encounters of the third kind. that s never been the case. see bush v gore. if this becomes a campaignish knew a very explicit way it is a fitting chapter in this weaponization of everything in our political life. i would go to the democratic voters, chuck schumer s job and the rhett of them. but i would go to to democratic voters and say the supreme court decided the election in gafr of george w. bush and gave us the iraq war. you don t think it matters? they decided to take it out of the hands of the state of florida and the states, and rule that they are going to decide 5-4 for george w. bush. they took the vote away from voters. with the gun issue, they laughed at the writing of the constitution and said it s not about malicious. everybody should have a big gun and all the ammo they can store. then they did it with money. instead of votes count dollars count. we are going to change the results of the election with dollars. and yesterday, if the democrats can t argue that the supre
conservatives. justice kennedy is a conservative but he is a northern california conservative. pete knows that, he went to stanford. northern californians are conservative on economic and partisan issues but on social issues they are live and let live. they are tolerant. they have gay friends, they think in terms of a conmow poll tan setting. that s what kennedy has been like. his decision in the lawrence case and the case involving california and that decision where he basically established marriage equality that wouldn t have happened under a regular hard nosed conservative pick by president. now trump is going for it, going for roses, to get hive hard nose ed conservatives. what choice do the democrats have. they have to use delayer to
he wrote the majority opinion in that case effectively gutting campaign finance laws by allowing corporations labor unions and others to spend unlimited amounts of money on political advocacy n. 1992, kennedy coauthored a majority opinion in a case in custom the high court ruled restrictions on access to abortion cannot place a, quote, undue burdenen on a woman s right to an abortion. this is important. in 2006 he rote wrote the opinion in which the supreme court ruled that detainees being held at guantanamo bay in cuba have the constitutional right to challenge their detention in u.s. courts. you can see, it s hard to peg this guy on one side or the other. but his role as a swing justice did not appear to be evident during his final term. in all 14 of the 5-4 decisions this term that divided alone eye deio logical lines kennedy sided with the court s conservative
point, that s why mitch mcconnell is not interested in having this vote any time after the beginning of november, right. right. he needs this conquickly because if liberals realize that possibly maybe i m overstating the case, if liberals realize that possibly abortion rights, gay rights are on the table, thises the last stand for 40 years, maybe. i have not been a person scaring people about abortion rights being taken away from them. but now once you lose kennedy you have lost that sort of moral force at the center and it s gone. the guy who did vote for the lawrence decision, voted for marriage equality, the guy who swayed the court into libertarian or let live and let live in common parlance terms, and against this gay bashing. i tell you, if he is gone, this guy we are looking at right now, the northern californian, republican northern californian kind of guy and he is gone and they replace him with a classic
he is the plaintiff in the case and a child support specialist in the illinois deputy of health care and family. mark, thank you for being with us. tell us about your first of all you will go down in history not just because you had a supreme court case come down in your favor but it was the last case decided with kennedy on the bench. you felt it would infringe upon your first amendment rights to have to have money taken out of your paycheck every monday to go toward a public service union? that s correct. because i did not get the chance or the opportunity to make a decision on my own. and i didn t have the choice as worker for state government in the public sector to say why am i paying this fee? and why am i doing this? it was mandated by illinois law, like there is in 22 other states, and 5 million other public sector workers across the country. was it a personal affront to