S1: Hi friend, thank you so much for downloading this podcast
S1: and I truly hope you hear something that edifies encourage, equips, enlightens,
S1: and then gets you out there in the marketplace of ideas.
S1: But before you go, I want to tell you about
S1: this month's truth tool. It's called Have You Ever Wondered?
S1: And I absolutely love this topic because if you're like me,
S1: going out into the night sky and looking up and
S1: seeing a million stars, don't you just stop and think
S1: about God? And are you not in a moment of
S1: awe and wonder or looking out over the vast expanse
S1: of an ocean and you start thinking, what is man,
S1: that thou art mindful of him? And it makes you
S1: wonder about the magnificence of God? I think that sense
S1: of wonder was put there on purpose, and this wonderful
S1: book includes a composite of multiple authors who have written
S1: from their perspective as a scientist, or a historian, or
S1: a mathematician or an artist, on why they all have
S1: this sense of awe through the work that they do.
S1: In other words, the heavens declare the glory. And as
S1: it tells us in Romans, we are really without excuse
S1: because his handiwork is everywhere. And this book invites you
S1: to walk through the chapters written by people who all
S1: have a sense of awe and wonder when it comes
S1: to God through their various disciplines in life. It's an
S1: amazing book and it's yours. For a gift of any amount,
S1: just call 877 Janet 58. That's 877 Janet 58. Ask
S1: for a copy of Have You Ever Wondered? And we'll
S1: send it right off to you as my way of
S1: saying thank you, because we are listener supported radio. Or
S1: you can go online to in the market with Janet Parshall.
S1: When you're also on the website, consider becoming a partial partner.
S1: Those are people who give every single month at a
S1: level of their own choosing. You always get the truth tool,
S1: but in addition to that, you get a weekly newsletter
S1: that includes my writing and an audio piece just for
S1: my partial partners. So 877 Janet 58 or the website
S1: in the market with Janet Parshall. Consider becoming a partial
S1: partner or asking for this month's truth tool. Have you
S1: ever wondered? And now please enjoy the broadcast.
S2: Here are some of the news headlines we're watching.
S3: This time the conference was over. The president won one
S3: of the.
S4: Americans worshiping government over God.
S5: Extremely rare safety move by a major in 17 years.
S6: The Palestinians and Israelis negotiated.
S1: Hi, friends. Welcome to In the Market with Janet Parshall.
S1: A very happy Monday to you. Thanks for deciding to
S1: spend the hour with me. Do we have a front
S1: row seat to history or what? B-2s only aircraft in
S1: the world big enough to carry those £30,000 bunker busters,
S1: and they went in with pinpoint precision and made Iran's
S1: nuclear program. Well, its current mailing address is the ash
S1: heap of history. The entire Middle Eastern region is being
S1: reformed and redirected. And there are even hints that possibly, Lord,
S1: may it be there might be a regime change in Iran.
S1: So much news to cover. Let me turn to my
S1: friend Chris Mitchell in Jerusalem for CBN news.
S7: Defense officials detailed the attack, which was the largest B-2
S7: bomber operation in history, and the first use of the
S7: 15 ton Massive Ordnance Penetrator, a bunker busting bomb capable
S7: of penetrating deep underground.
S8: At approximately 6:40 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. 2:10 a.m. Iran Time.
S8: The lead B-2 dropped two GBU 57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator
S8: weapons on the first of several Aim points at Fordo.
S8: As the president stated last night, the remaining bombers then
S8: hit their targets as well, with a total of 14
S8: Mops dropped against two nuclear target areas.
S9: The scope and scale of what occurred last night would
S9: take the breath away of almost any American, if you
S9: had an opportunity to watch it in real time. Planes
S9: flew from the middle of America and Missouri overnight, completely undetected,
S9: over three of their most highly sensitive sites, and we
S9: were able to destroy nuclear capabilities. And our boys in
S9: those bombers are on their way home right now.
S7: Before and after satellite images show the destruction to all
S7: three sites, but there are concerns Iran might have moved
S7: some of the enriched uranium beforehand. Just hours after the U.S.
S7: hit the nuclear sites at Natanz, Fordo and Isfahan. This
S7: was the answer of the Islamic regime. A barrage of
S7: about 25 missiles. This one hit north of Tel Aviv. Thankfully,
S7: no fatalities, but about 20 injuries. And you can see
S7: the damage behind me.
S10: Unfortunately, we're talking about a continuous pattern of the Iranian
S10: barrage of missiles targeting our civilian communities. The threat of
S10: Iran and that regime is not just a threat against Israel.
S10: It's a threat against all Western ideology, a regime that
S10: calls for the death of Israel, but also the death
S10: of the United States. We're in this together.
S11: We're not at war with Iran. We're at war with
S11: Iran's nuclear program.
S7: Vice president J.D. Vance told NBC news the U.S. wants
S7: Iran to return to the negotiating table to seek peace.
S11: What we've said to the Iranians is we do not
S11: want war with Iran. We actually want peace, but we
S11: want peace in the context of them not having a
S11: nuclear weapons program. And that's exactly what the president accomplished
S11: last night.
S7: But later on, Truth Social, President Trump posted this. It's
S7: not politically correct to use the term regime change, but
S7: if the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran
S7: great again, why wouldn't there be a regime change? MAGA
S7: or make Iran great again? Iran's foreign minister says the
S7: time for diplomacy is over.
S12: There is no red line that they have not crossed.
S12: And the last one and the most dangerous one was
S12: happened only last night when they crossed a very big
S12: red line by attacking nuclear facilities. I don't know how
S12: much room is left for diplomacy. We are now calculating
S12: the damages.
S7: After the strike. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu honored President Trump.
S13: History will record that President Trump acted to deny the
S13: world's most dangerous regime the world's most dangerous weapons. His
S13: leadership today has created a pivot of history that can
S13: help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future
S13: of prosperity and peace.
S7: Sunday, Netanyahu said Israel is now close to achieving its
S7: goals against Iran and won't engage in a war of attrition.
S7: Netanyahu also went to the Western Wall saying prayers for
S7: the IDF security forces, the hostages and President Trump.
S13: And am come.
S14: A people has risen up as a lion. We will
S14: continue to do wonders and miracles to ensure the eternity
S14: of Israel for generations.
S7: Chris Mitchell CBN news, Northern Tel Aviv.
S1: The eternity of Israel for generations almost sounds like something
S1: you heard in church yesterday, doesn't it? Absolutely amazing. So
S1: again this was with pinpoint precision. It says something about
S1: our men and women in uniform. Thank you God for
S1: protecting them. You leave a base in Missouri. You go.
S1: It was a 36 hour flight, by the way. Nonstop
S1: didn't have to fuel, and they were the only planes
S1: big enough to be able to carry these bunker busters.
S1: They're £30,000 apiece. So the Iran regime has been disabled
S1: in many ways. Remember, they may have a lot of missiles,
S1: but they got to have launchers. And Israel, to their credit,
S1: has been knocking off the launchers, which makes it difficult
S1: to send some of these missiles out. But they had
S1: to do something, something in response. And so what they
S1: did today is they decided that they would try to
S1: respond by hitting an American base in Qatar. Well, let
S1: me tell you how that went. In the words of
S1: the white House, because the president put this on X
S1: 53 minutes ago. Here's what he said. Iran has officially
S1: responded to our obliteration of their nuclear facilities with a
S1: very weak response, which we expected and have very effectively countered.
S1: There have been 14 missiles fired, 13 were knocked down,
S1: and one was set free because it was headed in
S1: a non-threatening direction. I'm pleased to report that no Americans
S1: were harmed. I add this thank you Lord, and hardly
S1: any damage was done. Most importantly, we've gotten it all out.
S1: They've gotten it all out of their system and there
S1: will be hopefully no further hate. All in capital letters.
S1: I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice,
S1: which made it possible for no lives to be lost
S1: and nobody to be injured. Perhaps Iran can now proceed
S1: to peace and harmony in the region. I will enthusiastically
S1: encourage Israel to do the same. Thank you for your
S1: attention to this matter. Signed the president of the United States.
S1: So that was their retaliation today. Now, again, remember the
S1: response today. Some of our missiles were fired out of
S1: Saudi Arabia. So you realize that there is not a
S1: nation state in that part of the world that is
S1: thrilled with Iran. Iran's a troublemaker, a bully in the neighborhood,
S1: and they really and truly would love to see regime change.
S1: But they're very tribalist in their form of Islam, the Shiite,
S1: the Sunni. And so they just kind of keep their
S1: opinions to themselves. But privately, they're hoping and believing that
S1: there's going to be a regime change. I have to
S1: tell you that the people in Iran particularly, are hoping
S1: that there will be a change in going what's going
S1: on in Iran. I've been back and forth with her today.
S1: He is the founder and president of Iran Alive Ministries.
S1: You can imagine the reports that he's getting and he
S1: said this, and I want to share it with you.
S1: He said, our job is not to let the news
S1: guide us, but to align ourselves with the heart, mind
S1: and will of the Lord. To that I say, Amen
S1: and Amen. Pray for those in authority. Pray for protection
S1: for the innocent people of Iran and Israel and pray
S1: for peace. And may it come through the Prince of
S1: Peace himself back after this. So many in our culture
S1: today are spiritually curious but hesitant about religion. That's why
S1: I've chosen. Have you ever wondered, is this month's truth
S1: tool explore how everyday experiences might be the signpost pointing
S1: to deeper biblical truths. As for your copy of have
S1: you ever wondered when you give a gift of any
S1: amount to in the market, call eight 7758, that's eight
S1: 7758 or go to in the market with Janet Parshall. Well,
S1: if you're into anniversaries, today is one of the sorts,
S1: and I want to share it with you. Today marks
S1: over 50 years since title nine became law. It was
S1: just 37 words long. And you know what it did?
S1: It changed American education by prohibiting sex based discrimination in
S1: schools that got federal dollars. So happy birthday, title nine.
S1: May you ever remain in place. It is, after all,
S1: a champion for educational equality. We're going to talk about
S1: that in a whole lot more with Sarah Perry. Yep.
S1: We did give her that name. She is the vice
S1: president and legal fellow at Defending Education. She's a former
S1: senior counsel to the Assistant secretary for Civil Rights at
S1: the Department of Ed, and former senior legal fellow at
S1: the Heritage Foundation. Sarah, the warmest of welcomes. And let's
S1: start with this title. Nine. And let's start with the
S1: presumption that a whole lot of people don't know Greek
S1: number or Roman numerals. And so if you look at
S1: one x and you see that as nine and you're
S1: not sure what it got amended to and what it did,
S1: start at the very beginning. What happened 50 years ago.
S15: Yeah. So very interesting. 53 years ago, a young woman
S15: named Susan Hollander actually sued so that she could run
S15: track in high school. There wasn't a track team on
S15: her Connecticut high school. It went all the way to
S15: federal court, and a federal judge actually weighed in and said,
S15: we need athletic competition in our boys. We don't need
S15: that kind of character from our girls. Well, that, of course, precipitated,
S15: as you can imagine, as anybody who likes equal opportunity
S15: and wants everyone to achieve educationally, regardless of whether you're
S15: a boy or a girl, whether or not you are
S15: a Christian or a non-Christian. We want public education to
S15: work for everyone, and that was the premise behind title nine.
S15: It actually took six months of negotiation and 250 versions
S15: of House and Senate education bills before we got that
S15: short 37 word statute that simply prohibits sex discrimination in
S15: any federally funded education program in the U.S.. Now, that's
S15: most education outlets charter schools, kindergartens, private schools, public schools,
S15: graduate schools, colleges. If you accept so much as a
S15: dollar of federal funding, your school is subject to the
S15: protections and requirements of title nine, which makes it a
S15: pretty significant law.
S1: And a pretty big blanket when you think of all
S1: the schools that it covers. So it has to be
S1: the end of the story. It's been around for 50 years.
S1: It's been super glued. It's a part of our legal statutes.
S1: So where's the brouhaha? What is the problem? Why are
S1: we even having to have this discussion other than happy anniversary?
S15: Yeah, that's a great question. So I think what we
S15: saw from the last administration was this manipulation of very
S15: plain text. The word sex, as it was enacted in 1972,
S15: was expanded by the previous administration to include gender identity
S15: or gender expression. Now, no one in their right mind
S15: could argue that in 1972, all of the drafters and
S15: the Ratifiers who were actually enacting title nine believed that
S15: the term sex meant anything other than male and female.
S15: But we've seen people take liberties with the definition of sex.
S15: They have expanded it to include transgender status, and one
S15: of those colleges to do precisely. That is an all
S15: women's college in Massachusetts, one of what are called the
S15: Seven Sisters, the private, all women's academies that were considered
S15: sister schools to the Ivy League colleges like Harvard and Columbia.
S15: And one of the things that we noted was that
S15: this all girls school, this all female institution of higher education,
S15: not only admits biological men who identify as women, but
S15: it also opens all of the bathrooms, locker rooms and
S15: housing accommodations to biological men as well. Which really brings
S15: us back to square one. If title nine was designed
S15: to protect biological girls and give them equal educational opportunity,
S15: what is a women's college doing admitting biological men?
S1: Okay, so on that point, let me dig a little
S1: bit deeper. You posted on X today about Smith College,
S1: and you said it was one of the largest all
S1: women's institutions in the nation. It omits natal men, maintains
S1: all gender bathrooms and locker rooms, and operates a bias
S1: response team to investigate bigotry. Okay, so now you said
S1: through defending editor, you've now asked the Department of Education
S1: to investigate Smith College. What's going on here?
S15: Well, what that entitled was filing a 15 page federal
S15: complaint with the Federal Office for Civil Rights at the U.S.
S15: Department of Education. Now, they have said specifically that June,
S15: rather than Pride Month, is title nine month. We celebrate
S15: educational equality and opportunity for girls so that they can
S15: go to graduate school and be admitted to higher education institutions.
S15: They can run track now. They can get access to
S15: the same Stem programs that were strictly limited to men
S15: as recently as 20 to 30 years ago. And one
S15: of the things we've done is file this complaint. It
S15: was submitted on Friday. Today is the anniversary of title nine.
S15: We have been in receipt of acknowledgment of our complaint
S15: and our hope, and our prayer is that the US
S15: Department of Education takes a very close look at what's
S15: happening at Smith College. Now, while Smith College is a
S15: private college, it is still subject to title nine. Why?
S15: Because it accepts federal research grant money and that automatically
S15: applies title nine. No college has to accept federal funding,
S15: but once they do, it works in the nature of
S15: a contract. If you break the terms of the contract,
S15: if you discriminate based on sex, if you expand title
S15: nine to include gender identity, you put your federal funding
S15: at risk. That is exactly what happened in the state
S15: of Maine. Many of your listeners will probably remember what
S15: happened when Pam Bondi announced she was suing the state
S15: of Maine, specifically because Janet Mills told the president to
S15: his face that she was going to follow contrary state law. Well,
S15: she has $250 million annually in the offing from the
S15: federal government. And that's precisely what we've requested the Department
S15: of Education to look at here.
S1: Wow. By the way, side note State of Maine. I
S1: love my friends in Maine. We've got great listeners up
S1: in Maine. One radio, one TV station there just had
S1: a man in drag. Give the weather. Now is it?
S1: I couldn't make the connection other than they had a
S1: gay rights flag down in the lower part of the screen,
S1: but they had a man dressed as a woman, a
S1: drag show giving the weather. You know, I thought to myself,
S1: I don't need a drag queen to tell me if
S1: it's going to rain. And by the way, I always
S1: have my phone. I can turn that channel off. Boom! Gotcha.
S1: I'm going to take a break and come right back.
S1: Sarah Perry is with me. Vice president of Defending Education.
S1: So much going on. You might think it's just a
S1: lot of legal blather, but in reality, it's about our children,
S1: is it not? Where they go to school. What happens
S1: when they get there? Right and wrong. And whether or
S1: not God makes mistakes back after this. We're visiting with
S1: Sarah Perry, who's the vice president and legal fellow at
S1: Defending Education, former senior counsel to the Assistant secretary for
S1: civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education, and former
S1: senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation. I want to
S1: linger just a little bit with Smith College, because there's
S1: a point here that I want to underscore for our
S1: friends listening all across the country. So today, as we
S1: noted earlier, marks the 50th anniversary of title nine. It's
S1: just 37 words long. It's not that complicated. Literally a
S1: level playing field, no pun intended. Done purposely for boys
S1: and girls. Men and women. Girls get a chance. If
S1: you take $0.01 of federal dollars. We don't care what
S1: portal it comes through. We don't care what program you
S1: take it through one penny. It is. For example, while
S1: Hillsdale College doesn't take a red cent from the federal government,
S1: so they're free to operate without the restraints of the
S1: federal government. But if you put your hand in the
S1: cookie jar and you take so much as one penny, gotcha,
S1: says the federal government, and they get to dictate how
S1: you will behave, what you will do. And so it's
S1: only 37 pages long. So what did they know 50
S1: years ago that we don't know now? Well, they knew
S1: that sex met a man or a woman. We have
S1: continued to devolve as a culture. We are on the
S1: brink of extinction as an as an entity because we
S1: have turned our backs on God and we're making a
S1: mockery of what is his truth. But let's just pretend
S1: for a minute that it was 50 years ago, and
S1: this issue at Smith College is raising its ugly head,
S1: and you were allowing men who've decided that God made
S1: a mistake. They're now trapped in a woman's body. And
S1: I'm going to malts into the girls bathroom at Smith College.
S1: If the language says and the title that it was,
S1: to quote, prohibit Discrimination based on sex. Isn't it quintessential
S1: discrimination to allow a man to come in and violate
S1: the privacy rights of women in a bathroom at a
S1: school for all girls?
S15: Well, therein lies the rub, doesn't it? It would seem
S15: to be an answer to the question itself. That is
S15: exactly it. In fact, we've taken this very short federal protection,
S15: and we've turned it on its head. In fact, you know,
S15: the women's liberation movement actually worked to pass title nine. Now,
S15: I would not ever classify myself as a feminist. As
S15: you know, I was raised in a very conservative Christian household,
S15: and I have to I have to tell you, this
S15: is one thing that I think the feminists got right.
S15: We did not realize it would be conservatives 53 years
S15: into the future that would be arguing for continued protection
S15: of title nine, because now we're having to prevent our
S15: children from being sexually assaulted in bathrooms. We're having to
S15: prevent gender identitarianism being shoved down the throat of our
S15: five and six year olds in kindergarten, and we're having
S15: to prevent our daughters from competing against the court from
S15: biological boys lest they suffer a concussion. So this really
S15: is taking everything that our grandmothers worked for. And remember,
S15: women have only had the vote for a little more
S15: than 100 years. And yet suddenly all of the progenitors
S15: of the women's liberation movement have fallen deadly silent on
S15: the issue of title nine. I think it's because they
S15: don't want to be characterized as transphobes, as haters. But
S15: you and I both know God doesn't make mistakes. We
S15: are created male and female as the word tells us.
S15: God does not put people in the wrong bodies. And
S15: this is something about which I feel very strongly because
S15: I have a daughter, as you know, going to college
S15: on a volleyball scholarship. I do not know whether she
S15: will face a biological boy unless we continue to fight this.
S1: Wow. Absolutely stunning. So the battle goes on. The other
S1: thing I find interesting too, is and again, you talked
S1: about being raised in a conservative household. Funny how that
S1: happens when I too was raised in a conservative Christian household.
S1: It's just repeats itself generationally, does it not? So I
S1: have a great respect for the law, and I know
S1: that sometimes the law is a donkey. There's another word
S1: for it, but I won't use it over the air.
S1: And the reality is that those laws are put in
S1: place because God understood that if we didn't have the
S1: indwelling power of the Holy Spirit and wanted the fruit
S1: of that indwelling of power is self control, that we
S1: needed a government, an external restraint. And so government is
S1: to defend and it is to restrain. So I find
S1: it interesting that while all of the governmental guidance coming
S1: out of DC now that says sex is. You were
S1: born a man. You were born a woman. The idea
S1: that we're going to move against, procedures that get any
S1: kind of federal funding to do transgender surgeries. And we're
S1: going to talk about this case in a minute, which
S1: is another bigger footprint on this particular issue. What I'm
S1: finding problematic is the absolute lawlessness of entities, organizations, teachers,
S1: lawmakers who basically thumb their nose at what now is
S1: legal precedent and common sense and good patient care and
S1: doing what's right in their own eyes. Uh, it seems
S1: to me that the dear folks at DOJ have got
S1: to be burning the midnight oil, because they're going to
S1: be busier than a one armed paper hanger. How are
S1: they going to keep up with all these lawsuits?
S15: Well, there are quite a number of them, I will
S15: tell you that right now their civil rights division is
S15: extremely active. But this also indicates exactly how right conservatives
S15: and and Christians were when back in 2015, we took
S15: issue with Obergefell v Hodges. Remember, that was the case
S15: that guaranteed a constitutional right to same sex marriage. And
S15: I am old enough. And you are old enough to
S15: remember all the conservatives. All the Christians said it won't
S15: end here. This is a slippery slope. You have manipulated
S15: the Constitution. There is no constitutional right to same sex marriage.
S15: But of course we were called alarmist. We were called
S15: individuals who were hysterical. And it was the histrionics about
S15: all the conservatives and the Bible thumpers. And yet here
S15: we are, exactly ten years hence, coming to the end
S15: of another Supreme Court term, and we are now having
S15: to fight to make sure that individuals who are 18
S15: and under are not subjected to life altering, catastrophic medical
S15: interventions based on a fleeting notion of gender identity. So
S15: in the end, as you know, we were right.
S1: Yeah, absolutely. And meanwhile, today from Planned Parenthood, literally, they
S1: post trans men need cervical cancer screening too. Just no
S1: editorial comment. Just think about that. We're going to take
S1: a break. When we come back, I want to get
S1: Sara's take on this committee decision that came down last week.
S1: Very significant. Again, another layer to this very interesting social
S1: phenomenon that's taking place back after this. If what you
S1: hear on in the market with Janet Parshall encourages you,
S1: enlightens you, engages you, and equips you, I want to
S1: ask you to become a partial partner today. This program
S1: depends on the faithful and ongoing support of listeners just
S1: like you. By supporting this program on a regular, ongoing
S1: monthly basis, you'll receive several benefits that only my partners receive.
S1: So please call today at 877 Janet, 58 or go
S1: online to in the market with Janet Parshall. We are
S1: visiting with Sarah Perry, who is the vice president and
S1: legal fellow at Defending Education. I've got a link to
S1: the website just below her bio on our information page.
S1: And also, she's the former senior counsel to the Assistant
S1: Secretary for Civil Rights at the US Department of Education
S1: and former senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation. I've
S1: got a link to a piece that she wrote for
S1: the Federalist Society entitled Supreme Court Upholds Tennessee's Ban on
S1: Gender Affirming Care for Minors in U.S. v Skrmetti. And
S1: that's what we're going to go next. This stellar, stunningly important.
S1: And boy, whether or not you just happen to read
S1: Supreme Court briefs like you read the back of a
S1: cereal box every morning or not, this is so tremendously important.
S1: 6 to 3. The three dissenters, three women, three liberals.
S1: Enough said. But the reality is this is a huge
S1: decision because it doesn't just impact Tennessee, but 26 other
S1: states that are dealing with exactly the same issue. Sara,
S1: give me your take on this.
S15: You know, I got to tell you, I think this
S15: was a miracle. I think a lot of people who
S15: are following this case, and especially among believers, we were
S15: praying that this would be the right outcome. Now, what
S15: this does is kind of leave us with a little
S15: bit of a messy outcome when it comes to state
S15: by state analysis, but that's what we got after the
S15: Dobbs v Jackson womens health decision overturning Roe versus Wade.
S15: This is, unfortunately, the way the Constitution envisioned the nations
S15: to work. This is going to be a little bit
S15: different and for example Tennessee than it will be in California.
S15: But at bottom, the Supreme Court in a 6 to 3,
S15: as you said decision, decided that this was simply a regulation,
S15: not on sex or transgender status, but on age and
S15: medical use. Well, why is that? Because Tennessee's law restricted
S15: things like cross-sex hormones, puberty blockers, and so-called gender affirming
S15: care like mastectomies. Two biological adults over the age of 19.
S15: As it should. Why? Because all of the legislators got together,
S15: and the governor agreed that after floor debate, this was
S15: something they felt strongly about. They wanted to protect minor
S15: children in the state. And this was a controversial, highly
S15: debated issue. And I'm quoting the justice here, the chief
S15: justice who wrote the opinion. This is an issue better
S15: left to the people and their elected representatives almost taking
S15: a line from the Dobbs v Jackson Womens playbook, in
S15: which they said issues like abortion should be left to
S15: the people and their elected representatives. We don't want judges
S15: who are not scientists, who are not parents, who are
S15: not educators or legislators to be making politically charged decisions.
S15: We simply want them to protect the rule of law
S15: and the power of states to decide things like medical
S15: regulation for themselves.
S1: Well, why the United States? And this would have been
S1: under the previous administration. Why were they arguing, and I
S1: call it now, the sort of garbage disposal of the Constitution.
S1: And I don't mean that with any disrespect, but if
S1: you can't figure it out with any other part of
S1: the Constitution or you throw it at the 14th amendment,
S1: equal protection. So how did the equal protection work its
S1: way into this case? Because that's what the U.S. was
S1: arguing here. And what was it about protected classes? How
S1: does all of that work?
S15: That's a great question. In fact, this was a question
S15: I was kind of hoping that the Supreme Court would clarify.
S15: So the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment guarantees
S15: every American so-called equal protection of the laws. Now, in
S15: many cases, the Supreme Court has taken that promise in
S15: the 14th amendment and had to apply it to real
S15: world situations like, for example, race discrimination, or in United
S15: States versus Virginia, a case in which Justice Ruth Bader
S15: Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion on the basis of sex.
S15: These are two classifications in which the Supreme Court has
S15: said specifically, these are characteristics that are arbitrary. They are
S15: what are called immutable characteristics. You can't do anything about them.
S15: They were granted to you simply by what the court
S15: calls accident of birth, like national origin or ethnicity. They
S15: basically come with a package. You are born either to
S15: an African American family or an Asian family or a
S15: white family. You are born either male and female. These
S15: are things that come with you from the moment of
S15: your conception. We have to protect those particular characterizations, but
S15: they did not get to the question of whether or
S15: not gender identity or transgender status are the same as
S15: those protected categories. The reason I was hopeful that they
S15: would offer some clarification on this is because we actually
S15: see four more cases pending on cert petition at the
S15: Supreme Court that simply indicate that clarity would help conclude
S15: those cases, whether it's on insurance coverage, whether it's on
S15: women's sports, or whether it's on other states and so-called
S15: gender affirming care bans. I was hopeful the Supreme Court
S15: would weigh in. Now. The majority did not. But in
S15: a separate opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said transgender status
S15: is not the same as sex and we have not
S15: decided that it is. This is something the court should
S15: have taken up. I think the Chief Justice Roberts took
S15: the middle way and he said, we're not going to
S15: address equal protection. We're not going to address what's called
S15: heightened scrutiny, that we have to look closer at those
S15: kinds of distinctions in state law. Instead, he said, it
S15: makes no distinction for anyone based on anything other than
S15: the medical use of these procedures and the age of
S15: the individual. I think that was a lost opportunity.
S1: Yeah, it was a sidestep, without a doubt. So many
S1: things here. First of all, I think the Supreme Court,
S1: speaking of sidesteps, can only sidestep this so far. If
S1: the legality of title nine as an example were to
S1: be brought up. This is a hypothetical before the court.
S1: They'd have to rule on the question of sex, because
S1: that's the spinal column for everything in title nine. So
S1: you can sidestep it all you want to and say,
S1: we're not physicians. We're kicking it back to the state.
S1: They had a model that they created in Dobbs, I
S1: agree with you. They used that model, kicked it back
S1: to the States, I get it. But the reality is
S1: they can sidestep it so far. And then at some point,
S1: for legal reasons, and you just ticked off a few
S1: of them. Insurance. ET etc. you're going to have to
S1: decide what sex means. It really is a revisiting of
S1: what the definition of that term is. By the way,
S1: you implied reference to Virginia versus loving. This is the
S1: famous case even if you don't follow law. I bet
S1: you saw the movie where it was a story of
S1: an interracial couple that challenged the illegality at the time
S1: of people of two different races marrying. Well, that goes
S1: to the point that Sarah was just making. Immutable. Immutable
S1: is this cumbersome word that you don't ever use unless
S1: you're talking to a bunch of lawyers. That means unchangeable.
S1: You cannot change your skin color. You cannot. God designed
S1: that as much as he designed, whether you were a
S1: man or a woman. And thanks be to God, that
S1: decision came down and said, absolutely, you cannot prohibit that
S1: by any stretch of the imagination. But in oral arguments,
S1: it didn't stop Justice Jackson, who in the end was
S1: one of the three dissenting justices from harkening back to
S1: the idea that there was a protection there in loving
S1: that should have been applied to the issue of transgender. Now,
S1: you just said it, but I want you to say
S1: it again so people understand this. You can change your
S1: sex by saying, I'm going to cut off my top surgery.
S1: I'm going to redo the bottom surgery. I'm going to
S1: infuse my body a bunch of testosterone, and I can
S1: physically manipulate the outside. But your DNA goes to the
S1: core of your being. That's why this whole thing is
S1: an illusion, a delusion. More to the point, you cannot
S1: and never will be able to change your sex. It
S1: goes to the very tiniest part of how God made
S1: us so. And yet she tried to take an immutable
S1: characteristic and superimpose it on immutable one. Talk to me
S1: about that.
S15: Yeah, that's so great distinction. You know, the the liberals
S15: voting together as a block on this one. It was
S15: so disappointing because it was an opinion that was so
S15: politically charged. And in fact, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who next
S15: to the chief Justice and Justice Clarence Thomas is the
S15: third most senior justice on the bench, is the one
S15: that wrote an opinion that was joined by the other
S15: two liberal females, in which she said the same thing
S15: and argued that transgender students and families had been neglected,
S15: that the court had not undertaken the proper analysis. But
S15: the minute the court starts engaging in politically charged speak
S15: about gender identity and born in the wrong body and
S15: a transgender boy, which means biological girl, you can tell
S15: that the Supreme Court's thinking on this has been subject
S15: to political pressure. And as somebody who watches the court
S15: as a lawyer herself, that was, I think, one of
S15: my greatest heartaches. Now we got the right decision. But
S15: there were footnotes in the Chief justice's majority opinion, in
S15: which he talked about transgender boys and used he him pronouns,
S15: even though this was in relation to biological girls. That
S15: bothers me significantly, because it indicates to me that other
S15: cases that could come before the Supreme Court. And remember,
S15: we have yet another one to come down the Mahmud
S15: versus Taylor case on whether or not there's a right
S15: of religious parents to opt their children out of gender
S15: identity curriculum. It indicates to me that the chief justice
S15: is malleable on an issue that should not be malleable.
S15: It should be very cut and dry, very clear to
S15: the justices that a boy is a boy and a
S15: girl is a girl, and never the twain shall meet.
S1: Yeah. And it just underscores why you never read the
S1: tea leaves with justices, because you don't have a clue
S1: what their final outcome is going to be. And they
S1: are human beings. They do not shed their worldview when
S1: they put on their robes and hear oral arguments at
S1: the High Court. So when you pray for those in authority,
S1: include those nine justices by name. They are people. They
S1: are fallible. Their worldview is very integral to the way
S1: in which they interpret the law as well. And these
S1: are crucial, quite literally, life and death decisions. So we
S1: need to remember them as the people that we pray for.
S1: In fact, here's a suggestion when you're starting to pray
S1: for those in authority, just look at the three branches
S1: of government and pray for the justices. During one of
S1: your prayer periods, pray for the president for one of
S1: your prayer periods, his vice president and his cabinet. Pray
S1: for the members of the House. Then pray for the
S1: members of the Senate. You can do this in a
S1: very orderly fashion. Even if you don't know them all
S1: by name, you can lift them up. God cares about judges.
S1: Check his book. He's got some books that carry the
S1: name judges, and he cares about presidents. He's got a
S1: book called Kings. I know no king but King Jesus.
S1: And then he also cares about representatives. Moses was told,
S1: choose out among yourselves representatives. Where do you think we
S1: got that idea? So this will help you specifically to
S1: pray for these men and women who are public servants
S1: and need wisdom back after this. We're visiting with Sarah Perry,
S1: who is vice president and legal fellow at Defending Education.
S1: So what I'm about to read is very apropos for
S1: our time together, because this just got announced by the
S1: Department of Ed. And if you want more information on this.
S1: But to all the school administrators out there, graduate level,
S1: college level, high school level, the US department is going
S1: to be a part of this 250th anniversary of America.
S1: I told you that when we had the parade honoring
S1: the birth of the US Army, that the administration has
S1: planned a year's worth of activities to celebrate America, our republic, democracy,
S1: and the principles that have guided this nation. So here's
S1: a great opportunity that the Department of Ed is just
S1: announcing today. They have issued what's called a notice Inviting
S1: applications for a new American History and Civics Seminar discretionary
S1: grant program that's designed to honor America's 250th celebration. And
S1: the applications are now open. All you have to do
S1: at this point is file an intent to apply, because
S1: it takes a while to fill out grant stuff. As
S1: you all know, if you've ever done one of those.
S1: But by the 2nd of July, you just have to
S1: let the Department of Ed know that you're interested in this.
S1: And what I like is that clearly they want to
S1: make sure that Americans get caught, get taught the values
S1: of this country. So applicants must study the seminars that
S1: they're going to put on. They must study the American
S1: political traditions, ideas, traditions, institutions and texts essential to American
S1: constitutional government and American history, with a focus on the
S1: first principles of the founding, their inclusion in the Declaration
S1: of Independence. Excuse me, the US Constitution and the Bill
S1: of rights priority is going to be given to applicants
S1: from institutions of higher ed that have established an independent
S1: academic unit dedicated to civic thought excuse me? Constitutional studies,
S1: American history, political leadership, and free market enterprise. Applicants must
S1: design and implement evidence based approaches. That's important to seminars
S1: for educators or students specifically focused on American history and
S1: civics that directly commemorate the 250th anniversary of the founding
S1: of the United States. Sarah. As someone who contributes frequently
S1: to the Federalist Society, you must be very happy about this.
S15: Oh, I'm thrilled about it. And in fact, I just
S15: did a webinar a few months ago for whether or
S15: not the federal government has any role in shaping curriculum.
S15: And the consensus among libertarians, among conservatives is that really
S15: education and curricular development is really constitutionally best left to
S15: the local level. But here's what the federal government has done.
S15: They have used the power of the federal purse, which
S15: we talked about a little bit, with title nine, to
S15: say specifically, we are going to give these particular allocated
S15: federal funds preference to schools, to developers, to curriculum, uh, consultation,
S15: consultations who are Specifically concerned with teaching about the American founding.
S15: Now this we've been told this is going to be
S15: a year long celebration. We know that the official 250th
S15: is next July. But we've seen obviously already the 250th
S15: anniversary of the United States Army. And what a patriotic
S15: celebration that was part of what we don't see in
S15: American education. And again, 90% of American school kids go
S15: to public schools, either because they are zoned into public
S15: schools or they need special ed services, as my sons did,
S15: or because they cannot afford private or parochial or there
S15: are no charter school options. Most kids go to private
S15: school or to public school. But what we've seen in
S15: public school is specifically a lack of understanding of American
S15: history and civics, and what we used to take in
S15: high school and middle school, which was called social studies.
S15: That gave us the understanding of how America was founded.
S15: Our very important American history. And all of the tools
S15: we needed to be contributing members of society going forward.
S15: I think this is a very welcome development. I think
S15: it's a very creative but very useful. Determination of how
S15: to use federal funding, the power of the purse that
S15: Congress gives. The executive agency, through that particular demonstration of
S15: what they can and cannot do. Vis a vis federal law.
S15: I think it's a great way to get other educational
S15: opportunities to sort of come together and educate children for
S15: the benefit of knowing their own nation's history.
S1: And our guiding principles, which I think is hugely important. education.gov. Gov.
S1: If you want more information. Again, the intent to apply
S1: just has to be reported by the 2nd of July,
S1: which is right around the corner. So I want to
S1: give you the heads up. You mentioned Mahmoud, and I
S1: really am waiting for this case to because you and
S1: I probably wouldn't be having this conversation if my wanting
S1: to opt you out of very dangerous programs that were
S1: coming to our local school hadn't happened. It is the germ,
S1: the seed, if you will, that started your dad and
S1: me by understanding that there was a war out there
S1: against the values that we held sincerely as followers of
S1: Jesus Christ. Well, not all the parents out of this
S1: case came out of Maryland are followers of Jesus Christ,
S1: but it is the exact same principle. Talk to me
S1: about this.
S15: That's such a great distinction. And in fact, I like
S15: to joke to people that you and I are apple
S15: and tree. I swore I would never go into conservative
S15: policy or politics. And the Lord said, really? Because I
S15: have something to tell you and it's going to be
S15: exactly this particular thing. In fact, your nonprofit educational reform
S15: organization was called people for Basic Education and our name
S15: before we transitioned into higher education was parents defending education.
S15: We used to be PD. Now we are just defending education.
S15: So again, I the irony is not lost on me. No,
S15: this is this is so critically important. Now I will
S15: tell you, I do think the Supreme Court and we
S15: could see this opinion on Thursday. We're getting opinions from
S15: the court again on Thursday. This is a critically important
S15: case because it's not just religious parents who want to
S15: opt their children out of sexually and gender identity, aggressive
S15: curricular inclusions. It's also secular parents, parents who understand that
S15: issues of sexuality and gender identity are best left to
S15: parents to impart to their children by hope. And I
S15: think based on oral arguments, I'm going to be right,
S15: is that they find for the parents in opting their
S15: children out.
S1: Boy, do I as well, because, you know, once upon
S1: a time, that building held a bunch bench of justices
S1: that talked about the right to look well to the
S1: ways of your house, so they didn't use that language
S1: from Scripture, but God got it before they did that.
S1: Really and truly, it was what they called a penumbral, right?
S1: It was so important, so transcendent, so universally understood that
S1: you hardly had to even talk about it, let alone
S1: defend it, which is where we are now. If the
S1: founders had thought that parents were fighting with public education
S1: rather than understanding at its founding, that American education was
S1: about using the Bible to build character and to teach literacy,
S1: they would be stunned. So I'm watching this one very carefully,
S1: because if parents can't look well to the ways of
S1: their household without the school, the government schools intruding, it's
S1: a dark day in America. So we're going to watch
S1: this one very carefully. We covered a lot of ground. Sarah,
S1: thank you so much. Let me get my friends to
S1: read your article again. If you go to In the
S1: Market with Janet Parshall under the synopsis of the hour,
S1: click on the red box. Program details and audio takes
S1: you to the info page. There's Sarah's longer piece in
S1: the Federalist Society on Skrmetti. Thanks, Sarah. Thanks, friends. We'll
S1: see you next time.