-- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com 800-710-0020. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com good evening, the supreme court closes one door to debt relief for millions of student borrowers. president biden tries to open another. john berman here in for anderson. tonight the case that pits a chief executive against a chief justice in the string of big decisions this week including one today on lgbtq protections

and the first amendment, now pitting some of the justices against one another. also tonight, a cnn exclusive, the shocking details from a report on sexual assault at the coast guard academy that went unreleased for years. plus a week after leading a failed rebellion that sent him into exile, where is wagner leader yevgeny prigozhin? and is russian intelligence now gunning for him? first tonight, president biden is vowing to work around a supreme court decision blocking his plan to forgive some $400 billion in student debt taken on by tens of millions of americans. this is the latest from a supreme court that has now reshaped the constitutional landscape on abortion, affirmative action, and today on how much leeway a president has to carry out legislation. and that would be less of it. in a 6-3 decision, the court holding that president biden could not interpret a provision of a post-9/11 law to cancel student loan repayments. chief justice roberts writing that something this significant required clear approval by congress.

so, the president announced a detour. >> we will ground this new approach in a different law than my original plan, the so-called higher education act. that will allow secretary cardona, who is with me today, to compromise, waive, or release loans under certain circumstances. this new path is legally sound. it's going to take longer, but in my view, it's the best path that remains to providing as many borrowers as possible with debt relief. >> whether that flies legally or not remains to be seen. what is clear, though, is just like yesterday's affirmative action decision, this one exposed tensions within the court. in her dissenting opinion, justice elena kagan suggested that the true overreach was by her conservative colleagues, pushing the court beyond its proper limited role in our nation's jurisprudence. the same tension that a web

designer on religious freedom grounds could refuse to create pages for same sex weddings. we're going to have a bit more on this later tonight on what appear to be the growing strains within the court between the justices. first, cnn's joe pascoupic with more on the court's ruling. what exactly did the court rule here? >> sure john. first thing of all, two things you're right about, framing this thing of the chief justice against the chief executive. john roberts had a really big term. he was a winner in many, many cases. let's start with the one that generated most of the tensions right at the top of the court's public proceedings today. in the courtroom, when they split, as justice neil gorsuch read the opinion that ruled for a woman who is a website designer who wants to do wedding websites but does not want to serve same-sex couples.

she says that the message of a same-sex couple wedding conflicts with her christian values that she believes marriage should be between one man and one woman. now, this whole case comes against the backdrop of colorado's public accommodations law that says that businesses that are open to the public cannot discriminate based on race, sex, and sexual orientation. so, this woman, lorie smith, brought a case trying to ensure that she would not be -- fall victim to the law if she essentially hung out a sign saying, same-sex couples need not apply. and the justices by that 6-3 division that you talked about right at the top of your opening, john, bore out in the courtroom as justice gorsuch really stressed that this was about not discrimination but about free speech. he likened the kind of action

that could be taken by colorado here to state action against children who want to fight saying the pledge of allegiance or saluting the flag. he went back to those kinds of free speech cases. and he said the first amendment envisions the united states as a rich and complex place, where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands. now, dissenters, as you know, sonia sotomayor spoke for the dissenters quite passionately this morning at the supreme court. she said, this is the first time the supreme court was going to allow a business to discriminate against a set of customers based on any kind of characteristic. here it would be sexual orientation. but she warned that that could be one day be extended to other kinds of protected classes, perhaps interracial couples.

and she also, john, talked about the trend in the country right now of states trying to restrict what people -- what goes on with lgbtq activities. and she said this is the absolute wrong time for the supreme court to be sending a signal that would allow more discrimination rather than protection for gay rights, john. >> ann, the president's student loan forgiveness program. why exactly did the court say it was striking it down? >> as you know, the secretary of education had relied on a 2003 law, a law that was passed in the wake of 9/11 that would allow the secretary of education to waive certain loan repayment requirements for emergencies. but what the chief said was that the secretary of education took this law much further than it was allowed to. he even used the phrase, slight of hand, as he denigrated the biden administration's legal arguments. and he essentially said that it's not a matter of -- it's not a question of whether something should be done. it's a question of who has the authority to do it. now, this was another one that

drew a sharp rebuke right there in the courtroom. this time from justice elena kagan who said, you know, this is part of the conservative majority's effort to crack down on agency activities, protections for the environment, protections for public health and welfare, and in this case, to give some relief in another national emergency, the wake of covid, to some 40 million borrowers. and she said, you know what the real take away here is? she didn't mince any words. the real take away here is that there's one group that wants to be the decision maker on policy. and that is this conservative supermajority. thank you for sharing the details with us. it is a big night for legal analysts, elie honig, van jones, and allen kinzinger. i want to start with the newest news. the supreme court strikes down president biden's student loan forgiveness program. so, this afternoon he comes out

and says, i have another way. given that chief justice john roberts basically said, you can't do something this big without specific congressional approval, how likely is it that this inroad will work? >> i admire the persistence but i think it's very unlikely that this proceeds as a matter of law. the question is not whether it's good policy, bad policy, fair, unfair, something in the middle. the decision today was that the president exceeded congressional authorization. like joan said, the first student loan plan was based on a 2003 law called the heroes act that said in times of national emergency, the secretary of education, through the president, can issue loan modifications or waivers. chief justice said if you're going to spend that money you're going to need more specific use than that. president biden says he's going to use a different law.

but it's similar really in the way it works. it gives the department of education of authority the authority to make different modifications. this is going to take several months to put the new plan in place. it's going to be channelled through the courts. and it's going to come back to the exact same court, barring some unforeseen development. i think it's very unlikely they reach a different result. >> and again chief justice john roberts specifically said it was the extent of the president's action. if he tries to do anything to a similar extent, you would expect some serious challenges. van, i want to shift to colorado here. and i want to play something the plaintiff in the colorado case told laura coates last year. >> my case is not only about me and my artwork but also protecting the lgbt artist or graphic designer who should not be forced to create custom artwork that opposes same-sex marriage. >> so, van, i want you to address that and also broaden it out if you want.

the supreme court said this is about free speech, expressive action, the right not to do a specific expressive action. your take? >> my take is it's really sad because why do we have public accommodation laws in this country? it's because when my parents were growing up, we didn't have those laws. so, we had a book in my grandmother's house that said, okay, if we go on a road trip, here's a hotel that will let us stay there, but these won't. here's a gas station that will let us have gas. can you imagine living in a world where people could say, because religious reasons by the way in the south, they were religiously commanded to separate the races. if you were a good christian, you believed in segregation. the first amendment, their religious rights, meant we couldn't go places we wanted to go. we weren't free. the government said, that's wrong. if you're going to open up for business, you've got to open up

for everybody. that's what public accommodations law means. we've now had the supreme court say it is okay for businesses to say, because of my religious beliefs, i can turn you away at the door, i don't have to serve you, i can humiliate you in front of your children, i can send you away. and the supreme court says that's fine with us. it is a horrible day in this country. it is a huge step back. i cannot imagine what people who are waiting now for a floodgate of other businesses to throw up the same signs, you're not welcome, you're not welcome, you're not welcome. and that's what it's about. you can't hide behind the first amendment. you can't use first amendment language to conceal bigotry. that was done to my family for generations. it was religious argument. so, if you don't believe that somebody could lock me out of the store because they believe that god separated the races, you cannot accept a company turning away someone else. and by the way, she can say whatever she wants to. but if she wants to open her doors and say she's open for

business in america, that means you've got to be open for business to everybody. >> congressman? >> well, look, i'm sympathetic to that argument. and when it comes to the what's next, when it comes to comparing the south, you know, and believing that god said separate the races, i understand it. in this limited thing, i'm also sympathetic to the fact that this woman felt it violated her religious beliefs. by the way, there is other web designers that can do that kind of design. so, i understand both sides of this. the thing i get concerned with, the first amendment isn't there to protect the religious arguments we agree with. it's not there to protect the speech that we agree with. it's actually there to protect the stuff we don't agree with because that's what's in danger. so, i don't have a definitive kind of opinion on this at the moment because i can really see both sides to this. i'll let the supreme court speak for that. >> i think, van, and i'll let elie weigh in here on what the chief justice is saying here,

gorsuch in this case, was saying here is that this website designer would have to open its doors to a same-sex couple. just the website designer would not have to expressively act, would not have to take the action of making a cake for a same-sex marriage. elie, is that what gorsuch -- sorry. >> yeah. and one of the big questions is, is the conduct here that's being vended or sold, does that include expression? does that include some artistic sentiment in it? and they batted that back and forth and concluded that, yes, it does. and there is a distinction drawn between can you deny service to these people. no, it was stipulated that that's not what the plaintiff was asking here. but can this web designer decline to make a website with that content in it. the court said, yes, it's really a balance between first amendment rights -- >> can i say one thing. >> -- and non-discrimination. and the court came out this way. >> you know what's ridiculous

about this whole thing? the reason why we're saying if, if, if. because this is a hypothetical website by a hypothetical company that's concerned about a hypothetical wedding. the supreme court went so far beyond its normal mandate. this woman should not have standing in a normal situation. we're supposed to have an actual case and controversy. she has an actual website, an actual person -- none of that is even here. this is a made up case. this is completely made up. and it got in front of the supreme court because the supreme court is that desperate to weaponize first amendment language and religious liberty. as a christian, nobody is more passionate about religious liberty than myself, but i can't use my religious convictions to run over your rights to be part of this country and run over your rights to public accommodation. in a multiracial democracy, that is the balance. and the supreme court went out of its way with a made up case with no actual website and no actual couple and no actual

wedding, to take away the dignity of the lgbt community. and it's wrong. >> congressman, on the student loan case, you agree with the court that president biden went too far. why? >> look, if you want to forget student loans, that's great. i don't know if it's good policy, but you have to go through congress with that. that is a $400 billion impact to the federal debt. it's not a decision a president can make alone. and i worry about the slippery slope of that. and people may say, well, look, congress is inept. trust me, i know that, right? they may say, congress will never forgive student loan debt. probably not in the current make-up. but that's why we have elections. that's why we have campaign issues. the president went way too far in unilaterally declaring this as policy. i think he knows it. he knows it particularly after the supreme court's vote. it doesn't mean i disagree with the policy of student loan forgiveness. i think there's merits to it.

but you can't do it unilaterally. and i'll tell you, as much as i thought the expansion of federal government under president trump too, i have to be fair in both of these. >> i've got to give elie the last word and it's got to be 20 seconds or less. has the court laid down a marker here for how much power it intends to use? >> yes, they intend to expand their power exactly for the reasons van said. both of these cases, the plaintiff did not have standing. the court said, we're going to hear it anyway. they're asserting their power in an unprecedented manner. >> thank you all very much. have a wonderful holiday weekend. next, the fault lines growing within the court as the majority rolls out seismic decisions. legendary court watcher and reporter nina totenberg joins us. and later the cia's top guy on russian and the intrigue surrounding yevgeny prigozhin and his whereabouts and what vladimir putin might have in store for him. inspired by, created for and powered by you. ♪

narrator: the man with the troublesome hemorrhoid enters the room. phil: excuse me? hillary: that wasn't me. narrator: said hillary, who's only taken 347 steps today. hillary: i cycled here. narrator: speaking of cycles, mary's period is due to start in three days. mary: how do they know so much about us? narrator: your all sharing health data without realizing it. that's how i know about kevin's rash. who's next? wait... what's that in your hand? no, no, stop! oh you're no fun. [lock clicks shut]

eva's about to learn her fear of missing out leads to overeating. i totally eat stuff to not miss out. and that's just a bit of psychology eva learned from noom weight. sign up now at noom.com like ours is spoiling their dogs. good, real food is simple. it looks like food, it smells like food, it's what dogs are supposed to be eating. no living being should ever eat processed food for every single meal of their life. it's amazing to me how many people write in about their dogs changing for the better. the farmer's dog is just our way to help people take care of them. ♪ listen up, you dogs with allergic itch! today's talking lesson is just one word: apoquel. ap--o--quel. ♪ you can't teach your itchy dog to talk... ...so, talk to your vet about apoquel.

apoquel is for the control of allergic itch in dogs. do not use apoquel in dogs with serious infections. apoquel may increase the chances of developing serious infections... ...and may cause existing parasitic skin infections or pre-existing cancers to worsen. new neoplasias have been observed. i'm glad we speak the same language. ask your vet for apoquel. splash into savings with our 4th of july sale. blendjet gives you ice-crushing, big blender power on-the-go, so you can soak up the sun with a frosty beverage. enjoy 15+ blends before rapidly recharging via usb-c. and it even cleans itself with a drop of soap and water. stand out even when you're accidentally twinning with our kaleidoscope of colors. don■t miss out on our best deal of the summer. visit blendjet.com to order yours. i am here because they revolutionized immunotherapy. i am here because they saw how cancer adapts to different oxygen levels and starved it. i am here because they switched off egfr gene mutation and stopped the growth of tumor cells.

there's a place that's making one advanced cancer discovery after another for 75 years. i am here... i am here.... because of dana-farber. what we do here changes lives everywhere. i am here. wherever you come down on recent supreme court decisions, there is no denying how significant they have been to so many. and as we mentioned at the top, they have come hand in hand with biting words in dissenting opinions. this includes thinly veiled accusations such as justice kagan's today that her more conservative colleagues now indulge in the kind of judicial activism they once decried. legal affairs correspondent nina totenberg joins us now. great to have you here.

it is majority opinion striking down the debt relief plan. chief roberts said reasonable lives may disagree, at least three do. we do not -- it is important that the public not be misled either. any such misperception would be harmful to this institution or our country. how unusual is that kind of statement? >> i actually have never read anything like it in a supreme court opinion. i've seen plenty of opinions where they go at each other and go at each other hard. and you expect that. these are important issues, and people have strongly felt views. and either justice kagan somehow got to him, got under his skin, or that more likely that's a message to the public. now that we're actually -- have public sessions in the supreme court where people can announce their dissents, which they didn't do since december of 2019

until this year because last year they didn't have, quote, public sessions. the building wasn't open. so, they abandoned the idea last year of announcing opinions, which incidentally insured that the dissenters who very much in the dobbs abortion case wanted to dissent orally, could not do that. so, this is -- you know, so this is, i think, much more a message that his words are a message to the public. listen, it's not -- we're not really at each others' throats. >> is he wish casting in this case? are they at each others' throats? >> i don't think they're at each others' throats. and i do think the strong words in these opinions are not atypical. but what i do think is that the court is not a bunch of happy campers, that the conservative majority is within its own ranks divided with a lot of people vying for the position of somehow the ideological leader. and they all think that

they're -- if you look in the affirmative action case, there were four opinions on the side of the majority. the chief justices, okay, that's a big deal, and then three other conservatives, if i'm remembering this right, also had concurring opinions in which they wanted to tell the world what they thought. and two of them spoke from the bench, i think. it's been a long day and a long week. >> no, no, it's been a very long day. look, this has been an historic day and an historic week with a lot going on. you told anderson back in april that these justices, quote, don't particularly get along very well at the moment, and that's showing. well, how exactly is it showing? and do you still feel that way? >> i still feel that way. but i think the court is very much missing two people at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum who were friends, real friends, genuine friends, and that is justice antonin scalia

and justice ryan goodman justice ruth bader ginsburg. and justice scalia could make a joke better than anybody else. and by doing that, he was often able to diffuse situations so that even in the worst days, like when the court ruled for gay marriage, i think it was a day or two later, the people who had disagreed were having dinner together. that doesn't -- i think that is not the situation in this court. and justice ginsburg was very much sort of a suck it up and get it done person. and i'm not sure that there is that sense of we need to as a group get it done. i think the chief justice certainly feels that, but he can't seem to make it happen. >> that's why i was asking if he

was just wish casting with his statement in that opinion today. what happens this summer? is there a supreme court barbecue? does everyone gather? >> no, they're all fleeing if they haven't fled already. most of them are leaving town to teach courses in europe, to see family and friends, to give speeches and be professors and teach students, as i said. but they do it in the most lovely of places. and some of them will actually have a real vacation, which they genuinely need. >> but is there any effort amongst them to get together? we do retreats, corporate retreats, people and companies do, trust falls and the like. is there any effort to sooth some of these tensions? >> look, they meet every week for a conference. they have lunch together. i don't know how often they have lunch together anymore. i just think that that's not going to happen. >> nina totenberg, great to see you tonight. thank you so much for all your

hard work, especially this week. >> thank you. coming up, a secret report on a decades-long history of ignoring or covering up allegations of sexual abuse at the u.s. coast guard academy that congress never saw until cnn started making inquires. we have an exclusive report next. ♪ if there's pain when you try to poo ♪ ♪ and going sometimes feels like you ♪ ♪ pushed through a pineapple or two ♪ ♪ colace is the brand you need ♪ ♪ to soften stools, we're all agreed ♪ ♪ #2 should be easy to do ♪ trust colace to soften stools with no stimulants for comfortable relief.

is it possible to protect my business from cyber threats? it is, with comcast business. helping every connected device stay protected. yours. your employees'. even... susan? hers, too. safe. secure. and powered by the next generation 10g network.

with comcast business, advanced security isn't just possible. it's happening. get started wih fast spees and advanced security for $49.99a month for 12 monts plus ask how to get up to a $750 prepaid card with qualifying internet. so, you've got the power of xfinity at home. now take it outside with xfinity mobile. like speed? it's the fastest mobile service around. with the best price for two lines of unlimited. only $30 bucks a line per month. that's hundreds in savings a year when you wave bye to the other guys. save hundreds a year on your wireless bill over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. and right now, get up to $1000 off select samsung phones. switch today. - [announcer] do you have an invention idea but don't know what to do next? call invent help today. they can help you get started with your idea.

call now 800-710-0020. on its website, the u.s. coast guard academy promises to develop officers with, quote, character. its mission, in part, to graduate young men and women with a, quote, high sense of honor. but the results of a secret investigation into alleged sexual abuse at the academy exclusively obtained by cnn reveal a decades-long history of ignoring or covering up accusations of rape, assaults, and other serious misconduct. what's more, the coast guard kept this report secret for nearly four years and only came clean to congress this month after inquiries by pamela brown. she has more. >> reporter: the multiyear investigation was called operation failed anchor and uncovered a history of sexual assaults that were ignored or covered up by high ranking

officials. but coast guard officials have kept the investigation secret since 2019 and never released the report. only approaching congress this month af cnn asked about it. during the the investigation, the coast guard found evidence of dozes of cases of sexual assault, even though they only looked into a specific time frame. from the late '80s to 2006, overlooking many years when other assaults had been reported. a report on the investigation found suspected attackers were not criminally investigated. punishments, if they happened, were sometimes as minor as extra homework. victims sometimes faced punishment for fraternization or lewd acts. many suspects went on to have successful military careers, while victims were sometimes kicked out of the academy. for those who stayed, it could be just as difficult. >> i was sexually assaulted three times. it was completely toxic and devastating to my sense of self.

and left lifelong damages to my physical/mental health. >> reporter: this young woman is a recent cadet. she graduated in 2022 and said the coast guard culture has not changed. >> the coast guard academy employees, reinforces, and cultivates a system that thrives on the trauma and pain of women and minorities. it's designed for their failure. >> reporter: the coast guard's secret investigation revealed that female cadets describe survival tactics they had to use while at the academy. they would rig their doors to make it hard to get in, and cadets were hesitant to report for year that as female cadets, they wouldn't be taken seriously. one woman described a fraternity of male cadets that hated women and didn't think women should be in the coast guard.

>> you realize if you say something, you're blacklisted because you're the girl who cried wolf. >> even if it really happened? >> even if it really happened. >> it sounds like from what you're described, the survivors are the ones who are punished and those who are accused of sexual assault go on to thrive. >> exactly. when cadets get in trouble, there is this intense shame, this group shaming. >> reporter: the coast guard did investigate one of this victim's assaults but told her they didn't find enough evidence. >> i was 17. i needed my mom. i needed somebody to stand up for me in those moments. and it just -- it broke me. >> reporter: democratic senators maria cantwell and tammy baldwin sent a letter friday to the head of the coast guard that called the information, quote, disturbing, and demanded answers. they committed to pursuing full accountability for perpetrators and investing in meaningful support for survivors. >> and i'm joined now by cnn anchor pamela brown. pam, what does the coast guard have to say about all this?

>> reporter: after cnn's report, the coast guard sent us a statement saying that the coast guard fully recognizes that by not having taken appropriate action at the time of the sexual assaults, the coast guard may have further traumatized the victims, delayed access to their care and recovery, and prevented some cases from being referred to the military justice system for appropriate accountability. the coast guard owns this failure and apologizes to each of the victims and their loved ones. and i will tell you, our colleagues on the investigative team, blake ellis, melanie ash, we're going to stay on this story as it unfolds. >> getting answers because of the questions you and your team are asking. pamela brown, great to have you, thank you so much. >> thank you. just ahead, according to ukrainian military intelligence, russia's secret sfb is plotting to kill yevgeny prigozhin, the founder of the mercenary wagner group, who led a short-lived rebellion in russia last week. so, where is he?

to 50 years with my best friend. [sfx: gasp] [sfx: spilling sound] nooo... aya... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty absorbs spills like a sponge. and is 2x more absorbent so you can use less. bounty, the quicker picker upper. meet the portable blender we can barely keep in stock. blendjet 2 gives you ice-crushing, big blender power on-the-go. so you can blend up a mouthwatering smoothie, protein shake, or latte wherever you are! recharge quickly with any usb port. best of all, it even cleans itself! just blend water with a drop of soap. what are you waiting for? order yours now from blendjet.com before they sell out again!

type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes.

taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone. you may pay as little as $25. i realized that jade was overweight. i wish i would have introduced the fresh food a lot sooner. after farmer's dog, she's a much healthier weight. she's a lot more active. and she's able to join us on our adventures. get started at betterforthem.com sleepovers just aren't what they used to be. a house full of screens? basically no hiccups? you guys have no idea how good you've got it. how old are you? like, 80? back in my day, it was scary stories and flashlights.

we don't get scared. oh, really? mom can see your search history. that's what i thought. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity. even the white house says it does not know the current

whereabouts of the man who led last week's short-lived rebellion in russia. and ukraine's military intelligence chief says that russia's fsb is plotting to kill yevgeny prigozhin. quoting him now from an interview. quote, we are aware that the fsb was charged with the task to assassinate them. will they be successful in doing that? we'll see with time. we're joined by steve hall, a former cia chief of russia operations. steve, how likely is it that the fsb knows exactly where prigozhin is? and if they wanted to kill him, how hard would it be for them to do it? >> yeah, i would say that this analytical statement by the ukrainian military intelligence is not a huge stretch. it's not a particularly bad analytical position. if i were a betting man, i think prigozhin's in some significant

trouble from the fsb to begin with. the fsb is extremely good. they'll be able to find him. they know how to kill people. we've seen that many times before. for me the question is, why now? if they were going to kill him, the time to have done it would've been before he caused all the difficulties that he caused. and the fsb is the organization responsible for informing the president, putin and those close to him, that something is amiss. and either they did that and he ignored it, unlikely, or they failed to see it. yeah, it's kind of obvious now that they would want to get rid of him. but why not two, three weeks ago? they would have saved themselves a lot of trouble? >> what's keeping prigozhin alive if he is still alive? >> this is another thing. we just don't know. there's so little information right now. of course this is one of the things the russians are really good at is putting question marks above these guys. prigozhin, the rumor is, everybody is saying that he's, you know, happy and healthy -- maybe not so happy -- but he's

in belarus someplace thanks to the intervention of president lukashenko. we haven't seen surovikin either, another guy who there's a lot of question marks over. in a sense, this plays into what i think the kremlin is trying to do, which is, you know, if they do the expected, if they go ahead and kill these guys, then everybody is, like, okay, well, that's predictable and now that's over and we're past that. by keeping some questions out there, i think it keeps people that putin is still unsure about on edge. and perhaps they will make a mistake, which will put them on the list to be gotten rid of as well. so there's some housekeeping that needs to be done. >> i was just going to ask about keeping his internal house in order. who are the people that putin is most concerned about now? >> it's hard to say because of the nature of how difficult it is to predict what's going on inside the kremlin. i think we all probably remember the days we were looking at how many guys were on top of lenin's tomb and people were marching by and that gave us an idea of what

was going on. it's still very, very hard to know what's going on inside the kremlin. but obviously the people who have the most power and are closest to putin are ironically not only the ones who would be called upon to take care of problems, but also the ones who pose the greatest danger, the head of the fsb, the head of the other securities services, even the security guys are at risk. he's got to do something. whether putin does -- whether it's a stalin-like purge of everybody or something more modulated, we'll just have to see. >> it is fascinating how history sometimes seems to repeat itself. steve hall, great to have you here. i suspect as soon as we'll be talking soon about some of this. >> i bet so. now to two story of rebellion inside russia. the short-lived insurrection we were discussing and a voice of protest, whose story we brought you earlier this year. the reporting tonight from cnn's melissa bell.

>> reporter: two russians in exile. one, a student with a rebellious tattoo. the other, an insurrectionist warlord. only one of them is on the run on terrorism charges. meet 20-year-old olessia. her alleged crime? an antiwar social media post last year that led to a conviction and her escape to europe. now in norway, as she looks for work, she was glued to the images coming out of russia over the weekend. >> translator: i watched it non-stop. i followed this justice march all day. i wondered how it would end. and i really wanted to see in person how prigozhin was taken to the pretrial detention center. >> reporter: pretrial detention centers are well op known to her, but that's not where wagner chief yevgeny prigozhin ended up, heading instead to belarus, where putin ally, alexander lukashenko offered him refuge.

>> i also realize there was a harsh decision made to destroy. i suggested putin not to hurry. let's talk with putin and commanders. >> reporter: no such help. prizing off her own electronic bracelet on her way to the border. cnn first brought you her story earlier this year. she just arrived in vilnius, lithuania, after fleeing her home in northern russia, taking very little. but a reminder of the cost of her freedom, the reason she was made an example of, she says, is there are many ordinary russians like her. >> translator: every day we see the people are put in jail for the post on the internet. but a person who is guilty of killing 20 people, 14 people, according to the official version, and they tell him, you can go to belarus. every time i think about it, i get angry. >> reporter: but there is only

one prigozhin, even if vladimir putin never named him as he addressed the failed insurrection. >> translator: what we are facing now is treason, unreasonable ambitions, and personal interests led to treachery, state treason, and betrayal of one's own people. >> reporter: the man behind an insurrection facing no charges at all. >> translator: there is no law and no justice in russia. it's just all one big act of insanity and hatred. >> reporter: melissa bell, cnn, paris. coming up, an unsettling scene in southern california. what is happening to hundreds of sea lions and other marine life there? we'll take you along on the rescue missions and reveal the likely culprit. that's next.

income tax. sales tax. gas tax. californians pay some of the highest taxes in the nation. but now lawmakers are proposing a so-called “link tax” that would charge websites every time they link to a news article online. experts warn it could undermine the open internet,

punish local newspapers, while subsidizing hedge funds and big media corporations. so tell lawmakers: oppose ab886, because another new tax is the last thing we need. paid for by ccia. this fourth of july weekend,

beachgoers in southern california are being warned about sick and dying sea lions and dolphins. for weeks now at times there have been has many as 60 reports an hour of sea animals in danger. cnn's david culver went out with a marine rescue team to find out what's likely behind the deadly threat. >> reporter: 8:00 a.m., and they're already playing catchup, these marine wildlife rescuers inundated. >> one is way up the beach and one by the tideline. >> reporter: the beach itself has been narrowing, so it's a little dicey sometimes. we go along with wildlife rescuer adam fox. he's been saving sea lions for 15 years. what he's seen on california

beaches since late may is unprecedented. >> is there anyone there to potentially assist us? >> reporter: as we get closer, we spot one of the sea lions. >> looks like he's having a seizure right now. >> what we'll do is be very gentle with her, get those flipper pits in. and i'm going to flip her to you. 3, 2, 1. obviously we were able to rescue one, but you can see behind us another one that didn't survive. it's just heartbreaking seeing this. >> reporter: the cause sits just off the coast in the pacific ocean. out here, scientists say a massive bloom of toxic algae is growing, stretching some 200 miles from santa barbara south to san diego and forecasted to get worst. >> the ocean temperatures projected to be the warmest over the next five years. that's the recipe for these blooms to be more intense. >> reporter: smaller sea creatures feed on the toxic algae. they are eaten by larger mammals like dolphins and sea lions. these blooms have happened before, but this year scientists warn that the concentration of

toxins in this bloom forecasted in red is leading to potentially record deaths of marine life. >> experts liken this to wave of a tsunami washing over a seabed. >> the dolphins lifeless once they hit the shore. the sea lions, beached and suffering from seizures and paralysis. >> people have called in because they've seen animals on the beach. they've described it as the ocean coughing up death. >> i'm here to report a sea lion who seems to be foaming at the mouth and looks like it's in distress. >> this one is really on its way out. it's shallow breathing. it's so sad. >> all of it weighs on rescuers like adam. >> sorry. i just know from working in the colonies how incredible these animals are. they deserve respect. >> reporter: respect this team shows through care, unloading the seizing sea lion for dr.

lauren palmer to begin treatment. dr. palmer has not had a day off in months. her desperate patients keeping her busy. >> big breath. she seems a little bit more comfortable. >> reporter: there's no guaranteed cure. the meds and fluids can help flush the toxins out, but if the toxins take hold, the brain damage is irreversible, causing erratic and aggressive behavior, including toward people who get too close. off to the side we notice this pup fighting for survival, desperate for milk and nurturing that only his mother can provide. she's sedated as her body fights off the toxins. >> she might deliver a healthy live pup but doesn't nurse, doesn't lactate, doesn't pay attention to it. >> reporter: the marine mammal care center had 40 sea lions this time last year. today they're caring for three times that number. we ordered fish for the whole year based on what we would normally see and have gone

through the entire amount this month. >> reporter: so overwhelming they've had to accommodate overflow in the parking lot. >> and that puts strains on our personnel. we have one veterinarian. >> they used to call it an unusual mortality event. and unfortunately, they're frequent enough now that they no longer call them unusual because they're not. >> reporter: relentless and expected to intensify. possibly devastating generations of sea lions like this pup, just seven days old. he may not make it. >> normally, john, in a story like this we would want to show you the release of the healthy rehabilitated sea lions. the problem is, not only is that toxic algal bloom still out there, but it's also growing. so, folks who are treating those sea lions can't yet release them at a risk of them being reinfected as soon as they're back out into the ocean. so, that further complicates this situation and really overwhelms those efforts to take care of those animals, john. >> what a story. it really is so sad.

thank you. next, a welcomed change of pace. our senior data reporter, harry enten on apple, now a $3 trillion company. that's trillion with a t. and the $64,000 question, how well would you have done if you had bought shares in it years ago. that and how apple's wealth stacks up against some pretty good sized countries. so you can soak up the sun with a frosty beverage. enjoy 15+ blends before rapidly recharging via usb-c. and it even cleans itself with a drop of soap and water. stand out even when you're accidentally twinning with our kaleidoscope of colors. don■t miss out on our best deal of the summer. visit blendjet.com to order yours.

apple has made wall street history. apple stock ended trading today at a record market value of $3 trillion, the only company to ever reach that mark. our senior data reporter harry enten joins us now with more. so, harry, if you were smart enough, maybe lucky enough, to invest in apple, like, 20 years ago, how much would you have made? >> i have some tissues that i'd like to use right now to wipe. just so sad. if you had invested, say, $10,000, 20 years ago, do you know how much that would be worth today? $6.7 million. >> really? >> yes. yes! this is so upsetting. you know, i -- my father asked me when i was young what stock did i want to invest in the late '90s and i said microsoft. i was so close. i was so close