Skip to main content

tv   Don Lemon Tonight  CNN  May 2, 2022 7:00pm-8:00pm PDT

7:00 pm
here in the u.s. with seismic implications. i'm talking about what is possibly going to happen in the supreme court and what politico obtained. >> yeah, i mean, it's a, it is a stunning laeak.
7:01 pm
it's overturning of unkongs constitutional rights since the early 70s. huge story. no doubt you'll be covering for the next two hours. >> see you tomorrow. appreciate it. this is "don lemon tonight." poli, i poltico obtained a draft wrote by samuel alito. it's an unheard of breach. we're covering all angles of this huge story tonight. we'll go straight to 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 it is not a final unpublished -- a final published, i should say.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
7:02 pm
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
7:03 pm
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
7:04 pm
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.
7:05 pm
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
7:06 pm
opinion in 1973. in opinion after opinion over the next 50 years, 49 years, the supreme court ratified that view. most famously in 1992 in the casey decision where the court again reaffirmed roe v wade but justice scalia and thomas have been -- were criticizing that opinion over and over again saying the constitution itself says nothing about abortion. the constitution doesn't recognize the right to abortion, doesn't prohibit, doesn't grant a right to abortion. it simply is a political issue that should be decided by the states, the way most political issues are decided by the states. justice justice's point makes that decision. the constitution is silent about abortion. this should be a political issue
7:07 pm
the voters and their representatives decide not judges. that's the legal rational. >> this is what jeffrey, to your point, january 22nd, 1973, the u.s. acceptsupreme court confir legality of a woman's right to have the abortion. a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy recognized and grizwald versus connecticut protected by the 14th amendment and gave women the right for abortion during the entirety of their pregnancy and defined different levels of state interests for regulating abortion the second and third trimesters. again, that's what you said. then, as you said, alito is saying roe was egregiously wrong from the start and it's time to send this back to the states. wrong from the start. there is reasoning exceptionally wreak and the decision is damaging with damaging consequences. so that is from justice alito from the very beginning, the
7:08 pm
national settlement of abortion issue roe and casey have inflamed debate and deepened division. laura coates, what is your response to this? what's your reaction? >> well, forgive me. i seem to be losing my voice so you'll hear me a little differently. it seems to be in line with how women lose their rights. this opinion can be if true narrowed down and defined quite simply. women are not viewed as equal to men. the right of privacy, a fancy way of talking about a fundamental right meaning in a country where we talk about how we do not want people's rights to infringe on another's and your rights end where mine begin and it's about the consent of the governed, well, in this instance, the court already said there are some areas, if you believe fundamental rights include things like marriage, include things like interstate travel and include things like contraception and the like, surely, you would believe within that same umbrella of thought that things related to one's
7:09 pm
health and agency over one's body should also be in that privacy spear but instead, you have this justice, if this draft opinion is to be believed and to be actually followed to a conclusion of an official holding then you have the saying when it comes to a woman's body and agency over ourselves and our decisions and our bodies, we're simply not equal to men. i don't see a single thing in the draft opinion that i saw from politico or otherwise that mention things like vasectomies or a man's inability to choose when and whether to have and give birth to a child although of course, they cannot give birth to a child but i guess that's the point. so when you look at this, think about all the other aspects of our society to which we rely and have said we do not want to give individual states the autonomy to decide because then we would not be the unite states of
7:10 pm
america. we would be separate countries and people in one state wouldn't have the same rights as a person in another state. that's simply not how this nation is supposed to operate. yes, there are distipnctions about certain laws but the as spekts -- aspects of the privacy decision, 50 years, my mother, my grandmother, my great grandmother is still alive, for that span of generations that are fundamental because a justice says you know what? it's time for the states to decide, i don't know what country that would actually reflect. but if i can just say, on the backdrop of thing eveking aboute aspects, it's telling the united states of america the leak of a supreme court opinion and the fundamental rights of women evaporating with the stroke of a
7:11 pm
pen. >> pete? >> oh. i'll just opine. i agree with everything lawyer s -- laura said. the fact of the leak is how serious the issue is and how people must feel. we've never seen anything like this before. i was booked on the show a few hours ago to talk about the investigation on the insurrection on january 6th and obviously, the news cycle changed. if you think for a minute, it's not too great a stretch to say there is a connection to overturn the election and overturn roe and it's this, there is a segment of the spectrum now who thinks it has certain kinds of powers and wants to engage in radical efforts to overturn things they don't like. there is no more increatincreatl and you don't like the rights and talk about hanging the vice president of the united states and get the presidency back. similarly here, we've been talking for the last number of
7:12 pm
months about this move towards the eradication of abortion by the supreme court and a lot of people assumed there would be an opinion of some sort in attempt to gut row wie without overturn roe. it's a direct on slot and given the history radical effort to erase roe and not only that, other elements of the party outside the courts are now talking about, you know, not just eradicating traditionally restrictions on abortion but also no exceptions for rape or inscest and no exceptions for life of the mother. we're no longer talking about the fact certain states like new york can preserve the right to abortion and other states would have different results depending on their makeup, we're now also talking about the complete elimination of abortion through federal statute throughout the country. there is a radical element to this and connects the dots between insurrection and what is happening in the court today.
7:13 pm
>> jeffrey, you talked about roe v wade in the beginning and mentioned grizwald versus connecticut. what other cases have been decided based on these precedents that could now be in jeopardy? >> same-sex marriage is certainly -- this came up a lot during the confirmation hearings of judge ketanji brown jackson that it is quite clear that the republican majority in -- the republican politicians at least feel like this is the time to rollback a whole series of opinions that were passed when the supreme court had a very different majority. i mean, you know, this should not be a surprise. when donald trump ran for president in 2016, he could not
7:14 pm
have been more explicit. he said over and over again i will appoint justices to the supreme court who will vote to overturn roe v wade and what i think he meant by that was he was going to appoint justices to the supreme court who will vote to overturn roe v wade and if this leak is accurate and i have every reason to believe that it is, that's precisely what happened. and, you know, when democrats have tried to point call attention to this, people have said oh, they're overreacting. they're panicking. it not true. roe v wade has been around for 50 years. nobody is going to ever overturn it. well, take a look at this. this is what republicans and conservatives have been trying to do for decades. and it looks like they succeeded. the supreme court, my favorite quote is that from justice robert jackson, he said we are
7:15 pm
not final because we're infallible, we're infallible because we are final. this is it. this is what the supreme court has said. abortion is no longer a right that all american women have anymore. it's now up to the state legislatures, which are mostly dominated by men that they're the ones who are going to decide whether women have the right to abortion anymore. not the contusion. >> uh-huh. i mean,'s earlier point, go ahead, laura. >> when you mention that, one of the problems with the idea of thinking about, you know, equal, equality is the idea and i don't think it's a problem to have equality. it a problem to be naive that we actually should expect it now in this day in age given this particular opinion because rich women will still be able to get abortions. >> right. >> i know that people will focus a great deal on the idea of black and brown women and lower
7:16 pm
income women and they will conflc conflict the groups as if they're synonymous and the groups will be the ones with an unplanned pregnancy but in reality, those who won't be able to have the luxury of travel, who are not going to be able to have the luxury of the privacy to decide where they should go to actually seek whatever service they ultimately wanted to actually obtain but rich women will and so this idea -- even people who are not wealthy but just people of means and so when you think about the fundamental rights and think about equal protection, the law and privacy, this particular opinion if it holds will essentially only extend that to those of a certain soes oyoe -- economic status. and finally, i just want to point out as jeffrey was talking about and prete and joan, the idea of precedent. this has come up a great deal.
7:17 pm
alito mentioned it in saying things should actually stick. this is what it is and the inertia will keep going. we'll not in surprise because we saw how the supreme court allowed texas to do an end runaround precedent. they did not honor it in that way. but i think most people thought about maybe it would be parameters, maybe the weak the compelling interest of the state to protect, protect an unborn fetus would out weigh the compelling interest of a state of a woman to carry a pregnancy at a particular part of a trimester. we thought the plan might be mas massage. the obliteration talks about the inequality and will impact people that do not have the means but will not stop people with a i abortion in this country but those who do not have the luxury of choice and what is the story of america if not that? >> can i just add one point to that?
7:18 pm
you know, there is a lot of evidence, there are many societies, especially in central and south america that ban abortion all together and the rate of abortion does not go down when abortion is banned. there are just as many abortions if not more in societies where abortion is legal what is different is women die and women are horribly mutilated because abortion is coffinnducted in an unsafe way. stopping abortion is a myth. it does not happen. all it does is drive the process underground and endanger women's lives. >> a couple of things here, p, ar -- prete. first, laura, women of means have always been able to get an abortion before abortion was legal. it was -- perhaps then it was
7:19 pm
rich women who were able to fly off somewhere or go across the border or do whatever and then poor women trying to seek abortions would harm themselves trying to do it themselves or going to someone who is not reputable. so this will affect a group of people but not necessarily many of the people actually fighting to ban roe v wade or overturn roe v wade because many of those people are women with means. it's women with means have always been able to get abortions whether legal or not and this is definitely going to have an impact. >> well, yeah, the reason i point out the economic and racial disparities is because i want to as the rights of women are about to be obliterated in the court, i want to 0 oblitera only break and brown women of a lower status have unplanned pregnancies this is a philosophy in and of itself but this stereo
7:20 pm
type is often times what drives the public perception that suggests this is a paternal attempt to protect those who cannot protect then selves and they mean black and brown people of a lower economic status ignoring the fact this is a far more universal system and a for more universal issue to contend with. i think there is something to be said for individual states for issues that are specific to geographic areas, areas that are going to be unique to the needs of a particular community but issues around a uterus and carrying the term and the frame work and fundamental rights are something that goes beyond geographical boundaries. that's part of what i'm looking for the sup preme court when th issue whatever opinion they issue. i want an opinion wholistically thinking about the fact it is going to be a universal constraint on a fundamental right and what the court is
7:21 pm
doing has to acknowledge that at the very least and the idea of, you know what? hey, we don't want to get involved in a political issue and by giving this particular opinion, we've gotten ourselves in deep. there are a lot of issues over the course of american history that have been political wedge issues. i would note race for example. i would note segregation and unequal education access. these are all things that are fundamentally things that have been political wedge issues but if not the court to confirm what the constitution ought to have, then where do we intend to look? that's the big question. >> even marriage. even ent even interracia luck minterraci >> prete would this have happened without the three jump justices brett kavanaugh, neil
7:22 pm
gorsuch, amy barrett. >> no. the map doesn't add up. the courts are very, very important. jeffrey and others and i and you on the show have talked for years about the idea that one of the most important things for people on the conservative spectrum of ideology, the reason they care so much about the courts is because of these issues because they felt they were on the losing side of the abortion issue and which is why as a political matter there are many, many, many people in the republican party who don't like things about donald trump that liked one thing. he outsourced the picking of justices and he got three. carter got zero. they both had one term. it's who retires and who dies and who stays on the court. and they got what they wanted and so an interesting question i think that is implied by your question, is what is this going to mean for politics, what is this going to mean for the
7:23 pm
midterm elections? what is this going to mean for the other side of the aisle for a long time state in loud terms they care a lot about the court but because some of these things have been on their side and precedence on their side, roe and casey and other things, i don't want people to send mail to me but there is a little bit of complacency about this. they cared more about the court and changing legislatively like this issue through the court than the liberals have been and we'll see what happens. >> you're 100% correct. i was going to make that point. send your letters all you want. that's the truth. to me. not to prete. that's the absolute truth. the folks who were -- republicans, they're issued voters. many times single issue voters. they vote mainly for the years on this network over the second ameant ameantment, right? that is why people stuck with trump. they didn't like the tweets.
7:24 pm
they didn't like any of that but they liked how he was going to -- who he was appointing to the court or he had the ability of appointing to the courts. >> yeah, mitch mcconnell has contempt for donald trump whether that means something, other people can decide but one issue on which he celebrates donald trump and never fully breaks is the court because the court can do things even he, mi mitch mcconnell can't do what the court can do. and the court is now done some of the will of mitch mcelcconne and that's why they abide donald trump many of them. >> thank you-all. still breaking. if we need you, we'll come back. appreciate you joining us. we have more to come on the breaking news tonight and it's stunning. politico has obtained a draft of majority opinion written by justice samuel alito that would strike down roe v wade meaning
7:25 pm
legal abortion in this country. more ahead throughout the next two hours. it's lawn season. and i need a lawn...ququick. the fast way to bring it up to speed... scotts turf builder rapid grass. ♪ rapid grass is a revolutionary mix seed and fertilizer that will change the way you grow grass. it grows two times faster than seed alone for full, green grass in just weeks. after growing grass this fast, everything else just seems... slow. it's lawn season. let's get to the yard.
7:26 pm
get help managing your money for the life -- and years -- ahead. with fidelity income planning, we'll look at what you've saved, what you'll need, and build a straightforward plan to generate income, even when you're not working. a plan that gives you the chance to grow your savings and create cash flow that lasts. along the way, we'll give you ways to be tax efficient. and you can start, stop or adjust your plan at any time without the unnecessary fees. we'll help you go from saving... to living. ♪ play all day ♪
7:27 pm
better hearing leads to a better life. and that better life... ...starts at miracle-ear. it all begins with the most innovative technology... the new miracle-earmini™. available exclusively at miracle-ear. so small, no one will see it. but you'll notice the difference. and now, miracle-ear is offering a 30-day risk-free trial. you can experience better hearing with no obligation. call 1-800-miracle right now and experience a better life. the mosquitoes are just all over the quiet please. okay. wow! [light bulb breaks] hey! i said get a pro. i did get a pro. an orkin pro. [mosquitoes buzzing] i got you. got mosquitoes? don't call any pro, call the orkin pro. orkin. the best in pests.
7:28 pm
7:29 pm
so we're back with breaking news, politico obtained a draft by samuel alito that would ban row vare v wade. what is your reaction? >> unbelievable. none of us know the final opinion. things change. this is breaking news. i'll say i predicted this in my questions of amy coney barrett way back then when she would not commit roe v wade was super precedent to the predictions after the court argument that in fact, this court has been stacked and they are doing something where they are completely breaking with precedent if all of this news that we're hearing is correct and i want to talk about the
7:30 pm
result, don, because if this opinion is issued, it will be against the wishes of 80% of americans who believe that women should have the right to make their own health care system. it would trigger the laws in over 20 states that have already said that they will out law abortion in their states. it will create a patch work of laws across the country and my prediction, don, is that it will drive women to the polls and men, anyone, that 80% of the public who believes that health care decisions should be made by a woman and her doctor and not by ted cruz. >> yeah. >> so this is going to have major impact -- >> senator -- >> all of this down as it looks. >> i want to talk about the impact. your earlier point and then we'll get back to the impact because it's huge. you mentioned your questioning of amy coney barrett and others. i want to play that. this is a trump supreme court nominee about that and this is how they answered.
7:31 pm
watch this. >> is roe a super precedent? >> how would you define super precedent? i'm answering a lot of questions about roe and scholars across the spectrum says that doesn't mean roe should be over while ever ruled but descriptively it not a case that everyone accepted and doesn't call for it over ruling. >> as a judge, it is an important precedent of the supreme court, by it, i mean row vark v wade, casey is precedent on priest dent, which itself is an important factor. senator, as the book explains, the supreme court of the united states has held in roe versus wade that a fetus is not a person for purposes of the 14th amendment and the book explains that. >> do you accept that? >> that's the law of the land. i accept the law of the land, senator, yes.
7:32 pm
>> so -- yeah. and you -- what do you think? what do you think of the responses? what do you think -- were they telling the truth in that moment? >> well, when they're saying it the law of the land and they arguably use this to convince certain senators to vote for them, i think that is a major problem. he said it was the law of the land. they are talking about the fact that it's been affirmed time and time again and that's why i think a lot of people are shocked. i will tell you that i'm not shocked because i -- you could see this in the way the questioning went and the willingness as you know, don, in the texas case, a different case to actually in a shadow docket no briefings, no public hearings where they actually allowed an abortion ban to go forward that also included a bounty hunter provision, which allowed citizens to go after each other. it is an unbelievable shift in
7:33 pm
court decisions and so i am of course as a member of the u.s. senate who someone believes that roe v wade should be codified into law so we don't have a patch work of state laws and we protect women from back ally abortions and bus rides across the country just to make their own personal health care decisions -- >> or across borders. >> i believe the senate needs to act and act now. >> yeah. or across borders. let me read this. i want your response. you talked about the ramifications of this in the fallout. and this is what a source is telling cnn. that roberts does not want to completely over turn roe v wade meaning apparently the he would be dissenting from alito's droft opinion with the court's three liberals but willing to uphold the mississippi law that would ban abortion after 15 weeks, cnn learned. under current law government
7:34 pm
cannot interfere with a woman's choice to terminate the pregnancy before 23 weeks when a fetus could live outside the womb. i want to read that because i want to get this exactly right. what do you make of roberts not wanting to completely overturn roe v wade? >> i don't know where this is coming from and i think leaks from the court are disturbing. but beyond that, i think that justice roberts has signalled not just in the case before us with mississippi but in other cases time and time again and recent environmental case where he publicly came out against using the shadow docket, his upholding of the affordable care about, the refusal to strike it down when looking at the law. he's cleanly shown a sense of independence. i don't know what he's going to do in this case. i think what your viewers have to understand is if in fact, these five ultra conservative justices do something like we've
7:35 pm
seen in this leak or that p politico is reporting, whatever justice roberts does is important headed is irrelevant because that's a court decision if in fact they all go against what many of them said in the past like the law of the land and that it's been reaffirmed many times so it's precedent and overturned this decades and decades long precedent. >> yeah. senator amy klobuchar, thank you so much. appreciate you jumping in to speak to us about this and we heard you on the long term ramifications -- >> it is huge and you have republicans wanting to put a six-week ban in already. that's what we're dealing with here. >> thank you, senator. appreciate it. i want to bring in congressman gregory meeks with us as part of the delegation with nancy pelosi on her visit, surprise visit to kyiv this weekend but also here to talk to us about what is happening, the possibility of roe v wade being
7:36 pm
overturned and politico's reporting tonight. what's your reaction to the breaking news on this draft opinion that would overturn roe v wade? >> it's horrible. let me say what senator klobuchar said. it not the decision yet. but should it be? it's a game changer for america. it's a game changer for women. and women's rights to control their own body. to repudiate well established law. it is, you know, why every year we do talk about when you vote, you need republicans apparently and the super conservatives, they're voting judges. it is dangerous what is taking place right now and as some of your other guests have said, those that are affluent will be
7:37 pm
able to go to one place to another to have an abortion if they have to but those who are poor, they will be victimized. there is no question about it because that's the history before the decision. so this decision should it be true should it remain the same would be absolutely devastating to who we are as a people in the united states of america. >> thank you for responding to that and of course, you know, we still have a war going on in the ukraine. i want to switch gears now because that's a big story, as well. i know your congressional delegation spoke to president biden about your trip to kyiv. what did you tell him about your meeting with president zele zelenskyy? >> we told him we had a very good heart felt meeting that president zelenskyy is focused
7:38 pm
and what he wants is just help to get what he needs to defeat vladimir putin. and i know president biden also said to me that we're know focused on getting him those needs, that's why we have the 33-gave the request for $33 billion for military aid, for humanitarian aid and economic aid to ukraine and we know that because we've seen over the last two months the ukrainian people fighting for sovereignty and fighting to make sure that we stop putin and don, what is happening right now because of the positioning of putin's people particularly in the back sea when we know that the ukraine 50% of sunflower seeds
7:39 pm
as far as the world is concerned comes from ukraine. 15 to 20% of wheat and corn comes from ukraine. if that cannot go out to the harbor, there will be starvation. >> you spent -- >> the coninnocneinnocentconinnd here in the quitunited states, o an economists, the cost of grain that goes into almost everything from the beginning of the year has gone up 20% in the last month alone 14%. and that's directly relateded to t this war. he has to be stopped. >> you spent hours on the ground with zelenskyy. we have journalists there. we have staff who are there from
7:40 pm
cnn of course but were you nervous about being there? were you in fear of their safety and security there? >> we know there is a risk. we know we were in a war zone when you're driving around in kyiv, you would see you're in the war zone but you can also see the individuals, the ukrainians would prepare to defend themselves and in fact, the russians couldn't succeed to take over kyiv. and so now that's one of the things we talked about, that there is a war that is going to a different stage and different types of weapons that they need and that's part of what this $33 billion is so that as it moves to the donbas area, which is not a city like facility where there
7:41 pm
is more flat land in the middle of america, agricultural, et cetera, there is different types of artillery that's necessary even because one of the reasons you can't get the wheat to harvest and out to the ships is because in the black sea that's where putin is blocking so you need something that can reach the ships and make them get out of the way of the blockade so other ships carrying the wheat, carrying the sunflower seeds can get through. >> yeah. >> and that's what we're working on right now in the united states congress. >> congressman, i'm so happy that you could come on to discuss this and our other breaking news this evening here on cnn. we really appreciate it. thank you very much. glad you and the delegation are all back safe. thanks so much. >> thank you for having me, don. we have a lot more to come,
7:42 pm
politico obtaining a draft written by samuel alito that would strike down roe v wade. you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on yourr discover card. ♪ you can never have too much of a good thing. ♪ and power... ..s a very good thing. ♪ ♪("i've been everywhere" by johnny cash) ♪ ♪i've traveled every road in this here land!♪ ♪i've been everywhere, man.♪ ♪i've been everywhere, man.♪ ♪of travel i've had my share, man.♪ ♪i've been everywhere.♪ ♪ ♪ life can be a lot to handle. ♪ this magic moment ♪ but heinz knows there's plenty of magic in all that chaos. ♪ so different and so new ♪
7:43 pm
♪ was like any other... ♪ this is koli. my foster fail (laughs). when i first started fostering koli i had been giving him kibble. it never looked or felt like real food. but with the farmer's dog you can see the pieces of turkey. it smells like actual food. i saw a difference almost overnight. healthy poops, healthy dog, right? as he's aged, he's still quite energetic and youthful. i really attribute that to diet. you know, he's my buddy. my job is to keep my buddy safe and happy. ♪ get started at this is a hero, walking his youngest down the aisle, which to his bladder, feels like a mile. yet he stands strong, dry, keeping the leaks only to his eyes. depend. the only thing stronger than us, is you. only two things are forever: love and liberty mutual customizing your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. if anyone objects to this marriage... (emu squawks) kevin, no! not today. only pay for what you need.
7:44 pm
♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ and print. come on! print! print! print! you should be ashamed of yourself! just print... please. (crying) do you suffer from cartridge conniptions? be conniption-free, thanks to the cartridge-free epson ecotank printer. big ink tanks, a ridiculous amount of ink! up to 2 years of ink comes in the box. the ecotank is the perfect cure for... do i look like a money tree? is that what i look like? do you see leaves? the epson ecotank. just fill & chill. >> tech: when you have auto glass damage, trust safelite. this dad and daughter were driving when they got a crack in their windshield. [smash] >> dad: it's okay. pull over. >> tech: he wouldn't take his car just anywhere... ♪ pop rock music ♪ >> tech: he brought it to safelite. we replaced the windshield and recalibrated their car's advanced safety system, so features like automatic emergency braking will work properly. >> tech: alright, all finished. >> dad: wow, that's great. thanks. >> tech: stay safe with safelite. schedule now.
7:45 pm
>> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪
7:46 pm
we're back now with our breaking news tonight. politico obtains what it calls a draft majority opinion that would strike down roe v wade.
7:47 pm
i want to bring gloria boringer and david axelrod. good evening to both of you. gloria, let's start with you. votes can change before opinions are formally released but if this happens, if it does happen, a constitutional right women have had for 50 years will be gone. it a monumental moment in this country's politics. what is your reaction? >> it's a category five political and social hurricane in this country. as you point out, and one fail swoop, something that wasn't right for women for the last 50 years has been taken away. we do not know all the ramifications of this yet at this point but i want to point out that this is something that the republican party has worked on for decades at the satate level, at the federal level, in the judiciary trying to get to this moment and it is something
7:48 pm
as i think one of my colleagues pointed out earlier the democrats while they've talked about it a lot have effectively said, you know, they didn't do it in the way republicans did. they didn't protect it in the way republicans fought it. and in the end, now, you have this conservative majority on the court and the democrats are going to face the midterm election very soon and then a presidential election and they're going to have to decide how they battle this out, how they use this in order to get those voters out there to the polls to understand that elections have consequences and this for those pro-choice democrats was one of the consequences they hoped would never happen but it looks like it happening. >> you know, what gloria said, we said so much there is no clear example of how much our elections do have consequences. real consequences in this country than what we're seeing
7:49 pm
now, david? >> well, we haven't seen anything like this in our lifetime. the whole sale withdrawal of a basic right and so, you know, it's really hard to think of a r precedent for this. if you were republican st strategists privately right now, you would say this is not good. we do not need this. we were on the path to winning a big victory in the fall. the whole sale overturning of roe versus wade may be one thing that can change the dynamic because the people who have in polling expressed the strongest objection, remember, the vast majority of americans, 70% of americans or more said they didn't want this but the people who are most spoken up about this are people under 45, democrats, obviously, women and yes, and these were voters who
7:50 pm
democrats were particularly worried about in the fall. will they come out? will they participate? there is participate, polling suggesting the enthusiasm wasn't there. you look at cnn's own polling, and younger voters, a majority of younger voters said they'd be angry if the court did this. so i think, you know, the most important thing is there are real implications for real lives across this country. but as a political matter, it also is a very significant event. >> gloria, let's talk about that. he brings up a point. cnn's polling from january. i'll let you weigh in. so you said 70%, close enough, 69% of americans do not support overturning roe v. wade. 30% support overturning it, so what do you think? does that have -- does that fill the republican party for so many
7:51 pm
years, but do you think that this somehow pushes the enthusiasm among democrats that they may come out, especially women, those under 45 as david said? >> yeah, i do. i don't know how much. i mean, they couldn't get, you know, any less enthusiastic about going to the polls right now. i mean, you look at the enthusiasm gap between democrats and republicans. democrats are much less enthusiastic about voting. joe biden is an unpopular president. we've got an economy that's pretty rough. this is something that voters understand, that women voters understand, and i think when you take away something that people have had. >> yeah. >> that's difficult. that's really difficult. and you already have 18 states that have enacted pretty restrictive laws, so you see it going on around the country. it's there. this could affect battleground
7:52 pm
states like arizona, like georgia. so i'm not surprised our colleague jeff zeleny said the president's going to come out and talk about this tomorrow. he's not going to wait for the official opinion. so this clearly they believe is a way to motivate democrats and say look at what is happening? this is not something you want, and this is going to affect voters at the bottom end of the economic scale. those are the people that democrats say they want to help. so they're going to use it. now, it may be an up hill battle for them. we all understand that, but of course this is an issue that now has a lot more resonance than it did ten hours ago. >> david, let me ask you -- did the president do that is it premature to come out. cnn has not confirmed that, but is it premature for the president to do that? >> it seems like the battle is engaged here, don. you know, you're right.
7:53 pm
the prudent thing, i guess, would be to wait six weeks, but we're having this discussion now and people all over the country are going to be having this discussion, and there are plenty of indications based on what the court has already done that this is very consistent with the signals that have been sent, so i don't think it's necessarily inappropriate for him to come out and make a forceful statement about this. i wanted to make a different point. >> sure, go on. >> there are state elections all over this country. if this goes down as it is written, then all of a sudden state legislatures and governors are going to be the people who are going to make these decisions and there are very hotly contested governor's races in many of the battleground states that are going to have big senate races this fall, and you could see the outcome of those races shifting as a result of this, as people focus on putting governors in office who
7:54 pm
will protect abortion rights for their citizens. >> david, gloria, thank you both. i really appreciate it. thank you so much. >> sure. a supreme court draft opinion that would overturn roe v. wade published by "politico" tonight. we'r're going to have more on ts next. this stutuff works without hurting your back. this stuff worksks guaranteed, or your money back. this is roundup weed & grass killer with sure shot wandnd. this stuff works. the sleep number 360 smart bed is on sale now.
7:55 pm
why choose proven quality sleep from sleep number? because the sleep number 360 smart bed is really smart. it senses your movement and automatically adjusts to help keep you both comfortable all night. it's also temperature balancing, so you stay cool. it's so smart it knows exactly how long, how well, and when you slept. sleep number takes care of the science, all you have to do is sleep. don't miss our weekend special. save $500 on the sleep number 360 c4 smart bed, queen now only $1,299. lowest price ever! plus, free premium delivery when you add a base. ends monday. we definitely have ants in here. not for long. [irish music plays] nice. what's going on here? i said get a pro. i did get a pro. orkin pro. i got you. got ants? don't call any pro, call the orkin pro. orkin. the best in pests.
7:56 pm
everyone knows eating well and exercise are a big part of losing weight. ww's new program teaches you how to do it. i still eat the foods i want to eat and i have lost 69 pounds, james. you're just changing your mindset and shifting your eating habits. for me ww is all about flexibility. there's no restrictions. more knowing means more doing. do with ww. i'm reading your aura right now. it's telling me that ww works. get you first 3 months free today at offer ends may 2nd.
7:57 pm
when you need help it's great to be in sync with customer service. a team of reps who can anticipate the next step genesys technology is changing the way customer service teams
7:58 pm
anticipate what customers need. because happy customers are music to our ears. genesys, we're behind every customer smile. this is don lemon tonight. we're going to begin with breaking news. politico reporting has obtained a supreme court draft opinion that would overturn roe v. wade, the landmark ruling that guarantees the right to an abortion. we're also going to talk about ukraine. mariupol is in an evacuation there, 100 people getting out of the besieged plant before the rescue operation was halted by russian shelling today. 100 adults, 20 children are still believed to be trapped inside that facility. and there's also a man hunt happening in alabama. a search underway for a
7:59 pm
corrections officer and an inmate who disappeared from a county jail on friday. i want to go straight away to cnn legal analyst and supreme court byographer, and analyst, john avlon. we've got news about the chief justice john roberts and his apparent dissent from justice alito's draft opinion. tell us about it. >> yeah, thanks, don. just to mention how stunning it is that politico would publish this draft opinion which we have not authenticated but it jives with what we know about what's been going on behind the scenes at least in a preliminary way, and what we know independently from our own sources is that chief justice john roberts would be dissenting from this opinion. he was not prepared to overturn roe v. wade, to roll back a half century of precedent. he's never been in favor of abortion rights generally, but it's just so staggering to
8:00 pm
remove the right to abortion and for many institutional and other reasons, the chief was not planning to join this opinion as far as we know. he was, however, don, ready to uphold the mississippi law that was in dispute before the justices, which is a 15-week ban on abortion, ban on abortion at 5 weeks of pregnancy, so what politico has gotten its hands on and published and just, you know, a real earthquake of news in women's rights and court protocol, i mean, i'm sure the court right now, the nine justices are just so shaken by having this information out here in this draft form, before everything is completely resolved is that this court is ready to roll back rights by a narrow 5-4 vote, which would


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on