at the crux of it, invoking brett kavanagh, the victim of all victims.ou may be under the hot lights and cross-examination, they are telling jackson, but we are the real victims here. the average voter may not recognize all the names, but the activist base knows them. if only as victims of some long ago democratic treachery. let's bring in professor of law at the university of california at irvine, also, correspondent for new york magazine and author of the life and times of ruth bader ginsburg. michelle, i want to play some of senators ted cruz and josh holly today pressing judge jackson again on her work in child pornography cases. take a listen. >> i've taken every case seriously. these are very horrible -- >> i'm asking you specifically -- >> i've taken every case seriously. >> so you're not going to answer that? >> these are very horrible crimes as was that one. >> gave him three months. my question is do you regret it or not? >> senator, what i regret is that in a hearing about my qualifications to be a justice on the supreme court, we've spent a l

the tide for justice kavanagh. he may have been right. and i think he's gotten comfortable in that role. so now he's kind of the drama guy. i was disappointed because he is capable of very pointed, effective questioning. unlike other senators who's done some cross-examination in his day and he typically knows how to make a point and make it well. but this was awkward that he was kind of trying to put on a show, like you said. you know, give me the popcorn and where are the credits. >> danielle, one wonders what the strategy is on behalf of a number of these high profile republicans on the committee. whether this is not just fodder for some broader argument they're making. some broader attempt at a culture war within american society. i guess i just wonder, you know, it seems like they're trying to figure out a way to be righteously indignant over judge jackson's nomination, but there's really not much there in her record. do you read it in the same way? >> absolutely. yesterday, what was interesting is we didn't se

here is lucy kavanagh. >> reporter: at america's southern border, anguish and uncertainty for the waro, unable to bring her parents or brother along. >> i just cried so much, hugging so much and telling good-bye and we don't know -- maybe not see each other anymore in this life. >> reporter: traumatized, shaken, waiting for a chance to apply for asylum in the u.s. you have not been able to cross despite the fact you're fleeing war. >> here we are third time. >> at this border. >> we try to go there. >> reporter: this man and his wife and two little ones fled as soon as the invasion began before the russians turned their home to rubble. they're really hoping to be able to cross. he says he wants to go to america. an unreachable dream for many with the u.s. southern border largely closed off to asylum seekers for the past two year thanks to an order known as title 42. shortly after we spoke, christina and other ukrainians were allowed to cross, but they weren't the only ones seeking refuge from vladimir putin's wrath. there is confusion at the border here in tijuana. we saw some ukraini

he still has a grudge about how brett kavanagh was treated by democrats.so while he says wait and see, i haven't decided or haven't yet announced how he's going to vote yet, all indications point to the fact that he's going to oppose her. republican leadership tell me that there will be probably a couple republicans who do support ketanji brown jackson but it's probably just going to be a couple. maybe a few but not many more than that, hallie. >> leigh ann caldwell live for us on the hill. leigh ann, thank you for that. tomorrow former president donald trump is heading to i astate he lost, he lost in 2020, in hopes that if he does run again in 2024 -- >> thank you. >> thank you, leigh ann caldwell. that he will be able to turn things around. he's holding a rally on saturday with some candidates he's endorsed ahead of that state's republican primary coming up in a few months in may. but a lot of the folks who you won't see on stage have something in common. they refused the former president's push to try to overturn the legitimate 2020 election result in g

i'm thinking particularly of brett kavanagh's fiery exchange with the senators during his confirmation battle. we're not seeing that from her. she's been the model of judicial temperament here. and again, the questions really are a quite marked shift in tone. almost to the point of blatant disrespect. i think it's a really poor look for the republicans. i think garrett's exactly right. they veered into territory that they were hoping to avoid. but there we are. she's remained absolutely unflappable, a true model of a judicial nominee. >> there was some news made as we were coming on the air in that line of questioning separate from what we're discussing and what garrett has laid out around her sentencing of child sex predators, which is on this affirmative action case related to harvard and judge jackson saying clearly it is her plan, paul butler, to recuse herself from that. talk about the significance there and give us the background. >> so it's not required under the law. supreme court justices make their own decisions about whether to recuse themselves. a lot of legal scholars said