>> Donald Trump will be announcing his Supreme Court pick on Saturday, which means that he
already knows who the individual is.
And according to sources close to Donald Trump, his selection will be Judge Amy Coney Barrett.
The New York Times makes a point to mention that she would be the least experienced Supreme
Court nominee.
However, she is a favorite among conservative politicians and conservative voters because
of her Christian background.
But also, more importantly, and I think this gets left out in a lot of the analysis in
the media, she also would immediately invalidate the Affordable Care Act.
So she's on the record saying that, whereas the thing that people seem to be more focused
on right now is Roe v Wade.
Obviously, I don't wanna be naive and just assume that she won't touch Roe v Wade, but
she is on the record saying that she believes in the precedent when it comes to reproductive
rights, even though she, as a devout Catholic, disagrees with abortion and all of that.
But Emma, I wanted to get your thoughts, we were talking about this a little bit during
the break.
Talk a little bit about what this means for the Affordable Care Act.
>> Certainly.
So that's my concern, too.
We're both women, we obviously have concerns about our reproductive health.
But I think there is a hesitance in terms of justices overturning that precedent because
of the ripple effects and how massive and that it would be.
I feel like it's just more of a political talking point for conservative politicians
to score points than it is a judicial reality.
That's the only thing saving us here.
What should concern everybody is that she's 48 years old, she has a history of pro-corporate
positions that side with the employer, against the employee, etc., I believe.
And she's sided against, I'm reading some of it here, things and gun rights.
She dissented in a decision that would disarm felons, for example, after they came out of
prison.
She's pretty extreme when it comes to those issues.
But for the Affordable Care Act, guys, if it's six to three, if she gets through, and
it's that solidly conservative, they're going to do away with the Affordable Care Act.
And then, that's a conservative, basically supermajority for decades at that point.
Say ideally, we get a progressive president in 2024, who wants to put Medicare for All
through, that's done.
That's what concerns me most about these decisions.
Yes, the Supreme Court's been pro-corporate for a very long time.
Although Mitt Romney says we're a center-right country and the Court's been leftist for a
while, talk to him about Bush v Gore and Citizens United, whatever.
But yeah, that's what scares me the most about this, is the complete mixing of any legislation
that comes through that could be progressive, that's appealed.
Conservatives, there's appeal, appeal, appeal, go the Supreme Court, and they know that it's
just going to be overturned, and corporations can have a field day, and Big Pharma will
be doing great.
>> Yeah, I am definitely worried about this.
Representative Roh Khanna introduced a bill that would limit the time a Supreme Court
justice could serve on the Supreme Court to 18 years.
I don't know where that piece of legislation is gonna go, but I do think that it's important
that you mentioned her age as you just did, and how her influence on the Court will have
lasting ramifications on this country, really.
And yeah, the pro-corporate angle is something that just seems to get lost in the fray, lost
in the analysis, and I'm glad that we're talking about it.
In a story that we'll cover later, Donald Trump signed more ridiculous, phony executive
orders alleging that he's protecting people with pre-existing conditions.
The truth is those executive orders, constitutionally speaking, have no teeth.
But what it does is it messages to his voters that, don't worry, don't be frightened of
the repeal of the Affordable Care Act because I signed these executive orders.
They're not gonna do anything but it's just enough to cover his ass while also simultaneously
causing great harm to, honestly, all Americans, because anything can be considered a pre existing-condition.
If you tested positive for COVID, that's considered a pre-existing condition.
So this is gonna have a damaging effect on so many people in this country.
I wanna read a quote from this piece in The New York Times.
It's by Nan Aron, who's a president for the Alliance for Justice, it's a liberal group.
She says, Amy Coney Barrett meets Donald Trump's two main litmus tests.
She has made clear that she would invalidate the Affordable Care Act and take healthcare
away for millions of people, and undermine a woman's reproductive freedom.
Again, I'm not entirely sure that the Supreme Court would overturn Roe v Wade.
I know that there's a lot of fear about that, I understand that fear.
A lot of my fear, again, has to do with corporate issues that make it to the Supreme Court,
and what is very likely to happen to the Affordable Care Act at this point.
And remember, the Supreme Court did strike down the healthcare mandate.
That's an important part of the Affordable Care Act, that's what kept premiums low.
And when they undid that, of course, premiums immediately shot up.
And so we'll see how this all plays out, but it is pretty terrifying.