Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Supreme Court Overturns Roe v. Wade. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired June 24, 2022 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:55]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Alisyn Camerota. Welcome to CNN NEWSROOM. Victor is off today.

One of the most consequential decisions in Supreme Court history was just handed down. The conservative majority of justices overturned Roe vs. Wade, ending the constitutional right to an abortion.

In a narrow 5-4 vote, the landmark decision reverses nearly 50 years of court precedent. This is sparking a range of emotions from victory celebrations to outrage. You see some vocal protesters gathering outside of the Supreme Court at this hour.

President Biden called the decision a -- quote -- "tragic error."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Today, the Supreme Court of the United States expressly took away a constitutional right from the American people that it had already recognized. They didn't limit it. They simply took it away.

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.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: So, the stunning decision now turns abortion rights over to the states, and the impact on women will be immediate and far- reaching.

Nearly half of all states have trigger laws, as the president alluded to there, or other plans in place to ban or severely limit abortion.

CNN Supreme Court reporter Ariane de Vogue joins us now.

So, Ariane, tell us the significance and the implications of this ruling.

ARIANE DE VOGUE, CNN SUPREME COURT REPORTER: Right, the court wiping away nearly a half-century of precedent. Justice Samuel Alito really hewed would very closely to that draft opinion that we saw last month. He said that Roe is egregiously wrong. He said the right is not in the Constitution. And he said that this issue belongs to the states. And he made a point to say that women had political power and they could go to the states and work in the political arena on the issue.

Here's what he wrote on behalf of the conservatives: "Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak and the decision has had damaging consequences. And from for bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have inflamed debate and deepened division."

He also tried to wall off this opinion today from other cases that had similar legal reasoning, cases like for gay marriage and the right to contraception. For Alito, he said, abortion is different because it has to do with ending a potential life, so an enormous victory for opponents of abortion and, of course, a big loss of for supporters of abortion rights.

Interestingly, the dissenters here, the three of them, they wrote together. That doesn't usually happen. They wrote this biting dissent. And here's how they ended it.

They said: "With sorrow for this court, but more for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection, we dissent."

They said that this represents a curtailment of a woman's right, and for their status as free and equal citizens. And here's another interesting thing. This is probably one of Justice Breyer's last dissents on the court, and, today, this decision actually overturns and opinion that was on the books for his entire tenure, so a poignant last week or so of the court for Justice Breyer.

CAMEROTA: Ariane de Vogue, thank you for all of that context.

DE VOGUE: Thanks.

CAMEROTA: So the president weighing in, as you heard, on this monumental Supreme Court decision.

CNN's Phil Mattingly is at the White House.

Phil, is there any executive action that President Biden could take that would impact this decision?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Alisyn, the disappointment and the president's voice today when he reacted to this decision was palpable.

His authority is limited. There's no question about it. White House officials have been preparing intensively behind the scenes over the course of several months, even more so since the leak of the draft opinion that was released today, in the last several weeks, trying to figure out ways that they can address this in some way shape or form, knowing that in many states across the country, the state laws will allow abortion to continue.

[14:05:12]

Now, the reality is, short of legislative action, short of major changes in Congress, there's not anything that can directly address what happened today. But, as you noted, looking through administrative options, the president underscoring, however, that, politically, something needs to change for the broader decision to have an impact.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: My administration will use all of its appropriate lawful powers, but Congress must act.

And with your vote, you can act. You can have the final word. This is not over.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Yet, you heard a similar sentiment from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi earlier today, making clear this is an issue that will be on the ballot in November.

Political aides inside the White House had been trying to gauge what type of activation this would bring to a party that has been kind of in the doldrums over the course of the last several months. They believe it will have an effect. How big of one is still an open question, but there's no question about this.

This is an extraordinarily consequential moment, not just in the president's presidency, but in the country's history, certainly over the course of the last five decades.

CAMEROTA: Right. We could hear their language talking about basically trying to galvanize voters, and now it's in the hands of voters.

But in terms of what the president was saying about the Department of Justice, and keeping this from being criminalized or women being criminalized, what can they do there?

MATTINGLY: The president gave a window into these debates that have been going on behind the scenes, legal debates, policy debates, regulatory debates, as they have tried to figure out pathways to address particularly states that are continuing to allow abortions that may border with states that will not anymore.

The Justice Department, the president making very clear: We will fight back on any efforts to criminalize things like travel. Obviously, the FDA, the Health and Human Services department will be looking at abortion that can be purchased, abortion pills that can be purchased as well, making sure that those remain legal.

There are going to be a series of things rolled out over the course the next several weeks on the regulatory side, on what the Justice Department can do that underscores the administration's efforts, knowing that this was coming.

I would also note this. Vice President Kamala Harris is in Illinois today. She has been a key player behind the scenes over the course of the last several months on this issue. She will be rolling out a rather sweeping maternal health proposal, set of proposals on that trip to Illinois.

And while this was long in the works before this decision came through, it certainly takes on a new moment of urgency in this administration, given some of the health challenges they believe will be raised by what happened today, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK, Phil Mattingly, thank you for all of that reporting.

Let's bring in now Gloria Borger. She's our CNN chief political analyst. We also have Joan Biskupic with us, our CNN legal analyst and a Supreme Court biographer, also Elie Honig, who's our CNN senior legal analyst and a former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.

And, Elie, I just want to start with the legal battle here, because, in a simplistic conclusion, you could say, OK, well, it goes back to the states. The red states obviously restrict abortion. The blue states expand rights, or at least keep protections in place.

And there you have it, except that I have heard so many legal analysts say, no, there will be interstate battles, this is more complicated than that simplistic reading.

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Alisyn, it's going to be certainly more complex than that.

Base level, it looks like the United States will be split roughly in half between those that do and do not allow abortion. Where it's going to get really complicated is if states that have outlawed or will outlaw abortion start passing laws that have longer reach, that extend over their state borders, for example, if they say it's a crime to get an abortion in the state. It's a crime to cross over the state line, to travel across or through this state to get an abortion elsewhere.

Then how's that going to play out? If it's a crime in a given state to do anything to obtain an abortion, for example, to get on the phone with a doctor in another state, to consult about an abortion, to pay for an abortion, to schedule, to order medication that may go with this, then we're going to see lines crossed across states.

And that's where DOJ may have a role to step and to challenge rules that overreach, that reach across state lines, and to argue that this violates the Commerce Clause or violates larger federal interests. So things are about to get a lot more complicated than even the 50/50 split.

CAMEROTA: Joan, we heard many people, including Speaker Pelosi today, talk about what they see as this contradiction, maybe even hypocrisy in the past 24 hours between these two Supreme Court rulings. Gun rights cannot be left to the states, basically, it seemed as though the Supreme Court was saying, but abortion rights can be left to the states. How does the Supreme Court square that?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SUPREME COURT ANALYST: You know, Alisyn, this is a whole new court, and it's going to be with us for a while.

The five-justice bloc that decided to totally reverse Roe was part of what -- the group that ruled for gun rights yesterday, but Chief Justice John Roberts was with them. In this case, he wasn't with them. But it just goes to show how different things are, evidenced by this ruling, than it's been for the past 50 years with other Republican- appointed conservatives.

[14:10:05]

Other Republican-appointed said, we may not have liked Roe v. Wade, but we had to respect it, we had to uphold it based on a very revered principle in the law of adherence to precedent.

But these five justices, and including the three new Trump appointees, just cast that aside. And what the dissenters said is, they are not done yet. And I think this is a really important point for our audience. They are not done yet.

Clarence Thomas, one of the five in the majority, even said that he would welcome challenges to other privacy interests like contraceptives, like same-sex marriage. So this just goes to show what has happened in America with our highest court, for better or for worse, this is it.

And the rhetoric and tone of this ruling to say not just that Roe is egregiously wrong, as Samuel Alito wrote, but to highlight, rather than a woman's right to choose what happens with her pregnancy, to highlight fetal life and to refer to the fact that Mississippi, which passed the 15-week ban that was at issue here, had referred to fetal life as an unborn human being.

So that is the tone of this opinion. And I should also mention about the future of this court three of the justices in the majority, the Trump appointees, are only in their 50s. So, for at least another generation, they will be deciding the law of the land.

CAMEROTA: Gloria, one of those is Justice Brett Kavanaugh. And we all remember when then-Judge Kavanaugh was, during his confirmation process, able to convince Senator Susan Collins that he would respect the precedent of Roe vs. Wade.

And, today, she sounds as though she feels she was misled. She says -- she put out a statement saying: "This decision is inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Kavanaugh said in their testimony and their meetings with me, when they both were insistent on the importance of supporting longstanding precedents that the country has relied upon."

Your thoughts?

(LAUGHTER)

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, should this be a shock?

I mean, when was the last time that somebody sat in front of the Judiciary Committee who wanted to be confirmed to the Supreme Court and actually said, this is how I would vote on Roe? And I think that it might -- Justice Bork was the last one who actually told what he thought about things. And, of course, he didn't get confirmed.

So the answers we're used to getting are complete pabulum. And I think everyone sort of presumes that, and we should presume that, given what happened with Roe, for example. And I think the question now before the American public is, how do you react to this whole new world?

It's been 50 years. And this is a right for women that has been taken away. And Joe Biden said very clearly Roe is on the ballot. The court -- by 2-1 margins, the public disagrees with what the court did. And it's too early to say how this is going to play out.

But there are lots of questions that people will be asking their legislators and the court, because faith in the court has sunk to an all-time low of 25 percent.

CAMEROTA: You know, we keep talking about this as though it's a women's issue.

BORGER: Oh, yes.

CAMEROTA: I mean, it's hard to get -- it's hard to get pregnant without a man.

(LAUGHTER)

CAMEROTA: I mean, it's possible, actually, but it's difficult.

BORGER: Yes.

CAMEROTA: And so it's a family issue. It's a man's issue. It's a woman's issue.

I mean, it's complicated.

BORGER: It's an economic issue.

CAMEROTA: It's a huge economic issue.

But, Elie, about that stare decisis, the respecting of the precedent and about the slippery slope argument. I mean, what -- how do you interpret what Justice Alito said about now sort of everything's fair game?

HONIG: Well, there's three different perspectives in this opinion that came out today, Alisyn.

Justice Alito says, look, even though these rights to abortion, to contraception, to marriage, to sexual practices all spring from the same source of the Constitution, the 14th Amendment, we're only touching the abortion issue today. All those other ones, they're safe. We're not going there.

Justice Clarence Thomas says, oh, we should go there. We should reconsider those rights that we have established regarding marriage and contraception and sexual practices. The dissent, of course, says, why should we trust you what you say, Justice Alito? Because based on the legal principle that you're establishing here, all those other rights could well be in jeopardy as well. They should not be, the dissent argues, but they're in play now too.

So that's where this is going to head in the future. We have got a split court. But, as Joan and Gloria said, this is a 6-3 conservative court any way you cut it, and it's likely to remain in conservative control for the next several years at least.

CAMEROTA: But, Joan, Chief John Roberts is a bit of a wild card. I mean, maybe I'm overstating that, but the way he decided when with this, but not thinking that Roe vs. Wade should be overturned, was that interesting or unexpected to you?

[14:15:06]

BISKUPIC: No, it wasn't -- it's interesting that you point it out, Alisyn.

But he had tipped his hand during oral arguments back in December in this case, where what he wanted was to uphold the Mississippi law, the 15-week ban. And he had proposed that essentially during oral arguments, and also cautioned, look, we don't need to confront Roe v. Wade.

In fact, Alisyn, when the justices first agreed to hear this case, they said they were only going to decide whether the 15-week ban should be upheld. They weren't going to decide the fate of Roe v. Wade, which is another sign of how aggressive this five-justice conservative bloc is.

But what the chief had argued, sort of implicitly during oral arguments, but then also behind the scenes, was, we don't need to go as far as you five want to go. Let's just uphold this 15-week ban. Let's save to another day the fate of Roe v. Wade, when the issue can be fully joined.

He has an institutional interest here, Alisyn. He's -- he constantly argues in every speech he makes about how the justices aren't political, that they're not partisan. Once they come on the court, they're just wearing these black robes and they're neither, as he said to Donald Trump, Obama judges, Trump judges, Bush judges, Clinton judges.

But we saw so clearly right now we have the three Trump judges and two different Bush judges in this majority here. But the chief had -- want -- did not want to send that signal, but there was nothing he could do here. There was nothing he could do. There were no takers. And as he wrote his concurring opinion, again, siding with the

Mississippi officials, but not wanting to do Roe, he said, we needn't have taken it all the way down to the studs. It just wasn't time.

CAMEROTA: Gloria Borger, Joan Biskupic, Elie Honig, thank you all very much.

BISKUPIC: Sure.

CAMEROTA: So, our coverage of this historic day at the Supreme Court continues.

We will talk to two Republicans on opposite sides of the abortion issue next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:21:30]

CAMEROTA: Protesters are gathering outside the Supreme Court right now after Roe vs. Wade was overturned today.

Joining us now, CNN political commentators Alice Stewart and Ana Navarro. Both of them are Republicans. Both have very different views on this.

Great to see you, ladies.

Alice, I want to start with you, because I know that you support this decision. You like this decision. And I read you called it an astounding victory for democracy.

What do you mean?

ALICE STEWART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, certainly, this is a victory because there have been people in the pro-life movement and parents and pastors and politicians for the last 50 years that have been advocating and fighting for this decision, because they agree with Alito's opinion this that Roe was egregiously wrong from the start, and it's time to put this decision of life and against abortion away from unelected justices and put it in the hands of elected representatives.

And it's time to put this decision back in the hands of people at the state level. And democracy is best when it is served of the people, by the people, and for the people, and in this case closest to the people.

So those closest to the people across this country will now have the opportunity to weigh in on this very controversial and emotional topic.

CAMEROTA: OK, Ana, your thoughts?

ANA NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: States' rights not for guns, but yes for this, right? So, apparently, it's OK for -- to go -- just yesterday -- you can't be but struck by the contrast that, just yesterday, the Supreme Court rolled down the gun -- the concealed weapon issue in New York, and said it was not a state's right.

So, apparently, states are allowed to regulate my uterus, but not guns that kill people. So I have a very hard time with the inconsistency and cherry-picking of what makes states' rights.

I also think there's a bunch of different issues. Look, I am Catholic. I fully respect people who are against abortion. But if you are against abortion, then don't have an abortion. If you are against gay marriage, then don't marry somebody who is gay. If you are against contraception, then don't take contraception.

But if we are honest, this decision is based -- has been promoted, advocated and is based on Christian values, on religious values. And I -- we live in a country where there is supposed to be separation between church and state.

And I should not imposing my Catholic values on any other American. And I'm also very concerned by the fact that this creates two Americas, right? There's going to be the states where people have some rights and there's going to be states where people don't have some rights.

There's going to be a difference between people who have -- women who have money and the men who impregnate them when they have money.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

NAVARRO: Women who don't have money -- this is not getting rid of abortion. This is getting rid of safe abortions.

Let's be real about what this means.

CAMEROTA: Alice, obviously, Ana there raised a lot of questions.

But beyond the political debate, beyond the emotional debate, beyond even the religious debate, my question has always been about the practical issues. Who will support these hundreds of thousands of unwanted babies when they're forced to be born? Who will -- in these Republican-led more red states, will they expand the social safety net?

Who will pay the medical bills, the housing bills of these children? How will that work?

STEWART: Look, there are a lot of facts factors that need to be ironed out as this moves forward and is put back at the state level, where it belongs.

[14:25:05]

But I can tell you, having worked and advocated in the pro-life community for many years, there are crisis pregnancy centers set up across this country that are there to provide assistance, financial assistance for expectant mothers before, during and after...

CAMEROTA: All right, but I mean after they're born.

(CROSSTALK)

STEWART: Before, during, and after they have their child...

CAMEROTA: Yes.

STEWART: ... whether they decide to put it up for adoption or they want to keep it themselves.

There are services in place in the pro-life community that will help in this situation.

(CROSSTALK)

CAMEROTA: But, Alice, I mean, -- hold on, Alice.

Let me just talk to you about that. There are something like 410,000 children in the foster care system right now in the U.S. So, clearly, they're not all being adopted. And some of these babies will have, obviously, physical disabilities.

I mean, what is the plan? Obviously, they're not just all being taken care of currently.

STEWART: Well, clearly, those are important issues. And abnormalities of children, whether in the womb or after the child is born, is something that needs to be discussed and considered and obviously taken care of, again, at the state level.

And I think it's really important that, while we're obviously concerned about this issue, it's very divisive, very controversial, look, no one has spoken up for the last 50 years for the unborn child, the sanctity of life. And now people have had the opportunity to speak up for the unborn child. And that's important.

Look, I know Ana is a woman of faith. She has a huge heart. She's very passionate. But also I know that the Catholic faith believes in life and supports the sanctity of life.

And I find -- it's just -- I don't understand how you can say on one hand you support life, yet you're fine with a woman's decision to choose abortion.

CAMEROTA: OK.

Let Ana respond. OK.

STEWART: And, look, there are provisions to protect the mother before, during and after the child.

(CROSSTALK)

NAVARRO: And I am not anybody tell you what you need to do with your life or with your uterus, and because I have a family with a lot of special needs kids.

I have a brother who's 57 and has the mental and motor skills of a 1- year-old. And I know what that means financially, emotionally, physically for a family. And I know not all families can do it. And I have a step-granddaughter who was born with Down syndrome.

And you know what? It is very difficult in Florida to get services. It is not as easy as it sounds on paper. And I have got another, another step-grandson who is very autistic, who has autism, and it is incredible -- and their mothers and people who are in that society, who are in that community will tell you that they have considered suicide, because that's how difficult it is to get help, because that's how lonely they feel.

Because they can't get other jobs, because they have financial issues, because the care that they're able to give their other children suffers. And so why can I be Catholic and still think this is a wrong decision? Because I'm American. I'm Catholic inside the church. I'm Catholic when it comes to me.

But there's a lot of Americans who are not Catholic and are not Christian and are not Baptist. And you have no damn right to tell them what they should do with their body. Nobody does.

CAMEROTA: Ladies, obviously, it's a very emotional topic. I hear you. I understand that.

And I think that -- Ana, thank you for sharing all of that. And I appreciate you pointing out that it's complicated beyond just supporting the pregnant woman. Supporting the pregnant woman is good. But then it gets more complicated after that.

And, Alice, I appreciate your perspective as well. Thank you both for being here on this really important and emotional day.

STEWART: Thank you, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Protesters still staying outside of the Supreme Court. We're going to take you there live.

Also, the senior vice president for Planned Parenthood is going to join us with where they go next.

Plus: The House passes the first major federal gun safety legislation in decades. We talk about the significance of this too.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)