live from washington, this is bbc news. welcome to viewers on pbs in america. the us supreme court rules in favour of access to a widely—used abortion pill. fighting in sudan continues, despite agreement for a ceasefire. and the uk's deputy prime minister resigns following an inquiry into bullying allegations. hello, i'm sumi somaskanda. we start here in washington. the us supreme court has ruled in favour of maintaining access to an abortion pill, while a legal appeal against its use is still considered. the decision temporarily blocks a lower court's ruling, in texas, that restricted the use of drug. the drug, mifepristone, is used in more than half of all abortions in the us.

this decision is a victory supporters of abortion rights, as it defends broad access to this pill, and for the biden administration. president biden has responded: with me is our correspondentjess parker. she has been looking into the story for us. what does this ruling mean?— story for us. what does this ruling mean? access continues as it did before _ ruling mean? access continues as it did before two _ as it did before two mifepristone which, as you are saying, is widely used in america as part of a two drug regimen for abortion. just colbeck a little bit, there was

a judge in texas who said that actually approval should be halted for the time being and then an appeals court basically ruled that went too far but looked to restrict access to mifepristone so you can only take it up to seven weeks of pregnancy, you couldn't ordered by mail, you had to go for an in—person appointment. the supreme court has ruled for now none of those things will happen, axis remains as it was, and they kicked it back to the lower court and we could be talking about the supreme court looking again at this issue in a few months but i'm try more towards the end of the year. now it is the quo, access to mifepristone stays the same, why is it such an important medication here in the us? it is used in the majority of abortions as part of the stem yacht drug regimen, over 50% of cases for women. and as well it has been approved for over 20 years. so it has been in place for a very long time and i think they broader political point, after the overturning of roe v. wade last year, which gave state the possibility to

ban or curtail abortion, which some have, this is now seen as the kind of next battleground in that fight between people who are anti—abortion and people who are pro—choice. trier? people who are pro-choice. very interesting- _ people who are pro-choice. very interesting. jess _ people who are pro-choice. very interesting. jess parker, - people who are pro—choice. very interesting. jess parker, thank you very much. we're joined now by robert barnes, the supreme court reporter for the washington post. robert, thank you so much for joining us tonight. this is a court that had a majority to overturn roe vs wade. how should we read that there wasn't a majority to let this ban go into effect? well, the important thing to remember is this was not a decision on merits, this was something that, as your correspondent said, lower courts had approved, it was a pretty bold move, courts have not said that the fda is wrong to have passed on the safety of a drug before and overturned such a thing, so it was a pretty bold move. and all the

supreme court did tonight was leave things in place while these legal fights continue. we also saw a _ these legal fights continue. we also saw a descent from samuel alito and clarence thomas that was published as well. what can we take away, glenn from that descent? .,, we take away, glenn from that descent? ., , ., descent? those early the two members _ descent? those early the two members of _ descent? those early the two members of the _ descent? those early the two members of the court - descent? those early the two members of the court that. descent? those early the two | members of the court that are probably the most conservative. they have expressed concerns about this drug before and so while they said they were not making a decision on the merit, you know, these were the two justices you would think would be most likely. the rest of the court didn't really explain its reasoning for this. but, you know, it is a very busy time for the supreme court, a controversial time for the supreme court. it has a loss on its plate right now and i think in something this big the court may have been saying we are going to hold off a little bit, let this play out, and we don't

need to be forced into a decision here until we have to make one. decision here until we have to make one-— make one. what do you think chief justice _ make one. what do you think chiefjustice john _ make one. what do you think chiefjustice john roberts' . chief justice john roberts' role was chiefjusticejohn roberts' role was in chief justice john roberts' role was in this chiefjusticejohn roberts' role was in this ruling? chiefjustice john roberts' role was in this ruling? hard to sa , role was in this ruling? hard to say, because _ role was in this ruling? hard to say, because the - role was in this ruling? hard j to say, because the majority didn't explain its reasoning, didn't explain its reasoning, didn't say why it was leaving things as they are and letting the fight continue in the lower court. so we would be speculating. but, as i say, you know, this is something that the course doesn't need to take on right now or to decide right now and i think that that has a lot of to do with it. you might remember that the chiefjustice remember that the chief justice was remember that the chiefjustice was not among the conservatives who thought the court should overturn roe v. wade, he thought that there was another path to uphold more abortion restrictions without overturning what had been a constitutional right for a half—century. constitutional right for a half-century.— constitutional right for a half-century. constitutional right for a half-centu . ~ ., ., ~ half-century. what do you think makes this _

half-century. what do you think makes this case _ half-century. what do you think makes this case so _ makes this case so unprecedented, the fact that this lower court has challenged the fda's authority, essentially, for deeming this bill safe to use?— essentially, for deeming this bill safe to use? yes, it was a very bold _ bill safe to use? yes, it was a very bold legal _ bill safe to use? yes, it was a very bold legal battle - bill safe to use? yes, it was a very bold legal battle that - very bold legal battle that these anti—abortion doctors waged and there were lots of questions about whether they have the proper legal standing to bring this challenge and the way the challenge was filed in a district in which only one judge was known to have anti—abortion sentiments would be thejudge to anti—abortion sentiments would be the judge to rule on it. anti—abortion sentiments would be thejudge to rule on it. so there were a lot of questions about the legal theory as this case advanced and it's another reason for the court to sort of take things slowly, because it is something that has not been done before. it is unprecedented for a court to say that the fda was just wrong when it approved the safety of a drug. ibis when it approved the safety of a dru~. �* , ., , , a drug. as we heard, this is auoin a drug. as we heard, this is going to — a drug. as we heard, this is going to get _ a drug. as we heard, this is going to get kicked - a drug. as we heard, this is going to get kicked back - a drug. as we heard, this is i going to get kicked back down to the lower courts, lost you think we will see there? well,

noes think we will see there? well, goes back _ think we will see there? well, goes back to _ think we will see there? well, goes back to a _ think we will see there? well, goes back to a very _ goes back to a very conservative court, the us court of appeals for the fifth circuit. the panel of that court didn't go as far as judge kaczmarek did about the fda, but it did roll back some of the restrictions that the fda had lifted in recent years and so it's probably the most conservative appeals court in the country. it wouldn't be surprising to see a win for the anti—abortion forces there and thenit anti—abortion forces there and then it would come back to the supreme court. [30 then it would come back to the supreme court.— then it would come back to the supreme court. do you think the sureme supreme court. do you think the sopreme court — supreme court. do you think the supreme court delhi _ supreme court. do you think the supreme court delhi road - supreme court. do you think the supreme court delhi road will i supreme court delhi road will ultimately ban this pill will ultimately ban this pill will ultimately ban. it’s ultimately ban this pill will ultimately ban.— ultimately ban this pill will ultimately ban. it's a tough court. when _ ultimately ban. it's a tough court. when it _ ultimately ban. it's a tough court. when it overturned i ultimately ban. it's a tough i court. when it overturned roe v. wade, is thejudges and courts need to get out of this business, return it to the states, return it to the people's elected representatives stop so the

first case that comes back to them is not a case about that, it is one that would affect people nationwide, women all across the country who want to take this drug to ease early pregnancy abortions. and so it was an unusual case for the court and one that you could see the court might be a little regular reluctant about. band regular reluctant about. and one that a — regular reluctant about. and one that a lot _ regular reluctant about. and one that a lot of— regular reluctant about. and one that a lot of people have been watching very closely. you have a sense of how long this process could take before it ends up again at the supreme court? ., ., , ., ., court? no, it would be a matter of months. _ court? no, it would be a matter of months. we _ court? no, it would be a matter of months, we think, _ court? no, it would be a matter of months, we think, and - court? no, it would be a matter of months, we think, and the i of months, we think, and the court, when it stayed at the lower court's decisions, said this stays stays into effect the status quo will remain in effect until this case comes back to us and we decide whether to take it and then when we decide it. and so that could be quite a while. mil

could be quite a while. all riaht, could be quite a while. all right, robert barnes, the supreme court reporter for the washington post, thank you very much forjoining us on bbc news. much for “oining us on bbc news. ., ., ., turning now to sudan. it appears another ceasefire — supposedly agreed so people can celebrate the muslim holiday of eid al—fitr — hasn't held. there are reports of more fighting between sudan's army led by abdel fattah al—burhan and the paramilitary rapid support forces led by mohamed hamdan dagalo. this was the capital khartoum, earlier friday — gunfire and explosions heard across the city. the un says more than 400 people have now been killed in the fighting. i spoke with kalkidan yibeltal, who is monitoring the situation from the ethiopian capital, addis ababa. the general al—burhan has been speaking since the first time since the fighting began. what has he been saying? yes, he gave a televised statement and during which he expressed his hope that they will emerge victorious. there was a 72—hour ceasefire initially announced

by the rapid support forces and the army, but what is happening on the ground is not calm or a pause in fighting, but what we're hearing is the continuation of the violence. residents have reported hearing gunfire and there is also air strikes, so this means the warring parties are still at each other. the general seems to suggest that he wants to continue heading on and trying to defeat his enemies. fighting is continuing. it appears there is no end in sight and food and water supplies, as we have heard, from civilians is running low. is there a way to get aid in? the hope was that the three—day ceasefire would give a chance to residents to increase

their food stocks, their food supplies, and for people who are trapped in conflict areas to leave those areas, to be evacuated, and for aid agencies to provide aid as well as for facilities, health facilities to have breathing space to increase their supplies. but if the fighting is still going on, it is going to be difficult for aid agencies to provide relief efforts. it's going to be difficult for health facilities to provide support. and it will be very difficult for civilians to get any support or leave the areas. we have heard concerns the fighting in sudan could even ripple beyond the borders. tell us about that. yes, we've already heard an increase in the number of people leaving the capital, khartoum, as soon as people get a chance to move around, they try to escape the violence and leave the capital to other relatively safe areas, but we also have reports

of many people leaving sudan altogether and crossing borders to neighbours, for example, countries like chad. if the conflict will drag on and the violence is going to continue in escalation, there are concerns that many sudanese people can face this real possibility of migrating, moving into the neighbouring countries. so neighbouring countries have this real concern of the possible influx in refugees coming from sudan. kalkidan yibeltal reporting for us from addis ababa, great to speak with you. in the uk, the deputy prime minister and justice secretary dominic raab has resigned from government after a report upheld some bullying claims against him. today's report says his behaviour was at times intimidating, insulting, and "unreasonably and persistently aggressive." in his resignation letter

mr raab said he believed the findings were flawed and that the report had set the threshold for bullying too low. this is the third senior member of the uk government to resign since rishi sunak became prime minister — and the second over bullying claims. 0ur political editor chris mason has the details. the man who was justice secretary but now claims something of an injustice in how his conduct is seen. the man who said he'd resign if an allegation of bullying was upheld, and has now resigned. but thinks the inquiry that finished him off was flawed. is this a stitch—up? look, i wouldn't describe it that way. i resigned from cabinet today because i said i would if there was any adverse finding from this inquiry and i am true to my word. politicians should be. but i do think it sets a very dangerous precedent. if you look at the tolley

report it dismissed almost all the claims against me. it found i have never once in four and a half years lost my temper, sworn, shouted, anything of that nature. but it also highlighted maybe two or three instances where i've been what they described as unintentionally abrasive. so what is in adam tolley kc�*s report? the senior lawyer says dominic raab "acted in way which was intimidating, in the sense of unreasonably and persistently aggressive conduct. it also involved an abuse or misuse of power in a way that undermines or humiliates." adding he went "further than was necessary or appropriate in delivering critical feedback," and was "insulting". mr tolley also says mr raab was abrasive and had described work done for him as "utterly useless and woeful". a description " reasonably understood as insulting

personal criticism". to germany now, where representatives from 50 countries have been meeting to discuss how they can give ukraine more support. the latest package includes ammunition for himars rocket systems, long—range artillery, and anti—armour weapons. earlier, i spoke to the us national security council spokesmanjohn kirby about the us position in ukraine. i want to start with an announcement we saw from the defence department saying that the abrams tanks that the us has promised to deliver to ukraine, that they will get to the battlefield this fall — that is earlier than expected. do you think, however, that these tanks getting there earlier by the fall will still be enough? we are also providing hundreds of other vehicles and combined arms trading for battalions outside the country to get ready for the fighting. in the weeks and months ahead.

it is notjust the abrams tanks, they are also taking possession, the ukrainians, of leopard tanks that are produced by germany, and other nations are providing their leopard tanks and many, many different types of armoured vehicles, notjust from the us, but from around the world. so it is a concerted effort to get into ukrainian hands the full scope of capabilities we think they will need in the weeks and months ahead. armoured capability, tanks and armoured vehicles, is just one of them. ammunition, and defence also key needs. the secretary of defence lloyd austin was speaking in germany earlier today when he was meeting with international defence chiefs and he did discuss the leaked pentagon documents. as i discussed this issue with allies and partners, i've been struck by your solidarity and your commitment to reject efforts to divide us. and we will not let anything

fracture our unity. so, hearing from the defense secretary, it does not sound like this issue has divided allies, but from what you have seen, is this going to be an issue of trust among allies, especially with ukraine? we're certainly going to do everything we can to make sure this does not become an issue of trust with our allies and partners, and as secretary austin noted, it has not. we have been working very, very hard to keep relevant allies and partners informed as we learn about disclosures, to let them know what we are seeing, listen to their concerns and make sure they know we're going to keep them informed of the way we have seen no breach of any of the confidence that we have in our many relationships, whether they are bilateral or multilateral, and we certainly haven't seen any demmunition of support and resolved by so many allies and partners were supporting ukraine. i want to ask you about sudan.

the us is putting forces in place for evacuation of government personnel. when would the white house determine it is the right point to evacuate personnel? our focus riaht evacuate personnel? our focus right now _ evacuate personnel? our focus right now is — evacuate personnel? our focus right now is twofold. _ evacuate personnel? our focus right now is twofold. one - evacuate personnel? our focus right now is twofold. one is - right now is twofold. one is making sure we have got and can maintain full accountability of our government personnel there in khartoum, and we do, we have them all now consolidated and together and all accounted for. number two is working closely with people on the ground, particularly having conversations with both sides, the rapid security forces commander and the sudanese armed forces commander, to try to get meaningful sustainable ceasefires in place. thus far we haven't been able to do that in the violence continues, it is still a very dangerous place. in the meantime, the military is prepositioning some additional capabilities nearby in the region, should there be a need to move in and evacuate our government personnel. but thatis our government personnel. but that is what the focus is right

now. , ., , y that is what the focus is right now. , ., _ ., ~ that is what the focus is right now. _ ., ~ that is what the focus is right now. , ., ~ ., now. john kirby, thank you for cominu now. john kirby, thank you for coming on _ now. john kirby, thank you for coming on bbc— now. john kirby, thank you for coming on bbc news. - now we turn to afghanistan. since the taliban took over 1.5 years ago, there international community has tried to find ways to help afghan people without directly supporting the taliban. here in the us, the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction, also known as sigar, told a us house committee that: it's complicated for aid agencies too. and earlier this week, the united nations deputy secretary general talked about a possible un recognition of the taliban during an interview — take a listen. 0ut out of that, we hope we will find those baby steps to put us back on the pathway to recognition. is it possible? i don't know. recognition. is it possible? i don't know-— recognition. is it possible? i don't know. recognition of... the taliban. _ don't know. recognition of... the taliban. in _ don't know. recognition of... the taliban. in other - don't know. recognition of... the taliban. in other words, | the taliban. in other words, there are conditions. i spoke with annie pforzheimer, former acting deputy

assistant secretary of state for afghanistan and deputy chief of mission for kabul. thank you very much forjoining us on our programme. we heard the un debris secretary's words. do you think the us would support taking steps towards recognising the taliban?_ towards recognising the taliban? ~ , ., taliban? absolutely not. i think that _ taliban? absolutely not. i think that those _ taliban? absolutely not. i think that those remarks l taliban? absolutely not. i- think that those remarks were very leaning in a way that perhaps the deputy secretary general regrets at this point. you said you think she might regret those comments. at the same time should discussing the reality on the ground which is because of the fact that caliban is governing afghanistan. so how can the un, the us work together to help civilians of afghanistan while not legitimising the taliban? the taliban is controlling afghanistan, i would the taliban is controlling afghanistan, iwould not the taliban is controlling afghanistan, i would not say they are governing it. i think they are governing it. i think the united states and the un have an obligation to talk to

all afghans. the taliban is in the legitimate boys of afghanistan and under no circumstances should they be given a un seat for the country of afghanistan until they make an effort to be a legitimate ruling entity. they have made a living hell for women that is hard to describe and hard for anybody outside afghanistan to understand. women who cannot leave their houses, men who are being picked up and murdered because they were of part of the former security forces. this is a country that is being ruled by terra.— this is a country that is being ruled by terra. what should the us and the _ ruled by terra. what should the us and the international - us and the international community, the un, do? first and foremost, _ community, the un, do? first and foremost, they _ community, the un, do? first and foremost, they have - community, the un, do? first and foremost, they have to i community, the un, do? f “st and foremost, they have to keep in place the very power towards the influence they still have, and include sanctions that the united nations against taliban leadership and they should also make sure that they are talking

to the non— caliban afghan leaders, human rights defenders, members of civil society inside and outside the country to find out what they want and what they could use to be protected. i want and what they could use to be protected-— be protected. i want to ask you about something _ be protected. i want to ask you about something we _ be protected. i want to ask you about something we asked - be protected. i want to ask you l about something we asked about the secretary general for reconstruction. he said usaid might be flowing to the taliban. how could that happen? i think that is something that will have a political reverberation in the united states. it is very possible that there will be an effort to cut back on humanitarian assistance, and that is coupled with the fact that the taliban have taken the untenable step of barring women from being part of the humanitarian distribution that is so badly neededin distribution that is so badly needed in afghanistan, and that violates not only the human rights principles of the un and the international community, but humanitarian principles. so combined with their acts of

terror, the fact that they are supporting terror groups within that have —— within afghanistan, the fact they are stopping women from being part of the distribution, there may be a backlash that will affect millions of afghans. so be a backlash that will affect millions of afghans.- be a backlash that will affect millions of afghans. so do you think that _ millions of afghans. so do you think that there _ millions of afghans. so do you think that there needs - millions of afghans. so do you think that there needs to - think that there needs to be better oversight from the biden administration of the state department and us iid? ida. administration of the state department and us iid? no, i actually think— department and us iid? no, i actually think that _ department and us iid? no, i actually think that the - actually think that the oversight right now is adequate because up until the decision about women working for the un, there was a relatively straight forward and leads based approach to distributing assistance. now, if the taliban make demands, they make to man some day that the international community doesn't give the money to them and let them be in charge of distributing it, and that may be a bridge too far. at the same time, how can we not help the millions of

people who face starvation if we don't help them? it people who face starvation if we don't help them?- people who face starvation if we don't help them? it has been 'ust over we don't help them? it has been just over a _ we don't help them? it has been just over a year _ we don't help them? it has been just over a year since _ we don't help them? it has been just over a year since they - just over a year since they chaotic withdrawal from afghanistan. how do you see the country? how has it changed since then?— since then? the country has lost everything _ since then? the country has lost everything that - since then? the country has lost everything that it - since then? the country has lost everything that it was l lost everything that it was working for in terms of peaceful and prosperous future. i have many friends outside and friends who are inside and i really cannot... i can't fathom the despair, especially of a girl that is, say, 13 and was affecting to go to high school and may now be facing a forced and may now be facing a forced an early marriage, childbearing, and the only future education will be jardee education. the taliban is trying very hard to indoctrinate an entire country. great to have you on our show.

earlier this month, the bbc world service launched the first series of an education programme for young audiences in afghanistan. the programme, called dars, brings learning to children not at school, including girls barred from formal education. dars makes the most of the bbc�*s teaching content with adapted maths, history, science, and more. it's also available via bbc news pashto and bbc news dari radio, bbc persian tv broadcasts and online. now, some news about wrexham — the welsh football club which — after hollywood actors ryan reynolds and rob mcelhenney bought it — has gotten a lot of attention. forfifteen years, wrexham has played in the national league. ryan reynolds and rob mcelhenney have said one of their aims for the club was to start winning. and lately, it's had a string of victories. saturday is a big day for wrexham. they're playing a home match against boreham wood fc, and if they win, they'll be promoted to the league above, league two. a big day for them. we will be

watching on bbc news. please stay with us. hello. a beautiful day on friday across scotland and northern ireland — quite warm, too. the coming days, however, are going to be pretty chilly in the north. a cold wind will set in even some wintry showers to come across the scottish hills, maybe even the pennines. here's the forecast for the short term — outbreaks of rain across parts of northern england and eventually reaching northern ireland by the early hours of saturday morning. some clear spells overnight too in scotland and the south of the country. that does mean a touch of frost, especially outside of town. but for most of us, around 5 or 6 degrees tonight. let's pick up on that rain in the north — you can see showers in northern england. that weather front reaching the southern uplands by lunchtime or so and certainly looking quite wet there in northern ireland, but also, showers clustered

in the southwest of the country. so these areas will be pretty chilly, 10 to 12 degrees, the southwest, northern ireland, the south of scotland, but where the sun does pop out briefly, i think on saturday, maybe 13 to 15 degrees. now, talking about colder weather, there's that chilly atmosphere spreading in from the north on a east, northeasterly, so that change really starts to happen on sunday. in the north, frequent showers, really strong winds up to gale force, increasingly falling as wintry across the hills, and then elsewhere, it's a real mixed bag, even a crack of thunder here and there. the temperatures on sunday will struggle again in the north — 7 or 8 degrees, 12 degrees expected in liverpool in the south, maybe a couple of degrees high. but the winds will be strong everywhere, so we really will start to feel that chill. and then, sunday into monday, we'll see even stronger winds and colder air spreading into parts of scotland. notice the wintry showers there across the hills spreading further southwards and really chilly along that north sea coast. and then elsewhere,

i think a mixture of sunny spells and showers. so the temperatures really disappointing on monday — 6 in aberdeen, 8 in birmingham, maybe just about double figures there for cardiff and for london where showers are expected. and that chilly atmosphere spreads right across the uk and into the continent, into scandinavia as well on tuesday. warmer weather will reach us, but not until later next week. so, here's the outlook for this weekend. chilly mixed bag on the way, that chilly air relatively for the time of the year is with us until wednesday, then from thursday, should warm up. bye— bye.

this is bbc news. we will have the headlines and all the main news stories for you at the top of the hour straight after this programme. in august 2021, the taliban shocked the world as they swept to power in afghanistan. it wasn't long before they began to crack down on the rights of women. last year, i met with activist tamana paryani, who'd been involved in a protest in kabul. after daring to raise her voice, the taliban came

in the middle of the night to arrest her.