. >> the forced birth side cites plessy. overturning roe would be like the overturning of plessy. they are establishing the rules plessy was citing. you can't ride on this bus. what do you make of this constant lean on plessy as their excuse and they're trying to put-back the same states rights plessy was talking about. >> no, melissa. >> i think it's absolutely ironic. it's exactly as you say. plessy upholds whether to be a system of apartheid or not. this is returning to the states to be a system of reproductive apartheid or not. it is being cast this is the ground that will overrule the constitutional ruling that was plessy/roe versus wade. >> let's play hillary clinton. hillary clinton on this opinion. here's what she said. >> this opinion is dark, it is incredibly dangerous and it is not just about a woman's right to choose, it is about much more than that. any american who says, look, i'm not a woman. this doesn't affect me. i'm not black, that doesn't affect me. i'm not gay, that doesn't affect me. once you allow this kind of extreme power to take hold, you have no idea who

board of education was a landmark ruling overruling a case called plessy versus ferguson which established the sameful separate but equal doctrine between blacks and whites in public transportation and public schools. brown said that's fundamentally discriminate yoar and will -- discriminating and will not stand because it does not meet the constitutional standards. it's tough today to imagine what our country would look like had the supreme court not reached its decision in brown nearly 70 years ago. classrooms, restrooms, water fountains, and even health care facilities would be designated by race. i'm confident i can speak for everyone in this chamber when i say thank goodness the court overturned plessy v. ferguson and reached the ruling that it did in brown v. board of education. there are more modern examples where the court overruled precedent like lawrence v. texas. it was overruled in 2003 by the precedent established by bowers v. hardwick. it made it a crime to engage in same-sex conduct. so without a doubt, the court's decision to overturn its precedents has altered our society,

brown v board of education was a landmark ruling overruling plessy versus ferguson thatst established this shameful separate but equal doctrine between blacks and whites in public transportation and public schools. brown said that is fundamentally discriminatory and will not stand because it doesn't meet the constitutional standards but it's tough today to imagine what the country would look like and the supreme court not reached its decision nearly 70 years ago. classrooms,ve restrooms, even healthcare facilities would be designated by race. i'm confident i can speak for everyone in the chamber when i say thank goodness the court overturned plessy versus ferguson and reached the ruling that it did. the more modern examples were the court overruled warrants like texas was overruled in 2003 and established by bowers versus harwood which made it a crime to engage in same-sex conduct. without a doubt the decision to overturn has altered our society and i've suggested it's changed our society for the better in many of those instances. i realize given our political and ideological preferen

in closing i would say in plessy versus ferguson, there is no cast system here. the homeless in our country -- the humblest in our country, it took 58 years for the court to recognize those realities and that is the greatest decision this court has ever reached. we are running on 50 years of roe, it has inflicted damage upon our country and will take innumerable human lives unless this court overrules it. we ask you to uphold the state's a quorum call. the presiding officer: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum be dispensed with. mr. schumer: this is a dark and disturbing morning for america. last night, a report disclosed that a conservative majority of the supreme court is ready to overturn roe v. wade and overturning decades of precedent affirming a woman's right for an abortion. if this happens, the supreme court is going to restrict the rights on women over the past 50 years. under this decision, our children will have less rights

in closing i would say in plessy versus ferguson, there is no cast system here. the homeless in our country -- the humblest in our country, it took 58 years for the court to recognize those realities and that is the greatest decision this court has ever reached. we are running on 50 years of roe, it has inflicted damage upon our country and will take innumerable human lives unless this court overrules it. we ask you to uphold the state's law. >> the case if submitted -- is submitted. >> chuck schumer is joined by democrats where they spoke about the draft supreme court decision overturning roe v. wade.

board of education overturned plessy putting an into racially segregated schools. just as it appears now poised to overturn the erroneous decisions in roe and in casey. the opinion is exceptionally well reasoned, thorough, and grounded in the constitution. it also means that in states across our country, including in my home state of utah, hundreds of thousands of unborn children, children who could not be protected by state law due to restrictions placed on them by an invented nonexistent constitutional doctrine created out of whole cloth out of roe and casey now with some chance of being protected. depending of course on which decision-makers in which states make which decisions regarding the protection of human life. as americans, we must not, we can never forget what's at stake. if this majority decision stands, those who recognize the sanctity of human life, like myselfy and like the majority of utahns, will have much to celebrate, but we must also recognize that this is not the in of this chapter in american history. the efforts of the last half-century have

he's making a plessy ruling almost spot on and then trying to disguise himself as the hero, throwing that cape on yourself does not make you a hero, sir, it makes you a thief. alexis mcgill johnson, thanks for being here. up next, it's primary state including in nebraska where the trump candidate for governor is accused of being a serial gopro and he should fit in just fine. and two republicans vying to be the top election officials, they believe the big lie and ted cruz is a horrible person. don't take from me. ask the parents of trevor reed who was recently released from russia no thanks to ted and america's top officials says pete will be not be satisfied, even if he takes control of the donbas region. what happens after that? "the reidout" continues after this. appens after that? "theei rdout" continues after this the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know wher

. >> was plessies for ferguson good law. >> no. >> slavery. did not commit any offendses. three supreme court decisions, overturned. >> correct. infamous decisions that took the court a long time to correct, but at least the court did it. and in one of the footnotes in draft opinion, justice alito points to 25 cases. where the court has overruled its prior precedent and over 150 such examples, the court of has a duty to get it right, and overrule that which it believe its wrong. >> in argument that roe has been in place for 49 years, is not that effective is roe is not constitutionally based. supreme court decision in my view is not modest. they didn't take a position, they said, hands off. somehow that is a radical decision attacking women's right, every woman in america, having her rights attacked. what do you make of that. >> there is a terrible distortion of what the draft opinions says, it is a restoration, saying we were wrong in roe v. wade taking the calderon out of debate. the democrat demonstrate other day, they don't believe in roe v. wade either, they don't bel

world war ii and the 1896 decision that blessed racial segregation under the rule separate but equal, plessy versus ferguson. just pull this thread a little more for our viewers in helping us understand the significance of alito's phrase, egregiously wrong. >> well, what he's trying to do in this opinion and part of the reason that i think it is so forceful and so brutal in its assault on the roe v. wade precedent is he's trying to build up ahead of steam here to say that this isn't just a precedent that was wrong. this is a precedent that the court got so terribly and in his word, egregiously wrong that we should disregard the usual policy of respecting precedence and throw it out the window. and what is very interesting about this alito opinion and i think probably challenging to a lot of people who read it is, you know, he's drawing a direct line to plessy versus ferguson. he's essentially saying roe v. wade was as wrong as the decision that said that segregation, legal segregation could be carried on between the races in the united states, and so why is he doing that? again, it's because

in closing i would say in plessy versus ferguson, there is no cast system here. the homeless in our country -- the humblest in our country, it took 58 years for the court to recognize those realities and that is the greatest decision this court has ever reached. we are running on 50 years of roe, it has inflicted damage upon our country and will take innumerable human lives unless this court overrules it. we ask you to uphold the state's law. >> the case if submitted -- is submitted. >> chuck schumer is joined by democrats where they spoke about the draft supreme court decision overturning roe v. wade. >> [indiscernible] >> good morning, i am joined by many of my colleagues from the democratic caucus. this is a dark and disturbing day for america. last night, a report came out that a conservative majority on the united states supreme court is ready to overturn roe v. wade and uproot the gates of precedent affirming -- uproot decades of precedent affirming abortion. it is hard not to feel angry, troubled, and disturbed about what overturning this will do to across

. >> was plessy versus ferguson good law. >> no. >> >> no slavery, segregation, and internment of japanese americans, inconfident, 3 supreme court decisions. all of which have been overturned. >> that is correct. infamous decisions that took the court a long time to correct, but at least the court evenly did it and in one of footnotes in draft opinion, justice alito points to 25 cases where the court has overruled the prior precedent and there are over 150 examples. the court has a duty to get it right. and to overrule that which it believes it wrong. mark: an argument that roe has been in place for 49 years. an that effective if it is not constitutionaly based. the supreme court decision in my view this modest, they didn't take a position, they said, that is not our job, there is nothing in federal constitution, they said, hands off. and somehow that is a radical decision to attack women's right, every woman in america is having her right attack. >> there has been a terrible distortion of what the draft opinions said. it is a restoration, saying we were wrong in roe v. wade taking this is

if something is wrong, plessy versus ferguson -- ferguson was wrong. it doesn't matter how many years it was in effect and you need to overturn it and give the rights back to the people. we don't have a federal right on death penalties, do we? we have states that have different laws on death penalties. why can't we have different state rights on abortion? host: what that's neil gorse itch didn't from brett kavanaugh or amy coney barrett, all three of them are new. caller: gorsuch has been there enough and i have seen him line up with alito and thomas to say he's one of the three clear originalist thinkers on the court. host: so you judge your supreme courts by whether they vote originalist or not originalist? caller: i do. that's the proper principled way to interpret the institution and federal laws. there's no such thing as a living constitution. it's clear, if you want to change laws or the constitution, there's an avenue to do that. these callers who are so perturbed go and use the democratic process and either get an amendment to the constitution

if something is wrong, plessy versus ferguson -- ferguson was wrong. it doesn't matter how many years it was in effect and you need to overturn it and give the rights back to the people. we don't have a federal right on death penalties, do we? we have states that have different laws on death penalties. why can't we have different state rights on abortion? host: what that's neil gorse itch didn't from brett kavanaugh or amy coney barrett, all three of them are new. caller: gorsuch has been there enough and i have seen him line up with alito and thomas to say he's one of the three clear originalist thinkers on the court. host: so you judge your supreme courts by whether they vote originalist or not originalist? caller: i do. that's the proper principled way to interpret the institution and federal laws. there's no such thing as a living constitution. it's clear, if you want to change laws or the constitution, there's an avenue to do that. these callers who are so perturbed go and use the democratic process and either get an amendment to the constitution

that's to be equated with the overturning of a decision that was clearly wrong from the get-go like plessy v. ferguson is frankly offensive. >> i want to hear from the three trump justices during their confirmation hearing. here it is. >> is roe a super precedent? >> how would you define super precedent? and i'm answering a lot of questions about roe indicates that roe doesn't fall in that category, and scholars across the spectrum say that doesn't mean roe should be overruled but descriptively it's not a case everyone has accepted. >> as a judge it is an important precedent of the supreme court. by it, i mean roe v. wade and planned parenthood versus casey, been reaffirmed many times, casey is precedent on precedent, which itself is an important factor. >> senator, as the book explains, the supreme court of the united states is held in roe v. wade that a fetus is not a person for the purposes of the 14th amendment, and the book explains that. >> do you accept that? >> that's the law of the land. i accept the law of the land, senator, yes. >> steve, i want to get your response to that, but

court has always worked correcting its own past mistakes overturning roe v wade is no different than plessy versus ferguson with separate but equal later overturned by brown versus board of education. but there is a profound difference it appears that never before in the history of america has a supreme court decision abandoned law that made americans less free. never and taking the serious step to overturn a law it has done so to expand freedom and opportunity now to eliminate but the activists of the antitrust majority is unprecedented radical and dangerous. here's another fact republican lawmakers hope you don't notice is not just the right to abortion the draft opinion questions the very existence iand the right to privacy and enumerated rights explicitly mentioned in the constitution must be deeply rooted in us history to be recognized as a constitutional right. who decides what is deeply rooted in history and tradition? the court decision establishes marriage equality only seven years ago with the courts reactionary majority next on the chopping block what about the right to contracep

they claim overturning roe is no different than the supreme court overturning plessy versus ferguson, a decision that gave the odious fiction of separate but equal. it was later overturned by brown versus the board of education. there is a profound difference, it appears never before in the history of america has the supreme court decision abandoned lot made americans less free, never. in the past when the court has taken a serious step of overturning some law it has done so to expand opportunity, not aluminate it. the activist anti-choice majority in this court would do is unprecedented, radical and dangerous. here's another fact republican lawmakers hope you won't notice, it is not just the right to abortion that is in jeopardy. justice alito's draft opinion questions the very existence of the right to privacy, argues enumerated rights, rights not expressly mentioned in the constitution, not expressly mentioned in the constitution must be deeply rooted in us history and tradition to be recognized as a constitutional right. who decides what is deeply rooted in history and tradition?

but a, you know, my father is here as i don't know for him thus, plessy. i guess with a miracle, but there was no grief for my son christiano on the letter on there. whenever michael sal was, there is no where i can go and nothing although no where i can set up an altar for him or place across e. yes, he's done with all of but this is what it's like for all of us parents, maddie sta supplies. none of us really believe that our children are dead. then we're still sick, was then where to put a on september of 2014 for a 3 kids disappear in mexico. and i tried to not cheat. i tried to, i don't care. okay, that happened there. so they are there john alleys. there are there people someone have to take care about with what i start to see that the ga i'm. is that the say really ridiculous. it bought this is that by the way it happened. i started to see some contradictions about the witness. i start to investigate and that this them a with this said las or did some was everywhere. so his pictures were everywhere and they've been living with this pain. and they, al

they claim overturning roe is no different than overturning plessy versus ferguson which gave us the affection of separate but equal and was lateroverturned brown versus board of education . but there is a profound difference. it appears never before in the history of america has the supreme court decision abandoned settled law that made americans. never. in the past when the court has taken the serious step of overturningthe law it's done so to expand freedom, expand opportunity , not eliminateit . with the activist antitrust majority on this would do is unprecedented, radical and dangerous. here's another fact republican lawmakers are hoping you won't notice. it's not just the right to abortion that's in jeopardy. justice alito's draft opinion questions right to privacy. it argues that enumerated rights that is reached not explicitly in theconstitution , unenumerated rights must be deeply rooted in us history and tradition in order to be recognized as a constitutional right r. who decides what is deeply rooted in history and e tradition? the courts over gravelle versus hodges decis

just like he says this is the brown versus the board of investigation, this case is the plessy for women. >> you're talk about the distinction between the case that established quality and the original case that tried to say separate but equal. >> exactly, because that case is the one that courts tried to say -- to people of color. in this one, the court said states have the fundamental -- those are the two cases that should be equated, not brown in this decision. >> juanita, i'm curious your decision. as caroline mentions, this can evolve a little, but this is the blueprint that five agreed to in february. justice alito got the assignment, and he wrote it and he claims in here doing this to women in america would be like their brown v. board. your reaction? >> i wrote just last week that the republicans and evangelical right will be waiting for the green light from the supreme court to do full bans. i feel like this draft opinion is that green light. this is what they have been waiting for. decades with the coordinated effort to get federal society approved justices on the bench, with t

so, senator graham is cool with the "dred scott" decision that said black people are property, "plessy v. ferguson" that established jim crow segregation, and "buck v. bell," which said it was okay to sterilize the mentally ill. i'm guessing, to lindsay graham, the saddest part of a funeral is when they run out of lemon bars. as usual, fox news was committed to not reporting the news and instead reporting spin the leaked draft into a win for democrats. >> this is a godsend for a lot of democratic candidates. >> democrats clearly using this for the midterms. they don't want to talk about inflation. they want to talk abortion. >> it's very curious to me that the democrats weren't talking about it until today. >> stephen: yeah, typically, people wait until something happens to talk about it. ( laughter ) nobody on the "titanic" was complaining about icebergs when they left the harbor. but, then about halfway through, it was, "iceberg dead ahead" this, and "never let go... glug, glug, glug" that. ( applause ) i don't know! one republican took a break from attacking the leaker to vilify wom

and then plessy and lochner would still be the law and all the subject to evaluation of the court so the ability to review is important and that's another thing and then to strip away protection that has been made particularly with the starry decisiveness thatle they respect to that. >> and then to be equally susceptible as plessy versus ferguson. >> one of the things we have not talked about in just a couple years ago and then to further uphold the principles of roe vs wade. >> i yield back my time has expired. >> i want to think our witnessess it has been challenging and then to in fact completely ignore how difficult it is it's more difficult to listen to them of how women should plan their future and that they believe they should be the ones to stand between a woman and her doctor. it is shockinge to me and then the dark days to return women into. want to share a story briefly. once the supreme court draft was made public, and incredible mother approached me to share her story of abortion she is pregnant with her third child they bought a could then prepare the room and were fort

i point to plessy, decision involving japanese internment camps. it's different because of the amount of times it's been reaffirmed by society on these and the connective tissue being fundamental rights which i remind people, fundamental rights are following within a zone of privacy where the government ought not to be able to interfere. it runs the gammet from who you can love, who you can marry, who you can be in a relationship with. if those begin to chip away, he is trying to wall off and only look at abortion. it's hard to unring that bell. if you give a mouse a cookie, it's going to ask for a whole lot more. >> what is going to happen when the final ruling drops likely at the end of next month? is there still the possibility, the possibility that roe take a big hit but isn't totally over turned? >> that's always a possibility. remember, this leaked draft memo was drafted back in february. a lot could happen. i remind people it's may. it could be that only a couple eyes are going to be removed and t's uncrossed. it could very well be but the w

due process cases like board -- brown versus board of education board of education that overturned plessy v. ferguson separate but equal. they were very clear. especially amy coney barrett. she was cleared to say stare decisis means that the courts under us have to respect our decision is a supreme court, the highest court in the land. and thus it is super due process, unless it is like brown versus board of education where you cannot separate a white and black children then we can decide based on what comes before us. >> geraldo: five have three daughters in the state of ohio in the fetal heartbeat law that will now be in that place, it will not be the law of the state of ohio. what am i going to tell my daughters now? that they don't have control over their body? that they can't make those choices for themselves? that's old man scratching his belly and some other state is going to say that -- >> amy coney barrett is not an old man. >> let's listen to some media responses to all of this if we could. >> the founding fathers didn't recognized abortion is a fundamental right because the fou

a price that has to be paid obviously brown versus board of education is leading example overruling plessy versus ferguson the west coast hotel case over ruling the lochner era decisions those those were to a certain extent jolts to the legal system and the arguments against them had a lot to do with stability and predictability, but the other arguments that intervening precedence had eroded the authority of those cases that those precedents that they were that were overruled had proved unworkable carrying the day in those cases. one final citation from the joint opinion in row quote after nearly 20 years of litigation in rose wake we are satisfied that the immediate question is not the soundness of rose resolution of the issue. but the presidential force that must be accorded. to it's holding. do you think the court the joint opinion is correct? an elevating precedential force even above the specific holding of the case. that is the general approach when you're considering starry decisis. it's the the notion that it's not enough that you might think that the precedent is flawed that there

plessy vs. ferguson. they don't ask people like that. everybody knows that's settled law under our constitution. the corrupt decision was plessy, not brown. but roe v. wade is cruchings the supreme court. this is why we have unalienable rights and the majority should never rule in all cases. >> ainsley: mark, as far as the leaker is concerned. obviously it was unethical for this person to do this. but was it illegal in law school would have you learned this would have been illegal and if so does this person go to court after the fbi investigates? does this person go before congress? >> he says book tour i'm not aware of a federal criminal statute the people who do this for a living they will look. maybe accuse them of trespassing or parading at the supreme court. that might be a good try but nonetheless, no. it's ethical if they are a member of the bar they will be disbarred. they don't care that calculation was already made. again, they will be viewed by the left the pelosis and shiewrms not as do i having the institution. making it inc

if you trace it back in recent opinions the court, that's the kind of thing that debuts to overrule plessy versus ferguson, in terms of immigration. he's tried to linked it to the past where the court has said, you know, we got an issue deeply, deeply wrong. alito is saying we did it again. and it looks like they might have a number of conservative allies on the court to make that prevailing opinion. votes change. it is possible to see votes change and we've seen that in high-profile cases. >> yes, votes could change. but words could change. some of this language could change in ways that does substantively alter perhaps the meaning of all of this. there are those looking at this, josh, again, raising questions about, well, is this ruling, as written in this draft, does it only have an impact on abortion? or could it have an impact on other decisions decided from the '60s, really in the '60s and the '70s that found a certain right to privacy, starting were with contraception or interracial marriage. alito seemed to anticipate that criticism, didn't he? >> right, he tries to rim abortion. a

with the life issue, and all of those other issues -- many previous precedents have been overturned, plessy v. ferguson is a case in point. look, talking about what is crazy making, what's crazy is we have some states, virginia, for example, that allows abortion, taking of a life up to the third trimester. i mean, the maybe is almost born and they're fine with aborting it. >> but that's where the country lives, in the middle. it's not the extreme. >> save a woman's right. this is insane. >> hold on, i'll let you make a point. i think most of the country believes there should be restrictions on abortions, the life of a mother should be included in that, that it should be allowed but that is not what is happening here. going on, sorry, i'll let you make your point. >> the vast majority of abortions happen within the first eight weeks, you know, this is always taking us off into this other part of where it's dealing with like an 1% of abortions. it's not what we should be talking about. i want to get back to what you said, alice, and this is the point i was trying to make with the tweet that d

you mentioned the book on plessy, i read that in the -- >> yeah. that's right. >> how is there gets more specific about it, right? it's not until jim crow gets linked with disenfranchisement that it becomes something. >> i think that's absolutely right. yeah, i think it makes sense to see the 30 years after emancipation as something like a period of flux. i guess you could call it something like -- it was an open question. what the terms were going to be, the south was great constructed, but lack citizenship was consolidated. especially in relation to the dominant plantation economy in the south. these things just got work through overtime. >> he made the point earlier about what was at stake for the merchant landlord merchant class and the late 19th century that would cause them suddenly to consolidate around disfranchised meant. it wasn't just the large questions of who's going to pay for schools. even down at the local level, i remember reading a study of lynching that said that lynchings didn't happen if the sheriff showed up. >> [laughs] >> th

you know, we saw, you know, back in 1896, plessy versus plerg son overturned brown v. board of education declaring separate but equal unconstitutional. this would be momentous. this would be earth shattering. and you know what anderson? we're already seeing states across the country, and particular in oklahoma, in florida, even arizona, we're seeing these states already starting to change their abortion laws. oklahoma has outlawed abortion. that goes into effect in august. they're expecting that the supreme court will overturn roe v. wade. so, these states are already taking action on what they expected from this court. and anderson, tonight it appears, based on what politico says is a draft opinion, it appears that the supreme court has five justices -- that is enough -- who have voted to overturn roe v. wade. no official announcement from the court, but politico saying they have this draft opinion, which indicates what the court will eventually announce here. anderson. >> and jessica, if that is in fact the ruling of the court, it would then be up to each state to de

when brown overruled plessy, they were granting additional equal rights. when lawrence overruled bowers, they granted liberty rights. here, the court is taking away from rights. it is a stunning change. there is a sense that we have been marching forward towards more equality, more liberty, more justice in a good way. but this is a slide backwards. our daughters, will have less rights than we do. take a minute to think about that. that is extraordinary. the only thing that has changed, really are the three trump appointees that joined the bench, corsica, kavanaugh and amy coney barrett. it really dramatically shifted the court to the hard right here. i think there are some individuals that watch those hearings and heard those nominees talk about roe and casey as settled and well established precedent, who probably are feeling that some of those statements were disingenuous right now. assuming that the court's decision when it is handed down in june will look a lot like this leak draft. yes, i do think this will shake the public's confidence in the supreme

tia: " songs and really exciting songs and if you get a chance, do go a chance, du plessis and any issue bc on the big screen. 0n the subject of which about my reissue of the week and i hope you are the same way about this, cataract is 50 years old. i this, cataract is 50 years old. i just cannot believe this. was up to me before we came in and... 50! i cannot recall a semisolid but here is a chance. cannot recall a semisolid but here is a chance-— is a chance. back in selecting a miss a google _ is a chance. back in selecting a miss a google where _ is a chance. back in selecting a miss a google where you i is a chance. back in selecting a miss a google where you live i miss a google where you live and whether cabarets playing and if you've only ever seen cabaret on the television and both public will because it was in situm mid—50 years ago, go see on the big screen. it's a brilliant film, the musical people who don't like musicals because all the numbers happen, there's a reason for it and have people bursting into song, its political and about the rise of nazism and a fantastic p

they've done it a lot in the civil rights cases in plessy versus ferguson, overturned by brown, the super precedent cases. so as a lawyer admitted to the bar of the supreme court i am disturbed by the court not honoring that stare decisis, let the decision stand. that's number one. number two, back to liberty, alice is a wonderful woman, a friend, we are both pro life, but if you are going to be out here protesting about masks and saying that a mask impinges upon your liberty as an american and that it is something that is so grave that in the case of michigan they wanted to take out the governor of michigan because she was impinging upon their liberty asking them to wear a mask, how can you then not extend that to a woman, brianna, and the care of her own health and her own body and the decisions about what to do with the pregnancy. and i think this is where conservatives are getting into trouble, they are inconsistent. there's some hypocrisy going on. for me personally pro life sophia nelson wouldn't have an abortion. i don't agree with it. but another woman can make a different choice

. >> that's what some conservative justices have likened to, plessy versus ferguson, they have written those decisions were so wrong that precedence doesn't apply. >> that's right. but they do overrule them now and then. it is not unprecedented in the court's history to overrule precedent. but once you start overruling precedent on a regular basis, you sacrifice the constitutional respect that the court has. that's the risk that they run. >> you were talking about whether or not by banning or overturning roe v. wade basically alito is opening the door to other things. he writes, the abortion right is also critically different from any other right that this court has held to fall in the 14th amendment's protection of liberty. he writes this, in this case, a source anonymous with privacy, the idea of a constitutional right to privacy since the 1960s has protected things like interracial marriage, contraception, recently same sex marriage, he seems to be writing abortion is different, but -- >> but, once you start eviscerating the right to privacy, you can't control where it necessarily g

even after the civil war, and the reconstruction era, the court articulated american apartheid in plessy versus ferguson, approving jim crow arrangements throughout most of the country. so there was that brief few decades -- now the roberts court, the supreme court has returned to that traditional baseline. and all it means to me, at least in my mind, and made a liam speaking as a person in politics. but we need to turn out the vote like we've never turned out the vote before, the people need to stand up and defend democratic institutions and the rights of the people, because a supreme court is certainly not doing anything for us. >> congressman raskin, let me ask you a question that i posed to them josh gerstein, the reporter about the story of the top of the hour. from the ruling, the way that it is written, and with the caveat that this is what appears to be a first draft opinion and, it will likely go through many other iterations in lots of changes, before we ultimately get the ruling, but based on what we've got, there's a remarkable leak of a first draft, and the way that justice

i feel like i know kind of how it feels when plessy ferguson went down. came down the same. we're doing this. can't stop us. we're the elites and we rule you. something else. thank you very much. always great to talk with you. still ahead, chilling new details on the corrupt plot to overturn the 2020 election and how extreme party gerrymandering now poses a serious threat to american democracy. former u.s. attorney general eric holder joins me next. we're back after this. holder jx we're back after this. manhood looks different from guy to guy. but when yours bends in a different direction, you might feel bothered by it. so talk to a urologist. because a bend in your erection might be peyronie's disease or pd. it's a condition that involves a buildup of scar tissue. but, it's treatable. xiaflex is the only fda- approved nonsurgical treatment for appropriate adult men with peyronie's disease. along with daily penile stretching and straightening exercises, xiaflex has been proven to help gradually reduce the bend. don't receive if the treatment area involves your urethra, or i