whether and donald trump ultimately has immunity for the alleged crimes he committed while president, more on that story in a moment. another major headline involves the u.s. supreme court which is set to play a major role in the 2024 election, the justices announced they will decide whether to restrict access to a widely used abortion drug even in states where it remains legal, mifepristone is one of the most common abortion methods in the united states, the patients use it at home and have been for two decades, this new case could be decided by 2024 which will throw the court in the middle of an election where access to abortion and whether it will be legal will be a key issue for many voters. the justices also announced they will consider an appeal for an indicted 20 -- right or how a federal instruction law can be used for the capital attack or if it can be used at all, that could impact hundreds of criminal cases including donald trump. we will breakdown the impact starting with cnn's paula reid who was taking a look at how the mifepristone case and how it can affect millions of women across the united states. >> the supreme court says it will consider whether to restrict access to a widely used abortion drug, mifepristone when taken with another drug is one of the most commonly used methods in the u.s. >> has this abortion drug been on the market for more than two decades? >> yes, 23 years i think. >> it has been used by millions of women during that period? >> many with millions. >> the drug remains available nationwide, the supreme court put on hold lower court rulings that would impose restrictions that abortion opponents would like. >> i am concerned before or than half of the abortions in this country are medical, medicinal, and these drugs have been legal in our country for years. >> last year, the conservative leaning court overturned roe v wade altering the abortion landscape in the u.s. more than half of the states outlaw or severely restrict the procedure by agreeing to take up the case, the court will once again way into the abortion debate. a decision which is expected by july could put the justices is in the middle of the presidential election where abortion has become a hot issue. >> i am pro-life, i believe in creating a culture of life. >> the justices said that was wrong and should be back in the hands of the people, that's where we should be deciding this. >> the president has been very clear he's going to fight that. abortion battles are also heating up at the state level, this week, the texas supreme court ruled against a woman who sued for the right to an abortion just hours after she fled the state to get her procedure. >> there is no outcome here that i take home my healthy baby girl, you know. it's hard, you know. >> the arizona supreme court heard arguments from opponents who want to revert back to an 18 to 64 state law banning nearly all abortions. >> abortion is healthcare, this will have a profound impact on pregnant arizonans to access healthcare. >> state courts in wyoming are also hearing argument on restrictions in michigan, governor gretchen whitmer signed a bill to expand access and repeal a state insurance coverage requirement. >> let's protect the freedom to make her own decisions without interference from politicians, let's get it done. >> the court said it will take up a case that could impact the federal election subversion case against former president trump, they will consider whether part of the federal obstruction law can be used to prosecute some of the writers involved in january 6th and how they defined that law could impact other cases including trump. >> let's get back to breaking news, walk us through this decision by the judge in this 2020 federal election subversion trial, why is she pausing the case, how long can this pause last? >> she has to do this because these bigger issues about immunity, double jeopardy have been appeal to the court of appeals. she no longer has jurisdiction until these issues are resolved, the special counsel mindful of the calendar and clock has asked the supreme court to just region and decide issues, then move along as quickly as possible so this case can still go to trial on march 4th. even today, the judge had said something federal judges never say. this is going to trial on the date i said, she's acknowledged the date she said could potentially move but -- depending on how long these appeals take. usually questions like this could take months to a year to work its way to the supreme court, this is the next ordinary circumstance and there is a possibility the justices will answer this themselves. >> the special counsel appealed and went all the way to the u.s. court, you are going to decide whether donald trump is immune, potential crimes as president, the supreme court says they will take that up. >> they have to give the trump team time to weigh in, so the trump team has until the 20th to weigh in. they don't want the supreme court to take this up because the special counsel want the supreme court to skip the court of appeals and weigh in so this case can go to trial before the election and they are relying on precedent from the nixon watergate investigation when the supreme court was able to decide discrete issues very quickly. that's what the special counsel is hoping, the trump team has time to weigh in that we will find out if the supreme court is going to decide these issues. >> he does not want that to wait and because he wants to drug it on as long as he can. >> that's a fair assessment, we know. i talk to people close to the team repeatedly, they know the merits of these arguments that he has presidential immunity, that those are not going to prevail, it's all about delay they want to stretch this out as long as they can, they would love to go to the court of appeals than the supreme court, they're likely to oppose. >> thank you, joining us now to discuss, tammy duckworth, thanks so much for joining us. your reaction to the news that a federal judge overseeing the federal subversion trial will delay the case well trumps appeals over presidential immunity play out to the supreme court. >> i'm deeply disturbed, i think trump is above the law or something, they are not. unfortunately, we have a far right supreme court that i'm afraid is going to get a new to not call precedent and rule in his favor, frankly i think that everything should move forward and i think trump should be standing trial like everyone else watching and waiting to see what's happening here. >> i know you have strong feelings about the supreme court announcing they will take up the abortion medication case to decide whether to restrict mifepristone nationwide. what are your thoughts? >> every american should be able to ask is medication in a manner the fda, the federal agency establish to make these decisions and is safe and effective, mifepristone is one of those vacations. this far right supreme court has thrown out 50 years of constitutional rights. now they hear this case, it is understandable that many women are afraid this might be the first step towards a frightening future where their healthcare decisions are not decided by themselves and their doctors but also by their personal bullies by any conservative judge, i'm deeply concerned and frankly, judges are not medical experts. why are they making decisions off of the health and well- being of women? >> you will hold -- quote never stop the right to choose a lot, what can send it do to restrict access to this drug? >> we can pass the reproductive health care act and we can work to get that across the finish line. frankly, we need to make sure that we oppose corporate executives who have access to supreme court justices as opposed to their rights of women, we will keep them, democrats will stand up for every rights to -- women rights to choose. keep politicians out of doctors offices, if we do this state-by-state, we will do that. at the federal level we push for the women's right to reproductive health care act. >> the case of kate cox in texas, the women who sued and wanted to end her pregnancy after learning her fetus had a deadly condition, doctors were warning her that if she carried this child to term, her fertility was at risk, her health was at risk and senator john cornyn was asked to weigh in on the fact the texas supreme court was trying to force her to carry this child to term, take a listen to what you're calling had to say. >> that is strictly a matter of state law, i'm a federal official. i'm not a state official so i'm not to comment on what -- state officials are doing. >> senator ted cruz, the other senator also declined to comment, your thoughts? >> both of them have voted to try to march towards this nationwide abortion ban, what happened to kate cox is horrific, they were doing this to her. no one should be forced to leave their state to get the healthcare they need, kate cox is being forced to risk her health and with a fatal condition, and jeopardize her future ability to have another child if she wanted to simply because she lives in texas. no woman should have to go through that. the republican will continue their statewide national no abortion band, i will never stop working for every american in every state to have reproductive choice. >> i've heard abortion rights activists say that the texas case is an example of the so- called compromise that you talk about, in and out -- existence, she's two weeks pregnant, no one is arguing her life is at stake, it's her health and ability, fertility. if the so-called 15 week compromise about these republican politicians going forward. kate cox would not be exempt, they would ban her from being able to get an abortion nationwide as well. >> well, i don't accept a compromise. i believe what you support to reinstate roe v wade, with the conditions under roe v wade, i will tell you this. in states that have enacted these abortion bans, you have women who have to sit in hospital parking lots bleeding out until their life is in danger before they can get an abortion, this is happening. we have all heard the stories and kate cox's story is equally horrific, she's trying to preserve her right to have a future child and they are preventing her while she has the resources to lead the state, other women in texas don't. we are in in america today were women have to be for sieved -- forced to leave their state. >> tammy duckworth of illinois, thank you so much. on capitol hill, we are nearing the scheduled vote as there is a formalized impeachment inquiry . the new plans for the president's son, hunter biden who did show up not for testimony but to talk in the way he wanted to talk, not behind closed doors as republicans wanted, look at that. right in front of congress. stay with us. for six years, i have been the target of the unrelenting trump attack shouting where is hunter? here is my answer. i am here. >> there he was indeed, president's son, hunter biden demanding to testify publicly before the republican-led house over heise -- oversight committee, a closed-door deposition. now house oversight committee says his chair will start contempt of congress proceedings for not exceeding to their demands. they could vote to formalize a beam -- impeachment inquiry into president joe biden after months of republican holdout saying there is no tying president biden to financially benefiting to his business dealings, they turn around and are willing to vote that way. cnn is here, evan, hunter biden technically did not comply with the subpoena for closed-door deposition set for today. when you look at the january 6th hearing, they did do closed- door hearing before they did a public hearing. why is he so intent on testifying publicly, does he have a legal basis? >> he says he does not trust republicans, what he did was defy the subpoena, it says this is the place and this is the time you're supposed to show up, he did not do that, he went to the senate side of the applet aptly known senate swamp, that's a metaphor for what we are watching. the place he's standing right now. you know, the reason why is he says he does not trust if he'd testifies behind closed doors that they are not going to come out and just twist his words and try to use it against him. as you pointed out, this is how usually it is done, it's very common for you to do closed- door depositions then go out and have a public hearing if necessary, the two chairmen who were sitting waiting for him, spoke to the media awaiting there with him, here's what they had to say. >> this is an investigation about public corruption at the highest level. we have accumulated mounds of evidence concerning to an overwhelming majority of americans. >> congress comes as a and -- ask you to come to testify. >> wait a second, jim jordan says when congress asked you to come, you testify. he refused to testify. >> as i said, the senate swamp, there is a metaphor. i think one of the things that you are watching right here, the idea they are starting this impeachment inquiry and are also going to try to hold them in contempt, this sets up a few more months of this show. a lot of this is political and hunter biden is sort of addressing that in his statements, he does have real legal problems, going on legal trial in two locations in los angeles and delaware, those are serious things he has to face. >> under the argument in the november a subpoena, hunter biden that its demands were part of an impeachment inquiry that are ready started, it seems to undermine that already . >> it does, what you are doing is trying to formalize this. one of the reason they are doing that is because they know they have to try to push this forward and then try to see if they could use this in court to enforce some other subpoenas. >> it so much, let's go to our 2024 lead presidential candidate, nikki haley campaigning today along the side chris sununu. we are in concorde, new hampshire where we sat down with nikki haley and governor sununu. you asked nikki haley to respond to an attack on the town hall i hosted with governor ron desantis? >> yes, you know that the governor of florida who you are with, the former governor of new jersey, chris christie and nikki haley were all vying in a public way for chris sununu's endorsement. chris christie was quite disappointed even though he's been publicly quite different, ron desantis was not thrilled but when you asked him about it last night. he turned it not against the governor but against nikki haley. i asked both of them about that moment last night. it >> governor desantis did a townhall with cnn in iowa last night and he was asked about this endorsement, he said even a campaigner as good as chris is not going to be able to get over nikki being an establishment. >> you can say something but it doesn't make it true, i was a tea party candidate when i became governor. i was a strong conservative governor that brought in 11% unemployment to 3% unemployment. we moved thousands of people from welfare to work, we reformed education, we did voter i.d. then you sommi go to the u.n. i took the kick me sign off of our backs, everything i have ever done has been strong. it's been economic freedom, individual freedom, making sure i've made people proud. he can say establishment, i don't think labels matter. at the end of the day, we are fighting to save america. actually i believe that. his endorsement has given us a big kick at the time momentum was building and this will continue to take us where we need to go. >> where you were last night in iowa with the candidate you are with, ron desantis. she got a big endorsement from the governor who was quite popular with republicans, kim reynolds. that did not give him a bump at all. the big question is whether or not it would be different in new hampshire with governor sununu, they are campaigning actively together, today, and will continue to do so or. he will do as much as he can to try to get her numbers up because she's very far behind donald trump here just like she and others are pretty much everywhere across the country. one other thing i want to mention is that after they left, they went to a townhall and the voters stood up and said to nikki haley, i don't want to talk around donald trump. i want you to go after him. in these new townhall environments, she's hearing from sununu with voters that expect more from new hampshire. it >> good to see you, vivek ramaswamy will get his moment tonight in the cnn townhall. gabby philip will moderate that discussion at 9:00 p.m. eastern only on cnn. then immediately after, stay tuned for king charles. that is at 10:00 eastern on cnn. the white house today struggling to answer for president biden's comments yesterday in which he said israel was indiscriminately bombing gaza. stay with us. ' we are back with worldly tensions between the leaders of israel and united states continue to bubble after president biden told donors that israel's indiscriminate bombing is eroding global support for israel. when he brought that up with benjamin netanyahu, the response was quote well, you carpet bomb germany and dropped the atom bomb. a lot of civilians died. biden's description of indiscriminate bombing is decidedly at odds. israel has been trying to reduce civilian casualties, senior white house correspondent, mj lee joins us. you were all over this at the white house briefing, trying to figure out how these two things made sense which of course they do not in the white house spokesman, john kirby struggled to support that. >> when the president made these comments, they were so striking because it does not get more blunt than indiscriminate to describe the content and more. i went back to a -- john kirby continued repeatedly to insist israel has the intent to minimize civilian staff -- casualties. take a listen. >> indiscriminate is my definition, without discrimination, not deliberate, not careful. we undermined civilian casualties when the president himself said yesterday israel is bombing indiscriminately. >> sometimes in war, i'm not speaking for the israelis. sometimes in war, your best plans and execution does not always go the way you wanted to go. we know that from bitter experience and our own military. i'm saying -- >> in practice, that is not what you are saying happen. the mac i'm saying there is a clear intent by israelis, they have admitted to it publicly that they are doing everything they can to reduce civilian casualties. i have said earlier that we have seen him act on that intent in positive ways. >> i want to be clear, a number of my colleagues also pressed kirby, i do want to give you a sampling. is israel behaving in accordance with international law? is that not a war crime, does that mean the u.s. puts conditions on military aid? he was asked whether the president misspoke, that exchange sort of gives you a good sense of how john kirby answered questions. we are clearly seeing a white house that is increasingly struggling to answer israel's war tactics. >> the short answer is you cannot square it, it does not make sense, you can either be doing everything you can to avoid civilian casualties or indiscriminately bombing. you can be doing most -- both. new fallout after the uproar, over three college presidents with -- accusations of anti- semitism and plagiarism. it's our only -- not only harvard on defense, stay with us. i am mj lee at the white house, this is cnn. the u.s. house of representatives is set to vote condemning anti-semitism on college campuses, the testimony from three university presidents from harvard, m.i.t., and penn failed to say calling the genocide of jews violated code of conduct. the president of penn state of course resigned five days later, they had also been under pressure to resign when she had later apologized. she's also been accused of plagiarizing parts of four papers published between 1993 and 2017. unanimously standing in support of the president despite all of this in their analysis found no harvard standards. for corrections in two articles to insert citations and quotation marks omitted from original publications. republican of new york, leases to phonic has been leading the charge is calling out for her alma mater to not only stand by its president. >> this is a moral failure of harvard leadership in higher education leadership at the highest levels. the only thing they have change to their code of conduct whether they fail to condemn calls for genocide of the jewish people, the only update to the code of conduct is to allow a plagiarist as the president of harvard. >> she's also being accused of plagiarism by democratic colleague congresswoman manning, she drafted a letter to the boards of penn, harvard, and m.i.t. which she then shared with the congressman who made edits. she doubts it's plagiarism, approaching on the house floor with a rough draft, i told her i would like to review it then decided to go in different directions with two separate versions. her true commitment to fighting anti-semitism is being questioned by a different democrat, jamie raska. they asked five questions about anti-semitism with the republican ranks, if a presidential candidate is qualified to be president, if he hosted his -- at dinner, nick fuentes, a pro-hitler holocaust provision is calling for a holy war. here is he -- nick fuentes a few days ago, this is a man trump hosted for dinner at mar-a-lago last year. >> we take power, they need to be given the death penalty. people that are suppressing the name christ and suppressing christianity must be absolutely annihilated, we take power. this is not the domain of atheist, or devil worshipers, or perfidious jews . this is christ country. >> we wanted to ask about the testimony last week, and some other issues. she declined to come on, let's bring on congressman raskin. your first question was about that dinner that trump hosted with nick fuentes, and kanye west, another holocaust denier. do you regret endorsing trump in 2016? after he got the star of david superimposed on hillary clinton's face and a pile of cash, yes, no? did you get a specific response at all to these questions about anti-semitism and the republican ranks? >> not at all, she did what the ivy league college presidents did according to her, she evaded. she dodged questions and said that donald trump was the greatest president that there had ever been for jewish- american then she gave five reasons that were not answered to my five questions. they included things like moving the u.s. embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem, him having destroyed the iran nuclear agreement, those are foreign-policy issues and have nothing to do with the questions i raised about domestic violent anti-semitism like the guy who showed up at the tree of life synagogue and murdered 11 jews in the worst anti-semitic attack in american history. she has herself dabbled in great replacement theory, of course the mass murderer in that case invoked great replacement theory about how jews and george soros were bringing in alien races to replace the native white population, that is something that has been invoked in other mass murderers, including buffalo. i asked her to deal with that question but she wouldn't. she completely dodged and evaded everything i asked her about, there are more questions being asked about her indulgence of or embrace of anti-semitism by donald trump and by the republican party. >> i always find that so strange when anyone questions aligned with donald trump about his flirtation with anti-semites , they immediately start talking about jerusalem. i don't live in israel, i live in washington, d.c., why are you bringing up a foreign country? understand it's a jewish country but that's like talking to a catholic who was upset about discrimination against catholics. it has nothing to do with what we are talking about. >> you've got it, in fact donald trump is someone who constantly repeats that anti- semitic trope in fallacy. he several times had different republican jewish groups come to the white house and inevitably said stuff like well, you people have a great country, we love your country. you have a great prime minister. he treats american jews like visiting -- which partakes obviously anti-semitic views about dual loyalty, the issue is that while she is posing as a great champion of the jews and opponent of anti-semitism on campus, and for college presidents, she won't say anything about presidential anti-semitism when it comes to the white house, the real president and that of course is a much greater threat to jews in america where you have donald trump who says things like they are very fine people on both sides of an anti-semitic race riot called by in charlottesville, virginia. >> let me ask you, did you think that hearing with the university presidents achieve something important and was illustrative, and did bring out the fact that for whatever reason, these three presidents of universities seem to have trouble with a question that seemed very basic in terms of whether or not hate speech against jews was as offensive as hate groups of another minority might be, i've heard a lot of jews they thought that hearing was well done, whatever you think of congresswoman stefanik separately from that. like most college presidents, they were completely bureaucratic and morally tone deaf, they gave these overly legal answers. if someone asked me one of your students or faculty, or staff people is calling for the genocide of jews or anyone else, what would you do, i would dispatch the campus police to go and see if anyone is in danger because in the age of tens of millions of ar 15's in our society, lacks republican gun laws, that person can be in immediate danger to jews and anyone else around, if they are not, they needed immediate mental diagnostic, they need a mental health exam. if that's not the case, then they are almost certainly endangering the learning environment, creating a hostile learning environment which is what title vi is all about, that's what the president rush to discuss, there is a defense by the way by ronald reagan's a solicitor general, charles freed who said they gave totally appropriate legalistic answers, they are not the answers i would have given. they did not show any common sense, guess who's not showing any common sense, people in congress are about to get swept away with stefanik's mccarthy like crusade, she wants to dictate who will be college president, or university president across colleges, are these the worst offenders? an american -- jewish-american president of m.i.t., has she done a complete study of racism and anti-semitism on campuses, she was giving hypothetical questions. there might be real cases of anti-semitic violence or racist abuse that are taking place, what about the campuses where there is sexual harassment and sexual violence where they are looking the other way, is that our new job, let's do it systematically get people due process rights, in the meantime, the boards of harvard and m.i.t. have been standing by their president, i don't think the congress of the united states need to be dictating who should resign and who showed there. >> your larger point, however if anti-semitism is ugly on a campus, it's also ugly when it is congresswoman marjorie taylor greene standing at white supremacist conference. >> by the way, marjorie taylor greene goes to nicholas fuentes conferences. what does brave stefanik have to say, is she a champion -- it's either anti-semitism or offending you all the time, or none of the time. you can't have it only offends you when it is on the left or right, depending on where you stand, jamie raskin. thank you so much. the climate deal with arguably major discrepancies in the fine print, stay with us. >> >> just in, a very big day on wall street, as markets are reacting positively to the fed's decision. vanessa, the dow hit a significant milestone. >> reporter: at 2:00 p.m. when the fed announced it was going to pause rates, we saw the dow pop. you can see it right there at 2:00 p.m. that led the dow to close up 1.4%, setting a new all-time record high, beating its record that was set two years ago. and this was a great day for wall street overall. the nasdaq and the s&p also closing and gaining up. traders are liking the pause that the fed announced today, but also liking the fact that what they had baked into markets and what they were expecting next year, rate cuts, is exactly what the federal reserve has projected. we could see three rate cuts next year. that's encouraging also for the american people, who are dealing with high mortgage rates, high interest rates, rate pauses and rate cuts are good for the american people, and clearly markets are also liking what they're seeing, jake. >> vanessa, thanks so much. some good news for a change. some agreement out of the united nations climate change summit, known as cop-28, a historic statement which calls on countries to move away from fossil fuels. the bad news, scientists say, the language is so vague, it could allow countries to take very little action at all. cnn's bill weir is following this unprecedented agreement. bill, it sounds good, but there are a lot of loopholes i hear. >> reporter: there are, jake, yes. it is historic that for the first time in 28 tries, humanity is naming the problem behind climate change. it is a fossil fuel crisis, and the transition away from them seems encouraging, especially when it comes from the ceo of abu dhabi's national oil company. but he's going to go back to his day job next week, jake, where they have plan to expand oil and gas by $150 billion. so these are the high points. transitioning away, net zero emissions, they're still going for that. there are eight different pathways that countries could take to help on this endeavor, including helping the world triple renewable resources and double energy efficiency, and helping the poor developing countries suffering the brunt of this. but there's no real direction on financing, on how to help that transition along. and then in the meantime, the united states is the biggest exporter of oil and gas in the world. the u.s. is the biggest petro state. so john kerry trying to spin this as a positive. >> bill weir, thanks so much. minutes from now, republicans will vote to begin the process to impeach joe biden. for what? that's the question. stay with us. goli, taste your goals. this hour, a vote on the house floor as republicans look to strengthen their case for impeachment inquiry into joe biden. plus, donald trump's return to iowa as a challenger with momentum in the 2024 race, tries to take him on. >> with me, i have a different approach. no drama, no vendettas, no whining. it's about work for me. and lead thing hour, the new audio attained only by cnn, a lawyer in the oval office, shortly after donald trump's 2020 loss, later describing key moments that led to the fake lector scheme, which resulted in criminal cases against many people, including donald trump. cnn's marshal cohen is here with the exclusive reporting. so marshal, we're talking about kenneth chesebro, the wisconsin attorney. what happened in his interview with prosecutors and in the oval office? >> reporter: he told prosecutors about a photo-op gone wrong in the oval office in december 2020. go back to that hectic time. at that moment, trump's team in wisconsin had just lost their election challenge, and th