AMNA NAWAZ: At the end of this busy week, capped# off with today's Supreme Court decisions, let's## turn now to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart.# That is New York Times columnist David Brooks,## and Jonathan Capehart, associate# editor for The Washington Post.

And we should say that you are both joining# us tonight from the Aspen Ideas Festival in## Colorado.

Your beautiful backgrounds make me wish# I was there with you guys.

It's great to see you.

But let's jump right in to those Supreme Court# decisions today, big wins for the president,## one on allowing religious parents to opt their# kids out of LGBTQ learning and storybooks## in school, the other severely limiting lower# courts' ability to issue nationwide injunctions.

We heard President Trump very# happily thank the justices who## ruled in his favor earlier today.

Take a listen.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United# States: I want to thank Justice Barrett,## who wrote the opinion brilliantly, as well# as Chief John Roberts, and Justices Alito,## Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Thomas, great people.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, kick us# off here.

What's your reaction## to those rulings?

What do you take away from that?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, on the# injunction ruling I reached out## to former senior official in the Democratic# administration just to get their take on it.

And the response back was mixed bag.

And# it's a mixed bag because, on the one hand,## Democratic presidents and Republican presidents# never liked it when a lower court judge reached## in and stopped them from doing something with a# nationwide injunction.

I'm thinking particularly## of President Biden and, say, student# loan -- student loan debt forgiveness.

But when it comes to what the court# did in terms of birthright citizenship,## the ruling is stayed.

The injunction is still# in place for 30 days.

But after 30 days,## we're going to be in a situation where children# born in the 28 states that weren't a party to## this to this ruling could be born in# -- not be citizens in those states.

The chaos that the Supreme Court has unleashed on## the country with this ruling,# I just think is unfathomable.

When it comes to the LGBT school# ruling for that to come out the day## after the 10th anniversary of the Obergefell# ruling, which legalized same-sex marriage,## made it a constitutional right is# really -- it's painful.

It also## speaks to the court's willingness to be# a party to erasing a whole community.

But then, on the other side,# flip side, the same Supreme Court## made it possible or said that it is OK# for the Affordable Care Act to cover## treatments such as PrEP and HIV medication.

So# that is a good thing for the LGBTQ community.

AMNA NAWAZ: David, what's your take# on that, a mixed bag as well?

And,## in particular, this idea that# we're moving to like a patchwork## of potential citizenship here based on# that injunction ruling, what's your view?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I think the patchwork# argument is the best argument that people## in favor of the national injunction have# that, where the Constitution is going to## be interpreted differently in different# regions, that doesn't seem to make sense.

Nonetheless, I hate to say it.

I think# the court decided rightly on the national## injunctions.

I remember, back in the Biden# administration, there was a judge in Amarillo,## Texas, who decided to ban an abortion pill.# And I thought it was just crazy that a single## judge can set national policy on a fraught# issue that should be settled by democracy.

And Democrats were rightly outraged.

Now,# I am all in favor of judges stopping what## the Trump administration is doing, but# you have got to be consistent for both## parties.

And I think if people want to# challenge what the Trump administration## is doing or any administration,# they can file class action lawsuits.

But we should not have this shopping where# liberals go to a Northern California liberal## judge, conservatives go to# an Amarillo, Texas, judge,## and they can set national policy through one# person.

That just doesn't seem to make sense.

I agree with Jonathan on the birthright# citizenship.

The case they were dealing## with wasn't specifically about the# question of birthright citizenship,## but they're the Supreme Court.

They can do# whatever they want.

And they should have## expanded the question and settled the# birthright citizenship right away.

It's## written right there in the 14th Amendment.# There should be no objection about this.

And they left open the realm of chaos.

AMNA NAWAZ: I do want to ask you both too# about the big news from Iran this week,## because the president was asked about that# earlier this morning as well.

And this is a## week in which we saw both President# Trump and the secretary of defense,## Pete Hegseth, continue to insist that# Iran's entire nuclear program has been## completely destroyed, obliterated# as a result of those U.S. strikes.

That's even as the results of a preliminary# intelligence assessment that was leaked said## that some of the highly enriched# and radium could have been moved,## could still be safe.

Experts have told us that# as well.

Senators got their first intelligence## briefing as well.

This is what Democrat Senator# Chris Murphy had to say after that briefing.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): I just do not# think the president was selling the truth## when he said this program was obliterated.# There's certainly damaged done to the program,## but there is the significant -- there's# still significant remaining capability.

AMNA NAWAZ: David, even Republican Senator# Mike Rounds said to us yesterday that there's## no question there's still uranium there.# Why the insistence from the president that## this was completely destroyed, the# program was completely destroyed?

DAVID BROOKS: It's not -- it's hyperbolic to# say it's completely destroyed.

But we have## evidence from a report from David Albright's# think tank, leading scholar on this, that the## enrichment capability is basically gone.

We have# the IAEI, the -- IAEA, the international agency,## International Atomic Energy, whatever that thing# is -- Bush could never say those initials either.

(LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: And they say it's .. And the main feature is, Iran has to know that# any time Israel, and the U.S. want to go back,## and if Iran decides they want to# reconstitute their nuclear program,## the U.S. and Israel can take care# of it.

And the bigger story here is,## over the last 10 months, Israel in particular# has degraded Hamas, degraded Hezbollah.

They have made the Iranian# regime look weak and decrepit## and they have established deterrence.

And that# 10-month stretch -- and I detest Bibi Netanyahu,## but he's done a good job of making the# Middle East safer over the last 10 months.

AMNA NAWAZ: It's the IAEA, for those# of you following along at home.

AMNA NAWAZ: And, Jonathan, what# about you?

What's your take on this?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: You know, it's# in situations like this when at## least I would hope and expect that a# president of the United States would be## small-C conservative in the way they talk# about a mission so consequential and so big.

To step out there within hours to say# that the program had been obliterated,## when we didn't even know what had really# happened, I think was irresponsible.## And the leaked intelligence briefing# on the initial assessment is one view,## but as we have seen over time, that initial# assessment will probably change as time goes on.

And so I just think it would be best for everyone# involved to take a wait-and-see attitude.

But## we're talking about President Trump.

I'm wishing# against all the wishes.

He will never do that.

AMNA NAWAZ: I got to ask you both too about# Tuesday night's events in New York City,## the Democratic mayoral primary contest,# the entire country was paying attention to,## when Zohran Mamdani, who was a# little-known state assemblyman,## went on to beat the former New# York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

Mamdani is 33 years old.

He's a self-described# democratic socialist.

And his win, we should## point out, has really fueled a hateful response# from some on the right.

There's a major MAGA## voice named Charlie Kirk who posted this:# "Twenty-four years ago, a group of Muslims## killed 2,753 people on 9/11.

Now a Muslim# socialist is on pace to run New York City."

Tennessee Congressman Andy Ogles actually# called for Mamdani, who was born in Uganda,## is a naturalized U.S. citizen,# to be denaturalized and deported.

Jonathan, what does Mamdani's win tell# us about Democrats and their message,## if anything?

And what does the response# tell us about Republicans and theirs?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, the response -- I will## start with the Republican response.

It's# shameful.

..

It also tells me that Republicans are# deathly afraid of their prospects in## the 2026 midterm elections, especially if# they're going after a guy who just simply## won the primary in a municipal election.

And# the other thing I -- folks need to understand,## the reputation of New York City is# of a liberal bastion.

But -- and## it's a city where there's a 6-1 Democratic# registration advantage over Republicans.

And yet this city that has a reputation# of being a liberal bastion elected Rudy## Giuliani twice and Mike Bloomberg three# times, the first time as a Republican,## the next two times as an independent.

And so what# I take from Mamdani's win above all else is that## he went out there and he asked New Yorkers for# their votes.

He did not do a Rose Garden strategy.

He asked people for their votes# and he gave them something to vote## for.

And that's the thing I think Democrats# should emulate.

Ask people for their votes.

AMNA NAWAZ: David, what do you make of Mamdani's# win and the response we have seen so far?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, people hate the# establishment these days, and the## Republicans have found a way to tap into that.# And now Mamdani has found a way for Democrats.

And so if moderate Democrats who don't think the# party should go Democratic socialist want to win,## they should be as bold as he was, as# much vision, as vibrant as he was,.

He## ran a great campaign.

And the problem# with the more mainstream Democrats is,## they're looking old and tepid these days.

So# be more like Mamdani without the socialism.

(LAUGHTER) AMNA NAWAZ: David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart, great to see you both.

Thank you# so much.

Have a great weekend.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: You too, Amna.

You too.

DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.