1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:02,040 Speaker 1: Welcome to the Truth with Lisa Booth, who well get 2 00:00:02,040 --> 00:00:04,520 Speaker 1: to the heart of the issues that matter to you today. 3 00:00:04,559 --> 00:00:08,119 Speaker 1: I'm joined by Carrie Severino, president of jc EN. She's 4 00:00:08,240 --> 00:00:11,080 Speaker 1: also co author of the best selling book Justice on 5 00:00:11,160 --> 00:00:14,320 Speaker 1: Trial the Kavanaugh Confirmation in the Future of the Court, 6 00:00:14,360 --> 00:00:15,760 Speaker 1: and that's what we're going to talk about today, the 7 00:00:15,760 --> 00:00:18,400 Speaker 1: future of the court, the future of the judiciary in 8 00:00:18,440 --> 00:00:21,200 Speaker 1: the country. We've seen how left wing activists have tried 9 00:00:21,239 --> 00:00:24,520 Speaker 1: to use the courts to stop President Trump's agenda, to 10 00:00:24,600 --> 00:00:27,560 Speaker 1: thwart as agenda, and we've also got some big, big 11 00:00:27,640 --> 00:00:32,360 Speaker 1: Supreme Court battles coming up on things like Trump's executive 12 00:00:32,400 --> 00:00:37,600 Speaker 1: power limits, birthrights, citizenship, transgender sports bands, gun rights expansions, 13 00:00:37,600 --> 00:00:41,720 Speaker 1: election law reforms. We're talking big, big ticket items here, 14 00:00:41,800 --> 00:00:46,040 Speaker 1: hot button issues. So do we think Supreme Court justices 15 00:00:46,080 --> 00:00:49,280 Speaker 1: are scared right now in this environment? And we've seen 16 00:00:49,360 --> 00:00:53,600 Speaker 1: attempted assassinations against some of the Supreme Court justices. You've 17 00:00:53,600 --> 00:00:56,160 Speaker 1: got a bunch of crazy people out there. Does that 18 00:00:56,280 --> 00:00:59,840 Speaker 1: shape their opinions? Does that shape some of these rulings. Also, 19 00:01:00,280 --> 00:01:02,920 Speaker 1: we've got this group, the Federal Judicial Center, so it's 20 00:01:03,000 --> 00:01:06,880 Speaker 1: basically the research and education agency of the Judicial branch 21 00:01:06,920 --> 00:01:10,080 Speaker 1: of the United States government, but it's partnering with a 22 00:01:10,240 --> 00:01:14,280 Speaker 1: left wing climate activist group. Why is that and what 23 00:01:14,319 --> 00:01:17,200 Speaker 1: does it say about left wing bias in our legal 24 00:01:17,280 --> 00:01:18,000 Speaker 1: system today? 25 00:01:18,400 --> 00:01:25,960 Speaker 2: All that more with Carrie Severino. Well, Carrie, it's great 26 00:01:26,000 --> 00:01:27,240 Speaker 2: to have you back on the show. 27 00:01:27,520 --> 00:01:31,320 Speaker 1: There really are no shortage of judicial topics to discuss, 28 00:01:31,360 --> 00:01:35,399 Speaker 1: so appreciate you for making the time happy to I 29 00:01:35,440 --> 00:01:37,840 Speaker 1: saw today, I'm not sure if you I'm sure you 30 00:01:37,880 --> 00:01:41,199 Speaker 1: saw it, but that Chief Justice Roberts has started asking 31 00:01:41,240 --> 00:01:45,199 Speaker 1: Supreme Court staff to sign NDAs after you know, we've 32 00:01:45,240 --> 00:01:50,240 Speaker 1: seen some controversial leagues, particularly with the Roe versuade overturning 33 00:01:50,280 --> 00:01:51,120 Speaker 1: the draft on that. 34 00:01:51,800 --> 00:01:53,520 Speaker 2: Is this the right call? What do you make of that? 35 00:01:54,360 --> 00:01:58,040 Speaker 3: Well, you know, it's very discouraging to see the leaks 36 00:01:58,080 --> 00:02:01,280 Speaker 3: that have happened through this the Supreme Court when I 37 00:02:01,320 --> 00:02:03,920 Speaker 3: clerked there, now this is now, you know, over twenty 38 00:02:03,960 --> 00:02:06,680 Speaker 3: years ago at this point, but the Chief Justice himself 39 00:02:06,760 --> 00:02:12,240 Speaker 3: was very clear about the fact that this what happens 40 00:02:12,280 --> 00:02:14,519 Speaker 3: in these walls has to be kept with a strict 41 00:02:14,560 --> 00:02:17,120 Speaker 3: confidentiality and lawyers should be familiar with this. It's a 42 00:02:17,200 --> 00:02:21,720 Speaker 3: legal ethics question. So I think unfortunately, you know, it 43 00:02:21,800 --> 00:02:23,760 Speaker 3: used to be that you could have a little more 44 00:02:23,760 --> 00:02:26,639 Speaker 3: confidence that people who were functioning at that high level 45 00:02:26,880 --> 00:02:29,680 Speaker 3: were going to also have ethics to go along with 46 00:02:29,919 --> 00:02:33,839 Speaker 3: that importance of that job. Unfortunately, obviously with the Dobbs leak, 47 00:02:34,360 --> 00:02:36,440 Speaker 3: we saw that that doesn't always hold true, and so 48 00:02:36,680 --> 00:02:39,560 Speaker 3: I think I wish he hadn't been forced into that position, 49 00:02:39,639 --> 00:02:40,640 Speaker 3: but kind. 50 00:02:40,440 --> 00:02:42,959 Speaker 1: Of was Isn't that kind of underscore where we are 51 00:02:43,000 --> 00:02:46,560 Speaker 1: today and also where like the law currently is and 52 00:02:46,600 --> 00:02:50,639 Speaker 1: where the judiciary brand. It's like everything is political when 53 00:02:50,639 --> 00:02:52,919 Speaker 1: it used to not be. So, I mean, there's always 54 00:02:52,919 --> 00:02:55,519 Speaker 1: been politics, but not like this bad right. 55 00:02:56,160 --> 00:02:58,040 Speaker 3: You know, I'm not a historian, so it's hard to 56 00:02:58,040 --> 00:02:59,760 Speaker 3: be hard to do the comparison, but I'll tell you 57 00:02:59,760 --> 00:03:04,280 Speaker 3: the Court has had definitely moments of tension based on 58 00:03:04,360 --> 00:03:08,720 Speaker 3: politics in the past, but the justices themselves have generally 59 00:03:08,720 --> 00:03:10,240 Speaker 3: been able to rise above it because they know that 60 00:03:10,280 --> 00:03:12,960 Speaker 3: they have to work together literally for the rest of 61 00:03:13,000 --> 00:03:16,400 Speaker 3: their lives. It's life tenure, but it's also a life sentence, 62 00:03:16,919 --> 00:03:19,960 Speaker 3: and so I do think it's discouraging to see the 63 00:03:19,960 --> 00:03:23,359 Speaker 3: clerks at least seem to be maybe not at least 64 00:03:23,400 --> 00:03:26,720 Speaker 3: in so far as the leak has been concerned not 65 00:03:26,919 --> 00:03:29,920 Speaker 3: taking it as seriously, and I hope that we can 66 00:03:29,960 --> 00:03:33,960 Speaker 3: get back to a time when we're looking to the 67 00:03:34,000 --> 00:03:37,360 Speaker 3: health of these institutions and respecting them highly enough that 68 00:03:37,360 --> 00:03:40,240 Speaker 3: we don't have to worry that someone be it a 69 00:03:40,360 --> 00:03:43,320 Speaker 3: clerk or justice, is going to leak something in order 70 00:03:43,400 --> 00:03:45,920 Speaker 3: to try to influence other justices in the court. 71 00:03:45,960 --> 00:03:48,200 Speaker 1: You know, before we get to more specific things that 72 00:03:48,240 --> 00:03:50,560 Speaker 1: are happening right now, I mean, we've really seen the 73 00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:53,040 Speaker 1: left and they did this stiring President Trump's first term. 74 00:03:53,040 --> 00:03:55,520 Speaker 1: They're doing it again, really trying to use the courts 75 00:03:55,560 --> 00:03:58,800 Speaker 1: to stop his agenda, and they really stop what Americans 76 00:03:58,880 --> 00:03:59,440 Speaker 1: voted for. 77 00:04:00,520 --> 00:04:01,880 Speaker 2: How successful would. 78 00:04:01,640 --> 00:04:04,400 Speaker 1: You say they've been this second term in trying to 79 00:04:04,480 --> 00:04:06,000 Speaker 1: stop orthwort his agenda. 80 00:04:07,600 --> 00:04:11,120 Speaker 3: Well, you know, it's it's always a strategy that people 81 00:04:11,160 --> 00:04:17,400 Speaker 3: want to do. It is increased in volume dramatically, particularly 82 00:04:17,520 --> 00:04:19,560 Speaker 3: during the Trump years. It used to be that you 83 00:04:19,560 --> 00:04:21,960 Speaker 3: could expect that maybe major things are going to get 84 00:04:22,640 --> 00:04:25,680 Speaker 3: attacked in the courts. Even in the first Trump administration, 85 00:04:26,080 --> 00:04:30,240 Speaker 3: there were regulations that before the inquisite it we're beenprinted 86 00:04:30,520 --> 00:04:33,640 Speaker 3: in the Federal Register already had lawsuits against them. I 87 00:04:33,680 --> 00:04:36,680 Speaker 3: do think that because of some of the actions of 88 00:04:36,720 --> 00:04:40,480 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court, particularly and pushing back against the universal injunctions. 89 00:04:40,600 --> 00:04:44,200 Speaker 3: That effort hasn't been as successful as it could have been. 90 00:04:44,320 --> 00:04:47,200 Speaker 3: It's now not just a matter of the top you know, 91 00:04:47,320 --> 00:04:49,359 Speaker 3: tier things are going to get sued, but anything that 92 00:04:49,400 --> 00:04:51,480 Speaker 3: the administration is doing is going to get a lawsuit. 93 00:04:51,600 --> 00:04:53,640 Speaker 3: I think that's why the Supreme Court did step in 94 00:04:53,720 --> 00:04:57,080 Speaker 3: last term and said, hey, you can't have courts trying 95 00:04:57,080 --> 00:05:00,640 Speaker 3: to block with one lawsuit, block the execution of a 96 00:05:00,720 --> 00:05:05,280 Speaker 3: law or in executive order throughout the entire country, because 97 00:05:05,360 --> 00:05:07,599 Speaker 3: otherwise you literally will not be able to get anything 98 00:05:07,600 --> 00:05:09,520 Speaker 3: done in four years or maybe even eight years. It 99 00:05:09,520 --> 00:05:11,680 Speaker 3: takes so long for these lawsuits. So I think that 100 00:05:11,720 --> 00:05:15,160 Speaker 3: has done a lot to help push back on that. 101 00:05:15,400 --> 00:05:17,279 Speaker 3: And there are some really important cases that the Court 102 00:05:17,320 --> 00:05:20,560 Speaker 3: has tried to work through very expeditiously. You know, just 103 00:05:20,600 --> 00:05:23,000 Speaker 3: this term alone, we're looking at birthright citizenship kind of 104 00:05:23,040 --> 00:05:27,240 Speaker 3: for the second time. We're looking at the whether the 105 00:05:27,240 --> 00:05:31,000 Speaker 3: president has the right to hire and fire without having 106 00:05:31,600 --> 00:05:35,800 Speaker 3: tenure on different high level of executive officials, including people 107 00:05:35,839 --> 00:05:39,440 Speaker 3: at the FTC and at the Federal Reserve. So there's 108 00:05:39,520 --> 00:05:42,440 Speaker 3: some really important issues that the Court is trying to 109 00:05:42,440 --> 00:05:45,919 Speaker 3: look at his tariffs. They're trying to move these through expeditiously, 110 00:05:46,240 --> 00:05:50,000 Speaker 3: but it's definitely slowed things down. But it certainly hasn't 111 00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:52,880 Speaker 3: they haven't been able to grind things to a halt and. 112 00:05:53,200 --> 00:05:58,279 Speaker 1: Just further underscoring the bias that's seeped in. So the 113 00:05:58,320 --> 00:06:02,320 Speaker 1: Federal Judicial Center is research and education agency of the 114 00:06:02,400 --> 00:06:04,680 Speaker 1: judicial branch of the United States. And I know you've 115 00:06:04,800 --> 00:06:08,960 Speaker 1: flagged this, but the Federal Judicial Center has partnered with 116 00:06:09,160 --> 00:06:12,839 Speaker 1: an activist group. Walk us through this, why it matters 117 00:06:12,880 --> 00:06:14,480 Speaker 1: and why people should know about it. 118 00:06:15,080 --> 00:06:19,080 Speaker 3: Yeah, So, the Federal Judicial Center is a government organizations 119 00:06:19,080 --> 00:06:22,560 Speaker 3: supposed to be just kind of doing administrative actions for 120 00:06:22,600 --> 00:06:26,400 Speaker 3: the courts, supposed to be helping out judges, but as 121 00:06:26,520 --> 00:06:30,840 Speaker 3: part of one of their sensibly educational efforts, they've really 122 00:06:30,880 --> 00:06:34,320 Speaker 3: become co opted by some a group that's on the 123 00:06:34,720 --> 00:06:39,400 Speaker 3: far environmental left called the Climate Judiciary Project and also 124 00:06:39,440 --> 00:06:42,719 Speaker 3: the Environmental Law Institute. These are left wing, dark money 125 00:06:42,760 --> 00:06:48,160 Speaker 3: funded organizations that are regular supporting lawsuits on environmental law issues, 126 00:06:48,200 --> 00:06:51,920 Speaker 3: trying to shut down energy production and other things before 127 00:06:51,960 --> 00:06:54,799 Speaker 3: the courts. Normally, if a group like that is trying 128 00:06:54,839 --> 00:06:58,200 Speaker 3: to be involved in a lawsuit. What they might do 129 00:06:58,320 --> 00:07:01,560 Speaker 3: is either support the lit against themselves file and a 130 00:07:01,600 --> 00:07:05,320 Speaker 3: meekus brief to make their positions known. Right, that's one 131 00:07:05,360 --> 00:07:07,920 Speaker 3: way that outside groups can influence the courts. What they 132 00:07:07,960 --> 00:07:10,040 Speaker 3: decided to do here is actually, no, we're going to 133 00:07:10,120 --> 00:07:13,720 Speaker 3: run judicial education and we're going to feed them our 134 00:07:13,800 --> 00:07:17,120 Speaker 3: ideas both about what the actual state of sciences, which 135 00:07:17,160 --> 00:07:21,000 Speaker 3: obviously comes with a very heavy tilt to environmental scientists, 136 00:07:21,000 --> 00:07:23,000 Speaker 3: including we're looking at some of these people who are 137 00:07:23,000 --> 00:07:27,480 Speaker 3: actually very controversial and disgraced scientists on the left. We've 138 00:07:27,560 --> 00:07:32,920 Speaker 3: got them pushing legal theories that would favor the litigants 139 00:07:32,920 --> 00:07:37,400 Speaker 3: who are the pro environmental group litigants in these cases, 140 00:07:37,440 --> 00:07:39,200 Speaker 3: and presenting it to the judges as if this is 141 00:07:39,240 --> 00:07:41,800 Speaker 3: a balanced and neutral thing. And the worst thing is 142 00:07:41,840 --> 00:07:45,840 Speaker 3: this coming out of now a organization, the Federal Judicial Center, 143 00:07:46,040 --> 00:07:50,000 Speaker 3: that is funded by our tax payer dollars. And so 144 00:07:50,160 --> 00:07:54,720 Speaker 3: this is a real co opting of a government organization 145 00:07:54,880 --> 00:07:57,760 Speaker 3: for what's supposed to be neutral to actually be really 146 00:07:57,800 --> 00:08:01,880 Speaker 3: influencing these judges who are going to be hearing cases 147 00:08:02,000 --> 00:08:04,560 Speaker 3: that these same groups are really advocating it. 148 00:08:05,400 --> 00:08:10,440 Speaker 1: We're basically paying for this indoctrination then so what you're saying, Yeah. 149 00:08:10,280 --> 00:08:12,320 Speaker 3: We're paying for the inductor nation, and you know what, 150 00:08:12,360 --> 00:08:17,040 Speaker 3: we're we're giving free bonus time to one side in 151 00:08:17,080 --> 00:08:20,760 Speaker 3: a major controversial lawsuit. They're getting to have, you know, 152 00:08:20,800 --> 00:08:23,520 Speaker 3: all of this time looking at the judges. Instead of 153 00:08:23,520 --> 00:08:26,640 Speaker 3: their maybe forty page amakas brief, they get a whole 154 00:08:27,160 --> 00:08:31,080 Speaker 3: reference manual that's presented as a neutral factual document that 155 00:08:31,200 --> 00:08:33,840 Speaker 3: now the judges are going to be coming at it 156 00:08:33,880 --> 00:08:40,319 Speaker 3: from their perspective, it's its outrageous attempts to influence the judiciary. 157 00:08:40,360 --> 00:08:42,480 Speaker 3: And it goes back a little to how you framed 158 00:08:42,679 --> 00:08:45,080 Speaker 3: some of the other actions where this is some these 159 00:08:45,120 --> 00:08:48,240 Speaker 3: are these are oftentimes pushing things that didn't get passed 160 00:08:48,280 --> 00:08:51,880 Speaker 3: through the through our elected representatives. The American people didn't 161 00:08:51,920 --> 00:08:53,680 Speaker 3: vote for the Green New Deal, but they're going to 162 00:08:53,720 --> 00:08:55,559 Speaker 3: the courts trying to get it, and now they're trying 163 00:08:55,600 --> 00:08:58,840 Speaker 3: to capture these judges so they can just push through 164 00:08:58,840 --> 00:09:01,319 Speaker 3: in the judiciary what they couldn't do it the ballot box. 165 00:09:01,360 --> 00:09:02,960 Speaker 3: That turns our system on its head. 166 00:09:03,520 --> 00:09:06,040 Speaker 1: Well. And also this is concerning because very often left 167 00:09:06,040 --> 00:09:10,640 Speaker 1: wing groups use like environmental issues and climate issues to 168 00:09:10,800 --> 00:09:13,040 Speaker 1: try to shut down like even if you look at 169 00:09:13,080 --> 00:09:18,880 Speaker 1: it Alligator Alcatraz in Florida with where you know, Florida 170 00:09:18,920 --> 00:09:22,400 Speaker 1: was keeping some of the illegal aliens. You know, the 171 00:09:22,520 --> 00:09:25,880 Speaker 1: left used environmental issues to try to shut that down 172 00:09:26,040 --> 00:09:29,040 Speaker 1: as well. So this is very problematic. How does something 173 00:09:29,080 --> 00:09:29,760 Speaker 1: like this happen? 174 00:09:31,160 --> 00:09:33,839 Speaker 3: You know, that's something I'm hoping we'll be able to 175 00:09:33,880 --> 00:09:37,280 Speaker 3: get more information on. The Houp's Judiciary Committee is actually 176 00:09:37,600 --> 00:09:40,960 Speaker 3: looking into these organizations, the Climate Judiciary Project, the Environmental 177 00:09:41,000 --> 00:09:43,960 Speaker 3: Law Institute, and they're going to hopefully be able to 178 00:09:44,040 --> 00:09:46,080 Speaker 3: uncover a little bit. How how on earth do you 179 00:09:46,120 --> 00:09:52,240 Speaker 3: insert yourself into this purportedly neutral government organization. You know, 180 00:09:52,320 --> 00:09:55,839 Speaker 3: the Federal Judicial Center is coming back asking for about 181 00:09:55,920 --> 00:10:00,839 Speaker 3: thirty five million dollars in federal funding annually. I think 182 00:10:00,880 --> 00:10:02,920 Speaker 3: Congress ought to take a look at it and say, hey, 183 00:10:03,240 --> 00:10:06,880 Speaker 3: until you can explain what's happening here, until you want 184 00:10:06,920 --> 00:10:10,480 Speaker 3: to rescind these you know, documents that are so coming 185 00:10:10,520 --> 00:10:13,480 Speaker 3: at it from such a biased perspective, we're not going 186 00:10:13,520 --> 00:10:17,480 Speaker 3: to be further funding this enterprise. So I think we 187 00:10:17,640 --> 00:10:20,840 Speaker 3: really need to get dig into this and shine some 188 00:10:21,080 --> 00:10:24,240 Speaker 3: light on what's been happening here. Really, you know, the 189 00:10:24,280 --> 00:10:27,760 Speaker 3: deep state happens. This is just another example of a 190 00:10:27,880 --> 00:10:31,480 Speaker 3: yet different area where you have the left burrowing into 191 00:10:31,920 --> 00:10:35,160 Speaker 3: our government organizations and trying to just turn them into 192 00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:37,160 Speaker 3: leftist propaganda groups. 193 00:10:37,960 --> 00:10:40,560 Speaker 1: Have we seen other examples from the federal Judicial center 194 00:10:40,720 --> 00:10:44,880 Speaker 1: of you know, sort of linking arms with left wing activists. 195 00:10:45,480 --> 00:10:48,840 Speaker 3: This is certainly the most egregious that we have seen. 196 00:10:49,160 --> 00:10:51,440 Speaker 3: I feel like in general, we probably could have seen 197 00:10:51,520 --> 00:10:58,680 Speaker 3: some more consistent defense from the judicial branch when it 198 00:10:58,720 --> 00:11:01,800 Speaker 3: came to judges who are being being threatened, particularly during 199 00:11:02,080 --> 00:11:03,520 Speaker 3: when we started to see this a lot during the 200 00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:06,240 Speaker 3: Trump era. There are judges who needed to boost their 201 00:11:06,240 --> 00:11:09,960 Speaker 3: marshal presence. We obviously saw things like the attempted assassination 202 00:11:10,040 --> 00:11:13,800 Speaker 3: of Justice Kavanaugh. The Supreme Court justices with people, even 203 00:11:13,800 --> 00:11:17,400 Speaker 3: the ones with children at home, had people protesting at 204 00:11:17,440 --> 00:11:21,640 Speaker 3: their private homes in many cases in violation of local 205 00:11:21,720 --> 00:11:25,439 Speaker 3: law that wasn't being really dealt with properly. Yet we 206 00:11:25,520 --> 00:11:28,880 Speaker 3: saw a very delayed response from the Administrative Office of 207 00:11:28,880 --> 00:11:32,360 Speaker 3: the Courts until after it was In terms of the 208 00:11:32,360 --> 00:11:35,200 Speaker 3: Biden era judges who were also and I don't think 209 00:11:35,200 --> 00:11:38,200 Speaker 3: any judges on either side should be intimidated, particularly at 210 00:11:38,200 --> 00:11:41,400 Speaker 3: their homes, but we saw them standing up a lot 211 00:11:41,440 --> 00:11:45,720 Speaker 3: more vociferously I think for the Biden appointees than they 212 00:11:45,760 --> 00:11:48,680 Speaker 3: did for Trump appointees and just general judges on the 213 00:11:48,760 --> 00:11:54,000 Speaker 3: right that were being attacked and threatened by violent individuals, 214 00:11:54,080 --> 00:11:56,600 Speaker 3: particularly around the time of the Dobbs decision. 215 00:11:56,920 --> 00:11:58,679 Speaker 2: Got to take a quick commercial break. If you like 216 00:11:58,720 --> 00:11:59,120 Speaker 2: what you're. 217 00:11:59,000 --> 00:12:00,920 Speaker 1: Hearing, please share and social media or senate to your 218 00:12:00,960 --> 00:12:07,400 Speaker 1: family and friends. Who is oversight over the Federal Judicial Center? 219 00:12:07,640 --> 00:12:10,160 Speaker 3: You know, Congress ultimately does they They hold the power 220 00:12:10,160 --> 00:12:13,160 Speaker 3: of the purse, and they they do have oversight authority 221 00:12:13,559 --> 00:12:18,680 Speaker 3: to bring people in hold subpoena documents and to question witnesses, 222 00:12:18,679 --> 00:12:21,000 Speaker 3: and so I think I'm hoping that that is what 223 00:12:21,040 --> 00:12:24,040 Speaker 3: the House Judiciary Committee WI ultimately do. I'm hoping they 224 00:12:24,040 --> 00:12:25,800 Speaker 3: may be able to even hold a hearing on this 225 00:12:26,400 --> 00:12:29,000 Speaker 3: to get people in front of them to say, what 226 00:12:29,080 --> 00:12:31,440 Speaker 3: were you thinking? How is this supposed to go down? 227 00:12:31,800 --> 00:12:36,560 Speaker 3: That is ultimately Congress's role is to to make sure 228 00:12:36,600 --> 00:12:38,000 Speaker 3: that this kind of thing doesn't happen. 229 00:12:39,160 --> 00:12:41,400 Speaker 1: You know, you had mentioned earlier with some of these 230 00:12:41,480 --> 00:12:45,520 Speaker 1: Supreme Court cases that we're going to see I mean 231 00:12:45,600 --> 00:12:51,160 Speaker 1: we're talking like major things, right, like climate stuff, election law, 232 00:12:51,559 --> 00:12:57,359 Speaker 1: transgender sports bands, like gun rights like ecolutely, Trump's executive 233 00:12:57,520 --> 00:12:58,520 Speaker 1: power like. 234 00:12:59,000 --> 00:13:01,600 Speaker 3: Yes, no, it's it's a huge, huge term. I think 235 00:13:02,280 --> 00:13:05,400 Speaker 3: a lot of those ones I alluded to before have 236 00:13:05,520 --> 00:13:08,160 Speaker 3: to do with just the role of the presidency and 237 00:13:08,240 --> 00:13:13,960 Speaker 3: how how to the president has authority over the federal officials. 238 00:13:15,280 --> 00:13:18,120 Speaker 3: Is he required to keep people on who he just 239 00:13:18,200 --> 00:13:22,360 Speaker 3: fundamentally disagrees with just because the statute that was passed 240 00:13:22,760 --> 00:13:24,400 Speaker 3: may say they have a certain number of years. But 241 00:13:24,440 --> 00:13:26,520 Speaker 3: we saw that President Biden was firing people left and 242 00:13:26,600 --> 00:13:28,800 Speaker 3: right where the statute might have said they had years 243 00:13:28,880 --> 00:13:30,560 Speaker 3: left on their term, and he said, well, no, this 244 00:13:30,600 --> 00:13:33,000 Speaker 3: is part of the president's authority. I'm glad that President 245 00:13:33,040 --> 00:13:35,319 Speaker 3: Trump is finally taking that to Supreme Court to get 246 00:13:35,360 --> 00:13:38,319 Speaker 3: an ultimate ruling, so he knows, hey, is it or 247 00:13:38,360 --> 00:13:39,880 Speaker 3: isn't it? Do I have the right to do this? 248 00:13:39,960 --> 00:13:41,680 Speaker 3: And I think they're ultimately going to say he does. 249 00:13:42,440 --> 00:13:42,480 Speaker 2: We. 250 00:13:43,280 --> 00:13:45,360 Speaker 3: As I mentioned, he's got the tariff's case coming up, 251 00:13:45,400 --> 00:13:47,880 Speaker 3: We've got whether he can fire the Federal Reserve chair. 252 00:13:48,160 --> 00:13:50,520 Speaker 3: We've got the birthright citizenship question, which is going to 253 00:13:50,520 --> 00:13:53,439 Speaker 3: be really significant. How do we interpret the Fourteenth Amendment? 254 00:13:53,520 --> 00:13:56,680 Speaker 3: How do we understand the notion of birthright citizenship because 255 00:13:56,760 --> 00:13:59,360 Speaker 3: it says that everyone who's born here, who's in the 256 00:13:59,400 --> 00:14:02,480 Speaker 3: United States subject to the jurisdics of the laws. The 257 00:14:02,520 --> 00:14:05,600 Speaker 3: Court has dealt with that in some ways, but never 258 00:14:05,800 --> 00:14:08,559 Speaker 3: as directly as they're going to hear in terms of 259 00:14:08,920 --> 00:14:13,000 Speaker 3: are you fall under birthright citizenship under the Constitution if 260 00:14:13,000 --> 00:14:15,160 Speaker 3: you are here illegally, if you are here in a 261 00:14:15,200 --> 00:14:18,600 Speaker 3: transient fashion, not someone who's actually a permanent resident here. 262 00:14:18,760 --> 00:14:21,920 Speaker 3: So that's going to be a really important thing. Women sports, 263 00:14:21,960 --> 00:14:24,880 Speaker 3: as you alluded to, was discussed. There's some really important 264 00:14:24,920 --> 00:14:30,000 Speaker 3: election law cases coming up dealing with redistricting in other 265 00:14:30,120 --> 00:14:33,760 Speaker 3: areas and campaign finance laws. Boy, it's going to be 266 00:14:33,800 --> 00:14:37,239 Speaker 3: a huge, huge Supreme Court term. 267 00:14:37,000 --> 00:14:42,400 Speaker 1: Or the birthright citizenship challenge. How do you see that going? 268 00:14:43,360 --> 00:14:45,480 Speaker 1: And obviously that's very significant. 269 00:14:45,920 --> 00:14:48,960 Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, Well, we're still in the early stages of this. 270 00:14:49,240 --> 00:14:52,480 Speaker 3: They have petitioned to have the Court hearing the case. 271 00:14:52,640 --> 00:14:54,600 Speaker 3: I think it's one they simply are going to have 272 00:14:54,680 --> 00:14:58,360 Speaker 3: to address that issue with the last time they took 273 00:14:58,880 --> 00:15:01,560 Speaker 3: a case dealing with birth citizenship, they really addressed it 274 00:15:01,640 --> 00:15:04,560 Speaker 3: on the level of the universal adjunctions. We had judges 275 00:15:04,720 --> 00:15:06,880 Speaker 3: that were just saying, well, here's one case in this 276 00:15:06,920 --> 00:15:08,960 Speaker 3: one state, but we're going to forbid the gout federal 277 00:15:09,000 --> 00:15:13,600 Speaker 3: government from carrying their policy out anywhere nationwide, really worldwide anywhere. 278 00:15:13,640 --> 00:15:15,880 Speaker 3: And the court didn't get all the way in the 279 00:15:15,960 --> 00:15:19,440 Speaker 3: question of ken President Trump make this birthright citizenship clause. 280 00:15:19,440 --> 00:15:21,600 Speaker 3: They just said, look, you can't forbid him from even 281 00:15:21,680 --> 00:15:25,080 Speaker 3: taking any steps anywhere in the country. So now it's 282 00:15:25,120 --> 00:15:27,880 Speaker 3: coming back on the merits. As we say, looking at 283 00:15:27,920 --> 00:15:30,480 Speaker 3: this question, I think it's a lot harder question than 284 00:15:30,520 --> 00:15:33,160 Speaker 3: a lot of people assumed for many years. I think 285 00:15:33,200 --> 00:15:35,640 Speaker 3: a lot of us just run along going, oh, yeah, 286 00:15:35,720 --> 00:15:37,800 Speaker 3: everyone who's born here automatically. But then when you look 287 00:15:37,840 --> 00:15:40,360 Speaker 3: at the text more closely, when you look at the history, 288 00:15:40,880 --> 00:15:43,080 Speaker 3: I think it's going to be a real battle of 289 00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:45,840 Speaker 3: the historians in a way, because what we need to 290 00:15:45,840 --> 00:15:48,280 Speaker 3: look at when we're looking at a constitutional provision isn't 291 00:15:48,720 --> 00:15:50,720 Speaker 3: what do I read these words in twenty twenty six 292 00:15:50,760 --> 00:15:52,720 Speaker 3: and think they need today? But what did the people 293 00:15:52,760 --> 00:15:56,720 Speaker 3: in eighteen sixty five, whenever a particular text was passed, 294 00:15:56,720 --> 00:15:59,440 Speaker 3: what did they think it meant? Because it's not going 295 00:15:59,480 --> 00:16:01,680 Speaker 3: to be fair if I pass a law today and 296 00:16:01,680 --> 00:16:03,200 Speaker 3: a one hundred years from now, someone says, well, this 297 00:16:03,240 --> 00:16:06,080 Speaker 3: word now means something different. That's not representative government anymore, 298 00:16:06,080 --> 00:16:08,880 Speaker 3: because I didn't. It's not what I decided on. And 299 00:16:09,160 --> 00:16:11,240 Speaker 3: so we need to make sure that we read the 300 00:16:11,280 --> 00:16:14,120 Speaker 3: fourteenth Amendment as it was understood at the time. And 301 00:16:14,200 --> 00:16:18,160 Speaker 3: there's some there's some strong historical arguments really on both 302 00:16:18,200 --> 00:16:20,760 Speaker 3: sides of was this actually we know it was intended 303 00:16:20,800 --> 00:16:24,680 Speaker 3: to give citizenship to the children of the freed slaves. 304 00:16:24,680 --> 00:16:27,760 Speaker 3: That was the clear purpose of that. Absolutely, that's included. 305 00:16:28,120 --> 00:16:31,200 Speaker 3: Beyond that, we also have later court cases saying, you know, 306 00:16:31,200 --> 00:16:34,280 Speaker 3: if you're a legal permanent resident here you and you 307 00:16:34,360 --> 00:16:36,560 Speaker 3: have children, even if you're not a citizen yourself, but 308 00:16:36,600 --> 00:16:39,600 Speaker 3: you're living here permanently in a legal fashion, Yes, that 309 00:16:39,640 --> 00:16:42,680 Speaker 3: conveys citizenship on that. But it's never been understood that 310 00:16:42,880 --> 00:16:45,880 Speaker 3: someone who, say, the child of a diplomat is born here, 311 00:16:45,880 --> 00:16:48,000 Speaker 3: maybe lived his whole life here, but doesn't matter his 312 00:16:48,080 --> 00:16:51,960 Speaker 3: father's you know, the ambassador from China, he's not an 313 00:16:51,960 --> 00:16:55,240 Speaker 3: have American citizenship. If someone's an invading army and they 314 00:16:55,320 --> 00:16:57,440 Speaker 3: have they bring a pregnant one with them for whatever reason, 315 00:16:57,640 --> 00:17:00,720 Speaker 3: she gives birth, not a not an mama consitizens. So 316 00:17:00,920 --> 00:17:03,400 Speaker 3: we've always understood there's some things that are clearly in 317 00:17:03,440 --> 00:17:05,160 Speaker 3: and some things that are clearly out. But I don't 318 00:17:05,160 --> 00:17:07,639 Speaker 3: think we've had a chance to hear back from the 319 00:17:07,680 --> 00:17:10,919 Speaker 3: court on the final answer of Okay, what happens for 320 00:17:11,000 --> 00:17:15,040 Speaker 3: this huge millions of people interim group now where we 321 00:17:15,119 --> 00:17:18,600 Speaker 3: have so many illegal immigrants and people who are engaged 322 00:17:18,600 --> 00:17:22,399 Speaker 3: in birth tourism and other transient visitors to the country, 323 00:17:22,440 --> 00:17:24,680 Speaker 3: even was that really the understanding of the fourteenth Amendment 324 00:17:24,720 --> 00:17:27,000 Speaker 3: that they would all be automatically conferred citizenship. 325 00:17:27,760 --> 00:17:30,320 Speaker 1: I feel like the Lisa Cook case is interesting too, 326 00:17:30,960 --> 00:17:34,399 Speaker 1: with President Trump firing her from the Federal Reserve Board 327 00:17:35,240 --> 00:17:39,040 Speaker 1: because you can't fire for cause, but four cause has 328 00:17:39,080 --> 00:17:44,120 Speaker 1: been untested and it's undetermined, and so it's like, where 329 00:17:44,160 --> 00:17:46,439 Speaker 1: does that go, right, how do they determine that? 330 00:17:46,800 --> 00:17:48,600 Speaker 3: Yeah, that's going to be an interesting case because in 331 00:17:48,640 --> 00:17:51,359 Speaker 3: some ways it's similar to the Slaughter case that I 332 00:17:51,400 --> 00:17:54,800 Speaker 3: alluded to earlier, where it's just his ability to fire 333 00:17:55,320 --> 00:17:59,119 Speaker 3: high level executive branch officials just across the board without cause. 334 00:17:59,400 --> 00:18:01,080 Speaker 3: And I think there's from court's going to say, yeah, 335 00:18:01,119 --> 00:18:03,520 Speaker 3: there's certain officials you could definitely even fire without even 336 00:18:03,560 --> 00:18:06,879 Speaker 3: having cause the Federal Reserve. From the arguments that we 337 00:18:06,920 --> 00:18:09,440 Speaker 3: heard a few weeks ago, the court seems like it 338 00:18:09,560 --> 00:18:11,520 Speaker 3: does want to treat it differently than a lot of 339 00:18:11,560 --> 00:18:17,680 Speaker 3: these other federal agencies. And it's unclear exactly how that case, 340 00:18:17,720 --> 00:18:19,760 Speaker 3: in my mind, is going to shake out. In this case, 341 00:18:19,800 --> 00:18:22,359 Speaker 3: the President's not saying I can just fire Lisa Cook 342 00:18:22,400 --> 00:18:24,200 Speaker 3: for any reason I feel like, and he's saying, there 343 00:18:24,240 --> 00:18:27,000 Speaker 3: is cause she lied on these mortgage documents that goes 344 00:18:27,119 --> 00:18:30,440 Speaker 3: to the actual issues that's she would be dealing with 345 00:18:30,520 --> 00:18:31,960 Speaker 3: at the FED, And so we want to make sure 346 00:18:32,000 --> 00:18:34,280 Speaker 3: these people are going to be people who are upright 347 00:18:34,320 --> 00:18:37,320 Speaker 3: and are not committing fraud in any way. I think 348 00:18:37,359 --> 00:18:39,400 Speaker 3: it's possible the Supreme Court's going to try to chart 349 00:18:39,400 --> 00:18:41,080 Speaker 3: a middle path that says we're going to leave in 350 00:18:41,080 --> 00:18:43,040 Speaker 3: place the idea that you have to have some kind 351 00:18:43,119 --> 00:18:46,480 Speaker 3: of cause to fire someone from the FED. But I 352 00:18:46,520 --> 00:18:49,800 Speaker 3: think the big question is how much what kind of 353 00:18:49,840 --> 00:18:51,480 Speaker 3: cause do you need? Is this going to be close enough? 354 00:18:51,480 --> 00:18:53,200 Speaker 3: How much are Court's going to look into this is 355 00:18:53,720 --> 00:18:55,479 Speaker 3: a good reason, this is a bad reason, and how 356 00:18:55,560 --> 00:18:59,959 Speaker 3: much notice an opportunity to respond then to someone like 357 00:19:00,240 --> 00:19:02,600 Speaker 3: Lisa Cook get to say, hey, wait, no, that was 358 00:19:03,080 --> 00:19:05,640 Speaker 3: a typo. I didn't make this false claim or whatever 359 00:19:05,720 --> 00:19:08,320 Speaker 3: whatever they want to say to defend themselves if they're 360 00:19:08,320 --> 00:19:09,480 Speaker 3: being fired for cause. 361 00:19:10,240 --> 00:19:14,560 Speaker 1: And the transgrender for the sportspan that they're looking at. 362 00:19:14,800 --> 00:19:18,800 Speaker 1: What it West Virginia and versus Jay and similar cases. 363 00:19:19,000 --> 00:19:21,840 Speaker 1: What are a broader because obviously, you know this is 364 00:19:21,880 --> 00:19:24,639 Speaker 1: dealing specifically with men and women's sports. But what are 365 00:19:24,640 --> 00:19:28,440 Speaker 1: the broader implications as a result of you know, we 366 00:19:28,480 --> 00:19:30,920 Speaker 1: get a narrow rolling, a broad rolling. What are sort 367 00:19:30,920 --> 00:19:32,240 Speaker 1: of the broader implications here? 368 00:19:32,680 --> 00:19:35,720 Speaker 3: Yeah, well, so the two states that are directly involved 369 00:19:35,760 --> 00:19:37,360 Speaker 3: in this case you mentioned West Virgina and the other 370 00:19:37,359 --> 00:19:39,840 Speaker 3: one is in Idaho. But this is a case where 371 00:19:39,920 --> 00:19:43,720 Speaker 3: twenty seven different states have laws or policies in the 372 00:19:43,760 --> 00:19:47,520 Speaker 3: book that say, in women's sports only actual biological women 373 00:19:47,560 --> 00:19:50,800 Speaker 3: can compete. And we all understand intuitively why that is. 374 00:19:50,800 --> 00:19:53,520 Speaker 3: It's because there are biological differences to how men and 375 00:19:53,560 --> 00:19:56,520 Speaker 3: women perform on the sports field. They want to make 376 00:19:56,520 --> 00:20:00,359 Speaker 3: sure women have a fair shake at a very minimum. Obviously, 377 00:20:00,400 --> 00:20:02,960 Speaker 3: this is going to affect all of those the majority 378 00:20:02,960 --> 00:20:06,440 Speaker 3: of states in the country and by extension, the majority 379 00:20:06,480 --> 00:20:09,440 Speaker 3: of I would say that I don't know what percentage 380 00:20:09,440 --> 00:20:11,520 Speaker 3: of the American populations in those twenty seven states, but 381 00:20:12,359 --> 00:20:15,720 Speaker 3: women across the country and young women who are athletes 382 00:20:15,760 --> 00:20:17,480 Speaker 3: and want to make sure that they have a fair 383 00:20:17,520 --> 00:20:21,920 Speaker 3: opportunity to compete in sports. But it does go broader 384 00:20:21,920 --> 00:20:27,919 Speaker 3: because if you take the arguments that the left is 385 00:20:27,920 --> 00:20:30,159 Speaker 3: making in this case, basically the people who want to 386 00:20:30,400 --> 00:20:34,000 Speaker 3: open up women's sports to even biological men go it's 387 00:20:34,119 --> 00:20:36,680 Speaker 3: very hard to draw lines to say, first of all, 388 00:20:36,800 --> 00:20:38,840 Speaker 3: how could you draw a line that only says men 389 00:20:38,880 --> 00:20:41,879 Speaker 3: who identify as women can play in these sports? That 390 00:20:41,960 --> 00:20:44,000 Speaker 3: was one of the questions that came up in the arguments. 391 00:20:44,200 --> 00:20:47,159 Speaker 3: Aren't you then making a distinction based on transgender status? 392 00:20:47,160 --> 00:20:51,000 Speaker 3: You'd say that biological men who think their men can't 393 00:20:51,080 --> 00:20:53,200 Speaker 3: compete in these sports with biological men who think they're 394 00:20:53,200 --> 00:20:56,760 Speaker 3: women can. That is actually making a distinction based on 395 00:20:56,800 --> 00:21:01,119 Speaker 3: transgender status. But depending on how broadly the court adopted 396 00:21:01,119 --> 00:21:03,679 Speaker 3: these arguments, you could imagine that could have a major 397 00:21:03,760 --> 00:21:07,600 Speaker 3: impact on all sorts of laws having to do with 398 00:21:07,800 --> 00:21:11,000 Speaker 3: just separate bathroom and locker room facilities. Any kind of 399 00:21:11,119 --> 00:21:14,200 Speaker 3: distinction but based on sex then is kind of up 400 00:21:14,200 --> 00:21:18,320 Speaker 3: for grabs, and potentially men would be then allowed to 401 00:21:18,440 --> 00:21:23,159 Speaker 3: be in women's spaces and in women's organizations that heretofore 402 00:21:23,320 --> 00:21:26,639 Speaker 3: have been able to be separate under federal law and 403 00:21:26,720 --> 00:21:27,440 Speaker 3: under state law. 404 00:21:28,240 --> 00:21:31,359 Speaker 1: You know, look at the voting rights ACKed. You know, 405 00:21:31,400 --> 00:21:34,199 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court's looking at that in Louisiana. 406 00:21:36,240 --> 00:21:36,520 Speaker 2: You know. 407 00:21:38,760 --> 00:21:41,239 Speaker 1: How much of it, how many maps would change in 408 00:21:41,280 --> 00:21:44,840 Speaker 1: the country as a result of what the Supreme Court 409 00:21:44,880 --> 00:21:45,480 Speaker 1: decides on this. 410 00:21:46,600 --> 00:21:48,840 Speaker 3: You know, that's all up to the Supreme Court as 411 00:21:48,840 --> 00:21:50,679 Speaker 3: few as one. It could be that it decides the 412 00:21:50,680 --> 00:21:54,120 Speaker 3: case in such a narrow way that really only Louisiana 413 00:21:54,280 --> 00:21:57,000 Speaker 3: is affected. And historically that's kind of been the way 414 00:21:57,000 --> 00:21:59,200 Speaker 3: the Court has done it. It's often decided these cases 415 00:21:59,480 --> 00:22:02,880 Speaker 3: and bases that are so tied up with the facts 416 00:22:02,880 --> 00:22:06,360 Speaker 3: of the case that it's very hard for other courts 417 00:22:06,520 --> 00:22:09,080 Speaker 3: to then extrapolate and say, all right, now I'm looking 418 00:22:09,119 --> 00:22:10,879 Speaker 3: at a case into Alabama. Now I'm looking at a 419 00:22:10,920 --> 00:22:12,879 Speaker 3: case in Florida. Now I'm looking at a case of Texas. 420 00:22:12,880 --> 00:22:15,440 Speaker 3: How do I apply this law even just to these 421 00:22:15,480 --> 00:22:19,040 Speaker 3: other other similar states. So if the Court, I'm hoping, 422 00:22:19,280 --> 00:22:20,720 Speaker 3: and I think a lot of people see that the 423 00:22:20,760 --> 00:22:22,879 Speaker 3: fact that the Court was supposed to decide that this 424 00:22:22,920 --> 00:22:26,879 Speaker 3: case last spring, decided to hold it over another to 425 00:22:26,960 --> 00:22:29,240 Speaker 3: another term. Hear it again this year. I think a 426 00:22:29,240 --> 00:22:30,720 Speaker 3: lot of people see that as a sign that they're 427 00:22:30,720 --> 00:22:33,080 Speaker 3: going to make a broader decision, and so that in 428 00:22:33,119 --> 00:22:35,320 Speaker 3: that case, that could this could be a decision that 429 00:22:35,400 --> 00:22:38,440 Speaker 3: has a much broader impact. States right now are in 430 00:22:38,520 --> 00:22:40,480 Speaker 3: a kind of damned if you do, damned if you 431 00:22:40,520 --> 00:22:43,760 Speaker 3: don't situation because they have laws on one side telling 432 00:22:43,800 --> 00:22:46,680 Speaker 3: them if you don't have a certain number of you 433 00:22:46,720 --> 00:22:48,639 Speaker 3: know this, the Voting Rights Act says you can't be 434 00:22:48,680 --> 00:22:50,840 Speaker 3: discriminating in the basis of race. Great, I don't think that, 435 00:22:51,160 --> 00:22:52,480 Speaker 3: thank god. I think there's not a lot of states 436 00:22:52,480 --> 00:22:54,320 Speaker 3: who are actively trying to discriminate in the basis of 437 00:22:54,400 --> 00:22:57,560 Speaker 3: race right now. But people have interpreted that then to say, well, 438 00:22:57,600 --> 00:22:59,560 Speaker 3: you have to have a certain of a minority majority 439 00:22:59,600 --> 00:23:02,560 Speaker 3: minority districts, and then the states will say, okay, well, 440 00:23:02,600 --> 00:23:07,280 Speaker 3: if we're drawing our district lines based on looking at race, 441 00:23:07,440 --> 00:23:10,120 Speaker 3: then on the other side, we run into the fourteenth 442 00:23:10,119 --> 00:23:13,040 Speaker 3: Amendment or the fifteenth mem How are we not discriminating 443 00:23:13,080 --> 00:23:15,399 Speaker 3: on the basis of race? If we're drawing our lines 444 00:23:15,440 --> 00:23:16,960 Speaker 3: on the basis of race, and so you might have 445 00:23:17,000 --> 00:23:20,159 Speaker 3: the same map that one court says, well, this map 446 00:23:20,320 --> 00:23:22,879 Speaker 3: is bad because it looks not enough at race and 447 00:23:22,920 --> 00:23:26,400 Speaker 3: it's not drawing lines in a race conscious way enough, 448 00:23:26,440 --> 00:23:28,560 Speaker 3: and another court looks at it says, no, this map 449 00:23:28,600 --> 00:23:32,040 Speaker 3: is bad because it's making too much consideration of race, 450 00:23:32,160 --> 00:23:34,960 Speaker 3: so that it's violating the Constitution over here. I'm hoping 451 00:23:35,000 --> 00:23:38,240 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court comes up with some kind of way 452 00:23:38,280 --> 00:23:41,880 Speaker 3: to break that a really difficult buying that states find 453 00:23:41,920 --> 00:23:44,000 Speaker 3: themselves in right now. And I think that could have 454 00:23:44,040 --> 00:23:47,640 Speaker 3: a huge impact across the country because states really need 455 00:23:47,680 --> 00:23:50,040 Speaker 3: some guidance so they understand how to go forward. And 456 00:23:50,080 --> 00:23:53,200 Speaker 3: it's not just going to be for every time their redistrict. 457 00:23:53,240 --> 00:23:55,720 Speaker 3: It's just years and years of litigation. It might be 458 00:23:55,760 --> 00:23:58,840 Speaker 3: bad for election lawyers if they can't keep on bringing 459 00:23:58,960 --> 00:24:02,040 Speaker 3: indefinite numbers of lawsuits, but I think it would be 460 00:24:02,080 --> 00:24:03,240 Speaker 3: really good for the country. 461 00:24:03,960 --> 00:24:06,080 Speaker 1: Now, before we go, do you think our Supreme Court 462 00:24:06,240 --> 00:24:09,359 Speaker 1: justice is scared to do their job these days? You know, 463 00:24:09,400 --> 00:24:14,440 Speaker 1: we've seen assassination attempts against some of them, particularly britt Kavanaugh. 464 00:24:14,560 --> 00:24:19,440 Speaker 1: Obviously he faced a character assassination during his confirmation process. 465 00:24:20,720 --> 00:24:23,360 Speaker 1: You know, we're living in really heightened times, and these 466 00:24:23,400 --> 00:24:25,560 Speaker 1: are really big cases that. 467 00:24:26,320 --> 00:24:27,680 Speaker 2: Really transformed the country. 468 00:24:29,440 --> 00:24:31,359 Speaker 1: How much of impact do you think that has on 469 00:24:31,680 --> 00:24:34,000 Speaker 1: the decision making and some of these rulings. 470 00:24:34,520 --> 00:24:37,479 Speaker 3: Well, I think it's a real factor in terms of 471 00:24:37,520 --> 00:24:41,480 Speaker 3: the justices, something that's on the justice's minds. And thankfully 472 00:24:41,520 --> 00:24:44,280 Speaker 3: they do have good security because remember we know it's 473 00:24:44,320 --> 00:24:48,200 Speaker 3: not just Justice Kavanaugh who was targeted by the assassin. 474 00:24:48,640 --> 00:24:51,720 Speaker 3: It was multiple justices that he was hoping to take out, 475 00:24:52,280 --> 00:24:55,840 Speaker 3: and unfortunately we had a really irresponsible judge that gave 476 00:24:55,880 --> 00:25:00,720 Speaker 3: him a pitifly low sentence for this tempted you know, 477 00:25:01,240 --> 00:25:04,640 Speaker 3: up to four attempted murders there, so that was really shocking. 478 00:25:04,840 --> 00:25:08,280 Speaker 3: I do think that the marshals have really upped their 479 00:25:08,280 --> 00:25:11,320 Speaker 3: game in terms of protecting Supreme Court justices. But remember 480 00:25:11,440 --> 00:25:13,879 Speaker 3: there are so many other federal judges who are also 481 00:25:13,960 --> 00:25:17,959 Speaker 3: getting threats, and not everyone I think has the level 482 00:25:18,160 --> 00:25:21,639 Speaker 3: of marshal coverage that the Supreme Court justices do. So 483 00:25:21,680 --> 00:25:24,040 Speaker 3: I hope that it's not affecting their decisions. I do 484 00:25:24,040 --> 00:25:26,399 Speaker 3: think they make every effort not to let that affect 485 00:25:26,400 --> 00:25:29,840 Speaker 3: their decisions, but I hate that they have to worry 486 00:25:29,840 --> 00:25:31,240 Speaker 3: about it. They have to worry about going to a 487 00:25:31,280 --> 00:25:33,119 Speaker 3: restaurant that they have to worry about being able to 488 00:25:33,160 --> 00:25:36,080 Speaker 3: be seen in public and having their houses docked. That's 489 00:25:36,560 --> 00:25:40,040 Speaker 3: really inappropriate having their We've had people broadcasting, you know, 490 00:25:40,040 --> 00:25:42,199 Speaker 3: where different justices go to church, where their kids go 491 00:25:42,240 --> 00:25:44,840 Speaker 3: to school. This should not be the price of being 492 00:25:44,840 --> 00:25:46,159 Speaker 3: able to be a public servant. 493 00:25:47,320 --> 00:25:49,800 Speaker 2: I agree with that. It's a strange world we live in. 494 00:25:49,880 --> 00:25:52,480 Speaker 1: Carrie Sabrino, appreciate you making the time, thanks for coming 495 00:25:52,480 --> 00:25:52,920 Speaker 1: on the show. 496 00:25:53,160 --> 00:25:56,200 Speaker 2: Thank you Les carrieus Evarino. Appreciate her for making the 497 00:25:56,240 --> 00:25:57,080 Speaker 2: time to come on the show. 498 00:25:57,119 --> 00:25:59,880 Speaker 1: Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday. 499 00:26:00,040 --> 00:26:01,040 Speaker 2: You can listen throughout the week. 500 00:26:01,080 --> 00:26:02,960 Speaker 1: I also want to thank John Cassio, my producer, for 501 00:26:03,000 --> 00:26:03,840 Speaker 1: putting the show together. 502 00:26:04,040 --> 00:26:04,760 Speaker 2: Until next time.