this morning my question, when is it right to defend evil. plus republicans embracing civil rights as a branding strategy. and a fresh look at city dads on this father's day. first, our civil rights in danger at the supreme court next weekend and we have a nerdland panel to break down the struggle. good morning. i'm ari melber sitting in this weekend for melissa harris-perry. in modern america we have a story we tell ourselves about civil rights. it's about protest movements pushing the courts and courts pushing politicians even as they resisted to defend the status quo. today we want to explore a slightly different take on the story. this is a story where they are turning against social movements and a mantle of a color-blind society. it's a story where idealism of

evers has been come opted by political gain by the same people seeking to strike down civil rights laws. starting monday the supreme court begins the end of this term. it will rule on two core terms of civil rights law, voting power and equal opportunity. understand why the court may be on the verge of unraveling its own precedent you have to look back on its history of combatting racism. 1950s socialism and campaign forced discrimination onto the national agenda. the country was bitterly divided and politicians in both parties treated apartheid as states rights, supreme court found consensus where the state could not. 1954 brown decision a unanimous court drafted separate by equal. two years later ended segregation of the bus system in montgomery, started by martin luther king in 1955. turn to act two. congress stepped in and enacted

crown jewels of civil rights era. congress passed civil rights in 1964 but civil rights were divisive. one out of four senators opposed the measure. then congress tackled segregated power instruct you're north dakotaing specific program to address sub jegation of rights in america. not only to suppress the vote like poll taxes, it erected future system to prevent future racist acts and tactics that didn't exist at the time. that's pretty important because the civil rights movement knew how creative. if poll taxes didn't work they changed district lines or registration rules. innovation of segregation. they required voting changes to be cleared in advance because certain states burned up their credibility and were not entitled to deference. then political parties began realigning around race, a story you probably know.

segregation as democrats had a harder time on left and republicans became a wider party. it realigned in the last decades. something interesting began gop began rebranding its relationship with civil rights. this is where we think act three begins. republicans found a way to talk about a vision of racial progress, color-blindness. they talk about opportunity with handpicked conservative minorities on stage at their national conventions and in their presidential cabinets. even if that sounds like some posturing, the rebranding did yield a legislator shift. seven years ago, the last time vra authorized republicans overwhelmingly supported it and president bush supported it. lets look at that. this the same president that appointed alito and john roberts to the court before leaving office. that takes us to the final chapter here, act four, which i think starts next week. the core values of the civil

rights movement have become so sacred very few national republicans openly challenge them today. the last republican president touted vra, as i mentioned, and last gop candidate mitt romney was the first in recent history to not run against affirmative action but simply run away from it. the party is proudly elevating minorities to key positions and talking about a new appeal to minorities. that's a testament to the power of civil rights victories. when authentic, i think it's an in tingt we should welcome. not nearly enough. each turn this branding of civil rights falters when it comes to universal action. president bush may factor in diversity when choosing his cabinet but he limited that practice to political appointees. when it came to public policy he never supported hiring programs for the rest of the nation, for the rest of us. he may have jumped at a chance to sign a voting rights bill but he's appointed the very people poised to unravel it next week.

i think the story we tell ourselves about civil rights is more complicated than we realize and could all be about to change. to chart the road ahead a panel of civil rights experts at the table. nyu law professor, kenji josh ino and jelani cobb, director of institute of african-american studies in connecticut and author of "the substance and hope," the professor at law school, worked for department of justice and naacp legal defense fund where she headed their voting rights project. and director of constitutional government, arizona's public financing law. i want to start with you on this thesis. walk us through what the supreme court might do and why republicans might be of a single

mind. >> a good question when you consider the re-enactment of voting rights act was 98-0 in terms of the members of the senate. so you see that the republicans are supporting at least on its face things like the voting rights act but in terms of enabling the voting rights act to work there's pushback and a case pending before supreme court where she wilby sknt, alaa is challenging one provision called section 5, which is the preclearance provision and which has enabled the justice department to intervene before damage is done as opposed to waiting for damage to be done and requiring independent plaintiffs to file a lawsuit in which they have to then subsidize costs involved.

i'm saying on the one hand republicans politically claim to be in support of voting rights. but then in terms of supreme court and the fact there's a case pending before supreme court challenging the way in which the act applies to particular jurisdictions rather than to all of the states in the united states. >> so kenji is that encouraging or depressing? >> i would say it's a little bit depressing, because the encouraging piece of it is we have majorities that are actually doing the right thing. authorize marshall, how often do they reach out to protect a minority. what is a court doing striking this down in the name of color-blindness. the dark side of it with respect to color-blindness, she mentioned shelby county case and

fisher case, a big affirmative action which will decided by june in the supreme court. what we see in affirmative is what a scholar called ideological drift, it was at one end of the spectrum, drifts over to the other side of the spectrum, as you were describing in your essay at the beginning. his example is color-blindness. color-blindness comes from dissent. it's seen as idea logically part of the left. now in more recent years it's drifted over in the court's language to be a tool of the right where color-blindness has been a name where affirmative action programs, one after another, have been struck down. i think we'll see a wedge of affirmative action driven by the court in the next if you weeks. >> jelani, i want to take a look at something you were just mentioning, a shift in the voting patterns. if you look at the house gop as

one measure of conservative views of this issue, what you see there up on the screen is that from 1965, the percent of the caucus actually against voting rights for predominantly african-american interests was up around 39%, a significant share. as we mentioned down in 2006 it drops to 17%. yet jelani what kenji is saying here is it may drop but coming with a high price of color-blindness that won't advance measurable equality. >> it's important to remember in quincy versus ferguson the idea is not incompatible with color-blindness. in that decision it said there is no problem with segregation, save the problem that black people have with it, saying the whole idea of segregation being troubling and problematic may simply be all in your head. we've created a kind of color-blind society that

recognizes color if we can say it in that weird contradictory way. when we look at that shift, it's the same thing that happens with overt racism. no one is going to say, okay, i believe in inferiority of this group. >> today. >> it's possible to net policies with that same disparate impact. people say, sure, we're in favor of voting rights. are you in favor of preclearance, the basis of vote rights established. >> what is disparate impact. >> we mean this saying we have a policy that allows -- that makes it more difficult for black people or communities historically discriminated against to elect a candidate of choice. this will replicate the old kind of status quo. that's what we mean by this, when we talk about disparate impact. on a more fundamental level, if we're looking at preclearance

going what do people have about other aspects, the fact you have to have language ballots, have to have language ballots in election materials made available to people on a language of their choice, if that group of people represents a certain portion of the population. what happens there? what happens for voting rights for native americans. there's implications beyond what we're seeing now. >> i want to go to nick here, who is more in line with the conservatives but i'll let you explain your own position. i want to play for you something justice said in oral argument about what right and left agree on, it's good, people in both parties support voting rights act. we want to look at whether they mean it, it's good. justice scalia didn't think it was good. lets take a look at that. >> and this last north dakotament, not a single vote in the senate against it, and the house is pretty much the same. >> what's up with that. >> i think the problem is

politicians don't have the courage, which i hope this court will, return to first principles, state racism will not end and will not succeed particularly now we're 50 years past water hosing and ban on sitting in the front of the bus. i mean, it really belittles the challenges the civil rights movement faced in the 1960s to 50 years later be insisting that conditions still warrant the extraordinary remedy the court deemed it to be in the 1960s. it doesn't warrant it. the civil rights movement should declare victory. we should recognize we have greater threats arising from the centralization of power in the federal government and we should also thank the supreme court on reinvigorating decentralization of power of returning to the states their primary role in regulating elections. with nsa surveillance, the greatest threat we all face too much power concentrating in

washington and not enough power concentrating in states. >> you're talking about how we get to racial equality in the current context and what people in the civil rights movement think would work. a lot agree and some at this table. i want responses to that when we come back. also, how did justice sotomayer pick during oral arguments. she had some rebuttals of her own. we'll take a look at that next. [ male announcer ] this is kevin.

to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap.

question about that, that some portions of the south have changed, your county pretty much hasn't.

in the period we're talking about, it has many more discriminating -- 240 discriminatory voting laws blocked by section 5 objections. >> that was supreme court justice sonia sotomayer calling out rhine on the notion the south changed enough we don't need these kinds of civil rights laws anymore. before the break we have nick saying very much racism, as we understand it, as a justification for these rules and protections is not at a level that requires government action. as we're going to break, jelani said, are you serious? go ahead. >> that's my question. the fact of the matter is, every single indicator we look at, whether employment, health, criminal justice system, we see the continuing existence of racism. we have eeoc, 10 or 11,000 complaints each year we get in eeoc complaints. there are also some indicators

that racism is a vital and very much vibrant, dynamic part of american society right new. >> racism is always going to be a problem just like crime is always going to be a problem. the question is do we want to consolidate more power in the federal government when we have an opportunity to decentralize it now that we're past the worst of it. no one can deny conditions on the ground are nowhere near what was faced in the 1960s. at that time vra had a five-year renewal period. why are the burdens heavier on vra in state sovereignty than 1960s. it makes no sense. i hope the court will see through those arguments and strikeette down. >> can i ask one question? congress had an opportunity to strike it down and did not. in the senate, as i said earlier, the vote was 98-0, why should the supreme court be in the position of making this judgment when elected officials of the country have made a adjustment that is antithetical

to what you're saying. >> because the court has the job of saying what the law is, the constitution is the fundamental law of the land. fundamental to the constitution is the decentralization of power between the states and federal government with the states having primary role of regulating elections. keep in mind what we're talking about is preclearance where we have a penalty box, handful of states no longer the bad actors, mind you, states outside this penalty box that have worst statistics on any sorts of racial concerns, and yet the law persists. the law persists in violating state sovereignty. >> nick, part of your answer going to fundamental. to the question, which is a good one, justice scalia had a different answer, some thought cynical, we try to give him air time so his views are exposed and well understand. i want to play his answer to the question. >> whenever a society adopts

racial entitlements, it's very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes. >> so, i mean, this is the supreme court justice who should understand the job of the supreme court is to interpret the law, not to correct legislators, unless the legislators have violated the spirit of the constitution or letter of the constitution. not a job onto say legislators are voting in a way to be politically unpopular or voting for something they don't have the temmerity to vote something down, we have to correct these in the supreme court. nowhere is the court afforded that. >> kenji says to get them out through political process, that sounds like analysis. if they were brought into voting rights protection, federalized, even on the states, if it's been constitutional this whole time, surely there must be a greater burden than simply say it's hard to get rid of for the court to intervene.

>> absolutely. to that point, we have to think what a future congress would do if i support a voting rights in the future. do i throw my vote against it in order to protect it against justice scalia's review. >> you're not joking, under his jurisdiction. >> he's saying that, unanimity in the senate, counts against in the constitution rather than for it of that's his analysis. >> bottom line, lopsided majorities have approved all kinds of bad majorities -- >> this isn't just lopsided, this is a complete representation of every member of the senate who voted. >> not different from those who voted for patriot act, those allowing incredible amounts of invasiveness by them. no matter how it's enforced. >> i think you're blurring. i've been critical of the way we conduct surveillance in this country. i don't think in a

constitutional dimension it has the same historical antecedents of slavery. putting surveillance to the side you can't fully endorse scalia's idea something that was constitutional in a certain context becomes more suspect with high majority support. >> i can support it. i think justice scalia is dead on right. in 1960s you had discrimination that was systematic. we don't have that anymore so you can't use the same remedy. >> so i think that part of this argument is really what nick is saying. just to take it really seriously is that we've seen so much progress that this is no longer necessary, so it's outlived usefulness. it's not a slam of what happened in 1965, but voting rights renewal that happened more recently. if we were to take that seriously, people in 1965 could say, well, slavery was so much worse than where we are today. we've made so much progress and

slavery was abolished in the middle of the 19th century. we shouldn't do anything because things are so much better. the question can't be, have we made progress. obviously we have made progress. the question has to be have we made enough progress and are there still problems on the ground. what jelani -- we have a factual dispute how much racism on the ground. >> we are going to pull in numbers on disparate impact and disparities. your question about expiration date, affirmative action, justices said this is good for now but maybe not forever. when we come back we'll look deeper into that, what happens to affirmative action as it bumps up into justice o'connor's famous debt line. every parent wants the safest and healthiest products

for their family. that's why i created the honest company. i was just a concerned mom, with a crazy dream. a wish that there was a company that i could rely on, that did all of the hard work for me. i'm jessica alba, and the honest company was my dream. [ male announcer ] legalzoom has helped a million businesses successfully get started, including jessica's. launch your dream at legalzoom today. call us. we're here to help. because what you dont know can ahurt you.urance,y. what if you didn't know that it's smart to replace washing-machine hoses every five years? what if you didn't know that you might need extra coverage for more expensive items?

and what if you didn't know that teen drivers are four times more likely to get into an accident? 'sup the more you know, the better you can plan for what's ahead. talk to farmers and get smarter about your insurance. ♪ we are farmers bum - pa - dum, bum - bum - bum -bum ♪

you will lose 3 sets of keys 4 cell phones 7 socks and 6 weeks of sleep but one thing you don't want to lose is any more teeth. if you wear a partial, you are almost twice as likely to lose your supporting teeth. new poligrip and polident for partials 'seal and protect' helps minimize stress, which may damage supporting teeth, by stabilizing your partial. and 'clean and protect' kills odor-causing bacteria. care for your partial. help protect your natural teeth. i went to my staff and said

how come all the people in the jobs are men. they said these are the people that have quchx. i said, can't we find women also qualified. we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds who could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. i went to women's group and said can you help us find folks. they brought us binders full of women. >> who could forget mitt romney's version of affirmative action from the second presidential debate, binders full of women. yet, jelani, he was speaking to something important. if you want to have america reflected in leadership, you have to find a way to think about it. there are many ways. some have been ruled directly unconstitutional. the idea of reserving a spot just for a woman or a certain minority is off the table and has been since 1978. the idea when you're booking a television show you want people who know different things, are from different backgrounds or fill in military leadership or political leadership, is that something we should be able to

do? is mitt romney gesturing clumsily towards something we all need to do? >> absolutely. what's controversial is he said binders full of women. if he said binders full of black people, one, inherently even clumsier, it would have gotten a different action. we've seen affirmative action more acceptable along the lines of gender than race. >> an example. >> lots of dynamics. look at what's going on in the supreme court. the many aspects, many elements people are allowed to look at in terms of admission to university of texas. race is the one people are most concerned w the same thing, the university of michigan. people moved beyond, much more nuanced as opposed to the sledgehammer approach to diversity in the 1970s. >> you talk about what people are concerned with. lets look at a poll not

reliability. i look at a poll of affirmative action. the kind of question, is affirmative action still needed or should it be ended, you see a drop. points are meeting because people are skeptical. lets dig into that. this is something kenji has worked on. the text question of that poll, whether we need affirmative action was affirmative action programs are still needed to counter-act the effects of discrimination against minorities and are a good idea as long as there are no rigid quotas. i just mentioned quotas are off the table. the idea of countering effects against minorities, discrimination as history. today under current law, regardless of what the supreme court does, right now that is not legal affirmative action, because the supreme court case that upheld it said it had to be for diversity and not remedial measures. whether or not that's good, what does it say about the conversation we're still polling a question that assumes affirmative action that isn't technically practiced anymore.

>> basically to set the table if i may for constitutional jurisprudence two rational, one, immediate rational, remedy past harms and other is diversity which says we're interted in a diversity of viewpoints. that's better for everybody. >> one talking about the history we discussed previously. bad things happen, racism, we need to counter act that history. the other you're saying what does diversity mean. >> in the words of imor tal guest, gifts rather than grievances, that's a quote. the idea there, diversity of back grounds, socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, allowing individuals to bring different perspectives to the table. it's not so much about past harm as it is about future and present convictions that people

can make. as you said in the 2003 case upheld practiced by university of michigan on university rational. military came in. important briefs, green briefs, amicus written by military and corporations. do not dry up our pipeline. this is what we need for diversity of thought. >> a recurring segment. since you brought it up looks at the argument, military argument, not traditional diversity argument, so important. the president instructing his lawyers to make the case pretty strongly. i think we can put that up on the screen when we talk about obama's brief and supporting affirmative action. this is directly from, like i said, the president's lawyers. the absence of diversity in the officer corps also undermined the military's very legitimacy by fueling popular perceptions

of racial ethnic minorities serving as cannon fodder for military leaders. seems it speaks to diversity but legitimacy. what the president's lawyers are saying, if you take away our tools to keep in mind diversity and affirmative action, we could end up with white leaders like we had in vietnam sending only minorities off to die. that's not only bad for our society but it's bad for our security. >> there's a lot to say in responding to what you've just said. i think the key, since we're talking about the military is an example malcolm gladwell gave where he talks about the difference between a beauty school and marine corps in the context of diversity. he says a beauty school looks for people already beautiful and wants to associate itself with them and benefit from their beauty. the marine corps says, if you come, meet our basic requirements, we will make you a marine. and i think in terms of the

admissions to higher education, which is where the affirmative action debate really becomes very, very argumentative is that we are using affirmative action to look for people who are already beautiful -- or not using affirmative actions per se, looking for admissions to look for people already beautiful and then associate ourselves with them and say, ha, this shows what a great school yale is or harvard is or any schools, look at the people we've admitted. in 2009, for example, yale had its commemorative issue of the daily news in which they talked about yale by the numbers for the class of 2009. every single number was about the students before they set foot on yale. it was as if yale added no value. the value came from bringing these students who were from many different places.

>> right. which i want to come back to that. it goes to policy question of diversity. >> what's the issue? is the issue simply diversity in terms of the groups you're bringing to the school, or is diversity actually a way of making better decisions because you have a diverse group of people looking at a problem from multiple perspectives. through that process, you're actually improving merit. >> lets come back to that. nick, you're a house conservative. you're not meant to be seen and not heard. we'll get your take on all of this when we come back right after the break. [ male announcer ] a doctor running late for a medical convention loses his computer, exposing thousands of patient records to identity theft. data breaches can happen that easily. we don't believe you should be a victim of someone else's mistake. we're lifelock. we constantly monitor the web

so if any of your personal information is misused, we're on it. ♪ ow. [ male announcer ] call 1-800-lifelock or go to lifelock.com today. make a wish! i wish we could lie here forever. i wish this test drive was over, so we could head back to the dealership. [ male announcer ] it's practically yours. test drive! [ male announcer ] but we still need your signature. volkswagen sign then drive is back. and it's never been easier to get a jetta. that's the power of german engineering. get $0 down, $0 due at signing, $0 deposit, and $0 first month's payment on any new volkswagen. visit vwdealer.com today.

on any new volkswagen. your children's health can affect their gpa.

yes, exercise and education go hand in hand. so make sure your kids are active 60 minutes every day. you'll help them feel good and even perform better in school. the more you know. so i have this front porch. but so, my dady empty. is making me these. i said i'd help. ah, so you're going to need some tools of your own. this battery will power over 50 tools. don't worry, i'll show you. in case i forget to say thank you. let's get together. grab some tools. and bring it in on budget. we did good. great job. now what? more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. this ryobi one+drill and impact driver combo kit, now just 99 bucks. have to sit around and wait for some segregationist congressman and senators and a president from texas in washington, d.c.

to make up their mind that our people are due now some degree of civil rights. no. we want it now or we don't think anybody should have it. >> that was malcolm x in 1964 just before the passing of the civil rights act. i want to go back to nick. as a conservative malcolm x was also critical of the role of the federal government because he never thought it would go far enough. now we have conservatives saying the federal government has gone way too far. the conversation we're having about affirmative action, why shouldn't military to lani's point be able to take into account all types of diversity when deciding who is going to run one of the most important issues in american life. >> the issue before the court is university admissions. there may be a different standard applied to the military or not. >> do you support the end of affirmative action in all government? >> i believe affirmative action in the sense of giving people admission based primarily on their race or ethnicity or

because they were born in a certain place is clearly unconstitutional because it violates color-blindness required under proper interpretation of the constitution of the 14th amendment. lets pull back just for a moment and talk about the case actually before the supreme court. what you had was a young woman, abigail fisher, who was more qualified than some african-americans and hispanics -- >> that is not true. that is not true. >> that's the allegation and contention being made, in fact, people less qualified than her ended up getting admitted and she did not on the basis of their ethnicity, because of a system being used. >> brief rebuttal. >> she was not in any better shape than the people who were, in fact, admitted under holistic review. there's no evidence she outperformed any students. >> the holistic review formula as dissent pointed out in this case is not any different than what's been struck down in the past.

bottom line all things equal, two applicants, one in a protected class, one is not, the protected class will get in. the problem is what we need is diversity of ideology, ideas, not a diversity of skin color so much. what we want is a diversity of perspectives. there is not necessarily a connection between one's ethnicity and racial background and that kind of diversity. i think there's more diversity on this panel than in the typical university on ideology. >> i might disagree but we strive for diversity of ideas. we hope to see you again, nick, the rest of the panel will stay for more. two reports up next to show how far we still have to go. stay with us. ♪

[ male announcer ] moving object detection. ♪ blind spot warning. ♪ lane departure warning. safety, down to an art. the nissan altima with safety shield technologies. nissan. innovation that excites. ♪

her long day of pick ups and drop offs begins with arthritis pain... and a choice. take up to 6 tylenol in a day or just 2 aleve for all day relief. all aboard. ♪

all aboard. so you can capture your receipts, ink for all business purchases. and manage them online with jot, the latest app from ink. so you can spend less time doing paperwork. and more time doing paperwork. ink from chase. so you can. . welcome back. even as we await these decisions from the supreme court that could seriously alter laws and practices utilized for decades used to address our nation's equalities and history there's two signs that show we face

enduring racism. accused tuesday two major companies, carmaker bmw and discount retailer dollar general of indirectly discriminating against african-americans by using criminal background checks to screen out workers. the same week, department of housing and development released an important new study that indicated overt racial discrimination against minority home buyers persist as they face subtle obstacles in housing surge. while supreme court might be ruling against affirmative action we are seeing these are two seriously data discriminations of a new kind is thriving, so much so the government is looking to get involved. some people call it the new racism or as the author put it, searching for white-opia. habits, institutions not specifically designed to skril nature. contrary to popular belief it does not require animus they thrive in absence of ill will.

it's common to have racism without racist. panel discussion rich, thank you for being here. lets talk about racism without racists. a lot of what people look at, people don't need to be walking around with a racist target in their mind to be part of a system that still leaves things incredibly unequal. >> yes. in my learning and experience that is what often confuses students like abigail fisher. they operate every day life, interpersonal relations seem to be good and they are not generally aware of studies you've pointed out that racial disparity still exists. when i spoke to conservative whites around the country, they say, we are not racist. i say the point is to look at structural issues, practices that leave us with as much residential segregation and educational segregation as we had a generation ago. >> so your book looks at the

question of where is the racism and says for 2013 that may be the wrong question. >> exactly. we have to look at social engineering, transportation policies, laws, practices that socially engineer society with racist results we have to say. i say that with the affirmative action and quote, unquote, racial positive policies, we're told that's racial engineering, you can't change human nature, but all public policy is social engineering. the question is what effect do you want to have. >> jelani that goes to the subject we were discussing with nick from a conservative view, look, things have changed. people aren't being fire hosed is some of the language he used, so the government shouldn't be in these decisions anymore. >> i think that the problem with that argument is that it's like saying if crime decreases then we no longer need to make murder illegal or no longer need to say it's illegal to assault someone. the fact is that we have a kind

of prophylactic effect with laws. the point is to be preventive. >> i want to pause. that's so important. kenji, that's such an important point, the idea usually in public policy if something is working and reducing the bad thing, we say this policy works and lets continue it. here in civil rights we're being told this policy works so make it go away. >> khaki. so this progress narrative is hurting us both in a voting rights context and affirmative action context, which is to say we've made so much progress racism is over. what rich is saying is so important here because i think that many of the forms of racism that exist today don't exist at the level of i have conscious animus against a particular person. i think the cutting edge research is structural racism, unconscious bias about things like that rather than the person willing to come out in polite society and say i'm against a

particular racial group. >> i want to underscore what kenji said in terms of unconscious bias. it's absolutely correct to emphasize structural problems but many people are aware of the fact they harbor a bias. if you're in a place where people are smoking, you're inhaling the smoke, you may not be a smoker but you're still inhaling the passive smoke. this to me is not just about structure but the way in which people individually claim they don't see race because psychologically they are attuned not to admit they see it. so on these tests you can take, implicit association tests, you can find out it's much easier for you, if you are white, to associate other white people with good things and black people with guns and with knives. it's not intentional.

>> it's weird. you talk about that as well, rich, the idea that people have been taught to pretend they are not seeing what they are saying. i could say to you, look at your afro, big hair, lets talk about it or i could never say rich is my black friend. what do you mean by black friend? which is a funny thing people driving in less diverse areas, less in new york city but other parts of the country, to avoid talking about things we need more tools to expos. i want to get your thoughts on that when we come back right after the break. stay with us here on mhp. woman: everyone in the nicu -- all the nurses wanted to watch him when he was there 118 days. everything that you thought was important to you changes in light of having a child that needs you every moment.

i wouldn't trade him for the world. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. if you're caring for a child with special needs, our innovative special care program offers strategies that can help.

welcome back. we've been waiting on the supreme court to make up their minds on pretty big cases on the docket. this could possibly potentially be the week starting thursday if they decide against government assurance of voting rights, marng equality, against affirmative action, what then. what will be next for those of us who care about the issue. if we see negative rulings on affirmative action and vogue

rights, which many people expect when you look at alito replacing o'connor, a key vote on prior decisions, what do people who want to advance civil rights do? >> as we were talking about, it's going to become about social movement. here is the bottom line ari, 2014 why people are due or scheduled to become a minority. this is an matiimating a lot of decisions. the question is how will we manage that transformation does one have reactionary restrict n restrictionist division or does one have an expansive view like you or bill gates who sees this as an opportunity. how we manage that not just with supreme court decisions but other policies and practices will be critical to our well-being economically and politically. >> i think the question is that will happen in the future. i think we can kind of see what the general trend is. i think what will happen in the future is the same thing that will happen in the past.

we've never seen a straight linear progress for african-americans. every time there's been progress there's been regression. after emancipation, governments that brought about lynching. after civil rights, '70s and '80s. if that happens again people will have to go back to strategies sustaining since the end of slavery and continue to press forward. >> kenji. >> i guess i'm a little more optimistic than you are, ar issuing, i think we'll win marriage cases and i think we'll lose in some ways two race cases, voting rights and affirmative action. this is going to be a term about promise and limits of formal equality. i think that needs to be messaged out to the country, which is to say what does equality mean to you? does equality mean mathematical equal treatment of people or does equality mean lifting up people historically subordinated, anti-classification view or anti-subordination view.

>> the action is within the reaction, which is an organizing term for saying people are going to have to mobilize in order to direct attention to the fact that these problems continue despite the court or certain members of the court feeling we've solved these problems a long time ago. >> rich, a final word? >> yeah, we'll see. we'll see how it goes. you know, ari, you went to michigan. you understand the benefits of this. this is what i was talking about, expansive, positive view of the future, one reactionary and restrictionist people per receive resources or can we expand. can we appeal to best values as americans and say this is the opportunity, the pie is infinite. that might sound poly annish, it might be how people are viewing

same-sex marriage, vote rights. >> the picture in jelani's head, how we react, whether we see as advancement or some arguments president obama made, not just the gift argument lani has written so eloquently about, the person sitting next to you in the classroom is for your benefit, the white minority benefit but also the legitimacy of our society depends on the people who are empowered to make decisions. that includes equal opportunity policy and clearly voting protection so we're all making those decisions about power together. i want to thank you guys. it's been a tremendous conversation. i wish we had more time. i suspect mhp may have many of you on again as you have been on before. next up, i want to talk about defending evil. what it really takes to fight for the rights of those on the wrong side of the law. you're going to want to hear what we have to say about that. and on this father's day a special look at the challenges of being a dad in inner city.

more nerdland at the top. stay with us. [ phil ] when you have joint pain and stiffness... accomplishing even little things can become major victories. i'm phil mickelson, pro golfer. when i was diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis, my rheumatologist prescribed enbrel for my pain and stiffness, and to help stop joint damage. [ male announcer ] enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers,

nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. before starting enbrel, your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. you should not start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have symptoms such as persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. since enbrel helped relieve my joint pain, it's the little things that mean the most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine prescribed by rheumatologists. for all those who sleep too hot or too cool, for all those who sleep and struggle to sleep comfortably together, now there's a solution. the company that individualized your comfort with the sleep number bed is now introducing sleep number dual temp, the revolutionary temperature-balancing layer with active air technology that works on any mattress, including yours. whether you sleep hot or cool

sleep number dual temp allows each of you to select your ideal temperature. so you can both sleep exactly the way you like-at your own perfect temperature. and there's only one place in the world you'll find an entire collection of temperature-balancing solutions-including the revolutionary new sleep number dual temp layer-designed to give you the soundest sleep of your life: a sleep number store near you. sleep number. comfort individualized. visit sleepnumber.com to find one of our over 400 sleep number stores nationwide. there's a reason no one says "easy like monday morning." sundays are the warrior's day to unplug and recharge. what if this feeling could last all week? with centurylink as your trusted partner, it can. our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and dedicated support,

your business can shine all week long. welcome back. i'm ari melber in for melissa harris-perry. lately there have been several events that forced us to think about evil. we knew it when we saw it at the boston marathon. when the nation turned from grieving to a manhunt in realtime when police released pictures of suspects in terror. the nation acted not only with horror but vengeance, there were calls to dispense with a trial and go for execution. they rejected that in terms of criminal rights. the due process rights we all have, importantly to his own lawyer, some questioned why we should fund his defense, some

questioned how you defend the indefensible. if it's competent and good defense does that raise the idea the killer could go free, if he is a killer. the same principle in a different boston massacre, 1770, a different enemy, british captain preston was accused of ordering his soldiers to kill five civilians and wounding many others. while at the time many did not think he deserved a trial or lawyer, preston was represented by one of the best american advocates of the day, john adams. paul brought that moment to life in the film "john adams." >> prisoners must be judged solely on the evidence produced against them in court and by nothing else. and the evidence we have heard speaks plainly enough, gentlemen. a sentry's post is his castle. to attack it by english law is an illegal act.

soldiers so assaulted may defend themselves to the death. >> well, it is that tradition we see in the coming trial of dzhokhar tsarnaev. led by this woman, while the concept of the right to counsel is old, the right to counsel for all people, including all poor people is fairly new in this country. in march we mark the 50 year anniversary securing that right. recognized the right to court appointed counsel. gideon has been diluted to some degree, an empty promise for marginalized defendants. they are increasingly assigned lawyers underpaid, overburdened and prevented by our system and spending choices for having a reasonable amount of time to work on any case. shortage of funding led to a shortage of public defenders. they now spend an average of six minutes per case indigent clients for arraignment according to a recent report.

in many instances they have met their client hours or minutes before the hearing dispensing quickly of the case, the defendant sometimes go for a plea deal they might otherwise not take and it's on to the next. those insurmountable case loads have been reluctant to kick in any money to meet this burden of an underfunded indigent defense system. what do you get? two separate and unequal systems of justice, the promise of gideon undermined by practicalities. we have people who work to do the best they can within the system. former prosecutor in the bronx d.a.'s office, an attorney and former president for legal aid society in new york city. his firm is also going to trial in october to challenge indignity of defense system in upstate new york. jodi owens, southern property law center and normal williams, civil attorney who has

represented thousands of criminal indigents. norman, i want to start with you. >> as you said, the system is overburdened. people have way too many cases. we don't have time to dig into a person's needs. it's tough to figure out what legal steps you need to take for each individual client. it is rough. it is rough. public defenders just do the best they can. case loads are just way too high, and you're dealing with a portion of the population that has a lot of diverse problems. >> danny, on the fundamental question, the paul giamati question, is it harder to get public awareness, spending commitment to this where they understand why this is good, why people who are accused of awful

things should have a vigorous defense. >> it is difficult but it's such a fundamental right. i guess one way to start with your question about whether or not how can you defend these people is to really take it to a different step. when you talk about evil, the greatest evils in our history have been done by government in the name of its people, whether it was early times of attila and alexander, or rwandaan genocide, holocaust, modern times apartheid. all done by government saying in the name of our people it's important to do. it's important to understand the defense counsel, people who stand there and say proudly we will not let government overreach. we are going to test this, by evidence, by competence, by beyond a reasonable doubt standard. we want to make sure the right person is actually convicted, if he's convicted. because not only is there a fear that someone will go free, there's a great fear that the

real person is out there and hasn't been caught because the wrong person has been accused. >> do you look at it this way, philosophically, this is the first line of defense. >> i do, i agree with the philosophy but take um bridge, six minutes, just meeting a client before a hearing. i'm a criminal defense attorney. 80% of my practice is court appointed. i'm an ex-d.a. unlike norman who came from legal aid. i can say for his legal aid colleagues that legal aid attorneys, they are excellent. they are beyond qualified. i don't see any of those legal aid attorneys that i see every single day i'm in court take only six minutes or review a case but momentarily before walking into a hearing. nobody chooses this job because you want to be famous and rich. you choose being a prosecutor or criminal defense attorney --

>> i don't know why you have to bring up my television career when we're trying to talk about something important and it hurts my feelings but go ahead. >> we have such great passion, i think everybody at the table can agree, we have such great passion for law and order and crime. because of that, you sign up for that am i overworked and underpaid, sure, but i signed up for it. you have a conscious and do your job. >> i want to go to the numbers then. you make an important point. part of the distinction if i read you right, lets distinguish between the integrity of people who do this work and systemic pressures on some people in some places where they don't feel they have enough time when you have to do math and take the number of cases assigned. i'll give you a chance to respond to that. to your point about numbers, personal experience, part of why you're here, you know a lot about this, i want to put up on the screen something called meet them and plead them, mother jones, looks at recommendations, amount of time public defenders

have on procedures and times actually allotted. you'll see average hours needed is the longer bar. in most cases from felonies to misdemeanors to juvenile, average hours available often several hundred hours left, according to national advisory counsel on criminal justice standards and goals. we want to seed this with real numbers and jody i want to bring you in. >> it's not just time but resources. there's salary differences in prosecutors and public defenders office that dictate our value system as a country has leaned more toward the prosecution of these individuals tha rather than adequate representation of individuals. people who do this work are passion at, but if i have a case load twice that of a prosecutor my representation will be lacking. >> i think when people hear that, they will be confused. when you hear that or watch "law & order," you feel like prosecutors are heroes and terrible defense attorneys in

depiction and you feel they are as powerful and have as much time as prosecutors. jody is saying that's not true. >> i think what jody is saying is a great point, the pay scale is differentiated, a lot of people do not know. you see on tv the prosecutor taking the subway in a dowdy suit and you see the flashy defense attorney rolling up in the benz to the courthouse. that's not the case. prosecutors sometimes, for the amount of work and the resource i think is what jody is saying, prosecutors have a nice 10:00 to 4:00 day, some work harder. they have excellent benefits, great salaries and abundant resources. >> they have the police department. the police department is their investigator. when need an investigator they apply to the court and say can i have the money to be able to hire an investigator so i can do this. so there's just simply no

question that the differentiation in roles and the way we see those roles reflects everything we talked about for the previous hour we've been on, what kind of society do we live in, who gets prosecuted in court, who is there, who gets jail terms, who goes to prison for life for minor crimes. have you to understand that system within the democratic system we have, competition for resources for all the other important things, education and housing and all the others. people don't like people accused of crime. politicians don't get re-elected by making big, good statements about people. so it's part of the dilemma. absolutely right, nothing to do whatsoever with the individual attorney on the case. it has to do with the systemic problem, what kind of resources do those attorneys have. >> people don't often think of the people accused of a crime as their potential brethren, their potential constituents. this could be you.

>> that's true. i think a lot of times when the person is a child and they need services, society is willing to help the child. but when that child grows up to become a flown or criminal offender, then we sever ties and decide that person is no longer deserving of what society has to offer. it's a very short sighted analysis, unfortunately but human analysis. >> where i practice in the deep south, linked to inadequate representation or access to representation at all. >> we're going to stay on this and i want to talk about the financial piece you mentioned. stay with us here on mhp. [ male announcer ] if you suffer from a dry mouth then you'll know how uncomfortable it can be. [ crickets chirping ] but did you know that the lack of saliva

can also lead to tooth decay and bad breath? [ exhales deeply ] [ male announcer ] well there is biotene. specially formulated with moisturizers and lubricants, biotene can provide soothing relief and it helps keep your mouth healthy, too. [ applause ] biotene -- for people who suffer from dry mouth. [ female announcer ] stress sweat is different than ordinary sweat. it smells worse. get 4x the protection against stress sweat. introducing new secret clinical strength stress response scent.

little things anyone can do. it steals your memories. your independence. ensures support, a breakthrough. and sooner than you'd like. sooner than you'd think. you die from alzheimer's disease. we cure alzheimer's disease. every little click, call or donation adds up to something big.

welcome back. among those who are underserved by our system of public defense, a group of people whose particular challenges sometimes go unacknowledged during hearings, mentally ill. after a hearing if they are found guilty, things for the mentally ill will usually get worse. take a look at this video. that video from american civil liberties union given to us by the law center currently pursuing a lawsuit against the

mississippi prison where the man being attended to in the video ultimately died from suicide. it was a desperate attempt, we think, to escape conditions inside east mississippi correctional facility. that's a for profit prison where mentally ill are being housed. the lawsuit says inmates are enduring, quote, barbaric and horrific treatment and living in a perpetual state of crisis." the lawsuit a little happened of the medical care they are supposed to receive at this facility, the prisoner's health needs are instead ignored, underfed. they are living in sometimes filthy and rat infested cells. some are forced to live in darkness, isolation for weeks, months, years. with us bringing that very lawsuit from the prison, jody i want to go right to you, what conditions are you seeing you want to use this suit to addr s address. >> it's a cesspool. they are forced to defecate in

bags because rats the toilets run out of. they get no mental health treatment whatever. they beg for tray slots for treatment and guards are taking fire extinguishers and shooting them inside their cells. we have countless inmates with psychiatric needs that aren't getting services or find themselves worse off when they came to the facility. >> what would your suit do if one. >> restructure entire facility and make sure mental health provided, monitors in place to ensure bake human rights are protected of these individuals are treated worse than animals. >> as a former prosecutor, where do you come down when you look at this kind of issue. i'm not asking you to defend sending people off there. that's not obviously your jurisdiction. what do you think about it? >> duly i read about this before i met jody and i was thrilled he's addressing this issue. now they are bringing mentally ill inmates into the conversation. lets be reminded that mental

illness, in terms of criminal defendants, that's only entered our scope maybe the last few years. the problem with other system, again, talking about indigent defendants, mentally ill criminals. the problem is not having the resources to defend those people and meaning having the doctors, having the clinicianse s having the clinicianses to real investigate, was this criminal or was it a result of mental illness. >> that sounds right and goes to the conversation we were having about the funding of certain things in the criminal justice system at the expense of others, at the police and prosecutal arm, seems flowing to this industry and private industry. put up on the screen to give spending habits, spending on corrections, police. rising bar at the top is police.

at the bottom in red, basically flat, indigent defense. statistics from policy institute. at some point we see that disparity generally. then in the context of these kinds of jails, the money is going there but not regulated in a way that reflects our values i would argue. >> just think about it. what could be a worse idea than to say to private companies whose goal by definition is to make as much money as they can, we are going to contract with you to provide services nobody cares about to people nobody cares about to people nobody cares about and whatever you don't spend, you're going to keep as profit. you don't have to be a lawyer. you don't have to be much of anything to understand how flawed that system is. it can't work well. >> what i don't understand this prison, that particular prison, is being run in part by medical administrators. so why are they allowing this to

happen? isn't there some duty of care in terms of the physicians running that. >> what do you mean by duty of care? >> duty of care. physicians have a duty of care. lawyers have a duty of care. ethical responsibility. >> ethical and legal obligations would be to act differently. >> just as he said, the the goal is to maximize profits. you maximize profits by cutting services. that's what we continue to see. this facility houses 1200 people only one psychiatric dr. you know seriously mentally ill people. there's no way the doctor can see people. that's why we sue department of corrections. mississippi and all states have obligation to make sure they are enforcing whoever the contract with to not move forward these practices. >> as a prosecutor, did you think about where people ended up in the prisoner system? ultimately it's not the job of the prosecutor to worry about that. they are supposed to prosecute the case. some of these prisons give you real pause. >> with the plea, not guilty by

reason of insanity, norman has a lot of experience with, with that plea, there's many prosecutors who red cross nice mental illness and say this person doesn't belong in prison. that's a separate issue, the fact we have mentally ill people in prison when they don't belong in prison, they should be in the hospital. >> i think we have a few problems here. first off we have difficulties in our country dealing with the mentally ill that are not criminally accused. i think the problem that jody has pointed out with the one physician that has to deal with thousands of patients, it's almost the same problem a public defender has dealing with their own case load. sometimes we find when you look in the average prison, there is a good chunk of their population that has some mental issues. but those mental issues don't necessarily become part of a person's case. so sometimes you don't figure out that someone needs services until after their case is over.

>> how do you figure that out on a personal level? >> it's difficult because we're lawyers. we're not physicians. we're not psychiatrists. >> but you have a bedside manner. >> thank you. you can see, you can feel when someone has a problem. a lot of times what amazes me is how much brightness runs along with mental disorder. sometimes the clients that i've had the most fruitful conversations with are those that suffer from schizophrenia or other disorders. >> you don't actually have to be a clinician. if you recognize a few points, all you have to do is ask the judge for a psychological evaluation. it's that easy. >> danny, when you're overseeing 1,000 lawyers for basically some of the poorest people in new york who can't afford them, did you have a process to look at this piece of it? >> well, one of the things the lawyers became trained for, interestingly before the supreme court said they had to do it is

consequences of taking a plea or having their client found guilty. in the world we live in, if somebody is found guilty, even of minor crimes, they may lose the right to housing authority, they may lose the right to any kind of government benefit. specifically in immigration cases a plea could result in somebody being deported or children taken away. for many of our clients, it's much more important that not happen and they go ahead and try a case. our lawyers are particularly sensitive to these other kinds of issues we're talking about. they were trained to do so and as everybody said, they are extraordinary people. being there they cared very much about it. >> extraordinary people often in these tough spots. i know you're working on a new effort that would push systemic change. i want to ask you about that, what you want to force the government to do for justice here. we'll get to that right after the break. stay with us here on mhp. people join angie's list for all kinds of reasons.

i go to angie's list to gauge whether or not the projects will be done in a timely fashion and within budget. angie's list members can tell you which provider is the best in town. you'll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare. now that we're expecting, i like the fact

that i can go onto angie's list and look for pediatricians. the service providers that i've found on angie's list actually have blown me away. join today and find out why over 1 million members count on angie's list. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. there was this and this. she got a parking ticket... ♪ and she forgot to pay her credit card bill on time. good thing she's got the citi simplicity card. it doesn't charge late fees or a penalty rate. ever. as in never ever. now about that parking ticket. [ grunting ] [ male announcer ] the citi simplicity card is the only card that never has late fees, a penalty rate, or an annual fee, ever. go to citi.com/simplicity to apply. or an annual fee, ever. we replaced people with a machine.r, what? customers didn't like it. so why do banks do it? hello? hello?!

if your bank doesn't let you talk to a real person 24/7, you need an ally. hello? ally bank. your money needs an ally. ok s o i' your money needs an ally. 've been having with greek nonfat yogurt, loaded with protein 0% fat that thick creamy texture, i was in trouble. look i'm in a committed relationship with activia and i've been happy and so has my digestive system. now i'm even happier since activia greek showed up because now i get to have my first love and my greek passion together, what i call a healthy marriage. activia greek. the feel good greek. ♪ dannon

welcome back to melissa harris-perry. we're talking about the role of the public dvdrer, what some call indefensible and others look at as fundamental value. back to danny greenberg who used to run new york legal aid and oversee some of the people who defend people who have nothing, no money and no other way to get through the court system. discussing the system, discrimination and issues here, you're actually working on new effort with new york civil liberties union that would force more justice in the criminal justice system. what's that case about. >> first i'm lucky to be in a great law firm, a chance to focus on some of the problems i saw at the legal aid society. this lawsuit says it's a class action, in many counties in upstate new york, literally people don't get lawyers until days gone by. they are arrested in the middle

of the night, brought before magistrate, sets bail too high for the person to get ouchlt by the time a lawyer comes and sees him in prison, days have gone by. that's totally violative of gideon. so there have been -- >> the case upholding this right. >> there have been nine commissions that studied it and said there's a problem and the state has really not moved on it. this is one where it isn't the county's fault. it isn't the individual lawyer's fault. it's clear to us we're not suing individual lawyers. this is a systemic problem. >> you'd ask a judge to do what exactly? >> to order the state that there be enough resources and resources be used to ensure that at arraignments somebody is present. >> jody, if you're watching this at home and frustrated and there are efforts to make judges do better things. we talk about judges don't care about the issues here and

earlier in the show at the level of the supreme court, what else can people do politically in organizing and movements. southern poverty law center does a range of action to try to get justice. >> people can educate others about the judicial system and how it works and how disadvantages of not having representation, regardless of what crime you may have committed limit your ability to have your day in court. without having your day in court, it's stacked against you. it needs to be fair. the bedrock of the constitution, fairness. this fairness is not there, all constitutional guidelines don't matter. >> this is true. this is true. we need to get more funding into the county so people can be adequately represented. it's crucial, what this country is founded upon. >> danny is saying upstate new york there aren't lawyers for arraignments, whereas in new york county there's 20 of us sitting around waiting for an

arraignment with nothing to do. in mississippi, i believe, you were also saying, jody, there aren't enough lawyers. in terms of education, it's not only every state but every county in every state runs differently. >> the larger problem is if you're not staffing the system accordingly you put way too many in prison. state budgets can't handle overincarceration, highest in the country. we also know we lack public defenders to fund it. >> we'll walk through it briefly, the justice policy organization has gone through some of these issues of what it actually causes when you have this kind of inequality. more pretrial detention for people who need it. it's bad for security. increased pressure to plead guilty. wrongful convictions, excessive sentencing, fail to take into account unique portion of the complaint. >> that reads like our complaint

in the lawsuit. i heard myself before talking about the profit mode of private industry in the prisons. i would be remiss if i didn't say my law firm together with the civil liberties union has put in literally thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars, because great law firms really do see these kinds of issues. when you have leaders of the firm like paul roth, where their whole lives have been involved in these kinds of things, the private bar is a terrific ally for people who need counseling. my job is special counsel for pro bono, 100% time to help those who need it. >> i think, danny, what you are saying is correct. but again it's just the general public does not know how these things work on a daily basis. the fact that someone accused of a crime is going in front of a judge and being arraigned without a lawyer there. >> it's shocking. >> people don't understand what this means in practicality.

>> i don't think people understand what being arraigned means. walk us through that without a lawyer. >> you get reads your formal charges. pretend ari gets arrested. >> for what. if we're going to do it, lets go all the way. >> assault. >> i'm going to say jaywalking, we can go up. that's my prior. >> jaywalking, under general constitution, speedy trial, you have a right to go in front of a judge within, lets say, 24 hours. that's the rule. now you could be sitting in downtown in the courthouse in the pens two to three days before you see a judge. the thing is when you see a judge, everything you say can be held against you. you need your lawyer there to number one ask for you to be released because ari has no record presumably and jaywalking is first offense. he should be allowed to go home. >> you like my odds but i would need a lawyer. >> absolutely.

even you should not defend yourself. >> the state has one. you should have a lawyer. >> when you put it like that, that's what people don't realize from the beginning. some goes back to "law & order," where ideas come from, pop culture and movies. movies have politics undergirding them like our politics are anti-defendant. >> it's like much in society, it's a little bit complicated. there have been studies of people saying should everyone who is accused of a crime get a lawyer. it's off the charts, 89% of people say that and i think believe that, when as you point out at the beginning, you get into a particular kind of case and people hear that, then those numbers tend to drop. >> the principle is the same, shouldn't matter what kind of crime, jaywalking, terrorism, drug use, or violent offense and whether the lawyer provided is in a position to secure that right and do the job. that's what we keep an eye on on both your suits. i want to thank you, danny, seema, norman, jody.

i've learned everyone's name. i hope you have at home as well. up next, we have the lawmaker who says he cares about heck cost because he has a man's brain. wow, seriously? i'm gonna give jimmy some honey maid teddy grahams to snack on. are they actually made with real fruit and eight grams of whole grain? does a bear make sparkly hats for dogs? ♪ yes. yes, he does. sprinkle him teddy. ♪ [ mom ] yea, give it more sparkles. [ male announcer ] your kids make great things. so give them a tasty, wholesome snack that has eight grams of whole grain and is now made with real strawberries and bananas. honey maid teddy grahams. two new flavors now made with real fruit. honey maid teddy grahams. hoo-hoo...hoo-hoo. hoo-hoo hoo. sir... i'll get it together i promise...

heeheehee. jimmy: ronny, how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico? ronny:i'd say happier than the pillsbury doughboy on his way to a baking convention. get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.

♪ ♪ ♪

[ male announcer ] for dad's first job as dad. nissan tests hundreds of child seats to give you a better fit and a safer trip. snug kids, only from nissan. ♪ and now it's the world famous mhp segment where we ask "wow ... seriously?" first up, a lesson in biology and gender from a republican politician. this ought to be good. >> from the other side of the aisle, i hear the conversation being about free. this is free. we they'd to take it and it's free. now, my brain, being a man's brain, sort of thinks differently. because i say, well, it's not -- if it's free, is it really free. i say, in my brain, there's a cost to this.

>> that was ken ferdette, about whether maine should expand medicaid. he's explaining science. man brain good, understand free market economics. women's brain soft, want free shiny money. a few days later, he will not run for congress. obviously people in nerdland know women have normal brains. duh. >> president obama's pick to be deputy director of the cia, first woman ever who would hold the job, she advised white house and cia on legal issues on guantanamo bay, national security policies, helped shape ideas in the president's speech on the strategy in the war on terror. we're not here to talk about that. "the daily beast" had the real scoop on her this week, hours

after the president announced nomination. new cia used to read and write allowed at her bookstores, "e t "erotica night." they didn't stop there with the facts we need to know. quoted a neighbor talking about her work ethic saying she used to renovate her apartment wearing, quote, jeans or a pair of shorts. it's shocking and i'm not done. another headline in the same "the daily beast" women's section was always on haynes, lamented women in the cia facing a glass ceiling, for more on that, check the sexist vertical. take you to the diocese where they have fired second grade teaching and banned her from teaching at any school. her offense, being a victim of domestic violence. she says her husband is abusive. in january after what she called

a bad weekend -- what he called a bad weekend, got to get that right, he violated a restraining order and showed up at the school which went into lockdown. no one was hurt and he's in jail on felony stalking and domestic violence charge and he'll get his day in court. but the church doesn't want to take chances. they told her in a letter, we feel deeply about you and the situation you and your children find yourself through no fault of your own. in the interest of students, faculty and parents we can't let you work there or any other school. she has worked in the district 14 years. she has four children all of whom attend the school and all of whom have been kicked out. you don't stop domestic abuse by punishing the victim. in a serious note that's a real case of "wow ... seriously?" up next, dads doing the best they can on father's day. stay with us.

so i have this front porch. but it's really empty. so, my dad is making me these. i said i'd help. ah, so you're going to need some tools of your own. this battery will power over 50 tools. don't worry, i'll show you. in case i forget to say thank you. let's get together. grab some tools. and bring it in on budget. we did good. great job. now what? more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. this ryobi one+drill and impact driver combo kit, now just 99 bucks. water, we take our showers with it. we make our coffee with it. but we rarely tap its true potential and just let it be itself. flowing freely into clean lakes, clear streams and along more fresh water coast line than any other state in the country. come realize water's true potential.

dive in-to the waters of pure michigan. your trip begins at michigan.org. since i've been using crest pro-health, i've noticed a huge improvement. [ male announcer ] go pro for a clean that's up to four times better, try these crest pro-health products together. the toothpaste is really awesome. it cleans a lot. [ male announcer ] crest pro-health protects not just some, but all these areas dentists check most. this is gonna be a very good checkup. i feel it. [ male announcer ] go pro with crest pro-health. my dentist was so proud of my teeth today. after using crest pro-health for a few weeks, i just feel brighter, fresher, cleaner.

after using crest pro-health for a few weeks, so you can capture your receipts, ink for all business purchases. and manage them online with jot, the latest app from ink. so you can spend less time doing paperwork. and more time doing paperwork. ink from chase. so you can. it's father's day so we want

to take time to say happy father's day to all the dads in nerdland and introduce you to a new book called "doing the best i can, fatherhood." written by kathryn and nelson, it challenges inner city dads are deadbeat dads. spent years in communities camden, philadelphia, interviewing 110 specifically unwed fathers. some of the results surprised the authors like the fact most of the men they interviewed welcomed being a dad. i'm pleased to welcome kathy and tim to the table. why is it it was a surprise to you even young fathers, i hear one as young as 15 was excited for what sounded like an unplanned parenthood. >> prior to this research i spent years researching single moms. colleagues said you've got to talk to the dads. so finally we did.

they thought dads would respond to a pregnancy by cutting and running. that was sort of the conventional wisdom at the time. instead we found even though most of the births were unplanned, fathers were really excited. they greeted the opportunity to father with a great deal of enthusiasm. >> tim, we know and you write about how birth rates do vary greatly by socioeconomic class and by race in different communities. 50% are the birth rates for unmarried women among african-americans, for example, as opposed to 20% for white americans. how does that play spot story and research you're explaining. >> we did interview african-american and white fathers. i think things started out more as a race story back maybe a couple decades ago but now it's becoming more of a class story. really the dividing line is whether you have a college degree or not in terms of the rates of unmarried parenthood.

>> yeah. you say in looking at that research actually for noncohabitation people without high school diploma or ged noncome happnon cohabitation and falls with education. most people think they know why that is but why is that? >> well, the men we interviewed were low in come men, struggling to get by in pretty bad neighborhoods. often did not have a high school diploma as you say. the employment situation was really bad. and there's a lot of relational issues as well. >> kathy, people read "doing the best i can" will find stories while anonymize individuals are incredibly intimate. how did you get people to open up about things some weren't happy about. >> we moved to one of the poorest cities, camden, new jersey and hung out. did our laundry with everybody

else. you know, now, we, too, found the maytag repairman wouldn't come. our kids played with the kids of these men. they played together. i think willingness to be parents hurt. >> that's frowned upon in social scientists, journalists don't do it because they don't have time, energy or interest. you file a story over a few days, maybe a couple weeks for a long magazine piece but you don't live with people and you're not supposed to. do you think -- is that a competitive edge for what you're finding here. >> the spread of single parenthood is the biggest demographic mystery in the last half of the century so we figured extraordinary measures were required. doing this goes way back to margaret mead. >> final word. >> these guys really want to be parents. it's not about the status of parenthood, it's about the role.

they really want to do this. >> the book "doing the best i can, fatherhood in the inner city." and appropriate book to look at for the different kinds of fatherhood on father's day. thank you for being here. >> thanks. >> i want you to stay with us. in my closing comment today i want to tell you why dna is a civil rights issue. [ panting ] we're headed the same way, right? yeah. ♪ [ panting ] uh... after you. ♪ [ sighs ] [ male announcer ] it's all in how you get there. the srx, from cadillac. awarded best interior design of any luxury brand. lease this 2013 cadillac srx for around $399 per month,

with premium care maintenance included. to help protect your eye health as you age... would you take it? well, there is. [ male announcer ] it's called ocuvite. a vitamin dedicated to your eyes, from bausch + lomb. as you age, eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite is uniquely formulated to help protect your eye health. now that's a pill worth taking. [ male announcer ] ocuvite. help protect your eye health. and now there's ocuvite eye + multi.

an eye vitamin and multivitamin in one.

here's a fundamental premise. you own your body. now, it's not exactly news that there are two powerful forces that try to steamroll that fundamental right -- politicians and corporations. but what you may not know is that three days ago the supreme court struck back against it one half of that problem. the court got involved because medical companies have been pushing the boundaries of how to

profit off dna. these corporations were claiming they could patent and own organic dna. your dna. the court said no. it rejected privatized dna. but then when it came to the government seizing dna, most of the justices lost their nerve. the surrender to aggressive police tactics came in another key case earlier this month. the justices okayed a huge and relatively new power for police. the power to search you, seize your dna, and use it to track you in a database, even if you've never committed a crime. now, dna databases and crime tracking may sound like a far-away fantasy out of "minority report." but the future here's. 29 states already take dna samples of suspects for certain crimes. now, i'm not talking about convicted felons. the state already has authority to gather information about them which makes sense if they're headed to jail piem talking about how the police treat the rest of us. we're all innocent until proven guilty. that's supposed to apply whether you're minding your own business or talking to a cop or being stopped, frisked, and arrested

by one. and that's where these new dna powers run into some very old police practices. we already know about the systemic discrimination in our justice system. we talked about it today. african-americans make up 13.6% of the population, and in this dna area now 40% of the fbi's dna database is made up of african-americans. i think that has two consequences. at this rate the very first national database of dna will be of black america. one out of four black men are already in it. and second, the genetic pool for solving crimes will inexorably bend toward the people who've been swabbed, toward black people. and since dna cases are easier to solve with the available genetic evidence, however it's collected, these black suspects will be more likely to face apprehension than similar white suspects for similar crimes. now, some say any police tactic that lowers crime is worth it. but that's not how our rights work. and in a dissent from the court's ruling one supreme court justice sliced through the idea

that we should surrender to all police imposition just to keep us safe. this justice wrote, and here i'm reading to you, "today's judgment will solve more crimes, but so would the taking of dna samples from anyone who flies on an airplane. or attends a public school. perhaps the construction of such a genetic panopticon is wise but i doubt the founding fathers would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection." republicans, please take note. the man who wrote that objection to an endless police state was antonin scalia. and anyone who's serious about conservative small government would have to agree with him. and they can join everyone who's serious about civil liberties and racial justice. now, scalia failed to address the racial discrimination here, so he came up pretty short. but i think that's the next battle because science will continue to empower police and the state. here's a rule of thumb since many policy makers and pundits don't yet grasp that dna is a

civil rights issue. in a justice system where the majority of official practices have a discriminatory impact, just about anything that system touches will become a civil rights issue. that is our show for today. i want to thank you all for watching. i want to thank melissa for having me here. and she will be back next saturday at 10:00 a.m. eastern. don't miss that. now it's time for a preview of "weekends with alex witt" hosted today by mara. what have you got? >> ari, thank you so much. new information today on wheths the nsa snooping programs actually stopped any terror plots. why do some say they stopped dozens? a survivor of military sex assault. new reaction on a setback in congress that may change nothing for those wanting to report a sex attack. i'll talk to her. a proposed law in one state could give traffic police the right to take your cell phone and check whether you've been using it on the spot. plus, what's the most sinful city in the u.s.? well, here's a hint. it's not vegas. even though you might have bet it was. those stories over the next two

hours. don't go anywhere. i'll be right back. to support s. and the brand most recommended by... my doctor. my gynecologist. my pharmacist. citracal. citracal. [ female announcer ] you trust your doctor. doctors trust citracal. [ female announcer ] you trust your doctor. in parks across the country, families are coming together to play, stay active, and enjoy the outdoors. and for the last four summers, coca-cola has asked america to choose its favorite park through our coca-cola parks contest. winning parks can receive a grant of up to $100,000. part of our goal to inspire more than three million people to rediscover the joy of being active this summer. see the difference all of us can make... together.

it's delicious. so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. i never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ robert ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. find out with venus embrace. every five-bladed stroke gives you 360 degrees of smooth for goddess skin you can feel and feel. only from venus embrace.

the edward snowden saga continues. he's now disappeared. is he still in hong kong? and could he defect to china? there's new information at this hour. which one of these republicans does not belong with the others? or do they all represent a splintered faction of the party? the latest from this weekend's big gathering. waiting for history. when and how will the supreme court rule on two big issues, gay marriage and voting rights? could it happen tomorrow? two expert opinions straight ahead. and doing it the old-fashioned way. which cities in the u.s. rank highest when it comes to reading the printed word? hello, everyone. it's high noon in the east, 9:00 in the west. welcome to "weekends with alex witt." i'm mara schiavocampo in for alex. intelligence officials are releasing new information on the terror plots they say were thwarted by the nsa surveillance programs as well as the