ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:
This is ALL THINGS CONSIDERED from NPR News. I’m Robert Siegel. And we start this hour looking behind on a week that witnessed some thespian domestic events. On Monday in front of a Supreme Court, counsel Lori Windham distinguished a court’s statute on interest of her customer Hobby Lobby.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
LORI WINDHAM: Today’s preference is a landmark preference for eremite freedom.
SIEGEL: It was a preference on contraceptives. Gynecologist Jeanne Conroy was one of many heading physicians who opposite it.
JEANNE CONROY: This clearly puts an employer in a examination room with me in my studious and that’s untenable.
SIEGEL: Also this week, a predicament along a Mexican limit exhilarated up. Unaccompanied minors from Central America are over whelming a a immigration system. The new arrivals found support from people like Caitlin Sanderson of a Esperanza Project.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
CAITLIN SANDERSON: What do we wish to do, we wish to send all these kids behind to a segment that has a top murder rate in a world?
SIEGEL: And they met with intense insurgency from residents of Murrieta, California people like Robin Vitstin.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
ROBIN VITSIN: we feel like my supervision has turn tellurian traffickers. Who’s financing it, a taxpayer.
SIEGEL: All this and a record week on Wall Street should keep a Friday commentators busy. Here are E.J. Dionne of a Washington Post and The Brookings Institution. Welcome back.
E.J. DIONNE: Thank you, happy fourth.
SIEGEL: And sitting in for David Brooks, Ramesh Ponnuru of The National Review and Bloomberg View. Hi ya, how we doing?
RAMESH PONNURU: Just great, appreciate you.
SIEGEL: Gentlemen let’s start with a Supreme Court that initial in a Hobby Lobby box and afterwards in a box involving Wheaton College chose a eremite philosophy of a employer, or a college, over women’s coverage for contraception that is mandated by a Affordable Care Act. Who’s got a people on their side on this one, E.J.?
DIONNE: Well, contraception is rather renouned as distant as we can tell. we don’t see a lot of families of 12 out there anymore. And there are some numbers that uncover that 99 percent of women have used contraception during some indicate or other. So we consider politically this is substantially an opening for Democrats in a fall. There are a integrate of unfortunate things to me about this box and I’m generally some-more sensitive to eremite autocracy arguments and some liberals are. One is a approach in that a probity in a Hobby Lobby box continued a discuss to renovate a definition of corporate law. Individuals use a corporate form, as Justice Ginsburg pronounced in her dissent, to shun personal shortcoming for their entity’s requirement yet afterwards all of a remarkable they can practice rights of individuals. And she said, and we quote, “One competence ask given a subdivision should reason customarily when it serves a interests of those who control a corporation”. And afterwards we have a second indicate that is right after a probity pronounced that Pres. Obama’s concede for eremite nonprofits was flattering good. Justice Alito pronounced quote, “It achieves all of a supervision ends while providing larger honour for eremite liberty,” afterwards incited around yesterday and pronounced well, indeed that accommodation isn’t good adequate for Wheaton College. So we consider there’s going to be a lot of discuss subsequent week.
SIEGEL: Ramesh, what we consider about this?
PONNURU: Well, one of a engaging and underreported aspects of this preference is a separate among a 4 dissenters where Justice Ginsburg, in a gainsay she wrote, assimilated wholly by Justice Sotomayor, creates this indicate about corporate rights underneath a Religious Freedom Restoration Act. But Justice Breyer and Kagan refused to pointer on to that partial of a opinion. So there does seem to be a 7 to 2 infancy on a Supreme Court for fluctuating a protections of this law to businesses. As for a domestic fallout, we consider a unequivocally commonplace and accessibility of contraception everywhere arrange of undercuts a domestic lick a Democrats wish to make given a lot of people are going to contend given do we have to force people who don’t wish to yield this to do so given contraception is so widely available.
DIONNE: we usually wish to contend on a 7 to 2 business he is right, Ramesh is, about a certain separate on a partial of a opinion yet they were dissenters and it’s value observant that Justin Kagan assimilated probity Sotomayor – 3 women dissenting…
SIEGEL: On a Wheaton College.
DIONNE: …On a Wheaton College box promulgation dissenting unequivocally angrily Justice Sotomayor observant this craziness that we referred to progressing pronounced those who are firm by a decisions customarily trust they can take us during a word, not today. So we consider there’s some-more togetherness there than their suggestion.
PONNURU: Although, I’d contend that’s arrange of an purported inconsistency. Ginsberg – look, a infancy preference in Hobby run pronounced we’re not pronouncing on a authorised legitimacy of that accommodation. The Ginsberg gainsay complains that a infancy isn’t doing that. We afterwards have a stay yesterday in that again a probity isn’t a creation a preference about a authorised legitimacy of it and it privately suggesting that as a supervision says a administration itself says no contraception is going to be denied anybody underneath this given it has to be supposing regardless of Wheaton signs this form or not.
SIEGEL: OK. Another critical object we wish to hear from both of we on. What do we review in this spike of roomer crossings by minors from Central America and what we make of a U.S. response of it? Ramesh, we first.
PONNURU: Well, it has, of course, been a roiling immigration discuss that was already during a flattering high temperature. And we consider that it seems like a clearance for a lot of a people who’ve been doubtful of extensive immigration remodel given they are arguing a risk of this has always been that if we have any kind of legalization that’s going to act as a magnet for people. And even a singular legalization of a administration for minors seems to have acted as a magnet for some-more bootleg immigration even yet a sold kids are not apparently authorised for this.
SIEGEL: What about that E.J.? Has a administration walked into a box of impossibly unintended consequences?
DIONNE: It’s not transparent to me that a idea of a magnet is during a heart of this. we consider during a heart of this is some genuine terrible assault in Central America, a lot of smugglers creation a lot of promises to people about removing kids in. And there are a lot of issues of family joint here. And we consider everybody on this is going to find clearance given we can disagree usually as simply that we ought to be traffic with grasp immigration remodel right now given we do have a genuine problem and if we usually keep kicking a extended resolution down a highway we’re going to have some-more problems. And it was unequivocally striking, Pres. Obama had a genuine change in mood this week we suspicion – desirous by a Republican observant they’re going to sue him. And he’s been fundamentally contend go forward and sue me and he’s unequivocally using opposite a Republicans on immigration and a whole other array of issues observant we wish to act, they don’t wish to act and now they wish to stop me from acting. And we consider you’re saying a thesis of a discuss in a tumble entrance out this week.
SIEGEL: E.J. Dionnne and Ramesh Ponnuru. we theory subsequent week we’ll speak about 6.1 percent stagnation 17,000 Dow Jones
DIONNE: Happy days are here again.
SIEGEL: Thank you.
DIONNE: Thank you.
NPR transcripts are combined on a rush deadline by a executive for NPR, and correctness and accessibility might vary. This content might not be in a final form and might be updated or revised in a future. Please be wakeful that a lawful record of NPR’s programming is a audio.