the january 6 committee hearings investigating the attack on the u.s. capitol. getting tonight, the first hearing, including an overview of what happened. eyewitness testimony from a u.s. capitol police officer injured during the breach and a film maker who captured video of the rally and the proud boys that day. you can also watch on c-span now, our free mobile video app or any online at c-span.org. >> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable.

host: conversation out on the role of evangelical voters. timothy had is the head of the committee. remind us what you do. guest: thanks for having us on. our organization is based in atlanta, georgia in 2009. we like to say our role is to give christian voters a voice in government. we work on a number of issues for a lot of conservative faith voters. the question of life is a central issue but also issues of , family, religious liberty, also education, immigration, the justice system, human trafficking, a host of other issues. we certainly walk the halls of congress itself and certainly state legislatures across the

country, so we have been around for about 13 years now and it is a treat to be able to work with a lot of people on the federal and state levels on important issues like this. host: if you are interested, you can go to ffcoalition.com. your first principle listed is respecting the sanctity of life. take me through what friday was like at the faith and freedom coalition. guest: that is a great question and it certainly was not just for faith and freedom coalition, but for a number of organizations that focus on issues of life and, frankly just , a lot of voters across the country. this has been -- to be clear obviously the supreme court , decision did not once and for all settle any issues, but it certainly kind of reset the playing field, so to speak for

, this lively debate. but for a lot of people that have been kind of in the throes of thinking through and working on issues like this, this was a seminal moment. i think a lot of people, frankly, never actually thought that something like this would happen or could happen, and so to see close to 50 years of work and for a lot of praying people, , a lot of prayers, it was an emotional day. it was satisfying in a lot of ways, but also somewhat sobering to think that in those roughly 50 years, there's also been a little over 60 million procedures that, from a lot of people's perspectives, have been ultimate decisions. so, while it is a sobering day in many regards it also was a , day of rejoicing for what the future may hold. host: you called it a seminal

moment. with road being -- with roe being such a driving force for pro-life voters for so long, what is next and how do you keep the momentum up after achieving the mountaintop here, something that you said was unclear whether this day would come? guest: that is a great question and certainly i think for a lot of people that don't necessarily live and breathe these kinds of decisions, but are certainly interested, there is some confusion, not even just on the pro-life side, but also on the choice side. there's a lot of misunderstandings or maybe even some misinformation going on. obviously, like i alluded to, this is a once and for all decision -- this isn't a once and for all decision. the questions still persist. it moves the decision back to the people and their

representatives, is the way they phrased it. this becomes a state-by-state issue, and a lot of people think that is either confusing or frustrating. maybe i live in a state where i do want to make that choice, and it has a lot of complicating arrangements. more than likely -- so, there are 13 states right now that have automatic trigger laws. there is some other little mechanism that has to click in, maybe the action of an attorney or state legislature, but 13 states have laws on the books that basically immediately or automatically trigger, so these are automatically or in the next 30 days. then, another 15 or 16 states have passed laws in anticipation of a day like this. then, another six or seven states, either the governor or

the state legislature have somehow intimated that they would like to take action. there are probably 15 states that are going to expand abortion services in their respective states. obviously, places like california and new york, illinois has made some allusions to that effect. in some places, it is like dropping a glass and seeing the shards of glass kind of spread in a lot of different directions. you're going to have a lot of different responses in the 50 different states now. host: for about the next 35 minutes, you are here on this washington journal. phone lines open if you want to chat with him about the faith and freedom choate -- faith and freedom coalition, about the supreme court decision on friday. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. i wonder, mr. head, as folks are

calling in, what your thought is on it whether dobbs becomes for the pro-choice movement in this country, what roe v. wade was for so many decades for the pro-life movement. does this galvanize and focus the pro-choice movement in this country, and what do you think about that? guest: i think that is a perfectly reasonable question, and frankly a question that a lot of organizing organizations and activists on the political left have kind of assumed. i think that just in a previous segment on your show, one of the callers made the allusion that half of the country does want abortion and half of the country doesn't. numbers actually are a little bit skewed in the direction of a pro-life sentiment, but i would

say, at this almost 70% of point, responders to those polls say that they do want restrictions on abortion but , with limitations, usually around the life of the mother, incest, some kind of exceptions like that. but i think on the political left and the pro-choice community, clearly, there is a rallying cry that is going to be heard loud and clear. i think from a lot of those states i just alluded to, certainly the huge states like new york and california, but some smaller states as well, the pacific northwest, pacific northeast. probably a couple of great lakes states. it's a little bit unclear. but what i would like to try to say, to explain, is that i think it just kind of shifts the playing field maybe 45 degrees. it doesn't completely reset the

chessboard altogether. i think that you are going to see a highly motivated pro-life community and a highly motivated pro-choice community just playing on slightly different fields. host: from the dissent, this is what they wrote. "no one should be confident that this majority is done with its work. the right row and casey recognized is not standalone. the court has lingered for decades with other seven freedoms involving bodily integrity, familial relationships and procreation, and obviously the rights to terminate a pregnancy arose the , right to purchase the use of contraception and in turn, those rights lead more recently to the rights of same-sex intimacy and marriage. they are all parts of the same constitutional fabric protecting our decision-making from the most personal of life decisions." do you think the court is done with its work when it comes to these issues? guest: in many regards, to kind

of pull the thread, if you will to unfurl the thread of the , question of life from a constitutional perspective, it immediately does flow logically and jurisprudential he to other liberties that you just enumerated and clearly not only did the dissent articulate these things, but also in justice thomas' concurring opinion, he also alluded to these same phenomenon, that frankly, when you kind of tip one logical domino over around this, it does have repercussions. ultimately, the controlling majority will kind of distinguished -- majority the >> up next, the prent