Democrats gained control of the senate in the upcoming election. Senator marco rubio joins the chair Lindsay Graham and others at a News Conference to talk about the proposed amendment. Can you hear me with this on. Thank you for being here today. A year and a half ago before the debate was going on about the court and the nomination, we predicted to expand the packet. I chuckle when i hear people say if they move forward we are going to go ahead and pack the etcourt. They were going to do that anyway. Our institution to solidify the institution requires stability and thats why weve filed this amendment over a year and a half ago. I dont think you have to wait to hear directly from joe biden or any of the people around the country i dont think you need to wait to hear from them whether they will expand the court. I think we already know the answer and that has become pretty apparent throughout this process. It is our hope that eventually we will be able to get a vote and maybe we can we will be able to put people have to be on the record whether they think that its a good idea to destabilize one of the three branches of the government by a Court Packing scheme designed to do nothing but tilt the outcome purposes. That isnt the way that the system should work and we hope this calls attention to what is coming and we can take action on it before it is too late and i will turn over to my colleagues that may want to add to that. Number one, i think [inaudible] this was done a year and a half ago. I cant think of a more destabilizing event for america than to change the number of judges on the Supreme Court every election cycle because it becomes a way in or take all for the court. The traditional debate is who fills vacancies, liberal conservatives. Its never been about how many will you have. And you will eventually destroy the judiciary as we know it. Weve screwed up enough on our side of the constitutional law abiding for each other constantly so i just want to urge all of my colleagues to support the senators efforts to solidify that we are sticking with mine. Mine has served us well. I know people are mad but the thing i can tell you about the court you never know. A lot of criticism about roberts on our side that just comes with ten year. My belief is life tenure is a good thing. My belief nine has served the nation well and if we go down the road that they are talking about, that will destroy the independence of the judiciary, and finally, will it happen or not. Senator feinstein is a good person. She served California Well i believe. Shes somebody you can do business with. She approaches issues from a progressive point of view but you can find common ground. Whats happened to her by showing just some human kindness should make us all concerned. Imagine what would happen to a democrat if they voted for Amy Coney Barrett. In this modern Democratic Party a word of warning if you think thatf they are not, if you think they are kidding you are making a mistake. I would hate to be the senator that says i dont want to pack thee court on the democratic sie because if you think it was bad for senator feinstein your world would comee to end politically and we need to get the fever to break. Theee best way is for the county to make a decision to put in the constitution that nine is the right number. I support what senator rubio is putting forth. What hes doing here is unprecedented power grab for the democrats. Moving to 11 or 13 is exactly what Chuck Schumer will do if he gets control of the senate, combined with adding two more senators for the district of columbia and two more for puerto frico with statehood. It would then eliminate the Supreme Court from being the check and balance on the power of the senate and stop what would be a radical far left agenda put forth by Chuck Schumer and the democrats. Second, this is an attack on the montana way of life. When Justice Ginsburg passed away, on the front page of the great falls tribune, it said Justice Ginsburg fagans he puts the Second Amendment on the center stage. It stops the Keystone Pipeline and stops timber projects. Last week we had the opportunity to have the judge in front of us in thehe Judiciary Committee and what was abundantly clear to those of us that sat through those hearings was that she is very well qualified and a very fair jurist and has been commended by liberals and conservatives across the spectrum prior to being named as the nominee for the Supreme Court justice. We had this idea nine months before b ginsburg passed that te idea would be to pack the court or expand the number of seats. What s they want to do, they beg the democrats is to establish a super legislature. We all should be very afraid of that. This is our third branch of government. Our judicial system is at risk by giving them power beyond what is currently established. Even ruthst Bader Ginsburg who said nine is the right number. Weve had nine Supreme Court justices for over 150 years, so i am very supportive of these efforts to pass this amendment and resolution and enshrine our traditions andon history permanently. So, again, lets come together and support this resolution and lets make sure that we are not creating a super legislature. Three things i will underscore and thank you for covering this now. To restore Institutional Trust in the country and in the government this isnt new for us since its become a campaign issue. A lot of us have been pushing for this for some time so im glad you are starting to cover it now but it shouldnt be interpreted just through this moment. We have a lot ofe work to do rebuilding and restoring Institutional Trust in the second of all if you would become the majority leader its too nuke to out of the three branches of government. The idea of nuking the senate. So many of the conversations that dominate political cable news are always about the presidency. Its for control of the United States senate and f the question of whether it will remain a deliberative body and whether we will have three branches of government that continue to check and balance one another and all of us, not just the republicansf appear today but te democratca and republican senats have taken the oath of office to a constitutional system that is tedelicate and fragile. The purpose the founders had in mind with limited government was to recognize the center of American Life is not in government. Itste the neighborhoods where americansre are living and workg and raising their kids and coaching little league. The center of life is not washington, d. C. And the politicization of more of life and then the majoritarianil politicization will not be good for American Peace and the longterm deescalation. Im grateful if you are covering this issueli and i think its critically important and if we head down this pathway of the thjoritarian senate that changes the size and structure of the Supreme Court every election,ct you are not just going to have 11 or 13 Supreme Court justices. You will head to a Banana Republic structure where every time theres an election, people talk about trying to politicize and turn it into the super legislature. In that world it would be better for judges to be publicly popularly elected than to pretend that they are somehow still a political. The apolitical branch of s government. The reason we have justices wear robes is because they are symbolizing the cloaking of their partisan preferences. If you have judges that are just super legislators, then they shouldnt have lifetime tenure. They should have to stand for the election because it is the only way that the American People can have accountability over them. The constitutional system with the branches where people stand for election and in apolitical branch is a brilliant structure, and we should fight to maintain that the less publicized and less majoritarian structure. Thanks. I am pleased to be here with my colleagues and i want to thank senator rubio for his leadership of over a year on this very important issue and its certainly come to light. Anticipating this and knowings what is best for the American People is emblematic and what we are trying to say here today. That is to depoliticize the judicial system to not try to restructure and thats what the democrats are saying now. They are talking about restructuring. Why arent they saying packing, because that sounds worse but thats actually what they want to do. They want to pack the court with the preordained decision to stay with that decision would be because it would be in the political realm. So i think that the American People will reject packing as they would reject structuring because they are actually one in the same. The other thing i would say that has been pointed out more than a few times, the sensitivity of the checks and balances or something to marvel at. We have had the decision and how they have moved from right of center left and as the policies would dictate and i think that is what you want. I think that you want a thoughtful and impartial set of justices to judge us as policymakers and to judgert the president and the executive and every check and balance the court brings to us keeps us from veering too far from what the American People want. We have had it for over 150 years and its worked pretty good i think. Thanks for raising this issue. The democrats have demonstrated they want to pack the court. I jusmetwith judge amy coney bad am so inspired by her. This truly is her calling and she is a gift to the country when she is confirmed to serve in the Supreme Court. I would put my life on the line. Those who served in the military and oath of office to the constitution willing to give it all to protect america and its freedoms and what these democrats want to do is demanding. To fundamentally destroy the foundations of the country, the institutions at all costs. It doesnt matter. Its about gaining power at all cost. That isnt what america was founded on. That isnt what the men and women who serve with me gave ntheir lives for and those that came back i didnt put my life on the line for. Americans want stability right now. They want to be able to trust their institutions more, not less and to somehow get their way. The campaigning on the other side to transform the institutions like this. Nine is a good number lets solidify that and provide more stabilityou and more opportunits for people m to meet the potentl and live out their godgiven freedoms o the way the Founding Fathers intended it to be. Thank you for advancing this. Two weeks ago, Chuck Schumer stood on the stage and said he wasnt going to waste the majority. We all know this could be a democratic senatorial primary candidate in a couple of years in new york and is demanding that we expand and pack the courts. If anybody thinks that this is a hypothetical or political stunt to raise awareness this is a clear andue present danger on wt happens in november. I believe Chuck Schumer will reduce the threshold to the majorityt and will move forward with an expansion of the Supreme Court and then after its expanded, it will be packed with liberal activist judges and the cycle will go on and on and on. We need to raise the threshold, and this is a step in the right direction. Depending on the outcome its one that will rule the day if in fact Chuck Schumer delivers on the promise. The last thing i will leave you with is the vice president. He said i will tell you my position on packing the courts after the election. Hes doing one or two things. Hes either not telling the radical left he wouldnt expand the Supreme Court or hes not tellingo the moderate left that hee would. We deserve an answer to that as well. But i do believe this is a good step in the right direction. Thank you for your leadership. Shiperyone is abandoning here. To do Something Like this would take away the comedy [inaudible] [inaudible] there is no plan. They should come out n and sy we dontt want to do it. Theyve refused to take a position on this issue including those running for state senate and senate seats around the country. What he said as he wants to wait and see how the nomination plays out before he lets the voters know. So ultimately if you believe it needs to be expanded, say it. All the energy in the Democratic Party that comes from the radical elements in the party right now and all the money that you see being born poured in before there was a vacancy for the seat before the judge was being considered by this, it is unrelated to this issue and its more the broad point that we in the institutional system to function meaning we have a determined number of seats based on the districts apportioned to the o population of the states. Wen have two senators per state and there needs to be some stability. It cannot be we decide to change the number of people on the court every time the outcomes do not favor your particular policy preference because that isnt the court. They will not to say that they are for it and there are plenty including prominent voices in the party that are asking for it and demanding it. The difference is now you have candidates that wont take the position or they are avoiding it. Why not just say it. Why cant they a just say we wil not do j this. Lets give them a vote before we leave here lets put everybody on the record to state whether they are for it or not. If the questioning is right that no one is proposing this or considering it then they can put it on the record and exemplify that position. But heres the bottom line the fact of the matter is they will not commit and there is a reason for that. Rs ago that say publicly now may be the time for you to go back and read that letter go to every member who signed it, asking where they are today. And you can determine whether not they are still a threat. And then contributing and then we go back but secondly to senator tillis is your best argument to be on the presidency . Back to the first question, these are two separate issues the filibuster members of the Supreme Court. On the members of the Supreme Court which is what my amendment is about, not the filibuster but institutional stability. On the issue of the filibuster i thought it was a terrible thing and i thought it was unfortunate for the ong. Senateo ultimately become the Supreme Court ase well going back 2025 years they still got their votes that has changed the nature of our politics. And then to change on the legislativeti standpoint if all that takes is a simple majority and then to have a place to move more slower and more deliberate. I will admit even with you on the losing side of issues lets get rid of the filibuster and then hope everybody understands so the senate was intended and that sometimes the passions of the moment overcomes the politics. And that can be change. And then to get into a position if somebody is in the majority and with those and with those chaotic countries that so my amendment is about of the last 14 years in office turning the North Carolina economy around passing the jobs act with an economy that was a story can record low unemployment so by the same time i have an appointment an opponent. Thank you. This is about politics one month ago i voted on a cares package and they also said we need to do more individual payments absolutely. And bailing out california and new york to save schumer and feinstein . Absolutely not. If i can provide resources to anyone to demonstrate the benefactor and with those liability protections. Prepared to stay here again. The senate Judiciary Committee votes tomorrow on whether to send the Supreme Court nomination of judge barrett to the full senate for consideration live coverage starting at 9 00 a. M. Eastern. Ahead of the vote Chuck Schumer and democratic members of the committee boycotting the meeting to say republicans to jam through the nominee and with the breaking longstanding Committee Rules we will not grant this process any further legitimacy by participating in the Committee Markup 12 days before the culmination of the election already underway. Development people run it really well if i run it badly they will blame me. Already costing 10 Million People the healthcare. The senator from minnesota. I rise today to tell the people of minnesota why oppose the confirmation of judge Amy Coney Barrett to me an associate justice of the United StatesSupreme Court. Our constitutions most render peopusr