about. you don't get answers, or get the solutions, unless you really talk things through that's what we're here to do. that's what we all should be here to do, so we thank you so much for joining us today, for joining us every day and we'll see you back here tomorrow will: have a great saturday. jedediah: thanks so much. neil: she was 5-foot 1, 100 pounds soaking wet but a power brain, a force of nature unto herself and now, ruth bader ginsburg is gone. dead at 87, and it has turned the political world upside down, probably much as she expected it would. we don't know what happens next, this much is very very certain, the political environment has changed over the last 12 hours. now what happens? welcome, everybody i'm neil cavuto. you're looking at the seat outside the u.s. supreme court right now where they're remembering this force of nature , 27 years on the highest

court and the land, as someone who championed women's rights and racial equality and now becomes, well, a force in an election that could change now, mightily, based on whether donald trump will be able to get a nominee to the supreme court to replace her, whether he will try, indications are that he will, and what will happen to that? we'll discuss that we'll discuss republican senators would are vulnerable themselves in deciding on a possible replacement for the justice, but for now, let's get the latest from mark meadows outside the supreme court. mark? >> neil good morning to you tributes are pouring in from around the country in honor of justice ruth bader ginsburg. while she served on the court she became a cultural icon somebody celebrated for championsing equal rights and she was a graduate of columbia law school graduating back in 1959 not far from her home of brooklyn and she helped find the aclu women's rights project and argued before the

high court multiple times before being nominated to the bench back in 1993 and she was nominated by then-president bill clinton and became the second woman to ever serve on the nations highest court. president clinton released a statement overnight saying her 27 years on the court exceeded his highest expectation. we're also hearing from those that worked with justice ginsburg including the chief justice of the supreme court, john roberts he put out a statement overnight also saying our nation has lost a historic stature we at the supreme court have lost a cherished colleague and while many lawmakers are eager to honor her career as you mentioned, neil there's already a lot of focus on the upcoming battle over choosing her replacement and among those eager to see a new replacement named soon texas senator ted cruz. >> i think it is tremendously important that not only does the nomination happen next week but that the confirmation happen before election day, because democrats and joe biden had made clear, they intend to challenge this election. they intend to fight the

legitimaticy of the election >> democrats plan to fight back though saying they don't leave that any nominee should be voted on until after the presidential election, so, voters can have their voices heard. as you can imagine a lot of people have been coming out here to the supreme court to pay their respect, you don't see anybody up here on the steps behind me that's because they have blocked that off for the public, but there is a growing memorial about 100 feet from where i am where people have been dropping off cards, candles signs people taking photos i saw one woman, neil sobbing at 4:00 a.m., certainly overwhelmed with emotion at the loss of this american icon. neil? neil: all right, thank you very very much for that, mark meredith by the way was interesting seeing ted cruz there he is on that list of 20 names that the president released a little more than a couple weeks ago, way ahead of anyone thinking that this day would happen so soon, with ruth bader ginsburg's passing. four other senators are on that list as well a host of circuit court of appeal judges and the like we'll get to that in a second. kevin corke from the white house

now, and what does the white house plan to do, kevin? reporter: neil good morning to you as you well know, the inevitibility of death hits us all and yet on rare occasions someone's passing they will anticipate it could still be quite surprising and indeed that appeared to be the case for a great number of americans after the passing of justice ruth bader ginsburg last night. yes she survived so much a cancer survivor and yet her passing last night really did hit so many americans very very hard. the president, who was speaking when word of her passing was revealed put out a statement, neil. it read in part, a fighter to the end. justice ginsburg battled cancer and other very long odds. throughout her remarkable life, our thoughts and prayers are with the ginsburg family, and their loved ones during this difficult time. may her memory be a great and magnificent blessing to the world. here is press secretary kayleigh mcenany. >> she paved the way and i remember you always paid a little bit closer attention when

it was a scalia descent and ginsburg descent these people just left their legacy on the court, ruth bader ginsburg notably going to law school, her husband gets cancer, she's raising a three-year-old on the law review, she really paved the way she's made a place in american history that will never be forgotten. >> kayleigh mcenany a harvard law graduate, ruth bader ginsburg also attended harvard law, before graduating from columbia. she was a legal foil, however, to the trump adminitration on a number of occasions and yet, in death, as in life, her fighting spirit is revered. as you can imagine, neil, it will not take long for the conversations to turn to speculation, as people do wonder , who might the president put forward to replace the late justice ginsburg. a list, as you pointed out, we've already seen, from which they will select, just who and when, remains to be seen. neil? neil: all right thank you my friend very much kevin corke at

the white house. very happy to have back with us chris scalia, of course the son i believe the second of nine children of of course the late justice scalia joins us right now. chris, i've caught your comments in talking about how your dad's relationship which was unusually tight with ruth bader ginsburg they were from different ends of the philosophical aisle but they respected each other, liked each other, kidded each other. that seems so alien now. what do you make of the environment in which a possible replacement now could come, to say the least? >> thanks for having me, neil it's always good to talk to you. i do need to clarify something though, i'm the second to last of nine. i don't want any confusion. neil: oh, i apologize. >> my brother gene would get really mad at me. neil: [laughter] >> but to answer your question,

yeah, their friendship was remarkable, and i think, because it just i think in a lot of ways its familiar because i think many people are close friends with people who think differently from them, but the fact that justice ginsburg and my father had such high profiles i think that's what kind of separated them from the relationships so many of us have, and i kind of hope it serves as a model for us, especially in what are sure to be pretty tense months ahead, that we can remain friends, good friends with people who see the world very differently from us, as long as we stay focused on without giving up our principles or what is really important to us, recognizing that, you know, that we have other things in common. there are other things to share with each other, and we should still value those friendships and cherish them.

neil: you know, i was thinking of your dad. i believe it was 98 nothing confirmation vote. probably would have gotten 100, two senators, you know, they were out at the time, so i'm just wondering in that environment, we're now in the latest case with justice kavanaugh was the 50-48 vote that went on a long time, these whole confirmation battles seem to be taking longer, they are averaging close to 70 days since 1975 they used to take anywhere from 35-40 before that, a lot less a century ago, before that so i'm just wondering is it just the times we live in now? >> i think a lot of it has to do with how people perceive the role of supreme court justice us. this is an argument my father made very often. one of the many ways he and justice ginsburg differed was that as far as judicial opinions went was that my father had kind of a more limited understanding of what a judge's interprative

role was and my father argued that as judges kind of gained more power, their confirmation hearings would become more [inaudible] neil: all right we're having some problems are we okay now can we go back? all right chris i apologize we had audio issues there, but one of the things i did want to pursue with you was this notion that it's a different world different environment now and there's a battle back and fourth as to the timing of when you can replace a supreme court justice. your father was caught in the middle of that sadly after his death some years back and i'm just wondering how he would view this issue, does the senate have to be the same as the president, does it matter because that's going to be the next debate. >> i don't know what his opinion be on that, and that's a pretty hot cake i don't feel equipped to respond to right now

i just expect some pretty tense months ahead and i think that, obviously, justice ginsburg as she said apparently doesn't want president trump to replace her and my father wouldn't have wanted a liberal justice to replace him, but you know, there's only so much control the justice us have over those situations unfortunately. neil: you know, your father was such a remarkable writer, as was justice ginsburg in the way they stressed their opinions, and i found it most alarming in your dad's case, his descenting opinion when he would speak out against what a court would rule as i was with ruth bader ginsburg. so, they were both towering intellectual forces and nothing against the other justice us so

each and his own way has a way with words and getting that opinion across but back to these divisive times no one appreciate s the left of that opinion and what backs it. it's either left or right. left or right, conservative or liberal. your dad would occasionally surprise ruth bader ginsburg about overreach or challenging those. she would deal with that, but it was never black and white, at least all the time, so that's changed a lot too hasn't it? >> yeah, i think that my father often delivered surprising opinions where he occasionally he sided with justice ginsburg especially on occasions that dealt with the right of the accused and issues of police search and seizure and i think that to a large degree kind of americans expect that of their justices to not kind of just

support the side of the president who appointed them and i think to a large degree that's what americans expect from their justices. neil: yeah and there were cases where justice ginsburg talked about the dangers of the government overreach, having said that i'm just curious now we talk about the tone, the ten or of the country and that this is going to come front and center, as supreme court nominations often do. i was going through the history of them, rarely are they all sweet and wonderful and even your dad got some confirmation hearings his way even with his unanimous acceptance so that's part of who we are. what do you think your father would say about where we go next that we still have robust debate s, i'm sure, but that we probably keep it in perspective, what do you think? >> yeah, i think that's right. again, he never thought that before he and justice ginsburg

were friends, they should pull their punches and their opinions , but they were when they disagreed with each other and their opinions they made that very clear. it wasn't personal though, they attacked each other's ideas, and i think that's how they were able to maintain that friendship , despite all the disagreement and, you know, in the months ahead i hope we're able to keep that same kind of perspective. we need to have a pretty robust discussion about what's ahead of us, but we need to keep the perspective of the fact that we're, for the most part, all we really care about the phase of the country and we have a lot in common despite all of the differences we're going to be expressing, and we should engage in the idea of the level of ideas. neil: i think you're right and i'm sorry if i offended your seven older siblings, so thank you very very much, chris. it's always good having you that's a big family. i don't know how you guys managed all that but you did

very very well. chris scalia on this , and his dad, it's possible that they can still get along and chat with each other essentially aggressively debate with each other, without getting nasty, without getting to the way things are today. we'll have more after this.

neil: all right we're getting a lot from both sides of the aisle what should be done in light of judge ruth bader ginsburg's passing, kamala harris, the runningmate for joe biden says make sure that president biden can appoint a justice to justice ginsburg's seat, president obama also weighing in saying a principal of law and every day fairness is that we apply rules with consistency not based on what is convenient at the moment the rule of law the legitimaticy of our courts

the fundamental workings of our democracy all depends on that as votes already being cast in the election republican senators are now called to apply that standard in which the former president is saying do not fill ginsburg's vacancy until after the election. the president has been tweeting as well that the most important consideration is this election of the u.s. supreme court justices talking about president and their obligations. we have this obligation without delay so clearly, he is going to put a name forward he had not too long ago put 20 additional names forward and they include at least five u.s. senators, whether he will pick from that expanded list, we don't know what it is, very very clear, that he is going to make a choice on this and as mitch mcconnell would say, they are going to act on that choice. regardless of the closeness to the election which is about 44

days away let's go to senator joe manchin of west virginia, democrat. how do you feel about that senator. we can do it now. we will start the process now. >> well neil i would just hope there's enough decency still left within the senate that we can honor and celebrate ruth bader ginsburg's life, her contributions to society to every woman and every young girl and every aspiring lady out there in the profession that she paved the way for them and she was a voice for the voiceless. i hope that we have enough decency to say can we not wait and celebrate and basically honor her until we lay her to rest and may her soul rest in peace and then get on with this challenge that we have in front of us? i just think it's wrong for any of us at this point in time to be weighing in while we should be honoring ruth bader ginsburg. neil: so if the president were to put a name forward and

obviously all of that be done post i know they are apparently private funeral service plans for the justice. i'm just wondering then how you would feel about proceeding after that moment, when four years ago in the case of barack obama, still 10 months out from stepping down from the white house, the republican senate under control of mitch mcconnell opted not to hear or go through a confirmation process at all for his justice choice. i'm just wondering how because apparently mitch mcconnell is. >> neil i was really ashamed of the senate for allowing that to happen and one of the finest individuals and one of the best jurists that we ever had before us and we've had great ones and not even to get

the consideration and the decency and civility of setting down and talking to him, when people refuse to even talk to the nominee, i hope we can get past that and that was a horrible mark, i think, on our history as far as selection of the supreme court justice. i just, it's going to be a horrific situation, and i would hope, i don't want to get involved in this debate until at least justice ginsburg and her family have had time to mourn and celebrate and reflect. i think there's a time for that and a time for healing and we'll get on with the business, although a disfunctional congress if you will but i'm hoping there's enough decency. i have good friend, neil unboots sides wonderful friends on the democrat and wonderful friends on the republican side which i get along and respect each and every one of them. i hope there's enough decency and fairness that we can come to an understanding later on and

i'm just hoping that we can give a little bit of time to honor justice ginsburg. neil: all right, senator joe manchin thank you very very much this as we're getting word from the senator in massachusetts he'll threaten to attack the supreme court on filibuster nc trump fills this seat, after this. .so we can spend a bit tod, knowing we're prepared for tomorrow. wow, do you think you overdid it maybe? overdid what? well planned, well invested, well protected. voya. be confident to and through retirement. (announcer) improve your health, and strengthen your immunity., starvation dieting, processed foods, shakes, and diet gimmicks have made us heavier and sicker. the solution for losing weight the right way is golo. we help transform your body and change your lifestyle, so you can lose weight and get healthier. over 20,000 people of all ages, and entire families, switch to golo every week, because golo works. golo is a unique approach to weight loss

that targets insulin resistance and body fat. insulin resistance makes it easy to gain weight and harder to lose it. golo is a patented system that uses natural plants and minerals, and sound nutrition to help your body convert fat to energy faster. so you'll lose weight while improving your health and immunity. join over 1 million people who found golo, a smarter way to lose weight. let golo help you lose weight and reach your health goals quickly. head to golo.com. that's golo.com.

neil: all right, senator joe manchin here just a little while ago saying can we at least find time to talk about the life and the legacy of ruth bader ginsburg, but watching it being what it is they are already talking about what happens next. we've heard from chuck schumer and quoting from his the american people should have a voice in the selection of their next supreme court justice , therefore vacancies should not be filled until we have a new president.

we've got the tweet from the president indicating that a selection could be coming and that that is his constitutional responsibility to do that, i'm paraphrasing that so he will continue with his process as will mitch mcconnell, who said that he would entertain doing that going through a confirmation no matter how close we are to the election. ed marky who just survived a primary battle with congressman kennedy has already threatened to pack the supreme court, abolish the filibuster as we know it, if the president tries to fill this seat right now. that there be a vendetta there and act on it, you know, with a new congress and of course, he hopes a new president, but that just sort of lays the ground work for what we're dealing with right now. these are very divisive times, each party very very forceful in arguing for republicans, that they have a republican president , they have a republican senate they will have that until at least january 20 of next year, and they will act on that. democrats saying just the

opposite. it's very very close to the election. you shouldn't be doing all of that and all of this in the middle of a race that will be decided what 44 day, griff jenkins right now following that with the president is going to be doing that with north carolina and this issue out of nowhere griff emerges ha? griff: yeah, neil good morning. you know this is the president's fourth visit this year to north carolina, the third in the last 30 days, and the president is going to be speaking to rally-go ers who are certainly well aware of the news, of the passing of justice ginsburg and in fact the president is just tweeting ahead of his visit down here. here is what the president tweet ed moments ago. at gop, we were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, and the most important of which has long-been considered to be the selection of the united states supreme court justices. we have this obligation without delay. now, this rally here won't happen until 6:30 tonight, neil but we went down on main street

in fayetteville. now remember, the president won north carolina by just over 3.5 points and he trails in the poll s by just about the same amount right now, we talked to the voters and said you know how important is this news of justice ginsburg going to be in terms of your decision, these two undecided voters weighed in here is what they had to say neil take a listen. >> i think possibly so, because it's such a politically-charged environment all right that people will still be entrenched in the way they are going to vote anyway but it could bring out more voters because of how substantial people consider the election. >> i think everything has implications in the election. i think we have to weigh everything, all around us. this is a whole new voting era, the coronavirus has changed our whole lives, so you have to weigh everything. it's so sad, in a way, because

you don't know how to vote. you try to vote for the issues, neither really covers everything , so it's hard but we have a choice to make. griff: meanwhile, joe biden is called a lid for the day, neil he won't have any events for the rest of this saturday but he did release a statement on ginsburg last night in which he says this. the voters should pick a president and that president should select a successor to justice ginsburg. this was the position that the republican senate took in 2016 when there were nearly nine months before the election. that is the position the united states senate must take now. we shall see and we're talking to some of the voters as well, neil about whether or not these voters here, obviously the rally to support president trump whether or not they think the president should move forward with nominating someone or actually wait out of respect we'll bring that to you in the next hour. neil? neil: all right, griff thank you

very very much griff jenkins a political fall out from all of this is in ever inevitably the case, lee carter following very very closely don peebles with us right now democratic fundraiser and donor. don i'll begin with you because a lot of people are saying mitch mcconnell is a double standard here he wouldn't allow barack obama to do this , 10 months before the election. his last year in office, why is he allowing this president, mitch mcconnell comes back and says well this is a party of the same, and the white house, and the distinction goes back to the 1880s where mcconnell says that was the way it went. your thoughts on this. >> well look first of all justice ginsburg was an amazing person and accomplished a great deal for the nation. i don't think that anybody is being inconsistent here in terms of the republican side. the reality is is that the party in power gets to make these decisions and up until january 20, has the right to

make these appointments and has the authority and the american people elected the president to conduct business for this country until january 20 and it's unlike barack obama, the democrats do not control the senate and could not move his nomination forward the republicans control the senate and those in power in congress make the rules and so i anticipate the president nominating a justice and that justice actually getting confirm ed because i think that the democrats are going to have a heck o of a time finding that fourth vote even if they lose ro nmi, and i think romni will have to step back and think because based upon that he can not accept the republican party and conservative back in court should trump lose the election but i think they should do it before the election. neil: you know, lee, it's not only mitt romney, republicans might have to worry about there are a host of others susan collins, lisa murkowski of alaska who have serious

reservations about this and a good man it of others who are up for election themselves, very tight election how is that going to influence things? >> it's going to influence things a lot. first and foremost america needs to take a moment and recognize the amazing accomplishment of this woman and mourn her loss no matter where you sit politically she's done amazing things for this country, for women and i just think that if we're going to make this too political too fast there's going to be a huge backlash on both sides, do the right thing and let's just honor her and that's the first statement i want to talk about. the second thing is i think it be smart for republicans to take a pause and slow down. if you look at what happened in 2016, there were many republican s who were unsure about what they were going to do with their vote with donald trump and they still voted for him, 70% said the number one reason they voted for donald trump was because of the supreme court and i think that that could actually tip it in their favor. neil: guys i know i'll have you back in the next hour so we'll explore this a little bit more.

to the point here and where mitch mcconnell is coming from he's saying since the 1880s no senate has confirmed opposite party president's court nominee in a presidential election year we should also point out that six presidents have indeed appointed justice us. we'll have more after this.

neil: all right with the death of judge ruth bader ginsburg of course the attention turns now to remembering her life, but in

this political environment right now, who replaces her on the highest court, of course this is happening in election year with a little more 40-plus states to go before election day and that is not totally unprecedented certainly when it comes to election year one-third of u.s. presidents i should point out appointed justices during presidential election years, six were appointed during lame duck sections if you can believe that so there is some precedent, so we have georgetown university law center dean. dean, very good to have you, play this out for me, the uniqueness of this year, not totally unprecedented but certainly given the volatile times, and the polarizing times, noteworthy just the same, what do you think? >> well actually, i think the senator put it very well. this is a time right now where we should be honoring the legacy of the justice, so you know, she was an extraordinary person, and

all of us are heartbroken, so i think for me, this is a time to reflect rather than to think about what lies ahead, but she was amazing. very much a part -- neil: she was indeed but she did have a perfect wish i guess she said that and quoted which that a new president would administer a replacement, so you can't pick and choose what a president does or which president does what, but she obviously hoped for that but there is the process, right? >> well she was somebody who had great faith, and believed that courts should defer to the political process and actually one of the things she did when she was on the court of appeals was she gave a speech that is very famous at the time that said that the court in roe vs. wade had moved too quickly, that while the decision was right it should have been narrow because

the court should have waited for the political process to reach an answer, and so what her last statement reflected the same faith in limited role for the court, and the need to defer to elections that she had said so long ago and that actually it was really quite striking because in a lot of ways that almost cost her the nomination for the supreme court, because a lot of women's groups, you know, felt that she was ambivalent about roe, but she had a real sense that the electoral process and democracy is at the center. neil: you know, she was a founder of this women's right project, that you're quite right back when she was associated with the aclu moving forward on this issue, there was a number of issues that many were advis ing bill clinton at the time not to nominate her to the high court and he did anyway and

she built a legal legacy looking at gender equality, civil rights and the like. it obviously depends on the president the moment and the time the issues that come up but they obviously didn't hurt her nomination back then, but we live in a far more polarizing world now, where they are tight as a tick and in the case of justice kavanaugh, it was a 50- 48 vote i believe injustice ginsburg's case only two voted against her, so what do you make of the timing of all of this? >> well again, i think it's a very different time from when she was nominated. one of the things though that is also one of her messages was the importance of people working together and reaching out to people from the other side. she was famously very close to

justice scalia. they vacationed together, they were super at the washington opera and there actually was an opera about the two of them, scalia and genentech and justice ginsburg often came back to george down law. her husband, marty was a beloved member of the faculty for many years and one thing that we forget about justice ginsburg is people focus on her as an advocate as a supreme court justice, but she was also a teacher, and herman it year, she was a teacher at rutgers and columbia before she went on the bench and one of the things she would say when she came and spoke which she did very often was the importance for respect ing people across the aisle and she talked about her friendship with justice scalia and while they disagreed about almost everything, they were able to establish a friendship based on respect, so i think that's another message

that the justice conveyed to our students, and it's important now , but again, i realize that we're at the height of the political season, but i think this is a moment that the senator put it very well. this is a moment to mourn somebody who was a giant in the law and both as an advocate and as a justice and you'll never see her like again. neil: dean thank you very very much, georgetown university law center, and to that point, on justice scalia would say himself , to justice ginsburg you'd never know looking at her five foot 1 100-pound frame she was such a force of nature, but she was, and then some, we'll have a little more after this. and it's made for her she's serving now we made it for all branches and all ranks

whether they served one tour or made a career of it. we also made usaa for military spouses and their kids usaa is easy to work with and can save you money on auto, home and renters insurance. become a member today. get an insurance quote at usaa.com/quote usaa. what you're made of we're made for she said it was like someone else was controlling her mouth. her doctor said she has tardive dyskinesia, which may be related to important medication she takes for her depression. td can affect different parts of the body. - [narrator] in today's trying times, we're here to help you manage td. visit talkabouttd.com for a doctor discussion guide to prep for your next appointment in person, over the phone, or online. - we were so relieved to learn there are treatments for td.

>> to have senators have their name on the ballot or solicitor

general have an assistant attorney general, there's a long history in our government of having supreme court justices who did not come up the ranks of just practicing law, and then sitting on lower courts and then going to the supreme court, and i think it would help to have that kind of perspective because one of the most fundamental qualifications for the court is to understand the difference between making the law and applying the law and too often, we have a group of nine unelected lawyers who want to make the law in accordance with their preferences and not allow our people whether in congress or the state legislatures through their elected representatives to make law for themselves. neil: all right that was not even two weeks ago when i was talking to senator tom cotton he's among at least three senators on that expanded list that the president put out who would consider supreme court justice justices, ted cruz is on that list, senator josh holly of missouri, but a list that also includes judge amy barrett, who

the president i should say placed on the court of appeals and a host of others but it is a mix of names already out there whether the president would glean from that anyone's guess but of course this is all the talk right now with the passing of ruth bader ginsburg, and it is inevitable that both sides start to get in the heated argument about the timing of this , and the aggressive back and forth, so soon, after her passing. mark meredith outside the u.s. supreme court with more on all of it. >> neil president trump put out a list of potential picks during the last campaign and since then that list has grown quite a bit and of course whoever the president does put on this list is going to be somewhat controversial at least for the other side so we have seen that the possibility of this list has grown and the possibility of protests over decision to nominate a new justice weeks before the election. now the latest list from the president, neil as you mentioned includes three sitting gop senators tom cotton of arkansas, ted cruz of texts a and josh holly of missouri, but we just started going a little bit off the alphabetical the

start of the list you have people like amy barrett, the u.s. court of appeals and former clerk to supreme court justice scalia people lake bridgette bay, a judge for the ninth circuit and keith blackwell, a justice on the georgia supreme court, and also served on got gary cohen court of appeals and the deputy special attorney general in the state of georgia and there's a lot of names on that list, not time to go through each one but what is interesting to see the contrast between the president as well as joe biden, because joe biden has not released a list of his own, however, he has hinted about what he's looking for in a potential supreme court pick. listen to what biden had to say back in june. >> we're putting together a list of group of african american woman who are qualified and have the experience to be in the court and i'm not going to release that until we go further down the line of vetting them as well. reporter: now, of course, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell

said that he intends to hold a senate floor vote on president trump's nominee, still unclear exactly when we are going to see that nomination put forward the president putting out a tweet earlier indicating the republicans have a responsibility to go forward because they remain right now the senate majority. democrats insist this not the right time to go through with this , with the presidential election loom ing, neil the battle you can expect politically here in washington is going to be massive. we haven't seen any protests outside of the supreme court right now it's only people coming here to pay respects for those protests are coming right here to the nations capitol. neil? neil: indeed, mark thank you. i know you've been there since dawn so thank you and great reporting and updating mark meredith, the u.s. supreme court to that end we're just getting word that senate democrats are planning on having a 1:00 p.m. conference call, so a little bit more than two hours from now, to discuss how to handle the supreme court vacancy after justice ginsburg's death. we've already heard from chuck

schumer, the senate democratic leader says the american people should have a voice in this election of their next supreme court justice, therefore , this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president. barack obama saying pretty much the same thing. in fact exactly the same thing. we'll have more, after this. oscar the grouch here to tell you, yeah, you,

to wear a mask out in public around other people. sure it'll keep you healthy. but more importantly, i won't have to see your happy smiling face. ugh. and if you don't want to wear a mask, i've just got one thing to tell you. scram, go away. ugh. caring for each other because we are all in this together. so wear a mask and have a rotten day, will ya? ugh.

neil: all right, welcome back everybody. the scene outside the united states supreme court many hundreds are coming to pay their respects in the memory of ruth bader ginsburg who passed away yesterday at the age of 87. she had battled so much and so many bouts with cancer finally, a return of pancreatic cancer, took its toll and took her life, and now, of course, they remember her, and in the heated

political environment the focus on who will replace her, and i was surprised to learn, thanks to some insight from you, many many, you know, supreme court nominations have occurred not only during election years, but six lame duck presidents were involve in the middle of them, most of them getting their nominees across regardless of their successors, so, there's some crazy precedent, ha? >> well it is hard for a president to get a justice through in an election year, if he doesn't control the senate. if his party controls the senate that's a different story, and that was the basis of the dispute in 2016. neil, you and i had a good discussion on merit garland in 2016 and -- neil: i remember. the point was that senator mcconnell was making is that as long as president obama

started with a 71% approval rating it had dropped down to 38 %, and he had lost control of the senate so therefore, mitch mcconnell said we ought to wait and let the voters decide and i will not put forth merit garland as a nominee. this time, senator mcconnell is saying look president trump has gained in the senate. 2018 represented an increase in the republican control of the senate, and it's an election year and he has control of the senate, so i will put forward his nominee. neil: you know, there was a great editorial in the wall street journal about this where they rouse over that controversy some four years ago and they raise that issue with chuck schumer. does anyone who has ever met mr. schumer think that he wouldn't insist on a confirmation vote now if he were majority leader and there were democratic president? it's a good point. what do you think? >> absolutely it's a good point you made a point four years ago

when we discussed this , you thought you were making at least suggesting the argument that merit garland, we should put him fourth and see what his credentials are are and he should get some kind of hearing. i thought of that yesterday when this came about i thought it's probably important for president trump to make a nominee right away because then, the issue is not should he do it but what are the qualifications of the nominee he is putting forth which was the argument you made four years ago, which i thought was an interesting one. neil: well, then i was just thinking up or down vote or give it a try, but of course that was right now, do you think we will have a nominee made before inauguration day? >> i think there's a good chance we will. senator cruz made an excellent point that we need to give another justice on the court, because the election is likely to be contested. back in 2000 when we had a contested presidential election

and it wasn't clear who really, the supreme court had to decide by a 5-4 margin, in favor of president bush, and if you don't have nine justices, you may not get a majority. neil: burt, thank you we'll have more after this. ...

>> all right. the scene outside the u.s. supreme court. i want to take a look at that here because people have been sort of driven over there of their own sense of loss, the passion, and remembering ruth bader ginsburg to passed away at 87 yesterday. 27 years on the court. and people remember, of course, the gender equality, civil rights, all the things she did before that. the first woman on the editorial staff of the harvard law review. founder of the a.c.l.u.'s

women's rights project many thought would get in the way of bill clinton appointing her to the supreme court or making the nomination. she got through, only three voted against her 96-3 back then. oh, for those days, right? and to think about what happens after this, ginsburg herself had said that her fervent wish was not to be replaced until a new president could do that. this president said he's going to move quickly for a replacement and therein lies the battle royale, for many members who sit on the judicial committee, a good number of republicans, they're up for election themselves. and following that drama and where this one goes right now. hey, chad. >> neil, good morning. this is going to hinge on two things, timing and the math. how quickly can they advance the supreme court nominee and

would that nominee have the votes? let me do a breakdown for you. this is going to get kind of complex. it takes an average of 40 to 45 days for a supreme court nominee once they've been picked to get a hearing and then about 67 to 71 days for confirmation, that means confirming someone before the election will be tough. supreme court nominees often spend weeks making the rounds on capitol hill meeting senators and since this is a lifetime appointment, there's a thorough vetting process. 53 republicans to 47 senators who caucus with the democrats. republicans can only lose two, and the vice-president has never broke and tie to confirm a justice. and senate majority leader mcconnell says they will confirm a nominee. if you're asking me a hypothetical whether this senate would appoint someone to the supreme court for november

of this year, we would fill it. >> and they never allowed merrick garland. and democrats think they lost a seat after the way that mcconnell handled merrick garland. he said he would never do it. and he says it's a senate rolled by the republican parties, and president trump is a republican and therefore it's okay to forge ahead. the 45 day threshold before the election, 40 to 45 days, it hard to believe they could vet somebody and get them through and keep in mind, sometimes we have certain nominees who spill off the tracks. harriet meyer nominated by president george w. bush, she

withdrew. robert borque was defeated and after robert borque you had ginsburg, another ginsburg, he was nominated and he had to withdraw, which is how they wound up with justice anthony kennedy. back to you. neil: you know, chad, i know about the distinction that mitch mcconnell has made, the senate when one party controls the white house and all that. he didn't say that to my memory four years ago and he has handed a statement that no senate since 1880's has confirmed an opposite president supreme court nominee in a presidential election year, but i didn't believe that was the point four years ago or did i miss something? >> that's right, and that's where some people are saying, wait a minute, this is kind of changing the rules, expost facto and something that mitch mcconnell talked about, the biden rule, and the biden rule wasn't something that was written down, just something that mcconnell came up with. that joe biden when he was a

senator in the late '80s, they should not allow a nominee to go through in an election year and kind of what they based this on. again, confirming somebody is going to be really tough. that math is narrow and we already have susan collins from maine who suggested in an interview it was getting late to put somebody through and lisa murkowski from alaska, she would be reluctant before the inauguration. air down to 51 there if they hold true to those statements and mitt romney you're to look for, and down to 50-50 if you lose one more and it would be extraordinary to have a supreme court justice confirmed by the vice-president, especially if it's going to flip after the election or conceivably the president would be a lame duck, that's possible. >> the assumption is that all democrats would vote against. that's possibly not the case in alabama, right? all bets are off, we don't know. >> doug jones, the moderate senator from alabama, democrat

who has probably the toughest race for any democrat on the board, i will say that at 1:00 eastern time today you're going to have a democratic conference call where they're going to decide their strategy. again, you know, they're fuming after what happened with merrick garland. dianne feinstein, the top democrat on the committee said last night under no circumstances based on the merrick garland precedent should they try to move a nominee right now. just think, neil, how toxic that environment was on capitol hill with brett kavanaugh in 2018 especially allegations came out with christine ford, if you think that was bad, we're in for a tough, tough road. >> i heard one that said mary theresa couldn't get through in this environment. thank you very much. i want to go to senator

loeffler. some of your colleagues are leery of doing and susan collins from maine. >> look, my thoughts are with the family of justice ginsburg, but look, the constitution allows this process to keep moving forward and the president has every right to nominate someone and leader mcconnell has said that we will have a vote on the senate floor on this and i completely support that. we need to bring forward a conservative justice, someone who will be a strict constructionist who will protect innocent life, who will bring the second amendment cases and making sure we're protecting our right to bear arms in this country and we need to keep the process moving regardless of it being an election year. neil: i know, it's sort of guessing, senator, so i apologize in advance, but i do know democrats are going to be meeting at 1 p.m. to sort of straegize on this. are there similar meetings for

republican colleagues, strategizing how they deal with it, how you'll deal with it. >> i think senator mcconnell is clear that there will be a vote on the floor of the senate. this is an important part of our constitution following the law not being i am -- intimidated, but those on the left and threatening violence, you see on social media. we need to make sure the country has the constitutionalist on the supreme court and that's what i'm pushing for and so many of my colleagues. neil: how much of an election year do you suspect this will be? many talk about this defending the race and front and center, people who voted on donald trump based on notion that he was going to pick a conservative justice, little did they know he would be picking two, possibly three. many on the left worry about that and just as galvanizing for them to prevent him from doing this. where does this issue stack up

compared to the economy, compared to the progression of the virus and how that's going and all of that? >> this issue is significant, it's why we have to keep the senate majority in republican hands, it's why we have to reelect the president for four more years, this is what's at stake. it's the future of our country. it's the future of our children. and look, this is an election year issue that is just as big as the economy, as the virus, and you can see stark differences, a huge contrast in the approach that would be taken by the republican party versus the liberals that want to tear our country apart, that don't respect our constitution, our rights, they don't believe in our way of life today, they want to radically change our country. that's why it's vitally important that we keep the senate and reelect president trump. >> all right. senator, thank you very, very much. i appreciate you taking the time on a saturday no less. senator kelly loeffler. we're looking at some of the

senate republicans who might be under pressure not to take this up. besides lisa murkowski and susan collins of maine. and the timing of this, that doesn't mean that the former judiciary committee chief is against it and raised lindsey graham who chairs the committee has in the past, this would be bad timing. don't know his latest views on on this subject and mitt romney, it's not a sure thing, or that republicans would go along. the senate leader, mitch mcconnell has essentially sent a message to all of those, keep your powder dry. just keep your powder dry. more after this.

>> all right. ruth bader ginsburg being remembered now by a country that marvelled at her legal mind. i'm no expert on these matters, but i did like to read her

dissenting opinions sometimes because they were barn burners. but she was a brilliant writer. antonin scalia as well. no wonder they were close friends. and judge napolitano another brilliant legal mind. i don't have your legal bones here, but one thing i noticed in reading many of her opinions, how passionate and brilliant they were laid out, whether you agreed or disagreed, you could say, man, that's a convincing argument and i'm wondering, i mean, that's something that's in sort supply pretty much anywhere today. what do you think? >> good morning, neil. it's always a pleasure to be with you. sometimes judges write using arcane language, as if they're only writing for her judges and legal scholars, and sometimes judges write in plain english so that almost anyone can understand what they're talking about. both justice ginsburg and

justice scalia were in the latt latter category. they viewed the constitution in exact opposite ways, to justice scalia, the constitution was an instrument of restraint, to restrain the court and to restrain the government. to justice ginsburg the constitution was an instrument of change, to change the government and to change the culture so as to make it more fair to more people. interestingly, even though they looked at this document in exactly the opposite ways, justice scalia said it means today what it meant in 1789. justice ginsburg said it means today whatever we say it means. they sometimes ended up on the same page and sometimes agreed with each other. >> judge, while i have you, we're getting word of a short lit, apparently from that long list that the president had when he added 20 names including a few u.s. senators, but particular tension, you hear mentioned quite a bit is

judge amy coney barrett, who the president placed on the circuit court and another appeals court judge, barbara lagoa, a cuban-american. your quick thoughts on both? >> both are the type of human being that president donald trump promised from before he was president. pro-life, pro second amendment. very justice scalia-like in believing that the constitution is an instrument of restraint. clearly in the scalia camp. i don't know if they'll be confirmed. the last conversation you had with chad, nobody knows more than the congress, nobody on the planet, than chad, indicates that's going to be difficult even if it were mother teresa, but in terms-- which it can't be. but in terms of complying with his promises and delivering to his base, either of those nominees would do that for the president. neil: you know, we talk about

these vulnerable republicans running for reelection, and this has already become an issue over a kavanaugh vote for susan collins in maine and why she might be leary of this process for now, but it's not a given you'll have every republican on board and she could ultimately vote against a presidential pick, regardless. and the number of other republican leaders, murkowski of alaska, and probably chuck grassley to used to chair the judiciary committee. then you've got to look at the possibility if they can't keep it to three, three who peel off to protect the vice-president being the tying vote. can they pick up any democrats, regardless. it's going to be a tortured process isn't it? >> tip o'neil once said all politics is local. i think this year might be an exception. i think the senate races are going to be national and this is going to be the issue and justice scalia once said

there's only reason why politicians vote the way they vote is to get reelected. and without impugning anyone the so-called vulnerable six republicans, we know who they are, they'll do what the polls tell. if they think a nomination would help them get reelected, they'll do it. if they thought that forcing a vote would cause the democrats to take the senate they won't do it. we won't know what the polls say for probably a couple of days. >> you know, judge, let's say the president chooses someone and someone soon and he indicated that he's going to move on this. and mitch mcconnell said he's going to act on this and others raising concerns in the republican party. maybe they keep their powder dry. what if we get to election day and we haven't decided on this and then you're into a lame duck session.

know there have been one or two in the session. how do you think this plays out? >> well, if donald trump is reelected, i don't think it matters if he elects someone in the lame duck session. if joe biden is elected and the president nominates somebody in the lame duck session, you'll see extraordinary pressure for this vote coming to pass. trump is a tough day, he's going to do whatever he wants to do, for his reelection bid or believes this person, he or she may be ought to be on the court, but as chad said, the confirmation hearings for then judge, now justice kavanaugh will probably pale compared to what we can expect this time around. because this is a game changer. ruth bader ginsburg is a -- was a liberal progressive democrats from the liberal wing of the democratic party, if you know what i mean.

president trump is going to appoint someone who will be her polar opposite. that will significantly and substantially change the outcome of 5-4 votes on hot button issues like obamacare, second amendment, and abortion. neil: you are right and then some. judge, thank you very much. judge andrew napolitano. we'll be exploring that. in the meantime we have eight supreme court justicesment can you imagine if we had any controversi controversies with the election and as in the 2000 election, if a 4-4 court if it ever came to be, then what do we do? all of this comes up right now in light of the death after iconic justice after this.

♪ >> you know, much has been made of the relationship between justice ruth bader ginsburg and the late justice antonin scalia. opposite minds of the legal thinking tracks here, but there was another special relationship that the liberal justice had with the conservative clarence thomas, that's a unique angle that you don't here much about. a former clerk to the supreme court justice clarence thomas and we don't hear much about that, but they had a special bond, didn't they? >> you know, justice thomas is really someone who likes to get along well with his colleagues and justice ginsburg as we heard did as well. when you're serving for a life tenure you know you're probably going to spend the rest of your life with these people and

there's no benefit in creating hostility and negative i want their vote later. ginsburg and thomas weren't trading votes very often, right, but you can still be friends with someone even while you disagree with them and that's something that was really beautiful about seeing the relationships on the court. neil: did they try to win over the other even on important ski decisions especially on the 5-4? what was it like? >> what a lot of people don't realize is practicically speaking there are cases unanimous, 40% or higher. and we hear on 5-4 decisions. practically speaking, justicings, particularly ginsburg and thomas are almost never going to see eye to eye. every once in a while, but the

high profile cases less so. there was grounds for agreement for members. court we look at the big one and we get exorcized about them. >> one thing that i remember about justice ginsburg, she would make her decisions known and a query would come before the court ap she almost spoke up. justice thomas almost never. how did that go down? how did other justices react to this dichotomy? >> well, you know, justice thomas has long said he feels the justices need to do a little more listening and not talking. when justice thomas had come on the court it wasn't where you interrupted each other all the time. and he felt maybe you listen to

the litigants. >> and what happened in the covid world and we've had justice thomas speaking a lot more. an organized system where the chief justice will go down by order of seniority and he and justice ginsburg were there in terms of seniority, two years apart when they came on the court. you're taking turns and not just interrupting each other on what i think he felt was a not helpful insight into the case. neil: he, of course, justice thomas, a very divisive court hearing and confirmation process, remember the whole anita hill thing and all of that. a different time, obviously. much earlier for justice ginsburg, in fact, now it's more common for these divisive battles and confirmation votes. where do you see it going? >> after thomas was confirmed in 1991, maybe it was partly because people didn't want to go down that route and ginsburg

even though she was known to be very liberal was only unanimously confirmed and only three negative votes. not that she said this and that, but 60 different questions she said i can't talk about that, i can't predict what i would do in a particular case. it was a different world and during the kavanaugh confirmation, she was v criticizing the kavanaugh confirmation process, she said the way it was is how would be, and she wanted to go back to a more civilized confirmation process like she herself had. neil: i believe that judge kavanaugh remarked after he was on the court the one who treated him the nicest and open to reaching out to him was justice ginsburg. i'm just wondering, we're going to have a 4-4 court for a while

here, don't know how long, that could be problematic the longer it goes on, right? >> well, yeah, anytime there's a 4-4 court there's a chance that decisions and maybe even important decisions are tied. that happened when justice scalia left the court. not as often as you think, only a handful of cases when that happened and sometimes the court can hold them over and hear them again if they feel they need a decision. if it's 4-4, the decision below defaults and it depends on the urgency of the decisions. obviously you don't want to be sitting around with a 4-4 court, especially in an election year when there are potentially very important issues and very time sensitive issues that could be discussed by the court. neil: you're right. i did not know that about the 40% of unanimous decisions. you're right, we're so focused on the fights that we don't focus on most the time there are no fights.

the former clerk to the supreme court justice clarence thomas. thanks for reminders all very, very much. we're following the developments on the campaign trail because this suddenly becomes a campaign issue as it already has. and the president will be in north carolina, the vice-president, former vice-president has spoken out, he believes no decision should be made until the american people decide on a president and that president that makes the choice. we shall see. the battle is on. more after this.

>> all right. the president's already made clear, mitch mcconnell has made clear that they may replace ruth bader ginsburg unlike what barack obama and joe biden have said. a fundraiser and donor, the argument, mitch mcconnell doesn't do four years ago with barack obama, an election year, you don't do it and he since clarified it's the party in power. anyway, it's on. how big of an issue do you think it gets to be for joe biden? >> well, i think first of all, mitch mcconnell did not do his job in the senate the last time around. barack obama did nominate and he was constitutionally

obligated to do. donald trump, as president, an obligated to fill this seat. he needs to make the nomination and mitch mcconnell will move it and that is what he should do. two wrongs don't make a right. the party out of power of course wants to put the brakes on and if they have the power in the legislative branch they'll do it as mitch mcconnell did. in this instance you have a republican president, republican senate majority and i believe that president trump will nominate a nominee shortly and that nominee will move through the senate. and i don't think, and i've heard your viewers talk about this, i don't think that the democrat will find more than three. and i think there will be hell to pay if mitt romney votes against an acceptable conservative nominee when he gets ready to run for reelection, too. he's a politician, too, and has to face the voters. the voters elected this

government to go until january 1, 2021 the. >> the guy that runs the judiciary committee, lindsey graham, that's neither here nor there. lee. i want to know who this galvanizes more. the big part why so many flocked to donald trump four years ago that he had a list out there of potential names he'd consider. i wonder whether that passion supercedes some of the other issues that come up conversely for joe biden. a lot of his supporters don't share the same passion that donald trump supporters do for him, but they might be galvanized by an issue like this. so, for whom does it bring out the vote more, do you think? . you know, it's a really, really good question because before ruth bader ginsburg died, this was a very important issue to voters. it was more important to democrats than to republicans in the last poll i saw 60% of

importance to democrats and about 48% to republicans. i think that's going to change now because we're looking at a court now that's 4-4. and so, whoever wins this election, whoever is able to appoint this, this is the way the court is going to be and that's just not four to six years, this is a generation, a longlasting important decision and one, i think that galvanizes both sides. i think that democrats in this moment are very, very motivated and i think that if donald trump does not get a candidate, you know, does not get a nominee, does not get somebody appointed before the election, this is absolutely going to motivate republicans and a lot of republicans who are never-trumpers are going to say i'll vote that way because the supreme court is very important to me. those issues are important. when you look at exit polls in 2016, 70% of voters say they voted the way they did because of the supreme court and a similar situation. and i think this could motivate some of the republicans who are

thinking that they could never vote for trump because of this issue. neil: that's interesting. you know, we know that while joe biden has not put out a list of his own candidates to consider for the supreme court, he has said and often, that he'd be looking for an african-american woman, you know, almost as limited as his vice-presidential search where he was looking for a woman and then limit it to african-american women, we're told. what do you think he'll be under increasing pressure to put out a possible list of names? >> i'm very disappointed at the way he prefaces this. the reality is you pick the most qualified nominee and you look at a diverse pool of candidates. if that candidate is an african-american woman, great. but she comes to the evasion deemed among the most qualified candidate period not the most

qualified black candidate. he needs to look at people based on their substantial, but i think he's using these actions, the same thing with the vice-president, is to try to gain political, you know, favor within a constituency that is not moved by him and that he has a real issue with black voters. i mean, i don't think that anybody focused on this. 1994 crime bill is being talked about online constantly by african-americans saying, how can this man come to us for our vote now after locking up so many millions of black men in 1994 with this ridiculous crime bill. and so i think he's trying to do these types of things to address, you know, a very big crack in his armor when it comes to black voters, in terms of black voter enthusiasm. neil: lee carter, the issue comes up with the president might veer toward a woman for this job. what do you think? >> i think that would make sense, there's many qualified

women i know he has already talked about when he was talking about for justice kavanaugh, many qualified women out there. there's an issue where there are many qualified candidates and there's a diverse pool and pick the best one for the job. joe biden is in an interesting position. only a third of americans feel like they understand what joe biden's america looks like so i think that joe biden would be very smart to talk about the type of person he'd be looking at and even a slate he'd look at as well. i think weetd we'd want to see a range of folks with different opinions and transparency how president trump and joe biden is thinking about the type of people they are going to put on the supreme court is very, very important to the american people. neil: lee carter, final word. don, want to thank you as well. they both touched on the notion this is galvanizing interest on either side. one interesting statistic,

there's a group called act blue that pushes for democrats to do well in november. within an hour of hearing on the death of the ruth bader ginsburg, 6.2 million dollar was raised online for democratic donors, that was a record. it was broken in the next hour 10 p.m. when 6.3 million dollar was raised. that's passion. that's money. that's politics.

looks like they picked the wrong getaway driver. they're going to be paying for this for a long time.

they will, but with accident forgiveness allstate won't raise your rates just because of an accident, even if it's your fault. cut! sonny. was that good? line! the desert never lies. isn't that what i said? no you were talking about allstate and insurance. i just... when i... let's try again. everybody back to one. accident forgiveness from allstate. click or call for a quote today. >> all right. the president indicates the battle is on to find a replacement for ruth bader ginsburg who passed away at age 87 yesterday. democrats just as passionate saying all of this should wait until after the election. we've told you about the money that's being raised by, you know, democratic groups and others online as a result of this and it's some records being touted here just as passionate on the right. charlie gasperino on the fund

raising that could pick up steam because of that. what are you hearing? >> it most certainly will. what i have now is particularly now that the president and mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader has signaled, they want to have -- they want to replace ginsburg and not wait until after the election, this sort of reinforces the notion on the democratic side that at least that's the early read i'm getting just making some calls here, that trump needs to be replaced and they need to ramp up fund raising efforts and they're going to raise a lot of money on this. obviously, legally, the president could do whatever he wants to. there's a republican in congress, republican-led congress, he's the president, he gets to pick, they need 50 votes. they probably have at least 50 votes. you know, mike pence could be the tie breaker. so, this is probably a done deal. i think things could get really ugly in different ways though,

particularly if they do this in a lame duck session. you know, that's also the read i'm getting that, you know, if they really -- if they don't do this while he's president, if they do this, particularly if the democrats win the senate and biden wins, people are talking like, this is going to be -- i mean, we've gone through six months of social unrest, i mean, we could see a really difficult situation here. so, i think some of the talk i'm getting from some of my sources who are republicans, they work on wall street. what does wall street care about this? it is the supreme court, it does have a huge business implication and wall street hires all sorts of political experts to try to figure stuff out. but so they are following this and the thing that i keep hearing, if they don't do this soon and particularly if trump loses and the senate goes

democrat, they could be playing with fire, you know, given what we've been through. so, my guess is mitch mcconnell knows that and so does the president and at least according to my wall street sources, they're going to probably do this before the election, do it faster rather than slower. neil: do you think a lot of the money guys are looking to either democrats or republicans and now see this as a galvanizing issue to raise money, not so much what was lappi lapping-- happening on the virus and the law and ford things of this could become a big sort of way to raise dough? >> yeah, i mean, listen, there were certain issues that this election hinged on, at least that's what they're telling me and the virus was one, the economy was one. this may eclipse all those because what we're talking about here is, you know, we're in an election year. you have a whole merrick garland, i guess, precedent where president obama wanted to

put up merrick garland and mitch mcconnell said no. it it's not quite the same because the republicans controlled the senate back then and they now control the senate and the presidency. if they get to pick the next supreme court justice it goes 6-3 conservative. another thing i'm sure that mitch mcconnell is thinking about in the back of his mind saying we may lose the presidency, may lose the senate majority, but we could score big here for conservative and free market principles if we pack the courts. i mean, he's definitely anything that and that's why i think that's another motivation factor for this to get this thing done fast and do it. so, it's going to be -- neil, we've gone through such rough times, social unrest in the last six months, you know, you get the feeling that this is

like one of those issues that touches off even more. so it's going to be interesting to cover. neil: to put it mildly. thank you very much. charlie gasperino, and mitch mcconne mcconnell back home, on this. the and there was vaccines and immediately put thoughts in doctor's mind and said, wait a minute, are you making people unsure if a vaccine were to come out early they shouldn't take it? did joe biden goof on that? after this. - i didn't know why my body was moving on its own.

it turns out i have tardive dyskinesia, a condition that may be related to important medications i take for my bipolar disorder. tardive dyskinesia can affect different parts of the body. it may also affect people who take medication for depression and schizophrenia. - [narrator] in today's trying times, we're here to help you manage td. visit talkabouttd.com for a doctor discussion guide to prep for your next appointment in person, over the phone, or online. - it's a relief to know there are treatments for td.

>> the vaccines likely to be approved so far are start off

with a group of 10,000 doses, all the way to 60,000 doses. well, you know, there are millions of people. it's going to take-- and then you get up to several million, but it takes time is what i'm saying and it has to be done fairly and well. it can't be based on your tax returns, figuratively speaking. it's got to be based on who is most vulnerable. neil: well, that seemed like a cheap shot, was joe biden saying that well, once the vaccine is out there it's only going to be distributed to those with means? that flies in the face of guidelines that pretty much all the mainly drug companies are working on the vaccine as well as the f.d.a. and c.d.c., goes to health care workers, elderly, those most vulnerable to this. anyway, chris murray is with us right now. the director at the institute for health metrics and evaluation. the director, very good to have

you. i thought that was a little surprising to assume that the medical pros had already decide today dole any any vaccine based on someone's tax returns or not. could you disavow us of that notion? >> well, i think that the first thing, we need to get through the phase three trials and see the results, and be sure that a vaccine, you know, is beneficial, and how beneficial it is. and you know, when we cross that hurdle and i'm sure everybody's going to be focused on getting the vaccine to those who are most in need. who are going to be benefit the most from the vaccine. >> the former vice-president, doctor, seemed to intimate the syming timing of all of this, politically motivated, before election day, and raised concerns, a lot of people, maybe i shouldn't take it,

maybe there's something sinister afoot. explain the process and how it goes. >> well, for many years we have very clear criteria for figuring out whether a new drug or a vaccine works and it's a series of studies that get done, what's called the phase two studies are to make sure it's safe to give to a larger group and then what's called the phase three study where you actually randomly assign two different groups getting it or not and compare, what was the coronavirus or covid-19 between the two groups and figure out whether the vaccine has a benefit and how big that benefit is. once that's done, then the producer of the vaccine goes to the f.d.a. with that evidence and they review it to see if it met their thresholds for being convincing. neil: do you believe -- i mean,

there's an effort as soon as the vaccine is added, might be several to your point, that it could get out in the public's hands by the middle of next year, spring of next year? >> you know, i think the scientific community sees that there are many vaccine candidates out there already being studied. i mean, in some cases people are out, in the case of the russian and the chinese vaccine, distribute vaccines that haven't yet gun through the careful evaluation and don't know really what they do. there are many candidates, everyone is hopeful that there will be vaccines that are reasonably effective coming soon and then there's a whole question of scaling up production, so i think as we model the epidemic, as we look to the winter surge that's coming, we don't think a vaccine is going to change that winter surge until the late first quarter. neil: all right.

we'll see what happens. doctor chris murray, thank you very much. reminder, with this coming out and with smart doctors, working on it, if one comes out, fear not.

♪ # >> noon eastern here in the nation's capital as we look on the right side of your screen at the u.s. supreme court as there's a solemn tribute growing. people have left flowers, cards and momentos as they come by this weekend to remember the life of justice ruth bader ginsburg. she passed away last night at the age of 87. welcome to america's news headquarters. i'm leland vittert in washington, hi. >> hi, i'm alicia acuna in denver. the first tributes