i'll be home for christmas. you can count on me. right now, all over the country, kids at shriners hospitals for children® are able to go home and be with their families for the holidays. and it's only possible because of the monthly support of people just like you. with your gift of just $19 a month, only $0.63 a day. we'll send you this adorable love to the rescue® blanket as a thank you and a reminder of the care

you'll be providing so kids can be with their families. thanks to a generous donor, your gift will go twice as far and help more kids like me. thank you for giving! please call the number on your screen or go online right now with your monthly gift. and when you do, your gift will have two times the impact. just moments after a seven-day truce expired, israel resumed combat operations against hamas in gaza. but qatar says negotiations for the release of hostages are still ongoing. we have the latest from the region. plus, lawyers for former president donald trump in court right now in georgia defending him for the first time in the 2020 election interference case there.

we'll break down their legal strategy, how they're trying to get that case dismissed. and in an historic vote, the house expelling congressman george santos. he's the first house member removed from the chamber in more than two decades, the first to not be convicted in a crime in 100-something-50 years or so. we're following these stories and more coming in. the sounds of war have returned to israel and gaza. since the truce expired hours ago, rockets fired into israel have been intercepted. we've seen it just over the past two hours here. but gaza has suffered major hits, including in the southern city of beit hanoun. israel defense forces dropped leaflets directing palestinian civilians to evacuate. people are on the move, but the

critical aid has stopped flowing into the enclave from egypt. 200 trucks were able to get into gaza each day. negotiations are still under way. cnn's oren liebermann is in tel aviv for us. we heard blasts in sderot in the last hour. we've been hearing them as we've been talking to you throughout the show. what have you been experiencing? >> reporter: we heard from jeremy diamond, who is in sderot off the northeast of gaza there, saying he's seen one of the most sustained ba ranls of rocket fire coming from northern gaza in weeks. that is significant. that's where israeli forces have been operating. that hamas still able to operate and fire rockets from there is a significant statement about what israel can control there and what it is not able to control there. meanwhile, we have seen at least two major barrages fired towards where we are in central tel aviv.

here, rockets, iron dome interceptors fired at intercepting rockets headed for this area. that statement about what hamas and other militant groups are still able to carry about on their part of the war, they said they are ready to resume operations and very much done that as we've seen from our position here. meanwhile, israel has carried out punishing strikes against southern gaza focused on the major city there, as well as rafah, the border crossing where humanitarian aid has not gone through since the resumption of fighting. israel said it has carried out some 200 strikes against what it calls terror targets in southern gaza, but we have seen the results of those strikes and the results on the civilian population there. health authorities in gaza say more than 100 people have been killed since strikes have resumed. meanwhile, hospital officials and health authorities say the largest hospital that is still functioning in gaza is operating at more than 200 person of

interest -- 200% capacity. that gives you an idea of the burden on the hospitals. we have seen the pictures of children being rushed to hospitals there. with fighting set to continue, the number of palestinians killed, they're almost certain to rise in the coming hours. >> oren, even as this bombardment continues and these rockets are being fired, these negotiations, these multiparty talks about hostages are continuing. what can you tell us? >> reporter: absolutely. perhaps that's not too much of a surprise. the first truce came about as a result of negotiations in the middle of some of the most intense fighting of the war. that's where negotiators are once again right now. israel and hamas talking indirectly through qatar, which has been the main mediator here. egypt, as well as the united states trying to get back to a point where you can have a truce. israel's conditions remain the same. if hamas wants another 24 hours for a pause in the fighting, they have to release ten women

and children. israel believes they have those numbers. idf spokesperson said israel believes they have 17 women and children that can be released as a part of the current state of negotiations. hamas, meanwhile, says they don't, in fact, have the numbers to meet that requirement. instead, they tried to expand the agreement to include elderly men as well as men and women who could be of fighting age in the idf or reservists. they say israel rejected any attempts to expand the talks there. meanwhile, those negotiations are ongoing to try to come to some sort of agreement on a continuation of the pause. a senior state department official had said -- expressed some level of optimism they could be back to a pause in the fighting sometime in the next day or two. from what we're seeing now, that seems a far way off. >> certainly does. oren liebermann, live for us from tel aviv. thank you for that. i do want to go now to jerusalem, which is where cnn's ben wedeman is following what is

happening in gaza. people in gaza, they are experiencing this bombardment, and of course that means death and destruction after what was a week of relief. >> reporter: yes. in fact, a week of relief where the guns were silent. now, no longer silent at all. according to the health ministry, the current death toll is 178, hundreds more injured. the worst strike was in the city in the south, where in one house 15 people killed, in the house next door, 10 people were killed. we've seen footage from that strike where there's a 2-year-old girl on the table in the emergency ward, medics are trying to revive her and then realize that she has died. there's many more images coming out of gaza, many civilians get

again being killed. israelis had dropped leaflets on the city of khan younis telling people around those areas to leetch it because it will be an active military zone. they've been told to go to rafah, which is the furthest south in the gaza strip, but that area is already crammed with people. we understand the u.n. schools that have been converted to shelters are completely full. one person says there are 600 people for every single toilet. now, the israelis also published a map of gaza showing it sort of cut up into little school districts that are numbered on that publication. there's a qr code, which supposedly is going to tell people where at any given moment they can be safe. keep in mind, however, many of the people who fled from the north to the south of gaza actually had to do so on foot, so if suddenly they find out that they're in a dangerous

area, they're going to have to move to another, that's going to be difficult. but even more difficult is the fact that internet coverage, cell phone coverage in gaza at this point is very weak, so they may not be able to find out through this publication -- and i say publication, it's not even a leeaflet -- they can't find ot where it is they should go. the situation is difficult and getting worse. john kirby, the spokesman for the u.s. national security council, has come out and said some aid has gotten to gaza. he's talking about perhaps a dozen or dozens of trucks, but that's nothing compared to the approximately 200 they were getting through during the truce. keep in mind, before the war, about 500 trucks were getting through to gaza every single day. >> ben wedeman, thank fou you f

that report. former president trump's defense lawyers are trying to get his georgia racketeering case thrown out. they claim that the fulton county indictment tied to election interference violates his free speech rights. so they're also pushing for the trial to be postponed. we'll see if that is going to work here, potentially for years. in washington, a federal appeals court paved the way for the former president to be sued over his role in the january 6th insurrection. the major ruling says that trump is not protected by presidential immunity for certain lawsuits. let's break it down. cnn's nick valencia is outside the courthouse in atlanta, and in studio we have chief legal affairs correspondent paula reid and norm eisen. what have the two sides argued today so far, nick? >> reporter: this is the first time we're seeing trump's attorneys in court in this case. they're saying this indictment should be thrown out based on

the first amendment. what his high-profile criminal defense attorney is arguing is that when president trump, after he lost the 2020 election, began peddling conspiracy theories, claiming there was widespread voter fraud, that that at its core was political speech protected by the first amendment. in a legal finding on monday, they said the speech should not be count earned by an indictment from the fulton county district attorney's office. but the state responding saying, while it sounds good to claim there's political persecution here, this is about laws that were broken and crimes committed. another big headline had to do with scheduling. in a recent interview, the district attorney, fani will liles, told "the washington post" she wants this trial with trump and his co-defendants to start in august of 2024. listen to what trump's attorney had to say about that in court a short time ago. >> -- win election 2024, could he even be tried in 2025?

>> the answer to that is i believe with the supremacy clause and his duties as president of the united states, a trial would not take place at all until after he left office. >> solely against him. >> solely against him. >> all right. and mr. wade, i'll give you the option to respond if you so desire. all right. that's something we'll be taking up in greater detail in the new year. >> reporter: it's really important to remind everyone that even as trump's defense attorneys argued that this indictment should be thrown out against him, four of the former president's former co-defendants have admitted to guilt in this to the crimes alleged in this indictment. all four attorneys in exchange

for a not guilty plea, will testify against the former president. >> the judge has made it clear in the past on this free speech issue -- it comes up again. >> reporter: that's right. important to note this first amendment challenge has come up with ken chesebro and sidney powell, those former co-defendants. what scott mcafee, the ruling he issued there says facts and evidence need to be established if court before that first amendment challenge could be put into the equation. brianna? >> norm, this first amendment argument, as we noted, the judge has struck it down before. any doubt in your mind that that happens again this time around? >> it's virtually certain, boris, that this trial is not going to be slowed down by the first amendment argument before we get to trial. now, it is possible, when you get into trial and the facts and evidence come in, and that's what the judge signaled, he may say, well, we're going to take

this piece of the case out, some of the remarks on january 6th, you won't be allowed to argue that to the jury. so he may peel away little pieces here and there, he may not. for now, first amendment not an obs obstacle. >> and trump's lawyers are attempting to get all these criminal trials delayed here. >> well, and we got a taste of that in the afternoon session before the judge today. he's new judge but has been so impressive because he surveyed the waterfront, all of the reasons that there might be delay, other cases, the fact that trump's a presidential candidate. but then he was very smart. he said to trump's lawyer, well, what if mr. trump is not a candidate, or what if the other cases have been resolved? why should i kick the case forward now? he's showing a very flexible approach. i think we're going to stick with the august target of a

trial date now and see what happens. some of those other cases could move, like judge cannon, the mar-a-lago case in florida. that case could slip. this case could slide right in. >> that's in fulton county, georgia. in washington, d.c., a significant ruling when it comes to trump's potential liability and his role as president, his immunity as president playing a role on january 6th. >> a huge decision, one we've been waiting for for a while. the appeals court said trump can be sued for his actions on january 6th. now, it does not mean that he is liable. what it means is that capitol hill police officers, lawmakers who have tried to sue him, that they will now get their day in court, unless it's appealed and overturned. trump is arguing he can't be sued because january 6th he was the president, and federal officials from the president on down enjoy immunity for things they do in their official roles. but here the court found that his speech on january 6th was

part of a, quote, pro-trump rally, that this was more of a campaign activity. they described him in this moment as being, quote, an office seeker not an office holder. and they said, quote, in this opinion, when he acts in an unofficial, private capacity, he is subject to civil suits just like any other private citizen. and today, his team, though, once again insisting that he was acting in his role as the president. but this is a big question going forward. this is about civil liability. big question now is criminal liability, because a similar issue is going to come up in a criminal context. the trial that judge says is going in march no matter what. we'll likely try to test this here. you have an appeals court saying look, not everything you do in your official role as president is immune from liability. >> it was so telling -- of course paula's right on the money in analyzing the case, but the test that trump was pushing here, the nixon v. fitzgerald

test, this is within your out-of-perimeter presidential duty, you can't be subject to legal process, that's the same argument that he's pushing for criminal immunity before judge chutkin. it's one of the most significant days i think as we look at the criminal case, hey, he's not going to be able to stop that march trial date, probably. >> can we talk about what this means for him, though? i mean, he has so many court proceedings in different cases before him, and then i think at least ten cases involving police and lawmakers alone on january 6th. even if they're unsuccessful, he still would have to mount a defense. that is a lot. >> yeah. >> that is a lot. >> we've seen this the past seven years. you'll have to employ more lawyers. he's chosen a pretty narrow group so far to cover the field and all the other places he

needs to be defended. this will be costly both in money and time. and that calendar is crowded between campaign events, election events, and all these trials. >> thank you all so much. appreciate your perspective. come back anytime. you're welcome here. >> stick around. still to come, the house's overwhelming vote to show congressman george santos the door, what it means for the already slim republican majority. and later, the death of former supreme court justice sandra day o'connor, how she inspired generations of women.

in an historic move, the house overwhelming voted 311-114 to expel new york republican congressman george santos from his seat.

house speaker mike johnson and three other top republican leaders actually voted to keep santos partly, perhaps, because the math changes, making the republicans' slim advantage over democrats even slimmer. melanie zanona joins us. a lot of republicans voted to oust santos, yet many still support someone facing multiple felony charges. >> reporter: yeah. that's why there was a lot of uncertainty heading into this vote because the gop has really been divided over this question of whether or not they should expel george santos. you saw that really reflected in the vote tally because house republicans were pretty evenly split down the middle as to where they landed. the top four republican leaders and many others said they were concerned about the precedent of voting to remove someone yet to be convicted in the court of law. but there were many other republicans, including the chairman of the house ethics committee, who pushed back on that argument, and they said that the evidence is overwhelming, it was damning, and they are argued that congress has a constitutional

right to police itself. let's listen. >> i'm upset about it because you're talking about erasing the very fabric of what's made us the greatest nation in the world. it's not the actions of george santos. it's the fact that everybody is afforded their day in court. and that was denied to him. >> today he lost his job. >> in years past, and i think we have seen members who have committed conduct substantially less severe than mr. santos resign. most members don't want to put themselves, their family, their constituents through this process. we know that was not the case with mr. santos. >> reporter: in the end, 105 republicans voted with most democrats to expel george santos, and already the clerk has taken over his office. my colleague hailey talbot reports the sign has already come down. when you go to his former website, it directs to the clerk's office. on his way out the door, santos had few words for press, but he

said, "to hell with this place." i'm sure a lot of senators have similar feelings towards their former colleague. but the george santos saga is officially over on capitol hill. >> for now. we'll see. unpredictable guy. we'll see what's the next chant erp o er of this saga. former justice sandra day o'connor has passed away at age 93. we have a look at her life and legacy straight ahead.

in order for small businesses to thrive, they need to be smart, efficient, savvy. making the most of every opportunity. that's why comcast business is introducing the small business bonus. for a limited time you can get up to a $1000 prepaid card with qualifying internet.

yep, $1000. so switch to business internet from the company with the largest fastest reliable network and that powers more businesses than anyone else. learn how you can get $1000 back for your business today. comcast business. powering possibilities.

she ushered in a new era for the united states supreme court, inspiring generations of women to join the legal profession. today america is mourning the death of former supreme court justice sandra day o'connor. joining us with more on a remarkable woman is evan thomas, the author of the book "first: sandra day o'connor." thanks for joining us to talk about the justice here. in a career full of firsts, how did she view becoming the first woman on the court? >> she liked to say it's good to be the first, but you don't want to be the last. she knew that she couldn't screw up. you know, she was the first in 200 years, and she was very tough and confident, but she was also humble and modest. she knew that this was going to not be easy, but she took it with her usual cowgirl aplomb

and immediately convinced her brothers, her new brothers on the court, that, even though she'd been just a state court of appeals judge, she knew what she was talking about. one of her colleagues wrote about a month after she got there, "she's brilliant." and she was, and she was for 24 years. >> i think one of the things that is so amazing about the arc of her career is she graduates near the top of her law school class. and when she applies at law firms, she gets a job offer, which is as a legal secretary, and then eventually, you know, goes on to be on the supreme court. but just as a graduate of law school, a legal secretary. that's the job offer. >> this is 1953. that's the way it was. law firms were not hiring women. it was crazy. she was near the top of her class, maybe one other person in her class, bill rehnquist, the former future chief justice of

the united states, maybe -- maybe he was smarter than her, but she was smarter than all the rest. yet, as you say -- and they asked her, how well can you type? that was the question, for a legal secretary job. the thing about her is she was never bitter. she just said, okay, went down the street to the d.a.'s office and said, i'll work for you. the guy said i have no money. she said i'll do it for free. he said i have no space. she said i'll work off of your secretary's desk. she did. and she worked her way up to the public sector, finally getting a state court of appeals job, but serving in the arizona legislature along the way, learning a lot, and, you know, when she was ready, she was ready. >> she was key in the land mark 1992 planned parenthood v. casey decision, which protected a woman's right to have an

abortion before fetal liability. she was an appointee of ronald reagan. how unexpected was her role in that decision? >> well, somewhat, because harry blackman, who wrote roe v. wade, the famous decision upholding abortion back in 1973, she came on the court, he said, no, you're going to reverse, you're against abortion. it took her a while. she had to work it through. it was a difficultish for her legal issues and women's issues. but she helped put together a coalition to preserve a woman's right to an abortion. that was in 1993. that held until a couple years ago. but she was the reason that abortion rightss -- they were o their way out from the reagan appointees. she saved it for about 30 years. >> she was considered a centrist, obviously, but talk a little bit about how she reacted as the court started to tilt to the right, which is something

that really began with her replacement, samuel alito. >> she was not happy about it. she was a centrist, a pragmatist. she did not like ideology. she did not like, you know, what they do in the court now, this originalism, where everything is supposed to be based on the way it was at the time of the constitution. that was not her style. she was a balancer, and she sometimes came out with liberal results, and sometimes she came out with conservative results. she thought the law moved slowly and paid close attention to where the country was on issues like abortion and affirmative action. so, she was not predictable. she was very careful and very careful about the consequences of court decisions. she didn't want -- her opinions were very narrowly written so that they didn't do things they didn't intend not to do. and she was careful that way. she was not an ideologue. >> it's very interesting to

reflect on what her approach was. how do you think she would want to be remembered? >> well, i'd like to say she would like to be remembered as a wise judge, not just as a woman or a man but as a wide judge. she was very proud to be the first. she was. she was very happy when ruth bader ginsburg came along and there were two. that was 11 or 12 years later. so, she was sensitive to women's rights, and she was very careful about setting a role model for law clerks, about promoting women. so, she was sensitive to that. i wouldn't call her a feminist in the traditional sense, but she certainly did a lot for women. she would want to be remembered, i think, as somebody who was civil. she really believed in civil society. she didn't like stupid fights. she would avoid the stupid fights that justices or anybody can get into. she wanted people to get along, to work together, to get things

done. she didn't like posturing. she didn't like showing off. she would be pretty unhappy, i think, today with politics on the court as well as politics off the court. she liked to get things done. she was a cowgirl. she grew up on a ranch where there was no time to mess around. you had to get it done or the cows would die. that was her style. and she was a hard worker. there were no excuses in her chambers. you get your work done. but she always told your law clerks, you have a family here, you have to take care of them. never be too busy to take care of somebody. she quit the court at the peak of her power to take care of her husband, who had alzheimer's. she said he, john, her husband, sacrificed for me, and now i'm going to sacrifice for him, so she quit the court to take care of him. >> that's right. it was such a decision that created so much conversation around it because it's obviously one that many justices do not make.

evan, it's great to talk to you about sandra day o'connor. thanks for being on. >> thank you very much. up next, one of the nation's largest book publisher's best-selling authors and educators is suing iowa over book bans.

iowa's largest teachers union, four best seller, and a publisher are suing iowa over a

new book-banning law, the second federal lawsuit filed against iowa after its republican legislature passed a law this year making it illegal for school libraries, including high school libraries, to offer books that describe sex. the law also forbids teachers from raising any issues about gender identity or lesbian and gay issues for kids from kindergarten through sixth grade. let's talk to cnn correspondent rene marsh about their argument against this new law. rene. >> penguin random house is saying this is a violation of freedom of speech under the first amendment of the constitution and a violation of the 14th amendment that calls for equal protection under the law. the publisher is saying, look, every book is not for every person. as a large publisher, they put out a wide range of books from a wide range of authors with diverse backgrounds, thoughts, and ideas. they say that's what democracy is all about, and that the government shouldn't be deciding

about what eat appropriate for students to read. that should be in the hands of teachers and librarians. ohio's republican governor is responding to this lawsuit, and she says, quoting, "protecting children from pornography and sexually explicit content should not be controversial." but penguin random house might say that statement is a bit disingenuous. they point out in their lawsuit that a lot of books they have published has already, as a result of this law, been removed from schools or targeted for removal. when you look at the list of the books they lay out here, these are books that have been on, like, best seller lists, new york sometimes bestseller lists, some winning the pulitzer prize. we have some on the screen, books like "beloved," "the bluest eye,""the handmaid's tale."" they're fearing that the vague language in this law could mean that they have this just broad

d discretion over what books belong in schools and what don't. >> what is the punishment if a school has these books on their shelves? >> they are saying if they're finding these schools are in repeat violation, you could be looking at disciplinary action and even at termination, boris. >> rene marsh, than for the update. appreciate it. still to come, how a cnn's battle with cancer inspired her lifesaving work, helping families in her native american community.

cnn heroes -- brought to you by humana. the lead-up to this year's big event, we're introducing you to the 2023 top ten cnn heroes. many native americans face significant health care challenges, leading to the lowest life expectancy and highest preventable illness death rates in the united states. one woman, inspired by her own battle with breast cancer, and accessing crucial treatment, supports fellow cancer patients and their families on her reservation. >> our reservation is about 30 miles from the canadian border in north central montana. we're probably about a good three hours to major hospitals. okay. we're on our way. we know the need is huge for transportation. the majority of our people are living in poverty. if i didn't physically transport

them and would help them with food, hotels, or gas -- i started getting into the nutrition of it. if we could eat healthy, it will reduce our risk of cancer. hi! we have done distributions of fresh fruits and vegetables, fresh eggs, and we join in collaboration with our tribe to help harvest their buffalo. prior to my diagnosis of cancer, i thought my life was based on my professional career. now i know that this is my calling. >> you can go to cnnheroes.com to vote for her for cnn hero of the year or any of your top ten heroes. voting ends on december 5th. this sunday we are bringing you the all new film about the

'70s. a school bus full of children and their driver were kidnapped in california, and they were buried underground for more than 12 hours before orchestrating their own dramatic escape. the incident became a turning point in our understanding of the treatment of childhood trauma. cnn's dr. sanjay gupta has a preview. a quick warning that some viewers may find parts of this clip disturbing. >> we're trying to locate 26 lost children. >> this is a story that stopped the nation dead in its tracks. july, 1976, a bus full of children on their way home from summer school, held at gunpoint by three masked men, forced into a trailer and then buried underground. the kidnappers hoping to be paid a huge ransom. >> the bus has been found, there are no signs of violence and

there are only horrified guesses as to what may have happened. >> ultimately, after 28 hours, somehow they managed to escape, and authorities were quick to say there was, quote, no indication of harm. that was something child psychologist tear did not believe. >> the kids were not okay. somebody got a psychiatrist to come to town, and he made a prediction, he said, one kid in this 26 is going to have a problem. but what happened was that no parent wanted to admit that his kid was the one in 26. by the time i got out there, 100% of those kids were having problems. >> well, there was no diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder in 1976. it not only didn't exist for children, it didn't exist for adults, either. there was no protocol, there was

no way that we knew how to respond after this event at that time. >> they did what they thought was best, sent the kids to a trip to disneyland, never speak about it again, and just allow those children to move on with their lives. it didn't work. >> the trip to disneyland was an intrusion into the nightmare, that's all it was. >> the children are resilient, they will forget. best not to bring it up, because that could cause harm. that seemed to be the thinking, right? >> i think that there was the wish that children would recover, forget about the event and go on with their lives as though it never happened. >> even when the kidnappers were caught, there were court hearings and they continued to bring up this question of harm. >> there's very little physical

damage at all, and it's nonexistent. >> there is no physical harm here, that was their case. can we say definitively that emotional trauma causes physical harm? >> well, i think it causes brain changes, which in the brain is a physical object. so in that regard, i would have to say yes. >> but i think the most important issue is that the psychological, emotional harm is robust, it's life altering, and it is of a magnitude comparable to physical harm. >> life altering, which is exactly what dr. tear found after studying the children of chowchilla for five years, and it was her work that paved the way to accepting that childhood trauma was real and it produced long-lasting effects. >> from a scientific standpoint, it was a landmark, and now we

know how to assess them, diagnose them, and offer them treatment, and the chowchilla work and then subsequent work by others has established child ptsd as legitimate. >> but the children of chowchilla are the ones who made the biggest impact. >> they paved the way for us to understand more contemporary things, what happens when you force children away from their parents, what happens to children? some of these horrible school shootings. >> because of the kidnapping, there were counselors at columbine after the shooting, there are counselors at nightclubs after shootings. >> chowchilla children are heroes and they continue to teach us what childhood trauma is, 46, 47, 48, 50 years after

the fact. >> dr. sanjay gupta, cnn reporting. >> such an important look at that. >> and an angle of that story that i didn't anticipate. >> exactly. so far reaching. all new cnn film will premiere on sunday at 9:00 p.m., only on cnn. "the lead" with jake tapper starts after a quick break. thanks for joining us.

call about finding votes? finally, we hear how trump's lawyers ar