0 >> again, it has been a remarkable hour. this is groundbreaking reporting from politico.com. josh goldstein, alexander ward. they have obtained -- i can't even, i still caught sounds crazy to hear the words coming from my mouth. they've obtained a graph maturity opinion from the supreme court. this is not a ruling that has been issued, but it is been drafted by conservative justice samuel alito which overrules roe v. wade and planned parenthood versus casey, full stop and completely. and with an exclamation point. effectively clearing the way for republican controlled states and any future republican controlled congress at white house to flat out and completely ban abortion in this country, making it illegal without constraint. we're fundamentally changes as the country, it will fundamentally change the relationship between women and the government. it will fundamentally change the future of every girl in the country, for all our daughters and granddaughters, and women that come after us. just a remarkable thing. we knew was coming, but to see it, even in draft form, in terms of this blunt, it makes it feel like a different country. that's gonna do it for us for now, now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell, ignorance. good evening, rachel, what we're witnessing tonight is the loss of a lights. they loss of a constitutional right. that is something that you and i have never borne witness to in our lives. if you pointed out, if you're 50 years old or younger in this country, if you're a woman 50 years old or younger in this country, you've had a right throughout your life to abortion services. a constitutional right, to that decision, that is what is being taken away here. a constitutional right. >> and will just say, in terms of the real world impact on women's lives, congressman jamie raskin raised a really good point about the reasoning in this opinion, which again is a draft opinion. but the way this is written, it undoes a woman's right to decide whether or not she's gonna carry a pregnancy to term, but this also absolutely creates their circumstance in which it is possible for them to undermine, and overturn a related ruling called griswold, which is about the right for people to have the right to contraception, even if certain state legislatures decide that contraception is evil, and we want to make it unavailable to people. it's a straight line from this ruling, not only to banning abortion instantly and potentially nationally, but to also preventing americans from accessing birth control. in a ruling that is argued along the same lines as the established presidents that are starting on this opinion. it's a fundamentally different world if this happens. >> and included in this fundamentally different world, is the other part of what we're experiencing tonight, it is minority government, minority ruled government, and the supreme court is the most incredible exemplar of that. you have these judges, appointed to the supreme court by two presidents, who did not win the most votes in that presidential election. george w. bush, appointed the justice who wrote this opinion, he did not win the most votes in his presidential election, but he won the electoral college. and then you have donald trump, appointing three of these deciding justices, he did not come close to winning the most votes, but he got the presidency in this country because of this capacity for minority rule in our government, which is what the united states senate is about every day of every year. more people vote for democrats for the united states senate, but republicans end up either in control of it with fewer people voting for them, for those seats, or as we see now in the 50/50 position this is a minority-controlled government, this is the product of that. >> it also raises the question as to, how the court is perceived. the reason that stare decisis is, it's maybe not when you learn day one of kid law school but it's maybe day to. part of the legitimacy of the court is that the court compounds the idea of the legitimacy of the role of lava respecting past president. and to have thrown out established super precedents, in casey and in a row here, the way that this draft opinion is written, is to say that there is nothing that any court has previously done there's nothing that any supreme court that has previously arrived that that deserves respect and even with as you say, justices that are pointed by presidents who didn't win the popular vote, and one case by president who had already been impeached. it doesn't matter, because once you've got power, you can use it to wreck everything, because stare decisis doesn't exist, and whatever we'd say has to go, goes and we have the power to do, it and how you gonna respond? we -- it's a challenge on the legitimacy and credibility claims of the court, that implies that battle is over. that they're no longer trying to appeal to people, respecting them for their work. >> and let's consider what this republican controlled court does not respect, they do not respect the in effect republican controlled court the wrote roe v. wade, it was a 72 decision 49 years ago, and five of the deciding justices in favor of roe v. wade, where republican appointed supreme court justices. in the last week or so, there's been a very intense discussion especially in the world of twitter about how much the democratic party has moved to the left in recent years or how much the republican party has moved to the right, there is no better demonstration about the extreme direction towards the right that the republican party is moved, when you look at the five republican appointed justices in 1973, who voted for roe v. wade in a total of seven justices. and then you see these five tonight, possibly six in the end put five as of tonight, voting to repeal it completely. and, insulting as much as they possibly can justices who decided it. >> yeah, and also just 30,000 foot view, it's 2022 and america is going to outlaw abortion? mexico just legalized it, you know i'm saying? there's a way in which the fast retrograde politics of the new wright puts us on a very different timeline, then the way we think of ourselves as a mature democracy. this is a decision, the repercussions of how this draft came to light we've only started to understand the basic implications of that, and kind of radicalism that you're describing. but what this means for women in the very short term will not be theoretical this will be a very practical, thing and this will change the lives of women of every station but particularly women without resources, marginalized women, and women who are pouring can't work around the law in a case like this. this will fundamentally change women's lives, this, year this generation and, permanently because the decisions are forced by the government on whether or not a woman gives birth, resonates for entire life and for generations in terms of your opportunities. >> yes, and this is a historic night rachel, we are going to proceed with a coverage that you just let us into, last hour, social riches is gonna join us, she's been in this struggle as long as anyone. we're gonna be joined by others who have been with this issue for a very long time, legal experts. this is something we've never seen, it is the removal of a constitutional right. we are sitting here feeling it removed by a minority-controlled government. >> yeah, get to it lawrence, thank you. >> thank you rachel. we are now joining a list of 24 countries. we will be the 25th country, in which abortion is illegal, either in part of the country, because of the states, or eventually in all of the country if republicans control the senate and the house, and they have a republican president to sign a federal law, that makes it illegal in all of the country. but certainly we in 20 states, it will be illegal. we will be in one of 25 countries, countries like a, dora aruba, a egypt, el salvador, haiti, honduras, laos, mauritania, nicaragua, philippines, senegal, sierra leone. that's the kind of list we are joining. we are not joining any of the major european countries in this unique position, that this country is now taking thanks to this minority controlled supreme court. this is a night like no other, in the reporting that we have done, and the history of this network which is over 25 years old. and that is the loss of a constitutional right, a constitutional right that has been with us for almost 50 years. how long can we have a constitutional right and considerate granted permanently? 50 years, we now know, is not enough. we are joined now by social richards, former president planned parenthood, all -- chancellor professor of law at the university of california irvine, an msnbc we contributor delia lithwick, is doing overtime with, us see leah let me continue with you because we have been in this struggle from virtually your entire professional life, i just want to get your reaction to the news that we appear to be now, at that spot where roe v. wade is going to be overturned. >> so lawrence, i think i feel like a lot of women, writing in now which is that we've known this was coming because the republican party has been committing to overturning the right to legal abortion for years. then, as we saw them stacked the supreme court, we've seen them run on this, we've seen them state-by-state past these horrific abuse of laws against women. but i have to say, even though a intellectually was ready for it, i'm just distraught. we and obviously, the harm we, just a frank cruelty, even in the opinion or this leaked opinion. the willingness to trade off women and women's rights for people's own political views is sickening. we and i don't know, i guess that's my initial reaction. willis >> just go to -- before we proceed, i want to go to this ritual in our supreme court confirmation hearings about roe v. wade. there have always been these questions about roe v. wade, and became a game for nominees, for some extent on both sides, to avoid the question. very few have dealt with the question, in any kind of direct way. but let's look at samuel alito's confirmation hearing answer. tonight, right now, his answer to questions about roe v. wade. he is the author, now, of this opinion that will overturn roe v. wade. let's listen to what alito said about it in his confirmation hearing. >> why don't we move on to another important quotation out of casey. quote, a terrible price would be paid for overruling casey, for overruling whoa, we would certainly we can the courts capacity to exercise the judicial power, and to function as a supreme court of a nation dedicated to the rule of law. and to overrule roe under fire, would subvert the court's legitimacy. do you see the legitimacy of the court been involved in the precedent of casey? >> well, i think that the court, and all the courts. the supreme court, my court, all of the federal courts should be insulated from public opinion. they should do with the law requires in all instances. that's why the members of the judiciary are not elected. we have a basically democratic form of government, but the judiciary is not elected in, and that's the reason, so that they don't do anything under fire. anything the law requires. >> do you think there is as fundamental a concern as legitimacy of the court would be involved if roe were to be overturned? >> mister chairman, i think that the legitimacy of the court would be undermined in any case, if the court made a decision based on its perception of public opinion. it should make its decisions based on the constitution, and the law, it should not sway in a wind of public opinion at anytime. >> julia lithwick, what did we or should we have learned from that answer in his confirmation hearing? >> yeah, that was the tell, lawrence. he was very very transparent that, casey, which is a protracted meditation on stare decisis, and the need of the court to not reverse course willy-nilly, because people have a reliance interest, they order their lives around constitutional protections that are afforded them. what you just heard justice alito say it was pretty much where he put in his draft opinion which is that, not my problem. and it's really interesting because, if you look at the polling, the polling is not close here. americans really, really, really did not want to see roe overturned. and so i think quite justice alito just told us is, don't care. >> professor goodwin, is there anything -- this opinion says that basically it goes back to the states. all 50 states can make their own decisions about abortion now. does the court in this opinion say that the congress must stay out of it? or that the congress could then overrule the state's decisions? >> so, the court does not say that congress must stay out of it, but i'd also like to correct a few things to, lawrence, which is that this is a playbook that we've seen before. and, if you think of these stripping away of other constitutional protections, let's think about voting rights, and the shelby county decision which has upended the right for many to be able to vote in the united states. particularly people of black and brown communities across the united states, that stripping away has led to the undermining not only a voting rights but essentially of abortion rights as well it's important that we stick together these histories and not see this in isolation there is a playbook that runs thickly between racial oppression in the united states and that baked into law. let's remember that states rights laws that's the jim crow playbook. and what we're about to see is the jane crow playbook, which is going to be the companion to the jim crow playbook. we've seen that revisited through voter suppression, and now we see quite explicitly is that this court under its current formation is ready to yank the rug out from underneath what you've described as a 49 year protection that was not a close decision a 7 to 2 opinion with five of those justices been republican appointed, and justice black man who wrote the opinion row being placed on the court by richard nixon. so what we see is completely antithetical to republican history of prescott bush being the treasurer of planned parenthood, we are seeing a time for people who are like calculating been afraid about these times represent. they should be, and not just count the attack on abortion, because next will be attacks on contraception there already happening. we already saw that in the hobby lobby case and were already seen attacks on sex education in schools as well. >> joining our conversation now is neil catio. neil is joining us from london, there is a time zone stress here and i want to get meal and it's quickly as we can. neil in your reading of this 98-page decision. is there anything in it that says that congress should stay out of it. who's doing cream court says that we have no role in this because it should be left of the states. is the supreme court saying that congress instead of this too because it should be left to the states. >> no, they're not quite saying that, so it's perfectly possible that we -- codified the roe v. wade above anything the court can put in or take, away but that's going to require majority vote in the house and senate. i think that they should break the filibuster for it, i think if this draft opinion becomes the law, it is a huge list step back for women in decades, for reproductive justice and for reproductive feed him. i think here, lawrence, is the most telling facts in this draft opinion, if it does become the law, it upholds the mississippi law. the mississippi law, had no exception for rape or incest. so it's just a flat ban. so if mississippi is a okay, any other state can do that, or possibly, lawrence, if there are republican takeover of the house in the, senate congress could pass a law banning abortion in all 50 states. so this is a dramatic win, if it becomes the law of the supreme court is breathtaking. i understand all of this wondered about other things about the court voting rights and so on but on this day i think which we should focus on is roe v. wade because this is monumental in a way that nothing like this has happened in our lifetime. >> neil, just a quick follow-up, this is a draft opinion. one of the kinds of changes than normally occur between a draft opinion, this one was drafted in february, a opinion that might come out as latest june. what kind of changes happen? >> so, changes can happen of all sorts, lawrence, big and small. one of the justice can say, hey, justice alito you can drop that footnote, read a paragraph that says this or delayed a whole section. possibly you can even have a justice switch opinions, and say i voted initially after oral arguments to totally uphold the mississippi law, and join justice alito. now, i think that's not true. and join what would be the dissenters. the problem here is that chief justice rob roberts would be that most likely person who is so-called switch sides. but his vote doesn't matter anymore because after justice ginsburg passed away, and was replaced by justice barrett the chief justice became the sixth not the fifth. so you need to get one of the justices like justice barrett to flip her view from the conference and that's on my plate. that's why i think there's a lot of doom and gloom going on right now after looking at this draft opinion, and yes it's possible that things can change but it's really quite unfortunate -- >> i want to go back to another supreme court hearing, we all remember that senator susan collins staked her vote to confirm justice kavanaugh on her belief that justice kavanaugh would uphold roe v. wade. her belief was based on what he had to say in his confirmation hearing, let's listen to that. >> have your views on whether roe was settled precedent, or could be overturned? and has your views changed since you were in the bush white house with. >> senator isa said that it settled as a president of the supreme court entitled to respect under-principles of stare decisis. one of the important things to keep in mind about roe v. wade is that it has been reaffirms many times over the past 45 years, as you know. and most prominently, most importantly, reaffirmed in plant parenthood versus casey in 1992. and as you will recall, senator, when that case came up, the supreme court jim just reaffirm it in passing, the court specifically went through all of the factors of stare decisis, in considering whether to overrule it. and then the joint opinion of justice kennedy, justice o'connor, and justice souter at great length went through those factors. that was a question presented in the case. >> social richards,, that is what susan collins confidence was based on. >> look, we can go over that hearing again, obviously that was devastating. having kavanaugh on the court is. but the truth is we have to look ahead now, and i think what is so distressing, this is now five people in the united states of america who are now poised to take away the right of every single woman in this country, as rachel said earlier. this is something we've never seen before, this is a right that all of us have lived our entire lives been able to exercise. and that is the most fundamental right to make a decision about their pregnancy. this isn't about whether, or not you feel about abortion. it's about do you want the government to make these decisions for every single person in this country, that's what they have just done. no exceptions, as neil said, this is a devastating opinion. if this should actually come to pass, and it is going to change the lives and opportunities, of every single person in america. and it didn't happen, because the american people rose up and said, we need to make abortion illegal, it happened because the republican party has been 100% committed to ending illegal abortion for years, and they just did that, and if people don't wake up and understand that this is a political battle, this is not about the supreme court. this is about one party taking away the right of over half this country. we better get serious about fighting back. >> professor goodwin, it seems that we learned in justice kavanaugh's confirmation hearing, that when a nominee is talking about stare decisis in a confirmation hearing, we can just ignore that. because here is someone who just made a very strong statement about stare decisis in his confirmation hearing, and he's one of the five who is overturning roe v. wade. >> that's right, i think what we've been seeing is a matter of political expedience, to simply get through the process. we've seen senator is not really pressed, i have senator should in this regard. we've seen congress fail to pass women's health protection act, but hopefully that's gonna be speech acts. here i think you speak to something absolutely accurately, which is that we've seen people obfuscate. judges, who were looking to be appointed on the supreme court, obfuscate or flip around these issues, and don't take them seriously. i do want to point out something injustice alito's draft opinion here, where he talks about this being egregious. and that it's a decision that has damaging consequences, we should remember that a person is 14 times more likely to die by carrying a pregnancy to term, that by terminating it. and given that this has been part of supreme court jurisprudence and record just a few weeks ago -- this is a deadly decision. it's not just the sort of breach that we've seen in half a century, it means that it's essentially a death sentence, where we already lead other countries in maternal mortality, what this means when you drill down, in mississippi, alabama, louisiana, texas, is that it's a death sentence for lots of black and brown women. >> kelly alyssa, mike if justice alito, if it was up to him to sign the opinion, and he took the opinion for himself he does have one woman on the court on his side when he could've assign the opinion to. he could've looked at this decision and said, well, this is really a decision about the reproductive rights of women in this country. i'm going to ask justice barrett to write it, as the only woman supporting this decision. >> yeah, lawrence, a lot of us thought that justice barrett had this opinion for exactly that reason, don't forget that was expressly said that she was been held over, when judge kavanaugh was selected, because they wanted to have a woman replace ruth bader ginsburg, so women could write the opinion overturning roe. that was part of that grand plan that's the steelers talking about, and it's also worth remembering, because we talked about confirmation hearings, and michel makes this really important point, it's not just abortion, it was justice barrett who wouldn't say that griswold versus connecticut, that is the case that gave the foundational right to use birth control within marriage, she wouldn't say that that was a president of the court. so i think this really important point that michele makes, which is that the whole bucket of rights here, it's not just abortion, we were hearing at the ketanji brown jackson hearing, whispers about getting rid of griswold, whispers about getting rid of burqa felled, and even not in the hearings but talk about getting rid of loving, the anti mask education case. anyone who is fooled by the rhetoric in this opinion, but the stops at roe, i think fails to understand that roe, the underpinning of roe is the underpinning of so many other vitally important liberties, and i think it's really, really important to see the scope of this, as neil says, not just for women today it's a catastrophe, but for all the kind of privacy family autonomy, bodily autonomy writes that we also have taken for granted for way too long. >> neil castillo, a pick up on julia's point. what might be the next fall? could we lose the right to contraception? could not be left up to the states? >> yeah, so dalia exactly right, it's the same family and same basic underlying constitutional protections, and conservatives of derided, calling it a penumbra not, the right to privacy not being in the constitution, that's at the supreme court hearings are all around. i'd also say it endangers game, marriage it's obviously been a target of the conservatives. if they can overrule this case, roe v. wade. which is a most super precedent case ever, it's the case that three republican justices in 1992, kennedy, o'connor and souter said, that's the case that social expectations have crystallized around roe v. wade, so even if you're wrong you can't overrule, it because it would damage the courts legitimacy, they did it here. so, if we can do it, here unfortunately they can do it anywhere, and that is the threat tonight. >> neil kept, yale social reassures, and all the alerts like. thank you very much for starting us off in this conversation, continue with this conversation, we really appreciate it. and joining us now is kelly robinson, she's the executive director of planned parenthood action, fund and the width -- of america. what does it mean out there in the country, as soon as it becomes law, which could be june. >> it's a terrifying reality, i do want to be clear, for tonight abortion is still illegal. as of today, it remains our constitutional right. we also have to be clear that it is hanging on by a literal thread. and with this leak decision, but this lead draft means is the deepest fears are coming true. if this comes to fruition through an official supreme court decision, that means that half the states, 26 days will be poised to eliminate abortion access in this country. that's a frightening reality that will dramatically change so many peoples lives. so many peoples lives. there are some states who apparently have noticed called trigger laws which is the day that roe v. wade was overturned in the state automatically. abortion becomes illegal as of that date. do you nominee states have those kind of trigger laws? >> there are about 13 states that have trigger laws on the books, we expect another 12 to 13 states after the decision becomes law to actually move swiftly the ban abortion. again, impacting nearly house of people. >> we should stress that abortions on abortion rights will remain safe and very big states like new york, california, also strongly in democratic-controlled states, massachusetts, and so many others where most of the population of the united states lives within states where the services will remain legal. but we are dealing with a minimum of well over 40% of the population that will suddenly lose these rights. >> yeah, this is a crisis! and then of the day, no matter what the laws, if abortion is banned, doesn't stop people from eating health care. doesn't stop people from needing abortion access. all it does is make it fundamentally more and more difficult, particularly for black and brown folks. people of low incomes. for folks i struggle to take time off work because they don't have paid sick leave. this is challenging jing for folks and will force people to actually find access to care outside the traditional health care system. moving outside of their city, or estate, or actually being forced to carry them. -- >> the spawn parenthood and other organizations have an action plan for the day where roe v. wade is overturned? >> we, do our health care centers are really focus on making sure people have access to care. where beefing up our navigation. we're making sure that folks have every access available through telehealth, and we're doing everything we can to partner with health organizations, and support organizations like that bush and funds. to tell people to get the resources they need access care. now, i do want to say, still today, abortion is still legal. this is a terrifying reality that we are mobilized to stop. we have to make our voices heard. >> kelly robinson, planned parenthood action fund, thank you very much for joining us tonight with this report. we really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> and joining us now from austin texas is wendy davis, former texas state senator and founder of deeds not words, which is struggling for reproductive rights in texas which is a difficult struggle. also with us is sophia richards, who is from texas. wendy davis, honig a reaction right away to this opinion and what it's gonna mean in texas. >> well, lawrence, it's shocking, utterly. and in spite the fact that we all expected that this would come. it's deeply upsetting and deeply shocking. and states across the country are about to endure what's exodus has been enduring for the last eight months ever since the senate bill eight past here which essentially overturned roe in our state beyond six weeks of pregnancy. no, what it's meant is that people across our state are being forced to continue pregnancies that they otherwise would choose to terminate. it is true, as your prior guest from planned parenthood said, that organizations on the ground here have been mobilizing to try to do everything they can to help people access care out of state. the problem with that is, as she mentioned, for people in marginalized communities, for people already have children, four people have jobs that they cannot miss for fear of losing those jobs, and in some instances, or in relationships where they fear telling the person that they are in a relationship with that they are pregnant, there are alternatives to seeking care have been completely closed down. and that's about to be the story across the country because more than 20 states have trigger laws in place so that if roe v. wade is overturned, immediately abortion will become illegal in their states. and the terrifying aspects of this law is exactly what we're seeing here in texas. where just recently in the rio grande valley, a young woman was arrested and criminally indicted for terminating a pregnancy. that is the next layer of what we are likely going to face if roe is overturned. and i know it may sound completely dramatic to say that, but i can assure you, there are lawmakers here and around this country, that's their next goal. and that's where we are headed. >> yeah, i don't think there's any language in dealing with will we're learning tonight that is overly dramatic. for example, the law that samuel aledo is probably upholding in this decision requires -- makes it impossible for a 12-year-old girl who has been raped by her father, it makes it impossible for her to have an abortion. that's what this does. samuel alito and the majority of the supreme court and all elected republicans in washington want 12, 13 year old girls to be forced to carry pregnancies to term if no matter who has impregnated them, including their fathers including any incest victim, this is what these people are saying should be the law of the land. these children should have absolutely no options. cecilia richards, you've known this about their rhetoric for decades, but now it's a reality, now they're saying and writing to children, if you are pregnant as a child you must, you must have that baby. >> that's right, lawrence. the cruelty and then humanity of all of this and these laws is indescribable. but i want to go back to something that wendy said about the pace that just happened in texas. because it's not only that they were jailed for 11 million dollar bond, they jailed a 26-year-old young woman in south texas, but under texas law, when she found out she was pregnant, and then i'm on a baby, she could not talk to her mother, her sister, her friend, her teacher. anyone, because under the bounty system that the republicans have designed in texas saw any of those people can be turned in to the authorities. we are leaving young and not only young, vulnerable people, vulnerable women across this country, on their own. and there is really, it is unspeakable. and something that i know you, know we talked about on the show before. abortion didn't begin with roe v. wade. abortion existed long before roe. it has existed for all of eternity. it's simply before role, it was illegal, and it was unsafe, and young healthy women died routinely. i heard this from planned parenthood doctors all the time. young healthy women died in emergency rooms across this country. i cannot believe that is what the republican party wants to take us back. and just one other, point, lawrence because i know there's discussion about what else will happen. even safe states, even states like new york, like california, that have been passing more progressive laws guarantee you, this republican party takes over congress this november. if that should pass, i can guarantee you house bill one will be an abortion ban in the state. make no mistake about it. they say it's about states rights, but it's not. it's about taking away the right of women to make their own decision about pregnancy. and they will not stop. >> wendy davis, this is the product of our politics. a vote for republicans. at every level. state legislature, governor, senator, president. they have produced this decision. this is a republican political success, this is one of the only policies they've been running on for decades. and now they have basically realize that policy through the supreme court. created by republican presidents. the first president bush, second president bush, and president trump. their nominees are all doing those to the american people. they're all delivering this decision. one of the things that i believed when i was working in the united states senate with the republicans was that the overwhelming majority of republican senators did not believe their own personal rhetoric about abortion. and they never expected to have to deliver on it in any way. and the expected to profit on fundraising over resistance to roe v. wade for the rest of their political lives. they are now going to have to live with this access of this. what does this mean to republican politics in texas? >> well, it's gonna be really fascinating to see what it means, lawrence. and you're exactly right, i served in the texas senate with republican senators who absolutely supported abortion rights and yet voted time and time again for laws that intruded upon those rights. and i think that lawmakers across this country, and across the federal level, have always believed that the court will continue to be a backstop. but with donald trump's appointments on the supreme court and with mitch mcconnell's u.s. senate affirming those appointees to the supreme court, it changed the game. and now, republicans for all of the rhetoric are going to have to face a voting backlash on this issue. here is the real challenge though lawrence because the supreme court has also dramatically curtailed voting rights, and because gerrymandering has become so extreme in state after state after state, even though the majority of people and states like the one that i live in disagree that roe v. wade should be overturned, absolutely support a person's right to make a decision about their own body. even though a majority of voters believe that, the deck is so stacked against them because of the way these districts are drawn to favor a majority of republicans who are out of step with what they care about. and who are only concerned about the few voters in the republican primaries who are putting them into office. with that means is that a statewide elections, like the one we have coming up in texas in november, for a battle o'rourke, another people down the ballots, statewide. those elections have just taken on a new and incredibly important importance because redistricting cannot impact what happens in a statewide vote. and i hope that that will be our rally cry in state after state after state that we are going to do everything we can elect statewide leaders who will make sure that in our states this is not going to stand. and as to seal said, if republicans take control of congress, we can say goodbye to states being able to do anything about it at all. so the stakes and the federal election in november, just got even higher. and if that means that we have to fight like hell and do everything we can to make sure that we hold the house in november, and that we not only hold the senate, but we increase the number of democratic senators there, then we've got to do everything we can to make that happen. i'm rachel do us no good if we don't follow it with that kind of concrete action. >> cecilia richards, as we go forward, here, one thing that i think has always been a struggle for democrats is to link voting to the supreme court. the supreme court as a voting issue for president. the supreme court as a voting issue for the senate, which of course, confirms supreme court justices. if this doesn't clarify that for voters, nothing will. >> i understand what you're saying, lawrence, and i agree. it is a challenge. but the fact of the matter -- the five justices of the supreme court will put their like mitch mcconnell, and not only mitch mcconnell, the republican party. three of these justices put on by donald trump who pledged overturn roe v. wade. , and all the state laws we're seeing, when we're talking about the horrific things happening in texas. these happens because of republican governors and republican legislatures. that, to me, is all we need to motivate voters and november because there is one consistent thread. if you look at the states, oklahoma, kentucky, go across the board. the places where people are making abortion illegal have one thing in common, republican parties and control. >> joining us now is, oh i guess, no one is joining us now. getting mixing know from the control room here about what's happening. wendy davis, as we go forward in this, and you just brought this focus to the beto o'rourke governors campaign there in texas. obviously very important for these issues. what else should voters be thinking about tonight as they watch themselves for the first time in their lives lose a constitutional right like this? >> i think we all need to understand what's at stake here. it isn't just a principled arguments about whether we should or shouldn't have the right to abortion. it's about with the very human outfall of this decision is going to be. and it's not just the human outfall, it's not just about an individual in her family and what the impact might be. it's about the economic outfall that will occur. and i hope that companies across this country are coming to understand that if they don't step forward, if they don't add their voices to the outcry of individuals across this country on this issue, they, too, are going to feel this impact. for a long time, we've benefited from the ability that women can make decisions about when and whether to have children. and that has empowered us in the workforce, and that has fueled the economic engine of this country. so, what's at stake cannot be overstated. and i hope that people will understand that sitting home and sitting out these elections is absolutely not an option this cycle. and trevor ghana's asian working on the grounds and states across this country, i hope that donors who support them will support them more. those who are working to register voters, and to turn out voters, and to make sure that people understand, their votes can make a difference. if we all will simply decide that we are powerful enough to make the change that we want to see. >> if you voted for george h. w. bush, you voted for this, because he appointed crimes illness, was one of the deciding votes here. if you voted for george w. bush, you voted for this, because he appointed samuel alito whose writing this opinion. and of course, if you voted for donald trump, you voted for three of the justices who made this the majority opinion here. and so, any vote for any one of the last three republican presidents has turned out to be a vote to repeal this constitutional right. and, i didn't necessarily see in that way in 1988, voting for george h. w. bush, or even in 2000, when it seemed like, as brett kavanaugh was kept saying in his confirmation hearing, starring decisive this would hold roe v. wade in our law. what has changed within the republican party over that time so that this now became something they actually could the chief and did achieve this way through the court? >>, it just became a chorus about politics and the maneuvering to gain advantages and republican primaries. i've seen it just in my relatively short political career here in the state of texas. that more and more of those chamber of commerce republicans who actually supported a woman's right to choose and, by the way, of course, barbara bush being a very active and planned parenthood, and very much a supporter of a woman's right to choose. those republicans of yesterday have been replaced bit by bit, person by person, because of redistricting. through primaries where voters are looking for the greater and greater extreme, and candidates are giving them the extreme as much as they possibly can. who have committed to their primary voters that they are going to overturn roe v. wade. and who is sitting on the u.s. senate made these very promises to primary voters. i know there are a lot of people who vote for republicans. who believe this day would never come. have a dear friend who's one of them. we had an argument here is ago about voting for presidential candidates and whether a republican president would actually have the power ultimately to appoint a supreme court that would overturn roe v. wade. and she believed it could never possibly happen. i think a lot of republican voters have believe them. and the point that you make, lawrence, is an excellent one, which is our votes lead us to this point. they've let us the supreme court. and they've led us to the decision that they are about to make. >> wendy davis, thank you very much for giving us above the texas perspective, and then national perspective on this. thank you very much. joining us now is minnesota senator tina smith. she previously served as executive vice president in planned parenthood in minnesota. north dakota. and south dakota. senator, thank you very much for joining us tonight, and i just want to open the mic for your reaction to what's your reading in this draft opinion. when i worked at planned parenthood, i saw firsthand the capacity of people making decisions for themselves and what was best for themselves and their family. and will we see in this draft opinion is basically a bunch of supreme court justices led by simulate or saying, no, we know better, we know best of what is best for you and your family. i like to say that it is stunning, it is shocking, but of course, it can be so when we have seen that concerted effort of republican party and republican senators working to strip away this fundamental, most american freedoms, which is to have control over your own body and your own autonomy. it's a terrible night tonight. >> let's listen to what justice barrett said and her confirmation hearing about roe v. wade. >> okay, will you also separately acknowledged that in planned parenthood v. casey, the supreme court's controlling opinion talked about the reliance interests on roe v. wade, which in treated in that case a super president. is roe a super president? >> how would you define super president. >> i'm out of thought sunday i'd be sitting in the chair, but i'm not, i'm up here, so i'm asking you. >> people you super president differently. the way it is used in the scholarship, and the way that i was using it in the article that you're reading from was to define cases that are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling. i don't answering a lot of questions about row, which indicates the role doesn't fall in that category. and scholars across the spectrum say that it doesn't mean that roe should be overruled. but, descriptively, it doesn't mean that it is not a case that everyone has accepted and doesn't golfers overruling. >> here's what's interesting to me, you said that brown is -- i know my time is running out,, is a super president. that is something the supreme court has not even said but you have said that. so, if you say that, why won't you say that about roe v. wade? a case that the courts controlling opinion and that planned parenthood casey case has described as a super president? that's what i'm trying to figure out. >> well, senator, i can just give you the same answer that i just did. i'm using a term in that article that is from the scholarly literature. it's actually won those developed by scholars who are certainly not conservative scholars, who take a more progressive approach of the constitution. and, again, as richard fallen from harvard side, roe is not a super president because calls first overruling has never ceased, but that doesn't mean that russian be overruled. it just means that it doesn't fall on the small handful of cases like marjory versus medicine, that no one questions anymore. >> senator smith, tonight, the current has been pulled back on what those justices actually do think about roe v. wade. >> well, my colleague from minnesota, senator klobuchar, was getting at something really fundamental, which is it roe v. wade has been law in this country. it is been subtle as a constitutional right for people to access abortion for decades. and yet, we all saw now justice tanya barrett justice have a no, skirt around their position on this. and let me just be honest, all of a swath of the cylinder said what was happening. we understood that the president who had nominated them had pledged to overturn roe v. wade. and no matter what they said in these hearings, even pressed very ably by senator klobuchar and others. the handwriting was on the wall. and now we see the result of that. and this isn't just a legal argument, this is an issue that is affecting women in my state and especially women and south dakota, north dakota, places where their state legislatures and governors have already overturned roe v. wade. have already overturned their constitutional capacity to control their own bodies. and their own futures. so, again, it is shocking to see, but it is sadly not surprising. >> senator, i know that some people believed that if abortion services are going to remain legal in big states like illinois and california and new york that those women in the dakotas who used to work with in planned parenthood we need abortion services, they can just go to illinois. they can just go over to california new york. but would you say to people who think that's an option for women living in the dakotas and abortion services? >> a couple of weeks ago, i visited an amazing health care clinic in minnesota that is providing abortion services, including medication abortion to women, not only in minnesota, but in the surrounding states. and i heard firsthand about what that means for women who are working a job, maybe two jobs, many of those women already have children of their own. the deep challenge of trying to figure out how to get to a health care clinic, hundreds of miles from where they live, when they have to figure out transportation. they often got childcare, we have to figure out how to pay for those medically -- this medical procedure that they are choosing to have. this is not a walk in the park, this is not just a casual thing. it requires a massive amount of funding. and, if you think about, at a states start to make the time period during which abortion is legal, it makes it even more challenging for these women. so i think that to say that women are able to just, oh, fly to some of the state to get necessary health care procedure, imagine how we would feel of this will we were told if you needed another important medical procedure that isn't required to meet all of these legal hurdles and even bound instead of being put before us by the united states supreme court. >> senator gina smith, thank you very much for joining our breaking news coverage. i know this was not in your evening plans, and we greatly appreciate you joining us. >> thank you, lawrence. >> joining us now is congresswoman katie porter, a former visiting professor at harvard law school. let me address you as professor porter tonight, and get your reading on this landmark supreme court case. removing a constitutional right but this country has had for 49 years. >> this is a terrible setback for all americans it is an assault on our freedom including our economic freedom. what does it mean to live in a country that is trying to compete worldwide, and we're the only country that doesn't have universal paid leave, the doesn't have affordable childcare, and now the doesn't of reproductive freedom. this is a terrible outcome, not just for women but for all americans. >> we think of this as a woman's right, which it is. but this impacts all of us, as you say, in every way. -- >> absolutely, let me just say. you ask anybody else being child support, you ask any woman, any single mom like me who is just in the middle of making pesto pasta for a kid who is isolating with covid, and trying to do her job, the last thing i needed tonight was a lecture from justice alito about how easy it is today to be apparent. every child in this country should be -- and every person should be a fundamental liberty to make this decision. and for the supreme court to lecture single moms like me, women who are being faced with the risk of maternal death from pregnancy, this is a fundamental assault on freedom. and i feel mostly tonight's anger, and a deep sense of sadness that my daughter betsy, and my sons luke and cole live in a world with less freedom than i did, my mother, or my grandmother, that is a terrible setback for this country. >> it is, and will be living in a world or we become one of -- we will be the 25th country that have this kind of outlawing of abortion and recent part of the country, if not more. and it is not a distinguished list of countries that we are joining in that. and that is where some illegal things we belong. >> and he does not get to make this decision. i want everyone to read this. the first six or seven sentences of this draft opinion, he starts by saying, abortion is a topic on which americans have very different moral values. agreed, and that is all the more reason that this ought to be a decision left to every american to bake for themselves. not a decision that is limited, but afraid of this taken away. >> justice alito sends this back to the states saying that the supreme court doesn't have jurisdiction over abortion, apparently they're announcing that congress has no direction over abortion. >> absolutely. congress that is already passed the bill that my colleague from california jimmy chu that would create a statutory right to abortion. congress can protect the rights of every american of when and how to start a family.