now a short portion of the arguments in dobbs v. jackson where justice amy coney barrett engages on safe haven laws on adoption. >> i have a question about the safe haven laws. petitioner points out that in all 50 states you can terminate parental rights by relinquishing a child after abortion and i think the shortest period might have been 48 hours . so it seems to me seen in that light both roe and casey emphasized parenting and so far as you and many of your amici focus on the ways in which the forced parenting, forced motherhood would wet tender women's access to the workplace and equal opportunity. it's also focused on the consequences of parenting and obligations of motherhood that flow from pregnancy . why not the safe haven laws take care of that problem? it seems it focuses the burden more narrowly. there is without question a infringement on bodily autonomy as we have in other contexts like vaccines. however it doesn't seem to me to follow that pregnancy and then parenthood all part of the same burden. so it seems to me th

let's back up to friday in the dobbs decision. in the wake of this, what is the next frontier fothe pro-life movement after roe v. wade being overturned? guest: dobbs overturned roe and it ignited a culture war in which people were fighting through the courts an issue that was in the process of being woed out democratically. the challenge for pro-lifers will be to make their case showing love and concern for pregnant women. make their case emphasizing the fundamental humanityf unbn human beings and maksure that we have legal protections for them. host: what is it just policy consist of? there are complete bans, what is it just policy in your mind? guest: my own position is that an unborn human being has a right to life under law. are some cases like those in cases of rape or the protection of the mother. i believe very much in the basic protections from conception. i know a lot of people disaee with me. i hope to persuade them, but i will recognize that i have lost through democratic means. host: a lot of questions that arise from

you can listen to the oral argument from the dobbs case at c-span.org.'re watching live coverage on c-span. >> [indistinct chatter. ] >> [indistinct shouting] >> we need to speak out for people who are still here. raise your hand if you're hanging out with us all night. [indiscernible] >> [indistinct call and response] >> women are not incubators. [indiscernible] >> we will bring you back live to the supreme court shortly. earlier today, house speaker nancy pelosi spoke about the supreme court's decision to overturn roe v. wade during her press conference. here is a portion of her briefing. speaker pelosi: there is

the court deciding that dobbs v. jackson case six-three, upholding a mississippi law which bands most abortions after 15 weeks. >> i too, am from texas. victim to some of the most vicious attacks on abortion in the united states. [inaudible] [cheering] [indiscernible] >> the things that are being said from what is called the pro-life movement, which we have been hearing all day, for those of us who have been here all day, these gruesome stories that people have had to endure where there has been raped, sexual assault, incessant. these are the realities that are ignored when we see roe v. wade. instead is blamed on people not being responsible for engaging in intercourse. it is blamed on people, birthing people, that you should have been more careful. it was your fault. it is not fair. it is on birthing people. responsibility is put on them. it is not fair. there's no responsibility on the other party. it is important to remember that misinformation, identify that misinformation of people saying they are murdering bab

we heard justice sotomayor in the abortion case in dobbs. asked the question, will this institution, she said from the bench, survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the constitution and its reading are just political acts? and it was 1992 when the three justices, o'connor, kennedy, wrote in the majority opinion in casey overalling roe would weaken the court's capacity to exercise its judicial power and to function as a supreme court of the nation dedicated to the rule of law. big picture, whether you agree with this decision on abortion or not, big picture, where does the court stand now in terms of legitimacy in the eyes of the public that it is the independent institution that roberts so wants people to see it as? >> you know, poppy, those three justices from 1992, all republican appointees, all conservative. they had it right. this court's capital is its reliance on precedent, the trust that people have that the law will be stable, and not change simply because the personnel changes. we talked about the 1992 ru

>> how did we get to the dobbs decision? i know you and i talked about this before. had amy coney barrett not been rushed onto the supreme court, which flew in the face of what mitch mcconnell said when he blocked merrick garland back when merrick garland was being put forward by the obama administration. had those events taken place, we would not have the dobbs decision today, that's a fair reading of events, right? help me out here. >> totally. it's broader than that. the credit or responsibility for the dobbs decision depending on how you view it goes to mitch mcconnell as much as it goes to donald trump. he is the one that prevented merrick garland from replacing anton scalia. he is the one that pushed through brett kavanaugh in spite of the sexual ha hasment allegation. he jammed through amy coney berit in an abbreviated process. those are the three trump justices, two if not all three of them wouldn't be on the court but for mitch mcconnell. he is one of the absolutely central figures in the history of the modern supre

that is what dobbs did. if you think there should be so after fetal viability where abortion is restricted or illegal, guess what, that is the world we were living in until friday. host: i know that you'll have to turn around and focus on these new supreme court decisions that will be handed down. we will give you a minute before those start coming out. we do appreciate you coming on to the program, chatting with the viewers. ellie missed out, "allow me to retort." you we discussed policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, we discussed the supreme court decision including abortion and religious freedom. and also with talkshow host thom hartmann, author. watch washington journal, live at 7:00 eastern tuesday morning on c-span or on c-span now, our free mobile app. join the discussion with your phone call, facebook comment, text messages and tweets. the january 6 committee returns earlier than expected after today's announcement it would hold a public hearing on a new evidence tomorrow at 1:00

dobbs vs. jackson women's health in mississippi overturns roe v. wade republican lawmakers are weighing in. they will be live in about 15 minutes. senior washington correspondent eamon javers has been gathering some of that. >> a couple more statements interest republican senators cheering on the supreme court's decision senator grassley saying the decision recognized that the weak legal reasoning in roe v. wade has done more to provoke conflict than resolve it as the late justice ginsburg observed it has rightly done in landmark decisions throughout history from senator sasse as well saying america's work of becoming a more perfect eun unis never over today by righting a constitutional wrong the supreme court took an historic step forward. roe's days are over but the pro-lifer movements work has just begun and speaking of that work, it will take place in a political context in which the supreme court here is just not in the same place politically as the majority of americans are. a may nbc news poll support for abortion rights hit an all-time high

loving versus virginia, contraception, those are so far away from the court's decision in dobbs thaty almost should not even be discussed in a realistic sense at this point in time. >> except for loving which was a 1970s ruling as well, as i recall, roe is the only one that could reach the standard of reliance on a public policy. it goes back half a century. doesn't that make roe stand out from these much more recent decisions also based on the 14th amendment privacy issues? >> sure. the bottom line of roe has been relied on. again, the court has been changing its reasoning for the past few decades, as early as 1992. if one looks at the question about whether the procedural due process clause holds a particular right to privacy, the court has been signaling for years it has questions and concerns about that issue and about the important second issue here of pre-born life and potential life that is not at issue in the same way as some of these other decisions. of course, i'm not a justice. i think justice alito's opinion certainly seems to put a lot of effort behind explaining the rea

that is what dobbs did. if you think there should be so after fetal viability where abortion is restricted or illegal, guess what, that is the world we were living in until friday. host: i know that you'll have to turn around and focus on these new supreme court decisions that will be handed down. we will give you a minute before those start coming out. we do appreciate you coming on to the program, chatting with the viewers. ellie missed out, "allow me to retort." you >> beginning tonight, the first hearing, including an overview of what happened. live witness testimony from a u.s. capitol police officer injured during the breach, and a filmmaker who recorded video of the rally and proud boys. that is tonight on c-span. you can watch on our free app or online at c-span.org. >> the genuine sixth committee returns earlier than expected after today's announcement it would hold a public hearing on new evidence tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. eastern. watch on c-span, c-span now, or anytime online at c-span.org. you can v

host: your thoughts on politics in a post dobbs world? does dogs do for cash does -- does dobbs do for pro-life advocates, does it become a driving force for years and decades to come? guest: i doubt it. we will see. roe removed the abortion question from the democratic process and made it important for pro-lifers to fight year after year to improve the supreme court. in the coming battle, pro-abortion forces can win their legislative battles and lose them and fight them again. the decision will be an important issue and it will be volatile and i'm not claiming i can predict how it will play out. we have had 50 years in which neither side has tried to persuade the middle of the merits of its positions. that will be the challenge in the coming months and years. host: you have laid out where you stand on these positions. do you think that after achieving overturning roe v. wade that the pro-life movement loses this uniting force, that there may be less momentum or less passion behind the issue after they have achieved this goal? guest: i th

the same is true with respect to the second amendment case that came out the day before dobbs and othertial abolishment of rights when it comes to access to contraception, same-sex marriage. we will be ready. geoff: rob bonta, the attorney general for the state of california. ♪ in the day's other news, president joe biden today signed into law the first major federal gun safety legislation passed in decades. it marks a major bipartisan breakthrough on one of the most contentious policy issues in washington. the legislation came together following recent mass shootings at a ulde, texas elementary school and a buffalo, new york supermarket. president biden called the bill a historic achievement. pres. biden: from columbine, to sandy hook, charleston, orlando, los vegas, parkland, el paso, atlanta, buffalo, uvalde, and for the shootings that happen every day in the streets that are mass shootings that we don't even hear about. the number of people killed every day in the streets. their message to us was do something, how many times have we heard that? just do something. for god's sake just

i want to start with the reaction to the dobbs ruling.and the implications of it. >> well, it won't be long, bret. it's hard to say exactly how many months or even long beer it could take. but this matter will now go to the states. many of which dr. abortion rights guaranteed. a small number of which have banned abortion all together. but, when this issue is raised anew, as it is certain to do to happen nearly everywhere, it will not be the same political circumstance under which these laws were passed. people who voted. politicians who voted for abortion on demand right up through the end of pregnancy will have to cast that vote again. and when roe v. wade was in effect, the vote didn't matter as much. what particularly didn't matter as much were votes to ban abortion all together as happened in some states. it's -- it didn't matter because roe v. wade was on the books, and those votes counted for nothing. this time around, they will really count. and politicians will think -- have to think long and hard about whether to either ban it ou

the dobbs majority did not. in other words, [indiscernible] third, what is the majorities leitmotif? is it abortion from other rights because abortion is murder? it did not use that broad language that that's what they implied. the major reason why roe [indiscernible] of course, this idea that a fertilized egg as a person or a moment -- at the moment of conception and it stands as consideration as an actual person is ultimately a religious one. it's not the universal one. in the u.s., it's the view of [indiscernible] one synagogue is challenging abortion ban on the grounds of abortion is often a religious requirement. the supreme court took a religious viewpoint as a ruling or to put it in a way, just as lochner read into the constitution a view of economics, [indiscernible] it was a religious view. there is a lot to be said about quality -- about equality but i'm on a strict time limit so i will and. tom: thanks so much, caroline. very impressed that you are able to stick to the timeline in such a momentous dec

i just think what we have to understand is the individuals, those of us who are opposed to the dobbssee what states are going to do or trusting assurances either from the supreme court, sitting supreme court justices or trusting assurances from nominees to the courts is really not a strategy. it's not going to be anfective strategy moving forward. i think we can expect really enhanced restrictions and expanding restrictions based on the dobbs reasoning and i think we can expect that the supreme court will set a very high bar for overturning those restrictions. and on the flip side, in the states where we are attempting to enhance and affirm reproductive rights, we should expect that the court will set a high bar for affirming that legislation as well. so, you know, there is a lot that we can anticipate but anticipating that at some point that the court will not take up these questions or that the states will not put forward legislation to ban same-sex marriage based on dobbs is absurd. we cannot allow that to be what we're relying on in the future. >> so what is the strategy to prote

from noisy crowds in new york to los angeles, where a country convulsed by the supreme court's dobbs' decision. this constitutional milestone cast a half century by conservative activists. >> a motto that my mom taught me in her ministry is that our job is not to make abortion illegal, but make it unthinkable. >> reporter: it roshes robs women of a fundamental frefreedom, and gives state lawmakers, mostly men, control over their bodies. >> it was accepted by the supreme court by the constitution of the united states, and to have that being threatened now and other things threatened because of this casing in caving inis very, very scary. >> reporter: within months, abortion could be illegal by almost half of the country. these 13 states will activate what is called trigger bans. in this group of states, the dobbs' decision could see anti-abortion legislation unblocked by lower courts or resurrect pre-roe abortion bans. abortion's future is uncertain in parts of america. and in 20 states, abortion rights remain solidly in place for now. georgia is one of a dozen states to pass a so-call

for that reason i am interested to read the leaked draft opinion in dobbs versus jackson . notably in the text of the opinion justice alito did not reference eugenics at all but even more meaningfully in a nod to the box concurrence and there is considerable discussion of eugenics as a footnote in that decision. footnote 41. there justice alito said a series filed by the court in dobbs had noted that some such supporters of liberal access nto abortion had been motivated by a desire to press the size of the african-american population . he went on to say it is beyond dispute roe had that demographic effect. a highly disproportionate percentage of aborted fetuses are black.i wanted to stop and ruminate on that footnote. as we all discussed over the last couple of weeks the decision to overrule roe versus wade has nothing to do with eugenics. justice alito went it and planned parenthood. the fact that the right to an abortion is enumerated is not rooted in the history of this country. for that reason, it seems entirely gratuitous that this footnote appear in the draft opinion.

susan collins, united states senator, has put out a statement on the dobbs ruling and considering your closeness with the supreme court, mike davis, i want to get your reaction to this. ask you whether or not this was the case. she issued this, the supreme court is abandoned a 50-year precedent at a time the country is desperate for stability. this decision, she says, is inconsistent when what justices gorsuch and kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me where they both were inconsistent, sorry, insistent on the importance of supporting long standing precedence the country has relied upon. can you weigh in on that, do you know that to be the case? >> that's just political noise from a politician. the supreme court justices consistently say they are going to follow precedent and the law of precedent includes evaluating precedent to determine whether the precedent is right. liberal politicians don't have any problem when they overturn conservative precedent, only seem to find, you know, only seem to cry about precedent when one of their cases gets overturned. >> trace

the case going to before the supreme court is dobbs v. jackson's women's health organization, a case that directly challenge us role. the mississippi law bans abortions past the 20th week of pregnancy. this runs about four hours and 40 minutes. in this committee and judiciary will come to order. without objection the jurors authorized jewelry sisters of the committee at anytime. we welcome everyone to this morning's hearing on revoking rights, the ongoing crisis in abortion care access. before we begin our tech to remind members of that we've established an email address and distribution diaz did make the descriptive -- maps whitewash first part of our hearing today if. we'd like to submit materials we send them to the email addresses that has been previously distributed your offices and we will circulate the materials for members and staff as quickly as we can and i will now recognize myself for an opening statement two weeks ago, in a leak of a draft opinion from the supreme court, we learned that for the first time in its history the c

>> well, i think in the dobbs case, we don't know what the decision is going to be but certainly if iould like to get the decision out as soon as possible. every day goes by where a decision is not issued, you are risking the justice's life. we had an attempt where he's been charged with attempted murder of people court justice and every day a decision is not released really you're putting justices at risk. it seems that whatever the justices will do in abortion cases specifically in dobbs they should do it fast and not traditional end of june where they release blockbuster decision. mike: firearms case out of new york state, robert, what are your expectations? >> the question is whether the state really has the ability to regulate these issues. whether or not heller is governing and supercede state law. let's remember that the second amendment says well regulated should be necessary for the security of the state. shall not be infringed part at the state but have the right to determine what individualized state laws exist with regard to the ability to keep firearm, the grip on them, t

going forward, what the supreme court said in dobbs is that it's all about women voting.omen make up 50% of the population or more of the voting population. and so if they've got a problem with the decision, then basically they need to go out and vote and change the people who are making the laws. so right now, that's what i'm telling women, that this really is about the future. we can't think about yesterday, it's about starting the fight today and we have to do it at the ballot box in november. and that's why i'm running for attorney general. >> and as you run for georgia attorney general, i wonder if yesterday's decision now has altered the way in which you will be campaigning from this point forward. >> look, i don't think it's going to alter necessarily the way i'm going to be campaigning. but i can tell you that it absolutely gives clarity. women need to really understand the implications of the laws that have been passed by the republicans in the general assembly, and the fact that the leaders of our state don't even want exceptions for rape or incest or the life o

if so, does judge alito look at dobbs-- >> obviously dobbs is on a lot of people's minds and i wanted to open that up more to my colleagues. >> i'll quickly say this that there is deep concern right now about xenophobia nationalism in our country and on deeper inspection, there's deep concern about christian nationalism on the rise in the united states. and this is being tracked and that is really quite disconcerting. what we see in terms of this view, it is not even a full scale christian view. it's an isolated christian view that's anti-abortion and certainly consistent with other religious ideologies in the united states and i think it's a good point that's raised by that particular viewer. >> the world would look very, very different if griswold had been decided based on the fact that it was largely an anti-contraceptive statute promoted by an elment of the catholic church because even catholics are divided on this question. so, very, very different. i want to say something about textualism. i think that textual arguments have to be made and what professor goodwin and i tried to p

if you look at jonathan mitchell's brief in the dobbs case, also the author, i believe, of the texasrtion six-week law, right? a brilliant legal mind whether you agree with him or not in terms of how to shape things legally and have successful legal arguments that hold. he wrote in his brief in dobbs there are no reliance interests that warrant the retention of roe or casey and went on to write about the potential impact on all of those other rights. >> what's interesting, though, is politically you see the other justices, namely alito and kavanaugh, go out of their way to -- >> to say no. >> -- say absolutely not, other rights aren't affected, nothing to see here, don't worry about it, abortion is special. >> that's not the holding of the case. >> they're saying trust us. clarence thomas was the only one who openly called for the overturning of roe v. wade from planned parenthood versus casey onward. he is the only one who actually said -- >> -- politically to try to say don't worry about same-sex marriage and somehow a woman's right to choose what happens to her body politically is

the recent dobbs arguments before the seem corrupt, seeped other -- the u.s. as an outlier to the vast majority of other countries viability standards. he said, quote, when you get to the viability standard, we share that standard with the peoples republic of china, and north korea. it is unconscionable to think that the united states is one of only seven countries that allows for abortions for any reason after 20 weeks. and our nations were certificate, we boldly the clear that it is a self evident truth that human beings are made by their creator and they are dug by him with certain animal rights. first listed as the rice to life for obvious reasons. all three of the democratic's hearsay support and advocate what they say is unrestricted abortion on demand. let me ask dr. robinson, i can go to any of them, you're the medical doctor. based on your website, your testimony today, you clearly support the right to abort a 20-week-old unborn child. i would love for you to explain to us in your medical opinion, at one point and pregnancy, should happen in a portion

the leaker and tended to bring chaos and public pressure into the dobbs case. this hearing shows that they succeeded, those photos demonstrate that public is in fact responding to that leak as planned. >> these protests are in front of justice barrett, justice kavanaugh, justice alito. they don't appear to be having the opposite and anyway trying to influence the pro-choice, if you, all members of the court. is that correct? there's no similar intimidation going on? >> that is correct. >> i wanted to hear quote and hear comment on it. when someone says that it is reprehensible, stay away from homes and families and elected officials and members of the court you can express yourself, exercise your first amendment rights, but to go after them in their homes, to do anything of a threatening nature certainly anything violent is absolutely reprehensible. would you agree with that? >> i certainly would. >> senator dick durbin agrees with that. he's been one of the lone voices willing to denounce it. i have not heard it denounced even by one member on this day us on t

i'm pro-life, so i'm pleased with the dobbs decision. will also say i am pro-constitution, and i do think that this decision should be made by the people of the states, not forced down from the federal government. but louisiana's law was advanced by very well respected state senator, katrina advantageson, and signed -- jackson, and entwined -- signed into law by our democratic governor showing the breadth of southern that -- support that such a law has in my state. and it does allow the so-called morning after pill for someone who might have been a victim of rape or incest. so there are allowances for those situations that people are concerned about. but there's typically -- [inaudible] or the concept that the unborn child is a life. now, we can debate whether or not to have abortions, but i think people -- [inaudible] that when a child at 9 eke weeks has fingers and toes, a few weeks later can behind their elbow, can be seen sucking their thumb, can feel pain at some point that the child is truly a child. now, that is something that our

let's back up to friday in the dobbs decision.n the wake of this, what is the next frontier for the pro-life movement after roe v. wade being overturned? guest: dobbs overturned roe and it ignited a culture war in which people were fighting through the courts an issue that was in the process of being worked out democratically. the challenge for pro-lifers will be to make their case showing love and concern for pregnant women. make their case emphasizing the fundamental humanity of unborn human beings and make sure that we have legal protections for them. host: what is it just policy consist of? there are complete bans, what is it just policy in your mind? guest: my own position is that an unborn human being has a right to life under law. are some cases like those in cases of rape or the protection of the mother. i believe very much in the basic protections from conception. i know a lot of people disagree with me. i hope to persuade them, but i will recognize that i have lost through democratic means. host: a lot of questions that

i would have decided it differently that is very different in the dobbs case in the draft opinion as a matter of starry decisiveness one —- stare decisis i don't see the same amount of national division remaining that there has been ever since rove he weighed inok wayne you apply that to how manageable that has created uncertainty and chaos with the difficulty with these it is applied justice alito does a masterful job and for any of you who have not read this, regardless of how you feel about abortion, you should read it because it's very informative and persuasive and he thoroughly differentiates like a burger felt. i have seen a lot of people make that argument that if dobbs overrules row then another case will certainly overturn a burger felt and i don't think that is accurate. >> i'm an intern from on the in order to remove one of the last checks and balances for that legislative bureaucracy to target the supreme court. >> so the first half of your question the first half is yes that is the whole plane is saving many talking about expanding the court not based on the assessment

ban, then the case then the dobbs. draft opinion because obergerfil is very different than row. as a matter of story decisis and as a matter of where the country is, i don't see the same amount of national division remaining. with regard to obergerfil as there has been ever since row. and when you apply the doctrine of story decisis, the court looks among other things at how judicially manageable the cases the extent to which it's created uncertainty and chaos within the law based on the difficulty or ease with which it's it's applied. just as alito actually does a masterful job of this in his dobb's opinion and for any of you who haven't read justice league's opinion regardless of how you feel about abortion regardless of how you feel about gay marriage or anything else. you really should read it because it's very instructive. it's informative and it's persuasive and he very ably and thoroughly differentiates. cases like obergerfil of from row. so yeah, i i don't think that's i've seen a lot of people make that argument that if dobbs overrules rho than another case will certain

>> well, i van, i understand there are very real concerns prompting on dobbs.e sex marriage is one, contraception is the other and general right to privacy to a large extent democrats perceive at being at stake. personally i think that potential is overstated and the main reason, ivan, there's just not the same level of political con testation over some of these other issues today as there is with abortion. the court did revisit some of those other cases, it would be putting his institutional legitimacy at risk. justice kavanaugh wouldn't be open to. certainly many democrats are mindful of this in the dissenting opinion, the three liberal justices really suggested that this is something that could be at stake in the future. we'll have to see how this plays out. >> right. and abortion rights advocates are arguing that this decision has put the credibility of the supreme court at risk. thomas gift, thank you very much for your analysis. it's very important. >> thanks. >>> now more on the historic decision when we come back. the international shock waves that are

dobbs first jackson women's health organization. the case centers around a mississippi law that would ban most abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy. in may of 2022. a leaked draft majority opinion penned by justice samuel alito hinted the court is prepared to overturn roe with its final decision on dobbs versus jackson. the release of a draft opinion for a pending case is unprecedented in recent supreme court history. justine waltman kron. 4 news. well, coming next on the kron, 4 morning news. did you miss the nba draft last night? >> well, the lawyers got a nice shiny new pitt couldn't tell you more about it after it's beautiful out here. it sure is. and i earn 5% cash back on travel purchased through chase with chase freedom unlimited. that means that i earn 5% on our rental car, i earn 5% on our cabin. ck! i'm scared. in a good way. i'm lying. let's get inside. earn big time with chase freedom unlimited with no annual fee. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. well, welcome back to the kron. 4 morning news

accepting mississippi's law, upholding that mississippi law dobbs v. jackson women's health organization. i'm wondering what your reactions are, jennifer, to what we're living through right now? >> yes, well, thanks so much for having me this morning. it is a momentous day and a momentous decision and one folks have been waiting for. it's important to remember for the first 185 years of the country, the supreme court really had not weighed in on abortion, so in the decision in 1973 in roe v. wade, it was really the first time that the court was nationalizing the decision as a constitutional matter. so what the court really, the majority is doing today, is taking itself out of the seat of power. acknowledging that the text and structure of the constitution has never spoken directly to the issue of abortion, and that because as folks have already noted this morning, it is such a contentious issue with so many deeply seeded views on both sides, it's an issue for states and local elected officials and the people's representatives to work through with them

so many other issues that might be threatened by the dobbs decision. it's helpful we are questioning the obstacle that the filibuster is and that has basically made congress another dysfunctional branch of our government. that combined with the over politicized supreme court. >> thanks to you all. on an historic day. >>> the january 6th committee wants to hear from pat cipollone who has been resisting testifying and was a central figure in cassidy hutchinson's bombshell testimony tuesday. >> mr. cipollone said something to the effect of, please make sure we don't go up to the capitol, cassidy. keep in touch with me. we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. e imae make that movement happen. as a business owner, your bottom line is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network with no line activation fees or term contracts...

before i introduce our author michael dobbs, let me make a few announcements. please silence all of your electronic mobile devices for the latest updates about the book festival. make sure you're following the gaithersburg book festival on facebook and twitter and if you post about the festival if you're one of those people that social media savvy, please use the gbf hashtag. your feedback's really important to us surveys are available on our website, which you can access at gaithersburg book festival.org or by using the qr code that you'll see displayed prominently around the grounds by submitting a survey you'll be entered in a drawing for a $100 visa gift card, which we hope you'll spend in our bookstore. michael dolls will be signing books immediately after this presentation in the air condition comfort of the activity center. so please meet him there. copies of his books books are on sale in the politics and pros store, which is also in the activity center a quick plug for buying books. remember, this is a free event, but it does help our festival if you b

the leak of the dobbs decision was just stunning. and i think it disappointed and a enormous number of people. by the way, has the leaker been caught or punished? we have no public word that that has even happened. that is something that i think has damaged the image of the court and clearly, it has damaged relations inside the court as well. >> dana: today in about 25 minutes, we are going to get the first of the last two opinions that we have been waiting for. one on the remaining mexico policy. the other on the epa. much broader than just the epa about the whole federal government and how we can regulate businesses and farms and all of our lives. that's coming up. i do want to bring up this point about china. we don't talk about it enough. the president pointed out at the beginning. this is number 6. this is what he said about nato and china. >> president biden: the last time nato drafted a new mission statement was 12 years ago. at that time, it characterized russia as a partner. and it didn't even mention china. the world has ch

and the left's panicked reaction to the dobbs ruling tells you everything you need to know about theirn for america. they do not trust the states to be laboratories of democracy. they would prefer an activist court that legislates from the bench and look at how they respond to a big loss in the nation's highest court. they're saying the court is ill legitimate. it's the same way when they look a presidential election, they say the electoral college is illegitimate. as soon as a major national institution goes against the democrat party politics of the day, the left will attack that institution as being illegitimate. it shows a lack of understanding in civics and a lack of trust in the american government. dagen: i read a lot over the weekend. as andy mccarthy wrote, roe was never law, to what i was saying earlier. a controversial subject that should have never within rested from the people in the states has now been returned to them and as the wall street journal writes yesterday, it's in the paper today, the justices did not ban abortion. they said there's no constitutional right to a

now the dobbs case involving a statute out of mississippi is whether rights will continue. this is a especially bizarre scenario in supreme court history because a draft opinion of this -- in this case was leaked about six weeks ago . it's a historical moment. >> standby. i want to get to jessica schneider outside of the court with more. jessica, what is the opinion from the court? >> reporter: the court issuing that landmark ruling that this nation has been bracing for and the supreme court has overturned roe v wade. they have eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion and at first glance this opinion is very similar to that draft opinion that we saw leaked about a month and a half ago at the beginning of may. what we're seeing at first glance here is that this is a 5-4 decision. this is an opinion written by justice samuel aletto joined with the other conservatives. the chief justice john roberts not joining in the opinion but joining in the judgment meaning he agrees that the mississippi 15-week abortion ban should be upheld but not agreeing with there sweeping p

head, as folks are calling in, what your thought is on it whether dobbs becomes for the pro-choice movement in this country, what roe v. wade was for so many decades for the pro-life movement. does this galvanize and focus the pro-choice movement in this country, and what do you think about that? guest: i think that is a perfectly reasonable question, and frankly a question that a lot of organizing organizations and activists on the political left have kind of assumed. i think that just in a previous segment on your show, one of the callers made the allusion that half of the country does want abortion and half of the country doesn't. numbers actually are a little bit skewed in the direction of a pro-life sentiment, but i would say, at this almost 70% of point, responders to those polls say that they do want restrictions on abortion but , with limitations, usually around the life of the mother, incest, some kind of exceptions like that. but i think on the political left and the pro-choice community, clearly, there is a rallying cry that is going to be heard loud and clear. i think from a lot