had to cancel everything for getting covid and she is so freaking impressive every time i speak with her, i can t stand it. i just kept thinking about what she said, the lowering of the our of elected officials. we need to raise the bar. it should be there making people s lives better, not just that they are not breaking the law. and to be clear eyed about what this is, what public service is and what heroism is, and these two things don t go hand in hand. she s a very very smart person and i m looking forward to her being act in office at some point. she has not ruled that out. politics is in her blood, that s what she said. thanks. thanks for joining us, i do apologize for not being here in this chair this time last week, i was out sick, i finally got covid, i think i m one of the last people in the country who have never had it before but i finally tested positive for weekend a half ago. i m vaccinated so i think that helped make it an easier bout. i rested up, i
and these two things don t go hand in hand. she s a very, very smart person and i m looking forward to her being back in office somewhere, someday, at some point. she s not ruled that out. politics is in her blood. appreciate it. have a great show. thank you. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. i dopologize for not week here in this chair tis this time last week. i was out sick. i think i was in the last people in the country who never had it before, but i finally tested positive about a week and a half ago. i m vaccinated, so that helped me get an easier bout, and rested up and took a five day course of paxlovid, which honestly is kind of gross while you re taking it, but in my oin totally worth it. it s only five days of pills. by the end of my five days i had no fever, totally reduced symptoms, and most importantly i was testing negative and plot a risk to other people. anyway, i m back. i m sorry i missed you here last week. i also had to cancel and re
is it your argument that a case can never be overruled simply because it was wrong? i think that at the very least the state would have to come forward with some kind of materially changed circumstance or some kind of new argument and mississippi hasn t done so. suppose plessy was argued and nothing changed. you could say it was a wrong decision on the day it was handed down and now overreeled. it was very wrong on the day it was handed down but what the court said in analyzing that to brown and casey was that what had become clear is that the factual premise that underlay the decision. is it your answer that we need all the experience from
thought the case was wrongly decided in the first instance would run counter to the ability to function as a corner stone of the rule of law in this context. is it your argument that a case can never be overruled simply because it was e egregiously long? i think at the least the state would have to come forward with changed circumstance or some kind of materially new argument, and mississippi hasn t done so really? suppose plessi versus ferguson was reargued. nothing had changed. would it not be sufficient to say that was an egregiously wrong decision on the day it was handed down, and now it should be overruled? it certainly was egregiously wrong on the day it was handed down, but what the court said to brown and casey was that what had become clear is that the factual premise that underlei the decision, was mistaken. and
0 standard of self-has proved difficult to administer and that is relevant to the analysis. and i want to give you an opportunity to respond. yes, your honor. the first point i d like to make is the undue burden test is not at issue in this case. that is the test that applies to regulations, not prohibitions. and the state has conceded that this is a prohibition. that s the title of this law. an act to prohibit abortion after 15 weeks. the only thing at issue in this case is the viability line, and the viability line has been enduringly workable. the lower federal courts have applied it consistently and uniformly for 50 years, and the fifth circuit here below had no difficulty striking down this law unanimously, 3 -0. it s been an exceedingly workable standard. if i may return to your question, sir chief justice, a reasonable possibility standard would not be workable. it would ultimately boil down to an argument that states can prohibit a category of women from exercising the consti