national political reporter. that is our show for tonight. time for the last word with lawrence o donnell. lawrence, i m gobsmacked by some of these numbers. i m just gonna leave it to you while i scratch my head. ali, you know that thing happens once in a while where one of our great guests really is getting warmed up right when we have to go to commercial break because that s life on commercial television? that happened last week with yale professor david blight, who is an expert on the 14th amendment. he knows everything about how it came to be, the congressional debate about it. we are bringing him back tonight to finish his thoughts about that. that is worth watching because the most important amendment nobody ever thought about six months ago, and this is worth staying and listening to. certainly not thought about in this context. and he will follow harvard law professor laurence tribe, also an expert on constitutional law and the 14th amendment, who will give us
lawrence, i m gobsmacked by some of these numbers. i m just gonna leave it to you while i scratch my head. aly you , know that thing happens once in awhile where one of our great guests guests really is getting warmed up right when we have to go to commercial break because that s life on commercial television. that happened last week with yale professor david blight, who is an expert on the 14th amendment. he knows everything about how it came to be, the congressional debate about it. we are bringing back tonight finishes thoughts about that. that is worth watching because the most important amendment nobody ever thought about six months ago, and this is worth staying and listening to. certainly not in this context. and he will follow harvard law professor laurence tribe, also an expert on constitutional law and the 14th amendment, who will give us his view of how the 14th amendment, how it has the power to keep donald trump off the ballot in some states. i look forw
apply for it is running out. the amicus briefs, harry litman, those filed in addition to the briefed by the parties in this very important appeals hearing in washington d. c. and today the court said we want to hear from both sides about these amicus briefs. the one that has the most vivid piece that does not appear in jack smith s pleadings is the amicus brief saying the appeals court doesn t even have jurist diction over this at this stage. what is your assessment of what we see in these amicus briefs and the pieces of them that the appeals court would be most interested in? there are now four. we just ran the gamut from reinforcing the arguments with very eminent parties to now there s a new one that actually says jack smith is an unconstitutional officer in the first place. but lawrence, i think the one you mentioned really bears
to the briefed by the parties in this very important appeals hearing in washington d.c. and today the court said we want to hear from both sides about these amicus briefs. the one that has the most vivid piece that does not appear through jacks myths pleadings is the amicus brief saying the appeals court doesn t even have jurist diction over this at this stage. what is your assessment of what we see in these amicus briefs and the pieces of them that the appeals court would be most interested in? there are now four. we just ran the gamut from reinforcing the arguments with very eminent parties to now there s a new one that actually says jack smith is an unconstitutional officer in the first place. but lawrence, i think the one you mentioned really bears watching. what it says is that the test
people who want to come here, work hard, believe in the american ideal and american values. one of the leaders of the movement has no credibility in my eyes largely because of the sanctuary status of los angeles. i would posit a story standard to ram american hispanic citizen who was killed in cold load by an illegal alien who was deported five times and yet allowed to again hide in plain sight because los angeles county is a century city jurist diction. i would say ditch her house in order about giving dangerous people away from the concerned citizens then we can worry. why are we focusing? why is this organization focusing on sanctuary cities? as if i ll just express, legal immigration is awesome. we want die. that is what makes america america. fourth of july were at a naturalization ceremony. that s what we do. why are they poking the bear