00:00:00 | 3:02:50




The Supreme Court heard arguments today that could decide the fate of President Obama's most sweeping executive action on immigration. His program would delay deportations for some four million immigrants. Twenty-six states and Republican leaders say the constitution doesn't grant him the power to do it. Barbara Bogaev guest hosts.

Later on the program, the political fight over eggs. Does "cage free" mean healthier and more humane?

Photo: Immigration activists rally outside the US Supreme Court as justices hear arguments to United States v. Texas on April 18, 2016. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

US Commits More Troops and Equipment to Iraq 6 MIN, 30 SEC

Defense Secretary Ash Carter is in Iraq today and he announced the US will deploy 200 more troops, this time close to the front lines of the conflict with ISIS. The US military is also for the first time using Apache helicopters against the militant group in Iraq. Both actions are reportedly part of a build­-up to help Iraq retake the city of Mosul. Eric Schmitt, senior writer covering terrorism and national security issues for the New York Times, joins us from Washington.

Eric Schmitt, New York Times (@ericschmittNYT)


Eric Schmitt

Undocumented Parents and the Supreme Court 34 MIN, 26 SEC

Today the Supreme Court heard a case that could determine the fate of President Obama's most sweeping executive action on deportation. It would also drastically change the lives of some four million undocumented immigrants in the US. The President's 2014 plan would delay the deportation of parents of children who are US citizens or permanent legal residents, and offer them temporary work permits. But it's been on hold since it was announced 18 months ago because of court challenges, leaving immigrants across the nation in limbo -- the majority of whom have been in the country for ten years or more. The case lands in a presidential campaign already swirling with talk of a wall on the Mexican border. Will the short­handed high court end in a 4­4 deadlock?

Elizabeth Wydra, Constitutional Accountability Center (@ElizabethWydra)
Robert Barnes, Washington Post (@scotusreporter)
Josh Blackman, South Texas College of Law / Cato Institute (@JoshMBlackman)
Maria Bilbao, immigrant
Frank Sharry, America's Voice (@FrankSharry)

United States v. Texas
Barnes on prognosis for Obama's immigration program at the Supreme Court
Constitutional Accountability Center on US v. Texas
Cato Institute on Obama's executive action on immigration
America's Voice on judicial, political issues at stake in US v. Texas
California Gov. Brown urges SCOTUS to uphold Obama's executive action on immigration

Massachusetts' Battle over "Cage Free" Eggs 9 MIN

In November, voters in Massachusetts will be asked whether the state should ban the sale of eggs, pork products or veal from animals that are too tightly confined within cages. If the ballot measure passes it would have far reaching consequences for the egg industry both in Massachusetts and several other states. It would also mark a big win for the cage­free egg movement. But are cage­free eggs really more humane for animals or healthier for humans?

We hear more from environmental journalist Zack Colman, and Chris Green, Executive Director of the Animal Law and Policy Program at Harvard Law School.

Zack Colman, energy and environmental journalist (@zcolman)
Chris Green, Harvard Law School (@Harvard_Law)

WWLA on California's Proposition 2: Standards for Confining Farm Animals (2008)
Colman on the fight for cage-free eggs
Wamart on transition to cage-free egg supply
Rembrandt Foods announces cage-free site in Lake Preston, South Dakota

Subscribe to the 5 Things To Do newsletter

Never miss the best of what to do with your free time.


More From To the Point



View All Events


Player Embed Code