Chance to protect this glorious heritage by sending judge Brett Kavanaugh to the United StatesSupreme Court. Meanwhile, after President Trump announced his decision, a number of highprofile Democratic Senators gathered to speak out against the nominee. President trump has told us what he wants to do. He wants to roll back individual rights. He wants to roll back a womans right, and workers rights. He wants to roll back civil rights. But we will not go backwards. President trump has announced his plan to nominate Brett Kavanaugh for a lifetime appointment to the United StatesSupreme Court. Im not going to sugar coat this. We are in the fight of our lives. We have the American People on our side. Now weve got to go state by state by state to make sure that senators do what their constituents want. Lets bring in peter baker, harry littman, and kimberly atkins. Welcome to you all. Harry, Home Field Advantage must have some advantage. So, well begin with you. What stands out to you about this nominee, what should the folks watching at home know about this man and his jurisprudence . About the man, hes really a classic washington insider. He knows everyone in town. On both sides of the aisle. Born there and raised in the suburbs. Wellrespected, genial, likable, et cetera. About his jurisprudence, he has an aggressive view of certain parts of the constitution, especially executive power. What kind of things the president can and cant do. And, this is going to be hard for democrats to try to explain to the American People, but he wants to shrink the administrative state. The alphabet soup of epa, eoc, et cetera, that have so much to do with peoples lives on the ground. And that he thinks have had too much power, basically, since the new deal. And lets go right after this, what will become, were living in an era where people assume the fix is in. In a number of different areas. Yes. So you have this president nominating this man, who has written about his belief that president s should not deal with the distraction of being sued or being litigated against while in office. What about the notion of this guy, when he gets to the Supreme Court, could be handed the case of the trump presidency, in effect, pulling himself out of the case, recusing himself from that case. A few things. First of all, he said that in 2009 on the bench. Ten years before that, he didnt have any trouble with the distractions that he bedeviled president clinton with it. Worked with ken starr. Then saw better of it, and says the president should not be subject to this. He says congress should pass legislation to make it happen. On the recusal question, its a tough one. Nixon appointees sitting in judgment of nixon, the same for clinton appointees. And hes appointed, nominated at the very time that trump is so much in the soup. But under the standard, first, he will not commit to recusing at the hearings. Hell say hell think about it. And when push comes to shove, i think he likely will not. Peter, some will look at what we just aired and find some of the democratic lawmakers veinp veinp veinpoppingly loud. And others will agree. How is this shaking out in your early reporting, having followed the turns of this, following you on twitter all day . Look, this used to be a different type of process, back when president clinton was in office, and ginsburg was confirmed, and scalia was confirmed until unanimously. Now, the default is the opposite. The default is, your party, the party of the president stays with him, and the other party is automatically suspicious if not outright opposing to begin with. So, it becomes yet another campaign. So, you start this confirmation process with the assumption that both sides start in the middle 40s, in terms of their votes. And only a handful on each side seem to be up for grabs. And kimberly, as you know, we have the unknown of senator john mccain, who is in the fight of his life. A big, important republican vote with margins this close. So, the mcconnell and schumer b the process of working on the math. Getting the votes and holding on to the votes. Exactly. And senator mccain, while hes remaining in arizona, he signaled his support for judge kavanaugh doing what he can to encourage his colleagues to back this vote. But it could come down to one vote at the very end of this. So, it is a very thin margin. Of course, this is what Mitch Mcconnell does. He gets his caucus together, and so long as senators murkowski and collins remain there, they will be able to confirm. And the red state democrats up for election this year, many of whom voted for gorsuch. Some who could be pushed to vote yes, too. The margins are thin. And the numbers are there. Absent something going really wrong, i think mcconnell is feeling pretty good continue. And mcconnell, criticizing the democrats with a straight face. A few of whom said, i dont care who the president puts up, im going to vote against them. Mcconnell, famous for having blocked president obamas nominee, which could have been william rehnquist, he was going to block the nominee until the republican became president. Youre right. Th he blocked merritt garland, said it was nothing personal. He just wasnt going to put anyone forward in a president ial election year. He made up a new rule that democrats are trying to use against him, saying because its a midterm election, no one should be put forward. Mcconnell, of course, is not swayed by the logic. And there will be a vote, and very likely, a confirmation. The president faced a choice. Had some rookies of the federal bench under consideration. The president and his staff are known to believe they may get another choice or two on the court, depending on the route of his presidency. He chose a young 53yearold veteran of the federal bench. That means theres a paper trail. He has written 300someodd opinions that were free to pour through. And look for any mines in the road ahead. Huge point. And mcconnell, remember, actually advised trump that kavanaugh and barrett were the two that were harder to confirm. He has a very big paper trail. He has the time in the bush white house. He has the starr report, hes the principal author for and has to own. And has quite a number of opinions. And i think it does open up one glimmer of hope for the democrats, which is not a down vote, but a delay. There is the real possibility with the big paper trail and something coming up, this is why mcconnell preferred someone else. That the democrats may be able to maneuver into the shadow of the midterms and possibly the Mueller Report comes out, which could be a gamechanger. And the president s desire to have a yale or harvard type. So, this is rooted in a way with the president s personality, the strange relationship he has with the group he always calls the elites. Wanting to shun them, being angry at not being accepted into their circles, but still wanting the acceptance of elements of the senate and the media. Thats exactly right. Of course, the Supreme Court is certainly in need of more ivy leaguers on there. Judge kavanaugh, if he gets confirmed, will be the ninth justice from harvard or yale. Keeping the sweep thats been there now for quite a while. Its a curious thing about President Trump. He both values and scorns the eli elite institutions of america that are so important to both the judiciary, as well as business and politics and so many other aspects of our country. He went to an ivy league school, but he will talk populist tones about how the elites are ruining the country. So, this goes back to what you were saying on your earlier program. This is a bargain hes made with the judicial conservative movement, hes going to accept their selections, their culling of a list of people they consider to be qualified in exchange for their support. No matter what other issues they may have with his presidency. And the reports, the president on the phone with putin, talks about members of his staff as stupid. Hes going to represent us at nato in the uk, and meeting with putin with only interpreters. So, how big a week will this be . Its huge. The balance of power of the court could change for some time to come. Then going to nato, to confront our allies, and in london, where hes very unpopular. And the government there is already in turmoil on its own. And to see putin, in what seems to be set up as a friendly meeting. You cant imagine a week like this scripted in this way. And one thing about the russian meeting, he will be visiting lond london, just rocked by the death of a british citizen by a nerve attack that seems to have come from russia. Thats an awkward back and forth there. And you mentioned a story that we like to say, in normal times may be our lead story on any given night. One that has not been given near the play it deserves. The chemical agent in the uk. And thanks to peter, harry, and kimberly. Really appreciate you joining us tonight. Coming up, Rachel Maddow picks up our coverage of the president s choice for the court tonight. Because youve made sure this sensor and this machine are integrated. She can talk to him, yes. Atta, boy. Some people assign genders to machines. And you can be sure you wont have any problems. Except for the daily theft of your danish. Not cool at t provides edge to edge intelligence. It can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. Thats the power of. This shipment will be delivered. Which is why i use armor tall ultra shine wash wipes. Y. They effectively remove dirt, dust and grime with no water. That car is in tip top shape we are both in tip top shape armor all, its easy to look good. Looking for a hotel that fits. Whoooo. Your budget . Tripadvisor now searches over. 200 sites to find you the. Hotel you want at the lowest price. Grazi, gino find a price that fits. Tripadvisor. Just for a shot. But why go back there when you can stay homefice with Neulasta Onpro . Strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. In a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17 to 1 , a 94 decrease. Neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. Neulasta is for certain Cancer Patients receiving strong chemotherapy. Do not take neulasta if youre allergic to it or Neupogen Filgrastim . An incomplete dose could increase infection risk. Ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. Report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. In patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. The most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. If youd rather be home, ask your doctor about Neulasta Onpro. Pay no more than 25 per dose with copay card. Brett kavanaugh to fill the v vacancy of the Supreme Court. He has been on the d. C. Circuit court of appeals for a dozen years now. Since he has been on the d. C. Circuit court, you should also know that kavanaugh has been serving all these years under the chief judge of that court. Whose name is merritt garland. Who was nominated in the spring of 2016 to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated by the death of scalia. Nominated by barack obama. Because he was nominated by barack obama, republicans in the senate would not allow a hearing on the nomination. They cited the election coming later that year. Close observers will note there is an election coming later this year but nobody knows if democrats will be able to apply the same standard this time to wait on the kavanaugh hearings the way republicans pushed the garland nomination to the horizon and ultimately off the edge. The democrats will apparently try to do that, but we dont know. After less than 18 months in office, donald trump is already making his second nomination to the Supreme Court. Only nine people on the court. This comes at a time when the choice is fraught and consequential in ways that have never applied to any other u. S. President ever. The snapshot of whats going on right now includes the fact that the president s First National security adviser has pled guilty to a felony charge. He will appear in court tomorrow. A federal judge is about to hold a hearing on the start of his process. The president s Campaign Chair is three and a half weeks into solitary confinement, awaiting the start of two federal trials. The president s longtime personal lawyer has just secured the Legal Services of one of president clintons lawyers from his impeachment fight in the 90s. While prosecutors mull charges against him and while he is widely reported to be considering cooperating with those prosecutors in a potential plea deal. If the president ends up in the crosshairs of the investigation, any number of the elements of his defense may end up before the u. S. Supreme court. And potentially before the nominee he has named tonight. Can the president be subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury . Can a president be criminally indicted . Can the president pardon himself . Can he pardon others if the goal of the pardons is to weaken the case against himself or his family . Can states bring prosecutions against people the president has pardoned if he pardons them for that reason . All of those questions are considered to be unsettled as matters of american law. It means if and when push comes to shove, tonights nomination to fill the seat of retiring Justice Kennedy, this nomination will be critical to both law and policy in this country but also to the president s personal fate. In a way we have never seen before. Joining us now, cory booker, who serves on the judiciary committee. Thank you for being with us. Thank you for having me on. What is your reaction to the president s nomination . Im a little sort of stunned at the way this has all played out. If you look at the 20 or so people, the one person who could be most assured to rule in his favor is this judge. He picked the one guy who has specifically written that a president should not be the subject of a criminal investigati investigation. Which the president is right now. So this seems to be, of all the people, the most self serving person he could choose to protect himself from this investigation. Cnn reported earlier this evening that that factor about judge kavanaugh, his writings on whether a president can be indicted, about a president s potential susceptibility to obstruction of justice charges, those writings by judge kavanaugh were overtly considered and reviewed by the White House Team that was advising the president on making this pick. If thats true, if it turns out the president chose judge kavanaugh for this nomination in part on what he said about whether President Trump could be indicted, would that itself be a factor for confirmation . Would that be disqualifying . First, i have no doubt this president who seems to be very concerned about himself, didnt see that as a Shining Pearl within the picks that he had and the criteria that he looked at. Ive been saying emphatically before this and now with an Even Stronger voice that we as the United States senate, forget partisanship or what have you, to avoid a constitutional crisis, we cannot let this confirmation process go forward. Especially since we have someone who has clearly said they have a strong opinion should any of those issues come before the Supreme Court. We know now the ideas that are not settled law, that the president can pardon himself. Whether he can just dispense with a criminal investigation. A lot of these issues could come right before that judge. You are a trained lawyer and you have Expert Opinions on these things as well as observing them through a political lens. The way i understand judge kavanaughs writing on the subject is not just that he said a president definitively cannot and should not be indicted when in office. But that he said a president shouldnt be subject to criminal prosecution or any civil lawsuits while in office. That a president should be exempt from accountability on either criminal or civil law while in office as a way to ensure that hes able to focus entirely on the business of running the country. Thats interesting given his history with the ken starr investigation. I believe he was the lead author of the ken starr report. This would seem to have implications for the president s potential liability not just for the mueller investigation, but also for any liability that may attend to the trump foundation, or the zervos lawsuit, or the emolument cases that have been brought over the last year and a half. We know this president is already nose deep in legal matters before he even became president and was settling with millions of dollars beforehand. Now he has a lot of legal trouble. The challenges that this president could have caused for himself, now he has that insurance policy. He has this get out of jail free card. And sifting through 20plus names, as well as all the others he could have considered, he picked the one, its not just that he said a president couldnt be indicted or held accountable for his actions. He goes as far as to say even an investigation. Even being in the midst of a larger investigation. This could distract a president from other urgent work. Youre right, rachel. Its a choice piece of irony that this is a person that is very much a political actor before he was a jurist, that was a part of the starr investigation himself. I am deeply troubled. Before you get to the issues that concern me as an american citizen. That this is a person who is going to roll back so many of the freedoms and liberties that americans have gained for themselves over 50 years. Whether it is a womans right to make her own medical decisions, whether its voting rights. The right for individuals to organize. And to have the rights of citizenship like voting rights. People on both sides of the aisle worrying about corporate ascendancy. We already saw it is so muted the voices of ordinary americans and the billion of dollars now that we see in dark money pouring into campaigns. This trend now with the shifting of the court, that should be enough to cause outrage. And to give me a sense of conviction. I am really stunned whats happened over the last six months with an investigation, there has been 70plus charges. 20 plus individuals have been subject to those charges. Five guilty pleas. One sentence. People all swirling around this president. We have a Bipartisan Group on the senate side saying the russians did indeed attack us. All of this is going on now and it is like im watching a bad movie. That now the president of the United States has indemnified himself by picking the one person he knew would have his back. The one person who would give him shield from anything that might come at him. Even though we see that numerous people are under investigation right now. Senator cory booker, thank you for being with us tonight. Thank you for having me. That last point senator booker was making, that this nominee was chosen off a list, which is an unusual thing. Previous president s havent done this. This president said that he would choose nominees from a list prepared by conservative interest groups. Kavanaugh was added to the list late last year. What senator booker is saying, he is the one person on that list who is explicitly on the record talking about a president s liability to criminal investigation and indictment. And saying, as senator booker said, that a president should not be subject to criminal investigation and cannot be indicted. If he is the one guy from that list of two dozen choices who has been explicit on that point, is that the signal element that we should see here in this choice . Joining us once again, dahlia, Legal Correspondent at slate. Com. To this point is senator booker correct that kavanaugh has an explicit and overt record that might appeal to the president because of his own legal woes . I think if the president were pouring over the writings of every person on the list, judge kavanaugh would have given him most succor. I want to clarify one thing. In the article where he talked about this, he didnt say as a constitutional matter, the president should be immune from all civil and liability. He said congress should pass a law to protect the president. Not that we think congress is capable of doing anything in any sense. I dont think he was making the constitutional point that is quite so broad. Hes making a political argument that the impeachment of a president would put a prosecutor in the place of supplanting Congress Responsibility to impeach. Yes. I think it is important because it is not quite as dispositive of this question as we would like to think. On your question, if you think about how much fire kavanaugh drew. Ted cruz hated him. We had, the whole federalist was posting anonymous posts saying, we wont be for trump if he puts kavanaugh up. What was the resistance to kavanaugh . It has been really interesting to me. I thought for a long time it was just that he wasnt a sort of religious conservative. This wasnt going to be the firefight that some of the evangelical community wanted. Now i think its just that theyre not completely certain, ted cruz has been warning all along, hes going to be a suitor. Are there any indications, he has more than 300 opinions. Hes been on the Appeals Court for a dozen years. Its the d. C. Circuit. Lots of highprofile cases. Very ideologically charged cases. He was bush gore recount bush lawyer. A george w. Bush white house employee for more than four years. What would allow conservative critics to see him that way . I have no idea but i was stunned with how they came out with the long knives against him. And i think that donald trump was making exactly the calculus you just identified. If i have to figure out who to mollify, i have all these groups angry about someone. I am going to protect myself. I am going to pick the guy who wrote most expansively over years what the scope of president ial power is. In that sense, you see trump not looking at the landscape of that. Who do i need to satisfy for the upcoming midterms. Instead, how do i protect myself . Lets just quote directly judge kavanaugh from a 1998 georgetown law article. Quote, congress should establish, important to point that out, congress should establish that the president can be indicted only after he leaves office voluntarily or is impeached by the house and convicted and removed by the senate. Thats kavanaugh on the record saying, there should be no indictment of a sitting president. Dahlia, thank you very much. Good to have you with us tonight. Thank you. I want to bring in my good friend chris matthews, the host of hardball on msnbc. Who has covered any number of Supreme Court fights. Chris, it is good to see you, my friend. What is your reaction . My first reaction is how smart you are. I think this guy was promised to judge kennedy that he would be his replacement. I think thats what theyre going to sell him as. Did you notice the little thing there. He come from my parish. Blessed sacrament. He coached cyo basketball for his daughter. He went to georgetown prep. Thats the world i come from. He also pointed out that there is a lot of arguments in that community. That theyre not all prolife in the way political people use the term. They have different views about politics. He said, theres a difference of opinion within his community. I thought it was very thoughtful. Unlike perhaps amy barrett would have said something. He tried to pick someone in the model of Justice Kennedy who might be surprisingly live and let live on areas of Sexual Orientation or even abortion rights. He wanted to get someone out there that would get votes that he needs to get to 51. He already has the votes for the appellate confirmation from the two people leaning perhaps to a hard prolife appointment. He also has the precedent of gorsuch getting the votes from Heidi Heidkamp and manchin in west virginia. It looks like theyve sized it up. Theyve solved the equation. Okay enough for the people in the democratic side who want to lean toward their constituency at home and the most importantly you put your finger on it. He has a history of saying he doesnt think president s should be indicted and he doesnt think there should be legislation on it. This is powerful stuff. Trump likes people telling him how great he is and how hes always right. Heres a guy applying for the job and says, you shouldnt have a finger laid on you. Thats a pretty good selling point. What strikes me as important about that, senator booker was focused in on it. There were a couple dozen names on the list. Were in a weird situation where the president is picking names off a list. We can look at all the other names. It is judge kavanaugh who i believe alone on that list is the only one who is on the record at length on this question of whether a president is subject, should be subject to criminal investigations, civil lawsuits, indictment, impeachment and all the rest of it. He is the only one from that list who said a lot on the record in print on this matter that the white house could have reviewed and hes the one they picked. I cant imagine that under any other president picking him. But with no other president picking him, would your first concern be that maybe he was picking him because he thought he wouldnt indict him. Does the phrase judge shopping come to mind . Hes selecting the decisive vote that will rule on whether he has to respond to a subpoena or not. These are near term concerns. Within this year the court may have to rule on whether he has to be questioned by mueller. These are very near term questions. Judge cavanagh was initially nominated by george w. Bush. In the trump white house, that means hell be seen as a bush guy. That has become something negative to this president in a lot of circumstances. We have the history of what he went through last time. He was picked in 2003. His nomination was essentially iced because it was so controversial. For three solid years, he didnt get a successful hearing until 2006. It was very contentious. He was described as unqualified, one of the most partisan nominees. Of the era, if not ever. It was a hard thing for him to get confirmed a dozen years ago. How does that Carry Forward . It carries forward from crawford, texas. Dateline, crawford, texas. This just came out. President trump has made an outstanding decision in nominating judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. This is from george w. He will make a superb justice of the United States. This fight is going on. I dont understand. Ill be honest with you, i dont understand the nuance of this. Hes cleared muster with the whole legion of the asymmetric warfare that goes on between right and left. Democrats dont have the federal society, the heritage foundation, all that mechanism for finding who speaks for the great force of the right. Chris matthews, my dear friend. I always want to talk to you on big nights in history. Thanks. And the list of a dozen names, that was one thing. That was one thing figuring out how Brett Kavanaugh rose to the top of the list. Now that the president made the choice, this nominee has to get through the u. S. Senate. Where the balance of power stands at 51 republicans to 49 democrats. Among those 51 republicans is senator john mccain who is out and at home because of health concerns. Given that math and the way this Supreme Court nomination came to be, giveren the history of barack obama not allowed to advance his nominee, merritt garland. What are the republicans best chances . What should we expect in terms of fight ahead as to whether kavanaugh will be confirmed . I want to bring into the conversation a former staffer, adam gentleson. He is not a household name but he is a crucial character. He was part of the fight in 2016 to put garland on the Supreme Court. He was deputy chief of staff for harry reid who was seen as a master of the senate rules and who went to the mat in all sorts of unprecedented ways in fights like this in the past. Thank you for being with us tonight. I appreciate you being here. Thanks for having me. Youve spoken publicly about what you think democrats ought to do if they want to pull out all the stops to fight. Now that weve got a name and it is not just hypothetical, do you think that Brett Kavanaugh will inspired a unified democratic opposition in the senate . I think Brett Kavanaugh will present democrats who want to find a way to vote no, ample opportunity to get to no. You were talking about the russia aspect. The president appointing someone with pretty clear intent to be let off. Thats one rationale. Kavanaugh seems very likely to overturn the Affordable Care act. Thats another rationale. His writings on roe v. Wade are very troubling. It seems like he would overturn the womans right to choose. If you want to get to no, you have ample ways of doing it if youre a Senate Democrat right now. Of course, process doesnt seem to motivate people at large the way policy does. But we do have this strange precedent with the last vacancy on the court being created by the death of antonin scalia. February of 2016. Republicans just refused to allow president obamas nomination of merritt garland to proceed in any way, shape, or form. No hearings, no votes. They said they wouldnt do it until after the election. Democrats have made some noises about trying to hold the president to the same precedent. Saying, this time, the election is even closer than when scalia died. What do you think about the chances of delaying, simply that that was the precedent set . Its hard to the difference is that the republicans held the majority when garland was nominated. All it took was Mitch Mcconnell wanting to delay. Democrats are the minority. But the minority has a lot of power in the senate. There are a lot of things they can do to delay this process as much as possible. And one interesting thing about kavanaugh on that front, he has a massive paper trail. That deserves to be scrutinized very carefully. You mentioned the 300 decisions. Making sure that all the proper paperwork is delivered to the judiciary committee, the review is completed before the committee holds its hearings, there are ample opportunities. That are legitimate, not just throwing sand in the gears. This is a man who has a massive, massive paper trail who is being nominated. And scrutinizing that will take some time. Mcconnell said he wants to hold a vote by september or october. That is a very, very fast track to put someone like kavanaugh on. So democrats, similar to the rationale for voting no, theres opportunity for delay here and scrutiny if democrats choose to take them. And briefly, in addition to his time on the Appeals Court, Brett Kavanaugh served for many years in the white house. He was counsel to george w. Bush and then staff secretary which is a small sounding job that is actually an incredibly important job. Would you expect that democrats and other senators would want to see democrats and other senators, considering this nomination, would want to see all of his records . All the paperwork associated with it . All the work product associated with all of his time serving in the executive branch in addition to his judicial record . They should absolutely want to see them. Especially given that the nature of executive power and kavanaughs opinions, how it is wielded, it is massively important, especially given the russia investigation. So all of his emails are public record. Theyre available, they should be posted online. Democrats should demand that. And every piece of paper associated with this man who is poised to wield a massive influence on the future of this country, should be and ought to be scrutinized. And it is likely to be millions of documents, given the length of his career. Adam gentleson, former deputy chief of staff, now part of the group democracy forward. Thank you for your time. Appreciate you being here. Nina totenberg will be joining us in just a moment. We have much more to come this big news night. Do stay with us. vo i was born during the winter of 77. I first met james in 5th grade. We got married after college. And had twin boys. But then one night, a truck didnt stop. But thanks to our forester, neither did our story. And thats why well always drive a subaru. Booking a flight doesnt have to be expensive. Just go to priceline. Its the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40 . Just tap and go. For the best savings on flights, go to priceline. The president has announced that Brett Kavanaugh is his nominee to fill the vacancy of the Supreme Court that was created by the retirement of Justice Anthony kennedy. Can we go to a shot of the Supreme Court . We are already seeing, do we have that footage . Yes. We are already seeing protests. This is outside the u. S. Supreme court. I believe we have some still images of the wider shot. This is happening right now in washington, d. C. , on the steps of the Supreme Court. Weve got people gathered there. Basically for the announcement from President Trump. Now that the nomination has been announced specifically with Brett Kavanaugh, you have people with signs that say stop kavanaugh. Joining us, Nina Totenberg from npr, thank you so much for being with us on this big night. Its my pleasure. So let me get your top line reaction to the president choosing Brett Kavanaugh. Seems like from the survey weve done over the evening thus far, he is both an expected choice, somebody who wouldnt be a surprise choice for any republican president looking for a Supreme Court nominee, but also one that is seemingly raising some controversial issues that others might not have raised. What is your take . I think this is, from the president s point of view, from the point of view of conservatives, is a smart choice. You saw a very graceful, gracious nominee. Not nearly as stiff as neil gorsuch was. Somebody who is used to washington. Who has already been mauled by the Senate Judiciary committee at least once. And somebody who is likely to be able to handle it. On the other hand, if hes confirmed, one assumes that he will be an enormously influential member of the court and very quickly. If you have already written 300 opinions in the d. C. Circuit which handles the big, regulatory cases, which handles big separation of powers cases, true, he hasnt specifically ruled on roe v. Wade, but he has ruled on other stuff, they concede that he will be able to carry the water. And there are five very conservative members of the court if hes confirmed. The terms of his expected role, what have we learned about him over the course of his 12 years in terms of his not just his temperament and ideological place on the number line, but his skill as a jurist and the way he works with other judges . He is, as i said, enormously skilled and very conservative jurist. Who as far as i can tell gets along with his colleagues very well, can slice the salami thin when he needs to. And is something of a team player and not, sort of, a rogue on your own, ill dissent with everything in whatever small ways i dont agree person. That is the picture of somebody who is potentially a very influential member of the United StatesSupreme Court. Having said that and having acknowledged that the democrats at the moment do not have the votes to defeat this nominee, as i have often said, anything can happen in a ball game or a confirmation hearing, and the other part of this that we have not seen quite play out is that there is a recent study that came out that showed the responsiveness of recent nominees to the Supreme Court from 1968 or 65 onward. And from bottom to top, it turns out the republicans always talk about our nominee is going to follow the ginsburg rule. Im not going to give any hint how im going to rule. I will not answer any questions about a specific case and that was true for ginsburg, but she actually answered a remarkable number of questions. It turns out in this analysis, anyway, neal gorsuch was the least responsive person to sit in the nominees seat. And if you look at the others, they werent particularly responsive either, but thats because these nominees learned if they answer a question, they might end up in trouble. They will have to answer more and more and they dont want to go down that path. But the democrats have enough votes, i think, to demand a certain level of responsiveness. To put at least some limit on the stonewalling. And if you dont answer questions about brown v. The board of education, whether you ruled on constitutional segregation, if you wont answer some pretty basic, accepted decisions, and that may not include roe, by the way, but if you arent more responsive about the elements you will be looking at when examining the question of whether you follow precedent and such, if you are not more responsive, i can see the ads in my brain already. And we know that on the right and the left, they are going to spend millions and millions of dollars defending Brett Kavanaugh and attacking Brett Kavanaugh. And always the attackers have the slight edge. It is easier to make a charge than refute it. Nina, thank you for being with us tonight on this big night. It is nice to have you here. Always a pleasure to be with you, rachel. Thank you very much. What she was saying there about the declining responsiveness of nominees at their confirmation hearings over time, in the case of Brett Kavanaugh, that will run up against this interesting thing, that he does have a paper trail a mile long. Not only 300 opinions hes authored in the d. C. Circuit, which deals with a lot of the knottiest issues that have come before the with a kn. Never do homonyms on television. There is also his record, an extensive record in the george w. Bush white house and his time in politics. That will all be up for discussion. You heard several references to roe v. Wade and whether or not judge kavanaugh, if hes confirmed, would be the justice to cast a deciding vote to overturn roe v. Wade or get rid of the right to legal abortion in this country. On the point, joining us is nancy northrup. The president and ceo of the center for reproductive rights. The front line of the League Defense of roe v. Wade. When states pass laws that deny women reproductive rights, it is their lawyers that file these cases. Thanks for being with us tonight. I appreciate it on this busy night. Thank you, rachel. What is your reaction to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh . Here is how i see the nomination. The president promised to appoint to the Supreme Court only justices who would overturn roe v. Wade. And we need to assume that President Trump has done that. The presumption is that he has nominated a man he feels confident will overturn roe v. Wade. His record is not one that rebuts that presumption. He has decided one case on abortion in his time on the d. C. Circuit, and in that case he ruled against the woman seeking access. And this was of a 17yearold undocumented young woman who was in health and Human Services custody. She found out that she was pregnant. She sought to have an abortion, and she even went through the process in texas where the judicial system said, you can consent and make this decision. And, yet, hhs denied her the ability for four weeks to get the abortion. It goes up to the d. C. Circuit and judge kavanaugh would have denied her the abortion for at least another 11 days. Time is everything when you are making this decision. Eventually that was overturned by the full d. C. Circuit, and judge kavanaugh dissented. And, so, hes got one case on abortion. It was ruling against access of a young woman to an abortion. And, so, we have to be very concerned and vigilant that we cannot play the games that always go on in these Senate Confirmation hearings. The americans need to have answers about where he stands on our basic personal liberties. There are at least two female republican senators who are on the record as supporting roe v. Wade, describing it as settled law. Saying that it shouldnt be overturned and saying that may be a factor in their votes. Do you expect that judge cavanaughs record on that subject should sway the votes of republican senators who arent diametrically opposed . His record should. But also the fact he has been appointed by a president with this unusual promise that hes only putting on justices who would overturn roe v. Wade. What the senators should insist upon, is that they get an answer. A direct answer, a plain answer, about where judge kavanaugh stands. Will he accept the rationale and the basis for the decision of roe v. Wade . Does he understand this is about a womans most personal decisions . And the entire broader liberty cases, which it is part of. And will he confirm he is not going to overturn it . This is not a time for games or cleverness. We need answers. Nancy, the president and ceo on the center for reproductive rights. Thank you for being here. Again, the news is that it is Brett Kavanaugh. He is 53 years old. He went to yale undergrad and yale law school. He is an appeals judge right now. On the d. C. Circuit court of appeals. He was nominated to that position in 2003 by george w. Bush. The nomination was not well received. It was incredibly controversial and the senate essentially iced his nomination for three solid years. He didnt have a successful confirmation hearing until 2006. Even so, there were a few dozen votes against him, more than 30 votes against him when he was confirmed. He was seen as somebody who might have been used to persuade Justice Kennedy to retire. Judge cavanaughs name was only added to the list late last year and there has been some speculation he was added to that list as a way to assure Justice Kennedy that his seat might go to his former clerk and somebody he approved of. We dont know whats going to happen in terms of the nomination fight from here on out. We have heard a number of different grounds that democrats might try to object or delay this hearing, the hearings that are ahead for judge cavanaugh. At least now we have a name. That does it for us tonight. Now its time for the last word. I just want to run something by you from judge cavanaughs 2009 law review article because