on the supreme court overturned roe v. wade. in that explosive decision, they not only overturned that landmark decision, the court also galvanized liberals and triggered backlash at the polls. and today, they also triggered counter-protesters. while the march began as a response to roe, we don t end as a response to roe being overturned. why? because we re not yet done. i am here. it is to show that we will not let america be bullied out of the right to abortion. everything that happened before roe, that was just the preseason. [ chanting: abortion is essential ] not when roe will be reversed, but when. our work just began. it felt more pressing this year. at this point, we no longer have a constitutionally protected right to abortion. the landmark decision from the supreme court overruling roe has not only sparked pushback from the left, it has also given rise to a growing fear and confusion among conservatives as they struggle to define the future of their move
of this lecture and the stakes couldn t be higher. the president and the former president, one stage two, very different visions for america s future. the cnn presidential debate tomorrow night at nine, live on cnn and streaming on max happening now, the final countdown to cns historic presidential debate with just one de to ago before president joe biden and former president donald trump go head-to-head right here in atlanta. we re getting do behind the scenes details and how the candidate let s hope to impress voters and attack one another we re also following a breaking story. the united states supreme court reportedly tips that s han briefly posting a draft ruling on a pivotal abortion case we re breaking down the apparent decision and how it was mistakenly released. welcome to our viewers here in the united states and around the world, i will flits you re in atlanta and year in the situation room we re coming to you live from cnn studios in atlanta, the back drop for t
that becomes harassing. and at some point in that pattern of conduct, a judge or a group of judges become frustrated. there s a waste of court resources, and they will use rule 11 sanctions to tell that litigant, you ve got to quit doing this. but it takes a lot for judges to reach that threshold. i think that s what happened here. the court is out of patience, it may signal to other courts that this is now one of those annoying litigants who brings repeated cases that are meritless. and in the context of this particular case, right, this is trump suing hillary clinton, the dnc, others who are members of the dnc, but also individual fbi agents, and saying that they created a false narrative about his campaign s willingness to engage with russia during the 2016 campaign. and he files this after the senate intelligence committee, which is led by republicans at the time, issues a bipartisan report that concludes that paul
another leading question, but i ll take it. yes. you know, i ve been covering the court for about ten years and there is a lot of animosity in the opinions. there s a lot of vitriol. but i ve been so impressed watching the justices respond after one justice calls another justice s legal reasoning pure applesauce, saying, i would rather hide my head in a bag, they come back to the oral argument the following week and they re hunky-dory. they don t seem to be hunky-dory this fall. i think there s a new kind of iciness on the bench. they are looking at each other with some disdain. they are less patient with each other. they are showing signs that they re not as friendly as they used to be. we used to have clarence thomas and stephen breyer they would whisper and chuckle like schoolboys during arguments. we don t have anything like that anymore. with the exception of neil
given the degree to which a lot of those stories centered on certain justices, why didn t the court come out immediately by saying that the justices had been improved? and why wouldn t they put them to a sworn affidavit like any other employee? so, i assume that that s a rhetorical question, right? this was the obvious move for the court to make. if i can put on my prosecutor hat for a minute, had i been looking at, this is a criminal investigation, and the court suggests in its report that it considered some criminal statutes, the first thing that you need to do, if only for completeness sake and to rule out the possibility is to talk to justices whose names have come out in the past. one of those justices was justice alito. he had publicly said, this isn t true, i never leaked this opinion. still, you need to touch bases with him. and here s yet another reason it was incumbent on the court to talk seriously with the justices. if you are a law clerk getting ready to launch your car