Fox News "Your World" - Transcript: Sen. Rand Paul: Supreme Court vote will be divided along party lines

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

CAVUTO: All right. We will know soon what the president wants to do about this, replacing Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court here.

Now, much of this was telegraphed. It was just a matter of when we were told, not even if. But, again, as we indicated, the Supreme Court justice indicated to the president today, he wanted to stop by, talk to the president, tell him in person that he wanted to step down.

And now the choices. The president has a list. He's going to use that list.

Now, on that list so happens to be the Utah Senator Mike Lee.

I want to get the read on that from Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, what he makes of that.

One senator on the list, Senator, and your colleague Mike Lee. How do you feel about that?

SEN. RAND PAUL, R-KY.: I think he would be a great pick.

But I think I would hate to lose him in the Senate. He and I are allies are so many things, constitutional war powers, criminal justice reform, personal privacy. All of these issues, Mike Lee has been right there with me. So, I would hate to lose him from the Senate.

But he's a very thoughtful guy, well-read, well-spoken and knows the law better than anybody that I have ever met probably. So, he would be a great pick. But I would be of divided loyalties, because I think we really need him in the Senate, where we're often outnumbered by people who don't really seem to give a darn at all about the Constitution.

CAVUTO: Well, that is high praise from you, Senator.

Obviously, it would be a little convoluted, too, because then he would have to leave the Senate. And then obviously the governor of that state would appoint a replacement. And that could be confusing.

But do you think that there's anyone on that list that could surprise folks, because some people look back, particularly on the conservative side, and say, we have been disappointed before. They use the Souter example and others, even Anthony Kennedy, who surprised people with how he could go from conservative to a swing vote, albeit an important vote.

But what do you make of that?

PAUL: Well, I don't know anybody on the list.

But I do know that the guy who was at the top of the list, Neil Gorsuch, is amazing. I just read his opinion in the Carpenter case. This is a case about whether the government can track your location forever, all of the time, without a warrant.

CAVUTO: Right.

PAUL: And his was the only dissent that said, when you give your records to a third party, a telephone company or a bank, Gorsuch was the only one that says the Fourth Amendment still should comply completely and always, that you still have a privacy or a property ownership in information when you let somebody hold it. You haven't given up an expectation of privacy.

And Gorsuch's opinion was better than anybody else's on the court. So, you're talking to a guy who is a big fan of Gorsuch on the Fourth Amendment and I think on property and on a lot of other issues. He is going to probably end up being the most libertarian justice we have.

So if anybody else is in the mode of Neil Gorsuch, I'm all for them.

CAVUTO: Senator, some of the recent decisions that have been close ones and 5-4 rulings have prompted some to say we need a more decisive court. One more conservative vote in this case could potentially make 5-4 rulings 6-3 rulings. The other side laments that process, though, and hints that this is going to be a very, very divisive summer into the fall.

What do you think?

PAUL: I -- if I had to predict, I think Supreme Court vote, no matter who President Trump picks, will be divided among party lines, because the Democrats have dug in.

And I don't think they're willing to look at each individual person that is nominated. They're so angry, they're now talking about violence. There are people in the Capitol pushing people, yelling kidnapper.

It's really gotten kind of out of hand. You have members of Congress fomenting this kind of stuff. So, no, I think they're going to dig their heels in and just yell and scream and vote against anybody President Trump picks.

But there's about eight states where Democrats are running for the U.S. Senate where President Trump won by between 20 and 40 points. And so if they want to yell and scream and say they hate everything about Trump and they're not going to do anything and not listen to anything Republicans have to say, their voters might think otherwise in November, because I think they're tired of Democrats making everything so partisan, frankly.

CAVUTO: So, this other view that, oh, what's the rush? And you hear that many on the left and said, there's no need to rush. And they use that.

And Chuck Schumer, I believe, used that, I'm paraphrasing here, Senator, that Mitch McConnell had used that argument in holding off on a Barack Obama appointment for the Supreme Court position that was ultimately filled by Judge Gorsuch, that the same applies here.

So they wonder why. What do you think?

PAUL: It's sort of -- I would say it's a completely different situation.

When Senator McConnell said we need to wait until after the election, it was a presidential election. The president gets to pick Supreme Court. So you can see how, when you're in the middle of deciding who the president is, you probably shouldn't, at the very last minute of a presidency, when that president is not running, have them pick.

You can how the election might really be important to decide who the next president is going to be. We're not going through a presidential election. We're just going through a congressional election.

So, no, I think we should proceed forthwith. And, like I say, if President Trump nominates somebody half as good or nearly as good as Neil Gorsuch, I will be very happy.

CAVUTO: Because there is another thought here.

Whatever happens in the House, Senator, there's a good likelihood, at least in the Senate, Republicans could pick up seats. Way too early to say. And you and I have gotten into this before. But the math might improve for the odds of getting a pick approved. Right now, it's as close as you can get.

PAUL: Yes.

No, I think that it's very likely that the Republicans keep their majority in the Senate or actually maybe expand that authority or majority.

I think, in the House, it's going to be historic. But, typically, throughout history, when a president wins in one party, the other party often takes over 30 seats or more in the House. I think it's looking less likely than that, because the Democrats' problem is, they're now the party of social sort of a specific, sort of small percentage, sort of victim groups spread out through society.

But they have sort of lost track of being for the working man. And I think just the general working man who is not part of some sort of special class or special group, victim group, who just wants a good job, is starting to say, gosh, the economy is picking up, wages are picking up.

This may be the most rapid growth we have seen in a decade or more. I think we are going to hit 4 percent GDP growth. The enthusiasm I feel, I think we could hit 5 percent GDP growth if we could just sort of calm the waters on the trade front.

But if we can get beyond this trade war, and it doesn't escalate, I think the tax return is just starting to get into the economy. And I really think you're going to see some amazing economic growth.

CAVUTO: You mentioned the economic growth and the wind that has been at the back certainly for the president.

Of course, we had the market trip up today, as we have had in nine of the last 11 trading days. So, I don't want to get too overly obsessed with that.

But is it your concern, Senator, that a chief justice should be a strict constitutionalist? In other words, just following what our forefathers intended, and not trying to reinterpret that or add to that?

Because, by that definition, a lot of modern-day decisions were apart from that, and that even so-called conservative justice, now swing vote justices, have veered from that.

What does a Rand Paul want to see out of the Supreme Court pick?

PAUL: Someone who reads the Constitution as it was intended, is aware of the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, and understands basically that they wanted a very small government that did very little in the marketplace, and actually had a very modest and moderate foreign policy that made it difficult to go to war.

We only went to war when Congress voted on it. So, a Constitution that was -- not only thought it was important to protect privacy, but John Adams said that James Otis' arguments against general warrants or writs of assistance, he said it was the spark that led to the revolution.

So, Fourth Amendment privacy issues are very big for those of us who believe in the original interpretation of the Constitution. All I can say is, I don't know everyone on the list, but I do think that Neil Gorsuch, who was at the top of the list, has turned out to be a great justice.

And if we can get any more similar to Neil Gorsuch, I will be exceedingly happy.

CAVUTO: Senator Rand Paul, very good seeing you. Thank you very much.

PAUL: Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source