Roe v. Wade may be on the chopping block after oral arguments at the Supreme Court, and Joe Biden s team prepares for more co-ordinating authoritarianism. On today's show, Ben Shapiro explains why abortion should be illegal after 15 weeks of pregnancy, and why forced birth is a bad idea in the first place. He also explains why the left doesn't want women to have kids and why they should get rid of birth control in order to achieve complete equality in the workforce. And he explains why forcing birth is bad and why we should stop having kids altogether. The full show is available on Amazon Prime and Vimeo worldwide. Thanks for listening and share the podcast with your fellow podulters! Ben Shapiro is the host of the podcast "The Ben Shapiro Show" and is a writer and editor at large for The Weekly Standard. He is also a frequent contributor to the conservative newsletter National Review and has been featured in the New York Times, The Daily Beast, and The Huffington Post. His latest book is out now: Click here to buy a copy of his new book, "Roe Vs. Wade: How to Make It in America: The Case Against Roe V Wade." If you haven't already done so, you can do so on Audible or wherever else you're listening to the show, go to Audible.org/Roe V Wade. Roe v Wade: What's Wrong with Roe v Wade? It's That's Good, Right, Is It Good, It's Not Good, Is That Good, Here's My Story? And More? Reeves v Wade v Wade, That's It's Great, Here s My Story, And This Is It, And That's Not Really Good, And I'll Say It, Too Much, And More, and More, And It's More Than That, And So Much More, And This & This & More, This's It, and This, and This And This, That And This And That, and That's That, And That & This, And Other And That And More... and More And More And This and More On That, Plus This, Finally, Finally, And Finally, This And More At Last, That's My Reaction To That And That s My Reaction to That And So And So On And That At Other And More On It, My Reaction, And ... ... And This ...
00:00:00.000Roe versus Wade may be on the chopping block after oral arguments at the Supreme Court and Joe Biden's team prepares for more COVID authoritarianism.
00:00:16.000It's time to stand up to big tech, protect your data at expressvpn.com slash Ben.
00:00:21.000Before we get to all the news, a reminder, you're spending way too much on your cell phone bill if you are using anything other than Pure Talk, because Pure Talk has great deals on cell phone coverage.
00:00:29.000Do you think you need one of the big networks in order to make sure that your coverage is good?
00:00:33.000Well, what if you could use the same towers as one of the big networks, but pay like half the price?
00:01:24.000Okay, so yesterday was oral argument time at the Supreme Court over a brand new abortion law in Mississippi that bans abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.
00:01:39.000Which, by the way, is still a more lenient law than the laws of places like France.
00:01:43.000The United States has some of the most liberal abortion laws on planet Earth.
00:01:47.000So, lest anybody tell you that we are puritanical about abortion, precisely the opposite.
00:01:51.000Thanks to Supreme Court precedent, we are one of the most liberal countries on planet Earth as far as when a woman is allowed to kill the baby within her womb, along with her doctors.
00:02:00.000The Mississippi case would go further.
00:02:05.000They say, well, if you uphold this 15-week ban, then we'd like to go to six weeks.
00:02:09.000There are a bunch of issues at play in the Mississippi case.
00:02:11.000In order to understand them, we have to go through the legal precedent.
00:02:14.000But to understand why this is such a controversy in the United States, of course, you have to understand the role that abortion plays in the left's pantheon of almost idolatrous worship of particular political viewpoints.
00:02:25.000So the idea of the left is that in order to achieve complete equality, you have to get rid of the material conditions that could lead to inequality.
00:02:32.000Well, that means getting rid of certain baseline biological realities.
00:02:36.000This is why the left objects to things like the notion that, for example, men are on average taller than women.
00:02:41.000Heather Hying, who is the professor of biology over at Evergreen State College, remember she lost her job for making that controversial contention.
00:02:49.000If you point out that men and women are different in any way, biologically speaking, this is a problem because it leads to unequal outcomes.
00:02:55.000If you point out that women are biologically different, in that they have periods and then they have children, and that this may constrain some of the choices that they make, particularly having children in the workforce, this is very bad.
00:03:06.000And so in order to achieve complete equality of outcome, we must get rid of kids.
00:03:11.000We have to make sure that women have the opportunity to be just like men, biologically speaking.
00:03:16.000So theoretically, they could do that with birth control.
00:03:18.000But what if they don't want to do that with birth control?
00:03:31.000Now, in no circumstance in life do you think of a normal biological process coming to its fruition as the use of force.
00:03:40.000It doesn't occur in any other biological process that you can name.
00:03:44.000When it comes to eating and then digesting your food, if you say that somebody is digesting their food, you don't say that they are engaged in forced digestion.
00:03:54.000If you said, you know, it's probably not a great idea for you just to vomit up all your food every day.
00:03:59.000If you said that to somebody, they wouldn't say, well, you're anti-choice.
00:04:01.000You'd say, well, no, the normal process by which you eat food and digest it is that.
00:04:07.000And this is true for every biological process.
00:04:10.000It is a normal biological process for when a woman getting pregnant, for when a woman gets pregnant, for her to bring that child to term.
00:04:17.000That is the normal biological process.
00:04:20.000It is true for every female creature in the mammalian species.
00:04:25.000Pregnancy generally leads to childbirth.
00:04:28.000But only according to the left, because the left is anti-biology, because biology stands in way as an obstacle to equality of outcome.
00:04:35.000For the left, abortion has become a sacrament.
00:04:38.000It moved from safe, legal, and rare, a tragic situation that requires a tragic decision sometimes, which was the language of Democrats in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, to abortion is the greatest good.
00:04:47.000It is the highest good, because it is only things like abortion that allow women to make the same life decisions as men.
00:04:54.000Well, uh, we are speaking out against any efforts to roll back Roe v. Wade.
00:04:57.000Court yesterday and she says we're not even a democracy if women can't have abortions.
00:05:01.000Well, we are speaking out against any efforts to robobobby Wade. I feel that we're not even in a democracy if women can't make decisions about their own bodies.
00:05:13.000We're not even a democracy if a woman can't choose to abort her child.
00:05:18.000Now, whenever people say this is a pro-choice position, the question becomes, for the vast majority of women who get pregnant, they do not get pregnant through rape or incest.
00:05:26.000That is a vast, vast, vast minority of cases.
00:05:28.000According to the Guttmacher Institute, which is a very left-leaning social science and sexual practices institute that studies the data on this stuff, they say that well under 1% of all abortions are because of things like rape and incest.
00:05:42.000But that's always used as sort of the leading edge because it relieves the obligation from women who get pregnant, not through rape or incest, through irresponsibility or through choice or in some sort of circumstance that they don't particularly want, but was foreseeable and was not through the use of force.
00:05:58.000Those are the cases that the left wishes to protect because, again, they wish to protect abortion Full stop.
00:06:09.000In fact, you're not fully a woman unless you have had an abortion.
00:06:12.000Lena Dunham famously said this a few years ago, and the left kind of got embarrassed by it because it was so bizarre and strange, but it was true.
00:06:19.000She said, I feel guilty I haven't had an abortion.
00:06:21.000I feel like I haven't had the full experience of womanhood in the United States if I have not had an abortion.
00:06:25.000And according to the left, this seems to be sort of the way that they think about this, the hard left.
00:06:29.000They don't think of abortion as a tragic choice made by some in order to even further their own life ambitions, which would be bad enough because you're not allowed to kill people to further your life ambitions as a general rule.
00:06:40.000They've tended to think of it now as almost a rite of passage.
00:06:43.000It's taking control of your own biology to achieve equal outcome with men by making the same life decisions that men never have to make because men don't get pregnant.
00:06:52.000Unless you are a real leftist, in which case sometimes men do get pregnant, and also sometimes women are men and have balls.
00:06:59.000So, it's all self-defeating for the left, but again, the end goal is the same, which is men and women exactly the same, all of us interchangeable widgets, and if biology stands in the way of that, then biology is the enemy.
00:07:09.000This is why abortion is such a closely fought battle.
00:07:12.000In the United States at a time when, again, birth control is widely available.
00:07:43.000I went out into their garage when they were about to move to Florida with us.
00:07:46.000Went out into their garage, and they had just boxes and boxes of old stuff.
00:07:50.000I'm talking about, like, old pictures of the family.
00:07:52.000I'm talking about VHS tapes that they used to take with the handheld camcorder.
00:07:55.000I'm talking about old film reels of my parents' parents.
00:07:59.000And I took all that stuff, I loaded it up into a legacy box, I sent it to my good friends over at Legacy Box, and they digitized all of that, sent all of the originals back, and sent my parents a digitized version.
00:08:08.000My parents were able to give these CDs, DVDs, you know, digitized versions to me, to my sisters.
00:08:14.000So we all have the family memories preserved forever.
00:08:18.000So make that happen for your own parents.
00:09:03.000And so you have to wonder why it became a sacrament, and the answer is because it is a sacrifice to propitiate the gods of equal outcome.
00:09:11.000And this is why you see abortion activists literally taking abortion pills outside the Supreme Court building, as though this is an act of heroism.
00:09:18.000Okay, these are women who are standing outside the Supreme Court.
00:09:22.000I say women because I assume they're gender.
00:09:25.000Again, according to the left, maybe these are men.
00:09:26.000Says, we are taking abortion pills forever.
00:09:39.000By the way, here I would like to make a linguistic, linguistic and semantic point that actually has some relevance.
00:09:46.000It's a point made by Robert George, the philosopher over at Princeton.
00:09:49.000A lot of people talk about potential human life when it comes to the fertilization of an egg.
00:09:54.000He says, no, that's a human life with potential.
00:09:56.000That is a distinction with a difference.
00:09:58.000You are talking about human lives with potential.
00:10:01.000The minute that the egg is fertilized, you have a separate DNA profile, you have a separate human being, and the question of when life begins is very simple.
00:10:12.000There really is no scientific argument about this.
00:10:15.000There is no other metric for when life begins that has any sort of consistent application to the real world or even to adults.
00:10:21.000Okay, so, all this comes to the Supreme Court yesterday, and there are oral arguments over what the standard should be.
00:10:28.000So, to understand what the standard should be, you sort of have to understand the timeline of Supreme Court cases here.
00:10:33.000So, leading up to Roe vs. Wade, which of course happens in 1973, there's a whole line of Supreme Court cases that are created from whole cloth by the Warren Court, designating a generalized right to privacy.
00:10:45.000Now, if you look in the Constitution of the United States, of course, there is no right to privacy.
00:10:49.000There are certain rights against things like unreasonable search and seizure.
00:10:52.000There's a specific liberty against unreasonable search and seizure.
00:10:56.000And we understand that there is such a thing as private religious practice, that a generalized notion that privacy is a good thing is embedded in certain parts of the Constitution.
00:11:05.000But there is no wide-scale right to privacy that can be used to overcome the presumptions of state authority in a wide variety of matters.
00:11:13.000It just doesn't exist, which is why whenever the left talks about, you know, the Second Amendment, it doesn't mean what you think it says.
00:11:18.000It certainly means a lot more what I think it says than there is a right to privacy in the Constitution, which there absolutely is not.
00:11:23.000So in 1965, there's a very famous case called Griswold v. Connecticut.
00:11:27.000Griswold v. Connecticut is about a Connecticut state law that says that you should not be able to be prescribed contraceptives.
00:11:38.000And the idea was that they wanted to keep up the birth rate, that it was a sin to use contraceptives from a certain religious perspective.
00:11:46.000And in Griswold versus Connecticut, the state runs up directly against the fact that such prohibitions have been in place in the United States for a very long time.
00:11:53.000Now, this has nothing to do, and this is a key distinction we should make.
00:11:56.000When it comes to the law, there's the question of what you think a good law is, and there's a question of what does the state have authority to regulate.
00:12:14.000Okay, so I don't have to greenlight what the state does in order to understand that the state has the power to do it in much the same way.
00:12:20.000I don't have to agree with your use of free speech to believe in a generalized right to free speech.
00:12:26.000So what the left likes to do when it comes to legal discussions is they'll take a case like Griswold versus Connecticut and they'll say, what do you want to do?
00:12:31.000Get rid of contraceptives for married people?
00:12:33.000Say, no, I actually think contraceptives for married people are fine.
00:12:36.000I have no generalized problem with that.
00:12:38.000But that does not go to the question as to whether the Supreme Court, whose job it is to determine whether a state has acted within its regulatory authority, can go above and beyond that to simply act as sort of a legislature determining what's a good law and what's a bad law.
00:12:52.000That's not the job of the Supreme Court.
00:12:53.000The job of the Supreme Court is not to determine whether a law is a good idea or a bad idea.
00:12:57.000The job of the Supreme Court is to determine whether a state law is in conflict with the Constitution or whether it is not in conflict with the Constitution.
00:13:05.000The reason I bring this up is because in 2012, this was literally what the Democrats claimed about Mitt Romney.
00:13:10.000Mitt Romney had said, there is no right to privacy in the Constitution.
00:13:12.000They said, oh, so you must be against contraceptives for married people.
00:13:17.000What he means is that there is no inherent right to privacy, generally speaking, that has now been applied, by the way, to a variety of very public activities like same-sex marriage as well as abortion.
00:13:28.000Those have nothing to do with privacy per se.
00:13:32.000They said, well, you must be in favor of the Connecticut law if you think there's no right to privacy in the Constitution.
00:13:36.000No, I can be against the Connecticut law and also think there is no right to privacy in the Constitution.
00:13:40.000Okay, so Griswold versus Connecticut happens in 1965, and under a doctrine called substantive due process, which I'll explain in just one minute, they say there's a right to privacy.
00:13:51.000The Constitution of the United States, again, has very specific provisions that you have to conflict with in order for a law to be overruled.
00:13:58.000There is no rights to privacy in the Constitution.
00:14:00.000So the court had to create out of whole cloth a doctrine by which they can simply strike down laws they don't like.
00:14:06.000And so they pick up this bizarre thread.
00:14:08.000An American constitutional history that has a really dark and terrible history going all the way back to the Dred Scott decision.
00:14:13.000The Dred Scott decision, which happens in 1856.
00:14:15.000The Dred Scott decision was a decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States, led by Judge Roger Taney, decides that black people who have escaped to the North do not have any sort of citizenship rights under the Constitution of the United States because black people are not, in fact, people under the Constitution of the United States.
00:14:32.000This is the Dred Scott decision, the worst decision in Supreme Court history, bar none.
00:14:37.000And the doctrine that they use to strike down federal law on this question, right, and state law on this question, the doctrine they use is something they call substantive due process.
00:14:46.000The Constitution guarantees that every person shall not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
00:14:52.000What it means is that the authorities can't simply come to your house and take your stuff.
00:14:56.000You need to go through some sort of process.
00:14:57.000You need to go through some sort of judicial process.
00:15:18.000But what the Supreme Court says in Dred Scott is there's something called substantive due process.
00:15:22.000And what we mean is there has to be a substantially fair process, not the process itself.
00:15:27.000Something substantially fair has to happen in order for the law to be legal.
00:15:31.000Now you may notice this has nothing to do with process.
00:15:34.000And so substantive due process becomes the hook the Supreme Court hangs its hat on for basically the rest of time in determining that it can strike things down.
00:15:41.000Whenever the Supreme Court has no good excuse for striking down a law, they simply declare, thanks to substantive due process, your rights have been violated, and therefore we're going to strike down a law.
00:15:51.000Just use substantive due process as basically a catch-all phrase, meaning we just want to strike a thing down.
00:15:56.000Okay, so the Supreme Court in 1965 says under substantive due process, we are going to strike down this Connecticut law on contraceptives, and we are going to say that there is a generalized right to privacy in the Constitution that emerges from emanations and penumbras.
00:16:12.000There is no generalized rights to privacy that emerges from quote-unquote emanations and penumbras.
00:16:16.000All they mean by that is that in the Constitution, as I've said, you can see certain rights to privacy like against unreasonable search and seizure, for example, but that doesn't like emerge into some full-blown fantasy about a right to privacy that you can then apply to completely independent circumstances that are not unreasonable search and seizure.
00:16:32.000The Supreme Court simply declares itself basically the arbiter of all that is good and just.
00:16:37.000and creates a right to privacy out of whole cloth.
00:16:41.000And it's about whether married couples are allowed to get contraceptives.
00:16:44.000And they said, yes, married couples can get contraceptives.
00:16:46.000Then in 1972, the Supreme Court goes further in a case called Eisenstadt v. Baird.
00:16:50.000Okay, and in this particular case, the question is whether unmarried couples, whether everyone has a right to contraceptives.
00:16:57.000Now, again, you can say that a state has a very strong state interest in unmarried couples not getting contraceptives.
00:17:02.000The idea being that you want to incentivize people to get married, right?
00:17:05.000If you want to have sex, you should get married.
00:17:07.000And that way, if you get pregnant, you're going to do so within the context of marriage.
00:17:11.000The Supreme Court says there is no rational basis for you to ban contraceptives from unmarried people.
00:17:16.000Now, again, This is not a question as to whether you agree with the law or disagree with the law.
00:17:20.000This is a question as to whether the founders of the Constitution of the United States were very much in favor of 17-year-olds screwing without contraceptives.
00:17:34.000But the Supreme Court has now extended the right to privacy to you going down to the pharmacy as a single person and picking up contraceptives.
00:17:50.000It is just creation out of whole cloth.
00:17:52.000Now we've extended from contraceptives, which again might be a certain privacy issue.
00:17:56.000Maybe you can kind of see it through a glass, right?
00:17:58.000Because obviously you're going to use contraceptives under private circumstances to now an act of abortion, which is very not private because it involves another human being.
00:18:34.000Helix knows that, so they have several different mattress models to choose from.
00:18:37.000They have soft, medium, and firm mattresses.
00:18:39.000Mattress is great for cooling you down if you sleep hot.
00:18:41.000Mattress is great for spinal alignment to prevent morning aches and pains.
00:18:44.000Even a Helix plus size mattress for plus size sleepers.
00:18:46.000So if you're looking for a mattress, you take the quiz, you order the mattress you're matched to, the mattress comes directly to your doorstep for free.
00:18:52.000You don't ever need to go to a mattress store again.
00:19:38.000Before Roe vs. Wade, abortion was not illegal across the country.
00:19:41.000States like California had very liberal abortion laws before Roe vs. Wade.
00:19:45.000States like New York, and more liberal abortion laws before Roe vs. Wade.
00:19:48.000Before Roe vs. Wade, there was a state standard, because again, regulatory standards, states have a lot of power to legislate.
00:19:54.000They have a lot of power to regulate in these particular areas.
00:19:57.000So Texas law did not look like New York law.
00:20:00.000The question of Roe v. Wade is whether Texas had the ability to regulate abortion.
00:20:04.000And Roe v. Wade, the court under Harry Blackmun, high on his own fumes, says, no, there is no ability for states to regulate abortion because under a vague right to privacy, you now have the ability to kill your own child.
00:20:18.000This is a right under the Constitution of the United States.
00:20:22.000They say that the constitutional right to privacy, which again started with the emanations and penumbras of Griswold versus Connecticut, nowhere to be found in the constitutional text, encompasses a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy.
00:20:33.000The court then characterized this right as fundamental.
00:20:35.000Okay, so there are certain rights that are weighed and balanced against state interests.
00:20:40.000But they characterize this as a fundamental right, meaning that the state better have an extraordinary interest in order to regulate abortion in any way.
00:20:48.000They said the state could not interfere with abortion unless they had a compelling reason for regulation.
00:20:54.000And you could only assert a compelling interest in protecting a fetus once it became viable.
00:21:39.000When you actually read the court opinion, again written by Harry Blackmun in this case, he doesn't even bother to pretend that he knows what the hell he is talking about.
00:21:49.000The court says itself in Roe v. Wade, quote, The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right to privacy.
00:21:55.000In a line of decisions, however, going back to perhaps as far as Union Pacific Railroad v. Botsford in 1891, the court has recognized a right of personal privacy or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy does exist under the Constitution.
00:22:06.000In varying contexts, the court or individual justices or individual justice in dissent, who cares, have indeed found at least the roots of that right in the First Amendment, in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, In the penumbras of the Bill of Rights, that's Griswold.
00:22:18.000Or in the concept of liberty guaranteed by the first section of the 14th Amendment.
00:22:22.000These decisions make it clear that only personal rights that can be deemed fundamental or implicit in the concept of ordered liberty are included in this guarantee of personal privacy.
00:22:31.000And they say, this right of privacy, whether it be founded in the 14th Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or as the district court determined in the 9th Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.
00:22:47.000The detriment the state would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent.
00:22:51.000Okay, so, again, they basically say, they throw up their hands, like, we have no clue where this is coming from in the Constitution, but whether we find it here, or whether we find it here, whether we pull this rabbit out of this hat here, or whether we make the coin appear behind your ear, you have a right to an abortion under the Constitution of the United States.
00:25:45.000It was a case where conservatives widely expected that it was going to be overturned because there had been some new justices who had been appointed by Republicans who had joined the court.
00:25:53.000Justice O'Connor, Justice Kennedy, who turned out to be, both of whom turned out to be half-assed, kind of garbage justices.
00:26:01.000They voted for, and Kennedy largely wrote, the decision in Planned Parenthood versus Casey.
00:26:05.000The governing standard moves from essentially no regulation of abortion in the last trimester to the undue burden test, under which state regulations could survive constitutional review, so long as they don't place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a non-viable fetus. Okay, so now the line is no longer last trimester, now the line is viability.
00:26:27.000Okay, so you're allowed to regulate the abortion of viable fetuses, but you still have to show a compelling state interest.
00:26:36.000You can sort of carve back a road just a little bit.
00:26:38.000So Planned Parenthood carves back a road just a little bit.
00:26:40.000Now, the Planned Parenthood versus Casey decision also ends up being the source of an entire line of cases that move toward the legalization of same-sex, not legalization, forced legalization at the federal level of same-sex marriage.
00:26:52.000That used to be a state issue also, right?
00:26:53.000You'd have states like California that would legalize same-sex marriage or Massachusetts.
00:26:56.000And then you'd have states like Alabama or Florida that didn't.
00:27:00.000And then the court just decided to take that up to the federal level because this is what they do in usurping power, becoming a group of powerful people in robes, simply making law out of their heads, as opposed to interpreting the Constitution of the United States.
00:27:14.000Planned Parenthood v. Casey sets very bizarre legal standards that are not legal standards at all.
00:27:19.000In fact, Planned Parenthood v. Casey contains literally my least favorite constitutional line of all time, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy.
00:27:30.000Our law affords constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education.
00:27:38.000Our cases recognize the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.
00:27:50.000That was a predecessor case, as we mentioned, to Roe v. Wade.
00:27:53.000They'd already made way for Roe v. Wade in 1972.
00:27:57.000Now, again, there is no history to suggest that this liberty is as broad-based as it is being made here.
00:28:04.000Once they say you have the liberty as to how you marry, you're basically making the case for Obergefell, right, all the way up to same-sex marriage.
00:28:10.000Once you say you have the liberty as to whether or not to have a child, even post getting pregnant, now you're talking about the case for abortion.
00:28:17.000All of this created by whole cloth out of a Supreme Court that has no relationship to the constitutional text.
00:28:22.000In fact, by the way, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, we'll get to this, what the actual legal arguments look like in court yesterday, because the Supreme Court justices did their questioning.
00:28:30.000Justice Sotomayor openly said, she was asked, like, there's no right to privacy in the Constitution.
00:28:34.000She goes, there's lots of stuff that isn't in the Constitution that we pretend is there.
00:28:38.000She basically just said it straight out.
00:28:40.000Which, by the way, is why the Supreme Court has been kind of a garbage institution for quite a while.
00:28:45.000In any case, The finding in Planned Parenthood versus Casey, the worst constitutional line, I think, in modern American history.
00:28:52.000Quote, and led by Justice Kennedy, whose entire theory of constitutional jurisprudence is that there is a right to autonomy created by Anthony Kennedy out of whole cloth and then placed into the Constitution.
00:29:04.000Now, again, there are spheres of autonomy under the Constitution of the United States because the powers of the federal government are restricted under the Constitution to make room for your personal autonomy.
00:29:14.000And state constitutions do the same thing.
00:29:15.000But there is no broad-based right to do whatever you want under the Constitution of the United States.
00:29:45.000Federal government is supposed to have the fewest powers of all.
00:29:48.000So using the federal government to trump local governments in the name of rights that are never established in the federal constitution is a complete Here's the line that I'm talking about.
00:29:56.000I keep pitching it because it's so bad.
00:29:57.000to the constitutional structure and the philosophy of the Constitution. Here's the line that I'm talking about. I keep pitching it because it's so bad. Here's what Anthony Kennedy wrote.
00:30:05.000These matters involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the 14th Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, of the mystery of human life.
00:30:23.000Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under compulsion of the state.
00:30:28.000Okay, well, so basically, either you're advocating for anarchy, which is not what Anthony Kennedy is doing, or you're using vague mumbo-jumbo philosophical crap in order to trump basic questions about the rights that, for example, unborn human beings hold.
00:30:43.000And whether you have the ability to kill an unborn child in the womb.
00:30:47.000The idea that at the heart of liberty is the right to define your own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, of the mystery of human life.
00:30:54.000You're going to need some sort of limiting principle there.
00:30:57.000Because it turns out that if you're just saying that in your head you can define all those things, of course that's true.
00:31:01.000If you're saying that that now manifests in action that affects the rest of the world, nope.
00:31:06.000Then some limits are going to have to be drawn, particularly when you're waving your fist around and it hits a baby and kills the baby.
00:31:12.000At that point, you're going to have to start drawing some limits.
00:31:14.000Okay, so Planned Parenthood versus Casey sets the modern standard for undue burden.
00:31:18.000And the idea is under the undue burden standard, the only way that you can survive a constitutional review is if you don't place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a non-viable fetus.
00:31:29.000So, in other words, the state has a little bit more authority to regulate abortion post-viability.
00:31:33.000Again, post-viability is defined in law under Planned Parenthood v. Casey at, like, 21-22 weeks.
00:31:40.000And why it's placed at viability is beyond reason.
00:31:43.000Like, there's no reason why, for example, a 19-week-old fetus does not have any protections, but a 21-week-old fetus has many, many more protections.
00:31:52.000Viability is a very bad place to draw the line, particularly because medical viability keeps getting earlier and earlier and earlier.
00:32:27.000And then they'll light up the Empire State Building pink in celebration of infanticide.
00:32:33.000If Governor Ralph Northam has his way in Virginia before he leaves office, then you'll still be able to keep the baby comfortable while they decide what to do.
00:32:39.000Okay, so it's going to vary state by state if Roe v. Wade is gotten rid of.
00:32:42.000And this is why it's always been a ridiculous contention by the left that if you get rid of Roe v. Wade, abortion completely disappears.
00:32:57.000Door number two is the overruling of Planned Parenthood versus Casey, which would get rid of the viability standard.
00:33:03.000So the idea would be, because the Mississippi law goes to 15 weeks, the Mississippi law would now say, OK, it's not about the viability standard.
00:33:12.000It would have to be some other standard.
00:33:15.000You'd say that there's still a right to an abortion, but viability is not the point at which the debate begins.
00:33:20.000And that opens up a whole can of worms, because then the question becomes, okay, so what standard do you draw for when you're not allowed to abort anymore?
00:33:45.000The only people who are arguing at this point not to strike down, that the Mississippi law should be completely struck down, are the three justices on the left.
00:33:55.000The justices on the Supreme Court right now, they break down essentially into three groups of three.
00:34:00.000This is the way that people tend to think of the Supreme Court right now.
00:34:03.000So you've got the sort of hardcore constitutionalists.
00:34:06.000That'd be Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
00:34:09.000And to a certain extent, Justice Gorsuch, although obviously his decision in the extension of the Civil Rights Act to transgenderism is insane and unjustifiable and crazy on every level.
00:34:21.000But those are the three most conservative members of the court, would be Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas.
00:34:26.000And then you have the sort of center of the court, and that right now is perceived as Justice Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.
00:34:34.000We have no idea really where Amy Coney Barrett is, but she was specifically appointed on this point, right?
00:34:38.000The reason that Trump picked her is because of Roe v. Wade.
00:34:40.000It's because she's written critically of Roe v. Wade in the past.
00:34:43.000Okay, so that's sort of the center of the court.
00:34:45.000And then you have the far left of the court, from sort of center to left, it goes Elena Kagan, Steven Breyer, and then finally Sonia Sotomayor, who is just a judicial activist of the highest degree.
00:35:10.000She's like a Justice Ginsburg type who's an activist who's been put on the court to pretend that she gives a crap about the law, but actually doesn't.
00:35:15.000I mean, make no mistake, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a disaster of justice.
00:35:21.000There are a few administrative law issues where she was actually not bad, and then on social issues, just... She never broke with now, basically, where she used to be a lawyer.
00:36:26.000To me, every area of legitimacy in life, period, is about you doing your job.
00:36:30.000If you call a plumber and your plumber comes over and bashes a hole in your wall and doesn't fix your plumbing, He has lost his institutional legitimacy.
00:36:39.000But Justice Roberts seems to think that the institutional legitimacy of the court rests on public polling.
00:37:06.000Please don't get rid of abortion in Texas.
00:37:09.000And then there's argument number two, which is stare decisis.
00:37:11.000Stare decisis is the basic meaning is the case has been decided.
00:37:15.000The idea being that if there was a case, the same fact pattern, and in that case you held one way, you shouldn't hold differently now because it upsets the apple cart.
00:37:23.000Because too many people have reliance interests.
00:37:25.000People are reliant on that case, and they retain a certain reliance culturally on that case, and so you can't overturn it.
00:37:32.000If that argument had been applied to Plessy v. Ferguson, we'd still have segregated buses in the United States.
00:37:37.000Or at least, it wouldn't have been ruled illegal by the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board.
00:37:42.000Brown v. Board overturned Plessy v. Ferguson.
00:37:46.000And if it had not been for getting rid of stare decisis, the court is very unclear about when they are going to abide by stare decisis.
00:37:54.000Obergefell is a complete overruling of stare decisis.
00:37:57.000That was already decided in a case called Bowers v. Hardwick in 1988.
00:38:01.000And the Supreme Court took the exact same fact pattern and found the exact reverse.
00:38:04.000So stare decisis is basically a way for justices to pick and choose what they think is worth upholding without actually having to justify why they uphold it.
00:38:12.000So you had Sonia Sotomayor, who does not give any crap about stare decisis when it comes to gay marriage, for example, saying, oh, stare decisis really matters here.
00:38:20.000And Justice Thomas, who's perfectly consistent about this, is like, stare decisis is garbage and we shouldn't pay attention to bad cases.
00:38:26.000So Justice Roberts kind of seems to want to chart a middle path here.
00:38:30.000The middle path being not overruling either Casey or Roe.
00:38:35.000Instead, basically arguing that we will continue to hold the undue burden standard, but we will move it back to 15 weeks, for example, or 14 weeks.
00:38:45.000We won't make it fetal viability, per se.
00:38:47.000We'll just say that something quasi-like fetal viability moves a little bit earlier.
00:38:51.000So we'll retain Planned Parenthood versus Casey, and we'll just say that it's not about viability anymore, viability keeps getting earlier, we'll set the standard a little bit earlier.
00:38:58.000There doesn't seem to be the taste for that from anyone else on the court.
00:39:01.000We'll get to more of its analysis in just one second.
00:39:04.000First, obviously, inflation continues to dominate the country, and we are at a level we have not seen in decades.
00:42:49.000So if you're planning on adding that terrifying thriller to your queue in 2022, and you want us to keep making content to combat the over-politicized mainstream entertaining streaming on major platforms, go like and share the trailer on YouTube.
00:43:01.000Really, your support makes a huge difference.
00:43:03.000Also, We're getting involved in culture in pretty much every conceivable way.
00:43:07.000We all knew that Matt Walsh had more talent than he was letting on because he had to, right?
00:43:11.000But none of us knew just how much talent he actually had.
00:43:29.000It's an inspiring tale of a young boy who pretends he's a walrus, and it's all pretend, until the internet tells Johnny's mommy that Johnny is actually a walrus, and she must uphold, and she must forward, his trans walrus identity.
00:43:41.000If you know Matt's brain, his twisted brain, you will laugh your butt off reading this to your kids, or mostly to yourself and to your liberal family members.
00:43:48.000Head on over to johnnythewalrus.com, reserve your copy of Matt's timely masterpiece, Johnny the Walrus, today.
00:43:53.000You're listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
00:43:56.000All righty, so you've got the court and it's split 3-3-3 usually.
00:44:40.000The Planned Parenthood versus Casey standard, but get rid of viability and just move it back to 15 weeks.
00:44:45.000So he kept saying over and over the thing that is at issue before us today is 15 weeks.
00:44:49.000I think he wants to maintain the quote-unquote institutional credibility.
00:44:52.000Now, there is no justice in my lifetime who has undermined the institutional credibility of the Supreme Court quite like Justice Roberts, who has now presided over Obergefell.
00:45:02.000He voted the other way, but he presided, his court did, over Obergefell, presided over the Obamacare cases, and has presided over a wide variety of cases that should He's presided over a bunch of cases that are just ruled either the wrong way or that he overtly attempted to twist constitutional law in order to prevent the Supreme Court from being embroiled in controversy and in the process made the Supreme Court more embroiled in controversy.
00:45:27.000So Justice Roberts wants to not get rid of Roe, not get rid of Planned Parenthood versus Casey, just sort of get rid of the viability standard and move it back.
00:45:35.000There doesn't seem to be a case for this.
00:45:37.000The plaintiffs in this case, the pro-abortion side, They said, in order for you to uphold the Mississippi law, you have to get rid of Planned Parenthood versus Casey.
00:45:46.000They said, there is no way that you uphold the undue burden standard.
00:45:50.000Because once you get rid of viability, then the question becomes, what is your standard of when an abortion is allowed and when it is not?
00:45:56.000There is no clear line anymore, right?
00:45:57.000Roe Is a deeply wrong and I think evil decision, but Roe does draw a pretty clear line on a legal level, which is the last trimester and then Planned Parenthood versus Casey is a deeply wrong and stupid decision, but it draws some line and viability.
00:46:11.000If you get rid of the viability line, what's the standard?
00:46:13.000So even the plaintiffs are like you have to overrule Planned Parenthood versus Casey.
00:46:28.000Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett is which they choose to do.
00:46:31.000Do they go along with these sort of narrow decision of Justice Roberts?
00:46:35.000Or do they say, okay, we're getting rid of the viability standard completely and the underburden standard, and we will go back to the idea that there is a baseline right to abortion in Roe, and we will just draw a different standard as to how to balance those interests.
00:46:50.000Or do they just overrule Roe entirely?
00:46:53.000Justice Roberts, again, trying to draw that narrow line.
00:46:55.000There was not a lot of support for it.
00:46:56.000Julie Reichelman, who's a lawyer for the abortion clinic, she disputed that.
00:47:00.000She said there are limits in many other countries that are subject to significant exceptions.
00:47:03.000Other conservative justices, this is according to the New York Times, indicated they were not interested in Roberts's intermediate approach.
00:47:09.000Samuel Alito said the only real options we have are to reaffirm Roe or to overrule it, which, of course, I agree with it.
00:47:15.000So, Roberts would need to get two votes for a narrower opinion.
00:47:19.000Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett were pretty silent on all of this.
00:47:22.000They kind of kept their cards close to their chest on where they are on this particular decision.
00:47:27.000I think the most likely scenario here is that He does craft some sort of majority decision with six votes to pare back Planned Parenthood versus Casey beyond the quote-unquote viability standard.
00:47:39.000I think that probably Roberts gets his way here.
00:47:41.000And the reason I say that is because I just don't think that Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett have the stones to actually overturn Roe.
00:47:47.000Because it is clear on a legal level that they should.
00:47:50.000We've described the entire line of cases.
00:47:52.000If Roe were overturned, 20 states would seek to probably make abortion illegal, which leaves, last I checked, another 30 states that will not.
00:48:01.000Chief Justice Roberts expressed frustration with Mississippi's litigation strategy.
00:48:05.000In the state's petition seeking Supreme Court review, officials told the justices the questions presented do not require the court to overturn Roe or Casey.
00:48:13.000Once the court agreed to hear the case, the state shifted its emphasis and began a sustained assault on these precedents, says the New York Times.
00:48:40.000Meanwhile, he had Justice Breyer quoting from Planned Parenthood versus Casey.
00:48:45.000And he said, to overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to re-examine a watershed decision would subvert the court's legitimacy beyond any serious question.
00:48:53.000I'm sorry, Roe versus Wade already subverted the court's legitimacy.
00:48:56.000Justice Sotomayor, who is the most political justice of my lifetime, asked whether the court would, quote, survive the stench of being considered a political institution.
00:49:04.000The stench of being... Sorry, guys, a little late for that one, considering that you declared that same-sex marriage was the entire law of the United States by yourselves, without any constitutional precedent.
00:49:16.000Again, we have now declared, in the past 10 years, that there is a fundamental right for men to marry each other under the Constitution of the United States, penned in 1789, and there's a constitutional right under the Civil Rights Act, as extended by the Civil Rights Act, for men who believe they are women to be treated like women in public settings.
00:50:03.000In a White House news briefing, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the greatest of all doctors except for the much-ballyhooed Joe Biden, he announced that it was one person who traveled from South Africa on November 22nd and tested positive for COVID-19 on November 29th.
00:51:35.000Would there be any public health benefit to furthering its spread by lifting travel restrictions, for example, so it out-competes the Delta variant?
00:51:44.000You're talking about something really dangerous.
00:51:46.000You're talking about let a lot of people get infected to see if, in fact, you could protect them.
00:51:51.000That's something that I think almost all infectious disease people with any knowledge about infectious disease would not say.
00:53:58.000Even the Biden administration used to say this.
00:54:01.000Now, apparently, they just can't make up their minds.
00:54:03.000And again, the fact that they can't make up their minds underscores what I have been saying now for months, for more than a year at this point.
00:54:10.000People who refuse to acknowledge that government cannot solve all of their problems are the same people who believe that we have to keep locking down, we have to keep being scared, because after all, if they ever admit that government can't solve all of our problems, we might actually start taking our lives into our own hands.
00:54:27.000Here's a top research scientist on CNBC saying, yeah, by the way, it looks kind of like the vaccines are durable against Omicron and you're all panicking because you're stupid.
00:54:37.000T-cells are what's really protecting us from severe disease, from COVID pneumonia.
00:54:42.000And our T-cells are very intensive, not affected by variants to any significant degree.
00:54:50.000So there's lots of reasons for optimism that this is not some horrible situation that we're in.
00:54:57.000The vaccine should hold up against severe disease, especially with people who are boosted.
00:55:05.000Hey, so what are we panicking over exactly?
00:55:08.000Well, what exactly are we panicking over?
00:55:09.000OK, so the answer is, again, it goes to the root baseline belief of Democrats, of many people on the left, that they are capable of fixing your life if you give them control.
00:55:23.000Ron Klain put out the most insane tweet of the day yesterday.
00:55:26.000So this is the actual chief of staff of the White House.
00:55:28.000Ron Klain is the shadow president because Joe Biden is no longer with us.
00:55:31.000He sadly departed this earth, at least on a mental level.
00:55:34.000I mean, if we're talking about Viability.
00:55:36.000I'm not sure that Joe Biden is viable at this point as a human.
00:55:38.000Joe Biden left us many, many months ago.
00:55:42.000Ronald Klain is the guy who's actually making policy at the White House.
00:55:45.000So there's a columnist named Greg Ip who writes for the Wall Street Journal.
00:55:48.000And he says, COVID carved a partisan divide through the United States.
00:55:51.000Democrats have been much more cautious and protective, which manifests itself as generally lower infections and deaths, but also much weaker economic outcomes.
00:56:02.000It sort of depends on the state as far as death per million ratio, because New York did worse than Florida, and New York is about the same size as Florida.
00:56:11.000Florida was much more open, but focus in on the economic statement right there, right?
00:56:15.000He's correct about this, that they are killing their own economies.
00:56:45.000Your own president says this, but he's saying that it's stronger COVID measures like lockdowns, presumably, and mask mandates that generate stronger economic out... If that's the case, why wasn't strong economic growth the thing last year?
00:56:57.000After all, we actually locked in our houses for months at a time last year.
00:57:39.000It was a lie in the Soviet Union with regards to the economy, and it's a lie with regards to COVID and the economy.
00:57:44.000And by the way, when I say it's a lie, I don't mean that he's just getting it wrong.
00:57:47.000I mean he is a liar because this is perfectly available data.
00:57:51.000Patrick Ruffini, who is a Republican pollster, he put out a chart showing the percent of jobs recovered since the beginning of the pandemic by state.
00:58:02.000Okay, here are the top states in terms of percentage of jobs that have returned since the beginning of the pandemic.
00:58:07.000Utah, Idaho, Arizona, Texas, Montana, South Dakota, Georgia, Nebraska, Tennessee, South Carolina, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina.
00:58:19.000The only state that I just listed that has a blue governor is North Carolina, which again is a state that tends to go red in presidential elections.
00:58:26.000So every single state I just mentioned in terms of jobs recovered, percentage of jobs recovered, is a red state.
00:58:33.000But you have Ronald Klain saying that no, lockdown measures are actually helpful to the economy.
00:58:38.000Okay fine, so if you believe that, why not just lock it all back down?
00:58:43.000The answer is the markets think that's what these guys believe.
00:58:45.000This is why the Dow is just getting destroyed.
00:58:48.000So the Dow finished 460 points lower on Tuesday.
00:58:53.000According to the CNBC, the major averages fell sharply, giving up solid gains on Wednesday after the CDC and Prevention confirmed the first case of Omicron in the U.S.
00:59:24.000And we were all supposed to be like ready to go.
00:59:26.000And now they're talking about how stronger COVID measures produce stronger economic outcomes.
00:59:31.000It's no wonder that Joe Biden is down in the high 30s, low 40s in terms of public approval rating.
00:59:35.000Meanwhile, he's just out there babbling nonsensically to himself about economic matters.
00:59:38.000He said yesterday that he built the economic recovery.
00:59:41.000No, you have stagnated an economic recovery that was perfectly natural.
00:59:45.000And this guy is the biggest placebo effect when it comes to the economy in American history, except it turns out that the placebo wasn't a placebo.
01:00:09.000It was because of the American Rescue Plan, which virtually every Democrat in Congress voted for and every Republican voted against.
01:00:17.000It was because of the hard work my administration has done to try to solve the challenges in our economy, instead of just pointing fingers and complaining.
01:00:26.000Nope, you did not build the economic recovery.
01:00:28.000Your economic recovery has been rife with inflation, which was completely unnecessary because you decided to pay people to stay home.
01:00:33.000So you've been under supply of labor, we have supply chain shortages, and you blew money into the economy.
01:01:26.000Meanwhile, Joe Biden is still promoting more spending, more spending.
01:01:28.000Build Back Better is going to fix everything.
01:01:30.000Now, my Republican friends are talking a lot about prices, but they're lined up against my Build Back Better plan, which would go right at the problem for rising costs for families.
01:01:51.000I noticed that that's all you do, is complain about problems that you yourself created and that you do nothing about while your Secretary of Transportation is on a two-month paternity leave in the middle of a supply chain crisis.
01:02:05.000Meanwhile, Janet Yellen's saying the same thing.
01:03:32.000For the vast majority of the country, that's not what's happening.
01:03:36.000Because of the actions the administration has taken, in partnership with business and labor, retailers and grocery stores, freight movers and railroads, those shelves are going to be stocked.
01:03:49.000Because that's not what I'm hearing from all of the people who are in industry right now.
01:03:54.000But it's you, the people, who are at fault.
01:03:56.000These, your great rulers, will be the ones who eventually decide whether you are allowed to have liberty or not.
01:04:01.000So I guess the leftist notion of governance can be summed up in the following logic.
01:04:08.000You have the right to decide your meaning of the universe, of life, of human existence when it comes to killing babies in your womb, but when it comes to your ability to actually live your life freely, We will tell you when you're allowed to live your life freely.
01:04:23.000At least when you're not killing babies.
01:05:23.000— John Bickley here, Daily Wire editor-in-chief.
01:05:26.000Wake up every morning with our new show, Morning Wire.
01:05:30.000On today's episode, President Biden's vaccine mandates suffer several court setbacks, the Supreme Court hears arguments on a landmark abortion case, and CNN suspends host Chris Cuomo.