Welcome to the Journal Editorial Report im Paul Gigot as heads into the final stretch a new cnn shows they are in a tight race in six Battle Ground states with Vice President Kamala Harris leading among michigan and former Donald Trump ahead in arizona. Two are nearly even in Georgia And Nevada and dead heat in all important State Of Pennsylvania where the candidates are set to meet next week in a high Stakes Debate that could set the tone for the final eight weeks of the campaign. So what should we expect when the two face off on tuesday in philadelphia . Lets ask Wall Street Journal Columnist Fox News contributor karl rove. Karl, welcome good to see you as always. So we have the big Harris Surge for several weeks after she got in. A lot of talk now that maybe that momentum has stopped. And maybe trump has stopped her surge and it is now pretty even. What do you think . Where are we . First of all it is not a very big bump historically because this race is remains tight. It looks like
Bret good evening, welcome to washington. Im bret baier. Breaking tonight, Special Counsel jack smith has filed a reworked indictment in his election interference case against former president donald trump, the new filing keeps the same criminal charges but narrows the allegations against the former president following that Supreme Court opinion on broad immunity on former president s. So what about this . What goes on from here . Correspondent david spunt has details from the Justice Department tonight. Good evening, david. Bret, good evening to you. This is the new indictment of president donald trump, the former president still has the same four core charges from when he was indicted last year. But, as you mentioned, it narrows some of the language. The language is a little bit tighter and it takes out mentions of certain people that Special Counsel jack smith felt that he could not move forward if he wanted to be successful in court. Something else to point out, a brand new grand j
Chilled from participating in the enumeration. But that counting is now over and whatever chill ever existed has odd thawed. Appellees therefore pivot to possible future injuries but as of this morning career experts at the Census Bureau confirmed with me that they still dont know even roughly how many illegal aliens they will be able to identify, let alone how their number and geographic concentration may affect apportionment. And if they dont know, certainly the otheparties of the case do not david the court should therefore follow the course charted out by the District Court judge last week, vacate the judgment bel, allow the sectary to comply with the memorandum, and allow any effect on apportionnt to be litigated as it normally would be. Is no merits, there procedural problem with the memorandum. The directionmade in two sets of numbers to decide the numbers being the real fight is sstantive, over how much discretion a president has. Text, history, and president are all clear abou
Justice and the associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. All persons having business for the honorable Supreme Court of the United States are advised to give their attention for the court is now sitting. God save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear argument first this morning in case trump vs. New york. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court, this case should be over. Thatistrict court held illegal aliens would be shielded from her dissipating in the enumeration. But that is now over, and whatever existed has thawed. They pivoted therefore to possible future injuries but as of this very morning, career experts at the Census Bureau confirmed with me that they still dont know even roughly how many illegal aliens they would be able to identify, let alone how their number and geographic concentration might affect the course of it. And if they dont know, certainly the other parties in this case do not. The court therefore should follow the co
Louisiana trials. But we need to place this into perspective. This laudable ruling would only apply to cases then pending or recent will i adjudicated. It meant nothing to mr mr. Edwards, the only place that would jail you for life on a nonunanimous verdict. Why should the 6th amendment mean something less to mr. Edwards. Members of the ramos court were divided how to reconcile the fractured decision with then existing precedent. This cleared two paths that ramos, two paths to remedy those jailed by a jury scheme we know was morally wrong at its i think so tension and is unconstitutional. For some, apdoca was dead on arrival. And with these, they provided no value and ramos is an old rule dictated by precedent that simply restored the 6th amendments full measure either through the due process clause or privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment. For other justices. Apadoca was such a wrong decision, it needed to be overruled. And this restores fairness to jury trials in loui