the former president is facing a criminal investigation into his handling of classified files after leaving the white house. leading republican house speaker kevin mccarthy calls the indictment a dark day for the indictment a dark day for the united states, and says he will stand with the former president. ukraine's president tours the flooded areas affected by a burst dam, as the world health organization warns that cholera could spread. we start with the news former president donald trump has been indicted — over his handling of classified files after he left the white house. here's a short clip of him speaking earlier.- speaking earlier. i'm an innocent _ speaking earlier. i'm an innocent man. - speaking earlier. i'm an innocent man. i'm - speaking earlier. i'm an innocent man. i'm an i speaking earlier. i'm an - innocent man. i'm an innocent person. innocent man. i'm an innocent erson. h, innocent man. i'm an innocent erson. ,., , innocent man. i'm an innocent erson. , person. ok, so trump saying there, "i'm — person. ok, so trump saying there, "i'm an _ person. ok, so trump saying there, "i'm an innocent- person. ok, so trump saying | there, "i'm an innocent man." he's disputing these claims

and, in an accompanying written post, he said, "i have been summoned to appear at the federal courthouse in miamon tuesday at 3pm." us media is reporting he faces seven charges, including unauthorised retention of classified files. it is the second indictment of mr trump, who it is the second indictment of mrtrump, who is it is the second indictment of mr trump, who is campaigning once again to be president. his first was a state indictment — this is a federal case. it's the first—ever federal indictment of a the first—everfederal indictment of a former president. prosecutors had been looking into the transfer of files to mr trump's mar—a—lago florida estate since last year. the beach—side property was searched last august and 11,000 documents were seized, including around 100 marked as classified. some of those were labelled top secret. mr trump has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and has described the investigation as politically motivated. trump's lawyer says he will appear in court on tuesday. let's break this all down. i have two guests with me. with me isjoe moreno, who is a former federal prosecutor at the department ofjustice and bob costa,

chief election and campaign correspondent at cbs news. great to have you both. joe, i want to start with you. what do we know about what's in this indictment?— indictment? well, i mean, i think peeple _ indictment? well, i mean, i think people have _ indictment? well, i mean, i think people have been - indictment? well, i mean, i- think people have been focused a lot on whether or not donald trump is guilty of hoarding classified documents, right? the other side will say he declassified them, and they'll go back and forth. i think that's the wrong focus. and i think what we're going to see incoming days as the details of this indictment come out is that this is effectively an obstruction case. this is not about whether donald trump had classified documents — it's about whether he was honest when he was given a grand jury subpoena last year and said he'd turned over all documents marked classified. then, the fbi raided his compound and found he had 100 more documents. that's what that case is about. it's not so much difficult to grasp — it's not — it probably is pretty simple to prove. it is what it is. so i feel like that's what this case is — an obstruction, effectively a perjury case, about whether donald trump lied

to a grand jury in filing a sworn statement last spring through his lawyers. find sworn statement last spring through his lawyers. and we're heafina through his lawyers. and we're hearing these _ through his lawyers. and we're hearing these reports - through his lawyers. and we're hearing these reports of- through his lawyers. and we're hearing these reports of seven | hearing these reports of seven counts. can you tell us what those might be?— those might be? well, it's a combination _ those might be? well, it's a combination of _ those might be? well, it's a combination of obstruction, | combination of obstruction, there might be — it's reported there might be — it's reported there might be a conspiracy angle to it. there will be a retention of national security information — basically another way of saying a violation of the espionage act — and whether or not he had classified documents that he shouldn't have had. regardless of whether he declassified them, they're still national security —— there's still national security information in some of these documents, potentially, and he should not have had them in annan unsecure facility like annan unsecu re facility like his annan unsecure facility like his compound in florida. bob, cominu his compound in florida. bob, coming to _ his compound in florida. bob, coming to you. _ his compound in florida. bob, coming to you, we _ his compound in florida. bob, coming to you, we saw - his compound in florida. bob, coming to you, we saw the . coming to you, we saw the reaction and played a bit of a clip from trump there saying he was an innocent man. you were tweeting about how trump has been taking this news. what are you hearing?— been taking this news. what are you hearing? based on news from cbs and his _ you hearing? based on news from cbs and his inner— you hearing? based on news from cbs and his inner circle, _ you hearing? based on news from cbs and his inner circle, he's - cbs and his inner circle, he's very— cbs and his inner circle, he's very frustrated with this indictment. he did not necessarily believe it would happen _ necessarily believe it would happen. there was so—called happy— happen. there was so—called happy talk in his inner circle

from — happy talk in his inner circle from some of his lawyers, some of his— from some of his lawyers, some of his advisers, that special counsel— of his advisers, that special counseljack smith would not move — counseljack smith would not move forward in such an aggressive way with seven such changes, — aggressive way with seven such charges, and maybe it would be a wait—and—see moment as the special— a wait—and—see moment as the special counsel investigated not only classified documents, but trump's conduct in and around _ but trump's conduct in and around the january 6 capitol attack _ around the january 6 capitol attack. he's in a legal war but also _ attack. he's in a legal war but also a — attack. he's in a legal war but also a political war. talking to some _ also a political war. talking to some of his presidential opponents, they see an opening if he _ opponents, they see an opening if he starts to bleed out legally. but also, many republican voters could rally to trump's side.— to trump's side. let's talk about the _ to trump's side. let's talk about the political- to trump's side. let's talk about the political aspect | to trump's side. let's talk i about the political aspect for about the political aspect for a moment. iwant about the political aspect for a moment. i want to read what kevin mccarthy said a little bit earlier about this indictment: "today is indeed a dark day for the united states of america. it is unconscionable for a president to indict the leading candidate opposing him. iand to indict the leading candidate opposing him. i and every american who believes in the

rule of law stand with president trump." so rival candidates who are also running for the republican nomination might see a bit of an opening there but, again, publicly, we're seeing republicans line up behind the former president.— former president. they're also makinu former president. they're also making these _ former president. they're also making these statements - making these statements somewhat in the dark, both politically and legally. we still — politically and legally. we still have not seen the scope of the — still have not seen the scope of the indictment and, based on my months of reporting on this investigation, jack smith, the special— investigation, jack smith, the special counsel, is notjust special counsel, is not just looking _ special counsel, is notjust looking at obstruction. he's looking _ looking at obstruction. he's looking at obstruction. he's looking at whether former president trump had criminal intent — president trump had criminal intent when he left the white house — intent when he left the white house in _ intent when he left the white house injanuary intent when he left the white house in january of 2021 and brought— house in january of 2021 and brought documents back to mar—a—lago. was that done out of frustration with the department ofjustice, with the nationai— department ofjustice, with the national security establish. for how— national security establish. for how they handled the russia investigation and other issues around — investigation and other issues around trump? finding out why those _ around trump? finding out why those documents landed back at mar—a—lago in the basement at that property in his office has been — that property in his office has been part of the investigation - as — been part of the investigation - as well_ been part of the investigation — as well as how trump responded to the subpoena and responded to the subpoena and responded to the national archives. responded to the national archives—

responded to the national archives. , ., ., archives. interesting to note that we're — archives. interesting to note that we're hearing _ archives. interesting to note that we're hearing from - archives. interesting to note i that we're hearing from another republican presidential hopeful, ron desantis, who's saying a desantis saying a desa ntis administration saying a desantis administration would bring accountability to the doj, the department ofjustice, and excise political bias. another political comment there. joe, what do we know about the case that prosecutors have here, and whether this would actually go to trial — and when? whether this would actually go to trial - and when?— to trial - and when? well, i mean, justice _ to trial - and when? well, i mean, justice may - to trial - and when? well, i mean, justice may be - to trial - and when? well, i mean, justice may be fair, | to trial - and when? well, i. mean, justice may be fair, but it's not always swift. and so i think it's fair to say that it's unlikely this would go to trial, if it ever does, before the presidential election next year. it could take that long. wow. if year. it could take that long. wow. ., , ., ., wow. if it ever goes to trial based on — wow. if it ever goes to trial based on who _ wow. if it ever goes to trial based on who wins - wow. if it ever goes to trial based on who wins the - wow. if it ever goes to trial - based on who wins the election, that'll be of course a key political point there. so i think you'll see a flurry of activity the next few days as we get the details of this indictment. you'll see donald trump appear in court apparently next tuesday in miami. and then i think we'll see a lull. and a lot of behind—the—scenes kind of wrangling between lawyers and the justice department. wrangling between lawyers and thejustice department. and of course, all this happening in the background of a political

campaign. the background of a political campaign-— the background of a political camaiun. ., , campaign. yeah. interesting you sa that campaign. yeah. interesting you say that it _ campaign. yeah. interesting you say that it might _ campaign. yeah. interesting you say that it might not _ campaign. yeah. interesting you say that it might not even - campaign. yeah. interesting you say that it might not even go - say that it might not even go to trial before the next presidential election. 0ne to trial before the next presidential election. one more question, joe, about where this is taking place in florida — that's where most of the classified documents were found. we have, i believe, some pictures of a story that ran in the messenger saying, essentially, florida will be a very difficult place for prosecutors to actually win a case like this. and they said that there was a veteran defence attorney who said, "forget documents. if trump shot someone in miami, a jury would not find him guilty." is florida — we see the sentence there — is florida going to be a difficult place for these prosecutors to try this case? there are certainlyjury pools that are more or less sympathetic to defend in a space where the defendant is, of course. ultimately, i have a strong belief thatjuries are fair. thatjuries, no matter where they're based, will look at evidence and look at the law and listen to prosecutors and listen to defence counsel and come to the right decision. so i think it might be a small victory in the donald trump world tonight that at least

this will be held in florida and not in washington dc — but at the end of the day, i think the facts in the law will speak for themselves. let the facts in the law will speak for themselves.— for themselves. let us not foruet for themselves. let us not forget - — for themselves. let us not forget - this _ for themselves. let us not forget - this is _ for themselves. let us not forget - this is not - for themselves. let us not forget - this is not the - for themselves. let us not| forget - this is not the only forget — this is not the only legal— forget — this is not the only legal storm trump is facing. he already— legal storm trump is facing. he already has a looming trial in new— already has a looming trial in new york— already has a looming trial in new york about those hush—money payments— new york about those hush—money payments from 2016. in august in georgia, fonny willis, the fuiion— in georgia, fonny willis, the fulton county district attorney, is expected to indict trump — attorney, is expected to indict trump for— attorney, is expected to indict trump for his pressuring of election— trump for his pressuring of election officials. and you have _ election officials. and you have the january 6 case from the special counsel now hearing from _ the special counsel now hearing from key— the special counsel now hearing from key witnesses, or at least trying — from key witnesses, or at least trying to — from key witnesses, or at least trying to hear from them, like steve — trying to hear from them, like steve bannon, whojust got a subpoena. steve bannon, who “ust got a subpoensfi subpoena. logistically, bob, -ut subpoena. logistically, bob, ut that subpoena. logistically, bob, put that all _ subpoena. logistically, bob, put that all together - - subpoena. logistically, bob, put that all together - how l subpoena. logistically, bob, l put that all together - how can put that all together — how can trump continue to run for office? �* , trump continue to run for office? , �* trump continue to run for office? , office? because as i've covered him on the _ office? because as i've covered him on the campaign _ office? because as i've covered him on the campaign trail- office? because as i've covered him on the campaign trail in . him on the campaign trail in recent— him on the campaign trail in recent weeks, he believes the populism _ recent weeks, he believes the populism and grievance among republican voters nationwide that fuelled him in 2016, fuelled him in 2020, will do so again — fuelled him in 2020, will do so again. and ifany fuelled him in 2020, will do so again. and if any campaign comes— again. and if any campaign comes out and says that they're out of _ comes out and says that they're out of line — comes out and says that they're out of line with trump, that they— out of line with trump, that they -- _ out of line with trump, that they —— the trump people don't believe — they —— the trump people don't believe those candidates can

-et believe those candidates can get any— believe those candidates can get any support. but it's notable _ get any support. but it's notable his own former vice—president, who i spoke to yesterday— vice—president, who i spoke to yesterday in iowa, said trump does — yesterday in iowa, said trump does not _ yesterday in iowa, said trump does not follow the rule of law, _ does not follow the rule of law, does not follow the us constitution — strong words from — constitution — strong words from someone who was at trump's side for— from someone who was at trump's side for four— from someone who was at trump's side for four years but, because _ side for four years but, because of the searing experience ofjanuary 6, is now speaking — experience ofjanuary 6, is now speaking out against trump and running — speaking out against trump and running against him, and announced his campaign the day before _ announced his campaign the day before this historic indictment.- before this historic indictment. �* indictment. but bob, the reality is. _ indictment. but bob, the reality is, after— indictment. but bob, the reality is, after the - indictment. but bob, the reality is, after the last l reality is, after the last indictment for the case in new york, we saw trump's numbers in the polls get a boost.— the polls get a boost. that's exactly right. _ the polls get a boost. that's exactly right, and _ the polls get a boost. that's exactly right, and that's - the polls get a boost. that's exactly right, and that's the | exactly right, and that's the expectation among most of trump's _ expectation among most of trump's rivals. but they believe _ trump's rivals. but they believe once the indictment is, in some — believe once the indictment is, in some ways, unsealed — this deals— in some ways, unsealed — this deals with _ in some ways, unsealed — this deals with national security, sources— deals with national security, sources and methods of intelligence — and if former president trump in any way through— president trump in any way through his conduct made sources— through his conduct made sources and methods of us intelligence vulnerable to attack _ intelligence vulnerable to attack or to compromise positions, then they believe that— positions, then they believe that they could make a national security— that they could make a national security case against trump, notjust— security case against trump, notjust a _ security case against trump, notjust a rule—of—law security case against trump, not just a rule—of—law case or not _ not just a rule—of—law case or notjust— not just a rule—of—law case or notjust a _ not just a rule—of—law case or notjust a political not just a rule—of—law case or not just a political case. notjust a rule-of-law case or notjust a political case.- notjust a political case. joe, when we _ notjust a political case. joe, when we get _ notjust a political case. joe, when we get more _ notjust a political case. joe, when we get more details i notjust a political case. jre: when we get more details on this indictment, what will you be looking out for? what should

we be looking out for in this indictment?— we be looking out for in this indictment? there's been lots of speculation _ indictment? there's been lots of speculation about - indictment? there's been lots of speculation about where i indictment? there's been lots. of speculation about where this case is going since that raid by the fbi last august. i can't wait to actually see what the counts are. are there seven, or more or less? of course, then — what are they? then, we'll be able to construct — what will the case, the prosecution against donald trump — have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt? then we could also summise what his defence could be. he could say he didn't understand what he had in his possession. he could say that his lawyers were doing things that he wasn't aware of. he could say that those around him were taking steps that he didn't endorse. and so we can kind of — even though it might take a long time for this to ever go to trial, we'll have a lot more information to formulate — what are the laws that have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and what could donald trump possibly put up could donald trump possibly put up to say, "this is why i should be found not guilty"? i'll ask you both a last question, starting with you, joe. 0n question, starting with you, joe. on tuesday, we'll see the former president, we expect to see him at a courthouse in miami at 3pm eastern time. we know that cbs is reporting that secret service will meet

tomorrow with trump's staff to make a plan, essentially, for that scene there. what do you think we'll see legally on tuesday?_ think we'll see legally on tuesda ? ~ ~ ., tuesday? well, i think we are “ust tuesday? well, i think we are just dying _ tuesday? well, i think we are just dying for _ tuesday? well, i think we are just dying for information - just dying for information here, as anyone is. we're going to see, unfortunately, very little. probably a lot like we saw in new york city a few weeks ago. we'll see the motorcade pull up, we'll see donald trump come out of his vehicle, probably give a wave to the cameras, and then he'll head into the courthouse. and that's where there will be this very awkward hand—off between the secret service — who of course, their mission is to protect presidents and former presidents — and court security, which effectively will take custody of donald trump for the sake of his appearance in federal court that day. so, certainly a very awkward and uncomfortable situation for everyone. bob, politically. _ situation for everyone. bob, politically, how _ situation for everyone. bob, politically, how will - situation for everyone. bob, politically, how will trump l situation for everyone. bob, i politically, how will trump use this? ~ , politically, how will trump use this? . , ., politically, how will trump use this? a ., ., ., this? as i heard tonight from several trump _ this? as i heard tonight from several trump sources, - this? as i heard tonight from several trump sources, what j several trump sources, what they — several trump sources, what they believe they are in now is a political— they believe they are in now is a political and legal war on multiple fronts.— a political and legal war on | multiple fronts.- and a political and legal war on - multiple fronts.- and they multiple fronts. mmm. and they don't want _ multiple fronts. mmm. and they don't want to — multiple fronts. mmm. and they don't want to settle. _ multiple fronts. mmm. and they don't want to settle. they - don't want to settle. they don't _ don't want to settle. they don't want to settle. they don't want to settle. they don't want to negotiate. they are going _ don't want to negotiate. they are going to fight this at every— are going to fight this at every inch, believing that

power _ every inch, believing that power is _ every inch, believing that power is still within their grasp. _ power is still within their grasp, that they can win the nomination and win the presidency again, and they are going — presidency again, and they are going to — presidency again, and they are going to fight, fight, fight. 0k~ — going to fight, fight, fight. 0k. well, ithink going to fight, fight, fight. 0k. well, i think it's fair to say all the cameras will be trained on miami tuesday at 3pm. guys, great to get both of your insights. thank you so much. great to have you with us. we'll talk to you again soon. thank you.- us. we'll talk to you again soon. thank you. we turn to ukraine now, and the world health organization is warning that cholera could spread in areas of the country now under water after the destruction of dam in the southern kherson region earlier this week. president volodymyr zelensky visited the flooded areas on thursday. while there, he thanked rescuers — but also criticized international aid agencies, saying they had been too slow to respond. meanwhile, ukraine and russia have accused each other of attacking the dam. just a matter of hours after the visit, the area came under intense russian fire — killing one person — and making rescue operations even harder. it's hard to picture an estimated four cubic miles of water until you're in it.

victor and vitaly haven't stopped for two days, searching for people trapped. why don't you want to leave? so they've said, "we don't want to leave. "there are older people who can't get away. "give us your power banks," so they can charge devices. while the water levels have stabilised, they're still dauntingly high. so we're just now passing through two apartment blocks, and it feels like a strange theme park ride because of what we're having to weave through, and yet victor is asking people whether they want to be evacuated — no—one yet has taken him up on that offer. and why do you think people don't want to leave their home? because many people are stupid, you know?

they think everything will be ok after maybe one day or two days. but it's not ok. every time, more water, more, more, more. when this finally recedes, you wonder what will be left. a war, an invasion by russia which takes everything. james waterhouse, bbc news, kherson. earlier i spoke to angela stent, senior fellow at the brookings institution and author of putin's world: russia against the west and with the rest. thank you forjoining us. i want to start with this key nato summits coming up injuly in vilnius. the former nato secretary general anders rasmussen has been speaking and said the following... so what he is essentially saying is that you could see some nato member countries

decide to actually send troops to ukraine. do you think that's a real possibility? j’m to ukraine. do you think that's a real possibility?— a real possibility? i'm a little bit _ a real possibility? i'm a little bit sceptical - a real possibility? i'm aj little bit sceptical about that. i mean, clearly what ukraine wants is a clear path to nato membership, sooner rather than later, but it's clearly not going to get that at the upcoming vilnius summit. up at the upcoming vilnius summit. up till now, no nato country has sent troops to fight the russians in ukraine, because that could really lead to escalation and it could lead to russia attacking those nato countries, so i understand the frustration of the people who would like ukraine to get a quick path to nato membership but i would be sceptical that individual nato countries are going to fight their troops to fight with the ukrainians. d0 fight with the ukrainians. do ou fight with the ukrainians. do you think there will be a quick path to ukrainian membership in nato? j path to ukrainian membership in nato? ., �* ~' nato? i don't think there will be as long — nato? i don't think there will be as long as _ nato? i don't think there will be as long as the _ nato? i don't think there will be as long as the war - nato? i don't think there will be as long as the war is - nato? i don't think there will| be as long as the war is going on. the baltic states, poland, some other countries in europe would favour a quicker path. the united states has said no, not as long as there is a war

going on and so have a number of other leading european countries. so what i think they're going to do at the nato summit is they are going to upgrade the native ukraine commission to a nato ukraine council. they will find ways may be to integrate ukraine towards nato discussions but i think as long as the war is going on, they will not be a clear membership path. what is our clear membership path. what is your sense _ clear membership path. what is your sense of — clear membership path. what is your sense of president - your sense of president zelenskyy, do you think you would be satisfied with such an arrangement?— arrangement? well, the ukrainians _ arrangement? well, the ukrainians want - arrangement? well, the ukrainians want more i arrangement? well, the i ukrainians want more than arrangement? well, the - ukrainians want more than that obviously, but they will have to take whatever they can get essentially, and i think right now what's going on is that they are trying to find the maximum way of getting protection from nato, and the nato countries are also talking about security guarantees for ukraine, as long as it is not a member of nato, and i think thatis member of nato, and i think that is something certainly on the agenda now that is being discussed in all of the nato capitals, and that's something which the ukrainians are watching very carefully. j

which the ukrainians are watching very carefully. i want to ask you _ watching very carefully. i want to ask you about _ watching very carefully. i want to ask you about the - watching very carefully. i want to ask you about the fighting l to ask you about the fighting on the ground at the moment also, it appears the counteroffensive, this long—awaited ukrainian counteroffensive, is in its opening phases. what do you think it might look like when it hits full swing? so think it might look like when it hits full swing?— it hits full swing? so at the moment — it hits full swing? so at the moment we _ it hits full swing? so at the moment we have - it hits full swing? so at the moment we have seen - it hits full swing? so at the moment we have seen the | it hits full swing? so at the - moment we have seen the leopard tanks and the storm shadow missiles from britain, leopard tanks from germany that the ukrainians are now using. they are trying to push south. whenever they want to push south and their aim would be to break this land bridge to crimea but is also quite possible that they will also focus on the east where there are more russian troops there, and i think there will be surprises too. i think they are deliberately conducting vests in such a way as to not make it predictable to the russians. what you mean by it surprises? well, they may show up in other areas, they may use tactics that we haven't seen yet, we don't know. but they are being very careful not to telegraph their intent very much.- their intent very much. very interesting _ their intent very much. very interesting insights, - their intent very much. very interesting insights, thank. their intent very much. very interesting insights, thank you

forjoining us tonight. nearly 100 million people are facing hazardous air in north america. in fact, data from the us environmental protection agency shows cities in the region had the worst air quality in the world on thursday morning. the poor conditions have cancelled events and grounded flights across the us. philadelphia and washington dc are struggling with their worst air quality in years. in these pictures, you can see some of the most iconic monuments and sights here in washington are now covered in fog. and these are pictures from earlier today in new york. you can see that orange haze is still lingering over manhattan. all of this is as a result of intense wildfires in canada. 0fficials there say this is shaping up to be its worst wildfire season on record. the white house sent us firefighters to help, and presidentjoe biden described it as a "stark "reminder of the impacts of climate change". a blurry look at the manhattan bridge. the day is onlyjust starting in new york city but the haze continues to linger from the day before,

when the city was engulfed in a thick orange fog. today, many heeded warnings about the hazardous air quality. commuters wore masks, seemingly back to the covid days. smoke from several hundred wildfires burning across canada continue to blanket the northeastern united states with dusty polluted air. the blazes have already burned more than 3.8 million hectares of land. officials in new york city advised people to stay indoors. this normally very busy park was strangely quiet. how surprised are you by just how empty it is? yeah, it was a little shocking actually. i thought maybe i shouldn't be out here. not only the park but all of our sidewalks are empty. it's reallyjust quiet, it's kind of eerie. it smells like barbecue. it's giving me bad headaches. the us state of alabama has

been ordered to re—draw its electoral map after the supreme court ruled that it had discriminated against black voters. the justices found that the republican—dominated state had drawn up a congressional map with only one district where black voters were in the majority — despite their making up over a quarter of its electorate. the ruling means that alabama will have to redraw its congressional map to include a second majority—black district. earlier, i spoke to deuel ross — an attorney with the naacp legal defence and education fund, who argued on behalf of the plaintiff's lawyers. thank you very much forjoining us here on bbc news. you said today this ruling is a crucial win against the continued onslaught of attacks on voting rights. do you think made this case so important? you rights. do you think made this case so important?— case so important? you know this was a _ case so important? you know this was a real _ case so important? you know this was a real test _ case so important? you know this was a real test for - case so important? you know this was a real test for the i this was a real test for the voting rights act alabama through, the case was about alabama's black belt, a region in alabama that is extremely poon in alabama that is extremely poor, that has a long history

of racial discrimination against black voters but is also the place where martin luther king began his ministry. if this case in which there is a really clear black community that was in need of representation wasn't going to win, there is going to be no case that would win from the supreme court, and the fact that the court found not only that the court found not only that black voters were discriminated against, but it is a historical and significant when that will reverberate for years. when that will reverberate for ears. . ., ., , , when that will reverberate for ears. . ., ., , years. election law experts are callin: it years. election law experts are calling it a _ years. election law experts are calling it a surprise _ years. election law experts are calling it a surprise because i calling it a surprise because this is a core that has chipped away in recent years, so why do you think the court ruled the way it did? i think the court ruled this way because in alabama it is sort of undeniable what happened. there is this region of alabama called the blackbelt that was divided into four congressional districts when it is very clear that it districts when it is very clear thatitis districts when it is very clear that it is possible to divide it into only two districts in which lack voters would have an opportunity to elect their candidates of choice. the three judges who decided this case

initially, two were appointed by president trump said this was a textbook case of a violation of the voting rights act so that is what compelled the justices to act so that is what compelled thejustices to come to the same conclusion as i said, if alabama is not violating the voters rate act then really no one is. i want to ask you about what the justice wrote, he wrote the majority opinion considered race to heavily during these district lines and is urging a more race neutral approach. what is your response to that? the act has existed in its current form for a0 years. the purpose of the act as justice jackson said is the purpose of the act as justice jackson said- justice jackson said is to address _ justice jackson said is to address racial _ justice jackson said is to i address racial discrimination in voting so it is impossible to remedy that without thinking about race, without looking at race, without looking at the implications of choosing maps in which white voters control disproportionate power and

which black voters have less power. so it is frankly impossible to remedy racial discretion without thinking about it, asjustice thomas is suggesting. jn about it, as justice thomas is suggesting-— about it, as justice thomas is su~estinr. it; ,, , suggesting. in 2013 the supreme court struck _ suggesting. in 2013 the supreme court struck down _ suggesting. in 2013 the supreme court struck down a _ suggesting. in 2013 the supreme court struck down a key - court struck down a key provision of the boat is right act that have a history, making states that have a history of voting discrimination get any voting discrimination get any voting changes pre—cleared by the federal government, and the argument there was that these provisions are outdated and no longer in line with contemporary voting, so why do you think that is still relevant?— you think that is still relevant? ~ ., , ., relevant? we are coming up on the ten year — relevant? we are coming up on the ten year anniversary - relevant? we are coming up on the ten year anniversary of- relevant? we are coming up on the ten year anniversary of it i the ten year anniversary of it and unfortunately congress has failed to respond to that decision. but what i think today's opinion from the supreme court affirms is that the voting rights act is very much needed, that racial discrimination continues to exist in alabama, in places like new york and california, and mississippi and georgia, all over the country, and that is why we need a strong voting

rights act that continues to have that preclearance provision.— have that preclearance rovision. . , , ., provision. the last question, there are — provision. the last question, there are similar— provision. the last question, there are similar cases i provision. the last question, there are similar cases in i there are similar cases in louisiana, texas and georgia, where plaintiffs are suing to require more of these majority minority districts. do you think this ruling will set a precedent for those of the cases as well? jt precedent for those of the cases as well? it absolutely will set a — cases as well? it absolutely will set a precedent. - cases as well? it absolutely will set a precedent. it i cases as well? it absolutely will set a precedent. it is i cases as well? it absolutely will set a precedent. it is al will set a precedent. it is a very robust defence and the famines of the importance of the voting rights act, and i think that the decisions that we have in louisiana, that other organisations have in georgia and texas and washington state, all of those decisions will benefit from the ruling from the supreme court that the voting rights act remains constitutional, and black, latino and other voters of colour are entitled to representation where they are able to prove violations of that rule. —— of that law. thank you for sharing your perspective. a reminder of the breaking news, former president donald trump has been indicted over

his handling of classified files after he left the white house. trump is saying he is an innocent man, he is disputing the claims. he says he has been summoned to appear at the federal courthouse in miami, tuesday at three p m. us media reports he is facing seven charges including unauthorised retention of classified files. this is the second indictment of mr trump. this is the second indictment of mrtrump. he this is the second indictment of mr trump. he is campaigning once again to be president. his first was a state indictment, this is a federal case, so it is the first ever federal indictment of a former president. bbc .com has live updates on the stories as you can see here so head to our website to stay updated on the very latest details on this breaking news historic story and we will be back here at the news desk at the top of the hour with more updates. thank you for watching bbc news.

hello. love it or loathe it, a spell of very warm weather's upon us, but what will be less desirable, i think, is the level of humidity, which will become particularly noticeable over the weekend. one thing that we do need is rainfall, and we haven't had much of it recently, and we are expecting some showers and thunderstorms through the course of the weekend. let's have a look at the satellite picture, and you'll soon see the sun setting over the storm clouds here, out towards the south. initially, these storms will be very well—scattered, so not many of us will actually get them. but it's that humid air to the south that'll start arriving, ithink, friday night into saturday, and then through sunday. that'll also keep the nights really balmy, so some pleasantly warm evenings on the way, too, but quite sticky at night. so here's the forecast, early on friday morning, cloudy skies across eastern scotland, eastern and central england. but out towards the west, it's sunshine, could be a few

showers, maybe the odd thunderstorm across the southwest of england, early in the morning. and then, through the afternoon, it's pretty much what we've had in the last few days — so the cloud burns back to the coast, and just a few coastal strips there, hanging onto that cloud through the course of the afternoon, where it will be a little on the cool side. so maybe only 1a in newcastle and aberdeen. 0ut towards the west, it's sunny and warmer, temperatures could be nudging up into the mid—to—high—20s in one or two spots on friday. then, friday night into saturday, this is the weather map, a weather front approaching. that'll spark off a few showers and thunderstorms during the day on saturday. starts off really sunny everywhere, but then that risk of storms, i think, across parts of england and wales. some of the storms will bring torrential downpours, hail, and gusty winds, but very localised, and many of us will miss it altogether. temperatures low—to—mid—20s, high—20s in one or two spots — we could nudge up to 30 on saturday, which will be

a little too hot for some. then saturday evening, look at that, at 10pm, temperatures could still be in the high teens, perhaps even in excess of 20 celsius, in bigger towns and cities. this is sunday's forecast — lots of sunshine right from the word go, and then, that increasing risk of showers and thunderstorms across some western areas. how about the temperatures? again, typically in the mid—to—high—20s, so warm enough for most of us. bye— bye.