i'd like to bring in alan dershowitz. thanks for joining us, unfortunately on such sad news that we're hearing at the moment, the passing of a supreme court justice according to the reports that we're getting right now. and from what you know, from what you've heard about the passing of justice scalia, what are some of the reactions that you're having as well as that you're hearing as well as perhaps any contact that you might have with the family there? >> well, i've known justice scalia since he was a young law professor in his 30s. probably he is the most innovative and transformative justice in modern history, certainly modern history and conservative aspect of the court. he introduced activist conservatism. he was a lovely man in person. we spent some time together in israel, we spent time together at harvard. he came to my class, we debated. you know, we had a kind of love, but antagonistic relationship. i disagreed with many of his opinions but i admired his intellect and the consistency of his views. he is probably

joining me to talk about that is defense attorney alan dershowitz. do you or any others think he has a shot at wresting the nomination over donald trump? >> it's very difficult, it's getting harder and harder. i do think rubio has a shot. if cruz dropped out it would be rubio against trump. it would be a very close race and rubio might win. i'm not sure that cruz can do that, he is a strong candidate and very extreme, may do to the republicans what barry goldwater did to them back years ago, give them a devastating loss as a liberal democrat, that would please me. but as a loyal american i want to see two very strong candidates run on each party. i want to see at the end of the day that i would be satisfied that either of them won even though i prefer one candidate over the other. it just doesn't look like it's moving in that direction. >> what do you expect from the debate tomorrow night? >> you know, we never know, it's the most unpredictable element in trump. he violeated -- i mean, the kennedy school, everything has been proved wrong. so who know

even alan dershowitz, the babe ruth of civil rights, said that under some circumstances torture is not only justifiable, it obligatory. that's right. to find a ticking nuclear device hidden somewhere in new york city. so it's okay to torture someone to save a million lives? there's at least an argument for it. what if the bomb wasn't in new york city? what if it was in rugby, north dakota, where only a couple of thousand people would be at risk? that's a bogus argument. i don't think the grants would agree. let's not forget that mitchell lowell kidnapped their little girl. let's also not forget that we have a constitution. call me a stickler, but i think we should at least pretend to follow it. and i think that the constitution should be used less as a shield for the guilty fontana do what they claim he did? he said he didn't. but you're not 100%? well, whatever happened, by judicial fiat, it's no longer your problem. torture is morally wrong. at least according to the petition i signed condemning the fun and games at guantanamo bay. well, that's true, but your morality is not at issue

joining me is alan dershowitz. i'm so interested to talk to but this.ed to ask you about the presidential race and your former student ted cruz. do you think he or others have any shot at wrestling this nomination away from donald trump? >> it's very difficult. it's getting harder and harder. i do think rubio has a better shot. if hypothetically cruz were to drop out and it would be a one against one, rubio against trump, i think it would be a very close race and rubio might win. i'm not sure that cruz can do that. he's a strong candidate but he's very extreme and might very well do to the republicans what barry goldwater did to them back many, many years ago, give them a devastating loss as a liberal democrat that would please me butch as but as a loyal american, i want to see very strong candidates run. i want to see when the two candidates run against each other that i would be satisfied if either of them one, even though i prefer one candidate over the other. it just doesn't look like it's moving in that direction right now. >> what do you have expe

let's discuss with alan dershowitz, and george who was deputy attorney general under president georgek you gentlemen. alan, to you first. before we get to the nitty-gritty, you knew justice scalia. i imagine you disagreed on a whole host of issues. any stories you want to share with us. >> we never had a conversation that didn't include an argument except when we talked about his father. i knew his father, a professor at brooklyn college when i was a student there. he wrote he a letter that said some day before both of us become senile he'd like to sit down and persuade me that his vote in bush versus gore was correct. i'd written critically about it in "supreme injustice." he came and helped me teach my class in criminal law at harvard and debated in israel and in the united states. we have this wonderful feisty relationship. he wrote a blurb for my book "taking the stand" in which he said you aren't as bad as some of my right wing friends say. i'll miss him personally and professionally. >> are they going to go ahead or could we see a delay in their schedule with just eight justices

alan dershowitz said previously ted cruz was his law student. he said he's best law student. marco rubio got a big lift saturday night. he's campaigning with tim scott and trey gowdy, both of whom endorsed him. john kasich gets to play above it all and say i'm the guy who is not down in the mud. not wrestling. vote for me. i'm the nice happy reagan. dr. ben carson playing the same card. it's not a war. it's primary. i like primaries. in is who it's all about. we'll nominate the strongest candidate. i came up with this earlier. hillary clinton is the willie sutton of classified information. she's falling like a rock in nevada. there's a wall street story saying bernie sanders catching her. i think come the end of the primary season, we'll nominate the toughest, strongest republican and we're going to win and get the next supreme court justice. maybe two or three. >> let's talk about this. what happened september 11th? what is your reaction to trump using it against jeb and the former president. you mentioned that, you know, the former president was out there speaking today and

with us alan dershowitz, author of identify taking the stand, my life with the law." >> there niece unwrittenbe done on off years. that's not in the constitutional text. i'm amused when i hear people who claim to be strict interpreters of the constitution suddenly reading into it a whole series of provisions that are not there. there is more than enough time for the senate to consider in a thoughtful way the record of a nominee that i present and to make a decision. >> so, john, we have heard that the republicans of course are vowing to block any nomination but what about actually having a hearing? >> well, look, article 2 section 2 of the constitution certainly gives the president of right to nominate and appoint justices to the supreme court, but only after receiving advice and consent from the senate and of course there is nothing in the constitution that says that the senate has to give that advice and consent, that they have to have a hearing. presidents have submitted according to the congressional research service 160 names, men and women nominated to the supreme court. 36 of those wer

i want to ask you another question in plain english, which is starting with what alan dershowitz told nbc news today, justice scalia introduced both a new methodology and a new style in the way he wrote opinions. talk to us about that methodology, in plain english for non-lawyers, what did justice scalia do in the way he interpreted the constitution, and if you can, your time with him. >> the most important thing to justice scalia, the theorist of interpreting the constitution was to develop a theory that would restrain the judges. this is hard for liberals, especially, to hear, because we think of the conservatives and we think that they're making up constitutional restrictions all over the place, but this is what motivated justice scalia. his idea was, the way to restrict judges, to make sure judges were not injecting their own personal political philosophies into the constitution was to tie them to the original meaning of the constitution. so what that meant is, if you have a question, you know, should a state be allowed to execute somebody, you go back to 1789 or 1791 or 1865, dep

i had a tip from alan dershowitz, my criminal law professor in law school. went to the basement, looking in the pre-internet days, i found the files and showed up at shapiro's office uninvited and he talked to me and gave that story. i hand to be on the set this summer when they shot that seen. it was a very surreal experience. >> based on your book as well. and you were a consultant. >> i was a consultant. >> whoefeverybody who has seen >> and they picked an actor which is better looking than i was. >> did you wear glasses like that? >> i did. i still wear glasses but i forgot them in new york. >> you should have worn them today. >> for old time's sake. >> stand by. a lot more coming up. >>> just ahead, a very different story we're watching. we're getting new details right now of a very rare u.s. air strike against isis in libya. did it take out a top terrorist operative? >>> and also we're standing by to hear from donald trump. these are live pictures coming in. he's campaigning in south carolina right now just ahead of tomorrow's republican primary. what