tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News June 30, 2013 12:00pm-12:31pm PDT
we'll see you next fox news sunday. note float. >> paul: this week on the journal editorial report, nsa leaker still on the run. while the obama administration faces another setback as russia refuses to return edward snowden. how should the u.s. respond to this latest diplomatic embarrassment? >> plus, landmark rulings on voting rights, racial preferences and more. we'll break down what the high courts decision mean for race in america. and a key senate vote puts immigration reform in the hands of the house. now it faces a huge uphill battle. will lawmakers get on board with the overhaul? >> paul: welcome to "journal editorial report". i'm paul gigot.
hunt for nsa leaker edward snowden strange straining tense relations between u.s. and russia. president obama says he shouldn't have to call vladimir putin to get him back. >> i'm not going to have one case of a suspect who were trying to extradite suddenly being elevated to the point where i've got to start doing wheeling and dealing and trading on a whole host of other issues simply to get a guy extradited so he can face the justice system here in the united states. >> paul: how would it affect the administration and united states influence abroad. joining the panel, dan henninger, brett stevens and kim strassel.
so the president says it's 29-year-old hacker. i shouldn't scramble the jets as he put it. >> the head of the national security agency says snowden has irreparable damage to americans. >> paul: others have, too. >> i would trust general alexander. he knows what secrets he had in his possession and secrets the chinese in hong kong or russians at the airport in moscow could easily have downloaded. >> paul: he certainly downloaded? >> this is what they do for a living. we would like to borrow your computer for a brief inspection. we'll give it back to you tomorrow. that kind of thing. this is major breach of american security whether snowden meant to hand over these documents, russians and chinese now have access to the national security agency in a way they didn't have before. terrorists can begin to
understand already how it is that we look at patterns of communication to see how they may or may not be seeking. so for the president to say no big deal a big deal. >> paul: why is the president down playing this when his justice department have brought charges against snowden? >> i think it goes that question. you had in the opening, american influence. i think the president is worried that the influence may be such they can't get snowden back. so if they lose, they look bad. i think there is also an element of incompetence here, too. there has been a strong tendency to rely on legal means of doing this, of signing the right papers. president hinted we've done all this, this should be routine. it's not routine. this president seems not to understand, you do have to
pick up the phone and things like this. you have to exert pressure. >> can i say reemphasize what kim said. that statement was unpresidential. i can't imagine george or bill clinton. i'm not going to deal with some guy. that is unpresidential behavior is watched closely by leaders all over the world. if they is see as kim is suggesting he is not up to the job, it gives them an incentive to on move forward and take risks. >> i get to red, the rodney dangerfield presidency. >> and implication dangerfield he deserved respect. he doesn't deserve respect because he doesn't seek it. >> also because no consequences to confronting the united states or challenging the united
states. in india, secretary of state said there would be consequences. president is not doing that bat. he should be talking to his good friend vladimir putin you and your billionaire friends want visas to the united states us, if you don't hand him over quickly there will be restrictions on that. >> paul: that is the leverage we have. there will be consequences and there will be "a", "b", "c", "d" not regarding snowden but other things? >> that is right. left to congress to make some of those threats, ecuador where snowden is potentially asking important asylum, members of congress, we have a free trade agreement and up for renewal and you better think hard before you give him sanctuary because we're going to block access to
your goods. >> paul: some evidence that snowden may have been working with other people before he took the job as a consultant with booz allen and had access to fees files. he apparently working with glenn greenwaltd before he took the job. do we know everything about this story? >> there is a lot more to come. idea that one guy could have pulled this off. he had help in hong kong. he had safe houses there. regardless of how the president wants to characterize it. the f.b.i. and national intelligence has to chase this guy and pursue this story until we get him back. >> paul: this is not a. >> this is not a case of a whistleblower, this a guy that wanted to leak information. >> paul: how could he have a access to this stuff?
when we come back, a big week for supreme court that dramatically shifts the debate on race in america. is this the end of racial preference? throughout our live. one a day women's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for women's health concerns as we age. it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day 50+.
to fly home for the big family reunion. you must be garth's father? hello. mother. mother! traveling is easy with the venture card because you can fly airline anytime. two words. double miles! this guy can act. wanna play dodge rock? oh, you guys! and with double miles you can actuay use, you never miss the fun. beard growing conte and go! ♪ win! what's in your wallet?
♪ ♪ >> paul: u.s. supreme court redefines equality in america in a series of landmark rulings and one controversial decision, court struck down a key part of the voting act of 1965. one key justice said it amounted to demolition of law. jason riley and colin levy. let's take on the voting rights decision. a lot of liberals are saying it will take us back to the era of jim crow where black voters were disenfranchised. how do you see it? >> i think it's important
to note this was not a radical decision. the court said the constitution requires that all states be treated equally. those extraordinary circumstances existed in 1965 because there was rampant discrimination. those conditions no longer exist and as chief justice roberts wrote, current burdens on the states need to be justified by current needs. so they said take the formula you had in 1965 and reconsider it. if you think it's still important, it's fine we can do it but you need to come up with a new formula. >> paul: roberts this signaled this inviting congress to rewrite the formula. it didn't. >> that is right. that was an 8-1 decision. >> paul: roberts reported to the liberal justices who supported that, even though they opposed this decision. >> the president's view his
reaction is disappointment in the decision is very telling, as telling of the left's view. first black president nothing has changed on voting rights front past 40 years is a ridiculous notion to begin with. it speaks to why the left likes this provision. they don't like it because they are worried about voter access or black voter access. black voter registration in the south exceeds what it is in other regions. in the last election, black voter turnout exceeded white voter turnout. they like this law for what it can do to help them term elections, ballot integrity that is why they are so whetted to this provision. it doesn't have anything to do with ballot access and it's been a huge success on that point. >> on the fisher case,
courted saying in education, texas and lower courts must readvice revisit their formula for admitting students and not make race as prominent feature. that was a victory for the plaintiff abbey gail fisher but did not declare racial preferences was unconstitutional? >> justice kennedy argued, in a previous decision said diversity was justification. they had this test called district scrutiny. what kennedy said in this case was you cannot just gesture in the direction of scrutiny, we tried to have a race neutral program so we are going to race based program. you have to prove it. you have to do analysis. there is a lot of legal analysis going on about this case about people that have written about it like
edward blum who was on miss fisher's legal's team. they believe they are going to have a difficult time to pass justice kennedy's test. there will be move away, unless there is wave of litigation. >> paul: that is not a universal view, they think justice kennedy he is the swing vote on these cases. he missed one of his last opportunities to make a firm, clear declaration on racial preferences. >> are racial preferences constitutional? justice thomas pointed this out. problem here with the baby steps the harm that racial preferences are doing to the intended beneficiary. we have a lot of research showing that it is hurting black graduation rates. instead of going to school,
it hurts the number of black scientists and doctors we get because kids are going into fields where it's easier to graduate because of the school system. there is actual harm being done. it's not just about equal protection. the intended beneficiaries of these policies are being damaged by these policies. >> paul: what do you think? >> i appreciate jason's point. that is absolutely true in larger sense but i think you can't minimize the fact you have seven justices signing on that says racial preferences are extremely disfavored and universities are entitled to no denks in how they enact policies in terms of trying to put through race based policies when race neutral ones are available. i think it signals where the court is going in the future. >> paul: we have to mention gay rulings that are land marks, as well. what does it tell us about the future of gay marriage in america? >> i think it tells us that
the effort to enacted gay marriage, make it valid and legal in the states will continue. the battle will be joined in the states out there. you can't get redress in congress or the government. >> so the battle returns to the states. all right. coming up next, senate passes historic immigration legislation but will hushed wills in the house bring this reform plan to a halt? the kyocera torque lets you hear and be heard even in stupid loud places. to prove it, we set up our call center right here... [ chirp ] all good? [ chirp ] getty up.
seriously, this is really happening! [ cellphone rings ] hello? it's a giant helicopter ma'am. [ male announcer ] get it done [ chirp ] with the ultraugged ocera torque, only from sprint direct conct. buy one get four free for your business. i don't always have time to eat like i should. that's why i like glucerna shakes. they have slowly digestible carbs to help minimize blood sugar spikes. [ male announcer ] glucerna. helping people with diabetes find balance.
over. what are the prospects for this legislation going forward. jason, let's deal with the senate bill first. is this an improvement? >> i would say on balance it is an improvement. major problem with the current system, too few ways to come. this expands more legal ways to enter the country. secondly, it does something about the huge illegal population we already have here now. >> paul: puts them on path on citizenship 15 years down the road. >> those are two major problems and this bill takes a step in the right direction. >> paul: isn't the 1200 page bill by some definition long? you write this omnibus legislation that isn't even related to immigration. what are the problems with this bill? >> the problems of the bill that it is too complex just like every piece of legislation is too complex. we have to get over there.
it's not going to change. as jason is suggesting, it does in principle create a better system, guest work. >> paul: automatic green cards for science and technology graduates from foreign countries. if you graduate from say stanford and intel makes you a job offer you are in. >> to resolve the grinding problems at the center of each of those subjects, we should probably move forward get the bill passed and let the american marketplace sort through it. it won't beut we have enough faith in the market to assume they will be able to get it across the goal line. >> paul: what about the prospects in the house. speaker boehner says he is not going to pass thinking nig with majority of republicans support that. is tall barrier given the fact that some republicans will not vote for this path to citizenship that jason described? >> that-he put out there,
could really prove a problem. here is the reason why. all along the how long is saying they are going to pass in pieces. the reason.... >> paul: that makes sense? >> it does because boehner knows he has a certain coalitions of republicans that support some of the free market aspects of this bill. for instance, guest worker programs. the problem is whether he can get a majority of the majority to support a pathway to citizenship. that is big problem because the republicans think they can pass a sort halfway immigration bill or pieces of it that does not include the pathway, they are kidding this themselves. >> paul: dan says pass it and let the market sort it out? >> i would keep in mind there are a bunch of democrats that wanted this issue, they think demographics is on their side and time is on their side.
>> paul: they don't want to pass the bill? >> not only in the next year but going forward. democrats would love to be able to painted republicans as anti-hispanic. they know that immigration is symbolic issue. a lot of democrats are pretty indifferent as to go forward. >> paul: so to pass it but how would you improve it? >> one way to improve it is expand the legal ways to come particularly for low skilled workers. >> paul: visas are not adequate -- that becomes an incentive for more illegals? >> exactly. that is problem with 1986. people talk about the amnesty provision but the real problem with '86 was labor flows going forward. giving u.s. employers to access to the labor they need going forward. they should shouldn't make the same mistake again. >> path to citizenship, 11 million illegals, they can't become citizens between ten to 13 years,
attract shone is going to wait to become citizens. the problem is overstated. republicans should fight it out over the next decade. they won't be voting for ten years. >> paul: what do you think the real prospects are thinking about it in cold-blooded fashion? >> it's very cold-blooded fashion. most likely thing you see, you see the house pass a border security element. that is something that republicans are obsessed on. and you see them potentially doinging in smog guest worker programs, a lot less certainty about a pathway to citizenship and some of the reforms in the senate bill. >> paul: this thing could go down in the house? >> i think republican leaders understand would it not be to their favor to not pass anything. i think they are going to try to pass something.
the question is will it add up to a comprehensive bill that the president signs. >> paul: republicans if they are smart they would improve the bill and increase avenues for legal immigration and less about that racing big business and set wage rates. one more break, hits and misses of the week. [ male announcer ] running out of steam? ♪ now you can give yourself a kick in the rear! v8 v-fusion plus energy. natural energy from green tea plus fruits and veggies. need a little kick? ooh! could've had a v8. in the juice aisle.
♪ ♪ >> paul: time for hits and misses of the week. kim, first to you? >> a serious miss for president obama for his latest attack on the economy in terms in the form of sweeping climate proposals. fuel efficiency standards for cars and new attempts to shut down coal plants. all of this is going to have a terrible effect on economy and jobs. if the president put half as much interest in things
that would help all out of work, economy might be getting somewhere. >> is serious miss to susan rice, out going ambassador to the united nations who is leaving the u.n. denounced that body for what she said was the disgrace of its performance on syria, that history would judge the u.n. harshly. she would denounce the u.n. doing nothing in syria and its her own administration that is doing nothing to stop the blood letting. >> i have a miss democratic on house and ways deplete, hey, there was no political bias when the irs try to slow roll conservative groups because the word progressive appeared on one lookout list. i think democrats are trying to make the story go away but it's not really working. >> paul: so progressives were not as targeted as the
others -- that is it for this week's show and all of you watching. follow us on twitter. i'm paul gigot. hope to see you right here next week. >> jon: on fox news watch.... >> i'm not going to scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker. >> jon: president displays hands off attitude, man wanted for espionage charged with stealing u.s. secrets and story getting major media attention but is it enough? >> why should you be charged with crime. >> media take shots at glen greenwald, is there an agenda here at work? >> a monument decision by the supreme court.... >> big news from the highest court. media reacts to key decisions on voting rights and then