Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Next Stop for Elena Kagan: Supreme Court; 'Birth Tourism' Debate; Crusade Against Obesity; President Obama Announces Elena Kagan as Next Supreme Court Justice; Oxford's Secret Vault of Words; The Making of a Great Athlete; Wordplay: Judicial Power; XYZ: Which Dream Job to Choose?

Aired August 06, 2010 - 14:00   ET

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

T.J. HOLMES, CNN ANCHOR: We're coming up on the top of the hour here now, and we are standing by for an event at the White House. We're expecting a little get-together, a reception for the newest, or soon-to-be, I should say -- the newest Supreme Court Justice, Elena Kagan.

Of course, we saw her confirmation yesterday. She was approved yesterday 63-37, but the president having a get-together in the East Room for her in about 30 minutes. We're expecting it at the bottom of the hour. Expecting a get-together in the East Room just essentially to say congratulations, just a little reception for her.

Now, she's going to be joining a court in which of course there's only four women ever. She would be the fourth ever female to sit on the court, but she's going to join two other women on the current court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and also Sonia Sotomayor, who was approved last year, another of President Obama's nominees on the court. And now Elena Kagan is going to be joining that group.

We will be standing by and bring you that event live when it happens at the bottom of the hour.

But in the meantime, as we wait for that event, we want to bring in former "New York Times" Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse. She's on the line with us from D.C.

Ms. Greenhouse, ma'am, thank you so much. It's a pleasure to be talking to you today.

We saw this 63-37 vote yesterday. Are the days long gone of us ever seeing those big, overwhelming majorities of these justices being approved? Is it always going to be some kind of partisan split from now on?

LINDA GREENHOUSE, FMR. "NEW YORK TIMES" SUPREME COURT REPORTER: Well, it does seem that way, because the attack on Elena Kagan from the Republicans, all but five of whom voted against her, lacked a certain coherence. They were struggling for something to articulate. And so I think that says to me, we're just in a partisan morass.

HOLMES: And like you said, they were kind of fishing for something to go after her with. So, why go after anything in the first place and oppose a justice that really doesn't change the balance of the court?

GREENHOUSE: Well, I think the judicial wars is kind of politics by other means right now. So I think the Republicans don't want to cut the Obama administration any slack on anything.

We've seen that across the entire domestic agenda. And so, you know, you're blocking a number of his nominees to the lower courts. And I think this is just all of a piece, it's a strategy.

And one thing that was very interesting that emerged from the Republican attack is quite ironic. Elena Kagan was being attacked as being too much in favor of judicial restraint. That is to say, not going out there with all guns blazing to overturn acts of Congress that some of the Republicans don't like such as the health care law. So, it was pretty amusing to see Republicans saying basically, you ought to be more of a judicial activist, and then we might like you better.

HOLMES: Well, and of course the other side of that, other judges or other nominees get attacked for being activist judges at the same time.

GREENHOUSE: Exactly.

HOLMES: So what do make of -- and has not been made enough of the fact that she's going to join the court and be the third women on the current court?

GREENHOUSE: Well, it's certainly a nice thing. I mean, I'm sitting here in my office, and on my wall I have a photograph of the Canadian Supreme Court, which has five out of nine female justices. And I think the Canadian public has come to accept that as just -- you know, that's the way things are.

So I think the fact that not a huge amount has been made of it tells us that at a time that women are half the students in the country's law schools and are making their way in the legal profession, and almost half of the state court chief justices are women -- people don't realize that, but it's something in the 20s out of the 50 states. So this has been happening. And it's really, I think, not so much a breakthrough as a ratification of the change in the status of women in the legal profession in the last couple of decades.

HOLMES: And something I wanted to ask you, should have asked you here at the top, but we talked about how the infighting, all the politics and the back and forth when it comes to Supreme Court nominees now -- and we saw this 63-37 vote when it's not really changing the balance of the court, liberal/conservative balance there, some would say -- what's going to happen when the day comes when there's a justice that could tilt the court one way or another? What kind of a fight can you imagine we see then?

GREENHOUSE: Well, yes, I think we have to understand what happened this time in light of everybody's expectation that at some time down the road -- and who knows when and who knows who will be in the White House at that time -- one of the dominating conservative justices will retire. And that would be -- if President Obama or some other Democrat is in the White House, that would be an occasion to actually change the balance.

And I think the Republican senators were kind of setting a marker, saying, you know, we're fighting you even on this occasion, with this nominee who does not really have a potential to change the balance, and take notice of the open warfare that's going to occur if there's a next time.

HOLMES: All right. Last thing here.

Elena Kagan is joining a court that's going to be taking up what? There's been so much attention to Proposition 8. But what do you see as possibly even landmarks in this country? Some would say that Proposition 8 on same-sex marriage is coming certainly down the pike in the next year or so, but what else do you see this court and Elena Kagan being a part of?

GREENHOUSE: Well, I think it's pretty inevitable that the court is going to weigh in on the health care law, because there's something like 23 legal challenges, many of them brought by governors of various states, challenging the constitutionally of the mandate in that law, the requirements that individuals buy health insurance. And we had a preliminary district court judgment just the other day on that. So those cases are in the pipeline. Some of the Republicans wanted a promise from Elena Kagan that she would recuse herself from any such cases because she was solicitor general at the time the bill was signed into law, and she declined to give such a promise because she hasn't actually functioned on this litigation. But that's probably a landmark in the making.

HOLMES: Linda Greenhouse, it is a pleasure to get a chance to talk to you. We'll let you go back to looking at pictures on the wall there in your office. But we appreciate you hopping on the line with us. Thanks so much.

GREENHOUSE: OK. Thank you.

And again, to our viewers, we're standing by. At the bottom of the hour, maybe about 20 minutes or so, we are expecting to hear from the president and Elena Kagan. Going to have a little reception at the White House. We'll bring that to you live.

Also, a BP bigwig giving a concrete answer on this week's progress in the Gulf. It affects what happens next and it is this hour's "Sound Effect."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DOUG SUTTLES, COO, BP: The cement plug is very, very extensive. I think it comes up some 5,000 feet up inside the wellbore. So this is a very large cement plug in this well. And we also displaced cement behind what we call -- over- displaced it, so we pumped it in, whichever path it was coming up. We think that was up through the casing. We pumped it through that path, and it went back into any spaces that were behind the casing and out into the reservoir. So the job went very, very well. And then we left a large volume of cement inside the casing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Well, now they've got wait for all that cement to cure, to dry, which will probably take most of the weekend. Next week, that giant drill will work in 30-minute increments to finish BP's relief well. Now, when that's done, more cement gets pumped in to kill this nightmare well completely.

To sum this up, we're on day 109 of the Gulf oil disaster, set off, of course, by that explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig that killed 11 men. Nearly five million barrels of oil have gotten into the waters of the Gulf, but the end of this chapter possibly is in sight.

Well, coming up, it's something called birth tourism, foreigners coming here to the U.S. to have a baby so that baby can become a U.S. citizen. Some lawmakers want to put a stop to that. The big debate over it coming your way next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: Well, is it possibly another front in the immigration debate? We've been watching what's happening in Arizona, and then you've been hearing about something called birthright citizenship. Even if a child is born to illegal parents here in the U.S., that child born on U.S. soil is in fact a U.S. citizen. That's according to the Constitution -- in particular, the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, saying, "All persons born or naturalized in the United states and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and the state wherein they reside."

Some people call these "anchor babies." You'll hear that term thrown around a bit. But there are some efforts in Washington, D.C., also in Arizona, to try to possibly change the Constitution, do away with this birthright citizenship that we have in the Constitution.

And now bring in something else on this front, something called "birth tourism." Essentially, people are coming here to have their babies. We're talking about people who may even enter the country legally just to have a child on U.S. soil.

I want to bring in now an immigration expert. Joining me now from Chicago, Rosalba Pina.

Rosalba, thank you for being here.

Help people understand this, because this might be the first time they're hearing something like this about the tourism part of it, at least. Just how widespread is this tourism? Is it a big problem just out?

Not at all. Not at all.

ROSALBA PINA, IMMIGRATION LAW EXPERT: Out of millions of individuals that come to the United states, it is estimated approximately -- statistics show about 7,600 have children here. So we're talking about a very small percentage. It's not a problem.

HOLMES: And explain for people as well how this works. And the first part I need to get out, that there is nothing illegal about this.

PINA: Absolutely. They enter lawfully, with permission by the U.S. government, and they pay for their expenses. If anything they're bringing money to -- they pay for their expenses, their medical expenses, if they have to stay in a hotel. They pay for everything. They're not receiving any public benefits to be able to have a child here.

HOLMES: Help people as well understand, what is so enticing? What is the draw about a child having -- I mean, no matter where a person might be from -- we hear some of these birth tourism sites set up in China and other places. But if a citizen living in China -- what is still the draw? Why is it so desirable to have your child have U.S. citizenship and that U.S. passport?

PINA: Well, many times, it's my understanding, that moms choose to have their children here because they think they are receiving better medical care. So, usually that is the factor that they focus on when deciding to come here to have a child.

But having a U.S. passport obviously is very advantageous because they don't have to request visas to be able to come to the United States. And it allows them to be able to live here and study here and work here if they wish to do so during their lifetime.

HOLMES: And for a lot of people who may not understand this, the way immigration works, if someone could get what's called a B visa, they could come here as a visitor to this country, just come in for a visit for a few months. Now, is there a higher level of scrutiny by U.S. immigration officials when someone is trying to apply for a visitor visa, and they see that person might be pregnant? Do they take that kind of stuff -- are they allowed to take that kind of stuff into conversation when deciding whether or not to let a person into the country?

PINA: When somebody's requesting a tourist visa, a visitor's visa, to come here, they have to establish that they do not have immigrant intent, and that they have means, they have the money to come here and visit, and that they are going to leave the United States. Those are the factors that are taken under consideration by the U.S. government when they issue the visas.

HOLMES: Let me ask you as well, on another front -- we're talking about birth tourism here, but at the same time, so many people believe that if a child is born here in this country to illegal parents, that in some way, now that that child is here, that that could help the parents actually get citizenship or become legal status.

That's not the case, is it?

PINA: No, not really. For a child to petition a parent under our immigration laws, the child needs to be 21 years old, first of all.

Second of all, for waivers of inadmissibility, there are circumstances. There are laws under which you cannot even consider hardship to a child to obtain a waiver of inadmissibility, for example, for unlawful presence. And to defend yourself from removal, in order to avoid having to leave the country, you need to establish exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a citizen child.

So it's not that simple to become a permanent resident and eventually a citizen just because you have a child born in the United States.

HOLMES: And the last couple of things, back on the birth tourism, the people that do come here, what kind of people are we talking about who do -- because these things, frankly, aren't cheap. A lot of these services out there that do do birth tourism, it's not something cheap.

So what kind of folks are coming over for this?

PINA: The cases that I'm familiar with and that I've known about, and from reading also, are individuals that have the means to come here. These are people that can afford -- it's about $30,000 in estimated costs to have a child in the United States. These are individuals that can afford to, first of all, be issued the visa by the U.S. government. They have to qualify. And then, second of all, to be able to have the means to pay for the medical expenses and being able to stay here for that period of time that is necessary to have the child.

We're talking about a lot of money.

HOLMES: All right. Rosalba Pina, we appreciate you being here, we appreciate your expertise, and, quite frankly, getting a lot of the facts out, because we know there's a lot of disinformation and a lot of people just don't understand some parts of this front and the whole immigration debate.

But, ma'am, thank you so much for being here. You enjoy the rest of your day.

PINA: Thank you for having me.

HOLMES: Well, coming up, we're going to be talking to one of our CNN Heroes. And she did something that was remarkable. She helped shed 15,000 pounds. This, of course, was for her community, but she's not going to stop there.

You're going to meet her coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: All right. Welcome back.

Want to introduce once again to one of our CNN Heroes. These are always great to do. And what this CNN Hero did is try to fight obesity in her particular state. And fighting obesity led to 15,000 pounds being dropped.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LINDA FONDREN, CNN HERO: Obesity affects us all. And the only way that you combat it is to stand together and help each other. We need to make a commitment to change.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: And that is our CNN Hero, Linda Fondren, who joins me now live from her home state of Mississippi.

Linda, good to have you here with us.

You're in Jackson, but your home town of Vicksburg is where you were doing all this good work. So what got you going in the first place that you knew that you needed to get involved?

FONDREN: Well, T.J., what got me going was, as you know, our state, Mississippi, has horrible statistics. We are number one in diabetes, high blood pressure, and lack of physical activity. So we've gotten an "F" for the fattest state in the nation. But we have so many other good things about our state, but this overshadows it all.

So my concern and my love for my community got me to start this Shape Up Vicksburg weight loss challenge.

HOLMES: Now, how did you put this challenge together? Explain to our viewers a bit just exactly what you had people doing.

FONDREN: Well, you know, first, in order to get it going, you have to get the support of the business leaders, the local hospitals, the businesses that are there, the restaurants that are there. But also, I took it to our elected officials, and I issued that challenge to them, because they took an oath to serve our community. And so the support really came through, the people that hold the businesses in our community, and they jumped at the opportunity to help, because they realize as well that we do have this problem not only in our state, but our community was not immune to this.

HOLMES: And how difficult was it -- or was it easy, I should say, to get the community on board? FONDREN: You know, when I issued this challenge, I had people calling me on the telephone wanting to know, where can they sign up? You know, people want to do better. And they just do not have the tools and opportunities to do this.

And so that's what I wanted to provide. So, was it difficult for people to come on board? Absolutely not. People were ready, and they still are ready.

HOLMES: Well, I guess, where do you take it from here? Like we mentioned, you helped people lose some 15,000 pounds. How much are you going to keep dropping there? What's the next step for you?

FONDREN: You know, I really want to keep going. There are so many people in the community that I did not reach.

I've also found that because of some of the disabilities that the people have -- don't forget, we are obese. So we have trouble with our limbs, standing too long.

So one of the things that I came up with was the walking club after the 17,000-pound challenge ended. That walking club is easy because it's something we do every day. It is the number one exercise.

So I started a walking club, and getting people involved, just getting out into your community. But you also get to learn to love your community. You see places you haven't seen before.

So I think that loving your community makes you want to do better. So that's not all that's going on. We also have programs, health education programs, because this is something that's very important. As you know, nutrition, proper eating and exercise go hand in hand.

HOLMES: Yes, ma'am. Well, it is why you are one of our CNN Heroes. It's an absolute pleasure to get a chance to talk to you today.

We'll continue to follow and maybe get Mississippi off the bottom of that list. Nobody wants to be on it, one of the fattest states, as they say. Nobody wants that distinction.

Linda Fondren, ma'am, it's a pleasure to talk to you. Enjoy the rest of your day.

FONDREN: Thank you so much.

HOLMES: All right.

And for more information on Linda's crusade and Shape Up Vicksburg, be sure to log on to our Web site, CNN.com/heroes. While there, you can also check out the complete list of our 2010 CNN Heroes.

Also, check out the upcoming CNN Heroes special, "Coming Back From Katrina." Our Anderson Cooper leads us through the inspiring story of three CNN Heroes determined to rebuild New Orleans. Again, that's CNN Heroes, "Coming Back From Katrina." It airs Saturday, August 14th, 7:30 Easter Time, and again Sunday night, the 15th, at that same time.

We are keeping a close eye, like we said, like we promised, as I keep an eye, at the White House. Expecting an event to take place here at any moment.

The president having a little reception today for his newest Supreme Court justice, justice to be, I should still say. This is in the East Room at the White House, a live picture. We were just given the heads-up that this was about to happen.

But Elena Kagan, who was approved yesterday, 63-37 by the Senate, she will be the fourth woman to ever sit on the high court and also the third woman to sit on the current court joining the president's other nominee from last year, Sotomayor, and also Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who's also on that court.

Now, you see people gathered here. Several of her family members, we just saw them -- or I should say I assume family members just came in, took their place at the front of the room there.

But always -- I mean, it was not a lot of drama about what was going to happen. A lot of people knew the vote, that the Democrats had the vote -- or the president had the votes, I should say, to get her approved. Not a lot of drama there, but it's always such a big deal.

As we look at the picture, there she is, the Supreme Court justice to be. It will be official tomorrow, when she's sworn in. But for now, there she is, "Shorty," 5'1" tall. She was nicknamed that some years ago.

But getting that reception, and now let's go ahead and listen in to the president as he -- and again, as we call this just a little reception, as they're calling it there.

Let's go ahead and listen in to the president now.

(APPLAUSE)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Thank you, everybody. Thank you.

Everybody please sit down. Have a seat.

This is a good day.

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the White House. I am pleased that all of you could be here today as we celebrate the next member of our nation's highest court.

And while she may be feeling a twinge of sadness about giving up the title of "general," a cool title, I think we can all agree that "Justice Elena Kagan" has a pretty nice ring to it.

(APPLAUSE)

We are very honored to be joined today by two of Elena's new colleagues, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Anthony Kennedy.

(APPLAUSE)

Justice Kennedy assured me that he would keep Justice Kagan out of trouble, and Justice Ginsburg assured me that she would get Justice Kagan into trouble.

(LAUGHTER)

So we'll see how that works out.

We're also pleased to have several members of Congress, as well as our cabinet, here today, and of course members of Elena's family.

And thanks to all of you for your service and for taking time to be here today.

I also want to express my gratitude to our Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Senator Leahy; Ranking Member Senator Session; Majority Leader Reid; and Republican Leader McConnell for seeing to it that Elena got a full, fair and timely hearing.

After more than 80 one-on-one meetings and 17 hours of testimony, I'd say that the Senate got a pretty good look at Elena Kagan. They got a good sense of her judicial philosophy, her commitment to the rule of law, her rich understanding of our Constitution, and, of course, where she can be found on Christmas Day.

(LAUGHTER)

And the bipartisan support she received in yesterday's vote is yet another example of the high esteem in which she's held by folks across the political spectrum. There aren't many law school deans who receive standing ovations from both the Federalist Society and the American Constitution Society, and I don't know too many folks whose fans include President Clinton, Judge Abner Mikva, and Justice Ginsburg, as well as Ken Starr, Miguel Estrada and Justice Scalia.

In fact, I understand that Justice Scalia came to relish their spirited exchanges during Elena's appearances before the court, even after Elena cheerfully informed him that he was -- and I quote -- "wrong" in his understanding of a recent case. I'm sure that was refreshing for him to hear.

(LAUGHTER)

These folks may not agree on much, but they've all been impressed, as I have, by Elena's (INAUDIBLE) intellect and path- breaking career, as an acclaimed scholar and presidential adviser, as the first woman to serve as dean of the Harvard Law School, and most recently as solicitor general. They admire how while she could have easily settled into a comfortable practice in corporate law, she chose instead to devote her life to public service. They appreciate her evenhandedness and open-mindedness, and her excellent and often irreverent sense of humor.

These are traits that she happens to share with the last solicitor general who went on to become a Supreme Court justice, one for whom Elena clerked and whom she considers one of her heroes, Justice Thurgood Marshall. And we are very proud to have Justice Marshall's widow here today.

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA: In a tribute she wrote after Justice Marshall's death, Elena recalled how she and her fellow clerks took turns standing guard when his casket lay in state at the Supreme Court and how 20,000 people stood in a line that stretched around the block to pay their respects.

There were people from every background and every walk of life, black, white, rich and poor, young and old. Many brought their children hoping to impress upon them the lessons of Justice Marshall's extraordinary life. Some left notes. Some left flowers. One mourner left a worn slip opinion of Brown versus Board of Education.

It is to this day a moving reminder that the work of our highest court shapes not just the character of our democracy, but the most fundamental aspects of our daily lives -- how we work, how we worship, whether we can speak freely and live fully, whether those words put to paper more than two centuries ago will truly mean something for each of us in our time.

Because as visionaries our founders were, they did not presume to know exactly how the times would change and what new questions fate and history would set before us. Instead, they sought to articulate principles that would be timeless, ones that would accommodate the changing circumstances of our lives while preserving the rights and freedoms on which this country was founded.

Today is one of those moments when you can't help but appreciate the extraordinary success of their efforts. For nearly two centuries, there wasn't a single woman on the Supreme Court. When Elena was a clerk there was just one, but when she takes her seat on that bench for the first time in history, there will be three women serving on our nation's highest court.

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA: It is, as Justice Ginsburg recently put it, one of the most exhilarating developments, a sign of progress that I relish not just as a father who wants limitless possibilities for my daughter, but as an American proud that our Supreme Court will be a little more inclusive, a little more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before. And as yet, another example of how our union has become more not less perfect over time, more open, more fair, more free. That's not just a matter of accident or chance. Those founding truths about liberty and equality were not self-perpetuating, and it is the members of our highest court do the vital and constant work of ensuring that they endure.

And that's work that I'm confident Elena will carry out with integrity, with humanity and an abiding commitment to the ideal inscribed above our courthouse door, equal justice under the law.

So it is now my great pleasure to introduce as our next Supreme Court justice, Elena Kagan.

(APPLAUSE)

ELENA KAGAN, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. Thank you for the honor you've given me and the trust you've placed in me by nominating me to the Supreme Court. I am deeply grateful.

Thank you also for lending me some of your marvelous staff since my nomination. It's a lot of work and preparation that goes into the confirmation process, and I very much appreciate their tireless efforts.

And one person deserves a special shoutout for her incomparable energy, expertise and wisdom. And that's the head of your judicial nominations team, Susan Davies.

(APPLAUSE)

KAGAN: I also want to thank the Judiciary Committee and the entire Senate for giving me such respectful and expeditious consideration. Chairman Leahy gave me wonderful advice throughout this process and both he and Senator Sessions ensured that my hearing was serious and courteous.

I also very much enjoyed meeting with 83 senators, but really, who's counting?

(LAUGHTER)

KAGAN: And enjoyed learning more about their concerns, their interests and their deep commitments to public service.

I'm delighted that many of my former colleagues from the Solicitor General's Office here. It's the best law office in the country and I've learned every day from its members.

Now, once I put on that robe, I'm only going to vote with them when they have the better of the argument. Which, let's be frank, is not in every case.

(LAUGHTER)

KAGAN: But I will always appreciate their integrity and professionalism and dedication.

Finally, I want to thank my family and friends. I have a lot of family here today. My brothers and sister-in-law, a nephew, a niece, aunts, uncles, cousins, and I have a great many friends here as well. You came from all over the country as soon as you heard the Senate had approved my nomination and I'm moved and deeply grateful for your support.

And all around me in this room, I feel the presence of my parents. I wouldn't be standing here today if not for sacrifice and devotion. And although my parents didn't live to see this day, what I can almost hear them saying -- and I think I can hear Justice Marshall saying this to me right now as well -- is the disappointment appointment is not just an honor, much more importantly, it is an obligation, an obligation to protect and preserve the rule of law in this country, an obligation to uphold the rights and liberties afforded by our remarkable constitution, and an obligation to provide what the inscription on the Supreme Court building promises -- equal justice under law.

Tomorrow, I will take two oaths to uphold this solemn obligation. One to support and defend the Constitution and the other to administer justice without respect to persons, to the rich and poor alike. Today, Mr. President, I will simply say to you and to everyone here and across the nation that I will work my hardest and try my best to fulfill these commitments and to serve this country I love as well as I am able.

Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA: I told Elena to go ahead and soak it in because I'm not sure they're allowed to clap in the Supreme Court.

(LAUGHTER)

OBAMA: But thank you very much for joining us and please enjoy the reception. Thank you.

HOLMES: Well, there it is. Enjoy the reception. You see the room full of family and friends, people she's known over the years, other invited guests in there in the room.

But Elena Kagan looked like she was trying to hightail it out of there when she got done talking. You step down -- again, she got that nickname "Shorty" from Thurgood Marshall that she clerked for at the Supreme Court. But she's about all 5'1" of her stepping up to the podium there.

But still as they often do, a big moment even though not a lot of drama about whether or not she was going to be approved by the Senate, but still always a big moment when we see another Supreme Court justice. And 63-37 was the vote. She'll be the third woman on the current court, the fourth woman ever to serve on that court. And again, just the 112th justice in the 200-something years of the court. So again, we don't see this that often. Even though there wasn't a lot of drama, but this is always a big deal.

She will be officially sworn in tomorrow. The oath she talked about she's going to take, that's happening in a ceremony, I believe, around 2:00 Eastern tomorrow. You can certainly see that right here live.

Meanwhile, have you ever heard of a sprog? What about smushables? How about a quackmire? They're all words found in a secret vault that the Oxford English Dictionary rejected. We're unveiling the secrets next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: As we do go "Off the Radar" here with Chad everyday -- you went way off the radar yesterday. Kind of bringing it back to us. We got some rejects.

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: We're out of the book. We're out of the Oxford Dictionary. We're out.

Fumb -- what do you think it should be?

HOLMES: What's that?

MYERS: It's your big toe, it would have been. Didn't make it.

Another one, a nonversation -- completely useless conversation, wasting your time.

HOLMES: Have that all the time.

MYERS: Yes, exactly. Especially in this building, right?

Optotoxical.

HOLMES: Optotoxical, has something to do with the eyes?

MYERS: A little bit of a look.

HOLMES: Of a look, OK. That could kill.

MYERS: That could kill.

HOLMES: That's optotoxical -- OK. I like that one.

MYERS: I know. And then a peppier.

HOLMES: That's sounds like a drink.

MYERS: No.

HOLMES: Peppier, an animal? MYERS: It's that little person that comes around at a restaurant that only does pepper. It's the peppier. He's not a sommelier, he's the peppier.

HOLMES: I thought it was like -- what's the skunk? Pepe le Pew? That's what I thought it was. Sorry.

All right, you got one more? Are we out? We're out?

MYERS: Scrax.

HOLMES: Scrax.

MYERS: It's that wax that comes off a scratch-off lottery ticket.

HOLMES: That's scrax.

MYERS: That didn't make it either.

Talk to you in a little bit.

HOLMES: Chad "Off the Radar," as always.

Quick now, difference between a super athlete and just some bum sitting on the bench? Well, some people say it's all right here, it's in the belly button. Don't laugh. We're going to explain this and you will not see my bellybutton. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: You want to know what makes a great athlete? It's all in here, right here, the belly button. Seriously. Samantha Hayes, do tell.

SAMANTHA HAYES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, T.J., we're simplifying physics here. But the theory is this, if you have two athletes of the same height, the one with the higher belly button with the faster runner. The one with the lower belly button, a faster swimmer.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES (voice-over): At 6'3", Michael Phelps dominates in the water. Usain Bolt, 6'5", is the fastest man on land. One is white, the other black, which has presented an intriguing question for Duke University professor of engineering Adrian Bejan.

PROF. ADRIAN BEJAN, DUKE UNIVERSITY: If we have extremely good runners of the same size and extremely good swimmers of the same size, then why is it that all the finalists in one sport are of one origin today and all the finalists in the other sport are of a different origin.

HAYES: In his recently published report, Bejan says the fastest swimmers have a long waist, a characteristic of European origin. The fastest runners are of West Africa origin and have a high center of gravity, long legs and a short torso.

(on camera): There's been a mixed reaction to your research.

BEJAN: Every time physics is brought into the discussion of social dynamics, there is effervescence. I wouldn't say controversy, because I really have not seen it.

HAYES (voice-over): High school swimming coach Joe Viola (ph) says perseverance is more important.

JOE VIOLA, HIGH SCHOOL SWIM COACH: We've had incredible success over the years with a lot of different types of guys, some that could barely swim when they first got here. And over the years of working hard and stuff, we've been fairly successful.

HAYES: Olympic champion Cullen Jones, who is black, nearly drowned as a child but went on to help set a world record in 2008. Bejan acknowledges the exceptions, but says science shows the general trend.

BEJAN: That goes without saying. Individuals are individuals because they have the talent to deviate from the pack. The law of physics is about the group. It is about the evolution of the population.

HAYES: Which scientifically speaking means even Phelps and Bolt are likely to see their own records broken by somebody else.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: Bejan predicts that eventually track and swimming events will be divided by height, much like different classes for weightlifting.

T.J., back to you.

HOLMES: All right, Samantha Hayes, you've got us all in the studio checking our belly buttons right now. Thank you so much.

"Wordplay" is coming up next, and it's Elena Kagan related. Stay here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: The "Wordplay" today is all about judicial power, that's how the Supreme Court is described in Article 3 of the Constitution.

Now there was no established court until 1789. The Judicial Act of 1789 set out the court's makeup and officially gave the president the power to nominate justices. The first court only had six chief justice, five associates.

That judicial power went on the road in the early days. Back then, the justices were required to preside in 13 separate judicial districts. The most popular name for all justices has been the name John, 13 have been named John on the court. One of them, John Paul Stevens, is making his way out of the court for Elena Kagan.

Well, that is your "Wordplay" for today, but coming up, got a bit of a dilemma. You want to be a pro athlete or you want to be a fighter pilot? What would you do? That's my "XYZ" for today?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: In my "XYZ" today, ask little boys out there what they want to be when they grow up and you'll hear a lot of different answers, but among them, likely you're going to hear professional athlete. Maybe a kid will say he wants to be fighter pilot. You know, "Top Gun" had everyone wanting to be a fighter pilot.

But fighter pilot, professional athlete usually unattainable options for most young men. But there's a guy in Denver that actually has the option of both.

His name is Ben Garland. He's a rookie defensive lineman who signed a contract -- signed it in April -- with the Denver Broncos. He's in training camp with the team now, but his NFL career might be over before he ever plays a regular season game.

You see, Ben is a graduate of the Air Force Academy. That means he's obligated to do some active duty service in the military. That's going to start at the end of the month.

Now this is where it gets tricky. He can choose to take a coveted spot in the Pilot Training Program in the Air Force, but if he does that, he'd have to commit about 10 years to it, essentially killing any hopes of playing in the NFL. But if he doesn't opt for the Pilot Training Program, he could possibly only do two years of active duty service and then return to the NFL.

So he has to decide right now if he has what it takes to have a long-term NFL career. And based on that, he'll either go into the Pilot Program or not.

Earlier this week, I told you here in the "XYZ" about a young man who was a Harvard graduate who just signed a one-year contract with the NBA's Golden State Warriors. He's choosing to try out the NBA. If it doesn't work out, he has a degree in economics from Harvard to fall back on.

Ben's story is a little different. Yes, he has something to fall back on, but he's also in a position that he'll have to choose one or the other.

What would you do? Not that many jobs out there that a young man would take over being a professional athlete. But an Air Force pilot? That's hot.

That's it for me today. Don's list is coming up after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)