Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

GOP Presidential Candidates React to Supreme Court Decision on Same-Sex Marriage. Aired 11:30a-12:00p ET.

Aired June 26, 2015 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: She's getting a lot of reaction from more than a dozen republican presidential candidates. Dana, how are they reacting to this historic landmark United States Supreme Court decision?

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's very interesting because to a candidate, they're also far saying that they oppose the decision, but the big divide is what they want to do about it. And when it comes to Jeb Bush, when it comes to Lindsey Graham, they're very much saying, "You know what, everybody? Let's move on."

In fact, I just got a statement from Governor Bush's office saying that he does not believe amending the constitution is the right course. And the reason why that is key is because that is already the developing divide within the republican field, whether or not that you should push forward and say, "You know what? We have to start a movement to have a constitutional amendment to reaffirm states' rights to decide whether or not same-sex marriage should be legal."

Governor Walker has done that. Mike Huckabee and others already on the 2016 front, but again you have the Jeb Bushes and the Lindsey Grahams of the world saying that's just kind of a losing battle. It's futile. Let's move on. And there's a term that we're hearing a lot more about from those kinds of republicans, religious liberty. Religious liberty is the new catchphrase in that sort of wing of the republican party, Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes, the Governor Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida, the republican presidential candidate, his statement said, "Guided by my faith, I believe in traditional marriage. I believe the Supreme Court should have allowed the states to make this decision." You're getting more reaction, Jeff Zeleny, what are you hearing?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: No question, Dana is absolutely right about this. I mean, the idea of what happens now is going to play out in this republican presidential primary campaign. And so interestingly that it's happening in Iowa and New Hampshire. Those are two states that have allowed gay marriage for several years.

So these feelings are very raw in those states. So interesting that Scott Walker is now saying that he is calling for a constitutional amendment. Of course, he's the governor of Wisconsin. Just a couple of years ago he said he did not believe that was necessary.

So that is the divide we're going to see in this party right now between, as Dana said, Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham and others. And as the social conservatives in Iowa and some of New Hampshire, South Carolina, of course these early voting states that are going to decide this.

So republicans now are very slow to react to this overall, but they're going to see how these issues play out. Well, this could be a very dangerous move politically speaking for some of these republican candidates in the general election because there's no question about it. You talk to senior republicans, republicans throughout the party. This is a settled political issue in the long-term. But in the short term, how these candidates play it in those states of Iowa and New Hampshire, is the open question.

BLITZER: It's a good point. I want to go to Michelle Kosinski, our White House correspondent. Michelle, for the second day in a row, the president of the United States welcomed a historic Supreme Court decision. And now the White House is taking more action, right?

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Right. I mean, they clearly see this as a victory for equality. And sometimes the White House waits a little while to put out a statement, to craft the perfect statement, or wait until they can organize an appearance like this one here in the Rose Garden.

But today on this issue, we saw the president almost immediately tweet that this is another step on our march to equality. He added a hashtag of Love Wins. And look at the Facebook page, the background for that, the twitter page with a rainbow White House.

I mean, clearly they had this prepared in advance ready to go. But they want to put that symbol out there. Even the president using the word "Love" in a hashtag. We heard him use that in the Rose Garden probably at least ten times. And that's something that we've heard from the administration on this issue.

Even though it hasn't been a big push when they've been talking about equality, they always say equality based on who you love. Wolf?

BLITZER: Michelle standby. I want to go to Brianna Keilar. Brianna, you're getting a lot of reaction from the democratic presidential candidates, all of whom clearly are welcoming this Supreme Court decision.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN SENIOR POLITCAL CORRESPONDENT: Very much so, Wolf. And let's start with Hillary Clinton. She tweeted out, "Proud to celebrate a historic victory for marriage equality and the courage and determination of LGBT Americans who made it possible." She also tweeted out a map with no states highlighted. It really all states highlighted saying that this is her new favorite map where states, where marriage equality are law. We also heard of course from Bernie Sanders who is commending

this equal justice under law saying that is engraved upon the building of the Supreme Court and endorsing the court's decision. And then we also heard from Martin O'Malley, former governor of Maryland, also saying that the court made the right decision.

But you know, Wolf, this is an issue that democrats are certainly through a political frame excited about for 2016 because this is something that revs up their base. This is something that really revs up millennials, whether LGBT supporters and donors or you're talking about young, straight voters.

[11:35:00]

This is where they are moving. And you're talking about millennials. They're a huge population group. This is the new baby boomer generation. There are so many of them. And democrats are really hoping to harness that energy.

But it's also really interesting to point out, Wolf, just how recently the shift has come in democratic politics on this issue. Hillary Clinton, only two years ago, endorsing same-sex marriage following President Obama by about a year or so. And so, this is something that certainly, you would even say, democrats have very much lagged behind public opinion on this. But looking towards 2016, they think this is something that's a bit of a litmus test for a number of voters and that that's going to work to their advantage over republicans.

BLITZER: All right. Excellent. Well-said. Jake Tapper, it's really fascinating, it's really fascinating right now when you think back the decisive vote on the United States Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy who was, of course, nominated by Ronald Reagan to be on the Supreme Court, he says that gay Americans have equal right to get married. He says they're not condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization's oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The constitution grants them this right. Powerful words from Justice Kennedy.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And I was just talking with my legal team, Wolf, about how important this decision is. Neal Katyal, former acting solicitor general for the Obama administration, you say that this is going to be one of a handful of decisions that in hundreds of years they will be talking about.

NEAL KATYAL, FORMER ACTING SOLICITOR GENERAL: Yes. So, I mean, forget about the 2004, that you know, referenda, forget about presidential politics, forget about all of that. This is one of the handful of Supreme Court decisions in American history that hundreds of years from now people are going to be talking about.

This is like Brown versus Board of Education. This is a huge landmark decision written by Justice Kennedy saying that gays and lesbians are equal citizens under the law, and have all rights and benefits. They are Americans. TAPPER: And Jonathan Turley, you've been making the point that

not all of the legal dissents in this opinion are dissents because people oppose homosexuality, but I have to say some of the language being used by Justice Scalia, he at one point is talking about intimacy and whether the freedom of intimacy is part of the right of marriage. And then he says, "Ask a hippie."

JONATHAN TURLEY, LAW PROFESSOR GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: Yes, I mean, there was that sort of "get off my lawn" rhetoric that is unfortunate, but I think that what you have to recognize is that many of the people, including the justices on this court, are talking about something that is a good faith opposition to the court playing a role in a divisive political question.

What Justice Scalia talked about is we're not a super legislature; this belongs to the American people. But on the other hand there are very few of these moments, fewer than you would think, of this transcendent time when the court steps forward and says "Enough," that the touchstone of the United States remains equality and we're not going to wait any longer. Remember, you would need to remember, Kennedy has written a series of decisions where he stopped dead right before reaching same-sex marriage.

TAPPER: Right, there was decriminalizing homosexual sex. There was undermining parts of the Defense of Marriage Act leading up. It's almost all been like a very conscious path to today.

TURLEY: That's right. That's part of the incrementalist aspect of the court. But time has run out for those five justices. They're saying enough. That we're talking about something that is the thing that defines us. That's equality. The people on those stairs and those steps are American citizens and they want something that really all Americans want, recognition of loving relationships.

And you're right Justice Scalia really comes out and says, "I don't see this as a right. What is this thing of intimacy? Where do you find it in the constitution?" But five other justices had no problem finding it in the constitution.

TAPPER: Yes. Jeffrey Toobin, we were talking earlier about the fact that the debate over same-sex marriage is not going away. We already have one presidential candidate, if not more on the republican side, calling for a constitutional amendment to undo what happened. And then obviously there are other fights. What do you see when you look into the future?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think it's important to remember on this day that gay rights is celebrated, that in about 30 states in the United States, an employer can walk up to an employee and say, you know, you are doing a great job and you're very good at your work, but you're gay and you're fired because of that. And that's legal.

That is legal in many, many states in this country because the United States congress has failed to pass anti-discrimination law expanding gender, race, to sexual orientation. And only some states have passed laws that say you can't discriminate against gay people in employment. And I think that is certainly one of the next fights that will be heard both in congress and around the country.

[11:40:00]

So on this day, when we celebrate or many people celebrate how much the country has changed, it's worth remembering that legal equality does not apply in all areas. It applies now in marriage, but people who support gay rights have plenty of more work to do.

TAPPER: The lead plaintiff in this case is a man named Jim Obergefell from Cincinnati, Ohio. He was suing the state of Ohio because his same-sex marriage, which took place in Maryland, was not recognized in Ohio.

Just a few minutes ago, CNN was right next to him as he received a phone call from President Obama congratulating him. Let's replay that remarkable moment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, US PRESIDENT: Hi. Is this Jim?

JIM OBERGEFELL, LEAD PLAINTIFF: Yes it is, Mr. President.

PRES. OBAMA: Jim, when I saw you that we were going to be hoping for some good news. And we did. I just want to say congratulations.

OBERGEFELL: Thank you so much, sir. I think it was your wishes.

PRES. OBAMA: You know, your leadership on this, you know, has changed the country.

OBERGEFELL: I really appreciate that, Mr. President. It's really been an honor for me to be involved in this fight and to have been able to, you know, fight for my marriage and live up to my commitments to my husband. So I appreciate everything you've done for the LGBT community and it's really an honor to have become part of that fight.

PRES. OBAMA: Well, we're really proud of you. And you know, just know that, you know, not only have you been a great example for people but you're also going to bring about a lasting change in this country. And it's pretty rare where that happens. So I couldn't be prouder of you and your husband. God bless you.

OBERGEFELL: Thank you, sir. That means an incredible amount to me. And, yes, thank you.

PRES. OBAMA: All right. Take care.

OBERGEFELL: Thanks for the call, Mr. President.

PRES. OBAMA: OK. Bye-bye.

OBERGEFELL: Bye. (END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: If the lead plaintiff Jim Obergefell seems remarkably sympathetic, his story remarkably compelling, we were just discussing - that's often not an accident. People looking to change laws, trying to find the best argument for their case.

TURLEY: That's right. I mean, he's really the entire package here, you know. He's got a very touching story that brings to the forefront the human cost of these laws. He's also very articulate. And he's also someone that conveys a certain earnest quality. He's not here to showboat. He's deeply moved by being a part of this.

And so it's a perfect person to put forward, not that the other ones are not equally compelling. But as lead counsel, you often do look at who can stand in front of the light and best represent the issues in your case. And he is ideal in my view.

TAPPER: Because you're not only trying to win over a swing justice like Anthony Kennedy, Neal, but you're also trying to win over the public who might find somebody from Ohio who is well spoken and refers to himself as a taxpayer more identifiable, more relatable, more compelling than somebody who might be less so.

KATYAL: Yes, and as a litigator, that's exactly what you're trying to do, trying to find the most sympathetic plaintiff. And particularly, this kind of case, this is like a family law case. This is the thing that this court as opposed to local courts finds the most uncomfortable. They hate this stuff. It's too emotionally laden for them. And sitting in the court today, unlike any other Supreme Court handout I've ever seen, there were not dry eyes in that courtroom. I mean, even though they're reading sober legal language, this is emotional, this is gut wrenching stuff.

TAPPER: Well, you were there.

KATYAL: Yes.

TAPPER: Tell me what you saw because we're not allowed to bring cameras into the courtroom. It's still a rather opaque institution. People were crying?

KATYAL: Yes, I mean, the Chief Justice began the session by saying, "Justice Kennedy has the opinion on Obergefell." And Justice Kennedy started reading in a very sober, even-handed kind of way but you could tell within a couple of minutes where this decision was going. And there were tears. In fact, at one point, someone clapped toward the end of it. That's, you know...

TAPPER: Generally a no-no.

KATYAL: It generally gets you thrown out of the court. But boy, I mean, it was really, really emotionally powerful. That's why you want the right set of plaintiffs because this is so personal. This isn't like some dry area of bankruptcy law or something like that. This is one of the most profound decisions we make as an individual, as a country, how do we treat the set of discriminations.

TAPPER: In fact Jim Obergefell telling our own Pamela Brown, what, I think a lot of us were thinking, that - when she asked him "What do you think about the fact that your name is now going to be up there with Brown and Brown versus Board of Education," et cetera.

[11:45:00]

He said a lot of people are going to have to learn to spell and pronounce his name, which we've all been struggling with, including President Obama. Is it important when you pick a case to say this person might help me win it? This person, I don't know if it's as compelling, I don't know if he or she is as compelling?

TURLEY: Well, frankly, you do. You have multiple plaintiffs. You have to look at someone who can withstand the heat of the lights, having lots of people asking their stories, someone who has the strength of personality to convey it. You'll notice a very big difference in how the court treats the gay community in this decision. If you go back to the Hardwick decision...

TAPPER: What's the Hardwick decision?

TURLEY: Infamous. It was an infamous decision where the court voted 5 to 4 to uphold the criminalization of homosexual relations.

TAPPER: When was this?

TURLEY: This was back in 1986. And that was the case where Powell said he never met a gay person. But if you really...

TAPPER: He said that to a closeted gay person?

TURLEY: That's right. His clerk was gay. And, but you see how that opinion just sort of monolithic image of the gay community that comes out. And how much we've changed. Now the court talks about these are people with children, these are people who have lost loved ones in one state, people who have married in another, they're no longer this monolithic group. They're human beings.

And so you want to pick someone that really conveys that, that these are individual people that are suffering from these laws in very real way. And I think that they succeeded in doing that, not just necessarily plaintiff. But throughout the filings, they came back to the court, trying to put a face on these rights. It's not an abstraction anymore.

KATYAL: That's right. It's not just about the plaintiff, Jim Obergefell. It's about the way in which the gay and lesbian community litigated this whole thing, putting human faces, bringing families, bringing partners into the discussion and throughout the country. And that's really - I think the Supreme Court decision itself recognized that, that really we now have a profound change over the last 10, 20 years in which now people have come out and we understand them to be just like us. TAPPER: And I think that is one of the biggest changes we were

talking earlier about how in 2004 President George W. Bush won re- election in part by drumming up people to get to the polls, by rallying in the polls to vote against same-sex marriage.

One of the architects of that was Ken Mehlman who was at the time in the closet is now out a gay man lobbying for same-sex marriage. Those kinds of changes, people coming out of the closet, whether it's Vice President Cheney's daughter or the former director of the Republican National Committee or whomever, that changes opinions. Because then people think, "Oh, I know gay people. I didn't think I did."

TURLEY: In reality, it shouldn't, right? It shouldn't. It shouldn't have taken Justice Powell to meet a gay person to be able to understand the pain. It shouldn't require a politician's son or daughter to be gay in order for them to re-evaluate it, but those types of divisions now are in the past. I mean, the court here has this transcendent moment for everyone that says we need to recognize that these people have equal rights, that they love each other and that they have a right for that love to be recognized in a marriage license.

And you know, as we talked about the cases in the past, there aren't that many cases where the court has led the country on a divisive political question. But when it has, those have tended to be the legacy of the court, the ones that last.

KATYAL: The reason we had a transcendent moment today is precisely because of this change in the social attitudes over the last 20 years. It's unthinkable even 10 years ago or 20 years ago when we were in school together, that the Supreme Court would announce a decision like this, or that the president of the United States would call a gay man on the steps of the Supreme Court. This is a profound change in our lifetimes. Today's decision is one that will be remembered for generations.

TAPPER: All right. Wolf Blitzer, back to you.

BLITZER: Thanks very much. The president of the United States warmly, warmly, very enthusiastically applauding this decision by the United States Supreme Court. What a day it is for the president. He's now getting ready to fly to Charleston, South Carolina, to participate in the funeral of the Reverend Clementa Pinckney who was murdered last week.

Look at live pictures coming in from the procession. This funeral just beginning to get under way. Gloria Borger, John King, you know, you think about the emotional ride that the president and so many other millions of Americans are going through now on this issue of same-sex marriage, gay marriage now going to be legal in all 50 states, and now the president's going to be preparing to eulogize the Reverend Pinckney who was so brutally, together with eight other wonderful people, massacred last week in a church, a historically African-American church in Charleston. GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: I think it just sort

of opens a public window into what the president of the United States deals with on a seesaw every day. I mean, we had this morning, we had terror attacks, right, in Tunisia.

[11:50:00]

You have to deal with that. You have a ruling from the Supreme Court that he was thrilled about. Another one yesterday he was thrilled about. But a massive shooting at home just last week now having to be the pastor in chief here at a memorial service that, of course, he never wanted to be at, Wolf, much more memorialize somebody he knew, respected, and go to a community that is in grief like that. This is, you know, this is part of the role of the president to be a pastor today.

BLITZER: Hold on for a moment. Victor Blackwell is there outside the church on the scene for us. This funeral - the entire service is only now, Victor, just beginning.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, really just beginning, Wolf. And we obtained a copy of the program. And there are more than two dozen members of clergy, politicians, friends, relatives who are playing some role in this formal service here today at the arena.

For what we know, the capacity inside for a normal event is at about 5,100 with the added seats on the floor, a few additional hundred people can be there. But what we saw outside, thousands of people turned away, for wanting to be part of this service to pay their respects to Clementa Pinckney. People still here hoping they can get inside. Unfortunately that's not going to happen.

But, you know, what we heard from Congressman Clyburn this morning, Wolf, in his conversations with the president, was that the president was going to deliver a very personal eulogy, that he sees coming back here, coming back to his people not in a racial context but in 2008 during the campaign a really connecting not only with the people of Mother Emanuel but personally with Pastor Pinckney.

BLITZER: You know, it's amazing when you think about what's going on the stage, John King. There's this very, very powerful moment for the next several hours, this funeral that's going to be taking place in Charleston, South Carolina.

Thousands of people have been gathering there and millions of people will be watching here in the United States, indeed around the world. We'll have live coverage of that especially the president's eulogy. But it comes on the heels of this historic decision in the United States Supreme Court.

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And so the president just had a celebration in the Rose Garden saying that on an issue in which he has evolved in recent years, he now believes this is a great civil rights victory. He had a celebration yesterday when his health care law was upheld by the Supreme Court. He celebrates a great civil rights victory today. Now he's going to eulogize the pastor and, as you mentioned, the eight other victims in a church, that if you remember after this horrible tragedy, we were reminded of the history of this church, the pictures of Dr. King visiting this church in its role in a much longer march towards civil rights.

It'll be very interesting to see, as Gloria knows, this is a test of the diversity of the presidency. The different challenges and the different ways a president has to communicate with the country. The president is going to make this personal. Remember, he came out after and said "I would still like to have some new gun laws. In the next breadth, more or less, and I know I don't have the votes."

Speaker Boehner will be there. A large republican delegation will be there. This is a very interesting moment, a month from now, will this remarkable week in the Obama presidency have lasting power in his influence? A month from now, will people be back to saying he's a lame duck? And we're focused on the presidential campaign or is there something else going on in him that allows him, maybe not legislatively, but morally, bully pulpit-wise, to do something in the final year and a half of his presidency? I don't know.

But I do think it's a fascinating moment. This has changed, this is another - we're talking about change this week, in the wake of this decision, which is a landmark hundreds of years from now they will talk about. I don't know how long lasting this other change is but you have democrats and republicans who don't talk to each other in South Carolina to mourn this tragedy.

You have whites and blacks in South Carolina of both parties who don't often congregate together, coming together to say let's do something. You have both politically and in the corporate sphere this reaction to take down the confederate flag, to get it out of the marketplace, to get it off the public grounds. Where will we be in this conversation a month from now? We don't know. But it's fascinating.

BLITZER: Gloria, again, A Ronald Reagan appointed Supreme Court justice who is the decisive vote in favoring equal rights for gay Americans.

BORGER: Equal rights and, you know, a civil rights moment, you know, 14th amendment, equal protection clause under the constitution. A great civil rights moment. This decision will be hailed as a civil rights decision. And yet, on the flip side of that, a white supremacist goes and, you know, shoots up people in a bible study in a church and you see the struggle for civil rights still continuing in Charleston, South Carolina, and elsewhere in this country. Race has become such a huge issue.

[11:55:00]

So you know, you see the diversity, not only as John was saying the president's job, but of the continuing struggle in this country as it evolves in every way.

KING: And how much of the tone of that conversation will be civil and polite on issues of which people disagree. The flag and gay marriage and how much it will become contentious. One other quick point, this court case has roots in Ohio. The republican convention next year is in Ohio. And there are a lot of republicans, the establishment in particular, who want to strip from the republican platform its opposition to same-sex marriage.

They believe today they gained the upper hand in that fight to take it out. But trust me, I'm getting conversation from social conservatives who say that battle will continue in Ohio.

BLITZER: Very quickly, S.E. Cupp, has it hit you? I know you're a big supporter for equal rights for gay Americans. Has it hit you that two men who love each other, two women who love each other, want to get married, they will now be able to get married in all 50 states?

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I mean, just watching Jim Obergefell, I mean, he is not a political person, he is a human being, he is the perfect face of this. I've written recently about the gay rights movement and sort of the wrong ways to go about this, right? And this is the absolute right way to go about this, putting someone throughout with a human story who's going to tell the human story of their husband, loss, just wanting recognition.

Those are the ways you change hearts and minds. Look, I don't believe the government should be in the business of marriage. But if it is, it certainly should not pick winners and losers when it comes to tax exemptions, benefits, et cetera. And so on that principle, this is a huge, huge victory I think for all Americans and for everyone who loves the institution of marriage.

I recently got married and had a kid and it's the greatest thing that's ever happened to me so I'm thrilled my friends get to experience that as well.

BLITZER: S.E., thanks very much. We're going to continue our special coverage on this, what's going on in Charleston, the terror attacks on three continents that have occurred today. Much more coming up with Ashleigh Banfield and Legal View right after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)