united economic conservatives, national security conservatives and social conservatives into a very powerful bloc. one caveat among all voters, trump has a majority negative approval rating. take us inside trump s thinking here as he and the administration are compiling a short list for supreme court nominees. the supreme court wasn t something donald trump thought about a lot. he knew his supporters were super interested in some of the social issues he were to consider. so remember during the campaign he announced his short list for supreme court justices to fill the scalia vacancy. he thought that was a political masterstroke that got his conservative backers riled up. he added to that again in november. one thing we have on axios this morning is a chart listing how conservative that list is, far more conservative than justice kennedy, who he s replacing. trump is going with conservative allies like ralph reed, the federalist society which vet as
because they wanted the process to be more partisan. they re in control of state government, they wanted to draw the congressional maps themselves to help republicans more. but the supreme court today upheld the districts being drawn instead in this bipart expert good government technocratic way instead. that immediately effects arizona, but it s also a signal to good government types and reformers all around the country that you can do your congressional districts in a better way. you can stop rigging the game if you want to. no pressure. just in case the supreme court wasn t making enough news already, these past few days today they did hand down that ruling on congressional districts being decided in a technocratic nonpartisan way and that being an okay thing to do. they also blocked the epa from regulating emissions from power plants. they blocked texas from implementing its new antiabortion law which was supposed to go into effect the day after tomorrow, and that would have probab
republicans in arizona sued because they wanted the process to be more partisan. they re in control of state government, they wanted to draw the congressional maps themselves to help republicans more. but the supreme court today upheld the districts being drawn instead in this bipartsan expert good government technocratic way instead. that immediately effects arizona, but it s also a signal to good government types and reformers all around the country that you can do your congressional districts in a better way. you can stop rigging the game, if you want to. no pressure. just in case the supreme court wasn t making enough news already, these past few days, today they did hand down that ruling on congressional districts being decided in a technocratic nonpartisan way and that being an okay thing to do. they also blocked the epa from regulating emissions from power plants. they blocked texas from implementing its new antiabortion law, which was supposed to go into effect the
today, they have a bipartisan, balanced expert commission that draws the districts instead of letting the politicians do it. it s a way that s supposed to be fair to everyone instead of just picking one party to win. republicans in arizona sued because they wanted the process to be more partisan. they re in control of state government, they wanted to draw the congressional maps themselves to help republicans more. but the supreme court today upheld the districts being drawn instead in this bipartsan expert good government technocratic way instead. that immediately effects arizona, but it s also a signal to good government types and reformers all around the country that you can do your congressional districts in a better way. you can stop rigging the game, if you want to. no pressure. just in case the supreme court wasn t making enough news already, these past few days,
contracepti contraceptives. availability is still out there. the burden is back on the federal government to say this is something they feel they re compelled to do. there are other ways to do this, that do not remove the religious freedoms from those individuals from those companies as well. there are other avenues to do it that are less oppressive basically on that company that actually accomplish the same purposes. the supreme court wasn t pushing away and saying you shouldn t have contraceptives. the supreme court was saying you can t take away someone s religious freedoms so someone else has access to this. not that people won t get the cont contraceptives but actually the government will pay as opposed to the company in this case. thank you for joining us. a supporter of this decision. coming up next, general motors is trying to make amends over its faulty car scandal. we ll meet with the man who is helping them do that.