WHITE HOUSE" ON THIS MONDAY.
"THE BEAT" WITH ARI MELBER
STARTS NOW.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WELCOME TO "THE BEAT."
I AM ARI MELBER.
WE STARTED AT HOME, A AHISTORIC
DAY IN WASHINGTON.
KETANJI BROWN JACKSON TOOK THE
FIRST STEP OF BECOMING A JUDGE
ON THE SUPREME COURT.
AS SHE READIED HERSELF FOR THIS
GRILLING TO COME, ESPECIALLY
TOMORROW, TODAY SHE STRUCK A
NOTE OF HUMILITY ABOUT REPLACING
THE VERY JUDGE SHE ONCE WORKED
FOR.
>> IT IS EXTREME LIVELY HUMBLING
BE APPLYING FOR JUSTICE PRIOR'S
SEAT AND I KNOW I COULD NEVER
FILL HIS SHOES.
BUT IF CONFIRMED, I HOPE TO
CARRY ON HIS SPIRIT.
>> SOME REPUBLICANS WERE
TREADING QUITE CAREFULLY IN
THEIR OPENING STATEMENTS TODAY.
THAT AND THE RAW MATH THAT
PRESIDENT BIDEN IS ON TRACK TO
WIN THIS CLASH BY JUST HOLDING
HIS OWN PARTY'S VOTES.
NOW, THERE IS NO PRESIDENTIAL
DECISION THAT LEAVES A LONGER
IMPRINT ON AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
THAN WHO GETS THIS LIFETIME
APPOINTMENT TO THE HIGH COURT.
TODAY SEVERAL SENATORS NOTED
SOME VERSION OF THE BLUNT
HISTORY HERE.
LET'S BE CLEAR, A WHOPPING 97%
OF ALL THE SUPREME COURT'S
MEMBERS HAVE BEEN WHITE.
THE COURT HAS NEVER, EVER
INCLUDED A BLACK WOMAN JURIST.
SEVERAL DEMOCRATS TOOK TODAY'S
OPENING TO NOTE THAT ITSELF
WOULD BE AN OVERDUE CHANGE.
AND THESE ARE NOT JUST
STATISTICS OR SOME KIND OF
OVERSIGHT.
THE REASON THE SUPREME COURT HAS
BEEN 97% WHITE IS BECAUSE OF
DISCRIMINATION.
IT'S BECAUSE LEADERS IN BOTH
PARTIES KEPT THE COURT THAT WAY,
GUARDING THE NATION'S HIGHEST
COURT, WHICH IS THE LAST WORD IN
OUR SYSTEM ON WHAT THE LAW SAYS,
WHAT IT ALLOWS AND WHAT JUSTICE
REQUIRES, GUARDING IT AS A KIND
OF LAST BASTIAN OF AN EXCLUSIVE
WHITE MEMBERSHIP, WHICH IS ONE
WAY TO REINFORCE WHITE
SUPREMACY.
THIS IS BASIC, KNOWN, IN IS A
FACT.
IT IS RELEVANT TODAY AS WE THINK
ABOUT THE POTENTIAL CHANGE TO
THE COURT'S MEMBERSHIP.
IN FACT, IT WAS OVER 50 YEARS
AGO THAT THE FIRST BLACK LAWYER
WAS PUT ON THE COURT, THURGOOD
MARSHAL.
HIS RETIREMENT BROUGHT THE
SECOND BLACK AMERICAN TO THE
COURT, CLARENCE THOMAS, AS
PRESIDENT BUSH LOOKED FOR
NOMINEES WHO WOULD NOT DROP THE
COURT'S BLACK MEMBERSHIP AT THE
TIME BACK TO ZERO.
THE SENATORS SPOKE TO THIS IN
REMARKS TODAY, SOME REPUBLICANS
SAYING THEY WELCOME A COURT THAT
LOOKS MORE LIKE AMERICA WHILE PROMISING TO GRILL THE NOMINEE
PROMISING TO GRILL THE NOMINEE
AND DEMOCRATS TOUTING THIS
BREAKTHROUGH.
>> YOU'RE THE FIRST BLACK WOMAN
AND IT LONG PAST TIME.
>> JUDGE JACKSON IS NO JUDICIAL
ACTIVIST, IS NOT A PUPPET OF THE
SO-CALLED RADICAL LEFT.
>> SHE WASN'T GROOMED IN
PARTISAN PETRI DISHES.
>> I THINK YOU AND YOUR FAMILY
ARE GIVING A LOT MORE PEOPLE
FAITH THAT WE WILL ACHIEVE A
NATION OF LIBERTY AND JUSTICE
FOR ALL.
>> FOR HER PART, JUDGE JACKSON
INVOKED HER PARENTS' EXAMPLE FOR
PURSUING PROGRESS.
>> MY PARENTS TAUGHT ME THAT
UNLIKE THE MANY BARRIERS THAT
THEY HAD HAD TO FACE GROWING UP,
MY PATH WAS CLEARER, SO THAT IF
I WORKED HARD AND I BELIEVED IN
MYSELF AND AMERICA, I COULD DO
ANYTHING OR BE ANYTHING I WANTED
TO BE.
>> ON THIS BIG DAY IN THE LAW,
WE BRING IN TWO LEGAL
HEAVYWEIGHTS, NYU LAW PROFESSOR
MEL ACE MURRAY AND "NEW YORK
TIMES" LEGAL WRITER EMILY
BASILON.
PROFESSOR, WHAT DID WE LEARN
TODAY ABOUT THIS JURIST, THIS
WOMAN, GIVEN THAT IT WAS MOSTLY
OPENING STATEMENTS FROM THE
SENATORS?
>> I THINK WE GOT A VERY CLEAR
VIEW, ARI, OF WHERE THE
REPUBLICAN OPPOSITION WILL COME
FROM, BUT WE ALSO SAW JUDGE
JACKSON COME OUT SWINGING,
OFFERING A REALLY POINTED
PREBUTTAL OF WHAT WE CAN EXPECT
FROM HER TOMORROW.
SHE MADE VERY CLEAR THAT SHE WAS
AN INDEPENDENT JURIST, SOMEONE
WHO APPROACHED EACH QUESTION
WITH AN OPEN MIND AND WITH FULL
VIEW OF WHAT THE LAW REQUIRED.
SHE WAS NOT A TOOL OF THE
RADICAL LEFT.
SHE ALSO MOVINGLY INVOKED HER
DAUGHTERS AND THE CHALLENGE OF
TRYING TO BALANCE HER WORK AS A
MOTHER WITH HER WORK AS A
LAWYER.
AND I THINK A NUMBER OF WOMEN IN
THE AUDIENCE COULD DEFINITELY
IDENTIFY WITH THAT.
LIKE AN EARLIER NOMINEE, AMY
CONEY BARRETT, SHE MADE MUCH OF
HER FAITH.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS A POINTED
INCLUSION, ONE THAT UNDERSCORED
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DOES NOT
HAVE A MONOPOLY ON FAITH AND
THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT THE
DEMOCRAT COULD INVOKE, FIDELITY
TO GOD, COUNTRY AND THE
CONSTITUTION.
>> THERE'S ONLY ONE MORE PIECE
OF THE FAMILY PART.
I WANT TO PLAY SENATOR CORY
BOOKER AGAIN.
HE READ FROM HER DAUGHTER'S LETTER.
WE ALL KNOW HOW POLL TUXITICS AN
PARTISANSHIP WORK.
I THINK ANYONE COULD RELATE TO
THIS PRECOCIOUS YOUNG PERSON, 11
YEARS OLD AT THE TIME, LOBBYING
FOR THEIR OWN PARENT.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
>> I SUSPECT AFTER THESE
PROCEEDINGS AND PLEASE, GOD,
AFTER YOUR CONFIRMATION TO THE
SUPREME COURT, SOMETHING NEW
WILL HAPPEN IN AMERICA, THAT
THAT LETTER FROM YOUR DAUGHTER
WILL NOT BE EXCEPTIONAL.
WHETHER THEY'RE DAUGHTERS OF
WHITE PARENTS OR BLACK PARENTS,
BIRACIAL, WE'RE GOING TO SEE A
NEW GENERATION TALKING ABOUT
THEIR MAMAS AND DARING TO WRITE
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA THAT MY MOM
SHOULD BE ON THE SUPREME COURT.
>> EMILY?
>> I MEAN, I JUST THINK IT'S SO
GREAT THAT HER DAUGHTER WANTED
TO RECOMMENDED HER FOR ANY JOB.
I DON'T THINK THERE MANY PARENTS
OUT THERE WHO FELT MOVED BY THAT
IDEA, THAT A KID WOULD FEEL SO
STRONGLY, POSITIVELY AND WARMLY
ABOUT THEIR PARENT.
AND THE IDEA THAT KIDS COULD
FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE A VOICE,
THAT IT WOULD BE WORTH WRITING
TO A PRESIDENT AND TAKING A
STAND ON WHO THE NEXT SUPREME
COURT JUSTICE OR A NEXT JUDGE
SHOULD BE.
THAT'S A LEVEL OF POLITICAL
ENGAGEMENT THAT IS ALSO JUST
REALLY IMPRESSIVE IN ITSELF.
>> FAIR.
AND PROFESSOR, SINCE YOU MENTION
IT, HERE IS ALSO JUDGE JACKSON
TODAY, THIS WAS SORT OF THE THEME.
THE FIRST DAY, AS WE KNOW, CAN
BE QUITE BUYBIOGRAPHICALLY --
>> GIRLS, I KNOW IT HAS NOT BEEN
EASY AS I TRIED TO JUGGLE THE
CHALLENGES OF MY CAREER AND
MOTHERHOOD.
AND I FULLY ADMIT THAT I DID NOT
ALWAYS GET THE BALANCE RIGHT,
BUT I HOPE THAT YOU'VE SEEN THAT
WITH HARD WORK, DETERMINATION
AND LOVE, IT CAN BE DONE.
>> PROFESSOR?
>> WELL, AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS
A REALLY POINTED, POINTED
MESSAGE.
WE SAW IN THE LAST CONFIRMATION
SO MUCH WAS MADE OF JUSTICE
BARRETT'S MOTHERHOOD BUT WE SAW
VERY LITTLE OF THE DETAILS OF
HOW THE SAUSAGE WAS MADE, HOW
AMY CONEY BARRETT MANAGED TO
BALANCE HAVING SEVEN CHILDREN AS
A LAW PROFESSOR AND LATER AS A
JUDGE.
HERE WE HAVE SOMEONE BEING VERY
FORTHRIGHT AND CANDID THAT IT
WAS DIFFICULT AND HARD AND SHE
DID NOT ALWAYS GET IT RIGHT.
WHAT REMAINED STEADFAST WAS THE
LOVE AND COMMITMENT THAT SHE HAD
FOR HER FAMILY AND FOR HER
CAREER.
WE JUST COME THROUGH A PANDEMIC
WHEN SO MANY WOMEN HAVE BEEN
FORCED TO LEAVE THE WORKPLACE
BECAUSE OF THE CHALLENGING OF
BALANCING WORK AND FAMILY AND I
THINK THIS WAS AN INSPIRATIONAL
AND RELATABLE MESSAGE.
>> THE DEMOCRATS FEEL THEY HAVE
THE VOTES TO WIN.
IF YOU WIN THE CONFIRMATION,
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 50 OR 0990 OR 100.
50 OR 0990 OR 100.
YOU HAVE THE SAME VOTING RIGHTS
REGARDLESS.
>> SOME
SOME OF THE WHITE HOUSE TEAM
SAID THIS AIN'T A SPENDING BILL,
WE HAVE ALL 50.
THAT'S NOT A DIRECT QUOTE.
>> NO, I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING TO
THROW THE NOMINATION OFF TRACK.
I THINK THE DEMOCRATS MUST BE
FEELING RAE GOOD ABOUT HOW
SMOOTHLY THE DAY WENT, HOW KEL
THEIR NOMINEE PERFORMED.
I THINK IT'S REALLY HELPFUL
JUDGE JACKSON HAS BEEN BEFORE
THE BODY OF THE SENATE MULTIPLE
TIMES BEFORE.
SHE KNOWS THE DRILL, THEY KNOW
HER.
SHE HAS PASSED THESE
CONFIRMATIONS BEFORE WITH TO
JUSTIFY VOTING AGAINST HER.
MANY, IF NOT MOST OR POSSIBLY
ALL OF THEM WILL DO THAT, BUT
THE ASPECT OF A CONFIRMATION
HEARING, WHICH IS ABOUT PERFORMANCE, ABOUT SOMEONE BEING
PERFORMANCE, ABOUT SOMEONE BEING
IN AK SEEING HOW HER MIND WORKS.
>> WE USED SOME OF THE BALANCE
OF THE TIME HERE TO TALK ABOUT
THE COMMITTEE AND ON THE
REPUBLICAN SIDE, PROFESSOR
MURRAY, WE HEARD A CASE THAT WAS
DEVELOPED ACROSS SEVERAL
COORDINATED OPENING REMARKS THAT
FOCUSED NOT SO MUCH ON JACKSON
OR ATTACKING HER YET, BUT REALLY
ON ATTACKING THE DEMOCRATS ON
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LECTERN
AND SAYING THEY'RE NOT
SUBSTANTIVE, THEY'RE MEAN,
THEY'RE NASTY AND THIS HEARING
WILL BE, THEY SAY, THEY CLAIM,
WE'LL SEE, MORE RESPECTABLE AND
WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE?
WHAT'S YOUR ANALYSIS AND ASSESSEDMENT OF THAT IF.
ASSESSEDMENT OF THAT IF.
>> ARI, THE MANY OF THE NOM MES
THEY ALL ALL OF THE OTHERS WERE
CONFIRMED.
THEY SPECIFICALLY WITH BRETT
CAVANAUGH, WE ALL KNOW WHAT
HAPPENED THERE.
BUT AGAIN, THIS WAS NOT ABOUT
JUDGE JACKSON.
THIS WAS ABOUT LAYING A
POLITICAL FOUNDATION FOR
CASTIGATING THE DEMOCRATS FOR
THEIR WORK IN THE CONFIRMATION
PROCESS.
AND I THINK EVEN SOME OF.
CRITIQUES OF JUDGE JAMAL
KHASHOGGI'S RECORD.
THAT'S NOT ABOUT HER.
IT IT BE AND LAYING A FOUND ACE
FOR CRITICIZING THE DEMOCRATS