tv PBS News Hour PBS June 24, 2022 6:00pm-7:01pm PDT
♪ judy: good evening. tonight, the end of roe. the supreme court overturns ro v. wade almost after -- almost half a century after a guaranteed the rights of women to an abortion. the ramifications it will have now and years to come. >> i can't even remember when the supreme court last revoked a right that an american citizen held. >> and weighing in on the supreme court's ruling and the by passage of bipartisan gun
safety legislation in congress. all that and more on tonight's "pbs nshour." ♪ >> major funding for "the pbs newshour" has been provided by -- ♪ >> pediatric surgeon. volunteer. topiary artist. a raymondjames financial advor tailors advice to help you live your life. life well planned. ♪ >> the john s. and james l not knight foundation, fostering gaged, informed communities. more at kf.org. ♪ >> and friends of the
"newshour." this program was made possible by corporation and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. judy: it is a tectonic shift on abortion rights. the u.s. supreme court today remade the legal landscape, throwing out the president laid down 50 years ago in roe v. wade. we will be dedicating most of tonight's program to the decision and the praise and protest that it has touched off. john yang begins our coverage. john: outside the supreme court, jubilation and celebration for some. >> my body! >> my body! >> my choice!
>> my choice! john: others resolve. the court's ruling and the constitutional right to an abortion, a right that had been the law of the land for nearly 50 years. alito wrote the majority opinion, joined by justices thomas, gorsuch, kavanaugh, and coney barrett. the liberal justices -- stephen breyer, sonia sotomayor, and elena kagan -- dissented. the chief justice did n join his colleagues in voting to overturn roe. he said there was no need to do that in order to overturn a mississippi band that was the subject of the case. >> the court has done what it has never done before -- expect -- expressly take away a constitutional right that is so fun -- fundamental to so many
americans that had already been recognized. the court's decision to do so will have real and immediate consequences. >> the only way we can secure a woman's right to choose and the balance that existed is for congress to restore the protection of roe v. wade as federal law. john: in a statement, former president trump called the ruling the biggest win for life in a generation and went on to take credit for it, saying it was only made possible because "i delivered everything as promised." house speaker nancy pelosi weighed in at her weekly news conference. >> american women today have less freedom than their mothers. for 50 years, a constitutional right, a woman having the right to choose. the hypocrisy is raging, but the harm is endless. john: house republicans leader kevin mccarthy claimed a win. >> the people have won a victory. the right to life has been
indicated. the voiceless will finally have a voice. this great nation can now live up to its core principle that all are created equ, not born equal -- created equal. >> today's ruling is likely to lead to abortion bands in about half the states. some have lost triggered by the overturning of roe or pre-roll laws still on the books. michigan attorney general said her state's 1931 law is unenforceable. >> in the event that the court of appeals or later the michigan supreme court were to overturn that, then the 1931 law would spring back into effect, but as of right now, it is unenforceable, so everything remains the same as it s yesterday at this time, but just for now. >> corporate america also responded. the walt disney company announced it would pay for employees' travel if it was needed to access family planning
and reproductive care. citigroup, j.p. morgan chase, netflix, and amazon, among others, had already pledged to offer similar benefits. from overseas, leaders weighed in on the historic ruling. british prime minister boris johnson. >> i think it is a big step backwards. i have always believed in a woman's right to choose, and i stick to that view, and that's why the u.k. has the rules that it does. >> canadian prime minister justin trudeau tweeted it was horrific. french prime minister emmanuel macron wrote, abortion is a fundamental right for all women. as the day wore on, the crowd outside the supreme court group. gatherings are expected in cities across the country later tonight. judy: to unpack today's supreme court opinion, including its conservative majority and liberal dissent, we turn now t
marcia coyle of "the national law journal." this is a big one. put this in context, though. in the pantheon of major supreme court decisions, where does this one fit? >> this is huge. i cannot even remember when the supreme court last revoked a right that an american citizen held, so this one was nearly 50 years old, had also been reaffirmed multiple times. judy: and rolling the clock back essentially. is that right? >> absolutely it does. there will be a patchwork of laws around the nation, either having abortion legal or illegal. will we see some of the deaths and injuries that occurred pre-roe when desperate women may have gone to back alley-type abortions? i don't know. it will depend on how some of
these abortion laws were structured. judy: we did have an inkling this was coming. the leaked draft opinion written by justice alito that came out in may and we see some of the same language in this opinion. i want to quote from part of today's decision. "we hold that roe and kc must be overruled. the constitution makes no expose it reference to abortion and no such right is protected by defenders of the contribution the provision has been heldo guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the constitution, but any such right must be deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition, and the right to abortion does not fall within this category." explain what justice alito was getting at their. >> the conservative majority on this court approaches the constitution by -- and
constitutional rights by looking at the text of the constitution, tradition, and history. there are many respected american historians who disagree and also challenge the ability of the court and judges in general to do the kind of historical research that is required to reach these kinds of conclusions, but be that as it may, the majority did do that analysis and found that as i said, abortion did not fall in that category. judy: chief justice john roberts does sign on to the majority opinion but does write a separate, concurring opinion saying the court erred, in his words, by completely overruling roe and casey. he says if it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of the case, then it is necessary not to decide more. surely, we should adhere closely
to principles of judicial restraint where the broader path the court chooses entails repudiating a constitutional right, we have not only previously recognized but also expressly reaffirmed applying to doctrine of starter sizes -- sta ri decisis. >> he felt that he was concerned about the court's legitimacy in making this ruling at this time, and he agreed with that part of the majority opinion that did get rid of the viability line, but he would not, as you said, go so far as to overrule the entire decisions.
judy: as we know, there was a strongly worded dissent by the three liberal justices. here is part of what they wrote in today's opinion. that as a matter of constitutional substance, the majority's opinion has all the flaws its method would suggest because laws in 1868 deprived women of any control over their bodies. the majority approves states doing so today. today's decision strips women of agency over what even the majority agrees is a contested and contestable moral issue. it forces her to carry out the state's will, whatever the circumstances and whatever the harm it will wreak on her and her family. in the 14th amendment's terms, it takes away her liberty. >> the dissent had a lot of problems, obviously, with the majority opinion. first, the history. the point they made clearly was that the history that the majority relied upon, the laws
at the time that they looked at were all made by men. women at the time did not have rights, basically any rights at all, so that was one flaw. the other very important flaw they felt was that the majority failed to stand by old precedent , and that is known as stare decisis. they felt the majority did not properly apply the factors the court has generally applied in determining if they will overrule an earlier precedent, factors like reliance and workability, so i think those were the two main takeaways. one other thing i would add about the majority opinion that i think is kind of important is that going forward, how will courts judge abortion regulations and restrictions? the majority opinion said that all a state has to do is justify that regulation by a rational, reasonable basis, and that is
considered the easiest form of constitutional scrutiny. judy: what doe that mean for these state courts? >> it means state and federal courts will be probably upholding many more abortion regulations and restrictions than they have done in the past. judy: beginning to digest this most historic and significant decision handed down today in the supreme court. thank you. >> my pleasure. judy: today's decision is set to reshape where women may be able to access abortion services. john yang has more on how potential future legal battles could play out at the state level. john: now that the right to an abortion has been overturned, an estimated 26 states are certain or likely to banhe procedure according to a research group that supports abortion rights. so what is next? a law professor at the
university of california davis wrote "dollars for life: the antiabortion movement and the fall of the republican establishment." thanks for being with us. we just showed that map. what justice decision mean for a woman who may, let they in the coming days, learned she is pregnant and decides she wants to terminate it? >> at the moment, that person would in many of these states only have the option to travel out of state or try to self manage and abortion. what had been a constitutional right in all 50 states is now going to be protected in less than half. john: what hpens now to the legal battle over abortion? >> there are multiple phases. there are state constitutional ttles in places like michigan, that has already decided a struggle -- struggle about if there is a state right to constitutional abortion. there will be knocked down political battles in states that
have yet to committing to having outright bans on abortion, and there will be legal battles as well as conservatives will likely come back to the supreme court and ask for protection for feudal rights. states may try to regulate out-of-state conduct, right? either preventing people from traveling to get abortions or preventing doctors from performing abortions on people from red states. those fights raise complicated legal questions. john: yotalked about abortion rights opponents coming back to the supreme court to talk about fetal rights. talkbout that. what will they be pressing for? >> the idea that -- and this has been the main constitutional crux of the movement from the inception -- is that the word person, which guarantees equality under the law, applies before as well as after birth. it will be pressing the supreme court to recognize that claim, and if the supreme court were to
do that, that would have the effect of banning abortion everywhere, not just states that may choose to do so. >> in other words, this would be a federal right, a constitutional right, but on the others? >> exactly. right. i do not anticipate that happening soon. brett kavanaugh, who i think was a key vote on this, was trying to telegraph his concurrence on this, essentially that the constitution is neutral, but if you had asked me as little as two years ago, there were not the votes to overturn roe v. wade, so this is a fast-moving topic where things can rapidly change. >> give us the historian's context or view of today. >> i think it is a fairly unprecedented moment. there have been times when the supreme court has to reverse decisions that discuss constitutional rights, but nothing exactly like this really in modern history.
it is also remarkable that the supreme court has done this involving the most well-known supreme court decision, right? the supreme court in this decision quite clearly says this may damage the court's legitimacy, this may upset the american people, but that's not our problem, essentially, and that is a remarkable thing to see as well for a court that had historically been restrained by fears of public reaction. clearly, this court is unrestrained, so this is a historic moment when it comes to moments enjoyed by women in pregnant people and is a historic moment in terms of the court in the role of our democracy. >> thank you very much. >> thanks, john. ♪ judy: we are going to hear from leaders on both sides of this issue about what comes next. first, i'm joined by the president of the susan b anthony
pro-life america organization. welcome to "the newshour." what is your reaction, the reaction of the antiabortion movement? how much of a victory is this? >> for the pro-life movement, this is a culminating movement -- moment of 50 years of what we believe is the greatest human rights movement of our time. in every single abortion, there are two that must be served, and the experience of women since 1973 when they were told this would be the great liberator, has not been that. it has been quite the opposite. now that the states and congress -- every elected body will be able to discuss this issue in the public square, the merits of the arguments will be meted out in ways that are not closeted as the supreme court required all those 50 years ago, and the will the people will make its way into the law, and women will be
served in ways that they deserve . judy: i do want to ask you because you told another reporter today -- you said that you and others will work to ban abortion -- and i'm quoting -- in every state and every legislature, including the congress. is your goal to ban abortion nationwide? >> i think if you look at what i said, you will see that i will work and so will the pro-lif movement, so will all the legislators, so will democrats that do not like abortion after the first trimester that -- to work to be as ambitious as possible in every single legislature that will be different state to state to state. north carolina will be different from alabama will be different from vermont and california. it means state law will reflect the will of those people. judy: we see -- and you are aware of this -- public opinion polls have been done. "the newshour" itself has commission polls the last couple of months that show that the
majority of americans think -- thought that roe should not be overturned, th most people think american women should have a right to abortion. hodoes that public view square with what we have seen today? >> i have to believe that you have looked at the rest of those polls. when you look at the rest of those polls, you see that democrats, women, diverse groups of people -- this is not a partisan issue -- think that abortion should at least be restricted in the second and third trimester. this seems reasonable to most people. again, it does not please both sides, but it definitely is something that is a consensus in this nation. people want restrictions, people want limits that grow -- that roe simply never would have allowed. the other piece is the service to women is vital, and it has
been going on, and this is a moment of flourishing to serve them in a way that our original women who got us into politics in the first place -- susan b anthony and the rest -- saw as serving women and not allowing them to be exploited by the so-called abortion liberator's who will liberate them trying to build file rights -- their rights on the broken rights of their chdren. judy: i do want to ask one more question, and is one that comes from the antiabortion movement, and that is the fundamental unfairness of saying to women who don't have the financial means, who live in states will -- where abortion will no longer be legal, that they are in effect either going to give birth to a child they are not prepared to give birth to, whereas women who have financial means are going to be able to travel somewhere if they want an abortion to get it. what about that? >> well, that would be unfair if
that were true, but pro-life, not antiabortion, is pro-life at birth and throughout life. that is my commitment and the commitmentf every leader that i know and not just that small number of people, but the governor has not spoken to 22 so far in the states most likely to limit abortion very early on. that commitment to those who are perceived as outliers, people who are perceived as cannot manage allowing their children to be born -- those are the people we go to first. those are the people that we love. love is at the center of this w to the president of theonyat planned parenthood action fund,
the political arm of the country's largest abortion provider. thank you very much for joining us. what is your reaction to this historic decision? >> obviously, i'm devastated. it is so challenging to have lost faith and hope in the institution that controls literally our bodies, our freedom. the fact that they came out with this decision, even though we saw a weak version of it less than a month ago, feels even harder to see it come to fruition. judy: what do you think the practical effect of it is going to be for american women, for american families? >> the practical effect is that, you know, people will have to go to great lengths to get out of their states to get access to care. we know that 26 states are poised to ban access to abortion
or severely restrict access. we know at 36 million women and non-binary entrance folk will be affected by this decision. we know that people who would be most impacted are likely to be low income, rural, black, brown indigenous communities who may lack the resources to be able to get out of state, so it means that many people will be forced into pregnancy, and that will have a devastating consequence for the families they are currently caring for, much less themselves and their communities. judy: what does it mean for planned parenthood and other organizations like yours that support abortion rights? what do you do now? >> oh, look, i may have lost hope in the court, but i have a lot of hope in the people. now is the time for us to fight back, andhat's exactly what we are planning to do. we are mobilizing people across the countrto ensure that they know what is at stake, to ensure
that every lawmaker, every corporation, every university understands the impact this will have on their constituents, on their rkforce, on their communities, on their students, and to ensure that no one gets to stay neutral in this moment. no one gets to say that's a complicated controversial issue i don't want to touch. when it starts to impact your community, you will have to take a stand, and we are going to force everyone who is in every community to have that conversation. judy: the antiabortion movement, many of its leaders are now saying they are not stopping with this. they are going to look now to try to ban abortion nationwide. how will you respond to that? >> they have been forecasting this for so long. you can see how incredibly emboldened they are that they are showing their entire playbook. not only do they want to pu for a nationwide six-week ban,
which mitch mcconnell said he would take up if he became senate majority leader again. we know they will try to identify opportunities to amend the constitution for other protections, so we have to fight back and be just as relentless to fight their extremism, and that is exactly what we are going to do. judy: finally, what is your message to young women, to families who are out there listening to this, listening to you right now who are questioning what it means for them and what they should do now ? what is your message? >> my message is the same message i gave to my daughter, my 13-year-old daughter, 10-year-old daughter, both of whom are going to grow up with less rights than i have enjoyed for the last 29 years of my life. iold them, we are going to fight this at every turn. now is the time to be engaged and fight. now is the time to make sure
future generations continue to maintain and hold rights. we have to make sure that every movement understands that you have to make it relevant for every single generation, and we want young women to grow up in a world where they are able to pursue their own freedom, their own imagination, and we are going to continue to fight with them and for them until they take the baton so they can fight along with us. judy: alexis mcgill johnson, president of the planned parenthood action fund, thank. >> thank you for having me. judy: for an even closer look at how this decision impacts americans and how organizations are responding on the ground, we turn to anna. anna: that's right. we get two perspectives. i'm joint first by the president of the group ohio right to life who has been with the organization more than 14 years. welcome. thank you for making the time. there have been people working toward this decision for 50
years. help me understand, what is this moment like for you? >> it is historic. never in my lifetime did i believe we we come to this and here we are today. we have a monumental task ahead of us. our work is not done. we need to ensure we have the greatest social service safety net here in the state of ohio to help all women, especially women who find themselves in an unintended pregnancy. >> women in ohio like a lot of women around the country lived through a pandemic and were disproportionately affected when it comes to workforce participation. i saw in ohio, rental prices have been soaring like everywhere else. we are living with record inflation. how can your nonprofit support these women? do you have the funding and resources you need? >> we do not as an organization help every single woman in ohio, but we have the tax dollars the legislature provides ourselves and our client. we find extra dollars are take dollars we currently have and send them to help with different
programs that help women, if it's for prenatal care for their own health care. we think every woman should have access to a doctor, and we believe if we continue these commonsense approaches at our city, county, and state level, the resources are there to make sure every woman who finds himself in an unintended pregnancy will have everything they need to raise their child or put their baby up for adoption. >> you're confident the resources are already there or will be there? >> that are already there. our coffers are full and we are ending the money now. under governor continues to provide extra money for women for diapers, formula, parenting classes and the like, and he's doing a great job. >> we should mention, too, in ohio, the governor signed a parking bill that bans abortion at about six weeks, but even with that, if a woman in ohio becomes pregnant, she can still
travel out-of-state, order in medication. how does your group deal with that? >> we are at a new frontier. on the heartbeat bill, the federal judge just looked at the injunction, so 10 minutes ago now, the law in ohio is a heartbeat standard as of 10 minutes ago. as it relates to mail-order prescriptions, we cannot really -- we cannot regulate the internet at this time, so we have to sit down and tackle these issues together as a nation, as a state on how we ensure women are ordering safe drugs from china or mexico or wherever else. anna: let me ask you about that briefly in just a few seconds. we know the outlawing abortion does not end abortions. how afraid are you of women turning to increasingly dangerous alternatives to save abortions? >> were committed to providing opportunities to help women and demonstrate to them that they
have the care they need, the health care, in every county, and it is there today. >> president of the group ohio right to life. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. >> joining me now is the executive director for the new voices for reproductive justice, a nonprofit working in ohio and pennsylvania to help lack women, girls, and trans people. thank you for joining us. tell me about what this decision means, specifically for the people you serve, and what are they telling you today? >> well, today is a devastating day, but if you are surprised, you have not been paying attention. as we heard throughout today's broadcast, folks have been working in concert across this nation to limit human rights, including access to comprehensive sexual reproductive health care, which includes abortion.
across the states we represent, we know that those that are most impacted by abortion restrictions are black women and gender expensive folks. >> let me ask you about ohio and pennsylvania where you also work. a lot of folks predict now, because of tightening in ohio, pennsylvania providers will see a surge of women coming in from ohio, west virginia, from elsewhere. can you handle that? do you have the resources you need? >> for states where abortion is still legal to absorb the influx of patients from states where abortion is now illegal because of trigger bands, we know that that cannot possibly be the case. also, not everyone has the means to be able to travel. again, folks that are disabled, folks living in poverty who do not have access to sick leave or
childcare are having challenges traveling. also, to ask a health-care system which has been plagued by infectious disease and record numbers of resignations and ill health care workforce to absorb even more of an influx of patients is morally and epidemiological he unconscionable. anna: you just heard our guests say he's confident there are state resources available that will step up and help these women. do you believe that will happen? >> no because it has not happed. states have had horrible budget deficits because of the covid-19 pandemic, d ohio, we have children today living in poverty, right? we have infant formula shortage, right? and worsening black maternal
morbidity and mortality crisis, and that was with roe being the law of the land. we now know these issues will skyrocket, in ways that maim communities of color the most. anna: there's a woman who becomes pregnant and wants to end her pregnancy. what are her options? what can she do? >> i just want to say that a six-week abortion ban is effectively 100% abortion ban because the vast majority of people do not know they are pregnant within six weeks of their pregnancy, so now this person, this hypothetical person, but this is the real life for tens of thousands of people across the state, has to secure childcare, has to take off of work, sometimes have to travel to neighboring states that require multiple doctors visits, have to pay
out-of-pocket, right? all of those things we know particularly marginalized groups do not have access to, but that's why we are committed within the reproductive justice movement to giving folks the access that they need wherever abortion is legal today. anna: in the few seconds we have left, how does this change the work you do? what are you doing differently today that you were not doing before? >> it does not change anythi. we are working smarter, harder, faster with more commitment and passion now more than ever. >> kelly davis, executive director of the new voices for reproductive justice joining us tonight. thank you for joining us. ♪ stephanie: we will return to the full program after the latest headlines. the u.s. house of
representatives gave final approval to a $15 billion gun violence bill, the first of its kind in nearly three decades. it had passed the senate last night with 15 republicans joining all 50 democrats. today's debate and vote in the house was much more down party lines. >> to the members who lack the courage to join in this work, to those who lack the courage to join in this work, i say your political survival is insignificant compared to the survival of our children. >> congress is moving full steam ahead to restrict the right to self-defense for law-abiding gun owners and the right to due process for all americans. this legislation is the wrong approach and we ought to oppose it. stephanie: among other things, the measure curbs gun sales to people convicted of domestic violence and helps fund state laws to take guns away from people deemed dangerous. president biden will sign the bill into law on saturd. in ukraine, government forces considered control of the
eastern city of severodonetsk, a major milestone in verses advance across the luhansk region. the regional governor said fighters were pulling back to avoid being encircled. quick now we are in a situation where it makes no sense to stay in decisions that have been smashed to pieces during many months of fighting because the number of casualties in these areas grow every day. >> russian forces are also advancing across a river from severodonetsk. it becomes the last major pocket of ukrainian resistance in the region. the official earthquake death toll in afghanistan has risen as the devastated region shuddered again today with a heavy aftershock. survivors struggle to find food and shelter and waited for a thats slowly trickling in. the united nations human rights office today blamed israeli troops for the death of a palestinian-american journalist.
she was shot dead last month during unrest in the occupied west bank. the united nations review concluded she was hit by seemingly well-aimed bullets fired by israelis, not palestinians, and it called for a investigation. >> more than ask weeks after the killing of a journalist and the injury of her colleague on the 11th of may, 2022, it is deeply disturbing that israeli authorities have not conducted a criminal investigation. >> israel has denied its soldiers targeted her and also called again for palestinians to share access to the fatal bullet. palestinians have refused, saying they do not trust the israelis to conduct a legitimate investigation. in ecuador, indigenous protesters are staging nationwide strikes paralyzing the country. they are clashing with police over soaring gas prices and government austerity measures. the president said today's
protest leaders are attempting a coup, and he is out to use all legal tools to contain the violence. record-breaking heat has hit more highs today all around the northern hemisphere. cities in northern china had readings of 107 degrees. in the russian arctic, it was nearly 90 on thursday, and for and states across the u.s. had highs of one hundred degrees. scientists say the extreme heat this early in the summer is likely linked to climate change. updating our top story, abortion providers across arizona have halted procedures todaas they determine if a law from over 100 years ago is now in effect. the law has been in the books since before arizona became a state and subjects abortion providers to potential prison time. a newer law prohibits abortion at 15 weeks and has yet to take effect. in california, democrat governor gavin newsom signed a bill that immediately protects abortion providers from liability when caring for patients who have crossed state lines for
procedures. and democratic governors in washington state and oregon are pledging to take similar measures. >> this is "the pbs newshour" from weta studios in washington and in the west from walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. judy: the supreme court's decision to overturn roe v. wade has sent washington into overdrive. observers consider the political and cultural ramifications. that brings us to thenalysis of the associate editor of "the washington post" and his colleague, the opinion columnist. david brooks is away. we welcome both of you on this friday night. jonathan, i'm going to start with you with the story that is all over the news today, and that is the supreme court. what is your reaction?
>> well, i think i worked out my -- not rage, but my alarm. alarm is the right word. when the leak of justice alito's draft opinion was leaked last montand in reading it, i saw roe is being overturned, but a bunch of other rights to privacy would be weakene if roe were overturned. with theecision out today, it hews closely to that draft opinion, and, you know, i'm sitting here still trying to process what it means to live in a post--roe world because we have states that have trigger laws that the moment it was overturned, abortion was made illegal, and my heart goes out to women who live in states where their right to choose
their own reproductive health care is no longer their decision, and my heart goes out to those families because this is -- it is not only a personal decision for the woman, for the person who is pregnant, it is a decision that impacts an entire family. there are men out there who are going to be dealing with this as well. in the hours that we have been trying to digest all this, i'm still trying to get my head around what this means, but this much i know -- it is not good. judy: michael, your thoughts? >> similar reaction. i come from a pro-like background, but this -- i found views very mixed today. we are a nation with an escalating culture war, and acing this issue right now in the center of our national debate in states across the
country is going to be deeply divisive. it is a terrible time, you know, to talk about this set of issues. i also thought there were a couple of good points made in criticism in the decision itself . one of them is by roberts, the chief justice of the supreme court -- judy: criticizing the main -- >> the main opinion. he concurred, but it is a very prickly opinion essentially saying, i would have done it differently. you did not need to overturn roe completely in order to answer the mississippi case. he said that this ruling was a ruling all the way down to the studs, and that was -- to see that kind of dissent within the majority was kind of interesting, and then there was -- i thought the dissent made the point very well.
alito says in the decision that this does not affect other cases that have to do with sexual privacy, but he does not make a particularly good argument about why his reasoning would not. there could be good reasons. maybe john roberts could write them, but the reality is that th was left a little bit blank, and i think it will cause some consternation. judy: what do you think this says about the court, what we are looking at here? >> i think the credibility is now more on the line than ever. i hesitate to say that the legitimacy of the court is in question or at risk because that's just -- that's a step too far, but when you read this decision and read the concurring opinions, the legitimacy of the court i think will be eroded. to michael's point about alito
saying, don't worry, this only applies to abortion -- he made that same argument in that draft opinion, and that is what raised my alarm. just to sort of be an exclamation point on alito's "don't worry," you have the senior justice putting in riding, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this court's substantive due process decisions, the right to same-sex marriage, the right to privacy to same-sex intimate contact, right of married couples to have access to contraception. all of these decisions are grounded -- >> these are grounded decisions. now as an out and also one
married man i am faced with the prospect of my marriage being rendered illegal. the leadership is being shown by the five justices themselves. that is an awkward position for him to be in. but this was a 6-3 decision. he has accepted the basic point here. the point of the conservative legal revolution over the last several decades. which is if the constitution does not say it, then we cannot
create it. >> there's an additional element. one point that they make is that there are actually to make different groups with visions of human rights at stake. and one of those words hold you could ever win. they were essentially disenfranchised. it is a perilous decision no matter which way you go. but i think there are still arguments to be made in favor. >> absolutely. in a time where democrats are
facing historic headwind in terms of maintaining control of the senate the criminal justice reform wasn't done. or voting rights wasn't done. but now you're looking at a woman's right to choose? it's gone. other rights potentially on the chopping block with a galvanizing issue for republicans and democrats alike. but practically for those who are in favor of the abortion- rights. because now they've lost something. on the only way to get it back it's more democrats in the house and the senate.
>> do you see this energizing democrats more than republicans? >> absolutely. this is a right withdrawal. it doesn't mean it's illegal across the country but it means it's illegal in some places. and that is likely to concern the democrats. not too terribly deep into the politics, but the outcome of midterm elections is tied to the popularity of the sitting president. if you are below 50 you're going to lose more than 30 seats. does is make the president more popular? i don't think that's true. he gave a speech today that had
some of those elements. so i think there could be an effect on the democratic base. but this is still a tough election. >> although president biden is not on the ballot there are folks in the senate who are running and they can run and say if you want to fortify is right you must select democrats. unprotect the reit legal right to contraception. >> let's talk about the other court.
negating regulations on who can carry guns out in the open. that came down from the court at the same time that congress has now passed. anything close to gun control legislation has been here for decades. where are we in guns given all of that? >> americans are in favor when it comes to abortion. this was a perfectly reasonable law. it relates to the earlier question that there is a concern on robert's part of the activism on the right.
this was the first of its type and 30 years. but this was a demonstration to some extent the way congress should work. you make compromises and you have incremental reform. that is what american democracy does. so i think there is a lot that is praiseworthy. but a lot of them are not coming back or not even running in the next year. but i think this was well done. get the court going one direction and congress reacting to real-time horrors.
the fact that they were able to do this it was the first time in 30 years. if congress shows the ability to pass on guns they can do it again. but when it comes to the court decision it is something else that worries me. this idea of the reliance on ordinary self defense. ordinary self-defense is very subjective. when you are a person of color we've seen many instances where the answer is now. >> there's a lot to interpret on that one. thank you for being with us on this historic evening. ♪
for more coverage of the supreme for coverage of the supreme court overturning roe v. wade please join us at 8:00 eastern time here on pbs. and streaming online. following that join moderator you misha offender and her washington panel with an additional levels on pbs. that is the news hour for tonight. join us online and again tomorrow evening on pbs news weekend. jeff bennett will have the latest on the response to overturn roe v wade. thank you and stay safe. we will see you soon. >> major s newshour" has been provided by s -- ♪
>> moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions and friends of "the newshour," including kathy and paul anderson and camilla and george smith. the. for more than 50 years advancing ideas and supporting institutions to promote a better wod at hewlett.org. >> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems.
and friends of "the newshour." ♪ this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. this is "the pbs newshour" from weta studios in washington and in the west from walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. ♪