d.c. circuit court the d.c. circuit court is probably the probably it is second only supreme court the most important court united states and so most important court because any federal regulation which includes all oversight from labor law to pollution laws to everything else all of it gets litigated in the d.c. court because these are all federal laws they come out of washington d.c. this so the d.c. circuit court is like the court. up until. it was put on this chord there was a forty three republican majority and has been for a long long time their politics want to keep it this way and they have now filibustered to demo. pratik appointees they're about to filibuster a third. this you know for obvious reasons they don't they don't want democrats making regulatory decisions do you think that this is going to provoke harry reid to bring about the nuclear option so i absolutely hope so because those who live by the sword die by the sword and republicans are going to get a majority and they're going to be able to r

d.c. circuit court the d.c. circuit court is probably the now probably it is second only supreme court the most important court united states and some most important court because any federal regulation which includes all oversight from labor law to pollution laws everything else all of it gets litigated in the d.c. court because these are all federal laws they come out of washington d.c. is so the d.c. circuit court is like the court. up until. a boss and was put on this court there was a forty three republican majority and has been for a long long time their politics want to keep it this way and they have now filibustered two democratic appointees they're about to filibuster a third. this you know for obvious reasons they know they don't want democrats making regulatory decisions do you think that this is going to provoke harry reid to bring about the nuclear option so absolutely hope so because those who live by the sword die by the sword and republicans are going to get a majority and they're going to be able

d.c. circuit on the d.c. circuit court gosh i don't have the need to think i couldn't tell you there's a new democrat president obama finally got them in a court was he too late for the here for the arguments he's going to be part of this decision oh i don't think it's going to be part of the decision. pending on how long they stretch it right but i mean as of now we don't think he's going to be a part of the decision and is this the sort of thing that however the court rules it's going to end up in the supreme court anyway. that's a tough question you know it's going to if the f.c.c. loses on authority definitely they're going to try and get it into the supreme court somehow some way so i can tell you that the bottom line basically is that we've. published interest groups the f.c.c. in the public desire saying like a public utility right and you've got all these for profit corporations comcast prize in one thousand nine hundred principly sane. you know we want to not only be able to make as much money off as possible but

d.c. circuit court does not need more judges. i find this claim unpersuasive based on the workload of court. we can debate, in fact, the numbers, but statistics in this instance fail to reflect the complexity and difficulty of the cases that come before this court. and the same senators who say that the caseload fails to justify appointments now gladly voted to approve john roberts to the ninth seat on the court when the court had just 111 pending peels per judge. it now has 182 appeals per active judge. the history here is that the senate approved appointees nominated by george bush to fill the ninth, tenth, and 11th seats on the d.c. circuit, the three seats that are vacant today. but this issue should not be about partisan politics, it should not be about which president made the appointments. it ought to be about the principle, and that is if the workload is insufficient, the number of seats on the court should be reduced by legislation. the congress should not refuse to fill vacancies when they exist lawfully and, in fact, wh

d.c. circuit court of appeals this is the third republican filibuster of one of obama's d.c. circuit court nominees in just the past few weeks and democrats are. pretty furious and they might have every right to be the d.c. circuit is the second most important court in the country after the supreme court has jurisdiction over most cases involving federal regulation cases that involve the e.p.a.'s power to control greenhouse gases for example right now the court has an even four four split between republican and democratic appointees so make no mistake about it republican filibusters of president obama's nominees have one aim in one aim only and that aim is preventing democrats from getting the majority on the second most important court in the country no one should really be that surprised by this latest bout of congressional republican sabotage under mitch mcconnell's leadership of the g.o.p. minority in the senate the use of the filibuster has skyrocketed for many democrats monday's vote was the last straw growing number of democratic lawmakers including those in leadership

d.c. circuit court of appeals. those seats pre-dated the obama administration. how calling it court packing when all the president is doing is following his constitutional duty to appoint nominees to these existing judicial vacancies. it's absolutely silly. >> the circuit court currently has eight judges, four a pinted by democrats and four by republicans. soon there will be more appointed by the president having a direct impact on the epa. shannon? >> thank you. we'll talk about the implications of the nuclear option in our panel tonight. if you have not participated in our pulse, please take a moment to go to the home page. fox news.com/special report. there are simple instructions there. you can provide an and monitor real time feedback to what our panelists have to say. you can access the pulse on your smartphone or tablet. go to binge.com/politics. >>> the fallout with the fox allstars when we come back. yeah... try new alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heartburn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. [ male announc

d.c. circuit court the second most important court in the country after the supreme court and this was the third filibuster of one of president obama's d.c. circuit court nominees in just the past three weeks and for senate democrats it was the last straw so they took action the new filibuster rules will make it easier for the president to fill empty court seats and cabinet posts but they're not a cure all for washington gridlock republicans in the senate will still get to block popular legislation like the manchin toomey gun bill that they filibustered back in april and the cap and trade bill that they filibustered back in two thousand and ten and of course if the senate does manage to pass a bill over republican filibuster threat that bill still has to go through the house where the republican majority serves as a de facto filibuster threat of its own. we're seeing that right now with the senate's immigration bill which passed five months ago in june but which john boehner has yet to call a vote on it's easy to explain away washington gridlock with buzzwords like partisanship but the roo

d.c. circuit court, hall began and patricia millett. in the last five years, five men have been confirmed to the d.c. circuit, one woman. today the senate has an opportunity to help shape a court that better reflects our country. so i hope that they will not block another qualified female nominee for partisan reasons. at least senate republicans -- the least senate republicans owe professor pillard is the same confirmation process that chief justice roberts received. should republicans block her confirmation, as i fear they will, the senate will then vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to enhance safeguards at compounding pharmacies, which create custom-tailored medications for patients with unique health needs. this bipartisan legislation will ensure drugs manufactured in factories and mixed in pharmacies across the country are safe for -- are really safe for consumers. the measure will also implement tracking of medicines from the factory to the drugstore itself. last year unsantory conditions at a -- unsanitary conditions led to

d.c. circuit court will be impacted. at court is one of the critical checks on presidential power and federal regulations. the president has nominated three potential judges who will now basically be fast tracked, including professor nina pillard. >> degrees from yale and harvard, worked at the solicitor general's office, argued nine cases in the supreme court, briefed numerous others. two years in the office of legal counsel at the justice department. >> reporter: but critics say there's no reason for the president to insist these nominees be approved as quickly as possible. across the country, there are four federal courts so lacking in judges there are "judicial emergencies," and the d.c. circuit court is not one of them. skeptics say pillard is out of the main stream. >> she's probably the most extreme judge that has been nominated for this court, possibly for any court in the country. she seems to view everything from the radical feminist perspective. >> reporter: senate democrats are expected to vote on all three no

d.c. circuit court of appeals. the second most powerful court in the country. this is not normal behavior. >> this president has a lower percentage of -- that either george w. bush or bill clinton. the democrats don't have to accept it. harry reid -- option, simple majority vote that would change the senate rules so that nominees could be approved. instead, the republicans have counted on to obstruct. senator reid he is reluctant. threat to change the rules, but each time, he and mitch mcconnell have come to a gentleman's agreement. in january 2011 -- >> today's bipartisan agreement is. >>> it is promptly broken by republicans and the obstruction continues. this is not a way to govern, there's glowing momentum for harry reid to act. even vice president joe biden said it's worth considering the nuclear option. and today, both barbara boxer and dianne fienstein join a growing number of senate democrats in support of the nuclear option. harry reid today said once again he is actively weighing the nuclear option. >> one of the leading advocates of filibuster reform

d.c. circuit court to move forward. some democrats did vote against this.vin of michigan, an outspoken opponent of the nuclear option as well as joe manchin and pryor, two red state democrats. harry reid was able to get the majority. tending to distract from the presidented health care law, this is unprecedented. mitch mcconnell earlier saying they will be sorry they did this. hint hint, someday when we get power again. moving forward, alex, new rule of the united states senate in terms of how the president can move his judicial nominees forward. >> luke russert, thank you as always for the updates, my friend. >> sam, the idea that hint hint republicans may get power again. i think we can fold these two conversations together. we're talking about poverty and hunger. lately in the past week paul ryan emerged as the good shepherd that's going to lead the republican party out of this mrore morass. is what paul ryan proposing substantive. a blog, page and page of paul ryan's plan trying to figure out whatted dude -- dude -- is saying he would do to lower povert

d.c. court, circuit court nominations. this has been in the works for a week. these nominees were filibustered by republicans, all the while harry reid was warning them if they keep doing this, he's going to finally go nuclear. if you paid attention to the senate longer, the filibuster has been contention shuss most of -- contentious. the last time they changed the rules was in the 1970's. they moved it to 60 and democrats today said it's still too high of a bar. the supporters are calling it the constitutional option. saying every president the democrats were quick to focus on this week, not just president obama, all future presidents will have a stronger prerogative to fill the government with the people they want to work for them and seems like a very basic thing to support. on the downside there's something called minority rights which is sort of what makes the united states senate the united states senate which gives each senator an equal amount of importance in the chamber. the idea any of them can come up the works is sort of what makes it a special plac

d.c. circuit court. home state, in my and extraordinary well-qualified person, argued 32 cases before the u.s. supreme court and she was endorsed i both political parties. they were asked whether or not she could be bipartisan or nonpartisan. that, another woman, a professor at the georgetown university law school, and robert wilkins, he was nominated. they were all stop a filibuster. not a single person on the republican side stood up to criticize their qualifications for the job. it has nothing to do with their qualifications. it was to deny president obama on opportunity to fill the slots in the court. to add insult to injury, with the did to our friend and colleague, a congressman. 1843, the senate denied a member of congress the opportunity for an executive of i met. they did it to our friends, a congressman who had served in the house banking committee. he was stopped cold by the republican filibuster. if you listen, to the speech given by senator mcconnell, here is what you can sympathize and -- sy

d.c. circuit of the u.s. courtn the pentagon papers, watergate tapes, even ollie north and is likely to have a say on everything from environmental to dodd/frank but we can't seem to fill it. >> every single federal independent agency, every court case when they get sued or they sue goes to this particular court. the judge that we voted on, the senate voted on today, do you know whose seat she was there to fill? john roberts. john roberts the chief jus tifs the united states supreme court. when was he elevated? >> years ago. >> yes. 2005. so think that through. the court is divided equally between four rs and 4 ds not counting the retired justices with seniority. of those four active judges george bush appointed three and his father one. fill the courts is the president's job. their job is to say yes or no and that is mr. mcconnell's court. >> as ever thank you so much. >>> coming up jeffrey sachs joins us as we look back on the legacy of president john f. kennedy but first the cnbc market wrap on this historic day

d.c. circuit court of appeals. but the facts don't back them up. only one obama nominee has been confirmed to four nominees for bush and eight nominees for reagan. so how would he be stacking the court when he's only had one nominee that was approved and he was putting in nominations for empty seats? the seats need to be filled, angela. >> they absolutely need to be filled, but, rev, on a larger scale we need to be celebrating that today a substantial advancement was made. we can now bask in rnr which is the reid rule. we still have a major fight ahead. >> re-rule. not rest and relaxation. don't send the wrong message. >> we know you don't rest, rev. but to that point we now have a fair fight. we are now more on a level playing field. we know the constitution calls for majority rules. that is how a democracy absolutely should work. that is not how they've been operating. the filibuster was to be used for extreme circumstances. we've even seen filibusters, people protesting things simply because they did not like them. these are folks like judge wilk

d.c. circuit court. i think that frame is more or less right depending on how you want to phrase it. >> where your politics are. >> that's basically right. what it allows them to do is remove folks and get people in there. ed demarco oversees federal housing finance through the white house want to get rid of for a long time can be pushed aside because mel watt can get through the senate. i think when they named mel watt, i don't know if they ever actually expected him to get confirmed. now they are in this weird place they will get mel watt. >> mel watt is no longer a suggestion. >> mel watt is going to do some things to make people unhappy. he will probably make it easier for boriers to refinance their loans, which is not good for a lot of investors who have a lot of friends in the white house as well. >> in the interim, chris, i go back to you on this. in the interim i feel like this nuclear option will be used as a cudgel against the administration by folks in the tea party and on the radical right, o

d.c. circuit court. icia mallet, born in my state, an extremely well qualified person, argued 32 cases about the u.s. supreme court. she was endorsed by both political parties when they were asked whether or not she could be bipartisan, nonpartisan, add to that a professor from georgetown university law school and then robert wilkins, he, too, nominated. all stopped by a filibuster. not a single person on the republican side stood up to criticizes their qualifications for the job. it had nothing to do with their qualifications, it was to deny president obama an opportunity to fill these slots on the court. that's what it came down to. then to add absolute political insult to injury, what they did to our friend and colleague congressman mel watt. it's been since 1842 -- >> 1843. >> since the senate denied a member of congress an opportunity for an executive appointment and they did it to mel watt. a lawyer who had served in the house banking committee with distinction appointed by the president and stopped

d.c. circuit court and the nominee, patricia millett. the result?ere's senator patrick leahy on thursday. >> president obama is being treated differently than president bush was, patricia millett is being treated different than john roberts was. it is not fair. it's not extraordinary circumstance. there's no justification for it. >> forget the 2005 deal. forget extraordinary circumstances. better luck next time. you're an obama nominee. in fact, so far in this administration, 32 of his nominees have needed cloiture petitions to end filibusters over nominations. that number in the entire bush presidency just 18. there's that old saying justice delayed is justice denied and couldn't be more true right now in the judicial system. might be a political game to republicans in washington but access to the courts matters to americans of all political persuasions across the country and we saw that firsthand this week. joining is professor spencer overton and drew courtney. thanks to you both. >> thanks for having me. >> thank you. >> spencer, i want to start

court in washington, d.c. holds a whole lot of power. >> the d.c. circuit court of appeals. >> this is a court that can rule for or against the executive orders of this administration. >> a court that some people have called the second most important court in the nation. >> it is delivered rebuke after rebuke to the president's agenda. today, the court overturned an obama care provision mandating businesses cover their employees' birth control. this year, it invalidated the president's national labor relations board appointments, making the body nonfunctional. last year, it struck down epa rules on air pollution. all of that from this one court. now, republicans filibustering a nominee isn't new. what is new and dangerous is the reason. you see, the d.c. appellate court has 11 seats, three of those seats are now vacant. and the judges who are there reliablely deliver conservative rulings. if the president could appoint one judge, it would tip the court's balance. if he could fill all three vacancies, it would transform the court and all of american justice.

d.c. circuit court of appeals. the second most important court in the country after the supreme court. let me bring in now connecticut senator richard blumenthal. sir, thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. >> the president speaking a short time ago, reacting to this decision. he points out that this is years in the making with both sides, democrats and republicans. but now you have republicans saying that they will reciprocate when they control the senate and the white house again. >> i actually think that this rule change will make the senate work better. it will enable us to get things done which is what the american people want. the democrats may some day be in the minority. but at least the government will work on doing its constitutional duty. >> senator, i have to pause you for one second. we are following breaking news here, a potentially dangerous situation in kansas where a massive 747 had landed at the wrong airport. there was great concern it would not be able to get into the air. as it is 9,000 feet or more needed for this aircraft. now we see it's been a successfu

d.c. circuit court. it's an incredibly important post. the d.c. federal agent sis. the same court that rumed against the contraception mandate in the affordable care act earlier this month. on tuesday the supreme court -- go ahead on a restrictive law that shuts down a third of abortion facilities in the state. on the same day voters in albuquerque, new mexico, overwhelmingly defeated a measure to outlaw abortions after 20 weeks. it was the first time a municipality voted on the issue. it's an ominous sign of the anti-choice strategy to go increasingly focus at the local level. liz winstead, author and co-creator of "the daily show." dina wieinstein. a mom who had an abortion after 20 weeks. i want to start with you, liz, talk about what you were doing monday night with sarah silverman helping to raise money, actually, for women in texas. >> when the ruling came down and the fifth circuit decided they were going to allow these draconian laws to go implemented, women's clinics all over texas had to call patients at 11:00 at night and say, we can't

d.c. circuit court of appeals. the move short-circuits filibusters on most presidential nominees except for those from the u.s. supreme court. >> important and most dangerous >> the most important and most dangerous restructuring of rules since thomas jefferson wrote them. enough is enough. >> this is too important to keep falling prey day after day to washington politics. >> we are approaching a slippery slope that will destroy the vy unique aspect of this institutioion called the united states senate. >> i'm wonderg if senator mccain has a point. will the senate begin to resemble the house? >> it will. you will see a marked increase in partisanship. the filibuster was not used and the republicans have abused it and overused it aand trivialized it. and the grgreat civil rights fit of 1964, the difference betwtwen then and now was found in the vote. they were 29 vos to keep the filibuster going against this -- the civil rights act of 1964. 24 of those were cast by democrats. the parties were not polarized. they are

d.c. circuit court of appeals. this doesn't take into consideration they twice turned down one of the most qualified people in my 30 years in the senate that i have ever seen come before this body, caitlin halligan. so we have got three more to add to that list. the d.c. circuit is considered by many to be the highest court of the land, and some think maybe the most important. it deals with these complex cases come from federal agencies and other things within their jurisdiction. republicans have blocked four of president bush's five nominees to the d.c. circuit, whereas democrats approved four of president bush's six nominations to this important court. today, the d.c. circuit court, at least the second most important court in the land, has more than 25% in vacancies. mr. president, i ask order. there is a conversation over here that's quite distracting. the president pro tempore: the senate will be in order. the senator is -- has the right to be heard. mr. reid: thank you. mr. president, there isn't a single legi

d.c. circuit court. because we want it to be dominated by the judges who were confirmed when president bush was president. and then just yesterday, this pattern of blockading up-and-down votes on nominees continued with the minority filibustering, blocking the closing of debate on cornelia pillard. and, again, highly qualified individual. an argument wasn't made that there was some exceptional circumstance in her background that left her unprepared for this position. the argument was simply made, we don't want to let the president put any judges on this d.c. circuit court. well, that's an extreme concern, and i must say that it has caused folks who have been scholars in this area to look at it. norm ornstein of the american enterprise institute basically said that's ridiculous for the minority to block up-and-down votes. not on the basis that there's something wrong with their qualifications but just because they want to take away the president's ability and constitutional responsibility to nominate indi

d.c. circuit court. so the democrats did the exact same thing when the position was reversed. second, there isn't enough work for the current members of that court, let alone continuing to add. third, senator grassley has a bill to remedy it. why don't you work with us on a bipartisan basis to address the underlying problem. >> john, i really think that does not pass the laugh test. just coincidentally these are obama's nominees. >> let me further push the laugh test for a second. i can't resist. as you know, i like having you here, and i think you're always very candid and come at angles i don't think of normally. senator cornyn said today something that i think sort of fits. you're talking about a fight over three d.c. court of appeals judges. maybe sooner or later you might want to get to a nuclear option. senator cornyn said he thought faced with two weeks of going home that in fact this was kind of a good things to have a new argument. what happens it that made it necessary literally the day they're going home for the thanksgiving break to bring it up today? >> i think thi

d.c. circuit court in your favor. frustrated when the court curbs your power on recess appointments. do whatever it takes. stack the d.c. circuit with your favorite appointees, people that will rule in your favor. worried that e.p.a.'s regulation on cap-and-trade fee increases might get challenged in the court. do whatever it takes, stack the d.c. circuit in your favor. frustrated because senate republicans have the nerve to hold you to the same standards you established during the last administration. do whatever it takes. change the rules of the united states senate. that's what we have witnessed today. nothing but an absolute power grab. the majority in the senate and their allies in the administration are willing to do whatever it takes to achieve their partisan agenda. they know that there will be additional challenges to obamacare, they know that if they can stack the deck on the d.c. circuit, they can remove one of the last remaining checks on presidential power. but make no mistake. my friends on the other side will have to answer this question, why did you choose this moment

d.c. circuit's caseload is low, but they claim d.c.'s caseload numbers don't take into account the complexity of the court's docket based upon the number of administrative appeals filed in that circuit . as i've said, this argument doesn't stand up against scrutiny. my colleagues argue the d.c. circuit docket is complex because 43% of its dockets is made up of administrative appeals. but of course there is a reason they cite a percentage rather than a number, and that is because it is a high percentage of a very small number. when you look at the actual number of these so-called complex cases per judge, the second circuit has almost twice as many as the d.c. circuit. in 2012, there were 512 administrative appeals filed in the d.c. circuit, but in the second circuit there were 1,493 filed. stated differently, in d.c. there were only 64 administrative appeals per active judge. the second circuit has nearly twice as many with 115 filings. again, that's 64 administrative appeals per judge in d.c. compared to almost twice as many with the second circuit at 115. so this entire argument about complexity i hope comes out to be nonsense to most

d.c. circuit court of appeals which because of the important federal matters that it handles, is considered second only to the supreme court in importance so that was really the breaking point, and this drama, i will say, also does create a distraction which the administration of course welcomes from the obama care rollout which has been dragging down president obama's approvals to record lows in some polls. >> the president had a different perspective, brianna, when he was a united states senator, right? >> reporter: yeah, that's right. it's always interesting to have a president who has a record in the senate when they get into fights with congress, and the president does on this specific case. in 2005, he took to the senate floor and spoke out against the nuclear option. here's how he explained why the minority party should have the option of this tool of the filibuster. >> if the right of free and open debate is taken away from the minority party and the millions of americans who ask us to be their voice, i fear that the already partisan atmosphere in washington will be poisoned to the

d.c. circuit court of appeals. on the second one of those nominees as well, cornelia pillard and robert wilkins. the d.c. circuit court has jurisdiction over washington, which means it hears appeals over every regulation that congress passes, every piece of legislation a president signs. three vacant seats on the court, those three obama nominees would tip the ideological scale in the democrats' favor. it seems reasonable enough, since obama is the duly elected president. he won the election, after all. he's won two elections. but the republicans don't quite see it that way. instead of playing by the rules, they're trying to change the makeup of the court. instead of filling the three empty seats in the d.c. sicircu court, they want to eliminate them. they say there are three seats too many. it is an absurd argument but republicans have sticking with it and blocked all three nominees from joining the court n short, they have been picking a fight. they have picked fights like this before, only this time harry reid d

d.c. circuit court. because of the ideology, john, of these -- or even the qualifications of these particular judges. it's because they are concerned about stacking this court because it is currently evenly split. pretty much evenly split between judges appointed by a democratic president, judges who are appointed by a republican president and they don't want to rock that boat. it's certainly not the only reason democrats are making this move but certainly is one of the most recent reasons. when i say "this move," it is to prevent republicans from using the filibuster in a way that we have seen so many times. right now, a filibuster needs 60 votes to overcome. and what this rule change would do would be to make it a simple majority. 51 votes. it would make the democrats life a whole lot easier right now because they have a 55-vote majority. the reason it's not done every time the senate changes hands is because everybody has sort of tended to realize that they could be in the minority the next time aroun

d.c. circuit court of appeals. second only to the supreme court because it rules on all sorts of federal regulations and agencies. it looks at important issues of government. chuck grassley wants to slash the seats that obama's nominees would fill. right now the political make up is half and half. >> there are 11 full-time positions and three availablingan sis for four of the eight folks, for democrat and republican. this assumes that they are all driven by ideology in making decisions on the law. the republican argument forgets the fact that there's something like five or six so-called senior judges, part-time judges coming from the judicial ball pen to decide case, the majority of those in this case happen to be republican judges. grassly makes the wonderful argument, i think highly dubious that you need not fill the availablingan sis because there's not enough work. it's less than an empierical assessment. i would argue, the skeptical journalist i am, hypocritical for a bunch of guys who don't suffer from exhaust

d.c. circuit court all of us now he's no longer qualify and it turns out he's impeachable right turns out oh he's got so many conflicts of interest he's been he has he has behaved in a way that if he was on any other federal court he would have been impeached by interacting with his confirmation on like his predecessor who slipped through half the hearings and notably admitted to his biographer that he left his i don't deny right we might have a conversation about you know history but it's become political so let's let's let's move on elizabeth warren is to teach a course on it no doubt and i would doubt in her speech just in a speech yesterday a list senator warren elizabeth. and warned that the idea of too big to fail banks has only gotten worse since the two thousand a financial collapse warren said that who would have thought five years ago after we witnessed firsthand the dangers of an overly concentrated financial system that the too big to fail problem could only have gotten worse this is something i talk about in my new book the crash of twenty sixteen i discuss how there's going

d.c. circuit court will rule in favor of internet companies sadly abolish current regulations how do you see this case playing out. well i think that analysis is is is fair we listen to the oral arguments in september the f.c.c. which was which was brought to court by of arisan didn't put up a very good defense of this sort of questions that the judges were asking indicated that they favored horizons argument here and i just to be clear what verizon is saying is that it has the first amendment right as a corporation to edit the internet has the first amendment right to decide what sort of content goes over the internet and conversely what kind of content does not and it seemed that this appeals court was was borrowing a lot of that argument so there's every possibility that in the next couple of weeks as you mention that a decision could come down that basically takes away the f.c.c. ability to protect consumers and this is a kid in having the p.a. with no power to go after oil companies if they pollute or things like that it's a real question of whether or not the federal communications com

d.c. circuit court will rule in favor of the internet companies sadly abolish current regulations how do you see this case play now. well i think that analysis is is is fair we listen to the oral arguments in september the f.c.c. which was which was brought to brought to court by of arisan didn't put up a very good defense of the sort of questions that the the judges were asking indicated that they favored horizon's argument here and i just to be clear what verizon is saying is that it has the first amendment right as a corporation to edit the internet has the first amendment right to decide what sort of content goes over the internet and conversely what kind of content does not and it seemed that this appeals court was was borrowing a lot of that argument so there's every possibility that in the next couple of weeks as you mention that a decision could come down that basically takes away the f.c.c. ability to protect consumers and this is a kid in having the p.a. with no power to go after oil companies if they pollute or things like that it's a real question of whether or not the federal co

d.c. circuit. it's the second most powerful court in our country. it handles the regulatory issues out of washington, d.c. here is the problem. none of these are judicial emergencies. the president didn't declare an emergency. the d.c. judges aren't asking for additional help. as the power of the president, he's boldly saying he wants to reshape the federal judiciary and tilt the ideological balance. if you don't think this is a fight against ideology you're kidding yourself. what the senate republicans need to do is be tough. >> there are three vacancies, they need to fill them. then i see they tried to fill them even under president bush. one of the vacant seats was left vacant by chief justice john roberts. george bush tried to nominate somebody and the democrats filibustered him. >> because that's the way the system works. the senate has rules in place including the 60 rule which impacts the judicial nominations. you have the to get 60 to confirm, at least the vote to go forward. then a majority once you have clearance to have the vote on the flo

d.c. circuit court which is, as we've been talking about, a very important critical court in this country.en done. finger's been lifted off the trigger now. it's detonated, as you say. what will that heavy price that senator mccain refers to be? >> reporter: we're going to see. look the senate is arranged in i pretty clever way and even though the power of the filibuster, the power of the minority in what was until a few minutes ago the filibuster, 60-vote threshold was a big one, but there are other tricks senators from up their sleeve. the process, the best way a senator, any single senator, can legislate and can make a political impact is by learning those rules. and ways around the rules and there are lots of ways for members of the senate body to throw things up in the air. i think that's one of the answers. the other answer is in terms of getting along. the reason why we wanted to talk to senator mccain in that particular exchange that he had with reporter is so interesting is because he was the one about a month ago, maybe a little bit more who got a deal going with the democratic l

d.c. circuit court.ght now tied 4-4, with three vacancies if those are filled by democrats, 7-4 in favor of whatever regulations this court controls, federal regulations. >> what we saw yesterday was replay actually what happened with obamacare t was a brazen, partisan abuse of power and it was designed to do couple things. number one to change the topic. democrats want to talk about anything other than millions of people hurting because of obamacare. but number two, it replayed, you know, just as the president said, if you liked your plan, you can keep it. harry reid, said repealy this year under no circumstances use "the nuclear option" to change senate rules. just like president obama did, he broke his promise. he broke his word. but you put your finger on the immediate end goal here. which is they want to pack the court. in particular pack the d.c. circuit, to cover up, the president and this is one of the most troubling aspects of this administration, has been lawless and picking and choosing which