>> what we're going to see is another gorsich. he will be much more of a flag bearer. justice kennedy wasn't really a swing vote. i think it's the wrong way to think about him. he hates that term. most of his votes went with be conservative majority and most votes that were 5-4, he went with the majority. i think we're going to see someone much more ideological in terms of activism on the court. i think we're going to see this view on roe v wade will become an unspoken litmus test. it come out quite frontally when any of the candidates for this seat are being vetted because nobody wants to blow this up and that will certainly be one that will rally the democratic base. >> the age of reagan ended today. his last appointee, justice o' connor, justice kennedy. we're now in a court where there's one bush 41 appointee, george w. bush, barack obama. this was the pay off for republicans who decided once trump had hijacked the party and the base had sided with him that they were willing to vote for trump because they did not want a president hillary clinton making the decision

if it's another gorsich then i think we're fine because even more than scalia, gorsich is a big friend of constitutional protections for criminal defense. look at his opinion here where he was the only conservative joining the liberals in striking down a vague catch-all provision. he's very much of that mold. but not everyone on the list is. so on the -- on trump's list there are some who are like gorsich and scalia with respect to criminal procedure issues that are very much civil liberty oriented and some more law and order and deference to law enforcement. so that's definitely a difference that tees out. until we know who the nominee is, we can't say for sure which way the criminal procedure wind will blow. >> when it comes to rowe, we don't need to wait and see who. it will happen automatically. i think our run take away is that the president does what he says he's going to do. he promised a total and complete shut down of muslims entering the united states and that is what he did. it would be foolish to wait for the particular name. we know what the president's attempt is with res

the tweet was of mitch mcconnell shaking hands with neil gorsich. by preventing merritt garland for getting a vote. i think history will deem this as an error but another decision that will come down the pike tomorrow relating to public sector unions. neil gorsich will probably give the court the fifth vote on that decision also. >> i'm trying to understand your interpretation of your view of presidential power as it relates to this case. if we took a future president. it's not donald trump. i don't know if it's a republican or democrat. i don't know anything about this future democrat but if a future president asserted that i as the president have the power to make a determination that the following three or four countries have absolutely, unacceptable vetting procedures and until those vetting procedures are addressed, i'm not going to allow entries into the united states from those countries. would that future president, do you think that future president has that power? >> the error of this court's decision is they did not take into consideratio

. >> okay, before i let you go, i have to ask you about justice gorsich. he's certainly in the spotlight now. this certainly goes to what a president does which is getting to appoint and confirm a supreme court justice. >> oh, absolutely. some of you might have seen the tweet that majority leader mitch mcconnell put out. it doesn't have any words. it's a picture of him shaking hands from justice gorsich, and this is senator mitch mcconnell delivering on not allowing president obama to exercise his constitutional authority. we have seen this week and last week 5-4 opinions. i bet you anything the major opinion coming out tomorrow will also be 5-4, and it's inconceivable that all of the opinion, tremendously consequential opinions, it's inconceivable that all of them would have come out the same way. so it's hugely consequential, and justice gorsich is a young man in good shape, bikes to work, he'll be there for a long time. >> all right, thank you david. for additional details into the supreme court rulings today, be sure to ahead to our website, ktvu.com.

he considers his orchestration of neil gorsich getting on the supreme court to be among his proudest achievements. he's not going to listen to appeals of fairness. we're going to make sure our voices are loud and clear. we're not going to be party to president trump saying, the supreme court should remain republican. this is a president who doesn't understand anything about the rule of the supreme court. so what. he's going to proceed. we're going to question the nominee. i'm looking for a nominee who can be fair, set aside their very conservative ideological perspectives and do what they are supposed to do. >> the focus shifts to the red state. do they need to hold the line? republicans can only afford to lose one vote. do you think they will? >> i really respect all three senators. they have got to mobilmobilize. republicans and their rich supporters have set the stage for this to happen over a period of decades. we need to continue to show up and stay the course. we're going to do everything we can. i'm going to do everything i can to raise the concerns that we have about rights f

. >> this decision was set as soon as neil gorsich was seated in the court.t's not a decision based on the facts. it's based on the competition and political ideology of the supreme court at this moment. >> that is broadly true. the court reflects its appointees and reflects to some degree the party that owns the white house. they refused obama's nominee in 2016. if you play what if, eventually it cancels everything out. if trump didn't win then gorsich wouldn't be on the court but there wouldn't be a travel ban to rule on today. the larger point goads a little deeper tonight. courts are still, with everything going on now, they are still a guardrail for the constitution. that's a good thing. they're not there to overrule any old bad idea that people may want out of the the political arena. the constitution gives the president broad immigration power and as the nation now assesses the competence and ethics of donald trump's use of that broad power, the question is not whether donald trump had it but whether as a nation, we want him to continue using it like t

gorsich is on the streak, the death on the supreme court, the hostages have come home and is an amazing year and a half. if you listened to the mainstream press you wouldn't know that, but by anyone's recognition we worked on so many fronts and it goes to the president of the united states and the good work he's doing. christina: people worry that the president's trade policies could undermine things. how comfortable are you with the tariffs he's proposed and how would it affect your district? representative jordan: i have concerns. i'm for going after what the biggest problem is which is china and i think the president shares that concern. i think even larry kudlow in the white house shares that concern. we want trade agreements in the best interest of the united states and that are fair but we understand there are lots of jobs across this great country and certainly in the fourth district of ohio that are there because we can market goods around the planet. we can market and sell our goods in all kind of markets. that's a good thing. i do get a little nervous about the tariffs because

the list, the final list, for the supreme court running that ended up going to neil course such -- gorsich, so, those are people who are considered to be top of the list. our sources are saying, eliana, that the brett cavanagh is someone that that the president is looking at it very closely. >> live in washington for us, thank you. for more on justice kennedy, and the battle that will loom over his successor, i am joined with addie, thank you for being here. let's start with the justice kennedy's legacy, what will he be remembered for? >> this retirement will include things that he might have known -- a been known for, before the big decisions today and yesterday. probably, mostly as a swing vote, or the person regarded as eccentric in many supreme court battles. >> in a majority of the cases, he cited with more conservative justices. he was an appointee of president ronald reagan, but, it is his liberal decisions, on social issues, that he will most be remembered for. >> usually, we can make predictions of which way judge is going to go, based on who appointed them. justice stevens it was

>> laura: what michael is getting at, mitch mcconnell didn't move forward on a vote, allowed for gorsichourt, now we have another opening. he didn't play by the same rule book. we are going to make up rules, i don't know. >> you act like the biden rule is something written into law. it's something that biden suggested when he was a senator. he said the will of the voters should be heard. the same thing during a presidential election can be heard during congressional midterm elections. >> no, it's always a congressional election. it's congressional year round. we had a lame duck president in the last situation. we don't have a lame duck president. we have a sitting president. >> he lost the popular vote. >> right now our constitution is written. go back and read the constitution and then come back. >> i got the same law degree you got. >> laura: the electorial college issue, that argument has been raised since 1996, 1998, 2000. people have been raised, hillary talked about it. we are a representative republic. we are not a pure democracy. our framers understood we didn't want to be ruled

. >> this decision was set as soon as neil gorsich was seated in the court. it's based on the competition and the political ideology of the supreme court at this moment. he said he wanted a complete and total ban of muslims entering the country. he languaged it it up. he really didn't change it that much. some people will say he didn't ban all muslim countries so it's not a ban. the countries that are banned are banned because they are muslim countries. the people who are being affected. they are not people who have a bad record. they're just muslims from these countries and that is enough. the throwing in of northern korea and certain officials in sw venezuela is nothing but lipstick on a pig. it's to cover up an ugly policy. the fact the supreme court says the president can do it, ought to to be nervous. i think that is a very worrisome development. >> the first muslim american elected to congress. thank you for joining us on your reaction. we expect to hear for the president. he's been talking to the pool and speaking about the wall, immigration and wantin

make hisjudicial nominee, democrats tried to block it, they changed rules in order to confirm neil gorsichessentially the deciding vote here. it wasn't just this travel ban case, it was another case about regulating pregnancy crisis centres and it was decided 5-4. there was a gerrymandering case decided 5—4, voting rights case decided 5—4. there's going to be a union case decided 5—4. time and time again that one seat has made all the difference in determining what is and is not constitutional, what is and is not legal. so when you say elections have consequences, in this particular case it has some serious consequences about the direction of the us supreme court and judicial interpretation. this would always be good news for the white house — but this is timely. the trump administration has been on the backfoot over the family separation story. that has been playing out on the border with mexico. on that, this drone footage of a "tent city" in texas. this is holding children who have been separated from their parents. we're now being told by us border agents that they will temporarily sto

. >> and just to be super clear, neil gorsich was willing to go on the record at his confirmation recordnd say unequivocally that brown was correctly decided in the binding precedence. so think about the fact that a year later it is possible to take the posture at a confirmation hearing that that's not to discuss it because it may come before me again because the jury racial segregation in the schools is bubbling up. i mean, that is an astounding change in discourse around what judges do. and i think, you're right, we barely tracked it. it was outrage number 974 that day. so my next note just says jeff sessions justice department disgust. [ laughing ] >> and we can -- i mean, we can start if you want. [ laughing ] >> we're just having a tiny little breakdown. [aughing ] >> but we can start with the aca. with the, you know, career lawyers declining to sign a brief in the new aca litigation. and maybe we'll start with that. but just the larger -- pan back and let's talk about what policies on incarceration, on drugs, on prisons, on sanctuary cities flipping policies easily and happily chan

last time he was the runner-up when gorsich got the call. i made a few calls to tom checking in seeing what is going to happen. there was that mysterious day where tom was spotted driving east and everybody thought he might get the nomination. it is a very intriguing process they go through as the president reviews candidates. >> what are your thoughts on his judicial style? what would your recommendation be to the president? >> i actually offered some advice before the last one. i saw the president for a second and said tom is a good man. this decision, the president is going to be taking very serious. it is a very serious responsibility that the president has, and we'll look forward to his pick. >> we're talking with a republican joining us. until the top of the hour you can call in if you want to join in. having this discussion during a very busy week in washington, besides what happened yesterday at the supreme court on the floor of the house yesterday, republicans failed to move forward an immigration overhaul bill for the second time.