for friday, december 18th, 2020. stay tuned for continued coverage of the passing of supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg, we'll and see you back here on monday, good night, everybody. >> tucker: this is a fox news alert, supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg has died, 87 years old. she passed away tonight at her home in washington, d.c., of the effects of pancreatic cancer. a big story with profound implications, the outlines of which are just becoming clear. were going to start tonight with fox news chief judicial correspondent, the host of fox news at night shannon bream, is with us now. tell us what you know. >> we were told her family was with her when she died peacefully, she is survived by

two children and a lot of grandchildren who she was very proud of and talked about all the time. she was the second woman to serve on the court, appointed in 1993 by then president bill clinton and she has forged a path. long before she joined the court and all of these years that she has served, she had been a strong advocate for ideas that she believes in. she had been celebrated by the left, she is an icon. people dress their babies as rbg. she is somebody who had a very loyal and loving following. we have all cheered for her over the years and the many things that she's overcome, it's no secret she battled cancer numerous times in numerous forms as well. it was a few weeks ago that we heard she was actually doing well. she was suffering another recurrence, she talked about treatments, chemo was going well and we really didn't know until tonight that it had taken this very serious turn for the worse. she is somebody as i have told

the story before, she shows up. she show was close to her husba, they are an internal family at the court, despite ideological differences they spend time together, very close relationship with justice scal justice scalia, they had common interests. she and her husband entertained together a lot and i was stunned to show up to the court and see her on the bench. this was her life's work, and she repeatedly said despite calls from the left and the bite at different times to retire, she is not going to do it. this was her passion, her calling, and her life's work. she has said as long as i feel like i can do this job and be mentally clear and physically strong, i'm going to keep doing it. we've seen her overcome so much

and it' stay physically strong. other people don't have a chance of surviving and it's a shock tonight. her colleagues are grieving, we are starting to hear reporting for them, they knew she had been suffering in a way the public did not but she has been a trailblazer in so many different ways. coming out of law school, she had a hard time finding a job because it was unusual back then. she was married, she had a family and she wanted to do all of those things. she was a very modern woman in that way. the second female appointed to the court, she clearly made her mark. we all know about her dissent and when they read their opinions, normally the person who writes the majority opinion will read portions from it. it's not often that you get a dissent but it does happen and she often read her descendants from the bench. she is strong and forceful with her language and she's never shy about sharing her position on

any number of things. she was well loved and her colleagues are rattled tonight. they've lost a member of their tight-knit family in the country has lost someone who wa was a pioneer. >> tucker: shannon bream, thanks so much i hope you will stay with us tonight as we covered this literally breaking story. for more reaction tonight and the political imprecations of this which are vast given the timing of justice ginsburg's death, we go now to ned ryan of american majority, were happy to have him. we are going to throughout the night intersperse segments on justice ginsburg with the implications of her passing. but i think given the accelerated calendar here and the fact that we are in the middle of an election, very intense presidential election, this will have implications for that race. >> my advice with trump and

mcconnell, there are some reports they are going to move on this. i've been hearing any call me barrett, i'm a big fan of, i preferred her over kavanaugh might be on the inside track for this nomination, i think she would be a solid choice, still in her 40s. on the seventh circuit right now, has proven her conservative credentials, wonderful story. mother of seven kids but is respected on both sides of the aisle. i would say any call me barrett and i think they will move and i hope they do move before the election. with trump and mcconnell together and the majority in the senate, this is an opportunity and i say they seized the moment and it highlights the fact that what is at stake on november 3rd, the supreme court. especially for the evangelicals of which i am one, the importance of the supreme court especially with regards to the life issue, especially regards to roe v. wade. the most pro-life president we have seen with donald trump, he can go to the mat with amy call

me barrett and say i'm going to nominate her and get her nominated before november 3rd, i think it will be a massive help. >> tucker: do think it's possible that can get done in the 46 days between now and the election. >> there is no filibuster with regards to confirming federal judges. we need the simple majority. we have those votes and i think this is one of those things where you probably could get enough votes to get through there and get a supreme court nominee confirmed. i see you go for it because of nothing else, a battle 40 some days out of the election highlights the importance. i would advise for it. i think they would have the votes to get her through. >> tucker: democrats will say and they will be correct on this one point that there is precedent for delaying the confirmation hearing in the final months before an election, now in the final weeks before an election, how will

mitch mcconnell who is for that of course in the final months of the obama administration, how will he respond? >> that has typically been when they are different parties in control of the white house and the senate, it's not the case here. both controlled by republicans, let's go for it. they are the ones in power, it's their constitutional right to nominate and confirm federal judges at all levels come i think you go for it. >> tucker: i just wonder, this has just happened, there are many levels to this and i almost feel bad because i do believe you should pause and remember a person's life, because it's an election year, i feel like we should discuss this. do you think you were hearing tonight at the white house is planning to move forward with a nominee before the election? >> i can only say there are

rumors, i have not heard direct confirmation of that. i will point this out, what you think chuck schumer would do if he controlled the senate and the democrats controlled the white house, do you think they would give it a second thought? at some point we have to say there's so much at stake, we are going to do this and i think it's a bold move, a strong move and the president and mitch mcconnell i don't think should have a second thought about it, should go for it. >> tucker: interesting. ned ryan, thanks so much for that. jen ellis is a senior legal advisor to the trump reelect and counsel to the president, we are happy to have her join us now. thanks for coming on. your reaction to this. >> of course, ruth bader ginsburg was someone who served this country remarkably throughout her entire tenure on the bench and our condolences to her family and i think taking some time to recognize that before we get too

much into the politics is definitely how the country should celebrate her legacy. and remarkable achievement for women, as a female attorney myself i applaud the fact that she was one of the first female justices on the bench. of course we all have her opinions on her decisions, i think her service to this country needs to be recognized and president trump needs to do that for the next days and weeks ahead. >> tucker: i couldn't disagree more with what she did turn her 27 years on the bench but i think we should all bow in reverence before the death of anyone. it's the most profound transition there is. i think it's important not to politicize funerals as we often say in this show, thank you for saying that. >> under the constitution, to nominate someone for a vacancy, the supreme court is entirely up

to the president. in terms of the constitution he can. then it comes down to advice and consent of the senate. certainly there is time this term, his first term hopefully, it's not up until january 20th. so he certainly has sufficient time if he should choose to do that and that it will fall into the hands of the senate to determine their advice and consent pursuant to their constitution. >> tucker: what will happen, quickly, if the president decides to do that? do you anticipate social volatility? how intensive a moment would that be? we set the last time the president got justice on the supreme court, the country stopped and the left did things i didn't think any political movement would ever do, what would happen if the president did that now? >> i think this is what is so

important, the american public recognizes the importance of the supreme court and when president trump released his list of nominees, it didn't get any media attention but it's going to be front and center over the next few days and it's so critical for joe biden to put forth his list which he has refused to do and it showed the president to move forward with a nominee, i hope the senate, particularly the democrats that are on the senate judiciary committee will treat this fully and fairly and they won't politicize it and do everything that we all lived through with the cavanagh confirmation and they will give it the full attention and respect that a supreme court nominee deserves. >> tucker: that was an atrocity what they did and you make a good point about biden releasing his supreme court li list. because this is on some level a human story, also a political story, i want to go down to the chief political correspondent bret baier who's standing by for us in washington tonight. this definitely shuffles the

deck. >> bret: yes. >> tucker: what's your reaction to it? >> bret: this is a major change in this election. tonight is about the life and legacy of ruth bader ginsburg. but the focus now on this replacement and what it means for the election 46 days away. there are already statements out from democratic senators saying the american people need to speak about this justice replacement and they have to wait until after the election. i think this is going to be a real battle. the president is probably going to move forward with one of those people on the list that he just rolled out a couple of weeks ago. if you thought the brett kavanaugh hearing was intense, wait until this nomination hits and the hearing starts for this replacement.

tonight is about looking back at her life and legacy and she was a giant, but the battle you have to come will be in the senate judiciary committee. >> tucker: that's exactly right, chaired by senator lindsey graham. the fear for everyone is mob violence we've been living through for the last three months will accelerate. i wonder if it will be possible to call some kind of truce where everyone agrees our supporters aren't going to go into the streets and hurt people. >> bret: we don't know what's going to happen because we've seen the entire landscape change in the past few months about how protests evolve into different things, this adds more fuel to the fire but i think how it's handled on the senate with both mitch mcconnell and what he decides is going to be crucial. that is going to start.

>> tucker: i would imagine those conversations are taking place for certain right now. do you have any sense, and i know this just happened and so i know it's asking a lot of you to provide fresh reporting on it, but you have any sense of what mitch mcconnell might be thinking about this tonight? >> bret: he's been asked about it numerous times about what he would do and point back to the merrick garland situation and he says if the senate was in the hands of an opposing party to the president, you would not move forward. but since it's the same party of the president, you would move forward. that is going to get a lot of pushback from democratic senators, but i think that's what's going to happen. >> tucker: do you think quite a few republican senators are up for reelection this year that mcconnell can count on holding every republican? >> bret: this will change the dynamic in a lot of different races. it was not on the front burner, it was always a key issue but it

will change the dynamic for races where the justices and replacing this justice in particular because it swings the court will now come front and center. >> tucker: all eyes on susan collins of maine in a very tight race. she was one of the decisive votes last time. you've got to kind of wonder, i will just ask you once again, do you think this makes it harder for mcconnell to hold his votes were easier? >> bret: somebody like susan collins is in a tough spot as is. she's getting pushback in maine for the brett kavanaugh decision and voting for brett kavanaugh. some of these can go either way and not only that but it fires up both bases. let's make sure not only on the right side of the left will be immensely fired up to make sure

they get control of the senate. ideally in their view, they have this chance to block or possibly move forward with this justice. >> tucker: a dramatic season just got so much more so. thanks so much, i hope we see you next week. an opinion host with the hill newspaper, we were happy to have him on tonight. what do you think republicans should do after they pause and acknowledge that a human being has passed, someone who served in the court for 27 years but as a political matter, what are they go now? >> like you said, that is the question being asked in washington right now. he made a key point, this puts the issue of the court front and center in every single election, that could be great for some republicans which are on the cusp in certain races, it could be terrible for somebody like

susan collins. already while we've been speaking, the margin is incredibly tight. lisa murkowski already coming out and saying she would not vote until after the election, or inauguration day, that's one vote you can count down from the republicans, all eyes there on susan collins. in terms of the republican strategy, this is something they have promised their base from the beginning. they keep telling their base, one more justice away from achieving what we've always wanted to. now they have a chance, if they decide to go for it, they have to reckon with the country very much and this is what i feel a sinking pit in my stomach as much -- i want to honor the life of justice ginsburg and she was an icon in the united states here in washington but we've seen the normalization of the left political violence by the highest echelon of american society. we saw the groundwork for that laid during the kavanaugh

hearings. we remember protesters vandalizing the supreme court building. abraham lincoln, all across washington -- this could be that times a hundred, times a thousand. the stakes for the election are existential right now. >> tucker: you've seen for the past three months prominent figures encourage violence the key supreme court decision on free speech carved out a huge space but it drew the line at encouraging imminent violence. you would like to help some of those people would be held accountable for encouraging violence if they do. it feels like american society could still be damaged by this if it gets more intense. >> i think we need to go into this very clear, the murder rate is up by 40% across all major

cities and when you talk to police officers, people are angry, they are on edge. drug use is up, alcohol use, so much of what is happening. americans are depressed at a higher rate more than ever, only 14% say they are satisfied with the country right now. is this the time to inject something like this? what has the republican party been elected for? they promised their base over and over again, we are just one more justice away from roe vs. wade, one more justice away from doing this, now they might have to put their money where their mouth is and they could dramatically and i really mean this, shake this country over the next 46 days. >> tucker: watching the behavior and the decisions of chief justice john roberts who was confirmed to the delight of republicans in washington who thought he was their guy, turns

out to be an utterly conventional establishment liberal, a lot of conservatives say we can't have that again. if you're going to nominate someone, it has to be someone who believes what she says. >> that's right and this is one of the biggest party fights. who's going to have the say? is it going to be federalist society, are we going to get pro-corporate and socially malleable judges, or are we going to get judges that are not socially malleable? this is the greatest fight in conservative legal establishme establishment, which was shook by the transgender right case before the court a couple of months ago in which justice gorsuch shocked a bunch of people in conservative legal establishment in ruling the way that he did. again, there is going to be a level of scrutiny on these nominees that did not even exist for neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh. the litmus test for democrats and republicans are all over the

map. with 46 days until the election with a democratic party and a left movement which has already mobilized, has normalized political violence, roe vs. wade may literally be on the ballot, things are ripe for problems right here. >> tucker: thank you so much, i appreciate that. we want to take a moment to consider some of the issues that ultimately are decided by this country's highest court. immigration is one of them. it's a key issue for the trump administration as well. dan stein is the president for american immigration reform. we are happy to have them on tonight. to what extent is our immigration policy crafted at the supreme court level? >> major issues that define our constitutional norms, our separation of powers which are in important definitely the side

supreme court, justice ginsburg was part of the faction that sought to erode the traditional deference the courts have traditionally given to the president in matters dealing with border security, border control, and procedural process for aliens at the border. this is kind of a philosophical dividing issue where you see the liberal justices which ginsberg has been a part of eroding certain doctrinal principles that prevented americans from suing on behalf of aliens outside the country. which dramatically increase the volume in the amount of litigation that was used for example in challenging many of the things that president trump try to do during his administration. it's a significant thing, if donald trump is able to make this appointment go quickly -- come on, what would chuck and nancy doing the same situation, right? mcconnell has got to put somebody up there quickly, so does the president because this is his stance to put his mark on the court and restore this idea.

congress makes the immigration laws and the president and forces them under this broad delegation of authority. otherwise the system spins out of control. >> tucker: that's a very smart point. the presumption as he has all of the members behind him, republicans aren't quite as good at discipline as democrats are, do you think is someone who watches congress a lot, do you think he can corral his senators into supporting the nominee assuming there is one. >> a lot of it will depend on how much he consults with lisa murkowski and susan collins before hand, gets their buy-in on a female candidate. he's got a pretty good list he's put together right now and it depends how well he's able to sell the idea this is politically in their interest. what mitt romney does is an open

question, nobody is expecting -- he's going to take the side of not wanting to politicize the process. this is an opportunity for trump to raise the immigration issue within the context of a supreme court nomination. if he were to sit on his hands, the president -- through the election, and lose, it might be the last opportunity the republicans have to put somebody who is really good on the immigration issue on the supreme court for 20 years. >> tucker: it seems like the president, the white house is going to come under some pressure to move ahead, that's what i'm inferring from what you said. >> the question is really -- politics is about seizing the opportunity. the idea that we are supposed to be afraid of potentially normalizing violence, whatever that means, our institutions have to be able to function efficiently in our country. the supreme court as a part of the efficiencies in those

institutions, it represents the bulwark and protection of our democratic liberties. if we can't nominate a supreme court justice efficiently and smoothly and get that person appointed quickly, the institutions themselves are in jeopardy. maybe that's what the agenda of the far left is but an awful lot of people are hoping the president understands that there's a lot more at stake right now. there's no such thing as a supreme court justice seat that is liberal or conservative, there are just good justices who interpret the law of the way congress intended and we need a justice on the supreme court to interpret the law properly consistent with what a judge is supposed to do, not reengineer the constitution, rewrite it or give us a different constitution from what we all supported originally. >> tucker: you make a very wise point. if the institution can't function under stress, it's a dysfunctional institution. peter schweizer is a

best-selling author, frequent guest on this show, we are happy to have them join us tonight. for our viewers just joining us, supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg what next? >> i would say justice ginsburg is not somebody i would agree with in terms of judicial philosophy but i admire the fact that she had friendships with people across the aisle, the judicial aisle like a justice scalia. this is going to be a major stress on our system because what has happened is the left has become so engaged in judicial activism. they can't accomplish things on a legislative scale, they can't win the necessary elections or have the kind of electoral heft to advance their agenda through the legislature, so they have relied increasingly on the

courts over the years. the stakes are very high and i think that's probably one of the inherent problems here that we have to keep in mind. it's going to get worse before it gets better. i think on the question of timing, it's the president's prerogative. maybe it's not a vote in the senate, certainly you think one could be held in the middle of january 1 and inauguration takes place. >> tucker: it's a little strange, i'm glad you made this point in a purported democracy, we spend this much energy, this much attention on a lifetime appointed seat to a court. that's not really how are sips of him is work, is it. >> i think that's a hugely important point to make, it's inherent to the judicial activism that we have coming from the left.

what the left is doing is is nine individuals in black robes that have lifetime appointments that are not elected by people, they are elected by a majority of senators get to make a very wide, overarching statements about what is constitutional and what is not constitutional. i think there's a lot of evidence that the judicial branch has become much stronger than the executive and legislative. the way the founders envisioned it as you know as they wanted them all to balance and check each other out. this is the reason why people like mark levin and others said we should consider term limits or other restrictions on the court but because of the way it's operating right now, the powers of the supreme court has come of that is what makes this next decision about who's going to be on the court really a zero-sum game. one side is going to

dramatically win and one side is going to dramatically lose. and there's very little wiggle room that you might have in a legislative arrangement or something else. that's the problem. part of the reason we are at the high stakes game we are today is because the left has pushed this kind of judicial activism going back 40, 50 years. >> tucker: this is too significant a job. we are just getting word that npr is reporting, with a grain of salt, that on her deathbed ruth bader ginsburg said to her granddaughter i think i'm quoting "my most fervent wis wish" -- as she died "is that i not be replaced by this president." i'm going to choose not to believe that she said that because i don't think people on their deathbeds are thinking about who is president, you hope not, that's a pretty limited way to think as you die. but certainly this will be used as a cudgel by the left i would

think. >> i think you're right. look, it's very tragic that she's passed away, she's been battling this illness for a couple of years, but we all have to remember that there were murmurs in the latter parts of the obama administration where people were asking her to consider stepping aside and she refused to. part of the reason we are in the situation is because of that. >> tucker: that's a good point. peter schweizer, thank you so much. reset at the half hour, bringing you in on a fox news alert, as you're probably aware, supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg has passed away in washington tonight at the age of 87 years old. she's been battling various forms of cancer including pancreatic cancer for quite some time but is been reporting to work anyway. without warning at least to the outside world, she passed away setting up in the middle of a single most intense political season an and a lifetime of anye

watching, yet another political battle. we don't know where it goes, we don't know who the white house will put forward as a candidate to replace ruth bader ginsburg in the 46 days between now and election day, we don't know what the republican of the very closely balanced senate will back that decision, we are hearing tonight that lisa murkowski, republican senator of alaska said she will not vote for a replacement for ginsberg until after the inauguration. mitt romney almost certainly will vote against anything and susan collins of maine in a very tight race in that state, unclear where she would come down on that. there's a lot that we don't know at this hour. we do know a very intense political moment is about to get much more intense. with that, we are going to spend the rest of this show taking a look at this question and the

life of ruth bader ginsburg from a bunch of different angles. we will bring you back with shannon bream who has covered the supreme court, is a lawyer and hosts a few shows after this, thanks much for coming back. give us a sense about what you're hearing, i know everyone in washington is on the phone or texting, give us a sense of the reactions that people in washington are publicly expressing to the passing of ruth bader ginsburg and give us a sense of what you think might follow this if you would. >> shannon: she's got a place in history that will always be there, as the second woman appointed to the supreme court by bill clinton back in 1993. her impact is hard to overstate. she has a loyal following even in the last couple of years there have been documentaries and movies made praising her. she is a cult figure almost on the left. they most certainly have praised her work, her strong positions and a strong dissent when she

wasn't in the majority opinion. she's going to be remembered for so many reasons being a trailblazer. i'm getting word that there was a turn earlier this week just a couple of days ago that may have indicated to those closest to her that her death was imminent. her family was with her, she leaves behind two kids and four grandchildren. family was everything to her as much as she loved her life's work she talked incessantly about her family and was one of those women early on. i think there were only nine women in her graduating law school class in harvard. one who came out married and wanting to juggle a legal career while also having a family and it's something she set an example about how to do on so many different levels. her fellow colleagues are grieving tonight, they have been through this not that long ago with the sudden death of justice scalia and the two of them were so very close even though they did not agree on much. now we look forward on what comes next for the court, it's a very delicate, sensitive time in

washington. we want to be able to highlight the great strides and things she accomplished in her life but there are already conversations by democrats and republicans happening in washington about what will come next. in the middle of a very difficult election year, we have talked about this in the past, i have talked to senator mitch mcconnell about this in recent months. the indication was that they would move forward. a lot has happened in this country this year and i don't know if he holds that position again tonight. we will probably know in short order put in the meantime she leaves a real mark on the court and on the history of this country and its jurisprudence, tonight at 87 years old. >> tucker: i appreciate it. at some point, i would love -- probably not tonight because it just happened, i would love to get a more granular sense of her legacy on the court. we read accounts in the paper but it's unclear exactly who the intellectual forces are on the court.

i hope we can talk about that. great to see you tonight, thanks so much. we mention to senator susan collins of maine, we told you she's in a tight race for reelection. earlier this month, she told "the new york times" about seating a supreme court justice in october, she said she would not do it. here's the quote. "i think that's too close, i really do. "she also said she would oppose it seating a justice in the lame duck session, that's the period between the election and the inauguration should the president lose. brit hume is fox news senior political analyst and we are happy to have him join us tonight. i want to jump into the politics and it made no disrespect but i think it's important. this suggests that if lisa murkowski and susan collins are both on the record saying they will not vote for a replacement before the election,

that suggests that this can't happen does it not? >> i might also add that that lindsey graham back in 2018 before he took over the chairmanship of the judiciary committee said that even if we were just into the primary season, he would not want to see a nominee advance in the election year. i might add this. i think mitch mcconnell has laid out what his principles are for this and as bret baier mentioned earlier, it's yes we would go forward and the only circumstance under which we wouldn't go forward in the election year as if the president and the senate were of the opposing parties which at this point they are not, that would set the stage for a nomination to be made in advance. but i think the circumstances may have changed since he outlined that. our american institutions right now and our political system were undergoing a stress test as

difficult and intense as i've ever seen. i go back to the 60s when we had the tremendous upheaval and turmoil over the vietnam war and the divisions that provoked, what we are seeing now is more intense than that. i think leaders have to consider what the effect would be if we plunged what would undoubtably be a brutal and divisive confirmation battle into the middle of this. i think that is the threshold question whether to even make a nomination. trump's instinct undoubtably will be go forward but whether mitch mcconnell will feel that way as the majority leader of the senate at this stage i think it is unclear. it will be good to hear from him in the first thing he's going to want to do is -- if he decides it's an idea worth pursuing, whether he would have the votes. if you've got people like lisa murkowski and susan collins and possibly someone like mitt romney not prepared to go along,

you might not be able to pull it off no matter what you did. those are things that have to be considered as to whom if any want to nominate to replace this brave soul who waged such a courageous fight against cancer. >> tucker: i think it's fair to say that you can't count on mitt romney's vote, i'm going out there on a limb with that. >> the other thing is if you're the leader of the senate and you're trying to hold the majority, you're going to have to look at a lot of races out there to look around and see how this might play. you have people like cory gardner in colorado and so forth who is in a tight race and others. you will want to know what injecting this new broad battle into the whole picture, what the effect would be. it might be rallying come off the top of my head i don't know. these are all things that are going to be under consideration

but i think the threshold question is whether to put the country through this. as you and bret baier were talking about earlier, what we saw with brett kavanaugh -- remember, the kavanaugh nomination was to succeed a centrist on the court. ruth bader ginsburg is the leader of the liberal block. to try to get her replaced by a conservative jurist, a judicial conservative would provoke an even more intense battle. i think the handling of the brett kavanaugh nomination by his opponents was the worst thing i've seen in my years in washington, it was the absolute bottom. i hesitate to imagine where such a battle over this would go. >> tucker: we are being held hostage. i have to ask you. let's say the administration puts forward a name but the senate doesn't cooperate, but that reminds all of us that one of the effects of your vote in november is choosing the next

supreme court justice, does that help the president or help his opponent? >> it would rally his base, it would rally the republicans because the court is something that is considered to be a crucial matter. it's considered crucial by both parties but for slightly different reasons. on the left the supreme court and the lower courts have been the place where they have been able to go to achieve policy objectives that they couldn't achieve through the legislative process either through the states or in washington. there have been a lot of results through the years by activist judges in the eyes of conservatives that they found disagreeable. their purpose and nominating justices has been to stop that action, to bring the courts back to a more traditional role where they closely adhered to the language of the constitution and well understood constitutional

principles. liberals will give you an argument and say they weren't activist and i've heard it many times and i'm sorry, i don't buy it. that's been the struggle, the struggle by the left to advance its agenda t to the courts and e struggle by the right to block that. the right really hasn't succeeded in advancing all that many novel constitutional or legal interpretations to the courts. there has been some. big argument for example over gun rights was settled by the supreme court although it's still going on so there you have an example. the feelings are very intense on both sides, make no mistake about it. president trump's articulation of a list of potential jurists did a lot to rally conservatives to his cause in 2016 when they weren't necessarily going to go for him. they didn't know at the time there was going to be hillary but it was important to him, and

might have unimportant rallying effect as well. >> tucker: they would like to see stacy abrams on the court and will next see if they get it, i hope you will stay with us. judge jeanine pirro is the hostess of judge jeanine, she joined us on face time to respond to this breaking news. what is your reaction? >> its shock and certainly sadness. you have to understand that ruth bader ginsburg in addition to being the second woman appointed to the united states supreme court was very much a cult figure for a lot of young women. a woman who went beyond the odds and ended up on the united states supreme court and fought constantly for women and women's rights. she was a pioneer in terms of equal pay that led to the lilly ledbetter act. she worked with president obama

on and she was very proud of her decision in united states versus virginia military academy where women were denied entrance because of their, it was a single-sex military academy. she was very much a smart woman who has a long the following and will be remembered. in terms of the legacy, not just in terms of court cases but in terms of young women and a whole generation who believes in the notorious rgb, her death will motivate some on the left. she clearly was a left judge was on the liberal wing of the cou court. i think she will activate that base. i think the one thing that is so clear about ruth bader ginsburg and her presence on the supreme court was how strong she was, how hard she fought, and how much an activist judge she

really was. >> tucker: may i pause you there and ask a question and i don't know the answer to this -- there are certain supreme court justices who might have strong political views but who on fewer legal grounds sometimes find themselves voting with the other side. if they are principled enough to cross over. was she one of those? what was her crossover percentage? >> i can't speak to her crossover but what i can tell you is she was motivated by her beliefs in women's rights and activism. i was a judge myself and there were cases that i disagreed on but the law and precedent dictated what position i would take. ruth bader ginsburg was a judge who allowed her belief on a particular issue to dictate her final judgment in the case. if indeed it is true what they are saying that she has

indicated she wants to be replaced by another president, that gives you -- if that's true -- all you need to know about ruth bader ginsburg. her comments about the president before he became president, donald trump, very critical. she was more than just a justice, she was a political activist. >> tucker: the president, i have to ask, is at a rally right now, onstage in minnesota. do you think he knows that this happened? this is going to have a huge effect on the presidential race, how could it not? how could he know that ruth bader ginsburg has passed. >> i'm sure if he hasn't been onstage for all that long, one of the people with him on the campaign trail would have told him -- i think this has been public knowledge for about 30 minutes now. i'm not sure the president would

do other than speak highly of her now that she has passed. the political game that will be played after this will be as you and brit hume talked about, something that would be so incredibly strong in terms of both sides going at each other, it's not something that we necessarily need to see before the election. >> tucker: since you've lived in this country all of your life, does it seem a little bit weird that all of us are intimidated by violent mobs of dividebiden voters? we should try to exercise or system in the way it was intended to be exercised because biden voters will get mad and start hurting people, that's the starkind of weird place to be. >> the truth is the people who are silent now will be speaking in 46 days and i think that if this becomes another issue, then

what we have to be able to do is make sure that we have the ability to stand firm in our beliefs. there are a lot of attempts to stamp out our freedom right now. and i think the strength of this country is people believing that they can go to the ballot box, they can be able to say what they may not be willing to say in public because of the backlash and they will say it when they go to vote on novembe. >> tucker: that is exactly right, that is a voice of the population. thanks so much for on tonight. this news just broke, the president was in fact speaking at the time this news crossed on the newswire, so it's not clear that he knows. and we don't know sitting here in the studio what the reaction from the rest of the country has been to this. we've asked rick leventhal to join us with an update on what people are saying about the

passing of supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. >> widespread condolences on twitter over the loss of justice ginsburg, many calling her a giant and a champion of gender equality. we have heard from former first lady and presidential candidate hillary clinton who wrote "justice ginsburg pave the way for so many women including me, they will never be another like her, thank you rbg." we also heard from senator bernie sanders who wrote "the passing of justice ruth bader ginsburg is a tremendous loss to our country, she was an extraordinary champion of justice and equal rights and will be remembered as one of the great injustices in modern american history." we now have also heard from former president george w. bush released a statement saying "laura and i join our fellow americans in the mourning the loss of ruth bader ginsburg. she dedicated many of her 87 remarkable years to the pursuit of justice and equality and she inspired more than one generation of women and girls. justice ginsburg loved our country and the law. laura and i are fortunate to

have known this smart and humorous trailblazer and we send our condolences to the ginsburg family." we are monitoring the president's remarks, we will not you know if and when he weighs in. >> tucker: thank you so much, rick leventhal. former president george w. bush endorsing the legacy of ruth bader ginsburg. mollie hemingway is a senior editor of the federalists, we are happy to have her on tonig tonight. respectful question hoping for a respectful answer but how would you assess the legal legacy of ruth bader ginsburg? >> regardless of what you think of her jurisprudence, this is a woman who had a lengthy career in public service. she was inspirational for quite a few women as only the second woman to sit on the supreme court. she had quite a fan base which seem to be based more on the results of her ruling in favor

of abortion as opposed to any particular leas legal reasoningr whatnot, there are people on all sides who appreciated her even recently after justice kavanaugh was confirmed. you might remember she was extremely critical of what democrats had done to him and trying to destroy his life. she was well regarded even by her colleagues on the supreme court for how she defended it. >> tucker: she was tough and i admire that. she lived to 87 despite fighting all kinds of cancer and i definitely admire that, good for her. assess if you would her jurisprudence. we haven't heard anything about that tonight, it's not a partisan question, i'm just interested. was she respected by legal scholars? >> apart from her political work in her support for abortion which is the reason why many people like her, she was well regarded by some people for some

of the more arcane legal reasoning she worked through that helped lawyers throughout the country. it's not so political but she did have some stuff that people appreciated there. but that's not why she drives excitement. >> tucker: that's probably right. i have what i think is a statement from the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell of kentucky and i'm going to read it. i just want to say i'm getting this cold, so apologies for mistakes. here is the statement for mitch mcconnell. >> americans we elected our majority in 2016 and expanded in 2018 because we pledge to work with president trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary. once again, we will keep our promise. president trump's nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the united states senate. i believe this is a statement for mitch mcconnell. president trump's nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the senate.

that seems to indicate the answer to the question we've been asking for the last hour and 20 minutes since we've heard this news, it sounds like the white house and the republican-led senate will will move forward with a replacement for ruth bader ginsburg before the election, is that how you read that? >> that would match with what they had said earlier in the year that if there was a vacancy, they would move to fill it. and contrary to what you've heard a lot of people say, there is no inconsistency between this and the mcconnell rule that came in 2016. that rule was you don't fill a nomination if the senate is held by a different party than the president and the final year of the presidency in an election year, that's not the case here. republicans -- voters gave republicans the senate in 2016 and in 2018, that is an indication of what voters want in terms of the presidency and the senate, there is no conflict

there. people were hoping that mitch mcconnell would not want to move forward, but this statement indicates that he will be moving forward and that matches with what the american voters would like him to do. >> tucker: assuming this is true and there will be a nominee, that nominee would have to be announced imminently, very soon. who do you think it's likely to be, who should it be? >> president trump has been working on nominees since before he was elected in 2016, he has a list that he upgraded and improved over the years, i think many people think it would be amy coney barrett, a judge who has a very good reputation. she has been confirmed recently by the senate. she has a recent relationship with the senators and is held in high regard. she is someone who americans

appreciate. she faced opposition not as bad as what cavanagh went through and senators who derided her for being religious but she handled that. she is intereste has interestind their is enough people who feel confident she would make a good supreme court justice. this is something that helped donald trump in 2016, a lot of people voted for them because they were concerned about the supreme court, voters care very deeply about this issue about who sits on the court. democrats said if they were to take power, they might pack the court, they would nominate in the mold of a more liberal judge or whatnot. i'm not sure that is something that will motivate their voters as much as it motivates republican voters or conservatives to care a great deal about the integrity of the court. >> tucker: given what the left

did to brett kavanaugh, you have to wonder if someone like amy coney barrett who has quite a few children with want to go through that. >> i think any decent person has to look in horror at what happened, not just to justice kavanaugh but to other people who have been nominated to the high court. unfortunately, people have ramped up what they are willing to do to fight someone from serving on the court and anyone who cares about their family has to be worried. at the same time, i think the appetite for the antics that were deployed against justice kavanaugh -- what they really didn't like was invented this horrific story and destroyed his life, that went over very poorly with a lot of american voters and also taught them that the left opposition is to anyone who gets in their path, it's important.

>> tucker: mollie hemingway, thank you for that analysis, appreciate it. will not talk to porta formal fl prosecutor, what's your reaction to the passing of ruth bader ginsburg? >> it's sad for her and her family and i'm sorry for them and how they are going to mourn her loss. what i can't help thinking is that this is going to roil the selection and roil this country and i heard molly talking about the cavanagh confirmation which was a shocking event in our country, and i think it's going to pale in comparison to what's going to happen if there is a fight in the next six weeks over confirming the new justice over the supreme court when the election is right around the corner. >> tucker: are you worried? >> i am worried. given everything that has happened since george floyd, i'm worried about violence.

i think especially the left has seemed to accept that violence is a way of life. we have a war on police happening, we have police officers being gunned down sitting in their patrol cars and people talking about bill barr as if he is a traitor to the country, the attorney general to the united states. i can only imagine whoever the nominee might be going to the confirmation process is going to inspire a lot of violence. i think fascism is really on the march here. it seems to me that it's on the left and they are trying to silence one side and make people afraid to speak out and give their opinion. if you don't want to wear a mask, you get silenced and fired and ascent from society in shame. i can only imagine what's going to happen in this country, it's going to be worse when it's something like a supreme court justice seat is at stake. >> tucker: i think you're right to be concerned. francie hakes, thanks so much

for that. as we finish this hour respond to the news of the passing of a supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg, we are going to end with one of the wisest voices we have at fox, senior political analyst brit hume joins us once again. apparently we have a statement from the senate majority leader saying there will be a nominee and will be a vote, what do you think? >> it's not his call whether this going to be a nominee, he will have some say in it, that's up to the president. what he said was more importantly perhaps is the president's nominee will get a vote in the senate. that was his instinct immediately when merrick garland was pending under obama and he moved expeditiously to say no, sorry, he's not going to get nominated -- the american people should have a voice in the spirit tonight, senator schumer his opposite number on the democratic side has come out with a statement in almost exactly the same words. of course, mcconnell's rule

about this has been there should not be a nominee acted on if the president is of a different party from the senate which is not the case here so we know that. what he seems to be saying is if the president nominates, the senate will vote. he may feel differently about that if he starts counting hea heads. senator grassley told our own martha maccallum back in 2018 when he was chairman of the judiciary committee that he wouldn't take up a nominee during the campaign in 2020 -- will he's not the chairman anymore, that's up to lindsey graham who said much the same thing in 2018. i think it remains to be seen what the outcome in terms of what they decide to do. the ball is in the president's court and he will obviously have to be informed, the white house will have to be informed by what

the senate majority leader says. i think that as a matter that is in question at this moment tonight. >> tucker: the president still speaking in minnesota, no indication as we serve this news. >> sean: welcome to fox news. 9:00 on the east coast, 6:00 on the west coast. u.s. supreme court justice ruth bader ginsberg is dead at the age of 87. she battled cancer for decades. i was fighting pancreatic cancer at the time of her passing. show leaves a long legacy of the supreme court. she was appointed by president bill clinton, known as one of the most liberal-leaning judges on the bench. justice ginsberg had a distinguished legal