now beijing isn't the only city to announce these measures as another city, joan joan, central china, herb to 12000000 people that announced similar measures to day on wednesday. and also, if you look at shanghai, china's commercial center, the moors populous. a city in china further down south that remains mostly under lockdown. official said that they have eased restrictions beginning on sunday. but because that city is continuing to see thousands of new cases every day. they're still a long way to go until that lockdown is lifted. so the majority of the 25 or so 1000000 people living in shanghai remain confined to that compounds or even their apartments curve is still having a huge impact. the and china katrina money. thanks for bringing the latest from beijing. more protests of being held across the u. s. altro leaked draft opinion by the supreme court suggested abortion could be outlawed in several states. activists supporting abortion rights, demanding national laws to protect women's access to the procedure. shebra tansy reports from washington dc. i thousands gathered outside

still relative freedom now, beijing isn't the only city to announce these measures as another city, joan joan, central china home to 12000000 people that announced similar measures to day on wednesday. and also if you look at shanghai, china's commercial send to the most populous a city in china. further down south that remains mostly under lockdown officials. they're said that they have eased restrictions beginning on sunday. but because that city is continuing to see thousands of new cases every day. they're still a long way to go until that lockdown is lifted. so the majority of the 25 or so 1000000 people living it, shall i remain, confined to that comp housed, or even there are problems still here on al jazeera, martial law has kept in place. am eastern democratic republic of congo for the army is fighting at least $100.00 on truth and, and support with santa highlights from the n b a playoffs, including a special mike from the snap. ah hello there, let's look to the middle east and we've had a dusty few days across the region thanks to sand storms pushing down from iraq. now, a lot of t

get it. >> i think that's it, stan. >> i think we did it. >> joan: we did it. >> tucci: we did it. >> joan: nice. >> tucci: there we go. >> joan: it's nice to have help. i love it, it's fun. that's my hobby. but i don't have anyone to cook for anymore. i miss my grandchildren. oh don't, don't. but you could move to england. if this series does well... if this series does well. >> which series? >> the one we're shooting right now. >> i got news for ya. [laughs] the time we shared in florence changed everything for us. finally, you're here. >> yes. after a year spent in the home of the renaissance, we returned to america as a family reborn. it's so delicate, this sauce too, isn't it? you smell the sweetness of the carrot and the butter. our eyes had been opened to some of the greatest treasures on earth and some pretty good food too. it's so good. for me, it was the start of a lifelong love affair with italy. >> cheers. >> cheers. thank you, thank you. to florence. >> thank you, cheers. lemons. lemons. lemons. lemons. look how nice they are. the moment you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels.

joan cancelo, >> 10 minutos por jugar, joan cancelo el que tiene la pelota, guardiola, con muchas ganas de llegar una final y levantar una orejona, era la misiÓn de este aÑo, por ahora hay tiempo, bernardo silva infracciÓn tiro libre, >> ya real madrid jugando con 2 lÍneas de 4, defendiÉndose, en estos minutos de la segunda prÓrroga, dejando prÁcticamente a vinicius y a rodrigo en la salida. >> tiro libre, bastante debate pasado, el cabezazo fue debilitado,, fue por ese balÓn se , la marca estÁ a rodrigo, recupero sabor pelota, ceballos que vino controlar nÚmero 5, saque de banda miren la ceballos, mirena rodrigo, miren todo lo del madrid quiere levantar el santiago bernabÉu dani echaron a,. >> bien esto modificaciÓn para apretar las tuercas de ser resultado se ha puesto la camiseta esperarÍa ingresar junto a gallego la verdad que si . reportero: ahora dani carvajal que vino con el pelotazo, vino recupero la pelota, joanefensa, ha marcado 2 goles fundamentales, bien brasileÑo, en esta colaboraciÓn en defensa fue sensacional, Él fue el cupo espacio, habÍa creado banca que, desde su 10 de carvajal. >> tiene campo para recorrer, para llevÁrsela al otro lado, >> se pierde un poco mÁs de tiempo, aprovecha estos madrid, el cambio de militao que no se hizo ante, se va tener que realizar ahora, se pierde mÁs tiempo, mira con la facilidad que entrena caloca ma camillero deben ser del madrid . >> ya no hay recoge valore, todo se vale en el fÚtbol. >> tiene 2 da a diego de que no sea de real madrid, deben tener la blanca debajo del peto rojo, >> la querÍa terminar, por ahÍ esta el mÉdico, el edema por militao por haber seguido la cancha, son creo que desde una lesiÓn grave, le va ser muy difÍcil llegar a la final. >> tambiÉn esta vinicius lo que estÁ corriendo el dÍa de hoy, va a ingresar. >> entran los cash vÁsquez, vinicius tira del mediocampo, calambre, levÁntese que lo vi caminar le dice el Árbitro. vinicio

joan were there spreading the light. joan was one of the first people to reach out to jill, and it meant the world to us. it meant the world. you just heard from my friend, jon meacham. fritz was a master legislator who shone a light on those who needed it most. the desire to lift up others stemmed from his youth, from his service as a corporal in the u.s. army, and those early days organizing for hubert humphrey in parts of minnesota that democrats didn't win. fritz learned early the power of bringing people together. and i know that for fritz, no moment was brighter than when he joined forces. because i was with him. i was just a bit player, with an african american senator from massachusetts, senator edward brooke, and they passed the fair housing act. i was on the same side of the chamber in the back where fritz was. i remember the look on his face. opened up neighborhoods diminished by segregation for so long. when the act passed, fritz spoke on the senate floor. and he said that, quote, the words justice and fairness will will never mean more to our fellow americans than they do today. that was fritz spreading light, the light of our country, to families who had never truly known its warmth. at every stage of our lives, at every inflection point, fritz and joan. i apologize, as we say in the senate, for the, you know, point of personal privilege here, but they were there for jill and me and my family. not on a political level, but on a personal level. it was true that my first days in the senate when i needed help very badly, and it was true in my last days in the senate as well. in 2008 -- and fritz and i had become close friends, and i sought his counsel many times -- i was asked to join the ticket with barack obama. i was, as i usually was, on amtrak going home. i commuted every day. they later told me over 1,200,000 miles on amtrak. they should name a station or something after me. [laughter] pres. biden: but all kidding aside, he called me after it was clear he was the de facto nominee. and he said he'd liked me to join him on the ticket, at least consider it. you know, we have to do that background check. and i said, no thanks, barack. i thought he was just dragging that bloody [inaudible] through the senate like presidential nominees

joan were there spreading the light. joan was one of the first people to reach out to jill, and it meant the world to us. it meant the world. you just heard from my friend, jon meacham. fritz was a master legislator who shone a light on those who needed it most. the desire to lift up others stemmed from his youth, from his service as a corporal in the u.s. army, and those early days organizing for hubert humphrey in parts of minnesota that democrats didn't win. fritz learned early the power of bringing people together. and i know that for fritz, no moment was brighter than when he joined forces. because i was with him. i was just a bit player, with an african american senator from massachusetts, senator edward brooke, and they passed the fair housing act. i was on the same side of the chamber in the back where fritz was. i remember the look on his face. opened up neighborhoods diminished by segregation for so long. when the act passed, fritz spoke on the senate floor. and he said that, quote, the words justice and fairness will will never mean more to our fellow americans than they do today. that was fritz spreading light, the light of our country, to families who had never truly known its warmth. at every stage of our lives, at every inflection point, fritz and joan. i apologize, as we say in the senate, for the, you know, point of personal privilege here, but they were there for jill and me and my family. not on a political level, but on a personal level. it was true that my first days in the senate when i needed help very badly, and it was true in my last days in the senate as well. in 2008 -- and fritz and i had become close friends, and i sought his counsel many times -- i was asked to join the ticket with barack obama. i was, as i usually was, on amtrak going home. i commuted every day. they later told me over 1,200,000 miles on amtrak. they should name a station or something after me. [laughter] pres. biden: but all kidding aside, he called me after it was clear he was the de facto nominee. and he said he'd liked me to join him on the ticket, at least consider it. you know, we have to do that background check. and i said, no thanks, barack. i thought he was just dragging that bloody [inaudible] through the senate like presidential nominees

joan were there spreading the light. joan was one of the first people to reach out to jill and that meant the world to us. you heard from my friend. fritz was a master legislator who shined a light on those who needed it the most the desire to lift up others from his service as a corporal u.s. army in those days and parts of minnesota the democrats didn't win and the power of bringing people together. no moment was brighter than when he joined forces. with a senator from massachusetts and passed the fair housing act. i was in same side of the chamber in the back where fritz was. i remember the look on his face. "neighborhoods diminished for so long he said the words justice and fairness will mean more. that was fritz spreading light to those that have never truly known. at every stage of our life, every inflection point they were there for me and my family not on a political level but a personal level. in 2008 we became close friends and i sought his counsel many times. i commuted every day they later told me they should name a station or something after me. all kidding aside, he called me after it was clear he was the de facto nominee and said he would like me to join him on the ticket or at least consider it. could he do a background check on me? you know they have to do that background check and i said no, thanks. i thought he was just dragging it through the senate like the presidential nominees do to get everybody excited and involved. he said there's only one other person i'm considering. i said i don't want to be vice president. he said why, basically because of standby equipment. i said what i want to do, and by that time i chaired two major committees and was influential in the senate. would you go home and talk it over with your family, just talk it over, so i did. i called jill on my cell phone and i was about halfway home when i got the call. when i got home, i went in and of the first person i called was fritz before the family gathered in the back porch. and i said what should i do. he went into great detail. i'm serious. as a matter of fact he send me a memorandum prepared for president carter when they were deciding how the relationship would work. he told me he holds no inherent power, none, zero. it's a reflection of the relationship with the president of the united states. about seven years ago, i adjoined at a forum in his honor at george washington university. he recounted it wasn't his expertise in the political policy area but the genuine personal relationship he built with president jimmy carter. relationships built on affection and trust. they sat down to lunch with each other every weekend he said make sure to get a commitment from barack obama. once a week have lunch to discuss whatever is on your mind. he was the first vice president to have an office in the west wing just a few steps away from the oval office. that never happened before over and the executive office building across the street they were. that was true strength and the vice presidency. the strength we replicated in our time in office and what we are doing today and she sends her regards to the whole family. she told me before i got on the plane. it was fritz that led the way. at his core he embraced everybody with the beliefs everyone is entitled to be treated with dignity not just the right to vote with dignity. he was loved by the american people because he reflected the goodness of the american people. especially the people in minnesota. every senator wears on his and her sleeve the state they serve, but the love he had for the people of minnesota ran deeper than that. he loved you all and you left him back it was obvious because he reflected the very best qualities of this state. the warmth and optimism that you reflect and in return he reflected the light of this nation, who we are and what we can be. he called me when i had said we are the most unique nation in all of history. we are the only nation founded on an idea every other nation in the world based on geography, ethnicity, religion and race, founded on an idea we hold these truths to be self-evident all men and women are created equal and with certain inalienable rights including the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and it goes on. he believed that in his gut. i watched him every day for over 35 years in the senate and when he was vice president. he united people, sharing the same light and hope even when we disagreed he thought that was important. i will never forget on a personal level what it meant to have a friend like fritz. less than four years after losing eleanor to brain cancer and just a year after you've losing joan, fritz was there to help me again when jill and i lost our son to brain cancer after a year in iraq. i will never forget how fritz reflected so much light and love into our family again at our darkest moments. and coming here to minneapolis eight years ago to say goodbye to joan most people remember fritz went to the mayo clinic for a quadruple bypass the very next day. he delayed the surgery so he could be with all of us to reflect her light and put off treating his own heart because as all you know his heart belonged to joan. as i've said many times, i say to the family seeing your mom and dad together reminded me of that great line from the christopher marlowe poem come live with me and be my love and we shall all the pleasures prove. you can tell when a couple has been together a long time still looks at each other with love, deep love. it's been said that memory is a power together roses and winter. your dad blessed you with an endless garden of those memories. most of all the me

joan biskupic, cnn, washington. >> you heard joan discuss the stunning implications of this. cnn's don lemon spoke to two of our legal analysts earlier and here's what they had to say about why the supreme court might be looking to strike down roe versus wade. >> it's an argument that people have been expecting, that the conservatives have been previewing for a few years now, and is argument is basically that the constitution does not protect a right to abortion, that the supreme court erred in 1973 when it recognized under the due process clause of the 14th amendment, a right for pregnant individuals, pregnant women to obtain pre-viability abortions and the court is righting the wrong that its predecessors punitively made, you know, 49 years ago. don, i think one of the many, many, many layers here is not just what this opinion, if it becomes the law of the land, means for abortion in america, but what it means for other rights that the supreme court has tied to the same constitutional provision, to the due process clause of the 14th amendment. rights to contraception, right

joan biscupic with the exclusive reporting. joan, tell us what you're learning. >> sure. first of all, remember, this is the most important case of this term, in many years, potential to roll back a half century of abortion rights, privacy rights. midway through negotiations of this case a draft document was leaked, as we all know, it was leaked from last february. so not only did the public see where the court was headed to roll back roe v. wade but seriously disrupted negotiations in terms of justice where is they were going to head by june. chief justice john roberts launched an unprecedented investigation four weeks ago today. apparently that has made absolutely insufficient progress, i would say. and they have taken this new step to have clerks sign affidavits. i'm not sure exactly of the wording. but there would be denial of any responsibility. and also starting to lay the groundwork for obtaining cell phone data. now, i should tell you that this private draft went to not only the nine justices, their law clerks, each has four apiece. and then probably about a dozen other people in the supreme court building. electronically and hand delivered to the chambers. you know, a lot of more people could have had this inside the courthouse. but also if anybody brought it home, the potential for other people obtaining it is great. so, they're focusing on law clerks right now. but we don't know, at least from the outside whether, you know it would definitely be a law clerk. somebody else, a full-time employee. anybody else who came upon this, unlikely a justice. >> nonetheless, law clerks are now going to have what some of them clearly feel is an invasion of privacy. >> that's absolutely right. in fact, that's how we found out about it brianna. some of them consulting former law professors, friend, people saying, you know what do we do here. because think of all of the information on your cell phone. we're not sure if it's going after just telephone data or text images. everything else you could possibly have on there. your life is on your cell phone. even if the marshal, a welcome by the name of gayle kerley, a lawyer herself skugting the investigation, saying look, we're only going to look to see if you had contacts with reporters if there's anything to implicate your involvement here. think of everything else that could be there that suddenly could come to light. that's making law clerks certainly very nervous. and the other thing, even though these people were all trained in the law and they know to go outside to a lawyer to perhaps even obtain council should not be a sign of guilt. it's still one of those things, they think, if i suggested that i need a lawyer, does that suggest that i'm guilty in some way here. >> you can see how that would happen. it's really sort of an honor system that they've been operating under. this is great reporting. >> let me just say for the public watching we should know in about four weeks exactly how this momentous case comes out. that's the most important thing, what will the supreme court rule on abortion rights. brianna. >> joanthank you so much. berman. >>> in uvalde, texas, visitation and rosary set for three of the victims of the robb elementary school. we do have reporting about schools across the country increasing their security measures. cnn's nick valencia live from uvalde. nick, what's the latest from there? >> reporter: yeah, good morning, john. it's officially been a week since the mass shooting. there's so much pain and so much grief. the devastating loss of 29 lives has deeply wounds this community continuing to rally to support each other as viewing and funeral services for some of the youngest victims. this as cnn has obtained new video, new audio which gives insight into the first moments of the shooting. >> oh, my god. >> reporter: chilling new video captured in apparent radio call outside of robb elementary school where a gunman had opened fire inside classrooms. >> are you in there? >> where? where? >> i got shot! >> reporter: in the video what sounds like a student says they've been shot.

joan biscupic with this exclusively reporting. joan, what you have learned? >> well, they're certainly ramping up this search as to who would have leaked this document to politico. it's been four weeks now since chief justice john roberts announced he's launching this investigation. apparently insufficient progress has been made. they're now turning to the clerks to turn over cell phone records. it's a very aggressive move and raised concerns for the clerks. we know, john, how much information son our cell phones. we don't faux if they're just asking for calls or texts or images. but it does show how seriously the court is taking this and how concerning it is over the next weeks and four weeks agency the justices wrap up this term. now, already, this all happened in the most important case of this term. if not the most important case of decades one that would roll back a half century of abortion rights and privacy protections. and one thing to know that as much as this draft has sort of shocked the country in both directions. you know, people very maep with the direction that the court might be taking and those who are just very much disturbed. it's very much disrupted negotiations inside the court. this draft was dated in february. and the justices themselves are still trying to -- still working on potential compromise. or maybe strengthening this draft. so it's disruptive. the leak, the disclosure by politico, just a little bit over four weeks has just rattled people inside and out. and, apparently, they have made insufficient progress to figure out how this happened. that they're now taking this dramatic step, john. >> cell phone records and affidavits, joanve reporting. appreciate it. joining us now chief legal analyst jeffrey toobin. jeffrey, what about this? have you ever seen anything like this? >> i mean, zero, nothing like this. i mean, the supreme court has been an institution that prides in secrecy. has preserved its secrecy, now they're doing apparently a serious investigation. i think it's important to point out this is not a criminal investigation. t is -- it is basically an employment situation, where all of these clerks are in danger of being fired. or anyone else is in danger of being fired, if they leaked. but i don't think there's any criminal dimension to this. and these are not grand jury subpoenas. these are simply requests to the clerks. but as an employment situation, if you don't agree, you can be fired. so, you can understand why the clerks are freaking out here. >> they are. many of them are considering lawyering up for this situation. jeffrey, another development overnight, i want to ask you about. because it's po

joan roberts. i want to start with you joan, we don't know where he may stand on these issues but by virtue his position, your book, the light of turbulent times, what do you make of these comments suggest that it may be illegal or reprehensible for people to protest in light of this draft opinion? >> first of all, people have the right to protest peacefully. it happens all the time. law enforcement and officers in many of these municipalities have said they're not going to arrest people if it is peaceful. obviously, some people can feel like this is not the route to go. we still dont 't know what's happening behind the scenes. i think people running concessions at these justices but there are plenty of pressure. you referred to the chief justice and i can tell you he's not sitting around doing nothing, waiting to see what happens with the draft that sam alito has written. i suspect he's working his on alternative draft, he may be privately shopping it to other justices to see if he can possible still peel off one of the conservatives for some sort of a compromise. we still have about eight weeks left. even though politico reported there were no other subsequent drafts, there are many other ways justices are communicating. just so you know, once sam alito would said around that first draft, every other justice would sent him a memo saying i will join it or i am thinking of concurrence or i am waiting for the decent. there is communications that follows that even if it is not an actual draft. the others are they do tend to send memos that they would circulate to all but my experiences especially with the chief that he would work privately sometimes. he did that with affordable care act in 2012. we know in the past with the 1973 roe v. wade and the 1989 abortion case that where the justices staff short of reversing roe and certainly 1992 when the justices -- they were working privately. i anticipate something like that are going on but i do want to remind you, laura and certainly our audience that key conservative justices will make sure there were compromises back in '89 and '92 are not like our conservatives today. the conservatives we have today are far to the right and i would not expect someone like alito and gorsuch and barrett to vote for a compromise. brett kavanaugh? possibly, laura. >> the words you have said to me is something that many people are pointing out of this idea of expectation of privacy when is comes to opinions, an expectation to be able to have private deliberations of one's thought. this is very rich and the supreme court's expectation of privacy. if this draft opinion is to be made final, it takes away its own privacy and there is expectations of prievacy from women who wants to have agency and their productive rights. what do you make of the focus now being really more so in parts on the leak itself, jeffery and the protests surrounding as opposed to the draft conclusions? >> well, i think this controversy illustrates that republicans are nervous because they are choosing to talk about the leak. they're choosing to talk about the protests at the homes of the justices rather than the subsistence of the opinion which if we believe the opinion polls is unpopular. this is is an opinion that will reverse a constitutional right that women have had in the united states for 49 years and lead to even more restrictions on people's rights. this is something that the court and the republican party have believed in and fought for many years. it is not something that the broad majority including most independence want in american life. that's why you see republicans lending their garments over the lack of privacy in the supreme court and over these really rather docile, if annoying protests. they rather talk about that than the loss of rights the american women face. >> you know it is interesting, i want to bring this to everyone's attention. what should make nervous and i wonder and there is some subjectivity in the idea of what people find nerve-racking. if the concerns is about the safety of judges, let's put this into confectiocession if you ca. federal judges were the targets of 4,500 threats last year alone. there was an ig report back in june that found the marshal's office does not actually have the funding it would need to provide that security of the 2700 sitting judges and so it begs the question at this point in time as to why is this a safety of these justices so paramount knowing there had been risks to others who resulted in violent threats that we have seen protesting in front of these homes. and people walking and no arrests to be made. do you wonder why this particular issue and these protests are prompting the rallying around the justices. is it good to be the king or good fto be one of the supremes nine? >> the important thing is what goes onto the building. if you go to the building, there is a newly installed nine-scale of a fence bringing the whole building. there is a area that says "closed" bymarshals. they are worried of threats. you refer to that inspector general's report of lower court judges who faced a lot and much more in the trenches of the law dealing with criminal and civil cases where people know who they are and they could come after them. that's are problem for many years. i know justices own security haves been beefed way before. >> again -- i want to say, joan, it must be sad while we are having conversations about the safety of judges that between 1977 and 2020, there were 11 murders and 42 bombings and 194 arsons and thousand of incidents of criminal activities directed at abortion providers. last year alone, 125% reports of assault and battery outside of clinics as well. i am a fan like we all are of consisten consistency. that has to be apart of the conversation as well. >> joan and jeffery, thank you very much. >>> by the way, there is this. five sitting members of congress just been subpoenaed by the january 6 committee including the top republican in the house. see there? none of them by the way would cooperate voluntarily, but you wonder will any now participate now that they are compelled via subpoena to testify. what if their colleagues in the panel do if they don't comply? extraordinary discussions and extraordinary times, up next. allergs don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily sps your body from overreacting to allergens

joan with me. joan, we have been cutting up all morning.ne but to me what's more offensive is how they are not being held accountable for what they are doing. >> lawrence: you say going to the churches and desis he creating at the catholic church going too far. >> definitely. definitely too far. >> lawrence: who are you going to vote for in this election? >> mooney. mooney 100 percent. >> lawrence: you are hearing it from the folks. i want to talk to my other friend nikki. you said the number one issue for you is the economy, you have been looking at your financial investment and you are saying it's a mess right now. >> i don't want to look. >> lawrence: you don't want to look anymore. >> no. >> lawrence: what do you think is causing it? >> i think a lot of things. it started way back you know months ago. and it's just gotten worse and worse. go to the grocery store and what used to be $50 is now $75. everything is nod as good as it used to be. >> lawrence: under trump it was much different. >> well, yes. >> lawrence: who are you voting for

joan biskupic, cnn legal analyst joins me now. joan, i'm glad you're here. you've written my abook on the supreme court and know this well. is justice thomas right about the court of yesteryear and the sort of kumbaya moments that were there? >> well, i can say that justice thomas and others from that era had a higher level of trust. he said what has been simmering inside for many years, and i think it's telling that it would come out at this point. two things, and they're both in the clips that you played, laura. first of all, when he said, we actually trusted each other, as in, now we don't. and the more recent clip you just played about ruth bader ginsburg when he said, you knew where she was. she told us how she felt, how she was going to rule. and the implication is -- and i know this is the case behind the scenes -- as they regard the chief as secretive and cagey, but it has been toward an end that has made john roberts successful in other times in brokering a compromise. just think, laura, of how close larence thomas is right now to realizing his goal he's had for three decades of reversal of roe. the political draft that came out earlier this month suggested there were five votes to completely overturn roe v. wade. the draft was dated february 10th. so many weeks since then and there are still about five weeks more to go until, you know, we'll probably see the ruling, although it can come at any point. but i think this is likely to come at the end of june. and i think clarence thomas' very candid remarks that he has prided himself in not being so candid on the relations behind the scenes reveals some of the tension there and could suggest that the chief is actually having some success in climbing that very steep hill of convincing either brett kavanaugh, possibly amy coney barrett that we can reverse roe, but this is not the case for it. laura, as you know -- >> is that possible though? i mean, joan amy coney barrett or justice brett kavanaugh might be the ones to be persuadable in this context is striking for so many people across the country because the expectation during the confirmation hearings would be that these would be the two in particular who would side against the idea of upholding roe v. wade. hedge their answers to confirm their confirmation, of course, as every justice who's a nominee does. but is it a possibility that those two could be persuaded? is that what might be happening behind the scenes? >> well, let me just say this. and i don't want to raise expectations because, you know, you've got five very hard core conservatives who have been eager to reverse it. but let me just pose this possibility. i think the strongest card the chief has is the fact when they granted this case a year ago, in may, they said they were only going to look at whether the constitution prohibits any kind of ban on pre-viability abortions. and you know what that means. it would mean a

joan is a cnn legal and supreme court analyst. joan, there's some court watchers who are wondering if justice roberts is losing control of the court. >> good afternoon, victor. yes, in a couple ways he has. first of all, a significant area of the law involving women's rights and privacy, and also over the operations of the building. first on the contents of this draft opinion by justice samuel alito, the chief is unlikely to be on it. we don't know for sure yet because things are still in development behind the scenes. but at this point, this is not the kind of opinion john roberts wanted to sign given what he said during the oral arguments in this mississippi abortion case. samuel alito would completely overturn half a century of abortion rights and women's privacy rights. the chief did not want to go that far. the chief was willing to uphold the mississippi law in question right now that would prevent abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, but the chief had signaled he very much wanted to wait to take on roe v. wade until later. so this shows the five justices to his right wing going further than he would go, and then secondly, victor, in terms of the control of operations of the building, as chief justice, he's supposed to have control over how the building operates, the security, the secrecy, and just the way that this opinion has burst forth through this leak to politico really shows a lack of control over the work product and workforce at the supreme court. >> how much will this leak affect his reputation, undercut his message about the integrity of the court? >> you know, victor, there's hardly an opinion that the chief writes or a speech that the chief gives that he doesn't talk about how the justices are not like elected politicians, they're impartial on the law, that they have integrity. he's all about the institution of the court. and the way we see this initial draft opinion, it looks like it's going to be the five most conservative republican appointees against the three liberal democrats. and with the chief somewhere in the middle. this opinion, and likely in the end, this case will only re-enforce the notion of the justices as political actors, not as impartial because look at what appears they're doing. and i want to stress to the audience that we do not know yet how this case will definitely come out. there are several weeks left in the term, things could change. the chief himself could turn the game around and it would be a more modest ruling in some ways. but right now, look at what it does. it just turns away, as i say, a half century of privacy rights and a ruling from 1973 that was upheld in 1992 after careful consideration by justices, republican appointees, as a matter of fact, who said we might not have voted for it the first time around, but it's been the law of the land and we have to respect it. so the chief's message is seriously undercut by where this is headed, and again, with all of the chaos surrounding this disclosure. it just looks like another branch of government is really losing its moorings and its institutional status. >> and these weeks of uncertainty until the actual opinion is publishes. joanh. >> cnn has new polling on what americans think about abortion rights in the wake of this leaked supreme court draft. we'll bring that to you ahead. ♪ my way. the new floral fragrance. giorgio armani. i don't just play someone brainy on tv - i'm an actual neuroscientist. and i love the science behind neuriva plus. unlike ordinary memory supplements, neuriva plus fuels six key indicators of brain perfmance. mo brain performance? yes, please! neuriva. think bigger. my a1c stayed here, it needed to be here. ruby's a1c is down with rybelsus®. my a1c wasn't at goal, now i'm down with rybelsus®. mom's a1c is down with rybelsus®. (♪ ♪) in a clinical study, once-daily rybelsus® significantly lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you

joan and jeffrey toobin and laura coats and pete. i want to begin with joan. good evening to you. this is only a draft opinion that we're looking at now. it is not a final unpublished -- a final published, i should say. if this does hold, it would be a seismic shift for this country. what more are we learning? >> absolutely, don. first of all, cnn has not i independently obtained a copy of this opinion or verified it but our own reporting is consistent with the fact that the five most conservative members of this court were ready to take roe down completely and chief justice john roberts was willing to say that the mississippi ban on abortions at 15 weeks could stand but not go so far. now, as we know, votes can shift in the process but obviously, what sam alito was writing that politico obtained was a robust objection of roe that's been around for nearly 50 years. the 1973 landmark made abortion legal nationwide essentially let women decide to terminate a pregnancy until about the 23rd week of pregnancy. so if this becomes the law of the land and it looks like it's headed in that direction, your word seismic would be practically an understatement here because it would change so much in terms of women's rights in america. and the other thing that is such a jolt to use a word that john roberts himself used and used at his own senate confirmation hearing is the way this all came out, don. typically, any draft opinion stays private. it's -- you know, i will often get leaks about votes. i'll often gets leaks who is writing the opinion but to get an opinion in hand that's gone as far as this one does on this big of an issue is amazing and i do have to say it presents the court with a couple different problems and i think it plays into how the confidence that the american public might have in the court or not have in the court. one of the reasons the chief justice was unlikely to want to overturn 50 years of precedent is how americans relied on roe for so many years and part of an understanding of the court's legitimacy and then to see it all apparently rolled back in this manner disclosed in someway in this, you know, in this stunning announcement, this stunning release of sorts tonight rather than at the end of june with very thoughtful consideration from both sides on the pros and cons, we don't know what the dissenting justices are saying at this point and we also don't know if possibly, don, it's unlikely but possibly that one of the descenters could convince a justice in the majority to go over to the other side. it is happened and i don't know if at this point that would even be possible because of the way it's come out, don. >> yeah, yeah, it's very interesting. that's joan who reports for us for the supreme court. again, this is major breaking news. politico obtained this draft. again, this is only a draft. cnn has not as joan said independently verified this. again, that is the reporting. let bring in our experts now. thank you-all for joining us. good evening to you. jeffrey, i'll start with you. the legal grounds, what are the legal grounds they are using in the draft to overturn the precedent, which has been the law of the land for decades? >> well, this has been a brutal fight in the courts over the years and even on the acsupreme court. the legal arguments are very familiar. starting in the mid 60s, the supreme court began recognizing the right to privacy and have a zone within people's lives that the government couldn't invade. it started with the right to take birth control for married people in 1964 and 1973 that right to privacy was recognized as including the right to abortion and harry blackman's opinion in 1973. in opinion after opinion ove

baby names that are set to make a comeback this year are joan, mary, and margaret, which is also a full curse in a catholic household "oh, joanry, and margaret! [ light laughter ] and fin -- [ laughter ] "i stubbed me toe! [ light laughter ] i've got a little bit of criticism recently about my really good irish accent [ light laughter ] and finally, the new york state lottery announced yesterday that the results of tuesday's drawing were published with the wrong mega ball number and things are pretty awkward at the house that thought they won. "honey, i was joking about the divorce. that was - [ laughter ] ha, ha, it's me. that's when i'm funny. [ light laughter ] that was a monologue, everybody. [ cheers and applause we have a fantastic show for you tonight. she is a comedian and author you know from "strangers with candy" and "at home with amy sedaris. you can see her in season two of "girls5eva" on peacock the hilarious amy sedaris will be here. she's one of our favorites [ cheers and applause and he is the playwright of the new broadway hit "a strange loop," which has already won the pulitzer prize for drama, and on monda

host: joan is next on the educators line. hi, joan. caller: i have a question.hat would she suggest if you are working in a school and there are people who are not obeying the protocols. we know what the politics of that can be if you report somebody. when people are getting lax and not doing the things they should do, like keeping doors closed, what would her organization suggest? what can be done about that? host: what do you think? guest: that is a critical question. i have 30 years in public education as an administrator and teacher. it is about teacher leadership and principal leadership in making this a priority and integrating it into part of what we do every day. these are the daily operating procedures. we take attendance, we have our class, we talk about homework, but we also do things to keep kids safe, to build relationships and establish a positive culture. to be out and about and present, supervising students and being aware of what is going on with them. we worked in providing training on how to do things strategically and intentionally that enhan

host: joan is next on the educators line. hi, joan. caller: i have a question.hat would she suggest if you are working in a school and there are people who are not obeying the protocols. we know what the politics of that can be if you report somebody. when people are getting lax and not doing the things they should do, like keeping doors closed, what would her organization suggest? what can be done about that? host: what do you think? guest: that is a critical question. i have 30 years in public education as an administrator and teacher. it is about teacher leadership and principal leadership in making this a priority and integrating it into part of what we do every day. these are the daily operating procedures. we take attendance, we have our class, we talk about homework, but we also do things to keep kids safe, to build relationships and establish a positive culture. to be out and about and present, supervising students and being aware of what is going on with them. we worked in providing training on how to do things strategically and intentionally that enhan

joan claybrook and porter's director of the auto safety. biden ralph nader was famous for his first book on the dangers of the automobile. and joan claybrook, you know, was the woman who pushed through seatbelts and airbags and you know, so carter -- and she wasn't the only naderite who was appointed, there were literally dozens of them. and his whole point was he wanted to, as president, he wanted to use his office in the interests of to protect consumers. and you know, this cut both ways. so you talk about airline deregulation, this helped consumers. it allowed middle-class americans to travel. but it also disrupted big business and the airline industry opening up the big carriers to competitions so the business roundtable was initially opposed to it. it also alienated labor unions because it made it difficult for the airline -- the unions that represented airline workers to keep their monopoly on power and such. so, it was a populist, pro consumer administration that undercut some of the core constituency of the liberal democratic base, trade unions. so this is the paradox, another paradox of the carter presidency. >> yeah. it

joan was questioning. so i think the democrats are going to raise these issues. i think biden's going to raise these issues, and how people react remains to be seen. >> joan, i know you have reporting on where chief justice roberts stands on this issue. we know that the supreme court in its reputation and where it stands within the country right now given the hyperpolarization is very important for him to protect. >> you know, that's just -- that's right. rarely does he write an opinion or give a speech that he doesn't somehow infuse it with the importance of the institutional regard for the court and this time and how he likes to stress that the court is not like, you know, not nine politicians in robes, and he has been so self-conscious about the court's standing in america that he himself has been edging to the left just because of his fears about how far this court has been lurching right ward, and this is exhibit a for the court lurching right ward, and what i knew from reporting before this "politico" bomb shell that came nowhere near to discovering something like this, an actual draft opinion from samuel alito was that i had learned that the chief had been trying to convince colleagues to not go so far. he has been a long-time opponent of abortion rights dating to his work for the reagan administration in the 1980s. he's voted against abortion rights and voted to uphold abortion restrictions. but he has started to hedge on that and from everything i know, he did not want to join the canine okind of opinion that samuel alito was writing. he was willing, however, as i understand it, to say that the mississippi law in dispute that would prevent abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, that that could stand, which would already undermine part of roe v. wade, but it wouldn't -- it would at least leave part of that landmark behind. and what i had learned was that he had made no headway with key justices to try to pick them off, the two most likely would have been justices kavanaugh and barrett, the most recent justices and they were not budging according to my reporting up to now. >> joaif we do hear from the president, we'll have you back. >>> democrats are vowing to fight back as the supreme court appears ready to overturn roe v. wade. so what can lawmakers do to protect abortion rights. senator elizabeth warren joins me next. under budget too! and i get seven days to love it or my money back... i love it! [laughs] we'll drive you happy at carvana. if your moderate to severe crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis symptoms are stopping you in your tracks... choose stelara® from the start... and move toward relief after the first dose... with injections every two months. stelara® may increase your risk of infections, some serious, and cancer. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection, flu-like symptoms, sores, new skin growths, have had cancer, or if you need a vaccine. pres, a rare, potentially fatal brain condition, may be possible. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. feel unstoppable. ask your doctor how lasting remission can start with stelara®. janssen can help you explore cost support options. wayfair has everything i need to make my home totally me. sometimes, i'm a homebody. so cozy. sometimes, i'm all business. and yeah, i'm not a chef- perfect. but thanks to wayfair, i do love my kitchen. yes! it's started. somewhere between a cuddle and a struggle, it's...the side hug. tween milestones like this may start at age 9. hpv vaccination - a type of cancer prevention against certain hpv-related cancers, can start then too. for most, hpv clears on its own. but for others, it can cause certain cancers later in life. you're welcome! now, as the "dad cab", it's my cue to help protect them. embrace this phase. help protect them in the next. ask their doctor about hpv vaccination today. . >>> in a written statement, president biden says a woman's right to choose is fundamental, and that lawmakers need to protect it if roe v. wade is overturned. moments ago, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell reacted to the news but only focused on the leak of the draft opinion. take a listen. >> one of the court's most essential and sacred features was smashed just about the outrage industrial complex a few extra days to scream nonsense about what the court might rule. this lawless action should be investigated, and punished to the fullest extent possible. >> joining me now is democratic senator elizabeth warren. senator, welcome to the program. we are just getting breaking news in the form of a statement from chief justice roberts, and i'd like to read it to you and then get you to respond. it goes as follows, although the document described in yesterday's report is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case. to the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. the work of the court will not be affected in any way. we at the court are blessed to have a work force, employees and law clerks alike intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. he goes on to say that i have directed the marshal of the court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak. clearly his focus is on the integrity of the court and the unprecedented nature of this leak. just wanting to get you to respond to the first statement, and that is that the document in yesterday's report is authentic. >> yes, the document is authentic, and this is a conversation about the integrity of this court. this is about the integrity of justice who is said in open public rule of law and respecting the rule of law means this precedent that has been there for nearly 50 years. look, i feel really angry about this, and what i feel angry about is that an extremist supreme court is going to impose their views on the rest of america, and do you know who this is going to fall hardest on? it's not going to fall hardest on well to do women. they can afford to get on a plane and go to another state where abortion is legal. they can afford to leave the country. who this is going to fall hardest on is going to be on poor women. it's going to fall hardest on those who have been molested, it's going to fall hardest on women who have been raped. it's going to fall hardest on the woman who's already working two jobs to try to take care of the children she has. and this supreme court has said they don't care. they don't care about those women. what they care about is imposing their extremist view on the rest of the country. that's what the republicans have been building toward, and it looks like they have about arrived there. >> let me ask you about the president himself who put out a statement and if we do hear from him, we'll take it, but put out a statement this morning obviously highlighting his support in the defense of roe v. wade and also what his administration has done in defending it in court. i'm curious given what our -- we discussed in our previous segment about him not even mentioning the word abortion thus far in his term as president, do you think that he and his administration have done enough publicly to highlight the significance of this issue? >> look, we're past the time when we can look in the rearview mirror. we just don't have the luxury of that. the question is what are we going to do now? what are we going to do today and tomorrow and the next day and the next day and the next day. remember, the supreme court is not the ones that will get the final word on roe versus wade. it is congress that gets the final word. we have the capacity to keep roe versus wade as the law of the land, and if we act, then we can do that. so to me, this is all about the focus on what we're going to do in congress, and how the president is going to help us do that, how people all across this country are going to help us do that. we can put that vote on the floor now. we can get everybody on record on where they stand on roe versus wade, where they stand on a woman's right to an boabortio after she's been raped, where they stand on the right to an abortion for a 14-year-old who's been the victim of abuse. where they stand on the right to an abortion for some woman who can't support the children she has and is desperately trying to keep her family together. let's get them on the record voting on that, and if we don't have enough votes to pass it now, we get everybody on the record and then we take that to the public in november. we've got less than 200 days until election day, roe versus wade, in that sense is on the ballot. >> i know you have been in favor of blowing up and eliminating the filibuster so has your colleague, bernie sanders. i'm just curious, do you have any sense that other democrats, joe manchin, who doesn't support abortion rights to begin with or kyrsten sinema would on this issue in particular? >> i think that it's one thing for them to talk about this in the abstract. you'd have to ask them how they feel about it now that we know what's happened with roe versus wade. but again, keep in mind we can keep everybody voting. we can make them go on the record, and if we need more democrats to change the rules, that's what happens in november. >> senator, senator, we're just going to -- we're just going to break in and listen to the president for a second. >> a call saying that it's been announced that it is a real draft, but it doesn't represent who's going to vote for it yet. i hope there are not enough votes for it. that's the main reason why i worked so hard to keep robert b boruk off the court, it reflects his view almost -- anyway. look, the idea that concerns me a great deal that we're going to after 50 years decide a woman does not have a right to choose within the limits of supreme court decision. but even more equally profound is the rationale used, and it would mean that every other decision made in the notion of privacy is thrown into question. i realize this goes back a long way, but one of the debates i had with robert boruk whether on griswold versus connecticut should stand as law. the state of connecticut said that the privacy of your bedroom, a husband and wife could not choose to use contraception. the use of contraception is a violation of law. if the rationale were to be sustained, a whole range of rights are in question. a whole range of rights. and the idea we're letting the states make their decision would be a fundamental shift in what we've done. so it goes far beyond, in my view, if it becomes a law and if what is written is what remains, it goes far beyond the concern of whether or not there is the right to choose. it goes to other basic rights, the right to marry, the right to determine a whole range of things because one of the issues that this court and many members of the court, or a number of members of the court have not acknowledged that there is a right to privacy in our constitution. i strongly believe there is. i think the decision in griswold was correct in overruling. i think the decision in roe was correct because there's a right to privacy. there can be limitations on it, but it cannot be denied. >> irdo you think that this has irreparably -- the court? we've never seen this happen before. >> if this decision holds, it's really quite a radical decision. and again, young the underlying premise, i've not had a chance to thoroughly read the decision. it basically says all the decisions relating to your private life, who you marry, whether or not you decide to conceive a child or not, whether or not you can have a abortion, a range of other decisions, how you raise your child. what does this do and does this mean that in florida they can decide they're going to pass a law saying that same-sex marriage is not permissible? it's against the law in florida? so it's a fundamental shift in american jurisprudence. >> mr. president, do away with the filibuster to codify roe? >> i'm not prepared to make those judgments now about, but you know, i think the codification of roe makes a lot of sense. look, think what roe says. roe says what all basic main mainstream religions have historically concluded, that the existence of a human life and being is a question, is it at the moment of conception? is it six months? is it six weeks? is it quickening like aquinus argued? the idea that we're going to make a judgment that is going to say that no one can make the judgment to abort a child based on a decision by the supreme court i think goes way overboard. >> thank you. thank you, guys. >> the midterms, what does this mean for the democrats' argument in the midterms? >> i haven't thought that through yet. >> do changes need to be made to the court in light of this, if this decision holds? >> i beg your pardon. >> do changes need to be made to the court in light of this? >> we just have to choose t titi -- look, they refuse to acknowledge that there's a ninth amendment. thi they refuse to acknowledge there's a right to privacy. there's so many fundamental rights that are affected by that. i'm not prepared to leave that to the whims and the -- of the public at the moment in local areas. thank you so much. >> thank you, guys. come on, guys. >> there you heard the president answering questions saying that if overturning roe does, in fact, happen, if this decision holds, it is a radical decision in his words. he also went on to say that he supports codification, codifying the rule making it a lot of sense in his opinion but would not weigh in on the filibuster. i want to bring back in senator elizabeth warren to get her to respond to what we just heard from the president, specifically on the fact that codifying roe makes a lot of sense but not delving deeper into the filibuster. >> look, i've been on the record for a very long time that we need to get rid of the filibuster, and roe is just exhibit a for the reason for that. the latest data suggests that about 69% of americans, and that's americans everywhere, not just democrats, 69% of americans, red states and blue states, young people, old people want to see roe preserved as the law of the land. when 69% of americans in a democracy want to see something happen, you'd think we'd be able, at least, to get a vote on the floor of the senate on that question. but the filibuster prevents us from doing that in the same way that historically the filibuster was used to prevent us from getting to the civil rights laws, to prevent us from getting to anti-luncynching laws. it prevents us from having a vote on the fundamental question of whether or not a woman has a right to seek an abortion in america. and so for me that is the gat gateway. we have to deal with the filibuster head on because until we do that, we have handed the republicans just a veto over anything we want to get done and understand, this is not, oh, but what happens when the republicans come back and if they're in power, wouldn't the shoe be on the other foot? understand this, the republicans have had two things that they've been beating a drum now for years. one, cut taxes for rich people and number two, get an extremist supreme court in place to accomplish things like overturning roe. they've gotten what they wanted. on the democratic side, listen, we got to get serious and we got to get tough, and that means we've got to get rid of the filibuster and protect a woman's right to an abortion. >> doesn't that begin, though, with the president supporting getting rid of the filibuster, which he wouldn't do here? i mean, is he enough of an ally to the party on this issue? >> look, i think this is where all democrats should be. i've made this argument, i've been making this argument for years. in a democracy, it makes no sense, it is antidemocratic to let a minority continue to control the united states senate. the filibuster's not in the constitution. this is a rule that was developed by the senate, and that means the senate can get rid of it, and that's exactly what we need to do. we need to get rid of the filibuster and then affirm what two-thirds of america wants us to do, and that is protect a woman's right to access to an abortion. >> senator elizabeth warren, thank you as always for your time. >> thank you. >> i want to bring back our panel, jeremy diamond, jeffrey to toobin, gloria borger,. >> what i thought was interesting was he was speaking in a bit of insider code as a former member of the senate and former chair of the senate judiciary committee. he talked about in 1987 when he was chair of the committee and robert boruk was nominated to the court by president reagan, and he was defeated in large part because he would not acknowledge that there is a right to privacy in the constitution, and that's why biden voted against him. that's why biden led the fight against him. it was a 58-42 vote against robert bork. i think what this -- what the draft opinion illustrates is how much the republican party has shifted in recent years because it used to be that there was a very significant core in the republican party of pro-abortion rights, pro-right to privacy. but that right is eliminated in this draft opinion. the president, i don't think he was particularly clear about it but i think he was saying that the right to privacy is not just about abortion rights but it's about contraception. it's about sexual relations, it's about marriage, and all of that is in jeopardy with an opinion like this one. >> and joanet's not lose sight of just how extraordinary it is to hear the president confirm what we heard from the chief justice just moments ago, and that is the document described in yesterday's report is authentic, but does not represent a decision by the court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case. >> you know, this is just one more extraordinary thing that's happened in the last 24 hours for the chief justice to issue this kind of statement is really remarkable, and to say the court is saying outright this document that "politico" obtained is authentic, but the chief is rightly reinforcing the idea that we don't know what kinds of changes are going to be made to this first draft. i actually suspect that many changes have already been made to it since it was dated february 10th, so that -- that part is true. he also suggested that maybe, you know, votes -- it might not reflect the true votes from everything i've picked up, you know, i think there is a solid five-justi