>>> WITH LESS THAN THREE MONTHS LEFT IN JOE BIDEN'S TERM, IT IS UNLIKELY HE WILL ACHIEVE ANY MEANINGFUL SUPREME COURT REFORM. A RECENT POLL RELEASED BY EMERSON COLLEGE UNDERSCORES JUST HOW UNPOPULAR THE COURT IS AND WHY REFORM MAY NOT BE A FLEETING DREAM. CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING NUMBERS. ONLY 34% OF THE COURT A POSITIVE APPROVAL RATING. 60% BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN AGE LIMIT TO SERVE ON THE SUPREME COURT. WHILE 58% SUPPORT INTRODUCING TERM LIMITS. AND 71% BELIEVE THAT SUPREME COURT JUSTICES SHOULD BE HELD TO THE SAME ETHICAL STANDARDS AS ALL OTHER FEDERAL JUDGES. NEVERTHELESS, AND DESPITE THESE NUMBERS, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CURRENTLY MAINTAINS LIFETIME APPOINTMENTS WITH NO ENFORCEABLE ETHICS CODE. JOINING US NOW IS TOM ROGERS, THE EDITOR AT LARGE AT NEWSWEEK AND THE FOUNDER OF THE NBC AND OF MSNBC . TOM, IT IS GOOD TO SEE YOU HERE ON THE KATIE PHANG SHOW . AN OBSERVATION FROM THIS EMERSON COLLEGE POLL IS THAT 54% BELIEVE THAT THE JUSTICES REFLECT THE POLITICS OF THE PRESIDENT WHO APPOINTED THEM. AS WE ARE ON THE EVE OF THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL ELECTION IN MY LIFETIME, HOW MUCH IS AT STAKE ESPECIALLY IF THE NEXT PRESIDENT COULD APPOINT TWO MORE SCOTUS JUSTICES? >> KATIE, GREAT TO BE WITH YOU. I LOVE HOW YOU TACKLE LEGAL ISSUES. I THINK PART OF THE STRONG DISAPPROVAL OF THE COURT'S PERFORMANCE COMES FROM THE FACT THAT AS YOU LAST POINTED TO AT THE 54% BELIEVING THE COURT REFLECTS THE POLITICS OF THE PRESIDENT THAT APPOINTS THEM, THAT INSTEAD OF THE SUPREME COURT BEING AN INDEPENDENT BODY MAKING DECISIONS THAT ARE SOUNDLY BASED ON A REASONABLE LEGAL JUDGMENT, IT HAS BECOME HIGHLY POLITICIZED. YOU COUPLE THAT WITH PUBLIC PERCEPTION THAT THE COURT IS HIGHLY ETHICS CHALLENGED AND TOTALLY OUT OF STEP ON TWO OF THE MOST IMPORTANT SOCIAL ISSUES THAT THE COUNTRY CONFRONTS, ABORTION AND GUN CONTROL. YOU REALLY HAVE A FORMULA FOR SEEING HOW A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES APPOINTMENT OF JUSTICES CAN TOTALLY SHAPE THE POLITICS OF SOME OF OUR MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES. >> TOM, WHAT I ALSO LIKED ABOUT THIS POLL IS THAT IT DOES DEEPER THAN WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON THE SUPREME COURT. IT EXPORTS HIM THE MOST SIGNIFICANT OPINIONS THAT HAVE COME OUT RECENTLY LIKE THE PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY RULING. I WAS MARVELING AT THE GENDER DIVIDE I SAW HUBERT 27% OF AN APPROVED OF THE IMMUNITY DECISION WHILE 44% OF MEN GAVE THEIR APPROVAL FOR THAT IMMUNITY RULING. WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT HOW WOMEN ARE VIEWING SCOTUS AND ALSO THE IDEA OF GIVING SO MUCH POWER TO ONE INDIVIDUAL, WHO HISTORICALLY, HAS ONLY BEEN A MAN? >> WE'RE SEEING GREAT GENDER DIVIDE WHEN IT COMES TO PERCEPTION OF THE COURTS JUST AS WE ARE GENERALLY POLITICALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS OF HARRIS VERSUS TRUMP, MASSIVE GENDER DIVIDE IN TERMS OF WHERE SUPPORT LIES. WHILE YOU SEE BROUGHT SUPPORT FOR CERTAIN WAYS OF CHANGING THE COMPOSITION OF THE COURT, TERM LIMITS IN PARTICULAR, AND LIMITING A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE 'S ACTIVE TERM TO 18 YEARS. YOU REALLY SEE THE GENDER DIVIDE EVEN GREATER WHEN IT COMES TO MORE RADICAL WAYS OF CHANGING THE COMPOSITION OF THE COURT, NAMELY EXPANDING THE COURT BY FOUR JUSTICES. THERE YOU SEE WOMEN VERY MUCH SUPPORTING THAT IF IT WOULD HELP OVERTURN SUPREME COURT'S DECISIONS ON ABORTION AND GUN CONTROL WHILE MEN OPPOSE AN EXPANSION OF THE COURT. >> I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE I WANTED TO ASK YOU MORE ABOUT THAT. THE MAJORITY OF THE RESPONDENTS ON THIS POLL EXPOSED EXPANSION TO 13 JUSTICES. WHEN YOU FRAME IT LIKE YOU JUST DID, BRING THE QUESTION OF EXPANSION IN TERMS OF HOT BUTTON ISSUES WITH ABORTION AND GUN CONTROL, MORE THAN TWO THIRDS OF DEMOCRATS ENDED UP SUPPORTING EXPANSION OF THE COURT. LET US BE CLEAR, TERM LIMITS ARE GOOD BUT COURT EXPANSION ISN'T UNLESS YOU PRESENTED THROUGH THE LENS OF A HOT BUTTON TOPIC? >> I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING TO THAT. REFORM IS MORE POPULAR IF IT IS NOT TIED TO A SPECIFIC ISSUE OR OUTCOME. CERTAINLY, YOU WOULD HAVE TO READ THE RESULTS OF BROADER REFORM FOR TERM LIMITS THEN FOR INCREASING THE NUMBER OF JUSTICES ON THE COURT. WOMEN UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO AFFECT CHANGE ON THE ABORTION ISSUE, THERE IS REALLY VERY LITTLE ABILITY TO DO THAT BY CHANGING TERM LIMITS. BECKETT TAKE A FULL GENERATION TO CHANGE THE COMPOSITION OF THE COURT. THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF YEARS THAT A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE USED TO SERVE FROM 1790 TO 1970 WAS 15 YEARS. FROM 1970 ON, THE AVERAGE TERM OF A JUSTICE IS 26 YEARS. IT WILL TAKE A LONG TIME FOR THE COMPOSITION TO CHANGE. BY IMPORTING FOUR NEW JUSTICES KAMALA HARRIS WON AND HELD THE SENATE, EVEN IF IT IS A 50/50 SENATE WITH WALZ AS VICE PRESIDENT, YOU COULD END UP WITH THE ABILITY TO APPOINT FOUR NEW JUSTICES. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE ONLY NEAR- TERM WAY YOU COULD AFFECT SUPREME COURT DECISION. >> UNBELIEVABLE AND I LOVE THIS CONVERSATION. WE WILL