♪ amna: good evening. i'm amna nawaz, in kyiv, ukraine. geoff: and i am geoff bennett. the u.s. supreme court considers whether in charge of obstructing an official proceeding can be used to prosecute capitol rioters. and former president donald trump. >> tonight from ukraine we look

, at russia's intensifying attacks on ukraine's energy system, the impact on its people, and the war. >> what's going to happen in the city? will the rockets come into the city? will they hit houses? what will happen the next day with heat, with water? geoff: and house speaker mike johnson's job is in peril again after a second house republican pushes to oust him over plans to send aid to ukraine and israel. > major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> these are people who are trying to change the world. starbucks have this energy that energizes me. i am thriving by helping others every day. people who know know bdo. >> the ongoing support of these

individuals and institutions and friends of the newshour including kathy and paul anderson and camilla and george smith. certified professionals are proud to support pbs newshour. cfp professionals are committed to acting in their clients' best interest. more information at the website. >> the foundation fostering an and engaged communities. more at kf.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. ♪

this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. amna: welcome to the newshour. here in ukraine, as leaders await news on additional u.s. aid, russia's war has entered a new phase, attacking ukraine's energy systems with devastating precision. but first, we start at home where the u.s. supreme court heard oral arguments today in a case about january 6. geoff: this arguments focused on -- those arguments focused on whether part of a federal obstruction law can be used to prosecute some of the rioters involved in the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. the court's ruling could impact hundreds of criminal cases, even the pending case against former president donald trump, kyle -- donald trump.

kyle cheney, politico's senior legal affairs reporter, has been following the january 6 legal fallout, and joins us now. this case was brought by joseph fisher, who was charged with multiple crimes for pushing his way into the u.s. capitol on january 6, 2021. walk us through the arguments the justices her today. kyle: it is a complicated law but his argument is simple. this law was passed after the enron scandal in 2000. it was meant to stop people from tampering with evidence in a court like proceeding or congressional proceeding, not envisioned to cover the sort of riotous conduct we saw on january 6. he may be culpable for a lot of stuff but this obstruction charge, which has a 20 year maximum sentence, he says that should not apply to him or his fellow rioters. amna: the supreme court's -- kyle: the supreme court's conservative -- >> help us understand why they seemed dubious of the broad reading of this obstruction law. >> the doj that this law was

passed by congress as a catchall and should apply to all kinds of disruptive conduct. they missed stuff enron was doing and they wanted to make sure they did not miss anything again so we can sweep in all of this stuff that happened after january 6 as part of the broad umbrella and the conservative justices in particular were very skeptical about how broadly doj viewed it. could it sweep in someone who stands up and interrupts the supreme court, could that person be charged with a 20 year felony? the doj said it is much tougher than that. he had to prove somebody had corrupt intent, that they knew they were disrupting and they did it on purpose, but the justices seemed to worry about how widely it could be applied. >> some 350 people have been charged with obstructing an official proceeding for their part in they attack. more than 100 people have already been convicted and are serving prison sentences. what might the outcome of the supreme court's ruling mean for

those cases and what might it mean for donald who is also charged with the obstruction crime? kyle: if the supreme court rules as narrowly as it might, it could upland all of those cases that you described. if you already serve your sentence, you are out of luck. it could totally change the game for you and you could be on the hook for misdemeanors instead of a felony. as for donald trump, did his actions to send fake electors to congress count as the same type of obstruction that this law was meant to cover? how the justices read that could mean the charges against donald trump right out of jack smith's case or could preserve it depending on how narrowly they construe it. geoff: is he planning for an outcome that could upend his federal election subversion case? kyle: he did. he reviewed this case in the immunity case with the justices next week. his argument is essentially that even under the narrowest

interpretation the supreme court might take of the obstruction law, donald trump conduct might fit squarely because by sending fake electors certificates to congress, that is exactly the type of evidence tampering congress is worried about when they passed this law in the aftermath of the enron scandal. geoff: thank you so much for sharing your reporting on your insights with us. we appreciate it. kyle: good to be with you. ♪ geoff: in the day's other headlines, six jurors have been chosen to serve in donald trump's criminal hush money trial in new york. their selection came on day two of the trial. lawyers still need six more to serve on the 12-person panel. at one point today, judge juan merchan reprimanded the former president after he could be heard commenting about a juror and gesturing towards her. in the middle east, israel's war cabinet postponed a planned meeting to address any planned response to iran's weekend attacks.

they'll reconvene tomorrow. the delay comes as western allies discuss new sanctions against tehran, in an effort to dissuade further military escalation. today, the pentagon reaffirmed its support for israel. >> we do not seek escalation in the region, but we will not hesitate to defend israel and protect our personnel. um, again, we do not want to see a wider regional war. we don't seek conflict with iran, but we won't hesitate to take necessary actions to protect our forces. geoff: air force jets and navy destroyers supported israel during the iranian attack on saturday. a congressional panel is accusing china of using tax rebates to subsidize the production and export of fentanyl materials. lawmakers said in a report today that the incentives only apply to deadly chemicals that are sold outside of china. at a hearing on capitol hill today featuring former attorney

general william barr, and others, committee members lashed out at beijing. >> through its actions, as our report has revealed, the chinese community party is telling us it wants more fentanyl in this country, it wants the chaos and devastation that has resulted from this epidemic, and yes, that means more dead americans. geoff: fentanyl is a leading cause of drug overdoses in the u.s., killing an average of 200 americans each day. federal regulators issued new protections today for coal miners against so-called black lung disease. mining companies will have to cut workers' exposure to the toxic silica dust that causes the ailment in half. in central appalachia, one in five miners has black lung disease. acting labor secretary julie su said of the rule, quote, "we're making it clear that no job should be a death sentence." a federal appeals court has overturned a west virginian law banning transgender girls from playing on girls' sports teams. the court found that the law violates title nine, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools. the case was brought on behalf

of a 13-year old transgender girl, who said the law had blocked her from running on her middle-school track team. pepper-jackson image a -- middle-school track team. a renaissance-era landmark in denmark's capital went up in flames today. the blaze broke out on the copper roof of copenhagen's old stock exchange as it was undergoing renovations ahead of its 400th anniversary. the spire of the structure, a twisted spear of four dragons' tails, collapsed in the fire. the city's mayor called the building an iconic piece of danish heritage. >> i can't put into words what the stock exchange means for us as a building and a symbol for copenhagen. the four dragons are a part of our skyline, and a lot of people from copenhagen cycle past it or walk past it every day. it's a 400-year-old cultural history that has been lost not only in copenhagen, but also in denmark. geoff: casters by -- passers-by helped emergency crews save paintings and other artifiacts from inside the famous building.

there were no reported casualties and no word yet on what caused the fire. the torch for this summer's paris olympics was lit at a ceremony in greece today. in ancient olympia, where the games originated, an actress playing the role of high priestess set the fire ablaze. it will be carried relay-style to athens, and then onwards to france. the journey will end with the lighting of the olympic flame at the opening ceremony in paris, on july 26. on wall street today, investors weighed comments from fed chairman jerome powell that houston inflation will likely delay any rate cuts until later this year. the dow jones industrial average gained 63 points are close at 37,000 798. the nasdaq gave back 19 points and the s&p 500 lost 10. the library of congress has added 25 new audio selections to the national recording registry. that means they are "worthy of preservation for all time based on their cultural, historical, or aesthetic importance." they include the 1994 album

"ready to die," "parallel lines," and "rudolph the red nose reindeer." also among the entries was abba's classic "arrival," and their hit, "dancing queen." >> ♪ you can dance, you can jive ♪ amna: eight look at worsening humanitarian crisis in sudan -- geoff: a look at worsening humanitarian crisis in sudan. and the new film, civil war, explores what could happen if a divided america goes to war with itself. ♪ >> this is the pbs newshour from weta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. >> this year, russia has

launched a series of deliberate and devastating attacks on ukraine's energy infrastructure. taking advantage of gaps and shortages in ukraine's air defenses, russia has systematically targeted nearly every single power plant in this country. officials here tell us the last few weeks have been unlike any they've seen before in this war. an idyllic scene, in the city of ukrainka, just outside of kyiv, but the russian attack here just three days earlier is fresh in gennediy's mind. >> it was about 5:00 a.m. everybody woke up because it was a massive explosion. and then, a few more explosions. amna: the 64-year-old local builder struggles to describe the moment. >> you need to hear it to understand it. you need to live through it. amna: the air strikes destroyed their target, the trypilska power plant, one of the country's largest power plants and the main electricity source for three million people in the kyiv region and surrounding areas. it's also the center of this

cities tour livelihood. -- city's livelihood. >> more than half the city's population works at the power plant. amna: 19-year-old alina has lived here her whole life. she had a clear view of the attack and aftermath from her window at home. what did you think when you heard the explosions? >> what's going to happen in the city? will the rockets come into the city? will they hit houses? what will happen the next day with heat, with water? amna: in the early morning hours of april 11, trypilska was one of multiple power plants hit by the russians. that followed a march 29 attack on other power plants, which followed march 22 strikes, also targeting ukraine's energy system. >> they try, they test, they see the results and just repeat, . amna: dmytro sakharuk is executive director of d-tek ukraine's largest private energy , company. he says russia has attacked power plants earlier in the war but this year is different. >> the efficiency these days unfortunately, is higher because of, russians develop their skills.

and this is basically the third year of war. they improve the technology. they, i guess, install some more advanced guiding systems. amna: when you say efficiency, you mean they're more efficient at causing more damage. >> to causing more damage, yeah . amna: so far, an estimated 60% of ukraine's power generating capacity may have already been impacted by russian drones and missiles. rolling blackouts have been imposed in several areas. >> everything was different. >> everything. amna: president volodymyr zelensky says ukraine's inability to defend its energy infrastructure is a microcosm of larger battlefield challenges, as they face a critical artillery and air defense shortage. at the plant, he tells us, his forces intercepted 7 of 11 russian missiles, but were 4 missiles short of saving the plant. >> when you're running out of missiles, people are dying.

trypilska is just the most recent small example of a large challenge. amna: they were four missiles short. that is what made the difference between protecting that plant and that plant being destroyed. how often do you find yourself in that situation? >> i guess, all our plants, are in the same situation where partially, the incoming missiles were intercepted and second wave or not, the plant or not, and they just hit the targets. amna: sakhurak now keeps a flak jacket for facility visits. his teams have been issued the same. >> like soldiers, basically, they have helmets. they have vests, even some, some armored vehicles. amna: like soldiers on their own front line, then. >> it's -- we call it "energy front line." amna: for alina, who lives on that front line, russia's

mission is clear. >> to destroy our nation, to destroy our moral spirit. but they won't succeed at all. amna: they won't succeed. why not? >> because they attacked the wrong people. we are much stronger than them, we have morals and less fear than them. amna: gennediy says he was turned away twice from the military recruitment center past their age-60 cutoff. >> when people are dying, when children are dying, women, how could you not be worried? as a father, i'm worried for my children. amna: this is hard for you to talk about. >> well, you can hear it in my voice. amna: this father is now bracing to send his own son to fight in a war that's already come to their home. >> we understand what it's like to be without lights, without water, but we will survive. they don't understand that. amna: officials here have scrambled to repair the plants they can, and keep the power

flowing into homes. but they say until ukraine can defend its skies from russian drones and missiles, no part of its critical infrastructure can truly be safe. geoff? geoff: as president zelensky told you in the interview yesterday, ukraine needs congress to approve aid, to help fill those gaps in its air defense and replenish its artillery. what's been the response to speaker mike johnson's plan for separate bills for ukraine, israel, and taiwan aid? amna: no direct response to that proposal so far but sort of an indirect response, if you will, in what has become his nightly address to the nation. tonight, he reiterated some of the concerns he has made to us as well about what he sees as a different standard for security for israel and for ukraine. in part, he said the world must ensure true equality and protection from terror so when we face the same terror and strikes from missiles and

drones, the rules are equal in ukraine, europe, and other parts of the world. to the president told us yesterday he found it strange that republican lawmakers would separate out that ukraine aid from the other bills mainly because he said he got a firm commitment from speaker johnson when they spoke directly just a few weeks ago, but a bit of news from the president's office today, he is now requesting an urgent meeting of the nato ukraine counsel, the joint body put together last year where nato leaders in the president of ukraine can meet to share and talk about shared concerns and of course, that is as they are seeking full membership of nato but we did ask zelenskyy's office for any additional comment about that proposal in the u.s. congress. they say no comment for now. they say they are going to watch how the process unfolds. geoff: great to see you. thanks to you and the team there. amna: thanks, jeff. ♪

-- geoff. ♪ geoff: on capitol hill, house speaker mike johnson spent the day juggling his foreign aid priorities for ukraine and israel with potential threats to his job from members of his own party. lisa desjardins is here to explain. so, lisa, lots of consequential topics, all being debated at once today. lisa: that's right. some breaking especially out of the house of representatives and even by the standards of this congress, the john mack and the stakes for this week are perilously high. >> thank you, mr. leader. lisa: after six cautious months, mike johnson is now defining and risking his speakership with a high-stakes push to aid ukraine and israel. >> i put out a preliminary plan, as you know on these measures to handle these matters from israel to ukraine to the indo pacific region.

lisa: it's a big move with reporters waiting for details, mostly watching johnson's fellow republicans. after thomas massie of kentucky called for johnson to resign and vacate or oust to johnson, introduced by marjorie taylor greene. >> i'm not going to call a motion to vacate but i will tell you, if it is called, there will be a lot of people who vote for it. lisa: he says johnson is helping democrats but today, most house republicans, even rebellious types, back to johnson as speaker. >> i disagree with that. last thing this country needs is that. >> total waste of time and absolute ridiculous concept. >> if we are going to identify a problem with mike johnson, i understand, but you have to have a solution so were we going to lisa: israel is on alert after weathering an extensive attack

from iran and ukraine is getting outshot by russia sometimes 10-1. president zelenskyy told, devise that u.s. -- told ahmed abbas that u.s. aid -- our reported that u.s. aid is a must. >> that aid has been paralyzed after the senate overwhelmingly passed $95 billion worth in february. that large senate bill has funds for ukraine, israel, the into pacific, and humanitarian aid, but it is unpopular with house republicans. johnson passed four separate bills that seems to add up to roughly the same amount but with more loans and less grants to ukraine. also included, legislation about tiktok and humanitarian aid although the amount for that is not clear. in this blurb, johnson is direct about his job. he is not resigning. >> we are going to work this out. lisa: but it is not clear who or

what survives as johnson gambles that his resolve will not backfire. >> we are in unprecedented times. we are in dangerous times as has been articulated here, around the world, at home. we need steady leadership and steady hands at the wheel. lisa: last week a former member , told us speaker johnson is holding his fingers in the dam -- a dyke, trying to keep it up right. he's calling them and hoping to avoid another internal disaster. geoff: let's start with ukraine aid because for weeks now, president biden has been saying if the house speaker just brings this bill to the floor, it will pass. is that still the case? lisa: unclear. it was not even for sure he would bring us to the floor. this is the defining moment of his speakership so far but he does face major hurdles in all of these bills. let's go through some of the challenges speaker johnson faces in the house. there are some republicans who oppose all funding to ukraine.

i'm told many of them when they were in their districts last week heard that from constituents. there are some who want more oversight in the bill on israel. there are some in both parties who would like conditions on israeli aid and that is very complicated and then we have yet another simple, not at all simple issue. some republicans are demanding their be border security elements in these bills before they can vote for any of this so essentially, johnson has two options, trying to get all of this past this week. the easy way, which would be with health republican support -- house republican support, but replay bookends may not -- republicans may not even agree with that. he needs two thirds of the house which may include democrats. if he includes democrats, then his speakership is on the line. geoff: how close is he right two ousted? lisa: incredibly close. -- to ousted? lisa: incredibly close.

just one foe and i know at least one republican who is thinking about also voting to oust him. one of the issues here of course is marjorie taylor greene. my sense is that she is not ready to pull this trigger this week. she is trying to push this off. that can change any day. if they do put this motion out, someone -- house democrats. a theory running around is house democrats potentially, if the math works out, have the power to install hakeem jeffries as the speaker of the house. i asked them about this today and they said if they have the ability to do it, they very well may. >> looked, i think i feel very confident speaking for the democratic caucus that we want jeffries to be speaker. whether that happens in this calendar year or in january, that's the focus. mathematically, it is possible. lisa: this is some high-level

game theory in a way. prisoners dilemma. there is a reality show called the prisoners. who do you trust? it is not clear right now. the difference with this high level of game theory is the stakes are impossibly high for this country, for ukraine, and for republicans. geoff: let's talk about this unprecedented impeachment trial of secretary may all caps -- the secretary. lisa: there was a great deal of showmanship today. this is part of pomp and circumstances as part of how impeachment works. this is the first impeachment of this secretary in our history. we saw the lebron republic -- the 11 republicans walk over. you might see marjorie taylor greene, that republican in the front. she is the one who led this effort against the secretary. there is no action other than the reading of these articles. there are two articles of impeachment. the first is charging the

secretary with refusal to comply with the law. the second is breach of public trust. we talked about those here on air before. the biden administration and democrats, as well as a couple of republicans, say that there is no proof, that this is a cabinet secretary doing his job, into that point, what did the secretary say today? he was on capitol hill in a budget hearing and did not talk about impeachment. when we heard from the secretary, he has an agency that needs more resistance and guidance from -- resources and guidance from congress on how to secure the border. geoff: that is on the immigration bill that republicans blocked. many of us remember covering that trial, both of them. how will this be different from the trump trials? lisa: it will be faster. this is what we expect tomorrow. the senate will convene shortly after lunchtime. they are required to do that. after that, the rules of impeachment are not really spelled out. there are just nine pages of impeachment rules and this could be a matter of hours tomorrow but we will watch that closely.

geoff: lisa desjardins, thanks to you as always. ♪ lisa: you are welcome. ♪ geoff: this week is the one-year anniversary of the war in sudan. what started as an internal power struggle has now forced more than 8 million people to flee their homes. 16 million are facing hunger and even famine, and tens of thousands have been killed. sudan shares borders with 7 countries and the red sea. and the u.s. warns the conflict could destabilize the region. nick schifrin, in collaboration with the north african media company, ayen, begins our coverage, as seen from a refugee camp in chad. nick: in the windblown sahara desert, children of war lineup for a plate of food. these families are stopped by hunger and haunted by horror. >> my family is poor.

we are innocent. and we don't have anything. they came to us with weapons drawn. we could not do anything. nick: she spoke to our collaborator on condition of anonymity. she escaped sudan's west darfur, the scene of what the u.s. calls crimes against humanity. she has lived here for 11 months. >> a. us in our stomachs. i was in a lot of pain from the beating and i did not even know where i was. nick: hers is a story all too common in this civil that termed residential blocks into battlegrounds. it is a power struggle between the sudanese armed forces, which the u.s. has accused of war crimes, and on the other side, the rebel paramilitary rapid support forces. accused by the u.s. of ethnic cleansing, accused of killing her brothers and scarring her

for life. >> they took me to a faraway place. they raped me and then they threw me out naked. my family thought i was dead. but they found me naked and they took me home. my brothers were also killed. there was nothing else to do but come to chad. nick: she has had two surgeries and battles physical and mental trauma. the u.n. says rate has been used as a weapon of war and for far too many victims, there is little support. >> i am depressed and completely shattered mentally. i need a psychologist or at least to change my environment to forget what happened to me because every time i remember what happened, i get panic attacks. nick: inside sudan, more than 6 million have fled their homes including this camp in the northeast. for this 10-year-old, there are moments of distraction and even joy.

for her brothers, boys get to be boys. but the parents are not all right. they fear the future and are scarred by the past. press the children were frightened by any sound and they would hide under the bed. they were terrified and i would hug them at night to comfort them. nick: she fled her home while pregnant. >> there was no medical treatment. i was not able to test my blood for so many days. i did not know if the baby inside me was alive or dead. nick: they are twice displaced. all they can hope now is to protect their children and provide as best they can. the u.n. warns that in sudan, water and food are so scarce, hundreds of thousands of children could die just in the next few months. this weekend, they pledged $2.1 billion to help sudan but that is half of what is needed.

the u.s. delegation was to lead by a u.s. special envoy, tom. >> it is urgent for the international community to increase its attention on sudan and its contributions on the humanitarian side, and we are seeing thousands and thousands of women and children crossing the border, saying that their primary motivation right now is finding food. we need this conference but we also need it cannot just be one day on the anniversary. we need the world to continue paying attention and pressuring the actors until we get a peace deal and ensure that humanitarian access can reach all sudanese people. geoff: congressional officials who were on a trip to the region tell me that there is a shortage of food in the camps and that it is so bad, if you don't get more funding, the food will actually run out by the end of the month. is that what you see? >> that is correct. we see the rss which has burned all the harvest and looted all storage of food so there is no resiliency inside where people

are at an incredible level of fragility in what they face in addition to the violence and horrors being conducted against women. when they get out, we need them to at least have the full set of psychosocial counseling of at least three meals per day and we are not meeting that standard. the united states will have given over $1 billion now since the war began in the rest of the world has not stepped up. >> you mentioned some of the actions that the support forces have taken inside sudan. the u.s. said sudanese armed forces have blocked aid deliveries across the border. bottom line, are both sides using food as a weapon of war? >> absolutely. both sides are violating all of the basic norms of international humanitarian law. it's about not attacking humanitarian workers and convoys or politicizing aid delivery. this is an absolutely horrific treatment of civilians, the most fragile civilians in a situation by both sides.

we do expect both sides to obey international humanitarian law and these are their own people, the sudanese people, that they are starving as a mechanism of war. >> they u.s. ambassador to the u.n. has talked about the possibility of a security council resolution that would guarantee food deliveries into sudan much like the security council created in syria but do you also believe there should be discussion about protecting food convoys inside sudan with some kind of peacekeeping or even military force? >> at this point, we need to be considering all options. this is a situation of life and death for millions and millions of sudanese, the largest displacement crisis in the world. the united nations, along with ourselves and our partners, particularly african partners across the region in the african union, need to be thinking about all options that will solve a humanitarian crisis and also, we need the war to end, which is the biggest threat to the humanitarian situation.

there's a huge amount of consensus among the sudanese about the urgency of ending the war, wanting a unified, integrated military that is accountable to the people, a return to the constitutional transition that really inspired the world. >> let's talk about the diplomacy and let me begin with the large overview. do you fear the leaders could decide it is more profitable for them to keep fighting dan makepeace? >> one -- than make peace. >> we are seeing to a failed state, to generalized infection lies conflict. >> do you have the tools that you would want going into this

diplomacy, not only of what we talked about before, about a way to protect some of those convoys, but also a way to perhaps kind of threaten leaders that they will be held accountable for their war crimes? >> the united states has laid on sanctioning bad actors on both sides of this, not just individuals who committed atrocities, but banks and other institutions that have been part of that. that is certainly an option we have to expand those sanctions but also to encouraging other governments to join us in expanding those sanctions, but we are again needing to look at all options on the table including some of those that you mentioned. before getting to a deal. >> peace talks are supposed to resume imminently. have these saudis agreed to a date? >> they have agreed to host the talks and to having key partners there that have not been part of the past. they have not yet set a date. i think we are seeing a significant shift in the political will of actors in the region who may not have been as motivated as we were by the

atrocities, by the horrible treatment of women, and these crises, but for those who only care about stability, this is a time we are seeing much greater engagement from key actors. >> have you sent a message to those countries that if we approach famine this summer, which is a real possibility, then that will be the responsibility? >> we have been in contact with all the countries that are in the region and i think part of the message is this is the trajectory we are on, going from a two-sided war inside sudan to something that could become a regional war in a failed state but this is also a strategic failure being fueled by key actors more and more that are coming in including foreign fighters being counted on the er southside. this is not a good outcome for anyone who cares about stability in the region. >> is that the race, a more faction lies conflict, one that produces even more refugees and threatens the stability of the region? >> it is a certainty if we don't

change course. we hope we are building some momentum with some of the initiatives in egypt and others. we hope that will come together with talks. the sudanese people deserve a future back and we don't have much time to get to the outcome. >> special envoy for sudan, thank you so much. tom: thank you. ♪ geoff: about on a stretch of land along the mississippi river in southeastern louisiana. those facilities provide many of the essentials of modern life. plastics, fertilizer, and even medical equipment. but that production also comes with serious risks. this area has also long been known as cancer alley, because of the high rates of cancer among people who live near those plants. as william brangham reports, a new study now documents how those risks may fall on the next generation as well.

>> all right. william: not long ago, teesha couldn't imagine making memories like this with her son, cairo. >> with mommy? william: he was born prematurely, almost two months early, weighing just four pounds . he had to live in this incubator, had a slow heart rate, and sometimes stopped breathing entirely. >> my first time seeing him after birth, i was holding him., , and he looked so peaceful. and i was like, oh my god, he's so peaceful. and i took a picture and seconds later, his alarms went off. he had stopped breathing and and of course, just me being new to the experience, it was very overwhelming. there we go. william: teesha, who asked we not use her last name for privacy reasons, has lived in louisiana's st john the baptist parish most of her life. the community sits within an 85-mile stretch of land that's home to some two hundred fossil fuel and petrochemical operations.

>> growing up, we knew nothing about how those things were affecting us. you know, you just had asthma, you just had eczema. your grandmother had cancer. a lot of people, women i know with fertility issues, a lot of women i know trying to get pregnant and can't or experiencing a lot of miascarriages or early births. and we just thought that that was normal life. william: last month, researchers at tulane university found that in louisiana's most polluted areas, pregnant women had a 25% higher risk of low birth weights, and a 36% higher risk of premature births. prematurity is the leading cause of death among infants in the u.s. black and low income women in those areas faced the highest risks. >> it's a wakeup call in terms of how we think about the consequences of industrial pollution. and you know, making people -- what you emit today affects

the health of somebody who's going to be born in six months or nine months, right? it's not decades from now. william: kimberly terrell is a staff scientist at tulane's environmental law clinic and was lead author of the study. kimberly: what was really surprising was the proportion of adverse birth outcomes that could be attributed to pollution exposure in louisiana. so our study suggests that a third of the cases of low birth weight and about half the cases of preterm birth in the state can be linked to pollution exposure. >> the mississippi river is, you know, full of petrochemical plants as well as grain elevators, because they are truly the gateway to the world. >> louisiana republican state senator eddie lambert chairs the environmental quality committee, which oversees the agency that regulates the chemical industry. >> i'm sure your committee has seen the number of studies that have linked living in these areas to disproportionately high negative health health outcomes.

you don't accept that as a premise? >> i don't accept that, as a complete truism. i mean, you know, there may be some, some correlations. i mean, i'm gonna tell you, let's start looking, you know, vaccines, you know, we've had an explosion of vaccines in the last, you know, 20, 30 years. and now you have autism. you know, is there a connection there? i don't know, there's a lot of people who think there are. william: there's a lot of people who think there are, but there's no good evidence that they are connected. >> and, you know, and that may be the same thing with some of the the situations with the chemical plants. there's, you know, circumstantial evidence that's there. but you know what? let's really dig down and see what is the, you know, what is there. he says there are other reasons women in these areas may be experiencing poor birth outcomes. >> a lot of that depends on your -- is it, you know, economically

depressed, their health, what kind of prenatal care are they doing? i mean, there's all kinds of factors. william: but terrell argues those factors were accounted for in her study, and they aren't exclusive. >> they are compounding. and so, you know, you can't control the neighborhood that you're born into. and it doesn't make sense to say, well, we're just going to ignore pollution and focus on, you know, poverty or health care access. if we know pollution is a risk factor and we do, we absolutely know that pollution is linked to low birth weight and preterm birth, you know, across the board. why aren't we addressing that? william: you think on balance right now you guys are hitting that correct balance of economic development versus protecting people's health? >> we could probably be doing a little bit better on both. you know, i would like to see, no pollution. that's a perfect scenario. you know, as technology advances, you learn to do more -- now, how much of a negative impact there is, i don't know, but i know they also bring a lot of things to us that we could not exist without them. would it not be for the chemical industries, especially

fertilizer, you could not support the world's population. william: a recent report from human rights watch found that for decades, the louisiana department of environmental quality, or ldeq, has "repeatedly failed to enforce the minimum standards set by the federal government, and to protect the environment and human health." and terrell says that agency still hasn't acknowledged the racial disparities in who gets exposed to pollution. from 2019 to 2021, the department allowed industrial emissions of pollution that were seven to 21 times higher in mostly black communities compared to mostly white ones. in an email to the newshour, the department declined to comment. >> i think the key is that the deq needs to take an unbiased approach to environmental justice analysis in its permitting decisions. and what that means is when a facility wants to build a new plant in a community of color, deq needs to say, okay, what's the existing burden of pollution here? and is this community overburdened?

william: two years ago, the epa opened up a civil rights investigation into whether state regulators here in louisiana were allowing petrochemical and oil and gas companies to build and pollute in a way that disproportionately harms black communities. in response, louisiana's then attorney-general, and now governor, jeff landry, sued the epa, and the agency dropped the investigation. the epa declined to comment, citing pending litigation. >> we're gonna focus on mitigation with climate change. william: in ascension parish, another community with concentrated petrochemical plants, ashley gaignard is counting on a younger generation to enact change. she founded the organization "rural roots louisiana" to teach kids about environmental issues. >> that creates another

generation of awareness. it preserves our land, it sustains what we have. because if we don't start preserving it, industry is going to buy out every piece of clean property that they can. william: all three of gaignard's children were born premature and with low birth weights. she says, at the time, she didn't connect her babies' poor health with the air she breathed when she was pregnant. >> but my son born with an undeveloped lung, and he's had really horrible asthma all his life. and to have a kid get told he can't take recess anymore. when you learn formaldehyde in the air and methyl ethylene in the air, and all of those chemicals have effects on your respiratory system, you get angry. william: back in st. john the baptist parish, teesha says, even now, she worries about how the air could be harming her son. >> if you could, is that something you thought about? >> it is something i thought about but i love it here. i don't want to be anywhere else.

i want to be home and i want my baby to know home and to love home like i do. so what do you do when you need to be home and home is unfortunately where the problem is? william: for the pbs newshour, i'm william brangham in southeastern louisiana. geoff: the new film "civil war" is stirring debate and provoking conversation about where a divided nation could lead. it topped the domestic box office this weekend with a nearly $26 million opening, the biggest ever for its independent production company, a-24 studios. jeffrey brown talks to the film's director as part of our arts and culture series, canvas. >> the time: the near future. the place: the eastern part of the united states, now a battle zone of armies, militias, armed individuals guarding their property.

>> you don't know what side they are fighting >> someone is trying to kill us. we are trying to kill them. jeffrey: we don't know why this is happening, what factors brought the country to the brink. we just see and feel what it could be like if america really was at war with itself. >> what kind of american are you? jeffrey: british director and writer, alex garland. alex: i took on the subject because i had a set of anxieties and worries, and i wanted to join the conversation surrounding those anxieties and hopefully contribute to it. jeffrey: and those anxieties, those fears. how do you define them? alex: i would define them as a real concern about the power and the growth of extremist thinking within your country, my country and many european countries. the essence of the film in political terms is absolutely extremists versus centrist, yes.

-- extremists versus centrists, yes. it is what happens when extremists are not limited in their journey. amna: -- jeffrey: garland's chief protagonists, a group of journalists, led by a veteran war photographer played by kerstin dausend -- kirstin dunst, familiar with covering horror elsewhere in the world but now seeing it at home. >> every time i survived a war zone, i thought i was sending a warning home. don't do this. but here we are. jeffrey: as they travel behind the lines of an invasion by the so-called "western forces" of california and texas attacking washington, d.c., where the president, played by nick offerman, has just taken a third term. who's good or bad? right or wrong? right or left? we don't really know. this is a kind of warning, but it's for us to fill in the details. the details the politics are , less important than just

putting us in this place? alex: i would question your use of the word politics, because the use you are using of politics is a politics which is defined by left and right. and the one i'm talking about is not left versus right. it's extremist versus centrist. jeffrey: for you, this is a political film. alex: for me, it categorically is a political film. it's just not choosing a politics of left and right. i think that if i sat down and asked somebody, why might your country or my country disintegrate into a state of civil war, they would know the answers. i don't need to spell them out. those answers surround us. so i felt it would be not just patronizing, but redundant to spell it out. jeffrey: and that means, in this case, putting us into this position, that we can recognize all these places and some of these people perhaps, but then letting us figure out what's going on.

alex: exactly. yeah, exactly, which to me is related to the other subject matter in the film, which is to do with the press. so in a way, it is trying to take a certain kind of leading bias out of the film and making the film function like reporters. and then it is showing as its protagonist, reporters. jeffrey: reporters wrestling with getting a story at all costs, with the ethics of portraying violence in the form of compelling, even beautiful imagery. >> once that's the job. >> that's the job. >> i'm not saying it's wrong. it's just your job. jeffrey: issues garland himself had to confront. what were the key decision in your thinking about what to show, what not to show, how much to give, how much not to sensationalize.

alex: i hope it hasn't really sensationalized anything. i would argue it has not. film has traditionally has been incredibly concerned with spelling everything out for an audience and not leaving things up to the audience in terms of their own decision-making processes or their personal responses. i just choose to make films where i assume a certain level of interest in the audience in asking questions, thinking about the answers, posing them in a way they want to pose them, and coming to their own conclusions. and i don't object to that, i encourage it. i like it. jeffrey: garland is nothing if not ambitious in the subjects he takes on, including artificial intelligence, and what it means to be alive in 2014's "ex machina". and toxic masculinity in "men" in 2022. reactions to "civil war" have included questioning the ethics

of even making a film like this that might itself further promote violence or division. garland says he can't predict any such response, but -- alex: i do know that silencing people also leads to trouble, that there's an issue to do with the freezing out of opinions in a public space and the shouting down of opinions within a public space, that is its own sort of problem. so we're not living in a perfect world where every decision can be made with exact prediction of how it will work out. what we're living in a world is where we have to think and act like adults and understand the messy, confusing state and do the best we can with it. >> is a pretty huge civil --

there is a pretty huge civil war. >> we are trying to stay out. jeffrey: so what do you hope people take from this, take away from this film? alex: in my dream scenario, which i'm aware will probably not exist. they would see it as a kind of treatise against extremist thinking. i hope they find it thought provoking in a way that is, interesting. they they may be provoked in other ways that might make them angry. that's part of the risk one takes. there's a complicated thing that within cinema that films often exist really, to please people. i do not want to make people angry, but i do not just want to please them. box office results so far, at least, suggest audiences are coming to "civil war" on garland's terms. for the pbs newshour, i'm jeffrey brown. >> god bless america. ♪ geoff: and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm geoff bennett.

amna: and i'm amna nawaz. we'll be here tomorrow night with a report from the city of kharkiv, under relentless russian assault and bracing for more in this third year of war. on behalf of the entire newshour team, thank you for joining us . >> major funding has been provided by -- >> travelers experience the maritime heritage and culture of the coast and new england islands. we explore american landscapes, sea villages, and historic harbors. where you can experience local customs and cuisine. american cruise lines, proud sponsor of pbs newshour. >> consumer cellular. this is sam. how may help you? this is a public aisle.

with consumer cellular, you get nationwide coverage with no contract. that is kind o our thing. have a nice day. >> certified financial planning professionals are proud to support pbs newshour. cfp professionals are committed to acting in their clients' best interest. more information at the website. ♪ >> carnegie corporation of new york, supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security at carnegie.org. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> you are watching pbs.

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] ♪

♪ ♪ hello, everyone and welcome to "amon pure & co." we are is what's coming up. >> israel is on the brink. >> israel's and iran's slado war erupts into the open. i speak to former u.s. amssador to israel daniel kurtze about what could come next. then. >>