is dealing with late-term abortions as well. so i think it's going to make a tremendous difference in the pro-life movement, assuming this opinion gets issued legally. >> sean: we will have more tomorrow. leo, thank you. that's all the time we have left this evening. please never miss an episode. thank you for making the show possible, let not your heart be troubled, laura is next. >> laura: i'm laura ingraham and this is a fox news of relief. political reporting on a leaked draft of the supreme court opinion in the mississippi abortion case. and just to say milton has been assigned the majority opinion, which according to the draft, means roe vs. wade will be overturned. what does this mean? this returns the apportionment issue to the states, which preroe, which is where it was always was. some will allow, some sites might ban it, some will find what they believe is a middle ground. i want to say this very clearly

tonight. no matter what you think about this outcome, the leak itself represents a shocking and unprecedented breach of the courts confidentiality. and it is key to the courts ability, on any issue, to engage and they in the give-and-take and all the decision-making that is required to reach these decisions based on legal principle. based on the constitution. not because of political pressure. that is what the legislature does, not the court. and those, especially the law clerks, they are afforded a tremendous privilege. think about that. to work at the court, to learn from the justices. but the invaluable deal that you strike when you accept that clerkship, which is the most coveted thing you could have as a young lawyer, is that you swear confidentiality regarding everything you see and

everything you hear. and especially the internal deliberations of the court, especially that. it is not up to a law clerk to decide when the decision of the court will be announced. and it does not up to a law clerk or any employee of the court to leak a decision and what is a naked attempt to try to change the outcome before the final opinion is issued. now why am i so passionate about this tonight? i actually know what i'm talking about. a lot of people on television do not know what they were talking about. i was a supreme court law kirk. and i know, because i saw it. drafts in the don't like opinions going back and forth. language changes. sometimes, sometimes even votes might change. may be a justice will see an argument he or she didn't think of, it's rare, but it does happen. this is all done confidentially to encourage this free exchange

of ideas that is always been -- it doesn't matter. it is deemed essential to the proper functioning of our nation's highest court. chief justice rehnquist, and our orientation session at the court, said to all of us, so there's nine justices for clerks for each chamber. about 36. i met a couple of the retired justices still have clerks that are still at the court. but not money. it is about 36, 40 young lawyers. he looked at us and he said, if you leak anything from this court, you can kiss your legal career goodbye. done. yes, we remember that. through the entirety of the court's history, no matter how controversial or disruptive they have been, and i am talking decades, decades of decisions on

the freedom of religion, rights of criminals, same-sex marriage. none of those draft opinions ever leaked. you know why customer because everyone in the building understood that was a line that could be never crossed. it is a sad commentary that someone in that building took it upon himself or herself to totally usurp the role of the justices and hijack the court's deliberative process. this was a bald-faced attempt to tip the balance of the vote one way or another. we know which way. the leaker undoubtably hopes, rights, that this leaked opinion will drive activists to the court doors. they were desperately banging on the doors during brett kavanaugh's confirmation hearing. all of them outside screaming, all the colorful sides. that's going to have some impact that will have one of the justices, the majority, change his or her vote.

once again, it looks like the left will just smash an established government process to get their way. do anything in their power to stop the conservative majority from issuing a ruling on a pending case. this leaker is going to be sorely disappointed and should be immediately discovered and disbarred. joining me now, jonathan turley, gw university law professor and fox news contributor. civil rights attorney and ceo for the center for american liberty is. we also hope to be joined by former doj lawyer and just moments. professor, i am -- this is one of those things i thought i would never see in my life. i've seen a lot in my time in washington. i've been here way too long. this is one of the most

destructive things that i could ever imagine to happen to our legal system. take it away. >> we are all in disbelief. i've covered the court for years and i teach a class on the supreme court. i really didn't think this day would come. that is a strange thing to say in the city that literally floats on leaks. the only island not see that did not have leaks was the supreme court. and it existed on a level of integrity that is all too foreign today in politics. and to see people celebrating this leak is perhaps the most disturbing thing of all. it just seems that there is no ruler institutional value that can withstand this age of rage. what happened with this leak caused lasting damage to the supreme court. i think that the court will never quite be the same because

it has always existed, as you said, laura, on an understanding on a good faith of institution, believing truly and each other, even though they disagreed wholeheartedly and opinions. this was a malicious act. and the only reason to leak it was to try to create external pressure to change the position of the court and may be encourage congress to pass this federal abortion law to try to federalize the abortion area. what is really quite about this, if anything the justices are more likely to dig in. the second greatest blow to the court would not just be after the leak gets it would be to external pressure. this is turn everything into a mirage. what this person did cheapen the institution to a degree that is

breathtaking. you know, i don't know why -- maybe it was the last area of naivete that i had left after years in washington. but i truly never thought we would come to this moment. >> we have been hearing now for the last year from democrats that they exist merely to face guard democracy, right? since january 6th, there is a true guardians of democracy. all of the institutions, all of the norms are being protected by joe biden and the left. what do we see tonight? with this having happened? >> laura, there are so many thoughts going through my mind was a lawyer for the pro-life movement, as a constitutional lawyer, and ever someone involved in politics for this was a deeply political act and

it was named not only at the legislation like you mentioned at undermining potentially the corey courts legitimate see, but also affecting the midterm elections. this is going to be a talking point in advertisements is that are being drafted as you and i are speaking tonight about how it is important to vote for democrats to save women from back alley abortion, still in the blank, et cetera. but all of that is a lie. this is an insurrection level that if you talk about insurrection against the court, but i agree with professor, in honor and dignity the justices are likely to not change their votes, the ones were honest, and stick with this opinion. it returns to the states a decision that always should have been there. this draft opinion goes through the analysis very well. that there never was a consensus in this country about abortion. it doesn't fit in the 14th amendment. when you look at the mississippi

law itself, it provides exception for the life of the mother and for significant fetal defects. it is not even a band. you are going to have -- look at what the democrats have done on the political side in california. do you have -- talk about babies dying in a pronatalist setting that is up to 28 days after birth. that being protected from prosecution. they have gotten, laura, after the roe v. wade, more and more at -- >> they are fanatics. >> when the rest of the civilized world does not remember any of the spirits be when this is about abortion on demand. this is utter fanaticism and does burn down the court and in to get your way. claiming to be the great protectors of our democratic system. to that point, professor, the author of that political piece

that leaked the draft opinion, we don't know if it is draft opinion, people think it is. we don't know. but he spoke to msnbc tonight. watch. >> this opinion that he has written, which is just a withering takedown of the roe v. wade precedent. it holds no punches at all. it is pretty brutal. and the way it is structured, and needs to be that way. because of the way they confront this issue of a court precedent. the legal terms. >> laura: a lot of people thought the original roe opinion was brutal as well given what happened to 50 plus million babies, but your response to his comment? >> as you know, as a draft it can change. this is a february draft. the votes can change. although whoever did this probably made that less likely. it does have -- it does sound

like justice alito has spent his entire career questioning the basis for roe and casey. he was not alone, by the way. professor at harvard called roe a smoke screen. into the late justice ginsburg said that she had reservations about how it roe was written. so roe has barely been a difficult path for the court. it has been subject to a series of 5-4 decisions, often decisions that were quite fractured, nuanced beyond definition for some people. but the court has never been -- what this court would suggest is that if it is in fact a legitimate draft, that they have a secure five justice majority. it would make sense that justice alito would be picked if justice roberts was not originally in the majority.

he might be going with the dissent or he may have decided that he could not find the majority. but the decision itself -- it has aspects to the type of analysis that we have seen from justice alito, who is is not believe that this right is found in the constitution as opposed to resting with the states. >> laura: we have former doj james trusty with us tonight. james, bernie sanders tweeted something moments ago saying congress must pass legislation that codifies roe vs. wade as law of the land. and if there aren't 60 votes in the senate to do it, and there are not, we must end the filibuster to pass it with 50 votes. this seems like the goal. jim, i mean, this seems pretty obvious at this point. they were ready with the politics the second this thing dropped in the political. it was almost like they had a plan ahead of time.

>> almost like they talk to each other about what's coming. laura, you've stolen my thunder and so is professor truly. i heard this notion that there was a leaked draft opinion and i didn't really care which way the opinion went. i thought to myself, i can't use all the words, but i will tell you, this is an outrageous historic moment to have a leak out of the supreme court. i have two things that we need to mine. a horrific momentum to something beyond belief. maybe as a possible way is deflecting that. the supreme court needs to issue a statement that condemns out of what just happened. >> laura: to your point, i want all of you to chime in here. to me it seems like the court

needs to come out like an hour ago. immediately the chief justice should come out and issue a statement. in the age of computers, you can do that i understand. you can issue a statement this is a unauthorized obvious leak from the court and lay out the points. as to why, how this leaker must be found. there has to be consequences for this individual, whoever it was. we can guess their names floated out there, i'm not going to see any names on television, but there are people who have been connected to the author of the piece. i'm not going to get into it, because we have no idea. but they are going to find out. if any of you on television tonight deny that we will find out who leaked this opinion? do you any of you think that? >> we will find out. we will find out who did it. >> laura: what do you think? >> i am hopeful that we can.

i know that chief justice roberts is going to do everything he can. this is the greatest crisis not just of his career, but of any modern chief justice. this is the original sin of judicial ethics. it does not get worse. and i think that when you mentioned, what is the court doing come i think chief justice roberts has been meeting nonstop with the marshals and others to see how they are going to find the culprit here. and god have mercy on that soul, because the court will have none. this is the worst type of attack you can launch against the integrity of the united states supreme court. >> laura: james, the chief justice, as most chief justices to the current chief justice, they are there and they believe that their role is to safeguard the court for future generations. we heard a lot about the legitimacy of the court after

cavanaugh, justin thomas, his confirmation after the casey decision, after lawrence. all of these cases, the legitimacy of the court is called into -- well, what about now? chief justice is incumbent upon him. to bring every law clerk before him. give me your phone's, i'm sorry. or the fbi. give me your phones, we want all of your accounts. we have to look at every device you'd ever used and find out who did this. tell me what could be done? >> i hope our fbi is not as politicized as it's been in recent years. but look, i'm going to pose an alternative theory. these are logical steps in the exact of bright appropriate aggressively stops that the chief justice should take with federal law enforcement. my alternative theory here, it is ground zero.

but what if this person is treated as a heroic whistle-blower by the left? i think it is quite possible that this person is going to be front page of the newspaper, the big hero who tried to put the brakes on changes to roe v. wade. it will be great celebration and great rewriting of history about how this was such a necessary moment to stand up against evil. i could see all of that happening, which is thoroughly depressing. >> laura: that is the end of the court. if that happens, and they are telling me i need to get to the next discussion, if that happens, if they are celebrated, they never should be able to have the role that they have now. they are never going to be able to have access to opinions. i don't know what will happen at the court, period, if that's the case. >> it will just change the court. it is going to change who we are as a country that we idolize someone who -- if we reach that

point, problems go beyond the court itself. >> laura: that's an excellent point. go ahead. speak i was just going to say, we are at that point. i think that is absolutely what's going to happen here. it is political end of the chief justice doesn't come out with the second statement, the court had no comment, so -- >> the court had no comment. >> it's a much bigger. roe vs. wade is itself a huge decision. we will get to the implications, but what happens with this leak, people have to understand, things will never be the same again in our judicial branch. in less dramatic actions are taken. it's got to happen fast. this is just the latest escalatory step but taken by the left to tear down our norms, our institutions, our traditions. and i don't think the voters are on board with what the left is doing. joining me now, chris rufo,

manhattan institute senior fellow and chris liked her. activism is fine. we celebrate activists. it doesn't matter what you believe. you are out there, have a legitimate exchange of ideas. no problem. what does this say to you about the level of desperation on the left. >> we've seen it for the last two years. the left did $2 billion in damage, burned down entire city blocks after the death of george floyd. and has really been on a steamrolling effect. they use on a site what kind of justification to just to hide behavior -- this isn't a surprise to me. but i think what really has to happen is that conservatives, especially those justices on the supreme court, have to hang tough, stick to their principles, and cannot back down to this intimidation. we all have to come together,

pushback, and reestablish those boundaries if we want to keep our country. >> laura: earlier tonight, rachel maddow seemed to suggest that this leak was worth it. watch. >> it is shocking, as he said. and as we started discussing, it's shocking in substance and in terms of what it means about the court and what it means about the stakes here that someone was willing to do this. it is just a remarkable thing. speak of a remarkable thing. imagine if this was thought to be a conservative law clerk. to leak something in a case that the liberals were all thrilled about. imagine what rachel and the crowd would be same tonight, kurt. >> i can imagine, laura. and i think we all know that they would be rather upset. we have been hearing for almost a year and a half about attacks on our democracy and insurrections. this did more damage than a bunch of elderly trump voters

taking selfies in the rotunda. the actual decision itself is huge. it is probably the most important decision since ferguson was overturned by brown versus board. ended that case, the democrats are very, very upset about it. but i think you are rightly focusing on the procedural aspects, the institutional aspects. and frankly, i think there are a lot of former conservative voices we can't count on waiting for david french, the conservative case. to come out and explain why we are wrong. this is a disaster on every level. the court needs to come together against this and we need to go back to basic principles and basic functions and norms of our institutions. i'm afraid that is unlikely to happen at this point. >> you notice they could about

tonight? justice breyer. obviously he is retiring. he's been a champion of a more liberal judicial activism on the court. i've had the chance to meet him a few times. he's always nothing but pleasant. very genteel individual. what is he thinking tonight? this is the court he's leaving behind regardless of what he thinks about the outcome. there's tons of outcomes over the last 40 years that conservatives were disgusted by. and i talked and wrote about them. but the idea that anyone would celebrate the smashing of court protocol that goes back 100 years to the start of the court, the modern court. i can't imagine he is happy about this tonight. >> no, he's not. but this is something we've seen on the left for the last 50 years. a hard left activist including marxist individuals have really

run a long march to the institutions and it's very simple. we get our people into the institutions, we change those institutions from within. we violate democratic norms and go on an antidemocratic process simply by dominating the bureaucracies. they believe they can do the same thing with the courts that they have done with other prestigious institutions. and to a certain extent, it's working. that is why they have to adapt. they have to come up with new strategies and tactics to start pushing back on the left institutional dominance before they are really taking this democratic show and putting whatever they want inside. >> it has become their pattern. and it's by any means necessary. whatever they have to do, whether it is ripping down a statue or is machine -- or blowing up sex education in school and turning into something different, they do it and they will say oh, you are an

outlier for complaining about it. that is what is happening tonight with this leak in the court. the 2019 "new york times" piece reminded everybody that back in the 80s, it was senator joe biden who supposedly was a devout catholic and voted to let states overturn roe v. wade. so just that it's a pretty good indicator, is it not come of how far the democrat party has shifted to the most radical abortion on demand position on this one of many cultural issues. >> i'm not surprised at all, laura. it's becoming more extreme, more extreme, and more extreme over the years. we have a supreme court nominee who wouldn't admit she knew what a woman was. >> laura: she's not a nominee,

she is a new justice on the supreme court. she is not a nominee anymore, wishful thinking there, buddy. >> notably not a biologist. look, i don't want to take it too far, but i the privilege of serving our country and i served in places where the institutions fail. and were neighbor killed a neighbor. and i worry about our country. because if power is the only currency, you are not going to have one side stick with the old status quo while the other ones run rampant. it's not going to happen. we need to get back to the principal. the constitution as they are, it gives us the framework. all we have to do is be wise enough to reimburse it. >> our kids are being taught in school, and some cases, that the institution is structurally racist. so if you are dealing with a structurally racist document written by some good writers, but they were racist too, a lot

of them, the founders, then that they are a hero in that story. that is the problem. and that goes back to what you demonstrated with what was happening with crt in the schools, right? >> that is exactly right. the technique is this. if you delegitimize a country's founding, if you delegitimize the country's constitution, and their history, you can take kids, adults in any direction that you want. we are entering almost a post-constitutional phase in the minds of many people who believe that the constitution is an old document that upholds racist values. when that disappears, when that commitment is evaporated, you enter very dangerous and very scary territory. and i'm afraid we've taken another step in that direction tonight. >> panel, thank you both. here now is a republican candidate david mccormick. david, this issue because -- we

are off the court now into politics. this issue of life for the pennsylvania voters has been really important for years, and years, and years. it used to be pro-life democrats. but you and your chief competitor dr. oz, differences on that issue, your reactions? >> first, as you are just saying, what an earth-shattering breach of trust that is just further evidence of an assault on her institution. it's a very scary and sad day that she would see this happen in the supreme court. second, if, in fact, the decision of the court turns out to be what was in this brief, this would be a huge step forward and a huge victory for the protection of life, which is certainly where they conservative and republican party is in pennsylvania and a number of democrats. this is an issue on the campaign trail.

it has already been a flash point. i'm someone who is pro-life, has been pro-life, and this is something where my primary competitor three years ago to this month had spoken up on a breakfast club interview about his concerns about this very scenario. that if roe v. wade was overturned that the states would put in more restrictive policies regarding abortion, more pro-life policies. so this is a flash point, this is something the voters want to talk about and it is within the context of the broader culture war that you are speaking of, this pushed by the extreme left. whether it is the question of transgender, transitions at schools, or whether it is the history that is being taught about america. these are all flash points for parents and voters in pennsylvania are feeling like the extreme left is taking our country and a dangerous, dangerous direction. it is going to erode the very foundation of our country. >> david, think about -- you are obviously west pointe graduate.

you are an army ranger. you served your country in uniform. based on the principle that america was worth defending. that america's principles were worth even exporting abroad. and we help other countries can be as free and love their foundation as we do. but when we stop loving our institutions, our separation of powers, the courts confidentiality is all part of wrapped up into that narrative. we are going to save ukraine? i don't think so. not if we don't love ourselves first. >> i couldn't agree more. the recognition that we live in the most exceptional country in the world, that it has been the leader in terms of creating liberty, prosperity, human rights equality, relative to anyone else in the world with all of our challenges and mistakes come of that recognition being lost. and we see it being chipped away where people come americans no

longer trust their leadership and their institutions. you know a lot more about the supreme court than i do, but that was always on such hallowed ground, always viewed as a place where institution was pure and regardless of the decisions, as you said. here we see a breach of trust that because the very integrity into question. it is very difficult to see, but it is part of a broader trend is you and i have discussed. >> david, this issue is going to be very important in two weeks for the big primary. a lot of candidates running. it's safe to say i think that is going to be had. i'm sure we will have you back before then. thank you, david. bring it on. that is the focus of tonight's angle. >> importantly, she says, there is no scientific debate when it comes to the big picture. >> there is no argument about the value and the importance of gender affirming care.

there is no argument. >> forget her being a political liability to the democrats. rachel levine is first and foremost a lawyer. there is no argument among medical affectional's about subjecting minors to this complete barbarity? that's false. >> transition of forming therapies are virtually untested and inflict lasting harms. and instead of providing parents with medical information and evidence based studies, are frequently pressured into accepting these risky treatments on behalf of their children. >> medications are being used off label without proper fda risk assessment profile. this whole thing is an experiment on children. >> let's drop the misleading euphemisms. gender affirming care goes beyond boys wearing dresses and girls changing their names. it can include barbaric surgery to remove reproductive organs and hormones to block puberty. go under affirming care includes

social affirmation at any age, puberty blockers during puberty, and hormone therapy starting during early adolescence. irreversible surgery is "typically used in adulthood or case-by-case. or a case-by-case in adolescents. you know what i say? what is a case by case basis? at what basis are these made for the adolescents to get the surgery? and i'm going to guess. it is a totality of circumstances. meaning the language is bad enough to allow for gender reassignment surgery on demand, regardless of the age. parents across america are shocked at the speed that basic truths, institutions are coming under assault. we are talking about what's happening that the court tonight. when they see a biological boy playing women or girls in a sport, most parents are horrified, they are outraged.

the same way that they feel when they see schools machine and gender identity discussions on little kids. >> my ability to parent my child. child. even before i had any knowledge, i didn't even get to show support. you asked for support, i didn't get a chance. your job was to educate my child and math, science, et cetera. do your job, and let me do mine. >> laura: phenomenal concept, doing your job. cratering among almost every demographic group, they are determined to fight back. saw a little bit of thought on the court. they have convinced themselves that forcing their ideas on the nation, no matter what they have to do to do that, will ultimately pay off. in the meantime, they tell everybody else as outliers, holding back what is the progress. as we learned of most political piece, the court has voted,

apparently, to strike down roe v. wade. coming from the sleek draft of an opinion from the court which again is a breach that has never occurred in the history of the supreme court. and by the way, the ruling is merely to send the abortion issue back to the states. the idea that the u.s. constitution ever prohibited states from regulating or even outlawing the procedure was total legal fantasy from day one. it was totally made up. the left is going into the stratosphere tonight, they are going nuts. they know their entire facade, everything they fought for, this is the heel they will die on. they are worried it will all come crumbling down. they think that somehow this leak is going to be a gift that could rescue them from the midterm. while it is misguided. think about what the american people are saying about some of

the other hot topics out there. gender identity, pushing education the so-called antiracism ideology and crt influence and schools. how about the diversity equity inclusion, my favorite acronym. the orthodoxy and college admissions, and corporate america, the attacks on law enforcement, the abortion industrial complex that is screaming out tonight. trans athletes and women in sports. >> my 5-year-old is being peddled transgender books in her library. teenagers are being served under the guise of young adult literature. do something, be a leader. because if you know what? the citizens of this county deserve better. >> as we saw in orlando, republican governors like ron desantis are fighting back with success. even to get some big corporations. >> the company has posted itself

to attacking the parents and my state. when that company [cheers and applause] >> when that company has very high up people talking about this in programming with young kids. it is wrong. walt disney would not want that. get back to the mission. do what you did great. that is why people love the company. and you lost your way. maybe this will be the wake-up call that they need to get back on track. >> never got a chance to see that recorded. that was pretty wild. but the white house, they are fresh out of ideas. so what they decided to do was wind up old biden and send him out the snapback. >> there's too many politicians trying to score political points, trying to ban books. did you ever think any of the younger -- did you ever think

you would be worrying about book burnings and banning books? all because it doesn't fit somebody's political agenda. we have to stop making of the target of culture wars. >> maybe he was sleeping over the past 40 years, but his loyalists succeeded in removing some of america's classic literary works over that time. books like huckleberry finn, of mice and men, to kill a mockingbird. those are being taken out of schools across the united states. steve got the teachers union, they are fighting not for great literature, but again for any memory of american traditionalism. the american federation of teachers -- that is the go-to cash cow. by the way, member, they did more damage to children by supporting the covid lockdowns than we are ever going to know. they could have remained virtually forever, i think they would have.

>> if there are problems and shortages, then either some schools are closing in those districts where those districts are taking a pause. >> it is not a matter of we don't want to be there. it's that we can't stay there. math, vaccinations, proper ventilation. our schools, most of them, don't have those basic things. >> still waiting for that ventilation. over the weekend, we were in florida, and other parts, which we will talk about later, but mothers, fathers, they were coming up to a sane, never stop fighting for us, please. it's always gratifying to hear from you. i had no idea how bad things had gotten with schools until covid. the biden administration is just doubling down on their failure on all these cultural issues. this means democrats are standing against more traditional parents, common sense parents at this point who just want politics out of the

classroom. but democrats -- they are finding some new stars out there. >> who am i? i am a straight, white, christian, suburban, married mom who knows that the very notion that learning about slavery or redlining or systemic racism somehow means that children are being taught to feel bad or themselves because they are white is absolute nonsense. i want every child in the state to feel seen, heard, and supported. not marginalized and targeted because they are not straight, white, and christian. >> the new yorker's calling her a role model for the midterms. i kid you not. move over, aoc. a liberal karen with a headband is coming for the spotlight. she's part joy reid part joy's sake. if democrats don't stand up and fight back on the republicans are going to put forward people who may not support our having free and fair elections ever again. she hasn't heard about the court yet.

liberals one minute -- than they support limiting free speech the next and leaking stuff from the court. these people are the anti-democrats. and they're thinking is as flat as their singing. misinformation herself, she is a ranked partisan coming yet somehow she's put in charge of the dhs disinformation office. those who question the handling of covid were the ones pushing up the disinformation according to her. the whole wet market origin series that was ridiculous from the beginning. it turns out her commentary on the origins trapped china's remarkably well. getting a lab leak theory is still the most plausible explanation. tiktok princess doesn't care.

the democrats new millennial culture warrior will spend her time scolding conservative media with the karaoke accompaniment. so will any of this work? this in-your-face defense that they are trying to hide from taxpayers from all these years bear these attacks on the first amendment, even now the super courts legitimate see. i will say is that republican campaign managers and their candidates across america tonight are thrilled about the democrats new strategy. so bring it on. for too long the g.o.p. establishment has ran from the cultural issues of the day. like economic and tax policy. that is not enough. not without the issues that touch the formation of our children, our own hearts, the sanctity of their bodies and the safety of our streets. the democrats have reminded us

just how critical these issues are. so let's hope the g.o.p. doesn't forget those lessons. and that is the angle. joining me now is dr. michelle rotella, pediatrician and former executive director of the american college of pediatricians. let's start what i started with. dr. levine said there is no argument among medical professionals about the value of "gender affirming care" which is a term made up not too long ago. your response? >> dr. levine has been paying attention to the medical literature the last few years. there has been a huge international debate among psychiatry as well as madison. in fact, the u.k., france, sweden, and finland, have all taken a far more conservative approach to gender dysphoria in children as compared to the u.s.

they are high really distinctive in fact. the reason it is -- well, twofold. first of all, we know that the vast majority of young children will outgrow their gender dysphoria or their discomfort with their biological sex. either through watchful waiting or accompanying them with counseling that treats underlying emotional issues. >> laura: doctor, i don't mean to jump on you, but we are limited time, this is a huge debate. she is line, she is lying by saying there is no debate. they lie about a lot of issues. settled on coming never talk about them again. >> that's right. >> laura: dr. paul mchugh, of course, at johns hopkins, did

the most groundbreaking research. he's now almost 90. the most groundbreaking research on this. >> laura: yes. what we are most concerned about in children is that you are dealing with cross sex hormones and surgeries come you're talking about permanent sterilization, dysfunction, talking about giving these kids chronic diseases as adults. strokes, heart disease, diabetes, cancers. this is not something that you rush headlong into. this is not something that you promote as safe and effective. the science is absolutely not there. not by any stretch of the imagination. and here in the u.s., there are two organizations. the american college of pediatricians, which has clearly presented signs that refute with what the biden administration is putting forth. >> laura: they are not

listening to the signs. >> they are not. the society for gender-based medicine has refuted the documents line by line. be one this is devastating. we will make sure to get that information on my website. we will have you on the podcast too. we love more time to talk about all these issues. doctor, he gave us some amazing perspective. thank you. up next, the cringe he has moments from the weekend. nancy pelosi and raymond arroyo have it all. the seen and unseen, next. my a1c wasn't at goal, now i'm down with rybelsus®. mom's a1c is down with rybelsus®. (♪ ♪) in a clinical study, once-daily rybelsus® significantly lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer,

or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® 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. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? (♪ ♪) ask your healthcare provider about rybelsus® today.

cal: our confident forever plan is possible with a cfp® professional. a cfp® professional can help you build a complete financial plan. visit letsmakeaplan.org to find your cfp® professional. ♪♪

>> laura: live outside the supreme court where protesters are enraged at that leaked ruling from political tonight regarding roe v. wade. they are outraged about what is in these decisions, which of course returns the issue of abortion to the state. >> this is big and important breaking news. i have to say, watching this it is hard not to think that this is all part of an orchestrated idea and a plan.

you leaked the document, then you send in all of your activists and protests -- it's opposed to what the court is handing down. the truth is, for many, many decades before roe v. wade was decided. it was the law of the land. if it is indeed the ruling, it does give you pause since 1973. they've been taking to the streets of the city, raising up the voices of people whose voices couldn't be heard. and now, almost 50 years later, to see this decision drop is a historic moment. >> laura: it hasn't dropped at. >> but we assume it is giving this opinion. what has happened in that interim is the rise of maternal and child care centers all over this country that are ready for this decision when it drops. we have those centers that we

didn't have before. crisis centers and maternal hair centers. there's a sensitivity obscuring from mothers and pregnant numbers that was not there in 1973. it is in place today. it is the culmination of just like the civil rights movement, came from a prayerful group. >> it kind of extends from what we were talking about and the angle tonight, which is people say you are doing the culture war. no, no, you are seen with the people are doing in front of the court. they are exercising their first amendment rights, which we believe are protected, and they are protected by the first amendment. that first amendment it's been upheld by most cases in the supreme court. how ironic they are exercising their rights, yet the undergirding of so much of what is happening in the left into demonized, delegitimize the founders, the framers, the declaration of independence, the constitution.

yet they are enjoying the very liberty is that they say stem from a structurally racist document. you see out none of this makes any sense? >> laura: and they are out practicing their right to life. that right was insured by their parents and given to them. the court is now saying, let every state decided whether this is -- >> laura: it was obviously an issue that was never settled. this is now settled, what? 120,000 people showed up at the march for life every year even in freezing weather, horrible weather, great weather. it's a religious movement, but a young person's movement. >> i've been talking to a number of people in law enforcement who say that their law clerks should be lined up tomorrow, interrogated by the fbi and if someone doesn't pan out and say it, i did it, they should all be laid off and find new clerks. >> laura: i think you might have to. >> i don't know how else you

purge the leaks of a leaker in the middle of the supreme court and the destabilization of one of our precious institutions. >> laura: former texas democratic ole editorial candidate -- didn't she have pink sneakers? she had this to say. >> what will the ripple impacts of this be? not only in the lives of the individuals who will be impacted, but in our economy across this country as women's ability to participate in the workforce takes a dramatic and drastic low. that is exactly what is going to happen with the overturning of roe v. wade. >> that is not where the supreme court justices come from. they are looking at this as a constitutional matter. does the constitution of the united states -- does it allow abortion on demand state to state as a national fiat? the answer is, if you read this opinion, no, it does not. there is no right to abortion in

the constitution under this majority of opinion. they staked very clearly -- >> laura: find it in the 14th amendment. >> it was privacy. a right to privacy. it trickled on down. >> they ran abortion into it, but this was always -- >> laura: this was a state issue. he said it was shaky and bad. >> laura: everyone has to remember before everyone freaks out that this is now going to be determined by you, the people. you can move -- she could live in new york and you say look, remember, new york did that standing ovation in albany. you want to know what sick is? it is not safe, legal, and rare. in new york you get a standing ovation for having abortion up until basically the baby is out of the womb. they stood and gave the standing ovation for the most liberal abortion law i believe in the united states and new york. they gave it a standing ovation. okay, that is what the people in new york want.

it wasn't one-size-fits-all. tonight on msnbc, jamie raskin have the favorite line on this issue. >> i found it astonishing and appalling about the basic legal claim here is that the word "abortion" does not appear in the constitution and of course it doesn't. this would appear to be an invitation to have handmaid's tale type antifeminist regulation and legislation all over the country. >> laura: is he not speaking as a former embryo, is that not my question? >> when you have no constitutional to expand upon, cite margaret atwood. >> laura: they tried that with cavanaugh dressing up -- they were all in the outfits. >> look, this is performative theater. what you are seen on the streets

tonight, this is performative theater. step back, everybody has to take a deep breath. let's support, finally issued a formal opinion. then we as a country can digest it. i don't like that this leaked out. this is a bad day. you talk about democracy? damaging democracy? this is one of the most damaging moments to our democracy right here when a major institution has been briefed and undermined. i hope there is a congressional investigation into this. >> laura: they are too busy -- oh, no, this is my question. where is liz cheney tonight? she supposedly is a strong conservative. maybe she is out and she said something and maybe i missed it. but again, if you truly care about these institutions the other riders, which we condemned, took down those barricades and injure those police officers, we were against that and we said so, i treated it. but what about this?

all of you guardians of democracy -- the guardians of democracy. maybe they should show up. maybe they could come up tonight. >> the barricades are out. the barricades are upper on the supreme court. the moment it leaked in politico, the barricades came up. he knew what would happen next. and we are watching it unfold. let's hope this doesn't create pressure that changes the vote and properly and against constitutional law of the constitution. >> i say this, people say -- no, it's age in history. when i'm trying to say, that was the first thing we were told when we walk through those doors, that was the first thing justice rehnquist told us. you leak something out of here, you are gone. your career is over. a bunch of us were texting each other tonight. and i had forgotten that until they reminded me.

oh, my gosh, i remember. and it sent a chill. i wasn't even -- it wasn't even a question. >> this is the rapid -- >> laura: they politicized and they are doing it all over again. raymond, great to see you. we will do your other segment later in the week. executive director of justice put out a tweet. a lot more coverage coming up. ♪♪ . >> greg: happy glorious monday everyone what a great monday for you, me and america because our audience is back. you heard them. take