Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Tonight

What's Going on With All the Wrong-Place Wrong Time Shootings; As America Grapples With Gun Violence, Some Cities Find Answers; Florida Bans Teaching of Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Through 12th Grade; Supreme Court Temporarily Extends Access To Abortion Pill; Supreme Court Hears Mail Carrier's Religious Tolerance Case; Anti-Vaccine Activist RFK Jr. Launches Presidential Campaign. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired April 19, 2023 - 22:00   ET



ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: On Saturday in Upstate, New York, 20- year-old Kaylin Gillis was shot to death in a friend's car that pulled into the wrong driveway. Her grieving father explains what he hopes happens to the shooter.


ANDY GILLIS, KAYLIN GILLIS' FATHER: It angers me so badly. And I just hope to God that he dies in jail.


CAMEROTA: Tonight, we're going to talk about one city that has managed to cut gun violence in half and we'll find out how they did it.

Plus, the Supreme Court is considering the case of a mail carrier, an evangelical Christian, who says his faith does not allow him to work on Sundays. Can he be forced to?

And few hours ago, I sat down with a group of dedicated Fox viewers to see what they think of the $787 million settlement that Fox had to pay for spreading misinformation about Dominion Voting Systems.


CAMEROTA: A show of hands, how many of you are surprised by the $787 million settlement that Fox agreed to pay to Dominion for broadcasting false information about the voting systems?

None of you?


CAMEROTA: Okay, we'll get to that. But we do start with yet another story of two teenage cheerleaders who made the innocent mistake of walking up to the wrong car in a parking lot thinking it was theirs, as we all have at some point, but for that common misunderstanding, they got shot.

I want to bring in my panel, L.Z. Granderson from the Los Angeles Times, Alyssa Farah Griffin, former White House Communications Director, our Law Enforcement Analyst John Miller and Jessica Washington from The Root. Great to see all of you.

John, this is the third night in a row that we have reported on an innocent mistake like this getting someone shot. What is going on in this country?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Clearly, there is some confusion here, and, I mean, I don't know how we got here. The question is, you know, the drumbeat of stories about crime going up, you know, all that goes on and that equals fear.

And then there's this weird calculus that, you know, gun ownership means being able to prevail over fear. And then there's this even stranger and darker calculus, which is, well, if I use my gun out of fear, that I am therefore justified.

And it is becoming harder and harder to explain these incidents away except for kind of looking at this phenomenon because we have three kinds of weird gun violence. We have a regular crime guns, criminals using guns to commit crime. We can talk about that. I know my way around that one pretty well. We have the active shooter sphere, which is the mass murder thing. That's disconnected from crime. Those people don't expect to get away and often expect to die.

But now we're seeing this strange middle ground of random shootings that are not accidental, that are on purpose by people who would be otherwise considered rational making irrational decisions because they have the power of this gun. I don't know where we're going here.

CAMEROTA: I'm so glad that you put it into those three buckets because I do think they're distinct.

MILLER: They are.

CAMEROTA: And so, Jessica, it's like, I don't know if everybody's on a hair trigger right now, I don't know if the people who are on a hair trigger who are most scared have access to guns. I don't -- like John, I too am just looking for answers of what is going on that people, in a split second, before any questions are asked, are shooting.

JESSICA WASHINGTON, SENIOR REPORTER, THE ROOT: Yes. I think it's terrifying this idea that a mistake that we all make all of the time, you know, going up to the wrong door. You know, I think recently there is another incident of someone, you know, having to turn around in the wrong driveway, things that are just so benign.

I think what's happening is we have this -- it is about, you know, having access to guns, but it's this culture of we need guns to protect ourselves, if this is something important. I think this has been pushed, you know, politically, culturally in the United States for a long time, this idea of, well, you have to have this weapon in order to protect yourself. You know, in this country, it's so important you have a gun in order to protect yourself against intruders. And I think then people see, you know, this messaging time and time again, and then they act on it in these really kind of bizarre circumstances.

CAMEROTA: Alyssa, I do think there's a connection to fear-mongering. I do think that there is some fear-mongering going on and that there is a feeling of we're under assault or the others are coming in, and all of that does heighten this hair trigger.

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, it certainly does, because in nearly all of these cases, it's somebody with a gun, not even asking a question, just shooting before and then asking questions after, and that's horrifying. That's not ever what should happen. Having, you know, the right to self-defense means there has to be some kind of act of aggression for you to defend, that someone pulling into your driveway.

I honestly think that this is the logical conclusion of what we've seen of fear-mongering in our country. I think there's an element of our adversaries having pit us against one another for the last decade, whether it's over social media, whether it's through technology.

CAMEROTA: Meaning foreign adversaries?

GRIFFIN: I think there's an element for a nexus in the sense that we look at neighbors as our enemies in a way that we didn't before. People don't have that same sort of community orientation that even 20 years ago we would have had.


You used to go to your neighbor's house to borrow some sugar, and now you're not going to knock on their door because they're going to pull out a weapon.

You also can't eliminate the guns from the conversation, I believe, fundamentally and legal gun ownership. But if you're somebody who's going to shoot before even asking questions if your door is knocked on, there should be a question about if you should be owning a gun then.

CAMEROTA: L.Z., what do you think is going on?

L.Z. GRANDERSON, OP-ED COLUMNIST, LOS ANGELES TIMES: I just think we're just seeing more of what's always going on, to be quite honest with you. I mean, I've been a reporter, small town newspapers, big newspapers. There have been tons of these stories that my newspapers that I've worked at have had to cover, accidental shootings, mistaken identities, things of this nature. It's just because of 24-hour news media and social media, we're just seeing more of it.

CAMEROTA: But just pulling into the wrong driveway -- I mean, I agree, there's always been shootings but pulling into the wrong driveway and somebody shooting at you while you're on your way out, in a mall parking lot, a supermarket parking lot, going up to the wrong car getting shot at. I don't know. Doesn't that feel a little different?

GRANDERSON: It feels as if it's more of just craziness that's always occurred. I mean, I remember covering a story on Father's Day, and it's a story that shook me to my core. But, basically, it was this dad had dropped this family off from Father's Day, the mom realized she forgot something and asked the dad to go to the store and get it and he ends up accidentally hitting one of his children.

And, you know, it's like, oh, but you found out later he was drinking, and that may have been a part of it, and it's like going. Well, what's going on? Everyone is drinking and driving. It's like going -- well, let's calm down a little bit.

So, when I think about these particular incidents, they are very different. We don't even know why the 25-year-old suspect, you know, who's supposedly shot at the at the cheerleaders, we don't know what triggered them. We don't know if he was afraid because I haven't seen the reporting yet. We don't know if he was expecting someone else. It was late at night.

So, before we start hitting these things all together, I think it is important that we wait for the details of everything. But, overall, I don't think it's more or less. I think it is the awareness that's increased.


MILLER: So, I mean, the empirical data, you know, in New York in 1992-'93, we had 5,000 shootings a year. In 2017, we had under 1,000. You know, that number is lower today, even though it's going up a slight bit because of some crime conditions in New York. So, we're not where we were before.

But -- and maybe L.Z. is right. Maybe this is the effect of social media rapidly moving information that then spills into mainstream media and magnifies, but there is something going wrong when you go from a Nashville to a Louisville, to a -- you know, from a Uvalde, from a Newtown.

When this becomes a problem for us on the news desk to decide what used to be a very big story is something we'll even cover because these things have become too common. We really have to step back and say, who are we?

CAMEROTA: Yes. And, I mean, every night here, we search for answers about gun violence, and if only there were some mythical American city that had figured out how to bring down gun violence. Well, it turns out there is and it's not a myth. It's real. Omaha, Nebraska, has cut gun violence in half over the past 15 years.

So, joining me now is Omaha Police Chief Todd Schmaderer and Willie Barney, the founder and president of the Empowerment Network. Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining the conversation. Chief, how did you do it?

CHIEF TODD SCHMADERER, OMAHA POLICE DEPARTMENT: Well, I'll tell you what. It's been a long haul for us. We're happy with our numbers. Really, and just a high level view, we've plugged in with the community. The community, the police department, we have the same goals, we have the same mission and we do the same three things, enforcement, intervention and prevention. When we're working one of those three areas the community knows about it and it's really a teamwork effect and this has been great for Omaha.

CAMEROTA: So, let me just share some numbers with folks so they know the scale of what we're talking about. In 2009, Omaha had 246 victims of gun violence. Last year, that number was cut in half to 120. In 2008, you had 44 homicides. Last year, that number was down to 29, the lowest -- I know it's bounced around in the past, you know, few years. The lowest was in 2018, and it was 22.

So, I know that also you talked about the Empowerment Network. Tell us what that is, Willie, and how other cities could even use that.

WILLIE BARNEY, FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT, EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: Yes, thank you. It's a comprehensive and collaborative approach, bringing community sectors together and working in an aligned way to develop strategies, first of all, identified issues that develop strategies that can be implemented. So, that's from the police department neighborhoods, community-based groups, faith community schools, all of them identifying what their strengths are, and then aligning that work on a consistent basis.

So, o the empowerment network also works on root causes. We know that violence is a symptom. And so we need to go upstream and address employment, housing, education development, housing development revitalization.


So, the Empowerment Network is a tool and a facilitator of that type of process.

CAMEROTA: So, Chief, I mean, what I hear Willie and you saying is that it's multipronged. So, you have to deal with education, employment, as Willie just said, housing and violence protection. Obviously, Omaha is not as big as New York City or Philadelphia or other places. Can that be used in bigger cities?

SCHMADERER: So, I feel it can. I mean, Omaha has a half a million population. And when you when you see our trend lines go down, I do think this program, what we have and working with 360 is replicable. It's definitely the midsize cities and major cities all across the country, and I think as you piece by piece through each of the bureaus, it can be replicated by Chicago, New York City, Los Angeles.

CAMEROTA: Chief, we were just talking about these shootings for the past three nights. We've reported on these shootings of young people, teenagers, you know, young Americans who made an innocent mistake of ringing the wrong doorbell or pulling into the wrong driveway. What do you think is at the root of that? SCHMADERER: And, you know, it's something I'm looking at pretty closely because we've had a really bad run here. You know, our neighbor major city, Kansas City, had similar incident occur recently here. So, it's concerning to me.

And I heard one of your panelists earlier break it down into three areas. You have your mass shooters, you have your general gun violence and you have this new phenomenon. And this new phenomenon, something is going on. It's either great media blitz and how quickly things surface or we have a perception issue going on in this country that we definitely need to get a hold of.

CAMEROTA: Willie, I was understanding, I was doing a little bit of research on what has happened in Omaha, and I understand that every Wednesday, you all hold a public forum with the community. How can the community help? I mean, what do you task the community members with doing to bring down gun violence?

BARNEY: And that's really been the secret of that each individual, each organization identifies what their strengths are. So, yes, we meet every single Wednesday from 2:00 to 3:00. It's a very strategic meeting, but it's also tactical. What's happened the last seven days? What are the things that can be any type of retaliation, any type of issues that might surface that we can respond to, but also looking forward to the next seven days, what's coming up, a football game, something going on in the neighborhood, working with the police department.

I do want to emphasize that we've identified specifically what each organization, what each individual from the grassroots gang intervention person to the neighborhood, to the church, community- based agencies help, what role they can play and then making sure that we're aligned and continue to move forward on that. That's been the strength of Omaha 360 the partnership with the police department.

CAMEROTA: Gentlemen, thank you. It's really heartening to know that it can work somewhere, and I hope that other cities are reaching out to you for what the secret sauce is and how they can implement it here. I really appreciate talking to you tonight. Thank you.

SCHMADERER: Thank you.

BARNEY: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Okay. So, what I hear them saying, Jessica, is that they are proactive in that community meeting. They look forward to the next seven to ten days ago, okay, what's coming up, what do we need to have our eyes on, that's interesting. And then what they were saying is they look at education, employment, housing and violence prevention because they know it all has to work in tandem.

But I am I am skeptical that it can be scaled up to the level of New York or Philadelphia just because it sounds like they are able to get their arms around it in a really great way there.

WASHINGTON: Yes. I mean, I think what you have to think about is individual communities within New York City. I tell people calling New York City one city almost feels slightly unfair. It is massive from a much -- I'm from D.C., which is much smaller. You know, you can walk across it. Here, that's not happening. But you could potentially look at this within communities.

And what I really love about this is it's engaging communities as opposed to feeling like police are occupying force with it. I think a lot of communities in the United States do feel they are now working together as letting the community have agency and creating safety. And the thing is it's worked, which is the really incredible part.

CAMEROTA: Yes. What did you think about what you heard?

MILLER: I don't think they've reinvented the wheel. I think they've invented a good wheel. You know, we reduced crime by 80 percent in New York. We brought shootings down from 5,800, you know, over a period of time, and now it's hovering around 1,000, again, but that's a dramatic decrease.

When we saw the spike in shootings that occurred in 2020 in many cities, what the NYPD did was infused a lot of cops into the neighborhoods where the shootings were spiking, but they also infused a lot of programs, summer jobs, rebuilding broken basketball courts and recreation areas, getting people into indoor events, trying to provide alternatives for young people because it was kids shooting at kids, to be at other places, to do other things and to be engaged.

And that had a good effect but it can't be a momentary thing. We tend to lurch from crisis to crisis and then let that ebb.


We need to keep building on that, and that's important.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Alyssa, we have to go, but because you're at the White House, I just wonder what resonated with you and if you think that, nationally, we can tackle some of this.

GRIFFIN: I think this is a really smart approach to deal with gun violence, generally, especially going back to like youth who may fall into the wrong circles and giving them alternatives and making them feel like they're built into the communities and don't need to fear the police. The police are working alongside them. I'm not sure this answers the question we're trying to figure out about these random shootings. That's something I think we have to look at further agreed.

CAMEROTA: Yes, agreed. Okay. L.Z., I'll get you next time.

Next, you're up next, remember how Florida would not allow any teaching on gender or sexuality from kindergarten through third grade? Okay, well, they've just extended that ban through 12th grade. What will that mean for families and students? We discussed with my panel and L.Z., next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CAMEROTA: Students in Florida schools in grades kindergarten through 12 can no longer be taught about sexual orientation and gender identity. The so-called don't say gay law was originally just for students from pre-K to third but now it's been extended through high school after a vote today from Florida's State Education Board. The rule does make an exception for health and reproductive courses. Teachers who violate the new state policy could be suspended or have their teaching licenses revoked.


I'm back with my panel. L.Z., as promised, I'm coming to you. First of all, when do you get instruction on sexuality outside of your sex ed class in high school, first of all? I mean, it's only insects ed class. So, I'm not sure what problem this is solving, first of all. However, I do think that what we've heard from teachers and parents alike is that it's so vague, it has a chilling effect on teachers and they no longer know what questions they can answer.

GRANDERSON: And that's the design, right, to keep it vague so that you can scare people into not talking about it. This isn't necessarily about persecuting queer people. This is about silencing us, making people afraid to talk about us, making people afraid to teach about our history.

You know, Governor DeSantis, when he first got into office, actually visited Pulse after the shooting and talked about how he was going to be there for the queer community. And check the timeline, as soon as President Trump became vulnerable, DeSantis switched and he got very anti-queer because he knew this was an avenue that could help raise my profile nationally.

I'm not making this up on the man. He went to Pulse, the quotes are all there in the newspaper. And when Donald Trump got in trouble, and it started with the investigation with the first impeachment, you started noticing a shift not only in his rhetoric but also in the policies that he was pushing, not only when it came to CRT or the 1619 Project, but particularly when it came to queer people. He went after us and he's going after our kids, which is even a greater sign that he's nothing more than a bully, just like the predecessor in the White House.

GRIFFIN: So, I have a frustration, and I would say to my party, the Republican Party, I think that some of our elected officials are misreading the cultural moment right now by leaning so heavily into anti-LGBTQ policies. Eight in ten Americans believe in more protections to protect the LGBTQ community from discrimination. 67 percent of Republicans support more support to prevent discrimination. So, this very, very heavy anti-LGBTQ sort of rhetoric but also policies that you're seeing, I think, is completely misreading the moment.

I'd also note Gen Z and millennials will be the biggest voting bloc in the next election in 2024. You lose my generation on down. We are the generation of marriage equality. We're not going backward, whether you're right, left or center. I think you are spot-on on the shift with DeSantis because he did not start as a culture warrior on these issues. This is why I implore him and my friends on his campaign do some national interviews. Come sit down on CNN and explain why you think this is good policy because it leaves so many open questions about how you can talked about basic things, like what your family unit looks like in the classroom.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Jessica, that leads us to you and your generation. I'm so confused by this because are you allowed to go to your guidance counselor? Can you go to your guidance counselor if you have any issue with sex or sexuality or gender? I don't know anymore.

WASHINGTON: That's what makes it so incredibly unclear and so terrifying. I mean, for teachers who, you know, just existing and your gender identity existing as a queer person, now, all of a sudden, it's unclear if you can talk about that, if you could be arrested under this law, you know, what could happen to you? I think that's terrifying. I feel really bad for these students.

CAMEROTA: And they're not talking about being arrested. They're talking about being suspended from your job.

WASHINGTON: Yes, thank you for clarifying that. No, no, no, sorry for me at this (INAUDIBLE), for being suspended from your job, and that's terrifying. I mean, these are people who are relying on these paychecks.

And then you also think about the kids. I mean, these are children who -- it is already difficult enough to grow up as a queer child in the United States and to not know if there are adults you can talk, to not know if there are other queer adults that you could come to. And then to have it, you know, no one could be open about this with you. And that's what's really scary. It's going to hurt these teachers, but it's really going to hurt these kids when they have no one to look towards.

CAMEROTA: What's your interpretation, John? I think if you look at the choices between organized education in an academic setting, which, you know, they have now extended to grade 12 as a ban versus what -- I mean, I was a kid before high school and during high school, you know, to get your education on sex education, gender, everything else, from what your friends know and think, where are you going to get a more balanced or accurate picture?

But, I mean, to circle back to our earlier section on guns, what's crazier? I mean, drag queen story hours going on in libraries across the country to introduce children to different gender identities, people say, well, that's going to frighten them, and there're pedophiles and, you know, this is frightening. So, they then surround the library with a bunch of guys in military fatigues with AR-15s, which is frightening children. You know, again, we've gone from rational to completely irrational.


GRANDERSON: I would say that the story time isn't just to introduce kids to different representations on the way to present yourself, it's also just to entertain them to read a book. Drag is entertaining. Drag is fun and it always has been. So, I don't think it's about trying to introduce or teach kids that you can be anything you want to be, sure, that's a byproduct, but drag queens are funny.


GRIFFIN: And at the end of the day, the parent has the right to bring their child to choose not to. It doesn't need to be regulated by the state.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Also in this new Florida law --

MILLER: Or by some militia that --

CAMEROTA: Yes and one more thing that I didn't add is that in this new Florida law by the Florida State Board of Education, the parents can opt out of sex ed. So, the one place where you're being taught, you know, facts about health and sex ed, your parents can sign you out of. So, to John's point, I don't know if your friends are the best teachers for all of this.

GRANDERSON: I learned a lot from mine.

CAMEROTA: I learned everything I know from Saturday Night Fever and Grease. Thank you very much, friends.

All right, so how far should the government go in accommodating religious beliefs of employees? One postal service worker is putting that to the test by asking not to work on Sundays. Now, his case is headed to the Supreme Court. We will take that up next.



CAMEROTA: The Supreme Court has temporarily extended access to that abortion drug until midnight on Friday. After that a lower court ruling could impose serious restrictions on access to that abortion drug, mifepristone. We'll discuss that with our reporters in the next hour.

But there's another important case in front of the Supreme Court right now. The justices hearing oral arguments in a religious freedom case involving a former mail carrier who says the U.S. Postal Service denied his request to not work on Sundays in observance of his evangelical Christian faith.

My panel is back along with CNN legal analyst Elie Honig. Elie, we're all fascinated by this because none of us want to work on Sundays. OK, and so can any employer force you to work on a Sunday?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So Justice Jackson, who was our newest justice has been sort of quiet, because usually the most junior justice knows their place and stays quiet. She said it best with two words during the oral argument yesterday. It depends. Not very helpful. It may seem but she nailed it. Because so much of the law is just you have to take a reasonable approach to all the factors. And this is an age old tension in the law.

On the one hand, we respect the free exercise of religion, but the tension is we don't want to place an undue burden on our government. And so the legal test that has developed over the years is what we call a de minimis standard, meaning if a person's religion can be accommodated, without cost or inconvenience without substantial cost or inconvenience, then it's OK. A classic example, if someone needs to wear a head covering, and it doesn't interfere with the job that generally will be tolerated. Now, this is a step or two up for that.

CAMEROTA: So they said that they did try to accommodate his requests.

HONIG: Right.

CAMEROTA: But here's what they did. They offered to adjust his schedule. So he could work after any religious services on a Sunday, told him he should ask others to pick up his shift. He could do that. At some point, the postmaster was doing deliveries in lieu of him, but didn't want to do that forever. And then finally, they suggested he choose a different day to observe the Sabbath.


CAMEROTA: Which doesn't sound at all.

HONIG: That was bizarre observing, does that even work? This is why the lower court ruled against the postal carrier, they said the government went above and beyond for you here again, it depends. You have to look at all the facts. Those all matter.

CAMEROTA: It's interesting. OK, Jessica, your thoughts?

JESSICA WASHINGTON, SENIOR REPORTER, THE ROOT: Yes, I mean, this look, I would also love to have Sunday work. And I'm not going to lie about that. Yes. I mean, I it does seem like this was a huge burden on the Postal Service. I don't know where the courts going to come down on this. I mean, we definitely have a pro-business side of the court. And we have of the conservative side of the court, and we have a more kind of religious side of the conservative court.

And so it is going to be tricky to see kind of where they come down on this, particularly the majority -- the majority Conservative side.

CAMEROTA: That's interesting. So you're seeing the tension between the conservatives?

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I would agree with Jessica, I think that's the interesting part is that for, I think a conservative position would be we cannot be mandating to business that they have to give this man time off. I mean, it is fundamental Sunday delivery to their operations. On the flip side, it's a religious liberty argument. So there is some tension there.

I do worry about the precedent, though, if they come down on the side of this individual, of course, you know, Saturdays for the Jewish community, Sundays, for many in the Christian Catholic faith, that could put a really undue burden on employers to just suddenly give those days up and say that you have to be able to give people that time off.

So I'll be very curious to see where the court comes down. I wonder if it's some kind of a nuanced it depends kind of answer.

CAMEROTA: I didn't even know that you could get mail on Sundays, number one, because --

HONIG: It's all Amazons.

CAMEORTA: it's forcing them to. They're delivering on behalf of Amazon. Yes, LZ.

LZ GRANDERSON, OP-ED COLUMNIST, LOS ANGELES TIMES: Listen, I want the Supreme Court to take this up, you know, we were joking about it out there. It's like, if you want to burn it down with your silliness, then go ahead, let's take it to the next level, and suggest that Americans --

CAMEROTA: What kind of silly?

GRANDERSON: The silliness to me is pretending as if you can be this republic that is separate from religion, while seeing all these rulings that you ask yourself, will this be a case if it weren't for religion? You know, like when it comes to like reproductive health, for instance, all the arguments, as far as I can tell, stem from a religious perspective, and even the argument with the medications. They're trying to say, Well, is it really safe? Well, all the document that -- all this research says it is? Where are you really bringing this case up?

So, if you want to have this conversation, go ahead, because there are tons of religions besides just Christianity, besides Judaism, besides Hinduism, like Wicus (ph) probably have a whole list of days they can show up and say, it's the solstice Sorry, can't work this month.

GRIFFIN: That's where it becomes a bit of a slippery slope, though is I do think what's -- what faith traditions do we have to recognize as all high holy holidays, it becomes something where you could have employers asking for quite a bit of time off and saying that they have a right under this.

HONIG: This is -- we all revere the Constitution and but we're also allowed to criticize it. And in the First Amendment, you know, the first one you learn it tells us at the same time, we have free -- the right to free exercise of religion, but also we don't establish religion and that leads to situations like this and again, Justice Jackson gave us the answer, which is --

CAMEROTA: It depends. But what do you think about the tension between the Conservatives? What do you hear them saying?

[22:35:02] HONIG: It's really interesting because I don't think this is going to be your straight six to three ruling like we saw in the ruling where they allowed a football coach to prey on the field after game straight six conservatives, three liberals that looked to me like Gorsuch and Kavanaugh in particular, were looking for some sort of middle ground, what they may do is raise that bar.

Remember, we talked about de minimis, they can raise it a little bit. There's various ways you can say substantial burden or something like that, looks to me like they're fun trying to find a middle ground for once.

CAMEROTA: That's interesting. So in this case, they were saying that it's more than a de minimis burden because he was asking other people to work.

HONIG: Yes, they were -- people are transferring, moving schedules, again, compare it to, let's say, a police officer who wants to wear a turban, OK, it doesn't interfere with the job, no cost, doesn't impose costs on others. That generally took a little while, but now that should be allowed.

CAMEROTA: OK, thank you very much, really helpful. OK, be sure to tune in at the top of the hour, some of our top reporters will join me to talk about the big stories, what we're talking about, big stories that they're covering. We're going to hear also from Fox News viewers how they feel about that defamation lawsuit with dominion. And when they found out about it.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I just wasn't aware that Dominion had filed, essentially a defamation suit against Fox. So, when your producer had reached out and said, Hey, this, this is going on, and this is what we'd like you to come on and discuss. You know, I guess I just sort of looked at and thought, well, I guess that makes sense.


CAMEROTA: That's at 11. But first, is it a good idea to let your kids lose every now and then? Will it make them tougher, more competitive? What if they're four years old? One grandfather think so. We'll discuss next.



CAMEROTA: That is a good one. All right, should we let little kids win? Or is it a good idea to let them lose? A new opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal is titled "Why I Let My Four Year Old Granddaughter Lose." She needs a taste of defeat as well as victory to learn how to compete in life.

The author Bob Brody writes, Granted, losing hurts. I've never quite recovered from getting cut in tryouts for my eighth grade basketball team. But losing is also instructive and fortifying, losing motivates you to bring out your best. Lucia should understand that nobody deserves an award simply for showing up and that nothing makes you want to win more than losing. I've failed over and over again in my life. Michael Jordan says in a commercial and that is why I succeed.

I'm back with my panel. OK, Mr. Tough Love, Elie Honig. What do you think about your little kids when they were four?

HONIG: I would like to share one of my finest parenting moments with you all if I might. So when my son was two or three, so even younger than four, he loved Candyland. Right. And I would always let him win. Now you're probably wondering how would you let someone win in Candyland, you just draw cards? The answer is I would just fix the deck, just slide the government, you know, it's not hard when he's two or three. And I would always let him win.

And one day I was playing with them. And I got out ahead early. And he was being a brat. And he was sobbing and getting all worked up. And I sort of looked at my wife and she gave me a look like finish it, finish it. And I beat him. And when I pulled into the Candy Castle, he lost a tantrum rolling around crying. But you know what, it was a valuable lesson and I daresay he's now 17. And he has turned out resilient and tough as a good kid.

CAMEROTA: I'm not sure any of us can add to this (INAUDIBLE) parenting we ever need to know.

GRIFFIN: I was going to say force him too young. But apparently it's not too young.

GRANDERSON: For us, you know, the turning point was actually a pickup basketball game we played actually not too far from here, we're in Brooklyn together, we're at a one of my good friend's house. And we were playing one on one. And I beat him. But he came close to blocking my shot. And at this point, he's a little bit older. And he's you know, he's tall, he's athletic, or whatever.

And I shot it, I miss my shot, he got the rebound and looked at me. And I looked at him and he looked at me and I looked at him. And we both knew like, things are changing. Things aren't the same. And I've never played basketball with him since then. I was a -- you would never block my shot. Ever.

CAMEROTA: That's awesome.

GRIFFIN: That's going to be a wake up call, you eventually lose to your child. I will not be ready for that.

GRANDERSON: Neither was (INAUDIBLE) played with him.

CAMEROTA: That sort of proves the point of things do eventually come around like your -- your son wouldn't be a brat, a two-year-old brat forever, even if you didn't squash him --

HONIG: Right.

CAMEROTA: -- like breaking that game.

HONIG: Yes, you know, you're right. But they do have to learn the lesson. And look, I think sports are a big part of this. Both of my kids are high school athletes. And you, you know, there's not too many areas now in life -- the life of a current teenager, where you get tough news where you take a tough beat, like you would in a sporting event.

I mean, there's a lot of cushioning under these kids now. And so, you know, obviously lucky, you don't have to dunk on your six year, right? But I do think you know, they need to go through some stress and some trauma to be ready to be old.

CAMEROTA: Go ahead, Jessica.

WASHINGTON: Yes, I mean, all I'm going to say is I understand that, you know, you want to teach them about losing. But I think that kids do go through really hard things in this life. I think what I've loved about you know, my own parents is that I always knew that life would get hard, but at home, I was the greatest. I was the best. You know, no one loves me more than they did. No one would build me up when they did. And I think it made me stronger.

So when the tough things did happen, I know I could pick up the phone and there was someone who was going to say that I was great. If someone said that I wasn't. I think that made it so I wasn't afraid to fail. I wasn't afraid to go out and do things because there was always going to be a soft spot to land.

CAMEROTA: See, that's the other philosophy.

GRIFFIN: That's beautiful. I love it.

CAMEROTA: Which is that the family is a foundation like a warm --


CAMEROTA: -- and cozy foundation because life's going to beat it out of you.


GRANDERSON: But they're not separate, right? They don't have to be exclusive, you can still be the place like, we don't have participation medals in my house.


GRANDERSON: Like I raised them very early. Like we don't do that. That's just not how we roll. Either you finish where you earn the medal, or we throw that trash away. And I thrown all my participation medals away and he's thrown on his way. But it's still a place where you can go and fail and be loved, but it's not a place you can go and be coddled and be told you're the greatest when you suck.

CAMEROTA: Interesting you're going to throw away your honorary doctorate when you're awarded it by Harvard?

GRANDERSON: I'm going to be like peace. Because I didn't put in the work like when I put my --

CAMEROTA: I will take your Honorary Awards.

GRANDERSON: Like I have like a little wall with my awards. I worked my ass off for those.

GRIFFIN: He needs more.

GRANDERSON: It needs more. I don't want something next to it says I showed up. What's that?

CAMEROTA: Well done. Great, you guys. Thank you very much. I think we've solved all the parenting problems. All right. Meanwhile, vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is joining the race for the White House. He's running as a Democrat without the support of many of his own family members. So we'll talk about his longshot bid, next.



CAMEROTA: Anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. launching a bid for the 2024 Democratic presidential election today. He's already facing a big hurdle he lacks support from prominent members of his own famous democratic family. During his speech in Boston, he described himself as a truth teller.


ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. (D) 2023PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Motion over the next 18 months of this campaign and over my throughout my presidency will be to end the corrupt merger of state and corporate power is threatening out impose a new kind of corporate feudalism in our country.


CAMEROTA: And though he invoked his father and uncle, Kennedy was forced to acknowledge his estrangement from some members of his family over his incendiary rhetoric. Back with me now, LZ Granderson and Alyssa Farah Griffin. OK, Alyssa your thoughts.

GRIFFIN: Keep an eye on this. So there's a USA Today Suffolk poll that had him at 14 percent, which I think is incredibly high. I think you hear the name Kennedy and the average voter push voter voting, and this is not even sure which Kennedy to associate it with. Also, something to keep an eye on in this. Steve Bannon has been hyping him on his War Room podcast as well as Roger Stone.

CAMEROTA: And is that a maneuver? I mean does he really like him or he's trying to just disrupt and blow up the democratic --

GRIFFIN: I think it's an effort to disrupt and to try to take votes away from Joe Biden. And of course, right now he's running as a Democrat. But there's nothing to say that you wouldn't try to run a some kind of a third party challenger in a potential, you know, Trump- Biden had to head not a serious person. But we do know there's an anti-vaxx sentiment in this country. I'm sure that that will help get him some votes. But I yes, it's concerning.


GRANDERSON: I don't have a problem with anyone deciding they want to run for president with the exception of the twice, you know, impeached, ex-president, everyone else. I don't have a problem with. I do think, though, however, this -- what this does do is sort of remind Democrats, if you will, that, you know, President Biden hasn't officially announced yet.

And while all things that I've seen in my own personal reporting, plus reports from other reporters in DC, is that for all intents purposes, he's going to run, but there is this vacuum here. And if you're someone who you know, not quite sure what to do with your political future, and you want to raise up your profile, why not run for president?

I mean, the Beto O'Rourke really have a chance of being President? No, of course not. But it kept his issues out there and the things that he was concerned with, it kept those conversations going because he was running for president. So if Mr. Kennedy is really serious as the anti-vaxxer, this allows me platform running for president to continue to push those views.

GRIFFIN: I do worry that we're going to have candidates on both the right and the left who are running on such extreme platforms. I mean, he represents something that, especially in a post pandemic era, I think, is wildly dangerous, some of the things that he's espoused. And on the right, we've seen some extreme positions being taken. I'm hoping we see both fields consolidate quickly. And I do think it's incumbent on the president to announce sooner rather than later.

CAMEROTA: But I mean, are you saying that you think that if Joe Biden announced that he is running for reelection, Robert Kennedy, Jr. wouldn't get in?

GRANDERSON: No, I'm just saying there's a vacuum right now. There's no movement in terms of 2024 in terms of a Democrat, right. This is like the first time you've heard someone running as a Democrat for 2024. Right. So this is like, Oh, that's right. We do need to gear up for the primaries. We do need to do these things. And while I don't expect President Biden to find himself being primary by established Democrats, it is important to continue to have these conversations that are outside the spirit of liberalism, in order to push agendas or policies forward for the real debates, right? Because eventually, at some point, someone's going to talk about COVID. Someone's going to talk about vaccines and you going to have answers. And this is good batting practice

CAMEROTA: Is really interesting to hear you say that name recognition gets you that far already. GRIFFIN: You have to imagine, I mean, just when I saw that poll, that's got to be the fact that his last name is Kennedy and that people are like, which one is it? I'm not totally sure.

GRANDERSON: And he's got the same age.

GRIFFIN: Yes. Joe Kennedy who great moderate former member in the House. I think there's an element of confusion there. He does have kind of a cult like following similar to what Marianne Williamson where there are people who will kind of follow them, you know, regardless of the viability of the campaign, but to get him to that sort of a number seems surprisingly high to me.

CAMEROTA: Alyssa, LZ, thank you both. Great to see you guys. All right. Coming up, Fox viewers, tell us what they think about the network's big settlement with Dominion and if it's impacted their view of the network.


Some of our favorite reporters will be here momentarily to talk about the stories that they are working on for tomorrow. That's next.


CAMEROTA: That's great. Thank you as well. Great to have you. Hi, everyone. Thanks for tuning in to this hour where we bring you tomorrow's news tonight. We have our great lineup of reporters to share their scoops. Here with me tonight we have Sara Fischer, Jessica Dean, Omar Jimenez and Alayna Treene, great to have all of you.


But I want to start with what's next for Fox in the wake of that $787 million settlement.