she brings to the court. you'll see that tomorrow. te, expectedfloor vo committee vote for judge amy coney barrett. that will be thursday. you can follow along with what is going on on our respective networks tomorrow. you can also listen along on our free c-span radio app app. next we will take your calls. if you support the confirmation of amy coney barrett, call 202- 748-8941. -748-8920.ose it, 202 if you are undecided, 202-

748-8922. if you want to text us, you can do that as well. you can post on our facebook site at facebook.com/cspan. where you saw some of those people we heard from yesterday. among them is senator chris , 120 from delaware saying supreme court decisions that were decided 5-4 that touch upon nearly every facet of american life are all at risk of judge barrett is confirmed. he has the listing of those 5-4 decisions. you can see that direct exchange that he had with judge barrett on our website. here is a portion talking about issues of balance. president trump did not nominate you to carry on justice ginsburg's legacy, he nominated you because he would like to undermine or shift that legacy.

he was very clear before you were chosen about his intent to shape justices in the mold of scalia. you mentioned yesterday that replacing justice scalia with judge garland would have changed the balance of the court. it is something that you wrote about in 2013. you recognized that these balance shifts are why supreme court nominations are so much at issue in residential elections. -- presidential elections. that your knowledge nomination will profoundly impact the balance of the court and the weight in which it decides and the way -- and the way in which it decides future court decisions? t: what i was writing shortly after justice scalia's death, but before justice garland's nomination, i did use the term lateral move.

i said we should not talk about republican judges are democrat judges. of course it is true that dem -- that judges have differences in traditional philosophy. breyer that justice sometimes had public debates with justice scalia advocating original ism and liberty. there is room on the court for that, for different approaches. with your colleagues on other sides of the aisle, all of you have different policy platforms. judges do not have policy platforms but they take different approaches to interpreting the text. that is what i meant when i was describing how the balance of the court would shift. it would be away from one balance toward another in terms of how judges think about the text. >> one more time with the numbers if you want to give us your thoughts.

support the confirmation to the supreme court, if you oppose it or are undecided. you can text, you can tweet us, and you can also post on our facebook page at you can always watch the hearings on our website. from garden city, new york, we will start off with gregory. what do you think of what you heard over the last couple of days? think she is one of the most amazing women i have heard in my life. she should run for president. it would be better than the other two candidate. what was the stand out to you? caller: she did not get rattled when they were going after her.

she was classy. she was thoughtful. so impressive. i did not know anything about her until the other day i'm so impressed with her. host: ok. let's hear from cindy in indiana . caller: good afternoon. host: what did you think of what you saw? sheer: i don't really think is all that qualified. she gives too many nonanswers. she does not fully address almost anything. host: is there an example that you saw over the last couple of days as far as things she did not address? whether the president can postpone the election. results canelection be challenged. where she stands on abortion.

she never made that clear cut. whether she would come after roe v. wade. whether she would come after the affordable care act. if you want to go to yahoo! news, they have a story on one of the topics you heard plenty of over the last couple of days. issue on the voting rights act. you can look it up on your own. alice is next from palm desert, california. caller: good afternoon. support amy coney barrett she is like a walking encyclopedia of laws and information. respect the fact that she addressed everything and did not

dodge any questions. i think we are very lucky to have someone like this on our team. the previous caller said there were many issues she did not fully address or expand on. but you did not see it that way? caller: everyone hears what they want to hear depending on their own when of you. anticipate any particular point of view. i am a registered independent. i was open to whatever would be said. that is my point of view. she was absolutely incredible. she had no notes in front of her. everyone else was running through their pages to remember what they wanted to say or find

the information they needed. she had all the information stored in her head. she is like a walking encyclopedia. host: another story i can point you to. marked differences between what you saw play out over the last three days. 2018hat played out in concerning brett kavanaugh. you heard senator graham talk about the process and praise the colleagues on the other side. by that story on the hill. good afternoon, go ahead. good afternoon. i hope you are well. i think she is extremely knowledgeable.

and articulate. deflected on so many of the issues. whether it was aca or roe v. wade or affirmative action. i think she was deflecting and dodging too much. i oppose her even though she is brilliant. here the lines you can give us a call on.

pamela is in utah on the oppose line. i thought she handled i come from a red state. i believe with the election so close, this should not have been pushed through. if biden wins, he should put up whoever he chose. what question did you want to see her expand upon? caller: all of them.

all of the questions. host: was there a question that stands out that you would want to see a better answer to? on healthe questions care. the questions on abortion. every question that was asked. she kept deflecting. host: don't forget you can call us. you can send a text along. a couple of tweets this morning.

i 100 to 10% -- 110% support her nomination. this is a woman who will not be coerced. a breath of fresh air. hello? i think we will move on. folks, if you would not mind, turn down your television so there is not interference. caller: thank you. i find it troubling that democratic senators have not really questions her on her

credentials or background. they keep asking the same few questions over and over and over they have been a waste in time. the whole point of her being there is to ask her questions about her background. host: specifically, what are you looking for? more of where she went to school, what she learned in those schools, her opinions on cases she has actually done. things she has allowed to talk about. instead of just having to give the same answer over and over again. tot: did you get a chance see your senators questions? caller: i watched a little bit. what impressed you most?

like he called democratic senators out on exactly what i have been talking about. things we are not supposed to be talking about. how she will decide certain cases. i like that she pointed that out. caller: i am undecided. of tryingke the rush to get her through. one of the things that is disturbing is that senator

booker and senator harris, it is always a racial thing. for, i thinkey run this is what divides america. we have to talk as a whole if we want to bring ourselves together. undecided.little host: did you learn anything about her personally, where she stood judicially, through this process? is there a standout feature you learned? caller: yes. she knows when to talk and when not to talk. i really appreciate that. she could not be pressured into saying things that she knew she should not be saying. some of the things that are still active in the court. host: there was the process

question about the timing of it. she highlighted some of the things she expressed. she said this is a very difficult process. i have used the word excruciating over the weeks. we will show you more of the exchanges that took place today. this is with senator thom tillis of north carolina, asking her why she decided to go through this process. tillis: my daughter was thrilled to meet you. they will cherish those gifts. it will take a few more years. i really enjoyed that discussion. there is something i would like you to share with the committee. you have stellar academic credentials.

you have a stellar record as a professor. you have done an excellent job on the seventh circuit. you have been a great mother and wife. you have so many options are there are so many things he could be doing besides going rudely first confirmation hearing, which was not pleasant. i was here and i remember it. he knew this would be even more challenging. , knowing you do this how this was going to play out? knowing you would be attacked and unfairly treated? to a level where your constitutional rights have been the night. why are you doing this? why not to say thank you but no thank you, leave it for someone else? ms. barrett: as i said to , thisr graham yesterday is a very difficult process. i think i have used the word excruciating over the week.

the knowledge that people will say horrible things. my private life will be combed over, i will be mocked, my children will be attacked. one might wonder why any sane person would undertake that risk. unless it was for the sake of something good. law andnk the rule of its importance in the u.s. is important. it is a great good. it would be difficult for anyone in the sea. i think everyone knows the confirmation process is difficult. the same difficulty will be present for everyone. it would be a little cowardly. i would not be answering the call to serve my country. in our conversation, i said that

my children were part of the reason not to do it. got very upset yesterday during the questioning. i was surprised he stuck it out as well as he did. he got really upset at the questioning. i said to you before any of that happened, the children are reason not to do it. but they are all also a reason to do it. if we don't protect our institutions and freedoms and , we need tolaw participate in that work. you can always watch those on our website.

we got a text that i am in support of amy coney barrett. she did not say what people wanted to hear. cindy from twitter says after watching this, i wholeheartedly knows her confirmation. these are strictly in alignment with the federalist society. let's go to normal, illinois. caller: i oppose her because i don't think he answer the questions. i don't think she would represent everybody. it would be like she is forcing her opinion. she expects everyone else. i don't think that is right. i don't think she cannot be

biased. shen't think the opinions makes will be fair for everyone. i think it will only be toward a select group. i don't think it will be fair. host: such as? caller: roe v. wade. a lot of the things she won't recuse yourself from. i see what senator kuhn said. i don't think she will take that into consideration. this eats she is taking is not going to be representative of justice ginsburg. host: let's go to jerry and

bakersfield, california. strange whend it people call and say she didn't answer the question. ruth bader ginsburg stretched the rules for answering those questions. i think she will do a great job. i think judges do not make laws. what question do you think she answered well? caller: i think she answered all of the questions well. about how she feels and what she does. she cannot answer questions about cases. ginsberg said we shouldn't do that. she answered about who she was, who her family was.

some of the questions were way out there. she is not a politician. i think she will be an outstanding juror. i don't think anybody in the chamber thinks otherwise. i have six kids and a grandkids. that theortant to me court becomes a court, not lawmakers and politicians. and: alex is in kansas, undecided person when it comes to the confirmation. good afternoon. student, am a college so i did not grab the entirety of the hearing. way concerned with the senate democrats took this as a attack on president trump. feel like if this were to happen after the election, we would get a bit more of a fair hearing.

i wish we would have been able to get a better hearing. some questions, such as what we heard from senator hirono, she did that,ther or questions from senator harris. whether covid-19 is a contagious disease. kennedy.senator john part of these questions seems wrong. this is a senate hearing for supreme court nominee. the nominee will spend the rest ontheir life, depending whether they decide to retire, in the supreme court. these should be very serious

questions. not the questions we heard today. feel like trump has the responsibility to put in his supreme court nominee. i am a bit disappointed with senate democrats. and republicans as well. host: a lot of the topics that you heard him mention. a bit of discourse about the houston astros. you can always catch this on our website. from michigan on our oppose line, good afternoon. good afternoon to you. confirmation only because it is too close to the election. and the fact that they have november 10 coming up.

and affordable care act. gavel like the answer she were appropriate. , youas poised, confident can tell she was very educated. she knew what was going on. sometimes i had to really listen. sometimes i has you had to do it over again in the evening. the biggest thing for me is i don't believe they have ever done a supreme court confirmation this close to an election when people are already voting. i am a firm believer that we need to wait until the next president is named. . . and then that seat should be filled. that will be very difficult. because of the loss of ruth bader ginsburg. let's read some texts from our viewers.

no law prohibits her nomination. she handled herself well. she has a background of working across party lines. from and sylvania, acv has more class than the democrats. but the city and state that you are texting is from. david in vermont, hello. caller: good afternoon. it was certainly a lot to digest. i think politics has crept into every crevice of the judicial branch. saw was a lot of pointed

questions from both guys. a lot of pandering from the right. criticism from the left. both of them unjustified. aso think she came off clearly the smartest person in the room. did you have a chance to see senator lahey? caller: i did. he has presided over the hearings for every contemporary setting supreme court judge is noble but concerning. he seemed a little bit lost at times. a little bit of an agenda. as all senators are. they want to push their programs.

i admire the way she fended off the repetition. host: david in vermont calling us. from toledo, ohio, and undecided caller. caller: you guys are doing a great job. i got so educated. i learned so much. i saw things on the screen about people who were asking questions. i worst me to go online rated am no longer undecided. blumenthal really showed his

true colors. his lawsuit was turned down. i was so believing that this was wrong. that trump should do this. that is why it is so important that we keep doing our job every day. getting more people to do their jobs. if it means filling a seat with a seat with the woman who passed away. i think this is the time. it was the law. the right thing to say. host: how did you come to watch

it on our network? caller: i heard so many times that c-span was where the message was at. where people could watch without commercials. i don't know what to watch anymore. i am so scared. the news keeps telling us the wrong thing. host: we invite you to go to our website. you can see some of the back-and-forth.

caller: it is more important to focus on the pandemic. i hope someone would ask her that. getting the stimulus bill passed for all of us americans. i think if she was not white, she would be criticized by the republicans. bitchy, coming off rude.

being disrespectful. not answering the question. host: finishing it all for today. it is the end of day three of this process. it still goes on tomorrow. additional witnesses. they will be heard from tomorrow. it is expected that the committee will vote this nomination out of committee. then it will go to the senate floor for a full vote. for vote is planned thursday, october 22. stay close. you want to listen along to our radio app. you can find all of that on our

website. we will have your reaction. just reactions for a couple of hours. that will be on our morning program. portion offor this the confirmation hearings. we will take you back to the start this morning. so, a couple observations from yesterday. there's an opportunity here to thinkinghe nominee's to the extent she can share her thoughts without deciding a particular case that comes before her. senator harris who are respect suggested you were not candid and judge