Already attracted criticism. And Opposition LeaderAnwar Ibrahim pushes his case for becoming the new Prime Minister of malaysia. And im santa hummus and i have all the sport. Major League Baseball welcomes back fans as the Atlanta Braves win the opening match of the National League championship series. The government says cyprus is suspending a controversial citizenship for Investment Program after an undercover investigation by aljazeera the countrys attorney general has also announced an investigation into possible criminal offenses fall. The revelations that expose high ranking officials expressing a willingness to see aides convicted criminals to obtain citizenship in august all to serious investigative units released the cyprus papers which revealed serious flaws in the citizen buy Investment Program well lets say across live now to our Investigative ReporterDavid Harrison he joins us now from nicosia david its the cypriot government has always tonights there was any any wrongdoing so what reason are they giving for suspending the scheme. Well its very interesting to have deputy to shift but this morning the announcement was made at the president ial palace no less and they were approaching we this is under the beauties of the Passport Program its you know the the people the protagonists is the ones they feature the undercover documentary they all initially denied isnt there still that they still have that mr any wrongdoing but they were playing things like conspiracies they were blaming just you know having a huge was a country and to be trying to tarnish cyprus but that view has really shifted it was it was initially taken up by all the public opposition media but since the documentary actually appeared theres been a sea change in attitude and now this announcement by the attorney general of the investigation into possible criminal offenses shows that they are really taking this seriously and that they believe this is credible enough to warrant a very serious inquiry ok David Harrison there live in the case for now thank you very much indeed and if you want to find out more about the cyprus papers and that investigation weve got a podcast up on our website so you can find out more there just head to al jazeera dot com forward slash podcasts forward slash out to sea or investigates to listen at any time and at your convenience and of course you can watch that documentary in full papers under cover were screening that again at all 100. 00 g. M. T. On wed and state. A Senate Confirmation hearings are getting underway this hour for a new u. S. Supreme Court Justice to replace the lakes with Bader Ginsburg ripping the life pictures and i phone the hearing on capitol hill where Lindsey Graham is speaking and lets listen thats a political fight im in a campaign at home if it were up to me we would block grant this money send it back to the states in a more fair allocation and we would require preexisting conditions to be covered as part of the block grant we want sick people covered but i got an idea i think South Carolina may may be able to deal with diabetes better than and different than california if you want good outcomes in medicine you need innovation and the best way to get innovation is to allow people to try Different Things to get Better Outcomes so the debate on health care is consolidating all the power in washington have some bureaucrat youll never meet running this program versus having it centered in the state where you live under my proposal South Carolina would get almost a 1000000000. 00 for the state of South Carolina would be in charge of it ministering obamacare they couldnt build football stadiums with the money they have to spend it on health care that have to cover preexisting conditions but if as a patient in South Carolina you would have a voice you dont have today if you didnt like what was happening to you on the health care front you could go to local officials and complain in the people youre complaining to live in your state they send their family to the same hospitals you go thats a structural difference thats got nothing to do with this hearing its got everything to do with politics we all decide. Do not believe obamacare is the best way to provide Quality Health care over time our friends on the other side this is a placeholder for Single Payer Health care if you dont believe me just ask them so thats the fight going into 2020 doesnt make them bad it just makes them different if we were up to me bureaucrats would not be administering health care from Washington People in South Carolina would be Running Health care if it were up to me would get more money under bamma care than we do today 35 percent would not go to 3 states and sick people would be covered so thats the political debate were involved in a campaign in South Carolina my fate will be left up to the people of South Carolina so thats what obamacare is all about now how do you play and here judge there is a lawsuit involving the Affordable Care act before the Supreme Court well talk about that in a bit and the difference between analyzing a lawsuit in having a political argument is fundamentally different and i hope to be able to demonstrate that over the course of the day and i hope that my colleagues on this will not feel shy about telling my colleagues on the other side of the aisle why we think we have a better idea on health care now the bottom line here judge you said yesterday something that struck me and i want the American People understand what you meant you said youre an originalist is it true what does that mean in english. Here past a button i mean we all love senator lee but. In english and english ok so in english that means that i interpret the constitution as a law that i interpret its text as text and i understand it to have the meaning that it had at the time people ratified it that meaning doesnt change over time and its not up to me to update it or infuse my own policy views into it so in other words youre bound by the people who wrote it at the time they wrote it that keeps you from substituting your judgment for theirs is that correct yeah all right Justice Scalia his original is right yes he was people say that youre a female scalia what would you say i would say that Justice Scalia was obviously a mentor and as i said in the when i accepted the president s nomination that his philosophy is mine too you know he was a very eloquent defender of originalism and that was also true of textual islam which is the way that i approach statutes and their interpretation and similarly to what i just said about originalism for textual ism the judge approaches the text as it was written with the meaning it had at the time and doesnt inform your own meeting into it but i want to be careful to say that if im confirmed you would not be getting Justice Scalia you would be getting justice barrett. And thats so because originalists dont always agree and neither do textualists justices glia and thomas disagreed often enough my friend judge animals the part teaches a class called scalia versus thomas you know its not an mechanical exercise our way to the movie comes out so. The bottom line for me is there is a narrative building in this country and again you can. Standdown this is just me speaking for me Justice Ginsburg was an iconic figure in American History just not the law she was a trailblazer she fall for better conditions for women throughout society she was unashamedly progressive in her personal thought she was devout to her faith she worked for the a. C. L. U. She was proudly prochoice personally but all of us on this apparently when they voted excepted that she was highly qualified but i want the American People to know i think its ok to be religiously conservative i think its ok to be personally prochoice and think is ok to live your life in a traditional catholic fashion and you still be qualified for the Supreme Court so all the young conservative women out there this hearing to me is about a place for you i hope when this is all over that you will be a place for you at the table will be a spot for you at the Supreme Court light there was for judge ginsburg and to President Trump i dont know if youre listening or not by picking judge barrett you have publicly said you find that you and all of these characteristics but beyond anything else you find judge baird to be highly qualified i would say youre one of the greatest picks President Trump going to may and from the conservative side of the aisle youre one of the most qualified people of your generation lets talk about brown versus board of education cosigned though senator blumenthal will im going to. Talk about that you said in writings it was a super president what did you mean. Well in my writings so as a professor i talked about the doctrine of star decisis and super president is not a doctrinal term that comes from the Supreme Court and i think maybe and political conversation or in newspapers people use it different ways but in my writing i was using a framework thats been articulated by others and in that context super precedent means president that is so well established that it would be unthinkable that it would ever be overruled and there are about 6 cases on this list that other scholars have identified was talk about brown talk about why it would be unthinkable 1st lets talk about whats the process that would lead to it being overruled what would have to happen for brown to be overruled you would have to have congress or some state or local government. Impose segregation again opens the kayleigh start right there if you want to make yourself famous by the end of the day you can say we want to go back to segregation i promise you youll be on every cable t. V. Channel in america i doubt if youll go very far but the point were trying to make here is the court just cant wake up and say lets revisit brown it has to be a case in controversy is that right yes thats right so before brown decision could you could review brown somebody out there would have to be dumb enough to pass a law saying lets go back to segregated schools is it fair to say that is fair to say you see that happening any time soon i do not see that happening anytime soon yeah i dont either. So lets talk about the process in general theres the heller case was that about the heller case as a case decided by the Supreme Court which held that the 2nd amendment protects an individual right to bear arms now my friends on the left some of them have a problem with heller they may try to challenge the construct of heller if a state or local government passed a law in defiance of heller what would happen. In defiance of heller or that would challenging the construct of power that challenge the concept of heller if it was a lower if it was brought in a lower court heller binds i mean hellers lower courts always have to file a Supreme Court precedent and so you know if the Supreme Court wanted to revisit pillar what would they do. If someone challenge heller below because a state or local government passed a law contradicting heller the Supreme Court would have to take that case once it was appealed all the way up to the court would have to decide yes we want to overrule heller and we have enough votes to grant cert and then do so so thats the way the process works yes it would start because there was a law then there was a lawsuit then there was an appeal then the Court Granted cert and then the court decided the case is that true no matter what the issues with Abortion Health care or Campaign Finance does that process hold true for everything yes you always know judges cant just wake up one day and say i have an agenda i like guns i hate guns i like abortion i hate abortion and walk in like a a royal queen and impose their will on the world you have to wait for cases and controversies such as the language of the constitution to wind their way through the process all right well senator says give us a good civics lesson out does the basic lesson along here so if a state said you know i dont think you should have over 6 bullets and somebody you believe that violated the 2nd a member there would be a lawsuit in the same process would work right the same process would work in that case there would be parties would have to sue the state to have a you know arguing that that law was unconstitutional it would wind its way up and if it got to the Supreme Court and if the Supreme Court decided to take it a whole Decision Making process begins you hear arguments from litigants on both sides they write briefs you top 2 clerks. As a judge you talk to your colleagues and you write an opinion opinion circulate and you get feedback from your colleagues so its a its an entire process its not something that judge or justice would wake up and say are we hearing this case i know what my votes going to be lets talk about. The 2 Supreme Court cases regarding abortion or the 2 leading cases in america regarding the abortion life think most people think of roe versus wade and casey as the case after roe that preserved Central Holding but grounded it nestle different rationale so what is that rush no rationale is that its not impose an undue burden on a womans right to terminate a pregnancy ok unlike brill there are there are states challenging on the abortion front there are states that are going to a fetal heartbeat bill i have a bill judge that would. Disallow abortion on demand at the 20 weeks the 5th month of the pregnancy where one of 7 nations in the entire world allow abortion on demand and that the 5th month the construct of mobility is because the child is capable feeling pain in the 5th month doctors tell us to save the childs life you have to provide in a stage if you operate because they can feel pain the argument im making is if you have to provide in a stage or to save the childs life because they can feel pain must be a terrible death to be dismembered by an abortion thats a theory to protect the unborn at the 5th month if that litigation comes before you where you listen to both sides of course so do that in every case so i think 14 states have already passed a version of what ive just described so there really is a debate in america still a light brown versus board of education about the rights of the unborn thats just one example so. If there is a challenge coming from a state they state passes a law and. It goes into court where people say this fall lates casey how do you decide that well it would begin in a District Court and a trial court you know the trial court would make a record you know the parties would litigate and fully develop that record in the trial court and it would go up to a court of appeals that would review that record looking for error and then again it would be the same process someone would have to seek search or are at the Supreme Court the Supreme Court would have to granted and then at that point it would be the full judicial process would be briefs oral argument conversations with law clerks in chambers consultation with colleagues writing an opinion really digging down into it its not its not just a vote you will do that you will have a policy new cast a vote the judicial process is different ok so when it comes to your personal views about this topic but do you want to go on. We do own a gun ok. All right. Do you think you could fairly decided case even though you want to gun yes all right youre catholic i am i think weve established that. The tenets of your faith mean a lot to you personally is that correct that is true youve chosen to raise your family in the catholic faith is that correct thats true can you set aside whatever catholic beliefs you have regarding any issue before you i can i have done that in my time on the 7th circuit i stay on the 7th circuit i continue to do that if im confirmed to the Supreme Court i will do that still i would dare say that there are personal views on the Supreme Court. And nobody questions whether our liberal friends can set aside their believes theres no real question no reason to question yours in my view. So the bottom line here is that theres a process you fill in the blanks where this about guns and heller abortion rights lets go to Citizens United to my good friend senator wyden us man youre going to come closer and