1 00:00:00,720 --> 00:00:01,040 Speaker 1: To night. 2 00:00:01,080 --> 00:00:03,280 Speaker 2: Michael Brown joins me here, the former FEMA director of 3 00:00:03,320 --> 00:00:06,280 Speaker 2: talk show host Michael Brown. Brownie, no, Brownie, You're doing 4 00:00:06,280 --> 00:00:07,040 Speaker 2: a heck of a job. 5 00:00:07,200 --> 00:00:11,440 Speaker 1: The Weekend with Michael Brown broadcasting Life from Denver, Colorado. Hey, 6 00:00:11,440 --> 00:00:12,959 Speaker 1: it's the Weekend with Michael Brown. Glad to have you 7 00:00:13,080 --> 00:00:15,760 Speaker 1: joining the program. Today's text line, as usual, is always 8 00:00:15,760 --> 00:00:18,200 Speaker 1: open twenty four hours a day, seven days a week. 9 00:00:18,480 --> 00:00:21,000 Speaker 1: Numbers three three, one zero three on your message app, 10 00:00:21,040 --> 00:00:24,720 Speaker 1: whichever one you used, I don't care. We are agnostic 11 00:00:24,760 --> 00:00:27,800 Speaker 1: when it comes to message apps. Just use three three 12 00:00:27,960 --> 00:00:30,680 Speaker 1: one zero three keyword Mike or Michael. Tell me anything, 13 00:00:30,800 --> 00:00:33,640 Speaker 1: ask me anything. And here's why I love the text line. 14 00:00:34,360 --> 00:00:37,199 Speaker 1: So we finished the last hour talking a little bit 15 00:00:37,280 --> 00:00:40,279 Speaker 1: about this yahoo from Minnesota that thinks, you know, if 16 00:00:40,280 --> 00:00:42,919 Speaker 1: we're going to study retail theft problems in Minnesota, why 17 00:00:42,960 --> 00:00:46,880 Speaker 1: don't we look to see if there's some benefit to it. Well, goober, 18 00:00:46,960 --> 00:00:50,080 Speaker 1: number forty one forty one writes, which, by the way, 19 00:00:50,120 --> 00:00:53,280 Speaker 1: is a great number, Michael. One of the major benefits 20 00:00:53,320 --> 00:00:56,360 Speaker 1: of retail theft is that when the items that are 21 00:00:56,440 --> 00:01:00,520 Speaker 1: stolen are sold, it generates income for the those hard 22 00:01:00,520 --> 00:01:03,680 Speaker 1: working people who have determined a way to create a 23 00:01:03,760 --> 00:01:08,280 Speaker 1: black market, and these people generate an income for themselves, 24 00:01:09,080 --> 00:01:12,280 Speaker 1: and then I am certain they will report this and 25 00:01:12,360 --> 00:01:15,280 Speaker 1: be able to be removed from the welfare roles. Do 26 00:01:15,400 --> 00:01:18,080 Speaker 1: you not trust the integrity of those that are involved 27 00:01:18,080 --> 00:01:22,400 Speaker 1: in retail theft to report their income? You know not? 28 00:01:22,600 --> 00:01:25,480 Speaker 1: I think about it that way. We should just delete 29 00:01:25,520 --> 00:01:28,759 Speaker 1: that last entire segment and forget about it, because you're right, 30 00:01:29,360 --> 00:01:35,920 Speaker 1: it's just created a will an underground economy, which quite truthfully, 31 00:01:36,160 --> 00:01:38,480 Speaker 1: I wouldn't mind being a part of the underground economy 32 00:01:38,520 --> 00:01:41,399 Speaker 1: because when you look at my tax bill only moly. 33 00:01:43,280 --> 00:01:47,199 Speaker 1: Let's start with some facts I would call this. Let's 34 00:01:47,240 --> 00:01:50,840 Speaker 1: talk about a family, a hit man, and a legal 35 00:01:50,920 --> 00:01:55,000 Speaker 1: question that might be worth fighting about. These are the facts. 36 00:01:55,560 --> 00:02:01,280 Speaker 1: Douglas and Berto Eurias Arlano, his wife, and their minor 37 00:02:01,440 --> 00:02:07,280 Speaker 1: child came into this country without authorization, i e. Illegal 38 00:02:07,280 --> 00:02:13,280 Speaker 1: aliens in twenty twenty one. They came from El Salvador Eurias, 39 00:02:13,320 --> 00:02:20,160 Speaker 1: Irre Arolina Eurias, we'll just call him Euryas testify credibly, 40 00:02:21,320 --> 00:02:25,800 Speaker 1: because the immigration judge agreed that is the caario. You know, 41 00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:30,840 Speaker 1: A hit man had been targeting his family since twenty sixteen, 42 00:02:32,160 --> 00:02:36,240 Speaker 1: had already shot two of his half brothers and threatened 43 00:02:36,240 --> 00:02:41,640 Speaker 1: to kill every member of the family. So when Eurias 44 00:02:41,639 --> 00:02:46,919 Speaker 1: tried to relocate within Al Salvador, the threats followed, money 45 00:02:47,000 --> 00:02:52,640 Speaker 1: was demanded, he was physically assaulted. After a fourth relocation, 46 00:02:53,560 --> 00:02:58,320 Speaker 1: men were asking around town about any newcomers. So for 47 00:02:58,720 --> 00:03:01,600 Speaker 1: Douglas and bartel Or Alano and his wife and their 48 00:03:01,639 --> 00:03:06,440 Speaker 1: minal child, that was enough and they left. I want 49 00:03:06,480 --> 00:03:08,840 Speaker 1: you to sit with those facts for just a moment, 50 00:03:10,680 --> 00:03:16,400 Speaker 1: because the United States Supreme Court sat with those facts also, 51 00:03:18,320 --> 00:03:24,960 Speaker 1: and then the Supreme Court unanimously nine to zero in 52 00:03:25,040 --> 00:03:31,520 Speaker 1: an opinion written by of all people, Justice Kaitanji Brown Jackson, 53 00:03:32,000 --> 00:03:34,400 Speaker 1: or as I like to refer to her as Jackson, 54 00:03:34,440 --> 00:03:41,800 Speaker 1: Brown said that is not persecution under the law, and 55 00:03:41,840 --> 00:03:45,000 Speaker 1: we're not going to second guess an agency that made 56 00:03:45,040 --> 00:03:50,880 Speaker 1: that call. This is the Urias case, and it is 57 00:03:51,160 --> 00:03:55,240 Speaker 1: far more important than it looks. So let's get first 58 00:03:55,240 --> 00:04:00,040 Speaker 1: to the legal question. The Immigration and Nationality Act. It 59 00:04:00,880 --> 00:04:04,600 Speaker 1: allows the government, the United States government, to grant asylum 60 00:04:04,640 --> 00:04:09,360 Speaker 1: to someone who qualifies as a refugee. Now, refugee is 61 00:04:09,400 --> 00:04:15,360 Speaker 1: defined as a person unable or unwilling to return home 62 00:04:16,040 --> 00:04:22,880 Speaker 1: because of quote persecution or a well founded fear of 63 00:04:23,000 --> 00:04:31,040 Speaker 1: persecution that is based on race, religion, nationality, membership in 64 00:04:31,120 --> 00:04:36,280 Speaker 1: a particular social group, or their political opinion. Got it, 65 00:04:37,200 --> 00:04:43,520 Speaker 1: That is a style a refugee status, a person unable 66 00:04:43,600 --> 00:04:47,120 Speaker 1: or unwilling to return home due to persecution, or a 67 00:04:47,120 --> 00:04:50,800 Speaker 1: well founded fear of persecution, and that persecution has to 68 00:04:50,839 --> 00:04:55,160 Speaker 1: be based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular 69 00:04:55,200 --> 00:04:59,800 Speaker 1: social group, or political opinion. Now, three levels of decision 70 00:04:59,839 --> 00:05:06,400 Speaker 1: may makers reviewed this family's case. At the lowest level, 71 00:05:07,240 --> 00:05:13,480 Speaker 1: an immigration judge denied asylum, denied them refugee status. The 72 00:05:13,520 --> 00:05:19,520 Speaker 1: Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the immigration judges first decision. 73 00:05:20,960 --> 00:05:26,240 Speaker 1: The first Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. At 74 00:05:26,320 --> 00:05:30,799 Speaker 1: every single level, the conclusion was the same. The facts, 75 00:05:31,000 --> 00:05:36,520 Speaker 1: as bad as they are, did not legally constitute persecution. 76 00:05:38,160 --> 00:05:40,280 Speaker 1: So the family went to the Supreme Court and argued 77 00:05:41,640 --> 00:05:44,440 Speaker 1: their argument is essentially this, the question of whether facts 78 00:05:44,760 --> 00:05:48,280 Speaker 1: rise to the level of persecution is a legal question 79 00:05:49,320 --> 00:05:53,040 Speaker 1: and it requires a de novo review. What does that mean? 80 00:05:53,720 --> 00:05:57,840 Speaker 1: It means that every court that you appeal to, because 81 00:05:57,880 --> 00:06:01,760 Speaker 1: this is a legal question, not a fact question, you 82 00:06:01,839 --> 00:06:05,279 Speaker 1: should be able to review the case with fresh Eyes. 83 00:06:05,839 --> 00:06:09,200 Speaker 1: In other words, there should be no deference to the 84 00:06:09,279 --> 00:06:14,120 Speaker 1: agency in this case customs and Border patrol or immigrations 85 00:06:14,160 --> 00:06:18,080 Speaker 1: in custom enforcement. There should be no difference to a 86 00:06:18,240 --> 00:06:21,880 Speaker 1: judge in this case, the immigration judge. There should be 87 00:06:21,920 --> 00:06:25,960 Speaker 1: no difference to a Board of Immigration Appeals, and there 88 00:06:26,000 --> 00:06:30,520 Speaker 1: should be no difference to the first circuit fresh Eyes, 89 00:06:31,120 --> 00:06:34,960 Speaker 1: no difference to the agency. Every judge along the way 90 00:06:35,040 --> 00:06:39,120 Speaker 1: gets to figure it out independently. Well, the Government countered 91 00:06:39,200 --> 00:06:43,440 Speaker 1: that argument. The government countered and said, this is essentially 92 00:06:43,480 --> 00:06:50,080 Speaker 1: a factual determination, and factual determinations in immigration cases. Congress 93 00:06:50,360 --> 00:06:57,719 Speaker 1: very specifically prescribed a deferential quote substantial evidence standard. What 94 00:06:57,760 --> 00:07:02,480 Speaker 1: does that mean. It means the will only reverse if 95 00:07:02,560 --> 00:07:07,680 Speaker 1: any reasonable adjudicator, any reasonable judge, would be compelled to 96 00:07:07,720 --> 00:07:11,760 Speaker 1: reach the opposite conclusion. Now, in legal terms, that is 97 00:07:11,800 --> 00:07:15,520 Speaker 1: a very high bar. Well, guess what happened in this 98 00:07:15,600 --> 00:07:22,480 Speaker 1: Supreme Court case. The Court sided with the Government unanimously, 99 00:07:23,200 --> 00:07:27,600 Speaker 1: all nine justices. If you're one that wants to divide 100 00:07:27,640 --> 00:07:33,720 Speaker 1: the justices up into conservatives or moderates or liberals, that's fine. 101 00:07:34,200 --> 00:07:37,000 Speaker 1: All nine of them agreed. If you want to divide 102 00:07:37,040 --> 00:07:41,040 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court up between those who are textualists or 103 00:07:41,080 --> 00:07:44,240 Speaker 1: originalists who look at the playing meaning of the statute 104 00:07:44,280 --> 00:07:48,400 Speaker 1: and read that those words in their playing meaning, and 105 00:07:48,480 --> 00:07:52,240 Speaker 1: those who don't. Uh, they all agreed. If you want 106 00:07:52,240 --> 00:07:55,000 Speaker 1: to divide the court up in between those who are 107 00:07:55,520 --> 00:07:59,800 Speaker 1: non activist judges or activist judges who want to make 108 00:07:59,840 --> 00:08:07,840 Speaker 1: up their own rules, no, all nine agreed. Here's the law. 109 00:08:09,280 --> 00:08:15,720 Speaker 1: This law is the Elias Zacharias law, the immigration and 110 00:08:15,960 --> 00:08:21,480 Speaker 1: all the reformats in the art of congressional codification. And 111 00:08:21,560 --> 00:08:23,640 Speaker 1: I want to walk through every single one of those 112 00:08:24,240 --> 00:08:27,320 Speaker 1: because for all of the court observers, the Supreme Court 113 00:08:27,360 --> 00:08:29,600 Speaker 1: observers who say that the court, Oh, we got to 114 00:08:29,640 --> 00:08:33,240 Speaker 1: pack the Supreme Court, we need to expand the Supreme Court. Oh, 115 00:08:33,280 --> 00:08:37,000 Speaker 1: the court is so badly divided, they can never agree 116 00:08:37,000 --> 00:08:41,280 Speaker 1: on anything. Well, buckle up, because we're going to walk 117 00:08:41,320 --> 00:08:44,280 Speaker 1: through this case and you're going to realize that, you know, 118 00:08:44,480 --> 00:08:48,839 Speaker 1: when the law is actually clear, hmmm, the court can 119 00:08:49,000 --> 00:08:53,240 Speaker 1: unanimously agree and they can take the newest and what 120 00:08:53,360 --> 00:08:56,800 Speaker 1: I think is the dumbest justice of the United States 121 00:08:56,840 --> 00:09:00,720 Speaker 1: Supreme Court and let her write the opinion and all 122 00:09:00,840 --> 00:09:03,640 Speaker 1: of the eight others will sign on to it. It's 123 00:09:03,679 --> 00:09:07,240 Speaker 1: a fascinating case. Be sure and subscribe to the podcast 124 00:09:07,280 --> 00:09:10,760 Speaker 1: on your podcast app. Search for whatever podcast app you use, 125 00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:14,880 Speaker 1: doesn't make any difference. Search for the Situation with Michael Brown. 126 00:09:14,920 --> 00:09:17,240 Speaker 1: That's the name of the show, the Situation with Michael Brown. 127 00:09:17,480 --> 00:09:20,080 Speaker 1: Get that subscribe button, leave a five star review because 128 00:09:20,120 --> 00:09:22,319 Speaker 1: that helps us with the algorithm. And then now we'll 129 00:09:22,320 --> 00:09:26,520 Speaker 1: automatically download every weekday program that we do Monday through Friday, 130 00:09:26,760 --> 00:09:30,199 Speaker 1: plus this Saturday program, so you get all six programs 131 00:09:30,440 --> 00:09:33,640 Speaker 1: of Michael Brown. Hang tight, let's go through this case. 132 00:09:33,920 --> 00:09:44,600 Speaker 1: We'll be right back. Hey, so beeking with Michael Brown. 133 00:09:44,640 --> 00:09:46,600 Speaker 1: Glad to have you with me. If you haven't followed 134 00:09:46,640 --> 00:09:49,079 Speaker 1: me on social media, then why haven't you get busy 135 00:09:49,080 --> 00:09:52,959 Speaker 1: and do that. Whether it's X formerly, Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram, 136 00:09:53,000 --> 00:09:55,880 Speaker 1: they're all at Michael D. Brown, Michael D. Brown, So 137 00:09:55,960 --> 00:09:59,760 Speaker 1: go do that. Right now, we're talking about this case 138 00:10:00,160 --> 00:10:04,480 Speaker 1: that is a unanimous Supreme Court decision. Urias versus Bondy. 139 00:10:04,840 --> 00:10:07,400 Speaker 1: Urias versus Bondy is the case. So let me give 140 00:10:07,400 --> 00:10:10,160 Speaker 1: you a little history of it. Back in nineteen ninety two, 141 00:10:10,360 --> 00:10:13,679 Speaker 1: in a case called Immigration Naturalization Service that was the 142 00:10:13,960 --> 00:10:19,920 Speaker 1: precursor to our current Homeland Security, Immigration Departments, Immigration and 143 00:10:20,000 --> 00:10:24,839 Speaker 1: Naturalization Service in a case called I Ins versus Elias Zacharias, 144 00:10:26,360 --> 00:10:35,160 Speaker 1: it established that in order to overturn a agency's persecution determination, 145 00:10:36,520 --> 00:10:40,400 Speaker 1: an applicant for asylum must show the evidence was quote 146 00:10:41,000 --> 00:10:46,319 Speaker 1: so compelling that no reasonable fact finder, a judge, or 147 00:10:46,360 --> 00:10:50,800 Speaker 1: a jury could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution. 148 00:10:52,480 --> 00:10:58,679 Speaker 1: That's substantial evidence review applied to the entire persecution determination. 149 00:10:59,440 --> 00:11:03,600 Speaker 1: And it's not just the raw facts, but it's it's 150 00:11:03,600 --> 00:11:07,240 Speaker 1: the legal conclusion that is also drawn from the facts 151 00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:11,240 Speaker 1: in a case. So remember, in any case, you have 152 00:11:11,760 --> 00:11:18,120 Speaker 1: two important components. You have the facts that you establish, 153 00:11:18,840 --> 00:11:22,439 Speaker 1: and then you have the law that you have established, 154 00:11:22,840 --> 00:11:24,719 Speaker 1: and you apply the law to the facts, and you 155 00:11:24,760 --> 00:11:27,640 Speaker 1: apply the facts to the law. And so what they're 156 00:11:27,679 --> 00:11:33,000 Speaker 1: saying here is that someone that's applied for asylum must 157 00:11:33,040 --> 00:11:37,360 Speaker 1: show that the evidence was so compelling that the fact 158 00:11:37,440 --> 00:11:40,080 Speaker 1: finder in the case that has been appealed, whether that 159 00:11:40,160 --> 00:11:43,679 Speaker 1: was a judge or a jury, must show that the 160 00:11:43,720 --> 00:11:48,080 Speaker 1: evidence was so compelling that no reasonable fact finder could 161 00:11:48,320 --> 00:11:52,760 Speaker 1: do anything other than find the requisite fear of persecution. 162 00:11:53,440 --> 00:11:58,040 Speaker 1: That substantial evidence review applied to the entire persecution determination. 163 00:11:58,440 --> 00:12:02,400 Speaker 1: Not just raw facts, but the legal conclusion that you 164 00:12:02,400 --> 00:12:06,720 Speaker 1: would draw from those facts. And then four years later, 165 00:12:07,640 --> 00:12:12,920 Speaker 1: Congress passed an additional immigration law. It amended the Immigration 166 00:12:13,040 --> 00:12:19,600 Speaker 1: and Naturalization Act judicial review provisions. The key addition section 167 00:12:19,640 --> 00:12:22,160 Speaker 1: twelve fifty two be four B. It doesn't make any difference, 168 00:12:22,880 --> 00:12:27,280 Speaker 1: but the key addition says that administrative findings of fact 169 00:12:27,320 --> 00:12:33,760 Speaker 1: are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator, a judge, or a 170 00:12:33,800 --> 00:12:39,040 Speaker 1: jury would be compelled to conclude the contrary. In other words, 171 00:12:39,679 --> 00:12:43,400 Speaker 1: it would be that if if a trial court, a judge, 172 00:12:43,480 --> 00:12:47,920 Speaker 1: or a jury at the trial level found that there 173 00:12:48,040 --> 00:12:52,440 Speaker 1: was or was not a reasonable basis for persecution, that 174 00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:56,559 Speaker 1: to appeal that, whether the government appealed it or the 175 00:12:56,640 --> 00:13:01,160 Speaker 1: asylum seeker appealed it, you would have to be so 176 00:13:01,520 --> 00:13:07,600 Speaker 1: conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude 177 00:13:07,600 --> 00:13:13,439 Speaker 1: the contrary. Now read that language, Now read the Elias 178 00:13:13,559 --> 00:13:20,120 Speaker 1: Zacharius standard. They're essentially identical. Congress didn't accidentally mirror a 179 00:13:20,400 --> 00:13:23,960 Speaker 1: four year old Supreme Court decision. It codified the decision. 180 00:13:24,520 --> 00:13:29,360 Speaker 1: So when the family argued that the statute only covers 181 00:13:29,600 --> 00:13:33,560 Speaker 1: findings a fact and not mixed questions of law, in fact, 182 00:13:34,000 --> 00:13:37,959 Speaker 1: the Court said, politely but firmly, you've missed the force 183 00:13:38,040 --> 00:13:41,520 Speaker 1: for the treaties. Because the history tells us that Congress 184 00:13:41,520 --> 00:13:47,439 Speaker 1: meant for the whole persecution determination to receive deferential review, 185 00:13:48,320 --> 00:13:53,040 Speaker 1: that we should allow that whatever determination was made in 186 00:13:53,160 --> 00:13:57,880 Speaker 1: the lower courts, we should defer to that. Now, here's 187 00:13:57,920 --> 00:14:04,239 Speaker 1: where the case gets genuinely interesting. The family's lawyers deployed 188 00:14:04,840 --> 00:14:10,280 Speaker 1: lowper Bright Enterprises versus Romando. That's the twenty twenty four 189 00:14:10,400 --> 00:14:15,200 Speaker 1: decision that killed Chevron. Defarn the deference as their sword. 190 00:14:15,720 --> 00:14:20,760 Speaker 1: Here's the argument. Lowper Bright requires courts to independently interpret statutes, 191 00:14:21,400 --> 00:14:25,000 Speaker 1: so applying the persecution standard to undisputed facts is a 192 00:14:25,080 --> 00:14:28,600 Speaker 1: legal question. Therefore, you should be able to get a 193 00:14:28,720 --> 00:14:35,520 Speaker 1: denovo or fresh eyes applies, and any deference to the 194 00:14:35,560 --> 00:14:42,520 Speaker 1: original decision the broper light resurrects the Chevron doctrine that 195 00:14:42,560 --> 00:14:45,920 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court had just buried. Now that I find 196 00:14:45,960 --> 00:14:49,280 Speaker 1: that pretty creative, But it's also better suited for a 197 00:14:49,360 --> 00:14:51,680 Speaker 1: law reviewed article than a court rumor. For that matter, 198 00:14:51,680 --> 00:14:56,560 Speaker 1: even though a radio presentation, the Court drew a careful distinction. 199 00:14:57,320 --> 00:14:59,960 Speaker 1: Loper Bright governs whether courts must defer to an agent 200 00:15:00,440 --> 00:15:04,720 Speaker 1: interpretation of a statue what the law means. Well, that 201 00:15:04,800 --> 00:15:08,160 Speaker 1: difference is now dead. The Supreme Court got rid of 202 00:15:08,160 --> 00:15:12,880 Speaker 1: the Chevron difference. But the Uriah's case is about deference 203 00:15:12,920 --> 00:15:17,720 Speaker 1: to an agency's factual and mixed determinations under a standard 204 00:15:17,760 --> 00:15:24,000 Speaker 1: of review that Congress explicitly prescribed. That's not Chevron. That's 205 00:15:24,400 --> 00:15:31,080 Speaker 1: Congress telling the courts to review agency's findings, which is 206 00:15:31,120 --> 00:15:34,920 Speaker 1: exactly what Congress is allowed to do. So the death 207 00:15:34,960 --> 00:15:37,680 Speaker 1: of Chevron doesn't mean the death of all administrative difference. 208 00:15:38,000 --> 00:15:41,040 Speaker 1: It means that these agencies can no longer claim interpretive 209 00:15:41,040 --> 00:15:43,960 Speaker 1: authority over the meaning of statues. They can still receive 210 00:15:44,040 --> 00:15:47,960 Speaker 1: factual difference when Congress has mandated and the Court declined 211 00:15:47,960 --> 00:15:51,800 Speaker 1: to let a legitimate administrative law revolution become a vehicle 212 00:15:52,080 --> 00:15:55,080 Speaker 1: for collapsing all difference across the board. Now, why does 213 00:15:55,080 --> 00:16:00,000 Speaker 1: this case matter beyond one family's tragedy. Before this decision, 214 00:16:01,000 --> 00:16:04,400 Speaker 1: the circuits were genuinely split on the standard review for 215 00:16:04,520 --> 00:16:09,600 Speaker 1: persecution determinations in immigration courts. The Supreme Court has now 216 00:16:09,680 --> 00:16:15,400 Speaker 1: definitively resolved the whole determination gets substantial evidence review. Every 217 00:16:15,440 --> 00:16:18,240 Speaker 1: circuit has got to conform to what the Supreme Court said. 218 00:16:18,920 --> 00:16:22,520 Speaker 1: So what's a practical effect on these asylum claims. The 219 00:16:22,560 --> 00:16:26,680 Speaker 1: substantial evidence standard is a high bar. Courts must affirm 220 00:16:26,760 --> 00:16:30,600 Speaker 1: if there's any reasonable basis in the record. So now 221 00:16:30,720 --> 00:16:34,880 Speaker 1: applicants who face genuine hardship in legal gray zones will 222 00:16:34,920 --> 00:16:39,840 Speaker 1: find this dispositive far more often than not. This is 223 00:16:39,880 --> 00:16:43,760 Speaker 1: the most important takeaway for those tracking administrative law. Urias 224 00:16:44,520 --> 00:16:47,880 Speaker 1: or Lana confirms that lober Bright has real but limited reach. 225 00:16:48,360 --> 00:16:51,800 Speaker 1: The post laber Bright world means that judicial independence on 226 00:16:51,920 --> 00:16:57,280 Speaker 1: questions establishes of statutory interpretation, not wholesale independence from all 227 00:16:57,320 --> 00:17:05,000 Speaker 1: agency determination. Statutory deference deference commands that Congress enacted, but 228 00:17:05,160 --> 00:17:10,000 Speaker 1: Congress enacted must survive. That distinction will echo through administrative 229 00:17:10,080 --> 00:17:13,560 Speaker 1: law for years now. And here's what's really interesting. Justice 230 00:17:13,640 --> 00:17:17,440 Speaker 1: Jackson was exactly right. And here's the part that probably 231 00:17:17,440 --> 00:17:20,800 Speaker 1: some of you might find jarring. This was the right call. 232 00:17:21,400 --> 00:17:24,840 Speaker 1: Not because the Uriahs family situation was terrible, it clearly 233 00:17:24,920 --> 00:17:31,359 Speaker 1: was terrible, but because persecution must mean something specific and 234 00:17:31,400 --> 00:17:35,760 Speaker 1: it has to be applied consistently. And that's where the 235 00:17:35,760 --> 00:17:41,119 Speaker 1: court has put a nail in Chevron deference. Let me 236 00:17:41,280 --> 00:17:44,600 Speaker 1: explain by giving you the alternative. I think it'll help 237 00:17:44,600 --> 00:17:54,840 Speaker 1: you understand it. I'll do that next, don't go away 238 00:17:56,400 --> 00:17:58,600 Speaker 1: to night. Michael Brown joins me here, the former FEMA 239 00:17:58,640 --> 00:18:02,080 Speaker 1: director of talk show host Michael Brow. Brownie, no, Brownie. 240 00:18:01,720 --> 00:18:03,800 Speaker 2: You're doing a heck of a job the Weekend with 241 00:18:03,920 --> 00:18:04,639 Speaker 2: Michael Brown. 242 00:18:05,240 --> 00:18:07,080 Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Weekend with Michael Brown. Glad have 243 00:18:07,119 --> 00:18:10,520 Speaker 1: you listening? Thanks for joining the program today. So I've 244 00:18:10,560 --> 00:18:13,560 Speaker 1: got a listener that's sending me text messages and I 245 00:18:13,600 --> 00:18:19,719 Speaker 1: want to maybe by helping him out, help others out also. 246 00:18:20,840 --> 00:18:24,879 Speaker 1: So we are no longer on the Blaze network. The 247 00:18:24,920 --> 00:18:28,400 Speaker 1: Blaze did a bunch of they made a bunch of changes, 248 00:18:28,920 --> 00:18:31,680 Speaker 1: and then those changes they dropped us from the Blaze network. 249 00:18:32,359 --> 00:18:35,240 Speaker 1: And this individual has you know, he's upset about that. Well, 250 00:18:35,320 --> 00:18:36,960 Speaker 1: you know we're upset about it too. We can't do 251 00:18:36,960 --> 00:18:39,320 Speaker 1: anything about it. So Beck does what he wants to do. 252 00:18:41,000 --> 00:18:44,000 Speaker 1: So I gave him some options of how you can 253 00:18:44,040 --> 00:18:48,480 Speaker 1: stream us live because he said, well, iHeartRadio only gives 254 00:18:48,480 --> 00:18:50,280 Speaker 1: me the option of podcast, and I don't want to 255 00:18:50,280 --> 00:18:52,640 Speaker 1: listen to old news. Well you can stream us live 256 00:18:54,359 --> 00:18:58,480 Speaker 1: or I on the iHeart app, or you can go 257 00:18:58,640 --> 00:19:02,560 Speaker 1: to you can go to Michael says go here dot com. 258 00:19:02,680 --> 00:19:05,800 Speaker 1: Michael says, go here dot com. Just type that into 259 00:19:05,800 --> 00:19:09,840 Speaker 1: your address bar on a browser and that will take 260 00:19:09,880 --> 00:19:15,359 Speaker 1: you to my Denver affiliate, where there's a tab that 261 00:19:15,400 --> 00:19:19,240 Speaker 1: says how to listen, and under there you'll find an 262 00:19:19,240 --> 00:19:23,240 Speaker 1: interactive map that shows all three hundred and fifty plus 263 00:19:23,280 --> 00:19:26,880 Speaker 1: affiliates all across the country. You can either scroll through 264 00:19:26,920 --> 00:19:28,960 Speaker 1: the map, or you can scroll through the list and 265 00:19:29,040 --> 00:19:31,040 Speaker 1: you can find a station that is, you know, maybe 266 00:19:31,080 --> 00:19:34,840 Speaker 1: in where you live, or you can just stream us 267 00:19:34,920 --> 00:19:39,520 Speaker 1: live from my home base in Denver, which is a 268 00:19:39,560 --> 00:19:43,119 Speaker 1: station with the call letters KDFD Freedom ninety three seven 269 00:19:43,520 --> 00:19:46,440 Speaker 1: FM or seven sixty AM, and you can listen live 270 00:19:47,400 --> 00:19:51,080 Speaker 1: No Old News Now if you and that's if you 271 00:19:51,119 --> 00:19:53,240 Speaker 1: don't want to listen to the podcast. But I would 272 00:19:53,240 --> 00:19:56,560 Speaker 1: say even if you listen to the podcast, the news 273 00:19:56,600 --> 00:19:59,960 Speaker 1: isn't old because there's no news on the podcast. There's 274 00:20:00,000 --> 00:20:02,920 Speaker 1: there's no news there. So I'm not quite sure what 275 00:20:03,080 --> 00:20:05,119 Speaker 1: the problem is. But there are so many ways to 276 00:20:05,160 --> 00:20:08,680 Speaker 1: listen to this program. You can listen to it live 277 00:20:09,080 --> 00:20:11,720 Speaker 1: through a local affiliate. There's three hundred fifty of them 278 00:20:11,760 --> 00:20:14,920 Speaker 1: across the country. You can go to the iHeart app 279 00:20:15,520 --> 00:20:18,080 Speaker 1: and if you want to listen live on the iHeart app, 280 00:20:18,119 --> 00:20:20,840 Speaker 1: you can stream it live, and I would just suggest 281 00:20:20,880 --> 00:20:24,359 Speaker 1: you can just use the Denver station. That's fine. The 282 00:20:24,440 --> 00:20:28,080 Speaker 1: Denver station for the Saturday program is Freedom ninety three seven, 283 00:20:28,680 --> 00:20:32,600 Speaker 1: which is ninety three seven FM or seven sixty AM. 284 00:20:33,160 --> 00:20:36,440 Speaker 1: You can find an affiliate that's closer to you, doesn't 285 00:20:36,440 --> 00:20:38,560 Speaker 1: make any difference. There's three hundred and fifty plus otherm 286 00:20:38,960 --> 00:20:41,639 Speaker 1: and you can stream it live there. Now, some affiliates 287 00:20:42,040 --> 00:20:45,600 Speaker 1: carry the program later in the day. Sometimes they don't 288 00:20:45,600 --> 00:20:48,560 Speaker 1: play it until Sunday. They play it in the evening, 289 00:20:49,040 --> 00:20:51,280 Speaker 1: so you can. That's why I just suggest you just 290 00:20:51,359 --> 00:20:54,800 Speaker 1: go to the Denver affiliate and just stream it from 291 00:20:54,840 --> 00:20:59,119 Speaker 1: the Denver affiliate. But just because the Blaze dropped us, 292 00:20:58,880 --> 00:21:01,719 Speaker 1: there's a bazillion the ways to listen to us, and 293 00:21:01,720 --> 00:21:05,080 Speaker 1: I'd encourage you to do that. Or again, you can 294 00:21:05,119 --> 00:21:09,560 Speaker 1: always do the podcast, and the podcast doesn't carry old news. 295 00:21:10,359 --> 00:21:13,800 Speaker 1: So let's go back to this case. Now, let's go 296 00:21:13,880 --> 00:21:16,240 Speaker 1: back to the facts of the case before we get 297 00:21:16,280 --> 00:21:20,360 Speaker 1: to the court's reasoning. The facts of the case are horrible. 298 00:21:20,960 --> 00:21:25,159 Speaker 1: So this guy Douglas Sumberto Arias Orlano, his wife and 299 00:21:25,160 --> 00:21:28,760 Speaker 1: their minor child came into this country illegally in twenty 300 00:21:28,800 --> 00:21:33,160 Speaker 1: twenty one. They came from El Salvador, and he testified 301 00:21:33,760 --> 00:21:37,520 Speaker 1: in the trial in the immigration court, and in the 302 00:21:37,560 --> 00:21:42,440 Speaker 1: immigration judge agreed that a cicario, a hit man, had 303 00:21:42,480 --> 00:21:46,800 Speaker 1: been targeting his family since twenty sixteen. That this hit 304 00:21:46,880 --> 00:21:50,359 Speaker 1: man or some other ciccario had already shot two of 305 00:21:50,359 --> 00:21:52,880 Speaker 1: his half brothers, and it was threatening to kill every 306 00:21:53,400 --> 00:21:57,200 Speaker 1: family member. So he tried to relocate within l Salvador, 307 00:21:57,440 --> 00:22:01,040 Speaker 1: but the threats followed and the cicario were demanding money. 308 00:22:01,080 --> 00:22:05,440 Speaker 1: He was physically assaulted and beat up. After a fourth relocation, 309 00:22:06,160 --> 00:22:09,280 Speaker 1: men around the new town started asking about any newcomers 310 00:22:09,800 --> 00:22:12,640 Speaker 1: and that was enough. The family decided they'd had enough, 311 00:22:13,080 --> 00:22:17,040 Speaker 1: so they sneaked into the United States illegally. Horrible situation. 312 00:22:17,200 --> 00:22:21,720 Speaker 1: I understand, it's horrible, but it doesn't meet the standard 313 00:22:21,720 --> 00:22:26,040 Speaker 1: of persecution, which is what they were trying to seek 314 00:22:26,080 --> 00:22:31,080 Speaker 1: asylum under. And this is where I think some of you, 315 00:22:31,560 --> 00:22:35,679 Speaker 1: my listeners might find this jarring. It was the right call, 316 00:22:36,240 --> 00:22:39,959 Speaker 1: not because their situation was terrible, it clearly was terrible, 317 00:22:40,600 --> 00:22:45,919 Speaker 1: but because persecution means something specific and the courts have 318 00:22:46,040 --> 00:22:50,920 Speaker 1: to apply it consistently with the administrative law system receiving 319 00:22:50,960 --> 00:22:56,920 Speaker 1: appropriate deference when Congress has mandated it. The alternative federal 320 00:22:56,960 --> 00:23:02,159 Speaker 1: courts substituting their judgment or the Board of Immigration Appeals 321 00:23:02,480 --> 00:23:07,240 Speaker 1: on every asylum determination, applying de novo or fresh eye 322 00:23:07,280 --> 00:23:12,600 Speaker 1: review case by case, that would be chaos. There are 323 00:23:12,720 --> 00:23:17,960 Speaker 1: nine hundred federal circuit judges making independent calls on persecution 324 00:23:18,119 --> 00:23:22,439 Speaker 1: claims from hundreds of countries, each with unique political and 325 00:23:22,480 --> 00:23:27,320 Speaker 1: criminal contexts that immigration judges spend careers learning, so you're 326 00:23:27,359 --> 00:23:32,440 Speaker 1: going to get wildly inconsistent outcomes. It is truly judicial 327 00:23:32,480 --> 00:23:38,520 Speaker 1: policy making dressed up as legal interpretation. And there's something 328 00:23:38,720 --> 00:23:44,080 Speaker 1: deeply conservative in the best sense about this ruling. It 329 00:23:44,200 --> 00:23:50,399 Speaker 1: respects the institutional structure that Congress created. It applies the 330 00:23:50,440 --> 00:23:56,320 Speaker 1: standard that Congress prescribed. It declines to let judicial sympathy 331 00:23:57,280 --> 00:24:00,800 Speaker 1: for a particular petitioner, in this case, a particularular family 332 00:24:01,640 --> 00:24:05,680 Speaker 1: corrupt a framework that must function across millions of cases. 333 00:24:07,440 --> 00:24:12,840 Speaker 1: And the most amazing thing to me is Justice Jackson 334 00:24:12,920 --> 00:24:18,520 Speaker 1: wrote the opinion, and every justice joined that opinion that 335 00:24:18,840 --> 00:24:23,840 Speaker 1: unanimity is not an accident. It reflects the facts that 336 00:24:23,960 --> 00:24:30,240 Speaker 1: this case, whatever it's emotional valance has a legally correct answer, 337 00:24:31,359 --> 00:24:36,240 Speaker 1: because if Congress believes that the persecution standard is too narrow, well, 338 00:24:36,280 --> 00:24:41,600 Speaker 1: then Congress can change the statute. But nine justices correctly 339 00:24:41,680 --> 00:24:46,800 Speaker 1: held that decision belongs to Congress, not to federal judges 340 00:24:47,000 --> 00:24:51,480 Speaker 1: armed with good intentions and a donobo or a fresh review. 341 00:24:53,040 --> 00:24:56,640 Speaker 1: That is not a defeat for justice. That is the 342 00:24:56,760 --> 00:25:02,840 Speaker 1: law and justice operating as design. So whenever you hear 343 00:25:04,119 --> 00:25:07,040 Speaker 1: progressive starting to scream about how oh, we've got to 344 00:25:07,040 --> 00:25:10,159 Speaker 1: pack the court or we've got to just you know, 345 00:25:12,080 --> 00:25:15,320 Speaker 1: we've got to quit allowing people like Donald Trump to 346 00:25:15,359 --> 00:25:22,200 Speaker 1: appoint you know, these these wildly conservative justices. As much 347 00:25:22,359 --> 00:25:29,600 Speaker 1: as I have criticized Katanji Brown Jackson for her really 348 00:25:29,720 --> 00:25:34,640 Speaker 1: kind of lack of gravitas on the court, here, all 349 00:25:34,720 --> 00:25:38,399 Speaker 1: nine justices said, Congress has been very clear, there is 350 00:25:38,440 --> 00:25:44,679 Speaker 1: a persecution statute. It is written very plainly, and we 351 00:25:44,840 --> 00:25:49,960 Speaker 1: have to apply that standard. And we cannot allow appellate 352 00:25:50,000 --> 00:25:56,119 Speaker 1: courts or different parts of the Bureau of or the 353 00:25:56,119 --> 00:25:59,760 Speaker 1: Board of Immigration Appeals to come up with different decisions 354 00:25:59,840 --> 00:26:04,320 Speaker 1: all around the country based on just these really horrific facts. 355 00:26:05,600 --> 00:26:11,160 Speaker 1: Because regardless of how bad the facts are, apply those 356 00:26:11,200 --> 00:26:16,120 Speaker 1: facts to the law, and if those facts, as heart 357 00:26:16,160 --> 00:26:20,400 Speaker 1: wrenching as they are, don't meet our standard of persecution, 358 00:26:21,440 --> 00:26:24,639 Speaker 1: then the courts have only one choice, and that is 359 00:26:24,680 --> 00:26:29,480 Speaker 1: to uphold the original immigration judge's decision that you did 360 00:26:29,520 --> 00:26:32,919 Speaker 1: not meet the standard in the law. And when you 361 00:26:32,960 --> 00:26:36,520 Speaker 1: don't meet that standard, we're not going to have people go, oh, 362 00:26:36,520 --> 00:26:38,720 Speaker 1: but we feel sorry for you, So we're going to 363 00:26:38,760 --> 00:26:46,200 Speaker 1: bend the law. No, and of all people, Justice Jackson, 364 00:26:47,640 --> 00:26:54,240 Speaker 1: Justice Soda, mayor Justice Kagan all said exactly the same thing. 365 00:26:55,600 --> 00:26:57,960 Speaker 1: And even Justice Robert who I would kind of put 366 00:26:58,000 --> 00:27:02,920 Speaker 1: in in the middle, said that's right. That's the law. 367 00:27:03,920 --> 00:27:05,520 Speaker 1: And if you want to take it to the extreme, 368 00:27:06,119 --> 00:27:10,359 Speaker 1: Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Alito said yes, the law 369 00:27:10,440 --> 00:27:16,480 Speaker 1: says very clearly. Congress wrote, here's what persecution means, and 370 00:27:16,520 --> 00:27:22,159 Speaker 1: you did not meet the statue. So therefore we're not 371 00:27:22,200 --> 00:27:25,000 Speaker 1: going to hear the case, and we're going to uphold 372 00:27:25,480 --> 00:27:29,240 Speaker 1: not just what the immigration judge said at the trial level. 373 00:27:30,480 --> 00:27:33,440 Speaker 1: We're going to uphold what was held from the Board 374 00:27:33,440 --> 00:27:38,320 Speaker 1: of Immigration Appeals. We're going to uphold what the Ninth Circuit, 375 00:27:38,359 --> 00:27:40,879 Speaker 1: the Fifth Circuit, the Seventh Circuit have all said in 376 00:27:41,720 --> 00:27:47,920 Speaker 1: regards to persecution. There's one statute. The Chevron deference is gone. 377 00:27:48,400 --> 00:27:51,240 Speaker 1: The agencies just can't make up things because oh the 378 00:27:51,359 --> 00:27:57,159 Speaker 1: facts here are really sad. It actually gives me hope. 379 00:27:57,760 --> 00:28:03,240 Speaker 1: It gives me a simple hope that this deferring always 380 00:28:03,240 --> 00:28:08,720 Speaker 1: to the agency decisions is now over. The agencies have 381 00:28:08,840 --> 00:28:14,679 Speaker 1: to have clear, unequivocal statutory authority to make rules and 382 00:28:14,760 --> 00:28:19,680 Speaker 1: regulations based upon what Congress says they can or cannot do. 383 00:28:20,520 --> 00:28:25,320 Speaker 1: And if the agencies go beyond that, then the Court says, no, 384 00:28:26,240 --> 00:28:29,119 Speaker 1: you have no authority whatsoever. If Congress wanes, you have 385 00:28:29,240 --> 00:28:32,600 Speaker 1: the power to do that. Congress would have written that. Now, 386 00:28:32,800 --> 00:28:34,920 Speaker 1: before we go to break, let me just say this. 387 00:28:37,000 --> 00:28:39,520 Speaker 1: Not only is this a tough decision for the Court 388 00:28:39,560 --> 00:28:43,160 Speaker 1: to have made, and they made it unanimously, but it 389 00:28:43,280 --> 00:28:47,560 Speaker 1: says to all the other agencies, quit making crap up. 390 00:28:48,680 --> 00:28:52,280 Speaker 1: When you come to us and someone's appealed your regulation 391 00:28:52,760 --> 00:28:56,400 Speaker 1: or your interpretation of your regulatory authority, We're going to 392 00:28:56,440 --> 00:28:59,600 Speaker 1: look at what did Congress tell you could do and 393 00:28:59,680 --> 00:29:01,720 Speaker 1: not do, and we're going to look at the plain 394 00:29:01,880 --> 00:29:04,440 Speaker 1: meaning of the statue. Now, this one case is not 395 00:29:04,480 --> 00:29:08,120 Speaker 1: going to solve all of that, but it sets a baseline, 396 00:29:09,000 --> 00:29:13,160 Speaker 1: and for once, maybe we can get back to two things. Congress, 397 00:29:13,160 --> 00:29:15,920 Speaker 1: if you want to give the agency's authority to interpret 398 00:29:16,520 --> 00:29:20,520 Speaker 1: the law, then say that specifically. And if you want 399 00:29:20,520 --> 00:29:23,640 Speaker 1: them to write certain rules or to not write certain rules, 400 00:29:23,920 --> 00:29:27,440 Speaker 1: then you need to do your job. And to the courts, 401 00:29:28,440 --> 00:29:33,360 Speaker 1: quit and quit placing your own interpretation and look clearly 402 00:29:33,400 --> 00:29:36,840 Speaker 1: at what the statute says, and if it fits, then 403 00:29:36,880 --> 00:29:39,480 Speaker 1: you can rule one way. If it doesn't fit, you 404 00:29:39,560 --> 00:29:42,440 Speaker 1: have to rule the other way. We ought to stand 405 00:29:42,520 --> 00:29:45,280 Speaker 1: up and applaud the court for doing something and for 406 00:29:45,400 --> 00:29:48,080 Speaker 1: all of those Democrats in the US Senate that keep 407 00:29:48,160 --> 00:29:51,480 Speaker 1: screaming about how the court is out of control this 408 00:29:51,600 --> 00:30:03,240 Speaker 1: case just through cold water on that. I'll be right back. Hey, 409 00:30:03,240 --> 00:30:05,040 Speaker 1: welcome back to the weekend with Michael Brown. Glad to have 410 00:30:05,080 --> 00:30:10,200 Speaker 1: you with me. Appreciate you tuning in text lines always 411 00:30:10,240 --> 00:30:13,800 Speaker 1: open number three three one zero three keyword Mike or Michael. 412 00:30:15,280 --> 00:30:21,040 Speaker 1: When when you have progressives in control of government and 413 00:30:21,320 --> 00:30:27,040 Speaker 1: trying to influence society the future of shipping cargo. You know, 414 00:30:27,200 --> 00:30:29,960 Speaker 1: cargo shipping is just like oil coming out of the 415 00:30:29,960 --> 00:30:34,520 Speaker 1: strait or her Moves or any other shipping. All of 416 00:30:34,560 --> 00:30:38,240 Speaker 1: the cheap Chinese crap that comes across the Pacific, or 417 00:30:38,400 --> 00:30:42,400 Speaker 1: things that traverse the Panama Canal. I want you to 418 00:30:42,400 --> 00:30:46,840 Speaker 1: think about those ships for a moment. They're humongous. You 419 00:30:46,840 --> 00:30:50,400 Speaker 1: think about the ships that come in to the ports 420 00:30:50,400 --> 00:30:54,120 Speaker 1: in California. If you've ever been to the port of 421 00:30:54,160 --> 00:30:57,360 Speaker 1: Long Beach, for example, you'll just see in the same 422 00:30:57,360 --> 00:31:01,840 Speaker 1: strue on East Coast. SAME's true down Houston. You see 423 00:31:01,840 --> 00:31:06,040 Speaker 1: these huge cranes and all these ships come in. They're 424 00:31:06,080 --> 00:31:11,840 Speaker 1: just stacked with shipping cranes. They're monstrous in the longshorem 425 00:31:11,920 --> 00:31:14,280 Speaker 1: and I mean lots lots of things are computerized. But 426 00:31:14,640 --> 00:31:18,520 Speaker 1: watching those things unload and then they get put onto 427 00:31:18,600 --> 00:31:21,560 Speaker 1: eighteen wheelers and they you know, they get their manifest 428 00:31:21,600 --> 00:31:23,320 Speaker 1: and they and they go off and they and they 429 00:31:23,320 --> 00:31:27,560 Speaker 1: crisscross the country just taking stuff everywhere. Shipping is really 430 00:31:27,600 --> 00:31:32,960 Speaker 1: a fascinating business. Well with I think with these activists 431 00:31:33,000 --> 00:31:35,840 Speaker 1: in the church, the congregants in the in the church 432 00:31:35,880 --> 00:31:39,000 Speaker 1: of the climate activists, with them in charge of so 433 00:31:39,040 --> 00:31:43,880 Speaker 1: many things, the future of shipping cargo might start to 434 00:31:43,880 --> 00:31:46,680 Speaker 1: look like the thing of the past. This comes to 435 00:31:46,760 --> 00:31:52,960 Speaker 1: us via CNN Climate A one hundred, A one hundred 436 00:31:53,680 --> 00:31:59,440 Speaker 1: wind powered cargo ship that can dramatically cut Transatlantic shipping 437 00:31:59,480 --> 00:32:03,640 Speaker 1: times carbon emissions, according to its operator, could launch in 438 00:32:03,840 --> 00:32:09,520 Speaker 1: early twenty twenty seven. Now, I think it's unlikely that 439 00:32:09,600 --> 00:32:13,920 Speaker 1: reverting to pre twentieth century technology would reduce shipping times, 440 00:32:14,760 --> 00:32:19,280 Speaker 1: but the point is the allegedly harmful carbon emissions. There's 441 00:32:19,280 --> 00:32:22,640 Speaker 1: a French company, Vella, wants to run a service between 442 00:32:22,680 --> 00:32:27,520 Speaker 1: France and the United States with custom made seacraft. A 443 00:32:27,600 --> 00:32:31,000 Speaker 1: life cycle assessment conducted by Vela and climate consultancy group 444 00:32:31,560 --> 00:32:36,000 Speaker 1: Carbone four calculated that carbon emissions from the North Atlantic 445 00:32:36,040 --> 00:32:40,240 Speaker 1: crossing would be up to ninety six percent less than 446 00:32:40,280 --> 00:32:44,720 Speaker 1: a conventional container ship and up to ninety nine percent 447 00:32:44,800 --> 00:32:51,200 Speaker 1: less than air freight. Well, oh well, because sailboats make 448 00:32:51,280 --> 00:32:54,560 Speaker 1: less noise than modern boats that use motors, they could 449 00:32:54,600 --> 00:32:58,880 Speaker 1: also maybe be less disturbing to wildlife, which they actually 450 00:32:58,920 --> 00:33:01,240 Speaker 1: don't care about unless you're talking about the whale killing 451 00:33:01,280 --> 00:33:09,760 Speaker 1: offshore wind turbines. What I don't seriously, We're going to 452 00:33:10,480 --> 00:33:14,880 Speaker 1: put sails on these cargo ships, and I can't imagine 453 00:33:14,920 --> 00:33:17,640 Speaker 1: they can be the same size, so you'll need much 454 00:33:17,720 --> 00:33:22,680 Speaker 1: more of them. And then that makes you realize, oh, 455 00:33:23,240 --> 00:33:28,880 Speaker 1: so you're going to shift the carbon emissions from the shipping, 456 00:33:30,080 --> 00:33:36,920 Speaker 1: the cargo shipping ships to sailboats, gigantic sailboats. But you'll 457 00:33:36,920 --> 00:33:40,040 Speaker 1: have to manufacture those, manufacture the sails, manufacture all of that, 458 00:33:40,440 --> 00:33:44,240 Speaker 1: and so you're just going to offshore or reshore or 459 00:33:44,520 --> 00:33:51,479 Speaker 1: displace the emission somewhere else. And then think about go 460 00:33:51,600 --> 00:33:56,400 Speaker 1: back to the eighteenth century, even the nineteenth century, and 461 00:33:56,440 --> 00:34:02,240 Speaker 1: we're gonna have sailboats crossing everywhere. These people are nuts, 462 00:34:02,280 --> 00:34:08,319 Speaker 1: absolutely nuts. The International Maritime Organization agreed back in twenty 463 00:34:08,360 --> 00:34:12,720 Speaker 1: twenty three to reach net zero emissions by about twenty fifty, 464 00:34:13,800 --> 00:34:16,640 Speaker 1: but hopefully the global warming hosts will be behind us 465 00:34:16,640 --> 00:34:19,520 Speaker 1: by then, or shipping could be set back by well 466 00:34:19,520 --> 00:34:23,400 Speaker 1: over a century, thereby reducing our standard of living and 467 00:34:23,480 --> 00:34:29,160 Speaker 1: coming soon maybe we could have wind blown trucks, or 468 00:34:29,280 --> 00:34:33,160 Speaker 1: maybe they would just horse drawn carts. All they want 469 00:34:33,200 --> 00:34:37,960 Speaker 1: to do is take us back to olden times. They 470 00:34:38,000 --> 00:34:44,560 Speaker 1: can't stand modern technology. The guy that Democrats tried to 471 00:34:44,560 --> 00:34:46,840 Speaker 1: place a heartbeat away from the presidency was on Capitol 472 00:34:46,920 --> 00:34:49,560 Speaker 1: Hill this past week for a fraud hearing held by 473 00:34:49,560 --> 00:34:52,600 Speaker 1: the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. It didn't go well 474 00:34:52,719 --> 00:34:56,520 Speaker 1: for the governor of Minnesota. Ten Walls. One report says 475 00:34:56,560 --> 00:35:00,839 Speaker 1: the Justice Department, which is indicted almost people for fraud 476 00:35:00,920 --> 00:35:03,799 Speaker 1: schemes of Minnesota, has estimated the scale of fraud to 477 00:35:03,920 --> 00:35:08,280 Speaker 1: now potentially exceed the nine billion dollars since twenty eighteen 478 00:35:09,160 --> 00:35:12,399 Speaker 1: feeding our future. Look, they just looted taxpayers for about 479 00:35:12,400 --> 00:35:14,640 Speaker 1: two hundred and fifty million dollars. Well Walls and his 480 00:35:14,760 --> 00:35:18,239 Speaker 1: liberal media allies, the Minneapolis Star Tribune claimed that a 481 00:35:18,320 --> 00:35:22,200 Speaker 1: state court ordered the state Education Department to resume payments 482 00:35:22,239 --> 00:35:25,000 Speaker 1: to that criminal enterprise. Of course, the court denied that. 483 00:35:27,480 --> 00:35:30,759 Speaker 1: So Jim Jordan asked, so the court's line or are 484 00:35:30,800 --> 00:35:35,520 Speaker 1: you lying? And tampon? Tim replied, I can't tell you. 485 00:35:36,200 --> 00:35:38,600 Speaker 1: It didn't go well. Saron, I recognize as Miss Mace 486 00:35:38,640 --> 00:35:39,520 Speaker 1: from South Carolina. 487 00:35:39,960 --> 00:35:42,719 Speaker 2: Thank you, mister Chairman, and good morning, gentlemen. Thank you 488 00:35:42,760 --> 00:35:46,120 Speaker 2: for being here today. Governor Walls and Attorney General Ellison, 489 00:35:46,239 --> 00:35:49,600 Speaker 2: you've presided over one of the worst government fraud scandals 490 00:35:49,640 --> 00:35:53,360 Speaker 2: in American history. This was money intended to defeat hungry children, 491 00:35:53,520 --> 00:35:56,719 Speaker 2: help kids with autism, provide food and shelter, and health 492 00:35:56,719 --> 00:36:00,520 Speaker 2: care to the needy, and more. You both allowed billions 493 00:36:00,800 --> 00:36:03,719 Speaker 2: in these American tax pay dollars to be pillaged and 494 00:36:03,760 --> 00:36:07,920 Speaker 2: plundered by Somali pirates. You knew this was happening, you 495 00:36:08,000 --> 00:36:10,120 Speaker 2: chose to do nothing about it, and in some cases, 496 00:36:10,160 --> 00:36:14,000 Speaker 2: you even enabled it. Attorney General Ellison, you even profited 497 00:36:14,040 --> 00:36:17,400 Speaker 2: from this fraud by taking campaign donations from these Somalians 498 00:36:17,440 --> 00:36:21,000 Speaker 2: after pledging to help quash the investigation into them. I 499 00:36:21,040 --> 00:36:26,320 Speaker 2: find your behavior despicable. My questions this morning my first 500 00:36:26,320 --> 00:36:29,000 Speaker 2: go to Governor Walls, and I hope you learned some 501 00:36:29,160 --> 00:36:32,560 Speaker 2: lessons from your last hearing with me. On the other. 502 00:36:34,000 --> 00:36:37,320 Speaker 1: Do you think he learned any lessons? Of course he didn't. 503 00:36:37,719 --> 00:36:39,799 Speaker 1: Hang tight, we're coming right back