GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

Amna Nawaz is away.

On the "News Hour" tonight: Newly elected Pope Leo XIV holds his first mass and now faces the task of addressing the Catholic Church's biggest challenges.

Legal battles over the Trump administration's immigration policies heat up, as a top adviser suggests the White House could suspend the right to due process.

We speak with one of the students fighting deportation.

MOHSEN MAHDAWI, Formerly Detained Columbia Student: My release communicates to the whole country here that democracy is still functioning.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, in Russia, President Vladimir Putin uses an annual celebration of victory over Nazi Germany to strengthen his country's alliance with China.

(BREAK) GEOFF BENNETT: Welcome to the "News Hour."

Pope Leo XIV celebrated his first mass less than 24 hours after being elected the leader of the Catholic Church.

He's not only the first pontiff from the U.S., but also the first Augustinian friar to lead the church's 1.4 billion members.

Pope Leo brings decades of international experience from serving as a missionary and bishop in Peru to a senior Vatican official in charge of overseeing bishops around the world.

That perspective shaped the tone he struck in today's homily.

POPE LEO XIV, Leader of Catholic Church: To the ministry of Peter, you have called me to carry that cross and to be blessed with that mission.

And I know I can rely on each and every one of you to walk with me as we continue, as a church, as a community of friends of Jesus as believers, to announce the good news, to announce the Gospel.

GEOFF BENNETT: To tell us more about what shaped Pope Leo's views and who he is, we're joined now by the Reverend Robert Hagan, prior provincial of the Augustinian Province of St. Thomas of Villanova and a longtime friend of the pope.

Thanks for being with us.

REV.

ROBERT HAGAN, Villanova University: My pleasure.

GEOFF BENNETT: You first met Pope Leo, as I understand it, when you were beginning your own journey as an Augustinian.

What were your first impressions of him back then?

REV.

ROBERT HAGAN: I did.

You don't have to be in his company very long before you come to realize he's incredibly bright.

He speaks multiple languages.

He's conversant on many different subjects.

He's a critical thinker.

He has a certain depth of spirituality.

And he's a very -- he expresses himself very -- with a lot of clarity and concise, intelligible, relatable ways.

And I knew him as kind of a new person in the order.

I was a transplant from the East Coast to the Midwest, where he served in his province of Our Mother of Good Counsel at the time in the Midwest.

He couldn't have been more welcoming.

He introduced me to other brother priests and people in Chicago that I wouldn't have known.

And so what I found was a very warm and approachable and hospitable person and also very bright and spiritual.

So it was not a surprise to me that other people would find him to possess the qualities for this kind of leadership.

But, still, we were shocked when he emerged from that balcony because you just never know what's going to happen and with the Holy Spirit in the conclave.

So we were flabbergasted by the choice and certainly so happy for the Augustinians, for our church and now for the world.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, what does it mean for the church that Pope Leo comes from the Augustinian Order?

How might his approach or priorities differ from his Jesuit predecessor?

REV.

ROBERT HAGAN: It's a really good point.

We are trained in the foundation of Augustinian spirituality and theology.

Augustine was an incredible writer and preacher and rhetorician.

He -- a core value for St. Augustine was friendship.

He believed that we encounter and discover the presence of God in and through one another.

And so what you find in Pope Leo XIV, as smart as he is, he's also a very much a people person who is approachable, is warm and has a real passion for the plight of the poor.

As you know, he served for 10 years in our missions in Peru.

And so there's a certain love and empathy and compassion for the worker, for the laborer.

For Augustine, the heart has to engage the mind.

It's not enough just to know the law or to know your faith, but to put it into practice and let your love for God be expressed through your love for your fellow brothers and sisters.

So I think that's a foundation, a spirituality, a way of living as an Augustinian religious that he will just carry on now in his role as the Holy Father.

GEOFF BENNETT: Did he ever express to you any sense of calling or even ambition to one day be pope?

REV.

ROBERT HAGAN: No, he didn't.

I have said to myself and to some others, I don't think he aspired to be pope.

The core principle in the rule of St. Augustine is to love God with your whole heart, your whole mind and soul and to love your neighbor as yourself.

And I think that's simply what he was doing in his role, certainly in the U.S., but later on around the world.

He served as a general for our order.

He's been to many different countries.

He speaks multiple different languages.

He is not afraid to immerse himself in other cultures.

And so he has just, I think, followed his call to love God and neighbor, and it has led him to all these experiences that really prepared him now for this role, that we believe that the cardinals were in the conclave, but we also believe that that process was driven very much by the Holy Spirit.

And so, as people of faith, we believe that it was in fact the will of God that he now serve in this role.

GEOFF BENNETT: Finally, is there something that the world doesn't yet know about Pope Leo that might surprise or might reveal more about who he is that you can share?

REV.

ROBERT HAGAN: I think sometimes you see leaders and ministers with the garb and all the pomp and circumstance, and we almost treat them like they're not real people.

He's an incredibly engaging person.

He has a wonderful sense of humor.

He has a twinkle in his eye and an appreciation for a good story and tells a good story.

And so I think the humanity and the love to laugh I think will come through and people will see that in Pope Leo XIV.

GEOFF BENNETT: The Reverend Robert Hagan, thank you for your time this evening, sir.

We appreciate it.

REV.

ROBERT HAGAN: My pleasure.

Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: The day's other headlines begin at Newark's International Airport, where air traffic controllers suffered a second radar outage in as many weeks.

The FAA says the facility in Philadelphia directing planes in and out of Newark went dark for 90 seconds early this morning.

That's similar to last week's blackout, which led to hundreds of flight delays and cancellations.

The knock-on effects of today's glitch are unclear.

It comes a day after Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced a multibillion-dollar proposal aimed at updating the nation's run-down air traffic control system.

The Trump administration will soon bring dozens of white Afrikaners to the U.S. as refugees.

That's according to multiple documents from the Office of Refugee Resettlement obtained by the "News Hour" and a government official familiar with the matter.

Roughly 54 Afrikaners are expected to arrive Monday at Dulles International Airport in Virginia.

They will then move on for resettlement in 10 states.

In a February executive order, President Trump made resettling the South African ethnic group a priority.

That's all while the administration has blocked virtually all other refugee admissions.

The White House today defended its decision to bring Afrikaners to the U.S. KAROLINE LEAVITT, White House Press Secretary: This group in South Africa has faced racial persecution.

In fact, the government there has vowed to take away their farmland that they own.

And so the president has talked significantly about this.

GEOFF BENNETT: Leavitt was referring to a recent South African law that allows the government to seize land from private owners.

Its government says no such seizures have yet taken place.

Officials also say that granting refugee status to Afrikaners, many of whom are descended from Dutch colonizers, ignores the country's history of apartheid.

Democrats are outraged after President Trump abruptly fired the librarian of Congress.

Carla Hayden was appointed by President Obama back in 2016.

Her 10-year term would have expired next year.

She was the first woman in first African American to serve in the role.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries called her firing unjust, saying it's part of Trump's ongoing effort to ban books, whitewash American history, and turn back the clock.

The Library of Congress holds a huge collection of rare books and historical artifacts.

The Trump administration has not yet announced a replacement.

Meantime, the U.S.

Postal Service has tapped a FedEx board member to lead the organization.

The selection of David Steiner to be the nation's 76th postmaster general comes as President Trump and other officials have floated the idea of privatizing the service.

Postal unions have protested that idea.

The U.S.

Postal Service continues to face serious financial headwinds.

Just today, it reported a $3.3 billion loss for the quarter.

Turning now to England, where a jury found two men guilty today of cutting down the famous Sycamore Gap tree.

The iconic tourist site once stood along the ancient Hadrian's Wall in Northern England, but was cut down in 2023.

Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers were found guilty on two counts each of criminal damage.

The pair denied taking part, but prosecutors used digital evidence, including this grainy cell phone video, to show they cut the tree down at night with a chain saw.

The judge ordered them held in jail until their sentencing in July, when they could face long prison sentences.

On Wall Street today, stocks ended the week on a subdued note.

The Dow Jones industrial average ticked about 100 points lower on the day.

The Nasdaq ended virtually unchanged.

The S&P 500 dipped just four points, so roughly flat.

And Liam and Olivia are once again the most popular baby names in the country.

That's according to an annual ranking from the Social Security Administration.

When it comes to boys names, Liam is joined by, in order, Noah, Oliver, Theodore and James.

And the top five names for girls include Emma, Amelia, Charlotte and Mia.

The Social Security Administration has been tracking names since the 1880s.

The agency released this year's list in time for Mother's Day.

Geoff, sadly, did not make the cut.

Maybe next year.

Well, still to come on the "News Hour": Russia uses a World War II celebration to strengthen its alliances at a critical time in the war against Ukraine; India's ambassador to the U.S. discusses escalating tensions with Pakistan; and David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart reflect on the legacy of the late Supreme Court Justice David Souter.

Today, the Trump administration again escalated its fight with the courts.

In stunning remarks to reporters this afternoon, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said the administration is considering suspending habeas corpus.

Habeas petitions give people the right to contest unlawful detentions.

STEPHEN MILLER, White House Deputy Chief of Staff: Well, the Constitution is clear -- and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land -- that the privilege of threat e writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion.

So, it's an option we're actively looking at.

Look, a lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not.

The courts aren't just at war with the executive branch.

The courts are at war with -- these radical rogue judges with the legislative branch as well too.

GEOFF BENNETT: Miller's comments come as judges across the country have blocked major parts of President Trump's immigration agenda, including ordering that some students being targeted for deportation by the administration be released from detention.

Our White House correspondent, Laura Barron-Lopez, joins us now for the latest.

So, Laura, can the president do this, as Miller is suggesting?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So habeas is the most basic entitlement to judicial review of unlawful detention, as you noted, Geoff.

And, essentially -- I spoke to Steve Vladeck, the constitutional law scholar, who said that habeas is so fundamental that it is a right that is in the original Constitution under Article I, and that the overwhelming consensus is that it's long been that only Congress can suspend habeas corpus.

The only other time that a president has essentially done this is when it appears as though Congress is not in session.

President Lincoln did this when Congress was not in session at the beginning of the Civil War, but then Congress later authorized the ability to suspend habeas.

Another constitutional law expert I spoke to said that this is significant because, without habeas, there's no way for a person to go before a court and to essentially argue that their liberty was taken away and have a hearing to argue that.

Now, the timing of Stephen Miller's comments is key here because of the fact that it's after a judge -- judges have repeatedly ruled that the administration's actions regarding deportations are unlawful.

And it also comes after a student just today was ordered released by a federal judge from detention after filing a successful habeas petition.

GEOFF BENNETT: And that was the federal judge in Vermont who ordered that Tuft student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was being detained in Louisiana, is that right, that she must be released?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: That's right.

GEOFF BENNETT: Bring us up to speed.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: That's right.

So, Rumeysa Ozturk is a Ph.D. student from Tufts who was not charged with a crime.

Her student visa was revoked and she's been in detention since March because of an op-ed that she wrote that was critical of Israel that the administration said is evidence that she poses a foreign policy - - an adverse foreign policy consequence.

And the judge today, District Judge William Sessions, said that the government's case was entirely based on this op-ed that Ozturk wrote, that essentially there was no evidence that she has engaged in violence or advocated violence to back up their claims that she poses a threat to U.S. foreign policy.

They said she does -- the judge said that she does not pose a flight risk and so he placed no travel restrictions on her.

He called her health - - she suffers from asthma and she even had an asthma attack during the hearing today.

He called her health in extraordinary circumstance and said that her further detention could potentially pose dangerous -- a danger to her health.

And this is one significant line that the judge as well said, Judge William Sessions said, that: "Her continued detention potentially chills the speech of the millions and millions of individuals in this country who are not citizens."

And I just want to say also, Geoff, that she was initially detained not far from her home.

She was arrested by plainclothes agents off the streets of Boston and.

When that video was released, it was pretty stunning to see.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yes, we're looking at that video right now.

Laura, I know you spoke with another student who was recently released from detention, Mohsen Mahdawi.

What did he have to say?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: That's right.

Last week, Mahdawi was released from prison in Vermont after a federal judge ruled that the government continuing to hold him presented a great harm to his person who has not been charged with a crime.

So, like Ozturk, he was not charged.

Now, Mahdawi is a green card holder and he was arrested by agents at his naturalization interview in April.

Now, the Trump administration maintains that he -- his role in leading protests on Columbia University against the war in Gaza posed, again, a foreign policy threat to the United States.

Now, Mahdawi is still facing the threat of deportation.

He is allowed to travel to Columbia for his graduation later this month, and he's also allowed to travel for meetings with his attorneys.

But I spoke to Mahdawi.

I spoke to Mohsen Mahdawi last night about his experience.

Mohsen, you were detained for more than two weeks.

Can you tell me about your experience in detention in a place where you lived for years?

MOHSEN MAHDAWI, Formerly Detained Columbia Student: My experience actually has conflicting feelings about it, the first one is being grateful for being in Vermont among my community and the close legal support and going through the due process here and through the justice system.

And the other one is feeling the soreness of this injustice to be basically punished for practicing free speech.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: You said that you thought that your citizenship interview last month was a -- quote - - "trap."

Why did you still go?

MOHSEN MAHDAWI: I was torn apart between feeling excited for this interview that I waited for, for more than a year and being very cautious about the possibility that this interview might lead to my detention.

Part of me felt that there might be people in this system of immigration who see my activism for what it is, that it is an activism against war and for peace.

On the other hand, I also wanted to take the shot, because I knew that being detained in Vermont, if I lined up everything perfectly with my legal team, I could go through the process and fight for my rights and fight for my rights on fair grounds.

I would say that I have done everything correctly.

I have lived in this country, paid taxes, never committed a crime.

I have studied in this country, built the bridges, connected with many communities.

And I really wanted to give it a fair shot and see if I will be - - if I can become a citizen.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Mohsen, the administration has said that your presence in the U.S. would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences.

And in a memo obtained by The New York Times, Secretary of State Marco Rubio went further, saying that your activities could -- quote -- "potentially undermine the Middle East peace process."

What's your reaction to their argument?

MOHSEN MAHDAWI: I think it is actually a joke and laughable that they are accusing me of those false accusations.

If there is a peace process that they have in mind, let's bring it to the public, share what is your peace process, and come and look at my peace plan that I have developed with partners, Israelis, Palestinians, and Jews and with professors on campus.

My vision for peace is through international law and restorative justice.

Their vision is through war.

How could you have peace with war?

If that is their goal, that means they are -- actually, they are not thinking of a peace process.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: The administration has also said that it's part of your protest, you promoted antisemitism and have accused you of threatening Jewish people.

What's your response to that?

MOHSEN MAHDAWI: I believe that they are gaslighting Americans and Jewish Americans as well.

I am one of the people who stood up against antisemitism in public.

And I have basically denounced an act of antisemitism that is recorded on video.

I am a person who has deep connection and deep empathy for the suffering that the Jews have gone through over the past decade.

I see all human life as equal and deserve equal rights.

And this administration obviously does not see it the same way.

They are looking at the issue from a supremacist perspective, which is actually a danger to our humanity.

That is the threat, not my protest and my free speech.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Even this week, we have seen more protests at Columbia, your university.

Given your experience, your detainment, and your potential deportation, would you encourage those students to continue protesting?

MOHSEN MAHDAWI: I encourage students to continue protesting peacefully, to abide by the principle of nonviolence, because our words and our voice and bringing the issue to light has way more power than any other elements of it.

I would also have to share that I am deeply disappointed of Columbia University administration.

It's undermining democracy.

It's our undermining peaceful protests.

And it is punishing its students, which is actually technically capitulating to the Trump administration and degrading the system of the liberal university we have and which we love Columbia University.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Some of your peers like Mahmoud Khalil are still being detained under similar legal grounds as you were.

Do you have a message for them?

MOHSEN MAHDAWI: My message is, don't give up.

Stay hopeful.

The justice system is working.

This is a light of hope.

My release communicates to the whole country here that democracy is still functioning, that the system of checks and balances is still functioning.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Mohsen, you have been a green card holder for 10 years.

And when you were detained, it was during your citizenship interview, as we noted.

Do you still want to become an American citizen?

MOHSEN MAHDAWI: The question of becoming an American citizen is related to my deep belief in democracy, in the principles and values that it holds.

And the answer that I am waiting for is not necessarily from government officials that are trying to destroy every element of democracy that this country has.

The answer that I am waiting for, I have received from my people in Vermont, from Vermonters, who marched, who chanted, who sang, who protested, and who welcomed me when I came out of prison.

This is a clear message for me that my quest for the citizenship has been answered of the people who I love the most in this country, my Vermonter people.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Mohsen Mahdawi, thank you for your time.

MOHSEN MAHDAWI: A great pleasure.

Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: Today, Russia celebrated the Soviet Union's victory over Nazi Germany in World War II in an annual parade that filled Red Square with military hardware and dozens of foreign leaders.

Vladimir Putin once again tied Russia's past triumphs to today's war in Ukraine.

And he also further tied Russia's fate to that of China.

Here's Nick Schifrin.

NICK SCHIFRIN: In Moscow today, pomp, pageantry, patriotism, a show of force from the intercontinental missile carriers of the Cold War to the drones of the Ukraine war.

Vladimir Putin's Russia ties what many Russians consider their finest moment, victory over Nazi Germany, to today's confrontation with the West.

An on display today, what Moscow considers a new world order, an alliance of autocracies led by the leaders of China and Russia, with the help of North Korea, and nearly 30 visiting leaders to help Putin weaponize the past to justify the president.

VLADIMIR PUTIN, Russian President (through translator): Russia has been and will continue to be an indestructible wall against Nazism, Russophobia and antisemitism.

Truth and justice are on our side.

Our whole country, society and people support the participants of the special military operation.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But left unsaid today, Russia's vulnerabilities to the war in Ukraine, the Internet here was jammed, and the stage where dignitaries sat reportedly fitted with a roof to stop drones.

Earlier this week, Kyiv launched a record number of drone attacks, overwhelming Russian air defense and closing airports as Putin's guests arrived.

Yesterday, Putin and Xi Jinping further cemented what they call their no-limits partnership.

They released a joint statement pledging to -- quote -- "decisively counter Washington's dual containment of Russia and China' and demanding a Ukraine settlement -- quote -- "eliminate its root causes," which they mutually defined as Western alliances.

XI JINPING, Chinese President (through translator): In the face of the countercurrent of unilateralism and the act of power politics and bullying in the world, China will join Russia in shouldering a special responsibility and promote an equal and orderly multipolar world.

ALEXANDER GABUEV, Director, Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center: And that just shows that they're standing back to back and supporting each other in this order that used to be America-centered.

And now it's increasingly up for grabs.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Alexander Gabuev directs the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center and says Xi and Putin cannot be separated and believe time is on their side.

ALEXANDER GABUEV: Arrival of Donald Trump brings in itself a lot of unpredictability, but also a lot of opportunities for them.

Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin feel very emboldened, and they know that working together is the surest way to deliver this past Pax Americana, a new multipolar world order where they will be standing tall, dominating their respective regions.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: I say get this stupid war finished.

NICK SCHIFRIN: President Trump has piled enormous pressure on Ukraine, but most recently, especially after meeting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Vatican, he has also pressured Russia.

Yesterday, President Trump warned the U.S. could - - quote -- "impose further sanctions."

And, on Wednesday, Vice President Vance described Russian demands as unrealistic.

J.D.

VANCE, Vice President of the United States: Right now, the Russians are asking for a certain set of requirements, a certain set of concessions in order to end the conflict.

We think they're asking for too much, OK?

NICK SCHIFRIN: To that, top Putin, Yuri Ushakov shrugged.

YURI USHAKOV, Russian Presidential Aide (through translator): Well, yes, I guess we are disappointing them.

They are also disappointing us, maybe even more than we disappoint them.

ALEXANDER GABUEV: Vladimir Putin is not interested in a temporary cease-fire because Ukraine can use this time to create facts on the ground, for example, regroup, rearm.

Russia's calculus is that Ukraine is still standing, but it's exhausted.

And in a war of attrition, a country with more soldiers, more artillery, firepower and more resources can win over time.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Today, European allies tried to buy Ukraine time, providing more aid and creating a legal tribunal to prosecute Putin.

And, this week, Ukraine's Parliament tied its economic future to the U.S., overwhelmingly approving a deal where Ukraine will split future minerals, oil and gas profits with the U.S.

But Putin believes he can outlast Western support for Ukraine and Western sanctions on Russia, says Gabuev ALEXANDER GABUEV: Next decade, Vladimir Putin definitely has the problem, but you will need to carry Ukraine forward for the next decade.

And the question is whether Ukraine has this time.

And I think that the answer is no.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Russia does face economic and military headwinds, but, overall, Putin and the war maintain public support as he organizes Russian life around past sacrifice and confrontation with the West.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Nick Schifrin.

GEOFF BENNETT: Tensions are escalating tonight in South Asia.

India and Pakistan exchanged drone strikes and shelling along the de facto border in Kashmir.

Explosions heard in India-administered Kashmir, as India accused Pakistan of launching drone attacks for a second straight night.

Pakistan has denied using drones, but vowed to retaliate against Indian airstrikes earlier this week that hit several Pakistani cities, killing more than two dozen people.

India says those strikes were aimed at terrorist infrastructure in response to a terrorist attack last month in Indian-administered Kashmir that killed 26 people.

We spoke earlier this week with the Pakistani ambassador.

To get India's perspective, we're joined now by India's Ambassador to the U.S. Vinay Kwatra.

Mr.

Ambassador, thank you for being here.

VINAY KWATRA, Indian Ambassador to the United States: Thank you for hosting me.

Thank you very much.

GEOFF BENNETT: And starting with some breaking news, we have confirmation from Pakistan's military this evening of Indian missile strikes on Lahore and Rawalpindi.

What more can you tell us about that?

VINAY KWATRA: Yes, look, I don't know what is the basis on which the Pakistan side is sharing this information, but I would rather not speak to the operational details.

But I think the way you read the preface to your question in terms of describing the tensions between India and Pakistan, I think well before the recent round of drone exchanges started happening last night, early morning, day before last night, previous early morning, I think, as you very rightly observed, the killing of 26 civilians on 22nd of April by four terrorists with clear linkages, support base and training facilities in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir was the starting point.

The attack took place in Pahalgam in India.

I would say not Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir.

It is India's Kashmir.

India -- Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India.

The only aspect that has yet to be resolved is the return of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir to us.

Be that as it may, so it started on 22nd of April.

I'm sure the viewers would like to know that the killings were carried out in the most brutal manner, based on the religion.

All the non-Muslims were shot in the head in front of their wives, in front of their innocent children.

That was the start.

We waited 15 days, expecting, hoping that Pakistan would act against these terrorist bases, terrorists in their country.

Nothing happened.

We even started receiving intelligence reports that there might be more impending terrorist attacks on India.

So, on 6th -- night of 6th May, 7th May, we launched a very protracted, limited attack on nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir linked to terrorists, linked to terrorist training camps, linked to training terrorist-integrated facilities, where they train them, arm them, equip them, organize them.

That was the purpose with which the strikes were launched.

With that, we closed the chapter on our side; 22 April was the trigger.

We responded.

The matter from our side was closed.

We are not interested in what Pakistan is doing vis-a-vis other countries.

We were only interested in bringing terrorists to justice, holding them accountable, and giving justice to the victims of the terror.

And that's what we did.

Day before yesterday, Pakistan did some military engagement through drones.

We responded.

Matter closed.

Yesterday night, this morning, we did a drone engagement.

We engaged, matter closed.

So, from our side, it has always been about terror and holding terrorists accountable and bringing justice to the victims.

We have no intention of going in any other direction.

But should we, should Pakistan be proactive?

I have no option but to respond and insofar as our attack on Pakistan's soil is concerned on these terrorists.

GEOFF BENNETT: So I hear you say that the response is proportional.

With both nations possessing nuclear capabilities, what measures is India taking to prevent further escalation and to promote regional stability?

VINAY KWATRA: Yes, I think we have not taken any step in this entire episode since 22nd of April to which you could call escalation.

We have only responded to the escalation that was thrown at us.

We have not indulged in warmongering.

We have not indulged in aggressive rhetoric, which we have heard from the other side, because for us, it has always been about holding terrorists accountable and bringing justice to the victims.

We have scrupulously excluded military installation from our attacks.

We have scrupulously excluded economic and social infrastructure from attack.

And the simple reason is because our focus is on terrorism and, as I said, taking out these people who have really carried out the most heinous of crimes on the Indian soil, and these terrorists are backed by facilities in Pakistan.

Look at the -- I mean, if one was to put it in very simplistic terms, four terrorists with clear linkages backing in Pakistan come into India, kill 26 civilians.

Any self-respecting country should and must and will respond to such terrorists.

That's what we did.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the minute we have left, a minute -- a question about the role of international actors, because, as I'm sure you know, Vice President J.D.

Vance said on FOX News yesterday that this war is -- quote -- "fundamentally none of our business," none of the U.S.' business.

How does India view the role of the U.S., the U.N., international actors in mediating or facilitating dialogue between India and Pakistan?

VINAY KWATRA: Since you have little time left, three very sharp, crisp things.

One, deeply grateful to the U.S. leadership, to President Trump, and to bipartisan strong support which has come in India's favor from the U.S.

The president spoke to my prime minister within hours of the terrorist attack, condemned the attack, full-hearted support to India.

Same -- Vice President J.D.

Vance was in India when the attack unfolded.

He spoke to the prime minister the next day, condemned the attack, offered full support, strong bipartisan support from the congressmen, senators, full support, no issues.

I think the only -- the best thing that the international community, the U.S. and other countries of the world can do is to impress upon Pakistan to stop supporting terrorism.

That's all that's needed, and everybody will be at peace with each other.

GEOFF BENNETT: Ambassador Kwatra, thanks again for your time this evening.

VINAY KWATRA: Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you for hosting.

GEOFF BENNETT: Retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter, who spent nearly 20 years on the nation's highest court, has died.

Chief Justice John Roberts praised Souter in a statement today, saying he served the court with great distinction and brought uncommon wisdom and kindness to a lifetime of public service.

Souter was a critical figure in several key battles in the court over issues like abortion and the 2000 presidential election.

William Brangham has this remembrance.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: After ascending to the nation's highest court, Justice David Souter quickly turned from a great hope for conservatives into a judge who sided most frequently with the court's liberals.

And because of it, he inspired a Republican rally cry, no more Souter.

He grew up in a small New Hampshire town and carried that Yankee upbringing with him to Washington, according to a former law clerk, Noah Feldman.

NOAH FELDMAN, Former Justice Souter Law Clerk: He never wore a coat in Washington, D.C., because as a New Englander, he took the view that it was never cold enough to need a coat, and that included at the memorial service for Justice Harry Blackmun, when the justices had to stand outside for more than two hours in pelting snow, and he absolutely refused to wear a coat.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: From Harvard Law, Souter became a prosecutor, and then his home state's attorney general.

President George H.W.

Bush appointed him to the federal bench, and then, just a few years later, tapped him to serve on the nation's highest court, when liberal Justice William Brennan stepped down.

GEORGE H.W.

BUSH, Former President of the United States: The Supreme Court must be guided by independent minds, and its members are appointed for life, largely to keep them above the flames of political passion.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Despite having little national profile, his fellow New Hampshirite Bush's Chief of Staff John Sununu assured conservative skeptics of his bona fides.

And Souter was confirmed 90-9, but he quickly angered some of his Republican backers.

In 1992's Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Souter joined the court's moderates to uphold abortion rights nationwide.

And in one notable dissent in the controversial 2000 election case Bush v. Gore, Souter argued Florida should continue its recount.

NOAH FELDMAN: The biggest mistake that people made about David Souter was thinking that somehow he was a conservative when he went on to the court and then magically became a liberal.

In fact, Justice Souter was hiding in plain sight the whole time.

He believed that the Constitution was not a dead document that should be interpreted according to what people thought 200-and-some years ago, but rather was a document that needed to be interpreted in the light of our changing needs and circumstances.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Months after President Obama took office, Souter announced his decision to retire and move back home to New Hampshire.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor took his place on the bench.

While Souter rarely spoke about politics after stepping down, in a 2012 interview with the "News Hour"'s Margaret Warner, he warned of the fragility of American democracy.

DAVID SOUTER, Former U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice: I don't worry about our losing republican government in the United States because I'm afraid of a foreign invasion.

What I worry about is that, when problems are not addressed, people will not know who is responsible.

And when the problems get bad enough, as they might do, for example, with another serious terrorist attack, as they might do with another financial meltdown, someone person will come forward and say, give me total power and I will solve this problem.

NOAH FELDMAN: Justice Souter's whole career was devoted to being an example of the rule of law and a justice of the Supreme Court who was completely uninterested in partisanship or political ideology, but was just committed to the idea of getting the law right.

And in the current moment, when the threat to the rule of law is unprecedented, we need that model.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Former Supreme Court Justice David Souter was 85 years old.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm William Brangham.

GEOFF BENNETT: From the election of the first American pope to the Supreme Court justices, some of them defending an independent judiciary, lots to discuss tonight with Brooks and Capehart.

That's New York Times columnist David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart, associate editor of The Washington Post.

Great to see you both.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Hey, Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, the election of this new pope, the first American pope, provides a fresh lens to discuss the influence of religion our politics, especially Trumpism.

And, David, this might be the first pope with a social media trail, because, before he became Pope Leo, Cardinal Robert Prevost occasionally posted on social media.

His posts and reposts have been dissected by many, criticized by some of those on the right.

And his posts have suggested that he supports protecting immigrants, reducing gun violence, combating climate change, certainly in line with the Gospel, maybe not in line with right-wing politics.

What questions, if any, does this really pose for the faithful who also see themselves as being Trump supporters?

DAVID BROOKS: First, I just say I found it incredibly moving to watch him give his first remarks as pope, in part because here I was watching an American on the world stage being a decent human being and being a good person.

So I found it so just refreshing to see America portrayed in this way by this man.

Secondly, I think the cardinals did a brilliant thing in selecting an American, which was so unexpected.

But a couple decades ago, when the Soviet Union was the chief problem area in the world, the cardinals selected John Paul II, a Pole, and he was -- helped end communism.

Now America is the most troubled nation the world, and they select an American who represents Catholic social teaching, who represents a series of teaching about the marginalized, about the dignity of all human people, about welcoming the stranger.

And they knew what they were doing.

They picked somebody -- if Donald Trump is about pagan values, about dominance, power, control, victory, conquest, here's a guy about blessed are the poor in spirit, blessed are the meek.

And that's a complete social change and a moral challenge to Trumpism.

And the final thing I will say is that, during World War II, in the middle of the 20th century, there was communism on one side, there was capitalism on the other side, these two machines.

And the Catholics gave us a system in the middle there which they called personalism, a guy named Jacques Maritain, Emmanuel Mounier.

And that was a more humane version to combat the dehumanizing processes that were afflicting left and right.

And so who knows, but this pope could be a real moral force in the country and especially in America.

GEOFF BENNETT: A real moral force.

Where do you land on this, Jonathan?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, one, I could not help but think of Pope Leo XIV while reading David's column in The New York Times.

But my immediate thought after saying, oh, my gosh, it's an American pope, I instantly thought, but looking at it politically to your point, David, I thought, this is kind of -- how could I not look at this as an incredible rebuke to the American president?

Because here you have an American pope who is as a leader in the world going to go toe to toe with the American president who, from everything we have seen, is the complete opposite of the Holy Father.

And so the question then becomes, what do American Catholics do when they have an American pope who speaks the teachings of Jesus Christ, all the things that David was talking about, and yet they have been supporting a man who is antithetical to all of those things?

To me, I look forward to Pope Leo XIV, but I really look forward to seeing what American Catholics do in response.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yes.

Well, from the pope to former President Biden, there is a through line there since, Biden is the most devout Catholic... DAVID BROOKS: OK. GEOFF BENNETT: ... ever to... GEOFF BENNETT: The second Catholic elected, but certainly the most devout, you could argue.

Anyway, President Biden's been on something of a media tour.

He's speaking with the BBC.

He appeared on "The View," offering this counter to President Trump's agenda while trying to shape his own legacy.

In one interview, he said he wasn't surprised that Vice President Harris lost.

He cited racism and sexism playing a role in that.

But he says he believes he could have beaten Donald Trump.

Is he right about that?

And is there any sort of strategic value in saying that out loud right now?

DAVID BROOKS: You know, I think he's empirically wrong about that.

Kamala Harris ran about as good a campaign as she could.

She was saddled with the Biden legacy, an unpopular presidency.

Biden would have been saddled by that legacy in addition to his age.

So you take those two factors, it's hard to see how he wins.

But he's a man with a -- he's proud man with a chip on his shoulder who feels himself under attack, frankly, in the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.

And so he wants to stand up for himself.

I would only counsel him as someone, who's a longtime admirer of Joe Biden, is that what we want from our presidents is not more politics.

What we want from our presidents is somebody who's post-politics, who can speak to us from a higher level, not in the partisan mud.

And Jimmy Carter did that.

I think George W. Bush has done that through his painting.

You do a book of paintings about immigrants, you do a book about paintings about veterans, you have expressed a set of values without being political.

And if I were -- if Joe Biden ever called me to say, what should you do with his post-presidency, which is probably not going to happen... JONATHAN CAPEHART: You never know.

DAVID BROOKS: You never know.

And I would say, be post-political, rise above it and don't get back in - - don't try to fight old battle.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, the president said - - the former president said he's trying to figure out a way that he can be - - what did he say?

Figure out the most significant and consequential role he can play moving forward.

So where could he have the most impact, do you think?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: I think he could have the most impact by just speaking the truth vis-a-vis what's happening right now.

I mean, I think one of the things that the president did, I watched his interview on "The View," he defended his record.

And there is a significant record to defend, especially now that we're more than 100 days into a second Trump presidency, all the things that have run counter to that.

But there's one thing that we have to remember.

There's a book coming out on May 20 that is going to cast a very negative light on the Biden presidency, the people around him, and what the authors allege they did to -- quote, unquote -- "cover up" something involving the president's health and his mental acuity.

Going on the BBC, going on "The View," doing these extensive interviews is basically a prebuttal.

Say, you think there's something wrong with me?

I'm sitting here, I'm talking, I'm defending my record.

You can ask me whether I could beat -- whether I could have beaten Donald Trump?

Of course he thinks he could have beaten Donald Trump.

He's the only person in America who has actually done it.

And so I just wish folks in our profession would just stop asking the man that question and get him to talk about the things he did and how they're being eroded by his successor.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the time that remains, let's talk about these public remarks from the Supreme Court justices defending the role of the judiciary.

First, we have Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She warned that attacks on judges undermine democracy.

She says: "Across the nation, judges are facing increased threats of not only physical violence, but also professional retaliation just for doing our jobs.

And the attacks are not random.

They seem designed to intimidate those of us who serve in this critical capacity."

Justice Sonia Sotomayor addressed a gathering of the American Bar Association.

And she said: "Our job is to stand up for people who can't do it themselves.

We need trained and passionate and committed lawyers to fight this fight.

For me, being here with you is an act of solidarity."

Add to that Chief Justice John Roberts, he did a fireside chat in his hometown.

Here's what he had to say.

JOHN ROBERTS, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court: But, in our Constitution, judges and the judiciary is a co-equal branch of government.

And its job is to obviously decide cases, but, in the course of that, check the excesses of Congress or of the executive.

And that does require a degree of independence.

GEOFF BENNETT: And yet you could argue that the Roberts court afforded Trump a shield against prosecution for crimes in office, elevating him to a king-like status above the other branches.

What do you make of all this?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I mean, people have different interpretations about executive power.

And I think the this court has decided the executive controls the executive branch.

But that doesn't mean this court believes the executive controls the whole government.

And they clearly don't.

I have conversations.

I have had a lot of conversations over the last few weeks, how bad are things?

Are we hanging on there and our institutions holding up, or are we over the waterfall and we're just in freefall?

And different people have different views.

I'm still on the, we're not over the waterfall yet.

We're still hanging on there because our institutions are holding.

And among the institutions that are holding are the courts.

And to hear these three justices come out very assertively, say we're a co-equal branch of government, we're doing our job, we're not going to stand up for this intimidation campaign, that to me is very cheering that the courts -- and I think, on the whole, the courts, Trump appointees and non-Trump appointees, have been pretty good about standing up for the Constitution.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: We might not have gone over the waterfall, but we are in the barrel.

And we're getting very close.

And while it is wonderful to have three members of the Supreme Court, including the chief justice, saying the things that they're saying, I'm curious to see what do they do when the president of the United States openly defies a direct order, a direct ruling from them.

And the fact that I'm not confident in what they will do should concern a lot of folks.

It concerns me, I mean.

GEOFF BENNETT: We should also mark the passing of retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter.

His tenure is often cited as a reminder that justices once confirmed are not beholden to the presidents who appoint them.

What stands out to you about his time on the court?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, I like the fact he was a guy who never really came here.

Like, not all people who go to -- come to Washington, like, come of Washington, he was separate.

But he became a symbol in the Republican Party for a thing the Republicans call growing in office, which meant growing more liberal when you come to Washington.

And after Souter appeared to grow in office, though I think he was always pretty consistent, they were never going to nominate somebody who could evolve to the left.

And so they have picked a much more hardcore set of justices because of the Souter model.

GEOFF BENNETT: Jonathan?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: The thing that stands out to me the most about Justice Souter was the fact that he left the court when he was relatively young.

GEOFF BENNETT: It is remarkable, isn't it?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Sixty-nine years old.

And, to me, that speaks to a selflessness and sort of a person who knew who he was and knew what he wanted to do and what he didn't want to do.

When he decided he didn't want to be on the court anymore, he left.

GEOFF BENNETT: Jonathan Capehart, David Brooks, thanks to you both.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thanks, Geoff.

DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: And be sure to watch "Washington Week With The Atlantic" tonight on PBS.

Jeffrey Goldberg and his panel discuss President Trump's leadership on the world stage and America's role in conflict zones across the globe.

And on "PBS News Weekend": As the Trump administration tries to clear the way for deep-sea mining, how little we know about the ocean floor.

And that is the "News Hour" for tonight and this week.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

For all of us here at the "PBS News Hour," thanks for spending part of your evening with us, and have a great weekend.