Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Interview With Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH); President Biden In Germany For G7 Summit; Interview With Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) About January 6th Hearings; Third Day Of Protests Across The US After Roe v. Wade Overturned; "Fair Play" Documentary. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired June 26, 2022 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:01]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: Up next -- next hour, I should say, I'll ask Jim his concerns about the possible challenges to same-sex marriage.

And the next hour of CNN NEWSROOM starts right now.

I'm Pamela Brown in Washington. You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

Across a deeply polarized nation Americans are taking to the streets both denouncing and celebrating the Supreme Court decision to overturn a 50-year precedent. Some protesters taking up posts again outside the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The reaction to the Supreme Court ruling so swift and so intense that the Department of Homeland Security is warning that violent extremism is likely. The DHS says its assessment is based on an increase on violent incidents after a draft opinion was leaked last month.

Meantime freshman GOP Congresswoman Mary Miller is trying to walk back a remark she made last night at the Trump rally in Minden, Illinois.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARY MILLER (R-IL): President Trump, on behalf of the MAGA patriots in America, I want to thank you for the historic victory for white -- life in the Supreme Court yesterday.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Well, that remark has gone viral. Miller's campaign says she very clearly meant to say victory for right to life and called the incident a mishap.

Well, there's a new CBS News poll out today showing nearly 6 in 10 people disapprove of the decision to overturn Roe v. wade, and that includes two-thirds of women surveyed.

Joining me now is Republican Congressman Warren Davidson of Ohio.

Good evening to you, Congressman.

REP. WARREN DAVIDSON (R-OH): Good evening, Pamela. BROWN: So let's talk about Ohio. Your state's Heartbeat Bill that is

now in effect bans abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected roughly six weeks into a pregnancy. That is a time when some women don't even know they're pregnant. There's no exception for rape or incest.

So my question to you is, what happens when a 12-year-old girl falls pregnant after being raped? Are you OK with her being forced to carry that fetus to term?

DAVIDSON: Well, under Ohio's law, you know, it doesn't ban things like abortifacient. So let's say someone who is raped, you don't know you were raped for two months? I mean, I think that it's incorporated in to deal with that. Now that is a compromise. People believe that life begins at conception. That's what the science says so I think that as a public policy compromise --

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: Well, hold on. The science is not conclusive on that. Right. And there is no consensus on -- that life begins at conception but I know that that is certainly something that you believe and other conservatives believe. But I just want to ask you again, because this obviously raises some tough questions, of course, right? What happens if a 12-year-old gets raped? Are you comfortable with her having to now carry that baby to term because there is no exception for her case now under Ohio law?

DAVIDSON: I fully support Ohio's law and I commend, you know, our -- frankly our governor and our legislature for passing it where previous administrations had failed. They passed it. It was held up by the courts and a relief from the injunction was filed immediately on Friday. And it is now the law in Ohio.

I think it's a great law and it is a compromise. And like I say, rape is raised as an objection but the Heartbeat Bill already deals with that. I mean, anyone -- it's hard to conceive of somebody who doesn't know they were raped for two months.

BROWN: Right. Well, look, I'm not going to put myself in the shoes of someone who was raped, but I am sure if they were here to speak with you they would be pushing back on that notion that there's all kinds of traumatic experiences that would happen after such a thing, and the processing it, and then finding out if you are pregnant and so forth. There's a lot of complexities.

I do want to ask about Ohio in terms of its rankings when it comes to infant mortality and near -- you know, it's near the middle for maternal mortality, it's ranked 41st and then mortality, African- Americans are disproportionately impacted. And with this ban in place that rate of infant mortality will likely go up. So what are you going to do to combat that and protect these disadvantaged women and children who are directly impacted by this abortion ban?

DAVIDSON: Well, look, Ohio unfortunately we have over half of the live births in Ohio are on Medicaid. So we have a really disproportionate amount of our families that are growing are low-income families and I think that overwhelmingly accounts for, you know, the loss of life in labor and delivery. And so I think we have to look at how do we strengthen that. You know, early treatment of anything that goes wrong in the pregnancy is always important and I think it's just consistent prenatal care through that process.

[19:05:05]

You know, my wife and I had our kids while we were in the army and, you know, that was government operated health care. I would hope that the federally qualified health care centers that dot Ohio's counties would at least meet that standard and where they fall short, you know, our office is open for, you know, case work to try to support it. We haven't had any.

BROWN: I know that this is an issue that gets a lot of people worked up but I think what -- there is a lot of concern right now that so many states including Ohio have these abortion bans and there's been this fight for a baby in the womb but what about the fight for the child after it leaves the womb and the disadvantaged mother? Are you going to commit to fighting for them?

DAVIDSON: I already do fight for them. And frankly, you know, look, as somebody who believes that, you know, life begins at conception we want every baby to be a healthy baby, and we know that some babies are challenged, you know, from birth. I just was at church this morning with someone who is providing foster care for a, you know, prenatal, you know, from the NICU. This baby is just now out, just now at full term, so spent the first nearly two months in NICU to try to get stable.

BROWN: Right. And there's all kinds of stories out there but the bottom line is, you say you're fights but there is 16,000 kids in Ohio who have been taken away there with caregivers other than their parents. I think it's 9,000 in foster care. There is concern that that system is just going to be overloaded and what's going to be done to help them with resources.

I do want to ask you about former Vice President Mike Pence. He is calling for a national abortion ban. House leaders are calling for a national ban after 15 weeks. Do you support a national -- a nationwide ban?

DAVIDSON: Look, I believe life begins at conception and I understand that we have people who passionately disagree. If you look at where Democrats were on this issue, why was this case before the Supreme Court? They were unwilling for Mississippi to limit abortion to 15 weeks.

Not only were that, House Democrats put on the floor that opposed -- every single member of the House Democratic Conference opposed the Born-Alive Survivors Protection Act. This is babies that have already been delivered, they still wouldn't want to protect that life. They supported basic Governor Northam's position that well, the baby will be kept comfortable while the mother and doctor have a conversation --

BROWN: Just to be clear, though.

DAVIDSON: That's not abortion. That's infanticide.

BROWN: Just to be clear --

DAVIDSON: So it's a very radical position on the other --

BROWN: Do you support a nationwide ban on abortion?

DAVIDSON: I support life at conception act in the House. I'm a co- sponsor.

BROWN: So --

DAVIDSON: But when you look in Ohio, I think Ohio's heartbeat bill is a very reasonable position of compromise and I would love to see states across the country get there not by force. Just by moral consensus that this is a life and it is precious. It should be protected and if a mother says, you know, I just don't think I can raise this baby, there are millions of Americans who would love to adopt that baby.

BROWN: OK.

DAVIDSON: And hopefully we can make adoption and foster care a more viable option for everyone and I think we should treat every life as precious.

BROWN: Unfortunately, the foster care system is so incredibly broken, though. We've done story after story on that. But what it sounds like you're saying it you would like other states to adopt the bill like Ohio has but you are not for a federal law mandating every state to have abortion. Correct me if I'm wrong before we move on because we do have other topics we need to get to.

DAVIDSON: Well, look, I'm a co-sponsor of life at conception act in Congress. And I think it's important that Congress says look, if you want to push, you know, birth abortion from conception until delivery on the Democratic side we're going to push back with what we truly believe is life at conception and I think the courts delivered a position that says, you know, it's OK if states are different.

I mean, they could have gone to the full extreme position under the 14th Amendment that people would view as radical but, you know, no one can be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process. How do you provide due process in life --

BROWN: And I know that's something that you have said you supported. Right. And I know you have supported that. The Supreme Court did not go as far saying that it just should be left up to the states and we've heard other Republicans also say they are not for a nationwide ban because if defies Republican principles of allowing the states to deal with issues.

I want to move on to guns, though. Let's talk about this bipartisan gun safety bill the president signed into law yesterday. Republican Senator Rob Portman of Ohio along with Republican Representatives Mike Turner, Steve Chabot, Anthony Gonzalez and David Joyce, they all voted for this bill. Why didn't you?

DAVIDSON: I think it's unconstitutional and I think, look, on the same day that we had a great opinion from the Supreme Court --

BROWN: How is it unconstitutional?

DAVIDSON: We're passing bills that are unconstitutional and instead of giving a vote on individual components of it, it was just take all of it or leave it, and no amendments. So same kind of broken process from Speaker Pelosi.

[19:10:02]

BROWN: But as you heard many of your Republican counterpart say, this bill will save lives and it still protects Second Amendment rights. So what --

DAVIDSON: No, it doesn't. The red flag law is unconstitutional. It's a civil --

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: How is it unconstitutional?

DAVIDSON: -- says we can seize your guns first and give you due process later, and in the case for red flag law --

BROWN: No, if they go before -- I just have to be clear with our audience. In the red flag laws, these state grants and another that there is due process. They do go before a judge and make their case. It is similar to child custody cases. There is due process.

DAVIDSON: No, but the person whose rights are being -- whose property is being seized, whose rights are being denied never has the right to confront their accuser. They'd never have the right to present it until after the action is taken and frankly the legal fees are going to be more expensive than some of the guns seized. So they're just going to buy more guns. And look, every state, the premise of this is we could say, you know, this person is sending off, you know, everybody knew Johnny was crazy, we should have stopped Johnny.

Well, that didn't happen in states like Florida and New York who already have red flag laws but every single state in the country has something like a Baker Act where someone can be adjudicated mentally dangerous, mentally incompetent, and then you do the right thing, you take the person, not their gun. The person is the thing that's dangerous. The gun is going to lay in a drawer on a shelf or in a safe. The person could end up driving a vehicle through a parade.

BROWN: Right. But AR-15s are much more lethal.

DAVIDSON: And still be a danger to their neighbors.

BROWN: And their guns are the number one killer of kids according to the CDC. I mean, do you admit that the mass shooting could not happen without a gun?

DAVIDSON: Well, a shooting by definition -- I mean, I suppose you could do it with arrows but it'd be a lot harder to do it with masks. I mean, and shooting by definition is a gun --

BROWN: And not as lethal. Right. Right. Exactly. So it does take a gun. That is a component of a mass shooting. I mean, you know about guns. I know you're a former Army Ranger. You have advanced training in guns. Well, a person can fire more rounds more quickly with an AR- 15 than other guns. For example, what is so wrong with delaying an untrained person who might still be in their teens from buying such a lethal weapon or at least requiring extra training and scrutiny?

DAVIDSON: Well, states may decide to do that. They've done that for handguns. And, you know, we should really kind of rally around one legal age for adulthood. You know, historically it was 18 but now I guess no one at any age is able to buy a menthol cigarette or a vape product, but 21 years old for a lot of things. And you know, you're on the parent's insurance until 26. So there are a lot of ages that are bracketed in.

But the right to keep and bear arms is in the Constitution. A lot of these other things, there's not a right to smoke in the Constitution.

BROWN: Right.

DAVIDSON: There's a right explicitly protected, not granted by the government, but protected by the Second Amendment saying the government shall not infringe on that right.

BROWN: Right. And unfortunately we don't have a lot of time to go into the constitutional arguments there but the bottom line is people just look at this and say 18-year-olds who are part of these two big mass shootings recently have underdeveloped brains and yet they can just walk into a store and buy an AR-15 which is highly lethal and kill innocent people, and I just think that is still something that is top of mind for people in this country.

I want to go to the January 6th hearings. Witnesses testified that many Republican congressmen -- you're part of the Freedom Caucus -- asked Trump for pardons. You voted to decertify the results in two states. Do I recall conversations with your Republican colleagues about approaching the White House for a pardon?

DAVIDSON: I know there were some conversations about it because at the end of any administration there's a lot of conversations about pardons. There were rumors that President Trump considered just providing a blanket pardon to, you know, anyone that may have been involved with what he was already being accused of. It is inciting, you know, an insurrection, you know, a protest that turned violent at the Capitol.

And, you know, obviously he decided not to but, you know, as far as more details about, you know, who did what, you know, that -- I know I didn't ask for a pardon but I do think a lot of people did phrase hey, this may just be a preemptive thing so that the country can move on. I don't think anyone believes -- that I know believes, but I can't say

that, I do know some Democrats who believe that there are crimes committed. But I don't think that there was anything to pardon people for. And so for that reason, I think the president said yes, it will just look worse. I don't think there's nothing to pardon.

BROWN: Congressman Warren Davidson, great having you on. Thank you for your time and for sharing your perspective on this really important topics going on right now. We appreciate it.

DAVIDSON: Thank you.

BROWN: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:19:00]

BROWN: Well, President Biden and his fellow G7 leaders are meeting in Germany and at the same time a fresh round of deadly attacks in Ukraine. An apartment complex in the capital Kyiv hit by Russian missiles. At least one person was killed and a 7-year-old girl was pulled from the rubble. One of their priorities at the G7, come up with a plan to stop Vladimir Putin.

CNN's M.J. Lee is following the summit. She joins us now.

So, M.J., what are G-7 leaders proposing they do toward ending the war?

M.J. LEE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the G7 leaders gathered in Germany are trying to figure out exactly that. A path forward on the war in Ukraine. They are of course trying to discuss different ways to continue ramping up the pressure on Russia and of course the other part of it, too, is talking about ways to continue providing aid to Ukraine.

And to that point, Pam, CNN is learning tonight that the U.S. could be announcing as early as this week that it has purchased an advance medium to long-range surface-to-air missile defense system for Ukraine.

[19:20:02]

This would of course just be a small part of the billions of dollars in aid that the United States has already provided in terms of military and security assistance to Ukraine.

And the other thing I would note, too, is that earlier today, G7 leaders announced a new ban on import of new gold from Russia. This is just one more way again in which they're trying to sort of squeeze the Russian economy and try to make Vladimir Putin pay a price. Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with Jake Tapper earlier today and explained the rationale behind this move.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ANTONY BLINKEN, SECRETARY OF STATE: That is the second most lucrative export that Russia has after energy. It's about $19 billion a year and most of that is within the G7 countries. So cutting that off, denying access to about $19 billion of revenues a year, that's significant. But beyond that, Jake, everything that we've done from the start in imposing these unprecedented sanctions and the export controls is having a profound impact on Russia. Even as it gets oil revenues with higher prices, it's unable to spend them because of the export controls.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEE: And one important preview of what we might expect to see tomorrow Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy he is slated to give a virtual address to the G7 so this should provide an important update in terms of what he thinks the trajectory of the war is. And we also expect him to sort of lay out what he needs as the Ukrainians continue to fight against Russian aggression.

And the other thing I would note, too, of course is that President Biden next heads to Madrid, Spain. That is where the NATO summit is expected to take place. Of course there, too, the war in Ukraine is expected to be a major, major topic -- Pam.

BROWN: M.J. Lee, thank you so much.

Well, the January 6th Committee has been painting a damning picture of Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. And there are more public hearings to come.

Up next on CNN NEWSROOM, committee member and Congressman Jamie Raskin joins me live to discuss who might testify at future hearings.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:26:16]

BROWN: The attack on the Capitol and the case against Donald Trump. House lawmakers on the January 6th Committee have used their first five public hearings to paint the portrait of a sitting president desperately and as some officials have said maybe criminally trying to subvert democracy and overturn the legitimate election of Joe Biden.

Now last week, state elections officials testified how Trump and his allies pressured them to decertify Joe Biden's legitimate election win. And on Thursday three top officials from the Trump Justice Department described how they defied his pressure to act on baseless claims of voter fraud.

Joining me now is a member of the Select Committee, Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland.

Hi, Congressman. So those top Justice officials testified in detail that Trump was relentless in attempting a coup. These were firsthand witnesses. These were former Trump loyalists. The name that was mentioned over and over again was White House counsel Pat Cipollone. What is the latest in getting him to testify?

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Well, I believe the negotiations have continued. Obviously the committee is very interested in hearing from Mr. Cipollone who's come up at a number of points and it appears as if he was a kind of red light for the president when he was trying to tear down a lot of legal boundaries to his usurping the presidency, so it came up during the Department of Justice assault. It came up with counterfeit electors trying to get the states to nullify the popular vote and so on. So we'd like to have him in to talk about the full merry-go-round efforts to overthrow Biden's lawful win and electoral college.

BROWN: We know there were one-on-one conversations between then President Trump and his Vice President Mike Pence. Considering what we have learned, is there still a chance that the committee might call Mike Pence?

RASKIN: Well, we're still in the investigative phase and we are learning new things on a daily basis. This is a dynamic and continuing investigation and so any one who is a material witness who has relevant information could still be called and of course we don't just go out and subpoena people. We've been approaching everybody first to see whether they will cooperate voluntarily with the committee.

BROWN: And one of the people, you've done that with Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Can you give us an update on that? Is she willing to come to testify behind closed door, in public, about her connection to these efforts to overturn the election? What's going on on that front?

RASKIN: You know, well, I'm not on the particular team that's working with that potential witness. I did read Ginni Thomas' public statements that she was very willing to come in and to clear the air and explain what exactly her involvement was, so I hope she does that. We've had more than 1,000 witnesses and we think that everybody who has information relevant to the investigation should come forward and tell us about it.

BROWN: Yes. And you've had some witnesses that were at top levels on the White House. You had White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson. You had White House counsel Eric Herschmann, revealing the GOP members of Congress who were seeking pardons. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Was Representative Gaetz requesting a pardon?

ERIC HERSCHMANN, FORMER WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: I believe so. A pardon that he was discussing, requesting, was as broad as you could describe.

[19:30:02]

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, AIDE TO THEN-WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF MARK MEADOWS: Mr. Biggs did. Mr. Jordan talked about congressional pardons, but he never asked me for one. Mr. Gohmert asked for one as well. And Mr. Perry asked for a pardon, too. I'm sorry.

QUESTION: Did Marjorie Taylor Greene contact you?

HUTCHINSON: No, she didn't contact me about it. I heard that she had asked the White House Counsel Office for a pardon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Different GOP members have denied or rationalized this. Will the Committee be providing more evidence about the pardons? The requests, I should say?

RASKIN: Well, you know, a pardon is indicative of some kind of consciousness of guilt, or at least fear of prosecution.

It's not a crime for any of these members to ask for a pardon. You know, that would be their right. However, one cannot corruptly ask for a pardon, which means to seek a pardon in exchange for something else. It is kind of a political quid pro quo.

So I think that, you know, if and when more information is revealed, we want to make everything public, but that's all I can really say about that at this point.

BROWN: Do you have any evidence of a possible quid pro quo or anything like that?

RASKIN: No. I'm just making the point that, you know, it's not criminal for people -- yes, it is not criminal for people to seek a pardon, unless there is a quid pro quo, and that's just a statement of what the law is.

But I think from a commonsense perspective, it is indicative of consciousness of guilt, possible participation in some kind of criminal activity.

BROWN: You are leading --

RASKIN: I mean, you know, I don't know anybody who has ever requested a pardon myself.

BROWN: Okay. I want to ask you about the upcoming hearing. We have a little break here, a couple of weeks. You're going to be leading one of the upcoming hearings. Just if you would lay out what we can expect. Will there be any new information, new witness testimony? Can you give us a little window into what it might look like?

RASKIN: Well, you know, we've been pursuing a chronological breakdown of the events that took place leading up to January 6th, and now we're getting closer to January 6th.

I've been working most intently on the mobilization of the mob and the domestic violent extremist groups, like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers and the Groypers and the Three Percenters and so on. And so we want to explain both what happened with the mobilization of

a violent, fascistic street movement and then how that insurrectionary mob violence converged with the attempts to coerce Mike Pence and Congress to step out of the way, so that there could be essentially a seizure of the presidency by Donald Trump.

BROWN: Just quickly, do you think that Donald Trump by way of the actions, you've laid out that he was treasonous?

RASKIN: Well, you know, that's not a word that I have used. But, you know, I'm continuing to watch very carefully all of the evidence that's coming out in each of the hearings.

Treason is the only crime we have that's actually defined in the Constitution, so it is a very strict proof of levying war against the United States or adhering to the enemies of the United States.

So, that's not something that we have advanced.

BROWN: All right, Congressman Jamie Raskin, thank you.

RASKIN: Thank you so much for having me.

BROWN: Demonstrations after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade had been mostly peaceful, but there are new warnings of possible violence against officials, healthcare facilities, and even protesters.

CNN national security analyst, Juliette Kayyem joins me next.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:38:44]

BROWN: Tempers and emotions have been flaring this weekend over the Supreme Court ruling on abortion rights. Two people were arrested for allegedly throwing paint over the fence by the Supreme Court Building, and six people were arrested in Greenville, South Carolina during a demonstration.

These are just two examples where no one was seriously hurt, but Homeland Security officials are warning a possible extremist violence in the wake of Roe's reversal.

A department memo says: "Federal and state government officials including Judges probably are most at risk for violence in response to the decision."

CNN national security analyst, Juliette Kayyem joins me now. Her new book "The Devil Never Sleeps: Learning to Live in an Age of Disasters" is out now.

Wow. What an encouraging title there for your book here, Juliette. Wow, it is true. Right? JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes.

BROWN: And now we're talking about this memo that is including these warnings about First Amendment protected events, reproductive and family advocacy, healthcare facilities, and faith-based organizations being targets for violence or criminal incidents.

What do you think about this? Does the DHS, you think have intel on possible attacks or is this just like preemptive?

KAYYEM: This is preemptive. And look, the intelligence chatter since the leak of the memo before the decision came down had already animated various groups, including obviously focus on a particular Supreme Court Justices.

[19:40:10]

KAYYEM: Whatever your politics are, the focus or the attempted violence against Justice Kavanaugh is not legitimate, it is a Federal crime and it is something that has to be addressed. That elevated level of violence towards Justices or even Judges is then reflected also in the public discourse.

Look, we have an opinion that is really challenging. I'll take the politics out of it. It basically says that something is not constitutional, reproductive freedom. Lots of people who believe in that decision also believe that abortion is murder, and yet, the Supreme Court is for now still allowing reproductive freedom in whatever states choose to have it.

That gap is something that Intelligence Agencies and domestic experts on radicalism are looking at. It's just a -- it's an unmanageable gap, if you know what I mean. It's just, you know, we still have reproductive freedom in about half the states. For those who oppose abortion, and are actually promoting now a Federal abortion ban, that gap becomes where the conflict is.

Either, you know, because they want it to end or not. Then on the other side, we've seen the growth of some groups, some radical groups are related to protecting reproductive freedoms. They're also disconcerting to law enforcement.

BROWN: Yes, certainly passions, emotions are running high right now.

KAYYEM: Yeah.

BROWN: For people who just feel so strongly about this.

You tweeted, "The biggest public safety concern is not peaceful protests. Sure. Police need to be reminded the rules of engagement. But the bigger concern is in states where access to reproductive freedom still exists, but it's contentious, or ones that are set to close down access."

If you would go into a little more about that. KAYYEM: Yes. So the history of the pro-life movement has been a legal

movement, of course, right, in other words, and successful as of Friday, but there has also been an element of violence to it. And while once again, while I'm going to stay out of the politics of it, it's disingenuous to say that there hasn't been violence as part of the pro-life movement in terms of attacking and killing doctors who perform abortions, or attacking, and targeting abortion clinics. That's just part of the narrative.

You're being political if you don't admit it, right? So because of that, law enforcement has been worried because they don't know where that goes for reproductive facilities, reproductive choice facilities that still exist, right?

So now, they still exist, they are still lawful to this day. And so I think that's the gap that makes law enforcement nervous in terms of an intelligence perspective, because there are people who believe that this is murder. There is a very, very small element that has used violence in the past of that group.

And yet reproductive freedoms are still allowed in half the states or slightly less than half the states. And that's that gap where we need to focus. Focus less on political discourse or what's happening on Twitter. I could care less with having -- focus on where women are still able to assert a right that is recognized, at least for now, by the Supreme Court.

But I do want to say, because there is political discussion about the Federal anti-abortion ban, that just means that their work isn't done, right? In other words, that this will continue.

The idea that this is somehow settled legally, politically, emotionally, it's just the most ridiculous thing and therefore that is where you're going to see these debates.

BROWN: Yes. You're so right, it is far from that.

Juliette Kayyem, thank you.

KAYYEM: This is the beginning for both sides. Yes.

BROWN: It's so true, and both sides think, you know, they have the right view, that their view is the right one and that is why you're seeing these emotions running so high.

We'll be right back.

Thank you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:48:46]

BROWN: If you're in a heterosexual partnered relationship, I have some questions for you. All right. You've got to be honest here. Who last emptied the dishwasher? Who took the kids shopping for new

shoes or new clothes? Who cooked dinner? Think about this. Think about the answer.

These questions are behind an eye-opening new documentary called "Fair Play."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I had the breast pump in the diaper bag in the passenger seat of my car. I was racing to get Zach at his toddler transition program.

I had a client contract in my lap, the pen would stab me in the vagina. Seth decided to send me a text, "I'm surprised you didn't get blueberries."

I remember thinking to myself, the defaults for literally every single household and domestic tasks for my family.

TEXT: Hello Sunshine Presents ...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: When I became a mom, I felt like my identity completely changed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I really didn't understand the amount that she had to endure.

TEXT: In association with The Representation Project.

(UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE speaking in foreign language.)

(UNIDENTIFIED MALE speaking in foreign language.)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It goes back to the twisted notion of, well, you've just got to ask for their help.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't want to ask.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What time? Yes, I have to phone calls from work already.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I became obsessed with a quest to figure out what was happening to us.

TEXT: A film that makes invisible work visible.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: When it comes to care, we're so far behind.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're saying we value work more than we value our families.

[19:50:07]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There's this hidden message there, which is just too expensive to support women. TEXT: Inspiring a more balanced and equitable future.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Work-family conflict, it is not even about women. It's about men and gender pressures on men.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is for men what feminism is for women.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: For women to step into their full power in the world, it requires men to step into their full power in the home.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's a legacy that we all deserve.

TEXT: "Fair Play" a film by Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Joining me now, Eve Rodsky, author of "Fair Play," and Jennifer Siebel Newsom, who produced, wrote, and directed the documentary.

Hi, ladies. Wow. What a trailer that was.

So Jennifer, we booked this discussion before Friday's Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. I have to address the fact that one of the main ways that women have found any agency in the society is by managing their own fertility.

What do you think about this? What if that ability is compromised or taken away?

JENNIFER SIEBEL NEWSOM, WRITER, PRODUCER AND DIRECTOR, "FAIR PLAY": No. Thank you for bringing us to the reality of this really dark new reality for so many Americans and people who can get pregnant, and it's just a really scary time. And unfortunately, women once again, are being punished and controlled by an extreme far right agenda, evangelical agenda that really is, you know, the patriarchy is still at work and still in control in our country, and unfortunately, the Highest Court in our country.

And so we're going to pay the price. We're still not paid equitably. We are a country that doesn't have universal paid family leave or universal childcare or are universal sick leave. And so we're struggling, right?

We still don't value the family. We don't even have -- you know, recognize women and the family and the Constitution. And women are now relegated to second class citizenhood.

And so it's a really, really dark time in our history and women and families are going to pay the price and this is very dangerous. And it set us back 150 years.

BROWN: Yes. And as you know, there are millions of others on the other side of this issue who say -- who were applauding this, right -- women included, women that I have interviewed who are applauding this, who say this is protecting the weakness. This is what we have been fighting for, for the last 50 years, and this is coming at us at a time, Eve, as we see the concurrence from Justice Thomas, even wanting to revisit the right to use contraception.

What do you think about that?

EVE RODSKY, AUTHOR, "FAIR PLAY": Well, I think that this is not about babies. If this was about babies, then we would have universal childcare in America, we would have paid leave in America, we would actually care to have access to schools that are not just until 2:30, but we know that this is really about power and control and really, it comes down to what we're talking about in the film, that women are the social safety net for this country.

And as we add more caregivers, because we have less access to control our own reproduction, and we will have more forced births, then we're going to have more caregivers and we're going to have more mothers continuing to burn out at the pace that we're putting them at.

We're making them be the breadwinners for their family. We're making them do the super majority of childcare and housework in their homes. During the pandemic, we were making them homeschool their children. It's unsustainable, actually. It feels incredibly unsustainable.

BROWN: Let's talk a little bit more about this documentary. It started as a spreadsheet, it then became a book. Modern women have been talking about unequal division of labor for decades. But the needle hasn't really moved as much as many women say it should.

The fact is, we still live in a patriarchal society. So, how is this ever going to change especially in the wake of this abortion decision, Eve?

RODSKY: Well, I think the only way it's going to change as you saw in the trailer is if we start to invite men to their full power in the home, so that women can step into their full power in the world. And what this film does is it shows the benefits -- the benefits.

This is not chores and housework and who takes out the garbage or who left the sponge in the sink. Who taught us to ride a bike? Who we went grocery shopping with? Who we made our meals with?

This work, the unpaid labor of our society is our true humanity and it's where we get our love. It's where we get our memories. And so to center caregiving as opposed to paid work is how I think we're going to change things.

[19:55:08]

RODSKY: Because I started to ask leaders: Do you believe an hour in the boardroom is as important as an hour holding your child's hand at the pediatrician's office? Which one is more important to our society?

BROWN: Jennifer, I want to bring you back in. Why do you think Eve's "Fair Play" book needed to become a documentary?

NEWSOM: Well, first of all, because I think it needed to speak more to men, because men aren't always going to gravitate towards a book that looks like it's, you know, meant only for women. And so I know for a fact that, you know, Eve is hysterical.

I can't wait for couples, for all folks to see this film. It's poignant. It's educational. It's inspirational. It's painful, but it's got the whole kind of, you know, films are great catalysts for awakening consciousness and shifting hearts and minds, and attitudes, and behaviors, and ultimately, transforming culture.

And so I think this film has the ability to complement the book, because again, they're different. So I highly recommend you read the book, and then I highly recommend that you also take your partner to see the film.

One thing I just want to add that you were just talking about, though, about the present and the hope that I feel right now is that I think there are enough fathers that are so upset about the ruling the other day, and young women who really didn't realize how privileged they were and often, you don't know until you're in the workforce, and you have, you know, a disrespectful, you know, slimy, harassing, you know, boss or male colleague.

That's when you start to go, "Ooh," you know, or you're not paid equitably.

And so I think these young women are like, you can't put their genie back in the bottle. They're so angry right now and these fathers who have daughters are so angry right now and don't know how to communicate to their daughters that actually, yes, the Supreme Court just made a decision that guns are more important than these young women and their lives.

And so I think that we're going to have a revolution of sorts, and I have hope, because we all have to be awakened to what has really been going on. And again, as we mentioned earlier, has been planned, and ultimately, men doing their fair share at home, just really quickly, if men did 50 more minutes of care work and domestic work a day, they would have less depression, less anxiety. They'd be less likely to be on prescribed meds.

They'd be happier. They'd have greater longevity. They'd have a better sex life. Their marriages would be better.

Their wives would have all the benefits of less anxiety and depression and less of that mental load, more leisure time, and then their children would have better cognitive development. They would have healthier relationships and fewer peer problems.

So there's so many benefits to men stepping into care at home. Fifty more minutes a day or 40 percent of child and domestic work.

BROWN: Of course, my husband would say, I've been doing that, but I've not seen these benefits.

Anyway, Eve and Jennifer, thank you so much.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:00:00]