appreciate the time. thank you. i d like to bring in today s agenda panel. erin carmone and sa bree ya. sabrina, i want to start with you. the huff post just came out with a new poll for the anniversary of roe v. wade. give us a few of the highlights maybe what was surprising here. sure. well, we have a new poll done in collaboration with u-gov that shows while americans continue to be evenly split how they view abortion from a ideological perspective, few americans don t believe the government has a place in determining abortion. 64% of responds said that decisions on abortion should be made between a woman and her doctor, whereas just 24% of respondents said if the government has a right or obligation to pass restrictions on abortion. moreover, only 35% of
than to shut down clinics that are providing what is supposed to be a federally protected, constitutionally protected right? a right that 60,000 women in texas access every year? today, a federal appeals court held a really important hearing on that we. a panel of three judges considered a challenge to some of the antiabortion restrictions passed by texas republicans last summer including the ones designed to shut down the clinics with those hospital agreements. erin carmone was in the courtroom reporting for msnbc.com and summarized the oral arguments today as a debate over how much hardship is too much hardship for texas women to endure on purpose at the hands of their state government? all three judges in that texas courtroom today are women. all three are republican appointees. all three have been hostile to abortion rights in the past and two of the three already have ruled in favor of letting the texas antiabortion restrictions go ahead.
way? is it constitutional for the state of texas to pass laws like that with no real purpose other than to shut down clinics that are providing what is supposed to be a federally protected, constitutionally protected right? a right that 60,000 women in texas access every year? today, a federal appeals court held a really important hearing on that we. a panel of three judges considered a challenge to some of the antiabortion restrictions passed by texas republicans last summer including the ones designed to shut down the clinics with those hospital agreements. erin carmone was in the courtroom reporting for msnbc.com and summarized the oral arguments today as a debate over how much hardship is too much hardship for texas women to endure on purpose at the hands of their state government? all three judges in that texas courtroom today are women. all three are republican appointees. all three have been hostile to abortion rights in the past and two of the three already have ruled in favor
[ female announcer ] remember when you thought anything was possible? it still is. you can do weight watchers new simple start plan entirely online. and get more support than ever. it s a 2-week plan to start losing weight right away. join for free. weight watchers online. log into your new beginning today. today, the conservative 5th u.s. court of appeals in new york excuse me, new orleans, took up the new law that comes as states passed an unprecedented 205 abortion restrictions in the past three years. that s 16 more than the number passed during the entire first decade of this century. the goal, targeting abortion providers, medical abortions, and bans after 20 weeks. msnbc.com national reporter erin carmone joins me now.
worker, working at a national craft arts and crafts company and you re paying $600 for birth control, not covering it is a big deal. it s an economic issue. erin, the other thash strikes me, there was a citation of citizens united in this, and this sort of question of are corporations people too? do you put the rights of the individual over the corporation? it does raise dramatic implications. but there s also broader legal implications. what s important to note is that when you incorporate your company, you re shielding yourself from certain kinds of liability. you re turni ining it into a coy and you have responsibilities and rights. you don t get to have it both ways. these cases are likely going to be decided not on the basis of citizens united or a first amendment argument but on the religious freedom restoration act which was passed by congress in the early 90s. i think what they have to show