esteemed conservative judge, it was the most important cases -- if the rule for what that north carolina legislature wanted, it is a set of the legislating power of the states has unchecked power to set election rules. but the time when they made a ruling that i felt was a positive one, like the voting rights act, they kept the law in place. it was a good thing we did it because after a decade in which the supreme court has weakened the voting rights act, putting aside those two cases, they have been moving aggressively and carefully to continue pushing to the right with a theory of how to read the constitution that is itself new and radical. they are claiming to be originalists. last year in june they crammed in decades of conservative social policy in three days. they're acting less like a court and more like a political body. one of the reasons we see is that the consequence of that is that public trust in the supreme court has collapsed to the lowest level ever recorded in the polls. certainly the justices chief justice john roberts thinks about the public standing of the court, they have to be

legislature passed a very gerrymandered map. that produced a congressional allegation that was weight disproportionately heavily republican. and the state supreme court said that that violated the north carolina constitution. all these states have their own constitutions, but there are protections. and the states say that violates our constitution. the state legislatures went to the u.s. supreme court and said no, the constitution gives us the legislature the power to set election rules without these checks and balances. by the, way nobody ever notices up until now. that's not how a state is ron. and very encouragingly, in an opinion written by chief justice john roberts, six justices said no, that is wrong. the constitution does not give unchecked power to state legislatures. constitutions among other things still matter and courts matter. there are some complications with the decisions, but it was a pretty decisive projection. of this notion. and it was radical. i think ultimately if we have space and democracy to encourage our courts to step aside and stop writing doctrines for their own political views pretending they're just making constitutional rulings, then we will have a stronger cou

it's one of 20 state legislatures that passed some kind of restriction on medical care for transgender people. this week in north carolina the legislature sent the governor a bill that bans doctors in the state from providing gender-affirming care to minors even if there is parental consent. in louisiana lawmakers advanced legislation that would block hormone treatments, puberty blockers and surgeries for young people. before such anti-trans medical restrictions get tested in everyday life, they are running into legal roadblocks. this week federal judges in kentucky and tennessee temporarily blocked similar laws in those states and judges have also temporarily blocked alabama and indiana's versions. foremost is arkansas where a federal judge after an eight-day trial struck down the state's save adolescents from experimentation, or safe act, banning gender transition care for minors. the judge said it was unconstitutional. it was the first ruling to block such a ban for an entire state. in his decision, james moody jr. said the law discriminated against transgender people and viola violated the constitutional laws of doct

the legislature passed a very gerrymandered map that produced congressional district that was disproportionately republican. the state supreme court said that violated the north carolinaution. all states have their own constitutions with strong actions and the state supreme court said that violates our constitution. the state legislature went to the u.s. supreme court and said the constitution gives us legislatures the power to set election rules without these checks and balances. nobody ever noticed it until now, that is how each state is run. encouragingly, in an opinion written by chief justice john roberts, six justices said that is wrong. the constitution does not give unchecked power to state legislatures. state constitutions among other things still matter and courts still matter. there were complications but it was a decisive rejection of this notion that was radical. ultimately, if we have faith in democracy and encourage our courts to step aside and stop writing doctrine of their own political views and pretending they are making constitutional rules, we will have a stronger country. host: minority leader mitch mcconnell wrote an op-ed. he says neither party

important constitutional case on democracy in a long time if they had ruled for what the north carolina legislature wanted which was to say the legislatures of the states to say election rules without checks and balances from state constitutions from the state ste board of governors. but more broadly times they made a ruling i thought was a positive one they just kept the law in place. it was a very good thing they did it comes after decade in which the supreme court has really weakened the voting rights act but putting aside this two cases they have been moving aggressively and carefully both in this term to continue pushing the court to the right to the theory of how to read the constitution itself pretty radical in the way the claimant to be originalist. last year in june they can in three days they cramped in decades of social policy. less like a court that we see as a public trust in the supreme court has collapsed ever recorded in the polls. and certainly the justices and the chief justice john roberts who is kenny and thanks about the public standing of the court, would have to be well aware

harper, it was actually out of north carolina, about the statewide redistricting where the state supreme court had had that ruled that the state legislatureiolated the state constitution in north carolina with ma particular -- a particular map. and the question posed was whether the state legislature was not subjects to the checks and balances that we all learned about in elementary school and on schoolhouse rock, and they could do whatever they want. thisis is a theory, a very radil theory called the independent state legislature theory. and rhonda's quite right, it was promoted by supporters of the former president in the aftermath of the 2020 election to try to tell legislatures that they could ignore the will of the people, they could just appoint electors however they wanted even if it was in direct contravention to how the people voted. and what the supreme court said -- and it waseo a very important case in terms of establishing guard guardrails for 2024 and onward -- three democratically-to appointed justices joined the chief justice and said, no, that's not the case. state legislatures are still subject to the checks and balances

supreme court decision called moore versus harper, out of north carolina, about the statewide redistricting, the supreme court ruled the legislatureiolated the state constitution in north carolina with a particular map. and the question posed was whether the state legislature was not subject to the checks and balances we learned about in elementary school and on schoolhouse rock, and they could do whatever they want. this is a radical theory called the independent state legislature theory. rhonda is right, it was promoted by supporters of the former president in the aftermath of the 2020 election to try to tell legislators that they could ignore the will of the people and appoint electors however they wanted, even if it was against what the people voted. what the supreme court said, and it was important in terms of establishing the guardrails for 2024 and onward, and a 6:3 vote, said, no, that is not the case. state legislators are still subject to the checks and balances of their state court system and constitutions and estate executive, and if a losing candidate comes to the united states supreme court to expect that the united

north carolina. all the governorship, that's unnecessary, -- and we are gonna pick up seats in the legislature to ensurend that will force the republican legislature to have to negotiate. >> we had a series of stunning decisions from the supreme court this week. let's talk about the affirmative action rolling. university of north carolina was one of the schools at the heart of that rolling that ended race conscious some mission policies. what impact will this decision had on diversity in north carolina schools. and what would you do as governor to make sure that all students get a fair shot of higher education? >> we absolutely have to have exactly that. everyone has a fair shot of higher education. everyone is a fair shot at a better life. that's the fundamental promise of this life. that people have an opportunity to build a better future. and unfortunately, the u.s. supreme court into decisions, university admission case that my office had defended, and biden's student loan, targeted student loan relief plans, those were big defeats for this country. because the supreme court is now making it harder

north carolina at the moment. they've got control over both state legislatures, the state supreme court, what is your reaction to this it will have on north carolina going forward, but broadly speaking across the country in the long run? >> you know, i think republicans finally have a taste of their own mess medicine, from their own party, which i'm excited about, and overjoyed over the fact that we're gonna have an opportunity to have our state legislature we draw these maps because we do know that when the legislature had drawn them originally, we were left with a ten and four congressional district, which is not representative of the 50/50 split that's actually north carolina right now. currently under an independent judiciary independently drawn maps we actually have 77 congressional representation which is much more equitable for the state of north carolina. and so, i am really excited to see this decision come down, and republicans honestly get to see the fact that, you know, partisan gerrymandering is not something that either party wants to align themselves with. >> representative kenyatta, i want to get your

is whether that clause -- whether state legislatures have the authority to move from any restrictions on them under state law. the case arose from north carolina and the state supreme court invalidated legislatures districting plan based on the clause in the state constitution. the argument was the state constitution cannot really restrict what the legislature does. the legislature has free reign. the other backdrop of the case was another provision of the constitution, the presidential election clause with says each state shall appoint in such a manner as the legislature dictates, the number of electors. the question is, the lurking question was, if the elections clause gives the legislature plenary power, what does that mean for the presidential election and they're concerned about the 2020 election and litigation from that and the 2024 election. there were various standards advanced in the case. one is the legislature can do whatever. the second was the legislature is bound by procedural requirements, the majority requires legislative action and governor has to sign a bill in order for it to become law. but not substantive restrictions in t

i think north carolina itself, our people, we are welcoming we are diverse we are inclusive legislatureen't reflecting who north carolina is. i'm going to keep telling the country and the world who we really are in our state. >> we'll see how that goes governor roy cooper, congratulations to you, the people of north carolina, and the general assembly, only the second time since we've been doing that a state has won back-to-back you can now see where your state ranks at topstates@cnbc.com. lots more coverage throughout the day. >> three-peat, that's a possi possibility. >> north carolina and south carolina -- the carolinas, i think, is a great spot can you answer one question, scott. why would you need ten houses that big i think it was because there were no yachts back then or something? i don't understand i guess you couldn't get a boeing business jet. i don't understand what's -- >> isn't that an amazing -- look at that. it's just beautiful. i don't know i don't know >> do you have 34 couples come over to hang out in the bedrooms or something i just -- i'm just trying to figure out wh

rich question and it's it's also a moving target because for example north carolina there's legislation before the state legislature at this moment that will transform the way k through 12 students in the state learn history. but i guess what i would say is two things we have we're a world in which ap history influences what anybody in high school in the united states learns about american history. now and yet on the other hand, we now have increasingly a kind of politicization of what we learn and what is taught in schools and i, i actually and fairly optimist that we the those of us who are committed to the study of history, the teaching of history, i like to say we have the facts on, our side and if if we have to engage in debates, the past, i think we're in a pretty good position to, hold our own and don't say that with you know pollyannish. but if if people us to talk about teach the history of free market capitalism in the united states, bring it on. let's start talking about slavery and it fit into free market capitalism or let's start talking about railroad ties and the funding of railroads and what that me

north carolina, the governor roy cooper vetoed three laws passed by the republican controlled legislaturea's don't say gay law a step further, banning gender affirming care for minors, restriction trains participation in school sports, limiting how section gender can be discussed in schools. the videos are temporary reprieve, north carolina's -- there's been a whopping 500 plus that have been introduced in state legislatures across this country. so far this year, dozens of those laws have also passed and been signed, and they are in effect. targeting the trans community, one of the most and represented groups in government. right now on capitol hill there are no openly trans members of congress. and my guess hopes to change that. delaware state senator sarah -- becoming the nation's first transgender state senator in 2021. she is now running for congress. senator, thank you for being here. a recent political article cites you as shaping president biden's personal and political evolution on transgender issues. what has that looked like, senator, from your vantage point? >> well first off,

supreme court decision called moore versus harper, out of north carolina, about the statewide redistricting, the supreme court ruled the legislatureted the state constitution in north carolina with a particular map. and the question posed was whether the state legislature was not subject to the checks and balances we learned about in elementary school and on schoolhouse rock, and they could do whatever they want. this is a radical theory called the independent state legislature theory. rhonda is right, it was promoted by supporters of the former president in the aftermath of the 2020 election to try to tell legislators that they could ignore the will of the people and appoint electors however they wanted, even if it was against what the people voted. what the supreme court said, and it was important in terms of establishing the guardrails for 2024 and onward, and a 6:3 vote, said, no, that is not the case. state legislators are still subject to the checks and balances of their state court system and constitutions and estate executive, and if a losing candidate comes to the united states supreme court to expect that the united stat

supreme court decision called moore versus harper, out of north carolina, about the statewide redistricting, the supreme court ruled the legislatureted the state constitution in north carolina with a particular map. and the question posed was whether the state legislature was not subject to the checks and balances we learned about in elementary school and on schoolhouse rock, and they could do whatever they want. this is a radical theory called the independent state legislature theory. rhonda is right, it was promoted by supporters of the former president in the aftermath of the 2020 election to try to tell legislators that they could ignore the will of the people and appoint electors however they wanted, even if it was against what the people voted. what the supreme court said, and it was important in terms of establishing the guardrails for 2024 and onward, and a 6:3 vote, said, no, that is not the case. state legislators are still subject to the checks and balances of their state court system and constitutions and estate executive, and if a losing candidate comes to the united states supreme court to expect that the united stat

north carolina. the state supreme court invalidated the legislature's districting plan based on a clause in the state constitution. the argument was the state constitution cannot restrict what the legislature does. the legislature has free reign. the other backdrop of the case was another provision of the constitution. the presidential electorate clause that says each state shall appoint in such a manner as the legislature if they direct in number of directors -- blah blah blah. the lurking question was if the elections clause gives legislature plenary power what does that mean for the presidential electorate clause? there is lots of concern about the 2020 election and the 2024 election. there were various standards advanced in the case. let me pick through them. one is legislature can do whatever nothing in the state constitution's binding. legislature is bound by procedural requirements. the governor has to sign a bill in order for it to become law but not substantive restrictions in the state constitution. third, the legislature is bound by the state constitution but there may be a little bit of f

north carolina? >> super dangerous and scary. it would mean first of all, state legislaturesistricts, and they could exclude people, empower certain people. this election map, that this case had, it came from north carolina, it is an evenly divided state so that would have been for since -- if it were done normally, but the way the republican state legislature did it, they gerrymandered it so we have had ten or 11 republican seats and only three democratic ones. that is just on the district, could be on and think, a state legislature could say for example no one can absentee vote, period, no one at all. or they could change the polling places in minority communities today before the election. or they could've done any number of shenanigans that is limited only by their ingenuity. they would be able to do it and the courts would have no role whatsoever in policing that. the state legislatures could do anything they want. that is fundamentally un-american, that is what i said to the supreme court. i said, go back, start at the founding, justices, you claim to care about the his

in north carolina, 85% will go to counties and the rest to the state legislature. >> having this funding -- >> john never imagined he could get into politics. >> in the last five years, i have known people who passed away, and this last one, one of my best friends. he struggled for quite some time. >>'s best friend loved music and his community. he died from a sentinel overdose last year. >> he is now focused on saving lives. >> we have not engaged this issue, it has seeped into every household and we have to be proactive for those who want it. >> that is why he pushed for settlement payments on more narcan and hiring crystal. >> within 72 hours of an overdose, we want her engaging with the individual. after that experience, it's a great time to talk about making different life choices. >> for those who have lost loved ones, this money remains out of reach. >> without anything. >> rita has lost two children in the last four years. she enter sunset down with me in a it bill. >> there are a lot of parents that lost their children, mothers and fathers. i hope as a survivor that we get some

, i was a little surprised to see the results that we got in the north carolina case the court said that the independent state legislature theory was something that had no basis in the constitution, identified for what it was a fringe theory designed to give republicans power to which they were not entitled. in the alabama case the court said that section two of the voting rights act is still a vital piece of legislation and said that what was done in alabama diluted the voting strength of african americans there who should have at least two opportunity districts to elect the candidate of their choice. so those two decisions were good for our democracy, and again, the facts the law, and precedent were on our side and nevertheless i was surprised by those verdicts because this court has never been a friend of voting rights. all the way back from citizens united, shelby county case, now ten years old, the anti gerrymandering case, the -- case, a number of cases in which the court has had the opportunity to solidify the basis for our democracy. the right to vote. and it has turned its back on that opportunity, turn its back

north carolina. first, we must get involved not only in national politics, but local politics and regional politics. even our home state of north carolina, getting ready to elect a new governor, getting ready to bash the legislatureip is democrat. north carolina needs to find ways to get everybody to work together. those who are independent, republicans and democrats. at the end of the day, it is not the party label, it is what you stand for. what we do to help all americans across racial lines, across socioeconomic lines. i think our democracy needs to be further strengthened. i want to encourage you to get involved in not just the partisan politics, but get involved in mobilizing and organizing. you are from a part of north carolina that i think has great potential to the extent to which you get involved politically, economically, businesswise -- we need to improve the overall quality and life in the communities in which we live. i think north carolina has made progress, but still has a long ways to go. host: let's hear from julie in springfield, illinois on the republican line. caller: thank you. i think that this is a great idea. we have gotten ourselves into such a divisive politics era that it is all about

north carolina. first, we must get involved not only in national politics, but local politics and regional politics. even our home state of north carolina, getting ready to elect a new governor, getting ready to bash the legislatureip is democrat. north carolina needs to find ways to get everybody to work together. those who are independent, republicans and democrats. at the end of the day, it is not the party label, it is what you stand for. what we do to help all americans across racial lines, across socioeconomic lines. i think our democracy needs to be further strengthened. i want to encourage you to get involved in not just the partisan politics, but get involved in mobilizing and organizing. you are from a part of north carolina that i think has great potential to the extent to which you get involved politically, economically, businesswise -- we need to improve the overall quality and life in the communities in which we live. i think north carolina has made progress, but still has a long ways to go. host: let's hear from julie in springfield, illinois on the republican line. caller: thank you. i think that this is a great idea. we have gotten ourselves into such a divisive politics era that it is all about

so the case involves a north carolina supreme court ruling that rejected a new congressional map adopted by the state's republican-controlled legislature over concerns of partisan gerrymandering. and the supreme court would be examining whether the state's highest court overstepped. proponents of the theory say the courts have no control over election rules. - and quite honestly, i do not think the independent state legislature doctrine, as, in the way that you articulated it, with the strength that you articulated it with, i don't think that will have purchase at the supreme court. - so why are you so confident that there wouldn't be purchase? - well, let's look at it this way. let's look at it from an originalist perspective. this radically new, and it is radically new reading of the power of the state legislature, is not something we see in the history and tradition of american election regulation. it's not only not been dominant, it's not even been part of the conversation really, about american elections. and so you're looking at a court that to greater or lesser degree, a majority is originalist where essentially the proponents o

north carolina and alabama. but in those situations, the state officials, republican-led legislatures were pushing the law so far that this court is still moving fairly extreme, moving in some ways in radical ways, but they're just not going to go as far as some of the gop states want. and finally, let me just tell you about our future. this court is a very young court. the three trump appointees are only in their 50s, which their pups compared to when people -- when the justices near retirement, they're already in their 80s. so this is a court that your children and grandchildren will experience down the road. >> so to the point that you were making about the kind of mix bag of rulings it seemed, from this court, gregory garr, the former bush solicitor general said this to "the washington post," i really do feel like the term was a tale of two courts. one that remains boldly conservative and willing to revamp precedent to acleave objectives and another that is seeking to find common ground where possible and sensitive to the sustained attack on its legitimacy. at the same time, maybe they're sensitive to the at

legislature. unquote. echoing wilson, future chief justice of south carolina. now, here's virginia. i'm just giving you sort of north and south. this is john marshall of virginia. he repeatedly sang the praises of democracy in the virginia ratifying convention here, quotes from him, quote, support of the constitution are firm friends of the liberty and the rights of mankind. we, sir, idolized democracy. we admire the proposed constitution because we think it is a well-regulated democracy. we contend for a well-regulated democracy. so that's not actually this sharp distinction between republics and democracy that you've all been teaching your students when the word to mock. christie appeared in the founding era, it was often associated with, rather than defined against, republicanism even by madison himself, which he calls in the federalist papers the republican remedy for the republic disease. actually, this philadelphia convention note he calls the democratic remedy for the democratic disease in the 1790s, when various promo madison pro jefferson groups sprang up, they called themselves republicans societies or dem