hello, i'm sumi somaskanda. thank you forjoining us. we start in ukraine, where russia continues its violent bombardment, despite its own domestic turmoil. the latest missile strike killed at least four and injured more than a0 others in the eastern ukrainian city of kramatorsk. it remains under ukrainian control but is close to russian—occupied parts of ukraine. moscow's attack struck a restaurant and shopping centre at a time when the region's governor said the area was crowded with civilians. a witness told the bbc he could hear people screaming as rescuers tried to reach them underneath the rubble. that witness, a belgian freelance journalist, also estimated that up to 80 staff members and customers were in the restaurant at the time of the strike, and said he fears the casualty numbers could be severe. president zelensky, meanwhile, said the attack showed the world that russia had to be defeated. the strikes comes after a weekend of instability in russia, where the wagner mercenary group nearly staged

a rebellion against the leadership of president vladimir putin. that mutiny came to a halt when wagner leader yevgeny prigozhin told his troops to stand down, just hundreds of kilometres away from russia's capital, moscow. the whereabouts of prigozhin were unknown until today. belarus's leader aleksandr lu kashenko announced that the wagner chief was flown to the capital of minsk, where he has started his exile. lukashenko discussed his interactions with prigozhin while speaking earlier. translation: al first round of talks lasted about _ translation: al first round of talks lasted about 30 _ translation: al first round of talks lasted about 30 minutes. talks lasted about 30 minutes and we talk mostly in swear words. almost only swear words. later it occurred to me that there were ten times more swear words than normal words. he said i'm not asking for a lot, let them hand me over, i also need to meet putin. you know putin as well as i do.

the strength of vladimir putin's grip on power has now been cast in doubt. earlier today he addressed the nation's military, telling them they had stopped a civil war following the aborted wagner rebellion, and insisted his rule was not weakened. putin also claimed today that wagner was wholly funded by the russian federal budget. he said in the past year alone, since the assault on ukraine, moscow had paid the wagner group around $1 billion in salaries. the us treasury department announced sanctions on four companies and one person who had deals with the wagner group, saying they exploit insecurity around the world. prigozhin was previously sanctioned by the us, eu, canada, and the uk. 0ur eastern europe correspondent sarah rainsford has been following these developments from warsaw. i think what we're seeing happening in today is all about trying to rewrite the narrative and to reassert this kind of image of vladimir putin as a man in control. to try to suggest that throughout this crisis he was decisive and he was on top of what was going

on. so we saw those images of him flanked by his security forces inside the kremlin compound and thanking them for what he said was that heroic action during the events of the weekend, remembering the pilots who actually shot down and killed during that much of the wagner mercenaries on moscow. although the circumstances of that are still unclear. so about, as i say, reasserting this idea that putin is strong. at the same time today we have been hearing more about what has been happening to yevgeny prigozhin. it has been confirmed by the belarusian president he has arrived in belarus, that his plane landed this morning, and that he will be given somewhere to stay there. he has been told that he can bed down there for a bit if he wants to and the belarussian's will essentially look after him. and, indeed, his aim forany look after him. and, indeed, his aim for any hugger militants who want to follow and join him militants who want to follow andjoin him in militants who want to follow and join him in belarus. what exactly they will do that isn't exactly they will do that isn't

exactly clear. mr lukashenko said they could join the belarusian army, the belarusian defence ministry. 0ne belarusian army, the belarusian defence ministry. one thing is clear he won't want an independent army, potentially a threat to his own power established in belarus. we also had some very colourful details from him about his own mediation effort during that crisis. i think most of that aimed at bringing up his role and trying again to shore up this idea that vladimir putin was always the man in control. i spoke to lieutenant colonel alexander vindman earlier, who served on the us national security council and is currently in kyiv. thank you again forjoining us on bbc news. you are in kyiv. what has been the reaction there in ukraine developments in russia? i there in ukraine developments in russia? ~ ., there in ukraine developments in russia?— in russia? i think a lot of --eole in russia? i think a lot of people continue - in russia? i think a lot of people continue to - in russia? i think a lot of. people continue to scratch their heads, frankly, as they do in western capitals in places around the world where people have been monitoring this war to understand what unfolded. i mean, the president

for a 24—hour insurrection, a short lived coup in russia is pretty thin. so people are trying to understand what the implications, quite frankly, what happened, and what the implications are long—term. what about ukraine itself? what did ukraine need to do to capitalise on the instability we have seen in russia? are you getting the sense that there is a change of strategy there in kyiv? i a change of strategy there in k iv? ., �* ~' a change of strategy there in k iv? ., �* ~ ., , kyiv? i don't think there was necessarily _ kyiv? i don't think there was necessarily a _ kyiv? i don't think there was necessarily a change - kyiv? i don't think there was necessarily a change in - necessarily a change in strategy, i think to the ukrainians were quite close to the matter, they certainly understood the dysfunction of this war. they had been watching this viewed between wagner, which has tens of thousands of troops, and one of the most formidable military units that the russian federation fielded and frankly gave quite a pounding to the ukrainians around the city of bakhmut, even though the ukrainians inflicted heavier

casualties the russians and hugger were able to seize it. they have been watching this viewed slowly boil over and the fact that vladimir putin, who could have at any moment put a stop to this, he could have said "ipay your bills, prigozhin, i don't want to hear anything from you, subordinate yourself. lowes prigozhin would have bent his knee. he did not do that. i think there was an expectation as we come to a flashpoint in and a lot of ways i think they are ready to seize the next initiative. i i think they are ready to seize the next initiative.— the next initiative. i want to oscar about _ the next initiative. i want to oscar about something - the next initiative. i want to - oscar about something happening on the battlefield. according to the uk, ukraine is likely to have recaptured some russian land that had been occupied since 2014. at the same time, the bbc spoke to ukrainian president zelensky last week and he said the counteroffensive is not going as quickly as they had hoped. what do you think is actually happening? i what do you think is actually happening?— what do you think is actually happening? what do you think is actually ha enin: ? ~' .,, ., happening? i think there was a little bit more _ happening? i think there was a little bit more nuanced - happening? i think there was a little bit more nuanced what i happening? i think there was a | little bit more nuanced what he said it did not go as quickly as they would have hoped, but

at the same time he did, because everybody tends to be a little bit of an optimist and tends to have overinflated estimates of how well they will do, but he also, as leader of his country, in a country that has been at war for almost a year and a half, recognises how difficult these things were and he also counselled him not to think of this as days, but in terms of weeks and months. so, yes, he kind of suppressed the extremely high expectations, but he also said that ukraine is going to win. for me that resonates. for me it is quite clear that the ukrainians will actually come over the course of the summer, my expectation has consistently been that over the course of the summer they will liberate swathes of territory. right now what we are seeing is almost a war of attrition, where the russians are being ground down by ukrainian advances. there were re ”ortin ukrainian advances. there were

reporting today _ ukrainian advances. there were reporting today that _ ukrainian advances. there were reporting today that russian - reporting today that russian struck kramatorsk and other areas, how do you expect russia to move forward without? it areas, how do you expect russia to move forward without?- to move forward without? it has been a many — to move forward without? it has been a many months _ to move forward without? it has been a many months long - to move forward without? it hasj been a many months long terror campaign. when russia can't succeed on the battlefield they shift to terrorising the population. is there a military benefit to it? not really. they were not successful in destroying ukraine's critical infrastructure and freezing the population out, they haven't been succeeding in —— successful in forcing any kind of capitulation. so this is mainlyjust lashing out. russia does not have much in the way of additional resources. it of additional resources. it would also like to ask you about something you tweeted out today about the role that the belarusian leader has been playing. is that listening to lukashenko it is a bit surreal, he is gloating about how he saved putin. the power dynamics seems to be shifting. lukashenko seems to be emboldened. what do you think

has actually changed in the power dynamic between these two men? in power dynamic between these two men? ., ., ., ., , men? in a fundamental way i think putin — men? in a fundamental way i think putin has _ men? in a fundamental way i think putin has lost - men? in a fundamental way i think putin has lost some - men? in a fundamental way i think putin has lost some ofl think putin has lost some of his lustre, some of his strongman misty. he is still pretty firmly in charge. i think he has some doubts in his own mind about how reliable the military is, how reliable the population is, his office and what happened how warmly wagner was welcome. he is not a man he was welcome. he is not a man he was a week ago, has definitely lost that lustre and i think he is weaker and he is weaker in the eyes of strongman that expect, have a particular kind of expectation for behaviour. you don't allow things to boil over, that results in an insurrection.— over, that results in an insurrection. ., , ., insurrection. final question, what are _ insurrection. final question, what are the _ insurrection. final question, what are the global - insurrection. final question, i what are the global indications of all of this? do you think, for example, the instability in russia could have consequences for china's relationship with russia? i for china's relationship with russia? ., . for china's relationship with russia? ~' ., , ., russia? i think there are some indications _ russia? i think there are some indications that _ russia? i think there are some indications that already - russia? i think there are some indications that already mightl indications that already might be true. china has enormous

footprints around the world. the ambassador to the uk mount and, you know, advanced the notion that china supports the territorial integrity of ukraine. i think he fact is that russia looks weak. russia has not delivered on this quick lightning war that putin promised early on in the days before the war unfolded. this war has had costs for china in terms of stability and trade and inflation and things like that. and the chinese are not looking to back a loser. so the weaker that putin looks, the weaker that putin looks, the weaker that putin looks, the weaker that russia looks, i think the more definitive china is likely to be with regards to supporting ukraine and pressing china to potentially negotiate. lieutenant colonel alexander vindman thank you so much for joining us. vindman thank you so much for joining us— in other news: an area of tropical forest the size of switzerland

was lost last year, according to new data. in that time, the tropics lost 10% more rainforest than 2021. this increased deforestation comes just a year after global leaders vowed to halt and reverse forest loss. five cases of malaria have been detected in the us states of florida and texas. it's the first time the disease has been locally spread in the us in 20 years, according to the centers for disease control and prevention. but the health agency says the risk of contracting malaria in the us still remains low, as most cases are contracted by people travelling outside the country. a report by the usjustice department has found significant misconduct by federal prison staff contributed to the suicide of the high—profile sex offender, jeffrey epstein. it said 13 staff were complicit in failing to check on epstein in the hours before he was found hanging in his cell in new york. the report found systemic failures, including severe understaffing and lax maintenance of surveillance cameras. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news.

voiceover: bbc news - bringing you different stories from across the uk. it's a dirtyjob but these paddle boarders are ready to do it, litter picking on the thames as they cruise along. around 100 volunteers are taking part to raise awareness, and clear some of the plastic pollution is clogging our waterways. trying to find as much plastic pollution as we can. we find all sorts of strange things, signs from the river, from the roads. i found laptops before, bags, all sorts of things, bones, things you really don't

the top court in the us ruled today on election laws ahead of the 2024 presidential election. in a 6—3 decision on tuesday, the supreme court rejected the independent state legislature theory, which would have given state legislatures almost unlimited power to decide federal election rules, including the passage of voter suppression laws and the drawing of partisan districts without interference from state courts. it is a theory favoured by conservatives and would have been a radical overhaul of america's election laws. the ruling comes after monday's decision that cleared the way for louisiana's congressional map drawn by republican lawmakers to be challenged, and for another majority black district to be added. that's came just weeks after the court approved the same action to be taken in the neighbouring

state of alabama. in the alabama ruling, also known as allen v milligan, the bench said the state's newly enacted congressional map violated the voting rights act of 1965, which outlawed the discriminatory voting practices adopted in many southern states. i understood that we looked at the history and traditions of the history and traditions of the constitution, at what the framers and founders thought about and when i drilled down to that level of analysis, it became clear to me that the framers themselves adopted the equal protection clause, the 14th amendment, the 15th amendment, in a race conscious way, that they were in fact trying to ensure that people who had been discriminated against, the freed man, during the reconstruction period, were actually brought equal to everyone else in society. —— freedmen. everyone else in society. -- freedmen— freedmen. that was ketan'i brown jackson's i freedmen. that was ketan'i brown jackson's oral i freedmen. that was ketanji i brown jackson's oral argument brown jackson's oral argument for that case.

joining me now to discuss all of this in—studio is shan wu, former federal prosecutor and emily birnbaum, bloomberg legal reporter, and in the screen to my right is justin hansford, director of the thurgood marshall civil rights center at howard university. this would have given states almost unlimited power on election law. what was the judges' reasoning in their decision?— judges' reasoning in their decision? ., decision? they said that, you know, decision? they said that, you know. the — decision? they said that, you know, the state _ decision? they said that, you know, the state had - decision? they said that, you know, the state had argued l decision? they said that, you i know, the state had argued that the republican lawmakers in the state had argued that the constitution basically enabled this, this sort of off the wall theory that a lot of people have taken issue with, essentially that state legislature can always override state courts. they said this

right exists in the constitution and the supreme court said that is incorrect at all, that isn't the reading of our election laws that the founders intended, so they struck it down.— founders intended, so they struck it down. what did you think of the _ struck it down. what did you think of the ruling, - struck it down. what did you think of the ruling, shan? i l think of the ruling, shan? i had a lot of relieved, because it seems_ had a lot of relieved, because it seems it really could have led in — it seems it really could have led in its _ it seems it really could have led in its extreme form tojust a wholesale rewrite of the election results. i think it is very— election results. i think it is very much_ election results. i think it is very much what some of donald trump's — very much what some of donald trump's strategists were banking on kite that they could overturn — banking on kite that they could overturn the original election. there — overturn the original election. there is— overturn the original election. there is a _ overturn the original election. there is a lot you could say about — there is a lot you could say about what roberts was trying to do — about what roberts was trying to do to — about what roberts was trying to do to erode the court's credibility. but there is relief _ credibility. but there is relief. , , ., credibility. but there is relief. , , , relief. justin, did you sense that same _ relief. justin, did you sense that same relief? _ relief. justin, did you sense that same relief? i- relief. justin, did you sense that same relief? i did. i relief. justin, did you sense | that same relief? i did. one thin to that same relief? i did. one thing to keep _ that same relief? i did. one thing to keep in _ that same relief? i did. one thing to keep in mind i that same relief? i did. one thing to keep in mind in i thing to keep in mind in terms of context. _ thing to keep in mind in terms of context, this _ thing to keep in mind in terms of context, this is _ thing to keep in mind in terms of context, this is ten - thing to keep in mind in terms of context, this is ten years i of context, this is ten years after— of context, this is ten years after the _ of context, this is ten years after the supreme - of context, this is ten years after the supreme court- after the supreme court essentially— after the supreme court essentially gutted i after the supreme court essentially gutted the i after the supreme court- essentially gutted the voting rights— essentially gutted the voting rights act _ essentially gutted the voting rights act in _ essentially gutted the voting rights act in the _ essentially gutted the voting rights act in the shelby- essentially gutted the voting . rights act in the shelby county decision — rights act in the shelby county

decision we _ rights act in the shelby county decision. we come _ rights act in the shelby county decision. we come out - rights act in the shelby county decision. we come out of- rights act in the shelby county decision. we come out of a i decision. we come out of a legisiator— decision. we come out of a legislator in— decision. we come out of a legislator in north - decision. we come out of a legislator in north carolina| legislator in north carolina that— legislator in north carolina that about _ legislator in north carolina that about six _ legislator in north carolina that about six years - legislator in north carolina that about six years ago i legislator in north carolina i that about six years ago was going — that about six years ago was going to _ that about six years ago was going to have _ that about six years ago was going to have discriminatedl going to have discriminated against _ going to have discriminated against black— going to have discriminated against black voters - going to have discriminated against black voters in i going to have discriminated against black voters in the i against black voters in the voter— against black voters in the voter id _ against black voters in the voter id department- against black voters in the voter id department with. voter id department with surgical— voter id department with surgical precision. - voter id department with surgical precision. so i voter id department with| surgical precision. so this particular— surgical precision. so this particular legislature, i surgical precision. so this i particular legislature, trying to create _ particular legislature, trying to create a _ particular legislature, trying to create a mechanism i particular legislature, trying. to create a mechanism where they— to create a mechanism where they would _ to create a mechanism where they would be _ to create a mechanism where they would be unchecked, i they would be unchecked, essentially, _ they would be unchecked, essentially, was _ they would be unchecked, essentially, was a - they would be unchecked, essentially, was a very, i they would be unchecked, i essentially, was a very, very problematic— essentially, was a very, very problematic notion. - essentially, was a very, very problematic notion. so i essentially, was a very, very| problematic notion. so many essentially, was a very, very. problematic notion. so many of us are — problematic notion. so many of us are really— problematic notion. so many of us are really breathing - problematic notion. so many of us are really breathing a - problematic notion. so many of us are really breathing a sigh. us are really breathing a sigh of relief. _ us are really breathing a sigh of relief, although _ us are really breathing a sigh of relief, although we - us are really breathing a sigh of relief, although we are i of relief, although we are keeping _ of relief, although we are keeping it— of relief, although we are keeping it in— of relief, although we are keeping it in context, i of relief, although we are j keeping it in context, and of relief, although we are i keeping it in context, and this is more — keeping it in context, and this is more so _ keeping it in context, and this is more so upholding - keeping it in context, and this is more so upholding the i keeping it in context, and this. is more so upholding the status quo is more so upholding the status guo great— is more so upholding the status guo great leap _ is more so upholding the status quo great leap forward. - is more so upholding the status quo great leap forward.- quo great leap forward. three 'ustices quo great leap forward. three justices voted _ quo great leap forward. three justices voted against. i quo great leap forward. three justices voted against. what l justices voted against. what are they saying their descent? i think one of the concerning things is that chiefjustice roberts still gives the door open a little bit, saying there still could be some reason to rein in the state court. and i think one thing to keep in mind with that is the default position is really that it ends up position is really that it ends up letting the supreme court decided these sorts of big

issues. like in bush versus drawer. and i still see that was some alarm. —— gore. you have on the descent side some of the more extreme folks that are all in favour of the idea that the state courts, state legislature should be totally unreviewable. i legislature should be totally unreviewable.— unreviewable. i want to get our unreviewable. i want to get your take — unreviewable. i want to get your take on _ unreviewable. i want to get your take on that _ unreviewable. i want to get your take on that as i unreviewable. i want to get your take on that as well i unreviewable. i want to get your take on that as well of leaving the door open. did you see that in the descent? what should we take away from that? dissent. i did see that as welt _ dissent. i did see that as welt this _ dissent. i did see that as well. this is _ dissent. i did see that as well. this is an _ dissent. i did see that as well. this is an ongoing i well. this is an ongoing battle _ well. this is an ongoing battle. justin— well. this is an ongoing battle. justin cavanaghl well. this is an ongoing i battle. justin cavanagh was well. this is an ongoing - battle. justin cavanagh was one of the _ battle. justin cavanagh was one of the surprise _ battle. justin cavanagh was one of the surprise those _ battle. justin cavanagh was one of the surprise those in - battle. justin cavanagh was one of the surprise those in favour i of the surprise those in favour here — of the surprise those in favour here many— of the surprise those in favour here. many court _ of the surprise those in favour here. many court watchers i of the surprise those in favour l here. many court watchers were hoping — here. many court watchers were hoping that _ here. many court watchers were hoping thatjustice _ here. many court watchers were hoping that justice barrett i hoping thatjustice barrett would _ hoping thatjustice barrett would be _ hoping thatjustice barrett would be the _ hoping thatjustice barrett would be the first - hoping thatjustice barrett would be the first boat i hoping thatjustice barrett would be the first boat as| would be the first boat as welt _ would be the first boat as welt we _ would be the first boat as well. we see _ would be the first boat as well. we see a _ would be the first boat as well. we see a break- would be the first boat as well. we see a break in l would be the first boat as i well. we see a break in the 6—3 divide _ well. we see a break in the 6—3 divide that— well. we see a break in the 6—3 divide that most _ well. we see a break in the 6—3 divide that most of— well. we see a break in the 6—3 divide that most of us - well. we see a break in the 6—3 divide that most of us had i divide that most of us had predicted _

divide that most of us had predicted would _ divide that most of us had predicted would hold i divide that most of us had predicted would hold for. divide that most of us had. predicted would hold for all divide that most of us had i predicted would hold for all of these — predicted would hold for all of these civil_ predicted would hold for all of these civil rights _ predicted would hold for all of these civil rights then - predicted would hold for all of these civil rights then cases. i these civil rights then cases. -- fifth — these civil rights then cases. -- fifth vote~ _ these civil rights then cases. —— fifth vote. just _ these civil rights then cases. —— fifth vote. just as - these civil rights then cases. —— fifth vote. just as who - these civil rights then cases. —— fifth vote. just as who is. —— fifth vote. just as who is sometimes _ —— fifth vote. just as who is sometimes a _ —— fifth vote. just as who is sometimes a swinging - —— fifth vote. just as who isi sometimes a swinging vote, —— fifth vote. just as who is - sometimes a swinging vote, that is an— sometimes a swinging vote, that is an optimistic— sometimes a swinging vote, that is an optimistic view— sometimes a swinging vote, that is an optimistic view of— sometimes a swinging vote, that is an optimistic view of it. - is an optimistic view of it. but — is an optimistic view of it. but it— is an optimistic view of it. but it is— is an optimistic view of it. but it is an _ is an optimistic view of it. but it is an interesting - but it is an interesting development - but it is an interesting development and - but it is an interesting development and i- but it is an interesting l development and i think but it is an interesting - development and i think there is more — development and i think there is more to— development and i think there is more to come. _ development and i think there is more to come. do - development and i think there is more to come.— development and i think there is more to come. do you agree, emil ? i is more to come. do you agree, emily? 1 agree- _ is more to come. do you agree, emily? i agree. i— is more to come. do you agree, emily? i agree. ithink- is more to come. do you agree, emily? i agree. i think that - is more to come. do you agree, emily? i agree. i think that we i emily? i agree. i think that we have seen _ emily? i agree. i think that we have seen that _ emily? i agree. i think that we have seen that these - emily? i agree. i think that we have seen that these election | have seen that these election -retated _ have seen that these election —related cases fall along interesting kinds of lines. but i interesting kinds of lines. but idon't — interesting kinds of lines. but i don't think, necessarily, idon't think, necessarily, that— i don't think, necessarily, that we _ i don't think, necessarily, that we can glean, you know, that— that we can glean, you know, that legal— that we can glean, you know, that legal experts have been wrong — that legal experts have been wrong in _ that legal experts have been wrong in their predictions about— wrong in their predictions about the court likely overturning affirmative action or siding _ overturning affirmative action or siding with the website designer who doesn't want to make — designer who doesn't want to make webpages for gay couples. those _ make webpages for gay couples. those are — make webpages for gay couples. those are just a couple of the important _ those are just a couple of the important civil rights related cases — important civil rights related cases that we still haven't got decisions _ cases that we still haven't got decisions on and i'm not sure if the —

decisions on and i'm not sure if the breakdown really tells us a — if the breakdown really tells us a tot _ if the breakdown really tells us a lot about how that will go — us a lot about how that will no. us a lot about how that will i o, , ., us a lot about how that will go. there is a statement from chief go. there is a statement from chiefjustice — go. there is a statement from chiefjustice john _ go. there is a statement from chiefjustice john roberts. - chief justice john roberts. that's where we can chiefjusticejohn roberts. that's where we can bring that up. he writes "the elections clause doesn't prevent legislators from the judicial review". that is what we had from the chiefjustice. how much do you think the efforts to overturn the 2020 election, the politics of this, wait on the politics of this, wait on the decision? i the politics of this, wait on the decision?— the decision? i think it is hard to _ the decision? i think it is hard to see _ the decision? i think it is hard to see legally, - the decision? i think it is hard to see legally, butl the decision? i think it is hard to see legally, but i think you can seejustice roberts really trying to pull together the majority, because he is aware that the court's credibility has really tanked. you can see him trying by some means to try to cobble together something just to keep the status quo, rather than make it look like completely going over the precipice. look like completely going over the precipice-— the precipice. yes, justin, i would ask— the precipice. yes, justin, i would ask you _ the precipice. yes, justin, i would ask you about - the precipice. yes, justin, i would ask you about some | the precipice. yes, justin, i. would ask you about some of the precipice. yes, justin, i- would ask you about some of the decisions we saw a little

earlier. two critical voting rights cases in alabama and louisiana. we mentioned that before we started the interview. what precedent do you think that these cases that? do you think we could see similar rulings other states? you know, ialso similar rulings other states? you know, i also am cautious in terms _ you know, i also am cautious in terms of— you know, i also am cautious in terms of these _ you know, i also am cautious in terms of these other— you know, i also am cautious in terms of these other rulings - terms of these other rulings because, _ terms of these other rulings because, again, _ terms of these other rulings because, again, these - terms of these other rulings because, again, these were| terms of these other rulings - because, again, these were also rulings— because, again, these were also rulings that _ because, again, these were also rulings that avoided _ rulings that avoided catastrophe. - rulings that avoided catastrophe. goingl rulings that avoided - catastrophe. going back to rulings that avoided _ catastrophe. going back to the ruling — catastrophe. going back to the ruling today, _ catastrophe. going back to the ruling today, upholding - catastrophe. going back to the ruling today, upholding the - ruling today, upholding the principle _ ruling today, upholding the principle of _ ruling today, upholding the principle ofjudicial- ruling today, upholding the principle ofjudicial review, | principle ofjudicial review, which, _ principle ofjudicial review, which, according _ principle ofjudicial review, which, according to - principle ofjudicial review, which, according to the - which, according to the opinion, _ which, according to the opinion, predates - which, according to the opinion, predates evenj which, according to the - opinion, predates even the constitution, _ opinion, predates even the constitution, starting - opinion, predates even the constitution, starting from | constitution, starting from your— constitution, starting from your side _ constitution, starting from your side of— constitution, starting from your side of the _ constitution, starting from your side of the pond. - constitution, starting from your side of the pond. so i constitution, starting from - your side of the pond. so these are old — your side of the pond. so these are old principles _ your side of the pond. so these are old principles that - your side of the pond. so these are old principles that are - are old principles that are being _ are old principles that are being upheld, _ are old principles that are being upheld, not - are old principles that are being upheld, not a - are old principles that are being upheld, not a leapi being upheld, not a leap forward _ being upheld, not a leap forward per— being upheld, not a leap forward per se, - being upheld, not a leap forward perse, in- being upheld, not a leap . forward per se, in anything except— forward per se, in anything except for— forward per se, in anything except for our— forward per se, in anything except for our low- except for our low expectations, - except for our low expectations, i. except for our low- expectations, i suppose, except for our low— expectations, i suppose, from a voting _ expectations, i suppose, from a voting rights— expectations, i suppose, from a voting rights perspective. - expectations, i suppose, from a voting rights perspective. but. voting rights perspective. but ithink— voting rights perspective. but i think perhaps _ voting rights perspective. but i think perhaps this _ voting rights perspective. but i think perhaps this was - voting rights perspective. but i think perhaps this was a - voting rights perspective. but. i think perhaps this was a term on the — i think perhaps this was a term on the voting _ i think perhaps this was a term on the voting rights _ i think perhaps this was a term on the voting rights act - i think perhaps this was a term on the voting rights act side l on the voting rights act side that was— on the voting rights act side that was a _ on the voting rights act side that was a pleasant - on the voting rights act side that was a pleasant surprisei that was a pleasant surprise for many— that was a pleasant surprise for many will _ that was a pleasant surprise for many will give _ that was a pleasant surprise for many will give people i

that was a pleasant surprise i for many will give people hope that in— for many will give people hope that in 2024— for many will give people hope that in 2024 we _ for many will give people hope that in 2024 we will— for many will give people hope that in 2024 we will have - for many will give people hope that in 2024 we will have a - that in 2024 we will have a more — that in 2024 we will have a more reasonable _ that in 2024 we will have a more reasonable election. more reasonable election process _ more reasonable election process— more reasonable election rocess. ., process. something you mention 'ust a process. something you mention just a moment — process. something you mention just a moment ago, _ process. something you mention just a moment ago, shan, - process. something you mention just a moment ago, shan, how l justa moment ago, shan, how important you think that cases that we have just discussed, and in terms of the court's reputation? i and in terms of the court's reputation?— and in terms of the court's reputation? i think they are really important. _ reputation? i think they are really important. it - reputation? i think they are really important. it is - reputation? i think they are really important. it is at - reputation? i think they are i really important. it is at such a low point right now, the reputation of the court. when you havejustices reputation of the court. when you have justices saying things that we are not political hacks, making it clear that they know people think of them that way. but also questions about the lack of a code of ethics, all the financial questions that look like conflicts of interest. i think justice roberts is aware of the problems for the court. usually the chiefjustice is the gatekeeper, trying to keep things in the middle, making sure the court isn't too radical. and it is this hard situation to him.- radical. and it is this hard situation to him. justices have made a lot _ situation to him. justices have made a lot of _

situation to him. justices have made a lot of headlines - situation to him. justices have made a lot of headlines in - made a lot of headlines in recent months. emily, this is a conservative court at the moment but they haven't always ruled as people might have expected. what have we learned about the justices from some of these rulings? latte about the justices from some of these rulings?— these rulings? we have learnt that justice — these rulings? we have learnt thatjustice brett _ these rulings? we have learnt thatjustice brett cavanagh . these rulings? we have learntl thatjustice brett cavanagh was that justice brett cavanagh was more _ that justice brett cavanagh was more of— that justice brett cavanagh was more of a — that justice brett cavanagh was more of a wildcard than was expected. we have also learnt that supreme court justice jackson— that supreme court justice jackson is unspoken and willing sometimes to partner with people _ sometimes to partner with people as conservative as justice _ people as conservative as justice gorsuch. we are seeing strange — justice gorsuch. we are seeing strange alliances between liberals and conservatives that are bucking some of our assumptions about what these cases— assumptions about what these cases might look like. the bi aer cases might look like. the bigger stage _ cases might look like. the bigger stage in _ cases might look like. the bigger stage in case - cases might look like. tie: bigger stage in case we are waiting for is that on affirmative action. given some of the things we have sent you what you expect to see? i of the things we have sent you what you expect to see? i have ve low what you expect to see? i have very low expectations. - what you expect to see? i have very low expectations. one - what you expect to see? i have| very low expectations. one way to look— very low expectations. one way to look at — very low expectations. one way to look at these _ very low expectations. one way to look at these decisions - very low expectations. one way to look at these decisions is - to look at these decisions is sort — to look at these decisions is sort of— to look at these decisions is sort of a _ to look at these decisions is sort of a softening - to look at these decisions is sort of a softening of the i sort of a softening of the blow, _ sort of a softening of the blow, which— sort of a softening of the

blow, which many- sort of a softening of the blow, which many of- sort of a softening of the blow, which many of us i sort of a softening of the i blow, which many of us feel sort of a softening of the - blow, which many of us feel is inevitable. _ blow, which many of us feel is inevitable, certainly— blow, which many of us feel is inevitable, certainly from - inevitable, certainly from affirmative _ inevitable, certainly from affirmative action, - inevitable, certainly from . affirmative action, certainly probably _ affirmative action, certainly probably with _ affirmative action, certainly probably with student - affirmative action, certainly probably with student debt| affirmative action, certainly. probably with student debt as well — probably with student debt as well most _ probably with student debt as well. most of _ probably with student debt as well. most of us _ probably with student debt as well. most of us are - probably with student debt as well. most of us are holding i well. most of us are holding our breath, _ well. most of us are holding our breath, waiting - well. most of us are holding our breath, waiting for- our breath, waiting for opinions _ our breath, waiting for opinions on _ our breath, waiting for opinions on those - our breath, waiting for opinions on those two| our breath, waiting for- opinions on those two cases especially _ opinions on those two cases especially-— opinions on those two cases eseciall . . , , u, especially. that is the second bi . especially. that is the second big case- _ especially. that is the second big case. what _ especially. that is the second big case. what is _ especially. that is the second big case. what is your - especially. that is the second big case. what is your take, i big case. what is your take, shan? i big case. what is your take, shan? ., _ big case. what is your take, shan? ., ., shan? i would say on the affirmative _ shan? i would say on the affirmative action - shan? i would say on the affirmative action we - shan? i would say on the affirmative action we are | affirmative action we are pretty much looking at a wholesale loss on that point, i think. ithink wholesale loss on that point, i think. i think what will be left after that is how employers, as schools in particular will try to manage the ruling try to manage diversity, the way it is implemented, i think this will be quite problematic.- be quite problematic. your thoughts? _ be quite problematic. your thoughts? l _ be quite problematic. your thoughts? i think- be quite problematic. your thoughts? i think the - be quite problematic. your . thoughts? i think the basically most experts _ thoughts? i think the basically most experts think _ thoughts? i think the basically most experts think that - thoughts? i think the basically most experts think that they i most experts think that they are going to end affirmative action— are going to end affirmative action and dominate in higher education within the question becomes what about race neutral actions _ becomes what about race neutral actions that have the effect of improving diversity at colleges

and universities? they will be the most _ and universities? they will be the most extreme version. that is what — the most extreme version. that is what will be really looking out — is what will be really looking out it— is what will be really looking out. . ., . ~ out. it be an exciting week, watching — out. it be an exciting week, watching the _ out. it be an exciting week, watching the scotus. - emily, john, shan, thank you for your opinions. you are watching bbc news. stay with us. hello there. it looks like today will be the warmest day of the week, feeling quite humid, especially across england and wales, and it's across england and wales where we should tend to stay dry for much of the day. but there will be a band of rain pushing in across scotland and northern ireland that will continue its journey eastwards during tonight. so, we're in this wedge of warm and humid air, especially for england and wales. this cold front, though, will be pushing rain initially into northern ireland and then

into scotland as we run through the day and behind it, it'll turn brighter, but there'll be some cooler, fresher air here and the rain will tend to ease down as it pushes its way eastwards. but much of england and wales will stay rather cloudy, generally dry, bar the odd heavy shower and some glimmers of brightness here in there. but it will be warm and muggy, 22 to 25 degrees here. but the mid to high teens, further north and west where it brightens up behind the rain band. but through wednesday night, it looks like that rain band then starts to pepper up as it reaches the midlands, southern and eastern england. so send the rain may turn out to be heavy by the end of the night. and again, it'll be quite a warm, muggy night in the southeast corner, much cooler and fresher further north and west. this is the pressure chart for thursday. there's that weather front, very slow to clear from the southeast. so, it could be quite a wet day here. but elsewhere, it's brighter start to have sunshine around. one or two showers will develop

as the cloud bubbles up mainly across the north and west of scotland. it'll be breezier, but it'll be wet across east anglia in the southeast, i think, for much of the day. in fact, some very welcome rain here. of course, temperatures are lower across the board, away from the very far southeast. we're looking at 15 to 18 in the north and the west, 20 to 22 for much of england and wales. for friday, though, another set of weather fronts start to spread down across the country thanks to low pressure. so it'll tend to stay quite cloudy and damp, but more isobars on the charts, too. so a breezier day to come on friday, especially around irish sea coast across scotland and northern ireland. it's here where we'll see most of the rain, the heaviest of the rain. but we also some patchy rain pushing into western england and wales. further east that you are tending to stay dry with variable cloud, maybe some glimmers of brightness which could push temperatures up to 22 degrees. otherwise for most, it's the mid to high teens, so feeling fairly fresh for the time of year. into the weekend, low pressure continues to bring sunshine and showers mainly to the north and the west of the country. better chance of staying drier and a little bit warmer further south and east.

to the bbc news website.

a report suggests china will see an outflow of over 13,000 millionaires this year. we speak to its author to find out why. and we take a look at the business of drag and why this could be a challenging thing to run in singapore.

hello and welcome to asia