it is fair if you say i cannot endorse the way this person will represent the constitution. you cannot ignore that. we need to be able to have that discussion. and say you could be a nice person but i have to vote against you. host: four days of hearing starts today. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> broadband is a force for empowerment, that is why charter invented billions in building infrastructure, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications

support c-span as a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> we are live on capitol hill when under half an hour, we will see the start of the confirmation hearings for judge ketanji brown jackson to be a justice on the u.s. supreme court. if confirmed, she will be the first black woman to serve it is -- as an associate justice on the high court. today, opening statements from judge jackson, q&a and testimony from outside witnesses will happen later this week. so far, a of reporters and photojournalists taking their positions. when committee members and the nominee arrive, you will see it live here on c-span. all coverage of the hearing will get underway at 11:00 eastern on c-span and on our website, c-span.org and with our free

mobile app. another perspective on ketanji brown jackson. melanie campbell serves as president of national coalition on black civic participation. remind viewers what the coalition is and how long you have been around. guest: it has been around since 1976. a we are a civil rights organization that focuses on voter empowerment, women's leadership, use leadership. we focus on social justice issues. policy host: you are speaking at a

rally today. who is speaking at that rally? guest: about 30 or 40 other organizations. today is his story in itself. we celebrate that we have the first black woman in 230 three years who is going to be elected and going to the hearing process. as black women, women of color, we tended to have a harder time and not treated fairly in this confirmation process. host: she has been through this process before. a bipartisan vote was delivered nine months ago. is your assessment this will be any different from that one? guest: biden

what role will judge jackson's race in gender play over the next four days? guest: as a woman, black woman, i have two things when i walk in the door. that is what she has walking in the door. with that represent lived experience in this nation. issues of diversity and inclusion, opportunity. what is happening here, we have always had exceptionally qualified black women, other women of color. but we have not seen in the highest court in the land that

represented on the highest court. this is where one of my friend says opportunity meets experience. that is what she walks in the door with, that lived experience. myself being black and a woman, i can relate to that. how challenging it is for us to have these opportunities of experience. we've only had a handful of women to sit on the court, too, one is still sitting on the supreme court out of 233 years. what she will bring to that is the lived experience of being black and a woman.

sometimes good things can happen and bipartisanship. host: she was confirmed, the d.c. court of appeals position, nine months ago by a bipartisan vote. 53 to 44. she is 51 years old, undergrad and law degree from harvard. she would be the first former federal public defender to serve on the supreme court. to the phones, elizabeth is calling from maryland, independent. you are up first in this

segment, go ahead. caller: what do you think republican senators on the judiciary committee are going to drill her with? do think she will have a hard time with republicans or not? guest: we are hoping she will not. but both of us who are advocates and others will push back if what happens is unfair and challenging the public speak up, voters speak up. they do not use her as a political football, do your job. he ask her fair questions. you have a right to ask about her experience on the bench, a right to ask about the things she has done. do not make it personal. attacker character. that is where the concern lies.

host: where you concerned about the series of tweets on her record on child poor cases? guest: sometimes it is hard to make delivery, what are you inferring about her, that is where we run into real problems with folks trying to create theater around her nomination as opposed to doing their jobs. as a senator, you have a right. ask the fair questions, ask the hard questions. don't try to infer something that a texas woman's character and her experience. host: to susan in illinois, good morning. caller: i am very concerned about abortion. i believe in abortion up to 12 weeks or so, it is everybody's choice. what they want to do. but not knowing as a child, a

lot of people do not believe it is a child. that situation, under three months. i thought that was the law for a long time. i didn't know about late-term abortion, i did not know that happened. that is my main concern. she is a christian -- not just a christian, but believing in a higher power would be nice. i am very concerned about nap, i just found out what that means -- map, minor attractive person. that is scary. i realize some people are born bisexual or however they are born, i think they should be accepted into people should be kind to them. however god made them attracted to other people. host: i will let you jump in.

guest: i am not quite sure what the question was. but i would say i do not think, other jurors on the supreme court, i think the key for her or anyone is to look at the rule of law, the constitution. host: to orlando, social circle georgia. democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, had a question. with 95% of inmates being blackmails in a black woman judge is only one, for my understanding. why wouldn't she be the most qualified candidate to morally decide whether it 95% black inmate, what could possibly be

her son with the constitution that you should be judged by your peers? guest: i think her lived experience on the bench will be something that, as a person who is not a prosecutor, but also defended those who were charged, i think that will be something very unique as they deliberate things, such as criminal justice issues that may or may not come up. that is going to be a plus for the bench, to have someone in that room who can bring that experience to the conversations they had. host: back to the circuit court confirmation hearing. talk about the role racial bias complaint in the criminal justice system and her

experiences in cases involving those issues, here is about a minute and a half of that exchange. [video clip] >> he has been a judge for about eight years. in your experience, would you agree or disagree with someone who said that most racial disparities and criminal convictions and sentencings result from an unconscious racial bias of judges, juries and other judicial decision-makers? would you agree or disagree with that statement? >> as a judge now, it is very important for me not to make personal commitments about things like the question that you asked. my personal views about anything don't impact my rulings. i am aware of social science

research. there is a professor at harvard who has done implicit bias work. there are studies from the commission when i was in the policymaking world that talked about and indicated that all of us human beings can have biases we are unconsciously operating on and we have to think about that when we are making decisions. especially policymakers in the criminal justice system. i am aware of the studies, but i am not a social scientist. >> i understand that. i am asking for your overall since as a judge. host: melanie campbell your thoughts on that exchange from last year? guest: that is the point i was attempting to make, even if she

has personal viewpoints, she is looking at the law, the constitution, and that is what she will bring to the supreme court. as a judge, she has to set aside personal views to look at the law and make sure she uses exact justice, based on the rule of law. host: north carolina, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. first of all, we can start with the supreme court justices going back to clarence thomas, he should never have been on the bench in the first place. the republicans pushed him through. not only that, his wife, a trump fanatic still walking around doing things, saying things that indicate that donald trump -- i am sorry.

i'm so uptight with this. gorsuch was not investigated properly. neither was cavanaugh. cavanaugh, they cut the fbi off from investigating him further. they have thousands of tips they were not even responding to because they were told not to by the justice department and by the president. the fbi cut down the investigation. they pushed him through. the deal they did -- host: do you have a question? caller: the question is, how come every time the democrats have somebody up, we go through this dog and pony show? when republicans come up, these last couple, they have been taking advantage of the situation. host: melanie campbell?

guest: those in power push the nominees. one thing about this administration, they have put a lot more judges on. in this administration, in some cases that is historic. but i agree that a lot of times you can see some biases where the democratic party -- no judgment, just what i see. we as democrats go overboard in trying to find balance on the other site of the i/o, very different. at this point, what i have seen has been strong support for her from the white house. and from the democrats in the senate who are ultimately responsible for pushing her candidacy through. i think that is what has to be done. host: