Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Ukraine: All Women, Children, Elderly People Evacuated From Mariupol Steel Plant; Biden Announces New $150M Aid Package For Ukraine; First Lady To Spend Mother's Day With Refugees, Children In Slovakia; Amber Heard Testifies to Alleged Assault by Ex-Husband, Johnny Depp; State Prosecutors Weigh How to Respond if Abortion Rights Overturned; Women Face Uncertainty as States Consider Impact of Abortion Laws; Leaked Alito Draft Contradicts 2006 Confirmation Testimony; Astronauts Collaborate in Space During War on Earth. Aired 1-2p ET

Aired May 07, 2022 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:17]

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello again, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. We begin with this breaking news out of Ukraine. Ukrainian officials now say all women, children and elderly civilians who had been trapped in that steel plant in Mariupol have now been evacuated. This comes after weeks of bombardment in the long besieged city.

CNN's Scott McLean has more from Lviv. So, Scott, what are they reassurances that that is indeed the case?

SCOTT MCLEAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, Fredricka, we have been waiting all day for some kind of a statement, some kind of a confirmation that the civilians had gotten out. And now we finally have it. So, this is coming from Ukraine's deputy prime minister who has been heavily involved with the negotiations and the efforts to get people out from underneath of the steel plant.

She says that all women, children and elderly people have been taken out from the plant successfully. The order of the president has been done, she says. So, this part of the mission at least is complete. We also got word from one of the soldiers inside the plant that that evacuation mission went off without a hitch, without any kind of incident. What we still don't know is whether or not there were any civilian men who are left behind that is a possibility but we don't know.

We also don't know how many civilians there actually were trapped underneath of there. The latest estimate was that there was around 100 civilians, perhaps still trapped. Earlier, we had gotten word from the separatists government, Donetsk People's Republic that sort of swallowed up that part of Mariupol saying that 152 people, including 32 kids had been allowed to leave the city.

But it wasn't clear from that statement, whether that included people from underneath of the plant or whether that was only referring to people from the broader city. Of course, even now that all or the vast majority of the civilians are out from underneath the plant, you still have a situation there, you still have hundreds perhaps of soldiers trapped. The Ukrainian say that hundreds of soldiers are injured alone and they would very much like to get out.

Soldiers have said they would like for some deal to be brokered to allow them to leave in one piece. President Zelenskyy says that he's working on his diplomatic options, along with some influential third party states to try to broker some kind of a deal. But we don't have any word on that right now. And of course, the soldiers say that, in the absence of that kind of a deal, they will not leave without a weapon in their hands, which means they are prepared to fight till the end.

One of the thing, Fredricka, and that's that the latest word from the Ukrainian military is that the Russians have still got the plant blocked off now that the civilians are gone. And they are using tanks and artillery to fire on it.

WHITFIELD: All right, Scott McLean. And again, we don't know how many Ukrainian soldiers might still be in it.

MCLEAN: Correct. Yes. So, the estimates are that there are several hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers inside. U.S. estimates are that there are some 2000 Russian soldiers surrounding that plant, two battalions. But again, the Ukrainians have said that there's several hundreds were injured alone, and that they've been dying in agony is their word. So, this could be potentially a very bloody end to what has been a very long two plus months for these people.

WHITFIELD: Wow. Horribly sad. All right. Scott McLean, thank you so much. So, with the war raging on the U.S. is stepping up its efforts to help Ukraine and its people. President Joe Biden announcing a new $150 million security aid package. And this weekend, First Lady Jill Biden is meeting with Ukrainian refugees in Romania and Slovakia. CNN Arlette Saenz and Kate Bennett Joining us now with more on this.

So, Arlette, you first. You know, we're getting new tales about details rather about what this new U.S. security package for Ukraine entails. Walk us through that.

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Fred. President Biden yesterday announcing that the U.S. would be sending another $150 million worth of security assistance to Ukraine as the U.S. wants to continue that the Ukrainians have the tools and equipment they need to defend themselves against this Russian invasion of their country. Now, if you take a look at what exactly this package will entail, it includes artillery rounds, also counter artillery radars, jamming equipment and other field equipment.

Now, this is going to come from existing U.S. stockpiles. And this $150 million that the president authorized is nearly exhausting the funds that the U.S. currently has to be able to give to Ukraine. Last week, President Biden asked Congress to pass another $33 billion worth of assistance for Ukraine. That would include military assistance as well as humanitarian and economic assistance. But that currently remains tied up on Capitol Hill.

[13:05:03]

SAENZ: The president in announcing this latest package that will be sent to Ukraine urging Congress to pass that measure to ensure that this assistance can continue to flow into Ukraine uninterrupted. Now, this announcement of this new military assistance that's heading to Ukraine comes as President Biden tomorrow is set to participate in a virtual meeting with G7 leaders and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy.

Part of this meeting is an effort to show solidarity with Ukraine that the topic of sanctions against Russia will also be on the table as the U.S. is trying to continue to find ways to hold Russia accountable and support the Ukrainians as they're defending themselves in this war. Fred?

WHITFIELD: All right, Arlette. Thank you so much. Kate Bennett with us now, you're traveling with the First Lady on her trip to Eastern Europe spending this Mother's Day weekend in fact, with Ukrainian refugees. So, so far, how is it going?

KATE BENNETT, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's been a very busy trip. We're in Slovakia now. But earlier today we were in Romania in Bucharest with the first lady. She had a briefing there with humanitarian organization leaders. So, have hearing about boots on the ground situations. There are still 7000 Ukrainian refugees arriving to Romania each day. These include, of course mothers and children.

She later went to a school with the first lady of Romania who also happens to be a teacher like Dr. Biden, a full time teacher in addition to her role as first lady. They visited a school where Ukrainian children have been absorbed by the education system in Romania and how classrooms have had to adjust not just in size, but also an understanding. These are children who have been through recent trauma.

They've picked up they've left their homes and they're now reentering a new city, a new school, a new classroom, new friends, all sorts of things. The first lady was there to listen to them to observe them in the classroom. And one little girl made a sign that said that she only wished that she could go home and be with her father. And she was from Kyiv, another girl who was five years old said her wish was to go back to Odessa.

Of course, we know that these are parts of Ukraine that have been bombed incessantly at times by Russian troops. So, certainly, it was a challenging day. The first lady was thinking about these mothers and their children. She had a listening session with mothers who would take it all they had and their kids and sled, some of them in the middle of the night, mostly without their husbands, without the children's fathers who stayed back to fight.

So, sort of imagine having a toddler or two toddlers, if you will, already. And then having to move knowing your country was under attack and then ending up in Romania where the people here or people there open their homes to these refugees, and the first lady was there to thank them. And this entire trip, Fred, is to show our support for the Ukrainian people. Tomorrow. she'll head to the border. And we'll pick it up from there. Back to you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Kate Bennett and Arlette Saenz, thanks to both of you, ladies. Appreciate it. All right. Still ahead. After weeks of testimony, actress Amber Heard finally took the stand and recounted her explosive relationship with Johnny Depp. We'll discuss straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:12:15]

WHITFIELD: All right. Let's get back to the breaking news that we're following out of Ukraine. Ukrainian officials now saying all women, children and elderly civilians who had been trapped in that steel plant and Mariupol have now been evacuated. They have been trapped in the plant for weeks, as Russian troops decimated the surrounding city of Mariupol. Let's bring in now Simon Shuster a correspondent for TIME Magazine, who was who has also been covering the war for quite some time now.

And he also recently spent two weeks with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy for a time cover story. And Simon, I'll get to that cover story in a moment. But let's talk about these evacuation efforts. What we understand the circumstance to be that steel plant, there were dozens of women, children, soldiers representing Ukraine who were there. Now we're being told by Ukrainian officials that women and children had been released. But what do we know about the soldiers who were there? Many of whom were injured.

SIMON SHUSTER, TIME MAGAZINE SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: The soldiers are still there. As far as we know there are still hundreds of them. And when I met with President Zelenskyy about two weeks ago, last time we spoke it was -- it was amazing to me how personally involved he is and has been for weeks in trying to get them out. So, he's -- one thing that surprised me in our interview is that he has been personally texting and doing phone calls, sometimes in the middle of the night with a couple of the commanders who are there, underneath that steel plant.

And he's in touch with them. Directly hearing about their needs, about the wounded, about medicine they need about the weapons they're asking for to try to break the Russian siege. It seems like that's not so much a possibility anymore. I don't think the Ukrainians are attempting to break the siege at the moment. They just don't have the firepower. But it's kind of amazing that the president himself has been personally, you know, talking to and hearing from the soldiers who are down there.

WHITFIELD: And it seems from the time that you've spent with him, I mean, he has been very personally involved on so many levels, and that he has grown into this job and in your profile. You talk about how three years ago, you know, when he was running for office, he was a different man than what he has come to be and this invasion has reshaped him in a way that's even surprised him. Tell me about what the discoveries have been.

SHUSTER: I think so. Yes. I mean, during this invasion, it was my fourth interview with President Zelenskyy. So I've known him for about three years since he went into politics.

[13:15:08]

SHUSTER: The first time I interviewed him was when he was a comedian and actor running for president. And of course, you know, every time I've checked in with him since and every time I've interviewed him, he's been a -- he's changed. And I think the changes this time when I spoke to him were especially dramatic. You know, these two months have really taken a toll. When I asked him, how have you changed in the last two months with the invasion.

He said, he had aged, he'd taken on, as he put it, a wisdom that he never wanted, related to the war, the suffering that he's seen, the atrocities that he's seen the Russian soldiers commit. So, yes, he's become harder. But also, I'd say, compared to the person I met three years ago, much more confident in his leadership, a lot stronger and more tough.

WHITFIELD: He's harder, he's more confident, tougher. But you also describe that he's still, you know, what remains are many fears, particularly as this conflict goes. And that he is concerned that people while there seems to be global support for Ukraine, and its fight and his leadership, that he grows very concerned and worried that people will simply get tired of the conflict. They'll turn the page.

Tell us more about his concerns, how he is hoping that people will not -- the global community will not lose interest in what's happening. And that would really be his biggest nightmare, as this conflict continues.

SHUSTER: Yes. That's one of the things actually he asked me about, you know, he said, Simon, what's your sense of the level of attention? Is it waning in the West around the world? Have you have the sense that the world is still paying attention to what's happening here in Ukraine? And that's a big concern of his. You know, he sees that as a really fundamental part of his leadership, not only to stay in touch with the military commanders on the ground and make sure that they have the support they need, but to constantly be engaged with international leaders, giving speeches, giving interviews.

You know, most of his day, when I was there with him, those two weeks with his team, most of their focus and attention is related to keeping the world on board, maintaining the support of the international community. And that usually involves, you know, an -- a huge list, a daily list of speeches, engagements, meetings with the international community to try to keep them interested and keep their support strong.

So, he's very concerned that that could flag as the horrors of the war constantly filled the news cycle and the headlines and the social media feeds of people around the world. WHITFIELD: It really is a fascinating article, Simon. Thank you so much for sharing it with, you know, the reading public. I mean, just all of that detail from the creases in his face, you know, the fatigue and -- but at the same time, how he battles that fatigue with an awareness of where he is on the global stage. And the leadership of his country and how he no longer looks in the rooms, you know, for him as advisor but how he really has grown into this position. Simon Schuster, thank you so much. I encourage everybody to read it. TIME Magazine.

SHUSTER: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, coming up. Emotional testimony from actress Amber Heard. She took the stand and recounted explosive allegations of abuse by her ex-husband Johnny Depp. We'll discuss next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:23:09]

WHITFIELD: All right. This week, taking the witness stand. Amber Heard in the defamation lawsuit brought by her ex-husband Johnny Depp. The actor is suing his ex-wife for $50 million over a 2018 Washington Post op-ed in which she described herself as a public figure representing domestic abuse. Depp was not mentioned in the piece, though he maintains it cost him lucrative acting gigs.

Herd filed her own $100 million counter suit against Depp in 2020, which is ongoing. CNN's Polo Sandoval reports on week four of this trial.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

POLO SANDOVAL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Amber Heard took to the witness stand in her defense for the first time during week four of Johnny Depp's defamation trial against her.

AMBER HEARD, ACTRESS: This is horrible for me to sit here for weeks and relive everything.

SANDOVAL: It was the start of two days of emotional testimony from the 36-year-old actress. During her first two days on the stand, Heard offered the jury a glimpse of what she alleges was constant physical and sexual violence suffered at the hands of her then husband. Allegations Depp denies.

HEARD: Was trying to get through to Johnny. They couldn't see him. I couldn't see him at all. My head was bashing against the back of the bar and I couldn't breathe and I remember trying to get up and I was slipping on the glass, my feet were slipping, my arms were slipping on the countertop. And I remember just trying to get up so I could breathe, so I could tell him that he was really hurting me. I didn't think he knew what he was doing.

SANDOVAL: Heard maintain she could do little to make the abuse stopped during the couple's short-lived marriage. HEARD: Nothing I did made him stop hitting me. Nothing. So, you know, I tried for over a year. Maybe two. Just not responding physically, not responding verbally, just staring at him I tried to freeze, I tried to go to a different place. And I even threatened to leave him, you know, and tried to leave them and nothing was working.

SANDOVAL: Depp previously testified that he was the one who endured physical and verbal abuse from Heard. Though Heard could recall only one instance in which she struck Depp saying it was in defense of her sister who was present during an argument between the couple.

HEARD: I, for the first time hit him, like, actually hit him square in the face. It didn't push my sister down the stairs.

SANDOVAL: That we concluded with what may be some of the most graphic testimony that the jury has heard so far. During an explosive fight in 2014 at a rental home in Australia, Heard claim Depp used a liquor bottle to sexually assault her. During that testimony, Depp seemed to look away from the witness stand.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you recall what Mr. Depp was saying to you when he had the bottle and was pushing it against your pubic bone?

HEARD: He said that (BLEEP) kill me.

SANDOVAL: Heard testified that she left Australia feeling destroyed and heartbroken.

HEARD: The discomfort I was feeling afterwards just paled in comparison to how scared, shocked. I was scared. I just married this man.

SANDOVAL: Outside of the proceedings Depp's spokesperson called Heard testimony convoluted and the performance of her life. Writing the upcoming cross examination from Mr. Depp's team will be most telling and will certainly highlight the many fallacies Ms. Heard has now attempted to pass off as fact. Heard's team responded calling Depp's behavior during the trial as pitiful as it was in their marriage.

Heard's testimony picks up on May 16th with closing arguments expected may 27th. Polo Sandoval, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: I want to bring in now Sara Azari to discuss she's a criminal defense attorney. And she joins me live from Los Angeles. So good to see you, Sara. So --

SARA AZARI, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Good to see you too, Fred.

WHITFIELD: Yes. So Amber Heard's testimony this week, I mean, it was quite striking. How do you interpret what was said on the stand?

AZARI: So, you know, Fred, domestic violence is a deadly epidemic. You know, obviously, it's horrific, what she's describing and graphic detail is awful. But in a court of law, we look for the truth. We look for credibility, we look for corroboration. And her testimony has been largely implausible.

WHITFIELD: Why?

AZARI: I don't impose -- well, look, I'm not -- I'm not saying that victims of domestic violence need to gather proof and take photographs of all their injuries. But this is a person who was very well documenting and photographing the chaos around her. The broken objects, the video, you know, videoing Johnny Depp in his kitchen slamming cabinets. But yet she does not take any photos of some very, very serious injuries, not just little marks on her face but cuts.

You know, things, you know, the broken nose, the broken ribs. And she saw one friend who was surrounded by nurses and doctors and other witnesses who have testified that they saw no marks of abuse on her ever following these incidents that she's alleging. Then you look at the added facts over time, when you start elaborating and exaggerating, the facts become more detailed, that usually shows fabrication on some level.

And last but not least, she has very selective memory, the facts that are bad for her, she says she doesn't know she doesn't recall. And yet she recalls the type of flooring that she was dragged across after being sexually assaulted. It's really, you know, a credibility call for this jury, but I would say between her in Depp, Depp is the one that's more credible and likeable. And, you know, in a court of law as you know, Fred, if the jury likes you, they will believe you. If they don't like you, you better have some strong corroboration.

WHITFIELD: Wow. But in her defense, can't sometimes trauma interrupt your memory of things?

AZARI: Yes, absolutely. And we had experts testifying to that, or at least her expert, Heard hired (INAUDIBLE) Dr. Hughes testified before she testified. But again, you look at the totality, right? You give her that. You say, OK, fine, you don't remember. But then why is it that you remember other things that are irrelevant, you know, but you don't remember, you know. And then you look at, you know, the lack of photographs.

You know, some of these injuries, Fred, she absolutely would have landed in the hospital for, non-option. It's not whether you're, you know, oh no, I don't want to go to the hospital like some victims do say. It's that she would have been bleeding. You know, she would -- she would not have a choice but to be taken to the hospital. So, again, it -- there's implausibility here that I just can't overlook, and she's just not as relatable as Depp was in his testimony.

[13:30:00]

WHITFIELD: Hmm. So, as a defense attorney, how would you prepare your client for a moment like this?

AZARI: Well, you know, I think when you are telling the truth, your lawyer will prepare you and you are prepared for anything that comes at you on cross-examination. If you are putting together facts in a story, then it is tough.

Because there might be questions asked of you on cross -- and her cross is going to be brutal, I imagine -- that you just cannot prepare for.

And ultimately, Fred, I want to bring this back to the veracity of the 2018 op-ed. Because that is why we're here, right?

WHITFIELD: Right.

AZARI: We know that -- let's just say this jury believes her. They must have absolutely also believed Depp. Because he definitely had the more credible case.

So now you have two perpetrators. Her op-ed is written as a first- person me-too victim point of view.

So is it truthful to say that you're a victim of domestic violence when, at least on some occasions, you've been the perpetrator? To me, that is deceptive. It is a half-truth. And a half-truth is a lie, which makes it defamatory.

WHITFIELD: You mentioned the cross-examination just might be brutal. We know that a spokesperson for Johnny Depp has said that, when they cross-examine, it will highlight the many fallacies that she has testified to.

At the same time, might it potentially backfire if cross-examination is too tough?

AZARI: Yes. I mean, you know, sometimes when lawyers get snarky and they get personal and they get really sort of hostile, it doesn't look good before a jury.

But sometimes the witnesses is the one that gets hostile in response because she or he is not prepared for that question.

And so I -- this will be really interesting. I keep saying, a first- year law student could do this cross-examination and unravel this testimony. There's just so much, Fred, that she could be impeached with. There's so much we've heard in the last three weeks that is contrary to what she's saying.

And I'm also curious about the other witnesses that she's going to put up. Are they going to change the trajectory of this case for her in some way?

WHITFIELD: All right. We'll all be watching.

Sara Azari, good to see you. So glad you could join us today.

AZARI: Thank you, Fred, for having me, finally.

WHITFIELD: All right. Thank you. Thanks for saying yes, right? All right.

(LAUGHTER)

WHITFIELD: All right. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:37:08]

WHITFIELD: All right, the fallout from a leaked draft report showing the U.S. Supreme Court could overturn abortion rights in the U.S. continues to grow.

Take a look right now. Live pictures of Centennial Olympic Park in downtown Atlanta where a crowd is gathering at an abortion rights rally. It is one of several planned rallies across the U.S. today.

If Roe v. Wade is repealed, at least 20 states could move to ban abortions. Other states would move to protect abortion rights.

And as CNN's Jessica Schneider reports, the patchwork of old and new state laws could lead to confusion.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GOV. KEVIN STITT (R-OK): We want to outlaw abortion in the state of Oklahoma.

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Nearly two dozen states are on the brink of banning abortion. And it will happen almost immediately if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade.

Thirteen states have trigger laws, abortion bans that will go into effect once Roe is off the books.

Nine states have so-called zombie laws, abortion bans that were never repealed once Roe took effect in 1973. These bans would go back into effect if the conservatives on the court eliminate that constitutional right to abortion.

DANA NESSEL, (D), MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL: That very moment, prosecutors around the state could begin prosecuting doctors, and I would argue, potentially women as well.

SCHNEIDER: Michigan's law makes no exception for rape or incest. But it would allow abortions to save the mother's life.

But the Republican running for attorney general in Michigan says he would prosecute even if abortion was performed in an effort to save the mother.

MATT DEPERNO, (R), CANDIDATE FOR MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL: And then said, well, what about the life of the mother, OK. Do you have an exception for that?

I said, I do not. Because there is literally no medical diagnosis that says that if the mother's life is in danger, abort the baby.

SCHNEIDER: That is just one example of how uncertain the actual enforcement of criminal abortion statutes could be.

In Wisconsin, the attorney general is already saying he'll refuse to prosecute and will instead leave it to local district attorneys.

JOSH KAUL, (D), WISCONSIN ATTORNEY GENERAL: It's my view that we have problems that we need our law enforcement to be dealing with, like violent crime, drug trafficking.

And we don't need to shift their focus from -- from those important efforts to -- to going after people for allegedly violating a ban that nobody had understood to be enforceable for almost 50 years.

(CHANTING)

SCHNEIDER: The wide-ranging prosecutorial approach reflects just how uncertain and uneven the legal landscape would be in a post-Roe world.

MARY ZIEGLER, VISITING PROFESSOR, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: I think the most important and difficult question is going to be whether states can reach out of their own borders to prosecute people, or whether states are going to prosecute patients for having abortions, as Louisiana seems to be doing.

SCHNEIDER: Louisiana lawmakers passed a bill out of committee this week that would classify abortions as homicides, leaving the door open for patients to be prosecuted.

[13:40:06]

And then there's the question about how officials would even find out about illegal abortions.

Privacy advocates are now raising the alarm that people's Google searches could be used against them or even their own cell phones.

Alan Butler leads the Electronic Privacy Information Center and points out that third parties can buy data from Google and perform reverse searches that could enable law enforcement to track who was at an abortion clinic and when.

ALAN BUTLER, PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER: If the prosecutor goes and gets a court order to get this type of data or they go and try to buy this data on the open market, for example, which is another thing that happens, then they would know the information about the devices that were there, the I.D. of your device.

SCHNEIDER (on camera): Legal experts are now scrambling to fully understand all the implications of a post-Roe America.

And many say, rather than the Supreme Court's likely decision being the final word, it could instead spur a flurry of state-by-state legal fights in the years ahead.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Thank you so much, Jessica.

With me to talk more about this is Franita Tolson. She is the vice dean at the University of Southern California Law School.

Vice Dean Tolson, so good to see you.

FRANITA TOLSON, VICE DEAN, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LAW SCHOOL: Good to see you, too, Fred. Thank you for having me.

WHITFIELD: Thank you.

So this is a draft. But what wheels do you see have already been set in motion as a result of its leaking?

TOLSON: Well, we know that abortion is on the chopping block. Until five justices sign on to this opinion, then Roe and Casey are still the law of the land.

But at end of the day, the draft tells us we should expect the worst. Of course, things can change between now and the end of term. But it is unlikely.

And so I think it is best to prepare for a world after abortion, after abortion rights, after reproductive freedom. What does that world look like? Because it is likely it will strike down the right come the end of the term.

WHITFIELD: What are your concerns what the world will look like then?

TOLSON: Oh, I don't even know where to start. I think the package gives us a taste of how things will be.

You know, it is entirely possible that many states will start defining life as starting at conception. So that means that you could have situations where a miscarriage becomes a potential murder investigation.

Where women who have unviable pregnancies, where they may suffer an atopic pregnancy or carry a fetus that is not viable, they have to see that through at risk of their own health.

These laws could potentially ban contraceptives, like the IUD or Plan B. And it could also have implications for in-vitro fertilization, right?

So it's possible that it could become a crime to destroy discarded embryos that are produced as a part of that process.

And so this opinion has implications well beyond abortion. And that is something that we have to take seriously.

WHITFIELD: Do you have similar concerns that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed about the what's next?

That if Roe v. Wade is overturned that it sets a precedent rather on the right to privacy and could open up a rolling back of other rights, from interracial marriages to same-sex marriages to a continued chipping away of voting rights. The list goes on and on.

TOLSON: Absolutely. I think we have to be concerned about any right that is not expressly enshrined in the Constitution, in the constitutional text.

So there's always going to be some play in the joints where the court will interpret the constitutional language to protect a right.

So the right of abortion, as viewed at least by the court in Roe and Casey, is the aspect of the right of privacy, which the court was protected in the Constitution.

But because it is not expressly mentioned -- and there are many rights that are not. So the same-sex marriage right that the court recognized a few years ago, the right of sexual autonomy that the court recognized in a case called Lawrence v. Texas 20 years ago.

Things like that will be on the chopping block because essentially the draft opinion shows really no reverence for precedent at all.

So those cases, those earlier cases, which, in normal circumstances, would constraint the court's discretion -- and in fact, if you look at Casey opinion, that reaffirmed Roe, that was all about recognizing the sanctity of precedent.

We have a decision and we have to honor it, regardless of if we, the justices, think the decision is rightly or wrongly decided. There's a precedent.

We don't really have that anymore. Dobbs itself is overturned in precedent. So any case involving a right that's not expressly mentioned, I think we have to be concerned about that right.

WHITFIELD: And at least two of the justices in recent memory actually made reference to precedent and the laws of the land and being respected as such. But of course, now we're seeing something differently from this draft.

[13:44:59]

I mean, listen to Justice Alito, who wrote this leaked draft, during his confirmation hearing 16 years ago on precedent and how these decisions are made. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED SENATOR: Do you believe it is the settled law of the land?

SAMUEL ALITO, U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: Roe v. Wade is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It was decided in 1973. So it's been on the books for a long time.

It has been challenged on a number of occasions. And I think that when a decision is challenged and it is reaffirmed, that strengthens its value as stare decisis. For at least two reasons. First of all, the more often a decision is

reaffirmed, the more people tend to rely on it.

And secondly, I think stare decisis reflects the view that there is wisdom embedded in decisions that have been made by prior justices.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Do you listen to his answer any differently now? Do you evaluate it differently now, knowing that he authored the draft that has been leaked?

TOLSON: I don't. And, in part, it is because it wasn't believable when he said it. And it is not believable now.

Supreme Court confirmations are political theater. So justices say what they think they need to say in order to get on the court.

But you have to remember that these are life appointments. So absent egregious behavior, they can essentially do whatever they want to do as long as you can count to five, right?

If you can get five justices behind any position, it doesn't matter what is said in a confirmation hearing.

So, that is just performative. So I never believed it.

WHITFIELD: Oh, gosh.

All right. Vice Dean Franita Tolson, appreciate your candor.

TOLSON: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: Thanks for being with us.

All right. Still ahead, as war rages on, it's nothing but peaceful aboard the International Space Station where U.S. astronauts and Russian cosmonauts are working hand in hand. CNN spoke to two astronauts about the unique dependency they share in space.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:51:47]

WHITFIELD: Welcome back. A group of astronauts has arrived at the International Space Station where they were greeted by Russian cosmonauts. What is it like in a time of war back on earth?

CNN innovation and space correspondent, Rachel Crane, joining me now.

Rachel, good to see you.

You interviewed two of the astronauts about how they remain committed to their mission right now.

RACHEL CRANE, CNN BUSINESS INNOVATION & SPACE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Fred. These two astronauts that I spoke to said they understand the magnitude of what they are doing up on the International Space Station.

Of course, the International Space Station remains one of the last diplomatic links between the U.S. and Russia. This is a decades-long partnership that they've had working together on this floating laboratory.

And it really -- they depend on one another. The Russian side controls the propulsion of the laboratory and the U.S. side controls the power.

Now Dmitry Rogozin, who is head Roscosmos, he has consistently been tweeting statements threatening to pull out of the International Space Station. NASA maintains that there's no immediate threat to Russia's involvement in the station.

But I had a chance to speak with Jessica Watkins, a NASA astronaut, and also ESA astronaut, Samantha Cristoforetti, about mood onboard station and their concerns.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CRANE: Do you worry that the Russian government could order their cosmonauts to take aggressive actions on station, like closing off access to Russian modules or some sharing resources? And if not, why not?

SAMANTHA CRISTOFORETTI, EUROPEAN SPACE AGENCY ASTRONAUT: Yes, we do not worry about that. The reason is that we have, I think, an instinctive understanding of the community we are part of.

I think we all understand what we do here is valuable, that the space station is valuable. That the space station is valuable. And that, even in times of conflict, you have to preserve bridges. You have to preserve some areas of cooperation. And, you know, the best candidate for that is just the space station.

JESSICA WATKINS, NASA ASTRONAUT: We are a family up here. We have dinner with our cosmonaut colleagues. And we understand the shared mission, the shared goal. And we'll all work together to do our best to accomplish that and do so successfully, safely, and efficiently.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CRANE: And, Fred, I just want to point out this is a milestone mission for Jessica Watkins. It's her first mission to space.

But she's also the first black woman to have an extended stay on station. She'll be there over six months. So really an historic mission here -- Fred?

WHITFIELD: Fantastic. Congratulations to her.

Rachel Crane, thank you. Thanks for bringing it to us. Still to come, a disturbing mystery in the Bahamas. Three American

tourists were found dead at a beach resort. Details about the investigation, straight ahead.

But first, CNN's original series "NOMAD," with Carlton McCoy, continues with Carlton's first trip to South Korea.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARLTON MCCOY, HOST, "NOMAD": Do you feel that the younger generation in Korea values places like this?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

[13:55:05]

MCCOY: I didn't expect that answer.

If there was one positive about how fast the world moves today, all the technology, social media, it's actually drawn people back to places like this.

Young people are leading the pack. They're starting to say, like, we don't want this, you know? I think it's really powerful.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right, now I see what's going on there.

All right. Catch an all-new episode of "NOMAD," with Carlton McCoy," tomorrow at 10:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)