tommy, his family, everything about it is wonderful. kissing the dad. the dad kissing the agent. it's like a script writer could not have written a better script. frankly, i don't know how you feel, he's done well. throws a good ball. improved every week. i love it. >> reporter: look, they won three-straight. in large part to tommy devito and kisses all around for kisses. they beat green bay, rolling in style. >> coy, a lot of jets fans on our team here, but i think everybody can appreciate tommy devito. coy wire, appreciate it. "cnn this morning" continues right now. the supreme court moving fast after the special counsel asked the justices to rule on one of trump's main defenses. >> whether he is immune from prosecution, whether he is protected from double jeopardy. >> jack smith wants to skip the middle step. voters need to know if this man is a convicted felon when it comes time for the election.

♪ the texas supreme court reversing a ruling that allowed kate cox to get an emergency abortion. >> she had no other option to leave the state to get an abortion. >> she had the option, many, many women are trapped in their seats. ukrainian president zelenskyy to the white house and to capitol hill as delays for more aid are continuing in congress. >> the prospects of this getting done before the calendar year is up looks not good right now. >> the free world hesitates, that's when dictatorships celebrate. ♪ good morning, everyone. i'm phil mattingly with poppy harlow in new york. we start with an extraordinary request from the special counsel in the election subversion case against donald trump. jack smith, special prosecutor, wants an answer from the supreme court, on whether the president is immune from prosecution and he wants it as soon as possible. >> smith went directly to the high court, specially leapfrogging what could have been a very lengthy appeals

process. it could push the case far past the march trial date. last night, the court agreed to expedite the consideration of smith's request. trump now has eight days until december 20th to respond. let's dive straight in with cnn senior legal analyst elie honig. let's start with the argument trump's legal team was making here. explain it. >> let's talk immunity. this is really interesting, trust me. and it's about to get really, really important. so there are some things we do know and some things we don't know. let's start with what to we do know. there is such a thing as what we call civil immunity. a federal official or former federal official cannot be sued civilly for anything that falls within the scope of the job. we actually got that from a decision back in 1982 involving richard nixon. nothing to do with watergate. basically a former federal official had been fired during the nixon administration. sues richard nixon and the supreme court says you can't sue him. that's part of the job as president, that's within the scope of working in the white house.

now, here is what we don't know but we're going to find out very soon. first of all, criminal immunity. i put that question mark there on purpose. we don't know whether there is such thing as criminal immunity. can be immune from criminal prosecution. and the question really is first, is there such thing as criminal immunity. the second thing, if so, did donald trump's conduct fall within the scope of his job as president or not? the way it was described to me by the way doesn't just apply to the president. when i became a federal prosecutor is if you get sued for something you do in court, bringing a case, you're covered. that's within the scope of the job as a prosecutor. but if you go out on the weekend an get in a bar fight, not that i ever would, you're in the covered for that because that's outside the scope. the district judge rejected donald trump's criminal immunity argument. she has said there's no divine right of kings. therefore there is no criminal immunity. but that's the issue as it's teed up now. >> the real question is the scope of the job. >> yeah. >> the argument is -- the crux

of it is within a president's job to allegedly interfere in all these ways to try to keep the job. >>. how does this apply to the cases against him? >> look, the big issue here. the reason donald trump is moving quickly, or excuse me, doj is moving quickly is because of the calendar. let's orient ourself. today is december 12th. the key date is the trial date in that case, which is march 4th. that is 84 days away. that is not a lot of time to get through the appellate process. here is how the appellate process normally would work. this is the district attorney judge. the trial judge. we already have an opinion from them. normally the next step would be up to the court of appeals. that takes months in the ordinary course. and if donald trump lost there, he could then ask the court of appeals to rehear again what we call enbank, the whole court of peels. that will take more time. only then do you get to ask the u.s. supreme court to review the case. there's no way you get that done in 84 days. what jack smith, doj, is asking

here, we are at again -- we have a decision from the district court. we want to go right up to the supreme court. it's called direct review. now, how often is this occurring? it's very rare historically. it actually happened richard nixon in the watergate case. then it didn't happen for a long, long time. however, this current court has granted direct review 19 times in the last four years. i have to credit steve vladik looked that up. the biden student loans case went direct to the supreme court. an important dispute about immigration enforcement, skipped that middle level, went right up to the supreme court. so this is what doj is now asking the supreme court to do. they're going to decide on that fairly quickly. >> all right. elie honig, really appreciate the breakdown and the fact that you would never get into a bar fight. good information. >> never, ever. >> scare people off from the start. why would they start? >> got the crew laughing with that one, elle. ukrainian back in washington

preparing to head to capitol hill with hat in hand trying to win other new rounds of funding from a very divided congress on this issue and frankly a divided country on this issue as he battle against vrussia. >> he has face time with mike johnson. arlette saenz is live at the white house. we talked to white house officials. what are they hoping can come out of this visit? >> reporter: phil, president biden wanted to invite ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy here to washington to make that personal and direct appeal to lawmakers who still remain bogged down on whether to support additional aid for ukraine. but, zelenskyy will have a very difficult task as he speaks with lawmakers. he was here at the white house yesterday meeting with jake sullivan ahead of that full slate of meetings up on capitol hill, meeting with the full senate and then one-on-one meetings with the house speaker and house democratic leader as well before coming here to the white house in the afternoon for

meetings and a press conference with president biden. and both zelenskyy and president biden have warned that in action for this aid on ukraine will simply be playing into putin's hands. you had officials warning for weeks that not giving this aid to ukraine at this moment will kneecap them on the battlefield. but, zelenskyy is really facing a very difficult and nearly impossible task at this moment. republicans remain dug in that any aid for ukraine must also have changes to border policy paired with it. and there are republicans up on capitol hill yesterday who said that zelenskyy's visit wasn't going to change their minds on that matter. so, right now, this is a very complicated moment for both zelenskyy, who needs the support for -- to continue his fight against russia on the battlefield, but also for president biden who has made his calls for western unity central to try to face russia's aggression against ukraine. >> for sure. and tomorrow a huge political battle is going to come to a

head with the house deciding whether it will formalize an impeachment inquiry against president biden. i wonder how the white house is responding to that in the mix of all of this. >> reporter: well, poppy, the white house has always braced for the possibility that the house could go down this route, but they continuously pointed to the fact that so far these information investigations have not turned up any evidence of wrong doing on president biden's part. that is something that a spokesperson for the white house counsel's office pointed to yesterday. quote, if they press on ward with this baseless phish expedition what a sham this is. all of this could also present a very complicated, political dynamic for president biden. if they decide to move forward with that impeachment inquiry and then you potentially head into a full impeachment of the president heading into a 2024 presidential campaign, it all could complicate much of the political dynamics for him as

well. >> ar let science, thank you so much. texas supreme court blocked a ruling that would have allowed a woman to terminate her high-risk presidency. what this decision means for her and the women across the state of texas. a minnesota man's conviction just been overturned. >> i shed tears. i haven't cried so much in 19 years. ♪

♪ new this morning, the michigan governor gretchen whitmer signed legislation expanding abortion access in her state at the same time he's repealing the state's ban on insurance coverage abortion with the the purchase of a separate rider. she says, quote, to never stop fighting for what you know is right. new developments this morning in the case of the texas woman fighting to end her high-risk pregnancy last night. the texas supreme court ruled against kate cox, reversing a

lower court's ruling that would have allowed her to get an abortion under the state's medical emergency exception. cox's doctors say her fetus has a fatal genetic condition and will likely not survive and that kate, the mother's health, is at risk as a result. but in its ruling, the court said this, quote, no one disputes that ms. cox's pregnancy has been extremely complicated. any parent would be devastated to learn of their unborn child's diagnosis. some difficulties in pregnancy, however, even serious ones do not pose the heightened risks to the mother that the exemption encompasses. this ruling comes just hours after cox's attorney announced that she had already left the state to get an abortion elsewhere. it's a move that brings to mind something the late u.s. supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg warned about in 2015. essentially previewing what life may become if roe fell. >> there will never be a time when women of means will lack

choice. because take the worst case scenario, roe v. wade is overruled by the supreme court. what it means is a woman who can afford a plane ticket, a bus ticket will be able to decide for herself whether to have an abortion. but the women who won't have that choice are poor women and that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, i think. >> and that is the reality now in the state of texas. joining us now, senior adviser for planned parenthood, texas votes and former texas state, wendy, her filibuster to stall a bill that would have implimented

strict. thank you for being with me this morning. the texas supreme court bases its decision in this, quote, these laws reflect the policy choice that the state legislature make, lawmakers, and the court must respect that choice. you were a state legislature. why is that wrong in your view? >> well, it's wrong because the state legislature is intervening in the most private, personal healthcare decisions that a person can make. and, of course, they're substituting their own judgment for situations in which we should be respecting people's privacy. what kate cox and her family faced is a complete tragedy, one, of course, that she will have additional, emotional turmoil and trauma because she's had to leave our state to get the care that she needs. and as justice ginsburg said, if

kate hadn't had the means to do so, imagine the horrific situation she would be facing and the fact of the matter is that women across our state every single day are denied the abortion healthcare that they need because they don't have the means to access it. >> you are arguing this court -- the high court of texas, is denying people's right to privacy, but indeed the supreme court in the dobbs decision overturning roe said there is no constitutional right to privacy. that's the basis on which it fell. so if there's not clarification in this language, what does that mean for women across texas, pregnant women in a position like kate is in? >> you know, it's interesting that you showed what governor whitmer is doing in michigan, which is, of course, in complete contrast to what we're doing here in texas. and it demonstrates how important electoral outcomes

are. our policies, of course, are formed by policy leaders who reflect the values of the people who elect them to serve. and what that means for people like us, in states like texas, where we do have a great deal of voter suppression, is that we've got to work even harder to make sure that we are helping people understand they have a voice in this situation. they have a voice in who will serve them. and they have a voice in whether their values are going to be reflected in the decisions of lawmakers. these particular lawmakers have said that it's perfectly fine for doctors to spend the rest of their lives in prison, to lose their medical license if they choose to provide needed abortion care to people in our state. they've substituted their judgment for doctors. and it's time for us to say we're not going to accept that. >> i'm glad you bring up what is a felony that doctors could

face. it is punishable by a minimum of five years in prison and a maximum of 99 years in prison if doctors are found guilty of violating it. i do want to ask you, wendy, is this an issue of clarifying the language? the texas supreme court saying doctors can make this decision but they're essentially arguing that the language that kate's doctor used wasn't clear enough. they write, dr. carson asked to preauthorization an abortion could not or did not atoast the court that ms. cox's position imposes the risk the exception requires. is this about a need for clarity of language and doctors being extraordinarily clear when they're using that language about a patient? >> what we're learning here, poppy, is that language can be argued in any instance. and that's what's put doctors in such danger here. the court is suggesting and the legislature has said that this

should be a reasonable judgment standard. the problem is there's always five or ten people who may disagree that your judgment was reasonable. what the center for reproductive rights has been asking is that instead, doctors be allowed to use a good faith standard. that in their good faith judgment they can provide this care. and without that kind of clarification, and that kind of protection, doctors across our state are stuck in a quandary unable to provide care even when their patient's lives are at risk. >> this case exemplifying there are indeed limits even when there are exceptions written into the law. wendy davis, thank you very much for your time. former texas state senator. >> thank you, poppy. >> of course. phil? well, this morning israel says its troops have surrounded hamas' last two strongholds in northern gaza. we'll be live in israel with the latest on the offensive.

with only five weeks into the iowa caucuses, ron desantis joins our very own jake tapper tonight live from iowa to take questions from the voters there. ahead a preview of tonight's presidential town hall. ♪ with five weeks until the iowa caucuses, florida governor and republican hopeful ron desantis joins take tapper live from iowa to take questions directly from voters. a cnn presididential town hall. ron desantis, , tonight atat 9: p.m. easastern, onlyly on cnn.

first time i connected with kim, she told me that her husband had passed. and that he took care of all of the internet connected devices in the home. i told her, “i'm here to take care of you.” connecting with kim... made me reconnect with my mom. it's very important to keep loved ones close. we know that creating memories with loved ones brings so much joy to your life. a family trip to the team usa training facility. i don't know how to thank you. i'm here to thank you.

♪ u.n. general assembly is set to vote on a resolution this morning demanding an immediate cease fire in gaza as the humanitarian crisis worsens each day. israel's defense minister claims the last two strong are surrounded in gaza. heavy fighting reporting in the south as well as israel's military expanded its offensive. this crossing is big news today. what are you seeing on the ground there? >> reporter: it is big news, phil. just opened a couple hours ago to allow for more trucks of aid to be inspected to go into gaza. you can see this line of trucks here. we have been watching them line up and get inspected. we have seen cases, for example, in their cargo holds from the world food program. you can see another long line of trucks right here awaiting their turn to get inspected. they're coming from the egyptian side of the board eand just in a

few moments they'll come around this corner to go down into that inspection process. but phil, essentially what this does is that this allows for more approved aid to get into gaza. it does not necessarily mean that more aid is going to get into gaza. no aid will be crossing from this side. all of these trucks that you see here that are being inspected, they then have to go back into egypt and back up to that rafah crossing before they are allowed into gaza. so even if more aid is approved and israel had a very strict inspection process, there's still a bottleneck at that rafah crossing. rafah is not built to handle a large volume of trucks. you have seen enormous numbers of people fleeing south. the pandemonium in the southern part of gaza, the heavy violence that made distribution so difficult. but in theory, phil the good news is that this would double the amount of aid that israel approves to go into gaza. >> to that point, alex, u.s. officials have been pressing their israeli counterparts on the issue of aid, onramping up

aid, surging it to some degree as well and pressing them to try to minimize civilian casualties, be more precise in the operations in the south. have you seen any sense or gotten any sense in talking to israeli officials that they're heeding those requests or those warnings? >> reporter: well, phil, you heard secretary blinken over the weekend said repeatedly that there's still a gap between what he calls the intent to keep civilians safe and what is actually happening on the ground. israel is defending itself by saying, well, we issued these warnings for civilians to evacuate the area. but still, civilians are being killed and harmed in incredible numbers. one of the most pressing issues for the united states right now, phil, is to get this aid into gaza. humanitarian officials certainly hope that this crossing will be open soon. for now, i'm told by the idf, that is not on the table. that it is a political decision. so essentially the netanyahu government has decided that for

now this will not be used to get the aid into gaza. it is only going to be used for these inspections. >> that's really important and interesting point. alex marquardt live for us on the ground. thank you. today is the last day of a critical climate summit, but talks are now headed into overtime. what's missing from the draft agreement that climate experts are calling weak? and this just in, in a letter first shared with cnn, we're learning three top democrats are demanding that the faa require airlines to carry epipens on board commercial flights. right now it's not required for life saving medication that stops alallergic r reactions t carrrried insidede an emergencn. we'll keepep you posteted. we'll l be right b back.

♪ we've been seeing the fossil fuel polluters try to manipulate this process for a long time. and the world's running out of patience. >> well, brand new this morning, a deadline set by the president of cop 28 -- of the cop 28 climate talks, they have come. they have gone. there have been no deals and climate activists are outraged. this is the official last day of the summit in dubai. negotiators have been scrambling

to bridge the divide after a controversial draft of the agreement was published last night. >> latest version dropped calls for a phase out of fossil fuels which had appeared in previous drafts. united states and some allies including the united kingdom and the european union not happy about that. former vice president al gore posting on x that the conference was on the verge of complete failure. the eu climate commissioner says they're working on their next move. >> there is a great majority of countries who actually want and demand more in terms of phasing out. and in terms of what is in the text. and it is up to us to make sure that these voices are being heard and that this is solved in the next day or next days or however long it will take. >> joining us now is bill weir. >> good morning. >> this was the hope. al gore to jake this morning was saying if we can get to an agreement phase out of fossil

fuels that's the hope. that's out of this draft now. >> it is. one spokesman from green piece says it's a dagger to our heart. there was so much hope last week. in fact, there was so much momentum behind the ambitious countries wanting to say this is the beginning to the end of fossil fuels that opec had an internal meeting fraught with worry saying we have to fight this. it's so telling about human nature. this is the 28th conference of the parties every country comes together. we have been doing this for almost 30 years. this is the first time they managed to use the f word, fossil fuel which is is the source of the climate crisis. saudi arabia is adamant about keeping that language out. that seems to be where the logger head is. the united states, the eu, the smaller most vulnerable countries saying if not now when. and the big petro states refusing this language. >> can you explain a great majority of countries want to do more. that's not enough. >> not enough. >> why not? >> because the minority of

countries includes saudi arabia, russia and other -- >> they have veto power over the final statement? >> this is supposed to be unanimous. the idea is if it's 90% of the world ratifies this idea, there's always wiggle room for everybody to say not everybody is on board, why are you holding it to us? >> right. it's not binding. you want people to comply, you need them on board. >> here is the thing that's missing. i spoke to two ceos of new energy startup companies who went there and said, they came back so enthused because what's happening on the sidelines are states, countries, cities, super ambitious about decarbonization. the economics are all there. they say it's just a matter of time. even the big oil heavies know they are working on borrowed time and the fossil fuel economy is just how long that fight takes and how many ecosystems die as a result of this debate. >> having been last year with president biden, if you can go, go. you will not walk away from it depressed and feeling like everything is awful. the young people, the

entrepreneurs at cop give you an energy you wouldn't expect given the dynamics on the top of this conference. >> once a promise is set like the paris accords, it flattened the curve for a lot of countries because they're on record saying we want to do this. >> until we pulled back in the last administration. bill weir, thank you. >> thanks, bill. in a little more than an hour, ukraine's president will be on capitol hill urging lawmakers to provide more aid. up next, senator chris murphy will join us ahead of this morning's alall senatorsrs meet with volodymyr zelenskskyy.

i'm a little anxious, i'm a little excited. i'm gonna be emotional, she's gonna be emotional, but it's gonna be so worth it. i love that i can give back to one of our customers. i hope you enjoy these amazing gifts. oh my goodness. oh, you guys. i know you like wrestling, so we got you some vip tickets. you have made an impact. so have you. for you guys to be out here doing something like this, it restores a lot of faith in humanity. ♪ just about an hour, ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy will begin a day of high-level meetings on capitol hill. he is set to meet with senators and have a one-on-one meeting with the house speaker, mike johnson, before he heads to the white house. senators are getting more pessimistic about a deal on immigration in order to green light aid to ukraine. republicans say zelenskyy's visit will not do anything to change their demands that u.s.

border policy be dealt with as part of this. >> we have a responsibility to the united states of america. i would be going back to my state saying i care about people in oh countries but i don't care what's happening in my own country. it's important we do two things at once. we're united states of america. we have to actually pay attention to our own needs while we're also dealing with the needs around the world as well. >> that was oklahoma republican senator james lankford, the lead republican negotiator on immigration policy, the lead democratic negotiator on all this, senator chris murphy has warned, quote, the future of the world is at stake if we fail. murphy says putin is delighting in republican's insistence we get a deal on immigration reform. russia does appear to be celebrating. look at russian state tv. >> translator: what's happening in the u.s. is beneficial for us. ukraine is losing.

russia is winning. this is it. they're funding and weapons came to an end. >> translator: as of now, well done republicans. they're standing firm. that's good for us. even mitch mcconnell, well done, gramps. >> joining us now is senator chris murphy of connecticut. senator, you said the future of the world is at stake. and you're shaking your head, i think, because of what you just heard from russian state television. you guys have 48 hours. are you going to get this done? >> well, i hope that president zelenskyy's visit is impactful, but that's absolutely remarkable to listen to vladimir putin's mouthpieces on russian state tv celebrating republican's decision to hold up aid to ukraine, which they say they support because they want to get trump border policies put into law. something that the american people don't support. i just think this is too important to play games over. yes, i'm in the room trying to figure out a path forward on

these republican demands because failure cannot be an option. but we shouldn't have to be here. if we all agree that it would be terrible for america and terrible for the world for vladimir putin to march through ukraine and potentially into europe, then let's stop him from doing that. i have lots of domestic, political priorities. i would like to see universal background checks for a ban on assault weapons passed. but i am not conditioning my support to stop vladimir putin's ma into ukraine upon the resolution of my domestic political priorities. if all of us did that, washington would grind to a halt. we have to get things done when we agree. and republicans say they support ukraine funding. so i wish they would just put their votes where their mouth is. instead we're in a difficult negotiation on border policy that may come to a conclusion this week. it may not. but the future of the world is at stake. >> james lankford, who we just

heard from, your republican counterpart in all this, look, it's the biden administration, the president that coupled this all together in his supplemental request. he put border funding with ukraine and taiwan and israel funding. you said the white house is more involved now. do you think he has a point by saying the biden administration coupled it together and now we have to deal with it together? >> i don't because it's fairly normal for there to be these emergency spending bills before congress when we have insufficient funds for the operation of the border or for our foreign policy objectives. it's very different to say on top of that funding we are going to make major changes in law. that's what republicans are asking for. they are asking for very severe, very draconian immigration policy changes. policy changes that they know could not pass if they weren't holding up support for the war against vladimir putin. >> but isn't that the exact

point? >> that's the difficulty. >> isn't that their exact point is this is -- it's a crisis. i think many people agree what's happening at the border is a crisis. so this is a moment we have to deal with it at home and then we're going to help ukraine, too? >> yeah. i think we should separate the two. i don't think that vladimir putin should be given a green light to invade and concur ukraine in europe simply because for 40 years we had a tough time coming to a conclusion on immigration policy. but listen, poppy, we're going to work at this. i'm at the table. i hear what republicans have been saying. we're going to try to come to a conclusion. and i'm sitting down with senator lankford and others in good faith this week. >> you did point out, look n your words this is ten times more complicated than even gun reform to have comprehensive immigration reform which i think speaks to just what you're up against. you know what i'm struck by, senator, is the sentiment of the american people. there are a number of new polls out that show that the support for more funding for ukraine is

waning. 31% of americans think u.s. is providing too much support to ukraine. the same thing is reflected in gallup. what do you say to those people at home who feel that way? how do you change their hearts and minds? >> well, listen, i think we do labor under the consequences of really bad american foreign policy for the last 20 years. when the american public looks at the places where the united states has been involved or funded wars overseas, few of them have gone right. i admit that, right, from vietnam to afghanistan to iraq to syria. but this is different. this is the world war ii, the post world war ii order coming undone. and if big countries can reset their borders by invading smaller countries, then i think it's just a matter of time before american troops are directly at war with the big

power abroad, whether it be russia or china. so, this feels different to me. if we don't hold the line here, ultimately i think we're going to have american men and women fighting and dying overseas, which is something that i don't want and the american people don't want. >> senator murphy, thursday marks 11 years since the tragic massacre at sandy hook elementary. it's the reason it propelled you to congress to try to change things. this has been your fight on guns of your entire career in congress. the youngest sandy hook victim would be 17 today. they would be finishing high school. they would be planning for college. they would be with their family getting ready, celebrating hanukkah, getting ready for christmas, all of that. our latest analysis at cnn is that there have been 80, 80 school shootings just so far this year. reflect on the last 11 years where we are and where we go. >> yeah, listen, obviously this is a really hard time for all of

us as we get ready to mark 11 years since sandy hook. i've spent a lot of time with the families from sandy hook at this time. and there's a dissent that happens for all of them as they get ready for december 14th. yes, the mass shootings, the school shootings are still at historic highs, but there is some good news. we passed last year the first bipartisan major change in gun laws in 30 years. we broke the back of the nra. and overall gun violence rates in this country are actually down by a significant number since we passed that bill. over 10%. the mass shootings are still high, but there are far fewer people dying from guns this year than last year because we passed legislation making it harder for dangerous people to get guns. now, that means there's 100 people, not 110 people dying everyday. that's still far too high. but it shows what is possible. and what is possible is real changes in gun laws because we built a movement since sandy hook of kids, adults, community

members to make sure that we are more powerful than the nra. so it is a very sad time of the year. but for me, it's a reminder of what is possible and what we've actually achieved in the last decade. >> congress can do hard things when there is a will. senator chris murphy, thank you very much. we'll be thinking of all of you on thursday. >> thank you. well, just 16 years old, marvin haynes went to prison for murder he says he had nothing to do with. now nearly 20 years later, his conviction has been thrown out. coming up, marvin joins us live for his first national tv interview as a free man. stay with us. ♪

♪ ♪

>> that moment after spending two decades behind bars for a wrongful murder conviction, marvin haynes is free this morning. he was sentenced it life in prison for the 2004 killing of a man in a minneapolis flour shop. was 16 years old. the 36-year-old maintained his innocence from the beginning. monday his conviction was overturned on the basis of unconstitutional witness identification. the judge citing lack of physical evidence writing, quote, there was no physical evidence linking petitioner to the crime scene, no dna evidence, physical evidence, surveillance evidence or other forensic evidence. >> the prosecutor who tried the case said he was appalled by the decision to overturn the conviction and speaking to cnn affiliate kare 11 the family called this a travesty. here's what martin said when he learned his conviction was overturned.

>> i shed tears. i haven't cried so much in 19 years. overwhelmed with emotion. i was excited just to get my life back, to know these people has recognized my innocence and truth prevail at that time. 2 took 19 years, but i am here. i want to move forward and get my life back. >> joining us for his first national television interview since being released is marvin haynes and his attorney andrew mark heart, a attorney at the great north innocence project. thank you very much for being with us. marvin, we were talking during the commercial. you started smiling. a smile you have been waiting to give as a free man for almost 20 years. your justice was delayed, but ultimately not denied in the end. what do you want mpeople to kno? >> i want people to know i'm innocent. i was innocent from the very beginning. and i am just happy that people

just recognized it and understand my story and really know that i am actually innocent. i am proud that people know my name and my story. >> i have to ask about your sister. reading about everything over the course of the last several years, even the last several months, her role in this moment, we saw her behind you when you were speaking to the press after you were released. talk about what she was doing throughout this process. >> she was tremendous in this process. she was in the community making sure people know that i am innocent, talking to everybody you could think of just so they could know, yeah, this man is really innocent and this is a tragedy to the community. we need to come together and make sure they recognize what's going on so we can correct this injustice. >> andrew, to you. i'm interested in your response. from the d.a. on the case now, not the one who originally prosecuted it. here is what she said. >> the hennepin county

attorney's office bears responsibility for taking almost 20 years away from marvis haynes and his family. we have deeply devoted professionals committed to doing the right thing every day, and doing the right thing sometimes means we must seek to undo the harms of the past and not defend them. and that is what we have tried to do today. >> andrew, can you speak to those who are in similar shoes to marvin still behind bars who may not have a sister like him or attorney like you? >> sure. that was an incredible moment to hear those words from the now county attorney whose office ultimately agreed toe vacation this conviction on the strength of the evidence here. so i think marvin's story can be an inspiration for people still

fighting their cases. unfortunately, it takes far too long and too many instances and our laws make it far too difficult to get this kind of relief. but, hopefully, his story provides some hope for those still out there fighting. >> marvin, she said about you, and i thought this was interesting in her press release, you lost the opportunity to graduate from high school to have a prom, to have relationships, attend a wedding and funeral and be your families for the holidays. i am deeply sorry. i know sorry doesn't take it back. i wonder what those words felt like? >> it means so much to me for somebody with that much power to now recognize that i'm innocent and corrected and just helped me move forward with my life because it's been a long journey. so to hear the words to knowledge that i'm actually innocent and help me get my life back, i can't even explain what it means to me.

>> marvin, what was your first night home like? what do you have planned for the weeks, months, years ahead? >> i went to a nice dinner with my lawyer. we enjoyed each other. so appreciative of them. they helped save my life. just, you know, correct my narrative. and i'm just so -- i was so happy about that. but i am looking forward to getting a job and getting my life in order and just, yeah, just try to work me a little job and have discipline and, you know, just try to help my family out. >> well, thank you both very much for being with us and yaus just to read a statement from now senator klobuchar, who was the county attorney at the time, didn't prosecute this case, she said the -- her office says the they respect the judicial process and has long supported the innocence project's work and will continue to do so. thank you both.

>> thank you. >> thank you. "cnn this morning" continues right now. every one else who sees russia's war on ukraine as his personal lecture. the so-called university of aggression gets the message loud and clear. putin must lose. >> good morning, everyone. the next hour, ukrainian president volodymr zelenskyy will meet with senators pleading for more war funding. why he says doing nothing is a win for putin. and house republicans are set to meet as they plan to formalize their impeachment inquiry into president biden with a house vote this week. this despite any direct evidence at least at this point of wrongdoing by the president. also in 30 minutes we will get a key inflation reading for the month of november. how those numbers could factor into what the fed does with rates tomorrow. this hour of "cnn this morning" starts now