Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Supreme Court on Texas Abortion Case; Warren Stumps With Clinton; S&P Slashes U.K. Rating; U.K. Campaigners Backpedal. Aired 2- 2:30p ET
Aired June 27, 2016 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[14:00:00] PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Pamela Brown, in for Brooke Baldwin. This is CNN's breaking news on the fallout of a seismic decision that has sent tremors around the world, the U.K.'s vote to leave the European Union rocking Britain's economy with news that the S&P has just cut the U.K. credit rating to AA from AAA. This as three million Brits and counting are asking for another shot. They're signing an online petition calling for a do-over vote on whether to leave the European Union.
And regrets over the so-called Brexit now have a name, "regrexit." The petition actually only needs 100,000 names to be debated in Parliament. A member of that body says lawmakers will bring it up tomorrow.
And, meantime, world markets are equally queasy. The Dow resumed its slide at the opening bell after giving up 610 points on Friday. More on this in just a moment.
But now to what's being hailed as the most significant Supreme Court decision on abortion in the last two decades. And it went in favor of abortion rights advocates.
They cheered and hugged outside the Supreme Court at word of this decision. In a 5-3 ruling, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law known as HB-2 that put restrictions on abortion clinics. One required abortion doctors have to have hospital admitting privileges and the other required Texas clinics to upgrade facilities to hospital-like standards. The majority found that the requirements put a, quote, "substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions and constitutes an undo burden on their constitutional right to do so."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm so happy for so many Latinas today and all American women, but especially women who have a hard time getting access to quality health care. I'm here with Vota Latino (ph). We have our team here. We're so, so happy for women today and our allies. The next step is protecting victories like these, not just here at the Supreme Court but in the ballot box. We have to make sure we keep fighting for women.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So today we're really disappointed. The five justices let us down. We did face a loss, but the pro-life generation is coming back stronger than ever. We're out here to turn the tide and we are turning the tide. And I'm excited to see what we do next.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: And I want to turn now to CNN contributor Steve Vladeck, a professor at the American University Washington College of Law.
So, Steve, I was out there at the court today when this opinion was announced and you could feel how historic it was with the anti- abortion activists and the abortion rights activists just getting their reaction on both sides because this is the most significant abortion case in two decades. Tell us about it.
STEVE VLADECK, PROFESSOR, WASHINGTON COLLEGE OF LAW, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: Yes, I mean, Pamela, I think that's exactly right. The last time the Supreme Court had a case that presented as squarely as this decision just how far states could go in interfering with a woman's right to an abortion was in 1992 in a case called Planned Parenthood v. Casey. And that decision, of course, was famous because the initial vote was to overrule Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case recognizing the right to choose.
The three justices in the middle, Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Sandra Day O'Connor, came together to actually save Roe and replace it with this undue burden test. What the Supreme Court did this morning was to put teeth back into that undue burden test in a manner that I think is going to have reverberations across the country.
BROWN: And what's interesting here is that Justice Kennedy has written the opinions in most all of the abortion cases since he's been on the bench in 1988, but in this case he left to job up to Justice Breyer. What do you make of that and him joining the liberal justices on this?
VLADECK: Yes, I mean I think there are two really interesting things there. The first is that Justice Kennedy, who, as the senior justice in the majority, was in charge of assigning the opinion, didn't keep it for himself but gave it to Justice Breyer. But it also, Pam, that he didn't write separately. I think what that really suggests is that he wanted the court to send one message, to speak in one voice, not just to lower courts, like the federal appeals court in New Orleans in this case, but to state legislatures about not pushing so hard to scale back abortions, access to abortions, to actually reinvigorate the Casey test in a manner that's going to make it harder for these kinds of laws to survive going forward.
BROWN: But it's interesting, he's joined the liberal justices on this, on affirmative action, on gay marriage. It has raised some questions about whether Justice Kennedy is moving more to the left. Steve Vladeck, thank you very much. Appreciate your analysis there.
VLADECK: Thank you.
BROWN: And the Supreme Court's decision culminates a long fight against the Texas abortion law. And when it came before lawmakers three years ago, one state senator gained national attention for filibustering against it for more than 11 hours. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WENDY DAVIS (D), TEXAS STATE SENATE: The true intention of these bills is to attack a basic human right, the right for any woman in this American society today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: And that lawmaker, former Texas State Senator Wendy Davis joins me now. Also here, Genevieve Wood. She is an anti-abortion advocate who was a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee.
[14:05:05] Ladies, thank you so much for coming on. I look forward to hearing both of your perspectives.
And, Wendy, I want to start with you because this has been a long fight for you against this law for three years now. What is your reaction to the high court's ruling today?
DAVIS: We were absolutely overjoyed because the court recognized that this law was a sham. That the arguments that somehow this was going to protect women's health was absolutely disingenuous. They saw right through it. And I was thrilled to see the vigorous way that they defended Roe in this particular decision. It is good news for women in Texas and around the country where we've seen copycatting of this particular law.
BROWN: So, Genevieve, on that note, Wendy is saying, look, you know, this is a sham, that this law was a thinly veiled attempt to end abortion. This was not about women's health. What is your reaction to that? To you, is it just about women's health or is this also about stopping abortion?
GENEVIEVE WOOD, ANTI-ABORTION ADVOCATE: Well, I think the sham here was that the abortion industry won today, but women's health actually lost. Look, over the last six years, 150 abortion clinics across 30 states have come under criminal investigations and have been charged because of substandard health and sanitation in their clinics.
The state of Texas was simply saying, if you're a woman in the state of Texas, you shouldn't walk into that kind of abortion clinic. And I'm sure that many of your viewers have heard of Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia. And that was a clinic that went 17 years without being checked at all.
Look, as a - as a people, we allow the government to regulate what kind of lightbulbs we use, regulate what our kids can eat in school, but we're saying on this that we're going to give the abortion clinics a pass. I don't think that's right. This was not a - this was not a case that said we're going to outlaw abortion. It simply said, if you're an abortion clinic, you've got to meet certain cleanliness standards and sanitation standards so that the women walking through your doors are going to get the best health care possible.
BROWN: So to you this was just about women's health? It didn't have anything to do with stopping abortion in the state? WOOD: There was nothing about the law that would stop an abortion. If
a clinic didn't meet the right standards, there was nothing that said they couldn't come up to standards. I understand that that costs money, but let's keep in mind, the abortion industry usually makes money. Most clinics are for-profit clinics. So the idea that they can't come up with money to fix and get themselves up to standards, that's their problem. That's not the law's problem.
BROWN: Wendy? I saw you were reacting, so I want to give you a chance to jump in. Go ahead.
DAVIS: Well, the fact of the matter is, there - there - there are laws which, of course, require that abortion clinics meet health and safety standards. And, in fact, the very statistics that were mentioned a moment ago point to the fact that when those laws are enforced, there are importance protections for women that are put in place as a consequence of them.
The question on this particular law was whether it had any relationship whatsoever to making women safer. As part of our record, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the AMA, the Texas Medical Association all weighed in, in saying that none of these provisions would actually create a climate that made women safer and, in fact, just the opposite, because, by putting them in place, clinics would close around the state and that's exactly what happened. We went from 42 to 19, to increased wait times, to jeopardizing women's health. And it is also and was always about closing abortion clinics -
WOOD: Wendy, let's - let's be clear, even - even Planned Parenthood -
DAVIS: Example or exhibit a, of course, the lieutenant governor tweeted out on the night of this particular vote -
BROWN: Genevieve. Go ahead, Genevieve.
DAVIS: Tweeted out on the night of this particular vote his bragging rights about how many clinics would now close in Texas as a consequence of this.
WOOD: Yes, but, Wendy, even -
BROWN: I just want to give (INAUDIBLE). Go ahead, Genevieve, and then we'll have to wrap it up, unfortunately.
DAVIS: It's always been about foreclosing women's access to abortion and the Supreme Court justices saw right through that.
BROWN: You're filibustering, Wendy. I'm kidding.
Go ahead, Genevieve.
WOOD: She - she's good at that.
Look, the reality is, Planned Parenthood even itself admitted many of the abortion clinics that were just cited there were already closing, had nothing to do with this particular law. Look, the reason people need to know what - I would encourage people to go Google Kermit Gosnell if they don't want to - if they want to know what's going on, because the reality is, as I mentioned, 17 years went by without anybody checking his clinic. We ought to be very concerned about what people are walking into. We ought to be as concerned about women's health as we are their right to abortion. And at the end of the day, the special interests won here, the abortion lobby, not women.
BROWN: And the liberal justices, with Kennedy joined, did actually address Kermit Gosnell, saying that that would have happened anyway even if these provisions were in place. But this debate will continue.
[14:10:06] DAVIS: That's right.
BROWN: We know there are other states with similar provisions and those cases are percolating in the pipeline. Of course, this will have an impact on that.
But, Wendy Davis, Genevieve Wood, thank you very much for coming on and sharing your thoughts, your perspective. We do appreciate it.
DAVIS: Thank you.
WOOD: Thank you.
BROWN: And, meantime, chaos erupts across the U.K. as voters decide to leave the European Union. And, get this, some of the leaders who pushed for the divorce are now backing off their promises.
Plus, some families of the victims in the Orlando massacre are now questioning why police didn't end the standoff sooner. Hear the official response.
And Elizabeth Warren campaigning with Hillary Clinton for the first time, and they did not hold back on their favorite target.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Donald Trump says he'll make America great again. It's - it's right there. No, it's stamped on the front of his goofy hat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[14:15:03] BROWN: "I'm with her." Those words today from Massachusetts senator and liberal firebrand Elizabeth Warren about Hillary Clinton. The two women took the stage together for the first time today in Cincinnati. And their aim, to unify the Democratic Party and team up against Donald Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Donald Trump says - Donald Trump says he'll make America great again. It's - it's right there. No, it's stamped on the front of his goofy hat. You want to see goofy? Look at him in that hat.
When Donald Trump says he'll make America great, he means make it even greater for rich guys just like Donald Trump.
What kind of a man does that? What kind of a 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.
What kind of a man? A nasty man who will never become president of the United States.
Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States because she knows what it takes to beat a thin-skinned bully.
HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I must say, I do just love to see how she gets under Donald Trump's thin skin.
Donald Trump proves everyday he's not in it for the American people, he's in it only for himself. And Elizabeth reminds us of that every chance she gets because it is really important that voters here in Ohio and across America understand this. She exposes him for what he is, temperamentally unfit and totally unqualified to be president of the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: And I'm joined now by CNN political director David Chalian.
So, David, how did Warren change the dynamic for Hillary Clinton today, in your view?
DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, I think this is just the beginning of a process where we're going to see Elizabeth Warren out there stumping for Hillary Clinton. We've seen her do some solo events. But them together on the - together on the stage, obviously, will pack a tougher punch against Trump.
But, listen, Elizabeth Warren has a two-fold mission here. One is, we know that she's being looked at by the Clinton team as a potential vice presidential candidate. So campaigns do like to have the candidate out there with the potential VPs to look at chemistry, see how the two operate a crowd together, see if there's any genuine partnership and warmth there. But also Elizabeth Warren has proven to be a really effective surrogate who can cut through the media noise with her Trump attacks and actually also bait Donald Trump into a conversation with her. So she's proven pretty successful at that and for those two reasons I think this was a moment in the campaign to see them on stage together for the first time.
BROWN: Certainly. And someone who was not on stage, of course, was Bernie Sanders. Was this a missed opportunity for him?
CHALIAN: Well, as you know, he hasn't really endorsed Hillary Clinton yet, so I don't think he'll be invited any time soon to share a stage with her. So I don't know that it would be a missed opportunity because he - he just hasn't gotten there yet in his mind and - but I do think that Elizabeth Warren is a really effective tool for Hillary Clinton in reaching out to those Sanders supporters.
And I do think because of the energy she provides, you know, Bernie Sanders does have a window here where, you know, he doesn't want to be, after a really successful race in the Democratic primary, he doesn't want to be sidelined and Elizabeth Warren has the potential here to step up and become the leader of that Sanders' wing of the party, and I'm sure he still very much wants to own a piece of that. So I don't think he'll be ceding the limelight to Elizabeth Warren all that much from now through November.
BROWN: But he has - he has consistently said that he will do whatever it takes to defeat Donald Trump. In your view, is that happening? Is he doing all that he can to do so?
CHALIAN: Well, he certainly is moving down the path. He has said publicly that he realizes he's not likely to be the nominee at this point. He says he's most likely to vote for Hillary Clinton. But he's made clear, he still really wants to fight for some of these reforms in the party platform and in the party leadership at the DNC. And so he wants to make sure that before he gives the full-throated endorsement and completely calls it quits from what he started last year, he wants to see some of those changes that he's fighting for implemented in the platform. And you see, actually, it having some impact on the way that the DNC committee - the way the platform committee has started drafting the party platform.
[14:20:02] BROWN: And, meantime, the Trump campaign has responded to Warren's blistering attack today. It released a statement and it reads in part, "as Clinton tries to salvage support among the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party, Senator Elizabeth Warren has become a turncoat for the causes she supposedly supports. While Warren claims that Wall Street businesses have too much influence in D.C. by paying barely disguised bribes through campaign contributions, the Clinton campaign has accepted over $41 million this cycle from Wall Street interests."
Does Trump have a point here?
CHALIAN: I think this may be Trump's most effective line of attack against Warren that he has tried to date, Pam. I think that, you know, reminding folks that she used to be very much on the other side of issues from Hillary Clinton, never mind Barack Obama. I mean there was, you know, a bankruptcy bill debated when Hillary Clinton was in the Senate that Elizabeth Warren was very dismissive of Hillary Clinton's position at, saying basically that she was in the pocket of the banks for that bill. I do think that Donald Trump, trying to make sure that that populist energy that's been part of his success reminds enthused, reminds his supporters here and those potential Sanders' supporters he hopes to woo, that by Elizabeth Warren getting buddy, buddy with Hillary Clinton, raising the question, is she selling out some of her core principles? Obviously, she would push back at that. But I think this is the - a frame that Donald Trump may use time and again when Warren's on the (INAUDIBLE). BROWN: And she didn't endorse Hillary Clinton until very recently as
well when her colleagues in the Senate, many of them, had already endorsed her. So I imagine that will be a sticking point.
David Chalian, thank you so much. Appreciate it.
CHALIAN: Thanks.
BROWN: And up next, chaos in the U.K. as the vote to leave the European Union leaves major uncertainty about what's next. And how many leaders who led the charge for the Brexit are walking back on some of their promises.
Plus, an evangelical leader says Donald Trump is born again and that he's a baby Christian. What he meant by that, coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:26:31] BROWN: Well, as we get word that the S&P has just cut the U.K. credit rating to AA from AAA, we are watching the Dow struggling to recover from Friday's beating. It was the eighth biggest point loss ever and it seemed some regret is taking hold. In fact, almost 4 million Brits and counting are signing an online petition calling for a do-over vote on whether to leave the European Union. The petition actually only needs 100,000 names to be debated in parliament. And a member of that body says lawmakers will bring it up tomorrow.
Let's go live to London and CNN International's Becky Anderson.
So, Becky, the political chaos is only just beginning to play out it seems. Now we're hearing the U.K. lost its AAA credit rating. But is there really any chance of do overs or vetoes at this stage?
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: On a scale of likely to not going to happen, I would say very unlikely. Look, let's deal with what's going on here. The petition that you alluded to, you're absolutely right, more than four million people have signed a petition asking for parliament to consider a new referendum. Well, it has no real constitutional weight aside from demanding that at least people's voices are heard and that in Westminster Hall, not the - inside the palace Westminster, but not in the chamber, as it were, that this be discussed. So that is not going to carry any sway.
There are two other ways that you could overturn what's happened here. The first would be if you had a snap general election and a party campaigned strictly on the "remain" mandate, as it were, and they got such an overwhelming majority that it became clear that if they were to lead the country going forward, they would have the facility to hold a second referendum. That is very, very unlikely.
The only other way you might be able to consider a referendum - and, again, this is very unlikely - was - were if the negotiators who will now go to Europe on the U.K.'s behalf, if they were to be able to negotiate such a good deal for Europe that were - were this not to happen, that they could come back to the U.K. and say, let's have another referendum. That would be another way. But, you know, very, very unlikely I would say at this point.
BROWN: All right, I think that sums it up. Becky Anderson, thanks so much.
And, meantime, the leading politicians in the campaign to leave the European Union are back-pedaling, it seems, and they're back-pedaling fast on a number of pledges they made during their campaign, particularly over extra money for health care. And some are again drawing parallels between what's happening in the U.K. and what's happening here in the U.S. with Donald Trump. In fact, just this weekend, Donald Trump watered down his promise of a ban on U.S. entry to all Muslims, instead saying that he only wants to ban Muslims from, quote, "terrorist countries" and there would be no mass deportations.
I want to bring in Amanda Carpenter, CNN political commentator, former communications detector for Senator Ted Cruz. Also Ned Ryun, CEO of American Majority and former writer for President George W. Bush, who says he'll vote for Trump in November.
No, Ned, I want to start with you here. As Trump has said, his promises are only suggestions, that he's flexible, but does this make voters think twice when the Brexit leaders are so quickly backing off?
[14:29:57] NED RYUN, CEO, AMERICAN MAJORITY: Well, I mean the thing to remember about the leave campaign and Brexit is, it's a national referendum. They have no governmental authority. So I think the three things that people are really focusing on in saying oh they're back- pedaling on, well, one is, again, that 350 million a week, which is probably closer to 250 million a week that was being sent to the E.U.
