over to the weather center because as we look forward now to the weekend ahead, the 4th of july holiday weekend, a lot of county fairs are opening up and the weather is going to be getting weather is another topic of conversation, john. it's going to be a hot one. good morning. yes, not just a hot one. the hot 3 today tomorrow and sunday. >> going to be in the midst of some triple digits inland. our hottest temperatures of the year so far. so what can you d

appointees by president trump in his years in office he put on brett cough in awe, coney barrett and neil gorsuch, they all are the majority today you take the three today and you look at a different kind of court, you see a lot of energy on the side of the right right now when it comes to the court, doesn't mean that they're winning everything just the other day the court ruled against conservative complaint, conservative side in the voting rights case in alabama i think it was in fact went ahead with the idea that race is and still is an important factor in drawing aligns in how that can be done it went against the conservative point of view they were for i believe on the issue for the state legislative's have control over the election that was a high part of the right, no question that dobbs decision last year in this decision today are huge winds for the conservative part of the political spectrum that has been trying to build support within the federal judiciary now who is going back to reagan through today. this is a big day for them and a tough day obviously for liberals who believe that t

justice is neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett all reported income from teaching.nting a parking space she owns in washington d. c.. all of these details and more were included in the justice's 2022 financial disclosures. after the supreme court adopted new ethics rules, this year, requiring justices to provide a fuller accounting of their financing and received gifts. that includes gifts that constitutes personal hospitality, the category that has come under intense scrutiny because of explosive reporting from propublica about the many luxurious gifts justice clarence thomas had been receiving from the texas billionaire and republican megadonor harlan crow, all in the name of personal hospitality. so, what did justice thomas and his 2022 financial disclosure claim? we are going to have to wait a little longer to find out, because justice thomas has requested a 90-day extension. that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow. and now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good, evening lawrence. >> good evening, alex. does this mean that

he talked about conservative justices neil gorsuch, amy coney barrett and made up six justices in theority, part of that majority that voted this way. had they not been there would we be seeing this day now? >> wealthy bit, if you had two or three justices that had come from the other side of the aisle, they were democratic nominees, appointees i wonder whether the court takes the case. there are four seats secret vetos get something on the calendar, i wonder if they would have. if they had i imagined case would have turned out differently. the three democratic appointed justices stuck together. in one case justice jackson was recused because of her role with the board of overseers in harvard. if you added another 3:00 justices who were democratic appointees i doubt this case would not come out the same way. we heard former vice president pence asked for reaction, i'm proud of this coalition we built, this court we put together, also giving the trump era credit for what we saw today. neil: you know, shannon, i didn't read through the whole thing like you do, i just go on my cliff note

the court's three liberal justices joined by neil gorsuch in dissent, writing that the government hasuty to properly manage the water it holds for the tribe. thousands of navajo nation members lack access to running water in their homes even though the colorado river runs along the northwestern border of their reservation. and in new york, immigration advocates have vowed to keep fighting after new york assembly speaker carl heastie refused to hold a vote on legislation that would have allowed undocumented people to enroll in new york's essential plan, government-subsidized health insurance under the federal affordable care act. the coverage for all bill had passed the state senate earlier this month. both chambers are controlled by democrats. nearly half a million new yorkers are currently excluded from medicaid in the essential plan healthcare coverage due to their immigration status. to see our interview with new york assembly member jessica gonzÁlez-rojas, who sponsored the bill, go to democracynow.org. and those are some of the headlines. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org,

what neil gorsuch and the conservatives have done in this case is really bring us back to a plessy v. ferguson standard in terms of public accommodations loss. >> and to say that everyone except white christians and billionaires have no rights that anyone is bound to respect. that actually does sum up this court pretty well. thank you both very much. >>> up next on "the reidout," how conservatives on the supreme court have clumsily danced around the once all important issue of standing in cases before the court. "the reidout" continues after this. to finally lose 80 pounds and keep it off with golo is amazing. i've been maintaining. the weight is gone and it's never coming back. with golo, i've not only kept off the weight but i'm happier, i'm healthier, and i have a new lease on life. golo is the only thing that will let you lose weight and keep it off. who loses 138 pounds in nine months? i did! golo's a lifestyle change and you make the change and it stays off. (soft music) - [female narrator] five billion people lack access to safe surgery. thousands of children are suffering and

justice is neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett all reported income from teaching. and justice elena kagan listed earnings from renting a parking space she owns in washington d.c.. all of these details and more were included in the justice's 2022 financial disclosures. after the supreme court adopted new ethics rules, this year, requiring justices to provide a fuller accounting of their financing and received gifts. that includes gifts that constitutes personal hospitality, the category that has come under intense scrutiny because of explosive reporting from propublica about the many luxurious gifts justice clarence thomas had been receiving from the texas billionaire and republican billionaire donor harlan crow, all in the name of hospitality. so, what did justice thomas and his 2022 financial disclosure claim? we are going to have to wait a little longer to find out, because justice thomas has requested a 90-day extension. . that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow. and now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good, evening lawr

justice neil gorsuch wrote the majority opinion saying, quote, the first amendment in visions, the united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish not as the government demands. in her dissent. justice sonia sotomayor wrote, quote, today, the court for the first time in its history grants a business open to the public, a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. all right. well, we're going to several different opinions on these ruling. more of those reactions coming out. exactly. and we'll be talking about throughout the morning. first, let's talk about what's happening in terms of the heat to travel at the moment. the sun is up, john. when will the hot temperatures start to roll morning? we're already seeing things warming up for a few spots. >> antioch, you're getting close to 80 and it's only 09:00am right now. so your window is growing a little shorter inland areas, at least where temperatures are climbing under that heat. san jose later today. you're going to be at 93 degrees. going to be a scorcher of

smith argued the law violates her free speech rights justice neil gorsuch wrote the majority opinionthe first amendment envisions the united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish not as the government demands. in her dissent. however, to sonia sotomayor wrote, quote, today, the court for the first time in its history grants a business open to the public, a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class, end quote. other headlines this morning, governor gavin newsom will be bringing more chp officers and california national guard members into the city to tackle the opioid crisis. the governor says that he will be doubling the number of patrol and guardsmen deployed in the city, both working to improve public safety and crack down on fentanyl use and sales. it's been 6 weeks since the 2 agencies were brought into the city to try to tackle the crisis. and the governor says they've done a lot of work in that time. >> beijing will allow us, i think, get a 560 hours a week, which is not insignificant morrison ext

neil gorsuch writing that majority opinion saying in part, quote, colorado seeks to force an individualspeak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance, continuing tolerance, not coercion is our nation's answer. the first amendment envisions the united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands because colorado seeks to deny that promise. the judgment is reversed. so there was dissent. we heard from justice sotomayor saying in part yoet, the court for the first time in its history grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. we've heard from the justices, in terms of reaction, i had a chance to speak with not just a member of a legal institute in minnesota, who is also part of the lgbtq community, but also we spoke with smith at the center of all of this. when we asked for the reaction, she was thrilled. she said this is a win for free speech, freedom of expression, and so remember what she h

justice neil gorsuch wrote for the court's six conservative justice. quote, first amendment envisioned the united states as rich and a complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands. but justice sonia sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion saying, quote, today the court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public. a constitu right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. the decisions are being seen as a win for religious right, but a big defeat for gay rights. and it comes on the final day of pride month. many in the lgbtq community worry this opens the door to more discrimination. ktvu brooks jarocz joins us now live from the newsroom. after speaking with those who say the supreme court got it wrong. well, lgbtq and civil rights groups call this a license to discriminate and claim the high court has ignored years of precedent. it is a departure from the courts. expand option of lgbtq rights, most notably giving same sex couples the right to marry in 2015 and i

and as you say, neil gorsuch has turned out to be a surprising champion of native american rights.o does not hail from, he's actually from the mountain west colorado the tenth circuit, where there's actually a very active docket of travel issues. so this is something he knew as a judge on the tenth circuit, and it's the importer that here. more importantly, justice gorsuch identifies himself as a tax shoeless, meaning that he cares about about the text of zach stoops, the text of the constitution. much of federal indian law is governed by treaties between native american tribes and the federal government. so there is a lot of textual support for these rights, and so when justice gorsuch comes out in favor of the tribes, it's often because there is technical support for him to do so. elie mystal is exactly right, it's probably unlikely that we are which the justice gorsuch coming out with the same kind of vehement defense of rights for other minority groups. again, travel right seem to be a very special situation here. >> this is going to be such a busy and a path for. week i want t

justice neil gorsuch wrote the majority opinion saying, quote, the first amendment in visions, the united states is a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish not as the government demands. now in dissent, justice sonia sotomayor wrote, quote, today, the court for the first time in its history grants a business open to the public, a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. and we've also heard from president biden this morning to he issued a statement saying in part, quote, i'm deeply concerned that the decision could invite more discrimination against lgbtqi. plus americans more broadly, today's decision weekends, longstanding laws that protect all americans against discrimination in public accommodations, including people of color, people with disabilities, people of faith and women. more on these stories to come. thank you for joining us here at 10:00am i'm james fletcher. and on this friday, june 30th, let's now get a check of the forecast because let's not forget the other big story we're following this weekend. jo

this is the very interesting opinion that was written by justice neil gorsuch on this. he wrote this. "as this court has long held, the opportunity to think for ourselves and to express those thoughts freely is among our most cherished liberties and part of what keeps our republic strong. toller ance, not coercion is the nation's history. because colorado seeks to deny that promise, the judgment is reversed." i'm joined by lori smith with her lawyer, kristin wagner, ceo and general counsel of the alliance defending freedom. great to have both of you with us today. so lori, let me start with you. tell us your reaction and tell us what the it was that sort of ignited this case process for you. what were you asked to do that your conscious and your faith wouldn't let you do. >> first, i am incredibly grateful for the court's decision. that affirms that the government cannot force anyone to say something that they don't believe. this journey started over seven years ago when i was being censored and my speech was being compelled by the state of colorado. i want to create we

that majority opinion written by neil gorsuch says in part, quote, tolerance, not coercion, is our nation's united states as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands. you mentioned that 6 to 3 vote along ideological lines, and we have that dissent written by sotomayor. she said in part, quote, by issuing this n license to discrimina i a case brought by a company that seeks to deny same-sex couples the full and equal enjoyment of its services, the immediate symbolic effect is to mark gays and lesbians for first and send class status. the headline is that the majority opinion was focusing on the right to free speech and expression, but sotomayor in her dissent said that this decision makes a mockery of the law, guys. >> marissa, i know that you spoke with that web designer. when she talked about sort of what she felt in terms of reaction to that ruling, did she expand a little bit about her answer? >> reporter: yes, we actually heard from a number of people on this. of course, laurie smith, the web designer at the heart

. >> dana: ilya, neil gorsuch from colorado as well. he followed this case for a long time. >> something in the air or altitude i guess. >> dana: you mentioned the gay marriage case. yesterday on "the view", i can't remember which one of the ladies from "the view" said what's next, gay marriage? can you answer that as if the court will -- >> i can't see that happening. for reasons both theoretical, practical and political. in the abortion case, justice alito's majority opinion said it's very different. abortion at a certain point, a second life and being. whether it's first or second or try mister. gay marriage is consenting adults. practically there is the country has shifted. majorities in each state support same-sex marriage. a lot of reliance interests. people's marriages and kids and families are already made and obligated and so forth. these are all very different cases. for affirmative action this is government or large institutions that get federal funding being required to treat people equally. if anything yesterday's affirmati

justice is neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett all reported income from teaching.he owns in washington d.c.. all of these details and more were included in the justice's 2022 financial disclosures. after the supreme court adopted new ethics rules, this year, requiring justices to provide a fuller accounting of their financing and received gifts. that includes gifts that constitutes personal hospitality, the category that has come under intense scrutiny because of explosive reporting from propublica about the many luxurious gifts justice clarence thomas had

neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett.endous assault and pressure, they are. you see what is going on. in the sports world the color playing the refs. they say horrible, horrible things. some people change. a lot of them change. you can't let that happen. i just hope that these justices, who are brilliant and very good people, hope they remain strong and -- in face of the harassment and intimidation that is coming their way and has come their way by the radical left lunatics. i hope they can withstand it. i hope they do not go to the other side. that's happened so often. with politicians it happens. what happens with judges. we hope that is not going to happen with them or any of our judges. exactly one year ago today, those justices were the pivotal votes for the supreme court's landmark decision ending the constitutional atrocity known as roe v. wade. [cheering] pres. trump: thank you. they have been trying for 50 years, exactly 50 years, amazing that today's the day. did you set this up on purpose? this is the day. toda

amy coney barrett and neil gorsuch, and so is president biden. 537, the 4th of july just a week away and families are getting ready for a busy week of travel. and around the country, airline passengers face thousands of flight cancellations yesterday, powerful storms ripped through the mid-atlantic states and parts of the northeast. but the department of transportation warns those problems could get worse beginning july 1st. planes that are not retrofitted with new five g wireless signal interference won't be allowed to land when visibility or the weather is bad. it's kind of an involved process, but it's not technically that difficult. but when you don't have enough people, it is now in a letter, transportation secretary pete buttigieg urged the airlines to finish their upgrades to adjust flight schedules. all right. hopefully we talked about this before. that fog might affect the airports. it could. i would think maybe sfo, oakland. don't think san jose as you're looking ahead right to friday, saturday , monday. could we're going to see a big d

appointed more than 300 conservatives to our federal courts at every level, including justice neil gorsuchy barrett. [applause] >> and i couldn't be more proud to have been part of the administration that appointed three of the justices that sent roe versus wade to the ash heap of history where it belongs. [applause] >> they gave america a new beginning for life and we can do it all again. and i'm here in iowa today and i'll be back a little bit later next week because iowa, iowa is the place that we shape principle conservative leadership. iowa is the place that shaped the standard bearer of this party and i have to tell you over the last two years, karen and i have reflect and prayed about what the country is dealing with today. i don't have anything to announce today, but i can tell you when i have time to announce come this wednesday, i'm announcing in iowa. [applause] >> you know, in contrast to the democrats' agenda of decline and decay, republicans have to offer a positive vision of the future grounded in conservative principles and we've got to speak hard truths. men and women, we'

neil gorsuch selling property in colorado to a law firm that argues in front of the cart, undisclosedu think chief justice robert would tackle these issues but his wife takes millions of dollars from law firms in fees that argue in front of the court, undisclosed. what was samuel alito's response in the wall street journal? you can accept gifts and i'm paraphrasing, as long as it otherwise wouldn't go to use. can you imagine using that in a bribery case? my question to you is there's got to be away that we can lock this down. the supreme court is at an all-time low and there's got to be a way we can push back. host: joshua kaplan. guest: yeah, it's worth making the distinction between some of these things that have come out. john roberts'wife for instance, it's healthy that's being examined, scrutiny of public officials, spouses work has a long history in other branches of government and historically it has not happened at the supreme court. we don't get that type of sustained coverage. there is not really evidence of impropriety here. she has her own we are and she makes a lot of mon

then in 2018, mitch mcconnell went nuclear to confirm neil gorsuch and the -- they change the filibustere first. then it was mitch mcconnell, the republican senator from kentucky changed the rules to the bare minimum for the supreme court justices. caller: that's right but the precedent, it's always about precedent, the precedent was set by harry reid mitch mcconnell explicitly warned the democrats at that time and said you will regret this one day. and that's what ended up happening. it's always about precedent. it's undeniable that the democrats set the precedent first and mitch mcconnell ran with it because that's -- of course that's what they will do but you cannot say that republicans set the precedent in terms of changing a vote threshold. host: not saying that, just citing the sequence of events here. it sounds like you've been watching closely over the years. caller: i would say one more thing. i generally approve of the justices. all nine of them i think are honorable people. i really do think that. i understand there have been some news stories about clarence thomas or samuel a

but in this majority opinion, justice neil gorsuch wrote that congress has the power to regulate commercet has yet to enact legislation displace proposition 12. now, i read justice gorsuch saying to the congress of the united states, why do you -- or the courts are kind of saying to themselves something like this -- why should we say that cost of living has acted unconstitutionally when congress has the power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce and they have not done it? so this is the reason for this bill. this bill would put an end to the california's war on breakfast and override the coastal state's overreach into the heartland's breadbasket. the supreme court asked congress to act. so that's what senator marshall, ernst, and i and many other senators have now joined us in this effort -- that's what we're responding to the supreme court decision. feeding your family is not a partisan issue and neither is protecting our food supply chain. food security, after all, is national security. i'm engaging in discussions with as many as -- as many of my colleagues as i can on this issue

neil, what are the so-called knock on effects? where are the kinds of legal challenges of this ruling potentially trigger? >> there is a concurring opinion by justice gorsuchmight also apply to not just private and higher education institutions but also to employers, private companies -- and the like. i think that is wrong, and i think the majority of the supreme court ultimately will see that as wrong, because corporate pepper city programs, corporate affirmative action programs stand on a different jurors prudential footing, but nonetheless, they do expect a wave of litigation to occur, and people used to 13 companies, not to have the ei plans and the like. obviously, me and lots of other people are going to stand up and say there is absolutely the wrong way to view the law. >> neil castillo, as always, thank you for coming to the last word. >> thank you. >> coming up, the day's supreme court decision to and or revoke affirmative action is another example of america moving backwards, but the biden administration is ready to move forward through economic policies designed to help working people. that is next. that is next m & enamel relieves sensitivity,