0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i do think amy coney barrett is a really good example of this point. oral argument prediction is dynamic. you can't just do it at the beginning of the argument. justice amy coney barrett is a really good example because at one hour 55 minutes and the argument, michael dreeben, more than an hour into his argument for jack smith, talked about the allegations in the indictment about what donald trump did to the justice department, trying to pressure the justice department to send fake letters about election concerns and threatening to fire those justice department officials. i can tell you it wasn't just justice barrett. you could hear a pin drop in the room at that moment. that was a pivotal moment for the argument. it is one that caught the attention of justice amy coney barrett and i suspect the chief. given all of that, i do think that it is fair to say there is a path forward that would allow even a trial to happen but certainly andrew's solution. >> quickly before we go. i can't remember, i'm sure it happens, i haven't seen it happen. trump's lawyer
i do think amy coney barrett is a really good example of this point. oral argument prediction is dynamic. you can't just do it at the beginning of the argument. justice amy coney barrett is a really good example because at one hour 55 minutes and the argument, michael dreeben, more than an hour into his argument for jack smith, talked about the allegations in the indictment about what donald trump did to the justice department, trying to pressure the justice department to send fake letters...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
coney barrett. she was asking what happens if a doctor what reached the conclusion of good faith that an abortion was medically necessary, but prosecutors disagreed. would they be prosecuted under the idaho law asking questions like that, which sort of goes to the very heart of why this is such an issue, obviously, first and foremost, policy-wise. but also politically across the country, because these are questions being asked in courts of law in legislatures that have to do mostly with how a doctor and a patient view in this case, a very dire situation that doesn't necessarily just mean, will i save the life of a mother, but will i save? the mother's ability to have children again, if she wants to. >> yeah, exactly. that. that specific hypothetical was brought up by another justice and you've really hit on one of the key exchanges here about the fact that idaho is suggesting that really doctor's judgment may be subject to the judgment of a prosecutor. that's what amy coney barrett was getting out t
coney barrett. she was asking what happens if a doctor what reached the conclusion of good faith that an abortion was medically necessary, but prosecutors disagreed. would they be prosecuted under the idaho law asking questions like that, which sort of goes to the very heart of why this is such an issue, obviously, first and foremost, policy-wise. but also politically across the country, because these are questions being asked in courts of law in legislatures that have to do mostly with how a...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> there was a lightning round of questions in which justice amy coney barrett, a trump appointee, got trump's attorney to concede that the indictment and lists acts by donald trump allegations of behavior that would not be covered by presidential immunity because they were private acts take a listen petitioner turned to a private attorney, was willing to spread knowingly false claims of election fraud to spearhead is challenges to the election results private, as we dispute the allegation by sounds private took sounds private. >> sinner conspired with another private attorney who caused the filing and court of a verification signed by petitioner that contain false allegations to support a challenge so sounds private three private actors to attorneys, including those mentioned above, and a political consultant helped implement a plan to submit fraudulent slates of presidential electors to obstruct the certification proceeding and petitioner and a coconspirator attorney directed that effort you ready to quickly i believe that's private joshua, what do you make of that concession? >>
. >> there was a lightning round of questions in which justice amy coney barrett, a trump appointee, got trump's attorney to concede that the indictment and lists acts by donald trump allegations of behavior that would not be covered by presidential immunity because they were private acts take a listen petitioner turned to a private attorney, was willing to spread knowingly false claims of election fraud to spearhead is challenges to the election results private, as we dispute the...
0
0.0
Apr 28, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
coney barrett. she was pretty skeptical of some of the arguments that trump's collin was making, but at the same time, she seemed to at least be open to the idea that there should be some form of immunity that would apply, that would prevent a former president having to go all the way through trial and stand in front of a jury in a case that has to do with their official actions. at one upon the, chief justice roberts, chief justice john roberts, he is one of the more -- he is one of the court's institutionist judges talking about the stature over the supreme court, he too seemed to be a bit concerned with the ruling over the d.c. circuit below him. he read from a portion of the opinion at one point and said that is not the law. we should send this case back to d.c. circuit. i think whatever iteration you get, however you get there, it may well just be a narrower form of immunity or some other rational. when you get lower court proceedings that jeopardize if not make it down right impossible idea th
coney barrett. she was pretty skeptical of some of the arguments that trump's collin was making, but at the same time, she seemed to at least be open to the idea that there should be some form of immunity that would apply, that would prevent a former president having to go all the way through trial and stand in front of a jury in a case that has to do with their official actions. at one upon the, chief justice roberts, chief justice john roberts, he is one of the more -- he is one of the...
0
0.0
Apr 29, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
this indictment were both helpful and surprising because no one had amy coney barrett on their bingo card as the swing vote. >> i didn't and it sounded like most of you didn't, either. let me play a moment from justice alito. >> if an incumbent, who loses a very close, hotly contested election, knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponents, will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy? >> he seems to be arguing in plain english that immunity is necessary because otherwise, presidents fear prosecution and will be incentivized to attempt to hold power unlawfully. what did you make of that statement? >> i thought it missed two important things. in the 200 year history of this country, it's never happened because we always thought that presidents were subject to criminal liability, and second, that there were powerful remarks made in january 2021 where they said, do
this indictment were both helpful and surprising because no one had amy coney barrett on their bingo card as the swing vote. >> i didn't and it sounded like most of you didn't, either. let me play a moment from justice alito. >> if an incumbent, who loses a very close, hotly contested election, knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
that lack of a clear standard is exactly what both justice sonia sotomayor and amy coney barrett tried to wrestle out of the attorney representing idaho today. listen. >> this particular patient had to deliver her baby. the baby died. she had a hysterectomy, and she can no longer have children. all right. you're telling me the doctor couldn't have done the abortion earlier? >> again, it goes back to whether a doctor can in good faith medical judgment -- >> that's a lot for the doctor to risk. >> it is very case by case. >> that's the problem. >> i'm kind of shocked, actually, because i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered, and you're now saying they're not? >> no, i'm not saying that. that's just my point, your honor. >> you're hedging. justice sotomayor is asking whether this would be covered or not, and it's my understanding that the legislature's witnesses said those would be covered. >> those doctors said if they were exercising medical judgment they could in good faith determine that life saving care was necessary, and that's my point is it
that lack of a clear standard is exactly what both justice sonia sotomayor and amy coney barrett tried to wrestle out of the attorney representing idaho today. listen. >> this particular patient had to deliver her baby. the baby died. she had a hysterectomy, and she can no longer have children. all right. you're telling me the doctor couldn't have done the abortion earlier? >> again, it goes back to whether a doctor can in good faith medical judgment -- >> that's a lot for the...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
coney barrett? >> so it was very interesting to watch them talk about medical care between a patient or physician without actually have a patient or physician in the conversation. you saw a bunch of attorneys and justices trying to parse out what is a medical emergency that meet the standard for a state of idaho to allow a lifesaving intervention to happen to save a woman's life. and what was remarkably refreshing was actually to hear justice amy coney barrett really reflect on the idea at some point you heard him say why are we even here? what is the case you're fighting for? where are you trying to stop the intervention to save a woman's life in the state of idaho where the doctor is ready and willing and waiting to do what needs to be done, but somehow you won't let that happen, you're denying the care. and that is what you heard in the clip just there was both justice sote mayor and justice barrett say, wait, what? you're stopping care in an emergency? that does not seem to be what we were tryin
coney barrett? >> so it was very interesting to watch them talk about medical care between a patient or physician without actually have a patient or physician in the conversation. you saw a bunch of attorneys and justices trying to parse out what is a medical emergency that meet the standard for a state of idaho to allow a lifesaving intervention to happen to save a woman's life. and what was remarkably refreshing was actually to hear justice amy coney barrett really reflect on the idea...
0
0.0
Apr 3, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i mean do think amy coney barrett and kavanaugh are they were bought in. uh, for sure. kavanaugh is for sure. i don't know enough amy coney barrett to know whether she lives a bubble of her own views and has just the bubble just happens to be exactly the kind of bubble that federalist society folks were looking for and liked and wanted get onto the court. but i know for sure that kavanaugh knew exactly what he was doing. kavanaugh did this stuff for president bush, and that's how we got to know leonard leo is organizing the outside money influence over those appointments. and if you want to know the power of this, even early on, you remember a woman named harriet miers. harriet miers, white house counsel for, president bush. she was very conservative. she was female at a time when it would done them some good to put another female judge on the court. and she was very conservative and she knew him personally as white house counsel. she's around him every day up goes her name as the nominee. and the president had to effect a humiliating withdrawal of name because of the p
i mean do think amy coney barrett and kavanaugh are they were bought in. uh, for sure. kavanaugh is for sure. i don't know enough amy coney barrett to know whether she lives a bubble of her own views and has just the bubble just happens to be exactly the kind of bubble that federalist society folks were looking for and liked and wanted get onto the court. but i know for sure that kavanaugh knew exactly what he was doing. kavanaugh did this stuff for president bush, and that's how we got to know...
0
0.0
Apr 28, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
amy coney barrett trying to suss out and pin down john sauer with respect to the actual allegations in this indictment were both helpful and surprising, nobody had her on the bingo card as the swing vote here.>> i certainly didn't, it sounds like most of you didn't either. i'm going to play a moment from justice alito.>> if an incumbent loses a very close, hotly contested election and knows a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but the president will be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent, will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a duck democracy and he seems to be arguing in plain english that immunity is necessary, because otherwise presidents will feel fear prosecution and be incentivized to hold onto power unlawfully. would you make of that statement?>> i thought it missed two really important things, one, the over 200 year history of this country in which that's and literally never happened even though we've always thought that presid
amy coney barrett trying to suss out and pin down john sauer with respect to the actual allegations in this indictment were both helpful and surprising, nobody had her on the bingo card as the swing vote here.>> i certainly didn't, it sounds like most of you didn't either. i'm going to play a moment from justice alito.>> if an incumbent loses a very close, hotly contested election and knows a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
KNTV
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
amy coney barrett and sonia sotomayor will weighing in on health risks versus death. can a doctor in idaho treat a woman in idaho is a health risk. idaho is saying no. idaho's law says she has to be on death door in order to be treated. idaho argued that their law is sufficient, doctors can make their objectsive decisions on whether or not they want to treat a woman she doesn't have to be on death door. amy coney barrett was interesting to watch today, she asked whether or not pros durts might disagree with the doctor's decision, the lawyer for idaho said yes, they could. a stunning moment said to the lawyer from idaho, i'm stunned by some of the answers you're giving here and a bit concerned about whether or not prosecutors might put doctors in jail for doing something that was a good faith effort to save the woman and the baby. >> what do you make of the arguments we heard today. >> it's always difficult to predict, i heard some skepticism from justice barrett, maybe even from justice kavanaugh and chief justice roberts, i don't know if we'll see this traditional co
amy coney barrett and sonia sotomayor will weighing in on health risks versus death. can a doctor in idaho treat a woman in idaho is a health risk. idaho is saying no. idaho's law says she has to be on death door in order to be treated. idaho argued that their law is sufficient, doctors can make their objectsive decisions on whether or not they want to treat a woman she doesn't have to be on death door. amy coney barrett was interesting to watch today, she asked whether or not pros durts might...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but from what you heard, where did you see amy coney barrett coming down? because she is an interesting swing vote here potentially. >> yes, i think so. i gotten a opportunity to listen to the oral arguments which are now available in real time on the supreme court website. and i heard skepticism from justice barrett and justice kavanaugh. they asked pointed question. so if you add those to the sotomayor, kgan and jackson, you come up with five which is sufficient to rule in favor of the united states here. and so won't things that i thought that justice barrett was particularly pointed at was really pushing the lawyer for the state of idaho about the daylight that exists between idaho law and federal law. and as you heard there, the difference really is this idea between health risk and a death risk. and that they would have to wait until a person's situation deteriorated so much that they were on death's door before an abortion could be performed. and that is just not tenable. the whole idea of federalism and the supremacy clause is that federal law can p
but from what you heard, where did you see amy coney barrett coming down? because she is an interesting swing vote here potentially. >> yes, i think so. i gotten a opportunity to listen to the oral arguments which are now available in real time on the supreme court website. and i heard skepticism from justice barrett and justice kavanaugh. they asked pointed question. so if you add those to the sotomayor, kgan and jackson, you come up with five which is sufficient to rule in favor of the...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
this was an exchange with amy coney barrett, one of the trump appointees on the court and trump's lawyer watch petitioner turn to a private attorney, was willing to spread knowingly, false claims of election fraud to spearhead is challenges to the election results. >> private as much. i mean, we just moved the allegation, but sounds private. two sounds private petitioner conspired with another private attorney who caused the filing and court of a verification signed by petitioner that contain false allegations to support a challenge. >> sounds private three private actors to attorneys, including those mentioned above& a political consultant helped implement a plan to submit fraudulent slates of presidential electors to obstruct the certification jim proceeding and petitioner and a coconspirator attorney directed that effort you write it quickly. i believe that it's private that's seems to answer a lot. >> there it does, casey and that is the genesis of the concern, right? you have to now parse out. is they have private conduct from presidential conduct and then, you know, this sort of, t
this was an exchange with amy coney barrett, one of the trump appointees on the court and trump's lawyer watch petitioner turn to a private attorney, was willing to spread knowingly, false claims of election fraud to spearhead is challenges to the election results. >> private as much. i mean, we just moved the allegation, but sounds private. two sounds private petitioner conspired with another private attorney who caused the filing and court of a verification signed by petitioner that...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i'm gonna read it. >> it's the questioning from justice amy coney barrett, and it's interesting because she pushed the idaho attorney joshua turner over when doctors could be criminally prosecuted for performing an abortion under state law. >> and she's making an interesting point here, because really it was the liberals who dominated most of turner's arguments their questioning. but she asked him whether if a doctor reached the conclusion in good faith that an abortion was medically necessary, but prosecutors disagreed. could they be prosecuted under idaho law? right. what is the prosecutor thought and i'm quoting her now. well, i don't think any good faith doctor would draw that conclusion. i'm going to put on my expert turner responded saying that you're honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case. i think he might have missed the point she was trying to make. she's raising concerns that if they agree with his side, your doctor's could potentially be prosecuted at the discretion of lawyers and he didn't defend his position very well. >> yeah. and san
i'm gonna read it. >> it's the questioning from justice amy coney barrett, and it's interesting because she pushed the idaho attorney joshua turner over when doctors could be criminally prosecuted for performing an abortion under state law. >> and she's making an interesting point here, because really it was the liberals who dominated most of turner's arguments their questioning. but she asked him whether if a doctor reached the conclusion in good faith that an abortion was...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
coney barrett. she was pretty skeptical of some of the arguments that trump's collin was making, but at the same time, she seemed to at least be open to the idea that there should be some form of immunity that would apply, that would prevent a former president having to go all the way through trial and stand in front of a jury in a case that has to do with their official actions. at one upon the, chief justice roberts, chief justice john roberts, he is one of the more -- he is one of the court's institutionist judges talking about the stature over the supreme court, he too seemed to be a bit concerned with the ruling over the d.c. circuit below him. he read from a portion of the opinion at one point and said that is not the law. we should send this case back to d.c. circuit. i think whatever iteration you get, however you get there, it may well just be a narrower form of immunity or some other rational. when you get lower court proceedings that jeopardize if not make it down right impossible idea th
coney barrett. she was pretty skeptical of some of the arguments that trump's collin was making, but at the same time, she seemed to at least be open to the idea that there should be some form of immunity that would apply, that would prevent a former president having to go all the way through trial and stand in front of a jury in a case that has to do with their official actions. at one upon the, chief justice roberts, chief justice john roberts, he is one of the more -- he is one of the...
0
0.0
Apr 23, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
justice amy coney barrett, questioning that claim so it would not violate the eighth amendment to punish public urination and defecation. the case stems from the city of grants pass, oregon, which has banned anyone who sleeps in public from using a blanket, pillow or cardboard box. >> i think that it is harmful for people to be living in public spaces on streets and in parks, whatever bedding materials. when humans are living in those conditions, we think that that's not compassionate. >> the case has nationwide implications amid the expanding problem of homelessness and public safety concerns. while many justices appeared sympathetic to the city, others pointed out the need for homeless people to sleep somewhere. >> it's sort of like breathing. i mean, you could say breathing is conduct, too, but presumably you would not think that it's okay to criminalize breathing in public. >> i would like to point to the federal regulations for a homeless person who has no place to go sleeping in public is kind of like breathing in public. >> one question the justices will need to decide is whether
justice amy coney barrett, questioning that claim so it would not violate the eighth amendment to punish public urination and defecation. the case stems from the city of grants pass, oregon, which has banned anyone who sleeps in public from using a blanket, pillow or cardboard box. >> i think that it is harmful for people to be living in public spaces on streets and in parks, whatever bedding materials. when humans are living in those conditions, we think that that's not compassionate....
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KQED
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
interesting it is a distinction that one of the conservative members of the court, amy coney barrett, was interested in. whether or not any of the things donald trump is accused of fall into the private realm, because donald trump's lawyers acknowledge that private acts, asked him a private row, were -- can be subject to prosecution. she went throu some of the things that are part of the indictment. and donald trump's lawyer acknowledged they were potentially in the private realm. what you are starting i think to see here is a way forward where perhaps the supreme court says, look, there is a bunch of stuff in this case that may be subject to prosecution. that -- there may be some areas of the original indictment that may be more problematic. go back to the earlier courts, sort out, given our distinction between the official acts in the private acts, go back and sort out what you think you can actually prosecute, given that distinction. and restart the case. i don't think -- you are not going to get from the supreme court a blanket, total immunity. i think that is very clear from what
interesting it is a distinction that one of the conservative members of the court, amy coney barrett, was interested in. whether or not any of the things donald trump is accused of fall into the private realm, because donald trump's lawyers acknowledge that private acts, asked him a private row, were -- can be subject to prosecution. she went throu some of the things that are part of the indictment. and donald trump's lawyer acknowledged they were potentially in the private realm. what you are...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KSTS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
coney barrett parecio alinearse con sus c colegas de tendencia liberal, expresando frustracion por la postura de idaho ante posibles complicaciones medicas. >> fueron ahora dices que dicen que no lo a proteger al estado de idaho porque tenemos el derecho de proteger a las mujeres y a los ninos en nuestro estado un tema polemico que dividio opiniones tambien afuera del maximo tribunal lo que quiere hacer la administracion en este caso esforzar a los enfermeros doctores que prueben abortos y estamos muy opuestos a eso. >> ¿puede ser que una persona que vive en este estado de v valladolid y tenga una emergencia medica hay necesidad de un aborto en un hospital, no pueda tener ese tratamiento medico y le pueda salvar la vida. >> la definicion de la corte se conocera a finales de junio o inicios de julio. >> una opinion por parte suprema determinando que las leyes estatales toman preeminencia sobre esta ley federal en casos de emergencia va a tener un gran impacto a nivel a nivel nacional pues la decision impactaria no solo a idaho, sino a unos 14 estados con prohibiciones similares. >> pa
coney barrett parecio alinearse con sus c colegas de tendencia liberal, expresando frustracion por la postura de idaho ante posibles complicaciones medicas. >> fueron ahora dices que dicen que no lo a proteger al estado de idaho porque tenemos el derecho de proteger a las mujeres y a los ninos en nuestro estado un tema polemico que dividio opiniones tambien afuera del maximo tribunal lo que quiere hacer la administracion en este caso esforzar a los enfermeros doctores que prueben abortos...
0
0.0
Apr 13, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i want to thank the six justices, john roberts, clarence thomas, fred cavanaugh, amy coney barrett and neil gorsuch. incredible people. for having the courage to allow this long-term, hard-fought battle to finally end. this 50 year battle over roe v. wade took it out of the federal hands and brought it into the hands, minds and hearts of the people of each state. now it is up to the states to do the right thing. like ronald reagan i am strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. you must follow your heart on this issue but you also must win elections to restore culture and win back our country which is currently and sadly a nation in decline. vice president harris: the former president yet again how proud he is of his responsibility for overturning roe v. wade. he said he is probably responsible for overturning roe v. wade. one in three women of reproductive age now live in a state with an abortion ban and probably responsible that doctors and nurses can be jailed in some states for life for providing care. probably responsible that states have passed bands
i want to thank the six justices, john roberts, clarence thomas, fred cavanaugh, amy coney barrett and neil gorsuch. incredible people. for having the courage to allow this long-term, hard-fought battle to finally end. this 50 year battle over roe v. wade took it out of the federal hands and brought it into the hands, minds and hearts of the people of each state. now it is up to the states to do the right thing. like ronald reagan i am strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest and life...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
coney barrett? >> all right. who seemed to kind of agree with that in the sense that these are questions a jury could answer. >> yes. i mean, i think that's what's going to happen. but the problem is the whole framing around official immunity that's in a civil case, not a criminal case so they took trump's framing of this question and then they're running with it and that is going to cause enormous delay and confusion. they mentioned the state cases and georgia in new york so if i'm a lawyer in those cases, i'm going to bring that up. so the problem is they had a statesman like option which has said the president is not immune. and they didn't choose it. >> we'll see what this ruling looks like when we actually get it coming up. we're gonna go back to anderson in new york and what we're learning from the transcript, the full quotes of what happened today and that manhattan courtroom, john berman is going to be with us with some of the biggest moment from today's testimony does it like a snack if all
coney barrett? >> all right. who seemed to kind of agree with that in the sense that these are questions a jury could answer. >> yes. i mean, i think that's what's going to happen. but the problem is the whole framing around official immunity that's in a civil case, not a criminal case so they took trump's framing of this question and then they're running with it and that is going to cause enormous delay and confusion. they mentioned the state cases and georgia in new york so if i'm...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
in one remarkable moment, justice amy coney barrett -- a staunch opponent of abortion rights -- exclaimed she was "shocked" by idaho's argument that women in crisis could be refused an abortion in an emergency room on a case-by-case basis. >> it is very case-by-case. the examples -- >> i'm kind of shocked, actually. because i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. and you're now saying they're not? >> no, i'm not saying that. that's just my point, your honor, is that -- >> well, you're hedging. >> reporter: a decision on that case is expected in june. meanwhile, tomorrow, the justices will consider whether or not former president donald trump should have absolute immunity in his federal case surrounding his efforts to try to overturn the 2020 election. david? >> david: all eyes on that case, as well. rachel scott at the supreme court, thank you, rachel. >>> we turn now to the husband and father vacationing with his wife in turks and caicos, arrested after four bullets were found in his luggage at the airport. could he possibly now face years behind
in one remarkable moment, justice amy coney barrett -- a staunch opponent of abortion rights -- exclaimed she was "shocked" by idaho's argument that women in crisis could be refused an abortion in an emergency room on a case-by-case basis. >> it is very case-by-case. the examples -- >> i'm kind of shocked, actually. because i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. and you're now saying they're not? >> no, i'm not saying that....
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
KSTS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
coney barrett tambien mostro frustracion por algunas de las respuestas de este abogado. >> por parte de la administracion biden estuvo ahi la procuradora general quien dijo que esta prohibicion en aida pone en una situacion practicamente imposible a los medicos y a las mujeres de ese estado, una postura que tambien escuchamos aqui afuera del m maximo tribunal donde en algun momento llego a haber mas de 100 manifestantes que intercambiaron tambien opiniones, puntos de vista de manera apasionada sin que pasara a mayores, por s supuesto, la presencia tambien de la policia. >> pareciera que la corte parece estar dividida en lineas ideologicas veremos que es lo que ocurre, habra que esperar al termino de la sesion de la corte, que esto es a finales de junio, inicios de julio, tipicamente, para conocer su decision, una decision que sabemos no solo afectara al estado de idaho, sino tambien a otros estados con medidas similares como texas, octavio o nicole. >> muchas gracias, javier. >> un tema importante, polemico, dividido y despues de esto que los estados tienen este poder a ver que prece
coney barrett tambien mostro frustracion por algunas de las respuestas de este abogado. >> por parte de la administracion biden estuvo ahi la procuradora general quien dijo que esta prohibicion en aida pone en una situacion practicamente imposible a los medicos y a las mujeres de ese estado, una postura que tambien escuchamos aqui afuera del m maximo tribunal donde en algun momento llego a haber mas de 100 manifestantes que intercambiaron tambien opiniones, puntos de vista de manera...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
that you get to amy coney barrett's point and you get it back to where it needs to be. you do not have access out the official part of it. you don't have to excise that out. presented with limited instruction. that happens every day in a court of law. >> particularly justice jackson were trying to say there was a way to do this. here's a way we should can do this. >> she was a public defender. >> she is trying to stop this scheme. >>> we've been on the air for nearly an hour. i'm not one quarter of the way through all the things i want to talk about, even just with the supreme court. it's been a big day. will be back with more the recap, coming up next. >> as you've indicated, this case has huge implications for the presidency, for the future of the presidency, for the future the country in my view. my name is oluseyi and some of my favorite moments throughout my life are watching sports with my dad. now, i work at comcast as part of the team that created our ai highlights technology, which uses ai to detect the major plays in a sports game. giving millions of fans, lik
that you get to amy coney barrett's point and you get it back to where it needs to be. you do not have access out the official part of it. you don't have to excise that out. presented with limited instruction. that happens every day in a court of law. >> particularly justice jackson were trying to say there was a way to do this. here's a way we should can do this. >> she was a public defender. >> she is trying to stop this scheme. >>> we've been on the air for nearly...
0
0.0
Apr 27, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
justice amy coney barrett joined the three female liberal justices to push back on arguments made by the lawyer representing idaho. >> when idaho law changed to make the issue whether she's going to die or not or whether she's going to have a serious medical condition, there's a bit of daylight by your standards, correct? >> it is very case-by-case. the example-- >> i'm kind of shocked, actually. i thought your own expert had said below these cases are covered. now you're saying they're not? >> those doctors said if they were exercising their medical judgment, they could in good faith determine life-saving care was necessary. >> but some doctors couldn't-- some might reach a contrary conclusion i think is what soda mayor of is asking you. >> right now, she's getting ready to attend the white house correspondents dinner. mini, thank you so much for coming on the show. so were you at all shocked by the gender divide playing out on the court? >> reporter: you know, i wasn't shocked about the liberal justices, you know. they really gave the idaho state attorney a lot of grief as he serve
justice amy coney barrett joined the three female liberal justices to push back on arguments made by the lawyer representing idaho. >> when idaho law changed to make the issue whether she's going to die or not or whether she's going to have a serious medical condition, there's a bit of daylight by your standards, correct? >> it is very case-by-case. the example-- >> i'm kind of shocked, actually. i thought your own expert had said below these cases are covered. now you're...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
KQED
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
justice amy coney barrett who is a staunch opponent of abortion rights was taken aback by what she was hearing happening at hospitals in iowa -- idaho and elsewhere. >> i'm kind of shocked actually because i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. and you're now saying they're not? >> no, i'm not saying that. that's just my point, your honor, is that -- >> well, you're hedging. i mean, justice sotomayor is asking you would this be covered or not, and it was my understanding that the legislature's witnesses said that these would be covered. >> yeah, and those doctors said, if they were exercising their medical judgment, they could in good faith determine that lifesaving care was necessary. and that's my point. this is a subjective standard. >> but some doctors couldn't, is -- some doctors might reach a contrary conclusion. geoff: in the dobbs decision it was justice alito who seemed particularly focused on this matter of fetal life. in today's arguments he talked a lot about unborn children. >> regarding the status and the potential interests of an
justice amy coney barrett who is a staunch opponent of abortion rights was taken aback by what she was hearing happening at hospitals in iowa -- idaho and elsewhere. >> i'm kind of shocked actually because i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. and you're now saying they're not? >> no, i'm not saying that. that's just my point, your honor, is that -- >> well, you're hedging. i mean, justice sotomayor is asking you would this be covered...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i think their number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett on board with a decision that is quick and firm and can be sent down to the lower courts to kick this in motion. those three conservatives are the ones to watch. thomas alito has staked out a strong pro trump position. gorsuch in between. but for roberts he probably recognizes at this point what the rolling stone article pointed out. team trump has pulled off the heist. the supreme court has slow walked this case as compared to the ballots removal case from earlier this term. the nixon cases in the 1970s during water gate. they ensured this trial will not happen before november before election day. and you know, when john roberts is embarrassed by a case, sometimes he goes quiet. he doesn't say anything. so one thing i will be looking to is whether the chief justice mostly keeps his mouth shut or whether he trying to direct arguments toward some kind of consensus position. >> i know the supreme court is quote unquote inpenetrable and don't pay attention to press. and are not victim to whatever
i think their number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett on board with a decision that is quick and firm and can be sent down to the lower courts to kick this in motion. those three conservatives are the ones to watch. thomas alito has staked out a strong pro trump position. gorsuch in between. but for roberts he probably recognizes at this point what the rolling stone article pointed out. team trump has pulled off the heist. the supreme court has slow...
0
0.0
Apr 8, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
supreme court, not the least of which amy coney barrett, a lot has changed in that time. they need to rediscuss it anyway. bill mitchell, who has his own studio, i happened to catch his tweet. trump just took abortion off the table for 2024. it will not be a presidential decision. what do you say about that, doug sc schoen. >> i say that's flat out wrong. we've seen in 2020 and 2022 the power of the issue. charlie is right, i think, from a legal point of view. it is a state issue but politically women, swing voters want to know that their rights of abortion will be protected. in states like florida and others with six-week limitations, that effectively makes abortion illegal. i think trump would have been better served saying 15 weeks is my position and my policy. i think this is going to hurt him and hurt the republican party. >> harris: a quick response to that, charlie, and we'll move on. >> look, i do agree with doug it has been a problematic issue for republicans. but it is because democrats are distorting it. i'm not saying doug is doing this but they are distorting
supreme court, not the least of which amy coney barrett, a lot has changed in that time. they need to rediscuss it anyway. bill mitchell, who has his own studio, i happened to catch his tweet. trump just took abortion off the table for 2024. it will not be a presidential decision. what do you say about that, doug sc schoen. >> i say that's flat out wrong. we've seen in 2020 and 2022 the power of the issue. charlie is right, i think, from a legal point of view. it is a state issue but...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
that is conservative justice amy coney barrett at the supreme court. she is getting from slayer to agree that a whole bunch of things trump was indicted for, all bunch of those things could not possibly be construed to be official actions of a president. now, justice barrett emerged from the arguments today as potentially the swing vote on this overall issue, maybe, which is crazy given how right- wing she is. out of all of the conservative justices she seemed like the one trying to work out a workable answer, like she might be persuadable by either camp. i think chief justice roberts was hard to read. justice barrett gave more indication than any other conservative justice that she might be thinking about where she will come down. justice barrett really suggested to the other side's lawyer, the lawyer for special counsel jack smith, that maybe if there is a whole bunch of stuff that trump did that everybody admits was just his private acts when committing these alleged crimes, maybe trumps official actions could be kicked out of the indictment and you
that is conservative justice amy coney barrett at the supreme court. she is getting from slayer to agree that a whole bunch of things trump was indicted for, all bunch of those things could not possibly be construed to be official actions of a president. now, justice barrett emerged from the arguments today as potentially the swing vote on this overall issue, maybe, which is crazy given how right- wing she is. out of all of the conservative justices she seemed like the one trying to work out a...
0
0.0
Apr 28, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
amy coney barrett should therefore not be on that court because if that rule that did not exist had existed, she would have been just a few miles outside of that -- all i am saying that everyone is saying, the court itself is rigged. if you think about the democratic processes by which we have usually had bipartisan agreement about how the supreme court is even constituted and what it actually does, when you get to this point, when you get to this point, what do you expect? >> yeah, yeah. >> yeah, yeah. odt. for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura and the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. it's the only migraine medication that helps treat & prevent, all in one. don't take if allergic to nurtec odt. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. people depend on me. without a migraine, i can be there for them. talk to your doctor about nurtec odt today. (♪♪) [shaking] itchy pet? (♪♪) with chewy, save 20% on your first pharmacy order so you can put an end to the itch. get fle
amy coney barrett should therefore not be on that court because if that rule that did not exist had existed, she would have been just a few miles outside of that -- all i am saying that everyone is saying, the court itself is rigged. if you think about the democratic processes by which we have usually had bipartisan agreement about how the supreme court is even constituted and what it actually does, when you get to this point, when you get to this point, what do you expect? >> yeah, yeah....
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
that is conservative justice amy coney barrett. she is getting donald trump's lawyer to agree that a whole bunch of things that trump was indicted for in the january 6th federal case, a whole bunch of those things are things that could not possibly be construed to be the official actions of a president. now, justice barrett emerged from the arguments today as potentially the swing vote on this overall issue. maybe, which is crazy. given how right wing she is. but of all the conservative justices, she seemed like the one who was maybe trying to work out some kind of workable answer. like she might be persuadeable by either camp. justice roberts was hard to read. justice barrett gave more indication she might be really thinking about where she will come down. justice barrett later suggested to the other side's lawyer, to the lawyer for special counsel jack smith that maybe if there is a whole bunch of stuff that trump did that everybody admits was just his private acts when he was committing these alleged crimes, maybe all trump's pu
that is conservative justice amy coney barrett. she is getting donald trump's lawyer to agree that a whole bunch of things that trump was indicted for in the january 6th federal case, a whole bunch of those things are things that could not possibly be construed to be the official actions of a president. now, justice barrett emerged from the arguments today as potentially the swing vote on this overall issue. maybe, which is crazy. given how right wing she is. but of all the conservative...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the three progressive women on the court, s sotomayor, kagan, even amy coney barrett, the arguments made by idaho, the state, it really struck me that the feminine part of the court matters. it was the four women, even the one conservative justice who were asking the tough questions about life and death scenarios and seemed pretty troubled by the state's arguments. but ultimately, i think it's really important two thanks to take away from the moment we've had today. one, 86% of americans support emergency access to abortion. recent polling by kaiser. 86% of americans, a wide range of americans to make up that number. and that this is a national case. this has national implications. and, you know, our republican friends are really fond of pointing out exceptions. the idaho council kept pointing out to the idaho exceptions. imtala could be viewed as the ultimate national exception to an abortion ban. and yet here we have idaho in court arguing and fighting back against a very simple clear-cut emergency case of abortion care. and that's frightening and chilling. >> you know, katty, the ques
the three progressive women on the court, s sotomayor, kagan, even amy coney barrett, the arguments made by idaho, the state, it really struck me that the feminine part of the court matters. it was the four women, even the one conservative justice who were asking the tough questions about life and death scenarios and seemed pretty troubled by the state's arguments. but ultimately, i think it's really important two thanks to take away from the moment we've had today. one, 86% of americans...
0
0.0
Apr 28, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
while justices seem prepared to allow the band to move forward, liberal justices, along with amy coney barrett, were concerned about the possible implications. >> a state tomorrow could say, even if death is around the corner, a state tomorrow could say even if there is an f toxic pregnancy, that is a choice of the state and they have nothing to say? >> the understanding is a humble one with respect to the federalism rule. they are the primary care providers. >> it might be too humble for yourself, you know? >> i want to bring in mary ziegler from the university of carolina. and also -- welcome back. it is good to see you. the four female justices are the ones that pushed back hardest on this ban. that is still not enough for a majority. from what you observed, how do you expect the justices to rule? >> i think idaho is going to win. john robertson and brett kavanaugh also asked some challenging questions. maybe whenever moses up for grabs, but we know that the supreme court let idaho's law go into effect back in january, which signals at least at the time, the court was prepared to si
while justices seem prepared to allow the band to move forward, liberal justices, along with amy coney barrett, were concerned about the possible implications. >> a state tomorrow could say, even if death is around the corner, a state tomorrow could say even if there is an f toxic pregnancy, that is a choice of the state and they have nothing to say? >> the understanding is a humble one with respect to the federalism rule. they are the primary care providers. >> it might be...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
even amy coney barrett tried to get them explain how fake electors is an official act. how are they going to write it? >> there for three distinctions that were salient. there was criminal versus civil because there is already broad civil immunity. then i think there was this official versus private acts, and then finally, there was sitting versus former president distinction. all of them, i think you're right, the one they're going to loft up is the official versus private. i think they'll do something similar to the case a couple years ago where they remanded it, and it seemed like a slam against trump, but ultimately, it gave him infinite amounts of time. i think it's going to be some kind of four-part test for how to distinguish between official and private acts. you didn't consider that, d.c. circuit. consider it and apply it. >> they kept citing this case which is ironically police officers who said they were harmed by trump, and even though police officers enjoy complete immunity, they're like, he harmed us. one of the other ironies is brett kavanaugh. he worked
even amy coney barrett tried to get them explain how fake electors is an official act. how are they going to write it? >> there for three distinctions that were salient. there was criminal versus civil because there is already broad civil immunity. then i think there was this official versus private acts, and then finally, there was sitting versus former president distinction. all of them, i think you're right, the one they're going to loft up is the official versus private. i think...
0
0.0
Apr 27, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
for the third trump employee, amy coney barrett, mitch mcconnell entirely forgot about his rule against nominations. this conservative majority has already taken away abortion- rights with the dobbs decision and may not stop there. then, there is what we've heard from the conservative justices, yesterday. >> the only words in the constitution is that, that have to do with the president of the law is that "he shall take care that the lobby faithfully executed." correct? it's hard to imagine that a president who breaks the law is hatefully executing the law. correct? >> he has to execute all of the laws. >> do you really, president have to make a lot of tough decisions about enforcing the law, and they have to make decisions about questions that are unsettled, and they have to make decisions based on the information that is available. do you really -- did i understand you to say, well, you know, if he makes a mistake, he makes a mistake, he subject to the criminal laws like anybody else? you don't think he's in a special, a peculiarly precarious position? >> using a special position for a
for the third trump employee, amy coney barrett, mitch mcconnell entirely forgot about his rule against nominations. this conservative majority has already taken away abortion- rights with the dobbs decision and may not stop there. then, there is what we've heard from the conservative justices, yesterday. >> the only words in the constitution is that, that have to do with the president of the law is that "he shall take care that the lobby faithfully executed." correct? it's hard...
0
0.0
Apr 16, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
however, it's worth noting that amy coney barrett noted this that even if the court -- that's a big even, because i think the defense has a big uphill battle. even if they were to prevail, the united states has taken a position that the creation of the slate of fake electors and using those to obstruct congress would be covered even under the way the defense wants to sort of narrow the scope of the obstruction statute. i don't think that even if the defense were to prevail here that it's going to prove fatal to the donald trump case even on the obstruction charges. of course, he is charged with more than just this obstruction offense. but it will be interesting to see and to hear the rest of the oral argument that is now something that people can hear for themselves by going to the scotus blog. >> i want to share with you that right now we are reading this from the google doc coming from inside the court, from the reporters, that the judge is asking donald trump to sign a waiver indicating that he does not now want to be present at the sidebars with the perspective jurors as he previousl
however, it's worth noting that amy coney barrett noted this that even if the court -- that's a big even, because i think the defense has a big uphill battle. even if they were to prevail, the united states has taken a position that the creation of the slate of fake electors and using those to obstruct congress would be covered even under the way the defense wants to sort of narrow the scope of the obstruction statute. i don't think that even if the defense were to prevail here that it's going...
0
0.0
Apr 28, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
here's an exchange between justice sonia sotomayor or and idaho were lawyer, joshua turner, and amy coney barrett. >> when idaho law changed, to make the issue whether she's going to die or not or whether she's going to have a serious medical condition, there's a bit of daylight, by your standards, correct? >> it is very case-by-case. >> i'm kind of shocked, actually, because i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered and you are now saying they are not? >> those doctor said if they were exercising the medical judgment, they could, in good faith, determined that life- saving care is necessary and that's my point, a -- >> some doctors couldn't. some might reach a contrary conclusion, i think is what justice sotomayor is asking you. >> justice barrett said she was shocked by turner's answer but as a laid out before the break, is it really surprising? isn't this what actavis said would happen after the overturning of roe v wade? tina yeah. >> they are saying that doctors in good faith should be covered but there are some cases were clearly, doctors practi
here's an exchange between justice sonia sotomayor or and idaho were lawyer, joshua turner, and amy coney barrett. >> when idaho law changed, to make the issue whether she's going to die or not or whether she's going to have a serious medical condition, there's a bit of daylight, by your standards, correct? >> it is very case-by-case. >> i'm kind of shocked, actually, because i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered and you are now saying...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and it was his questions followed up by amy coney barrett, ketanji brown jackson, they'll reference back to them. what was your take away? >> i was struck by i thought the extreme positions of both sides. we have donald trump arguing absolute immunity for all official from criminal prosecution from all official acts and you had the department of justice arguing zero immunity. i thought to myself how can a president function if they have no immunity whatsoever from criminal prosecution for their official acts? brett kavanaugh, who i worked for, when he was going through his confirmation process, i thought he raised some very interesting points. he talked about how troubled he was for the trajectory of the american presidency. if they were to side with the department of justices approach which is this zero immunity, this pastor, so i was also struck by the dojs argument of don't worry about it because prosecutions are not politically motivated. we take both about that kind of stuff and i thought how could you possibly say that given what we are all watching happen in new york? and secondly
and it was his questions followed up by amy coney barrett, ketanji brown jackson, they'll reference back to them. what was your take away? >> i was struck by i thought the extreme positions of both sides. we have donald trump arguing absolute immunity for all official from criminal prosecution from all official acts and you had the department of justice arguing zero immunity. i thought to myself how can a president function if they have no immunity whatsoever from criminal prosecution for...
0
0.0
Apr 28, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
conservative justice amy coney barrett joined the three female liberal justices to push back on arguments made by the lawyer representing idaho. >> when idaho law changed to make the issue whether she is going to diet or not or whether she is going to have a serious medical condition, by your standards? >> it's very case-by-case. >> i'm kind of shocked, actually. as i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of experts cases were covered. neither saying they are not? >> does dr. said that if they were exercising their medical judgment they could in good faith determine the lifesaving care is necessary. and that is my point, this is subjective. >> but some doctors couldn't? some doctors might read it a contrary conclusion. >> joining me now, the president of reproductive freedom for all. she was outside the supreme court on wednesday. right now she is getting ready to attend the white house correspondents dinner. thank you so much for coming on the show. so, were you at all shocked by the gender divide that was playing out on the court? >> you know, i wasn't shocked about th
conservative justice amy coney barrett joined the three female liberal justices to push back on arguments made by the lawyer representing idaho. >> when idaho law changed to make the issue whether she is going to diet or not or whether she is going to have a serious medical condition, by your standards? >> it's very case-by-case. >> i'm kind of shocked, actually. as i thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of experts cases were covered. neither saying they are...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
what do you make of justice amy coney barrett's line of questioning. she seemed rather skeptical of that impeachment first, and conviction on impeachment, i should say, before anyone could be prosecuted for private acts, let's say, not official acts. >> great to see you, andrea. you're correct, there was an extraordinary set of oral arguments today at the supreme court, and these questions raised by justice barrett and others of criminal prosecution of a former president raised some core questions about the future role of the office of the presidency, and you could tell that a number of justices, some of whom have served previously in the executive branch have questions and concerns that the role of federal prosecution might be used as a weapon against prosecution of former political rivals or here in this case actually president biden's department of justice is prosecuting a current rival. some questions like justice barrett's are going to end up not being central to how the court decides to resolve this case. i would expect that some questions that e
what do you make of justice amy coney barrett's line of questioning. she seemed rather skeptical of that impeachment first, and conviction on impeachment, i should say, before anyone could be prosecuted for private acts, let's say, not official acts. >> great to see you, andrea. you're correct, there was an extraordinary set of oral arguments today at the supreme court, and these questions raised by justice barrett and others of criminal prosecution of a former president raised some core...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
you even had someone like amy coney barrett who is seen as a conservative justice, she was asked questions about prosecutorial misconduct and whether or not prosecutors would go after a doctor who said in good faith i gave this person an abortion because i felt like their health was at risk. you had a number of the liberal justices say this could lead to women having real issues with their fertility in the future if they're allowed to get so sick their organs fail or they have forced hysterectomies. a really interesting case here. it's going to have a large impact. a number of cases had trigger laws. when the justices decide what they want to do with this case, it's going to have ripple effects around the country. >> polls indicate there are a growing number of people who support abortion rights at least in some circumstances, right? why against that backdrop do we have so many states passing these bans? >> look, i think this has been a polarizing issue politically for quite some time. you have, as yamiche just said, trigger laws in states that may have passed laws a long time ago that hav
you even had someone like amy coney barrett who is seen as a conservative justice, she was asked questions about prosecutorial misconduct and whether or not prosecutors would go after a doctor who said in good faith i gave this person an abortion because i felt like their health was at risk. you had a number of the liberal justices say this could lead to women having real issues with their fertility in the future if they're allowed to get so sick their organs fail or they have forced...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i think the number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh, and amy coney barrett on board with the decision that is quick and firm and can be sent back down to the lower courts to kick this trial back into motion. now, with those three conservatives, they are clearly the ones to watch. i think thomas and samuel alito have staked out a strong program position, neil gorsuch is somewhere in between. i think that for chief justice roberts especially, he probably recognizes at this point what that article pointed out, which is that team trump has pulled off the heist. the supreme court has slow walk to this case as compared to the ballot removal case from earlier this term, the nixon cases in the 1970s during watergate. they have in short, i think, that this trial will not happen before november, before election day. and, you know, when john roberts is embarrassed by a case for sometimes he goes quiet, he doesn't say anything. one thing i will be looking to is whether the chief justice mostly keeps his mouth shut or whether he tries to direct arguments toward some kind of conse
i think the number one goal will be to get john roberts, brett kavanaugh, and amy coney barrett on board with the decision that is quick and firm and can be sent back down to the lower courts to kick this trial back into motion. now, with those three conservatives, they are clearly the ones to watch. i think thomas and samuel alito have staked out a strong program position, neil gorsuch is somewhere in between. i think that for chief justice roberts especially, he probably recognizes at this...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 1
i mean, i think we heard justice amy coney barrett really, i think picking up on the dear of sediments back to the trial court, put in private acts on the prosecutorial side of the line. she even got trump's lawyer to concede. yeah. i see. let me interrupt. let me interrupt right there. just to play that soundbite so you can then explain it better to us if we could run sought 11 with justice amy coney barrett you concede the private acts, don't get immunity. >> we do. okay. and i want to know if you agree or disagree about the characterization of these acts is private petitioner turn to a private attorney was willing to spread knowingly false claims election fraud to spearhead is challenges to the election results. private as i want to jamming, we distribute the allegation, but sounds private it sounds private. petitioner conspired with another private attorney who caused the file blinken court of a verification signed by petitioner that contain false allegations to support a challenge. >> so sounds private. >> three private actors to attorneys, including those mentioned above and a po
i mean, i think we heard justice amy coney barrett really, i think picking up on the dear of sediments back to the trial court, put in private acts on the prosecutorial side of the line. she even got trump's lawyer to concede. yeah. i see. let me interrupt. let me interrupt right there. just to play that soundbite so you can then explain it better to us if we could run sought 11 with justice amy coney barrett you concede the private acts, don't get immunity. >> we do. okay. and i want to...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
KTVU
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
amy coney barrett, kind of in the middle. that's where we really need to look to see how they're going to vote. and then the conservative wing of the conservative party, i think being comfortable with allowing states to make these decisions and not wanting the federal government to be in the business of, frankly, kind of being in this lane of telling states when they can and can't outlaw abortions. >> all right. so now we look look ahead here to another important ruling on abortion from the nation's highest court. we appreciate your perspective. jessica levinson, loyola marymount school of law. good to see you. thank you. thank you. >> well, over the last few weeks here on the floor, we have been raising awareness about sexual assault and prevention. and today, law enforcement officials in san francisco are wearing denim in solidarity with sexual assault victims. denim day began 25 years ago and is observed on the last wednesday of april, which is sexual assault awareness month. today police chief bill scott and district atto
amy coney barrett, kind of in the middle. that's where we really need to look to see how they're going to vote. and then the conservative wing of the conservative party, i think being comfortable with allowing states to make these decisions and not wanting the federal government to be in the business of, frankly, kind of being in this lane of telling states when they can and can't outlaw abortions. >> all right. so now we look look ahead here to another important ruling on abortion from...
0
0.0
Apr 24, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
even some of the conservatives who are in the middle of the court, like rick kavanaugh and amy coney barrett, they seem to be a little concern there, but bottom line, the justices have already allowed this idaho ban to take effect. >> joan biskupic really intense arguments before the court. we appreciate you bringing us up to speed. let's turn now to jessica levenson. she's a law professor at loyola law school, also the host of the passing judgment podcast thanks so much for being with us, jessica, i am curious to get your perspective on the fact that idaho's attorneys are viewed that this federal reading of the law doesn't conflict with the state's law. the federal government through the solicitor general, argued that there is a conflict even though it is narrow where do you come down on this? >> well, i think this is exactly what you have to argue either if you're the government, the federal government's attorney, or the state government's attorney because that's what it all comes down to. yes. this case is all about abortion. and yes, we are back here talking about abortion after
even some of the conservatives who are in the middle of the court, like rick kavanaugh and amy coney barrett, they seem to be a little concern there, but bottom line, the justices have already allowed this idaho ban to take effect. >> joan biskupic really intense arguments before the court. we appreciate you bringing us up to speed. let's turn now to jessica levenson. she's a law professor at loyola law school, also the host of the passing judgment podcast thanks so much for being with...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i actually think at times amy coney barrett seemed hostile to the trump position. that is part of the appellate process is to play devil's advocate when you're wearing the robe. so some of these justices may surprise you sometimes. but here's the thing, they are concerned with drawing a line. they all appeared concern with where do you draw the presidential immunity line. you could come up with arguments on both sides that make each side's argument a doomsday. we've heard the s.e.a.l. team 6 example or does every president on their last day have to pardon themselves because they might be politically prosecuted? this seems relatively easy for the litigants because they're advocating for each of their suggested bright line rules. >> so the best case scenario for getting this on the calender before election day, what would you say the ruling has to be? and then give me the worst-case scenario for voters not being able to hear the underlying cases here assuming the supreme court rules in a specific and targeted way? stl here's the likely results of that and we saw hint
i actually think at times amy coney barrett seemed hostile to the trump position. that is part of the appellate process is to play devil's advocate when you're wearing the robe. so some of these justices may surprise you sometimes. but here's the thing, they are concerned with drawing a line. they all appeared concern with where do you draw the presidential immunity line. you could come up with arguments on both sides that make each side's argument a doomsday. we've heard the s.e.a.l. team 6...