[applause] ginsburg: that is for citizens united. the other question about, what , i will quote what sandra day o'connor said about that. said, "get out there and make a good show. the more women are out there doing things, the more women will believe that they can do things." that would be my answer to your second question. [applause] >> thank you, justice ginsburg and professor babcock. i am to your left. for all of your inspiration, i have your first book, professor babcock. i got it when you were at the national association of women lawyers meeting many years ago in california. i'm looking forward to reading the second one. i'm going to follow up on the last question, and something that professor babcock said earlier. this association, the american bar association, numerous women lawyer groups have studied why women are leaving the legal profession early on and later in their careers. also, produced surveys showing the stagnation of women once they get into partnership ranks, not moving up into leadership roles. interestingly, in

here i failed to take into account marty ginsburg and the remarkable ginsburg marriage. toward of end of his life, marty, a renowned tax lawyer, told a friend that the most important thing i've done is to enable ruth to do what she has done. marty did not live to see ruth rock and roll, though i'm sure he would have applauded that, too. my personal story about ruth and marty has to do with participating in his campaign for her appointment to the d.c. circuit, which then led to the supreme court. ruth did not ask me to do it. marty called. he did not argue her case but simply assumed that i would do all i could because ruth and i were on the same team. part of the same great movement for women's rights, one of the small but ever-increasing band of feminist law professors, law professor feminists. when marty engaged me to aid in ruth's appointment to the d.c. circuit, i was assistant attorney general for the civil division. and the attorney general asked me to find some women for the president to appoint to federal courts, as if this involved a harrowing and difficult sear

here, justice ginsburg quotes from the constitution. we the people of the united states in order to form a more perfect union." -- and she continues. " we are still striving for that more perfect union. one of the perfections is for the we the people to include an ever enlarged group." the author then concludes. "this expansion has been rbg's life's work. it is not over yet." i would add that we the people should be very grateful. [applause] please welcome justice ruth bader ginsburg. [applause] justice bader ginsberg: good evening. before i introduce tonight's super lecturer, a few words about the new portrait recently hung in the back of the room. [laughter] [applause] justice bader ginsberg: that is my official portrait. it is also shown on a collection of my own words and writings. as an official portrait, it will not be transported back from here to the court until i am a -- no longer part of this world. and as i am trying very hard to stay fit. [laughter] [applause] justice bader ginsberg: i anticipate that they will possess that

justice ginsburg: so, like, guenevere? she longs for the days of n knightsaiden hood whe would cross blades over her. 's longing for the way notould have been but was because of arthur. : there can be no -- fake news. aided and abetted by the failing camelot news network. there can be no accusation without evidence and there is no evidence. >> what about the fact that king arthur's administration was already in a lot of trouble for missteps? even after lancelot massacred 80 knights, all he did was throw paper towels to the crowd for cleanup. [laughter] francisco: that is how the deep state works. mordred's genius was in realizing dissatisfaction with arthurian values. before arthur came to power, all the nice did was whack away freely without any restriction in the rule of law. he prohibited their ability to whack and channels it into the rule of law. >> doesn't that violate the second amendment? [laughter] [applause] your honor, i: think that it might, but we have had no second amendment claims raised in this case. about,

here, justice ginsburg quotes from the constitution. of the united states in order to form a more perfect union -- we still striving for that more perfect union. one of the perfections is for the we the people to include an ever enlarged group. the authors then conclude that this expansion has been rbg's life's work. it is not over yet. i would add that we the people should be very grateful. [applause] please welcome justice ruth bader ginsburg. [applause] justice bader ginsberg: good evening. before i introduce tonight's super lecturer, a few words about the new portrait recently hung in the back of the room. that is my official portrait. shown on a collection of my own words and writings. portrait, it will not be transported back from until i am aourt longer part of this world. i am trying stare -- very hard to stay fit. [laughter] [applause] that they will possess that portrait for a fair number of years. [applause] kim.rtist is she painted the portrait of may on display at columbia law school. associations, and was my daughter's cla

justice ginsburg. you have always been a very generous -- been very generous in giving of your time to the efforts of the society, when we have called upon you. thank you for taking time from your enormous schedule at this particular time of year. about becauseomes of my deep and abiding connection to our two hosting organizations, the supreme court historical society and the john simon guggenheim foundation. my history with the historical society goes back over 25 years. my history with the guggenheim goes back a little over 10 years. each of these organizations has forme a touchstone for me, our collective american history. what could possibly be the common thread? it would be the constitution itself. purchasedsband howard a copy of the united states september 17, 1787, nearly 30 years ago. during my stewardship of this have attempted to provide much greater access to the public, the student sent to academics. touch thecal to even document when you have the opportunity to do so. not tonight. through

by supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. the event, in the supreme court chamber, was cohosted by the supreme court historical society and the john simon guggenheim memorial foundation. it is about an hour and 15 minutes. jus. ginsberg: let me begin by expressing the society's gratitude to justice ginsburg. you have always been a generous -- very generous in giving of your time in your efforts to the society, when we have called upon you. and thank you for taking time from your really enormous schedule at this particular time of year. this evening comes about because of my deep and abiding connection to our two hosting organizations, the supreme court historical society and the john simon guggenheim foundation. my history with the historical society goes back over 25 years. my history with the guggenheim goes back a little over 10 years. each of these organizations has become a touchstone for me, for our collective american history. what could possibly be the common thread? it would be the constitution itself. my late husban

justice ginsburg. [applause] justice ginsburg: absolutely my pleasure. from our first encounter many years ago, dorothy goldman has people. of my favorite thanks, dorothy, for that fine introduction and appreciation to your many contributions to the well-being of the supreme court historical society. and, good evening to all gathered here. a hearty welcome to my workplace, the supreme court of the united states. [laughter] the the conversation you are about to hear, on modes of constitutional interpretation, is sponsored by the supreme court historical society and the john simon guggenheim memorial foundation. dorothy goldman was the catalyst in bringing the two organizations together. my colleagues and i applaud her initiative. the society, as many of you know, was founded by chief justice warren burger in 1974 to advance public understanding of the court and its role in our nation's democracy. the society pursues its mission in many ways, including programs like tonight's, and publications. here it is. but publications and one of my favorites is called

just exactly following the ginsburg rule. i expect this nominee announced tonight to likewise follow the ginsburg standard. i will ask the nominee how he or she use the law and a judges role on the bench. i will not presume to know how a nominee will rule on any case that might come before the court today, tomorrow or ten years from now. i certainly will not be basing my vote on whether i think i will agree with the majority of his or her decisions. the president reported that the president focused on six or seven potential nominees for this vacancy. each one is well-qualified and would make an outstanding supreme court justice. the nominee will get a full and fair hearing and under my watch the senate judiciary committee will never be a rubberstamp. several recent nominees to the lower courts learned that the hard way. the process will be fair and will be transparent, as much as i can make it. that is been my approach during my nearly 38 years in the senate and all of those 38 years on the senate judiciary committee and i wi

justice ginsburg: [ indiscernible] shortly after that, the country. what with the simple folks think about that? refer toeech could shared leadership with arthur. there were two thrones and mordred thought he should be at the right hand of the father. -mails.ll, the e you have a question for before the merits of the case. as you heard, i am from another country and i wonder if you are disputing my jurisdiction to be here with some sort of a tariff. >> well, as an immigrant, albeit temporary, we assume you are not throwing away your -- >> you are not taking the position i am an illegal immigrant. >> no. we think you are allowed and we welcome you. >> i think you are downplaying the slight of the knights. vanquishedh the vegas golden knights. bewellk, knights will knights. you cannot take anything they say literally. you can take it seriously, but not literally. the noted social scientist and connecticut yankee, mark twain, observed that knights take all they bosh and believe boobies.ig while we are taking notice of things outside of the record, i was l

ruth bader ginsburg, how long she plans to stay on the high court? >> let's start with the twitter war of michael cohen and donald trump. what was already a shifting denial of collusion today has turned into a flat out that collusion even matters? >> i have been sitting here trying to find collusion as a crime. collusion is not a crime. i don't know if it is a crime collusioning of russians. >> you start analyzing the crime. the hacking ises t the crime. >> the president didn't hack. >> okay, again all this is just a day before jury selection begins on the trial of manafort's. we start with jeff bennett at the white house and ken delanian. >> fill us in. >> rudy giuliani was on fox news and he was explaining why he believes that michael cohen is saying that there is a premeeting a strategy session before the infamous june 2016 trump tower meeting where a bunch of senior trump officials met with the russians. rudy giuliani says michael cohen is now saying that some of the participants including donald trump jr. and jared kushner got together and talke

bader ginsburg was attending a play about her good friend antonin scalia. bader ginsburg added it is not the bald eagle, but the pendulum which is a symbol of the united states. once it moves far in one direction, you can count on it moving back. >>> and garrett thomas capturing the -- geraint thomas wins the tour de france. he won by 1:51. chris froome came in third. with thomas' win, team sky has won six of the last seven tour de france titles. thomas telling the bbc the win is incredible. the stuff of dreams. >>> take a look at this. former president barack obama and michelle obama jamming out at the beyonce and jay-z concert on saturday night. videos of the pair getting down in the box seats with several filming their moves on their phones. she attended a concert in paris just two weeks ago where she was caught on video dancing with queen bey's mom. did you attend? >> i did not. i could not make it. who doesn't love beyonce and jay-z? >> i'm more of a beyonce fan. >> it is a dynamic duo. >>> president trump launching one of the most direct attacks yet o

that was amazing then judge ginsburg was nominated and that was a disaster also. because it turns out he smoked marijuana as a harvard law school professor and that was a no-no back then. so when justice kennedy was nominated it was almost like anti- climax this playing guy from sacramento. as i recall, it was a fairly hearing people were exhausted and just wanted to get it over with. >> but then and now there was a big difference between certain republican nominees but bjork spent his whole life criticizing the war in court to the liberal court of the 60s and 70s and was opposed to a lot of the civil rights decisions certainly roe versus wade and a lifelong critic if he was on the supreme court that would change a lot and go back and overturn a whole series of precedents he was like a younger version of the same thing the hard edge hard conservative let's overturn but kennedy was a very different person conservative guy coming up in the reagan administration when reagan was governor a catholic conservative but he had none of the passion that says i will come into

it's what ruth bader ginsburg did during her confirmation process in 1993. she said a judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints. no hints, no forecasts, no previews. she said that this would, quote, display disdain for the entire judicial process and she was confirmed. that's the ginsburg standard. every nominee since then has followed that standard. the second thing i expect to happen is that democrats are going to complain that judge kavanaugh follows the ginsburg standard. we've heard it already. they're going to complain that we won't -- that he won't promise to take their side in cases that might come up before the court. they're going to complain and have already that some of the cases he's decided in the past didn't work out the way that they wanted them to work out, not what the law said, not what was right but what they wanted. it's what democrats and the judiciary committee did when neil gorsuch was nominated to the supreme court last year. we've seen this movie before. we know the playbook. they've criticized him for some

at the beginning of the week we heard justice ginsburg talk to the d.c. bar. she wanted to present the court in a nonpolitical fashion. as you point out, by friday we had things very different. that was one very well researched article. the exchange would think trump and kennedy was referenced about the banking interest. about the charting of the kennedy clerk. >> we need you to ask the question. >> your reactions in light of the article and how it makes you feel about the court? >> i don't think that's the question is -- we talked about this at the beginning about whether the trump administration's attempts to get kennedy up the court, do they shake my confidence in reality and the political system and democracy? no, it is quite routine. presidents try hard to usher off the court. kennedy'shat justice son had business dealings with president trump, i don't know if that tells you anything. it is worth knowing. the kennedy kids are successful, middle-aged men who of gone on to have careers. it is not unusual in new york people should a business dealings with ea

ginsburg is 85. breyer is 79. thomas is 70. alito, 68. sotomayor is 64. roberts is 63. isan is 50 8 p.m. gorsuch 50. other possible nominees, kavanaugh is 53. -- guest: there are interesting parallels in the age -- the folks on the left of the court and the democratic leadership in congress as well. it sort of feels like democrats are bumping up against things in both congress and on the supreme court. i think all of this is by design, at least when it comes to potential nominees. yesterday atpotted lunch, rudy giuliani, andrew giuliani, sean hannity, eating lunch with the president in new jersey. guest: this is the one caveat of all the vetting and things that go through the white house counsel's office. obviously, the president has a zone outside kitchen cabinet folks. those are the people harder to engage. he is hearing it from a multitude of folks, including folks with big cable news platforms. his attorney, rudy giuliani. he asks everybody about the big decisions that are coming up before him, a special es like the spirit we have heard some things about who these f

do you think this evokes ruth th bader ginsburg? i believe it it t bader ginsburg?e i believe it it to the audience. [laughter] audience. [laugh the bigger problem -- it's thee doily --igger problem - >> laura: they are both it's t beautiful and their own way.y. >> laura: they are both beau >> of felicity joines had the doily, it would be better. >> of felicity >> laura: she's super nice.nes e doily, it would be better. >> laura: she's super nice. i spent new year's eve with her i spent new year's eve with 1986. her 1986. >> they played a trailer of this movie, and legal scholars are going crazy. watch. this movie, and legal scholars are going crazy. >> you think you can change the watch. country, you should look at heru generation. think can change the country, you they are taking to the streets.r gene >> protests are important.tion. they are taking to changing the current dominant culture means nothing of the law doesn't change. >> what did you see your nameta. was?s? changing the current dominant culture means nothing of the law >> ruth bader ginsburg. doesn't ch

ruth bader ginsburg gives a major clue on when she plans to retire. >>> the secret government program tracking u.s. citizens when they fly, even those not suspected of a crime and not on a watch list. the tsa explains the so-called "quiet skies" program. >>> also, the young man from texas who finished in last place at the tour de france, but inspired millions. >>> plus, the homeless man giving out his resume on the road side instead of asking for money. this morning, the overwhelming response. >>> and what you need to know if your child is a fussy eater. the new research on what not to do. >>> and we do say good morning, everyone. >> i'm kendis gibson. >> and i'm romina puga, filling in for diane macedo. >>> we begin with the breaking news overnight from the wildfire emergency on the west coast. the death toll now rising with another firefighter losing his life. >> also overnight, a dramatic increase in the number of homes lost around redding, california, where more than 38,000 people have now been forced to flee their homes. with new flames igniting and little relief in sight, the ca

in any case, we have looked at the record and read what justice ginsburg said. is said this, " this something central to a woman's life, to her dignity, a decision she must make for herself and when government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult, human responsible for her own choices." pretty straightforward, eloquent answer, and to us, the actual ginsburg fule mea -- rule testifying insupportable women's right to choose. anything less should be disqualifying. on the afford care act, the nominee must be clear. the law has been upheld by the supreme court not once but twice. the nominee should be allowed, should not be allowed to avoid sharing their views on these past cases. so, we expect to hear the nominee will consider these cases have been been rightly decided and it would uphold the affordable care act if it comes before them in the future. this issue is particularly relevant because this nominee's confirmation is happening in a time when the trump administration is refusing to defend the law in court. and is join

there is a new ruth bader ginsburg biopic. >> you have your tickets?laura: i'm ready, ready, ready. it's called "on the basis of sex" ." is that the joke? >> that's not it. >> laura: is coming under fire for potential inaccuracies. what are they? >> first of all, portraying ruth bader ginsburg as an actress named felicity jones. i'll put up a picture of them side by side. you can compare. you think this evokes ruth bader ginsburg? i believe it it to the audience. [laughter] the bigger problem -- it's the doily -- >> laura: they are both beautiful and their own way. >> of felicity joines had the doily, it would be better. >> laura: she's super nice. i spent new year's eve with her 1986. >> they played a trailer of this movie, and legal scholars are going crazy. watch. >> you think you can change the country, you should look at her generation. they are taking to the streets. >> protests are important. changing the current dominant culture means nothing of the law doesn't change. >> what did you see your name was? >> ruth bader ginsburg. >> the word "woma

the truth is, as a previous caller said, justice ginsburg is really on the way out.s highly likely to be replaced by trump. if trump decides not to appoint barrett this time around, he will do it for the replacement nominee for justice ginsburg. host: most of the callers this morning seem to be leaning towards amy barrett. the optics of her selection -- what would that mean? guest: selecting a woman would be important for this president. you saw the importance of roe v. wade in this decision-making and the debate we are about to see on capitol hill. having a woman be one of those justices could be -- if roe v. wade is overturned -- having a woman being one of those justices in that opinion would be very important for a lot of different things. for republicans who confirmed her, for the president who nominated her. so very important. and having a third woman on a nine-member bench is probably important as well. host: nbc news is reporting on congressman jim jordan as assistant coach knowing about allegations of sexual assaultabl assault and activities that went -- asi

the society's gratitude to justice ginsburg. you have always been a very generous in giving of your time to the efforts of the society, when we have called upon you. thank you for taking time from your enormous schedule at this particular time of year. this evening comes about because of my deep and abiding connection to our two hosting

>> supreme court justices ruth bader ginsburg, stephen breyer and elena kagan took part in a the trial titled insurrection of camelot. other participants include the u.s. solicitor general noah francisco and the canadian supreme court justice suzanne coat. this is an hour. >> in a kingdom not so far away and long time ago, king arthur and queen guenevere have created a near utopian society.

justice ginsburg is 85 in march. was there any implications, where he says i'm thinking about going now, what about you? you know what i'm talking about here. would they communicate about that? >> i'm sure they talk about a lot of things, but i'm not sure they have had that conversation. justice ginsburg has made it clear she's not going anywhere any time soon. >> you know, part of justice kennedy's legacy is that he has upheld roe v. wade, right? >> he was a vote in one of the joint alters of the plurality in casey. >> how much pride do you believe he takes in that? you were one of his clerks, what did he speak about in that regard, if at all? >> we didn't talk about that case in chambers possibly because we didn't have an abortion case in the term that i was clerking. one of the things that i think about when i think about his legacy there is that it's so much broader legacy than one opinion. and the next justice will affect so many other issues than just abortion. the precedent that comes to mind is something that

i could not disagree with anyone in the bottom line with ruth bader ginsburg. kennedy the same. no one can i believe's way that man off hisar

tom: another figure displaying civility is 85-year-old supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg, also the subject of a een doingry that has exceedingly well. >> how could you not want to make a documentary about ruth bader ginsburg? she is this totally amazing person. she was a lawyeroing back to the 1970's who fought for women's rights in courts, including the u.s. supreme cours she hacome in recent years this mega celebrity who millennials treat like a rock star. >> the must be times when you do feel blue. i'm not feeling blue right now. >> me neither. tom: one theory on why the films about ruth bader ginsburg and fred rogers have been popular is the profile inspirational imfigures during troubling and they give mature, grown-up role models. >> i think both rbg and fred rogers are very adult figures, and that is something we don't currently have. we don't have someone who is delivering the truth, like authentic people on tv or in the film space. i think people are starved for that in some way. rbg and fred rogers deliver that. those films deliver that. tom: other documentaries doing

i could not disagree with anyone in the bottom line with ruth bader ginsburg. kennedy the same. no one can i believe's way that man off his mark. he was ready to retire and so he did. if we want to look for difficulties and division -- i feel it too. .t is a tough place to live certainly in the swamp but across the nation. and i do think getting back to this abortion issue is there a more divisive issue? more rancor or difficulty involving any issue you can think of? the reason for that, we as citizens were disenfranchised from our ability to enact laws into the register that would reflect our view of what this means. host: let's hear from mike in virginia. republican line. caller: i think people are getting wound up over roe versus wade for nothing. the odds on thing getting .verturned are miniscule if it were to be overturned, it would be from a case coming before the court where the justices were having to reconsider whether or not roe versus wade was decided properly in the first place. decision back over the , i see that the whole idea of the constitutional right was create

good to see you again, director ginsburg. i'm jackie flynn, phillip randolph institute here in san francisco. as many of you know, we work with families across the city. over the years, our organization has volunteered to help connect low-income families and at-risk youth to san francisco rec and park activities like the green ages program. we've worked with supervisor cohen's office, build inc., to create a genuine community engagement program that allows our families to provide input on changes happening in the neighborhood. to many families in our neighborhood, every penny counts. oftentimes when folks get worried about hearing about bond measures that may impact their income and gentrify the neighborhood. it's been providing opportunity for residents to communicate concerns and also express their desires. we encourage all residents to participate in their civic duty and vote in every election. as we've heard from parents, youth and elders that use or want to use open spaces and parks, they've said they need more. the ones

so justices ginsburg and sotomayor agreed 95.8% of the time and justices thomas and alito agreeing 93%. but sotomayor and alito disagreed and thomas 50.7% of the time. so you do really see i think this term just in the data shows some pretty stark things. i think we some of -- some of the things stayed the same. like justice thomas wrote the most opinions. which i think, you know, there's some particularly along the left like oh this guy is not up to the job or something. i mean, every year writing these incredibly detailed opinions separately, 31 opinions this time compared to justice kagan's nine opinions that she wrote. i don't think numbers necessarily tells you too much. but i mean, to the extent that anyone is saying like you know some justices are not working, that's obviously not the case. just one other number i want to give you before i get to the travel ban and that's just the number of women who argued at the supreme court this year because as some of you saw judge kavanaugh's remarks yesterday and i noticed something in his hiring patterns that he does hire a lot of women.

. >> david, i was reminded today the vote on ginsburg, ginsburg, not all that long ago in our lifetimes, was 96-3. she was not a puzzle to us. writers of history, it strikes me you're entire business is all about timing. look back at the last three presidents, two term presidents. they had two picks over eight years. along comes donald trump and he gets two picks right off the bat. 18 months and sooner or later, guys like you are writing about legacy, whatever else happens that defines whatever this presidency is. >> absolutely. it's interesting. if judge kavanaugh is confirmed, we'll have one justice from the one term president from george walker bush, clarence thomas, then two from clinton, two from 43, two from obama and two from trump. and so interestingly the court itself will reflect the presidential elections of the era. and as you say, we don't know how many more he may get. the generational aspect of this is fascinating. i think david is right. presidents are not often defined by the choice necessarily. but eras are. but there is also this longer term drama that is unfolding wh

in this case, you have justice ginsburg joining a dissent. then overruling another president of the court. >> let's get to that one. the supreme court reconsidered a president in the internet sales tax. >> the case is called south dakota versus wayfarer. it is interesting because it had impact on economy, and suggests that has a lot to say about story decisive. president will live large in that confirmation. you see two rival perspectives on how to think about president -- precedent. well -- in quill, it stood by the decision called national ballast. 1967 thatsaid in states can require a retailer to collect sales tax if that retailer has an " physical presence in the state." amazon had no physical presence, now they have these bookstores, and stuff. so you bought from amazon and didn't have to pay the sales tax for the very same book if you got it from politics and prose, or wherever. there was a disparity. and it was decided in 1992, one national ballast was decided, the interstate economy was different. we had mail order catalogs, that's i

that's the ginsburg standard. every nominee since then has followed that standard. the second thing i a expect to happen is that democrats are going to complain that judge cavanaugh follows the ginsburg standard. i've heard it already. they- will complain that he won't promise to take their side cases that might come up before the court. they're going to complain and have already that some of the cases he's decided in the past didn't work out the way they wanted them to work out. not what the law said, not what was right but what they that's what democrats did last year. we have seen this movie before. we know the playbook. they've criticized him for some of his rulings that theyke didn't like you know the rulings follow the law, they didn't like the rulings so they criticize the judge for following the law. they suggest he should have ignored the law, sided with the little guy in a case regardless of what the law had said. if judge gorsuch new the same thing that judge cavanaugh knows. judges are absolutely not supposed to consider who they think is sympathetic in

ginsberg: let me begin by expressing the society's gratitude to justice ginsburg. you have always been a generous -- very generous in giving of your time in your efforts to the society, when we have called upon you. and thank you for taking time from your really enormous schedule at this particular time of year. this evening comes about because of my deep and abiding connection to our two hosting organizations, the supreme court historical society and the john simon guggenheim foundation.

the ginsburg ruled means testifying unequivocally and clearly in support of roe and a woman's right to choose anything less should be disqualified. on the aca, the nominee must be equally clear. the law has been upheld by the supreme court twice. -- nominee should be allowed should not be allowed to avoid sharing their views on these past cases. we expect to hear a nominee will consider these cases having been rightly decided and it would uphold the affordable care act of it comes before them in the future. this is the tickly relevant because this nominee's confirmation is happening at time when the trump administration is actively refusing to defend the law in court is joining a group of states suing to have the law declared unconstitutional. this argument is without merit and is brought together strange bedfellows from the left and the right in support of the aca. even people like jonathan adler of case western have joined longtime proponents of the law in saying that the term administration argument in this case is without merit. a nomination be asked about the principle of severabi

democrats will complain that judge kavanaugh follows the ginsburg standard and i have heard already. they're going to complain that he won't promise to take their side in cases of my come upth before the court. they're going to complain and have already that some of the cases he decide in the past didn't work out t the way that they wanted them toat work out, not what the law said, not what was right but what they wanted. some democrats in the judiciary committee did what neil gorsuch was dominant in the supreme court last year. we've seen this movie before. we know the playbook. they criticized him for some of his rulings that they didn't like even though the, rulings followed the law, they didn't like the rulings so they criticized the judge for following the law. they suggested he should have ignored the law, sided with the little guy, , the sympathetic se in the case regardless of what the law had said. judge gorsuch knew thege same thing the judge kavanaugh knows. judges are absolutely not supposed to consider who they think is sympathetic in a case, where the empathy lies. it's

justice ginsburg also having a bit of her own busy time in the culture.hat documentary "rbg" which has made more than 13 million at the box office. she's also the subjective a film coming out this winter where she will be played by felicity jones. and her workout routines have led to moments in the culture like this in late night. >> why are you on your knees? >> what? i'm cramping. working out with an 85-year-old woman ♪ >> can i ask you a question? and i want you to give me an honest answer. are you juicing? >> no. >> always honest. you don't want to commit perjury. now, i have a quick programming note before we go. i am in for rachel maddow tonight, and i am deciding whether to bring back an old tie from off the rack. so if you tune in tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern, you can see what happens. plus we have a lot more news kicking off what's been a very busy week thus far. so i wanted to let you know about that tonight. 9:00 p.m. eastern. but don't go anywhere because "hardball" with chris matthews is up next. >>> fallback. let's play "hardball." catch thi

to say justice marshall was the last justice appointed by a democrat until we get to ruth bader ginsburg in the 90s so it's not an accident that he was very much in the minority on many of these important cases i'm going to speak about in a moment. he was a majority in the first major desegregation case that was decided while he was in justice and that was reading versus new kent county case out of virginia where there were two schools in rural virginia. one or early all-black school and one all-white school and in the late 1960s, they remind overwhelmingly isolated. that is to say that there were no white student had ever elected to attend the former early all-black school and only 15 percent of the black students elected to attend the all-white school so the supreme court made it clear that the time or all deliberate speech had run out and it was necessary to get beyond schools and black schools and move to just schools. the most remarkable thing about the green decision in my view is it was 1958, before the court made it clear that all deliberate speed run its course and it was time f

. >>> coming up here on c-span3, supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg, followed by a discussionmass incarceration and reforming the criminal justice system. and the senate special aging commission gets an update on the state of the alzheimer's research. >>> today a review of the supreme court's recent decision in wayfair v. south dakota, which ruled in favor of states that require online retailers to collect the sales tax even if they don't have a physical presence in the state. that's live at noon eastern on c-span. after that, the latino advocacy group unidos u.s. has its annual conference in washington to talk about civil liberties and human rights. speakers include mike morell and nira tanden. also live on c-span starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern. >>> president donald trump will anounls his nominee for the supreme court filling the vacancy left by retiring justice anthony kennedy. watch the announcement live tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span and c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. >>> next, remarks from supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg and stanford

he nominated ginsburg who withdrew and then justice kennedy, more of a moderate. as i mentioned earlier justice kennedy was confirmed 97-0. host: what do you make of the critique of the process so far? guest: it is not rushed at the moment. we have to see what hearings are set and the timing. hearings in the first or second week of august would be rushed when you have a nominee whose record has more than 90 pages to review. enough time for 100 senators to have a careful review of his record. host: a senate deadline for cavanaugh, saying he intends to have a vote in the fall. this gives judiciary ample time august.hearings in they go on to say 60-70 days is within the norm between nomination and confirmation. ruth bader ginsburg, or the two days. the average wait for these democratic nominees was 65 days. neil gorsuch took 66. barring some major revelation, this is a fair time for nomination. your reaction? guest: setting a date at this point whether it is october 1 or september 27, that is an artificial just -- deadline. they are the swing vote in key cases involv

president clinton and the ruth bader ginsburg appointment. was i don't agree with her, but she is highly qualified, she's a good finger, she's a good judge. that had been the standard i think there's a sense among conservatives at what happened to justice bork had nothing to do with whether or not he was qualified or how the right temperament already huge scandal that might make him drivable or something. it was about his philosophy and that's the difference. host: matt lewis with the daily beast. how often do you publish and what are you writing on? guest: 203 times a week at the daily beast. -- two or three times a week at the daily beast. life's moving very fast right now i try to bring some historical context and some additional wisdom to really whatever is happening at the moment. my last two pieces have been about the supreme court. carolyn from washington, d.c., democrats line. a little know this is water into the bridge, but could you explain a little more about judge kennedy's son and relationship to president trump and some of that

that's exactly the ginsburg rule. and i expect if he wants to be on the supreme court, not only for the sake of being on the supreme court, getting there, but to serve the role he ought to serve as an impartial justice, that he's going to follow this ginsburg rule when he comes before my judiciary committee. i implore my colleagues not to try to extract assurances about how he will rule in specific cases in exchange for the confirmation vote because they caught to get an answer from kavanaugh that ginsburg would give, and as far as i know every one of the nominees since then. the only question that matters is this, does judge kavanaugh strive to apply the law as written by congress regardless of his personal views? and from what i know about judge kavanaugh, and i haven't gone through all of his 300 opinions yet that he's written as a circuit judge, but the answer appears to be yes. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer:

>> ruth bader ginsburg. >> actress felicity jones transforms into ruth bader jones. movie looks at the early life of one of the most notable supreme court justices. the film is set to open on christmas day. >> leading the news, released body cam footage shows the las vegas police officer exchanging fire with a pair of suspected killers during in abtense pursuit. for nearly four minute the police were shot at 34 times as they tried to stop the suspected murderers. denise from our affiliate tells us more abo the harrowing chase. >> shots fired. >> reporter: an intense pursuit seen from the front seat of a metro patrol car. >> it's charlie 4. i'm not injured.r: fouepor for roughly minutes officer william trying to stop a pair of suspected killers. the pair firing at police 34 times. watch as he shoots back while driving, b his own windshield. the pursuit eventually ends at howardallings worth. miranda tries to reverse towards officers. he is shot and killed while munoz runs away tryinid toe on school property where he is eventually caught and arrested. assistant sheriff

justice ginsburg wrote the dissent and accused the court of engaging in a form of locker ring and goresuch vehemently disputed that characterization. lochner is an important case in constitutional law. everyone agreed and virtually everyone agrees that it was incorrectly decided. there seem to be differing reasons as to why lochner was wrongly decided. for justice corsets, it is about the court imposing economic policies over the people's representatives. it is a claim that -- the form of judicial activating invalidated, particularly the realm of the economy. justice ginsburg correctly it seems to me that she is suggesting that there was a deeper harm at issue in lochner which is that the court in lochner avoided the issue of differing levels of power and it treated employees and employers as they were coming together for a meeting of the minds about how long they wanted to work and it was wrong of the court to step in and and you know, reverse that. she said that employers required their employees to sign these measures and so if you view lochner is one of the problems there as having