WEBVTT - Justice Is Coming!

0:00:05.519 --> 0:00:07.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm Josh Hammer, and this is the Josh Hammer Show.

0:00:08.560 --> 0:00:11.520
<v Speaker 1>Mike Davis, the Viceroy, my colleague, got the Article three project,

0:00:11.520 --> 0:00:14.280
<v Speaker 1>will join us later in the program for a deep dive,

0:00:14.320 --> 0:00:17.440
<v Speaker 1>full ranging conversation about all the day's legal controversies. I'm

0:00:17.480 --> 0:00:20.759
<v Speaker 1>sure we'll talk about Ice and the Insurrection Act and

0:00:20.880 --> 0:00:23.960
<v Speaker 1>immigration more generally. Was to say about our nation's priorities

0:00:24.400 --> 0:00:28.680
<v Speaker 1>that many Democrats are objecting so strongly to the most foundational,

0:00:28.760 --> 0:00:31.800
<v Speaker 1>rudimentary notion that nation is only a nation because of

0:00:31.840 --> 0:00:34.360
<v Speaker 1>the borders. It enforces. All that and much more of

0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:37.040
<v Speaker 1>Mike Davis later on in this hour of The Josh

0:00:37.080 --> 0:00:39.479
<v Speaker 1>A. Hammer Show. But for now, I'm wanting to flag your attention.

0:00:39.560 --> 0:00:42.840
<v Speaker 1>While we're on the topic of the law, while we're

0:00:42.880 --> 0:00:46.199
<v Speaker 1>on the issue of the courts, a big and I

0:00:46.280 --> 0:00:50.320
<v Speaker 1>mean big oral argument is happening today Tuesday, January twentieth,

0:00:50.720 --> 0:00:53.920
<v Speaker 1>at the US Corps Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in

0:00:54.040 --> 0:00:57.320
<v Speaker 1>New Orleans, Louisiana. I know this court very well. Why

0:00:57.520 --> 0:01:00.360
<v Speaker 1>because I clerked on it. Because I clerk for the

0:01:00.400 --> 0:01:03.400
<v Speaker 1>Honorable Judge James C. Hoo, a Trump nominee to the

0:01:03.400 --> 0:01:05.440
<v Speaker 1>Fifth Circuit. I was one of Judge hosts First four

0:01:05.560 --> 0:01:09.280
<v Speaker 1>Law Clerks and the Fifth Circuit, which is historically and

0:01:09.319 --> 0:01:13.479
<v Speaker 1>still is one of the more conservative constitutionalist originalists appellate

0:01:13.800 --> 0:01:16.759
<v Speaker 1>courts in all of the federal juiciary. The Fifth Circuit,

0:01:16.880 --> 0:01:21.200
<v Speaker 1>which covers three states, namely Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, they say,

0:01:21.280 --> 0:01:25.679
<v Speaker 1>are hearing the consolidated oral argument out of two cases

0:01:26.040 --> 0:01:28.600
<v Speaker 1>with very similar fat patterns. That's why they've been consolidated

0:01:28.880 --> 0:01:32.480
<v Speaker 1>out of the states of Louisiana and Texas. Two of

0:01:32.480 --> 0:01:35.240
<v Speaker 1>the three states that the Fifth covers the basic fat

0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:39.440
<v Speaker 1>pattern in question is the state of Louisiana and then

0:01:39.480 --> 0:01:42.120
<v Speaker 1>the state of Texas, which did so just this past year.

0:01:42.240 --> 0:01:46.479
<v Speaker 1>In their twenty twenty five legislative session, they each passed

0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:52.160
<v Speaker 1>a law requiring some variation of the Ten Commandments the

0:01:52.200 --> 0:01:57.040
<v Speaker 1>Ten Commandment to be displayed in classrooms all throughout the state.

0:01:58.080 --> 0:02:01.640
<v Speaker 1>Governor Jeff Landry of Louisiana signed that lawn to place

0:02:01.880 --> 0:02:04.520
<v Speaker 1>in Louisiana in twenty twenty four, two years ago, and

0:02:04.520 --> 0:02:07.240
<v Speaker 1>then Governor Greg Out of Texas signed a very similar

0:02:07.240 --> 0:02:12.119
<v Speaker 1>statute into law just last year in twenty twenty five. Now,

0:02:12.160 --> 0:02:15.240
<v Speaker 1>a lower court judge, a federal district court judge has

0:02:15.280 --> 0:02:19.000
<v Speaker 1>no doubt you're familiar by now they blocked it. This

0:02:19.120 --> 0:02:21.640
<v Speaker 1>notion of federal district judge is blocking these laws. We

0:02:21.720 --> 0:02:23.600
<v Speaker 1>discussed that at length. That's going to be an evergreen

0:02:23.639 --> 0:02:25.880
<v Speaker 1>topic for god knows how long here on the show.

0:02:26.240 --> 0:02:28.880
<v Speaker 1>But in this particular litigation, a federal district judge blocked

0:02:29.240 --> 0:02:33.160
<v Speaker 1>the Louisiana and Texas laws, respectively from coming into place.

0:02:34.480 --> 0:02:37.560
<v Speaker 1>Three judges on the Fifth Circuit because normally appeals court

0:02:37.600 --> 0:02:40.440
<v Speaker 1>sits with three judges, So a three judge panel left

0:02:40.760 --> 0:02:44.880
<v Speaker 1>that flawed district court ruling in place. What followed then

0:02:45.360 --> 0:02:48.320
<v Speaker 1>was the judges of the Fifth Circuit then voting to

0:02:48.440 --> 0:02:51.800
<v Speaker 1>rehear this case in what is known as en banc fashion,

0:02:52.120 --> 0:02:54.320
<v Speaker 1>meaning that all of the judges of the Fifth Circuit,

0:02:54.360 --> 0:02:56.160
<v Speaker 1>which again is one of the more right of center

0:02:56.240 --> 0:03:00.360
<v Speaker 1>courts in the country, they decided to hear all of

0:03:00.400 --> 0:03:04.040
<v Speaker 1>them today this case. And sure enough, that is exactly

0:03:04.120 --> 0:03:09.840
<v Speaker 1>what happened earlier today in New Orleans, Louisiana. Folks, this

0:03:09.919 --> 0:03:12.960
<v Speaker 1>question gets to the very heart of who we are

0:03:13.000 --> 0:03:17.160
<v Speaker 1>as a people. It cuts to the very core of

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:19.360
<v Speaker 1>what it means to be part of the rule of law.

0:03:20.040 --> 0:03:24.680
<v Speaker 1>Of whether American constitutionalism is ethereal, whether it is clouds

0:03:24.680 --> 0:03:26.800
<v Speaker 1>in the sky, whether it is tethered, whether it's anchored

0:03:27.360 --> 0:03:33.320
<v Speaker 1>in something deeper, something more transcendental, more natural, more biblical,

0:03:33.639 --> 0:03:38.119
<v Speaker 1>more godly. The argument that has been deployed by secularists

0:03:38.120 --> 0:03:41.360
<v Speaker 1>and leftists for longer than I've been alive to object

0:03:41.480 --> 0:03:45.160
<v Speaker 1>to public displays of things like the Ten Commandments is

0:03:45.200 --> 0:03:49.600
<v Speaker 1>they say that is prohibited by so called separation of

0:03:49.680 --> 0:03:54.800
<v Speaker 1>church and state. The problem, you will, no doubt notice,

0:03:55.640 --> 0:03:58.240
<v Speaker 1>is that those of you who've read the First Amendment, no,

0:03:58.480 --> 0:03:59.960
<v Speaker 1>and for those of who don't know, I will inform

0:04:00.120 --> 0:04:03.680
<v Speaker 1>you know that particular verbiage is actually nowhere to be

0:04:03.680 --> 0:04:07.640
<v Speaker 1>found in the First Amendment to the Constitution. The First Ments.

0:04:07.720 --> 0:04:13.600
<v Speaker 1>The Constitution reads in relevant parts as follows, quote Congress

0:04:13.600 --> 0:04:16.240
<v Speaker 1>shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or

0:04:16.240 --> 0:04:20.479
<v Speaker 1>prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Those two clauses, respectively, are

0:04:20.520 --> 0:04:23.680
<v Speaker 1>typically referred to as the establishment clause and the free

0:04:23.680 --> 0:04:27.880
<v Speaker 1>exercise clause. The establishing clause is where you have leftists

0:04:27.880 --> 0:04:32.560
<v Speaker 1>and secularists who say that separation church and state is

0:04:32.560 --> 0:04:37.840
<v Speaker 1>codified as a principle, except it isn't. The actual text

0:04:38.000 --> 0:04:43.320
<v Speaker 1>says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.

0:04:44.640 --> 0:04:48.279
<v Speaker 1>The actual history of the establishing clause, as just as

0:04:48.320 --> 0:04:51.560
<v Speaker 1>Clarence Thomas has explained in numerous Supreme Court opinions, and

0:04:51.640 --> 0:04:57.120
<v Speaker 1>as various constitutional law scholars such as Philip Hamburger have

0:04:57.520 --> 0:05:01.120
<v Speaker 1>explained as well in compelling and paints to makingly detailed

0:05:01.120 --> 0:05:05.360
<v Speaker 1>the meticulous legal scholarship, the Estallusian clause was actually a

0:05:05.440 --> 0:05:10.559
<v Speaker 1>federalism provision. In other words, it says that Congress shall

0:05:10.560 --> 0:05:13.159
<v Speaker 1>make no law respecting the establishment of religions, that the

0:05:13.279 --> 0:05:20.000
<v Speaker 1>states can do that, and sure enough they did. By

0:05:20.040 --> 0:05:23.680
<v Speaker 1>the time of the American founding, many, perhaps most, of

0:05:23.720 --> 0:05:28.719
<v Speaker 1>the colonies turned into nascent states, had established state churches.

0:05:29.920 --> 0:05:31.880
<v Speaker 1>Think about it. Maryland was known as a place where

0:05:31.880 --> 0:05:34.240
<v Speaker 1>Catholics go. Pennsylvania was known as a place where Quakers go,

0:05:35.279 --> 0:05:39.520
<v Speaker 1>and on and on. Think about the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,

0:05:39.520 --> 0:05:42.280
<v Speaker 1>which today is a leftist Bastian Senator Elizabeth Warren and

0:05:42.279 --> 0:05:45.960
<v Speaker 1>all that Massachusetts had an established church. It was the

0:05:46.040 --> 0:05:50.720
<v Speaker 1>Congregationalist Church. Well into the nineteenth century. It was eighteen

0:05:50.800 --> 0:05:54.480
<v Speaker 1>thirty three Massachusetts finally got rid of its established church.

0:05:55.720 --> 0:06:00.560
<v Speaker 1>You see, America was a pluralistic society. No, it was

0:06:00.560 --> 0:06:04.960
<v Speaker 1>not a multicultural society. We'll get into the notion of

0:06:04.960 --> 0:06:07.719
<v Speaker 1>Somali fraud in Minnesota and what it means for immigration.

0:06:07.760 --> 0:06:09.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure we're against that with the Viceroy Mike Davis

0:06:10.240 --> 0:06:13.080
<v Speaker 1>coming up shortly. But at the time of the founding

0:06:13.080 --> 0:06:17.760
<v Speaker 1>America was pluralistic necessarily when it comes to Somali's when

0:06:17.760 --> 0:06:21.760
<v Speaker 1>it comes to people from the Far East. Now, they're

0:06:21.800 --> 0:06:25.960
<v Speaker 1>pluralistic in the confines of the Biblical religions. Within the

0:06:25.960 --> 0:06:28.640
<v Speaker 1>confines above all Protestantism and to a lesser extent of

0:06:28.720 --> 0:06:33.120
<v Speaker 1>Judaism and Catholicism, and the various Protestant sects in particular

0:06:34.600 --> 0:06:38.239
<v Speaker 1>had to make sure that they were able to flourish

0:06:38.279 --> 0:06:42.560
<v Speaker 1>at a state level, Folks, this is a federalism provision.

0:06:43.839 --> 0:06:46.599
<v Speaker 1>So where you might ask does the notion of separation

0:06:46.680 --> 0:06:50.120
<v Speaker 1>of church and state come from, It comes actually from

0:06:50.160 --> 0:06:53.719
<v Speaker 1>a letter written by Thomas Jefferson when he was President

0:06:53.720 --> 0:06:57.480
<v Speaker 1>of United States in eighteen oh two. Jefferson wrote a short,

0:06:57.520 --> 0:07:00.000
<v Speaker 1>pithy letter two hundred and thirty three words in length,

0:07:00.200 --> 0:07:03.120
<v Speaker 1>essentially the length of a long tweet, and he sent

0:07:03.160 --> 0:07:10.200
<v Speaker 1>this letter to the Baptist convention in Danbury, Connecticut. Why

0:07:10.640 --> 0:07:14.000
<v Speaker 1>it's actually a political letter. He was trying to make

0:07:14.080 --> 0:07:19.000
<v Speaker 1>political inroads for his party, the Democratic Republicans of Jefferson

0:07:19.040 --> 0:07:21.720
<v Speaker 1>and Madison, either trying to make inroads into the New

0:07:21.760 --> 0:07:25.440
<v Speaker 1>England clergy, which at that time were a political bastion

0:07:25.800 --> 0:07:29.760
<v Speaker 1>for the opposing party, the Federalist Party of Alexander Hamilton,

0:07:29.880 --> 0:07:33.800
<v Speaker 1>John Adams, George Washington, and so forth. And it was

0:07:33.840 --> 0:07:38.160
<v Speaker 1>in this letter, this tweet of sorts, that Jefferson first

0:07:38.240 --> 0:07:42.160
<v Speaker 1>used the phrase separation of church and state, a wall

0:07:42.200 --> 0:07:46.440
<v Speaker 1>of separation, he refers to it. But Jefferson wind no

0:07:47.000 --> 0:07:50.200
<v Speaker 1>was in the First Amendment. He wasn't even there at

0:07:50.240 --> 0:07:54.480
<v Speaker 1>the Consortors convention. He was gallavanting off in pre revolutionary France,

0:07:55.200 --> 0:07:58.640
<v Speaker 1>palling around with the folks who soon will become the Jacobins,

0:07:59.000 --> 0:08:03.000
<v Speaker 1>engaging in the Garen and the reign of terror. As

0:08:03.240 --> 0:08:07.440
<v Speaker 1>William Ranquist persuasively put it in a nineteen eighties case

0:08:07.480 --> 0:08:12.480
<v Speaker 1>called Jeffrey Tamas, Jarrison is not someone whose thoughts in

0:08:12.480 --> 0:08:16.200
<v Speaker 1>the First Amendments seemed like particularly persuasive or compelling authority,

0:08:17.160 --> 0:08:20.320
<v Speaker 1>and the notion of so called separationism, separation church of state,

0:08:20.520 --> 0:08:23.960
<v Speaker 1>was not actually codified as a matter of Supreme Court

0:08:24.000 --> 0:08:28.360
<v Speaker 1>case saw as being the effective, if not literal, language

0:08:28.360 --> 0:08:30.760
<v Speaker 1>of the Assagian cause. It was not read into the

0:08:30.760 --> 0:08:35.559
<v Speaker 1>clause until a somewhat obscure nineteen forty seven case called Everson,

0:08:37.360 --> 0:08:40.600
<v Speaker 1>a case out of New Jersey. In an essay this

0:08:40.640 --> 0:08:43.440
<v Speaker 1>past summer for the Harvard Journal lam Public Policy, my

0:08:43.559 --> 0:08:47.280
<v Speaker 1>two co authors and I argued that Eversin must fall

0:08:47.360 --> 0:08:50.440
<v Speaker 1>because Eversin versus Board of Education. This case that for

0:08:50.480 --> 0:08:54.120
<v Speaker 1>the very first time read separated church of state as

0:08:54.160 --> 0:08:58.040
<v Speaker 1>being incorporated to the states via the fourteenth Amendment. This

0:08:58.120 --> 0:09:02.760
<v Speaker 1>case was wrongly decided because there's no such thing actually

0:09:03.200 --> 0:09:06.439
<v Speaker 1>as so called separation. Sure, of course there's free exercise.

0:09:07.000 --> 0:09:09.079
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonn observant Jew. I care quite a bit actually

0:09:09.600 --> 0:09:13.160
<v Speaker 1>about the free exercise of religion. But the two religion

0:09:13.160 --> 0:09:17.560
<v Speaker 1>clauses are complementary. They're not at loggerheads with one another.

0:09:18.840 --> 0:09:24.960
<v Speaker 1>You could have various public facing forms of ecumenical geo

0:09:25.080 --> 0:09:31.959
<v Speaker 1>Christian inheritance, biblical teachings, maxims, and so forth, and also

0:09:32.000 --> 0:09:37.800
<v Speaker 1>protect private religion. They're not irreconcilable. They actually fit very

0:09:37.840 --> 0:09:42.280
<v Speaker 1>nicely together articably. Even more importantly, though than the actual

0:09:42.280 --> 0:09:46.360
<v Speaker 1>black letter law is this? What does it say about

0:09:46.360 --> 0:09:51.280
<v Speaker 1>a country country like ours founded in the proposition that

0:09:51.600 --> 0:09:54.520
<v Speaker 1>all men to create equal a Genesis one twenty seven principle.

0:09:54.679 --> 0:09:57.559
<v Speaker 1>A country that prints in God we trust on our coinage.

0:09:58.640 --> 0:10:04.240
<v Speaker 1>A country that founded by religious Christians, whose first president,

0:10:04.280 --> 0:10:08.120
<v Speaker 1>George Washington wrote so compellingly in his Thanksgiving proclamation that

0:10:08.200 --> 0:10:11.160
<v Speaker 1>Thanksgiving X this to thank Almighty God. What does it

0:10:11.200 --> 0:10:15.160
<v Speaker 1>say about a country that has litigated for four to

0:10:15.320 --> 0:10:19.160
<v Speaker 1>five six however, many decades now the notions to whether

0:10:19.200 --> 0:10:24.480
<v Speaker 1>the Ten Commandments, the original ten Commandments Moses is setting

0:10:24.480 --> 0:10:28.360
<v Speaker 1>from SINAI, Thou shall not murder, Thou shall not steal

0:10:28.760 --> 0:10:31.400
<v Speaker 1>honor your parents. How do we get to a place

0:10:32.559 --> 0:10:37.680
<v Speaker 1>where a nation as godly as ours is even debating

0:10:38.160 --> 0:10:41.240
<v Speaker 1>whether or not a public display of the Ten Commandments

0:10:41.760 --> 0:10:45.280
<v Speaker 1>violates a reading, or is the case that we hear

0:10:45.360 --> 0:10:50.559
<v Speaker 1>a misreading of a certain constitutional amendment. It's absolutely grotesque.

0:10:52.160 --> 0:10:53.880
<v Speaker 1>The case law on this, where it's worth, has been

0:10:53.920 --> 0:10:56.240
<v Speaker 1>all over the map. There was a case from two

0:10:56.280 --> 0:10:59.160
<v Speaker 1>thousand and five called Van Orden versus Perry, also out

0:10:59.200 --> 0:11:01.440
<v Speaker 1>of Texas. The carry there in question is former Governor

0:11:01.520 --> 0:11:05.840
<v Speaker 1>Rick Perry there. The fat pattern involved a monument of

0:11:05.880 --> 0:11:08.560
<v Speaker 1>the Ten Commandments. It's still there today. Actually, go to Austin, Texas,

0:11:08.640 --> 0:11:10.600
<v Speaker 1>walk the state Capitol grounds. You'll see it. I've seen

0:11:10.600 --> 0:11:13.320
<v Speaker 1>it many times in person. They're the Ten Commandments.

0:11:13.320 --> 0:11:13.640
<v Speaker 2>One.

0:11:14.240 --> 0:11:19.200
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes the Ten Commandments don't win. It's all hypocrisy. The

0:11:19.400 --> 0:11:22.000
<v Speaker 1>Justice of the U Spreme Court have a freeze on

0:11:22.040 --> 0:11:24.719
<v Speaker 1>the Wall of Moses with the Ten Commandments because he

0:11:25.000 --> 0:11:28.240
<v Speaker 1>was the first lawgiver in the history of the Geo

0:11:28.360 --> 0:11:32.120
<v Speaker 1>Christian Biblical tradition. The fifth crogate should do the right

0:11:32.160 --> 0:11:34.560
<v Speaker 1>thing here and push as hard as they possibly can

0:11:35.600 --> 0:11:38.560
<v Speaker 1>within the confines of Supreme Court presidents and the U

0:11:38.600 --> 0:11:41.960
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Courts really ought to grant a rid of cercerari

0:11:42.200 --> 0:11:44.800
<v Speaker 1>and hear this case. If it goes the wrong way,

0:11:45.520 --> 0:11:47.480
<v Speaker 1>perhaps they'll find a way to take it, even if

0:11:47.480 --> 0:11:49.760
<v Speaker 1>it goes the right way, because we have to make

0:11:49.800 --> 0:11:53.800
<v Speaker 1>sure that generations hence know that this country stands for

0:11:53.920 --> 0:11:57.600
<v Speaker 1>Godly values, Biblical values, and that our American Constitution is

0:11:57.679 --> 0:12:01.560
<v Speaker 1>downstream of the Ten Commandments. Godspeed to the lawyer's argument

0:12:01.600 --> 0:12:03.960
<v Speaker 1>that proposition in New Roleans today, I'm Josh Hammer. Stay

0:12:03.960 --> 0:12:11.320
<v Speaker 1>with us to the break. Mike Davis on the other side. Well,

0:12:11.320 --> 0:12:14.640
<v Speaker 1>as promise, it's now time for the viceroy. Let's bring

0:12:14.679 --> 0:12:16.920
<v Speaker 1>on founder and president of the Article three Project, where

0:12:16.960 --> 0:12:18.960
<v Speaker 1>he's also my colleague. You can check us out at

0:12:19.040 --> 0:12:22.520
<v Speaker 1>Article three project dot org. It's the one only. Mike Davis,

0:12:22.600 --> 0:12:25.600
<v Speaker 1>friend of Josh Hammer Show, joins us yet again. Mike,

0:12:25.760 --> 0:12:28.560
<v Speaker 1>thank you, as always my friend for joining us. There's

0:12:28.640 --> 0:12:32.559
<v Speaker 1>always no shortage of legal controversies and news the day

0:12:32.559 --> 0:12:34.360
<v Speaker 1>happening there. I break it down when I can, but

0:12:34.360 --> 0:12:36.920
<v Speaker 1>it's always fun to have a comrade in arms to

0:12:37.240 --> 0:12:38.559
<v Speaker 1>join me in doing so as well.

0:12:38.760 --> 0:12:38.960
<v Speaker 2>Mike.

0:12:39.080 --> 0:12:43.160
<v Speaker 1>The big issue for the past week ish week and

0:12:43.200 --> 0:12:46.040
<v Speaker 1>a half maybe at this point is the insurrection at

0:12:46.559 --> 0:12:49.240
<v Speaker 1>you wrote a recent opbed on this for Fox News.

0:12:49.320 --> 0:12:52.000
<v Speaker 1>We're talking here, of course, about the anarchy the insurrection

0:12:52.120 --> 0:12:55.839
<v Speaker 1>happening in Minneapolis and the aftermath of the justified self

0:12:55.840 --> 0:12:59.640
<v Speaker 1>defense shooting of Renee Good and the subsequent anarchy that

0:12:59.720 --> 0:13:04.080
<v Speaker 1>is fun, these standoff altercations between these protesters and federal

0:13:04.160 --> 0:13:07.200
<v Speaker 1>law enforcement. The insurrection out to eight two oh seven.

0:13:07.240 --> 0:13:09.120
<v Speaker 1>Tell us about this law and tell us why it

0:13:09.240 --> 0:13:11.240
<v Speaker 1>is a fit or not a fit. But I think

0:13:11.240 --> 0:13:13.280
<v Speaker 1>it's a fit for situations exactly like this.

0:13:14.440 --> 0:13:17.240
<v Speaker 2>Well, let's back up really fast here. Remember this that

0:13:17.840 --> 0:13:24.320
<v Speaker 2>Congress are elected. Members of Congress exercise our sovereign power,

0:13:24.440 --> 0:13:27.880
<v Speaker 2>as we the people, to control our border and to

0:13:28.000 --> 0:13:32.200
<v Speaker 2>control our population, so they can pass immigration laws to

0:13:32.400 --> 0:13:36.079
<v Speaker 2>control our border and population, which is our most crucial

0:13:36.120 --> 0:13:39.640
<v Speaker 2>sovereign power as we the people. It's the president's job,

0:13:40.160 --> 0:13:42.960
<v Speaker 2>as the commander in chief and the chief executive officer,

0:13:43.400 --> 0:13:48.680
<v Speaker 2>to faithfully execute those laws. That is his constitutional and

0:13:48.840 --> 0:13:53.720
<v Speaker 2>statutory duty. Right, we had an election. We had an

0:13:53.760 --> 0:13:57.400
<v Speaker 2>election over immigration. We had two different paps. We had

0:13:58.640 --> 0:14:01.080
<v Speaker 2>whether we were going to have come Paula Harris continued

0:14:01.120 --> 0:14:06.120
<v Speaker 2>Joe Biden's path of the mass importation of third world

0:14:06.200 --> 0:14:11.320
<v Speaker 2>trash into America, including Islamists who do not share our

0:14:11.440 --> 0:14:16.880
<v Speaker 2>values and violent criminals, gangs MS thirteen, trendy Aragua, or

0:14:16.920 --> 0:14:20.080
<v Speaker 2>we were going to go down the path that Trump proposed,

0:14:20.120 --> 0:14:25.240
<v Speaker 2>which was securing our border and excelling illegal aliens starting

0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:28.560
<v Speaker 2>with the worst of the worst, like Trendea arragua, like

0:14:28.720 --> 0:14:32.600
<v Speaker 2>MS thirteen, like these Islamists who want to destroy our country.

0:14:32.800 --> 0:14:36.520
<v Speaker 2>The American people, we the people, we the sovereign citizens

0:14:36.520 --> 0:14:41.240
<v Speaker 2>of America, shows Donald Trump's path right. He won three

0:14:41.280 --> 0:14:44.280
<v Speaker 2>and twelve electoral votes all seven Spring states. The popular

0:14:44.720 --> 0:14:47.240
<v Speaker 2>vote kept the House, won the Senate. He has a

0:14:47.280 --> 0:14:51.160
<v Speaker 2>father electfaw mandate to lead, and he is doing that.

0:14:51.200 --> 0:14:53.920
<v Speaker 2>He is doing the unthinkable. He's doing what he promised

0:14:53.960 --> 0:14:58.800
<v Speaker 2>American voters he would do by enforcing our immigration laws,

0:14:58.840 --> 0:15:05.800
<v Speaker 2>his constitutional and statute forward duty. These Democrat activist pointiffs, attorneys,

0:15:05.960 --> 0:15:13.600
<v Speaker 2>judges try to sabotage this immigration enforcement through the courts.

0:15:13.720 --> 0:15:17.800
<v Speaker 2>They largely failed because the Supreme Court has largely stopped them,

0:15:18.160 --> 0:15:21.600
<v Speaker 2>and now they are trying to sabotage the president on

0:15:21.720 --> 0:15:27.000
<v Speaker 2>the streets, right, and that is completely unacceptable. You can protest,

0:15:27.680 --> 0:15:32.480
<v Speaker 2>you can protest immigration enforcement, you can't obstruct it. You

0:15:32.640 --> 0:15:36.440
<v Speaker 2>certainly cannot be violent. And if you look at the

0:15:36.520 --> 0:15:42.080
<v Speaker 2>Insurrection Act, it deals with this specifically. If you are

0:15:42.680 --> 0:15:51.600
<v Speaker 2>organizing violence to stop the federal government from enforcing federal laws,

0:15:52.040 --> 0:15:59.320
<v Speaker 2>that is text book insurrection. That is text book seditious conspiracy.

0:15:59.320 --> 0:16:02.800
<v Speaker 2>That is text book assault on federal law enforcement. That

0:16:02.920 --> 0:16:08.560
<v Speaker 2>is textbook harboring illegal aliens. That is textbook general conspiracy.

0:16:08.640 --> 0:16:12.280
<v Speaker 2>And I would say this to these Democrats who are

0:16:12.280 --> 0:16:17.160
<v Speaker 2>doing this, like Tim Waltz, the governor of Minnesota, Jacob Prye,

0:16:17.280 --> 0:16:23.280
<v Speaker 2>the Minneapolis mayor. You could very easily end up in prison,

0:16:23.520 --> 0:16:29.920
<v Speaker 2>federal prison for these very serious federal crimes like insurrection,

0:16:30.160 --> 0:16:36.920
<v Speaker 2>seditious conspiracy, assault, kidnapping, harboring, conspiracy, generally other very serious

0:16:36.960 --> 0:16:40.920
<v Speaker 2>federal felonies. So tread lightly, guys, because I don't think

0:16:41.040 --> 0:16:45.640
<v Speaker 2>President Trump and Attorney General Pambondi are messing around.

0:16:45.840 --> 0:16:48.520
<v Speaker 1>Like Davis, the founder and president of the Arcle three project.

0:16:48.560 --> 0:16:52.600
<v Speaker 1>Follow him on x at mrd DMIA, follow our work

0:16:52.680 --> 0:16:55.560
<v Speaker 1>at a three P at arcle threeproject dot org. Mike,

0:16:55.560 --> 0:16:57.600
<v Speaker 1>I think it's really important that you backed up like that.

0:16:57.680 --> 0:17:02.240
<v Speaker 1>Immigration obviously is a federal legal imperative. Congress has an

0:17:02.280 --> 0:17:04.919
<v Speaker 1>Article one, Section eight and numery power to prescribe a

0:17:05.000 --> 0:17:08.560
<v Speaker 1>uniform rule of naturalization. The President has the take Care

0:17:08.640 --> 0:17:12.320
<v Speaker 1>clause obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

0:17:13.080 --> 0:17:16.760
<v Speaker 1>This clearly is a core bread and butter federal prerogative.

0:17:16.920 --> 0:17:18.880
<v Speaker 1>And I think back in look at the recent lawsuit

0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:21.240
<v Speaker 1>that was filed by the State of Minnesota and the

0:17:21.280 --> 0:17:25.119
<v Speaker 1>Twin cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul against DHSS. The

0:17:25.119 --> 0:17:28.520
<v Speaker 1>whole Messecurity Department against the federal government generally. And Mike,

0:17:28.640 --> 0:17:31.920
<v Speaker 1>I was watching Keith Ellison, the adel Brains, you know,

0:17:32.040 --> 0:17:36.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, care connected attorney General of Minnesota, and he

0:17:36.880 --> 0:17:39.040
<v Speaker 1>was reading the statements where he was like, it's our

0:17:39.160 --> 0:17:42.760
<v Speaker 1>tenth Amendment States rights position. And I was looking at

0:17:42.760 --> 0:17:46.000
<v Speaker 1>this and I was like, I'm sorry, but I read

0:17:46.000 --> 0:17:47.880
<v Speaker 1>this in a history book ones and it came under

0:17:47.880 --> 0:17:51.080
<v Speaker 1>the name of John C. Calhoun. And I've been saying

0:17:51.080 --> 0:17:53.080
<v Speaker 1>this for years now that this whole notion of these

0:17:53.119 --> 0:17:58.000
<v Speaker 1>sanctuary jurisdictions, of just trying to not just protest, but

0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:01.520
<v Speaker 1>to obstruct and to undermine violate federal law. I mean

0:18:01.520 --> 0:18:04.959
<v Speaker 1>this reeks of the anti Bellum Confederacy, to which Abraham

0:18:05.040 --> 0:18:07.919
<v Speaker 1>Lincoln responded, among other things, with you guessed it the

0:18:07.960 --> 0:18:10.960
<v Speaker 1>Insurrection Act, which he invoked just a few days after

0:18:10.960 --> 0:18:13.560
<v Speaker 1>the Civil War began. So am I crazy? Or is

0:18:13.600 --> 0:18:14.560
<v Speaker 1>this how you see it as well?

0:18:15.520 --> 0:18:19.679
<v Speaker 2>Well? I mean it's you have Ellison who has become

0:18:19.680 --> 0:18:24.640
<v Speaker 2>the Confederates for Somali pirates and warlords and other fraudsters

0:18:25.160 --> 0:18:27.840
<v Speaker 2>in Minnesota. And you have to think about this is

0:18:27.880 --> 0:18:32.360
<v Speaker 2>the problem with immigration. You mass import people who do

0:18:32.480 --> 0:18:37.680
<v Speaker 2>not share our values, like Simolians, for example, who are

0:18:37.840 --> 0:18:40.639
<v Speaker 2>some of the dumbest people on the planets, some of

0:18:40.680 --> 0:18:42.639
<v Speaker 2>the most corrupt people on the planets, some of the

0:18:42.640 --> 0:18:46.280
<v Speaker 2>most violent people on the planets. That's why their nation

0:18:46.520 --> 0:18:49.639
<v Speaker 2>is failed because there are Somali pirates in warlords and

0:18:49.960 --> 0:18:54.960
<v Speaker 2>have the IQs of IQs of sixty five to to

0:18:55.080 --> 0:18:58.280
<v Speaker 2>seventy and we want to mass import them into the

0:18:58.400 --> 0:19:03.720
<v Speaker 2>United States. And I guess I would say this to

0:19:03.760 --> 0:19:10.640
<v Speaker 2>the Minnesota liberals. You managed to get duped and defraud

0:19:10.720 --> 0:19:13.720
<v Speaker 2>its by some of the dumbest people on the planets.

0:19:14.280 --> 0:19:16.679
<v Speaker 2>What the hell does that say about you as the

0:19:16.760 --> 0:19:20.040
<v Speaker 2>people of Minnesota that you allowed this to happen, not

0:19:20.200 --> 0:19:22.400
<v Speaker 2>just for a few weeks, not just for a few months,

0:19:22.400 --> 0:19:24.359
<v Speaker 2>you allow this to happen for like twenty five years.

0:19:24.760 --> 0:19:28.440
<v Speaker 2>You have been defrauded by the Somali warlords and pirates

0:19:28.680 --> 0:19:31.800
<v Speaker 2>when they're driving around in their range ropers to their

0:19:31.840 --> 0:19:37.920
<v Speaker 2>mansions and you have homeless US military veterans on your streets.

0:19:37.960 --> 0:19:41.199
<v Speaker 2>It's shameful what Minnesota has allowed to happen. And this

0:19:41.280 --> 0:19:46.960
<v Speaker 2>is why immigration is a federal concern determined by Congress,

0:19:47.000 --> 0:19:51.959
<v Speaker 2>so we don't have bulcanized American states like Minnesota, they

0:19:51.960 --> 0:19:55.879
<v Speaker 2>don't get to decide our population. That is, we the people,

0:19:56.000 --> 0:20:01.040
<v Speaker 2>the sovereign citizens of America, get to decide this. This

0:20:01.040 --> 0:20:03.399
<v Speaker 2>this idea that we're going to let the Third world

0:20:03.680 --> 0:20:07.360
<v Speaker 2>come to Minnesota. We have to pay for it through

0:20:07.400 --> 0:20:11.680
<v Speaker 2>federal medicaid, through federal grants that are being defrauded in

0:20:11.800 --> 0:20:15.719
<v Speaker 2>the tune of tens of billions of dollars around the country,

0:20:15.760 --> 0:20:18.920
<v Speaker 2>particularly in Minnesota. And then they're going to say, Okay,

0:20:18.920 --> 0:20:22.720
<v Speaker 2>we we have we have We've created loogadishue in Minnesota,

0:20:22.840 --> 0:20:26.880
<v Speaker 2>in Minneapolis, and if you try to stop the fraud,

0:20:27.400 --> 0:20:29.000
<v Speaker 2>We're going to have a civil war with you. We're

0:20:29.000 --> 0:20:33.000
<v Speaker 2>gonna We're going to encourage our law enforcement to arrest

0:20:33.640 --> 0:20:37.639
<v Speaker 2>ICE agents, Like are you kidding me? Are you trying

0:20:37.640 --> 0:20:41.680
<v Speaker 2>to get state and local law enforcement officers killed further

0:20:41.840 --> 0:20:45.680
<v Speaker 2>unlawful arrest of ICE agents. What what is the endgame

0:20:46.240 --> 0:20:51.040
<v Speaker 2>for Governor Tim Waltz and may Or Fred They they

0:20:51.359 --> 0:20:55.760
<v Speaker 2>do they want an armed conflict with the federal governments

0:20:55.920 --> 0:20:59.600
<v Speaker 2>so they can protect their fraud and corruption. How many

0:21:00.359 --> 0:21:04.959
<v Speaker 2>campaign donations are these Somali warlords, pirates and other fraudsters

0:21:05.000 --> 0:21:08.720
<v Speaker 2>giving to Tim Waltz to Jacob Pray, how many of

0:21:08.760 --> 0:21:12.120
<v Speaker 2>their friends and allies are on this Somali fraud Peewell.

0:21:12.200 --> 0:21:16.400
<v Speaker 2>I mean, this is shocking, it's sickening. It shows there's

0:21:16.440 --> 0:21:18.639
<v Speaker 2>a lot at stake for these guys if they're willing

0:21:18.680 --> 0:21:22.240
<v Speaker 2>to go to civil war with the federal government to

0:21:22.359 --> 0:21:26.480
<v Speaker 2>protect these Somali warlords, pirates and other prodstras.

0:21:27.080 --> 0:21:28.560
<v Speaker 1>It really does. And by the way, folks, for those

0:21:28.600 --> 0:21:30.200
<v Speaker 1>of you who don't know Mike as well as I do,

0:21:30.600 --> 0:21:33.320
<v Speaker 1>his ex handle is at Mr d d m i A.

0:21:33.520 --> 0:21:36.359
<v Speaker 1>The DMIA, if not mistaken, stands for Des Moines, Iowa,

0:21:36.760 --> 0:21:39.120
<v Speaker 1>which is where Mike from. I sense a little Hawkeye

0:21:39.160 --> 0:21:42.720
<v Speaker 1>state chauvinism in this bashing of your northerly neighbors Minnesota.

0:21:42.720 --> 0:21:45.240
<v Speaker 1>But frankly, you know, frankly, the people in Minnesota, I

0:21:45.480 --> 0:21:48.199
<v Speaker 1>grossly deserve it because they have brought this on themselves

0:21:48.240 --> 0:21:51.639
<v Speaker 1>and they are acting frankly in Jefferson Davis John C.

0:21:52.160 --> 0:21:55.560
<v Speaker 1>Calhoun style insurrections fashion. Stay with us with the break, folks.

0:21:55.600 --> 0:21:57.800
<v Speaker 1>Mike Davis again is the founder and president of the

0:21:57.880 --> 0:22:00.840
<v Speaker 1>ARG three Project. Follow us on the d Article three

0:22:00.880 --> 0:22:03.359
<v Speaker 1>project dot org. We'll be right back after the break.

0:22:03.359 --> 0:22:06.440
<v Speaker 1>With much more from the Viceroy himself. That's our friend

0:22:06.600 --> 0:22:15.199
<v Speaker 1>Mike Davis. Welcome back. We're still joined by Mike Davis,

0:22:15.200 --> 0:22:17.720
<v Speaker 1>who was the founder and president of the Article three projects.

0:22:17.920 --> 0:22:20.240
<v Speaker 1>He's the Viceroy. Follow him on x at Mr d

0:22:20.600 --> 0:22:23.479
<v Speaker 1>d M I A Mike. Lots of other stuff happening

0:22:23.560 --> 0:22:26.359
<v Speaker 1>in the legal world as well. When it comes to

0:22:27.520 --> 0:22:30.520
<v Speaker 1>not not just ice in Minneapolis. I want to get

0:22:30.560 --> 0:22:34.800
<v Speaker 1>your take on the recent Maduro raid in Venezuela. So

0:22:34.960 --> 0:22:37.639
<v Speaker 1>this happened, Mike, I keep the Jewish Sabbath, as you know,

0:22:37.680 --> 0:22:39.760
<v Speaker 1>this happened actually over the Jewish Sabbath, and I throw

0:22:39.800 --> 0:22:42.120
<v Speaker 1>my phone back on. I had like a million messages

0:22:42.160 --> 0:22:44.600
<v Speaker 1>like is this legal? How is it legal? How's justified?

0:22:45.119 --> 0:22:46.639
<v Speaker 1>And it makes a lot of sense to me. But

0:22:46.640 --> 0:22:48.359
<v Speaker 1>I think there are a lot of folks, some even

0:22:48.520 --> 0:22:51.720
<v Speaker 1>on our side on the right, who are struggling to

0:22:51.800 --> 0:22:54.120
<v Speaker 1>see this for what it is. And to me, there's

0:22:54.160 --> 0:22:56.720
<v Speaker 1>a lot of debate over the declare war clause and

0:22:56.800 --> 0:23:00.000
<v Speaker 1>foreign affairs, but it's not a foreign affairs issue actually,

0:23:00.200 --> 0:23:03.520
<v Speaker 1>properly speaking, it's really a law enforcement operation that happened

0:23:03.640 --> 0:23:06.560
<v Speaker 1>in Caracas earlier this month, isn't it yeah.

0:23:06.600 --> 0:23:10.159
<v Speaker 2>I mean, think about this. You had President Barack Obama

0:23:10.520 --> 0:23:15.720
<v Speaker 2>who ordered the extra judicial drone strikes and killings of

0:23:15.800 --> 0:23:21.880
<v Speaker 2>American citizens, including a minor, and we have no problem

0:23:21.920 --> 0:23:24.760
<v Speaker 2>with that on the left. But now that President Trump

0:23:24.800 --> 0:23:29.080
<v Speaker 2>is in office, when he went and executed an arrest

0:23:29.160 --> 0:23:36.600
<v Speaker 2>warrant for a narco terrorist leader, Maduro and his wife, somehow,

0:23:37.080 --> 0:23:41.240
<v Speaker 2>that is a constitutional crisis. Not only did President Trump

0:23:41.280 --> 0:23:45.320
<v Speaker 2>have the constitutional and statutory power to do what he did,

0:23:45.320 --> 0:23:49.720
<v Speaker 2>he had the duty. There was an outstanding arrest warrant,

0:23:49.720 --> 0:23:53.040
<v Speaker 2>and it's the president's job to take care that our

0:23:53.160 --> 0:23:57.280
<v Speaker 2>laws are faithfully executed. And that is exactly what he did.

0:23:57.280 --> 0:24:00.560
<v Speaker 2>It's similar to what happened with Noriega and pan of Bob.

0:24:00.760 --> 0:24:04.240
<v Speaker 2>This was not a war. This was execution of an

0:24:04.320 --> 0:24:09.240
<v Speaker 2>arrest warrant. And now Ladureau is in Justice Department custody.

0:24:09.320 --> 0:24:11.960
<v Speaker 2>He's in the Bureau of Federal Prisons, and you'll go

0:24:12.080 --> 0:24:15.879
<v Speaker 2>through federal trial with a federal judge and the federal

0:24:15.960 --> 0:24:19.200
<v Speaker 2>jury and the federal prosecution, and they'll decide his faith.

0:24:19.840 --> 0:24:23.679
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they will, and his fate, whatever it is, Frankie

0:24:23.720 --> 0:24:26.320
<v Speaker 1>will be more than deserved because like many of these

0:24:26.400 --> 0:24:28.720
<v Speaker 1>Narco terrorists. He has a lot of American blood on

0:24:28.760 --> 0:24:30.960
<v Speaker 1>his hands, not necessarily in the form of shoot a

0:24:31.040 --> 0:24:34.159
<v Speaker 1>point blank range murder, but in terms of drug overdoses,

0:24:34.200 --> 0:24:36.760
<v Speaker 1>something that for to many American families know way, way,

0:24:37.200 --> 0:24:38.320
<v Speaker 1>way too much about.

0:24:38.840 --> 0:24:39.000
<v Speaker 2>Mike.

0:24:39.240 --> 0:24:40.840
<v Speaker 1>Another thing that you and I do at the arg

0:24:40.920 --> 0:24:43.280
<v Speaker 1>three project is we pay close attention as a name

0:24:43.280 --> 0:24:47.280
<v Speaker 1>would apply to Article three to the courts. No shortage

0:24:47.320 --> 0:24:51.040
<v Speaker 1>of big cases on the Supreme Court docket. This particular term,

0:24:51.440 --> 0:24:54.399
<v Speaker 1>the one that I find to be most kind of

0:24:54.440 --> 0:24:57.080
<v Speaker 1>attracted to on a personal level. It might not be

0:24:57.119 --> 0:25:01.120
<v Speaker 1>the one that's getting most headlines is the birthright slaizenship case.

0:25:01.480 --> 0:25:03.200
<v Speaker 1>So this is a big question kind of about Donald

0:25:03.200 --> 0:25:06.439
<v Speaker 1>Trump's Day one executive order that says that the fourteenth

0:25:06.440 --> 0:25:10.720
<v Speaker 1>Amendment does not require birthright citizenship for the children of

0:25:10.800 --> 0:25:13.399
<v Speaker 1>legal aliens. Now, I buy this argument, hook, climent and Sinker.

0:25:13.440 --> 0:25:16.359
<v Speaker 1>I've been arguing this since I was a law student

0:25:16.440 --> 0:25:19.800
<v Speaker 1>over over a decade ago. I guess the question for you, Mike.

0:25:20.119 --> 0:25:22.800
<v Speaker 1>Many can kind of briefly explain what the rationale is,

0:25:22.880 --> 0:25:25.960
<v Speaker 1>but more than that, I'm curious is this going to succeed.

0:25:26.160 --> 0:25:27.440
<v Speaker 1>I think a lot of folks look at the current

0:25:27.480 --> 0:25:29.440
<v Speaker 1>court and they get very wildly trying to find five

0:25:29.480 --> 0:25:31.280
<v Speaker 1>votes there. So do you think that that administration has

0:25:31.320 --> 0:25:32.680
<v Speaker 1>a real chance of winning on this case?

0:25:33.800 --> 0:25:39.480
<v Speaker 2>The trub administration's position of birthrights citizenship is legally one

0:25:39.880 --> 0:25:43.600
<v Speaker 2>percent correct. And let's talk about that. We the people

0:25:43.640 --> 0:25:47.000
<v Speaker 2>again are the sovereign citizens of America. Our most crucial

0:25:47.080 --> 0:25:50.879
<v Speaker 2>sovereign power is to control our citizen is to control

0:25:50.920 --> 0:25:53.879
<v Speaker 2>our border, to control our population. We never gave that away.

0:25:54.600 --> 0:25:57.879
<v Speaker 2>After the Civil War, we had the Thirteenth Amendment to

0:25:57.920 --> 0:26:01.400
<v Speaker 2>outlast slavery, the fourteenth amend by due process and equal

0:26:01.440 --> 0:26:05.240
<v Speaker 2>protection to freed male slaves that was extended as women

0:26:05.240 --> 0:26:07.720
<v Speaker 2>with the nineteenth Amendment of them voting rights under the

0:26:07.760 --> 0:26:11.200
<v Speaker 2>fifteenth Amendment for the freed male slaves again extended under

0:26:11.200 --> 0:26:14.560
<v Speaker 2>the nineteenth amendments. As part of the fourteenth Amendment, we

0:26:14.640 --> 0:26:19.119
<v Speaker 2>had birthright citizenship for the freed slaves, for the children

0:26:19.160 --> 0:26:22.400
<v Speaker 2>of the freed slaves. In that Fourteenth Amendment, it talks

0:26:22.440 --> 0:26:25.960
<v Speaker 2>about persons born in the US subject to the jurisdiction

0:26:26.560 --> 0:26:29.600
<v Speaker 2>of the United States get birthright citizenship subject to the

0:26:29.680 --> 0:26:33.919
<v Speaker 2>jurisdiction is the key subject to the jurisdiction means that

0:26:33.960 --> 0:26:39.280
<v Speaker 2>you're loyal to the United States. The children born in

0:26:39.320 --> 0:26:43.160
<v Speaker 2>the United States to foreign ambassadors do not have birthright

0:26:43.240 --> 0:26:47.199
<v Speaker 2>citizenship because they're not subject to the jurisdiction of the

0:26:47.280 --> 0:26:50.359
<v Speaker 2>United States. They're subject to the jurisdiction of the foreign

0:26:50.400 --> 0:26:55.400
<v Speaker 2>country from where they came. Americans Indians were not subject

0:26:56.000 --> 0:26:59.280
<v Speaker 2>to the jurisdiction of the United States. Congress had to

0:26:59.320 --> 0:27:04.800
<v Speaker 2>extend birth right citizenship to American Indians through statues. So

0:27:04.960 --> 0:27:11.920
<v Speaker 2>ask this dispositive question, if American Indians do not have

0:27:12.040 --> 0:27:16.840
<v Speaker 2>birthright citizenship under the fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, how

0:27:16.880 --> 0:27:20.960
<v Speaker 2>the hell would illegal aliens And the answer is clear,

0:27:21.440 --> 0:27:25.600
<v Speaker 2>It's easy. They do not right. If Congress wants to

0:27:25.640 --> 0:27:30.600
<v Speaker 2>give the children of illegal aliens birthright citizenship, Congress can

0:27:30.640 --> 0:27:33.480
<v Speaker 2>do that through statute like it did for American Indians.

0:27:33.520 --> 0:27:36.399
<v Speaker 2>But for this idea that the courts are just going

0:27:36.480 --> 0:27:42.680
<v Speaker 2>to invent birthright citizenship for twenty million illegal alien aliens

0:27:43.000 --> 0:27:48.920
<v Speaker 2>children is a It is the It is the biggest

0:27:49.040 --> 0:27:53.800
<v Speaker 2>violation of our sovereign power, of our sovereign rights as

0:27:53.840 --> 0:27:56.480
<v Speaker 2>we the people, the sovereign citizens of America that you

0:27:56.560 --> 0:28:02.240
<v Speaker 2>can imagine that courts just hand out citizenship like this

0:28:02.400 --> 0:28:07.639
<v Speaker 2>when it's not authorized by LAMB is a grave violation

0:28:08.000 --> 0:28:09.919
<v Speaker 2>of we the people's sovereign power.

0:28:10.680 --> 0:28:13.400
<v Speaker 1>This sactue that they're talking about is this Calvin Coolish

0:28:13.440 --> 0:28:16.160
<v Speaker 1>era statue in nineteen twenty four of the Indian Citisens shipbats.

0:28:16.160 --> 0:28:18.719
<v Speaker 1>I agree, that's totally despositive about the way. If if

0:28:18.760 --> 0:28:20.960
<v Speaker 1>the children of American Indians were not subject to the

0:28:21.040 --> 0:28:24.280
<v Speaker 1>jurisdiction in eighteen sixty eight when the Fourthy Moment was ratified,

0:28:24.280 --> 0:28:26.639
<v Speaker 1>then I have no idea how to hack the children

0:28:26.680 --> 0:28:28.960
<v Speaker 1>of those who legally are not even here. You know,

0:28:29.000 --> 0:28:30.760
<v Speaker 1>they you know, they could be officially here, they could

0:28:30.760 --> 0:28:33.400
<v Speaker 1>have residents, but legally illegal aliens are not actually here.

0:28:33.440 --> 0:28:35.479
<v Speaker 1>So I have no idea, frankly, how this argument ever

0:28:35.520 --> 0:28:38.200
<v Speaker 1>got accepted. God willing, the court will do the right thing.

0:28:38.920 --> 0:28:41.680
<v Speaker 1>At least one final court case I want to get

0:28:41.720 --> 0:28:43.560
<v Speaker 1>your take on, and that's the big tariff's case. I

0:28:43.600 --> 0:28:45.280
<v Speaker 1>think a lot of folks are paying very close attention.

0:28:45.320 --> 0:28:46.640
<v Speaker 1>What's the court going to do when it comes to

0:28:46.680 --> 0:28:50.320
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump's tariffs. The big question here is the perceived

0:28:50.440 --> 0:28:54.240
<v Speaker 1>disonance between Article one, Section eight congressional power to levy

0:28:54.640 --> 0:28:58.440
<v Speaker 1>duties impost taxes versus this late nineteen seventy statute for

0:28:58.520 --> 0:29:02.280
<v Speaker 1>emergency economic powers that the administrations relying upon. How do

0:29:02.320 --> 0:29:03.560
<v Speaker 1>you see this one breaking up?

0:29:04.880 --> 0:29:08.840
<v Speaker 2>Well, that's a good question. The Congress definitely has the

0:29:08.920 --> 0:29:14.000
<v Speaker 2>power over tariffs under the Constitution. That Congress also delegates

0:29:14.400 --> 0:29:16.920
<v Speaker 2>a lot of this power to the president. If you

0:29:16.960 --> 0:29:19.280
<v Speaker 2>look at the Youngstown Steel case, which is an old

0:29:19.320 --> 0:29:22.680
<v Speaker 2>Supreme Court case, the president is at the apex of

0:29:22.720 --> 0:29:26.520
<v Speaker 2>his power when these in foreign affairs, which tariffs are

0:29:26.520 --> 0:29:29.760
<v Speaker 2>in foreign affairs, and you have a congressional delegation of power,

0:29:29.800 --> 0:29:32.160
<v Speaker 2>which is exactly what you have here. So if the

0:29:32.200 --> 0:29:36.440
<v Speaker 2>Supreme Court follows precedents, if they follow the Youngstown Steel

0:29:36.480 --> 0:29:40.120
<v Speaker 2>President President Trump should win. If they don't follow President

0:29:40.120 --> 0:29:44.240
<v Speaker 2>because they want to be a political activist because it's

0:29:44.280 --> 0:29:48.080
<v Speaker 2>Trump instead of Biden, you could see you could.

0:29:47.880 --> 0:29:50.840
<v Speaker 3>See President Trump loser. You could see some kind of

0:29:50.840 --> 0:29:53.440
<v Speaker 3>split the baby thing where they have a tiered system,

0:29:54.360 --> 0:29:58.040
<v Speaker 3>you know, some balancing tests, some weird tests that squishy

0:29:58.880 --> 0:30:02.000
<v Speaker 3>lawless justices do when they want to be politicians in ropes.

0:30:02.520 --> 0:30:05.040
<v Speaker 1>You know the Youngstown case. Actually that's a really nice example.

0:30:05.160 --> 0:30:07.680
<v Speaker 1>This is the Harry Truman Steele Seize Your case and

0:30:07.720 --> 0:30:10.880
<v Speaker 1>You're totally right that when the president is acting on

0:30:11.000 --> 0:30:13.920
<v Speaker 1>delegate authority in foreign affairs, that really is the height

0:30:13.960 --> 0:30:16.080
<v Speaker 1>of his power. I also make another argument as well,

0:30:16.680 --> 0:30:19.880
<v Speaker 1>which is that President Trump, I think, views tariffs as

0:30:19.880 --> 0:30:22.600
<v Speaker 1>an emergency issue because he cares a lot about the

0:30:22.640 --> 0:30:26.720
<v Speaker 1>balance of trade, So he genuinely, subjectively, perhaps objective, but subjective,

0:30:26.840 --> 0:30:29.880
<v Speaker 1>views trade as an economic emergency. So I think that

0:30:29.960 --> 0:30:33.040
<v Speaker 1>on those grounds he's probably justified as well. Mike Bill

0:30:33.080 --> 0:30:35.200
<v Speaker 1>could before I let you go again, follows folks at

0:30:35.280 --> 0:30:38.200
<v Speaker 1>Article three project dot org. What is the number one

0:30:38.280 --> 0:30:41.440
<v Speaker 1>priority that you would like to convey to this audience

0:30:41.440 --> 0:30:43.440
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to what we at A three p

0:30:43.560 --> 0:30:45.640
<v Speaker 1>are pushing right now? What is number one priority? And

0:30:45.680 --> 0:30:47.880
<v Speaker 1>how can the listeners of viewers get involved.

0:30:48.920 --> 0:30:53.600
<v Speaker 2>I think that this lawfare and judicial sabotage against the

0:30:53.720 --> 0:30:57.320
<v Speaker 2>duly elected president of the United States is a direct

0:30:57.320 --> 0:31:02.320
<v Speaker 2>assault on we the people, and it's unacceptable. This idea

0:31:03.040 --> 0:31:11.080
<v Speaker 2>that judges can control our population, control our citizenship, controller

0:31:11.080 --> 0:31:15.840
<v Speaker 2>of borders is completely totally unacceptable. We've been fighting that ferociously.

0:31:15.920 --> 0:31:18.440
<v Speaker 2>We fought the lawfare before the election to help President

0:31:18.440 --> 0:31:20.840
<v Speaker 2>Trump get back an office, and now we're fighting the

0:31:20.920 --> 0:31:25.440
<v Speaker 2>judicial sabotage while he's in office. The judicial. We're winning

0:31:25.480 --> 0:31:28.400
<v Speaker 2>in all these fronts again. Now Democrats are turning to

0:31:28.480 --> 0:31:31.320
<v Speaker 2>violence on the street, so we need to push the

0:31:31.560 --> 0:31:35.560
<v Speaker 2>Justice Department to start arresting these people for insurrection, for

0:31:35.680 --> 0:31:41.240
<v Speaker 2>seditious conspiracy, for assault, kidnapping, conspiracy, harboring, many other federal felonies.

0:31:41.280 --> 0:31:44.440
<v Speaker 2>And you can go to article three Projects dot org,

0:31:44.560 --> 0:31:47.480
<v Speaker 2>article number three project dot org take action, donate all

0:31:47.480 --> 0:31:50.280
<v Speaker 2>of us on social media, and Josh Hammer, you have

0:31:50.320 --> 0:31:53.120
<v Speaker 2>been a warrior for us for many years, so I

0:31:53.240 --> 0:31:56.560
<v Speaker 2>really appreciate that all that you do. Congrats. I'm making

0:31:56.560 --> 0:31:59.720
<v Speaker 2>it big time. Now it's hammer time. It's your prime

0:31:59.760 --> 0:32:02.160
<v Speaker 2>time hammer time, So congrats on all you do.

0:32:02.360 --> 0:32:04.560
<v Speaker 1>Mike, Mike, we love you, man the Viceroy. Follow him

0:32:04.560 --> 0:32:08.320
<v Speaker 1>on x at mrd DMIA. I'm Josh Hammer. We'll be

0:32:08.360 --> 0:32:10.200
<v Speaker 1>right back after a short commercial break. Make sure to

0:32:10.240 --> 0:32:10.560
<v Speaker 1>stay with.

0:32:10.640 --> 0:32:15.320
<v Speaker 3>Us, folks.

0:32:16.600 --> 0:32:20.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm Josh Hammer. Welcome back, Mike Davis, great friend of

0:32:20.600 --> 0:32:23.360
<v Speaker 1>the show. Also again my colleague at the article three projects.

0:32:23.560 --> 0:32:25.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm very proud of the work that we do at

0:32:25.760 --> 0:32:28.080
<v Speaker 1>a three P as we call it. Make sure again

0:32:28.240 --> 0:32:31.600
<v Speaker 1>check us out Article three project dot org. There's plenty

0:32:31.640 --> 0:32:33.520
<v Speaker 1>of big cases at the US Supreme Court going on

0:32:33.720 --> 0:32:36.560
<v Speaker 1>right now. I want to briefly elaborate for now on

0:32:36.720 --> 0:32:38.920
<v Speaker 1>the tariff case that Mike and I were discussing. So,

0:32:39.680 --> 0:32:44.200
<v Speaker 1>the statutory basis that Donald Trump invoked to justify his

0:32:44.240 --> 0:32:47.760
<v Speaker 1>reciprocal tariffs, which he first introduced in so called Liberation

0:32:47.840 --> 0:32:50.840
<v Speaker 1>Day at the Rosegarn the White House last April, was

0:32:50.880 --> 0:32:55.160
<v Speaker 1>this late nineteen seventies era emergency economic statue that comes

0:32:55.160 --> 0:32:58.240
<v Speaker 1>from the Jimmy Carter presidency, and the argument that his

0:32:58.240 --> 0:33:01.680
<v Speaker 1>administration has made is that the use of tariffs are

0:33:01.720 --> 0:33:05.120
<v Speaker 1>in emergency power, that they can be justified here as

0:33:05.160 --> 0:33:09.120
<v Speaker 1>an emergency economic use. Mike made a very clever argument.

0:33:09.440 --> 0:33:11.240
<v Speaker 1>It's really kind of out of a con law one

0:33:11.240 --> 0:33:15.000
<v Speaker 1>oh one class during law school, which is this case

0:33:15.200 --> 0:33:18.360
<v Speaker 1>from President Harry Truman in the early nineteen fifties called

0:33:18.360 --> 0:33:21.600
<v Speaker 1>the steel Seizure case, where in the context of trying

0:33:21.600 --> 0:33:25.360
<v Speaker 1>to get supplies for the Korean War, President Truman went

0:33:25.400 --> 0:33:29.040
<v Speaker 1>ahead and, acting on congressionally delegated power that was debated,

0:33:29.040 --> 0:33:33.200
<v Speaker 1>but acting nominally on that kind of power, went ahead

0:33:33.240 --> 0:33:36.400
<v Speaker 1>and seized some steel mass. And the court does have

0:33:36.440 --> 0:33:41.800
<v Speaker 1>this famous reasoning where they say that the president sometimes

0:33:41.840 --> 0:33:44.280
<v Speaker 1>acts at the lowest ebb of his power, the highest point.

0:33:44.760 --> 0:33:49.040
<v Speaker 1>When Congress delegates power, that's when the president acts at

0:33:49.040 --> 0:33:51.640
<v Speaker 1>its highest point. The real question here is whether or

0:33:51.680 --> 0:33:55.720
<v Speaker 1>not this is a clear enough delegation. The folks on

0:33:55.720 --> 0:33:58.640
<v Speaker 1>the other side say they like to cite Anthony Scalia,

0:33:59.080 --> 0:34:02.480
<v Speaker 1>who Longo said the Congress does not hide elephants in

0:34:02.520 --> 0:34:05.800
<v Speaker 1>mouse houls, that when Congress wants to delegate a big thing,

0:34:06.280 --> 0:34:09.480
<v Speaker 1>for instance, they would argue, like tariffs, then they have

0:34:09.560 --> 0:34:12.880
<v Speaker 1>to articulate that a little more clearly and crisply. You

0:34:12.920 --> 0:34:17.120
<v Speaker 1>can't just subsume tariffs into emergency. The other side that argument,

0:34:17.520 --> 0:34:19.680
<v Speaker 1>as I said to Mike, is that at least for

0:34:19.719 --> 0:34:23.879
<v Speaker 1>this president, tariffs really are an emergency. Why. Because Donald

0:34:23.920 --> 0:34:26.680
<v Speaker 1>Trump is a big mercantilist. He's a big balance of

0:34:26.719 --> 0:34:28.880
<v Speaker 1>trade guy. You might love that, you might hate that.

0:34:29.520 --> 0:34:32.680
<v Speaker 1>It might be a hardcore las a fair free trader,

0:34:33.200 --> 0:34:35.160
<v Speaker 1>which typically means that you don't really care about the

0:34:35.160 --> 0:34:37.120
<v Speaker 1>balance of trade. So it means that you you support

0:34:37.160 --> 0:34:40.840
<v Speaker 1>in an export based economy, not an import based economy.

0:34:40.880 --> 0:34:44.839
<v Speaker 1>So probably you hate you hate tariffs. Doesn't matter because

0:34:44.880 --> 0:34:47.560
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump does not view it that way. Donald Trump

0:34:47.719 --> 0:34:53.000
<v Speaker 1>views mercantilism bounces of trade as being sound economic theory. Again,

0:34:53.000 --> 0:34:54.840
<v Speaker 1>I don't really care what you think, telling you how

0:34:54.880 --> 0:34:57.200
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trum approaches this. So for him, the notion that

0:34:57.239 --> 0:35:02.120
<v Speaker 1>America runs gargantuan trade deficits, or at least did for

0:35:02.200 --> 0:35:04.480
<v Speaker 1>years and years and years, decades, decades, a decadees, especially

0:35:04.480 --> 0:35:08.480
<v Speaker 1>as the post Cold War neoliberal order really took off.

0:35:09.680 --> 0:35:13.160
<v Speaker 1>He views that as a big problem as dare I say,

0:35:13.280 --> 0:35:20.200
<v Speaker 1>an emergency, thereby requiring some sort of emergency power. So

0:35:20.600 --> 0:35:23.520
<v Speaker 1>to me, that is one of the more compelling arguments

0:35:23.560 --> 0:35:26.640
<v Speaker 1>why I think the court might uphold the tariffs. But

0:35:27.160 --> 0:35:30.279
<v Speaker 1>I don't necessarily know that they're gonna do it. I

0:35:30.280 --> 0:35:33.600
<v Speaker 1>think it's gonna be a very close call. I generally

0:35:33.680 --> 0:35:36.120
<v Speaker 1>hesitate to make a prediction on the tariff case. We'll see.

0:35:36.280 --> 0:35:38.960
<v Speaker 1>I certainly hope though, that Secretary Bessends and the other

0:35:39.000 --> 0:35:42.279
<v Speaker 1>ECONO policy makers they're in the administration, so they have

0:35:42.400 --> 0:35:45.880
<v Speaker 1>a backup plan in place when it comes to trying

0:35:45.920 --> 0:35:48.360
<v Speaker 1>to know what to do with this if the tariff

0:35:48.400 --> 0:35:51.880
<v Speaker 1>case does indeed go the wrong way and the administration loses,

0:35:52.040 --> 0:35:54.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure they have something in mind. I don't pretend

0:35:54.160 --> 0:35:57.399
<v Speaker 1>to know exactly exactly what that is. Perhaps the even

0:35:57.719 --> 0:36:00.279
<v Speaker 1>broader question, though, which Mike was gonna add towards the

0:36:00.360 --> 0:36:03.839
<v Speaker 1>end of our conversation, is his notion of judicial sabotage

0:36:03.880 --> 0:36:07.480
<v Speaker 1>and judicial insurrection. More generally, it's been an issue plaguing

0:36:07.520 --> 0:36:11.560
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump since his very first days in office. During

0:36:11.600 --> 0:36:15.480
<v Speaker 1>the first Donald Trump term, the very first term, he

0:36:15.560 --> 0:36:20.960
<v Speaker 1>faced more so called nationwide injunctions than the first forty

0:36:20.960 --> 0:36:24.600
<v Speaker 1>four presidents combined, somewhere between sixty and seventy by a

0:36:24.680 --> 0:36:29.879
<v Speaker 1>rough count, and thus far just in the first year.

0:36:30.600 --> 0:36:32.960
<v Speaker 1>It's now year to the day on the first year

0:36:33.000 --> 0:36:38.080
<v Speaker 1>to the day of this second administration, depending on how

0:36:38.080 --> 0:36:40.600
<v Speaker 1>you count, that he's faced just as many, potentially even

0:36:40.680 --> 0:36:44.440
<v Speaker 1>more than he faced his entire first term. This is

0:36:44.480 --> 0:36:46.840
<v Speaker 1>in spite, by the way, in spite of the Supreme

0:36:46.840 --> 0:36:50.479
<v Speaker 1>Courts fairly clear ruling not crystal clear, but fairly clear

0:36:50.560 --> 0:36:54.799
<v Speaker 1>ruling last summer in the Casa case, a case that

0:36:54.840 --> 0:36:58.080
<v Speaker 1>was initially litigated as a birthrights Isn't Your case, but

0:36:58.160 --> 0:37:01.239
<v Speaker 1>had its procedure changed throughout the litigation. It became a

0:37:01.280 --> 0:37:04.319
<v Speaker 1>case about the legitimacy or lack thereof of so called

0:37:04.400 --> 0:37:08.319
<v Speaker 1>nationwide universal injunctions, and there any Cony Barrett, writing for

0:37:08.360 --> 0:37:12.680
<v Speaker 1>the Court, wrote pretty clearly that with some very very

0:37:12.760 --> 0:37:16.560
<v Speaker 1>very very very tiny exceptions dispensations from the rule niche Wie,

0:37:16.600 --> 0:37:20.320
<v Speaker 1>injunctions are bumpkin their garbage. They offend our constitutional tradition.

0:37:21.960 --> 0:37:25.960
<v Speaker 1>Why because the judgment power, the judicial power of which

0:37:26.040 --> 0:37:28.600
<v Speaker 1>Article three of the Constitutions be speaking in theudiciary is

0:37:28.640 --> 0:37:31.719
<v Speaker 1>the power of a court to bind the named litigants

0:37:31.800 --> 0:37:36.560
<v Speaker 1>to a certain lawsuit no one else. And yet they

0:37:36.600 --> 0:37:40.920
<v Speaker 1>keep on going, don't they? How many so called sweeping

0:37:40.920 --> 0:37:43.759
<v Speaker 1>injunctions to bind not just the parts of the case.

0:37:43.960 --> 0:37:47.080
<v Speaker 1>Have we seen just since the Casta case last June,

0:37:48.320 --> 0:37:54.120
<v Speaker 1>whether it's Judge Michelle Boardman, Judge Jeb Bosburg, Judge McConnell

0:37:54.160 --> 0:37:56.480
<v Speaker 1>up in New England, a guy who was trying to

0:37:56.520 --> 0:38:00.960
<v Speaker 1>hold trumdministrators visuals in contempt a contempt of court last year.

0:38:02.400 --> 0:38:07.480
<v Speaker 1>The chutzba of these lower courts robes tyrants. Have they

0:38:07.520 --> 0:38:10.680
<v Speaker 1>not read Alexander Hamilton in the Federal seventy eight? Have

0:38:10.760 --> 0:38:17.120
<v Speaker 1>they not read Hamilton explaining explicating quite clearly that the

0:38:17.280 --> 0:38:21.080
<v Speaker 1>justiciary is quote the least dangerous, the least dangerous of

0:38:21.120 --> 0:38:24.759
<v Speaker 1>the branches because it has neither force nor will, but

0:38:24.840 --> 0:38:32.880
<v Speaker 1>merely judgment. Hamilton explains this, I think extremely clearly. Kiashu

0:38:32.960 --> 0:38:36.680
<v Speaker 1>goes on to say that this is because they depend

0:38:36.719 --> 0:38:40.400
<v Speaker 1>that to say, the judges depend upon the efficacy of

0:38:40.520 --> 0:38:44.360
<v Speaker 1>the executive branch even for the enforcement of their own judgment.

0:38:44.920 --> 0:38:48.840
<v Speaker 1>In other words, they don't even judges can't even enforce

0:38:48.880 --> 0:38:52.799
<v Speaker 1>their own judgments to this day, they rely on the

0:38:52.880 --> 0:38:55.759
<v Speaker 1>US marshals in theory to do that. We are the

0:38:55.840 --> 0:38:59.839
<v Speaker 1>US marshals institutionally bureaucratically housed. Are they part of Article

0:38:59.840 --> 0:39:02.080
<v Speaker 1>three the courts? No, they're actually part of articles too,

0:39:02.120 --> 0:39:05.439
<v Speaker 1>the doja at the executive branch. So to this day

0:39:05.480 --> 0:39:09.800
<v Speaker 1>Hamilton's warning is true. Another man who ordered a warning

0:39:09.800 --> 0:39:14.640
<v Speaker 1>on this, a great man, is Antonin Scalia. We just

0:39:14.680 --> 0:39:16.440
<v Speaker 1>mentioned a few minutes ago in the context of his

0:39:16.600 --> 0:39:20.560
<v Speaker 1>famous adage about Congress not hiding elephants and nousols. He

0:39:20.640 --> 0:39:24.680
<v Speaker 1>was talking there about how to interpret its statutes. Here

0:39:24.719 --> 0:39:26.880
<v Speaker 1>I want to read for you the final paragraph of

0:39:26.960 --> 0:39:31.680
<v Speaker 1>Antony Scalia's vociferous descent, as he was known to do.

0:39:32.480 --> 0:39:35.760
<v Speaker 1>In the same sex marriage case O Bergfeld versus Hodges,

0:39:36.560 --> 0:39:41.800
<v Speaker 1>the case that erroneously constitutionalized same sex marriage in twenty fifteen,

0:39:41.880 --> 0:39:47.319
<v Speaker 1>in a wild naked act of pure judicial usurpation of

0:39:47.360 --> 0:39:49.799
<v Speaker 1>the ability of the people to define what is and

0:39:49.840 --> 0:39:53.840
<v Speaker 1>what is not a marriage. Here was antonin Scalia concluding

0:39:53.880 --> 0:40:00.640
<v Speaker 1>his quite quite amusing and enjoyable descent. Hubris is sometimes

0:40:00.640 --> 0:40:04.280
<v Speaker 1>defined as overweening pride, and pride we know goes before

0:40:04.320 --> 0:40:07.320
<v Speaker 1>a fall. The judiciary is the least dangerous to the

0:40:07.360 --> 0:40:10.360
<v Speaker 1>federal branches because it has neither force nor will, but

0:40:10.440 --> 0:40:14.160
<v Speaker 1>merely judgment, and must ultimately depend upon the aid of

0:40:14.200 --> 0:40:17.640
<v Speaker 1>the executive arm and the States even for the efficacy

0:40:17.719 --> 0:40:21.680
<v Speaker 1>of its judgments. With each decision of ours that takes

0:40:21.719 --> 0:40:24.960
<v Speaker 1>from the people a question properly left to them, With

0:40:25.120 --> 0:40:28.400
<v Speaker 1>each decision that is unabashedly based not on law, but

0:40:28.480 --> 0:40:32.080
<v Speaker 1>on the reason judgment of a bare majority of this court,

0:40:32.880 --> 0:40:35.200
<v Speaker 1>we move one step closer to being reminded of our

0:40:35.239 --> 0:40:41.080
<v Speaker 1>own impact. I think he had it right with every

0:40:41.120 --> 0:40:45.040
<v Speaker 1>act of judicial usurpation. Every time that Jeb Bosberg tells

0:40:45.080 --> 0:40:48.920
<v Speaker 1>a plane to turn around when the plane is transporting

0:40:48.960 --> 0:40:52.840
<v Speaker 1>legal aliens out of the country, any judge that says stop,

0:40:53.000 --> 0:40:57.440
<v Speaker 1>you can't end TPS temporary protective status has become an

0:40:57.520 --> 0:41:02.000
<v Speaker 1>amnancy program for Honduran small these lots of others. That

0:41:02.080 --> 0:41:06.520
<v Speaker 1>judge is overstepping his or her legitimate boundaries of his

0:41:06.640 --> 0:41:11.319
<v Speaker 1>proper Article three federal jurisdiction and beyond the confines. What

0:41:11.440 --> 0:41:13.799
<v Speaker 1>the jugital power of Article three, Section one, Clause one

0:41:13.800 --> 0:41:18.759
<v Speaker 1>properly means. The onus at this point is on the

0:41:18.800 --> 0:41:21.920
<v Speaker 1>Congress and the Executive branch to go even further than

0:41:21.960 --> 0:41:26.600
<v Speaker 1>they already have to actually remind the courts, as sclea

0:41:26.640 --> 0:41:30.840
<v Speaker 1>pudd It of their own impotence. Ideally, that requires Congress

0:41:30.840 --> 0:41:33.480
<v Speaker 1>to act. There's only so much the executive branch can

0:41:33.520 --> 0:41:37.440
<v Speaker 1>do of its own accord. Congress should start defunding judges.

0:41:37.520 --> 0:41:39.920
<v Speaker 1>Chip roy On the House User Committe's been proposing exactly that.

0:41:39.960 --> 0:41:43.360
<v Speaker 1>When it comes to judges Bosberg Andenbornment, defund them, strip

0:41:43.440 --> 0:41:48.319
<v Speaker 1>them of jurisdiction, impeach them. There's lots of things you

0:41:48.360 --> 0:41:50.800
<v Speaker 1>can do. Congress has more power than they care to

0:41:50.840 --> 0:41:53.600
<v Speaker 1>utilize in this area. It's been one years that's Trump

0:41:53.719 --> 0:41:56.560
<v Speaker 1>was sworn in, and the audital insurrection, as its gust

0:41:56.600 --> 0:41:59.440
<v Speaker 1>of Mike Davis is still raging. One of my wishes

0:41:59.440 --> 0:42:01.560
<v Speaker 1>for year two, the Trump presidency is to see this

0:42:01.600 --> 0:42:05.320
<v Speaker 1>digital insurrection quashed, just like the insurrection that's been underway

0:42:05.400 --> 0:42:09.399
<v Speaker 1>in Minneapolis after the Renee Good shooting. I'm Josh Hammer

0:42:09.440 --> 0:42:11.200
<v Speaker 1>who hoping that you have enjoyed today's episode of The

0:42:11.239 --> 0:42:13.320
<v Speaker 1>Josh Hammer Show. Make sure to watch the subscribe wherever

0:42:13.360 --> 0:42:15.880
<v Speaker 1>you get your podcast, watch us in the Sale news channel.

0:42:15.920 --> 0:42:17.200
<v Speaker 1>We'll be right back tomorrow.

0:42:21.520 --> 0:42:24.800
<v Speaker 2>The Josh Hammer Show is a member of the Trust Project.