>> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> fathom travel. carnival corporation's small ship line. offering seven day cruises to three cities in cuba. exploring the culture, cuisine and historic sites through its people. more at fathom.org. >> you were born with two stories. one you write every day, and one you inherited that's written in your d.n.a. 23andme.com is a genetic service that provides personalized reports about traits, health and ancestry. learn more at www.23andme.com. lincoln financial is committed to helping you take charge of your future. >> and the william and flora hewlett foundation, helping people build immeasurably better lives. >> supported by the rockefeller foundation. promoting the well-being of humanity around the world by building resilience and inclusive economies. more at rockefellerfoundation.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: and individuals. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> ifill: it's the supreme court's biggest abortion case in nearly a quarter century. by five-to-three, the justices struck down a texas law that forced many abortion clinics to close, by requiring doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. it had since been widely copied in other states. opponents of the law celebrated, but both sides vowed the fight will go on. >> today's supreme court decision is a game-changer. in the unrelenting assault on women's health and rights that has been going on in state legislatures for years. this is a tremendous victory, and we will go forward in making sure that all of the laws that are blocking women's access to constitutional rights will be overturned. >> unfortunately, the supreme court sided with abortion. so we stand here as members of the pro-life movement saying we will not give up, if anything, we're more resolute. this next election is about between one and four supreme court justices, hundreds of lower court justices, and 5,000 appointees for our government. we as a pro-life community must vote. this is a call to action. we will not give up. >> woodruff: >> ifill: also today: the court overturned the bribery conviction of former virginia governor bob mcdonnell. the unanimous decision is likely to make it harder to prosecute elected officials for corruption. we'll explore today's court action after the news summary. in the day's other news, britain's vote to quit the european union weighed on world markets again, and on wall street. the dow jones industrial average lost 260 points-- on top of the 600 points it lost friday, it closed today at 17,140. the nasdaq fell 113 points, and the s&p 500 dropped nearly 37. meanwhile, two debt rating agencies-- standard and poor's and fitch-- stripped britain of its top credit rating. a new round of storms rolled over west virginia today, as more than 20 counties braced for new flooding. since last week, floods across the state have killed nearly two dozen people and destroyed scores of homes. and, police warned today of looting in some of the hardest- hit towns. >> we will be stepping up patrols in that area now that we're able to get in there easily. and the citizens have armed themselves. if you decide to loot and steal from people who have already been ravaged by these flood waters, you'll be lucky if we're the ones that catch you. >> ifill: there's no damage estimate yet, but it could be the state's worst in 30 years. a wildfire in central california has now destroyed 250 homes and other buildings, and killed two people. the blaze has burned across 45,000 acres in kern county, about 110 miles north of los angeles. the fire is about 40% contained. it was stoked by record-breaking heat and the state's ongoing drought. another 165 pages of e-mails have emerged from hillary clinton's tenure as secretary of state. they include 34 that the democratic presidential hopeful had not turned over to the state department. instead, the department obtained them from huma abedin, clinton's deputy chief of staff. a federal court ordered them made public in a lawsuit by a conservative group. the governments of israel and turkey agreed today to normalize relations, ending a bitter, six- year diplomatic rift. turkey severed ties with israel in 2010 after ten turkish activists were killed trying to run the israeli naval blockade of gaza. even today, the two sides appeared at odds over future access to gaza. >> i'm sure this is an agreement that is good for both sides so i don't want to start quibbling on that, but i will say this: the security naval blockade remains in place. >> ( translated ): our first ship carrying 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid will set sail. therefore the blockade there in gaza will have been lifted with turkey's leadership. >> ifill: the agreement does call for delivery of relief supplies to gaza, plus an exchange of ambassadors. and, israel will pay compensation for the deaths of the turkish activists. turkey also moved today to improve relations with russia. the turkish government announced it will prosecute a man who allegedly killed a russian military pilot shot down at the syrian border. in a letter to russian leader vladimir putin, turkish president recep tayyip erdogan also apologized for downing the jet. still to come on the newshour: the supreme court's momentous ruling on abortion access, we're on the ground in london and in scotland, as the reality of brexit remains foggy, politics monday: elizabeth warren goes to bat against donald trump, and much more. >> ifill: we return to the historic day at the supreme court. abortion rights advocates claimed a huge victory as the eight-member court came down five-to-three against a restrictive texas anti-abortion law. for more on end-of-term decision, we turn to newshour regular marcia coyle, chief washington correspondent of the "national law journal." just to be clear, we're talking about two different anti-restrictive laws that were returned today. >> right. >> ifill: how did this case get to the dismownchts a group of abortion clinics in texas challenged the two texas regulations that were contained in a law now noun as h.b.2 enacted in 2013. the two regulations required clinic doctors to have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles to have the clinic. the second regulation required the clinics to meet the building safety and other standards of ambulatory surgical centers that are almost hospital-like. >> ifill: what was the practical effect of the law as it stood before the court waited? >> when the admitting privileges requirement went into effect, roughly 20 of the 40 existing texas abortion clinics closed. the clinics estimated that when the ambulatory surgical center requirement would go into effect which it hadn't, that the 20 remaining clinics would go down to seven or eight. >> ifill: we've seen this happen with other cases that have made it to court, whether it was actually a group looking for a challenge? >> no, i mean, this was actually a reaction to what texas had enacted. texas claimed that these regulations were designed to protect the health of women. the clinics claim that the regulations were designed to stop abortions. so the clinics challenged them. they lost in the lower federal appellate court but won in the trial court, but because they lost in the lower federal appellate court, they had to go to the supreme court, and in the supreme court they claimed that these regulations were unconstitutional under the court's 1992 test that asks whether the regulations or restrictions impose an undue burden on a woman's access to abortion. so, you know, what is an undue burden? this is why this case attracted so much attention and concern. what was the court going to say? house of it going to apply that test? well, the court in '92 did say that unnecessary regulations that have the purpose or effect of imposing a substantial obstacle in the path of the woman constituted an undue, unconstitutional burden, and that's what five justices found today the way the two restrictions were implemented. that's the effect of those. >> ifill: we talk all the time about how there are normally nine justice but in this case there were eight and in the affirmative action last week there was a 5 to 3 decision on something this important and hot button. how did it come act and what was the reasoning of the court? >> first of all, i don't think that justice scalia's presence on the court, had he lived, would have made a difference in the outcome. i think he would have been in the dissent and itould have been a five-four decision. justice breyer wrote the majority opinion and took the two requirements one by one, the admitting privileges requirement. abortions, he said, have very rare complications, you don't need the hospital at happened within 30 miles. he also said that clinic doctors already had working arrangements with other physicians who did have admitting privileges in case it was needed. then he looked at the effect here, when the privileges requirement went into effect, 20 of 40 clinics closed, the result, fewer doctors, increased crowding, longer waits, longer drive distances, and he said there was just no health problem that this lawn was seeking to cure. on the surgical centers requirement, there he looked and he said, okay, abortion has fewer complications than many of the procedures that texas law allows to be done outside of surgical centers, in homes, in offices, and the risks there, he said, ordinary birth, childbirth is 14 times the risk. so what's the impact, then, of that requirement? he looked at that. the 20 remaining clinics would go down to seven or eight. >> ifill: but the surprise, at least for we novices, was justice kennedy ended up on the same side more or less as justice breyer. >> justice kennedy was in the 1992 decision that reaffirmed rowe v wade. he expressed some unhappiness of how the coward applied the 1992 position when it took up some of nebraska's partial birth abortion act, but justice breyer said as long as the court continued to follow rowe v wade in the 1992 casey decision, this is the way they should interpret the undue burden. gwen, justice kennedy was the senior justice in the majority in this case so he had the right to assign the opinion to anyone who was in the majority. >> ifill: by assigning it to justice breyer, he knew what he was getting. >> he did and he got a very fact-laden, straightforward opinion from justice breyer. >> ifill: marcia coyle, thank you and thank you for the term. it's been exciting. >> it's been an unusual term. thanks, gwen, my pleasure. expwrfntl >> ifill: we are now joined by advocates on both sides of the court's abortion decision. nancy northup is president of the center for reproductive rights, which helped bring the challenge against the texas law to the courts. and favoring the texas law, steven aden. he's senior counsel for alliance defending freedom. big victory today, we'll start with you. tell us what the effect is of this ruling in a small sense, what happens in texas and in a broader sense what happens around the country? >> this was a tremendous victory today. it was just a clear out win. what that means for texas is that the clinics that are currently open in texas can stay open, they were threatened to be closed by this underhanded law, and also that other clinics would be able to reopen. you know, one of the things that happened with h.b.2 was that it devastated abortion acts in texas closing half which the court said was unconstitutional because they weren't justified on medical grounds. >> ifill: what tried to limit the scope of the abortion clinics. >> we believe it's a big disappointment and loss for women's health and safety. all texas was trying to do is regulate abortion the same way and manner as other similar outpatient abortion procedures. if you or i go in for a colonoscopy or a laparoscopy chances are our doctor will have admitting privileges because if something goes wrong you want the best standard of healthcare available to help you. that's all texas was trying to do. the fact the supreme court would strike this law by one vote does not argue well for women's health. >> ifill: weren't you hoping for a four-to-four. >> that's right, if justice kennedy would have come along it would have been a four-four split but that didn't happen. >> ifill: what about the argument that this was something affecting women's health and in fact tha that the law was desigd to protect women's health? >> well, i think the supreme court made clear today this was a pretext, the idea that it was about women's health because as the american medical association and others saw, it didn't advance women's health and hurt it by putting so many women out of reach of being able to get abortion receivables. it's a game changer, the decision from the supreme court today, which is why we're excited about it because we have been fighting these kind of sham laws for years and the supreme court has made clear that you have got to have a justification to regulate abortion and you have to make sure that the burden does not overwhelm the justification the law has or it can't stand. >> ifill: steven aden, was this a game changer? was this landmark historical? >> it remains to be seen if this was a one-off. this was a decision of one justice that went the other way. >> ifill: isn't that how most things get decided in the court? >> sure. what we'll find out in years to come with many cases like this coming before the court which is whether the supreme court is in earnest makeig it more difficult for most states to regulate abortion the same as similar state providers. the fact it close add number of clinics says two things, as the the lead plaintiff in one of the cases, amy said she's more about planned parenthood closing her down because they're cornering the market for abortion in texas than about regulation themselves. so we don't know why many of the clinics closed, we just know they did. that was the argument texas made. unfortunately, again, the supreme court by one vote did not accept the argument. >> ifill: i want you to respond and ask yor about the single-vote majority. >> i think the decision today is the response to that. the court could not have been clearer that was no justification for these laws. this is what we have been facing in scores of laws passed around the country and in court after court after court after court in jen have blocked them because they're not justified. they see them for what they are which is an attempt to do by the back door what you can't do by the front which is ban abortion. the supreme court reiterated today as it has for 40 years, women have the right to make the important personal decisions for their lives, and with this decision today, the reason it's so monumental is that it protects for the next generation of american women the right to make these decisions for themselves. >> ifill: let's talk ability how the decision got made. you mentioned a couple of times steven aden that justice kennedy decided basically to tip the balance. were you surprised by that? >> a little bit. he made no secret of his antipathy for abortion. he spoke strongly against it the last time the supreme court made a pronouncement on the practice before. when you talk about women making decisions, this law was upheld twice by two fifth circuit panels. open those fifth circuit panels were five different women, and i think that says a lot for how women view this law. by and large when they get a chance to look at the facts, they uphold it, but in this case one man, justice breyer writing for the court, decided the law imposed an undue burden, which is a shame. >> ifill: what about that, the idea one man writing for the court turned this upside down in terms of interests for women? >> the supreme court obviously is five justices ruled today in our favor, and the issue is not whether it's men or women sitting on the court. americans differ in their views about abortion. what's important and the courts recognize while people of good faith can disagree about abortion, the constitution protects our decisions that we make about whether or not to end a pregnancy. the decisions about our family and our lives and our health. and that's what matters. so people can make their own decisions, but what the court protects and the rule of law was vindicated today was that it is for women to make these decisions. that's been true for over 40 years and it was reaffirmed again today in this important case. >> ifill: were you surprised by justice kennedy's decision? >> justice kennedy was in the majority in the planned parenthood haves casey case which was the last abortion case that set the standard the court interpreted today, so justice ken ep diwas consistent with the decision as the court was in what they ruled on 24 years ago. >> ifill: let me ask you both briefly, is this it? is this over or does this fight continue in another way? >> i think it continues in many ways. the pro-life movement has been winning on all fronts. it lost today in this one court, but it's been winning in the court of public opinion. it's been winning the first amendment questions about access to sidewalks in front of abortion clinics. by and large, in fact, the abortion rate today is the same as it was in 1973, the year rowe vs. wade was decided and i think the argument will continue. >> we have a lot of work ahead of us. we'll see state laws get overturned in the light of this decision. the momentum is on our side. seven or ten americans support women should be able to make a decision in deciding to terminate a pregnancy. as the fight goes ahead, we'll see the momentum be on the side, and the supreme court's overwhelming rejection of underhanded tactics like they did today is a good sign for the future. >> ifill: nancy northup, steven aden, thank you both very much. >> thank you, gwen. >> ifill: we turn now to britain, and the hang over from last week's historic vote. hari sreenivasan is in london. >> sreenivasan: there is confusion with a touch of remorse here in england as the reality of their vote to leave the e.u. settles in. key promises that were made are being walked back, and parliament is met with the task of picking a new prime minister. >> the decision must be accepted, and the process of implementing the decision in the best possible way must now begin. >> sreenivasan: it was his first appearance in the house of commons since the fateful vote, and prime minister david cameron sought to reassure a jittery country. >> we know that this is going to be far from plain sailing. however, we should take confidence from the fact that britain is ready to confront what the future holds for us from a position of strength. >> sreenivasan: cameron himself will not be a part of that effort. he opposed leaving the e.u., and plans to step down by fall. his labor party counterpart-- jeremy corbyn-- also opposed "brexit" and is also under pressure to quit. nearly 30 members of his inner circle have resigned since sunday to protest corbyn's leadership. those who championed taking britain out of the e.u. face criticism as well-- amid claims they have no concrete plans for what to do next. one urgent question: exactly when and how the united kingdom will formally depart the e.u. first, london must invoke article 50 of the e.u. treaty, which governs exiting the union. that, in turn, will start negotiations that could take two years. prime minister cameron said today the government is in no rush to take that step. >> the british government will not be triggering article 50 at this stage. before we do that, we need to determine the kind of relationship we want with the e.u. and that is rightly something for the next prime minister and their cabinet to decide. >> sreenivasan: european leaders also met today in berlin and agreed no formal or informal exit talks will begin before britain officially invokes article 50. german chancellor angela merkel acknowledged they don't expect that to happen overnight. >> ( translated ): we can't afford long-term uncertainty. it wouldn't be in either side's economic interest. but i have a certain understanding that great britain needs a certain amount of time to analyze things. >> sreenivasan: meanwhile, efforts are underway to calm other members of the e.u. u.s. secretary of state john kerry was in brussels today, meeting with the e.u.'s federal policy chief, federica mogherini. >> i think it is absolutely essential that we stay focused on how, in this transitional period, nobody loses their head, nobody goes off half-cocked, people don't start "ginning up" scatterbrained or revengeful premises, but we look for ways to maintain the strength that will serve the interests of the values that brought us together in the first place. >> sreenivasan: kerry traveled on to london, to meet with his british counterpart, philip hammond, and said the u.s. relationship with the u.k. will stay strong. but global markets are another matter, and they fell again today, despite attempts at reassurance by the british treasury chief george osborne. >> we were prepared for the unexpected, and we are equipped for whatever happens. and we are determined that unlike eight years ago, britain's financial system will help our country deal with any shocks and dampen them, not contribute to those shocks or make them worse. >> sreenivasan: former london mayor boris johnson-- one of the most prominent "leave" campaigners-- welcomed osborne's efforts to allay concerns. >> it's clear now that "project fear" is over. there is not going to be an emergency budget, people's pensions are safe, the pound is stable, the markets are stable. i think that's all very good news. >> sreenivasan: still, a leading british business group said 20% of its 1,000 members now plan to move some of their operations outside the u.k. we head to scotland now, where malcolm brabant reports on the mood among citizens where a majority of voters had wanted to stay. >> reporter: stung by the brexit vote in england and wales, scotland now appears to be racing along the road to independence. two years ago, scots voted in a referendum against leaving the united kingdom. above all because it guaranteed continued membership of the european union. according to independence activist stuart bremner, brexit feels like betrayal. >> the scottish referendum was a bit like the final cracks opening in the british empire, and what we're seeing in the last couple of days could be not just cracks, but the heart of the british empire splintering completely. people are unable to say what they feel because they're so emotional. there's tears. there's anger. i was in a march and a rally in this very square on friday night, there were people speaking, there were people crying. and people are deeply upset by this. and it's almost beyond words because it's too enormous. what's happening is beyond anything we've ever known in this country in our lifetimes. ♪ >> reporter: on edinburgh's royal mile, an upbeat tune swirled from the pipes of thomas wilson, but in his heart was a lament. >> i'm incredibly disappointed actually. i never wanted to leave the e.u. i'm incredibly worried. for starters, i'm a big supporter of free movement around europe. i enjoy going around europe, busking and travelling to all the different cities, you know. and i'm very disappointed that i'll not be able to do that as easily any more. i think we should go for our own independence referendum again, which i hope will happen in the next two years because that's when the u.k. are planning on leaving europe. >> reporter: with an opinion poll estimating that nearly 60% of scots now want independence, first minister nicola sturgeon has taken the nation's pulse and put the wheels in motion. >> good morning. a second independence referendum is clearly an option that requires to be on the table and it is very much on the table. and to ensure that that option is a deliverable one in the required timetable, steps will be taken now to ensure that the necessary legislation is in place. >> reporter: that's music to the ears of hard core scottish nationalists who've never abandoned hope of what they regard as liberation. especially at the permanent vigil in edinburgh where campaigners display the arbroath declaration of independence, written in the 14th century by the legendary scottish king, robert the bruce. unemployed bricklayer's laborer dean halliday. >> they made their decision about their country. we made our decision about ours. there's no difference. we don't not like the english people. the english people are lovely people. it's their government we don't want to be tied to. we can't keep being subservient to a government that's not working in our interests and that's westminster. >> reporter: outside scotland's idiosyncratic parliament building holyrood house, the brexit vote has reaffirmed history lecturer lesley orr's desire for independence. she believes scotland is sufficiently mature to flourish. >> scotland is not just part of the state of the united kingdom, but it's a nation which has its own longstanding centuries old traditions, relationships, legal framework, educational system, religious tradition-- all of which are different from england and wales. >> reporter: but the leader of the main opposition scottish conservative party, ruth davidson, is vehemently opposed to a second independence vote north of the border. >> the u.k. market is worth four times as much to scotland as the e.u. market. i cannot support even further instability by having a second independence referendum. we voted on that in scotland. we had a clear vote. with a clear mandate to stay within the united kingdom and we all have to work together, scottish government and u.k. government, to get the best deal for scotland's businesses going forward. >> reporter: scotland's first minister nicola sturgeon is advising parliament here to vote against britain leaving the european union. some people are hoping her words mean that scotland has the power of veto. but constitutional experts say that is not the case and all the parliament can do is advise westminster. christine o'neill, one of scotland's top constitutional lawyers, believes the country should be in line for fast track membership of the e.u., if it becomes independent. >> well, the first point is the e.u. normally deals with states rather than sub state entities. so it would be quite difficult for scotland to be a member of the e.u. without being a state in its own right. if scotland was to become independent, then it could negotiate its way into the e.u. in the way other states have done in the past. and we would expect scotland to be in a strong position to negotiate membership given that its in the e.u. at the moment. >> reporter: but what about business? edinburgh was the birthplace of adam smith, the economist who espoused the virtues of the free market. whiskey is a pillar of the scottish economy, providing 10% of the nation's exports to the e.u., and generating 40,000 jobs. according to industry spokesman david williamson, the producers aren't sure which way to jump over independence. >> scotch whiskey has been around for 500 years. we'll still be selling scotch whiskey to markets around europe. but what our members are telling is that there's uncertainty. for example, access to and influence within the single market, our biggest market. and also for us as an export industry, how do we keep benefiting from the trade deals that the e.u. negotiates around the world. >> reporter: at arthur's seat, the volcanic crag dominating edinburgh, business leader jill murphy insisted that scotland had nothing to fear from great britain becoming the disunited kingdom. >> we polled our members and 82% of them were clear that they wanted to remain within the european union, and that's because we're a net exporter. we want to keep that single market open. we want to keep that area of trade open. it benefits scottish business, but it also benefits our youth in studying future innovators and future investors in the scottish economy. >> reporter: but there were cautionary words from frances and ioannis lalos. she's scottish, he's greek. they moved to scotland from athens six years ago to escape the greek financial crisis. they've worked hard to become financially secure, are about to buy a house, but are worried about the currency of a future independent scotland. >> if scotland was to become independent from the u.k., they would, i presume, have to enter the euro zone like the rest of the countries entering the euro. when they join the e.u. that would be a concern for me. we experienced that in greece. it was a disaster for greece. i wouldn't want that to happen to scotland. it's a small country in a big pond, and have concerns that might not work out well. >> reporter: four days after the referendum, and warnings of armageddon, britain is still floating along, although her foundations seem to have vanished. but here in edinburgh, as in the rest of the united kingdom no one seems to know what the future will bring. except it will be like scotland's national symbol, prickly. for the pbs newshour, i'm malcolm brabant in edinburgh. >> ifill: stay with us. coming up on the newshour: jeff brown kicks off our summer reading series with a highly anticipated novel, one loosely based on the women in charles manson's cult. but first, democrats hillary clinton and massachusetts senator elizabeth warren hit the trail today in ohio, focusing their energy on presumptive republican nominee donald trump. the candidates are squaring off over trade, brexit, and which one of them is more qualified. for that, we turn to politics monday with amy walter of the "cook political report" and tamara keith of npr. let's start by the big cincinnati standoff today. i don't think it was a standoff -- between elizabeth warren and apparently very exciting rally and hillary clinton in which we saw the two of them basically take turns taking shots at donald trump. let's take a listen. >> what kind of man roots for people to lose their jobs, to lose their homes, to lose their life savings? i'll tell you what kind of a man -- a small, insecure money grubber who fights for no one but himself! (cheers and applause) >> this is a man who plays coy with white supremacists and mocks people with disabilities, who talks about banning an entire religion from entering our country, who advocates getting rid of gun-free zones in schools, letting more countries have nuclear weapons, defaulting on our national debt, turning back the clock on marriage equality and, just like elizabeth, i could go on and on. >> ifill: but she didn't have to because before they etch got on stage at about 6:00 this morning, donald trump tweeted this -- crooked hillary are is wheeling out one of the least productive senators in the u.s. senate, goofy elizabeth warren who lied on heritage. where to begin, tam. just go. >> and then donald trump, after the speech was over, called a correspondent for nbc news and doubled down on the elizabeth warren lied about her heritage thing and said that, absolutely he should call her hok poke han. this dates back to the race elizabeth con won. at some point she checked a box that said she was native american and did that help her get preference in hiring. then the republican party held a call to respond to the clinton-warren speech and former senator scott brown woo had run against elizabeth warren in 2012 was on the call and said, hey, does it make sense your candidate is going after a surrogate and not the person he's running against? and scott brown's response was, well, maybe elizabeth warren could get a dna test and solve this for everybody. he said that with a little bit of a chuckle, but the point is that, very quickly, they were not talking about hillary clinton, they were talking about elizabeth warren! >> ifill: well, this is my question, it seems there are many things they could be talking about -- brexit or trade -- instead, everybody tries to get under esked's skin. >> this is is i know you are but what am i election. the actual speech today with hillary clinton and elizabeth warren, you picked out the parts where they definitely were digging at donald trump, but there was also a broader economic message in there, and you could see it in the display they had top -- had on the front of the podium that said stronger together. just the point about we're going to be bringing people along based on x, y, z policies and hillary clinton went through huer policy positions. but, of course, that's not particularly interesting. what's much more interesting and buzzy is the debate over this i know you are but what am i piece. >> ifill: in part because they seem to be successful in getting him to respond. we saw just a few days ago a huge kind of global upheaval, and we saw the way donald trump responded to it, the careful way hillary clinton responded to it. how did hillary clinton's and donald trump's response fit into a larger strategy that may or may not be working for either of them? >> well, they're playing the part, that's for sure. donald trump was at his golf course in scotland, grand opening of the golf course his son worked on, he was there to promote the golf course, along one of the holes, he talked about brexit and said, hey, the pound falling may be bad for people, but it could be good, people might come to my golf course. that is completely in line with what donald trump has said about various things. he is doing what he did in the primary that was wildly successful for him. he's not running ads on television in key swing states. hillary clinton is. he thinks he has a strategy that's going to work. hillary clinton and her campaign are now running ads on cable at least, attacking donald trump on his reaction to brexit. and, you know, she responds with the sort of wonky world leader kind of thing. they're doing it themselves. >> anand the major theme is do u want to stay the course, stick with the status quo even though it has not brought the success you hoped, or make a change, even though it's a very unpredictable change? and the thing you'rer we're seeing in this country, obviously you have to be careful of parallels, but this was in the early june poll in the "wall street journal," they asked the question, i think correctly, which is -- of voters -- would you like to see change even if it's unpredictable or sort of a more steady stay the course even though it won't bring much change? 53% of voters say they want to sea change and that is what donald trump is hoping he be able to project for which, again, yes, there is some danger in making a change but aren't things so now so terrible you're willing to try something different? >> ifill: i read today when asked about whether it bothered them that trump didn't appear to know what brexit was a week or so ago, folks said that's okay because they didn't either. but there are other polls we're following. let's throw them into a pot. a washington abc poll showing hillary clinton headed by double digits. another one shows the "wall street journal" nbc news poll that shows her ahead by 5. i wonder whether they mean anything at this stage, added together? >> we can average them and say hillary clinton is ahead at this moment in time in the snapshot, but we also get the swing state polls that show it much tighter in the swing states. >> which he cites when behind. does cite and he has concern about the methodology in some of the polls, which he liked those polls earlier, but whatever the case may be, these are polls. the broad trend is that he is not ahead. >> i think they are important and i think that trend is correct. i think after the convention is going to be an important time to clue in. historically, once the conventions are over, we start to hit the august, september, and when the numbers start to lock in, then, they're harder to change unless there is a big, major event. so we may still see volatility going on. the other thing that's interesting especially in the nbc poll that came out, for all the talk of the collapse of donald trump, how he's losing, what i found the congressional ballot test which asks would you vote for a democrat or a republican in the house of representatives, that's evenly divided. in other words, what's happening is there is not that downward poll, not yet at least, it may happen, of donald trump on candidates underneath him. so senate and house members who were republicans who are very fearful of a donald trump effect, it's not showing up. >> ifill: one more we about the brexit issue, i noticed at the end of hillary clinton's speech today, she said let's take our country, and i thought, where's she going? in the right direction. which is not what trump said. but i wonder who are brexit vote gets people's attention enough or whether we don't make these judgments on issues that happen abroad? >> i would argue that people are not closely following what's happening abroad, but i think that the broad themes of the brexit vote are something that should give hillary clinton and her campaign great pause. >> i agree with that, but there has been an immediate effect and that is if you have a 401k or are at all in the stock market, that was an meet impact, and does it continue? it's one thing if it was one bad day and comes back. if it doesn't come back, then we're going to start to have a real discussion about how brexit impacted all of us. >> woodruff: well one more thing to add to the loop. that's great. amy walter, tamera keith, thank you both very much. >> you're welcome. >> ifill: now, to one of summer's great pleasures-- tackling that book you've been meaning to get to. tonight we begin a week's worth of suggestions, beginning with one of the most eagerly anticipated debut novels of the year. in the first of a three-book deal with random house, author emma cline writes "the girls," the story of a charismatic charles manson-like figure, and the young women who were under his control. jeffrey brown spoke with cline at the recent book expo america in chicago. >> brown: tell me first where did the idea come from? was it something always in your head? >> i'm from northern california where the book is set and i grew up hearing the california mythology, the manson stories, the communes ando cults that are endemic to that state so i wanted to engage with it in a new way that wasn't like the stories i had heard which focused on the men. i was always more curious about the women involved. >> brown: there is a lot in just what you said. let me go back first. the california mythology. >> yeah. >> brown: you're young, but for you, these were myths. >> right. both of my parents are californians. they were the same age as my main character in the '60s, both lived in california, so i think for them these events were really cultural touchstones. so growing up, i heard a lot about them. >> brown: how much did you know? in detail or just sort of out there? >> first just generally and then in detail. i think everyone that i know, anyway, sort of had that experience of reading helter skelter as a teenager. >> brown: the manson story. and feeling it was a sordid, exciting thing that you were just drawn to. >> brown: yeah. so maybe when i was a teenager, i got more into it. >> brown: and when did you actually start writing it? >> i started writing it maybe four years ago now, but i was always sort of circling around the same ideas, always interested in communes and sort of extreme living situations and extreme moments. >> brown: why? i think it's what i like most reading about in fiction, sort of the edge of human experience, and i think communes sort of bring out the best and worst in people. >> brown: so what kind of research did you do then? did you go live on one? >> sort of. >> brown: yeah. i lived in a collective in college. it was very mild. very nice. but, no, i mean, i did research before i even knew it was research, just because it was something i was always interested in that era and sort of memoirs from that time, and there is so much of the '60s still left over in california. we never quite recovered from the '60s so it's lots of leftovers. >> brown: when you write, do you set the research accede or do you keep it sitting there to use details? >> yeah, definitely it's like taking in so much information and just forgetting about that and trying to get at some tone that deals truthful. i'm not so much interested in factual truth. this is not a factual novel, it's taking a germ from the manson story and transforming it into something else. i hope this story stands on its own enough that it's not seen as manson novel because, really, it's the cults and crime at the center, it's not what the novel's about. to me, it's more about relationships. >> brown: right, and it's about "the girls," the name, which is what i wanted to come back to, is you were not so interested in the ways the stories were told, the mad man or the charismatic man. >> which is such a familiar story, a charismatic sociopath and everyone is drawn to him, and to me charles manson and people like him are pretty one note, especially characters in a novel. they're sort of everyday psychopaths and there is no ambiguity for me. but the women, many whom were home coming queens and straight a students who end up following someone like that, to me that's where the story was. >> brown: because that goes to what you were saying about the kind of good and bad, or the xtremes that somehow people get thrown into it in a way they never would have expected. >> yeah. i was thinking about it recently because i had read a story about the sort of teenage girls in europe who run away and join i.s.i.s. >> brown: yeah. and it's something that's still happening in these other ways. it's a strange combination of innocence, you know, teenage girls, and then this extremely, like, horrifying realm that you can't understand what the draw is, and i wanted to sort of really get down to granular psychological level of what is drawing girls to this sort of dangerous group. >> brown: so then how did you create these characters? i mean, given that, you were trying to give them sort of a normal upbringing. >> right. it's sort of trying to figure out what could be the milieu someone is coming from where this other group starts to seem magnetic, and that's maybe there is trouble at home, and i think all teenagers have that desire to be seen and known, and if you feel like you aren't being seen, and then there is someone who does see you or feels, you know, you feel yourself reflected back, i think that's -- >> brown: yeah. so because this is your first novel, i mean, you were clearly learning as you wrote it, right? fair to say? >> yes. >> brown: i think people would be interested in what was the hardest part. was it plotting, character? what was it? >> i mean, the whole thing was a struggle, and only, like, in the last week was i, like, oh, this is a book! but up until that last week, i was, like, this is a mess. >> brown: really, you had a moment where you said finally, this is a book? >> yeah, there was a moment where it felt like a book to me. >> brown: and what did that mean? >> i don't know. i could see it sort of had a completeness, whereas before it was sort of, you know, loose. >> brown: and, finally, what's next? are you working on -- >> i'm working on a novel. i'm still in the early days of it but i'm very happy to be on to something new. >> brown: you are? yeah. >> reporter: is it coming easier? >> no. i thought if i did it once, you will know how to do it. but i felt like every new book, you know, you're struggling anew. >> brown: well, happy struggle. the book is "the girls," emma cline, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> ifill: you can watch many more of jeff's author interviews from book expo america and other book festivals. you'll find those at the pbs website: pbs.org/book-view-now. >> ifill: finally tonight, our newshour shares: something that caught our eye that might be of interest to you, too. in 2012, a newshour colleague suggested historian michael beschloss create a twitter profile to share what interested him most. since then, beschloss has provided a unique perspective on american history-- often through photos-- to his more than 140,000 followers. he spoke with us recently about some of favorite posts. i do a lot of historical photographs but with a relevance to tarksd trying to find things people have not seen before, but also things that remind us that there is his trito some of the events that we're seeing now. this is john fct kennedy and wife jackie and sister ethel taking a selfie in a mir wror. louie arm strong in 1976 was playing in egypt and went to the pyramids and sphinx. these were the contents of abraham lincoln's pockets the night he was murdered. among the things he was holding that night was a $5 confederate bill and sort of amazing when you think about the fact that nowadays the united states $5 bill has a picture of abraham lincoln. six first ladies backstage, an event 1994, nancy reagan, liddy bird johnson, hillary clinton, rosalynn carter, betty ford, barbara bush. take a look at the lammings among them shows you how a photograph can speak volumes. babe ruth was knocked out in a game in 1924, was out about five minutes, and this was a very different time. he went back into the game and played. it was a doubleheader. he played another game that day. would not happen today. this is a report card that john lennon got when he was 16 years old, and what his principal said of him was, he has too many of the wrong ambitions and his energy is often misplaced. mary ellenen monroe went to korea in 1954 to perform for troops. she had a pentagon i.d. which shows her married name at the time norma gene dimaggio. 1865 new york, abraham lincoln's funeral parade in new york and in the upper circle is a 6-year-old theodore roosevelt looking down. he was affected for the rest of his life. when he was president, he said, i used to ask myself, what would lincoln do. this is harry truman in the '30s having a gun pulled on him by vice president garner. they thought it was a joke in those days. take a look at an imof a vice president doing this these days would not be so funny. when i did this, i thought there would be about three people interested at looking at old pictures. within a week, the number of followers went up very steeply and, since then, i have found that there are a lot more people interested in history in america in general and particularly our visual history than i realized. >> ifill: you can follow michael's photos on beschloss d.c. @beschlossdc. on the newshour online right now, a national study by the pew research center suggests that our perceptions of progress toward racial equality remain splintered. four out of ten african- americans said they doubt the nation will ever achieve racial equality, while as many white americans believe racial equality has been achieved. a deeper look at that data and more is on our web site: pbs.org/newshour. tune in later tonight on "charlie rose:" the music and l.g.b.t. politics of the canadian duo tegan and sarah. and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm gwen ifill. join us online and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> you were born with two stories. one you write every day, and one you inherited that's written in your d.n.a. 23andme.com is a genetic service that provides personalized reports about traits, health and ancestry. learn more at www.23andme.com. lincoln financial is committed to helping you take charge of your future. >> fathom travel, offering cruises to cuba and the dominican republic. travel deep. >> and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. >> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org this is nightly business report with tyler mathson and sue herera. >> brexit aftershock, losse and investors try to determine how the uk's vote to leave the e ao sector to defense stocks to silicon valley. >> portfolio protection. the toks you may want to own when times get tough. >> retirement in ruins? tips to protect your savings even as the market slides. that and more tonight on nightly business report for mond >> good evening, everyone and welcome. sit back and joy a half hour. it's calm now.