justice kagan had the honor and privilege of clerking for two legendry judges. first, judge abner on the u.s. supreme court -- u.s. court of appeals for the d.c. circuit and then for justice thurgood marshall at the united states supreme court. after briefly practicing at a law firm, justice kagan became a law professor at the university of chicago law school and later at harvard. she then served in the clinton administration as associate counsel to the president and then as deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy. after this time in washington, justice kagan served as the dean of harvard law school. she was then nominated and confirmed as solicitor general of the united states and then was appointed as associate justice of the supreme court. justice kagan has been a supporter of pro bono and public service throughout her career and we are happy to welcome her today as the aba celebrates the 10th anniversary of the national celebration of pro bono. we appreciate that justice kagan has taken time out of her very busy schedule to be here with us toda

he considered -- kagan: right. but if you're just listing that evidence, what you might think as a court if you're looking for delusions is that's all relevant, i'm listing the evidence, but that's irrelevant. is there ever a place where the court makes it clear that that is relevant? mr. govan: because it specifically said in its conclusion on page 10 that it was considering all the testimony of dr. goff and that eventually made the final finding, which justice alito pointed to, that "madison has a rational understanding as required by panetti that he is going to be executed." and it's important also to note that there were -- justice kagan: but do you see what i mean, mr. govan? and i won't belabor this, but you can list all the evidence and think to yourself: i'm listing all the evidence, but i find all this evidence utterly irrelevant to the legal standard because i think delusions are required to satisfy ford and panetti. mr govan: well, i understand, your honor. i guess the point is that the judge never made

justice kagan: right. i suppose what people are thinking of, and i'm -- i'm not even sure if this happens ever or whether there's any sort of physiology behind this, but the idea of a kind of fugue state or a blackout that's unaccompanied by anything else, does that count as the kind of mental disability that you're talking about? mr. stevenson: no, it is not. it does not. we're not arguing that someone who is competent to stand trial, who nonetheless at trial maintains that they blacked out or don't remember would, therefore, be incompetent to be executed. what we're arguing is something quite different. here, we know that mr. madison's brain is damaged. we can see it on an mri. we know that his cognitive disabilities have declined. we know that he is not able to understand the things going on around him. and we argued that, because of that dementia, which has very particular features, he is incompetent to be executed. the trial court found that because he's not insane and because he's not psychotic, ther

let me mention two things about justice kagan's comments.ink she now has an opportunity to be that swing justice in a way. she could start joining on legal opinions that she agrees with, the conservative vote and perhaps change the texture of that opinion and what comes out. she's been known, at harvard, when she was the dean, to work with conservatives, to bring conservatives on to the faculty, so there's an opportunity for her to fill that role. i also think she was warning senator lighthouse and others, don't attack the court. and that's what you see the left starting to do. we didn't win the kavanaugh decision, so they're saying to themselves, now we have to destroy the supreme court. that's the last thing that americans want to see happen out of all of this. >> let me play one more kind of exactly to the point we're talking about right now, one more thing that -- from elena kagan today. listen. >> part of the court's legitimacy depends on people not seeing the court in the way that people see the rest of the governing structures of this

brian: i want to show you video of harvard kagan. -- of robert kagan.red's wife kimberly, his father donald. lets see 42 seconds of robert kagan in this year 2018. >> we already see signs that democracy is not enjoying the kind of support that it once enjoyed around the world. we already see the return of geopolitics. in the united states, we seen the return of protectionist dependencies. if the united states is not in the business of supporting that order, then all elements that we have enjoyed will gradually go away and the world will return to normal. we have the idea that what we have now is normal but that is not true. normal looks like the early part of the 20th century and the 19th century and all previous centuries. brian: i want to read from your book. kagan became a fixture. kagan always struck me as crystal, meaning bill kristol, and that both were products of academia. they had similar views. the main difference was that kagan was dumber and less charming. kristol came off as ordained. -- came off as urbane. he seem like an aging linebacker

kagan became a fixture. kagan always struck me as crystal, meaning bill kristol, and that both were products of academia. they had similar views. the main difference was that kagan was dumber and less charming. kristol came off as ordained. he seem like an aging linebacker with a history of concussions. rather than make his case, kagan increased his volume. he yelled and stormed off. i always thought he was an idiot. not that it slowed him down in washington as a foreign-policy expert. i have to say, this is the most apprising couple paragraphs. tucker: because i have always have a debate i show i think that we all benefit . from, and i have always enjoyed hashing things out. what happens if we do that and what about this? whereas, bill kristol would entertain debate. there are always things that people don't want to debate but he would. kagan would always take the view. i was not on the opposing side. i was hardly a critic of neoconservatism in 1998, but i was interested because i did not fully understand.

kagan would always take the view. i was hardly a critic of , but iervatism in 1998 was interested because i did not fully understand. why are we so worried about russia still? not that i am on russia's side. he would say -- i am not carrying water, it is a question. are there other things we should focus on? you don't understand, shut up. i always thought he is far from the only person who built -- who behaves like that. if you find yourself going immediately to motive with someone you disagree with, maybe you're not examining your own assumptions very thoroughly and may that is a way of avoiding hard questions that you are not answering. it was really noticeable. really noticeable. then i just watched over the years. that clip is a perfect example. invalid andumber of important parts. -- points. ourway we have lived for entire lives is not a representative of how people have lived. it aligns over other questions that are even more fundamental, which is, why are we doing the things we are doing? if you were here, one

this is justice kagan. this. >> it is an incredibly important thing for the court to guard, is -- is this reputation of being fair, of being impartial, of being neutral and of not being simply an extension of the terribly polarized political process and environment that we live in. and, you know, this is a challenge. >> all right. those are pretty timely words. >> this speaking event was planned for a long time. it just happened today. but justice kagan could have avoided everything. she could have said, i'm not talking about it. she made a point almost like chief justice roberts would, but caring about the institution of the court there because she knows that coming out of this, this is the most politicized we have ever seen it and she wanted to send a strong message she cares about how this court looks and that -- that it can't be looked at politically. and she also said something else which we didn't have in that clip, but she also said, you know, for years we had a swing vote. maybe first it was o'conno

. >> no, we don't think so, justice kagan. >> why is that? where in the statute do you find that? >> the statute says it in three places. it says, in section 4, that only habitat of such species can be designated as critical habitat. >> but we know that habitat doesn't mean -- excuse me. i'm sorry. we know that habitat mean just where a species lives. i mean, that's -- that would be the common understanding of the word "habitat" but this statute clearly goes beyond that and we know because it says -- it's also where a species could live, right? it's out there -- there are also habitats that are outside the geographical area occupied by the species. so we know that the statute is not using the kind of garden variety definition of habitat. >> no, i disagree with that, justice kagan. 35 c says the critical habitat cannot be designated beyond the entire area which can be occupied. congress was thinking about habitat in the sense that it is used in common speech and in the dictionaries, which is a can be occupied sense. the 1979 convention of migratory species, to which we are signatur

i voted for sotomayor and kagan and never thought twice about it. i have never done to them what has been done to brett. jeffrey: please, sir. thank you. let me ask you about dr. ford's testimony. you believe that something terrible happened to her, but it wasn't kavanaugh. senator graham: i am not a psychologist, but i am a lawyer. i know if you are going to choose a person for a crime in this country, you are not assumed guilty. what got me upset in the hearing was judge kavanaugh turned to don mcgahn. if you are truly innocent, asked to expand this investigation, what are you hiding? this is not the soviet union, this is america. that is what got me going. i think the accusation was made by dr. ford, and i listened. she was heard i think she was , treated respectfully, because everybody deserves that. i say, what do i have? i don't have a location, the corroborating witnesses go the other way, and everything else in the record i know about brett kavanaugh is he is not bill cosby and he is not harvey weinstein. this is about power, it's not about

>> well, clearly, elena kagan and sonia sotomayor, who was there with her at princeton, are concerned about that, and i'm s, glad, hahat you started here with the oo-- twothe women justices speaking on this point. they're cleay very concerned. and this is an extraordinary thing that they spoke about this. justice kagan wentn to say that the legitimacy ofth e court relies upon public confidence in the court and in its independence, that if the public loses faith in the court, loses respt for the court, and loses a sense of-- of credible, of the court's credibility, that they won't listen to what we tell .hem to do that's basically what she came out and said. "we don't have an army," she said. "we don't have an army. we can't order with masses of force the public to dohings. we order through our legitimacy." and without that, all is lost for the court. and that's her concern. and she said that las and it was a bold thing to say. nd i'm so glad you started there, because ows tremendous concern on the part of at least these two justices about what's hapsepened theast few weeks. >> sreeniv

what is interesting about kagan and sotomayor there, they don't often speak out like that. and that was a long-planned speaking event and it happened to fall on this critical day, but they wanted to make two things absolutely clear, is that they recognize that this court cannot be looked at as just a part of the political branch. that is what makes them so nervous about it. they can't be looked at as republicans or democrat, and right now, and this doesn't always happen, there are four members who were appointed by republicans president, and four by liberals. that doesn't always happen. we have had that switch around before, so they are very, very concerned about this. and they are also, i think that kagan made that interesting note about the swing vote, because now anthony kennedy is gone, and before anthony kennedy, justice sandra o'connor was the swing vote. and right now, it doesn't look like there is going to be a swing vote. and she says that is another concern. because it looks like one side, one side of the bench would be owned in a particular issue. they are very n

chief justice roberts, justice kagan, justice -- justice breyer. they don't like being perceived as republicans or democrats. to the extent this process which is inherently political has gotten more political than normal, that has to be something are very unhappy about. >> assuming judge kavanaugh does make it to the court and become adjusted, what have we learned from clarence thomas experience on what basis judge kavanaugh if he does become adjusted into the future. >> well, justice thomas is not the most conservative justice at least in the top two along with justice gorsuch. he may have been that anyway, but it certainly the case after his experience, his views are dim and solidify. that may have been impart an effective the confirmation process, which over the years he did allude to, suggesting that it is still had an effect on him. and they have an effect on justice kavanagh. really hard to say because it is a personal thing. other justices about more difficult. confirmation processes and not been affected in quite the same way. n of course v

a few years ago,ma president obama nominated elena kagan and like judge kavanaugh she participated in public office but unlike the kavanaugh confirmation process the elena kagan process included the release of nearly every document related to her payment service. in fact no one got an example of so much of a nominee's record in government being hidden from the senate and hidden from the public as he judge kavanaugh's case. though rushdie and secretive process that characterized judge kavanaugh's nomination raises this question, what is he hiding? why doesn't he insists his record be made public and why doesn't he want people investigation of the sexual assault claims made against him and why won't republicans insist on transparency and a meaningful investigation. nor would the senate republicans care about thect fact. judge kavanaugh has been accused of sexually assaulting multiple women. doctor ford. they make judgments based on fact. they need to discredit these courageous women. donald trump openly mocked doctor ford at a political rally and republicans made clear this is the one a

. >>> and coming up, justices elena kagan and sonja sotomayor saying the court's legitimacy depends on staying above the political fray. are they sending a message directly to brett kavanaugh? >>> plus, first lady melania trump, speaking out overseas. her comments on the me too movement, judge kavanaugh, and his accuser christine blasey ford, coming up. today is the day you're going to get motivated... get stronger... get closer. start listening today to the world's largest selection of audiobooks on audible. and now, get more. for just $14.95 a month, you'll get a credit a month good for any audiobook, plus two audible originals exclusive titles you can't find anywhere else. if you don't like a book, you can exchange it any time, no questions asked. automatically roll your credits over to the next month if you don't use them. with the free audible app, you can listen anytime, and anywhere. plus for the first time ever, you'll get access to exclusive fitness programs a $95 value free with membership. start a 30-day trial today and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime and your b

sotomayor and kagan received more votes republicans and alito received from democrats.keep that in mind the next him democrats try to pin the blame for the confirmation wars on the gop. i'll say just a few words about president obama's d.c. circuit nominees. president obama appointed four judges to the d.c. circuit, lawson, patricia, cornelia, wilkins. the fifth nominee caitlin, withdrew her nomination. compared to the way senate democrats treated president bush's d.c. circuit nominees, the confirmation process for president obama's first nominee was a walk in the park. he was confirmed in the months after nomination by vote of 97-zero. not a single republican opposed his nomination. compare that to the vote on president bush's d.c. circuit nominees. 43 no votes, 24 no votes for griffith. 36 no votes for judge kavanaugh. you would've thought it was the 1990s again for president obama's of the d.c. circuit nominees were confirmed only after senate democrats changed the rules. and in order to eliminate the filibuster for lower court nominees. the hubris of this move was q

he nominated elena kagan during the latter half of his second term. the senate did not act on their nominations following the precedent senate democrats set under george h.w. bush. judges rogers and tatell were both confirmed by reasonable votes, really. it was not a difficult thing, but they were both confirmed by voice vote within four months of nomination. justice garland's confirmation process was a bit different. there was a dispute at the time over where there was a -- whether there was a need for another judge on the d.c. circuit. compared to other courts of appe appeals, the d.c. circuit had a smaller caseload per judge. after an extended back and forth, the senate voted to confirm judge garland 18 months after he was nominated. the vote was 76-23. the majority of republicans supporting his nomination. i'm going to pause for just a moment here to swap out my speech boxes. when you have a lecture this thorough, and, of course, this detailed, distinguished, it takes more than one speech box. [ laughter ] so i'm going to swap speech boxes at this

you know, a few years ago president obama nominated elena kagan to the supreme court. like judge kavanaugh, she had participated in public office. she had served. but unlike the kavanaugh confirmation process, the kagan process included the release of nearly document related to her time in service. in fact, no one has found an example of so much of a nominee's record in government being hidden from the senate and hidden from the public as in judge kavanaugh's case. the rushed and secretive process that has characterized judge kavanaugh's nomination raises this question: what is he hiding? why doesn't he insist that his record be made public? why doesn't he want a full investigation of the sexual assault claims made against him? and why won't republicans insist on transparency and a meaningful investigation? evidently neither judge kavanaugh nor the senate republicans care about the facts. judge kavanaugh has been accused of sexually assaulting multiple women. dr. christine blasey ford and deborah ramirez shared their stories of sexual assault at the hands of judge kava

>> i think that issue is way bigger than brett kavanaugh, it is way bigger than justice kagan.omething that's been coming down the rails since the 1980s when ted kennedy up and borked judge bork, kept him off the supreme court. that started this. that was on the nick sidemocrat. >> he set the table with his comments that he wrote, had time to sleep on, think about the next day, and deliver during the hearing. did he not set himself up for criticism he is facing? >> victor, what he said in the beginning of the speak is no one has seen the comments but me and one person that edited behind me. i think we know that's true. >> that's how he feels, it wasn't anybody's -- >> the white house would have toned down some partisanship or looked at the bigger picture there. i give him a little leeway there, if you are wrongfully accused of something that egregious, that horrible, of course you're going to react with emotion and anger. is it becoming of a justice, no, but i understand in that moment because he's also a human. >> brian said something that was key, victor. it was a toxic proce

justices thomas, ginsburg, alito, kagan all in attendance. it caps what "the new york times" called the best week yet for the trump presidency. including a big new trade deal, the lowest unemployment rate since 1969 and signs that the political momentum has shifted for republicans ahead of the midterm elections. take a look at that from our colleagues at 538. just a week ago democrats had a 1-3 chance of taking back the senate. now it's scaled back to 1-5. at a rally last night in topeka, kansas president trump was in his element boasting about his accomplishments and touting kavanaugh's confirmation a victory that ensures the president's legacy will last long after his time is over. supreme court, but at what cost? >> reporter: protesters stormed washington this week determined to derail kavanaugh's nomination. bringing their anger right to the senators before the vote and continuing to shout their disapproval even as the gavel came down. >> the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. >> reporter: it follows a messy and bitter co

justice kagan leaned over and joke ad few times with justice kagan.n hired kavanaugh when she was dean at harvard law school. she was a teacher there. kavanaugh wanted to know from a petitioner if a tap constituted violent force. the case was defining violent force. a moment of lefty when justice sotomayor turned to justice gorsuch and pinched him before he knew what was going on to say if that was violent force. that is what this was all about. there were no protests inside the courtroom, as it's a federal offense. supporters say that the two justices, with two justices that he nominated confirmed he is cementing his legacy on the courts and saying it will help the republicans in the midterms. >> last night you saw the 69th judicial nomination under president trump. the second supreme court. the 2 sixth circuit and dozens of appeals courts. this president's legacy, somebody that has reshaped judicial branch to strict constructionists this. is huge, huge win for the president. it galvanized republicans heading into a key midterm election. reporter: re

but elena kagan last night said something, it's not an extension of politics but somehow above the fray. >> yes. does this body makeup of these nine in the wake of everything we've seen this week, the last several weeks, will it be able to stay that way? will it stay above the perceived fray? >> it all depends on if people want to denigrate the court the way the trump administration has denigrated the justice department and the fbi. and so, look, i think susan collins had it right. merrick garland was denied a vote, that was wrong. she have had a vote. he's not 180 degrees out of favor with judge kavanaugh. so all this talk about roe v. wade, that's not the way the court works. they don't say let's return to roe v. wade and overturn it. having a conservative on the court means that we do look at precedent. we don't upend the court. we look at past decisions. as kavanaugh said, roe v. wade is established law. i disagree with it, but i don't think he'll get in there as one justice and overturn roe v. wade. >> i won't even ask you a question. you have been shaking your head. just go. >> we

but then we were reminded that justice kagan and justice souter were all confirmed in midterm election years and evaporated. next they said that should be delayed because too few documents were available but then with the supreme court nomination so what came next? that democrats call for delay because there were too many documents for them to read. i wish we could have remained inin the realm that when none of theseud tactics work as he had his brilliance and some chose a darker road. that the politics of personal destruction and i spoke at length of the allegation and for six weeks the confidential accounts from the democratic side of the judiciary committee to the washington dc lawyers were hand-picked for her. and with that confidential letter finding its way into her hands with proper procedure listening to the plea for privacy this is not politics as usual. doctor ford's allegation is not the only uncorroborated allegation that has been paraded around. all the mud and muck open entirely on brett kavanaugh and his family. and then came or corroborated allegations more outlandish.

i felt i was doing the traditional thing when it came to sotomayor and kagan. you this.l comes in the last year of president trump's term in the primary process is started, we will wait to the next election. jeffrey: you are on the record. senator graham: hold the date. north korea. >> [laughter] jeffrey: you and i have pastssed many times in the the nixon approach to foreign policy, the henry kissinger tactic of telling our adversaries, i am a reasonable guy, but this president, i don't know about him. senator graham: this is an easy sell. jeffrey: with the trump approach, we are not sure if this is a highly elaborate crazy nixon approach, or just crazy, right? senator graham: i am with you. jeffrey: you don't know either. is crazy?ahamyou think donald p senator graham: no. crazy like a fox. he won, by the way. you need to ask yourself, what was it about donald trump allowed him to win? if you can't figure that out, you won't win 2020. rocket man. we give sanctions, we relief sanctions, it didn't work. first conversation with president trump, this is your bigg

he also nominated elena kagan and alan schneider during the latter part of his second term. the senate did not act on their nominations following the president senate democrats set under george h.w. bush. george -- judges rogers and to confirmed by reasonable votes. thing.no difficult they were concerned by voice months ofn four nomination. just as garland's -- justice garland's was different. there was a dispute whether there was a need for another judge on the gc circuit -- d.c. circuit. compared to other court of appeals, the d.c. had a smaller caseload per judge. after an extended back-and-forth, they decided to confirm judge garland after he was nominated. .he vote was 76 ivan 23 majority of republicans supporting his nomination. let me pause to swap out my speech boxes. when you have a lecture this , and this detailed, distinguished, it takes more than one speech box. >> [laughter] beachatch: so i will swap boxes at that -- speech boxes at this point. after president clinton came president george w. bush. he appointed four judges to the d.c. circuit, john roberts, jani

that they struggle to explain as they did with you justice kagan.the first anomaly is, as you noted, that the transitions rule, which were meant to be a ramp up to the permanent rule, are completely superfluous. if, the government really could delay, for whatever reason, picking up people subject to mandatory detention for as long as it needs or wants, then congress would not need to have that intermediate step. the second anomaly with the governments reading, and the government struggles with this in response again to your question, justice kagan. if the only qualification to be subject to mandatory detention is that you fall into one of the four categories in a through d, they necessarily read out the prior criminal custody requirement. in addition to the example you gave, justice kagan, of a child or spouse of a terrorist. there's a very typical situation. i am an immigrant. i show up for my green card interview. i live in california or washington and i confidently say yes, i use marijuana on a regular basis. i've never been arrested. i've never

he's sitting next to justice elena kagan. during the breaks the two of them sort of laughed together, shared a few moments, talked a little bit. they are no stranger to each other. when elena kagan was dean of the harvard law school, she tired brett kavanaugh as a professor. those two do have somewhat of a history. can you see the lineup there, brett kavanaugh taking his situation, which is always reserved for that junior most justice. >> thank you. the president has using the drama surrounding the kavanaugh nomination as a battle cry. >> what happened to the kavanaugh family violates every notion of fairness, decency and due process. our country, a man or a woman, must always be presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. and with that i must state that you, sir, under historic scrutiny were proven innocent. >> with exactly four weeks from the midterms, will republicans use that same playbook? with me, michael deantonio. you wrote this whole piece saying that trumpism is winning. tell me why. >> well, it's winning for

elena kagan, for example, had hired him for a job in the past.t will be a transition that will be watched if the vote goes as planned. so far in the white house it's been a restrained response because it isn't over until it's over. there have been tweets from the president and vice president thanking those who support kavanaugh. in to e pika, kansas, we would expect he would be wanting to talk about his victory in the supreme court, one that has been difficult for everyone involved. richard? >> all right. nbc white house correspondent kelly o'donnell. thank you, kelly. >>> will roe versus wade survive? why some believe kavanaugh fooled senators on the landmark case to lock in his confirmation. o lock in his confirmation if you have psoriasis, ... little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats moderate to severe plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla . it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is as

justice kagan, thank you. and justice gorsuch. cutback. justice alito. justice kagan, thank you. cutback. i would also like to send our deep appreciation to maureen skelly, the wife of the late great anthony scully. and also to our white house counsel, don began. —— scalia. we are thrilled to be joined this evening byjustice andrew kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of noble service to our nation and i want to thank you very much. applause. very special and treasured tests tonight are justice kavanagh‘s treasured tests tonight are justice kava nagh's amazing wife, treasured tests tonight are justice kavanagh‘s amazing wife, ashley, thank you ashley. applause. and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and liza. applause. and we are alsojoined by margaret and liza. applause. and we are also joined byjustice kavanagh‘s mum and dad, martha and ed. thank you. commentator:. -- applause. i would like to begin tonight ‘s proceeding, differently perhaps, of any other event of such magnitude. on behalf of our nation i wa nt to magnitude

i shook hands with elena kagan today. i'm so impressed with her, i don't agree with a lot of her jurisprudence but she's a woman who went to the highest court in the land. what is this, what's happening? >> i worked with justice kagan in the white house and i agree, she's a phenomenal person. she was the dean of the harvard law school when now justice kavanaugh was hired. >> laura: he can't go to a university and speak, he can't teach as a -- you know, two or three classes at a law school today. he realized that, right? >> pepperdine might take him. >> i think the discourse has gotten so acrimonious, we are all sitting here having a civil conversation but it's getting harder to do that and that's a shame. i do think though that thou shall reap what thou dost so. when you have a president that thrives on division -- >> i thought it was more divided after eight years of obama. beco i think the rhetoric of both men speaks for itself so you can throw barbs and i can throw barbs and we can talk about what started it but we can

then they were reminded justice kagan, breyer and souter were all confirmed during midterm election years and that argument evaporated. next, democrats said the process should be delayed because too few documents were available from judge kavanaugh's past public service. then they received the most pages of documents ever produced for supreme court nomination, so guess what camet next year or goalposts move down the field and democrats called for a delay because they were too many documents for them to read. i wish this fight could remain in the realm of normalcy but when none of these tactics work, when judge kavanaugh demonstrated his wife acknowledged brilliance open-mindedness and collegiality at his confirmation hearings, some chose a darker road. the politics of personal destruction will willfully unleashed. i spoke at length about the under headways senate democrats are treated dr. ford and are allegation, and brief or six weeks dr. ford's confidential account passed from one democratic member of congress to the democratic side of the judiciary committee to the washington, d.c. law

host: professor elena kagan wrote a view of a book taking a look at the confirmation process. specifically highlighting the board hearings presenting to the --lic the meaning of the repetition of platitudes displays discussion of viewpoints and anecdotes have replaced legal analysis. is that something you would share? guest: i do not think it is entirely accurate. in the post bork years, there was a sophisticated discussion of additional philosophy and hearings. if you look at justice ginsburg, who is often touted as creating this "ginsburg rule" which suggests the nominees should not say anything, she actually talked about a lot of different cases and a lot of different points of law and express her opinions about them. justice thomas also talked a lot about his judicial philosophy, the role of natural law and his understanding of the constitution. they may not have said specifically how they would vote on particular matters, if they had not previously talked about itse in their writings or beaches, but they talk a lot about how they thought about the cause how they thought a

to my left is justice kagan. justice kagan was with justice marshall what your?>> 1987. >> it seems like yesterday. that was after having attempted princeton and oxford and harvard for law and served in -- chambers as law clerk and all of our panelists this evening clerked for one judge or another as did i. >> a good court. >> it was a great court. >> in the white house counsel's office under the clinton administration and policy counsel as deputy director, could not keep a job, apparently. taught at the university of chicago law school and after getting tenure moved on and settled at harvard. not very long after that he became dean of the harvard law school and could not keep that job either. he became associate justice, solicitor general and then associate justice of the supreme court. judge paul engel meyer, he is judge of the southern district of new york and has been 2011. i should see he came on the court in 2010. he went to harvard and to harvard law school as well. he clerked for judge wald on the dc circuit and was in the solicitor's office and then he w

>> i worked with elena kagan, justice kagan and the k white house and i agree she's a phenomenal person. she was the dean of the harvard law school when now justice kavanaugh was hired. >> laura: he can't go there now.o he can't go to a university and speak, he cannot teach as two or three classes at a law school today. you realize that, right? >> they would probably take him. i think the level of discourse in this country has gotten so acrimonious that it's hard for -- and we are sitting here having a civil conversation and it's getting harder to do that and that's a shame. i think however that thou shall reap what thou dost so and when you have a president that thrives on division, this is what he does best. i think the popular vote speaks for itself in both instances and i think the rhetoric of both men speak. but you can throw barbs, i can throw barbs and we can talk c about what started it but we can't deny where we are. i do think one of the ways we can come out of this is by focusing on problems. >> condemn what they did to susan collins, because the republicans are less or conse

then they were reminded that justices kagan, breyer and suter are all confirmed during even-numbered years, and that a all e evaporated. next the process should be delayed because too few documents were available from judge kavanaugh's past public service. well, then they received the most pages of documents ever priced for a supreme court nomination, so guess what came next? the goalpost moved down the field, and the democrats called forhe delay because there were o many documents for them to read. i wish this fight could have remained in the realm of normalcy. but when none of these tactics worked, when judge kavanaugh demonstrated his widely-acknowledged brilliance, onen mindedness and collegiality at his confirmation hearings, some chose a darker road. the politics of personal destruction were willfully unleashed. i've spoken at length about the underhanded way senate democrats have treated dr. ford and her allegation. in brief, for six weeks dr. ford's confidential account passed from one democratic member of congress to democratic side of the judiciary committee, to washington,

. >> kagan wrote a book on this. she said highlighting the bork hearings presented to the public the roll of -- the role of the court. subsequent hearings has presented a hallow charade where personal anti-doets -- anti--- antic doets. can you expand on that? >> i don't think that is accurate. between 1987 and 1993, there was a pretty sophisticated discussion about the philosophy in the hearings. if you look at justice ginsburg who is often touted as creating the ginsburg rule that you shouldn't say anything actually talked about a lot of different cases and points of law and expressed her opinions about them. justice thomas talked about the role of natural in his understanding of the constitution. they may not have said specifically how they would vote on particular matters if they had not talked about those in their writings or speeches, but they talked a lot about how they thought about the constitution and how they thought about law. in the new millennium, 2005 and going forward, we have seen a shift. the nominee

>> i worked with justice kagan including at the court. and at the time, there was a sense that the two sides had to talk to each other, reason through, and now there's the distinct prospect that the five can just kind of mow the other four down without exactly listening. i think that that may prove a little bit -- there may be some good news within the court, but the real problem, and it's what justice kagan was pointing to is the legitimacy of the court to the outside world. last time we saw justice kavanagh, he was in this volcanic rage and he gets there with the politics of contempt and partisanship and will five votes not command the legitimacy of the american public. that would be a disaster for the court, but it's a distinct prospect. >> and peter baker, you're already in florida, going to be speaking to the police chiefs. this is not a midterm rally, but it could quickly become one. he's bringing with him on air force one rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, it's interesting to say the least, but there should be some time d

he will sit in the empty chair on the right side of elena kagan kagan hired brett kavanaugh a right citizen, to teach at harvard law school when she was the dean there. david: kagan was involved in the white house inquiry in the clinton administration at same time judge kavanaugh was working to investigate. it will be a very interesting supreme court. thank you very much, edward. reporter: thanks, david. susan: a lot of history. david: a lot of interesting stuff. the kavanaugh fight is not over, believe it or not. president trump praising the newly-confirmed supreme court justice this afternoon, democrats are vowing to take the battle to the ballot box. a lot of republicans are saying, okay, bring it on. we're live with the details. >>> dan henninger from the "wall street journal" how the controversy is firing up both sides of the aisle. susan: progress in north korea. secretary of state mike pompeo touting another step forward in talks with kim jong-un. where we currently stand on a public second summit between president trump and the north korean leader. david: plus it is the free market

the two liberal justices, kagan and ginsburg, were there. there were four justices there. the other four, we're told, were out of town. they will have to get along. because here's the fact. you can't win -- your side can't win a supreme court case unless you have five votes so every justice is a potential ally. so the court will do what it always does. whenever there's a controversial or noncontroversial justice that joins the court. they'll pull together and try to act together. >> yes, and the nation will definitely be watching every decision very closely. pete williams, thank you very much. i want to bring in my panel. fi phil rucker. erin simone, co-author of "the notorious of rbg." ron insana, cnbc contributor. and mike, the host of the slate's daily podcast. >> you're invited. >> we got that officially on the record. >> the whole thing is an ask. >> perfect, got that out there. erin, first, i want to start because former u.s. attorney -- u.s. troernl, excuse me, eric holder had this to say. with the con gir mation of kavanaugh and the treatment of merrick garland, th

we've heard recently from bob kagan and now president obama's former u.s. ambassador to nato ivo daalder has published the "empty throne." america's abdication of global leadership. we'll delve into that with him as we start, though, with a potential consequence of the stance, the international mystery into the whereabouts of the saudi journalist jamal khashoggi from the consulate in istanbul. he went from adviser to the royal family to a critic of what he considered saudi arabia's heavy handed crackdowns at home and wars abroad. he sought residence in the united states when he continued to speak out. and he's a columnist for "the washington post." america's usual support of saudi arabia has been amped up under president trump. they say they're looking into the disappearance along with turkish authorities. turkey has also requested a search of its istanbul consulate after unnamed turkish officials say the outspoken critic was killed inside. let's unpack all of this with ivo daalder and see how it plays into the theme of his book "the empty throne." i've got

supreme court justice elena kagan, surely not someone democrats think of as either evil or an extremist, hired judge kavanaugh to teach at harvard law school where he has served as the williston lecturer on law. both inside and outside his profession, those who know him praised his character. 84 women who worked with him in the bush administration sent a letter praising him as, quote, a man of the highest integrity, end quote. a self-described liberal democrat and feminist lawyer who knows judge kavanaugh and knows him well wrote the following in an op-ed for "politico," and i quote -- my standard is whether the nominee is unquestionably well qualified, brilliant, has integrity, and is within the mainstream of legal thought. kavanaugh easily meets those criteria. just as a democratic nominee with similar credentials and mainstream legal views deserves to be confirmed, so, too, does kavanaugh. not because he will come out the way i want in each case and even most cases, but because he will do the job with dignity, intelligence, empathy, and integrity, end quote. that from a liberal lawye

justice kagan. and justice gorsuch.applause} 6 i want to send our deep appreciation to maureen scalia. >> the wife of the late great anthony scalia. >> on the two are white house .anceled >> we are thrilled to rejoin this evening by justice anthony kennedy. i want to thank you very much for a life in the -- lifetime of service to this nation. i want to thank you very much. [applause} >> very special and treasure test tonight are just kavanaugh's wife ashley. [applause} and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and it like that. -- liza. [applause} >> we are joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad martha and edit. ed.artha and i want to apologize to brett mean tire f family for the pain and suffering you have been forced to enjoy. -- indoor. those who step forward to defend -- not ary are campaign of destruction based on lies where it what happened to -- cap not family dilates denies every notion of fairness and due process. in our country, a man or a woman, must always be presumed guilty unless and until proven guil

on c-span three, supreme court justice elena kagan fits done theyou conversation with head of the american bar association, followed by president trump holding a rally in wisconsin. coming up on today's washington journal, tim story from the national conference of state legislatures, joins us to talk about how the 2018 midterms could affect redistricting over the next decade. then come a former white house communications director, anthony's koran which you, checks about his new book on president trump's connection with blue-collar workers. after

yet another mass shooting in the u.s. a country in mourning yet again why did our spawn of michael kagan joins us from our washington studio hi michael police say they've received a suspect what do we know about him well that he is now detained by police and he has apparently a history of making anti-semitic and white's extremist views on social media he apparently also used a the rightwing twitter alternative. gaffe which is used by by a lot of white extra extremists. to denounce the jewish people and and and hatred so this is this is that's why officials all are now looking into this as a hate crime and investigating it as a hate crime and you guys taking over this investigation as a result there. michael has there been any reaction yet to the shooting. well president trump has come out just recently again and said this attack now looks certainly like an anti-semitic act earlier already denounced the attack as a terrible terrible thing and yet said. that that this perpetrator should perhaps receive the death penalty for this act vice president pence also came out now he's also travelin

i mean, i would like elena kagan's words to be true, but they are not. ever since the famous florida chad overturning of gore's popular vote victory, the court has been seen as deeply political and partisan. now, not on every issue, but we still fight in america about moral issues that the rest of the world seems to have put to bed. issues like the death penalty and abortion. and this is one of the great reasons donald trump was elected president i believe because even republican women who were not happy with what he has been saying in the campaign about women did not want hillary clinton nominating supreme court justices, they wanted a republican doing that. so, you know, here we go. is it a partisan court? of course it is. >> all right. well, you say here we go. looking ahead, what are some of the cases where mr. kavanaugh could have the greatest impact should he be confirmed? >> i'm not sure because i haven't studied the court. but one of the clear cases that trump had talked about during the campaign was roe vs. wade, which is the famous case that fo

. >> and we say elana kagan talki about this. >> justice kavanaugh, justice kennedy, people found a center where people couldn't predict in that sort of way and that's enabled the court to look as though it was not owned by one side or another. and was, indeed, impartial. that sort of middle position, it's not so clear whether we'll have it. >> some people, jackie, saying maybe chief justice roberts would take that role as being the swing voter there, the independent voice. he particularly is concerned about the reputation of the court. >> he was the key vote on health care and enraged conservatives for being the key vote. this smash mouth, bare knuckle, no holds bar fighting we're seeing permeating the united states senate. out there you probably don't know, it's not the house. the house, they really hate each other. in the senate, they really do sort of -- there's been a tradition to lay down arms and get stuff done. >> cooler heads usually prevail. >> yes. so to see that kind of rage permeate that body for those of us who have been covering congress and watching congress it was striking

justice kagan, thank you. and justice gorsuch. i would also like to send our deep appreciation to maureen scalia, the wife of the late great antonin scalia, and also to our white house counsel don mcgahn, thank you, don. we are thrilled to be joined this evening by justice anthony kennedy. justice kennedy, america owes you a profound debt of gratitude for a lifetime of noble service to our nation. and i want to thank you very much. very special and treasured guests tonight are justice kavanaugh's amazing wife ashley. thank you, ashley. and their two beautiful daughters, margaret and liza. and we are also joined by justice kavanaugh's mom and dad, martha and ed. thank you. i would like to begin tonight's proceeding differently than perhaps any other event of such magnitude. on behalf of our nation, i want to apologize to brett and the entire kavanaugh family for the terrible pain and suffering you have been forced to endure. those who step forward to serve our country deserve a fair and dignified evaluation. not a campaign of polit