>>> WELCOME TO MEET THE PRESS NOW. AS YOU JUST HEARD, PRESIDENT BIDEN IS RESPONDING TO THE SUPREME COURT RULING AFTER THE COURT ISSUED 6-3 RULING ON THE TERM IN THE FIRST IN SUPPORT OF A PRIVATE BUSINESS THAT REFUSED TO SERVICE SAME-SEX COUPLES AND THE SECOND STRIKING DOWN THE BITING ADMINISTRATION MASSIVE STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS PLAN. SPEAKING AT THE WHITE HOUSE A FEW MINUTES AGO, THE PRESIDENT ANNOUNCED NEW ACTION ON THE STUDENT DEBT. AND JOINING ME NOW TO TALK MORE ABOUT THE RULING IS MY COLLEAGUE AND IN A MOMENT WE WILL BE JOINED AT THE WHITE HOUSE BY KELLY O'DONNELL. OBVIOUSLY THIS RULING WAS NOT SOMETHING THE WHITE HOUSE HAND INTENDED 18 BUT IT DIDN'T SEEM AS THE $400 BILLION FORGIVENESS OF STUDENT LOANS, THE PRESIDENT CANNOT DO THIS ON HIS OWN AT LEAST NOT UNDER THE LAW THEY CITED. IS THAT YOUR READ? >> GIVEN THE CURRENT MAKEUP OF THE COURT, THIS WAS THE MOST ANTICIPATED DECISION AND IT'S WHAT WE EXPECTED ALTHOUGH THEY DID HAND DOWN THE SHARPEST REBUKE AND IT COULD'VE BEEN THEY SAID GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND FIND A DIFFERENT PATH AND REACH UP HER COMMENT FILE THE ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES ACT BUT INSTEAD THEY SAID NO. THE STATUTE THAT THE BITING MINISTRATION IS LOOKING TO COME THE HEROS ACT STARTED IN 2003 TO ALLOW PEOPLE AFTER 9/11 TO HAVE SOME FORGIVENESS AND WAS CONTINUED DURING COVID AND THEY SAID IT DOESN'T APPLY AND THAT ALLOWS TO MODIFY OR TEMPORARILY REDUCE STUDENT LOANS BUT DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO REWRITE THE STATUTE FROM THE GROUND UP AND THAT IS WHY TODAY THE BITING ADMINISTRATION IS LOOKING TO A DIFFERENT STATUTE, HIGHER EDUCATION ACT AND THAT WAS THE ONE PUT IN PLACE BY LYNDON JOHNSON THAT OVERHAULED HIGHER EDUCATION AND WHAT GIVES THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY AFTER TITLE IV OF THAT ACT TO ADMINISTER FEDERAL GRANTS. IT GIVES THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION BROAD AUTHORITY IN TERMS OF HOW FEDERAL STUDENT LOANS ARE DOLED OUT AND HOW THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE FORGIVEN BUT IT IS A LONGER PATH AND THAT IS PROBABLY A REASON WHY THE BITING ADMINISTRATION DID NOT GO THAT ROUTE IN THE FIRST PLACE. BIDEN IS TRYING TO GIVE SOME VERY WORRIED BORROWERS OUT THERE , AT LEAST 16 MILLION OF THEM THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, TRYING TO GIVE THEM SOME KIND OF PEACE TONIGHT BY SAYING, EVEN THOUGH THE PAYMENTS ARE NOW TO COME THE FALL, WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO GET SOME TEMPORARY MEASURES OF RELIEF. HE MENTIONED BORROWERS WILL ONLY HAVE TO PAY UP O 5% OF THEIR EXPENDABLE INCOME AFTER HOUSING AND FOOD, ONLY TALKING ABOUT FEDERAL LOANS, THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER KIND OF LOANS OUT THERE. HE ALSO POINTED TO THE FACT THAT HE THINKS THE COURT REALLY MISINTERPRETED AND THEY THINK WITH THE NEW PLAN GOING FORWAR , POINTING BACK TO THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE PEOPLE RELIEF AND ALSO TELLING BORROWERS THAT IF THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO REPAY THAT HE WILL GIVE THEM SOME KIND OF RELIEF SO THEY DON'T GET INTO DEFAULT OR HAVE THEIR CREDIT SCORES WORSENED. ALL OF THESE THINGS MAY WIND UP BACK IN COURT OVER THIS VERY ISSUE THAT THIS IS CENTRAL TO THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND THEIR PLAN AND CAMPAIGN PROMISE AND THIS IS ONE OF THE GROUPS THAT THEY'RE PUTTING FRONT AND CENTER AS THEY LOOK TO 2024, YOUNG PEOPLE LOOKING TO START FAMILIES AND ARE SADDLED BY DEBT. >> LET'S BRING IN KELLY O'DONNELL WHO IS AT THE WHITE HOUSE. THIS IS CLEARLY A PRIORITY FOR PRESIDENT BIDEN AND IT'S ALSO PRETTY CLEAR THAT HIS ADMINISTRATION WAS BRACING FOR THIS LOSS BECAUSE THEY WERE ABLE TO COME OUT SO QUICKLY WITH THE PLAN. I WANTED TO PLAY THE SECOND SOUNDBITE THAT WE HAVE FROM PRESIDENT BIDEN IN HIS ADDRESS A FEW MINUTES AGO THAT SHOWS HOW PREPARED THEY WERE. >> TODAY THE DECISION HAS CLOSED ONE PATH BUT NOW WE WILL PUSH THROUGH ANOTHER. I'M NEVER GOING TO STOP FIGHTING FOR YOU AND WE WILL USE EVERY TOOL AT OUR DISPOSAL TO GET YOU THE STUDENT THAT YOU NEED AND REACH YOUR DREAMS. IT'S GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY AND GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY AND IT WILL BE GOOD FOR YOU . >> THE PRESIDENT HAD A LOT OF OPTIONS AND YOU HAVE SEEN HOW HE'S HANDLED COURT LOSSES AND COULD'VE SAID WE ARE GOING TO CREATE A NEW GROUP OF LEGISLATIVE TACTICS, TICKETS CONGRESS BUT INSTEAD HE IS ONCE AGAIN GOING THE EXECUTIVE ACTION ROUNDS AND IS THIS A DEMONSTRATION THAT HE WANTS TO SHOW THIS GROUP OF YOUNG BOATERS -- VOTERS THAT HE'S COMMITTED TO GETTING SOMETHING DONE? >> I THINK THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO DELIVER ON THE PROMISE AND CERTAINLY YOUNGER VOTERS ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE CONSTITUENCY THAT HE WANTS TO HAVE WITH HIM SO HE BELIEVES IN THE POLICY AND CERTAINLY THE POLITICS HELPED HIM AS WELL BECAUSE YOUNGER VOTERS UNDER 35, WE HAVE SEEN A DEFINITE CHANGE IN HOW THE PRESIDENT PROCEEDS AND JOB APPROVAL AMONG THAT GROUP AND SINCE THE TIME THE FINANCIAL PACKAGE OF STUDENT LOAN RELIEF WAS FIRST INTRODUCED ALMOST A YEAR AGO, THE PRESIDENT'S NUMBERS HAVE GONE UP AND HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED AND THAT IS HELPFUL TO THE PRESIDENT POLITICALLY AND ALSO BELIEVES IT'S GOOD FOR THE BROADER ECONOMY. IT'S BEEN SIX HOURS SINCE THE DECISION BECAME PUBLIC THAT IT'S BEEN MANY MONTHS SINCE ORAL ARGUMENT SO BASED ON THAT THE WHITE HOUSE AND ADMINISTRATION HAD A SENSE OF WHAT THE CONCERNS WERE UNDER THE COURT AND KNEW THEY HAVE THE MAJORITY ON THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE AND THAT GAVE THEM TIME TO PREPARE. AT THE SAME TIME THEY NEEDED THE HOURS TODAY TO LOOK FOR WHAT WAS THE CONCERN EXPRESSED BY THE COURTS AND WHERE WAS THIS DETERMINED TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL USING THE HEROS ACT. AND LOOKING FOR A DIFFERENT PATHWAY. THIS WAS ONE OF THE OPTIONS ON THE TABLE IN THE PLAN B LIST AND ONCE THEY HAVE THE DECISION AND LOOK AT SPECIFICS AND HOW THEY COULD MOVE FORWARD AND THE HARD PART IS THEY ARE STARTING FROM SCRATCH UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION LAW AND LOOKING FOR NEW RULEMAKING ON POLICY AND THAT TAKES TIME AND IT'S NOT A FAXED FEST FIX. UNDER THE EMERGENCY AUTHORITY FOR THE HEROS ACT IT WOULD'VE BEEN A FASTER TIMELINE. WE CANNOT ANSWER WHO WOULD QUALIFY AND HOW MUCH LOAN FORGIVENESS THERE WOULD BE. IT WILL BE SOMETIME BEFORE WE DO KNOW THE ANSWERS BUT BORROWERS WILL HAVE TO START REPAYING AND THEIR STEPS TO MAKE THAT EASIER AND HE THRESHOLD OF HOW MUCH THEY HAVE TO PAY HAS BEEN ADJUSTED UNILATERALLY BY THE PRESIDENT BUT EXPECT MORE LEGAL CHALLENGES. THE ADMINISTRATION WAS PREPARED BUT NOW THERE'S AN LOT OF NEW WORK TO DO. >> THANK YOU BOTH FOR SO QUICKLY GETTING ON THE STORY AND WE WILL GET INSTANT REACTION AND JOINING ME NOW IS THE CALIFORNIA CONGRESSMAN. YOUR INITIAL REACTION TO THIS VERY QUICK MOVE BY THE PRESIDENT TO TRY TO FIND ANOTHER PATHWAY TO DELIVER SOME LEVEL OF STUDENT LOAN RELIEF. DO YOU THINK IT WILL BE ENOUGH AND WILL HE COME QUICKLY ENOUGH? >> I WAS ALIGNED WITH THE PRESIDENT AND HIS INITIAL TARGET OF LOAN FORGIVENESS EFFORTS. AND THE COURT HAS PUT ITS SUBSTITUTION AND SUBSTITUTED POLICY PREFERENCES RATHER THAN INTERPRET THE LAW. I BELIEVE THE HEROS ACT CLEARLY GAVE THE PRESIDENT AUTHORITY TO MODIFY LOANS AND THEY DECIDE MODIFY DID NOT MEAN WHAT MODIFY MEANT. THAT HAD THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT UNDER THE STATUTE AND THE COURTS SIMPLY JUST DECIDED THAT THEY WERE GOING IN AN UNELECTED WAY CERVEZA LEGISLATURE AND BECOME -- SUBSTITUTE THE COURTS RULING FOR THE CONGRESS AND THEY BECAME THEMSELVES THE CONGRESS. >> I ASSUME WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUE WITH STUDENT LOANS, ARE ALSO TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER DECISIONS THAT CAME OUT. WE HAVE THE ISSUE RELATED TO THE LGBTQ RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH WITH THE WEBSITE DESIGN FOR SAME-SEX COUPLE AND THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AS WELL. JUST IN GENERAL AND I KNOW YOU PUT OUT A NUMBER OF STATEMENTS, HOW CONCERNED ARE YOU AT THE DIRECTION OF THE CONSERVATIVE COURT AND DOES CONGRESS HAVE ANY SORT OF ROLE TO TRY TO REIN IN WHAT YOU AND YOUR FELLOW PROGRESSIVE COLLEAGUES FEEL IS POWER? >> I'M VERY CONCERNED BECAUSE THE THREE CASES TOGETHER HAVE SOME THINGS IN COMMON AND ONE THING THAT JUMPS OUT WAS THE AGGRESSIVE WAY IN WHICH THIS COURT GRANTED STANDING FOR THE PLAINTIFFS, STANDING IS A LEGAL TERM. AND DECIDING QUESTIONS BEFORE AND IT'S THE IDEA OF STANDING AND THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING REALLY AT STAKE. IN THE CASE OF STUDENT LOANS, SEVERAL STATES ATTORNEY GENERALS BROUGHT THE CASES FORWARD AGAINST PRESIDENT BIDEN'S STUDENT LOAN RELIEF AND IT'S HARD FOR THEM TO PROVE THAT THEIR STATES THAT THEY WERE BEING HARMED SO HE CAME DOWN TO A LOAN PROCESSOR TO SAY, IF PRESIDENT BIDEN RELIEVES ALL THE STUDENTS FROM ALL THE LOAN PAYMENTS THEN THEY WILL MAKE LESS PROFIT FROM PROCESSING THE LOANS. THEY TURNED BACK THE STANDING FOR SEVERAL STATES AND SOMETHING SIMILAR HAPPENED WITH AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, AND MADE UP GROUP OF STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, NOT EVEN A REAL STUDENT, UNLIKE THE CASE IN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION THERE IS NOT A PARTICULAR STUDENT THAT WAS HARMED AND GRANTED ADMISSION. AND THE THREE OF THREE CREATIVE HIM A VERY HYPOTHETICAL ISSUE OVER THE DIGITAL CREATIVES AND THE COURT REACHED OUT TO BRING THE CASES TO THEM AND VERY BIG ON REACH OF POWER AND THE WAY WE CHECK IT IS WE NEED TO CHANGE THE COMPOSITION OF THE COURT . >> DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU BELIEVE PRESIDENT BIDEN JUST ADDS TO THE CURRENT ROSTER OF NINE JUSTICES? >> CONGRESS HAS A ROLE IN THIS. CONGRESS AT VARIOUS TIMES THROUGHOUT HISTORY, THE COURT HAS BEEN AS LARGE AS 15 AND AS SMALL AS SEVEN AND IT HAS NOT BEEN NINE FOR ALL THE TIME IN OUR REPUBLIC. CONGRESS HAS ADJUSTED THE SIZE SEVERAL TIMES AND THE NEW DEAL BY PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT WAS THREATENED BY AGGRESSIVE ACTIVISTS AND IN TERMS OF PASS LEGISLATION TO ENLARGE THE COURT CALLED A SWITCH IN TIME SAVES NINE AND IT WAS AN EFFORT AND IT'S BEEN CONTEMPLATED BEFORE. CONGRESS BY SIMPLE MAJORITY CAN ADJUST THE SIZE OF THE COURT. >> DO YOU THINK THAT'S REALISTIC GIVEN THE CURRENT MAKEUP OF THE CONGRESS THAT WITH A SIMPLE MAJORITY YOU COULD GET TO POSITION WHERE CONGRESS WOULD GIVE THE PRESIDENT THE MAJORITY WEEKS. OF COURSE WE HAVE A HOUSE CONTROLLED BY EXTREME REPUBLICANS AND THEY WOULD NEVER CONTEMPLATE IT. BUT THE COURT NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT ANOTHER FORM OF RESTRAINT ON THE COURT DECIDES STANDING IS THE KNOWLEDGE THAT IF THEY GO TO MAKE FAR, THE POLITICAL BRANCHES HAVE THE OPTION OF ALTERING THE SIZE OF THE COURT. THAT IS A LIMITED CHECK IN IS CONTAINED IN THE CONSTITUTION AND IF THE COURT CONTINUES TO OVERREACH AND THE WAY IT'S DONE THEN THAT IS GOING TO BECOME A POLITICAL ISSUE IN NOVEMBER 2024. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE IT SHOULD BE A CAMPAIGN ISSUE. GO TO VOTERS AND SAY THE SOLUTION TO FIX IT IS TO VOTE MORE DEMOCRATS IN OFFICE. DO YOU BELIEVE THIS WILL SOMETHING THAT YOU WILL GO ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND MAKE THAT CASE, HOW BIG DO YOU THINK THE RECENT RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURT WILL PLAY IN THE 2024 ELECTION? >> I THINK THEY ARE HUGE RULINGS AND THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CONSIDER RACE AT ALL AS ONE OF MANY FACTORS IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS WHETHER IT'S DENYING LGBTQ PEOPLE THE ABILITY TO TREAT IT FAIRLY AT A BUSINESS, BUSINESS'S BELIEVES CAN TRUMP THE OBLIGATION TO SERVE EVERYBODY THAT COMES THROUGH THEIR DOORS AND THE IDEA THAT WE ROLL BACK THE DATE OF AFRICAN-AMERICANS BECAUSE THEY WERE UNSURE OF WHETHER A HOTEL OR MOTEL WOULD SERVE THEM AND THAT IS THE BEGINNING OF THREE OR THREE CREATIVE CASE. THE ABORTION RULINGS, THESE ARE EXTREME OUT OF TOUCH RULINGS BY THIS COURT AND IT DOES SO IN AN AGGRESSIVE MATTER AND HAVE GONE OUT OF THEIR WAY TO BRING IT INTO THEIR COURT SO THEY CAN MAKE THESE DECISIONS AND ARE ACTING LIKE A LEGISLATIVE BODY THAN A COURT THAT IS RESTRAINED. THAT REALLY WAITS FOR TRUE ADVERSARIES AND THEY ARE SEEKING OUT PEOPLE WHO MATCH THEIR POLICY PREFERENCES TO BRING CASES INTO THEIR COURT . >> I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING TIME OUT DURING YOUR LEGISLATIVE RECESS AND I KNOW YOU'RE VERY BUSY IN YOUR DISTRICT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. >> MY PLEASURE . >> AS WE MENTIONED, IN ADDITION TO THE STUDENT DEBT, THE OTHER CASE THE SUPREME COURT RULED ON WAS THE LGBTQ RIGHT ISSUE AND THE COURT CITED THAT THE WOMAN HAD A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT, TOLERANCE AND NOT COERCION IS THE ANSWER. IT'S A RICH AND CALM PLEX PLACE WHERE ALL PERSONS ARE FREE TO THINK AND SPEAK AS THEY WISH AND NOT AS THE GOVERNMENT DEMANDS IT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS AND A DISSENTING OPINION WRITTEN BY SONIA SOTOMAYOR, SHE CALLED IT HEARTBREAKING AND COMPARED IT TO THE DISCRIMINATIONS THAT BLACKS FACE BEFORE THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. JOINING ME WITH REACTION IS THE DEPUTY LEGAL DIRECTOR FOR THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION AND WE THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE I THINK THE ACLU HAS AN INTERESTING ROLE. YOU'VE ALSO BEEN A PRETTY FIERCE DEFENDER OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT. IN FACT, YOU HAVE TAKEN THE POSITION OF GROUPS LIKE THE , DEFENDING THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND WHY WAS THE SITUATION DIFFERENT? >> THIS CASE ISN'T ABOUT SPEECH BUT PEOPLE AND IT'S ABOUT WHETHER A BUSINESS CAN REFUSE TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO PEOPLE CONSISTENT BECAUSE OF WHO THEY ARE AND WHO THEY LIVE. THE FIRST TIME EVER THAT THE COURT HAS SAID THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS THE RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE. THE OWNER OF 303 HAS A RIGHT TO SAY WHATEVER SHE WANTS. NOTHING WILL STOP THAT BUT THE QUESTION WAS IN HER BUSINESS, DOES SHE HAVE TO SERVE PEOPLE CONSISTENT WITH ANTIDISCRIMINATION LAWS AND THIS COURT MADE THE RADICAL RULING THAT THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS THE RIGHT TO TURN PEOPLE AWAY THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS A RIGHT TO SAY, I PROVIDE A SERVICE FOR WEDDING WEBSITES BUT I DON'T PROVIDE THAT SERVICE TO PEOPLE BECAUSE OF WHO YOU LOVE. THAT SAID SHE AND ESSENCE IS ABLE TO PUT UP A SIGN THAT SAYS, YOUR KIND IS NOT SERVED HERE OR WEDDING WEBSITE FOR HETEROSEXUALS ONLY AND THIS IS NOT A GOOD DAY IN THAT RESPECT . >> WHAT DOES THIS RULING MEAN IN TERMS OF THE BROADER CONVERSATIONS ABOUT FREEDOM OF SPEECH? IS A SUPPORT THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SAY DISCRIMINATORY TAINT THINGS AND WHAT IS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN OFFERING A SERVICE AND VOICING YOUR OPINION REGARDLESS OF HOW OFFENSIVE IT MAY BE? >> THIS IS ABOUT A BUSINESS AND LAWS THAT OUR COUNTRY PASSED AND COLORADO PASSED IT IN THE 1800s TO PROTECT NEWLY FREED SLAVES AND IT'S ABOUT A LAW THAT SAYS, IF YOU HAVE A BUSINESS, YOU CANNOT DENY SERVICE TO PEOPLE BASED -- YOU CANNOT RELAX SERVICE BECAUSE THEY'RE BLACK AND YOU CANNOT DENY SERVICES TO PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY ARE LGBT. YOU HAVE THE PRIVILEGE AND AT THE PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION ABOUT THE GREEN BUT, WHERE CAN WE GO TO GET OUR SERVICE AND WHERE CAN WE GO TO BUY OUR WEDDING DRESS AND THAT'S WHAT'S AT ISSUE, NOT WHAT YOU CAN SAY ON THE STREET WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT CAN STOP YOU FROM PROTESTING OR THE GOVERNMENT CAN STOP YOU FROM OPPOSING MY RIGHT TO ACCESS YOUR BUSINESS. WHAT WAS AT STAKE WAS, THINK OF YOUR STOREFRONT AND THINK OF THE STORE ON THE STREET AND WHETHER THEY CAN SAY, I REFUSE TO SERVE YOU BECAUSE OF WHO YOU ARE AND TODAY THE DECISION OPENS THE DOOR FOR BUSINESSES THAT PROVIDE GOODS AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO DENY SERVICES TO HISTORICALLY DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE. >> WE ALREADY SAW THE SUPREME COURT WAY IN AND A LOT OF THE CASES ORIGINATING OUT OF COLORADO AND ONE OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THOSE CASES AND WHAT THE RULING MEANS GOING FORWARD THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE MASTERPIECE KICKS RULING TOLD US? >> THE MASTERPIECE CAKE SHOP AND THEY COULD REFUSE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO A SAME-SEX COUPLE AND WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE. THE SUPREME COURT IN THAT CASE DID NOT RULE THAT THE BUSINESS HAD A RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE SO WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE 2018? THE COMPOSITION OF THE COURT. >> FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE CONGRESSMEN RIGHT BEFORE WE BROUGHT YOU ON ABOUT THE COMPOSITION OF THE COURT IN THAT EXACT ISSUE AND DO YOU AGREE THAT THE SOLUTION FOR FOLKS ON YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE TO CHANGE THE TRAJECTORY IS TO ADD MORE MEMBERS? >> I'M HERE REALLY TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THE COURT DID TODAY AND TO SAY WHAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, WE WILL KEEP FIGHTING SO THAT THE COURT AND OTHER PEOPLE CANNOT PUNCH HOLES INTO ANTIDISCRIMINATION LAW. NOBODY SHOULD HAVE TO WORRY THAT YOU WILL BE REFUSED SERVICE BECAUSE OF WHO YOU ARE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. >>> REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES AND A CONSERVATIVE GROUP LABELED ANTIGOVERNMENT EXTREMIST BY CIVIL WATCH DOGS. YOU'RE WATCHING LIVE PICTURES WERE FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP WILL TAKE THE STAGE TO ADDRESS GROUPS MOMS FOR LIBERTY. WAS THE OLITICAL FALLOUT FOR 2024 DURING THE LANDMARK DECISION, YOU'RE WATCHING MEET GIVEN. >> >>> WELCOME BACK S REPUBLICANS HAIL THE TRIUMPHS OF THE CONSERVATIVE COURT, THE PRESIDENTIAL FIELD ESCORTING A CONSERVATIVE GROUP AND THIS IS THE SCENE IN PHILADELPHIA AT A CONVENTION FOR A GROUP FOR MOMS FOR LIBERTY. THEY HAVE BEEN LABELED AN ANTI GOVERNMENT EXTREMIST ORGANIZATION WHICH THE GROUP LEADERS TO REJECT. NIKKI HALEY AND RON DeSANTIS SPOKE TO THE GROUP EARLIER TODAY. ALSO NOTING RECENT COURT RULINGS. >> THEY ARE MAKING A LOT OF WRONGS RIGHT. THEY HAVE CORRECTED THINGS ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND THEY ARE CORRECTING THINGS ON STUDENT LOANS AT THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS REALLY IMPORTANT. >> WE SAW THE SUPREME COURT UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AND SAY NO RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS. >> FLORIDA IS THE FIRST STATE TO GO EVEN FURTHER AND WE HAVE ELIMINATED DEI FROM THE PUBLIC UNIVERSITY. AND DEI BETTER STANDS FOR DIVISION EXCLUSION AND INDOCTRINATION AND THAT HAS NO PLACE IN OUR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS. >> DONALD TRUMP IS EXPECTED TO TAKE THE STAGE FOR HIS OWN REMARKS AND YESTERDAY THE SUPER PACs CELEBRATED THE AFFIRMATIVE- ACTION DECISION AS A RESULT OF HIS PROMISE TO APPOINT CONSTITUTIONAL INJUSTICES AND TRUMP APPOINTED THREE JUSTICES DURING HIS PRESIDENCY. JOINING ME NOW FROM PHILLY IS GABE GUTIERREZ. THIS IS A GROUP THAT HAS RISEN TO PROMINENCE OUT OF NOWHERE AND THEY WERE JUST A BUNCH OF MOMS UPSET OUT THE WAY THE SCHOOLS WERE HANDLING THE CARBON PANDEMIC. THERE ALSO PRETTY CONTROVERSIAL. TELL US ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION. >> THIS IS THE LATEST BATTLE OF THE SO-CALLED CULTURE WARS AND FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP IS GETTING READY TO SPEAK RIGHT BEHIND ME AND THIS IS A VERY CONTROVERSIAL GROUP SINCE IT STARTED AND 2021 FOUNDED BY SEVERAL MOTHERS IN FLORIDA TO COMBAT THE COVERED RESTRICTION AND PUSHBACK AGAINST MASS MANDATES. THE GROUP SAID IT HAS GROWN EXPONENTIALLY AND NOW HAS 285 CHOPPERS WITH MORE THAN 115,000 MEMBERS ACCORDING TO THE GROUP AND AS HE SAID THEY HAVE BEEN LABELED ON ANTIGOVERNMENT EXTREMIST GROUP AND THE CHAPTER IN INDIANA APOLOGIZE FOR QUOTING HITLER AND SAT DOWN WITH THE COFOUNDERS OF THE GROUP AND I ASKED THEM ABOUT THAT. >> THE LAW CENTER LABELED THE ORGANIZATION AND EXTREMIST GROUP. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT? >> THEY LABELED US ANTIGOVERNMENT EXTREMIST GROUP AND ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT OUR RECORD FROM LAST YEAR. WE WON 275 RACES AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO. GET INVOLVED AND GET BEHIND YOUR CANDIDATE AND WORK TO GET THEM ELECTED SO YOU CAN MAKE CHANGE IN YOUR COMMUNITY. >>> THE GROUP THAT BILLS ITSELF AS A GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT BUT SOME ARE QUESTIONING WHERE THE MONEY IS COMING BEHIND IT AS THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO REPORT THEIR DONORS. FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ABOUT TO BE INTRODUCED. >> SOME OF THE OTHER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SPOKE TODAY, GOVERNOR DeSANTIS AND GOVERNOR HALEY TALKING ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT BUT WHAT ARE THE OTHER TOPICS? >> GOVERNOR RON DeSANTIS SPOKE YEAR AND HE GOT A LOT OF APPLAUSE AND HE TALKED ABOUT EDUCATION IN FLORIDA AND DID NOT SEE IT AS A BATTLE BETWEEN THE GOVERNOR FLORIDA AND BUSINESS BUT THEY SEE IT AS AN ATTACK ON HER CHILDREN. A LOT OF RESPONSES HE HAS AND OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY AND IT'S VERY CONTROVERSIAL AMONG MODERATE REPUBLICANS AND THIS IS A VERY FRIENDLY CROWD FOR HIM AND MANY VIEW IT AS INDOCTRINATION AND THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE FIGHTING AGAINST AND SOME PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES KNOW THAT THEY HAVE TO WIN OVER THIS CONSTITUENCY IN THE GOP PRIMARY. >> WE ARE GOING TO LET YOU GO AS THEY ARE STARTING TO BEGIN THE PROGRAM. JOINING ME NOW IS THE NBC NEWS CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT, ALLIE THE TALLY AND SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS. AND REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST CHIT JIM DORNAN. YOU HAVE SEEN THIS PLAY OUT AND YOU BEEN ON CAPITOL HILL AND ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY AND WHAT WE HAVE SEEN PLAY OUT HERE, ISN'T THIS THE CULMINATION OF ALL THE ISSUES YOU COVERED WEIGHT BACK ALMOST EIGHT YEARS AGO? >> THE SEED THAT TEMP GRANTED FINALLY BEARING FRUIT AND NOW EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO DO THE SAME THING. RON DeSANTIS ALMOST TRY TO OUT TRUMP TRUMP AND YESTERDAY HE POINTED OUT THAT TRUMP SAID HE'S FINE WITH AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND DeSANTIS TRYING TO SAY THAT TRUMP IS AN ADVOCATE. WE ARE WATCHING THE TWO CAMPAIGNS TRYING TO GET AT EACH OTHER MORE BUT THIS WILL BE A PRIMARY LARGELY FOUGHT ALONG THE LINES OF THE SO-CALLED CULTURE WAR AND PEOPLE LIKE DeSANTIS AND TRUMP WOULD DO WELL BY THE METRIC BUT THAT IS NOTHING TO SAY HOW TRANSLATE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION. I WAS ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL TWO DAYS AGO IN HAMPSHIRE AND VOTERS SAID THEY WERE CONCERNED WITH THAT IS THE WAY THE PRIMARY WOULD PLAY OUT BECAUSE THEY WANT TO PUT FORWARD A CANDIDATE THAT SELECTABLE AND THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY CAN DO THAT IF IT'S TRUMP OR OTHERS. >> KELLY TALKED ABOUT THAT MOMENT AND WE HAVE IT. I WANT YOU TO LISTEN TO THIS. >>> AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION, SHOULD WE KEEP IT? >> I'M FINE WITH AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. YOU HAVE TO ALSO GO FREE MARKET, CAPABILITY AND DO A LOT OF THINGS BUT I'M FINE WITH AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION. I'VE LIVED WITH IT FOR A LONG TIME AND HAVE GREAT RELATIONSHIPS WITH LOTS OF PEOPLE. SO I'M FINE WITH IT. >> THIS DOES KIND OF DEFINE A LITTLE BIT OF THE ISSUE THAT DONALD TRUMP HAS HIS HIS IDEOLOGY HAS CHANGED A LOT OVER THE COURSE OF HIS POLITICAL CAREER. IS HE GOING TO LEAN INTO THE DECISION THAT THE SUPREME COURT IS PUTTING OUT IN HIS SEAN ALEXIS TO LEAN INTO THE DOBBS DECISION . >> I THINK HE PROBABLY SKIRTS THE LINE. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS PART OF OUR LIFE AND PART OF OUR SOCIETY. I CAN SEE WHY HE SAID THAT BUT ALSO HE WAS A DEMOCRAT AND HE'S NOT A CONSERVATIVE BUT THAT GROUP IS VERY CONSERVATIVE AND THAT'S WHY ALL THESE GUYS ARE GOING UP THERE AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHAT TRUMP DID TO WOMEN VOTERS IN THE SUBURBS WHO VOTED REPUBLICAN BRING HIM BACK AND THAT'S A GOOD REASON FOR THESE GUYS GOING UP THERE. I WILL MAKE A PREDICTION AND THE NEXT STATE WILL BE PROVEN WRONG. >> WE'VE ALL BEEN THERE. >> HOW DID DEMOCRATS PLAY THIS? THE RULINGS MAY BE VERY POPULAR IN A PLACE LIKE MOMS FOR LIBERTY BUT WHAT ABOUT THE GENERAL ELECTRIC? >> ANY PLACE TO GO IN THE COUNTRY YOU CAN TALK TO AN INDIVIDUAL OR TALK TO SOMEONE SUFFERING FROM STUDENT AT AND WOMEN DEALING WITH REPRODUCTIVE RIGHT CHOICES AND THIS IS STUFF THAT GOES ON. SOMETIMES YOU KNOW THAT THERE SHOULD BE MORE DECISIONS OF LIVING IN A BUBBLE AND THE OTHER PROBLEM IS THEY HAVE GONE TO THE MAJORITY VIEW ON LGBTQ AND AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION. AND THIS IS AN EASY POLITICS QUESTION. >> HOW EASY IS IT BECAUSE WE HAVE SEEN SOME PROGRESSIVE NUMBERS WHICH YOU ALIGN YOURSELF WITH TALKING ABOUT PACKING THE COURT AND YOU ATTACK THE COURT OR POLICIES BUT I WANT TO PLAY ANOTHER BITE FROM CHUCK TODD ABOUT WHO THE COURT IS. ACTUALLY WE DON'T HAVE THIS ONE BUT THIS WAS AFTER THE ROE V. WADE DECISION WAS OVERTURNED. SHE CALLED IT AN ACTIVIST COURT AND WE HEARD PRESIDENT BIDEN SAY IT'S NOT A NORMAL COURT AND IS THE SOLUTION TO GO AFTER THE COURT TO PUT THAT IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE AND SUGGEST ADDING MORE MEMBERS? >> THE COURT IS ACTING WITH THE POLICY ARM AND IF THEY WANTED POLICY ARM THEN THEY SHOULD JUMP DOWN FROM THE COURT AND RUN FOR OFFICE. NUMBER 2, I THINK I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN AND THE QUESTIONS AROUND AND PEOPLE FORGET WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY ASKING FOR IS A MORE ACTIVE CONGRESS. THAT'S WHY YOU WANT THIS ACTION TO OCCUR. YOU WANT LGBTQ LAWS PASSED THROUGH CONGRESS THAT ENSURE THESE RIGHTS AND HAVE A SUPREME COURT ACTING OUT OF STEP BUT IF CONGRESS WERE TO STEP IN -- WHAT IS THE QUESTION? DO WE GET A MAJORITY OR DO WE START PUSHING ON THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA? >> LET'S GO TO HER EXPERT, WILL ANY OF THIS GET DONE? THERE IS A DAWES FIRE AND WILL FROM THE GRASSROOTS BUT IT SEEMS A LOOSE END . >> AND WE DO THE SAME LIVE SHOT ON EVERY SINGLE ONE. OR EVEN LAST CONGRESS WHEN IT WASN'T >>> GOVERNMENT AND THEY STILL DID NOT HAVE THE VOTES TO DO WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO. AND THAT IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE WHY YOU'RE WATCHING THEM PUSH TO THE NEXT ELECTION AND IT'S NOT SO TERRACE POLITICS BUT IT'S GALVANIZING PEOPLE AND SUSTAINING ENERGY AND POLITICS IS A REAL DIFFICULT THING AND ALTHOUGH WE SEE THE INTENSITY ON THINGS LIKE GUNS AND REPRO WITH DEMOCRATS, SUSTAINING THAT IS HARD. >> SHE WAS NAMED THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM, WHEN ELECTIONS. >> PART OF THE PROBLEM IS WE DON'T TEST THE ELECTIONS IN THE GENERAL ELECTION. >> WE NEVER DID BUT SO MUCH OF THIS IS FOUGHT AT THE PRIMARY LEVEL WHERE THERE ISN'T REALLY AN INCENTIVE OR A MOTIVATION FOR THE CANDIDATES TO COME TO THE MIDDLE AND CUT DEALS AND FIND THE MOST POPULAR OPTION THAT MOST AMERICANS THINK. IS THAT ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS TO SEE REAL SYSTEMIC CHANGE, FIGHTING ON THE MARGINS? >> IT'S INCREDIBLY DIVIDED, FAR LEFT AND FAR RIGHT AND PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE DO NOT EXIST ANYMORE. I THINK YOU NAILED IT ALSO THAT IT IS TOUGHER OR THE VERY REASON . >> I WANT TO SHOW YOU, WE HAVE A POLL ABOUT PRIMARY VOTERS WHO HAVE EARNED A COLLEGE DEGREE OR HIGHER AND I SHOW YOU DID THE DIVIDE AND WE DO HAVE IT AND 51% OF DEMOCRATS OF PRIMARY VOTERS HAVE A COLLEGE DEGREE OR HIGHER AND 35% OF REPUBLICANS. THIS IS NOT A CHARACTER ASSASSINATION ON EITHER SIDE BUT THIS SHOWS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PERSPECTIVES OF THE TWO GROUPS AND THE MESSAGING >> AMERICAN WORKFORCE TWO THIRDS OF THEM DO NOT HAVE A COLLEGE DEGREE AND THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO WE INCREASINGLY HAVE SEEN MOVING TOWARD THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND I THINK REPUBLICANS HAVE DONE A FINE JOB OF MAKING THEMSELVES UNDER TRUMP AND ISSUES AROUND CORPORATE AMERICA AND WHAT I THINK DEMOCRATIC PARTY USED TO DO AND IT'S TO BE MUCH MORE AFFILIATED WITH WORKING-CLASS PEOPLE AND WORKERS WERE FIGHTING TO IMPROVE THEIR JOB AND BENEFITS AND GET RESPECT IN THE WORKPLACE AND THAT'S WHAT JOE BIDEN IS TRYING TO BRING TO DEMOCRATIC PARTY. >> IS THIS A WORKING-CLASS MESSAGE OR NOT? PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING WITH DEBT, NURSES ARE WORKING IN HOSPITALS AND WE FIGHT FOR YOU, NOT THE OPPORTUNITY THAT'S PRESENTED HERE. >> YOU THINK THAT'S WHERE THE WILL IS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY QUIZ. INK ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WE COVERED LAST CONGRESS. THE REASON THEY DID NOT PUT IT IN THE INFLATION REDUCTION ACT AND WE COVERED AT NAUSEA BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE OPPOSITES. IT'S NOT ALL DEMOCRATS WANT X AND REPUBLICANS DON'T AND IT'S WHY YOU'RE SAYING THE MESSAGE IS NOT JUST ELECT DEMOCRATS LIKE DEMOCRATS IN A LARGE ENOUGH MARGIN THAT WE CAN GET RID OF THE FILIBUSTER AND WE CAN DO ALL OF THESE THINGS BECAUSE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE THERE NOW AND THEY ARE NOT DEMOCRATS IN THE SENSE THAT WILL HELP THEM DO THAT. >> WE TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PRIMARY VOTE AND GENERAL ELECTION VOTE AND WHAT WE SEE PLAY OUT IS DESIGNED TO THE PRIMARY VOTER AND IS THE REPUBLICAN MESSAGING, IS A POSSIBLE FOR THEM TO WIN A GENERAL ELECTION AT THE PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL? >> THE CULTURE WARS WILL EVENTUALLY HURT THEM. THE BASE, 20% OF PRIMARY VOTE, IT'S NOT GOING TO TRANSLATE INTO GENERAL ELECTION AT ALL. I DON'T THINK THEIR THINKING FAR ENOUGH AHEAD. >> DO DEMOCRATS HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO TAKE ADVANTAGE? >> YESTERDAY YOU HAD RON DeSANTIS, HOW DOES THE NATION EXIST WITHOUT IRS AND ITS ANTIGOVERNMENT PARTY AND I DON'T THINK THAT IS SUCCESSFUL. >> GREAT CONVERSATION AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING
