>>> THERE ARE ONLY 18 DAYS UNTIL YOU CAST YOUR VOTE IN THE 2020
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, AND NOT LONG THEREAFTER, THE POTENTIAL
FUTURE OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND MILLIONS OF AMERICANS'
HEALTHCARE WILL BE VOTED ON IN THE SUPREME COURT.
"CONNECTING POINT'S" DARA KENNEDY DISCUSSED THE IMPACT OF
FILLING THE HIGHEST COURT'S OPEN SEAT PRE-ELECTION WITH HER GUEST
WASHINGTON POST JOURNALIST EMMA BROWN.
>> WHEN YOU WATCH THE HEARINGS, YOU KNOW, THE FOUR DAYS OF
HEARINGS OR THREE DAYS PLUS ONE WHERE PEOPLE COULD VOICE THEIR
OPINIONS AFTER THE HEARINGS, WAS THERE ANYTHING THAT STOOD OUT TO
YOU THAT WAS NOT SHARED WITH THE PUBLIC?
>> AMY CONEY BARRETT, THERE WERE A FEW THINGS THAT CAME UP AFTER
SHE SUBMITTED HER MANY HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF ANSWERS TO THE
SENATE'S QUESTIONS BEFORE THE HEARING.
THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT CAME UP WHERE SHE HAD NOT SUBMITTED
THEM. FOR EXAMPLE, SHE SIGNED ON TO AN
ADVERTISEMENT THAT RAN IN SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE BY A PRO-LIFE GROUP
THAT, YOU KNOW, WAS CRITICAL OF ROE V. WADE, WAS VERY
ANTIABORTION AND SHE HADN'T INCLUDED THAT IN HER RESPONSES
TO THE SENATE. SHE GAVE A COUPLE OF TALKS IN
HER RESPONSES, SHE'S SUPPOSED TO LIST EVERY TALK THAT SHE'S GIVEN
OR PUBLIC TALK AND THERE ARE A FEW SHE HAD LEFT OUT, INCLUDING
TWO PRO-LIFE GROUPS AT NOTRE DAME.
SHE SUBMITTED SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THESE IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL
QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE EVE OF HER HEARING, BUT HER EXPRESSION OF
HER ANTI-ABORTION VIEWS AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN BEFORE SHE
BECAME A JUDGE THREE YEARS AGO DID -- HAVE CAUSED CONCERN ON
THE LEFT AND AMONG DEMOCRATS WHO ARE WORRIED SHE WILL BE A VOTE
TO STRIKE DOWN ROE. >> AND THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT.
I GUESS WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS AS JUST REGULAR VOTERS, RIGHT?
AS WE'RE SITTING BACK WATCHING THIS UNFOLD, YOU KNOW, SOME MAY
SAY WELL WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL? CAN YOU HELP EXPLAIN TO OUR
VIEWERS, YOU KNOW, AS THIS PROCESS IS BEING HURRIED FOR HER
CONFIRMATION, FOR HER APPOINTMENT, YOU KNOW WHAT'S THE
DAMAGE OF THE RUSH AND OF MAYBE SOMEONE WITH THAT BACKGROUND
BEING PUSHED INTO THIS SEAT PRE-ELECTION?
>> I THINK THE REASON THIS IS A CONTROVERSIAL NOMINATION,
THERE'S TWO REASONS. ONE, AS YOU SAID, THIS IS
HAPPENING AT THE LAST MINUTE, AS THE ELECTION IS UNDER WAY, AND
THE LAST TIME A SEAT CAME OPEN IN THE LAST YEAR OF A
PRESIDENT'S TERM, WHICH WAS ANTONIN SCALIA'S SEAT DURING
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S TERM, SENATE REPUBLICANS REFUSED TO FILL IT.
IN THIS CASE IT'S JUST WEEKS BEFORE THE ELECTION AND SENATE
REPUBLICANS ARE HURRYING TO FILL IT.
AND SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO SEATS AND HOW THEY'VE
BEEN TREATED HAS BEEN ONE CAUSE OF CONTROVERSY.
ANOTHER CAUSE OF CONTROVERSY, OF COURSE, IS THAT RUTH BADER
GINSBURG WAS A RELIABLE LIBERAL VOTE ON THE COURT, AND IF AMY
CONEY BARRETT TAKES THAT SEAT, SHE WILL LIKELY BE ON THE
OPPOSITE SIDE OF THAT SPECTRUM. SHE DESCRIBES HERSELF AS AN
ORIGINALIST WHO INTERPRETS THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS AS THEY
WERE MEANT BY THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE THEM, WHICH IN THE MOLD OF
SCALIA WHO WAS HER MENTOR. AND SO HE WAS ONE OF THE COURT'S
MOST RELIABLE CONSERVATIVE VOTES AND SHE IS LIKELY TO BE, AS
WELL. >> AS A WOMAN I'M VERY HAPPY
THAT SHE'S A WOMAN, AND IT'S POSSIBLE THAT SHE COULD GRAB
THIS SEAT TO FILL THE GINSBURG SEAT, BUT BECAUSE OF HER VIEWS,
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF VOTERS AND A LOT OF WOMEN ARE FEELING A
LITTLE BIT ANXIOUS IF SHE DOES GET THIS SEAT, RIGHT?
BECAUSE SHE MAY NOT THINK FOR MAYBE THE BETTERMENT OF WOMEN
VOTERS. >> WELL, SHE HAS SAID OVER AND
OVER, AS SHE'S BEEN QUIZZED ABOUT HER OWN PERSONAL VIEWS ON
ISSUES LIKE ABORTION AND SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND SO ON THAT
SHE WOULD NEVER IMPOSE HER PERSONAL CONVICTIONS UPON THE
LAW, THAT SHE INTERPRETS EVERYTHING CAREFULLY.
AS I SAID, IN THE WAY THAT THE WRITERS OF THE LAW MEANT AT THE
TIME. BUT SHE WOULD BE A FIFTH -- SHE
WOULD CEMENT A CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY ON THE COURT.
AS THE DEMOCRATS SAID OVER AND OVER DURING HER HEARING, THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT LAW IS BEING CHALLENGED IN A CASE THAT WILL
BE HEARD BY THE SUPREME COURT THE WEEK AFTER THE ELECTION.
AND SO THERE ARE JUST A NUMBER OF ISSUES WHERE SHE COULD CAST A
DECIDING VOTE ON CASES THAT ARE VERY CONTROVERSIAL.
>> YEAH, SHE WOULD MAKE IT 6-3, RIGHT?
IT WOULD BE SO CONSERVATIVE AND WITH THE OBAMACARE, AFFORDABLE
CARE ACT COMING UP LIKE YOU SAID, A WEEK LATER, IT'S
POSSIBLE THAT OVER 20 MILLION AMERICANS COULD LOSE THEIR
COVERAGE. SO WHEN WE SIT BACK AND WE SAY
WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL, THIS IS A CHRISTIAN LADY, SHE'S A MOTHER,
SHE'S GOT A MULTIRACIAL FAMILY, ALL OF THAT IS SWELL, AND IT'S
GREAT, YOU KNOW. I THINK WOMEN AND VOTERS WHO SIT
BACK AND SAY WHAT'S THE BIGGER PICTURE?
AND THE TRUTH IS AMERICANS COULD LOSE HEALTH INSURANCE, IF SHE IS
THAT DECIDING VOTE. >> YEAH, AND SHE SAID DURING THE
HEARING THAT SHE IS NOT HOSTILE TO THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.
SHE SAID THAT REPEATEDLY. SHE HAD CRITICIZED ROBERTS,
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS' DECISION IN A PREVIOUS CHALLENGE TO THE
CASE, WHICH HAS LED SOME PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT SHE WOULD BE A
VOTE AGAINST THE LAW. THE ISSUE THAT IS COMING BEFORE
THE COURT IN THE WEEK AFTER THE ELECTION IS DIFFERENT THAN THE
ONE THAT THE COURT HAS RULED ON BEFORE, OF COURSE.
SO IT'S NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR THAT WE KNOW HOW SHE WOULD VOTE, BUT
IT IT IS ENTIRELY CLEAR THAT SHE IS AN ORIGINALIST WHO TAKES A
VERY LIMITED VIEW OF WHAT THE TEXT SAYS, YOU KNOW.
SHE TRIES TO INTERPRET EXACTLY WHAT THE TEXT MEANT AT THE TIME,
THAT IT WAS WRITTEN. >> AT THE TIME, THAT IT WAS
WRITTEN, WHICH HAD HARDLY ANYTHING OF WHAT WE GO THROUGH
DAY TO DAY. AFTER WATCHING THE HEARINGS, DID
YOU FEEL THAT SHE MAYBE CONVINCED ANY DEMOCRATS TO WANT
TO GO AHEAD AND CONFIRM HER? >> I THINK AFTER WATCHING THE
HEARING, I FELT LIKE THERE WAS NOT A LOT OF CHANGE ON EITHER
SIDE. I GUESS THERE MIGHT BE A FEW
VOTES IN PLAY. THERE'S SOME QUESTION, I THINK
PRESIDENT TRUMP TWEETED JUST THIS MORNING SOME QUESTION ABOUT
WHETHER SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS OF MAINE, FOR EXAMPLE, WILL VOTE
FOR AMY CONEY BARRETT, BUT I THINK AT THE END OF THE HEARING
IT FELT PRETTY CLEAR THAT SHE WAS ON A GLIDE PATH TO
CONFIRMATION. >> VERY INTERESTING.
LOTS OF VOTES, COMING UP. AND LET ME ASK YOU: DO YOU
THINK THERE WILL BE A LAST-MINUTE, DITCH EFFORT BY THE
DEMS, BY THE DEMOCRATS TO TRY TO STOP THIS VOTE?
WE DO KNOW WE HEARD IN THE HEARINGS THERE WERE SEVERAL
OPPOSING VIEWS -- OBVIOUSLY, SEVERAL THAT WERE MORE THAN
SEVERAL THAT WERE FOR HER, BUT SEVERAL OPPOSING VIEWS, MAYBE
SOME LAWSUITS COULD BE COMING UP?
>> YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY PROCEDURAL MANEUVER OR OTHER
SORT OF TACTIC THAT THE DEMOCRATS CAN USE IF THE
REPUBLICANS HAVE THE MAJORITY VOTE WHICH THEY SEEM TO HAVE.