wednesday night. alex wagner tonight's starting now. good evening alex. >> yeah. definitely -- the fact that we were talking about who is alone. 150,000 florida republicans i believe have signed on to that ballot. it is just an epically appalling move to try to do this to people across the u.s.. it is a disastrous political decision. they will pay, and pay, and pay as long as they can keep trying to do this. thank you chris. thank you jessica as always. and thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. anks to you at home the criminat donald trump, the one that was most likely to be completed before the 2024 election, the special counsel jack smith's federal election interference case today, it effectively came to a standstill. it was frozen, or in legal terminology, its deadlines were stayed. two weeks ago the judge in that case, judge tanya chutkan, denied the claim that the entire case would be null and void because of quote, presidential immunity. trump's lawyers immediately appealed that decision and asked judge chutkan to stay the case until the appeals court can rule on the question of immuni. today, judge chutkan granted that request and she clarified exactly what that means for the future of this case. if jurisdiction is returned to this court, the court will consistent with its duty to ensure both a speedy trial and fairness for all parties, consider at that time whether to retain or continue the dates of any still future deadlines in proceedings. including the trial. scheduled for march 4th, 2024. so this case is on hold until the immunity question makes its way through the appeals process. once that is done, judge chutkan will see whether the trial schedule still works, or if it has to be delayed. that means that the final decision on this appeal, and how quickly that decision is made, is very much a live issue. it could potentially delay or even destroy the special counsel's case altogether. but jack smith is not just rolling over here. earlier this week, smith asked the supreme court to take up the issue directly. and as soon as possible to try to head this whole thing off the past. trump's lawyers have another week to respond to that request. but even if going straight to the highest court in the land does not expedite the process here, mr. smith is working on the lower level courts as well. on monday, smith asked the d.c. circuit court of appeals to fast-track its appeals process on this immunity question. and today, trump's legal team filed their response. now he would think that trump's lawyers might want their own appeal heard and decided on as soon as possible. if they thought they would win it. and apparently they do not. they want a delay. because that is their main strategy in all of this. let me read you one of the actual arguments in court today in their formal filing to the d.c. circuit court of appeals. this proposed schedule what and support staff, and evidently disrupting family and travel plans. it is if the special counsel corralled with his cringe fingers, nervously drumming and must find some way to keep christmas from coming. it is one of the most spectacularly and serious legal arguments i've ever heard. and one of the most serious cases of this country has over grappled with. they literally called jack smith the grinch. and the whole thing is extra comical, when you think about how this entire case is about trump's actions in the lead up to january 6th. when trump and his lawyers worked around the clock, through the holidays to try to overturn the results of the 2020 election. for example, on the last night of hanukkah, in 2020, december 18th, sydney powell, michael flynn, rudy giuliani, they all pitched trump conspiracy theory after trump conspiracy theory in a quote unhinged west wing media. the same night, the last night of hanukkah, trump asked his followers to come to d.c. on january 6th saying be, there it will be wild. on christmas eve, trump lawyer, john eastman, wrote his infamous memo explaining how vice president pence could stop the certification of the vote on january 6th. on the first night of christmas, the federal indictment alleges that trump asked pence to overturn the 2020 election on christmas day. on the third night of christmas, december 27th, trump implored top justice department officials to just say the election was corrupt. and leave the rest of the other republican nominees. on the day after new years, trump was on the phone, georgia secretary of state, brad raffensperger asking him to find trump nearly 12,000 votes. how did they find time? what about the stockings? was there no christmas him that year? apparently in trump world it is fine to work over the holidays if the work is trying to overthrow american democracy. but when the workers he most important legal case in modern american history, suddenly, jack smith is the literal grinch. attorneys need eggnog as well, you know? special counsel is amazingly already ahead of this argument. within hours of the trump grinch filing. the special counsel's office immediately filed their response. and they asked the appeals court to respond tonight. and the d.c. circuit court did just that. the trump team legal work will now be due on december 23rd two days before christmas and eight days after the last night of hanukkah, and three days before kwanzaa. plenty of time for gingerbread houses. and if trump's legal team still has grapes with the 23rd of december, i would like to remind them that on december 23rd of 2020, not only did trump have time to pardon 26 people, including roger stone, and charles kushner, they also have time to call the lead investigator in georgia secretary of state's office -- and tell her that she would be praised with the right answer. it is abundantly clear that mr. trump does not, but every who in who bill wants to quit the delay stuff a lot. joining me now is former u.s. attorney and senior fbi official who's known msnbc contributor and msnbc legal analyst, chuck and lisa. i will ask you, lisa, do you prefer the lorax or the cat in the hat? or is the grinch the go-to? >> i think that this is more like green eggs and ham when i was thinking about tonight. trump's lawyers are the semi m. of their own situation. and leslie trying to have this internally contradictory story, and yet all of the judges they encounter, unlike the character in the seuss book do not want to eat green eggs and ham even if they don't give it up. >> yes. first, i mean, i will ask you both, chuck, let me go to you here. i am not a lawyer. we say this all the time, i didn't go to law school, but setting the grinch and making the excuse that an appeals process shouldn't be expedited because people need to celebrate the christmas holidays? it seems farfetched to me. what was your reaction? >> i thought it was juvenile, and what you want to lisa first because it was obviously well prepared on the doctors references. i'm not. i will tell you this. on any holiday, military officials, federal law enforcement officials, intelligence officials, are working. that's what they do. they work. because the work is important, and the work is necessary. so the notion that the most important criminal case in the country can't be litigated by attorneys over the holidays is juvenile and nonsensical and that was my reaction. by the way, calling people names and it doesn't get you any sort of traction. jack smith and gordon -- >> i don't even think that is trump space. just the idea that jack smith is a grinch-like figure. setting it aside for the minute, i wonder what you make of the appeals decision tonight. just a few hours ago to move this thing forward. three judge panel, two of them appointed by biden. one appointed by george h. w. bush. >> i think it is very interesting that they make a decision to move this along. particularly given that the supreme has already set a deadline for trump to submit his brief, and opposition to the petition that jack smith has put before them. we've talked before and about this two track approach that jack smith is trying to pursue. now we've got a three-day window. in between trump's supreme court brief on the 20th, his brief now to the d.c. circuit, ten days from now on the 23rd, if the supreme court wants to be what we would call good colleagues they will make a decision about whether to granted in the three-day window. >> to grant, you mean saying yes we will have this immunity question? >> yes. that obviously need for any further briefing in the d.c. circuit because the supreme court's supreme. >> right. the highest court in the land. how do you read the decision here? is this the d.c. circuit court of appeals basically hedging its bets against the supreme court and what they are going to do given this sort of different makeup on these two courts? >> i am glad that it is proceeding on the parallel track. i think that's appropriate on both courts. they were asked to expedite this important question. that is what they are doing. i don't know that there are hedging their bets. i think the best solution, of course, is for the supreme court to take the case now. they are going to get it eventually in one way or another. but the case now and resolve the issue is not a frivolous issue. i think the government winds it, in fact i am reasonably confident that the government wins it. but since it is going to be litigated in front of the supreme court, let's do it now. let's resolve it as quickly as possible and go back to the trial judge and in d.c., hit the play button again and get the case moving. that seems like the most logical thing to me. >> yeah. no matter what, judge chutkan has issued a stay. the thing is frozen in time as it stands right now. and i wonder how surprising you think that is on the part of judge chutkan and how meaningful it is in terms of trump's broader goals and delay everything here. >> it is not surprising in that jack smith effectively conceded that that was the right result. that an appeal on a motion to dismiss where the questions presented are ones of constitutional import. his presidential immunity argument is effectively a constitutional one. he's saying yes, i acknowledge that that deprives the trial court of jurisdiction and things have to pause. at the same time, what is notable about judge chutkan's decision today is her carving out a room for her still to exert some authority over the gag order which she can still in force and over trump's conditions of release. those are the rules by which he has to play as a free person having been criminally indicted. and over the protective order that governs the voluminous discovery that he complained of, in his brief to the d.c. circuit today. that means as i was telling one of our colleagues today, trump can't walk into a hallway with her burn book photocopies to discover into the public domain and let everybody see that which jack smith, and the department of justice don't want us to have vantage points and two at this point. >> and it all has to stay effectively under wraps. but chuck, the jury selection in this seems like it should be a prolonged process and that has to stop all this appeals court plays out, right? i would assume that is meaningful time that the judge is losing here and at the special counsel's office is losing. >> potentially. that is a problem. i think that lucy described it correctly. there are things that will remain in place. the case didn't evaporate, it didn't disappear, it suddenly paused. the protective order, the gag order and other things like it remained in place. the parties cannot go back in front of judge chutkan -- so you are right. jury selection will be paused. very important in a case like this. somewhat cumbersome and that is where you begin to see the potential delay tactics taking hold and taking effect. so the quicker this gets resolved and that it gets back to a point we were discussing earlier, the quicker the supreme court hears the case and decides it. the faster judge chutkan can go back, hit the play button, and resume all of the things that you need to do before trial like picking a jury. i don't know that the march trial date is doomed, but it is certainly in danger. >> that's going to be, i, mean it's hard to hear that given the fact that this case is in many ways the best shot that the plaintiff has in determining whether or not the president, the former and potentially future president of the united states is a felon. double jeopardy is another case of trump's lawyers are making alongside the presidential immunity claim. they are saying that because trump was already impeached for actions around january 6th they cannot be held accountable again. that has been kind of waved. i feel like we waved thought of as a viable form of defense. the supreme court says it will rule on that. how -- what do you make of the double jeopardy defense? >> when chuck was saying earlier that the issues that trump is presenting here are serious, they are serious and their issues are for the supreme court. however, between the two, between his structural absolute presidential immunity argument, and double jeopardy argument, i don't think it is a serious argument to say because he was impeached but not convicted by the senate he can't be criminally prosecuted. there is nothing as judge touching can said and the structure that would demand a result and in fact there is a provision in the constitution, the impeachment judgment clause, that would lead you to the opposite conclusion based on its actual plane text. >> if anything it is the trump -- and the fact the supreme court, this is such a difficult metaphor, it's scraping all of the spaghetti potentially off of the wall at the same time by deciding to take all of it out. seems meaningful here. chuck rosenberg, i'm sorry that we sprung all of this trivia on you without adequate preparation, you passed with flying colors. lisa reuben, -- thank you for your time. we have a lot more ahead tonight, and we are back before the supreme court. with the justices are considering, and how their decision could impact women, even in states where abortion is legal. but first, the impossible logic behind house republicans newly launched impeachment against joe biden. congressman adam schiff joins me now coming up next. stay with us. g up next. stay with us stay with us i recommend sensodyne. sensodyne toothpaste goes inside the tooth and calms the nerve down. and my patients say you know doc, it really works. liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. with the money i saved, i started a dog walking business. oh. [dog barks] no it's just a bunny! only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ generalized myasthenia gravis made my life a lot harder. but the picture started changing when i started on vyvgart. vyvgart is for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis who are anti-achr antibody positive . in a clinical trial, vyvgart significantly improved most participants' ability to do daily activities when added to their current gmg treatment. most participants taking vyvgart also had less muscle weakness. and your vyvgart treatment schedule is designed just for you. in a clinical study, the most common side effects included urinary and respiratory tract infections, and headache. vyvgart may increase the risk of infection. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or symptoms of an infection. vyvgart can cause allergic reactions. available as vyvgart for iv infusion and now as vyvgart hytrulo for subcutaneous injection. additional side effects for vyvgart hytrulo may include injection site reactions. talk to your neurologist about vyvgart. >> during my battle with addiction, my parents were there for me. they literally saved my life, and the depths of my addiction, i was extremely irresponsible with my finances. but to suggest that is grounds for an impeachment inquiry is beyond the absurd. it is shameless. there is no evidence to support the allegations that my father was financially involved in my business because it did not happen. there's no fairness or decency in what these republicans are doing. >> that was hunter biden today outside of the u.s. capitol taking accountability for his auctions and calling out republicans for a sham impeachment. hunter biden is facing nine charges of tax evasion in california and three dunchurch is from the state of delaware. in any normal election cycle republicans would be every we're talking about the president's son, a swirl of tax evasion charges. this is not a normal election cycle. republicans have spent the last three years telling their base that the biden family is orchestrating some kind of grand conspiracy, a conspiracy that directly implicates president biden in all kinds of nefarious acts. as it stands, they have precisely zero evidence to backup that claim that has not stopped republicans from raising expectations sky-high. and now, here in the real bind. a very real charge against hunter biden kind of pale in comparison to what conservatives have been promising. so republicans and conservative media are actually downplaying the crimes hunter biden is charged with claiming those charges are actually an effort to cover up the much bigger and so far imaginary crimes of president joe biden. >> they've been sitting on this potential indictment why did they release it now. is it a further cover-up? >> i'm wondering if the timing of this indictment on hunter biden is partly a cover-up. >> i totally agree that the timing is suspect and they are pushing hunter in front of the bus and saying okay, we've got to feed the masses a little bit to keep them off of joe. it does have a bit of a feeling of the biden folks creating bad news to cover up other venues. >> the fact that they are covering this up, sean, it's not only the crimes that biden committed it is the cover-up. >> lies that they may have invited hunter biden to protect him in the house oversight committee. >> yes. they indicted him to protect him. yes. the classic rubric. >> the republican theory of the case here is laughable. even the most generous reading makes no sense. but republicans are still hanging on to this was theory as a basis for an impeachment inquiry into joe biden. tonight, the house voted along party lines to 21 to 2:12 to open a formal impeachment inquiry into the president despite having no evidence of wrongdoing. every republican including these so-called moderates in the swing districts voted in favor of it. so how does this and? what do republicans do you know that they have opened the store with promises to expose some grand plot when there is no reason to believe that grandpa actually exists? how do democrats respond? i'll talk to congressman adam schiff who led trump's first impeachment about all of that coming up. l of tha coming up. coming up. cold. dayquil honey, the daytime, coughing, aching, stuffy head, fever, honey-licious, power through your day, medicine. children are the greatest joy and our best hope for a better future. friends, they are the future. but did you know that millions of kids right here in our own backyard are facing hunger every day without healthy food? it's harder to grow, to thrive, to feel their best. the impact when children don't have enough to eat is tremendous because when you're hungry and your basic needs aren't being met, you cannot learn. that's why i'm here now, asking you to join me in helping end child hunger in america. this is a problem we know how to solve, and we can do it better by supporting no kid hungry for just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month. you can help provide healthy meals like a good breakfast in class to power kids through their days. breakfast in the classroom contributes to kids being more focused, which leads to higher grades. test scores, and simply just their well-being. ensuring all kids get a good breakfast and other nutritious food is a beautiful thing. it's a game changer and you can help make it happen. when you join me in supporting no kid hungry today, that food is not just food. it's energy, health, confidence, hope and even love. yes, love. so please call now or go online to helpnokidhungry.org, right now. give $19 a month, only $0.63 a day. and when you use your credit card, you'll get this special team t-shirt to show that you're helping kids build a brighter future for themselves. thank you. families are struggling to make ends meet. these are hard times, but together we can help connect america's kids with meals. so please call now or go online to give. thank you. rsv is out there. for those 60 years and older protect against rsv with arexvy. arexvy is a vaccine used to prevent lower respiratory disease from rsv in people 60 years and older. arexvy does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients. those with weakened immune systems may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects are injection site pain, fatigue, muscle pain, headache, and joint pain. i chose arexvy. rsv? make it arexvy. >> the house has now spoken, and with every single republican voting in favor of moving into this official impeachment inquiry phase of our constitutional duty to do oversight. so when the majority of the house goes on record and support of an an impeachment inquiry with the power that reside solely in the house of representatives, this impeachment power sends a message. >> as a congressman points out today, every single house republican, in all 221 of them, voted to formally open an impeachment inquiry and president biden. yes, it sure does send a message, but perhaps not the one that mr. jordan thinks it does. joining me know is congressman adam schiff of california. member of the house judiciary committee. he also served as the lead house manager and donald trump's first impeachment trial. thank you so much for being here. we are told, those of us on the outside of the house of representatives out there are these fandom republican moderates, who understand the gravity of what this impeachment inquiry represents on the tenuous position they have us republicans from districts that joe biden won in 2020 and yet they still voted for this. what do you make of the entire republican conference supporting an impeachment inquiry? >> they are cowards. you can fully say the republicans in the house, they're always there when you don't need them. but when there's actually something of consequence, they cave. you know, they spend years and particularly this year investigating joe biden. they came up with nothing. and day in mid as much. so now they will have a formal impeachment inquiry so that they could find even more of nothing. they don't know what they are looking for, they don't know what crimes they even want to suggest joe biden committed, all they do know is donald trump wants this, donald trump needs this, donald trump is going to make their life difficult if they do not give it to them, those moderate republicans do not want donald trump coming after them and getting a primary against them so they are going to do this with the former impeachment to gratify it in mar-a-lago. they also know that we have no affirmative positive for the country that even their own members can agree. and they are doing nothing on housing, on health care, they are doing nothing on climate, they are doing nothing on guns, they can degree meng themselves on any policy. so what are we doing, what are we spending the year doing? well, they censured me for leading trump's impeachment. they vacated their own speaker's chair and now they want to begin an impeachment proceeding against joe biden. this is how they are occupying the nations time when there are serious challenges like funding ukraine, and israel that we should be doing. >> you make mention of the master down at mar-a-lago, it seems pretty obvious to the man they call orange jesus inside the republican conference. and yet, it is a strange strategy, if the point is to humiliate biden by impeaching him to give him that scarlet letter, it only brings up the fact that trump himself has been impeached twice. how do you even begin to talk about this on the campaign trail without inevitably ending up back in the place you want to pretend doesn't exist, which is trump got impeached twice? >> what they hope to do is muddy the waters. they hope to persuade people, you know, trump was impeached twice, but it was just politics. and now we are going to impeach biden, and that is just politics. they are going to try to establish some sort of false equivalence, when there is no equivalence. donald trump was impeached for his own abuse of power, for his own commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, for withholding hundreds of millions of military aid from ukraine while that nation was at war to extort zelenskyy into helping smear his opponent. and the first impeachment, and inciting a violent attack on the capitol in the second impeachment. his actions his misconduct and abuse of power, his constitutional high crimes and misdemeanors, by contrast, they are perceiving an impeachment inquiry into joe biden based on hunter biden. based on hunter biden's conduct. which they have not been able to tied to the president. it couldn't be a more stark contrast but they hope that if they throw up enough chaff, maybe they could confuse the public, and essentially persuade people that what donald trump did they should discount because everybody does it. >> you mentioned hunter biden. we played a little bit of sound from his remarks outside of the capitol this morning. i found it actually very effective. and someone moving to hear someone who has been grappling with addiction to take ownership of his wrongdoing. i wonder how, a, what your reaction to his comments, his remarks was, and also how important it is to hear from hunter biden in the middle of all of this? >> i did think that it was pretty powerful. it reminded me of a voice mail i think the republicans leaked sometime ago of the president leaving a message for his son that he loved him and he knew he was going through a hard time. that he was there for his son. and i remember watching the republicans push this out thinking why do they think that this is going to somehow engender support for the gop among the public? i think the public is going to see a father concerned about his son. and there are enough people in the country that up had tragic experiences in their family with loved ones with substance abuse, addiction, that, you know, attacking a father for being a father, i don't think it's a good political strategy. but i do think part of it, alex, is that they know the president loves his son. and this is a way to hurt the president, not just politically, but to hurt him personally. and in that sense, the republican conference and the congress is just like donald trump. donald trump loves to hurt people, in the way that he thinks is most effective to wound them. it is eight fundamentally indecent aspect of trump's very malignant personality. and here you see republicans emulating it. >> the cruelty is the point, which stands true for the entire republican conference in a moment like this. congressman schiff, given how organized the democrats were, how much evidence they had before they begin their impeachment inquiry, what are the implications for an impeachment inquiry that is going off to find the evidence. just in terms of the timeframe that we are operating under, the amount of cost the american taxpayer, and what they actually come up with, which may not have anything to do with any of the things that they are talking about at this moment. >> you know, i think the biggest cost to the american people are the opportunity costs. that is well they occupy all of the time in the house with these impeachment proceedings, and contempt proceedings, and speaker proceedings, they are not dealing with the nation's problems. we are about to break for the holidays, and there's a war going on in ukraine, there is a war going on in the middle east, and congress is failing to act and so the biggest cost is the opportunity cost. but i think they're also setting themselves up for a terrible end. because these things have a way of gaining momentum now that they've started this inquiry. donald trump is going to insist it come to a conclusion with an impeachment that they probably do not have the votes for. so they are going to be in the position disappointing trump, disappointing their maga feeling base, having set up all of these expectations, saying there was no there, or try to force a vote and force these vulnerable republicans to vote and potentially lose that vote it is a loser for the country anyway that they take it. >> a loser from the country from the least productive second least productive congress in modern american history. congressman adam schiff thank you for your time and wisdom tonight. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> still ahead this evening, it has been a year and a half since the supreme court overturned the constitutional right to an abortion. and already, today, the justices have decided that they might go get back to it once again. more on the new case at the high court has decided to review. that is next. t review that is next that is next shingles could make it hard to be there for your loved ones. over 50? the virus that causes shingles is likely already inside you. don't wait. ask your doctor about shingles. are you tired of clean clothes that just don't smell clean? downy unstoppables in wash scent booster keep your laundry smelling fresh way longer than detergent alone. get 6x longer-lasting freshness plus odor production with downy unstopables. try for under $5. at bombas we make the comfiest socks, underwear, and t-shirts that feel good and most of all do good. because when you purchase one, we donate one to those in need. visit bombas.com and shop our big holiday sale. bombas. give the good. when you have chronic kidney disease... ...there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure which can lead to dialysis. ♪far-xi-ga♪ farxiga can cause serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections, and low blood sugar. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. when you have chronic kidney disease, it's time to ask your doctor for farxiga. because there are places you want to be. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪far-xi-ga♪ >> today, the supreme court agreed to hear a case that could decide future access to the pill is a more than half of abortions in the country, mifepristone. antiabortion activists have been seeking to limit its use, if not to get off the market, completely. and now, the supreme court is going to decide whether mifepristone will be accessible via telemedicine and via the mail to ten weeks of pregnancy, or, whether pregnant women, many of whom living in abortion deserts, will have their access to health care tonight at seven weeks of pregnancy and will be denied in doctor visits to obtain a prescription. the high court finds itself in an awkward position of ruling on abortion in 18 months, after they decided the matter should be left to the states. oral arguments are expected to early next year, and the justices could rule by the end of june. joining me now is senior correspondent for new york magazine, thank you for being back here. it is like whiplash every other day, there is some sort of heinous infringement on reproductive rights, and now the high court's taking apartment for kristen let's talk about what these potentially newly imposed restrictions could mean for people seeking access to abortion. mifepristone available only until seven weeks of pregnancy seems meaningful. >> right, and who can prescribe it? the manner in which can be prescribed. >> telemedicine or by. now >> exactly, i think the big picture here -- of course, this is an administrative law case. before you fall asleep, anybody watching this, this is about a blue state abortion ban. that there was at the people who concocted this case have invented standings of antiabortion doctors who brought the case, despite the fact that they don't ever describe the pill, can't find harm of people with access to the pill. they are doing this because they understand that this pill, the more you restrict it -- let's put it this way, this pill represents freedom and privacy. in states where abortion as been restricted, people are able to stay dry across the border, get the bill from a mobile clinic, from a truck, through the mail, to a p.o. box. they understand that abortions have actually gone up since dobbs, because of increased access. a huge part of that is that the privacy, the quickness, the lack of multiple visits, that is represented by the highly safe drug -- >> mifepristone -- >> mifepristone and middle prosper taken in combination. they understand that what they need to be doing is restricting in places like here in new york, california, new mexico, colorado that have become havens for people living in abortion restrictive states. what they really wanted to do, and this is something as crazy as k times sheen, go back to 2000 and say that all of the approval of the bill, which, again, 24 years lost ago, should be undone. the big thing that happened today is the supreme court saying that is too crazy. >> we are not going back to the original approval of the drug back in 2000. >> they would dearly love for that the happen. if they could, they would take away the option that more than half of abortion patients prefer. so if they take this pathway step, like the fourth circuit tried to have it both ways, is it based in science, is it based on what is safe? is it based in process? it does not appear to be the case. the question is, is the supreme court coming into say, okay, this is absurd, or are they coming into say, let's make up yet another compromise and call ourselves matter on the issue. >> the compromise be rollback the regulations to what they were in 2018. they were just fine, no issues. >> which would have profound effects, because in 2018, there are not abortion deserts in the united states. mifepristone was not as important or critical as it is today. >> alex, there's been a whole body of research in recent years about the people understand how to take the safely? can they do telemedicine in order to find out where there they are in pregnancy, a large body of research has been built to show that this is very safe. not only is there the need, there is also the demonstratively realization that this is a safe option, and it's a safe option for getting it legally and for people forced to take matters into their own hands. >> when you look at the core and what it did with tops, i think a lot of people are considerably worried about how they might roll, taking on the issue of standing though, which -- how do you interpret the sort of way in which the court is saying it will rule on? this >> could be fair to the court, typically, if you say that the supreme court will take an abortion case, you want to file at this table, but the fifth circuit did create the situation that the supreme court did not allowed to go into effect that would have permitted it so it's actually kind of good news for the supreme court to take this up, if they choose. were they not to take it up, the restrictions will go into effect, should they choose to undo the fifth circuit opinion. but what is also good news, and i had not taken seriously what the conservative christian soldier in the district court did, which is to take it at face value, that the entire approval of the drug should be undone. there is a chance that this is kind of conditionally good news. the standing question of like, is doctors -- >> antiabortion activists -- >> these doctors can show that there is any harm to them, cannot show in any way that they deal with mifepristone, that they show harm to their patients either, but it may be necessary for them to come in and say, we will talk about the standing issue, but we will say whether the fifth circuit was right or not. but at least, they will have the entire approval of the drug on the table. that is a sign. the supreme court went so far, even further than what they were originally asked to do. it may be that even they realize that they now need to kind of moderate a bit, even on this issue. >> coming to or three days at a case where a woman was forced out of the state because a texas supreme court said she was not dying enough to have an abortion. it's an appalling turn of events. maybe a resonates with the court, you will see. irin carmon, thank you as always, my friend, for your thoughts and great analysis on this. >> thank you. >> still ahead this evening, the new deal that some officials are calling the beginning of the end of fossil feels. we'll talk to journalist david wallace-wells about what the cop28 summit was able to accomplish and what it left undone. that is next. s next with some help from j.p. morgan wealth plan. let's go whiskers. jen y is working with a banker to budget for her birthday. you only turn 30 once. and jen z? her credit's golden. hello new apartment. three jens getting ahead with chase. solutions that grow with you. one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours. teeth sensitivity is so common. it immediately feels like somebody's poking directly on the nerve. i recommend sensodyne. sensodyne toothpaste goes inside the tooth and calms the nerve down. and my patients say you know doc, it really works. we're traveling all across america talking to people about their hearts. who wants to talk about their heart? [honking] how's the heart? how's your heart? how's your heart? - it's good. - is it? - i don't know. - it's okay. - it's okay. - yeah. - good. - you sure? - i think so. - how do you know? it doesn't come with a manual and you're like oh, i got the 20,000 day check up, right? let me show you something. put two fingers right on those pads. look at that. that's your heart. that is pretty awesome. with kardiamobile, you can take a medical grade ekg in just 30 seconds from anywhere. kardiamobile is proven to detect atrial fibrillation, one of the leading causes of stroke. and it's the only personal ekg that's fda cleared to detect normal heart rhythm, bradycardia and tachycardia. how much do you think this costs? probably in the hundreds. $79. oh, wow. that could be cheaper than a tank of gas. for a limited time, kardiamobile is available for just $74. hurry, these prices won't last. get kardiamobile for yourself or a loved one at kardia.com or amazon. he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ first time i connected with kim, she told me that only pay for what you need. her husband had passed. and that he took care of all of the internet connected devices in the home. i told her, “i'm here to take care of you.” connecting with kim... made me reconnect with my mom. it's very important to keep loved ones close. we know that creating memories with loved ones brings so much joy to your life. a family trip to the team usa training facility. i don't know how to thank you. for the first time since i'm here to thank you. congress began meeting to phycology earlier's ago, a global pack to move away from fossil fuels has been approved. the agreement reached during negotiations for cop28 in the by is not legally binding. it cannot force any action, instead, it calls upon nearly 200 countries to transition away from fossil fuels and energy systems in ageist, orderly and equitable manner, and triple renewable energy by 2030. the day, president biden called the agreement a historic milestone. a u.n. climate official dumped at the beginning of the end of fossil fuels. critics say that the language of the agreement does not go nearly far enough, and they fear that it could allow welfare countries, who amid the most also feels, to continue delaying significant action. joining me now is a davis wallace-wells, a new york times writer and author of the uninhabitable earth, life after warming. david, thank you for being here. i don't want to rain on the parade immediately. this seemed like a step, you're like, no -- >> it's been 30 years. >> that is not heartening, but the fact that there is this idea that the word fossil fuels has been uttered publicly as something that needs to be, if not phased out, turned away from. how did you understand the language, and how meaningful is this? >> i think a lot of these processes, maybe the paris one aside, are following the science and heating, i think we know 50 or 70 years from now, fossil fuel will be a small part of our economy, if they are there at all. the next couple of decades are going to be dominant by renewable fossil fuel. we know that is in the near future. the question is how quickly do we get the zero, and on that point, i don't think disagreement thus much, tripling or noble energy is good, a little better than probably most people are protecting going into the conference. we don't know if we'll hit the targets, but if we do, there will be proper. it on its own, it will not be sufficient to warming to the levels that we have been saying, necessarily to prevent grandma comes. i think one legacy at the conflict, we'll look back at it and say, it's the moment we all realize we will not hit the targets. >> what do you think it actually looks like to turn away? practically speaking, there is what we want to do, what we are on track to do, and what it reasonably looks like to go off of fossil fuels. what do you in your expert opinion things that looks like? >> i think the low hanging fruit are the things you know how to do. basically, we know how to provide power and electricity, how to drive our transportation in non fossil fuel ways. we're not doing that yet. fossil fuels still dominating the global power sector. those cars on the road are combustion vehicles, but we know what the transition looks like. it means putting solar panels on their roofs. the challenging stuff is what we do about the industry, agriculture, -ification, and these are things we don't have easy solutions for. probably on that front, it's more r&d. but we have a little time to do our andy. what we don't have time to do is really dramatically replace fossil fuels with noble resources, in the areas that we know have -- which is, essentially, power, electricity and transportation. >> do you imagine that it is kind of a steep decline in fossil fuels? does it level off, or is the transition gradual, steady and then spikes? >> if we want to keep global warming to below 1.5 degrees, which i think is effectively possible, it would mean getting all the way to zero, somewhere around 2040. we only have about 5 to 8 years of current emissions before we exhaust that budget. we're hoping to limit warming to 2.7 degrees, we have until 2050. under two degrees, we have until 2080. those are slightly more manageable timelines, but none of the projections from any of the agency suggests that we are going to see a rapid decline with any at those curbs. what we are likely to see is a peak in the next few years, followed by a long plateau. that's why it's necessary, not just that we built our renewables, we figure out a way to draw down our fossil capacity, and there is little in this arena or any initiative anywhere in the world, for instance, close to that goal. >> what is the point of the sort of, is conference of parties, the cop symposia, as it were. there have been 28 or, them and there is another one scheduled in two years. let me paint an even more disciplined picture, if donald trump is reelected, what are the implications for a multinational agreement if we have someone like trump in the oval office, and furthermore, what is the utility of having these climate symposia, if the united states and other western countries are not leading the charge? >> to take the second question first, i think, basically, it's a test of how much rhetoric matters, leadership matters. these are not binding agreements, not forceable in any way, but they did show a consensus on the world's leadership about what the future is heading. they have help in that way in the past. in the paris agreement, 2015, that was where we establish 1.5-degree goal. in the year since, we've talked about parker's accounts that benchmark, every time. we really internalize the fact that that was important to get as close as we could to 1.5. we learned a lot about how the world looks, how much worse do degrees that to put 5 to 3. all of that is because of leadership by paris. not because paris handed us to pursue the goal, it's because it taught us a different way of thinking about the future and what we needed to do to get there. it is possible for conferences like these to shape the future in a way, but i think we are in a slightly different place with the global transition compared the back, then which is to say, as i mentioned a minute ago, almost everyone you ask says we are heading towards a fossil fuel future. it's a quickly will get there. i don't think the writer can do all that much. we need more innovation, or progress on finance, particularly the global south. they have a hard time putting their projects. now we need to move faster in the rich world, even though we are decarbonized somewhat. as for what donald trump means, i think that there is some hope to the fact that, markets are really moving this themselves. five or ten years ago, we talked about the moral burden that we would have to undertake. it would be costly and difficult, therefore, required diplomacy. now we're pushing to the green sensation, not fast enough, but