all the mandatory states for states that opt in. you can make exactly the same argument in the civil context with regard to civil actions brought by indians against non-indians. and yet this court made that statement in the context of whether or not public law 280 should be used to construe a state law as ousting the state of pre-existing jurisdiction. our submission is that public law public law 280 operates perfectly well under our interpretation. what public law 280 does is to confer this broad array of additional jurisdiction, not just plenary civil jurisdiction but, of course, criminal jurisdiction including jurisdiction over offenses committed by indians which appears to been congresses principal concern when it enacted public law 280. now to be sure, the text of public law 280 clarifies that states that participate in or opt in to the will also have jurisdiction over offenses committed against indians. >> let's talk about that for a second. first of all you agree though that in 1948 when congress passed the gca the text of it

the foreign tourism coming into the united states goes to the state of florida. if you look at what we have been able to do with our economy and our budget our fiscal year will end june 30 with a budget of about $101.5 billion that is less than half of new york's budget even though i would put our services, our infrastructure, our k-12 schools and or higher education system up against new york any day of the week. we do all that with no state income tax the lowest per capita tax burdens in the united states. [applause] with one or to $1.5 billion budget we will end fiscal year june 30 with a surplus in excess of $21 billion for the largest in florida history. and so, you see people wanting to live in florida, wanting to travel to florida. the validation -- make the best validation we could have is if you look at some these other politicians and other states, lockdown governors, walk down mayors pretty look at some the most hysterical lockdown voices on cable news over the last two years, all of these criticizing florida and say we should not of schools open, busi

it targeted every tier of federal and state elected officials, convincing state legislatures, he said to certify competing electors was essential to stop the count and ensure president trump's reelection. as we have seen in our prior hearings running through this scheme was a big lie that the election was played with massive fraud and somehow stolen. you'll remember what present the president's own attorney general bill bar said he told the president about these claims of massive fraud affecting the outcome of the election hand. ah, i told him that the stuff that his people were shoveling out to the public were book was bullshit. i mean that the claims of fraud were bullshit. the presidents lie was and is a dangerous cancer on the body politic. if you can convince americans that they cannot trust their own elections at any time, they lose, it is somehow illegitimate. and what is left but violence to determine who should govern the springs us to the focus of today's hearing. when state elections, officials refused to stop the count. donald trump in his campaign, tried to put pressure o

state outlaws abortion. additionally he has directed his administration to try to expand access to abortion medication. but at the same time, president biden has acknowledged there is little that he can do as president to fully restore that constitutional right to an abortion that was ensured for nearly 50 years. the president has said that legislation would need to be passed to codify that into law. and a bit earlier today, before the president departed for a trip to germany, he offered this assessment of the supreme court. >> reporter: do you think the supreme court's broken, in your view? >> i think the supreme court has made some terrible decisions. >> reporter: now, the president there was not only referencing his disappointment with this abortion ruling but also a gun ruling that the supreme court issued earlier in the week that really expanded gun rights in this country. now, the president made those comments in another historic moment as he signed the first major piece of gun safety legislation in ne

states. this is a 6-3 decision. it's written by samuel alito. we haven't had a chance to track it yet, but you may recall the justice alito was the author of the draft opinion that leaked in may, that suggested the supreme court was going to overturn roe v. wade. but lester, i have to say, this is not, while it is certainly going to be surprising to some, pleasing to others that have worked for this day for many years, it can't be too much of a surprise for three reasons. first of all, the fact the court agreed to take this place in the first place. this was a decision from the lower courts that said no, you can't strike down abortion that early because it would go against supreme court precedence. there was no division among the circuit courts. so why did the supreme court take it? the logical conclusion has to be they took it to overturn roe. secondly, what they did in the texas case when they allowed the texas law to go into effect that would restrict abortion, and third, the comments the

in state law.his morning, we want to hear what you want on abortion policy when it comes to your state and we want to hear from women only in this first hour of the washington journal. women in the eastern and central time zone, call (202) 748-8000. women in the mountain and pacific time zones, it is (202) 748-8001. you can also send us a text. that number, (202) 748-8003. if you do, please include your name and where you're from. otherwise, catch up with us on social media. good monday morning to you. go ahead and start calling in now. we are talking to women only in this first hour of the washington journal today. the headline on the topic we are discussing, the battle in every state over abortion rights. abortion opponents looking at new restrictions as the next headline there. politico with a map of where abortion policy stands now in various states. abortion out illegal in five states in this country. abortion is likely to soon be illegal in 11 others. abortion remains legal or at least legal

if the states are going to get their way, certain states are going to do what they want to do. it shouldn't be about writing wrong in this situation, a state shouldn't have the right to make a decision like this. these republicans, they do what they want to do. host: margaret in illinois. this is catherine in mississippi. caller: good morning. my mom and dad have 10 children. -- we had nothing. [indiscernible] host: how does this decision overthrow the government, what do you mean by that? caller: it will never stop. host: that is kathleen mississippi. our question in this segment as the issue returns to states, asking women only, what do you want from your state on the issue of abortion? mississippi said to become one of the states where abortion is illegal in just the coming days. the chart we have been showing you noting that it will be -- after the attorney general certifies the decision. temporarily legal and devote 20 weeks, that gestational age at the age of the trigger law preventing all abortions 10 days before after the attorney general certifies. it would become one

states. he has also written that contrary theory is espoused by one of his own former law clerks was, quote, incorrect at every turn. we are also joined today by one of the people who was with vice president pence on january 6th. greg jacob was council to vice president pence. he conducted a thorough analysis of the role of the vice president in a joint session of congress under the constitution. the electoral count act and 230 years of his historical practice. he also has firsthand information about the attack on the capitol. because he lived through it. he was with the vice president and his own life was in danger. i will now swear and our witnesses. the witnesses will please stand and raise the right hand. do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony that you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? you may be seated. let the record reflect the witnesses answered in the affirmative. i now recognize myself for questions. and t

can states ban people from traveling to another state to get an abortion? justice kavanaugh said in his view they can't, but that's just his view. there are questions about allowing medication abortion services or surgical abortion services on military facilities in states that ban abortion and receiving the medication abortion by mail from outside a banned state. so there's lots of litigation to be carried out here. the supreme court said in its majority opinion that roe created a lot of confusion. the dissenters said that the ruling on friday now creates huge amounts of confusion. i think it's going to be months and months while this all plays out. >> linda greenhouse you wrote in the times that friday's decision was, quote, a requiem for the right to an abortion. how do you see the difference between what justice thomas wrote about other privacy based rulings, including same sex consensual sex between adults, same-sex marriage and contraception? >> on the face of it, it's ridiculous to think that the court is going to back away from the 1965 ruling that

states. china definitely will want to impose its system or its values on to the united states. nothing is further away from the truth. and i think that poses a very interesting question because china hasn't, with a few notable historic exceptions, i think china has never been shy of adopting other countries, bass policies for, for its own good. do you think the united states will ever come to the point where it would be willing to borrow from china or any other country success to use some of some of the best practices of war in countries for its own good? i would say if you use objectivity and rationality to look at the situation in the world ever since 1978 ever since 9991 for example. and you need to conclude that china probably is really performing the why become a completely transform itself and is already in the top or in the countries of the world. so there must be something that china has been doing right. and many other countries have failed to do it in the right way. therefore, i think the united states are many other countries can really learn a lot from china's focus

state.re cheering this decision, understand we should not all of a sudden try to federalize these decisions. by the way, jim, i was listening to your intelligent discussion with congresswoman dingle. i think democrats may take another look at whether they think the filibuster is such a bad thing if republicans control congress. and some in my party try to enact a national ban. so leave it to the states, allow the politicians to make a decision based on what's best for the people in the states. if we try to nationalize this, i think it will resound negatively politically in the fall. we'll have to see. >> if the midterms were not in november but in a month from now, do you think that this has the potential to energize democrats to the point there could be consequences for republicans? >> there could be consequences. but on the other hand, i think we've seen that president biden has the lowest poll numbers of any president i've seen in my lifetime. and inflation is just killing families across

what legal reason did _ states constitution. what legal reason did the _ states constitution.me - states constitution. what legal reason did the supreme court. reason did the supreme court have reductions today? 50. reason did the supreme court have reductions today? so, roe v wade and _ have reductions today? so, roe v wade and the _ have reductions today? so, roe v wade and the planned - v wade and the planned parenthood casey decision, the idea of stare decisis precedents, it is an idea that courts use to guide them and to give way to prior decisions, to streamline decision—making for courts going forward, and it makes sense. it is a good principle. but blind adherence to it, asjustice gorsuch recently wrote, is a bad idea. and it would lead to continued reliance on decisions like dread scott, komatsu decision, dread scott, komatsu decision, dread scott, komatsu decision, dread scott, the decision where the supreme court held, relying on history, concluding that blacks were lesser than whites. —— dred scott. 0utrageous, but was a supreme court case, should we rely on that?

states. he has also written that contrary theory is espoused by one of his own former law clerks was, quote, incorrect at every turn. we are also joined today by one of the people who was with vice president pence on january 6th. greg jacob was council to vice president pence. he conducted a thorough analysis of the role of the vice president in a joint session of congress under the constitution. the electoral count act and 230 years of his historical practice. he also has firsthand information about the attack on the capitol. because he lived through it. he was with the vice president and his own life was in danger. i will now swear and our witnesses. the witnesses will please stand and raise the right hand. do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony that you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? you may be seated. let the record reflect the witnesses answered in the affirmative. i now recognize myself for questions. and t

some states already banned it as of tonight. the rest of the banned states are likely to follow in the coming weeks. justice brett kavanaugh in a controlling concurrence said states that ba abortion cannot make it a crime for their residents to travel to a state where it is legal to get the procedure others said the court ruling means from the moment of fertilization a woman has no rights to speak of, they said a state can force her to keep a pregnancy to ter even at the steepest personal and family costs. >> people are going to be heading to the streets in the wake of this decision immediately and in the days and months to come and making clear that the majority of the people in the united states support abortion rights. >> pete is joining us now from outside the supreme court. pete, what has it been like out there today >> well, this is the biggest crowd i have ever seen outside the supreme court after a decision it has been building steadily all day people celebrating and mourning the decisions. while it does return the issue

because i think that work for the state of florida work very well in the state of florida, but if we went at a federal legislation, i don't know how you could get a florida and a colorado, and possibly a louisiana, and fit us all into the same box. we in florida have decided, and worked through what works best for our miami-dades, our lafayettes, and everybody in between, so that it fits and we are have those optional pieces to make it for our particular jurisdiction. >> what do you think is a problem with this 20,000 ballots weren't able to be counted on election day. was this the printing error in printing the bar code, and why would that come up in some sort of pretext of the system? >> yes, so that was lancaster county. with one county. it was a vendor issue with this printing the bar code. so, at about 7 am when the county started pre-canvassing, they discovered this error that the scanner was not reading the bar code. so that is why they're hand marking the ballot. if we had ample pre canvas time, like florida, that would've definitely been called earlier. >> right. and on the

similar to states like florida. that was able to call the 2020 general election on election night, because of pre canvassing. we so that leads to my next point, which is that county and state election officials continue to bear the burden of addressing this information and disinformation regarding the integrity of our elections. it is especially disturbing that some disinformation has come from those with a sworn duty to defend our democratic process. the november 2020 election in pennsylvania, like every election since, was free, fair, and secure. allegations of illegal legal activity in pennsylvania's 2020 election has been repeatedly dismissed more than two dozen federal court cases and debunked by independent fact-checker's. repeating this falsehood over and over, harms our democracy and voters confidence in our elections process. finally, and most significantly, counties consistently express another need. adequate, consistent funding from the state federal government. in pennsylvania, counties bare virtually al

a state can force a woman to give birth, and make no mistake many states will. at least half a dozen already are, as of yesterday. now the rule has been overturned, 26 states are certainly to ban abortion in the coming days and months according to the institute. it advocates for reproductive rights. they have so-called trigger bans on the books. they are laws designed to automatically ban abortion if roe were to be overturned. officials and seven of those states, missouri, south dakota, louisiana, kentucky, oklahoma, utah, and arkansas, have already activated these bands. chief justice john roberts was the only conservative justice that disagreed with the court's decision. he disagreed. he ruled in favor of upholding mississippi's 50-week abortion ban. roberts did not vote to overturn roe entirely. however, all three justices appointed by the now twice impeached president now voted to overturn. roe nancy pelosi singled him out in her remarks yesterday. take a listen. >> how about those justices coming before the senators and saying that they respected the preced

court challenges based on state constitutions and state law.done is oftentimes we talk about the us supreme court setting a floor forfor certain rights and by cutting that floor out today, what the supreme court has done has made it a complete upheaval across the country. and it's interesting that the chief justice, john roberts, ruled with the majority, but said essentially he wouldn't have gone quite as far, and yet he did byjoining the majority. it's a bit of a confusing position, isn't it, by the chiefjustice? i mean, hejoined the judgment of the court. even in oral arguments, he sort of had made it clear that he was ok with striking down this specific law at issue. but he had real questions about about how the court was going to resolve this case. and he often talks about the court as as taking minimalist steps, doing as little as it needs to do to resolve a given case. and obviously, here, the court went a lot further than it needed to go in resolving this case. all that was at issue here was a is—week ban, which obviously went a lot furt

in some states they already have. these egregious laws are doing a number of things, heightening levels of racial discrimination, their weaponizing the power of criminal law to sweep aside neutral and none partisan election administrators, disenfranchising voters in the process. they are giving those who sow violence and doubt in the election process and given them political camouflage further threats and attacks. these laws undermine our democracy and its promise. this week marks the 65th anniversary of dr. martin luther king jr.'s famous speech, give us the ballot. what he warned us about those who gained prominence and power, by the dissemination of false ideas and deliberately appealing to the deepest hate responses within the human mind. dr. king reminded us that one individual -- the false ideas they spread the louder when those who disagree with them remain silent, because of fear, of political reprisals. democracy is a promise. democracy is also a choice. we have a choice when it comes to election administrati

and make sure that limits on abortion are brought in on every state nine states.is what they once -- in the united states. they are not happy that half the states in america will still be allowing the procedures. that sets up a huge battle for those states, the mayor of new york saying that his date will be a safe haven for women seeking terminations. you're likely to hear similar things from california, illinois, state-by-state you will have very radically different regimes and laws in place when it comes to women's reproductive rights. of course this is only the beginning, possibly of radical decisions like this from the supreme court. we heard from justice clarence thomas today that he thinks the courts should revisit other progressive decisions that he and some of the more conservative justices disagree with. he wants to look again at the guaranteed access to. contraception. he wts a look at the constitution -- the decision that legalized same-sex marriage. many of the cultural and social issues that are divisive in a polarized country at the moment could be r

tonight there is a growing patchwork of laws from state to state. right now abortion is illegal with few exceptions in at least seven states and in the coming weeks at least six more are also expected to put bans in place effectively wiping out abortion access across a wide portion of the south. for tens of thousands of women illinois would be the closest option the state's 17 planned parenthood clinics are preparing to serve them >> we are expecting to see 20,000 to 30,000 more out of state patients every year in the state of illinois. >> how will your clinics be able to handle that increase >> we are going to be able to handle that increase by increasing the number of appointments we have, by hiring more staff >> reporter: in georgia, the attorney general has taken steps to allow the state's heartbeat law to take effect, which would ban abortions after six weeks. but some anti-abortion groups are demanding a total ban. >> that will declare the paramount right to life of every human being from the earliest biological beginning to natural death. >>

in blue further state. nowhere does it suggest the president of the senate gets to make the determination on his own. judge luttig, does it surprise you the author of those comments in blue was in fact john eastman? >> yes, it does, congressman. but let me, watching this unfold, let me try to unpack what was at the root of what i have called the blueprint to overturn the 2020 mention. and it is this. and i had foreshadowed this answer in my earlier testimony to congresswoman cheney. mr. eastman, from the beginning, said to the president that there was both legal as well as historical precedent for the vice president to overturn the election. and what we have heard today, i believe, is what happened within the white house and elsewhere as all of the players led by mr. eastman got wrapped around the axle by the historical evidence claim by mr. eastman. let me explain very simply. this is what i said would require a digression, that i would be glad to undertake if you wished. in short, if i had been advising t

her from traveling from her home state to the state that allows it. it does not prevent a doctor, in that state, and that state from treating her. as the attorney general has made clear women must remain free to travel safely to another state to seek care they need. my administration will defend that bedrock right. if any state or local official high or low tries to interfere with a woman's exercise and her basic right to travel, i will do everything in my power to fight that deeply unamerican attack. my administration will also protect a woman's access to medications that are approved the food and drug administration , the fda. mike contraception, which is essential for preventive healthcare. and the fda approved 20 years ago to safely end early pregnancies, and is commonly used to treat miscarriages. some states are saying that they will try to ban or severely restrict access to these medications but extremist governors and state legislatures are looking to block the mail or search the person's medicine cabinet or control a woman's actions by tracki

in a state like texas. because we know that, although roe was before, it was really hard and inaccessible for texans to get to their abortions anyway. right? we already spent tens of thousands of dollars to send texans out of the state before sb8. and now we were struggling to figure out what more complications are there for texans. and not just texans, americans as a whole. anyone who lives in the united states. it's not just texas that has these bands. it's multiple states that have these bands. and we saw an increase in mileage, of mileage traveled by folks when oklahoma closed its doors. so, imagine now, no nearby states have access, what is going to happen. and so we just don't know and we want to get clarity, so we can make sure we are following the law and we are not doing anything to risk our team, to risk the pregnant people that are traveling. and so we can stay in existence long term, so we can continue to try to do this fight the right way. >> anna rupani is co-executive director of fund texas c

blocked in that state. we'll watch it and continue to you let you know. the latest state where lauts are playing out. now what do you have to say about it. the latest cbs news poll shows a majority of you here in the united states, 59% disapprove of what the supreme court did. that includes nearly 7 in 10 women. 52% in the polls say reversing roe v. wade is a step back for america. >>> well today the supreme court also busy weighing in on a case that effects religious liberty in our country. it centers orn a former washington state high school football coach who prayed on the 50 yard line after games. cbs news skylar henry withrt t s ruled in favor of a former high school football coach who sued his washington state school district claiming it violated his constitutional rights when it told him to stop prays with students mid field after games. >> i think it is a glaet ruling for america. >> reporter: writing the 6-3 majority opinion, neil gorsuch said it countels mutual respect and tolerance and not suppre

from her home state to a state that allows it. it does not prevent a doctor in that state from treating her. the attorney general has remained clear that women must remain free to seek care in another state. my administration will defend that bed rock right. many state officials who tries to interfere with the woman who exercises her right to travel, i will defend her right against that attack. i will protect medications like contraception which is essential for preventative health care. milfesprestone that is used to treat miscarriages. some states said they will try to restrict or ban these medications. two extremist governors who are looking to ban the mail search medicine cabinets or tracking data on her apps, they are wrong and out of touch with the majority of americans. american medical association, the american college of obstetricians and gynecologists wrote to me and vice president harris said these laws are not based on evidence and asked us to protect access to care. by eliminating access to these medicines, maternal m

i often think in the united states. and particularly in united states congress. there is a confusion between operational and declaratory strategy. um, we would be a lot more advanced both the united states and as us allies in our dealings with the people's republic of china if 95% of the focus was on the clarity and consistency of our behavior and its cont and its and it's consistency with the coherent strategy. of deterrence as opposed to what i would describe as this continued rhetorical attraction to what we put into our declaratory strategy about the chinese on every and every day of the week. furthermore if your emphasis is on the declaratory side rather than the operational side, then you create all sorts of opportunities to cause a fence cultural offense and and the rest which frankly clouds out your ability to deal with the substantive issues of the day. so i have a deeply realist view of how you deal with leninists those of us who come from social democratic parties like i do by the way for a hundred years since the second international in the 1880s, we'

to the other state. so i think we're going to see massive litigation being filed by some of these conservative activists, as well as gop legislators who are trying to kb intrude into the area of law that has been covered by the federal government. and at this point it's very clear to me that cases about abortion are going to make their way back up to the supreme court, because this issue is far from settled. >> harry, your legal take-aways of what the next steps are legally? >> first, i agree, it's far from settled going back to the court. alison, this is a sprawling disaster, and even leaving aside the subject matter, because what you have -- when you used to have other laws that, say, targeted intimate behavior, prosecutors rarely tried to prosecute. here you have state after state that is bound and determined, and now has wind in its salils from the supreme court to eliminate every abortion in this country. what happens with someone who crosses state lines, i'm sorry, regardless of what justice cavana

eastern time, 13 states called trigger state, they went into effect or will go into effect soon.as, oklahoma, louisiana, mississippi, north dakota and south dakota. look at states like florida, nebraska, montana, indiana, currently still working to pass legislation making abortion illegal in those states but gray stays on the map show where abortion is still legal. mike kherson, republican governor of missouri tweeted yesterday, missouri has become the first state in the nation to effectively and abortion, the issue returns to the state abortion access for abortion will depend on where the woman lives. she lives in phoenix, arizona, she may have to go cross state lines to california. >> i'm sorry, i'm less sorry than i am resolved and angry to do more. >> merrick garland wants a supreme court nominee himself, expressed disappointment with the court's ruling and said this about women crossing state lines. constitution principles, women who reside in states that have banned access to reproductive care must remain free to seek the care in states where it is legal. you have district

this court is for states rights, until they're not for states rights.il we're talking about localities, until we're talking about new york city. it's like ron desantis. he's a conservative and for local control, until he's not for local control. until he wants to take the right away from small business owners and entrepreneurs and cruise lines from deciding how to keep their businesses safe or local school boards or local communities, local classrooms. teachers can't make the decision if it goes against what ron desantis's latest conspiracy theory was about covid, so again, it's just all hypocritical, it's situational ethics. guy, the question is, again, what do those who are opposed to this hypocrisy do, and let me just also ask you, what about a state like wisconsin, a state that now, i guess, abortion is illegal now in wisconsin. what's the impact on races up there? i mean, that's not alabama. that's not mississippi. that's wisconsin. what's the impact? >> first, if i could also just say, the only difference between what clarence thomas said and what

in their states. justice alito, this widely decided -- has widely decided that abortion is not a fundamental right found in the text of the constitution and could not be brought into these other constitutional provisions such as the equal protection clause. i think it is important to understand what this decision, which overturns roe v. wade and plan parenthood dies. it is not immediately criminalize all abortions throughout the united states. it simply returns the issue back to the people's elective representatives in the state legislatures, which is where this question resided for most of our nations history up until the court took it out of the vocal process in 1973. host: i want to remind people that if they want to talk to our guest, you can feel free to give us a call on the lines republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. in independence, (202) 748-8002. we are talking about the decision to overturn roe v. wade. i want to ask about enforcement. how would this be enforced, a

in most states, the state would issue that permit.at an individual show proper cause or need. >> yeah, i would do -- >> including new york, an individual had to show a cause, a proper cause. and the state could approve it, it as did in two-thirds of the cases, or deny it, as it did in one-third of the cases. the supreme court has now said that is too onerous. we now have to figure out if we're going to legislate where you can carry a concealed weapon, what those places are. what are the sensitive places? pete referred to that earlier. we don't know the answers. they're much smarter than i am, but we don't know the answers yet. we have to legislate that and litigate that in the years to come. >> gabe gutierrez, who has been covering this story from all angles, i'm just thinking this comes at a time when tomorrow is the one-month anniversary of the massacre in uvalde, texas. >> that's exactly right. comes, of course, with the u.s. senate talking about this bipartisan legislation putting forth more gun regulations, but at the state level

officially, the united states is not in a hurry with fighters yet.ut, for example, gray eagle drones, according to the press, are ready to be handed over. it is no secret that the united states began supplying weapons to ukraine long before the start of the russian special military operation and even before the presidency of joseph biden. the so-called assistance packages were also in the previous administrations of donald trump and barack obama and this, not counting the numerous joint training exercises for officers in the american ssu. the instructors provide intelligence data on cash tranches of financing the russophobic neo-nazi ideology in this way. according to the united states, they contribute to the weakening of russia in which ukraine is used as a battle ram, this is how the united states considers its participation in ukrainian affairs, at least since the maidan is another question, how far the americans are ready to go in protecting their investment in the kyiv regime. how many more are able to transfer weapons and send money the new ame

by state.opefully 880 babies will be saved tomorrow in 26 states who should move quickly to make abortion a thing of the past and end this violence. but we're going to have lot of strategy conversations in the coming weeks and months. reverses roe v. wade doesn't end our fight. we'll no now go straight by state. and ready do that. >> thank you for taking time and being with us and expressing your views. i want to go right to nbc news justice correspondent, pete williams. we've had little over an hour now to digest this. you have had a chance to go through the entire ruling. what stands out? what should people know? >> well first of all, i think we have to say again this is 5-4 on overturning roe. 6-3 on upholding the mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. and secondly. chief justice roberts doesn't join the majority saying it is going too far too fast. and just alito who wrote the opinion said nothing in this opinion should be read to cast doubt on any of the court's ot

the fund that i referred to, while the state dollars will be in a fund for state residence, we have a separate fund where we are getting private sector donations, that's the expectation that would be able to support people from out of state if they find the financial means. so that's how we are structuring it. kristen: before i let you go i want to ask you, what if, and i'm sure you already -- you are already looking at that and preparing for the possibility, but if the high court were to have a case that comes up that allows it to strike down states rights on this issue and say, california, you cannot do that and guarantee this right? >> the court, so far, even as bad as it is, and i'm talking about the majority on the supreme court, it has respected states rights. i'm hoping they will continue to do so. i think if they were to start to strike down the state's ability to act, then i think you would have the reaction across the entire united states, and certainly a very ferocious reaction here in california. and let's just remind ourselves. all the polls have shown over 60% of america

your state? >> well, today's decision, which is absolutely devastating for at least half of the country, abortion is poised to be banned. it is immediately or will be very soon. texas, for example, there is confusion about whether the parole ban has come back to life, the sort of a zombie band that isn't actually where on the statute, and yet, the attorney general has come out with this extreme position, saying that somehow it bans abortion anyway, and threatening criminal sanctions against providers, like amy, like which i'm very proud to represent. the confusion has been sounded everywhere. and look, if you are in a blue state, and you think, this isn't gonna affect me. this is terrible. i hate this outcome. i hate this decision, but it's actually not gonna affect me. you are wrong. and the reason is, think about -- look at what's happened in texas after texas passed a six -week mandate has been in effect for nine months. as amy was saying, the rush of patients out of texas to oklahoma, to new

the united states is no longer able to interfere with the development of the states of the region withan assessment. we agree that the latin american experts summit america is not a summit meeting, not a forum of leaders of american countries, this summit serves only the goals of the united states itself, the leaders who still get to los angeles. will discuss on wednesday economic problems, thursday, climate and energy security, and on friday migration. us president joe biden is expected to announce $300 million in food security for the region, even independent american political scientists are skeptical of the initiative around the world. i just saw the united states agree to donate $40 billion in just a few weeks to ukraine. i wonder if the states can scrape together , at least 400 million for the entire western hemisphere. here's what they want to see people in mexico set off this year's largest caravan of migrants. about 5,000 people. we intend to cross the country from south to north and cross the border with the united states. at first, the movement of migrants was timed to coinc

to state. the state activism levels and voting levels have been so low, maybe it is time for people to get more involved. women are the majority of voters in this country, have women not been voting for various reasons? so this takes it back it, brings it closer to the people, which is what the far left and liberals in general, classical liberals have been arguing for to have their voices heard. at the supreme court they are shut out. this is a done deal in d.c. between the dealmakers. well, now that it is back in state houses, you actually can be heard. you can make a difference. you can vote. you can have a protest, a nice protest that does not involve threatening to kill people, but actually do activism for a change. i believe that the left knows it does not know how to do that anymore. they have relied on this kind of hammer for half a century, and they don't know how to proceed. that's why they are desperate here, and they only know how to threaten, bring things down, have assassins somewh

why not leave it to the states? >> look, we have never left individual rights to the states. the whole idea is that women are not second-class citizens and the government is not the one that will decide about the continuation of a pregnancy. you know there's no equivalent there for men, so what we believe is that access to abortion like other medical procedures should be available across the board to all people in this country. now, we've got a lot of things on our agenda right now. first of all, we need to help the women who are pregnant right now and need help, and that means sending resources to the states like new mexico, that border other states that are going to try to help out. it means getting involved by volunteering, by sending money, and also asking the president of the united states to make abortion as available as possible with the tools he has including medication abortion, including using federal lands as a place where abortions can occur, but it's also focused like a laser on the election in november and we get two more senators on the democratic side, two sen

because the states are doing this -- this is now up to the states. there are republicans trying to push forward a federal ban on abortions that are more than 15 weeks. do you agree that a federal ban should be put in place? >> well, i think what's important to just take a step back and note if you're living in california or new york or more progressive areas, nothing will change. this is where things are. >> i knew this was going to happen. >> abby -- >> so, you don't -- yes or no, do you think this should be a federal ban eventually in your mind? >> i personally prefer that but i know that people on the other side don't prefer that. that is the beauty of federalism to say that people will migrate. they will vote with their feet at the end of the day. as much as i would like to see a federal ban, i know that is politically unlikely. so, that, i think, is the best compromise. in fact ruth bader ginsburg said -- >> she did not say -- >> let me quote her. >> excuse me. >> i'm going to go to break -- >> you literally just cited a case from 1896 before wo

you have the whole united states, each school closure even some of the southern states there is not aot on the whole state of florida. and so now harvard has looked at this. what they have said is the places to lock kids out of school did not have reliable in person education. they have seen a widening of the achievement gap between rich, poor, black, white, however you want to slice it. states like florida worked hard to have kids in school even duringlt the difficult times of covid did not see any increase in the achievement gap. that is worth its weight in gold and future opportunities, the health of our society going forward. rebuy that oppose having kids in school, they werer wrong. we could never let something like that happen in this country again. [applause] we are proud to be the leaders in this country when it comes to empowering parents to make the best educational decisions they can for their kids. when i became governor of florida already had some strong school choice programs but least on the private level was maxed out it was done through a private corporate tax credit

>> i don't agree that the states are going to do a better job because obviously many of the states haveletely and outright banning abortion. >> for me, personally, there's been this huge focus on legality. right? it's never how are we helping the women on the ground, what is is the reason that people are actually getting abortions. >> more upset with the sprorkts f supreme court, decisin they made is not reflective of what americans, largely polled, indicated they believed. >> any of you have girlfriends or friends, here's where we find common ground? is it either/or? >> i changed stance on a position. came from low income background, only told this narrative that abortion is the way to go, and anyone against abortion doesn't like women, don't support women and frankly that's not true. >> you reject the pro-life label? >> because it's come to mean so many things and the super mainstream movement is super hypocritical, there's no other way to say it. my viewpoints don't come from religion but fact that each human being is distinct and important and should be respected and valued. i'm aga

more liberal states, some more conservative states, but ultimately, the states really making those decisions at the state level which which is how we are funded as country by the states -- by making decisions. the court is going to make a decision that our constitutional decisions. who do you think should make a final decision on something where it is your constitutional rights? which entity at our federal level? >> to be clear, there was actual a civil war about fundamental rights in the united states on that were not -- carry on whatever they wanted to do. that was the very point of the several war. the lives of black people were actually at stake. so, if you could then repeat your question, i thought -- >> what is the decision, we have a constitutional amendment, right, of the states decide to do that. the more you know, we can fight war, but then ultimately,, which power, which branch of our federal government has an ultimate decision to decide what is protected by our constitution? which branch? >> well, the supreme court is this -- >> so the supreme court? -- the valley that supreme co

ah, the united states. me that this is, first of all, a very clear indicator of emancipation, and no western countries, after all, mexico borders the united states on the one hand. it depends very much on the united states, but pay attention to what independent policy it is pursuing, and secondly, vladimir alekseevich, do you agree with the fact that this illustrates that in a multipolar world, than more, the united states will try to provide a bloc approach. here to rally against, yes, and the less effective, uh, will be american policy. and even more so. they will lose in the international arena. yes, it’s true, both russia and china and other major players did not talk about the fact that the bloc approach should remain in the past that we are moving into a completely new reality, and it should not be fictional, the americans invented the reality around them, where they are are the leader. this is not so, and already even this very-himself. it is america that demonstrates that the united states can not s

i think it's for the gulf states. i mean, they traditionally have always shied away from interfering and india domestic politics and have done their level best to do so. even when other muslim states, such as iran or turkey, or even malaysia under the former prime minister, might have been payment criticized india for se, revoking article $370.00 and changing the status of demo kashmir because they have held back traditionally because they've always thought to not to interfere, but insulting the profit when the spokesperson of the ruling party insults the prophet muhammad on satellite t. v. that's a different ball game altogether that isis to be an internal matter. i never have to ask you because you said that it doesn't appear in a very credible india response so far. how then can gulf states in particular for example, move past this? i think so on the one hand and the fact that the it can't appear as doing nothing because within days of no pressure mom, making those comments on t v. d. 's comments are picked up on t

while states will restrict abortion-rights there will be people who leave the states trying to get to free states where they can terminate their pregnancies including in california, new york, illinois and colorado amongst the states. >> and of course the governor today signed a bill 1866 that will protect women coming to california or anyone in a helps them come here to get an abortion. to what extent can a state like california insulate women from legal jeopardy and give them the kinds of services that they want and need. >> it means that what is taxed in california happens to be in the capacity of the institution the performance reproductive health care. do we have an adequate supply of medical providers nurses and more that can help in helping the people with their reproductive health care needs. whether it's prenatal care or terminating an abortion. so those are real questions in terms of capacity for the state of california. but certainly the urgency and the need recognizing constitutional rights at stake has been something that california has always been committed to long before

by state. for the most part, the candidate who win the popular vote in a state winds all of these states electoral college votes. and, whoever wins a majority of electoral college votes wins the presidency. when donald trump tried to overturn the election results, he focused on just a few states. he wanted officials at the local and state level to say the vote was tainted by widespread fraud and throughout the results. even though, as we showed last week, that was not any voter fraud that could have overturned the election results. and, like mike pence this public servants would not go along with donald trump's scheme there. when they would not embrace the big lie and substitute the will of the voters with donald trump's will to remain in power, donald trump worked to ensure they would face the consequences. threats to people's livelihood, and lives. threats of violence that donald trump knew about and amplified. and, in our other hearings we cannot just look back at what happened in late 2020

a safe apportion in this state and we el km individuals from other states, particularly republican statesw, as a result of trigger laws, um, will criminalize borgz even in the case of rape and incest but new york -- new york state is ready for the influx of individuals coming here for a safe abortion. >> considering your answer, you said something similar earlier. you said that new york state will always be a safe haven for anyone seeking an abortion. how will your office protect this right? >> so, in -- in anticipation of this decision, when it was a leaked decision, he organized 20 major law firms in new york state in addition to that, we organized advocates and we have organized medical professionals. and so, we will not bow, we will not break. we are ready to stand up and fight back and the best way to fight back now is, unwith, to organize and, two, to vote. it is really kcritically important that individuals understand this was a political decision and the ohm way to respond to a political decision is with a political response. and the best response is to vote. vote out individuals