it's definitely worth trying. it is an amazing product. "the new york times" just crossed a story that doj prosecutors subpoenaed surveillance footage from trump's new jersey club and prosecutors did consider whether they should try to issue another search warrant there but ultimately decided under the legal requirement they did not have bulletproof probable cause to conduct what would have been another search of a trump property. that's a new story. that's an update on it. i'm sure we'll have more as the night unfolds. "the reidout" with joy reid starts now. tonight on "the reidout" -- >> there was no document. that was a massive amount of papers and everything else, talking about iran and other

things. and it may have been held up or may not, but that was not a document. i didn't have a document per se. >> oh, gosh. an audio recording undercuts trump's pathetic defense in the classified documents case as the doj reportedly barrels forward on its investigation of his attempt to overturn the 2020 election. also tonight, a supreme court victory for voters and democracy. in a defeat for republicans who wanted to strip state courts of any role in running federal elections and give politicians the final say. plus, ron desantis admits he wants to rewrite the constitution so that right-wing politicians can decide whether people born in this country can legally be considered u.s. citizens. we begin tonight with a frequent and losing strategy by the twice impeached, twice indicted former president. whenever he finds himself stuck in a perilous legal mess of his own making, he goes full orwell and just tells the world don't

believe your lying eyes. >> stick with us, don't believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news. just remember what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening. >> it was the same during his first impeachment over his call with the ukrainian president, pressuring him to dig up dirt on joe biden ahead of the 2020 election. trump kept saying, read the transcript, as if by doing so, it would magically present a different conversation. he even mentioned it again this afternoon. >> they ended up impeaching me over a perfect phone call. congratulations on winning. that was a call to ukraine. >> it was the same during his second impeachment over his role in the january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol. regarding his call to georgia's secretary of state pressuring him to find the votes to overturn the election, trump told everyone to just listen to his perfect call, where nothing

wrong was said. and now, as trump faces the most serious charges he's ever faced, the special counsel's indictment over his mishandling of classified documents, he's at it again. probably the biggest bombshell within the 49-page indictment was the description of a conversation trump had in 2021 at his new jersey golf club with two staffers, a publisher, and a writer. none of whom possessed a security clearance, but that didn't stop trump from discussing classified documents about a military plan to attack iran that he says came from his former joint chief's chairman, mark milley. nbc news has obtained the audio of that conversation and it puts trump's own voice to the words we read in the indictment. >> except it is highly confidential, secret. this is secret information. look at this. and you know, he said he wanted to attack iran. these are the papers. this was done by the military

and given to me. i think we can probably -- >> we'll have to see. we'll try to -- >> declassify it. as president, i could have declassified it. now i can't. >> now we have a problem. >> isn't that interesting? it's so cool. >> so cool. at the time, there was plenty of media reporting on how general milley and others had tried to keep trump from acting out and potentially attacking a foreign country like iran in the waning months of his presidency. now, it should be noted the pentagon draws up military plans for every possible situation. it doesn't mean they actually wanted to bomb iran. by the way, our civilian controlled military doesn't do what it wants. it can only do what the commander in chief says. but all that aside, the recording reveals that trump in his own words confirmed that not only was he showing his guests highly confidential information, but that it also wasn't declassified. as he's repeatedly claimed over

the past year, and yes, donald, highly classified documents may be so cool, but there's a reason why they're not meant to be shared with just anyone. there is a reason that you need to have a security clearance, and there is a reason why such highly sensitive documents pertaining to our country's national security belong to the government. and not to a sad, failed former president. but like i said, trump would have you not believe your own ears. in a posting on his wanna be twitter platform, trump claims that special counsel jack smith somehow altered or he says, spun the tape, but nonetheless called it, quote, actually an exoneration rather than what they would have you believe. joining me now is neal katyal, former acting u.s. solicitor general and msnbc legal analyst, and by the way, he had a big win at the supreme court today. we'll have more on that later, and michael steele, former rnc chair, msnbc political analyst and host of the michael steele

podcast and occasional host of the show. neil, you have the disadvantage of not being here. donald trump, weirdly enough, claims that tape is somehow an exoneration. it seems, i'm not a lawyer, to be the opposite. your thoughts. >> yeah, i don't know if donald trump has spent too much time at the creative writers workshop or something because, like, there's just no way to read that tape as anything but a smoking gun. it is trump admitting to the crime and committing a new crime on the tape. so he's showing these highly classified documents on that tape. and then saying, oh, this is classified and i don't have the power to declassify it. so it blows a hole in everything he's ever said, and ultimately, joy, listening to the tape, i was disgusted because anyone who has handled national security materials, i did, my former job at the justice department was national security adviser, you really recognize the seriousness

of those materials. americans risk their lives to generate that information. and our allies do as well. to treat it so cavalierly and to say on the tape, oh, it's so cool that i have these documents, i mean, give me a break. that is criminal behavior. it's the most reprehensible behavior for anyone who knows anything about national security. >> i mean, michael, you have been around a lot of politicians. you have been in the game for a hot minute. the way he's, you know, you can hear him waving the stuff around and talking about it. you would think he was talking about, like, swag from the white house. not military plans on attacking iran. presidents get these things drawn up all the time. the fact he treated it so casually and he and the people around him didn't understand they were committing a crime, it's kind of shocking he can tie his own shoes if that's his level of acumen. >> giving a little deference if you will to the other

individuals in the room, they probable thought these were documents that had been declassified until that awkward moment where he said, well, i could have declassified these, but i didn't. you listen to the laughter afterwards, oh, really. look, the reality of it is, donald trump had a plan for these papers. regardless of what anything you want to say, he saw this as items that he could use to leverage for payment, for whatever other interests he has that he wants to say, hey, i got this if you give me that, you can have it too. why else? i mean, you don't walk out with all these boxes to put them in a bathroom. right? you don't leave the white house and take this stuff unless you intend to do something with it, because if nothing else, i can see if he said this is for my presidential library and i thought we were transitioning to that. no. this is the reality now, and neil is absolutely right. the worst part of this is that

of everybody, everybody in the room, he of all people should know the value of the information he has because he has generals, national security advisers telling him the sensitivities around these documents and why it's important they be kept secret. >> to that very point, the thing that's also kind of alarming is when you think about what jack smith has known and how long he has known it, he referenced very specifically, and it doesn't seem to me that jack smith is doing anything by accident. in the indictment, they were very specific about conversations including this one, and now we hear the tape of it. this is new "new york times" reporting, previously unreported details of the investigation showed prosecutors working for mr. smith have subpoenaed surveillance footage from bed menster much like they did from mar-a-lago and fought a battle with trump's lawyers late last year over how best to search the new jersey property. at one point in the early fall of last year, investigators went so far as to discuss executing a search warrant at bedminster,

according to two people briefed on the matter. investigators were concerned more documents were stashed at the club and the only way to account for them was to search the property. one of the people said the justice department lacked probable cause to get a warrant from a judge. so now we know, neil, there was a consideration of doing a search at bedminster too. what does that say to you about the possibility now that they have had these tapes, let's be clear, that there could be a second set of charges that come out of the dissemination that happened apparently in new jersey? >> yes, i think that's very possible here, and joy, you and i have talked for a long time about how it was a little unusual for the last year that the reporting was all about mar-a-lago, mar-a-lago, when we knew trump used bedminster and other places. so it's not surprising to me that jack smith started to realize that there were classified documents in other places, not just mar-a-lago. as that audiotape shows. so trump was running thing like

a mcdonald's franchise with stolen documents in different places and you could go to any of the outlets and get served up with them if the price was right or whatever. he was looking for, if he needed you to think he was cool in a particular place. so what smith has done here is to obtain this tape, which shows trump basically committing the crime of dissemination of classified information at bedminster, so that sets up a second series of charges that can be made in new jersey. and maybe smith is holding that in his pocket because he wants to see the time table of the florida case. but it is certainly possible now there's another whole set of indictments besides the january 6th stuff that we have been talking about with jack smith in the lead and besides the mar-a-lago stuff, there may now be another bedminster indictment. >> and to stay with you for a second, you also got donald trump's secret service agents at

least half a dozen now being interviewed. you seem to have movement on fake electors that there's been a lot of movement there in terms of what looks like jack smith potentially building a case there. how would all of these cases essentially be tried or proffered at once? because it feels like there are just jack smith alone could do three or four cases himself. >> yeah, no, exactly. if this were a tv show, we're only like in season two of what's likely to be a five or six-season special at this point. jack smith is certainly moving, it looks to me, to indict trump for january 6th. the secret service bringing them in to testify before the grand jury is an extraordinary step. you know, the secret service agents were literally in the room or the car where all this stuff happened on january 6th and in the days before january 6th. and there is no privilege for secret service agents. bill clinton tried to assert a

privilege back in 1999 and the u.s. supreme court rejected it. i think these cases will be staggered. you don't get like an extra benefit because you're a serial criminal and get to delay them all. you -- so they will all go to trial. and they will be staggered in some way, shape, or form. >> you know, michael, you wonder what the tolerance level is of the republican party for this. i mean, he's going to be traveling back and forth theoretically from court to court to court to rally to rally. there's the e. jean carroll civil case and that's a case about disparaging a woman after sexually abusing her and being found liable for doing that. what is the tolerance level? it feels like kevin mccarthy has an infinite tolerance level, and he's willing to destroy his own career, his own reputation, and his party. but in terms of -- is there any breaking point where people say okay, this guy can't be our nominee? >> no, there isn't.

and it's largely driven by the fact that a significant portion, some close to 40% of rank and file republicans are behind donald trump. they have not moved off him from the moment the "access hollywood" tapes were revealed to the present day. in fact, his power and hold and grip has strengthened in that regard. so from the political leadership standpoint, which is why mitch mcconnell has been so quiet. >> so quiet. >> so quiet. i don't know if anybody has noticed that. >> i forgot he existed. >> thank you, and he's very happy for that. he wants that because he's charting a course separate and apart from what you're going to see potentially play out in the house and at the white house. his goal is to become majority leader again and focus his team on how they create a narrative around the biden economy, the biden border, et cetera. and so you see these lines bifurcating and splitting in different directions where the house, mccarthy, and that crew are holding firm, making excuses

and explanations for trump. and the rest are like, okay, we're ready to move on. but here's the dirty little part of this. they're not going to be able to get that far away from it, because when these cases start exploding in court battles, right, that are going to play out on national television in the middle of a presidential race, those senatorial candidates, gubernatorial candidates, house candidates, dogcatcher candidates with an r behind their names have to account to the voters on the matter being discussed and pick a side. that becomes a problem. >> he's an anvil around their necks. the other piece that doesn't get, i don't think, enough attention is walt nauta, who is the other person that has been dragged into this by donald trump willingly, apparently. he lied to the fbi. he still doesn't have a local attorney. for some reason, he can't seem to find a lawyer in the state of florida who can represent him. he's being -- what lawyer he has

is out of state lawyer is being paid by donald trump's pac. do they get tried together in this particular case in florida? what happens to him? is he going to wind up with a public defender at some point? at some point, doesn't there have to be a final date where he has to have a lawyer? i think july 6th is the next date on the calendar where he can be arraigned. >> i think july 6th is the current deadline. it's got to hold because the timing is really important. to me, the most interesting thing, look, this is a big case. most lawyers would like to be in the center of this. this may be televised on live tv. good for someone's career if this were an ordinary criminal case. this is not because donald trump, you know, runs roughshod over his own lawyers, let alone the lawyer for his valet. so i think what you're seeing is a lot of lawyers with a lot of reluctance to take a case like this and worry about their reputations, their livelihood,

perhaps even their safety because trump might do something. >> by the way, walt nauta doesn't have $3 million to pay somebody in advance, which is probably making it more difficult for him than trump who was able to do that with his supporters' money. >> i'm sure that donald trump would like to pay some lawyer many millions of dollars to defend walt nauta because that is after all the mob playbook. pay off -- pay the legal bills of everyone else. you have control over them. >> yes indeed. we're going to talk more about this. we'll bring both of you back. i'm going to keep neil. it's a hostage situation now for neil. we're going to discuss a big decision from the supreme court that had the potential to completely upend american elections. neil gave an oral argument before the court in that very case. "the reidout" continues and we'll discuss after this. s aftes

with a majority of my patience with sensitivity, i see irritated gums and weak enamel. sensodyne sensitivity gum & enamel relieves sensitivity, helps restore gum health, and rehardens enamel. i'm a big advocate of recommending things that i know work.

when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... being me. keep being you... and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v

to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today. is it possible to protect my business from cyber threats? biktarvy can go with you. it is, with comcast business. helping every connected device stay protected. yours. your employees'. even... susan? hers, too. safe. secure. and powered by the next generation 10g network. with comcast business, advanced security isn't just possible.

it's happening. get started wih fast spees and advanced security for $49.99a month for 12 monts plus ask how to get up to a $750 prepaid card with qualifying internet. hi, i'm katie, i've lost 110 pounds on golo in just over a year. golo is different than other programs i had been on because i was specifically looking for something that helped with insulin resistance. i had had conversations with my physician indicating that that was probably an issue that i was facing and making it more difficult for me to sustain weight loss. golo has been more sustainable. i can fit it into family life, i can make meals that the whole family will enjoy. it just works in everyday life as a mom.

american voters can breathe sighs of relief, at least for now, that stealing an election didn't become any ease. . the supreme court shut down a radical theory to upend american elections that's been more than 20 years in the making. you probably don't remember this moment from the 2000 election when republican lawmakers in florida held a hearing to consider appointing their own presidential electors for george w. bush, regardless of the results of a recount ordered by the florida supreme court. with testimony from california law professor john eastman. >> here, the power delegated to

you by article 2 section 1 is a power, it knows no other appeal. we cannot view those congressional statutes as altering your plenary power you have directly by the constitution of the united states. >> eastman advocated a fringe legal theory, the independent state legislature theory, which claims that state legislatures have broad, unchecked authority to set election rules under the constitution's elections clause. he later pushed the theory in the lead-up of january 6th. trying to get slates of fake electors submitted in key states to hand the 2020 election to donald trump. but today, the supreme court rejected taking american democracy into the abyss in a 6-3 ruling, the court rejected the independent state legislature theory in moore v. harper, a case about north carolina's congressional map. chief justice john roberts wrote for the majority, quote, the

elections clause does not insulate state legislatures from the ordinary exercise of state judicial review. retired judge michaelluding, who had to tell mike pence he could not steal an election for trump, called this case the most significant case in the history of our nation for american democracy. today, he called the decision a resounding reverberating victory for american democracy. the judge served as co-counsel to neal katyal, who argued against the theory to the court, and he's back with me. i want to start by thanking you for rescuing american democracy by arguing this case, neal. explain in brief what the north carolina suit was about and how significant do you agree with michael luttig that this is the most significant case. >> it feels pretty darn good. >> to us, too, my friend. >> the reason it is so

significant is this. what the republican party was saying in the north carolina court and then the u.s. supreme court is that state legislatures can write all of the rules for elections, any way they want. they don't have to care about their own constitution. they don't have to care about their own courts. so this case was about gerrymandering election maps but the ultimate theory is about everything. it's about voting hours, absentee ballots. anything involving an election. and the republicans were saying, courts, you have no business doing anything. it's just raw political power that will decide this. that's a crazy theory if you know anything about american history. our whole system is based on checks and balances. but going up into this argument, a lot of people thought that we would lose. even after the argument, joy, i mean, one of the hardest things for me was out of all the people who claimed to be on my side, went and told the supreme court they lacked the jurisdiction to

hear this case and they were afraid and wanted to get it out of the court. and those arguments were so wrong, so misguided, and they stand as a really powerful lesson that if you carefully study and take seriously the united states supreme court decisions, litigants can win cases that stand up for our democracy, even in this court. >> so this court is the thing that i do want to sort of talk about. it was chief justice john roberts, it was sotomayor, kagan, kavanaugh, coney barrett, and ketanji brown jackson. dissents were clarence thomas, gorsuch, and alito. two of those don't surprise me at all, but the other thing that strikes me is it feels like the year 2000 election and bush v. gore are like a monster that you can't kill in one of these horror movies. it keeps coming back. john eastman arguing that 20 years apart that this insane theory is what should rule our

elections. four of the members of this supreme court had some role in bush v. gore. john roberts worked on bush's legal team, kavanaugh worked on his legal team. amy coney barrett worked on bush's legal team in florida, and clarence thomas was part of the 5-4 opinion. bush v. gore was said to be nonprecedential. but boy, does it feel like it. >> when you look at what a justice did in their past life and think they're going to approach it in a certain way and this stuff is going to live on forever. no, the nail was put in the coffin of all of this nonsense today. and it was put -- the nail was put in by chief justice roberts and joined by two trump appointees, amy coney barrett and brett kavanaugh, and what they said is basically, uh-uh, you know, there is -- there are standard checks and balances when it comes to federal elections, and you don't just,

because you have the raw political power, republican party, you don't get to call the shots and say courts have no business. so to me, it's a really strong signal, being sent by six justices of our united states supreme court that they're going to resist efforts to monkey with or let legislatures monkey with the 2024 election. they're saying uh-uh, we're here. we're going to review that, state courts are going to review that and we're going to have the standard check and balance and protection of american democracy that our court system is all about. to me, it's john roberts' finest moment on the court. i think this decision will live for a long time as a statement about the power of judicial review, about the power of courts to check political abuse. >> that is a resounding statement. that makes me feel good. my team kept trying to explain this to me but i do not understand it. this was the case in counterman

v. colorado where the supreme court ruled in favor of somebody who had been accused of online stalking. it was a 7-2 vote, but it was an interesting seven that included the liberals on the court. please explain. >> you know, honestly, i can't because i have been a little busy today. so that's out of my knowledge bally wick. you want to talk about 1987 and judicial review and the power of courts, i'm your guy. >> literally, i'm out of gas. i was like, maybe neal can help me with this. i tried to read the stories, like, i don't get it. i appreciate you. i love that. neal katyal, thank you for helping save american democracy. we so appreciate you and being here to help talk us through it. neal katyal, you're the greatest. do not worry, justices thomas and alito, only a few more big decisions to make before you can get back to accepting luxurious freebies from billionaires. just push through. you can do it, boys. we'll be right back.

♪ limu emu & doug ♪ what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

the virus that causes shingles is sleeping... in 99% of people over 50. it's lying dormant, waiting... and could reactivate. shingles strikes as a painful, blistering rash that can last for weeks. and it could wake at any time. think you're not at risk for shingles? it's time to wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist about shingles prevention. income tax. sales tax. gas tax. californians pay some of the highest taxes in the nation. but now lawmakers are proposing a so-called “link tax”

that would charge websites every time they link to a news article online. experts warn it could undermine the open internet, punish local newspapers, while subsidizing hedge funds and big media corporations. so tell lawmakers: oppose ab886, because another new tax is the last thing we need. paid for by ccia. don't get me wrong. today's decision on the fringe independent state legislature theory is a huge win for democracy, huge. we have dodged a couple bullets actually this past term, with the court also affirming the congressional maps in alabama and louisiana should be redrawn

to reflect the state's actual population. but that doesn't mean we're out of the woods, y'all. this session isn't over yet. i cannot help but feel there's another shoe that's going to drop. the cases we're still waiting on will have huge impacts on how many americans live. we're awaiting rulings on affirmative action, president biden's student loan forgiveness plan and whether the first amendment protects business owners who don't want to may wedding websites for same-sex couples. and while john roberts is the chief justice, the tone of this court is set by its most outwardly bitter, vindictive, and aggrieved justice, samuel alito. alito, who wrote the vengeful majority opinion overturning roe v. wade has claimed william f. buckley, the national review, and barry goldwater as the greatest influences on his views which actually explains a lot. but aczyz hook adds the key to

understanding alito is not judicial philosophy or ardent conservatism, it's his anger, an anger that resonates with the sentiments of many voters, especially white and male ones who feel displaced. it's sort of ironic alito seems so angered his personal and religious views are falling out of favor considering this is a guy who really loves favors. joining me now is dahlia lithwick, legal correspondent for slate, msnbc legal analyst, and host of the amicus podcast. i'm a fan. o so great to get a chance to talk to you. i want to start there on the anger. as a non-lawyer, i read the dobbs decision and it read to me like a right-wing screed i could have read on fox.com or newsmax.com. and you know, reading a very long new yorker article that talked about this evolving rage against the 1960s, against the

warren court, is that how you read alito, as just this angry man who hates the modern world? >> you know, it's so interesting, joy, because for the first year or two when alito came on the court, i used to say unairingly in interviews he's the single most thoughtful justice. he asks the best question in oral argument. he has really truly changed. i think part of it is he still resents his confirmation hearing. you may recall he kind of trolled president obama and went not true, and president obama was talking about citizens united, by the way, president obama was correct. and he's devolved, as you say, into someone who is just kind of spitting mad, dialed up to 11 all the time. and maybe the best answer on your dobbs question is he's the only justice in history who had the opportunity because dobbs leaked, he was fact checked in

real time by historians, by doctors, by providers. he could have changed the opinion, softened the opinion, or at least gotten the errors wrong. he changed nothing except to take swipes at the concurrence and the dissenters. this is a person who even given a once in a lifetime opportunity to soften a draft that was way over the top, opted just to go meaner. >> and then he took a trip apparently on the dime of the organization that brought him there, which also is an organization that files briefs before the court. right? he takes this trip and does sort of a victory lap where he does this sort of snidely whiplash act, mocking those who are enraged and terrified by the decision. and he seems to kind of revel in like trolling the libs in his view. and in undoing the 20th century where he feels that white men got the short end of the stick and women and minorities got too much. and it feels like he's set up to

keep doing that, right? i mean, he thinks he should get to take lavish trips and angrily justify that in a pre-op-ed before the piece comes out from propublica, and you know how he's going to rule on student loans, whether people can get their student loans forgiven and on affirmative action. i know hue he's going to rule. >> maybe the most interesting thing and it occurred to me when you were talking to neal katyal in the segment before, is this time last term, alito and thomas were in the cat bird's seat. they were writing opinions and major gun case, major abortion case, that were 5-4, 6-3. they were winning all the time. the trend we have seen this term, and you know, stipulated we have some whoppers to come, is that they are more often than not, as they were today, writing for themselves alone. they are dissenting by themselves. so if we're going to have the conversation that i think we're going to end up having when the term ends this week, what

changed in a year? is it entirely possible, and i'm speculating, that some of the conduct we have seen from justices thomas and alito, not just the trips, not just being caught not disclosing or not recusing, that stuff is bad, but it's the punching back, the persistent claims that it's the press' fault, that their critics want to destroy the legitimacy of the court, that their lives were threatened by the dobbs leak without any acknowledgment of the lives that were destroyed by dobbs. and i'm just finding myself wondering if there's some way in which this new quote/unquote center of the court where justices kavanaugh and barrett and sometimes gorsuch are joining the chief justice to modulate what we saw last year might be slightly a function of not wanting to be associated with that tone of petty meanness that you're describing. >> you know, it's interesting you say that because kavanaugh is to me the sort of judge that sort of surprises me the most.

he seems very sensitive, the way he got on the court was abominable, similar to clarence thomas and what he was accused of, there was scandal around him, but he seems to be trying to sort of present himself as more of an intellectual, not an angry scold like alito. i would argue that the two most corrupt justices in terms of their financial corruption, their willingness to be wined and dined and their seemingly angry insistence they must be wined and dines are isolating themselves. could we gain hope in the fact their gore corruption, ginni thomas, the trips, everything else, does somewhat isolate them from the ones like kavanaugh who are more sensitive to their reputation? >> you know, again, we have been trying to slice this salami for a couple weeks, joy, as we're trying to figure out why we're seeing the new justices peel off. i think one theory which is yours, is that they just don't want to be associated with what

looks like just pure venal pay to play corruption. i think let's remember that both kavanaugh and barrett are young. they're really young. they plan to be on the court for decades, unlike justice thomas and justice alito. they want to have an impact that goes on for years. if you burn the court to the ground in 2023, you don't have that option. and maybe the last thing i'll say is that i think justice kavanaugh, like the chief justice, is at the end of the day not a nihilist. i don't think he's an analog to steve bannon, burn it all down. i think he wants democracy to function, albeit with fewer voting rights so big business can keep winning and so the republican party can keep winning. that's not where thomas and alito are right now. >> they're fine with burning it all down. and you're right, they're the two oldest justices so they're like burn it all in the way out the door. dahlia lithwick, such a treat to talk to you. thank you so much for being

here. and coming up, protesters demand justice for ohio's jalen walker, shot over 90 times by police after a traffic stop, as authorities in florida say a white woman who shot her black neighbor through a front door will not be charged with murder. more next. love you. have a good day, behave yourself. like she goes to work at three in the afternoon and sometimes gets off at midnight. she works a lot, a whole lot.

we don't get to eat in the early morning. we just wait till we get to the school. so, yeah. right now here in america, millions of kids like victoria and andre live with hunger, and the need to help them has never been greater. when you join your friends, neighbors and me to support no kid hungry, you'll help hungry kids get the food they need. if we want to take care of our children, then we have to feed them. your gift of just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month at helpnokidhungry.org right now will help provide healthy meals and hope. we want our children to grow and thrive and to just not have to worry and face themselves with the struggles that we endure. nobody wants that for their children. like if these programs didn't exist me and aj, we wouldn't probably get lunch at all. please call or go online

right now with your gift of just $19 a month. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this limited edition t-shirt to show you're part of the team that's helping feed kids and change lives. if you're coming in hungry, there's no way you can listen to me teach, do this activity, work with this group. so starting their day with breakfast and ending their day with this big, beautiful snack is pretty incredible. whether kids are learning at school or at home, your support will ensure they get the healthy meals they need to thrive. because when you help feed kids, you feed their hopes, their dreams, and futures. kids need you now more than ever. so please call this number right now to join me in helping hungry kids or go online to helpnokidhungry.org and help feed hungry kids today.

trelegy for copd. ♪birds flyin' high, you know how i feel.♪ ♪breeze driftin' on by...♪ ♪...you know how i feel.♪

you don't have to take... [coughing] ...copd sitting down. ♪it's a new dawn,...♪ ♪...it's a new day,♪ it's time to make a stand. ♪and i'm feelin' good.♪ start a new day with trelegy. no once-daily copd... ...medicine has the power to treat copd... ...in as many ways as trelegy. with three medicines in one inhaler,... ...trelegy makes breathing easier for a full 24 hours, improves lung function, and helps prevent future flare-ups. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler... ...for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating,... ...vision changes, or eye pain occur. take a stand, and start a new day with trelegy. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy... ...and save at trelegy.com. today marks one year since

jayland walker, a 25-year-old black man, was killed by akron police officers after a traffic stop. eight officers fired 94 shots at walker and he sustained 46 gunshot wounds. walker was not armed when he was gunned down. in april, an ohio grand jury declined to bring charges against the officers, saying they were legally justified in their use of force. which is why today at a justice for jayland rally, the walker family and supporters took their demands directly to the steps of the department of justice in washington. here's what one family attorney had to say. >> we have filed a lawsuit against the city of akron for $45 million for each bullet that struck jayland. we have called on the department of justice, and we stand with this community as we hope that the department of justice will continue their conversations with us and get involved. >> joining me now is paul butler, msnbc legal analyst and

former federal prosecutor. paul, how in theory could the department of justice get involved? could this case in theory become federal? >> not only in theory but it's got to, joy. the justice department can do a pattern and practice investigation of the akron police department, just like it's doing in minneapolis where the police killed george floyd, and in louisville, where the police killed breonna taylor, and in baltimore, where freddie gray got his spine crushed while he was in police custody. the data shows that when doj and federal courts are looking at police departments, they do better. including killing and beating up fewer people. >> so let's talk about this lawsuit. so when people hear $45 million lawsuit, they go okay, the family will at least be able to exact some sort of justice even though it doesn't bring their loved one back. but i don't think people understand that if they win, it is the taxpayers of ohio who

will pay that $45 million. not the police department, it won't come out of the police pension. it doesn't harm the police departments at all. how do we work in a system where it's the taxpayers and the insurance taken out, not the police department at all, who pay these settlements? >> so people have heard about qualified immunity. that's this doctrine created by the conservative supreme court that says you can't sue me, i'm a cop. what that does is protect but joy, we know that's what works. if it's coming out of your paycheck, it makes you want to treat citizens better, to treat all citizens with respect if you know that there could be consequences to you. and again, we are not seeing officers held criminally responsible. this is a routine but tragic

failure of the law to hold bad apple cops accountable. >> let's go to the aj owens case. the state attorney issued this explanation for why they charged manslaughter and not second-degree murder, which is why the family wanted. in order to approve the climate secretary in the murder the state must prove depraved mind of the killer at the time of the killing. evidence of ill will, spite, or ill intended time of the killing. as deplorable as the actions were in the, case there is insufficient evidence to prove the specific and required element of secondary murder. but hang on a second, witnesses said, and she admitted, the shooter admitted she called the woman's children, aj owens children, the n-word and other racial epithets. she admitted screaming racial epithets. make it make sense of this is not second degree murder. she shot through a door with a nine year old standing on the other side. she didn't even get charged

with sex with reckless endangerment. >> it took the shares almost a week to arrest the killer to see if she had a defense raced on florida's notorious stand-your-ground laws, which she does not. and now the prosecutor showing the same kind of undue deference by under charging this defendant. mass manslaughter does not fit the gravity of this event. secondary degree murder needs proof of what the law calls proof of a depraved mind, reckless mind with ill will. what could be more reckless than shooting a mother through a closed door in front of her children? where could you find more ill will than this defendant, who admits that she called children in the neighborhood the n-word. she admitted that on another occasion she threw roller skates of these little kids and told them to go fetch them. in florida you get to be a racist and use the n-word, but you don't get to use is that

mindset as an excuse to kill an innocent black person. this defendant should have been prosecuted for murder. >> the prosecutor claimed that when she threw this case was in the same incident. that was why aj owens went to that door, because she literally threw an ipad and roller skates at her children. i don't know what's more depraved mind you could have been trying to assault little kids and then shooting their mom with a nine year old next to them. i don't understand where this prosecutor has done. hopefully we can get that prosecutor on. we would love to get you to explain what you have done. paul battler, my friend, thank you. rhonda sanchez says if he's elected president he'll try to repeal the constitution granting citizenship to anyone born in united states. good thing his own great grandparents aren't listening. back in a sec. back in a sec. it kills 99% plaque bacteria. and forms an antibacterial shield.

try parodontax active gum health mouthwash.

my a1c was up here; now, it's down with rybelsus®. his a1c? it's down with rybelsus®.

my doctor told me rybelsus® lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill and that people taking rybelsus® lost more weight. i got to my a1c goal and lost some weight too. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? you may pay as little as $10 per prescription.

we moved out of the city so our little sophie could appreciate nature. but then he got us t-mobile home internet. i was just trying to improve our signal, so some of the trees had to go. i might've taken it a step too far. (chainsaw revs) (tree crashes) (chainsaw continues) (daughter screams) let's pretend for a second that you didn't let down your entire family. what would that reality look like? well i guess i would've gotten us xfinity... and we'd have a better view. do you need mulch? >> this idea that you can come what, we have a ton of mulch.

across the border two days later, have a child, and somehow that's an american citizen, that was not the original understanding of the 14th amendment. and so we will take action to force a clarification of that. >> it was. that's ron desantis trashing the u.s. constitution but promising to and birthright citizenship, whereby anybody born in the united states is automatically system.

the 14th amendment states that, quote, a person's born or night light in united states and subject to the jurisdiction there of our citizens of the united states and of the state wherein they reside. seems pretty clear to me, ron. and yet he plans to, quote, force the courts and congress to finally address this failed policy. good luck with that. this and his other cruel border plans are all part of a desperate brit bid to out-maga trump. he's grasping at straws to do anything to boost is failing poll numbers. the over potential's version of drain the swamp, he wants to rein in the power of the government while expanding his own power within the federal government. he spent his entire campaign bragging about his campaign brag about insolvent promising to make america florida. that in itself is promising the impossible. does he think that all 90,000 public schools in america will

follow don't say gay and banned books? or that he can drive immigrants out of the entire country? yeah, good luck, agriculture. or for some blue states to not priests protect their citizens from a deadly pandemic, or shut down its theme parks when they support pride? is that what he thinks the president does? he's taking it further than trump, promising a demographically pam panicked base that he will be able to undo the reality of today's america. it will make people angry or than they already are. we have seen what happens when magazines get angry. this magical thinking isn't just dame. it's straight-up dangerous and that it's tonight's rhea readout. all in with chris hayes starts right now. h chri>> tonight, on all in, -- >> we no longer live in a self governing republic if we can get the answer to this question. >> animating legal theory behind a cool, alive and kicking in state houses across america.