they are looking to court of appeals to rehear the case. nbc news correspondent pete willia williams joins me. do they want the trump administration to hear this? they didn t say this. remember what happened here, the easy way to think about this is the lawsuit itself is still in the courtroom of the judge in seattle who after getting alawsuit from the state of washington and minnesota put a temporary hold on enforcement. the ninth circuit court said that hold remains in place. on the judge s own motions asked colleagues to vote on whether the ninth circuit to hear the case. the ninth circuit said let s
circuit does. in the meantime, the question is the one you asked, if the president trump issue a new executive order and there are indication he will, all of this stuff evaporates because it s about the executive order he wrote on january 27. and it becomes moot. the new one can be the state with go back to court and we would go true this one more time. although in the new order is narrower, people who never come here in the first place, then it would be a tougher case for the state. thank you, very much, pete. you bet. trump responding about missile test from north korea, why did they do it and what it the threat to the united states. e
past donald trump in those states. meanwhile, still all the intrigue of what happened in the fbi, and we have judy rue kwr r they have a couple surprises next. i had no idea jim comey was going to do what he was going to do the day he did it, and nor did i think he would do it, and what i did know is that the fbi was very, very upset about the way jim comey had handled the case, but i heard that from former fbi agents, not from current fbi agents. that was on fox news where he had a headwind. is there some indication he had cooperation from the fbi to team trump? our correspondent, pete willia
through, she said that commitment has been disserved by today s decision. now one little footnote here. this does not strike down the entire voting rights act. individual civil rights groups can still sue local governments whether they make election changes, and the justice department can still sue to put a state or a county or a city in to the coverage under section 5. but that would and very difficult process. it has to do it case by says, it would have to assemble the facts that there had been a history of discrimination that continued. so that s an option but i don t know how effective an option would be. this really does put it back to congress, just as the court warned four years ago that it was going to do. it rattled its saber four years ago in a case from texas and said, man, things have changed. you know, congress, if you want to keep this, you better make some changes. congress didn t. so today s outcome should be no surprise. pete, we just got a statement in from the pres
capart, josh barrow, margaret carlson and also richard cohen, and from outside the supreme court, our own nbc news justice department correspondent pete williams. good morning to all. i want to start with pete. pete, can you just go through and explain this ruling? in keeping section 5, but throwing out section 4, am i right that they ve essentially made section 5 unenforceable? reporter: well, they re sigh saying right now the map of states where section 5 applies is gone. so it doesn t apply anywhere. it could in principle if congress redraws the map. that s what congress will have do which will be politically a very difficult thing to do. what the court said is, if you look at the most recent census data, it shows that african-american voter registration and turnout is actually higher in the states covered by 5 of the 6 states