justice sotomayor: i am. -- are you interested? justice sotomayor: i am. melissa: then there's this next one. ah. so this is your book. justice sotomayor: this will be my book. melissa: tell me about this book. justice sotomayor: it is a picture book. for children between the ages of 3 and 8. it's probably sophisticated enough so most parents will have to read it with chair children, rather than a child reading it themselves. it's the story of my life, but through what i consider the greatest influence on my life, which was reading. i learned about the world through reading. given where i grew up, which many people know was an economically challenged neighborhood, i spoke frequently about the fact that my mom would have readers digest in our home and i would read about all these new books coming out and i would go to the local library and try to check out the book and my library never had them. i didn't realize that a local library in sort of the poor neighborhood of the bronx wasn't going to have recent books. but reading is what exposed me to the world.

justice sotomayor: yes, i am. justice sotomayor: but i made an uninformed decision. you know, i was -- i came from a very poor background. i not a whole lot of debt compared to what you guys have today. but debt. and i thought i had to get out there and work. and i was wrong. by clerking i would have advanced my career by five 10 years. and i tell every minority and every person who has -- who's in law school, the best choice you can make for yourself. and take it as a year that will promote your career and advance you five to 10 years. so it's worth the sacrifice. and don't forget that most law furms give you -- firms give you a bonus at the end of the year. [laughter] >> when i clerked for you, it was the most challenging year of my life. will my life. i came to work on weekends for a long time. but it was about being part of a family. i became really good friends with my co-clerks. we still see each other. and i think those are the benefits of clerking that people don't really appreciate. that it is part of being part of a bigger family, not just with your judge b

justice sotomayor: as justice -- mr. messenger: that is what -- justice sotomayor: breyer said, every single decision affects the public fisc. every time you lose something, you -- the public fisc is affected. you are talking -- chief justice roberts: care to comment? mr. messenger: again, to go back, i think it's the scale that makes the distinction, your honor. justice roberts: thank you, counsel. the case is submitted. i want to introduce you to mark janice, the league lannett -- mark janus, the lead plaintiff. and your lawyer at the liberty justice center and litigation director there, and an attorney for mr. janus. tell us your story how this all came about. >> it started approximately 11 years ago when i went to work for the state, and during that hr process, nothing was said about union. there were not any cards or information about it. i got my first paycheck and there was a line that said union dues. that surprised me because i never signed up for a union. i started asking my peers, and they said everybody has t

justice sotomayor: i know. [laughter] justice sotomayor: but i often thought of all the mistakes i made as a lawyer and how much better i would have been if i understood, really understood what judges were looking at. now that i hadul those experiences as a justice. >> that is how i feel about being a law professor. i wish i could go back to locke school -- law school because i would kill it. [laughter] i would be great at it. justice sotomayor: you are settling in. you are into the groove, welcomed new colleagues. court, youme to the are alone on the court from two she describedand that. from the time justice o'connor retired and you appeared. justice sotomayor: quintessential. joined andtice kagan now there are three women on the court. justice sotomayor: the dynamic changed a little bit -- >> the dynamics changed a little bit. a study was just released of these years ago -- released a few years ago. they found that women justices are disproportionately interrupted at high rates than their male colleagues by

announcer: sewing it -- the supreme court justice sonia sotomayor talked about working with other justices in her new book, and in a children's book. this one-hour event was hosted by the american constitution society. [applause] >> let's move the furniture? >> yes. >> i don't like being this far away from you. [laughter] >> how are you doing? >> i'm doing ok. >> it's going to be around for a while. >> what happened? >> i'm in the middle of the night and went to get a bottle of water from my kitchen and it , was dark and i tripped over a piece of furniture. [laughter] >> broke it in four spots, my shoulder. had to have it replaced and so now i'm partly bionic woman. [applause] i need identification to go through airports. >> i think you are good. >> i can travel abroad occasionally. >> are you taking care of yourself? >> yes. >> you sound dubious. are we worried about her? we are. >> i am feeling exceedingly well. my doctor and therapists are delighted. the only negative concert -- consequence of this is not being able to sleep well. pain, aswn causes me it does with most people who have s

this -- justice sotomayor: you -- justice ginsburg: this -- justice breyer: well, the reason that i -- mr. yarger: this law would app to protect people with religious beliefs. justice breyer: i see that. the reason i want you to continue this is that many of the civil rights laws, not all public accommodations laws, though -- there are exceptions, like, for example, with housing, a person's own room, for example. and what people are trying to do with exceptions is take the thing you're worried about, where they are genuine, sincere religious views or whatever it is, and minimize the harm it does to the principle of the statute while making some kind of compromise for people of sincere beliefs on thether i. and we find that in a lot of them, but that's primarily a legislative job. and my impression of this is there wasn't much effort here in colorado to do that. justice ginsburg: and your -- justice breyer: my problem is can we do that in any way, or is here any way to get to a place that without harming the law, and its object, which is fine, you can have narrow kinds of exceptions fo

a justice? do you think that is how he will be remembered as a justice? any thoughts about that, bob? robert: i guess i don't know exactly how he would want to be remembered. perhaps if he did, it would be some sort of defender of liberty and dignity and civility, which are words that come up a lot with him. i think what he will be known for more than anything is gay rights. he wrote every opinion, every positive opinion on gay rights for the court, topped by same-sex marriage. i think his legacy is clear in that way. what's interesting about him is that because he is on that side of that issue, but he also wrote citizens united, which is at least in my experience talking to groups about the least popular decision that any audience ever talks to me about. he has a mixed legacy. the interesting thing is we expect judges to sort of call them as they see them each case at the time, and yet there has always been frustration from both sides about kennedy that neither the liberals nor the conservative

justices and four conservatives. president trump now has the chance the give conservatives a solid majority. one that in theory that could last for decades. the president said justice kennedy had great version and heart hand he will work on his replacement. >> we will begin our search for a new justice of the united states supreme court. that will begin immediately. hopefully we're going to pick somebody that will be as outstanding. >> shepard: the president in the last half hour. president trump already appointed neil gorsuch to the bench replacing antonin scalia that did in february 2016. that happened to the dismay of democrats at the time. we can expect this to be one of the most bruising confirmation processes in modern american history. fox news anchor and correspondent shannon bream is live with us now. who would have thought this afternoon -- i was watching your report as the gavel came down and the session closed and no announcements. now this. >> this morning when the bench closed up shop, when the justices

i remember when justice powell was a senior justice and justice scalia was just coming on the bench, just justice scalia asked a lot of questions for a junior justice. overheard but got when justice powell let the bench, after one oral argument he said do you suppose he knows the rest of us are here? [laughter] i understand. the one thing i wanted to, it is interesting to me that there have been so many fewer chief justices of the united states than there have been presidents. of 17. one that's a very small number. that's a very high office. ofh office has a way occupants andhe restricting their freedom of movement. you, yourring if obligations to be an institutionalist and to lead the dissentead you not to it wass where you if just up to your individual druthers you might wish to write a dissent or to write a separate opinion because it may lead the court in a more splintered off fractured stage. do you feel that the weight of the office circumscribes your freedom in a way that an associate justice does not face? justice roberts: that is an interesting question. i thought about it b

it's rick to answer because i see very fair sim layeres between justice kent -- justice kennedy and justice breyer. justice breyer is -- he falls more into the category you're talking about than justice kennedy. justice kennedy is far more wedded to his principles than maybe justice breyer is. >> one of my reactions to that question is that question could be asked of virtually every justice. unfuneral. regretably. every modern justice. justices i think can be better explained by their principle -- their underlying principles which is what helen's book is about with respect to justice concerned than by the text of the constitution itself. even those justices who are more textualists than others -- there are some, obviously -- tend to have -- leave themselves method'ologial out under more than one sicker you don't have to follow the tex. with respect to precedent. you have precedent you like that has misinterpreted the text but you like the precedent you follow the precedent and be consistent with evidence inology and inconsistent with the text. since every justice gives. thes that out you co

justice had on these matters. the president and ceo of "the family", bob vander platts. very good to have you. how crucial is that issue to you? i mean, above others, with others, among others. what? >> it's the cornerstone of all of the issues, neil. this is an opportunity to restore a culture of life in this country that honors god and blesses people. we see this as an answer to prayer. i think it marks that this might be the most consequential election, 2016, at least in my lifetime, hillary and president trump. if gorsuch is the standard, we would like to see another one of him. >> neil: you might be surprised, those on the left feel differently. they urged that this be put off. how you feel about that? >> well, i don't think it should be put off. we're thrilled to have our own senator, iowa's senator, being chaired of the judiciary committee, chuck grassley. he pushed it back until we had the presidential election. this is not a presidential election. we have president trump. he's going to appoint the next su

it was replacing justice scalia, one of the greatest justices ever to serve on the supreme court. what the gorsuch pick did at the very best is maintain the status quo. the justice kennedy vacancy, on the other hand, is an opportunity to really have a profound impact on the court, an impact on the court that could last for decades. i think there's no issue more important, no issue more fundamental to what president trump has achieved, to what the senate majority of republicans has achieved than nominating and confirming principled constitutionalists to the supreme court and the federal courts that will uphold or rights and protect the bill of rights. >> dana: i remember when chief justice rehnquist passed away. liberals weren't too concerned about president george w. bush nominating a conservative because it was replacing a conservative with a conservative. the stakes are higher for conservatives and liberals, republicans and democrats. what do you think about -- from a strategy standpoint for republicans, what would be the best way to get this through the chamber and do you favor

justice kennedy has been key. and what is different this time around is that the senate has both the majority and the filibuster rules have been changed. it will be an easier time frankly for the republicans to get their appointee in place. >> i'm curious, when you say the justices were more casual and you saw justice kennedy he's wi there, when you say casual, how do you mean? do you think they knew? >> i'll tell you what i saw and we can just take it from there. so i'm sitting there, they come in, while justice alito was reading that labor union case that we've been talking about, justices breyer and clarence thomas were kind of chatting quietly on the side, laughing agent bit. justice breyer when he read his decision in a separate case, he was very ease going. i'm telling you, the liberals' life has really changed as of this moment because anytime that they were able to win, it was because of justice anthony kennedy. now, you know, maybe i should have said why is that man smiling. his life is about to be change

he was not with justice alito, justice scalia, justice robert, justice thomas who have been much more supportive of moving the machinery along and allowing executions to take place. justice kennedy was not as liberal as ginsburg, breyer, sotomayor and kagan, but he often sided with them in the death penalty cases. say good-bye to that fifth vote on those cases. >> you know, one thing, brooke, that laura referred to, samsa . alito's nomination in 2005 going into 2006 to ultimately succeed sandra day o'connor, i think all of us remember what happened first is that george w. bush nominated harriet miers and the base went crazy saying, first of all, she doesn't have the constitutional law chops, but also we cannot count on her to vote the way we want a new justice to vote. and there was such an uproar that she withdrew and that is how sam alito got the spot. and you know, for those of us who have been aaeeen around ever than that, the mantra used to be no more suitor, as in no more david suitors. >> okay. i appreciate the geek out at the supreme court today. thank you all so much. >> i re

presidents and justices appointed by democratic presidents. whoever fill justice kennedy's seat on the court will have the opportunity to impact the laws of the united states and the rights of its citizens for a generation. because justice kennedy was frequently independent minded and a deciding vote on important issues like marriage equality and a woman's right to choose, a more ideological successor could up end decades of precedent and drag america backwards to a time before americans with preexisting conditions could affordably access healthcare, to a time when women could not be prosecuted as criminals for exercising their reproductive rights, to a time before gay and lesbian americans could marry whom they love. an ideological justice, more extreme in their views than kennedy, could take the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively for a fair wage and stretch the bounds of executive power for a president who has demonstrated little respect for them. now, of course if republicans were consistent, they would wait to consider

he's way to the right of justice scalia. justice scalia was conservative on many issues but very liberal on first amendment issues and on issues of the rights of criminal defendants, and gorsuch seems to be very much to the right on both of those issues. every justice is different, and we'll wait and see what his legacy develops over the years. trish: how is this going to change if, in fact, the president puts someone in who is different than kennedy and he or she is not the swing vote but predictably conservative, how does that effect, what are the big effort things we could possibly see happen over the next ten years? >> a true conservative also believes in stare decisis and not changing the rules in existence. if you get a conservative who believes in stare decisis then you won't get tremendous overruling on previous decisions. if you get a justice who is prepared to simply impose his own views on the constitution, it will come out differently. >> the president is going to be addressing kennedy's retirement momentarily. w

justice kennedy. he has not been as good a friend of workers in as the lgbt movement and community i don't think that means things won't get worse. [laughter] and just to take janus in the union context, there are more steps we should be concerned about that this is a compelled speech unconstitutional under the amendment and now cases are pending that challenge the very idea of exclusive representation as compelled association under the first amendment so it is just a system of bargaining we have had 1975 51% of workers of workers have everybody covered by the contract. that is now susceptible to attack the first amendment. they make is that both public and private? great. another problem is that janus applies to the public sector because it is a constitutional holding. i think there will be an effort to extort janus to the private sector that will happen in congress that also in the court. you might think that's crazy he have the requirement of the state action and there is no action when they decide

justice sotomayor: as justice -- mr. messenger: that is what -- justice sotomayor: breyer said, every single decision affects the public fisc. every time you lose something, you -- the public fisc is affected. you are talking -- chief justice roberts: care to comment? mr. messenger: again, to go back, i think it's the scale that makes the distinction, your honor. justice roberts: thank you, counsel. the case is submitted. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> we will take you to the white house, where a short while ago cegislative director mar short talked about the process of taking a nominee for the u.s. supreme court. reporter: what questions might he ask them? marc: they would ask them about their past, their academic credentials, the past history of what they have written, but it was not a litmus test. reporter: can you go over your sense of how quickly you want to ge

on justice kennedy. justice kennedy has not been a good -- as good a friend of workers and unions as he has been of the lgbt movement and community. i don't think that means that hings won't get worse. and i think just to take janus and the union context, there are more steps that i think we need to be concerned about. so janus is a holding that fair share fees or compelled speech is unconstitutional under the first amendment. there are cases now pending all over the place that challenge the very idea of exclusive representation as compelled association unconstitutional under the first amendment. so exclusive representation is just a system of union bargaining that we've had since 1935. it just means that 51% or more of workers in a union, for a union everybody is covered by the union and by the contract. ok. that is now susceptible to attack under the first amendment. another problem -- >> is that true both in the public and private context? or is still just in the public? >> ok, great. another problem

let's talk about the impact of justice kennedy. mitch mcconnell who does run the calendar in the senate and represents the majority in the senate wants to get this done before the midterm elections and before the new supreme court term starts. who does this energize to get out and vote because the seat is lockdown what motivation to get out and -- >> this is easy. rush limbaugh is right, rush limbaugh is always right and he was right about this. the 2016 election we had an open seat was empty and up for grabs and donald trump won that. the great revolt, she interviews these voters in ohio and pennsylvania who voted for barack obama and one of the prime reasons they went for donald trump even though they were against him on a lot of things was that seat. they wanted to make sure -- you need the senate to approve that seat, whoever he nominates. it will motivate those voters, another reason to get voters out and reaffirm their decision donald trump is the man to fill the seat and feel there's a strong republican senate to confirm it.

as a justice. he said, you know, i really don't know enough. i need a little time. and, of course, that was honoring and respecting black and that was a smart thing to do. he was very close to felix frankfurter. and during brown v board of education. frankfurter was a proponent of judicial restraint as most of you know. and warren was very respectful of frankfurter. and frankfurter taught the law students at harvard for decades and he loved to teach. and nobody he would better teach than the chief justice of the united states. so that worked out really well at first so he was -- and frankfurter was a very generous flatterer. i mean, and so he could flatter and he could teach and he was in his element. as long as juan agreed with him. and warren began to become independent of frankfurter in the latter part of the 1950s. frankfurter became very, very critical of warren in private in lots of his letters. and warren knew it. and there was one thing that warren could not tolerate. even as a young man. y

the ceo of one justice, julia joins me in the studio. >> thank you for having me. >> one justice wasmong the torganizations t quickly mobilized at sfo and other airports across the country to help affected travelers, most of whom were muslims after the first version of thevel ban took effect in 2017. what is your reaction to the supreme court de up holding the current travel ban? >> i think i can speak on the entire behalf of the legal aid and civil rights community in saying disappointed we are. this decision will go town on the wrong side of history. >> disappointed why? >> well, w believe firmly still that the presiderent's vy publis commround kbleimplementing a full ban on muslims hitting the country violates somef the core tenets of our justice system and our american values.o we kw the supreme court has gotten these things wrong in the past around civilights and race and lgbtq issues, and they got this one wrong, too. i think that justice sotomayor's dissent makes clear constitution and our country deserved a d. ifferent outco >> on the issue of undocumented immigrants, preside

justice kennedy coauthored the decision up holding roe v. wade.t seems to been a geral cob consensus that won't be overturnedut it might be fwuted ovfwugut of over gutted dending on w replaces justice kennedy. >> a number of p lif groups have been seeding legislation at the lower court level, so there's aan on abortion at six week goes, we heart beak law in iowa. they've been anticipating a new justice in a few years and seeding cases that will come up to frontally challenge roe. the idea that overruling roe is offhe table i fallacious. ut is more likely to be undermined the idea of a complete overruling is not beyond the pale here. >> do you agree, jh? >> i wouldn't make any predictions on the future of abortion rights. >> there were major rulings this week. the court issued decisions on the tral ban, labor unions. there was a decision that said califoia cannot require faith-based pregnancy t centerso provide information on abortion. taken as a whole what to they tell you about the court? >> it was a good term for conservatives at the court. each

anthony replaced my justice, justice powell. chambers i occupied for a year as a law clerk. he succeeded sandra day o'connor as the swing vote. majorityten in the 5-4 as a practical matter. he certainly occupied that role, and prides himself a great deal on the way he wrote. he took his writing terribly seriously. and particularly on things like oftenative action, he was a key vote. he would not vote in lockstep with the conservatives. finally, the one thing i would say is you never know what will happen in the supreme court. once you get there, people change who they are. and you do not know what the dynamics in the supreme court are. if someone is very persuasive, they can bring people around to them. if not, they can be alone. julia: this is a very poignant moment for trump again to try to get his choice through and shift further the balance that we see here in the supreme court. absolutely. and on one hand, we have to balance the hyper partisanship we see here and in the senate, and on the other hand, exactly what president

i think justice roberts would thinkou thery supports it. ast nothing like justice kennedy or sandra day o'connor was.rt ro they did overturn a cision? >> abud versus detroit. >> i thought you meant koramatzu. >> john robertsbe wiln the middle but what he does in the liberals it will have weighar t the right side than justice kennedy. on rowe i can see them chipping ay, imposing new regulations that would make it hardefor a women to exercise their right. robert: this week, cl, e democrats saw in the primaries, alexandria won a primary in new york. if you are senator bill re on of florida, you under pressure to maybe not move to the left. >> i thi chuck schumer is in a tenableosition and he is the democratic leader and they nee to show their base they are doing all they can. they are pretty limited what they can do. not show up? that would be very extreme,t at would that do to the moderate dem the other states? i think there is an argument you can make f the democrats to say, listen, we know how this is goinnd to we need to put up a fight and

a pivotal voice for 30 years, justice kennedy has sided with both the liberal and conservative justices at times, playing a crucial role in decisions involving abortion and gay marriage. with a swing vote gone could those landmark rulings be overtuned? here's abe's terry moran. >> reporter: in these times that are so deeply divided on a court that's split along partisan lines, justice anthony kennedy was the man in the middle. and today after three decades on the bench, a surprise announcement he is stepping down sent shock waves through the nation. >> we really have to take our hats off to justice kennedy. thank you very much. we have to pick one that's going to be there for 40 years, 45 years. >> reporter: kennedy now leaves president trump the ability to shape the highest court in the land for years to come. >> it was a shock today to learn of justice kennedy's retirement, and we now know that the person who replaces him, whoever it might be, will affect american life maybe for decades to come. >> reporter: justice kennedy hand delivered his resignation to the white house addressed t

here are some of the justice's letter mom is off the bench. >> judge and now justice kennedy.t to make the record clear you made no promise to omit any member of the senate on anything come down mike. >> other than i would be frank and candid in my answers. >> they wanted to see a movie and i thought it would be 12 angry men, but it was legally blonde. people ask me, before i go on the bench, do i get nervous? i said, not at all. but up when i was on the other side i got terribly nervous. >> bret: he such a pleasure to talk to. thank you for your service to our country and thank you for inviting us into your home. that's it for the special report, fair, balanced and unafraid of. "the story" with martha starts right now. >> martha: and tonight we go live to the white house for white house for late-breaking developments in the search for a new supreme court justice at this hour. >> we have a list of 25 people that i actually had during my election. i had at 20 and i added five. so it will be somebody from that list. >> martha: that after today's stunning resignation from justice

have, in addition to myself, justice ginsburg and justice breyer and justice scalia. disagreed, our beginning points or the same because it is a generational thing. it is important that this court speak over time and life tenure does serve that. you can argue that back and forth. this taking your calls morning before the house of representatives comes in at 9:00. there is a shot of the supreme court there. this mornings about anthony kennedy after his retirement announcement. the last us is worthy of the -- leaving theg building. the era of us versus them will commence. one more, saying thanks justice kennedy for your years of dedicated service to our nation, people, and justice. tony says, the thing about kennedy is we cannot tell how we would rule in advance of a case. i can tell how ruth bader ginsburg will rule, not only the politics. that is truly bad. says, say goodbye to women's rights, civil rights, and human rights. say hello to your authoritarian dictatorship. you can join the conversation at c-span. from ellicott city maryland, line for democrats, go ahead.

then that's the new swing justice. there will always be a swing justice. et cetera he a just where that swing happens. just to remind everyone, john roberts is a very good man. and he actually -- he is more conservative than justice kennedy. >> yes. >> but in the most important decision of his life the obamacare case he voted. >> not the way everyone expected. >> it is an important position. its swing position. jeff is right, this is maybe the most significant vacancy that we have had in a generation at least. but let's first take, you know, a deep breath. no matter what, there are nine people on the court. and the eight that are left are all very good, even as they disagree with each other. and at most we just shift from kennedy to roberts as the swing. >> we are having conferring? let's give him a shout out. >> i appreciate that. let's go to capitol hill. garrett haake is having a conversation with senator john kennedy. a different kennedy. let's listen in. >> he was very unpredictable. that's the way you ought to be. >> there are some democrats saying t

being the median justice. we haven't had that in a long time. >> i didn't really have the understanding that you did that the filibuster accomplished a lot. but rick, do you want to take us into another area that we had thought of as justice kennedy as being incredibly important. rick is at uc irvine and one of the nation's leading experts on voting, campaign finance, and the like. >> i'm a pessimist by nature, but i have become much more pessimistic in the last term and the last few days. i was going to say there are three significant election laws of the term, two were victories and one was a punt. now we have three conservative victories. the most important of the cases by far was gill v. wickford which was out of wisconsin, a second case that was granted. a case out of maryland, which involved democrats engaged in partisan gerrymandering. but the main action was the gill case. the question was whether or not there were judicially management limits to separate permissible from impermissible qualities. it so

that was the investigation happening at the justice department.ls from the senate. the senate voted unanimously to hand the material over. now tonight "the new york times" has reported that apparently as part of that discussion and as parts of a -- discuss me as part of that investigation, the justice department secretly seized years worth of a "new york times" reporters phone and email records this year. unbee noents to horse. the reporter is ali watkins she previously for work buzz feed and politico. her editors were aware of a previous personal relationship with a staffer for the senate intelligence committee. ms. watkins says that the staffer was never a source of information for during their relationship. and again her editors knew about it but unbee known to another federal law enforcement officials secretly seized records as part of this investigation. phone and email records. senator ron wyden he told me live in terms of the surveillance of a national security reporter he told me that he was learning that the first time as i was reading it

yesterday justice anthony kennedy, great friend of mine, and a wonderful justice on the court, announced his intention to step down effective july 31st. justice kennedy has served this nation with highest distinction. over the course of his tenure, he has exercised influence on the supreme court playing a pivotal in some of the most consequential court decisions in modern times. as a testament to his independence, he rightly gained a reputation as the supreme court swing vote. sometimes he sided with the court's liberal wing. other times he sided with the conservatives. but he always sided with what he believed to be the correct interpretation of the law. what more could we ask for from a judge? throughout his public service, justice kennedy has mentioned the generation of jurists who went on to become -- he's mentored, not mentioned, he's mentored a generation of jurists who went on to become luminaries in their own right. not least among them is justice neil gorsuch, a former kennedy clerk. and now serves as his equal on the supreme court. with his one time pupil now working alongside

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 we're being con front confronted with today. there's two reasons that trump won with that part of the party. one was fewer taxes and the other was more justices. >> jeffrey. >> the difference between justice kennedy and the justice gorsich is the difference between an originalist and an advocate of natural law jurisprudence. justice kennedy was willing to define rights of privacy and dignity that justice gorsich or another trump appointee would not. new privacy rights not extended. i don't think it's right that a future trump nominee wouldn't check the president if he threw journalist in jail or a self-pardon might be challenged. originalist conservative justices are willi

justice retires. anthony kennedy announcing he's leaving the supreme court and taking with him a critical swing vote that has decided some of the biggest cases of the last three decades. who will president trump pick to replace him? >>> supreme fallout. the president said the search for the replacement begins immediately and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said a confirmation vote will come this fall. but democrats say the vote should wait until after the midterms. will they try to block the president's nominee. >>> putin's summit. officials confirm that president trump will meet with his russian counterpart with a date and location to be announced tomorrow. will mr. trump call out putin for russia interference in the 2016 u.s. election? >>> and kim's new construction. new satellite images show north korea upgrading a key nuclear facility used to produce weapons-grade material. is kim jong-un misleading president trump about denuclearization? >>> i'm wolf blitzer and you're in "the situation ro

and yet when we're talking about the fundamentals of this country, lady justice and meting out justice without any favoritism, indeed, that's why we need the documents. that's why we're trying to do our job. and that's why this resolution is so critical. with that i will recognize the gentleman from georgia, my good friend, mr. hice, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for three minutes. mr. highs: thank you, mr. speaker. i deeply -- mr. ce: thank you, speaker. i deeply appreciate my friend fromar forwarding me the opportunity to speak. find it interesting that those on the other side have an empty argument, their answer is to yell loud and rail on mr. speaker. i deeply appreciate my friend i unrelated to that which we're currently discussing. mr. speaker, our founders made it very clear when they drafted the constitution that we have a system of government that keeps each branch accountable. -- accountable to the constitution and rule of law. for nearly 18 months now the department of justice has attempted to shield itself from the legi

justice department approved the bid. one caveat.t will have to sell off the regional sports networks. earlier this month, comcast tried to crash the deal for fox. fox says disney's offer was superior and the two companies entered a merger agreement. >>> do you have $10,000 and want to be your own boss? amazon has a deal for you. it plans to help launch small businesses to deliver providing prime packages. this plan helps solve the challenge of getting packages to sme customers. it is too much for fedex and the postal service to handle. the president calls the deal a bad deal. the post office is losing money, but the parcel chservice is makg money. >> that is a fascinating experience. i don't want my package to be the one they are experimenting with. >>> "early start" begins now with the battle over the supreme court vacancy. >>> justice kennedy's retirement makes the issue of senate control one of the vital issues of our time. >> the bitter fight over the next supreme court justice is under way. the vacancy with major legal ramifica

the justice department wants that information.g handing that information over so the justice department can act on it. what is all that about? then later on tonight we started to get reporting from multiple sources that the unauthorized disclosure of information was from somebody who had been a long-time staffer on the intelligence committee in the senate. the senate and house intelligence committees obviously handle incredibly sensitive material. under incredibly rigorous secrecy protocols. and being a long-time staffer according to the "wall street journal" it was a 31-year staffer who had served in a non-partisan capacity under multiple administrations and under different majorities. this senate intelligence committee staffer was reportedly being investigated by the justice department for unauthorized disclosure of information. that's what we had as of last night in the reporting that was bubbling up through the day. now we've got a very unexpected turn in this from the "new york times." i think we got the headline here. yeah,

president trump says he's honored that justice anthony kennedy chose to retire during his term. >> justice anthony kennedy, a very special guy, also just announced a little while ago his retirement from the united states supreme court. great man. and i'm very honored that he chose to do it during my term in office, because he felt confident in me to make the right choice and carry on his great legacy, that's why he did it. >> so, let's talk more about justice kennedy. he was chosen by president reagan, he joined the court 30 years ago. he's been a pivotal swing vote every since. voting will be waved to legalize same-sex marriage. more often this term, including upholding the president's travel ban. now, president trump has a chance to fill the vacancy with someone much more conservative. democrats are demanding the vacancy not be filled until after the midterms. here's the reality, there's not a lot that they can do, elections have consequences. especially, the last presidential election, let's look at it. 30,000 people in three states decided the course of american history. think about th

to put this in some context, pete talking there about justice kennedy being sort of the swing justice on this court. pete williams, thank you for joining us down there in d.c. we appreciate you scrambling and getting there. just to, as we say, put this in a little bit of context here, the idea of justice kennedy as the swing justice here, how he got this seat in the first place about 30 years ago, originally the nominee from ronald reagan was a man named robert bork, one of the most conservative nominees we've seen for the court. that nomination was defeated by democrats. kennedy was the fall-back choice. he became the swing vote. now the political discussion here is going to be with a republican president, with a republican senate by the narrowest of margins, are you going to see this seat go more too the right with this new appointment? garrett haake standing by on capitol hill. the senate is 51-49 right now. that's the republican majority. a republican president trump and you have a 51-49 majority. you have democrats who are certainly going to be very concerned about there pick. ho

justice anthony kennedy is retiring. and now for the second time in his presidency, donald trump is poised to exercise one of a president's most consequential powers, nominating the court's next justice, a choice that is widely expected to drive the court further to the right. the wheels are in motion and the battle lines are being drawn tonight just hours after justice kennedy, the court's long-time swing vote informed the president of his retirement after 30 years in the court. our justice correspondent pete williams begins our coverage. >> reporter: anthony kennedy's retirement will set in motion the biggest change in the u.s. supreme court in half a century, that's because kennedy is often the most influential justice casting the deciding vote in closely divided cases. >> this was anthony kennedy's court because you couldn't get a major issue decided without his vote, almost without exception if it was a critical, ideological hot button issue, it was up to him. >> reporter: he hand delivered this letter to the white

be the chief justice. she probably a stronger conservative than justice kenny, but there e certain areas he feels very strongly about, the structure of the constitution in terms of who has the power to do what, and therea yo see him, perhaps, moving a little to the left. also, look at the court right now and have seen sort of a cre number for justices who try harder, i think, than the other justices in order to find common ground and avoid the 5-4 decisions that show the court ideologically divided, but ins the mif citizens a partisan court, and those four justices are kennedy, roberts, kagan and breyer. so i think, now, with justice kennedy leaving, rcthe sea for common ground may be harder. >> nawaz: you have spent hours in the courtroom watching the juswork. what stands out to you the way justice kennedy did his job? >> he's not as active a questioner as the morrecent justices, but when he asks a question, everybody leans forward to listen beuse he, so often, the key to how some of these more difreficul