american bar association is not high on senator lee's list and many of you. they've given republican nominees a hard time but i continue to use them because to get as many traditions in place as i can but the folks who are ewatching this hearing , their job is to evaluate the nominee in three categories: professional competency, character, judicial disposition. they've spent hundreds of hours, talked to hundreds of people from all walks of life about this judge. judge barrett. and here's what they found. the american bar association standing committee on the federal judiciary has completed the evaluation of the professional qualifications of judge amy barrett. and as you know the standing committee confined its evaluation to the qualities of integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. a substantial majority of the standing committee determined judge barrett is world qualified and the minority is of the opinion she is qualified toserve on the supreme court of the united states . the majority represents the standing committees official writing

with her including the dean of the notre dame law school who hired here, the a.b.a., the american bar association, which passes a judgment on all of these nominees, her colleagues on the seventh circuit, staff, everybody this person has ever interacted with. stellar recommendations. this is an incredibly well-qualified individual and somebody who can be relatable to the american people because she deals with the same issues that americans do. seven kids. trying to organize your schedule around seven kids, continue to be a professional, do exceptional work, highly qualified, towering intellect she's been described by her colleagues. so, mr. president, that's what this is about. it's about trying block a well-qualified judge to the supreme court simply because they don't like the process, and i understand that, but this is a constitutional process. this is a vacancy. the constitution doesn't follow the political calendar when it comes to filling vacancies. and as you heard reared leader mcconnell point out earlier today, precedent on this issue, on confirming a nominee by a president to a vacancy c

it's no surprise the american bar association which minority leader has called the gold standard gave judge baird its highest rating saying she's well-qualified to serve on the supreme court. but we all knew that. as i looked around the room during the first day i noticed all the binders that people like i and my other colleagues had come no books piled with paper, looks, reference books on the desk of republican and democratic members of the committee. my colleagues materials and preparing for this historic hearingar included previous decisions by judge barrett academic writings letters of support detailed background information about her career. i noted as judge baird was answering our questions she seemed to ben, doing so without even glancing down at any notes so i asked judge barrett, i've violated the number one rule that you learn as a lawyer not to ask a question you don't know the answer to but i did it anyway because i have a hunch. i asked her to hold up in notepad sitting in front of her to show us what materials she had been using during the hearing and it was a memorable

the american bar association is not high on senator lee's list. and many of you. i think they do give some republican nominee is a good time, but i have continued to manyhem because i keep as traditions in place as i can. but the folks who are watching this hearing, their job is to evaluate the nominee in three categories. professional competency, character, judicial disposition. hours,end hundreds of talk to hundreds of people, from all walks of life, about this judge. judge barrett. here is what they found. the american bar association standing committee on the federal judiciary has completed the evaluation of the professional qualifications of judge amy barrett. as you know, the standing committee confines its evaluation to the qualities of integrity, affectional competence, and judicial temperament. a substantial majority of the committee determined that judge. his well-qualified. a minority is of the opinion that she is qualified to serve on the supreme court. themajority represents standing committee's official rating, which is the highest you can get. two p

first, a representative from the american bar association announcing the rating for judge barrett. process and our evaluation of judge barrett. rating judge barrett a of well-qualified, as you know, our highest rating. , the standing committee has conducted thorough nonpartisan, nonideological, impartial peer-reviewed's of all nominees of -- of the federal courts. 'e assess the nominees integrity, professional, -- competence and integrity. the standing committee does not propose -- propose or recommend nominees.

surprise that the american bar association, which the minority leader is called he gold standard, gave her their highest rating. the chair of the standing said,tee on the judiciary in interviews with individuals in the legal profession and know judge o barrett, whether for a few years r decades, not one person uttered a negative word about her character. the assessment is in line with the glowing letters of support e've seen from her former colleagues and students, whose political philosophies and fall across the entire political spectrum. hat we repeatedly heard is about judge barrett's brilliance, her strong great temperament and her impressive humility. barrett, i'm convinced, will serve our nation well on court.preme it's clear that the mountains of evidence stand in sharp contrast that our trait colleagues across the aisle have this ted to paint of nominee. democrats have tried to claim that she's somehow too radical that in her act three years on the seventh circuit court of appeals she's with her colleagues 95% cases they in 600 have decided. back in 2017, when she was circuitd

we have a panel from the american bar association.e have an eight-person panel chosen by the minority and the majority. i will do whatever my colleagues want in terms of motions and being heard. panel -- hatethe it for the panel but i will let you decide what we do today. we will vote for the judge on october 22. i would prefer if possible we could hear from the panel. i will leave it up to my colleagues. senator feinstein? know, this is being done without any precedent in the time i've been on this committee, which is about 25 years. it is being done i guess to show power and push someone through. really abrogates the value of hearings that this committee should treasure and respect. somebody that has been on this committee for a while, i have come to value the hearings. the search for information. the desire to do justice to individuals. i really don't understand why it makes a difference whether it is two weeks or three weeks or four weeks. it allows us to complete a process which we have put in place that has worked i think very w

we saw the american bar association, and institutions the democratic leader is called the gold standard. judge barrett well qualified to sit on the supreme court and they heard while the legal professionals have found behind that rating called her listen to this, a staggering academic mi mind. the chair of the standing committee on the federal judiciary told the committee directly that with individuals in the legal profession and community who know judge barre barrett, whether for a few years or decades, not one person, not one uttered a negative word about her character. this outstanding nominee is exceptionally suited to this j job. i know we all know that. she's an exceptional nominee to the supreme court will make the senate and the country exceedingly proud. there are a few around to have experienced this up close and personal and i am one of them. those of you who have followed parts of history from the outside and now you are making history. it is a matter of fact, a matter of history that it was senate contemporary difficulties with judicial nominations in 1987. it initiated eve

in the land, i bring this full circle in our conversation because another a study by the american bar association, which i recommend to you shows that a person with a felony commitment in america is subject to 40,000 collateral consequences. in other words we now have an more marijuana-- has affected, and 2017 there is more possession of marijuana arrests in america than all of the -- arrest combined. disproportionately african-american people. and stanford and not notre dame, aside from football, but my point is, as you see that if a black person is not more likely to use marijuana but they are more likely to be convicted of a felony fort, some three to four times the rate, i hope you can see that that means that they are going to be more likely to lose other liberties, other rights that so deeply affects their lives. there voting life, their ability to raise their children when a parent has been put in a position where because of that felony conviction, doing things that two of the last three presidents admitted to doing they now cannot vote, cannot get jobs, they cannot get business licenses.

legal evaluators with the american bar association testified after the vote. while as those both for and against judge barrett's nomination. >> they concluded that judge barrett had demonstrated professional competence to exceptional and sufficiently outstanding to be rated well- qualified. >> the views are far outside the mainstream. >> reporter: outside the supreme court demonstrators are split on the nomination, while the public and lawmakers are unified in their effort to have her confirmed before election day. skyler henry, cbs2 news, capitol hill. >>> the judiciary committee's vote tees off a week before the election. u.s. jobless claims have gone up again, the labor department says 890,000 americans filed for first-time unemployment benefits last week. that is 53,000 more than of previous week. before the pandemic, claims to at 200,000 per week. bostic meanwhile slid today as investors worry about stall stimulus talks, and about your bringing back together coronavirus restrictions. the dow was down 19 points and the nasdaq lost 54 in the s&p was down fi

we have a panel from the american bar association. we have an eight-person panel chosen by the minority and the majority. i will do whatever my colleagues want in terms of motions and being heard. panel -- hatethe it for the panel but i will let you decide what we do today. we will vote for the judge on october 22. i would prefer if possible we could hear from the panel. i will leave it up to my colleagues. senator feinstein? know, this is being done without any precedent in the time i've been on this committee, which is about 25 years. it is being done i guess to show power and push someone through. really abrogates the value of hearings that this committee should treasure and respect. somebody that has been on this committee for a while, i have come to value the hearings. the search for information. the desire to do justice to individuals. i really don't understand why it makes a difference whether it is two weeks or three weeks or four weeks. it allows us to complete a process which we have put in place that has worked i think very

legal evaluators with the american bar association testified after the vote as well as those both for and against judge barrett's nomination. >> standing committee concluded that judge barrett had demonstrated professional competence to exceptional and sufficiently outstanding to be well qualified. >> judge barrett's views are far outside the mainstream. >> reporter: outside the supreme court, demonstrators are split on barrett's nomination, while republican lawmakers are unified in their effort to have her confirmed before election day. skyler henry, cbs news, capitol hill. >>> an upcoming book will feature some final thoughts from the late supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. it will also include some previously unreleased materials gathered by one of her former clerks. the university of california press said the book was in production at the time of ginsburg's death last month. it is slated to hit store shelves in march. >>> and a ring-tailed lemur we first told you about yesterday has been found after being stolen from the san francisco zoo. the 21-year-old male lemur named

where nominees to fill lifetime seats in the federal judiciary to the american bar association said we'rerough. instead of passing a covid relief package that will help millions of americans who are unemployed who have been been infected whose businesses or employers have closed we're focusing on jams through judge barrett i think this constitutes court packing. ainsley: that was chris koon imho sits on judiciary committee and if they jam her through and protest iowa gop senator chuck grassley member of the senate judiciary committee as well. good morning to you senator. >> glad to be with you thank you for having me good morning to everybody. ainsley: what's your response to what he said? >> first of all chris coons knows better his comments are absurd what we're doing is what has been done -- every time there's a vacancy on the supreme court. the constitution, the senate does constitutional responsibility of considering that nominee and that's what we're doing now in the case of barrett what senator coons and other democrats in particular senator biden don't want you to believe is what

some of these judges have been rated not qualified by the american bar association.ly been lawyers for four or five years and, get this, never tried a case. - how is that not criminal? - and now, they're sitting in federal circuit courts with lifetime appointments. we have to do something. we have to act. and the most effective proportional response is to expand the size of the court. - so, basically, if we can't expand the court, we're [bleep]. - in so many words, yes. - son of a mitch! [upbeat music] it's clear the democrats have to do something. the question imani gandy is asking is, "will they?" - democrats need to sack up. within two weeks of the election, the supreme court is set to hear a case that could overturn the aca. they're also set to hear a case called "fulton v. city of philadelphia" and that's going to decide whether or not government-funded foster care agencies can discriminate against lgbtq couples and non-christian couples who want to adopt or foster children. when i say the democrats have to do this, i mean they have to do it immediately, because

i was with the first american bar association and the legation to visit at the request of the government. i was most fortunate because i was the only women in the delegation. china was not well set up for tourists yet. i had a room of my own throughout the trip and these pillars of the barr of these distinguished gentleman, had to double up in my room. this is the same photograph that was on my book cart. >> right next to that is a photograph of senator michael ski. >> yes, it was taken also in 1993, when i was the new justice. it is my example of how relative most things are, so if you ask me, and my short? i would say yes, compared to chief justice rehnquist. but next to senator murkowski, i'm a giant. >> so this desk, is that your personal selection, and where did you get it? >> this desk is made here at the court. all of the chambers have similar desks. the variation in these chambers as they have put a granite top. on the desk as i have on the work table. >> what kind of books do you keep there on the shelf? >> books that i can access most often. i have them in two places. >> what w

the american bar association puts out a ranking or rating on any federal bench nominee that comes up not just for the supreme court but for all the circuit court and lower judges as well. and interesting here that they say they talked to hundreds of people, lawyers, judicial colleagues of judge barrett, talked to academics and students. all kinds of people and they said they didn't get even a hint of any concern. they use the words brilliant mind, outstanding writer, whip smart. they said there was nothing but praise for her. their job is to find out if there has been misbehavior on the bench or unethical happenings. they couldn't find anything. no people concerned. short and sweet on their part. the highest rating is well qualified. you will hear from professors and a little more contentious is another panel that will talk about healthcare, abortion, other issues. those are the democrats' witnesses. it may get a little more heated once those folks show up at the witness table. >> sandra: those witnesses are getting seated at this moment. we will get back to the hearing room in a mom

we have a panel from the american bar association. we have an eight-person panel chosen by the minority and the majority. i will do whatever my colleagues want in terms of motions and being heard. panel -- hatethe it for the panel but i will let you decide what we do today. we will vote for the judge on october 22. i would prefer if possible we could hear from the panel. i will leave it up to my colleagues. senator feinstein? know, this is being done without any precedent in the time i've been on this committee, which is about 25 years. it is being done i guess to show power and push someone through. really abrogates the value of hearings that this committee should treasure and respect. somebody that has been on this committee for a while, i have come to value the hearings. the search for information. the desire to do justice to individuals. i really don't understand why it makes a difference whether it is two weeks or three weeks or four weeks. it allows us to complete a process which we have put in place that has worked i think very

the american bar association standing committee on the federal judiciary which consist, mr. president, of 19 lawyers who conduct nine partisan peer reviews of federal judicial nominees, it relies on confidential assessment of junes, lawyers, law pro-- judges, lawyers, law professors, deans, community leaders and others with knowledge of the nominee. i want to share what some of them have said about her. for judge barrett the committee invited 944 people to provide input into whether she was qualified or not for the supreme court. i'd like to share here in the senate this afternoon just a few of the comments that the american bar association committee provided. they said about her. whip smart, highly productive, punctual, and well prepared. a brilliant writer and thinker. and intellectual giant with people skills and engaging warmth. the myth is real. she's a staggering academic mind. judge barrett has demonstrated -- i'm quoting them again -- stellar judicial temperament in all settings. she is often described as a good listener who makes time for people, whether they're law

deal, john davis, a famous attorney, infamous in some respects, official spokesman for the american bar association, writes an article he says the federal government is not [indiscernible] i.e. what is all of this new deal stuff? it is not with the government should be doing. couple that with what you see if you look in the newspapers of the time, january 22, the new york times, communists were boring into negro labor. october 22, 1926, the banner headlines, san francisco examiner, third [indiscernible] terror thug caught, confesses four beaten with hammer in strike riots. one month before whitney, new york times, american legion issued a report. condemning radicalization in the public schools, submitting it is out of place for discussions tending to create disregard for the united states government to be had in an educational institution supported by taxes especially when the organization concerned is identified with a parent body. think moscow, whose aims and objects are undermining our form of government. another opinion, the president of the civil legion saying college trained men and women are

she earned the highest rating from the left-leaning american bar association. they marvel at, quote, breadth, diversity, and strength of the positive feedback they received from judges and lawyers of all political persuasions. if confirmed, this daughter of louisiana and indiana will become the only current justice with a law degree from any school not named harvard or yale. any school not named harvard or yale. she'll be the first mother of school-aged children to ever sit on the court. by every account, the supreme court is getting not just a talented lawyer but a fantastic person. we've heard moving testimony from former students whom judge barrett went out of her way to help and to mentor. her past clerks describe an exemplary boss. her fellow scholars describe a winsome, respectful colleague who is tailor-made for the atmosphere of the court. by any objective standard, colleagues, judge barrett deserves to be confirmed to the supreme court. the american people agree. in just a few minutes, she'll be on the supreme court. two weeks ago a cnn journalist made

the nonpartisan american bar association rated her well qualified. that is the a.b.a.'s highest ranking for judicial nominees. judge barrett's judicial philosophy and record on the seventh circuit are those of a mainstream jurist who considers herself bound by the law, not free to decide cases based on her own personal opinions. and she reiterated that time and time again in the judiciary committee. that is so important because some of my democrat senate colleagues have -- were seeking promises from her about how she will rule in certain cases in the future. and they sought to examine her belief on policy matters such as protections for those with preexisting conditions. now i for one strongly support as most of us do legal protections to make sure that individuals with preexisting conditions can purchase and retain health insurance. passing laws like those are what we should be doing here in this body, not in the supreme court. after some of my colleagues were not given the hint, the hints that they were looking for on how judge barrett would rule on particular cases,

. >> republicans called two members of the american bar association who said appellate judge amy coney barrett is qualified to serve supreme just >> her integrity and temperament met the high standards for her appointment to the supreme court. >> judge barrett's views are far outside of the mainstream. for evidence you can look no further than her own words before this committee this week. she would not say whether voter intimidation was illegal. >> democratic senators called citizens and a physician to testify too. >> she publiclily denied holding up the affordable care act. it would spell an end for the affordable care act. a mother said how she relies on the aca you, total claims is $1 million for their care. in the first seven years, our combined claims have surpassed $4 million. >> without the protections of the affordable care act, my daughters would have hit their lifetime caps and now be rendered uninsurable. >> republicans called character witnesses to testify on barrett's police. >> one of her former law students explained how the notre dame law professor helped her get the t

notre dame professor and she was rated well qualified by the aba the american bar association which isd that liberals use. so she is a great woman. she is kind. when you choose a judge and especially a justice, one of the main things is humility. she is so humble. she is a real person. she is brilliant. she is going to be such an asset to the court. they need to confirm her right away. did you hear yesterday how they kept complaining about we have better things to do. we don't need to be sitting here the democrats. then confirm her right away, put her on the court because that's where she is going. jillian: one of the words they keep using to describe her this morning is poised. >> exactly. jillian: so poised in every answer she gave. joe biden says he is not a fan of court-packing but kamala harris refused to answer this question, that same question to fox news whether or not she agrees with him. go ahead and take a listen to both. this is from monday and tuesday. >> i'm not a fan of packing -- court packing. i don't want to get off on that whole issue. i want to keep focused. >> vice

judge barrett is held in such high regard by her colleagues, students, and peers and why the american bar association gave her its highest rating of well qualified. we knew well before the hearing that judge barrett possesses an extraordinary intelligence and comprehensive command of the law. after three days of testimony americans got to see her qualifications for themselves. they saw why she has been described as a jurist, a formidable intellect, a brilliant and conscientious lawyer and staggering academic mind. even the democrat-ranking member on the committee couldn't hide the fact that she was impressed. judge barrett understands the proper role of a judge in our system of government. as judge barrett made clear, she understands the job of a judge is to interpret the law, not make the law. to call balls and strikes, not to rewrite the rules of the game. or as judge barrett said to the democratic whip at the hearing last week, i apply the law, i follow the law, you make policy. judge barrett has made it clear that when cases come before her on the supreme court, had she will consider the facts, t

the american bar association has given its highest rating to supreme court nominee amy coney barrett saying she's well qualified to serve on the nation's highest court >>> in new york city, the police have handed out more than $150,000 in covid-19 fines since friday the penalties are being imposed in the city's hot spots and include fines for five houses of worshiped that each organized events with hundreds of participan participants and deadly floods have killed 17 in vietnam and another tropical storm is on the way. you are up to dates are sco, sc. back to you. >> let's talk twitter shares now. the price target at deutsche bank, $56. joe, i want to know the dow is up 300 points, the nasdaq is up 300 points nasdaq is up 300 points, 2 2/3 percent, 11,881. joe, it's yours. >> so is it relates to twitter, i purchased it a few weeks back and it was exactly for the reasons that are talked about in this note. you're seeing strength in fundamental and technical factors. five-year high today i agree with the price target. that is my personal target i believe you'll see this stock to the upp

speak at the committee heard from witnesses today including the american bar association standing committeeroader fda has faced the accusation that it doesn't treat conservative nominees fairly. >> judge barrett has earned and enjoyed an excellent reputation for integrity and outstanding character. >> there were also witnesses both for and against nomination. >> in part because of her unwavering support. i am the first blind woman to serve as a law clerk on the supreme court of the united states. >> judge barrett's views are far outside the mainstream and evidence that one need not look further than her own words before the committee this week. >> g.o.p. leaders have cleared up an ambitious schedule for getting barrett confirmed before election day. said to be voted out on the committee before 1:00 p.m. on the 22nd, likely along party lines. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell says he will take or nomination to the senate floor on the 23rd and get to an actual vote within three or four good after that. democrats seem resigned to the fact that they really don't appear to have any tools le

judges for the court for the federal courts that were rated unqualified to be judges by the american bar associatione young ideological warriors and then the republicans in the senate have said, yes, sir and with most all of them have confirmed them. if you're concerned about the way the courts take up some of these politically charged cases, insist that they appoint qualified people and that senators in both parties vet them thoroughly. >> do you, in looking at what's happening with the voting deadlines litigation now, does it smack familiar to you what the democratic party endured in 2000? >> i think this election is likely to be very different, chris. i'm knocking on wood here because i don't know what the result is going to be. i have a very strong feeling that the vast majority of americans, including a significant percentage of republicans have watched and listened to donald trump for four years and have concluded that we need somebody better as president. somebody who does not say crazy things all the time. someone who does not tell so many falsehoods that the newspapers and the news media ca

were nominees to the lifetime seats in the federal judiciary and the american bar association said we are not qualified, got jammed through. instead of passing a covid relief package that will help millions of americans were unemployed who have been infected, whose businesses or employers have closed, we are focusing on jamming through judge barrett. i think this constitute court packing and i think that's the implication -. chris: senator, with all due respect you are not being straight with me and you're not answering my question, we have 23 days left until the election, can vice president biden and senator harris, his running mate, can they continue to stonewall on a perfectly legitimate question. biden says it's legitimate. if you are elected, will you change one of the three branches of government by adding justices to the court, there have not been any more than nine justices since the 1870s, it's a pretty important question, can he hold out and stonewall for three weeks. chris: for the coming week what i'm holding always hope that there are still two more republicans who might

the president of the american bar association lamented that state regulation was eroding, quote, individual freedom. but what he decried as astonishing was the baldness of congressional economic regulation, which extended, quote, two fixing hours of labor and rates of wages upon the transportation system. not postal censorship or the policing of private beliefs. to be sure, the war effort had required temporary suspension of constitutional limitations. but according to conservatives, radicals were contriving to make such concessions permanent. quote, to establish a government by human win in the place of a government by law. in preventing this evil from taking root, the suppression of dissent was a tool, not a barrier. for their part, progressives believed that individual rights needed to yield to public welfare. as ross go pound and put the point, the individual interest in free belief and opinion must always be balanced with the social interest in the security of social institutions. when they assess the wartime dissent in terms of its infringement on personal liberty, the national intere

the american bar association told them, it puts a face on policies that they think are in jeopardy withrt. while she has been very persistent in trying to stay apolitical throughout this process. democrats argue the timing of her nomination a few weeks before election day turns this into "a power grab." >> president trump is always one to say the quiet part out loud, very loudly. he said he expects his nominee to side with him in any election related disputes. >> they have become accustomed to the supreme court, being policymakers, being a body that bails them out if they can win the election or a vote. >> some democrats are already plotting political payback. senator sheldon whitehouse said today that if democrats take control of the senate and the she was on the other foot and republicans will not have a leg to stand on if they object to controversial, but constitutional moves like expanding the supreme court, adding seats or getting rid of the filibuster. >> neil: hillary, thank you. can anything slow this or try to stop her from becoming the next justice? let's go to john. the forme

it was a finalist for the american bar association's silver gavel award, and shortlisted for the five attic kappa ralph waldo emerson award. professor driver has a distinguished publication record in the nation's leading log reviews on all matter of subjects relating to education, race, and constitutional law. among the other prizes -- excuse me. he has also written extensively for general audiences. you might have seen his pieces in slate, the atlantic, the new york times, the washington post, and the new republic. he's a member of the american law institute and of the american constitution society's academic advisory board. he's also an editor of the supreme court review. professor driver received his ba from brown university, a masters in modern history from modern college oxford, where he was a marshall scholar, and his jd from harvard law school, where he was editor of the harvard law review. after graduating from harvard, professor driver clerked for judge merrick garland, justice stephen breyer, and justice o'connor, sandra o'connor. and i don't know where this rings on the lis

this was written in the american bar association years later. it quotes justice attorney john rosenburg. rosenburg recalls that counting the ballots took a long time and when six predominantly black wards hadn't finished by late evening, the county's democratic executive committee picked up their boxes and refused to count the ballots. we filed a civil rights action. to require them to include the ballots. we weren't talking about who would win or lose. but the ballots in those boxes needed to be counted. that action that day in that election in alabama the year after the voting rights act was passed, the local sheriff who beat the hell out of people protesting for black voting rights took it to the next step on election day, tried to block black votes from being counted. that day, that election, that crucible was the first time the federal government intervened in an election like that under the votes rights act of 1965 to protect the votes of black americans. justice department lawyers entered into a civil rights action to make sure those ball

but we will hear from members of the american bar association and outside witnesses on her nomination. a vote is not a final vote, but we will get a sense of where this committee is headed. we already know because we've been listening for several days as lawmakers questioned her with democrats questioning whether she's a threat to the affordable care act and women's issues. >> this hearing has done nothing to alleviate the concerns raised about why this nominee was chosen and why this is being rushed when the american people deserve to be heard. >> this is the first time in american history that we've nominated a woman who is unashamely prolife and embraces her faith without apology and she's going to the court . >> republicans really pushing her qualifications and as you heard, senator graham say suggesting this is a foregone conclusion. so, from here, that preliminary vote ande witnesses today. the committee will take a final vote next week and t setting up for a final senate confirmation vote on october 26th. before the election. back to you. >> we'll be watching for that, tracie,

we're going to hear a lot of different witnesses, there will likely be witnesses from the american bar associationl explain their rating of the nominee and their assessment for qualifications, and then there will be witnesses from both the democratic side and the republican side. the republican side will likely be friends, colleagues of judge barrett's who will speak to her warmth as a person and her professional publications. two clerks who are testifying including laura wolk, judge barrett's student at notre dame law school, famously had a need for an accommodation, she's blind and she wasn't getting what she needed from the school initially and went to then professor barrett who said this is now my problem, laura, and then took it over and laura got what she needed from the school, so i'm sure that will be something that is discussed this morning. on the democratic side, though, we're going to see a more longitudinal view looking at judge barrett's records and specifically what will justice barrett mean for this court, which is already skewed to the right. will she take it further to the right

judge barrett is rated well qualified by the american bar association, the highest rating, and that mattersproblem is the process. it has been corrupted by obstruction, situational ethics and trust that the judiciary is dropping along partisan lines. we've gone from near unanimous confirmations as difference as scalia and begins fwourg bitter party line votes with brett kavanaugh getting the narrowest margin in history. it's not just fairness, but representative majority rule. because republicans have lost the popular vote in all but one of the last seven presidential elections, but they're on track to seat five of the last seven supreme court justices. based on the support of gop senators whose states represent less than half the american people. so, that's why mitch mcconnell is laughing. >> i -- and i will give you full credit for that and by the way, take a bow that. was a good one. >> and that's your reality check. >> it's something. it really is. important history there in context. appreciate it. >>> so pennsylvania's second lady is speaking out after being called a racist slur having

way, have been 85% white and 76% men, with ten trump nominees rated not qualified by the american bar associationaises the question of retaliation by democrats. some have suggested that congress should expand the number of seats on the supreme court, which was changed six times before it was settle od o the current nine. when fdr tried this, he got smacked down by a democratic congress. vice president biden proposes a bipartisan commission but republicans seized on packing the court as a campaign issue, with trump mentioning it almost 60 times in the last month alone, according to fact base. here is the thing. republicans have been trying to pack courts for years. take arizona where republican governor doug ducey expanded the supreme court from five seats to seven, when it comes to the u.s. supreme court he says we shouldn't be chanlgi ingchangin institutions. in georgia, nathan diehl expanded the supreme court from seven to nine in and iowa expanding the supreme court in 2009 after gay marriage was declared legal in the state. there have been 11 mostly gop-led attempts to pack state courts in re