but in 1987, president reagan nominated robert bork.f the problems was robert bork himself. >> i didn't say that, senator. i said it helped change my prediction of the outcome of litigation. >> robert bork was of a nature, he couldn't resist a good argument and he did. he argued himself out a seat on the supreme court. >> the democrats argued it was about robert bork's, not his qualifications, but the positions he'd taken on aspects of the constitution and that worried them. particularly issues related to right to the privacy and abortion rights. >> no appellate judge in the united states of america has a finer record. nonetheless, we have heard from some of the shrill critics of judge bork who fault him for being out of the mainstream. >> i see no place on the supreme court for someone who views equality, whether questions of race, gender or lineage, as an intellectual exercise rather than a matter of profound principle. >> the ayes are 42, the nays are 58. the nomination is not confirmed. >> democrats rejection of robert bork's nomina

i mean, by any realistic standards, judge robert bork was absolutely and unquestionably qualified for the job, and we're talking in the '80s. so that standard has been abandoned for a long time. and it was abandoned first by the democrats, then we kind of went back, you know, and we tell some of the story in "justice on trial." i think there are many times when republicans were hoping they could kind of return to that. you saw justices breyer and ginsburg had almost unanimous confirmations, and i think what we have seen is it's taken a while for republicans to realize that that standard hasn't been followed. and, actually, you saw a little of from frustration coming from lindsey graham who is one of the people who absolutely ascribes -- >> host: he wasn't the only one. >> guest: recall his outburst at the final confirmation where he said tell justice kagan and sotomayor hello, because i voted for them, and you are not following that standard. i think he's frustrated because he would like that to be the standard. that simply isn't the standard that's being followed. i think there shoul

and i know, robert bork trusted ab mikva, his wisdom and his acumen and his advice.amb: so how did you get your job in the solicitor general's office of the -- which president? wax: it was reagan, and charles fried was the solicitor general at the time. this was towards the end of his tenure as the solicitor general, that i was hired. i had been -- i had lucked into a summer internship at the solicitor general's office while i was at columbia law school. i had a professor who was a visiting professor from chicago. he's rather famous. his name is cass sunstein, and prolific. i had taken a couple of courses with him. he had said to me, "it's clear that you love to argue." he said, "you should really think about doing an internship at the justice department in the solicitor general's office because, of course, the solicitor general is the master litigator for the united states government." and everybody in the office had devoted to that mission, and i applied, and i got the job, so i spent a summer there, at the sg's office, as it's known. i got to know charles fried, i

in his book, robert bork showed how the internet -- opportunity for previously isolated deviance to connect to others. social media has sped up the process described as -- deviancy down. as a result, we have experienced the depressing proliferation of violent homegrown extremists, mass shootings, and domestic terror attacks. another dramatic shift was illegal immigration -- in 2011, only 3,937 unaccompanied children in central america were apprehended entering our southwest border illegally and families enon of exploiting our laws was so minor we wouldn't keeping track of it. 11 months into this fiscal year, more than 69,000 unaccompanied children from central america and 432,000 family members have been apprehended with most claiming asylum and being allowed to stay. i use these examples to the evolving complexity of the problems we face and our inability to effectively address them. unfortunately, there are not as many solutions as effective as hardening the cockpit doors. as chair of this committee, i have attempted to guide us through this process, gathering information, properly defini

in his book, robert bork illustrated how the internet provided an opportunity for previously isolated deviants to connect to others. social media has sped up the process daniel patrick moynihan described as, quote, defining deviancy down. we experienced a proliferation of homegrown violent extremists, mass shootings and domestic terror attacks. another dramatic shift involves illegal immigration. in 2011, only 3098 unaccompanied children from central america were apprehended on the southwest border and the phenomenon of families exploiting our laws, we were not even keeping track. 11 months into this fiscal year, 69,000 unaccompanied children from central america, 432,000 family members have been apprehended with most claiming asylum and being allowed to stay. i use these examples to highlight the evolving complexity of the problems we face and our inability to effectively address them. unfortunately, there are not many solutions as easy and effective as hardening. the chairman of this can be, i have attempted to guide us through the problem-solving process, gather information, proper

that there are voices left, right, and center when the people often referred to as warren burger, robert bork other people not known as left-wing judges saying that the second amendment did not protect an individual right. today it does and that is in part as as a result of this movement outside the court. but he came to come back to my agreement with erin, congress alone can't do it. popular opinion and pulse alone can't do it. it's got to lead to something that we recognize as constitutional change. >> if i can pick up on something joseph was saying. one of the reasons you had the shift in thinking is in part to go back to what we were just talking about, which is in the same time we thought content saw courts moving to this notion of interpreting the constitution in a manner consistent with the historical scope of what the provision of the constitution were intended to protect when they were put into the constitution. it was really a big part of the movement and the shift in thinking was you started having a bunch of historical scholarship about the second amendment and initially became mo

>> i think it started with the assault on robert bork.because -- clarence thomas, 5-4 would have changed things. wait until ruth bader ginsburg leaves the court. maria: they're going to go nuts. >> it will make what they did to kavanaugh look like kindergarten. >> when the court began to make legislative decisions and they began to do what congress didn't have the guts to do, whether it was brown, board of education. they made many decisions that really were political decisions. i think that was the beginning of this and it's become more and more -- >> brown versus board of education shows the supreme court can make a moral ruling that it can do the right thing when the political branches lack the courage and lack the will to do the right thing because they're worried about getting voted out of office. brown versus board of education is one of the greatest decisions in the history of the r court. the legislature had the guts to do it. >> the legislature should have, they didn't, the court interseeped and becam -- intervd and became a legi