he's an outspoken republican critic of donald trump. now, he's running for the senate. our keynote conversation with former maryland governor, larry hogan, on the direction of the gop as the 11th hour gets underway on this monday night. good evening once again, i'm stephanie ruhle live from washington d. c.. get out your sharpie and your old school calendar because we are now 246 days away. cross them off, from the election. the supreme court has officially ruled on a key question looming over the presidential race, the day before super tuesday. today, all nine justices rejected colorado's effort to kick former president trump off the ballot because of his actions leading up to january 6th. the decision applies to all states, basically ending the effort to remove trump from ballots around the country. the courts ruling comes on what was supposed to be day one of trump's federal election interference trial, but that has now been delayed by the supreme court. my colleague laura jarrett breaks down today's decision. >> reporter: tonight, the u.s. supreme court dealing a final blow to states trying to ban former president trump from the ballot. in a unanimous decision, the justices effectively leaving it up to voters to decide. if the former president returns to the white house. mr. trump, praising today's ruling. >> the voters can take the person out of the race very quickly, but a court shouldn't be doing that. >> reporter: the justices rejecting the colorado state courts ruling finding mr. trump ineligible to be president under section three of the 14th amendment. a largely untested clause of the constitution passed after the civil, disqualifying those who engage in insurrection from holding public office again. and elections officials in maine, and a judge in illinois, later doing the same. banning the republican front runner from the ballot in those states, in light of his actions on january 6th. today's ruling from the high court now ending all similar efforts to disqualify mr. trump from the ballot. >> most states were thrilled to have me. there were some that didn't they didn't want that for political reasons. >> reporter: the justices today saying that patchwork of different rulings across the country cannot stand. binding responsibility for enforcing section three against federal officeholders and candidates rests with congress and not the states. at the same time, the three liberal justices accusing their conservative colleagues of going too far on ruling congress must enact new legislation for banning presidential candidates. writing, this really will make it harder to bar an oath breaking insurrectionists from becoming president. conservative justice barrett cautioning, this court should turn the national temperatures down, not up. earlier tonight, one of the colorado voters who brought the case and who voted for donald trump in 2020 reacted to the court's ruling. >> the fact is that, if we do not enforce the constitution, if we keep an insurrectionist on the ballot, that is not disruptive, that's dangerous. >> the courts next big case related to the former president and current republican front runner involves his claim of immunity from prosecution. that hearing is set for people on the 22nd. meanwhile, in new york, trump's former chief financial adviser, weisselberg, pleaded guilty to perjury in testimony for trump civil fraud trial. he will be sentenced next month. he is not expected to be forced to testify against trump in an upcoming hush money case. keep in mind, this is weisselberg's second guilty plea. remember in 2022, he admitted carrying out a multi years-long tax fraud scheme that spent a total of 100 days behind bars. with that, let's get smarter with our leadoff panel. sank hague joins, us reporter for the new york times, she is reported on donald trump's finances for years, marshals of stern joins us, senior writer covering the courts and the law at slate and and push condor, federal prosecutor and senior writer for politico. i can, i want to start with sharing a bit of a very concerned a former federal judge, michael luttig said, reacting today's decision from the supreme court. watch this. >> the court today decided that no person in the future will ever be disqualified under section three of the 14th amendment regardless whether he or she has engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the constitution of the united states. it's stunning in its overreach. >> was this a ruling you expect? >> it was the ruling i expected. by the way, pointed correction, that's not what the [inaudible] today. not never. what the court held is that congress has to enact legislation in order for this provision to take some effect. point of correction. in any case, yes, i expected this to happen. this ruling, emil hemus the president was that it was 90 opposed to 72 or a one. this was a long shot challenge from the start. if you familiars with yourself but the case from the beginning, when a bunch of law for forces -- professors got on force -- long shot elements to it. of was not terribly surprised that it got shut down. >> well, i was not terribly surprise that donald trump did an interview today and mischaracterized the whole thing. i want to share a little bit a bit. it was a radio interview. listen. >> i was very honored by a 19 nothing about. and this is for future presidents. this is not for me. this is for future presidents, all presidents. >> the court did not say that. the court did not say that he was not an insurrectionist. what is your take away from the ruling? >> first, i think the court really wanted to take this issue off the table for the 2024 election. i do think that that held across all nine justices. the court was unanimous in saying a state can't go it alone. a state can simply decide, we are going to unilaterally remove this person from the ballot. however, the court split so very sharply on the question of how exactly the section of the 14th [inaudible] a crucial section enacted in the wake of the civil war to prevent insurrectionist from holding office, can be enforced. five justices, five conservatives, reached out and grabbed this issue that really was not necessary to decide the casing, only congress can enforce this section to enable legislation. does anyone seriously think that congress is going to do that so long as it remains divided? there were four other justices, the three liberals and barrett, who dissented from that. the three liberals more sharply than barrett, but i think it really doesn't sound quite right to say that this was unanimous when the court were so fractured over why exactly trump should remain on the ballot and how far into the future this relations stretch when it comes to shielding or not shielding other interest -- other insurrectionists. >> go deeper. take us inside the court. while it was unanimous decision, liberals had their criticisms, amy coney barrett came out and said, we need to be united here, we need to take down the temperature. what is going on? >> well, the three liberals separate opinion was actually a style as a concurrence. i looked at the metadata and the decision. it was originally styled as a descent. in fact, there is more. that opinion, well i stated to be a joint authored by the wealthy liberal justices, it was actually originally authored by sotomayor by herself. at some point in the process, the other two liberals joined. deciding to make it a show of force and agreement among the three liberals. they aren't met. they are upset about this decision. it used some very stormy rhetoric, but i think it's a trademark of sort of mira and the justices signed on to just say, we really resent the court thus far. justice barrett, even though she ultimately actually built the majority went too far as, well she scolded the three liberal justices, telling them, you know, i agree that this went too far, but we need to turn that national temperature down. we should not be in this election season saying anything that sounds strident or political. >> what does the justices action today tell you, in terms of clues, of how they might handle this immunity claim? >> look, i think there was already a lot of anxiety about how they're handling this immunity claim. they're handling the immunity claim. i have that exciting myself. the way that they've handled it so far is taking too long, it's taking too long. they are putting it serious risk the prospect of a trial in the january 6th case before the fall. some people think that's off of the table. i think there's still a little bit of help. that's the best you could say at this point. facing the justice system. >> suzanne, first of all, i love your house so much. every single time you join us from home, i want to do the whole show from there. can we break this down? the idea that the former president and current republican front runners longtime cfo, weisselberg or, has been with the trump family for decades. this man is about to go to jail for the second time for lying on behalf of donald trump. this should be a monster story. yet, it's like page three. how exactly did we get here again? >> right, incredible, his second trip to rikers island for was looking to be five months. this one started during the civil trial, the one that donald trump is facing in that huge multi million dollar penalty he's going to have to put up on bond for shortly. in the middle of the trial, allen by silberg ott on the stand and he was talking about his role and very aspects of evaluations. he said during that that he really had no role in valuing donald trump's try flex, the famous apartment donald trump's lives in, that he claimed was 30,000 square feet, it's really 10,000 square feet. allen weisselberg really distance themselves from the evaluation. almost immediately afterward, the reporter at forbes put a story up that had huge documentation showing weisselberg was all over the evaluation when it came to dealing with forms on that. of course, forbes points out the list that names the top billionaires of donald trump always wants to be on. it weisselberg is always at the front of those conversations. even the headline of the story that was wrote saying was silver lied on the stand. heads were spinning and almost as quickly weisselberg was facing perjury charges, which got him into court this morning. now, has him on another round trip to get to rikers. >> live on the stand, on behalf of donald trump. it's like allen weisselberg can have his own hegemony case. he is the one that continues to get paid to misrepresent donald trump and his businesses. can you remind our audience of how close this man is to trump and his family? what an internal part he has been in the trump organization, which is a tiny business and he has been a key member. >> it's incredible. i'm currently writing a book on donald trump and his money. in doing that, we're going back and looking back to donald trump's father and allen weisselberg has been in the frame for 50 years. >> 50. >> 50. he was to read trump, he got hired by donald trump. he's been there every single step of the way. he knows where every penny is in that organization. he's crucial. he is now in the middle of another trial coming up, the criminal child that is coming, up the hush money payment trial. i don't expect him to be a witness in. that i think was uncooperative in terms of what he was willing to say that he knew. i think the part of what happened today was, you know, the return trip to rikers island blocked and discredited him as a witness. they both does that and sends a message to any other witness that gets up if you understand, this is what is going to happen. he has been at the center of the trump family since donald trump was very young. he's [inaudible] for 50 some years. >> sure has. ankush, donald trump is trying to fight this gag order that help and break is trying to put in place with this hush money case. he is saying that it's an infringement on his freedom of speech, his past social media post, the statements shouldn't matter. do you think the judge is going to buy it? >> i doubt it, right? donald trump has done this a couple of times already. he's been under a gag order in the civil fraud trial in manhattan, under a gag order in the federal case in washington, d. c.. his arguments have not swayed any of these charges. his own behavior is a thing that has gotten him into the situation with these gay corridors being applied all of the place. i would expect that the judge what be quite happy to have one in place, tailored in the right way so as not to do process to choose a frost -- first amendment issues. the judge in the other cases have been effective. been effec. >> suzanne, i have to ask you about trump's latest request to delay coming up with the cash in the e. jean carroll case, right? it's almost $500 million. people are snickering saying, he doesn't have the data. that does not mean that a very, very rich person looking to curry a favor like that next potential president wouldn't cut that bill. i'm thinking back to all of the people who through parties and events and booked entire floors at trump hotels and golf courses while he was president, because they wanted to be in good standing with him. >> right. you mentioned the e. jean carroll case, that's 83. 3 million. he also has to come up with hundreds of millions for the attorney general's case. that's something everyone is watching. i think because of the monitor that is over his business, we are going to know how he comes up with the money. he is going to have to either come up with the money, or it looks like he's seeking out a bond in order to do this. he's going to basically come up with pretty much cash, bonds or stocks, something pretty liquid . these bond companies that underwrite these, they want something liwuid because it could go against him and it's a high risk bond that they will have to write. they're going to want to liquidate it very quickly. we are going to see, i think in short order, it's a matter of weeks, just how he's going to come up with the funds. so far, the courts seem unwilling to cut him a break. he's going have to come up with either the cash or a bond, pretty much in the full amount. in the case of a bond, probably a little bit more. >> might not need it. they're all sorts of unsavory, very wealthy characters happy to pay his debts and he will owe them big-time. suzanne, mark, ankush, thank you for being here. when we come back, we are just minutes away from super tuesday. we have an all-star political panel here to break down what to expect and what it could mean for candidates heading into november. later tonight's key note interviews with republican governor, larry hogan of maryland. his thoughts on today's supreme court decision, no labels, and who he plans to vote for it later this year. the 11th hour, just getting underway on a monday night, live from washington. from was if you're living with hiv, imagine being good to go without daily hiv pills. good to go binge-watch. good to go out even later. with cabenuva, there's no pausing for daily hiv pills. for adults who are undetectable, cabenuva is the only complete, long-acting hiv treatment you can get every other month. it's two injections from a healthcare provider, just 6 times a year. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you're taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions, post-injection reactions, liver problems, and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have liver or kidney problems, mental health concerns and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection-site reactions, fever, and tiredness. with cabenuva, you're good to go. ask your doctor about switching. is it possible to count on my internet with cabenuva, you're good to go. like my customers count on me? it is with comcast business. keeping you up and running with our 99.9% network reliability. and security that helps outsmart threats to your data. moaire dida twoo? - your data, too. there's even round-the-clock customer support. so you can be there for your customers. with comcast business, reliability isn't just possible. it's happening. get started for $49 a month. plus, ask how to get up to a $800 prepaid card with a qualifying internet package. don't wait, call and switch today! super tuesday is tomorrow. political warning signs are flashing for donald trump and president biden. while nikki haley continues to prove her appeal to independents. my colleague, garrett hague, since the scene. >> reporter: on the eve of super tuesday, republican front runner, donald trump, insisting legal efforts against him are giving him a big boost. >> the polls show that i'm much more popular than i was. and nonsense cases. everyone sees that. >> reporter: which is hours to go before polls open on the biggest single day of the republican primary, mr. trump's last remaining challenger also welcoming the high court's ruling. >> this is america. look, i will defeat donald trump fair and square. but i want him on that ballot. >> reporter: republican voters in 15 states, casting ballots tomorrow, with more than 800 delegates at stake. many in when or take all states where the former president is likely to claim key pictures. new polling shows him leading president biden in a head to head matchup within the margin of error. both men, unpopular. unlike 2020, polls show more americans now have an unfavorable view of mr. biden of mr. trump. while in colorado, which holds its primary tomorrow with former president trump on the ballot, both trump supporters and detractors shrugged off the supreme court's ruling today. >> trump, staying on the ballot, it is good because, you know, he has a tough hit. >> my biggest thing about president trump's i think he's a terrible example on how to treat people, but i don't like the idea of people -- of the government saying someone can't run. >> we have a lot to get to tonight. on the political front. you are in luck, we have a panel of experts here to break it all down. the cake offense, staff writer for the atlantic, and new political contributor, larry sabato, director at the center for politics and university of virginia, professor, professional historian and mark mckinnon joins us, for george w. bush and john mccain. we can, now that you are working here, you have to answer more questions. >> okay. >> so far, nikki haley has proved that there is an appetite for a non-trump candidate. is that time going to continue tomorrow? >> i think so. i think what we have seen so far is that there is a significant faction of the republican party that doesn't want trump to be their nominee. that doesn't want to go away. it's that faction just is not a majority. we've seen it consistently in several states. my guess is that -- you know, she might do better in vermont and maine. she did win in d. c.. do you see in places like that are not exactly that microcosm of the republican primary electorate in general. trump has consistently shown that he has, if not a large majority, at least admit near majority of support within the primary voters. i assume we will see that play out again tomorrow. >> larry, is trump sure these numbers might not win paley the nomination, but could they be enough to rob him of the white house? she said it over the weekend. donald trump has been in michigan for, basically running there for the last eight years. she showed up there a couple of months ago and had a really strong showing. >> of course it can make the difference. we don't know yet. look, where with those voters go in november? they could go to trump and maybe half or more than half of them, one assumes the affiliation would take control. a few at least would go to president biden, some would go to the third party candidates. who knows? some my sit at home. they are really four options for the haley voters. i think trump should be concerned about it, of course, he isn't. he assumes that his popularity is such that it would overwhelm any opposition. that is a problem for him, whether he admits it or not. >> mark, donald trump is definitively running for president. it seems like every speech he gives, he is dying to say, he got rid of roe and he is to blame for no deal at the border. i get that he is an unconventional guy and, sort, of grievance is what he plans on. but is this really how he thinks he can become the next president of the united states? >> well, it's how he did it the first time. make or break. he broke stuff. that's the big question. i think, fundamentally, what's going to happen tomorrow is that the decks will be cleared. it will be cleared that trump and biden are the nominees of the major parties. that's unlikely to change. everyone is going to be exhausted by that notion that we are going to see every run that nobody wants to see, which is just remarkable. the greatest democracy of the world, we are ending up with a couple of candidates that three quarters of the country doesn't want to see. i think at the end of the day, you know, joe biden has a good case to make. that's good news and bad news. he has a good story. the bad news is that he has a good story and he is not doing well. how much better can he tell the story than what's already been told? is he going to have to do a lot better? he starts off fine. the bad news for biden, because for trump, trump is now ahead by a larger margin in the polls than he ever has been since he started running in 2015. >> mckay, democrats are trying to downplay these new polls. is that really that right move? should they be flashing them as a warning sign? if donald trump really is a threat to our democracy, should they be driving this home to motivate all of those voters, who, to larry's point, we think about sitting on the couch in november? >> i think there is a delicate balance here. the democrats want to project a certain amount of confidence and strength. they also know that, you know, fear and true alarm at the fate of democracy is going to get their voters to turn out. but they can't keep their voters in a suspended state of panic for the next 6 to 8 months. they need to pace themselves. i imagine that we will see some of those flashing warning signs once we get to the fall. i think, at this point, the biden campaign is just trying to show the country that they are not in a kind of death spiral. the coverage has been so bad. the fixation on his age, on his mental, you know, abilities. i think that they are trying to calm everybody down right now and say, look, we have a long time to go before the election. let's not fixate too much samples at this point. >> they have a long time to go and a ton of policy wins. larry, 31% of voters say the economy has improved. that is a ten point increase from just two months ago. mark made the point that the president has lots of winds and he is struggling to get people to understand that. should president biden be flanking himself with kind of like the next generation of democratic superstars, and it was sheer, gavin newsom, whitmer, josh shapiro, west floor, just standing by him at all times? singing the praises of his policies. >> some of them have already been doing that. i'm sure they will continue and it will intensify as the election gets closer. i would make a counter point, a revolutionary point in modern politics that actually, joe biden does have a lot to sell. he's done a lot in the first term. i think his -- historians will write him much more highly than the public's right now. that doesn't help him in running for reelection. this is simplistic, but i believe that the democrats should run the most expansive, expensive refresher course in u.s. history. not refresher for joe biden, refresher for jonnel trump. there are hundreds and hundreds of flash points from the time he came on the stage in 2015 till now. it will continue. negative things, outrageous things that will infuriate people. they have enough to run a new one hour by hour. doesn't have to be on tv or all of. it doesn't have to be. it can be on social media. people need to remember what apparently, according to these polls, i don't know if i believe them, but they claim that americans have forgotten. they think the economy was terrific under trump. they think the border was under control under trump. all kinds of other things that, objective, louis are not true. it is the purpose of a campaign to correct untruths and to project your own truths. right, mark? >> mark, what do you think? >> i agree completely. i think it's going to be a real opportunity, stephanie. what we had is two candidates that the country knows very well. they're not going to be able to say a lot about each other in the next 7 to 8 months. we're not going to learn anything new about donald trump or joe biden. we know who they are. we know what they have done. we know a little about what trump might do in a second term, mostly because of some leaks from plans that they've got. we don't know a lot about biden's potential second term. that's where, i think, what we haven't heard from joe biden's, what is next? what is the vision of the joe biden's second term agenda? what will america look like under a second term? so, that's the picture that you have to be paying. i think that's where there's a real opportunity to for biden to biden begin to do that. >> state of the union, thursday, night we will all be watching. larry, good to see. mckay, mark, you are going to come back to us in just a bit. first, some might see the chaos on capitol hill and run for the hills. but not republican larry hogan, it's the reason he made a last- minute jump into the maryland senate race. tonight keynote interview is up next when the 11th hour continues. ♪oh what a good time we will have♪ ♪you... can make it happen...♪ ♪♪ try dietary supplements from voltaren for healthy joints. "overflowing with ideas and energy." that's the san francisco chronicle endorsing democrat katie porter for senate over all other options. porter is "easily the most impressive candidate." "known for her grilling of corporate executives." with "deep policy knowledge." katie porter's housing plan has "bipartisan-friendly ideas to bring homebuilding costs down." and the chronicle praises "her ideas to end soft corruption in politics." let's shake up the senate. with democrat katie porter. i'm katie porter and i approve this message. what do i see in peter dixon? with democrat katie porter. i see my husband... the father of our girls. i see a public servant. a man who served under secretary clinton in the state department... where he took on the epidemic of violence against women in the congo. i see a fighter, a tenacious problem-solver... who will go to congress and protect abortion rights and our democracy. because he sees a better future for all of us. i'm peter dixon and i at the moment, the senate map is stacking up pretty well for republicans in november. now, a traditionally blue state seat might be up for grabs, thanks to an incredibly popular former republican governor joining that race, larry hogan made the unexpected announcement last month that he will run for the maryland seat. for tonight's keynote, i sat down for -- with hogan to talk about why he decided to run, the strength of the republican party, and being one of the first republican politicians to speak out against donald trump. >> governor, for months, when you heard the name larry hogan, there was much buzz maybe he would be a presidential candidate. i feel even last month he said, the senate, no burning desire. alas, now, you are running. >> well, you know, i said probably 100 times that i didn't have a burning desire to be a senator. who in the right mind would want to go down in the middle of all that divisiveness and dysfunction, right? it doesn't seem like it would be a lot of fun. i just came to look at it differently. things are a mess in the country. the countries really off track. i'm fed up with the whole toxic politics. you can either walk away and give up, where you can step up and try to be a part of the solution. it wasn't because it is looking for a title or i needed a job. it's because the place is a mess. i thought maybe i could be some help. >> in 2022, you said you felt like that gop was focused on the wrong things. >> i think that gop still focuses on the wrong things. i'm very concerned about the direction of my party. i'm concerned about the direction of the country. i have been speaking up for a long time from one of the leading voices of my party to get back to a more traditional republican party that talks about things most americans care about. >> given that, do you consider yourself a member of the modern republican party? >> i do. some people say to me, why -- why are you still a republican? frankly, i have a lot of friends who've been in the party. i have friends that are in the democrat party or republican party, the fastest growing segment of american voters is independent. 40%. again, rather than walking away and giving up, i'm going to stay and fight, try to get the party back on track. >> given all those people who are now registered independents, let's talk no labels. you the coach of no labels. you step down. what in the world are they doing, governor? >> it's a great question. look, i'm not sure exactly what they are doing. hopefully, we are all going to find out soon. i was involved in the group for three years because i really believed -- i have a track record of reaching across the aisle, finding common sense bipartisan solutions. that's about that mission of no labels was. i think there is a huge segment of america that is frustrated enough or they don't want -- they are not interested in voting for joe biden or donald trump. so, there is a lane. there's no question that they have to figure out how to fill that need. there is a demand out there, but whether or not there are going to supply the answer, i'm not sure. >> do you see no labels being anything more than a spoiler candidate, if they do run someone? i mean, it's not you, not joe manchin, if it's not nikki haley, who could it be that would actually stand a chance to defeat -- joe biden or donald trump? >> that's a great question. look, i think there is a frustrated majority out there that is larger than there are people on either side, that would like to see this possibility. i think there's more of a chance of it than ever before in our country's history. however, you make a good point. it's one of the tough decisions i had to make. there was a lot of talk and interest in me potentially being the presidential nominee for no labels. i did not, for myself, see that there is a path forward. i did not want to be a spoiler for either donald trump or joe biden. if you can't find a way to get to two 70, you know, it could cause more harm than good. >> i don't know if it was a tough decision in 2020, but you didn't vote for donald trump or joe biden. what do you think you are going to do this december? >> i'm not voting for either of them again. it wasn't that tough. i did the same thing in 16 and 20, will likely do it again. i'm hoping there will be. >> how does that help? voting for neither one, who does that help? who does that serve? because the likes of donald trump or those who want to push voter suppression would love to hear people say i'm going to write in a candidate. that's essentially not voting. >> yeah, not really. i think that's why we have the ability to write in. >> what's it going to get you? >> and our state, joe biden beat donald trump by 33 points. my boat was not swaying the final outcome of the maryland votes. i did get to make a statement. i voted for ronald reagan saying, this is who i need to get back but the leaders. >> it would be tough for him to be the next president. >> probably. i wish her where another way. you're right. >> i want to ask about the supreme court, twofold. your thought on them here in donald trump's claim of immunity. if they do side with him and decide that a u.s. citizen is above the law, that could be transformative for the future of this country. >> of course. look, i have a long history on this one. my dad, infamously, was the deciding vote for house judiciary for first republican to come out for nixon's impeachment and said, no man is above the law, not even the president of the united states. >> your dad wasn't hot keoghan? >> now. that's my -- uncle. those words are still true today. no man is above the law, not even the president of the united states. i don't think the president should have blanket immunity. i don't think that's the way the court is going to roll. you know, it's certainly an important issue for us to continue to pay attention to. >> do you want donald trump to face a trial, should there be a verdict before the election? should the american people go into november knowing the outcome of these charges? >> i would prefer that. i mean, sometimes the justice system moves pretty slowly. i'm not sure that's going to happen. i think we need to get to the facts. i know that there are a lot of people just trusting all of our institutions. the republicans say it's weaponization of the justice department. they are serious issues and problems. things that we will have to get to the bottom of. it would be better to get the better result and have these court cases decided. i have confidence in our justice system. i think we have to get them -- it is going to create more havoc what happens after the election and before. >> the supreme court decided unanimously that donald trump should be allowed to be on that ballot and all 50 states. do you agree with that? >> i agree with that. i'm glad it was unanimous because i think the voters are the ones that ought to have that determination in november, whether they want donald trump to be president or not. and not have a state just not allow him to compete. it's just not the way our system works. all of the concerns and questions about donald trump, he hasn't been proven guilty in a court of law. you can't just kick somebody out of the ballot, voters have a right to decide. >> you have said before, when it comes to abortion, especially in your state, it is protected. democrats aren't making to pick up a deal of it. the fact that it's under threat or under attack. it is going to now be on the ballot in maryland in november. has your view changed at all? especially now that we're looking at other states where now, ivf is in question, there are other states that are no longer protecting women's rights. >> sure. my record has always been very clear. i promise to protect women's rights. i did that for eight years as governor. maryland thought is one of the strongest in the country. >> why is it on the ballot? >> there really isn't. the law -- the thing on the ballot just kind of buys the existing law. we have to be honest with mail- in voters. it's not going to change. >> but it protects it. >> now, it's already protected. it's not going to change and bay thing at the federal level, where i would vote against the ban. ivf, i was the first person in the country to speak out against that ruling. i thought it was absurd and ridiculous. it is such a wonderful opportunity for families that want to have children. ivf is great. i spoke at long before anyone else in the party did. >> i want to ask, you were one of the -- maybe not the first republicans. but you spoke out against donald trump pretty early on., which is a pretty difficult thing to do. what has that been like for you as a republican? right now, when you look at republicans that are currently in office who are wondering, why don't they say anything? we might not appreciate what that is like. what was it like for you? >> well, it certainly is tough to stand up anytime. when you with friends, or a member of the. group and you say, i disagree with you. and you have the courage to stand. up i, think a lot of republicans actually read with the things i was saying. they were just afraid to come out and say. them, but i was rewarded by the voters in my state, republicans, and democrats who appreciate the fact that i told it like it was. and, sure, you catch some flak, you get called some names. but i think we need more leaders that have the courage to stand. up all stand up to the current president, the former president, the democratic party, the republican party. and i'll tell them what i. think i'm not concerned. most people are too concerned about their next reelection, and making everybody happy. where, as i just try to get people exactly what i think the right answer is. >> was the blow back tougher than you thought? why don't other people do the same? >> i'm in a little easier position, because there's only about 20% of the people in my state of republicans. in the other places, if they were challenged by primaries, in a very red state it's tougher, i think, to speak out. without more blowback. but, yes, i think we need more profiles encouraged. and, it's one thing if somebody really strongly supports everything the president says and does. and they really believe it. it's different when people know that there's something wrong and they won't go out and say it. >> governor, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> governor larry hogan, not the son of hulk hogan. when we come back, we are going to dig a bit deeper on what he said about no labels and what in the world they are up to. is it time for them to pack it up and head home? our friends mckay coffins and mark mckinnon, back with us when the 11th hour continues. 1 do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. call coventry direct to learn more. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. our friend sold their policy to help pay their medical bills, and that got me thinking. maybe selling our policy could help with our retirement. i'm skeptical, so i did some research and called coventry direct. they explained life insurance is a valuable asset that can be sold. we learned we could sell all of our policy, or keep part of it with no future payments. who knew? we sold our policy. now we can relax and enjoy our retirement as we had planned. if you have $100,000 or more of life insurance, you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit coventrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance. politico is out with a very blunt new piece today, asking the question, is no labels about to face plant? they spoke to some big donors who are worried that the window has closed on a plausible third party presidential candidate. mckay coppins, mark mckinnon, still back with us. mark, you just heard my coverage here with larry hogan. he is not coming to no labels rescue. you were involved with this organization back in the day. are these donors right to worry? yes, the theory that there are all of these people across the country who want something else but now the rubber is hitting the road. what is going to happen here? >> well, we will see. i, mean it clearly larry hogan is not going to do it. is not going to do. it will be an obvious choice for nikki haley. i don't see that she has a future in the republican party that's dominated by donald. trump so that would be an obvious. choice but she said, she is not going to do. it but, listen, if this were 47%, 40% identifies at independent. only 25% identifies democrats as independents. and it all pointed back a year ago as, it was a bright, blast case of emergency scenario. and they said that the bottom line was, that they will appoint the exercises to ensure that donald trump was not reelected. and, back then, i, said what happens if we get to may of next year? and donald trump is winning by double digits. what's the backup plan? and so, this, at least they were laying down the pavement. doing the hard work, getting on the ballot. which takes a lot of work, and a ton of money. and, not labels to end it with the few staffers and a bunch of intern. so, i give them credit for giving a try. nobody stepped up when they have -- they're not gonna do it, if it's going to be a spoiler. so, maybe it won't happen. >> a few staffers, and a whole lot of highly, highly paid consultants. do you think there's another name out there? right? if it's not mentioned, it's not hogan, and it's not nikki haley, is there someone else that you think could be anything but a spoiler? >> i don't know. you know, i'd love to see list cheney, mitt romney, somebody like that do. it mckennon, you know a lot about mccraney if they could do anything. >> he's not going to do it. i asked him about this. this is the thing. i feel like as long as i've been covering politics, there have been these kind of long shot, well organized, well funded efforts to put together some kind of third-party that people might remember in 2012, americans elect, they secured ballot access in a bunch of states, got a bunch of donations that they couldn't find volleyball candidates and it imploded. 2016 you had people like mitt romney and bill kristol never dropped republicans were going around desperately searching for a standard bearer, to run a third party. they ended up settling on this no name guy. mcmullin. he didn't really make a dent. >> from utah? >> from utah. he made it done in utah nowhere. else but i think this is the problem. no labels has what seems like a possible case, right? >> in theory. >> in theory. on paper, americans are very dissatisfied with the two choices. but the problem is that the stakes are high. and, i would bet that if you took all those names that mark just went through, right? liz cheney, nikki haley, mitt romney, if you ask them, you know, off the record, to inject them with truth serum, who is the worst-case scenario? i know you don't like biden or trump. but who are you more afraid of. all of them would say, trump. and they don't want to be a spoiler who enables trump's election. and, that's why none of them will sign on to be the candidate for new labels. >> and, mark, what do you think about what larry hogan is doing? he said, even a month ago, he wasn't so just about running but just watching the dysfunctionality in the senate has somehow, while they repulsed is others. it has inspired him and he's going for. >> he is my kind of guy. you, know he's a fellow prisoner of hope and i appreciate the fact that he's going to keep him in the water. i, mean there's very few people out there like hogan, who fit that description. it's very much my dna. he's a compassionate conservative. he's a reasonable conservative. he's kind of a throwback. and, i'm hoping that the republican party rebuilds itself in the ashes of donald trump at some point. and let larry hogan be a part of that. >> hope. farfetched hope for realistic? >> i mean, look, i think that the better mechanism for some kind of bipartisan centrism is in the senate. it's better than running a presidential candidate. i think if larry hogan got to the senate, he could, hopefully, join some small group of senators or try to actually find solutions, work together. but, you, know you have to get their first. and, we don't know who will be president at that point. if trump is president, the climate for bipartisan deal making, or solution finding is not going to be good. >> sadly though, many of the american people are -- gentlemen, thank you both so much. and for you at home, make sure to tune in tomorrow night. our special coverage of super tuesday. it all starts at six pm eastern right here on msnbc. and on that note, i wish you all a very good night. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, and me, right here in d.c., thanks for staying up late. i'll see you at the end of tomorrow. ♪ ♪ ♪ what do i see in peter dixon? i see my husband... the father of our girls. i see a public servant. a man who served under secretary clinton in the state department... where he took on the epidemic of violence against women in the congo. i see a fighter, a tenacious problem-solver... who will go to congress and protect abortion rights and our democracy. because he sees a better future for all of us. i'm peter dixon and i this election is about who shares your values. approved this message. let me share mine. i'm the only candidate with a record of taking on maga republicans, and winning. when they overturned roe, i secured abortion rights in our state constitution. when trump attacked our lgbtq and asian neighbors, i strengthened our hate crime laws. i fought for all of us struggling to keep up with the rising cost of living. i'm evan low, and i approve this message for all of our shared values. okay, i want to start tonight here in washington, d. c., where for the second time in under one week the supreme court weighed in on an issue related to donald trump. today, in a unanimous decision, the justices ruled that it's not up