because now he is not position of power anymore. i, mean up until today he woul surround himself with guards and he just doesn't have tha anymore. the feds are on top of him and he can't escape. >> yeah, we now have a, yo know, we are gonna go throug the normal american cour process. he is of course innocent until proven guilty, of the charge against. i'm jose parlier, thank yo very much. >> thank you >> that is all in on thi wednesday night, alex wagner starts right now, good evening alex >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris >> good evening, chris in the until proven guilty. thank you very much. that is all in on this wednesday night. alex wagner tonight starts right now. good evening, alex >> good evening, chris you know, i was contemplating

get paid in himalayan dollars and then i said pay me in rugs which turned out not to be a bad idea they're a good investment. >> you know what i say in this job sometimes you get little moments of levity. when somebody told me on my staff steve bannon had been apprehended by postal inspectors on a yacht in connecticut -- >> this is one of the good stories. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour in december it was about parental rights. a federal judge in texas ruled that a grant program designed to provide birth control to kids from low income families was unconstitutional because that program violated parental rights the judge wrote the court finds no compelling governmental interest justifies defend's disregard of plaintiffs parental rights in this case. in november it was about the discrimination on the basis of

sex. that same federal judge cited with lawyers steven miller the judge decided obamacare and title 9 ruling against discrimination on the basis of sex did not protect lgbtq plus patients by discrimination thereby enabling doctors to deny patients gender affirming care in 2021 it was about irreparable harm to interests. asserting a public interest in maintaining the liberty of individuals to make intensely personal decisions according to their own conveks. all the reasons this judge gave for those rulings sound like arguments that could be made in favor of protective rights, but all these rulings were in favor of conservative interests and all written by trump appointed

judge matthew kazmierczak. kazmierczak has ties to the federalist society that date back to his law school years when he attened meetings, and now he's a headliner between 2015 and last month kazmierczak spoke at ten events. member of his family pointed him a man with deep religious convictions particularly when it comes to pregnancy when he was a college student me wrote a column for his school paper endorsing a republican party platform that would support feetm person hood. he wrote the democratic party's ability to condone the federally sanctioned eradication of innocent human life is indicative of the moral ambivalence. the ruling democratic party and idelaunlical affiliates have facilitated the demise of christian heritage

that is echoed in a 2015 article kazmierczak wrote against same sex marriage he wrote the sexual revolution sought public affirmation for the lie that marriage, sexuality, gender, identity, and even the unborn child must yield to the erotic desires of liberated adults before becoming a judge in 2019 matthew kazmierczak worked on the deputy counsel for the liberty law firm first liberty that is the man donald trump nominated to the federal bench senator richard blumenthal asked kazmierczak about the place religious convictions should have in a courtroom. >> do judges ever apply their religious convictions in the course of making decisions on the bench, district court judge

included >> they should not >> do you believe they do? >> senator, in working in the private government and non-profit sector i can't recall an instance where i observed a judge imposing their religion, but i will say for the record that it is inappropriate for an article iii judge to do so >> that was the response given by the man who in the coming days will decide a case that could up end access in one of the drugs in medication abortions nationwide they brought a case against the fda in november to challenge the agency's approval of the abortion drug mifepristone, an approval that came two decades ago. it's a group founded in the 90s by conservative christian lawyers. it has a history failed lawsuits targeting transgender student

athletes that group on behalf of anti-abortion organizers and doctors claims that the fda lacked the authority to prove mifepristone and did not adequately study its safety and efficacy alliance defending freedom lawyers want the judge to issue a preliminary injunction ordering the fda to withdraw or extend its approval of mifepristone that would effectively block access to judge entirely he reportedly began the meeting by enlisting the clerk to say let us pray, which is a typical occurrence in kazmierczak's courtroom and then they were off. the hearing ran a little longer than four hours. the plaintiffs and defense each had two hours to state their case the plaintiffs tried to make the case the drug wasn't properly vetted when it was in 2000

nbc reporters in the courtroom today said kazmierczak seemed sympathetic to the challenge brought by alliance defending freedom offering the plaintiffs more windows than the defense to clarify and elaborate on their arguments. he also asked plaintiffs if they could offer another example of a drug with long-standing approval being pulled from the shelves. they said no in the end he told lawyers both sides presented strong cases and he would make a decision as soon as possible. but both sides could continue to submit relevant examples of case law in the days and weeks to come so it might not be long before we know how this judge will rule his decision could be the end of mifepristone it could be none of the above, but it is a perilous time for women concerned about access to reproductive choice. this is not just about women and pregnant people in texas it's about people in georgia, pennsylvania, vermont and several others where eliminating

access to mifepristone will mean the percentage of counties with even one abortion provider will drop drastically to less than 3% in some states that is a huge access problem for people across the united states who might one day need abortion care, and that is what is at stake. joining us now is melissa marie, law professor and co-host of the strict scrutiny podcast, and jessica, writer of the every day newsletter thank you both for being here for this well, this day and what a day it's been. for people still confused how it is possible you can make the argument a drug that's been in the market for 23 years here i think almost 30 years in europe can possibly be questioned for its safety and efficacy. what is the argument alliance freedom is making? >> alliance is basically arguing the fda did not take the

requisite procedures in approving this drug 20 years ago. of course the fda has said, well, you've had a lot of time to make that argument. and they note there was a reapproval in 2016 where they actually loosened restrictions on the availability of mifepristone and that would be the opportunity to make the argument as well and they didn't. they're also arguing there was an injury to the doctors bringing this claim, representing these pro-life positions arguing their patients are harmed and they run into a kind of tricky problem because many conservative justices on the supreme court for years have said physicians cannot raise the claims of their patients enabortion cases, although the court has allowed that to go forward but it's always over the objectives of conservative judges >> it's usually when those doctors are trying to advocate that their patients deserve more choice >> it's interesting here judge kazmierczak is not touting what

has ordinarily been the conservative party line for physicians, third standing positions to make these claims because the patients and doctors are misalign here, which is not usually the case there's a lot here why is this case in judge kazmierczak's chambers along with these other hot buttoned issues because he's the only judge in this amarillo, texas. you're guaranteed to get judge kazmierczak and when you're guaranteed you think you know exactly -- >> what you're going to get. jessica, i didn't realize this attempt to kind of unwind access to mifepristone has been going on for decades when it was first approved it was controversial, but pro-life -- the anti-abortion movement has been after the fda approval for almost 20 years now. is that right? >> oh, yeah, they've been after it forever because they know

over half of women ending their pregnancies using medication abortion they know it's ease wrae know it's safe, and they're terrified by it. and we're seeing in what happened today they don't care about science and it seems the judge doesn't either >> what is so shocking about arguing against the safety and efficacy of a medicine -- like when it first comes out maybe you can make that case, but literally the argument hasn't changed at all why -- is it kazmierczak's ascension to the bench why is this happening now? is it dobbs, a catalytic event >> it's dobbs, kazmierczak they're choosing their moment. they think they have science on their side obviously they don't every single statistic they put forward is fall. less than a third of 1% of women who take it have serious complications. but they think this is their moment >> they're also making in the argument for standing, right,

they're saying not only is it they're saying these are the complications clause, they're saying women who terminate effectively -- i'm paraphrasing here they say women who choose to end their pregnancies are denying the doctors effectively of a patient -- a client base if you will because they can't offer them pregnancy care. >> they're basically arguing there is this massive abortion industry, and when these medications are used to end a pregnancy it's denying the physicians the opportunity to do surgically, to do it procedurally, and again this plays into a lot of the rhetoric the pro-life movement has used for years. again, this idea there is an industry of abortion providers who are preying upon women who are desperate and don't know what their choices are, and instead they push abortion on them again, these lawsuits should also be understood as dispersive moments, and this is part of building a rhetoric, a

rhetorical rhetoric if you will. >> how are we reading the behaviors of the last few days -- i just saw that facial expression the whole hearing was kept -- kazmierczak wanted no one to find out this hearing was happening. "the washington post" effectively leaked news of it. it's four hours, they're in court, and it sounds like he is open to the arguments being made by the adf it is a fete compli here >> even though it took the fda four years to approve the medication so i am very nervous i think everyone sort of expects it to come down on not the pro-choice side. and i think no matter what the fda does or the biden administration does, what the

impact looks like on the ground is going to be incredibly, incredibly dangerous for women because of the chaos >> so walk me through. if he does hand down a preliminary injunction, the biden administration, the doj is going to appeal this, right? and does this go to the supreme court do you think >> there are a lot of things that could be done the fda could say, you're right, we didn't do the right protocols even though it was reviewed for 20 years before it was approved here in 2000 that could be pending. maybe medication abortion would be available in that circumstance because the fda is pending, but what we may ultimately have a clash between the agency itself and this federal judge. can that's harder to say it's exactly as jessica said in a situation like that where you have these two very powerful entities clashing, the administrative state and the judiciary what you have is confusion, and doctors won't know they should provide it. pharmacists won't know if they should dispense it, and women

won't know if it's available just a landscape of utter confusion and chaos which is more effective perhaps than any ban at this point. >> and we showed that -- we can pull it back up that map that shows the states that are going to be affected by this chaos, jessica. and it's not just what you think of deep red states it's colorado. it's vermont it's new hampshire i mean is the expectation that, you know, the chaos will seem less chaotic in states where there's a more progressive attitude towards reproductive choice what options are there >> i would like to think so, but i am really nervous what's going to happen on the ground when you're talking about individual doctors who have a lot of reasonable fear, individual pharmacists already seeing refused medication, right, even before this decision comes down. and so i am really worried that's why every time i talk about this issuen my newsletter i tell everyone who can get

pregnant should have abortion medication in their medicine cabinet. you can get it whether you're pregnant or not. you should have it on hand whether it's for yourself or for a friend hopefully it won't come to that. i really do hope that. >> the idea we're at the stage of the game where people who follow this issue are saying stockpile this medication because you may not be able to get it or someone you love may not be able to get it, it's a terrifying hands made tale dystopia to imagine america is in that place. is there anything the biden administration can be doing at this juncture to urge the idea not to abide kazmierczak's ruling what can the white house do in this >> this was a drug that was reviewed it was reviewed by the fda, approved by the fda and done so after 20 years of other testing in europe. and it has a record here in the united states of 23 years of safe use and i think the administration

can lean on that to the extent there needs to be a new review procedure, fine we have the evidence and this, again, is playing with women's lives. all this is. it's a game of brinkmanship with women in the balance >> i will say the other part of the two drug regimen for abortion medication. number one, jessica, that is not an easier -- that drug has side effects for women. taking mifepristone off the market would mean women have to rely on something less effective and has more side effects, is that right >> it does it's more uncomfortable, more painful. i think while it is effective and a lot of doctors are planning on using miff mifepristone protocol there's a lot of fear there. it's not what is the safest and most effectivech and we know what is the safest and most

effective because we've been doing it for over 20 years >> do you think the second drug is potentially at risk here? a lot of people would say they would never do that, but this has been on the market for -- >> i don't believe they could never do that. >> remember all those people saying -- mifepristone has other uses and its essential uses for treating gastric ulcers and things of that nature. but this is a movement completely organized and focused on the complete and total abolition of legal abortion in this country, and i think you have to take them at their word. >> believe them when they tell you who they are thank you for joining me today as always. thank you for your wisdom. we have a lot more to get to tonight including the potential ripple effect if drug kazmierczak undoes the fda approval of one drug republicans don't like what other drugs could be next eye opening reporting from a georgia special grand jury plus new testimony today in new

york city. all that may spell double trouble for a man named donald trump. that is next

my role is now for the time being over i have complied with every request that was asked of me by the district attorney's office so that they could review this case as best as they possibly can. my position is that at the end of the day donald trump needs to be held accountable for his dirty deeds if, in fact, that's the way it will play out, plain and simple >> that was former trump fixer and attorney michael cohen after testifying, again, before a grand jury in the manhattan d.a.'s hush money investigation of donald trump. this is the second time this week that mr. cohen has appeared before that grand jury prosecutors via zoom by stormy

daniels, the adult film star trump allegedly paid hush money to prior to the 2016 election in order to cover up an alleged affair you heard michael cohen there say his role for the time being is over, which could be an indication the manhattan d.a. is wrapping up the grand jury portion of the investigation if that is, indeed, the case it means prosecutors could soon make a decision about whether or not to bring criminal charges against a former president of the united states for the first time ever. that in and of itself would, of course, be historic. but this is the trump era, and history making offenses like say impeachments or a special counsel investigation, those often come at two for the price of one, which why we're also watching prosecutors who may be close to a decision of their own on whether or not to indict the former president for his scheme in trying to overturn georgia's election results

the jurors listened to audio of trump calling the late georgia house speaker and asking him to convene a special session of the georgia legislature to overturn joe biden's victory. he rejected trump's request. according to one juror who described the call to the paper, the speaker basically cut the president off and said i will do everything in my power i think is appropriate he just basically took the wind out of the sales well, thank you, is all the president could say. this is now the third phone call that we know of in which donald trump pressured georgia officials to try and help him overturn the results of the 2020 election one unidentified juror also hinted at the idea we still have more to learn from this investigation. quote, a lot's going to come out sooner or later.

it's going to be massive it's going to be massive joining us now is michael moore, former u.s. attorney for the middle district of georgia and a current partner at the law firm moore hall michael, thank you for being here >> glad to be with you >> i am very interested of the fact we now know of a third call the president himself made to try and somehow overturn the results of the 2020 election we know the call to brad raffensperger, the secretary of state. we know about the call to francis watson, who's thochief elections officer in the secretary of state's office. how damning is that evidence as you look at this case? >> well, i'm glad to be with you. i do think it's a good piece of evidence i think it gives you a good picture of trump's state of mind and his intent

it tells you that he knew there was a problem so then when you take that call in conjunction with the call he made to raffensperger, it all starts to be as clear as it could be basically i think it's an indication trump knew he had problems but he was taking every avenue he could to try to overturn the election in georgia including references about possible criminal problems raffensperger may have or talking about these other votes. >> lindsey graham also quoted by one of these jurors as suggesting trump would believe

anything about the election. this is the quote. he said during that time if somebody had told trump aliens came down and stole trump ballots, trump would have believed it. what does that mean legally i guess is my question does that suggest trump's state of mind was something other than genuinely believing the 2020 election was stolen? >> i think he absolutely knew he had lost the election. while we're here i mean he knew exactly where he was and what the truth was. there's one side that says maybe he was a candidate who lost a race and he's doing everything he can to see if there's a path to victory he went way beyond that, and this has been the clearest case i think that she has it's almost like a taped confession before there's ever a

trial, before there's an interrogation and arrest by a police officer you've got this guy admitting and essentially saying give me this exact number of votes, i've got to find out how to do this and that's going to be the problem down the road. the grand jury's statements that's not usually the case but it is giving us some insight into what's out there. >> and i want to return to that in a second, the notion these jurors are talking to the press. but before i do just generally speaking the argument we usually hear from team trump is that he legitimately believed the election might have been stolen and that therefore excuses him do you think that argument has any merit? do you think anybody is buying that at this point, and do you think that's a viable path for trump attorneys to take if he is indicted, for example, by the potential counsel? >> i think any of us would be a

fool to try to think rationally about something that an irrational person thinks about that, and that would be him. who knows what he believes, but the truth that the time was he'd been told and he was continuing to run-down every path he could including what i think was a call to put pressure on raffensperger, and that's going to be his problem. if he wants to come say i've had this long state of mind, i've held this long held belief and wants to put up evidence, i don't think he's going to get very far with that there are other reasons the case may have some issues but whether or not he actually believed it, i think there'll be a lot of witnesses around the courthouse

explaining, you know, we had told him what the truth was. >> michael, i've got to ask you as we talk about one d.a.'s investigation, the new york d.a.'s investigation, alvin bragg's investigation, the fact michael cohon husband wrapped up his testimony, should we read anything into that in your opinion and the fact stormy daniels spoke via zoom to prosecutors but hasn't testified formally in front of the grand jury, does that mean this could go on? where do you land when we look at the details out of that case? >> i think he's close to making a decision i wegs these prosecutors would get somewhere in a room together and talk about who has the strongest case and who's got the most evidence and who can actually do something as opposed to worrying about who's going to be the first one at the watering trough i'm afraid that's where we're at, and i don't find the case very compelling when we're talking about a case as old as the new york case over a

misdemeanor charge, which they think maybe if they charge a certain way or have certain evidence added to it to might become a felony. i don't think that's a case you want to bring first. i think we ought to have jack smith and fani willis and our new york prosecutor friends to get together and talk about what they have and the resources and strength to move the case through. because a weak case is going to make bad law for those other cases that might be stronger and so that's got to be something they think about it's not to say it's not a crime, not to say he didn't do something wrong, not to say the payments were okay but it is to say we are talking about charted waters here. we're talking about a historical decisions that's got to be made. well, you know, there's only so many cays you can bring, and the idea they ought to cooperate seems to make a lot of sense to at least have a discussion

and maybe they've had that i hope they have i hope they've met somewhere in secret we don't know about i hope they really put their heads together to think about who's got the best cases, we think about who can actually get a conviction and who can survive an appeal that's going to take its way unquestionally after the supreme court. >> let's hope everyone is secretly talking to each other michael moore, thank you for your time and expertise on this topic. really appreciate it >> it's always a pleasure. we still have more to come tonight including what the assault over the fda on abortion medication might mean for other drugs that people take every day. plus not one but two stories about right-wing figures and yachts and alleged or potential crimes that is next have you thought about your wish? i wish that shaq was my real life big brother.

awe. what's up little bro? ♪♪ i'm not touching you, i'm not touching you! ♪♪ turns out, some wishes do come true. and it turns out the general is a quality insurance company that's been saving people money for nearly 60 years. mom! for a great low rate, and nearly 60 years of quality coverage make the right call and go with the general.

hey guys, detect this: living with hiv, i learned that i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is for some adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment or replacing their current hiv-1 regimen. detect this: no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. research shows people who take hiv treatment as prescribed and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit hiv through sex. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you take dofetilide. taking dovato with dofetilide can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. hepatitis b can become harder to treat while on dovato.

don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor, as your hepatitis b may worsen or become life-threatening. serious or life-threatening side effects can occur, including allergic reactions, lactic acid buildup, and liver problems... if you have a rash or other allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are, may be, or plan to be pregnant. dovato may harm your unborn baby. use effective birth control while on dovato. do not breastfeed while taking dovato. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato.

this is a $19 million yacht named the neverland. it sleeps 12 people plus staff the thing is literally a mansion on water, and it has an infinity pool on top of theuate in case you can't find a place to swim while on this literal boat on the water. now, a lot of the branding in this ad says namaste because

that was the name of thisuate. the reason it's now the neverland yacht is because it changed owners and changed orchestrated by a deal than none other than republican congressman and serial liar george santos as they look into mr. santos' mysterious finances. congressman santos denies any wrongdoing, but on its face this does not look good santos brokered the yacht sale between two of his wealthy donors and previously bragged to reporters about getting referral fee of anywhere between $200,000 and $400,000 from brokering $20 million yacht sales, which at worst begs the criminal question of whether this $19 million yacht sale was designed to inject more money into santos' campaign than allowed by campaign finance law at or at

best whether santos used his campaign to brush shoulders with the elite in turn enrich himself. so that was the first alleged republican yacht financial crime story today but there's actually another one. you may remember this $28 million yacht, the lady may. mostly because it's the mega yacht trump strategist steve bannon was arrested on in 2020 bannon was arrested on that yacht for allegedly defrauding investors in his campaign that planned to crowd fund building on the mexican border. bannon himself got off thanks to a pardon from president trump. it turns out that boat, the yacht bannon was resting on, the lady may, that yacht itself was also allegedly bought with ill-gotten gains by this guy the owner of that yacht a fugitive chinese billionaire

he was arrested this morning on charges that he also defrauded investors in his conservative business in addition to the yacht the justice department alleges he defrauded investors to buy a 60,000 square foot mansion, a $3.5 million ferrari and not one but two $36,000 mattresses because why not? why two. if you have been awake in the past eight years you know how influential steve bannon has become to the republican party part of the alleged fraud was convincing people to invest more than $450 politicalian in a media venture of his called gtv and then pocketing tons of that money himself. beyond the grift gtv pushed

information like vaccines and qanon and pivotally spread that disinformation on spanish and chinese language social media right here in america all with well paid consulting help from steve bannon so they're also the founders of the anti-chinese communist party lobbying group, the new federal state of china, which among other things was one of the official sponsors of cpac, as in the conservative political action conference. so lots of republican figures in the same boat tonight or boats the alleged financial crime boat turns out it's a lot bigger than we thought it's kind of a mansion on the water. we have still more ahead tonight including watching republicans stumble trying to define their newest four-letter word, one that is spelled w-o-k-e, and plus first they came from abortions medications, will covid be next

stay with us ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com. need a backup plan? get plan b one-step. plan b helps prevent pregnancy before it starts by temporarily delaying ovulation—and you can resume your regular birth control right away. i've got this. ♪♪

(woman) oh. oh! hi there. you're jonathan, right? the 995 plan! i've got this. yes, from colonial penn. your 995 plan fits my budget just right. excuse me? aren't you jonathan from tv, that 995 plan? yes, from colonial penn. i love your lifetime rate lock. that's what sold me. she thinks you're jonathan, with the 995 plan. -are you? -yes, from colonial penn. we were concerned we couldn't get coverage, but it was easy with the 995 plan. -thank you. -you're welcome. i'm jonathan for colonial penn life insurance company. this guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance plan is our #1 most popular plan. it's loaded with guarantees. if you're age 50 to 85, $9.95 a month buys whole life insurance with guaranteed acceptance. you cannot be turned down for any health reason. there are no health questions and no medical exam. and here's another guarantee you can count on:

guaranteed lifetime coverage. your insurance can never be cancelled. just pay your premiums. guaranteed lifetime rate lock. your rate can never increase. pardon me, i'm curious. how can i learn more about this popular 995 plan? it's easy. just call the toll-free number for free information. (soft music) ♪ as we speak, the future of the fda as the highest authority in the country for ensuring the safety, efficacy and security of drug, that authority is at risk. that is because inside that courtroom in amarillo, texas, anti-abortion groups are asking the federal judge matthew kazmierczak to rescasoned the fa

approval of mifepristone this case has already opened the door to two serious questions. one, what is the role of the courts in reduing the fda approval of drugs? and secondly what is the implication of other drugs being taken off the market because conservatives find them controversial? governor ron desantis has launched a public health policy committee to counter recommendations from the fda and cdc on covid vaccines. vaccines proved by the fda has been safely administered to over $269 269 million americans. in idaho republican lawmakers are going even further they introduced a bill last month that would criminalize the administration of mrna vaccines as in all types of m hp rna vaccines like vaccines for rabies or the flu. and then there are the 97 bills in 27 states that would ban

gender affirming care and that includes hormone therapy, which, by the way is also commonly used in menopause and finally there are republican efforts to target birth control. in 2021 conservative republicans in the missouri legislature tried to block medicaid funding from going to groups including planned parenthood the lawmakers further targeted contraceptives often sold under the name plan b. it was a medication approved by the fda back in 1999 if a texas judge sides with conservative groups to block the use of a drug safely used over 20 years, what is to say any drug that runs afoul of conservative principles stays safely on the shelf? joining us now is new york times columnist and msnbc contributor michelle goldberg. good to see you. and i don't want to be an alarmist here. i don't want to say the sky is falling, but the precedent this

kazmierczak case could set if he does in fact order a withdrawal of the fda's approval of could be profound across pharmacies and the country. >> as far as the immediate impact on people and women who need abortions there's a couple pieces there's the utter lawlessness of it i think when the supreme court refused to enjoin texas from their abortion bounty act, sb8, which was such a violation of what was constitutional precedent. >> for those not that familiar, that's the one that effectively criminalizes the act of someone helping seek or get an abortion. >> it was such a blatant end run around roe it was so -- the legal arguments for it were so outrageous the supreme court basically said we don't care i think it shocked a lot of people even pro-choice people who are very cynical about the

supreme court, oh, they can't possibly allow this. but it was a sign i think of all bets are off, that these people have been put into these various courts to do the bidding of the far right, and that's what they're going to do. and the legal arguments are almost irrelevant. and, you know, if they're irrelevant for abortion, i wouldn't be surprised if they were irrelevant if they try to bring up a case against plan b i think it's also interesting to note that they have been one of the anti-abortion sides arguments in this case before kazmierczak is about the com stock laws, you know, those old laws that were used to ban the mailing of contraception, the mailing of birth control information. they basically want to was rect the laws and say they apply here and there's a lot more -- there's many things besides abortion pills the com stock

laws can apply to. >> it's coming to the particular moment where the kazmierczak ruling could have a profound effect how they see the courts as tools to do what they can't do legislatively to punish and marginalalize members of the lgbtq community in particular, it concerns me when i think about this landscape oh, drug therapies used specifically in transition or hormone therapy or gender affirming care, that feels it's right for at least some kind of lawsuit if not an actual legal success here to get that stuff out of doctors offices, out of pharmacies where it's helping people who need it >> right and one of questions here is whether the -- whether states can just disregard or overrule the fda. one of the consequences of dobbs has just been this total fracture in the legal landscape where you cross the state border and you're in a totally different legal regime when it comes to your body yes, do i think we'll see -- we're already seeing states banning hormone therapy not just for minors but for people 18,

20, 21 i think that for the same reason that the second drug in the medication abortion regimen is a little bit safer than mifepristone because it has other uses, it's used for ulcers -- >> that's the insurance policy >> right, that puberty blockers are given to kids who have premature puberty. hormones are used for aging -- >> for menopauseal women >> right, so whether republicans are going to want to ban testosterone one thing presumably them -- >> that's the golden ticket. that's also reflective of this very, very distressing trend of the courts denying settled science, right i think we can't -- like the fda approved these drugs they are safe, they are effective. there are case studies to prove that there's a wide body of evidence, and then you have these christian fundamentalist

justices who seem to want to throw science away in the name of christian doctrine. >> i think it's been a very long history on the far-right ofcrying these alternative institutions, alternative legal institution, alternative medical institution. they're now in a position to impose on everyone else. >> it's now judges themselves. michelle goldberg, one of my favorite thinkers and talkers, thank you my friend. we'll be right back. ve snoring. so you can both stay comfortable all night save $1,200 on the sleep number 360 i10 smart bed. only for a limited time.

i wish that shaq was my real life big brother. what's up, little bro? turns out, some wishes do come true.

and it turns out the general is a quality insurance company that's been saving people money for nearly 60 years. for a great low rate, and nearly 60 years of quality coverage- go with the general.

♪♪ ♪♪ get $1500 purchase allowance on a 2023 cadillac xt5 and xt6. ♪♪ visit your local cadillac dealer today.

the word is woke, but what do conservatives think it means? >> would you mind defining woke because it's come up a couple of times and i want to make sure we're on all the same page >> so, i mean, woke is sort of the idea that -- this is going to be one of those moments that goes viral i mean woke is something very hard to dephene and we've spent an entire chapter defining it. it is sort of the understanding that we need to totally reimagine and redo society in order to create hierarchies of oppression >> hard to define.

redo society, something about oppression a conservative commentator and author who's studied wokism and written in her estimation entire chapters on it, and yeah, yeah sure it is tricky. so far the only person to define what woke actually is florida governor ron desantis. late last year his staffers were asked to define woke in court. his communications director defined woke as a slang term for activism, progressive activism his general counsel added woke is the belief there are systemic injustice in american society and the need to adjust them, which sounds right, maybe even sort of sensible maybe that's why the anti-woke movement has such a hard time with it. sometimes it's what you don't say that speaks volumes. and that is our show for tonight. we will see you again tomorrow "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next i do think you would be allowed to self-surrender, if you have any c