everyone, i'm tamron hall. the news nation is following heated and impassioned reaction to the landmark decision by the supreme court to strike down a key part of the 1965 voting rights act. within the hour, the congressional black caucus and hispanic caucus will address the ruling. right now we are watching as president obama delivers a major policy speech on climate change, which has been overshadowed by today's ruling. earlier, the president released a statement saying, quote, i am deeply disappointed with the supreme court's decision today. for nearly 50 years the voting rights act enacted and repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majors in congress has helped to secure the right to vote for millions of americans. today's decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent. the law signed by lyndon b.

johnson is widely considered the most important civil rights law in the country. in the past year, it's been invoked to stop a voting law in texas. the vice president reacted moments ago. >> we're going to work with congress in this effort. the administration is going to do everything in our power to ensure fair and equal voting processes are maintained. so there's a lot of work to be done. it's nonetheless disappointing the court made the change. >> at the center of the court's 5-4 ruling is this map of 16 mostly southern states required to get federal permission before changing their voting laws because of a history of racial discrimination. now the formula used to come up with that map has been found unconstitutional. the case was brought by shelby county, alabama, against attorney general eric holder. he expressed his disappointment.

>> like me, others across the country, i am deeply disappointed with the court's decision in this matter. this decision represents a serious setback for voting rights and has the potential to negatively effect millions of americans across the country. >> nbc's peter alexander joins me live from the white house with more. obviously, the president giving his climate change speech. but we knew from the beginning today that the supreme court would bring down a decision. here this one is overshadowing what we're hearing from the president, who also expressed his disappointment in the ruling from the supreme court. >> yeah, tamron. that's exactly right. there was some anticipation by some corners that the president may make remarks about this ruling. some of the other points he made in the statement he put out just a short time ago was echoing what attorney general eric holder said. he also said voting

discrimination still exists, acknowledging that it does not represent -- this decision does not represent an end to the white house's efforts to end voting discrimination in this country. i spoke to some senior officials in the white house after the words came out. in the words of one, this was not, quote, a welcome decision. they acknowledge it leaves open the window for congress to act on this topic. an official acknowledged to me that will be a difficult thing to do given the political dynamics that exist right now in congress. obviously, it's going to be a real challenge for them to make any real progress on this. >> all right. thank you, peter. joining me now, democratic congressman elijah cummings of maryland. thank you so much for your time. >> good to be with you. >> i think it was chuck todd who first said earlier today, or questioned whether or not this congress is, quote, mature enough, to make the correction curve the supreme court believes is necessary. what, obviously, he meant by that is we're watching, for

example, immigration. it may get through the senate, but the house says it will block. and a number of other initiatives that have been brought before this unpopular congress. and to have basically floated away in the wind. what is your reaction to now that this is in the hands of congress? >> well, first of all, i believe that voting is a fundamental right and not just a privilege for a few people. in that light, looking at congress and the climate that we're in today, i think it's going to be a steep climb. if congress would just take a moment and step back to just 2006 when the voting rights act was reauthorized, we had 98 votes in the senate and a unanimous vote in the house. we simply go back to the way we felt a few years ago. we should be able to do it. i'm not that optimistic. i want to be, but i see what's going on every day in the house

and in the senate, and it's going to be a tough job. >> justice ginsburg said congress' power to act is at its height. i want to play a little bit of what you said on the house floor february 25th when you gave impassioned remarks defending voting rights. let's take a listen. >> sadly, this country has witnessed very slow progress toward equality in voting. the reality is that in the year 2013, we're still fighting for the right to vote for all americans. in election after election, discriminatory voting laws and exclusionary practices still surface. this past election cycle, we saw a new wave of efforts to suppress the vote. we saw racially motivated efforts to cut back on early voting. >> what you cited there in the examples that others have

pointed out that we witnessed in texas, florida, south carolina, sir, was not enough to change the court's opinion, at least the majority here. but the court agreed that there are still issues. however, chief justice roberts pointed out in certain states, certain districts where african-americans had been -- the vote had been suppressed in the past, there's a larger turnout, which was his example of the '65 act working but is not necessarily what we need today. your response to that? >> well, i mean, it's one thing for people to register, and it's one thing for people to have turned out in recent elections. all he has to do is look at what has been happening all over this country and the 2012 election and the efforts to cut back on early voting, the i.d. laws, the unreasonable i.d. laws. we saw long lines. as a matter of fact, i held a hearing, a forum in virginia just less than a year ago where people came out and said that

they stood in line for some six, seven, eight hours to vote. that's -- we're better than that. we're a better country than that. so i think that if anything, this is a time where we need section four and the entire voting rights act intact, completely. we might even be in a position to even add some areas we want to look at. so this is not the time. but i must tell you that listening to the attorney general, i was pleased to hear him say that he was going to do everything in his power to make sure that people are not discriminated against. this is so important that we guard our rights. >> and sir, i should point out we just learned nbc news has learned that the senate judiciary committee will respond to the supreme court's ruling on the voting rights act with new steps beginning next month. we don't have all of the details. witnesses are to be determined. the senate judiciary committee will respond to the decision today. >> and i'm calling on speaker boehner to do the same thing. i think we should be united on this. >> all right.

thank you so much, congressman, for your time. i really appreciate it. joining me now, state representative jim mcclendon, who represented shelby county, the plaintiff in this case. sir, thank you for your time as well. >> yes, ma'am. thank you for having me on. >> you call it a glorious day. tell me why this was an important win for you and your state. >> well, it certainly takes a burden over us -- off of us that's totally outdated. the threshold for being subject to being preclearance was set a long time ago. we just went through redistricting for congressional district, board of education, house and senate districts, and the department of justice found no objection whatsoever. they found no sign of discrimination. in fact, the supreme court has not rejected any state-wide law in alabama in over 16 years. >> what happened in 2006 when

shelby county was found guilty of redistricting under section five of the voting rights act? as i understand it, the district reportedly went from 80% black to 29% black in that redistricting under section five where the state was found at fault here. what can you tell me about that? >> that was a city. that was not the state. >> the county of shelby, right? >> yeah, it was a city within the county. it didn't have anything to do with the way we run it at the state level. now, listen, just because section four has been put to the side, that does not mean that someone cannot file a lawsuit if they feel discrimination is going on. i think the people court has recognized vast progress made in alabama and in the other states, the other 15 states and cities that were subject to this. i personally am very proud of

how far we, in alabama, have come since those days back in the '50s and '60s. >> you're proud of your state, but do you believe that can be said for all states? certainly those that were affected by the voting rights act. >> i really cannot speak for the other states. i know what's going on in alabama, since i was involved in redistricting intimately. i know how that has worked. so as far as what the other states are doing, i really do not know that. >> all right. sir, thank you for your time. i really appreciate you joining me. state rep jim mcclendon out of shelby county, alabama, the county at the focus of this decision today. joining me now, scotus blog publisher tom goldstein, the national league urban president and the co-director for the advancement project. thank you, all, for joining me. tom, let me start off with you. you heard the state rep from shelby county.

he said, listen, alabama is a different place. it is not the place it was in 1965. his reaction obviously one of positive because he feels they've won here. >> well, that's absolutely right. that's his perspective. it's a perspective shared by five justices on the supreme court. that's what you need. it is not one that was shared by the overwhelming majorities in the house and the senate when they reauthorized the voting rights act. the justices have said the list that was used in that section four preclearance provision was outdated and needs to be updated and needs to be narrowed. that's the next discussion. what will happen across the street from the supreme court in the congress? >> you heard elijah cummings partly optimistic, but there's some skepticism of what can be done. with that said, tom, the supreme court today acknowledged, though, that we are still not a perfect society, that there is still an opening and perhaps still are areas where this is an issue and something is needed to protect the vote of the people. we talked about texas.

we saw how this heated up right before the general election as well in november. >> well, i do think it's important that the justices, even in the majority, recognize that there's a role for preclearance to play, if you can come up with a narrower list. i think the grave concern of civil rights advocates is, come on, we have to be realistic about the politics of this. can we imagine, and they hope we can, that a conservative house of representatives, for example, would go state by state and say alabama, we're still going to subject you to this provision, but louisiana, we're not. congress did revisit this and broadly reauthorized the section four list not that long ago. a supreme court majority was not impressed. >> all right. let me bring in mark. the aclu sent out a tweet on this. it says today scotus put up a roadblock that makes voting less free and fair. congress must protect the right to vote. as tom pointed out, this really is about reflection on the supreme court decision ruling and what was said, but it is about the next move. >> yeah, and the next move has

to be very quickly to respond by creating a new section or, if you will, a voting rights act circa 21st century. i think what i want the viewers to understand is that shelby county could have gotten out from under preclearance under section four. there were ways for jurisdictions to get out, to opt out of the preclearance provision. so the court really extended its arm and overreached and struck a dagger, if you will, a spear, if you will, in the heart of the voting rights act, now 50 years after the historic 1960s. >> so when i look at the national urban league, for example, i mean, we're in the first few hours of this decision. what is the strategy for organizations like yours? >> we're going to organize along with many of our partners and friends a people's movement to mobilize people from the community. congress will respond if the people respond and say this is

an issue about democracy. this decision, in effect, turns back the hands of time when we should be embracing the future. as a son of the south, the south has changed somewhat. but it's changed because of the tools of the civil rights act, the tools of the voting rights act. you don't take, if you will, the medicine away. you don't take those things away that helped to bring about that change and expect that you're not going to have retrogression. >> penda, let me bring you into the conversation. there have been people who have said there are more than enough examples to point out, certainly when you look at early voting or the long lines we witnessed in florida, where someone's vote is not in jeopardy but certainly in great question, some of the laws and legislation that were proposed before november. that this will be an easy fight, if you will, to prove the necessary si for a voting rights act.

>> well, i believe that it will be an easy case to make because advancement project does work in these southern states all the time. i'm actually from the south also. while we do know that a lot of progress has been made, the legislatures in most of these southern states have not repented. they have not reformed. they are, in fact, sharpening their knives, waiting to make it harder to vote. >> for example, what is an example of that? >> in texas they have two issues right now, the redistricting case and the most restricted voter i.d. in the country. they announced today they're going to start implementing those tomorrow because the supreme court has removed the restrictions. in virginia, it passed last year, another very restricted voter i.d. law after having the prior law approved by the department of justice, they decided they didn't make it difficult enough to vote. that would have had to be precleared. now they will presumably start

implementing that in the next round of elections. and north carolina is poised to be another state that is ready to pass a very, very restrictive voter i.d. law unless the legislature listens to the naacp and the forward together movement, which is protesting and getting arrested down there every week. but these southern states, they seem ready to take away the vote of people of color rather than expand it. >> ann, let's talk about the politics of this. as the president said, he's deeply disappointed. he's called on congress for action. but you and i know that whenever you use the word action in congress, it is met with skepticism. >> yeah, it's a little bit of a paradox these days. i mean, look, obviously there are members of congress who want to act. as you mentioned earlier, the senate judiciary committee is saying it wants to take steps. when you have the president and the attorney general both calling for action and saying that they're deeply disappointed, that doesn't mean nothing. on the other hand, congress has

a hard time doing many things, include iing as we saw recentlye farm bill, which you thought would have passed easily. immigration is a struggle. will this become a priority? if it did, could it pass? i think it seems like it's a very difficult long short at this point, but it's obviously going to register and it's going to be at the forefront of their minds going out from here. >> well, this is perhaps a lengthy battle, if you will. you heard mark. other organizations plan to organize and put pressure on members of congress, but we've talked about this with the gun debate, immigration debate. for every member of congress who believes some action be taken to the right, there's someone, for example, in the gun debate who's receiving a call from hisstitue backgrounds checks. but anne, let's talk about that. >> well, i think you're exactly right. that's the right question to be asking. you look at the gun debate where you have 80, 90% of the country

in agreement on elements and nothing happens. it's harder to see where the country is more divided on an issue such as this. interests may not line up. it's hard to see how this would take place in congress. anything is possible, but i wouldn't hold my breath. >> mark? >> politics is difficult, but nothing is more fundamental than voting. democracy is so basic to who we are as americans. you're going to see, i think, a strong coalition of mobilization take place. this is about democracy and the very franchise that enables us so say we're american. so when you strike at that, when the supreme court cuts that down, i think the response is going to be unprecedented. i can tell you that the 50th anniversary of the march on washington, which is going to take place on the 24th of august, now has its most important purpose. that is to rally in support of democracy and voting rights. >> and quickly before the let the panel go, tom, let me get

you in. tomorrow, another big day. prop 8 and doma. >> the court is finishing off a historic week here. two major same-sex marriage rulings, one on california's proposition 8 and the second on the federal defense of marriage act. all eyes will return back to the supreme court in the morning. >> thank you so much to our panel. i greatly appreciate your time and voice on this. coming up -- >> what did you explain to rt defendant and the other attendees about that slide? >> basically that they are the eyes and ears for law enforcement. they're an extension of law enforcement. that they're not supposed to take matters into their own hands. and they call 911 nonemergency to report suspicious activity and let law enforcement take the risk of approaching a suspect. >> that is the advice the head of a neighborhood watch program says she gave to george zimmerman. we'll break down her testimony on the stand today and what it could mean for the case. and the taliban claims responsibility for a brazen

attack in what's supposed to be the safest area of afghanistan. the same area where the cia keeps its home base. what does this attack mean for any peace talk between the u.s. and the taliban? and join our conversation on twitter. many of you have already shared your very candid thoughts on the supreme court decision. you can find me @tamronhall and my team is @newsnation. is like hammering.

riding against the wind. uphill. every day.

we make money on saddles and tubes. but not on bikes. my margins are thinner than these tires. anything that gives me some breathing room makes a difference. membership helps make the most of your cashflow. i'm nelson gutierrez of strictly bicycles and my money works as hard as i do. this is what membership is. this is what membership does. [ roars ] ♪ ♪ [ roars ] ♪ [ roars ] ♪ [ male announcer ] universal studios summer of survival. ♪

witness testimony is back underway in the second-degree murder trial of george zimmerman. prosecutors today called the stanford police volunteer co coordinator who worked with zimmerman to set up the neighborhood watch program. she explained how zimmer more

than contacted her and how she instructed volunteers to not take matters into their own hands. >> did you ever tell the defendant or anyone else at that meeting that it was okay to follow someone that they thought was acting suspicious? >> no, not at all. >> did you ever tell the defendant or anyone else in that meeting that it was okay to engage someone they thought was being suspicious? >> no. >> under cross-examination, she was asked to explain the role of neighborhood watch coordinators. >> is the neighborhood watch coordinator the person that is sort of the focal point -- >> yes. >> -- where this information funnels to? >> yes. >> explain that. >> neighborhood watch coordinator would be the contact for the police department. >> now, in a hearing before today's testimony, george debra nelson put off the decision of whether to allow the jury to hear prior nonemergency calls zimmerman made to police reporting suspicious behavior.

zimmerman's pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder. he claims self-defense. martin was unarmed at the time. joining me now is lisa bloom, who's following the developments for us this case. let's start off with this volunteer who helped george zimmerman coordinate the neighborhood watch program. really, the advice given to him to start this. >> right. she's the liaison between the police department and these neighborhood watches, which are trying to reduce crime in vary communities. she was very clear that what neighborhood watch people are supposed to do is be eyes and ears, meaning they can watch, they can hear, and they should report to the police any suspicious behavior. they are not to follow, they're not to confront suspicious people. >> she also pointed out that burglaries were a major priority, major concern for the people who lived in this retreat at twins lake. that's the name of the community. she said that the information proved legitimate as far as the number of suspicious things

happening around there. >> there's no question there were a number of break-ins in this community. we heard testimony about a mother bhowho was home alone wi her baby. someone had broken into her home. that caused her a lot of fear. that's something that connected up with george zimmerman, that he was concerned about his wife home alone. >> and this issue or advice not to take matters into their own hands. this will come up again. there is a debate, or the defense wants to present that george zimmerman did not take matters into his own hands. >> that's right. this is so important. the defense on cross-examination tried to get her to say, well, it's okay if you follow at a safe distance to keep an eye on a suspicious person, isn't it? she kind of went back and forth depending on who was asking her those questions. clearly the essence of her testimony is you can watch, you can report, but don't get involved. that's for the police. >> why so much wrangling over these five calls george zimmerman made reporting suspicious behavior, what he perceived as suspicious

behaviors? trayvon martin was killed february 26th, 2012. >> george zimmerman had called the nonemergency police number many times before reporting suspicious behavior in his community, as he was told he should do. what prosecutors say is he was getting frustrated. this went to his state of mind. by the time february 2012 came around, he was angry, he was upset, and when he saw trayvon martin, he profiled p ed him. he assumed he was one of the profiles in the community. >> and this sergeant who took the stand. >> that was very sad testimony. this is one of the first responders who came to the scene. he found trayvon martin lying there. he administered cpr without a mask. he didn't have time to put the mask on. ultimately, trayvon martin was deceased and he put the blanket over him. >> as we understand it, our kerry sanders in court is reporting that when the court showed a full photo of trayvon martin's body, his father exited with his attorney.

a reminder that this is about a loss of life. >> yes, the photos are sad. they're hard to watch. >> all right, lisa. thank you. still ahead, new revelations on the whereabouts of nsa leaker edward snowden. russia's president says he knows where he is, but he refused to extradite him. what options are left on the table in bringing snowden back to the states. and we're continuing to follow breaking news. we're awaiting a live news conference for members of the congressional black and hispanic caucuses reancting to today's supreme court decision. these new triscuit are baked with brown rice and sweet potato! triscuit has a new snack? no way. way. and the worst part is they're delicious. mmm, you're right. maybe we should give other new things a chance. no way. way. [ male announcer ] we've taken 100% whole grain brown rice and wheat, delicious sweet potato, and savory red bean... and woven them into something unexpected. the new brown rice triscuit line;

with sweet potato and red bean varieties. a new take on an old favorite. yeah? then how'd i get this... [ voice of dennis ] ...safe driving bonus check? every six months without an accident, allstate sends a check. silence. are you in good hands?

♪ there you go. come on, let's play! [ male announcer ] there's an easier way to protect your dog from dangerous parasites. good boy. fetch! trifexis is the monthly, beef-flavored tablet that prevents heartworm disease, kills fleas and prevents infestations, and treats hook-, round-, and whipworm infections. treatment with fewer than 3 monthly doses after exposure to mosquitoes may not provide complete heartworm prevention. the most common adverse reactions were vomiting, itching and lethargy. serious adverse reactions have been reported following concomitant extra-label use of ivermectin with spinosad alone, one of the components of trifexis.

prior to administration, dogs should be tested for existing heartworm infection. to learn more about trifexis, talk to your veterinarian, call 888-545-5973 or visit trifexis.com. you don't have to go to extremes to protect your dog from parasites. you need trifexis. visit our website to save up to $25. available by prescription from your veterinarian. russian president vladimir putin has bluntly rejected u.s. pleas to extradite u.s. leaker edward snowden. speaking on a visit to finland, putin added rush agencies,

quote, didn't work and aren't working with snowden. we also learned more about snowden's from hong kong to moscow. one of his attorneys claim it was as simple as this. >> use his passport, his american passport. he went through the official channel instead of being arranged to go through a special channel. nothing unusual happened. everything went on as usual. >> joining me now, nbc news national investigate correspondent michael isikoff. people will hear that sound bite of the attorney saying he followed the procedure you or i would and we're not the focus of a man hunt. >> exactly. there's also an explanation from hong kong authorities that there was confusion in the documents submitted by the u.s. for the arrest of snowden. apparently there was a discrepancy in the middle name,

whether it was james or joseph, which differed from his passport. hong kong authorities are citing that, suggesting there may have been a screwup by u.s. authorities in its formal request to the hong kong authorities for the return of snowden. couple things. first on putin's comments today, he did point out when he said that we weren't going to, that the russians were going to extradite snowden, that there is no extradition treaty between the u.s. and russia. that does complicate matters for the u.s. >> all right. thank you very much, michael. i want to take our audience to developing news. members of the congressional black caucus and hispanic caucus speaking now responding to the voting rights action from the supreme court. let's listen in. >> the court seemed to signal at that time that the kind of history that we used in 2008

when we reauthorized the voting rights act, they considered to be outdated and that something needed to be done to update the formula that we use. now, we in this congress did a study. if my memory serves, it was a 15,000-page study. and the vote in the senate was 98-0. the vote in the house, i believe, was 390-33. and we decided that enough evidence was there in front of us to require a reauthorization of the voting rights act. that was just 2008. now, if we were to look, in my

opinion, if we were to look at the reason the supreme court in talking about our figure to take into account the progress that had been made, i believe the best way to take into account the best progress being made in this country on any subject is to look at the actions as well as the debate that is undertaken by those who are elected every two years and in some instances six, but the house is re-elected every two years. we stay very close to the people. we then issued our opinion. but we saw when this case was being discussed, justice scalia seemingly wanting to inject himself and the court into this,

saying to the effect that the congress seemed not to be able to get it right. i think this -- >> we are listening into this news conference being held by members of the congressional black caucus and hispan pahispa caucus. referring to the 2008 reauthorization. we're going to continue to follow this for you. we're also going to take a break and return and talk about the president's big policy speech on climate change. we'll be right back. ready? happy birthday! it's a painting easel! the tide's coming in!

this is my favorite one. it's upside down. oh, sorry. (woman vo) it takes him places he's always wanted to go. that's why we bought a subaru. (announcer) love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru. congestion, for it's smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the busses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution to the earth. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment.

more breaking news. president obama just finished unveiling a sweeping plan to address climate change, a plan that's already drawing fire. i don't think that's a big surprise. speaking at georgetown university, the president set

ambitious goals and timetables to curb the gases blamed for global warming. take a listen. >> as a president, as a father, and as an american, i'm here to say we need to act. but this is a challenge that does not pause for partisan gridlock. it demands our attention now. and this is my plan, a plan to cut carbon pollution, a plan to protect our country from the impacts of climate change, and a plan to lead the world in a coordinated assault on a changing climate. >> the corner stone of the president's plan, take a look. redistricting carbon pollution at new and existing power plants and new wind, solar, and other renewable energy projects on federal lands. the plan also includes more aggressive steps to increase the energy efficiency of appliances

and requires all federal projects to withstand rising seas and more intense storms. most of the far-reaching plan will be executed through executive order. that is key here. and will not need congressional approval. but there's already a backlash, particularly in coal-producing states. democratic senator joe mansion of west virginia has call the the president's plan unreasonable. joining me live, dominic dominico montanero. there's been opposition. that's not a surprise. the president is presenting facts. >> that's the way the republicans will certainly present it, as a war on coal. we know why he's going through with executive actions this time, because when he tried this in 2009, it wasn't going anywhere, it got stuck in congress. he's announcing this now. there's two sides to this.

one, is he looking at his legacy? people are going to say president obama didn't push hard enough on climate change if he doesn't do something about this. the other side of this, and environmental activists have been worried about this potentially, is this could give cover to obama announcing his approval to keystone pipeline. i think for those people who might have had those fears, some of that was realized during this speech. despite president obama saying he's not going to approve keystone if carbon emissions exacerbate where things are now, you got to be very careful when you look at what he said. i'd be very surprised if he doesn't approve keystone now because the state department has already found that the impact from carbon emissions would only be minimal or be a slight increase, so i think a lot of people, you know, the initial -- it initially sounded like he would be, his tone was that he was going to not approve it. i think if you read between the lines, he's saying he will. >> to the people who would

criticize the president saying he's not focused on climate change, let me read a quote from david hawkins. he said in part, this is a moment, referring to the president's speech, that has been 20 years in the making. most of the last 20 years unfortunately has not been well spent. like so many issues that we address, this is not a new one, and when you look at the other priorities, jobs, the financial crisis, even immigration right now, this recent debate, these are all issues that the administration has focused on as well. you're always going to have basically someone not happy, but this issue of climate change and what to do is pointed out by the director of climate programs a 20-year problem, not a two-term president problem. >> we often talk about the short term or the short game versus the long game. if you are constantly focused on the short game, the long game never gets figured out. you know, we talk about this in presidential campaigns too, where someone won a new cycle but then lost the entire

election. well, i think that's part of what obama's talking about. if you believe that climate change is real as scientists have said, then, you know, then you need to be concerned about the long term. it's very difficult in this environment to make people focused on something urgently that doesn't appear to be urgent whether it's your pocketbook or whether it's an incremental increase. i mean, you talked about the seas rising a foot in new york. someone will say, well, that's only a foot over 100 years. you know, what's the difference? well, i mean, the difference, i guess he would say, when you look at what happened with sandy, it makes a big impact. but that is a difficult thing to really grasp people's attention on that. really, you haven't seen an extended dialogue on this since "an inconvenient truth" came out. >> so is this speech a game changer? will this increase the dialogue, especially given the executive order option that the president wants to pursue here?

>> i think environmental activists are happy with what he's putting through. i think it depends on the follow through, the enforcement. also, this is one speech. you know, we've heard a lot of speeches about one thing over the course of the years. i think it only matters if you're talking about a bully pulpit if he pushes this and continues to talk about it regularly, not just something that's a one off. >> all right. thank you very much. greatly appreciated. coming up, a daring attack in what's supposed to be the safest area of afghanistan. the taliban now claiming responsibility. what does today's suicide bombing mean for peace talks between the u.s. and taliban? what's the impact of obamacare? the truth is, americans are already seeing the benefits. she's seeing more seniors for free wellness visits. he received a $150 rebate from his health insurance company. and next year, she can expand her small business, thanks to tax credits that cover up to half of her workers' health insurance. better coverage and lower costs. that's what obamacare means for them.

get all the facts at: barackobama.com/healthcare energy efficient appliances. you can get a tax write off for those. a programmable thermostat, very smart, saves money. ♪ cash money sorry. i see you have allstate claim free rewards, for every year you don't have a claim, you'll get money off your home insurance policy. put it towards... [ glass shatters ] [ girl ] dad! dad! [ girl screams ] noise canceling headphones? [ nicole ] that's a great idea. [ male announcer ] home insurance that saves you money for not having a claim? that's allstate home insurance with claim free rewards. talk to an allstate agent... [ doorbell rings ] and let the good life in. if you have high cholesterol, here's some information that may be worth looking into. in a clinical trial versus lipitor, crestor got more high-risk patients' bad cholesterol to a goal of under 100. getting to goal is important, especially if you have high cholesterol plus any of these risk factors because you could be at increased risk

for plaque buildup in your arteries over time. and that's why when diet and exercise alone aren't enough to lower cholesterol i prescribe crestor. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. is your cholesterol at goal? ask your doctor about crestor. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, where we switched their fruits brosand veggiestand with produce from walmart. it's a fresh-over. that's great. tastes like you just picked them. so far it's about the best strawberry i've had this year. walmart works directly with growers to get you the best quality of produce they've ever had. all this produce... is from walmart. oh my god. i'm shocked. (laughing) i know where i'm going to be shopping for strawberries now.

get 2 full pounds of strawberries, just $2.98. backed by our 100% money back guarantee. walmart there was this and this. she got a parking ticket... ♪ and she forgot to pay her credit card bill on time. good thing she's got the citi simplicity card. it doesn't charge late fees or a penalty rate. ever. as in never ever. now about that parking ticket. [ grunting ] [ male announcer ] the citi simplicity card is the only card that never has late fees, a penalty rate, or an annual fee, ever. go to citi.com/simplicity to apply. welcome back. in afghanistan today, a brazen attack in one of kabul's most secure areas. it happened inside a heavily fortified area that includes the presidential palace and nato headquarters.

journalists outside ran for cover literally. nbc's duncan golestani was there at the sustain. >> we're stuck here. there have been a number of explosions ahead of us. gunfire is still coming from all around. you might be able to hear it. we're just outside the presidential palace. so there are roadblocks. we can't move. we're just trying to keep cover here with our friends who have just jumped in as well. >> u.s. officials tell nbc news they believe five afghans died in the kabul attack. the attackers were from the hakani network and not the taliban. no american personnel were killed. duncan golestani joins now. who was responsible for this attack? and what is the impact it could have if talks are to proceed between the taliban and the u.s.? >> reporter: hey, tamron. yeah, good afternoon. well, very quickly, this afternoon the taliban claimed responsibility for this. they said they were targeting the presidential palace and also a cia building nearby.

they said eight of their insurgents had been killed. later on, nbc news sources have said the pakistan-based terror network that, some of their members might have been involved and perhaps the reason for that was they were trying to disrupt the planned peace talks, which were meant to be happening around this week between the united states, the taliban, and the afghan government. remember, it's just one week since the taliban opened their office in qatar. supposedly a venue for discussion and bringing a political reconciliation to the nearly 12 years of violence that has been happening in this country. but after a series of false starts and blame on all sides, talks have not yet begun. tamron? >> and duncan, back to the events that played out there. you were there. there were so many journalists. the video, incredible. give me a little bit of the background on what was

happening. >> reporter: yeah, so we were just at one of the perimeter gates of the presidential pal e palace. we were standing on the street with about a dozen journalists. it was 6:30 in the morning local time. suddenly this gunfire just erupted all around us. everybody went running. we, the nbc team, were able to get into the back of a car. our great cameraman carried on filming throughout. on the opposite side of the street, the rest of the journalists had to hide behind a war. with them was a young schoolboy who was clearly very upset. he'd been dragged by one of the journalists to get into a safe place. these explosions were going off and gunfire was going on. it went on for around 40 minutes. it was pretty upsetting for all those involved. >> duncan golestani live for us in kabul today. thank you. and can congress pull it together and wake up today's ruling from the supreme court? it is our gut check. be sure to like the news nation on facebook.

we're at facebook.com/newsnation. [ stewart ] we've never cooked anything like this before. [ male announcer ] introducing red lobster's seaside mix & match. combine any two from a wide variety of seven exciting choices on one plate! all for just $12.99, but only for a limited time. i'm stewart harrington, and i sea food differently.

this is a dark day for the supreme court, but it's been pretty cloudy over there for quite some time now. >> i haven't read it yet. obviously, it's an important bill that passed back in the '60s at a time when we had a very different america than we have today. i'm just going to have to read it first, but i would say i do think america is very different today from what it was in the 1960s. >> senators mitch mcconnell and harry reid on capitol hill. both reacting moments ago to the big decision by the supreme court. the decision is our topic of the

"news nation" gut check. the justice's decision primarily focused on a map of 16 southern states that are required to give federal permission before changing their voting laws because of a history of racial discrimination. the formula to come up with the map has been found unconstitutional. the justices say it is up to the congress to come up with a new way, determining which states and municipalities require close federal monitoring of elections. what does your gut tell you given the climate in washington and congress right now? is congress capable, in your opinion, of reforming the voting rights acts? go to facebook.com/newsnation to cast your vote. that does it for this edition of "news nation." thank you for joining us for the breaking news of the day. "the cycle" is up next. ♪

♪ chances are, you're not made of money, so don't overpay for boat insurance. geico, see how much you could save. i'm s.e. cupp. straight ahead in "the cycle," the stream court makes history on voting rights. john roberts rules racism isn't over but a key part of the

vra unless congress acts. the court is leaving some of the most important civil rights legislation to congress, people who haven't passed a budget in four years and voted 37 times to repeal obamacare. from the speak court to the courtroom in sanford, florida. day two in the george zimmerman murder trial. we'll be looking live. all that, plus all the stars want to be in the cycle. the supreme court kicks a key portion of the biggest civil rights law in our country across washington to capitol hill. the majority says the formula used to determine racial discrimination at the polls is outdated. they're still using election data from 1972, and the justi