>> good morning, this area life

first, i'm still filling in for my friend velshi. good man, roughly one year after roe v. wade was overturned, supreme court issued another ruling that said two up and another aspect of american life. on thursday, the supreme court ruled that commissions programs at harvard and university of north carolina violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. it effectively puts an end to affirmative action, a decision that will back decades of progress and president and in fact colleges, universities, and younger generations of students around the country.

the 237 -- includes a dissent written by justice ketanji joao brown jackson the first black woman to be appointed to the supreme court. she wrote quote, with let them eat cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the record and announces colin finest for all by legal fiat. but deeming race relevant law does not make it so in life. during his remarks on thursday, biden echoed those sentiments. >> today, the court once again walked away from decades of precedent and the dissent has made clear. the dissent states that today's decision quote, rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress. i agree with that statement from the dissent. the court has effectively ended affirmative action in college admissions. i strongly, strongly disagree with the court's decision. because affirmative action is

so misunderstood, i want to be clear, make sure everybody is clear about what the law has been and what it is not been up until today. many people wrongly believe that affirmative action allows unqualified students, unqualified soon to be admitted ahead of qualified students. this is not, this is not how college admissions work. >> folks, for decades many people misunderstood and were misled about how affirmative action works and what it was trying to achieve. it was not a fast track to allow anyone of a certain race or ethnic background to get ahead of a white person. it was a remedy to give qualified people access to higher education who otherwise might not have been presented with that opportunity. you see, back in the 1960s, one man realize that it was not enough to enact anti-segregation in anti discrimination laws. america also had to take proactive measure, from

reaction to ensure that members of certain groups were left behind. now, if you don't know him already meet arthur fletcher. he was a black man, a lifelong republican and the man they called the father of affirmative action. he believed that diversifying the workforce would benefit the economy. if more people from different backgrounds were educated and trained, that would result in more skilled workers with higher personal incomes. thus, a more robust consumer base. in 1969, he was appointed by richard nixon to serve in his administration as the assistant secretary of labor. in that role, he built upon an idea that lyndon johnson's administration try to enact to address segregation in the construction trade area. the plan came to be known as the revise philadelphia plan. one of the first examples of affirmative action implemented by the federal government. around the same time, harvard university implemented a similar idea as part of its admission program, known as the

harvey plan. it was an initiative that we will consider applicants racial background in an effort to establish more equitable educational opportunities for larger pools of students. that plan however has now been ruled unlawful by the supreme court. joining me now is adam harris, staff writer for the atlantic and author of the state must provide, the definitive history of racial inequity in american higher education. also with us is amani, professor of african american studies at harvard. and the bestselling author of the book self to america, the journey below the mason-dixon to understand the soul of a nation. welcome to you both. armani, there has long been the criticism that affirmative action has allowed too many people of a certain race or ethnic background to get ahead over others. but according to the national center for education statistics, black undergraduate students still only make up a very small

percentage of elite universities. somewhere between five to 8%. meanwhile, black people make up about 14% of the american population. so, what do people misunderstand about affirmative action and how it actually is put in practice? >> there's so much that being -- the thank you for that context. certainly, one piece is that there's under representation of black people at elite institutions. black people comprised of a small portion of applicant pool and so part of what informed action does is actually make them visible, those who are these excellent students. the impact of further action on on black students and on latin students, not interested in is infinitesimal, about 1% or less of opportunity of getting into the schools. but more than, that people misunderstand the context. you have several hundred years of slavery, several generations

of jim crow. it is only 1968 when society begins to open up. within ten years, you have the opinion saying, yeah we have to be careful about being too -- and then by 1980, you have the backlash against affirmative action with any kind of remedy for this long history of racial discrimination. so, we had this very small modest remedial measure, effort to diversify the elite walls of our society. and really, now there's virtually no remedy. for that multi hundred-year history. and we live with an impact of that history every day. both past and present discrimination shapes the lives of people, millions of people in this country every day. >> you know, it's that multi hundred-year history that seemingly justice roberts didn't take into account. as you noted in the atlantic, the chief justice stopped short

of completely banning universities from considering race. so, what does the future look like for younger generations and minority students out there who are now facing the prospect of not having that playing field or access to that playing field in front of them? >> effectively, if those applicants would like to have the race considered, they need to explain in the person i say the ways that racism has impacted their life individually. effectively, what the court is now asking students to do is explain the ways that racism works. if you are thinking about that long history leading up to when you get that decision that effectively limits the role of race conscious -- as a remedy for historical discrimination and instead uses this as a broader lens for diversity, for the entire stream body, this idea that we

are better when we are living and working and studying in an ecosystem that is more broadly reflected of the america that we live in. we are going to have fewer states that are actually living in those ecosystems as we know what happens when race conscious admissions go away. we have seen in california, we've seen that michigan. three years after michigan introduced its race conscious admissions ban, it's a form of action ban. we saw a 10% decline in the black and women. it effectively never recovered, that irritant that they had prior to the ban. >> i want to go back to justice jackson, she wrote in the dissent, deeming race does not make it so in life. so, keeping that in mind, that she is the first black woman to heavy nominated and according to the supreme court, how do you think this decision will affect even more selective if institutions like law schools and medical institutions when they're looking at the future

of someone like a ketanji brown? >> i believe it will have a devastating impact. i think medicine is a phenomenal areas to focus on because we know that having black positions for example and he talked about this on social media, having a black physicians actually has a demonstrable effect on the quality of life of black patients. and so, there will be a major effect of this opinion, i appreciate that there are many institutions that are trying to find ways to continue to have a diverse outcome, even if they can't consider race in specific ways but with a strange exception for admissions essays which is strange because that question is not really before the court, where they're not students can talk about race in the application essays. it is a strange kind of -- in the analysis of the court. so, the picture that we have before us is potentially quite bleak. i think this is a wonderful

time because it is an excellent overview of actually the responsibility of the state to educate its citizens because at the same time, we have this opinion, we have this long dead opinion where students of other institutions are saddled with debt so there's all these avenues to the professions that are being cut off at the same moment by the supreme court which is active in ways that i think are very undemocratic. >> on that point, on thursday equated tweeted quote, i want to note that even though a handful of institutions are selective enough to use race in admissions, those that you are incredibly well funded and well stratification is really bad in higher education already. tell us a little bit about what you meant there. >> so effectively, if you look at the types of institutions that students tended, let's take black students in north carolina for example, if you are black student in north carolina, attending a public college, about 22% of black

students that are attending public colleges will attend one of the 12 predominantly white institutions. 26 to 27% attend one of the five public h c use, and roughly 50% attend one of the states community colleges, these institutions that have not been receiving the funding that they should. you think about several civil rights decisions and investigations over the years. in the 1970s, david went down to north carolina and said, these institutions are clearly unequal. the reagan administration comes in shortly after, settles with the state of north carolina and david deltell gives it quote and says, this doesn't read like a desegregation plant, this reads like a joint defense of everything the system did. we have a system that is incredibly inequitable, and was created on an inequitable foundation that we are now further stratify. if a student is not getting into harvard, it doesn't mean they're not going to get in and

wheels, they make it in to an institution that does not have as much money to fund them. they may need to take out some more student loans to attend that institution. bringing them further into that. as he was saying right there, these twin things happening that are just going to further stratify the system that we have. >> adam harris and amani, stay right where you are, we are going to continue this conversation after a quick break. break. . i offer what i can when i can. i started noticing my memory was slipping. i saw a prevagen commercial and i did some research on it. i started taking prevagen about three years ago. i feel clearer in my thoughts, my memory has improved and generally just more on point. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. >> i'm back now with adam

♪ ♪ ♪♪ voltaren. the joy of movement. ♪♪

harris, staff writer for the atlantic, and dr. amani perry, professor of african american studies at harvard university. now, we are going to continue our conversation about affirmative action, of course, especially at italy universities, but i first wanted to play a clip from my colleague in and friend, joint reading, speaking about her personal experience as a student at harvard. who benefited from affirmative action. >> let me just be clear, i got

into harvard only because of affirmative action. i went to a school known had ever heard of in denver, colorado, in a small suburb. i didn't go to exeter or hand over, i didn't have colleagues test prep, i just happen to be really needed, east martin, and had good grades, and goes sats corps. but someone came to denver, colorado, to look for me. harvard recruiter flew to denver and i met up with her at the village in restaurant, and did it a pre interview to get to pull me into harvard. i was pulled in. and the schools, like, -- that i got in, affirmatively. and it was literally not saying, we are going to take an unqualified person and put them in harvard. we are going to take a very qualified person, who we would never know existed, and put them in harvard. that's how i got there, that's how ketanji got their, that's how justice jackson, i should say, justice jackson got there. it's how clarence thomas got there. but the minute i arrived from my majority black little town, montebello in denver, to harvard, the first, like, week or two that i was in class, my

presence was questioned by white people. i was in this big conference class, where some white students stood up and said, those students, the black students, they are only here because of affirmative action. it became a huge argument that we all ended up having. this was freshman year. i had never had my academic credentials questioned. i have never had anyone questioned whether i was intelligent, until i go to harvard. and it was a defining point of my experience there. it's what really, one of the many reasons i was miserable there my freshman year. you feel completely out of place and people keep telling you, you should not be here, and yet, some of the people i went to school with were far less smart than me or the other black folks there. they got in because their daddy and their grand daddy, i went to school with somebody whose name was on one of the buildings! >> yeah, exactly. amani, he went to yale and harvard. does joy's story ring true to you? >> absolutely and i would go a little bit further and remind people, when has it been the

case that the intelligence and skill of black people has not been questioned in multiple sectors of this society? you know, this is actually part of the logic upon which racism in this society is built. and so, it rings true and it's also a reminder that we have to stop thinking about these institutions as proxies for skill and intelligence. they are certainly points of access and to go back to adam's previous point, i think we ought to keep in mind that for as many generations as we have been providing not just economic support and foundation for this country, but also we are paying taxes into places that are now effectively saying, you can't go here, yet again. which has been the case for most of our history. so, you know, yes, it rings true and it is completely erroneous. >> you know, adam, both joy and amani nailed the black student experience at these institutions and back in 2021,

you wrote a piece for the atlantic called, this is the end of affirmative action. you opened that essay with a story about how, during your freshman year at alabama a&m university, you want to visit the university of alabama at huntsville nearby. you wrote, quote, when i arrived at the university of alabama, i was shocked. the buildings looked new and fountains burst from man made ponds. the library had books and magazines i had never heard of, including the one from which i outright. something else quickly became obvious. almost every student i saw at you a age was white. that they, a little more than a decade ago was my introduction to that bitter reality that there are two tracks in american higher education. one has money and confers procedure, while the other, the one that the black student has to tread, does not. tell us a little bit about the disparities that you discovered

and how that shapes you, and continues to shape the way you look at this? >> absolutely and thanks for that. so, when i went to alabama a&m, it was effectively a family institution. my mom had gone there, my uncle was a -- a&m, my sister was there at the time, and so, it was really a place that i felt comfortable attending. there were other options to attend the schools, but i figured this was a place that an educated my ancestors right and this is a place that i needed to go. what i quickly realized was that it and emmett, there were buildings on campus that had not been renovated since my mom was on campus, right? she was like, this building was being renovated in the 80s, there it was in 2009, 2010, still being renovated. and so, going to you age, an institution that had been open for 75 years fewer than alabama and i'm, right? and him had been found in 1875, uah was founded in 1950 because segregation was the law and they needed an institution in huntsville for white students to attend and kind of noticing that, getting into covering

higher education, realizing that my experience was not necessarily an anomaly, but effectively, the norm for many black students, right? the institutions that have starkly done the work of educating black students, historically black colleges have effectively been shut out of the resources that come alongside that important work they are doing. i can go back to, you know, something like in the 1870s, great? when you have these dueling things happening of alcorn state university being founded in 1871 by a reconstruction legislature. they are given a guarantee the preparation of $50,000 a year for at least a decade. four years later, you have the redeemer's sweeping in, quote, unquote, white revolution and they produce that appropriation to $50,000 a year. a year later, they reduce that appropriation, again, to $5,500 a year. meanwhile, you have the university of mississippi, where the faculty are writing a letter to the weekly clarion saying that, we would rather close -- resigned than to enroll a black student at the university of

mississippi was founded to educate the white race. and so, you have these two things happening, you've never had that disparity mended. and so, in this environment where you are going to have these flagship institutions, which have done a terrible job of educating students within the proportion of the black population in their states, the latino population in their states, whatever it may be, you have these institutions that have done this bad job and you also now have these institutions that have been poorly funded, that need to have some of that recompense, right? they need to be funded and equitable manner to the work that they are doing, to educate students that, you know, sort of most selective institutions in higher education have done. >> adam harris, dr. amani perry, thank you both for a very enlightening conversation. right after the break, we are digging into trump's legal woes and that tape of the former president discussing classified material is not even the most shocking development. mos shocking development shocking development at cold water can't clean.

- food fight!! - food fight!! ♪♪ cold water, on those stains? welp, only one way to find out... tide cleans better in cold than the leading bargain detergent in warm. ♪♪ cold water can't clean tough stains? i'd say that myth is- busted! i always wanted to say that! turn to cold, with tide.

i'm orlando and i'm living with hiv. i don't have to worry about daily hiv pills i always wanted to say that! because i switched to every-other-month cabenuva. for adults who are undetectable, cabenuva is the only complete long-acting hiv treatment you can get every other month. it's two injections from a healthcare provider. now when i have people over, hiv pills aren't on my mind. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you're taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions, post-injection reactions, liver problems, and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms,

stop cabenuva and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection-site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva, attend all treatment appointments. it feels good to just live in the moment. with every-other-month cabenuva, i'm good to go. ask your doctor about cabenuva today. >> a lot has happened this week,

as the criminal cases against donald trump continue to develop. by now, you've probably heard the damning tape of trump discussing classified material at his residence in bedminster, new jersey. >> but that is not the only time that prosecutors allege trump discussed classified information with unqualified people, without the proper

security clearances. jack smith's indictment describes another similar instance it mid minister, where mr. trump showed a classified map to someone without proper security clearance. that person turned out to be susie wildes, one of the top advisers to trump's presidential campaign. and new reporting from cnn suggests that susie wildes has already talked with investigators multiple times. special counsel jack smith's investigation into trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents has already led to criminal charges against the former president. but it appears the investigators are still investigating. according to reporting from the new york times, the federal grand jury in miami has continuing to look into different pieces of the case. in just the last few days, they've issued new subpoenas to several individuals connected to the inquiry. and that is not all. the special counsel's other probe, the one looking into overturning the 2020 election, is also moving right along. last week, the new york times

reported that a former trump campaign official named mike roman, who tried to hand deliver fake elector votes to then vice president, mike pence, was cooperating with investigators. while according to new reporting from cnn, that guy is not working with investigators after he entered what it's called a proffer agreement. basically, a legal arrangement in which the defendants will provide investigators with relevant information and it cannot be held against them. we also learned this week that rudy giuliani, who was behind trump's fake election fraud claims, is also entered a proffer agreement, and has been interviewed by the special counsel's team. joining me now is elise adamson, she's a former assistant u.s. attorney in attenborough, she arraigned some of the first defendants arrested in the january 6th capitol riot. she's now a principal eye beverage and diamond law firm, sorry about that.

hey, elise, welcome to you. so, what do you make of the miami grand jury issuing more subpoenas and continuing its investigation, even after the indictment was made public? is that typical? and what does it say? >> well, first and foremost, michael, thank you so much for having me on. is it typical to continue investigation after an indictment? i would not say it is typical, but i would say it's not uncommon. a lot of times, there will be evidence that is found after an indictment is issued, such that investigators want to continue to dig in and bring potential charges. now, in secret proceedings and in cases that are truly not public, investigators don't typically want to do that because once an indictment is made public, it puts the defendants and everyone else involved on notice that they are investigating. but here, we do not have any of those issues. this was a very public

investigation and so, it's very reasonable that they would continue on, after receiving more information. and so, what is likely going to happen is jack smith will continue to put people in the grand jury and they can add additional charges, and also potentially, additional defendants. it is notable that only one other individual was charged. we had to make it a conspiracy, it has to be two individuals. and so, they initially charged wealth not a, but there are a lot of people named in that indictment. unnamed in that indictment that ultimately could be held liable for their conduct. so, i would not be surprised if we saw something called a superseding indictment, kind of supplementing the one that has already been issued with additional counts and individuals as defendants. >> so, just to clarify for everyone, what you are saying is that could, then, likely lead to additional charges coming out of what this additional investigation may or

may not find? >> that is correct. so, it would be additional charges arising out of the same investigation. and look, it doesn't necessarily need to be coming through the same indictment. we now have more information about what was happening at bedminster and now we know we have a witness in susie wiles. and so, ultimately, it may not even be the same indictment. as we saw early on in this initial documents probe, folks were put in front of the grand jury in d.c., and then the venue was changed to miami. so, it's very possible that jack smith is putting additional folks in a miami grand jury, but ultimately, might bring this case in new jersey, which would be the proper place to bring it, the proper venue for the other classified documents, such as you said in the lead up, with the classified map. that would be the appropriate venue to ultimately charge him. >> yeah, i want to ask you about susie wildes. what does her being identified

at this point, in this federal indictment, say about where the trajectory of this investigation is going? and how much damage could she cause trump in his defense? >> yeah, i think it's very interesting. i think it means it is ongoing and again, other charges are imminent. it's very damaging. we heard former president trump say that he was not really showing classified documents, it was just bravado. these were just random papers he had. but now we have a witness who is likely going to say, no, that was a map. we have someone who is present that can refute donald trump's claims. and so, i think that is very important because all we have right now is an audio recording and so, yes, he is making statements that are important for his knowledge and intent that he was hanging on to classified documents, which is important for the ultimate charges in this matter. but you have a witness say, yes, i actually saw classified

documents, that can lay the foundation for those additional, very serious, charges. >> i want to ask you, we've got about one minute left, about the january 6th investigation. you are present at the capitol on january 6th, as it was being stormed, and that case was quietly been progressing over the past few weeks and months, with the special counsel's office reaching partial immunity agreements with some of the fake electors, in exchange for their testimony. where do you assess that case at this moment and what do you think comes out of it next? >> i think this case is, we are coming very close to an indictment. we now know that they're immunizing folks who were fake electors, which means that they have already zeroed in on a legal theory. and they are essentially letting these people walk off scot-free, so they can generate enough evidence to charge this case. i think this is a really significant turning point, because this fake elector scheme is really the

centerpiece, i believe, of an upcoming indictment. of course, there are other charges relating to the violent insurrection on the capitol, itself. but this whole national scheme to replace electors, find electors from trump electors, is a very important feature of this potential indictment and now that we see so many people going into the grand jury in succession, and those that now cannot have charges brought against them, so they have a reason to be as forthcoming as possible, i think that we will be seeing an indictment shortly. >> all right, elise items, and thank you very much. appreciate you coming by. >> thank you. >> next, classrooms have become political battlegrounds with book banning and censorship being used as weapons. donald trump made his plans for education clear, at the mobs for a liberty summit in philadelphia yesterday. >> on day one, i will sign a new executive order to cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory,

transgender -- and other inappropriate, racial, sexual, or political content on our children. ildren (vo) this is sadie, she's on verizon. the network she can count on. and now she's got myplan, the game-changing new plan that lets her pick exactly what she wants and save on every perk. sadie is getting her plan ready for a big trip. travel pass, on. nice iphone. cute couple. trips don't last forever, neither does summer love. so, sadie is moving on. apple music, check! introducing myplan. get exactly what you want, only pay for what you need.

switch now and get iphone 14 pro max on us. offer ends july 5th. it's your verizon.

every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. try killing bugs the worry-free way. not the other way. zevo traps use light to attract and trap flying insects with no odor and no mess.

they work continuously, so you don't have to. zevo. people-friendly. bug-deadly. >> recently, the southern poverty law center, a nonprofit organization that tracks hate groups across the country, added a new name to his growing list. moms for liberty. members of the velshi banned book club should recognize the name of the newly -- hate group. it has become the loudest collective voice demanding literature be removed from classroom curriculums and library shelves. a champion in the so-called parents rights movement. the anti free speech group has gained tremendous influence within the republican party, some wanting education has a 2024 ballot initiative. that weight has been on full display at the moms for liberty summit, held in philadelphia's museum of american revolution

this week. the roster of speakers at the summit includes five republican presidential hopefuls, including former president donald trump, and former governor, ron desantis. our current governor, ron desantis. the event has spurred protests and backlash from a number of groups, including one of the largest organizations representing historians. the american historical association. they've penned a letter to the museum hosting the summit writing, in part, quote, moms for liberty is an organization that has vigorously advocated censorship and harassment of history teachers, banning history books from libraries and classrooms, and legislation that renders it impossible for historians to teach with professional integrity, without risking job loss and other penalties. the velshi banned book club will be fighting this unrelenting censorship by featuring two powerful books that had been heavily targeted by moms for liberty. lawn boy, by jonathan everson, appointment coming of age story

that examines what it means to be pushed to the margins because of your culture, heritage, sexual identity, and class status. and the hate you give by angie thomas, on award-winning book expanded from a short story thomas wrote in college, after a police shooting of oscar grant in 2009. the hate you give is an honest and crucial look at what it means to be a young black girl today. pick up your copies of lawn boy and the hate you give at your local bookstores and give them both a read. there is power in these books. we will be right back. e books. we will be right back. we will be right back. by providing blankets for comfort and warmth and encouraging messages of hope to help support nearly three hundred thousand patients facing cancer nationwide. we call it “the subaru love promise.” and we're proud to be the largest automotive donor to the leukemia and lymphoma society. subaru. more than a car company.

(bridget) with thyroid eye disease i hid from the camera. and i wanted to hide from the world. for years, i thought my t.e.d. was beyond help... but then i asked my doctor about tepezza. (vo) tepezza is the only medicine that treats t.e.d. at the source not just the symptoms. in a clinical study more than 8 out of 10 patients taking tepezza had less eye bulging. tepezza is an infusion. patients taking tepezza may have infusion reactions. tell your doctor right away if you experience high blood pressure, fast heartbeat, shortness of breath or muscle pain. before getting tepezza, tell your doctor if you have diabetes, ibd, or are pregnant, or planning to become pregnant. tepezza may raise blood sugar even if you don't have diabetes and may worsen ibd such as crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. now, i'm ready to be seen again. visit mytepezza.com to find a ted eye specialist and to see bridget's before and after photos. >> this busy supreme court term

has come to an end with a cascade of high profile decisions. and while many of the decisions have altered the fabric of american freedoms, polls are showing that americans are also becoming increasingly concerned with the lack of a code of ethics on the highest court. ethics issues unearthed by propublica in recent months have trained a spotlight on the politicization of the court and the lack of oversight over the nine justices with lifetime appointments on the highest court in the land. last week, propublica published an investigative report finding that justice samuel alito went on a luxury trip with a conservative billionaire, who which was never disclosed. paul singer flew alito on a private jet for a multi day

luxury fishing trip back in 2008. if justice alito had chartered the private jet himself, it would've cost more than $100,000.01 way. on top of that, singer would later have business before the supreme court, at least ten times. and justice alito did not accuse himself from any of those cases. and, of course, there was the first propublica report that found that justice clarence thomas also went on luxury trips with a different billionaire. harlan crow, and had had his grand nephews to russian paid for by crow, none of which was publicly disclosed by thomas. this all came out in the last month or so, and it doesn't even cover clarence thomas's wife, who exchanged text messages with the former presidents chief of staff, encouraging him to advise trump not to concede to the 2020 election. which he lost. after a quick break, i will talk to joshua kaplan, one of the propublica reporters who unearth these ethic issues, ethics issues, and michael

while ben, who served on president biden's commission on the supreme court. the supreme court. the supreme court. it kills 99% plaque bacteria. and forms an antibacterial shield. try parodontax active gum health mouthwash.

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? what, we have a ton of mulch.

sleepovers just aren't what they used to be. a house full of screens?ton. basically no hiccups? you guys have no idea how good you've got it. how old are you? like, 80? back in my day, it was scary stories and flashlights. we don't get scared. oh, really? mom can see your search history. that's what i thought. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity. >> joining me now to discuss the latest ethics concerns on the supreme court is joshua kaplan, one of the propublica reporters who has been uncovering these issues and doing an amazing job, and michael waldman, president and ceo of the brennan center for

justice at nyu law. and author of the super majority, the year the supreme court divided america. so, joshua, let's begin with you. it's just an incredible, incredible work here. the mind-blowing decisions that came down this term that, you know, really a separate issue in one sense, but there are still these ethics concerns and there are some connections being made. paul singer, the billionaire, who funded justice alito's fishing trip, for example, lobbied to cancel student loan forgiveness. yesterday, alito voted against biden's student loan forgiveness plan and, of course, you would've thought that that would've been some disclosure there that, hey, you know, i hang out with this guy and he's telling us to do what we are about to do. what do you make of that and what should we make of that? the citizens watching this court, sort of sink into this ethics hole? >> yeah, so, i mean, to be

clear, you know, singer has had personally a case before the supreme court. these amicus briefs are more if interconnection than, you know, when his hedge fund was on the -- court and i think experts would probably have differing views of whether, you know, how alito should handle an amicus brief from an organization tied to someone he's accepted expensive gifts from. but i think it is important that he is, you know, singer has involvement in these organizations that are regularly filing amicus briefs in the court. he's long been a major funder of efforts to the law and judiciary further to the right. as a donor, at least, and has taken active interest in the courts business. and i think that raises valid questions about, you know, when they are on a private jet across the country or spending

days in a patient together in public, you know? was its conversations consisted of, whether there was any effort, you know, or intentionally or otherwise, to have an influence on the justice. but to be clear, i mean, there is no evidence at this point that singer has ever lobbied alito in private at any particular case. >> right and i think that is an important point to make. but i think also, michael, what josh and propublica reporting shows that the supreme court is broken, that there are these concerns, legitimate concerns, that the american public has regarding its trust in the court, with these many ethical issues. what are we to make of that? >> i think the propublica journalism here has been extraordinarily important. it shows the degree to which

some of the justices have in a world of chummy privilege with right wing billionaires and the federalist society that got them on the court. making a match. it's all part of one of the reasons why public trust in the court, in the polls, has collapsed to the lowest level ever recorded. also the decision to the court has been making. there are some really important reforms that could make a difference. one is that the supreme court, we think, should have a binding ethics code, just the same as all the other federal courts do and all the other courts in the country. nobody is so wise that they should be the judge in their own case. congress could do this, but the supreme court could do it as well. so far, john roberts has not focused on that aspect of the court's public credibility. there are other steps as well to bring the court in line with what we think it ought to be.

>> to pick up on your point, and again, on josh's reporting, democrats on the senate judiciary committee, for example, announced plans for the supreme court ethics reform legislation. the statement says, in part, the highest court in the land should not have the lowest ethical standards, but for too long, that has been the case with the united states supreme court. that needs to change. is this a matter of a little bit too late? what does this reform even look like, at this point? and should it really be on the court to do it, versus the congress? >> congress emphatically has the power to do it and there is also bipartisan legislation and quite a few bills now being put out. among other things, we want to know when justices recuse or don't recuse themselves from a case, why not? why didn't clarence thomas recuse himself from the case, dealing with documents showing his own wife helped be part of

the movement that led to the insurrection? i think there are also other reforms that are more deeply structural that could really help bring accountability. i think there ought to be an 18-year term limits for supreme court justices. that is something interestingly that is broadly popular with both the left and the right, reflects the idea that nobody should have too much public power for too long, sort of the idea that george washing ton taught us when he stepped down. this is something that also could be done certainly by constitutional amendment, but again, by statute as well people who are looking at this supreme court, seeing how much power it has, seeing how these justices are acting like politicians need, not like judges, have things we can do to hold them accountable, to bring the court more in line with where the country is. or we will have a crisis of confidence and legitimacy. >> josh, you tweeted this photo saying, this photo is from a bar in a remote corner of

alaska. on the right, justice scalia hoisting a martini made from a glacier ice. to his left, the federalist society donor paying for the vacation. he flew the justice to alaska on a private jet and rented out a large. so, your point is, this has been going on for a while. so, this is not something new, it's a little bit more systemic to the institution. >> right, i mean, our latest reporting points to a broader pattern of extremely wealthy political donors getting direct, intimate access to supreme court justices, by paying for their luxury travel. it's not just harlan crow and clarence thomas and it's been happening for, you know, decades at this point. look, it's important to underscore here, these sort of trips would be unheard of for the vast majority of federal government employees, who are generally barred from taking

even modest gifts. but at the supreme court, i mean, there is extremely little transparency and extremely little oversight, and very few rules on things like what gifts they can accept. and that is a stark contrast from the rest of the federal government. >> yeah, a lot more investigative reporting had, i suggest, right, josh? josh kaplan and michael walden, thank you both very much. well, that does it for me, folks. thanks for watching. i'm back again tomorrow morning, filling in for my good friend, ali velshi. stay right where you are because alex witt reports starts right now. t report starts right now >> a very good day to all of you from the tom brokaw new center here in los angeles. welcome, everyone, to alex witt reports. developing for you this hour, the impact of a series of sweeping 6 to 3 ruling from the