The Charlie Kirk Show - SCOTUS Deals a Blow to American Sovereignty — Live Reaction with Texas AG Ken Paxton

00:00:00.000 Hey, everybody.

00:00:00.000 Today at Charlie Kirk Show, we unpack the recent decisions from the Supreme Court.

00:00:04.000 Remain in Mexico. 0.99

00:00:06.000 Not a great decision, not thrilled about it from Brett Kavanaugh, but a great decision on the fourth branch of government.

00:00:11.000 So a win and a loss.

00:00:12.000 Email me freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:00:14.000 The Attorney General of Texas joins us, Ken Paxton, as well as Josh Hammer to help us explain.

00:00:20.000 Come to our student action summit.

00:00:21.000 And guess what?

00:00:22.000 People of all ages are welcome.

00:00:24.000 5,000-plus activists, top conservative personalities, a celebration of youth and freedom.

00:00:28.000 Kaylee McEnany, Ted Cruz, Laura Ingram, Josh Hawley, Greg Gutfeld, and more.

00:00:32.000 And Turning Point Action will be hosting President Donald Trump and Governor Ron DeSantis.

00:00:37.000 Wow.

00:00:38.000 tpusa.com slash s-a-s.

00:00:42.000 Email me freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:00:45.000 Support the Charlie Kirk Show at charliekirk.com/slash support.

00:00:48.000 Buckle up, everybody.

00:00:49.000 Here, we go.

00:00:50.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

00:00:52.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.

00:00:54.000 I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.

00:00:57.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.

00:01:01.000 I want to thank Charlie.

00:01:02.000 He's an incredible guy.

00:01:03.000 His spirit, his love of this country.

00:01:05.000 He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.

00:01:10.000 Turning point USA. 0.65

00:01:11.000 We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.

00:01:20.000 That's why we are here.

00:01:23.000 Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage.

00:01:26.000 For personalized loan services, you can count on.

00:01:28.000 Go to andrewandodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandtodd.com.

00:01:35.000 So this morning there was some breaking news, and we're going to go through this with some incredible subject matter experts, including the Attorney General of Texas, Ken Paxton, and Josh Hammer, who's a phenomenal legal mind.

00:01:46.000 We had one major win this morning with the U.S. Supreme Court and one loss.

00:01:51.000 Now, I'm not willing to say it's a major loss because technically it sends it back down to the lower courts to reanalyze the remain in Mexico policy, but it's a loss.

00:02:03.000 Based on the headlines and based on the initial interpretation, it seems as if Joe Biden now has the ability and the power to rescind Remain in Mexico and basically not enforce the law at all, basically when it comes to immigration policy.

00:02:19.000 Now, when we talk about the courts, the courts are a double-edged sword.

00:02:23.000 I think it's admirable that conservatives for the last couple of decades have taken the courts more seriously.

00:02:29.000 The left always took the courts more seriously than we did in the 1960s and 70s.

00:02:33.000 That's how we got the war in court and the burger court.

00:02:36.000 There are many organizations that do great work, like the Federalist Society, that came up and they said, okay, we need to now go to the law schools.

00:02:42.000 We need to find young people that believe in the Constitution, that believe in original interpretation, that believe in separation of powers, checks, and balances, and are against judicial activism.

00:02:52.000 These organizations started to raise tens of millions of dollars, started to go and find judges and tried to find lawyers that will become judges.

00:03:01.000 They became better and better networked in Republican GOP circles, especially in the U.S. Senate, to be able to then create the list.

00:03:08.000 And so, for example, when Donald Trump said, I have a list of justices, that was produced by the Federalist Society who brilliantly thought ahead of time to get judges in place to be able to say, hey, if someone is running for president, how will they actually know who are the good judges and who are the not so good judges?

00:03:25.000 Now, the double-edged sword, though, and this is something we must recognize, we must understand, is that the courts are not going to save the country independently.

00:03:33.000 It's not going to happen.

00:03:34.000 They could play a necessary and important role.

00:03:36.000 And my goodness, President Donald Trump winning in 2016 and giving us Kavanaugh-Gorsich, Amy Coney Barrett, alongside Alito and Clarence Thomas is a massive victory.

00:03:46.000 But there are limitations sometimes to certain judges with how they view the interpretation of laws.

00:03:53.000 Remember, the judicial branch does not make laws.

00:03:56.000 The judicial branch interprets the law.

00:03:58.000 So when you interpret the law, you might have a very narrow way of interpreting the law.

00:04:03.000 So this morning we received a win for the Constitution, a win for liberty and a win for America, and a rather frustrating and irritating speed bump and loss that will send an issue on immigration back down to the courts.

00:04:18.000 Now, it's important that we as conservatives recognize that the courts themselves are a piece, but not the whole deal.

00:04:25.000 Because I feel as if some conservatives say, you know, I could take it easy just because we control the courts.

00:04:30.000 No, you know, the courts are largely right now a defensive measure to strike down bad laws.

00:04:36.000 The courts right now are ones to prevent the regime from getting completely and totally out of control.

00:04:43.000 And so this morning, a decision, I think it's the final decision of their court.

00:04:46.000 It has to be.

00:04:47.000 I think this is the last day of the month.

00:04:49.000 Yeah, it's the last day of the month.

00:04:50.000 So they're done after this, unless there's some other decisions that they might come out in July, which I would be surprised.

00:04:56.000 Basically is a question of will the court do the necessary and proper and right thing when it comes to a mass invasion of America, or will they stay with a very specific, narrow focus and use technical arguments to try and justify actions by the Biden regime.

00:05:17.000 Very pleased with most of the rulings out of this session.

00:05:20.000 However, Brett Kavanaugh made, I think, an improper and incorrect ruling.

00:05:25.000 We're going to go into that.

00:05:26.000 It was a 5-4 decision when Kavanaugh, really surprisingly and shockingly, in a very narrow decision, sided with John Roberts, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Breyer in what would be Breyer's final decision.

00:05:39.000 The 5-4 decision says basically the executive branch, the Biden White House and the Biden regime, does not have to execute laws as written by Congress.

00:05:50.000 Now, this is all about the question of immigration laws.

00:05:53.000 Now, Brett Kavanaugh, actually, in his confirmation hearings, one of the arguments that was made by a lot of hardline conservatives is that he's great on immigration.

00:06:02.000 If I remember correctly, there was a circuit court decision, a D.C. circuit court decision, where Brett Kavanaugh actually ruled favorably on certain immigration policies.

00:06:11.000 So in front of us was this issue of remain in Mexico.

00:06:15.000 Remain in Mexico was a Trump-era executive order that basically said that if you are going to come into America illegally, you are going to have to remain in Mexico until the detention and the paperwork process basically plays itself out, and you very well might be sent back to the country of origin.

00:06:34.000 Now, the regime and the Biden White House has known for quite some time that the way around laws they don't like, otherwise known as unfavorable laws, is not to repeal those laws.

00:06:45.000 It's just not to enforce them.

00:06:47.000 It's just to ignore them.

00:06:48.000 It's just that when you control the White House, when you control the people that enforce the laws, just say we're not going to enforce it.

00:06:55.000 They've done this with immigration law for quite some time.

00:06:58.000 This is exactly what they did with the slow-motion secession that happened in Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Chicago, where the slow-motion secession was blue states that said, we're not going to enforce immigration law.

00:07:11.000 We're not going to allow ICE into our cities.

00:07:13.000 Immigration has always been the wrinkle where the left has been willing to defy written law the most flagrantly. 0.99

00:07:21.000 So basically, the lesson from the U.S. Supreme Court this morning as authored by Brett Cavan, I don't know if Brett Kavanaugh authored it, but he sided with Breyer authored it, I think, or Kagan, Sotomayor, Roberts.

00:07:33.000 All right, by process of elimination, we got it. 0.87

00:07:35.000 John Roberts is a total snake. 0.84

00:07:37.000 John Roberts authored the opinion. 0.91

00:07:40.000 And basically, what it says is this.

00:07:42.000 It does not matter what the law is from Congress.

00:07:46.000 Basically, it matters who's in charge of enforcing and implementing that law.

00:07:50.000 Now, mind you, there are some wild and extreme examples that could be used with this, but Congress is very clear that if you enter into our country illegally, if you are a trespasser, which 20 million trespassers come into America, that you have to be detained and then deported.

00:08:05.000 Joe Biden is deciding not to follow that law at all.

00:08:09.000 Joe Biden is allowing them to be released into the interior of the country, which is de facto amnesty.

00:08:15.000 Now, this is the problem with the overemphasis on trying to make the courts save America.

00:08:21.000 When you try to believe the courts are going to save everything, and mind you, the courts play a role.

00:08:24.000 Praise God for the reverse overall versus Wade.

00:08:27.000 Praise God for the Coach Kennedy case.

00:08:29.000 Praise God for the Second Amendment case. 0.51

00:08:30.000 The courts are a necessary part, but they can't be everything.

00:08:34.000 Because sometimes you're going to get certain people like Brett Kavanaugh and John Roberts overly academic, in my personal opinion, of their interpretation of these laws that will take an incredibly narrow and fixed interpretation and not look at the essence of what is being said.

00:08:50.000 Instead, look at the exact word-by-word language and not think more broadly about the implications of this.

00:08:57.000 For example, and this is where I kind of push back against Brett Kavanaugh in particular, because Brett Kavanaugh wouldn't look at the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment, and say, well, only a militia can own guns.

00:09:10.000 No, no, you have to look at the essence of what was being said at the time.

00:09:13.000 That the militia at the time is all young men ages 18 to 35, able-bodied to defend themselves and their families against insurrection or invasion.

00:09:21.000 That was the essence of what was happening.

00:09:24.000 Unfortunately, Brett Kavanaugh did not look at the essence of the issue of immigration.

00:09:28.000 He looked at the hyper-technical language and nature of it.

00:09:31.000 And so, look, immigration law as passed by Congress is very clear.

00:09:36.000 That the White House doesn't like the immigration law, which says that you must detain and deport illegals.

00:09:43.000 By the way, while we are being invaded, so the White House just chooses not to enforce it.

00:09:49.000 What Joe Biden has created is a loophole, a loophole that was just challenged by the U.S. Supreme Court and unfortunately allows Joe Biden now to rescind the Remain in Mexico policy and ignore congressional law.

00:10:01.000 What is the essence of this?

00:10:03.000 De facto amnesty.

00:10:06.000 It is de facto, de facto asylum.

00:10:09.000 And to take away a step further from this, Brett Kavanaugh's argument is like, well, we're not allowed to use the power of the court to force Joe Biden to create a treaty with Mexico.

00:10:19.000 That is not what we're discussing at all.

00:10:21.000 This is not a discussion about treaties with Mexico or international relations.

00:10:27.000 It's a question of whether or not Congress's law when it comes to immigration can be defied by the White House.

00:10:37.000 So Brett Kavanaugh and Roberts in the dissenting opinion all agreed that, well, there's a wide interpretation of immigration law.

00:10:44.000 No, there isn't.

00:10:46.000 And by the way, getting this question wrong has massive implications.

00:10:50.000 And Kavanaugh even knew there was an issue in his dissent here.

00:10:54.000 Quote, one final note.

00:10:55.000 The larger policy story behind this case is the multi-decade inability of the political branches to provide Department of Homeland Security with sufficient facilities to detain non-citizens who seek to enter the United States pending their immigration proceedings.

00:11:09.000 But this court has authority to address only the legal issues before us.

00:11:12.000 We do not have authority to end the legislative stalemate or to resolve the underlying policy problems.

00:11:17.000 With those additional comments, I join the court's opinion in full.

00:11:20.000 So he understands the issue is real.

00:11:23.000 He knows that we're being invaded, but he effectively says, oh, Congress, you haven't been able to get comprehensive immigration reform passed.

00:11:29.000 Therefore, I have to side with the opinion in full.

00:11:32.000 That is gibberish. 0.87

00:11:33.000 It is nonsense. 0.97

00:11:34.000 It is horsepucky. 0.97

00:11:36.000 Now, I'm not going to say Brett Kavanaugh is a coward because the implications of this one are far less heated than the implications of the attempted assassination that happened towards him a couple weeks ago.

00:11:45.000 I'm not going to say Brett Kavanaugh has no spine. 0.98

00:11:47.000 I mean, come on, that's insane.

00:11:48.000 He ruled on Roe versus Wade correctly. 0.65

00:11:51.000 What I am going to say, though, is that maybe Brett Kavanaugh wanted to wink and nod and signal to the DC regime, like, hey, you might not agree on everything, but please don't still hate me.

00:11:59.000 You got to wonder if the assassination attempt and illegal pressure protests outside of his house played any sort of role at all whatsoever in this.

00:12:07.000 So Kavanaugh basically made and continues to make a hyper-technical legal argument that is bad for the country.

00:12:14.000 It's incredibly narrow and it doesn't talk about the essence of really what is happening.

00:12:19.000 The essence is very simple.

00:12:20.000 They're creating a loophole with mass amnesty.

00:12:24.000 But he's like, oh, well, no, it's about the narrow focus of what the court can do.

00:12:29.000 No, and Alito disagrees and Clarence Thomas disagrees and Amy Coney Barrett disagrees.

00:12:35.000 And yes, Neil Gorsuch disagrees, who guess what? Is not very good on the immigration issue.

00:12:40.000 Neil Gorsuch, of all the issues in front of him, has always been the weakest on immigration.

00:12:45.000 I like Neil Gorsuch a lot.

00:12:46.000 He just has a hyper constantly, a very strange view on the courts and the rule of law when it comes to immigration.

00:12:54.000 Even he agrees that the Biden regime cannot defy congressional immigration law.

00:13:01.000 What is the essence of the issue?

00:13:04.000 The issue is very clear that Brett Kavanaugh, siding with John Roberts, Kagan, Sodomayor, and Breyer, basically allow open borders to continue despite what the law says.

00:13:17.000 That's the big takeaway, is that the law says you're not allowed to release illegals into the interior United States.

00:13:23.000 Brett Kavanaugh says, well, actually, that power is in the president.

00:13:26.000 The president is allowed to defy congressional law even when you're being invaded.

00:13:33.000 How many years have I been telling you about Relief Factor?

00:13:35.000 Producer Andrew's right here doing an Iron Man thanks to Relief Factor.

00:13:38.000 And truth is, I know there are millions of people.

00:13:40.000 In fact, some say over 100 million people struggling with some kind of pain, maybe from exercise or just getting older.

00:13:45.000 That can do it, getting older, which is why I'm so impressed with the people at relieffactor.com.

00:13:50.000 They are on a mission.

00:13:51.000 You rarely see this kind of focus and commitment.

00:13:53.000 They recently shared with me that they are doubling down and want to literally double their total number of happy customers in the next year.

00:13:59.000 And I believe they'll do it.

00:14:00.000 So here's the deal.

00:14:01.000 If you're struggling with back pain, neck pain, shoulder, hip, or knee pain, even general muscle aches and pain, then I'm suggesting you order their three-week quick start, still discounted, only $19.95.

00:14:10.000 Go to relieffactor.com.

00:14:12.000 That's relieffactor.com.

00:14:13.000 Check it out right now.

00:14:14.000 ReliefFactor.com.

00:14:15.000 You should order the three-week quick start too.

00:14:17.000 Discount only $19.95 to see if it will work for you.

00:14:20.000 I think it possibly could.

00:14:21.000 Give your body what it needs to heal itself.

00:14:23.000 Go to relieffactor.com.

00:14:24.000 That's relieffactor.com.

00:14:26.000 Check it out right now.

00:14:29.000 Right now, we have Josh Hammer, legal expert, and also the head of Newsweek opinion.

00:14:35.000 We have Josh on anytime there's a Supreme Court decision that we need some clarity on.

00:14:39.000 Josh, welcome back to the program.

00:14:41.000 It seems as if the court ruled incorrectly on the immigration case.

00:14:44.000 I don't quite understand Kavanaugh's rationale.

00:14:46.000 What are your thoughts?

00:14:47.000 Charlie, great to be with you as always.

00:14:49.000 So this is an extremely complicated decision.

00:14:51.000 So I should kind of caveat everything I'm saying with I am still reading through and trying to figure out myself.

00:14:56.000 You know, I used to live in the Grace State of Texas.

00:14:57.000 I'm actually a barred attorney in Texas.

00:14:59.000 I have a lot of friends in the Texas Solicitor General's office who helped argue and brief this case.

00:15:04.000 They are still trying to figure it out too, actually.

00:15:06.000 So it's a very narrow, doctrinal, jurisprudentially technical ruling, as you said.

00:15:10.000 The overarching problem from my perspective is that sometimes, and the Chief Justice in particular has a very, very, very big problem in this respect.

00:15:18.000 Sometimes the court goes too narrow.

00:15:20.000 There was always a risk in going too broad when you can more narrowly decide a case, but the flip side of that is very true as well.

00:15:25.000 There was really no sense in unnecessarily kicking the can down the road when there was a very clear legal answer on a question there.

00:15:32.000 That's kind of how I read Justice Alito's dissent here.

00:15:35.000 One thing that I do want to say, it looks like from my reading, Justice Barrett actually agrees with the merits part of the majority opinion.

00:15:42.000 That was the three-page Kavanaugh concurrence.

00:15:44.000 He was basically underscoring that point.

00:15:46.000 So, Amy Coney Barrack has a lot of wonderful language in her dissent, but even she is a little wobbly on this issue.

00:15:51.000 And it's just yet another reminder, Charlie, that there are really only two justices on the current United States Supreme Court for all the victories of the past week, and there have been some real victories: abortion, guns, God, and these are like real culture war issues.

00:16:03.000 But this case is yet another reminder that when it comes to true, down-the-line, principled conservatives on the United States Supreme Court, from my perspective, Charlie, there's really only two: there's Clarence Thomas and Sam Malillo.

00:16:13.000 As you said, Neil Gorsuch is often with us, but he goes wobbly on some cases.

00:16:17.000 So, this case is erroneous, but the silver lining is that this litigation is not over.

00:16:22.000 Kavanaugh is very clear that the question as to whether the October memo with respect to the migrant attachment protocols, with respect to whether that violates the APA, the Administrative Procedure Act, that legal question is still pending.

00:16:34.000 So, the lower court judge, Matthew Kazmarek, who I actually used to be colleagues with at First Liberty Institute, I know Judge Kazmarek, he's a wonderful jurist.

00:16:41.000 He's going to present that question.

00:16:43.000 He will review that anew.

00:16:44.000 So, this fight is not over yet.

00:16:46.000 It's a very frustrating result, though, that has the immediate short-term effect, like you say, of de facto amnesty.

00:16:52.000 Alito's dissent was terrific.

00:16:54.000 It was just very passionate and really well articulated.

00:16:57.000 This is very frustrating, though, for me and for many others, because it seems like Kavanaugh is a hardliner on immigration.

00:17:04.000 What was the rationale here?

00:17:06.000 It's incredibly narrow.

00:17:07.000 I know you're still reading through it, but it feels as if this is de facto asylum or de facto amnesty.

00:17:15.000 I'm not really sure, to be honest with you.

00:17:17.000 I mean, I'm not really entirely sure what goes through Justice Kavanaugh's head.

00:17:20.000 I mean, we should remember, obviously, that he came down the correct side of numerous culture war cases over this past week: God, guns, and abortion, and he literally got all three of those right.

00:17:28.000 So, I think it's probably a little uncharitable to say that he's trying to kind of just feed the left some breadcrumbs there.

00:17:35.000 He probably has convinced himself that this ruling or that what he's doing is actually the correct course.

00:17:40.000 You know, it's worth noting that in Justice Kavanaugh's first term, that 2018-2019 term, right after the left threw out 5,000 years of innocent until proving guilty norms in his confirmation here, in that very first term, Kavanaugh sided with the Chief Justice more than did any other justice.

00:17:55.000 So, I'm just speculating here.

00:17:57.000 I haven't clerked on the court, I don't know the internal dynamics, but my outside observing is that the Chief Justice probably is cozier to Justice Kavanaugh than probably any other justice on the court.

00:18:09.000 So, it wouldn't shock me if, you know, in some emails and some kind of cafeteria water cooler kind of musings of the Chief Justice basically reached out to Kavanaugh and was like, Brett, you know, this has been like a very divisive term, obviously, a lot of high-profile cases here.

00:18:21.000 Let's try to go extremely narrow on this yet another culture war.

00:18:24.000 If he doesn't build the case, that actually makes me more angry.

00:18:27.000 But I'll be honest, if that's the case, I would rather have it be that Kavanaugh actually believes this stuff than not have John Roberts lobby him, you know, in between leaks and assassination attempts and kind of say, Hey, you know, let's bring the country together and allow the invasion of a sovereign nation just because, you know, hey, hyper-technical arguments that only we understand.

00:18:50.000 Like, that would actually make me more angry.

00:18:52.000 Overall, what do you give ABCDRF?

00:18:55.000 How do you grade the court this session?

00:18:58.000 Oh, this session has been an A.

00:19:00.000 I mean, this has been the greatest Supreme Court term of my lifetime.

00:19:03.000 This is an unfortunate ruling as far as the Remain of Mexico policy is concerned, but it should not, I think, undermine these other.

00:19:09.000 I mean, we overturned Roe versus Wade, Charlie.

00:19:10.000 I mean, that has been a goal for 50 freaking years.

00:19:12.000 And it was a sacred cow we were told that was impossible and we did it.

00:19:15.000 It's amazing.

00:19:16.000 All right, Josh, thank you so much.

00:19:17.000 Great commentary as always.

00:19:19.000 Everybody, check out Josh Hammer on social media, also Newsweek.

00:19:22.000 Great job.

00:19:26.000 Look, free speech, religious liberty, and the Second Amendment.

00:19:29.000 Our rights are being destroyed across the board.

00:19:31.000 And look, many months ago, I told our team, I am sick of paying all this money to these cell phone providers that hate me and hate our values.

00:19:41.000 So I said, go find that really cheerful guy.

00:19:44.000 I think his name was Glenn at one of our events, and he kept on wearing the Patriot Mobile shirt.

00:19:47.000 Found him, sat down in Dallas.

00:19:48.000 We had a great meeting, and I vetted Patriot Mobile head to toe, their business model, how they do things.

00:19:56.000 And I was convinced that we must partner with them.

00:19:58.000 They're not only America's only Christian conservative cell phone provider, they're one of the few companies fighting back.

00:20:02.000 They offer the same nationwide coverage as the major carrier.

00:20:05.000 So you get the same great service plus the peace of mind, and your money is combating the left's attempt to silence you.

00:20:10.000 Patriot Mobile has plans to fit any budget, and their 100% U.S.-based customer support team provides exceptional customer service.

00:20:18.000 Patriot Mobile shares your values, and they support organizations fighting for religious liberty, constitutional rights, sanctity of life, like Turning Point USA, and veteran and first responder heroes.

00:20:29.000 So here's how it works: if you have a big major carrier, you are funding the bad guys.

00:20:34.000 That money might as well be a check, Democrat, national committee, or you could have it go to Patriot Mobile, where they give their proceeds back to Turning Point USA, veterans, and amazing groups.

00:20:45.000 It's a no-brainer.

00:20:46.000 So go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot.

00:20:50.000 Get free activation with the offer code Charlie.

00:20:53.000 Veterans and first responders save even more.

00:20:55.000 So make the switch today.

00:20:57.000 Between the left, the media, and all these rhinos, we need to stick together.

00:21:00.000 Patriot Mobile helps you do that.

00:21:02.000 It's a way to get engaged.

00:21:04.000 It's a way to engage in the corporate warfare that's happening.

00:21:07.000 So do me a favor, check it out.

00:21:08.000 PatriotMobile.com/slash Charlie.

00:21:10.000 We've switched everything over, and we love Patriot Mobile.

00:21:13.000 Producer Andrew is a massive fan.

00:21:16.000 PatriotMobile.com/slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot.

00:21:19.000 Don't give your money to BLM or the Alphabet Mafia or whatever when you are doing the regular thing.

00:21:25.000 Instead, make the switch, patriotmobile.com/slash Charlie.

00:21:31.000 I'm not going to go all out against Kavanaugh, but I do think that some of the pressure against him, it wears a person down.

00:21:37.000 I really believe that.

00:21:39.000 And if Josh Hammer is right, I think Josh was trying to make an argument in favor of Kavanaugh.

00:21:44.000 I think it worked against it's nothing against Josh.

00:21:47.000 Obviously, Josh is phenomenal.

00:21:48.000 It's just, he's like, oh, well, maybe he's very chummy with Roberts.

00:21:52.000 That's not a good reason to allow the perpetual invasion of America at all.

00:21:58.000 But Kavanaugh ruled right on Roe, ruled good on guns, ruled great on Coach Kennedy.

00:22:03.000 So I do not appreciate, though, in my personal opinion, hyper-technical arguments when the essence of the issue is so obviously ignored.

00:22:18.000 Okay, with us right now is the Attorney General of Texas, who is the man who actually helped get this case all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, Ken Paxton, who's a great American patriot.

00:22:30.000 Ken, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show.

00:22:33.000 Hey, Charlie, great to be back with you.

00:22:35.000 I'm glad you're in the chair and I'm not.

00:22:37.000 We have a running joke.

00:22:39.000 Ken has actually hosted in the chair while I was in Fargo, North Dakota, on the wonderful Flag Radio Network.

00:22:44.000 Ken, what is your initial take on this U.S. Supreme Court case, the Remain in Mexico case?

00:22:50.000 Yeah, I mean, I haven't gotten to read the whole opinion because it just came out, but the, I mean, disappointed that we didn't get a 5-4 win instead of a 5-4 basically remand back to the district court.

00:23:01.000 It's not over because they did remand the second memo that rescinded where the Biden administration rescinded the Remain in Mexico.

00:23:10.000 They remanded that back to the court.

00:23:12.000 So we're basically starting over.

00:23:15.000 And you can look at the dissent from Alito, and it kind of gives some signposts as to the direction that we probably need to go.

00:23:24.000 Yeah, so can you explain kind of what's happening for our audience?

00:23:27.000 Because this is very technical and very complicated.

00:23:30.000 So is it going back down to a lower court?

00:23:32.000 That's confusing to me.

00:23:33.000 Can you help me understand?

00:23:35.000 Yeah.

00:23:36.000 So I don't totally, I don't have it down myself because I haven't gotten to read the whole case yet.

00:23:42.000 As you know, it just came out.

00:23:43.000 But basically, my understanding is they're sending it back to the district court because when we got our first injunction in district court against the Remain in Mexico program, the Biden administration came out with a second memo.

00:23:55.000 They'd issued their First Amendment memo getting rid of Remain in Mexico.

00:24:00.000 When we won and got an injunction, they changed the memo while we were in the middle of litigation.

00:24:06.000 And so basically, the first rescion went up, and the court struck that.

00:24:12.000 I mean, sided with the Biden administration on that, but they said there's still questions to be answered as to whether the Biden administration followed all the right procedures in changing to the second memo.

00:24:26.000 Got it.

00:24:27.000 So, and then just so our audience can understand the details of this, essentially, it says that Biden can end MPP right now, but the district court in theory could come back and say he wasn't allowed to end it based on a procedural matter.

00:24:41.000 I think that's right, isn't it?

00:24:43.000 That's pretty much right.

00:24:45.000 It's disappointing because of the way the court interpreted the shall.

00:24:48.000 There's a shell and a may, and the shell was the shell related, in our opinion, to shall detain these people or send them back to their country of origin prior to their hearing on asylum.

00:25:00.000 So, what's happening now is the Biden administration is inviting all these people to come.

00:25:04.000 They're claiming asylum.

00:25:05.000 It's a loophole.

00:25:07.000 And the loophole was shut by the Trump administration by using this federal law.

00:25:11.000 And the Biden administration said, No, we want them to come.

00:25:15.000 We want them to stay here as long as they're going to wait for their asylum hearing. 1.00

00:25:19.000 And then most of them disappear.

00:25:21.000 Yeah.

00:25:21.000 And so it is de facto amnesty, isn't it?

00:25:24.000 And that's an important point: outside of the hyper-technical, very narrow reading of this decision, isn't it about the essence and the implications of it?

00:25:33.000 I mean, for example, when you look at the Second Amendment, we don't say, well, only people in a militia can own guns.

00:25:38.000 We have to look at what was the founders' intent when they wrote that.

00:25:41.000 Being, of course, loyal to the textualist nature, but not so narrow where we just take it word by word by word.

00:25:47.000 Isn't that a pretty, I would imagine that's important, especially kind of factoring in this is an invasion happening to your state of Texas, the ramifications of which are extreme and severe.

00:25:59.000 Yeah, so I have a hard time understanding why Congress wrote the legislation that says they either have to be detained or sent back if they didn't mean that.

00:26:08.000 If they meant something, the argument that the Biden administration made was, well, they couldn't have totally meant it because we've got too many people here and we don't have it.

00:26:15.000 They haven't given us enough resources to detain all these people.

00:26:18.000 So we can't even follow the law they've given us.

00:26:21.000 But my argument back would be, wait a minute, you're the one that invited all these people to come and told them to hurry up.

00:26:26.000 And now we have millions of people on the border and you say you don't have enough facilities.

00:26:29.000 Well, part of that, a good part of that's your fault.

00:26:32.000 Well, I mean, so just Congress's fault.

00:26:34.000 And just to play out the logic, it's like saying, okay, we have federal murder laws.

00:26:37.000 Most murders go unsolved in Chicago because we don't have enough people to go investigate them.

00:26:41.000 Does that somehow invalidate the law? 0.99

00:26:43.000 I mean, what kind of silly, incredibly dumb legal argument is that? 0.99

00:26:47.000 That's the argument the Biden administration made. 0.98

00:26:50.000 And at least my limited reading and getting summaries People quickly is that that's kind of the direction the court took.

00:26:59.000 So I'm going to read Alito's opening dissent here, quote, when it appears that one of these aliens is not admissible, may the government simply release the alien into the country and hope the alien will show up for a hearing at which his or her entitlement to remain will be decided.

00:27:13.000 Congress has provided a clear answer to that question, and the answer is no.

00:27:17.000 By law, if an alien is quote, not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted, the alien should quote, shall be detained for a removal proceeding.

00:27:27.000 And we both know, Ken, because of the volume, because how they invited people, that what Remain in Mexico is able to do was put a check and a balance on first the amount of people coming and also saying that no, you don't get released into the interior of the United States when you get a piece of paper in exchange.

00:27:43.000 Isn't that right?

00:27:45.000 Yeah, because what Trump did by enforcing that law is he disincentivized people from using this huge loophole that the immigration lawyers in America had discovered worked, where you just show up, turn yourself into border agents.

00:27:58.000 You don't run from border agents.

00:28:00.000 You actually try to find them and then they bring you in because you've claimed asylum.

00:28:03.000 And it was a loophole that was being expanded every day as people understood, hey, we just claim asylum and we're in.

00:28:10.000 And so the Trump administration used this law to stop it.

00:28:13.000 And the Biden administration said, no, we like the loophole.

00:28:17.000 We want these people coming.

00:28:18.000 We want to get as many of them here as fast as possible.

00:28:20.000 And so they basically started telling people, you're invited.

00:28:24.000 Come.

00:28:24.000 We claim asylum.

00:28:26.000 You're perfectly welcome to do it.

00:28:27.000 And we'll just let you go.

00:28:29.000 Got it.

00:28:30.000 So, Ken, I want to ask you that Roe versus Wade has now been overturned and sent back to the states.

00:28:35.000 What are you doing to work through the kind of legal complexity to this in Texas?

00:28:38.000 And where does Texas stand when it comes to the practice of abortion? 0.90

00:28:42.000 Yeah, so we played a part in that we had our own heartbeat bill, but we also actually filed the amicus brief in that case.

00:28:48.000 We were the ones that recruited the other 23 states.

00:28:50.000 So there were 24 states, and we were there standing with Mississippi, not just arguing that their statute should be upheld, but also that Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

00:28:59.000 When that happened, our trigger bill went into effect, which was actually passed by my wife, Senator Paxton.

00:29:05.000 And that bill effectively stops abortions in Texas in a very short period of time.

00:29:10.000 So it's going to happen between the next 30 and 60 days.

00:29:13.000 Abortions in Texas will be outlawed, even beyond what we passed with the Hartbeat Bill.

00:29:19.000 That's amazing.

00:29:20.000 So it's also important to recognize and realize that some of the kind of abortion figureheads actually come from Texas, actually.

00:29:29.000 Richards, in particular, if I remember correctly, some of the most outspoken pro-choice, pro-abortion activists, at least Cecile Richards, who I believe is the daughter of Ann Richards.

00:29:39.000 That's correct.

00:29:40.000 And so how is it being received by the constituents in Texas?

00:29:43.000 I know you're not a political branch, meaning that you follow the law, but I'm just curious, how is this being received?

00:29:49.000 You know what?

00:29:49.000 I mean, it's obviously a controversial decision.

00:29:51.000 When the Supreme Court stepped in in 783 and took this away from the states, they changed the dynamic for decades and took over what was considered a legislative function.

00:30:02.000 And they continued to change their view of abortion and the law kept changing and it became very uncertain and it was just a mess.

00:30:11.000 And that's one of the reasons we argue that Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

00:30:14.000 I think anybody that loves the Constitution and loves democracy should love this, whether you're pro-life or you're not, you're pro-abortion.

00:30:21.000 It shouldn't matter.

00:30:23.000 It's now up to elected officials who we all have a say in that to make these decisions and why you'd be upset that it's back to a representative government.

00:30:34.000 Whatever your position, I think that's a good thing that just happened.

00:30:38.000 Yeah, and it allows the states to chart their own course forward.

00:30:42.000 If you don't like it, then, okay, there's other states that you can move to.

00:30:45.000 It's a restoration of the 10th Amendment and of really self-government in a very serious and profound way.

00:30:52.000 So finally, Ken, I want to ask you, this was a rather contentious term for the U.S. Supreme Court.

00:30:57.000 What grade do you give them?

00:30:59.000 A, B, C, D.

00:31:00.000 I mean, you've lived through a lot of these things.

00:31:02.000 What grade do you give this court?

00:31:04.000 You know, because of things like Remain in Mexico, it's hard for me to give them an A.

00:31:09.000 But on the other hand, you look at just what happened with the gun decision, the Second Amendment decision from New York.

00:31:15.000 You look at the Hartby bill, the Roe v. Wade, the Dobbs decision, and the prayer decision.

00:31:24.000 I mean, it's a pretty decent session.

00:31:26.000 One of the better ones that we've ever had as it relates to the amendments to the Constitution, whether it's the First Amendment or the Second Amendment, that they've all been sort of reinvigorated with life.

00:31:36.000 And I think that's a very, very good thing, not to pun, but that's a very, very good thing.

00:31:40.000 So, you know, let's just say B plus.

00:31:44.000 B plus, I will take a B plus because Ken, you and I lived through D's and F's for many, many years.

00:31:49.000 Closing final question.

00:31:50.000 You won your primary rather convincingly.

00:31:53.000 Congratulations.

00:31:54.000 Tell our national audience about that because it was the Bush family trying to come and derail you, nasty smear tactics, but you won overwhelmingly.

00:32:01.000 Tell our audience about that.

00:32:03.000 Yeah, I mean, this has been going on for a long time ever since I've been attorney general.

00:32:06.000 It's like the Bushes have had their design on that position because they wanted their nephew and son in that spot.

00:32:14.000 So, you know, they spent a lot of money.

00:32:15.000 They had 100% name ID.

00:32:17.000 And I think the people of Texas have kind of figured out sort of the angle the Bushes have been coming from for a long time. 0.75

00:32:24.000 And they decided they wanted somebody that was really going to go out and fight for them, that wasn't going to capitulate to sort of a leftist agenda.

00:32:30.000 It was going to fight for life.

00:32:31.000 It's going to fight for constitutional rights.

00:32:33.000 It was going to fight for the 10th Amendment.

00:32:35.000 And obviously, that's pretty controversial stuff.

00:32:37.000 So you're going to take a lot of arrows when you do it.

00:32:39.000 A lot of left-wing media, even liberal Republicans who don't like that, you know, you become sort of a lightning rod, but I don't know how to do it any other way.

00:32:50.000 I'd rather either do it the right way or not do it at all.

00:32:53.000 Well, just so everyone knows, Ken Paxton won with 68% of the vote against George P. Bush with 31% of the vote.

00:33:00.000 I think that is a major sign the Republican Party of Texas is becoming even more conservative.

00:33:06.000 That for years was kind of run by the Good Old Boys Network of the Bushes and many others.

00:33:10.000 Ken, congratulations on that one.

00:33:12.000 Congratulations on the Roe versus Wade interpretation.

00:33:16.000 And I hope we get Remain in Mexico sorted out.

00:33:18.000 God bless you, Ken.

00:33:19.000 Thank you.

00:33:20.000 Hey, thanks, Charlie.

00:33:20.000 Have a great day.

00:33:21.000 Thanks.

00:33:24.000 Look, over the years, you've probably tried different investments in stocks and mutual funds.

00:33:28.000 So now you know they could be up or down or all over the place.

00:33:32.000 But with inflation running at 8.5%, probably even higher than that, the highest rate for 40 years, do you need uncertainty?

00:33:38.000 Being able to sleep at night knowing your investments aren't about to crash.

00:33:41.000 It's worth its weight in gold.

00:33:42.000 And speaking of gold, if you've been jumping from one investment idea to the next, a gold IRA with Noble Gold is perfect.

00:33:48.000 With gold, you'll shield your gains from taxes.

00:33:50.000 You'll keep the real value of your wealth.

00:33:52.000 You'll own a global asset, something tangible, and you'll protect your wealth against an economic crash.

00:33:56.000 What is not to like?

00:33:58.000 And this month, for every cash deal above $20,000, you get an incredible three-ounce Silver American virtue coin completely free as a thank you.

00:34:06.000 You can't go wrong in Noble Gold.

00:34:08.000 Call 877-646-5347 now to find out more at noblegoldinvestments.com.

00:34:13.000 They're a phenomenal company.

00:34:14.000 I really think highly of them.

00:34:16.000 NobleGoldInvestments.com.

00:34:18.000 Own things you can touch at noblegoldinvestments.com.

00:34:25.000 I'm going to tell you about this amazing court victory in a second, but I want to take some of your questions here that you've emailed us, freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:34:33.000 Hi, Charlie.

00:34:34.000 I thought this was a national security issue, to say the least.

00:34:36.000 It is.

00:34:37.000 And that, in my personal opinion, is the prism of which I wish Brett Kavanaugh viewed the last decision through.

00:34:44.000 By just looking at it as a kind of technical issue, I think is incorrect.

00:34:48.000 This is a broad issue with far-ranging implications.

00:34:53.000 Here's a question here.

00:34:55.000 Immigration.

00:34:56.000 Hi, Charlie.

00:34:57.000 Border state governors will be tasked to come up with creative measures to slow and stop the flow of illegals after today's Supreme Court ruling.

00:35:02.000 They should have been doing that.

00:35:04.000 They should have been mobilizing people to the U.S. Supreme, to the U.S. border.

00:35:08.000 They should have been mobilizing a Texas version of Border Patrol, but they have not been.

00:35:13.000 Another question here emailed to us by our RAV audience.

00:35:16.000 Hi, Charlie.

00:35:17.000 Love the show.

00:35:18.000 Thanks for all you do.

00:35:19.000 One thought I have about the Uniparty, these politically correct creatures, criticizes deplorables for not accepting diversity in all forms of sexuality, illegal immigration, globalism, et cetera.

00:35:28.000 Do they not understand that it's all part of the reason they hate Trump?

00:35:30.000 He came to the presidency going through their channels.

00:35:32.000 He tried to reform the way Washington worked.

00:35:34.000 He did what he said he'd do, the nerve.

00:35:37.000 I could go on and on.

00:35:38.000 These swamp creatures hate change and diversity. 1.00

00:35:40.000 What hypocrites? 0.98

00:35:41.000 We must continue to fight your show and your efforts are much appreciated. 0.95

00:35:45.000 But look, this is an important point: that the reason why they are continuing this relentless pressure campaign on Donald Trump, well after he's been president, almost nastier now after he's been president than when he was in president, is they know that he has a great chance of becoming president again.

00:36:02.000 They know that.

00:36:02.000 They have to do everything they possibly can to try to derail the political prospects of Donald Trump winning again.

00:36:09.000 He's stronger than ever.

00:36:11.000 His message is resonating.

00:36:13.000 They are very worried they'll not be able to pull off again what they did in 2020 again.

00:36:17.000 That's why they don't want you to talk about the election either, by the way.

00:36:20.000 Okay, so there was a massive win this morning from the U.S. Supreme Court beyond just the Remain in Mexico nonsense that is incredibly frustrating.

00:36:30.000 And so starting back in Woodrow Wilson and even before that, with the German historicists who believed they could perfect the human being and perfect the human condition via governmental state power, this is a Hegelian belief where they thought that through government power, that the human nature itself could be perfected.

00:36:50.000 And they realized the United States Constitution was an impediment to do that.

00:36:54.000 So when Woodrow Wilson took the presidency, accidentally, largely, by the way, he's an accidental president, never won a majority of votes.

00:37:01.000 He won largely because of Teddy Roosevelt primarily William Howard Taft and then running as the Bull Moose Party in the election of 1912.

00:37:07.000 Woodrow Wilson, the once professor at Princeton, head of Princeton University, then governor of New Jersey, kind of became the accidental president.

00:37:14.000 Woodrow Wilson was the first president to write openly about how the founding fathers did not understand the times that we live in.

00:37:20.000 Sound familiar?

00:37:22.000 Woodrow Wilson, by far, was one of the most disastrous, venomous, and destructive presidents in American history.

00:37:28.000 So Woodrow Wilson started this idea of the fourth branch of government.

00:37:32.000 Now, he didn't come up with the idea in a technical nature.

00:37:34.000 That was all the Germans before him. 1.00

00:37:36.000 But instead, he started to implement it.

00:37:38.000 He said, a society of academics and experts will be able to know what is best for us.

00:37:42.000 But the U.S. Constitution is very clear about executive power, legislative power, and judicial interpretation.

00:37:48.000 So what ended up happening is all these alphabet soup agencies start to come out.

00:37:51.000 FDR kind of picked up the mantle of Woodrow Wilson and he put jet fuel behind it.

00:37:56.000 That's where we started to get all these different governmental agencies, some of which probably have some proper role, like the FDIC and the Social Security Administration.

00:38:05.000 But basically, the more we started to create these agencies, the more technocrats we got and technocratic states.

00:38:11.000 It was the tyranny of the bureaucracies.

00:38:13.000 Lyndon Baines Johnson took this forward and Jimmy Carter as well.

00:38:16.000 And guess what?

00:38:17.000 Richard Nixon actually created a lot of these federal agencies as well, including the Employment Prevention Agency, otherwise known as the EPA.

00:38:27.000 And so for a long time, these fourth branch of governments, these independent regulatory agencies, were able to operate without any sort of check and balance, which is one of the guarantees, one of the principles, one of the moral necessities of the U.S. Constitution.

00:38:40.000 So basically, the EPA was able to have power plant emissions put forward without Congress ever checking them.

00:38:46.000 They just did their own thing.

00:38:47.000 So then what ended up happening, and this was Woodrow Wilson's creation, is you get the executive power, the legislative power, and the judicial power all wrapped into one unaccountable, unknown, unchecked federal bureaucratic creation.

00:39:00.000 Well, today the U.S. Supreme Court has come in and has said, you know what, EPA, you are not allowed to create laws, create rules and regulations, and be in charge of your own kind of way of operating outside of congressional oversight.

00:39:12.000 A massive blow to all these independent regulatory agencies that include, by the way, Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, and all these other agencies.

00:39:22.000 It's a massive decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that puts a check and a balance on the unconstitutional nature of how our government has been operating.

00:39:31.000 Supreme Court limits EPA in curbing power plant emissions.

00:39:34.000 And a blow to the fight against climate change, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday limited, hey, there's the thing.

00:39:39.000 They'll always find an excuse for an emergency to take your constitutional liberties away. 0.76

00:39:43.000 Never forget that.

00:39:44.000 Thanks for listening, everybody.

00:39:45.000 See you at our Student Action Summit, tpusa.com/slash SAS.

00:39:49.000 Thanks so much for listening.

00:39:51.000 God bless.

00:39:54.000 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.

The Charlie Kirk Show - June 30, 2022

SCOTUS Deals a Blow to American Sovereignty — Live Reaction with Texas AG Ken Paxton

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript