The Auron MacIntyre Show - The 14th Amendment Is a Mess ｜ Guest： Ryan Turnipseed ｜ 1⧸29⧸25

00:00:00.000 We hope you're enjoying your Air Canada flight.

00:00:02.320 Rocky's Vacation, here we come.

00:00:05.060 Whoa, is this economy?

00:00:07.180 Free beer, wine, and snacks.

00:00:09.620 Sweet! 0.95

00:00:10.720 Fast-free Wi-Fi means I can make dinner reservations before we land.

00:00:14.760 And with live TV, I'm not missing the game.

00:00:17.800 It's kind of like, I'm already on vacation.

00:00:20.980 Nice! 0.94

00:00:22.240 On behalf of Air Canada, nice travels.

00:00:25.260 Wi-Fi available to Airplane members on Equipped Flight.

00:00:27.200 Sponsored by Bell. Conditions apply.

00:00:28.720 CRCanada.com.

00:00:30.000 Hey everybody, how's it going?

00:00:31.340 Thanks for joining me this afternoon.

00:00:32.980 I've got a great stream with a great guest that I think you're really going to enjoy.

00:00:37.200 President Trump obviously continues fast and furious with his different executive orders.

00:00:42.660 Great ground being covered.

00:00:44.400 Of course, we hope that ultimately many of these changes get codified into law.

00:00:48.800 But he's doing everything he can in the first few weeks when he doesn't have Congress and the rest of his cabinet set up.

00:00:56.380 So, impressive so far.

00:00:58.320 One of the biggest ones that everyone is talking about, of course, is the change to birthright citizenship.

00:01:04.580 It is addressing a problem that the 14th Amendment has kind of created.

00:01:10.660 The language of the 14th Amendment, I think, ultimately can be properly understood.

00:01:15.580 But the way that it has been abused and manipulated repeatedly has created this scenario where anyone born in the United States, even if both of their parents are illegal, is suddenly a U.S. citizen.

00:01:26.540 A lot of people can recognize the problem with that issue, but there are many other issues that have arisen from the 14th Amendment.

00:01:33.720 It's an amendment that did something important early on, but has been interpreted over and over again to stretch the limits of the Constitution, and in my opinion, regularly break the limits of the Constitution.

00:01:45.380 So, I think, with President Trump bringing a focus on some of the issues that the 14th Amendment has experienced, or at least the abuses that it has experienced, now is a great time to take a look at the history of the 14th Amendment.

00:01:58.040 What else does it do?

00:01:59.160 How did it come into being?

00:02:00.540 How has it been applied across case law repeatedly in the United States?

00:02:04.520 And one of our favorite young scholars of United States history is here to join me today and talk about this.

00:02:12.620 Ryan Turnipseed, thank you for joining me, man.

00:02:14.480 Thank you for having me.

00:02:15.760 How are you doing, Auron?

00:02:17.340 Doing well.

00:02:18.160 And I think today we're going to break into a subject that a lot of people probably aren't super familiar with.

00:02:23.980 They know the 14th Amendment was somewhere in that batch of Civil War amendments, but they don't know probably what it all does and what's involved with it.

00:02:33.980 So, I'm excited to dive into this today with you.

00:02:36.620 But before we do, guys, let me tell you about today's sponsor.

00:02:39.940 How far will a teacher go to save a kid on the brink of losing everything?

00:02:44.020 From Angel Studios, the studio behind Sound of Freedom, comes Brave the Darkness, an inspiring true story about a troubled teen struggling to survive in a world that lets him down.

00:02:56.380 Haunted by torturous childhood memories, Nate Williams finds himself engulfed in darkness.

00:03:01.620 When his drama teacher, Mr. Dean, bails him out of jail and takes him in, Nate must confront his past before it leads him to his own destruction.

00:03:11.700 Brave the Darkness reminds us that one meaningful connection can change everything.

00:03:16.760 This powerful film will leave you uplifted and inspires as it shows the strength of compassion and the impact of never giving up on someone.

00:03:26.340 I encourage you to see Brave the Dark in theaters now.

00:03:29.740 Get your tickets today at Angel.com slash Oren.

00:03:34.380 That's Angel.com slash Oren.

00:03:37.500 All right, Ryan.

00:03:40.100 So like I was saying, I used to teach high school, but, you know, very often covered this period in history, including these amendments.

00:03:47.280 We would often refer to the 13th, 14th and 15th amendment pass after the Civil War as either the Civil War, the Civil War amendments or the Reconstruction amendments, depending on how you're using that phrasing.

00:04:01.980 But these are the amendments that came again at the end of the Civil War.

00:04:05.820 The 13th amendment ended slavery in the United States.

00:04:09.000 The 14th amendment did a wide swath of things that we're about to get into today.

00:04:12.840 And then the 15th amendment granted voting rights to African-American men in the United States.

00:04:19.420 Now, before we dive into the 14th amendment, I know a lot of people are going to look at the title or they're going to start taking the, you know, the different clips out of context.

00:04:27.560 We want to just make it clear that the 14th amendment, one of the core things that it does is give citizenship to freed slaves in the United States after the Civil War.

00:04:38.500 And this is not us giving any kind of commentary on that, not pushing back against that, not saying that was a terrible thing or something like that.

00:04:46.760 Obviously, when you have a freed population in the United States with the understanding, at least of the franchise at that time, it made sense that they were going to become United States citizens.

00:04:57.400 We can have a larger discussion about the nature of the franchise, the United States, its expansion, what that has done to the American constitution.

00:05:04.960 But that is not the discussion for today.

00:05:07.420 And in the context that we are discussing, the 14th amendment did indeed ensure that freed slaves were given citizenship.

00:05:16.180 That was the original purpose of the text that people now abuse for birthright citizenship.

00:05:21.140 We are not challenging that today, that that is not the issue at hand.

00:05:24.640 So all of that said, Ryan, I think it would be best to start at the beginning with the 14th amendment.

00:05:31.680 We'll get into the text and the clauses and everything in a minute.

00:05:34.420 But for people who are unfamiliar, can you give a little bit of like the basic origin of the 14th amendment?

00:05:41.400 How was it ratified, these type of things?

00:05:45.180 Yeah.

00:05:45.900 And I think that we covered this in quite granular detail before.

00:05:51.600 So just very basically, after the Civil War, the Southern states were back and the slaves in a good chunk of the territories were free.

00:06:04.380 This presented a couple of issues for the North that had won the Civil War.

00:06:08.520 Number one, if they're back in the country, their states, they never left, according to some of them.

00:06:16.200 They are going to have representation and everything that comes along with that.

00:06:20.920 So it kind of just seemed like if nothing was going to happen for the Northern radical Republicans in particular,

00:06:28.200 the Southern states were just going to go back to exerting what they saw as a disproportionate amount of power over the country

00:06:35.680 due to their representative and electoral power.

00:06:40.060 But even more this time, because now every slave that was in these Confederate territories is, well, they're a freed man.

00:06:50.500 So they would get the apportionment as well.

00:06:54.820 It would basically, if nothing was going to happen, they just let the South back into the Union with the Emancipation Proclamation in full effect.

00:07:04.600 Maybe even with the 13th Amendment passed, it's just going to make the South very powerful electorally. 0.65

00:07:11.220 This is politics.

00:07:12.760 So regardless of what ideals or anything else that was articulated during the war,

00:07:19.400 the radical Republicans had a very big political issue in that the South was going to heavily rebound if nothing was done to it.

00:07:28.240 So after the Civil War had ended and after this crisis basically developed for the Northerners,

00:07:36.720 the South was occupied.

00:07:38.980 So they got no representation.

00:07:40.960 Even though they were in the Union, they never left.

00:07:43.780 But they were also now going to not be represented.

00:07:48.000 They were going to be led by military governors.

00:07:51.780 And part of the conditions for readmittance into the Union was ratifying this 14th Amendment.

00:08:00.400 And this 14th Amendment kind of looks like a Frankenstein Amendment.

00:08:04.360 If you actually look at it, it has five parts.

00:08:08.620 And they each are targeting something in the country at the time that it's passed to ensure that the radical Republicans can maintain their electoral dominance.

00:08:19.940 That's sort of the very brief overview.

00:08:23.760 This was forced onto the country illegally, if you will.

00:08:28.780 We don't really have a constitutional process for militarily occupying states that never left, according to the accepted narrative.

00:08:38.680 So but that's what that's what that's what's happened.

00:08:41.940 The southern states would ratify this 14th Amendment, among other things.

00:08:47.180 So that's this is the very basic history and context.

00:08:51.600 Do you want me to go farther maybe into the modern day or?

00:08:54.940 Oh, no, we'll we'll we'll go through the text and then we'll start kind of applying the modern day here, I think.

00:08:59.780 Perfect.

00:09:00.160 But yeah, I know that that's a good history for people to kind of understand, again, the context into which the 14th Amendment is entering onto the scene.

00:09:10.600 Like you said, this amendment, one of the reasons I kind of titled it, It's a Mess, is like you said, is a little bit of a Frankenstein Amendment.

00:09:16.620 It feels like they really did stitch together a large amount of, you know, different aspects and try to cobble together and cover a lot of the things that they needed to address.

00:09:27.720 As you point out, you know, there wasn't really a procedure for what if states left the union because, well, the country had been founded on the idea that people had the right to leave the government,

00:09:42.300 that they were a part of if they thought it was no longer just, if it was no longer doing what was supposed to be doing.

00:09:48.920 That's what the Declaration of Independence says.

00:09:51.620 Now, there have been many different questions across, you know, the many different decades since the Constitution had been written as to whether or not states had a right to secede.

00:10:01.520 That question was was asked many times over, sometimes answered in the affirmative, sometimes answered in the negative.

00:10:06.900 But like you said, there was really no doctrine for, you know, defeating states that had left and had seceded in a war, putting them under military occupation and adding them back.

00:10:19.480 So in a lot of ways, the union was kind of making this up as they go.

00:10:23.360 And once, you know, the states, if they wanted to have any political participation in the process after they had been defeated, the southern states, if they wanted to rejoin the union and have any voice, then they had to ascend to the 14th Amendment.

00:10:37.880 So, again, many people can, you know, point to that and say, well, that was a problem that makes it illegitimate.

00:10:43.120 Other people would say, well, what else are you supposed to do?

00:10:45.360 These are the political realities after the Civil War.

00:10:47.880 Again, we're not here to to litigate that today, but that is just the historical context in which we're going to look at the the 14th Amendment.

00:10:58.460 Now, the 14th Amendment, as you point out, has has five sections.

00:11:04.540 You know, Section five is pretty obvious.

00:11:07.620 It just says Congress has the power to enforce by appropriate legislation the provisions of this article.

00:11:13.700 So it's it's just going to say Congress can enforce the rest of this.

00:11:17.880 Section one is where all of the significant clauses in the 14th Amendment really reside.

00:11:25.160 And that's the one we'll probably read out and pay most of our attention to.

00:11:29.300 Is there anything in in sections two, three and four that you want to touch touch on?

00:11:35.140 Obviously, Section three usually isn't one that is particularly relevant.

00:11:39.400 However, it did come into play with with Donald Trump here recently, because many you heard this many times, probably from the media.

00:11:48.140 It might have been the first time you'd ever paid attention to this clause in the 14th Amendment.

00:11:51.960 But in Section three, there is specifically a clause saying that people who have engaged in insurrection and rebellion cannot be, you know, holding specific offices.

00:12:02.320 And this was what people were trying to say applied to Donald Trump, that he had read he had led an insurrection.

00:12:09.020 That's why the media settled on that specific term, even though you never heard them say it previously.

00:12:13.920 They wanted to to exploit this section.

00:12:16.660 But is there anything from sections two, three and four that you wanted to focus on before we go to Section one?

00:12:21.300 Not on the stream, I would just say to the audience that to kind of really imbibe the at least the narrative that we provided here, that this was a Frankenstein amendment that was that is firmly contextualized.

00:12:32.680 And at the end of the Civil War, you can kind of read through those sections and just see that it's very clearly targeting the newly readmitted states or perhaps the states that never left.

00:12:45.040 It's kind of a kind of a conflicting narrative from the from the radicals during the Civil War.

00:12:50.800 You can read those sections yourself and you can kind of see this is a this is very much a Civil War amendment that's that we've just drug into the modern era kicking and screaming.

00:13:03.220 Yeah. And, Brian, if you have a chance, if you can increase your volume a little bit, that would be helpful.

00:13:07.080 But the yeah, it's very clear, you know, the 13th Amendment very obviously is targeting the the abolition of slavery.

00:13:16.020 The 15th Amendment is very clearly giving the right to vote to African-American men.

00:13:21.560 The 14th Amendment is much more of a hodgepodge.

00:13:24.760 It really does feel like, well, we needed to stuff everything that was applicable to the the kind of the end of the Civil War.

00:13:33.720 And we're going to try to, like, tidy this up and put it together.

00:13:36.720 And I don't think it was very successful in that.

00:13:38.940 But, yes, as you point out, this was everything about this amendment.

00:13:42.740 If you look at Section four, it talks about a debt incurred during wars, but not the debt if it was if it was created during a rebellion or insurrection.

00:13:51.760 Three again is about rebellion and insurrection.

00:13:54.460 You can see very clearly that this entire 14th Amendment is in the context of that Civil War and trying to tie up those loose ends.

00:14:03.460 So that's going to be really important when we look at Section one, which today regularly gets involved in many different acts aspects of our law.

00:14:13.180 The fact that we're kind of pulling those things that were really very specifically trying to address issues that were only applicable right after the end of the Civil War and the fact that we're trying to slap those as some kind of principle onto given law cases today really shows a problem probably with with parts of our judicial process.

00:14:33.680 But let's go back up to Section one.

00:14:36.680 Like we said, this is the one that is going to have most of the key clauses that are regularly disputed or applied in modern constitutional law.

00:14:46.200 So we'll just start at the beginning here.

00:14:48.180 Section one of the 14th Amendment says all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

00:14:56.680 That's going to be the key phrase that the Trump administration is focusing on right there, subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the states wherein they reside.

00:15:10.460 So this is the birthright citizenship clause that at least has been interpreted as the birthright citizenship clause.

00:15:18.500 And again, as we said, its very specific purpose at the time of it being written was to clarify that all states in the Union, including the southern states, would need to grant citizenship to freed slaves.

00:15:32.720 The 13th Amendment had freed those slaves, but the 14th Amendment was going to grant citizenship, make sure that once those slaves, you know, a lot of questions of, OK, this person was a slave.

00:15:45.920 They're free now, but they weren't a citizen when they were a slave.

00:15:49.020 Are they a citizen now?

00:15:50.140 That was the question that needed to be answered.

00:15:52.880 And so that was what this first clause was attempting to point to.

00:15:57.120 You, yes, you were born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

00:16:03.040 Slaves were obviously still subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, even if they weren't citizens when they were or considered citizens when they were born.

00:16:10.880 Therefore, these are people who will continue to or will become United States citizens on the passing of the 14th Amendment.

00:16:19.200 Do you want to get any thoughts on kind of the that first citizenship clause and the way it gets applied today?

00:16:25.340 Not necessarily the way it gets applied today, but just for historical continuity, everyone, in fact, I think they probably learn more about this than any details about Reconstruction.

00:16:36.000 Everyone kind of learns about the Dred Scott case in their American history class because it's scary to modern ears.

00:16:42.200 How could the Supreme Court do this?

00:16:44.880 You know, look at how terrible it was.

00:16:46.460 But this is a that was sort of the legal precedent by interpretation of the law that said that blacks, slave or free, could not have citizenship in the United States.

00:16:57.540 This is the radical Republican response.

00:17:00.980 Or this be a little over a decade later, if I remember correctly, codifying into law using the that branch of government and basically just saying, actually, they are citizens.

00:17:12.040 And the Supreme Court couldn't really do much because its power base had been militarily occupied.

00:17:19.540 So this is this is sort of like the political dynamics of the time in the modern day.

00:17:24.940 Most people don't cite the 14th Amendment to discuss the citizenship of black people, which is kind of how how far removed from the context we are.

00:17:33.920 We've we've reached the sort of simulacra where we've like we had the original and then we had something referencing the original and then we have we've just divorced it from its context completely now.

00:17:44.980 Right. And that is why we have the current executive order that we have, because this very obvious application.

00:17:52.340 And again, you know, you point out the historical context as to why it was being drafted.

00:17:57.140 But but, you know, again, however you feel about the political realities of that time, that was very obviously its intention.

00:18:04.320 So if we have any interest in the intention of that in the context of it, that's what it is.

00:18:09.440 The fact that that amendment, as you point out, has been plucked entirely out of that context.

00:18:13.600 No one talks about it in reference to black Americans and their citizenship, but instead it is always brought up as to whether or not, you know, a Chinese woman who has purchased a birth tourism, you know, trip so that her child can have dual American and Chinese citizenship.

00:18:31.240 Like whether that's valid or whether illegal immigrants who have been smuggled into the country by a coyote, by a cartel looking to do human trafficking or traffic drugs, whether if they if they have a baby and suddenly that baby is an American citizen or whether, you know, two two workers overstaying their visas from a foreign country and then have children.

00:18:52.380 All of a sudden, all of a sudden that that child is a U.S. citizen.

00:18:55.500 And because these children are all created or granted citizenship, they are then basically create that is the anchor baby.

00:19:03.840 Right. This is where you get the phrase anchor baby, that once that child is given the citizenship, then all of their than their parents have a claim.

00:19:12.720 You know, they are more likely to receive the ability to stay in the country, less likely to be deported, more likely to receive some form of.

00:19:22.380 Visa, in order to stay inside the United States.

00:19:24.780 And this means not only that the child that has the citizenship and the parents that are using that child to anchor themselves in the United States, but then we get the chain migration, their children, their parents, their grandparents, their aunts, their uncles.

00:19:39.620 All of a sudden, everyone who is connected to this birthright citizen has the ability to get some level of priority into entering the United States legally or more likely if they're already here expediting their ability to receive proper documentation.

00:19:55.020 And so this the application of this has just been a disaster.

00:20:00.720 And if Trump is going to face a lot of court battles over this one, this will probably be the most significant court challenge he will receive of all of his executive orders.

00:20:10.260 But if he can get this to stick, and I think, again, there is a very good case that his understanding of the 14th Amendment, that his administration will argue that that is the correct understanding.

00:20:22.420 And therefore, however, however, we feel about the 14th Amendment in general, that that that you will be able to at least rectify some of the abuse done through this clause by birthright citizenship.

00:20:33.240 Right. And as you mentioned earlier, it's that specific that specific group of words and subject to the jurisdiction thereof that's going to be the the the the fulcrum of this whole thing, because clearly, now that we understand the context, the historical context, why why was this written the way it was?

00:20:54.420 The purpose was not just to make sure that anyone could come over here, have a child, and that child would then become a United States citizen.

00:21:01.000 The purpose of this was to basically enfranchise a formerly enslaved population that was denied citizenship on the on the judicial level.

00:21:12.320 And then that's kind of why the rest of this follows is to make sure that those people are then protected with the force of the law.

00:21:18.820 No state shall make or enforce any law which shall bridge the privileges or immunities of citizens.

00:21:23.040 So that's to make sure that you can't have a legal system of second and third class citizens, even though they are they're enslaved. 0.84

00:21:29.120 This is a this is one one method that you can find in, say, European countries was to just have different legal classes of citizens with different privileges and immunities and whatnot else.

00:21:40.360 And then it just keeps going that without the due process of the law is another famous one that feeds into this as well.

00:21:50.800 That's just to make sure that if it if it does occur that a a citizen of the United States once again,

00:22:00.240 the population that was in the population that was in mind when this was written was newly newly freed black now citizens,

00:22:08.180 this was to make sure that they wouldn't just be, say, screwed over by a local court system.

00:22:12.980 That that was the idea if you give this the the most positive reading that you can.

00:22:17.360 Instead, what we end up finding is that each of these sentences have been pulled apart out of context and quite frankly,

00:22:25.360 out of context within the same section of this amendment to just found their own legal doctrines so that the courts and the

00:22:33.100 the federal government can do whatever they want, which, you know, it's a question as if that's the is that the ultimate end of all law.

00:22:42.080 I don't know, but that's what this is now.

00:22:45.620 Well, and that's a lot of what we're going to talk about here.

00:22:48.460 So let's look at our as you said here, we've got the privileges and immunities clause.

00:22:53.500 No state shall make or enforce any law which shall bridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.

00:22:59.960 Now, this clause has remained relatively dormant because it only applies to privileges and immunities that are granted at the federal level.

00:23:08.240 The state level privileges were not generally applied through this.

00:23:12.840 However, it does team up with the next one here, which is, as you pointed out, our due process clause.

00:23:18.880 Nor shall any state be deprived, deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.

00:23:25.960 And these two clauses are the ones that I would you think it would be fair to say basically abolish the 10th Amendment.

00:23:34.440 Abolish is kind of understating it a little, completely reversing the 10th Amendment, perhaps.

00:23:43.420 Utter destruction of the 10th Amendment.

00:23:45.860 Yeah, yeah, yeah.

00:23:47.020 Raising insulting of the earth of the 10th Amendment.

00:23:50.440 That's getting a little bit closer to what's actually happened.

00:23:53.940 And it took however many generations, probably three or four, for the 10th Amendment to go from one of the most cherished amendments to, you know, slowly getting subsumed.

00:24:05.620 And then by another couple more generations, it's just no one knows what it is anymore.

00:24:09.580 Doesn't matter.

00:24:10.740 Nothing ever happens with it.

00:24:12.500 But with those two clauses, the Privileges and Immunities Clause and the Due Process Clause.

00:24:21.240 Get unlimited grocery delivery with PCX Press Pass.

00:24:25.020 Meal prep, delivered.

00:24:26.900 Snacks, delivered.

00:24:28.720 Fresh fruit, delivered.

00:24:30.600 Grocery delivery on repeat for just $2.50 a month.

00:24:34.360 Learn more at pcexpress.ca.

00:24:36.100 There were attempts to make both of those do the same thing, which was, what if we applied the Bill of Rights, which is supposed to regulate Congress on the federal level, make sure that Congress can't do anything against people within the country or different states.

00:24:55.080 What if we made that apply to just everyone so that state governments, county governments, or whatever else couldn't actually violate what's in the Bill of Rights, even though that was originally meant for Congress on the federal level?

00:25:10.060 Both of these clauses were tried.

00:25:14.100 There was an attempt to make both of them do the same thing.

00:25:17.440 The Privileges and Immunities Clause, as you said, was made dormant by the Slaughterhouse cases.

00:25:22.620 The audience can go and read those on their own time.

00:25:26.800 It's not the most important clause because it was gutted, is kind of the general narrative around it.

00:25:33.300 The Due Process Clause, though, is why your state government can't establish a church anymore, even though we have established churches for the first few generations of the country.

00:25:42.700 And that's because that violates the First Amendment on the state level, something that wasn't supposed to exist in law,

00:25:51.040 because we say that if your state establishes a state church, that violates the First Amendment, which is necessary for the due process of the law.

00:26:02.760 We've sort of just inverted our whole legal system using something here that was meant to be a firmly historical amendment that probably wasn't going to do much else.

00:26:16.200 So the writers thought, then, enfranchised the blacks themselves.

00:26:20.180 Right. So we did an entire episode on this, the incorporation doctrine, as it's usually called.

00:26:26.720 And so if people want to get, you know, an hour long explanation of the incorporation doctrine and what it has done to kind of the understanding of the Constitution and the way that the states are supposed to function and kind of destroying federalism as we understood it, they can check that out.

00:26:45.160 The most important thing here, as you point out, is this was initially not understood this way.

00:26:50.560 And to be clear, the 14th Amendment radically changes the way that constitutional work, constitutional law works in the United States.

00:26:59.300 Again, you might think that's a good thing. You might be think that's a bad thing, but it is a fact.

00:27:04.720 And so that's something we need to understand. You know, the when we give the eras of regimes, if you've ever heard Curtis Yarvin or if you've ever seen my episode on this, you have the you have the articles of confederation.

00:27:19.200 You have the original Constitution. You have the 14th Amendment regime. You have the the FDR regime. 0.85

00:27:26.680 And then I would add the civil rights regime after Curtis Yarvin didn't add that. But those are kind of the regimes, as I would understand the the the eras of the Republic, if you're using kind of the French understanding.

00:27:38.060 And the 14th Amendment is one of those pivotal points. It is as important, I think, if you know, as moving from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution or moving from the Constitution, as we understood it, to more of an FDR bureaucratic managerial governance or the Civil Rights Act.

00:27:56.480 Like it has that level of shift in the way that is understood. But as you point out, whether that was the maybe that was the original intention. Right.

00:28:05.220 Maybe the after the South lost, the North just wanted, OK, we just rule the South now. They've lost all the state rights. We're throwing that away. We're in charge now.

00:28:15.960 The end. And that's what the 14th Amendment is doing. But that is not really how it was applied. Initially, it took a very long time. Right.

00:28:22.660 Many of the incorporations didn't occur into well into the 1900s.

00:28:28.020 So it's not like they wrote the 14th Amendment and then immediately it was just understood that, oh, well, this one section incorporates everything.

00:28:36.520 The states don't have the ability to run themselves at all. The entire Constitution, you know, makes the law for everything in the United States.

00:28:44.380 That wasn't actually the process. Right. There was a very slow transition after this clause was created.

00:28:50.400 Right. And that's you can kind of see that after the Civil War, there is a evolution in our legal philosophies here where before the Civil War, there was a very strong emphasis placed on decentralization and federalism.

00:29:08.400 Federalism. Those aren't like formal laws or principles that you can find in writing, but it was generally understood.

00:29:13.860 That's the guiding principle. So that's generally what should be preserved.

00:29:18.140 It should be our law should be viewed in that context.

00:29:21.820 After the Civil War, you start getting a lot of different and new legal philosophies that are not so kind towards decentralization or federalism or any of these other antiquated ideas is kind of how they would come to be viewed.

00:29:36.300 But that didn't take hold in law until the 20th century, which just so happens to coincide with the rise of the managerial class, as you were alluding to, which may have a little bit of overlap with the legal class in the country, especially during that era.

00:29:57.700 So that class, the upper middle class, if you will, of lawyers, managers and various other people, that wasn't as large as it is now.

00:30:08.880 And those people tended to know each other. Their ideas would kind of flow in the same circles.

00:30:15.160 So it's not it's not entirely unexpected that we would get the managerial interpretation of our 14th Amendment here completely ripped from context, only made to serve one function, which is to make sure that foreign populations, which shouldn't have citizenship, get citizenship for free, basically. 0.91

00:30:34.880 Yes. And again, Samuel Francis, Sam Francis talked about how important it was to the managerial regime to kind of deconstruct all these previous legal and social arrangements.

00:30:50.280 And so the text of the law remains the same, but a revolution occurs under the text of the law.

00:30:58.280 And this is probably the most important thing for Americans to understand, because, again, I taught history.

00:31:06.520 I'm I'm super familiar with all the narratives about that.

00:31:09.340 I have I have I've taught the narratives about this.

00:31:11.480 But but but because in the United States, we didn't have a revolution every 60 to 80 years, we tend not to recognize the revolution that happened under our feet.

00:31:24.420 And so we don't see the radical change between the articles and the Constitution.

00:31:29.720 We don't see the radical change between the Constitution as it was and the 14th Amendment Constitution.

00:31:35.380 We don't see the radical change between that 14th Amendment Constitution and then the managerial application of it.

00:31:42.600 We have one of these revolutions every, you know, 60 to 80 years, but we don't call them that.

00:31:49.640 And so because we don't call them that and because the legal that, you know, the clauses stay there.

00:31:54.040 No one changed the words in the 14th Amendment, but they took the 14th Amendment apart piece by piece, especially the Section one.

00:32:04.340 And they started to say, well, actually, maybe this piece means this over here and maybe this piece deconstructs that over there.

00:32:11.200 And they just kept pulling out little individual pieces of it and saying, well, actually, this isn't a specific clause written to address a specific problem and a specific historical context.

00:32:24.620 Each one of these is an abstract principle that we can apply to our own ends.

00:32:33.380 And this is the problem kind of always with having a strict, you know, attempt to just focus on the text.

00:32:41.720 Right. This is how people abuse the Bible. Right.

00:32:44.120 They pull out. They don't use any of the context.

00:32:47.140 They don't want to know what people were doing at the time.

00:32:49.340 What did people believe? You know, what was the actual tradition of the time?

00:32:52.820 What was it addressing? No, they just want to pull out, you know, one little passage and say, oh, well, this this says what I want it to say.

00:33:00.440 So it it says that you have to be kind to the stranger. So that means infinite illegal immigration.

00:33:05.220 Right. Like this is the way that people use the Bible.

00:33:07.780 And unfortunately, it's the same kind of abuse that happens with the United States and its Constitution.

00:33:13.140 And so while we might look at these words in their historical context and say, well, of course, this is obvious.

00:33:19.040 The problem is that it has been wildly distorted.

00:33:22.500 And the more hodgepodge and uncareful the language of the amendment, the easier it is to abuse.

00:33:29.420 And that's why I think the 14th Amendment is one of, if not the most heavily abused amendments in the entire Constitution, because it was so easy to pick apart.

00:33:39.420 Now, again, that doesn't mean that in its context, there wasn't some degree of necessity for what it was doing.

00:33:44.920 But it it makes it very easy today for people to pull it apart.

00:33:50.080 And that leads us to our last clause in the Section one of the 14th Amendment, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.

00:34:00.140 And this phrase right here, we're going to get into due process as well, because it's been abused.

00:34:05.300 But this phrase right here, equal protection of the law, has been used in everything, like every case that you can think of that has just been an absolute disaster.

00:34:18.560 This this phrase is at the center at.

00:34:21.620 So, Ryan, do you have any thoughts on that phrase before we get into the cases themselves, or do you just want to move to examples?

00:34:28.720 It's it's just going to be another rerun of everything you were just saying.

00:34:32.780 Equal protection means something completely different in the 1860s and 70s than it does with the sort of very modern progressives coming out of the West Coast and part of the East Coast.

00:34:44.000 And the mid to late 20th, yeah, 20th century.

00:34:49.040 So this is a it turns out that if you make the written law the the one and only foundation and guide for a country, the written law, you know, the words don't change on the page and you can change the meaning at will.

00:35:04.700 So this is this is kind of the lesson that we learn here.

00:35:08.160 Maybe maybe writing down the proposition doesn't actually form a coherent nation just because meanings of words change over the time.

00:35:16.800 That's that is something something that maybe a few a few people in American politics now should consider when they when they argue for these things.

00:35:26.080 And something else to point out as well, just to prevent any any hardcore pendulum swinging from one side or the other, we did have a functioning country under the 14th Amendment, even after the turmoil of the Civil War, that didn't have all these modern redefinitions and meanings.

00:35:45.800 And there's a very important implication there, which is it really does not matter what the written law says.

00:35:52.000 If you have people that are seeking to abuse it and rule over you like tyrants, you can have as many amendments as you want.

00:36:00.980 But as long as the wrong people are interpreting and enforcing them, your country will just dissolve.

00:36:07.780 Speaking of which, yes, and that's precisely right.

00:36:12.760 And this is why Joseph de Maestro warns so much about what gets written down in constitutions.

00:36:19.120 And again, this was an argument that the anti-federalists or rather that the federalists had against the anti-federalists, even though I think largely anti-federalists had a lot of good points there.

00:36:28.040 One of the things that they said is if you make a bill of rights, if you write down these amendments, people will assume that what they have is limited to them,

00:36:38.460 that the words themselves are somehow kind of bringing in everything that is involved.

00:36:42.940 And Joseph de Maestro specifically warns us that when we try to enshrine principles and constitutions, we immediately open them up to people who would manipulate those words, right?

00:36:53.940 So principles, traditions, customs, folkways, they are far more robust, actually, than a written constitution.

00:37:04.200 Now, that doesn't mean that at some point you don't need to write down certain aspects of a constitution.

00:37:09.000 You might need to do that.

00:37:10.480 That's not saying that all written constitutions are invalid or a problem or anything like that.

00:37:16.120 That's not what we're saying.

00:37:17.060 However, the warning was the more you need to add, the more specific you need to get, the more that you need to put on paper, the more you will open yourself up to manipulation.

00:37:28.700 The less that you can rely on the traditions, the folkways, the customs, the culture, the expectations of your nation,

00:37:36.360 and the more you have to rely on the word as written down, the more you will make yourself subject to lawyers.

00:37:43.860 The more, when we say the rule of law, we usually mean rule by lawyers, right?

00:37:48.540 Actually, it's the way in which you can stretch and pull the amendments.

00:37:52.720 And if you don't think that's true, just look at what President Trump is now going to be facing with birthright citizenship, right?

00:37:59.620 This clause was never meant to create the anchor baby phenomenon, not even close.

00:38:05.700 It never in their wildest dreams was that the way that this was going to be applied.

00:38:10.160 And yet today, we are going to get full-throated, firing on all cylinders, defenses of that understanding, that anchor baby kind of clause, that interpretation of it.

00:38:23.740 That is going to be acted on as if it is gospel, as if that is core to the American identity, even though it was never intended to be in the 14th Amendment at all,

00:38:35.180 it will be argued as if it is the only thing that has ever defined the United States.

00:38:40.020 And that's what you need to understand, is if you let people change the narrative on the tradition, then the words in the 14th themselves are not sufficient.

00:38:50.700 And so there is something to the idea that being literal about the text of the Constitution might have some benefits.

00:39:01.020 But if you are relying on that itself to impose the will of the people who originally wrote the Constitution or its amendments,

00:39:09.780 then you misunderstand the nature of human beings and the way that they interpret law.

00:39:15.880 Right, especially the nature of those that interpret law for ill of others.

00:39:22.100 Like, that's the main thing here.

00:39:23.700 You would think that the conservative movement, I grew up hearing the conservatives were the people most in tune with how human nature works.

00:39:31.900 You would think that this fundamental fact of there are bad people and they will misappropriate things that you have written down to make sure that bad things won't happen,

00:39:40.240 you would think they would understand that here, but unfortunately, still seems to be a lesson to be learned, but perhaps we'll learn it.

00:39:48.700 That's our hope. That's what we're here to do.

00:39:51.060 Hopefully everyone grasps that lesson. That's why we're doing what we're doing here.

00:39:54.500 So, I'm going to just go, I'm going to list off a whole bunch of cases that have cited the Equal Protection Clause.

00:40:02.820 And I want to make it clear, this is by no means exhaustive.

00:40:07.000 This has been cited by hundreds, if not thousands, of judges, you know, in many different ways.

00:40:13.960 We're just hitting the highlights, the ones you might know, the ones that you know will be influential.

00:40:18.140 So, the Equal Protection here has been cited in Brown v. Board of Education, Loving v. Virginia, which is the case when it comes to interracial marriage,

00:40:28.300 Roe v. Wade, Bush v. Gore, the 2000s election case, Obergefell v. Hodges, which is the gay marriage case,

00:40:36.440 and Students for Fair Admissions to Harvard, which is the case that theoretically ended affirmative action.

00:40:42.500 So, just from that wide swath, you can see that it applies to segregation, interracial marriage, abortion, elections, gay marriage, and affirmative action.

00:40:56.320 It has been used in cases that are wild distortions of, you know, kind of the founders' intentions.

00:41:03.580 It has been used for conservatives to defend some of these things.

00:41:06.220 So, it has been all over the place.

00:41:08.060 It has been applied to all of these cases, but the continuous thing we see is that it depends on how the 14th Amendment is being applied, right?

00:41:16.840 So, it's very unlikely that some of the justices who are trying to apply the 14th Amendment one way in Obergefell would have applied it the same

00:41:25.680 if they had been on the court during, you know, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.

00:41:30.180 Again, same amendment. Nothing has changed. Nothing about that clause has changed, but it can vary, very, you know, widely from Brown v. Board of Education to Bush v. Gore.

00:41:43.440 Again, it just depends on the justice. It depends on the day. It depends on the context.

00:41:48.500 Same clause, but wildly different results when applied.

00:41:51.600 Right, and if you want a value-neutral heuristic, I'm not commenting here on what I think should happen.

00:41:57.520 If you want a value-neutral heuristic for, is this law functioning as intended,

00:42:02.720 just go through the mental exercise of trying to explain how it is being applied in the modern day to the people that wrote it.

00:42:10.600 And if you think that they would be violently repulsed by whatever is happening,

00:42:14.940 then it probably isn't being applied how it was intended to.

00:42:18.860 It's probably been ripped out of context.

00:42:20.960 You can apply this to multiple laws that aren't the 14th Amendment.

00:42:23.560 You can apply this to basically the entire Bill of Rights.

00:42:27.660 And if you just imagine this is how we apply it today,

00:42:29.980 I will try to think about explaining this to any of the founders.

00:42:35.140 And will it make sense to them, number one?

00:42:37.140 Would they agree with this, number two?

00:42:38.660 Could they even conceive of this thing happening, number three?

00:42:41.180 If the answer is no to any of those, something has changed.

00:42:48.580 And in our modern context, we can use other contexts that we have now.

00:42:53.520 It's usually for the worst.

00:42:55.000 This is usually to just erode things like national sovereignty, social cohesion,

00:43:01.020 these things that are required for a nation to function.

00:43:05.080 This is how they've been distorted.

00:43:07.240 You can use that heuristic.

00:43:08.560 It works really well.

00:43:09.460 And then if you want to know more, you can kind of usually just go read on the history of the law

00:43:15.380 to see how it has changed over time and confirm the heuristic if you so want.

00:43:21.440 Oh, I'm sorry.

00:43:22.240 I also forgot to throw in Planned Parenthood versus Casey,

00:43:25.080 though that one is more the due process clause.

00:43:29.280 But then, you know, that's the case that actually guaranteed a right to abortion. 1.00

00:43:33.480 Most people think that's Roe versus Wade, but it was actually Planned Parenthood versus Casey.

00:43:37.300 And, you know, the idea that, again, you might agree, you know, just again, from the neutral position here,

00:43:45.620 you might agree with, you know, people having a right to abortion or disagree.

00:43:50.080 But the idea that that right is found somewhere in due process is kind of wild, right?

00:43:57.280 So, again, we, as you say, if you try to turn around and explain to anybody who wrote that due process clause,

00:44:05.920 hey, by the way, this is going to be used to find a right to, you know, for like mass abortion inside the Constitution.

00:44:13.200 Like, imagine anyone who wrote that, you know, assenting to that.

00:44:17.760 Again, you might find that to be a positive or negative in American life,

00:44:22.280 but it's indisputable that the idea that this right was hiding somewhere inside the 14th Amendment,

00:44:28.340 it would be absurd on its face to anyone you propose that to.

00:44:32.600 Right, exactly.

00:44:34.520 Yeah.

00:44:34.680 So, I guess, do you have any other thoughts about the way that this applies today?

00:44:41.560 I mean, this one is pretty cut and dry.

00:44:43.220 I feel like we're, you know, we're pointing out the ways in which these clauses were originally drafted,

00:44:48.820 their intentions, the historical context around them, and then the way that they're getting applied today.

00:44:55.300 But is there anything that you think people should know about that that we haven't exactly outlined yet?

00:45:00.240 I mean, the first thing is that most of the world, especially the old world, 0.99

00:45:05.260 almost the entirety of the old world, does not use birthright citizenship.

00:45:08.740 And it's for a reason.

00:45:09.660 It's because they can either predict very reasonably what would happen if you did just have this completely loose definition of birthright citizenship,

00:45:20.560 or they can observe it happening in countries like, say, the United States.

00:45:24.000 It's not quite that desirable if you have a very high-trust, homogenous population that's based around history, cultures, and traditions, 1.00

00:45:34.900 something that's fairly unchanging over time.

00:45:38.340 It's not really advantageous to try to demolish all of that in favor of this very liquid, unstable concept of citizenship.

00:45:49.760 So, this is, you can see this in the rest of the world as well.

00:45:52.060 Look at what the other nations are actually doing.

00:45:56.000 Very, very few people have this interpretation of this is what a citizen is.

00:46:00.420 They were born inside of these lines, and therefore they are now part of this country as a full citizen,

00:46:06.820 just the same as someone who's been here for dozens of generations.

00:46:10.920 No one else really thinks like this except for us in the new world,

00:46:14.780 and, of course, the other countries in the new world that have this idea are socialist hellholes, quite frankly.

00:46:22.640 So, that's maybe a little bit.

00:46:24.840 You can kind of gather, is this a good thing, just by looking at who else is doing it and who isn't doing it.

00:46:30.560 You can apply that to numerous different subjects in your life.

00:46:36.940 It tends to work pretty well.

00:46:38.560 But, other than that, just on the case that's inevitably going to happen between the Trump administration and the leftists in the judicial system,

00:46:49.920 as we kept mentioning, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof is going to be the key fulcrum.

00:46:58.000 And that's because, in fact, it was written into this.

00:47:02.280 We kind of just have been subjected to a legal class that has tried to memory hold that specific part of the clause.

00:47:11.020 It's very hard to derive birthright citizenship from this,

00:47:14.420 because you have to say that, therefore, anyone inside of the United States is fully subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

00:47:20.780 If you said that in any other context, there would be quite a few countries in the world that would be really angry at us.

00:47:26.640 Right, right. Your dual citizenship is immediately invalidated,

00:47:31.520 and any of your citizens that happen to be visiting the United States are entirely subject to our jurisdiction.

00:47:38.760 You have no power here. Your citizens have no rights once they enter into the United States, because they're under our jurisdiction, right? 0.97

00:47:46.180 Yeah, right. It would be insane.

00:47:48.920 This is why we usually keep the legal distinction between citizens and people in residence,

00:47:54.360 people that aren't citizens but are just inside the borders.

00:47:59.460 Except, as our managerial and legal class has determined, citizenship works that way, though.

00:48:05.620 And other countries don't object because they benefit from it.

00:48:08.580 You can look at remittances coming out of the United States to other countries.

00:48:12.020 It's quite a big boon if the United States keeps this absolutely insane application of the law for this one subject,

00:48:19.620 and not for any of the others, that most of the world wouldn't even countenance doing.

00:48:25.260 It's very beneficial for them.

00:48:27.160 This is a...

00:48:28.700 I feel like that anyone that would try to give this a fair hearing in the audience could kind of piece together,

00:48:35.000 maybe this isn't entirely legitimate.

00:48:37.960 Yeah, and it really, you know, maintaining this current understanding of citizenship in the United States

00:48:45.160 is a disaster all over the place, obviously, from demographics to voting patterns to financial realities

00:48:51.300 to logistics and infrastructure.

00:48:54.240 But really importantly, it also feeds into this idea of the United States is just an economic zone.

00:49:00.100 The United States is just a set of borders.

00:49:02.240 And everybody inside the border, you know, you happen to be in the border for one second,

00:49:06.000 you're basically an American, right?

00:49:07.740 Like, this is not the way that nationhood has ever been understood.

00:49:12.680 This is not the way that identity has ever been understood.

00:49:15.460 This is not the way that citizenship and a polity, you know, membership has been understood.

00:49:20.600 And so the very modern interpretation of this, like you said,

00:49:25.240 the very managerial interpretation of this is specifically, you know,

00:49:30.480 something that helps to degrade that understanding of what a nation is,

00:49:35.180 what identity is, what it means to be an American.

00:49:38.000 And so on top of the many, many, many, many reasons it should go,

00:49:42.400 the final one really is just the fact that if we continue to maintain our current understanding of citizenship,

00:49:47.880 then America can't be a nation.

00:49:50.300 It can't be its own sovereign entity.

00:49:53.880 It can never truly have the identity and the, you know,

00:49:57.440 the kind of shared unity and understanding that a nation really should ultimately have

00:50:02.840 because anyone who happens to be passing through in any given moment and has a child,

00:50:08.500 suddenly that person, you know, just, they were inside the lines,

00:50:12.680 the technical lines on the map.

00:50:13.740 And so therefore they are a member, they are a member.

00:50:16.260 There is no other requirement.

00:50:18.000 There is no other understanding of what a nation is or what it takes to become part of a nation.

00:50:23.720 And that is just really deleterious to, to any country, like, which is why you said,

00:50:28.360 as you pointed out, pretty much no one does this unless they just kind of have a suicide wish.

00:50:33.380 Right.

00:50:33.960 The, the only, the closest historical analogy I can think of is the dividing of the,

00:50:38.540 of the Qing empire into different spheres of influence.

00:50:40.940 It's, we're basically doing the same thing now, but it's not with other nations coming by with gunboats

00:50:45.780 and with treaties.

00:50:47.240 It's just large amounts of foreign populations basically having children and establishing dominion 1.00

00:50:54.540 over parts of the country.

00:50:56.140 You can see that in the Southwest, certainly.

00:50:58.040 It doesn't look like it did decades ago.

00:51:01.120 You can see that in various large metropolises in the United States.

00:51:04.560 It does, they do not look like they did, say, 60 years ago.

00:51:08.720 And these, these populations that get birthright citizenship just because their parents gave, 0.93

00:51:15.560 their, their mother gave birth to them inside the United States.

00:51:18.360 It turns out they aren't actually that loyal to the United States either.

00:51:21.180 And we can see this very clearly in this last week on social media.

00:51:25.180 Quite a lot of them are, so take the, take the Mexican Hispanic population in the Southwest of the United States 1.00

00:51:32.820 or into the large cities.

00:51:34.580 This population that has American citizenship, I'm sure a large proportion of them do,

00:51:41.620 are waving around Mexican flags and advocating on behalf of their race,

00:51:46.240 which is their word, not mine.

00:51:47.600 Um, that doesn't really sound like a population that is American.

00:51:52.800 Uh, what is an American population if, if, if part of the population can wave around foreign flags 0.68

00:51:59.200 because they're really angry that it's coming into conflict with the, with the United States?

00:52:03.820 It doesn't quite make sense that this isn't a sovereign nation if that's, if that's what the people are.

00:52:09.060 Yeah, a video of, uh, the pop star Selena, Selena Gomez, uh, went viral this week.

00:52:15.160 She was crying about people being deported and she specifically said, you know, no, no tears for Lincoln Riley,

00:52:21.920 no tears for people burned to death on the subway by illegal immigrants, whatever those people don't matter. 1.00

00:52:27.060 Uh, but she, she had tears for the people being deported and the phrase she used was, was my people are being attacked.

00:52:33.920 My people are being deported.

00:52:35.420 Now Selena Gomez is a second generation American citizen. 0.94

00:52:39.620 I don't think she even really speaks Spanish.

00:52:41.720 Uh, but she says, these are my people.

00:52:44.200 Right.

00:52:44.560 And, and like you said, this is what comes of a birthright, you know, citizenship.

00:52:48.940 You, you create this scenario where people aren't particularly tied to the country.

00:52:54.760 Yes.

00:52:55.220 Technically because they were born inside some artificial border, uh, they, they are American,

00:53:00.140 but when the chips are down, when it's time to say, who are my people, am I American?

00:53:06.260 No, no.

00:53:07.460 I, that even though I was born here, even though I have birthright citizenship, that does not make me,

00:53:14.560 I was like, Oh, I got punted out there for a second.

00:53:30.840 Yeah.

00:53:31.120 Still with me?

00:53:31.720 Yeah.

00:53:32.000 Okay.

00:53:32.300 I'm still here.

00:53:33.620 All right.

00:53:34.060 We made it.

00:53:34.720 I was like, Oh man, he's going to have to start filling random historical facts.

00:53:38.080 I was, yeah, I would give it 10 seconds just because sometimes that happens when, when I lose

00:53:42.020 connection.

00:53:42.560 So.

00:53:43.140 Yeah.

00:53:43.660 No, luckily popped right back in.

00:53:44.920 All right.

00:53:45.180 So the point, yeah, again, the, the point being, you know, those, those are the words of Selena

00:53:49.100 Gomez.

00:53:49.880 That's her understanding of her identity and her citizenship.

00:53:54.260 Uh, those are not our interpretations being imposed upon her.

00:53:58.160 That, that is, as you point out, this is the way that people are interpreting things themselves.

00:54:02.020 These are their words, their actions.

00:54:03.820 Uh, and they speak much louder than, you know, uh, a, uh, wild distortion of an amendment that

00:54:09.660 was written in very specific historical context, uh, well over a hundred years ago at this

00:54:14.320 point.

00:54:14.860 So, uh, that said, uh, Ryan, we better move to, uh, the questions of the people before,

00:54:20.000 uh, you know, they try to completely throw me off the stream here.

00:54:23.060 So, uh, do you have anything that you want people to check out?

00:54:25.660 You're working on anything, anything you want people to follow?

00:54:28.180 Um, I have a YouTube channel.

00:54:29.960 I have not released, uh, many streams of videos here recently, but it has a very nice backlog.

00:54:35.500 I hope that, uh, at least someone in the audience can learn something, uh, and it's

00:54:39.460 here on, or at least on YouTube under, under my name, Ryan Turnipseed.

00:54:43.260 And then you can find me on Twitter at Turnip Merchant.

00:54:46.480 And last, but certainly not least, check out the Old Glory Club.

00:54:50.920 Um, you can find my writings there along with many other guests that have been, been on

00:54:55.000 your channel are on.

00:54:56.080 And I'm sure, uh, I'm sure that just about any American in the audience would be very

00:55:01.220 interested to hear from the Old Glory Club and, uh, perhaps join up.

00:55:04.940 Yeah, Old Glory Club, uh, sub stack is, uh, is a sleeper, man.

00:55:09.580 If people aren't, aren't, aren't subbed to that, if they're not paying attention, uh,

00:55:12.600 some of the best stuff from some, some very talented writers ends up on that, uh, sub

00:55:17.160 stack.

00:55:17.600 So definitely worth checking out.

00:55:19.700 All right.

00:55:20.340 Let's head to the questions of people real quick, real quick.

00:55:23.680 Uh, Matt Grader says, uh, we have no obligation to listen to biblical pro-immigration arguments

00:55:29.560 from atheists and secularists who generally hate God and have no issue lying about the

00:55:34.800 Bible, what the Bible commands.

00:55:36.440 Yeah, of course, this is the, the classic meme, right?

00:55:38.720 Like I don't believe in this stuff. 0.99

00:55:40.460 I think it's stupid and foolish and I've been mocking you about it, but you should believe 0.99

00:55:44.600 in this very distorted version. 1.00

00:55:46.460 I pulled out of a few verses because it's politically convenient for me.

00:55:51.320 Right.

00:55:51.940 And there's an, there's an even worse demographic of people that are, say, clergymen that should

00:55:57.460 believe all of this and still distort it in the exact same ways as atheists and, uh, secularized

00:56:02.680 who, who have nothing but disdain for it.

00:56:05.260 It's very interesting when, when the clergy and the atheists both come to the same rabid leftist

00:56:11.800 conclusion, uh, what, how, how are we supposed to interpret that?

00:56:16.940 Yeah.

00:56:17.540 Never a great sign when, uh, yeah, when your clergy is currently, uh, agreeing with the

00:56:22.920 most wild eyed leftists you can, you can find, but, uh, you know, hope, hopefully, uh, as,

00:56:28.740 as, uh, you know, progressivism and wokeness are defeated across the board, um, uh, the church

00:56:34.800 which should be fighting against trends instead of following them will finally drop this one.

00:56:39.880 I hate to see, uh, many Christian churches become the North Korea of, of wokeness inside 1.00

00:56:45.500 the United States.

00:56:46.340 It's falling out of everything else, but they decide to hold on at the end because they're

00:56:49.960 always behind.

00:56:51.780 That's what you get for chasing trends instead of being leaders, guys.

00:56:54.900 That's, that's how that happens.

00:56:56.500 All right.

00:56:56.820 Well, we're going to go ahead and wrap this up.

00:56:58.760 Of course, if you are not, uh, following Mr. Turnip Seed or enjoying his writings, you

00:57:04.140 should definitely fix that.

00:57:05.340 If it's your first time on this channel, make sure that you go ahead and subscribe, click the

00:57:09.360 bell notifications, all that stuff to know when we're doing things on YouTube.

00:57:13.120 If you would like to get these broadcasts as podcasts, you need to subscribe to the

00:57:16.920 Oren McIntyre show on your favorite podcast platform.

00:57:19.660 And when you do leave it a rating or review, it really helps with the algorithm.

00:57:23.880 If you'd like to get my book, the total state, it is out on both print and audio book at this

00:57:29.020 point.

00:57:29.320 So you have no excuse, make sure that you pick that up.

00:57:32.340 And if you would like to get some merch to support the show, you can head over to shop

00:57:37.140 blazemedia.com, click on the Oren McIntyre collection, and you can find something great

00:57:41.740 for you or another fan of the show.

00:57:43.740 Thank you everybody for watching.

00:57:44.960 And as always, I will talk to you next time.

The Auron MacIntyre Show - January 29, 2025

The 14th Amendment Is a Mess ｜ Guest： Ryan Turnipseed ｜ 1⧸29⧸25

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript