steven briar, one of the most-liberal voices on the court. sonia sotomayor dissented. sotomayor said the court ought not to back and wish way rather than confront the racial ineek quality to exists in the society. black and latino enrollment at university of michigan dropped since the ban went into affect at cal black students are among the most under represented >> i don't think that you just have a very small representation. >> the number of latino freshman offered admission increased compared to the previous two years. aat uc berkeley abc7 news. >> a 9-year-old boy has come down with whooping cough, a highly contagious disease. since january, four babies have been hospitalized with per tuesdayis in contra costa county sonoma county has been hard hit, reporting 121 cases as of last week. only one person has been hospitalized. there is a vaccine for whooping cough. >> u.s. fish and wildlife says tanker trucks will give young salmon a better chance at survival. if the young salmon had to swim from hatcheries near ring they'd be easy pray in the shallower than normal wa

the justice wrote >> this court is very wary of upholding racial pref yenss >> the sixth voice, steven briar. ruth investigator binzberg and sonia sotomayor said without checks democratically approved legislation can oppress minority groups. at cal, black students are most the most under represented. >> i don't think what berkeley does for african americans you have a small representation. >> the number of latino freshman increased compared to the previous two years. far less than the state numbers. >> a 15-year-old boy he boy who survived a flight to hawaii says he was trying to get to africa to see his mother. officials say he was unconscious foremost of the flight and did not regain consciousness until an hour after the plane landed. classmates who know the teenager said he transferred to santa clara high school from another school in san jose. he was kind of shy he didn't speak much. but we're all surprised about what happened. we didn't think it's him. we're happy to know he's all right. >> tsa says it will meet with law enforcement and officials to review security after he was able to

. >> reporter: but the four justices in the minority, led by justice steven briar wrote the decision understates the importance of protecting the political integrity of our governmental institutions. under today's ruling, there are some things that will stay the same. for example, a donor cannot give more than $2600 to a single candidate but can now give to as many campaigns as he or she wants. the previous $123,000 cap has been lifted. justice clarence thomas wanted to wipe out all limits. speaking for the majority, chief justice john roberts wrote the government may no more restrict how many candidates or causes that a donor may support than it can tell a newspaper how many candidates it may endorse. john burton is the chair of california's democratic party. >> it used to be you voted for a certain political party and you knew what you got. now you just vote for, you know, whoever can spend the most money and tell the most lies on television. >> reporter: burton says looking ahead, today's decision would most certainly affect the upcoming midterm elections. in san francisco, lyanne

. >> steven briar was many in the squormt and he's no conservative. >> we thought the swing vote would be justice kennedy. he wrote the opinion. but briar, a reliable member of the liberal wing joined with the conservatives on this. good to see you. >> hank you, megyn. >> developing tonight a deadly and violent holiday weekend in chicago raising calls for gun control. at least eight people were killed and 40-plus injured in a string of shootings in the windy city. among the wounded, six children. the sale of guns is completely banned inside chicago city limits. the head of the police department said it's not enough. >> we need help with the gun laws. the national averages for gun violence, we are way above it as far as murder by gunshot goes. >> one of the things we need to do is change our gun laws to make sure that our strategy of more police on the street -- kids, guns and drugs off the street, is as effective and coordinated as we can be. >> kentucky senator rand paul is live in chicago tonight, there for a school of choice event which we'll get to in a minute. the city of chicago

. >> reporter: but the four justices in the minority, led by justice steven briar wrote the decision understates the importance of protecting the political integrity of our governmental institutions. under today's ruling, there are some things that will stay the same. for example, a donor cannot give more than $2600 to a single candidate but can now give to as many campaigns as he or she wants. the previous $123,000 cap has been lifted. justice clarence thomas wanted to wipe out all limits. speaking for the majority, chief justice john roberts wrote the government may no more restrict how many candidates or causes that a donor may support than it can tell a newspaper how many candidates it may endorse. john burton is the chair of california's democratic party. >> it used to be you voted for a certain political party and you knew what you got. now you just vote for, you know, whoever can spend the most money and tell the most lies on television. >> reporter: burton says looking ahead, today's decision would most certainly affect the upcoming midterm elections. in san francisco, lyanne

that's a quote from steven briar, who took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench in versus the federal election commission. a ruling about which briar and the three other dissenting justices saiding taken together with citizens united eviscerates our nation's campaign finance laws, leaving a remnant incapable of dealing with the grave problems of democratic legitimacy that those laws were intended to resolve. i mean, what would be the odds that the same supreme court that found no compelling reason to maintain the voting rights act's protections against stayed wide schemes that reduce voters' access to the polls would also deliver vast rewards to a small, superrich elite who may have it in mind to buy elections. the roberts court over the last four years, in rather convenient symmetry with one political party, has put in place the potential for a nearly perfect storm of political oligarchy. a handful of superdonors can enlist in parties, political packs, superpacks knowing their winning bets are gerrymandered in place, which now have the green light from the supreme

driver, i want to put up on the screen what a liberal justice, steven briar, said in voting with the majority against in favor of the ban. he said this. i continue to believe that the constitution permits that what does not require the use of the kind of race conscious programs that are now barred by the michigan constitution. in other words, affirmative action, he believes, is constitutional, but it's not required, and the question is why not let the people decide if in their infinite wisdom the people vote 58-42, we don't want race, then who are you to say that they can't decide the policy? >> white voters are an overwhelming majority of michigan voters, and they voted two out of three to ban affirmative action. black voters who are a tiny minority of the voters in michigan, just because of the demographics of the state who are about 15% of the electric. 90% black voters voted against the ban. we've come back to this place where states can't determine what equality is. the federal court is saying -- >> i have to disagree with that because justice briar would say there are constitut

in the words of steven briar who wrote the dissent in the case, "if the court and citizens united openeday's decision may open a flood gate." at least john boehner's happy. joining me now, congressman keith ellison, democrat from minnesota. your reaction to the ruling in terms of what it might mean nr governance inside the house of representatives. will it in a weird way help john boehner get control of his tea party caucus? >> you know, i think it will make the polarization even worse because you'll have one person who can just bankroll the whole republican caucus and insist that all of them abide by a certain political line. the fact is now you have some variation among the republicans. you have far right tea party types and some what i call republican country club types. but now you can have the far right types like the koch brothers who insist on the most extreme right wing swing for everybody to abide by their party line if they want to get a check and, yes, they're in a position to give everybody a check given the explosion of these limits. so i think -- >> go ahead. >> as i was go

justice steven briar, for instance, called the decision a blow to the first amendment and to american democracy. he said, "if the court and citizens united opened a door, today's decision may well open a floodgate". i am joined by one of congress's biggest voices on this issue, that's vermont senator bernie sanders. you have been outspoken on this. senator sanders, i want to get a lay of the land. house speaker john boehner was asked this morning if he thought this gives too much advantage to wealthy donors. listen to what he had to say. >> what i think this means is that freedom of speech is being upheld. you all have the freedom to write what you want to write. donors ought to have the freedom to give what they want to give. >> so that's one republican reaction to this. who on the hill loses the most and who do you think gains the most from this decision? >> well, this is not a complicated issue. the republican party has been pushing this agenda and the conservative wing of the supreme court has supported it. clearly the winners are the millionaires and billionaires of this country

the decision was 6-2 with democratic appointee steven briar joining the conservative block of -- it doesn'ttatus quo on affirmative action. it certainly strengthens the hand of conservatives who want to take the case against affirmative action directly to the voters. let's spin. >> i obviously am a big supporter of affirmative action in two ways. i think it is good for people who get a chance through a diversity program to get a job or go to school. i also think it's really good for institutions themselves to make sure that they have diversity. when you look at this ruling, what it's basically saying is what kwfsh dz if michigan, which is go to the voters and say, hey, let's ban this, forget the fact that politicians in your state are supporting it, let's find a way to ban it directly through initiatives, that's fine. that's okay. that's what the court is saying. i think the fact that that went to the court also opens up a wrauder window into this debate, which is there's a lot of controversial policies and how we give out awards, how we give out benefits going to a good school as a type of

justice steven briar saying when you couple it with the citizens united decision of four years ago, that removed the restrictions on corporations and labor unions spending their own money to support candidates, he said that "is going to open the floodgates." he said today's decision may well open a floodgate. the real -- i think the heart of the disagreement between the two sides of the court here, andrea, is what it is the law was intended to prevent. the majority said it's intended to prevent only what's called quid pro quo corruption. i give you a lot of money, you give me a favor in return. it doesn't make any sense that you can give the maximum to nine candidates but you can't to the tenth because that would somehow be quid pro quo corruption. they say it's trying to level the playing field, trying to prevent big money from overwhelming the voices of small donors. the majority said sorry, that is not what the first amendment permits. you can't say that we're going to limit how much speech some have in order to make it possible for other voices to be heard. doesn't work that way. >>

now, before the setting justices led by justice steven briar said in effect that is all a bunch of nonsensey. that is not speech. this should be regulated. but, they only have four votes. that's us. >> now, we know corporations are people and money is people too. >> money is speech. that's the heart of this opinion. corporations are people of citizens united. the heart of today's opinion is that giving money to a candidate is like speech. a lot of people disagree with it. that's the law of the land. >> jeffrey toobin, thanks so much. who drove to the control room [ woman ] driverless mode engaged. find parking space. [ woman ] parking space found. [ male announcer ] ...that secured the data that directed the turbines that powered the farm that made the milk that went to the store that reminded the man to buy the milk that was poured by the girl who loved the cat. [ meows ] the internet of everything is changing everything. cisco. tomorrow starts here. ttdd# 1-800-345-2550 can take you in many directions. tsearching for trade ideas that ispark your curiosityg. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 you read th

justice sotomayor joined by justice ginsberg but steven briar actually agreed with the result.complicated case. actually it's quite personal for me. i was born in ann arbor but there's some old cases that could be read broadly to support justice sotomayor's position but you could also read them more narrowly and that's what the majority showed to do. justice briar argued in his opinion partly out of respect for the democratic process. affirmative action is permissible, but it's not required. and so the people of the states get to decide just how much affirmative action they want to do. that was basically briar's argument and it's a version of justice kennedy's argument for the plurality. >> speaking of justice kennedy, here's what he said the decision is not about. he wrote before the court addresses the question presented, it is important to note what this case is not about. it is not about the constitutionality or the merits of race conscious admissions policies in higher education. >> right. and there were two other justices, you know, there are a lot of moving parts to this

writing for the major city, chief justice john roberts: >> justice steven briar who cited the controversial010 court decision opening the door for unlimited donations and spending on political issues: >> it's expected to hurt democrats. >> they wish to dismantle all limits on giving piece by piece until we are back to the days of the robber barons, when anyone or anything could give unlimited money, undisclosed and make our political system seem so rigged that everyone will lose interest in our democracy. >> welcoming the decision, house speaker john boehner, saying donations can now flow directly to the candidates and by pass road groups that have undermind his authority. >> it's pushing all the money into outside party structure into various forums. i'm all for freedom, congratulations. >> critics say the wealthy already that actions and influence and this decision will skew it further. in the cost of elections steadily increasing, in 1998, the total cost are congressional races was $1.6 billion. by 2012, it was $3.6 billion. presidential races, the cost has doubled from $1.4 billion in 2

but writing in dissent, justice steven briar said if citizens united opened a door to today's decisionmay open a floodgate. the ruling sparked sharp differences between those worrying about the money of soft money and those who say it levels the playing field. >> most americans, 98% of americans would say big money has an interest and makes it easier for them. >> the reason we are excited it brings the political parties, i think the most accountable groups in america, a little bit closer to exercising our first amendment rights like everybody else. >> we want to bring in political writer for "the new york times" nicholas convasori. good to have you. >> seeing everybody running around in washington especially on the left with hair burning and this is the worst thing that has ever happened. i sit there wondering whether these weren't the same people running around with a sheldon a a adelson. did you hear the argument yesterday that it's sort of a zero sum game. you're actually taking power away from the megadonors possibly and giving it to the party because people are free to write more

she said steven briar did not join in the same sentiments. her dissent is of a piece and left wing outrage finding no factual basis for continued federal you suppertation -- if you want to read more, that's jennifer rubin's column in "the washington post." but we've got about 15 or 20 minutes left to continue this discussion with our viewers. we're asking race relations in the u.s. how far have we come? let's go to keith waiting in new york. keith, good morning. caller: yes. the misinformation by white people who are prejudice -- anybody can be prejudice but when you put prejudice into option that affects people's lives, that's racism. like the corporate control justices on the supreme court who pretend that racism doesn't exist, donald sterling, who sees his black players on the basketball team as slaves, and the donald trumps and the bundy who is don't pay their taxes. so a lot of people get confused for -- or deflating the issue. racism, we've come to a point but people in power are trying o turn the clock back with suppressions and the re

steven and stefan. they wanna see that house on briar again. really? i showed it to them five times. we were there, i think they got mail. yeah, well, that's why i'm calling. they hate upsetting people, unless, of course, it's me. then they don't mind waking me up at 7:00 a.m., asking me to call you. it's no problem. i'm just hanging around.