on tuesday night, the white house put this video together with judge garland. , theam merrick garland chief justice of the u.s. court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit and i have had it for 18 years. i am married to lynn rosenman garland. met sitting next to each other. she is the most honest, straightforward person i can imagine. we have two spectacular daughters who are both -- both very much like her, very athletic. when i am standing with the president and he announces my nomination, i will feel a little bit like it is an out of body experience. it is not anything i could've imagined. my mother will watch on tv and cry. my father would be very proud. position thatest somebody who is dealing with law and making sure the laws are applied fairly can be in. civil laws are what differentiate us from most other countries. is -- fairlyork and impartially. if people trust that in society. >> people also want to be sure this investigation goes forward. >> merrick garland has been talking about what has been going on for a hearing after a bombing in oklahoma city. a truck in f

so that's odd for merrick garland. on the other hand, as you have been hearing from ari and others, merrick garland is someone who is extremely well respected here in washington, in the senate, by republicans. when he was confirmed in 1997, 32 republicans voted for him. out of the 76 who voted to confirm him. and the only no votes were really based on considerations of the size of the federal court of appeals in 1997. there was and continues to be something of a controversy about whether the d.c. court of appeals has too many judges given its work load, and that was really the issue. not many people opposed him because of who he was. he has prosecution experience, as you have said. he served in the justice department in the clinton administration. and worked very in a high visible role in the oklahoma city bombing case, and also in the unabomber case. so he has a lot of support, bipartisan support, and he's also well liked. that helps, too. he's a friend of many members of the senate, republicans and democrats. so what

garland and i urge my colleagues to do the same. to my knowledge, no one, absolutely no one disputes the following. merrick garland is highly qualified to sit on the d.c. circuit. his intelligence and his scholarship cannot be questioned. >> so that was then, dana. but this is now. i guess things change. the president was very clear. he said, "i fulfilled my constitutional responsibility to nominate someone for the supreme court. now it's up to the senate to fulfill its constitutional responsibility to have sort of a consideration and an up or down vote". but you're saying that's unlikely to happen? >> that's right. and it again goes to the point that republicans have been making since this all happened, which is, it's not about the nominee. it's about the president nominating somebody, anybody to the highest court in the land for a lifetime appointment when he is on his way out the door. and, of course, democrats and the president himself said, like, wait a minute, i've got a whole year left here and congress and the senate in part

every day the odds that judge garland will become justice garland kicks upward. are not going to witness confirmation battle tomorrow or the next day, but with the american people and american senators, as they learn more about this man into sterling credentials, our republican friends will come around. i will take questions first on judge portland. >> [indiscernible] schumer: there has been broad unity on our side. i have read pleasantly surprised how broad that is. the number one that is going to convince people, as senators go about their lives in state, they are seeing average folks day-to-day, saying why will you have a hearing? so, i think those do have an effect. of thes also the feeling american people, which has even a greater effect. if senator mcconnell stands his ground, would you [indiscernible]? chuck schumer: the momentum is an hour direction and i believe thefirst step will be senators sitting down with judge garland. you've already seen 12 are willing to do it. that number will increase. the second will be hearings. once these folks it down with

>> oh, garland was devastated. >> but garland's not cowed, and neither is roy. but do the buckaroos have enough grit left in their boots? and why does it take so long for roy jr. to open roy sr.'s locked gun safes? >> i think that was one of his final practical jokes on me. >> next -- two strange inheritance stories come together. >> here's another quiz question for you. the .405 winchester was a favorite of which american president? the answer when we return. hey how's it going, hotcakes? hotcakes. this place has hotcakes. so why aren't they selling like hotcakes? with comcast business internet and wifi pro, they could be. just add a customized message to your wifi pro splash page and you'll reach your customers where their eyes are already - on their devices. order up. it's more than just wifi, it can help grow your business. you don't see that every day. introducing wifi pro, wifi that helps grow your business. comcast business. built for business. when it comes to the fithings you love,. you want more. love romance? get lost in every embrace. into sports? fo

. >> let's talk about merrick garland. senator mcconnell said this isn't about a person, but it is. what kind of pressure is on him right now? and is there anything he can do? can he knock on doors of members of the judiciary committee and try to get a hearing? >> usually when a person is nominated they will spending a few weeks preparing for the confirmation hearings, and the confirmation hearings are political theater, where they sit before the committee and withstand questioning for two, three, four, days. and this will be unlikely confirmation battle that i have seen in my lifetime, simply because the republicans have refused to even -- to -- to hold hearings, much less take -- take a vote. so the -- the key here i think is merrick garland's impeccable credentials. i was impressed by his presence there and poise. his personal touch. all of those things will work in his favor. and this will be -- his -- his no, ma'am -- nomination will be the most scrutinized nomination in the history of the court. >> the history of the

garland is the chief judge at the d.c. circuit, one level several of the current justices served on the dc circuit before you elevated to the highest court. garland served with a man who is now chief justice of the supreme court, and graduated first in his class from harvard undergrad, graduated harvard law school and did clerk for justice william brennan. he has been in private practice and worked as a federal prosecutor. he oversaw the investigations into the oklahoma city bombing and the unit bomber so he is well respected for his work on and off the bench. he was confirmed in 1997. many lawmakers on both sides have sung his praises talking about what a great pic he is, what a good job he has done on the dc circuit. those words are used by the white house. he is saying we have had a number of people in the senate, those who would say they would block a vote on anyone saying in the past is intellectually superior, well-qualified by the american bar association. there are no questions about his intellect, writing ability

>> oh, garland was devastated. >> but garland's not cowed, and neither is roy. but do the buckaroos have enough grit left in their boots? and why does it take so long for roy jr. to open roy sr.'s locked gun safes? >> i think that was one of his final practical jokes on me. >> next -- two strange inheritance stories come together. >> here's another quiz question for you. the .405 winchester was a favorite of which american president? the answer when we return. [dad] i wear a dozen different hats doing small gigs,side gigs...gig gigs. quickbooks self-employed helps me get ready for tax time. to separate expenses,i just swipe. it's one hat i don't mind wearing. [passenger] i work for me. and so does quickbooks. it estimates my taxes,so i know how much stays in my pocket. and that's how i own it. [announcer] stay in the flow with quickbooks self-employed. start your free thirty-day trial today at join-self-employed-dot-com. you're down with crestor. alright! now there's a way you can get crestor for $3. adding crestor, along with diet, lowers bad cholesterol. crest

judge garland, chief judge garland certainly absorbed from all different kinds of mentors. he really did take to heart his experience with the very liberal william brennan, but in the wake of that, you just don't see anything like justice brennan's very liberal ideology in basically anything he's done. when you have a judge who almost never votes to overturn criminal convictions as chief judge garland's history has been, when he regularly disagrees with more liberal colleagues in those cases, you know you're not talking about someone who is going to be an intellectual leader of the supreme court's left. you're talking about somebody who is going to be the rock solid center if he can get onto the court. >> let's bring in two more of our friends, kelly o'donnell and andrea mitchell. kelly, you have watched these things for a lot of years in washington. i just was asking the same question, it's hard for people to watch this and then be hold that this in part could be designed to go down in flames, a kind of sacrificial nomination. but the republicans don't seem to be moving on

mearns says garland knew the world was watching. geoffrey mearns: "he understood the broader context in which we were operating. that we weren't simply trying to get a conviction. that we were trying to conduct ourselves as representatives of the united states in a way that would bring respect for the outcome. not just many reasons why mearns wasn't surprised when garland's name came up as a possible nominee for the highest court in the land.geoffrey mearns: "he has the interpersonal qualities of modesty and humanity that i think make him suited to have served so well as a federal judge." at n-k-u, al, local 12 news. 3 our question of the day has to do with the nomination.. should the u-s senate hold confirmation hearings on president obama's nominee for the supreme court? you can vote by going to the story at local-12-dot-com. 3 now to our coverage of march madness. the first four games have wrapped up in dayton. last night's early game was holy cross versus southern. holy cross won 59-55. they'll take on number one seed oregon fri

i chose a serious man and exemplary judge, merrick garland. over my seven years as president, in all my conversations with senators from both parties, in which i asked their views on qualified supreme court nominees, this includes the previous two seats that i had to fill, the one name that has come up repeatedly from republicans and democrats alike is merrick garland. now, i recognize that we have entered the political season, or perhaps these days it never ends. a political season that is even noisier and more volatile than usual. i know that republicans will point to democrats who made it hard for republican presidents to get their nominees confirmed. and they are not wrong about that. there's been politics involved in nominations in the past. although it should be pointed , out that in each of those instances democrats ultimately , confirmed a nominee, put forward by a republican president. i also know that because of justice scalia's outsized role on the court, and american law and the fact that americans are , closely divided on a number

circuit, but garland was not on that panel. i don't think it would be fair to accuse him of the evasive when your u.s. court of appeals judge, you are randomly assigned to panels that i believe a computer does it and if there was an abortion case that came up during his tenure, he just was not randomly assigned to the panel. it is fair to say we don't know as much about him as me -- we might want to know because he wasn't randomly assigned to it. but i think this is simply a creature of the fact that those cases are not particularly common, they are randomly assigned, and garland did not draw that straw. amy: he is most well known for overseeing the prosecution and investigation of the obama city bomber timothy mcveigh, which would put him also on the side of the death penalty. >> potentially, yes. now a lot has happened in the death penalty since then. there's a lot of new concerns that have been raised about not just racial profiling in the death penalty, but about the method we used to execute people and whether it amounts t

merrick fp garland was confirmed in 1997. after at that time seven republican senators still sitting in the sonar, those seven senators actually voted for merrick garland, including senator orrin hatch, who had this to say about him, talking about merrick garland in 1997. >> based on his qualifications, i support the nomination of mr. garland, and i encourage my colleagues to do the same. to my knowledge, no one, absolutely no one disputes the following -- merrick garland is highly qualified to sit on the d.c. circuit. his intelligence and scholarship cannot be questioned. >> now, hatch has said that things have changed now. he put out a statement saying really agreeing with senator mcconnell, and chuck grassley, saying i think highly of judge garland, but his nomination doesn't in any way change current circumstances. those circumstances being that the republicans just will not consider a nominee, no matter who he is. some is republicans in touch reelection races will feel a lot of pressure, mark crook, the illinois republic

i have the same thought you do watching merrick garland. people on the supreme court always say that basically, lightning has to strike for you to be nominated to the supreme court. because there are lots of qualified judges throughout the country. qualified people in political life who could be nominated and serve well. combination of factors. i got the sense that one of the reasons merrick garland is so emotional is he's been up to the brink twiet ce before. not it's happening. not only is he being nominated to the united states supreme court, it's happening when he altar. >> chuck todd is in the studio with us. prior to this announcement, so many on the republican side of the aisle said, no way. not now. no hearings. we don't want to have a meeting. i watched you going over your phone as this was happening. is there any crack in that? >> some crack. for instance, your mainstream conservative senator from missouri said he'd vote against the pick. he said nothing about hearings. other republican senators said, i'm sticking by my pledge of

that's not a judge garland's fault. isn't it true a lot of groups on the left were disappointed that you had another guy who at least if you look at him on paper was just like so many other federal appointees? ms. aron: when you look at president obama's record in terms of his appointment of asian-americans, latinos, african-americans, he has done more than any other president in history to diversify the federal courts. his record is unmatched. placedlighted that he sonia sotomayor on the supreme court. equally happy elena kagan is there and i don't want to second-guess the president's thinking on this but i have so much confidence in the first two nominees and justices he appointed that i think merrick garland will be just as good as his previous two picks. we have many, many years of vacancies to fill. we will undoubtedly have retirement's coming up very soon and i can only think that if it's a democrat who was elected willovember, that democrat take diversity into account. in fact, make diversity a priority, and demo

court of appeals judge, merrick garland to the supreme court. three quick garland facts. number one, he pr

is anyone saying judge garland should be confirmed? who think anyone today would be willing to come forward without reading his cases, without looking into his background. we heard a great speech by president obama. it was terrific. if i had been asked to vote right after that, i would have charged forward. that is not my job. my job is to study the qualifications of these people. it is an awesome responsibility they have. i think all of us agree that we should take a look at the record. we simply are saying, do your job. take a look at this man. yes? [indiscernible] they are already feeling it. look at the numbers. as majority of american people, democrats, independents, even more than half of the republicans think we should move forward. this is elementary school stuff. i don't know how my counterpart, mitch mcconnell, could come up with that. if i asked my caucus to go to the edge of that clip and leap over, they would not do it. they would toss me over first. [laughter]

erricki garland, a 63-year-old chief u ofÑifá appeals from the d.c. circuit, a former prosecutor,ñ oversaw÷ th oklahoma city bombing and a long-time judge on the federal bench. >>av lot at s4 oe here. an election year.ñr sen president.Ñi we'll talk about the pick in a moment. first let's bring in nbc justice correspondent pete williams. pete, what do we know about himá what message the president sending with this çópick? >> the message is he's trying to make it harder for senatew3 republicans to oppose someone well liked and has a goodr expect, matt and savannah, to hear from judge garland when the ceremony beg( but the white house is already saying he has more federal judicial experience than any other supreme court nominee in history. >> pete, that brings me to chuck.fá certainly, the white house is tryingÑi to put senate republics who vowed nojd to bring any nominee up for açóxdÑ vote in a tighter spot saying this is known as a noni] ideological judge, a centrist.$xlr(t&háhp &% this is the best you're going to supreme courtdjÑ appoin

everyone likes merrick garland. he's like the paul rudd of federal judges. ( laughter ) in fact, it's like paul rudd with a puppy's face, and then, like, the puppy's rise paul rudd's face. that's more-- yea

he nominated merrick garland because at least he sees in merrick garlanmerrick garland as really unassailable qualifications, someone who shares a similar approach to the law. >> woodruff: what would you add to that, seth waxman? >> you know, i think merrick has a reputation for being a centrist, a prudent jurist, and i want to say that, you know, since we were in college together, merrick has had the deserved reputation for being a careful, deliberate, prudent person. i don't mean to say that he's timid. he makes decisions, and he makes them when they have to be made, and he makes difficult decisions, but he doesn't decide anything. he doesn't decide things-- with the exception of his decision to marry lynn, he doesn't decide things on emotioned. >> woodruff: which he mentioned today. >> and he doesn't make decisions based on the received wisdom of other people. he scnt say, "all these people they respect think this so i should think that." you know, merrick goes back to first principle when deciding things like which ski run to take when we're skiing together. he is a careful, prudent perso

i chose a serious man, merrick garland. over my seven years as president in all my conversations with senators from both parties in which i asked their views on qualified supreme court nominees, this includes the previous two seats that i had to fill, the one name that has come up repeatedly from republicans and democrats alike is merrick garland. now i recognize that we have entered the political season or perhaps these days it never ends. a political season noisier and more volatile than usual. i know that republicans will point to democrats who made it hard for republican presidents to get their nominees confirmed. and they're not wrong about that. there's been politics involved in nominations in the past, although it should be pointed out that in each of those instances democrats ultimately confirmed a nominee put forward by a republican president. i also know that because of justice scalia's outsized role on the court and in american law and the fact that americans are closely divided on a number of issues before the c

garland is a nominee. i know him personally. i know of his integrity, his legal ability, his honesty, his acumen. he belongs on the court. >> another important point. garland was then up for a court heappeals judgeship, the one holds now. what is different? >> the republicans have talked a about that biden speech. >> they call it the biden rule. theitch mcconnell called it biden rule. if you look at the entirety -- this was biden speaking after debacle. he was trying to say, how can we get the nomination process back track? what he said, in a presidential election year, i would urge a to nominat nom somebody in the heat of the campaign, but if theoes, what he said was judiciary committee should not schedule hearings until after season is over. he didn't say no vote. he said let's wait until november. >> in that case, he was talking in june of an election year, as no nominee to be made. this is march. there's a longer period of time. said, you're misinterpreting what i'm saying. >> it's never happened before. never in washington.

i chose a serious man and exemplary judge, merrick garland. over my seven years as president, in all my conversations with senators from both parties, in which i asked their views on qualified supreme court nominees, this includes the previous two seats that i had to fill, the one name that has come up repeatedly from republicans and democrats alike is merrick garland. now, i recognize that we have entered the political season, or perhaps these days it never ends. a political season that is even noisier and more volatile than usual. i know that republicans will point to democrats who made it hard for presidents to get their nominees confirmed. they are not wrong about that. there's been politics involved in nominations in the past. although it should be pointed out that in each of those instances democrats ultimately confirmed a nominee, put forward by a republican president. i also know that because of justice scalia's outsized role on the court and in american law and the fact that americans are closely divided on a number of issues before t

you, in fact, clerked with judge garland. what do you know about merrick garland? him hereclerked with in new york. we work closely together in other areas. good to see you, kay. beyond the ideology, we have to think about what kind of judge they would be. what is unquestionable is he is very intelligent, knows the law well. he has a wonderful judicial temperament. he listens to arguments on both sides. having clerked with justice powell, that is what i had in -- identify with. vonnie: isn't that the case for most justices? isn't that a prerequisite? david: i will not name names, but there have been justices in history that have not had those qualities. vonnie: is merrick garland the most obvious choice? may notsri srinivasan have been easier to get the nomination process underway. marek has been considered in the past. as i said, wonderfully qualified, would be a terrific justice. that said, i was a little surprised, even though i'm happy for merrick. one reason i'm surprised, his age, he is my age. typically, presidents are reluctant to appoint people in their ea

garland is 63, chicago-born, harvard law. here's chief legal correspondent jan crawford. >> today i am not indicating chief judge merrick brian garland to join the supreme court. [applause] >> reporter: his experience as a federal appellate judge is deep. his credentials unquestioned. but the president today said what sets garland apart is his temperament. >> to find someone who just about everyone not only respects but genuinely likes, that is >> reporter: garland seemed a long shot, the oldest nominee in modern history, he's been on the short list for previous vacancies and passed over. today, finally, was garland's moment. >> this is the greatest honor of my life other than my wife agreeing to marry me 28 years ago. >> reporter: his wife and one of his daughters were among more than 100 supporters in the rose garden. >> i only wish my father were here to see this today. i also wish that we hadn't taught my older daughter to be so adventurous that she would be hiking in the mountains out of cell service range. [laughter] wh

judge garland, a little bit about him, he's 63 years old. he's the chief judge for the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit. reading from the associated press this morning, as we watch members gather here for the announcement. judge garland is a long time jurist, former prosecutor known as a consensus builder on what is often dubbed the nation's second highest court. he would replace conservative justice antonin scalia who died last month leaving behind a bitter election year fight over the future of the court. of course there has been reaction as expected to the coming announcement from the associated press, new york democratic senator chuck schumer says, merrick garland is a bipartisan choice for the supreme court and asks if the republicans can't support him, who can they support? also, some tweets from members of congress. congressman -- senator mike lee has said, any meeting with scotus nominee would only be a waste of the senate's time. hawaii democratic senator tweeted out moments ago, are senators going

the one name that has come up repeatedly from republicans and democrats alike is merrick garland garland. now i recognize that we have entered the political season or perhaps these days it never ends, a political season that is even noisier and more volatile than usual. point to dememrats who have made it hard for republican presidents to get their nominees confirmed and they're not wrong about that. there's been politics involved in nominations in the past ahough it should be pointed out that in each of those instances democrats ultimately cofirmed a nominee put forward by a republican president. i also know that because of justice scalia's outside role in the court and in american law and in the fact that americans are closely divided on a number of issues before the court, it is tempting to make this confirmation process simply an extension of our divided politics. the squabbling that's going on in the news every dada but to go down that path would it would be a betrayal of our best traditions, and a betrayal of the vision of our founding documents. at a time when our politics are so

you mentioned merrick garland. many of the current justices served on this circuit before being elevated to the supreme court. garland has a 19-year paper trail on the bench. that could be a plus or a minus. there is also p soft judge sri srinivasan. he is foreign born. he was born in india and grew up in kansas. he served in the solicitor general's office in the bush and oba administration. he's younger at 29. but republicans including the senate judiciary chair chuck grassley say it's not going to happen. >> this president will not be filling this current vacancy. but the president indicated he intends to submit a nomination. that's okay. he's constitutionally empowered to make the nomination and the senate holds the constitutional power to with hold consent. reporter: i think the person he picks will tell us a lot about what kinds of fight he plans to have. to put up judge sri srinivasan would ask republicans to block someone who was approved by 90% of the senate. i can tell you some conservative groups put toge

there's not going to be a vote on garland and he had to make the case that it's not about judge garland because republicans supported him in the past. he is widely respected. they're trying to make it about a principle that it should be the voters that decide. it's purely a political fight now. democrats think they have the upper hand and they can betray republicans as obstructionists. they know that republicans across the country would revolt against them and they would be in bigger trouble. it's up to the people in the fall to decide who is right here but judge garland i don't think is going to get hearings or a vote on capital hill. >> how do you think this plays with independents and the sort of voter that's undecided? do they care about the supreme court political fighting? do you think they're convinced about the talk of the biden rule and president obama's own conduct when he was a senator? or might they be moved by what we just saw from garland standing up there talking about it's the most important moment in his life and here mitch mcconnell comes and snuffs it out and he's bas

the choice of judge garland, you know him. he is probably the least controversial of any of the possible nominees, but what did you find in that extraordinary 20-minute introduction by the president that was so important, the qualities that the president described? >> well, they cut both ways, andrea. on the one hand, the reason that merrick garland hasn't been confirmed twice before is that he is a white male and now he is 63. you have to go back 20 or so nominees ago to lewis powell who was 64 to find someone in that age group nominated to the supreme court. the trend in recent years has been to nominate younger people who can be on the court longer. so his age and the fact that he doesn't touch any diversity points was against him, but i think just watching him, andrea, my sense was one of the reasons he is so surprised is that he's been to the alter twice before, twice before the president has looked at him and then decided to nominate sonya society maya and elena kagan. that's one of the reasons he was so emotional today.

today, i'm nominating chief judge america brian garland -- garland to join the supreme court. [applause] president obama: now, in law enforcement circles and in the legal community at large, judge garland needs no introduction, but i would like to take a minute to introduce merrick to the american people whom he so ably serves. he was born and raised in the land of lincoln, in my hometown of chicago, and my home state of illinois. his mother volunteered in the community. his father ran a small business out of their home. inheriting that work ethic, merrick became valedictorian of public high school -- his public high school. he earned a scholarship to harvard where he put himself through and graduated summa cum laude and put himself through law school working as a tutor, stocking shoes in a shoe store and what is a painful moment for any young man, selling his comic book selection. [laughter] president obama: been there. [applause] [applause] [laughter] merrick graduated from harvard law and the early years of his career bears the mark of excellence. he clerked for two of pres

appeals court judge merrick garland garland as his scipio court -- supreme court judge. >> he has built a track record of being a thoughtful, fair-minded judge of all is the law. >> there could be no higher public service than serving as a member of united states supreme court. >> as a prosecutor, garland he has been considered for the supreme court twice before but not nominated. garland would replace justice antonin scalia, who died suddenly last month. leave in the court evenly split with four liberals and for conservatives. senate republicans say the next deciding vote. confirmation hearings. >> the american people deserve the opportunity, during this election year, to weigh in. s top democrat president' s nominee.

and that is in part because of who judge merrick garland is but it is also in part because judge garland's nomination is happening now. judge garland's nomination is happening this year in this political environment with all this mishigas as the background political noise in the party. president obama seems to think in this time, in this place with the national politics we're having right now, merrick garland is the one key that will turn in this particular lock. is he right? joining us now is my friend, dahlia lithwick, senior editor at slate. i'm glad you could be with us tonight. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me, rachel. >> is merrick garland a liberal or a moderate? >> he's a liberal-moderate. somewhere between the two. he has a 19-year judicial record, rachel, so whatever he is, he's not a mystery and i think he's pretty much a obama kind of reach across the aisle consensus building, incremental, judicial humility moderate liberal guy. >> one of the other criteria touted about some of the other people said to be on the short list for this pick were they had been confirme

of becoming justice merrick garland. we're going to be talking about with this nomination means. this nomination happened today in the context of this red-hot political campaign that we're in right now. right? this unusually insane process we're having this year of trying to choose a successor to president obama. i mean, today, alone, we've got senator rubio dropping out of the race. we've got the real prospect that marco rubio may go further than quitting the presidential race. he may actually quit his u.s. senate seat rather than return to it. part of the way senator rubio campaigned for the presidency was by talking openly about how much he hated the job of being a u.s. senator. brags about the fact that he basically never showses up for that job. trying to turn his worst voting record in the senate into some sort of political advantage because he hates the senate so much. he's been open about that. right? so there's the prospect that he will also quit the senate. that's out there today. we've also got former rubio su

even so, with what's happening in washington, garland may not make it. at 6'3", merrick garland would be one of the most experienced justices on the supreme court. he's seen as a moderate and arguably a consensus decision maker. 19 years ago, he was confirmed by the republican led senate 76-23 for the d.c. court of appeals. >> if judge garland is not confirmable, i don't think anybody is. >> reporter: the current dean of the law school at usf worked with him under then attorney general janet reno. he says garland is not a predictable vote on the court, which doesn't please conservatives or liberals. >> what it means to me is that judge garland looks at each individual case and there's no particular pattern of his decisions. >> reporter: that may not matter. mitch mcconnell today affirmed this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president. >> there hasn't been a vacancy created in an election year in 80 years. so this will not be filled. >> reporter: but that can backfire if hillary clinton wins. while unlikely, clinton could end up picking a

since there will not be a vote, mcconnell wished garland well. democrats, however, your lining up behind president obama's supreme court pick. senator charles schumer of the senate judiciary committee joins me now. senator, thanks so much for being on. appreciate it. >> glad to be with you, jake. >> some democrats wanted president obama to pick a nominee who might do a better job of firing up the liberal base for the election, hoping to turn out voters. merrick garland seems, while very qualified, a more cautious consensus kind of choice. you know how to get voters fired up. do you wish president obama had picked somebody who might excite democratic voters more? >> no, i'm very happy with this choice. i think democratic voters are excited. they think he's a mainstream justice, there's no question about it, a judge above all. but i think what people are seeing is that someone who is so qualified and such a judge above all, not very political, is the kind who will get republicans to crack. today we saw five or six republicans who in the past had sa

and then merrick garland. he's widely respected across both sides of the aisle and is considered by many a moderate judge. he's been waiting in the wings for this opportunity for years after he was picked over for the last two seats on the high court. a graduate of harvard and harvard law school and served at the department of justice. he's 63 years old and the conventional wisdom would be that obama would prefer someone younger. of course carroll this is a unique time with republicans vowing not to hold a hearing so anything is possible. >> you are right about that pamela brown. if i were a betting woman i would say sri srinivasan and only because the senate confirmed his position on the u.s. court of appeals 97-0. marco rubio and ted cruz voted in support. and manu raju now, despite that there is already a push on the floor of the senate to defeat whoever the nominee may be. >> that's right. this started as soon as the vacancy arose. mitch mcconnell said we should wait to the next president to see that repub

garland is an extraordinary judge. he is somebody -- i did a book years ago on the supreme court and tried to follow it since. and he's exactly the sort of person that should be on the court. he's reasonable. he listens. he is not really partisan in any way. >> wait a minute. wait a minute. you know what a lot of pep are going to say is when it comes down to a decision and it's 5-4, he'll end up being with the liberal judges as opposed to the conservative justices. >> he will. look, step back. there will be liberals and conservatives on the court and if you are going to have some liberals have the sensible -- like lots of people said about scalia, they didn't agree with him. on the court. that's the way it works. you have to be a consensus like. that but i don't think he's going to make it. confirmed. >> lisa, let's pick up open this from the political side of the democrats. democratic aspect, they clearly found that this argument, do your job. you're there. you're there for another eight months or whatever it is. and

he served as a law clerk to judge garland in 1998. i'm pleased to have both of them on this program. adam liptak, i begin with you. what is behind it. obviously a man requalified and a man who has a very powerful personal story. adam: it is a brilliant political strategy, but we should start talking about judge garland's he has impeccable credentials, he is very well regarded on all sides. in that way, president obama has made life a little harder for work republicans. he may have disappointed friends on the left who may have wanted to see someone more liberal, but it will be hard for republicans, many of whom have spoken in the past in favor of judge garland, to oppose him now. they have to rely on the abstract argument that no hearing should be held for any nominee ever in the last year of a president's term. it will be harder for them to make a case about this man in particular. charlie: but to people that voted against the court of appeals, one was mitch mcconnell, the other was chuck grassley, chairman of the judiciary committee.

people already seeing willing to meet with garlands -- garland. and democratic strategists grassleyhat senator and a senator mcconnell he are digging in, saying no reason to even meet. they are right. it they may get grassley to flip and hold a hearing. if they can hold a hearing, they may be able to get him confirmed. john: it is true. collins, in susan think we will see republicans up for reelection this year recognizing that being intransigent on this may be a political problem. merrick garland is a consummate washington insider. this is a rare moment when president obama is playing the inside game. he has a lot of conservative friends, including john roberts. he has worked with republicans on the court. mark: correct. john: if you weren't going to pick someone like brian sandoval, this makes a lot of republicans in this town comfortable. a lot of them voted for him, as well. we will talk more in the next topic. not everyone is falling in line with mitch o'connell right off the bat. mark: i will republicans crank up the pressure on grassley, le

that's not a judge garland's fault. isn't it true a lot of groups on the left were disappointed that you had another guy who at least if you look at him on paper was just like so many other federal appointees? ms. aron: when you look at president obama's record overall, in terms of his appointment of asian-americans, latinos, african-americans, he has done more than any other president in history to diversify the federal courts. his record is unmatched. i am delighted that he placed sonia sotomayor on the supreme court. equally happy elena kagan is there and i don't want to second-guess the president's thinking on this but i have so much confidence in the first two nominees and justices he appointed that i think merrick garland will be just as good as his previous two picks. we have many, many years of vacancies to fill. we will undoubtedly have retirement's coming up very soon and i can only think that if it's a democrat who was elected in november, that democrat will take diversity into account. in fact, make diversit

did he say "merrick garland"? don't get me wrong, merrick garland's a good name for a judge, but it's a great name for so many other things. for instance, merrick garland, a sexy bayou vampire in an anne rice novel. or how about merrick garland, an old country estate outside of atlanta that was probably built by slaves? or merrick garland, an evil oil tycoon from an '80s prime time soap opera? what's that, ghost scalia? the kind of evil oil tycoon who could smother a supreme court justice with a pillow at a texas ranch? what?! justice scalia, your sleep number is... eternity. ha ha ha ha ha! ♪ (applause) i don't know why we're staying on that story. excuse me? one of america's finest justices doesn't deserve justice? now, merrick garland is an eminently qualified justice. so qualified that, last week, republican senator orrin hatch held garland up as an ideal bipartisan choice calling the justice "a fine man" before adding that obama probably wouldn't pick him because he's too moderate, and back in 2010, hatch c

garland is a fine nominee. i know him personally. i know of his integrity. i know of his legal ability. i know of his honesty. i know of his acumen, and he belongs on the court. >> reporter: hatch said today that times have changed. >> there is a world of a difference between being on any circuit court of appeals and being a nominee for the supreme court of the united states when you have ultimate >> reporter: and a handful of senate republicans have agreed to meet with garland, and senate judiciary committee chairman chuck grassley said he'll consider it. scott, this is a political gamble. republicans want to appear strong but not obstructionist, which could ultimately backfire to the benefit of democrats. >> pelley: margaret brennan at the white house tonight. margaret, thank you. well, the presidential election overshadows this supreme court battle, and last night republican front-runner donald trump won at least three more contests. the states in orange are trump's wins to date. blue are ted cruz. two-term governor john kasich won his first and only prim

is hardlyrick garland a liberal. in 2003, he considered the national security case, a case to determine whether guantanamo detainees could have access to habeas corpus for purposes of challenging their detention and federal courts. he rolled against guantanamo detainees having that. i completely disagree. some would argue in this case that he was faithful to the precedent that he was operating on, and because he was a judge and not a supreme court justice, he was not able to offer his own interpretation of that precedent. sense, he was faithful to his responsibility as a judge. the outcome,ith and in fact, the supreme court ultimately review the matter and disagreed as well. host: let me step in with a hypothetical. in the george w. bush administration, republicans at the white house and democrats have the senate and president bush nominates john g roberts to fill a vacancy in february or march of an election year. with democrats be doing the same thing this year? guest: i don't believe so. i believe that roberts was