america and how will it change the process is the question at this hour. that decision will likely reach beyond college campuses and force even businesses to consider how they use race in their hiring. welcome back as a second hour of "america reports" gets underway. i'm sandra smith in new york and look who is with us. hi, rich. >> rich: it's good to be with you, sandra. judges ruling 6-3 to reject affirmative action which takes race into higher education admissions. the court says it violates the 14th amendment equal protection clause, the president called the decision a severe disappointment and seeming to question the entire court. >> president biden, congressional caucus [indiscernible] question its own legitimacy. is this a rogue court? >> this is not a normal court. >> should there be term limits for the justices, sir?

>> sandra: awaiting a press conference for students for fair admission who brought on this case after we heard from the president there just a short time ago. so that presser in washington will be underway any moment. we'll get there when it begins. the group brought two separate cases against the university of north carolina and harvard to the nation's highest court and asian-american student claims he was rejected from six elite universities by race. reaction out of it. >> thank you for coming. let me introduce participants of this press conference. on my far right is calvin yang, calvin is a participating member of students for fair admissions. he was rejected from harvard a few years ago. to my right is thomas mccarthy, typical spelling, thomas

mccarthy. tom is the founding partner of a law firm consevoir and mccarthy, and chief trial counsel and students for fair admissions versus the university of north carolina. to my left is adam mortara. adam is with mortara law, formerly with bartley beck, adam is our chief trial counsel and students for fair admissions versus harvard. my name is edward blum, founder and president of students for fair admissions. the opinion issued today by the united states supreme court marks the beginning of the restoration of the color blind

legal covenant that binds together our multi-racial, multi-ethnic nation. the polarizing stigmatizing and unfair jurisprudence that allowed colleges and universities to use a student's race and ethnicity as a factor to either admit them or reject them has been overruled. these discriminatory admissions practices undermined the integrity of our civil rights laws. ending racial preferences in college admissions is an outcome that the vast majority of all americans, of all races, will celebrate. a university doesn't have real diversity when it simply assembles students who look different but come from similar

backgrounds and talk and act and think alike. moreover, these opinions reestablish the founding principles of the 1964 civil rights act, which clearly forbids treating americans differently by race. let me quote. at the signing ceremony of the act on july 2, 1964, president lyndon johnson made these remarks. quoting now. "the purpose of the law is simple. it does not restrict the freedom of any american as long as he respects the rights of others. it does not give special treatment to any citizen." i'm going to read that again. "it does not give special treatment to any citizen. it does say the only limit to a man's hope for happiness and for the future of his children shall

be his own ability." beginning today america's colleges and universities have a legal and moral obligation to strictly abide by the supreme court's opinion. these obligations compel the removal of all racial and ethnic classification boxes from undergraduate and post graduate application forms. furthermore, the administrators of higher education must note. the law will not tolerate direct proxies for racial classifications. for those in leadership positions at public and private universities, you have an obligation to follow the letter and the spirit of the law. for decades our nation's most elite universities have given preferences to the children of

alumni, faculty and staff, athletes, and most notably, substantial donors. these preferences have been vigorously defended by these exclusive schools, even though court records reveal they have diminished individualized student diversity at nearly every competitive university in the country. the elimination of these preferences is long overdue and ssfa hopes these opinions will compel higher education institutions to end these practices. looking ahead at the upcoming admissions cycle, ssfa and its counsel have been closely monitoring the changes in admissions procedures should the court reach a decision like the one today. we remain vigilant and intend to

initiate litigation should universities defiantly flout this clear ruling and the dictates of title 6 and the equal protection clause. and finally, this organization is deeply grateful to the lawyers who have pursued this litigation with such skill and commitment. and finally, we are grateful to the dozens of young courageous men and women who joined ssfa as high school seniors after they were rejected from harvard and the university of north carolina. their dedication to the principles of equality is inspirational. thank you. calvin. >> good afternoon, ladies and

gentlemen. my name is calvin yang and i am a member of students for fair admissions. for so long asian-americans have strived for acceptance and recognition. for contributions to building a foundation of this country to be acknowledged. and for us to take up our rightful place within the society. today's decision has started a new chapter in the saga of the history of asian-americans in this country. it marks the promise of new beginning, resurgence of the principles of the american dream, and a return to the principles for all in this shining city on a hill. many people have asked me why i chose to speak out publicly for

affirmative action. especially amidst the potential backlash. my answer is simple. if no one is standing up to speak out against the injustices faced by our community, then our well-deserved rights will never be realized. today's victory transcends far beyond those of us sitting in this room today. it belongs to thousands of sleepless high schoolers applying to colleges. it belongs to the overachieving son of a recently unemployed west virginia coal miner. it belongs to those with the last names of smith or lee, chen or gonzalez. it belongs to all of us who deserved a chance but can now rejoice over the fact that at least our kids can be judged based on their achievements and merits alone. most importantly, it belongs to

all of us who believe that we work hard enough we all can have a chance at getting our own slice of this grand american dream. i firmly believe that diversity is very important for education. the future leaders of america need to have representation across all backgrounds of this society. this is why as i mentioned in my previous speech, affirmative action is a well-intentioned idea that is poorly executed in reality. thus, it is my hope to see a renewed college admissions system that recognizes and rewards the multi-facetted talents and diverse perspective that each individual can bring to the table. together let us embark on this journey to a fair educational landscape where the potential of our nation's youth knows no bounds.

thank you. >> good afternoon. just a few quick words. we are happy for students for fair admissions and the thousands of students and families who make up the membership across the country. we are pleased the court vindicated the promise of equal protection for all americans and a little bittersweet today, because my partner, friend and brother, will is not here, but i know that he is very proud of our team and very much his brilliance and hard work that is in large part a reason for the result today. >> and i have precious little to add to the words that were just spoken by, elegantly by edward,

calvin and tom, other than i also thank tom mccarthy and will for what they have achieved here, the firm opened its doors and the first representation it took was students of fair admissions and one of the first cases it filed was students for fair admissions against harvard and it's been nine years and this firm has accomplished a great deal. and thank my former partners at one of the premier trial law firms. not many firms like that would take on a cause like this and devote millions of dollars in attorney time and six lawyers trying this important case and they were brave enough to stand against woke corporations telling them not to do it and they did it. finally, i'm happy for my chinese nieces and nephews and my filipino god son.

>> we will take a few questions. if anyone has a question or two. >> [inaudible] >> you know, we have not dug deeply into this opinion yet, so i'm going to defer answering a question like that until we have had a chance to really go through the opinion. sometimes the representation of what is written can be read a number of different ways, so i'm going to decline answering that question for now. >> i know your organization stands for fair admissions and this is beyond the scope, taking into account i think we all have [inaudible] could the same law applied here in this case be applied to things like scholarships and other internal benefits not necessarily on

their face specifically for admissions? >> yes. >> i could have done that. >> well -- glad you and tom are here. any other questions? >> i just want to say on behalf of asian-american community, nati nationwide [indiscernible] top lawyer courageous students and -- >> good. thanks. >> the decision today explicitly carved out saying it does not

apply to military academies. is that the next phase of this, will you attempt to apply a similar logic to specifically military academies? >> good ahead. >> we are still digesting the opinion, and the future plans of students for fair admissions and mr. blum are not for discussion today. >> you mentioned [inaudible] is that something that you are thinking of suing over or putting litigation towards? >> well, speaking as a nonlawyer, legacy preferences are not actionable in court. if they were, i would have expected our friends at the naacp or aclu -- >> sandra: all right, you've been listening to reaction from the group that brought about

this case to the supreme court. obviously weighing in in just the hours after that decision was issued by the supreme court, just a moment ago, there was a gaggle as the president is making his way here to new york city at this hour after president biden delivered that speech from the white house a short time ago. kjp, his press secretary saying the white house has been working for months to prepare for this decision on affirmative action. this morning he was briefed by counsel and then convened a meeting with the senior staff and planned a speech and delivered it from the white house. let's bring in co-founder for coalition for thomas jefferson and mother of two. nice to have you on the program. i see you have your american flag flying there. what is your reaction to what you just heard there? and also from the president who spoke earlier. >> good afternoon. thank you for having me. a few minutes ago i was near the steps of the united states supreme court where we had a crowd, you know, celebrating this decision and thanking the

justices who did the right thing in upholding the constitution of the united states. this is such a great day, and it's, you know, it's a month men -- momentous occasion. america, she guarantees equal opportunity and equal treatment under the law, and it's a fantastic day. so i think we were all very happy. >> thanks so much for joining us this afternoon. as sandra had mentioned the reaction from the white house is that we are going to expect some guidance from the administration on how to deal with this case. are you concerned that perhaps this victory may be watered down for you? >> well, this was a great victory and this was a great fight, but it's not the last fight. there are many more fights to come. i am the co-founder of coalition for t.j., a parents grassroots organization in fairfax county,

virginia, we went through a lot of litigation against the school board who basically had watered down the education of the stem magnet school, thomas jefferson high school for science and technology by getting rid of the race-lined standardized tests. the real problem that they are hiding is the education in the primary, the elementary and the middle school, the science education is so abysmal that you know, students are not ready to compete for, you know, very rigorous education. so -- and our -- our litigation, which was overruled in the fourth circuit court of appeals, hoping to file a certification by august 21st and the supreme court, and the reason this -- our case is so important is because our school board uses -- used so-called very insidious

but race neutral mechanisms to get -- to achieve a certain racial demographic they claimed and said over and over was lacking in the school. so they want today racially balance so i think this leads to future litigation such as ours which we hope the supreme court will take this fall. >> sandra: suparna, what do you say for those for race being used in admissions process, and more diversity in the colleges and universities. what do you say to those who say it's going to load to less diversity? >> i reject that. the remedy to past discrimination cannot be future discrimination or present discrimination as martin luther king said, you know, we shouldn't be judged by the color of our skin but the content of our character and this was a celebration of the spirit, the true spirit of america which judges individuals by grit, determination and hard work, not

by the color of their skin. so i think that that is what america is and to me as an immigrant, that is what it means to be an american, to be treated equally under the law. >> this is a conservative court and this decision broke along conservative and liberal lines. did you expect this decision to go this way, and walk us through when you got the news, you were reading the decision, what you were thinking. >> that is exactly what was expected and i am -- i along with hundreds and thousands of us are so grateful to the six justices who did the right thing in upholding the constitution. i am not sure how american it is to claim that you should get a leg up because of the color of your skin or your ethnicity or where you come from. how can that be american? that is inhumane to continue to

persist. this is -- this would be the new, you know, discrimination, new racism to affirmative action could be and i feel that it is a great day, it's a momentous occasion, and i believe that we are all diverse because the real diversity is the diversity of your character, of your thoughts, of your opinions, not what the color of your skin looks like. >> sandra: thank you very much for joining us. appreciate your reaction to that. our best to you. >> thank you very much for having me. >> sandra: carrie severino, interesting thoughts from suparna, a mother of two, she says is the right decision on behalf of the supreme court. charles payne joined us last hour, carrie, and if he would passionately about this, and something he's been waiting for a long time, a great day for america. listen. >> i think the decision itself was amazing, great. i've been waiting for a decision

like this for at least ten years. because it is the ethos of america. he used the word fairness 2 or 3 times in the press conference. how is it fair to bar students who have worked their ass off to get the best grades out there, sacrifice so many things and no you don't get it because your family had money, the best news for black american, it can be, it can be, because maybe now we will demand strong education for our kids beginning in kindergarten so this kind of thing becomes a moot point. >> sandra: thanks for charles to his reaction on that. and also reaction to this. it appears to be harvard saying we'll find loopholes to the supreme court decision. in their statement following the supreme court ruling, they say this, first paragraph, the court also ruled that colleges and universities may consider in admissions decisions

"applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life," we will certainly comply with the court's decision. what was your take away from that, are they saying they will still find a way here? >> unfortunately, i'm sure they will absolutely find a way. already what they were doing, which they have been doing over 100 years when they were first trying to eliminate jewish students at the college by using other means, they would do a personality analysis, they found somehow jewish students were less interesting or worst personalities, doing the same thing with asian students. try to find work-arounds, certainly, but the chief justice said we are not going to try to just substitute the checking the box with writing the right application essay. we will look to make sure schools are not trying to do the work-arounds. that said, any student ought to be able to write an personal essay about overcoming challenges, and for some it

could be race, socioeconomic, difficult family situations, but issue people of anyrace, a black student in the deep south, appalachian student growing up in poverty, similar challenges to overcome things, and what's great, this is something that then focuses on the true character of the individual, how did the overcome the challenge, not just you get to check the box because you are one color or another. >> rich: carrie, you heard from the group that brought this case that this is something that now may begin to challenge or prompt a challenge to legacy admissions, admissions to donors, for college athletes. does that change the way admissions will happen in those areas when you have universities looking there? >> i think this is what really puts the test, the colleges claimed that racial diversity is so important to them.

if it really were, the most important thing to them, they would have done this already because it's very clear statistically if you eliminate legacy admissions or admissions to students of big donors you are going to get more diversity. so what they are saying is we are willing to sacrifice some things to achieve that diversity and what they are sacrificing is giving a fair shake to particularly asian students who apply, but not willing to sacrifice maybe not giving a bonus bump to students of parents who went here, big donors here. that is pretty hypothetical. so, i hope that universities are going to look at things like eliminating legacy emissions that would provide a more even playing field all the way across the board while achieving the goal of getting diversity. i think not just racial diversity, but diversity across a whole lot of different metrics. >> sandra: getting an update here as the president is making his way to new york city, shortly landing here and will head to midtown, can't wait to

see the traffic when we have to leave this building today. carrie, your reaction to what he said at the white house prior to his departure earlier. >> i strongly, strongly disagree with the court's decision. i know today's court decision is a severe disappointment to so many people, including me. but we cannot let the decision be a permanent setback for the country. we need to keep an open door of opportunities. >> sandra: what does that tell you as you listened to the president? >> well, that's no surprise. this president seems to have a strong belief in classifying people according to race rather than trying to look beyond that and try to bring people together. and that's unfortunate. i do think as charles payne pointed out earlier, addressing racial problems at their source, how do we make schools more even handedly educating students and

great point by the t.j. mother speaking earlier, rather than saying lets let kids in because we don't see enough diversity. how about we make the primary schools better at teaching kids science so they are not getting less quality education in some school districts than others, which is having a disproportionate impact on certain races. i think this will take away that band aid fix, make it better by letting students into colleges maybe they could not have gotten the scores to, how about bring everyone's scores up to qualify for the colleges when given an equal playing field. >> rich: carrie, the roberts court has delivered major decisions on healthcare, campaign finance, firearms, where does this sit in john roberts' legacy? >> this is one of the most -- probably the most important decision i think this year. issue that has come back and back and back to the court over the decades.

court is struggling how to address it, it does not sit well with the equal protection clause and really inconsistent with it entirely. the court is sympathetic to the idea we want diversity but finally said we cannot try to create discrimination of one sort in an attempt to remedy past discrimination. so, i think this is a good conclusion to that long series of cases, and now finally will allow states and allow the universities to move forward to try to find ways to actually address the problem again, maybe legacy admissions, all sorts of other things, but without trying to use race as that factor that we are discriminating, so at odds with our constitution this. is one of the hallmarks of chief roberts' legacy and the courts' legacy. >> sandra: our coverage continues. jessica, co-host of "the five"

and fox news contributor and garrett ventry is here, former chief of staff to ken buck, and grassley, and on the senate judiciary committee. >> no big deal. >> sandra: you have the resumes to talk about this. biden took a question when he was leaving the speech earlier. play i out. >> president, congressional black caucus said the supreme court is questioning its own legitimacy. is this a rogue court? >> this is not a normal court. >> should there be term limits for the justices, sir? >> sandra: i mean, he stopped firmly in his steps and when asked if this is a rogue court, he answered this is not a normal court. your reaction. >> he's expressed that sentiment before, basically since the dobbs decision came down a year and four days ago or whatever it was. we have been talking about this,

and the fact that donald trump got to appoint three supreme court justices, has changed the future of law and the laws we are governed by in america for generations to come. that was probably his greatest win, being able to do that. so i don't think what president biden is out of step with what a lot of people are thinking today and have been thinking, frankly, over the course of the last year. >> sandra: garrett. >> i would agree with jessica. this shows the importance of the supreme court, the vacancy, they make far after -- >> sandra: they matter. >> after presidents are out of office or alive, they make the decisions for 2, 3, 4 generations, and i don't think it's out of step for a president to weigh in on supreme court, you see this all the time, even though there may be disagreement there, it's a relatively normal thing to happen. >> sandra: a little more reaction this particular lawmaker, senator tim scott also prominently in the 2024

position, he reacted earlier to the decision on the falkner focus. >> anyone from anywhere at any time can rise beyond their circumstances and live out their american dream. thank god we are americans and thank god today we continue to see signs of progress. >> sandra: a little bit more of what we have been hearing, vivek ramaswamy, time to put a nail in the coffin and restore color blind, and nikki haley weighing in, obviously also supporting this decision, and to be honest with you, jessica, in line with what we have seen in polling. overall, affirmative action colleges considering race, ethnicity, in admissions, 50% in pew polling, reject that, disapprove it. when you break it down by race, it's the same. affirmative action by party. this has been in line with where americans see this.

>> yeah, and there have been states like california with no race-based admissions because of the very issue. but a majority of americans want universities to work to ensure there is diversity on campus, and this was one of the tools that's used to do that and i think we should point out, we are talking about a small sliver of universities. most people who go to college go to public universities because you can get there and come. we are talking the elite of the elite institutions and the media is biased of them, this contrast to have judge jackson and judge thomas, two people, both black, benefitted from race-based admissions and where the country is in terms of racial blindness

is bubbling up to the surface and a long road until we find out how it's going to impact admissions processes. you read harvard's statement. other ways as a function of being part of the disadvantaged group. >> sandra: the supreme court is all about that, that is the way it should be. sotomayor, it will entrench racial segregation, it will exist as long as it is ignored. and carrie and shannon bream, describe the admissions system in california and eight other states as devastating? >> yeah, i like justice sotomayor a lot, but i disagree

with her. one racial group was given a lower standards and asian-americans were given a higher standard, that is racial discrimination against the 14th amendment. it's a rare time and i think the justices would never admit to this, but public polling sometimes matches up with the right legal decision are. >> sandra: i wonder what the discussion is in the halls of the supreme court today, garrett. >> trying to get out of here. >> and you hear about the surprising friendships, we know ruth bader ginsburg and scalia and checking out the opera. i'm sure they know how to work with people with diverse points of view and these are some of the greatest legal minds in the country. >> sandra: and back to charles payne and his point, let's start from the ground up here, let's improve the education system so that this can be merit-based and all races can thrive. >> 100%, and integrated into

sotomayor and judge jackson's dissent, but we should all endeavor to improve education from the pre-k up to the college level. doing something like this, an immediate effect how admissions are based and where traditionally underserved communities, most likely black americans are able to get into topnotch level universities and barack obama wrote getting the chance to prove he deserved to be there just as justice thomas did when he got into a great school because they considered his race and said we are going to give this kid a shot. >> i think it comes down to the difference between justice jackson and justice thomas, obviously, i think she wants to obviously say it's more of a systemic issue, justice thomas would say he thinks lumping everybody together is not the way to go about. >> legacy admissions is fascinating and 70% of

legacy-based admissions are white people, so they should be going after that next and the lawyer spoke about that as well. >> that is very interesting. >> sandra: we'll leave it off on that note. thanks to both of you. appreciate having you. >> rich: education case out of new jersey, governor's office wants to stop telling parents if the child is using different pronouns. a concerned parent from one of those school district is moments away, but nate foy is in new york with the latest. bring us up to speed. >> the state filed lawsuits against three new jersey districts, one school board is trying to avoid going to court because of the cost involved but some parents in middletown new jersey appear more than willing to fight back against governor phil murphy. >> he's suing the taxpayers, people who don't agree with him.

what about when i sued middletown because a guy goes into the locker room with my daughter? >> take a look at this. activist protested outside the school board meeting last week in middletown, many parents expressed support for the policy but some, including this non-binary resident says teachers communicating with parents will put trans kids lives at >> you are going to be taking away the safe space if you pass this, and making a decision to harm students. you will be putting students in harm's way. >> so governor phil murphy's office put out a statement that reads in part "these policies pose a serious risk to the mental health and well-being of our lgbtq+ students and this administration will not stand for any organized efforts that undermine public education and marginalize our students." the attorney general filed the

lawsuits, and the same last month in hannover for a similar policy. a judge will look to block the policy implementation. and another school district voted to delay a decision about a similar policy while these three separate cases play out. back to you, rich. >> rich: nate, thanks very much, ann marie, the mother of both a 5th grader and an 8th grader at one of the schools in the new jersey lawsuit. thanks for joining us this afternoon. i want to get your reaction to what the protests have been and have you seen a reaction as parent like this in your district before. >> so the protests on tuesday night last week when we were at the meetings was intense as you can see. a lot of mostly out of towners and activists that were there to protest against the revisions of the policy. the last time we have seen

anything like this and was mostly parents oriented when governor murphy put the masked mandates in place. >> this is happening across the state here, do you think this is going to spread further to the state, do you think middletown is one example of we are going to continue to see this across new jersey and the country? >> i believe so. i believe the board of eds are standing up, middletown has an amazing leadership in place in the board of ed and they really are leaders and i feel that a lot of surrounding towns watch us to see what we are doing and almost get courage behind them for what our board of ed does for us. >> what have your children told you about this? what's their difference been in school? >> so, honestly, my children pretty much stay to themselves.

they go to school, they are happy to be in school, they do their thing, they come home, they do their sports, they do their activities. most of what i hear about the transgender topic is from other parents. other parents will say this is what i hear, or this is what's happening, or did you know this, and did you know that. so, most of it is coming out to me from the community of parents. >> rich: you heard in nate foy's piece, just ahead of our discussion, the conversation from governor murphy, from the non-binary resident who spoke at the school board meeting, the concern is you've got kids who feel they would be outed and put in danger if their parents were informed. what do you say to that? >> i argue against that strongly because first this is not an outing policy. this is a policy that is put in place to give teachers and

administration the right to bring parents into a conversation. in order for that to happen, the student would have had to have gone to school, tell a teacher, tell administration that they wanted to, a name change in their documents, they wanted a public accommodation to use a different bathroom, to use a different locker room, so they in essence are the ones that are going public. so all the school is doing in my opinion is then asking the parents to be part of this conversation. there is not a conversation, there is not anything that happens in school that a parent should not be a part of. we are the crucial people in their lives. the governor and the lawsuit is trying to take that away. we are the ones that care for our children. our teachers should not be responsible for protecting and being responsible for the most vulnerable students they have in their buildings. the parents should be

responsible for that. >> ann marie, middletown parent, thank you for joining us this afternoon. >> thank you. >> hey, everybody, here on the ground in north carolina we are starting our road -- summer road trip, we'll be taking electric vehicles on this road trip and i'm very excited to point out all of the investments that are happening. >> sandra: and how did that go? janet granholm taking to the streets in an e.v. to push the president's green agenda. she unfortunately hit a few roadblocks along the way. [laughter] >> rich: at least she ain't flying. more airport chaos as the july 4th weekend gets underway. transportation secretary pete buttigieg, and larry kudlow is here to break it down next.

the all-new tempur-pedic breeze makes sleep feel cool. so, no more sweating all night... ...or blasting the air conditioning. because the tempur-breeze feels up to 10° cooler,

all night long. for a limited time, save $500 on all-new tempur-breeze mattresses.

if you're the spouse of a military veteran, i want you to know something. your spouse has earned the right to apply for a va home loan. a va home loan is unique. it's different than other loans because it allows you to borrow up to 100% of the home's value. that extra borrowing power may allow you to pay down debt, lower your monthly payments, put cash in the bank, and give you the peace of mind that every veteran deserves.

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.

>> rich: 2024 presidential candidate mike pence is making a surprise visit to ukraine today. meeting with the country's leader in a show of support for the war torn nation. pence's trip comes on the heels of the mutiny in russia as we learn new details about the uprising hitting close to home for vladimir putin. according to new reports, one of

putin's top generals may have known about the rebellion beforehand, may have even helped with it. but first, greg palkot live in kyiv. greg. >> hey, rich. yeah, first to the unannounced visit for security reasons by mike pence here in kyiv. the former vice president and candidate for the presidential nomination toured towns outside of kyiv that have suffered so badly from the first wave of russian attacks last year. then he met with president zelenskyy, offered his appreciation for the visit and for u.s. support. remember, at least on the republican side, backing is weakening for funding of the ukraine war effort. here is a bit of what pence had to say today. >> we'll continue to do everything in our power to make sure we provide the ukrainian military with the support they need until they repel the russian invasion and restore the sovereignty of this country.

>> meanwhile, yes, more fallout from the attempted coup by mercenaries in russia. it is reported general surovikin is being questioned, arrested, even relieved of duty. it has been said the general was aware of the mutiny, might even have helped. and reports other military officers are swept up, moscow has no comment at all. prigozhin, his powerful group is out of the picture in ukraine. by the way, rich, pence is the first gop presidential candidate to come to ukraine during this campaign, analysts might argue if it helps his white house hopes but sentiments today sounded very heartfelt. >> rich: greg, thanks. and you know what it means and the analysts are going over what the wagner group -- what will

happen with the front in ukraine but there continues to be a pace of attacks against civilians there, correct? >> absolutely. the most dramatic this year -- this week, tuesday evening, a pizzeria, very popular restaurant slammed by a russian missile. the death toll now is 12, including four kids under the age of 18. at least 61 injured, including an 8-month-old infant. the targeting was just the center of a residential area of this town. no military target in sight. russia has been doing that for about 16 months now and could continue. >> rich: as we approach a year and a half of this for ukraine. greg, please stay safe. more on all of this and we are going to sandra now. >> sandra: ok, rich, thank you. take it. president biden touting his economic plan, i think they are calling it bidenomics, right,

energy secretary jen granholm is a part of that, taking a road trip across the south this summer. she's pushing the administration's clean energy projects, and she's doing it in a cadillac lyric, a high-end e.v. it starts at $58,000 a vehicle, joining us, larry kudlow, former national economic council director, needs no introduction, it is larry. jen granholm answered a question of increasing oil production to make sure we bring gas prices down for the american public. do you remember this? >> what is the granholm plan to increase oil production in america? [laughter] >> that is hilarious. would that i had the magic wand on this. as you know, of course, oil is a global market, it is controlled by a cartel. >> sandra: it was a very telling moment for this administration

and her tenure as the energy secretary she laughed the question off and now out there in the cadillac lyric, she's driving on the tour, $58,590 it starts at, and they ran into some roadblocks. apparently they had a hard time -- >> larry: finding charges. or if you do, you are on the way up the highway and trying to make some time. so instead of stopping and filling up with gasoline, which takes about three minutes, you have to hang around for somewheres between 30 minutes and three hours, why americans are extremely skeptical about these cars. you look at polls, they don't want it, people want a choice, they don't want a bunch of government bureaucrats to jam down their throats that you have to do this and you have to do that. that includes things like shower heads, microwave ovens and includes getting a decent pizza in new york city of late. you know, ms. granholm, former

governor of michigan, easy answer. produce more oil and gas. unlock the spigots and what the bidens should have done from day one, have an all of the above energy policy, ok. make use of our great fossil fuel resources, make use of whatever ingenuity you can have to bring the cost down for renewables, wind and solar. understand they are not reliable, and that you cannot eliminate fossils in the national electricity grid because they are not reliable. some states are going back to coal because of the lack of reliability, this was an extremist policy from day one and that's an economic term. but in political terms, it has been extremely unpopular. look at any poll. >> sandra: but this is bidenomics, is it not? >> part of bidenomics, yes, sir.

>> sandra: they are embracing that is their push, i love the label. >> middle out, lower up, or lower in, whatever, stay over your skis. by the way, growing at 1%, the level of consumer prices has gone up 15.6% since february of 2021. they didn't deliver. >> sandra: guess what's not going up 15%, your income, your wages. >> real wages are getting clobbered for lower and middle class workers. people are working. the pandemic jobs have come back. didn't have a thing to do with that. but they are getting clobbered on their wages. >> i rarely interrupt you, larry. >> i'm honored. >> markets are up, ok. there is -- there is key economic data points that are coming out that make it look like this economy isn't going into a recession. and the left right now is saying ha ha to all those who said doom and gloom, look, gdp is up, the country is growing despite

everybody saying that these policies are awful. so, please explain that disconnect from what the white house is touting to what people are experiencing. >> larry: the war against fossil fuels, and regulatory war against businesses large and small, tax increases on companies and the inflation, all right. so biden's first full year in office 2022, we grew at 0.9%. a terrible number. >> sandra: i got it. >> larry: the first quarter was revised up, almost 2% or 2%. the atlanta fed gdp tracker, 1.8%. >> sandra: are we going to recession or not? are we going to avoid recession? >> we should be growing at 4, 5, 6% to get back. are we going into recession? >> sandra: we have sound from

the road trip, can we just play it quick, i've got to get this in here. mpr -- this is the mpr reporter on the road trip with granholm. >> yesterday we stopped at a fast charger where one of the chargers was broken, right. another one was actually being used by an electric school bus on a road show, pretty cool. but more people who wanted to charge than there were chargers, and one person was waiting actually called the cops about a nonelectric vehicle trying to hold a spot for the secretary of energy. turns out it's not a crime, the cop said, but it is a frustration. >> sandra: i can only imagine how frustrating that was. >> larry: i'm not against e.v.s. figure out the chargers technology, but let us drill for the battery -- for nickel and so forth because otherwise you are just subsidizing china. don't mandate an end to gasoline cars. let technology work over the

next 30 to 50 years and give people a choice. but you -- look at, 1 to 2% growth is a failure. can i just say that. we should be growing at 4, 5, 6%. we have to break through the trend. we grow at 3.5% for 50 years, after world war ii. >> sandra: got him fired up, ladies and gentlemen. >> larry: inflation is crushing wages. look, bidenomics, middle out, lower up or in, is nothing but class warfare and all this spending is a big grift. spending on donors, he's spending on esg corporations, spending on democratic interest groups, and it ain't working in the economy. >> sandra: and by the way, that's how jerry baker says the wall street journal intended bidenomics to be defined, picking winners and losers. government should not be in the -- >> larry: it's a grift, goes to the west coast, $600 million so silicon valley and they give him

back 100 million for the campaign. it's a grift. >> sandra: this is your warm-up for the 4:00. >> larry: we need unleashed prosperity, ok, for all people. don't pit one group against another, stop the class warfare, let a rising tide lift all boats. that is the american spirit. by the way, the democratic party under j.f.k. and later under bill clinton had that philosophy. this is a left wing class warfare, socialist philosophy, not going to bring the goods. it's completely wrong and needs to change. i'm not being partisan. democrats have done it and gone to the left. >> sandra: sees it as color blind. and rich, i want to bring you in here and what i asked larry about is this disconnect, you know, the markets seem ok, larry, and people are saying are

we really -- still not answering the question about -- >> larry: markets got clobbered last year, down 20%. come back, rebound, that has nothing to do with anything, this is a.i. and speak. j. powell in europe said he has to raise rates month after month, and thinks the economy is going into recession. 71% chance of recession in the next year. i hate recession, i hate recession. i want a rising tide that lifts all boats. i want both political parties to be pro growth and prosperity. i want to stop this silly stupid class warfare, which says if you fail it helps me. that is just not true. we all must succeed. >> sandra: you want more of larry kudlow, watch 4:00 on fox business. thank you so much. rich, we ran with it there. bidenomics is giving us a lot to talk about. >> larry: sorry, rich. >> rich: no problem, it's a good topic of conversation, a topic

of conversation in 2024 with political candidates and a question of how much they are going to be talking about it and what's the first thing they are going to do if they get in office, if there is a change in administration. >> sandra: a great question, a lot of great debate questions. >> larry: or they could text. >> sandra: rich, great to have you joining us. set your dvr. i'm >> martha: hi, guys. i'm martha maccallum. there's one monumental decision today on affirmative action. the supreme court sends shock waves through american universities and the way that they have done things for decades. this decision will likely reverberate through corporations and governments across this country as well. this case was brought by asian students that believe they were discriminated against because too many of them were doing too well in thei