Zblfshgts the president s unprecedented refusal well see what happens. Two days before the first debate. Hes got 47 days. Ive got 3 1 2 years. Well see. Im prepared to go out and make my case. Our powerhouse roundtable takes on all the weeks politics, plus, nate silver and a closer look at battleground michigan. Announcer from abc news its this week, here now chief anchor george stephanopoulos. Good morning, and welcome to this week. Eight days after the death of ruth bader ginsburg, two days before the first debate, another unprecedented twist in this unpredictable campaign. No Supreme Court justice has ever been confirmed this close to the election. Republicans are already closing ranks behind judge Amy Coney Barrett. Hoping to jolt the election. Democrats are calling the process a sham, warning that a Justice Barrett couldor threat ase me on the air this morning, our brandnew poll with the rity of americans believe the president elected on november 3rd should fill the Supreme Court vacancy, its against a backdrop of president ial race that has been stable for months. Joe biden now holding a steady tenpoint lead over President Trump. Jon karl is at the white house. John, this is President Trumps third nomination to the Supreme Court and these Court Appointments are the glue to the republicans. These have kept republicans in lock step with donald trump. But almost across the board republicans are enthusiastic about Amy Coney Barrett, above all, theyre ecstatic to have Something Else to talk about besides donald trump and his handling of the covid19 pandemic. In fact, george, i would expect Senate Republicans especially to try to make Amy Coney Barrett the face of the Republican Party effectively over the next five weekrather t know atald trp rag onene candidates in state after state. The goal is to get this done before election day, any way democrats can get it beyond november 3rd . Well, i just spoke to a top democratic strategist who told me flatly that theres no procedural Silver Bullet. The democrats on their own have no ability to delay this vote until after the election. The timing is in Mitch Mcconnells hands, now the republicans have outlined a series of events which would lead to a final vote the week before the election, so theres very little room for error here, but it would have to be a republican decision, the republicans would have to decide if its in their interest to delay. And george, as you saw, as you mentioned at top of the show, the decision to go ahead with a vote for the next Supreme Court justice with a vote, is a deeply unpopular one, democrats will hit that hard over and over again between now and the election. Lets bring in our supreme car yesterday that she shares his judicial philosophy. What does that mean for the court if shes confirmed . Harder to imagine a starker contrast with justice ginsburg. Akron cretely, i think she would vote to overturn roe v. Wide, strike down gun rights and side with the Trump Administration to strike down entirely the aca. A rock solid conservative majori the sr 30 years. By all accounts, shes a brilliant lawyer, what are the flash points at e mation hearings . Shes well regarded, well liked. On the merits on the substance, i think the future of legal abortion in this country will be a significant issue. Shell be noncommittal. If you look at what things like senators have been saying, there should be litmus test, would you overturn roe . If she passes the litmus test its clear where members of the Republican Party stands on roe, the future of the Affordable Care act in the moment of this election and the election could be flash point, the president has repeatedly suggested that getting her confirmed is important because there will be inevitable legal disputes. Hes broadcasting the idea that she would potentially weigh in and weigh. On his side in such a dispute. I think that does raise questions about independence and the legitimacy of the time line that the republicans have laid out. None of that is judge barretts fault. Its the thing that will have to be addressed during the confirmation hearings. Kate, thank you. Lets take those questions to members of the Senate Judiciary committee, were going to start with senator dick durbin. I want to begin where jon karl began. You have no procedural Silver Bullet to take this beyond the election, is that true . Thats true, and there have been two republicans who have spoken out already, senator murkowski and collins who say they wont support this procedure before this election, if two others decide during the course of the debate, then we could have a different timing and perhaps different outcome. I read a piece by adam, a top staffer for harry reid, they could systemically deny unanimous consent to meet, thats not good enough . I know adam, i like adam and respect him, but hes wrong, we could slow it down, perhaps hours, days at the most, but we cant stop the outcome, what we should do is to address this now respectively, but understand the context, george, senator Mitch Mcconnell, who could find no time to attend the negotiating on the Coronavirus Relief package that we need to put together for the pandemic facing our country, for the unemployed people, for the businesses, senator mcconnell refused to attend those meetings, didnt have the time to do that. When this vacancy occurred, now were going hellbent. And he had to reverse the positioning he took four years ago saying we should wait for the next president to fill the vacancy. As their caucus, they looked down at their shoes and changed their minds, too, we now agree with senator mcconnell. Some are calling democrats to boycott the committee proceedings. Several of your colleagues on the screw dish Area Committee said they wont meet with judge barrett. Will you meet with her, will you participate in the hearings . I met with every Supreme Court nominee since ive been in the senate, i will extend that courtesy if she requests it, for at least a socially distanced safe meeting, perhaps over the phone. I want to be respectful, we disagree on some things and in terms of participating in the Senate Judiciary committee hearing, ill be there to do my job. I want to ask her pointblank, as im sure others will, whether or not her position is that we should end the Affordable Care act, providing Health Insurance for 20 million americans and protections for americans from one coast to the other with preexisting conditions. These are fundamental questions, no more important now than at any time. Important at this moment because of the pandemic we face, there are many other questions but lets start with that. So many believe that this is illegitimate process, if its illegitimate process, why legitimate it with your participation . I have a job to do, george. Its likely that this nominee the republicans have promised even before her name was announced they would vote for the president s choice, someone who will be on the highest court of the land for the remainder of her life, i take that seriously. Questions i mentioned earlier about the future of health care in the midst of a pandemic and what this would mean for families, shes been pretty explicit in criticizing Justice Roberts when it came to the opinion he wrote, but now we have a new question brought to us by the president and thats the legitimacy of the election and whether this president , the first in history, the first in the history of this country who would not declare that he would accept the verdict of the American People on the future leadership in the white house. He said he wants that court to be full, he wants nine members there, oubsly the inference hell need some supporters. Heres what the president said on that subject. I think its better if you go before the election, i think this scam that the democrats are pulling, a scam, a scam will be before the United StatesSupreme Court and i think having a 44 situation is not a good situation. Given those repeated comments by the president , will you and other democrats request that judge barrett recuse herself from any consideration of the election . I certainly wish she would, it would really helps matters. She wants to be fair in addressing this, why, this president has been outspoken and outrageous, to think he would not verdict of the election and that he would make it clear that hes filling this vacancy on the Supreme Court to make sure it tips his way, if theres any election contest, thats an outrage. No president has ever said that in our nations history, he said it twice, he said it four years ago and now hes saying the Supreme Court is part of his plan this time. I think that she should step forward that she would recuse herself from any election contest involving this president. And if she doesnt . Well, the votes will cast ultimately on her nomination, each senator will have to make that decision after they hear her testimony. You mentioned the president s refusal to accept a peaceful transition of power, saying that he would abide by a peaceful transition of power. Last week senator ted cruz was on this program and he and others have drawn a moral equivalence between what he said and Hillary Clinton. Joe biden should not concede under any circumstances, because i think this is going to drag out, and eventually i do believe he will win if we dont given a inch and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is, do you agree with those comments . No, i dont. I disagree with Hillary Clinton. I respect her, i like her, but i think shes just flatout wrong. The election itself is going to be announced, the winner will be announced at some point, it will take longer with all the paper ballots that are being cast, at some point, i hope my choice joe biden is elected president , but if were going to maintain a democracy, peaceful transition through an election is the only way to do it. Just look at the streets of belarus today. If you want to see the alternative. We dont need that in america. Whoever the winner is, if its clear and legal, that should be announced and the other party should concede. Are you convinced its going to be a Fair Election . I hope so, george, but we have so much meddling going on here. We have the russians still at work, the chinese, perhaps the iranians and others, we certainly have the conspiracy threeists in this country, and we have what i consider to be corruption of the media, to think that were broadcasting through social media things which are truly false is really misleading the American People. We need and should have a much better approach to this than we currently do. I worry about the outcome. Finally, if democrats are successful in november, and you increase your numbers in the senate, your colleague ed markey has suggested that if republicans confirm judge barrett, you should end the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court, is that on the table . Well, i can tell you the conversation of the future about the senate rules is on the table and im part of it. The reason is this, we have seen under Mitch Mcconnell the destruction, denigration of the United States senate. George, last year in the senate, 2019, we had 22 amendments voted on in the entire year in the United States senate, Mitch Mcconnell has taken the senate and has turned it into something note a dlib ray delib ra tif and legislative body. We need to make sure what the procedure is in the future that we get down to business. Senator mcconnells approach i think has been failure. Senator durbin, thank you for your time this morning. Lets get the republican perspective from mike lee. Senator lee, thank you. Lets pick up where senator durbin left off. If the democrats are successful in november, they may move to end the filibuster possibly expand the court, your response. I think that would be an unfortunate step. I think the filibuster is there for a good reason. The ninemember Supreme Court has been something we have had in place for a very long time. Something that we have relied on. That said, this is promise theyve made. This is an expectation theyve created with their own voters, if they choose to take that step, it will have been with the consent of voters who will have elected him. Which is one of the reasons that democrats dont take the majority. You know, you talk about the filibusters, one of the reasons you may be able to get barrett through is because there are no fillibusters on judges. Thats right. That was an unfortunate step then, it had its natural consequences. I hope we can contain the damage so it doesnt go into the legislative calendar. You say you hope that youre successful on november 3rd, we just showed that poll, most americans believe whoever wins on november 3rd should select the next Supreme Court justice, worried at all that if you continue to push this through there might be a backlash at the election. Not on that point. Look, President Donald Trump campaigned in 2016, hes campaigning again this time, promising to appoint judges to federal courts and justices to the u. S. Supreme court, who are originalists, interpret the constitution on what it says, rather than on basis that they might wish it said. Hes fulfilling that promise. I think the American People respect somebody whos willing to stand behind his campaign promises. What does the confirmation of judge barrett, Justice Barrett, means for roe v. Wade . You know, only time can tell what will happen to any one precedent. Although, i would point out here, george, any time someone is looking at overruling a precedent, its a lot more complicated than people might think and in any event you cant look at the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice and boil down that jurist, contribution to the law, past and future to what they might do with a single case. This judge has an incredible background, this is a judge who will bring her expertise to the table. And it will be brought to bear on a whole wide variety of scenarios just as Justice Ginsburgs expertise was brought to bear in her cases. Including health care. Senator durbin and democrats are united concerned if judge barrett is confirmed, the aca and its pro texts for preexisting conditions will go down as well, valid concerns . Look, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act was i believe unconstitutional when it was enacted, unconstitutional when it was ligated in 2012. Unconstitutional when chief Justice Roberts, writing for a narrow majority, rewrote the Affordable Care act in two critical ways. In order to render an otherwise inevitably unconstitutional law constitutional. It shouldnt tarnish judge barrett in this. Her job is to figure out whether its unconstitutional or not. I dont believe it is. John rockets rewrote twice nortd to make it appear constitutional which it is not. You got a very forthright opinion on the Affordable Care act, lot of your colleagues are concerned that that forthright opinion is going to cost you on november 3rd . Okay, well, look, judge barrett, were talking about judge barrett here and constitutionality, judge barrett would look at this on the basis of constitutionality. Now, i dont purport to speak for what judge barrett might say or might speak. You asked me for what i think on the constitutionality on Affordable Care act. I dont believe it is. We also heard senator durbin talk about whether or not she should sit in judgment of this election, he believes that she should recuse herself from any electionrelated cases if indeed shes confirmed. Should she recuse . Judges and Supreme Court justices have a welldefined set of rules that helps guide their determination in making recusal decisions. Im not going to purport to speak of what she ought to do with her recusal. I have every confidence that shell make the right decision. On the face, the president is talking about a 44 court from his perspective saying, the election is going to be rigged, he says he needs a Supreme Court justice in there to create a majority and by implication support his position, doesnt that create a series of conflicts on its face . George, your use of the words by implication there does more lifting than those words can bear, more than logic and reason and the record can bear. Its hes repeatedly talked about a 44 court. Yeah, yeah, the dangers of a 44 court are significant. Dangers that were outlined by democrats in 2016 when they wanted us to confirm judge garland. And the republicans like you said no problem at all. Well, one can get around it. We didnt say it was no problem at all. We said that there are procedures whereby a 44 split can result in the affirma