daily and attacked. in qatar, women are denied the right to make key decisions about their lives, from marriage to work, without a male relative, human rights watch reports. under saudi s male guardianship system, women must obtain permission for basic rights. men can file a case for disobedience. there has been a recent shift in the kingdom. a driving ban was reversed and travel restrictions on females eased in recent years. there are certain interpretations that are held up and others that are equally valid in islamic law that are not. why? that s a public policy decision. reporter: that s exactly what the taliban say they are changing. they want to engage on a global stage. they also have to take into account relationships that they have with powerful actors outside of the country. reporter: that leaves the
ambassador, in sp i have heard a lot about the position the united states is taking unilaterally and the great impact it has on allies, britain and beyond, and also a lot of monday morning quarterbacking about what that means for the relationship between the u.s. and the u.k. where do you think this decision in this moment leaves the u.s./british relationship? is it damaged? is it different today than yesterday? well, kate, i think i would be misleading you that i said there wasn t any damage to the relationship. i think there was great disappointment at the way the president took that decision, given that back in cornwall at the g7 meeting he had said to other heads of government that united states military would remain there in such a way to ensure that diplomatic activity
9-0, that s a final word from the court. quick follow-up question. my understanding is part of the heart of the issue involves the fact that the city had exceptions for other groups and agencies and yet refused to allow exception for this one. the court that dig into that and said if you are going to have these different distinctions you can t then use them against a religious affiliated group or a group who says i can t do what the city is asking me to do without violating my faith. chief justice john roberts wrote about that in another part of the opinion saying, you can t tell them that you can be part of this but you will have to give up part of your doctrine and that s not the way it works. the fact that this came together 9-0 is the most surprising thing for people on either side of this debate. indeed. thank you so much. this is part of a trend that has been called part of an extraordinary winning streak for religion of the supreme court and a recent study conducted even
kelly, there are some absurd and delusional approaches that you see from the democrats when it comes to weighing who is a bigger concern for the united states. are there any foreign enemies are adversaries who could reach the same level as say what we are being constantly lectured here at home and the insurrectionist that we hear about every day? no. democrats are much more concerned about trashing republicans even on the world stage then being focused and obviously in this case joe biden himself focused on countries who are doing some things that impact and undermine u.s. interests. as a whole host of problems here but there was also an opportunity for the media is trying to prop this guy up and we hope that we have all forgotten he s been reliably wrong in every major public policy decision. we all know it, and this guy
interest and payments and debt. emily: fox news alert. it s been called a major victory for supporters of religious liberty is, the supreme court in that unanimous decision siding with the catholic foster care agency and in a dispute with the city of philadelphia. the justices ruling the city violated the u.s. constitution and banning a religious group from taking part in the city s foster care program because of its exclusion of same-sex couples.