At 9 00 a. M. , headed tonights debate, university of missouris Mitchell Mckinney talks about the history of president ial debates. Host good morning, it is the washington journal for september 29 and your look looking at video at case western reserve theersity, that the site of first president ial debate between President Trump and joe biden. Cspans coverage of that event starts at 8 00. We want to hear from you in this first hour on when it comes to president ial debates, do they matter . Weathering helping you decide or perhaps hearing about candidates positions on policy issues. Heres how to call to let us know. If you support President Trump, 2027488000, if you support joe biden, 2027488001. If you are undecided or support others, it is 2027488002. If you want to text us, do so at 2027488003. cspanwj. Itter pollingeet journal to on president ial debates asking the questions on if they matter. Some of what they found saying more than 70 of americans say the debates wont matter much
As a touchstone to understand the branches of our government. It is also a place for we encourage participatory democracy. In fact, we just started a nonpartisan effort called just a vote. Just vote. Most important, i encourage you on november 3 yto just vote. It is the most important thing we can do as citizens. Where we want to invigorate civil discourse and inspire the next generation of leaders. Programn think of no and no speaker who meets every one of the goals that my husband had for this place more than todays special guest, Justice Stephen breyer. Breyer is a man for our time and demand for all time. Here in boston, we are proud to claim him as one of our a graduate of stanford, oxford, and harvard law, he went on to workforce for Supreme Court Justice Arthur goldberg. He served for many years as a professor at Harvard Law School and taught at the Kennedy School of government. He was a lawyer in the antitrust division of the Justice Department and was an assistant special coun
Check us out at our website. Host from the perspective you take, when you consider someone like Amy Coney Barrett constantly possibly going to the Supreme Court, what are the concerns from the stands she takes on interpreting the constitution . First of all, i think that its improper to even be considering a nominee right now when we are in the middle of an election. Not just an election year, the election is happening right now with half a million ballots already cast in early voting states. Not to mention that we are in the middle of the pandemic and the senate is taking away an important time that should be devoted to dealing with those virgin, crucial issues in these next five weeks. Aside, i thinkt theres a real legitimacy question when you have the public voting right now for the president and the senate, the folks thatof the deal with nomination and confirmation of a Supreme Court justice, and if there is a lack of public space in the way that process works, there is going to be
This philosophy that some historians have called right related liberalism. The idea that liberalism was primarily devoted to the protection of individual rights. As a result, the Supreme Court became an important mechanism for this. One problem, which is that if you are going to govern, you have to be able to appoint Supreme Court justices. This becomes an increasingly fraught prospect for liberals. So the backdrop. Lbj. After 1964 with the Civil Rights Act, 1965 with the Voting Rights act, he has a sense that the Supreme Court will be significant. Unlike with kennedy, there are no openings on the court. Johnson essentially creates one. The first one comes in 1965. It is a custom which dates back to the wilson administration. There was one jewish member on the court. The jewish member on the court in the early 1960s was arthur goldberg. He had been appointed by jfk. Johnson however wants to appoint this man, his longtime lawyer and fairly close personal friend and advisor, abe fortas.
[applause] pres. Trump thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. I stand before you today to fulfill one of my highest and most important duties under the United States constitution, the nomination of a Supreme Court justice. [applause] this is my third such nomination after Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh and it is a very proud moment indeed. Over the past week, our nation has mourned the loss of a true american legend, Justice Ruth Bader ginsburg was a legal giant and a pioneer for women. Her extraordinary life and legacy will inspire americans for generations to come. Now, we gather in the rose garden to continue our neverending task of ensuring equal justice and preserving the impartial rule of law. Today, it is my honor to nominate one of our nations most brilliant and gifted legal minds to the Supreme Court. She is a woman of unparalleled achievement. Towering intellect, sterling credentials, and unyielding loyalty to the constitution. Judge Amy Coney Barrett. [applause] p