♪ nick: good evening, i'm nick schifrin. judy woodruff is away. on the news however tonight, after the massacre rm. a teacher killed in uvalde, texas is laid to rest as questions about the police response linger. then democracy in crisis plans to enlist help as activists. then marine biologists look for solutionses to save coral reefs. >> we cannot save coral reefs without stopping climate change. in the meantime we need to ensure that we don't lose the diversity that we have now. nick: all that and more on tonight's pbs news however. [captioning performed by

thenational captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] >> major funding for the pbs news however has been provided by -- ♪ >> moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> cfo. caregiver. eclipse chaser. a raymond jamesinancial adviser tailors advice to help you live your life. life well planned.

>> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems. skollfoundation.org. >> the lemelson foundation, committed to improving lives through invention in the u.s. and developing countries. on the web at lemelson.org. supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. information online at macfound.org. and with the on goirng 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. nick: twin funerals in uvalde,

texas, today for a woman who tried to protect her students, and her husband who died two days later. mourners at a catholic church paid final respects to irma garcia, one of two teachers killed by a gunman, and her husband joe who had a fatal heart attack. also today the school district police chief pete arredondo denied he stopped cooperating with authorities who are investigating his decision to delay going in after the gunman. a grand jury in buffalo, new york, has formally charged an 18-year-old white suspect in last month's killings at a supermarket. payton general dron is accused -- gendron is accused of killing 19 people all of them black. the u.s. and germany announced they'll send new advanced weapons to ukraine to try to blunt a russian offensive in the east. the u.s. package includes rockets that can strike targets 45 miles away.

germany is sending air defen missiles in. washington, secretary of ste blinken and nato secretary general dismissed threats that the weapons could widen the war. >> with respect to weapons being provided, the ukrainians have given us assurances they will not use this these against toornghts russian territories. there's a strong bust between ukraine and the united states as well as with our allies and partners. nick: in ukraine today, russian forces occupied more than of sever don -- sever donzeing -- severdonesk. they say fleeing and gettinged aare no longer possible. people in shanghai were finally allowed out of lockdown. >> it's my first time getting on the subway since the lockdown. i feel pretty good. it's not that crowded nor that

deserted, it looks like people are not nervous. it's pretty good. nick: the world health organization warned a covid outbreak in north korea appears to be getting worse. officials apeel to the north for more information. back in this country, president biden defended his response to the shortage of baby formula. he said no one realized initially how bad it would be when a plant in michigan closed from contamination. at a virtual round table he announce nud formula shipments from abroad and said the administration's efforts were in high gear. the number two executive at facebook's parent meta is stepping down. sheryl sandberg announced he's leaving after 14 years as chief operating officer. she helped build the company into a powerhouse but drew criticism for underplaying how facebook was exploited in the 2016 elections and the january 6 riot at the u.s. capitol. admiral linda fay began became the commandant of the coast guard today, the first woman to lead a u.s. service.

she formally took over in a ceremony at the white house with president biden. she saluted an earlier commandant who opene doors. >> owen siler was the one who had the courage and made the decision to open the academy. they the first group of women graduated in 19 0, i started a year later. if it was not for so weapon wp -- for owen siler's courage i would not be here today. nick: the man who shot president reagan will gain full freedom on june 16. a federal judge ruled john hing lee is no longer a danger to himself or others. he is now 77 and spent 20 years in a mental hospital before being allowed limited freedom. on wall street, retreats. the dow jones industrial average

lost nearly 177 points to close at 38,813. the nasdaq fell 81 point, the s&p500 slipped 31. coming up, we exane gun safety abroad and how the rest of world sees american gun massacres. a conversation about the white house adviser about today's new shipments of heavy weapons to ukraine. the battle over freedom of speech and limitations on social media content. plus much more. >> this is the pbs news however, from weta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. nick: in uvalde it will take two full weeks for the community to hold funerals for the 21 lives lost in the school shooting. etch even as the greeing continue, the community is awaiting reports about the law enforcement response. there are serious divides about the need for more action on gun safety and gun laws.

william brangham speaks with a state lawmaker in uvalde. william: there was been new questions seemingly every day about how the tragedy occurred, how police responded what accountability may look like, and what changes ought to be implemented going forward. democratic state senator roland gutierrez represents uvalde and he is there now. state senator, thank you so much for being here. i know you have been meeting with the families and talking with a lot of them. can you give us a sense of how they're doing amidst this horribleness? >> the families that i have visited are just devastated. the community is devastated. i've seen little kids that were in that school. that are just -- they can't -- they're frozen. they're just stuck. i get it. i understand it. it was the same kind of shell shock that we had as a state, we had as a country last week but

these folks are just living it day after day. william: i can't imagine having to deal with the enormous grief they're having to deal with but also what i imagine must be the anger at what they have been learning about the police response and how are they juggling those two emotions same simultaneously? >> you know, they're very angry at everything that's going on. they're certainly angry at the police response. they're angry at the fact that they're not getting, you know, any specific answers. one day they're told one thing, the next day they hear another story. yesterday it was about the door, they were trying to point the finger at the teacher. we find out the teacher indeed did close the door. last week initially we heard it was the local police chief and everybody is pointing the fainger at him. i don't know the man. i think that every law enforcement unit failed to adhere to the protocols on active shooters. william: there have been

conflicting reports about this investigation and some reports that local police may not be cooperating with state investigators. are you confident that this investigation will be done in the correct way? >> it's unfortunate, it seems to me like we're living in a world where we hear one thing one day, the following we hear the opposite. we have finger points of one investigative unit and i think that every one of these law enforcement entities has to -- has some responsibility. we're not getting any conclusive. i asked for a full report as to where each individual unit where each officer was at the time. i was supposed to get that friday. today i was told that that may not happen while they develop further investigations. i'm demanding that we get this report. this community is demanding it. i'm demanding that we get it soon. william: much of the conversation has also been about how we deal with guns in

america. to prevent events like this the next time around. are there specific things you would like to see done? >> it's very clear. number one, i called for a special session. the governor today called for a special committee hearing. those things are not the same. there's really no such thing as a special committee hearing. we have interim committee hearings. from the action he's called today, no action will be able to be taken. we need to get back into the legislature to establish a minimum age of 21 on assault rifles. it is astounding to me that an 18-year-old can have access to militarized weaponry. we need to have red flag laws. we need to be able establish waiting periods. those are reasonable things that can help prevent this type of tragedy. william: your state, as you well

know, has been moving in the opposite direction in recent years. all of the things you're talking about are largely anathema to the republican-controlled legislature in your state are. you confident that your voice will be heard more forcefully now because of this tragedy? >> it seems like there is a feeling now in texas that is calling for change both with democrats and republicans. the real answer is, is greg abbott going to do anything this time in this is now the seventh massac. every time we have one of these all he does is expand access to militarized weaponry. i can only hope and pray, i'm going to keep doing my work to make sure we get change. william: state senator roland gutierrez, thank you for joining us. >> thank you.

nick: earlier this week, canada unveiled new legislation that would freeze new handgun purchases and create a mandatory buyback program for semiautomatic rifles. the announcement coincided with the funerals in uvalde but it was years in the making and an example of how countries around the world have responded to their own mass shootings. >> what happened in nova scotia this past weekend is every community's worst nightmare. >> it was the deadliest shooting in canadian history. in april, 2020, 22 people were shot to death in nova scotia including police constable heidi stevenson who died trying to protect her community. canada suffered previous gun tragedies and tightened gun laws but the nova scotia massacre led to a ban on military style rifles and further restrictions announced this week. >> what this means is it will no

transfer or import handguns. anywhere in can davment. >> the new legislation also forces owners of military-style rifles to turn them in for destruction. that move echos reforms made in 2019 by new zealand. for the city of christchurch, march 16 was a day of mourning. residents laid mountains flowers near two muslim worship centers where a lone gunman had, the day before, walked inside and killed 15 people as they prayed. for prime minister ja sin da ar dern it was a call to action. >> i can tell you right now our gun laws will change. >> in fewer than four weeks parliament debated and passed a bill banning many guns and offering a buyback program for banned guns, and anyone who kept

those guns went to jail. >> it is our experience. i'm eur -- i'm sure the liesks australia, who we use their experience, would equally be open to do the same. >> first a scene of carnage in art arthur. >> in 1996, australian tv showed the aftermath of a massacre. a gunman killed three dozen people. it became known as one of australia's darkest days. >> it was shocking. 35 people were killed which at the time was the largest of these types of shootings ever in the world. because it was a holiday destination, people were killed and injured from every state in australia. >> it's time for tough, tough gun laws. >> rebecca peters is an expert on international gun control to reform australia's gun laws. >> we used to have in australia a mass shooting about once a year. our two major parties were both intimidated by the gun lobby

which had said whichever party moves to strengthen gun laws we'll campaign against them in an election. >> but a conservative prime minister had just been elected and didn't feel those fierce. within days he issued sweeping reforms. australia's parliament passed the national firearms agreement banning semiautomatic isifles and shotguns, establish a registry of all guns in the country and enacted strong background checks. and a buyback program seized and destroyed thousands of guns. >> our politicians somehow just stood up and said we're going to be grown ups and both pears agreed it was critical to have bipartisan support. so i think it was kind of a rare moment of integrity for our members of parament. >> what was the impact of the gun laws passed after port arthur? >> it's been a very dramatic impact.

we didn't have another mass shooting for 25 years. we still have things go wrong. but we have much lower levels of gun violence. and also a higher level of confidence. you know, australians never -- it never occurs to us that we might get murdered and we don't have metal detectors going into schools. >> school shootings in britain are also largely unthinkable since the 1996 tragedy in the scottish down of dunblain. parents rushed the school after a gunman carrying four handguns shot dead a teach arynd 16 children. >> just in a state of shock. it seems unreal. can't understand anyone doing anything like this. >> over the next few year, the british passed increasingly strict laws that banned all but the smallest caliber handguns. today their gun homicide rate is .7 per million one of the lowest in the world. the u.s. rate is 38 times the

u.k.'s. so far this year the u.s. has suffered at least 225 mass shootings. >> with these kinds of mass shootings never happen with the kind of frequency they happen in america. why? why are we willing to live with this carnage? why do we keep letting this happen? >> why does this only happen in your country? >> last week sky news' mark stone challenged texas republican ted cruz. >> why only in america? why is this american exceptional. i so awful? >> i'm sorry you think american exceptional. i is awful. >> i think this aspect of it -- >> you got your political agenda. god love you. >> so it appears these tragedies will remain uniquely american. >> today the administration unveiled a new $700 million package of weapons for ukraine. it includes the most advanced

rockets yet to be used in the conflict with russia, the high mobility rocket systems can hit targets 45 miles away and comes with increased targeting capacity. to discuss this we're joined by amanda sloat, senior adviser to the president and senior director for europe on the national security council. ukraine has been asking for these for months. why are you sending them now? amanda: we have been responding to what ukraine has been asking for throughout the crisis. when the war started in late february, ukraine's top priorities were anti-tank, anti-armor and antiaircraft systems. that's what we provided them. the ukrainians used those to great effect to drive russians out of kyiv. as the battle moved east they asked for howitzers and artillery. we provided now thousands of rounds of artillery and oer ammunition. now they're asking for these

higher caliber, more precision targeted weapons, as you said so we are responding to their request as we have throughout the crisis. nick: ukrainian officials tell me they requested this again many weeks ago. russia announced its focus on the donbas and the east march 25, nearly 10 weeks ago. do you feel this is too little, too late? amanda: absolutely not. we have seen ukrainians fight very effectively with the weapons we have given them. most notingly bli stopping the russians from their broad drive across the country and succeeding in the battle of kyiv. once we got the additional funding from congress which was provided on a solid, bipartisan basis, the administration moved quickly in response to the ukrainians' latest request. nick: the u.s. is capping the range of the ammunition being provided for these weapons. why is that important when ukraine has guaranteed, president zelenskyy himself

guaranteed to president biden, that ukraine will not use the ammunition to cross the border and fire into russia. >> it is our assessment that given where the battle is, this is me most effective system for the ukrainians at this stage i the fight. le of we will continue to assess the situation as we have over the last number of months. based on conversations that the administration has had with the ukrainians and the last number of days as we have rolled out the system, the ukrainians told us they are satisfied with the degree of assistance we're providing them. nick: those assurances the ukrainians have provided not to fire into russia have come from multiple levels. what if the war changes and kyiv decides it must use some of these weapons to attack inside russia? amanda: i think as the war continues to evolve we'll continue to look at the types of security assistance we are providing to ukraine. but if you look at where the conflict is now, it is primarily in the don bas. it is in the east and south of the country. it's important to remember that

russia invaded ukraine. russia is inside the ukrainian territory and so we are continuing to give ukraine the security tools that they need to defend their country and to repel russia from their country and we believe that the addition of these weapons to their arsenal will allow them to do that more effectively. nick: zoom out with us a little bit, to what end are these weapons being provided? the u.s. says it will let ukraine define victory. president zelenskyy says he wants to kick russia out of all of ukraine including territory it's been occupying for many years. does the u.s. support ukraine in that mission? amanda: we have been very clear from the beginning that we were going to support ukraine in helping them defend their territory. this was also what president biden said to president putin before the war began, that if russia invaded ukraine we would continue to give the ukrainians security assistance above and beyond what we have done. as the president made very clear in the op-ed he published in the

"new york times" earlier, one of our overriding objectives in this conflict remains enabling ukraine to be an independent, sovereign, democratic country. we're continuing to provide them with security assistance so they can defend their country, they can continue to achieve that aim and ultimately be in a stronger position on the battlefield which will enable them to be in a stronger position at the negotiating table when the time comes. nick: that's a little different than what zelenskyy has been saying, which is evicting russia from territory it currently occupies. amanda: president zelenskyy himself act knowledged there needs to be a negotiated end to the conflict. we continue to give them the weapons they need on the battlefield and support them when it comes to time for serious negotiations when russia shows it's ready to do so. nick: senior u.s. official tonight confirms the sus considering sending gray droans to ukraine. they can loiter for a while. they can fire hellfire missiles

at specific targets. these are sophisticated systems. who will operate them and will there be restrictions on how they're operated? amanda: i don't having any further to announce in terms of additional security assistance we're providing to ukraine but it ison a wcciturate t whe ukrainians. we continue to get their requests for assistance as the battle continues to evolve. and continue to do what we can as well as in close cooperation with our international partners to ensure that they have the equipment that they need to fight effectively. nick: i've got about 30 seconds left. any concerns that these weapons, as you say, increasingly sophisticated weapons to ukraine, any concern they might encourage ukraine to think that they could achieve victory on the battlefield and therefore they would be less inclined to negotiate? amanda: i think as president zelensky himself acknowledged, there needs to be a negotiated end to the conflict. but thing es involve on the

battlefield. our objective is to give ukraine the tools to defend themselves and continuing to support them when it comes time for negotiations. nick: amanda sloat, senior director for europe on the national security staff. thank you. for a different perspective we turn to steven simon, worked under presidents clinton and obama, he's now with the massachusetts institute of technology, and with a think tank. welcome to the program. you heard amanda sloat give their argument for why the administration is providing these rockets, why do you believe the administration should not be providing them? steven: well, it's not that the administration shouldn't provide weapons to ukraine. i think they obviously should. ani think the administration is doing a good job in calibrating the kind of military assistance they're providing.

to ukraine. to defend its territory against russian attack and the kind of war crimes the russians seem to be carrying out, the territory they've taken. in principle, supplying weapons is fine. ukrainian assurances that the weapons won't be used to attack targets within russia need to be take within a grain of salt, of course. their use will depend on battlefield contingencies that are hard to predict. the white house realizes this which is why it's providing missile launching capability with only a 40 to 50 mile range. the issue with the transfers is not that they're taking place but that they are unconditional. or they seem to be. since a negotiated end to the conflict is in the u.s. interest as secretary blinken and others in the administration have stressed, these arms transfers should a oblige the ukrainian government to participate in such a process. nick: let me interrupt there. you're saying oblige the ukrainian government to follow a

diplomatic path. as we know, u.s. and ukrainian and european officials say that russia is the one that is not taking this diplomacy seriously. so how can ukraine oblige that when it's russia that is not pursuing the diplomatic path? steven: you know, for the moment, military assistance to ukraine is meant to provide leverage on russia. it should also provide lef ran on kyiv. on both countries. as president biden wrote yesterday, the u.s. and ukraine have the same goals. expulsion of russian forces from ukraine. but we might differ on how we get there. it's possible after all that it won't be militarily feasible for the ukrainians to do it on their own. at this stage both combatants look like they want to slug it out despite the high price they're paying. only a high-powered diplomatic initiative can probe the intentions of the combatants and determine whether they're

prepared to contemplate the deal of some kind. now conditioning arms transfersen a willingness to participate in such a process would make good sense for just that reason. now whether the administration can take this step is open to question. we're embarkedden a different path right now and we'll probably have to wait to see how it plays out. nick: let me interrupt again. why is it either-or? for many weeks, you saw ukrainian and russian officials debating, meeting. those talks have broken down. zelenskyy says he's happy to meet president putin anywhere at any time and russia refuses. so can the military support continue as the encouragement to diplomacy continues as well? steven: i think as you said before, there's a moral hazard on the ukrainian side for providing these weapons. that emerges from providing

these weapons. as you noted, zelenskyy could look at these weapons and say hey, they're pretty good. so as long as they keep coming, i don't have to negotiate. and i can rely on putin's negativism and the lack of a high-powered diplomatic initiative that commands, that really demands, the participation of the parties. because of the energy and scope that the diplomatic initiative entails. so it's quite important to actually leap in and do something. diplomatically. because the potential for escalation in a high-tempo war of attrition is quite severe. and the blowback of rapid, severe escalation will fall on the united states as well as other parties.

so a diplomatic initiative is necessary and if conditioning arms sales on the participation in such an effort is doable, then it seems to me to make sense under the circumstances as an incentive to participate. you're absolutely right. well, actually, there have been meaningful diplomatic initiatives that have taken place thus far under turkey, for example. in tms of access to the black sea and waters outside of the black sea for the export of grain. to the global market. so there have been some negotiations. but negotiations between capital, between kyiv and moscow, you're right. they haven't taken off. but they haven't really been tried at a high level. nick: i'm sorry to interrupt but we have to leave it there. but we got that point in.

thank you very much, steve simon, appreciate it. thank you very much. nick: the lie that former president trump won the 2020 election has played out again and again in republican primaries for statewide office. from senate to governor to secretary of state. now reporting by politico details the efforts by the republican party on t local level to challenge and potentially overturn future elections. william is back to explain. william: it's called the precinct strategy where partisans are recrewed to be pollworkers on election day at different polling stations. they'll look for fraud and if they believe they find it they'll call into a network of republican attorneys who are primed to file lawsuits to block the vote counts. a story out in politico today details how this effort is

already under way in michigan and it's being led by the republican national committee. this idea, putting partisan actors into what are supposed to be nonpartisan roles, has been promoted on the right for months, amplified by former trump adviser steve bannon. >> the establishment signaled nothing puts the fear of god into them more than the precinct strategy. william: it's also backed by former president trump who continues to lie about the results of the last election. in february he urged his supporters to become precinct committee members to, quote, take back our great country from the ground up. to help us understand this strategy and what it means for elections and for our democracy, i'm joined again by rick hasen, a law professor at university of california irvine and author of the new book "cheap speech: how

partisanship destroys sphree speech." rick: even though we hold national elections every four year we don't conduct a single election we conduct 10,000 different elections. everything is hyper localized. so while there's been a lot of focus on secretary of state races and on governors, really the line workers, people who check you in at the polling place, take your ballot, maybe scan it into a machine, it's down to that level where we see people who have embraced the big lie being recruited by one of the political parties to come in and serve not as a poll watcher, which we've seen a lot of in the past, someone observing what's going on in the polling place and maybe reporting to their party but a poll worker. somebody who should be having allegiance to the election body that is actually running the election, but who is now being told they should be reporting what they see via an app to a political party.

william: as politico detailed, they heard types of meetings planning toraollwinkers,se a tse say, different from poll monitors, to call republican lawyers if they see something amiss. on election day. is that legal? rick: first, because we're talking about this decentralized system, every state has their own rules as to what pollworkers are allowed to do. and so i'm sure that in many states, to communicating outside the chain of command, that is, if y see a problem at the polling place you should go to your supervisor, going instead to the outside could be ground for the person to be let go. i don't think it would be unreasonable for a -- an election official to say if you have a problem tell me and we'll deal with it. you can always talk about the issue later. i'm concerned that this strategy of going outside could create kay ys at the polling places. could lead to disenfranchisement of workers who might be

challenged for reasons unrelated to their qualifications. maybe they don't speak english well or have an accent and they're being called a noncitizen for no good reason. ultimately i'm worried that this could create the grounds for a legislature to try and say that the election was not fairly run and try make some kind of change to election results down the line. william: meaning if they can -- if partisan pollworkers can create enough smoke in a couple of different precincts on election day, we know that according to the politico piece that the g.o.p. is trying to find a network of district attorneys who are simp at the toik this cause as well that then the legislature might step in and do something nor drastic? rick: right. you may remember part of the 2020 strategy trump and his allies were going through to try to steal the 2020 election was to say that there was a failed election, there was so much aud or problems with how the election was won, we don't know

who won the state of arizona. let the arizona legislature come in and pick its own winner. send in an alternate slate of electors. this is something we'll hear from the january 6 committee coming up late they are month. you can imagine a similar strategy next time. lots of smoke. lots of unsubstantiated claims of fraud or problems and the legislature uses it as a flimsy excuse to try to overturn voters' will. william: in the politico piece, several republican officials working on this strategy say this is not nefarious. this is just us trying to offset population of pollworkers in cities like detroit or philadelphia and we're just trying to balance the scales here. it's nothing to worry about. what do you make of that argument? rick: if all that's going on here is the republican party is recruiting workers to work in heavily democratic areas like philadelphia or detroit, i don't think there's anything wrong

with that. we need more pollworkers. the problem is peoplere being recruited based on the idea tha they're going to be looking for this fraud. fraud is quite rare in american elections. but people believe the false claims from 2020 that the last election was stolen. they're being put into area where they're being told, and we just heard mo brooks say this yesterday, that fraud happens in democratic areas. they're being primed to believe it's democrats, people of color, poor people who are stealing votes. and so if you go in with that attitude as opposed to i'm going to go in and help our dmok stoi assure that all eligible voters and only eligible voters can cast a ballot that will be fairly counted, then you're in trouble. then you don't have a system where the process is iming to work in the right way. william: rick hasen, u.c. irvine, always good to see you. thank you for being here. rick: it's good to be with you.

nick: late yesterday, the supreme court blocked texas from instituting a new law that would prevent social media networks from blocking users over their point of view. >> they say it's censorship over religious views. an appeals court blocked a similar florida law from taking effect while it's being challenged. the key legal question is whether the platforms are like phone companies or cable companies as texas and florida lawmakers argue and are subject to regulation or as the industry argues are they like publishers, protected by the first amendment. two perspectives. carl cey beau and gener manager -- general counsel of net choice, the trade association challenging the texas and florida laws.

he teaches internet law at the george maison university law school. -- george mason university law school and adam candeub who directs the law program at michigan state university. mr. candeub i'd ride to -- i'd like to start with you. i want to get to the legal issue later. but first, explain why this law, these laws are good ideas. why are they necessary? adam: i think a lot of americans fear that certain groups, certain people with certain perspectives are being shut out of the public square which is what the supreme court terms the internet. the social media platforms are the place where we discuss politics, where we meet our friends. where politicians talk to voters. and if we have a thumb on the scale so that only certain viewpoints get promoted, that's undermining a central problem in

our society -- a central prop of our society, democratic participation. >> what' your response, carl? is there a thumb on the scale? carl: what we're talk about is simple. it's about government, in this case republican government, forcing a private platform to say something it doesn't want to say. it would be like the government going in to which i poet lee and telling them they have to serve hamburgers because people want hamburgers and of course that's absurd. it's a simple issue. do we want in this case the republican states of texas and florida to be able to tell private businesses that they have to host content they don't want, ande're not justalking political content. we're talking about lawful but awful content. stuff like terrorist speech, terrorist recruitment, child grooming, a shooter's manifesto would have to be ride to be allowed on these platforms under these laws. there's a reason why net choice is fighting against these. it's because of the first

amendment protects every person, every business from this type of government compelled speech and it doesn't matter if you are a cable company or an i.s.p. because the supreme court says even they are guaranteed these first amendment protections and not have to carry speech they don't want to carry. so really it's a simple issue. last reason why we've had two district court judges, four circuit court judges and at least five u.s. supreme court justices side with us every step of the way. >> adam what about that argument that this would require social media platforms to distribute terror speeches as mr. szabo says? adam: this is a mischaracterization of the law. the law clear that platforms are free to censor dangerous content. they can censor, get rid of all

sorts of undesirable content like nudity. what they can't do is censor whole viewpoints. they can say no nudity on the platform but they can't censor me if i want to be an advocate of the naturist lifestyle. get ba to mr. szabo's point, that's absurd. the government requires businesses to host speech that they don't like in all sorts of instances. this television program is a good example. local television broadcasters can compel cable systems to carry their channels and their programs. and the supreme court has upheldthis. the supreme -- the supreme court and other courts have upheld the obligation of telephone companies to carry on their wires views they don't like. similarly in the network you centrality regulation, the the district of columbia said i.s.p.'s must carry indiscriminately all sorts of

messages. this is just -- this is smoke and mirrors saying private businesses have some sort of first amendment expressive right to exclude people. restaurants don't have the expressive right to exclude black people or jewish people from their restaurants. because they want to make a point. similarly the platforms which are -- again are the supreme court has called our public square can't exclude people they dot like to make some obscure, not quite clear expressive point. >> mr. can tube, i want to me sure i understand. under these law, the platforms could still set a code of conduct, a standard? adam: of course they could. if you look at the law, i welcome your viewers to go on the internet and look up h.b.20 passed by the state of texas, the statute says look, it only goes to viewpoint. it doesn't go to content. it allows the platforms to

censor types of speech that the government allows -- already allows them to do which under section 230 would include obscenity, indecent time of speech, nudity, excessively violent content. and it's very disturbing that net choice is making this claim. they put this claims in their papers to the supreme court that underscores justice ali to's dissent should not have been made in this context. because with these false claim, they can't really have a proper and clear hearing of the issues. >> what's the argue for why social media platforms should have first amendment protection? carl: it's incredibly simple. they're a private business. mr. candeub and others support cases like hobby lobby and citizen united that were

predicated on the notion that private businesses are private businesses and can decide what's best for users and customers. we have cases like turner which is about turner broadcast cable which says that even cable companies who the district circuit court decides are common carriers, are able to discriminate on what type of content is or is not allowed. the notion of we're just throwing a bunch of spaghetti at the wall and it's smoke and mirror, we must be really good at it. we've convinced four circuit court judges, all of whom are conservatives that we're right. we convinced at least five u.s. supreme court justices that we're right. and once again, this is a really simple issue that a lot of people try to make much more complicated. if i were to go into which i poet lee and start flipping oved started flipping over table, we

wouldn't blink an eye if they ask me to leave because i was violating rules. what we're seeing in these two laws, that's being forbidden. and it's forbidding our ability to speak freely, to moderate content how we want, to decide how to promote content we want. >> i want to -- i'm sorry, i'm going to interrupt you. i want mr. candeub to respond to that. we have a very little amount of time left. adam: sure. the social media company exas are about connecting people to people. they are about the expression of their users. nobody goes on to the social media platforms to hear what, you know, zuckerberg feels about their kids' pictures. it's about communicating. like the telephone company they have an obligation to serve all. mr. s disprvetion abo says it's like chip torvetion le. they can't say you can't come eat ourfood because you're black or because we dent like your

political point of view. >> i'm sorry to interrupt but we have to leave it there adam candeub of the michigan state university law school and carl szabo of netchoice and michigan university law school. thank you. ♪ nick: coral reefs around the world are in growing danger due in no small part to rising temperatures connected with climate change. in florida and throughout the caribbean there's a new epidemic killing once-healthy corals. scientists are diving deep to find answers. miles o'brien recently joined them on their mission to revive the reefs. miles: i've been scuba diving in florida and the bahamas for 35 year which is makes me an eyitness to a slow-motion disaster. marine biologist karen neely is

also saddened by what she sees. >> i know what it's like to go somewhere where you've had old friends and they're not there anymore. that's what we're seeing on the reefs here. over the last 20 years, the's been the continued loss of coral. miles: it's a global problem brought on by pollution, overfishing and the climate crisis. the intergovernmental panel on climate change predicts up to 90% of tropical coral reefs will vanish as soon as 2030 unless drastic action is take ton limit greenhouse gases. grim as that is, here in florida, things are worse. neely is on a mission to stop a deadly coral epidemic decimating reefs here and throughout the caribbean. first ident fid near miami in 2014, stony coral tissue loss decide spreads and kills like wildfire. it strikes more than 20 of the 60 or so species of coral that live here. mortality rates range from 66 to

100%. the iconic pillar coral is one of the most susceptible. >> it's heartbreaking. it's just unbelievable. miles: marine biologist valerie paul is head scientist at the smithsonian marine station at fort pearce. she's helping lead the urgent hunt for answers. >> when we started, we didn't know anything. we just knew it was killing coral tissue, right? we know more than we did a few years ago but we surely don't know enough. miles: corals are complex, fragile and poorly understood animals. they survive thanks to a mutually beneficial or symbiotic relationship with algae that live in coral tissue. in this marriage, the coral is the homemaker and the algae brings home the bacon. actually, nutrients derived from photo synthesis. many of the vivid co-lofers

coral are created by the algae. so white patches are siefns disease or death. >> so really, this whole piece is diseased at this stage. this is fairly advanced disease on this coral. miles: but no one know what is sort of pathogen is at work. it could be viral or bacterial or perhaps some combination. here they isolated a beneficial bacterium that fight thawfs edisease. >> we started testing it in the laboratory first in various aquarium studies with pieces of diseased coral and found it slowed down the disease or stop it. entirely. so this was like wow, this is cool. miles: so they are treating healthy corals with probiotics applied beneath a weighted bag. it looks promising but it's still early. antibiotics are also working. karen neely is among a group of

scientists applying amoxycillin paste to corals. >> we come back in a month, the coral has no sign of disease, it's not dying and eventually starts regreing. miles: her team and others have collectively saved nearly 15,000 corals. still the researchers are well aware they're only making a small dent in a massive problem. >> we really have to be quite selective. we're figuring out what can we sief? what might be ok if we can't get to it? and what are we going to lose regardless? and trying to get the most bang for the buck. we can't pretend this isn't happening and not do anything about it or the prognosis takes a sharp turn for the worse. miles: at the florida aquarium, coral conservation center, they are fighting this disease on land. >> this is a tank of corals that are going to be going out into the ocean in a couple of weeks. miles: carie o'neill is the

senior coral scientist here. at first she hoped to participate in a massive effort by a team of scientists to harvest healthy coral from the reefs to create an arc, a desperate move to avoid extinctions. >> however they don't stop growing and if you're keeping them under happy conditions then they're just going to keep growing and growing. miles: she wondered if she could make endangered pillar corals happy enough to reproduce. sothing like that had never been done before with florida corals in aquariums. >> you have to get all the seasonal cues right. the change in temperature, the change in daylight. sun riedz, sunset, the moon phase. all of these different cues have to be just right in order for that one event to occur around the full moon of august. miles: the spawning happened on their first try. in august of 2019. >> we were just cheering and yelling and calling everybody like come in, we need help.

[laughter] and it's happened like clockwork every year since then. miles: so what started as a gene bank a few years ago is now a huge, thriving coral breeding center. carie o'neill occasionally joins divers from the florida fish and wildlife conservation coission as they cement their offspring onto ailing reefs. they use teepees so the young corals don't become fish hors d'oeuvres. so farther thriving maybe because they're young and strong, maybe because the worst of the epidec has passed. she hopes to find out what caused the disease and breed animals that are immune to stony coral loss disease but this disease is just one of many threats. >> we cannot save coral reefs without stopping climate change

and cleaning up our environment that takes time. in the meantime we need to ensure we don't use the diversity that we have now so we can build back the population. our work here is buying us time. miles: when karen neely swims past corals she has treated she feels the same way. >> i don't feel it's a futile effort, i do feel we have to do something. if you like seafood you like coral reefs. if you like vacationing in florida you like coral reefs. you might not know it but it's super important that we have them. it's pretty problematic when we lose them. i think in my lifetime we'll either start to see the swing back toward more healthy reefs or we'll see reefs continue to decline into something almost unrecognizable. miles: imagine that, a world without thriving coral reefs. not a pretty thought. it's heart breaking to watch it happening right before my eyes. for the pbs news however, i'm

miles o'brien, 30 feet beneath the surface at lieu key, florida. nick: that's the news however for tonight. -- news hour for tonight. join us online and again here tomorrow evening. for the the news hour. >> major funding has been provided by -- >> consumer cellular's goal has been to provide ways for people to communicate and connect. we offer a variety of plans and can help find one that fits you. visit consumercellular.tv. >> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the front lines of social change worldwide.

and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public brd casting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

[soft music] - hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour & company." here's what's coming up. - i will stand in this breach. i will defend this nation. and i will allow no one to place a dagger at the throat of democracy. - [christiane] our special edition on democracy a year since the storming of the us capitol january 6. i ask pulitzer prize-winning historian doris kearns goodwin and yale's expert on autocracy, timhy snyder, about how to save american democracy. then, what south africa and colombia can teach us about restorative justice and building a new democracy. south african analyst eusebius mckaiser and colombia's lead peace negotiator, sergio jaramillo, join me. plus. - evil people, evil systems don't last forever.

they bite the dust.