AMNA NAWAZ: Good evening.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

GEOFF BENNETT: And I'm Geoff Bennett.

On the "NewsHour" tonight: the latest from the Southern border as the Biden administration's new asylum policies take effect, complicating migration and sparking legal challenges.

AMNA NAWAZ: A Marine veteran is charged with manslaughter in the choke hold death of a mentally ill man on the New York City subway.

GEOFF BENNETT: And Turkey prepares to vote in the country's most consequential election in a generation, with President Erdogan struggling to maintain his grip on power.

GONUL TOL, Founding Director, Middle East Institute Center for Turkish Studies: After being in power for 20 years, he has become a very polarizing figure.

And that's why I think he's facing such a huge challenge in the upcoming vote.

(BREAK) GEOFF BENNETT: Welcome to the "NewsHour."

The U.S.-Mexico border remained mostly calm today, just hours after the expiration of Title 42, the pandemic-era border restrictions that immediately expelled migrants.

AMNA NAWAZ: Homeland Security officials said there was not a -- quote -- "substantial increase" in immigration across the border today.

The Biden administration is also implementing new rules that reject asylum seekers who did not apply online or who traveled through another country.

That's being challenged in court.

But the confusion for those crossing the border remains.

Cindy Ramirez covers immigration and the border for El Paso Matters.

She joins us tonight from the border city.

Cindy, welcome.

Thanks you for joining us.

There's certainly a lot of anticipation about what it would look like when Title 42 ended.

You are there.

Tell us what it feels like, what you're actually seeing on the ground in El Paso today?

CINDY RAMIREZ, El Paso Matters: I think probably a little bit anticlimactic.

Certainly, there was a lot of unknowns and whether it would be chaotic.

But, as you noted, it was relatively calm and quiet overnight and into this morning and still remains so as of right now.

The area of the border itself, the International Bridge where the migrants were to turn themselves in if they wanted to apply for asylum starting today, everything has been relatively quiet.

AMNA NAWAZ: Still, we have been seeing some of those numbers ticking upwards.

I know border officials said some 10,000 people apprehended in -- on average over the last few days.

That is a very high number for them.

But, as it was ending, there were some journalists from Reuters who spoke with people who were crossing the border overnight.

This was in Yuma, Arizona, last night.

Here's just a little bit of what folks had to share.

IRENE YENCOH, Migrant: I feel so bad, but I have no choice.

I have no choice -- after my life.

Those people were after my life, the military people after me.

WIN, Migrant: It's been a crazy journey, though, but I think it will be better, I hope.

That's why I'm here.

I'm here with hope and faith.

LUIS JUNIOR SALAS SALAZAR, Migrant (through translator): I have come here for a future more -- a future of work and study at the same time, and also to have my own family here in American lands.

AMNA NAWAZ: Cindy, I want to point out the folks we just heard from came from Cameroon, from Ghana and from Peru.

I know you're overseeing your reporters as they talk to folks who are crossing.

Give us a sense of who is arriving at the border right now.

Where are they from?

Is it families, single adults?

CINDY RAMIREZ: The majority have been single, single adult males, mostly from Venezuela.

We have seen a good number of families, women traveling on the roads or in groups of other women.

But we do see the people from Guatemala, Honduras, some from Cuba, so a little bit of mixed, but, certainly, the majority are single men from Venezuela.

AMNA NAWAZ: And we mentioned that new asylum rule the Biden administration has introduced barring anyone from making an asylum claim if they didn't already make one in a country they passed through.

The ACLU sued overnight to block that.

Cindy, what does that mean for the standard in place at the border right now?

CINDY RAMIREZ: Well, I think, right now, what we're seeing -- what we saw last night, for example, was about 1,600 migrants across the border and turned themselves into Border Patrol in order to meet the deadline of Title 42, so that they wouldn't face tougher consequences under Title 8 if they crossed without turning themselves into Border Patrol or between points of entry.

But, certainly, what that means is that there's going to be a lot more uncertainty among the migrants who are across our border city of Juarez, and in Mexico, and trying to figure out what's next for them.

There's certainly been a lot of confusion, misinformation, and worry about all of the changing rules and laws and policies that have come into place, so certainly a lot of confusion among them and what they should do next.

AMNA NAWAZ: And, just to clarify, Title 8, of course, was the immigration standard at the border before Title 42 went into place.

We have heard from the Biden administration, from Secretary Mayorkas they have been opening up legal pathways even as they impose these other restrictions at the border.

From the folks you talk to, has anyone been able to access those legal pathways?

CINDY RAMIREZ: Very few of them have actually had a little bit of luck with the -- with the phone app, and they have been able to have -- made some appointments.

But the majority have not been able to access that.

The vast majority of the migrants that we have seen in our community had already left several countries and traveled here, sometimes six months ago, sometimes four weeks ago, when they left their home countries.

The majority also don't really have an interest and actually have a fear of remaining in Mexico.

There's been some clashes between some law enforcement and migrants in Mexico, and, as you may know as well, a deadly detention fire, a migrant detention fire in Juarez that killed 40 people.

So I think that certainly scarred a lot of people who have no interest in remaining in Mexico.

(CROSSTALK) AMNA NAWAZ: Cindy, we have just about 30 seconds or so left.

We have heard from officials there's some 65,000 people waiting in Northern Mexico potentially to cross.

You said, so far, it's crowded, but calm.

What do you expect in the days or weeks ahead?

CINDY RAMIREZ: I think the big thing for communities like El Paso is, when those migrants that have been taken into Border Patrol custody gets released into the communities, and the shelter capacity for that would become an issue.

AMNA NAWAZ: We will be tracking that as well, following your reporting.

Cindy Ramirez from El Paso Matters joining us from El Paso, Texas, tonight.

Cindy, thank you.

CINDY RAMIREZ: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the day's other headlines: The U.S. Marine veteran who put a fellow passenger in a fatal choke hold on a New York City subway was charged with second-degree manslaughter today.

Daniel Penny was freed pending trial after being released on $100,000 bond.

He insists he acted in self-defense.

The family of the victim, Jordan Neely, said he had a history of mental illness and was not a threat.

Clashes between Israel and Islamic Jihad raged for a fourth straight day.

Palestinian militants launched a barrage of rockets toward Jerusalem.

Israel later stepped up its airstrikes, bombing targets in Gaza and killing a top Islamic Jihad leader and his aide.

Since Tuesday, the fighting has claimed the lives of 33 Palestinians in Gaza and one man in Israel.

In Sudan, airstrikes rocked the capital, Khartoum, today, as another truce between the country's warring generals appeared to collapse.

Late Thursday, Saudi Arabian state TV aired video of the two factions signing a deal promising safe passage to fleeing civilians.

But, today, in Port Sudan, some remained skeptical.

ALAA AL DEEN AL FADEL YOUSSEF, Port Sudan Resident (through translator): This deal doesn't represent us in any way.

It was announced to please the warring sides.

The Sudanese people have nothing to do with this deal, because it does not concern them.

GEOFF BENNETT: At least 600 people have died since violence first broke out nearly a month ago.

The U.N. estimates around 200,000 people have fled to neighboring countries.

A high court in Pakistan granted former Prime Minister Imran Khan a two-week reprieve from arrest after days of deadly protests.

The opposition leader left a courtroom today surrounded by security and media.

He claims the corruption charges leveled against him are made up.

Back in this country, Twitter will soon have new leadership once again.

Elon Musk named Linda Yaccarino as his successor.

The NBC Universal advertising executive will take her new post in about six weeks.

Musk acquired Twitter last October.

The Tesla billionaire will now serve as Twitter's executive chairman and chief technology officer.

The Congressional Budget Office says the U.S. faces a -- quote -- "significant risk" of running out of cash within the first two weeks of June without a debt limit increase.

The warning reinforced Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's estimate of when a possible default could occur.

It comes as the White House and congressional leaders postponed a meeting planned for today to break the impasse.

They will now meet early next week.

Concerns about the U.S. economy pushed stocks lower on Wall Street today.

The Dow Jones industrial average lost nine points to close at 33300.

The Nasdaq fell 44 points.

And the S&P 500 slipped 6.

And a passing to note.

Journalist Hodding Carter III died Thursday at his home in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

He was the State Department spokesman under former President Jimmy Carter -- no relation - - and he briefed the country throughout the Iran Hostage Crisis.

A former newspaperman who championed civil rights, he often appeared on a number of news programs, including this one.

Hodding Carter was 88 years old.

And still to come on the "NewsHour": the public health questions that remain as the official COVID emergency comes to an end; David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart weigh in on the week's political headlines; and Tom Hanks talks about his newest credit as a novelist.

We return now to the death of Jordan Neely on the New York City subway last week.

Daniel Penny, the former Marine accused of putting Neely in a choke hold for several minutes before he died, surrendered to police today and was released on bond.

Witnesses say, on May 1, Neely got on the train acting erratically.

They say he was shouting at passengers, but there are no reports that he physically attacked anyone.

Then, video shows Penny wrapping his arms around Neely's neck, forcing him to the ground.

Witnesses say he held him there until Neely stopped breathing.

Daniel Penny's attorney spoke to reporters today outside the police station.

THOMAS KENNIFF, Attorney For Daniel Penny: This morning, Daniel Penny surrendered at the Fifth Precinct at the request of the New York County district attorney's office.

He did so voluntarily and with the sort of dignity and integrity that is characteristic of his history of service to this grateful nation.

GEOFF BENNETT: At a separate news conference, the family of Jordan Neely said he had a history of mental illness and posed no threat.

They demanded the charges be raised from manslaughter to murder.

LENNON EDWARDS, Attorney For Family of Jordan Neely: Daniel Penny chose, intentionally chose a technique to use that is designed to cut off air.

That's what he chose.

And he chose to continue to hold that choke hold minute after minute, second after second, until there was no life left in Jordan Neely.

GEOFF BENNETT: The killing has touched off widespread protests in New York over policing and a lack of support from the city for those who are homeless and mentally ill. To unpack all this, we're joined by Errol Louis.

He hosts "Inside City Hall" on New York One and is a columnist for "New York Magazine."

Errol, it is good to have you here.

And, look, it took two weeks for the Manhattan DA, Alvin Bragg, to bring charges in this case.

Was that because the investigation took that long, or was this a response of -- or was this a response to two weeks of public pressure?

ERROL LOUIS, New York 1: Well, it's always hard to say whether public pressure makes a difference, but I can tell you for sure the district attorney's office had a lot of work to do in this investigation.

That video is compelling, a compelling piece of evidence.

But it's not the only piece of evidence.

They tried to round up every last person they could find who was on that subway car and tried to interview them and get all kinds of different information and evidence and put it all together before making a decision about whether or not to move forward.

So it wasn't entirely clear that a crime had been committed or who had done it or what the circumstances were.

So, in some ways, they're moving at a pretty fast clip under the circumstances.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yes.

And this case brings new focus to issues of race and crime and mental illness and homelessness.

There are people who say that Daniel Penny was a good samaritan who jumped into action when Jordan Neely was shouting about how he was hungry and tired and how he didn't want to live anymore and didn't care if he went to jail.

And there are others who say that this case represents the worst form of vigilantism.

How is this dividing the city?

ERROL LOUIS: Yes, well, it's really right along those lines.

I mean, like, take the term vigilantism, which is being thrown around.

Well, that requires the commission of a crime.

A vigilante is somebody who stops a crime under their own authority, rather than under the color of law.

But throwing your jacket down on a train and yelling is not a crime.

Saying that you're hungry and that you're despairing, you're thirsty, you don't care what happens to you, that's not a crime either.

You could offer the man a sandwich.

You could offer him a couple of dollars.

You don't necessarily have to throw him in a choke hold.

And so that's the kind of conversation that's happening in New York right now.

What do we owe to our neighbors, those among us who are in distress, who may have an addiction problem, who may have a mental health or emotional disability?

Do we owe them more than just physical force and treating them like an outcast or criminal?

Or can we do a little bit better?

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, on that point, you wrote a column for "New York Magazine" with a headline that just stopped me in my tracks.

The headline was: "Jordan Neely Was Already Dead."

And what you meant was that he was socially dead, that to be Black, homeless and destitute in New York City, that he was an outcast.

He was an outsider.

Tell me more about that and what it all says about the city's social safety net.

ERROL LOUIS: Sure.

Well, Geoff, a long time ago, I took a course with a man named Orlando Patterson, who really did a masterful work called "Slavery and Social Death."

And he surveyed societies across many millennia all over the world, Asia, Europe, Africa, everywhere.

And, really, what he came up with was this concept of social death.

And it reminded me of how we treat some people in our own modern society.

The concept has not gone away, which is that certain people are just considered outside the circle of care and concern.

They are socially dead.

What happens to them is of considerably less concern to the rest of us.

And that is really what we do every time we're walking past somebody like a Jordan Neely, who's in clear distress and asking for our help.

So there was some graffiti scrawled in the subway near the scene where he died saying: "Who killed Jordan Neely?"

And, to a certain extent, the answer is all of us.

GEOFF BENNETT: Errol, I spoke with New York Mayor Eric Adams on this program some months ago about his plan to address homelessness and combat crime.

Is any of that showing results?

ERROL LOUIS: Well, we have seen some numbers that are really quite impressive.

The number of cops was doubled and then I think tripled.

A lot of overtime has been spent.

A lot of cops are down in the subways.

The number of arrests has more than doubled.

The number of crimes have plummeted.

So,yes, that response has yielded results.

What it has not done, though, is dealt with people who are in need, who are perhaps disorderly, who perhaps are homeless, because you cannot arrest somebody -- you cannot arrest your way out of those problems.

Arresting somebody doesn't get them an apartment.

It doesn't get them addiction treatment.

It doesn't get the mental health counseling or whatever other assistance they might need.

And that has been sort of the stubborn remnants of a policing approach that some people have condemned as the wrong tool for the current situation.

And it's really both/and.

You certainly don't want pickpockets and muggers running around in the subway plying their trade.

But you also don't necessarily want to apply an anti-crime policing approach to people who need a different kind of a help.

And Jordan Neely is a perfect example of that.

He spent 18 months on Rikers Island in the custody of New York City.

And he comes out and, a few months later, we have the tragedy that has unfolded here that we have been talking about.

GEOFF BENNETT: What happens next in this case, Errol?

ERROL LOUIS: Well, Mr.... GEOFF BENNETT: Penny.

ERROL LOUIS: I'm sorry.

Mr. Penny is going to be back in court in July.

He's free on bond right now.

He cannot leave the state.

He has surrendered his passport.

He is a suspect in an important case.

An indictment will very likely follow.

When he comes back in July, we will have that - - he will have received a lot of information from the district attorney about the evidence that they have collected, the investigation that they have conducted.

And he will be in a better position to assess whether or not he wants to either change his plea, strike a deal, or go to trial.

Those are pretty much the choices that he has in front of him.

GEOFF BENNETT: Errol Louis is the host of "Inside City Hall" on New York 1 and a columnist for "New York Magazine."

Thanks so much for being with us.

ERROL LOUIS: Thank you, Geoff.

AMNA NAWAZ: This Sunday, more than 60 million Turks will cast their ballot to decide the country's next president.

Turkey is a NATO member, part of the G20, and for two decades has been led by Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The opposition calls him authoritarian.

He calls them terrorists.

And, as Nick Schifrin reports, Erdogan faces his toughest battle yet in an election that could have major implications for Turkey and its allies.

NICK SCHIFRIN: In the city that propelled him to power three decades ago, the man dubbed Turkey's new sultan unleashed new insults.

Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan last weekend branded his opponent pro-LGBT, a supporter of terrorism, and a drunkard.

RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN, Turkish President (through translator): Mr. Kemal, drink as much as you want.

You can drink a full keg, but even that will not make you better.

My nation will not give the floor to an alcoholic.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Mr. Kemal is opposition candidate Kemal Kilicdaroglu, who focuses on kitchen table issues from his kitchen table.

KEMAL KILICDAROGLU, Turkish Presidential Candidate (through translator): This is the real agenda of the people, as they all know that, when I come to power, there will be democracy, and your purchasing power will increase.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Kilicdaroglu has pressed that message at his own massive rallies.

And a unified opposition of a half-a-dozen parties poses the greatest electoral threat that Erdogan has ever faced.

GONUL TOL, Founding Director, Middle East Institute Center for Turkish Studies: I know it's a cliche for the politicians to say that the upcoming elections are existential, but, in Turkey's case, it's actually true.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Gonul Tol is the founding director of the Middle East Institute's Turkey Program and the author of "Erdogan's War."

GONUL TOL: If he wins another term, I think Turkey will degenerate further into an authoritarian regime.

If the opposition wins, however, I think Turkish democracy will have a shot.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Voters' number one issue has been sticker shock.

Today, inflation is more than 40 percent, down from 85 percent last November.

MELIKE SAKA, Deli Owner (through translator): They have said inflation is 85 percent.

But I don't think it is 85 percent.

It feels around 250 percent to 300 percent.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Thirty-one-year old Melike Saka feels the cost of living crisis as consumer and seller.

She works at a deli that's a family affair.

That's her father.

They have never witnessed consumers buying less or profits dropping faster.

MELIKE SAKA (through translator): The quantities that we sold have decreased.

I can say our sales have decreased by half.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Turkey's economic pain runs deep, but analysts say Erdogan's unorthodox prescription of slashing interest rates made the country sicker.

GONUL TOL: The country's faltering economy and the cost of living crisis has been high on the voters' agenda.

And these economic troubles are largely of President Erdogan's own making.

And the second problem for voters is this growing repression.

NICK SCHIFRIN: In 2013, police and the government cracked down on critics after massive anti-government protests.

In 2016, the government accused the military of a failed coup, and Erdogan launched a society-wide purge, 50,000 arrested; 150,000 lost their jobs or were suspended, including teachers branded terrorists, who clashed with police.

And critical journalists like "Cumhuriyet Books" magazine editor Turhan Gunay were detained, as he told me back in 2017.

What happens to people in Turkey right now if they oppose the government?

TURHAN GUNAY, Editor, "Cumhuriyet Books" (through translator): I can only answer this question through my own experience, and that is, you are thrown into jail.

The government has no tolerance for the slightest criticism.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And the 2018 election created a new presidential system that increased Erdogan's powers.

RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN (through translator): From now on, it's time for the president and the Parliament to do more work.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But that portrayal of himself crumbled in February's earthquake.

Countless buildings collapsed.

At least 50,000 people died.

Survivors criticized the government for a slow response and for favoring builders who cut corners.

GONUL TOL: He promised that, if the country switched to a presidential system that would grant him unprecedented powers, that he would be able to solve the country's pressing problems in a more efficient way.

And on the day of the earthquake, we saw that that was not the case.

NICK SCHIFRIN: It was another megaquake in that helped propel him to 1999 power.

He became prime minister in 2003 thanks to anger against the secular political elite.

He was the alternative, a religious, working-class outsider who presented himself a progressive ally of the West, and helped lead the country to economic growth.

But, today, Erdogan's charisma and populism has divided society.

GONUL TOL: He has become a very polarizing figure.

And that's why I think he's facing such a huge challenge in the upcoming vote, because he always relied on others, relied on alliances to secure a majority, and for the first time in two decades, he's struggling to find new allies.

NICK SCHIFRIN: He's leaned on strongmen, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, for economic, political, and military support.

An Erdogan loss could weaken that partnership.

And the opposition fears an Erdogan loss could also lead to violence.

On Sunday, a leading opposition figure's bus was pelted with stones, and Erdogan has threatened to take to the streets.

Today, Kilicdaroglu's aides said he campaigned with a bulletproof vest and armed guards.

He and his wife have made a heart their symbol.

And he hopes to put an end to what he calls 20 years of one-man rule.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Nick Schifrin.

GEOFF BENNETT: After more than three years, the COVID-19 public health emergency has ended.

Thanks to vaccines, testing and treatment, we are in a much better place and deaths are at their lowest level since March 2020.

But concerns over how the federal government will respond to new variants or even a serious new epidemic remain.

William Brangham has our look.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: More than 1.1 million Americans have died of COVID since the pandemic began three years ago.

For those who lost loved ones early on, this moment, where the country has declared an end of the public health emergency, is a complicated time.

TRACEY THROWER, Widow of COVID Victim: My name is Tracey Thrower.

I am the wife and widow of John Thrower Jr. My husband passed away from COVID September the 23rd, 2020.

He died of something that he should not have died of.

And I know people think it is over with, but it is not.

Going out there in the public and being out there, it has scared me so much, because what he went through, I wasn't -- I was not there when he passed away.

I couldn't be there.

That was the beginning of the pandemic.

I could not touch him.

I could not say goodbye.

I am still dealing with it.

There's no time frame on death for someone you love.

There's no time frame.

I live with this every day.

I had to go to therapy because of the death of my husband.

So I live with this every day.

So, they don't get it.

Some people that don't -- have not lost a loved one, some people that it has not affected them, they go home with their everyday life, because they think they're invincible.

But they're not.

It can happen to any of us.

MAX OSCEOLA III, Son of COVID Victim: Hello.

My name is Max Osceola II.

My father is Max Osceola Jr.

I'm a member of the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

My father, he himself was a member of the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

He was a councilman in my tribe for 26 years.

He served 13 two-year terms.

And he accomplished a lot for us.

My father passed away in -- roughly about two years ago.

It was October.

It was in the very beginning of COVID.

My mother was with my father for 50 years.

They were high school sweethearts.

Their life was intertwined in a way that is unimaginable.

So that's really what it is.

It's about understanding life and moving forward in the sense of, how can we honor my father?

I think society has already opened up, in a sense, and our governments are just reacting to that, where we're better prepared for the other emergencies.

COVID is not going away.

The genie is out of the bottle.

So I'm sure, in the future, there's going to be another outbreak.

Hopefully, we respond accordingly.

My family has been able to honor my father.

We have been able to have a little bit more closure.

We're very, very fortunate for the father that we have.

There was a lifetime of love.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Many of the federal programs set up in response to the pandemic are now also ending with the expiration of the emergency order.

So, where does that leave us?

For a closer look at that, we are joined again by Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo, professor of epidemiology and director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health.

Dr. Nuzzo, great to have you back on the "NewsHour."

I mean, we had been talking on and off for three years of this pandemic, and through some of the worst periods of time, and now as the light that seems to be at the end of this tunnel.

Where do you see this moment that we are in right now?

DR. JENNIFER NUZZO, Brown University School of Public Health: Well, I think it is where you said it is, a complicated time.

I mean, we are in a complicated time.

COVID, the acute emergency is over.

The emergency declaration is over.

But the tolls of COVID, including the loss of life, persist and continue.

And, in my view, those tolls remain unacceptably high and really point to the need for continuing to work to reduce those tolls and also, crucially, to make sure we are never again left as vulnerable to a virus as this one made us.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: To that point, though, this virus is still with us.

Do you think we are -- have the right eyes on this situation right now?

Are we doing enough monitoring so that, if a new variant emerges, if cases were to tick up again, we'd be able to see it in time?

DR. JENNIFER NUZZO: Yes, I'm quite worried about our abilities to pick up future emergencies.

That may include a future COVID variant, but it probably also includes other viruses that we have yet to discover that could emerge and cause pandemic threats.

But much of that progress is at risk now with the end of the emergency.

We are scaling back the types of data that we are collecting.

And that generally gives us less insights into what's going on with COVID.

But it also means that we will have less ability to pick up new pandemic threats.

And so the point that I really want to make clear is that, while the acute COVID emergency has ended, our vulnerability to events like COVID has not changed, unless we decide to take action to make it change.

That requires improving our data, along with a lot of other things that we still have yet to do.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: As you well know, there is this ongoing fight in Congress over some of the things that you're describing here.

What do you think are the key priorities that we ought to be focused on, even as we -- quote, unquote -- "wind down" this end of the pandemic?

DR. JENNIFER NUZZO: So, first of all, the fact that we are having fights over pandemic preparedness at this point, after witnessing the loss of a million Americans, is, to me, unfathomable.

I just don't know how much more we need to endure in order to make the investment in preparedness worth it.

But in terms of what we should be doing with the resources that we have is, first of all, we have to be fixing our data.

For most of the pandemic, we were just trying to triangulate our way to the truth.

We had huge blind spots in understanding what was happening with COVID, who was being affected worse by it, what sorts of activities and places were driving transmission, and how COVID was affecting us.

We didn't have a complete picture in all communities.

That was one big problem.

But, also, we're not done in terms of treating COVID and also thinking about how to make ourselves less vulnerable to severe illness from other respiratory threats.

So, one thing I really liked to see are new vaccines that produce longer-lasting immunity and possibly prevent infection.

That would be great.

Not sure if that's scientifically possible, but absolutely worth the investment in the science.

Making sure that we have the best possible treatments that we can, not just for COVID, but thinking about future infections.

And then also, crucially, we need to figure out what sorts of other measures we want to put into place in our communities to reduce our vulnerability not just to this virus and other viruses that we know continue to threaten us year in and year out, like influenza and RSV.

We had big problems with that in the fall, but thinking ahead to future threats.

It is possible to make investments now to put into place a bolstered infrastructure and plans that can be ready to snap into place such that, when the next pandemic threat arises, we don't have to have our lives upended in the way that COVID did.

We have seen progress being made in terms of tackling other public health threats.

I like to think of public health threats like the way we think about other recurring hazards like fires.

If we reduce our social vulnerabilities, we reduce our community-wide vulnerabilities to these threats, we can go about our lives largely not thinking about them, but with enhanced safety against them.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: On the issue of long COVID, we know there are still millions of people suffering with that.

And, on some level, the end of the emergency declaration doesn't mean much to them, because they are still and continue to suffer.

Do you think we are doing enough research to understand what is happening with that ailment and how to help those people?

DR. JENNIFER NUZZO: This is something that I think we have not done right by these patients.

These patients are suffering quite a bit.

And they haven't gotten the kind of resources they need to help them.

And I want to stress that this is likely not just about COVID.

It is possible that what we are seeing in patients who are affected by COVID could be something that we could experience with other infectious diseases.

So, while the case numbers of COVID may be diminishing, the need to understand how viruses can affect us in the long term has not changed.

And it's an important point that we should be investigating, so that we don't yet have long X, Y, and Z when we think of other viruses that we may encounter or experience large outbreaks of.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: All right, Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo, the Brown University School of Public Health, always good to see you.

Thank you.

DR. JENNIFER NUZZO: Thanks for having me.

AMNA NAWAZ: Well, this week brought us several major political stories, including the end of a controversial border policy, former President Donald Trump found liable for sexual abuse, and ongoing negotiations over the debt ceiling.

To discuss all of this, we turn to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart.

That is New York Times columnist David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart, associated editor for The Washington Post.

Welcome to you both.

Good to see you.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Hey, Amna.

DAVID BROOKS: Good to be with you.

AMNA NAWAZ: We're talking about immigration once again.

Focus is back on the U.S. Southern border.

David, as you know, we saw from the report earlier, folks are saying, as Title 42 ends, it's crowded, but not chaotic.

Still, numbers have been ticking up.

They're at very high daily averages.

And, as Secretary Mayorkas has said, they continue to work within the confines of a system that has been outdated and underfunded for years.

Did it have to be this way?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, given our political system, for sure, yes.

(LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: I think a couple of things.

One, I'm glad they're getting rid of Title 42.

It's insane to have an immigration policy that really pretends to be a health care policy or vice versa.

And, basically, we have to define what asylum is.

And so there are lots of people who are fleeing persecution.

Asylum -- that's what the asylum bill is meant for.

But there are lots of people who are just seeking a better life, and that's a perfectly legitimate reason to try to immigrate here, but you can't -- then they're trying to use the asylum system to get in.

And that's one of the many ways our system has broken down.

But I'm really -- you look at what's happened in Europe, around the world, and in this country.

Donald Trump would not have been president without chaos at the border, in my view.

And the far right people in -- across Europe would not be doing so well politically without chaos at the border.

So it doesn't matter what level we have.

I have preferences at a level, but, mostly, Americans need to have a sense that somebody's controlling this thing, and, right now, they don't have that sense.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, what do you make as you're watching this?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, to pick up on what David was saying, that people using the asylum system -- why?

And part of the reason why is that the American immigration system, there's such a backlog through the legal channels, the proper channels, that people are finding any and every way possible to come into this country.

So, until Congress gets its act together and do something, comprehensive immigration reform, which, the last time, if memory serves, that we got anywhere near doing something was when the Senate passed its bipartisan Gang of Eight immigration reform bill out of the Senate.

And then it stalled in the House in 2014.

And we have not seen anything like that since.

And this is one of those situations where, if Washington were working properly, if the country were in a different place, this is the situation where you would have another Gang of Eight, gang of 12, just a gang, a congressional gang, getting in a room and hashing out, OK, how do we fix this now?

This is our opportunity.

And, instead, it doesn't seem like Congress is going to do anything.

AMNA NAWAZ: But does it surprise you, though, to see the Biden administration move further right on this?

I mean, the fact that they're being sued by both progressives and conservatives about their immigration policies, what does that say to you about this moment?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: It says that everything's broken.

It is broken.

I should correct myself.

The House did pass an immigration bill.

AMNA NAWAZ: They did.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: But it's not going anywhere in the Senate.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, to that point, David, they knew that bill would be dead on arrival in the Senate.

DAVID BROOKS: Right.

AMNA NAWAZ: Where's the incentive to compromise?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, first, on the brokenness, I mean, the Biden administration, I think, is shifting toward a more mainstream position.

You remember that Democratic presidential primary debate in 2020, when, should we decriminalize the border?

And all those hands went up, but not Biden's.

But that was a moment when the party was really not in the mainstream, because people want immigration, but they also want some control.

I'm going to be on the irrational side of tiny hints of optimism.

You know, the House -- the House passes this bill, and then, in the Senate, you get Kyrsten Sinema and Thommy Tillis, two senators saying, yes, it's a starting point.

And then you get Dick Durbin, Democrat, saying - - he wouldn't say it's a starting point, but he said it's hopeful.

Schumer is active.

There are a lot of people suddenly who are active.

And so I guess one thing, we have been covering this and people have been trying to push immigration reform as comprehensive immigration reform, where it's one big bill, everybody gets a piece.

We have been trying that for 30 years.

Maybe we should try something more modest, just take a step.

And with all the desire -- there's pent-up desire to do something, but that big thing looks pretty hairy and messy.

AMNA NAWAZ: We're surely going to be talking about this, I think, in 2024 quite a bit.

And the front-runner on the Republican side for that race right now remains former President Donald Trump, who was also in the headlines quite a bit.

Earlier in the week, he was found liable of sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll.

He also took part in a live CNN town hall, where he continued to lie about the 2020 election.

He mocked Carroll and I think, it's fair to say, offered a real clear preview of what we're going to see for the next year-and-a-half.

Jonathan, I know you were watching all of this unfold.

Is this what we're in for... (CROSSTALK) JONATHAN CAPEHART: Yes.

Oh, absolutely.

This is what we're in for.

But I wasn't surprised.

I have watched this Trump rerun since June 16, 2015, when he announced his presidential campaign.

But what was so horrific about that town hall was the reaction of the audience, the reaction of the audience when it came to talking about January 6, especially the reaction of the audience as he continued to defame E. Jean Carroll and to question the jury, a jury of his peers who found him liable for sexual abuse.

There was just an ugliness and rawness about that reaction that I think probably helps him in the primary.

But, God almighty, I hope it hurts him in the general, if he is indeed the Republican nominee, because that cannot be.

America cannot go down that road again.

AMNA NAWAZ: Is granting him a live platform a mistake or a bad idea?

DAVID BROOKS: No, I don't think so.

He's in -- Washington Post poll, he has a healthy lead on Joe Biden.

By a huge margin, people prefer his economic policies to Joe Biden's.

He is the number one or two most important political figure in the country right now.

We in the media don't get decide who we cover.

Basically, the American people get to decide, and they did get to decide by their votes and their preferences in polling.

And so we cover major figures.

Now, there's ways to cover and ways not to cover, but, in my view, it would be disastrous if we appointed ourselves the censors or the determiners of who gets covered in this country.

And one of the reasons Donald Trump is popular is because people think people in our business are arrogant.

And, to me, that would be an arrogant move to say, no, we're just not going to cover that guy.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: I mean, let's be clear.

Donald Trump isn't popular because folks see that the media is arrogant.

Donald Trump is popular because he scratches that very raw, emotional and ugly itch that is there within the American -- within the American populace, where he -- if I read one more time of someone saying, I like Donald Trump because he says what we're thinking, if that's the case, then those are some really ugly thoughts.

AMNA NAWAZ: I know we're going to be talking about this for several months ahead, so I want to turn now to another looming issue, which is, of course, the talks over the debt ceiling.

There is no clear path in sight right now, but the talks do continue.

So do you at least take that as a sign of progress?

Is there going to be a deal in time?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I'm on the tippy bottom end of cautiously optimistic.

(LAUGHTER) AMNA NAWAZ: Tippy bottom is a new phrase, by the way.

(LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: And so, you know, they're talking.

The staffs are talking.

They postponed the meeting.

That suggests to me there is talking.

They seem to have some agreement at least what they're going to talk about, spending cuts and timing and things like that.

We have had dozens of debt ceiling crises - - or not crises, but where we had to raise a debt ceiling.

And in the majority of the recent ones, they attached some budget cuts to it or they attached some debt reduction.

And so -- and in every single one of those times, they did it without a crisis.

Now, clearly, it's a hairier situation than any of those dozens before.

But the fact that history suggests that they did it how many dozens of times without sending the country and the world into global chaos, that puts me at the tippy bottom.

AMNA NAWAZ: Is history a guide?

Are you at the tippy bottom of optimism?

Are you... JONATHAN CAPEHART: I think I'm there with David being optimistic that the staffs are meeting.

The staffs met on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday.

They met today.

And so if the staffs are meeting, then that's a great sign.

But this is one scary ride that we are on.

I don't see -- here's what I would love to see happen.

Great that the staffs are talking and that they're talking about budget cuts,but it has to be part of the appropriations process.

This needs to be twin -- dual-track, raise the debt ceiling cleanly, and then keep having those conversations about what those budget - - the spending cuts should be.

That's the way it should be done.

And my fingers are crossed that, in the end, we pull this plane out of the nosedive with an announcement that that's exactly what's going to happen.

AMNA NAWAZ: Is that enough for Speaker McCarthy?

He traded away a lot to get to the speakership.

Can he come back to this conference with anything short of a promise of spending cuts?

DAVID BROOKS: Oh, he's going to get spending cuts.

But the question is, how big will they be?

And if you look at what happened in '90, '93 '97, they did sort of that.

They said, we're going to raise the debt ceiling, but we're going to have a big omnibus bill.

And, in those cases, they actually got to a balanced budget we're not going to get to.

But he -- I think Biden administration knows they're going to have to cut some spending, as they should.

We're just spending too much money right now.

AMNA NAWAZ: So where do you hope this ends up now?

You think there's two paths ahead, and that's what -- that leaves both sides with a win they can walk away with?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: I said what I said.

(LAUGHTER) JONATHAN CAPEHART: Yes, the dual track gives each one -- gets to yes for each camp.

They just have to do it.

AMNA NAWAZ: OK, we will watch.

We will wait.

We will have you back and see if you're right.

(LAUGHTER) AMNA NAWAZ: That's the real test.

Jonathan Capehart, David Brooks, always good to see you.

Thank you.

DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thanks, Amna.

GEOFF BENNETT: You could be forgiven for not knowing about the new blockbuster film "Knightshade."

That's because it's a fictional film at the center of a new novel starring, or make that written by, Tom Hanks.

This is Hanks' first novel.

And, earlier this week, he talked with Jeffrey Brown in New York about it and his own love of making movies for our arts and culture series, Canvas.

TOM HANKS, Actor and Writer: I'm a schoolteacher.

JEFFREY BROWN: Take a blockbuster film, one starring, say, Tom Hanks.

TOM HANKS: Sometimes, I wonder, if I have changed so much, my wife is even going to recognize me whenever it is I get back to her.

JEFFREY BROWN: We know Hanks and perhaps the famous director, but what of all those names in the credits?

One day, Tom Hanks the author realized he had a story to tell about them.

TOM HANKS: My editor said: "You should write a novel next."

And I said: "You are right.

I should.

What should it be about?"

(LAUGHTER) TOM HANKS: And he said: "You live in a pretty rarefied world that would be an interesting thing to read about.

Everybody just assumes they like movies and they know how movies are made."

He said: "Well, and isn't that something to write about?"

And I said: "You are exactly right."

And right at that moment, the book landed in my head.

JEFFREY BROWN: The result?

The making of another major motion picture masterpiece, part send-up, all love letter to an industry.

Where does your ambition come to write a novel like that?

TOM HANKS: Well, I can't help it.

I wake up with stories in my head and I wake up with questions that I want to ask of people.

I know this is new to everybody.

JEFFREY BROWN: Hanks draws on what he knows from his storied career.

TOM HANKS: An excellent lawyer.

JEFFREY BROWN: Two-time Oscar winner for "Philadelphia" in 1993 and "Forrest Gump" 1993 a year later, some 100 films, from the youthful "Big," through "Saving Private Ryan," to, more recently, "A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood."

TOM HANKS: My neighbor.

JEFFREY BROWN: Which brought us together in 2019.

Hanks is a world-famous star, but one who loves the process and the stories of people behind it.

TOM HANKS: I do this thing.

Like, when I'm watching particularly an old movie, right, a movie made before 1959, and there's a crowd scene, and it takes place at night, and they shot it on the back lot at Paramount, OK?

JEFFREY BROWN: A place you are familiar with.

TOM HANKS: I am familiar with.

I shot "Bosom Buddies" on the back lot of Paramount.

See, it's all perfectly normal.

If there is a taxi and a bus and pedestrians, every single one of those people showed up from their apartments, their houses.

JEFFREY BROWN: They had to get there.

(CROSSTALK) TOM HANKS: Had to get there.

They had to be put in wardrobe.

They had to be told what to do.

They had to stand around and wait.

They had to drive on the thing.

They had to do all this stuff.

And at the beginning of every shot, there is a moment of controlled chaos.

Quiet, quiet, quiet.

We're rolling, we're rolling, we're rolling.

Background, and action.

That has gone into every single shot in motion picture history.

The mechanics of that, to me, is as fascinating as those kind of like documentaries of how it is made.

How is it made?

Well, it's made very -- over a long haul with very particular tasks that have to be solved.

JEFFREY BROWN: The novel follows the making of the making of a film in 2020 filled with rich characters, including director Bill Johnson, chapter headings direct from the film process itself, even pages from the fictional screenplay.

But Hanks goes further to give us a big story that begins in 1946 and a made-up comic book which would lead to the made-up film decades later.

TOM HANKS: Comic books were the original versions of storyboards for motion pictures, so that now, when you read storyboards for movies... JEFFREY BROWN: Oh, you see it that way, of course, right.

TOM HANKS: Yes.

Yes, exactly, and particularly the comic book at the end.

This would literally be like these storyboards that you would see closeups of eyes, something like that, somebody floating up like that.

The script gives you a description of what you're going to see, but the storyboards are actually what you are going to see.

JEFFREY BROWN: And a novel is a form of telling us how that works.

TOM HANKS: Exactly.

Yes.

JEFFREY BROWN: In 2017, Hanks published a book of short stories titled "Uncommon Type."

We spoke then about the move to fiction, and now, with the more ambitious storytelling of a novel, about how it differs from his work in film.

As novelist, you are the storyteller.

TOM HANKS: A novelist, I get to do the whole shebang, and I get to get into the heads of the people and the motivations of the people and the weaknesses of the people, as well as the strengths.

A lot of time, actors are given way too much credit for the end result of the movie that they are in.

But, in fact, we shot that one day.

I mean, we twisted ourselves in a knot in order to give unto the camera something that was ephemeral only and logical only unto ourselves.

And then a director and a screenwriter and an editor and a whole phalanx of people ended up taking that and sometimes twisting it around just enough, moving it around, so it becomes something a little different than what you brought to it.

And I could walk you through any of the movies that I have been in, in which, on the day that I shot it, I was just trying to carry an idea from one room into the next.

But in the final moment of the film, with the rest of the story, with the other performances, with the cut, with the score, it has become a much, much, much more important building block in the movie than I ever anticipated.

JEFFREY BROWN: The making of a movie, as we see in your novel, looks like a series of plans and then accidents, right... (LAUGHTER) TOM HANKS: Yes.

JEFFREY BROWN: ... piled on top of each other.

When you look at the arc of a career, how much planned, how much accident, how much serendipity do you see?

TOM HANKS: Well, I'm going to say that, in the younger days, I actually thought there was a ton of stuff that you could control or you could make happen, that you could force, manifest into it, like, I'm going to wear it like this, I'm going to say it like this, and I'm going to make this decision, and this movie will impact that movie.

The fact is, you begin at square one every time.

Nothing you have done up to that point warrants anything that you can assume is going to be in the palm of your hand going into it.

You can only show up on time.

You can only know the text to the -- and I don't mean just your own dialogue.

I mean know the material that you're making.

JEFFREY BROWN: You still -- you really feel that?

I mean, after the success, Tom Hanks walks into -- and that says something?

TOM HANKS: I will tell you this.

Sometimes, there's a number of people that can walk in and allow the thing to be made in the first chance.

I'm going to -- I'm going to drop my own name like I'm a big shot.

JEFFREY BROWN: OK. TOM HANKS: OK.

They get in and say, we got Hanks.

JEFFREY BROWN: Right.

TOM HANKS: So, therefore, we're going to get our -- we will get our financing.

Why?

Because we got Hanks.

We're OK. We got Hanks.

And then I show up and we start... JEFFREY BROWN: That's how I'm feeling right now.

TOM HANKS: OK.

I'm glad.

JEFFREY BROWN: I got Hanks.

Yes.

Yes.

TOM HANKS: OK.

But then, once you start doing that, you realize that, well, you got the financing, but that doesn't guarantee you the output.

It doesn't necessarily warrant the theme of the movie that you make is good enough in order to withstand people's attention for two and half-hours, better about 110 minutes.

(LAUGHTER) TOM HANKS: I find the 110-minute movie is an awfully good movie, just under two hours.

JEFFREY BROWN: You planning to keep writing?

TOM HANKS: Oh, yes, yes.

I can -- yes.

I don't know what, but I like to consider myself to be a writer with a day job.

(LAUGHTER) TOM HANKS: And the day job is pretty glamorous sometimes.

Where are you?

ACTOR: Asteroid City.

JEFFREY BROWN: Tom Hanks returns to his day job in June in the film "Asteroid City."

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Jeffrey Brown in New York.

AMNA NAWAZ: And there is much more online, where Tom Hanks talks about the writers strike and the changing economics of his industry.

You can see that on our YouTube page.

GEOFF BENNETT: And don't forget to watch "Washington Week," moderated tonight by our own colleague Laura Barron-Lopez.

That's right here on PBS.

AMNA NAWAZ: And tune in to "PBS News Weekend" tomorrow for a look at what's led to a devastatingly poor citrus harvest in Florida.

And, meantime, that is the "NewsHour" for tonight.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

GEOFF BENNETT: And I'm Geoff Bennett.

Have a great weekend.