my prediction, we will see a lot more stories about a lot of other people between now and then. thanks for being here. appreciate that. that's going to do it for this hour. i'm steve kornacki. "mtp daily" starts right now. good evening. i'm kristen welker in washington, in for chuck todd. welcome to "mtp daily." it has been an incredibly busy news day. two major supreme court rulings, one blocking the president's immigration action. coming up, we talk to the attorney general of texas, the state at the center of both of those rulings. plus, an unprecedented day of news on capitol hill. the dramatic conclusion of a 24-plus hour gun reform sit-in on the house floor while in the senate, a bipartisan compromise bill on guns passes the first test. all this as polls are closing right now in britain in an

historic vote on whether or not to remain in the european union. let's dive right in. we begin with that big news out of the supreme court. a split decision, 4-4. that means president obama is unable to enforce his immigration plan which sought to shield more than four million people from deportation. now, the ruling dealt a major blow to the white house, which has used executive actions to try to advance an agenda blocked by congressional inaction. this afternoon, president obama said congress and the courts have left the nation without an effective immigration policy. >> now we have got a choice about who we're going to be as a country, what we want to teach our kids and how we want to be represented in congress and in the white house. we're going to have to make a decision about whether we are a people who tolerate the hypocrisy of a system where the workers who pick our fruit or make our beds never have the chance to get right with the law

or whether we're going to give them a chance just like our forebearers had a chance to take responsibility and give their kids a better future. >> i'm joined by nbc justice correspondent pete williams at the supreme court. thanks for joining me. i think the big question on everyone's mind right now, the practical implications of this. who is this decision impacting, what does it mean in practice? >> reporter: what it means in practice is that everything stays the same. this was announced in november of 2014. it was immediately challenged by 26 states led by texas, and a court put the whole thing on hold and said the president was likely to lose that. came all the way up to the supreme court. so the question here was can the president go ahead and put this into effect while it's still in the lower courts. the supreme court couldn't answer that question. so that effectively leaves the legal stay on hold. two things about this. the administration has always said this policy had two components. first an enforcement setting of priorities that the administration would focus on

criminals and terrorists and people who ought to be deported immediately, then it simply couldn't deal with all 11 million people who were here illegally so it would say to them we are just not going to get to you, we might as well admit you're going to stay. that part doesn't change. the administration enforcement policy wasn't challenged. what was challenged was the other part that said once those people were given in essence that deferral of deportation, they could get work permits so they still can't get that work permit. >> so just to look forward a little bit, what happens to this program then? does it get kicked back to the lower courts? >> reporter: it's still in the lower courts. the basic question about whether the president had the authority to do this remains unanswered. it's worth pointing out here that today's decision stands for nothing. it doesn't mean anything. the court couldn't get to five votes. you have to have five to say anything about the law here and they couldn't get five. so it doesn't say anything about

the president's authority or the constitutionality of the program. that's to be worked out in the lower courts. the ultimate decision about this is going to be a political one. it's going to be up to the next president on whether to continue this, because it's an executive program. hillary clinton has said she will stick with it, maybe even toughen it, and donald trump had said he would abandon it. >> all right. pete williams at the supreme court, thanks for helping us to yurpd sta understand all of that. i'm joined by texas attorney general ken paxton who lead the coaliti coalition. thanks for joining me. i want to get your initial reaction and want to know what you would say to all of those people who came out of the shadows thinking they would be protected by this. >> so i think this is a great day for not just texas but a great day for the 26 state coalition and for americans, because for us, it wasn't about the immigration policy. congress needs to decide what that's going to be. this was about the rule of law.

there was no statutory authority for the president to do this and the constitution, separation of powers, because our constitution divides powers and gives different responsibilities to the president and congress and in this case, the president was stepping into the role of congress and tahat was really or argument. >> what do you say to the critics who would argue you are effectively leading the movement which is going to lead to families being torn apart, people being deported? >> so i -- this is a representative form of government. we elect officials, there is supposed to be debate, there is supposed to be elections of congressmen and congresswomen and those people are the ones given the responsibility under our form of government to make those decisions. i would say it's in the hands of congress. >> but isn't that effectively the result of this, the fact that it's now deadlocked in the supreme court? doesn't it open up many people to being deported? millions of people? >> that's why we have elections. that's why we have elections of congress every two years.

it's up to them to make those decisions. if we move to a system where one person, effectively the president, ultimately making the decision for the rest of it, that's not the way our government is set up. that's what we are fighting for, where we have a separation of powers and congress makes the legislative decisions and the president implements those. >> but practically speaking, i understand what you're saying, but as you know, this hasn't passed through congress and that's why the president took this executive action. doesn't it practically make sense to try to have these people stay here, pay taxes, determine a way to have them stay here legally? >> i think there's all kinds of good ideas floating around about what should be done about immigration. what we are saying is one person can't make that decision for the rest of us. they can't unilaterally change the law. it's just not the way a representative form of government works. so that's really our fight. immigration policy is up to somebody else. the states are just saying you

can't have the president just unilaterally implement it without congressional approval. >> let's take that point you are making. the court effectively didn't rule on that. so were you disappointed that they didn't pass a judgment on your key argument that this isn't up to one person? >> well, so it was a win for us. obviously i would like an 8-0 vote but we did win at the district court level, we did win again twice at the fifth circuit -- >> what happened taoday was nota win for you. it was a win in terms of optics but it wasn't a win in your favor. >> when there's a tie it goes back to the decision of the fifth circuit, where we did win. now it will go back to a trial court for a trial on the merits. we are optimistic about how that will turn out. >> i want to go back to the argument that you laid out about this. you said quote, we write a national immigration law requires the full and careful consideration of congress, not the political will and assertion of one person which is basically

the argument that you are making again today. so does that effectively mean you oppose donald trump's immigration policies, his plan to build a wall and deport 11 million people? >> i say it's the same thing. he needs to go through congress. i don't care whether it's a republican or democrat making these decisions. what i care about is that the process is followed, that the constitutional form of government that we set up is followed. so if donald trump has an idea, he can't just unilaterally do things that are outside of the law. he's going to have to take it through congress and he's going to have to work that process where people have input, there's debate and there's a vote. >> donald trump seems to be arguing that we have the power to do that, to build a wall, to have mexico pay for it. so you are saying tonight that he's inaccurate on that? >> no. i haven't looked at the statutory authority for whether he can do it or not do it. if it's in the statute, if he has the authority to do it, so be it. if he doesn't, it doesn't matter to me whether it's president obama or president trump, if they don't have the statutory authority to do it, they need to

go through congress the way the system was designed by our founders. >> just to be clear, does the president have the authority based on your determination to build a wall unilaterally? >> you know, i have not researched that. that is not what our case is about. our case was very specific about the executive action taken by president obama and remember, this is a president that said i don't have the authority to do this, he said it over 20 times. he said congress had to do it, then he came out and said i changed the law. that's just not the way it works. >> ken paxton, thank you so much for your time and your reaction tonight. really appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. i really appreciate it, too. for more i'm joined by henry fernandez, immigration advocate, senior fellow at the center for american progressive action fund. thank you so much for joining me. really appreciate it. >> absolutely. good to be here with you. >> i want to get your gut reaction to what happened today in the supreme court. the fact that this was effectively a tie and the fact that at the heart of the argument against the president's unilateral action is this idea that major immigration policy

should be enacted by congress. look, even the president initially said he thought he didn't have the power to act unilaterally. do you disagree with that? does he have the power to act unilaterally? >> the president took action that was very consistent with actions, executive actions that have been taken by presidents since eisenhower. every president since eisenhower has taken executive action on immigration. we have seen that for cubans, we have seen that for the vietnamese immigrants and refugees. so this is actually pretty clear that he had the authority to do this. what attorney general paxton refused to do was talk about the four million people who are going to bed terrified tonight and the six million u.s. citizens who are family members of those four million people. this was a horrible, horrible situation created by the texas lawsuit that's going to hurt families. no question about it. >> what do you say to those four

million people? what should they be doing right now in terms of trying to stay here legally? >> well, unfortunately, there's really not a' li line for them get in. this is a process that would help solve their problems but the six million people who are u.s. citizens and have these folks as family members need to be very aggressive in this upcoming election. this case will ultimately go back to the supreme court because we can expect that one of the most extreme judges on issues of immigration in the country will find for texas and the other 25 states, so this will make its way back up to the supreme court. it's going to be very important who's elected president. hillary clinton will almost certainly appoint a supreme court justice who will take precedent into consideration in a way that didn't occur for the four conservative judges today. >> but based on your argument, and you are arguing that whoever the president is does have the

authority to act unilaterally, that would then mean that donald trump, if he were to win, would have the authority to act on some of his policies, his call for building a wall, for deporting 11 million immigrants. isn't that right? >> the difference here with regard to building a wall would be that you would actually need to get money from congress to build this wall, or i suppose from the mexican congress to get the money to build a wall. that actually does require legislative action. these executive actions did not require money from congress. so they are actually very different issues than what's going on now. >> it seems like at the root of the president's argument is that some action is better than no action. as you know, house republicans blocked the bill that was passed by the senate or they didn't bring it up for a vote. what they were calling for is they said we want a vote on this piecemeal. would you support that? with this next president, if you could get something done in a piecemeal fashion, would you support that?

is that strategically a better way to go about this? >> i don't think that frankly anything would have passed in this congress. let's understand, we are in this situation because congress refused to move on comprehensive immigration reform. when we had a piecemeal bipartisan dream act bill come out of the senate, the house republican-controlled house refused to move on that. the reason that we don't have -- we did not have a 5-4 decision today is because the senate, republican-controlled senate, refuses to even meet with president obama's appointee, judge garland. that dysfunction is why we are in this situation. dysfunction and refusing to move on immigration reform, refusing to move on their basic duty to advise and consent on a supreme court justice. this is a broken congress. that's why we're where we are today. >> all right. henry fernandez, thank you so much for your insights. really appreciate it.

coming up, democrats wrap up their historic action on the house floor. was it a success or just a stunt? i talk with congress members from both sides of the aisle about the sit-ins impacting the gun debate. polls in the u.k. have closed. britain's future will be decided in the coming hours. stay with us.

sglp after an unprecedented sit-in lasting nearly 26 hours, democrats left the house floor this afternoon led by civil rights icon congressman john lewis. democrats staged a dramatic revolt against the house rules in an effort to force a vote on gun reform measures. house republicans wrapped up business late last night and adjourned for the july fourth recess without a vote on guns. today, house speaker paul ryan slammed the democratic effort as a p.r. ploy. >> i think what we did was we

watched a publicity stunt, a fund-raising stunt descend an institution that many of us care a great deal about. so yeah, i think it sets a very dangerous precedent. if this is not a political stunt, why are they trying to raise money off of this? off of a tragedy? >> when the dust settled, congressman john lewis delivered an emotional appeal to folks gathered on the steps of the capitol. >> maybe our foremothers and forefathers all came to this great land in different ships, but we are all in the same boat now. no one from no one can afford to stay home on election day. we got to get out there and do it, turn our country around. ♪ i do believe that we shall overcome some day ♪ >> we will live in peace. >> as the action was winding down in the house, things were heating up in the senate, where a bipartisan compromise

amendment from susan collins of maine received majority support in a test vote. whether the amendment can reach the 60 votes needed to advance remains unclear. we will speak with house leaders on both sides of the aisle about the path forward after a quick break. i've made plans for later in case this date doesn't go well. same here. wouldn't it be great if everyone said what they meant? the citi double cash card does. earn 1% cash back when you buy, and 1% as you pay. double means double. this just got interesting. why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction and the urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas for pulmonary hypertension, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away

for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis and a $200 savings card more on the dramatic gun debate on capitol hill. but first let's get the latest from nbc's luke russert, who is running on caffeine and adrenaline after 25 plus hours of work. what an incredible marathon. >> reporter: just a day in the life, my friend. that's just what you do daily. >> i don't know. i think you topped me last night. that's for sure. luke, help us understand this, break this down. what happens now? this was obviously very dramatic. it was historic. where does this go from here? >> reporter: we will start over in the senate today, where the

collins proposal you had mentioned earlier, that was effectively given a second life. it's a very small life, in the sense that it wasn't killed off today by republicans and it has a chance to come back again for another vote. but if you counted the votes today in a procedural motion, it seems that they would have topped out about 54, still six short of breaking the filibuster and getting to 60 which you need in the senate. on the house side, the democrats were calling for the ability to vote on two bills. one which would be a variation of the no fly, no buy, if are you on the terrorist watch list you can't get a weapon. another would have had stricter background checks for private sellers at gun shows and internet sales. both of those have gone down previously in the committee process which is the rules of the house. speaker ryan today was very angry about what the democrats did and said if they have ideas, they can go through the regular order of the house. we won't make any exceptions, we won't push forward an amendment on the floor, anything in that capacity. as to where it goes now,

legislatively in the house, i believe everything is pretty much dead on arrival because the republican leadership is upset about what happened and the democrats just don't have the strength in numbers. in the senate they might be able to get another vote on the measure but there is a swing state republican portman and johnson who they were looking at who went against this today over there. so i think the thing to keep an eye on is when the house gets back on july 5th, day after the 4th, what will be their reaction. will they have more civil disobedience, will they try and do something that goes around the regular rules of order like they did with their protest and try to elicit a public response similar to what they had last night which was really unprecedented and engaged so many people on social media. as far as real concrete policy moving through, it's an uphill battle. >> luke, thank you for that recap. really excellent reporting over the past 24 hours. appreciate it. i'm joined by republican

congressman tom cole with oklahoma, the deputy whip for the republican conference. thank you for joining me. >> thanks for having me. >> you guys are getting a lot of heat for leaving. why did you leave? why not vote? >> we finished -- first of all, we finished our business. what we scheduled to do, which was to pass the appropriations for the veterans administration, over $80 billion, well above what the president wanted to do. military construction, and provide $1.1 billion for zika. something the democrats -- so we did the things we were scheduled to do. >> congressman, you didn't vote on guns. that's obviously what the sit-in was about. that's obviously what democrats are trying to force. that's obviously at the center of a big national debate right now. >> first of all, let's talk about the gun issue. the issue itself did come before the senate this week and it failed. so it doesn't make a lot of sense to bring up legislation in the house that has already failed in the senate. it has to pass both bodies. second, the legislation came up actually yesterday in the appropriations committee.

appropriately so. it was a democratic amendment to one of the appropriations bills. they lost 31-17. two of their own members actually voted with the majority party. so they failed because they don't have the votes and they don't have enough support in the other body. >> congressman, let's talk about this -- since you raise the senate, let's talk about what happened in the senate today. a test vote did pass a compromise measure by senator susan collins. would you support that piece of legislation? >> i haven't had a chance to look at it. there's not a lot of sense looking at senate language that hasn't passed until it's actually submitted, sent over to the house. i would be happy to look at it. i have a lot of respect for senator collins. she is usually a bridge between the two parties. again, i'm not going to comment on legislation i haven't seen. >> as you know, a key part of it is this no fly, no buy piece that has been, it seems like gotten a fair amount of bipartisan support. should that be a part of any piece of legislation and could

you support that? >> you know, it depends on the nature of the list. yes, if we are talking, if we can refine the list which is shot full of inaccuracies. as a matter of fact, the aclu has come out against using this list for anything because there are so many innocent people on it. you are not told how you're put on the list, you are not told how you can get off the list. you get no due process. when you have people, john lewis has been on this list at one point. so it's clearly not an accurate tool. now, it's better than nothing, i suppose. but you need to be awfully careful when you take away the rights of american citizens. you need to know you actually have got somebody that legitimately is on the list. there's a lot of questions about this but i also think there's a willingness to try and work on it. >> as you know, though, democrats are using this to rally their base. secretary clinton has tweeted about this. this is an election year and it seems like right now, house republicans are on defense. how do you get back on offense?

should house speaker paul ryan hold a vote? >> well, no, i wouldn't, not on this legislation. that would make it go through the regular committee process where it's actually drawn up and examined in detail and tough questions are asked. that's how you move legislatively. frankly, the democrats are very fortunate that they did not succeed. this was all about politics and they admit it. but had they succeeded, if you established this as a precedent, what if republicans behaved like this during the passage of obamacare, legislation that's important to them, try to shut down the facility, break every rule. you're not allowed to film on the floor, not allowed to wave placards on the floor, not allowed to conduct demonstrations on the floor. these are rules, by the way, routine in the house under democratic leadership or republican. i don't think you actually can make the legislative process work by breaking the rules. i suppose you can make the political process work. that's what this was all about. politics. not about serious legislation. >> well, let me get your reaction to the other big story today. of course, the supreme court divided on the immigration

ruling. a lot of folks saying that is only going to energize latinos, more latinos will register to vote. this could ultimately help democrats and hurt donald trump. what do you make of that? >> well, i think you have to look at any supreme court, first, is this a constitutional or immigration issue. in this case, honestly, it's both. >> on that political point, congressman, does this hurt donald trump given that he's struggling already. >> i don't think we ought to look at supreme court cases that way. the supreme court is there to interpret the law. had justice scalia been alive it would have been a 5-4 defeat. every lower court decision has been against this so far. look, i grant you there's a legitimate constitutional debate because there are justices on both sides. what i think i really got out of today is that mitch mcconnell was really wise to say let's let the american people have a voice. they will have that voice in

november, fully knowing you will get a very different supreme court if senator clinton wins as opposed to donald trump. that's probably the way it's best decided. let the american people make the choice. >> congressman cole, thank you so much. really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> now we want to turn to democratic congressman javier becerra who will join us after the break. as polls close on the brexit vote. stay tuned for all of that and more. and so... my new packing robot will make jet warehouses even more efficient... and save shoppers money. genius! (smoke alarm sounds) oh no... charlene? ...no... charlene. no. charlene. why is she wearing earrings? why is it a she? shh... at jet.com, we always find innovative ways to save. get 15 percent off your first order.

a farmer's market.ve what's in this kiester. a fire truck. even a marching band. and if i can get comfortable talking about this kiester, then you can get comfortable using preparation h. for any sort of discomfort in yours. preparation h. get comfortable with it.

for over 100 years like kraft has,natural cheese you learn a lot about how people cook. i wish i had like four different mexican cheeses but in one super melty cheese. it does exist! you still have two cheese wishes left.

my bladder leakage made me feel like i couldn't be the father that i wanted to be. now i use depend. i can move the way i really want. unlike the bargain brand, new depend fit-flex underwear is now more flexible to move with you. reconnect with the life you've been missing. get a free sample at depend.com. more now on that dramatic day on the hill. i'm joined by democratic congressman javier becerra of california, chairman of the house democratic caucus. thanks for joining me. i guess the question is, this sit-in has now ended and the house is not back in session until july 5th. have you lost some momentum and what happens next?

realistically, do you think you can get something done on guns? that's what everyone wants to know. >> this has not ended in the sense we will stop trying to fight to get to sensible gun safety measures up for a vote in the house of representatives. the only thing that ended was session when the speaker abruptly told us to go home even though we hadn't done our week's worth of work and we could start our break for the fourth of july recess. we will go back. we will make sure that people back home understand what's going on, that there still is an effort to try to make sure we address the violence, the killing, that took place in orlando, or columbine or newtown or san bernardino or chleston, you name it. what we don't want to do is come back to another mass killing and have just yet another moment of silence. congress has to do something. >> i just interviewed congressman cole and he called what you did a stunt. he made the point that there has been fund-raising off of what happened overnight. how do you respond to that?

was it a political stunt? >> i don't think there's anyone in america who believes that trying to make sure that an american who wishes to buy a weapon should be able to do so without having to go through a background check. i don't think most americans who know that there's an individual who's so dangerous that he cannot fly on a plane in the skies of america, but can walk into a gun shop and buy an assault weapon and commit the kind of crime that we saw in orlando. the two measures that we are trying to get votes on simply do that. they make sure that everyone goes through a background check if they want to purchase a weapon and if you can't fly, because you're on a no fly list, then you can't buy a weapon in a gun shop. that's the only thing we are asking. 90% of americans, not just 90% of democrats, but americans, republicans and democrats, support these two measures. we just don't understand why we can't get a vote. i think most americans would call that sensible policy. >> i understand your point. back in 2008 you recall

republicans did something similar. that was over oil and gas drilling. democrats called that a stunt. are you being a little hypocritical and does it not set a dangerous precedent to break the rules of the house to try to get something accomplished and ultimately to turn up with no real tangible results? >> we have two measures that have bipartisan support that we would like to put up for a vote. we are not asking our republican colleagues to vote for them. we just want to have a vote to show that we want to get something done. if republicans want to kill those two sensible gun safety measures, then let people see where they are on the vote. but we should at least do our job and do work rather than just cut out of town. >> as you know, there are real concerns about due process surrounding that no fly, no buy piece of legislation which does seem to make sense but even the aclu has said there are concerns about that. how do you get around that? how do you deal with the due process issues? >> i say to myself they are so

concerned about due process, why aren't they doing something to remove people from this no fly list that exists right now? if there's a concern about using names on this list, then why aren't they fighting the list from the get-go? or is that just an excuse not to do the legislation? we believe that if they have due process concerns, they can express those through their vote. but to simply shut the house down and have us do what we have done for the last several years, essentially nothing, is not getting the work of the people done. most americans would say to you we don't elect you to be asleep at the wheel. we want you to get stuff done. right now, we have this mindset of obstruction that's infected congress to the point where it's now created this culture of total dysfunction which doesn't let us get anything done. let us have a vote. let's decide based on democratic means whether or not it passes or not and we will be happy if we can at least do what we are hired to do and that is to vote to see if we can make good law for this country.

>> let me shift over to the other news of the day, the fact that the supreme court was effectively deadlocked on the president's unilateral action on immigration. your reaction to that and as you know, your fellow house republicans have said look, they want a vote on immigration reform but they want to do it piecemeal. would you consider that approach? >> well, you know, i would like to just get back to the business of voting, of doing our job. we have left for the fourth of july break. >> understood. but would you consider a piecemeal approach to get something done on immigration reform? >> you know, that has been tried over and over and it's never succeeded. i haven't yet seen the piecemeal approach that republicans would like to move forward and to see if we can get something done. quite honestly, what's going to happen is you do it piece by piece, what happens is you leave out important pieces and do the easy pieces. it's ease dwrochy to cherry pic.

we got to do the hard work. >> that sounds like a firm no. >> show me the bills. you say they want to do a piecemeal approach. you haven't said what that means. it's harder for me to tell you yes or no about something you have not articulated, they have not articulated what it is. we have put a bill up that got bipartisan support, 68 out of 100 senators supported it. the house republicans wouldn't even give us a chance to vote on it. forget about piecemeal approach. how about a bill that already has two-thirds of the senate on board, and we can't even get a vote. that's the dysfunction that i mentioned before, that mindset of obstruction which has caused this deep culture of dysfunction in congress where you can't even get bills that have two-thirds of a bipartisan body on board to say let's do it. >> congressman, thanks for joining us on such a busy news days. really appreciate it. just ahead on "mtp daily" we will have the very latest from london on today's brexit vote. and when we could learn the results. first, susan lee has the

cnbc market wrap. >> yes, stocks rallying across the board today as the uk voted on whether to remain in the eu. the dow jumping 230 points. the s&p rising 27. the nasdaq adding 76 points. filings for first time jobless claims dropping by 18,000. to 259,000 in the week. claims have remained below the level associated with a healthy jobs market for more than a year now. new home sales are falling 6% in the month of may due to steep declines in the northeastern part of the u.s. and the west. economists expected a smaller drop.

polls just closed at the top of the hour in the united kingdom on the brexit referendum. soon we will know if the uk will remain or leave the european

union, leaving the 28 nation bloc would be an unprecedented move with ripple effects that would impact the united states politically and economically. it could also give momentum to the anti-eu sentiment gaining ground in other countries. british voters have been bitterly divided on the matter and it remains unclear what tonight's results will bring. kelly is outside the house of parliament in london. tell us about turnout. how was it and i know that strong turnout could favor the effort to stay in the eu, right? >> reporter: that's right. we don't know actual turnout numbers, probably won't know those numbers until much later tonight. there are early indications that there were very long lines at some polling stations around the country despite what has been just a miserable day in terms of weather in large parts of this country, including in london. we are already getting an early indication of how this vote may go. a poll by the organization ugov

has come out in the past few minutes. this is a poll taken today and it suggests that the remain side has a slight edge, 52% to 48%. we have to stress this is not necessarily reliable, especially when they are as close as these results are and we have to wait until all the votes are counted before we know the result. we could get initial results in the next couple of hours, possibly an indication of where this is going by about ten to midnight eastern time. >> kelly cobiella, we really appreciate it. i want to bring in the chief economics commentator for the "wall street journal" to help us break down what this all means for the folks living here. first let's talk about the global markets, though. this was a debate that started about the economy, turned into a debate about immigration. what will the impact be? could the impact be for global markets? >> well, for the most of the

last few months while the debate has been going on, the markets have assumed that remain would win. every time remain started to lose you saw the markets go down. in the last few days, the last few polls have suggested remain was once again edging ahead so if in fact the vote is to remain, i would anticipate that that rally to continue a little bit but not to be dramatic. however, if leave wins, i would expect a fairly sizeable sell-off in markets, especially in britain and europe, to a lesser extent in the united states. >> given that as americans watch this very closely, they are thinking about their 401(k)s and the stock market here. what can you tell folks about that? >> i don't think that the fact that britain will enter a new negotiation for new trade arrangements will cause a severe recession, possibly in the uk, but the impact on the united states will probably be very modest. it's one more source of uncertainty in a world that has a lot of those sources of uncertainty so it weakens economic growth here. >> and of course, as we were talking about president obama negotiating this major trade deal and he's actually commented on this, he said the uk would go to the back of the line in terms

of these trade deals, so what could the impact be in that regard and could it have ripple effects for the u.s./u.k. relationship? >> first of all, they will retain their special relationship. the u.k. is not about to become some isolated anti-american country. however, it does hurt things on the margin. for example, within the european union, the united kingdom has always been the country that was closest to the united states on things like military matters, on things like economic matters. to give you two examples, sanctions against ukraine. the u.k. was closer to the u.s. position on that. the negotiations currently right now on a trans-atlantic trade deal. the u.k. was much more likely to pull the rest of europe to our position. without the u.k. that becomes much harder. it's hard tore get a deal the united states is going to like. >> just very quickly, you started by saying that the remain effort seems to have the momentum right now but that it's flip-flopped a bit. why did remain sort of gain momentum, do you think, in recent days? >> there's a couple things. first of all, the murder of jo cox i think perhaps shocked some

people. i think that -- >> the mp. >> that's correct, member of parliament. i think also we have seen in a lot of these events that as people actually come close to the point of actually having to cast their vote, they may have felt i want to protest but as the reality of the event comes closer, the status quo bias of wanting things to remain the way they are sort of sets in. that might be what we are seeing. we saw that with the scottish referendum where the polls were close but scotland decided to stay. >> thank you so much. really appreciate it. final results are expected late tonight. stay with msnbc throughout the night for brexit result coverage. we'll have more ahead on this wildly busy news day next. ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla, apremilast. otezla is not an injection, or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. some people who took otezla

saw 75% clearer skin after 4 months. and otezla's prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.

'. just a short time ago, lester holt sat down with donald trump for his first tv interview following wednesday's speech targeting hillary clinton. here's a sneak peek. ' >> you claim that her e-mail, personal e-mail server had been hacked probably by foreign governments, suggesting that -- >> you don't know that it hasn't been. >> suggesting that she would be compromised as president. what evidence do you have? >> first of all, she shouldn't have had a personal server, okay? she shouldn't have had it. it's illegal. what she did is illegal. she might not be judged that way because we have a rigged system. what she did was illegal. she shouldn't have had a personal server. >> is there any evidence it was hacked -- >> i think i read that and heard it -- >> where? >> somebody also gave me that information. i will report back to you.

>> you can see all of lester's exclusive interview tonight on "nbc nightly news." we'll be right back. with usaa is awesome. homeowners insurance life insurance automobile insurance i spent 20 years active duty they still refer to me as "gunnery sergeant" when i call being a usaa member because of my service in the military to pass that on to my kids something that makes me happy my name is roger zapata and i'm a usaa member for life. usaa. we know what it means to serve. get an insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life.

who don't have access thto basic banking,on people

but that is changing. at temenos, with the microsoft cloud, we can enable a banker to travel to the most remote locations with nothing but a phone and a tablet. everywhere where there's a phone, you have a bank. now a person is able to start a business, and employ somebody for the first time. the microsoft cloud helped us to bring banking to ten million people in just two years. it's transforming our world. time now for the lid. thanks to all of you for being here. you just heard the sound bite from donald trump. lester holt pressing him on saying clinton's e-mail has been

hacked. does this start to hurt him politically? it's red meat for the base. it makes it look like he's not speaking in facts. >> it would be sprotronger if h was more precise. the ap was reporting she didn't trn ov turn over all her e-mails. as long as we're talking about that, that's trouble for her campaign. >> donald trump has had a tough couple of weeks. he's had a big campaign shake up but he started to turn things around. now he's headed off to scotland. politically, smart move or does this set him back in terms of trying to reboot his campaign? >> last i checked, scotland was not among those battleground states, colorado, nevada,

virginia, florida, ohio. it doesn't seem to make sense. a lot of what donald trump does is not what conventional nominees do. if you look at his travel schedule since may 3rd, he's spent very little time in the states he needs to be. >> he hasn't been to ohio in weeks. he gave the speech from new york. his schedule is not the typical schedule of a nominee. >> talk about this moment for hillary clinton. democrats feel as though she's found her voice. here you have donald trump pivoting, his kids taking over the campaign. are democrats getting jittery that donald trump will have a comeback. >> donald trump goes out there and doesn't insult half the country and gets patted on the back for doing a good job. the fact is, we saw financial reports from his campaign.

it's very unhealthy. he has less than $2 million on hand. >> he says he can self-finance. >> why is he paying himself salary out of his campaign? right now, you're seeing trump, he's having a hard time just getting republicans on board. now he's going away to scotland. he should be here fund raising and in battleground states. it doesn't make a lot of sense, his strategy. >> alex, what do you make of those numbers that doug talks about? donald trump says my campaign is difference, i'm an outsider. >> he did forgive the 50 million he loaned his campaign which is great step forward. i think that was a step in the

right direction. he does need to raise more money. voters that don't vote republican, that requires boots on the ground in these early states and requires resources. >> i'm going to put up the two tweets. this became political fodder. we must do better. h. she tweeted out the same thing in spanish. donald trump tweeted out the supreme court kept us safe from executive amnesty. hillary clinton's open borders are tearing american families apart. who does this moment help most, do you think? >> i think even without the ruling, we knew immigration was going to be one of the biggest issues in this campaign. in part because democrats need that hispanic vote and have

successfully chased that vote by saying, we are with you on immigration. also, of course, we're talking about donald trump who has put immigration at the center of his campaign, gone farther than any other republican nominee before him. >> doug, this is a legacy issue for president obama. he's making the argument, look, the supreme court didn't really rule on this. yet, it doesn't allow him the move forward with his executive action. could that in and of itself be damaging to secretary clinton on the campaign trail? >> no. i think this will embolden them to campaign harder for comprehensive immigration reform. it's going to put republicans on the defense. when you have a candidate like donald trump who is deeply unpopular with hispanic, it will hurt republicans in colorado and florida. i don't think you can win the white house without winning florida. he's sinking there. >> rushing to get latinos signed

up to vote. your take on today. >> it's a 4-4 decision. it reminds us how important the supreme court is. it's important that republicans keep the majority in the senate, which is going to ultimately determine who is on the supreme court. second of all, hillary clinton's hypocrisy on this. she didn't do anything when she was in the senate. >> thanks so much. we'll be right back after a quick break. before it became a medicine, it was an idea. an inspiration. a wild "what-if." so scientists went to work. they examined 87 different protein structures. had 12 years of setbacks and breakthroughs,

4,423 sleepless nights, and countless trips back to the drawing board. at first they were told no, well... maybe, and finally: yes. then it was 36 clinical trials, 8,500 patient volunteers, and the hope of millions. and so after it became a medicine, someone who couldn't be cured, could be. me. ♪ youthat's why you drink ensure. sidelined. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you.

when a moment turns romantic why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction and the urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas for pulmonary hypertension, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away.

ask your doctor about cialis and a $200 savings card.

that does it for us tonight. chuck will be back tomorrow. "with all due respect" starts right now. i'm mark halperin. >> the countdown clock telling me we're now 23 hours and 48 minutes. >> if we had a countdown clock, i wouldn't need to tell you this. we'reless than 24 hours away from the start -- >> we do. i was kidding. >> in europe's final countdown. >> 21 hours and counting. that's the clock your screen. >> with the vote clock showing 2:17. >> we're counting down to tonight's cnn libertarian town hall. >> c