Speaker 1: You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. Team Buck, Welcome to the
Speaker 1: Freedom Hut Thursday, June thirtieth edition of the program. We
Speaker 1: got two Supreme Court decisions that came down today, one
Speaker 1: having to do with remained in Mexico at the border,
Speaker 1: the other having to do with the EPA. So it's
Speaker 1: bad news, good news, bad news on the border and
Speaker 1: the continued lawlessest of the Bide administration will be what
Speaker 1: we face now. And then good news when it comes
Speaker 1: to the EPA and creating some roadblocks within the administrative
Speaker 1: state to harassing us to save the environment or whatever.
Speaker 1: Plus a horrific shooting in New York City getting more
Speaker 1: attention from everybody now for the crime issues that this
Speaker 1: city faces, and also all cities across the country with
Speaker 1: Democrats in control face. We will discuss all of it.
Speaker 1: Every want to invest in real estate, but did another
Speaker 1: time or expertise to do it on your own. That's
Speaker 1: how I felt until I met my friends at done
Speaker 1: for your real estate? Now I'm a real estate investor.
Speaker 1: They turned me into a real estate investor. I've bought
Speaker 1: multiple homes we've done for your real estate and it's
Speaker 1: worked out so well for me already. I've seen considerable,
Speaker 1: considerable value increases in those homes. Only been a couple
Speaker 1: of years and I'm getting free cash flow every month.
Speaker 1: It's a great system. It's stable, it's long term, it's proven.
Speaker 1: Check them out yourself. They'll talk you through every take
Speaker 1: you through every step of the process too, from figuring
Speaker 1: out what part of the country you want to be
Speaker 1: investing in the real estate market, getting you a broker,
Speaker 1: a mortgage, a management company, and a tenant in play,
Speaker 1: step by step by step it works. Gonna done for
Speaker 1: you Buck dot com. To see how this works. That's
Speaker 1: done for you, Buck dot Com again, done for you,
Speaker 1: Buck dot Com. I we'll start with the the bad
Speaker 1: news on the Supreme Court front. I thought we were
Speaker 1: going to get two wins today. I'm sorry that that
Speaker 1: is not the case. I was hoping didn't work out
Speaker 1: that way. So here's the situation. The Biden administration came
Speaker 1: in and said we're going to end the Remain in
Speaker 1: Mexico program. You remember, Remain in Mexico was what the
Speaker 1: Trump administration set up when there were those migrant surges,
Speaker 1: illegal immigrants coming into the country, and what Remain in
Speaker 1: Mexico says is you can come to America enter illegally
Speaker 1: claim what they called defensive asylum, meaning that you say, okay, fine,
Speaker 1: I shouldn't be here, but I need asylum, I need
Speaker 1: your help, and then you're supposed to have your claim adjudicated,
Speaker 1: meaning is it true, is it valid? Are you really
Speaker 1: an asylum seeker? Are you just skipping the immigration line,
Speaker 1: breaking the law in the process. Remain in Mexico says, okay,
Speaker 1: you get to stay in Mexico while you wait for
Speaker 1: your turn to be called for your asylum hearing in America.
Speaker 1: Totally fair due process for illegal migrants under the circumstances.
Speaker 1: Of course, they don't want that because they aren't legitimate
Speaker 1: asylum seekers, and they usually under the Biden administration, are
Speaker 1: just released into the US interior, never to be seen
Speaker 1: or heard from again by the federal government more than
Speaker 1: half of cases, and effectively they're good to go. They
Speaker 1: are now getting to live in America. They've skipped the
Speaker 1: whole immigration system. And this is why we have a
Speaker 1: couple one hundred thousand illegal migrants a month coming into
Speaker 1: this country, right, That's why the numbers are so high.
Speaker 1: So Missouri and Texas challenge the Biden administration ending the
Speaker 1: Remain in Mexico program on the grounds that it violated
Speaker 1: the Immigration and Naturalization Act and the Administrative Procedure Act,
Speaker 1: boiling down about a sixty page decision into a couple
Speaker 1: of minutes here I read it this morning. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of back and forth over over what the whether
Speaker 1: the administrative procedures were properly followed the Biden administration change
Speaker 1: during the initial the initial objection in the legal process
Speaker 1: by Missouri and Texas, at first they just said they
Speaker 1: weren't adding new people on the program. Then they said
Speaker 1: which essentially meant they weren't going to use the program,
Speaker 1: but it would still exist. And then they said, we're
Speaker 1: just going to scrap the program. So they changed the
Speaker 1: game to alter the way this would go through the courts.
Speaker 1: And basically it all comes down to the statute in
Speaker 1: the Immigration Naturalization Act about the wording which says, either
Speaker 1: you detain somebody who enters illegally or they're held in
Speaker 1: a or they may or shall be held. And that's
Speaker 1: what it all comes down to. In a third in
Speaker 1: a third party country pending adjudication, or they have to
Speaker 1: be removed to a third a third country. So the
Speaker 1: fi for decision came down unfortunately having on Roberts joined
Speaker 1: the Libs on this. I don't know. Roberts must be
Speaker 1: having having sad feelings and wants a nice word written
Speaker 1: about him in the New York Times, and so what
Speaker 1: they said is no, they are able to do this. Now.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna tell you this is a This is a
Speaker 1: close call from the statutory language perspective. I obviously think
Speaker 1: that Alito and Thomas and Gorsitch are correct and Amy
Speaker 1: Coney Barrett are correct in this, but it's it's not
Speaker 1: a totally cut dry It's not like overturning Roe v. Wade,
Speaker 1: which was illegal and ethical monstrosity. This one is kind
Speaker 1: of down in the weeds. But here's why it matters.
Speaker 1: The Biden administration now gets its way, which means scrapping
Speaker 1: or made in Mexico, which means that they are going
Speaker 1: to essentially ignore the law what it comes to expelling
Speaker 1: people who come into the country illegally and don't show
Speaker 1: up for their hearings. And they don't want this to change.
Speaker 1: They want this to be a situation of continued illegal
Speaker 1: immigration into the country. They want this to be a
Speaker 1: situation where you have people who are flooding over the border.
Speaker 1: And it's because the Democrats ideologically believe in this and
Speaker 1: also politically they think they will in the aggregate overall
Speaker 1: the long term, they will benefit from this mass illegal migration,
Speaker 1: which people keep saying, Oh, it's it's this is just
Speaker 1: about Latino or Hispanic illegal igration. That's not true. There
Speaker 1: are almost one hundred countries that have had four nationals
Speaker 1: who have been detained at the border for illegal entry.
Speaker 1: People are entering from Vietnam, people are entering from West Africa,
Speaker 1: people are entering from all over the planet basically, So
Speaker 1: that's that's another component of this. This is an open
Speaker 1: door into the country through illegal means. And they I
Speaker 1: didn't team doesn't want it to stop. So legal immigration
Speaker 1: is going to keep going exactly as it's not going
Speaker 1: to get any any better. The other decision, so that
Speaker 1: was the loss, but you should just know what happened there.
Speaker 1: The other decision that I think is important, well, it
Speaker 1: is important obviously is the EPA. And here's what happened there.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court has now the way that CNN writes this.
Speaker 1: For example, Supreme Court curbs EPA's ability to fight climate change.
Speaker 1: Turns out that's not actually what well. I don't believe
Speaker 1: the climate change is the threat that they think it is,
Speaker 1: so that's why I wouldn't have that as a headline.
Speaker 1: But here's the basics. So we're all on the same page.
Speaker 1: To regulate carbon emissions from existing power plants, the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court said, look, you can't do this. The ruling was
Speaker 1: six three. John Roberts actually wrote the conservative majority opinion.
Speaker 1: Three libs on the Court dissented. Roberts that quote, our
Speaker 1: president council skepticism towards EPA's claim that the law empowers
Speaker 1: it to devise carbon emission caps based on a generation
Speaker 1: shifting approach under our precedence, this is a major questions case.
Speaker 1: There's little reason I think Congress assigns such decisions to
Speaker 1: the agency. Essentially, this is saying, hey, these federal three
Speaker 1: letter agencies don't get to just make up laws and
Speaker 1: enforce them. Laws are written by Congress. So when you're
Speaker 1: going to be having a sweeping, a sweeping regulation like this,
Speaker 1: it should come from Congress, and it can't just be
Speaker 1: the administrative state deciding for itself that they can do this,
Speaker 1: and here you go. Here's you know, administrative law, by
Speaker 1: the way, is an awful thing, and the administrative state
Speaker 1: is the I think the biggest threat to Americans. Americans safety, health,
Speaker 1: and freedom from their own government in this country. COVID
Speaker 1: was an administrative state issue in so many ways. And
Speaker 1: the way they did it was the CDC was essentially
Speaker 1: delegated by the executive branch decision making authority that then
Speaker 1: the executive branch said, well, they're just advisory at the CDC,
Speaker 1: so it's not our fault. And the CDC said, well,
Speaker 1: we're just advisory. It's the executive branch. And you say, well,
Speaker 1: who do we hold responsible for these moronic fauci decisions?
Speaker 1: You know, who's actually supposed to be the one that
Speaker 1: we get angry when they're wrong on this stuff? Well,
Speaker 1: it's not clear. It's a big Kafka esque bureaucracy. Who
Speaker 1: do you go to complain to. Nobody knows and nobody cares.
Speaker 1: You know, are they going to ruin your business, They're
Speaker 1: going to destroy your freedom, They're gonna take away your
Speaker 1: right to breathe freely on an airplane. You name it
Speaker 1: so many things. The administrative state is a monstrosity and
Speaker 1: the most anti freedom, the most anti freedom threat we
Speaker 1: have from with in our own government. Other than the
Speaker 1: Kamis who have overrun the Democrat Party, they're bad too.
Speaker 1: If your job requires you to wear a suit and tie,
Speaker 1: you're gonna need a comfortable pair of dress shoes. Trust me,
Speaker 1: I've got the shoes and the brand name. It's Wolf
Speaker 1: and Shepherd. I owned three pairs of them. This is
Speaker 1: the dress shoe made and worn initially by athletes. Before it,
Speaker 1: guys like you and me made the discovery. I've been
Speaker 1: wearing Wolf and Shepherd shoes for years. They make you
Speaker 1: look slick, you look good, you look stylish, but your
Speaker 1: feet feel like they're wearing sneakers. So your feet are
Speaker 1: so comfortable, you're not gonna get tired. You're not gonna
Speaker 1: get blisters or have your toes getting pinched into some loafer.
Speaker 1: Wolf and Shepherd shoes are amazing. I've got three pairs.
Speaker 1: Whenever I've got to wear shoes that look nice, I
Speaker 1: wear Wolf and Shepherd. Can encourage you know, if you
Speaker 1: get a pair for yourself once they're a part of
Speaker 1: your wardrobe and routine. You're gonna feel the same way
Speaker 1: about them. I do better footwear for the workday. See
Speaker 1: what I'm talking about. Wolf and Shepherd dot com. Don't
Speaker 1: worry about a promo code. Just find what's right for
Speaker 1: you wolfin Shepherd dot com. That's Wolf and Shepherd H
Speaker 1: E P H E r d dot com. Go check
Speaker 1: it out today. So there was this heinous shooting on
Speaker 1: the Upper east Side. I grew up on the Upper
Speaker 1: east Side of Manhattan, so I know the neighborhood honestly,
Speaker 1: like the back of my hand. I know it very
Speaker 1: very well, and it's rare that you would have this,
Speaker 1: and it was according to police. Now, it was an
Speaker 1: execution style shooting and it had to do with a
Speaker 1: longstanding domestic abuser tracking down the mother of his child
Speaker 1: and killing her on the street. It's horrific And when
Speaker 1: you look at the background to this story, there were
Speaker 1: multiple attempts made to get the police involved previously that
Speaker 1: he was harassing, threatening, abusive, and the police didn't make
Speaker 1: any arrest. The mother of this woman who was murdered
Speaker 1: has said that she believes that the City of New
Speaker 1: York failed to protect her daughter. And this is really
Speaker 1: striking a chord because for so many people, New York
Speaker 1: has become more dangerous. There was just a story yesterday
Speaker 1: about restaurants and bars in what had traditionally been low
Speaker 1: crime areas having to hire not bouncers to check who's
Speaker 1: coming in, just security guard for the street outside of
Speaker 1: the establishment, because there are so many aggressive vagrants who
Speaker 1: often will who are often involved when there are assaults
Speaker 1: in those and there are people who are just praying
Speaker 1: on their fellow New Yorkers by robbing them, by attacking them.
Speaker 1: And everyone's really just sick of this in this city
Speaker 1: and in so many other cities across the country. And
Speaker 1: I'm here to tell you, we know what the template
Speaker 1: is to stop this. We know what the plan is.
Speaker 1: If they want to use the playbook, they could to
Speaker 1: bring down all of this crime, but they would have
Speaker 1: to go back on some very central Democrat ideas, namely
Speaker 1: the ending of mass incarceration, the abandonment of this notion
Speaker 1: that your first concern with law enforcement is systemic racism.
Speaker 1: All of these very central Democrat ideas, particularly aftermath of
Speaker 1: George Floyd's killing in the BLM movement and the Democrat
Speaker 1: Progressive Prosecutor project that came along with all this. They decided,
Speaker 1: it's very straightforward, let's make crime less illegal and let's punish.
Speaker 1: Let's punish criminals less and see what happens. Well, we've
Speaker 1: seen what happens. We are seeing what happens. And that's
Speaker 1: why this focus is tremendous. Focus they have on guns
Speaker 1: just goes to show you that they don't care what
Speaker 1: worked in the past, because it was about getting the
Speaker 1: criminals off the streets before. Eric Adams here is once
Speaker 1: he spoke about the shooting last night, the Mayor of
Speaker 1: New York. Here's what he says about the situation of
Speaker 1: targeting first and foremost firearm and it doesn't matter if
Speaker 1: you are on the Upper East Side or East New
Speaker 1: York Brooklyn. Of a saturation of guns endangerous people, they
Speaker 1: repeatedly leave our criminal justice system to continue actions like this.
Speaker 1: It is what's making the New York City Police Department
Speaker 1: and other law enforcement agencies here in New York, across
Speaker 1: the country and across the country of difficult to fight
Speaker 1: this issue. No, it's actually not the case that it's
Speaker 1: just the guns. There have been periods in New York
Speaker 1: where there are far more guns and there was not
Speaker 1: necessarily a lot more crime. If we're talking now, are
Speaker 1: we talking about legal or illegal guns? Well, what are
Speaker 1: we talking about? And they estimate, I believe that there
Speaker 1: are over a million firearms in New York City in circulation.
Speaker 1: Think about that, over a million just in New York
Speaker 1: City and they maybe take five to ten thousand a
Speaker 1: year off the streets in total. So there are hundreds
Speaker 1: of thousands of guns still in circulation, and you have
Speaker 1: a few hund hundred something like four hundred homicides it
Speaker 1: was four hundred and eighty eight in twenty twenty one,
Speaker 1: and you have a few thousand people who are shot.
Speaker 1: So look at the numbers, look at the math. Is
Speaker 1: it really possible that by focusing on the guns you're
Speaker 1: going to stop this? No, you've focused on the criminals.
Speaker 1: But that means Democrats need to stop with this soft
Speaker 1: on crime madness. Let's take back our cities. As if
Speaker 1: for the Buck Show at eighteen, thanks for rolling more
Speaker 1: Tomorrow She'll tie