people as the central players shush, don t tell them. well, cats out of the bag. it s happening. i think it happened today. thank you for the book plug, as well. thank you my friend. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. the year was 1990. republican incumbent north carolina senator jesse helms was pulling behind his black democratic challenger, a man named harvey gantt. it was a surprisingly competitive election. so helms cold in the political consultants, who helped the helms campaign figure out a way to fight back. and this is what they came up with. this ad. you needed that job. you are the best qualified. but they had to give it to a minority tick is of a racial quota. is that really fair? harvey gantt says he supports ted kennedy s racial quota law but makes the color of your skin more important than your qualifications. you ll vote on this issue next tuesday. for racial quotas, i began. it against racial quotas, jesse helms. that added, with
the year was 1990, republican incumbent of north carolina senator jesse helms was polling behind his black democratic challenger, a man named harvey gantt. it was a surprisingly competitive election, so home called in the political consultants who, in turn, helped the helms campaign figure out a way to fight back, and this is what they came up with, this ad. you needed that job, but they had to give it to a minority because of the racial quota. is that really fair? harvey gantt says it is. he supports the racial quota law, making the color of your skin more important in your qualifications. you will vote on this issue next tuesday, harvey gantt . that ad, with the white hands holding the rejection letter as the narrator intones you are a better candidate than the minority guy that they went with, can you steal the injustice of it all? that ad was exactly what senator jesse helms needed, he. term in the senate, 54 to 46%. that strategy worked. it worked well. making ga
abortion rights still enact a decades old ban? what happens with abortion pills? where can they and can t they be mailed? what about the politics, can a republican congress with a republican president now move to restrict all abortions across the can country? what can democrats do to reverse this, if anything? at least ten states quickly moved to implement laws effectively banning abortions since friday, some happened with trigger laws, another five states expected to enact further laws limiting abortion and all 26 states have laws that indicate they could outlaw or set extreme limits on the procedure. there were some protests across the country over the weekend, they were largely peaceful. and as some states move to restrict abortion rights others are taking steps to protect access and funding. some major companies are pledging to provide support not just for employees, in some cases they re saying they re going to provide support for dependents in states where abortions a
wrecked reconciled with the equal protection grounds. they like sufficiently focused a measurable objectives we re entering the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, and of racial stereotyping, a lack of meaningful and points. we have ever permitted admissions programs to work in that way. and we will not do so today. in a fiery dissent, the core courts new justice ketanji brown jackson called the ruling a tragedy for us all. we will let them eat cake obliviousness the majority pulls the record and announces color blindness for all by legal fiat. but deeming race irrelevant to law does not make it so in life. and the colleges of this country are required to ignore a thing that matters, it will not just go away. it will take longer for racism to leave us. and ultimately, ignoring race just makes it matter more. joining us now to discuss our melissa murray, nbc legal
the court said deciding on a student body in that way is not allowed under the constitution. so they try to 2007 and they tried again in 2013 and then again in 2014. but today they succeeded. roberts and thomas, joined by the courts for other conservative justices voted to strike down race conscious admissions. in a 6:33 ruling they found race conscious admissions programs at harvard irony university of north carolina they found them unconstitutional. in violation of the delivering the majority opinion, chief justice roberts reported, the ambitious programs can be wrecked reconciled with the equal protection grounds. they like sufficiently focused a measurable objectives we re entering the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, and of racial stereotyping, a lack of meaningful and points. we have ever permitted