>> lachlan, elizabeth and james all have their own places in the murdoch empire. lachlan is closest to the seat of power. >> and he finds himself in the middle of this shark tank. >> elizabeth has rupert murdoch's own eye for the new and the fresh. >> people were very impressed by her abilities. >> james proved a real rival to his brother. >> in most families, this would be a happy occasion. in the murdoch family, it completely upends the dynamic. >> announcer: the following is a cnn special report. ♪ may 2nd of this year.

an idyllic spring morning. no hint of what is to come that night. the nine justices of the supreme court attend a memorial service for one of their own, the late john paul stevens. the end of the court's term is just weeks away. >> a whole host of consequential decisions to come. >> a bitterly divided country awaits a momentous decision. >> is this the end of roe v. wade? >> -- of law and of life. >> reporter: at the service the judges look collegial. they call themselves a happy family. beneath the surface there is much more to this story. >> they not only aren't getting along with each other, they don't like each other. >> people die! >> it is a court at war with itself. and in the center stands chief justice john roberts. >> john roberts is someone who is used to winning.

>> he's very much a judicial conservative. >> not a fan of roe vs wade. >> but the chief is stayed to be keenly aware that abolishing roe could tear america apart. >> he cared more about preserving the legitimacy of the supreme court. >> which meant saving roe. >> abort the court! >> he wasn't going to let go. >> months earlier -- >> abortion justice! >> oral arguments in the case of dobbs versus jackson women's health center. at issue, a mississippi law that would limit but not eliminate the right to an abortion. but five justices want to abolish it altogether. >> the conservatives to his right wanted to go all out against roe v. wade. >> the fetus has an interest in having a life. >> i thought it was stunning. >> to save roe roberts must

change one vote. >> there was really only one desperate hope. it all came down to kavanaugh. >> justice brett kavanaugh. >> brett kavanaugh has at times gone with the chief. >> prior to his confirmation hearings justice kavanaugh was widely thought of as somebody who liked to be in the middle. >> that was prior to the hearings. >> i hope the american people can see through this sham. >> the fight over kavanaugh's nomination was ugly. >> a nomination in turmoil. >> this has destroyed my family. >> physical and sexual assault. >> i've never sexually assaulted anyone. >> it was just a train wreck. >> to help me god. >> some even thought the damaging hearings might affect kavanaugh's vote on roe. >> he would have enraged conservatives by not overturning roe v. wade. right now those are his only friends. >> yet as the spring wore on

there appeared to be a chance kavanaugh flight flip. >> a lot of chatter in conservative circles he might be about to go along with chief justice roberts. >> then the stakes rose higher. in late april the "wall street journal" fired a warning shot straight at roberts and kavanaugh. >> the "wall street journal" editorial page is very wired in to the conservative side of this court. >> it called the roberts effort to save roe a ferocious lobbying campaign. >> don't be bullied. don't be persuaded by john roberts. >> yet even by may 2nd there was still a chance of turning the vote around. >> i thought there might be some ambivalence there. >> chief justice roberts bent over backwards. >> but the chief's desperate mission would not last the night. the roberts effort ended at 8:32 p.m. in one dramatic moment

with a keystroke politico published samuel alito's draft opinion abolishing roe vs. wade. >> the stunning news from the supreme court. >> unprecedented major draft opinion. >> it was like a bomb went off. >> it was such a breach of their secrecy. >> the first time in history. >> there has never been a leak like this. >> john roberts had lost his fight. >> my body my choice! >> we will abolish abortion! >> june 24th, the final decision, a shock but not a surprise. >> this is cnn breaking news. >> the cnn has overturned roe v. wade. >> and ended the constitutional right to an abortion. [ cheers ] >> there was unbridled joy. >> this is a historic day. >> roe v. wade is going to go!

>> on the other side of the great american divide the deepest despair. >> i am absolutely terrified. i am so beyond livid. >> my body! >> my choice! >> everything's on the table now. everything's on the table. >> good evening. i'm fareed zakaria. the republic endures, and this is the symbol of its faith. that description of the supreme court came from chief justice charles evans hughes in 1932. his words eloquent and precisely right. this country has long seen its highest court as the pinnacle of democracy. america's greatest has been judicial independence. judges who stood apart from politics, trusted to make big decisions based solely on the law. now that foundational idea, that

faith may be just one more casualty of america's deep political divide. with the court beginning its new term tomorrow, consider this troubling poll. 75% of americans, 3/4, tell gallup they do not have full confidence in the supreme court. it is the lowest number ever recorded. why? what happened? this is the story of how we got here. >> the current supreme court committed an act of institutional suicide. >> burn it down! >> by overturning roe v. wade. >> after the most dramatic supreme court ruling in decades there was rage. even violence. [ screaming ] americans had a message for

their highest court. >> we won't go back! >> across the country tens of thousands took to the streets. >> you ain't seen nothing yet. >> what i want you to do now -- >> the constitutional scholar noah feldman says america now sees a court poisoned by politics. >> [ bleep ] the supreme court! >> the current court is taking all of its weight and putting it behind popular conservative positions. and the reason that's so scary from the standpoint of the united states is that we don't have another institution whose job it is to protect the most vulnerable, to protect the rule of law. >> feldman is a liberal. >> so help you god? >> who testified in favor of donald trump's impeachment. >> president trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors. >> yet he also supported the nomination of amy coney barrett. >> she is a first-class lawyer. i believe we need the smartest and best people.

>> the right way to think about the supreme court is not to ask is it liberal, is it conservative. it's to ask what is the role that it fundamentally plays in preserving constitutional government? >> we the people! >> many americans question that role. >> hey hey, ho ho. >> these are live images, folks, at the doors of the supreme court. >> this crowd was trying to force its way inside the court to stop the swearing in of justice brett kavanaugh. >> whose court? >> our court! >> there's an adage about the supreme court. it doesn't have the power of the purse. it doesn't have the power of the sword. what it has is public respect. >> as a reporter joan biskupic has seen radical changes over her 30 years of watching the court. >> people believe that the dobbs ruling was politically motivated. and why would they not? former president donald trump

ran on a platform that included appointing only justices who would reverse roe v. wade. >> trump was open about it. he wanted justices with a bias. >> i will appoint judges that will be pro life, yes. >> highly, highly respected judges. >> republicans were nervous that trump would not appoint true conservatives. >> he will not invest the capital to confirm a conservative. >> to mollify the right he released a list of right-wing judges. >> what we did, and i just have it, we just took a -- >> can he deliver the kinds of candidates we want for the supreme court? when he releases that it immediately gives him credibility among establishment republicans. >> but donald trump had nothing to do with choosing the names on his list. >> that list was of course generated primarily by the

federalist society. >> the federalist society. the most powerful legal conservative group in the country. every one of the conservative justices has strong ties to it. >> i thought it was stunning. the presidential candidate would take a list of judges from the federalist society and use those judges as part of a campaign? >> so we'll see the president and the supreme court justice -- >> the president who chose three supreme court justices. >> congratulations. >> who transformed the court for a generation. outsourced crucial decisions to this man. >> he had an idea. what do you think of having me put out a list of people who i would pick from for the u.s. supreme court? i set about to suggest to him names of people who would be appropriate. >> leonard leo has long been the power behind the federalist society, amassing hundreds of

millions of dollars to nurture a network of conservative judges. >> $1.6 billion from just one donor. >> leo hit the jackpot earlier this year with a record-breaking donation for another conservative group he controls. >> the largest single donor contribution that's ever been reported. >> leo told the "washington post" he doesn't like to talk about money. >> i don't engage in that conversation because, one, i'm not particularly knowledgeable about a lot of it. but secondly because it's just not what i do. >> all of this is important because leonard leo, a man elected by no one, a man few americans have even heard of, played a powerful role in choosing the most conservative court in a century. >> here they come. >> one example of leo's clout, justice neil gorsuch. >> was this the choice you advised president trump to make? >> well, my job was just to give him a list of great people and

tell him everything i could about each of them. it was ultimately his decision. >> was he on the list? >> neil gorsuch? >> yeah. >> oh, yeah. absolutely. >> and leonard, you were fantastic. >> the ability of trump to have that outstanding list of nominees to choose from has everything to do with the success of the federalist society in creating a movement. >> carrie severyno works with leo. >> he's someone i absolutely work with very closely. >> she has led the public relations fight to push through conservative nominees. >> never a whisper of misconduct. it doesn't add up. confirm kavanaugh. >> what we're really seeing is the left losing that stranglehold on the court and being very frustrated that there are republican nominees who aren't as easily swayed to the middle as they were before. >> the federalist society began back in 1982 with a few chapters on law school campuses. >> the federalist society was

born out of a perception by conservatives that liberal constitutional ideas had become the mainstream within american legal thinking. >> which was true. so conservatives embraced the society. >> very moneyed interests are pouring funds into the federalist society. >> then in 1987 a seismic event turned the federalist society -- >> good morning. >> -- into a conservative juggernaut. ronald reagan nominated one of its founding members to the supreme court. judge robert bork. >> the bork battle was such a big defining moment in america. >> starting with justice rehnquist. >> back then confirmation hearings were usually brief and tame affairs. >> you were a competent judge, capable of being a functioning justice, you would get confirmed. >> the bork confirmation changed that. >> judge bork should be

immediately confirmed -- >> the right thought bork would be i ashoohin. he was a distinguished scholar and an appeals court judge. >> so well thought of in the legal academy there would be no problem getting him confirmed. >> the left saw him as a far right extremist. >> liberals were appropriately worried about what robert bork would do if he got on the supreme court. >> among his views, he was against the 1964 civil rights act. >> blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters. >> ted kennedy led the charge against bork. >> robert bork's america is a land in which women would be forced into back alley abortions. >> the women's groups frankly are afraid. they're afraid of you. >> one incendiary example of why? bork had upheld a mandatory sterilization order for women who wanted to work at a chemical plant. >> i suppose the five women who chose to stay on the job, on that job, with higher pay and

chose sterilization, i suppose that they were glad to have the choice. >> those in favor of the bork nomination will vote aye. those opposed will vote no. >> a young joe biden, then chairman of the senate judiciary committee, called for a vote. >> mr. byrd. >> no. >> mr. metsenbaum. >> no. >> the nos won. republicans were furious. >> let this trashing go on and let this good man be characterized as some sort of frankenstein's monster without raising a voice against it. all of us are accomplices. >> those hearings became sort of the battle cry of the republican party after that. >> nina totenberg has been a supreme court reporter for 50 years. >> the republicans definitely believed that democrats started this, now that they did this to bork we're going to bork everybody else. >> a young senator from kentucky had the last word. >> and so to robert bork, you

fought the good fight. you happen to be the one who set the new senate standard. that will be applied in my judgment by a majority of the senate prospectively. unfortunately, it got set over your dead body, so to speak. >> he essentially said you will rue the day. >> and he was right. >> this is a circus. it's a national disgrace. it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks. >> the circus hearing has become a repeated ritual. >> that is a farce. >> it would be the greatest travesty i've ever seen in the nomination process. >> the more corrosive the hearings grew the more america's trust in the court collapsed. how did we get here? to really understand the roots of it we need to go still further back, to what may just be the most consequential moment in supreme court history.

♪ the early 1950s. the post-war boom. but for many the american dream was only available if you were white. segregation had an iron grip on the south. >> we have absolutely no intention of integrating in the south. >> for the brown family of topeka, kansas separate but equal meant their daughter could not attend her neighborhood school. the supreme court heard the case of brown vs. the board of education. like america itself the court was bitterly divided over separate but equal. >> separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. >> a new chief justice was determined to change that. earl warren knew that a ruling in favor of brown would not be enforceable unless it was unanimous.

>> chief justice warren was a great master of trying to bring the court together. >> he argued and cajoled for months. finally, he got every judge to agree. the court ruled for brown 9-0. >> it's may 17th, 1954. america has never been quite the same. >> it was the magna carta. it was the second emancipation. >> it was the beginning of the warren court. a revolutionary judicial era that would change the fabric of american life. >> the court under earl warren just opened up america in so many ways. >> the supreme court. >> it was in a sense today's court in reverse. >> conservatives used to castigate the liberal warren court as being activist. >> it issued dozens of rulings that enraged conservatives. >> history-making decisions.

♪ >> some enhanced the rights of criminal defendants. >> the miranda decision. you have a right to a lawyer. you have a right to have a lawyer present when you're questioned. >> there were also privacy rulings. on the right to use contraception. and to interracial marriages. >> impeach earl warren! >> all of it led to a collective shout from conservatives. >> impeach earl warren! >> impeach earl warren. when earl warren finally retired in 1969, conservatives believed they might finally get their chance to change the court. but it would be another 40 years, a long political battle for power and money, before the right would get the court it dreamed of.

psoriasis really messes with you. try. hope. fail. no one should suffer like that. i started cosentyx®. five years clear. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infection, some serious and a lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reaction may occur. best move i've ever made. ask your dermatologist about cosentyx®.

we're carvana the company who invented car vending machines and buying a car 100 percent online now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car whether it's a year old, or a few years old we want to buy your car so go to carvana enter your license plate answer a few questions and our techno wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds when you're ready we'll come to you pay you on the spot and pick up your car that's it so ditch the old way of selling your car and say hello to the new way at carvana

a bombshell decision >> the court could target other landmark precedents -- >> the supreme court's most life-changing ruling in decades. >> 2022 has been a year of high drama at the supreme court. >> made possible by a conservative supermajority. >> the conservative majority of justices -- >> reverses nearly 50 years of interpreting the constitution. >> the supreme court in the last two years -- >> but america has been here before. >> we want a supreme court which will do justice under the constitution, not over it. >> the epic knockdown constitutional brawl. >> a political bombshell that divides the nation. attacks the supreme court. >> of the 1930s. hard-right supreme court justices. >> we cannot yield to the personal judgment of a few men

fearful of the future. >> rallies around the country. >> killing popular, bipartisan laws, like no court before. laws meant to save a nation from collapse. >> millions of able and willing americans, bewildered. >> $30 billion in stock value vanished. >> grim, bleak, hopeless and helpless. >> the conservative justices were known as the four horseman of the apocalypse. >> diehard conservatives among the supreme court -- >> struck down the agricultural adjustment act. >> the new york minimum wage law. >> theirs is the last word. >> and their story carries warnings for today. >> if we would make democracy succeed, we must act now! >> it was the beginning of the worst calamity the united states economy had ever known. >> it was the height of the great depression.

>> banks closed, millions were put out of work. >> the stock market had plummeted 90%. >> despair, a sense of helplessness, a sense of hopelessness. >> a quarter of the country was unemployed. >> the masses of america -- >> huey long. >> makes his bid to become dictator of america. can't happen here, the saying goes. but it seems to be. >> and political extremism was threatening democracy. >> communists became violent, taking advantage of the depression and general unemployment. >> this whole country was in danger of going under. >> this is a call to arms. >> franklin's people turn hopefully toward a new national leader. his campaign promise, a new deal. >> a nation that needed saving. >> the inauguration of franklin delano roosevelt. >> elected franklin delano roosevelt in a landslide.

>> this nation is asking for action. >> hoping his activist government policies would rescue the country. >> the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. >> in his first 100 days, he delivered. >> bill after bill pours into congress. >> 15 bills of far-reaching significance were passed. >> with the most ambitious legislative agenda in history, the new deal. >> we can put people back to work. >> creating vast federal programs to get americans back on their feet. >> you people must have faith. >> together, we cannot fail. >> they were going to try almost everything and anything. to try to get this country sort of stood up again and working. and they did. >> but the president had a big problem. the supreme court was killing his laws at a record pace. ten times more often than

previous courts. >> vital pieces of new deal legislation are unconstitutional. >> the supreme court of the united states was controlled by a conservative, indeed libertarian property-protecting majority. >> the court had killed almost any law that tried to regulate the economy. like minimum wage laws. >> half a million children are working as low-paid day laborers. >> even child labor laws. >> the entire new deal program -- >> in 1935 -- >> in quick succession, the supreme court invalidated law after law. >> the court dealt three huge blows to the new deal in one day. >> major pieces of legislation passed by an overwhelming majority of congress, as the solution to the depression. >> americans were livid with the court. hanging justices in effigy. one justice referred to the

great depression as a temporary inconvenience. >> this is a conservative majority that really didn't care about the little guy. >> it's roosevelt again. >> roosevelt takes every state in the union. >> by the largest majority in history. >> in 1936, the nation responded. >> i will faithfully execute -- >> re-electing fdr with more than 60% of the vote. >> we can now march forward, all of us together. >> but the new deal still appeared to be doomed. >> we must take action to save the constitution from the court. >> so roosevelt declared war on the court. >> he tried to enlarge the court with justices of his own choosing. >> shocking congress with a bombshell bill. >> opponents denounce it as court packing. >> that would add as many as six new justices chosen by him. >> what he proposed is for every

justice who is over 70, and it was the older justices who were causing him so much trouble, he would be able to appoint a new justice. >> i am opposed to packing the court. >> the seekers of unlimited, unchecked power. >> there was bipartisan outrage over the bill. >> this is the road to autocracy. >> even accusations of fascism. >> he horrified a lot of people, some of them calling him a ct. >> but the president's plan was perfectly constitutional. >> the constitution actually never says that there have to be nine justices. >> the number of justices had changed many times. starting at six in 1789. then five. reaching ten at one point. before settling on nine. the court was very weak in the early days of the republic. some of its rulings were openly defied.

>> president andrew jackson, after an opinion he didn't like, is reputed to have said, "chief justice marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it." and then jackson just ignored the supreme court. >> but over the years the court had gained enormous power. and now it was using that power to block progress, said fdr. >> we've only just begun to fight. >> the president and congress. >> the greatest political sweep in history. >> despite their overwhelming election victories -- >> the stock market crashed. >> -- could do virtually nothing to fight the depression. >> from 61% of the american public came a definite answer. >> the clash over court packing riveted the nation. >> it is the duty of every citizen to concern himself with this question. >> let's not tamper with it. >> by all means let us make this change. >> it was the greatest political drama of the era.

>> the supreme court captures the headlines. >> thousands of letters and telegrams poured into congress from all over the country. >> it was one of the great legislative battles of all time. the majority leader had a heart attack and died in the middle of it. >> i believe the people are entitled to new judges and should have them now. >> fdr's plan seemed almost certain to pass congress. >> great majorities have approved what we are trying to do. >> and the court would soon number 15 justices. then suddenly, the supreme court blinked. >> the supreme court upholds the wagner act. >> it completely changed its view in three seismic cases. upholding the minimum wage law. an important labor law. and the social security act. >> holding the balance of power at 61, the youngest justice. >> the court's swing vote, justin owen roberts, who had

sided with the conservatives, swung over to the liberals. with the new deal laws upheld, court packing seemed unnecessary. >> the senate of the united states gave the most popular president of the 20th century his worst political defeat. >> and was soundly defeated in congress. >> it was a switch by one justice that saved the court from being packed. and observers call that the switch in time that saved nine. >> is there a justice on today's court that could have a similar change of heart? and move the court closer to the views of most americans. possibly, court insiders say, but don't count on it. >> in their view the last half century of law handed down from the supreme court has been magnificently wrong and they want to make it magnificently right.

alice loves the scent of gain so much, she wished there was a way to make it last longer. say hello to your fairy godmother alice and long-lasting gain scent beads. and now, get $10 back when you spend $30. that's a seriously good deal. hi, i'm jason and i've lost 202 pounds on golo. so the first time i ever seen a golo advertisement, i said, "yeah, whatever. there's no way this works like this." and threw it to the side. a couple weeks later, i seen it again after getting not so pleasant news from my physician.

i was 424 pounds, and my doctor was recommending weight loss surgery. to avoid the surgery, i had to make a change. so i decided to go with golo and it's changed my life. when i first started golo and taking release, my cravings, they went away. and i was so surprised. you feel that your body is working and functioning the way it should be and you feel energized. golo has improved my life in so many ways. i'm able to stand and actually make dinner. i'm able to clean my house. i'm able to do just simple tasks that a lot of people call simple, but when you're extremely heavy they're not so simple. golo is real and when you take release and follow the plan, it works.

the supreme court overturning roe vs. wade and restricting states' ability to legislate guns. eroding the barrier between church and state. >> for those shocked by the supreme court's last term, court watchers have a piece of advice -- strap yourself in. >> it's going to be a very bumpy ride. >> fundamental rights are back on the table. >> more bombshells could be coming. and more rights could disappear. in his concurring opinion overturning roe v. wade, justice clarence thomas signaled his desire to keep going. >> clarence thomas wrote so many

other things should be up for grabs. >> he called on the court to reconsider the right to contraception, gay marriage, even same-sex intimacy. liberals may not like it, but there is a certain logic to the thomas argument. like roe, those rights were all based on what previous courts saw as a constitutional right to privacy. strike down that foundation, and the other rights fall with it. in a separate concurrence, justice kavanaugh said the court was not opening the door to eliminating other rights. >> he bent over backwards to say this is only about abortion. >> kavanaugh was trying to reassure the american people. but thomas's logic is clear, and we know that this court does not mind overturning long-established laws and supreme court precedents. >> a good example would be the

new york state gun law more than a century old. >> it doesn't end there. america's long-standing system of governance is under fire. for nearly 100 years congress has passed sweeping laws empowering federal agencies like the epa, the fda, and others to create rules that keep americans safe. >> agencies have expertise. it's up to the agency to interpret ambiguous statutes in the light of the agency's expert knowledge. >> but last term, the supreme court said not so fast. the court struck down a rule from the environmental protection agency aimed at reducing carbon emissions from power plants. the rule could have helped blunt the ravages of global warming. >> the united states, ravaged by wildfires. >> the worst drought in centuries. >> flooding of biblical proportions.

>> if the court keeps ruling in this direction, it could strike down thousands of others regulations, created by federal agencies under broad congressional statute. basic rules that protect consumers, patients, workers could all be up-ended. congress would have to pass hundreds of new laws to address every possible application of its intentions. that will never happen, of course, which hands even more power to the justices. >> the court effectively said to the rest of the political system, we are the last word, we are in charge. >> and then there's the biggest case you have never heard of. >> legal theory headed to the supreme court. >> that worries scholars from across the political spectrum. >> it could literally upend democracy. >> this term, the supreme court will rule on the so-called

independent state legislature theory. partisan state legislatures may soon have complete control over federal elections. >> that's dictatorship. that's madness. >> the theory isn't new. it dates back more than 20 years. to another monumental case. >> nine justices, as divided as this nation. >> bush versus gore saw five conservative justices essentially hand the presidency over to george w. bush. >> please raise your right hand and repeat after me. >> most of the justices seemed unconvinced by the court's own decision. they suggested the opinion was limited just to this one unusual case. even after voting with the majority, justice scalia called the opinion, pardon my language, but i am quoting here, a "piece of shit."

>> the opinion itself was only cited one time by a supreme court justice. >> that is, until 2020. >> we're going to defeat sleepy joe biden. >> as donald trump faced off against biden, republicans began dusting off an obscure argument from the once pariah case bush v. gore. the independent state legislature theory. chief justice rehnquist claimed the constitution gave state legislatures complete control over presidential elections. today, some republicans want that unchecked power over all federal elections. to put it very simply, state legislatures can do whatever they want and state courts, even the state's supreme court, has no authority to say what you're doing violates the state constitution. >> and what makes this so poignant is that right now in

america, most of the state legislatures are controlled by republicans. >> six of rehnquist's fellow justices rejected the theory. but this court has seen four conservatives already voice some support. if the theory stands, election experts predict chaos in any close contest, with legislatures questioning the results and maybe even selecting their own electors. >> imagine it's 2024. the presidential election is so close it all comes down to one state, let's say pennsylvania. >> pennsylvania's voters choose the democrat. but the republican-dominated legislature claims fraud and awards the state to their candidate. >> so now the president of the united states is going to be the republican candidate. >> even though they actually lost the election. democrats appeal to the highest court in the land. >> and the supreme court of the united states, using the independent state legislatures theory, says we don't care that the pennsylvania legislature has violated its own law and

violated its own constitution because it's up to the legislature to say how the president is going to be selected. >> the republican enters the white house. the loser becomes the winner. >> that would be a constitutional travesty. >> not everyone agrees the theory can lead to a stolen election. >> federal law prohibits state legislatures from overturning the results of elections. >> the federal government could rein in a runaway state legislature. but who can predict what this supreme court would decide? with a supermajority anchored by three of its youngest and most idealogical members, this court does have the chance to rewrite life in america. >> these people will affect our lives, our children's lives, probably our grandchildren's lives. >> as with the last term's abortion decision -- >> we won't go back! >> -- the future may rest in the hands of one justice in

particular. >> justice kavanaugh, for better or worse, is now the swing justice on all of those basic issues. the question is, what will justice kavanaugh do? >> we won't have to wait long to find out. just look up your prescription on the singlecare app and show the coupon to your pharmacist. go to singlecare.com or download the app today. ♪

♪ and now for my final thoughts. the power of the first branch of american government, congress,

comes from its ability to tax and spend, a formidable strength. the power of the president, the second branch, crucially includes his or her role as commander in chief of the armed forces. the power of the third branch, by contrast, is simply its symbolic authority. the supreme court cannot enforce any of its own rulings. it relies on the other branches and the public to accept them. that is why the legitimacy of the court is so important. and that is why actions that make the court seem more partisan, more radical, more out of tune with the country are so dangerous. the court's approval rating, one rough measure of legitimacy, has been declining for decades. but it went down sharply after bush v. gore. that was a nakedly partisan ruling which conservatives, who had for long championed states rights, suddenly discovered that the federal government had a crucial role in the 2000

election. but it was just a highly visible example. the court has been becoming more idealogically predictable that is particularly partisan in recent years. judges appointed by republicans now almost always rule in ways that republicans want them to. and ditto for judges appointed by democrats. it's all part of the hyper polarization of american life. but it's also partly because of the strange way that america's highest court is structured. it might surprise you to know that no other major democracy gives members of its highest court life tenure. most western countries have fixed terms and mandatory retirement ages. 68 in germany. 75 in britain. 75 in canada. germany gives its constitutional court judges a 12-year term. as do some other democracies. the american system of selection

is also extraordinarily political. in many european countries there are panels of experts that play a lark role in sending forward nominees or vetting them. the competition of the committees is often designed to be bipartisan and involving legal experts. for example, france's high council of the judiciary is mostly made up of elected judges, with a few appointed by other bodies. britain has a somewhat similar selection process. and it's rare to reject the advice of these bodies. some european supreme courts are required to rule by consensus rather than majority vote. and they often take pains not to air political divisions. in italy, belgium and france, for example, the high court justices do not publish dissents in order to maintain the court's image of impartiality. the most egregious aspect of the american judicial system is one

that's close to unique, life tenure. it raises the stakes sky high. judges can wield their power longer than most dictators. some stay on the court for decades. clarence thomas has been on the supreme court for almost 31 years. and he's still just 74 years old. the prize is to find young judge s to perpetuate their for as long as possible. for an aspiring judge, ideological rigidity and lock-step consistency are now the most prized signals to their party that they show get the nod. and the middle-aged, middle of the road extremely distinguished idealogically moderate judge, in other words, a judge with perfect judicial temperament doesn't stand a chance. and of course there is the uncomfortable question of mental deterioration, which is

certainly something worth considering when judges could be ruling into their 80s and beyond on highly consequential matters involving new technologies, complex economic systems and legal theories. the supreme court of the united states has moved in a direction that has weakened its own legitimacy. it might be an occasion to begin a national conversation on what reforms could be put in place to make it less partisan, less divisive, and more trusted by the vast majority of citizens. after all, that is the only way the rulings would be truly accepted, in a diverse democracy of 330 million people. i'm fareed zakaria. thank you for watching, and good night. ♪

singlecare is accepted at major pharmacies nationwide. just look up your prescription on the singlecare app and show the coupon to your pharmacist. go to singlecare.com or download the app today. ♪ this is john. he hasn't worked this hard to only get this far with his cholesterol. taken with a statin, leqvio can lower bad cholesterol and keep it low with two doses a year. side effects were injection site reaction, joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath. with leqvio, lowering cholesterol becomes just one more thing life throws your way.

ask your doctor about leqvio. lower. longer. leqvio. new salonpas lidocaine flex. a super thin, flexible patch with maximum otc strength lidocaine that contours to the body to relieve pain right where it hurts. and did we mention, it really, really sticks? salonpas, it's good medicine. ♪ hisamitsu ♪

rupert murdoch, the media mogul hospitalized. >> we really realized this story was about a father and his children. and this question of what is going to happen to this empire? >> early on, rupert develops a machiavellian approach to the newspaper business