cardiac.com or amazon hi marla signs at the white house and this is cnn closed captioning is brought to you by sokoloff law mesothelioma victims call now $30 billion in trust me has been set aside. you may be entitled to a portion of that money all when 8085920400. that's when 8085920400 the supreme court strikes down a ban on bumps stocks, one that was originally approved by former president trump in the wake of the deadliest mass shooting in us history. >> well, the latest on the fallout also today, a hardware freaking reminder of the precious lives lost to gun violence. the building were 17 people were killed by a gunman, six years ago is now being demolished crews have started tearing down that structure at marjory stoneman douglas high school in parkland, florida. we're going to speak to the father of one of those victims. and buckingham palace i was providing a new update on the princess of wales. she said to make her first appearance since her cancer diagnosis with new details ahead as we follow this and many others through developing stories, all coming in right here to cnn, news central a landmark ruling from the nation's highest court today, handing a big win to gun rights activists and a major setback for those working to curb gun violence in america okay today, the supreme court lifted a federal ban on trump era bump stocks, making it legal again to buy the gun accessories that let semiautomatic rifles fire hundreds of bullets per minute. >> bump stocks were used by a gunman who opened fire at a las vegas music festival back in 2017, in the deadliest mass shooting in us history. he's sprayed the crowd with more than 1,000 bullets from a hotel room window, killing 60 people and injuring hundreds more. cnn's joan biskupic is with us now on this story. this was a 6-3 decision. liberals on one side, conservatives on the other yeah, quite a divided tableau at the supreme court this morning to, you know, this is the time in a year when we get our most consequential opinions and occasionally we'll get a rare oral dissent from the bench. >> and this time around, what justice clarence thomas read from the bench for the majority provoked justice sotomayor to read part of her descent on behalf of the liberals. you refer to that tragic shooting in 2017. and after that donald trump's administration, the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms expanded the weapons that would be covered by 1934 ban on machine gene guns. and today's case came down to a phrase in that 1934 law referring to a single function of the trigger. and the way justice thomas with backed by five other conservative appointees, read that language is to say that a bump stock because of the way the mechanism works, would not be covered that way because when it comes right down to it, a bump stack only it has to have a repeat function of the mechanism. and let's just, here's a good comment from him that kinda tells you how he interpreted the federal law a bump stock does not convert a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun anymore than a shooter with a lightning fast trigger finger does. even with a bump stock, a semi-automatic rifle will fire only one shot for every function of the trigger now, justice sotomayor, when she read an impassioned dissent from the bench looked at the language of that federal law much differently and stress that when a bump stock is fired, it starts with the initial poll of a trigger, but the pressure that a shooter would apply is what causes the continuous number of rounds up to, you? hundreds, 8800 rounds. >> and she reading the same language concluded today, the court puts puts, bump stacks back in civilian hands to do so, cast aside congress's definition of a machine gun and seizes upon one that is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the statutory text and unsupported by context or purpose. >> when i see a bird that walks like a duck swims like a duck, and cleft like a duck. i call that berta doc bottom line. i call this bump stock a machine gun. >> yeah. they sure look like them when you see them used, it's really stunning, right? >> and just as thomas said, well, if somebody is going to expand the definition, it should be congress. it shouldn't be the regulators at the atf but as you know, briana is unlikely the congress will take action here. and it would fall to the any administration' 's atf john. >> thank you. somewhere for that. we appreciate it. let's bring in cnn security correspondent josh campbell. josh, i know you've covered so many of these legal cases involving guns since that landmark 2022 supreme court decision expanded gun rights is there really a chance of congress trying to ban bump stocks? i almost feel foolish asking you that, but is that something that you could see happen in the coming years yeah you know, very slim especially in this particular congress. >> i mean, getting any type of gun control measure through the republican house obviously would be a challenge. and because of the mechanics of the us senate, that is likely going nowhere, but it's important to note that we now live in this era post 2020 when the supreme court decided that landmark yeah, decision expanding gun rights, that any new gun law has to fall under that framework. and this gets a little bit wonky, but it's so important because imagine a bill actually did make it through congress today, banning bumps stocks, it would still run up against that supreme court precedent. what the supreme court ultimately decided back in 2022 is that any modern law is only click constitutional pertaining to guns if there was a similar law on the books at the founding of the nation. and so in this case, you can imagine through that framework, because bump stocks were not illegal at that time, it doesn't matter that they didn't exist at all. the supreme court would look at that and say, this can't be constitutional because there wasn't this analog law that was it's in place. so certainly an uphill battle has been to discuss this decision today. certainly setback for some of the gun safety advocates. >> josh, what are the law enforcement and public safety implications of this ruling? thank so much of this often comes down to the ability to fire bullets and a rapid fashion, the more bullets they obviously more deadly that have shooter can be this. >> so of course runs head on into what we're hearing from gun rights advocates who say, look, this is a slippery slope. if you start reducing any type of freedom as it pertains to guns, that then opens the door. this has been this long term debate. we've obviously heard, but talk to gun safety advocates as well who say they look, people can have certain guns, but let's look at the ability to reduce the amount of times that a shooter can actually fire. that's why we've heard debates about so-called high high-capacity magazines. that's the device that goes into a weapon holding the bullet you know, if the shooter or even has to take a short amount of time that then possibly reload that weapon, that then increases the chances mass shooting tuition that people can be fleeing, or that, that gun could jam, or that law enforcement could arrive on the scene. but particularly with this device, the bump stock, the ability to fire hundreds and hundreds of rounds. obviously cree increases that lethality of any type of device that is equipped with that. and then finally, it's worth pointing out, i constantly hear from law enforcement as well across the country that they often feel like they are outgunned when it comes to some of the devices that they're seeing being on the streets. so it is certainly an interesting dynamic that on one hand you have those obviously who are in favor of gun rights at one, no restriction on the other hand, oftentimes you have the police themselves saying, look, we're the ones that are often on the receiving end of these bullets whenever we show up on the scene of some of these heinous shooting yeah. >> i just interviewed a democratic senator who tried to pass a bump stock bill and he said, this will be a tool for cartels and other criminals. they're going to use this. we'll have to see josh campbell. thank you so much for us. >> the supreme court ruling on bump stocks comes amid a silver in reminder today of the human toll of gun violence in the united states as we watch the demolition of the site of a mass shooting crews are tearing down the 1,200 building at marjory stoneman douglas high school in parkland, florida, were six years ago funnyman killed 14 students and three staff members on valentine's day. since then, the building was essentially untouched because it was used as evidence in the shooters trial. cnn's got a low suarez has life force outside the school. what are you seeing there and what are you hearing from? members of the community well, laborious as you can imagine, today has been an incredibly difficult and emotional day for the parkland families. >> some of the fathers told us that the start of this demolition project ahead of the father's day holiday on on sunday. really only added to their pain construction crews began their workout here early this morning and they are still going at it at this hour. you can see they've been able to take out a good part of the corner of the building where this happened now the victims families were invited to watch the start of the project. now some of them have wanted this building gone for some time now. others it said that really it should be preserved. the 12, 12 hundred building really hasn't been touched since the mass shooting in 2018, as you noted, boris, it was preserved as a crime scene for the trial of the shooter. and in the past year families of some of the victims, they coordinated these tours of the 1,200 building with bipartisan members of congress and top person and biden administration officials, including vice president kamala harris all of it really in an effort to try and pass a school safety measures as well as a stricter gun control laws, both at the state and federal level. here now is a tony montalto, his daughter, gina, was killed e was talking about the emotions of today. he knows this building very well, having taken part in these tours, a number of times. here's what he said. >> it's building has been a symbol symbol, a failure many in the community are happy to see ago. i know in my family we have but a difference of opinion. my son is concern that people will forget now that the buildings being taken down my wife said she had kind of grown attached to them space as we walk through it. so many times with different leaders and policymakers as for me, i'm concerned because we we haven't seen a solid plan yet for what's going to replace this building so the broward county school district has not said what the building is going to be replaced with, but a lot of the parkland families would like to see a permanent me built on the site to honor the 17 victims of the massacre in 2018 of course, i'll broward county is not the only county in the country to tear down a school after a mass shooting. the sandy hook elementary was was taken down after that, and the plan for robb elementary in uvalde is also to be demolished. boris carlos, what his life for us from parkland, florida. thanks so much. for the update. let's discuss now with manual oliver, his teenage son, walking effectual known as guano, was among the students that was killed at the shooting sir, thanks so much for being with us. i'm curious to get your thoughts on this demolition well i just wanted to make sure that everybody understands that this is not closing chapter for me. i do think that the community will feel better and now i'm thinking all those families that still have case that survived that day i think it's good for them not to see the building there. >> in our case the bottle continues and we have to just move on. there's other things that we need to do. if you start the monitoring things after ground violence, you will need to demolish, have the country probably when it comes to what you would like to see, fill that space, what would you like to see in the future at that site? is it a permanent memorial that would commemorate the memory of your son and others that were killed i really don't care. >> that's a school site the memory of my son i try to keep it intact by doing other things like i'm talking to you. >> i mean, europe right now, working on our latest campaign and that's what's keeping joaquin alive and joaquin spot of the solution whatever happens in that ground is not anymore. my business. >> so you mentioned here in europe, you're actually an portugal, right now as part of an effort to push gun safety laws. what's your reaction to hearing that the supreme court struck down this federal banned by the atf on bumps stocks well, i think that the gun industry is very lucky to have a supreme court for them, a supreme court that is concerned about their future and their business on their money but not all concerned about the lives of our loved ones it's, it's incredible, it's crazy. >> you see these countries that we had visited during this latest campaign and we don't solve for those things. so the call erases, probably the only step forward that we saw doing the trump era that was working forward to save lives too late for me, but you guys can still enjoy the people that you love. >> when it comes to the decision it's sort of move the onus back to congress to write legislation that would then ban bump stocks. we did see the passage of a bipartisan safety gun bill that you and i have talked about back in 2022. but you who've been arrested protesting inaction by lawmakers on capitol hill. are you confident that this is going to be an issue that lawmakers take up? probably not before this next election, but perhaps after i gotta be honest with you, i've been i've been trying to speak to lawmakers and off it serves and representatives from every single angle inside the united states. >> and we have been ignored. >> and you can see that since the last six years, more than 300,000 people have died from gun violence. and nobody seems to care that much. so that's why we're here today. we are promoting the crazy idea of foreign urged citizens adopting american kids and bringing them to their safe countries so they can be saved from the us gun laws. how crazy is that? not crazy enough. to grab people's attention maybe maybe that's what i need to do now, create a warner's because i told everyone that is watching this interview years ago that this could happen to you and some people are regretting not been involved so now we have to go outside of the united states to get the attention. shame on us and shame on our supreme court by the decision they made today. >> um, no oliver, always appreciate you joining us. thanks for sharing your perspective thank you very much. >> have a great day. >> of course, you to brianna we're following breaking news, the justice department says it will not act on the houses contempt peripheral of attorney general merrick garland in a letter to house speaker mike johnson, the doj pointed to its longstanding position of not prosecuting executive branch officials who withhold information subject to executive privilege from congress. we have cnn's evan perez, who's joining us now. tell us what you're learning here. oven while brianna, this is long anticipated, the justice department, of course, is not going to prosecute the attorney general merrick garland, who runs the justice department. >> of course, for his essentially refusing to comply with congress has demand to turn over the audio from president biden's interview with rob her, the special counsel who investigated the president for his mishandling of classified documents, you remember that that investigation wrapped up a few months ago and there was a declination to prosecutors get the president for mishandling no recommendation to prosecute the president for the mishandling of those documents. we saw, of course, congress recently pass contempt motion against the attorney general for his refusal to turn over the audio. i should note that they turned over the transcripts of those interviews here is the key part of this letter that went from the justice department to speaker mike johnson today, it says consistent with our long-standing position and uniform practice that department has determined that the responses of attorney general garland to the subpoenas issued by the committees did not constitute a crime. and accordingly, the department will not bring congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the attorney general because obviously, part of this story here, brianna, is that the president biden did assert executive privilege over those recordings and part of the reason why the administration says that they won't turn them over is that they believe republicans only want to use this essentially for attack ads. i should note briana, that cnn is right now suing the administration and the department of to seek for them to turn over these recordings because we believe that they are newsworthy from our point of view. so i should, i should note that fact what remains to be seen though, briana is what republicans in the house might do next. there is one representative from florida who has site who has threatened to into at least bring up inherent contempt. this is something that's been rarely, rarely used where the sergeant of arms could go and try to arrest the attorney general, hasn't been done since 1934, where a former commerce official was locked up in the willard hotel for about a week nobody thinks we're going to get there, but look, we live in the weirdest of times and we never know what congress will do yeah, that's like alice in wonderland stuff, evan, but i will say i think politically republicans will like sort of the image that this gives off. >> they've referred this to the doj and the doj is passing on, obviously moving forward on something were for the head of the doj. so republicans can, in a way make their point. but at the same time, some of these very republicans going after merrick garland, including the chairman of one of the committees behind this has actually defied a congressional subpoena himself, right that's right. >> jim jordan famously did that with the january 6 committee and they have i think that the congressman has seen no irony in the fact that he has been pressing for this very action against the attorney general. they see no irony in that or any any kind of contradiction in what the chairman of that committee himself has did back then, right? and so we don't know, obviously what what course of action they will take next. congress could bring a lawsuit and try to challenge the president's assertion of executive privilege. that's something that's going to take some time probably a couple of years to work out. and that might of course, obviously the the the point of all of this, as i think the president and the administration believes this is they want to use this before the november elections. so by the time that could get resolved we'll be past the election. >> yeah. >> good point. indeed, evan, thank you so much for the latest on that. we appreciate it. britain's princess catherine says she's making good progress in her cancer treatments as she prepares to make her first public appearance in months, we are live outside of buckingham palace with the latest on that, plus pope francis is making history as the first pontiff to attend an address a g7 summit, the global issues that world leaders hope tackle. and as the us tries to bounce back from a long running shortage of adhd medications federal authorities, a warning, it could soon get even worse. those stores phrase and much more coming up on cnn nuisance the most anticipated moment of this election and the stak