We have been waiting and waiting on a slew of major decisions from the Supreme Court, and one is now in tonight. It's a loss for the gun control movement. A lot more on that in moments. But all eyes have been on the court for months now, and public trust in the justices is at an all-time low. Growing ethics scandals only fueling the scrutiny. Justice Alito blaming his wife for an upside down flag, a symbol of election denialism displayed outside his home. Justice Thomas failing to disclose even more luxury trips paid for by Texas as billionaire. The list goes on. There's also a perception out there that the court may be running out the clock, running it down to the last possible second on Donald Trump's immunity decision, a decision that we're still waiting on. As the clock takes ever closer to the debate, the conventions with the fall campaign and the election. Meantime, the possibility that Democrats might lose both the presidency and the Senate in November have some voices on the left now publicly nudging liberal justices Sonia Sotom mayor and Elaina Kagan to retire, doing so would pave the way for President Biden to appoint younger justices now who could remain on the court for decades to come.

Biden says he thinks the next President could appoint more than one justice.

Guess what? The next President, they're going to be able to appoint a couple of justices. If, in fact, we're able to change some of the justice when they retire and put in really progressive judges like we've always had, tell me that won't change your life when just Trump justices are already gutting voting rights, overturning road, decimating affirmative action, and so much more.

Elections have consequences. The future direction of the Supreme Court could be at stake, probably very much is at stake, leading us off tonight, known Trump critic and conservative attorney who has argued in front of the Supreme Court, George Conway and Republican strategist, Shermichael Singleton. Gentlemen, great to see you on this Friday night. Thanks, as always. George, we just went down the list. Alito with the flags and Thomas with the trips. We heard the audio clips this week that had folks wondering what's going on with these justices. We can show poll after poll that shows confidence in the court. If it's not an all-time low, it's pretty close to it. What the heck is going on? And do you trust the court right now on this immunity decision that's coming down the pike? Everybody thought that might come today. We're still waiting.

I'll start with the last question first. I do trust the court on this. I think the I think Donald Trump is going to lose. I think he's going to lose big. There may be a few wrinkles in the opinion that may add a few steps to the process, but at the end of the day, I don't think his argument is going to fly. In terms of delay, I wish they had not taken the case. I wish they had decided it once before. But the fact of the matter is, I don't think there is some grand conspiracy or even an effort by some of the justices to put this off to help Trump. The fact of the matter is, if the decision comes down June 24th, the week of June 24th, last week of the term, that could mean that the case goes to trial at the end of September or beginning of October, which would be highly unfavorable.

You think it could still happen?

Yes. Well, the reason is because when the case first went up to the Court of Appeals, there were 81 days. It 81 days before trial. The Court has said basically, the district Court has said that it's going to keep that 81 day schedule. If you add 81 days to the end of June, you basically get the middle of the fall campaign. It could actually backfire on Trump. But that But instead, I think the Supreme Court is just being the Supreme Court. This is one of the most important decisions that they will render in a long time. I think they didn't have to take the case. I think that the DC circuit had it right. But once they took the case, they want to get it right and they want to make sure every jot and tittle of it is correct. It's like nine separate law firms there. It's hard to herd them all. There might be a few egos involved. There might be, yeah. It's going to take till the end of June. It always was.

Sure, Michael, George, with a very reasonable rational view on all of this, giving the court the benefit of doubt. A lot of folks don't want to do that these days. Justice Thomas taking these undisclosed lavish trips. We just heard about war about them this week. Flying on private jets. Justice Alito had an election denialism symbol hanging outside the house. He was talking about that with this liberal activist who went in there with a film crew not too long ago. Folks Folks are pissed at these guys.

Look, they're pissed with the Supreme Court. They're pissed with Congress, both the House and Senate. There's a lot of anger and angst from the American people with our elected and unelected leaders. I do think George is right. The Supreme Court is going to make a consequential decision here, and the ramifications of this decision will potentially be felt for decades for presidential administrations to come. We should not want to rush this, regardless of where you may fall on the side of this. I do agree with George. He's a lawyer here, but it was always an uphill battle, this idea of complete immunity. I think most people can understand some immunity for the executive to make very tough and consequential decisions without fear of retribution from Congress or district attorneys, et cetera. But the idea of a divine rights of Kings type theory, George, is just something that's never existed in that country.

That's going to get shot down. That's one of the questions a lot of people have right now about the Supreme Court is that, not sure if you heard today, today is Donald Trump's 78th birthday. George, I don't know if you sent him a card, but we hear a lot about the candidate's ages in this race. But the ages of several Supreme Court justice put this up on screen. Justice Thomas, 75. Justice Alito, 74. Justice Robert, 69. Justice Sodomar, 69. Justice Kagan, 64. George, do you still like the idea that they can have these lifetime appointments that they can just... We're getting justices now appointed in their 40s and 50s, around my age. We're just nutty to think somebody my age is on the Supreme Court. I'm sure Michael might feel the same, but- I'm 33.

Sorry. Just saying, okay? I'm 60.

These are spring chicken. I'm 60. Justice Kagan, she's a teenager.

What about this pressure that Soto Mayr and Kagan should think about stepping down? Now, Look at the composition of the court.

Look, I understand why the Democrats feel that way because they had Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, who was 83 in 2016, had previously had pancreatic cancer and previously had colon cancer, had been in and out of hospitals for the prior 17 years or so. I understand how they feel they lost a seat. The Democrats lost a seat because of that.

Could be a 5, 4, 4.

What? Could be a 5, 4. It could have been, right. But that's why we have Amy Cohen-Barrett. I think that But you're not going to get Justice Kagan or Justice Sotomaya to retire. They are much too young to quit at this point. Kagan, I don't know that she has any health issues. Sotomar may have some, but they're still young. They still got a few years before anyone would expect them to retire. You're just not going to... These are all type A personalities. These are people who want to do their job that they've been appointed to. It's a lifetime appointment, and it's hard to get them to resign. I think it's unrealistic to be trying to pressure them to quit.

But, George, I think some of the concern from Democrats, though, is what if President Biden doesn't win in November and President Trump will more than likely get Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, and maybe a third Justice, which I'm sure scares the heck out of Democrats.

What if Sotom mayor steps down during a second Trump administration? It's possible. You get a more seven to- Yeah, but it's basically the Ruth Bader-Ginsberg scenario all over again. Then progressives think, okay, for a generation, you're not really going to get balance in the court unless something remarkable happened.

Again, I think they felt like they got burned by Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, unfortunately, but She's amazing. She made it to 87. Incredible.

Term limits. Should there be term limits?

Well, I mean, yes. I do think... Well, let me be very precise on this. You cannot term limit justices and judges of Article 3, judges and and so on. It could be possible to structure a system whereby each, you appoint a new justice every couple of years, as this has been talked about, and then you have the Supreme Court sit in panels of less than its total complement, which is what happens in the US Courts of Appeals. I don't think that would be a bad system. I think you could create a system that encourages justices to take what's called senior status in the way that the Courts of Appeals judges do. You'd end up with younger people on the court, and you'd end up with younger panels of nine sitting, and then you'd have a few more senior justices who could sit in when people recused themselves. It wouldn't be a bad system. I think one of the positive effects would be that you'd have confirmation hearings that were probably less contentious.

Just to throw another, it reminds me of the old joke, what's the difference between God and a federal judge? God does not think he's a federal judge, But anyway. No, but the other flip side of this- People laugh at God's jokes. I don't know. We're going to talk about that later, as a matter of fact. That's in the show. The Pope was talking with some comedians. But anyway. That's not a joke that they walked into a bar or something like that. But, Schermichal, The flip side of that is if Joe Biden wins re-election and the Republicans take the Senate, you could have a whole other scenario emerge where President Biden is unable to put justices on the Supreme Court because the Senate just says, You know what? We're not going to do this. Well, look, I can tell you this. We're throwing that tradition out the window, too.

I can tell you this. If President Biden wins the election, and let's say there's a justice or two who decides to step down, maybe some health or illness, takes them off of the court, I would be surprised if Republicans allow an appointment to move forward. I think they would find- Isn't that what Mitch McDonald did? I think they would find any type of Senate rule possible to say, We want to wait until there's a Republican President, even if that means waiting until 2028. George, I don't know what the rules are for this. If there's someone missing from the court. But I don't see the appetite, at least within the Republican base, that would thus put pressure on Republican officials saying, We don't want this. I think those officials would adhere to the vocal critiques of their voters.

What do you think, George? Probably so, and it will be a terrible thing for the courts. If they basically left the seat open for four years, it will be horrible.

Could a Supreme Court function with one or two missing justices? I suppose it could.

It could, but it wouldn't be functioning well, and it would further harm the authority and the functioning of the court. It would be a terrible thing for the.