The Lead with Jake Tapper Aired July 29, 2024 - 16:00 ET THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. … (COMMERCIAL BREAK) TAPPER: Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, results of a presidential election called into question. The Lead with Jake Tapper Aired July 29, 2024 - 17:00 ET THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. [17:00:00] JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: -- see the data in Venezuela, where strongman leader Nicolas Maduro claims he won, but so is his political opponent. Plus, the new heightened sense of a wider war in the Middle East as the world waits to see how Israel will respond to the attack that killed 12 children in the northern Israel Golan Heights region. What stance is the U.S. taking? Biden's National Security Advisor John Kirby will be here. And leading this hour with only 175 days left in his term, President Biden is rolling out bold new proposals for the U.S. Supreme Court calling for term limits for justices, which would need the approval of Congress. He wants to strip legal immunity for future presidents, which would require constitutional changes. Biden's vice president, Kamala Harris, has endorsed these reforms as her own presidential campaign takes hold. This hour, as Biden gets ready to speak in Texas, two Democratic governors, Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan and Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, will campaign in support (inaudible). And in just a few minutes here on "The Lead," I'm going to talk to the governor of New Mexico, Democrat Michelle Lujan Grisham, as Harris faces an uproar of Republican criticism in her border state. But first, Biden's court reform plan. CNN's Kayla Tausche is at the White House. Kayla, the prospect of Congress passing these reforms is pretty much nil. How much of this is really just about rallying the Democratic base? KAYLA TAUSCHE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, that's certainly a big element of this, especially considering that President Biden first alluded to the timing of these reforms on a call with progressive lawmakers when he was trying to shore up support for his own candidacy and said that he was going to be rolling out some of these Supreme Court reforms, that he was going to need those lawmakers help in advancing some of these proposals. But, of course, that's nearly an impossible task. House Speaker Mike Johnson today calling those proposals dead on arrival. The White House's director of public engagement saying that they were going to give it the good old team try, but that they understood that there were going to be immense challenges awaiting some of those proposals, which include 18-year term limits for justices, a code of ethics that would apply to justices, as well as a constitutional amendment removing presidential immunity. That's something that would require the involvement of states as well, which makes it an even more Herculean task than before. It's also worth noting, Jake, that this is about legacy for President Biden. He began his administration by appointing a bipartisan commission on the Supreme Court. That commission produced a nearly 300-page report at the end of his first year in office that's been sitting on the shelf. And they did very detailed studies on things like term limits and an ethics code for those justices. So the president certainly had a lot of material to draw from in making this decision. And we've also now been told that Vice President Harris was deeply involved in deciding how and what to propose today, however unrealistic it may be, Jake. TAPPER: And, Kayla, Vice President Harris is going to return to the campaign trail tomorrow morning after announcing a staggering fundraising haul. What's on her schedule? TAUSCHE: Well, we know that she'll be delivering a rally in Georgia the second in two weeks that we are expecting to be a very high energy affair, much like her first campaign rally in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, was last week. What's notable about her return to Georgia after going to Battleground Wisconsin last week, is that it's a state that really became out of grasp for Democrats when Biden was the candidate. Now Harris is making a renewed push. There's a belief within the campaign and within the party that Georgia could be in play again and that Harris could be the one to deliver it again. And so that's why that visit is being watched very closely tomorrow morning, Jake. TAPPER: All right, Kayla Tausche at the White House. Thanks so much. Joining us now to discuss, New Mexico's Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham. Governor, thanks so much for joining us. So ahead of President Biden's speech today, the House Speaker Mike Johnson said these new proposals to reform the U.S. Supreme Court are dead on arrival. He went on to say, quote, "It is telling that Democrats want to change the system that has guided our nation since its founding simply because they disagree with some of the court's recent decisions." What is your response to this argument that this is about Democrats trying to change the rules because they keep losing in court? MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM (D-NM): Well, plenty of Republicans have lost in this same court as well. I think it's a desperate response for folks that know that the American public has lost total faith in the Supreme Court, the bedrock of our productive, safe democracy. The issue here is they're riddled with ethics complaints and a number of issues that don't give American's confidence that you are, in fact, receiving objective fact finding responses by the court. [17:05:01] And I think that the president's point here is telling, which is, look, no president should be able to have decades worth of Supreme Court opinions and strategies tied to that particular president's appointments when, you know, a Supreme Court opinions and strategies tied to that particular president's appointments when, you know, a democracy is about change and embodying where we are as a nation of individuals. So I'm really interested in these proposals the president is about to speak about. TAPPER: Let's talk about the race for president. You say that you've seen some renewed energy among Hispanic voters now that Vice President Harris is the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. We have seen a swing in national polling among Hispanic voters. Biden -- when Biden was the nominee or the presumptive nominee, he was trailing Trump with Hispanic voters, 50 percent to 41 percent. Those same voters now split about evenly, 47 percent for Harris, 45 percent for Trump. So, yes, she's doing better, but I think Joe Biden won 65 percent of the Latino vote in 2020. She's still far behind where she needs to be in order to win, no? GRISHAM: Well, I think one thing that we haven't quite assessed yet is that we got a whole bunch of first-time voters may not be anywhere in the polling radar. Hispanics are the youngest voters in America. We've got 66 percent of the Hispanic voters eligible in New Mexico who are going to be first time voters, 45 percent highest per capita in the nation. Hispanic voters (inaudible) I am seeing on the ground, incredible enthusiasm by young people. And how do you (inaudible) -- they're volunteering. They want to be part of strategy calls. They're interested in learning more about the candidate. They're coming to the Democratic Party. They're coming to any of the unofficial events that I'm hosting as governor. It is a sea change in attitudinal right shift, which I think bodes very well for Hispanic voters and their turnout for the vice president. TAPPER: You're a border state governor. Just yesterday, you called on the Biden administration to do more when it comes to border resources and agents. When Vice President Harris was running for president in 2019 as a senator, she said she thought crossing the border without document -- documentation should be a civil offense and it should be decriminalized. Do you want her to tack more to the center on these border issues than she -- then where she was when she was running for president in 2019? GRISHAM: You know, honestly, Jake, as a border state governor and someone who understands these issues and these pressures and frustrations, I don't want any more political labels and I don't want any more politicking about the border. We know that we have people who are desperate to seek asylum and refugee status. We need a fair, safe process for doing that. You need to be able to get visas up front. We need more economic opportunity for the countries that create in the triangle this kind of mass migration. But we also need security at the border. We've got to use new technology and tools. We don't invest in border agents or ICE. We're not smart about our ports of entry. We've just sort of languished in this political design. And it is for me despicable that the former president and Republicans continue to politicize this and weaponize these issues at the border. It harms our commercial activity, our economic activity, our public safety, our ability to work across the border with Mexico to make sure we're all safer. I'm sure you saw two huge arrests related to the cartel happened actually in New Mexico in the El Paso sector. So I don't want anyone anywhere politically except pass comprehensive immigration reform. This is a candidate who believes in that, who stood up for that. And in the meantime, the Biden-Harris administration have provided relief to states like New Mexico by getting agents where we need them most. TAPPER: Okay. I want to ask you another question because you've had very kind words to say about Arizona Senator Mark Kelly from neighboring Arizona as a possible Kamala Harris choice for vice president. You haven't yet officially endorsed him for that job. Why not? GRISHAM: Well, I don't think my endorsement would matter in the slightest. This is a personal pick for the vice president. And what I was pointing out is it's lovely to have your neighbor and friend in the mix. This is an incredible bench. The governors that folks are reporting, I mean, I'm not in the know about who's being vetted, who isn't. But it really points to we've got a Republican candidate who appears by public reporting to have potentially buyer's remorse and a guy that's focused on single women and cats. [17:10:04] And you've got this huge bench of governors and senators and cabinet secretaries and a huge Democratic reflection from, you know, older to more experienced candidates in the mix. This should make Americans feel great about the potential of continuing to move this country forward. I know it inspires me. TAPPER: Given the Republicans continually attack -- GRISHAM: But I'm not Mark Kelly. Who doesn't want (inaudible) with them? TAPPER: Given that the Republicans continually attack the Biden administration over the border and immigration and it is consistently where voters give the Biden Harris administration the lowest marks, do you think it would help Vice President Harris to pick a running mate from a border state? GRISHAM: Listen, I don't -- that's going to hurt in any way. And I think people do want a productive set of responses. But again, and I really appreciate your focus here, Jake, we need to be talking not about responding to Republicans alleging chaos. I mean, we've got the lowest border crossings since the Trump administration, down by 55 percent. We're doing the right work in this administration. But it's easy to change perception, demonizing immigrants, having really heinous. Frankly, it's pure evil the way in which they talk about minorities and immigrants in this country. And so to divide the country, to stoke fear and hate as opposed to that we're doing the right work. But it will never be enough until Congress stops weaponizing border issues. Meantime, states like mine, we understand. I understand smart border security. I worked on the USA Act with Senator McCain and Will Hurd from Texas and Congressman Aguilar. We had a really good package. Probably Trump wasn't going to sign it. We know the damage to attacking Dreamers and their parents. We've got so many mixed status families. Half of the children in California have an immigrant parent. I mean, this makes no sense to be demonizing. I think let's solve problems. TAPPER: All right. GRISHAM: We know we can. We need to think we can do that. TAPPER: Governor, thank you so -- thank you so much. President Biden is stepping out right now to speak marking the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act. Let's listen in. (BEGIN LIVE VIDEO) JOE BIDEN, PRESIDNT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Thank you. (APPLAUSE) Thank you. (APPLAUSE). Thank you, thank you, thank you, really. Thank you. Please. Please. (APPLAUSE) Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. Ambassador, thanks for that introduction and above all for your friendship over the years. There's only one word that comes to mind every time I think of Andy Young. Words of integrity, absolute integrity. Thank you to the Johnson family for carrying forward the legacy of a truly great president and first lady. Your mom was incredible as well. (APPLAUSE) The same goes to Mark Updegrove, president of the LBJ Foundation. It's great to be back here. I thank you all and distinguished guests gathered here today. Look, I was in college at the University of Delaware in my early beginning years when I heard the news that President Kennedy had been assassinated. I remember exactly like anybody in my generation remembers exactly where they were sitting, standing or walking. I was on the steps of one of the halls, one of the university halls called Hullihen Hall at the university, listening on transistor radio with three other people. Seemed unbelievable. And then later watching President Johnson help the nation find a way forward. His first address after the tragedy, President Johnson said, and I quote, "Nothing could more eloquently honor President Kennedy's memory than the earliest passage of the Civil Rights Bill." That's what he said. (APPLAUSE) As a kid coming up. I always admired President Johnson for his public service, whether it was a schoolteacher in southern Texas, South Texas, master of the United States Senate, historic vice president and president. This philosophy was simple. In a great society, in a great society, no one, no one should be left behind. He'd say -- [17:15:04] (APPLAUSE) -- it's time for us to come to see that every American gets a decent break and a fair chance to make good. As Andy Young said, President Johnson met repeatedly with the civil rights leaders and build a coalition to bring that vision to life. For 50 years, the LBJ Foundation has convened this symposium to reflect one of the crowning achievements, the Civil Rights Act of 1964. A defining moment that has since opened doors of opportunities for all Americans regardless of race, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religion, national origin. Together with the Voting Rights Act and the Fair Housing Act, these three landmark laws he signed are remarkable in their scale and their scope. Taking together, these three acts have made this nation fundamentally more fair, fundamentally more just, and most importantly, fundamentally more consistent with our founding principles, for real. (APPALUSE) And we're a better nation because of them. We must be clear, their work, our work is not done. It's not done. We do not celebrate these laws as part of our past, but as critical components of our future. President Johnson understood what President Lincoln understood in his own time that the courts would determine the scale and scope, the scale and scope of our laws. Over 100 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, President Johnson vowed, in his words, to do this job that Lincoln started, to do this job that Lincoln started by challenging the court to live up to its constitutional responsibility. He did that by nominating Thurgood Marshall as the first black justice of the Supreme Court. (APPLAUSE) And by aggressively defending civil rights throughout the courts. But now, we live in a different era. In recent years, extreme opinions that the Supreme Court has handed down have undermined long- established civil rights principles and protections. 2013, Supreme Court in Shelby County case gutted the Voting Rights Act, opening the floodgates to a wave of restrictive voting laws that have seen states across the country pass. In 2022, the court overruled Roe v. Wade and the right to choose that had been the law of the land for 50 years, 50 years. The following year, the same court eviscerated affirmative action, which had been upheld and reaffirmed for nearly 50 years as well. And now there's an extreme movement and agenda called Project 2025. Well, by the way, they're serious, man. They're planning another onslaught attacking civil rights in America. For example, Project 2025 calls aggressively attacking diversity, equity, and inclusion across all aspects of American life. This extreme MAGA movement even proposed to end birth rate citizenship. That's how far they've come. End birthright citizenship, which if you're born in America, you're an American citizen. That's how extreme these guys are. This issue and so many other civil rights that Americans take for granted are likely to come before the court in the years to come. And most recently and most shockingly, Supreme Court established in Trump v. the United States a dangerous precedent. They ruled, as you know, that the President of the United States has immunity for potential crimes he may have committed while in office, immunity. This nation was founded on the principle there are no kings in America. Each of us is equal before the law. (APPLAUSE) No one is above the law. And for all practical purposes, the court's decision almost certainly means that the president can violate their oath, flout our laws, and face no consequences. Here's what Justice Sotomayor, Supreme Court Justice, wrote under dissent and I quote, "Under the majority's reasoning, President now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. [17:20:00] Orders the Navy SEAL Team Six to assassinate the political rival, immune. Organizes a military coup to hold on the power, immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon, immune. In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law." Just what Justice Sotomayor wrote in her dissent. Folks, just imagine what a president could do in trampling civil rights and liberties given such immunity. The court's being used to weaponize an extreme and unchecked agenda. This decision is a total affront to the basic expectations we have for those who wield the power in this nation, that they are expected to be wholly accountable under the law. The president is no longer constrained by the law, and the only limits on abuse of power will be self -imposed by the president alone. That's a fundamentally flawed view and a fundamentally flawed principle, a dangerous principle. On top of its extreme decisions, the court is mired in a crisis of ethics. These scandals involving the justices have caused public opinion to question the court's fairness and independence that are essential to faithfully carrying out its mission of legal justice under the law. For example, there are documented reports of a decades-long effort to reshape the judiciary, including the Supreme Court backed by shadow special interest, but also support Project 2025. Undisclosed gift to justices worth hundreds of thousands of dollars from wealthy benefactors who have interest before the very court they're contributing to. Conflicts of interest from those connected to January 6th insurrectionists, and a blatant attack on nominating and confirming justices of the court itself. Do you all remember when Justice Scalia died in February of 2016, and the Republicans blocked the President's nomination, President Obama's nomination, to fill that vacancy for nearly a year by making up an entirely new standard that there be no confirmations of the court during an election year. But then when Justice Ginsburg died in 2020, Republicans rushed through the President Trump's nominee. At the very same time, votes are being cast in an election that Trump would lose. It's outrageous. (APPLAUSE) I know I don't look at it, but I served in the Senate for 36 years. Including as Chairman and Ranking Member of the Judiciary committee. I've been told that I've overseen more Supreme Court nominations as Senator, Vice President and President than anyone in history, anyone alive today, I should say. (APPLAUSE) I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers laid out in our Constitution. But what's happening now is not consistent with that doctrine of separation of powers. Extremism is undermining the public confidence in the court's decisions. As soon as I came to office, I convened to bipartisan presidential commission on the Supreme Court of the United States, comprised of leading constitutional scholars, both liberal and conservative, to provide recommendations on potential reforms to the court. I've been careful in these deliberations because these are serious, serious decisions. In the face of increasing threats to American democratic institutions, I use the Commission's analysis, and today I'm calling for three bold reforms to restore trust and accountability to the court in our democracy. As the press shouted to me as I got off of Air Force One, the Republican Speaker of the House said whatever he proposes is dead on arrival. Why I think his thinking is dead on arrival. (APPLAUSE) First, I'm calling for a constitutional amendment called No One Is Above The Law Amendment. It holds -- (APPLAUSE) And I mean you sincerely, it holds it as no immunity for crimes former president committed while in office. I share -- (APPLAUSE) -- our founder's belief that president must answer to the law. The president is accountable in the exercise of the great power of the presidency. [17:25:00] We're a nation of laws, not kings and dictators. (APPLAUSE) The decision can be boiled down to the title of one case, Trump versus the United States. The court asserted it was making a ruling for the ages. That isn't true. The court made a ruling for one, a former president. No other president of our history has asked for this kind of immunity for criminal actions. And no president, no former president, not me, not one, not one, has and should have been given any exception to this with such immunity. The second thing I'm asking for, we've had term limits for presidents of the United States for nearly 75 years after the Truman administration. And I believe we should have term limits for the Supreme Court justices in the United States as well. (APPLAUSE) In fact, the United States is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats of their high court. Term limits would help ensure that the court membership changes with some regularity. That would make timing for the course nomination more predictable unless arbitrary. It reduced a chance than any single presence he imposes undue influence in generations to come. The bipartisan commission I convened analyzed various term limit structures. Based on their report, I believe the best structure is the 18-year term limit. That would help ensure the country would not have what it has now. An extreme court that's a proud of an attack on the confirmation process that's been weaponized by those seeking to carry out an extreme agenda for decades to come. By the way, these guys mean it. These guys mean it. Project 2025 is real. They mean it. Third, I'm calling for binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court. (APPLAUSE) The Supreme Court's current ethics code is weak and even more frightening voluntary, voluntary. Any code of Congress must be enforceable. Under reform, I propose, justice would be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity, recuse themselves in cases in which they have -- they or their spouses have a financial or other conflict of interest. Most people don't realize that Congress passed the law decades ago that says all federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, have to recuse themselves in such cases. But the current justices insist on enforcing that requirement themselves without any public oversight or compulsive. See, that's their decision. They don't have to tell us how they made it. That might work. The court was actually enforcing those requirements, but they are not. The court is not self-policing. The court is not dealing with the obvious conflicts of interest. We need a mandatory code of ethics for the Supreme Court, and we need it now. (APPLAUSE) My fellow Americans, based on all of my experience, I'm certain we need these reforms. We need these reforms to ensure trust in the courts, preserve the system of checks and balances that are vital to our democracy. Where also common-sense reforms that a vast majority of the American people support as well as leading constitutional law scholars, progressive and conservatives. I look forward to working with Congress to implement these necessary reforms. A number of members of Congress here today. Let me close to this. President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 just two days before the 4th of July. He said in that bill signing, and I quote, "This is a proud triumph, yet those who founded our country who the freedom would be secure only if each generation fought to renew in the largest meaning," end of quote. That's what I've tried to do throughout my career inspired by the cause of civil rights. (APPLAUSE) [17:30:05] That's what got me involved. Initially. My state was a state that was segregated by law. We were one who only reason fighting this side of the South we couldn't get there. I'm serious. What motivated me to be a public defender? County councilman. I'll never forget, I had a good job with a big trial firm. And in Delaware, you have to study for the bar for six months before you're allowed to take it. And in the meantime, while I was studying for the bar, as Dr. King was assassinated. We're the only state in the nation, city in the nation that had a military station every quarter are drawn bayonets for 10 months, for 10 months, insisting because we had a very conservative Democratic governor. In those days, when the Democrats won, they could choose to be part of the Southern governors or Northern governors, Northeast Governors Conference. I chose the Southern Governors Conference last time. But guess what? Got me engaged. I love reading these biographies. You may know that I knew I was going to run for president. I remember walking in to the public defender's office, which was part time at the time and asking him for an application because I wanted to join the public defender's office. And he looked at me, his name is Randy Kearns, he said, don't you work for Pickett Ward (ph), Bernie Sanders? I said, yes. Why then would you want to do this? It's not a joke. But I said, let me do it. I became a public defender. Folks, here's the deal. Because I got engaged like a lot of you do, whether you run for office or not, and get engaged and you want to change things. So I kept trying to change the Democratic Party in my state, which is very conservative. And then a group of people came to me as my senator knows, Chris Coons came to me and said, look, we want you to run for state Senate. I said I can't. I can't go to Dover all the time. I'm just starting a law firm, a part time public defender. And then he came back to me and said, why don't you run for the county council. I said, I can't. He said, you stupid SOB. It's right across the street there. I'm serious. It meets only twice a week. So my sister, my best friend, manage my campaign. And we picked a district that we couldn't possibly win, no democratic everyone. But my problem was I had my sister during my campaign. Everyone. Next thing I know is part of a group assigned as young senators, young elected officials to try to bring the party around and get someone to run for the United States Senate. And I was put on a commission when you're the young lawyer to get to turn the lights on and off after every meeting. And so I remember going down to the Democratic Convention off year in Dover, Delaware. And after the afternoon session, went back and I was in my room, nice motel, motel you just drive up to get out, walk in your door there. And then, an eight by 10 bathroom, a shower, stall. And I had my towel around me and a shaving cream on my face and I heard bam, bam, bam on my door. And I thought it was the guys that came down with a guy with a real how to talk show name, Bob Cunningham was a big civil rights guy. And two others. So I thought of him. I walked open the door. There was a former governor, former Supreme Court justice, I swear to God, the state chairman and the former congressman. I said we just had dinner. I said I'm sorry gentlemen. And I walked in and ran to the bathroom (INAUDIBLE) I could put something on it on there. I walked back out of the towel. I'm standing against the nail destined out of the wall. And those -- on the beds that are nailed to the headboard end of the wall for him sitting across said, Joe, we're thinking you should run through the United States Senate. I said gentlemen, are you crazy -- are you serious? And there I made their case, I hope all of you had a professor's enlighten his mind. I had one professor named Dr. Ingersoll, my political philosophy professor at the University of Delaware which is between Dover and where I was going home. [17:35:06] So I called her I got stopped by and see him. And I said, what do you think I should do? He said, Joe, remember what Plato said, I'm thinking what the hell the Plato's -- seriously. So Plato said the penalty could people pay for not being involved in politics being governed by people worse themselves. I spoke to my (INAUDIBLE) wife, she's -- look, Joe, you're working 40 hours a week trying to set up a law firm and you're working 40 hours a week as a public defender, get in and get out. Next year you know I was running. We won by -- Nixon won my state by 60 percent of the vote, but we won by staggering 3,800 votes. I didn't know what the hell I was doing. But look, I want to be able to be -- I had to wait a little bit to sworn in, you got to be 30 to be sworn in. And then I had -- I was vice president -- the first African American president in American history. My presence to our first woman vice president. I've made clear how I feel about Kamala and she's been an incredible partner to me, a champion throughout her career. She'll continue to be an inspiring leader and project his very idea of America. The idea that we're all created equal deserve to be treated equally throughout our lives. We've never fully lived up to that, but we've never walked away from it. We've never walked away because leaders like Lyndon Baines Johnson. My fellow Americans, in two years will commemorate the 250th anniversary of the signing the Declaration of Independence. That's July 4, 2026, will be a moment not only about our past, but about our future. Imagine that moment and ask yourself, what do we want to be? We can must be protected and expand our civil rights in America, we can and must prevent the abuse of presidential power and restore faith in the Supreme Court. We can and must strengthen the guardrails of democracy. They must have to remind ourselves who we are, we the United States of America, and there is nothing, nothing beyond our capacity, nothing when we do it together. So let's stay together and God bless you all. Lyndon Johnson, Ladybird Johnson. May God bless the whole family. Ladies and gentlemen, may God protect our troops. Thank you for listening. TAPPER: President Biden speaking at the LBJ Library and Museum. The panels here everyone standby we're going to squeeze in a quick break. We'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) [17:42:06] …