Transcript for Sen. Chuck Schumer calls out Supreme Court
Right now the supreme court is hearing arguments on a major case about abortion rights, and senator chuck Schumer is under fire for comments he made at a rally yesterday. Watch. Republican legislators are waging a war on women, all women. And they're taking away fundamental rights. I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions. Justice Roberts made a rare public rebuke, calling Schumer's comments dangerous and inappropriate, and here's what the senator said just this morning. Of course I didn't intend to suggest anything other than political and public opinion consequences for the supreme court, and it is a gross distortion to imply otherwise. I'm from Brooklyn. We speak in strong language. I shouldn't have used the words I did but in no way was I making a threat. So, is this all a distraction from the fact that a major abortion rights case is being heard right now? I'm a champion of women's reproductive rights as fundamental human rights but I don't think it's productive for a senator to publicly rebuke supreme court justices before a ruling. I mean, we have constitutional separation of powers for a reason and the fact is if this had happened in reverse, then I'm sure chuck and many other Democrats would be very, very upset about it. Well, we were. It has happened. It has happened in reverse, Trump does that all the time. It was terrible then, it's not great if Democrats do it either. You know, and Gorsuch -- you know, listen, the law is the law and we will -- we'll fight when we know what the outcome is. We don't know what the outcome is. Also, I don't exactly understand why he was saying Gorsuch and Kavanaugh would suffer. It's the Republican people who are running for congress, Republican party people running for congress that might suffer because the people will not like the idea that our rights are being taken away. But how does Gorsuch and Kavanaugh suffer? What did he mean by that? How will they suffer? They're on the supreme court for life. That's why it seems to inappropriate obviously. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense that you face political consequences if you have a lifetime assignment. He did make the point though and everybody should know that if abortion rights are repealed, a lot of people will lose their seat, and he was warning them about that. Right, but as he said, his verbiage was not the best. Okay. I always thought of chuck Schumer as very even keeled in his commentary in speeches. Like I never think of him as a flame thrower, so this actually really surprised me. Just even the yelling, the way he was speaking, and him saying you won't know what hit you, look, when you have people like Steve Scalise who has literally been shot over politics, you got to be careful the way you talk. We talked about yesterday how I think all presidential candidates of a certain level should have secret service and I think that level is being on the debate stage. I think we're living in really dangerous politically polarizing times and I think if you're chuck Schumer and a lion in the senate, you have to be more careful regardless of how you feel about abortion and abortion rights and I think there's a way -- even for me being pro life, it makes me zone out when I hear rhetoric like that. We can have a responsible conversation but when you're screaming and talking about you're not going to know what hit you if you disagree, I think people tune out. The good thing about this whole conversation is that it's reminding people, voters, that you're not just voting for a president. You're voting for the supreme court. You're voting for rights taken away from you. It reminds people of that. The Republicans have been much more effective at focusing on judiciary appointments than the Democrats. Oh yeah, Obama was blocked when he tried to do it. In terms of galvanizing voter energy and enthusiasm, it's true. Now the pent lum is swinging the other way where people are waking up to the fact that these appointments will have very real consequences for years and years to come. You know, the thing that I've always been knocked out about when it comes to the supreme court is you just never know with them. Everybody said justice Roberts is just always going to vote that way and he's -- We have to do away with lifetime appointments for supreme court justices. I agree. They have to have terms. It doesn't make sense when you're appointing someone and you're literally like, ohh, he's young and healthy, he's going to be here for 30 years. Who's trying to set rules for 30 years. And the federal judges too, don't they have lifetime appointments? Some of them at very senior levels. We created lifetime appointments in the constitution when people didn't live as long. People used to step down for a variety of reasons. Now it's entirely rational for us to follow Ruth Bader Ginsburg around scrubbing every door that she touches. You got to do that for everybody because stuff that comes to kill you doesn't care how old you are. But when you're 89 and you've suffered from I think the health issues she has, that's a concern and we all respect -- I'm not religious but I'm praying for Ruth Bader Ginsburg. If you had 18-year term limits it would affect both parties. You ought to be able to get it through both parties because it's not one side or the other. It's just a better process. One would think. One would think. One would think but you know how stuff goes.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.