from prosecution based on their official acts in office. many legal scholars have speculated that one route the supreme court can take is they decide if there's some level of immunity, perhaps it doesn't apply to the conduct charged against donald trump in this election case brought by jack smith, and that could cause further delays in that case because it would require it to be tossed back to the judge to decide which of these things were presidential acts and which weren't. there's another case that could potentially involve the prosecution of donald trump, has to do with a charge of obstruction of an official proceeding that has been brought against many january 6th defendants, and it's also a part of that washington, d.c. election suppression, trump indictment, and the question whether that has been properly applied to the conduct at issue. and then as you said, there are many other very important decisions we're watching for including a potential gun rights case involving the question of whether someone convicted of domestic violence can be prohibited from owning a firearm in light of the supreme court's recent decision that said that all gun regulations must have an analog in history. during the oral arguments it did appear the justices were leaning in favor of prohibiting firearms. we'll have to wait and see on that one. there are two important cases involving social media companies and the potential regulation and content moderation. one is a question of how far the federal government can go in flagging disinformation and other kinds of prohibitive content to social media companies and whether the government violated the first amendment by intimidating social media companies when they did that, and another one involves two states, florida and texas that have passed laws restricting how social media can moderate content, particularly politicians, whether that's constitutional, and there's a big abortion case having to do with idaho's anti abortion law, and whether that is consistent with the federal law requiring basic levels of emergency care to anyone because in some cases, one side says that emergency care can involve abortion and that conflicts with the idaho law. so some really big cases we're watching, we're refreshing the web site as we speak. we'll have that for you as we speak. >> keep refreshing, don't move a muscle otherwise. ken dilanian, stay close to us. joining us to continue the discussion, msnbc legal continue, lisa rubin is here. also with us, leah litman, university of michigan assistant professor of law, and former alabama democratic senator and former u.s. attorney doug jones who also helped guide justice jackson through her confirmation process. good to have all of you here. let's look at the big picture here, 23 cases left undecided. that's about a third of the cases this term. what do you make of the backlog? >> first of all, we're at 22 now. we have a decision that's come down. not one of the ones that we were eagerly anticipating, in the case having to do with repatriation tax. not exactly a hot button issue for viewers and voters generally but we're down to 22. in terms o. backlog, ana, we have seen in recent years, definitely a growth in the number of cases that wait until the end of june, and at the same time, a diminution in the overall number of cases the court is taking on the merits and those two things have not escaped supreme court observers notice. their workload is generally stronger, and yet, they are leaving until the end, major decisions with big reverberations for our oat -- our society and our politics. that's not something i can explain, except it's one of those things that makes you go hmm, they are deciding fewer and fewer cases, yet we are waiting with baited breath for decisions on guns, abortion, and presidential immunity. >> cases that could have impacted on every american in our daily lives as well as the country and our democracy, senator, the immunity case, of course, is the biggest one we're waiting on. the court could have decided not to take this case and just let the appellate court's decision stand which rejected trump's immunity argument. is this already a victory for trump on that case, given how long it is delaying his criminal trials? >> well, certainly i think that, you know, any criminal defendant usually wants to delay their trials. and donald trump is certainly no exception to that. in his case, it involves even more. when you get a delay, you get toward the election and the odds of a case going to trial, the closer we get to an election is slim to none. i think it remains to be seen what kind of victory this will be. i tend to agree this is likely to go back to the district court for findings. i have never been one to believe this is black and white, yes or no, immunity or not. the presidency is more complicated than that. personally i expect it to go back to the district court. >> while we wait for that decision on presidential immunity, former attorney general eric holder was on msnbc yesterday, and had this to say. >> anything less than a decision by the supreme court that says a president should be held to the laws just like any other american citizen, anything other than that is absurd. the notion, for instance, well, if the president violated a criminal law but was doing so in his official capacity, there may be some basis to say that's okay. we need to step back and think about that, you know, wait a minute, a president can violate the american criminal law if he or she is doing something in their official capacity. that is an absurd and dangerous conclusion. >> leah, what is your reaction to that? >> i think it's important to keep in mind what precise issue in this case is. it doesn't have to be whether presidents are necessarily immune from all criminal prosecutions whatsoever, it's instead whether the facts alleged in special counsel jack smith's indictment related to the events of january 6th are something that presidents are entitled to immunity from, and there the answer as to be a resounding no. whatever the scope of presidential immunity is, it just can't extend to a month's long effort to contest the results of a valid election and remain in office when you lost the election. so really, the supreme court has a very small task before it in this case. just answering whether this specific indictment alleges facts to which a president is possibly entitled to immunity, and the answer is clearly no. which makes it so ridiculous that the court is taking as long as it is to resolve this case. >> senator, it has been nearly two years now to the day since the supreme court overturned roe v. wade, and since then, we have seen public trust of the court just crumble. according to the latest polls it has been hovering around 40%, near record lows, the lowest is 38%. how could that lack of trust be a factor as we're awaiting controversial cases dealing with immunity, abortion, gun rights and more? >> well, i think the lack of trust, you know, may affect individual justices but, remember, you know, ana, this is not just about the court's decisions, the lack of trust. it's also about what you're seeing with justice alito and flags. it's about what you're seeing with justice thomas, and all of the trips, and whether or not he is, you know, essentially being purchased for his decisions. that, i think, is contributing as much as anything, but when it's a one-two punch, when you get the decisions overturning decades of precedent, with what appear to be personal issues involving the court, it's a major problem. i think that will weigh on certain justices more than others. obviously we're seeing it's not affecting some justices, i think the others have got to think about how the court is being perceived by the american public right now, and in terms of timing and the delay, i agree, it's hard to believe why the delays are coming to the end of the term, but at the same time, this is such a fractured court right now, i think it's just taken longer to try to figure out what this is going to entail when you write these decisions, and it's just taken a long time. i also think they just like to get these and get out of town. >> well, we usually see all of the decisions before the end of june, so that literally leaves this day, tomorrow, and then next week, right. leah, looking at the immunity case, i recall during arguments, as we were bringing it to our viewers' lives, the audio of those, justice kavanagh, they were writing a rule for the ages. that's how consequential this case as they all are, when it comes to a presidency. if the justices do decide to side with trump in this immunity case, how would that affect a potential trump second term. >> i think it would result in a trump unleashed if the justices were to side with donald trump in the immunity case. this would be effectively saying. look, of course, you can overturn the results and try to overturn the results of a valid election. try to throw out lawfully cast votes. you would face no consequences to do so. they allowed trump to get back on the ballot of the colorado disqualification case, notwithstanding the efforts. if they side with him in the immunity case, there would be no criminal, legal accountability and political accountability whatsoever. that's an extremely dangerous prospect and it would be emboldening donald trump or other future presidents to break the law in order to further their own political ends at the expense of american democracy. i think it's also worth pointing out, even though justice kavanagh suggested he wanted to write an opinion for the ages and several other justices gestured in that direction as well in the immunity case. in the tax case that justice kavanagh said, we don't have to decide congress's power to tax. all we have to say in this case is this precise tax is constitutional. they could do something very similar in the immunity case, saying we don't have to decide the precise scope of immunity. all we need to do is say that what is alleged in this indictment does not fall within the bounds of presidential immunity. >> there's this other case we're dealing with that applies to january 6th and a defendant, the fisher versus u.s. case, and this defendant is trying to throw out the obstruction of an official proceeding charge. and, lisa, that's a charge trump faces, right, so will that decision also have implications on trump's legal fate, potentially? >> yes, and no. because the argument that the defendant is making in that case is that the meaning of the statute has to be interpreted in light of some of the clauses that come before it that have to do with, essentially, destroying paper work and impeding or obstructing, it has to do with, for example, destroying records or falsifying records. now, if you look at the allegations in the indictment against former president trump, when we think about things like the fake elector scheme, that's exactly what's going on there. so you could see a situation in which the defendant who has brought that fisher case gets relief for himself and perhaps for many other january 6th defendants, in ways that aren't necessarily applicable to the allegations against former president trump, as they pertain to that particular charge. >> senator, you mentioned how the supreme court has just been dogged by these questions about ethics from justice clarence thomas, and the luxury trips he took that he paid for, flown at justice alito's properties, how do you think those impact this institution and the crisis of confidence and why? why are we in this space right now? >> you know, it's hard to answer the latter question. i do think it's having an impact on the supreme court and that's really unfortunate. i think that in the past, you know, regardless of the decisions that the court is making, the justices were always seen as acting honorably, and in this particular case or i say in this case, in a number of the cases before the court, that is called into question because the personal conduct of justices that have become public. that is an individual justice issue. i don't think you're going to see these kind of issues come up with all of the justices. you haven't seen this. and so i think that the other justices are going to try very hard to make sure that they maintain what they should as an independent judiciary, but it gets clouded when the issues with just a couple of justices overshadow, and i think that is an individual basis, and i think it's going to, quite frankly, i don't see anything happening at the court that would require recusals or anything else. there's going to be a change in the court mentality and the court personnel and order to really start looking at restoring the integrity of the court. >> we heard president biden recently talk about how he believes the next president will ultimately be nominating for confirmation to more supreme court justices, that that's the kind of turnover expected, and the next term we'll see. in the meantime, we wait on this year's term and the decisions that have consequential impacts. thank you, lisa rubin, leah litman, and doug jones. stay close, we will keep our eyes and ears trained on the supreme court, we'll bring the decisions as we get them. also ahead, going head to head, how trump and biden are preparing for their debate showdown next week. plus, thou shall not put the ten commandments in schools. there's a growing legal battle over one state's effort to do the opposite. but first, wildfires, extreme heat and a tropical storm. the extreme weather scorching and sinking parts of this country. we're back in 90 seconds. it may be time to see the bigger picture. heart failure and seemingly unrelated symptoms, like carpal tunnel syndrome, shortness of breath, and irregular heartbeat could be something more serious called attr-cm, a rare, underdiagnosed disease that worsens over time. sound like you? call your cardiologist, and ask about attr-cm. always dry scoop before you run. listen to me, the hot dog diet got me shredded. it's time we listen to science. one a day is formulated with key nutrients to support whole body health. one a day. science that matters. when migraine strikes, you're faced with a choice. ride it out with the tradeoffs of treating? or push through the pain and symptoms? with ubrelvy, there's another option. one dose works fast to eliminate migraine pain. treat it anytime, anywhere without worrying where you are or if it's too late. do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. allergic reactions to ubrelvy can happen. most common side effects were nausea and sleepiness. migraine pain relief starts with u. ask about ubrelvy. learn how abbvie could help you save. [introspective music] recipes. recipes written by hand and lost to time. are now being analyzed and restored using the power of dell ai. ♪ this morning a big swath of the country is still sweltering, and while the northeast bakes, dangerous weather is hitting other parts of the country too, with tropical storm alberto, the first named storm making landfall in mexico and dumping rain in texas and louisiana. with the threat of tornadoes this morning, this as we see more air quality alerts from wildfires burning out west. new mexico's governor has now asked the white house for a major disaster declaration, announcing the second wildfire related fatality overnight. these fires have destroyed hundreds of homes and other structures, and forced thousands to evacuate their homes. nbc's antonia hylton, and meteorologist michelle grossman are following this crazy heat. first, let's go to nbc's sam brock, in alberto's path in freeport, texas, a little break in some of the worst conditions, sam, what's the storm looking like from the ground? >> good morning. it's blustery, as you can see. the rain has subsided for now. a good thing for residents. we are on the west end of surf side beach. you can see how water logged everything is. you would be hard pressed to go in any direction. elevated from the ground, but still seeing all of this water, still a day later, pooling around their properties. i'm watching as residents are trekking back and forth, looking after one another. one woman was carrying groceries, got a ride in a pickup to go down to her neighbor. seeing lots of good samaritans. the fire department was prepared to rescue if they had to. the reality is they didn't need to. the water never got that high where there was a life threatening situation. that's good news. the members of this fire department told me even this morning, there were actually a couple inches of water going up toward their department here. now they're just kind of hanging out and taking in the sun as things are drying out. the problem right now is that you're getting offshore winds that are pulling out the high tide. you're getting really lots of water trapped on the ground with nowhere to go. once the tide recedes and the winds die down, you would expect this flooding to die down. as far as where we rank in this hurricane season, i'll leave you with this, the forecast from noaa, a record breaking season with 17 to 25 storms, and potentially 8 to 13 hurricanes. this is just a tropical storm and the very start of what might be a chaotic next couple of months, back to you, ana. >> thank you so much, sam brock. let's head to antonia with more on the extreme heat. how are people coping with the heat advisories in new york? >> reporter: people are hanging out in the shade, wearing hats, carrying sun block, and lots and lots of water in new york. we are among the $65 million americans under heat advisories and extreme weather warnings. what we're seeing are families in some of the parks in splash pads. some people are keeping their kids home from school in some cases. temperatures are 10 to 20 degrees above average in the northeast, new england, all the way to the great lakes. what we're hearing from officials here is they're taking a number of actions from the governor's office, kathy hochul, taking the step to make sure the national guard is activated in case they need to help with heat emergencies, local schools, in some cases, letting kids out around lunchtime to head home and relax with families in air-conditioning. for people who might not have air-conditioning at home, the real message is to make sure that you have access to somewhere safe in the new york area. that can mean free libraries, going into cafes, malls and museums, so you have a place to cool off and you have access to fountains and cold water. it can be a silent killer that affects the very young, school aged kids, the elderly, and people with all kinds of medical conditions. they want people to take those extra steps. even if you're going to, some people behind me are getting exercise in today, you need to have sort of an extra level of alertness here to make sure that you are taking care of yourself and your friends and making sure they don't have usual symptoms of getting the heat sickness, and that's really the concern when you're talking about this. so make sure that you have access to a cool place and to water, and we should be able to make it through this heat dome. >> all good information. thank you so much for that report. antonia hylton. and we just got notified that the president has been briefed on alberto, the wildfires, this extreme heat. is there any relief in sight in. >> there is so much going on, and i wish i will better news. we are looking at days and days of this continuing into early next week and the outlook at least for the eastern portion of the nation, we're going to have an above average june as well. still under heat alerts from the great lakes, the ohio valley to the northeast into new england. heat advisories in the orange. watch is in the lighter, red color and the heat warning, bangor, maine, you're looking at that. we had a