♪ amna: good evening. i'm amna nawaz. geoff: and i'm geoff bennett on the "newshour" tonight. the u.s. supreme court issues major decisions on obstruction charges against january 6 rioters, federal regulatory power, and homelessness. amna: analysis of key moments and fallout from last night's presidential debate. geoff: and david brooks and kimberly atkins stohr break down the latest political headlines.

♪ >> major funding for the pbs news hour has been provided by. the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the newshour. the judy and peter bloom kober foundation. created by strengthening democracies. >> a proud supporter of public television. the world awaits. a world of flavor, diverse destinations and immersive experiences. a world of leisure. and british style. all with white star service.

♪ >> the foundation fostering engaged communities. ♪ >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the "newshour." ♪ this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs news station from viewers like you. thank you. geoff: welcome to the "newshour." with just one day left in its term, the u.s. supreme court issued a trio of major decisions. amna: the justices upheld a law

making it a crime for unhoused people to camp in public areas like parks, sidewalks and plazas , they narrowed the scope of a law being used to prosecute the january 6 rioters, and weakened the rule-making powers of regulatory agencies. "pbs news weekend" anchor john yang reports on the supreme court for us and is here to break this all down. good to see you. john: good to see you. amna: let's start with a case of joseph fischer. he was charged with seven counts after storming the capitol on january 6. john: he challenged one charge, obstructing an official proceeding. the way the law is written, his argument had to involve a piece of evidence. the justices agreed it did not cover storming the capitol or confronting police officers inside the capitol. chief justice john roberts said

the way the justice department is using the law criminalizes a broad swath of conduct exposing lobbyists and activists to decades in prison. it was a 6-3 decision. amy coney barrett wrote the dissent. she said the majority did textual backflips to reach their decision. amna: there are 1300 other january 6 defendants. john: this is former justice department official. >> that's because first of all, only 346 of the more than 1400 defendants charged for the riot and the attack on the u.s. capitol were even charged with that offense. of those, the vast majority are charged with another felony. so whether they went to trial or whether they pleaded guilty, they could be resentenced. to a similar term of incarceration based on that other felony. there's a very few number of

people who either were not convicted or found guilty of another felony or it was only a misdemeanor. and those are the people who might get a resentencing. john: it is also one of the charges against former president donald trump. some are suggesting that might not have to be dropped because his case does involve documents. the fake electoral ballots. amna: there is a separate position of want to ask you about in which the conservative majority -- basically criminalized behaviors associated with things like homelessness, sleeping in public parks, etc. john: the challengers said these laws -- they were punishing people for being homeless. you cannot punish someone for their status. you can punish them for their conduct. the six conservative justices said that is what these laws do, they punish conduct.

the liberal justices disagreed strongly. listen to the opening lines of soto sonia more nash she said sleeping is a biological the 70. for some people sleeping outside is their only option. for people with no access to shelter it punishes them for being homeless. that is unconscionable and unconstitutional. amna: what kind of reaction has that decision been getting from city leaders and public housing advocates? john: city and state leaders who have been struggling with this welcomed it. >> this decision will help with safety. for us, we had a nexus with gun violence and encampments. and so that was shown through our police data. now local decision makers who , understand the unique circumstances in their communities are able to make laws that are responsive to what their needs are instead of following something that might be better for a town that's thousands of miles away.

john: on the other hand, housing advocates say this will make things worse. he runs enterprise community partners, a nonprofit trying to expand housing. >> criminalizing homelessness does not work. in fact, it makes it worse. in part, it's a game of cruel left them. -- whack-a-mole. if folks don't have a place to sleep, no home, no shelter. just moving them or putting them in jail, those tents, those encampments are going to turn up some more else. but even worse, by arresting people, by fining them, you actually make it harder for them to find jobs, to find housing, the things that end homelessness. amna: meanwhile in another decision, the conservative majority overturned a decades all president that officially limits -- it is dry stuff would

help us understand the math the potential impact. john: it is something called the chevron deference. it first arose in the 19 any for case dealing with chevron. it says if a law is ambiguous the courts have to defer to the agency's interpretation of the law. conservatives have been gunning for this for a long time. they call it the government always wins doctrine. today, chief justice john roberts struck it down. he said the law requires judges to independently evaluate actions and judges should not defer to the agencies simply because the law is ambiguous. this is a big deal. it has the most widely cited in u.s. jurisprudence. the underpinning of 17,000 federal regulations dealing with

the environment, drugs, food safety. amna: huge potential impact. john yang after a busy week, thank you. so good to see you. john: thank you. amna: meanwhile, the supreme court has swept aside longstanding legal precedent in its ruling today overturning the chevron doctrine, majorly curtailing the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they regulate. the decision is expected to have far-reaching implications on everything from the environment to healthcare. geoff: for a closer look at the overturning of the chevron precedent, we're joined by andrew mergen. he spent three decades as an attorney for the department of justice environment and natural , resources division. he now heads the emmett environmental law and policy clinic at harvard law school. thank you's the much for being with us. andrew: thank you. geoff: the chevron case is of scare but has a huge impact. it is shorthand for a long-standing tradition that says there is an ambiguous

statute that courts defer to -- the thinking has been the agencies have the expertise. today the supreme court said that is no longer the case. how big of a deal is this? andrew: in the short term it is a very big deal. we will see an enormous number of challenges to governmental regulations in an environment, food safety, health care, health care administration. there will be many challenges. the lower courts and the justice department that offends those regulations will be very busy. geoff: do we know how or if this ruling today will affect cases that were already settled? andrew: it is an excellent question. with chief justice in the majority opinion says those decisions should not be up for review merely because they are

dependent on chevron deference. justice kagan in her dissent -- i tend to agree. this is a very complicated question. it is sometimes hard to parse out exactly why courts upheld regulations. i fear that there will be many, many folks ready to test the limits and reopen past regulatory judgments and regimes. geoff: this could affect everything from clean water, clean air, health care, gun regulations. give us a sense of the potential real-world impact. andrew: oh, yeah. in the short term it will create an enormous amount of instability. we do not know how far-reaching it will be in terms of unsettling established regulatory precedents.

in the preservation of clean water. many environmental and health regulations. my hope is the agencies know how to probably get these regulations in the absence of chevron deference. going forward i think they know what is expected of them. i tend to agree with justice kagan that the doctrine and chevron deference promoted stability law. there will be a lot of gamesmanship, as we have seen elsewhere in terms of seeking out favorable courts to upend long-standing regulatory regimes. geoff: on this matter of the chevron doctrine promoting stability within the law, conservatives over time to lowe's it because it was dashcam to loathe because it was mainly democrats used this to justify. a number of business leaders i have spoken to said it is not a good thing for business

development when you have regulations that shift as a result of who controls the federal government. what do you say to that argument? andrew: i think it is right. the business community is split on this issue. i do not think business interests are monolithic. we see this reflected in other disputes. some car companies are anxious to support epa and others are skeptical. one thing for sure is if this decision allows challengers to upend prior regimes, we will have a hard time knowing what the law is. for some folks, that may create opportunities. for others trng to plan for the future or figure out how the manufacturing processes -- it will be unsettling. i do think as the justice department suggested in its

briefing, it has the potential to be at least in the short term a very, very destabilizing for a host of stakeholders. not just people concerned about health and the environment but folks in business. i think there is a real need for this kind of deference. justice kagan points to there being many things justices do not understand. amino acids, manufacturing processes, it makes sense to listen to the agencies and the expertise that resides in the agencies. geoff: in the roughly 45 seconds we have left, the fort reversing a 40-year precedent, what is it mean about adherence to stare decisis? andrew: we have entered into a whole new era.

certainly in the dobbs decision and here as well. less respect for stare decisis and more of an appetite for risk in terms of unsettling established law and seeing what happens next. to me, that is contrary to traditional rule of law. geoff: thank you so much for sharing your insights. andrew: thank you. ♪ geoff: in the day's other headlines. iowa's supreme court is letting a law go into effect that bans most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy. the decision removes a lower court's temporary block on the measure, which was passed with only republican support last year. there are exceptions for rape, incest or if the pregnancy

endangers the life of the mother. 14 states now have near total abortion bans, and three others ban abortions after six weeks . the former police chief for schools in uvalde, texas, failed to identify the 2022 attack at robb elementary school as an active shooting. that's according to an indictment unsealed today. pete arredondo was arrested and released last night. he faces 10 felony counts of abandoning or endangering a child. the indictiment said arredondo slowed down the response when he "directed law enforcement officers to evacuate the wing before confronting the shooter." security footage shows officers retreating as gunfire could be heard down the hall. 19 students, and two teachers, were killed. in iran, voters cast their ballots today for a new president. the snap elections were called to replace the late president ebrahim raisi, who died in a helicopter crash last month. voters are choosing from a tightly controlled group of four candidates loyal to iran's

supreme leader at a time of growing frustration. voters are still making their voices heard. >> unfortunately some people think the president has already been selected but we must vote. if i do not vote someone else will and the candidate who is not the best might be elected. geoff: a final result is expected this weekend. if no candidate receives a clear majority the top two finishers would advance to a runoff on july 5. the pentagon announced the temporary pier build off gaza was removed once again amid rough seas. the pier started operating in may to increase aid deliveries. dave's letter it was damaged by rough seas. the pier was reinstalled but humanitarian groups have suspended -- citing security

concerns. that has left supplies piling up. a pentagon official said resuming pier operations could depend on freeing up the backlog. >> if there is not enough room on the yard it does not make sense to put our men and women out there when there is nothing to move. but we do need to see that marshaling yard open up to allow for the continued distribution so we can get more aid in. the idf geoff: into northern gaza. troops operating in the southern city of rafah. palestinian officials say tank shelling killed at least 11 people. the blind administration will expand temporary protected status to more than 300,000 haitians already living in the u.s. the designation lasts 6-18 months and can be extended.

more than 260,000 haitians are already in the u.s. ongoing gang and criminal activity has left haiti increasingly dangerous. the u.n. said more than 5 million haitians are facing food insecurity. nasa said today the first two astronauts to travel aboard the boat in starliner to the iss will stay up there for a few weeks longer. engineers will use that time to investigate the crafts thruster issues that have delayed the return trip multiple times. >> a lot of cheering here in the room. [applause] geoff: veteran astronauts celebrated a successful docking with the iss on june 6. they were due to stay on board for only about a week. on wall street the dow jnes industrial average lost 45 points. the nasdaq fell more than 120 points on the day. the s&p 500 also ended lower.

still to come on the "newshour." a democratic governor reacts to president biden's debate performance on the fall not within the party. and we fact-check some of president biden's and mr. trump's claims from the presidential debate. ♪ >> this is the pbs "newshour," from weta studios in washington and from the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism from the arizona state university. >> over a 90-minute presidential debate last night there was sparring over top policy issues, personal attacks and even an argument about golf. former president donald trump repeatedly made false claims and president biden repeatedly struggled to dispel concerns about his age. it is open to new concerns over the stakes of a possible trump presidency and spark discussion about whether biden should be his party's nominee.

our white house correspondent has our debate digest tonight. >> the fallout from a debate full of fumbles and falsehoods. both candidates holding rallies in key swing states today to dominate the post debate airwaves. donald trump claimed the victory in virginia. >> the question every voter should be asking themselves today is not whether joe biden can survive a 90-minute debate performance but whether america can survive four more years of crooked joe biden in the white house. >> praised by republicans for his debate performance trump repeated lie after lie including this one on abortion. >> he is willing to rip the baby out of the womb and the ninth month and kill the baby. nobody wants that to happen, democrat or republican. pres. biden: that is simply not true. roe v. wade. . does not provide for that >> the president of the united states, joe biden. >> for president biden, a rally

in north carolina to convince his base he can see it through. pres. biden: i do not walk as easy as i used to or talk as smooth as i used to or debate as well as i used to. but i know what i do know! i know how to tell the truth! [applause] i know how to get things done! i know like millions of americans know, when you get knocked down you get back up! >> after his debate performance left many democrats in a panic, no moment clear than when the president appeared to lose his train of thought while talking about the national debt. pres. biden: making sure we are able to make every single person eligible for what i have been able to do with the covid -- excuse me, with dealing with everything we had to deal with -- look, -- we finally beat medicare. >> stumbles that happen so

frequently that republicans pounced. some in congress introduced a resolution that would force consideration of the 25th amendment to remove biden from office. >> our adversary sees weakness in the white house. i take no pleasure in seeing that. >> biden's sharpest attacks came when he took aim at one of trump's biggest vulnerabilities with voters, his criminal cases. pres. biden: the only person on this date she was a convicted felon is the man i'm looking at right now. what he is telling you is simply not true. >> and called out trump's continued refusal to accept the results of the election. >> the question was what you accept the results of the election regardless of who wins, yes or no? trump: if it is a fair and legal election, absolutely. i would have much rather accepted these but the fraud and everything else was ridiculous. pres. biden: i doubt he will

accept it because he is such a whiner. you cannot stand the loss. something snapped in you when you lost the last time. >> democrats were debated on biden's debate night. the vice president hitting the airwaves to defend the president. v.p. harris: a slow start but a strong finish. >> pennsylvania governor josh shapiro with more candor. >> i acknowledge that multiple times joe biden had a bad debate night and he has a burden on him to show people that he is still able to move forward in these debates and make prosecuting the case against donald trump. >> some opinion pages today including the new york times urging biden to bow out. biden allies quickly called those discussions unhelpful. >> do not turn your back because of one performance. what kind of party does that? >> president biden's campaign said the president is committed to debating mr. trump in september. geoff: as you reported a sense

of panic set in among democrats after president biden's debate performance. >> it is not good for democrats right now. most democrats i spoke to said they are worried. lawmakers, party operatives and democratic party leaders that i spoke to and that you spoke to told us panic is an understatement. they said the guy we are dominating is just not capable of getting elected any longer. some also said it will require a ton of work to come back from this. there were other democrats, big leaders in the party like barack obama who posted on x, bad debate nights happen but this election is to the choice between someone who has fought for ordinary folks his entire life and someone who only cares about himself. obama ultimately said that did not change that. i have never heard this level of panic before from democrats across the board on and off the hill about whether or not they

think president biden can win in november. but no one is saying this on the record. no one is saying they conceivably think they can replace president biden on the ticket and other major party leaders like akeem jeffries and jim clyburn are sticking by president biden. >> how are biden campaign officials addressing this echo >> they are essentially saying we understand it was not a good night for the president but it was one night. they said -- any asks for him to step aside are ridiculous and he will not be stepping aside from this race. i also spoke to one of president biden's campaign pollsters who said in the monitoring of voters in the aftermath of the debate based on no real movement based on the debate, voters were in their partisan corners and among undecideds, they saw some undecided voters did not respond

well to donald trump's talking about january 6. it was also effective for president biden when he was attacking donald trump specifically on the criminal cases donald trump is facing. the campaign also pointed to fundraising. they raised $14 million from small dollar donors on debate day and they said their best our of fundraising was in the hour right after the debate. geoff: really? is replacing president biden on the ticket even a viable option? he would have to make that decision. >> it is possible but highly unlikely. if democrats pursue this, here are the steps it would take. it is a difficult process that has not been used in decades. the clearest path is if president biden declines the nomination. at the convention more than half of pledged delegates would have to reject biden during the roll call.

it is something that is certainly possible but a number of democrats i spoke to said they do not think the party is at that point right now. geoff: as quickly as news cycles move these days, how much impact would a debate have on the race? >> again, the reaction from democrats is notable. it is starc. one concern democrats have is down ballot. is this debate performance from president joe biden going to impact democrats down ballot? so far they have been pulling ahead of president biden. they have been running effectively on his record during his first term but will this hurt them as they continue running their races in difficult battleground states? president biden today really sought to strike a contrast again and tried to refocus the race on the stakes. he called donald trump a genuine

threat to democracy and pointed out donald trump lied over and over during the debate. we know he did on immigration and abortion. president biden ao said what is at stake this election cycle is freedom, democracy. that is what we will see the campaign focused on in the weeks ahead. the extremism argument they believe is very effective. not just with their basement undecided voters. geoff: thank you to you as always. amna: for more on president biden's debate performance and what is at stake we are joined by the soda governor tim walz. he is a surrogate for the campaign. >> thank you for having me. i am glad to be back with you. amna: let me ask you about some reaction to the debate. a former senator who has long been a strong surrogate for president biden said the president had one thing to accomplish, to go out and prove to people he is up to the job at his age.

in her words, he failed at that. do you agree with that assessment? >> i agree he had a poor night. that is not up for debate. the totality of the president's work, especially at the crisis time coming out of covid, as a governor we are at the tip of that spear. i do not think you judge a person's body of work on one night. i have done dozens of these and they do not always go the way you want to. i have confidence in the president because he has delivered. the thing i was disappointed about last night quite concerned because of what donald trump said. he was very articulate in his belief that he should deny women reproductive rights and very articulate he did nothing wrong with january 6. that worries me because a trump presidency is almost unfathomable. we saw a poor performance of the president and that makes that a little more of a reality.

i will not defend the performance but i will defend the record. amna: i want to ask you about former president trump's performance in more detail but back to president biden. his record is one thing as you and others have said but when voters are looking at the next four years ahead. some 44% of democrats have said they believe he is too old. doesn't that performance matter in proving to people he is up for the job? >> i think it does. it puts more pressure on the president. he is down in north carolina today. one thing i am hearing is why was that guy not there last night? that is the way things go. he is not a young man but he is an honest man. he works hard for folks and has a team around him who are able to deliver. we are in the middle of massive flooding in minnesota. he took time wednesday calling out here to see how the flood

recovery was going. it is a valid point. i will not gloss over this not being a great performance but i'm still seeing the president do this job. i am seeing him be responsive to crisis situations and putting out policies that will make life better for people, unlike donald trump, who is horrifyingly misleading last night. more than that, blatantly cruel in his policies. we see a supreme court decision in iowa today restricting reproductive rights. donald trump wants to expand that even more so. it is a concern but i am still confident in the president's ability and his administration to move us in a positive direction. this is a binary choice. donald trump's "mad max" america were the wealthy extremists get everything in the rest of us are left with the scraps. i am not interested in that. amna: a key part of the biden

campaign mission is to draw the stark contrast between these two men. former president trump was calmer than usual, confident. he did deliver a steady stream of lies that went largely unchecked. do you think that contrast was clear? >> i hope so. it was terrifying to me. he was calmer. i will give him credit. he was articulate, loud and forceful in his declarations that he will destroy women's reproductive rights. he was clear he sees nothing wrong -- he has no intention of doing anything to help public education for middle-class people. he was articulate last night. he was articulate in a terrifying message. i think what most americans -- you never hear donald trump talk about them. you hear him talk about himself

about how he has been wronged and his list of grievances. at the core of this when we make this binary choice, you have a decent man and joe who cannot articulate as clear as he might want to but has delivered time and time again. we are seeing the golden age of infrastructure. we are seeing a resurgence of chip manufacturing and clean energy jobs. look, i know americans are smart enough to know inflation is a tough one. prices at the stores. but they look around and understand this is a global issue that joe biden has navigated better than any world leader. you see donald trump more than happy to side with vladimir putin, those are decisions they will think about more than one night in june. amna: last night's debate has also sparked discussions on whether or not mr. biden should be the nominee moving forward. as you well know there has been polling over the last year that has shown there are other

democrats who would perform basically the same as mr. biden's polling against mr. trump in hypothetical matchups, gretchen whitmer and vice president harris. do you believe there are other democrats who could defeat donald trump? >> oh, yeah. there are a lot of folks who could, just like joe biden. he is the one who actually did. our bench is deep. we do not all wear rds hats and chant in unison. we have leaders across the spectrum inside the predent's administration, there are fabulous folks. i think the american people understand this president has delivered. there are a lot of folks supporting him and we are making the case, look, we need these policies to make sure we can deliver. it is a discussion i am not having now.

the names you mentioned, i think one will be president in 2028 after we get the president over the finish line. amna: do you believe president biden should debate again in september and will he? >> i told my team i did not want to debate. i get into debates with folks about my military service. i do 24 years, they do zero and somehow they are the heroes. i do not think they are real life. they are performative. i think way too much emphasis is put on them because it is the governing, the record and the delivery of the things that make a difference. i am in no rush to ever do that. in this day and age you can convey your message in a lot of different ways. the debates i'm not sure are really not conducive to good governance. amna: that is democratic governor from minnesota, thank you. >> thank you.

geoff: last night's debate might be the first time millions of americans paid attention to the presidential campaign this year. they heard a lot of claims that have been refilled in your refrains on the campaign trail, not all of them true. we turn to samantha of polin effect. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me. geoff: let's take some of these debate topics one by one starting with the economy and inflation. donald trump said president biden caused inflation and the cost of food doubled and tripled and quadrupled while president biden said trump's proposed 10% tariffs would cost the average american $2500 a year. help us understand what is true. >> trump's claimed that biden inherited inflation was mostly false. inflation was 1.4%. as conditions improved there was inflation peaking at 9% 1.5

years into his presidency. economists say his relief did -- he did not single-handedly cause it. trump's claims that it doubled and tripled it was false. the 21% increase is nowhere near what trump claed. that would need to be 300%. 10 times larger than what trump said. biden's claim about trump's tariffs costing americans $2500, we found that to be mostly true. economists say it will force consumers to pay more in that range between $1700 and $2500. geoff: let's turn to immigration. donald trump said president biden allowed in 18 million people and they're are coming from prisons, jails and mental institutions. president biden said there are 40 percent fewer people coming across the border illegally. what we know about the situation at the southern border?

>> trump's claim about the millions of people coming from prisons and mental institutions was our worst rating, pants on fire. data shows officials have arrested 100,000 noncitizens from 2021 to 2024. the data reflects the people the government knows about. immigration experts that despite the limitations there is no evidence to support his statement. we rated false his statement that biden has allowed in 18 million people. immigration officials have encountered 9.7 million immigrants under bidens presidency. the number rises to 11.4 million with got aways. encounters represent events not people. one person who tried to cross the border twice counts as two encounters. biden was more accurate on immigration. is 40% claim is mostly true. encounters dropped by 40%. in the weeks after biden

announced policy on june 4. geoff: on abortion, mr. trump repeated a false claim he has made before the democrats will take the life of a child in the eighth month, ninth month and even after birth. help us understand this because willfully terminating the life of a newborn is illegal in every state. >> we did find this to be false. most elected democrats have spoken publicly about this. they support abortion under roe v. wade which produces access up to fetal viability. many of these democrats of also said they support abortions past this point if the physician deems it necessary. experts say fetal death in the third trimester are rare. less than 1% of abortions occur after 21 weeks. these cases typically involve life-threatening emergencies. geoff: the cnn moderators last night did not provide real-time fact checking. the networks said they did not do that as their role.

their role was to facilitate an exchange of ideas that it was up to the candidates to challenge each other. it was an approach that both campaigns agreed to. what is a consequence when a torrent of lies delivered with a fervent vigor go unchallenged as they were last night? >> i think the consequences are quite high. this was on the biggest political stage thus far in this presidency. fact checking is important. i understand the moderators went to make sure they got their say in and not appear like they were unfairly favoring. as journalists it is their job to hold powerful people accountable and check them when they are inaccurate with the american people. i do not think they could have fact checked every false or misleading claim less night but they could have done their due diligence to correct false claims on topics like abortion and immigration.

the american people deserve to know when a presidential candidate is spreading falsehoods on issues they will be voting on. geoff: that is samantha of po litifact. you can find more fact checks on our website. amna: for more on how last night's debate is shaking up the race for the white house, we turn to more analysis. david brooks and kimberly atkins stohr. great to have you here. good to see you both. let's jump into the analysis. david, you saw the reporting about some of the panic among democrats right now. based on what you saw is that panic warranted? david: yes, i think so. i went back and looked at the 2020 presidential debates and he looks like a different person. this defeat by biden was not like obama's defeat with mitt romney where he had a bad day. this is about fundamental -- it

did raise the possibility this guy cannot be joe biden. to win an election you have to have a strategy and biden has gone through what i thought were possible strategies. use fiscal stimulus to turbocharge the election. working-class voters come to your side. it did not work. second, really create a positive economy so everyone is prospering. inflation. the third strategy was the state of the union address really work for joe biden so let's move up the debate and he will prove he is vibrant and younger you have to be to skype. that is the third failed strategy. i do not know if it is time for me to call him to step down. amna: we saw him be almost a different person and north carolina. he is saying i do not debate like i used to but i do know how to tell the truth. is that kind of messaging enough to calm the concerns that are clearly spreading echo kimberly:

i think it is too soon to know if it calms concerns. i was watching the debate like everyone else. there were moments that were difficult to watch and got wrenching to watch. but it was still one day. . he was not that same person later on that day in atlanta and was not the same person in north carolina but he also has an entire term of presidency to run on. even if he did not say he missed a lot of key points -- i think it was a terrible performance by any measure. i expected him to come out and make a clear lay on issues like abortion when donald trump was standing there lying about it. one of his many lies. he could not even manage that. democrats are very good at fretting. that is what is happening right now. it would be good to take a breath, sit back and look if it has moved voters to before

making big sweeping calls before trying to change horses on the last lap of the race. geoff: david, mr. trump once again repeated a number of lies on things like immigration and abortion and january 6. all issues that resonate with voters. if you were watching that debate as a conscious republican or a curious independent, how do you feel about trump today? david: lies do not change votes. what changes votes is not facts, it is beliefs. you can get your facts wrong as long as you tell a story people believe in. we care about the facts, that is our business. but it turns out to be a political reality, if you tell a narrative they believe and they will ignore the facts. the narrative trump tells has a lot of residents. inflation is hurting us and the system is broken and we need some guy who will bulldoze the

thing down. that is a simple story but has a lot of residents with voters right now and joe biden epitomizes because of the career he has had, one of the great careers in politics, he is an insider and it is tough to be an insider right now. western europe and all around the world. amna: he has had this record to run on. there is the forward-looking voter right now. thinking about the next four years. folks who are dissatisfied, what you think they took away from watching that? kimberly: i think that lies matter more than you may believe that they do. especially given what he is lying about. we have seen the former president live about the earth, not even agree to accept the results of the election and lie again about fraud.

we know americans care about democracy. they thought january 6 and they know it is not true. we know americans care about access to abortion. they saw donald trump lie and say everything was fine. of course that is not the case. there are people being airlifted out of states where abortion is banned. maternity mortality is going through the roof. it is a health care crisis. his lying does not make that any better. we know despite the lies and despite the threat that donald trump poses, even if he got up and ruled in front of the american people the republican party would not be calling on him to step down. he is the threat that is presented and democrats need to make that case and stop worrying about joe biden for one minute and focus on what the real job is, which is defeating donald trump. amna: is that contrast clear? did you see that on the stage last night? kimberly: no.

joe biden did not make the contrast. i wanted him to speak clearly about abortion, democracy, point out the fact he will not result -- except the results of the election. i wish that was the first question asked of donald trump instead of the last when many people tuned out. he did not make that. just one day is not an entire campaign season and there is plenty of time for him and his surrogates to make the distinction. david: the economist said donald trump has a 2/3 chance of winning. the crucial questions biden was trending on before the debate is who is a better manager? trump is ahead by double digits. who do you trust in a crisis? donald trump is ahead by double digits. those are bad numbers for any incumbent. abortion is a great issue for democrats. a lot of the things joe biden has done with the economy have

been great for workers but competence, the economy and who do you want as a leader in the crisis, that is a real problem for joe biden and that was not just one day. amna: do you think there should be another debate? kimberly: why not? i do not think debates matter as much as we feel like to do right now but why not? [laughter] david: i do not think they matter that much unless your candidate does not look up to the job. amna: i do want to ask you about the supreme court. a big week and a lot of big decisions. just today the overturned a decades-old president the chevron decision that weakens federal regulators. what does it say about the court? david: i will let you do the legal stuff. i will try to do just public policy. congress passed a law and they are vague. congress loves to give power to

someone else so they do not get blamed. who should be in charge of interpreting the laws? traditionally it has been agencies, the fyc, epa. the court seems to be grabbing some of that power and saying it should be the courts more. i have problems with the agencies because they are kind of partisan. there is a thing in the white house which regulates the regulators. when you have a strong person making sure regulation makes sense the advantage the agencies have is those people are actually experts and judges might be plenty smart but they are not experts on greenhouse gas. i like it when the agencies do it as long as there is strong oversight. kimberly: i think it is a bigger power grab by the courts than even that. this is a groundbreaking change. you are giving courts and judges not just the scotus a tremendous

amount of power. remember the case that began with one judge who was picked purposely to try to toss out fda approval of a drug. that is not what judges do. that is not -- the supreme court today just because they wanted to overturned a precedent. we need to rely on them and less and less the supreme court is allowing people to do it. amna: there was another big case coming up, monday will be the last day of their term and there is the case involving former president trump's claim of immunity, trying to overturned the 2020 election loss. how are you looking at that? kimberly: with the caveat that no one knows what will happen i expect this court to find some level of immunity. not absolute. the fact it has taken this long i expect there will be a lot of

strong dissents that will be issued that the justices might still be working on. and then the case will be remanded down. we do not know how it will play out but i think it makes it all but impossible a trial happens before the election. david: in oral arguments i noticed they were trying to parse a distinction between actions. donald trump tried to erase the distinction and make the whole office part of his private -- he treated the whole office as his playground. it is a bit of divine justice if they do not grant him all of the immunity. amna: other big cases ahead. kimberly: there are also big cases that involve the regulation of social media. there are two states the try to claim facebook and other platforms are discriminating against conservative voices.

you have the government saying that is not how this works. the supreme court has yet to weigh in on that. big repercussions for the first amendment. amna: big repercussions, big cases to follow. kimberly atkins stohr, david brooks, great to see you both. ♪ geoff: online right now, our weekly digital show takes a look at the big week in politics including last night's first presidential debate of 2024. you can find that in more on our youtube page. amna: be sure to tune into washington week with the atlantic tonight. jeffrey goldberg and the panel will examine the key takeaways from last night's presidential debate. geoff: on pbs news weekend, the

-- growing impact on climate change in bangladesh. amna: a note of thanks to a longtime member of our weta production team. geoff: jim schneider, one of the key people responsible for making sure this broadcast makes it to the air every night is retiring today after two remarkable tours of duty. amna: we want to thank you for making everything we do better. for always finding a solution to whatever challenges thrown your way and we know we have thrown quite a few challenges in your direction. geoff: [laughter] amna: you are calm, your expertise and your good humor will be missed. geoff: and that is the "newshour " for tonight. i am geoff bennett. amna: i am amna nawaz. on behalf of the entire team, thank you for joining us and have a great weekend. >> major funding has been

provided by. ♪ and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions and friends of the "newshour," including kathy and paul anderson. the walton family foundation. working for solutions during climate change so people and nature can thrive together. the william and flora hewlett foundation. for more than 50 years, advancing ideas and supporting institutions to promote a better world. and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. ♪ >> and friends of the newshour. ♪

this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] ♪

>>

wow, you get to watch all your favorite stuff. it's to die for. now you won't miss a thing. this is the way. xfinity internet. made for streaming. ♪ hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour & company." here's what's coming up. france gears up for macron's big gamble, baiting the far right at this weekend's snap elections. i speak to financial times columnist simon kuper. plus, the latest earth-shaking decisions from the supreme court. then -- >> i'm here because you called.