15 in the classrooms. the prime minister wanted schools open by the end of july. it's not going to happen until september. france, a little more successful at the moment, poppy. >> yeah, it shows some of the challenges though that we could face. appreciate your reporting and thanks to all of you being with us this morning. i'll see you back here tomorrow morning. "newsroom" with john king starts right now. hello, everybody. i'm john king in washington. thank you so much for sharing a very busy news day with us. very big breaking news right here in washington. the supreme court rejecting a signature trump administration challenge on immigration. the high court ruling the president did not follow the law or government procedures when he tried to end legal protections for the daca recipients, some 700,000 immigrants brought illegally into the united states when they were children. the decision was settled 5-4 on big core issue of the case. the traditionally conservative

chief justice john roberts siding here with the four liberals on the bench to preserve for now an obama era legacy. the president can try again to deport daca recipients if he wants but the loss at the high court means he won't be able to keep his 2016 promise to do so before voters decide this november whether he deserves a second term. let's get straight to cnn's jessica schneider outside the high court for this important decision. jessica, what did the justices do and what did they not do? >> reporter: john, for the second time this week the chief justice john roberts siding with the liberals ruling with the trump administration in this case writing the opinion that blocks the trump administration from rolling back daca. it's that program that president obama enacted in 2012 that protected about 700,000 daca recipients from deportation. these are children who were brought here when they were children, when they were young and now who continue to live here, work here. they applied for the daca renewals every two years. now they will be protected

because of the decision authored by the chief justice john roberts. now, john roberts is not saying that the trump straying is powerless to roll back daca, but it -- instead the trump administration has just rolled it back the wrong way so there's still the possibility that the trump administration could end this program but not now, and, of course, we're just a few months from the election. john roberts saying in this opinion that we do not decide whether daca or its recision or sound policies, the wisdom of those decisions is none of our concern. we address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation. he then went on to talk about the hardships that daca recipients would face if this program was rolled back which it will not be. now, the conservative justice, justice thomas, he issued a really scathing dissent here saying today's decision must be recognized for what, it an effort to avoid a politically

controversial but legally correct decision. the court should have made clear that the solution respondents seek must come from the legislative branch, so justice thomas saying that it is congress who should be worried about the daca recipients here, and just in the last few minutes the president responding in part to this decision. he re-tweeted "the daily caller" report that talked about justice thomas' dissent here. we haven't gotten any direct comment or reaction from the president or the white house, but for now the 700,000 plus dreamers in this country are rejoicing. some of them have gathered in front of the supreme court steps here. it is a far cry from the hundreds who gathered outside to see the arguments when they played out before the supreme court in november. john, i talked to some of those daca recipients back in the fall. they said that despite the fact that they were born in another country and brought here as children, they feel just as much

american as you and i. one woman i spoke with came here at the age of 14 from ecuador and lives in long island, has two young children. she works and pays taxes and she was pleading with the justices to really deal with this in a humane way which it seems has exactly been done by chief justice john roberts telling the trump administration you do have authority to roll this program back but you didn't do it in the right way. therefore, daca remains in place, and the so-called dreamers remain protected. john? >> in place and protected as we go now towards the election. jessica schneider outside the supreme court, thanks for keeping your cool amid the celebration. appreciate that. this decision 5-4. the chief justice john roberts siding with the four liberals on the bench. let's get perspective now from our sunshine legal analyst. joan, the chief justice is your wheelhouse. you are a biographer and the like. it's a very interesting decision here, and you get the sense from it in the clarence dissent, clarence thomas essentially saying, you know, deal with the

politics. the chief justice saying the administration gave me a reason not to because they didn't follow the rules. >> yeah. there are a couple of messages here from the chief justice and one is do it right. do it right. we're not against you. we would be with you if you would just follow the procedures here and do it correctly. the other thing that you have, john, is sort of a message of when the chief justice is going to flip over to join with the liberals, and in this case it was another one of those politically charged disputes involving tensions between two administrations, the obama administration and the trump administration, and it's in his interest to defuse those tensions and that's where we see him edging over, and we also see him edging over to say we're not going to take you out of your lane. we're going to actually keep you in your lane as the administration to do this directly or have congress do it, and in response to someone like justice clarence thomas who says

that the chief is essentially legislating here. he says, no, we're putting check on other branches but we're leaving the real policy to those other branches themselves. >> and joan, somebody who has watching all week, saying there are -- there have been two big decisions going against want president want. on both of them the chief justice has voted with the liberals. on one of them, neil gorsuch, the president's appointee, wrote the decision saying you can not fire someone because they are gay or transgender in america. two very different cases. in terms of the discrimination ruling, that's a big landmark supreme court decision. this is more you didn't follow the rules. if you want to, try again, right? and that's the way people should understand these. first of all, i think we have a pattern for sure of the trump administration being smacked town when it pushes too far. that's a consistent theme in

these cases and it will be going forward but who forms the coalition for the majority? that will evolve. it will depend on the particular case. we had, as you mention had had, a very important civil rights case on monday that played to a texturalist reading that trump appointee neil gorsuch was going to take. that was very distinct to neil gorsuch and the way he wrote that opinion. now, granted the chief justice signed on, but i think the chief justice realized once there was a majority for this very important decision having to do with a statutory interpretation that he would be with it. he was not with the supreme court when it voted in 2015 to support a fundamental right to gay marriage, so the chief is going to come on when it appear a narrower ruling, something that's within the -- the limits of a statute as we have here, the requirements that the trump administration faced to actually do the daca recision properly.

we had that. and i think going forward, john, in the next crucial weeks as the supreme court finishes what's been just a -- a very unparalleled term, unprecedented to time in american history, will probably see other surprises, but we'll have to take them one at a time and dissect them just as you're doing one at a time because the pattern, again, even though it involves smacking down the trump administration from going too far, does not involve a lot of consistency, neil gorsuch and brett cavanagh, the trump appointees, they dissented here. >> i suspect you may be back tomorrow or day after as we get another one of these big decisions. with me now to share their reporting and their insights is maggie haberman of the "new york times" and dan ball of "the washington post." thank you for taking time on this northern day. maggie, we'll start with you. we don't know what the president will do. we do know a little bit about

what he thinks retreating talking about the clarence thomas dis-september, an effort to avoid a politically correct decision. we know what the president wanted here. the question is now what will he do? will he ask the dhs, go back and follow the road map the supreme court laid out or will he back off knowing there's an election just down the road? >> we don't know what he'll do. we don't really know what he wanted out of this decision, right. what we know is at the time that jeff sessions was announcing they were going to rescind -- the president was saying to some of his own advisers how do i get out of this? the president was all over the map on this decision and what you saw him re-tweet there in terms of re-tweeting a paragraph about the dissent saying this was a politically motivated decision, liberal activists, liberal judges and so forth and

i think he'll use that to punt until we get past the election because if not you are looking at a circumstance where the president could be deporting a lot of people who were brought to this country, not of their own volition four and a half months before an election and up until that point and i don't think that something that the president or most of his advisers want to be dealing with at all right now. >> to that point, dan, had he won that case and had the authority to start the deportations, his base would have demanded he do so, so in an odd way is this legal defeat, i don't know if political victory is the right word, but a political pass through the election? >> it's political breathing space, i suppose, but on the other hand it's a rejection of something he had tried to do. i think maggie is right. he's always been uncomfortable with aspects of this, and we've seen him try to make a deal on daca to get his border wall funded and things like that. he's always held that out as a possibility of making a deal, but i -- i'm just struck by the fact, that you know, it was

eight years ago about this time that president obama made this decision to protect the daca kids and flummoxed then presidential nominee mitt romney. now you've got the supreme court flummoxing the incumbent president over the same issue. it's a politically difficult issue for him four and a half months before the election, and my guess, as maggie says, he'll likely try to punt. >> and yet, i'm going to read you a treat that the president has been on air which is unfair because you haven't had a chance to read this. this is interesting. these horribly and politically charged decisions coming out of the supreme court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves republicans or conservatives. we need more justices it or we will lose our second amendment and everything else. vote trump 2020. so here you have, again, the president by the end of the hour, if not by the end. day or the end of the week or the end of the month could change again because he often does but this is his reflex, trying to turn this into let's make it about judges and the

conservative base. let's make it about something i know works for me at a time, of course, we know whether we're looking at racial unrest in the country, looking at the coronavirus response, the president's numbers are politely in the tank. maggie, what do you read into that, that he's trying to make it about judges? doesn't even mention immigration in the tweet. clearly what it's about. >> john, i think your read is exactly right. we've seen the president suffering some softening in his support, particularly among evangelicals and amongst some conservatives, not just in the last couple of weeks of racial unrest but even before that when he was doing the coronavirus briefings that were basically as many of his advisers have acknowledged privately an act of self-sabotage, so i think that this is him taking another opportunity as he has many times to try to remind people who are conservatives that this is why you like me. this is why you took a chance on me in 2016. i gave you judges. this is this deal that we have made together and this is what you keep with me going forward. i expect you'll hear him

focusing on that a lot and a lot more than on the immigration aspect of this. >> and yet, dan, he's the incumbent president so we have to always remember that the election is about him. do people like this and like it enough to give him four more years? i want to go back in time. remember how important immigration was in 2016. he was going to build a wall and mexico is paying for it. they are making progress, mexico is not paying for it but the american taxpayer is but let's listen to the president on this particular issue is daca. >> when when the president is terrific, we want them back here. >> will they have to leave? >> it sounds cold and sounds hard. we have a country. our country is going to hell. we have to have a system where people are legally in the country. we're always talking about dreamers for other people. i want the children that are growing up in this the united states to be dreamers also. they are not dreaming right now. >> now he has to decide whether to take a different position or stick with his history on this issue, dan. >> well, he does.

i mean, the problem for him on this issue is that there is probably no more popular immigration program than daca. i mean, there's overwhelming support among the american people to allow daca kids to stay in the united states and most of them aren't kids anymore. they are young adults who are leading productive lives, going to college, working, et cetera, who are fully assimilated into the fabric of of this country. that's what he is pushing against if he tries to say they should -- we should have a system in which they would not be allowed to stay here. >> just moments ago, the question i'm going to ask on other side of this is do we know how much this matters in the sense that, you know, there's a new bolton book we'll talk about momentarily. we're in the middle of a coronavirus pandemic and a racial reckoning in the united states and now we get this supreme court decision that, again, puts the immigration question and essentially the humanity, how do you treat 700,000 to 800,000 people who came into to country through no

power of their own, most of them children, most having never lived anywhere else. they consider themselves americans. here's the speaker of the house nancy pelosi and her read on the supreme court. >> a large number of republicans, independents, over 60% of people who support trump support the dreeramers, so this is -- we were in such threat about what could possibly happen at the court up until last night if it goes this way or if it goes that way. but this way is the american way. >> this way is the american way, and yet, please, boast you laugh at me. we'll start with you. maggie, in the sense that the president could if he wanted to send a unifying signal at this moment of divide saying let's get this over with. let's pass legislation allowing them to stay. if you've not committed a crime, eligible for daca which means you've not committed a crime, you were bought here by your parents when you were too young,

you have a job, might be serving in the united states military, you can stay. the expectation that he can do that is what, zero? >> nothing is always zero with him because all of these transactions are open. that's not the posture the people in his administration have been taking, especially his son-in-law who has been tasked with trying to come up with a broader immigration deal. democrats will have to come to the table now if we lose on daca and that's really on them. that's not how democrats see it, so i understand that that's how they are going to try to telegraph this or at least potentially telegraph this. i don't think that that's how this is going to go. i also don't think that this president who we noted earlier has seen a softening among his conservative base, i don't think he's in a rush to say let's do a deal. he needs all of his voters to turn out. >> that's the key point. you mentioned evangelicals and seen other question marks with his base. when that happens, one thing

he's consistent on, is his reflection and coming up stunning new claims from president trump's former national security adviser john bolton.

i use rakuten to get cash back in-store and online. or anything i want to buy is going to be on rakuten. rakuten is easy to use, free to sign up and it's in over 3,000 stores.

i buy a lot of makeup. shampoo, conditioner. books, food. travel. shoes. stuff for my backyard. anything from clothes to electronics. workout gear. i even recently got cash back on domain hosting. you can buy tires. to me, rakuten is a great way to get cash back on anything you buy. rack it up with rakuten, sign up today to get cash back on everything you buy. hit it, charlie! ♪matthew, say's to bring it back. the five-dollar footlong. better choice for matthew. it's back sandwich emoji.♪ five-dollar footlongs are back when you buy two. for a limited time.

five-dollar footlongs are back i don't have to worry about that, do i?are irritated. harmful bacteria lurk just below the gum line. crest gum detoxify, voted product of the year. it works below the gum line to neutralize harmful plaque bacteria and help reverse early gum damage. gum detoxify, from crest. and get way more.ith wso you can bring yours vision to life and save in more ways than one. for small prices, you can build big dreams.

spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair today. john bolt on-the-now the latest one-time trump insider out with annee-wopg book. he says it's president trump first, not america first and he says the president asked the chinese for re-election help and said he would try to intervene in legal cases to help friendly dictators and not to mention encouraging concentration camps for china's riegwegher muslims this is bolton's verdict in what he saw up close. >> i don't think he's fit for office. i don't think he has the competence to carry out the job.

there really isn't any guiding principle that i was able to discern other than what's good for donald trump's re-election. >> the president says bolton is not to be believed. the president tweeting this morning the book is, quote, a compilation of lies and, quote, pure fiction. we're back with maggie haberman of the "new york times," ban dalz of "washington post." there's a lot of insider books written in washington, a lot of people very close and john bolton known as a loyal republican staffer throughout the year and known to have differences with this president on policy and temperament issues but this is a wow. >> absolutely, john, and we knew we had differences in that they didn't get along in many ways, but nonetheless we've not seen something like this from past administrations. we've not seen this from current administrations. there's been looks of books about the dysfunctionality in the trump white house and the problems with the white house but never from somebody who had,

a, the up-close view that john bolton had and, b, somebody who is known through every administration as a copious note-taker and contemporaneously doing so, so here we have from, you know, the bird's eye view a devastating portrait of the president of the united states. >> maggie, there are so many things and you can decide depending on what your personal or political interests are are. you read this book different things might grab your attention. examining president xi, you know, can you start buying a lot of crops, farmers are critical with soybeans, can you help with soybeans and other agriculture products. this one jumps out for any american president whether toys him is donald trump or president barack obama. xi explained to trump why he was basically building concentration camps. according to our interpreter trump told him go ahead with building the camps which trump thought was exactly the right thing to do. an american president telling the chinese dictator it's the right -- exactly the right thing

to do to build concentration camps for the muslim minority in china. if that's true, it's mind-blowing. >> it is john, an unbelievable piece of information that john bolton is putting his name to and saying that this happened. the president while he's sort of broadly dismissed the book as not gone piece by piece other than a piece this morning to say he was upset at john bolter for upsetting kim jong-un a couple years ago, i would say the criticism of bolton has been in this book he's very, very negative about house democrats who were attempting to impeach president trump, that they didn't go far enough, so he sat on this piece of information about concentration camps and saved it for his book and then he's criticizing democrats for not knowing it. that's a -- it's a extraordinary book and the fact that he's willing to talk about what he

saw, but i think there will be limits to how many commendations he's going to get for how he handled this. >> that's an excellent point. so the question is does it get more attention? does it get more credibility with people out there? we have to remember in the context of an election, some people have already decided they are not open to changing their mind. for those who might be open to inning chaing their mind either way, dan, john bolton joins james matys and many others, several who have been very close to this president who have later either in books or other interviews or both painted incredibly damning pictures about how the president operates. they all call himselfish and trump first and all question whether he's informed enough and reads the brief. will it matter that so many people -- he criticizes them now. he brought every single one of them into the administration and praised them when he did so. does it matter that there are so many, again. we get tell-all books in every administration and can question

the interests of the person writing the book trying to sell books and advance a career and so many people with such credibility, bolton, matys, et cetera. >> it will be up to the voter to render a final judgment on what they are hearing about the president that makes him unfit for office as john bolton said, but it is extraordinary when you think about it, that the top level of his national security apparatus and not just in the first year but now continuing through bolton has basically in the aftermath of their service said he is unfit to be president of the united states. the portrait that john bolton paints in this is similar to what we have heard from jim mattis or general kelly, everyone who has been away from him has come after their service

with a very bad taste in their mouth about the way he operates. people will have to process that and make their own decisions about that, but we've never had a president who has had that kind of judgment rendered by the people who have worked closest with him. >> and part of the president's argument now, maggie, played out last night on "hannity." john bolton was a frequent contributor on fox news so if the president is trying to convince people who might view john bolton as credible that's one place to do it. listen to the president's take last night on this book. >> they broke the law. very simple, as much as it's going to be broken. this is highly classified. >> the administration is trying to go to court to block all this, but so much of it is already out there. is that also a moot legal challenge? >> i don't know if it's a moot legal challenge because i'm not familiar enough with how the law could play out but in terms of the public relations challenge,

you're absolutely right. this is not going to slow the spread of information that john bolton is offering to share in this book, and as dan correctly says this is all a piece of the portrait that we've seen from other officials over time. i think that it will be up to individuals to decide whether they care or not, but i think for people who voted for president trump in 2016 taking a chance because they didn't like hillary clinton or didn't like president barack obama or whatever their reasons were, we told themselves that donald trump was playing a part in 2016. the aggregate of these portraits make clear that this is who he is and what you see is who he is and how they decide that factors into their vote remains to be seen, but i don't think that the administration is going to successfully stop people from knowing what is in this book. >> maggie haberman, dan balz, grateful for your help on both of these big stories and we'll continue to watch as this continues to play out legally. other important break news now. one of the officers charged in the rayshard brooks shooting in than thea has turned himself n.cnn's diane gallagher joins us

with that breaking news. diane. >> yeah, john, just a few moments ago, officer devin brosnan, the original responding overs to the incident that led to the death of rayshard brooks turned himself into the fulton county jail according to his attorney. he's currently being processed as we speak. brosnan was facing three charges in the shooting death of rayshard brooks. the first one being aggravated assault because the district attorney says that brosnan stood on rayshard brooks' shoulders while he was still on the ground fighting for his life there at that wendy's in the parking lot. the other two were violations of his oath of office. now, the attorneys for brosnan had said that there's a mischaracterization when it comes to the standing on the shoulders of mr. brooks. they said that brosnan actually sustained a concussion during the scuffle with brooks on the ground and that he was

disoriented and he was unaware at the time according to his attorney that brooks had been shot by rolfe and he didn't know at that point in time and if you remember yesterday during this press conference with the district attorney he initially said that brosnan had turned state's witness but his attorneys for the officer who is on administrative duty right now came out and said that that is not the case. he is not a state's witness, that he spoke openly and honestly in the interview with the district attorney the day before the charges were announced but that he was not a state's witness, and at that point he had not even agreed to plead guilty to those charges. they believed that he is at this point not guilty and are going to continue doing that, but, again, john, he is being processed as we speak. he will have a bond unlike at this point we're told by the district attorney the other officer, garrett rolfe, who is

facing 11 charges, the most serious of those charges against the former officer gave the rolfe who was fired the day after the killing of rayshard brooks is felony murder. john, that carries a penalty of up to life in prison or even the death penalty upon conviction. rolfe is also facing five aggravated assault charges. two of those are against mr. brooks, one for shooting him and the or the district attorney says is for kicking him. the three other aggravated assault charges are for individuals who were inside of a car that was hit by a bullet during that shooting. there's a proper damage charge as well as violation of his oath charges there. rolfe, as far as we know at this point, has not turned himself in to the fulton county jail just yet. i just tried to contact his attorney to get an update on that situation, but, john, as we know right now the current former or the officer devin brosnan at the fulton county jail being processed right new as we speak on those charges

related to the killing of rayshard brooks. >> diane gallagher, appreciate the reporting on the breaking news. let us know when we hear the update on officer rolfe, now fires offereders rolfe. >> the president says the coronavirus is fading, dying, his words. florida now reporting just hours ago thousands of new cases. but when you're with fidelity, a partner who makes sure every step is clear, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. a partner who makes sure every step is clear, vif you do, one call to newdayn? can save you $2000 a year. newday lets you refi at today's near rock bottom rates by shortcutting the loan process. there's no income verification, no appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. it's the quickest and easiest refi newday's ever offered. one call can lower your mortgage payment by this time next month.

sixty-two thousand seven hundred and ten dollars and thirty-one cents. sofi allowed me to refinance all of my loans to one low interest rate and an affordable monthly payment. and i just feel like there's an end in sight now and that my debt doesn't define me anymore. ♪ sofi is helping me get my money right. ♪

anolon pioneered the hard- anodized non-stick pan. we spent 35 years perfecting it. we put non-stick inside and out, so it's easier to clean. we invented an induction-ready, extra-thick aluminum base, so it can take the heat. then we added an edge-to-edge stainless steel bottom, so it's truly dishwasher-safe. most importantly, we made it for you. anolon. the ultimate nonstick. get yours at anolon.com

is. break news out of florida this hour, new numbers on the coronavirus, and there's reason to be concerned. let's go straight to cnn's rosa flores in miami. a new record. how bad? >> reporter: you know, john, you and i were talking about this yesterday, and yesterday we were talking about 2,600 cases. this time 3,207 covid-19 cases in it the state of florida on thursday alone. like you mentioned, that appears to be a record. we're checking to double check that, but, again, the cases in it the state of florida continuing to rise. last week we were talking about 1,000 cases a day. over the weekend that turned into 2,000 cases a day which we've been talking about this week and now more than 3,000 cases. now, yesterday, john, after your show, we got a response from

governor ron desantis' office saying this is all due to aggressive testing in communities that have outbreaks, like prisons, long-term care facilities, agricultural communities, migrant worker farms and other areas, but we also talked to an expert at fiu that looks as these numbers regularly and infectious diseases, and she says that this is not just due to increased testing, that this is due to a real increase in the number of covid-19cateses and that it should be of great concern. the mayor of miami-dade yesterday saying that there is an uptick in cases, that he is concerned and also that there's an increase in hospitalizations. you and i know that that's one of the metrix that both governor ron desantis and all the leaders at the local level have been worried about because of those hospitalization numbers. now, john, one of the things that mayor jimenez said yesterday is that for everybody,

businesses included, if you think that this is not your business to social distance, to wear a mask, he said that they are going to make sure that people know that it is their business. they are sending out police officers to businesses, parks and beaches to enforce those guidelines. john? >> rosa flores with those very concerning new numbers out of florida. let's take a look at how they fit in the national perspective. again, the president says the coronavirus is fading. you look at the numbers and you decide whether that's the case. if you go back to april, the newly confirmed cases, you do see it's a bit of a drop but now in recent days starting to head up a little bit, the seven-day moving average still more than 20,000 new cases a day confirmed in the united states. that might be manageable, but it is not fading, and you can see it starting to trickle up right there. this number if encouraging is the right word, this is always terrible, you do see the death toll is coming down, trending down. the seven-day moving average. still between 500 and 1,000 americans dying every day from coronavirus but down from the highs we saw in april and early may as we come down into

mid-june. this is the map that is concerning. rosa flores just reporting the new numbers from florida. see the dark red, that means 50% more cases this week than you had last week. that is not heading in the right direction. by no standard, even if it's manageable or even if you have the hospital beds you don't want to be 50% higher this week than last week this deep into the n pandemic, but that's happening in nine states, deep red on your screen, 50% more reporting this week. 23 states, nearly half heading in the wrong direction. eight states holding steady and 19 states, that's the green, the northern half of the country and then out here heading down, but 23 states heading into the wrong direction, florida among them. such a large state, 50% more cases this week than last week. if you look at that. just some of the states we're going to watch in addition to florida. you can seat lines they are all going up. arkansas in green, utah, oregon and oklahoma, and if you look, if you go back to early april, they are all down here reopenings, right? reopenings start, reopenings

start to accelerate and you can see this happening. again, not necessarily a disaster but a sign for concern. as you see it tick up here, oklahoma, where the president goes for his rally this weekend. you can see the shelter in place order lifted the beginning of may. you see a flat line for a long time in the seven-day moving average but then in recent days you see that going up heading very much in the wrong direction. this is oklahoma. this is the united states of america. that's 23 states. numbers don't lie. 23 states going up. the case cause for concern. listen to the president, says we're done. >> if you look the numbers are very miniscule compared to what it was. it's dying out. we're very close to a vaccine and very close to therapeutics, really good therapeutics, and -- but even with that, it i don't even like to talk about that because it's fading away. it's going to fade away but having a vaccine would be really nice, and that's going to happen. >> let's discuss this with a an

epidemiologist and e.r. doctor and also a doctor of resolve to save life. i just went through the state-by-state numbers and i want to be very careful. just because a state is going up, we know that was inevitable when it reopened. that's not a sign of disaster but when it's a 50% increase from last week to this week, the president says it's fading and it's dying. is it? >> i think in the united states we have a steady rate of around 20,000 to 250 infections in may and june but this highlights a mixed picture. some states have increasing or stable cases and half are declining, so it's really some of the states with increasing or stable cases that we're concerned about, states that you mentioned like arizona, florida and texas, because multiple indicators indicate that there could be a problem there. >> multiple indicators. not just the case count but the hospitalizations. >> right. >> and the stress and the system and positivity when you look at testing in some of those cases

as well. here's my question as a public health professional. when you have the president. united states saying it's fading, it's dying, essentially sending the message we're on the good side and things are getting better and swen someone you work, scott gotlieb, former fda conditions, we need to get all the states in the green and the way to do that is for individuals to me wear a mask. >> uniform masking would go a long way. one study showed if 60% of the people would wear masks you'd get the reproduction number under one meaning you'd have a declining epidemicic rather than an expanding epidemic. >> he used the words expanding epidemic. a lot of people that the president listens to it's expanding, correct? >> some, in parts of the united states it's expanding which is extremely concerning and if

leadership doesn't show urgency about it it makes our job as public health officials. >> hear about dr. fauci, one of the interesting things he said when he's trying to talk, when you're trying to talk, when people who do this for a living who are a hell of a lot smarter than a guy like me on this and we ask you questions, what should we do, what shall we follow and what piece of data is most important to track, dr. fauci says there are some people out there who just won't listen. >> unfortunately, there is a combination of an anti-science bias that people are for reasons that sometimes are, you know, inconceivable and not understandable, they just don't believe science and they don't believe authority. that's unfortunate because, you know, science is truth. the. >> a, do you agree with that, that some people just won't believe science and therefore won't believe smart authorities like dr. fauci and yourself, and if that's the case how do you

break through it? >> i agree with it. there are pockets of people that don't agree with it and don't believe that maybe what's going on with covid, and i think it really requirements engagement with those communities to understand what are the reasons why and really, you know, use data to show the situation, and i think some of the things we're advising for, we call them the three ws, wash your hands, wear a mask and watch your distance, those things are really low -- they are not very disruptable, don't cause a major disruption to your day, easy to do and prevent disease. that's not in question so to have everybody do them and get on board with that, we really need to engage communities. >> that would be nice, and as you're right they are not all that disruptive. they make it pretty easy once you get them into your daily routine. thanks for your insight. dr. anderson cooper and dr. sanjay gupta tonight, a brand-new coronavirus town hall right here at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on cnn. covid-19's toll on the

elderly, social distancing can protect them physically but it can be a very isolating time for seniors. a income nonprofit connecting people with older members of their community. that's on this week's impacting your world. >> it's a good feeling that you don't feel alone. >> good to see you. i haven't seen you in a minute. >> i miss you. i would like to hug. you still look like you haven't had enough sleep. such a sweet kid. >> we talk about our lives and, you know, music and politics and movies and -- and it's really just like a nice time that we have together. >> good friend. >> for many of our older adults their partners and spouses are no longer living or in some cases they never marry, and so as a result, as their social circles have diminished greatly, it's really the friendly visitor that plays such a meaningful role and for younger people studies have shown that when

they engage with older adults, they also have an increased sense of self. >> the biggest sadness i have is -- >> bob actually kind of worked in the music industry as i do. >> i worked as a manager in the record department. >> the walls of his apartment are just covered with old records. i think he kind of gets a kick out of me telling him stories from the road. it's really nice to be able to get advice from him. >> i think he deserves a medal. >> very touching. to find out how you can help others or seek help yourself during covid-19 go to cnn.com/impact. up next, the challenges of prosecuting the police officers now charged in the killing of rayshard brooks.

ok everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. whoo-hoo! great tasting ensure with 9 grams of protein, 27 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients to support immune health.

and nutrients to we know you're always at univethere for them.x, that's why our advisors are always here for you. learn more at phoenix.edu.

'remember when any footlong was five dollars?' hit it, charlie. ♪ oh, you're five, ♪ five. ♪ five-dollar, ♪ five dollar ♪ five-dollar footlong. ♪ it's freshly made ♪ with veggies. ♪ it's back. five-dollar footlongs are back when you buy two. for a limited time. for the same medications as the vet, but up to 30 percent less with fast free shipping. visit petmeds.com today. one of the two atlanta police officers involved in that deadly shooting of rayshard brooks is now in police custody himself. he faces an aggravated assault

charge. the officer who shot brooks, garrett rolfe is facing 11 charges, including felony murder. joining me, mr. lewis, thank you for being back with us again to help us with your expertise. i want to focus on officer rolfe, who has yet to turn himself in. he faces the most serious charges, here 11, charges, including felony murder, five aggravated assault, four violations of his oath of office and damage to property. what you're hearing from prosecutors, b.s., my client was doing his job. listen. >> i'm kind of getting tired of saying that mr. brooks was running away. mr. brooks was not running away. mr. brooks turned and offered extreme violence toward a uniformed law enforcement officer. if he was able to deploy the taser, it would incapacitate officer rolfe through his body

armor and at that point if he decided to disarm another officer, he would be in possession of a firearm. >> help me through this from two perspectives. number one, as a prosecutor, how do you read that video ? the lawyer is wrong when he says he not running but correct when he says he does try to use the taser. if you're the defense lawyer you tell the jury, look, you may not agree with what my client, the police officer, did, but at that moment in the heat of it, he saw the taser and decided to pull his firearm. >> well, john, let me make two comments. first of all, georgia law is muff more forgiving of police officers' use of force. when -- i'm licensed to practice in minnesota not in georgia, but i did take a look at the georgia use of force statue, and it

actually justifies the use of force against someone who possesses a device when used offensively as capable of inflicting serious bodily inj y injury. so i totally expect officer rolfe's lawyers to be latching on to that as a possible defense as justifiable use of force. secondly, i was somewhat surprised at the felton county attorney's reliance on a case called grand versus connor because this is a case that helps the prosecution. grand versus connor is a case that police invoke all the time and this is why -- jurors are told that they need to judge the officer's use of force not by a reasonable person's standard but by a reasonable police officer's standard. they're supposed to give deference to the police officer and not use 20/20 hindsight. there is plenty of room for the defense to maneuver to create

reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury regarding the use of force here. >> and help me with this one from your experience, especially in the castile case, you thought you had a strong case, the jury wouldn't great. as the prosecutor made his announcement, the georgia bureau of investigation said we are in the process of conducting this investigation. although we have made significant progress in the case, we have not completed our work. the gbi was not aware of the press conference before it was conducted. we were not consulted on the charges filed by the district attorney. if i'm a defense attorney for mr. rolfe, i'm going to use that statement to say the people charged with doing the investigation had not finished their work, this is about poll te poll -- politics, not the law. >> if you're the defense attorney, you're going to make any possible explanation of why the prosecution is moving faster than the facts allow.

you're correct. the authorities usually wait for the state body that's usually charged in doing these investigations to present evidence. but keep in mind there is a lot of public pressure to bring these charges earlier than later. that was the case here in minnesota. and it's often the case in many states that you do file these charges quickly by complaint. there's plenty of time to add to the evidence, to conduct the investigation. as i understand, it will be presented for consideration by a grand jury for indictment. so the fact that there's still opportunity to provide more evidence, gather more evidence shouldn't be fatal to this prosecution. >> don lewis, as always, appreciate your expertise and insight. thanks for your time, sir. >> my pleasure. >> still ahead, a major decision from the supreme court to keep daka. president not happy. ♪

[shouting] [clapping and shouting] [cymbals clanging] [knocking] room for seven. and much, much more. the first-ever glb. get 0% apr financing up to 36 months on most models, and 90-day first-payment deferral on any model.

thanks for sharing your day with us. a business' breaking news day. president trump in the thick of it. there's another blow to the president's crusade. the president excluding a damning part of his leadership.