Justice Alito Delivers Politically-Charged Speech On Covid, LGBTQ Rights | Ayman Mohyeldin | MSNBC 1

Justice Alito Delivers Politically-Charged Speech On Covid, LGBTQ Rights | Ayman Mohyeldin | MSNBC


MSNBC’s Ari Melber breaks down comments Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito made to the Federalist Society that involved Covid-19 lockdown restrictions and the status of same-sex marriage rights. Aired on 11/13/2020.
» Subscribe to MSNBC:

As part of its commitment to providing breaking news coverage throughout its daytime schedule, MSNBC has a block of ""MSNBC Live"" programming throughout the day, with different anchors splitting up the hours. This portion of the block is anchored by Ayman Mohyeldin. As with the other "MSNBC Live" programming blocks throughout the day, the Mohyeldin-anchored show explores the day's developments in news and politics so the network's viewers can continue to be informed of the latest happenings. In addition to covering breaking news, the show includes newsmaker interviews and analysis of the latest stories.

MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, Meet the Press Daily, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House with Nicolle Wallace, Hardball, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and more.

Connect with MSNBC Online
Visit msnbc.com:
Subscribe to MSNBC Newsletter:
Find MSNBC on Facebook:
Follow MSNBC on Twitter:
Follow MSNBC on Instagram:

#SamuelAlito #Covid #MSNBC

Justice Alito Delivers Politically-Charged Speech On Covid, LGBTQ Rights | Ayman Mohyeldin | MSNBC


    1. @The Tweatles works at a leather daddy bar serving drinks while wearing a Japanese school girl’s miniskirt

    1. @Thom Colmer i think because of Trump brainwashing you, you literally think the president can do whatever he wants. He can just repeal a law made by congress.

      You need to get some serious counseling. You’re a danger to yourself and those around you.

    2. @Lex Luxon How? No court case came before his Circuit Court during his time on the Court of Appeals. Lastly Obama Expanded the Patriots Act so this outrage is funny.

  1. What about seat belt laws? What about helmet laws? These were brought on to save insurance companies money with saving lives as secondary game. How many more lives to be saved by such a simple action like wearing a mask not to mention the Savings in healthcare dollars or buffering the economical impact.

    1. Did you actually listen to what he said??? Ofc not…. he clearly states covid lockdowns are stopping people from practicing in church. That blatantly goes against the 1A

  2. It is shameful that such a partisan character ever made it to the supreme court.

    He makes Cavanagh look like an angel.

  3. It bothers me, how easily organized religion can take issues of our society and turn them into assaults on their religious rights. Seems like they’re desperate to be the victim.

    1. @A Writer I’m sorry, but that doesn’t answer the question at all as I agree everyone has the same rights. So you have freedom of religion as much as I do, but what does that entail?

    2. @4336aaa Thanks for the response! So if their beliefs are discriminatory and bigoted, should they be able to practice those parts?

    3. @Metroid 1402 Generally speaking, I would say yes. But I would not like to be on the receiving end of those beliefs. and I would hope they were sensitive enough to know that not everybody practices their beliefs.

  4. If he’s so concerned about giving up freedoms, where was Supreme Court when during 9/11 Bush introduced a wholesale onslaught on privacy and rights ?

    1. @Str8 Street if masks are unconstitutional but for people’s safety, why aren’t people getting in line to do that? If Supreme Court thinks they should limit the things he spoke of in his speech then limit them all. It’s either right or it’s wrong. Don’t just pick and choose what you want to limit if the concept is the same for all.

    2. @Robert Rodgers yeah let’s characterize one group of people as being the ones with basic human characteristics. That’s not hypocritical in itself…

    3. @D B maybe it’s a little bit of the fact that these institutional changes are being made in the matter of 6 months, and by regulation not the passage of law.

    4. @D B The Supreme Court does not legislate closing your eyes to these things does not mean they need to change them not their position, when & if these things do come before them they will rule according to Constitutional Law, not political ideology. The Constitution does not allow the government to rule our health or what we wear it does not matter what the reason is, We The People consent to be governed by just men it’s not mandated by the government when they become unjust in their rulings We The People do not have to consent. Laws are legislated not mandated like these governors and mayors are doing, they get passed in the House then the Senate than the President sign it into law nationally, or the Governor for state law none of that has happened with masks or any pandemic responses.

  5. Think about the greater good. It’s a national pandemic one off, that had there been a national response we would be done with by now.

  6. We need to pack the SCOTUS so there can be progress and we don’t go back to “Jesus times,” when the world was Savage beyond belief. CHURCH AND STATE NEED TO BE SOCIALLY DISTANCED!!!!

  7. Uh, first amendment? Why is he asserting his religious rules from office? Stick to the constitution when judging please.

    1. @Mike ekiM great, then let’s appoint a muslim judge to exercise his religious beliefs from the judiciary. Good?

  8. This fool says: ” We don’t want Covid restrictions after the Pandemic has passed”..!!! .No Sheet, Sherlock…!!!…What is he smoking???

  9. Alito, 1956:
    “You can’t say that white children and black children should go to segregated schools. Until recently, that’s what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now, it’s considered bigotry.”

    1. @Bobby Sox Support and defend the Constitution. People risk their lives on the water or crossing deserts to come to the United States for the guarantees that are given to us by the founders as articulated in the US Constitution. If you study the constitution and the intent of the founders by reading their writings and their thought process, every word contained within the constitution was put there for a reason. The founders were wordsmiths. Everything in the constitution is there to protect citizens from the government. Don’t change it.

    2. @Bobby Sox The founders included the opportunity to amend the US Constitution to address a pressing need. Some of the recent amendments to address a pressing need include the 26th, 24, 22, 21, 19th and others. The amendment process is very complex, difficult, and time-consuming which the founders implied was necessary to prevent the constitution from being subjected to knee-jerk reactions. The complexity is intended to give rational people time to think.
      The founders argued extensively about guarantees that should be included in the constitution. One set included the “right to travel “between the states. Some argued that this was necessary but others prevailed stating that the right to travel was implied and it was such a basic rights similar to breathing and eating.
      Were you aware that the federal government has supremacy over all post roads? This fact then begs the question, why do the people allow each state to regulate travel on Post roads by issuing drivers licenses?
      Protect, defend and cherish the constitution because it is a document that protects people from government. We must remember that the founders were subjects of an oppressive government in the form of a monarchy. In order to understand the dangers that the founders were in when they signed the document you should study what happened to each of the founders, their families and property after the penned their name to the US Constitution.

  10. Alito: “I want people to be able to burn down their neighbor’s house, because they should have the freedom to hurt others and destroy their property.”
    That applies to all of his anti-American points spoken at that most anti-American of organizations, “The Federalist Society”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.