the president again. in 30 minutes, he ll speak from the roosevelt room, explaining the white house s next steps because a lot could change with a ruling that sided with a web designer opposed to same-sex marriage. and a lot will change now that the president cannot constitutionally cancel student debt. joining me now nbc news correspondent julia ainsley who s outside of the supreme court for us, and nbc news white house correspondent mike memoli. noah pransky is here with us as well, and cnbc washington correspondent, emily wilkins. thank you very much for being here, everybody. so 6-3 ruling, two more 6-3 rulings, i should say. student debt. you re right, katy, if somebody was going to sum up this supreme court right now, the name of the book might be 6-3 because we re seeing so many opinions fall along those lines. today we saw two more, the first coming in, a case having to do with a web designer in colorado who says that she does have gay clients but didn t want to be
Transcripts for MSNBC Deadline White House 20240604 21:46:15
archive.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from archive.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
or in whole struck down. i have to be quick with you, does the supreme court s recently ruling that a web site designer doesn t have to design sites for lgbtq weddings, does that change anything here? it doesn t in terms of the laws we re talking about. there s a lot of nuance with respect to that decision and how it will be applied. people are zealous thinking this is going to allow them to discriminate against gay and queer folks and that s not the case at all. answering your question, being a lawyer that i am, i m going to say it depends. still ahead, a social media stunt that s cost people their lives. what officials are saying about this viral video challenge of thrill seekers jumping off speeding boats. jumping off speeding boats
speech. should you be compelled to endorse or create speech you do not agree with, and in that case this was a web site designer that said, look, i will happily serve anyone who walks through my door, gay, straight, black, white, i just don t want to have to create messages that i don t agree with. and i think anyone regardless of their political welcomed background could understand joey: that s such a great point that people haven t made. it s not about she wants to treat homosexuality or homosexual people different, she wants to serve them, but it s the messaging of what she s being asked to do, and and she works in a first amendment platform. for example, if antifa came in and said we want you to do some flyers for us or a web site, does this case cover her there? there s so many places in free speech that you may be allowed to the say it, but you re not necessarily protected to make someone else partake in it. will: that s right. rachel: you know, it s interesting on student lo
ago the epa s clean power plan just assuming awesome authority based on flimsy statutory language. but i don t, you know, reporters always want a theme at the end of the term. this court is just not deciding that many cases, and they don t all fit neatly together. we have the independent state legislature doctrine thrown out, is that a loss for conservatives, is it a win for separation of powers because ordinary judicial review prevailed even though the court declined to provide a standard of exactly when state courts go beyond their remitt in policing state legislative efforts to regulate elections. so a lot to digest, certainly. and as i said, the the so-called vibe, the feeling we get from the court is different now than even what it was 50 hours ago, just over 2 days ago. so hard to, hard to the put it all and generalize. paul: well, talk about religious liberty. it seems to me that that s another theme that has emerged here, particularly with this last case and the web site
vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.