0 >> again, it has been a remarkable hour. this is groundbreaking reporting from politico.com. josh goldstein, alexander ward. they have obtained -- i can't even, i still caught sounds crazy to hear the words coming from my mouth. they've obtained a graph maturity opinion from the supreme court. this is not a ruling that has been issued, but it is been drafted by conservative justice samuel alito which overrules roe v. wade and planned parenthood versus casey, full stop and completely. and with an exclamation point. effectively clearing the way for republican controlled states and any future republican controlled congress at white house to flat out and completely ban abortion in this country, making it illegal without constraint. we're fundamentally changes as the country, it will fundamentally change the relationship between women and the government. it will fundamentally change the future of every girl in the country, for all our daughters and granddaughters, and women that come after us. just a remarkable thing. we knew was coming, but to see it, even in draft form, in terms of this blunt, it makes it feel like a different country. that's gonna do it for us for now, now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell, ignorance. good evening, rachel, what we're witnessing tonight is the loss of a lights. they loss of a constitutional right. that is something that you and i have never borne witness to in our lives. if you pointed out, if you're 50 years old or younger in this country, if you're a woman 50 years old or younger in this country, you've had a right throughout your life to abortion services. a constitutional right, to that decision, that is what is being taken away here. a constitutional right. >> and will just say, in terms of the real world impact on women's lives, congressman jamie raskin raised a really good point about the reasoning in this opinion, which again is a draft opinion. but the way this is written, it undoes a woman's right to decide whether or not she's gonna carry a pregnancy to term, but this also absolutely creates their circumstance in which it is possible for them to undermine, and overturn a related ruling called griswold, which is about the right for people to have the right to contraception, even if certain state legislatures decide that contraception is evil, and we want to make it unavailable to people. it's a straight line from this ruling, not only to banning abortion instantly and potentially nationally, but to also preventing americans from accessing birth control. in a ruling that is argued along the same lines as the established presidents that are starting on this opinion. it's a fundamentally different world if this happens. >> and included in this fundamentally different world, is the other part of what we're experiencing tonight, it is minority government, minority ruled government, and the supreme court is the most incredible exemplar of that. you have these judges, appointed to the supreme court by two presidents, who did not win the most votes in that presidential election. george w. bush, appointed the justice who wrote this opinion, he did not win the most votes in his presidential election, but he won the electoral college. and then you have donald trump, appointing three of these deciding justices, he did not come close to winning the most votes, but he got the presidency in this country because of this capacity for minority rule in our government, which is what the united states senate is about every day of every year. more people vote for democrats for the united states senate, but republicans end up either in control of it with fewer people voting for them, for those seats, or as we see now in the 50/50 position this is a minority-controlled government, this is the product of that. >> it also raises the question as to, how the court is perceived. the reason that stare decisis is, it's maybe not when you learn day one of kid law school but it's maybe day to. part of the legitimacy of the court is that the court compounds the idea of the legitimacy of the role of lava respecting past president. and to have thrown out established super precedents, in casey and in a row here, the way that this draft opinion is written, is to say that there is nothing that any court has previously done there's nothing that any supreme court that has previously arrived that that deserves respect and even with as you say, justices that are pointed by presidents who didn't win the popular vote, and one case by president who had already been impeached. it doesn't matter, because once you've got power, you can use it to wreck everything, because stare decisis doesn't exist, and whatever we'd say has to go, goes and we have the power to do, it and how you gonna respond? we -- it's a challenge on the legitimacy and credibility claims of the court, that implies that battle is over. that they're no longer trying to appeal to people, respecting them for their work. >> and let's consider what this republican controlled court does not respect, they do not respect the in effect republican controlled court the wrote roe v. wade, it was a 72 decision 49 years ago, and five of the deciding justices in favor of roe v. wade, where republican appointed supreme court justices. in the last week or so, there's been a very intense discussion especially in the world of twitter about how much the democratic party has moved to the left in recent years or how much the republican party has moved to the right, there is no better demonstration about the extreme direction towards the right that the republican party is moved, when you look at the five republican appointed justices in 1973, who voted for roe v. wade in a total of seven justices. and then you see these five tonight, possibly six in the end put five as of tonight, voting to repeal it completely. and, insulting as much as they possibly can justices who decided it. >> yeah, and also just 30,000 foot view, it's 2022 and america is going to outlaw abortion? mexico just legalized it, you know i'm saying? there's a way in which the fast retrograde politics of the new wright puts us on a very different timeline, then the way we think of ourselves as a mature democracy. this is a decision, the repercussions of how this draft came to light we've only started to understand the basic implications of that, and kind of radicalism that you're describing. but what this means for women in the very short term will not be theoretical this will be a very practical, thing and this will change the lives of women of every station but particularly women without resources, marginalized women, and women who are pouring can't work around the law in a case like this. this will fundamentally change women's lives, this, year this generation and, permanently because the decisions are forced by the government on whether or not a woman gives birth, resonates for entire life and for generations in terms of your opportunities. >> yes, and this is a historic night rachel, we are going to proceed with a coverage that you just let us into, last hour, social riches is gonna join us, she's been in this struggle as long as anyone. we're gonna be joined by others who have been with this issue for a very long time, legal experts. this is something we've never seen, it is the removal of a constitutional right. we are sitting here feeling it removed by a minority-controlled government. >> yeah, get to it lawrence, thank you. >> thank you rachel. we are now joining a list of 24 countries. we will be the 25th country, in which abortion is illegal, either in part of the country, because of the states, or eventually in all of the country if republicans control the senate and the house, and they have a republican president to sign a federal law, that makes it illegal in all of the country. but certainly we in 20 states, it will be illegal. we will be in one of 25 countries, countries like a, dora aruba, a egypt, el salvador, haiti, honduras, laos, mauritania, nicaragua, philippines, senegal, sierra leone. that's the kind of list we are joining. we are not joining any of the major european countries in this unique position, that this country is now taking thanks to this minority controlled supreme court. this is a night like no other, in the reporting that we have done, and the history of this network which is over 25 years old. and that is the loss of a constitutional right, a constitutional right that has been with us for almost 50 years. how long can we have a constitutional right and considerate granted permanently? 50 years, we now know, is not enough. we are joined now by social richards, former president planned parenthood, all -- chancellor professor of law at the university of california irvine, an msnbc we contributor delia lithwick, is doing overtime with, us see leah let me continue with you because we have been in this struggle from virtually your entire professional life, i just want to get your reaction to the news that we appear to be now, at that spot where roe v. wade is going to be overturned. >> so lawrence, i think i feel like a lot of women, writing in now which is that we've known this was coming because the republican party has been committing to overturning the right to legal abortion for years. then, as we saw them stacked the supreme court, we've seen them run on this, we've seen them state-by-state past these horrific abuse of laws against women. but i have to say, even though a intellectually was ready for it, i'm just distraught. we and obviously, the harm we, just a frank cruelty, even in the opinion or this leaked opinion. the willingness to trade off women and women's rights for people's own political views is sickening. we and i don't know, i guess that's my initial reaction. willis >> just go to -- before we proceed, i want to go to this ritual in our supreme court confirmation hearings about roe v. wade. there have always been these questions about roe v. wade, and became a game for nominees, for some extent on both sides, to avoid the question. very few have dealt with the question, in any kind of direct way. but let's look at samuel alito's confirmation hearing answer. tonight, right now, his answer to questions about roe v. wade. he is the author, now, of this opinion that will overturn roe v. wade. let's listen to what alito said about it in his confirmation hearing. >> why don't we move on to another important quotation out of casey. quote, a terrible price would be paid for overruling casey, for overruling whoa, we would certainly we can the courts capacity to exercise the judicial power, and to function as a supreme court of a nation dedicated to the rule of law. and to overrule roe under fire, would subvert the court's legitimacy. do you see the legitimacy of the court been involved in the precedent of casey? >> well, i think that the court, and all the courts. the supreme court, my court, all of the federal courts should be insulated from public opinion. they should do with the law requires in all instances. that's why the members of the judiciary are not elected. we have a basically democratic form of government, but the judiciary is not elected in, and that's the reason, so that they don't do anything under fire. anything the law requires. >> do you think there is as fundamental a concern as legitimacy of the court would be involved if roe were to be overturned? >> mister chairman, i think that the legitimacy of the court would be undermined in any case, if the court made a decision based on its perception of public opinion. it should make its decisions based on the constitution, and the law, it should not sway in a wind of public opinion at anytime. >> julia lithwick, what did we or should we have learned from that answer in his confirmation hearing? >> yeah, that was the tell, lawrence. he was very very transparent that, casey, which is a protracted meditation on stare decisis, and the need of the court to not reverse course willy-nilly, because people have a reliance interest, they order their lives around constitutional protections that are afforded them. what you just heard justice alito say it was pretty much where he put in his draft opinion which is that, not my problem. and it's really interesting because, if you look at the polling, the polling is not close here. americans really, really, really did not want to see roe overturned. and so i think quite justice alito just told us is, don't care. >> professor goodwin, is there anything -- this opinion says that basically it goes back to the states. all 50 states can make their own decisions about abortion now. does the court in this opinion say that the congress must stay out of it? or that the congress could then overrule the state's decisions? >> so, the court does not say that congress must stay out of it, but i'd also like to correct a few things to, lawrence, which is that this is a playbook that we've seen before. and, if you think of these stripping away of other constitutional protections, let's think about voting rights, and the shelby county decision which has upended the right for many to be able to vote in the united states. particularly people of black and brown communities across the united states, that stripping away has led to the undermining not only a voting rights but essentially of abortion rights as well it's important that we stick together these histories and not see this in isolation there is a playbook that runs thickly between racial oppression in the united states and that baked into law. let's remember that states rights laws that's the jim crow playbook. and what we're about to see is the jane crow playbook, which is going to be the companion to the jim crow playbook. we've seen that revisited through voter suppression, and now we see quite explicitly is that this court under its current formation is ready to yank the rug out from underneath what you've described as a 49 year protection that was not a close decision a 7 to 2 opinion with five of those justices been republican appointed, and justice black man who wrote the opinion row being placed on the court by richard nixon. so what we see is completely antithetical to republican history of prescott bush being the treasurer of planned parenthood, we are seeing a time for people who are like calculating been afraid about these times represent. they should be, and not just count the attack on abortion, because next will be attacks on contraception there already happening. we already saw that in the hobby lobby case and were already seen attacks on sex education in schools as well. >> joining our conversation now is neil catio. neil is joining us from london, there is a time zone stress here and i want to get meal and it's quickly as we can. neil in your reading of this 98-page decision. is there anything in it that says that congress should stay out of it. who's doing cream court says that we have no role in this because it should be left of the states. is the supreme court saying that congress instead of this too because it should be left to the states. >> no, they're not quite saying that, so it's perfectly possible that we -- codified the roe v. wade above anything the court can put in or take, away but that's going to require majority vote in the house and senate. i think that they should break the filibuster for it, i think if this draft opinion becomes the law, it is a huge list step back for women in decades, for reproductive justice and for reproductive feed him. i think here, lawrence, is the most telling facts in this draft opinion, if it does become the law, it upholds the mississippi law. the mississippi law, had no exception for rape or incest. so it's just a flat ban. so if mississippi is a okay, any other state can do that, or possibly, lawrence, if there are republican takeover of the house in the, senate congress could pass a law banning abortion in all 50 states. so this is a dramatic win, if it becomes the law of the supreme court is breathtaking. i understand all of this wondered about other things about the court voting rights and so on but on this day i think which we should focus on is roe v. wade because this is monumental in a way that nothing like this has happened in our lifetime. >> neil, just a quick follow-up, this is a draft opinion. one of the kinds of changes than normally occur between a draft opinion, this one was drafted in february, a opinion that might come out as latest june. what kind of changes happen? >> so, changes can happen of all sorts, lawrence, big and small. one of the justice can say, hey, justice alito you can drop that footnote, read a paragraph that says this or delayed a whole section. possibly you can even have a justice switch opinions, and say i voted initially after oral arguments to totally uphold the mississippi law, and join justice alito. now, i think that's not true. and join what would be the dissenters. the problem here is that chief justice rob roberts would be that most likely person who is so-called switch sides. but his vote doesn't matter anymore because after justice ginsburg passed away, and was replaced by justice barrett the chief justice became the sixth not the fifth. so you need to get one of the justices like justice barrett to flip her view from the conference and that's on my plate. that's why i think there's a lot of doom and gloom going on right now after looking at this draft opinion, and yes it's possible that things can change but it's really quite unfortunate -- >> i want to go back to another supreme court hearing, we all remember that senator susan collins staked her vote to confirm justice kavanaugh on her belief that justice kavanaugh would uphold roe v. wade. her belief was based on what he had to say in his confirmation hearing, let's listen to that. >> have your views on whether roe was settled precedent, or could be overturned? and has your views changed since you were in the bush white house with. >> senator isa said that it settled as a president of the supreme court entitled to respect under-principles of stare decisis. one of the important things to keep in mind about roe v. wade is that it has been reaffirms many times over the past 45 years, as you know. and most prominently, most importantly, reaffirmed in plant parenthood versus casey in 1992. and as you will recall, senator, when that case came up, the supreme court jim just reaffirm it in passing, the court specifically went through all of the factors of stare decisis, in considering whether to overrule it. and then the joint opinion of justice kennedy, justice o'connor, and justice souter at great length went through those factors. that was a question presented in the case. >> social richards,, that is what susan collins confidence was based on. >> look, we can go over that hearing again, obviously that was devastating. having kavanaugh on the court is. but the truth is we have to look ahead now, and i think what is so distressing, this is now five people in the united states of america who are now poised to take away the right of every single woman in this country, as rachel said earlier. this is something we've never seen before, this is a right that all of us have lived our entire lives been able to exercise. and that is the most fundamental right to make a decision about their pregnancy. this isn't about whether, or not you feel about abortion. it's about do you want the government to make these decisions for every single person in this country, that's what they have just done. no exceptions, as neil said, this is a devastating opinion. if this should actually come to pass, and it is going to change the lives and opportunities, of every single person in america. and it didn't happen, because the american people rose up and said, we need to make abortion illegal, it happened because the republican party has been 100% committed to ending illegal abort