Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Conservative Majority Dominates The High Court; Democrats Decry The Court; Conservatives Could Dominate Court For Decades; DeSantis Keeps His Focus On Fighting "Wokeness"; Supreme CT Guts Affirmative Action In College Admission. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired July 02, 2023 - 11:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[11:00:31]

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: The High Court makes its mark.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: We've seen opinions that will touch every single person in this country.

PHILLIP: How major decisions on affirmative action, LGBTQ rights, and much more are reshaping America.

Plus, supreme showdown.

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This is not a normal court.

PHILLIP: Biden lashes out at the conservative supermajority. The left says it's time to do something about it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're witnessing the most radical politicized Supreme Court in recent history.

PHILLIP: And the fight to beat Donald Trump.

GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL): No more excuses. 2024 is the time to put up or shut up.

PHILLIP: Halfway through the year, the ex-president is still clobbering the GOP field.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We have a massively leading by so much that people don't even want to put out the numbers. They don't even believe it.

PHILLIP: Is his nomination inevitable?

Hello, and welcome to INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY, I'm Abby Phillip.

One year after the federal ending a federal ban to on abortion, the Supreme Court's conservative supermajority has now flexed its muscle once again over key aspects of American life.

In a blockbuster ruling, a finale to its term, the six Republican appointed justices struck down President Biden's student debt forgiveness plan. It limited protections for the nation's LGBTQ community and most notably, it ended race based affirmative action in college admissions.

And just like the Dobbs decision, it is another example of this conservative supermajority, reversing decades of established precedent. The ruling guts programs which have helped open doors for qualified black and Latino students in higher education in the post- civil rights era, but affirmative action's opponents who have argued for decades that it effectively reverse discrimination, they rejoice this week.

And hours after the momentous ruling, President Biden issued his own verdict on the court itself.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Congressional Black Caucus said the Supreme Court has thrown into question its own legitimacy. Is this a rouge court?

BIDEN: This is not a normal court.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: And for his part, former president Donald Trump, congratulated himself for reshaping the court and he vowed that this is only the beginning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: You know, many presidents never get the opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice. I had three, they are golden. They are -- they are not happy about that. And maybe we'll get three or four more. Can you imagine? Let's get seven. Let's have -- let's have seven or eight, or maybe even nine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: And let's discuss all of this and more with CNN senior Supreme Court analyst, Joan Biskupic, Laura Barron-Lopez of the PBS NewsHour, and the Boston Globe's, Jackie Kucinich.

Joan, what a momentous term for this court in so many ways. And over the last two years, really, this has been a court that has been really in a concerted effort to reshape the country in a more conservative fashion, starting with Roe and now this.

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SENIOR SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Yes. This is a very muscular court, you know, they sit up there on this elevated bench. And over the last week, I was just looking up there and their power and authority is so manifest in that room.

You mentioned, you know, so many cases from last year and this year, but it also expanded gun rights. And one theme that we've seen in this court, which doesn't have the kind of impediments that the other two branches had have. It can do exactly what it wants and it has a supermajority do it.

Remember, they also expanded Second Amendment rights. And the message on what they're doing with federal authority, among the branches, is that essentially reserving more to themselves as they rule in ways that make it harder for agencies such as the Department of Education to carry out acts of Congress. They're essentially amassing more power to themselves.

Now, there were a couple of cases in which they hedged a bit in voting rights cases from North Carolina and from Alabama. But in those situations, the state officials, Republican led legislatures were pushing the law so far that, you know, this court is still moving fairly -- extreme moving in some ways, in radical ways where they're just not going to go as far as some of these GOP states want.

[11:05:06]

And just finally, let me just tell you about our future. This court is a very young court. The three Trump appointees are only in their 50s which, you know, they're pups compared to, you know, when people -- when the justice is near retirement, they're already in their 80s. So this is a court that your children and grandchildren will experience down the road.

PHILLIP: Such to the point that you were making about the kind of mixed bag of rulings it seemed from this court. Gregory Garre, who is the former Bush solicitor general said this to the Washington Post. "I really do feel like the term was a tale of two courts, one, that remains boldly conservative and willing to revamp its precedent to achieve long-standing conservative objectives. And another that is seeking to find common ground where possible, and seemingly sensitive to the sustained attack on its legitimacy."

At the same time, maybe they're sensitive to the attack on its legitimacy. But these rulings, when these big, kind of, societal rulings come down, the American public -- they're pretty easily forgets about the common ground ones, and focuses on things like the affirmative action one, the LGBTQ rights one, and perhaps rightfully so.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ, PBS NEWSHOUR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Right. And the public is still dealing with the ramifications of the Dobbs decision last term. And very much so that the Biden White House thinks that's going to be a big deal in the 2024 election campaign, and something that they can rally around and run on and that Democrats will be motivated by.

Now you add these on top of it, the decisions this term on affirmative action on weakening LGBTQ anti-discrimination, and the student loan forgiveness. You add that all on top of the Dobbs decision, and you're seeing the court move in ways that are not in line with what polling has shown time and time again, that the public support.

PHILLIP: Meanwhile, we played in the intro Donald Trump really celebrating this, and he is really responsible for this court. I mean, the justices that he put on this court are far more conservative, even than the Chief Justice, it seems. John Roberts --

BISKUPIC: Well, definitely. Definitely they are. PHILLIP: -- definitely more conservative. And it seems to validate his bet in that 2016 primary that if we put out a list and we say, we're going to pick from that list, that this is going to be the issue that establishes his, you know, his legacy

JACKIE KUCINICH, BOSTON GLOBE WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Well, he's used this as a shield already. Particularly on something like the Dobbs decision, like abortion where he thinks, politically, maybe that wasn't great for Republicans. He's used these -- the -- his -- his appointments as, you know, saying, like, look, these -- I am legit here. You can't question my conservative credentials.

But I wanted to mention one other thing. One thing you're not hearing from Biden, he did criticize the court this week, he's not on board with court reform. You're just starting to hear that from the left again. And that is something that -- that is a bridge too far.

PHILLIP: Absolutely. And we'll talk a little bit more about that later in the show.

Joan, I have to ask you this because this ruling on LGBTQ rights was so interesting in so many different ways, but really from the beginning. Why did the court take on this case? And now, actually, after the ruling, we've now found out that the website designer here in Colorado, apparently, never actually received an inquiry for her -- for her services.

The man cited in the case, in some of the legal parts of the case, is not gay. He's been married to the same woman for 50 years. And here's how Pete Buttigieg, the transportation secretary, who is also gay, responded to this just a few moments ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE BUTTIGIEG, UNITED STATES TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: The fact that this was relief from a situation that may have never happened in the -- in the first place, tells you everything you need to know about this agenda, to use every instrument of government, courts, and legislatures to claw back at these rights for people who are just trying to go about their lives and just trying to be treated equally by businesses and by the government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: There is this principle in jurisprudence about standing and about whether you have actually experienced harm. How does this affect the legitimacy question?

BISKUPIC: Well, this court took this case before this law had been enforced against this woman who sued. And it was an aggressive move to hear it. And once they heard it, they just said, as Neil Gorsuch said from the bench when he announced the opinion, we're just going to set aside the facts. We're just going to let the stipulations go.

They didn't -- they didn't care what the actual bottom line facts were. They wanted to get to this. They wanted to look at this public accommodations law that said that businesses could not discriminate against customers based on sexual orientation.

So they were going to get to the bottom line, irrespective of what the facts said, irrespective of whether Colorado was even going to enforce its law against this website designer.

[11:10:00]

PHILLIP: Wasn't it notable also a lot of Republicans aren't really saying a huge amount about this particular case as well.

BARRON-LOPEZ: I think so. I think because, you know, there's some lessons -- some lessons learned from Dobbs maybe. I mean, I think that Republicans are seeing that polling shows on this question, in particular, that voters support stronger protections for LGBTQ people. And this is a weakening of those protections.

And one thing that kind of stood out to me from Justice Sotomayor's dissent was she referenced the Civil Rights Act. And that at the time, opponents said that this would also infringe upon business' ability to express their beliefs.

And I thought that it was striking because that's something that she's saying that again, you know, the court this time is saying that freedom of expression -- and Joan can maybe correct me, but freedom of expression outweighs, you know, these anti-discrimination laws.

PHILLIP: Joan, before you jump in, I mean, you wrote this piece just -- I think it was out today. John Roberts does not want to hear any dissent about his supreme court. That's so interesting, because he understands that there's quite a lot of it right now.

BISKUPIC: And he's winning -- and he's winning. He included in the student loans case this paragraph, just admonishing anyone who had criticized the majority, either from within the court or beyond the court, say, you know, essentially, there is nothing to see here. We are all just fine. Don't take any disagreement from my colleagues as disparagement.

And Justice Elena Kagan countered, OK, maybe it's not personal, but we're going to say what the destruction that's coming from these rulings. And he doesn't want to hear it. It's interesting. He's a winner. But that tone had a bit of a whiner tone to it.

PHILLIP: If only we could see what you saw this week. I mean, it feels past time, right, for the court to open its doors to the public, so that we can actually see and hear these words as they're being read from the bench.

Joan Biskupic, thank you so much for joining us for this one. And you'll be back actually later in the show.

But coming up next for us, the left demands changes to the nation's highest court as we were discussing. How is President Biden handling those cries for court reform?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [11:15:07]

PHILLIP: President Biden striking back at the Supreme Court, vowing to do whatever he can to keep this week's decisions from entirely dismantling LGBTQ rights, affirmative action, and his signature policy promise, student loan forgiveness. But there's one line that he will not cross and it is also what his party is increasingly demanding from him. And that is court reform.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC HOST: Do you worry that without court reform, this conservative majority is too young and too conservative that they might do too much harm?

BIDEN: Well, I think he may do too much harm. But I think if we start the process of trying to expand the court, we're going to politicize or maybe forever in a way that is not healthy.

WALLACE: That you can't get back.

BIDEN: That you can't get back.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: And joining our panel to discuss this is Bloomberg's Mario Parker and CNN's Kristen Holmes.

So as Jackie was raising just a little while ago, this is a line that President Biden will not cross. And he, at his heart, is actually not a kind of, you know, loud, leftist type of person. And this is where you start to see it.

MARIO PARKER, BLOOMBERG WHITE HOUSE AND POLITICS TEAM LEADER: Yes. He's a centrist, right? He's been in Washington for almost 50 years. He campaigned in 2020 on restoring the norms of democracy. So for him, this is anathema to expand the court in a way that he feels could be an escalation, right? What happens when Republicans get the -- essentially get the ball back? And they seek to expand the court going forward as well?

PHILLIP: Yes. And I mean, you were pointing out that this is something that progressives, the AOCs of the world and others are talking about much more loudly, especially now in light of these decisions.

KUCINICH: Well, and he was pressured during his last camp -- during the democratic primary on this and just would not bend. And there's certain areas where, you know, he will listen to progressives. You saw that after the student loan decision came down. He's talking now about using the Higher Education Act, or he's going to use the higher education --

PHILLIP: Which is also what progressives want.

KUCINICH: Which is what Elizabeth Warren in particular, someone who's been really pressuring him on that. There are places he will bend, this does not appear to be a place where that's going to happen.

PHILLIP: Listen to AOC actually just now with Dana Bash. She's linking, not just the Supreme Court cases, but also some of the ethics questions that we've seen around the court.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): They are expanding their role into acting as though they are Congress itself. These are the types of rulings that signal a dangerous creep towards authoritarianism.

The Supreme Court has not been receiving the adequate oversight necessary in order to preserve their own legitimacy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BARRON-LOPEZ: I think -- what's striking there is, yes, progressives like Ocasio-Cortez are trying to push the administration on this, not just on the front of the decisions, but also on all of the things that we've seen about conflicts of interests and ethical questions about justice is, you know, going out on luxury trips with billionaires. And then those people having business before the court. And what that raises, again, to your point, Abby, about the legitimacy of the court and the legitimacy of their rulings.

Biden, though -- President Biden so far, though, does not want to really -- you know, he had his whole commission on court reform and ultimately walked away from that saying, I don't want to touch this. I don't want to expand the court. I don't think this is something necessarily that we want to get into.

Now, Democrats don't necessarily have the majority and Congress to try to pass some type of ethical reforms on the Supreme Court. And that's the thing right now is that if Biden isn't willing to go there, you know, it would be -- it would take up more majorities of Democrats in Congress for actually something they're trying.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: And I do think it's not just these left wing progressives that want this. I mean we're hearing from voters on the campaign trail who are interested in this. I mean they had no idea that there was no oversight in the Supreme Court.

[11:20:09]

I mean, this has been very shocking to people who aren't just these progressives who are looking for some sort of court reform. So it'll be interesting to see how that plays out. When we talk about Biden not, you know, wanting to reform the court, he will have to come up with something to energize Democrats.

Obviously, we know right now Democrats are angry. Is that enough to bring them to the polls? We've seen in the past that Republicans are always energized by the Supreme Court, whether or not there is a decision out there, whether or not something has just happened.

Can Biden figure out a way to actually ramp up his base around this, make sure that that anger translates into votes but while still kind of trying to not touch it?

KUCINICH: He said a little bit with Dobbs, though. He said a little bit in the midterm elections, that did energize voters. And they're trying to make that magic again with Dobbs going into 2024. With these other issues that whether you can incorporate some of these other things that the court has ruled on into that, that's the question.

PHILLIP: And, look, we still have a whole other term before --

KUCINICH: Right.

PHILLIP: -- the 2024 election actually happens. And the court -- this is a court that has not been shy about taking up some of the most controversial issues before them.

One of the other things about the court reform issue that brings it -- brings it to the table is just it's a recognition among Democrats, that they have a long time to live with this court.

I mean, just take a look at when some of these justices will turn 80. And let's call 80 the age at which maybe we might start talking about retirements. 2028 is really the soonest for someone like Clarence Thomas who basically has said, he's not going anywhere.

And then when you look at an Amy Coney Barrett, she could be on the court until 2052. They have to live with these justices. And so in that environment, they're asking for reform.

PARKER: No, absolutely. And when you look at the spectrum of what's happened over the last six weeks or so, right, we've had an unfavorable ruling toward unions, unfavorable union -- I mean, excuse me, ruling toward environmentalists, unfavorable ruling towards LGBTQ, student loans, and then affirmative action, which touches on minority voters.

When you speak to Democrats, they feel as though this can be a galvanizing issue to get voters out, that it squeezes even more angst out of what we saw last year with the Dobbs decision. But what they also concede is what a price they've paid.

PHILLIP: Yes. And look, on student loans and on affirmative action, this really hits at the heart of the core constituency for Biden and African-Americans votes.

PARKER: No, absolutely. I spoke to -- yesterday, I spoke to Derrick Johnson, NAACP's president, and he's holding Biden's feet to the fire on this.

While Biden is saying that his alternative route of the Higher Education Act could take time, as we're 16 months away from the presidential election, Derrick Johnson ominously told me that, hey, these people vote. We want something immediately. These people were promised $20,000.

And then if you look at the spectrum again, through the lens of police reform failed -- PHILLIP: Yes.

PARKER: -- voting rights failed as well. This is something that you have to worry about in terms of galvanizing.

PHILLIP: Well, let's look at the numbers real quick just to show what they're dealing with here. Black voters, how would you feel if Biden is reelected, only 17 percent say they are enthusiastic.

And then look at the younger voters and how they approve of Biden. He is facing his lowest approval rating among younger voters.

BARRON-LOPEZ: I think that that's a sign that we've seen time and time again with Biden. And we saw that in the 2020 election as well. But then what we've also seen is that, ultimately, those voters end up turning out for him or for Democrats when they're faced with just that option --

PHILLIP: Yes. Choices, yes.

BARRON-LOPEZ: -- him versus the alternative. And the Democrats that I've spoken to after these decisions were handed down, told me that they really think that, for once, the Supreme Court, to your point, Kristen, could actually be a pretty big issue for Democrats, one that does makes them decide to turn out that maybe makes also independents that are starting to lean more towards Biden to turn out as well because of this collection of civil rights that they see under attack.

PHILLIP: And, hey, look, those younger voters are actually the ones who are going to be living with this court the longest, right?

KUCINICH: Yes, absolutely. I mean that -- and -- but in the alchemy of getting young voters out to vote, always up in the air --

PHILLIP: Yes.

KUCINICH: -- every election cycle.

PHILLIP: It's tricky, and sometimes it's sorted out at the very last minute. Frankly, most voters are making up their minds at the very last minute here. So we have a long way to go until 2024.

Speaking of which, coming up next, as we hit the halfway mark of 2023, do any of Trump's primary rivals have a plan at all to stop him?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:25:46]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Never forget. Our enemies want to stop me because I am the only one who can stop them. They want to take away my freedom, because I will never let them take away your freedom. I will never let it happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: That was quite a fourth of July message from President Trump at a rally yesterday in South Carolina repeating familiar messages over the past four months. He's been indicted twice. And nine Republicans have also jumped into the presidential race.

But fundamentally, nothing really has changed. This was a Fox poll in March with Trump leading DeSantis by 30 points, with no one else even close.

And this was a Fox poll from just last week with Trump leading DeSantis by 34 points. And again, no one else is even close.

At some point, Governor DeSantis may need to reevaluate his strategy, but for now, he is sticking to his signature message.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DESANTIS: Parents in this country should be able to send their kids to school, should be able to let them watch cartoons or just be kids without having some agenda shoved down their throat.

When you take someone that swam on the women's -- men's team for three years, they switch to women's and you crown them women's champion, you're asking us to be complicit in a fraud. We're not doing the pronoun Olympics in Florida.

[11:30:10]

(APPLAUSE)

And that's just the way it's going to be. We are going to leave woke ideology in the dustbin of history where it belongs.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: It's now an adjective, woke, right? It's like just every -- every subject turns to woke. And that works really well in that room. I mean, you saw the applause. However, what --

KUCINICH: I'm going to say, however, that same event, Trump also spoke later, our reporter just been good was there. She said, the place shut down when Trump got there. People were in line waiting for pictures. So the reception DeSantis got, yeah, that's a very warm crowd. Nothing compared to the -- to what former President Trump got. And he has augmented his message to target that group too. So yes, he's -- DeSantis has a friendly crowd. Not so not -- not as much as the former president.

HOLMES: And I was there as well. And they stood up for Trump. I mean, I spoke to a number of the moms in the room who said they were excited to see DeSantis. But they were really there because they wanted to see Donald Trump. And when you look at that group, and that is a group that has tripled in size since it started. This is a very powerful group. And there's a reason that they were able to draw DeSantis as well as Donald Trump to their event. This is a group that both of these people want to get their vote when it comes to the GOP nomination. They are very, very powerful right now. But as you said, deeply shut down to the point president.

BARRON-LOPEZ: Speaking about the -- the wokeness message, I mean, DeSantis has essentially fashioned himself as an anti LGBTQ anti- transgender candidate, and he was speaking to a group moms for liberty, which itself has also attacked LGBTQ people and try to ban repeatedly books about gender identity and race across the country.

And investigations by outlets like VICE have found that moms for liberty has used intimidation tactics, harassment tactics, that they also are tied to extremist groups like the Proud Boys and other similar extremist groups like that. So I think when we look at the bigger picture, we have to recognize the type of group that they were speaking with.

PHILLIP: So, a really important piece of context there about all that's underneath the -- the sort of parents rights issue. But on the issue of LGBTQ rights. I mean, we are -- we just ended Pride Month. And this video really kind of ricocheted across the internet. This was a video it seems created by a DeSantis supporter and was spread by DeSantis' campaign, just watch it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just produced some of the harshest, most draconian laws that literally threaten trans existence.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Congratulations, Ron DeSantis. Mission accomplished.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: I mean, even Republicans, many Republicans, frankly, were calling it homophobic. There was a line. It's a bizarre video, but a line flashing across there that you saw that says DeSantis is evil. I mean, this is a really online thing. But also, it seems to indicate that they are really running against LGBTQ people in this country.

PARKER: Yeah, it was a bizarre video, and it's extremely online, which is exactly how Ron DeSantis started his campaign, right? Once you look at -- if you look at it, he's what he showed a willingness to fight Disney LGBTQ community. He's a CRT as well, but hasn't shown a willingness to fight Donald Trump, the person right there in front of him. And that's why he can't convince voters, primary voters to jump on the bandwagon with them.

PHILLIP: Yeah, it's such a perfect segue because earlier this week, he was in New Hampshire, he was speaking in a town hall and he was asked a question by a young voter about January 6, listen to his answer. And then also listen to Chris Christie, also running for president, responding to DeSantis here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DESANTIS: So, I wasn't anywhere near Washington that day. I have nothing to do with what happened that day. Obviously, I didn't enjoy seeing, you know, what -- what happened. But we've got to go forward on this stuff.

CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: He wasn't anywhere near Washington. Did he have a TV? Was he alive that day? Did he see what was going on? I mean, that's one of the most ridiculous answers I've heard.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: So here's the thing, you know, Chris Christie is in this race to take Donald Trump down, but he might have a role in pressuring people like DeSantis as well to do more to take on Trump.

HOLMES: Yeah, that's right. But I mean, look what DeSantis was saying I wasn't anywhere near there. He's trying to walk this thin line. And he's also said just weeks before that he would pardon anyone who was involved in January 16. Look at it and see what happens.

So I mean, he -- he was really appears to want to have it all ways. He wants to really appeal to that Trump base. He wants to run to the right of Trump. I mean, yeah, that video clearly is running to the right of Trump. The first pass half that we didn't show is him hitting Trump for being supportive of the gay community.

[11:35:17]

And so, you know, he wants to run to the right of Trump. But then also in a crowd like this, when he's getting pressured on it, he wants to say, well, I was nowhere near that. And obviously, I didn't like what I saw. Well, those are very conflicting narratives, since he just had said that he would pardon people involved in January 6.

KUCINICH: Now, exactly. I mean, this is why I really am curious what happens during a debate, which is coming at the end of August, if everyone decides to participate. That is where, you know, DeSantis is going to be put in a spot. He is going to have to answer questions. He is -- and as is the former president and the -- the -- the face off actually next to each other, that's pretty fascinating. And how both of them react is -- is going to be, I think, very telling.

PHILLIP: Yeah. And so many of the candidates right now, including several just this morning, on a bunch of Sunday morning programs, we're trying to make the case that OK, we have time to get on that debate stage. And then when we get on that debate stage, that'll be our moment. Here's Nikki Haley.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NIKKI HALEY, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: National polls just don't matter right now. I mean, we've got a debate in August, we've got a debate in September, we've got a debate in October. I have qualified to be on the debate stage. Having been 3% in a five-way governor's race, I know that this is all about hard work. (END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: What about a 10-way race in which there's one candidate who is far and away the frontrunner.

BARRON-LOPEZ: I mean, you saw the way debates went in 2016. And when it was a really crowded debate stage, then as well, and when they faced off against Donald Trump then, it didn't go very well. No one was able to land a knockout punch. He steamrolled a lot of them. Now, he may not be on the very first debate stage, he might hold out for a little bit. But we also know that he very much likes to get in there and brawl with them.

I think that, you know, when we look at the larger scope of the race, there really are only, what, two candidates they're willing to say anything about Trump and stand up to him on January 6, and stand up to him on policies and it's Chris Christie, and Asa Hutchinson. Occasionally Mike Pence.

PHILLIP: And Will Hurd, who's --

BARRON-LOPEZ: Will Hurd, now, yes. Yeah.

PHILLIP: But, yeah, I mean --

BARRON-LOPEZ: It's so few compared to the rest of them that are actually running on very similar policies to Donald Trump.

PHILLIP: And -- and all of these people, by the way, that we just discussed are, you know, middling somewhere in the very low single digits. There are groups like Americans for Prosperity, the Koch group, and even actually the pro -- the anti-abortion groups that are saying we are open here and willing to spend money for maybe someone other than Trump.

KUCINICH: And but I do wonder if that will be the difference? It really -- there's going to need to be a very large disruption for to shake up this field. The indictments have not what that is. I don't know that it's outside groups. I think it has -- it will have to come either from Trump himself.

HOLMES: That's always been the biggest problem with Trump is that, you know, that's why people don't know how to beat him, is that you're looking at DeSantis, who has this enormous war chest. We look back to 2016 and, you know, Jeb Bush had an enormous war chest. He had the backing of all of these establishment Republicans, and yet the field completely tilted towards Trump's. So the idea is, how exactly do they beat Donald Trump? And I don't think anyone's figured it out and talk about the Koch group, maybe putting $70 million into another candidate, who is that candidate?

PHILLIP: Right.

HOLMES: And, again, it's early -- it's early, someone could emerge on the debate stage, as we said, but they need to have somebody who is worth putting $70 million and somebody who looks like they're actually going to shine and have a chance to be Donald Trump. And right now, it -- that doesn't seem to exist.

PHILLIP: And the voters have to want that too.

HOLMES: Right. Yeah.

PHILLIP: I mean, there is -- I mean, the polls shows probably about 30% at some contingent of the Republican primary, they're open to someone else. They're looking maybe actively, but Trump still has a real hold on people. And that is what even $70 million I'm not even sure that that's going to change that.

But coming up next for us, what that landmark ruling ending affirmative action in colleges means for the future of higher education writ large.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:43:19]

PHILLIP: The Supreme Court reversed decades of precedent to bar colleges from using race as a specific factor in college admissions. The decision will almost certainly mean a less diverse student body. Harvard's University admissions process was at the center of that case, and the head of Harvard's black student association says you cannot separate a college applicant from her race.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANGIE GABEAU, HARVARD BLACK STUDENT ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT: My race is not, you know, something I tack on and take off like a shirt. It's my -- it's me. It's my identity. So being colorblind and race messages just erasing a large portion of my stories, my history, my parents history and my parents stories.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Opponents of affirmative action say that this is how you level the playing field.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KENNY XU, COLOR US UNITED PRESIDENT: We shouldn't be treated on the basis of our merits. We should be treated on the basis of how hard we work or study, our SAT scores, our grades.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Our Senior Supreme Court Analyst Joan Biskupic is back with us and she's the author of Nine Black Robes: Inside the Supreme Court's Drive to the Right and Its Historic Consequences. We also have with us Adam Harris, from the Atlantic. He is also an author of the book, The State Must Provide: Why America's Colleges Have Always Been Unequal -- and How to Set Them Right.

I can't think of two better people to have on this particular topic. You know, Adam, what you get at presciently in your book, frankly, is at the heart of this case. And you write here, if the majority dismisses what remains of the nation's experiment with affirmative action, the United States will have to have to face the reality that it's System of Higher Education is and always has been separate and unequal.

[11:45:05]

And that's what they've done. They've gotten rid of affirmative action and we are left with a stale and unequal K through 12 system and colleges now that don't really know what to do about it.

ADAM HARRIS, ATLANTIC STAFF WRITER: Exactly, right. In America, we've had a situation that has effectively stymied black education since that -- before the founding, right? 1740 was South Carolina, became the first state to ban teaching black students to read, right? After the 1800s and several enslaved folks uprisings. They even made it illegal to read the Bible, right? That's how -- that's how difficult the situation has been for so long.

When you move into the higher education ecosystem, right? You've never had a system that equally funds or accepts black and white students on an equal basis. And effectively, if you read through Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's descent, she really digs into some of that history. And why this program, that it effectively, you know, from the inception of race conscious admissions programs in the 1960s, on to 1978, when you get the bucket decision that effectively limits the scope of the effects of -- of race conscious admissions. We've never really seen a system of higher education in America that was equitable.

PHILLIP: Yeah. But you have Clarence Thomas, also saying in -- in his concurrence that, you know, students have today shouldn't pay for the sins of their ancestors, which that might be true, but it seems to miss the point of what is happening today.

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SUPREME COURT ANALYST: It's continuing. And it comes down to sort of two ideas of how to get beyond race, how to get to a point where students of all color will be treated equally. And the question is, how much do you take an account of race to get to that point, and the philosophy behind some of the justices who are part of the backend majority, not Lewis Powell, who wrote it, but Harry Blackmun, for example, who said, you have to take race into account to get beyond race.

And that's the philosophy of Justice Jackson, as you were saying, whereas Clarence Thomas has always felt that any kind of consideration of race is stigmatizing. It also violates the Constitution in his mind. And -- and the mantra that Chief Justice John Roberts has always proclaimed was embraced by the majority of this time. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.

But I think Justice Jackson, and the other two liberals who joined with her and dissent made a good case for America is not to the point yet, where race cannot be considered to fulfill the promise of both Brown v. Board of Education and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

PHILLIP: I want to play here what President Biden said this week. He presented this as a way forward on college admissions. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, (D) U.S. PRESIDENT: When the poor kid, on a poor kid may be the first in their family to go to college, gets the same grades, and test scores as a wealthy kid, his whole family's gone to the most elite colleges in the country. And his path has been a lot easier, while the kid who faced tougher challenges has demonstrated more grit, more determination, and that should be a factor that colleges should take into account in admissions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Would that help the issue of the achievement gap, which is racially very stark?

HARRIS: You know, it was interesting, you know, in Justice Roberts opinion, he mentioned right, you can still talk about, you know, how race impacted you individually, effectively shifting the burden onto students who have to explain the ways that racism works and their college applications. But I think effectively, the heart of the issue here is that the institutions that we're talking about, the ones that are selective enough to need to use race and admissions.

You know, they are some of the most well-endowed institutions in the nation. They're the institutions that are able to financially provide for students, you know, if your family makes under $100,000, a year at Princeton, you have free tuition, room and board, right? Where are other institutions that these students if they're not admitted, right, we've seen what happens when race conscious admissions goes away.

You saw a precipitous decline in California, you saw precipitous declines in black and brown enrollment in Michigan. They will be -- they don't not go to college, right? They just shift to different institutions that are able to provide less financially for them.

PHILLIP: So Joan, I want to get you on this. We had a bit of a fight between the two black Justices Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson in the -- in the footnotes. Here's Justice Thomas. He says, "As she sees things, we are all inexorably trapped in a fundamentally racist society, with the original sin of slavery and the historical subjugation of black Americans still determining our lives today. Justice Jackson's race-infused worldview falls flat at each step."

Ketanji Brown Jackson fires back, Justice Thomas's prolonged attack response to a dissent I did not write in order to assail and admissions it program that is not the one UNC has crafted. Justice Thomas ignites too many more straw men to list, or fully extinguished, here." I mean, wow.

[11:50:11]

BISKUPIC: It was so interesting to watch as Justice Thomas who rarely speaks from the bench, deliver that in the courtroom, you know, after the chief read the majority opinion, usually that's the end of it. But Clarence Thomas starts by saying, I rarely read anything, a concurrence or dissent from the bench. But here's what I want to say. Now he -- you know, he talks about this personal experience that he's had. And he said, even -- even growing up in the segregated south, we were not the sum total of our skin color. Justice Jackson is just staring straight ahead as he sees it.

But here's the thing he -- he's saying that to even take account of race is to have some sort of racial victimhood and she say no, it's empowering is to even get in the game to consider race given where the country has been and where the country still is.

PHILLIP: I always find it ironic that the people who say that people are only, you know, admitted because they're black are usually the ones who have, you know, they're the ones creating the kind of victimhood mentality for black people. I'm not sure that black people who benefit from affirmative action would see it that way otherwise, but Joan and Adam, thank you great discussion here at the table.

BISKUPIC: Thank you.

PHILLIP: And coming up next, fireworks are in the air for this Fourth of July weekend. But patriotism that is another question. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:55:40]

PHILLIP: All right, so maybe you're feeling a little lukewarm about the fireworks and the hot dogs as we head into the Fourth of July holiday but you are definitely not alone. For the second year in a row patriotism here in America seems to have bottomed out. According to Gallup, just 39% of adults feel extremely proud to be American. And that's statistically the same as last year which was an all-time low.

And there are also some stark differences in patriotic spirit among party lines, 6 in 10 Republicans say they're extremely proud compared to 3 in 10 Democrats. Age also plays a factor with just 18% of those aged 18 to 34 saying they feel ecstatic stream American pride.

Well that's it for us on INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. Thank you again for sharing your Sunday morning with us. Have a great Fourth of July holiday week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)