The fastest three hours in radio. You're with Brian Kilmeade. Shannon Bream, great coverage. As the news broke, you were sitting there outside ready to go and do some instant analysis. Fox News's chief legal analyst, also anchor of Fox News at Night.
And you see her all over the channel, best selling author. Shannon, thanks for joining us. It is great to be with you. Well, first off, put in perspective, what this day means for the country. I just had Alan Dershowitz on projecting summer of rage. So they're calling for a night of rage.
That's what they're calling it. And I think that there's a lot of unrest. There's a lot of frustration. And it's, you know, kind of like a tinderbox, much as it was during covid, where people were feeling, you know, isolated and frustrated. Now it's the economy. People are really on edge. And I think the left is very upset about a lot of what they're getting from the Supreme Court. So I think that urging caution as our authorities have done in light of the threats that are openly. There is a good move. We see the Nancy Pelosi is beside herself.
Simple floating so speak with people behind who are passing your side just as they must be given a done. They cannot do anything. They can've been out with a great deal of it.
Who can be inadequate if they've been put into some kind of effort just to actually help and defend themselves with anger. Not a good day. The 63 decision. One of the things, as you've pointed us to. And it's just a. John of internally is John Roberts is chief justice. He wrote up his own opinion and essentially it's not it's he voted with the majority.
But he's not so much with the majority. And maybe you'll put a perspective. One of the lines is the court opinion and the dissent display is relentless. Is relentless freedom from doubt on the legal issue that I cannot share.
I am not sure, of course, before people that are going to take Nice waves or going toSpot Milwaukee could also be looking for new options of a the state of Florida. And I think that's true. And I think that's true.
And I think it's true. For example, that a ban on terminating pregnancy from the moment of concession must be treated the same under the Constitution as a ban after 15 weeks. So he is openly thinking about this speculating this and letting us know his mindset.
Number one, how rare is that and how powerless was he in this. Well, I mean, let's and let's say I'm a little bit too sure of their legal position and I couldn't go to either of those places. So for him, this is where we sort of thought when we saw that leaked opinion, kind of thought this is where he was going to go. It seems like after the case that there were plenty of votes to uphold that Mississippi law. But then the question was always whether or not they go after Roe. And since the chief wants to have narrow opinions, narrow decisions, narrowly tailored solutions, he's always been about that.
So I didn't think he'd go all the way there. And listen, when the court decides to hear a case, they identified the so-called question presented. That's supposed to be the only thing the case is about. And he cites to that because what they decided was the question were pre-viability bans on abortion unconstitutional. He stuck to the Mississippi question and you know, he chides the court for going all the way after Roe and Casey. He just didn't feel like this case necessitated what he thinks was an overreach on the original question. He he goes on to say a thoughtful member of this court once counseled this difficulty of a question admonishes us to observe the wise limitations on our function and to confine ourselves to deciding only what is necessary to the disposition of the immediate case. I would decide the question we granted review to answer, whether previously recognized abortion right bars all abortion restrictions prior to viability, such that a ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancies is necessarily unlawful.
The answer to that question is no and there's no need to go further than to decide the case. So he would have, what is he saying there? He's saying he didn't want to get to Roe. He doesn't even want to issue an opinion on that. He doesn't feel like that's where they should go. I mean, he felt like we have this question. It was about the Mississippi law and that's the only place that we should be going.
Like I said, he's a minimalist about this kind of stuff. He doesn't want to do big, sweeping broad decisions, but he's the chief. There's only so much he can do because he was outnumbered here. There were five who were ready to go there and to stick together under immense enormous internal and external pressure.
And that left him with no place to go, but kind of on this island by himself. So Shannon Bremar asked, Shannon, what about people that are saying and tweeting that now next is going to be contraception, next is going to be goodbye same-sex marriage. Didn't Judge Justice Alito address this? Yeah, he did. He talks about all of those things and distinguishes them and says they are not, that's not what we're talking about.
We're not going after the underpinnings of any of those things. And so he made it very clear. We saw that in the leak. It was like the people who didn't want to see it ignored it. It's still in there today and they're ignoring it.
He made very clear this decision is not about that. But of course, politically, it makes sense for the left to say that's exactly what this is about and to say you got to show up at the ballot box. I mean, it's going to be a fundraising and a rallying cry for them because, you know, the polls show it should be a good term for the GOP this election fall. So, of course, the political side of this is they're going to make hay about this. They're going to exaggerate and misrepresent some of what is in and what's not in this opinion.
Right, and she just said that again, Nancy Pelosi, I guess a short time ago. So on the greater story of guns, 6-3 conceal and to prevent people from carrying a gun in New York City is unconstitutional. What's the impact of that? I know it's going to affect directly seven states, but in there is a two-pager from Kavanaugh saying tell me the places you don't want to be able to bring a gun. Tell me the limitation. Tell me the restrictions like, for example, a state capitol, a courtroom, let's say a school, a subway.
So where does this go from here? Well, yeah, in many, many states this is even a question. As you said, there are just a handful of jurisdictions where this matters.
The interesting thing is, though, even though it's a small amount of states, it's a really concentrated you know, like a quarter of the US population. Probably going to have some change to the laws, but what it is, you know, if you're going in to get a permit or carry a permit, a concealed carry permit, for example in New York, of course is where the case came from, they can have subjective criteria like, hmm, we're going to decide who gets one and who doesn't based on whatever we decide. If it's something like, okay, everybody's subject to a background check, everybody has to have this age limit, everybody has to have this residency requirement, whatever it is, it's got to be objective, not subjective. So it doesn't mean that states cannot license and permit and require those things for guns. And the only people who are going to be impacted by this are people who are trying to do this in a lawful way. They want to be law abiding gun owners. And of course there are worries and folks who want to see more gun control and less guns on the streets, they worry that if more concealed carry permits are out there, that it means more guns on the street. But, you know, that's probably logistically true, but it should also mean people who've been fully vetted, there may be some training requirements, it depends on the state. This is not a free for all. This does not just mean everybody can carry a gun anywhere, anytime. It's still going to be very tightly controlled.
Precise, personal, powerful. Is America's weather team in the palm of your hands? Get Fox weather updates throughout your busy day every day. Subscribe and listen now at FoxNewsPodcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts. Fox's legal expert Shannon Bream is with us fortuitous to have you on the calendar before this decision came down, but it came down about 90 minutes ago. Roe v. Wade has been overturned 24 hours ago.
We learned about this gun loss, 6-3 with Clarence Thomas writing the opinion. Now, we're going to see the President of the United States in 45 minutes address the country. What are his, besides expressing outrage and going against what he said in the 1970s when he was looking to overturn Roe v. Wade, besides saying that, you know, he's going to be outraged by it, what do you think he can do executively?
What will he urge his party to do? I'm not really sure what they can do. I'm sure that they're going to think about things like, you know, you could think about funding. We know that some of the states have set up funds to say, hey, if your state won't allow you an abortion, we're going to have these social justice or reproductive, you know, justice funds that you can come here. We're going to beef up what's available in aid to our abortion clinics in states so that we can make sure people have options once they get here. States are going to go, you know, into their corners. You have places like Colorado where there's really no limit on abortion up until your due date now. They passed that law in response to what they thought they'd get from the court today. And you have other states that literally today abortion becomes illegal in almost all cases because they have these trigger laws.
So what they can do at the federal level, I'm not really sure, other than offering funding is probably something they're going to do. But when the Speaker of the House stood up after this opinion and said this is now a nationwide abortion ban, she knows better. She's smarter than that. And, I mean, if anything, her home state, California, is probably going to have, you know, an increase if people travel there because they're going to have more abortion freedom in her state. Shannon, why don't you do what Nancy Pelosi just said. In their attempt to destroy it, radical Republicans are charging ahead with their crusade to criminalize health freedom. In the Congress, be aware of this, the Republicans are plotting a nationwide abortion ban. They cannot be allowed to have a majority in the Congress to do that.
But that's their goal. So, already plotting to try to keep the Speakership. Well, of course, that is, again, one of the political things that's going to go on. There will be fundraising, there will be mischaracterization, potentially on both sides.
I mean, people need to be honestly informed about what this means. It's going to depend a lot on where you live. And there's no ban on going into a different state or residents of different states going to abortion clinics where it's legal.
There's no ban on that. If you can travel, then you'll be able to seek what is your choice. And people will say, well, you know, people without a lot of resources will find themselves in a difficult place. And that's why I think not only so many states are saying, we're going to set up these funds to help you travel. The feds may try to do something like that. But a number of employers are saying too, we're going to add that as a benefit to your package of benefits that if you live in a state and work for us in a place where you can't easily get an abortion, we're now going to cover the cost of you traveling out of state. So, you know, people will have options to say a nationwide abortion ban at this point wouldn't be accurate if she says that they're going to try to do something even more in Congress.
I don't see the legislative framework for doing that based on what we just got from the court. All right. Thank you, Shanna.
Can't thank you enough. Where are you going to go? What's the rest of your day look like? Stay on the Supreme Court steps?
Yes. And listen, if you are bored, you'll see me every hour. I'm here for you. I'm here if you need me.
We didn't even talk that much about guns, but man, there's so much going on. Of course, we'll watch your show tonight. Shanna Bream, thank you. Put the power of over 100 meteorologists and the worldwide resources of Fox in your hands with the Fox Weather Podcast.
Precise, personal, powerful. Subscribe and listen now at FoxNewsPodcast.com or wherever you get your podcasts.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-02-15 04:38:44 / 2023-02-15 04:45:55 / 7