he thought chief justice rehnquist was his first judicial hero. one of the first things was he dissented in roe v. wade. i don't know for sure what he will do on the supreme court, but you have to think, based on what he has written and said, that he was skeptical about roe and questions whether it is a rule or precedent the court should stick with forever. >> if abortion restrictions are upheld by a new majority of the supreme court, how could we see this issue play out in the courts going forward? david: depends on what you mean by restriction. there are a lot of instructions -- restrictions that could be upheld. regulations that make women think twice about getting an abortion. supposed louisiana or mississippi passes a law that says new abortions after six weeks or we are going to criminalize abortion. that gets struck down because of roe v. wade. the appeal to the supreme court. so what does the supreme court do? we will see if they want to move slowly, step-by-step, or if they are faced a year or two from now with a state that has essentiall

expressing support for justice rehnquist dissent in row, or the justice argued for allowing restrictions on women's reproductive rights, kavanagh agreed with the idea that if a right is not explicitly stated in the constitution, it must be rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people. he made clear, he doesn't believe a woman's right to choose is rooted in the traditions of conscious in our people. i am deeply concerned about who judge kavanagh thinks about and trusts when he imagines the traditions and conscience of our people and makes those decisions accordingly. bench,opinions from the it only heightens my concern. in one opinion, he rolled to allow the trump administration -- ruled to a lot of trump administration to block a pregnant 17-year-old who arrived alone at our border from accessing abortion until the government could place her with a foster. he felt she needed a support network around her before she was capable of making the decision, even though she had been seeking it for months, and already met state level requirements. in another opinion, he expressed belief t

, and he cited rehnquist's dissent in roe v wade. back in 1973 -- >> woouff: opposing the majority. >> right. again, he did not say i agree with it, but he was holding him up as a hero and has done the nime with the late justice anschiia also an opponent of abortion rights. i think what we'll see on september 4 when the hearings begin is a man who expresses regard for precedent, talks about what's settled, talks erout how it's a jolt, as chief justice john ro had said, to society when precedent is overrud, but i think once he gets up there in a lifetime position, all bets are off. >> woodruff: but there's little doubt that they will be asking him abo those two things, the case about the immigrant, the young immigrant woman whwas pregnant and about certainly praising justice rehnquist in dissenting in roe. >> right, they'll ask him, then again and again. right now, judbey, i what he's doing is rehearsing his answers to try stisfy senators enough to get the majority vote. >> i know in one officwhere the senator is listening to the that

he joined with william rehnquist. he was kind of a wildcard. blackmun was very glad when he endorsed roe and actually pushed back on designating when life came into being. he wanted to expand it to viability. host: in terms of history of the country, we learned that it was after the richard nixon inauguration, but the day became historically notable for another reason. lyndon baines johnson died that as you mentionedlyndon baines johnson died that day, and that , really dominated the headlines. how long did it take the media to catch up with the importance of this story? clarke: it was on the front page of "the new york times," below the fold. johnson's death is the leading headline on january 23. but it was announced by walter cronkite. what is significant, i think, about the earlier media announcements is that the media almost consistently says that the right to abortion is limited to the first three months and we know that is inaccurate. but that was the initial message the public got about roe v. wade and doe v. bolton. we know that when yo

all but rehnquist, justice rehnquist agreed that was discrimination on the basis of sex.t sexual discrimination would be scrutinized at the same level as race zrichlz discrimination. we almost got that four of the justices ruled in our favor on that. >> you remain close with her in washington and beyond. do you think she is close to being done? >> no. i think that she -- first of all, she said that she has at least another five years in her, and she has maintained her health beautifully. she works out, as you can see in the documentary, religiously, and i think that she really -- that's what she does. she is a justice of the court. she is not going to leave and retire and go to the beach. that's just not ruth. >> brenda feigan, thank you so much for walking us through. >> my pleasure. >> airing this monday night at 9:00 eastern time, really, you don't want to miss it. thank you for joining us. "ac 360" starts now. >>> president trump keeps talking witch-hunt and the russia probe keeps finding broomsticks. john berman here in for anderson. one more guilty plea in connectio

that kennedy was clearly the most member of the rehnquist court if they would have put justice kennedyjustice kennedy and libertarians in the same sentence it is when they are driving those opinions. in his free speech trying that same principle and with that initiative he created a long time the american bar association coming from the terrorist attacks of 911 initiative to understand jurisprudence and it is something that is insufficient attention and mentioned in a couple of footnotes as an example running around to tell high school students but if you delve into that idea that is a great a great way to understand jurisprudence. so that is desirable freedom to encourage the idea that all viewpoints tolerated and that this tolerance leads to a more in more in my and citizenry. this translates into the passionate opposition based on the content of their expression. governments are most change -- dangerous when -- dangerous when i tell people how to think. he is thought to have an extremely number of speech. the goal of the first amendment can be sent to be the preservation of the indi

has produced, for its size, leaders like goldwater, udall, john rhodes, sandra day o'connor, bill rehnquistn mccain. the >> he didn't have to turn it on her fake it. he genuinely cared about these people and i was 24/7. >> senator mccain was transported last night to a funeral home in phoenix later this week. on wednesday he will lie in state at the state capital according to governor ducey. so many chapters in his life also together by his love of country. he believed in american exceptionalism and when he wasn't in d.c. he would be preaching democratic bodies, believe in civil talk would lead to civic action. the >> is one of the best known political figures in the world today because he's a man who stood for principle and stood for what he believed and despite very often his party been in another place. reporter: people would turn out in the thousands to pay their respects to john mccain. as for his replacement, that's up to him. whoever does will have to face voters in 2020. we won't go into it right now, but it will be pretty big shoes to fill for anybody. not to you. leland: as you no

with seventh circuit judge richard posner and with the late supreme court chief justice william rehnquist. since 2009, he has served as assistant u.s. attorney for the district of south carolina. currently -- current and former peers in the u.s. attorney's office say he has, quote, a well-earned reputation for excellent preparation, good judgment, fairness, and hard work. in that role, mr. richardson led the successful prosecution of the gunman who murdered nine innocent people at emmanuel a.m.e. church in charleston, south carolina, back in 2015. our colleagues on the judiciary committee have received a letter from jennifer pinkney, the wife of the late clemeta pinkney, one of the victims of that senseless violence. ms. pinkney wrote to enthusiastically support mr. richardson's confirmation. she said that he, quote, will make a fine jurist. i urge my colleagues to join me in voting to confirm both of these impressive nominees. now, one final matter. members were back in our home states meeting with constituents last week. i had the opportunity to visit a remarkable business in my hometow

i remember chief justice rehnquist wrote a series of very interesting books about the supreme court and history. in the introduction to one of them, he said that when he was writing, he thought constantly of his wife, who was educated at stanford like he was, but was not a lawyer. but these books were about law and about the court. and he said that having his wife, an interested, intelligent reader, in mind, but not a technically trained reader, was a great advantage to the final product. so whether it's thinking of one person or of a larger audience of a type of person. i promise you what you write tomorrow will be better than what you write today if you sort of put it in those terms. i know this from experience. >> yeah. and also keeping in mind what the policy means for real people. so painting the picture of what -- what's the human result of this policy. i think, you know, sometimes because we had to turn thing over really quickly, you get the fact sheet and you end up like, if you get really tired or lazy you are just rewriting the fact sheet, trying to update a little. really, yo

i remember chief justice rehnquist wrote interesting books about the supreme court and history. in the introduction he said when thought ofing, he his wife, educated at stanford, but not a lawyer. these books were about law and the court. he said having his wife, and and intellegent reader in mind, but not a technically trained reader, was a great advantage to the final product. whether it is thinking of one person, or of a larger audience of a type of person, i promise you what you write tomorrow will better than what you write today if you put in those terms. i know this from experience. june: keeping in mind what the policy means for real people. painting the picture of what is the human result of this policy. i think, sometimes, because we had to turn things over quickly, you get the fact sheet and you end up tired or lazy, you are just rewriting the fact sheet, trying to elevate it a little. really, you should stop, write the fact sheet and then figure out what this means to do build on. what is the human impact? what does this mean for an average family of four, this perso

especially given his recent praises of dissent in rowe and casey in 2017 and 2017, he praised judge rehnquist and judge scalise's view that rowe and casey was decided wrongly. what is anyone supposed to believe? given that president trump said he will only nominate people who will repeal rowe, given he has praised the dissents in rowe and casey, the fact that he was unwilling to refute any of that in any way to even say that an abortion, a limit on abortion after four weeks was an undue burden should raise real questions for any american who believes in choice, who believes in the kiewnality of the -- constitutionality of the government helping with health care, including preexisting conditions. and then there is one issue we discussed yesterday that took on a whole new light mere minutes after our discussion concluded. i asked judge kavanaugh about his remarkably expansive views on executive authority. as context, judge kavanaugh has said that presidents should not be subject to criminal or civil investigations while in office. he said the only remedy for a president who committed a serious