Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Republican Senator Lamar Alexander Supports McConnell To Vote For Supreme Court Nomination; Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) Is Interviewed On Senate's Vote To Replace Justice Ginsburg's Replacement; U.S. COVID-19 Deaths Nears 200,000; Uncertainty In The U.S. Elections Over Justice Ginsburg's Death. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired September 20, 2020 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Thank you for staying with me. We have breaking news this hour. A complicated and messy chess match is unfolding right now over filling the seat left vacant by late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

In the last hour, we learned a key Republican senator, Lamar Alexander, says he is okay with the Senate moving forward with a vote on whom President Trump nominates. And here is why that matters.

Alexander had been part of a group of senators we've been watching closely amid this debate over whether the Senate should take up a vote only 44 days before the election. If just four of the Republicans are willing to press pause, siding with all Democrats, Trump's nominee won't get a vote, at least not right now.

We have already learned senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins believes a vote shouldn't happen before the election. So if you're doing the political math, that means if two more senators step away from the president on this issue, at the very least there could be a delay.

Earlier today the Democratic nominee for president, Joe Biden, said whoever wins the election should get to make the pick.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: To jam this nomination through the Senate is just an exercise in raw political power. And I don't believe the people of this nation will stand for it. Even if President Trump wants to put forward a name now, the Senate should not act until after the American people select their next president, their next Congress, their next Senate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: CNN's Lauren Fox is joining us on Capitol Hill. Alexander was seen as a possible opponent to a speedy vote. Tell us what he is saying and why it's so significant. LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well essentially, the math this weekend was two Republicans like you said, Lisa Murkowsky and Susan Collins, who is up for re-election in November. Both of them had said they were uncomfortable moving forward with a Supreme Court vote to fill that vacancy until after the election.

In fact, Susan Collins was very clear that she said she didn't even want anyone who didn't win the election to be able to select the Supreme Court replacement. So, that was very important. We were just looking for two more members.

And Alexander was someone we were keeping a very close eye on, but he has since said he is comfortable moving ahead. He supports Mitch McConnell, the majority leader in his decision to forge ahead on this nomination.

And this is what he said in a statement, "No one should be surprised that a Republican Senate majority would vote on a Republican president Supreme Court nomination, even during a presidential election year. The Constitution gives senators the power to do it. The voters who elected them expect it. Senator McConnell is only doing what Democratic leaders have said they would do if the shoe were on the other foot."

So, that makes it a lot harder to figure on who those two remaining Republicans would be that would join Democrats in blocking this nomination. Now, Ana, it's important to remember we don't know when a vote will formally happen on the Senate floor. That's a question that the Majority Leader is going to be asking his members over upcoming days.

We know that Republicans are going to meet as a conference on Tuesday for their regularly scheduled luncheon. That's going to be really important. An opportunity for lawmakers to voice their concerns and opportunities for voting on this nominee either before the election or after the election.

It's very important because remember, some Republicans are going to be pretty uncomfortable taking that vote when they're staring down an election or re-election in November.

Meanwhile, the risks you always run in politics is the longer you wait, things can change. What happens if President Trump loses the White House and then Republicans return in a lame duck? What does that do to the vote for the president's Supreme Court nomination? It's unclear, Ana.

CABRERA: So many questions at this moment. Lauren Fox on Capitol Hill, thank you. I want to bring in CNN White House correspondent John Harwood. And John, last hour you mentioned Senator Lamar Alexander as this possibility to halt a Supreme Court nominee. No more, of course. It appears the dominoes are falling into place for the president.

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right. He was a long-shot possibility all along. In truth, Ana, if you look -- go past Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, the two most moderate members of the Republican caucus, everyone is a long shot here, in part because appointing conservative justices is a key tenet of what Republican politicians believe in and advocate.

Republican senators can look at this as much as a Mitch McConnell appointment, as a Donald Trump appointment, especially if it's a mainstream conservative nominee, the kind any other Republican president would appoint.

[17:05:00]

Democrats were counting initially on the hypocrisy argument that Republicans wouldn't go back and do what they did to or wouldn't reverse themselves having block Merrick Garland in 2016. Lamar Alexander was one of those who did that.

But senators don't really care about hypocrisy. They are happy to change their position when it suits their own party and so, some of the other possibilities that we've been looking at, Lindsey Graham, who said in 2016, you can use my words against me. I'm not going to do different in 2020.

Well, he's done different. He reversed himself. Now, there is Chuck Grassley who was then the judiciary chairman. Will he stick it? The words that he said in 2016. I don't think any Democrat is counting on it. So, it's very much odds in Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump's favor situation at this point.

CABRERA: And yet we heard from Joe Biden earlier, trying to make an emotional appeal on this issue. Fill us in.

HARWOOD: Well, he's doing a couple of things. First of all, he's saying it would be an abuse to shove this through so close to the election. Second, he's pointing out the hypocrisy. He's also saying that Republicans should keep in mind the political temperature of the country.

It's hot, it's divided, there's been a lot of anger this summer, protests in the streets, and he's urging them to put the temperature down, try to bring the country together. And he's also not being too pollyannaish about his prospects for success. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: Look, I'm not being naive. I'm not speaking to President Trump, who will do whatever he wants. I'm not speaking to Mitch McConnell, who will do what he wants, and he does. I'm speaking to those Republicans out there, Senate Republicans, who know deep down what is right for the country and consistent with the Constitution.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARWOOD: So, that is consistent with Joe Biden's belief that he can work together with people of goodwill on the other side, trying to appeal to their conscience about what this would do to the country. I do not think that Joe Biden has a huge amount of confidence that that's going to work. CABRERA: All right, John Harwood, thank you for walking us through all

of that. Joining us now, Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. And Senator, no sooner did we learn that Lisa Murkowski is saying pump the brakes. Senator Alexander is saying he's okay with a Senate vote. So, boy, the math is getting pretty tough here for Democrats. What do you plan to do?

SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): Well, Ana, it's good to be with you. As Joe Biden said, we are still pushing hard on Republicans and we're really not relying on trusting what they might have said before. Almost all of them said in 2016 we should not move forward in a presidential election year, that of course when Barack Obama was president.

But, there of course, the American people and their constituents. And this is why Vice President Biden talked about the stakes in this Supreme Court choice, specifically with respect to the Affordable Care Act, the fact that the Supreme Court is taking up the Affordable Care Act case in mid-November.

And what Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump are trying to do through the courts is what they were unsuccessful at doing through the legislature. They failed by one vote in the Senate to destroy the Affordable Care Act. Now they're trying to take that healthcare away from the American people in the middle of a COVID-19 pandemic.

And so the American people need to be calling their senators. There are a number of elections this time as you know in swing states. So, we're going to continue to highlight the stakes in the selection.

CABRERA: Okay. So if you're pushing on some of the Republican senators, I wondering how you're doing that because we've heard pushes from other Democratic lawmakers primarily in the House at this point suggesting that if, you know, Biden wins, if the Senate turns over to Democrat majority come November, that Democrats should just expand the number of Supreme Court justices.

You have tweets like this from Congressman Joe Kennedy, III. "If he holds a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021." Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler tweeted something similar. Is that the plan?

VAN HOLLEN: So, Ana, our focus right now remains on trying to stop this abuse of power right now, to try to get another two Republican senators who will not want to face the wrath of their constituents.

Obviously, relying on people like Lamar Alexander, who some thought might want to retire with some dignity. Obviously we can't be counting on that. At the end of the day --

CABRERA: So who are you counting on? Who are the other two who might join Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski?

[17:10:01]

VAN HOLLEN: Well, there are still -- there are, of course, are number of Republicans, who again, have not weighed in on this. There are a number of key states like Cory Gardner. Again, I'm not banking Cory Gardner, but he's in a very, very tough race right now. And he cannot win without independent moderates voting for him.

So look, again, Ana, what I'm saying is we will use every procedural opportunity. We are calling on the American people to weigh in. If somehow they abuse their power and ram this through, then obviously we will consider all the alternatives available to us.

But right now we remain focused on trying to stop this abuse of power to strip away the Affordable Care Act, to take away women's rights, to take away worker's rights.

CABRERA: Okay. Here's what Joe Biden said last year. He said, no, I'm not prepared to go on and try to pack the court, because we'll live to rue that day. And I guess, Biden's whole candidacy, as you know, has been based on this notion he's going to return the office of the presidency to some kind of normalcy, that he would be a uniter, not a divider.

So when you say all options are on the table and you're, you know, prepared to take these further actions if you can't convince Republicans to stop, you know, moving forward with a Trump nominee to the Supreme Court, doesn't that openly contradict what Biden is trying to sell?

VAN HOLLEN: No, Ana. First of all, I'm saying we are focused right now on trying to stop this paragraph at this moment. That is our focus, trying to get those two more Republican senators, as we also use all our procedural options. Obviously, we're weighing every single one of those and we will use every angle --

CABRERA: What kind of procedural options are there, and forgive me for interrupting. I don't mean to, but I just want to make sure I use time wisely here. I think Americans are listening. Procedural options, what does that look like?

VAN HOLLEN: That mostly has to do with whether there is a way to use the clock to our advantage, to make sure we use our full amount of time on any kind of motion going forward, and whether that's enough to essentially block consideration before Election Day.

I'm not saying it is for sure. I'm saying we will pursue every option we have in that regard as we continue this fight to communicate what's at stake and try to persuade another two Republican senators to join Senators Murkowsky and Collins.

Now, you know, the Senate has these traditions and McConnell established this rule himself back in 2016. And it is important to let everybody know that if they're going to run roughshod over these sort of rules and procedures that they established.

Obviously what that means is that, you know, everything is on the table in the event that, you know, they do use this power grab. But, again, I want to emphasize that this is not over. We're going to fight and find every way we can to stop what's happening right now. CABRERA: So, I hear you saying, you're going to try to delay this

process, but that means this fight is going to be in the spotlight that much longer.

And I have to think Republicans are breathing a sigh of relief right now that not all the oxygen is on the coronavirus and the president's handling of this pandemic, which unfortunately, has now claimed the lives of almost 200,000 Americans.

And so, if you have this protracted fight over the Supreme Court, could that play into the Republicans' hands?

VAN HOLLEN: I don't think so because what the Republicans will be telling the country is that it's more important to abuse their power and try to pack the court with justices who are going to take away people's access to Affordable Care Act, take away people's protections for preexisting conditions, than it is to pass emergency relief that deals with both the health care issues as well as the economic issues.

This is a proxy fight over whether or not we're going to provide the American people with affordable health care in the middle of a pandemic. And what Republicans are saying is not only are they going to refuse to take over -- up the Heroes Act and vote on the Heroes Act to pass the House.

Not only going to do that, but they're going to use all this precious time between now and the election, trying to hijack the court and pack the court with right-wing ideologues who are prepared right now to strip away the Affordable Care act.

That has been Donald Trump's goal from day one. He failed to get it done in the House and the Senate. He has sued to destroy the Affordable Care Act.

[17:14:59]

That case is up in November and that's what this pick for a Supreme Court justice is all about. They want to take away the Affordable Care Act. They want to strip women of their rights and they want to strip workers of their rights.

CABRERA: Senator Chris Van Hollen, thank you so much for taking the time. I appreciate it.

VAN HOLLEN: Ana, good to be with you.

CABRERA: And that, again, was a look inside what the Senate Democrats have in mind to try and block President Trump from replacing Justice Ginsburg before the election, but what else might be on the table? What can the minority do legally without the help of at least four Republicans? Former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara joins us next live in the "CNN Newsroom."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: Senate Democrats say all options are on the table as they try to stop what they call a power grab from Republicans who they say are trying to hijack the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Ginsburg. Our senior legal analyst, Preet Bharara, is here to discuss. He is also the host of the podcast "Stay Tuned with Preet."

[17:20:00]

So, Preet, after Justice Ginsburg died, you tweeted, "I don't know about you, I'm finding it hard to balance the need to grieve and the urge to fight in this sad moment." Is threatening to stack the court the only way to truly fight since Dems can't really stop it, can they?

PREET BHARARA, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, you know, that remains to be seen. I think I was expressing a sentiment that a lot of people had on Friday evening, hearing the news, not fully surprising because we know that she had been ill, but shocking because in recent day she seems to have been doing better.

And on the one hand, you mourn the loss of this petite giant, as some people have called her, of the law, an icon, a hero to so many people, an inspiration to so many people. On the other hand, realizing what's at stake.

And so you quickly go to the questions that you have been talking about in your show thus far that I've been watching. If the Democrats want to prevent the Trump administration from putting in their pick for Supreme Court justice, what do they do?

Now, one thing they can do as you mentioned, is to threaten with full force that that is the thing that they will do come January of 2021, which will depend on Joe Biden winning the presidency, and depend on the Senate changing back to Democratic hands.

AS you also pointed out, Joe Biden has said previously that that's not something he's been prepared to do. So I don't know how strong a threat that is. They can do that.

They can also try to use whatever maneuverings they can strategically in the Senate not to stop it, but to at least delay the possibility of a confirmation until after the election and then some of the dynamics change after November 3rd, depending on what the results are.

CABRERA: How concerned are you if the Republicans push through another Trump nominee?

BHARARA: Well, I think people are beginning to understand, on both sides, how important the Supreme Court is. I feel like sometimes that only happens when there's a vacancy. And it's been a long time since there's been a vacancy that would actually change the direction of the court as dramatically as this.

When you replace a conservative justice with another conservative justice, yes sure, it changes the make-up of the court, but it doesn't dramatically change the trajectory (ph). Here you have the opposite of that.

You have the possibility that a reliable liberal vote, depending on the issue, will be replaced by what Trump will probably see as a reliable conservative vote that could mean the end of Roe as we know it.

Lots of people are also opining that no matter what happens, whether it remains a 4-4 court or Trump gets his person on the court, that the Affordable Care Act is in deep trouble.

And it may only be able to be put back together again, if you're a Democrat and you want that if Biden gets elected president. So, those are just two examples of things that I think would be very different in this country in the coming months.

CABRERA: Here is what Joe Biden said about this whole process a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: We can't keep rewriting history, scrambling norms, ignoring our cherished systems of checks and balances. That includes this whole business of releasing a list of potential nominees that I would put forward, and now saying, after they -- after Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away, they said Biden should release his list. It's no wonder the Trump campaign ask that I release a list only after she passed away. It's a game for them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: There is a lot discussion about norms when it comes to Supreme Court nominations and when it comes to this president, but I wonder if you agree with Biden or should he release a list of potential picks, as Trump has done?

BHARARA: I mean, I think that's up to the individual candidate. That's Joe Biden's decision. I do think that President Trump, in releasing a list both previously and also more recently, is a little bit more about politics and little bit less about the court.

He understands that a lot of the things he does and says are actually not that popular and his style is not that popular and his rhetoric is not that popular. And certainly his handling of the pandemic is not at all popular with Democrats and Republicans of all stripes.

But the one thing that keeps him popular with many, many diehard conservatives is his judicial selections because they would be the same as if, you know, Trump makes them as the same selection that maybe a more traditional Republican would make.

And he understands that by putting out a list that has two or three senators who are diehard conservatives on them also, and the list is either vetted by, prepared by or at least blessed by the federalist society, he understands that that earns him points.

So, I don't know what, you know, particular constitutional and legit purpose putting out a list serves. Joe Biden has made it very clear and pretty specifically, that he intends to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court. That's not an infinite set of people. So, you know, people I think people can make their lists and Joe Biden has no need to make a list of his own.

CABRERA: Right. And he reiterated that today as well in a speech that he would nominate as his first pick a black woman if he is given that opportunity.

[17:24:55]

I also think your point is well taken, in that I talked to a number of voters in 2016, who weren't necessarily big Trump fans, but they were voting for him because of the Supreme Court opportunity that that posed.

One Republican talking point that has come up in all of this is from lawmakers like Ted Cruz, and that is that we may have a contested election in November, and the court must have a full roster of nine justices in order to deal with that prospect. This is despite the fact that we're only eight justices through the 2016 election, but what's your reaction to that argument?

BHARARA: Well, it sort of sounds good in its face, if it was made in good faith and if it's made by somebody like Ted Cruz who didn't say the opposite and wasn't completely pleased to have months and months of a Supreme Court at 4-4 on a number of case but a total number of eight.

And what it sounds like they're saying is, you know, underneath that statement, the subtext of that is, yes, we may have a contested election, there's a decent probability of that. And so, therefore, Trump should get to put a thumb on the scale by having one of his justices be put on the court.

So it's not deadlocked in a way that is adverse to Donald Trump. That's really what they're saying. There's saying you can't have a deadlock court. There is going to be a contested election, so let one of the people who will be in the contested election make the decision at this late date, contrary to a lot of precedent to have a thumb on the scale. I don't think that holds a lot of water analytically.

CABRERA: You talked about grieving the loss of Justice Ginsburg while fighting over her vacant seat. And we just got these pictures of that actual seat, draped in black along with the bench directly in front of it. It is a tradition that dates back to the 1800s. How would you like Ginsburg to be remembered?

BHARARA: Well, I think a lot of people who knew her better than I have met her a few times and obviously followed her career, are better able to talk about the way in which she should be remembered. You know, I think as I said at the beginning, she was not only somebody who was super-smart and super-focused on work, but also an inspiration to a lot of people, men and women, especially women.

Some of the things I've heard people say about how they were inspired to go into the law, how they were inspired to be aggressive and to seek positions in the law, seen the trailblazing that Ruth Bader Ginsburg had done, is incredibly moving and incredibly inspirational. And I think if part of the measure of a person is how much they have

inspired people and how much they protected people and improved people's lives, think I think that the contributions made by Ruth Bader Ginsburg are in fact immeasurable, and I think that's the legacy that she leaves behind.

CABRERA: And we've also heard from so many people who know her well about how meticulous she was and how brilliant she was and her intellect. And I just wonder, as a lawyer, as somebody who is very seasoned in your field, have you learned anything specifically through observations of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her writings?

BHARARA: She was a very clear writer. Her opinions are always excellent. The other thing that comes out about her if you study her a little bit more, it's not just that she was a staunch advocate for equality especially women's equality and justice and fairness, but she understood that you don't just do that by being smart. Shrewdness matters also.

And so, a lot of the tactical decisions she made as strategic decisions she made as a lawyer and an advocate for reproductive rights or other things before she came on the court, I think is something that lawyers and people generally who work in complicated professions can take a lesson from.

The final thing I will say that I left off is in people who've discussed this, but I think it's an incredibly important part of her legacy and something that people can take from how she comported herself, her friendship with Antonin Scalia, which is much commented on much documented, and more so lately.

And at a time when there is so much viciousness and division, you have two people who cared very, very deeply about their differing constitutional principles and they still were friends. And Antonin Scalia, you know, sent her two dozen roses on her birthday. That is something we could think about I think in a good way as well.

CABRERA: Yes, let that be a balm (ph) for the time that we're living in right now. Thank you Preet Bharara. I really appreciate you taking the time.

BHARARA: Thanks, Ana.

CABRERA: Nearly 200,000 Americans have died and the country is far from containing the coronavirus. The testings are for the White House is telling everyone to stay strong and wear a mask. But why is that message still not getting through to so many? You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:30:00]

CABRERA: As the U.S. nears 200,000 deaths from the coronavirus, moments ago in the nation's capital, the bells of the National Cathedral rang out 200 times for those lives lost. (VIDEO PLAYING)

CABRERA: Two-hundred chimes, nearly 200,000 American lives gone since this pandemic began, according to Johns Hopkins University's data. It's a somber moment that I want to discuss with CNN medical analyst, Dr. Jonathan Reiner. He is a professor of medicine at George Washington University. Doctor, did you ever think we would see the day that nearly 200,000 Americans have died from a coronavirus?

JONATHAN REINER, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST: No, Ana, I did not. And it's almost too terrible a toll for really anyone to bear.

[17:35:00]

Every year on the anniversary of 9/11, they read the names of the almost 3,000 Americans who died during the terrorist attacks. If we tried to read the names of all 200,000 Americans who've died during this pandemic, it would take a week. It would take a solid week of reading these names around the clock. The toll is immense, just immense.

CABRERA: More than 30 states right now are seeing an increase in cases. I think we have the graphics. You can see the big -- lots of red, lots of orange right there. However, there has been an overall decrease or at least trending downward in terms of the number of daily deaths. So, what is your assessment on where we are right now? Are things moving in the right or wrong direction?

REINER: Well, we're a bit better than we were in June and July, that's for sure, but unfortunately we plateaued at about 40,000 cases a day. And that really has been steady for over a month, 40,000 new cases a day. And that translates, again, to a steady of about 800 to 1,000 deaths a day.

So, I'm afraid that we've plateaued at an unacceptable level going into the fall and winter where many epidemiologists are concerned that the incidents of the virus will rise and so will the hospitalizations and so will the death rate.

So, this is not the plateau that we needed to be at, at the beginning of the fall. We really need to be much lower, and we have the ability to do this. We just need the political will to do it.

CABRERA: Right. And to that point, the president's, you know, coronavirus testing czar was on our air this morning and emphasized how important it is for people to take all the right health precautions. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRETT GIROIR, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, HHS: We have to stay strong and do the things that could decrease the spread. Number one, wearing a mask when we can't physically distance. Number two, avoiding crowds. Number three, hygiene and with smart testing, we can flatten the curve and slow the spread. Again, we are working every day. We do have a formula to reduce the

deaths, reduce the cases, but we all have to be disciplined and diligent to make sure we obey that every single day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Disciplined and diligent he says, and yet a few times this week, including just last night, the president held a huge rally, big crowds packed in together, most not wearing masks. I mean, talk about opposing messages.

REINER: It's so frustrating. It's so frustrating. My wife reminded me earlier this week of the scene at the end of "The Wizard of Oz" where the good witch tells Dorothy that she's had the power all along to get back to Kansas.

We've had the power all along to suppress this virus and it's simply social distancing and wearing a mask. That's the magic -- that's the magic to put the virus away, yet we have the president of the United States, I mean, you and I talked about this seemingly every week.

The president of the United States holding super spreader events, completely pulling the rug out of people like Admiral Giroir and his colleagues who are trying to get the numbers down, trying to do the right things, but yet the commander-in-chief feels the compulsion to hold events with unmasked, non-distanced supporters. It's maddening.

CABRERA: And clearly counterproductive. Dr. Jonathan Reiner, as always, thank you.

REINER: My pleasure.

CABRERA: The death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will have a big impact on the presidential election in November. And voters already had an idea of who they want to pick the next Supreme Court justice. Our polling guru Harry Enten is up next, live in the "CNN Newsroom."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:40:00]

CABRERA: Forty-four days until the election, and now if the stakes weren't high enough, the death of Justice Ginsburg is raising the stakes again in an already historic election year. President Trump vowing to nominate his pick to fill Ginsburg's seat within the next week.

And CNN's senior political writer and analyst Harry Enten joins us now. Harry, what do the polls tell us about which presidential candidate voters trust more to nominate the next Supreme Court justice?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL WRITER AND ANALYST: Yes. You know, there was a very interesting "New York Times"/Sienna College Poll done in three important swing states, Arizona, Maine, and North Carolina. And what did it show among persuadable voters, those voters who say they made change their mind or aren't choosing at this point between the two major party nominees.

They overwhelmingly preferred Joe Biden, 49 percent of Donald Trump 31 percent to pick the next Supreme Court justice. I should point out this poll was taken before the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but still, it's a good starting point for Biden.

CABRERA: In terms of the issues though, where does this fall? Just how important are Supreme Court nominations to voters?

ENTEN: I mean, look, this to me is rather interesting. So, you know, there's all that talk in 2016 about how Donald Trump really benefited from the idea that he could nominate the next Supreme Court justice. And what we saw was more Trump supporters that year said in fact that the Supreme Court nominations were extremely important to their vote than Hillary Clinton supporters.

But look at our last CNN poll and what do you see for this year. You see more Biden supporters say it's extremely important to their vote in 2020, the Supreme Court nominations so, we see a real flip. So, if anything, the Biden supporters seem to be more motivated by the idea of Joe Biden picking the next Supreme Court justice.

CABRERA: And it's not just about whose going to go on and win the White House, but also the Senate races. And four Democratic senators lost their seats in 2018. The landscape is very different now, no?

ENTEN: Yes, it's extremely different. You know, you really just can't compare the 2018 Senate landscape to the 2020 Senate landscape. And the way we can see this really well is just look at the number of competitive races back in 2018 in which there were Democratic senators. There were five in states that Donald Trump won by ten points or more.

[17:44:59]

This year there's just one down in Alabama so, it' very different. And indeed, to get a better understanding of how in fact the congressional races may shape up this year, remember last time around back in 2018 before the Kavanaugh hearings, what we saw was the Democrats were up by eight points in the generic congressional ballot. They ended up with that same eight-point lead once we got out of those.

Right now, Democrats are well ahead six points in the generic congressional ballot. If in fact we see a similar development going on this year, if there's in fact a Supreme Court nomination, I really wouldn't be surprised if Democrats hold their ground, at least in the race for Congress based upon what we saw in 2018.

CABRERA: And Harry, you say Arizona could play a heavy hand in confirming President Trump's the Supreme Court pick. How so?

ENTEN: Yes. So Arizona's really interesting, right. So, essentially of a special Senate election there between the incumbent, Martha McSally and the Democratic challenger, Mark Kelly. And that race, whoever wins that race, let's say Kelly defeats McSally, which right now he's well up in the polls, up by eight points. He could get seated come the end of November, by the end of November.

You don't have to wait all the way until January. So, if Kelly in fact wins, that would be one less senator that the Republicans could cout on to confirm any nominee that Trump put forward in the lame duck session, if in fact it comes to that.

CABRERA: Harry Enten, thanks for breaking it down for us, brother.

ENETN: My pleasure always with you, Ana.

CABRERA: All right, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg transcended the court. She secured a spot in pop culture as a feminist icon. Coming up, a tribute from Kate McKinnon who parodied Ginsburg on "Saturday Night Live." And these are live pictures outside the Supreme Court, as Americans are paying their respects.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:50:00]

CABRERA: People across the country continue to pay tribute to the incredible life and legacy of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, even at barely five fee, 100 pounds, she was a force to be reckoned with.

Justice Ginsburg worked out with her personal trainer, Bryant Johnson, twice a week since 1999, calling him the most important person in her life. Her gym routine was highlighted by actress Kate McKinnon on "Saturday Night Live."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KATE MCKINNON, ACTRESS: The arguments I heard, they were so weak. I just hope they're not holding up Justice Scalia's chair. Oh that's a GinsBurn.

If you're wondering, I'm not using the time to relax. I'm actually training for the 2021 Olympics. I'm going to do mental gymnastics to figure out why they cut the pandemic response team in 2018. GinsBurn.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: And in a 2019 interview, Justice Ginsburg responded to McKinnon's portrayal of her.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUTH BADER GINSBURG, SUPREME COURT ASSOCIATE JUSTICE: I like the actress who portrayed me.

NINA TOTENBERG, LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: -- Kate McKinnon? I think -- yes.

GINSBURG: And I would like to say GinsBurn sometimes to my colleagues.

(END VIDEO CLIP) CABRERA: McKinnon tells "USA Today" that meeting the justice was one of the great honors of her life, calling her a real life superhero, a beacon of hope, a warrior for justice, a rogue crusader who saved the day time and again.

And of course when you picture Ruth Bader Ginsburg, you may think of her wearing those iconic neck collars over her black court robes. Well, on Wall Street, the fearless girl statue has a new look. She originally faced the charging bull statue to send a message about gender diversity in the workplace. Well, she now wears a familiar collar around her neck making fearless girl even more fearless than before.

In this week's "Impact Your World," a couple starts a non-profit in Chicago to help children feel represented and they're providing free books where the main characters of the story are black. It's called "Young, Black & Lit."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KRENICE ROSEMAN, CO-FOUNDER, YOUNG, BLACK & LIT: When a child sees themselves reflected in the books that they read and the books are mirrored to them, they feel value.

It wasn't something I really thought about until my niece came around and it really kind of sat in any me that there were bookstores that she would walk into and not be able to feel seen.

"Young, Black & Lit" is a non-profit organization based in the Chicago land area. Our mission is to provide children's books to youth featuring black characters at no cost to the youth or their families.

KAREEM WILSON, AMIR'S FATHER: Since 2018, we provided over 5,000 books to community centers, organizations, schools and directly to students homes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was just always a challenge finding the ones for his age. They introduced the program to the school. He was pretty excited about it. Show them the paper.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Other people say they can't do stuff, then they prove them wrong.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We try not to just focus on historical figures. I know we value their importance, but we also try to focus on some of the simple everyday life activities as you would go through, but we also have books around getting a haircut.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And Miles Morales does best Spider-man ever. His suit, better than all the other suits and he has powers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You thinks he is Spider-man.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, I do.

(END VIDEOTAPE) [17:55:00]

CABRERA: On that happy note, I'm going to sign off for tonight. Thanks for being with me. I'm Ana Cabrera and a special edition of THE SITUATION ROOM with Wolf Blitzer starts after a quick break. Have a great night.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:59:59]