ladimir putin that is 7:00 for "washington journal." thank you for, with us. morning.see you in the [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] > next "newsmakers: nan aron" president of the alliance for justice then president trump's announcement of his selection to replace supreme court justice anthony kennedy and reaction from senators. a joint house hearing peter strzok.ent siobhan: our guest is nan aron of alliance ress

for justice opposing the nomination of brett kavanaugh. we will learn more about why. thanks for being our guest. us. thank you for having >> siobhan hughes and mark eople asking he paoepl questions. siobhan: what is the nomination of this and why does it feel so much ore monumental than the prior nominee neil gorsuch. an: it feels more monumental because it is because brett kavanaugh is being considered held by anthony kennedy on some very significant set himself apart from ome of his conservative colleagues on the court, on issues, on btq juvenile rights. to be the considered

swing on the supreme court. when he was being considered for the supreme fee was up for antonin scal right.s seat hard anthony canada more -- can't in the -- anthony kennedy more the man in the middle. is taken on greater meaning because the president has laid specifically in fact his he was running for offi office, that if elected he would appoint an individual who met criteria.specific one, he was looking for someone was against the affordable care act, and two he was for an ally looking individual who would oppose roe wade. so, this president has himself

a very volatile process criteria, out to two ing the choice outside groups, heritage action up ral society and coming with a nominee on a number of american life to has shown us he would turn the clock back. siobhan: given the stakes you laid out from your perspective a real also have particular chance of -- stopping chance of this nominee? nan: i would say democrats and a realistic ave chance of stopping this nomination. at the moment really the only know, which is significant, about brett whataugh are, one, we know donald trump was looking for. we are reading those 300

that he's written so we know what his record is. our belief is that once the his can people understand record, once they hear and read have an opportunity to eview the thousands pages of documents describe be his work starr, independent counsel, once they have an review his to records when he was in the white counsel as office, staff offices, , and other documents, trove of and i believe once the american people have an opportunity to ome to understand his full record, they will convince, they reach out to and senators both on the democratic

side and republican side and ask to oppose kavanaugh. mark: i want to turn to one gotten attention lready and that is the idea of kavanau kavanaugh's view of presidential won't nd your view he stand up to donald trump specially in relation it the meddling in the 2016 election. clinton rom the past appointees against in the ball and watergate tapes case. why are you persuaded that a cavanaugh wouldn't stand up to donald trump if it comes to that? mark, it goes back to brett kavanaugh's whole record. interesting. when he worked with the ndependent counsel, ken starr, back in the 1990's, he sought president

clinton's records. three times to get access to president records. to getfought really hard the president to turn over a whole slew of information. interestingly, when he went to work for president bush right after the clinton administration administration, interestingly, brett the first things kavanaugh did was push for an would have der that papers, presidential george bush's presidential papers, even though there was a law requiring those papers to be released. it is his early action with administration and then from then on he took the position the president should be criminal m prosecutions, investigations.

he's talked about the xtraordinary power that a president has. he appears to be very player.a partisan when president clinton was in office he sought disclosure. president bush came in office it was the opposite. and on what he has said ritten and his actions, it appears that he would very much ide with president trump in trying to shield all of his from thememos, papers, american people. mark: but he has also called in addition to calling for congress to pass a law to shield the president from prosecution and has said that e he believes that that same law a provision that would basically require a grand nt to respond to jury subpoenas with the

exception of national security exception to that. that would seem to cut against just rain that you described. nan: that was a while ago. what we know most recently about brett kavanaugh bet -- brett kavanaugh's views is he would do what he could to shield president trump from any kind of investigation, subpoena, anything else at this point. brought up have mr. kavanaugh's white house service. chances ou think the are that the senate will see all of the documentation related to period of his service or chances access to that will be limited? we would expect that chairman grassley, who chairs judiciary committee, will request and obtain all of being sought about his years in the white house. actually some precedent

that.enator grassley to do john roberts worked in the white house, elena kagan worked in the white house. and they made -- they released including r records e-mails. so there is direct precedent notion that these records need to be made vailable and carefully reviewed. and we would expect chairman obey that precedent. i think it is also important a supreme court critically s so important that the american and e ought to understand understand well who it is who is considered for that particular role. is efore, i think it incumbent on the republican party to make all of this accessible,

people ample give it.e to review and digest siobhan: there is so much paperwork. senate kly could the judiciary committee get to a hearing. nan: it is interesting you say because i just read that rob rosenstein is hiring or assistant u.s. attorneys to help review all of those records. what the timing will be. is really say is it the responsibility of the senate committee chair to be fair and open and make that available in time so an opportunity to review it. ark: even before any of these records have been released your organization has come to the conclusion that he shouldn't be confirmed. is there anything that you would

you der a smoking gun that would point say republican that you would need to attract to defeat that nomination? already havesay we two smoking guns. , really, what president rump said, that he is seeking someone whose mind is made up on the ssue of healthcare and issue of abortion. welly, in all the years that have been toiling in these judicial fields i don't think i come across a president who was so direct for what he was looking and i would say when you take a at brett kavanaugh's record take an optional roe and the oth

affordable care act. when you just t step back for a minute in the what we i think that are looking for in a judge or whose mind omeone isn't made up, someone who can open mindases with an and be fair minded. here you have a candidate who is already subscribing to some very views which, just imagine, what donald trump repealing the affordable care act -- he will brett to do by putting avanaugh on supreme court, depriving millions of americans of their healthcare. say that in and of itself is a smoking gun.

but, to further the conversation, we expect there to thousands of pages of documents released, and to review mple time those and i know people will be interested to learn more views.kavanaugh's n fact, at his d. krfpc. circut court hearing -- i think it was 2004 -- he was specifically about his views and what e did with respect to overseeing to have a abuersation about for cher, ghra ghraib. he ducked those questions. in fact. a letter sent to him by senators and durbin investigated answers.er his so i think it is important to documents and perhaps will be made

public. mark: you raised abortion and health care in your answer. are some conservatives who choosing an establishment republican that resident trump did not go as conservative as he might have and they point to two opinions he didn't rote where go as far as he might have or cases as far ion as one of his colleagues was eady to go in the case of the immigrant teen. nan: there is no question in the 17-year-old immigrant, she pursued all of that were in place at the time to get an what brett d kavanaugh did is said you know to put a ink we need

few more burdens in the way of her getting an abortion. so, while he may not have come ut outright in opposition to roe v. wade, if she had had to it would ose burdens, have made having an abortion much more difficult. he did so, i would also say, in patronizing way. she did exactly what she had to the d.c. circuit en banc said she should have this abortion and he said no. so, it is not just the case of a immigrant.d he expressed satisfaction with dissent in roe v. wade as well. so, i think we have a pretty idea of where brett kavanaugh stands on the issue of abortion. i also want to make clear, this

over just a fight abortion and healthcare. learn about and brett kavanaugh's record across range of issues, not just his views on presidential power what he said and has written and done on healthcare and the other major concern are his views on the of administrative agencies. the existence t of the consumer financial protection bureau. against clean air act, clean water act. against consumer protections, against net neutrality. can think of few instances here he voted in favor of everyday people when their lives or regulated by

government agency. this record, in not just healthcare, abortion, to be exploredch and learned. >> eight minutes to go. iobhan: is there any trump nominee who could be subpoena believe to you given you feel so explicit about what he is looking for? of 25rump released a list names and our organization lliance for skwrufrlt researched -- justice researched one of them and came to the conclusion that none were acceptable. based on their records but it is also in part because donald trump a choosing uld apply in a supreme court justice. so i would have to say the answer is no. when you step becoack there are

probably republican lawyers across this country who would justices. we in fact know of some of these people. if i tell you who they are, it would probably be the kiss of for them. but he's looking for a very person, and no one on be deemed to be a really good choice for the american people. do you think your group and others on your side of the adopt what the federalist society and heritage liststion did and produce of possible candidates going forward under a document presidency? nan: absolutely. in fact, we over the years at have been justice very actively identifying and ecruiting really good candidates for judgeships. 40 ave done that for over yea

years, and we are really pleased the individuals that we suggested have become judges. to do that.inue e are proud of the fact that president obama chose two xcellent supreme court justices, elena kagan and sonia sotomayor. president clinton ruth bader steven brayer and garnered ent and all republican and democratic votes. siobhan: you had mentioned also being in a position to block the nomination. see re the republicans you most likely to flip? nan: the two republicans that talked about the most are susan collins and lisa murkowski. susan collins from maine and lisa murkowski from alaska. both of those fine women voted

gainst the repeal of the affordable care act because is now ing conditions being litigated in the courts that should also mention trump administration said preexisting conditions are unconstitutional. think both of those senators could be very concerned about that litigation and very that brett kavanaugh is confirmed and would be a case challenging preexisting conditions in the supreme court. about the n you talk potential for rand paul to be something of a wild card in this his concerns about privacy, libertarian leanings? say about rand paul. i know he has respond out raising concerns. can't predict at the end of the day where he will be learn a lot more

about brett kavanaugh's views privacy.g the other thing i would say about the two republican women years professed wade supportive of roe v and i think we are going to look bold, e two women to be to be courageous, and to stand up. siobhan: let's turn to the political arena because we are elections.he november what does timing do for both parties going into the midterm? nan: i think the timing works for us and i think it works for is an opportunity be a e supreme court to onversation in all those elections, which is a critically important conversation. he presidential conversation in 2016 one talked it and one not so much. this will be an opportunity for

races, senate se races, to really talk about what an hrebelection. and the stakes really for the obviously a presidential election is even who is ortant because elected president can name to the lowerjudges courts, but i think it is a very good time. also think if you take a walk let's history a little, go back to daniel mannion. many years ago, 1986. there was one republican senator all set to who was vote against daniel mannion for seventh circuit court of appeals. at the last moment he changed and voted for damage

mannion and he lost his seat that year. you look back to anita hill, after that huge bruising fight and hearing, a who voted emocrats a veryrence thomas faced hostile crowd back home. in georgia lost his race. trying to was up for illinois and in he lost his seat over this issue.lar ,o, voters are paying attention particularly at the supreme court level. and because there is so much engagement and more excitement, at least on the side, i think that this will be a huge issue. last question a from each of you.

siobhan: i wonder if the risk is energizing an already ener base but democratic don't expand the pool of the public that might have concerns. nan: my assumption is based on a this is perience in th that, once people come to brett kavanaugh and d what he stands for the threats that he would pose o all of our rights and liberties, not just for two years, four years, but for a eneration mark: i think people will come to understand just how important is, this discussion is, and press their senators to against. mark: just to stay on the there are some democrats running for re-election in the senate who in states that trump

carried who voted for gorsuch as well. them to oppose kavanaugh with their seats on the line? nan: i do. i absolutely do. think once their constituents learn more about kavanaugh, his record, and the critical importance of the court, they will communicate with their senators. the next couple of weeks and months look like for your organization? oh, my goodness! 24-7. lawyers, activists, resear legal record.s polling.ing poll iing out people in states to be communicating with. service e doing a full

pla engagement. >> thank you for making us part your schedule the found are and alliance of justice, nan aron. nan: thanks for having me. talking about president trump's supreme court pick and we have nan aron as the are and president of alliance of justice which nomination. our two reporters, siobhan hughes and mark sherman. swing vote with that concept. justice canada didn't like to be kennedy was not always number five every time the court swung. what there does to the dynamics of the court. it changes the dynamics of the court and makes justice justice the closest to the center on a range used to be ere it justice kennedy. so he will control on range of however the court goes

either to the right or occasionally to the left. must be said you suggested hat on some issues he already found himself there healthcare be ing being prime one he and four obama care. upheld >> the moral of the story for appointee is al what? mark: you can't predict to a totainty how anyone is going vote on every case that might come before a justice. of work put lot in, in this case by the federalist society and others in compiling a list of candidates that conservatives feel will, in main, deliver the kind of votes they would like to see. >> let's talk about getting this nominee confirmed. we talked about the list of senators, the two republican a number of democrats who are facing re-election who

everyone's gets attention. joe mansion of west virginia was 71 and i can't be whipped into voting by my leaders.c what is the task the democratic leader has and what is the task the e republican leaders next couple of weeks. siobhan: the republican leaders all the to keep members together and that appears to be somewhat of an that facing han chuck schumer. ideally like to keep them together but he has a umber of democrats up for re-election in states trump one in some places overwhelmingly calculate whether to force them to take one for rick am and vote no and the seat or cut them lose. probably opt for the latter because barring something nforeseen the betting in washington is this nomination is

likely to go through. to lose the not seat. siobhan: play the long game. chuck grassley what is his task picking the the stage?tting siobhan: heguest: he has a toug, his task is to stay on schedule but carry out the hearings in ways that preserve the credibility of the institution. theproblem is that this is candidate that has perhaps the longest written record of anybody that trump could have chosen from those final four. he's got to figure out how many documents to request, how to corral staff members to read all the documents and how to really preserve an aura of credibility. host: and they want to get this done in time for the new court session? october 1 is the absolute drop deadline, though i would understand them to want him in place earlier. guest: that's true, several

justices joined the court after things began. .ncluding justice gorsuch there is a steep learning curve. it might not be ideal, but it certainly doable. host: is our last question here for both of you, the whole spectacle of judicial nomination hearings, many senators expressed frustration with the candor of the appointees that appear before them. how have these hearings evolved and what can the public and the senators really learn about them? guest: the hearings themselves, i don't think there's much to learn. the learning comes in the release of documents and we come to find out things we didn't previously know about candidates are nominees. and also in the analysis of opinions. the questioning at the hearings themselves liselotte to be desired, though. /i would add that we are in a social media world right now where things like the russia

investigation are less prominent than they used to be. the level of attention brought by the general public could be a component of this. to be ans going interesting couple of weeks as we find out the date and learn more. thank you very much for your questions this week for nan aron . good to have you. guest: good to be here, thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] >> tonight on "q&a" -- >> she saw me sitting in the aisle, she tossed it at me and said no change. i decided right then and there, i'm going to get that amendment ratified. >> gregory watson, the man responsible for getting the 27th amendment to the constitution ratified. was will never forget it, i in the library downtown in austin, texas and i came across a book that had in it an entire chapter devoted to amendments

that had passed congress that not enough state legislatures had approved. and this one just jumped right out at me. law varying the compensation for the services of the senators and representatives shall take effect until an election of representatives shall have intervened. and i can remember standing in the aisle, holding that book in my hand. it was as if lightning had struck. i could feel the pulsating electricity of it all. and i thought -- you know what? instead of writing about the and thishts amendment disputed extension in its ratification deadline, why don't i instead write about this amendment that says that when we members of congress want to

adjust their salaries, they have to wait until the next election? at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." on monday, president trump nominated brett kavanaugh for the -- to replace retiring supreme court justice anthony kennedy. a former lawh is clerk to justice kennedy. this is about 20 minutes. [applause]