statement. he said, well, the supreme court didn t do anything on section 230, now congress needs to. jessica snider, thanks so much. let s discuss with axios media reporter kara swisher and jul juliette kayyem. i think what senator durbin said is correct. this is congress job to do something about 230 since they passed 230. so i think the supreme court was like this is not our deal, and in fact it was unanimous so all the justices agreed, and in fact justice kagen had said that. this is just a court, we re not exactly technology experts, and so they didn t want to come up against 230 because they do believe it s a congressional mandate to do something about this if they really believe this is problem. sarah, do you think this ruling, this decision makes it nearly impossible for individuals to sue tech
roe v. wade even though they said during the confirmation hearing they thought it was a super precedent and they would not. so anything is on the table and that makes the country unsure of their high court and makes everyone think the powers are being abused and has a political slant. so i don t think that he s getting the public. and the question of legitimacy was days before the start of the term. you talk about the fact that just he is sotomayor and kagen talked about the fact that the legitimacy of the court could be questioned if president dent wasn t preserved. and last week samuel alito issued a statement to the wall street journal saying that sort of view point crosses a line. he didn t direct his statement toward justice sotomayor and kagen and with a 6-3 majority
or not the disagreement with an opinion means that the court s legitimacy should be questioned, i think we re all looking at a court that has been politicized. and outwardly politicized and the power of that court is in question. and as justice brown jackson then looks at these cases and decides these cases she s going to be playing a role in history. over 50 years of social justice progress, civil rights work and voting rights and so many other areas will be turned back by this cohort of conservatives in a super majority. so there is a lot on the line here for this entire country. what happens to african americans, what happens to others effects the rest of the country and i think everyone should be paying attention. yeah. you know, it is interesting, gloria, because in this debate we ve seen in the last few months over the summer some justices speaking publicly in these speechies about the legitimacy about the court. justice kagen and sotomayor.
you can see large crowd gathered outside the court this morning. protesting both for and against this decision. justices breyer, sotomayor an can re and kagen said a state will be able to impose its moral choice on a woman and give birth to a child. we want to begin with tom foreman. we will break down the ripple effect of this ruling across dozens of states. this is how it will affect you. 13 state vss have the trig ger in place. laws go into effect quickly to ban abortion. in kentucky, louisiana and south dakota, it happens immediately. meaning if you had an
i do want to say i m so glad you brought this one up because everyone is paying attention to abortion and gun rights and religious liberties, but this is a case that at the center of the dispute is the famous, you know, miranda ruling, you have the right to remain silent, you have the right to have a lawyer. but it s not a question of whether you have to have the evidence withheld if you haven t been read miranda rights. it s a question of whether someone who has not been read his miranda rights can bring an individual civil rights action against the officer who failed to do that. it s a side question on it, but during oral arguments on this in april justice kagen said do we really want to diminish this right in any way? do we want to undermine the legitimacy and integrity in any