>> Braude: TONIGHT ON "GREATER BOSTON," WHAT THESE RECENT SUPREME COURT RULINGS MEAN FOR US HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS.

THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO ABORTION ACCESS IS NO MORE, AN ISSUE FOR THE STATES, ACCORDING TO THE COURT.

THE SAME STATES THAT THE SAME COURT DECLARED CANNOT ACT ON THEIR OWN TO PUT RESTRICTIONS ON WHO GETS TO CARRY A WEAPON IN PUBLIC.

AND SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE BECAME A LOT LESS SEPARATE, FRIDAY AND TODAY, WHEN THE JUSTICES BACKED A CHRISTIAN COACH WHO PUBLICLY LED HIS STUDENT-ATHLETES IN PRAYER ON GAME DAYS.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MASSACHUSETTS PRESIDENT AND C.E.O.

DOCTOR JENNIFER CHILDS-ROSHAK AND STOP HANDGUN VIOLENCE CO-FOUNDER JOHN ROSENTHAL AND A.C.L.U.

OF MASSACHUSETTS LEGAL DIRECTOR MATT SEGAL ALL JOIN ME AHEAD.

♪ ♪ ♪ >> Braude: IT'S A RULING WE SAW COMING FOR WEEKS, BUT THAT DIDN'T SOFTEN THE BLOW OF THE SUPREME COURT'S 6-3 DECISION TO OVERTURN "ROE V WADE" FOR THE 60% OF AMERICANS WHO SUPPORT ABORTION ACCESS.

>> I'M ANGRY, I'M FIRED UP.

THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER.

>> MY BODY, MY CHOICE!

MY BODY, MY CHOICE!

>> Braude: PROTESTERS HAVE BEEN ON THE STREETS OUTSIDE THE SUPREME COURT AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY FOR DAYS, INCLUDING IN MISSISSIPPI, WHERE THE SUPREME COURT CASE ORIGINATED, AND IS ONE OF NEARLY A DOZEN STATES THAT NOW BAN OR SEVERELY LIMIT ABORTION SO FAR.

AND HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS, WHERE ABORTION IS LEGAL UP TO 24 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY AND LATER, IF NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE MOTHER'S LIFE AND HEALTH, OR BECAUSE OF A LETHAL FETAL ABNORMALITY, STATE LAWMAKERS ARE ALSO LOOKING AT WAYS TO EXPAND ABORTION PROTECTION AND ACCESS BEFORE THEY BREAK FOR THE SUMMER.

AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE COURT'S RULING CAME DOWN, GOVERNOR CHARLIE BAKER SIGNED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER AIMING TO PROTECT OUT-OF-STATE PATIENTS AND THE ABORTION PROVIDERS WHO HELP THEM FROM LAWSUITS.

I'M JOINED BY DOCTOR JENNIFER CHILDS-ROSHAK, A PHYSICIAN AND THE PRESIDENT AND C.E.O.

OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS.

SO GOOD TO SEE YOU.

THANKS NOR YU TIME.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

THANKS FOR HAVING ME ON.

>> Braude: SO THE CONVENTION AT WISDOM IS REALLY BAD NEWS FOR WOMEN IN MOST OF AMERICA BUT HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS THEY ARE PROTECTED.

IS THAT YOUR ANALYSIS SO FAR?

>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS, WE HAVE PUT INTO PLACE A LOT OF PROTECTIONS THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR WOMEN WHO LIVE HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS OR CAN GET TO MASSACHUSETTS FOR CARE.

>> Braude: LET'S STAY IN MASSACHUSETTS FOR A MINUTE AND THEN WE'LL GET TO WHAT THE FEDS MAY OR MAY NOT DO ON THE GOOD OR BAD SIDE FURTHER ON THE SUPREME COURT.

IS THERE MORE THE STATE SHOULD BE DOING, I TOUCHED ON IT A MINUTE AGO BUT I SHOULD ASK, WHAT SHOULD THE STATE BE DOING TO PROVIDE GREATER PROTECTION FOR WOMEN WHO ARE HERE?

>> I THINK THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER WAS FANTASTIC.

THE TIMING OF THAT WAS REALLY INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT AND CRITICAL TO PROVIDING CARE HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS.

IN THIS VERY UNCERTAIN ENVIRONMENT.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, A VERY IMPORTANT NEXT STEP WOULD BE CODIFYING THE ELEMENTS OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER AND POTENTIALLY OTHER THINGS AS WELL.

TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT JUST A TEMPORARY PROTECTION BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT LASTS THROUGHOUT, AS LONG AS WE NEED IT, YOU KNOW, INTO THE FUTURE AS WELL.

>> Braude: REGARDLESS WHO THE GOVERNOR WAS BUT LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT THE IMAIRK THING.

I WAS RIGHT WAS I NOT, THAT ESSENTIALLY IT PROTECTS IN STATE PROVIDERS WHO PROVIDE SOME REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE TO A WOMAN WHO COMES HERE FROM OUT OF STATE IS THAT CORRECT?

>> CORRECT, CORRECT.

>> Braude: DOES IT DO ANYTHING ELSE OR IS THAT THE EXTENT OF IT?

>> SO IT PROTECTS THE PATIENTS AS THEY COME TO MASSACHUSETTS.

IT PROTECTS PROVIDERS ON MULTIPLE LEVELS SO EXTRADITION TO ANOTHER STATE FOR EXAMPLE LIKE A TEXAS OR A STATE WITH A BOUNTY LAW AND IT ALSO PROTECTS PROVIDERS LICENSES AS WELL.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW DOCTOR ONE OF THE THINGS I NEVER UNDERSTAND, ALTHOUGH I USED TO LOBBY AND I USE THE TERM LOOSELY ON BEACON HILL.

ONE YOU SAY TO CODIFY THIS, ONE I DON'T UNDERSTAND, WHY THIS IS NOT YOUR PROBLEM.

WHY LEGISLATORS WHERE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GO HOME FOR SIX MONTHS WHEN THERE'S IMPORTANT LAWS TO DO, I WON'T STICK THAT ON YOU BUT WHY CAN'T THEY CODIFY THIS RIGHT NOW BEFORE THEY GO ON THIS MULTIPLE-MONTH VACATION, THEORETICALLY TO PREPARE FOR ELECTION, TO ENSURE THE WOMEN WHO ARE OUT OF STATE CONTEMPLATING COMING HERE WILL HAVE FULL PROTECTION?

>> WELL I THINK THEY PROBABLY COULD DO IT EITHER NOW OR WITHIN THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, HANDFUL OF DAYS.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THE -- I WOULD SAY THE LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN EXTREMELY SUPPORTIVE.

AND THE DECISION JUST HAPPENED ON FRIDAY.

SO WHILE WE KNEW THAT IT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN I COULD CERTAINLY APPRECIATE HOW FOLKS WERE WILLING TO DO SOME PRO ACTIVE THINGS IN THE LEGISLATURE BUT REALLY WANTED TO SEE HOW THINGS SHOOK OUT.

SO I THINK THERE'S TIME AND I THINK THERE'S ALSO BEEN SOME VERY CLEAR SUPPORT THAT THEY'VE SIGNALED ALREADY AROUND THINGS LIKE THE BUDGET, ET CETERA.

>> Braude: SO I HOPE THERE'S -- THERE IS A FEW MILLION DOLLARS THEY'RE PUTTING IN THE BUDGET FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND TO DO EXACTLY WHAT DOCTOR?

>> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THERE IS $2 MILLION ALLOCATED IN THE BUDGET TO PROVIDE MORE FUNDING FOR ABORTION FUNDS FOR FOLKS WHO NEED HELP.

AFFORDING ABORTION CARE.

AND THEN ALSO FOR THINGS CONNECTED TO PROVIDING CARE, SECURITY, AND, OF THE OTHER PATIENT ACCESS THINGS THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT.

>> Braude: TERRIFIC AND AGAIN THAT'S NOT LAW YET, IT'S IN ONE CHAMBERS, BUT HOPEFULLY IT CAN BECOME LAW.

CAN WE GO TO D.C. FOR A MINUTE?

NANCY GERTNER IS GOING TO BE WITH ME TOMORROW NIGHT.

AND WHILE SHE NOT ONLY BELIEVES THERE IS STATUTORY PROTECTION UNDER THE ROE ACT, BUT SHE BELIEVES A CASE HER HUSBAND AND SHE DID YEARS AND YEARS AGO, HE WAS THE LEGAL DIRECTOR OF THE ACLU OF MASSACHUSETTS PROVIDES CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION FOR THE RIGHT TO ABORTION.

HOWEVER, A BIG HOWEVER, THE REPUBLICANS TAKE CONTROL OF CONGRESS AND THERE'S A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT TO SIGN WHAT THEY DO COME 2025 THAT IF THEY PASS LEGISLATION SAYING A FETUS IS A PERSONAL ALL THE PROTECTIONS THAT WOULD EVAPORATE DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT ANALYSIS?

>> WELL SO I'M NOT A LAWYER.

>> Braude: THAT'S OKAY.

>> I THINK IF JUDGE GERTNER SAYS IT THEN I BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE.

SHE'S A CERTAINLY EXCEPTIONALLY SMART AND TALENTED AND PERSONSED JUDGE.

I DO THINK, THOUGH, ONE OF THE CRITICAL THINGS THAT -- AND THIS IS YOU KNOW IT'S NOT THE TYPICAL TALKING POINT, FOR I THINK A HEALTH CARE PERSON.

BUT YOU KNOW, THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT IS ONE WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION FOR WOMEN IN AMERICA.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT IS PROBABLY WORTH EXPLORING, IN A MORE DEEPER WAY.

>> Braude: I'M SO GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP.

VERY BRIEFLY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING AND SAYING, THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT, DIDN'T THAT DIE?

IT WOULD BE IN THE CONSTITUTION IF THE ARCHIVIST AND UNELECTED OFFICIAL DECIDED THAT WHAT SOME CONSIDER ANTIERA PEOPLE CONSIDER TO BE, QUOTE, LATELY-STATE VOTES WERE NOT IN FACT LATELY, IT WOULD BE EMBODIED IN THE CONSTITUTION AND I'M SO GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP, THE PROTECTION YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE CODIFIED.

SOME ARE, MAYBE THIS IS JUST PUTTING HOPE AHEAD OF REALITY, BOTH SENATOR COLLINS, FROM MAINE AND SENATOR MANCHIN FROM WEST VIRGINIA, SENATOR CLIFNS WHO AT LEAST SAYS SHE'S PRO-CHOICE AND SENATOR MANCHIN WHILE HE SESSION HE IS ANTICHOICE, HE BELIEVES ROE WAS AND SHOULD BE THE LAW OF THE LAND IS THERE ANY PRESSURE BEING PUT ON BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND NATIONAL LEADERS TO URGE THEM TO JOIN OTHER DEMOCRATS, COLLINS IS NOT A DEMOCRAT BUT MANCHIN AND COLLINS TO JOIN OTHER DEMOCRATS TO CARVE OUT A PIECE, A PROVISION IN THE FILIBUSTER THAT WOULD ALLOW THE CODIFICATION OF ROE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION TO HAPPEN?

IS THAT BEING DISCUSSED?

>> THAT'S A GREAT WE.

I WOULD SAY YES IS PROBABLY THE SHORT ANSWER.

I ASSUME SO.

BUT I'M MOSTLY FOCUSED HERE ON MASSACHUSETTS.

WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT YOU KNOW, THIS IS A -- IT'S A HORRENDOUS DECISION THAT HAS COME DOWN WITH HUGE IMPACT AND I THINK ANY ANGLE YOU KNOW WHETHER IT'S LOOKING AT THE PLITTIZATION OF THE REPORT, WHETHER IT'S LOOKING AT JUSTICE ET CETERA AND THEIR ETHICS, WHETHER IT'S WAIVE THE WOMEN'S HEALTH ACT, THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS TO ADDRESS GET TO THE SOLUTION.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO DO IT THAT WAY.

I THINK THERE'S NOT ONE SOLUTION THAT FITS ALL.

>> Braude: AND ONE THING WE COULD ADD TO YOUR LIST, I ASSUME YOU COULD AGREE, THAT THE PILLS FOR MEDICATION ABORTIONS COULD BE OVER THE COUNTER WHICH WOULD MAKE LIFE MUCH EASIER ARE FOR WOMEN WHO ARE GETTING THE SHORT END OF THINGS AS A RESULT OF THIS RULING CORRECT?

>>FULLY WAY WE SO REDUCE BARRIERS TO CARE, WHETHER IT IS EMERGENCY CONTRASESSION OVER THE COUNTER, PILLS OVER THE COUNTER, THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS TO DO THAT.

EVEN THE CURRENT LIFTING OF PRIENLING MEDICATIONS IN A HEATING CENTER -- HEALTH CENTER, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS ARE REALLY CRITICALLY IMPORTANT AND ALL OF THAT COULD BE DONE UNDER THE SUPPORT OF A PHYSICIAN OR PROVIDER AS WELL.

WHICH ALSO IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR CARE.

>> Braude: DOCTOR, ONE LAFS THING FOR YOU, A POLITICAL QUESTION.

YOU KNOW THE CONVENTIONAL WISDOM TO WHICH I SUBSCRIBE IS PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF ISSUES LIKE THIS AND GUNS ARE FAR BETTER AT VOTING ON THAT ISSUE THAN PEOPLE LIKE YOU.

I MEAN GENERICALLY, I DON'T MEAN YOU IN PARTICULAR.

DO YOU SEE THIS AS THE MOTIVATE THAT MOST SUPPORTERS OF REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM SUGGEST IT COULD BE COME MID TERM ELECTIONS?

>> I THINK IT WILL BE A MOTIVATOR.

51% OF THE POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES IS FEMALE, AND CAN GET PREGNANT.

AND YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT IN THEIR LIVES.

AND I THINK THERE'S, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING IN AMERICA THAT IMPINGES ON INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, I THINK DOES STRIKE A CHORD.

AND YOU KNOW, WE COULD TALK ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT UNTIL BLUE IN THE FACE.

BUT YOU KNOW BEING ABLE TO DECIDE WHEN OR WHETHER TO BE A PARENT HAVING AWE TON MY OVER YOUR OWN BODY, BEING ABLE TO MAKE YOUR OWN HEALTH CARE DECISIONS, THAT IS LIBERTY AND THAT IS WHAT I THINK WILL REALLY STRIKE A CHORD WITH FOLKS AND I CERTAINLY HOPE, I THINK IT WILL GET FOLKS, MY GENERATION, YOUR GENERATION OUT TO VOTE.

I THINK IT WILL GET THE YOUNG PEOPLE OUT TO VOTE SO I DO THINK WE WILL SEE SOME SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.

>> Braude: AND I REALLY HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT BUT THE ONE CAUTIONARY NOTE IS A HUGE PERCENTAGE OF WHITE WOMEN VOTED FOR A CANDIDATE IN 2016 WHO SAID HIS LITMUS TEST FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WOULD BE PRO-LIFE.

MEN, WOMEN, EVERYBODY IS AWAKENED WITH THE REALITY.

DOCTOR THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR WORK.

>> THANK YOU.

BE SURE TO JOIN US ON THURSDAY AT THE BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY STUDIO AS PARIS ALSTON, CALLIE CROSSLEY, AND MARGERY EAGAN HOST A COMMUNITY CONVERSATION ABOUT THE ABORTION RULING.

AND YOU'RE INVITED.

THAT'S THURSDAY AT 2:00 ON GBH RADIO 89.7, AND STREAMING ONLINE AT youtube.com/gbhnews.

OF COURSE, JUST A DAY BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT DECLARED ABORTION WAS NO LONGER A RIGHT IN THIS COUNTRY, FEDERALLY, THEY EXPANDED ANOTHER RIGHT-- ACCESS TO GUNS.

IN ANOTHER 6-TO-3 RULING THURSDAY, THE JUSTICES STRUCK DOWN A NEW YORK LAW THAT SAID PEOPLE NEEDED TO SHOW A SPECIFIC NEED IN ORDER TO CARRY A CONCEALED GUN OUTSIDE THE HOME.

AND WITH THAT, THE DOORS WERE THROWN WIDE OPEN FOR FUTURE LAWSUITS AGAINST THE SEVERAL OTHER STATES THAT HAVE SIMILAR, COMMONSENSE RESTRICTIONS ON GUN OWNERSHIP, LIKE MASSACHUSETTS.

I'M JOINED BY JOHN ROSENTHAL, CO-FOUNDER OF STOP HANDGUN VIOLENCE, AND A LONGTIME ADVOCATE FOR STRONGER GUN SAFETY MEASURES.

JOHN IT'S.

>> TO SEE UL.

>> THANK YOU.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, THE CONVENTIONAL WISDOM IN ANTICIPATION OF THAT SUPREME COURT DECISION WHEERCH IT CAME DOWN WAS THE MASSACHUSETTS LAW WAS SO SIMILAR TO NEW YORK LAW THAT IF THE NEW YORK LAW IS GONE MASSACHUSETTS WILL BE NEXT.

BUT YOU AND DAVID HOG FROM MARCH FOR OUR LIVES, WROTE A PIECE IN THE GLOBE SAYING THEY WERE DIFFERENT ENOUGH SO THAT WE SHOULD NOT FEAR.

WAS THAT NOT PUTTING HOPE AHEAD OF REALITY OR NO?

>> I THINK THEY ARE DIFFERENT ENOUGH.

THERE IS ENOUGH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROPER CAUSE, THE REASON THEY ARE CARRYING A GUN VERSUS A SUITABILITY PERSON TO CARRY A GUN, I KNOW IT SOUNDS LIKE WORDS BUT I KNOW IT'S DIFFERENT ENOUGH.

I ALSO TOOK HEART IN ALITO'S POSITION THAT HE IS NOT UNDOING HELLER OR MCDONALD.

IN THE HELLER CASE IN D.C. SCALIA WROTE FOR THE MAJORITY, I DON'T MEAN SEMI YOU AUTOMATIC WEAPONS OR ASSAULT WEAPONS.

LIKE ALL RIGHTS THEY ARE NOT UNLIMITED AND YOU CAN PUT REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS OFTEN HOW GUNS ARE SOLD.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE OKAY REALLY BUT REMEMBER THIS IS NOT YOUR GRANDFATHER'S COURT.

THESE ARE CONSERVATIVE JUDGES WHO SEEM MORE INTERESTED IN CHANGING CULTURE THAN RESPECTING LAWS AS FAR AS I CAN TELL.

>> Braude: ALSO YOU'RE IN PART DEPENDING ON WHAT JUSTICE ALITO SET.

BUT MARGARET JUSTICE WAS ON THE AIR WITH US, SAYING, I'LL BE LESS POLITE THAN SHE WAS, DON'T BELIEVE THEM FOR A SECOND.

SO THE NOTION THAT HE SAYS THAT CAN, THE BOTTOM LINE, WITHOUT GIVING PEOPLE A HEADACHE, IT SEEMS TO ME THE ISSUE WITH THE SUPREME COURT WAS, THEY DON'T WANT ANY DISCRETION IN THE HANDS OF LOCAL PEOPLE LIKE OUR POLICE CHIEFS HERE AND EVEN THOUGH YOU THINK THE DISCRETION IN MASSACHUSETTS IS NARROWER IT IS DISCRETION NEVERTHELESS, CORRECT?

>> OH, IT IS ABSOLUTELY DISCRETION.

WHO KNOWS THEIR PEOPLE BETTER THAN LOCAL POLICE CHIEFS?

AND SO FAR, ALL OF OUR LAWS HAVE BEEN UPHELD.

HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED AND UPHELD BUT THE FUTURE IS UNCERTAIN WHEN YOU HAVE GOT ACTIVIST JUDGES, WHO DON'T REALLY RESPECT THE PAST AND TRYING TO MAKE UP RULES AS THEY GO.

>> Braude: I WANT TO QUOTE YOU, TO YOU, IN THAT SAME OP ED, YOU SAY WILL THE SUPREME COURT END THERE?

WHAT ARE AREAS, WHAT ARE DIRECTIONS IN THE GUN WORLD AND THE GUN OWNER'S RIGHTS WORLD THAT WORRY YOU MOST THAT THEY MAY GO DOWN NEXT?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I MEAN CLEARLY, THE GUN LOBBY HAS A STAY NO PRISONERS APPROACH.

THEY THINK THAT EVEN A BACKGROUND CHECK IS AN IMPOSITION ON GUN OWNERS RIGHTS.

THAT IS NOT WHAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID IN THE PAST.

BUT REMEMBER, YOU CAN'T EVEN GET 60 SENATORS TO SUPPORT A BACKGROUND CHECK WHERE YOU NEED A BACKGROUND CHECK TO DRIVE A SCHOOL BUS.

I MEAN YOU NEED AN I.D.

TO GET A CLARETON BUT NOT TO BUY 32 WEAPONS A DAY FROM PRIVATE DEALERS.

BUT I DO KNOW THAT URBAN MASSACHUSETTS HAS THE MOST EFFECTIVE GUN LAWS, WE'VE REDUCED THE RATE OF GUN DEATHS BY 40%.

AND IF EVERY SINGLE STATE HAD SIMPLY THE LOW GUN DEATH RATE AND TREATED GUNS LIKE CARS LIKE MASSACHUSETTS, 27,000 LIVES COULD BE SAVED A YEAR WITHOUT ANY INCONVENIENCE TO LAW ABIDING GUN OWNER.

SO IF THE GOAL WERE TO ACTUALLY SUE, YOU KNOW, PROTECT PEOPLE WITH GOOD, STRONG GUN SAFETY LAWS WITHOUT INFRINGING ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT LOOK NO FURTHER THAN MASSACHUSETTS.

UNFORTUNATELY I THINK THIS SUPREME COURT MAY GO FURTHER.

WE JUST DON'T KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT AND, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW WE KNOW THE REPUBLICANS ARE OWNED, I SHUDDER TO THINK A MAJORITY ON THE SUPREME COURT IS OWNED AS WELL.

>> Braude: IS THERE ROOM?

WE SHOULD SAY YOU'RE BEING A LITTLE MODEST.

YOU ARE IN PART RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE THOSE TOUGH LAWS AND WE HAVE THE REDUCED INCIDENCE OF FATALITIES IN OUR STATE, THE LAWS DO WORK DESPITE WHAT THE POANDZ SAY.

IS THERE EVEN MORE THAT OUR LEGISLATURE COULD DO THAT YOU'RE FAIRLY CONFIDENT WOULD AVOID THE RATH OF THE SUPREME COURT?

>> WELL, GOOD QUESTION, JIM.

I KNOW THAT OUR LEGISLATURE RIGHT NOW IS CONSULTING LAWYERS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR EXISTING LAWS CAN WITHSTAND A CLELG AND IN WE HAVE TO -- CHALLENGE AND IF WE HAVE TO TWEAK THOSE LAWS I THINK WE WILL.

I KNOW WE HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE GOVERNOR AND I KNOW WE HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, TO SUPPORT THE LEGISLATURE, AND PROTECTING THESE GUN LAWS.

I MEAN THEY DO SAVE LIVES BUT JIM, I MEAN, YOU CAN ONLY SAVE SO MANY LIVES, WHEN ANYONE CAN STILL GO TO MAINE, NEW HAMPSHIRE, VERMONT AND 32 STATES IN TOTAL AND BUY AN UNLIMITED NUMBER OF GUNS AND BRING THEM INTO MASSACHUSETTS.

SO WE'RE UP AGAINST IT AND THE SUPREME COURT IS NOT HELPING SAVE LIVES IN AMERICA FROM PREVENTIBLE GUN VIOLENCE BEEN.

>> Braude: SOME PEOPLE HAVE HEARD THE STORY BUT YOU TOOK MY RADIO CO-HOST CLEG COLLEAGUE TO A NEW HAMPSHIRE GUN SHOW TO PROVE THAT POINT AND SHE ASKED ABOUT A HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINE, THE GUY WAS READY TO SELL IT TO HER.

SHE SAID, IT'S NOT LEGAL IN MASSACHUSETTS.

BUT HIS RESPONSE WAS, NOBODY NEEDS TO KNOW, ESSENTIALLY ISN'T THAT WHAT SHE HEARD?

>> JIM THAT'S RIGHT, AND WE ALSO SAW A YOUNG KID WALK OUT WITH A GRENADE LAUNCHER.

THIS IS TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION WHEN IT COMES TO GUN POLICY, IT IS THE REASON WE HAVE MORE GUN VIOLENCE IN AMERICA THAN 27 INDUSTRIALIZED NATIONS COMBINED.

IT IS BY CHOICE AND IT IS LIKE THE SUPREME COURT CHOOSING TO TAKE, TO RESPECT UNLIMITED ACCESS TO GUNS, BUT ATTHE SAME TIME, TAKE AWAY A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE?

THIS YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT THE AMERICA THAT WE ALL THOUGHT WE WERE LIVING IN.

AND WE BETTER WAKE UP.

AMERICA IS CALLING.

WE HAVE GOT TO GET OUT AND VOTE THESE CONSERVATIVES OUT OF OFFICE.

AND ULTIMATELY CHANGE THE COURT OR WE ARE GOING TO LOSE OUR DEMOCRACY AND SEEING REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS AND SEEING GUN RIGHTS TRUMP, YOU KNOW, HEALTH CARE?

IS INSANE!

IN AMERICA.

>> Braude: ON THAT NOTE JOHN ROSENTHAL, THANKS FOR YOUR WORK AS ALWAYS.

SEE YOU SOON.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

TOMORROW THE MASSACHUSETTS COALITION TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE WILL BE HOSTING A SCREENING AT THE BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY OF THE EMMY NOMINATED DOCUMENTARY FILM "THIS AIN'T NORMAL," WHICH FOCUSES ON GANG VIOLENCE IN BOSTON NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE ORGANIZATIONS TRYING TO GET THESE YOUNG MEN OFF THE STREETS.

>> THIS IS NOT AN ACCIDENT.

ALL OF THESE HOMICIDES IS HAPPENING WITHIN A THREE MILE RADIUS.

IF YOU THINK YOU CAN MAKE ME BELIEVE THAT BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, ONE OF THE BEST, UM, FORENSIC SYSTEMS, LAW ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS IN THE WORLD CAN'T CONTROL THREE MILES... YOU'RE CRAZY AS ALL HELL.

>> THERE WAS A SHOOTING, THERE WAS A MURDER, THERE WAS A MURDER, A SHOOTING, A SHOOTING BUT NOBODY SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, SO THAT RIGHT THERE TELLS YOU WHAT SOCIETY'S VISION AND VIEW ON WHAT'S GOING ON IN INNER CITIES DON'T MATTER.

>> WHY DO WE ALL NEED TO CARE?

BECAUSE THE ISSUE OF MURDER, THE ISSUE OF VIOLENCE, THE ISSUE OF DEATH BY A GUN IS HAPPENING IN URBAN, SUBURBAN AND RURAL COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT AMERICA.

WE NEED TO RALLY ABOUT THIS.

>> Braude: IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT FILM.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, OR TO REGISTER FOR THE SCREENING VISIT bpl.org.

AND IN YET ANOTHER 6 TO 3 DECISION TODAY-- ONCE AGAIN ALONG IDEOLOGICAL LINES-- THE SUPREME COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF A WASHINGTON STATE PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL COACH WHO WAS FIRED BY HIS DISTRICT FOR LEADING PRAYERS AT THE 50-YARD LINE AFTER GAMES.

IN THE MAJORITY OPINION, JUSTICE GORSUCH RULED THE FIRING WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, BECAUSE "BOTH THE FREE EXERCISE AND FREE SPEECH CLAUSES OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECT EXPRESSIONS LIKE THIS."

THIS IS JUST ONE OF A NUMBER OF RECENT RULINGS THAT APPEAR TO WEAKEN LONGSTANDING LEGAL PRECEDENT FOR THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

JUST LAST WEEK, THE COURT RULED A TAX-PAYER FUNDED PRIVATE SCHOOL TUITION PROGRAM IN MAINE CANNOT EXCLUDE RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS, JUST THE LATEST IN THIS TREND OF ALLOWING GREATER AND GREATER STATE INVOLVEMENT IN RELIGION.

I'M JOINED BY THE LEGAL DIRECTOR OF THE A.C.L.U.

OF MASSACHUSETTS, MATT SEGAL.

MATT IT IS GOOD TO SEE YOU.

THANKS FOR BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU JIM.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW STARTING WITH THIS MAINE THING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IMPACT THESE DECISIONS HAVE IN MASSACHUSETTS.

WEREN'T WE WIN OF THE 37 STATES THAT HAD A CONSTITUTIONAL FROIKS ON PUBLIC AID MEANING TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS TO GO TO RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS, AM I NOT RIGHT ABOUT THAT?

>> WE DO HAVE A MASSACHUSETTS SOMETHING CALLED AND ANTI-AID AMENDMENT BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE MAINE CASE B.U.

BUT ALSO ABOUT THE FOOTBALL PRAYER CASE IS THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASES THAT THE SUPREME COURT DECIDED MIGHT BE SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE FACTS THAT EXIST IN MASSACHUSETTS.

>> Braude: HOW SO?

>> EVEN WHEN THERE WAS THIS PROGRAM IN MEAFN, WHICH WAS A TUITION PROGRAM BASED ON AN IDEA THAT PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS ARE GIVEN ASSISTANCE TO ATTEND PRIVATE K-12 SCHOOLS, AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT RELIGIOUS.

WE DON'T HAVE A CASE LIKE THAT NOR DO WE HAVE WITHIN SUCH A PROGRAM A LAW THAT SINGLES OUT RELIGIOUS PRIVATE EDUCATION.

WE'RE NOT HANDING -- TO MY KNOWLEDGE WE ARE GENERALLY NOT HANDING PARENTS MONEY TO SAY YOU CAN USE THIS MONEY ON A PRIVATE SCHOOL, SO LONG AS IT'S NOT RELIGIOUS.

AND OR THE THAT REASON, IT'S NOT OBVIOUS THAT THE PRONOUNCEMENTS BY THE SUPREME COURT AS WORRISOME AS THEY MAY BE ON A BROAD SCALE, ARE GOING TO HAVE AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT IN MASSACHUSETTS.

>> Braude: THAT IS SOMEWHAT COMFORTING.

DO YOU FEEL THE SAME WAY ABOUT THIS KNEELING AT THE 50 YARD LINE?

I HAVE TO SAY I'M A BIG FAN FOR NPR BECAUSE I WORK FOR A LOCAL OUTLET BUT WHEN I HEARD NPR REPORTING ON THIS DECISION, IT SAID THE.COVE INVITED PLAYERS WHO WANTED TO PRAY WITH HIM.

WHEN YOU'RE IF HEAD COACH, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE TAXPAYER FUNDED, SAKE I WOULD SUGGEST YOU SHOULD GET HERE IF YOU WANT TO START ON THE GAME ON TUESDAY.

IS THAT OF LIMITED CONCERN TO YOU TOO?

>> I HAVE A SIMILAR RESPONSE.

FIRST OF ALL AS A CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYER BUT ALSO AS A PARENT I HAVE SOME DOUBTS ABOUT THE FACT AS THEY WERE CHARACTERIZED BY THE SUPREME COURT.

I MEAN MY KIDS PLAY SPORTS.

WE ALL UNDERSTAND AND I THINK SLOOTS UNDERSTAND STUDENT-ATHLETES UNDERSTAND, WHAT IS IMPORTANT BY THE FACTS, AS TARGETED TARGET -- ARE ARTICULATED BY THIS OPINION, THERE WAS NO FD OF COERCION, THAT MEANS PEOPLE WILL BE FLEE IN FUTURE CASES TO GET A DIFFERENT RESULT WHEN THEY CAN ESTABLISH THERE THERE WAS COERCION.

NOW IN THE DISSENT IN THIS CASE CERTAINLY SAYS WAIT A SECOND, THOSE AREN'T THE FACTS.

THE ACTUAL FACTS HERE ARE THAT THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF COERCION.

BUT AS CONSTRUED BY THE MAJORITY, THERE'S NO EVIDENCE OF COERCION IN THIS CASE.

AND SO LIKE MY ANSWER TO YOU JIM, WITH RESPECT TO THE MAINE CASE, THIS MIGHT BE ANOTHER CASE THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO HAVE A BROAD IMPACT IN, SAY, MASSACHUSETTS WHEN THERE ARE SITUATIONS WHERE THE COERCION IS OBVIOUS.

>> Braude: BY THE WAY I'M COMFORTED OF THIS BY THE VIRTUE OF EVERY OTHER RULING, I KNOW YOU HAVE DEEP CONCERNS BEYOND OUR BORDERS.

BUT AS A LAYPERSON, I'M NOT A LAWYER LIKE YOUR KIND OF LAWYER.

SS THERE DE FACTO COERCION WHEN A AUTHORITY FIGURE LIKE THAT SAYS FEEL FREE NOT TO PARTICIPATE?

I TELL IF YOU I WAS ON THAT TEAM I WOULDN'T FEEL FREE NOT TO PARTICIPATE.

AM I BARKING UP THE WRONG TREE?

>> WELL, CERTAINLY, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING JIM IS IN LINE WITH WHAT THE DISSENT SAID.

I'M NOT HERE TO TELL YOU OR ANY LISTENER OR VIEWER THAT EVERYTHING IS JUST FINE AT THE SUPREME COURT.

>> Braude: UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING.

IT IS ROUGH AND I'M NOT HERE TO PRETEND THAT THIS DECISION WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON ERODING OR EVEN -- OR CHIMG AWAY EVEN -- CHIPPING AWAY EVEN SIGNIFICANTLY AT THE WALL BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE.

WHAT I AM HERE TO SAY IS IF YOU ARE A PARENT OUT THERE OR STUDENT OUT THERE WHO REALLY IS BEING COERCED, THIS DECISION DOES NOT TELL TO YOU JUST STAY SILENT.

>> Braude: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> AND NOT TELL YOU TO SEEK HELP.

YOU CAN GO GET HELP AND YOU SHOULD CONTACT PEOPLE.

>> Braude: I ONLY HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT AND I KNOW THIS IS NOSTRADAMUS TIME.

BUT EVERYTHING FROM HOBBY LOBBY ON DOWN, RELIGION AND GUNS, RELIGION TRUMPS ALL WITH THIS COURT, IS THAT NOT A FAIR STATEMENT?

>> WELL, ONE WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT IS, IF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES WERE AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY, AND ITS DECISIONS WERE TO COME UP FOR REVIEW BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, THE SUPREME COURT MIGHT SAY THAT THOSE DECISIONS WERE NOT FAIR.

>> Braude: ON THAT NOTE, MATT SEGAL, IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTS, I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU JIM.

THAT'S IT FOR TONIGHT, BUT COME BACK TOMORROW.

CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR, HARVARD'S LAURENCE TRIBE AND FORMER FEDERAL JUDGE NANCY GERTNER-- BOTH MEMBERS OF PRESIDENT BIDEN'S SUPREME COURT COMMISSION-- WILL JOIN ME WITH MORE ON THE BROADER IMPLICATIONS OF THESE LANDMARK DECISIONS, AND THE FUTURE OF COURT ITSELF.

AND THEIR ANALYSIS ON THE JANUARY 6 HEARING THAT WAS JUST ADDED FOR TOMORROW.

THAT HEARING STARTS AT 1:00.

AND A REMINDER, YOU CAN LISTEN LIVE ON GBH RADIO 89.7, ALONG WITH MARGERY EAGAN AND ME.

YOU CAN ALSO STREAM THE HEARINGS LIVE AT gbhnews.org OR CATCH THEM LIVE ON THE GBH WORLD CHANNEL, WHICH IS OFFERING A FULL RE-AIRING AT 3:00 A.M.

THE MORNING AFTER EACH HEARING AS WELL.

THAT AND MORE, TOMORROW AT 7:00.

THANKS FOR WATCHING-- AND PLEASE DON'T FORGET ABOUT UKRAINE.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ Captioned by Media Access Group at WGBH access.wgbh.org ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪