of the right to vote and other things, that that was an appropriate statute to use. it really does describe what donald trump did, which is that he conspired with others to deprive others of the civil rights, in particular what he was doing with his henchmen was saying to state legislators, hey there is no fraud here, you can throw out the vote in your state and just send your own hand picked slate of electors to washington, d.c. to count in the electoral college, and deprive all of the citizens in the state like arizona or georgia other votes. that is a preposterous legal theory and i just targeted version of it in the united states supreme court in a case called more forces harper. it is so anti-democratic, so corrosive and 18 usc to 41 is exactly the way to think about coming after it. neil castillo, thank you as always for providing tons of
institutions should be doing. i was not surprised by the decision, but i was disappointed by. so, neil, what are the so-called knock on effects? where are the kinds of legal challenges of this ruling potentially trigger? there is a concurring opinion by justice gorsuch the suggest that this might also apply to not just private and higher education institutions but also to employers, private companies and the like. i think that is wrong, and i think the majority of the supreme court ultimately will see that as wrong, because corporate pepper city programs, corporate affirmative action programs stand on a different jurors prudential footing, but nonetheless, they do expect a wave of litigation to occur, and people used to 13 companies, not to have the ei plans and the like. obviously, me and lots of other people are going to stand up and say there is absolutely the wrong way to view the law. neil castillo, as always,
before the supreme court. he s also a msnbc legal analyst and host of the podcast, courtside with new castillo. neil, thank you for being here. perfect person to ask this question, what are the immediate practical effects of this ruling? so, i ve had a lot of involvement in these cases, so i will speak her personally, not on the behalf of any institutions that i am involved with. i think that is a a decision the, jonathan, is disappointed, but in some ways, it s more narrower than people expected, because it did leave the door open to well crafted affirmative action plans, plans that focus on an individual s applications, which he or she writes in the essay, focusing on the impact of race and what that and the visual bring to campus. the chief justice of the us part of the opinion says that is okay, so given that, did you think the university going forward will have a way to decline the decision and yet still have a formative action program, not something like the blanket bans that h
supreme court ultimately will see that as wrong, because corporate pepper city programs, corporate affirmative action programs stand on a different jurors prudential footing, but nonetheless, they do expect a wave of litigation to occur, and people used to 13 companies, not to have the ei plans and the like. obviously, me and lots of other people are going to stand up and say there is absolutely the wrong way to view the law. neil castillo, as always, thank you for coming to the last word. thank you. coming up, the day s supreme court decision to and or revoke affirmative action is another example of america moving backwards, but the biden administration is ready to move forward through economic policies designed to help working people. that is next. how are folks 60 and older having fun these days? family cookouts! [blowing] [dice roll] playing games! [party chatter]
better. the best that can be set of the majority s perspective is that it proceeds, offshoots like, from the hope that preventing consideration of race will and racism. but if that is its motivation, the majority proceeds in vain. joining us now, near, former acting solicitor general of the u.s., who has argued 50 cases before the supreme court. he s also a msnbc legal analyst and host of the podcast, courtside with new castillo. neil, thank you for being here. perfect person to ask this question, what are the immediate practical effects of this ruling? so, i ve had a lot of involvement in these cases, so i will speak her personally, not on the behalf of any institutions that i am involved with. i think that is a a decision the, jonathan, is disappointed, but in some ways, it s more narrower than people expected,