that's what john roberts proved last night. until last night, john roberts had enjoyed the public image of being possibly the most thoughtful republican appointed member of the supreme court. the terrible truth might be that he is the most thoughtful republican appointed member of the supreme court. we now know that he's not just a republican politician, he is a small minded thinker who has no idea of the pain and anguish, the cruelty, of his decisions. has inflicted on people. including ten-year-old girls. and the only pain and anguish he seems to be capable of feeling, in his job, is when he gazes out his office window and sees the fence. that he feels he was forced to erect to keep the sounds of the pain and anguish he has inflicted on other people as far from his years as possible. leading off our discussion tonight, social richards co-chair of american bridge 24 century, and former presidential of planned parenthood, also -- many tomorrow due, president of narrow pro-choice america. and cecile, when i heard john roberts say

under john roberts watch. as wandering through the single most publicly corrupt period of the supreme court's history. john roberts offered the weakest possible defense. of the supreme court low ethical standards. which has held the lowest ethical standards of any governing body in the federal government. >> i want to assure people, i am committed to making certain, we as a court, and here to the highest standards of conduct. we are continuing to look at things we can do to give practical effect to that commitment. and i am confident that there are ways to do that that are consistent with our status as an independent branch of government under the constitution's separations of power. >> you can see the obliviousness there. john roberts is completely oblivious to how wildly out of control the ethics standards of the supreme court have become. because of clarence thomas's flagrant use of private jets, yachts, in violation of the disclosure requirements that supreme court justices. and also, because of john robert

then john roberts.apital punishment cases. and, apparently, those were not hard decisions for him. even though his catholic religion and the pope opposed every one of those prosecutions, john roberts had no problem supporting them. john roberts had made important decisions on countless cases that have affected the health and safety of millions and millions of people, and that apparently was not hard for him. he decided to repeal the portions of obamacare and take health insurance away from people, that was not hard. and he decided to revoke a constitutional right that allowed women the control their own bodies and that was not hard for john roberts. but, he did not want the protesters against his easy decisions to revoke the constitutional rights -- to get close to the supreme court so he ordered a temporary fence erected around the supreme court, for which he just might have to keep their or decide to cook there for the rest of his life. so that the voices of those protesters can be pushed farther away

the chair asked john roberts, _ about this? the chair asked john roberts, the - about this? i about this? the chair asked i john roberts, the chiefjustice to come and testify. he declined and sent a letter outlining the rules as they were, a code of ethics that they said they would abide by, again, they are the ones with the final arbiters of this, as they they respect the ethical guidelines about transparency and about when a justice should recuse themselves. they have been otherjustices that have commented publicly about this. samuel leto, one of the more conservative justices, who alter third the docs decision, striking down the abortion all constitutional rights last year, he had an interview with the wall streetjournal saying that he felt that their supreme court justices are that he felt that their supreme courtjustices are being court justices are being targeted courtjustices are being targeted and hammered by critics every day, they do not feel safe, that there is no—one who is defending the supreme court rhetorically at least from these types of criticisms and feel t

and our understanding is that roberts does care about how the court is perceived. >> i think in addition to the public opinion poll, we have seen that last week when john roberts said he was not coming to this hearing, he did send a letter and attached something that many people would say that was not very strong and he said here are the ethics policies we have. i'm not saying that there is a strong document, but that is pretty unusual. he and the court are feeling this drumbeat of story after story, all these things that have been coming in for months, last year or two. he said we signed this ethics statement its remarkable. it didn't do a lot, i think we are seeing signs they are paying attention and said that public opinion is not high on the court right now. william: let's say john roberts says as we have been hearing, we have got this, don't worry about it. do you think that will be enough to satisfy congress but this drumbeat and looks awful -- we should say none of what has been disclosed. the failure to disclose them is illegal. you can get gifts but you have to acknowledge. do they have to step in and acknowledge? >> there is a huge partisan d

if we want to keep food on the table without continuing to robert john not should environment. we need to completely rethink how all foods industries work. i'm russell bid in finland where one restaurant is championing a hyper local circular economy to create a revolutionary approach to dining unless necessary neo in a stable scientists of combating jellyfish blooms by taking. them out of the sea and onto a plate. in developed countries like finland it's hard to imagine that we're in the thick of a global food crisis. these helsinki shelves are stacked to the hilt with a wide variety of tasty treats. as salami. who was the true cost double is choice two are increasing the beleaguered planet reindeer spring roll. a global food system is incredibly wasteful use huge amounts of energy water and land to grow food in flight thousands of miles around the world only for much of its remaining money it's an- incredibly inefficient and- balanced operation. quotable post i don't know if my pronunciation is quite right. well worth it. and gore vocals okay so i've been having to dig around

second of all, there are not any formal checks in place to make sure that jane roberts' work is not influencing what johnrts does. third, because roberts could not point to any kind of code he followed, there is no way for him to defend himself in something like this arises. amy: back to clarence thomas and his wife ginni thomas, how is it possible that he does not recuse himself, for example, on an insurrection ruling, which she has so been deeply implicated, everything from text messages with trump's chief of staff mark meadows pushing states to overturn their elections? >> thehing with clarence thomas come he does not think the rules apply to him. if you look at his rulings, he does not belie in following proceeded. he is perfectly fine with sweeping aside 80 years of law if he likes the weight w done in 1918 better. he does not think the rules apply to him. the court has said fairly consistently that it is up to each justice to decide when they want to recuse. this court has said that because they say they don't with the other eight justices to remove other justices from cases and i could change the

thank you. >> it's about john roberts. "some of chief justice john roberts's colleagues... this quote because to go with what nina said and to go with what laura said, we have to look to the chief justice. does he have -- if he leads, does he have any followers? >> well, and that was written capturing a time when he was more in control when he had -- >> this was pre-barrett. >> yes. this was pre-barrett when he was the key vote. so he could do a lot of maneuvering behind the scenes. >> he was the fulcrum. right? >> that's exactly right. and some of that behavior, frankly, has come back to haunt him because the other justices to his right, now they have justice amy coney barrett. they don't need him. they don't need him on big, important cases like the dobbs and they might not respond to him. and i think we've seen they are not responding to him on issues of ethics. so his problem right now is twofold. one is having to do with consequential opinions, like the dobbs opinion that rolled back roe v wade, and also what kind of formal ethics policy they will even adopt. he does n

chief justice john roberts declined to comment. that's why when we did hear clarence thomas, his explanation on the travels with harlan crowe was at least a step forward. but was interesting that he said, you know, they essentially me not to report them but who you know then if you go back, you say, okay, well, who exactly? well that's all we're saying about that. you know, using. yeah right. who's they who they is. exactly right. you probably saw it in my acknowledgments i sort of mentioned you know in addition to thanking all sorts of people in my life indulge this pastime of mine. i mentioned how i've always had mantra about the supreme court. this is your supreme court. but there was another mantra that had that more recently has been swirling my head or another of line that i thought of and that from when a court official to me, when i was asked an incredibly easy question, all things considered, if we had wanted you to know that we would have told you that, and it wouldn't like. why have that added? you are you are part of th

they had interviewed john roberts they had interviewed samuel alito. they had interviewed michael luttig, all federal judges, all conservative. and the president followed to get to the chief, john roberts. but he went with his gut for harriet miers. a friend of his, also someone he knew in his mind would be conservative enough. remember, he was a a composite conservative. he thought that she was they had their friendship. he thought they had he thought she was meritorious and he thought that she would be a good supreme court justice. you might recall that that didn't work. and so we had the opportunity and i to bring harriet miers here to interview her. we went to washington to interview alberto gonzales. we interviewed karl rove. we interviewed chief justice rehnquist or excuse me, -- cheney, all the people who had served on that process committee. and as it turned out, the right wing of the president's party did not want harriet miers that o'connor seat, because you might remember it was called the swing seat. she a moderate conservative and sometimes

i think democrats would agree with republicans that if john roberts showed an inclination to impose a code of ethics on themselves, the democrats would cease to offer these bills. the problem is the court is not doing that so that is why democrats are saying we need to pass them. host: let's talk to william in harrington, delaware, democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i always wonder why we wait until the horse is out of the barn before we start dealing with these problems. in my opinion, i am about 68 years old at this point, and i have seen a lot of what goes on with the approval of these folks that sit in their ivory tower on the supreme court thinking they are above everything. we don't have that in this country. this country is supposed to be made for accountability. these folks do not have any of that. as far as i am concerned, the rock that exists far and wide in that institution is the responsibility lies in the people who were federalist society folks. they groomed them specifically to get on there. they are corporatists that do not represent the majo

the scotus does not adhere to a code of ethics loo like the lower courts john roberts sent a letter declining to testify at the hearing. according to business insider chief justice john roberts' wife allegedly made over $10 million in commissions as a recruiter for the nation's top law firm. the details come from a whistleblower complaint filed by a disgruntled former colleague of the wife. nbc news h not after verified the documents. neither roberts' wife nor her law firm responded to requests for comments justice clarence thomas did not disclose gifts from harlan crow. i said the gifts were personal hospitality. >>> to the latest banking crisis, the fdic has accepted a bid from jpmorgan chase. over the weekend u.s. regulators asked big banks to submit their bids to take over first republic among jpmorgan chase and pnc according to people close to the situation bank of america did not submit a bid although they were involved in earlier talks first republic saw shares plunge 90% after deposits tumd bld by more than $100 billion during the first quarter. this is the third bank failure this yea

scotus does not adhere to an official code of ethics like the lower courts last week, chief justice john roberts sent a letter declining to testify at the hearing. now according to a new report from business insider, chief justice john roberts' wife, jean-roberts, allegedly made over $10 million in commissions as a recruit forenation's top law firms. according to insider, the details come from a whistle-blower complaint filed by a disgruntled former colleague of his wife. today's hearing also comes after reports that justice clarence thomas did not disclose gifts from conservative billionaire harlan ceo thomas said those gifts were, quote, personal hospitality. >>> saturday nights's correspondents dinner was an evening filled with laughs and calls to defend the first amendment. it is meant to celebrate america's free press featured cutting remarks from both president biden and featured comedian roy wood jr. of the daily show the often scrutinized topic of biden's age was lampooned by both wood and the president himself. >> they rioted because they didn't want him to work until 64 meanwhile, in n

court does not adhere to an official code of ethics like lower courts last week, chief justice john roberts sent a letter declining to testify at the hearing. according to a new report from business insider, chief justice john roberts' wife jane roberts allegedly made over $10 million in commission as a recruiter for the nation's top law firms according to insider, the details come from a whistle-blower complaint filed by disgruntled former colleague of roberts's wife. nbc has not obtained the documents. clarence thomas did not disclose gifts from billionaire harlan crow thomas said those gifts were, quote, personal hospitality. >>> now to the latest banking crisis the fdic is reviewing bids for first republic bid and could announce a new owner later this morning. over the weekend, u.s. regulators asked big banks to submit bids to take over the ailing bank. among them jp morgan chains and pnc. among people close to this situation, bank of america did not submit a bid, although they were involved in earlier talks first republic saw its shares plunge 90% after deposits tumbled by more than $1

why is john roberts so unconcerned with that?f the public think the rulings coming out of the highest court in the land are credible anymore. >> the supreme court's approval is definitely down the tubes. last summer people thought it couldn't get much lower after they overruled roe vs. wade quickly and unleashed the drafted consequences on the country, but the recent reports about corruption at the court have only sunk the court's approval even lower. i think the reason the justice isn't concerned about that is unfortunately our institutions are sufficiently insulated from popular opinion that even though a majority of the country, really a super majority of the country, wants there to be limits on the court's authority, those preferences aren't easily registered in congress considering the mall apportionment of the senate or gerrymandering in the house. so even if you have 50% of the country, 60% of the country, 65% of the country thinking there should be something addressing corruption at the court, it's hard to get congress to

we are very excited to have doctor robert caleb john yesterday. he's welcome to commissioner. >> thank you so much. >> if i seem sluggish today i spent the weekend at a baptist funeral in my hometown of south carolina and it's not a bad thing. my uncle died at age 90. as say many times he's going on later things. we've known him a long time but the broccoli casserole, corn pudding and what was served up for dessert was chocolate poundcake. coconut cake and banana pudding all in one table and my great act of pulling sback was not to be the now putting everything else i had totaste . i am delighted to be with you . this is like and i'm not going to be here for the whole meeting because we are discovering a lot of important topics in visual health. as i said i've done a lot of personal work. and the program as i would agree with it i think you hit the nail onthe head . we're synergistic, not independent of each other as we understand how to engage with people in many ways this convergence is a tremendous opportunity but also touches on a number of se

durbin, your colleague on the judiciary committee has a softer version of that, saying he urges john roberts to take this seriously. john roberts has to police this do you think the notion that roberts and the chief justice of course should police itself over this is sufficient? . >> no. >> first, we have referred the matter to the chief justice for investigation. he has intern returned to the digital conference. they have returned to their financial disclosure committee. we're watching closely and expanded the ask to the financial disclosure committee to get a real result out of this. because the last time they did this 11 years ago with harlan crow with gifts to clarence thomas, there is no public record of any determination ever having been reached by the financial disclosure committee. it came to no apparent conclusion. so this has to come to a conclusion this time. and we're gonna be watching it very closely the second thing is all the mischief with leo and these phony front groups, all of that is potentially in violation of the tax code. some of it is conceivably even fraud. there coul

chief justice john roberts has been one of the critics.is not about the bottom lines in these cases. the complaint is about the process the justices are using to get there. when we are talking about how the court functions as an institution, the prophecies it follows, that ought not to be partisan at all and that we, the justices as much as their critics, ought to be invested in the court looking like, acting like, behaving like, it is handling these decisions in an aboveboard manner. the problem when you look at these cases the last five or six years, it is hard to come away with that impression once you put them side-by-side. host: all right. we are talking with university of texas law professor steve vladeck. we are going to go to your phone calls right now. as a reminder, (202) 748-8000 free democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. our first caller is mark in asheville, north carolina on the independent line. what is your question or comment? caller: i generally agree with professor vladeck's concern about

john roberts in washington. all of those stories and more coming up but begin with this fox news alert. >> sandra: a long and brutal week for the fbi has left the nation's top law enforcement agency in credibility and crisis. starts at the highest level. >> some people at the top forgot their oath they made to the fbi and that's what's got to change. >> john: still unpacking the explosive john durham report, new revelations the fbi shut down multiple investigations into alleged criminal activity involving the clintons just months before the 2016 election. >> sandra: republicans are calling for the agency to reopen the probes. get right to it with national correspondent griff jenkins. good to see you. where do things stands right now? >> great we. the week began with the durham drop but ends with renewed calls for investigations and a big question mark, will john durham testify next week as requested by jim jordan. top question will be why did the fbi top brass shut down all four investigations into the clintons

. >> john: i'm john roberts. always great to have you here in d.c. >> sandra: fun to be here. >> john: kinda way to keep you here, siphon the gas out of your car. and adidas is selling a women's swimsuit by using a male model. critics say it's about so much more than just a bathing suit. >> sandra: tammy bruce is fired up about this, we begin hour two with another progressive push, the growing green agenda. gas stoves, gas lawn mowers, gas cars, some of the things americans use every single day that democrats nationwide are trying to eliminate with an aggressive green energy push. threat to gas stoves has joe manchin so fired up he's drawing a battle line, he says it's about so much more than those stoves, and overall pattern from this biden white house. >> john: so much more about a lot of things today. catching a theme, and aggressive push to go green is putting one family's dream and entire life savings in jeopardy. allan is a farmer on the wrong side of the fence when it comes to energy in his back yard, liter

republican appointee on this court was approved by him one way or another, including chief justice john robertsth him. john roberts probably would have been selected anyway, but he did meet with leonard leo. he is the consummate networker. the federalist society goes all the way back to the early 1980s, but it was in 1991 when leonard leo became a director, that he began raising all sorts of money. in high school, his nickname was mr. -- you know, moneybags. he is a terrific networker. he's very effective on what he wants. he worked very closely with mitch mcconnell, the senate leader, in selecting people. and he was very close to don mcgahn in the trump white house. and most recently he secured a $1.6 billion donation that will help him be even more powerful going forward with money. >> so, walter, democratic congressman ted lieu of california tweeted, quote, leonard leo directed fake invoices to be made so that he could secretly line of the pockets of the wife of a supreme court justice. this is corrupt, unquote. how is it corrupt? obviously it doesn't look good, but it's not as though leonar

then a story from insider about the wife of chief justice john roberts working a multimillion-dollar regularly appear in front of the supreme court. if you're about to have a case in front of the supreme court, here's a handy way to put a lot of money in the pocket of the chief justice via his wife. tomorrow senate democrats are set to hold their first hearing on ethics and conflicts of interest at the united states supreme court. yeah, maybe it's time. they requested that chief justice john roberts appear and testify about the ethics rules, he declined the invitation, then they sent a series of questions about how the court enforces ethics policies. he sent this question, has there ever been any censure, reprimand, admonition -- has anybody gotten into trouble for breaking the rules he says you follow? he sent his answer, no. nobody's ever gotten in trouble as far as he knows. quote, i'm not aware of any penalties imposed on justices for failing to abide by the principles. so nobody has gotten in trouble for breaking the supreme court ethics rules. they're very strict rules totally

there and the gop establishment, let's face it, it has a record of appointing david suter and john roberts. so, that's four major issues, issues that should be critical in any election where trump right now has a clear policy advantage over both biden and the gop establishment. and that all leads to the following, on domestic policy, trump has a proven record of building an economy that generated higher real wages for american worker he. now neither the biden administration nor the old gop guard can say the same. and on social policy, trump led us to a huge victory to overturn roe versus wade, we know what the gop establishment failed to do, yeah, overturn roe versus wade, only 40 years. by the way, trump did all of this while facing impeachment and the fraudulent mueller investigation. so, simply attacking trump as a person or his style, that ain't going to work. if you want to win the gop nomination, you are going to have to convince the voters that you are going to do the right thing on china, on the borders, obviously the economy, on the military, and judges. i don't think that many pe

politico jane roberts is made of chief justice john roberts made $10.3 million in commissions for elitehistleblower documents show. professor, what do you make of these calls for the court now to step up, draft and adopt a code of conduct? was is long overdue for the court to have a code of conduct. these revelations are historic. you look back whose misconduct involved $20000 in payment, you look at the history the supreme court has been great about avoiding financial improprieties in life. this has called into question for good reason the effects of this court. >> the federalist says this though. the only that matters is creating the perception that conservative justices are corrupt rates part of a concerted effort to delegitimize a supreme court that is still occasionally opposed a semblance of constitutional limits on the state. the one thing still stay in the way of progressive progress. megan, when you make a bet of these headlines in these questions? >> that headlines or political mudslinging for the justices here did not do anything wrong. some of them accurately reported transa

chief justice john roberts has been one of the critics. it is, the complaint is not about the bottom lines in these cases. the complaint is about the process the justices are using to get there. when we are talking about how the court functions as an institution, the prophecies it follows, that ought not to be partisan at all and that we, the justices as much as their critics, ought to be invested in the court looking like, acting like, behaving like, it is handling these decisions in an aboveboard manner. the problem when you look at these cases the last five or six years, it is hard to come away with that impression once you put them side-by-side. host: all right. we are talking with university of texas law professor steve vladeck. we are going to go to your phone calls right now. as a reminder, (202) 748-8000 free democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. our first caller is mark in asheville, north carolina on the independent line. what is your question or comment? caller: i generally agree with professor vl

chief justice john roberts has been one of the critics.is, the complaint is not about the bottom lines in these cases. the complaint is about the process the justices are using to get there. when we are talking about how the court functions as an institution, the prophecies it follows, that ought not to be partisan at all and that we, the justices as much as their critics, ought to be invested in the court looking like, acting like, behaving like, it is handling these decisions in an aboveboard manner. the problem when you look at these cases the last five or six ♪ c-span's washington journal. every day we are taking your calls we will discuss policy issues that impact you. coming up monday morning, wall street journal congressional reporter natalie andrew previews the week ahead in congress on efforts to reach an agreement on the debt limit. then state government and politics reporter for south carolina's estate discusses republican senator tim scott's formal entry into the 2024 presidential race. president of committee for a responsible

you said less than a month ago that john roberts, retweeted this. john roberts is a disgrace. disagree with justice roberts -- he did not call him chief justice, you called him john roberts. you retweeted this. >> i did not. can you provide a copy to me now? because i did not. >> can you tell me why you think chief justice roberts is a disgrace? >> i did not say that, i did not retweet that. >> maybe twitter got it wrong. >> someone got it wrong. >> the unstated premise of all of this, sometimes it is stated -- but the unstated premise of all of this is that some justices have been bribed. let us cut to the chase. ok? now, let me stay with you, mr. payne. let me go to -- i do not just want to pick on you, mr. payne. you can be looking up on twitter where you said those things. unable forth, 2019 -- on april 4, 2019, the american civil liberties union paid for justice sotomayor's trip to puerto rico. have you ever been there? is it expensive? >> well, it depends on when you go. >> how much do you think it costs? >> depends whether you fly first class or economy. >> first class.

i'm sandra smith. >> john: i'm john roberts. see you >> martha: thank you. good afternoon. i'm jilgillian turner in for maa maccallum this afternoon. first, police identify the man suspected of opening fire at a medical building in midtown atlanta about 12:30 eastern time. he's killed one person and hospitalized at least four others. police say 24-year-old dee

i'm john roberts. a lot of news happening this afternoon. >> a lot of help, not a lot of chance a deal will get done this weekend, but everybody will pay attention and watch it because it's pretty important. >> hope is not a strategy. should get something done. >> this is true. i'm gillian turner. we're on mccarthy watch. we'll bring you any news out of the speaker's office as it comes out at this hour. a presidential candidate is raising alarms, saying linkedin intentionally censored him. >> this was no accident. this was intentional viewpoint-based censorship. i fear it's just the beginning of what we'll see all over again this election cycle like we did in the last one. >> he's accusing microsoft-owned linkedin of shutting down his posts on climate and china. the company's response and mollie hemingway just head. >>> passengers near pre-pandemic levels. >> as to has already screened over 2.6 million people, the highest number since 2019, pre-pandemic. spike and near misses on runways have hit the in

and so in one sense dick durbin is correct, that john roberts does have the power in his hands in dick roberts doesn't have clean hands on this issue either. we've read the reporting about jane roberts and her clients that haven't been disclosed. and this goes to the flaws of the ethics requirements. they don't require justices' spouses to disclose the clients. they only have to say the name of the company they work for. they don't have to say who hires them. so if ginni thomas's case she didn't have to say that leonard leo was funneling payments to her llc. and in jane roberts' case she didn't have to say law firms that appear before her husband all the time are hiring her. so i think that's going to prevent john roberts from getting on his high horse and policing clarence thomas's ethical woes here. so it really falls back on congressional democrats and dick durbin and richard blumenthal like you said to step up to the plate here. and so i hope that that hearing that dick durbin held last week, which was good, is not the final word here because it won't be enough. >> brian and i used