democracynow--2020-10-12--Ai-jen Poo: Trump Flouts COVID-19 Safety Rules with "Utter Disregard" for White House Domestic Staff

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : “ How many of your staff are sick ?
Do you think you might be a superspreader , Mr. President ?
” Those were the questions a reporter shouted at President Trump as he left Walter Reed hospital last week after being hospitalized for three nights with COVID-19 .
Trump ignored the questions , then flew to the White House , where he marched up to the balcony .
In a reality-style wave , he saluted , took off his mask , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inside — unmasked .
Trump ’ s defiant mask removal threatened the household staff , a majority of whom are older people of color .
Little attention has been paid in the media to how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the health of domestic workers , not only at the White House , but across the world .
The New York Times reports three White House housekeepers and one other member of the residence staff were recently infected .
The Times reports the workers were told to use , quote , “ discretion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health experts have expressed alarm as Trump has repeatedly threatened the health of staff around him over the past week , from leaving the hospital while still being medicated , to returning to the Oval Office while still infected , to holding a rally on the White House grounds on Saturday that was not socially distanced .
Later in the program , we ’ ll be joined by Charles Allen .
His father , Eugene Allen , was portrayed in Lee Daniels ’ film The Butler for his work serving eight presidents , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But first , we speak to Ai-jen Poo , senior adviser to Care in Action , which is dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers in the United States .
It ’ s the 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) arm of the National Domestic Workers Alliance .
Ai-jen Poo , welcome back to Democracy Now !
It ’ s great to have you with us .
As we watch that defiant act of President Trump , where he took off his mask , turned around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we know that scores of residence staff are older African Americans and Latinx workers .
Can you talk about your response and what it signifies to you ?
AI-JEN POO : Look , I think — thank you for having me , Amy .
I think we and domestic workers all over this country were watching with horror as we saw the recklessness with which the president was treating his household staff .
I mean , these are essential workers who have been keeping him and his family safe and caring for them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ utter disregard for their health and safety in this context .
And it is , in many ways , the tip of the spear to how he ’ s been treating essential workers writ large .
I mean , here we are seven months into this pandemic , and still no Essential Workers ’ Bill of Rights , still no hazard pay , right ?
And here are the — in his house , right ?
Domestic work is all about — it really is a question of power here .
When your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there ’ s an incredible imbalance of power and a tremendous amount of fear that domestic workers have in asserting their rights and advocating for themselves , out of fear of losing their jobs and their livelihood .
Now , there could be no other house in this country where the imbalance of power is more severe than that between the president of the United States and his housekeeping staff , and I think he ’ s been abusing that power .
AMY GOODMAN : How do we find out who has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three dozen of his professional staff have been infected .
They ’ re high-profile people , like the press secretary .
Almost the whole White House media staff has been , and then a number of journalists who are covering the White House have been infected , at least four or five .
We know his top senior adviser , Stephen Miller .
We know the names of all these people .
But right before the White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany herself said she tested positive — I believe that was last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporters at the White House she would no longer be revealing the number or names of people at the White House who tested positive .
Now , it ’ s even harder to find out about those on the residence staff .
AI-JEN POO : Absolutely .
There ’ s 90 housekeeping staff , as far as we know , in the White House , who are charged every day with maintaining the order and the sanity and the safety of the White House itself for the people who live there .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is really defined by its invisibility .
People are working behind closed doors .
And their work isn ’ t even seen as real work .
It ’ s still referred to as “ help , ” right ?
After so many generations where we understand that this work is essential .
And it ’ s work that ’ s disproportionately done by women and people of color , women of color , Black and Brown women in particular .
And so , all of those factors contribute to the invisibility and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why it ’ s so important that we ’ re vigilant about finding out about the health and the safety and the well-being of those workers in this time .
We need transparency .
And even more than that , we need protections for these workers .
AMY GOODMAN : We ’ re going to break .
And when we come back , we ’ ll also be joined by the son of a man who worked in the White House for over eight — for eight presidents .
He was the subject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ re speaking to Ai-jen Poo , senior adviser to Care in Action , dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers in the United States .
She ’ s staying with us , as well .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .
Our guest is Ai-jen Poo , senior adviser to Care in Action , which is dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( c ) ( 4 ) arm of the National Domestic Workers Alliance , of which Ai-jen Poo is executive director .
If you can talk a little more , nationally , about the kind of dangers that people face who are in the most intimate jobs , many of them essential workers , but who are on the frontlines , in many cases caring for people with COVID , and the kind of protections they have — for example , domestic workers ’ bills of rights — and how far we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Ai-jen ?
AI-JEN POO : Absolutely .
So , this pandemic has hit domestic workers incredibly hard , because domestic workers came into the pandemic with a tremendous amount of insecurity .
Eighty-two percent of domestic workers didn ’ t have a single paid sick day , coming into this pandemic .
And what we saw , very early on , in the first week of the shutdown , was dramatic losses in jobs and income , so much so that in March we were holding calls with domestic workers where they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ screens , literally one cent left in their bank account , no ability to put food on their table for their children .
And here we are , seven months into this pandemic , and when you have a situation where , you know , you had no job security , no access to a safety net , and much of the pandemic relief has not reached you , it is a very dire situation .
It ’ s a full-blown depression for domestic workers , who are vacillating now between 38 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And then you have the workers who continue to work through this crisis , like the White House housecleaners , who are providing an essential lifeline to some of the people who are most vulnerable to the virus itself , like older people , people with disabilities , people with chronic illnesses , bringing them food , bringing them medication , providing essential services that are necessary for daily living for these populations of people .
And they ’ re doing so without access to PPE , without healthcare , without hazard pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay out of pocket for PPE and COVID testing .
And the burden of safety in this time of an unprecedented pandemic is falling on their shoulders , on the shoulders of the people who have the least amount of power and resources to navigate it all .
AMY GOODMAN : What rights do workers have to demand that they be even able to wear protective gear in a situation where they ’ re told not to ?
And what are employers ’ responsibilities ?
AI-JEN POO : Well , that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , one , there ’ s been a long history of systematic exclusion from basic rights and protections , including many health and safety protections , which is why an Essential Workers ’ Bill of Rights is so important and so important that it include domestic workers .
But also , when you are isolated in a workplace and you have no job security and you — everything that you ask for , you put yourself at risk of losing your job and your livelihood , at a time when you simply can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vulnerability and insecurity there can not be overstated .
It is incredibly difficult right now .
AI-JEN POO : I believe that they are government employees , which means that they should be represented by a government union .
But I don ’ t know for sure .
AMY GOODMAN : You , yourself , Ai-jen Poo , lost your grandmother during the pandemic , though not of COVID .
Can you talk about your experience of actually being able to see her and what that meant to you ?
AI-JEN POO : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to so many people who have been separated from loved ones who are ill and dying .
I was able to go and visit my grandmother , who passed away at 94 on Mother ’ s Day of natural causes .
And I was told by my family that if I wanted to say goodbye , that I needed to come , even in the midst of the pandemic .
And so I masked up and quarantined and went and saw her , and I was able to hold her hand every single @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say goodbye and to begin the process of grieving .
And I can not imagine — it really meant the world to me to have somebody who cared for me , from my childhood through my whole life , be able to hold her hand and say goodbye and tell her how much I loved her .
And I just can ’ t imagine what it ’ s been like for the 215 — now — thousand families who have lost their granddaughters , their grandmothers , their sisters , their best friends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appropriately grieve in this time of incredible crisis .
I just can ’ t imagine , when I think about what my family has been through .
AMY GOODMAN : Well , our condolences to you and your family .
Finally , the idea that a second stimulus package has not been passed , the consequences of this on the most vulnerable ?
The National Domestic Workers Alliance provided funding to domestic worker organizations around the country .
How ironic that at this point you have smaller organizations providing food and funding , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the larger employers not doing this .
What this means , and the pressure on groups like yours , and what it means for people not to get more money right now as so many tens of millions lose their jobs ?
AI-JEN POO : I mean , what we saw was , really early on in the crisis , incredible devastation .
I mean , you had people who were working paycheck to paycheck , so there was no money , no savings to stock up on groceries or supplies .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ insecurity is just unfathomable .
It ’ s like nothing I ever could have imagined in my 25 years of doing this work .
So , our Coronavirus Care Fund has been providing emergency cash assistance to domestic workers in need , because we knew that we couldn ’ t wait for government to act .
And seven months later , it still hasn ’ t .
Government funding still hasn ’ t reached the majority of domestic workers in this country .
And what they ’ re using the funds for is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that their children can stay connected to online learning opportunities .
Literally , the basic , fundamental human needs of survival are at stake right now .
And the impact on children and families is just devastating in this time .
So , the Senate — shame on the Senate for not moving on actual relief that can reach every American .
Every family , including immigrant families , deserves relief and safety in this time , because they will be a part of our recovery as a country .
And so , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate , I call upon the White House , to move on relief so that we can start moving towards recovery in this time .
AMY GOODMAN : Ai-jen Poo , I want to thank you so much for being with us .
And again , our condolences to your family on the loss of your grandmother .
Ai-jen is senior adviser to Care in Action , which is dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers across the country , the 501 ( c ) ( 4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alliance .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: “How many of your staff are sick? Do you think you might be a superspreader, Mr. President?” Those were the questions a reporter shouted at President Trump as he left Walter Reed hospital last week after being hospitalized for three nights with COVID-19. Trump ignored the questions, then flew to the White House, where he marched up to the balcony. In a reality-style wave, he saluted, took off his mask, appeared out of breath, then went inside — unmasked.
Trump’s defiant mask removal threatened the household staff, a majority of whom are older people of color. Little attention has been paid in the media to how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the health of domestic workers, not only at the White House, but across the world.
The New York Times reports three White House housekeepers and one other member of the residence staff were recently infected. The Times reports the workers were told to use, quote, “discretion” in discussing their infection. Public health experts have expressed alarm as Trump has repeatedly threatened the health of staff around him over the past week, from leaving the hospital while still being medicated, to returning to the Oval Office while still infected, to holding a rally on the White House grounds on Saturday that was not socially distanced.
Later in the program, we’ll be joined by Charles Allen. His father, Eugene Allen, was portrayed in Lee Daniels’ film The Butler for his work serving eight presidents, from Harry Truman to Ronald Reagan. But first, we speak to Ai-jen Poo, senior adviser to Care in Action, which is dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers in the United States. It’s the 501(c)(4) arm of the National Domestic Workers Alliance.
Ai-jen Poo, welcome back to Democracy Now! It’s great to have you with us. As we watch that defiant act of President Trump, where he took off his mask, turned around and walked into the White House, we know that scores of residence staff are older African Americans and Latinx workers. Can you talk about your response and what it signifies to you?
AI-JEN POO: Look, I think — thank you for having me, Amy. I think we and domestic workers all over this country were watching with horror as we saw the recklessness with which the president was treating his household staff. I mean, these are essential workers who have been keeping him and his family safe and caring for them, and he showed a complete and utter disregard for their health and safety in this context.
And it is, in many ways, the tip of the spear to how he’s been treating essential workers writ large. I mean, here we are seven months into this pandemic, and still no Essential Workers’ Bill of Rights, still no hazard pay, right? And here are the — in his house, right?
Domestic work is all about — it really is a question of power here. When your workplace is someone else’s home, there’s an incredible imbalance of power and a tremendous amount of fear that domestic workers have in asserting their rights and advocating for themselves, out of fear of losing their jobs and their livelihood. Now, there could be no other house in this country where the imbalance of power is more severe than that between the president of the United States and his housekeeping staff, and I think he’s been abusing that power.
AMY GOODMAN: How do we find out who has been infected? We know that about three dozen of his professional staff have been infected. They’re high-profile people, like the press secretary. Almost the whole White House media staff has been, and then a number of journalists who are covering the White House have been infected, at least four or five. We know his top senior adviser, Stephen Miller. We know the names of all these people. But right before the White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany herself said she tested positive — I believe that was last Monday — on Sunday, she told reporters at the White House she would no longer be revealing the number or names of people at the White House who tested positive. Now, it’s even harder to find out about those on the residence staff.
AI-JEN POO: Absolutely. There’s 90 housekeeping staff, as far as we know, in the White House, who are charged every day with maintaining the order and the sanity and the safety of the White House itself for the people who live there. And, you know, this entire industry is really defined by its invisibility. People are working behind closed doors. And their work isn’t even seen as real work. It’s still referred to as “help,” right? After so many generations where we understand that this work is essential. And it’s work that’s disproportionately done by women and people of color, women of color, Black and Brown women in particular. And so, all of those factors contribute to the invisibility and the dehumanization of this workforce, which is why it’s so important that we’re vigilant about finding out about the health and the safety and the well-being of those workers in this time. We need transparency. And even more than that, we need protections for these workers.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to break. And when we come back, we’ll also be joined by the son of a man who worked in the White House for over eight — for eight presidents. He was the subject of Lee Daniels’ film The Butler. We’re speaking to Ai-jen Poo, senior adviser to Care in Action, dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers in the United States. She’s staying with us, as well.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman. Our guest is Ai-jen Poo, senior adviser to Care in Action, which is dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers in the United States, the 501(c)(4) arm of the National Domestic Workers Alliance, of which Ai-jen Poo is executive director.
If you can talk a little more, nationally, about the kind of dangers that people face who are in the most intimate jobs, many of them essential workers, but who are on the frontlines, in many cases caring for people with COVID, and the kind of protections they have — for example, domestic workers’ bills of rights — and how far we’ve come on these around the country, Ai-jen?
AI-JEN POO: Absolutely. So, this pandemic has hit domestic workers incredibly hard, because domestic workers came into the pandemic with a tremendous amount of insecurity. Eighty-two percent of domestic workers didn’t have a single paid sick day, coming into this pandemic. And what we saw, very early on, in the first week of the shutdown, was dramatic losses in jobs and income, so much so that in March we were holding calls with domestic workers where they were showing us, on their Zoom screens, literally one cent left in their bank account, no ability to put food on their table for their children.
And here we are, seven months into this pandemic, and when you have a situation where, you know, you had no job security, no access to a safety net, and much of the pandemic relief has not reached you, it is a very dire situation. It’s a full-blown depression for domestic workers, who are vacillating now between 38 and 40% unemployment among domestic workers.
And then you have the workers who continue to work through this crisis, like the White House housecleaners, who are providing an essential lifeline to some of the people who are most vulnerable to the virus itself, like older people, people with disabilities, people with chronic illnesses, bringing them food, bringing them medication, providing essential services that are necessary for daily living for these populations of people. And they’re doing so without access to PPE, without healthcare, without hazard pay. So they’re having to pay out of pocket for PPE and COVID testing. And the burden of safety in this time of an unprecedented pandemic is falling on their shoulders, on the shoulders of the people who have the least amount of power and resources to navigate it all.
AMY GOODMAN: What rights do workers have to demand that they be even able to wear protective gear in a situation where they’re told not to? And what are employers’ responsibilities?
AI-JEN POO: Well, that’s the challenge in this industry, is, one, there’s been a long history of systematic exclusion from basic rights and protections, including many health and safety protections, which is why an Essential Workers’ Bill of Rights is so important and so important that it include domestic workers. But also, when you are isolated in a workplace and you have no job security and you — everything that you ask for, you put yourself at risk of losing your job and your livelihood, at a time when you simply cannot afford it. So, the vulnerability and insecurity there cannot be overstated. It is incredibly difficult right now.
AMY GOODMAN: Are the White House residence staff unionized?
AI-JEN POO: I believe that they are government employees, which means that they should be represented by a government union. But I don’t know for sure.
AMY GOODMAN: You, yourself, Ai-jen Poo, lost your grandmother during the pandemic, though not of COVID. Can you talk about your experience of actually being able to see her and what that meant to you?
AI-JEN POO: I mean, my heart goes out to so many people who have been separated from loved ones who are ill and dying. I was able to go and visit my grandmother, who passed away at 94 on Mother’s Day of natural causes. And I was told by my family that if I wanted to say goodbye, that I needed to come, even in the midst of the pandemic. And so I masked up and quarantined and went and saw her, and I was able to hold her hand every single day for 10 days in order to say goodbye and to begin the process of grieving.
And I cannot imagine — it really meant the world to me to have somebody who cared for me, from my childhood through my whole life, be able to hold her hand and say goodbye and tell her how much I loved her. And I just can’t imagine what it’s been like for the 215 — now — thousand families who have lost their granddaughters, their grandmothers, their sisters, their best friends, and to not be able to appropriately grieve in this time of incredible crisis. I just can’t imagine, when I think about what my family has been through.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, our condolences to you and your family. Finally, the idea that a second stimulus package has not been passed, the consequences of this on the most vulnerable? The National Domestic Workers Alliance provided funding to domestic worker organizations around the country. How ironic that at this point you have smaller organizations providing food and funding, and yet the most able to afford and the larger employers not doing this. What this means, and the pressure on groups like yours, and what it means for people not to get more money right now as so many tens of millions lose their jobs?
AI-JEN POO: I mean, what we saw was, really early on in the crisis, incredible devastation. I mean, you had people who were working paycheck to paycheck, so there was no money, no savings to stock up on groceries or supplies. The level of food insecurity and housing insecurity is just unfathomable. It’s like nothing I ever could have imagined in my 25 years of doing this work.
So, our Coronavirus Care Fund has been providing emergency cash assistance to domestic workers in need, because we knew that we couldn’t wait for government to act. And seven months later, it still hasn’t. Government funding still hasn’t reached the majority of domestic workers in this country. And what they’re using the funds for is groceries, to pay cellphone bills so that their children can stay connected to online learning opportunities. Literally, the basic, fundamental human needs of survival are at stake right now. And the impact on children and families is just devastating in this time.
So, the Senate — shame on the Senate for not moving on actual relief that can reach every American. Every family, including immigrant families, deserves relief and safety in this time, because they will be a part of our recovery as a country. And so, I just — I call upon the Senate, I call upon the White House, to move on relief so that we can start moving towards recovery in this time.
AMY GOODMAN: Ai-jen Poo, I want to thank you so much for being with us. And again, our condolences to your family on the loss of your grandmother. Ai-jen is senior adviser to Care in Action, which is dedicated to fighting for dignity and fairness for the millions of domestic workers across the country, the 501(c)(4) arm of the National Domestic Workers Alliance.


democracynow--2020-10-12--Headlines for October 12, 2020

Headlines for October 12, 2020

President Trump has resumed public events less than one week after he left Walter Reed hospital , where he was treated for COVID-19 .
Trump has repeatedly declared himself “ immune ” to COVID-19 in recent days and has also said he can ’ t spread the disease , with no evidence .
President Donald Trump : “ I beat this crazy , horrible China virus .
And it also gives you immunity .
I mean , it does give you immunity .
Even the — the people that just can not accept anything , I mean , they just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
No , so , we — I passed the highest test.
” On Saturday , Trump held a small campaign rally on the South Lawn of the White House , where he spoke , unmasked , from the balcony to a group which included many Black and Latinx supporters .
ABC News reports conservative activist Candace Owens paid travel and lodging costs for members of her so-called BLEXIT group to attend Saturday ’ s rally .
Trump is scheduled to appear at a rally at the Orlando Sanford International Airport in Florida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large rallies in Pennsylvania and Iowa later in the week .
This comes as Minnesota ’ s Department of Health identified nine cases of COVID-19 stemming from Trump ’ s rally in Bemidji last month — including one person who was hospitalized in an intensive care unit .
Ahead of Trump ’ s release from Walter Reed last week , The New York Times reports the president proposed an idea to his aides for a stunt : Trump would walk past photographers appearing frail and weak , only to rip open his button-down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On Friday , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced a bill that would create a congressional panel to judge the president ’ s capacity to carry out the job , invoking the 25th Amendment , which lays out the line of presidential succession .

President Trump has resumed public events less than one week after he left Walter Reed hospital, where he was treated for COVID-19. Trump has repeatedly declared himself “immune” to COVID-19 in recent days and has also said he can’t spread the disease, with no evidence.
President Donald Trump: “I beat this crazy, horrible China virus. And it also gives you immunity. I mean, it does give you immunity. Even the — the people that just cannot accept anything, I mean, they just don’t want to accept anything. No, so, we — I passed the highest test.”
On Saturday, Trump held a small campaign rally on the South Lawn of the White House, where he spoke, unmasked, from the balcony to a group which included many Black and Latinx supporters. ABC News reports conservative activist Candace Owens paid travel and lodging costs for members of her so-called BLEXIT group to attend Saturday’s rally. Trump is scheduled to appear at a rally at the Orlando Sanford International Airport in Florida today, and his campaign is planning large rallies in Pennsylvania and Iowa later in the week. This comes as Minnesota’s Department of Health identified nine cases of COVID-19 stemming from Trump’s rally in Bemidji last month — including one person who was hospitalized in an intensive care unit.
Ahead of Trump’s release from Walter Reed last week, The New York Times reports the president proposed an idea to his aides for a stunt: Trump would walk past photographers appearing frail and weak, only to rip open his button-down shirt, revealing a Superman T-shirt underneath. On Friday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced a bill that would create a congressional panel to judge the president’s capacity to carry out the job, invoking the 25th Amendment, which lays out the line of presidential succession.


democracynow--2020-10-13--A Rigged Judiciary Leads to Rigged Elections: Ari Berman on Barrett Hearings & GOP Voter Suppression

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
By the way , go to democracynow.org today .
We are live-streaming the full Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Amy Coney Barrett .
Well , we ’ re going to turn now to how Barrett may influence the outcome of the 2020 presidential election .
President Trump said he wants the Supreme Court to weigh in on any election dispute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be on the court in time to be a part of that decision .
This is not the first time Judge Barrett may have a sway over the results of a presidential election .
In 2000 , she worked for George W. Bush ’ s legal team on the Bush v. Gore case that stopped the recounting of ballots in Florida and secured the presidency for George W. Bush .
If confirmed , Barrett will be the third sitting justice to have worked on Bush ’ s team in 2000 .
Justices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on behalf of the Bush campaign during the Florida recount , stopping it .
For more , we ’ re joined by Ari Berman , senior reporter for Mother Jones , his latest piece headlined “ Trump Wants a Repeat of Bush v. Gore .
Amy Coney Barrett Might Make It happen.
” Tell us about this case , Ari .
So , Amy Coney Barrett , as you mentioned , was one of potentially three conservative justices , along with Brett Kavanaugh and John Roberts , who worked in Florida during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice Scalia .
She was 28 years old .
She was working for a law firm that worked with George W. Bush ’ s main law firm , Baker Botts , run by James Baker , the big Washington power broker .
And she worked on a case related to Bush v. Gore — two cases , actually , in which the issue was mail ballots .
So , it ’ s interesting because the issue is once again mail ballots today .
But what happened in Florida was that there were absentee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2000 in Florida .
There were errors on those request forms .
And Republican officials were actually able to go into the elections office , take out these absentee ballot request forms , fill in the missing information — which was illegal under Florida law for them to do this — so that Republican voters could get ballots .
This gave Republican voters a huge edge in mail ballots in Florida 2000 .
Afterwards , Democrats tried to throw out these ballots , because they said that voters should not have gotten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots .
Amy Coney Barrett went down as part of the legal team to try to get those mail ballots counted .
If those mail ballots had been thrown out , Al Gore would have been president .
So , this was a really important case that got very little attention at the time .
And it ’ s really ironic , because Amy Coney Barrett was defending Republicans doing the very thing that the Trump campaign is litigating right now .
And it basically shows you the Republican Party has no principles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They ’ ll do whatever they can to try to maximize their vote count , even ignoring evidence of fraud or improprieties in the process .
I think that ’ s what ’ s so disturbing about Amy Coney Barrett , because that ’ s exactly what President Trump wants to do right now .
He wants a justice who will rule his way on the vote count , no matter what the facts or the law actually says .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : Well , Ari , you ’ ve been following what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country on this issue of mail-in ballots and just the protection of the right to vote across the country .
There are reports today of the Republican Party in California putting out unofficial ballot collection boxes in different counties , and the Democratic state attorney general and other officials ordering them to stop .
Could you talk about what you know about the California situation and other — the most grievous examples you ’ re finding of tampering with the vote around the country ?
ARI BERMAN : That ’ s right , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to set up their own mail ballot drop boxes , which are illegal .
Only the state of California can set up these drop boxes .
And it led to major voter confusion , that people could put their ballots in these drop boxes , not realizing they ’ re unofficial drop boxes , and their vote could be nullified .
And , of course , California is a heavily Democratic state , and Democrats are voting by mail in larger numbers than Republicans , and particularly want to drop their mail ballots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Postal Service .
So this seemed like a deliberate attempt by California Republicans to try to throw out all of these Democratic-cast mail votes that are going to be dropped off at these drop boxes .
There ’ s a lot of attempts around the country to try to restrict mail voting .
Two of the most egregious attempts are in Ohio and Texas , where Republican officials there have limited mail drop-off boxes to one per county , meaning that Ohio will only have 88 drop boxes for mail voting in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousand drop boxes for mail voting .
Ohio is only going to have 88 .
In Texas , the governor there just issued an order a few weeks ago saying there could only be one drop box per county .
That means instead of 12 drop boxes in Harris County , there ’ s going to be one .
That ’ s a country that has more people than 26 states .
That ’ s larger than the state of Rhode Island , that has 2.4 million people .
That decision was just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals .
So we are seeing how a rigged judiciary is leading to rigged elections in this country .
And we ’ re going to see a lot more of this if Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Ari , could you talk about what ’ s happened in Pennsylvania with the Trump campaign ’ s election lawsuit there ?
ARI BERMAN : Yeah .
This was actually an interesting instance , Juan , where a Trump-appointed judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump campaign was seeking to get rid of drop boxes for mail voting ; to throw out ballots if there was a , quote-unquote , “ mismatched signature ” ; to allow you to challenge people at the polls , no matter what county you lived in .
And the Trump-appointed judge blocked all of these efforts and said the Trump campaign had produced no evidence of voter fraud to justify that .
And , in fact , the Trump campaign produced like a 500-page expert report , and they didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in these cases .
So , Trump is screaming about rigged elections every single day in his speeches , on Twitter .
But when it actually comes to show the evidence of rigged elections , to present the evidence of the kind of fraud he ’ s talking about , they have no evidence to show .
And even some Trump judges are skeptical of this .
We are still waiting , however , for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on whether Pennsylvania ’ s deadline for receiving mail ballots can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law says that if your ballot is postmarked by Election Day , it can be arrived after .
But the Supreme Court has yet to issue a ruling on that , so we don ’ t know quite yet what the law will be on that front .
AMY GOODMAN : And then , if you can talk , Ari Berman , about what happened in Georgia ?
Early voting started yesterday .
Some people in Atlanta waited up to 10 hours to vote .
And then , in Arizona , the Pascua @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reinstate the only early in-person voting site on the reservation , which was shut down in 2018 , the tribe also seeking a ballot drop-off site for the week preceding Election Day .
The lawsuit says the Pima County Recorder ’ s Office has closed an additional three early voting locations within the Tohono O ’ odham Nation since 2018 .
I mean , this vast suppression of the ability of people to go out and vote , especially during a pandemic .
But address these two places .
ARI BERMAN : Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was record early voting in Georgia yesterday .
That was the good thing , that people are motivated to vote .
The bad thing is that people waited up to 11 hours to vote in Georgia , which is completely unconscionable .
That is a form of a modern-day poll tax , to make someone spend an entire day waiting to vote , when they have jobs , when they have kids , when they have other responsibilities .
We already saw massive problems with voting in Georgia in 2018 .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ During the primaries , the average wait time for communities of color was 51 minutes ; the average wait time for white voters was six minutes .
So , we are seeing way too many problems with voting in Georgia that continue up to this day .
It ’ s great that people are committed to vote , that they ’ re willing to try to overcome these barriers , but there ’ s too many barriers being placed in front of them .
With Arizona , we ’ re seeing this in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to crack down on access for Native American communities , who live often very far from their polling place , who don ’ t have reliable mail service , who have been hit really hard by the COVID pandemic .
So , we have to make it as easy as possible for people to vote this year , in particular because of the pandemic , but we especially need to make it easy to vote for historically disenfranchised and marginalized communities , whether that ’ s Black voters in Georgia or whether that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Ari , could you talk to us about what you envision happening on election night itself ?
Clearly , it ’ s unlikely that we ’ re going to have — or , it ’ s likely that we ’ re going to have significant numbers of votes not counted and challenges all across the country in various states .
Talk to us about your nightmare scenario and your best-hope scenario .
ARI BERMAN : The best-hope scenario , I ’ ll start with that , Juan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be in a glass-half-full mindstate these days , even though it ’ s hard .
The best-case scenario is that we know who wins the election on election night , or shortly thereafter ; that it ’ s an overwhelming margin of victory ; and that there ’ s not as many disputes as we would have expected ; and that most people were able to cast a ballot or were motivated to overcome these barriers ; that massive turnout was able to beat massive suppression .
That ’ s my best-case scenario @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s very close ; that it takes a very long time to be decided ; that Donald Trump prematurely declares victory , even though he doesn ’ t have the power to do that , but the perception will be that he ’ s going to try to do that ; that he ’ s going to litigate every aspect of this , if it ’ s close , in places like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin ; and that the reason he ’ s trying to rush Amy Coney Barrett on the court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she will be a sixth justice to hear any sort of dispute , which is a fundamental conflict of interest .
He is nominating someone that could then rule on his behalf .
And he clearly thinks he needs six justices on the court , because he can ’ t trust John Roberts as a fifth conservative vote , even though John Roberts gutted the Voting Rights Act and did all these other things that have benefited Republican interests .
So , the Republican Party is desperate right now .
Voter suppression is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they want to carry out voter suppression is by packing the courts — in particular , the Supreme Court — so they uphold that suppression and install Donald Trump for a second term .
That is my nightmare scenario .
I hope it doesn ’ t happen , but that ’ s clearly what they ’ re trying to pull off .
AMY GOODMAN : And do you think Amy Coney Barrett , if she were to be confirmed , should recuse herself if it came to the 2020 election being thrown into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yeah , she absolutely should recuse herself , because people are already voting as she ’ s being nominated .
We ’ re 21 days from November 3rd , but over 10 million people have already voted .
By the time her hearing happens , many , many millions of people will have voted .
And President Trump has explicitly said that he wants the Supreme Court to look at the ballots .
So , everything about Amy Coney Barrett ’ s nomination is illegitimate , but it ’ s especially illegitimate if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so that he can install himself in a second term .
And she should say , “ I understand there ’ s a lot of concern about my nomination , about the appearance of my nomination or the timing of my nomination .
And to put some of those doubts to rest , I am going to recuse myself from any post-election dispute because of how close the election is , how many people have voted , and what President Trump has said about mail voting , and my own history in Florida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this before .
She has already intervened on behalf of Republicans in Bush v. Gore and related cases so that only Republican votes are counted .
So , both her history but also the context of her nomination makes it absolutely clear she should recuse herself from any post-election dispute .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Ari , what do you think the progressives should be looking to do on Election Day itself , on election night ?
What were the things that you would urge people to look out for and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well , first off , I think people should just be prepared for voter intimidation in general .
People should know that if they ’ re in line to vote , they have a right to vote .
If there ’ s any problems voting , people should call 866-OUR-VOTE , which is Election Protection , and don ’ t let anyone dissuade you from voting .
But in terms of election night , we ’ re not going to have election night in the traditional way .
We ’ re more likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And the message has to be it ’ s more important to get this right than to do it quickly .
And it ’ s more important to count all the votes than declare a premature winner of the election .
And so , we have to be patient .
We have to approach Election Day like it ’ s halftime in a game , not like it ’ s the end of the game .
And I think if we do that , I think if we explain to people this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ re in a pandemic , a lot of people voted a different kind of way , it ’ s going to take a little bit longer — that is the system working .
That is not evidence of fraud .
That is not evidence of cheating .
Taking a little bit longer is evidence of the system working , no matter what the president of the United States has to say .
AMY GOODMAN : Ari Berman , we want to thank you so much for being with us , senior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Give Us the Ballot : The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America .
Again , go to democracynow.org for the live-streaming of the entire Amy Coney Barrett hearings .
And a very happy birthday to our audio engineer Miguel Nogueira !
And a happy first birthday to Quentin Woronoff-Rowley !
That does it for our broadcast .
Again , democracynow.org is the site for our daily grassroots global election show and the live stream of the Supreme Court hearings .
Democracy Now !
produced with Renée Feltz , Mike Burke , Deena @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , María Taracena , Carla Wills , Tami Woronoff , Charina Nadura , Sam Alcoff , Tey-Marie Astudillo , John Hamilton , Robby Karran , Hany Massoud and Adriano Contreras .
Our general manager , special thanks to Julie Crosby and to Becca Staley , Miriam Barnard .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
Stay safe .
Wear a mask .
Save lives .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. By the way, go to democracynow.org today. We are live-streaming the full Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Amy Coney Barrett.
Well, we’re going to turn now to how Barrett may influence the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. President Trump said he wants the Supreme Court to weigh in on any election dispute, and intends for Amy Coney Barrett to be on the court in time to be a part of that decision.
This is not the first time Judge Barrett may have a sway over the results of a presidential election. In 2000, she worked for George W. Bush’s legal team on the Bush v. Gore case that stopped the recounting of ballots in Florida and secured the presidency for George W. Bush. If confirmed, Barrett will be the third sitting justice to have worked on Bush’s team in 2000. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and John Roberts also worked on behalf of the Bush campaign during the Florida recount, stopping it.
For more, we’re joined by Ari Berman, senior reporter for Mother Jones, his latest piece headlined “Trump Wants a Repeat of Bush v. Gore. Amy Coney Barrett Might Make It happen.”
Tell us about this case, Ari.
ARI BERMAN: Good morning, Amy.
So, Amy Coney Barrett, as you mentioned, was one of potentially three conservative justices, along with Brett Kavanaugh and John Roberts, who worked in Florida during the 2000 recount. She had clerked for Justice Scalia. She was 28 years old. She was working for a law firm that worked with George W. Bush’s main law firm, Baker Botts, run by James Baker, the big Washington power broker. And she worked on a case related to Bush v. Gore — two cases, actually, in which the issue was mail ballots. So, it’s interesting because the issue is once again mail ballots today.
But what happened in Florida was that there were absentee ballot request forms sent to Republican voters in 2000 in Florida. There were errors on those request forms. And Republican officials were actually able to go into the elections office, take out these absentee ballot request forms, fill in the missing information — which was illegal under Florida law for them to do this — so that Republican voters could get ballots. This gave Republican voters a huge edge in mail ballots in Florida 2000. Afterwards, Democrats tried to throw out these ballots, because they said that voters should not have gotten them because Republicans illegally tampered with the ballots. Amy Coney Barrett went down as part of the legal team to try to get those mail ballots counted. If those mail ballots had been thrown out, Al Gore would have been president. So, this was a really important case that got very little attention at the time.
And it’s really ironic, because Amy Coney Barrett was defending Republicans doing the very thing that the Trump campaign is litigating right now. And it basically shows you the Republican Party has no principles when it comes to mail ballots. They’ll do whatever they can to try to maximize their vote count, even ignoring evidence of fraud or improprieties in the process. I think that’s what’s so disturbing about Amy Coney Barrett, because that’s exactly what President Trump wants to do right now. He wants a justice who will rule his way on the vote count, no matter what the facts or the law actually says.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, Ari, you’ve been following what’s been going on around the country on this issue of mail-in ballots and just the protection of the right to vote across the country. There are reports today of the Republican Party in California putting out unofficial ballot collection boxes in different counties, and the Democratic state attorney general and other officials ordering them to stop. Could you talk about what you know about the California situation and other — the most grievous examples you’re finding of tampering with the vote around the country?
ARI BERMAN: That’s right, Juan. The California Republican Party tried to set up their own mail ballot drop boxes, which are illegal. Only the state of California can set up these drop boxes. And it led to major voter confusion, that people could put their ballots in these drop boxes, not realizing they’re unofficial drop boxes, and their vote could be nullified. And, of course, California is a heavily Democratic state, and Democrats are voting by mail in larger numbers than Republicans, and particularly want to drop their mail ballots off because they’re worried about the Postal Service. So this seemed like a deliberate attempt by California Republicans to try to throw out all of these Democratic-cast mail votes that are going to be dropped off at these drop boxes.
There’s a lot of attempts around the country to try to restrict mail voting. Two of the most egregious attempts are in Ohio and Texas, where Republican officials there have limited mail drop-off boxes to one per county, meaning that Ohio will only have 88 drop boxes for mail voting in the entire state. Michigan has a thousand drop boxes for mail voting. Ohio is only going to have 88. In Texas, the governor there just issued an order a few weeks ago saying there could only be one drop box per county. That means instead of 12 drop boxes in Harris County, there’s going to be one. That’s a country that has more people than 26 states. That’s larger than the state of Rhode Island, that has 2.4 million people. That decision was just upheld last night by three Trump appointees on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
So we are seeing how a rigged judiciary is leading to rigged elections in this country. And we’re going to see a lot more of this if Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Ari, could you talk about what’s happened in Pennsylvania with the Trump campaign’s election lawsuit there?
ARI BERMAN: Yeah. This was actually an interesting instance, Juan, where a Trump-appointed judge ruled against the Trump campaign. The Trump campaign was seeking to get rid of drop boxes for mail voting; to throw out ballots if there was a, quote-unquote, “mismatched signature”; to allow you to challenge people at the polls, no matter what county you lived in. And the Trump-appointed judge blocked all of these efforts and said the Trump campaign had produced no evidence of voter fraud to justify that. And, in fact, the Trump campaign produced like a 500-page expert report, and they didn’t list a single evidence of voter fraud in these cases.
So, Trump is screaming about rigged elections every single day in his speeches, on Twitter. But when it actually comes to show the evidence of rigged elections, to present the evidence of the kind of fraud he’s talking about, they have no evidence to show. And even some Trump judges are skeptical of this.
We are still waiting, however, for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on whether Pennsylvania’s deadline for receiving mail ballots can be extended, because right now the law says that if your ballot is postmarked by Election Day, it can be arrived after. But the Supreme Court has yet to issue a ruling on that, so we don’t know quite yet what the law will be on that front.
AMY GOODMAN: And then, if you can talk, Ari Berman, about what happened in Georgia? Early voting started yesterday. Some people in Atlanta waited up to 10 hours to vote. And then, in Arizona, the Pascua Yaqui Tribe filed a lawsuit Monday to reinstate the only early in-person voting site on the reservation, which was shut down in 2018, the tribe also seeking a ballot drop-off site for the week preceding Election Day. The lawsuit says the Pima County Recorder’s Office has closed an additional three early voting locations within the Tohono O’odham Nation since 2018. I mean, this vast suppression of the ability of people to go out and vote, especially during a pandemic. But address these two places.
ARI BERMAN: Well, first off, in Georgia, there was record early voting in Georgia yesterday. That was the good thing, that people are motivated to vote. The bad thing is that people waited up to 11 hours to vote in Georgia, which is completely unconscionable. That is a form of a modern-day poll tax, to make someone spend an entire day waiting to vote, when they have jobs, when they have kids, when they have other responsibilities. We already saw massive problems with voting in Georgia in 2018. We saw massive problems in the primaries. During the primaries, the average wait time for communities of color was 51 minutes; the average wait time for white voters was six minutes. So, we are seeing way too many problems with voting in Georgia that continue up to this day. It’s great that people are committed to vote, that they’re willing to try to overcome these barriers, but there’s too many barriers being placed in front of them.
With Arizona, we’re seeing this in other states, where Republicans are trying to crack down on access for Native American communities, who live often very far from their polling place, who don’t have reliable mail service, who have been hit really hard by the COVID pandemic.
So, we have to make it as easy as possible for people to vote this year, in particular because of the pandemic, but we especially need to make it easy to vote for historically disenfranchised and marginalized communities, whether that’s Black voters in Georgia or whether that’s Native American voters in Arizona.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Ari, could you talk to us about what you envision happening on election night itself? Clearly, it’s unlikely that we’re going to have — or, it’s likely that we’re going to have significant numbers of votes not counted and challenges all across the country in various states. Talk to us about your nightmare scenario and your best-hope scenario.
ARI BERMAN: The best-hope scenario, I’ll start with that, Juan, because I’m trying to be in a glass-half-full mindstate these days, even though it’s hard. The best-case scenario is that we know who wins the election on election night, or shortly thereafter; that it’s an overwhelming margin of victory; and that there’s not as many disputes as we would have expected; and that most people were able to cast a ballot or were motivated to overcome these barriers; that massive turnout was able to beat massive suppression. That’s my best-case scenario.
My nightmare scenario is that it’s very close; that it takes a very long time to be decided; that Donald Trump prematurely declares victory, even though he doesn’t have the power to do that, but the perception will be that he’s going to try to do that; that he’s going to litigate every aspect of this, if it’s close, in places like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin; and that the reason he’s trying to rush Amy Coney Barrett on the court right before the election is so that she will be a sixth justice to hear any sort of dispute, which is a fundamental conflict of interest. He is nominating someone that could then rule on his behalf. And he clearly thinks he needs six justices on the court, because he can’t trust John Roberts as a fifth conservative vote, even though John Roberts gutted the Voting Rights Act and did all these other things that have benefited Republican interests.
So, the Republican Party is desperate right now. Voter suppression is their main strategy. And the way they want to carry out voter suppression is by packing the courts — in particular, the Supreme Court — so they uphold that suppression and install Donald Trump for a second term. That is my nightmare scenario. I hope it doesn’t happen, but that’s clearly what they’re trying to pull off.
AMY GOODMAN: And do you think Amy Coney Barrett, if she were to be confirmed, should recuse herself if it came to the 2020 election being thrown into the Supreme Court?
ARI BERMAN: Yeah, she absolutely should recuse herself, because people are already voting as she’s being nominated. We’re 21 days from November 3rd, but over 10 million people have already voted. By the time her hearing happens, many, many millions of people will have voted. And President Trump has explicitly said that he wants the Supreme Court to look at the ballots. So, everything about Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination is illegitimate, but it’s especially illegitimate if Trump wants to get her on there so that he can install himself in a second term.
And she should say, “I understand there’s a lot of concern about my nomination, about the appearance of my nomination or the timing of my nomination. And to put some of those doubts to rest, I am going to recuse myself from any post-election dispute because of how close the election is, how many people have voted, and what President Trump has said about mail voting, and my own history in Florida” — that Barrett has already done this before. She has already intervened on behalf of Republicans in Bush v. Gore and related cases so that only Republican votes are counted. So, both her history but also the context of her nomination makes it absolutely clear she should recuse herself from any post-election dispute.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Ari, what do you think the progressives should be looking to do on Election Day itself, on election night? What were the things that you would urge people to look out for and to be prepared for?
ARI BERMAN: Well, first off, I think people should just be prepared for voter intimidation in general. People should know that if they’re in line to vote, they have a right to vote. If there’s any problems voting, people should call 866-OUR-VOTE, which is Election Protection, and don’t let anyone dissuade you from voting.
But in terms of election night, we’re not going to have election night in the traditional way. We’re more likely to have election week or election weeks. And the message has to be it’s more important to get this right than to do it quickly. And it’s more important to count all the votes than declare a premature winner of the election. And so, we have to be patient. We have to approach Election Day like it’s halftime in a game, not like it’s the end of the game. And I think if we do that, I think if we explain to people this is a different kind of election — we’re in a pandemic, a lot of people voted a different kind of way, it’s going to take a little bit longer — that is the system working. That is not evidence of fraud. That is not evidence of cheating. Taking a little bit longer is evidence of the system working, no matter what the president of the United States has to say.
AMY GOODMAN: Ari Berman, we want to thank you so much for being with us, senior writer at Mother Jones, author of Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America.
Again, go to democracynow.org for the live-streaming of the entire Amy Coney Barrett hearings.
And a very happy birthday to our audio engineer Miguel Nogueira! And a happy first birthday to Quentin Woronoff-Rowley!
That does it for our broadcast. Again, democracynow.org is the site for our daily grassroots global election show and the live stream of the Supreme Court hearings.
Democracy Now! produced with Renée Feltz, Mike Burke, Deena Guzder, Libby Rainey, Nermeen Shaikh, María Taracena, Carla Wills, Tami Woronoff, Charina Nadura, Sam Alcoff, Tey-Marie Astudillo, John Hamilton, Robby Karran, Hany Massoud and Adriano Contreras. Our general manager, special thanks to Julie Crosby and to Becca Staley, Miriam Barnard. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. Stay safe. Wear a mask. Save lives.


democracynow--2020-10-13--Packing the Courts: How Republicans Spent Decades Installing Judges to Cement Minority Rule

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
Less than a month before Election Day and with early voting already underway — more than 10 million people have voted — confirmation hearings for President Donald Trump ’ s Supreme Court nominee , Amy Coney Barrett , began Monday with opening statements from senators on the Judiciary Committee and from Barrett herself .
Four of the Republicans on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including the chair , South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham , who is in a very close race in South Carolina .
Senator Kamala Harris is the Democratic vice-presidential nominee .
The hearing took place in a room closed to the public amidst coronavirus precautions .
Judge Barrett sat with her husband and six of their seven children behind her .
Senator Harris testified from her office on Capitol Hill .
Because of the pandemic , she wasn ’ t directly in the room .
She warned Barrett ’ s nomination jeopardizes everything the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and spoke in front of a children ’ s picture book titled I Dissent : Ruth Bader Ginsburg Makes Her Mark .
AMY GOODMAN : That was vice-presidential nominee Kamala Harris speaking from her Senate office rather than going down to the Senate chamber , where the Judiciary Committee hearing was taking place , due to COVID precautions .
For example , the man presiding over the Senate Judiciary Committee , Senator Lindsey Graham , refused to take a COVID test and addressed this issue during the hearing , saying , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No one is going to tell me what to do , particularly my opponent.
” He was talking about Jaime Harrison , who demanded he take a COVID test before Friday night ’ s debate .
And when Senator Lindsey Graham refused , the debate was canceled .
Well , after Senator Harris and other members of the Judiciary Committee concluded their opening statements , Judge Barrett was sworn in .
She began her testimony by comparing her judicial philosophy to that of her mentor , the late Justice Antonin Scalia .
AMY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coney Barrett testifying on Monday .
Today she faces questions from senators , who have up to 30 minutes each to grill her .
If confirmed , Barrett would give conservatives a 6-to-3 majority on the court .
That final full Senate confirmation vote is expected to take place on October 29th , barring any surprises , a few days before Election Day .
Well , for more , we ’ re joined by someone who ’ s an expert on the judicial appointments .
Lisa Graves served as chief counsel for nominations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Senate Judiciary Committee .
She ’ s now executive director of the policy research group True North Research , where she tracks the impact of dark money , including on judicial selections .
Lisa , welcome back to Democracy Now !
I just want to share this point with you .
Republicans have lost the popular vote in five of the last seven presidential elections , but they are on track to seat five of the last seven Supreme Court justices .
Can you talk about the significance of what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you know , there ’ s no doubt that what we ’ re facing is , increasingly , rule by a minority in this country .
Basically , we live in a democracy that ’ s being plagued by minority rule — in essence , a very counter-democratic approach to governance .
And here we are with the Supreme Court , which is , by its nature , a not democratic institution .
It ’ s not one where people have an equal say in terms of the appointments .
The appointments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The United States Senate is increasingly dominated by a majority that represents a minority of people in America .
And so you have this — these two facets of counter-democracy are contrary to our majority rule that most people believe in and think that America really should stand for and should expand .
But I would add to your statistics , Amy , to say that , in fact , in my lifetime , since 1970 — pardon me , since Richard Nixon , there have been 15 nominations that have been confirmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Republican president and four for Democrats .
So , when people say that the court needs to be packed , it really needs to be unpacked .
What ’ s happened in my lifetime is , it ’ s been Republican nomination after Republican nomination , in part due to fate and in part due to this power grab that these Republicans are right now engaged in .
If they had not stolen the seat that became open in the beginning of 2016 , and if they were not in the process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the court wouldn ’ t be 6-3 with a majority Republican appointees .
It could very well be the other way around .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Lisa Graves , I wanted to ask you , though , about a little of the history of where we came to now .
Back in 2013 , Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , who was frustrated by Republicans blocking President Obama ’ s judicial nominees , decided on the nuclear option , eliminated the 60-vote rule on presidential appointees and even lower court federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Majority Leader McConnell countered by eliminating the 60-vote rule for Supreme Court .
So , that was just before the Gorsuch nomination .
So , to what degree is this back-and-forth between the Democratic majorities and the Republican majorities leading us to this point of even the extreme polarization on the court ?
LISA GRAVES : Well , as I said , we would have a 5-4 court but for these last four years of the way the Republicans have operated the United States Senate , in terms of Democratic appointees .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ been a longtime process .
In essence , the Republicans have been engaged in blocking nominees of Democratic presidents for the last , basically , 30 years , whenever they could .
In the 2016 — pardon me , in the 1996 election year for President Clinton , they only allowed , I think , 16 or 17 judges to be confirmed that entire year — no one for the Supreme Court , obviously ; there was no vacancy .
Democrats have not engaged in that kind of a blockade , a widespread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee , we blocked more than a dozen Republican appointees on the floor of the United States Senate .
Meanwhile , 200 of Bush ’ s nominees were confirmed .
And so , you know , when Senator Reid changed the rules or had the rules changed for lower court nominees , that was out of intense frustration , but the reality is , is that the Republicans were never going to honor that filibuster rule when it came to the United States Supreme Court , as Mitch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resulted in this situation in which there is no compromise .
And , in fact , the rules of the game have basically been rigged .
And they ’ re being rigged this week .
Senator Lindsey Graham is going to notice a vote on Amy Barrett ’ s nomination this Thursday , before even the answers are in from the written questions that will be submitted to her this week .
So they ’ re basically willing to break every rule , bend every rule , change every rule , in order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ re so desperate to overturn these laws , laws that are widely respected , precedents that are widely respected by the American people .
And there ’ s no doubt that Amy Coney Barrett has been chosen precisely with the view that that ’ s exactly what she ’ ll do .
She wasn ’ t chosen with the view that she ’ ll be fair .
She was chosen because they believe very strongly that she will be unfair , that she will reverse these precedents .
And so , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate has lost its way in terms of these rules that have been part of its history for a long time .
But the reality is , is that the Republicans have broken those rules time and time again in committee , as well as on the floor of the Senate , in order to force through increasingly extreme judicial nominees , as well as to block fair , reasonable , moderate nominees the Democratic presidents have put forward .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : But yet , during both the presidential debate and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harris both dodged the question of whether they would seek to change the composition of the court .
What ’ s your sense of what needs to be done ?
And should Democrats be letting the Republicans know from the start , if you go down this path , you potentially suffer consequences once there is a Democratic majority in both Congress and the White House ?
LISA GRAVES : Well , I think that the question that ’ s been put to them is one that often is without the context of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The fact is , as I said , that Republican presidents in the last 50 years have appointed — have had 15 nominations confirmed to the United States Supreme Court , and only four nominees of Democratic presidents have been confirmed to the United States Supreme Court .
That ’ s a massive , massive packing and capture of the court , in the words of Sheldon Whitehouse , Senator Whitehouse .
And so , you know , I think that has to be redressed .
I also think that we need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflects America .
But more than that , I think we need fair courts .
The only reason to abide by court decisions , besides the fact that they ’ re binding as a matter of law , is that there ’ s some notion that the judges will be fair .
The essence of a judge isn ’ t whether they ’ re smart or whether their fellow law professors like them as a colleague or whether they have people that they ’ ve mentored .
You know , everyone has that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re a lawyer .
They have people who will speak highly of them .
The essence of being a judge is to be fair .
And you need to have a record of fairness , a record of setting aside your personal views and deciding cases justly .
When Amy Coney Barrett says that she is embracing Justice Scalia ’ s acclaimed adherence to the rule of law , what we see in Justice Scalia ’ s opinions , time and time again , was opinions written as if they were op-ed columns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see a man who was willing to claim that he adhered to his ideals when they were consistent with his beliefs .
In other instances , he did not .
He didn ’ t read things or construe things strictly often when they weren ’ t in alliance with his views .
And so , you have someone who has tried to put a mask on his judicial philosophy by claiming it is so independent of his views .
And , in fact , you have a guy who basically was on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opinions and putting forward , in many instances , his own personal views and substituting them for the law and claiming that that was history .
AMY GOODMAN : So , I want to go to Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island , who was speaking in the hearing on Monday .
AMY GOODMAN : So , that ’ s Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse in the Senate Judiciary Committee .
Lisa Graves , he ’ s talking about the Affordable Care Act , which is up for oral arguments on November 10th @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she might be part of those oral arguments .
If you can talk both about the dark money involved with all of this , and the Supreme Court decisions , whether we ’ re talking about the Affordable Care Act or , possibly , President Trump choosing his own juror in a case that would land the election in the Supreme Court ?
LISA GRAVES : Yes .
Well , you know , one of the things that I ’ ve been calling for with the Ben Franklin Project is for her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from any case involving this election .
And the indications are that she will not .
But the fact is , is that we have this illegitimate process going forward to put her on the court .
And part of that illegitimacy , quite frankly , is the dark money that ’ s been swirling around this effort to pack this court .
And the person who is really at the center of that is a guy named Leonard Leo .
In a recent book , it was noted that he met for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coney Barrett on the list of potential Supreme Court nominees , to specifically put her on that list after Neil Gorsuch was confirmed .
She ’ s put on that list because they believe that she will advance their agenda .
Leonard Leo gave a speech last year , that The Washington Post reported on , in which he said , due to these appointments , that America stands at the precipice of what he called a “ revival ” of what he described as the , quote , “ structural constitution , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ room of donors that he was speaking to had seen the kind of revolution that was about to take place in the law , that basically would roll back a hundred years of precedent .
That ’ s an enormously radical , reactionary agenda that Leonard Leo advances .
That ’ s an agenda to basically take away — LISA GRAVES : He was the vice president of the Federalist Society .
He gave that speech to a group called the Council [ for ] National Policy .
And he has basically said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judge whisperer , in essence , for Donald Trump , a , quote , “ volunteer ” for the president , who took a pay cut from the Federalist Society in 2018 during the Kavanaugh nomination of about $ 100,000 .
And yet , because of his involvement with these other groups , he was able to pay off the mortgage for his house , and on the eve of the confirmation vote for Brett Kavanaugh , which is two years ago last week , he purchased a mansion in Maine , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the yacht club .
That was as cloture was being voted on on Brett Kavanaugh .
So he ’ s gotten very rich from his work to try to pack this court with people that he ’ s put on the list that President Trump chooses from .
And he has recently launched a new effort earlier this year , rebranded effort , a for-profit operation that also advises donors on how to basically influence who gets on our Supreme Court and our state supreme courts , including the Wisconsin Supreme Court , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who are very favorable to the corporate agenda and very favorable to a far-right-wing social agenda , which will repeal — potentially repeal a lot of laws , the ACA , repeal Roe v. Wade , and possibly even Griswold v. Connecticut , but , more than that , could possibly stop our federal government from being able to mitigate climate change , by putting up hurdles , judicial hurdles , to our ability to enact legislation to regulate carbon .
So , everything is on the line here , and Leonard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extreme agenda both from a social standpoint and also from a corporate standpoint .
As Senator Whitehouse said , this is an unreal situation , where we have groups raising money from a small number , potentially , of billionaires , who are then spending money to put people on the court to overturn precedent .
Meanwhile , on the progressive side , you have people who are merely trying to protect the precedents that exist .
They ’ re not trying to put on judges to change the law , to reverse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protect the precedents that many Americans have relied upon for decades .
So it ’ s a true crisis in our democracy to have this going on .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : But , Lisa Graves , we ’ ve heard a lot about Amy Coney Barrett in terms of abortion .
And what about the issue of worker rights ?
What has been her record on the issue of corporations versus workers ?
LISA GRAVES : Well , one of the things that Leonard Leo and the president and his adviser Don McGahn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in late 2017 , so that she could begin having just a slender judicial record so that they could claim she had sufficient experience to be on the Supreme Court , which has been a pattern of these appointments to the Supreme Court .
But the fact is , is that in her very brief time acting as a judge , she has often decided in favor of corporations against the rights of individuals , including in employment discrimination cases , including one where there was actually a racially segregated workforce .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involving other worker rights .
And she has , in essence , shown this sort of hostility toward the statutory rights of individuals who are coming to the federal courts to try to get some justice from corporations that have either denied them their rights or made them lose their jobs , basically , through decisions that they challenged .
And so , you have someone who — in Amy Barrett , who ’ s also been hostile to the rights of the American worker .
And I have no doubt that she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to fulfill President Trump ’ s pledge to overturn the Affordable Care Act , which , although it ’ s not a workers ’ rights case , it ’ s a working people ’ s rights case , because so many people can not afford health insurance , and so many employers do not provide health insurance , and we have this gig economy where people are using contractors that don ’ t get any benefits at all and can ’ t get health insurance without the Affordable Care Act .
AMY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we want to thank you so much for being with us , executive director of the policy research group True North Research and Ben Franklin Project .
She was the chief counsel for nominations for the chairman , then ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee .
She previously served as deputy assistant attorney general in the U.S. Department of Justice , where she was the staff leader of the Working Group on Judicial Selection , worked under Attorney General John Ashcroft .
This is Democracy Now !
When we come back , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to do with today ?
We ’ ll speak with Ari Berman .
Stay with us .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.
Less than a month before Election Day and with early voting already underway — more than 10 million people have voted — confirmation hearings for President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, began Monday with opening statements from senators on the Judiciary Committee and from Barrett herself. Four of the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are up for reelection, including the chair, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, who is in a very close race in South Carolina.
Senator Kamala Harris is the Democratic vice-presidential nominee. The hearing took place in a room closed to the public amidst coronavirus precautions. Judge Barrett sat with her husband and six of their seven children behind her. Senator Harris testified from her office on Capitol Hill. Because of the pandemic, she wasn’t directly in the room. She warned Barrett’s nomination jeopardizes everything the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought for, and spoke in front of a children’s picture book titled I Dissent: Ruth Bader Ginsburg Makes Her Mark.
SEN. KAMALA HARRIS: By replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with someone who will undo her legacy, President Trump is attempting to roll back Americans’ rights for decades to come. Every American must understand that with this nomination, equal justice under law is at stake. Our voting rights are at stake. Workers’ rights are at stake. Consumer rights are at stake. The right to a safe and legal abortion is at stake. And holding corporations accountable is at stake. And again, there is so much more. So, Mr. Chairman, I do believe this hearing is a clear attempt to jam through a Supreme Court nominee who will take healthcare away from millions of people during a deadly pandemic that has already killed more than 214,000 Americans.
AMY GOODMAN: That was vice-presidential nominee Kamala Harris speaking from her Senate office rather than going down to the Senate chamber, where the Judiciary Committee hearing was taking place, due to COVID precautions.
For example, the man presiding over the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Lindsey Graham, refused to take a COVID test and addressed this issue during the hearing, saying, “I took one two Fridays ago. No one is going to tell me what to do, particularly my opponent.” He was talking about Jaime Harrison, who demanded he take a COVID test before Friday night’s debate. And when Senator Lindsey Graham refused, the debate was canceled.
Well, after Senator Harris and other members of the Judiciary Committee concluded their opening statements, Judge Barrett was sworn in. She began her testimony by comparing her judicial philosophy to that of her mentor, the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
JUDGE AMY CONEY BARRETT: More than the style of his writing, though, it was the content of Justice Scalia’s reasoning that shaped me. His judicial philosophy was straightforward: A judge must apply the law as it is written, not as she wishes it were. Sometimes that approach meant reaching results that he did not like. But as he put it in one of his best-known opinions, that is what it means to say that we have a government of laws and not of men.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Judge Amy Coney Barrett testifying on Monday. Today she faces questions from senators, who have up to 30 minutes each to grill her. If confirmed, Barrett would give conservatives a 6-to-3 majority on the court. That final full Senate confirmation vote is expected to take place on October 29th, barring any surprises, a few days before Election Day.
Well, for more, we’re joined by someone who’s an expert on the judicial appointments. Lisa Graves served as chief counsel for nominations for the chair and then ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. She’s now executive director of the policy research group True North Research, where she tracks the impact of dark money, including on judicial selections.
Lisa, welcome back to Democracy Now! I just want to share this point with you. Republicans have lost the popular vote in five of the last seven presidential elections, but they are on track to seat five of the last seven Supreme Court justices. Can you talk about the significance of what’s taking place?
LISA GRAVES: Sure. Thanks, Amy.
I think that, you know, there’s no doubt that what we’re facing is, increasingly, rule by a minority in this country. Basically, we live in a democracy that’s being plagued by minority rule — in essence, a very counter-democratic approach to governance. And here we are with the Supreme Court, which is, by its nature, a not democratic institution. It’s not one where people have an equal say in terms of the appointments. The appointments are handled entirely by the Senate. The United States Senate is increasingly dominated by a majority that represents a minority of people in America. And so you have this — these two facets of counter-democracy are contrary to our majority rule that most people believe in and think that America really should stand for and should expand.
But I would add to your statistics, Amy, to say that, in fact, in my lifetime, since 1970 — pardon me, since Richard Nixon, there have been 15 nominations that have been confirmed to the United States Supreme Court for a Republican president and four for Democrats. So, when people say that the court needs to be packed, it really needs to be unpacked. What’s happened in my lifetime is, it’s been Republican nomination after Republican nomination, in part due to fate and in part due to this power grab that these Republicans are right now engaged in. If they had not stolen the seat that became open in the beginning of 2016, and if they were not in the process of stealing this seat right now, the court wouldn’t be 6-3 with a majority Republican appointees. It could very well be the other way around.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Lisa Graves, I wanted to ask you, though, about a little of the history of where we came to now. Back in 2013, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who was frustrated by Republicans blocking President Obama’s judicial nominees, decided on the nuclear option, eliminated the 60-vote rule on presidential appointees and even lower court federal judges. And then, in 2017, Majority Leader McConnell countered by eliminating the 60-vote rule for Supreme Court. So, that was just before the Gorsuch nomination. So, to what degree is this back-and-forth between the Democratic majorities and the Republican majorities leading us to this point of even the extreme polarization on the court?
LISA GRAVES: Well, as I said, we would have a 5-4 court but for these last four years of the way the Republicans have operated the United States Senate, in terms of Democratic appointees. But the reality is that this has been a longtime process. In essence, the Republicans have been engaged in blocking nominees of Democratic presidents for the last, basically, 30 years, whenever they could. In the 2016 — pardon me, in the 1996 election year for President Clinton, they only allowed, I think, 16 or 17 judges to be confirmed that entire year — no one for the Supreme Court, obviously; there was no vacancy. Democrats have not engaged in that kind of a blockade, a widespread blockade. When I was the chief counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee, we blocked more than a dozen Republican appointees on the floor of the United States Senate. Meanwhile, 200 of Bush’s nominees were confirmed.
And so, you know, when Senator Reid changed the rules or had the rules changed for lower court nominees, that was out of intense frustration, but the reality is, is that the Republicans were never going to honor that filibuster rule when it came to the United States Supreme Court, as Mitch McConnell did not. And that has resulted in this situation in which there is no compromise. And, in fact, the rules of the game have basically been rigged.
And they’re being rigged this week. Senator Lindsey Graham is going to notice a vote on Amy Barrett’s nomination this Thursday, before even the answers are in from the written questions that will be submitted to her this week. So they’re basically willing to break every rule, bend every rule, change every rule, in order to pack the Supreme Court, because they’re so desperate to overturn these laws, laws that are widely respected, precedents that are widely respected by the American people.
And there’s no doubt that Amy Coney Barrett has been chosen precisely with the view that that’s exactly what she’ll do. She wasn’t chosen with the view that she’ll be fair. She was chosen because they believe very strongly that she will be unfair, that she will reverse these precedents.
And so, it’s unfortunate the United States Senate has lost its way in terms of these rules that have been part of its history for a long time. But the reality is, is that the Republicans have broken those rules time and time again in committee, as well as on the floor of the Senate, in order to force through increasingly extreme judicial nominees, as well as to block fair, reasonable, moderate nominees the Democratic presidents have put forward.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: But yet, during both the presidential debate and the vice-presidential debate, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris both dodged the question of whether they would seek to change the composition of the court. What’s your sense of what needs to be done? And should Democrats be letting the Republicans know from the start, if you go down this path, you potentially suffer consequences once there is a Democratic majority in both Congress and the White House?
LISA GRAVES: Well, I think that the question that’s been put to them is one that often is without the context of how the court has already been packed. The fact is, as I said, that Republican presidents in the last 50 years have appointed — have had 15 nominations confirmed to the United States Supreme Court, and only four nominees of Democratic presidents have been confirmed to the United States Supreme Court. That’s a massive, massive packing and capture of the court, in the words of Sheldon Whitehouse, Senator Whitehouse. And so, you know, I think that has to be redressed.
I also think that we need a modern, 21st century judiciary that reflects America. But more than that, I think we need fair courts. The only reason to abide by court decisions, besides the fact that they’re binding as a matter of law, is that there’s some notion that the judges will be fair. The essence of a judge isn’t whether they’re smart or whether their fellow law professors like them as a colleague or whether they have people that they’ve mentored. You know, everyone has that in their professional lives if they’re a lawyer. They have people who will speak highly of them. The essence of being a judge is to be fair. And you need to have a record of fairness, a record of setting aside your personal views and deciding cases justly.
When Amy Coney Barrett says that she is embracing Justice Scalia’s acclaimed adherence to the rule of law, what we see in Justice Scalia’s opinions, time and time again, was opinions written as if they were op-ed columns for The Wall Street Journal. We see a man who was willing to claim that he adhered to his ideals when they were consistent with his beliefs. In other instances, he did not. He didn’t read things or construe things strictly often when they weren’t in alliance with his views. And so, you have someone who has tried to put a mask on his judicial philosophy by claiming it is so independent of his views. And, in fact, you have a guy who basically was on the court writing, in essence, op-ed opinions and putting forward, in many instances, his own personal views and substituting them for the law and claiming that that was history.
AMY GOODMAN: So, I want to go to Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who was speaking in the hearing on Monday.
SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE: Why would we rush forward? Well, the answer isn’t pretty. There’s a promise to big donors that must be kept. When David Koch ran for vice president, he campaigned on getting rid of Medicare and Medicaid. Imagine his fury when Obamacare passed. His groups are spending millions right now on this nomination.
AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Lisa Graves, he’s talking about the Affordable Care Act, which is up for oral arguments on November 10th. If Amy Coney Barrett is approved, she might be part of those oral arguments. If you can talk both about the dark money involved with all of this, and the Supreme Court decisions, whether we’re talking about the Affordable Care Act or, possibly, President Trump choosing his own juror in a case that would land the election in the Supreme Court?
LISA GRAVES: Yes. Well, you know, one of the things that I’ve been calling for with the Ben Franklin Project is for her to recuse and commit unequivocally to recuse from any case involving this election. And the indications are that she will not.
But the fact is, is that we have this illegitimate process going forward to put her on the court. And part of that illegitimacy, quite frankly, is the dark money that’s been swirling around this effort to pack this court.
And the person who is really at the center of that is a guy named Leonard Leo. In a recent book, it was noted that he met for dinner with President Trump to put Amy Coney Barrett on the list of potential Supreme Court nominees, to specifically put her on that list after Neil Gorsuch was confirmed. She’s put on that list because they believe that she will advance their agenda. Leonard Leo gave a speech last year, that The Washington Post reported on, in which he said, due to these appointments, that America stands at the precipice of what he called a “revival” of what he described as the, quote, “structural constitution,” and that no one in the room of donors that he was speaking to had seen the kind of revolution that was about to take place in the law, that basically would roll back a hundred years of precedent. That’s an enormously radical, reactionary agenda that Leonard Leo advances. That’s an agenda to basically take away —
AMY GOODMAN: Of the Federalist Society.
LISA GRAVES: He was the vice president of the Federalist Society. He gave that speech to a group called the Council [for] National Policy. And he has basically said — and he’s been the judge whisperer, in essence, for Donald Trump, a, quote, “volunteer” for the president, who took a pay cut from the Federalist Society in 2018 during the Kavanaugh nomination of about $100,000. And yet, because of his involvement with these other groups, he was able to pay off the mortgage for his house, and on the eve of the confirmation vote for Brett Kavanaugh, which is two years ago last week, he purchased a mansion in Maine, a 12-bedroom mansion that’s across from the yacht club. That was as cloture was being voted on on Brett Kavanaugh. So he’s gotten very rich from his work to try to pack this court with people that he’s put on the list that President Trump chooses from.
And he has recently launched a new effort earlier this year, rebranded effort, a for-profit operation that also advises donors on how to basically influence who gets on our Supreme Court and our state supreme courts, including the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and to help pack these courts with people who are very favorable to the corporate agenda and very favorable to a far-right-wing social agenda, which will repeal — potentially repeal a lot of laws, the ACA, repeal Roe v. Wade, and possibly even Griswold v. Connecticut, but, more than that, could possibly stop our federal government from being able to mitigate climate change, by putting up hurdles, judicial hurdles, to our ability to enact legislation to regulate carbon.
So, everything is on the line here, and Leonard Leo represents an agenda that is an extreme agenda both from a social standpoint and also from a corporate standpoint. As Senator Whitehouse said, this is an unreal situation, where we have groups raising money from a small number, potentially, of billionaires, who are then spending money to put people on the court to overturn precedent. Meanwhile, on the progressive side, you have people who are merely trying to protect the precedents that exist. They’re not trying to put on judges to change the law, to reverse precedents. They’re trying to protect the precedents that many Americans have relied upon for decades. So it’s a true crisis in our democracy to have this going on.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: But, Lisa Graves, we’ve heard a lot about Amy Coney Barrett in terms of abortion. And what about the issue of worker rights? What has been her record on the issue of corporations versus workers?
LISA GRAVES: Well, one of the things that Leonard Leo and the president and his adviser Don McGahn did was get her on the bench in late 2017, so that she could begin having just a slender judicial record so that they could claim she had sufficient experience to be on the Supreme Court, which has been a pattern of these appointments to the Supreme Court.
But the fact is, is that in her very brief time acting as a judge, she has often decided in favor of corporations against the rights of individuals, including in employment discrimination cases, including one where there was actually a racially segregated workforce. She has also ruled against plaintiffs in cases involving other worker rights. And she has, in essence, shown this sort of hostility toward the statutory rights of individuals who are coming to the federal courts to try to get some justice from corporations that have either denied them their rights or made them lose their jobs, basically, through decisions that they challenged. And so, you have someone who — in Amy Barrett, who’s also been hostile to the rights of the American worker.
And I have no doubt that she’s been chosen, in part, to fulfill President Trump’s pledge to overturn the Affordable Care Act, which, although it’s not a workers’ rights case, it’s a working people’s rights case, because so many people cannot afford health insurance, and so many employers do not provide health insurance, and we have this gig economy where people are using contractors that don’t get any benefits at all and can’t get health insurance without the Affordable Care Act.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Lisa Graves, we want to thank you so much for being with us, executive director of the policy research group True North Research and Ben Franklin Project. She was the chief counsel for nominations for the chairman, then ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. She previously served as deputy assistant attorney general in the U.S. Department of Justice, where she was the staff leader of the Working Group on Judicial Selection, worked under Attorney General John Ashcroft.
This is Democracy Now! When we come back, what does Bush v. Gore in 2000 have to do with today? We’ll speak with Ari Berman. Stay with us.