first, first person i'm to call on is colleen long, associated press. >> thank you. thanks, mr. president. about two weeks ago you changed course to allow ukraine to fire u.s. weapons into russia. given the reported successes, would you consider further expanding the parameters on u.s. weapons into russia even despite your concerns about escalation? and on the news from home, you're going through something that so many american families go through, the intersection of addiction and the criminal justice system. but you're not like most families. was your son able to get a fair trial, do you believe the justice department operated independently of politics? and for president -- >> let me answer your questions. with regard to the first question, it is clear that the near broad meeting, just across the line of the border with russia and ukraine, that it makes a lot of sense for ukraine to be able to take out or combat what is coming across that border. in terms of long range weapons, longer range weapons into the interior of russia, we have not changed our position on that sort. with regard to the question regarding family, i'm extremely proud of my son hunter. he has overcome an addiction. he's one of the bravest, most decent men i know and i am satisfied that i'm not going to do anything -- i said i abide by the jury's decision and i will do that and i will not pardon him. >> president zelenskyy, a number of leaders here in italy, including president biden, are facing upcoming election challenges. how will the security agreement signed tonight and the other promises of support continue if they're not in office? and what is your contingency plan if they don't? >> translator: thank you for this question. first and foremost, i would like to thank the people of the nations, first and foremost, to the united states, to the countries in europe and other continents who supported us since the very beginning of the beginning of this absolutely unjust war, fresh against the people against ukraine. and that is -- they have been killing people, homes and territory, all that is very important. it is part of this and first and foremost we're talking about people, and lives of people, you understand. and this war was unjust since the very beginning. the war of this evil. his name is putin, the war against the people of ukraine. he has killed so many people. to say it is not he and there was a military man who did it, the last one is just an instrument of his and his playing this instrument and therefore it is important for us, since the very beginning, we were supported by people, by nations, because they understood that we share common values. we simply want to live and the people understood, they imagined what will happen if such evil attacks them and therefore we were supported by people and i thank president biden and other leaders who since the very beginning of the invasion, putin's invasion started to support us, they, based on their values, they were based on the voice of their people and it is impossible without people, and i am sure that this nation chooses leaders and presidents and it seems to me that no matter who the nation chooses, first and foremost, it seems to me that everything depends on the unity within this or that state. and if the people are with us, any leader will be with us, in this struggle for freedom. >> want to call on a ukrainian reporter? >> yes, thank you so much. >> translator: yes, please. >> today, during the g7 meeting, the discussion focused on developing ukraine's air defense system based on the most -- and enhancing long range capabilities. can you provide any details on the initiative and the readiness of our allies to take part in it? thank you. >> i would be happy to respond to that. we have acquired a commitment from five countries so far for patriot batteries and other air defense systems and well as we let it be known to those countries that are expecting from us air defense systems in the future, that they're going to have to wait. everything we have is going to go to ukraine until their needs are met and then we will make good on the commitments we made to other countries. >> i think president biden already answered your question, really. he knows and all other partners, they know that urgently we need better systems, yes, to save our citizens, not all of them is -- but urgently seven and we discussed the possibility of having five of them, but the partners work on it. it doesn't mean that tomorrow we will have these five systems, but we see in the closest future good result for ukraine. >> you'll have some relatively quickly. american reporter, josh winegrove, bloomberg. >> thank you, mr. president. i have a question for president zelenskyy shortly on the announcements, but if you don't mind, i would like to ask you about your discussions on the situation in gaza here at the summit. you were asked a short time ago about it after the skydiving demonstration. can you give us your assessment of hamas' response and do you believe that they are trying to work toward a deal or is this response working against a deal and what is your message to allies including those here at the g7 about what more, if anything, the u.s. can do to drive towards a peace agreement? thank you. >> i wish you guys would play by the rules a little bit. i'm here to talk about a critical situation in ukraine, and you asked me another subject. i'll be happy to answer in detail later. the bottom line is that we made an -- i laid out an approach that has been endorsed by the u.n. security council, by the g7, by the israelis, and the biggest hang-up so far is hamas refusing to sign on, even though they have submitted something similar. whether it comes to fruition remains to be seen. we're going to continue to push. i don't have a final answer for you. >> and to president biden's point, the question about today's discussions, president zelenskyy, the $50 billion today, you had the supplemental, of course, from the u.s. congress recently. can you give us an assessment of the situation on the battlefield right now and what has been given now, how long will this get you in terms of either stopping the russian advance or making headway on this? and how long will it last you if, indeed, future leaders or current leaders are unable to reach consensus on further aid packages. and president biden, i would welcome your assessment of the situation currently on the battlefield and what difference the supplemental made as well, sir. thank you. >> translator: thank you for your question. indeed, we were expecting the fundamental package of this support was in the congress of the united states of america, and through it, it was -- it is important, we are grateful that in the very end we have this supplement and this will for sure strengthen our warriors, yes. this -- this has given the opportunity to the enemy within this pause to try to occupy kharkiv, but that attempt was stopped by our warriors. they were repelled. the enemy was repelled. and we, this point everything disrupted all their plans and it seems to me that is the most important thing. what this supplement that we will arrive gives us it enables us to fully equip the reserves, those guys, those brigades, that are ready. so that they provide for the opportunity to rotate our units on the battlefield, so that they can have some rest, so that the they can regenerate, so that other brigades enter the battlefield instead of them with equipment. this is what the supplement gives them. it raises morale, also for our brigades. it seems to me this is the most important. for how long this will be enough, look, we without package have been holding the lines for eight months and the russians had no successes. and therefore the question on -- for how long it will be enough, no, i think the question has to be for how long the unity will last, the unity in the united states, together with the european leaders, how these are those elections will influence this unity. it seems to me that we should look on this exactly this way, to preserve unity, to preserve the integrity of the world. integrity of the democratic world, because if ukraine did not withstand the democracy of many countries will not be able to withstand and i'm sure of that. >> we had to wait until we pass the legislation overall being held up by a small majority of our republican colleagues. just terrible. and there is a lot more money coming beyond what has already come in the other tranches that are available now that we passed in legislation. so, they'll have what they need and get it there as quickly as we possibly can. >> thank you so much, mr. president. >> translator: telegraph, please. >> thank you for this opportunity. i have a long way from kyiv and have enough time to prepare such long question. first to mr. joe biden, mr. president, the act you signed, for the war in ukraine, within 45 days after its enactment. this deadline passed on june 8th and to now yet the international community has not seen this strategy. has it been developed and if the strategy is classified, what does your administration plan to take to host ukraine victory in the world? it is my first question. >> what was the last part of your question? >> has it been developed, this strategy, and to what steps does your administration plan to take to victory ukraine in the world? >> steps we're going to take to make sure it has ukraine has victory in that russia does not prevail is continued support, what we just signed. we signed that and a significant number of nations signed it. we have convinced the g7 -- not convinced, we got the support of the g7 and frankly 48 other countries. we sat with the prime minister of japan, south korea, we have 50 nations signed up beyond nato and the g7. and so, we're going to stay as long as it takes. with regard to the plan, that is a plan in process now, we're in discussion with our ukrainian friends on exactly what it would be. we have a lot of movement toward that. we know the outlines of it. we have not done the detail of it all. but we know what ukraine is capable of doing when given the material to defend themselves and that's exactly what they're doing now. >> and my second question is to president zelenskyy to be in ukraine and recently made couple of sharp statements regarding china and there are rumors regarding the possible supplies of russia's weapons to china. apart from that, china is actively promoting its own peace plan and certain countries. what are the motives of beijing now and would it be possible to change the vision of china? and the final question, is china a partner of russia in these crimes that it commits? >> so, first of all, i have full conversation with leader of china. by phone. he said that he will not sell any weapon to russia. we'll see. we'll see. but he said to me. if he is respectable person, he will not because he gave me the word. the second, our, you know, very good, with details how our peace is very open for everybody, basing on charter, yes, and you know that it bases on next principles. territorial integrity, sovereignty, nuclear security, food security. if china has alternative view on it, it can prepare alternative peace formula. if we share common views on it, like with globally with all the world, i think so, so, if they share the same way to peace, we will find dialogue. >> by the way, china is not supplying weapons, but the ability to produce those weapons and the technology available to do it. so it is, in fact, helping russia. thank you, all, so very much. >> this concludes our press conference. thank you, everybody. ♪♪ >> president biden and president volodymyr zelenskyy shaking hands as reporters are drowned out by the music there and trying to get in an extra question. i'm going to get to ukraine in a moment. but, president biden there just made his first comments regard, the conviction of his son and the felony gun case, hunter biden earlier this week. he was asked about it, so many families are going through the same thing in this country, the intersection of addiction and the criminal justice system, and president biden said, again, that regarding his family, he's extremely proud of his son, he has overcome an addiction, he is one of the brightest, most decent men i know and i'm satisfied that i'm not going to do anything. i said i abide by the jury decision, i will do that, i will not pardon him. it is the same thing he's been saying, respecting the criminal justice system, respecting the process. obviously in contrast to the way that we have seen former president trump go after the justice system in the face of his trials and convictions. joining us now, msnbc news white house correspondent gabe gutierrez and chief foreign correspondent richard engel, and we also have former u.s. senator and msnbc political analyst claire mccaskill, along with retired four star general and msnbc military analyst barry mccaffrey. i want to head over to ukraine first, to you, richard, what did you get out of that news conference? >> reporter: well, i could hear the excitement in president zelenskyy's voice. i've met president zelenskyy more than half a dozen times since this war began, and he's been talking about these fighter jets since the beginning. he's been pounding the table saying ukraine needs fighter jets, it needs to be able to defend its air space, and now he says that squadrons of fighters, not just f-16s, are going to be coming. he said this is the most important agreement that ukraine has signed with the united states since ukraine's independence after the collapse of the soviet union. ukraine has been pushing to use either frozen assets or proceeds from frozen russian assets also for a long time. so this was an extraordinary moment for ukraine. i interviewed president zelenskyy, i think it was about four or five months ago, and he was at a very different state, the battlefront here was clearly in the russians' favor. the aid package delays were causing major complications on the battlefield, the troops were getting exhausted, they weren't rotating out, and then we saw some of what president zelenskyy had been predicting with this russian advance on the city of kharkiv, and i just came from kharkiv today, and over the last two weeks or so, since the new american money and weapons have started to arrive since russia has started to take attacks on its own territory after the u.s. authorized the use of weapons to strike inside russia. ukrainian commanders say both of those things made a significant impact on the battlefield and now kharkiv is much safer than it was two weeks ago. people are out on the streets, children are out on the streets again, instead of hiding in bunkers. so, this is an extraordinary day for ukraine, it is something they have been asking for. but i also think you have to keep this note of caution that president zelenskyy himself was talking about, will this hold, will this political will -- this collective leadership behind ukraine, will it last for the next five months? will it last in europe? will it last in the united states because if it does, and it continues like this, it seems like ukraine feels like it will be in a very strong position to either continue the war or reach some sort of peace talks. very significant day for ukraine with the question, will it last. >> again, as a ten-year security agreement with the united states on top of a $50 billion loan from the g7 nations, that's going to be repaid using as you mentioned, richard, the interest in the 300 billion of frozen russian assets he had been wanting to use that for quite a while. gabe, richard mentioned there was more of a lightness to president zelenskyy today than we have seen recently. he's been making the rounds, showing up in person or virtually to every major gathering of world leaders who is just in normandy, speaking to president biden, speaking to the french president macron. he's been at this for a while now, trying to make sure that the west stands by him. even said he had a conversation with the chinese leaders. >> yeah, that's right. president zelenskyy looked relieved as richard was mentioning, especially since the money and weapons are starting to flow in after congress moved on that supplemental. i want to talk about several things here, katy, that news conference stuck out for several reasons. i'll get to some of the comments president biden made about ukraine, but he also made some news regarding the israel-hamas war and also regarding his son hunter. at the end of the news conference, you may not have been able to hear it clearly, but reporters including myself asked president biden whether he planned to commute the sentence of his son hunter biden, that is different than what he had said earlier in the news conference, in the interview last week, that he would rule out a pardon for his son. commuting a sentence slightly different. it could reduce his sentence. and it wouldn't expunge his record. the president responded no. he said he would not commute his son's sentence. he also talked about being extremely proud of my son and that he is satisfied with the justice system, which is what we had heard in a written statement several days ago as well. the president was also asked about the israel-hamas war and he sort of brushed off the question, but he said he didn't really have an answer when it came to the status of the cease-fire talks, but what is revealing, katy, is that just before this news conference he was asked by another reporter here at the g7 summit whether he had confidence that a cease-fire deal would be reached? and he actually responded no to that question, but that he still held out hope. yes, as you said, katy, front and center here was all the discussion about ukraine, you mentioned the three things that stood out in terms of what the u.s. is doing to help ukraine at the battlefield. he mentioned $50 billion in loans, he mentioned this bilateral security agreement, and also the expansion of russian sanctions. the u.s. expanding those sanctions, targeting companies, in countries such as china, that do business with the kremlin. but, yes, as richard was mentioning and as you alluded to, president zelenskyy looked very grateful here, says second meeting with president biden in about a week. >> all right, barry mccaffrey, general, thank you very much for joining us as well. let's talk about what this is going to mean in practice on the battlefield. president zelenskyy saying he's grateful, he had about asking for a lot of this for some time. president biden even saying that he stands by the decision that the u.s. made to allow ukraine to use their weapons to shoot into russia. that's something that president or president putin is not pleased about. but, what do you see happening next? >> this war has been another catastrophe, not just for the ukrainians, but also the russians. the russians have taken now some 450,000 killed and wounded, they have gone to all war time economy. but at the end of the day, it is ukraine that is population 38 million doesn't receive support from the west, primarily nato, but also broader coalition, they would go under. half the population of ukraine would end up in western europe. it would be an utter disaster. so i think this biden team, secretary of state blinken, lloyd austin, defense, and director burns at the cia have done a remarkable job in pulling together this new initiative. it is bold. it is -- it will cause the russians to think about coming to the negotiating table, and in the short run provide resources they need to survive. a lot is at stake for u.s. national security and the outcome of this war. but in the background, as richard engel said, essentially the november election may decide the fate of nato, ukraine, and western europe. if trump's re-elected, personally i foresee a disaster in the deterrent value of nato almost immediately after the election. >> it is not just trump, richard. we spoke about this a little while ago, but i think it is worth repeating. trump is running for re-election here, there is a november election in the united states. there is an upcoming election in the uk. probably going to be a change of leadership there. there is a french parliamentary elections. snap election that was called by macron because of how poorly his party did in the eu elections. a rise in the right among europe and the right that is more naturally aligned with somebody like vladimir putin. so what does that mean going forward? >> reporter: well, it means that it is not all about the united states, but it is all about the united states. because the europeans wouldn't have come to this agreement had the u.s. not been pushing very hard, had president biden not been pushing very hard. there was a great deal of reluctance with this current group of g7 leaders to implement this loan package, the $50 billion, using frozen russian assets. a lot of europeans were worried, european leaders were worried this was going to put them in a position of responsibility, that if the policy was changed, or sanctions were dropped against russia, that they would certainly get left holding the bag. there was a lot of sort of wrangling back and forth about what they would do, and how much support. so, europe has been divided on this. europe was slow to -- to commit to arming ukraine. it is stepping up now. but it really has been the united states, it really has been president biden and his team that have been driving this. if that changed, come november, i don't think you would see even the current leaders stepping in to fill in the gap, let alone a group that is mostly -- more closely aligned with the right wing in europe and those parties are on the rise in europe. so, it really is about the united states and u.s. leadership and will continue to be so after the u.s. elections because i think we're going to see european support potentially start to diminish at least that's what the latest european elections seem to indicate. >> it is such a big moment, an inflection point if you will across europe and the u.s. -- or the western order, the current order of the world who the powers are and how things currently operate, how much of what we saw today, this g7 meeting, this agreement with president zelenskyy, this ten-year plan with the united states, all the money that the west is go to be pouring into the ukraine, how much does that matter politically here in the united states ahead of november? >> well, for anybody who is paying attention, joe biden is showing tremendous leadership on the world stage. he did a masterful job of boxing netanyahu in on the israeli proposal for peace in gaza. he has now managed to get, as you said, just after elections that had the far right doing better than they have in previous elections, he managed to get the g7 and as he mentioned in his press conference scores of other nations to show unity. and politically, you know, katy, it boils down to a simple question. my friend general mccaffrey can talk about the military angle and richard engel can talk about that it feels like on the ground, but politically it is not complicated. does america want to be for a dictator, redrawing the boundaries of a neighboring democracy by force? is that who we are? are we for that? we're for dictators, just by force, saying we're going to change where your country is located? that's not what america stands for. and he's on solid ground there, most americans agree with that. this love affair, the republican party is having with putin is inexplicable to me. he's not for freedom, he's not for freedom of religion, he's not for freedom of the press, he's not for open and fair elections. donald trump's just enamored with him. so, i think this is good for joe biden politically. i think he's coming from a very strong place, politically, with this move. and i think history will be kind to him in that regard. >> there is a rise in isolationist sentiment in the united states. donald trump was riding the coattails of just the disaster of the -- what happened in the middle east, the george bush effort and the wars in afghanistan and iraq, on the back of weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist. and it angered a lot of people in this country. part of reason why donald trump won in 2016. what do you make of the isolationist sentiment among the american public who is saying, hey, listen, we have a lot of problems here at home, and we think we should no longer be the world's policeman, that we only cause more problems. >> well, you know, i don't think we are the world's policemen. we don't have boots on the ground in ukraine. we are unifying democracies against despots, you know, dictators. people who don't hold our values. unifying the world again a bad guy is who america always should be. and i think most americans agree with that. and i will tell you, yes, the right did better in the elections, but i can make the case politically, this is really more about being against the status quo because look what is going on in the uk right now. you have the conservative party on the ropes with the labor party poised to take over that government for the first time in a very long time. and that is not the right rising. that is the right falling. and more center left taking control. so, a lot of it depends on who is in charge, because right now, it appears a whole lot of folks want something different. >> i'm going to let general mccaffrey and richard engel go, but, claire, i want to talk to you about what president biden did a moment ago, commenting for the first time on hunter biden and the conviction and saying much of what we have heard him say already, to david muir and on paper in the immediate reaction to the conviction. he was asked, listen, this is something that a lot of americans are going through. that there is an intersection between addiction and the criminal justice system. >> yeah, i think the biden family have been through an awful lot of pain and most american families have felt it. and i think that empathy goes both ways. i think american families feel empathy toward the bidens, the way joe biden has shown empathy toward them. and what a contrast, katy. what a marked contrast between these two trials. the jurors in the hunter biden case didn't go home afraid. the court staff in the hunter biden case had not been threatened and called names. jill biden was there every day, even though the case you might argue came from moral failings of her son. melania trump wasn't there in a case that came from moral failings of her husband. so, there is so many contrasts we can point to, but the most important contrast is one person had the power to stop a prosecution against someone he loved and he declined to take it. he said, no, no. i'm going to let the law treat my son no differently than anyone else. and, of course, we all know that never would have happened had donald trump been in the same position. never would have happened. >> could you think that's a contrast that american voters, the ones that haven't made up their minds yet, that affect them? >> i do. i think this -- personally, maybe more than some of the other contrasts. yes, there is a big contrast between joe biden and normandy celebrating the heroes that gave their life for freedom, by the way, fighting against another dictator, who tried to redraw boundaries. and meanwhile, donald trump was out, you know, talking about sharks and electric boats and telling the people at the rally he didn't care about them, he just wanted their vote. the contrasts keep piling up. one of decency and one if it isn't about him, it is not important. i think people sense that, especially undecided voters as they tune in more carefully as the election gets closer. it is going to be close. but i think the voters that have not made up their mind now, i would rather be joe biden than donald trump. >> claire, we have another segment we want to get you on. we have to sneak in a quick break as my friend brian williams would say, pay some bills. so don't go anywhere. coming up, what donald trump said on capitol hill, first time back since he inspired an insurrection. n insurrection what straps bold to a rocket and hurtles it into space? boring does. boring makes vacations happen, early retirements possible, and startups start up. because it's smart, dependable, and steady. all words you want from your bank. for nearly 160 years, pnc bank has been brilliantly boring so you can be happily fulfilled... which is pretty un-boring if you think about it. let's get started. bill, where's your mask? i really tried sleeping with it, everybody. now i sleep with inspire. inspire? no mask? no hose? just sleep. learn more, and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com (vo) explore the world the viking way from the quiet comfort of elegant small ships with no children and no casinos. we actually have reinvented ocean voyages, designing all-inclusive experiences for the thinking person. viking - voted world's best by both travel + leisure and condé nast traveler. learn more at viking.com. a slow network is no network for business. that's why more choose comcast business. and now, we're introducing ultimate speed for business —our fastest plans yet. we're up to 12 times faster than verizon, at&t, and t-mobile. and existing customers could even get up to triple the speeds... at no additional cost. it's ultimate speed for ultimate business. don't miss out on our fastest speed plans yet! switch to comcast business and get started for $49.99 a month. plus, ask how to get up to an $800 prepaid card. call today! almost exactly two years after erasing the constitutional right to an abortion, the supreme court has unanimously refused to limit access to the widely used abortion pill mifepristone. brett kavanaugh writing in today's opinion. today's decision was not based on the substance of a group of antiabortion doctors, cases against the fda, but on procedural grounds. we'll explain why that matters in a moment. while also considering the timing. the democrats say this ruling even though it is technically a win for abortion access, it is still a reminder of what republicans will try to do to women's healthcare if they are re-elected in the fall. and it comes right as the senate takes up likely to fail, which it did fail, by the way, legislation to protect ivf and one of the most powerful conservative voting blocs in america, protestant christians at the southern baptist convention voting to oppose it. joining us now, senior writer who covers the supreme court and that's mark joseph stern, also msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin. lisa, we saw you scribbling all over this decision as i was reading my intro. what were you writing down? >> one of the things that struck me about this decision is what it says for the future of abortion cases and not just on the antichoice side. but where it comes to doctors who have traditionally been the litigants in cases where women themselves are trying to get greater access to abortion. the reason that doctors have traditionally been plaintiffs is because pregnancy is short. it lasts for nine months and therefore it is very unlikely that the whole throughline of a litigation can happen while an individual woman is pregnant. and at the end of her pregnancy, guess what happens. she doesn't have standing anymore because her injury is past. it is not actual or imminent. so there are some really bad warning signs here for women whose doctors have been their advocates and pro abortion litigation, here's why. the court is saying in a footnote here, the third party standing doctrine does not allow doctors to shoehorn themselves into article three standing, that's code for constitutional standing, simply by showing their patients have suffered injuries or may suffer future injuries. what looks today to us like a victory for women and abortion access has easter eggs in it to use the swiftian term about what the future might look like. >> why would all the justices then, if there are easter eggs sign on to the decision? >> so eager for an outcome like this, kicking this case to the curb at least for now. they were willing to sign on to a decision by justice brett kavanaugh that does include a number of poison pills. another one i'll identify is that justice kavanaugh's reasoning boils down to the fact he says federal law protects doctors' rights to refuse to perform an abortion to assist with an abortion. he says even if a woman took mifepristone, prescribed by another doctor, walked into one of these plaintiffs' ers and asked for help, the plaintiff doctors could refuse to provide assistance, they could let them bleed out on the table if they wished. that's a very expansive reading of the federal conscience law that was until today very much in dispute. just kavanaugh decided to seize upon it and use it as the basis for his decision. that's good news for those who oppose this lawsuit. good news for now because it helps to maintain the abortion access in blue states where it is lawful, but it also means that down the road, there could be more doctors who are asserting the claims of a conscience right to refuse to treat patients who have gotten abortions and this was the conservatives sort of exploiting their super majority to push out a decision whose bottom line the liberals might agree with, but includes some skunk in the elevator passages that are going to come back to haunt the left flank of the court. >> we're getting a lot of euphemisms in there. i want to push back on something that, mark, you just said. if there is a doctor that says, i don't want to treat this person based on my moral beliefs, i can't do it, i'm not going to sign on to it, isn't it still the law that somebody within that emergency department has to treat that person, doesn't the hospital or the medical facility have to have somebody on call or on hand who is w willing to treat somebody an emergency situation. >> it depends on the outcome of the second of the two abortion cases that the court is deciding this term. that case has to do with the federal emergency treatment act and its collision with idaho's very stringent restrictions on abortion. when the solicitor general argued that case, she said a woman should not have to be dying on the table in an er for it to protect her. it should be enough she would suffer deleterious health impact by not being treated. they pressed her on isn't it the federal government's position that if a woman shows up suicidal, for example, to an er and says you must give me an abortion now, but that's included in what you consider her health, she disclaimed that. >> didn't justice coney barrett, getting the cases confused here, didn't she in this argument, wasn't she skeptical of the idaho doctor? didn't she say that a woman losing her organs shouldn't be acceptable? >> that is my recollection. >> mark, jump in. is that what happened? >> yes, justice barrett sounded shocked, she said she was shocked that idaho's lawyer wouldn't say, hey, we're not going to force a woman to start losing her organs before she gets an abortion. she made the rather extraordinary concession that she said she doesn't think that emtala overrides health consciouses. even in a healthcare desert that a doctor can still say i will not treat an abortion patient and that is consistent with federal law. a very broad reading of this will see if it gets refined in the emtala decisions which i expect very soon. for now, this is really like a pretty big silver lining for antiabortion advocates. >> thank you very much. the other adjacent story that we have been following today is in regards to ivf. i mentioned a moment ago that the senate tried to take up a bill to protect ivf. a democrat-sponsored bill, but republicans voted to shoot it down. you need a super majority to pass these things in the senate. the democrats don't have it. so, without the republicans signing on, at least ten of them, it is not going to go anywhere. and that's what happened today. they called it political, they said it is unnecessary, but there is also something else happening around the country, which makes democrats argue it is actually necessary, there was the supreme court decision in alabama that said that ivf, the embryos created were people. and that basically effectively made ivf as it is currently practiced illegal and there is also a vote at the southern baptist convention yesterday, this is a very large group of protestant christians, the convention decided, it voted, that it does not support ivf and that is a political indicator of what evangelicals in this country believe today. joining us now, nbc news correspondent erin mclaughlin. did i get that right? >> yes. >> okay. so why -- this is not binding. they have no legal standing. why is it significant that they voted this way? >> well, it is seen as extremely significant. the southern baptist convention is seen as a powerhouse representing some 13 million of this country's southern baptists and when they say something, conservatives tend to listen, and in this case, speaking out for the very first time against the -- ivf in the way that it is currently practiced in the form of this resolution, a resolution that was passed yesterday at the convention by some 60%. now, i have the opportunity to speak to albert muller, he drafted or helped to draft the resolution that was passed yesterday. and i asked him, is this a political call to action? take a listen to what he had to say. >> the court said that our clients don't have standing in this case. we're grateful the case will continue with three states working to hold the fda accountable for its reckless actions. the decision based on a legal technicality allows the fda to continue its reckless disregard for women's health at least for now. >> that's not the right clip. that was erin hawley who argued the supreme court case against mifepristone, that was her reaction today. do we have the sound bite that erin just mentioned? we don't have it loaded up, sorry, we changed things around last minute because president biden went late in coming to the podium. okay. so, paraphrase if you can -- >> absolutely. he said, yes, he sees this as a political call to action, while at the same time he recognized the political reality. the political reality being that -- >> vast majority. >> north of 80% of americans support access. >> evangelicals. >> exactly, including former president donald trump has spoken out in favor of access to ivf treatment. he's recognizing that, clearly he sees this as the long game with this first step, what they're describing as a dialogue, the opening up of a dialogue, very first time that this powerhouse convention came forward in this way on that issue. >> erin, thank you so much. i appreciate it. sorry about the sound bite. joining us now, university of california davis law professor and author of "dollars for life." i want to start on ivf with you, claire, before we get to the supreme court ruling. republicans today arguing as i mentioned that this was politically unnecessary. this protection for ivf that the democrats proposed. >> i think it is ironic considering what the largest group of evangelical christians voted yesterday, that they said that. and if it is protected, why don't they want to codify it? what's the problem? if everybody is for it? they are playing to the base of their party that obviously is not -- i mean, i thought that clip of erin hawley was very important, i'm glad you played it. they're not going anywhere, folks. louisiana made these drugs. mifepristone, a controlled substance. if you get caught with these drugs that have been safe and used for over 20 years in america, if you get caught with those drugs, without a prescription, it is like you have an illegal drug and you could be arrested and go to prison for it in louisiana. these folks are going down a road, they're not stopping. they're not going to stop at contraception. it is what it is. and politically they are really in a bad place and that's why i don't get, why don't they vote to protect if they believe in it. it makes no sense to me. >> so why don't they? when you're talking about abortion, there is some disagreement among americans about when abortion should be allowed, whether it should be allowed past the second trimester. there is agreement there, a line to be drawn on where most americans stand, even though most americans believe in the right to an abortion, especially in the case -- when a woman's life is at risk or rape or incest, et cetera. but when you're talking about ivf, the numbers are just through the roof. erin just mentioned them, north of 80% of americans support ivf, the majority of evangelicals as well. it is wildly unpopular to not be in support of ivf. kellyanne conway went to congress to tell lawmakers that very thing. apparently donald trump is saying the same thing to republicans in private as well. what is the deal? why are they not signing on to it? >> i think because of the base of their party. i think the loudest voices, i think they are afraid of the activism of this minority of america. >> that's a very small minority. >> i'm not sure about that, though. in missouri, it is the law. it is the law in missouri that it is life that begins at conception and the law in missouri is no different than the law in alabama. if someone brought a case similar to what happened in alabama, i'm sure the courts would make the same decision. the law is identical. and nobody in missouri, the republican party, is moving to change that. they're the ones that put it in place. so i think -- i think -- >> i think that's a good point. >> i think it is the base of the party that is absolutely committed to this view and i think as we have seen time and time again, the loud base of a party has outsized power as opposed to the rest of the country. and that's what's going on here. they're afraid of that base. >> yeah. mary, jump in. i know you have thoughts on this. what do you think is going on? >> i think claire is right. i think that there has been also a question of sort of how to use the abortion issue to rally the base now that roe is gone. it had been an incredible fund-raiing tool and the new tool is fetal personhood, an embryonic personhood, a social focus among conservatives going back to 1960s and you can't embrace this idea of personhood and ivf. so you're starting to see conservatives who hadn't really staked out a position on ivf feeling forced to do that, what we saw from the southern baptist convention and why it is not an easy issue for republicans despite what they're seeing. >> take it to its logical conclusion, how far can they go with this? >> they need to -- the gerbry, i think. or both state courts like the alabama supreme court and even potentially ultimately the u.s. supreme court. one of the features of the emtala case that hasn't been discussed a lot but we may see come out from the court is there is language in emtala that uses the term unborn child and idaho argues that means there can't be emergency access to abortion. this idea of if you mentioned language like that, you must have in mind fairly significant rights for fetuses and embryos, and the reason why conservatives are focusing on courts as you mentioned, katy, the banning of ivf, strictly regulating ivf, criminalizing states that have protects and their state constitutions created by voters, all of that is very unpopular. so the logical move is to go to decisionmakers like judges who are not accountable to voters in the same way or in some instances accountable to orders at all. >> when is there going to be a backlash and when does that backlash occur? we have seen when voters have abortion in front of them, as an issue, period, they want to enshrine it to the constitution. even very red states will enshrine the protections for abortion into the constitution. democrats argue this is such a motivating issue that it is why they're winning special elections in places they shouldn't win special elections. they also argue that this is the thing above all others that will -- that is likely to turn or they hope at least turn the election in november, that cases like this, conversations like this, votes that republicans took in the senate today, what we're seeing with the southern baptist convention is enough to tell americans by and large that this country is headed in a very different direction, if you vote for donald trump or vote for a republican, for the senate or republican for the house. >> yeah, it is interest because trump seems to have adopted this line, it is great, it is really popular, it has gone back to the states. and he doesn't realize how many women are in states where horrible things have happened to their ability to control their own health. and i -- listen, i think it is motivating. i think i remember before the 2022 cycle being on "meet the press" with a republican operative who said, it is not even polling that high, and i remember yamiche alcindor and i were on the panel and we look across and both went, yeah, wait and see. and sure enough, women spoke loudly along with many men that they absolutely fundamentally disagree with the direction that the supreme court has taken this country and i think we will see a roevember. >> claire mccaskill, mary ziegler, thank you very much. a difficult conversation, but i appreciate both your time. >> and that's going to do it for me today. "deadline: white house" starts after a very quick break. "deadline: white house" starts after a very quick break you need the air, you need the whoooooosh... inspire. sleep apnea innovation. learn more, and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com lactaid is 100% real milk, just without the lactose. delicious too. just ask my old friend, kevin. nothing like enjoying a cold one while watching the game. who's winning? no idea. real milk. real delicious. and don't forget to try some delicious, creamy lactaid ice cream. what's that mabel? (mooo) wow, smart cow! so this is pickleball? it's basically tennis for babies, but for adults. it should be called wiffle tennis. pickle! yeah, aw! whoo! ♪♪ these guys are intense. we got nothing to worry about. with e*trade from morgan stanley, we're ready for whatever gets served up. dude, you gotta work on your trash talk. i'd rather work on saving for retirement. or college, since you like to get schooled. that's a pretty good burn, right? got him. good game. thanks for coming to our clinic, first one's free. you know what's brilliant? boring. think about it. boring is the unsung catalyst for bold. what straps bold to a rocket and hurtles it into space? boring does. boring makes vacations happen, early retirements possible, and startups start up. because it's smart, dependable, and steady. all words you want from your bank. for nearly 160 years, pnc bank has been brilliantly boring so you can be happily fulfilled... which is pretty un-boring if you think about it. ♪ [suspenseful music] trains. [whoosh] ♪ trains that sense what isn't on the schedule. ♪ trains that use the power of dell ai and intel. ♪ to see hundreds of miles of tracks. ♪ [vroom] [train horn] [buzz] clearing the way, [whoosh] so you arrive exactly where you belong.