1 00:00:00,520 --> 00:00:05,120 Speaker 1: Already, and this is the dais, This is the DAILI OS. 2 00:00:05,120 --> 00:00:16,279 Speaker 2: Oh, now it makes sense. Good morning, and welcome to 3 00:00:16,320 --> 00:00:19,320 Speaker 2: the Daily OS. It's Monday, the thirtieth of June. Happy 4 00:00:19,400 --> 00:00:21,720 Speaker 2: end of financial year. I'm Emma Gillespie. 5 00:00:21,760 --> 00:00:22,680 Speaker 1: I'm Sam Kaulowski. 6 00:00:23,360 --> 00:00:26,160 Speaker 2: A group of parents in the US state of Texas 7 00:00:26,160 --> 00:00:28,720 Speaker 2: have launched a lawsuit to stop the state government from 8 00:00:28,840 --> 00:00:33,080 Speaker 2: forcing all public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments, 9 00:00:33,520 --> 00:00:37,640 Speaker 2: a list of moral orders central to some religions. Texas 10 00:00:37,680 --> 00:00:41,320 Speaker 2: follows another state, Louisiana, in forcing teachers to hang up 11 00:00:41,360 --> 00:00:44,239 Speaker 2: a poster of the religious text after it passed the 12 00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:48,599 Speaker 2: law earlier this month. But as with Louisiana, parents are 13 00:00:48,680 --> 00:00:52,559 Speaker 2: fighting back. The Texas families involved in this fight are 14 00:00:52,600 --> 00:00:56,240 Speaker 2: mostly themselves Christian, but they argue the move is violating 15 00:00:56,280 --> 00:01:00,320 Speaker 2: their civil rights under the US Constitution, among other concerns, 16 00:01:00,720 --> 00:01:03,400 Speaker 2: all of which we are unpacking in today's Deep Dive. 17 00:01:07,600 --> 00:01:10,480 Speaker 1: Emma, I think the really interesting angle to this case 18 00:01:10,760 --> 00:01:13,279 Speaker 1: is that point you just said about the families mostly 19 00:01:13,319 --> 00:01:18,119 Speaker 1: themselves being Christian. The family suing Texas over the Ten 20 00:01:18,160 --> 00:01:21,800 Speaker 1: Commandments law are religious. Yep. Do we know what religions 21 00:01:21,840 --> 00:01:23,440 Speaker 1: exactly they belong? To yes. 22 00:01:23,560 --> 00:01:26,800 Speaker 2: So the key plaintiffs or complainants in this case are 23 00:01:27,160 --> 00:01:31,600 Speaker 2: mostly Protestants. So that's one of the main arms of Christianity. 24 00:01:31,840 --> 00:01:35,039 Speaker 2: And these Protestants are from different branches of the faith, 25 00:01:35,120 --> 00:01:38,480 Speaker 2: but we'll call them Protestants. And there are also parents 26 00:01:38,560 --> 00:01:41,520 Speaker 2: in the group who belong to an organization called the 27 00:01:41,640 --> 00:01:45,039 Speaker 2: Nation of Islam. Now, for clarity, this is not a 28 00:01:45,080 --> 00:01:50,120 Speaker 2: group affiliated with mainstream Islam. It actually has different beliefs 29 00:01:50,160 --> 00:01:53,280 Speaker 2: and is best known as a black supremacist or black 30 00:01:53,400 --> 00:01:57,040 Speaker 2: nationalist organization. You might have heard of it associated with 31 00:01:57,080 --> 00:02:00,360 Speaker 2: Malcolm X, a civil rights activist who was assassinated in 32 00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:04,120 Speaker 2: nineteen sixty five. Now, the Nation of Islam has been 33 00:02:04,160 --> 00:02:08,680 Speaker 2: classified as a hate group by organizations like the Southern 34 00:02:08,720 --> 00:02:12,520 Speaker 2: Poverty Law Center. It cites a lengthy history of anti 35 00:02:12,520 --> 00:02:16,600 Speaker 2: Semitism and homophobia by some of the group's leaders, including 36 00:02:16,600 --> 00:02:20,239 Speaker 2: its current leader Louis Farakhan. Now it might sound like 37 00:02:20,320 --> 00:02:22,839 Speaker 2: an unlikely pairing to be talking about legal action being 38 00:02:22,919 --> 00:02:26,880 Speaker 2: brought by this black nationalist group and Protestant groups together 39 00:02:27,480 --> 00:02:31,320 Speaker 2: in opposition, but that's exactly what's happened there together in 40 00:02:31,360 --> 00:02:35,600 Speaker 2: opposition against this Texas law that's just been signed. By 41 00:02:35,639 --> 00:02:38,119 Speaker 2: the state's governor, a man called Greg Abbott. 42 00:02:38,320 --> 00:02:40,239 Speaker 1: And let's spend a bit of time actually talking through 43 00:02:40,360 --> 00:02:42,160 Speaker 1: what that law is trying to do. 44 00:02:42,400 --> 00:02:45,600 Speaker 2: Yes, so it would mandate that every public school classroom, 45 00:02:45,760 --> 00:02:48,920 Speaker 2: whether primary or high school, would have to display a 46 00:02:49,040 --> 00:02:50,760 Speaker 2: version of the Ten Commandments. 47 00:02:50,960 --> 00:02:54,240 Speaker 1: And for just in case, we're kind of assuming that 48 00:02:54,280 --> 00:02:56,280 Speaker 1: you haven't been exposed to the Ten Commandments in some 49 00:02:56,320 --> 00:02:59,079 Speaker 1: sort of setting before, run me through exactly what we're 50 00:02:59,080 --> 00:02:59,720 Speaker 1: talking about here. 51 00:03:00,040 --> 00:03:02,920 Speaker 2: So the Ten Commandments are moral orders that are central 52 00:03:03,000 --> 00:03:07,160 Speaker 2: to Christianity and Judaism. They include these broad rules of 53 00:03:07,320 --> 00:03:11,280 Speaker 2: things like you know, don't murder, don't steal, thou shalt 54 00:03:11,280 --> 00:03:15,080 Speaker 2: not lie, as well as some more specific religious directions. 55 00:03:15,400 --> 00:03:19,760 Speaker 2: But many of the Commandments are interpreted differently between various 56 00:03:19,760 --> 00:03:21,040 Speaker 2: religions and religious groups. 57 00:03:21,080 --> 00:03:23,679 Speaker 1: And that's an interesting point, I guess. And is there 58 00:03:23,760 --> 00:03:27,040 Speaker 1: an indication in the current framework in Texas of what 59 00:03:27,240 --> 00:03:29,040 Speaker 1: versions are going to be up in classrooms. 60 00:03:29,200 --> 00:03:32,920 Speaker 2: Yes, So the legislation specifies that classrooms would have to 61 00:03:32,960 --> 00:03:35,839 Speaker 2: display a version of the Commandments closest to the one 62 00:03:35,880 --> 00:03:39,119 Speaker 2: printed in the King James Bible, now that was published 63 00:03:39,360 --> 00:03:43,720 Speaker 2: in the sixteen hundreds, which means these posters in classrooms 64 00:03:43,720 --> 00:03:47,800 Speaker 2: would display lines like thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, 65 00:03:47,840 --> 00:03:51,200 Speaker 2: nor his manservant, nor his maid servant, nor his cattle, 66 00:03:51,240 --> 00:03:54,480 Speaker 2: nor anything that is thy neighbors, and honor thy father 67 00:03:54,600 --> 00:03:59,120 Speaker 2: and thy mother. So that version is what passed the 68 00:03:59,160 --> 00:04:02,440 Speaker 2: Texas State Legislature, which is its version of Parliament in 69 00:04:02,560 --> 00:04:06,760 Speaker 2: late May, and Governor Abbotts signed that into law last week, 70 00:04:06,840 --> 00:04:09,600 Speaker 2: but it doesn't actually come into effect until the first 71 00:04:09,640 --> 00:04:10,280 Speaker 2: of September. 72 00:04:10,600 --> 00:04:13,240 Speaker 1: And is that just to allow time for you know, 73 00:04:13,640 --> 00:04:15,920 Speaker 1: the printing of the posters, I guess, and schools to 74 00:04:15,960 --> 00:04:19,080 Speaker 1: get organized and some of that kind of implementation time. 75 00:04:19,120 --> 00:04:22,479 Speaker 2: Well a little bit. It's for similar reasons to why 76 00:04:22,560 --> 00:04:25,200 Speaker 2: Australian governments often set a date into the future for 77 00:04:25,279 --> 00:04:28,960 Speaker 2: laws to come into effect. It allows time for stakeholders 78 00:04:28,960 --> 00:04:31,640 Speaker 2: to kind of get ready, but also for any adjustments 79 00:04:31,880 --> 00:04:34,960 Speaker 2: from the industries and groups that a law affects. So 80 00:04:35,120 --> 00:04:38,279 Speaker 2: in this case, this window has allowed for a legal 81 00:04:38,400 --> 00:04:41,600 Speaker 2: challenge to be posed by these groups who are against 82 00:04:41,720 --> 00:04:42,719 Speaker 2: displaying the posters. 83 00:04:43,040 --> 00:04:44,720 Speaker 1: I want to ask you a bit more about exactly 84 00:04:44,800 --> 00:04:46,920 Speaker 1: what they're arguing, but first let's hear a quick message 85 00:04:46,960 --> 00:04:52,559 Speaker 1: from our sponsor. Okay, So, just to recap, the state 86 00:04:52,600 --> 00:04:55,120 Speaker 1: of Texas has passed this law, which isn't coming into 87 00:04:55,160 --> 00:05:00,080 Speaker 1: effect until September, that mandates public school classrooms show a 88 00:05:00,160 --> 00:05:02,840 Speaker 1: version of the Ten Commandments on the wall. And in 89 00:05:02,839 --> 00:05:05,520 Speaker 1: response to that, a group of religious parents have launched 90 00:05:05,560 --> 00:05:08,599 Speaker 1: a lawsuit trying to stop it. Now, Emma, you mentioned 91 00:05:08,640 --> 00:05:10,560 Speaker 1: right at the top they were arguing that it went 92 00:05:10,760 --> 00:05:14,200 Speaker 1: against the US Constitution. What can you tell me about 93 00:05:14,240 --> 00:05:17,760 Speaker 1: the link between these posts in the classroom and the 94 00:05:17,800 --> 00:05:19,120 Speaker 1: core document to America. 95 00:05:19,320 --> 00:05:22,120 Speaker 2: Yes, so we hear a lot about the US Constitution. 96 00:05:22,360 --> 00:05:26,000 Speaker 2: This is the founding document of the United States. It 97 00:05:26,080 --> 00:05:31,039 Speaker 2: has seven original articles and twenty seven amendments. And this 98 00:05:31,160 --> 00:05:35,440 Speaker 2: case hinges on the First Amendment to the Constitution, which 99 00:05:35,600 --> 00:05:38,640 Speaker 2: is probably one that the average assie has heard about 100 00:05:38,720 --> 00:05:42,159 Speaker 2: before because it's the one that protects freedom of speech. 101 00:05:42,640 --> 00:05:45,120 Speaker 2: So the First Amendment, on top of freedom of speech, 102 00:05:45,279 --> 00:05:49,919 Speaker 2: also protects freedom of religion, and activist groups have said 103 00:05:50,040 --> 00:05:54,320 Speaker 2: it protects freedom from religion. Now, that's because it says 104 00:05:54,320 --> 00:05:58,320 Speaker 2: the US Congress can't make laws about religious establishments and 105 00:05:58,560 --> 00:06:01,279 Speaker 2: can't stop people from to seeing religion. 106 00:06:01,600 --> 00:06:03,080 Speaker 1: So I guess to put that in kind of the 107 00:06:03,080 --> 00:06:07,680 Speaker 1: classroom context. Y, it means that the First Amendment should 108 00:06:07,920 --> 00:06:10,719 Speaker 1: protect a kid who wants to practice their religion in 109 00:06:10,720 --> 00:06:14,400 Speaker 1: the classroom, but then also protect a kid who doesn't 110 00:06:14,440 --> 00:06:16,400 Speaker 1: want religion imposed on them. 111 00:06:16,520 --> 00:06:20,240 Speaker 2: Exactly, that's a classroom full of kids of different faiths. 112 00:06:20,760 --> 00:06:23,839 Speaker 2: So the parents argue that legal precedent is on their 113 00:06:23,920 --> 00:06:26,680 Speaker 2: side when it comes to their case for trying to 114 00:06:26,720 --> 00:06:30,160 Speaker 2: get this law abolished to avoid having these Commandments displayed. 115 00:06:30,600 --> 00:06:32,800 Speaker 2: They say that there has been a precedent for almost 116 00:06:32,839 --> 00:06:35,760 Speaker 2: half a century. It has been well settled that the 117 00:06:35,800 --> 00:06:39,560 Speaker 2: First Amendment forbids public schools from posting the Ten Commandments 118 00:06:39,640 --> 00:06:44,000 Speaker 2: in this manner. So they're citing there a nineteen eighty u. S. 119 00:06:44,000 --> 00:06:46,720 Speaker 2: Supreme Court decision in a case from the state of Kentucky, 120 00:06:47,040 --> 00:06:49,880 Speaker 2: which passed a law requiring a copy of Ten Commandments 121 00:06:50,000 --> 00:06:52,200 Speaker 2: be in every public school classroom. 122 00:06:52,279 --> 00:06:55,120 Speaker 1: So this isn't a new idea. It's come up before, exactly. 123 00:06:55,240 --> 00:06:57,600 Speaker 2: Not only has it come up before forty five years 124 00:06:57,600 --> 00:07:00,200 Speaker 2: ago in the eighties, it's actually come up a lot 125 00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:04,440 Speaker 2: more recently in the state of Louisiana. So last year 126 00:07:04,520 --> 00:07:08,160 Speaker 2: they passed a very similar law in June, and that 127 00:07:08,240 --> 00:07:12,120 Speaker 2: was very quickly blocked by a successful legal challenge, So 128 00:07:12,480 --> 00:07:14,960 Speaker 2: I'm sure for these families in Texas they are looking 129 00:07:15,000 --> 00:07:17,840 Speaker 2: closely at how that one unfolded for their own argument. 130 00:07:18,200 --> 00:07:21,280 Speaker 2: But the state's attorney general in Louisiana appealed and a 131 00:07:21,360 --> 00:07:24,520 Speaker 2: higher court blocked it again, So both times the courts 132 00:07:24,520 --> 00:07:29,119 Speaker 2: there found that the idea was unconstitutional. Once again, though 133 00:07:29,240 --> 00:07:32,680 Speaker 2: Louisiana is appealing and the attorney general said she was 134 00:07:32,720 --> 00:07:35,600 Speaker 2: prepared to take it all the way to the Supreme Court. 135 00:07:35,640 --> 00:07:38,520 Speaker 2: So there is an ongoing fight in terms of what 136 00:07:38,600 --> 00:07:43,200 Speaker 2: will happen in Louisiana with its plan to display these commandments. 137 00:07:42,800 --> 00:07:45,200 Speaker 1: Which is interesting when you consider the fact that that 138 00:07:45,400 --> 00:07:48,320 Speaker 1: challenge is on foot at the same time as Texas 139 00:07:48,480 --> 00:07:51,480 Speaker 1: is now trying to introduce this law. Why do you 140 00:07:51,520 --> 00:07:55,160 Speaker 1: think Texas lawmakers have tried to bring this to the 141 00:07:55,160 --> 00:07:57,440 Speaker 1: forefront even though it's failed in another state. 142 00:07:57,800 --> 00:07:59,160 Speaker 2: I think it has a lot to do with the 143 00:07:59,240 --> 00:08:02,800 Speaker 2: fact that legislation failing in a US state under the 144 00:08:02,880 --> 00:08:07,480 Speaker 2: current US Supreme Court doesn't necessarily mean that it's failed 145 00:08:07,520 --> 00:08:10,720 Speaker 2: for good. There are many appeal avenues and that is 146 00:08:10,760 --> 00:08:13,760 Speaker 2: ongoing in the Louisiana case, and we'll talk a little 147 00:08:13,800 --> 00:08:16,920 Speaker 2: bit more about the Supreme Court soon, but when we're 148 00:08:16,960 --> 00:08:21,520 Speaker 2: talking about Texas specifically, one of the lawmakers there, Candy Noble, 149 00:08:21,600 --> 00:08:23,480 Speaker 2: she was one of the people who brought the bill forward, 150 00:08:23,560 --> 00:08:26,800 Speaker 2: so has really been championing this. She said, quote, government 151 00:08:26,920 --> 00:08:29,400 Speaker 2: was not made for man. It was made by God 152 00:08:29,520 --> 00:08:31,880 Speaker 2: for man, and we would love for our school children 153 00:08:31,960 --> 00:08:35,079 Speaker 2: to understand that God gave us the right and privilege 154 00:08:35,120 --> 00:08:35,720 Speaker 2: of governing. 155 00:08:35,920 --> 00:08:38,680 Speaker 1: So I know the US does have a complicated court 156 00:08:38,760 --> 00:08:41,040 Speaker 1: system with a lot of steps, a lot of avenues 157 00:08:41,040 --> 00:08:43,640 Speaker 1: for appeal. We talk about different cases making their way 158 00:08:43,720 --> 00:08:47,600 Speaker 1: up the ladder on this podcast, everything from abortion laws 159 00:08:47,640 --> 00:08:50,240 Speaker 1: to citizenship. It all seems to kind of snake its 160 00:08:50,240 --> 00:08:53,079 Speaker 1: way through exactly. You said that in the Louisiana case 161 00:08:53,280 --> 00:08:55,880 Speaker 1: that the Attorney general there was prepared to take it 162 00:08:55,920 --> 00:08:58,640 Speaker 1: all the way to the Supreme Court. Is the same 163 00:08:58,760 --> 00:09:01,880 Speaker 1: kind of framing being used in Texas for this. 164 00:09:01,360 --> 00:09:04,320 Speaker 2: This is purely speculative, but I do think that that 165 00:09:04,559 --> 00:09:07,040 Speaker 2: is what will probably end up being the case for 166 00:09:07,160 --> 00:09:09,920 Speaker 2: Texas as well. It's something that we'll only be able 167 00:09:09,960 --> 00:09:12,360 Speaker 2: to prove or disprove with time, but it is possible 168 00:09:12,720 --> 00:09:15,160 Speaker 2: and we are certainly seeing that approach When it comes 169 00:09:15,160 --> 00:09:19,160 Speaker 2: to more conservative law making in the US States. And 170 00:09:19,440 --> 00:09:22,160 Speaker 2: the thing to know here about the U. S. Supreme Court, 171 00:09:22,200 --> 00:09:24,800 Speaker 2: this is the highest court in the US, is that 172 00:09:24,840 --> 00:09:28,880 Speaker 2: positions on its bench of justices come up very very rarely, 173 00:09:29,480 --> 00:09:32,479 Speaker 2: and line up changes when they do happen are determined 174 00:09:32,520 --> 00:09:34,880 Speaker 2: by the president of the day, so who is in 175 00:09:34,960 --> 00:09:39,240 Speaker 2: power at the time. So Supreme Court justices are appointed 176 00:09:39,240 --> 00:09:41,720 Speaker 2: to the bench for life. They can either choose to 177 00:09:41,760 --> 00:09:46,200 Speaker 2: retire and vacate their position on the bench, but many 178 00:09:46,240 --> 00:09:50,360 Speaker 2: of them will die as serving Supreme Court justices. And 179 00:09:50,400 --> 00:09:52,600 Speaker 2: when a justice passes away, if they haven't given up 180 00:09:52,600 --> 00:09:56,080 Speaker 2: their seat, the President nominates their replacement. Now the Senate 181 00:09:56,080 --> 00:09:58,720 Speaker 2: has to approve that replacement. But this has played out 182 00:09:58,800 --> 00:10:02,400 Speaker 2: in the first term Donald Trump's presidency when we saw 183 00:10:02,520 --> 00:10:07,640 Speaker 2: him replace some justices with more conservative leaning candidates. And 184 00:10:07,720 --> 00:10:11,840 Speaker 2: now of the nine justices on the Supreme Court, six 185 00:10:11,920 --> 00:10:17,240 Speaker 2: have been appointed by Republican presidents, so they lean more conservative. 186 00:10:17,520 --> 00:10:20,200 Speaker 2: So the Supreme Court sitting now in twenty twenty five, 187 00:10:20,400 --> 00:10:23,560 Speaker 2: this is the same Supreme Court that overturned the previous 188 00:10:23,559 --> 00:10:26,720 Speaker 2: decision in the Roe v. Wade case that returned the 189 00:10:26,800 --> 00:10:29,600 Speaker 2: right to make laws about abortion to US states removing 190 00:10:29,640 --> 00:10:34,320 Speaker 2: federal protections for abortions, and experts across the US in 191 00:10:34,520 --> 00:10:38,000 Speaker 2: the field of abortion activism, but political experts as well, 192 00:10:38,520 --> 00:10:42,520 Speaker 2: do attribute Roe v. Wade being overturned to the way 193 00:10:42,760 --> 00:10:46,320 Speaker 2: that the conservative justices dominate sure the Supreme Court. 194 00:10:46,360 --> 00:10:48,920 Speaker 1: The composition of the Court at the moment favors more 195 00:10:49,120 --> 00:10:53,640 Speaker 1: conservative leanings in cases. That's seen through an evaluation not 196 00:10:53,720 --> 00:10:56,480 Speaker 1: just of those really high profile cases, but every single 197 00:10:56,559 --> 00:10:58,520 Speaker 1: judgment as a whole when brought together. I've had some 198 00:10:58,559 --> 00:11:01,679 Speaker 1: really interesting pieces that kind of evaluates even the language 199 00:11:01,760 --> 00:11:04,040 Speaker 1: used in some of these judgments exactly. The other interesting 200 00:11:04,080 --> 00:11:06,840 Speaker 1: point here, Emma, is that the Supreme Court has a 201 00:11:06,840 --> 00:11:09,840 Speaker 1: limited amount of time to hear cases, so there's a 202 00:11:09,840 --> 00:11:13,080 Speaker 1: bit of a kind of priority list that gets moved 203 00:11:13,080 --> 00:11:15,760 Speaker 1: around a bit. The fact that two US states will 204 00:11:15,800 --> 00:11:19,360 Speaker 1: both have brought we suspect in Texas the same thing 205 00:11:19,400 --> 00:11:21,720 Speaker 1: that has happened in Louisiana, it will happen and it 206 00:11:21,720 --> 00:11:23,760 Speaker 1: will continue to get appealed. The fact that there's two 207 00:11:23,880 --> 00:11:26,000 Speaker 1: US states that bring that will actually give it more 208 00:11:26,000 --> 00:11:28,440 Speaker 1: strength to be heard at a Supreme Court level. So 209 00:11:28,440 --> 00:11:30,200 Speaker 1: there is a pretty good chance that we'll see this 210 00:11:30,559 --> 00:11:33,360 Speaker 1: being argued than the highest court in the country. Is 211 00:11:33,400 --> 00:11:36,640 Speaker 1: there a precedent though for the way that the Supreme 212 00:11:36,679 --> 00:11:39,760 Speaker 1: Court in the US receives these kind of religious matters. 213 00:11:39,920 --> 00:11:43,920 Speaker 2: Well, according to political analysts, yes there is. They say 214 00:11:43,920 --> 00:11:47,200 Speaker 2: the Court has cided with religious groups more often than 215 00:11:47,240 --> 00:11:51,079 Speaker 2: not in the last fifteen years, and that political environment 216 00:11:51,120 --> 00:11:54,320 Speaker 2: could also be the reason why these states are pushing 217 00:11:54,320 --> 00:11:58,200 Speaker 2: the Ten Commandments in the classroom. Now, as you've mentioned, 218 00:11:58,320 --> 00:12:01,760 Speaker 2: the timing, the strength of two states pushing for the 219 00:12:01,800 --> 00:12:05,520 Speaker 2: same thing, the current Supreme Court justice makeup that we're 220 00:12:05,559 --> 00:12:08,000 Speaker 2: dealing with, it is possible that all of these things 221 00:12:08,559 --> 00:12:12,320 Speaker 2: favor favor the states that want to legislate having these 222 00:12:12,360 --> 00:12:16,000 Speaker 2: posters in classrooms. We do know though nothing is coming 223 00:12:16,040 --> 00:12:18,920 Speaker 2: into effect straight away. Getting to the Supreme Court is 224 00:12:18,920 --> 00:12:22,200 Speaker 2: still several steps away, specially for Texas, where really the 225 00:12:22,240 --> 00:12:25,960 Speaker 2: ball has only just started to get rolling. So this 226 00:12:26,000 --> 00:12:28,880 Speaker 2: is all speculation, but I would be surprised if we 227 00:12:28,920 --> 00:12:31,440 Speaker 2: aren't back here maybe in six to twelve months talking 228 00:12:31,800 --> 00:12:35,360 Speaker 2: about a much bigger case in America's top court. 229 00:12:35,679 --> 00:12:37,920 Speaker 1: Of course, as with everything in US politics at the moment, 230 00:12:37,960 --> 00:12:41,200 Speaker 1: there's a level of unpredictability in speculation that can extend 231 00:12:41,240 --> 00:12:43,400 Speaker 1: all the way through to some sort of federal mandate 232 00:12:43,440 --> 00:12:46,680 Speaker 1: being introduced by the current president that would take the 233 00:12:46,760 --> 00:12:50,440 Speaker 1: power away from the states and into a more federal context. 234 00:12:50,880 --> 00:12:52,520 Speaker 1: All of that speculation, we're going to have to wait 235 00:12:52,559 --> 00:12:54,920 Speaker 1: and see, but we will be following this Texas case 236 00:12:55,080 --> 00:12:57,400 Speaker 1: closely because it's super interesting. Emma, thank you so much 237 00:12:57,440 --> 00:12:59,600 Speaker 1: for taking us through that. Thank you, and we're going 238 00:12:59,640 --> 00:13:02,040 Speaker 1: to be back in your ears this afternoon with some headlines. 239 00:13:02,080 --> 00:13:04,200 Speaker 1: But until then, have a fantastic start of the week. 240 00:13:04,280 --> 00:13:10,199 Speaker 1: We'll speak to you again later. My name is Lily 241 00:13:10,240 --> 00:13:13,640 Speaker 1: Maddon and I'm a proud Arunda Bunjelung Kalkadin woman from 242 00:13:13,640 --> 00:13:18,000 Speaker 1: Gadighl country. The Daily oz acknowledges that this podcast is 243 00:13:18,040 --> 00:13:20,520 Speaker 1: recorded on the lands of the Gadighl people and pays 244 00:13:20,559 --> 00:13:23,760 Speaker 1: respect to all Aboriginal and torres Rate island and nations. 245 00:13:24,080 --> 00:13:27,000 Speaker 1: We pay our respects to the first peoples of these countries, 246 00:13:27,120 --> 00:13:28,319 Speaker 1: both past and present.