Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

Trump Says He'll Have A Supreme Court Nominee Next Week And His Pick Will Be A Woman; Supreme Court Fight Highlights U.S. Senate Races In Arizona, Iowa, Maine And South Carolina; Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Death Could Reshape Senate Races Across U.S. Aired 9-10p ET

Aired September 19, 2020 - 21:00   ET

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

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: President Trump moving quickly to name a nominee to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court following the death of the late -- last night, I should say, of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, saying that he'll make his choice next week, and that he'll choose a woman and sounding more definite about it at his campaign rally in North Carolina tonight.

[21:00:15]

And he did just a few hours earlier as he was leaving the White House on his way to that rally. I want you to take a look at it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman. It will be a woman.

I could see most likely, it would be a woman, yes. I think I can say that. It would be a woman. If somebody were to ask me now, I would say that a woman would be in first place. Yes, the choice of a woman, I would say, would certainly be appropriate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: From, more than likely than it will be a woman. The president also saying that once he makes his choice, he expects the confirmation process in the Senate to move quickly.

the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell vowing that the president's nominee will get a vote, but Democrats will try to stop that.

More tonight from Senior Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): This decision ought to be made by the next president.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That was Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell then when Barack Obama was president in 2016 with a vacancy on the Supreme Court. But times have changed, and so as the president.

MCCONNELL: I would fill it.

RAJU: Republican leaders are plotting a full-throated effort to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat with the election just 45 days away, trying to make the argument it's different now because Republicans control both the White House and the Senate.

Privately, McConnell and Trump speaking about potential nominees on Friday night, and the GOP leader, in a message to his colleagues, urging them to keep your powder dry and not take a position on whether the winner of the November election should be the one filling the vacancy left by the death of Ginsburg.

On Saturday, Senator Susan Collins of Maine facing the toughest re- election of her career, breaking ranks, saying, the decision of a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court should be made by the president who is elected on November 3rd. But with the 53/47 majority, Democrats need a total of four Republicans to vote no and stop the nomination.

GOP Senator Lisa Murkowski, before Ginsburg's death, made clear she did not want to move ahead on any vacancy before November. And it's unclear if two other Republicans will agree.

Privately, top Republicans are arguing that a Supreme Court fight will only boost their chances at holding the Senate majority in November and several Republicans in difficult races are indicating they'll vote to confirm Trump's nominee this year, even though some endangered Republicans, like North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis, took the opposite position in 2016.

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): We're going to let the American people speak.

RAJU: Yet, moving ahead before November could squeeze Republicans, like Cory Gardner, running for re-election in Democratic-leaning Colorado. Gardner's office did not respond to questions about whether the winner of November's elections should make the hugely consequential pick.

It typically takes between two to three months to confirm a Supreme Court nominee, meaning, it would be much faster than usual to approve a replacement before November. Yet, if a vote slips until after the November elections during the lame-duck session of Congress, there's another complication if Arizona's appointed senator, Martha McSally, loses in November. That would mean that Democrat Mark Kelly could be sworn in by the end of that month, bringing the GOP majority down to 52-48.

So McConnell has little margin for error and several senators are uncommitted, like Utah's Mitt Romney and some senators in the past have been wary about an election year confirmation, like Senator Chuck Grassley, who, as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, refused to hold hearings for Obama's nominee in 2016. He told CNN in July --

SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY (R-IA): If I were chairman of the committee, I couldn't move forward with it.

RAJU: On Saturday, his office declined to say if that is still his position. Others have clearly shifted theirs, including Lindsey Graham, who now chaired the Judiciary Committee and said this in 2016.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination. And you could use my words against me.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: Now, Don, Lindsey Graham says things have changed since his previous comments and he's pointing, in particular, to what happened to Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, that Supreme Court fight, he says he now views this situation differently.

But if the Republicans do move ahead, Democrats themselves are warning that they might retaliate in certain ways, potentially even trying to move legislation next year if they take the Senate majority to expand the Supreme Court, add more seats on the Supreme Court. They would potentially have to remove the Senate filibuster rules to do just that.

That would have dramatic ramifications on the Senate itself.

[21:05:01]

But on a conference call with Senate Democrats earlier this afternoon, Chuck Schumer said that nothing is off the table, and Dick Durbin, the Senate Democratic leader said tonight, that all options are being reviewed. Don?

LEMON: Manu, thank you very much. I appreciate that.

A lot to discuss with CNN's Senior Political Reporter, Nia-Malika Henderson, our Senior Political Analyst, Kirsten Powers, and Political Commentator, Matt Lewis.

Matt, it's been a long time, hello one and all. It's good to see all of you.

Nia, let's start with you. If we thought that this election was already chaotic, the next 45 days are really going to be next-level. What are you expecting in this political fight ahead?

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: Yes, the Supreme Court moves front and center. We thought in many ways this would be about COVID. Now, it's going to be about this fight. I think you're going to see the lines drawn in real contrast between the parties. Arguments about what the Supreme Court should do, arguments about abortion, our rights, whether or not they should be preserved or rolled back, arguments about the ACA, as well.

So, again, this was something that was unexpected coming right in the middle of this already contentious and toxic and sort of base-heavy campaign. You're going the see both of these sides, try to jazz up their bases. You know, there's all sorts of arguments about whether or not this

favors Republicans, whether or not it favors Democrats. I think in many ways, it jazzes up both bases who now are focused on the Supreme Court, particularly Democrats, who haven't been focused as laser-like on the Supreme Court as Republicans have in the past.

Now you have them really focused on this. And I think you're going to see real sharp arguments from both sides about why the Supreme Court matters.

LEMON: And, Nia, I think this is going to be -- this is huge. This adds another gigantic story and throws a wrench into this election, but COVID will certainly be on the ballot, as well, and people will be paying attention to that. It's important to a lot of Americans.

Matt, you find yourself agreeing with President Trump that this process should move forward without delay. And you say elections have consequences.

MATT LEWIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That's right, Don. So, for me, as a never-Trump conservative, I don't like Trump, but I'm still a conservative. And so test I ask myself is like, if Marco Rubio were doing this, would I support it? And I would. I think that, look, the president is duly elected and the Senate has the responsibility to do it -- give advice and consent and to confirm nominees.

So this is an entirely legitimate process. Presidents are elected. They get to pick Supreme Court nominees. The current Senate gets to at least try to confirm this nominee. And I'll say, look, Donald Trump has done a lot of things I don't like. He's been pretty good about picking Supreme Court justices.

So I think if you're a conservative -- no, if you're a progressive, obviously, you shouldn't like this. If you're a conservative, we've already -- look, we've had to take all the bad parts of Donald Trump. This is the good -- something good that could come from it. And so that's why I think it's maybe, again, a tragic event, but in terms of Donald Trump's legacy, and this may be what it comes down to, I see it as a net positive.

LEMON: But having said all of that, Matt, and you and I have been on the show and we have debated back and forth and you have criticized the president numerous times for being a hypocrite, and you're cool with the total hypocrisy that we're now seeing from the GOP? What about Merrick Garland?

LEWIS: Well, look, Don, there is no doubt that it's hypocritical. I mean, you could look, you can play back the clips of Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell saying, we're not going to -- you know, we shouldn't do this during an election year or the new president should be the one to make the pick, or that's what Democrats will say. I think on both sides, actually, you could show some hypocrisy. There is no doubt that Republicans are hypocrites on this issue. So I would ding them on

that. But for me, the question is does a dually elected president have the right to nominate somebody if there is a vacancy, and he does, and does the Senate have the right to confirm that person? And so I --

LEMON: Listen, I agree with, they do have the right. Hold on, yes, you can. But I just want to ask you, was your stance in 2016, Matt, about Merrick Garland?

LEWIS: In 2016, I basically thought that Mitch McConnell was playing hardball, I thought it was unchivalrous, but I also thought that it was probably smart. In fact, I think you can make a pretty good argument that the reason Donald Trump won the election in 2016 --

LEMON: Matt, you sound like the people you criticize for -- listen, I agree with you. I think that they have the right, but you sound like the people you criticize for -- for, you know, accepting everything that Donald Trump does. And -- but at what price? So it's the Supreme Court, so the hypocrisy is okay now?

[21:10:01]

LEWIS: I mean, you know --

KIRSTEN POWERS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It's also -- it's not hardball. It's not hardball. So this idea that he's playing hardball, he is not. This is unethical. It's -- hypocrisy, fine, I don't care. Like people in D.C. can be hypocrites, if you want to write that off. The point is the Republicans stole a Supreme Court seat. We need to not lose sight of this. If they move ahead with that they're doing --

LEWIS: That's not true.

POWERS: Yes, it is true.

LEWIS: That's not true.

POWERS: Listen, I sat here and listened to you, now, can you just listen to me? If they go ahead and hold one standard for themselves when Barack Obama is president and hold a different standard when Donald Trump is president, and in both cases end up with a Supreme Court nominee going to the Supreme Court, then they have stolen one seat. That is what has happened.

So the fact that you're defending that they lied, first of all, so you're defending lying. You're defending the fact that Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham --

LEWIS: No, I'm saying Mitch McConnell lied.

POWERS: -- Republicans stood up and lied and said all -- they believed all of these things, it's all on tape, that they are now saying that they don't believe, and are coming up with this bogus explanation because the Senate is in different hands, it's ridiculous. There's nothing.

LEWIS: No, Kirsten -- POWERS: It's like saying it's a full moon and now it's going to be different. I'm still talking. I'm not done.

LEWIS: Well, how long are you going to talk?

LEMON: Let her finish, Matt. Matt, let her finish. Go on.

POWERS: I'm going to finish my point. The point is, it's a completely bogus, ridiculous, gaslighting, made-up thing that because the Senate is in the same hands of the White House and the Senate -- the Senate and the White House are the same parties, it's just completely made- up. I mean, Justice Thomas was confirmed by a Democratic Senate.

LEWIS: No, that's how the Constitution works, Kirsten. No, that's how democracy works. See, when President Obama nominated Merrick Garland --

POWERS: No, it's not. This is how democracy falls apart, Matt. And all you talk about is being a conservative. What about being an American?

LEMON: Yes, go ahead, Matt.

LEWIS: Well, I'm for following the rules. And the rules say when President Obama nominates Merrick Garland, then the Senate gets to decide, first of all, whether they will even entertain this. That has actually happened -- this is not unprecedented. But they could just voted against Merrick Garland.

There's no rule that they have to confirm Barack Obama's nominee. They are dually elected. They have the responsibility in our government to advicee -- provide advice and consent, and that's what they did and that's what they're doing.

POWERS: Yes, and what do they typically do?

LEWIS: We may not like it, we may think it's unseemly. We may think that the way they handled it was uncool, but this is appropriate in terms of following the Constitution.

POWERS: No, it's not.

LEMON: But they wouldn't even take it for --

POWERS: And it's not how things -- that's not how things have been handled in the past. It's not what happened when there was a Democratic majority in the Senate, when Justice Thomas came up. There are norms and you talk in your column about norms. The people that are busting the norms are the Republicans.

LEMON: Okay, I've got to go.

LEWIS: What about the people that are talking right now --

LEMON: Okay. Matt, thank you. Nia, you and I will just go in the next room. I hate it when mommy and daddy are fighting. Thank you, both, Matt, good luck. POWERS: Thank you.

LEMON: Matt, good luck. I just -- we'll talk about it offline.

All of this is happening in the middle of a pandemic. It's unbelievable, in the middle of what's shaping up to be an epic battle over the Supreme Court. This pandemic is still raging in this country and we're getting closer and closer to the grim milestone, 200,000 coronavirus deaths.

Today, 29 states are trending upward with new cases, a stark difference from the start of the week. And tonight, two very different public gatherings related to other -- to our other big story, a vigil at the Supreme Court, with most participants wearing masks, and the president in North Carolina, his crowded -- his crowd largely mask- less.

So joining me now to discuss this is CNN Medical Analyst, Dr. Jonathan Reiner, he is the director of the Cardiac Catheterization Program at George Washington University Hospital. Thank you for joining us because I think it's important that our viewers know that this is happening in the middle of a pandemic and so much is going on and people are still dying at this point. Yes, it is sad and a huge, major story about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but we are in the middle of a pandemic.

So, Dr. Reiner, when we look at these gatherings, the images we had up on screen, the difference is apparent. Masks, even as all of the upheaval is going on, the pandemic is just raging. So, what do you think -- what happens in this political climate now?

DR. JONATHAN REINER, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST: Well, you have one candidate going about business, understanding the realities that we're in a unique pandemic time, where you can't hold gatherings and you certainly can't meet people without masks. And you have another candidate trying to sell to his supporters that there's nothing to see here, move along. Everything is fine. You don't need to wear a mask, as long as you don't come close to me, as long as you don't touch me.

[21:15:01]

Because as Olivia Troye said this week, the president thinks that's disgusting.

So we have two visions of reality. One is real and one is, as the president likes to call it, fake. But despite that --

LEMON: Go on.

REINER: But despite that, there are 45,000 new cases every day. And that's been flat for the last two months. That hasn't changed. And that's why the mortality rate is going to stay where it is now because we still have 45,000 cases a day, whether the president wants to acknowledge that or not.

LEMON: There were spikes. They're following a trend of post-holiday surges. What is contributing to this, you think?

REINER: Well, some of this may have come about after the Labor Day weekend. We saw this after Memorial Day and after July 4th. Don't forget that colleges are back and we've seen thousands of cases at colleges. And also kids are going back to school. And this is our first experience understanding what happens with community spread, when, in some places, kids go back for in-school. And also, maybe there's some COVID fatigue, where people are just letting down their guard.

The parts of the country that are doing well have remained masked up. You know, walk through the streets of New York. Just about everyone is wearing a mask, similar in D.C. But look in North Carolina, where you see just literally a throng of people without masks on.

LEMON: Yes, you're right, Doctor. I'm walking out and about in New York today and everyone, 99 percent of the people I passed or I came in contact were wearing masks here. Thank you so much, Doctor, I appreciate your time.

REINER: My pleasure.

With the death of justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, what happens to Obamacare? David Axelrod is going to weigh in on that, next.

And the president is promising his Supreme Court nominee next week. We're going to take a look at the names on his list.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:20:00]

LEMON: Republican leaders vowing to push for a vote on the president's nominee to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. The president says he'll make his choice next week. Let's discuss now.

David Axelrod is here. He's a former senior adviser to President Barack Obama.

David, good evening. My, oh, my, what a time we're living in right now.

DAVID AXELROD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Indeed, yes.

LEMON: If Mitch McConnell's plan to replace Justice Ginsburg before Election Day works, you say it will be a tyranny of the minority. Talk to me about that.

AXELROD: Well, I mean, consider this. If he seats another justice on the Supreme Court, we'll now have five justices on the Supreme Court who are chosen by presidents who actually got fewer popular votes than their opponents in the election, George W. Bush in 2000 and now Trump. Bush picked two justices, Trump will have picked three.

They'll also have been confirmed by Senates that represented less than a majority of the country, because that's the way our constitutional system works. Each state gets two senators. But the majority doesn't necessarily represent a majority of the country.

And what you have are justices who don't necessarily reflect the majority view in the country. And, yes, they're supposed to interpret the Constitution, but they come and increasingly, they're screened for their ideological preferences. And so you get a court that's out of sync with a society over which they have so much influence.

And I think that's a very big tension on our democracy.

LEMON: What's the solution?

AXELROD: Well, look, I'm not going to propose a solution, but I'm just underlining the problem. Obviously, people have talked about restructuring the court and so on. I think that discussion is a -- is certainly a premature discussion, but it should be a concern to people.

And, you know, we want people to believe in the legitimacy of the court and we want the court to be a representative court. We want them to follow the Constitution and that we don't want them bringing these huge ideological agendas, you know, into comport with whomever the president was who appointed them. And certainly, we want them to reflect, you know -- we want them to be appointed by presidents who have broad consensus.

So it's -- it's just a big problem. it's not, it is -- it is certainly our constitutional system. Donald Trump got a majority of the electoral votes. George W. Bush got a majority of electoral votes. But it is one of the things that weighs on this sense of tension surrounding our democracy right now.

LEMON: Let's talk about some of the issues at hand, because the Supreme Court hears the Affordable Care Act case in November, during a pandemic. You know, during -- after the election. Whether from the court or the election, Obama's signature achievement is hanging by a thread right now.

AXELROD: Yes, look, first of all, I always reject this notion that it should be discussed as Obama's signature achievement, as if this is somehow an affront to Obama. The fact is 23 million people have health insurance today, health coverage, because of the Affordable Care Act.

I just spoke to someone before I joined you, who was a heart transplant patient, has a daughter who has significant health care problems, and is just completely devastated with the anxiety, wondering now what's going to happen in the courts. The fact is, the fifth circuit, very conservative appeals court circuit, ruled that the mandate was unconstitutional, as part of the Affordable Care Act, and a lower court judge then ruled that that invalidated the whole act.

[21:25:00]

And the administration is supporting this effort to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act, along with some attorney generals around the country. Other attorney generals are fighting it. The Supreme Court is going to hear this. It's scheduled now for November 10th. We don't know, Don, if the Senate will actually confirm a justice by Election Day. I have some doubts as to whether it will happen that quickly. And if it doesn't, then two things can happen. One is that justice will not be seated in time if they approve that justice in a lame-duck session, will not be seated in time to hear the case, and therefore won't rule on the case, or Chief Justice Roberts could defer the case until later, so they could participate. If they don't sit in and they don't participate, then it's a 4-4 -- it could be a 4-4 tie in the court.

Roberts has voted twice to save the Affordable Care Act. If that happens, then the lower court ruling stands and that is a real concern for people who depend on the Affordable Care Act for their coverage.

And, you know, one thing that I think this will do is elevate the issue of health care and what's going to happen to people with pre- existing conditions and there are tens of millions of Americans like that in this campaign.

LEMON: In the campaign, and especially -- and this is all happening -- we have to remember, there is a pandemic. There's a coronavirus that's going on right now. Thank you very much, David. I appreciate it.

AXELROD: Okay, good to see you.

LEMON: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a skill for working with others regardless of party. Retired Justice David Soutor, to the right of Ginsburg, was appointed by President George H.W. Bush. He says Ruth Ginsburg was one of the members of the court who achieved greatness before she became a great justice. I loved her to pieces.

Next, how her loss will affect the court's dynamics for years to come.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:30:00]

LEMON: President Trump saying he'll choose a woman next week as his nominee to fill the vacant seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman. It will be a woman.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So the question is who is on the list.

Joining me now, CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, Laura Coates. Laura, hello to you.

So the president says he wants a woman. There are a couple of women on his list, Amy Coney Barrett, Barbara Lagoa. What do you know about them? LAURA COATES, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, remember, infamously, you had Amy Coney Barrett who, of course, has been a previous Supreme Court clerk, I believe, for Scalia, who is known to be quite conservative and sits on bench right now.

But she had an infamous encounter with, I think, senator from California, Dianne Feinstein, asking if the dogma was strong within her. And people criticized Feinstein believing that that was somehow trying to send a signal that she would be governed by her religious principles as opposed to her judicial objectivity.

And so we already have that battle brewing on the cusp of what we know will be a big fight towards the abortion rights cases, about the reversal of Roe v. Wade, about freedom of religion and exercise, as it relates to the Affordable Care Act and otherwise. You're going to have that battle brewing.

With respect to Lagoa, I believe she was one of the first women on the Florida Supreme Court to be of Cuban decent. And so their track record on both of them seems to be that they are both qualified woman. The problem here, of course, Don, is that when judging qualifications, the fact that they are both women is not the only criteria nor should it be.

The idea that they would be interchangeable with somebody who has such deep roots as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg makes me nervous this is going to be similar to what happened when Justice Thurgood Marshall moved one. And Justice Clarence Thomas, another African-American man, who was ideological foe, was presented as a viable choice and alternative.

LEMON: I think I had it spelled wrong, Lagoa, on my notes. It's Barbara, right? Is that -- yes.

COATES: I believe it's Barbara.

LEMON: Okay, great.

All right, so, listen, a source is telling CNN that the president has said that he would love to pick Judge Amy Coney Barrett. She's a favorite among religious conservatives. What impact could she have on issues like abortion?

COATES: Well, she could have a huge impact if you know, of course, that a lot of the interests in the Roe v. Wade decision lies in the ideas of procreation, it lies in the ideas of religious tenants that are in conflict with the trimester framework that has been laid out through Roe v. Wade and its successive line of case.

The interesting thing, of course, here is that she had been asked previously about this issue several years ago when she was a professor at Notre Dame. And she believed that it would be very difficult, if not, impossible to reverse the standing of Roe v. Wade.

So you've got this sort of a crank in the plans here, a thorn in the side, for those who think she might be a sure shot. It might be that the precedent is way too strong. And the reason for that, of course, is because there is not -- there does not seem to be anything legally speaking that could reverse Roe v. Wade knowing that we have the separation of church and state, if religious doctrine is going to be the guidepost, the First Amendment has some rethinking to do, doesn't it?

LEMON: Yes, absolutely.

So, listen, So Gorsuch replaced Scalia, as a staunch conservative.

[21:35:00]

Kavanaugh replaced Kennedy, a conservative-leaning swing vote. But this type of change would change the court much more dramatically, wouldn't it?

COATES: It absolutely would. You have a very strong and, frankly, one that was going to be, you know, able to exist for quite some time, with a 6-3. Remember, Ginsburg never actually served on a court where there was a liberal majority, so to speak. She was always a part of the underdog class in terms of when it came to the liberals and progressives on the court.

But this made Roberts a very, very powerful figure. You had swing votes with Kennedy and others. But the idea that now, you have Justice Roberts, who was able to be, in many cases, a tiebreaker, somebody who was involved in helping the LBGTQ community able to have the benefit of discrimination laws, the ideas of Trump and his tax returns and financial records, the idea of the Affordable Care Act as well, he was very careful, because there was a moment where he could be the John McCain putting his thumb down and surprising people.

But now, if you have a 6-3 strong majority, well, he becomes less powerful as a swing voter, somebody who could surprise and shake things up. So it will have lasting implications down the road.

And that's why it's going to be very important for this court to figure out, as Roberts has tried to guide in the last year-and-a-half, to figure out whether they want to be viewed as predictably partisan and along these different ideological lines, being able to predict who were the conservatives, who were the liberals, or whether they're going to reinvent themselves in this time or try to dig their heels in about being objective and not being so predictable, so that people are understanding of the impact of when a progressive justice passes, how that could thwart the court's entire composition.

LEMON: Laura Coates, thank you so much.

And don't miss the CNN films documentary, RBG, it's coming up at 10:00, right after this battle.

The Supreme Court battle heating up, several Senate races including Lindsey Graham's. I'm going to talk to his challenger. Jaime Harrison is here, he's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [21:40:00]

LEMON: The death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg putting a spotlight on the divisions in the Senate, turning up the heat in several competitive Senate races across this country, Maine, Arizona, Iowa and South Carolina, all crucial to the balance of power.

In South Carolina, Republican Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham facing a challenge from Democrat Jaime Harrison, and Jaime Harrison joins me now. I appreciate it. How are you doing?

JAIME HARRISON (D), CANDIDATE FOR U.S. SENATE FOR SOUTH CAROLINA: I'm good, Don. How are you?

LEMON: I'm doing well. Thank you so much for joining us.

Let's listen to just one of those times your opponent, Lindsey Graham, said he would not go forward with the Supreme Court pick during an election year. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): And I will tell you this. This may make you feel better, but I really don't care. If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump's term and the primary process has started, we'll wait to the next election.

And I've got a pretty good chance of being --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're on the record.

GRAHAM: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right.

GRAHAM: Hold the tape.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: That's just one of the times. There are others. So, imagine -- or at least one other I know of that is on tape. I imagine you're going to make sure voters in your state see that?

HARRISON: We are, Don. Listen, growing up here in South Carolina, my grandfather used to tell me, he said, Jaime, a man is only as good as his word. And Lindsey Graham gave his word to the people of South Carolina. He gave his word to the nation. And what we are seeing is that this man is trampling all over that. In essence, his word means nothing and that means that Lindsey Graham adds up to much of nothing also.

We need someone who will stand up. There's a precedent that was set in the United States Senate set by Lindsey Graham, a tradition set by Lindsey Graham. He needs to stick up to it. He said that they would not consider a judicial nominee in an election year. People have already started voting, Don, already started voting. And we need to let the people make the decision, just like they did in 2016.

LEMON: Your race has tightened. The latest polls show you tied right now. Do you see the Supreme Court becoming the deciding factor for voters in South Carolina? Could reluctant Graham voters be motivated to back him now, or people come over, because, from your side because they want another conservative jurist?

HARRISON: Well, I think at the end of the day, people want folks who won't lie to them, who will tell them the truth even if they don't like the truth, but will tell it to them. In the latest poll, I was beating Lindsey Graham on the question of honesty. I was plus 24, he was minus nine. It is because he's an -- he's untrustworthy.

And so in the end of the day, I'm going to talk about this, Don. I will -- and I make this promise to the people of South Carolina. I will never lie to you. I will never lie to you. Lindsey Graham, from day one of serving -- serving, has lied to the people of South Carolina. At first, he said that he believed in term limits. And as soon as he enjoyed the wine and cheese in Washington, D.C., he decided to stay a little longer. And now he is lying to them once again. I won't lie to the people of South Carolina.

LEMON: And so if Republicans are able to pull this off, right, are you in favor of expanding the court?

HARRISON: Well, Don, you know, that's a lot of ifs, ands, buts. Listen, at this point in time, the first bridge that we have to cross is whether or not this is allowed to proceed. Whether or not Lindsey Graham will push this nominee through despite what he said and despite the precedent that's in the United States Senate. And once we cross that bridge, we'll look at other things, but this is the first bridge that needs to be crossed right now.

LEMON: All right. Jaime Harrison, thank you so much.

[21:45:00]

Good luck. We appreciate it.

HARRISON: Thank you, Don. Take care now.

LEMON: You know, South Carolina not the only Senate race that's heating up. We're going to take a look at what's going on in Iowa and Arizona, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Several U.S. Senate seats up in the air with a vacant seat on the Supreme Court. CNN's Senior Political Analysts, John Avlon and Ron Brownstein both here. Wait, this is a rematch? Thank you, guys, good to see you.

John, you just heard Jaime Harrison. A poll shows a really tight race with Lindsey Graham in South Carolina. Is this one of several Senate races that has got, listen, a lot more import now? [21:50:01]

Democrats need to win either four or five seats to control the Senate.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes. And, look, there is no way to say which way the momentum from the death Ruth Bader Ginsburg will fall politically. In some way, it's indecent to talk about it.

I will say, as someone who -- South Carolina, my former home state, it is stunning to see Lindsey Graham in a dead heat with Jaime Harrison. You know Mark Kelly is in trouble in Arizona. You know Susan Collins is in trouble. Now, she's trying to put some daylight between her. There are a lot of other folks who are in real trouble.

Republicans have been o defense. And the question will be whether this Supreme Court opening and the strategy motivates Republicans to remember what they're willing to excuse in favor of judges or whether, all of a sudden, for the first time in memory, Democrats start voting on the Supreme Court.

LEMON: Interesting. Go, Ron, you wanted to say something?

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: I was going to say, I think this -- as John said, it is hard to know how this entirely sorts out. But I think this makes it easier for Democrats to get to the brink of a majority and doesn't necessarily make it easier to determine whether it helps them get over.

I mean, there are three states that Republicans are in trouble, Martha McSally in Arizona, Cory Gardner in Colorado and Susan Collins in Maine, where this, I think, is clearly a wind in the sales for Democrats. You don't have a big evangelical Christian population, you do have a lot of suburban white voters, college-educated, and you have a clear pro-choice majority.

But even if they win those three states, assuming they lose Alabama, where this is probably a help for the Republicans, they've got to win one more. And, Don, the politics of this are more ambiguous in those one more. We're talking about, in order, probably North Carolina, Iowa, Georgia, South Carolina. Those are states that do have both substantial suburban populations but also large populations of culturally conservative evangelical Christians. Opinion about abortion is much closer to 50-50 in those states.

So while this does, I think, clearly help Democrats get to the brink, it's to be determined whether it helps them in that last marginal state, which is probably North Carolina, where poll have been leading slightly tonight.

LEMON: John, did you say that Mark Kelly was in trouble?

AVLON: No. I said the opposite. I think Kelly is in arguably the strongest position out of that bunch.

LEMON: I thought that you said that. Because -- let me ask you, because -- let's talk about the Senate race, because it's a lot more interesting now, as you know, a winner there might be eligible to take office as soon as November. And it could be Democrat Mark Kelly. That's why. Talk to me about the possibilities.

AVLON: Yes. So this is a special election, and that makes all the difference in the world. Because right now, Democrats need to peel off four Republican votes in order to block a Supreme Court nominee in this unprecedented scenario. If Kelly gets seated in the special November, they need only three. So that changes the math.

And already, Murkowski has said she's not going to play. Susan Collins is a little murky, but saying she's not likely. We've got other folks who are playing footsy with that position. So the Kelly seat becomes really key if Democrats are going to have a prayer of stopping this jam.

LEMON: Do you think Murkowski is not going to play? I mean, she gave an interview before the death. But she hasn't said that she is not going to.

AVLON: (INAUDIBLE). Ron.

BROWNSTEIN: I think you can imagine, again, three. Collins, I think, was pretty strong today. Maybe he left herself a little wiggle room, but most likely has said, no (ph). You could imagine Romney and Murkowski saying no.

The next round of endangered Republicans electorally, will Cory Gardner take the risk of endangering his post-Senate future since he is so unlikely to win at this point? Thom Tillis is in for doing it in North Carolina. Joni Ernst is certainly going to be in, David Perdue in Georgia.

It may require one of the retiring Republicans, Lamar Alexander, Pat Robertson, leaning on them has not been exactly a sturdy tree for Democrats, but it may require one of them to say no rather than one of the endangered (INAUDIBLE), because one of the dynamics here is this is going to attach the Republicans more closely to Trump's fate. And it is certainly going to be harder for them to run ahead of him.

Conversely, it may be harder for Democrats to win some of these states if Joe Biden does it. And I'm thinking of North Carolina and Iowa, which have been their best chances to win a Senate even if Biden falls just short, the correlation between the Senate and the presidential may get tighter as a result of this kind of issue pushing everybody back to their partisan corners.

But, again, public opinion really closely divided on abortion. Both those states, a slight pro-choice majority in both North Carolina and Iowa, and then you have that whole other issue, which we haven't talked about, of health care. And this really does create a problem for Republicans with pre-existing conditions.

LEMON: I've got 30 seconds because -- go ahead, just respond, please, 30 seconds though, John.

AVLON: Look, we're going to have Obamacare in the Supreme Court the week after the election. Folks might not appreciate this but if it's 4-4 split, it goes back to the lower court decision. The implications of this are huge for the country. The question is who will focus on it and when will they feel the pain? Will they motivate the court back (ph) or regret after that?

LEMON: I can tell you what, all of this is going to be really interesting to watch. So, fasten your seat belts, everyone.

[21:55:00]

And, listen, we're going to be here to cover all of it.

Thank you, John. Thank you, Ron. I appreciate it.

BROWNSTEIN: Saturday with Don.

LEMON: And thanks for watching, everyone. I'm Don Lemon.

The CNN films documentary, "RBG," is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:00:00]