discussion about roe v. wade has eclipsed, outsized almost every other area of jurisprudence and constitutional law in the confirmation process, and, frankly, to the detriment of having a really thoroughgoing confirmation process where you talk about lots of other areas of the law that are extremely important in american life. that has been a distortion of a discussion about constitution law now since, as you say, 1973 or '74. so, that's a big part of what one deals with now in the confirmation process. >> you know, conservatives used to discuss roe v. wade in the context of a confirmation process, and what conservatives always used to say is, "there is no litmus test, right? we're not gonna have a litmus test for judges through the confirmation process." and the thing that's different now, it seems to me, is that we have a republican president who is determined and declared that there is a litmus test for judges. he has said that he will appoint judges who will vote to overturn roe v. wade. >> look, at a practic

just this year they overturned a precedent almost exactly as old as roe v. wade involving labor law. they overturn precedents -- you know, president trump said he was going to appoint justices who would overturn roe v. wade. that's what he's done with gorsuch, that's what he's done with kavanaugh. and i don't know understand why conservatives can't take yes for an answer. >> do ayou expect roe v. wade will be undone? >> all supreme court justices overturn precedents at one time or another. no justice thinks every precedent is there for eternity. however, i think it's impossible to know at this point what judge kavanaugh would do. he was in a lower court before. you don't have his practice of precedent. and really i think the key fifth vote to look at here and is going to be for this coming term and going forward is chief justice roberts and his views on precedent, i think do clearly show he's not someone who wants to go around willy-nilly overturning things. so i think he's the person you need to be looking at even closer. >> wasn't roberts part of the majority t

n roe v. wade. should she be? >>> noting that roe v. wade was decided 45 years ago and reaffirmed 19 years later in planned parenthood versus casey, i asked judge kavanaugh whether the passage of time is relevant to following precedent. he said, decisions become part of our legal framework with the passage of time, and that honoring precedent is essential to maintaining public confidence. >>> that is republican senator susan collins, part of the 45-minute explanation she gave behind her decision to vote yes to confirm judge kavanaugh. let's bring in our panel, also joining us this time around is amy hal. i feel compelled to ask this question of michelle. are you surprised that the senator sounds so confident that roe v. wade is safe? >> i'm absolutely stunned she believes that roe v. wade is safe. there's a reason why conservatives and president trump fought so hard for brett kavanaugh. president trump when he was then candidate trump told the american public he was only going to po you people on the supreme court who were going to do aw

or overturn roe v. wade. e is no way to decide that case without deciding the face of -- fate of roe v. wade. it is going to be overturned. it will be gone. there will be states in this country -- probably a dozen or so, maybe more -- where abortion is illegal. it will not change california. it will not change new york. many states will still have abortion as available as it is today, but abortion will be illegal in a significant part of this country because of what happened today. >> and when he told susan collins, among others, he believes in precedent, roe v. wade is a precedent, you say? >> that, you know, precedents get overturned all the time at the supreme court. they overturned a supreme court precedent which almost identically, within two years of roe v. wade just this past turn in a case about labor unions. and liberals overturn precedents, too. the lawrence v. texas was the case that said gay people couldn't be criminally prosecuted for having consensual sex. that was a decision in 2003. that overtu

supreme court one day. >> the president promised that he was going to appoint justices that will get roe v. wade overturned. is that the expectation now? has he fulfilled his promise? does the president expect to see roe v. wade overturned? >> both justice gore such and justice kavanaugh said that roe is settled law. >> but the president promised to -- so was that a broken promise? >> no. he's nominating people to the circuit court and the supreme court to apply the law. most americans don't know what roe provides and does not provide. we've surveyed this in the past. they think there are limits to having aye bo-- abortions. roe talked about trimesters, but they never really -- we're talking about trimesters now. people are going to look at state law and circuit law and are going to look at late term abortions, sex selection abortion. they'll look at abortion after nonpartisan scientists and doctors say a fetus can feel pain. this whole matter of abortion any time, anywhere on demand with no -- the fact that planned parenthood gets tax payer funding and uses it to support democrats is not what m

. >> ladies, let's talk about abortion, specifically roe v. wade. since the confirmation of justice kavanagh, there has been conversation on what would happen if roe v. wade were overturned. according to a july poll from the wall street journal, 71% of americans do not want it overturned, including 52% of republicans. what would be your next move, especially for women with no legal means to an abortion? senator baldwin: i support roe v. wade. i am pro-choice. i believe a woman should have the right to control her own body and make her own medical choices. i don't believe this is an area where government or leah vukmir should intervene. my opponent's positions on this have not only been supporting the overturning of roe v. wade, but well beyond that, measures that would ban in vitro fertilization. it would include vanishing stem cell research -- banishing stem cell research that has created promising cures for people that need it. it would ban access to abortion in all circumstances, including rape and incest. the fact remains in wisconsin that there

but if roe v. wadeurned, there are about 20 states that would immediately move to ban abortion, leaving more than 25 million women in this country without access. >> what happens then? >> well, i mean, unfortunately we've seen what this looked like before. listen, before roe v. wade was decided it wasn't that women weren't getting abortions. they were just going to unsafe measures to get them and in some cases dying. and even now in places where access is restricted so much to the point where women can't access it, you have women trying to cross the country borders to mexico, taking measures into their own hands. in texas when you saw incredible restrictions passed that really made it almost inaccessible for women, this google searches of how to self-induce an abortion spiked through the roof. >> wow. thank you for joining me. she's the director of political communications for planned parenthood. still ahead a special look at what's next for the me too movement. a generation after the anita hill hearing

of course it matters whether roe v. wade is overturned. even if roe v. wade is not overturned, with judge kavanaugh's record, all of these limiting laws by states that i just talked about will probably be supported by him. and at some point the right to an abortion that we have under roe v. wade will be pretty much a nullity. the supreme court will also be faced with cases that will address the right of workers to bargain collectively with their employers, as litigation comes up to the high court in the wake of a janus decision and many or important topics including voting rights, gerrymandering, the census, race-conscious college admissions and environmental laws. the supreme court's decisions touch every aspect of american life. with so much at stake, the senate has an obligation to closely scrutinize every nominee to the supreme court. we need to know that they have the qualifications for the job. do they have the proper education? do they have the necessary breadth of experience? will they treat everyone in the court including employees, law clerks an

he was going to appoint justices who would overturn roe v. wade. at i think he meant when he said that, i think he's going to overturn justice that's are going to overturn roe v. wade. that's what he's done with gorsuch, that's what he's done with kavanaugh, and i don't understand why conservatives can't take yes as an answer. >> is he right? do you expect it will be undone under whether it is under states rights and not by a landmark case overturning precedent? >> i think he is right about one thing. all supreme court justices overturn justices. no justice thinks every precedent is there for eternity. however, i think it is impossible to know what judge kavanaugh would do. he was in the lower court before. you don't have his practice of precedent. and the key vote to look at, for this coming team and going forward, is chief justice roberts and his news on precedent, it does show that he is not someone who wants to go around willy nilly. so i think he is the person to look at. >> wasn't he part of the majority that overturned labor law? >> sure. wou

agenda, promising them that he would only appoint justices to the supreme court who would overturn roe v. wade and the affordable care act. let me restate that. donald trump promised that he would only appoint justices to the supreme court who would overturn roe v. wade and the affordable care act. as to brett kavanaugh, the promises that donald trump and the federalist society made were backed up by kavanaugh's judicial record on the d.c. circuit. as a federal appeals court judge, brett kavanaugh brought a dissenting opinion questioning congress' authority to enact the affordable care act and suggesting that the president could choose not to enforce it. judge kavanaugh would have block add lower court's order, allowing an undocumented minor to safely and legally terminate her pregnancy. judge kavanaugh supported employers who sought to deny their employees access to contraception. judge kavanaugh wrote an opinion that unless guns were regulated either at the time the constitution was written or traditionally throughout history, they cannot be regulated now. eliminate have struck down the dist

one of the issues, roe v. wade. >> noting that roe v. decided 45 years ago and reaffirmed 19 years later in planned parenthood versus casey, i asked judge cavanaugh whether the passage of time is relevant to following precedent. he said decisions are part of our framework with the passage of time and honoring it is essential to maintaining public confidence. >> this idea that he's going the respect stare decisis, that he's going to respect the president -- precedent of the court is ridiculous. he was inspired by others to make sure he would be that deciding vote to overturn roe v. wade. that's just what's going to happen. >>> joining us now, elise jordan and nbcsn political analyst. we're waiting for 5:00, if that's when the debate ends. anything that you're hear, anything that you think might change what is the foregone conclusion that brett kavanaugh will now join the highest court? >> at this point republican sources that i'm talking to are confident that this is the count, this is the vote, that judge brett kavanaugh will become just

campaign trail made promise that he would be nominating justices that would potentially overturn roe v. wade. this has been a president who lived up to his campaign promises. do you believe it is his objective to overturn roe v. wade. >> i'm not sure what will happen, but he kept to his promises. he was able to get the huge tax cut through and the deregulation and the two supreme court justices. it's not just what will happen to the settled law of roe v. wade, a lot is happening on voting rights and environmental law and women's rights. while we have been focused on everyday breaking news, medicaid and medicare are being chipped away. that's the narrative that if the democrats want to provide a story for the country, it didn't simply be anti-trump. it can't be anti-what happened in the kavanaugh hearings. it has to be a fight with passion for restoring what the last 50 years created in terms of social foundation and economic justice and opportunity for people. if they can do that, they can get people to the polls out of passion and not just out of anger. to have more anger on one side than t

number 2, i think we should more thoroughly think about what her message was about roe v wade and abouther approach to equal protection issues. and one reason she was wrong about the analysis of roe, too far too fast. do people in this room know, for the next two confirmations of supreme court justices how many questions were asked about roe v wade? 0. that is how uncontroversial that decision was. ruth ginsburg, a large focus of her thoughts on this has been throughout her career, her women's rights, equal protection litigation in the 70s. to me it was about not getting too far in front of the american people. >> is there a question. >> take one minute but i don't -- >> i would appreciate if you would address a full interview of what she was getting at and getting at on gay rights and same-sex marriage. and they followed her advice which means they do a national ruling first time out, wasn't that right? they waited until a large number of -- >> and it is correct. i'm not sure how to address the rest of the question. 30 or 40 pages. and understand their strong views, how to address it c

i have to invoke the option, the question was what would you done after roe v. wade, especially half of women? >> abortion is wrong. choices. other are no people look at it from this perspective. i admit people whose parents decided to give them upright option and they are so grateful that both parents give them life that is aborting them. why are we talking about these soer options are available you will want to adopt children. we will move on. we are here in we are -- heavy on instagram workers. -- immigrant workers. immigrant workers will negatively impact the state's signature industries. wall mustaid that a be built before anything is built above immigration. the wall could be years away. what is -- in the meantime? >> i am the daughter of greek immigrants. and help them study further citizenship tests. they assimilated into this country. they want to become americans. it is so important to them. i feel very strongly. that that border security, that wall must be built. i stand with president trump recalls that in as ago run this great state, people strongly feel

and it is also based looking what roe v-letter wade a lost. but you can argue that it is responsible for the radicalization of the republican party. and then in the museums. but for roe v-letter wade you never would've had ronald reagan now it's not the straight line but certainly that help to radicalize the party to energize a movement of social conservatives. not a straight line that may have happened but the far better argument to do things in the political system because both sides could fight it out. >> i couldn't say that about graham that when they finally woke up to the fact with enormous society not dealt with by the political branches? and forced us that that did not precipitate a massive backlash? the democratic party lost the south because of brown and enforcing those tactics it doesn't matter that we would be better off segregating the schools and a stock loan - - strong democratic party in the south it is a tactical argument. and to have a considerable amount of time and the more they would've liked me sprinting - - spending but n

but reversing roe v. wade, overturning roe v. wade, that seems very unlikely. >> and jeffrey rosen, one other issue before i let both of you go. executive power has been at the front and center of this, including the mueller investigation and the potential surrounding issues, what is your view about how this court might rule if faced with questions along those lines? >> there's a really interesting under the radar case involving whether the attorney general can apply a sex crimes law retroactively and challengers say congress can't delegate that power to the president. what's at stake is essentially the future of the administrative state, can the environmental protection agency pass regulations without strong congressional oversight. interestingly justice kavanagh, like justice gorsuch likely hold that the government cannot pass regulations. but it's a broad victory for conservatives who want to roll back on the scope of the regulatory state with huge implications for executive power in the future. there are also cases involving s

take roe v. wade and all the kavanaugh stuff. the whole issue, nobody talks about anything about the roe v. wade except he is going to do away with abortion. not so. if immediately probably 95% of the states would pass abortion laws for their individual states, the whole thing has been about whether the federal government can pass a law or the supreme court could pass an edict that said it was going to be applied nationally. not whether or not it could be done. the same thing with gay marriage. it wasn't whether or not it could be allowed. it was whether or not the judicial system could say by fiat this is what the constitution allows for. the voter i.d., like i said, you look at voter participation, minorities in the southern states that were among the most affected by that and you'll find they're way up. in 1976 you had school busing going into place. i was much younger then and i wasn't too happy with it until i did the term paper and changed my mind. i actually became in favor of school busing as a means of creating an environ

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 come on every week and we have differences, but i have to push back strongly. the way that it will work when justice kavanaugh is confirmed, if they vote later today to do that there are bills in state houses right now ready to be passed. for example, in iowa, a heartbeat bill that essentially says as soon as you can hear the fetal heartbeat, that means you cannot have an abortion after the fact. many women don't know they are pregnant at that point. it outlaws access to abortion and many forms of contraception and iuds. so the idea that you have to completely overturn roe v. wade is actually a red herring. in practice that's not how it will work for american women who already in states like alabama, texas, louisiana because of trap laws, another hindrance for access to reproductive healthcare, they won't b

>> that was an issue left open in roe v. wade. and if i recall, it was closed court's mostthe recent decision. there where a series of regulations -- were a series of regulations that the court dealt with. upheldi remember, it most of them, but it struck down one of them. the notice to the husband. and has something to do with a matter that the chairman raised earlier, i think there was an thatation in that opinion marriage and family life is not always all that we might wish it to be. whoseat there are women physical safety, even their lives, would be endangered if the law required them to notify their partners. host: as you said, a lengthy explanation. what was the response, do you recall? guest: i do not recall what came next after she said that, but it was not a surprise to anybody that she thought roe v. wade was correctly decided, or she thought that women's equality depended on them being able to control their own bodies. she had written about that. one of the things that was disappointed to me about brett kavanaugh's testi

they could do it to roe v. wade when they get the right case. >> jeff toobin, thanks very much. >>> coming up next a question, will a red state democrat may a political price for voting no on brett kavanaugh? a look at the one who's perhaps in the most tight race, heidi heitkamp. >>> a how investigators are hoping to get closer to the truth of exactly what happened ahead. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter] (vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there? sharper vision, without limits. days that go from sun up to sun down. a whole world in all its beauty. three innovative technologies for our ultimate in vision, clarity, and protection. together in a single lens. essilor ultimate lens package. purchase the essilor ultimate lens package and get a second pair of qualifying lenses

>> that was an issue left open in roe v. wade. but if i recall correctly, it was closed in casey, in the court most recent decision, there were a series of regulations that the court dealt with and, as i remember, it upheld most of them but it struck down one of them with what the notice to the -- to the husband and has something to do with a matter that the chairman raised earlier. i think there was an indication in that opinion that marriage and family life is not always all that we might wish it to be and that there are women whose physical safety, even their lives, would be endangered if the law required them to notify the -- their partners. >> as you said, ms. shapiro, what was the response, do you recall? >> i actually don't recall what came after she said that. it wasn't a surprise to anybody that she thought that r.o.e. -- roe v. wade was decided. one of the things did hes appointing to me about judge kavanaugh's testimony is that he backed away from things that he previously wrote about publicly. for example, he said prev

we'll keep the president with roe v. wade. a conservative it is my third atestimo attempt to get you to answer the question. >> you are asking me questions about my policy preferences verses my legal interpretations, i am not a lawyer. . >> i ask you whether you feel betrayed. like judge kavanaugh, they can't answer the question because many of them supported him because they expect them to do exactly that. roll back affirmative actions and voting rights and immigration rights. three times you could not answer the question. you are a bright young lady especially on sunday morning alana. >> justice kavanaugh says frequently on main issues like abortion and voting rights law, certain laws established for the supreme court. you can say something that's precedent and chip away from that law. when there is legislation that's presented to the court and presented to the panel, he can find a number of different reasons and ways to still chip away at those laws that we consider establishing president and settle laws from the court. he

they could do it to roe v. wade when they get the right case. >> jeff toobin, joan biskupic, thank you very much. >>> senator heidi heitkamp. and later, everything we bernd will the limousine crash. we'll have more of that, ahead. shaquem get in here. take your razor, yup. alright, up and down, never side to side, shaquem. you got it? come on, get back. quem, you a second behind your brother, stay focused. can't nobody beat you, can't nobody beat you. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. you got this. with the one hundred and forty-first pick, the seattle seahawks select. alright, you got it, shaquem. alright, let me see. endless shrimp is back at with all the shrimp you want, any way you want them. there's new sesame-ginger grilled shrimp with savory soy-ginger sauce and sprinkled with asian seasoning. and favorites like garlic shrimp scampi! but endless shrimp won't last endlessly, so hurry in. smile dad. i take medication for high blood pressure and cholesterol. but they might not be enough to protect my heart. addi

that you will find some states and laws being upheld, but that is way short of overthrowing roe v. wadeelosi would like to see all the fbi documents that were called from this investigation made public. there are a lot of headlines this morning on the editorial pages that the resistance should not back down, and if there is a civil war in america, that just because and kavanaugh is now on the court, that doesn't mean that the fight that is undertaken to keep him from there would be given up. what do you see in the future with regard to that? >> i think that there is, if democrats take over the house, the new chairman would be the new chairman of new york. he said he's going to do that. >> do you think there will be enough effort to try to impeach if democrats take the i don't think it's a white speak to do and i don't think you'll find it for a basis for impeaching, but don't you see all this talk, whether it was prior to saturday's vote or since saturday's vote, every effort that has been made in the last month has been to detract from his outstanding qualifications and academic backgr

noting that roe v. wade was decided 45 years ago and reaffirmed 19 years later in planned parenthood versus casey, i asked judge kavanaugh whether the passage of time is relevant to following precedent. he said decisions become part of our legal framework with the passage of time and that honoring precedent is essential to maintaining public confidence. our discussion then turned to the right of privacy on which the supreme court relied in grizwald versus connecticut, a case that struck down the law banning the use and sale of contraceptio contraceptions. grizwald established the legal found ace that led to roe eight years later. in describing grizwald as settled law, judge kavanaugh observed it was the correct am ka -- application of two cases from the 1920s, myers and pierce, that are not seriously challenged by anyone today. finally in his testimony he noted repeatedly that roe had been upheld by planned parenthood versus cases describing it as precedent on precedent. when i asked him would it be sufficie

the president said he will appoint people that will uphold the right to life and overturn roe v wade.collins said she is confident he will not. one of the things that happen when people go through a traumatic and horrible experience and judge kavanaugh did, regardless of which side they come out on. they can sometimes surprise you and be their own person. he as a lifetime job unless he does something that results in impeachment. maybe he will really think about it and put his personal beliefs aside. maybe he will look at it in terms of the overall good. the supreme court is not designed to look at individual cases. it's designed the look at law for the entire country and it's designed to have precedent for everybody. it's designed to be what the law of the land is. the supreme law of the land. before we all panic about it and before we start talking impeachment and investigations, we ought to let the guy get down to work and see what he does. let's see if he keeps his promise that he wrote in the washington post op-ed where he said i was hot under the collar. i said things i shouldn't

justice rehnquist voted against roe v. wade. justice rehnquist criticized grace griswald versus connecticut. he voted against roe v. wade that does not enumerate the right of a woman to protect her reproductive health is not enumerated. but the court found it was a basic human right of women, and that's the basis of roe v. wade. the problem with justice rehnquist's approach and judge kavanaugh's approach to unenumerated rights is -- they say that unenumerated rights could be recognized by the courts only if the asserted right was rooted in the nation's history and tradition. that's called originalism or a piece of originalism. in other words, you can't assert a right unless you can show that the framers thought about it when they passed the amendments or that it was somehow rooted in the tradition, and if abortion was legal across the country in 1897 or 1867 or 1787, then it wouldn't -- you couldn't do it. the court would be making law. the problem is that approach freezes rights in history, and it allows no room for the evolutio

who would automatically overturn roe v. wade. e kavanaugh clearly meets the test. in a speech in 2017, judge kavanaugh focused on praising justice rehnquist and his descent in roe v. wade where he challenged the right to women's privacy as protected in the constitution. also last year, judge kavanaugh argued in a dissent in a texas case that a jane doe should not be able to exercise her right to choose. because she did not have family and friends help her make the decision. if adopted, this argument could rewrite supreme court precedent and require courts to determine whether a young woman had a sufficient support network when making her decision. even in cases, as is in this one, where she had gone before a court. his reasoning demonstrates that judge kavanaugh not only is willing to disregard precedent, but his opinions fail to appreciate the challenging realities women face when making these most difficult decisions. when i asked him about whether roe and casey were settled law and whether they were correctly decided, he refuse

it does appear roe v. wade will be overturned outright or that roe v. wade will be so altered and what is acceptable as an undue burden will be so changed that you won't recognize it as a right to privacy in many states in this country. women know that and that's why the kavanaugh win for the republicans may not be a long term win for them because women are afraid of what the republicans are giving them. >> phil rucker, let's talk about the building behind you at the u.s. capitol and specifically what is going on. your paper is reporting what may be a new whack at a new family separation policy. the majority leader in the house put forward a bill to fully fund the wall. considered d.o.a. when it reaches the senate. what are republicans doing in this period? >> well, i think, brian, there are a couple things at play here. one is politically they are trying to show the conservative base, the trump voters, the thousands of people that turn out at these rallies that they're pushing forward and plowing ahead and they are going to build a wall. it still remain

kavanaugh is going to vote to overturn roe v. wade, and any senator that's convinced himself otherwise is living in a fantasy world. the people i -- don't want the government telling them what they can and can't do with their bodies. a pioneering civil rights lawyer in new haven, we prefer the judges stay out of our private business. and finally when i'm walking across the state of connecticut i'm talking a lot about gun violence. it's not just that the murder of 20 little first-graders in sandy hook stillan hangs heavy over it's that the murders in ebridgeport, new haven, and suicides all over our state they continue unobeyeded. it's not like everybody i meet when i'm walking across the state agrees with me on what we should do. when you walk east to west you spend half your time in eastern connecticut, a part of the state where people love their guns. t i get into lots f arguments about assault weapons and gun permits. it's our choice on how we should regulate guns. and here's where judge kavanaugh's views really get outside the mai

kavanaugh no doubt about it is going to vote to overturn roe v. wade. any senator who convinced himself otherwise is living in a fantasy world. the people i represent in connecticut don't want the supreme court of the united states telling them what they can and cannot do with their bodies. the judicial doctrine of privacy comes from a connecticut case, gris world -- griswold v. connecticut. in my state we prefer judges stay out of our private business. finally, when i'm walking across the state of connecticut, i'm talking an awful lot about the issue of gun violence. it's not just that the murder of 20 little first graders in sandy hook still hangs heavy over connecticut, it's that the murders in hart ford, new haven and bridgeport and suicides across our state continue unabated. it's not like everybody i meet when i'm walking across the state agrees with me on what we should do. when you walk east to west, you spend half your time in eastern connecticut, the part of the state where people love their guns and i get into spirited arguments about gun per

made when he was a candidate saying he would put somebody on the supreme court that would overturn roe v. wade. we know the list of judges he chose from in the federal -- and the federalist society had the same commitment to overturn roe v. wade. anybody in this body that thinks that the judge promising that this is settled law ought to, with the cliche that -- that i have a bridge to sell you. i mean, it's clear what he's going to do if he's on the court. this fundamentally, madam president, this whole issue -- this whole vote, this whole nomination comes down to who's side you are on? you -- are you on the side of workers or multinational corporations or are you on the side of companies or -- are you on the side of the mother or the insurance company who wants to raise her rates. judge kavanaugh has sided on corporations, not american workers, not american consumers, not american patients who struggle with the cost of health care. the stakes for ohio is too high to give this person a lifetime appointment to the highest court. madam president, unanimous consent that are -- i ask unanimous con

roe v. wade. do you believe that we're going to see relitigation of roe v. wade and with limits, where do you believe a woman's right to choose starts and stop? mrs. grechen shirley: i support a woman's right to choose, i am concerned we will relitigate it, we need to stand up. abortions will continue to happen, question of whether or not they will be safe. we need to trust women to make the best decision for their bodies, trust them to work with their doctors, not the government. 99% of abortions take place early, before 20 weeks, the late-term abortions we're talking about are for the life of the woman or child. that is a scientific fact. these are not women who wake up and decide, i want to have an abortion later there is a medical reason. i support planned parenthood. mr. king wants to remove funding for planned parenthood. he has supported jailing doctors who perform abortion with murder. we need to trust women to make the best decision for our bodies and our families, with the support of our doctors, not our government. i would like to know mr. king, wh

other things may be roe v wade or abortion gets talked about.ohn roberts is in the middle of the court jurisprudential. things like that will only go as far as fast as he wants to take it. >> let me give you another example. that's gun rights. the court has not taken a case challenging state and local regulation of gun rights in quite some time maybe even send heller and mcdonald several years ago. i believe they didn't take it because they didn't think that maybe they had a majority but with brett kavanaugh, that could be the difference.>> if the four more conservative justices than roberts vote that way to take up these cases, i think the court will have that majority. i think it should take up the case however it ends up ruling because there's really been chaos and civil disobedience in the lower courts about the scope of the right that heller introduced. it's about time, it's been a decade and they need to flesh it out. >> you mentioned chief justice being the centrist on the court. i would define him more as an incrementalist and institutio

it's been 45 years since roe v. wade was decided. it established a viability standard and as medical technology has changed, viability standard has moved. we heard now justice kavanaugh say, roe v. wade was settled law. as you are asked the broad question -- what will you as a member of congress do? with regard to the topic of abortion. funding, late-term, etc. rep. finkenauer: if i stand by roe v. wade. we have to make sure that is upheld. when it comes to women's health issues, the same thing in the statehouse is what we will see in congress as well. you better make sure the decisions are between a woman and her doctor. i will tell you, i heard some heartbreaking stories from women who are coming under attack in the state of iowa. especially faced with some of the hardest decisions of their life when they found out that the very wanted baby would not have survived, and they were watching their government put themselves in their doctors ' offices, making those decisions for them. and again, it is not how this is supposed to work. i t

i a guest what called the roe v. wade a red herring. >> in my meeting with judge kavanaugh, what he expressed to susan collins as well, she's fairly confident the supreme court will not overturn roe v. wade, but i think it's entirely the exact way of doing this is going to the states. some of those laws may come before the court, but that's really the way the entire abortion issue should have been handled with in the first place. it wouldn't be such a divisive issue 40, 50 years after the initial court judgment. >>> senator johnson, thank you very much for joining me. i look forward to seeing you again. >> have a good day. >> in the meantime i'll get reaction from adam schiff in california. you were sitting here the whole time. >> well, my reaction is this, for senator johnson or any of the gop senators to say they treated dr. ford with respect, that's not what i saw from the president mocking her at a political rally. that's not what i saw with the republican senators, except for a small few, said nothing in the face of

roe v. wade. in my judgment, judge kavanaugh clearly meets the test. in a speech in 2017, judge kavanaugh focused on praising justice rehnquist and his dissent in roe v. wade where he challenged the right to women's privacy as protected in the constitution. also last year, judge kavanaugh argued in a dissent in a texas case that a jane doe should not be able to exercise her right to choose because she did not have family and friends help her make the decision. if adopted, this argument could rewrite supreme court precedent and require courts to determine whether a young woman had a sufficient support network when making her decision, even in cases, as is in this one, where she had gone before a court. his reasoning demonstrates that judge kavanaugh not only is willing to disregard precedent but his opinions fail to appreciate the challenging realities women face when making these most difficult decisions. when i asked him about whether roe and casey were settled law and whether they were correctl

sandra day o'connor, with the plurality supporting roe v. wade.augh is not saying they can overturn it. chief justice roberts is saying it's settled law. justice roberts does not like challenges to law. >> there's a lot of other things. it doesn't mean it's settled like it's permanently fixed in stone. that's what they want to believe. the advocates of the living constitution that's infinitely mountable will tell you, except for road. elizabeth: let me just back up. judge kavanaugh is saying in the hearings he may not -- is likely not going to touch it. >> they might trim it back. elizabeth: the point you're trying to make -- excuse me, let me back up. character assassinations out of fear of that. >> i believe senator maisie carrano said that to jake tapper because of his temperament i don't think he deserves a presumption of innocence. asked to clarify calmly said it sounds like you're saying because you don't trust him on the road. he let the cat out of the bag. elizabeth: doesn't preserve a presumption of innocence on his allegations that have

on the future of abortion rights based on that concern by judge kavanah would seek to overturn roe v wade protecting this right is important to me to my knowledge judge kavanah is the first supreme court nominee to express the view that precedent is not merely a practice and tradition but rooted in article three of our constitution itself he believes that precedent is not just a judicial policy it is constitutionally dictated to pay attention and pay heed to rules of precedents in other words president isn't a goal or an aspiration it is such a constitutional tenet that has to be followed except in the most extraordinary circumstances the judge further explained that president provide stability predictability reliance and fairness there are of course rarer and extraordinary times where the supreme court put rightly overturned a president the most famous example was when the supreme court in brown vs the board of education overruled plessy versus fort parkinson correcting a grevious lee wrong decision to use the judge's term allowing racial inequality. but someone who believes that the imp

noting that roe v. wade was decided 45 years ago and reaffirmed 19 years later in planned parenthood vs. casey, i asked judge kavanaugh whether the passage of time is relevant to following precedent. he said decisions become part of our legal framework with the passage of time and that honoring precedent is essential to maintaining public confidence. our discussion then turned to the right of privacy on which the supreme court relied in griswold vs. connecticut, a case that struck down a law banning the use and sale of contraceptions. griswold established the legal foundation that led to roe eight years later. in describing griswold as settled law, judge kavanaugh observed that it was the correct application of two famous cases from the 1920's, meyer and pierce that are not seriously challenged by anyone today. finally, in his testimony, he noted repeatedly that roe had been upheld by planned parenthood vs. casey, describing it as precedent unprecedent. when i asked him would it be sufficient to overturn a l

. >> do you want to see the court overturn roe v. wade? >> well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that's really what's going to be -- that's, will happen and that'll happen automatically, in my opinion, because i am putting pro-life justices on the court. >> reporter: but senator collins says kavanaugh told her the law won't change. >> does the president now expect that we are going to see roe v. wade overturned? >> both justice gorsuch and justice kavanaugh, in their respective supreme court hearings, nomination hearings, excuse me, said that roe is settled law. >> tara, justice brett kavanaugh will start hearing cases as early as this week. he's already ruling on some hot button issues? >> reporter: that's right. tuesday, he will have his first day on the high court. he'll hear cases on guns and immigration. but before that, he will be at the white house for a swearing-in ceremony. where he will be surrounded by friends, families, senators, and key allies. tom? >> tara, thank you. >>> we turn to the caribbean, where ha

are you 100% certain without a doubt that brett kavanaugh will not overturn roe v. wade? >> i do not believe brett kavanaugh will overturn roe v. wade. >> they're overturned all the time? >> they're not overturned all the time. listen to his conversation with me and also in the hearing. he says for an establishment precedent to be overturned it would have to be wrong and deeply inconsistent. he noted that roe had been reaffirmed 19 years later and he said it should be extremely rare that it be overturned and it should be an example of -- >> you have obviously full confidence? >> i do. >> one last question. the political backlash, i don't have to tell you, have been fierce. you saw a tweet from susan rice saying she would run, crowd funding website is raised $2.6 million for whomever your opponent will be in 2020. >> i have to do what i think is right. over the years the people of maine have trusted me to exercise my best judgment. that's what i did in this case. >> and you're prepared to use your vote if -- >> whatever the voters decide, but i'm going to do what i think is

obviously, that is what roe v. wade was. roe v. de said that states could not use the criminal law to criminalize, prosecute, or even jail women for making their own reproductive health decisions. this is a significant distinction between me and my opponent. he wants to overturn roe v. wade , and i think that is the right policy, as a matter of law, but i encourage everyone to live their faith april: suicide rates . april: suicide ratesamong younger veterans, ages 18-35 that have served in iraq and afghanistan have jumped despite a decade-long effort to sort the problem. rates have risen 30% since 1999. what solutions do you propose to treat ptsd and other issues causing mental breaks in military members? mr. kaine: april, this is a very important issue. i am a member of the armed services committee. i am also one of the few senators who has a child in the military. my oldest boy is an infantry commander, so the issue of mental health in the military is very powerful. there is a stigma in society and that stigma can even be sharper

writes, soon babies like this little angel will be protected in the womb by law, referring there to roe v. wade. other republicans, you mentioned susan collins, she sort of made the case for more of a moderate perspective. we know roe v. wade was important to her. she has presented herself as more, in her words, i guess, pro-choice. but she said or expressed sort of an assurance from kavanaugh that that is established law. but then you have a tweet like this from king. is roe safe or not? >> i'm glad that you brought up susan collins in this as sort of the measure for women who are worried about this, because there's no doubt in her entire career in the senate that has been very important to her. and she is a pro-choice senator. she does not want roe v. wade to come under attack and be at risk. she probably spent more time understanding his record. when i heard her say how she not only spent two hours with him directly but researched his 300 cases, had the congressional research service come in and sit with her and go through his opinions, his law articles -- >> but you know him personally. >>

roe v. wade. do you believe that we are going to see the relitigation now of roe v. , and specifically with limits where do you believe a woman's right to choose starts and stops? >> i fully support a woman's right to choose and, yes, i am concerned that we will relitigate it, and it's something that we need to stand up for. abortions will continue to happen. it's a question of whether or not they're going to be safe. we need to trust women to make the best decision for their bodies. we need to trust them to work with their doctors, not the government. be 99% of abortions take place early, before 20 weeks. the late-term abortions that we're talking about are are for the life of the woman or the child. and that is, that is a scientific fact. these are not women who wake up and decide, hey, i want to have an abortion later. it's because there's a medical reason for having an abortion at that point. i fully support planned parenthood. mr. king has voted to take funding away from planned parenthood 17 times. he is against a woman's right to choose even in the cases of rap