i'm investing in my dog's health and happiness. ♪♪ get started at longlivedogs.com hey, good to be with you. i'm yasmin vossoughian in for katy tur. you got a split decision for the biden administration today at the supreme court on the final day of its term. in one ruling the court sided with the biden administration allowing it to scrap the trump remain in mexico immigration policy. details and reaction on that is straight ahead. also, in a second ruling, a setback. the court agreeing with a group of red states and coal companies with the epa's efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. also at the supreme court, a history-making day. just a couple hours ago now, justice ketanji brown jackson sworn in as the first black

woman to serve on the supreme court. >> all the members of the court, i am pleased to welcome justice jackson to the court and to our common calling. [ applause ] >> her elevation to justice coming at an incredibly politically fraught moment for that court following the conservative-leaning bodies overturning of roe v. wade. joining me is nbc news justice correspondent pete williams, nyn professor and former law clerk melissa murray, and "politico" author eugene daniels. appreciate you joining us on this. pete, before we get to the history-making moment, i want to talk specifically about the two decisions that came down, really kind of a split decision for the biden administration here. >> reporter: that's true. the easier one to talk about is the "remain in mexico" program. supreme court said the biden administration went about it the right way trying to end this program that was launched during the trump administration.

that required the government to send asylum seekers back to mexico to wait for their cases to be heard. the biden administration can go ahead now and try to shut that down. it was a 5-4 ruling. chief justice roberts and justice kavanaugh joining the court's three more liberal members. the other was a 6-3 by the lineup we've seen so much this term with the conservatives on one side and the three more liberal justices on the other saying that the environmental protection agency didn't have the authority it needed from congress to carry out the next step in trying to curb greenhouse gas emissions. what the epa wanted to do or at least tried to do once before was to encourage industries, the electricity generating industry, to shift more of its resources from coal-fired power plants toward cleaner sources such as solar and wind. but today the supreme court said congress did not give it explicit authority to do that. you can't find that authority by reading the existing statutes,

they say. they went further -- this is the part that really has the potential point of view significance much beyond this case, it said this is a major question. and whenever agencies want to act on a major question like this that would basically change national policy, they have to have explicit approval from congress. so that's why this decision not only curbs the ability of the epa to act here, but also could affect other federal agencies in the future. so this -- there may be the seeds here to a series of decisions that could cut back on agency authority. >> really good stuff there as also. i know you got to go. a lot of other reporting to do, well. we appreciate you. thank you, pete. melissa, let's talk through this. eugene, as well. before we kind of get into the decisions that pete was just walking us through, i want to talk first about kind of the historic nature of today. before, of course, all the politics of that, which is the first black woman to join the supreme court, now justice ketanji brown jackson. it has been an incredible day to

say the least watching her be sworn in by then-justice stephen breyer who the minute she was sworn in no longer held that title. let's take a listen to that moment, melissa, and then we'll talk. >> i, ketanji brown jackson -- >> do solemnly software -- >> do solemnly swear that i will faithfully and impartially -- >> discharge and perform -- >> discharge and perform -- >> all the duties -- >> all the duties -- >> incumbent upon me. >> incumbent upon me. >> as an associate justice of the supreme court of the united states. >> as an associate justice of the supreme court of the united states. >> talk about this moment. emotionally really. >> this is a really profound moment. i imagine it was incredibly profound for justice jackson to be sworn in by justice breyer, the justice for whom she clerked. but it also comes i think at a bittersweet time. so many black women have longed

for this day, and it comes just as the court has really reached the legitimacy in many views. like this has been a really raucous term for the court. they have been incredibly extreme in some of these decisions, and so justice jackson is joining a court that is hobbled in terms of its institutional legitimacy. she's joining a court where she will see her views very much a part of the minority while there is a 6-3 supermajority that seems really bent on doing the most to unwind some of the gains that we've seen over the last century. so i think it's a bittersweet moment for a lot of us, but it sure was great to see her sworn in today. >> you talk a lot about kind of the credibility that has been slipping when it comes to the supreme court. much of what i heard outside the supreme court over the last coupleof days in my reporting there. i wonder as you look at kind of the landscape of the court going forward, of course some of the cases they're going to be overseeing in the fall during

the fall session. with all of that in mind, how is it that justice jackson now, ketanji brown jackson, will be able to maybe re-establish some of that credibility? what will she bring to the table to help move the court in a better direction? more positive direction? >> well, i think her role as an individual is going to be very limited. obviously she's someone who's very skilled in coming together across coalitions. she's someone who i think may be able to find common cause with someone like justice gorsuch, more a libertarian on criminal justice issues. we've seen strange bed fellows on criminal justice issues. she is one of three in a liberal minority. it's going to be very hard for her by herself or overnight with the other two -- or even with the other two justices to overcome the wave that is being developed by the 6-3 conservative supermajority. numbers do not lie. six is twice three.

>> eugene, let's get into the cases that they're going to be overseeing that they just announced in the next sessions. we are talking, of course, addressing election laws here, a win for the moment really for republican state legislatures, taking power away from state courts to protect voters. the possibility of something like that happening, affirmative action, as well. business regulations, as well. something they're going to be overseeing in the supreme court, a case that they're going to be overseeing. talk to me about how justice ketanji brown jackson could help affect cases like this going forward in this current climate. >> like the professor said, there's only so much one person in the minority is going to be able to do. she's going to reach across lines and talk to the other justices and try to inform their own decisions, but what we've seen and what's been made clear is with the 6-3 court, that even when democrats control the rest of washington, d.c., the rights, the conservatives' ability to make changes on key policy

issues is undimmed. and that is the future of the supreme court most likely. we're talking about affirmative action, we're also talking about them taking up the independent state legislature doctrine which you said essentially tests whether state legislatures can overrule courts and constitutions to have immense power, unprecedented power, over how that works. and for those of us who remember january 6th, paying a lot of attention to people like john eastman and those kinds of things, those kinds of people. this is concerning for those folks, right? it is concerning to watch the supreme court take up a case like this because what we all know is they don't have to take up anything. it is a choice to do so. and there's already been some opening by some of the justices to come on the side of conservatives in the north carolina case. for that affirmative action, all of these issues that justice ketanji brown jackson and her eight colleagues are going to be working on, it is a reminder

that on the politics of this for years conservatives have focused on the courts from the bottom up as one of most important aspects of making and changing and effecting policy change in this country while democrats -- and they talk about this themselves -- have not focused on that as much. and so while they are celebrating today seeing justice jackson, they are also concerned about what their future holds. >> concerned about what the future holds. melissa murray, eugene daniels, thank you both. appreciate it. more on today's supreme court decision allowing the biden administration to end the trump-era "remain in make" spoil. julian castro served under president obama and is a msnbc political analyst. secretary castro, great to see you once again, sirment thanks for joining us on this. want to get your reaction, of course, to the decision from the supreme court on the "remain in mexico" policy. >> it's a very welcome decision. you know, this was a coalition of justices that you don't

normally see sit together because you had in addition to the three liberal justices, chief justice roberts and justice kavanaugh side with them and say, no, the biden administration actually did things correctly when it attempted to end the remain in mexico policy. so it's a very welcome decision. one of the rare welcome decisions, frankly, during this term of the supreme court. but still welcome because it's going to mean that tens of thousands of folks or maybe each more who have had to wait while their asylum claim is adjudicated in mexico under dangerous circumstances, often in squalor, are going to have the opportunity to be here in the united states which was the norm for forever until trump came along. >> let's talk personally first about some of the folks seeking asylum here in the united states and what has been reported they have been facing along the border. human rights groups reported asylum seekers facing kidnapping, rape, assault. many of these tent cities that they have set up while waiting

asylum here in the united states. how will this change the game for them? >> well, number one, it's going to mean that they're going to be safer as they're waiting for their asylum claim to be ad jaud indicated. they're going to be -- adjudicated. they're going to be living in better conditions. in 2019 i had the opportunity to visit one of these tent camps. what i saw there was heartbreaking. people living like no human being should live, very crowded -- i remember meeting a woman who had a baby that was about 20 days old and flies flying around the baby. people there told me that sometimes folks would drink from the river that was nearby. so people shouldn't live like this. they don't have to live like this. and i'm glad that that is ending for their sake. >> here's the thing, right -- whatever side of the aisle you are on, i think everybody can admit we have a broken immigration system in this country. my question is if, in fact, the biden administration moves forward with shutting down this remain in mexico policy, you are

likely going to have an influx of folks seeking asylum here in the united states heading toward the border, wanting to remain here in the united states. do we have the infrastructure in place to support the thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, possibly million-plus people that will be entering this country? >> i think fundamentally that the infrastructure has -- is being put in place, can be put in place if the biden administration is allowed to put that infrastructure in place. you know, the numbers that we're seeing today are not the kind of numbers that we've seen -- we saw in the '90s and other times in united states history. as a country, you know, we should not act as though we have not seen numbers like this before. we have seen it, and we're a country that does have the resources to address this issue, to manage this effectively. i have confidence that that can be done, that the biden administration is doing that. they have had time to prepare

for this because, again, they wanted to end this some time ago. so they do have a plan in place, and i'm confident that they can handle that. >> all this obviously because texas and mississippi sued to keep this policy in place. texas' attorney general tweeting this, i want your reaction, secretary, which is, "i'm disappointed in scotus allowing the program to remain, one of our last protections against the democrats' border crisis. i will continue to fight to secure our border and hold biden accountable and my dozen other security suits in federal court." what do you make of it? >> it's total posturing. it was disappointing the other day when more than 50 migrants died in a trailer in my hometown of san antonio. the first thing that governor greg abbott did was threw this on the biden administration, just total politics, instead of even expressing an ounce of compassion for people. so this is more political posturing, the same red meat politics that republicans like ken paxon have used to try to

get ahead politically. and it's unfortunate that he's chosen to do that. this is the right decision from the supreme court. it's a humane decision, and i think it's a decision in keeping with not only our constitution but also the better ideals of our country. >> secretary castro, as always, good to see you. all right. ahead, biden is set to make a major speech on the january 6th committee's findings after the panel completes its investigation. the message our sources say the president intends to deliver. plus, more on how the supreme court just made the fight against climate change even more difficult. scientist michael mann is joining me with that. and former secretary of state hillary clinton's warning about the supreme court's reversal of roe. court's reversal of roe. >> if the republicans gain a majority, particularly if they get a republican president, they will try to pass a federal law banning abortion. a federal law a federal law banning abortion never too early to learn

you could save with america's number one motorcycle insurer. that's right, jamie. but it's not just about savings. it's about the friends we make along the way. you said it, flo. and don't forget to floss before you brush. your gums will thank you. -that's right, dr. gary. -jamie? sorry, i had another thought so i got back in line. what was it? [ sighs ] i can't remember.

all right. welcome back. so the president is set to deliver a major speech on the january 6th committee's findings once the panel actually wraps up their investigation. sources telling nbc news it's going to focus on what we have to lose as a country if the former president or his allies return to power in washington. this week's testimony from cassidy hutchinson has drastically upped the pressure on the justice department to take action and on trump allies to testify. trump's former white house counsel, pat cipollone, has been subpoenaed to appear before the committee. hutchinson's bombshell testimony put him at the center of that day's violent events. the subpoena coming amid warnings on alleged witness tampering. liz cheney telling abc news that the panel is prepared to slap anyone who tried to influence testimony with a criminal referral. >> so you think some of the testimony you received wasn't truthful because people were threatened? >> the way that i would put it is that it gives us real insight

into how people around the former president are operating and to the extent to which they believe that they can effect the testimony of witnesses before the economy. it's something we take seriously. and it's something that people should be aware of. it's a very serious issue, and i would imagine the department of justice would be very interested in and would take that very seriously, as well. >> being pretty transparent in that interview to say the least. correspondent ali vitali and josh dosi, political reporter at the "washington post." ali, let me start with you. give us a tiktok, what do we know, the abcs of what to expect from the president and when actually that speech would come? >> yeah. that timing is sort of in tandem with what the committee is doing, but our reporting from mike memaly and our colleagues t white house at nbc is that biden is trying to use a speech like that to both remind people what

he ran on in 2020, we covered that campaign together, the battle for the soul of a nation. that was the pitch even before the insurrection. certainly, though, biden now expected to wrap that into the larger frame knowing what we now know about what happened on january 6th and all of that which has been further illuminated by the committee's work. but it's also a launching pad for him for his 2024 aspirations which are coming into focus now as we see other national democrats traveling to states that typically perk up our ears, those of white house cover campaigns, the new hampshires, the iowas, the south carolinas, and starting to put the churn together of what the 2024 election field could look like even as biden himself says that he intends to run for re-election. of course the committee's work has tried to be, at least in their words, above the partisan fray and above the electoral pieces of this. but of course it's really hard to extricate those things when someone like former president trump who is very much the

center of the committee's work is likely at this point the next republican standard bearer, making him the most powerful republican in the party and very much the centerpiece of the january 6th committee's work. >> perking up our ears and giving us sleep anxiety. let's be real. let's be real. let's say the truth here. josh, let's talk through cipollone here. a subpoena obviously now delivered to cipollone. we know obviously the way in which cassidy laid out some of the things that he said throughout that day on january 6th, one is if we actually go to the capitol, there are a lot of criminal charges we could be -- we could see in our future. we also know as the committee has said, he has sat for a quote/unquote informal engagement back in april, right. so why do you think now the committee believes it is so incredibly important to have him come in and give likely closed door testimony but on the record testimony?

>> well, we know that pat cipollone was one of the most strident opponents of the stop-the-steal campaign and a lot of that outside advisers that were promulgated that information to the former president. we know he had concerns at many levels of what was happening and expressed those to others in the white house. the testimony indicated that. others said that, as well. the former president had quite a difficult vitriolic relationship within the time, he would often castigate him because cipollone would say no to the former president and would try to shoot down what he viewed as some of more of his hair brained ideas. cipollone also has told a confident that he is not inclined to want to testify in front of the committee. that these believes that there should be privilege issues and he should not talk about his conversations with the former president. that it gets at -- a precedent for white house counsels going forward, and he has not wanted to go through a video testimony or public testimony so far. and liz cheney and the committee

have been really determined to convince him otherwise, through hook or crook, so to speak. they've not had much luck. now we're kind of at the crucible here. he has a few days to respond to this subpoena. if he would like. if not, they have to decide how hard are they willing to fight, you know, to bring him in even against his own will. >> ali, pick up on that. i'm sure there's a major public appetite to hear from cipollone seeing as he was cited in cassidy hutchinson's testimony. with all of that in mind, cipollone is likely weighing claims of executive privilege in order to get out of the subpoena and avoid testimony. >> yeah. >> whether closed door or public. so what is the likelihood that would happen or that, in fact, he would testify? how far are they really willing to go with him? >> reporter: yeah. that's the question, right? clearly they were willing to go so far as a subpoena which is an escalation, but in talking to my sources yesterday, as they were mulling the idea of whether or not to subpoena pat cipollone

they realized he probably needed the subpoena for the optics cover to actually consider coming back before the committee. they mentioned in the subpoena that we got yesterday that they spoke with him again informally in april. they have more questions to ask in part because of cassidy hutchinson's testimony, but also because of what former department of justice officials testified the week prior about meetings that they were in about the separate but still relevant pressure campaign that they were under simultaneously to potentially put jeff clark atop the department of justice and thusly give something of a stamp of approval to all of the bogus claims that trump and rudy giuliani and others were putting forward that could have done things like false slates of electors or at least muddied the waters in critical states like georgia and arizona. there's a lot of reasons they want to hear from pat cipollone. you're also right, he's weighing executive privilege questions, but also potentially attorney general/client privilege questions. the executive privilege question some people might say they can be able to answer because

president biden has waived that. of course, that's something that mark meadows, the chief of staff, is also fighting in court. it's not a decided question on whether or not executive privilege applies here, at least from a court perspective. but then of course there's the sing lar lawyer perspective of attorney/client privilege that also has to be explored here. and we're told from our sources that's the stuff that cipollone's team is working through now. the other thing, though, really fast, is he is likely to testify for a transcribed deposition if he actually cooperates. that's not sitting in front of a committee but stuff the committee can use. >> for now, thank you both. appreciate it. coming up, everybody, how abortion advocates are challenging the supreme court's reversal of roe state by state. and we may be headed into the busiest holiday travel weekend since the beginning of this pandemic. airlines are already a mess. how much worse can it actually get? w much worse can it actually w much worse can it actually get?ll design delivers fast,

powerful, long-lasting pain relief. aleve it, and see what's possible.

- [announcer] the more we learn about covid-19, the more questions we have. the biggest question now, what's next? what will covid bring in six months, a year? if you're feeling anxious about the future, you're not alone. calhope offers free covid-19 emotional support. call 833-317-4673,

or live chat at calhope.org today. after switching to the farmer's dog we noticed so many improvements in remi's health. his allergies were going away and he just had amazing energy. it looks like nutritious food, and it is. i'm investing in my dog's health and happiness. get started at longlivedogs.com all right, so today yet another legal challenge to a statewide abortion ban in the wake of the supreme court's ruling to overturn roe. a state court in kentucky has blocked a complete abortion ban as well as a six-week ban while the court hears arguments for a

temporary injunction. all this happening as the president makes the case for action in congress. today biden called for an exception to the senate filibuster rules to clear the way for congress to codify roe. >> i believe we have to codify roe v. wade in the law, and the way to do that is to make sure that congress votes to do that. and if the filibuster gets in the way, it's like voting rights, it should be -- we provide an exception for this, require an exception to the filibuster for this action. >> so other democrats, prominent democrats i should say, now speaking out about the supreme court's ruling and what can or should be done to protect the right to an abortion in this country. including former secretary of state hillary clinton. nbc news washington correspondent yamish elsdor spoke at the aspen festival. getting her reaction to the supreme court ruling on roe. >> it's the most arrogant, misreading of history and law

that you could ever find. it is so narrow and baseless -- [ applause ] -- you know, it's a -- look, it's a results-oriented decision. i found that it was not only ignorant but almost dismissive to the point of contempt for women's lives and women's choices and the difficulties that women of all backgrounds -- this has nothing to do with your personal opinion, your religious belief. that was the whole point of choice. >> and we're joined from aspen with more of the conversation with former secretary clinton. >> that's right. former secretary of state hillary clinton, she issued a full-throated rebuke and condemnation of the supreme court ruling overturning roe v. wade. she said women's lives would be put at risk, some women might even die because they might seek out illegal abortions or be

forced to carry to term pregnancies they do not want to carry to term. let's listen to what she said about what republicans also might do as this new political landscape takes shape. >> if the republicans gain a majority, particularly if they get a republican president, they will try to pass a -- a federal law banning abortion. so even the states like where i live, new york, that are determined to try to protect women's personal choices and not have the government deciding, they may very well face even, you know, further restrictions going forward. >> she also said that democrats should be ready to mobilize because republicans have been working on this issue for decades. of course this ruling is the culmination of the conservative movement's effort to overturn federal abortion rights. she says that democrats need to get out there, they need to message, they need to explain to people that they need to get more people elected in office and grow their majorities in the house and the senate. of course, it's anyone's guess who will win in the midterms, but this new political landscape

really does show that abortion will be likely a top issue on voters' minds. >> thank you. joining me charlotte altar with "time" magazine and author of "the ones that we've been waiting for." charlotte, welcome. want to read a little from your piece in "time" talking about roe here for folks to hear. quote/unquote, roe fell in large part because anti-abortion activists and policymakers better understand how power truly works in this country. you go on, it is up to the feminist movement to regroup and recalibrate. so two questions for you here out of that. one of which is the question of power and why you feel as if republicans understand or i should say anti-abortions activists understand how power works and what do you suggest needs to actually be done? >> so one of the things that i think this moment really shows is the extent to which feminists are really in a lot of positions of power in this country.

i mean, things are going really well for women. and yet roe still fell. and i think that shows that over the last ten years how much of the movement has been focused on what i like to call a power move politics, often getting women into physical positions of power, cheering on movies, tv shows, cultural representation of women's equality, and yet in the meantime, anti-abortion republicans have been slowly but surely building these majorities on the state level, getting judges into positions where they could uphold abortion restrictions. you know, doing the slow wonky work of chipping away at abortion rights on the state level while a lot of women's rights advocates took those protections for granted. >> let me ask this because i asked this a lot when i was on the ground outside the supreme court a couple of days ago. and some of the women that i spoke to there felt as if democrats took roe for granted. it was obvious the republican

party, the majority of the republican party, they had a mission to overturn roe. and they were focused on that mission for the last half century, basically since roe came in in 1973. so with that, what do democrats need to do to change the game really here? if in fact that is part of the equation, thinking that, well, they're never really going to overturn roe? >> i think part of the reason a lot of democrats believe they would never overturn roe is because roe is incredibly popular in this country. why the majorities of americans support the right to an abortion. and that it's part of this sort of misconcentration that underpin -- misconception that underpinned the feminist misplacing energy over the last ten years. the idea that hearts and minds are what matter. and actually anti-abortion republicans understood that votes matter. even if wide majorities of americans support something, they can overturn it if they

have the majorities in the state legislaures and the seats on the supreme court to do it. i think this is about abortion rights advocates really focusing on the kind of representation that really matters which is representation in state governments and representation on the courts. >> charlotte, thank you. coming up, everybody, more on the supreme court ruling that will make it harder for the biden administration to fight climate change. and, quote, defending every inch of allied territory. at nato, the president unveiling a plan to ramp up u.s. military presence in europe amid russia's ongoing threat. amid russia's ongoing threat dollars. when we got the quote back from pie, it was a sigh of relief. they put us in a policy where we fit. i'm grateful that there's company out there that's willing to insure us little guys because every dollar counts. ask your

agent or get a quote at easyaspie.com moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. many taking rinvoq saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 1 week. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema.

talk to your eczema specialist about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save.

welcome back. so president biden now on his way back to washington following that nato summit in spain, topic one the war in ukraine. the president announcing the u.s. will, in fact, increase military operations across europe with more air, land, and sea deployments. this trip saw the addition of

two new member states to nato. >> putin thought he could break the transatlantic alliance. he tried to weaken us, he expected our resolve to fracture. but he's getting exactly what he did not want. warrior we're more united than ever. in addition to finland and sweden we'll be stronger than ever. they have serious militaries, both of them. we'll increase the nato border by 800 miles along the finnish/russian border. sweden is all in. >> so in a statement, nato leaders call russia, quote, the most significant and direct threat to allies' security and to the peace and stability in the euro atlantic area. nbc news senior international correspondent keir simmons is here. great to see you. i want to get your first raw reaction to what really stood out to you during the summit. >> reporter: you know, you had those three big, historic pieces

of news, turkey getting out of the way of finland and sweden joining nato. that massive ramping up of military to protect the border with russia, european border with russia and those tough words in the nato strategy. you had all that. but for me i think the big takeaway is how much the world has changed, transformed. just look at president erdogan of turkey who joe biden in the past called an auto accurate. this week they looked like best friends. i actually put that to president erdogan, and he laughed and said things change. he certainly -- certainly do. and i think we're going to see that more and more. we're seeing how president putin's actions in ukraine really are kind of turning the world upside down. just think about this -- president biden, who came into office to organize a democracy conference buddying up with

president erdogan. i think it's politics, the administration realizing that its key focus now, russian and china, means that other things need to be compromised. >> yeah, yeah. absolutely. that's a great point, well. i wonder here -- i was reading a piece earlier talking about how long the united states along with europe could sustain aid to ukraine, right? announcements from the united states, $800 million, $800 million, $1 billion, as well, air, land, and sea aid, as well. how long they could maintain this. when you look at the global economy right now with inflation where it is, energy prices the way that they are, as well, obviously summer it's easier to handle. as you head for the winter seasons, having to heat homes in it -- it causes a lot of issues obviously across the world right now. so i'm wondering if they are having those types of conversations inside the halls of the summit and what they think ukraine needs to maybe think about giving up in order to end this war. >> reporter: well, you bet those

conversations are happening privately, particularly with some european countries, particularly the ones that are more dependent or have been more dependent on trade with russia, if you like. but what president biden says -- we heard it again and again -- is we'll keep going for as long as it takes. you know, i think honestly we're in a pretty terrible race, if you like, between how long the west and by that i mean western european voters and american voters can sustain their support for this, and how long russia can keep going. i suspect in th end the most likely outcome is a frozen conflict in ukraine where we don't really see anyone -- on either side kind of get the outcome if you like -- that they want, but yeah -- look, the trouble is is predicting the future right now is almost impossible. >> yeah. >> reporter: you look at some of the countries, britain -- britain, the british prime minister, would he even be around in a few months' time

given the domestic troubles he has? president macron of france, politics there is paralyzed. even shultz of germany has struggled with the ukraine crisis. and there are president biden's domestic challenges. where will we be next year? i don't think anyone knows. >> absolutely a great point. so much upheaval around the world which it comes to leadership, how can you brikt what the next couple of months are going to look like, how we're going to resolve the conflicts at the least. as always, thank you. all right. let's talk about the supreme court decision again. u.s. carbon emissions are on pace to spike again this year, and the supreme court just made it much harder for the u.s. government to do anything about it. one of the most important environmental decisions in years, the justices preemptively curbed any regulations the biden administration might consider to limit carbon emissions at power plants. joining me to talk about this, michael mann, director of the earth systems science center. he's also author of "the new climate war." i'm going to bet you're not necessarily happy about the

supreme court decision. tell us why. >> yeah, i'd like to say it's good to talk with you. this is an awful day. it's a day that many of us suspected were coming, was coming. but still feared the day that it would arrive. look, you know, what the supreme court has done here, what this reactionary activist supreme court has done is to remove yet another fundamental right that we have as citizens. they've removed the fundamental right to privacy, they've removed the fundamental right to safety from gun violence, and they've removed a fundamental right to a livable planet. and you know, it's ironic in that some of the regulations that they are basically now preventing the executive branch from implementing against carbon pollution were actually put in place by republican presidents. george w. bush, his epa administrator, christine todd

whitman, recognized that carbon pollution was a pollutant to be regulated under the clean air act and began to initiate efforts to do that. then what we saw thereafter was an effort by fossil fuel companies to take over the party and ever since then what we've seen is republicans and this republican-dominated court now basically preventing the executive branch from being able to protect its citizens against threats, including the fundamental threat of the climate crisis. >> let me ask you this, michael -- obviously this is taking power away from the epa, right, to put these restrictions in place. are there ways to make incrementa change? are their rk-arounds the epa can now begin to look at? >> yes. i mean, the executive branch still has to assert its authority to defend the laws that are on the books, to make

sure that polluters are not given a free ticket to continue to spew carbon pollution into the atmosphere. there are things that the executive branch can continue to do, and it has to assert its rights here against a branch that is essentially trying to usurp its rights to enforce the laws of the land. secondly, we obviously need climate legislation to pass congress. if that's through reconciliation, that's what has to happen. we need legislation that will allow us to meet our obligations to the rest of the world, to lower our carbon emissions because without u.s. leadership, we're the largest polluter in history when it comes to the cukelative carbon pollution -- cumulative carbon pollution, we have put more pollution into the atmosphere than any other country. it is necessary for us to demonstrate leadership globally if we are going to expect the rest of the world to come to the table. so's critical that congress now

put in place legislation that will allow us to meet our obligations to decarbonize our economy, to move away from fossil fuels, to move toward clean, renewablea energy. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> michael mann, thank you. >> thank you. >> up next, what to expect ahead on what could be a record- setting holiday travel we can. we will be right back. as this may increase your risk of stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve op eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, or unusual bruising. it may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical

or dental procedures. the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor about eliquis.

if your flight takes off on time today or you get to where you are going without traffic, you are the lucky one. aaa expect 3.5 million air travelers this weekend. hundreds of flight cancellations and delays, as well. even more americans, 42 million hitting the road to get where they're going while gas prices are down in recent days. they are still hovering around record highs. joining you now from reagan national air outside. i was at reagan on sunday, i would like to file a complaint. three separate lights i booked

and all of them were canceled, and i ended up having to to drive back to new york city to make it in time for my kids last day of school. that is the state of things right now. >> yeah, look. that is about right. i had a flight out of st. louis yesterday that was canceled. i drove to indianapolis and that flight was delayed. these are stories we are hearing everybody. this is the state of things across america. part of it is just a staffing shortage. the airlines are trying to keep up. they have canceled some 3000 flights this week, there preemptively canceling others to try to rebook folks. but keep an eye on your rebooking. if you're reboot through multiple cities, that can be a problem as well. sometimes it is better if you just wait a day and fly direct. another word of caution are the rental cars. just like last year, rental cars are going fast. make sure there is one at your destination. i've been talking travelers all morning. here is a little bit of what we

have gotten. take a look. >> july 4th, are you worried about travel difficulties? delays? >> always. you don't know what may happen, and the weather plays a factor in most of the delays that we are experiencing right now. >> exhausting. a pain in the rear end. you have got to roll with it, though. you have to travel. >> area very quick report of travel tips. the airline app is the way to go. forget the airline. it is a staffing shortage. you're not going to get anyone on the phone. anywhere you have to have a human interaction with someone is going to be a chokepoint. if you are checking a bag, there will be a line. the security line is going to be a blind. if you're collecting your back on the other hand it is going to be a line. once again, don't take for granted that huber on that end. >> sounds fun. good luck to wherever you're going next. thanks for that. stay with me, everybody, for

another jampacked hour in news ahead. history is the first african- american woman takes her place on the supreme court. plus, with what more could the january 4th committee learned from trumps white house counsel. all that coming up. . and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too.

if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information. we've been streaming all day from every room.

the power and speed of this super-sonic wifi from xfinity is incredible. mom! mass speeds was my idea, remember? get minion net, with speeds of up to one minion bite per hour. [ low screaming ] but that was an epic fail. with xfi we can stream, share, swipe, like... impress your mom with super-sonic wifi. it's unbeatable internet for a more unbeatable gru. i mean, you. wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities.

age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein. devastating decisions, that is the reaction from president biden just a short time ago after the supreme court dealt a major setback and climate change policy. in one of the