reporter: there s certainly more people out here today than we ve seen in days past, especially because today we know exactly what we will get decisions on because it s the last day. you mentioned those two big cases, of course at the end of pride month. that case that has to do with whether or not a web designer can refuse to design a wedding website for a gay couple. we could see some reaction to that. the biggest one we re watching for is on student loans, whether or not biden s student loan forgiveness program will stand. the biden administration was using a congressional act started after 9/11 in 2003. it was continued through the pandemic, even invoke bid betsy devoss under the trump administration. can student loans be forgiven in their entirety forever? this would affect about 43,000 people, sorry, we re starting to get some decisions just in now. so i m going to go listen for what those are, and i said 43,000, that s 43 million people, and i ll be back to you when
speech doctrine. 5:00 is the deadline gregg jarrett trial of the century talking about what will be the trial of the century. thank you very much for joining us live. thank you, bret. at least three of them and then we have a fourth one. sequels. thank you, sir. all right. exactly 13 minutes before the top of the hour. ainsley: hand it over to carley she is over there on brian s other side for headlines. brian: never been on trial for anything, right? no. but what if i was, brian? that would put me in a very awkward position. brian: have to say yes, i was. steve: as greg just said, you could say something that is not true. carley: that s true. frfreedom of speech. a former minneapolis police officer will face sentencing today for his role in the 2020 death of george floyd. he was convicted of aiding and abetting second degree manslaughter. is he already facing three and a half years in federal prison for
major significance. melissa murray, you clerked for then judge sotomayor who wrote the dissent in this case. she s now justice sotomayor. and she writes today the court for the first time in its history grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. how significant and potentially breathtaking and broad-based could this ruling be? what kind of ripple effect could we see? i think this is a massive decision. again, kenji is right, it s unprecedented for the court to use its compelled speech doctrine to apply to circumstances like this when we re dealing with public accommodations laws. these laws are rife throughout the country. many jurisdictions have them as a means of ensuring that individuals are not subject to discrimination in the conduct of their daily lives and in commerce, and this would basically be a license for individuals to decide based on
we go to this website, you are not inviting them to the wedding. only those getting married are. so how does it become your message? in the same way that it is a message of a ghost writer who writes an anonymous press release or book. it is still that writer s speech. the whole point of the compelled speech doctrine is to ensure what is the limiting line of your? justice kagan asked you about another website designer. but how about people who don t believe in interracial marriage or about people who don t believe that disabled people to get married? where is the line? and our legal analyst has more. take us inside the argument. reporter: another set of very consequential arguments when more than two hours with the justices struggling on where that line would be.