here? you mentioned that abortion rights activists might have a narrow pathway here but what might happen next? ., , ., , ., next? one of the people involved in the abortion next? one of the people involved in the abortion providers next? one of the people involved in the abortion providers case - next? one of the people involved in the abortion providers case and - next? one of the people involved in the abortion providers case and we | the abortion providers case and we don t know what s going to happen so they will pursue their case and federal court and i believe that can be appealed so there might be a of appeals processes and you could rule out this might not come in front of the supreme court again so that s why abortion rights activists are seeing this as a narrow or a minor victory. it s happening in a context also where the supreme court is hearing another case on abortion rights. this has to do with a mississippi law that directly challenges the constitutional right to a
is this. they ve had one positive legal ruling here, indicative of where this would head if they were to wait. but is there any sign that they re willing to wait? yeah, not at all i would say, john. i would say this court ruling is really it s sort of a it s a victory for democrats but without that prize. i mean, we re not going to see we re unlikely to see mcgahn testifying on capitol hill in the next few weeks because of these appeals processes. yes, the judge was clearly signaling to other witnesses she believed they had to testify. but i mean, again, the reality is their lawyers are already arguing there s a distinction between various cases. obviously everybody s watching john bolton right now because he has sort of been he has told associates he was really uncomfortable and unhappy with what he saw happening in ukraine and has made it clear that he has firsthand information that is relevant to this investigation that lawmakers are doing on the impeachment inquiry regard
exhausted all of their appeals processes and they expect that they re going to be able to start these executions in december. now, this is a process that began at the beginning of the trump administration under jeff sessions, the attorney general at the time, and he ordered that the bureau of prisons to look into how to be able to restart federal executions. there s been a whole controversy over the protocols, especially the drugs that are used to put federal to put people to death under the death penalty. states have started using a new protocol. and so what the feds are doing now under this new order from bill barr, the new attorney general, is they re going to adopt century the same protocol that s being used in georgia and other states that have resumed executions. the obama administration has essentially just given up on using any of these. so we expect that in december we re going to get the first of these new federal executions, barring of course any new legal appeals that may
don t open the door. know your rights. don t speak to them. don t sign anything. report and alert people when the raids come. i m amazed that somebody that ran for the presidency of the united states that was willing to promise to uphold the laws of the united states, the constitution of the united states is now actively helping people avoid justifiable. these people have already been ordered deported they have already exhausted all of their appeals processes through the court system. they are not supposed to be here. they are illegally here and she is now helping them to continue to break the laws and i don t understand how the left continues to move further and further left in opposition to what the american public wants. if we want to become like guatemala, el salvador and honduras. then let s stop enforcing the laws. they have strict laws in this country. the reason why they are in the situation that they re
appeals court argument. why not? well, it s not that it couldn t be used. it s just it s not binding. federal district courts that are addressing the same issue, don t bind other courts in different jurs dicks. the court in boston is part of the first circuit and the court in washington state is part of the ninth circuit. they have different appeals processes. one goes to the appeals court in boston. the other goes to the appeals court in san francisco. ultimately they all go to the supreme court. one reason we have a supreme court is that it settles disagreements among these different courts, and that s why what president trump, i guess, was referring to is that the courts are not binding on etch auto other. i m going to have you stand by, and pamela, i want you to stand by as well in case we get that decision from the ninth