Senate confirms Amy Coney Barrett

"The View" co-hosts and guest co-host Bari Weiss react to the new Supreme Court justice and discuss if the court could be restructured.
10:57 | 10/27/20

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:



Skip to this video now

Now Playing:


Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Senate confirms Amy Coney Barrett
Joy is not here today. Anna is not here today. Joining us as guest co-host please welcome author of the book "How to fight anti-semitism" Bari Weiss. Thank you. History was made last night when Amy coney Barrett was sworn in as our newest supreme court Julian assange. Even though she didn't get a single vote from the Democrats she pledges to be a judge for all Americans. Take a look. A judge declares Independence, not only from congress and the president, but also from the private beliefs that might otherwise move her. The judicial oath captures the essence of the judicial duty, the rule of law must always control. My fellow Americans, even though we judges don't face elections, we still work for you. Well, so, that sounded good. I think it made a point. I always believed that justices when they become supreme court justices have to -- they change like Anthony Kennedy did. He was a very right wing guy and seemed to be judging about the how do you feel when you look at this and you hear this?how do you feel about how it all went down, Sara? The whole process felt rushed and for my personal beliefs it was inappropriate to push this through. Even the pictures of swearing in, this happened hours after she was confirmed. It was dark out. It felt secretive and strange. This is the first time in 151 years she didn't receive one single vote from the minority party. It kind of spoke to how divided we are. There was a bit of heavy-heartedness as I watched this. It made me sad. Swearing in a supreme court justice should be a great moment for our cou a and also for her as an individual. If it wasn't her, it would have been someone else. I don't blame her personally. What a heavy burden to bear on such a momentous moment. I think it kind of spoke to how divided we are. Everyone raced to the corners of their party. It was party over people. The only people that gave me hope was senator Susan Collins. She said something that resonated with me. She said what I have concentrated on is being fair and consistent. I don't think it's fair or consistent to have a senate confirmation vote prior to the election. That was only one person. That was kind of where I had to rest my hope. Sunny, you heard all of that. What was your impression? You know, of course he put her in three years ago so that he could confirm her, you know, in a couple years. How do you feel about it? Do you feel like she's ready for this or is this something you should get thrown into? Well, look, she's a constitutional law scholar. I don't know that anyone is questioning her legal chops. She's only been a judge for, you know, three years. She was put on the circuit court I believe in 2017. She's never tried a case before. She's never argued in front of the supreme court. That kind of experience is lacking. She certainly is a briiant constitutional law scholar. That being said, it was really odd that she even participated in the pomp and circumstance that we saw yesterday. She didn't owe president trump anything. She didn't have to be on the white house grounds, especially after the super spreader event of her appointment at the rose guard. I thought it was poor form. I thought it showed a tremendous lack of judgment. I think her appointment is really going to change the way the supreme court is going to -- not only handle cases, but the way the supreme court is going to look going forward. We all know the Republican party has been packing the supreme court for decades. They've been packing the judiciary for decades. Trump has put now three justices on the supreme court and just dozens and dozens of judges on the federal judiciary. I think what we'll see is perhaps the Democrats unpacking the supreme court so there's more of a balance because right now the supreme court does not reflect the values of America. The supreme court now reflects the minority of the values of America. That is important because it's supposed to really reflect what is a balance of American values, with a swing justice deciding sort of what the Lawis. That is not what we are seeing now. This is going to lead, I think, to an unpacking of court which may lead to 13 justices which would reflect the federal appeals courts around the country. Or some impeachments which is possible with supreme court judges. Bari, when you look at this, did you think this was a little quick or did you think I'm not sure she's the person or were you comfortable that she might be the person? We don't know. I'm confused about what nny's saying about packing and unpacking the court. Packing the court is about adding more justices to the bench which is something that AOC isdvocating for. Packing the court doesn't mean appointing justices that some people don't like. That's really where the debate is. Everybody knew that Amy coney Barrett had the votes to get through. You can be angry with the Republicans about their high hypocrisy. I think it's interesting that there's tons of discussion about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, mourning her death, the anger that a lot of liberals and Democrats feel of Republicans not honoring her last wish. In 2019 Ruth Bader Ginsburg was asked if she believed in court packing, which was already in the ether at that point. She opposed it. She said nine was a good number. One thing a lot of centrists and moderates are looking for is whether Joe Biden willave the strength to stand up to the left wing of his party. The fact that he has refused to say on the record whether or not he'll pack the court is suspicious. The fact that journalists aren't forcing him to answer the question is pretty ridiculous as far as I'm concerned. Can I correct Bari on something? Hold on one second. I think when sunny was talking about packing the court, I think she was talking about the fact that the lower courts have been I don't think she was talking about the supreme court. That's what I took from you sunny. I was talking about the supreme court. You were talking about the supreme court? You're wrong. I was in particular talking about the supreme court being packed. I use those words very specifically because if you look at an article in "News week" written by Tom Rodgers, it's entitled "Unpacking the supreme court." The Republicans have been packing the federal judiciary. In order to unpack the supreme court, meaning unpack the culture, unpack the values on the supreme court, in order to do that you would have to add either term limits, age limits or you would have to add justices which would then balance the supreme court which would lead to an unpacking. I used that term very specifically because I was referring to Tom Rodgers' article which has been discussed very much. I understand, but -- To your other point, Bari, about Joe Biden he answered that question. He said he was going to study the issue of the supreme court. That's not answering the question. I think it is a good answer. It's not. It's a dodge. He's answering the question in a bipartisan way because he wants this country, not to be as divided as it has been. He wants to bring the country together. The way to do that is to study the issue in a bipartisan way. I think that's the best answer anyone has really provided. Studying the issue is great. When a presidential nominee says he's unwilling to answer the question -- the minute after Amy coney Barrett was confirmed last night had all of the most in my view -- where the energy in the democratic party ilhan OMAR, AOC were tweeting about packing the supreme court. That's a live and relevant issue. I believe it's a dodge to talk about appointing a commission. He should have a straight answer to that just like rbg did. He did answer this issue twice. The fact that AOC and those young ladies -- they don't speak for the whole party. Agreed. There are lots of ways to shift this. One could impeach judges that have not stuck to the rules O being judges on the supreme court. That's been done several times. There's a lot of ways to balance stuff out. I'm quite happy he didn't I'll tell you why and then we'll go to break. I'm glad he didn't answer because frankly he doesn't have to. You know, we ask a lot of questions. We want answers. We don't always get them. Now I don't think we're going to get them the way we want them now. You don't think -- This will go up to the bottom of it. You don't think the American people are entitled to an answer about that? I think they will get an answer when he's ready to give one, when he has the information he's comfortable sharing. No, I don't think that the American people are used now to getting answers to the questions we ask because we have an administration that doesn't ever answer a question.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"duration":"10:57","description":"\"The View\" co-hosts and guest co-host Bari Weiss react to the new Supreme Court justice and discuss if the court could be restructured.","mediaType":"default","section":"ABCNews/theview","id":"73858865","title":"Senate confirms Amy Coney Barrett","url":"/theview/video/senate-confirms-amy-coney-barrett-73858865"}