Democrats have convinced themselves that this is a moral issue — they believe their own propaganda

'The lies of smugglers'

A recent poll showed that Bell had pulled ahead of Bush

'That was always the risk'

A genetically specific pesticide has shown to be lethal to the destructive Colorado potato beetle while leaving all other tested species, even the beetle’s close relatives, unharmed. Every year, this native of the Rocky Mountains causes $500 million or more in damages across the Northern Hemisphere—all across which it’s now found as an invasive species. […] The post New Safer RNA Insecticide Can Target Only the Devastating Potato Beetles and No Other Bugs appeared first on Good News Network.

The post Blue Scottish Fold: Pictures, Info, Care & More by Nicole Cosgrove appeared first on Catster. Copying over entire articles infringes on copyright laws. You may not be aware of it, but all of these articles were assigned, contracted and paid for, so they aren't considered public domain. However, we appreciate that you like the article and would love it if you continued sharing just the first paragraph of an article, then linking out to the rest of the piece on Catster.com. Click to Skip Ahead Characteristics History How They Gained Popularity Formal Recognition Fun Facts Do They Make a Good Pet? With their unmistakable look and charmingly sweet temperaments, it’s difficult not to fall in love with the Scottish Fold. The breed appears in numerous colors but is perhaps most attractive in a blue coat, a gorgeous contrast to the large golden eyes that make them stand out even more. An easygoing nature makes this Scotland original a splendid addition to any home or family arrangement. Discover whether you’ve found the perfect pet as we discuss the blue Scottish Fold’s personality, background, and care. Breed Overview Height:8.5–10 inches Weight:6–13 pounds Lifespan:12–15 years Colors:Blue Suitable for:First-time owners, owners with a mellow home life Temperament:Calm, playful, affectionate, sweet, intelligent Blue Scottish Folds distinguish themselves with their bluish-gray hair, with lighter shades being the preferred variety of this coat color. Blue is an attractive hue, and it is a rare tone for the Scottish Fold, as it is a recessive diluted variation of black. Coat color aside, the blue Scottish Fold retains the adorable, rounded features and affectionate, endearing personality that define the breed. Blue Scottish Fold Characteristics The Earliest Records of Blue Scottish Folds in History Scottish Folds first appeared in Scotland in 1961. Sporting a spontaneous mutation causing her ears to fold in the middle, a farm cat named Susie captured the attention of breeders who would develop the breed into the modern-day Scottish Fold. Today’s Scottish Folds all supposedly share some relation to Susie. The exact point at which the blue variety appeared isn’t clear. Susie was a white cat and only bore two folded-ear kittens. One of those cats, a white female named Snooks, would go on to have additional litters. Crosses with farm cats and British Shorthairs refined the cat’s signature look and allowed diverse color and pattern possibilities. Image Credit: supatsanasit, Shutterstock How Blue Scottish Folds Gained Popularity Scottish Folds quickly garnered interest in Britain and the United States once they found their way to the country in 1970. The UK’s Governing Council of the Cat Fancy first registered the breed in 1966, while the Cat Fanciers’ Association in America welcomed them to the club in 1974. In the early 1970s, controversy emerged around the breed’s susceptibility to skeletal issues related to the folded ears. Britain and much of Europe subsequently changed direction and rescinded registrations for the breed as an animal welfare measure. The breed’s popularity in North America, however, continued to expand. Breeders justified their practices with the low prevalence of significant disorders, mixing in American and British Shorthairs to reduce the likelihood of severe issues. Additional selective breeding exaggerated the folded ears. Today, blue Scottish Folds may have double- or triple-folded ears that lay tighter to the head, which is the desired look in show cats. Formal Recognition of Blue Scottish Fold Though the Scottish Fold lost recognition with the GCCF and the European Cat Fanciers’ Association in 1971, all major American and Canadian registries accept the breed. Scottish Folds gained registration status with the CFA in 1974 and championship status four years later. As long-haired varieties gained popularity in the 1980s, clubs eventually began recognizing them in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s. Top 3 Unique Facts About Blue Scottish Folds 1. The Folded Ear Gene Causes Bone and Cartilage Issues The controversy around breeding Scottish Folds stems from their unique susceptibility to osteochondrodysplasia. The genetic disorder affects the entire body, causing shortened and malformed bones. The tail and lower leg bones commonly thicken, stiffen, and become arthritic, resulting in discomfort and limited movement. Unfortunately, there is no cure, though pain and anti-inflammatory medications can help manage signs. Researchers discovered the connection to osteochondrodysplasia in the early 1970s, causing many registries to halt new registrations. The defect is an incomplete dominant variant in the TRPV4 gene, meaning only one copy of the mutation is needed for signs of osteochondrodysplasia to appear. Recognizing the risks, countries including Austria, Belgium, and the Netherlands banned Scottish Fold breeding in recent years. 2. Scottish Folds Don’t Always Have Folded Ears To reduce the likelihood of health issues, Scottish Fold breeders cross them with other short-haired cats. In doing so, only one mutated gene passes to the offspring. With that also comes the chance that some kittens won’t receive the gene. In these cases, cats have upright ears with rounded tips. Cats with these features are CFA-accepted, and they are named “Scottish Shorthair” or “Scottish Straight” to distinguish them from their lop-eared siblings. Image Credit: Ivanova Ksenia, Shutterstock 3. Scottish Folds Are One of America’s Most Popular Breeds Though the coat is rare, Scottish Folds have become easier to find in recent decades due to the breed’s growing celebrity. It all started in the late 2000s with Maru, a Scottish Straight from Japan who became a YouTube superstar, accruing hundreds of millions of views for videos of his at-home antics. In recent years, the Scottish Fold has stayed in the public view as an adored pet of global celebrities, including Taylor Swift and Ed Sheeran. Does the Blue Scottish Fold Make a Good Pet? Image Credit: luckat, Shutterstock The blue Scottish Fold is an exceptional pet for nearly any family arrangement, whether you have kids, pets, or neither. They are outgoing, playful, and loving, and though they aren’t loud, they may keep a conversation with a collection of light vocalizations. They’re curious and intelligent and can be relatively easy to train but also mischievous as they learn their way around the home. The easygoing Scottish Fold only needs daily enrichment to stay content and docile. Grooming is straightforward with short-haired blue Scottish Folds. Long-haired varieties need more frequent brushing to reduce mats and tangles. Being careful with the tail and limbs is crucial, as they tend to develop stiffness and discomfort. Finding a reputable breeder can have the most substantial impact on your ownership experience. Due to the breed’s various health problems, breeders must perform comprehensive testing for common issues like PKD, osteochondrodysplasia, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Conclusion The Scottish Fold is ideal for first-time cat owners and longtime pet parents alike, and they provide many years of laidback and loving companionship for a devoted family. Vetting reputable breeders is the most challenging and crucial part of ownership due to the potential health issues in the breed. You can find responsibly bred cats with thorough research and conversations with fanciers. Though any well-raised Scottish Fold can be a joy to own, the blue coat is a beautiful finishing touch for this delightful feline companion. Sources PR Newswire CFA Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery ACF Osteoarthritis and Cartilage   Featured Image Credit: Inna photographer, Shutterstock The post Blue Scottish Fold: Pictures, Info, Care & More by Nicole Cosgrove appeared first on Catster. Copying over entire articles infringes on copyright laws. You may not be aware of it, but all of these articles were assigned, contracted and paid for, so they aren't considered public domain. However, we appreciate that you like the article and would love it if you continued sharing just the first paragraph of an article, then linking out to the rest of the piece on Catster.com.

Excerpts Young Adult Read an Excerpt From Romina Garber’s Castle of the Cursed The house is always hungry… By Romina Garber | Published on July 2, 2024 Comment 0 Share New Share We’re thrilled to share an excerpt from Castle of the Cursed, a YA gothic romance by Romina Garber—out from Wednesday Books on July 30th. After a mysterious attack claims the lives of her parents, all Estela has left is her determination to solve the case. Suffering from survivor’s guilt so intense that she might be losing her grip on reality, she accepts an invitation to live overseas with an estranged aunt at their ancestral Spanish castle, la Sombra.Beneath its gothic façade, la Sombra harbors a trove of family secrets, and Estela begins to suspect her parents’ deaths may be linked to their past. Her investigation takes a supernatural turn when she crosses paths with a silver-eyed boy only she can see. Estela worries Sebastián is a hallucination, but he claims he’s been trapped in the castle. They grudgingly team up to find answers and as their investigation ignites, so does a romance, mistrust twined with every caress.As the mysteries pile up, it feels to Estela like everyone in the tiny town of Oscuro is lying and that whoever was behind the attack has followed her to Spain. The deeper she ventures into la Sombra’s secrets, the more certain she becomes that the suspect she’s chasing has already found her… and they’re closer than she ever realized. “If you’re finished, follow me,” she says, picking up my glass of water and leading us out. I grab my bag and trail her back to the gargoyle staircase that branches up in a Y shape. This time, she starts climbing, and after a moment’s hesitation, I follow. The gargoyles’ eyes seem to trail us. I count ten steps to the middle landing, then twelve more as we go up the right side of the Y and cut down another crimson corridor. “This is the extent of the house that’s habitable,” she says, stopping at a closed door after twenty-three steps. “Most of the structure is in disrepair and off-limits, so there are rules for living here.” She stares at me grimly, and I flash to the photograph of the purple room. Beatríz looked younger than Mom then, but now she has aged past her older sister. “Rule number one: You are not to explore the castle beyond where I show you,” she says, holding up one finger. “And rule number two”—she raises a second finger—“you are not to invite anyone over. ¿Está claro?” I nod in agreement because it’s the path of least resistance. “I have arranged for you to receive Spanish tutoring in the mornings. I wasn’t sure if you would need it, but I think you do. Afternoons, you will report to the clínica and help me there, then we will come home together to eat. ¿Bueno?” I want to shake my head in refusal, but it’ll be easier to just disappear. So I nod again. Yet in my mind, I’m already retracing the steps to the front door. I don’t have a cell phone, but there will be public phones in town. I can take a cab to the airport and fly back to D.C. I’m sure Lety will let me back into the center. I still have a couple of weeks before I turn eighteen. I can figure something else out— “My room is two doors down,” says my aunt, handing back my glass of water. When I reach for it, she holds out something small in her other palm. I was informed my aunt would have my prescriptions and would continue to administer my doses because I’m not to be trusted with pill bottles after what I did at the center. But this doesn’t look like any medication I’ve ever taken. Buy the Book Castle of the Cursed Romina Garber Buy Book Castle of the Cursed Romina Garber Buy this book from: AmazonBarnes and NobleiBooksIndieBoundTarget The pill is black and shriveled and makes me think of the seed of a sickly tree. “This is the equivalent of what you’re taking,” she says, with a bite of impatience. I don’t reach for it. “Is there a problem?” she probes. I stare at the seedlike thing in her hand. There’s no way that’s medicinal. It looks more like poison. I look at her, and I’m not sure if I’m frowning or glaring. Is there a difference? Whatever the name of the expression, I’ve no doubt she’s picking up on my refusal. “Your doctors weren’t sure you could handle this transition,” she says, closing her fist. “If that’s the case, we’ll have to find a new arrangement.” I can’t believe it’s possible to dislike my mother’s sister this much so soon. And yet, it’s barely been a couple of hours, and I already despise her. Since I’m going to spit it out anyway, I open my palm to accept her pill. Yet part of me wants to call her bluff and dare her to call the center. I doubt she would have gone through the trouble of bringing me here just to ship me right back. I tip the black seed in my mouth and chase it with water. Seeming satisfied, my aunt says, “Buenas noches.” As soon as she shows me to my room, I slip inside and spit the pill into my hand. Then I stuff the seedlike thing into an inner pocket of my duffel for future investigation. My new bedroom is the size of an apartment and comes complete with its own bathroom and an empty closet that could double as a second bedroom. My parents and I could have lived comfortably together in here. It’s hard to imagine Mom growing up in this castle. It’s even harder to imagine that I might have grown up here, maybe even in this very room, if not for whatever happened that sent Mom and Dad packing. Their decision changed my nationality, my language, my upbringing… and they never even bothered to tell me. I push those thoughts away and try to focus on something else. The bathroom has a raven-claw tub and no shower. I twist the brass tap to fill it with hot water. A collection of shampoos, conditioners, body gels, moisturizers, and bath bombs line the porcelain, all of them unopened. I haven’t bathed unsupervised in months, haven’t had any privacy at all. It feels surreal to be completely alone like this, to know I could do anything I want without anyone stopping me. I could hold my breath underwater until the last bubble pops.  I dunk my head and wait in muffled silence to be proven wrong. As the seconds pass, the world gets too quiet. When the absence of sound becomes overwhelming, I wonder if that’s what death is, just an earsplitting silence for all eternity. I break the surface, gasping for breath. When I finish bathing, I towel off and change into black tights and a hoodie. Then I break Beatríz’s first rule. I wear socks but no shoes. Padding across the icy hall, I stay close to furniture and other heavy items, where the floor is more settled and less likely to creak. Once I return to the landing of the Y-shaped stairs, I climb the twelve steps of the left branch. The darkness feels deeper here, and my steps are muffled by giant mothballs. I use my key chain flashlight—an investigative necessity, according to Dad—to examine the hall’s peeling paint and cobwebbed corners. A trickle creeps up the back of my neck that isn’t a spiderweb. I feel like I’m being watched. I swing my light in a circle around me, but I don’t catch the whites of anyone’s eyes. Yet as I keep going, peeking into dilapidated bedrooms and bathrooms, the sensation of being followed only grows. Only I hear no footsteps. Something brushes my cheek— Sucking in a sharp breath, I spin and flash my light in every direction. The beam flickers, cutting in and out, before shutting off for good. I toggle the switch, but the device is dead. I can see why the locals believe something is off about this castle. I should head back to my room, but the bands of fear tightening around my chest excite me. The siren call of my heartbeat is too tempting to ignore. A monstrous shadow grows sharper as I approach the end of the hall, and once my eyes adjust, I see another gargoyle carved of black stone. Like the ones from the staircase, its expression is grotesque and its eyes follow me closely. Once I manage to look past it, I notice a nondescript door. I swing it open to a swirl of silver, and I enter a starlit space with a wall of stained-glass windows. And I’m reminded of a different silver blaze. In the early weeks after the subway, before medication drowned my dreams, I used to get the same vision, night after night. It wasn’t the twenty-five dead bodies, or the black smoke, or even my parents. It was the blast of silver right before the train came back into focus. That’s how the dream would begin. Then the light would retreat into twin orbs—a pair of eyes. He had dark hair, chiseled cheekbones, and a starry gaze. I must have made him up to watch over me at night. I never remembered the details of our time together once I awoke; just the imprint of his face, and the way shadows danced around him, reflecting back not a man’s shape but a monster’s. I thought of him as my nighttime guardian, a gargoyle with an angel’s face protecting me from nightmares. I called him my shadow beast. Yet the silver light in this room comes from the night sky, filtered through stained glass. The windows are cloudy with dust, but I can still make out their original designs: the eight phases of the moon. This room has a hallowed feel to it, as if it was once a sacred chamber. Like a lunar temple for summoning gods. Or demons. The walls look scratched, and as I approach for a closer inspection, I see that they’re covered with words. Even before reading them, I know what they say. The same line has been etched into the stone, over and over and over again, in different handwritings and to varying degrees of legibility: No hay luz en Oscuro. There’s no light in Oscuro. The words are an incantation, and I’m thrust back in time to the purple room, as a memory overtakes my senses: A black fire blazes through the room, singeing the wallpaper and producing clouds of smoke. A person is screaming, and I see Mom framed in the doorway, her arms outstretched, horror splayed on her face. She looks like she’s desperate to reach something in the black flames— Me. Five-year-old me is being burned alive. From Castle of the Cursed by Romina Garber. Copyright © 2024 by the author and reprinted by permission of St. Martin’s Publishing Group. The post Read an Excerpt From Romina Garber’s <i>Castle of the Cursed</i> appeared first on Reactor.

The current Supreme Court term is now over, but conservatives have already suffered notable defeats in cases involving Big Tech censorship and free speech, states’ lawful ability to proscribe abortion, the ubiquity of the abortion pill (mifepristone), the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the possibility of a future wealth tax, and taxpayer responsibility for Indian tribal health care. One might argue—though I probably would not—that the term’s marquee gun case, involving firearm possession for those subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, went against conservative interests as well. Bear in mind this is the same Supreme Court the political Left and corporate media (but I repeat myself) have decried, for years now, as a purported den of far-right, authoritarian, “MAGA” iniquity. Worse, they allege the court is somehow “unethical” due to Justice Clarence Thomas having a wealthy friend in real estate magnate Harlan Crow, or Justice Samuel Alito’s wife flying at the family beach house the same “Appeal to Heaven” flag that was first commissioned by George Washington himself and that flew outside San Francisco City Hall for 60 years. For two years in a row, they have assailed the court’s legitimacy in a sprawling media disinformation operation. The Left thus gets the best of both worlds. Progressives are able to generate publicity and rake in fundraising dollars with their recurring temper tantrums about the court’s ostensible threat to “our democracy,” while on the other hand they reap the rewards of a court that delivers them substantive victories far more often than either side would care to acknowledge. As for the Right, it continues to suffer the indignity of frequent defeat at the hands of perhaps the one major political or legal institution in America that it nominally controls. Many of the Right’s recent disappointments can be attributed to wobbliness from the Trump-nominated triumvirate of Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. Gorsuch is the best of the bunch and issued heroic rulings during COVID-19, but he is an idiosyncratic libertarian who has proved himself unreliable on issues pertaining to sexual orientation and gender identity, immigration and due process, and Indian affairs. Kavanaugh is a prototypical Bush Republican—Karl Rove in a robe. Barrett, nominated to the court after a brief stint on the 7th Circuit and an unremarkable academic career, is timid and lacks the courage of her putative convictions. For many years after former President George H.W. Bush made the disastrous choice to nominate the liberal David Souter to the court instead of the conservative stalwart Edith Jones, those involved in Republican judicial nominations vowed, “no more Souters.” Here are some ways the next Republican administration can give that vow some teeth. First, do the actual research. Gorsuch’s stunning defection in the 2020 Bostock decision, for instance, in which he read sexual orientation and gender identity into Title VII, was entirely predictable based upon his prior similar ruling in a 9th Circuit case in 2009 called Kastl. And if there isn’t a huge body of case law because a prospective nominee hasn’t been an active judge for very long, that’s a good indication not to pick that person. Only demonstrable, proved track records can suffice. Second and related, dive deep into a prospective nominee’s record to verify full-spectrum, across-the-board conservatism. Conservatives are sick of one-trick pony lawyers and jurists, for instance, who obsess over regulatory issues and gutting the administrative state while having little to say when it comes to the core civilizational issues affecting sovereignty, life, religion, and human sexuality. Third, it’s imperative that conservatives vet nominees closely for a willingness and eagerness to overrule bad cases and correct course as aggressively as possible. The Right must only consider those who take a properly constrained view of stare decisis (precedent) in constitutional interpretation, will liberally grant writs of certiorari to hear flawed lower-court cases affecting key issues, and who will not search for ways to avoid tough rulings—as the court did last week when it punted on the Big Tech censorship case of Murthy v. Missouri on standing grounds, and dismissed as improvidently granted the Idaho abortion case of Moyle v. United States. Finally, the prospective nominee’s personal life should be closely scrutinized. There is not a single more important proxy than the “spouse test.” It is no coincidence that Thomas and Alito are the two most steadfast of the current justices. Their wives—Ginni and Martha-Ann, respectively—are exceptional, conservative women. Beyond the spouse test, a nominee must attend a theologically conservative house of worship; a rainbow flag-flying church or synagogue must be an automatic disqualifier. It is past time that conservatives actually play to win at the U.S. Supreme Court. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post How Conservatives Can Finally Get Judicial Nominations Right appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Biden Is Meeting With Democrat Governors Tomorrow

The broadcast networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC each spent a chunk of their Tuesday morning newscasts tearing at the fabric of American intuitions by stoking fear of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling limiting presidential immunity. Amid those reports, something interesting happened on CBS Mornings as legal correspondent Jan Crawford slammed the brakes on Democratic Party donor and CBS co-anchor Gayle King, who was trying to fear monger about presidents being above the law. Leading into the segment, King asserted that the “landmark” ruling “redefined the power of the office of the president.” “Now, you should know there is no precedent for a decision like this because, until now, we've never had a former president who has faced criminal charges like Donald Trump,” she added. As she was handing it off to Crawford to tell the rest of the story, King parroted “some people” who claim the court put president “above the law,” but the career legal expert wasn’t having it: KING: Jan Crawford at the Supreme Court is going to help us with the first part of the question. Jan, good morning. Some people are interpreting this to mean that the president is above the law. What can you tell us? CRAWFORD: Not exactly, by any means. I mean this basically sends the case back to a lower court to decide which acts of former President Trump are unofficial and can still be criminally prosecuted, but that can take time. It's very hard to see how this trial will start before November's elections. Crawford seemingly had the ability to perceive the future because her pre-taped report began with a quote from Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion definitely affirming that “not everything the president does is official. The president is not above the law.” “Noting a president’s unofficial acts could be prosecuted – possibly including those made as a candidate or party leader,” she added.     Seemingly taking aim at the liberal media’s narrative that the Supreme Court was just doing the bidding of former President Trump, she followed up by report that the justices “rejected [Trump’s] sweeping claims he was absolutely immune from prosecution for his actions around January 6.” While much of the rest of the liberal media were gushing about the dissent from far-left Justice Sonia Sotomayor (who ridiculously predicted political assassinations), Crawford countered with Roberts’ direct rebuke of the hysteria: The 6-3 decision sharply divided the justices along ideological lies. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a fiery dissent for the liberals, expressing her fear for our democracy, and saying the decision makes the president “now a king above the law.” That prompted an unusually fierce response from Roberts, accusing the dissent of “fearmongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals.” Crawford wasn’t the only one to push back on the fearmongering from the liberal anchors. Legal analyst Rikki Klieman rejected claims made by co-anchor Tony Dokoupil (Click “expand”): DOKOUPIL: So, a key part of the interference allegations and I think a disturbing aspect of the Supreme Court ruling for a lot of people is that Donald Trump's efforts to pressure his vice president not to certify the election will be an official act and therefore not prosecutable. KLIEMAN: No, wrong. It's the Justice Department conversations. They are definitely not prosecutable. The question of the conversations with Mike Pence to stop the certification they may be presumptively official, but I would still think Judge Chutkan will find that the government can overcome the presumption and there going forward. What's the problem here is delay because they're all going to be appealed. Despite those touches of sanity, the overwhelming flavor the CBS’s tone was to turn the American people against the court. King looked to CBS anchor and liberal commentator John Dickerson and suggested “the guardrails have now come off.” “And why do we think that? Three reasons—One, we have the testimony of his former officials who said much of our time was spent telling him you can't do that, it's illegal. He's likely to think you know what, I know how to get around this,” Dickerson divined. For her final question, King ask Dickerson to tell voters “how” to think about the ruling. Dickerson went on to bloviate about “character”: Character means two things. One, do you care about people other than your base because your president of the whole country. And what that means is are you going to do things that are going to help the most number of people. And the second part of character means do you realize there are long term consequences for your behavior. It’s not just what’s gonna help you and what’s gonna help you in the short term but you are in a job that requires that you think about the future. “And putting character back in focus on the job is a good thing for an election and it’s what everyone should be talking about,” he demanded. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS Mornings July 2, 2024 7:02:08 – 7:10:41 a.m. Eastern GAIL KING: We’re gonna begin though with this, that landmark Supreme Court decision you’ve heard about it which redefined the power of the office of the president. Now, the court ruled that the official acts of sitting presidents are immune to criminal prosecution even after they leave office. Now, you should know there is no precedent for a decision like this because, until now, we've never had a former president who has faced criminal charges like Donald Trump. So, what does this mean for Trumps legal cases and for the presidency itself? We’ll try to answer that as well as explain what the decision actually said. Jan Crawford at the Supreme Court is going to help us with the first part of the question. Jan, good morning. Some people are interpreting this to mean that the president is above the law. What can you tell us? JAN CRAWFORD: Not exactly, by any means. I mean this basically sends the case back to a lower court to decide which acts of former President Trump are unofficial and can still be criminally prosecuted, but that can take time. It's very hard to see how this trial will start before November's elections. [Cuts to video] In a historic decision, the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that former presidents have some immunity from prosecution. Though Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said “not everything the president does is official. The president is not above the law.” Noting a president’s unofficial acts could be prosecuted – possibly including those made as a candidate or party leader. DONALD TRUMP [FEBRUARY 8]: You have to give a president full and total immunity. CRAWFORD: The court rejected former President Donald Trump's sweeping claims he was absolutely immune from prosecution for his actions around January 6. But it said presidents must have some immunity to “execute the duties of his office fearlessly and fairly” and so “official acts” are largely shielded from prosecution. The 6-3 decision sharply divided the justices along ideological lies. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a fiery dissent for the liberals, expressing her fear for our democracy, and saying the decision makes the president “now a king above the law.” That prompted an unusually fierce response from Roberts, accusing the dissent of “fearmongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals.” The court emphasized the lasting significance of its decision well beyond Trump, noting concerns about opening up Pandora's box of criminal prosecutions of former presidents. Trump hailed to the court's ruling, writing the decision was a “big win for our constitution and democracy,” while President Biden spoke out last night siding with the dissent. JOE BIDEN: This is a fundamentally new principle and it's a dangerous precedent, because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law. CRAWFORD: But the high court's decision does allow Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump for private acts and deciding what those are now falls to Judge Tonya Chutkan who is overseeing the federal election interference case. THOMAS DUPREE (FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL): This is not the end of the prosecution of Donald Trump. I strongly suspect that Jack Smith will find allegations that he thinks survive and Judge Chutkan, more importantly, will find allegations that she thinks survive. [Cuts back to live] CRAWFORD: Now, last night, Trump's legal team did send a letter, citing the decision, and asking the judge in his New York hush money trial to overturn his criminal conviction. That is a stretch, to say the least. It seems perhaps more of an effort to delay his sentencing which is now set for July 11th, Tony. TONY DOKOUPIL: Jan, got it, thank you very much. For more on this, let's go to our chief political analyst John Dickerson and CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman. Good morning to both of you. We're going to talk to you, John, in a moment about the presidency and what this means but first, the legal cases that Trump is facing -- what now, Rikki? RIKKI KLIEMAN: Well, Jan just mentioned New York looking to stop the conviction, to overturn it and not be sentenced is ridiculous. So, let's look at the January 6 case. The January 6 case is the case that went up to the Supreme Court. What is going to happen here is a matter of procedure. It is going to get kicked back down to the district court -- that's Judge Tanya Chutkan. Judge Chutkan is going to have a hearing on every act that is in this indictment. Keep in mind this indictment is 45 pages. It has 128 paragraphs in it. And of them, 123 are acts. So, what Judge Chutkan is going to do is go one by one after they brief the issue for her and hear arguments, and she's going to make a decision and say, well, this act is not official, this act is private. And there I will say, I think, without fear of contradiction, understanding Judge Chutkan who is prompt, who is precise, who is smart, and found that there was absolutely no immunity that about 95 percent of this case she is going to say is ready for trial. DOKOUPIL: That five percent is a big deal right? So, a key part of the interference allegations and I think a disturbing aspect of the Supreme Court ruling for a lot of people is that Donald Trump's efforts to pressure his vice president not to certify the election will be an official act and therefore not prosecutable. KLIEMAN: No, wrong. It's the Justice Department conversations. They are definitely not prosecutable. The question of the conversations with Mike Pence to stop the certification they may be presumptively official, but I would still think Judge Chutkan will find that the government can overcome the presumption and there going forward. What's the problem here is delay because they're all going to be appealed. KING: John, can you put this in perspective about what it means historically because many people are sitting here thinking the guardrails have now come off. What does this mean? JOHN DICKERSON: So lets -- we have to separate this in a few different ways. There's the office of the presidency -- forget who's in the office. There have been debates about the power of the president and the executive and what kinds of powers the executive needs to act with dispatch. Those arguments are going on pretty much right after they finished the Constitution 234 years ago in that hot summer in Philadelphia. In that regard, this basically gives more power to the presidency, but that's an abstract debate about the presidency. What does it mean with respect to Donald Trump? Well it means what Rikki was just talking about there are specific ways in which it will affect this case about his participation on January 6. But then there's the third part, which is the biofeedback. How is he going to receive this news, and if he is to be elected again, how is he going to operationalize it? We've seen him already claim this gets him out of the New York case which is a stretch and ridiculous reading of the Supreme Court. But if he's president, he's likely to read this ruling as a kind of all guardrails are off. And why do we think that? Three reasons—One, we have the testimony of his former officials who said much of our time was spent telling him you can't do that, it's illegal. He's likely to think you know what, I know how to get around this. The second, thing is when presidents are given power, they rarely say, you know what? I'm not going to use it. And the third thing is if you believe you in politics that if you have the power you can do what you want, well he’s likely – and those who support him are likely – to read this ruling as saying if you have the power and its part of your job, then go ahead and do what you want. KING: But John he has said this even before the ruling – that he has the power. How should voters process this? DICKERSON: They should -- and I'll go back to what I've been talking about for years. They should think of this as an office that requires the occupant to have a certain level of character. Because when you're given extreme power, it comes down to you and your character and whether you'll use that power wisely and in a restrained fashion in the job. And that goes to not just these questions that are a part of this ruling but more broadly in the job. Character means two things. One, do you care about people other than your base because your president of the whole country. And what that means is are you going to do things that are going to help the most number of people. And the second part of character means do you realize there are long term consequences for your behavior. It’s not just what’s gonna help you and what’s gonna help you in the short term but you are in a job that requires that you think about the future. And putting character back in focus on the job is a good thing for an election and it’s what everyone should be talking about. NATE BURLESON: Yeah, well given the ruling, the convictions, the upcoming election this is very layered. Thank you for breaking it all down. We appreciate you – could be talking about this the entire show actually but thank you we’ll check back in with you later.