Good wednesday morning to you. Thanks so much for joining us. Im laura garcia. And im marcus washington. Well get to the commute in just a bit. First lets start with the forecast. Meteorologist kari hall has been tracking those temps for us. Were starting out cool this morning in the trivalley, checking out whats going on in dublin, and we are seeing some clear visibility for now. We will see some light, patchy fog drifting by, but it will be slightly cooler today. And by tomorrow well have a very cold morning. Some of us may be starting out near freezing. Our dry weather does continue at least throughout the weekend. Well talk about whats ahead coming up. Mike, how is it looking right now for the commute . Kari, its looking really great right now as we look at the bay bridge toll plaza. Very light volume now and i expect for the earlier morning commute maybe 6 00, 6 15 well see slowing. Well watch that. The maps show no major issues around the bay. Maybe a little fog in the north bay.
A very good wednesday morning to you. Thank you for joining us. Were halfway there through the workweek, the day before thanksgiving. Mike has a look at the commute. First that forecast. Meteorologist kari hall has been tracking that. How is it looking, kari . It looks pretty good. We are all quiet across the bay area. We started out with Cool Temperatures and patches of fog particularly in the north bay. A live look in dublin, it will be cooler but comfortable for the middle of the day. We do have some cool mornings ahead. The dry weather does continue. Well talk about that in the forecast coming up. Mike, how is it looking driving through some of those foggy areas . Yes, folks might have trouble looking around them. The bay bridge for a reference, very light traffic flow. The note as we look at the north bay 29 to highway 1 up to healdsbu healdsburg, thats that warm amber blob where the fog has registered. Lower visibility there. Really no slowing on this map. Back to you. President
Fulton versus city of philadelphia. Ms. Windham. Mr. Chief justice and may it please theourt, the court below made a simple error. They failed to understand where emplment division versus sth controls and where it doesnt. Ith doesnt control when the government uses the system of individualized exemptions. Orem when it makes other exceptions that underminets rules or when it changes the rules to phibit a religious practice. Philadelphia made all threefe those errors here and the city still cant identify a neutral genelly applicable law even ter six attempts and in our knowledge is its decisions are subjective and individualized. The courts belowtill apply to smith and even said smith would be a dea letter if petitioners prevailed a that demonstrates the confusion and instability smith has csed. Respondents rather than defendansmith asked the court for a newly minted nstitutional standard that is even less protective of religious exercise and that approa has no basis in the text, history
Attention to where the court is sitting god save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear arguments this morning case number 19123 fulton versus city of philadelphia. Mr. Chief justice and mia please the court, and failing to understand where the controls and where it doesnt smith it doesnt control when the government uses a system ofndividualized exemptions or when it makes other exceptns to undermine the rule or when it changes the rules to prohibit a religious practice philadelphia made all three of those errors here. U can identify and apicable law even after six tempts and our kwledge is the decisions are subjective d individualized. The courts bel said smith would be a dead letter if petitioners prevailed and respondents asked the cou for a newly minted constitutional standard that approach has no basis in the traditions of the free exercise clause. The city has no compelling reason that is exercised by harris children in philadelphia for two centuries nor does it
Morning and case number 19123, fulton v. The city of philadelphia. Ms. Windham. Mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court. The courts below made a simple error. They failed to understand where Employment Division versus smith controls and what doesnt. Smith doesnt control when the government uses a system of individualized exemptions or when it makes other exceptions that undermined its rules or when it changes the rules to prohibit a religious practice. Philadelphia made all three of those errors here. The city still cant identify a neutral, generally applicable attempts. Fter six it now acknowledges its decisions are subjective and individualized. Yet the courts below still applied smith. Even set Smith Wouldve be a dead letter if petitioners prevail. That. That demonstrates the confusion and instability smith has caused. Respondents, rather than defend smith, asked the court for new limited constitutional standard thats even less protective of religious exercise. That approach