against something like this? well, here s a theory of the case because we have this remarkable reporting in which the supreme court apparently has been talking about developing a code for four years, and so clearly there s a group of justices who think this is a good idea, and there s a group of justices who think it s not a good idea. justice roberts, justice aleto, they testified in congress in the past about their disdain where there s skepticism about this code. my worry is that the conservative justices on the court don t really think they re judges. they don t think they should be bound by the same code as every other federal court judge because they re policy makers, not judges. they re making law, not interpreting law. the new justices gorsuch, kavanaugh, they coney barrett, they ran campaigns for the supreme court just like we ran campaigns for elected office in the legislature. so my worry is that they don t believe they should be bound by the code that every other justic
independent person, she s his spouse, that shouldn t be held on his account? look, she s not on the supreme court. clarence thomas is on the supreme court. there s never been one whisper of impropriety on the part of clarence thomas. there s been a decades long attempt to smear clarence thomas and to degrade him over time and this is a continuation of that. regarding the approval ratings of supreme court they re not supposed to be reading polls. they re supposed to be reading the constitution and the laws and making decisions therein. you do not want this branch of government worried about its approval rating. you want them only worried about the law and doing the job that they were put on that court to do and the idea that they can t function unless they re waking up every day and checking a poll, that s maybe justice. that s mob rule. i don t think they re checking their twitter feed. they re not supposed to be it s not sally fields getting an
out and you have constitutional standards and it ll have to be done in the state. justice aleto has already told us, he doesn t want aba standards constitutionalized. it s got to be state by state by state. again, none of us want guilty people roaming the streets. we all want guilty people in prison. the question is are we sending innocent people to prison because of the inequities in the system. thank you so much. we ll be right back. chnology. we can replace your windshield .and recalibrate your safety system. customer: and they rerecycld my old glass. tech: don t wait. schedule tododay. singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. my relationship with my credit cards wasn t good. i got into debt in college and, no matter how much i paid, it followed me everywhere. between the high interest, the fees. i felt trapped. debt, debt, debt. so i broke up with my credit card debt and consolidated it into a low-rate personal loan from sofi. i finally feel like a grown-up. break
it s central to this campaign, so that has put the supreme court on the ballot. but as you know they re considering all kinds of issues in realtime that have profound impacts or will have profound impacts on the country. and, yes, i think that if there s conservative justices who were added to the supreme court, if they operate with a consistent philosophy, then you can say, well, this is their interpretation of the constitution. if they re inconsistent in order to achieve political goals, then they open themselves up to criticism. and if they are out there saying things that seem overtly political, justice aleto being an example of someone who does that from time to time, you invite the kind of criticism they re getting. i m going to turn to my good friend scott jennings for a second because maybe you don t realize he has a pet pig. it s true, right? i m bringing it up is it a potbelly pig? it s a julian made pig.
discussed in public or to be in any way, you know, punished. it s fascinating because we often hear about, well, the founding fathers wanted and thinking about constitutional interpretation. we actually don t have a hypothetical. we know what people like thomas jefferson and the like actually thought. it was a private matter. it wasn t a matter for public discourse. and so if that s the case is the aleto opinion fundamentally flawed? well, as an opinion based in history, yes, indeed it is. because in the founding era there were no laws against abortion. the historical survey that the opinion uses to justify the idea that abortion was not quote-unquote, you know, deeply rooted in the american past is a single case from the colony, not even state of maryland, in the 1650s.