Stay updated with breaking news from Doesnt appeal. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
With violence, that s great. he wasn t a white supremacist, he wasn t connected to a militia, why by the way there was organized group to do violence and it was black lives matter, and could you comment on that real quick? that s not going to happen because that doesn t appeal to their constituency. steve: why is that? i think it s because they have backed themselves into a corner to where they realize they really can t connect with regular americans who might sit there and go we absolutely agree with the sentiment of black lives matter but we don t want to burn our city down. and imagine being a politician in that position to where you don t feel like you can even agree with that or say that out loud. steve: that says a lot right there, doesn t it. it says that our country can get a lot better. that we can move into a better place maybe as early as the midterms. steve the whole point of the question was, you know, he was acquitted. there were these charges against him. and a jury ....
$10,000, but $1 million. do you think in that case the chill on the conduct at issue here would be sufficient to allow a federal court review prior to the end of the state court process? no, your honor, because that wouldn t affect either the article iii or sovereign immunity problems in this case. undoubtedly, it would increase the chill, the same way that individual you are exercising to protect, it would arguably protect as i understand, the only way in which you get federal court review is, of course, for somebody to take action that violates the state law and then be sued under the law, and then have the opportunity to raise their defense in federal court, eventually. and you re saying that somebody is going to undertake that activity, even though they re going to be subject to suit for $1 million, repetitively, because that doesn t exercise a chill effect? that s not what i m saying at all, your honor. what i m saying is, it doesn t expand access to the federal ....
They re essential to your argument, right? you agree that it would be adequate to have federal court review at the end of the state process, but for the chilling effect that you re talking about, right? i think not in the way that sb-8 is structured. i mean, if there is review from this court, holding that the law is unconstitutional, that would be adequate, but i think there are a number of the review at the end of the day, right? when we have a final judgment from the state judiciary? but there are a number of reasons that that is unlikely to happen. first of all, if you win in the trial court, if the state trial court says that the law is unconstitutional, then getting broader relief depends on your opponents appealing that through the intermediate court and through the texas supreme court. and the components of this that s true in any case, right? if you get relief in the trial court and your opponent doesn t ....
0 weeks. lindsey? gabe gutierrez, thank you. and in just seconds, we ll take you inside the supreme court to hear arguments in two challenges to the texas abortion law. i m lindsey reiser in for stephanie ruhle. jose diaz-balart picks up the coverage right now. good morning. it s 10:00 a.m. eastern, 7:00 a.m. pacific. i m jose diaz-balart. and we begin with something that hasn t happened before. for the first time ever, msnbc will bring you live oral arguments from the u.s. supreme court as it takes up two cases stemming from the controversial texas abortion law. this will be audio only, as the supreme court does not allow television cameras. the first case is whole women s health versus jackson. it was filed by abortion providers, challenging a law that effectively bans abortions in texas and shifts enforcement from the state to private citizens who can sue anyone seeking an abortion or anyone who helps a woman obtain one. with me now so break this all down, nbc news corresponde ....
That will be streamed in australia, the uk and the us, talking about politics, talking about sport and a variety of issues, that doesn t appeal? no. no, i can have my view about things that i feel are important, which i ve done. climate change for me is really, really important. i ve got four kids. i m not worried about. it s not about me going ahead. my generation will probably be all right, who knows? but i worry about my boys and worry about their children and their children s children. you know, are they going to have a planet that they can actually live on? so, important things like that. because i ve got a big platform, i can put it out there. obviously, i think about the things that i do, erm. but it s interesting you say you want to impact these issues, you say you are aware of your platform and you re using it, ....