minority on the court. in a dissent written by justice sonia sotomayor, she said ultimately what began as a policy. explicitly calling for a tal and complete shutdown of the united states has since morphed unit a proclamation putatively based on nional security concerns. but this window dressing cannot conceal an unassailable fact. the words of the president and his advisers create the strong perception that the proclamation is contaminated by impermissible discriminatory animus against islam and its followers. maya wile are and gene robinson are back with us. maya, i think everyone agrees that if a president had put in this kind of restrictive travel regulation and ban on these countries for national security reasons, without ever mentioning anything about religion at any time during the campaign or at any other time, that it would be constitutional. it would conform to the 1952 law. it s that question of what does
that was not good enough for the minority on the court. in a dissent written by justice sonia sotomayor, she said ultimately what began as a policy. explicitly calling for a total and complete shutdown of t unit a proclamation putatively based on national security concerns. but this window dressing cannot conceal an unassailable fact. the words of the president and his advisers create the strong perception that the proclamation is contaminated by impermissible discriminatory animus against islam and its followers. maya wile are and gene robinson are back with us. maya, i think everyone agrees that if a president had put in this kind of restrictive travel regulation and ban on these countries for national security reasons, without ever mentioning anything about religion at any time during the campaign or at any other time, that it would be constitutional. it would conform to the 1952 law.
and justice kagan, which they were saying, look, there s a question here that we think the courts have to look more closely at in terms of whether the president established a national security concern. we think there s actually a question here that hasn t been sufficiently vetted by the court. and so therefore we think we should send it back. that would change it obviously if they had come forward with evidence that, in fact, there was some national security concern. part of what the lower court said is you haven t demonstrated it. you have not shown it. yeah. it s the case we re going to be talking about long time. maya wiley, gene robinson, thank you for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. tonight s last word is next. before you and your rheumatologist move to another treatment, ask if xeljanz xr is right for you. xeljanz xr is a once-daily pill for adults wrate to severe ra for whom
of that district, or certainly with those who bothered to vote. she talked about universal health care. she talked about abolishing i.c.e. she talked about the crushing puerto rican debt. you know, in a district that is now about 50% hispanic. and otherwise, incredibly diverse. those are issues that resonated. and joe crowley didn t, frankly, connect with voters the way she did. and i think that s a healthy thing for democratic party. it s a kind of renewal. it feels inevitable, if you ve been watching new york city politics for a while. mile maya wiley, gene robinson, thanks for joining us in this conversation. when we come back, the supreme court decision that has allowed the president to continue his travel ban. is gonna raise your rate after the other car got a scratch so small you coulda fixed it with a pen. maybe you should take that pen and use it
interesting and important about the dissent from justice fryer and justice kagan, which they were saying, look, there s a question here that we think the courts have to look more closely at in terms of whether the president established a national security concern. we think there s actually a question here that hasn t been sufficiently vetted by the court. and so therefore we think we should send it back. that would change it obviously if they had come forward with evidence that, in fact, there was some national security concern. part of what the lower court said is you haven t demonstrated it. you have not shown it. yeah. it s the case we re going to be talking about for a long time. maya wiley, gene robinson, thank you for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. tonight s last word is next. -here comes the rain.