Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Kagan Selected for Supreme Court; Junk Shot: Clog the Leak!; Taliban Tied to Times Square Bombing; Dow Expected to Climb; Singer Lena Horne Dies; New Book Tells Story of Embryo Mix-Up; Examining Fertility Treatment Rights

Aired May 10, 2010 - 08:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to you. Thanks so much for being with us on this Monday. It's May 10th. Welcome to American Morning. I'm Kiran Chetry.

JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: I'm John Roberts. Thanks so much for being with us. Here are the big stories we will be telling you about in the next 15 minutes.

President Obama is set to announce Solicitor General Elena Kagan as is his next Supreme Court nominee. Kagan has never served as a judge and her views on many key issues do remain a mystery.

But we've got the best political team on television, including someone who's known her for a lot of years digging into her records this morning.

CHETRY: BP says they will keep trying every option available until the massive oil leak is plugged. The company plans to try to position a smaller containment dome over the oil that's leaking in the Gulf after a larger dome became clogged with ice crystals and failed to work over the weekend. The Coast Guard has another idea, to stuff shredded tires and golf ball into gusher to try to plugged it up that way.

ROBERTS: And huge rallies around the globe in the markets after an unprecedented $1 trillion rescue plan to keep Greece' debt crisis from spreading across Europe. So, what does it mean for your investments in America's recovery? Our CNN Money Team will break it all down for us this morning.

CHETRY: And, of course, the amFIX blog is up and running. We'd love for you to join the live conversation -- head to CNN.com/amFIX.

ROBERTS: But, first, in just two hours' time, President Obama will nominate his choice to replace retiring Supreme Court justice, John Paul Stevens. And CNN learning today the president will tap Solicitor Elena Kagan. She is a 50-year-old New York native. And if she is confirmed, it would be the first time in history that three women have served on the high court at the same time.

We've got a team of reporters and analysts standing by this morning, including our senior White House correspondent Ed Henry, CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, and senior congressional correspondent Dana Bash.

Let's start with Ed Henry, live at the White House.

And why Kagan? Why this time around, Ed?

ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, as you know, she came very close to getting it last time when it ended up being Justice Sotomayor. She also -- we're told in private -- impressed the president in their one-on-one session here at the White House. They believe she's eminently qualified.

As, you know, she clerked for then-Justice Thurgood Marshall and rose all the way up to become the first female solicitor general, a job she's in right now, where she basically represents the federal government before the high court, also the first female to be dean of the Harvard Law School.

And when you look at the fact that she's only 50 years old, if she's confirmed, she'd somebody who could be on the high court long after this president has left office, adding her to Justice Sotomayor, he can clearly put his stamp on the court.

And there's another factor when you talk to advisers to the president. They believe that while many people are focused on the fact that retiring justice, John Paul Stevens, is very liberal, this will not necessarily shift the ideology of the court. They think there was another ingredient here with Justice Stevens, that he was a real leader on the court and inspiration. The word used by David Axelrod was a spark. And they think that same kind of spark in leadership can come from Elena Kagan and that maybe she can shift the court on some of those five-four decisions, shift it ever so slightly to the left, John.

ROBERTS: So, how much of a fight are they expecting at confirmation?

HENRY: You know, Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, has already said in recent days, he is expecting a battle of enormous proportions even before they picked Kagan, that, you know, no matter who they came up with in this current toxic environment on Capitol Hill, it was likely to be a big battle.

They looked, though, at the fact that just last year, when she was put up for solicitor general, this very same Senate confirmed her, 61 to 31 -- more than enough to break off any potential filibuster. They believe, when you look at her record, there's going to be a lot of fight back and forth, but in the end, she'll be confirmed, John.

ROBERTS: Ed Henry, thanks so much -- Ed Henry at the White House this morning.

CHETRY: And as they just alluded to, Kagan's fate will be up to the Senate where Democrats have more than enough votes to confirm her. So, what kind of battle can we expect on Capitol Hill?

ROBERTS: Yes. Our senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, is with us. And you've known Kagan since college days.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Since law school actually. I met her on the first day of law school. I didn't know her in college. But that's pretty close. It's a long time ago.

CHETRY: Thirty years. And tell us a little bit about her. You talked about her being a consensus builder, being very, very bright. What are some of the things that you think she's going to bring to the table if indeed confirmed to the Supreme Court?

TOOBIN: Well, she is someone who is used to working with groups. In fact, more than most Supreme Court appointees, she has been an administrator, not a judge. I mean, she is the first person since William Rehnquist to be nominated without having served as a judge. It's a big change on the court.

You know, the court that decided Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, eight of the nine justices had never been a judge before. The current court, all of the justices had been former judges. I think President Obama feels strongly -- he said this -- that he wants to go back to a time when Supreme Court justices had varied backgrounds, different kind of experiences. And I think Elena Kagan's background -- particularly in uniting the very divided faculty at Harvard Law School -- will be a predictor of her ability to do some uniting on the Supreme Court.

ROBERTS: What do we know of her politics? What do we know of how she might rule in certain cases, because, as Dana Bash was suggesting to us earlier today and I think Ed Henry talked about this as well, that she might be far enough to the left for some people?

TOOBIN: Well, she's certainly a Democrat with a capital "D." You know, she served in the Clinton administration in a political post. She is an Obama -- member of the Obama administration. I don't think there's any doubt, you know, where she stands on the sort of broader, philosophical spectrum.

But in terms of the specific issues that the Supreme Court takes up, abortion, affirmative action, church/state issues, she has never written or spoken on those issues. And you can assume based on the fact that she's a Democrat in terms of where she might go. But in terms of a prior written record on those issues, it's just not there.

CHETRY: So, when you talk about the paper trail or any type of body of work, she has memos to the president when she worked within the Clinton White House. But you were careful to point out before when you were talking to us in the last hour that just because you're making these arguments on behalf of the administration or the government doesn't mean you personally feel this way?

TOOBIN: That's true. Now, when she's the solicitor general -- as solicitor general, she is defending laws that she might not have supported if she were a member of Congress. We will now get access to memos she wrote in the Clinton administration.

But, again, she was reflecting the views of a president who was her employer. In terms of her own views, it will be interesting to see if anyone digs up some sort of specific, you know, statements about these issues. I've known her well for a long time. I've never heard her make these statements. I frankly doubt they're out there. But, a lot of people are going to be looking.

CHETRY: Right. There's not going to be a wise Latina sound bite to be thrown all over the plate.

TOOBIN: Oh, I don't know. There may well be. I mean, in terms of a speech, there may -- there may be a speech that she has to defend herself on.

But, you know, look, John Paul Stevens was confirmed 98 to nothing. Ginsburg, Breyer, Scalia were all confirmed with over 90 votes. Those days are over.

CHETRY: Right.

TOOBIN: There is never going to be anyone confirmed with over 90 votes. Certainly, today, it looks like she will be comfortably confirmed. But it's -- she's certainly going to have more than 30 votes against her.

CHETRY: All right. Jeff Toobin, a buddy of Elena Kagan --

(CROSSTALK)

CHETRY: -- going back a long time from your law school days. It will be interesting. Thanks so much.

And stay with CNN. President Obama plans to announce the nomination this morning at 10:00 Eastern, less than two hours from now. We'll bring it to you live when it happens.

ROBERTS: Right now, oil is still gushing into the Gulf of Mexico after the first attempt to cover the leak with a dome failed over the weekend. But crews are working on another option. It's called the junk shot, stopping the leaking well by clogging it with garbage.

Our Rob Marciano joins us now from Pass Christian, Mississippi. And he's got a little more of an explanation of what they might do to try to clog up this well.

Good morning, Rob.

ROB MARCIANO, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Good morning, John.

Yes, garbage would be a general term I suppose. It seems like what they're trying to do is take some stuff that would have some sealing capability, old rubber tires, golf balls -- something that has some sort of elasticity, and basically jam it in that hole, inject some fluid on top of it for additional pressure and then seal the whole thing with concrete, kind of old school way of doing things and hope it holds.

There's no timeline they're giving us at this point as to when they think they may try that. But, certainly, as a solution -- why looking at these kinds of solutions? Well, the dome thing over the weekend didn't work. They put the dome over the well and it kicked up a bunch of hydrates, which is something that's fairly common at that depth, especially methane hydrates near oil wells. They won't say whether or not it kicked up the hydrates or whether or not the oil filling that dome moved those hydrates, so there were ice crystals up to that hole and clogged it that way.

But down at that depth, the pressure and the salinity creates temperatures that are actually below freezing and you can have ice crystals at that depth. They're thinking maybe they would try that again, not with the big, with the smaller dome which has not yet been completed yet, maybe pump in some methane and that may eliminate the hydrate situation. No timeline on that either.

The other option is the relief well. That's been an ongoing task. They have got to get it to 18,000 feet and then kind of side swipe the well and cap it that way and drain the oil that way.

Right now, they are only about halfway done with that. So, it seems like the solutions after this weekend's failure are still days, if not weeks, away. And the oil continues to spew out of that and continues to spread across the Gulf, now reaching potentially central Louisiana by the end of the week -- John and Kiran.

ROBERTS: Rob Marciano for us this morning in Mississippi -- Rob, thanks for that.

CHETRY: And the attorney general this past -- over the past couple of days, talking about the Taliban and Pakistan being behind the Times Square bomb plot, a change from the early days after it happened when there was talk it was a lone wolf.

Now, we're going to be speaking with Fran Townsend, a former national security adviser under President Bush and Peter Brookes, former CIA officer, about what this means for the war on terror.

Ten minutes past the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROBERTS: Thirteen minutes now after the hour.

Iraqi officers under fire, a series of coordinated attacks across Baghdad killed at least 23 police officers and soldiers this morning. Gunmen using automatic weapons opened fire at six checkpoints around the city and explosions rocked four others. The attacks follow the recent arrests and killings of two top al Qaeda members in Iraq.

CHETRY: The White House says that new evidence is, quote, "proof positive" the suspect in the failed Times Square bombing, Faisal Shahzad, was working with the Pakistani Taliban. Now, if it's true, it's the first time the group, which has close ties to al Qaeda, has attempted an attack on U.S. soil.

Joining us now from Washington with White House reaction: CNN national security contributor, Fran Townsend, and former CIA officer, Peter Brookes.

Good morning to both of you. Thanks for being with us both of us.

PETER BROOKES, FORMER CIA OFFICER: Good morning.

FRAN TOWNSEND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTOR: Good morning.

CHETRY: Fran, let me start with you. So, Attorney General Eric Holder, along with counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, pointed out yesterday that Pakistan's Taliban was the orchestrator of the Times Square bombing attempt in their opinion. Now, if anything, what does that change in terms of how we fight terror threats?

TOWNSEND: Well, you know, Kiran, the interesting is, the Pakistani Taliban had issued a threat in retaliation of U.S. drone strikes in federally administrative tribal areas of Pakistan -- they were going to launch attacks here in the United States. And a senior counterterrorism official in the NYPD, the New York City Police Department, said to me, we need to start taking these guys at their word.

Remember in the Christmas Day attempted attack, it was al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. And we heard from the administration that they were surprised -- they looked at them as a regional group without the capability to attack inside the U.S. and they did. Here we are again with another seemingly regional group who's threatened the U.S., who's able to strike here.

So, Kiran, I think what we take from this is, these small regional groups that share the sort of ideology and the tactics of al Qaeda have to be taken as serious threats directly to the United States' homeland security.

CHETRY: And, Peter, what does it say about how big of a threat U.S. citizens -- naturalized or not -- aligning with foreign terrorist groups that we once thought of as more regional, to attack within the U.S.? What's the strategy?

BROOKES: Well, the strategy here, Kiran, is to get people who do not need passports, who can move back and forth between training camps overseas and places in the United States to perpetrate terror attacks. I mean, this is an expansion of the threat we are dealing with.

I mean, Fran was absolutely right but, in addition, there were other groups that were mentioned in some of these reports such as Jashi Mohammed (ph), which is another group that is aligned with al Qaeda but tends to focus itself on India and the Kashmir problems. So, we have to understand that we have this new threat vector. The tactics are evolving and changing, and we have to be ahead of those tactics, on top of those tactics, on top of the people that might be perpetrating terror attacks. So, other words the threat is evolving and the threat is expanding.

CHETRY: And so, Fran, what do you suggest? What is an option for us? TOWNSEND: Well, you know, one of the things -- we heard on yesterday's talk shows from both the Attorney General and from John Brennan, the president's Homeland Security Adviser, about the connection to the Pakistani Taliban. What is going to be important to understand is was he radicalized after he traveled overseas or was he radicalized here. Both are a problem, but you target them differently. If he was radicalized overseas, it makes it all the more important to understand travel patterns, to understand length of stay overseas and what those connections are as opposed to somebody who was radicalized here where you are looking for more domestic connections.

And so, where he was radicalized and how this case proceeded before the day of the attempt in Times Square will be important to understanding what tactics the government needs to use to thwart such attacks.

CHETRY: And Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton had some strong words on this incident, and also our relationship with Pakistan on "60 MINUTES." Let's listen to what she said last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: We have made it very clear that if heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHETRY: She talks about severe consequences. Peter, what would those be?

BROOKES: I'm not quite sure what she is getting at there, because I think the relationship with Pakistan is critical and it is very important that we get Pakistani policy right. I mean, if she is talking about the terrorist groups, obviously there is going to be consequences. We are going to continue our drone attacks. We are going to continue to press the offensive to the extent we can.

But the critical element here is, I am not sure if she was talking about the Pakistani government and making threats towards them. But we need cooperation from the Pakistanis. They understand how these groups are operating in Pakistan. They have an ability to work against them. We need them to press the offenses in places like north Waziristan, which seems to be a safe haven for a lot of these groups.

So, I am not quite exactly sure what she is getting at there, but they are very tough words. And we do have a very difficult problem ahead of us.

CHETRY: What did you make of them, how did you parse it, Fran, that she was referring more to the perpetrators behind it or perhaps a thinly veiled warning to the Pakistani government that you have to do better? TOWNSEND: Well, I suspect, Kiran, she is going to have to clarify that statement. The words were seemingly very harsh. We need the Pakistani government to win against this kind of a threat on their territory. And the relationship, the counterterrorism relationship, has been better. If it was a threat against the Pakistani government, the way the Pakistanis are going to hear it is a threat to the enormous military aid that we provide to Pakistan.

And that's the sort of threat that the Pakistanis will not take kindly to. We need to reassure them that we are their allies even when we face a common problem, a common threat. And so that would be very troubling to the Pakistani government if they hear it as a threat to their military aid.

CHETRY: Right. And as we heard from our own Nick Robertson, who has been doing a lot of reporting there, there has been no comment from Pakistani officials or government yet on any of those words.

Finally though, Peter, the drones, that seems to be our most effective tool right now in that area, in that lawless area, Waziristan province in Pakistan. But drones alone can't solve this problem. So what do you do?

BROOKES: Absolutely. I mean, drones have been effective. I am glad the Obama Administration has embraced this. It started under the Bush Administration.

But, you are right. I mean, you have to combat terrorism with a multi-pronged effort here. Obviously, law enforcement on the ground, military operations on the ground with the Pakistanis, or by the Pakistanis, intelligence cooperation between the two sides, we have great intelligence assets. I mean, there is a whole host of things that you need to deal with, economic development.

You know, once again, Pakistan as a country is very economically challenged, a great deal of underdevelopment and poverty. You want to get people to decide that they can have faith in the central government and can turn away from this sort of radicalism. Also, what happens on the other side of the border in Afghanistan.

So, the point here Kiran, is it is not easy. There is a lot of moving parts. We need to obviously -- Pakistan tends to be an epicenter of this sort of radicalism and terrorism for us here and for the region. And we need to deal with it effectively.

CHETRY: All right. Thanks to both of you for your insights this morning, Peter Brooks and Fran Townsend. Always great to talk to you, thanks.

ROBERTS: Well, the Dow is set to soar this morning if futures are any indication as to what might happen over the next little while on Wall Street. So, is the nightmare on Wall Street over? Christine Romans is taking a look at what's ahead. Twenty minutes after the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) ROBERTS: Twenty-two minutes now after the hour. Christine Romans "Minding Your Business." She joins us now. Dow futures are way up. Are we going to turn back the clock here to a happier time a week and a half ago?

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: I know. Hopefully, two weeks ago, please because the market is going up. Right now, you got futures up very sharply this morning. And I am going to tell you why. It is because you had overseas markets also up very, very sharply. World markets rallying, the Hang Seng, the Nikkei, the Futsi (ph), the Cackaron (ph) is up, some 7 percent this morning. That's a big move for one day folks for stocks. Why? Because Europe has announced a huge, nearly $1 trillion rescue package to make sure that what's happening in Greece doesn't spread to other debt-ridden economies in the EU.

ROBERTS: What is happening in Greece, stays in Greece.

ROMANS: Right. Or they are trying to do that at least. And they are calling this, as Kiran pointed out earlier that a lot of the economist and analysts saying that, Europe's financial version of shock and awe. Let me tell you what's in this rescue plan. Government-backed loans totaling about $570 billion. These are from the Eurozone countries. Lot of people are saying this is the rich countries ponying up, promises to help the poor countries, so this thing does not spread. I should not say poor countries, I should say the countries with -

CHETRY: -- in trouble.

ROMANS: The counties in trouble with less economic growth. A $284 billion in guarantees from the IMF and in economic emergency stabilization fund of $77 billion. All together, this is almost a trillion dollars. It is Europe basically banning together to make sure that it's common currency isn't undone by the problems that you are seeing spreading through here.

A lot of people are looking back to '97 and '98, you remember, the Asian contagion, the financial crisis in 1997-1998. Again and again, we thought it had been contained. And again and again, one country after another was knocked down, very serious problems. They do not want to have that happen right now when you have got a global recovery that is still fragile.

CHETRY: So you have a Roman's numeral for us this hour?

ROMANS: I do. Speaking of, 998 as in 998 points.

CHETRY: Is this the fluctuation just for the past week alone?

ROMANS: How is that darn decline on Thursday, remember? We still don't know why the Dow was down 998 points. We still do not know. Never has it taken so long to figure out what a trigger was in the market. You are hearing technical glitches, you are hearing electronic trading taking over, the exchange chiefs, the people who run the stock exchanges, the commodities, and the futures exchanges have been summoned to Washington today to meet with the SEC to try to get to the bottom of it. Still don't know why the market so violently sold off on Thursday.

ROBERTS: Conspiracy theorists are talking about maybe somebody hacked into the system from outside.

ROMANS: The government says it was not a cyber attack. But they need to figure out what it was.

CHETRY: It's also a good reason why you cannot obsess day by day about the market. It's up 400 points, down 400 points, I mean, you know, you can't time it. It's down 1,000 in five minutes and then 30 minutes later it was back up 500. You cannot obsess day to day or you will drive yourself crazy if you are an average investor.

ROMANS: I love to obsess day to day. But I obsess day to day so you don't have to.

CHETRY: Good. We have nothing to worry about.

ROMANS: You are right. If you have the right plan, this 1,000 points, you shouldn't make any moves on Thursday because of 1,000 points.

ROBERTS: It's good to have you obsessing things.

CHETRY: Well, still ahead, the president picks Elena Kagan for the supreme court. Where does she stand on "don't ask don't tell." Sandra Bask (ph) is going to be breaking that down for us, coming up.

ROBERTS: And you will remember that stunning fertility clinic mix-up where a couple was called in by their IVF specialist and told, your embryos were thawed and by the way they were implanted in another woman. She gave birth. The baby is now seven months old. We will talk to the Morells about their experience and find out what can be done to make sure that it never happens again.

It's twenty-six minutes after the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: Twenty-nine minutes past the hour right now, time for a look at our top stories.

There is new video this morning of Solicitor General Elena Kagan. She is arriving at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, which is just next door to the White House. There she is. Kagan is President Obama's pick to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. The president will make the official announcement in just an hour and a half, 10:00 Eastern this morning. Kagan has never served as a judge. She is the former dean of Harvard Law School.

ROBERTS: Attorney General Eric Holder says a federal lawsuit against Arizona's controversial immigration law is a possibility. Holder told NBC's "Meet The Press" the Justice Department could file a challenge to the law, if it violates civil rights and leads to profiling. The measure allows police to question a person's residency status based on a, quote, "reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegal." And that's an interpretation that's open to interpretation.

CHETRY: BP says it will try many other options right now to stop the massive oil leak in the gulf. The latest plan involves lowering a smaller containment dome over top of the gushing valve. And the Coast Guard also has another idea, clog the leak with shredded tires and golf balls.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DOUG SUTTLES, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, BP: To stop the flow options, we still have several available to us. And that includes what we call the jump show, which is also the same of top kill. We actually pump that material in and try to plug it up from that blowout preventer, then follow it with heavy fluids followed by cement.

We also have an option out available to us to actually put a valve or a new block on top of the existing one.

What we are going to do is keep developing and keep trying these options until we get the flow stopped.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHETRY: The first try to lower a near 100-ton containment dome to the sea floor Saturday failed after ice crystals formed inside of it. In addition to the top kill, perhaps lowering a second blowout preventer on top of the one.

And in the process also still digging a relief well. They say that process is still continued.

ROBERTS: It will take a long time to get that relief well done.

President Obama has picked Solicitor General Elena Kagan to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. If confirmed she will become the first justice in nearly 40 years that has never served as a judge.

CHETRY: Senior Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash joins us live from Capitol Hill. It could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on who you ask.

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. Looking at it right now, it seems as if Republicans don't wage a filibuster, which they did not against Sonia Sotomayor, Democrats certainly have enough seats in the Senate for Elena Kagan to be confirmed.

We have to remember we are in the middle of a very volatile election year. Democrats are not taking anything for granted.

But what is interesting is that among the reported finalists for this position that President Obama was looking at, she is among the most palatable, at least on paper, to conservatives because of what she has argued in terms of executive privilege and handling terror suspects.

And she has actually gotten support in the past from some of the leading conservatives in this country when it comes to judicial thinking.

But it is really the fact that she, and we have been talking about this all morning, and it bears repeating, that she has no experience on the bench and a very limited paper trail of writings and speeches that senators can look at to get a sense of her positions that make her a question mark not just for conservatives but even more interestingly for liberals. Many activists have said they were very skeptical of the president nominating her for that reason.

ROBERTS: Dana, Kagan has previously called the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy a "moral injustice." Do you expect that will be a point of controversy during these hearings?

BASH: Absolutely it will be. When she was dean of Harvard Law, the law school banned military recruiters from coming on to the campus, and she joined other people in putting forward an amicus brief to the Supreme Court saying this should not happen, that schools should not be required to do this. The courts rejected that by 8-0.

This is something that conservatives are saying this is proof she is more of an activist than somebody who was an impartial jurist. And this is probably the most out there in terms of issues that tend to be hot-button issues that we know about her. She doesn't have a record on issues like abortion and gun rights.

CHETRY: We know a little more about her personally. She used to teach with the president in Chicago. She likes to play softball, poker. What about some of the other things about Kagan as a person, not necessarily as a future Supreme Court justice?

BASH: First of all, the fact she plays poker, if she is really good, boy, that's going to serve her well at these hearings if she does stick to the president's recent past of nominees not answering direct questions from senators.

I mention the fact that liberals are skeptical of her, but if you look at her political leanings just in terms of her campaign contributions, she seems to be a pretty good Democrat. She worked for the Dukakis campaign in 1988. She gave $12,000 in campaign contributions since the year 2000, including the max to Barack Obama for his presidential campaign. So that's interesting in terms of where she might lean politically. No surprise publicly.

Other fun facts -- she clerked for Thurgood Marshall, somebody whom she called her mentor. And he called her "Shorty," which has become a joke about her, that he called her "Shorty" because of her diminutive stature. But I met her several times several years ago, I didn't think she was short. But then, again, I am 5'1" and a half, as you both know.

ROBERTS: As we know, Dana, the best things come in small packages, right? BASH: Amen.

ROBERTS: Dana Bash, thanks so much.

And stay with CNN. President Obama plans to announce the nomination this morning at 10:00 eastern. We'll bring that to you live just as we're getting going here at the White House.

CHETRY: Another sports fan tasered. You may remember what happened at the Philadelphia Phillies game when that 17-year-old thought it would be fun to run through the field and not stop when police asked him to. Well, this was a heckler of Tiger Woods at the golf tournament over the weekend and police needed to use a laser to stop him as well.

It's 35 minutes past the house

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: The legendary Lena Horne has died. The actress and singer whose signature tune was "Stormy Weather" broke racial barriers, became a major star in the 1940s and 50s. Horne was one of the first African-Americans to get a long-term contract with a major Hollywood studio back in 1942.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LENA HORNE, SINGER: I think the black boy that cleaned the shoes and me were the only two black people there, except for maids that were working for the stars.

And it was very lonely. I wasn't very happy, but I'm grateful because they gave me the name. The name was scene, "Stormy Weather," and "Cabin in the Sky." Every soldier, every troop, white and black, saw those pictures. It was good for me in that way.

But after I realized that I would go only so far, I went on the stage.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHETRY: Lena Horne said performing for live audiences was what she loved the most. She was 92 years old.

ROBERTS: Two pains in the neck for Tiger Woods. Neck pain forced him to withdraw from yesterday's final round of the players' championship. Tiger thinks he might have a bulking disc in his upper back.

Pain number two, a rowdy fan who refused to stop heckling Tiger about his. Police resorted to a taser gun when the spectator said he wouldn't leave the course.

Then, there was the woman from the Golf Channel who had a slip when she was talking about the bulging disc that Tiger had.

CHETRY: Don't you hate it when that happens?

ROBERTS: Fertility clinic mix-up. Doctors implant embryos from one couple into the wrong woman. See how it all turned out. There is the result right there. You will get to meet them coming up next.

It's 20 minutes to the top of the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: It is the story that's grabbed headlines and resonated with parents across the nation. Paul and Shannon Morell went to see a fertility specialist trying to add a child to their family.

ROBERTS: But Shannon's embryos were planted in the wrong woman, someone that they never met who lived in another state. The couple is now telling their story in a book called "Misconception." I sat down with them to talk about everything they have been through and why they feel it is so important to share their story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS: Take me back to the emotions of when the doctor said to you, we've got a problem. Your embryos were thawed and they were implanted in another woman.

SHANNON MORELL, AUTHOR, "MISCONCEPTION," EMBRYOS IMPLANTED INTO ANOTHER WOMAN: I just felt like, well, those are my embryos.

PAUL MORELL, AUTHOR, "MISCONCEPTION": It was so much disbelief. It was like, are you sure? We couldn't believe it. We thought they were joking.

ROBERTS: This could have easily gone the other way. And in the book, you talked about your fears. One of the things you say on page 79 of this book, you said, "I found myself desperately hoping that the other woman, Carolyn, believed in god, that she would realize she carried our family's last best hope."

What was going through your mind when you heard she was carrying your child and she had a lot of different options?

S. MORELL: I immediately put myself in her shoes, because it could have happened to me. What would I do? I think about friends, the choices that they make. I knew she could terminate any day. She had the right.

ROBERTS: The thing you had a hard time coming to terms with that you explain in the book, is how they could have made such a mistake.

S. MORELL: I asked so many questions. I kept asking and asking and asking. All I ever got was it was human error. So in your mind you want to understand what happened.

ROBERTS: So what you discovered was, after you finally met Carolyn, was your maiden name is Savage. Her married name is Savage. You didn't just have similar. You had the same. S. MORELL: At the time, I thought the husband and the wife would be together. And we have two names. So I thought, how in the world -- plus, first names. How can you mess something up? Obviously --

ROBERTS: Have you ever had a suitable explanation of how this happened?

S. MORELL: Yes, I did. I can tell a little bit someday. It's exactly the way he told us -- the name did have something to do with it, and it was human error.

P. MORELL: Yes.

ROBERTS: When this all became public, obviously, a lot of people were talking about it. You went to your daughter's doctor --

S. MORELL: Yes.

ROBERTS: -- and were talking to him about it and here is what he said and here is what you said of that exchange. Because he was wondering how you could take the baby.

S. MORELL: Yes, yes.

ROBERTS: So here's the exchange you said, quote, "He stared at me and his brow crinkling and you're going to take the baby from this woman?" You say, "I couldn't believe the look on his face. Of course, it's our baby, our baby. The doctor shook his head. But she's carrying the baby and bonding with the child."

S. MORELL: But those cells are mine that's what I said, it's my child.

ROBERTS: But is that a misconception, a misperception that you're trying to clear up.

S. MORELL: I think you know what, you're right. Because a lot of people say, well, you carry that baby and you bond. And that -- it's true you don't have to have the genetically connected to a child to bond with a child, people know that from adoption and so forth.

ROBERTS: Did you ever have a pang of guilt where you ever thinking, "Oh my goodness maybe we should let her keep the baby.

S. MORELL: I thought about it. And I felt guilty the whole time. But at the same that was my child and I wasn't going to let that child just be given away without fighting for my child.

ROBERTS: What's your relationship right now with Sean and Carolyn Savage?

S. MORELL: It's friendly, ok.

P. MORELL: Well, it's like they're extended family.

ROBERTS: Have they seen Logan since he was born? S. MORELL: They saw him between Christmas and New Year's when he was three months. And we are working on another time when they can see him.

ROBERTS: From what you have learned over this whole ordeal, what do you think is the number one thing that needs to be done to avoid this happening in the future?

S. MORELL: There has to be lots of different checks, whether it's names, numbers, colors, two, three, four people going through a checklist. It just can't be routine; this is not routine. This is not filing something in a file cabinet. Ok, and taking that file out. Yes, you make a mistake, no big deal. This is a big deal.

ROBERTS: Even after what you went through, you're not sour on the technology?

S. MORELL: No, no.

P. MORELL: We're a success story, I mean, we have twin girls. I mean --

S. MORELL: No, I'm not. Because where -- well, we've been blessed, if we wouldn't have done it, we may not have had the family. And I have a lot of other friends that have families because of IVF. I would say go for it definitely and don't wait either.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS: So Logan now is seven months old in addition to their other two IVF twins there. So they do have a happy family but there's the other side of the story as well. And the woman who carried the child still doesn't have her own child yet. And she says the last seven months have been very difficult for her.

KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: Yes. I mean, she had the choice technically.

Here is the statement from the Savage family.

ROBERTS: Right they're responding to the book. They say, "These past seven months have been more difficult for us than anticipated. As a result, we are still trying to gain perspective on this life changing event."

And the Morells understand that, "We pray Logan Morell grows to understand his birth was a blessing and his life was a gift."

But you know --

CHETRY: And the Savage family did a very brave thing as well because they could have easily terminated the pregnancy and they say that they were encouraged to do that.

ROBERTS: She could have done it as easily as stopping her progesterone shots. CHETRY: Right.

ROBERTS: Which people take during IVF procedures to make sure that everything goes well.

CHETRY: But they both had a strong conviction as she said; she was relieve that those families were very, very Christian and felt that the right thing to do was to carry this child to term, this life and give it to the biological parents.

ROBERTS: Yes, the Morells are certainly happy about that.

But you know what are the medical and the legal ramifications of all of this? What are your rights and how diligent is the IVF industry making sure that mistakes like this don't happen?

We are going to talk with Dr. Jamie Grifo at NYU Medical Center coming up as well as our legal analyst, Paul Callan. Stay with us. Twelve minutes now to the top of the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROBERTS: Before the break, we talked with Shannon and Paul Morell about their new book "Misconception". The Michigan parents went to a fertility specialist only to find out that Shannon's embryos were implanted into another woman. The two couples in the story worked through a very difficult situation. Logan was born, he's now seven months old and he's doing very well.

But if you decide to seek fertility help, what are your rights and how are you protected? Let's bring in Dr. Jamie Grifo, he's the program director at NYU Medical Center's Fertility Center and attorney Paul Callan.

So Jamie, how common is something like this or how rare is it?

DR. JAMIE GRIFO, DIRECTOR, NYU FERTILITY CENTER: Fortunately, it's incredibly rare. But we can't tolerate these kinds of errors.

Probably there's been several million IVF cycles and this is the third case that I am aware of where the wrong embryos were transferred. But even one in a million is too is one too many.

ROBERTS: Yes.

GRIFO: We have to be careful.

ROBERTS: So what are the checks and balances that typically a clinic like yours would go through to ensure that even if people have the same last name, this case both turned out that they had the last name, Savage, to prevent a mistake like this from happening?

GRIFO: Well, there are several elements to it, one is the identification needs to be precise, it needs to be repeatable. And you can't have human error get in the way. So you have a label that has husband's name, wife's name, social security, date of birth and then you engage the patient in seeing what the material is that you're transferring. Have them look at the page, have them sign off that this is them.

And then have two embryologists check the dish to make sure you've got the right dish. And then with those checks and balances, this case wouldn't have happened in our lab. And in fact we've done about 18,000 procedures with no errors. But this is my biggest nightmare.

ROBERTS: But that's what --

GRIFO: Yes.

ROBERTS: -- you're biggest nightmare.

GRIFO: Yes, I lose sleep weeks after one of these cases just thinking about the possibility. It's terrifying.

ROBERTS: So Paul, in terms of legal recourse, the Morells told -- they felt like they were powerless because this woman could have aborted the baby at any moment even just by stopping the progesterone shots as I said before the break. And could they have made a case in the State of Ohio to keep the child?

PAUL CALLAN, ATTORNEY: Well, you know, this case really puts a spotlight on the fact that it is the Wild West in terms of laws relating to this. The law hasn't kept up with this new technology. And frankly, many of the states -- some of the states prohibit it, gestational contracts. Some of them permit it; 34 states. It's a mixed bag; so it's a very, very mixed legal picture.

But I think the rule you can take away in most all cases is, if there is a genetic connection to the child, the person with the genetic connection will have visitation rights. However, in a situation like this, where the birth mother actually had no genetic connection, she is still going to have the right to participate in parenting if she wants to or, of course, she could abort the child.

ROBERTS: You know, we have seen some cases before in the state of New York where surrogate parents do -- are awarded rights. But in the case of it being a tragic mistake like this, does that change the law at all?

CALLAN: Well, you know cases are looked at on a case by case basis. But frankly, if this case were looked at by a judge, he would have a really, really hard time with it. Common sense says since the Savage woman had no genetic connection, why should she have any parenting rights?

But on the other hand, she gave birth to the child. She is a traditional mother and maybe she bonded with the fetus. So I think, in the end, the court could have said she would get custody and the Morells will get visitation. It could have played out that way. It's really, really hard to say.

GRIFO: Yes. I mean I think there are issues with the law and the technology has been ahead of the law.

ROBERTS: How much ahead of the law?

GRIFO: Well, you know, a few steps; the law is catching up. But to use the analogy Wild West, implies that us, physicians, are robbers and bandits trying to do bad things. We are out there trying to help patients. We're not trying to create problems. We're trying to solve problems. We are trying to help people build families.

ROBERTS: There are some bad people out there though. For example the fellow to implanted the octomom with way too many embryos.

GRIFO: Well, in real life, there is always going to be the bad guy. But I think in general the specialty is trying to help people build families and without it, this couple wouldn't have children.

CALLAN: Oh, I agree with the doctor completely. The Wild West is not the doctors here; the Wild West is the legal system, which, from state to state, has different sets of rules. I know doctors are struggling with this. And I think it is time for the law to catch up and get a uniform approach.

ROBERTS: But the question here Jamie is that most of these IVF clinics, I think the entire industry is pretty much self-regulating. The governing body kind of hands down guideline but --

GRIFO: That's the myth about it. We are the most highly- regulated specialty in medicine. We have the CDC; we have SART. We have the FDA.

ROBERTS: Well, self-policing I think is what I really --

GRIFO: Yes, well, there is a lot of self-policing as there should be because you know what, we are better than the regulators anyway. We know more and we can pick up things better. And as a specialty, we have done a good job.

But we are the most highly regulated. We have the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology. I mean there are multiple levels. The New York State Department of Health, they are in our labs, they're inspecting us. They're investigating us. (INAUDIBLE) We are highly regulated. Regulation will not get rid of human error.

ROBERTS: Now certainly, you know, any IVF clinic gets its fair share of lawsuits. And I know that you have been dealing with this too over the course of your career. But Paul, anyone who runs into any problem with an IVF procedure, what's the first thing you think they should do?

CALLAN: Well, I think you should consult with an attorney and find out what the laws are in your particular state and then get an attorney into the negotiation process right away. And this is not so much negotiating with the clinic or the doctors; it may very well be negotiating with the gestational mother to ensure that if the child and the embryo is, in fact, yours, that you can work out an agreement that you will, in fact, get legal custody of the child. And I also think, John, the other thing in this area legally that is so bizarre and why we need laws in this in area -- for instance if you have a donated egg and by a couple -- fertilized egg and they get divorced. The mother then goes on, remarries and gives birth to the child. Does the former husband have to pay child support?

There are actually ABA standards -- the ABA has issued a model code to deal with such problems as that.

GRIFO: But we have been very pre-empted in those cases. We always have a custodial agreement about what to do in certain events. When patients freeze embryos, that very scenario is brought in. So we have a written legal agreement before we even freeze embryos in that case to avoid conflict.

ROBERTS: Certainly, there are a lot of issues out there. It's becoming more and more common as people wait longer to have children. So we'll be seeing a lot more of this.

Paul Callan, Dr. Jamie Grifo, great to see you this morning. Thanks for coming in.

CALLAN: Nice to be with you Jack.

ROBERTS: Two minutes now to the top of the hour. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: Well, that's going to do it for us. Thanks so much for joining us today on AMERICAN MORNING. We'll see you back here bright and early tomorrow.

Meanwhile, special coverage of President Obama's Supreme Court pick is coming up next.

ROBERTS: With Kyra Phillips in the "CNN NEWSROOM".