next hour, the president will unveil a new policy to let undocumented spouses of american citizens stay in the u.s., while they seek to become citizens. we'll dig into the politics, the practical implications and whether the next president will have the power to wipe it all away. plus, the man once dubbed the prince of pop, justin timberlake, busted for dwi in the hamptons overnight. the latest on what happened and what is next for the singer. frustration over republican opposition to new gun measures boiling over on capitol hill. >> those people are dead and they're never coming back and their families are changed forever. shame on him. shame on him for disrespecting the dead. >> we'll tell you what prompted that outburst from nevada senator jacky rosen and what it tells us about the new congressional push to ban bump stocks. we start with president biden launching one of the most sweeping immigration initiatives in recent decades, giving half a million undocumented immigrants an opportunity to stay in the country without the threat of deportation. this executive action, he's announcing today, targets just a slice of the undocumented population, specifically the spouses of american citizens who have been here for a decade or more. not only will it let them stay in the u.s., it will also offer them a possible path to citizenship, something they couldn't access under current law, without leaving the country first. one source close to the program calling it, quote, the biggest thing since daca, a program that protects immigrants that came here as children many, many years ago. joining us now, for more on today's executive action, nbc's julia ainsley, along with alan orr, immigration attorney and former president of the american immigration lawyers association, cornell belcher, a democratic strategist and pollster, and tim miller, host of the bulwark podcast and former communication director for jeb bush in 2016. so, julia, first, can you just explain who exactly qualifies for this and the potential impact? >> well, i just got to meet one of those people who will qualify for this. someone who came to in country at 3 years old and has daca. a lot of people might have daca, but the fate of daca has so often been up in the air year after year as the trump administration tried to unroll it, it might not get through in the courts, they think this offers them something more secure if they can get on a pathway to citizenship. just got to speak to javier castro, a nurse and a critical care unit in a hospital in houston. here's what he told me. >> an action like this has been way overdue. people said the same thing about daca. that it wasn't necessary. that it was overstepping. and daca turned out to be a very successful program. so, i don't see it as a bad thing. in fact, i see it as life changing in a positive way for hundreds of thousands of families and people. america is going to be stronger because of this. >> javier says he married his high school sweetheart, he's been in the united states since he was 3 years old, but he and his wife worried that if he left the country to apply for citizenship, which would be required before this action goes into effect, they were worried he might be separated from them for years or might not ever get back into the country. >> julia, this is an executive action as we mentioned, not legislation. so does that mean if donald trump wins in november, he could just undo all of this? >> very easily, much like he tried to undo daca, the courts ultimately kept daca in place, but it could be undone, that's for another conversation. the one thing that makes this more secure, though, ana, is if these people, like javier, can get on that pathway to citizenship, it would be much harder for a future administration to come in and take away their green cards. they could say, perhaps, people who haven't applied yet wouldn't be eligible, but once someone is on the pathway to citizenship, has something like a green card in their hand, that gets a lot harder to take away. >> alan, we mentioned one source characterized this as the biggest thing since daca. is that how you see it and if somebody were to walk into your office today, a client, asking for your advice, what do you tell them? >> so, it is the biggest thing since daca because it is something that is actually happened. i have a number of clients waiting for something to happen that will get relief now under this new program. i think it is a little bit like daca. individuals who apply and the process starts and the legal challenges start, they're already in the process, it will be very difficult to take that back away from them. >> cornell, it comes a few weeks after president biden announced this other executive action to crack down on illegal border crossings. "the wall street journal" reports today that, quote, the president's advisers thought for months that to avoid further angering immigration advocates and latino voters with family members lacking legal status, new border restrictions ought to be paired with a sweetener to benefit long time immigrants already living in the u.s. do you think today's move strikes the right balance? >> well, look, i think it is good policy. and, look, i mean, as the interview showed, this is going to, you know, impact the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in a positive way. and so the president is trying to solve for the problem with executive action earlier and along with this one, he's trying to solve for the problem that as you know and we reported on here, that republicans -- republicans did not want to solve for, did not want to do immigration reform, he's trying to solve for the problem. so, sometimes good policy does make for good politics. i think this is good policy that is needed. and, again, it is going to change the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. it is also to those voters out there, both on -- who are sort of on the left and upset about immigration reform, it speaks to them that the president is trying to do something. with the moderate voters, again, you have the contrast here with the president trying to solve for the problem, it is not perfect, but trying to solve for the problem, while his opponent is trying not to solve for the problem but use it politically. it is good policy and good politics. >> tim, nbc news reported earlier this month that latino voters, specifically have been frustrated with the biden administration, they want tougher border control. and help for immigrants, and a growing number of them tell pollsters that trump would do a better job. so, do these two moves by president biden even the score perhaps? >> i don't know about even the score, but they're absolutely needed. and i think it is important because the president and the democrats have a much tougher challenge on immigration to message it to these voters. because as you mentioned, hispanic voters, most voters in the electorate want a secure border and want compassion and want us to be a welcoming country. it is easy to do the trump message, to say, no illegal immigrants, strong border, mass deportations. it is a blunt instrument. biden has to be nuanced to appeal to his coalition. it is noteworthy that he seems to make positive progress on this. there is a report out today, record low number of border crossings this past month in may. and so i think that's good sign and something the white house is going to be able to tout. i think pairing both these two things together is important, politically. i think they're both good policy. even if you didn't like one of the policies, politically you need to work together in both strong border and being reasonable and rational to people have been in this country since they're 3 years old. >> we're just looking at pictures of demonstrators related to daca and alan, daca recipients have lived in limbo for the last 12 years as they have seen legal challenge after legal challenge. do you think that's where this is headed? >> it may be heading in that direction, but i think one thing that we should remind people of is ronald reagan was the standard republican who said we should reward people who add to our economy, who have been here for a long time. he was the last republican that stood and said, i recognize the value of individuals who came here, who have these equities, been here a long time, came here as children. i would like to distinguish between the two executive orders from the president. one executive order denies asylum after a certain number is reached. in this case, we're looking at something on a case by case analysis. when you do something, which they saw daca did, that's why it had the challenges it had today and has not been resolved in the court. bans have already been resolved by the court and will not stand, so these are two different types of order and a stretch of the executive power because our congress is not doing what they need to do for the american people. >> cornell, recent polls showed 62% of americans would favor a new national program to deport all undocumented immigrants living in the united states. that includes 38% of democrats and more than half of hispanics specifically. you talk about good policy being good politics, but when you look at those numbers, could today's move backfire on president biden? >> well, you know, i like the ability to see through walls and fly, but that's not realistic. and, again, my friend on the right said, you got to be rational and reasonable. we're not going to deport all people in this country illegally. that's not reasonable. we got to have adult in the room conversation about how do we fix the system that is broken and how do we put together -- reach across the aisle and try to get congress to act and congress won't act, the president has to take action that he can, reasonable action. there is a lot of things that american public might want, but it is no way possible to sort of, you know, take all these people who have been living in this country a long time out. that's not reasonable. it is not -- it won't make for good policy. there is a middle ground here. i think the president is trying to aim for that middle ground. >> tim, just this morning, the trump campaign sent out an email that was, i guess, predictable, saying everyone who crosses the border illegally is handed a ballot with every democrats' name filled in. that's barely believable. but some people might buy it. is it a worthy investment for the biden campaign to try to combat claims like that and convince the people who believe them they're untrue or have they written off people who would believe something like that anyway? >> look, it is up to the media, i don't think we had a lot of hope for our friends at fox. it is up to the media to spread the truth about this. people here illegally can't vote in federal elections at least. and i think that it is really the job of the biden campaign to point out the extremism of trump and the right on this issue. and i think this is the challenge, the democrats are a little afraid to engage on the issue because of the poll you referenced in the previous question. but as much as people are for deporting undocumented immigrants, when you put faces on this, they are not for it. people are not for deporting somebody that came here as a 3-year-old who doesn't speak spanish, who never has been to their home country, who is married to their high school sweetheart, didn't commit any crimes. american people don't want that person deported. donald trump has said, yeah, we're going to deport a lot of criminals and there might be one sympathetic mother who didn't do anything, but that's what we have to do to be tough. that's a losing message for trump and the biden campaign should be focusing on his more extreme statements on this and trying to as cornell said take the big middle on this issue. >> and to your point about who this would impact, we're talking about people who have been in this country for on average 23 years, according to the biden administration, when you look at this group who would be eligible under this new executive action. julia ainsley, alan orr, cornell belcher and tim miller, thank you. the final few fake electors in arizona including two of trump's closest allies appearing in court today for their arraignment. how they're now pleading and what happens next after this break. w pleading and what happens next after this break. camilla tried the new scent of gain relax flings and it changed everything. (♪♪) hey dave, don't knock it 'til you smell it. new gain relax flings. we really don't want people to think of feeding food like ours is spoiling their dogs. good, real food is simple. it looks like food, it smells like food, it's what dogs are supposed to be eating. no living being should ever eat processed food for every single meal of their life. it's amazing to me how many people write in about their dogs changing for the better. the farmer's dog is just our way to help people take care of them. ♪ just moments ago, the final three indicted fake electors in arizona, including two close allies of former president trump pleaded not guilty to charges related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election. trump attorneys and advisers boris epshteyn and jenna ellis and james lamon now join the rest of the 18 co-defendants in this case who have pleaded not guilty to fraud, forgery and conspiracy charges. joining us now is former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst barbara mcquade and nbc's vaughn hillyard. vaughn, what do we know? >> each of these three individuals showed up virtually in the last hour for these arraignments, the final three of the 18. the entire slate has pleaded not guilty. so when you're looking at the likes of boris epshteyn, it is important to note that he continues to remain a close adviser to donald trump and his campaign. he's coordinated all of donald trump's legal counsel for the various cases, in legal question marks that have plagued donald trump. now, boris epshteyn has his own, but each of them entering this not guilty plea. talking about the potential of plea agreements down the line, take a listen. >> we anticipated, like any other case, we have not made any plea offers yet. so i have discussed the possibility with -- >> so, have not made any yet. that's a question mark as this process here moves forward, exactly where this heads and, of course, the question mark for each of these individuals is whether they have a motion to sever their cases, so there is still a lot ahead, we shouldn't expect a trial before the 2024 election. >> this is a big group. a lot of eyes were on jenna ellis going into this hearing since she took a plea deal and pleaded guilty in the georgia rico case. but here she pleaded not guilty. what does that signal to you from a defense standpoint? >> it doesn't mean a whole lot because typically when a person is facing their arraignment, this is the first time they had a chance to look at the charges. typically has not yet been any opportunity for negotiation. but i suppose the fact that she chose not to contest the charges in georgia, she actually admitted in open court to committing this crime and she's also been sanctioned bit colorado board authorities, her home state, that it seems she is unlikely to contest these charges. so if you are a savvy prosecutor, this might be someone you would focus on to try to see if she's interested in not only testifying, not only pleading guilty, but perhaps in testifying against some of the other defendants. oftentimes you can look to someone like jenna ellis and ask her if she's interested in providing information about others, such as rudy giuliani or boris epshteyn, people who are considered bitter fish in the scheme. >> rudy giuliani, mark meadows who is also part of this group, the 18 co-defendants. now that all 18 have been arraigned, pleaded not guilty, what comes next? >> so, the completion of the arraignment is kind of an important moment. the hearing itself is typically uneventful, a reading of the charge, acknowledgement it has been received, but it starts the clock. this is when the speedy trial clock begins and this is when parties receive discovery and so they learn about the strength or the weakness of the case. when prosecutors are bringing a charge and believing they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, the evidence is strong and that's when the plea wheeling and dealing begins. i think you can see a likelihood of looking for lower level people, perhaps people who simply signed on to the false slate, you know, not fully appreciating the scope of the scheme, maybe those are the people who would be either people who want to contest their guilt or interested in a guilty plea. i think the other thing to look to is people who are charged in multiple jurisdictions because those people have a strong incentive for a global resolution and maybe would be interested in cooperating in multiple venues. >> and i'm thinking about the georgia case, which is indefinitely on hold at this point. would you expect this case to go to trial before the election? >> i don't think so. with 18 defendants, i'm sure there will be a lot of motions that get filed. certainly it is a possibility, but here we are in june, i imagine that with this many defendants we will see a number of motions that get filed, just as we have seen in some of these other cases, and that takes time for parties to respond, courts to hold hearings, courts to issue opinions and so not impossible, but strikes me as unlikely. i'll tell you the other thing i think is really interesting here is that although in the federal indictment only donald trump is named, he's the sole defendant, there are others named as unindicted co-conspirators. i think the speculation is that some of the names we're hearing today are also those unindicted co-conspirators. that's an extra incentive for them to participate in cooperation, not only in the state courts, but perhaps also with jack smith in the federal case. >> that is interesting. we're still waiting on presidential immunity decision from the supreme court related to that federal election interference case. barbara mcquade and vaughn hillyard, thank you, both, so much. now we have some breaking news in the entertainment world. justin timberlake arrested earlier today in the hamptons and accused of driving while intoxicated. nbc's antonia hylton joins us now. what more do we know about this and the circumstances around his arrest? >> hey, ana, well, we now know justin timberlake is out of custody. he's been released and he's been charged with this dwi charge, but also for some other minor charges related to blowing past a stop sign and what they say in this report that has now been released, authorities say they witnessed him essentially swerving on the road, unable to maintain his position in the lane. this is after sources close to justin tell nbc news that he was at the american hotel, a swanky place known for celebrity sightings in the hamptons, and he left and tried to go and continue the night at a friend's home. that's when police spotted him. we also know that in addition to the sort of standard field sobriety test that they attempted to administer, that the officer made note of the fact that he had glassy eyes, that he could smell alcohol emanating from justin timberlake's breath and he's going to be back in court now at the end of july. this couldn't be coming at a more complicated time for him, though, because he's in the midst of a tour. he's supposed to be in chicago in a couple of days, do a couple of shows there and then around the globe. so, now he'll be managing what is always a very difficult tour for artists with this case, and a reappearance here in the hamptons in just a couple of weeks. >> antonia hylton, thank you for bringing us the latest there. up