Have the legal right to challenge the law. Moments ago former president obama tweeted out a statement that reads, today the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care act again. This ruling reaffirms what we have long known to be true, the Affordable Care act is here to say. The principle of universal coverage has been established and 31 Million People now have access to care through the law we passed with millions more who can no longer be denied coverage or charge more because of a preexisting condition. Also decided today, a local religious freedom case. Justices ruled in favorite of Catholic Foster Care Agency in philadelphia that refused to consider samesex couples as foster parents. Joining us to talk about this, cnn justice correspondent Jessica Schneider and White House Correspondent jeremy diamond. Jessica, on the obama care decision, what more do we know about how the decision was made . These seven justices essentially ruled on procedural grounds without getting to the heart o
Have the legal right to challenge the law. Moments ago former president obama tweeted out a statement that reads, today the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care act again. This ruling reaffirms what we have long known to be true, the Affordable Care act is here to say. The principle of universal coverage has been established and 31 Million People now have access to care through the law we passed with millions more who can no longer be denied coverage or charge more because of a preexisting condition. Also decided today, a local religious freedom case. Justices ruled in favorite of Catholic Foster Care Agency in philadelphia that refused to consider samesex couples as foster parents. Joining us to talk about this, cnn justice correspondent Jessica Schneider and White House Correspondent jeremy diamond. Jessica, on the obama care decision, what more do we know about how the decision was made . These seven justices essentially ruled on procedural grounds without getting to the heart o
roe v. wade. take a look at the decision today. take a look at how it s how it s ruled on a number of issues that have been precedent for 50, 60 years sometimes. across the board, the vast majority of the american people don t agree with a lot of the decisions this court is making. that s president joe biden yesterday on msnbc, reacting to the supreme court overturning the use of affirmative action in college admissions. you know, willie, it was a fascinating interview. i have to say, though, a little concerned. the new york washington post new york post, which is morning joe s paper of record also, people come up to me and ask why. it s simple. they won more pulitzer prizes collectively than all other newspapers. look it up. look it up if you don t believe me. that s why. anyway, don t look it up. they have on the cover online, like, joe biden walking off set, right? it s like he got lost. kind of like barnicle. we ask him a question, and he walks off in
way. what is your reaction to the legal argument made by chief justice roberts in the majority opinion? right. so the legal argument, there s a constitutional basis engaged here for saying that these programs that give a bump up to minority applicants have to come to an end and they have to come to an end now. unfortunately, that ignores some of the basic realities of the world we live in. justice jackson s dissent does an impeccable job of pointing that out. she says, in essence, the chief justice tries to decide by fiat that discrimination, that racial discrimination has come to an end in america, so there is no longer any need for these affirmative action programs. we hear an echo of justice roberts decision in shelby county versus holder, the voting rights case. ten years ago, he said, there s no longer any reason to have concern about racial discrimination in voting.
jackson had to recuse herself. chief roberts stated, they lack sufficiently focused objectives warranting the use of race, with stereotyping and lacking meaningful end points. he gave admission offices an opening on the admission of race, writing, nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration or otherwise. justice ketanji brown jackson in the rebuttal wrote, with let them eat cake obliviousness today, they announce color blindness for all by legal fiat. but deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life. the court noted the decision will not take effect immediately. in a concurring opinion, justice