egregiously wrong. 5-4 on the question of overturning roe, 6-3 on the mississippi law. chief jon john roberts and not go along with that. he says that decides too much. the dissent is blistering, says it's a sad day for the court and for the millions of americans who now lose a constitutional right that the court once granted and took away. i would notice one other thing the attorney general of missouri has now just tweeted that it's the first state to let its trigger law spring into action, that the abortion is now banned as of today in mississippi -- or in missouri. it was one of 13 states that had these trigger laws on the books that said abortion would become illegal once the supreme court ruled. he already issued a letter declaring that's the law of the land it's the first state to do this. just a couple of other things. justice kavanaugh in his concurrence today says, in his

opinion, he does not believe it would be constitutional for one state to bar women in that state or make it a crime for women this that state where abortion is illegal to go into another state where abortion is legal and get that service so of course because he is one of the five to go along on overturning roe v. wade, that has to be considered a controlling statement from him and the other thing is there is nothing in this decision that says that states can constitutionally or need to have an exception in their laws for rape or incest, and the decision sent says that's one of the problems with today's decision, there is no longer any constitutional requirement that states make exceptions in their laws for rape or incest, shep. >> did you read anything into, pete, these back-to-back decisions, the new york state gun law and then this dobbs v

jackson women's health do they say anything about the future >> they say look to the history. the analysis in the gun case and this case today, remember what alito says is if the constitutional right is not explicitly spelled out in the constitution, the only way to find it in the 14th amendment is it if it's something that is deeply root inside the nation's history and tradition and part of the concept of ordered liberty. he said abortion doesn't pass that test. now many have said, neither does same-sex marriage, the right to contraception, the right to interracial marriage, the right to refuse medical treatment, so many other things. the entertainment is still in the majority opinion here that was in the draft that came out in may that was written in february that says nothing about today's decision should affect those precedents because alito says abortion is different there is a moral dimension because there is a potential life involved, and justice kavanaugh also says the same

thing. he says overruling roe does not mean the overruling of these precedents, although justice clarence thomas says in his opinion the court should look at those other decisions that were based on this notion of substantive due process in the 14th amendment but both of them, the gun case also said, the gun control test is, is it part -- was an historically recognized. so it's the same kind of analysis, shep >> pete williams, thanks so much for the ruling and the analysis. greatly appreciate it. from our research team, i have gotten these to sort of follow on what pete williams was saying abortion would be banned without exception for the health of the mother so banned in all cases health of a mother or not in arkansas, idaho, mississippi, north dakota, oklahoma and south dakota and without exceptions for rape in arkansas, kentucky, louisiana, missouri, north

dakota, south dakota, tennessee and telkz and without exceptions for incest in arkansas, kentucky, louisiana, mississippi, missouri, north dakota, south dakota, tennessee, and texas. if not at this moment, will be soon enough. brie jackson is a reporter for our station nbc 4 washington she is outside the supreme court where i understand there are people on both sides making their views heard. >> yeah, and this is something we have been seeing the past couple of weeks as people waited for these cases to come down but one thing that was clear today was that both sides were out there. but there was once that ruling came down a cheer coming from those who have been waiting for this day for roe v. wade to be overturned and then news from those who have really feared this day what we notice now is that ever since that ruling has come down, the voices of those who are against abortion are louder.

it seems like they are cheering, their voices are much louder an those are the ones we are hearing out here today >> bree, have you noticed a change in crowd size we wondered as we were getting the opinions from the supreme court, they start at 10:00 every morning and until the end there, been a small crowd, we always wondered will people be coming out on this day whenever it came i wonder what you are seeing. >> reporter: yeah, the crowd size was bigger today, in particular compared to yesterday when it was raining a little bit. there was a good amount of people out but it's important to note that the justices had several cases to go through. so as the days started to pass, you could start seeing the crowds getting a little bigger because it was either going to happen sooner, sooner or later, you know so it's one of those things compared to yesterday the crowd size is bigger today and there were more passionate today before that ruling came out and then certainly once the

ruling was -- came out, that roe v. wade was overturned you could feel the energy from some of the crowd drop while others started to praise that decision. >> brie jackson from our station nbc 4 washington thanks for contributing. let's turn to david de pietro now, constitutional law expert and former prosecutor. could you give us a top line on what we should expect from the states, the individual states now? >> you are going to see states like my state, florida, where you can go to the ballot and change our state constitution. so i think you are going to see a litany of different things happen one of the things to look at is whether prosecutors in these states are going to actually prosecute these crimes of abortion so i think you are going to see a lot of division on this. now, at the local level, now that -- and the federal level, there is no more constitutional right to an abortion it's interesting that the court admitted that the courts errored

before citing plessy v. ferguson saying we got it wrong before. that's the separate but equal document in the 1800s. now they say they got in egregiously wrong. we will see how important local elections are in this country, how important prosecutors are in this country, how important sheriffs are in this country because you will see whether these laws will be enforced on a local level. >> the rules are different state to state, right? and who is available for punishment and the level of punishment varies across the country. for instance, in some states you will be able to sue in some way the abortion provider, the person who is receiving the procedure, even an uber driver in some cases who might facilitate the transfer to such a facility or to such an end game if that uber driver, for instance, knew that they were taking someone to have an

abortion those rules are going to differ, right? in some cases they will be more extreme than others? >> exactly and you are going to see jurors put to the test now. will jurors actually convict people like physicians and people that receive abortions? are they going to go that far? it's hard to say because i'll use florida as an example because it's a purple state. could it pass referendum in our constitution to allow a state constitutional right to abortion, but then again still have a majority republicans running the state? so there could be a dichotomy in this country of every state has very different laws, like we have many different issues in the country so abortion from county to county or from state to state could be lookeding very different on what you can and cannot do. it really is going to strengthen in the sense of how important local elections are in this country and often are overlooked because we seem to focus on what

happens in washington, d.c now what happens in town halls is going to be extremely important like we saw with the school board debates and other things happening in this country, what the supreme court did today is whether you are for it or against it, they just gave the strength to local officials and local state representatives and state senators and governors, they gave them a strength of power that they once didn't have on this issue. you are going see local elections become more important, not less important, than d.c. >> it's interesting what you are saying to focus specifically on where you are in florida when you think about florida and its politics and its makeup, you see a world in the panhandle, you walton, the rest of those counties between pensacola and, say, apalachicola, that will be one thing. from tampa to daytona beach, that's another then the east coast of florida, miami-dade, broward, palm beach, another thing. then southwest florida with lee

and gulf you could see a bunch of different states within a state there. and competing viewpoints and competing individuals. >> exactly i live in broward county, which is the most blue of the state of florida, which is now going more red. so we have a prosecutor here, he of the democratic party, he going to prosecute this when the governor and the other side of the aisle is pushing maybe potentially to make this completely illegal so you are going to have a big fight over this. and you are going to have issues of whether people are going to actually prosecute this law in states like florida, even though the state might ban it i think this debate just reopened -- if but call it a wound, it just reopened the wound of this debate of abortion and it will become more and more involved now that there is so many people, so many elected officials are going to be

involved and their opinions are going to matter as to what they decide to do or not do and their respective rights. >> david de pietro, it's a reminder, no matter how we feel on this position, our local politics is important and for us to have our views embraced or noticed. we have to get out and be involved in the process in one degree or another. we have a live picture out of jackson, mississippi, the state capital. this is where all of this began. the case was dobbs vs. jackson women's health it started back in 2018. u.s. district court for the southern district of mississippi ruled in favor of the clinic when it challenged then mississippi's health officer, thomas dobbs, he is the chief health officer for the state, appealed to the u.s. court of appeals for the fifth circuit, and a year later that court affirmed the lower court's ruling that dobbs v women's health, that was

unconstitutional, that they could not close down that one abortion -- a facility that provides abortions in the state of mississippi in june of 2020, thomas dobbs again appealed this time to the supreme court and in may of last year the supreme court agreed to hear the case and the court heard oral arguments in december of last year we presume that jackson you are women's health, which is the only abortion provider in the state of mississippi, will be shut down today, if it is not already. the governor there in mississippi had made it clear that they would act expeditiously once the supreme court ruled. >> and since it has, one would assume he would as well. a cnbc washington correspondent eamon javers in washington eamon, any more reaction coming in what are we expecting the next few hours? i expect to hear from republican leadership shortly. >> absolutely. and also from the white house. we have not heard from president biden just yet you imagine that they have

statements ready to go this was a much anticipated ruling so just a matter of time before they roll out the playbook here politically. and speaking of politics, i want to turn back who what nancy pelosi said just a short time ago because she is raising the spegter now for democratic voters of the possibility that a republican house and senate could pass a national law banning abortion there is a political reason she is doing that. democrats have long said privately if you talk to democratic strategists in this town that a silver lining politically for them of this ruling would be that the backlash to it could be significant enough to turn around their fortunes going into the november midterm elections that is, in november democrats are expected to lose and take a thumping politically here basd on the numbers we have seen this year this ruling might be a thing that changes the momentum calculation on that. you saw nancy pelosi peeking directly to this, saying that abortion is on the ballot nationally in november

if you don't want a federal law passed by republicans to ban abortion, then you've got to support democrats in the fall. that is a rallying cry to democratic voters and voters who don't agree with what happened today. the reason democrats will feel politically they have the upper hand on that is expressed in the gallop polls i pulled up a poll on abortion support in the united states 550% 50% wants it to be illegal under certain circumstances. 35% want abortion to be legal under any circumstance and just 13% want abortion to be illegal in all circumstances so the difference between 35 and 13, a 40 point difference in terms of those who want abortion to be legal under any circumstances and those who want to be illegal in all circumstances. that is a huge difference in american politics and that is a large group of people, the democrats feel they might be able to mo mobilize going into

november that's why you heard nancy pelosi say abortions on the ballot in november we will see if has the impact that political analysts thought it might you can see the energy outside the supreme court. the question will be now will that energy flow through to the ballot box in november or will the trends hold that were deeply, deeply anti-democratic going into the fall election republicans expected to have a very strong turnout this fall. shep. >> eamon javers, thanks very much house republican leadership will be speaking top of the next hour, noon eastern time, 9:00 a.m. pacific we will have live coverage on cnbc just a moment ago we heard from pete williams about missouri putting its law into place and i want to give you details which we have just gotten from the governor's office. signed a proclamation to end elective abortions in mississippi and what they call in response spo roe v. wade the governor signed a proclamation giving legal effect to a certain section in law

here's what it does. three things first, prohibits doctors from performing abortions unless there is a medical emergency second, it creates criminal liability for any person who knowingly knowingly performs or induces a non-medical emergency abortion and subjects his or her professional license to suspension and, thirdly, it protects any woman who receives an illegal abortion from being prosecuted for violation of this act. meaning abortion provider would be prosecuted. criminal liability for a person who knowingly performs the abortion, but protects any woman who receives an illegal abortion from prosecution in violation of this act one more thing on the other side former president barack obama issued a statement a short time ago on twitter saying, and i quote, today the supreme court not only reversed nearly 50 years of precedent, it relegated

the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and idea logs attacking the essential freedoms of americans. that from former president barack obama on twitter. house republican leadership to speak the top of the hour. joining us now constitutional law expert and attorney, seth, this dynamic of state to state is one to be watching because every state will have its own specific rules i just went through the ones in missouri. >> absolutely. and we are really witnessing history today. this is the most impactful decision issued by the supreme court in decades and with the press of a button, the supreme court has now wiped out roughly a half a century of precedent. this is going to have a very sprawling effect with immediacy today. not only do you have this historic decision that has been issued here in washington, d.c., but this is going to immediately

flow down to the states. there are 13 states that have so-called trigger laws, as you are covering the breaking news is demonstrating that those states are need e immediately jumping in and making it clear those are coming into effect the other thing that i think -- another aspect that hasn't quite yet been covered relates to the impact on corporate america. one of the things that's going to be a brand-new question, and this is something that we are starting to see through the breaking news this morning, is the question of how are employers going to be addressing this some significant employers have issued determinations that they are going to add to their list of health benefits for their employees travel expenses related to helping their female employees travel to a place where they are going to be able to have their reproductive decisions not criminalized so not only are we going to see a very impactful change in the

federal and state level, but i think there is going to be a lot of discussions within companies and their hr departments about how they are going to handle this whole new world. >> i want to update our viewers on the plan ahead. i mentioned republican leaders to speak in washington a group at noon the president will deliver remarks on the supreme court decision in dobbs v jackson women's health to overturn roe v. wade at 12:30 eastern time. about an hour and 11 minutes from now live coverage on cnbc. seth, we have heard from some states where even if you drive someone to have an abortion, even you could be prosecuted are we expecting in some of the more conservative states, some of the states where this has been an issue for decades and decades and a heavy push, there might be things like that where we could run into an area of

unintended consequences? >> well, absolutely. we already know that there are certain terms and provisions under state laws, including some trigger laws that are literally coming intoing effect any moment today, such as the proclamation that was just issued by letter and announced a few moments ago where there is going to be widespread criminal liability not only with respect to the health care provider, but, for example, if somebody takes a taxi, an uber or a lyft, what's going to happen to them are they going to be faced with a jail sentence? so there is a lot of implications to this keep also in mind the opinion by justice thomas he has said that although the decision today is specifically with respect to abortion, that they are going to -- and he certainly is going to take the lead in opening the door to reconsideration of other issues that arise for due process under the 14th amendment that's the exact legal pinpoint

of where this decision was issued the basis of the overturning of roe and casey is premised upon the right to due process under the 14th amendment what justice thomas is saying is that we have criminalization potentials with respect to things that are happening throughout the united states today, but as they say, stay tuned, because there is going to be a lot of activity happening, their trigger laws are coming into effect, and it's going to be unclear as to what the broad reaching implications will be. >> there is also this matter of privacy, because so much of this had been historically put under at least partially under the privacy umbrella >> correct roe had it tagged as a constitutional right of privacy. the court in casey, in supporting roe, reiterated it as a right of liberty, but it was still encased within the same fundamental right. now what the supreme court has

done today is it said that regardless of any of the flow of precedent that has emanated from roe v. wade in one press of a button and one fell swoop it's intierl overruled. so all of those rights that are set forth under the due process clause in the 14th amendment have now been eviscerated. as justice thomas has said, we will vhave to wait to see what happens. you will guarantee there will be other petitions for review on many other issues that will be filed in washington with the supreme court. >> ever we go to lift the veil a little bit, are there law firms and advocacy groups across the country working to bring suits to the table now that we're in this moment of uncertainty and change >> well, absolutely. there are public interest groups that are based throughout the country. they are not only gearing up to prosecute those claims on both sides of the legal equation, but

they are also working with state legislatures the extent you have states that don't have trigger laws, they are going to become ac actively. you will have more activity with firms, more litigation, particularly at the state level, litigating not only federal constitutional issues, but state constitutional issues as well. so everything has changed. we are living in a whole fundamentally different world than what we saw yesterday >> seth, thanks so much. appreciate your time and analysis this morning. business leaders are reacting. in fact, we just got something from sheryl sandberg let's get over to steve. what are you learning? >> shep, yeah, these responses are rolling in sheryl sandberg, the outgoing coo of meat that posting to her facebook page, the supreme court's ruling jeopardizes the health and lives of millions of women and girls across the country.

threatens to undo progress women have made in the workplace it will make it hard forewomen to achieve their dreams and it will disproportionately impact women with the fewest resources. that's coo of meta, sheryl sandberg. >> and more requests into other tech companies, apple, microsoft, and so forth. >> steve kovac we will turn back as we get more statements in. a half hour to republican leaders, about an hour and seven minutes or so to president biden, who we're told will speak this afternoon if you are watching the markets, the rally continues. things have been fairly stable today. the dow up more than 2%. still there. 625, near session highs. the nasdaq up exactly 2%, s&p 500 up 2.1%. good job numbers yesterday some suggestions of easing of inflation in some areas. sara eisen talking this morning about how nerves are calm at the

moment still in a bear market, of course the numbers today looking good joining us now is elizabeth, president of the constitutional accountability center and live with us. your read on what we have seen today, is there anything here that surprises you and what should we be looking forward to? >> i think the surprise was in many ways the transparency with which justice thomas, for example, made clear this isn't just abortion, even though the majority ruling said, oh no, only abortion is at issue today in the ruling. but justice thomas made clear that the reasoning in this abortion ruling could also apply to important rights like contraception use, marriage equality for lgbtq couples, intimacy, other rights that are considered private and ones that are -- have traditionally left to the individual without government interference. but really i think what is going to be felt today, you know, we are going to look at the legal analysis and read carefully, but

you talked about the polls that show a majority of americans want say a abortion to be legal and for that decisions to be made by the individual themselves with their doctor and their family and, you know, for their own bodily autonomy. and americans know that it's very hard to be considered a free and equal citizen in society if you don't get to make those decisions for yourself so i think that's where you have the american people sentiment coming up against a ruling from the court. for the first time they have rolled back a right that it previously recognized, and that, i think, is going to be an impact that's felt today and in the future but what we've seen from the court was not terribly a surprise in terms of the legal conclusion it maps very closely on to the draft opinion that was leaked earlier. but i think it still had in many ways is a gut punch to millions of women across the country.

the statements you just read from business leaders i think are testament to that and we are going to continue to see which way the country goes, whether it's the vision that's put forth by the supreme court and its view of liberty where it's left up to the states and a vote of your neighbors as opposed to a right of liberty and equality that is protected for everyone across the country no matter where you live. >> this matter of taking away a right is one that is of note for many constitutional scholars today. until recently, there had been no consideration of something like that happening. it's never been tun in the history of the country where we were granted a right through the constitution and then later that particular right was taken away. which brings into question all of the matters you mentioned and so many more it creates a level of uncertainty to which we are really not accustomed as a people >> i think that's a really great comment. it's exactly right

i think a lot of people woke up today, you know, those on the west coast woke up to this thinks news. those of us on the east coast were dwrapling with it it's not just with respect to abortion rights, but as you say, uncertainty as to other rights that really hit, you know, heart and home these rights that we have taken for granted, i think, some of us, over the past several decades that they would be rights we could make for ourselves. now we are plunged into a state of uncertainty because of this six-justice conservative majority but, you know, there will continue to be fights in the court. there will continue to be legislation contemplated by congress as we see the fallout from this, as there are criminal prosecutions against people, as people die, unfortunately, because of this ruling, then i think there will be another conversation it's an ongoing conversation about the rights that the court

ruled on today, the meaning of the constitution, and what kind of country we want to live in. that conversation will continue. >> elizabeth, thanks for your opinions and analysis today. appreciate it. you know, businesses all across the country are going to have to make moves in one way or another as it relates to the pr of this, optics of this, and more specifically what they are going to do or not do for their employees. let's get to cnbc's bertha coombs, has been looking into the business aspect of it all. >> hi, shep. it's one of those things that a lot of businesses have been talking about since that initial decisions, draft was leaked the last couple of months. it's an unprecedented situation. if you consider before roe v. wade, you didn't really have that sense of insurance, picking up the cost, of pregnancy termination in the case of an elective abortion. so that has been happening over

the last 50 years. now employers, many of them, have already come up the likes of jpmorgan this morning, but amalgamated bank, we know that salesforce, a number of other companies had already come out over the last couple of months saying that they will provide at least transportation access for people to travel to where abortion is legal. there are questions as to whether they will face pr prerepercussions for that. a number of legal scholars i talked to said that one of those things in states like texas, for example, it's a civil prosecution. that will lead to more counter lawsuits it's unclear whether that type of civil prosecution where anyone could say, hey, if you are salesforce, salesforce and you provide transportation for your employee to go to where it is legal to gain an abortion, we are going to sue you so employers have been trying to navigate all of that for insurers, it's going to mean

a very uneven land cscape as wi. we will have half of the states where abortion will be legal, so they will not be able to pay for it some large employers, national employers, they are under erisa, a federal lieuaw that gives them the ability for uniform health benefits to employees. that's what i think a number of employers are saying they will be able to process the situation where employees can travel to where they have access for providers, it becomes a sticky situation at well they would not be able to provide access in a texas or a mississippi or an arkansas but more than half of abortions these days, shep, are done medically. so that means sometimes people do it through a telehealth situation. those states will probably block access from telehealth within their borders, but that doesn't

mean they can block someone from traveling to a state or they could have a telehealth visit with a doctor in that state. they could get a medication prescription, pick it up at a pharmacy in that state and do it that way so it's going to create a real kind of patchwork situation. it's going to put insurers in the mandated it's going to put pharmacies in the middle it's going to put telehealth providers in the middle and providers of all kinds i spoke with ros brewer yesterday at pass sen, at the aspen health futures etf and she talked about the fact that they are going to have to watch and see state by state how this happens for the pharmacies, they are in the middle of those medical abortions that are done medically with medication as opposed to an actual procedure we are starting to hear from employers, but a lot i think are looking at the decision to see what it means for them, if they do provide these benefits. one benefits manager told me

that some employers are trying to sort of split the middle and they say we will give you travel benefits but we won't pay for it under your health hebenefits some will do both. the other issues for employers and large national employers, shep, two years ago during the george floyd riots, most companies came out and made statements they took a stand. they talk about where they stood. their employees may now expect them to do the same. and as we saw, for example, with the so-called don't say gay bill in florida when disney took a stand, there were repercussions there in the state their employees wanted them to take a stand they did the state then took a stand as well on their statement. so this puts employers in a whole new realm that we haven't seen since before roe v. wade was enacted more than 50 years ago. >> you are spot on

i thought at least from my own perspective when you talk about disney and the pitfalls that it had regarding what the opponents call a don'"don't say gay" law n florida, for companies large and small, what statements to make, whether you choose a side, whether you support -- what you do as a company now could begin to set off all sorts of divisions within companies, within families, and certainly within cities. businesses will lead in this area, and, you know, most would suggest that disney had a real rough time of it down with disney world and the tens of thousands of employees across the state of florida with desantis firing back you wonder if comms chiefs are scratching their heads and bringing out a playbook for how to play this. >> they have been. talking to a lot of them over the last few weeks, and a lot of folks basically, it was clear they were going to wait to see what the decision was because to

wasn't clear exactly how the supreme court would word it. i would imagine they are going to take a beat to read the decision, have their legal people say what this means, and we could see some employers actually re-evaluate what they are going to do as far as benefits this is the time of year when they put together their benefits for the coming year because open enrollment is generally in the fall for all of us so this is something that is, you know, right at the center of what they are looking at right now, and you can bet there are many discussions not just with the teams, the hr and legal team to see what they can do about this. >> tright now at the aspen institute. we will have more throughout the day. tech companies are reacting. various and sundry tech companies. john >> yeah, here is a statement from microsoft it reads, microsoft will

continue to do everything we can under the law to support our employees and their enrolled dependents in accessing critical health care which already includes services like abortion and gender-affirming care regardless of where they live across the u.s the support is extended to include travel expense assistance and other lawful medical services where access to care is limited in availability in an employee's home geographic region i got off the phone with john from unity software company. similarly, when we got the sense the leaked draft opinion from the court, that this was coming, they made a similar statement to employees about providing access to this care and travel where necessary. but, shep, this is a very challenging circumstance you referred to it before. the role and percentage of women in the corporate work force changed dramatically over the past 50 years since roe was

first decided. also the role of the labor movement and the relationship between employers and workers has changed. so right now in tech we are seeing a resurgent labor movement across the country. we are also seeing a very interesting dynamic where employers like amazon and apple now have huge work forces, worker workers who are not tech workers, retail workers, you know, apple more than half of the workers work in retail more of an hourly job. blue collar as it's generally called in amazon, warehouse workers, also blue collar workers and they are located across the country. not just in california not just in seattle, washington. not just in these coastal elite cities so i think there is going to be a challenge around exactly how does amazon, how does apple treat those workers who are in those locations doing the work that they want to have done when it comes to transportation, when

it comes to policy, when it comes to benefits, and i would add, shep, there has been an increasing use of contractors across all sorts of companies. it's one thing if you are a direct employee of these companies that have access to corporate benefits but if you are entry level, if you are a contractor, what then? will companies mandate that the staffing agencies have the same policies when it comes to benefits that the main company does? in labor, all these questions yet to be worked out as we digest this news. >> a moment ago bertha coombs was talking about employers' reactions and mentioned tzvi and the troubles it had in florida we have gotten -- or disney released a statement i will read that four. it will cover travel benefits for employees seeking family planning or reproductive car following the scored's ruling. so, john, to your point, the likelihood is that most big companies had a plan leading up to this.

you notice there was no mention there of benefits for the procedure itself i don't know the details of any individual person's insurance. but the company itself saying it will provide travel. so more and more we are hearing from big companies, large influentia influential companies saying if you need a procedure you can't get where you live, we will get you there on our dime. seems significant. >> it is significant it also raises questions, shep, because in the microsoft statement keep in mind they kept on making statements about legal, medical care. as states adjust and perhaps try to keep companies from offering that sort of transportation and care to people who live within their borders, what does that do to corporate policy? what does it do in this age of hybrid and remote work if an employee wants to move from california to arkansas, to alabama, to mississippi for a lower cost of living but then they also wouldn't to have access to health services that

are not legally available in that state, how is that policy going to work? those are the sorts of issues these companies are going to have to tackle and it's relevant to investors because in a time of rising inflation, here is another cost that's a bit unclear in how and when it's going to be applied. you got to consider on these balance sheets depending on the types of workers, the skill of a work force that a company wants to employ. >> thanks very much. we heard some abortion rights activists seek speaking a moment ago. the markets are near session highs now. 20 minutes to noon in new york and washington the dow tjones industrial averae david ushery u up 22%. the s&p 500 extraordinary rally. 2.3%, up 88 points the nasdaq up almost 250 points and about 2.2%

you see this rally it's held throughout most of the morning. got the jump got the news on consumer sentiment. jobs from yesterday. talk of easing of inflationary pressu pressures. we will have extended coverage of this, of course, throughout the it day from the professionals of cnbc. first, let's listen to this abortion rights -- let's listen. >> quadrupled if not more since the original decision came down after 10:00 a.m. i am still in the middle of it in front of the supreme court. what we've seen a mix of opinions it is a plurality of young people i want to bring in nina. she traveled from pennsylvania and she was one of the people that was celebrating the decision being overturned. so i want to ask you, what drove you to come out here today what are you looking for tell me a little bit about how you are feeling now that we saw the decision come down. >> i am very excited i drove down here for students for life

we are -- we have a bunch of leadership programs focused on making sure women have the necessary resources that they need throughout their pregnancy. i am excited but we all -- if you can see the celebration. but we all know this is not where work ends. this is where it begins because from anyone you can ask, this is what we will be working for to make abortion illegal, unthinkable, and unnecessary. >> reporter: our nbc polling has shown that 60% of women -- 60% of americans think that abortion should be legal in some capacity, 30% on the other side. what do you make that your group is kind of in the minority on this what do you want to stay to people who don't share your opinions >> there is a lot to, obviously -- there is a lot of nuances, a lot of different opinions but at the end of the day, human rights begin at conception and they end at natural death and

that's what we're fighting for no matter what you believe, we're here to protect the woman and the child. >> thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. like we talked about, there is a big variety of opinions on the ground right now we do hear a lot of celebration and music playing here today, and people that weren't necessarily expecting this to come down today. most people that i talked to were thinking it was going to be early next week, that this decision would come. it is interesting to see as the crowd continues to grow now that the decision has come through, and we will continue to talk to people on the ground, especially as we know that the president had previously said prior to the decision coming down he was hoping that congress would take action to restore roe. we have heard rumblings about house democrats coming down and we'll keep an eye out for lawmakers that are here as well. >> norah barrett from outside the supreme court. we heard from some who were

happy with today's ruling, some who were displeased with today's ruling all of them weighing in there as the crowds are growing around the supreme court. i have just gotten a statement from the attorney general merrick garland. the journalist of it is, quoting now, the supreme court has eliminated an established right that has been an essential kpoen it's of women's liberty for half a century. a right that safeguarded women's ability to participate fully and equally in society and the reflouncing of this fundamental right, which it had repeatedly recognized and reaffirmed, the court has upended the doctrine of stare disuses, a key pilar of the rule of law. that from merrick garland. dobbs vs. jackson women's health in mississippi overturns roe v. wade republican lawmakers are weighing in. they will be live in about 15 minutes. senior washington correspondent eamon javers has been gathering some of that.

>> a couple more statements interest republican senators cheering on the supreme court's decision senator grassley saying the decision recognized that the weak legal reasoning in roe v. wade has done more to provoke conflict than resolve it as the late justice ginsburg observed it has rightly done in landmark decisions throughout history from senator sasse as well saying america's work of becoming a more perfect eun unis never over today by righting a constitutional wrong the supreme court took an historic step forward. roe's days are over but the pro-lifer movements work has just begun and speaking of that work, it will take place in a political context in which the supreme court here is just not in the same place politically as the majority of americans are. a may nbc news poll support for abortion rights hit an all-time high a combined 60% of americans said

abortion should be always legal or most of the time. that's the highest dating back to 2003. the trend is in support of abortion rights. the majority of americans didn't want roe v. wade overturned. 30% said that they thought it should be kwurn overturned as republicans will be campaigning on this issue in the fall, in the teeth of public opinion nationally, that is opposed to the decision that we just saw come down from the supreme court. of course, most republicans, particularly in the house of representatives, will be campaigning in districts where the opinion is flip-flopped and the majority will support the decision today based on the local borders of the political jurisdictions they will be campaigning. nationally the decision, the politics might be against the court and some of the republicans who are going to be campaigning for it in those districts they will benefit. >> the democrats have been --

the republicans have been so confident that they will be able to turn out the vote in the upcoming elections but issues do drive voters and you wonder if democrats, might get some push out of this. if some of their base might be electrified by it. >> democrats absolutely think they will get a push out of this and they are going to get a huge momentum shift going into the fall election. the question now is going to be just a giant political test and we are in unchartered territory here we have never seen anything like this, a major right in american life being taken away after being granted by the supreme court. how does that play out vis-a-vis the normal things we think of going into a midterm election cycle, inflation, which works against the democrats and the president of the united states, the economy working against democrats and the president of the united states, issues around biden's performance as president of the united states, sagging poll numbers working against democrats and the president of the united states going into the

november election. all of those things on one side. now you are this massive society-changing decision on the other side the politics of that, a lot of theories how that plays out. we will see how it plays out in the real world going into the fall. >> we may learn a little something here in just a few minutes on cnbc because we know that republican leaders are -- i don't know who is coming i'll lean on you for that. but they have had time, eamon, with the understanding that this was going to happen. they have had a couple of months to decide how they want to play this so these leaders today, will they be speaking to a base that has been wanting this, many of them, for decades? will they be speaking to them or trying to hetread the line with those not as pleased >> i think the tone -- we'll see. i think the tone will be celebratory. we will see leader mccarthy and congressman scalise talking to reporters shortly and we will see whether the tone is celebratory. that's the tone of the

republican statements so far the challenge for republicans, democrats have their own challenges challenge on the recommend side is for decades they have benefitted politically from a careful balance, in pushing to overturn roe v. wade but not actually achieving it for many decades. they benefitted from the energy on the right, as you saw that young voter who was carrying the pro-life sign talking about the right of unborn thchildren that is a passion and a political energy the republicans have benefitted from for decades. but not overturning roe v. wade and achieving that stated political goal, they didn't have to deal with the backlash. now they have appeased the base. they are going to hto deal with the backlash we will find out soon, shep. >> certainly will. eamon javers, thanks interesting to hear from the two sides who care enough about this, are motivated enough to go to the supreme court and make their voices heard ken dilanian live there with some people who are doing exactly

that hi, ken. >> reporter: hey, shep yeah, that's right there were about 100 protesters here before the decision was announced on both sides. they had been coming pretty much every day, supreme court opinions were to be posted, in anticipation of this moment. but this crowd has grown by we were situated between the capitol building and the supreme court behind me. so far it is a largely peaceful if not rowdy scene capitol police seem to be out in big force. there's a lot of officers around here we just interviewed an important member of congress who oversees capitol police that says he believes they have the security situation in hand here, but it does bear watching the crowd is growing by the hour largely peaceful >> have you spoken with people, we have seen people, get in each other's faces about this a little bit, have you seen people

gathering to -- the thing is, it is done. i mean, no amount of protesting that's going to change what the supreme court has done i personally wonder if the crowds would become that big in that particular location today >> reporter: that's a great question had the same thought myself. people that come to these kinds of events are activist, it is not the woman that needs an abortion in mississippi, it is outside the supreme court. there are passionate people, people in tears when the decision came down young people, older people people of political persuasions. a lot of organization here there's a lot of money behind both sides of the issue in terms of lobbying and political advocacy also a lot of passion, shep. >> ken delanian outside the supreme court. interesting camera angle has come forth look at this

this is frederick douglass bridge in the booth, help me what we're seeing this is a lone demonstrator on top of frederick douglass bridge but it appears colors of ukraine. this is in washington, of course we'll see a lot of this sort of thing. play book for this, we planned for this sort of thing as a network, larger network nbc universal, we want to be able to be eyes and ears for you and viewers across our platforms so we set troops into motion across the country to try to take the pulse of the nation in big cities and small, rural areas and in seats of power and on the farms we spread our resources out, will be able to watch a lot of the nation for you and give you that insight today that was one picture, one person on top of frederick douglass bridge hopefully not too much of that with us now, professor of law at

rutgers law school good for you to be here. >> thank you. >> top thoughts on what we have seen, what's to come >> we were expecting this, knew it was going to come down. now that it is here, it is exactly as disastrous as i imagined and i think that a lot of people imagined, particularly concurens that makes clear the idea it is about abortion and not other rights, it is a farce. >> that is what he said. >> of course that's what he said, right? and that's very easy to say that in the same way justice kavanaugh anbd barrett said it was settled law and would stay that way, yet here we are. >> back to that. is there any gray area i looked back at testimony during the hearings. it didn't feel like a gray area

from the two you mentioned >> i think that's exactly right. i think people get prepped for these confirmation hearings, they know what they need to say in the confirmation hearings. >> then what is the point of the confirmation hearing if you're not speaking as you suggest, if you suggest you're not speaking your truth but instead saying what you need to say. >> i think one thing we should know particularly after watching the confirmation hearings for justice jackson is that they are theater at this point, they're not really about trying to assess whether someone is approved as supreme court justice, they're about scoring political points. >> are there cases, professor, you see in the pipeline people should watch more closely? are there cases regarding gender or race or sexuality or anything that might give us a little more understanding of where the court is going >> i think we know exactly where this court is going. there are some affirmative

action cases that are going to be heard i know where i would put my money in terms of how the court will come out on those cases i worry about future contraception cases might look like i think the court made clear it is very willing to reinforce first amendment rights related to religion and so that, again, is going to create an opportunity for other in roads into reproductive rights. >> help me understand from a legal perspective, what about today's ruling suggests as you put it that rights to contraceptives might be changed. >> so first of all, in concurring opinion from justice thomas he clearly points to griswald versus connecticut, that extended right to contraception to married couples, extended it to single people, and those pieces are derived from all from the same

idea, right, the idea that the 14th amendment has a substantive component that creates particular rights, including right to privacy, under which a lot of these things fall so contraception is absolutely on the chopping block here. >> if contraception is on the chopping block, is interracial marriage on the chopping block, same-sex marriage on the chopping block, all of this on the chopping block you come at this from liberal perspective, i presume >> i come at it from liberal perspective, coming at it from perspective of people often vulnerable and marginalized in this country and the constitution is an incredibly important document and needs to be a living document in order to protect those of us that have often been on the outskirts of protection in this country, so from that perspective i have very serious concerns what it means to decide all these sorts

of issues should be sent back to the states i don't think interracial marriage is particularly on the chopping block but certainly marriage equality, i have serious concerns about that. that's another case that justice thomas specifically points out in his concurring opinion in the case today again, this idea that it is just about abortion is ludicrous, that we are at the beginning, not at the end, and we're going to see a lot of legislation and a lot of litigation in the months and years to come to try to figure out what does it really mean to be a person protected by the constitution in this country >> as a layman and observer of the process, if you would indulge me in the thought process, i would appreciate it just thinking about it, it is one thing to say cannot have any more abortions abortions that have been performed have been performed, but in our state or county, you can't have any more abortions.

it is another thing to say you're a black man and you're a white woman, you can't get married any more, but plenty of black men and white women that are already married, which those marriages would be nullified in this hypothetical world about which you're speaking. >> i will say again. >> that's a real concern in america. >> no. no i will say again that i do not think interracial marriage is on the chopping block, in large part because i think the race component and race has been dealt with in a very particular and heightened way >> and lbgtq >> and that's where we should be concerned. >> i'm gay my gay friends that are married may find themselves poof, not married? >> that is one of the reasons why it might be difficult for the court to back out. we saw this in the world

preberger feld on the federal level, some states people were married, and you cross the state line, you wouldn't be married any more that's an untenable situation. i think one of the things the court will have to wrestle with if marriage equality comes again, the reliance issue that they brushed off in the context of abortion, certainly in the context of same-sex marriage, when you have people already married and have the benefits of marriage, what would it look like to suddenly decide those marriages are void i think that would be almost impossible to do without some uprising >> that's why i was asking forgive the interruption that's why i was asking if that's a way abortion is different. no more abortions. but the things which happened and continue taking those away feels like it would be a leap beyond >> i think what they could do, right, is not necessarily, and you have to be careful what we mean when we say take those away

because when you take away the federal right, same in the context of abortion, the constitution no longer protects the right to terminate a pregnancy, then you send it back to the states. so we can send issues back to the states and states can make their own judgments about who should be able to marry within their borders. and there are certain rights i think it is frankly dangerous to send them back to the states, right? so that's one of the things we'll see with abortion, this patch work, perhaps would see patch work in other areas as well i think marriage is probably the one that's sort of least easy to tackle at this point in terms of the court, so i don't think that's where anybody would start even though justice thomas opened the door to that. i think there are other things that are much easier to attack, including contraception and other sorts of issues like