captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> ifill: good evening. i'm gwen ifill. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. >> ifill: on the newshour tonight, frontrunners hillary clinton and donald trump take super tuesday by storm. what this means for the parties, and the rest of the presidential race. >> woodruff: also ahead this wednesday, the supreme court hears its first abortion case in nine years; a law that could add toughening restrictions to clinics in texas and beyond. >> ifill: then, we talk with the u.s ambassador to the u.n. samantha power about the toughest sanctions yet on north korea. >> woodruff: plus, astronaut scott kelly returns home after spending nearly a year in space, a record for an american astronaut. >> on one hand, i look forward to going home, but this has been such a big part of my life. i'm going to miss it. >> woodruff: all that and more, on tonight's pbs newshour.

>> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> here's to relationships. to comradery. to life long friendships and partnerships of all meaningful kinds. here's to love that lasts, year in, year out. for more than five generations, lincoln financial has helped people plan for the future. because this is what you do for people you love. lincoln financial. you're in charge. ♪ ♪

moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> ifill: "super tuesday" has

given way to what might be dubbed "whither, wednesday." as in: how much longer can this go on? the republican and democratic leaders are forging ahead, leaving rivals with some hard calculating to do. >> what a super tuesday! >> ifill: it was a big night for frontrunners hillary clinton and donald trump. with seven super tuesday wins apiece, each now holds commanding leads. for the rest of the field, tuesday's results dramatically narrowed any path to the nomination. but most promised, for now, to press on. ted cruz won three states last night and he campaigned late today in kansas. marco rubio cast his vote for the march 15 florida primary today. >> you know, last night was supposed to be ted cruz's night. we beat him in half the states on the ballot. we won the state of minnesota, we picked up a lot of delegates and we feel great about what the map looks like now, moving

forward. >> ifill: rubio notched only one win tuesday, in minnesota. and although he won no states yesterday, ohio governor john kasich headed to michigan this afternoon. >> ifill: ben carson, who has trailed far behind the others, announced today he is dropping out of tomorrow's g.o.p. debate in his hometown of detroit, writing supporters: "i do not see a political path forward." on the democratic side, bernie sanders won four states last night-- minnesota, oklahoma, colorado and his home state of vermont. he campaigned in maine today, taking shots at both clinton and trump. >> and it turns out that when they do these match-ups of sanders vs trump, clinton vs trump, we almost always do better in those match-ups than secretary clinton. so if people want a candidate who will defeat one or another of these right wing republicans, i think you're looking at him this afternoon. >> ifill: but clinton won significantly more delegates,

with lopsided victories mostly in the south. many republicans have not embraced trump's status as prohibitive frontrunner. mitt romney, the party's 2012 standard bearer, announced he will deliver an address on the state of the race tomorrow. but although he has been harshly critical of trump, there was no indication he plans to endorse a candidate or jump in the race himself. democrats, however, relished trump's triumph. >> republicans shouldn't be surprised. they spent eight years laying the ground work for donald trump. the reality is that republican leaders are reaping what they've sown. >> ifill: tuesday night's winners are clearly setting their sites on the general election-- and on each other. >> it's clear tonight that the stakes in this election have never been higher, and the rhetoric we're hearing on the other side has never been lower.

>> once we get all of this finished, i'm going to go after one person and that's hillary clinton, on the assumption that she's allowed to run. which is a big assumption. i don't know that she's going to be allowed to run. and i think that's frankly going to be an easy race. >> ifill: voters in more than a dozen states will head to the polls over the next two weeks, including delegate-rich florida, north carolina, ohio and michigan. we'll analyze the state of the race, after the news summary. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, the u.n. security council approved the toughest sanctions on north korea in 20 years. it's punishment for nuclear and missile tests earlier this year. the sanctions will mandate inspections of all cargo shipped to and from north korea, by land, sea or air. they also freeze financial assets and cut off weapons sales to what's officially called the "democratic people's republic of korea." the vote was unanimous, with u.s. ambassador samantha power saying existing sanctions don't go far enough.

>> that is why the resolution we have just adopted is so much tougher than any prior north korea resolution. we have studied the ways the d.p.r.k. has been able to exploit gaps and evade measures aimed at impeding its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs and we have put in place new measures to fill those gaps one by one. >> woodruff: we'll speak with ambassador power later in the program. >> ifill: for the first time, the u.s. military has captured a significant islamic state leader in iraq. it's widely reported he was seized last month by a special operations unit that was recently deployed. the group's mission is to disrupt isis in iraq and syria. officials have not released the militant leader's identity. >> woodruff: pressure built on the balkan states today to let more migrants move north from greece. macedonia did let 170 people cross its border, but many thousands more are still stranded. james mates of independent

television news is there: >> reporter: the door has finally opened, albeit just a crack. a few syrian and iraqi families with young children today allowed from greece into macedonia. 14-year-old ribhan and her eight-year-old sister rezan are among the first to pass through this tiny door to what they hope is a new life. how many days have you been waiting in the camp? >> 10 >> reporter: 10 days? and where do you want to go to now? >> germany. >> reporter: from the other side of the fence, those not getting through watched and shouted their frustrations. >> be merciful for all those people. we are not terrorists. >> open! >> reporter: the prime minister of slovakia, one of the countries on the refugee route, had come to see how his policemen were helping to block the passage north. this has been the first movement through this border post for 48

hours or so. whether it's part of a change of police or simply connected to this official visit, we'll find out soon enough. but either way, the flow is barely a trickle. while the numbers still arriving in greece resemble a flood. more than 2,000 a day. many today making their way through fields towards the same crowded camp. >> woodruff: as of today some 30,000 people are now waiting in greece for the chance to move north. >> ifill: another piece of a long-missing malaysia airlines flight may have been found. it turned up on mozambique over the weekend. that's thousands of miles from flight 370's last known coordinates, before it vanished two years ago, off thailand. so far, the only confirmed trace of the plane is a part of one wing. it was found last year on another island off africa. >> woodruff: indonesia was spared major damage today from a powerful earthquake. it had a magnitude of 7.8 and was centered at sea, 400 miles off sumatra. police in the coastal city of padang initially issued tsunami

warnings and evacuated a hospital. but in the end, residents were largely unaffected. >> ifill: and, wall street managed modest gains. the dow jones industrial average was up 34 points to close just short of 16,900. the nasdaq rose nearly 14 points, and the s&p 500 added eight. still to come on the newshour, the first major abortion case in a decade before the supreme court; charting the path to the white house after super tuesday; donald trump and the future of the republican party, and much more. >> woodruff: big wins on super tuesday, and impressive delegate leads, have both the trump and clinton campaigns starting to set their sites on the general election.

>> we've got work to do, but that work -- that work is not to make america great again. america never stopped being great -- (cheers and applause) -- and we have to make america whole! >> she wants to make america whole again and i'm trying to figure what is that all about. make america great again is going to be much better than making america whole again. >> woodruff: we unpack last night's results, and how it shapes the road to the white house, with reid wilson, chief political correspondent for the morning consult; and susan page, washington bureau chief with "u.s.a. today." and we welcome you both. so, you know, they're focusing, already, to some extend, on the general election but let's talk about what they still have to deal with in the primaries. susan, what did you make of the super tuesday result on the democratic side in. >> a pretty good night for hillary clinton. she won seven states, the

sweetest victory had to be in massachusetts, the state next door to vermont, the state that knows bernie sanders well and famously liberal and for her to beat bernie sanders in massachusetts is a sign that though he still wins states and won states last night she is on a pretty steady path in the nomination. >> woodruff: what did you read that the voters were saying in the exit polls? >> we saw a divided democratic party. one-half wants a candidate who shares their values and cares about people like them, bernie sanders is winning that half. the other half is looking toward november, wanting an experienced and electable candidate and those voters are going with hillary clinton. the difference is in early states, iowa, new hampshire, the sort of optimistic, id ideologi, idealistic votessers were outweighing the experienced and electability voters. now we're shifting where the

more traditional democrats are playing a bigger role in the coalition. >> with democrats, it's not as though democratic voters supporting sanders find clinton unacceptable. the question is will they be energized and inthews castiastic and turn out to vote in november whereas republicans have a big problem with vote horse find donald trump unacceptable. >> woodruff: the turnout in democrats strike lig small than last time. let's talk about bernie sanders and quickly look at the delegate count. right now, the democrat, to win the nomination, you need almost 2400 delegates. hillary clinton already has over 1,000. people are saying, okay, bernie sanders, he's done a great job, but some are saying why is me staying in. >> although opinions those numbers are misleading because her numbers are boosted by her support among super delegates. democratic delegates who are already convention delegates. if she hit a stumbling block, they could easily turn to a

different candidate. they're not obliged to vote for her. that said, the democratic establishment wants hillary clinton to be the no, ma'am nie and they want it wrapped up as soon as possible and with as few wounds as possible. >> woodruff: if you're bernie sanders wharks you hearing now? >> the path bernie sanders has to take to get to the 2380 delegates necessary to win the nomination is pretty steep. the way the democratic calendar sup favors the frontrunner. recall back in 2008, super tuesday gave a u.s. senator named barack obama just enough lead over hillary clinton that he could sort of sustain it through the long, grueling months until he got to those delegates knows win. so the what the sanders campaign has to do now is win by increasingly larger shares as the contest goes on. that becomes harder and harder especially in a party that shows it's okay for hillary clinton. >> woodruff: you mentioned donald trump.

we had news today that ben carson will not be staying in the race. i guess he'll fake the formal announcement later. what does that do to the field? obviously one person less. does it change anything? there is now so much pressure on the republicans to do something about donald trump. >> i think that it has very little effect. ben carson's support had gotten pretty low. if you look at it, maybe it boosts ted cruz a little bit because of the evangelical chris chain nature of a lot of ben carson's support. i think it's not really significant factor. what you did have today were wealthy contributors to the republican party who are unhappy with the idea of a trump candidacy seeing if they can do something to stop him and i think that is not likely to have much more effect than ben carson pulling out. these big donors have not had the kind of effect this year that you've had in years past. super pacs that got so much attention early on didn't save jeb bush at all in his candidacy. so seems like a candidate like donald trump who has gotten

where he is by attracting republican voters to primaries and caucuses is not going to be undone by contributors decideing they're not happy with him. >> woodruff: reid, what are the republican voters saying about why they are supporting donald trump, if they, are and if they're not, why not? >> well, again, there is this sort of division as on the democratic side. the diinvestigation on the republican side, though, is between those who want an eelectriccable candidate, mitt romney -- marco rubio, excuse me, freudian slip -- marco rubio tends to win those candidates and do much better among them. on the other hand, there are voters who want change and want somebody to tell it like it is. that's the single biggest segment voting for donald trump. a lot of voters feel like they haven't gotten the straight truth from politicians, not only politicians at large but republican politicians. a huge percentage of the republican electorate doesn't trust their own politicians. they're trump voters. >> woodruff: how does one

account, though, for the just surprisingly high turnout among republicans? if you're donald trump maybe you don't think it's so surprising, but he's bringing more people into the voting booth. >> one, we had this record-size field, so you've had a lot of candidates trying to get their voters to the polls, that's had one effect. but i think donald trump is bringing new and different people to the republican party and if he's the nominee, he will redefine at least to some extent what it means to be republican, what the republican party stands for, because these are voters who are not necessarily free traders or for muscular national defense, these are people focused on the economy at home, worried about their own futures and have an approach to politics that is different from the old republican party. >> woodruff: and these new voters, i think, reid wilson, make it harder for those who are trying to come up with a scenario to get rid of donald trump. but just quickly, let's look at the delegates on the republican

side, you need 1237 to win the nomination. trump has 319. scruze at 226. so it's a -- cruz is at 226. so it's a lead but not an overwhelming lead if you look at the numbers. >> it's not but because of the proportional rules under which the calendar is operating, it is harder and harder as the calendar goes on for somebody who make up even the smallest gap. the big moments left in this campaign will come on march 15 when, under republican party rules, states can apart delegates on a winner take all basis, the two big prizes that day ohio and florida, both home state candidates in the race, john kasich, the governor of ohio, marco rubio the senator from florida. the donald trump wins those states and he's ahead in both, this race is pretty much over. >> woodruff: it gets more and more fascinating every day. reid wilson, susan >> ifill: over or not, the

battle within the g.o.p. is threatening to split the party in two. we get views from the pro-trump and the stop-trump wings of the party. kansas secretary of state kris kobach endorsed trump this week; and strategist henry barbour is mississippi's republican national committeeman. he is backing marco rubio. gentlemen, thank you for joining us. so starting with you, henry barbour, what is donald trump's success, his electoral successes in the past few weeks, what is it doing to or for the party? >> well, you know, i think that remains to be seen what donald trump is doing to the party. you know, we're still very early in this process. you've got to get 1237 delegates to win. we've only allocated some 728 delegates to this point. for many trum -- for mr. trump t 1237, he has a long ways to get

there. it's not inevitable donald trump will be the candidate. we have 1100 delegates to be awarded in march and april, and there is no way that mr. trump is going to be able to get there at the pace that he's been going. he won 42% of the delegates yesterday, that would put him at about 750 delegates attend of april. my point is, gwen, we have a long ways to go in this process and a majority of republicans, about two-thirds, are voting for somebody other than mr. trump. >> ifill: but is this about delegate nose counting or a rejection from so many republicans of the establishment, of the way the republican party has always been structured? >> well, look, the voters are going to decide in the republican primaries and caucuses around the country who they want to be our nominee, whether that's donald trump or marco rubio who is a candidate who i think could -- that we could coalesce behind and who could beat hillary clinton. i'm afraid donald trump would

lose in the general election against hillary clinton when he can't answer a question about the ku klux klan, whether he's for or against them. sounded like he needed to do a little studying or fix his ear piece. i'm not sure what that was about. and reid mentioned in the segment before this that people like that donald trump tells it like it is, but i think if you ask the students at trump university, they weren't told like it is. the new york attorney general said it was a bait and switch program, a scam. >> ifill: kris kobach, why did you decide to endorse donald trump? >> well, first and foremost because he's taking the strongest position we've ever heard a presidential candidate take on illegal immigration and the vulnerability our country faces with respect to immigrants coming legally through the refugee system which is now it appears being used by i.s.i.s. as way of getting into the united states and into western europe and illegally. the threat to our country in terms of national security and the threat to working americans who see their wages depressed if

they don't lose their job, or lose their job is something that many people say, look, trump is actually the guy who's actually going to do something about it and he's not speaking in half words and half tones. he's saying, we're going to solve the problem and solve it now. the other thing i really find appealing about donald trump is he is massively broadening the republican base for the first time in, well, 25 years, and we've had all these talking heads and consultants tell the republican water, well, the way you broaden your base is you roll over on amnesty and tell everyone you're for amnesty and hopefully instead of getting 30% of the hispanic vote you will get 40%. that doesn't broaden the base. what trump is doing is broadening the base and we're seeing it before our eyes. unfortunately, the republican establishment is looking a gift horse in the mouth and saying we don't really want the blue collar workers coming to the republican party and that's the biggest thing trump offers is

something tha like the massive amounts of working men and women coming to the republican party. >> ifill: henry barbour wants to respond. >> mr. trump gave a gift to hillary clinton so she would come to his wedding, and, i mean, if that doesn't look like an establishment move, you know, i don't know what is. i do think that if you look at marco rubio's track record in florida, he was the original renegade who ran against the establishment in florida, a sitle governor running for the u.s. senate. everybody told marco you can't do it, the tea party rallied around marco rubio and he won and e's been a real reformer and made a difference as a conservative. one of the important differences for republican primary voters to understand is we know marco rubio is a conservative. has a 98% rating with the

american conservative union. one day donald trump says he's pro-choice, the next pro-life, yet he's giving money to planned parenthood which funds abortions. >> ifill: let me ask you both about whether this means -- the big discussion here and around the country is whether the republican party is splitting apart. can you see, kris kobach, a way that donald trump goes to the convention, plays by the rules of this party, and units the party, as he said last night he would? >> you know, i think it is going to happen because, at the end of the day, although there is grousing among some of the moneyed establishment interests and some people in the rnc, but not all, ultimately, if you have this many voters saying overwhelmingly, yeah, we like trump, which is what's happening and you will see more when you get to the winner stake all states where the delegates are overwhelmingly in his corner, i can't see any way at the rnc, the republican establishment, however you define it l say we're going to find a way to derail the trump campaign. i think you will see the threat of a clinton presidency that

republicans will united blind mr. trump. mr. trump is still for in-state -- mr. rubio is still for in-state tuition and amnesty. he hasn't take an conservative position on this critically important issue and deceived florida voters when running against charlie crist. he sponsored amnesty when he got into the u.s. senate. >> ifill: in exit polls last night not a lot of voters were listing immigration as their reason for supporting donald trump. we don't have a lot of time left. i want to ask henry barbour about the question about contested elections, the general election and whether in the end donald trump is electable and, if he is, whether he would get your support ultimately -- could get your support. >> well, look, right now, he's getting the support of about 35% of republicans.

so the majority of republicans right now want somebody else. i think he would have a hard time winning the general election. i have said consistently that i intend to support the nominee and that's what i hope to do. i will say this -- mr. trump's comments about the klan the other day as a guy from mississippi i find that very troubling and when he tries to pawn it off something happened with his earpiece, i find that really hard to believe and maybe kris can explain that. >> well, he's disavowed it so many times, and i find it kind of strange when republicans who are constantly falsely called racists take the leftist tactics and use it against republicans. if rubio doesn't win, i will be supporting him. >> ifill: kris kobach, kansas secretary of state, henry barbour, member of rnc from

mississippi. thank you both. >> my pleasure. >> woodruff: stay with us. coming up on the newshour, we talk to u.n. ambassador samantha power about the toughest sanctions on north korea in 20 years. and, an out-of-this-world look at scott kelly's year in space. but first, to the supreme court, and perhaps the biggest case of the term. >> we pray for all of us to have courage... >> woodruff: activists on both sides were out in force as the high court heard its first abortion case in nearly a decade. >> as a religious leader, i believe that every individual has the right to make their own moral decisions. >> i'm all about saving lives. lives are precious to me, even lives conceived in rape, even disabled, even kids that are suffering with multiple surgeries before they're five. those kids glorify god.

>> woodruff: on the docket: whether a texas law imposes an "undue burden" on the right to obtain an abortion. it passed in 2013, after a filibuster by then-state senator wendy davis that drew national attention. abortion clinics have to meet something akin to hospital standards-- and doctors must have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic. the state says its purpose is simply to protect women's' health. >> this case is not about overturning roe versus wade. what this case-- the issue ine t valid patient regulations and improve patient safety, and when over 210 women annually are hospitalized due to abortion, texas can. >> woodruff: but opponents say more than half of texas' 41 abortion clinics have closed because they can't meet the new standards. they say the law-- known as h.b.-2-- is really a back-door

way to stop abortions. >> it has been a long and arduous road that has led us to this day, but that is nothing compared to what the women of texas will face if h.b.-2 is not struck down. this law is cruel and it is harsh and it does nothing to advance medial health for women. >> woodruff: what the high court will do is even more of a guess than usual, since the death of conservative justice antonin scalia. if there's a four-to-four split, a lower court ruling that affirmed the texas law may stand for now. and we take a closer look inside the court now, with marcia coyle, chief washington correspondent for the "national law journal." marcia, so abortion back in the court after a long, long spell of nine years. how did it all unfold today? >> well, as you explained, the issue before the court is whether these regulations create

an undue burden on a woman's right to choose and, if it does, they're unconstitutional. what does undue burden mean? the spblght said in 1992 an undue burden is unnecessary regulations having the purpose of the effect of present ago substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion. so during the arguments today, first up was the clinic's lawyer, and she faced aggressive and skeptical questioning by justice alito on the effect of these laws. he didn't seem persuaded that the clinics had presented hard and sufficient evidence that the regulations at issue here really had the effect of closing the clinics that closed or that the remaining clinics had the compass di-- did not have the capacity to handle the demand for abortions by texas women. on the other side, justices kagan, sotomayor and ginsburg

also had aggressive skeptical questioning directed at texas' lawyer. there they focused on the purpose -- why did texas do this? texas says to protect women's health. justice kagan, for example, asked, well, listen, abortion is considered one of the safest medical outpatient procedures today. in fact, the risk is less than liposuction, it's less than some procedures in a dentist's office. why don't those procedures require being done in ambulatory surgical facilities? >> woodruff: so so much of the focus today, marcia, was on justice. anthony kennedy already seen as a swing vote. if justice scalia were alive, now that he's gone, we're looking at an 8-member court. what role was kennedy playing? >> justice kennedy suggested a couple of things. first, for the clinic's lawyer, he's picking up on justice

alito's questions about evidence. he said, would it be helpful if we sent the case back to the lower court so that both sides could put in evidence on the effect of these regulations? that's what we call a remand to the lower court. but he also said to the texas lawyer on the purpose here, could it be having the opposite effect? could these regulations actually be increasing the number of surgical late-term abortions with higher risks? and he noted that, nationally, abortions that are done by drugs, medically-induced abortions, are on the rise, but in texas they are decreasing. so he offered maybe a way for the court to avoid a 4-4 split, which the court generally does not like to do. >> woodruff: the consequences of this case, as we suggested, marcia, are bigger than just texas. >> absolutely. even if the court were to split

4-4, the ruling would only pertain to the states covered by the fifth circuit. these battles in courts are going on all around the country and i think both sides are looking to the supreme court for a decision that would resolve these battles. so it does have implications beyond texas. >> woodruff: a sense just quickly, marcia, of scalia's absence. how does it feel, i guess i'm asking? >> it's very noticeable because he always was a very dominant figure during the questioning, and certainly on the culture war issues including abortion, his voice was always heard. he also did not believe that rowe roe v. wade was constitutil so clearly he would have been on the side of texas in upholding these regulations. >> woodruff: marcia coyle. thank you. >> thank you, judy.

>> ifill: now, we get opposing views from two people who were also in the room for today's arguments. first: cecile richards, president of planned parenthood, which challenged the texas law. mrs. richards, part of the discussion in the courtroom today was about undue burden, about whether what the texas law was allowing would place undue burden on women seeking abortions. how did that play out for you, for your argument? >> well, i thought it was very clear and particularly the solicitor general made a very good point. he quite succinctly said, if a woman has a right she can't exercise, it really isn't a right. i think the case that was made about what's happened to women in texas, particularly women who live in rural areas, who live in areas that are not covered or are hundreds of miles away from an abortion provider that is an undue burden and i think on the flip side, too, the state was completely unable to make the case that there was any medical benefit at all to women the new restrictions had been put in place. >> ifill: justice kennedy expressed doubts about whether

this shouldn't be bounced back to the lower court. what effect would that have on your argument? >> well, obviously, now that there are only eight justices on the court, i think there are a lot of different things that could happen, but the women in texas are suffering right now. i think it's really important this law be overturned. we see at planned parenthood every day the burdens women face to access safe and legal abortion care. as we know dozens of centers have closed in the state of texas, already, and i think it's time we actually restore access in the state. so i hope actually the judges will hear, i think, the voices of women which to me were very present in the courtroom today and rule that this is an unconstitutional law and one that needs to be overturned. >> ifill: if there is a 4-4 decision with the court as it is currently configured, that would be a defeat for you, wouldn't it? upholding the previous law sphnchts it would be a defeat for the women of texas, absolutely, and i really hope that's not what happens. i think that the lawyers made a

compelling case and the justices were quite compelling about what the burden has been on women and, you know, the state has somehow tried to make the argument that this was for the benefit of women's health but, in fact, every reputable national organization from the american medical association to the obstetricians and gynecologists to family physicians have said not only are these laws not beneficial for women's health, they do nothing to help women, they actually are harming women because women are delaying care and making it much harder particularly for women who are low income in the state of texas to get access to a safe and legal abortion. >> ifill: you've alluded a couple of times to the burden on the women of texas. give me some examples of exactly what would happen or has happened to women seeking abortions in these areas of the state which now don't have those facilities. >> well, we've already seen a report out of texas that tens of thousands of women have tried to self induce abortions and i think that is, for anyone in this country who remembers the

days before roe vs. wade when young and healthy women were dying in emergency rooms across the country -- >> ifill: how do we know h this has to do with this law? >> because they haven't been able to get access to care. i was in fort worth, texas this weekend and a young woman came up and said she had to drive 400 miles because she lived in deep west texas and there was no other provider. even the state today admitted that the lack of a healthcare provider in el paso meant women were driving to other states. one of the things, gwen, that didn't come up today but is really important is this case is not just about texas because we're already seeing in the state of louisiana a similar law that is causing now closure of other women's health centers in louisiana. ironically, women have been driving from texas to louisiana to have access to an abortion provider. now if you end access in louisiana and texas and soon mississippi, you're talking about a whole area of the country where potentially women will not have access to abortion

services. >> ifill: it's been a while since we've seen an abortion debate at the high court. how does this compare to the parable birth abortion debate? >> the state argued this is somehow to benefit women's he would and it was clearly stated today there is zero evidence it is about women's he would and has been devastating for women. the other thing that struck me was the difference of having three women on the supreme court. all the justices obviously are important in that court but it really makes a difference to begin to have a court that more reflects the diversity of this country and i think women who can really speak from a woman's point of view of just how impactful these kind of laws that specifically target women and women's access to healthcare, how impactful they are. and i was really grateful to have the women's voices in the

room. >> ifill: cecile richards, planned parenthood, thank you. >> good to be here. >> ifill: and now, the other side: clarke forsythe is acting president and senior counsel for the anti-abortion rights group "americans united for life." i was asking cecile richards from planned parenthood about the undue burden argument. that's the argument in which they are challenging whether this law, this texas law should be upheld -- or overruled. what do you think about the argument that there is an undue burden place opened women. >> there is no undue burden. these are very important medical regulations, very important health and safety regulations. there have to be ambulatory surgical treatment standards and you would want every clinic to meet those standards. every part of those standards has a medical logic and a grounding in medical practice. dr. donna campbell was a state senator who testified in support of these regulations in the texas senate, 23 years an emergency room physician and she testified to the medical logic

behind every part of the ambulatory medical/surgical standards. there is logic behind admitting privileges. it involves continuity of care between the performing surgeon and the receiving surgeon in any hospital if there are complications. you wouldn't want to go to a clinic that didn't meet asc standard. you wouldn't want to go to a clinic in which the doctor didn't have admitting privileges. i wouldn't want my wife or one of my five daughters to go to any clinic that didn't meet these standards. >> ifill: is the argument before the court about medical logic or medical standards or is it about access for rights that women under the constitution or unler the laws that currently exist already have? >> there is no right to an unsafe abortion. access doesn't mean anything if it's not safe, and you have safety for patient by meeting medical standards. these are pervasive -- asc standards are pervasive across

the country. the real question is why are these generally amicable long-standing standards not applicable to abortion clinics? and the supreme court for 43 years since roe vs. wade has never allowed states to pass health and safety regulations in the first trimester when 90% are done. this is a landmark case. the court is a national abortion control board. they control standards in every state from coast to coast and never allowed health and safety regulations in the first trimester. this is a landmark case. >> ifill: how different are the options now for you with a 4-4 court with justice scalia's absence? does it change what you expect the outcome to be? >> well, based on what i heard in the courtroom today, i think the most likely result is a 4-4 split. this has had before in an abortion case during the bourke

vacancy before justice kennedy was confirmed in 1988. a 4-4 is a firm but equally divided court meaning the lower court's decision stands which means a victory for patient care in texas but could would not have applicability to any other state. so most likely the court would have to revisit the issue in 2017 or 2018. >> justice kennedy was musing aloud in court about sending this back to the lower court again. >> that's a possibility but if justice kennedy scrupulously applies his 2007 opinion for five justices, he will uphold these standards because you don't get two bites at the apple to make claims and repeatedly make claims. the clinics had all the time in the world to make their claims and to put their facts in about the burden of these things, and they failed to. >> ifill: 2007, i just want to clear it up, the 2007 decision

you referred to is the partial birth abortion ban. >> yes. >> ifill: how different is the situation in 2016 than in 2007 when the court ablghtd o acted . >> if the court applies the standards in 2007, they should uphold these regulations. this is a unique says because it's the first time the court has had a solid record of facts in protecting maternal health, and the court has never had that before. i was hoping it's eye opening for the court to see the need for health and safety regulations. the short-term and long-term risks. and the fact that access doesn't mean anything if you have substandard conditions and providers. > >> ifill: clarke forsythe, thank you very much. >> thanks, gwen.

>> woodruff: now, as we reported earlier, the united nations security council unanimously approved new sanctions against north korea this morning. the sanctions would impact many sectors of north korea's economy, and were designed to further limit its nuclear program after another bomb test in january, and a missile launch last month. the u.s. ambassador to the u.n., samantha power, was instrumental in getting the sanctions approved, and joins me now. ambassador power, welcome. this is a notoriously defiant regime. why will these sangs move them in any useful way? >> well, they are, as you indicated, the toughest and most comprehensive sanctions ever imposed on north korea, of course, but also the toughest imposed by the u.n. in more than 20 years and indeed there are measures in this package of sanctions that have never been done in the whole history of the u.n.

so for starters, we've turned the dial up not just a notch but many, many, many, many notches, and the degree of isolation, the degree -- the impediments to them actually pursuing the technology, the know how, the money, some channels they have been using to evade prior sanctions regimes have now been cut off with this resolution, and we're hopeful, also, judy, you know, china went along with this resolution and these unprecedented measures and i think that's a measure of china's frustration with the regime and its own signal on top of the practical effect of these sanctions, a very important message has been sent not only by the international community but by north korea's very influential neighbor and of course by the united states. >> woodruff: the u.s. is confident china is going to be every bit as aggressive in these sanctions and i wanted to ask you because some of the terms sound like they're very difficult to implement.

inspecting all the goods that go into and come out of north korea? how do you do that? >> well, each country will have to come up with its own inspection regime and you're right to point to the fact every member state has a responsibility to do this in as air-tight a way as possible. be uh to signal the contrast of today's resolution versus yesterday, yesterday, in order for a state to have obligation to inspect cargo going in or out, they had to think something was in the cargo with a ballistic missile program, it's hard to get that kind of intelligence and get it to people who might inspect in time. now the presumption has totally shifted where all cargo going into the dprk is suspected of being used to service this program which they've advanced over the years and every country will have to put in place mechanisms to make sure the cargo gets looked at and we will

have means of assessing whether or not states are in compliance and have political costs against someone who are deviating against the requirements of the resolution. >> woodruff: what will the measure be that the sanctions are working? >> great question. for starters, as i mentioned, the resolution is about actually blocking stuff coming into north korea and blocking their ability to traffic in coal, iron ore, gold and to use those proceeds to acquire technologies dual use and straight up technologies they've used to advance the program. so there is almost an incapacitation function and when we see it's harder for them to acquire materials, that they can't advance their program in the same way, that will be one sign the resolution is biting. the other and the ultimate objective is for them to come to the negotiating table but not just come to want to talk about whatever is on their agenda, and they would have a few things they would like to talk about,

but to talk about denuclearization, to talk about irreversible, complete, verifiable denuclearization and that is something they have not been prepared to talk about in more than ten years. >> woodruff: i want to ask you quickly about one or two other important international issues and one has to do with syria, the recent cessation of hostilities agreement. it's been reported a number of violations including by the assad regime using chemical weapons in recent days. assuming that is true, how much is the united states prepared to tolerate from -- whether assad or any of the other parties in order to say that -- before you say, frankly, that this agreement isn't working? >> well, much like the resolution we passed today on north korea, we have, over the course of the last year, done something very concrete on chemical weapons, not only removing and destroying the chemical weapons program by the regime but also creating an accountability mechanism where the opcw and u.n. actually go

out and investigate allegations of the kind we saw made by again high-level public comments. we ourselves are looking into the report of chlorine use. it wouldn't be the first time if the regime had used chlorine, but it would be in blatant violation of the cessation of hostilities and something we would expect russia as the backer of the syrian regime to hold the regime accountable for and to make sure that that practice stopped as we then pursued accountability for any perpetrator of such an attack. but again we can't confirm it. what we do know is there have been other forms of violations, attacks in the northwestern part of the country and, you know, this is not a perfect environment of cessation of hostilities. we don't have a big monitoring presence on the ground, we don't have a political agreement, so we never expected it was going be perfect, but i think the u.s., russia, i.s.s.g. channel is where we seek to in a way adjudicate these things and then get those who back the parties to put pressure on the parties

to get them to stop. i do think there is been a reduction in violence that's noteworthy because it also helps us get humanitarian assistance in but we have to see a more sustained cessation in hose hostilities and the violence stop if we have momentum in the political track. >> woodruff: refugees pouring or trying to get into europe from the middle east. we have been telling their story day after day. the top u.s. general of n.a.t.o. said the other day he believes i.s.i.s. is spreading like a carnes among these refugees. is that your understanding of what's going on now? >> well, i mean, i think that certainly we have seen, you know, i.s.i.s. turning up in european cities. we've seen the paris attacks. there is a lot of homegrown extremism. people who are first generation who have been born in european countries who have taken to extremism. i think what's important is the systems we have to process

people, most of whom the vast, vast, vast majority of whom are just in desperate need of refuge, that the systems we have are sufficient to actually being able to run fingerprint checks, you know, look into backgrounds and so forth and that's the great disadvantage of this flood is it's been much harder for europe to manage than, for instance, our program where we're able to deliberate over these refugee files over 18 months to make sure we get it right. >> woodruff: we'll leave it there and appreciate you talking to us. u.s. ambassador to the u.n., samantha power. >> thank you. >> ifill: finally tonight, what's it like to live in space for a year? that's what astronaut scott kelly has been doing on the international space station. it's the focus of a special on pbs tonight called "a year in space." scott kelly was actually up there for 340 days before he

descended by capsule into kaszhakstan yesterday. it was the longest any american has been in space, and part of an effort to see how the body and mind fare over time. nasa hopes to get astronauts to mars in another two decades. and it will take 2.5 years to get there. throughout his mission, scott kelly has circled the earth more than 5,400 times, traveling 143 million miles and witnessed thousands of sunrises, sunsets and other incredible views. we've put together our own compilation of some of what kelly's seen and said, from start to finish. do you consider yourself and mikhail pathfinders of sorts?

>> sure. i guess you could use that term, but i think we all are, you know. you know, all the crewmembers over the last 15 years and even those who came before that. you know, flying in space is a process. exploring space is a process that you take step by step. so, you know, on one hand, you know, misha and i might be at the front of that right now because we've spent, you know, a pretty significant amount of time up here, but that in no way takes away from anything that all the previous folks have done, you know, towards that future goal of going to mars.

you know, i'm a big believer in what we're doing here. i believe in the importance of flying in space and, you know, the research we do, i believe in exploration, and i will miss being on the front lines of that endeavor, i guess. you know, on the one hand, i look forward to going home, but it's something that has been a big part of my life, and i'm going to miss it. >> you know, you definitely have a different perspective on the earth and things that happen down there. i keep probably more in touch with what's going on on earth when i'm in space than when i'm actually on earth, and you definitely have a sense of -- an heightened sense of empathy and also, you know, notice, you know, the effects of our presence on the planet. it makes you somewhat -- if you

weren't already -- an environmentalist and, you know, definitely a feeling that we needed to take care of it. >> ifill: just spectacular. you can watch more about scott kelly's mission tonight. "a year in space" airs on pbs stations. on the newshour: for the >> woodruff: and that's the newshour for tonight. on thursday, making sense of sexism on wall street. i'm judy woodruff. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. join us on-line, and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf railway.

>> here's to relationships. >> lincoln financial-- committed to helping you take charge of your financial future. >> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and individuals. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> this is bbc "world news america." >> funding of this presentation is made possible by the freeman foundation, newman's own foundation, giving all profits from newman's own to charity and pursuing the common good, kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs, and hong kong tourism board. >> want to know hong kong's most romantic spot? i'll show you. i love heading to repulse bay for an evening stroll. it is the perfect, stunning backdrop for making romantic moments utterly unforgettable.