07/10/18 07/10/18 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] amy: from pacifica, this is democracy now! pres. trump: tonight, it is my honor and privilege to announce that i will nominate judge brett kavanaugh to the united states supreme court. amy: in a move to dramatically shift the supreme court to the right, president trump has nominated federal judge brbrett kavanaugh to fill anthony kennedy's seat on the high court. will president trump succeed in his campmpaign promise of

overturning roe v. wade? >> do you want the court, including the justices that you will name, to overturn roe v. wade, which includes, in fact states, a woman's right toto abortion? another two or perhaps threree justices on, tht is really what -- that will happen. that will happen automatically, in my opinion, because i'm putting pro-life justices on the court. amy: we will take an in-depth look at the kavanaugh nomination the round table of guests, including former planned parenthood president cecile richards. >> enormous concern is is a judicial nominee who was chosen not for his temperament, not for his experience, but because he was checked and approved by the federal society, an organization that is supported the overturn of roe v. wade. amy: all that and more, coming up. welcome to democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman.

president trump has nominated federal judge brett kavanaugh to replace retiring supreme court justice anthony kennedy. if kavanaugh is confirmed, it would create a bloc of five right-wing justices, making it the most conservative supreme court since the 1930's. critics warn this could lead to major rollbacks of c civil r ri, environmentatal regulations,unun control measures, voting rights, anand reproductive rights, including the overturning of roe v. wade.e. this is supreme e court nomineee judge brett kavanaugh speaking monday night. >> my judicial philosophy is straightforward. a judge must be independent. must interpret the law, not make the law. a judge must interpret statutes as writttten. a judge must interpret the constitution as written. informed by history and .radition and precedent

they make a we will host a roundtable discussion on brett kavanaugh after headlines. in immigration news, the trump administration will not meet today's deadline to rereunite al migrant t children under the a e of immmmigration officials took five from their parents at the border and then sent to jails and detention centers across the country. the justice e department says st will reunite onlnly about half f the morere than 100 migrant children under five today y aftr a federal judginin san diegogo agreed to o extend the deaeadlie mandatating the reunifificationf all of thehe youngest childrdre. today's secretive reunification operation will be overseen by the department of homeland security and will involve transporting the children hundreds of miles across the country to undisclosed locations. in tototal, about 3000 children are still separated from their parents. meanwhile, federal judge dolly gee in los angeles dealt a major blow to the trump administration's efforts to indefinitely jail migrant families, including asylum seekekers. she ruled the trump administration cannot amend the

1997 flores agreement, which says children cannot be jailed for more than 20 days. all this comes as pro-immigration protests continue nationwide, including in ohio, where 12 actiststs we arrested blockadg g an office ef ice, the iigigration and cusms enfoement agcy. presidt trump flying brsels tod for theato mmit. thousas rallieover the weekd in bruels to oose tru's vit, many rrying banns readin"pro-ameca, antirump" an"make pee greaagain." tuesd's oping of t nato summit ces as brish prim minier there may's conservative party is in crisis after two top officials, foreign secretary boris johnson and brexit secretary david davis, resigned in less than 24 hours. in east africa, the historic peace effort between ethiopia and eritrea continued monday, with the leaders of the two

countrieies signing a "j"joint declaration of peace and friendship" and declaring an end to the nearly two-decades-long state of war. from 1998-2000, ethiopia and eritrea fought a border war in which 70,000 people were killed. since then, ongoing border disputes have kept the two countries in a statate off conflictct. this is u.n. secretary general antonio guterres, celebrating the news of the landmark declaration. it is a very important not only for the two countries, but for the whole world. amy: in afghanistan, a suicide bomb attack in the eastern city of jalalabad has killed at least 19 people, including 10 sikhs. at least 20 more people were wounded in the bombing, which came only hours after afghan president ashraf ghani inaugurated a hospital in jalalabad. no group has claimed responsibility so far. in burma, two reuters journalists have been charged under burma's colonial-era

official secrets act, which carries up to 14 years in prison. wa lone and kyaw soe oo were arrested on december 12 as they investigated a burmese military massacre committed of rohingya muslims in the village of inn din last september. this is wa lone speaking outside the court monday. >> we did not commit any crime. what i would like to state relation to the court's decision today is that we will not give up. the court's decision is not a declaration we are guilty. even though we are charged, we are not guilty. we have an opportunity to defend ourselves. we will testify to our innocence. we will not trtrouble before the charges laid on us. amy: in haiti, workers launched a general strike monday, shutting down the capital port-au-prince amid ongoing anti-austerity protests nationwide. the protests began friday when the government tried to dramatically raise fuel prices at the behest of the international monetary fund.

this i is haitian protester francois anelson. >> i i think that the president should step down because of his incompetence from above all, because he makes by decisions. in this case, he should leave as soon as possible. amy: in thailand, rescuers have evacuated all 12 boys from a youth soccer team and their coach from an underground cave. the group has been trapped since june 23. the dangerous rescue operation the world.d - in india, a widespread environmental movement in the capital delhi has forced the government to abandon its plans to cut down 16,000 trees in a city that is already one of the most polluted on earth. the month-long grassroots movement included thousands of people participating in vigils, sit-ins, tree-defense patrols, and tree-planting activities. residents also filed lawsuits, which forced a high court to halt all tree-cutting in the city, ruling it could "not allow delhi to die at the cost of the redevelopment projects."

back in the united states, president trump's longtime personal driver, noel clintron, has sued the trump organization, arguing he was not paid for more than 3000 hours of overtime in recent years. the lawsuit argues -- "in an utterly callous display of unwarranted privilege and entitlement, president donald trump has, through the defendant entities, exploited and denied significant wages to his own longstanding personal driver." meanwhile, the trump organization is seeking to hire 61 foreign guest workers through the h-2b visa program to cook and clean at trump's private mar-a-lago resort in palm beach, florida. while trump has sought to dramatically crackdown on nearly evevery form of immigration into the unitited states s during his time in office, he has expanded the h-2b visa program, which benefits companies seeking to hihire foreign workekers for seasonal, low-wage work.

and in virginia, federal court has ruled a civil rights lawsuit against the neo-nazis and white supremacists who planned last year's deadly rally in charlottesville, virginia, can move forward. the lawsuit filed by charlottesville residents argues the organizers of the august 17 unite the right rally violated the 1871 ku klux klan act and the 1866 civil rights act. the suit specifically names prominent white supremacists, including jason kessler, richard spencer, and james fields, who killed anti-racist protester, heather heyer, when he drove his car through a crowd of counter protesters. and those are some of the headlines. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. juan: and i'm juan gonzalez. welcome to all of our listeners and viewers from around the country and around the world. in a move to push the supreme court further to the right, president trump has nominated federal judge brett kavanaugh to

fill anthony kennedy's seat on the high court. if kavanaugh is confirmed, it would create a bloc of five right-wing justices making it the most conservative court since the 1930's. critics warn a a solid right-wig cocourt could lead to major rollbacks for voting rights, reproductive rights, civil rightsts, environmental regulatitions, gun control, reproductive rights, even the overturning of roe v. wade. last year kavanaugh ruled against an undocumented teenager who sought to have an abortion while in federal detention. he said allowing the abortion would make the government "complicit" in something that is morally objectionable. amy: brett kavanaugh has also argued that sitting presidents should be shielded from criminal or civil investigations. in a 2009 article for the minnesota law review, kavanaugh wrote -- "i believe that the president should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary

citizenship while serving in office." he went on to write -- "the indictment and trial of a sitting president, moreover, would cripple the federal government." on monday night, president trump urged the senate to quickly approve kavanaugh's nomination. pres. trump: the rule of law is our nation's proud heritage. it is the cornerstone of our freedom. it is what guarantees equal justice and the senate now has the chance to protect this glorious heritage by sending judge brett kavanaugh to the united states supreme court. juan: brett kavanaugh has deep ties to the republican party. before becoming a federal judge, he served as a senior aide under president george w. bush in the white house counsel's office. while at the white house, he met his wife, who was bush's personal secretary. kavanaugh also worked for kenneth starr, the independent counsel who investigated president bill clinton in the 1990's.

kavanaugh, like justice neil gorsuch, clerked for anthony kennedy. and like gorsuch before him, kavanaugh is backed by the federalist society and heritage foundation who drew up a list for trump in 2016 of suitable right-wing judges to consider for the supreme court. on monday night, kavanaugh said he was honored to be considered for kennedy's seat. >> tonight it is my honor and privilege to announce that i will nominate judge brett kavanaugh to the united s states supreme court. amy: on monday night, protesters gathered outside the supreme court soon after president trump picked brett kavanaugh. speakers included senator elizabeth warren of massachusetts. >> he is hostile to health care for millions of americans. he is opposed to the consumer financial protection bureau and

corporate accountability. he is opposed to the rights of women, workers, and consumers. he is hostile to just about anyone who isn't wealthy and powerful. trumpnks presidents like should be above the law. know he wouldves overturn roe v. wade. [boos] i will be voting no. amy: senator elizabeth warren speaking outside the supreme network abouty 1000 people gathered. we will spend the rest of today's show looking at the nomination of brett kavanaugh to the supreme court. we begin in washington where we are joined by ian millhiser. he is senior fellow at the center for american progress action fund and the editor of thinkprogress justice. he is the author of the book, "injustices: the supreme court's

history of comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted." welcome to democracy now! a biography of president trump choice to replace anthony kennedy, brett kavanaugh? >> this guy looks like he was grown in a vat of the republican establishment. he went to the same school as neil gorsuch. i think they may have been in the exact same class. he graduated from yale'twas, clerked for justice kennedy. he worked for ken starr. he worked at an elite law firm. decade, on this last the d c circuit, the second-most powerful clerk, where he was antagonist of environmental regulations, where he said he would have -- he did not just say he would strike down net neutrality, he's that it

violates the first amendment where he was a big proponent of gun rights and moved to strike down d.c. gun laws. issue after issue -- abortion, birth control. record andly thick consistently voted with the right on issue after issue. amy: if you can tell us the positions also that he has occupied over time, specifically, working with president george w. bush, involved in his actual election. >> i believe he may have even worked on the bush v. gore case. he was the staff secretary. they handle every piece of paper that crosses the president's desk. i think that is significanant because ththe thing about judge kavananaugh is not that he is jt right-wing and wants to dismantle much of the federal

government, it is that he is extraordinarily smart. and through that experience, handling lititerally every piece of paper that crossed president desk, he had significant understanding of how the government works, where the leverage points are, or if he strikes on this regular and here, it leads to a lot of epa unraveling. he's going to be very effective in his mission of dismantling a great deal of the ministry of state. juan: you have written also about his role in what you call weaponize in the first amendment. some of the cases that he has decided really extending first commitment rights to groups that normally we would not consider the first amendment applying to, specifically the united states sec, netersus neutrality, as well as other cases that seem to been over backwards to give first amendment rights to corporations.

>> this is a major project of the roberts court. a lotecently, they nuked of the finding that public-sector unions are going to be able receive. they did that under the theory went unions bargain, that is a first amendment matter so therefore, there can be strict restrictions on the union. thewent unions bargain, that isa first amendment same -- or simis what judge kavanaugh used when is argued net neutrality unconstitutional. he claims if you regulate the internet service provider's ability to not slow down certain content, then that is regulating their ability to determine which speech you get to their pipelines, so that is a violation of the first amendment. i suspect we will see this reasoning. this is a major project of the roberts court, to transform the first amendment, which is supposed to be about free speech, into a vehicle for deregulation of business. and what he is shown in the dead

neutrality case is easier to drop onto this case probably has you u ideas for war they can go. amy: let's go to brett kavanaugh speaking last night at the white house. >> i judicial philosophy is straightforward. a judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. a judge must interpret statutes is written and a judge must interpret the constitution as written. informed by history and .radition and precedent for the past 11 years, i have taught hundreds of students, primarily at harvard law school. i teach that the constitution separation of powers protects individual liberty. amy: supreme court justice nominee brett kavanaugh speaking last night after president trump announced his nomination. ian millhiser, he was chosen by the federalist society.

that is a list president trump was using to make his choice. explain what the federalist society is. is an federalist society organization of conservative lawyers -- it is been around for a really long time. the is interesting about federalist society is it sort of benefits from this cycle where everyone knows if you want a judgeship from a republican president or if you want a job in a republican administration, the way to do that is you get a job or you get involved in the federalist society when you're a law student and ingratiate yourself to them and they told out favors. so because everyone knows that they are the ones that can dole out those goodies, it is a self-perpetuating cycle where people get involved with the organization because they know it is the place to go and that means the best conservative lawyers are getting involved with it. it provides is

the federalist society has moved very, very far to the right in recent years. they were one of the incubators for this idea that the affordable care act is unconstitutional. recently they have grown obsessed with dismantling little agencies like the epa or department of labor. those were ideas that just were not on the table 10 years ago. what is happening is the federalist society has become ambitiouswhere if you and you want to get a job in a republican in administration and you are a lawyer, you have to go through them. and they take more and more right wing position, which does not just mean that they are taking this positions, but it means every ambitious republican lawyer in the country feels like they have to take these extreme positions or they're just not going to advance their career. juan:: i want to turn to the president of the federalist society appearing on cbs this morning. he was questioned by norah o'donnelell. >> you h have been credited, alg with the federalist society, of being involved in the picks of

the last three supreme court. would you say that is true? >> presidents make the choices, but there's no question there's been a long-standing movement in the u.s. to appoint judges to the court that will interpret the law as written, and am a part of that. no ones has been said " has been more dedicated to the enterprise of building a supreme court that will overturn roe v. wade in the federalist society's leonard leo." this piclieve replacing kennedy for finally be the nail in the coffin of abortion rights? >> roe v. wade has been a scare tactic that is gone back 36 years going back to center o'connor's nominationon to the court. thatning is hapappen during period of time. for me it is not about roe v. wade. it is not what it is about. it is about interpretingng the constitution as it is written. basically, interpreting the limits on government power.

juan: can you talk about leonard leo, specifically, his role, the reportss that he is a member of the knights of malta, a secret right-wing organization within the catholic church and his role specifically in the vetting of these nominees of the republican president's especially president trump, to the court? >> leonard leo is a very, very conservative guy who sits rate close to the apex of this society network i was just describing. he just knows who everyone is. that is his value to republican presidents is that when you become president, yet to fill literally thousands of jobs. society network i was justthe course of your presiden, additionally hundreds of judgeships. most presidents are not going to know who is the person who will make a good trial lawyer in idaho. leonard leo is the guy who knows who all those people are. you spent his entire career

getting scott with these people and having breakfast with these people and getting to know who the reliable, consistently very conservative judges or lawyers are that he can then advise presidents to put on the bench. that is why they use them. i want to push back against a few things he said. first of all, of course overrule is going to roe v. wade. they have four votes already who are willing to uphold a texas lawthat was just a sham intended to shut down abortion clinics. kavanaugh has criticized roe v. wade. he said it was a freewheeling decision. you wrote an opinion just last year that used a -- took very aggressive postures so the trump administration could literally imprison women to delay their ability to have an abortion. this is s not a guy who is going to statate his hand when it t cs to roe v. wade. i think mr. leo once to muddy the waters a bit because there

are two republican senators, susan collins and lisa murkowski, who claimed to be pro-choice. at the very least, they want to have deniability if they vote for kavanaugh. there is no deniability here. this is the fifth vote to overturn roe v. wade, period. amy: we will talk about that in our next segment. ian millhiser, thank you for being with us senior fellow at , the center for american progress action fund and the editor of thinkprogress justice. peacel link to your "who is brett kavanaugh, trump's pick to replace anthony kennedy?" stay with us. ♪ [music break]

amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. juan: as we continue our discussion on the nomination of brett kavanaugh to the supreme court, we're joined by four guests. david cole is the national legal director of the american civil liberties union. cecile richards is the former president of the planned parenthood. rachel tiven is ceo of lambda

legal. and fatima goss graves, president of the national women's law center. i thihink this is a nomination we have all been dreading. we know that roe v. wade hangs by one vote on the supreme court. there are more than a dozen cases that are ready to come to the supreme court that would restrict reproductive rights. not only -- obviously, this is a nomination that was rubberstamped by the federalist society, committed to overturning roe, but i think what is important to understand, far beyond abortion rights, judge kavanaugh has taken the position that bosses should be up to determine whether or not their employees get birth control based on our own personal point of view. he obviously disagree with the finding in the d.c. circuit court the affordable care act could go forward. i think the threats to women's health and women's rights are

profound from everything from not only abortion access, birth control access, but even a protection that we have now for folks with pre-existing conditions. this is a very extreme appointment. i think you're going to see folks coming out across the country. amy: let's go back to president trump them of the famous debatae october 2016 that was moderated by chris walallace. >> do you want the court, including the justices that you will name, to overturn roe v. wade, which includes, in fact states, woman's right to ababortion? pres. trump: we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that is really -- that will happen. that will happen automatically, in my opinion, because i'm putting pro-life justices on the court. i will say this, he will go back to the state in the states will then make a determination. amy: president trump has clearly whether he wants to overturn roe v wade, he is not going to ask these nominees, these candidates he has come

about roe v. wade. but what exactly does it mean? he made this promise very , overturn roe v. wade and it will go back to the states. what does this mean? >> what it potentially means is then states across the country, it will depend on your state legislature, your governor, whether or not abortion is legal or not. one of the things that is important remember, amy, is that roe v. wade did d not create the idea of abortion. abortion e existed before it was legal. it was simply unsafe. young, healthy women died routinely in emergency rooms across the country. i still need doctors who remember doing the residencies and the rotations seeing women die. the point is now with what the president is saying, we're going to now say that women may be safe in some states, but not in others. my home state of texas where they have basically try to outlaw abortion almost completely, we're going to go back to a day in which women had

to go across the border or take things into their own hands. it is a very scary time for women. , from thed cole perspective of the aclu, what do you see in this nomination? >> the first thing i should say is the aclu by policy does not endorse or oppose nominees to the supreme court. we remain neutral. to me, the biggest lesson here is elections matter. if democrats had comome out to vote for hillary clinton like they came out to vote for barack obama and the prior two elections, hillary clinton would have been appointing this nominee. she would have appointed scalia's replacement. we would have an entirely different world. that is the way politics works. i think a real response has to be politics. ofn: but in terms of some the decisions, the record that we have right now with kavanaugh

, what do you see is some of the most troubling decisions he is made in the past? >> he is conservative. anyone that president trump would have named would be conservative. he is a very smart, very qualified conservative. that is what we were going to get very likely. you know, but i think given what president trump has said, he wants to overturn roe v. wade, i think it is incumbent upon the senate to really ask hard questions and demand answers too those questions. for example, do you believe in involving the constitution? do you believe the constitution made segregation unconstitutional? inw was not unconstitutional the 14th amendment. a maid sex determination a violation of legal protection clause, because it was not if you look at the founders interpretation. is it going to say, i am an , i'd only women are

prprotected by legal protectctin clause? similarly, you could ask them, do you believe that the constitution protects the freedom of individuals to make personal choices about their bodies andnd their families? that is the right recognized by the court for decades. it guarantees every a american e right toto choose contraception. big air t's every woman the right to abortion. it guarantees gays and lesbianss couples the right to marry on the same terms as straight couples. do you believe that? i think we can assess questions of him. his record is conservative, absolutely, but those seem to be the critical questions that you want to ask to see if this is someone who is really going to take us back to some kind of constitution that is unrecognizable or whether he is not. i don't think we know the answer to those questions, actually.

i think he has a conservative, but pragmatic. he has been criticized by the conservatives for not going hard right enough on the affordable care act cases, on the jane go case involving the own woman was detained denied an abortion. i think a remains three scene. we can't gamble on it. we need to have the senators ask for a hard questions. amy: i don't ask about immigration in a moment even beyond kavanaugh, the aclu involvement in the latest issue to reunite children. i want to go back for a moment to cecille richards, when you talked about the jane go case. if you can talk about this young immimigrant woman who was in immigration detention in texas and what happened to her. >> this is the case where obviously, aclu, thank goodness, was on the spot and defended her. he felt like it was not an undue burden to deny this young woman the ability to access a safe and legal abortion that she not only had the resources for,

she had the right to, she had gone through all of the various stages you have to go through in texas -- which is very hard. the restrictions are so onerous. he did not feel like it was an undue burden to delay this young woman's access to abortion. fortunately, he was overruled. to me -- or so many indications that in fact he is not sympathetic to abortion rights. williamraised rehnquist in a lengthy speech including his dissent in n roe . wade. this know, we just had texas case that when after t the supreme court that declared the texas laws and constitutional. if there is one switch in the supreme court, those kinds of restrictions would now stand. this is a very, very serious decision. i hope every single senator, womening two republicacan

who have been very staunch supporters of abortion rights, actually ask specifically, what is his position on the right to abortion which women of had for more than 40 years? amy: i want to turn to fatima goss graves in washington, d.c., president and ceo of the national women's law center. her recent op-ed for the new york daily news is titled "a failed litmus test: trump taints his supreme court pick with his promise to anti-abortion extremists." share your reaction to president trump's fichte the supreme court, then also talk about the aca, obamacare, and what this choice means for health care in america. >> well, what we know is this isn't a typical time. thisdent trump framed process from the beginning as one in which he was guaranteeing, promising his justice would overturn roe v. wade. we have to take him at his word. we know the steps he is taken to fulfill the source of political

campaign promises. what that means is we cannot have the typical senate process questionsnominees as and they say, yes. we needed deeper investigation. we need far more here because the process has been tainted from the beginning. when you pair trump's promises with the fact he outsourced the creation of a list to choose from from antiabortion groups, it was a little bit baked from the beginning. it is not a typical time. juan: what do you see as the potential for being able to block this nomination, not only in terms of the two republican women who might be expected to vote no, but also of the democrats from red states, senators from red states who may end up voting for him? >> the good news is that trump

has made clear what is at stake by saying his justice will overturn roe. so we know what is at play. 70% of people do not want roe v. wade overturned. that is not the constitutional view that they are seeking. it is not the world they want to live in. so we have seen women rise in exciting and surprising ways time and again. they are the ones who have been making calls. they are the ones showing up at town halls. and they're the ones who will be showing up t to five this nomination. amy: what about the aca? >> that is another one of trump's promises that he would appoint justices who would basically dismantle the affordable care act. and we know what is at stake, essentially with a pre-existing conditions. it wasn't that long ago when insurance companies used the idea of pre-existing conditions

to be able to discriminate and charge people more or not allow them to have insurance at all. and women retreated as dust were treated as a pre-existing condition. specific conditions women have, whether was having a pregnancy was considered a pre-existing condition. see section was considered a pre-existing condition. people had expensed domestic violence or had been raped and sought medical treatment. that was a sort of pre-existing condition that would allow insurance companies to discriminate. we know what is at stake here. and the promises that have been laid out. that is the sort of thing that will have people out in giant numbers. we saw already the way people came out when the republicans tried to eliminate the aca. that was a political fight that already. the same issues are on the table here. amy: last that over 1000 people

rallied outside the supreme court to protest the nomination of brett kavanaugh. this is the founding executive director of the national center for transgender equality. >> people thought we could not save the aca, and we saved it over and over and over again. are we ready to save it again? fight is not- this about hours and these senators. this fight is about the aca. it is about roe v. wade. it is about protecting people's health and their lives. people will not go back to being an uninsurable pre-existing condition. amy: we're joined by rachel .iven if you could elaborate on that and more, your concerns after

president trump made his nomination last night. >> what is crucial is we cannot afford 40 more years of trump values on this court. what we learned from the trump presidency is you have to believe what people say. you have to watch what they do and take them at their word. brett kavanaugh has been so aggressively hostile to abortion rights and so eager to establish a licensnse to discriminate for people who don't feel covetable following nondiscrimination law, and that is why we are worried. abortion rights are the foundation of individual liberty in the united states. if abortion rights fall and as my colleagues described, we are one vote away from possibly sing roe v. wade, not just abortion, but birth control undermined. if that happens, then lgbtq people are directly at risk. it is the foundation of

individual liberty and our rights to bebe free, not just marriage equality, but free nro bedrooms, are really at risk. juan: talk about the family research council, which was very active when kavanaugh was nominated to the d c circucuit court of appeals back in 2006, advocating for him. their impact as well. >> they push for him very aggressively and cheered when after a lengthy, lengthy process he was eventually put on the court. juan: he had a lot of trouble in the confirmatition. >> and there were senators who felt he was not truthful. i think we'll take a very long time to look through this record . i think senatorsrs like senator durbin is that at the time that they were not sure he is been forthcoming deserve a full accounting of his record and of all of the decisions that he has he isn and the dissents written since then. that is when a take a long time. the closer you get to the election, the more the mcconnell

standard should apply here. we should let the american people decide if that is was in an mcconnell said was appropriate when merrick garland was nominated, then surely, that should be appropriate here. amy: we're going to go to break and come back to this discussion. and guess are rachel tiven, head of lambda legal. fatima g goss graves, president and ceo of the national women's law center. david cole of the acac and cecille richards, former head of planned parenthood federation of america. we will be back in a minute. ♪ [music break]

amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. as we talk about president's nomination for brett kavanaugh to the supreme court to replace the retiring anthony kennedy posted in fact, brett kavanaugh and neil gorsuch were both clerks to anthony kennedy. our guests are david cole, legal director of the aclu, which has

become the rapid response organization in this country to all things trump. sza richards, former head of planned parenthood federation of america. president trump has promised to overturn roe v wade. rachel tiven is head of lambda legal. and fatima goss graves is head of the national women's law center in washington where she spoke in 1000 people gathered last night after president trump made his nomination. cecille richards? >> one of the issues here that women have is legal representation on the courts, in congress, and there is no way to of the 130act supreme court justices in our lifetime, only six have not been white men. so yet again, we a are now populating -- more than 75% of his judicial nominees have been men. whens discussed last night

roe v. wade is at stake, it could be a court where -- that is absolutely overturns the right to safe and legal abortion, that is done by menen. i think the point of inmate earlier is right. all of this is political. this is the most local nomination process i have ever seen. i think women are enraged. i think we're seeing this for aa number of women running for office, marching. this is going to simply inflame women more and have a huge impact in the november elections. juan: david cole, in terms of the legacy of justice kennedy -- the vast difference between this nominenee and what kennedy represented. if you could talk about his role in terms of the not only conservative, but at the same time, also seeing the

constitution as an evolving document. >> justice kennedy was also a conservative, appointed by aa republican president, and voted often with the conservatives -- particularly, on business cases. but he had an open mind. evolvinged in an constitution. as a result, he was willing to listen and willing to depart from the sort of script and decide what the liberals in some cases, conservatives and others. as a result, he kept the court within the mainstream of american society, notwithstanding a majority of conservative justices for the last 40 years. he wrote all of the court's gay-rights decisions. a number of them, 5-4. he was the fifth vote to preserve roe v. wade. he was the fifth vote to strike down the death penalty for juvenile. he was the fifth vote to hold that disparate impact, his

violation of the fair housing act -- a critical interpretation of civil rights statute. he was the fifth vote to save affirmative action. if it were not for justice kennedy, we would be living in a very, very different constitutional world. the question will be, if kavanaugh is confirmed -- and we have five more conservative justices on the court -- will we be living in a very different world? we don't know the answer, but i think we know this. the answer depends more on us than it does on justice kavanaugh. polls at thehe midterms, if we go to the polls in 2020, if we turn this moment momentinto a galvanizing for those who believe in civil rights and civil liberties, and the politics of the country reflects that and i think we can, the court has never, with one exception in our history, deported very substantially from where the mainstream of american

public opinion is. that one exception was in the progressive era in the early new deal where people in congress and the president wanted to work protection laws of the supreme court was struck him down left and right. what happened? the gore became illegitimate and it had to shift. -- the courts became illegitimate and had to shift. politics includes fighting about this nomination, but i would say the real politics includes getting out there in the midterms, getting out there at 2020 and voting like your lives depend on it. if that is the case, i think we will continue to have a court that is within the mainstream of americans is that, notwithstanding justice kavanaugh. amy: i want to go to what have might of been one of the most compelling reasons for trump to actually choose brett kavanaugh. arguinge kavanaugh sitting presidents should be shielded from criminal or civil investigations and a 2009 article to the minnesota law believer he wrote "i the president should be excused

from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office. the indictment andnd trial of te sitting president moreover would cripple the federal government." david cole, this is a man, brett kavanaugh, who actually worked with ken starr, who went after president trump -- apparently, what, he changed his views? but at this point, he is the one on the record he says don't go after president trump. it is going to be very significant of the mueller case goes to the supreme court. >> the thing about kavanaugh on the president is twofold. one, yes, he is taken the position there should not be criminal trials should not be civil trials. the administration took the position there should not be civil trials or should be held off while the president is sitting. it is not a radical position. and he also took a very bold view of what the president can be impeached for concluding lying and obstructing justice. on the impeachment, he is the person who wrote the part of the ken starr report that justified

the grounds for impeachment against president clinton. there was some thought that president trump would not appoint him because kavanaugh's opinions on that question are against trump's i interest. inin cap explain further. >> what is the most likely impeachment charge against president trump if there is the will to impeach him? it will be obstruction of justice. sets out theeport legal theory by which that is inappropriate -- he of people saying the president cannot obstruct justice, crazy position, the have kavanaugh saying, no, the president can obstruct justice and can be impeached for it. >> respectfully -- amy: look, here is what is important. where not know exactly judge kavanaugh stands, but i can take every single anti-choice organization in the country has been celebrating since last night. it spread all over the webpages. they finally feel like they have got the fifth vote to overturn

roe v. wade. the fact is, 70% of people in this country believe we should keep roe v. wade. it is overwhelmingly important to understand the vast majority of people in this country. so while we may not know exactly where he stands, i think i do have are pretty good idea. it is going to be incumbent in this process to establish that he in fact recognizes and supports the right of women in this country to make their own decisions about their pregnancies. we cannot wait another 40 years for this court to change because in the process women will lose their rights, lgbtq folks will lose their rights, women are going to lose their lives. this is a really, really important nominating process. muchwould emphasize how people's lives are in a stake in the shorort-term. faith, but is think what is important to understand is if the affordable care act is utterly gutted a and

overturned by this court, that has a drastic effect on the lives of lgbtq people, particularly people living with hiv. at that time the aca was first passed, 17% of people living with hiv had access to private health insurance. that left a huge gap in care. the aca has been transformative for the lives of people living with hiv/aids. this is a death sentence if it is overturned byn act of this not really care whether people live or die. juan: is your hope or expectation will be a groundswell -- >> the popular support for saving the aca was massive. if everybody who called their senators about the aca calls their senators about this nomination, it is absolutely possible to say that brett kavanaugh's views are not adequate to represent the american people. amy: susan collins and lindsey

graham have both said they will oppose any nominee who is openly hostile to roe v. wade. nomineeld not support a who demonstrated hostility to roe v. wade because that would -- me to meet other judicial philosophy did not include a respect for established decisions, established law. i believe that is a very ofortant fundamental tenet our judicial system. neverusan collins in fact opposed supreme court nominee put forward by republican. is that right, fatima goss graves? what does it mean to say if they openly oppose a woman's right to choose? sort of a way of telling brett kavanaugh, be very careful how you talk about your opposition.

>> this is why we need a higher standard. it is the truth that susan collins has never opposed a supreme court justice nominee from a republican president. in not typical times, were president trump has promised his nominee will overturn roe v wade. so that is a question before her. and just having the nominee say "i respect precedent," is not going to be enough. you need this deeper probing into whether are not they really believe that roe v. wade was correctly decided -- which we already know that judge kavanaugh has criticized in the past. we also need to know whether or not he believes in the personal liberty line of cases because the same antiabortion forces are also the ones that are anti-contraception, that are

attacking the range of types of personal relationships of people have. and these are not hypothetical matters. we know over 20's they are poised -- 20 states are poised to ban abortion as soon as roe is overturned. having someone like judge kavanaugh on the supreme court will only incentivize the many states that have already been trying to restrict abortion access again and again, making it harder for people to access the care they need. cole, i want to see if you could talk a little bit about the current situation with the battle over -- with the trump administration on immigration in the reuniting of those children separated from their parents there were taken from. >> we are trying to hold the trump administration's fee to the fire. we're in the court in san diego where we got an injunction to couple of weeks ago saying you had to reunite the family's within 30 days, all of the

families within 14 days, the childrenen under five. we were back in court in the last couple of days. they did not even have a list of the children under five. they were unclear whether they knew which kids were related to which parents. the judge, fortunately, is really holding their feet to the fire. we are basically in there talking with him and with the government on a daily basis about are they doing enough. the answer is, no, they are not, but they are being pressured by a court to do that. and because of the judge granted them an extension today for the under five. there are two weeks in all 3000 kids had be reunited. they have given the names of the 102 kids? they reunited, what, under 50. today, all at once, those 50 will be reunited yet so o then what happens to the other 50? >> realistically, they have to get them reunited as quickly as

possible. they will not meet the deadline of today, but you have -- you continue to press. they screwed this up from the beginning. they're not putting in sufficient resources to respond and efficientnt way. i mean, these are kids who are suffering and parents are suffering, and the government is "i h have two dogs it for my dog back home so i can come in here on the weekend to have an emergency hearing." i mean, the trump administration needs to take this more seriously. we're doing everyrything we can. i think k the amererican p peopy coming out and protetesting and speaking out as forcefully as they have, have helped tremendously. i hope we can get the kids and the families reunited. amy: du take this as a done deal, brett kavanaugh will be the exit from court justice? >> no, not at all.

absolutely not. this is a very closely divided senate. that are only a couple need to shift for this domination to be blocked. and when senator mcconnell has been so clear that when you are within, i don't know, a year of an election, right? at what point will democrats and shirley some republicans, called out the hypocrisy here? i think people are worried for the future of their country. and bipartisan people are worried for the future of the country. >> look, if the 5 million people who marched the day after the inauguration called her united states senators with concern, ii think thisis process would be slowed dowown and i think people would take a really hard look at this nominee. i agree there should be delayed until after the midterm elections. this is the only way this

domination is going to get through is if they try to simply jam it through. mitch mcconnell, if it was good enough to delay and a president obama, it is good enough to delay under president trump. amy: david, your wife serves in the same federal court as judge kavanaugh? >> yes. amy: any further comments? >> no. amy: fatima goss graves, what are you going to be doing in these next months, the national women's law center? >> we're going all in. we believe this is a fight we can win. the same way peoeople counted ot the aca, we know women will rise, be making the calls, showing up at town halls so people better get ready. amy: we want to thank you for being with us. we will continue to cover this process. david cole, legal director of the a so you, cecille richards, former head of planned parenthood federation of america, rachel tiven, lambda legal, and fatima goss graves, with the national women's s law center. happy birthday, laura

gottesdiener! democracy now! is currently accepting applications for a full-time news producer position in our new york city studio. visit democracynow.org to learn more and apply today. democracy now! is looking for feedback from people who appreciate the closed captioning. e-mail your comments to outreach@democracynow.org or mail them to democracy now! p.o. box 693 new york, new york 10013. [captioning made possible by democracy now!]

mechanic: o on the tunene-up pa, veronica: all i hear is, "we can't do this. it's too many miles." we just need d to get it done no