Originalists, clear wording of the constitution establishes a right and you will not acknowledge it. Well, senator it would strain the canons of conduct which dont permit me to offer off the cuff reaction and, as Justice Ginsburg said, it would display disregard for the whole judicial process. Brian, our next guest says hay maker judge, Amy Coney Barrett was challenged on originalism. So how did she do? Lets? Ask Fox NEWS, contributor, George Washington, university law, professor. I think we can still call it George Washington, university Jonathan Turley Great, to have you on great to have you back. You said that was a hay maker. Her answer in Laymans terms. Well, she is extremely nimble in these confirmation hearings. She was when she was up for the appellate court. You could see the senators were trying to stay a bit out of her

reach because they have grappled with her before she is very, very hard to connect with to do serious damage and the exchanges between Cure Bin and Barrett were actually the most substantive parts of the hearing. They were very interesting. Both did good jobs in raising their views, but she was very successful in pushing back at this and saying that im applying the same rule that the democratic senators supported nominees like Kagan in invoking these same questions were asked to Kagan and Sotomayor, and the democratic senators supported them in not answering them Brian when they put up the poster Board of the families and heart wrenching stories and we mapping. They are true about healthcare and families they werent really talking to her, were they they were talking to whom thats. The interesting thing is that she was about as relevant as the Ficas plant in the hearing. Room didnt expect no answers and no

answers were given because they could not be given under the canons of judicial ethics. I objected to those pictures which I thought were highly inappropriate. They made her look like some type of judicial serial killer like these were her victims. Theyre not those pictures are based on a wildly misrepresentation of the ACA case. The ACA case is not likely to resolve in the entire overturning of the affordable care act, its based on a very narrow and at least indicated in past decisions they believe in severability. So it was really unfair to her, but there were many of her cases were being misrepresented and it was hard for her to deal with that, but I thought she did a very good job. Brian Jonathan, the Jenning GO case subtly saying listening to it and put it our terms, but in

legal terms, trying to say from what I see the ACA would survive thats, a message that Republicans should embrace at this point because they have no this point because they have no healthcare replacement on the recusal. You should recuse yourself when you were younger Bush v Gore, you fought for Bush. Should you recuse yourself this election, so tight? It gets kicked up to the Supreme Court. What do you think about the recriewfl requests? Real, quick? They are utterly absurd. The judicial rules on recusal are meant to deal with issues where you have a personal or financial interest in the case, or you were involved in the underlying litigation. None of those apply. It would be facially ridiculous for a nominee to take herself out of a major challenge later, just because she was nominated confirmed before an election, and you wouldnt want that, because its the way, what the democratic senators were doing, was trying to influence the

outcome of any case by getting her to remove herself and reduce the court to eight that by the way could result in a tie, which is not what you want in a major traumatic moment for this nation, Brian Jonathan. Finally, I know you were preparing for a segment with me, which you find emotionalliality and mentally taxing. Could you show me the notes you took to prepare for this interview laughter? I have volumes here. Brian you do. The fact is I spent weeks preparation for this yeah practicing in front of the mirror, Brian Good, as usual,.