GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On the "News Hour" tonight: The Supreme Court# hears President Trump's challenge to birthright## citizenship and his effort to restrain# lower court judges who block his policies.

GEOFF BENNETT: Ukrainian and Russian officials# prepare to meet in Turkey for peace talks,## but who will and will not be at the# meeting raises questions about whether## Russia is serious about making a deal.

AMNA NAWAZ: And a federal judge whose## son was murdered speaks out about# increasing threats to judges.

JUDGE ESTHER SALAS, U.S. District Court of New# Jersey: There are severe consequences to the## type of rhetoric that is being used.

And I fear# for the safety of judges and their families.

(BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Welcome to the "News Hour."

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court## heard arguments in one of the most consequential# cases of the year, the ability for President## Trump to carry out his executive order# ending birthright citizenship.

That's the## constitutionally protected right of citizenship# for those born in the United States regardless of## their parents' nationality or immigration status.

GEOFF BENNETT: The central question in this case,## though, is the limits of judicial power, namely# universal injunctions which allow a federal judge## to issue a nationwide block to executive orders.

In recent months, several district court judges## have used nationwide injunctions to pause a# number of the Trump administration's policies,## including an executive order which seeks# to end birthright citizenship.

Today,## the government argued those judges are# overstepping their constitutional authority.

Earlier, President Trump weighed in, posting on# social media -- quote -- "Birthright citizenship## is about the babies of slaves and it had# nothing to do with illegal immigration## for people wanting to scam our country."

We will sort that out in a moment.

But,## outside the court today, a group of attorneys# general who are challenging the president's## order said the question of birthright# citizenship has long been settled.

MATTHEW PLATKIN (D), New Jersey Attorney# General: A hundred and fifty-seven years ago,## we came together as a nation post-Civil War and# sa.. babies born on American soil are entitled# to the rights and privileges of American## citizenship.

And contrary to what the United# States is saying, citizenship doesn't turn## on or turn off when you cross state lines.

GEOFF BENNETT: And joining us now to discuss## today's arguments are Amanda Frost, professor# of immigration and citizenship law at the## University of Virginia, and Amy Howe, co-founder# of SCOTUSblog and our new Supreme Court analyst## here at the "News Hour."

Welcome to you both.

And, Amy, it's great to have you# here officially in your new role.

AMY HOWE: Thanks very much.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, several## justices today underscored the fact that the# focus of today's arguments wasn't r.. the merits of the case, but rather on nationwide# injunctions.

What's your sense of why that was## the government's focus and strategy?

AMY HOWE: I think the government## was trying to isolate this.

This is an issue that has been the bane of## both Democratic and Republican administrations,# as the Trump solicitor general, D. John Sauer,## said in his presentation to the justices.

This# is a bipartisan issue.

And it has -- the issue## of universal injunctions has really stopped the# Trump administration from being able to implement## a variety of policies and orders since the start# of the Trump administration on January 20.

And they really wanted the justices to# focus on these universal injunctions,## including because in recent years several justices# have expressed skepticism about the propriety## of universal injunctions and suggested# that the courts should weigh in on them.

GEOFF BENNETT: On that point, the fact that this# has been debated, how much power federal judges## should have to block controversial White House# policies nationwide, how sympathetic were the## justices to this idea that these injunctions# are a problem for the rule of law at large?

AMANDA FROST, University of Virginia School# of Law: Yes, so I think the justices,## many of whom have had experience in the executive# branch themselves and previous admi.. are generally looking to try to limit or restrict# nationwide injunctions.

They don't like the fact## that a democratically elected president# sees their policies stymied or stopped in## their tracks by a single district court judge.

Justice Alito mentioned being concerned about 680## district court judges across the nation having# this power, and he said they can get it wrong.## But on the flip side, they're dealing with a# president that has unilaterally rewritten the## law through executive order, or tried to,# and the birthright citizenship executive## order is a perfect example of that.

GEOFF BENNETT: And the premise of the## government's argument was really picked apart by# the liberal wing of the court.

Justice Jackson## addressed the U.S. solicitor general and# warned that if the Supreme Court were to## narrow the scope of nationwide injunctions, it# could effectively permit the administration to## carry out unlawful actions while leaving# individuals without meaningful recourse.

Take a listen.

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON,## U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice: The real# concern, I think, .. to turn our justice system, in my view at least,# into a catch me if you can kind of regime from the## standpoint of the executive, where everybody has# to have a lawyer and file a lawsuit in order for## the government to stop violating people's rights.

And I don't understand how that is remotely## consistent with the rule of law.

GEOFF BENNETT: How did that land?

AMY HOWE: It landed -- I think, it was something# that the other justices picked up on, some of the## other liberal justices.

But some of the other# justices, some of the conservative justices,## were also expressing concern about --# even though this was ostensibly a case## about universal injunctions about the merits of# Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship## and whether or not this was something that the# justices were going to have to weigh in on either## in this dispute or in a future dispute.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, for example, said,## how can we get to this issue expeditiously?

GEOFF BENNETT: And on the specific issue of## whether it's practical to end birthright# citizenship, a lot of people are focused on## what conservative Justice Brett# Kavanaugh said.

Here he is.

BRETT KAVANAUGH, U.S. Supreme Court Associate# Justice: On the day after it goes into## effect -- this is just a very practical question# on how is it going to work -- what do hospitals do## with a newborn?

What do states do with a newborn?

GEOFF BENNETT: So how did the## government answer that question?

AMANDA FROST: I thought the government answered## that question very poorly, and I was surprised, in# fact, that they had almost no answer to how they## were going to implement this executive order.

And if they win this case in the Supreme Court,## 30 days from now, that order would go into# effect.

There's 3.6 million children born## in the United States every year, and every# single one of those families would have to## find a way to prove their child's citizenship# when the birth certificate alone showing## proof of birth in the U.S. no longer suffices.

I was really shocked they didn't have an answer,## and it played well into the hands of the# plaintiffs, who were saying there's going## to be chaos if you let this executive order go# into effect while the case is pending.

That's the## key.

What happens while the case is pending before# the Supreme Court rules?

That could be at least a## year, and the idea that it would go into effect# without any plan about how to implement it is a## huge problem for the administration.

GEOFF BENNETT: What struck you## about the line of questioning there?

AMY HOWE: I think exactly the same thing.

I think that the justices really were having# a hard time -- even though this was ostensibly## an argument about universal injunctions, were# really having a hard time separating the two.## And a lot of them, I think, may have gone in# sort of predisposed, or at least when they## agreed to take up the case, predisposed to the# idea that they disliked universal injunctions.

And particularly in the context of this case, and# as the question from Justice Kavanaugh suggested,## when you're talking about birthright# citizenship and maybe talking about## universal injunctions more broadly, it's# maybe not quite as simple as they thought.

GEOFF BENNETT: The fact that the president,# the administration is spearheading this effort## to end birthright citizenship, we can't# lose sight of how really seismic that is.

AMANDA FROST: Yes.

I mean, this is -- birthright## citizenship was intended to overrule Dred Scott# which said no Black person could be a cit.. and integrate the children of immigrants into our# society, ensure their citizenship.

That's what the## Reconstruction Congress said.

So, if you're# an originalist, you should be all in on the## idea of near universal birthright citizenship.

And it's been basically unquestioned for over a## century.

And to have a president# declare by executive order that## he can rewrite it, I mean, that is seismic.

GEOFF BENNETT: Amy, what's the timeline here?

AMY HOWE: It's hard to say exactly what the# timeline is.

A couple of years ago, the Supreme## Court heard arguments on two other cases that# came up on the emergency docket involving the## Biden administration vaccine mandates and issued# decisions in those in just a couple of days.

On the other hand, they have also taken# a couple of months to act on an emergency## application involving an EPA rule.

What we do# know is that the justices will almost certainly## take their summer recess at the end of June or# the beginning of July, and I would expect them## to have resolved this by then.

GEOFF BENNETT: Amy Howe, Amanda## Frost, our thanks to you both.

AMANDA FROST: Thanks.

AMY HOWE: Thank you.

AMANDA FROST: Thanks for having us.

GEOFF BENNETT: Online, you can watch our in-depth# report abo.. citizenship and the 1898 Supreme Court case that# confirmed the current legal precedent.

That's at## PBS.org/NewsHour.

AMNA NAWAZ:## President Trump continued his tour# of the Middle East today with a trip## to the United Arab Emirates.

The# Gulf nation promised significant## investment in the U.S. and partnership# on A.I.

technology and infrastructure.

Nick Schifrin has that story.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Tonight in Abu Dhabi,## the carpet is gray, and the fans were adoring for# the president's third state visit in three days,## full of pomp and circumstance.

The Emirates' first astronaut gave## President Trump a tour of the presidential palace# before the UAE bestowed on President Trump its## National Medal of Honor, and President# Mohammed bin Zayed promised to invest## $1.4 trillion in the U.S. in the next 10 years.

MOHAMMED BIN ZAYED AL NAHYAN, United Arab## Emirates President (through translator):# This partnership has taken a significant## leap forward since you have taken office.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: I## know you will never leave my side.

I# know that.

And you know the special## relationship that we have in our country# has.

So our country's back with you.

This is an incredible culture.

That, I can say.

NICK SCHIFRIN: All week, President Trump has## been showered with the Gulf monarchy's# economic and cultural riches, today,## the Grand Mosque.

And in return, President Trump# has endorsed Gulf priorities, including making a## diplomatic deal over Iranian nuclear enrichment.

DONALD TRUMP: Iran has sort of agreed to the## terms.

They're not going to make out, I call it# in a friendly way, nuclear dust.

We're not going## to be making any nuclear dust in Iran.

And# we have been strong.

I want them to succeed.## I want them to end up being a great country.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Today's agreements also include## a U.S. commitment to share A.I.

technology# with the Emirates and for the Emirates to## turn away from Chinese technology.

And# President Trump promised the Gulf the## American military assistance it desires.

DONALD TRUMP: As president, my priority## is to end conflicts, not start them.

But# I will never hesitate to wield American## power if it's necessary to defend the United# States of America or our partners.

And this## is one of our great partners right here.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But what the president could## not accomplish on this trip, a breakthrough# over the war in Ukraine after Russia sent a## lower-level delegation to peace talks that were# supposed to have been with President Zelenskyy.

DONALD TRUMP: I'm not disappointed.

Why would# I be disappointed?

We just took in $4 trillion.## And he says that you're disappointed about a# delegation.

I know nothing about a delegation.## I haven't even checked.

Look, nothing's going# to happen until Putin and I get together, OK?

NICK SCHIFRIN: It's not clear the timing# for that possible Trump-Putin meeting,## but Secretary of State and interim# National Security Adviser Marco Rubio said## it will be determined after the president returns# to Washington late tomorrow and, Amna, after## tomorrow's talks between Russia and Ukraine.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, Nick, we expected those talks## today.

Tell us more about what happened# there and also what each side is saying## ahead of their meeting tomorrow.

NICK SCHIFRIN: It was a bit of a## diplomatic dust-up today in Turkey.

The# Ukrainian and Russian delegations landed## in different cities.

The Russian delegation# ended up waiting in Istanbul for a Ukrainian## delegation that didn't even show up.

And the two delegations were really## lopsided.

Zelenskyy was there in Turkey with# his most senior aides, but Putin was a no-show## and sent relatively mid-level officials,# what Zelenskyy called a decorative group.

Despite all that, tomorrow, Turkey will host# the first face-to-face meeting between Russia## and Ukraine in some three years, since 2022.# But, as we heard there, President Trump said## the deal was only possible if he and President# Putin sat in the same room.

And today, we heard## that echoed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. Secretary of State: We don't## have high expectations of what will happen# tomorrow.

And, frankly, at this point,## I think it's abundantly clear that the only# way we're going to have a breakthrough here## is between President Trump and President# Putin.

It's going to require that level of## engagement to have a breakthrough in this matter.

I don't think anything productive is actually## going to happen from this point forward until they# engage in a very frank and direct conversation,## which I know President Trump is willing to do.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Now, as for the substance of## tomorrow, Russia continued its maximalist# stance.

We heard from the Foreign Ministry## in Moscow today tying Russian military gains# in Ukraine with their diplomatic demands on the## table.

And the chief Russian negotiator# said today that Ukraine needed to solve## the -- quote -- "root causes" of the war.

And Russia has defined that as capping the## size of Ukraine's military, Ukraine's# ability to get Western support, et al,## but also the presence of U.S. and NATO troops in# Eastern Europe.

All of that is dead on a rival## for Ukraine and the West.

And that led Zelenskyy# today to question Russia's commitment to peace.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, Ukrainian President (through# translator): Russia must demonstrate something,## either a high level of delegation or a level of# leaders or some decisions, something.

If there is## no such demonstration, it means that Russia is# not ready to talk about the end of the war and## to make a decision.

It means that there is not# enough political will and it means that Russia## does not feel it means to end this war.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And the fact is, Amna,## it does not appear that## Russia feels the need to end this war... NICK SCHIFRIN: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ:## We start the day's other headlines with# the impact of President Trump's tariffs.

The nation's largest retailer, Walmart, is# planning to raise prices in the coming weeks,## citing Trump's policies as a driving# factor.

Walmart's head said today## that -- quote -- "Given the magnitude of the# tariffs, we aren't able to absorb all the pressure## given the reality of narrow retail margins."

Walmart posted strong quarterly sales today, but## declined to give a profit outlook due to ongoing# economic uncertainty.

In the meantime, consumers## are growing increasingly uneasy.

New government# data shows that the pace of retail sales slowed## sharply in April from the month before.

A judge in Wisconsin pleaded not guilty## today to federal charges over accusations she# helped a man evade federal immigration agents.## Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan# allegedly escorted the person out the back door## of her courtroom last month as agents sought# his arrest for being in the U.S. illegally.

MAN: Get angry, get loud.

(CHEERING) AMNA NAWAZ: Dozens of demonstrators gathered# outside the courthouse ahead of today's## hearing.

Dugan's arrest has been a flash point# in the broader tensions over President Trump's## sweeping immigration crackdown.

She could# face up to six years in prison if convicted.

A federal judge has dismissed charges against# dozens of migrants who'd been detained for## trespassing in a newly designated militarized zone# at the southern border.

The Trump administration## recently transferred oversight of a 180-mile strip# of land in New Mexico to the military.

Entering## the area unauthorized carries a potential# sentence of at least a year in prison.

But, today, a U.S. district court judge ruled that# the government had provided -- quote -- "no facts## from which one could reasonably conclude# that the defendant knew he was entering## the zone."

The migrants could still face# other misdemeanor charges and deportation.

Turning overseas, Israeli airstrikes killed dozens# of people across Gaza overnight and into today.## Hospital officials in the southern city of Khan# Yunis say at least 54 people were killed in a## series of attacks, while, in the north,# explosions reverberated in Jabalia, where## Gaza's civil defense says 13 people were killed.

It all comes on the anniversary of the Nakba,## Arabic for catastrophe, when in 1948 hundreds# of thousands of Palestinians were forcibly## displaced from what is now Israel.

One# woman who lived through that experience## says today's violence is even worse.

GHALIA ABU MOTEIR, Displaced Palestinian## (through translator): Today, we're in a bigger# nakba than the Nakba we saw before.

We are not## living.

There is no life, no children,# no people, no food or drink.

How long## must we remain like this?

Where can we go?

AMNA NAWAZ: Today, U.S. Secretary of State## Marco Rubio told reporters he is troubled by the# humanitarian situation in Gaza.

He also spoke with## Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who# earlier this week vowed to -- quote -- "complete## the mission" by destroying Hamas.

Back here at home, Florida Governor## Ron DeSantis signed a measure today that# blocks local governments in the state from## adding fluoride to their water.

During a bill# signing event in Dade City, DeSantis said that## forcing the mineral into the water supply is# -- quote -- "basically forced medication."

Florida is now the second state to implement such# a ban after Utah.

State lawmakers approved the## bill last month, despite concerns from dentists# and public health advocates, who say it could## have long-lasting health consequences.# Florida's ban takes effect on July 1.

On Wall Street today, stocks drifted a bit# following the latest economic reports.

The Dow## Jones industrial average added about 270 points# on the day.

The Nasdaq gave back some ground## after recent gains, losing more than 30 points.# The S&P 500 rose for a fourth straight day.

One of the architects of America's hydrogen bomb# has died.

Richard Garwin was only 23 when he built## the world's first fusion bomb.

He later advocated# for arms control, worked on early technologies## that led to things like touch screen monitors,# and advised presidents from Eisenhower to Obama.## In the fall of 2016, it was Obama who awarded# him the Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest## civilian award.

Richard Garwin was 97 years old.

And a discovery of note.

Historians at Harvard## University say a document in their archives# long believed to be a copy of the Magna Carta## is actually one of the earliest versions of# the medieval text dating back to the year## 1300.

The university purchased the tattered# piece of parchment in 1946 for less than $30,## which would be about $500 today.

It# was wrongly cataloged at the time.

After coming across it on the law school library's# Web site, professors noticed the smallest of## details, certain letters capitalized, quirks# in penmanship, and realized what they'd found.

DAVID CARPENTER, Professor, King's College# London: They bought it for peanuts in 1946## from an auctioneer, Sweet & Maxwell, who equally# seemed to have no idea what it was.

Harvard Law## School have indeed, unbeknownst to them,# got an original of the 1300 Magna Carta,## an original, therefore, of one of the most famous# documents in world constitutional history.

AMNA NAWAZ: Until now, there were only six# known editions of the 1300 Magna Carta issued## by Britain's King Edward I.

The document was first# issued in 1215 and established the principle of## the law of the land, which influenced the framers# of the U.S. Constitution, among many others.

Harvard estimates their version is worth millions# of dollars, but has no plans to sell it.

Still to come on the "News Hour": we examine# the causes behind a significant drop in## opioid overdose deaths; retired Army General# Stanley McChrystal discusses his new book,## "On Character"; and one chef leads# the movement to bring traditional## Lao food to diners across the country.

President Trump's frustration with the## judicial branch has only grown since he reentered# the White House, and many of his policy priorities## have been slowed down or blocked in courts.

Mr. Trump and members of his administration## have been openly critical of some judges,# calling them radical, lunatics or lawless,## and suggesting some should be impeached.# A recent report from the Global Project## Against Hate and Extremism found -- quote --# "Violent threats and calls for impeachment## against judges have risen by an alarming 327# percent between May of 2024 and March of 2025."

Yesterday, leadership from the Judicial# Conference -- that's the policymaking## group of federal judges -- testified# on Capitol Hill, seeking a nearly## 20 percent budget increase for security measures.

One federal judge knows how real the threat of## violence can be.

Nearly five years ago, Judge# Esther Salas' husband was shot and her son,## Daniel, was killed by a disgruntled lawyer# posing as a delivery driver at her home,## according to police.

Judge Salas from the U.S.## District Court of New Jersey joins me now.

Judge, welcome to the "News Hour," and thank## you so much for making the time to join us.

JUDGE ESTHER SALAS, U.S. District Court of## New Jersey: Thank you for having me, Amna.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, since these incidents began,## we should note that you have been meeting with# the U.S.

Marshals Service.

You just met with them## today, in fact.

What can you tell us about# that meeting and whether you think they're## doing enough to keep you and other judges safe.

JUDGE ESTHER SALAS: Well, I want to start with## the last question, and that's yes.

I think they# are doing all that they can do to keep up with## the onslaught of attacks against the judiciary.

I did meet with representatives today.

The meeting## went well.

And I can tell you that they have# confirmed for me what I have known for some time,## which is that there are over 100 pizzas# that have been delivered to judges,## judges' children.

And now, recently, they're# sending pizzas to judges, their children,## and utilizing my murdered son's name.

They're# weaponizing my child's name to really impact fear## on judges all throughout this country.

AMNA NAWAZ: You're, of course, referencing## the spate of recent anonymous pizza deliveries# to judges that we have seen, as you mentioned,## many of them using your late son's name.

And we should tell folks Congress passed## a law in your late son's name that was# supposed to help judges remove personal## information from online like home addresses# and phone numbers and such.

The fact that## these deliveries are happening in this way,# does that say to you the law is not working?

JUDGE ESTHER SALAS: No, what it says# to me is that the law is working,## but we have to remember what the Anderl Act does.

The Anderl Act protects judges, federal judges,## and shields their personally identifiable# information on federal Web sites.

The problem## we have right now is, many states have not# enacted state laws that would serve as belt and## suspenders to the federal law.

So a lot of this# information is accessible on state Web sites.

So what we need to do is have state -- the# states and the federal government coordinate,## so that we can shield the very information that is# now used -- that the bad actors are utilizing to## inflict psychological warfare on judges.

AMNA NAWAZ: You know, there are some who## will look at this and say, how threatening# is it to have a pizza show up at your door?## Why is that considered a threat and not# a prank?

What would you say to that?

JUDGE ESTHER SALAS: I would say to# those people that this is not a prank.

This is certain bad actors that you send a pizza# to a judge, it says, we know where you live.

You## send a pizza to a judge's child, you're saying# to that judge, we know where your child lives.## You send a pizza to a judge or that judge's# child in my murdered son's name, and it says,## do you want to end up like Daniel Anderl?# Do you want to end up like Judge Salas?

Those are acts of intimidation.

This is# a concerted effort by a few bad actors## to attempt to intimidate the judges.

This is# serious.

This needs to be taken very seriously## by our government.

And we need to know that# the investigation will be supported and that## we are supported by this administration and# supported by the Department of Justice.

In today's environment, with this inflammatory# rhetoric that is being used against judges,## it isn't helping the situation.

I think# it is only exacerbating the situation.

AMNA NAWAZ: Judge Salas, you mentioned# that rhetoric.

Much of that has come from## President Trump himself attacking individual# judges, calling for them to be impeached.

The White House would argue the president has# the right to say he disagrees with the judge## if they rule in a way that's not favorable# to him.

And Chief Justice John Roberts has## even said some criticism is OK, as long# as you're not attacking judges.

What do## you make of that and where that line is,# especially when it comes to the president?

JUDGE ESTHER SALAS: I have absolutely no# problem with anyone in the administration,## anyone in a position of power, anyone with a# large media platform criticizing our rulings,## absolutely no problem with that.

What I have is when they begin to## really accuse us of being partisan and# there is no basis for that accusation,## when they use inflammatory rhetoric like calling# us rogue judges or calling us crazy leftist## unconstitutional judges.

That's not responsible# leading.

That is language that is irresponsible.

And when our leaders lead by using inflammatory# rhetoric, they are inviting people to do us harm.## And we have to remember, we have to remember that# lives are at stake.

I don't have my son anymore.## My son is no longer on earth, my only child.

I can tell you right now, there are severe## consequences to the type of rhetoric that# is being used.

And I fear for the safety## of judges and their families.

And I fear# for our nation if we allow this conduct to## continue to go unchecked, with civility and# professionalism and agreement to disagree.

But let's bring it back to the merits# of an issue, instead of bringing it to## personal attacks.

That's all we're asking.

AMNA NAWAZ: That is Judge Esther Salas from## the U.S. District Court of New Jersey.

Judge Salas, thank you so much for your## time.

We really appreciate it.

JUDGE ESTHER SALAS: Thank you## very much, and have a good day.

GEOFF BENNETT: Drug overdose deaths## in the U.S. last year plunged to their lowest# annual level since 2019, or before the pandemic.## That's according to CDC data published yesterday.

Our John Yang joins us now with more -- John.

JOHN YANG: Geoff, the numbers show that,# in 2024, nationwide overdose deaths fell## by nearly 30,000 from the year before.# That's a drop of about 27 percent.

There## were declines across all major categories of# drug use, including opioids, the source of most## overdose deaths in the past decade.

Brian Mann reports on issues## related to addiction for NPR.

Brian, how big a deal is this?

BRIAN MANN, National Addiction Correspondent,# National Public Radio: This is the most## dramatic thing we have seen real.. 27 percent drop in deaths, it's unprecedented.

The researchers I talked to say it's so vast## that there's a real mystery here about why it's# improving so quickly.

It's also continuing.

We## have now seen about 16 months in a row where these# dramatic improvements have continued.

And so,## after years of a really apocalyptic situation# with fentanyl and other street drugs,## we finally have some truly good news here.

JOHN YANG: What are the factors that brought## this about?

What do people credit for this?

BRIAN MANN: You know, again, it's -- one of## the things that's fascinating as a reporter# covering this is that there is uncertainty## there.

There is a mystery at the heart of this.

But people point in part to the huge public## health response that expanded under the# Biden administration.

We really started## to see the numbers coming down as early in some# places as 2021.

Also, street fentanyl appears## to be getting weaker in many areas, which is a# phenomenon that people are trying to understand.

I want to mention one sad piece of this,# that there's been so much death over the## last five years.

Hundreds of thousands of# people in the U.S. have already succumbed## to fentanyl and other street drugs.

Many of# the most vulnerable people are already gone.

JOHN YANG: The numbers came out from the CDC# even as HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. was## on the Hill talking about cutting federal health# programs, House Republicans were working on plans## to cut Medicaid.

BRIAN MANN: Yes.

JOHN YANG: Are there concerns?

The people you# talk to, the experts you talk to, are th.. concerned that this trend may be reversed?

BRIAN MANN: I think there's real fear.

I talk to researchers, I talk to front-line# physicians, people who are trying to save lives,## and they point to Medicaid, the source of the# largest single stream of funding for insurance## for people struggling with addiction, programs# that have been trying to research addiction,## and what the new deadly drugs are that# are appearing on the streets, right?

There are these new synthetic drugs popping up# all the time.

Fentanyl is kind of almost old## news now.

And if we lose the ability to track# these new drugs, we could be flying blind.## There's also just kind of discussion of chaos,# the same thing that we sometimes hear around## tariffs.

Like, are they on, are they off?

Well, the magnitude of cuts that are being## proposed here, they're really sending shockwaves.# People don't know how to start new programs,## whether they should continue programs.

So, yes,# at a time when there's all this good news, a lot## of people are saying, if it ain't broke, why are# we upending everything like this?

And I think that## will be a big part of the debate we're hearing# on Capitol Hill as these budgets are debated.

JOHN YANG: Is drug use declining,# or is it just less lethal?

BRIAN MANN: Among young people, drug use is down# dramatically.

I think it's important to say that## a lot of people who are surviving are still# very ill.

They're still very deeply addicted.

Survival, however -- and, again, this is# important to point to the good news here.## The longer people survive in severe addiction,# the better chance they have of recovering.

And## even if they're still on dangerous# drugs like methamphetamines or fentanyl,## if we're keeping them alive, there's a shot that# they're going to heal and really get better.

And, in fact -- this is important for# people to know -- most people do eventually## get better if we keep them alive.

JOHN YANG: And there's been a trend in## caring for addict -- for addiction, treating it,# managing it as a disease, rather than a failure,## a moral failure.

Has that helped?

BRIAN MANN: I think there are people## who are working on the front lines of this# that say the public health response has been## revolutionary.

It's been crucial to helping# bring these numbers down.

It's probably not## the whole picture, but it's a big factor.

And one thing that we really could be seeing## right now with the Trump administration's policies# is a shift back towards the drug war, back towards## targeting the drug cartels with a really militant# -- possibly even including boots on the ground in## Mexico is something that's been talked about.

And so that's going to be an interesting thing## over the next four years.

Do we see that public# health response continue, or do we see a shift## back towards policing and big drug busts?

JOHN YANG: And what are some of the## other public health changes that are# responsible for this, do you think?

BRIAN MANN: I think getting -- the big# one is naloxone and Narcan.

There's this## medication that gets into the community# where people can literally reverse a## fentanyl overdose or an opioid overdose.

Before that was there, people just died.## And now even many of the people in severe# addiction that I talk to, they carry this## and they use together -- and, again, I don't want# to say this is a happy outcome.

People are still## severely addicted, but they have learned how# to survive to use that kind of medication.

It is also true that there are better and better# medical care responses here, buprenorphine,## methadone.

These are medications that really# do help people recover long term.

And I think## there's a big push that's happened over the# past two or three years to get more people## onto that kind of advanced health care.

We're going to have to see whether the## funding remains going forward for more and more# people to get into long-term medical recovery.

JOHN YANG: Brian Mann of# NPR, thank you very much.

BRIAN MANN: Thanks for having me.

AMNA NAWAZ:## General Stanley McChrystal was the top# commander of American and international## forces in Afghanistan in 2009,# when his career was cut short.

An article in "Rolling Stone" quoted# him and his aides making candid,## yet disparaging remarks about President Obama and# Vice President Biden.

McChrystal resigned after## 35 years in the Army.

Among the units he led in# that career, the Joint Special Operations Command,## which hunted down al-Qaida in Iraq when the# United States was bogged down in that war.

He now has his own consulting firm# and is the author of a new book,## "On Character: Choices That Define a Life."

I spoke with him earlier this week and began## by asking him about the current leadership at# the Pentagon and the controversy around Defense## Secretary Hegseth's sharing of classified# information on a commercial messaging app.

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL (RET.

), U.S.# Army: Well, like most Americans,## I'm concerned about the Department of Defense# because it's res..

If I look at something like Signalgate, as# we will call it, mistakes get made.

To me,## that came across as people acting in an immaturish# fashion.

And they make a mistake and you move on.## But you accept responsibility for that mistake.

And what bothered me most about that particular## incident was the days after, when professionals# who were involved in that went in front of## television and I think some testified in front# of Congress and they claimed that the information## was not classified.

And they know better.

AMNA NAWAZ: And what's the impact of that?## I mean, I have had several conversations with# people who've said, had it been anyone else## in the military, obviously lower ranking than the# secretary of defense, had they done what Secretary## Hegseth did, there would be consequences.

The fact that there were none,## what message does that send?

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL (RET.

): I fear## that it sends a lack of seriousness.

I think that# somebody junior would have been held to account,## and most people junior believe they# would have been held to account.

And so I think the nation needs to have# confidence that we are going to fix the## mistakes we will make, for sure.

And so,# going forward, I think it's critical that## we establish that culture of accountability.

AMNA NAWAZ: After you assumed command of the## U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan, you# issued guidance that would reduce the number of## civilian casualties.

That was a priority for you.

One source that we spoke to who studies this said,## the casualties from airstrikes dropped 60 percent# because of the policies and the protocols that you## put into place.

There are now civilian harm# mitigation teams at every combatant command.## What do you make now of the decision by this# administration to stop funding those teams?## What will happen as a result of that?

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL (RET.

): I think## it will turn out to be something we# need to refund again in the future,## because we relearn a lot of lessons.

In Afghanistan, when we made that decision and## we worked very hard to reduce civilian casualties,# it wasn't just because we were nice people or that## it was the morally right thing to do, which it# was.

We did it because we judged that the only## way we could succeed in that effort was to win# the support of the population.

And you don't win## the support of the population by killing them.

AMNA NAWAZ: Back here at home, I should note, you## spend a good part of the book on Gettysburg, about# this place that clearly holds a special resonance## for you, why it matters today in particular.

And you write in the book: "We must remember## Gettysburg and why it happened.

The veneer of# unity and civilization we take for granted is## too familiar to feel fragile, yet North and# South toward each other less than a century## after uniting to create a nation.# Of course it could happen again."

You're saying of course it could happen again.# Are you worried about that level of violence in## America because of our divisions today?

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL (RET.

): I am.

And I worry that we sometimes talk about# those things sort of lightly.

We say we## have big divisions, people don't like each other,# there's a lots of guns in society and different## militias and whatnot, and we just assume# that nothing like that could repeat itself.

But, on a small level, it could do it tomorrow.# On a large level, it could do it very easily.## And if we look at other nations, civilized nations# that have had significant problems, when Germany## descended into Nazi rule, when the United States# broke into civil war, I think we need to pay## attention, and we need to act with the kind of# seriousness that the current divisions represent.

AMNA NAWAZ: You know, when you talk# about the politics of this moment,## you also reference leaders who easily# lie, some acting with craven opportunism,## debasing themselves for political success.

I'm# paraphrasing some of your descriptions here.

But, General, you never name names.

You're never# specific with some of those allegations.

So,## if you're talking about President Trump or others# around him, why not say who you're talking about?

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL (RET.

): As soon as# you mention any name, you lose half of the## American population.

They will literally turn# it off because they don't want to hear it.

If I talked about President Biden, and I think# that the people around him potentially didn't## represent his condition in the last year of office# completely honestly to the American people, that's## a disappointment.

If I do the same with people in# President Trump's circle on things that disappoint## me -- I think it's not limited to one party.

I think it starts with us as individuals,## but it is too broad for us to say# it's just those people, if we get## rid of those people, we will solve the problem.

AMNA NAWAZ: So much of the book is about country## and character, but there's some very personal# reflections in here as well.

There was one that## struck me in particular.

The amount of time# you spend talking about your granddaughters,## Emilu (ph), Elsie (ph), and Daisy (ph),# who you clearly adore, is wonderful.

But if there's an ounce of regret in the book,# it's a couple of lines you write about your son,## Sam.

You write: "I wasn't a great father.# In retrospect, I regret things I didn't do## as a father, but, thankfully, avoided doing many# things I would have regretted.

If I could do it## all again, I believe I would be a better father,# but I don't believe Sam could be a better son."

Why include that?

What would you do differently?

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL (RET.

): Well, I was very## focused on my career.

I didn't have a lot of# other hobbies, but, still, I didn't do many of the## things that other fathers did with their sons.

Then, I left for Afghanistan when my son -- right## before he graduated from high school.

I# essentially came back from Afghanistan,## Iraq and Afghanistan again, after he'd finished# college and had moved on.

And so I wasn't a lot## of things that my father had been to me.

Now, the beauty is, I get a second chance,## because my son lives next door to me now, along# with my granddaughters.

So, I see him every day.## We have a very close relationship.

But you# can't make up for things you didn't do.

AMNA NAWAZ: The book is "On Character:# Choices That Define a Life."

The author## is retired General Stanley McChrystal.

General, thank you so much for your## time.

It's a pleasure to speak with you.

GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL (RET.

): Amna, it was## my pleasure.

Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT:## Food can be a tangible and accessible way# to understand and connect with different## cultures.

One chef has led the movement to bring# traditional food from her home country of Laos## to diners across the country.

Laura Barron-Lopez reports for## our arts and culture series, Canvas.

SENG LUANGRATH, Executive Chef and Owner,## Thip Khao: Thank you so much for coming in.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: For chef Seng Luangrath## dinner here at her Thip Khao# restaurant in Washington,## D.C., is about more than the food.

SENG LUANGRATH: I saw you order (INAUDIBLE).## I was like, ooh, I got to go to that table.

MAN: It's amazing.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: It's a chance to highlight# the rich heritage and culinary artistry of Laos,## a country she fled in 1981 at age 12# with her mother, uncle, and two brothers,## after her father was taken to a labor camp.

SENG LUANGRATH: We have to cross the Mekong## River at 3:00 in the morning through a# small, tiny boat.

Then we have to walk## about our chest height of water to the# other side of the riverbank in Thailand.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Some 300,000 people fled the# landlocked country in the years after 1975.

That## was after the failure of both the Vietnam War and# the massive covert nine-year bombing campaign in## Laos led by the U.S. known as the Secret War.

SENG LUANGRATH: When we get to the Thai border,## we heard gunshots.

So we heard people trying to# escape, either people trying to escape after us,## or they just shoot up in# the sky when they saw us.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Many temporarily settled# in refugee camps in Northern Thailand.

That's## where Chef Seng, as she's now known, learned# to prepare dishes from across Laos that are## still reflected in her cooking today.

SENG LUANGRATH: I have a stronger flavor## profile because of what I had learned in refugee# camps, and also when I came to America, and## also meet different people from all over Laos.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Once she settled in the U.S.,## her love of food grew.

But she only cooked Lao# food for her family and people who were already## familiar with the flavors and strong aroma.

SENG LUANGRATH: I grew up like having -- like## have to hide.

My parents would say, if you eat# Lao food, don't eat in front of your friends.

I was doing that to my son too.

I packed food# for him, and I said, just be careful because## we don't want your friend to smell.

It's# like something that we were hiding.

Like,## we -- why we should be hiding?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: In 2010,## she became a professional chef, buying# her first restaurant, Bangkok Golden,## in nearby Falls Church, Virginia.

But her friends# and family discouraged her from serving Lao food.

SENG LUANGRATH: They were like, well, you're# not -- is -- I don't think you should do it,## because Thai is very -- is marketable.

Lao is# not marketable.

Nobody knows where Laos is.

And, of course, in my mind at the time, I used# that as my inspiration, as my motivation.

People## come for Thai buffet, and then we will ask,# are you here for the buffet or are you here## for Lao food?

A lot of people were shocked.# They'd never heard of that.

They were like,## what is Lao food?

So then we start# educating people about Laos, Lao food.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: You# just have to talk about it.

SENG LUANGRATH: Talk about it and teach how# to eat.. very pungent.

It's a lot of padaek, which# is fermented fish sauce.

And it's also a## lot of different exotic ingredients like# spice and also like a lot of fresh herbs.

So we also taught people how to eat it with# rice, instead of eating with lettuce or by## some -- like a salad.

So we taught people# how to grab sticky rice and roll it up in## the ball and eat it with larb.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: She renamed## Bangkok Golden in 2017 to Padaek, the# very sauce she was taught to hide.

This D.C. location, Thip Khao, is a nod to# the rice baskets that serve sticky rice,## an integral part of Lao cuisine and culture.# Although many Americans are familiar with Thai## papaya salad, she showed me how it's used in# the Lao version, known as thum mak hoong.

It has a spice.

SENG LUANGRATH: I like it.

(LAUGHTER) LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: I can't embarrass## my family.

I got to handle the spice.

SENG LUANGRATH: You did good.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Her recipe for success# has won over diners from all different## backgrounds, including Lao Americans.

BRITTNEY SOOKSENGDAO, Thip Khao Diner: I## remember bringing my parents# here for the first time,## and seeing non-Lao people eating Lao food# was incredible.

I think my parents were## about to cry.

I think I was about to cry.

It# was really special to get to move to a new city## and then have a place that felt like home.

SARIKA RAO, Thip Khao Diner: I knew of Laos## as a region, but I have never tried the food.# It's really important to recognize where people## are from and what made them who they are.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Chef Seng now runs four## restaurants in and around the Washington area# and hosts frequent pop-up events like this recent## backyard barbecue and market in Arlington.

She's also become the godmother of what's## known as the Lao food movement that encourages# chefs to embrace their heritage and history.

SENG LUANGRATH: I think it's so important to# learn the culture, to teach people.

The only## way that I would say I thought about teaching# people where Lao is, put Laos on the map,## the only way I can do is through food.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Lao restaurants have popped## up across the U.S. in cities big and small in# recent years, including Morganton, North Carolina,## Rockford, Illinois, and Wasilla, Alaska, many run# by chefs Luangrath helped mentor along the way.

JEFF CHANCHALEUNE, Chef and Owner, Ma Der: She# gave me some advice on what to do and to follow## my instincts, follow my gut, follow my palate.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Chef Jeff Chanchaleune opened## his restaurant, Ma Der, in Oklahoma City in# 2021 after spending more than two decades## working at Japanese restaurants there.

JEFF CHANCHALEUNE: I wanted to go back## to my roots to do Lao food because I# was kind of ashamed and felt terrible## about abandoning my culture for so long.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: The restaurant has won## critical acclaim in national# press.

And, like Chef Seng,## he emphasizes teaching through food.

JEFF CHANCHALEUNE: I'm trying to make## up for that now by learning as much as I can.# I'm learning every day.

And as I'm learning,## I am hopefully training and educating my staff# so that they can educate the diners.

And those## diners, you can spread the word, because, with# this food and with this culture, a lot of it## kind of spreads by word of mouth.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Keeping that## history alive is what keeps Chef Seng going.

SENG LUANGRATH: It's also bring me a happiness,## bring me, as a person, a better person.

I'm# proud of who I am, proud of my culture.

Now I## can seem out loud.

I'm loud, loud and proud.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: You can scream it.

(LAUGHTER) SENG LUANGRATH: Yes.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: For the "PBS# News Hour," I'm Laura Barron-Lopez## in Washington.

AMNA NAWAZ:## The latest Republican spending measure is likely# to undergo substantial changes in the coming## days as it winds its way through the House.

But,# currently, it includes a plan to give $1,000 to## every baby born between 2025 and the end of 2028.

It's an idea that was first proposed by economic## scholar Darrick Hamilton.

Here is his Brief# But Spectacular take on so-called baby bonds.

DARRICK HAMILTON, Director, The New School# for Social Research: We have the ethos that## if you just study hard, if you just work# hard, if you just make great decisions,## that one can accumulate wealth.

Now, certainly, studying hard,## working hard, astute decision-making# are beneficial, but they are limited## if you don't have capital in the first place.

Growing up in New York City in the 1980s, I could## see the differences between the people I grew# up with in Bedford-Stuyvesant versus those who I## went to school with.

I had the privilege of being# able to go to an elite private school, Brooklyn## Friends School.

The individuals in both of the# environments, the love, the care, they didn't## vary that much.

But what did vary was economic# circumstance and what that could afford people.

The typical Black family has less than a dime# for every dollar in wealth as the typical white## family.

In fact, when Black households# acquire more income or more education,## if you compare them to their white counterparts,# the gap does not reduce.

It grows.

I am the founding director of the Institute# on Race, Power, and Political Economy.

Can you summarize what you're# going to do in two pages?

I'm a scholar and I'm a teacher.

I# love engaging with people over ideas,## but it's not enough to scholarship.

It's not# enough to have broad conceptions of how society## works.

We translate that into actionable policy.

The idea around baby bonds is simply to ensure## that every child has the benefits that's often# exclusively reserved for the wealthy.

Baby bonds## are accounts that are seeded at birth, reserved# by government until the child becomes of age,## a young adult, and then those accounts are# allowed to be used in wealth-building ways,## essentially babies that are born into# poverty as measured by Medicaid use.

In July of 2023, the first baby to get a baby# bonds in Connecticut happened.

When they become 18## years old, that initial $3,200 will grow somewhere# between $10,000 to $18,000, depending on how well## the market does and how well those accounts# are managed.

And that child will be able to use## that money to provide a down payment on a home,# finance higher education, or start a business.

People are not free if they don't have resource.# If they don't have economic rights, if they don't## have rights to capital.

At the institute, we're# committed to building an economy grounded in human## rights.

We're investing in guaranteed income.# We're investing in reparations.

And guess what?## It turns out it benefits us all.

My name is Darrick Hamilton.

This## is my Brief But Spectacular take on# building a birthright to capital.

AMNA NAWAZ: And you can watch more Brief But# Spectacular videos at PBS.org/NewsHour/Brief.

GEOFF BENNETT: And join us again here# tomorrow night for the analysis of David## Brooks and Jonathan Capehart.

And that is the "News Hour"## for tonight.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On behalf of the entire "News Hour"# team, thank you for joining us.