battle in the case of the abortion drug mythic kristen, this means women girls, doctors can continue to have full access to one of, if not the most common method of abortion amid the preston without any restrictions, at least for now. the ruling. the decision takes us back to how the situation was in the united states before that texas judge ruled in which suspended access theoretically to mifid, chris stone, we re gonna start with cnn s jessica schneider and jessica, this came down just minutes ago. tell us more about the ruling and this isn t the end of this fight, right? i mean, the u. s. supreme court s going to still make a decision on this. this is not the engine that is right. this merely put this on pause for about five days. i mean, you can see it s a very short order here. what this does is this is this is justice samuel alito, granting in part what the doj and fda was asking for here. they were saying, if you if you can t give us anything else, give us an administr
administration impractical lifting title 42. now title 42 is the public health order that immigration officers have been using during the pandemic to block asylum seekers from entering the united states. over what they are calling public concerns. now, the tropical pointed judges robert our summer haze. and he said in his ruling that the cdc did not allow sufficient time for public comment before last month s announcement that the order will be lifted. just a few hours after the ruling, the justice department announced plans to appeal. and white house press secretary kareen jean pierre said quote, the authority to set public health policy nationally should rest with the centers for disease control, not with the single district court. well here at the latest is nbc news correspondent, in all things immigration grew, julia ainsley. welcome, julia. i first want to take a little bit deeper into the judges ruling. now, he has cited the administrative procedures act. what else we n
. stay will expire so presumably sometime on wednesday, we will once again be waiting for the supreme court to weigh into this and to see if there s a longer stay put on this, um the appeals process is already moving forward in the fifth circuit. the fifth circuit has already set a very aggressive briefing schedule. they ve already set oral arguments for may 17th so things are moving along at the appeals level, because, remember , this is just about pausing what the fifth circuit put into effect. the supreme court is doing that there will be no changes. but jake, as you mentioned this legal battle continues to play out, and once again on wednesday. all day will probably be on pins and needles again, much like we were today, waiting for the supreme court to once again, weigh in and see if they will continue to put these rules. are these changes once again on hold, jake. all right. jessica schneider with the breaking news. thanks let s bring in cnn senior supreme court analyst john bisku
going to be unduly hard in a public health, way if you look at the measures they ve taken. they say that they would be impacted by a lot of migration coming in all it once. now, you have to point out the fact that we are already in a surge of migration over 7400 migrants crossing per day. they expect that to go up to about ten or 12,000 a day, when title 42 would eventually left. right now, it is definitely delay because just summer haze hasn t put an end in that injunction. he wants to hear this case based on the merits. but because of that, appeal we can expect this to then be kept up to an appeals level, and taken out of his courtroom. so, julia, i think that it is really important point because this legal process could drag on for a while, and let s just say would judge summer haze has ruled has to stand. advising content period you go on for months, it could go on for years, correct? that s right. i mean, eventually you would
of law. our sense within the department are from our reporting is that there are a couple of things in play. there is, of course, the house investigation, and the house has already said if it finds criminal activity within its purview of its investigation, it will refer that to the justice department and then the justice department debate about what to do in terms of a prosecution. now, i think that the public seems to think that it would be easy to charge somebody like a mark meadows or the former president simply because of what we saw play out on our television screens that day. the justice department would need to secure a conviction not just at the district level but at the appeals level, and perhaps even before the supreme court, so any case would have to be beyond airtight, generally speaking, when i speak with former prosecutors they say this is not the time to do novel legal theory. this is not the time to stretch because you don t want to weaken yourself. this is something yo