stakes here are high, yet the court prevents congressionally authorized action to curb carbon dioxide emissions. the court appoints itself rather than congress, the decision-maker on climate policy. i cannot think of many things more frightening. respectfully, i dissent. i think that tells us just how significant this decision is. not just in removing a power from the federal government, but removing a power over climate regulation, what the supreme court earlier, 15 years ago, described as one of the most pressing environmental issues of our time. this is, you know, in conjunction with the earlier decisions on abortion and guns, as extreme results from the u.s. supreme court as in our lifetimes, jose. and i repeat, i don t think it s right to think of it as a loss for the biden administration. it s a loss for america. it s a loss for the world. i want to bring in chief
also kept migrants out of the united states. some of the advocates i ve been speaking with down there, the immigration advocates, say they re very curious to see what happens next with title 42. even if remain in mexico is lifted, as the biden administration wants to do, there is still some concerns from that community about whether those migrants will have to still remain in mexico because of title 42. so, that s immediate reaction from the border, jose. they re very pleased with this decision. and if you would, gabe, continue on the phone speaking with your sources. i want to continue this conversation as well. alan orr, for folks watching, so there was a policy in place that kept people from coming into the united states, asking for asylum, and coming in and waiting while their process is dealt with. is this now almost an immediate step of folks that have been
clean air act of 1963. what are, continuing with joyce s explanation, what are the real repercussions of this decision? it is incredibly major. so, it s an 89-page opinion, jose. i started to read it in the last six minutes. and i will say i ll say to you just everything i ve read so far, and obviously we ll have to study it more, suggests a major, major loss for climate regulation. i don t think to think of it as a loss for biden. it s a loss for the federal government s ability to regulate climate change in a 6-3 fully-throated decision by the chief justice. just to give you a sense of how dangerous and scary the decision is, let me read to you the last words of justice kagan s dissent in the case. she says, quote, the subject matter of the regulation here makes the court s intervention all the more troubling. whatever else this court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change. and let s say the obvious, the
between private and public can help these individuals get to places they need to be. it s important as americans that all these people coming to the southern border are not immigrants. they re brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles of citizens of the united states and we can do better. i thank you all very much for being with us this mornin. i want to bring in senator from california, a member of the judiciary committee. on this day where there s been two major decisions from the supreme court. i want to start with these two decisions. the epa decision and the decision on remain in mexico. how do you see things? well, obviously, a lot of big news happening today, jose. good to be back with you. look, the decision on the remain in mexico program, unexpected, but we will take it and let it serve as a reminder as the panel was discussing, congress needs to act.
jose, we visited reynoso, mexico, last year. there was a tent city that had sprung up. at the time there were hundreds of people in that camp. it continued to grow larger over the last few months. and last month, on may 3rd, that camp in reynoso, mexico, was actually taken down. there have been other shelters that have sprung up in reynoso, mexico, to handle this unflux of migrants. we visited another migrant camp last winter in december in tijuana, mexico. and that camp, again, had been seeing this influx of migrants. i spoke with another organization a few minutes ago, jose, as pete was going through that ruling. this was team brownsville, another organization, ngo that helps migrants on the other side of the border. he said that this is very significant. he was also thrilled about this ruling. jose, as one of your previous guests just said, there is still the issue of title 42. and title 42 policy that was put in place during the pandemic.