i'm lee cowan. please join us when our trumpet sounds again next sunday morning. until then, enjoy the rest of this holiday weekend. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com i'm margaret brennan in washington. on this fourth of july weekend on "face the nation" we'll look at the challenges facing an increasingly divided america. president biden's message after a week of consultation with our closest allies on the issues threatening global stability. all is well with our friends. the biggest threat to the world view of america is from within. >> you haven't found one person, one world leader to say america is going backwards. america is better positioned to lead the world than we ever has been. the one thing that has been destabilizing is the outrageous behavior of the supreme court of the united states. >> he's not the only one angry with the supreme court, as they

conclude their most consequential session in years, with far-reaching decisions on religion, the environment, immigration, and of course abortion rights. he is hoping democrats channel their anger and fear into support for his party in the november midterm elections. >> i share the public outrage of this extremist court that's committed to moving america backwards. but ultimately congress is going to have to act to codify roe into federal law. >> we'll assess the impact of these rulings. the court did rule in favor of president biden's plan to scrap a trump-era policy to make asylum seekers wait in mexico, clearing the way for more migrants to enter the u.s. we'll talk with homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas about how the administration plans to handle the influx. with rapid-fire local court decisions causing more chaos over where abortion is now illegal, we'll look at the state of maternal health in america.

how can we keep our abysmal record from getting worse. then what's next for the january 6th hearings following trump white house aide cassidy hutchinson's stunning testimony? >> the president said something to the effect of i'm the effing president, take me to the capitol now. >> we'll talk with a key member of the january 6 select committee, congressman adam schiff, about the attempts to influence witness testimony unfavorable to the trump administration. plus our interview with the german chancellor, olaf scholz. it's all just ahead on "face the nation." ♪ good morning, and welcome to "face the nation." thank you for joining us this holiday weekend. we begin today with immigration and the win for the biden administration last week in the supreme court.

that of the ending of president trump's remain in mexico policy. to discuss that and more we want to welcome homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas to this broadcast. mr. secretary, good morning to you. happy early fourth of july. >> good morning, and the same wish to you, margaret. thank you. >> so what happens now that "remain in mexico" is going away? are you ending this policy immediately? and what happens to those individuals in the encampments waiting right across the border. >> margaret, we were very pleased with the supreme court's decision, so now in light of the favorable supreme court ruling, we have to wait for that ruling to reach the district court that issued an injunction preventing us from ending "remain in mexico." so we have several weeks to go before the district court lifts its injunction. until then we are obligated by the district court's ruling to continue to implement the "remain in mexico" program and

we will do so in accordance with law. >> so those people will still have to wait in the camps on the mexican side of the border, but what happens to them next? >> right now they do have to remain in mexico and then we will actually continue with their immigration enforcement proceedings. remember, when people are encountered at the border, they are just not merely released into the united states. they are placed in immigration enforcement proceedings. and that is what will occur with these people. their proceedings will continue in immigration court where they will pursue their claims for asylum. and if those claims are unsuccessful, they will be swiftly removed from the united states. >> so reuters is reporting that there are right now thousands of people who departed on friday and are moving towards the u.s. border. what do you need right now? do you need more personnel for customs and border control? do you need more equipment to tackle these smugglers that are

exploiting these people? >> margaret, we are working very closely with our partners to the south, with mexico. that breaks up very often these caravans of individuals that seek to take that dangerous journey to reach our border only to be met with the enforcement of our laws. we have said repeatedly and we continue to warn people not to take the dangerous journey. we saw so tragically in san antonio, texas, one of the possible tragic results of that dangerous journey and so many people don't even make it that far in the hands of exploitative smugglers. we continue to enforce immigration law as is our legal responsibility. >> you're saying do not come but those words are not being heard. people are moving right now. so the efforts to stop the root causes are not stopping them.

this horrific trafficking, the worst smuggling tragedy in u.s. history with those individuals found dead in that trailer truck, that's not stopping people. are you predicting that this is only going to get more significant from here, that we are going to go beyond the record surge in migrants? >> no, i am not predicting that at all. and in fact in the wake of the san antonio tragedy and our homeland security investigations, as the lead federal agency investigating what occurred and working with the united states attorney's office in the prosecution of thus far four individuals who have been charged with that heinous crime, we're working with our partners to the south because this is a regional challenge that requires a regional response. i last week spoke -- >> but they got past the u.s. border officials. >> we have a multi-layered approach, margaret. we of course have our

inspections at the port of entry with our sophisticated nonintrusive technology. we then have checkpoints that are staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. the laredo checkpoint in question, 10,000 to 14,000 vehicles pass through that checkpoint every day. >> so how did this smuggler get these people across? 53 people died. >> these are very sophisticated transnational criminal organizations. they have evolved over the last 30 years. in the '90s i prosecuted them and they were much more rudimentary. now they are very sophisticated using technology and they're extraordinarily organized transnational criminal enterprises. we are much more sophisticated using technology and personnel 24 hours a day. you know, we have saved more than 10,000 individuals this fiscal year alone and more than

400 vehicle inspections. so can a truck get through our sophisticated means? sometimes yes. but we have interdicted more drugs at the ports of entry than ever before. we've rescued more migrants. we're seeing a challenge that is really regional. hemispheric in scope and we're addressing it accordingly. >> mr. secretary, i also want to ask you here at home about what we've seen in the past 24 hours. there's been a back and forth between state and federal law enforcement regarding security to supreme court justices and protests outside their home. does the threat go beyond picketing? is it specific and credible? >> so we have seen a heightened threat environment over the last several months over a number of different volatile issues that galvanize people on different sides of each issue. we in the department of homeland security have become involved.

when there is a connectivity between the opposition to a particular view or an ideology of hate, a false narrative, and violence. it is that connectivity to violence when we engage and we are very mindful that the supreme court's decision in reversing and overturning roe versus wade has really heightened the threat environment and we have deployed resources to ensure the safety and security of the supreme court and the justices. >> before i let you go, i do want to ask you about what we saw this weekend up in boston. a white supremacist group called patriot front marched through that city. they recently planned events, a riot in idaho. you're seeing this far right group, the proud boys, also disrupt events in california. how concerned are you right now about these militias?

>> margaret, i have said and this has been echoed by the director of the fbi that domestic violent extremism is one of the greatest terrorism threats that we face in the homeland today. individuals spurred by ideologies of hate, false narratives, personal grievances, to acts of violence. it is that violence that we respond to and we seek to of course prevent. we are in a heightened threat environment. >> mr. secretary, thank you for your time today. >> thank you, margaret. we're joined now by california democratic congressman adam schiff. he is a member of the january 6th select committee and chairman of the intelligence committee. good morning and good to have you here in person. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> i want to pick up on what we just heard from the secretary when we were talking about this far right group, the proud boys. this is one of the militias involved in january 6th. in this incredible testimony this past week from cassidy hutchinson, the former trump

white house aide, chief of staff to mark meadows, she testified she heard conversations inside the white house about this far right group and another one called the oath keepers. is there corroborating evidence to show that there was communication between those militias and the white house? >> i don't want to get too far ahead of what we intend to present in our next hearings, but our very next hearing will be focused on the efforts to who was participating, who was financing it, how it was organized, including the participation of these white nationalist groups like the proud boys, the 3%ers and others. we'll be presenting information that we have. we haven't answered all the questions we have. we'll continue our investigation into precisely what you're describing. >> hutchinson said rudy giuliani was someone she personally heard talking about them. >> this is one of the reasons that we had interest in his testimony and interest in the

testimony of others. we obviously want to probe any connection between these dangerous groups and the white house. i think we've gotten some answers but there's still a great deal we don't know that we're endeavoring to find out. >> it's an incredible allegation of course. so we'll track that. the vice chair of the committee, liz cheney, said not prosecuting president trump over the attack on the capitol would be a much graver sk r constitutional thre the country than the political difficulties involved with bringing charges. she said this in an abc interview. she also said there were possible criminal referrals. not just one, but multiple. do you agree? >> i do. for four years the justice department took the position that you can't indict a sitting president. if the department were to take the position that you can't investigate or indict a former president, then the president becomes above the law. that's a very dangerous idea that the founders would never have subscribed to. even more dangerous in the case of donald trump. donald trump is someone who has shown when he's not held

accountable, he goes on to commit worse and worse abuses of power. i agree with judge carter in california. i think there's evidence the former president engaged in multiple violations of the law and that should be investigated. >> but there will be a political calculus to this as well. this is incredibly divided country right now. millions of people voted for the former president and still believe, wrongly, that he won the election. prosecuting him, isn't there a very high risk to that? >> you know, it's certainly not a step to be taken lightly at all. at the same time, immunizing a former president who has engaged in wrongdoing i would agree with the vice chair is more dangerous than anything else. and the decision not to move forward with an investigation or not to move forward with the prosecution because of someone's political status or political influence or because they have a following, to me that is a far more dangerous thing to our

constitution than following the evidence wherever it leads, including when it leads to a former president. your colleague, adam kinzinger, said new witnesses have come forward since cassidy hutchinson testified. how many, how significant? is there new information that requires more hearings? >> i think there's certainly more information that is coming forward. in terms of whether that will materialize into particular witnesses on this topic or that topic, we're going to wait and see, but we are following additional leads. i think those leads will lead to new testimony. it's part of the reason we wanted her to come before the public is we were hoping it would generate others stepping forward seeing her courage would inspire them to show the same kind of courage. >> has she inspired pat cipollone to take up the request to speak to him again? >> i hope so. we're in discussions with mr. cipollone's counsel. i'm hopeful that we can work out

bringing him in for testimony. he clearly has information about concerns about criminal violations, concerns about the president going to the capitol that day, concerns about the chief of staff having blood on his hands if they didn't do more to stop that violent attack on the capitol. hard to imagine someone more at the center of things. and i hope that he'll demonstrate the same courage we saw of cassidy hutchinson display. >> who is attempting to intimidate the witnesses, as congressman cheney said, and how significant are the security threats against hutchinson? >> i have to imagine the security threats are very pronounced. certainly our members are feeling them and hearing them. i have to expect the same is true of her since the former president and his enablers are going after her. we want to make sure that she is safe. we have several concerns. we have the concern over the safety of our witnesses, we have concern over people trying to influence or intimidate

witnesses. >> who's doing that? >> i can't comment on specifics. >> but you know? >> we wanted to let the country know and anyone in the former president's world know that if they seek to intimidate witnesses, they will be referred for prosecution and we hope the justice department will move against them. we also have a concern about the fact that some of these witnesses are sharing lawyers, that essentially, and this gets to some of the testimony we revealed during the cassidy hutchinson hearing, that they are reviewing transcripts, that they're essentially coordinating potentially their stories or that witnesses feel they have got big brother watching when they sit in for their depositions. >> so on that, i want to ask you, one of the things that cassidy hutchinson described having been told by another individual is about this tussel in the beast, the president's vehicle where he allegedly lunged for the wheel demanding

to be taken to the capitol. the committee has already interviewed tony ornato and secret service agent robert engel. was this the first time you heard about that incident? did they back that up or contradict that testimony? >> i can't go into specifics of the prior testimony, but i can say i think we'd be interested in having them come back and others that can shed light on this. but the most important thing is there doesn't appear to be any dispute over the fact the president was furious that he could not accompany this armed mob to the capitol. that seems to be undisputed. and the fact that the president knew that the mob was armed, wanted the magnetometers down so they could take their arms to the capitol, that doesn't seem to be disputed by anyone except donald trump, and he has, as we've seen in the past, no credibility at all. >> quickly before i let you go, with your intel hat on here, the bullet that was used to kill an

american journalist has been handed over to the united states. it's undergoing ballistics testing right now. if israeli soldiers did indeed kill her, what consequences should there be? >> i think there needs to be an independent investigation so we understand exactly what happened and who was responsible and why. once we know that, then i think we can talk about what the consequences should be. but i do think there needs to be an objective investigation and i'm glad that the united states can help play a part in that. >> congressman schiff, thanks for your time. >> thank you. >> "face the nation" will be back in a minute. stay with us. nati ll be back in . stay with us.

the supreme court ended its the supreme court ended its term with a number of historic rulings. for a breakdown and a look at what comes next, we turn to cbs legal correspondent jan crawford. you have been incredibly busy, jan. we had a number of these decisions this week that reflect the will of the conservative majority. president biden called them extremist -- an extremist court. how do you characterize the

decisions? >> i mean this is a court that has shown it is clearly turned firmly to the right. it could have sweeping implications for american life, the democratic process. taken together what we've seen this term is this is a court that is not going to get involved in these divisive policy issues unless that it's clearly within its purview. if it is not specifically mentioned in the constitution, then that goes to the democratic process. that's what we saw in the abortion rights case overturning roe versus wade. it was not specifically mentioned. therefore, we're not going to resolve it. back to the democratic process. if congress can't do its job and congress isn't acting, this is a court that says administrative agencies and unelected bureaucrats, they can't jump in and fill those vacuums if congress isn't acting and try to set major policy questions. that was the case involving climate change and the epa. the bottom line is this court, unlike a more liberal court, is not jumping in to fill these

vacuums where congress or the legislatures are failing to act. and that is going to mean a profound difference in the democratic process and the rule of the courts or the role of the courts. >> because it's not clear if lawmakers will take up these issues. >> with dysfunction in congress, absolutely. but they're saying the ball is in congress' court or the state legislatures when it's a policy dispute if it's not specifically addressed by the constitution. >> to that point because now we are seeing all these states, their courts, their legislatures have arguments over what to do next, particularly on the issue of abortion. kentucky, florida, utah, louisiana, really significant legal battles taking place about abortion protections. what is your takeaway so far? is there a commonality to where they're ending up? >> right. remember 26 states asked the supreme court to overturn roe versus wade and let them set their own policies on abortion rights and that's what we're seeing now.

the court agreed and we're seeing that play out across the country. already states, almost a dozen states, had laws in place ready to go to completely ban abortion in their states. so you're seeing abortion rights advocates go into those states and file lawsuits in state courts under state constitutions because the supreme court said it's not in the federal constitution. but if a state has more protective rights in their constitutions, then work it out there. so that's what we're seeing now. we're seeing these legal battles play out at the same time as the state legislatures are passing their own laws. blue states passing laws to enshrine abortion access. and protect it even more, for example. >> and the chaos has led some people to mistakenly think abortion is banned. >> that's the most striking thing. the supreme court did not ban abortion nationwide. they just said there's not a right to abortion in the constitution. therefore, it goes back to the democratic process and states set their own policies. if congress wants to do something, congress can, but it's not in the constitution. so now you've seen a patchwork of laws and you're seeing legal

challenges under state constitutions, but you're going to see different laws in different states. if you're in new york or california or boston or illinois or any of those democratic states, this will not affect your life at all. the laws in your states won't change. it's those red states that we see that will try to ban or greatly restrict abortion and we already are seeing that. >> i want to ask you about what's coming. >> oh, yeah. >> why do you say oh, god? that's not a good reaction, jan. >> as big of a term this was and whenever the court overturns a near 50-year-old precedent, as they did with roe versus wade, next term could be as consequential, divisive as this term or more so. they have major cases already on the docket. they'll continue to add them throughout the year. they already have a case challenging affirmative action in college admissions. i expect the court will end that. they have a case about a conflict between free speech and gay rights and whether a state law can prohibit someone from saying on their website they oppose same-sex marriage and don't want to do that business

and designers and artists. they have voting rights and an election procedure case that could have huge implications for elections. this is just the beginning. and a new justice stepping in to a divided court. >> jan, you'll be back with us a lot, i understand, based on what you just sketched out. thank you for your analysis. we'll be right back with a lot more "face the nation." stay with us. with h a lot more "faface the natation." stay witith us. f your phohone didn't t just take e epic pho? what if it fixed them too? the amazing magic eraser on google pixel 6. my a a1c stayed d here, tit neededed to be hehere. ruruby's a1a1c is downn with rybybelsus®.. my a a1c wasn't at goal,l, now i'm m down with h rybelsus mom's a1a1c is downn with rybybelsus®.. (♪ ♪)) in a c clinical ststudy, ononce-daily r rybelsus® significicantly lowewered a1c better thahan a leadining brananded pill..

ryrybelsusus® isn't for peope withth type 1 didiabetes. don't tatake rybelsusus® if you or r your familily evever had mededullary ththyroid cancncer, or have e multiple e endocrie neoplasisia syndromeme type , or if alallergic to o it. ststop rybelsusus® and g get medicacal help rigight awayy if you g get a lump p or swellg in y your neck,, severe stotomach pain,n, or an alallergic reaeaction. seserious sidede effects may inclclude pancrereatitis. tell youour providerer about vin prproblems or r changes. taking rybybelsus® w with a susulfonylureaea or insuliln increaseses low blood sugagar risk. side effffects like e nauseaea, vomimiting, anand diarrheaea may leadd to dehydydration, whwhich may woworsen kidndney problemems. neneed to get t your a1c d d? (♪ ♪)) ask your h healthcare e provir abouout rybelsusus® today.. whwhat if you u were a glolobak who wawanted to susupercharge yoyour audit s system? so y you tap ibmbm to un-silo your data.a. and d start crununching g a ys wortrth of transnsactions agaiainst thousasands of complpliance controrols with ththe help of . nonow you'u're making g smarr decicisions fastster. operatating costs s are lolo. and evereryone from your r auditors to your r bankers feels likeke a millionon bu.

let's creaeate smarterer s ofof putting y your data t to . ibm. l let's creatate your shipppping manageger left t to “findnd themself”" leaving yoyou lost. you u need to hihire. i neneed indeed.d. indeed y you do. inindeed instatant match i insy deliversrs quality c candidats mamatching youour job descscri. visit indeed.com/hire if you can't watch the full "face the nation" you can set your dvr. plus watch us through our cbs or paramount plus app. . y managers e, but at fisher investments we're clearly different. (other money manager) different how? you sell high commission investment products, right? (fisher investments) nope. fisher avoids them. (other money manager) well, you must earn commissions on trades. (fisher investments) never at fisher investments. (other money manager) ok, then you probably sneak in some hidden and layered fees. (fisher investments) no. we structure our fees so we do better when clients do better.

that might be why most of our clients come from other money managers. at fisher investments, we're clearly different.

we'll be right back with a lot more "face the nation." stay with us.

illilinois is inin the mid. and whatat do you fifind in the mididdle? the meeting point of humanity and hihistory. it's the middle of f the architectural revolution. welcome to the middle of everything.

some meetings with top u.s. allies who are faced with a growing list of problems including rising food and energy prices exacerbated by russia's invasion of ukraine. chance elector sholz still speaks to vladimir putin and that's where we started our conversation. >> when you speak to putin, does he acknowledge the sanctions and how much the economy has been hurt or does he just not care? >> i think he cares but will not really admit it so you get some

idea that it really is hurting him and that he understands the deep impacts of our sanctions on his economy. i'm always mentioning it because it's necessary to say it. this is now happening to a country that is not that advanced, that is really needing all the technologies from the rest of the world for having a similar standard of living and for having the chance to be part of a world economy. this is now the real damage to the russian economy that they have no chance to do this. >> when will putin run out of weapons, run out of funds or can this continue for years? >> no one really knows. he is the leader of a very great country with a lot of people living there, with a lot of means. and he is really doing this brutal war and he prepared for it. so he will be able to continue with the war really a long time. >> do you believe that vladimir

putin will stop at ukraine? >> i think that all what we do will help to give him the view that this is not working and that he will not be successful. >> your country has earned this reputation of overpromising and unde underdelivering when it comes to ukraine. ukraine received its very first dl delivery of german howitzers last week. why did it take that long? we're in the fifth month. >> we took a very, very hard decision to change political strategies we followed for many decades, never to dleliver weapons to a country into a conflict. when we decided to send the most modern howitzer which you can buy on the world market, it was very difficult to organize that this can be used in the war because you have to have some training. we had ukrainian soldiers in

germany. when the training ended, they came with the weapon, with the howitzers to ukraine. >> but the united states is doing that. they're providing weaponry within 48 hours sometimes of the president signing and carrying out training. why did it take this long for germany? >> i think you should understand that there is a difference of a country like the united states spends that much for defense, which is a very big investment, and you have a lot of weapons and stocks. together with the united states and the united kingdom, we decided to deliver multi rocket launchers to ukraine now. >> those haven't been delivered yet. >> we are sending them and we are doing it with the means and ways we have and with the training. and once again, there are a lot of very experienced people who yesterday looked at google and today they know how to do things. but i will tell you there are weapons, but you have to have your training and you have to

have it not in ukraine, you have to have it here in our country and so we will always see that germany is one of the countries that is doing the most, because what we are sending now is the most sophisticated technology you can use. there is also anti-ballistic -- there are also weapons we give to ukraine that they can defend the air. >> the anti-aircraft missiles you promised? >> they can defend a city from -- against rockets and missiles that were sent there from putin. this is very expensive and very effective technology, but they will get it. >> the delays have led to speculation that it's not about getting the supplies, it's about the will of the government to actually deliver them and whether there's fear of provoking putin or whether it's years of budget cuts to your defense industry that have made

it just not possible for the german military to act quickly. how do you respond to that? >> those who are looking to the facts see that we are doing what is feasible. we are changing the way, how we spend money for defense, and this is the big increase, which will change the situation and give us the chance to be more quick in reaction to a threat that is coming to nato, the alliance, or to our country. >> germany is providing about $2 billion in aid to ukraine. that's roughly what you spend per month on gas from russia, on coal, on energy supplies. so while you're helping the ukrainians financially, you're also essentially giving vladimir putin a financial lifeline. >> he cannot buy anything from the money he's getting from us because he has all these sanctions on imports for modern technologies and things he is looking for. so this is what is making him angry. but to be very clear, when we

decided on sanctions together with all our allies, we said we will do it in a way that we harm putin more than us. many countries in europe are depending for historic reasons and because they are near to the place and it is the nearest place to get the gas on the imports of gas. and the whole europe is deciding to go out of this dependence. this will change the scenario even on the world market. >> but vladimir putin can use that money elsewheres are just not in the west. >> but he cannot buy -- >> is it still $2 billion a month german is sending to russia? >> the sanctions are hurting putin and once again we are doing real investments into technology and pipelines and ports. i know there are people that sometimes think that when you are having taken a decision one afternoon, the next morning you have a port and a 40 kilometers

pipeline. >> it takes time. >> in real life this is not happening. when europe is deciding to go out of the import of gas from russia, this will have consequences. >> this is the equivalent of them declaring war on you, by cutting gas supplies to germany. this isn't just your choice. they're using that as a weapon against you. >> this is obviously the case and this is why i was starting to ask the question what to do if gas delivery will be reduced right when i entered office. we should be very much prepared that we will have high energy prices all over the world in all countries. >> so germany's heavy industry association, bdi, warned a halt in russian gas deliveries would make recession inevitable. >> it is not -- it will be very tough if we will have a shortage of energy supplies. obviously all our countries, all our life is depending on the supply of energy. and obviously a lot of

countries, the most countries of the world are depending on the supply so we have to prepare for a difficult situation. >> vladimir putin is weaponizing inflation. he's weaponizing food. is he right to bet that he can fracture the western alliance by making it harder for europeans and americans and everyone else to afford food in these months ahead? >> you are very right. the shortages of food, many people in the world are seeing now as a threat to them. it is a direct consequence of russia's aggression against ukraine and the war he is imposing on the country. you are right that all the rising energy prices are also a direct consequence of his doing, and he is -- he is the one that is doing the wrong things. and we are always discussing this with our partners on the

globe. we are starting an initiative to import countries that don't have enough food with food. >> if putin doesn't agree to let the food out of ukraine, how do you lower global food prices? >> we are now collecting money for supporting the poorest countries, that they will be able to deliver food to the people. this is our international initiative. we organized together with others for food security, and we will continue to do that. >> but it risks global instability. >> it is -- >> to end this conflict sooner. what is your timeline when this conflict will end? >> it will end when putin

realizes he will not be successful conquering the territory of his neighbor. >> members of the german government have admitted it was a mistake to be so dependent on r russia for so long. >> i think it is wrong any time we had the chance to change who is delivering oil and gas for us. we should have invested all over europe in infrastructure that gives us the ability to change the supply from one day to the other, and i think this is the lesson that has been learned in europe and in many other places, that you have to be prepared for a situation like this. >> president biden also talks about this potential conflict between democracies and autocracies. is that the biggest threat on the horizon? >> we should be clear about the threats that are coming to our future, and this is coming from autocracies, yes, because they tend to be aggressive.

this is an aspect we should be very much aware of, and i am. and this is why i organized our meeting we had in germany with the g7 group of democratic -- economically successful democratic states that we invite partners from all over the globe that are also democracies for making it happen that the democracies are strong. >> and by strong, it also comes with 100,000 u.s. troops in europe and 300,000 nato response forces in europe. this isn't just diplomacy, this is muscle. >> this is, and it's necessary. >> mr. chancellor, thank you for your time this morning. >> thank you. >> our full interview is on our website and our youtube channel. we'll be back in a moment. we love our new home. we've got great outdoor space. but the neighbors have a big dog. [dog wagags tail andnd ba] atat least geieico makes bundling our home and d car insurarance easy.

for bundlingng made easysy, go to o geico.com.m. ththat's a bigig boy.

googlele pixel 6.. what if your phone didn't t just take e epic pho? what if it fixed them too? the amazing magic eraser on google pixel 6. what if yoyou were a g giganc snack foodod maker? and yoyou had to w wresta massivelely complex x supply n to satisisfy cravingngs from tokyoyo to toledodo? so you p partner witith ibm consululting to bring t together data and w workflows so t that every y driver anand merchandndiser cacan serve upup jalapeño,, sesasame, and chocolate-e-covered gogoodns withth real-timeme, data-driveven precisioion. let's s create supupply chs that havave an appetetite for r performancnce. ibm. let's's create. leaders at the g7 last week pledged an additional $4.5 billion to address what the

secretary general of the united nations is calling an unprecedented global hunger crisis. but aid organizations are warning it won't be enough, as russia's war in ukraine severs supply lines and inflation continues raging. cbs news foreign correspondent debora patta is in south sudan with this report. >> reporter: hunger is a never-ending season in south sudan. for three years, this country has been battered by one climate change shock after another. apocalyptic flooding in the north, crippling drought in the southeast. millions were already starving. then came the war in ukraine, triggering the u.n.'s biggest humanitarian crisis the century as food and fuel prices soared, tipping this country over the edge. in guit, floodwaters have still not receded. i'm standing in a place where people used to live.

these were their homes. this was the land that they used to cultivate and live on, and now it's completely submerged under water. sarah nyawal's entire village is gone. she has nothing to eat but the water lilies she's collecting. every child brought to nutritionist mona shaik was severely malnourished. >> i'm afraid that any child like that, we are very close to losing them. >> really? >> within days. >> reporter: there was nyanjima gatlak who walked for a week to get food for her baby, kang. and nyabany kong who hasn't eaten for two weeks. her mother-in-law is wasting away. battling almost impossible odds, the world food program is doing its best. but since russia invaded ukraine, their costs have risen

exponentially. wfp's marwa awad has said they have had to suspend aid. >> we're doing humanitarian triage. this is the worst thing any humanitarian or aid worker has to do. we must do something to help. >> reporter: this farmer's own mother starved to death. this was her last bag of food rations for the year. it will be finished in two weeks. just tell the world we need food, she implored. and when you visit again, she said, we will smile and tell stories of how we survived and find ways to help others in need. no one should die of hunger. there's enough food to feed everyone on earth. the stories we heard continue to haunt us. the people of south sudan, the world, must not forget.

>> debora patta reporting in south sudan. we'll be right back.

according to the gates

foundation, the maternal mortality rate is higher here than in any other developed country. the elimination of federal protection for abortion rights only underscores that reality and the risks ahead. dr. henning tiemeier is from harvard university and joins us now. good morning to you, doctor. >> hello, margaret, and good morning. >> i think this is incredibly important because i want to put the issue of abortion itself aside for a moment and talk about pregnancy in america as these states rewrite these laws. so how is it possible that in the richest country in the world we have the highest maternal mortality rate and how do we stop it from getting worse? >> well, i have to say two things to that. first of all, there seems to be an issue with the data. we think it's higher than other developed countries so it is higher. some of the uptick we've seen recently is partly due to poor data collection. so that has been corrected. but it is higher.

so why is it higher? we think that has to do with the general health of women in america. so it is a background risk, and it is partly due to poverty, to poor health care during pregnancy and importantly poor care after pregnancy, after delivery. >> the mortality rate among black mothers is three times higher than white women. why? >> that is correct. it is much higher. it is substantially higher. and it is -- you must understand that there's about 700 women dying during or after labor or in the first months after delivering. 700 per year. and we know that most of these deaths are preventible. and they indeed occur in minorities more often and in particular in black women. and why that is, is essentially one of the biggest challenges of

public health. we see that as the top of the iceberg of poor health in women and poor health in black women. and there are several reasons that seems to go from poverty to discrimination to poor care for this group of women. >> so according to the cdc, nearly 40% of all abortions performed in this country happen among black women. so in laying out what you did, i would base the assumption that you are projecting that the death rate for these mothers will also climb? >> i don't think we have good projections in numbers at the moment because that will depend on many of the issues actually that you touched on before, on the legal issues and access to abortion in states. but we know that abortion occurs in people of poverty and in minorities much more often. we know that they have difficulties to access abortion

outside the state. so we think it will impact their physical and mental health. how many deaths, nobody knows. it is very hard. it will -- i wouldn't want to quantify that. i couldn't put a number. it depends on so many other things. >> so we looked at medicaid coverage in this country. it covers about 40% of all births in the country. the federal government is trying to get states to take more money to extend maternal health care so it's not cut off at two months but goes longer so women can get pelvic exams and other things after they give birth. states like mississippi aren't doing that. what's the consequence if you don't have access to health care after two months? >> so what you're pointing out now is one of the big issues and one of the things that could be addressed quickly. there are numerous states, mississippi is one of them, but don't forget texas is another

one and that is big numbers that have not expanded, as we say, medicaid. they have not accepted the affordable care act offer to expand health care to women in the first year. and i would actually say it should go further than that, in the first year after delivery. that means that you have very little right and very little coverage. so only the very, very poor in these states are covered, but the big number of poor women, relatively poor low income women, women that struggle to make the time and the money to be ensured are not covered for things like mental health, physical checkups, so they will not have the pelvic examinations that are needed, you are right. >> so america looks a lot different now than it did in 1973. brookings says about 40% of u.s. households have women as the prime bread winner. so i want to ask you how important it is in your view from a medical perspective that

women be able to take recovery time after childbirth, because, of course, as you know, in this country there is no federal guarantee of paid family leave. if these women have to work for their family, their job is in question, or at least being paid for it. >> i think this is such an important issue. i know the vice president addressed some of it but it is very important to see that we need many measures for maternal health. one of them would be to improve prenatal care and the other is indeed to improve postnatal care, but also to support families. and it is in particular poor disadvantaged families, buying them time. so giving them leave -- paid leave is very important because having a child is a stress on the system. imagine you have three children, you have a fourth one, then if you're making minimum, you will not manage to make ends meet or

find the time to breastfeed. we see that breastfeeding is not going up as we wished it would because of this. so i say yes and many of my colleagues -- >> and we will continue to cover your research. we'll cover those issues on this program as well. i have to leave it there, though. we'll be back in a moment.

here in the nation's capital, we are surrounded with reminders of the challenges our forefathers faced in times of great conflict here at home and aprod. there are tributes to those who fought for america's freedom from tyranny to those who led americans through some of the darkest times in our 246-year-old history. there are collections of the histories of oppressed minorities who fought for equal footing among their fellow americans. and monuments to the titans who fought for equality and justice, a fight that continues to this very day.

sprinkled throughout there are bits of wisdom from these giants. when we look at them today, one might think that maybe they knew where we were headed. >> they seek to establish systems of government based on the regulation of all human beings by a handful of individual rulers. call this a new order. it is not new and it is not order. >> we can gather strength from looking back as we struggle to go forward. until next week, for "face the nation," i'm margaret brennan. happy fourth of july.

(announcer) who can you always rely on to be there when you need immediate help? any time of the day or night, even when you're hundreds of miles away from home, always giving you and your family peace of mind with people, benefits, and services always there for you to make your life a little easier? a company you know is always with you. aaa, a company built by and for members. (sentimental music) hi there, i'm jeff thisted. chances are you know about aaa's legendary roadside service, but you might be surprised at what you don't know about aaa. so come along and discover how aaa not only gives you peace of mind, but helps you enjoy life's little pleasures for a whole lot less. discover how the power of over 56 million aaa members