tv Hallie Jackson Reports MSNBC June 30, 2022 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein. devastating decisions, that is the reaction from president biden just a short time ago after the supreme court dealt a major setback and climate change policy. in one of the most important
environmental decisions in years, the courts conservative justices cited with several red states and coal companies, and limited the epa's ability to crack down on greenhouse gas emissions. in a victory for the president, the court ruled in favor of the ministrations efforts to shut down the trump remaining mexico immigration policy. we will have reactions to that straight ahead. also coming up it is now justice jackson. this afternoon, to tonya brown jackson became the first black woman to be sworn into the supreme court. it comes in a time of turmoil on the supreme court after the conservative majority overturn roe v wade. good afternoon, everybody. we are back with you for another hour, join now with our nbc news team, and mike medley is with us at the white house. let us take you through the monumental decisions. the biden administration taking a win and a loss all at the same time. >> sure, the win is a little easy to describe. this describes the so-called
migrant protection protocol, and it said that people coming from the south and wanting to cross the border into the u.s. to seek asylum had to wait on the mexican side of the border at least 10 that you are looking at spring up. human rights groups said the people there were subject to abuse and violent attacks, and could not get their lawyers because of the foreign relations problems with mexico. today the supreme court said the biden administration can go ahead with plans to shut this program down. the biden administration try to do this shortly after the president took office, but two states sued, and the ministration did not do it right. today the supreme court said yes, it did. they can go ahead and try to shut it down. that was a 5-4 decision with chief justice roberts and brett kavanaugh joining the three liberals. the other decision involved the environmental protection agency and greenhouse gases. it is undisputed that congress
gave the epa the the authority to limit air pollution at specific coal-fired power plants by requiring the best available technology to reduce pollution emissions from the stacks of the power plants. here's the question. did the epa also have authority to do something that the obama administration wanted to do? which is to save the utilities. one way you can meet the goals and reducing pollution is to shift more of your generation toward cleaner sources like wind and solar, and away from coal-fired sources. did the epa have authority to order regulations that would do that, and today by a vote of 6- 3, the supreme court said no. there is no way to read the existing statutes to that authority for the epa, and a part of the rolling that has the potential to limit the ability of regulatory agencies across the city to do more. it said when the agencies want to do something that involves a major decision like this, major
question, there has to be exquisite authority from congress to do it. that is what today's decision has a potentially wider impact. let me touch on one other thing that i think is going to get more attention in the days to come. that is the case of the supreme court today agreed to take, agreed to decide a case from north carolina that the public urged the court to take, involved a redistricting question. the larger issue is this. who gets the last word to say how elections are conducted in the state? is it the legislature or the courts, and today the supreme court said it would agree just to take that. there is this a growing belief among conservatives in the independent legislature theory that says legislators get the last word. you may or may be discussed in the last provincial election when some state courts allowed extended time for example for returning mail-in ballots even though the legislature never especially given that authority, the court upheld it anyway. can the state courts do that, or do legislators get the last word in something that is
unreviewable like the state court? the supreme court is going to take that up in the coming term. >> and i got to go, but since you had dad that on, then i have to ask a quick follow-up question before we move on. it is actually your. what does it say the court agreed to take that case? >> it says that the conservatives believe they have a vote to win. in the past, at least four justices have a made some sympathetic noises about this theory. obviously those for believe that they have a fifth. why would you take this case if you did not believe you're going to win? there is always a strategy that goes into it. impossible to predict how it is going to come out, but the conservatives who support this theory must think that they have that fifth vote here somewhere. >> i will let you go. thank you. i wanted to bring gabe and his to this conversation.
you have been at the border many times, obviously this is a major decision affecting immigration policy in this country, no matter what side of the alley were on. immigration policy in this country is proving that the infrastructure counsel for the number of people coming into this country. all that being said, how is the state of texas reacting? attorney general here, and the folks you been speaking to? >> we have been speaking with immigrant advocates, the border, and with a welcome this decision. they call it a step in the right direction, however, since title 42 is down, the pandemic policy that is still keeping migrants out of the border, they say that again this is just one step in the right direction but they fear that migrants will still be kept at the border in large numbers. as you mentioned, there is also reaction from public officials in texas, including many conservatives who do not agree with this ruling. let's take a listen to lieutenant governor, dan patrick on what he had to say earlier today in an interview.
>> this is devastating for the state of texas and the united states of america. we are going to see more people here illegally than live in the two largest areas in america. new york and los angeles combined. five times the number of people who live in houston, which is the fourth largest city in the country. >> of course the number of border encounters at the southern border, as you know, is at an all-time high. the critics of npp, or the mexico policy argue that it it is because those policies are in place but now there are repeat crossers, essentially, and that is why the numbers are inflated at this point. of course this debate is sure to continue in the coming months ahead of the midterm elections. >> will let you go as well, gabe. thank you. mike, is just you and me. taught me about what is being said in the building behind you. of course the president is not there. he is reporting from overseas. how are they reacting to the decision of the supreme court? i cannot help but wonder, especially when it comes to the
decision regarding the epa, obviously president is incredibly passionate about environmental presidency policy, especially when it can his soft infrastructure bill. not something has been successful at as of yet. how are they reacting? what are they saying? >> the president is due to come back in just a few hours. as a relates towhat we have to say is a rare victory for the biden administration in the supreme court on their mating mexico question. i have not heard from any white house official or the department of homeland security reacting to that yet. i just spoke with a white house official about that. they said they are still studying the decision as it relates to the timeline for moving forward now with fully terminating the trump policy. also there is an interesting component of this were the white house has negotiation still to do with the mexican government. the mexican president is actually due to come here to the white house in the next few weeks. we expect more reaction on that as the day moves forward, and as the lawyers have a chance to study it. as a relates to this decision regarding the epa's authority
to regulate, to enforce the clean air act and other environmental law, is a strong reaction coming from this white house. you have the president in a state meant earlier calling this a devastating decision that takes our country backwards, and he will not. for the biden administraon the ggest baier is the green energy agenda that has not been the courts. or regulation. it has been senator joe manchin from west virginia. this is an administration unlike the obama administration late in his second term which did rely on regulation and executive action that has been part trying to pursue its climate policy through legislation. there's been some quiet talk continuing with the senator trying to get pieces of the presidents legislative agenda as a relates to the climate through, we have not seen yet of those are the finish line. it has also been with noting
that the strong reaction we got on paper to the climate ruling today matches what we heard from the president in madrid as he was getting ready to depart, speaking with reporters at a news conference there. once again strongly reacting to the supreme court decision on row calling in an outrageous decision. also a rare step for him, endorsing a carveout in the filibuster to codify not just the right to have an abortion from the roe v wade decision, but a greater constitutional right to privacy that he feels is at risk now. >> let me just as he quickly before i let you go, which is what you brought up about the president essentially saying that he is in favor of doing away with the roefilibuster to codify. what is the motivation, knowing that that is something that is not likely to happen because of the senator and how they feel about the filibuster? even unnecessarily having that, if that were to be done. >> in fact, there was a congressional delegation also in madrid attending the nato summit, leader for democrats,
number two the senate democrats saying that just a few to the president endorse the rule change that we know they're not the votes to do it. this is immediate cold water, even from what the president's closest allies. you can look the president's announcement in two veins. it is something of a response to part of his progressive base that think he has not been forceful enough in responding to the decision to overturn the right to an abortion, this was an effort in part by the president to take the heat off himself and is not in that direction, but having covered this president for a long time, you speak with his advisers and they would still, after his election to the white house, the mount mark rushmore of biden's accomplishments in his career, they feel they expected his time on the senate judiciary committee blocking getting a seat on the supreme court, which at the time they felt was critical to protect the right to privacy. this is something that is been
a lifelong passion of his so it is notable that he is embracing the carveout to protect it now. >> thank you. shortly after the final rulings was issued, history was made with the supreme court. just a few hours ago. >> all the members the court, i am pleased to witness justin jackson. >> now justice ketanji brown jackson became the first black woman to join the supreme court. i'm joined now by melanie campbell, president and ceo of the national coalition on black civic anticipation. is great to talk to you, thank you for joining us. what's taught first about the historic moment. >> it was just tears of joy. i was just as emotional today, and my phone was blowing up,
black women most especially were overjoyed in the moment, what it means. yes, there the immediacy is in the court dynamic, but nothing is more powerful than watching what happened today. and that couple of minutes, it was just awestruck. i had one of my nieces who normally does not say anything about politics text me about it. she is in her early 20s. it was a moment of joy. >> what does it mean. what did your knees text, for instance? what does it mean for black women right now to see this happen? >> he just said yes! >> one word that means so much. >> but the reality is is that what it means is that as black
women we are finally seen in the highest court in the land. the sectional woman judge that she artie was, she is bringing that lived experience. all the things that she shared when she was going through her confirmation, and so now her voice will be there. for the affirming, or in many times unfortunately based on the courts makeup, a dissent. and bringing that to the highest court in the land. >> another guest that i had earlier explained this moment is bittersweet, because we do have to talk about the politics of the dream court, considering what has taken place over the last 10 days or so, and that is first and foremost the overturning of roe v wade. what is she entering into? how does she change the landscape of the moment for you as we look at the supreme court overall is a body, and the credibility that is waning of the supreme court?
>> one of the things i think she brings is that she brings not just a lived experience, but i think she brings the exceptional qualifications to the bench. i think her voice will ring in the system. i also think that, as you said, we are going through a time when all of our rights are being passed. we just had today that that they don't believe we should have clean air in the country. i happen to be in louisiana now , and kemper alley is right of the road, where communities of color are disproportionately impacted by issues of the environmental injustice in this country. it tells us that we have a real challenge with this court that is legislating from the bench.
i am a proponent who believes that you need to reform the court. expand it. what is happening is that you have nine people, and really six of those nine who have decided that they are going to carry their own personal views. not the constitution, and they are going to take rights away. in a very critical moment in our country,, said that our democracy is eroding from the judicial highest court in the land making decisions and taking rights away, and signaling that you are going to take other rights away due to your personal blues. we are in a tough time. we are in a really critical time of what we will have a democracy or not. >> article time. melanie campbell, we thank you. >> coming up next, everybody. the new plan for president biden to deliver a major speech with a january 6 committee
wraps up its work. plus, will trump white house counsel pat cipollone comply with the subpoena? we will be right back. getting a quote to see if we can save with america's number one motorcycle insurer? should flo stop asking the same question every time? -approved! -[ altered voice ] denied! [ normal voice ] whoa.
so many people are overweight now, and asking themselves, -[ altered voice ] denied! "why can't i lose weight?" for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now there's release from golo. it naturally helps reverse insulin resistance, stops sugar cravings, and releases stubborn fat all while controlling stress and emotional eating. at last, a diet pill that actually works. go to golo.com to get yours.
>> as the january 6 committee sets its sights on more witnesses from donald trump's inner circle, the president is delivering a major speech once this investigation wraps up. sources tell nbc that the goal is to really highlight what is at stake if trump ever returns to power. meanwhile, this week's surprise january 6 hearing seems to be working on reluctant witnesses from trump world former white house counsel pat cipollone has been subpoenaed just days after bombshell testimony from former aide cassidy hutchinson set him at the head of the days events. jake sherman live in the flesh, founder of punch bowl news and nbc political analyst. you should be up here. all sitting at the desk
chatting away. >> your all hang out about me, what's going on? >> my question to you about this speech we are going to be hearing from the resident as soon as his investigation wraps up, do we know if the committee at all is going to be kind of guiding the president as to what is actually included in the speech? i'm sure he's going to want to kind of connect the dots, right? >> look, inevitably whatever the committee finds out in events and public hearings is going to inform what stays in the president speech. whether that is a kind of arrangement does not necessarily matter, because these hearings are hardly happening in a vacuum. they are on every television screen, even just the other day here on the hill on tuesday, as you walk around here you saw that everyone who is in the halls of congress is the watching it on their phones or watch it on the tvs that are posted at various points around this building. certainly the same is true in the white house. i also think that what this potential speech does for biden is allowed to continue to refocus on the very reason that he was elected in the first
place, which is placing him in a binary against former president donald trump, now president biden making that pigeon basically saying to people as they head into a midterm year, this is the kind of ring that could come back to power if and inevitably when trump ends up running again and continues to pull at the top of the republican field. i will say from the committee's perspective, they have tried to keep this as a separate entity away from the electoral politics consideration, but that is pretty impossible to do when they are on the clock already simply because of the existence of the midterms. policy is never devoid from any of these conversations around the six. >> i know it is fascinating around all this especially when it comes to cassidy hutchinson, we are not single on the public speaking out about what she had to say. the only thing -- except for, of course, the republican president. i think marjorie taylor green had the anti-total retelling, whether the president grabbed the wheel or not. she was very forthcoming about
the fact that this is the story i was told. >> actually have questions about why they even included that. i don't think it was positive the overall narrative. trump was angry, he wanted to go to the capital, he was angry at his detail, and cassidy was forced to present it as i heard this secondhand. i don't really know the ins and outs of what happened. i don't quite know how to watch. allie has watch a lot of congressional hearings as well. i don't understand what benefit that has. i just don't get that. i agree with you, congress is out of session. you are not going to hear a lot of republicans chattering, for one. for two, the larger story is that there are no republicans in the room. they don't have any visibility into what comes next. it is very difficult to go criticize somebody if you don't know. the committee might have
more evidence for that issue around the corner. so i think that makes it really difficult, as well. >> could you touch on that, what jake and i were just talking about? if you have any more information on that as to why they would include that moment in which she kind of retold that story even though she did not have her stand knowledge of that, she was actually there? everything else seems very calculated. when we got the news that this testimony was coming and we did not know who it actually was, we knew it was going to be big. everything about the public version of the testimonies has been huge. major retellings of what took place on january 6. >> but this had an even higher bar, frankly. because the way that they popped it up, they made a spontaneous hearing, they said they were going to have new information, and they did. i think the question that jake is asking is valid here, which is this did not have the ebb and flow that other allegations that were lost in this hearing had. typically what you see is the in person witness lodging a complaint or lodging the allegations, and then you have somebody else on testimony or materials bolstering their claim. that is an open question now as to why they are not doing that
for cassidy hutchinson when she testified on this point. i also think the important thing here is that as we are charting where the pushback is, the pushback might be the lunging, body angle grab, the largest bush that is not in the ground is that trump wanted to go to lead the rioters because letting them come in the speech anyway. is a larger pushback, and i think the more damning details are not. >> providing any testimony to the january 6 committee. i have seen from sources around committee that they are open. i think they love him in open
session. i think the committee does recognize that there are some legitimate privilege claims that he can make. people talking around the committee claimed that he spoke to mark meadows about it, but he can make privilege claims about things that he spoke to the president about, and less the obvious question is did somebody commit a crime here? and you can't really assert privilege over those kinds of issues. i do think so. it is july. they need to get this show on the road. i really do think it comes up to this. >> by the way, did you hear allie say she thought your question was legitimate when? >> thank you guys. i appreciate it. democrats calling to action across the country. we will be right back.
- [announcer] the more we learn about covid-19, the more questions we have. the biggest question now, what's next? what will covid bring in six months, a year? if you're feeling anxious about the future, you're not alone. calhope offers free covid-19 emotional support. call 833-317-4673, or live chat at calhope.org today.
now made more about his ruling. some patients were certain parts of the ivf process could be made difficult with intense or bands on abortion. i've heard a lot about concerns when it comes to ivf now that roe is been overturned, especially from women that live in more conservative statements out. talk to me about what you are hearing and what answers healthcare providers may actually have one right now? >> what i'm hearing is a lot of panic right now. at this clinic, boston ivf, they say they're getting about 50+ phone calls a day from women living in states like missouri and texas asking about the possibility of taking their embryos, their tissue and transferring it to blue states like massachusetts. that is because they are nervous that the legal landscape is shifting on them. as one healthcare provider here explained to me, people think of abortion and ivf is being
opposite or one being the antithesis of the other, but the reality is the doctor see them as actually being intertwined on one spectrum. because the ivf process can sometimes be so grueling, and often with a lot of multiple tries and failures, there are elements of it that could be seen by a lawmaker or prosecutor as murder or termination. that is because embryos are created, that embryos are also sometimes destroyed. they are tested. mistakes happen and labs. people implant multiple and then remove some. the question is, is a lawmaker or processor seeing and an embryo as life. what does that legally mean for the patients going through this process and for the doctors who work with them? take a look into the conversation with one nurse who works here. >> a lot of patients are wondering what they should do with their embryos that they
have frozen now, they are not thinking about using them for another couple of years. we have had patients from out of state have called that are wondering about transferring embryos to our center. there are a lot of patients who are very fearful of what is to come of their future reproductive health. >> as of now, lawmakers are signaling they don't have an interest in going after providers who do fertility services. but still, doctors and many clinics are telling me that they are meeting with lawyers anyway. they say that all it would take is one prosecutor in a state like oklahoma or texas where there are abortion laws that allow people to go after individuals that they think are involved in abortion, and they think that just that one person or one action could change the entire landscape and could change the business and services that they provide to families. >> thank you, antonia. i wanted to bring in now senator ed markey of massachusetts. thank you for joining us. we are a week and after this decision released by the supreme court to overturn trends
roe. talking about the recording on the ground, as well. they're going major ripple effect across the board as the month march on. the way it has been to me is that we are facing a major public health crisis in this country with the overturn of roe. >> well, it is unconscionable. the supreme court overturn roe v wade, and now we are seeing the consequences ripple through our country. it was set in law for 50 years that families could take advantage of ivf technology in order to make reproductive decisions for themselves. now that is called into question. that is a cloud over too many families in our country. that is absolutely unacceptable. which is why i think the congress should take up the offer that joe biden has made to repeal the filibuster.
carveout of the filibuster and exception for abortion rights for families in our country, for women in our country so they can make decisions for themselves. they should not have to worry that there is an attorney general from oklahoma that might come into their lives and ruin all of the planning that they have made for their own families. i think that the president is right. i think it is time for us to carveout the exception for abortion. the filibuster has to be amended , or it has to be eliminated. otherwise we are just going to see, not just in this area, but gun rights, climate, and so many other areas just in evisceration of rights that americans have come to depend upon. >> i wanted to talk you about
another pretty monumental decision that we heard about today coming out of the supreme court, and that is, of course, stripping some of the power away from the epa when it comes to its regulations. you're one of the most aggressive democrats in the senate on climate issues that we know of. what is your reaction to that decision? >> this is an historic evisceration of the authority of the epa. to regulate greenhouse gases. our country, and the planet right now are suffering from a fire. there are no emergency planets. we have to put it into preventative care. what the supreme court said today's the epa is going to be stripped of their authority to put in place the measures they can reduce the danger the greenhouse gas poses to our planet and the well-being to everyone in our country. it is, again, a further step by now to rollback the last two
generations of laws that looks that people have been able to rely upon, and unfortunately, in the same way that the ocean decision has catastrophic consequences, this decision means that the health and well- being of the entire planet is in jeopardy. >> so what can congress do? what is congress prepared to do about it? >> again, i think that we need to repeal the filibuster. we need to expand the supreme court. this 6-3 majority is going to continue on a long line of wish lists right wing republican agenda items for the last 50 years, and what we have seen in the last week on guns, climate, torsion is just a preview of coming attractions. it is going to be issue after issue after issue. they're
going to be relentless, and the only solution is to expand the supreme court to make up two supreme court justices that were stolen by donald trump and by mitch mcconnell. this is the big decision that we are going to have to make his country, otherwise the problem, as they are being posed, are going to be unsolvable. that is why we have to think big here. a carveout for abortion is good, carveout for voting rights would be good, but ultimately we would have to carve out pretty much every single area of american life with the supreme court is finished implement their agenda. >> senator ed markey, thank you so much. coming up next, everybody. inside the legal fight to block wisconsin's 173-year-old abortion ban. the state attorney general leading the charge is going to join us live. we will be right back.
moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. many taking rinvoq
saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 1 week. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your eczema specialist about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. welcome back. wisconsin governor, tony ebert, and attorney general, josh call
, are challenging a 173-year- old law that and generally all abortion. the governor and ag announcing this following the supreme courts decision to overturn roe. the once dormant law went into effect the date it roe was reversed. wisconsin attorney general, josh call. thank you for joining us on this. the argument is that more recent state statutes supersede and overrule this 100+-year-old law that was in the books, that is now essentially in effect in the state of wisconsin. taught me through it. >> that's right. last week friday when the decision overturning roe went down, access to safe and legal abortion stopped in wisconsin. right now, abortion clinics are effectively being governed by this law from the 1800s that has no exceptions for late term, or incest. laws were passed afterwards effectively are inconsistent with it and also that the old
ball has fallen into disuse. >> so your governor called a special session, your democratic governor i should say called a special session to repeal this law. republican legislature essentially gambled in and out. said it was not happening. you feel this lawsuit is the only path forwarded this point? >> i think it is one of the passport. i do think that we need to continue calling out our legislature to act. as you said, the governor called the special session last week, and republican legislators for the most part did not show up to work. they went in and out, there was no debate, no consideration of the issues, and now we have all sorts of complications with this 19 century abortion band that we are trying to apply to 20th-century medicine. it just does not work. the more the people contact their legislators and put pressure on them, the more likely it is there going to come in and start working to address these issues. >> to be clear, the two
passport at this point, the way you see it, as this current lawsuit along with people contacting their legislators and putting pressure on them to do something. >> that's right, in the short term. the other thing we are doing to work is mitigate the impact of this. i have been clear that i'm not going to use any wisconsin doj resources to investigate or prosecute. ultimately voters have an opportunity in november to send a very clear message about how they feel about legislators taking people's rights away. >> and what about the clinics in your state of all but shut down because of law that is now in place? can they operate, or do they have to wait and see what happens? >> our argument in this case is that because the law was quietly repealed, the 1800s law, that access to safe and legal abortions remains lawful wisconsin. clinics, reasonably, are not going to take a chance that they might be prosecuted someday down the road for providing the services, so right now in wisconsin safe and legal abortion is not accessible, and it will not be
- i'm norm. - i'm szasz. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly; it's important. we walk three to five times a week, a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
so it's been a bruising pride month after a close call with violence at an idaho lgbtq event. there was heightened anxiety and security at events across the country and the overturning of roe fueled justifiable fears that the supreme court decisions that legalized same-sex marriage and intimacy will be next, not to mention the ongoing offensives against transgender individuals in states. in selma, alabama, plaque black lgbtq community are carrying on and how they're working to complete the unfinished business of the civil rights movement and queer rights. joining me now is the host of into america podcast. tremane, i know you traveled to
selma, alabama. >> i met quentin bell walking in the freedom of fighters and he's tapping into the spirit to make room in the bibl belt in the south for those who the movement have left behind including the lgbtq community. let's take a listen. >> growing up in selma, alabama, quentin bell never thought the city would have something to offer someone like him. >> when i did decide to transition i had a few family members who pulled away. if me walking in my truth makes you uncomfortable then we don't need to have communication and a relationship. >> he's an out trans man in alabama's bible belt when life can be complicated and then cayman epiphany, a moment of clarity. he could be the change in selma that he was looking for. >> i ran from this city for so long, and i remember standing on this bridge and said why me?
and i heard why not you. he founded tku, believed to be the only organization of its kind in the region. >> we are finding people within the community. we are finding our resources within the community and giving our folks an opportunity to move from surviving to thriving. it's headquartered in the shadow of the historic edmund pettus bridge, scene of a bloody battle for voting rights in 1965. >> there are people who say they're different, sifrl rights and the rights of lgbtq and those things are separate. >> what's the difference as being counting 3/5 of a person back then and having my rights stripped of me because i'm trans or because i'm queer. >> today, supporting selma's lgbtq community with health care, and rent assistance and he's resisting a wave of anti-lgbtq legislation including some of the strictest laws in
the nation past this year in alabama that criminalizes gender-affirming surgeries for trans people under 19 and restricts the use of puberty blockers and hormones. >> what we're hopeful are is more visibility of black queer, brown queer, trans people living open and whole it will give the opportunity for the community to ask those questions that they desperately want to ask in a way that we can open up and have intentional dialogue about what it means to be trans and what it means to be a black trans person. >> and while running an lgbtq organization in selma has its difficulties, quentin says hoo draws on the power of the city with its rich history of resistance and struggle to focus continuing the work that dr. king helped start here decades earlier. >> we are literally standing in the footsteps of some giants in the movement. why did this place matter to what you're doing today? >> it's the second leg of the civil rights movement. the same exact thing dr. king did here in selma in the '60s we
are doing here in selma in 2022. >> while folks like quentin say that there's been so much progress, what you hear over and over again during the reporting that so many folks in the community, lgbtq community have suffered from engaging in the church community and the bible belt and they have found an older generation and some have been reluctant and some embraced this new movement to continue what they didn't finish. >> that's incredible. what a strong man to do that and to focus his legacy, his work and everything that he's doing there. did he talk to you at all about the difficulties of it? of being someone who has to be out and leading this movement knowing and understanding it's difficult in a place like that, in a community -- in the community that he lives? >> you know, quentin is a pretty selfless guy, so he didn't focus
his struggles, but he talked about the community and so many young people in the community are being pushed out of their homes and homelessness issues and issues with securing employment and health care and we always talk about those who suffer most and not of himself. for him, he sees himself walking in the footsteps of mighty leaders and he's doing just that. >> that's awesome. trymaine lee, as always, love your stories and love your pieces. very great work. that does it for me, everybody. "deadline: white house" starts right after a very quick break. s right after a very quick break
>> hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in the east. the january 6th select committee has thrown down the gauntlet to the man whose shadows has lurked throughout every single one of the public hearings held by the committee this month and who, according to reporting and according to the testimony of trump officials and aides, appears to have at least tried to be a bull work against some of the most dangerous schemes cooked up by donald j. trump and his fellow coup plotters. we are of course talking about trump white house counsel pat cipollone. after months of public pleas to cooperate and testify before the committee, the panel issued a subpoena. the statement was issued by chairman bennie thompson and vice chair liz cheney. the select committee's