Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Interview With Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN); Supreme Court Overturns Roe v. Wade. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired June 24, 2022 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:31]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Hello everyone. I'm Fredricka Whitfield in New York. Ana Cabrera has the day off.

A single decision, a single vote and a seismic shift in the nation's legal and cultural landscape.

Crowds have been gathering outside the U.S. Supreme Court after a majority, five justices, overturned the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision. That means that, after nearly 50 years, American women no longer have a constitutional right to an abortion.

States will now define abortion laws. And 13 states have abortion bans that were triggered into law by this morning's ruling. In all, about half the states in this country are expected to implement abortion bans. It's a monumental victory for abortion opponents and conservatives.

But many liberals and moderates fear that the court could target other landmark precedents like same-sex marriage and contraception. Justice Clarence Thomas explicitly called for those cases to be revisited. He wrote today: "For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is demonstrably erroneous, we have a duty to correct the error established in those precedents."

CNN's Jessica Schneider is outside the U.S. Supreme Court. Kaitlan Collins is at the White House, and Lauren Fox is on Capitol Hill.

To you first, Kaitlan. The president just spoke. He did not mince words, saying this is a sad day for the court and the country. What else did he say?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: He called it a solemn day for the United States and said that the Supreme Court did not simply limit the constitutional right to get an abortion. They completely overturned the ruling, Roe vs. Wade, saying that they completely took it away in these arguments.

And he was talking about what a solemn day he believes it is for America. And for a president who doesn't often invoke his predecessor, he did by name just now, saying that it was the addition of those three Supreme Court justices who were appointed by former President Trump that factored in such a major way into today's decision by the court to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

And he noted the fact that there have been Supreme Court justices who were appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents who maintained this decision and upheld it for so long. And he talked about what the consequences of what today's decision means for Americans.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: State laws banning abortion are automatically taking effect today, jeopardizing the health of millions of women, some without exceptions, so extreme that women could be punished for protecting their health, so extreme that women and girls are forced to bear their rapist's child, with the child a consequence -- it just -- it just stuns me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: The president there at a loss of words for a moment, as he was talking about what this decision means.

He also talked about how the White House and his administration is going to respond. And he said the Justice Department will be ready to have legal challenges for any states or state officials that try to limit women who tried to travel out of state if they can't get an abortion in their home state to another state.

He talked about efforts to eliminate barriers to that abortion medication, of course, that the White House has talked about. It's really been a ruling they have been bracing for, for so many months.

But, at the end, of course, the president noted how limited he is in executive actions he can take. Of course, no executive action he can take will undo what happened with the Supreme Court today. And so, for that matter, he called on Americans to elect more pro-choice Democrats this November in the midterm elections, saying that he does believe Roe vs. Wade is on the ballot come November.

WHITFIELD: Kaitlan, thank you.

And, Jessica, this may be the most life-changing decision from the court in decades. So what more are you learning about the ruling?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Fredricka, life-changing for millions of American women, but also the most consequential decision from the Supreme Court in decades, just about 50 years, the court here eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion, something that they established way back in 1973.

[13:05:00]

And this gives all the power to the individual states. They will be able to determine abortion rights for the women in their states. And the changes are set to come, as the president said, almost immediately. More than two dozen states are poised to almost immediately ban abortion.

Now, this was a 5-4 decision. It was fairly identical to the leaked draft that we saw just about a month-and-a-half ago. This was authored by Justice Alito. Now, crucially, the chief justice, John Roberts, he did not want to go so far as overturning Roe v. Wade, though he said that he will vote to uphold the Mississippi 15-week abortion ban.

But, still, the consequence is that Roe v. Wade is overturned because of these five conservative justices. Here's something from Justice Alito's opinion. He called Roe v. Wade egregiously wrong from the start. He said: "Its reasoning was exceptionally weak. And the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have inflamed debate and deepened division."

Now, the dissent here also responded with a very curt joint response from the three liberal justices, Justice Stephen Breyer -- of course, he's retiring soon -- and Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan writing this: "Whatever the exact scope of the coming laws that are set to come in the Individual states, one result of today's decision is certain, the curtailment of a women's rights and of their status as free and equal citizens."

So, Fredricka, this opinion not only dividing the nation, but also dividing this court, this conservative majority really flexing its muscle in the past few days in particular, and today overturning Roe v. Wade, leaving it all to the states -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, thank you, Jessica.

Lauren, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was very somber. What does she have to say?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, she started her press conference saying that she wasn't even going to say good morning, because it was not, in her view, a good morning.

She was visibly upset, stunned by the decision. she said. Here's more about what she had to say in that press conference.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): What is happening here? What is happening here?

A woman's fundamental health decisions are her own to make in consultation with her doctor, her faith, her family, not some right- wing politicians. But to see the chief justice side with this radical agenda, it's just stunning.

And again, as a woman, as a mother, as a grandmother, to see young girls now have fewer rights than their moms or even their grandmothers is something very sad. If you're a woman, if you care about women, if you respect women, you know that this is a disgraceful, disgraceful judgment that they made.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOX: And I also spoke to two other Democrats this morning. Senator Chris Coons told me that this decision today really took out the goodwill that senators in that bipartisan group that had passed that gun safety legislation last night that they had felt for one another.

He said that this decision really totally changed the dynamics of how the Senate is feeling this morning and this afternoon. It just goes to show you that lawmakers still trying to take this information in, Republicans obviously celebrating this decision, Democrats saying that they are going to make this the campaign issue going into the midterm elections -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, Lauren Fox, Kaitlan Collins, Jessica Schneider, thanks to all of you. Appreciate it.

Let's talk more about all of this.

Let's bring in CNN senior legal analyst Laura Coates, constitutional law professor and author of "She Took Justice" Gloria Browne-Marshall, and CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Good to see all of you.

Jeffrey, I mean, the president said this is not over. He says, however, it is up to Congress to restore Roe v. Wade as federal law. We know that recently they tried to codify it. It didn't work. So what are the options?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: There are not a lot for the federal government. I mean, they can protect the right to travel. They can protect the ability to mail abortion pills through the mail.

But, I mean, this really is going to be a state-by-state fight. And it's also going to be a fight in the Supreme Court about other rights, because, remember, what the court said, what Justice Alito said in the opinion is, there is nothing -- the court -- the Constitution says nothing about abortion. It doesn't mention abortion in the Constitution.

It also doesn't mention same-sex marriage. It also doesn't mention contraception. It also doesn't mention consensual sex. And in Justice Thomas' opinion, he says the court should revisit, that is, overturn the decisions that prevent states from limiting contraception, same- sex marriage, consensual sex.

So the opportunity for change here is all on the right. All the left can do is play defense best as can state by state.

[13:10:07]

WHITFIELD: Justice Thomas signposting what possibly is ahead, foreshadowing.

So, Laura in the Plessy vs. Ferguson ruling, there was an expansion of rights. This is a right now that has been taken away. That is unprecedented. How has this happened when, for 50 years, Roe v. Wade has been upheld as constitutional a dozen times?

LAURA COATES, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: What's so important to think about is, I woke up this morning, as millions of women across this country, with certain rights. I will go to bed with less rights than my grandmother had in her lifetime, than my great-grandmother had in her lifetime.

This is one of the first instances I can think of when the Supreme Court has taken away rights, not only have been re invested in, that people have relied upon, that has been based and also upheld over successive generations for 50 years.

And you cannot overstate this principle enough. The real reason that the majority opinion found for this no longer to be a viable right is because it was not part of a longstanding or rooted in our history of our nation.

Let's just go back for a second here in the Constitution. A lot of things have not been rooted in our nation's history that ought to have been codified then, and later on were enveloped into our society. The idea that all the different rights that are a part of the same notions, fundamental rights, as Jeffrey talked about, same-sex marriage, interracial marriage, the opportunity to be in a same-sex relationship, the ideas of contraceptives, all of those things are not rooted in our nation's long history, according to this majority opinion.

And they want to carve that out and say, we're not talking about those things. This is just about this. The Supreme Court ought to know better than any other entity in the entire world about the problems of a slippery slope. And though they want to wall off just abortion rights in this country and ignore other things based on the same premise, they will not be able to do so.

And I remind everyone the Supreme Court has already been a part of its own delegitimization here, when they allowed Texas to do an end-run around their precedent and thumb their nose at the Supreme Court and said, I don't care what precedent you have. We're going to codify something anyway.

Well, the Supreme Court now has essentially said, our precedent is no longer going to be the end-all/be-all. As the majority said, stare decisis will not be a straitjacket, but, apparently, it's not for everything, just what they want to carve out.

WHITFIELD: Professor Browne-Marshall, I mean, this ruling allows states now to decide abortion rights or restrictions; 13 states have abortion-related laws now immediately a triggered into effect.

So what does this mean for women, for families? What does tomorrow look like? Just as Laura said, today, this morning, it's one picture. This evening, it's another. But for tomorrow, for those who are making plans, what does it potentially look like?

GLORIA BROWNE-MARSHALL, JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE: We don't know. And that's the problem.

The Supreme Court is supposed to give clarity to the country. When there are conflicts in the circuits, when there are issues that come before the Supreme Court, they take so few cases in order to give clarity to the country.

This gives no clarity. On the one hand, the New York case involving guns says that the state cannot decide who can conceal a weapon and carry it outside. And then it turns, on the other hand, and says, oh, you will leave us to the legislative body, and women have political power, and so therefore use that political power to lobby your legislative body and get them to say that it's all right for you to have access to abortion.

So, as was pointed out, we don't know, since abortion -- anti-abortion leaders have said this is just the first step. They have already said they're going to go into each step -- each state and make sure step by step that they're going to take away abortion rights altogether.

So I think this is the beginning of the end for many. But it's also -- and one last thing, going back to what was said with Laura and the history. When we look at the history, and they put forward these statutes from the 1800s of women who were denied abortion rights, these statutes came at a time of nationalism.

And that's what we're in right now. We're in a period of nationalism, in which every white baby counts, because they're not thinking about the people of color. They're thinking about population growth, knowing that, by the year 2045, this country is going to be majority people of color.

So there are underlying conservative issues here that are not being discussed that need to be when it comes to this decision.

WHITFIELD: And, Jeffrey, I mean, this is a victory for activist politicians who've been trying to overturn this for decades, who have fought through state legislation to chip away at Roe vs. Wade.

[13:15:00]

I mean, so what does this say about the power of this movement, especially this morning? There are a lot of people who are feeling like this came so suddenly and abruptly, but, really, it has been going on for decades to get this result.

TOOBIN: And this was something Donald Trump recognized when he ran for president.

He said over and over again -- he said in one of his debates with Hillary Clinton, if I win, I will appoint justices who will vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade. And conservatives who didn't like Donald Trump's personal life, who didn't like his demeanor, who didn't like the way he's conducted himself in all his marriages, they said, no, this is what matters to us. That's why we're going to support him.

The evangelical community was very strongly supportive of Donald Trump throughout his presidency.

WHITFIELD: Overlooked the other stuff.

TOOBIN: Overlooked. And they got what they wanted.

And there's a lesson here that the Supreme Court is on the ballot every time you vote for president, every time you vote for senators, who vote to conserve Supreme Court justices. So maybe Democrats will learn the significance. That is not something that's been a big motivating factor for Democratic voters.

It has been one for Republican voters. And they got what they wanted today.

WHITFIELD: And, as we're talking, the images right outside the Supreme Court, the crowd getting louder, getting bigger.

Laura, in the recent confirmation hearings, we heard Justices Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett all state the values of stare decisis, the precedent of Roe vs. Wade. And now those very justices joined a majority to overturn it.

So does this devalue the confirmation process?

COATES: Yes, I think it points out the fact that it is theirs to lose. And all they have to do is say the right things long enough to a particular audience to get that confirmation to then be called justice, and then to do what they'd like after that.

I'd note that, in the concurring opinion written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, he really focused in on this notion of stare decisis in a way, I think, trying to point out the fact that he anticipated we'd have this very conversation today, Fred, the idea of, I thought you all said you believe in the value of things.

But I go back to that majority opinion written by Alito to suggest hey, these are not straitjackets, and we can divert from it many different times, Plessy vs. Ferguson on one hand as one example they have raised.

But I will note there's a really great quote that the dissenting opinions wrote about this issue, pointing out the hypocrisy of part of these things, and then, yes, of compartmentalizing this notion. And what they essentially say is, either the majority does not really believe in its own reasoning, or, if it does, all rights that have no history stretching back to the mid-19th century are insecure.

Either the mass of the majority's opinion is hypocrisy or additional constitutional rights are under threat. It is one or the other. And, Fred, today, both cannot be true. You cannot on the one hand say, if there is no mention in the Constitution or no longstanding nod in history, then it cannot be honored, and then say but everything else outside of that same rationale can be. Either you are a hypocrite or you are ignoring it. Either you believe in stare decisis or you just wanted to be called to justice in the end.

WHITFIELD: All right, we will leave it there for now. Thanks to everybody. Appreciate it, Laura Coates, Professor Gloria Browne- Marshall, and Jeffrey Toobin.

Laura, I will see you again in a few minutes. Thank you so much.

Also, still ahead, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar from the Judiciary Committee joining us. We will get her take on this history-making day in America, the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe vs. Wade.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:20:08]

WHITFIELD: All right happening right now, the House is voting on the historic bipartisan gun control bill negotiated and passed by the U.S. Senate.

There is no doubt this bill will be approved, since Democrats have control of the House. But we are also watching how many Republicans end up supporting the legislation. So far, at least seven have, including Congresswoman Liz Cheney. We will let you know as soon as the vote is finished.

All right, meanwhile, it's only been a matter of hours since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, and some states are already enacting abortion laws and bans; 13 states have trigger bans or trigger laws to ban abortion as soon as the Supreme Court issued its ruling.

Missouri's attorney general says he signed an opinion moments after the decision that will -- quote -- "effectively end abortion" in the state. Louisiana's attorney general saying -- quote -- "This is the day the lord has made. I rejoice with my departed mom and the unborn children with her in heaven."

The Texas attorney general says he is making today an annual holiday.

CNN's Tom Foreman joining us right now.

So, Tom, what more do we know about the trigger bans and how states are reacting?

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: As you noted, 13 states, Fredricka, had so-called trigger laws in place for this day, meaning abortion bans that are going into effect very quickly, according to the abortion groups -- rights group Guttmacher Institute.

In Kentucky, Louisiana and South Dakota, for example, the laws said it would happen immediately. So barring some issue somewhere there, those are all in effect now. At the next level, abortion bans are to be enforced 30 days from now in Idaho, Texas and Tennessee, although there is a push in Texas to bypass that delay and implement a ban even sooner.

This whole map, all of this is changing very rapidly. Then we have a half-dozen states where officials need to certify their legislation is legally valid before the ban kicks in, Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming. And, as you noted, Missouri already jumped on it, certified, and others are moving very rapidly in that direction, making their bans almost immediate, as we mentioned the other ones.

So it could be just hours or days until all of those are done. And, finally, we can add in the states that have old unenforced abortion bans which now can be enforced, states that passed banned under Roe which were blocked by courts.

Altogether, you get a whopping 26 states certain or likely to ban abortion. We say likely because there are places such as Montana where a state Supreme Court ruling is for now still on the way. That's compared to just 16 states and D.C. with laws to protect abortion rights, states which are now preparing for an influx of patients crossing state lines to seek care.

[13:25:00]

So how severe are these new laws? Missouri has eyes on targeting even nonresidents who might pass through and conceive a child in their state. And if that person were to get an abortion elsewhere, they could pursue them legally.

Oklahoma passed a law of justice here to ban abortion from the moment of fertilization. Texas and some other states want abortion illegal after just six weeks, when many women may not even know that they are pregnant. Conservative lawmakers in several states have embraced the idea that there should be no exception for rape or incest.

And almost all these laws carry stiff penalties for medical professionals caught providing abortion services, tens of thousands of dollars in fines, loss of their licenses, and potentially years in prison -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, Tom, thank you so much.

All right, let's continue this discussion right now.

I want to bring in Senator Amy Klobuchar. She is a Democrat from Minnesota and sits on the Judiciary Committee.

Senator, good to see you.

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): Thanks, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: So, Roe vs. Wade, it's the law that you grew up knowing. How does the overturning of it make you feel today?

KLOBUCHAR: Fifty years of precedent, Fredricka.

I'm someone that believes in the law, believes in the court. And they literally flipped it on its head, these Trump-appointed justices. And you just heard about the impact, automatic trigger laws in 13 states.

I just believe that the people of America trust a woman over her own health care, to make her own decisions with her doctor, with her family, not politicians. And I also think we don't want a patchwork of laws where women in Minnesota have different rights than women in Texas.

And as was just pointed out by Tom, these extreme laws, 500 more are being introduced. Missouri actually had a bill introduced this last year that would allow people to sue people who help people to go to another state if they need an abortion.

And the reasoning of the court, it does -- it doesn't just set us back to the 1950s. It is the 1850s. You just heard about the laws from 1864 in Arizona, from before 1850 in Wisconsin. The women of America don't want to go backwards. They're going forward.

WHITFIELD: Your colleague from Maine GOP Senator Susan Collins says this vote is inconsistent with what Kavanaugh and Gorsuch said in their hearings. And she is disappointed, that from our reporting from Manu Raju earlier.

This may be serious buyer's remorse, but it's unreversible. So what does this tell you about how this court may address other matters, other issues that will directly impact households?

KLOBUCHAR: Well, of course, it's concerning when, in the majority opinion that Justice Alito wrote, he actually based his decision on precedent from the 1200s.

But he also added that the word abortion isn't in the Constitution. Well, it's been pointed out, woman, she is not in the Constitution, right? Woman is not in the Constitution. Contraception is not in the Constitution. Gay marriage is not in the Constitution.

And then Justice Thomas takes it a step forward in his opinion, and actually starts questioning those precedents. This is an extremely and extreme conservative court. The answer to me -- and I was listening to your fine panel before this -- when Jeffrey Toobin, who's a very good analyst, but he said Democrats' choice is defense.

No, no. I'm a football fan. I think the best defense is a good offense. And Democrats are going on offense here and asking moderate Republicans and independents to join us in states, Georgia, Nevada, New Hampshire, Arizona, Colorado, Washington state, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Missouri.

Why do I bring up these states? It's going to be on the ballot, because pro-choice Democratic incumbents and challengers are standing up for the right to choose. That is how you change this, Fredricka. You change it at the ballot box. And you already see the peaceful protests all over the country; 80 percent of the public is with us.

That is the answer to this extreme court that is out of touch, put in there, sadly, by our Republican colleagues and Donald Trump.

WHITFIELD: And, Senator, as a result of this decision today, women are going to need support.

And I know Democrats tried to pass paid family leave as part of the Build Back Better bill. When you talk about going on the offensive, is this something your party should be looking at, trying to pass some kind of stand-alone bill in that respect?

KLOBUCHAR: We actually had a vote on this bill.