reporter: there s certainly more people out here today than we ve seen in days past, especially because today we know exactly what we will get decisions on because it s the last day. you mentioned those two big cases, of course at the end of pride month. that case that has to do with whether or not a web designer can refuse to design a wedding website for a gay couple. we could see some reaction to that. the biggest one we re watching for is on student loans, whether or not biden s student loan forgiveness program will stand. the biden administration was using a congressional act started after 9/11 in 2003. it was continued through the pandemic, even invoke bid betsy devoss under the trump administration. can student loans be forgiven in their entirety forever? this would affect about 43,000 people, sorry, we re starting to get some decisions just in now. so i m going to go listen for what those are, and i said 43,000, that s 43 million people, and i ll be back to you when
creating environments that unsafe for the lgbtq community. leaders, their governors, are at the head of that. ensuring that it is not safe for lgbtq communities in that state. what we are seeing here is, even if the bills don t pass, we project about ten to 20% of these bills will pass. we are seeing them pass. there are ten don t say gay bills that have passed across ten different states in this country. the harm is done as soon as there proposed. they are proposing this insidious around the lgbtq community that we need to be legislated against as human beings. i beg any of these politicians to show me what happened. what went wrong that you needed to legislate against lgbtq people. i can answer that for. you absolutely nothing! these are solutions to problems that don t exist. they are causing great problems for our community. glad president, sarah kay ellis. often glad to give you the chance to chat and talk about this. for all of you that is gonna do for me on this edit
let s take a look at the week s top stories. we re following new reporting involving the investigation into former president donald trump. classify top humans that he took with him when he left the white house. multiple sources tell cnn that federal prosecutors have obtained the 2021 audio recording of trump acknowledging that he kept classified pentagon documents about a possible attack on iran after leaving the white house. the existence of the recording undercuts trump s primary defense that he declassified all the documents that he brought with him from the white house to mar-a-lago. cnn reports that july 2021 meeting was held at trump s golf club in new jersey, with two people working on the autobiography of trump s former chief of staff, mark meadows, as well as trump pays, including communication specialist, margot martin, who as the guardian reports, regularly taped trump s conversations with authors to make sure they re accurately recounting his remarks. so really,
sexual orientation versus race? that s one of the things we re now going to be looking for. the major headline here is that the high court has ruled in her favor, and now we ll see what happens next. savannah. okay. our thanks to laura jarrett. we were simulcasting with our network nbc, hence the delay on the front end. we really wanted to hear from laura because she s been studying so much on this. she s a lawyer herself. she gave us what she knows about the decision. some of my guests have had a chance to look through at least a few pages. i do want to bring in and add to our conversation the president and ceo of glad, sarah kay ellis. thank you so much for coming in here. give us your reaction to this ruling. i think this is license to discriminate at the highest court. i think this is a pattern we ve been seeing with the supreme court where they re taking away rights instead of broadening rights for marginalized communities. we saw it yesterday, we saw it last year with roe v.
it s a 6-3 conservative super majority, and they re basically doing what they want. laura jarrett mentioned this was a woman who hasn t actually been asked to provide a website to any gay couple. the court didn t have to take this case. it s not clear that there was jurisdiction to take this case, but it is nonetheless issued this broad and breathtaking ruling that will dramatically change public life for millions of couples. i do want to underscore that point. it was unique that this was a sort of hypothetical put out there. this web designer had not refused service. she expressed interest in moving her web design company into weddings, and didn t want to serve same-sex couples because of her religious beliefs. but again, saying she is a creator, that this is all free speech, and so given it was a hypothetical case here, sarah, do you think that makes a difference in terms of how you interpret this ruling? i think it proves out two things.