MELBER: Right. You're making the point -- I'll bring Elie in here, that it just depends how cynical people want to be about the courts. It is true that the Supreme Court does still resolve many things at near unanimous votes. All sorts of technical things. That are not always tied to the voting block of the -- the party of the appointment. But Elie, people are concerned about the Obamacare one, not because it's a strong argument, to Emily's point. Obamacare's been upheld many times. But because it could be a political grab that where you didn't have the votes last time with roberts, you might have it now.

MYSTAL: Look, the ACA was already in dangerous condition when RBG was still alive. The Republicans who are telling you right now that the ACA is safe because the challenge is so thin are the same people who told us that that challenge was really thin when it came up to the lower court, where Republicans won. And then when it went up to the fifth circuit where the Republicans won. So while I agree legally it's a dumb argument, being a dumb argument does not stop Republicans when they get it in their mind to do something. Right? So for the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, to act like they don't know how Amy Coney Barrett is going to vote on the ACA, how they don't know how she's going to vote on issues of a woman's right to choose is intellectually dishonest. The only reason why she is being put forward as a nominee is because they are confident in her positions as opposed to the positions of say a John Roberts. If the Republicans were confident that Roberts was with them, as he is 80% of the time, they would not be trying so hard to push forward a 6-3 majority on the court. They would be happy with their 5-4 majority on the court.

MELBER: Right. As you say, it's about the results not padding the -- padding the voting block. And it is -- it is a turning point, as we've emphasized in our coverage. Because this is the first time Trump is switching someone. Not replacing, for example, Scalia with someone who is Scalia-ish or maybe a little extra Scalia on the top, but, rather, a complete shift. Lindsey Graham said something that, you know, surprising as it may be, Elie, I think we should take seriously and genuinely and not question his motives. Just kidding. It's Lindsey Graham. Take a look.

(CLIP)

GRAHAM: Justice Ginsburg, she was confirmed 96-3. Now, those were days that have since passed. I regret that. I don't know what happened between then and now. I guess there's -- we can all take some blame.

(END CLIP)

MELBER: Elie, your view of Lindsey Graham, the Chairman there mixing a bit of lamentation for partisanship with a sort of generalized ignorance as if he doesn't know what's happening in the committee he runs.

MYSTAL: I will tell you exactly what happened between then and now. In 2016, Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland and that committee refused to give him the hearing. The hearing that we saw today, the respect that was given to Amy Coney Barrett today by listening to her talk is the respect that the Republicans never gave to Merrick Garland. If they had given him a hearing and voted him down, that would be one thing, but they didn't even give him a hearing and the reason why they didn't, they said, is because you shouldn't have a nominee put forward to be even considered after the primaries have started.

Now, as you just said in your last couple of segments, Ari, we are in the middle of an election that people are actually voting on. So the hypocrisy is off the -- is off the charts, but this goes -- Graham's statement and this goes to the general feeling of people watching the hearings of what was going on. The Republicans spent all day as victims in search of an assailant, right? They kept worrying about attacks that were never coming from the Democrats. The fact that the Democrats weren't making the attacks the Republicans worried about apparently didn't matter.

MELBER: Right.

MYSTAL: They still have this, dare I say, persecution complex about what's going to happen to their nominees. I heard one of them say, I think it was Joni Ernst, talk about how Democrats always do this when Republicans nominate a woman to the Supreme Court. Man, the Republicans haven't nominated a woman to the Supreme Court since 1981.