Court, one of the concerns especially with the stamps she takes on interpreting the constitution . Absolutely. First of all it is improper to even be considering a nominate right now and we are in the middle of an election. Not just an election year, election is happening right now with a half a million ballots already passed in early voting states not to mention that we are in the middle of a pandemic and the senate is taking away important time that should be devoted to dealing with those urgent crucial issues in the weeks. Ve you know, putting that aside i think there is a legitimacy question when you have the public voting right now for the president and the senates. The two halves of the folks that deal with the nomination and confirmation of the Supreme Court justice. If there isco a lack of public and that how that works theres a crisis of legitimacy for the Supreme Court which relies on really public relief inlets legitimacy for it to be voluntarily, sometimes begrudgingly but happily followed. That is an initial threshold point. With respect to her record he gives me great concern how shehe would be on the courts. We need judges and justices on the bench who will follow the constitution, including the majestic promises of equality and justice put in the constitution. Particularly in the amendments after the civil war. Justice would follow those regardless of her political preferences. See that she has questions, the ruling from the Supreme Court repeatedly upholding the Affordable Care act. Its more important than ever. So when people getting sick and losing their job, also in the question of equality and reproductive freedom, she is called v wade an erroneous decision. That is incredibly concerning to the of us who need control over the destinies of our lives and our own bodies. All the other aspects of her regarding, lgbtq plus americans, putting the interests of big business over Everyday Americans and im can extremely concerned about her record not to mention being extraordinarily concerned as a citizen, as a constitutional lawyer about the legitimacy on the bench right now. Usually it comes from her writings and the law school and educator. As a judge has she done anything to you that would suggest she would indeed offend some of the centura concerned about . To be to yes purchase but on the court for three years for thats a substantial amount of time but not as long as we have scenes from some nominees in the past. I think that is why you see ato lift to her public statements and writings from before she was on the bench. Ast her time on the bench, is mostly dissents for issues relating to rhe hearings of cases. The willingness of letting abortion restrictions go in place, issues related to notification of parents even after a court has determined that a minor is sufficiently able to make those decisions for themselves. And there are also issues related to immigrants, the idea that you would send someone back to a country where they are going to face clear persecution its related to the public charge rule. The idea you should not release grants to immigrants to work here, trying to find a better life. Trying to find place with himself and their family theres a chance they might need public assistance. There are definitely things concerning about her rulings in addition to the statements she has made. One thing that applies incredibly strongly here, is the concern with the witness test. He said repeatedly that he would only nominate so much of the Supreme Court if they were willing to, and his words automatically overturn roe versus wade. Someone whos willing to strike down the affordable llcare act, and there are some who said they would only voteom for someone whod strike down roe roe v wade. And he said hes indicated he will support judge Amy Amy Coney barrett. Putting all those things together, people who care about the Affordable Care act and its protections for those with preexisting conditions, people who care aboutpr ensuring that roe roe v wade remains law and people can make decisions for themselves, their bodies, their gods, their doctor not have the government decide that for them. Theres a whole host of other concerns about the constitutions guarantee for equality and justice. Absolutely theres cause to be concerned both based on her record on the court, which she said before what President Trump is made absolutely clear that he will do it comes to nominating someone to the Supreme Court. So when you talk to her desk and asked her questions by calling the lines. 202,748,001 for republicans, 202 7488002 for independent. So that last point before go to college, you think theres eran appetite for people to engage in cases that would consider those previous cases that have been decided . Guest absolutely pride you only need to look at the president s rhetoric on these issues. He has repeatedly talked about the need to, i also did not mention the gun issue. The Supreme Court even with conservatives like Justice Scalia on it, has recognizing theres individual rights in the home for selfdefense, is not necessarily constitutional right to have a gun anywhere you want at any time you want, and have that gun be obtained by anyone who wants one. And yet, we have seen the president say over and over about how hed their regulation is something that he did not want to see upheld, he would expand second minute rights are more they are even now with Justice Scalia. Certainly, over and over again i think President Trump saying those things to voters he must certainly think there is an appetite. I will say the majority of americans support maintaining roe roe v wade. They certainly support and embrace the Affordable Care act that we need so much now during the troubling and Uncertain Times during the pandemic. Will start with shock and torture, republican liner with arc guest, go ahead chuck. Good morning. Good morning. Caller if the roles were reversed and look at the audits and dont lie, if the roles were reversed at the democrats and the senate, they would put a judge on the court in ten days. And another thing, if biden was not so scared about who he would nominate, he would tell us who we would nominate. Why is he afraid to do that . Thank you for those question questions. I will start with your last question first. Biden before he was Vice President , was on the Senate Judiciary committee. I know kind of been bodies in some ways, the norms of the old days perhaps of Supreme Court confirmation hearing. And so i think there is some hesitancy on some folks. I could see both sides of this, that putting out a list improperly politicize this the Supreme Court. And a lot of people that politicizing the Supreme Court is a very bad thing. Which is supposed to be a non partisan institution of our government. Et something that is not just a group of republicans and democrats. We help impartial jurists. My understanding is that is why biden might be reluctant to put out a a list. Because in this election time is unduly politicizing the court. Coursers those on the other side that say that is a boon to President Trump to put out that list. By politicizing hilliard put on the courts and the voters of something useful to him. I think that is why biden has been reluctant to put out a lis list. Of the roles were reversed i do not know im not a political strategist im a constitutional lawyer. I think certainly what we have seen from democrats is a concern about the legitimacy with voting going on right now. Although roles were not perfectly reversed in 2017 when president obama nominated in the past us of scalia in february of an election year. It was many more months as to now where we are in the middle with early voting is two weeks away from the culmination of that election. Mitch mcconnell who run senate then and is running the senate now did not give merit garland a hearing much less a vote, i think that one thing we do want regardless of parties is to see that consistent standard are applied when it comes to the Supreme Court. Do they it mid the aspect of the Supreme Court which is the confirmation for a denomination and the confirmation of the Supreme Court justice are under the constitution. But the justice themselves, are supposed to be above politics. When you have Something Like mary garland compared to now, that i really feel that webl risk the court for the political power grab in a way that i think does undermine the legitimacy of the corporate arkansas independent lane, dorothy is up next. Caller yes i will be voting for joe biden. I am disappointed they did not wait till after the election to choose a nominee for the court. Because ite is only fair that they felt the same principle at the same time. My concern is the Affordable Care act. So i am wondering, since as judges just coming coming on should she recused herself ho ffrom the voting since shes just coming on the bench . Those are interesting questions. One thing i think not enough of the public knows is wherehi there there are rules explicitap rules that apply to lower court judges, there are actually not rules to bind Supreme Court justices to recruit so will we rely on them for self belief. Thats one reforming dont think its enough attention. I actually think if she were to be converted think it will be highly unlikely she would recused herself based on statements she has made about the Affordable Care act. Usually justices are explicitly involved in a case they have a financial interest or a strong personal interest in the case for your absolutely right to be concerned about that. She had questions the repeated ruling by the Supreme Court has upheld and upheld constitutionality of the Affordable Care act. Given President Trumps stated desires to have the Affordable Care act overturned and the fact the administration is in the Supreme Court now, he sat the lot validated. I think youre absolutely right to be concerned. Jeannie in pennsylvania, republican line, high. Sorry about that just push the button. Jeannie go ahead with your question or comment. Caller okay, my question is, as far as the nominee for the justice, it seems that, would you want somebody who goes by the constitution or as far as Party Politics court what they want . Guest i absolutely want someone who follows the constitution. What i want is someone who follows the whole constitution not just the way it was that it existed in 1789 when we still had a wonderful constitutional democracy established by her constitution. But still a constitution this deeply flawed because it allowed the original slavery to continue in this country. It allowed for women of color in so many more to be excluded from the Democratic Society and from equal citizenship. With the whole constitution, the constitution that has been amended over time by people make it more equal to make it more inclusive to make our society truly free her. The thing i get concerned about was socalled conservative originalists. As they overlook these amended guarantees of equality and justice. I say amended because they came through the amendments of the constitution paid the 14th mm of, the 13th amendment, the 19th amendment which celebrate the centennial of giving women more meaningful equal citizenship in this country. The mm method ensures no one will be denied if they cannot pay a fee or a fine before they go to thefo ballot box. What i am concerned about with judge amy kony barrett becoming justice amy cohen eight barrett, im not sure she embraces apple constitution regardless of where it leads. Certainly have not seen President Trump who has nominated her with those guarantees of equality and justice for all. And perhaps most on my mind right now is we are in the election season does not seem willing to have the constitutional guarantee as free and open Democratic Society as the rule of law. Given that youve been deeply concerned not all the constitution, when they lead to outcomes that support Everyday Americans are respected over those of the powerful. When it comes equality and a person having meaningful equality when they cannot even make decisions about their own body. I am deeply concerned about that. Active in california the democrats like, hello. Caller good morning, longtime listener, 67yearold democrat been voting for years. My Democratic Party was empowered, even mitch blocked us with garland, they would do exactly the same thing, we were banking probably on hillary winning lastwi time. They were not worried about it, and trump won. I was not happy, but he won and im still not happy. I think hes a bully in chief but on this issue, the dems rolled the dice and they lost now truth, bless her heart, may she rest in peace, tried to make it to the finish line in heaven got her before the next president was elected. But the dems took a gamble. They could have replaced her. I think she was getting sick, probably did not know how sick when obama was in. In circumstances werefe different. But we rolled the dice as a party. We would do the same thing and i would love to have coffee with thath republican gentlemen that called first on this issue. Because the Supreme Courts, and i group that gentlemen, its great to see a lift. As a damn thats part of our votes pretty want to see who they are going to elect. So God Bless America get out and vote. Splint alright thanks. Guest amen on getting out of voting for everybody a lot of people do share your sentiment about wanting to see a list there is legitimate concern about politicizing the court at the same time there people who would like to see a potential list of names from biden. There been many organizations. I shouldnt say many but there are some organizations put outlets for Vice President biden to consider. He said he would name an africanamerican woman to the court. In some of those lists have been put out by the organization sure theres an extraordinary west anti wealth of talent coming up through those who work in the criminal justice, trying to make sure that criminal justice is more just. You might want to look at those lists and see if theres anyone youd like your candidate to support. You know i think that Justice Ginsburg was so wise on the court, and one of her last wishes was told to her granddaughter, that she not be replaced on the Supreme Court until the conclusion of the election and her replacement be a named weather by who was elected whether it was vice President Trump attempt President Trump or Vice President biden. She served that court so long l and so well, that she knew, and i agree with you that putting someone on the bench right now as the people are having their say about who she been the white house and who should serve in the senate would undermine the credibility of the court and make it seemed like its just another political power grab. I totally hear you that youre saying yeah ita is a political power grab. Someone who cared deeply not willing to give up the legitimacy of the Supreme Court should be something once you are on that bench and put on that rope your fidelity is to the constitution is not another partisan, politicization is called by some after this process started about perhaps expanding the Supreme Court to compensate. Is that something you would like to see or not . Guest you know, i dont like the idea out of political vengeance. I think its something to enhance the legitimacy of the court. Were not just talk about this seat. I think a lot of people were deeply bothered by the way president obamas nominee was treated. They considered justice core that they replace him as perhaps in their view a lot of people were concerned by the process of Justice Kavanaughs nomination. And so i think when you put that together, if there is a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court perhaps expanding it to enhance legitimacy and the public eyes and think about, the constitution does not specify need a special number ofe justices. That is something i would look at. I would caution you dont know which party theyre going to help in the long run. They might put more nominees supported by the left on the n court. If its in the public interest, not just as a political football. Statement hello, thank you for taking my call. One thing that has not been addressed, my question is, constitutionalal amendment, of the justices spin expanding the court. As an action that clearly is constitutional but has been debased about the constitution does not speak term limits. Particularly. Upon good behavior. The idea they have their seat absent for some reason to remove them, for not good behavior. Without getting around that without amending the constitution having justices go into senior service. Which is something we see on her lower courts. Judges will be as regularly as a full members of the courts. They are still judges that important way. That is one way possible way to get around the potential need to amend the constitution. This is our guest, the next call is in allen texas. Burton hello. Howlo are you this morning i am well thank you. Caller briefly, two issues i would would appreciate. One being momentarily, if she might define for us or for everyone, how in the viewing audience right now, she might define conservatives versus liberals and a sense of politics versus in the sense of the judiciary. Now in a moment i would likef to get off and get an answer to that. Prior to that i would like to say with a little bit of honesty here, president just put up a Supreme Court nominee , as the bee heft and request of winning the 2016 to become president. We also took over the senate. That was not good enough for the electors, but in 2018 for the conservative side. Got the point across, will letter guest response that. Look we are in the middle of an election right now. There are a lot of people, particularly after the way the thpandemic has been handled by the white house and the senate who might feel very differently about the occupants of those bodies right now. Think that is really the problem for it not that there is an election in 2016 that had certain results. Ng people are not voting right now theyre having their say right now. The election will culminate in just a few, weeks. And so that is really the problem with that argument i think. In this moment right now. So one more call from diana. Diana on the republican line just aboutan time for the second but we go ahead for two yes i have two things. As in a talk about the pandemic which the president did do a good job on. Number one, thats the only party switch with the democrats for the democrats have never switched with the republicans. And also ginsburg, at the end two years ago said id do not vote my political beliefs, i do not vote by the constitution i vote by my political beliefs. Again i vote by political beliefs not the constitution for two years ago the end ofha the session she said that along when they were asked why they did not vote like everyone else did. Again she said i felt my political beliefs i do not vote the constitution. Guest i cannot imagine judges adjourned judges Ruth Bader Ginsburg ever saying those words anytime of the privacy ofwn their home, and the public, cannot imagine them saying that ive never heard that report. They are people who follow the constitution to protect the equality and justice that it guarantees. I would strongly disagree with you on that particular point are democrats ive switched isout for nominee. I disagree with him pretty much all of the facts that you just put out in your call. I would encourage people to really Pay Attention to the actual facts of what is going on right now with this nomination. The stakes could noton be higher when it comes to things that Americans Care deeply about like healthcare, like making their decision, like having a cord that works for everyone including those of us who are working hard and struggling every day to make ends meet. Please watch what is happening with the court and these senate. It is, incredibly important to the future of our country. And to honestly all of us as we live our lives every day. So when the u. S. Constitution. Org is the website for the accountability center. We thank you for your time today. Thank you summit for having me. Live look at the venue in cleveland with the first president ial debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President , joe biden is being held tonight. Case western reserve university and the Cleveland Clinic are cohosting the debate. Watch live, uninterrupted coverage on cspan tonight at 9 00 p. M. Eastern. Book tv on cspan2 has topped nonfiction books and authors every weekend. Saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern, pj orourke talks about his collection of essays on american history, economics and culture. In his book a crime pretty far middle part sunday at noon eastern on indepth. A two hour live conversation with Harvard University professor jill lepore. Then at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on after words, foxbusiness news host lou dobbs talks about his book the trump center which is interviewed by victor author and Hoover Institution senior fellow. Watch book tv this weekend on cspan2. Earlier today Senate Majority leader Mitch Mcconnell and Vice President mike pence welcome Supreme Court not many Amy Amy Coney barrett to capitol hill purge she met several lawmakers and had meetings with them. We are pleased today to welcome judge barrett to begin the process in the senate. As you know