AMNA NAWAZ: Good evening.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

Judy Woodruff is away.

On the "NewsHour" tonight: The surge continues.

The risks of reopening grow, as cases of COVID-19 spike across the country and the Centers for Disease Control faces scrutiny for its pandemic response.

Then: one-on-one.

Senator Bernie Sanders on the race for the White House and former Vice President Biden's new plan to tackle climate change.

Plus: Rethinking College.

The future of higher education remains in doubt for many community college students burdened by COVID-19 and structural inequality.

DERIONNE POLLARD, President, Montgomery College: Many of them live very fragile lives, and they're oftentimes one paycheck away from disaster.

AMNA NAWAZ: All that and more on tonight's "PBS NewsHour."

(BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: The relentless rise of COVID-19 cases has dominated another day in the summer of 2020.

More states are setting records for infections and deaths, and more are moving to curb activities again.

Lisa Desjardins reports on the day's developments.

LISA DESJARDINS: In Florida, the deadliest day yet from the coronavirus, with 132 deaths, a 10 percent increase from its previous record.

Republican Governor Ron DeSantis has defended reopening, but, today, he sounded a somber note.

GOV.

RON DESANTIS (R-FL): People are apprehensive.

People are hurting.

This virus has affected every Floridian's life in one way or another.

LISA DESJARDINS: Florida is part of a trio of high-population hot spots, along with California and Texas.

Those three states reported 30,000 new virus cases yesterday alone, this as local leaders across the country are rethinking their moves to reopen.

Officials outside Houston in Fort Bend County, Texas, have decided school this fall will open with online learning only.

DR. JACQUELYN JOHNSON MINTER, Director, Fort Bend County, Texas, Health and Human Services: We cannot tell this virus what we will and will not do.

The virus will teach us what is safe and what is prudent to do.

LISA DESJARDINS: In California, the same decision with even more impact.

Officials in Los Angeles and San Diego announced classrooms will stay closed, online learning only, when school starts.

That affects more than 800,000 students.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti: ERIC GARCETTI (D), Mayor of Los Angeles: We have never had as many people infected or infectious.

We have never had as many recorded positive cases each day.

And we have never had as many people in the hospital as there are tonight, as I speak to you, in Los Angeles.

LISA DESJARDINS: But there is divide.

Outside of Los Angeles, protesters for and against gathered as the Orange County School Board recommended that classrooms reopen next month without masks or social distancing.

On the opposite coast, the opposite direction.

The city of Philadelphia took a dramatic preventative step today.

Mayor Jim Kenney announced all large public events in the city are canceled through February of next year.

JIM KENNEY (D), Mayor of Philadelphia: What we are doing here is following medical advice, which I think every city and state in the nation should have, and we wouldn't be in the situation that we see resurging.

LISA DESJARDINS: In Louisiana, where cases are again mounting, Governor John Bel Edwards has mandated face masks for all residents in public.

Vice President Pence visited the state today to encourage emergency workers.

MIKE PENCE, Vice President of the United States: Keep up the great work, OK?

LISA DESJARDINS: Meanwhile, the White House's testing czar pushed back at some retweets sent by President Trump accusing health officials of lying.

Admiral Brett Giroir spoke to NBC.

ADM. BRETT GIROIR, U.S. Assistant Secretary for Health and Human Services: We may occasionally make mistakes, based on the information we have, but none of us lie.

LISA DESJARDINS: Dr. Anthony Fauci, the administration's top disease expert, whom President Trump has criticized, was asked in an online forum whom Americans should trust, and back to the experts.

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, NIAID Director: I would stick with respected medical authorities who have a track record of telling the truth, who have a track record of giving information and policy and recommendations based on scientific evidence and good data.

LISA DESJARDINS: Fauci also alluded to some good news on the vaccine front.

Researchers reported that the first U.S. tests of one vaccine did, in fact, boost immune systems, a positive sign, but just one of many steps and months of further tests ahead.

Abroad, India has seen confirmed infections explode, with 100,000 new cases in just four days.

The country has the third highest global tally.

And, in Australia, the government is imposing tougher penalties for people who violate quarantine.

In Queensland State, the penalty for breaking the rules will now be up to six months in jail.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Lisa Desjardins.

AMNA NAWAZ: In the day's other news: The Department of Homeland Security dropped its directive that international students in the U.S. attend college classes in person or leave the country.

The announcement came at a federal court hearing in Boston.

Harvard and MIT had sued, arguing the rule would force students to risk getting the coronavirus and cost the schools money.

More than 200 other colleges universities supported the lawsuit.

Three states held primaries today, amid the COVID-19 resurgence.

In Texas, Democrats were choosing a challenger to Republican John Cornyn, a three-term U.S. senator.

The state did not require face masks at the polls and did not expand mail-in voting.

In Alabama, former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions faced Tommy Tuberville for a Republican Senate nomination.

And in Maine, Republican Senator Susan Collins awaited the winner of the Democratic nominating contest.

President Trump has weighed in again on racial issues confronting the nation.

In a CBS News interview today, he dismissed concerns about the Confederate Flag and said -- quote -- "People love it."

He also criticized a question about black Americans being disproportionately killed by police by saying -- quote -- "So are white people, more white people, by the way."

The president also signed an order aimed at China's efforts to rein in protests in Hong Kong.

The order strips the territory of preferential financial treatment.

Meanwhile, China sharply criticized the U.S. for rejecting most of its territorial claims in the South China Sea.

Beijing accused Washington of -- quote -- "flexing its muscles" and interfering in the region.

Britain has reversed course, and will ban Chinese telecom giant Huawei from its next-generation mobile phone system.

The U.S. had pressed for the change, and the British government announced it today.

Dan Hewitt of Independent Television reports.

OLIVER DOWDEN, United Kingdom Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport: The U.K. can no longer be confident it will be able to guarantee the future security of Huawei 5G equipment.

By the time of the next election, we will have implemented in law an irreversible path for complete removal of the Huawei equipment from our 5G networks.

DAN HEWITT: So why have the government done it?

Well, Huawei may be the world's second largest supplier of mobile phones after Samsung, but the Chinese firm's equipment is also at the heart of the U.K.'s mobile network.

And it's their role in the newest technology, 5G, where the apparent security risks lie.

In May, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Huawei, who claim China could use the firm to spy on them.

And, today, U.K. Security Services concluded they could not guarantee that using Huawei's 5G kit was safe.

So the government will ban all telecoms companies from buying Huawei's equipment after this year and remove all their 5G technology from the U.K. by 2027.

JEREMY THOMPSON, Executive Vice President, Huawei U.K.: We're disappointed by the announcement today.

It wasn't totally unexpected, but the severity and the speed of the implementation, we think, will be a problem for the U.K. network.

So it's not good news for U.K. consumers.

DAN HEWITT: But major economies do not see you as trustworthy, and they believe you are ultimately answerable to the Chinese state.

JEREMY THOMPSON: We provide communication services to one-third of the planet.

So, we are trusted.

DAN HEWITT: Huawei will be allowed to carry on providing equipment for Britain's 3G and 4G networks, but the government admitted today that removing them from 5G would set the U.K. back two or three years, and cost the phone companies two billion pounds.

KAREN EGAN, Telecommunications Analyst: Ultimately, it's very likely the consumer is going to pay for that.

And the consumer is going to pay in terms of slower 5G rollout and kind of waiting longer for the benefits that ensues from that.

DAN HEWITT: While this latest government U-turn will be welcomed in Washington, attention will now turn to reaction in Beijing and the diplomatic cost of pulling the plug on one of its biggest names.

AMNA NAWAZ: That report from Dan Hewitt of Independent Television News.

In Bangladesh, seasonal monsoon flooding has now left more than a million people stranded or displaced.

With major rivers rising, villagers in the north are using makeshift boats to get animals and belongings to higher ground.

The water is flowing in from India upstream.

The monsoon season begins in June and runs through October.

Back in this country, meanwhile, the federal government carried out its first execution in 17 years.

Daniel Lewis Lee died by lethal injection at a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana.

He murdered three people in Arkansas in 1996 in a white supremacist plot.

The execution went ahead after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a lower court's injunction overnight.

British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell pled not guilty today to luring young girls into sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein.

She appeared in a video hearing before a federal court in New York.

The judge denied bail for Maxwell and set a new trial date for next July.

Her longtime confidant Epstein was facing sex trafficking charges when he killed himself in jail last August.

Another federal judge in New York has rejected a settlement between Harvey Weinstein and his sexual misconduct accusers.

The former Hollywood producer is serving 23 years for rape and sexual assault.

He had agreed to pay $19 million, but the judge ruled today that the dozens of accusers are too varied to be grouped into a single settlement.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was hospitalized today with a possible infection.

A court statement says she's at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore after having a bile duct stent cleaned out.

She's expected to remain there for several days.

Ginsburg has had two bouts with cancer and been hospitalized several times in recent years.

And on Wall Street today, stocks picked up steam after a slow start, as investors again pushed aside concerns over COVID-19.

The Dow Jones industrial average gained 556 points to close at 26642.

The Nasdaq rose 97 points, and the S&P 500 added 42.

Still to come on the "NewsHour": Bernie Sanders discusses the race for the White House and Biden's plan to combat climate change; the Centers for Disease Control faces increasing scrutiny for its handling of the pandemic; the struggles of community college students burdened by COVID-19 and structural inequality; plus, much more.

Today, former Vice President Joe Biden released new policy proposals aimed at the climate crisis.

His $2 trillion plan will increase the use of renewable energy, and it includes a goal of a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035.

Here's what the former vice president said in a speech in Delaware: JOSEPH BIDEN (D), Presidential Candidate: I know that climate change is a challenge that's going to define our America's future.

I know meeting the challenge will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to jolt new life into our economy, strengthen our global leadership, protect our planet for future generations.

If I have the honor of being elected president, we're not just going to tinker around the edges.

We're going to make historic investments that will seize the opportunity and meet this moment in history.

AMNA NAWAZ: These policy proposals were formed in part by joint task forces created to unify the Democratic Party.

They were put together by Biden and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who joins me now.

Senator Sanders, welcome back to the "NewsHour," and thanks for being with us.

I want to ask you about your team's efforts to move the Biden campaign and the Biden team platform a little bit further to the left.

As we just mentioned, you did get him to move up that timeline to commit to 100 percent clean electricity.

But it's not the Green New Deal.

You did get him to commit to a government-run public health care option.

But it's not Medicare for all.

So, those were key campaign issues for you.

Do you think these policies are enough for your backers to want to back Biden?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT): Well, given that the alternative is Donald Trump, the most dangerous president in the history of this country, I'm absolutely confident that those proposals are not only a significant step forward, but are going to win widespread support from the progressive community.

What Joe Biden understands is that, in order to win this election -- and I'm going to do everything I can to see that he does win it - - we're going to need a large voter turnout.

And to get a large voter turnout, there has to be energy and excitement among younger people, among working-class people, among people who very often who do not vote, for a variety of reasons.

And I think what our task force has managed to do is to reach compromises which are going to bring a lot more excitement to a sector of the voting population that was less enthusiastic about Joe.

AMNA NAWAZ: Can I ask you, Senator, are you worried those compromises could temper some of that excitement or enthusiasm that you say Mr. Biden needs?

I mean, there's already been some criticism, even from your former national press secretary, who said that the Biden team was showing -- quote - - "mocking disrespect" for voters with these kinds of plans.

What do you say to people who have concerns that these plans don't go far enough?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I will tell you, I don't think they go far enough.

And the people who are on representing the progressive community on the task forces don't think these proposals go far enough.

But the answer is to elect Joe Biden, and then to strengthen our grassroots movement to make sure that, in all respects, the environment, the economy, health care, we have a government that represents all of us, and not just the few.

But I think it is very hard for anybody to seriously look at these proposals, whether it is on health care, whether it's on the environment or climate change, whether it's on education, whether it's in the economy, and not to see that, if these proposals were to be implemented, Joe Biden would be the most progressive president since FDR.

It's a significant step forward, but, in truth, it's not all that I would like.

AMNA NAWAZ: Senator, as you know, during this pandemic, voters' top issues have shifted somewhat.

Things like health care, immigration, even climate change have moved further down the list.

Obviously, the coronavirus and the pandemic response and the economy have moved to the top.

So, as Congress is now considering another spending plan, I want to ask you, how big do you think it should be?

And what do you say to people who are concerned that, the bigger that response gets, the more it's going to push America into the red?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Look, this is what I say.

And that is that we are living in an unprecedented moment in American history.

We have a pandemic, because -- and, because of Trump's ineptitude and downplaying this pandemic from day one, is getting worse in many states in this country; 135,000 people have already died.

And that number will grow in months to come.

We have an economy which has lost tens of millions of jobs.

Today in Vermont and throughout this country, people are hungry.

By the millions, people are worried about being evicted.

People in many cases have lost their health insurance.

We have got to stand up and represent the working families of this country, who are seeing today more desperation than they have seen in many, many decades.

And the alternative to not becoming aggressive is to see, in my view, not only unbelievable human suffering, but to see this economy head straightforward into a Great Depression.

AMNA NAWAZ: Senator, to that point, how big do you think that that next spending plan should be, then?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Well, the House passed its bill for $3 trillion.

And I think the Senate should do at least as much.

We are seeing now unprecedented suffering in this country.

We have tens of millions of people who've lost their jobs.

Many have lost their health care.

There are people in my state of Vermont, throughout this country who today are worried about feeding their families.

People are worried about being evicted from their homes.

This is America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world.

Now is the time to stand with working families.

And let me just say this.

If we don't do that, not only are we going to see an increase in suffering and death.

What we're also going to see is this country plunging, in my view, into the worst economic decline since the Great Depression.

AMNA NAWAZ: Senator, less than a minute left.

I have to ask you.

As we look back to 2016, it's worth pointing out that most of your supporters back then did end up voting for Hillary Clinton, but more than a quarter did not.

In fact, I met many of them even earlier this primary season who described themselves as Bernie or bust, right?

They weren't sure that they were going to vote for the Democratic nominee if it wasn't you.

I wonder, do you think now that selecting a running mate who is more progressive, like Elizabeth Warren, would help Mr. Biden to win over some of those supporters?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I think that the Biden campaign, they're very good politicians.

And I think they understand that they need a vice president who not only will have the right politics for Joe Biden, but as somebody he is personally compatible with.

I think, when you're dealing with the vice president, there has got to be a lot of personal chemistry.

And that's a decision, I'm sure, that Joe and his team are looking very hard at right now.

AMNA NAWAZ: That is Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders joining us tonight.

Thank you so much for your time, sir.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: My pleasure.

Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Traditionally, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the CDC, is seen as the leading government agency to monitor public health during an epidemic and to convey key information to the larger public.

Historically, the CDC is not very political.

But, in many ways, its role has been very different during this pandemic.

As William Brangham tells us now, four former directors of the agency say, the CDC's voice has been muted for political reasons.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Amna, these four former directors these are men who have served in Republican and Democratic administrations just issued an editorial in The Washington Post.

And they argued that the agency's voice and crucial guidance has been sidelined.

They wrote -- quote -- "We're seeing the terrible effect of undermining the CDC play out in our population.

Willful disregard for public health guidelines is, unsurprisingly, leading to a sharp rise in infections and deaths."

One of those former directors is joining me now.

Dr. Thomas Besser -- Richard Besser is the CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which we should say is a funder of the "NewsHour."

Dr. Besser, thank you very much for being here.

The headline of your editorial said: "We ran the CDC.

No president ever politicized its science the way Trump has."

How has he done so?

DR. RICHARD BESSER, Former Acting Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Well you know, what we're seeing, William, is a clash of messages.

We hear every public health leader in the nation talking about how serious this pandemic is, talking about the steps we need to take as individuals and as a nation to ensure that we minimize the damage to people's lives.

And then we hear politicians, starting at the White House, talk about how there's nothing to worry about, how public health is overplaying this.

And the injection of politics into a public health response is extremely dangerous for the nation.

CDC is the nation's public health agency.

And their guidance informs what states do, what local public health does.

By injecting politics into it and undermining the trust that we need to have in that guidance, it puts people's lives at risk.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: And what are some of the real-world effects of that politicizing of the science?

DR. RICHARD BESSER: Well, a number of things.

The biggest challenge I'm seeing for CDC is that they're not having daily press conferences.

They're not able to talk to the public through the media about what they're doing and what they're learning.

So, months ago, CDC talked about masks and the importance of health care workers wearing masks, but talked about the general public not needing to wear masks.

But there's been a lot of learning that's gone on in every public health response.

I ran emergency response at CDC for four years.

And during every response, what you don't know early on far outweighs what you do know.

And you use science to drive the direction of your response.

So, as CDC learned more, as we learned more from other nations and what was successful, CDC changed their guidance.

They recommend that everyone in America wear a mask.

And the reason is because a lot of people can transmit this infection before they even know they're sick.

So, by wearing a mask, you can cut down on that.

Well, the CDC had no opportunity to make that case to the public.

So, it looked like a total flip-flop.

Without bringing the public along, there's no way to build the trust that is absolutely essential during a response.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: As I quoted, you write that the willful disregard of scientific expertise is leading to increasing cases and deaths.

Do you really believe that this interference has cost American lives, that -- people who would have survived had this interference not occurred?

DR. RICHARD BESSER: I do.

I do.

And I also think that that's part of the reason we're seeing such disparate impact on black Americans, Latino Americans, Native Americans, so many of whom are essential workers.

Well, if you're an essential worker, and the people you're having contact with aren't wearing masks because they don't believe that there's any value to it, you're putting those essential workers at risk.

And if -- those essential workers, maybe their health is fine, and they're going to do well with this infection.

But higher proportions of black Americans, Latino Americans live in multigenerational households.

So they're coming home, and maybe they will give this infection to somebody who won't handle it so well.

That costs lives.

The fact that we're seeing so many young people around the nation going back to their social lives, feeling like there's nothing to worry about here, that is a total undercut of what public health science is saying to do.

And we need our public health scientists and our political leaders to be on the same page.

And it needs to be the page of science.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: I mean, as you well know from your time running the agency, the CDC has to walk this very fine line.

It has to be close enough to an administration so that their advice is taken, but it also has to be separate enough so that the public sees them as a neutral arbiter of public health information.

Do you think, given how grave you're describing this circumstance, that the CDC director, Robert Redfield, should have stepped forward more forcefully and said, no, I don't think we're on the right path, we need to do differently?

DR. RICHARD BESSER: Well, I think every leader, every CDC director has to -- has to know what their line in the sand is, and recognize that if they're -- if they're forced to step over that, that they're going to take an action.

It is absolutely essential that the public trusts the information coming from the CDC, that it's the best evidence.

Whenever CDC puts through -- puts a guidance forward, it goes through clearance.

It's shared with other agencies.

It's shared with the White House.

That's where you have science and policy interacting, so that what goes forward can be going forward with a unified front.

But, after guidance comes out, it's been unprecedented to see political leaders undercutting the guidance, telling people they don't need to follow it, that it's -- that it's overdone, that it's too expensive.

The idea that we can open our schools this fall if we have not -- if we don't have this under control and if we're not providing schools with what they need to -- so that our children are safe and staff are safe and teachers are safe, this is something that we can do as a nation, but it has to be driven by that road map that public health is laying out so clearly.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: I mean, as you know, the CDC has had a few missteps.

Their initial viral test malfunctioned.

They seemed for a period of time to be double-counting both viral tests and antibody tests.

Do you think that some of those missteps might have added to the sort of ammunition that is being used to shoot at them now?

DR. RICHARD BESSER: Well, it's definitely ammunition.

But I worked at CDC for 13 years and led emergency response for four.

There was never a response effort that we had where we didn't make mistakes.

But we had the opportunity every day to talk to the public and say, here's something we tried.

We thought this was the right way to go.

Here's -- it didn't work.

Here's what we learned from that.

The CDC doesn't have that opportunity here.

So, there's so much conversation about old mistakes that CDC made.

If CDC were out front, and were talking to the press every day -- one of the things the press does, it asks the tough questions and makes sure that CDC doesn't have blind spots around things they should be paying attention to.

They're not getting that.

And so not only are they not able to share and build trust.

Their response is not as good because they're not interacting directly.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: All right, Dr. Richard Besser, CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and former acting director of the CDC, thank you very, very much for your time.

DR. RICHARD BESSER: Thank you, William.

AMNA NAWAZ: Now the first in a special series of reports about Rethinking College during COVID.

Many students, families and, of course, colleges and universities are indeed rethinking about what this fall will be like, as the pandemic continues to dramatically reshape the higher education landscape.

Our series begins with community colleges, which educate about 40 percent of undergraduates in the U.S.

Many were already stretched thin before the pandemic, but surveys indicate enrollment is likely to increase as students and workers shift plans.

Correspondent Hari Sreenivasan looks at how one community college and its students are coping.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Maryland's Montgomery College, just outside D.C., is eerily quiet these days.

During a typical July, the school's three campuses would be bustling with summer school students.

But like so many colleges and universities around the country, learning here has shifted from classrooms and labs to bedrooms and living rooms.

Montgomery College is one of the country's most diverse community colleges.

It's nestled in a county with pockets of poverty and wealth.

About 55,000 students ordinarily attend for accredited degrees and other programs like work force development.

The school was one of the first in the area to announce it will continue remote learning in the fall with a limited number of small lab classes.

It's too early to know how many will attend next year, but the school is already seeing an uptick in interest.

DERIONNE POLLARD, President, Montgomery College: If I look at my enrollment for summer, we will probably be about 20 percent up in terms of where we were this time last year.

HARI SREENIVASAN: DeRionne Pollard is president of the college.

She says, as the school gears up for increased enrollment, she's staying focused on current students, many of whom were struggling before the pandemic.

DERIONNE POLLARD: So, our students oftentimes are hungry.

They are taking care of multiple generations at any given time.

They're trying to figure out how to get to school.

Many of them live very fragile lives, and they're oftentimes one paycheck away from disaster.

HARI SREENIVASAN: In March, that disaster struck when businesses began to close.

Many students and their families lost jobs, and some struggled with the move to online learning.

That was the case for 19-year-old graphic design major Kayla Savoy.

She says she enjoys creating and learning about art in her classes, but technology issues and distractions at home made it difficult to stay focused on school.

KAYLA SAVOY, College Student: The Wi-Fi, absolutely atrocious at my house.

There's technically five or six of us all living at once.

You have a toddler screaming about "Paw Patrol" in the background while your 8:00 a.m. class is going on.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Savoy is paying her own way through school and says she managed to get straight A's last semester.

But she's been struggling to find work the last few months, and it's been hard to pay for things like gas and food.

On top of those concerns, she and many of her classmates have been deeply impacted by recent events surrounding racial inequities.

KAYLA SAVOY: I got to this point where I was like, I don't know how I'm going to be able to juggle more than I already have.

And then I turn around, and I see more senseless killings of my people.

And, as a black woman, I fear for so many people that are important in my life.

It becomes just an overwhelming feeling of, what can I do?

Can I not study for classes?

Can I not go to the store without my life being in danger?

HARI SREENIVASAN: Montgomery College has been trying to help students cope with many of these stresses.

The school has distributed more than $3.5 million in emergency aid, money from the federal CARES Act, private donors, established emergency funds, and $400,000 the school saved from canceled end-of-the-year ceremonies.

Early on, local companies donated laptops, and free food was handed out to students and the surrounding community, where unemployment has jumped up in recent months to nearly 9 percent.

DERIONNE POLLARD: Our students, they don't pop in for eight or nine months out of the year, live in a residence hall, and they go back to where they came from.

They live here.

They work here.

They raise families here.

So, as a result of that, the wealth and health of our community is a direct reflection of the health of our community college, and vice versa.

There's a mutuality to that that demands that we rise up in these moments.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Pollard says this moment also requires thoughtful engagement and action by the school and academia in general to address systemic racism.

During open Zoom forums called Let's Talk, faculty and staff have been facilitating candid conversations.

ANDRAE BROWN, Professor, Montgomery College: We're literally watching the murder of people consistently on television over and over and over again.

That's not only dehumanizing to the person, but it desensitizes us to what the value of that life is.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And some faculty, like anthropology adjunct Professor Amy Carattini are encouraging students to explore race and ethnicity in new ways.

Amy Carattini, Professor, Montgomery College: I think it's just so important to make students feel comfortable to talk about these issues.

I think there's a lot of nervousness or fear of saying the wrong thing or doing the wrong thing.

HARI SREENIVASAN: But outside of the classroom, some wonder how well Montgomery College and other community colleges will be able to meet the challenges of these times.

SARA GOLDRICK-RAB, Temple University: Community colleges have been systematically defunded for years, and they were already in a tough situation when it came to resources, when it came to instructional supports, when it came to being ready to serve these large numbers of students.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Temple University's Sara Goldrick-Rab is a professor of sociology and medicine.

She and her colleagues recently released a survey that found nearly three in five college students across the country have experienced basic needs insecurity during the pandemic.

She says lack of funding can lead to staff shortages and limited course offerings, and the current job market may make it more difficult for students to get across the finish line.

SARA GOLDRICK-RAB: These students are at very high risk of going to college for all the right reasons, and leaving because they had very little choice.

People used to work their way through college in the 1970s and the 1980s.

They have always done that.

But now work has literally disappeared.

This is not a temporary challenge, when these people, if they drop out of college, they're going to struggle for the next 10 to 15 years, at least, to repay the debt that they owe.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Montgomery College President Pollard has those issues and others on her plate as she steers the college into what could be a rocky fall.

DERIONNE POLLARD: If students do come to us and we know, they will need financial aid.

We know that the state and even the federal government may not be able to provide as much, because they're trying to raise an economy back up.

We know that there's a lot of uncertainty.

But here's the thing about it.

We have been here before.

Community colleges have a deep competency in trying to respond to these types of environments.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Fifty-five thousand students, more or less, will log into their online classes on August 31, when the fall semester begins, but the school's campuses will remain quiet for the foreseeable future.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Hari Sreenivasan.

AMNA NAWAZ: From landmark decisions on immigration and LGBTQ protections, to virtual oral arguments amid the pandemic, the Supreme Court concluded a term last week that is certainly one for the history books.

We take a deeper look into the Roberts court and its blockbuster term with Marcia Coyle, chief Washington correspondent for "The National Law Journal," Paul Clement, former U.S. solicitor general during the George W. Bush administration.

And Neal Katyal, he served as the acting solicitor general under President Obama.

Welcome to you all.

And thank you for being here.

Neal and Paul, we should point out, between the two of you, you have argued almost 150 cases before the court.

Neal, I'm going to start with you, because I want to get a sense of how you're looking back on this term.

Earlier in June, there was a sense that this is a court that's leaning actually quite liberal.

There, within a couple weeks, they ruled workers can't be fired for being gay or transgender.

They stopped President Trump's effort to end DACA.

And they struck down a restrictive abortion law in Louisiana.

How did you see that string of rulings?

Was that an outright win for progressives?

NEAL KATYAL, Former Acting U.S.

Solicitor General: Well, I agree that there have been an outright number of wins that progressives have had, the tax returns cases, DACA, the LGBT cases, the Louisiana abortion case.

In all of them, Donald Trump lost.

And I'm not aware of another president, outside of Richard Nixon, in our lifetimes and perhaps even beyond who has fared worse at the Supreme Court.

But I really think of it that way, is much more about serious losses for Trump than I do about the court turning progressive or liberal, which I don't think is true.

Paul and I both know this.

We both represented presidents in the Supreme Court.

It's pretty hard to lose if you're representing the president.

You got to kind of try.

It's like failing a class at Yale.

You got to work at it.

But, here, they have managed to lose a lot.

And I don't think it's really as much the fault of the lawyers, but really outlandish positions by the Trump administration and outlandish process by the Trump administration.

And so what look like liberal results are really just kind of basic rule of law results.

And I will point you in particular to the tax returns cases, in which President Trump's own appointees totally rejected his position of absolute immunity.

AMNA NAWAZ: Paul, what's your take on that?

When you look at those particular string of rulings, how did you assess them?

PAUL CLEMENT, Former U.S.

Solicitor General: Well, I think that, on a number of these cases, you really do have to look at the context of what the court is specifically wrestling with.

Those tax return cases were very unprecedented cases.

And I think, in some respects, it is not that unprecedented for a president to lose big, even with his own nominees, when it comes to executive power.

President Clinton sort of famously lost Clinton against Jones 9-0 and lost two of his nominees along the way in that case.

So I do think it really depends a lot on the nature of the particular issues.

And I think that, if you look two weeks ago, before the end of the term, it was looking quite liberal.

But, by the end of the term, there were a number of religious liberty cases in particular that kind of made it a much more nuanced story in the end.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I want to get to those in more detail in just a second.

Before we do though, Marcia, I have to ask you.

When you look at the abortion decision, for example, in that case, there were four liberal justices who voted to strike down the law.

And it was Chief Justice John Roberts who sided with them.

Talk to me a little bit about the role that Roberts has played on this court.

And, at the same time, we should mention he had a very full plate.

He was also presiding over the impeachment proceedings.

MARCIA COYLE, "The National Law Journal": That's right, Amna.

It was an extraordinary term on many levels.

But, as far as John Roberts goes, I will take the maybe 30,000-mile view of the term and say that this was a term that began with a number of cases that were fraught with political and partisan implications.

And I think the Supreme Court emerged unscathed by or untarnished by either of those because of John Roberts.

He was able, by forming cross-ideological majorities, to steer the court through those cases, and to sort of confirm what he has been trying to tell the public in some very rare public statements, that the court is an independent institution.

Certainly, a number of conservatives did hope that, with the confirmation of Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, that there would be a rock-solid conservative majority on the court.

And that is not the case.

It really does depend often on the nature of the cases that come before them.

But I really think, if you wanted to look at winners and losers in the term that just ended, you would have to say that the winner was the U.S. Supreme Court, because it did emerge unscathed from so many of those cases that could have painted -- if there had been 5-4 decisions in the normal ideological split, it could have been painted as a partisan institution.

AMNA NAWAZ: Well, Paul, I want to get back to some of those cases you mentioned involving religious freedom, because there were a few.

And there seemed to be somewhat of a trend when it came to how those went.

There was one shielding religious schools from lawsuits on employment discrimination, another one upholding the Trump administration rule that employers can deny contraceptive coverage on religious or moral grounds.

When you look at the body of those decisions, what was the message you think the court was sending?

PAUL CLEMENT: Well, I think adherence of religion and people trying to vindicate rights to religious liberty did incredibly well in all of those cases.

And in every one of those cases, they got the vote of Chief Justice Roberts.

Some of those cases were more in the 7-2 department than the 5-4 decision.

One of the most consequential, the Espinoza case about school choice and the role of state constitutions in limiting school choice, I think was a 5-4 decision and a big victory for religious liberty.

So, I do think those cases underscore that John Roberts is not a liberal or even a moderate when it comes to some issues.

And I think it really depends on the nature of the issues that come before the court in a particular term.

AMNA NAWAZ: Neal, what about you?

When you look at those specific cases involving this one issue of religious freedom, which we know is very important to the Trump administration, how do you look back on this term?

NEAL KATYAL: Well, I think Paul's absolutely right.

The religious freedom cases show the conservative, so-called conservatives won a lot.

And I agree with him that you have to look to the overall context.

It's just the number of cases here in which the Trump administration position lost is pretty extraordinary.

And so Marcia puts it better than me when she says, the Supreme Court is the winner in last term.

I would say a footnote to that is, I think the rule of law was also a winner.

I mean, our country is so bitterly politically divided right now.

And the Supreme Court, really, and because of Chief Justice Roberts' ability to steer the court, really points to a different way, a way of mutual respect, a way in which we can listen to those from the other side and be the -- forge agreements with them.

It was really, I think, a majestic thing to behold.

And it's not a liberal thing.

And I don't think the chief justice is some liberal.

The best evidence of that is, at 2:00 a.m. this morning, he cast the fifth vote to resume the federal death penalty, when the litigants didn't even have a chance to brief and argue all their challenges.

So I think everyone should be careful when they use liberal or conservative terms with respect to the court.

AMNA NAWAZ: Marcia, as we reported earlier, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is back in the hospital.

Obviously, there have been some health concerns among the Supreme Court justices.

As you look ahead to the next term, tell me a little bit about how we should be thinking about some of the cases ahead and some of the general concerns about the health of those justices.

MARCIA COYLE: Well, I think, Amna, when you look at the ages of some of the justices, you have Justice Ginsburg now 86, I believe.

You have Justice Breyer 81.

Several other justices are over 65 and are in that age group that is most vulnerable to the COVID-19 virus, that you have to take pause and wonder if, next term, there could be some changes in the court's personnel on the bench.

So that may very well be something to watch closely.

I know that the Trump administration is hoping once again to make the court an issue in the presidential election.

Right now, though, I don't think that is going to figure into how the justices deliberate at all.

Don't count Justice Ginsburg out.

She is -- has been remarkably resilient.

AMNA NAWAZ: It is a court to watch.

And, of course, I'm sure we all wish Justice Ginsburg a speedy recovery.

That is Marcia Coyle, Neal Katyal, and Paul Clement.

Thanks so much for being with us.

MARCIA COYLE: My pleasure.

PAUL CLEMENT: Thank you.

NEAL KATYAL: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: In the wake of protests against systemic racism in America, many industries are reexamining past practices and facing questions about their own racial biases.

One new effort puts a spotlight on the world of publishing.

Here's Jeffrey Brown's Race Matters report.

That's part of our ongoing arts and culture series, Canvas.

JEFFREY BROWN: It began as a social media call out, #PublishingPaidMe, a request for authors to reveal the advances they have been paid for their books.

The result, based on responses from hundreds of writers, a clear disparity between black and non-black authors.

The hashtag was started by L.L.

McKinney, a writer of fantasy novels for young adults.

L.L.

MCKINNEY, Author, "A Dream So Dark": This advance has a lot to do with how well the publisher thinks the story will do.

And a lot of that has to do with this idea of a universal story.

If a certain story is more universal, then more people will have access to it.

And this highlights what publishing views as the default for the universal story.

JEFFREY BROWN: The call-out struck a nerve, and many prominent black authors weighed in, including novelist Jesmyn Ward, who wrote of how she fought and fought for a $100,000 advance for her third novel, "Sing, Unburied, Sing," even after her second, "Salvage the Bones," for which she received about $20,000, had won the National Book Award for fiction.

By contrast, Lydia Kiesling, who is white, wrote of receiving a $200,000 advance for her literary debut.

N.K.

Jemisin, a black novelist who won the Hugo Award recognizing the best science fiction and fantasy writing three years in a row, said she received just $25,000 advances for each of the books in her award-winning Broken Earth trilogy.

L.L.

MCKINNEY: You have an award-winning author who is beloved by so many, you know, right on up to presidents picking up her book, you know, vs. some people who we have never heard of, because the book doesn't earn out or it flops.

But then that person can turn around and get that same advance and a second chance.

JEFFREY BROWN: The outpouring on Twitter confirmed many suspicions.

L.L.

MCKINNEY: I knew that there was a disparity.

I didn't realize how large the disparity was.

Like, we knew it was there, and we knew it was big, but we didn't know it was that big.

WOMAN: A new novel by Jeanine Cummins up a debate about white privilege, racism in publishing and the unintended consequences of telling a story that is not your own.

JEFFREY BROWN: Earlier this year, the publishing industry came under fire over issues of pay and representation for the novel "American Dirt," a story of Mexican migrants written by a non-Mexican author, Jeanine Cummins, who reportedly received a seven-figure advance.

Some prominent Latino writers found the story inauthentic, advancing harmful stereotypes.

For L.L.

McKinney, all these issues are personal.

L.L.

MCKINNEY: I was a kid who loved science fiction and fantasy, but science fiction and fantasy did not love me back.

If I was on the page, I was the sassy best friend, or I was the enemy, or I was the help, or I was the gangbanger.

As a child, I didn't have the vocabulary to articulate what I was seeing and feeling.

But now that I do, that's what I want to change for the readers of today and the readers of the future.

JEFFREY BROWN: Also now thinking of those readers, Dana Canedy, newly appointed publisher of Simon & Schuster.

A former New York Times journalist and more recently administrator of the Pulitzer Prizes, she becomes the first black person to head a major publishing house.

Dana Canedy joins me now from New York.

Dana Canedy, welcome to you.

So, let's start with that hashtag #PublishingPaidMe.

It put a spotlight on black writers being paid less and, therefore, a sense of being valued less.

Now, I know you're new to this industry, but what do you see?

How do you respond to something like that?

DANA CANEDY, Senior Vice President and Publisher, Simon & Schuster: Well, I think it's going to be my job to make sure that doesn't happen at Simon & Schuster and hopefully to be able to influence the larger publishing community as well.

There's no excuse for that.

And I wouldn't have stood for it when I was writing my book.

Thankfully, that didn't happen to me.

But, as a leader in this industry now, I want to hear from folks who have had those experiences and figure out how we can solve it.

JEFFREY BROWN: Many cultural institutions, of course, are now reexamining themselves in light of the Black Lives Matter protest.

In what specific ways -- publishing has long been seen as an insular and largely white in its makeup as an industry.

In what specific ways do you think it should look at itself and change?

DANA CANEDY: It's very funny to me when people say that publishing fits that sort of M.O., because you could be talking about law, or really sort of any other industry.

I think industries in general need to look at themselves, publishing included.

And I, for many years, headed up diversity and inclusion initiatives at The New York Times as part of my portfolio as a senior manager there, a senior newsroom leader.

And so I have a lot of tools in my tool chest that I can call upon.

But I think, for Simon & Schuster specifically, I don't have the answers yet.

I need to get -- start the job, get in there, roll up my sleeves, and see what they're doing and where there are opportunities for growth.

So, one thing anybody who works with me knows is, I'm very honest.

I'm not going to pretend to have answers that I don't.

So I will get in there, talk to the staff, talk to the leadership, and figure out where we go.

We will have -- and they may already, but we will have a comprehensive approach to diversity of all kinds.

I just need to get into the company and figure out where we need to go.

And then I don't think it's enough, as a leader in this industry who happens to be a person of color, to just look at Simon & Schuster.

I want to influence the entire publishing community.

It's a little early to answer how, but I will.

And you can check back with me in a year and hold me accountable.

JEFFREY BROWN: OK, we -- I hope we will get a chance to do that.

But I mentioned the case, the debate around the novel "American Dirt."

And I wonder.

You're a reader.

You're a writer yourself.

Do you - - when you look at this world of publishing, do you see a lack of opportunities for writers of color?

Do you see a lack of voices being heard?

DANA CANEDY: So, I think that's changed in recent years, and there's more opportunity than ever before, historically.

And not even in the very distant past, that's been the case.

I do think it's changing.

And I think it will continue to because of the movement that's taken hold in this country.

I also think that's where I'm going to have tremendous influence to bring in different voices, both established authors, but emerging voices that could be very important.

We have a lot of work to do.

We have to do it collectively.

I'm one person in one company.

But I think that there are some opportunities for leaders across publishing houses to put our heads together and figure out how we can influence this issue, how we can improve things related to both subject matter, pay equity for advances, the voices and the authors that get highlighted.

All of that provides, in my view, an exciting opportunity to improve things.

And I will do that.

I will as best I can.

JEFFREY BROWN: I know -- we just have 30 seconds, but I read that your son calls you, what, word nerd.

I know you love books.

But why take this job?

I mean (AUDIO GAP) what is it you hope to do, and why did you want it?

DANA CANEDY: Well, I think it's a tremendous opportunity to work with somebody I admire greatly, Jonathan Karp, who's one of the best minds in the business.

I wanted to work with him.

I also think I can have influence in the ways you and I just discussed.

And I will, and I intend to.

But, also, I'm a word nerd.

I love words.

So, this is like a dream job.

JEFFREY BROWN: All right, Dana Canedy is the new publisher of Simon & Schuster.

Thank you, and good luck.

DANA CANEDY: Thank you.

Thanks for having me.

AMNA NAWAZ: And tonight on the "PBS NewsHour" online, another episode of our podcast "America, Interrupted."

As the U.S. grapples with how to reopen and contain the coronavirus, we go across the pond to the U.K. to hear about what we might learn from how Brits are handling the pandemic.

Listen on our Web site.

That's PBS.org/NewsHour or wherever you get your podcasts.

Also on the "NewsHour" online, "Citizen" by Claudia Rankine is our July selection for Now Read This, our book club with The New York Times.

It's a collection of essays, images and poetry that consider how collective expressions of racism play out in contemporary society.

Rankine recently told the "NewsHour" about how a natural disaster, Hurricane Katrina, prompted her to focus her work on race in America.

And that is the "NewsHour" for tonight.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

Join us online and again here tomorrow evening.

For all of us at the "PBS NewsHour," thank you, please stay safe, and we'll see you soon.