tv Inside Politics With John King CNN December 1, 2021 9:00am-10:00am PST
hello and welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king in washington. thank you for sharing a very consequential news day with us. a shocking revelation in a new book. the former white house chief of staff said president trump hid it from you. answering big questions about this new variant, and yet the cdc thinking about its new
guidelines for foreign travel. they'll look past the history of the covid controversy and send him here to washington. just moments ago, arguments wrapped up in dobbs versus jackson. at stake, roe versus wade and the nearly 50-year-old right to abortion. they ban abortion after 15 weeks. but the state is asking them to uphold 15 weeks as a reasonable time. with the court now tilted conservative by a 6-3 margin, abandoning roe v. wade is very much a possibility. >> if you think the issue is one of choice, that women should have a choice to terminate their pregnancy, that supposes that there is a point at which they had the fair choice, opportunity
to choice. why would 15 weeks be an inappropriate line? the viability, it seems to me, doesn't have anything to do with choice. but if it really is an issue about choice, why is 15 weeks not enough time? >> jessica snyder is at the supreme court. jessica, we heard the supreme court justice there. a spirited debate among all the justices there. >> reporter: that's right, john, and it really seems that when you add on the justice's comments, all six conservative justices based on their questioning do seem to be leaning towards upholding this mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks. you heard the chief justice john roberts there talking about why isn't 15 weeks enough time to allow women to have abortions, and at that point after, the state might be able to ban it. that's one of the questions here the court will grapple with. the other one is should they overturn roe v. wade completely, because there is a way they could still uphold this law but
maybe not overturn roe v. wade completely. however, five of the justices really seem to be weighing on the side that maybe roe v. wade should be overturned. just as brett kavanaugh questioned the attorneys at length on at least three different occasions, and he asked pointedly, he said, what about the fact that maybe the court, all of these 50 years since roe, maybe they've been picking sides, and is it the time to return the court to a place of neutrality where it's, in fact, congress or the states that determines the rules around abortions state by state, leaving it to the people? his questioning seems to indicate that he might be in favor of limiting abortion significantly or overturning roe v. wade. and, of course, john, that would fly in the face of what he told senator susan collins back in his 2018 confirmation hearing that he wouldn't overturn roe. it seems like maybe he's having second thoughts here. john? >> jessica, let's walk through it, and i'll tell our viewers this is a 50-year political
debate as well as a 50-year legal debate. you see the crowd gathered outside the court as jessica speaks to us. jess, let's go through this. one of the leading liberals, sonia sotomayor, says throwing this out will put them right in the middle of politics. >> will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the constitution and its reading are just political acts? i don't see how it is possible. it is what casey talked about when it talked about watershed decisions. if people actually believe thaits all poli-- that it's all political, how will we survive? how will the courts survive? >> she is outnumbered, right? >> she is outnumbered, john.
interestingly, we heard three of those impassioned debates, soliloqu soliloquies -- if you will. this does seem this could come down 6-3, upholding that mississippi law. justice sotomayor is not the only one. he said any decision that might overturn roe v. wade could delegitimize the court in the public's eyes. the public might see them as bou bowing to political pressure. very impassioned words from the political justices, but i have to say, john, they're outnumbered 6-3. >> one of the reasons they're out numbered, one of the conservative justices, justice
alito, essentially asking, if you go through the history of this, there was roe v. wade in 1973. then in '82, a pennsylvania case which was essentially a compromise allowing some restrictions on abortion rights. justice alito asking, can we have another compromise or do we have to throw it all out? listen. >> i read your brief to say that the only real options we have are to reaffirm roe and casey as they stand or to overrule them in their entirety. you say that, quote, there are no half measures here. is that a correct understanding of your brief? >> that is just what mississippi is now arguing, right? we think you should throw out r roe and casey? >> they said that repeatedly in their arguments, they said that in their brief. but, john, they did leave as a possibility that the court could uphold the mississippi law and rewrite the standard here saying that mississippi does not put an
undue burden on women with this 15-week mark. that would fly in the face of casey that said viability was at 23 or 24 weeks. so there is maybe a middle ground here, but five of these justices really seem to be leaning toward overturning roe completely. john? >> jessica, i appreciate your live report and i appreciate your patience. it's tough to do that outside with some democracy happening around you. we have cnn's dana bash, mia malika henderson. they are saying we will keep roe but states can have restrictions if they do not have an undue burden, essentially reasonable restrictions. the arguments today were just about, never mind. just have the supreme court say this is to the states.
>> there were two fundamental things going on in the case today. one was this is about personal liberty, about constitutional liberty about women in america. and on the merits of the case, that's what it's about. but the second piece going on that we heard articulated by the justices in their questioning is this issue of the court's prec precedent. that pertains to the fact of is the court going to overturn these 50 years of history going back to roe in addition to the past almost 30 years when that case was reaffirmed in the casey case. >> and what is fascinating about it is that, you know, elections have consequences and life events have consequences. this would have been a very different case, and this would have been a very different hearing if not for the death of ruth bader ginsberg and donald trump's appointment of casey barrett. they made their 50-week law just
to say, we want the court to reaffirm its position. mississippi changed its strategy. listen. >> roe v. wade and casey are not our country. they have no basis in the constitution, they have no home offer traditions. they poison the law. they've choked off compromise. no where else does this court recognize the right to end a human life. >> that is a complete change in the state strategy because amy coney barrett is on that bench, not ruth bader ginsburg, and they have to come up with a compromise decision and want them tossed. >> nobody should look at this as anything other than a very, very strategic legal strategy and political strategy that has been in the works for decades. this is the long game exemplified. because conservatives have been pushing, pushing, pushing to pack the courts on the lower
levels and, of course, u ultimately the supreme court. if you want to know politically why so many conservatives to this day stick by donald trump, it's because of what we heard in the court today, the questioning by his three nominees were exactly what they were going for. we don't know how they're going to decide. but certainly they left some very big bread crumbs as to where they're headed. >> again, to the point. number one, we could show you a map. if the court just throws out roe v. wade and it becomes a state by state decision, some women will have to drive hundreds of miles or transport themselves. i say drive, move hundreds of miles to get access to an abortion. that is a decision we will know months from now down the road. the chief justice in the past who has been a defender of precedent has tried, in the previous court, to work with liberals to say, okay, i'm a conservative but we'll try to split the difference here. he made the point with
mississippi that you've changed our strategy here which makes the decision more difficult. >> your first question of which we granted on review was, whether all previability prohibitions on elective abortions were okay. and then i think it's fair to say when you got to the briefs on the merits, you shifted gears. >> the harder questions are should the court overrule and that i that momentous step and that's why we devote a lot of space to that very important issue. >> they believe they're at the precipice of it. >> right, and this goes back to your earlier point of how presidential elections particularly have consequences in the long run for the supreme court. that was especially true with president trump's second nominee to the supreme court, just as
brett kavanaugh replaced kennedy. he made a point to point out that there are several landmark cases by the supreme court that overturned previous precedent, such as brown versus board of education. that was not about -- particularly susan collins, one of the few pro-abortion rights in the senate, she said she believed roe versus wade was settled law, and that was not his message today. >> i just got this from justice kavanaugh. if we believe this case is wrong, why don't we go to the return of neutrality? not what he told congress. >> i don't think anyone believed brett kavanaugh. going to dan's point, this has been the fight on the right for decades. it's what energized white evangelicals to back donald trump in the numbers that they
did in 2016. i think the consequences of this, when you think about a st state-by-state decision could control essentially family planning and a woman's womb, that's a slippery slope you enter if this becomes a reality, if roe v. wade is overturned. that is something to behold and think about in different states if that is a reality. >> if we get to that point on what the court decides, we'll get to the point of an election year. let's talk about that from a legal perspective. if, as justice kavanaugh suggests here, let's take the supreme court out of this. they overturn roe, they overturn casey, obviously, and they say this is a decision left to the states. what happens to the legal framework. every state has to make a decision, and then those decisions get challenged to the courts as well, right? >> from a legal perspective, yes, and it would go back to the states. there are already over 25 states that have laws on the books that
would be triggered by such a decision. so if the supreme court were to overturn roe and casey, these state laws would immediately go into effect, so as a practical matter, the supreme court really is making the decision whether a woman's liberty and her ability to make this choice would be affected in this particular case. in addition, john, i just want to note, the counsel for jackson women's health, she took on this issue of whether or not the court should abandon the prior precedent. and the argument that she makes is that mississippi is not making any new arguments. in other words, for the supreme court to throw out its 50 years of history, there has to be a very strong reason for it to determine that its prior decisions were wrong. and what she argues is that mississippi isn't making any arguments for why those are wrong. >> so no new legal argument, so we will see what will ultimately be interpreted as a political decision. we'll stay on top of that. again, you see the dramatic
>> man: what's my safelite story? my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me... with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ look, serena williams... matrix... serena... matrix... serena... matrix... ♪ get your tv together with the best of live and on demand. introducing directv stream. hey, it's ryan reynolds. as owner of mint mobile my goal is to save our money so we can save you money. so by using this $400 stock video as our holiday commercial this year, we can afford to offer three months of free service on any plan, including unlimited i'm still not sure why someone made a stock video showing a snowman sitting on an explosive device that's about to blow.
this doesn't seem very holiday but you know, worth it. (man 1 vo) i'm living with cll and thanks to imbruvica (man 2 vo) i'm living longer. (vo) imbruvica is a prescription medicine for adults with cll or chronic lymphocytic leukemia. imbruvica is not chemotherapy- it's the #1 prescribed oral therapy for cll, proven to help people live longer. imbruvica can cause serious side effects, which may lead to death. bleeding problems are common and may increase with blood thinners. serious infections with symptoms like fevers, chills, weakness or confusion and severe decrease in blood counts can happen. heart rhythm problems and heart failure may occur especially in people with increased risk of heart disease, infection, or past heart rhythm problems. new or worsening high blood pressure, new cancers, and tumor lysis that can result in kidney failure, irregular heartbeat, and seizure can occur. diarrhea commonly occurs. drink plenty of fluids. tell your doctor if you experience signs of bleeding, infection, heart problems, persistent diarrhea or any other side effects. (man 2 vo) i am living longer with imbruvica.
only pay for what you need ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ spider-man no way home in theaters december 17th the living room slash yoga shanti slash regional office slash... and this is the basement slash panic room. maybe what your family needs is a vacation home slash vacation home. find yours on the vrbo app. today a dramatic revelation. former president donald trump te tested positive for covid-19 just days before a big debate with president biden. it's outlined in a book due this next week, and it suggests that president trump held the truth from you, the american people, and then he broke his own covid rules. he was on marine one when the white house doctor called up and told meadows to stop the
president from leaving for a rally in pennsylvania. why? because the president, the white house doctor said, had tested positive. but meadows did not stop the president. after trump boarded air force one, trump called him for the diagnosis. his reaction? oh, spit, you've got to be trucking lidding me. it's funny in the sense that mark meadows tries to hide the words there, but it's not funny to think that the president of the united states at the time, heading into a debate with his rival, plus his staff and all the people around him, tested positive for covid, went to a rally and in a sense just said to hell with the covid restrictions at the time. >> yeah, because president trump only cares about himself and not those around him, so he was gung ho on doing what he wanted whether or not he was putting other people in harm's way.
he probably did. given what he was doing at that point, he was likely spreading it. listen, almost nothing is shocking, what we learn about this president. this in some ways isn't shocking, either. i remember at the time there was sort of like, was he positive at the time on stage with biden? there was some speculation about that, and it turns out he likely was. >> i was laughing at your rendition, not this, because it is reckless. not surprising but inchristine blasey ford -- but incredibly reckless. the former president is claiming it was a false positive, and so on and so forth. but like, come on. he had covid. he was in the hospital. he was in walter reed. he was in really bad shape not that long after that. so that is the reality that they -- we saw with our own two eyes, and at that debate, he was sweaty, he was off, he was all of those things, and he put the
lives of the people on that stage, never mind his opponent, the person who beat him, everybody there and everybody at the white house at serious risk. >> to your point, because donald trump thinks about one person, donald trump. number one, you see debate pictures there. number two, we were talking about that this morning, september 26 is when meadows said he tested positive. on september 27 he had a military families event and press conference. september 29 was the debate. it was october 2nd they announced the president was positive. it was also the same time he appointed amy coney barrett to the supreme court. that event turned into a super spreader. members of congress ended up testing positive for covid, the president as well ask kellyanne conway. if you test positive for covid, isolate for ten days.
the cdc was also telling people in jest, bleach or take hydroxychloroquine. >> i was at that rose garden event, and we were outside which might have helped things a bit. while the reporters were in the back, we were all masked even though we were outside. but there was no social distancing, no masking. inside the white house they were mingling, hugging, kissing each other because they were happy about the supreme court nomination. the former white how else and so many people at risk because of their reckless approach to covid protocols. there was one line of mark meadows' memoir that i found interesting, that he feigned surprise that he actually contracted covid because the president was a massive germophobe. he always had sanitizer around him. that mask helped contain the
spread. i think maybe there was twice he wore a mask because he had to. it really shouldn't have been a surprise that this happened, but it is really still stunning that he would put so much danger to people around him. >> even though we know he lies almost as often as he breathes. some of the lives are still shocking because of their scope and their gravity. coming up, the covid variant may consider restricting travel. we'll see what the white house is considering, next. ♪ dad, why didn't you answer your phone? ♪ your mother loved this park. ♪ she did. ♪
this is elodia. she's a recording artist. 1 of 10 million people that comcast has connected to affordable internet in the last 10 years. and this is emmanuel, a future recording artist, and one of the millions of students we're connecting throughout the next 10. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students, past... and present, can continue to get the tools they need
president biden and his health team are now strongly considering stricter coronavirus testing for travelers. that part of the evolving strategy to deal with the new omicron coronavirus variant. omicron has been detected in at least 25 countries so far. nothing yet in the united states. ind kaitlan collins is here for more. >> reporter: right now if you are a vaccinated traveler coming into the united states, you can take a test three days before that flight boards in order to get into the united states. of course, a negative test result. now it seems all but certain they are going to shorten that time frame to just one day. you have to get that test 24 hours before takeoff, a negative result, in order to get into the united states. this is something that is a regulatory process right now. it could be announced at any moment, so if you are a traveler
who is on an international flight coming into the united states, that is a change that you should be prepared for, and they are also considering, john, having people retest several days after they get back into the united states. because health experts have said this is kind of a missing hole here where people take that one test, they get into the united states, but maybe they don't start to show symptoms or test positive until several days later. another thing under consideration that they were debating last night is whether or not even fully vaccinated americans should have to test again several days after getting into the united states, something that is recommended by the cdc right now but not required. we'll see if that changes. john, we should note that as they're ramping up surveillance at four different airports in the united states where you see all those international flights come into, they're also having airlines collect passenger information, give that to the cdc so the cdc can then turn it over to the state and public health departments in case they need to get in touch with these people that are coming into these nations where we know the
omicron variant has been found. >> kaitlan collins, appreciate the latest from the white house. let's get to dr. megan ranney. dr. ranney, do you think that is an overstatement or do you think that's public health? >> that is something that is accurate and something we've called for for months. i would love to see an additional requirement of vaccination for all air travelers, not just for foreign internationals but for domestic travel as well. great strategy to reduce the spread of this disease. although it is certainly scientifically appropriate, this is logistically complex to do. i'm curious to see how the federal government proposes to keep track of folks after they've landed and ensure they actually complete that testing two to three days later. >> we've added a couple more countries, but 25 nations so far have reported omicron.
not yet here in the united states, but listen, dr. ranney, this is dr. francis collins, head of the nih. he said they are going to be extremely cautious with this new variant, even though doctors are saying they're only seeing moderate cases, this doctor says we need to be careful because of the mutations. >> there are all different mutations, at least 50, and all the things we've been trying to do to keep this virus away, this is a different animal. >> he's saying this particular mut mutation, they're not sure where it's headed, so they want to be extra careful. z >> that's exactly right. i think we're trying to learn from our mistakes of 2020 and 2021. we have to take this new variant seriously but not overpanic. remember, even with these mutations, chances are that all of the traditional strategies, vaccinations certainly, but also masks, ventilation and testing
are still going to be our most important tools in fighting it, so we need to double down on those. but we can't ignore the mutations and pretend this new variant doesn't exist. we're then setting ourselves up for the same problems we've had with the delta variant. we have a smoke alarm, don't yet know if it's a five-alarm fire. legalities get the fire extinguishers and fire trucks ready to go while we figure out the details. >> dr. ranney, i appreciate your insight. appreciate it very much. ahead for us, it's official. tv's dr. oz running for senate in pennsylvania, and he clearly hopes to become donald trump's new favorite. - san francisco can have criminal justice reform and public safety. but district attorney chesa boudin is failing on both. - the safety of san francisco is dependent upon chesa being recalled
as soon as possible. - i didn't support the newsom recall but this is different. - chesa takes a very radical perspective and approach to criminal justice reform, which is having a negative impact on communities of color. - i never in a million years thought that my son, let alone any six-year-old, would be gunned down in the streets of san francisco and not get any justice. - chesa's failure has resulted in increase in crime against asian americans. - the da's office is in complete turmoil at this point. - for chesa boudin to intervene in so many cases is both bad management and dangerous for the city of san francisco. - we are for criminal justice reform. chesa's not it. recall chesa boudin now.
look! oh my god... oh wow. ♪ i want my daughter riley to know about her ancestors and how important it is to know who you are and to know where you came from. doesn't that look like your papa? that's your great grandfather. it's like opening a whole 'nother world that we did not know existed. ♪ you finally have a face to a name. when you give the gift of ancestry®, you give the gift of family. ♪
we're carvana, the company who invented car vending machines and buying a car 100% online. now we've created a brand-new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old. we wanna buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate answer a few questions. and our techno wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds.
when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot and pick up your car, that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way at carvana. celebrity surgeon dr. emmett oz has made not one, but two, fox appearances dipping into the pennsylvania primary hoping to be the next senator. he is criticizing president biden's covid mandates. >> i think one of the best compromises in america is we gave the world the mrna vaccines with president trump's warp speed. i'm so glad we were able to do that. i don't believe in mandates, and i also don't believe it's the only path to success. >> that pennsylvania race one of the big battlegrounds in the 2022 race for the senate.
a dozen republicans say they're running. oz is clearly hoping to win the endorsement. another supporter of trump backed out amid abuse allegations. number one, just the fact that someone is pro-vaccine is good. you have a celebrity candidate in a race that could well be one of the two or three we're looking at next november for which party controls the senate. >> right. also, dr. oz not a great "jeopardy" host, just to get that out there. the senate primaries in the -- senate republican primary races are going to be really interesting for the next midterm cycle. it's almost a hohousification fm a former president that still has a major grip on the party. in alabama to go from a richard shelby to a mel brooks from a
roy blunt to a toomey cast of characters which now includes dr. oz. there are a lot of dynamics here. it will be interesting to watch. >> it also opens up the question about whether any of those three key states that will control the senate, whether those republicans can win. missouri is a bit different, obviously, than pennsylvania, which is more of a blue state. that has been -- was -- mitch mcconnell's big challenge back in 2010 and 2012, that he had these republicans elected or nominated who couldn't win s statewise. dr. oz is different for a host of reasons, we'll see if he wins the preliminaries, but he is a celebrity. that goes a long, long way even if you can prove you have the most basic of policy chops.
z >> ideally he would live in pennsylvania. he doesn't now. he lives in new jersey so he's different than other folks in the field. his strategy clearly is to hug donald trump. we saw in virginia the strategy there with that gubernatorial race and how it was arm's length when it came to trump. he's clearly doing something different. is that really going to be an effective strategy for him? we also saw from that race that these races are about the state, are about sort of local issues that people care about. he doesn't know anything about pennsylvania. he doesn't live there. he has some ties there, i think he went to school there, his wife is from there, his in-laws live there, but that will be a real test for him. >> the other republicans will probably come at that, the carpetbagger idea, but why do you want trump to embrace you? the president's approval rating among pennsylvania republicans is off the charts, about 75%. number two, you're right, it
will be about local issues, but will people accept dr. oz? during covid you heard him there talk about vaccinations. that's a plus, having a republican candidate saying vaccines are good, amen. but during covid he was saying some things that people thought were off, not polite, not decent, and he corrected them. >> i just saw a nice piece in "the lancer" arguing that opening of schools may only cost us 2% in terms of mortality. every life is a life lost, but getting kids back in school where they're being educated, fed and making the most of their lives with the theoretical risk on the back side, it might be something folks would consider. i realize my risks of opening schools have confused and upset people, which was never my intention. i misspoke. >> trying to clean that up because it just sounded crass. >> it absolutely did when you're talking about the lives of children. it's not just that.
you alluded to the fact that he had to come before congress because of allegations and questions about things that he was pushing that, you know, diet, drugs and programs that weren't necessarily what he was selling them as. you know, those are going to be absolutely part of the political conversation. you know, i said that when you're a celebrity, obviously you have a name i.d. which is huge in politics. that's the plus. the downside is when you're a celebrity, you have a history that has nothing to do with politics, and therefore, you have a giant target. >> there are a lot of things in the tape library to go through. he makes a lot of appearances on local news. welcome to the race, dr. oz. up next for us, the republican family feud over hate and bigotry and its new "mean girls" twist. in that fight, marjorie taylor greene says guess what? donald trump is on her side.
♪ don't step on 'em, don't step on me ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ he'd better not take the ring from me ♪ house republicans are, well, a hot mess of hate and turmoil at the moment. and their leader seems powerless to stop it. kevin mccarthy has not condemned racist comments by one republican lawmaker. and trying to get the republicans to stop fighting among themselves is failing and failing big time. marjorie taylor greene is one he
asked to step back. she asked him to play the trump card. honestly, i love that man, she said. unfortunately nancy mace doesn't. i will be very very supportive of a primary challenger. >> if you say something bad and crazy, you say something extreme, you're going to raise money. that's the only reason she does that. she is a grifter of the first order and she does it to raise money. she takes advantage of vulnerable americans and vulnerable conservatives and makes promises she can't keep. >> fact check, true. however, there are a number of issues to get at here. number one, the bigger issue is the leader of the house republicans has not publicly condemned a vile racist comment. he thinks it's best to deal with this privately. that's not leadership.
>> it isn't. again, it wasn't that long ago when kevin mccarthy was kicking people off committees for their offensive comments, for example, steve king. he is driven clearly by other motivations right now. i'm sure when reporters see him later this week, he will get asked about this, but it shouldn't take pressing by reporters to condemn such vile comments. >> but it also gets at the ways that bigotry and homophobia is currently. you heard nancy mace say she preys on vulnerable conservatives, i don't know what she's talking about there, that this stuff works with a wide swath of the republican party, which is why kevin mccarthy is so reluctant to stand up to her because he knows this is where the base is. >> if you listen to republicans coming out of meetings today, this is a man who represents the swing congress.
listen to his first reaction when manu raju asked him, why do you think it's important that the fighting stop? >> i am concerned because we're just going through the polling numbers today. we have significant leads in polling with independents, the generic polling and every major issue. we should not be shooting ourselves in the foot with infighting, and it's not appropriate. >> again, he's a decent man and he said some things later. but the first reflex is, we will be in power if we just shut our mouths. it's all about winning power. >> listen, he's candid. he's explaining the reality, the political reality that they're talking about, and he's also said it's not appropriate. but the bigger question is what you were saying, is why isn't the republican leadership condemning what started this whole thing, which is lauren boebert, one of their own, calling a fellow member of
congress just because she happens to be muslim, a terrorist. that is what is not being condemned. and nancy mace is filling the void of kevin mccarthy. she's doing it in a way we're not used to. it's also quick to say that nancy pelosi in their meeting this morning, she talked with her caucus about what they're going to do. the question is whether, since they're in charge of the house, whether they're going to do anything. she said this is hard because these people are doing it for publicity. there is a judgment that has to be made about how we contribute to their fundraising and their publicity and how obnoxious and disgusting they can be, but i think it has to be clear there is no place for it. they're also weighing how much do we kind of feed into the their ridiculousness. >> but public condemningness, you don't have to agree with omar's politics. you can disagree with everything
she believes in. she came to a press conference yesterday and she played a voicemail to her. >> [ bleep ] jihadist, we know what you are. you're a [ bleep ] traitor. you will not live much longer, i can almost guarantee you that. >> leaders, regardless of party, have to publicly condemn it or you encourage that. it's just plain and simple. you have to make clear that is not acceptable. when we come back, horror and grief in a michigan suburb today after a deadly shooting in a high school. new details in that case, next.
that update just in to us, we're just learning a fourth student died this morning after a suburban shooting in a michigan high school yesterday afternoon. several people were injured. the shooter, a 15-year-old student at oxford high school, is now in custody and on suicide watch. shimon prokupecz is live fouls at the school. shimon? >> reporter: another student has died, 17-year-old justin shilling. that makes the fourth student to have died here in this shooting. really just a sad situation. there are other people in the hospital as well. there is also a 14-year-old girl in the hospital that officials here are very worried about who is fighting for her life. as you said, the 15-year-old
suspected gunman, the alleged shooter, he is in custody in a juvenile facility, saying they hope that the prosecutor will charge him as an adult. they're going to present some of the preliminary findings to the prosecutor and that we could see charges filed as early as today. the sheriff also expected to hold a 3:00 p.m. presser today to update us with any new information, john. >> anything, shimon, at all on motive? >> reporter: that's the big thing. they have wriktstings from the alleged shooter. they're looking at those and his phone. they said he fired indiscriminately. the sheriff saw all the video, and from what he can see, this is just cold-blooded murder, that the alleged shooter walked around through the hallways of the schools just firing at people indiscriminately. >> that's horrifying. shimon, thank you for your live
report from the scene. sanjay gupta will come together tonight with dr. fauci for an all new global town hall. that's "coronavirus facts and fears" tonight at 9:00 p.m. on cnn. ana cabrera picks up our coverage right now. have a good day. hello, i'm ana cabrera in new york. we are awaiting president biden. any minute now he plans to address the supply chain issue and the omicron variant. we will bring you his remarks just as soon as he begins. the other big story we're following this hour, abortion rights hanging in the balance before the supreme court. these are live images right now of what's happening outside the court. just moments ago, oral arguments wrapped up. this is one of the most significant abortion challenges in decades, a case that could weaken or
Uploaded by TV Archive on