Best of the Program ｜ Guests： Kelly Shackleford & Sen. Mike Lee ｜ 5⧸3⧸22
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
166.0375
Summary
The Supreme Court will rule on abortion in June, and it could change America forever. Good or bad, we're the ones who are going to decide. Also, summer is almost here, which means it's time for some snacks.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey, great program today. Mike Lee, Roger Marshall, both senators.
00:00:05.040
Mike was great going through what everything means.
00:00:07.780
And Kelly Shackle preferred from First Liberty.
00:00:14.880
We're not just looking at the abortion ruling in the Supreme Court, but what's coming in June.
00:00:25.580
Good or bad, I guess we're the ones who are going to decide.
00:00:33.020
That means making sure that you have food available on the go.
00:00:43.200
I don't know if you've ever heard that or noticed that, but I'm sure it's just me.
00:00:48.260
Something that I can eat that doesn't go straight from the lips to the hips.
00:00:57.120
Pilt Bar, you can throw them in your bag, your kids' backpacks, then head out to whatever adventure the day has waiting for you.
00:01:07.540
Anyway, things can get ugly when some people get hangry.
00:01:13.440
All Pilt Bars covered in 100% real chocolate makes them delicious.
00:01:19.720
They're also a protein bar, if you can believe it.
00:01:22.140
Most of them have 130 calories, 4 grams of sugar, and 4 net carbs.
00:01:26.620
So you're eating healthy and somehow or another enjoying it at the same time.
00:01:33.940
And if you haven't tried their puffs, you need to.
00:01:44.720
You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.
00:01:58.480
I think the Supreme Court should release this decision now.
00:02:03.120
They are, this is obviously, this was leaked to influence the decision and to put these guys in danger.
00:02:14.500
And if they don't have full-on Secret Service protection 24-7, I'm going to take up a fundraiser and take up a collection and we'll pay for private security.
00:02:27.780
I would feel actually more comfortable with private security at this point.
00:02:31.800
Um, but, uh, they are in danger and this should just be released as official.
00:02:39.840
Why let this drag on for months and months and months now?
00:02:44.920
Uh, by the way, these states allow abortion post viability.
00:02:49.480
If the mother's life or health is threatened, which is a sham, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Virginia,
00:03:06.200
These states allow late-term abortions with no state imposed thresholds.
00:03:11.700
Alaska, Colorado, uh, District of Columbia, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont.
00:03:18.820
Lawmakers in several Democratic-controlled states have now enacted legislation that explicitly protects the right of abortion if Roe falls.
00:03:29.500
For example, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, and Oregon have all passed laws to ensure that abortion remains legal within their states in the event that Roe does get overturned.
00:03:41.500
New York, in 2019, also expanded the conditions under which a patient can receive a late-term abortion from protecting the life of a patient to the health of a patient
00:03:53.500
and reclassified abortion regulations as a public health matter rather than a criminal one.
00:04:00.580
In California, Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom aims to make the state, quote, a sanctuary for out-of-state abortion seekers,
00:04:11.380
even proposing to use state funds to defray their travel costs.
00:04:21.460
California guarantees the right to abortion in statute and the state constitution.
00:04:25.580
It covers the cost of abortion for lower-income Californians on, uh, Medi-Cal.
00:04:31.000
It also requires private insurance to cover it, and the state has rejected the idea of requiring waiting periods or parental consent for abortion.
00:04:48.060
Uh, I hope Texas, uh, does it, uh, but we'll see.
00:04:54.300
I would expect that, uh, the governor of Florida, if he hasn't already, uh, is, uh, is going to be announcing some things today, I would imagine.
00:05:06.000
Um, Pat Gray joins us now from Pat Gray Unleashed.
00:05:22.460
The back-alley thing is a better idea than taking the $4,000 from your employer and just taking a flight to a place where you can get an abortion?
00:05:34.840
This is what women were saying on TikTok last night.
00:05:46.260
This abortion law goes beyond a woman's issue, and it goes beyond anything you can ever imagine.
00:05:55.760
The societal implications of this are going to be insane.
00:05:58.600
The amount of, uh, pain and damage this is going to cause, and the full ability to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body,
00:06:07.540
but we're going back into a handmaid's tale society.
00:06:19.920
Adults over 18 years old who did not go out and vote.
00:06:24.500
Who did not think that you need to protect your womb.
00:06:28.000
Does she not look like she's been drinking heavily?
00:06:41.660
Yeah, for all these babies that are going to have to live.
00:06:44.460
Yeah, I don't understand why this country is going to have to live so much.
00:06:54.260
How can you get through it if, I mean, you can't.
00:07:10.760
Is the name of that clip, Handsome Women Speak Out?
00:07:18.760
It's a visual joke, unfortunately, but it would have been a fantastic one.
00:07:29.360
I don't know how much trouble they're having in this particular arena.
00:07:42.180
The most frustrating part about that clip is they know no other references.
00:07:46.600
Everyone just goes to this, say, okay, we got it.
00:07:53.200
There is no world in which this is going to be the handmaid's tale.
00:08:02.480
I see religious people taking women and making them surrogates and just raping them.
00:08:16.360
It's an uplifting show, by the way, if you haven't seen it.
00:08:18.700
By the way, the max, the max we're looking at here is a two hour flight that will definitely
00:08:27.380
If you want an abortion, this is why this does not end this.
00:08:31.340
This is just the we're not even close to the end of the fight against abortion.
00:08:42.120
The whole thing about this ruling, if it stands, is that it belongs into the hands of the people
00:08:53.420
and that the legislative arm should have the right in different areas.
00:09:00.540
Which I, by the way, I don't know about you guys, totally disagree with.
00:09:03.540
No, the legislature should not have the right to kill children.
00:09:08.700
However, this is an improvement as to where we've been before.
00:09:12.200
So I am with you on that because, you know, I mean, I have heard this morning and I'm waiting
00:09:18.460
for verification of this, that California and New York are already starting to put things
00:09:27.240
We talked about California a little bit on that.
00:09:35.080
They're denying that's what it would say or do.
00:09:52.060
By the way, Glenn, I think you were going through the state laws.
00:09:54.800
Texas does have a trigger law already in effect.
00:09:57.080
26 states have trigger laws that would outlaw at least or restrict abortion if Roe versus
00:10:10.560
But again, you're either, if you say Florida, which I think is questionable.
00:10:15.100
And I don't know that, that Florida will go that far, uh, you know, Florida has essentially
00:10:22.260
Remember, Ron DeSantis was, was put in by like, you know, I know a very, very couple percentage
00:10:26.740
point, a couple of tenths of a percent basically.
00:10:29.200
But if you do that, you're maybe in Southern Florida, probably as far away as you can be.
00:10:33.320
Maybe in Louisiana, you have a couple of hours of a flight that every organization in
00:10:38.420
America that wants you to have an abortion will pay for.
00:10:40.780
And you can go on a little trip and have your abortion in another state.
00:10:48.800
They're going to say that this eliminates abortion, which it does not.
00:10:56.080
They have to have that argument because they're not arguing.
00:11:05.240
That's been the number one thing they have wanted over abortion.
00:11:09.960
They will use abortion to get to packing the court.
00:11:15.000
Ilana Mars already suggested it, that they pack the court.
00:11:18.800
And she said, as we've done numerous times before, well, it's happened six times in American
00:11:24.840
history, six, and almost always less than nine.
00:11:28.860
One time it went to 10 for three years and then went back to nine in 1869.
00:11:49.440
I mean, look, this is typical of the left, right?
00:11:52.660
Hey, this governmental body is doing something that we don't like.
00:11:56.660
Therefore, let's call them illegitimate and change all the rules.
00:12:00.640
Because that's what they want to do with the filibuster.
00:12:02.720
Normally, you'd need 60 votes to force through a law like this.
00:12:06.980
What they want to do is get rid of the filibuster.
00:12:14.240
Because then we can pass a national law that bans, that it requires everyone to have abortions
00:12:19.200
or whatever, puts governmental abortion huts on every corner.
00:12:26.800
That's why this case, Roe v. Wade, was overturned.
00:12:31.420
If you read the decision, it was overturned because it was all shortcuts.
00:12:36.140
And the Supreme Court was like, you can't use shortcuts on this.
00:12:47.680
They just want their way and to impose it on other people.
00:12:55.140
You know, I agree with you generally, but you know what?
00:13:00.900
It's not wrong to impose people being allowed to live.
00:13:07.580
But like, I don't think this, I am really happy this is happening.
00:13:11.780
But again, overturning Roe v. Wade is not the goal.
00:13:33.960
That's something that we have to work out as people.
00:13:37.260
And it talks about it's going, you know, it went one way for a while and now it seems
00:13:47.100
But you can't force people into a belief that becomes dictatorial, except in this particular
00:13:56.260
case, we are talking about, at least half of us believe, murder.
00:14:06.700
However, I will say, even that, even in overturn making it fully illegal, as we know, drugs
00:14:13.420
There are organizations set up all around the world.
00:14:18.720
Pills can be sent in envelopes to people's houses.
00:14:21.500
Also, the flights we're talking about that go from Texas to New Mexico can also go from
00:14:29.760
Justin Trudeau is not on the verge of overturning abortion.
00:14:34.220
And as long as you have your vaccine, they'll let you in and they'll give you as many abortions
00:14:39.000
This is not it only the only way it's won, Glenn, you're totally right on this, is by persuading
00:14:45.160
people that it is a horror show, just like it was won over for, you know, slavery or
00:14:52.000
When we all looked at this and said, wait a minute, they were enslaving people?
00:14:55.900
If they made slavery, if the Supreme Court came out today and said, you know, slavery is
00:14:59.280
legal again, how many people would be buying slaves?
00:15:07.340
I mean, in the traditional sense, we know that there are other slavery issues around the
00:15:14.020
I mean, I can't say that anymore just because I mean, I always used to think, oh, we all
00:15:24.000
But you have to get it to that point where it's just such a everyone realizes it's so
00:15:28.720
horrible that, you know, bank robbery is illegal.
00:15:34.160
We all know that they're going to back alley abortions will always be a thing.
00:15:38.360
Look, there there will always be a place where you can get and get to an altar to sacrifice
00:15:45.640
There will always be that place, especially with Uber.
00:16:09.760
First of all, um, is it illegal to leak this document?
00:16:15.200
I am not aware of any, um, uh, criminal violation.
00:16:21.260
Uh, obviously it's a, it's, it's a really, it's an attack upon the institution of the court.
00:16:31.480
Um, I don't know what they're going to have to do now, but the ability of all the, all
00:16:39.860
Uh, these are some of the brightest young attorneys in the country.
00:16:43.380
They bring in new ones and the ability to share with your own clerks, the opinions you're
00:16:53.080
Um, I mean, I, I just think it's going to damage the court permanently.
00:16:57.640
Um, and that's the reason why this has never happened.
00:17:01.040
And, and it's, it's, we've crossed that Rubicon now.
00:17:06.620
I don't, I'm not sure it will change forever if they put the hammer down on anybody that
00:17:14.320
Wouldn't that send a strong enough message to bring it back?
00:17:18.880
I mean, you know, I mean, number one, are they going to figure out who it is?
00:17:22.520
I mean, I think it's highly likely to be one of the 12 clerks for the three liberal
00:17:29.280
Um, I mean, you know, what if God forbid it, it ended up being involved with a justice.
00:17:37.960
Um, but I just think that people don't understand the long, I mean, this is like sort of shooting
00:17:45.720
Um, it, it, it is something that could, that we might not return from as far as the court being
00:17:51.860
able to be what it was, which is the ability for justices.
00:17:55.920
I don't know if people know this, Glenn, but what happens is there's a majority and a dissent
00:17:59.760
and you begin to write, you know, they voted just a few days after the argument, they vote
00:18:06.780
The majority writes theirs, the dissent writes theirs, and they share those.
00:18:10.020
And people end up being convinced this is the marketplace of ideas in a different way,
00:18:22.740
And there's lots of that that's happened where people go to a concurrence or a dissent
00:18:28.200
And if you can't share the opinions and have that discussion without people, you know, taking
00:18:34.760
what's being written and taking it out in public to try to use it as a political tool, I mean,
00:18:40.660
you just destroyed the internal deliberations that go on and the exchange of ideas.
00:18:46.400
It's a really horrible thing what this person did.
00:18:49.740
What about the, what about the idea that it might've been a conservative clerk that thought
00:18:57.840
maybe they're going to switch to the other side, this will lock them into position?
00:19:06.360
I understand people think that's really, really cute because it locks them in.
00:19:09.840
But I mean, number one, the whole point is that conservatives don't do that.
00:19:14.440
That conservative justices actually restrain themselves from politics and they say, you
00:19:20.560
know, no matter what I believe, I'm going to follow what works.
00:19:26.240
The whole philosophy of those people is not to warp the court into what they want it to
00:19:37.000
I mean, that is mentioned several times that we are not a political body.
00:19:43.880
So we have no idea what this is going to do with the American people, but we can't care
00:19:53.180
And that is to interpret the law against the constitution.
00:19:57.400
And here's the thing about that, Glenn, that nobody talks about is this is a, you know,
00:20:03.400
This is a massive return of power to the people and away from a few oligarchs who control everything
00:20:15.740
So this is a huge return of power to people of the United States to make their decision
00:20:21.340
to decide what they think is right or wrong and not have, you know, just a handful of
00:20:28.060
So it's not talked about that way, but it really should be.
00:20:32.680
It really is incredible because I saw signs last night, power belongs to the people, and
00:20:41.460
And I thought, no, that's what this document says.
00:20:45.980
Now, can this go to, we know it can now go back to states, as it should be, and they can vote
00:20:58.840
Does this, can this also just go right back to Congress and have a federal law?
00:21:03.860
They can, they can, if they can, if they can pass it.
00:21:08.240
Because again, the constitution doesn't speak to it, and therefore it's up to the people.
00:21:13.220
So they could pass a law, but they would, they would have to do one of two things.
00:21:17.260
They would have to, you know, in the Senate, get 60 votes in order to, what was called the
00:21:26.480
They could either get 60 votes, which they're not going to be able to do, or they could destroy
00:21:32.560
And that would be a permanent damaging of the Senate.
00:21:36.420
I mean, the last time they didn't have a filibuster was, you know, before Thomas Edison,
00:21:43.720
So, I mean, we're talking about that this would be, you know, change the Senate forever,
00:21:48.380
because the reason the Senate is considered probably the most well-known deliberative body
00:21:54.900
in the world is because you can't just pass it with raw political power.
00:21:59.980
You have to get some consensus from the other side.
00:22:03.220
It takes that 60 votes and it slows things down so that you don't have one party taking
00:22:08.440
over and flipping the country one major direction to the other.
00:22:12.080
The Senate kind of stops that and makes there be some consensus.
00:22:16.800
You take, if you destroy the filibuster, we're going to see court packing.
00:22:20.960
We're going to see Puerto Rico becoming a state, D.C. becoming, I mean, we're not going
00:22:27.540
And I think I've mentioned this before with your audience even, Glenn, but if people don't
00:22:33.180
understand how bad court, once you do court packing, once your country's over.
00:22:36.860
And so this is the kind of stuff that would happen if they do get rid of the filibuster,
00:22:42.040
as Bernie Sanders and others are advocating today, because they know they'll have to do
00:22:46.380
that if they're going to push through a new law, a new Roe v. Wade by federal mandate.
00:22:51.380
And is court packing just one justice or does it have to be several?
00:22:56.240
I mean, I don't know who would go five to five, but it's four.
00:22:59.940
Um, they've already filed the bill to add four justices to the Supreme Court.
00:23:04.580
So it would add four, which would then make the liberals have the majority and they would
00:23:09.660
just start doing whatever, basically like a super legislature.
00:23:13.040
But the problem is once you do it once, um, the court's over.
00:23:17.520
It's just, uh, you know, a subsidiary of the majority party in power and there is no rule
00:23:23.920
of law anymore and you don't have any rights anymore.
00:23:26.200
You have whatever right the majority party wishes for you to keep and that's why.
00:23:33.040
You look at, if people wonder what happened to Venezuela, that's what happened.
00:23:37.040
Um, Argentina, we can go through lots of countries.
00:23:40.100
People don't understand, but when it happens that first time you're done, you're tyranny.
00:23:45.060
And, uh, and really a dictatorship is where you go.
00:23:47.940
So it's something that they tried in 19, uh, 36, 37 FDR did because he did not like the
00:23:54.660
fact that, you know, they were, um, uh, not getting his new deal through, but even his
00:24:00.200
own party turned against him before it was over and said, this is tyranny.
00:24:08.240
And it's something that they can only do if they destroyed the filibuster, which would
00:24:17.040
So that is the thing that, um, uh, you know, I'm, I'm, I'm looking at here at, I'm not sure
00:24:24.340
they release this to do anything but to, um, pour fuel on the fire right now.
00:24:33.300
Why wait until summer, pour fuel on the fire right now to get court packing, uh, uh, done
00:24:42.920
I think it has more to do with that than the actual judgment from the court.
00:24:50.220
I think it's both probably they're, they're hoping they can, you know, intimidate, uh,
00:24:57.520
Um, but this is the beginning of what I've been predicting, you know, for months.
00:25:03.960
And I said, I think this is coming in June, uh, when these decisions start coming down.
00:25:08.860
Um, and I think they're going to go for court packing with a frenzy.
00:25:12.820
I think this is going to be their new election approach.
00:25:15.540
Um, cause they're obviously not working well under the current, uh, you know, polling and
00:25:20.900
And I, I think this is going to be their attempt and we're seeing just an early sort of release
00:25:26.520
In addition to a hope that they can intimidate one of the five justices that supposedly are
00:25:33.300
It only says Alito, but again, part of the leak was that for other justices, not the chief,
00:25:40.880
So they, they might hope that they can pick off a Kavanaugh or a Barrett who lose their
00:25:48.020
I think this will entrench them even more because yeah, it would just destroy the, I
00:25:52.560
mean, everybody would know that they changed their, their principled opinion because of
00:25:59.960
So I, I agree with you that I think long-term, this is their strategy and this is what they're
00:26:04.340
Kelly Shackelford is on the board of trustees of the United States Supreme court historical society
00:26:09.840
is earned his law degree from Baylor university.
00:26:13.080
And he is also the president and CEO of first Liberty Institute.
00:26:17.000
If you are thinking about donating money to any cause, I can highly recommend first Liberty
00:26:24.960
They can use your money and they are winning and actually leaving permanent marks.
00:26:33.660
So Kelly, you have been in front of the Supreme court and we were talking recently and you said
00:26:38.840
to me, um, we're probably more free by the end of summer.
00:26:42.360
We'll be more free, religiously speaking, than we have been in our lifetime.
00:26:47.660
You also said because of Roe versus Wade and the other opinions that you think are coming
00:26:55.420
down the pike that the left is going to lose their mind.
00:27:00.860
Well, you've got, obviously you've got Dobbs, which is the Roe v. Wade, which we're now seeing
00:27:06.700
the precursors to, but in addition, and by the way, what the way this works is the court
00:27:11.660
issues, all of its opinions in, in, by June, because the session will end and they will
00:27:17.620
mostly leave the country and speak and teach and stuff that other places.
00:27:24.720
Um, it's highly expected that most, you would have expected Dobbs, for instance, to be issued
00:27:33.700
Why don't they just finish it now and make it official?
00:27:39.000
I mean, I don't know how far along they are because what we saw was an early draft.
00:27:43.080
Um, and so, but you know, if I'm the chief, I think I might move it along now and say,
00:27:52.460
Um, but it normally would have been late, but in addition to Dobbs, um, you've got a
00:27:58.180
second amendment case, which will be, I think in favor of the second amendment and against
00:28:04.000
the New York restrictions, uh, on guns, which will do, which would do what it would, it would
00:28:10.160
just bolster the second amendment and say that, uh, these types of restrictions are unconstitutional
00:28:16.040
because there is a second amendment right, uh, to keep and bear arms.
00:28:22.780
I think you're going to get that kind of decision.
00:28:24.980
I think we're going to, uh, we argued a major school choice decision in December.
00:28:30.700
And I, you know, it's expected, uh, the way the argument went that we're going to win
00:28:35.160
that case, which it will say that anytime there's any school choice program anywhere in
00:28:42.360
the country, you cannot exclude religious schools or religious choices from the parents.
00:28:47.800
Um, and that'll make clear that school choice has to be fair, uh, and that be everywhere it's
00:28:56.580
Uh, the exclusion of the religious schools is over.
00:28:59.920
And so that, that will cause a lot of religious schools to come into being because now there'll
00:29:05.160
be resources that the parents have to choose what they think is best for their kids.
00:29:12.060
Um, the coach Kennedy case, which we just argued, uh, a week ago, Monday, um, that's a huge case.
00:29:18.600
And it looks like it's going to be even bigger than expected depending upon how they write
00:29:24.280
But, and again, this is a coach who was fired for going to a knee after the game to say a
00:29:30.080
20 second prayer, thanking God for the privilege of coaching the young many coach.
00:29:33.980
And it was, it's the first time the court has ever had a case on the free exercise or
00:29:41.260
religious freedom rights, uh, of a teacher, a coach, anyone.
00:29:48.580
So it's going to affect a lot of people that way.
00:29:51.060
But what people didn't expect is during the oral argument, the court got into a discussion
00:29:55.700
about possibly ending the lemon case, which has been around for 50 years.
00:30:01.620
And if people wonder why our whole lives, we've seen attacks on nativity scenes and menorahs
00:30:07.560
and veterans memorials with religious symbols and, you know, 10 commandments, monuments and
00:30:13.600
It's not because the founders said anything about that.
00:30:16.400
It's because of this really bad case 50 years ago.
00:30:19.800
And it's been the weapon of choice for secularists now for 50 years to try to wipe our society
00:30:27.580
And it's pretty clear that, uh, maybe a majority of the justices are about to say that's over.
00:30:34.180
And that, that's a sea change if that happens as well.
00:30:37.480
So those are just a handful and there's some others too.
00:30:43.380
There's the border case that was just argued last week.
00:30:45.640
So all this stuff is coming down and the end of June.
00:30:49.300
And I'm, my guess is that the, uh, the, the Marxist left is not going to like these things.
00:30:55.000
It is amazing to me as it, as we are traveling down this road where the country seems, the
00:31:02.200
government seems to be going in entirely the wrong direction, uh, and you're kind of losing
00:31:07.860
hope, uh, that the Supreme court now rides in and is doing remarkable, uh, things that
00:31:16.040
quite honestly, I would think would find favor in the eyes of, uh, of God.
00:31:21.340
Um, it's, I mean, hopefully it buys us some time, Kelly.
00:31:27.280
And you know, it's, it's what it's doing is, is these, these justices aren't themselves
00:31:34.480
They don't go one way or the other, but they're going back to the original meaning of the text
00:31:39.620
of the constitution, which takes us to our founding.
00:31:43.060
Kelly Shackleford, uh, president, CEO of first Liberty Institute.
00:31:47.440
You can find it and donate at first Liberty.org.
00:31:53.780
That's the thing about constitutionalist judges.
00:31:56.380
It doesn't always cut your way because it's all about freedom and rule of law.
00:32:28.780
I'm sure they're going to, I'm sure they're going to make reference to how riveting I am
00:32:34.420
No, I'm just, I'm just, well, I'm, I'm, I'll share them some other time.
00:32:42.280
No, no, no, Glenn, I'm open, I'm as open as can be anything you can do to make me, you
00:32:54.140
Mike Lee, horrible at parties, perfect in the Senate.
00:33:01.760
See, see, I can see that on the back of a, of a bumper someplace.
00:33:06.000
I'm not horrible at parties, but I get the point.
00:33:14.020
I can't wait to hear your opinion because you are, I think you're the strongest on the
00:33:19.540
constitution and you should be a Supreme court justice someday.
00:33:23.840
Tell me what, first of all, are we going to hunt for, find, and I don't think it's against
00:33:32.340
the law, at least kick this person out, uh, and disbar them for leaking this.
00:33:41.620
Well, I will say this, I, as a former law clerk, I've been clerked for Justice Alito.
00:33:46.140
I can tell you, law clerks are expected to keep utmost confidentiality and decorum.
00:33:52.040
You know, it's a respectful, collegial, and, and even friendly work environment.
00:33:56.340
And I can't imagine the damage this leak will bring to the atmosphere and the operation
00:34:02.220
I, I, I, um, I am confident that the court is going to look into it.
00:34:06.680
Now, what the court decides to do about it will be up to the court.
00:34:09.460
It's difficult to predict because we've never had a situation exactly like this.
00:34:13.720
You know, before the Obamacare ruling in 2012, there were, um, leaks in the form of rumors
00:34:28.780
An immense pressure was brought to bear on the Supreme court justices rumored to be in
00:34:34.160
what was thought to be a majority getting ready to strike down Obamacare.
00:34:37.440
And it turned out, uh, looks like those things might've made some difference, but there's no
00:34:42.280
precedent for this one where an opinion, an entire opinion, the opinion of the court has
00:34:49.900
The odds, the odds, the odds that a Supreme court justice knew about it.
00:35:00.460
The Supreme court justices themselves have got to work with one another for the rest of their
00:35:07.860
Um, and so it seems like the cost for them would be too high.
00:35:12.680
Well, it seems more likely that it was someone else.
00:35:22.540
It seems extraordinarily logical, uh, and really based on this was bad law from the very beginning.
00:35:37.280
Uh, and even the left and Ginsburg has said that these are all the things that I gleaned
00:35:50.520
I would add to that the fact that, um, Roe versus Wade just found no grounding whatsoever
00:35:56.920
in the constitution in hundreds of years of, uh, jurisprudence.
00:36:03.860
It, it, it was created out of whole cloth, uh, by the Supreme court in 1973.
00:36:09.300
And what this did was just take away the authority of the States to protect unborn human life and
00:36:16.080
to make the difficult decisions on exactly where the law line is drawn.
00:36:20.700
And, uh, you know, in States that allow abortion, what under what circumstances to allow it, uh,
00:36:26.240
uh, how long at what stage, all of these things were taken off the table by the Supreme court of
00:36:33.060
the United States acting without any constitutional authority because nothing in the constitution
00:36:39.340
Consequently, this is left to the States to decide.
00:36:43.660
They, they took what should have been an issue decided by state government and made it federal
00:36:48.600
and then took it away from the lawmaking process generally and made it a matter for nine lawyers
00:37:00.020
I, you know, I was amazed at seeing the people that were in front of the Supreme court yesterday
00:37:04.040
saying, you know, uh, power to the people, uh, you know, rights belong to the people.
00:37:09.180
And I thought, yeah, but that's what the Supreme court said that this, this is not taking away
00:37:13.980
anyone's right to have an abortion from the Supreme court.
00:37:18.360
It's just saying your state has to decide, correct?
00:37:24.020
There is nothing in this decision making abortion unlawful.
00:37:28.020
That is a fallacy, a fallacy pushed by the left to scare people.
00:37:33.140
What this is saying is that decisions regarding abortion will be made by lawmakers, primarily,
00:37:40.840
almost exclusively at the state level, not at the federal level.
00:37:44.700
So does this in, in any place, um, set it up for, you know, go ahead in California, do your
00:37:53.280
abortion laws and then bring it back to the court and, uh, you know, we'll see if it stands.
00:37:58.880
Does it is, does it make a case at all that is saying that it's going to be hard to pass,
00:38:10.420
Not from what I read in this opinion, this opinion as drafted, uh, I hope and pray this
00:38:17.180
is in fact, the opinion of the court as it purports to be, uh, because as written, it
00:38:23.100
uproots, uh, row and Casey root and branch doesn't leave anything left of them.
00:38:29.120
And it simply makes the case that, uh, these are decisions for state lawmakers, not decisions
00:38:37.140
Uh, now let me, let me take you to one of the things that I'm, I'm hearing and they spent
00:38:45.280
Um, people are saying, you know, there's 50 years now of precedent, uh, and you just
00:38:53.740
And they spent a lot of time talking about that.
00:38:59.320
Uh, now look, I, I would point people to page 39 of the opinion of the court authored by Justice
00:39:06.680
Alito, uh, the infamous decision in Plessy versus Ferguson is, uh, as the opinion characterizes
00:39:14.440
it, one of these decisions that the Supreme court decided and got it wrong.
00:39:27.580
And it, uh, Plessy versus Ferguson was the case that set up the separate, but equal.
00:39:34.480
And you know, it was evil, radically contrary to the constitution.
00:39:40.260
And it was precedent that was in place for many, many decades, far too long.
00:39:46.720
And fortunately the Supreme court has acknowledged that it got it wrong.
00:39:52.220
Sometimes it got it wrong in Plessy versus Ferguson.
00:39:58.860
And it, it says that even precedent, first of all, they disregarded, uh, precedent in our
00:40:05.560
country, um, by enacting this, uh, but also it, it says at no point does precedent play a
00:40:19.580
There's nothing about precedent that makes it sacrosanct.
00:40:22.340
The court follows this doctrine known as stare decisis, which basically just means we're
00:40:26.660
going to stick to a ruling that we've already issued, uh, in most circumstances, because
00:40:32.680
it makes it more predictable for litigants and it makes it easier for the court to stand
00:40:37.540
But the court also says it's not going to stick to precedent.
00:40:43.680
And, uh, particularly when you're dealing with constitutional interpretation, there's a
00:40:49.440
diminished standard of deference, uh, uh, uh, owed, uh, under the doctrine of stare decisis
00:40:54.720
where you're dealing with the constitutional provision.
00:40:56.540
These are things that can't just be changed by legislative bodies.
00:40:59.360
It would require an amendment to the constitution.
00:41:02.080
And so that's why, you know, mercifully, uh, the court was able to change course, uh, when
00:41:08.820
it decided Brown versus board of education, acknowledging that Plessy versus Ferguson was wrong.
00:41:14.140
Let me, it had other instances where it's, it's reversed itself after interpreting the
00:41:20.340
So Mike, um, take me through quickly, the idea of the 14th amendment and, uh, the right
00:41:31.080
So there are provisions in the constitution that protect things that we associate with
00:41:39.540
Uh, best example, um, might well be the fourth amendment, right?
00:41:44.140
You know, the, uh, the government can't, um, uh, search your house without a warrant.
00:41:49.860
And the warrant has to be based on particular evidence, providing probable cause and describing
00:41:54.540
with particularity, what's going to be searched.
00:41:57.100
There are other amendments that in one way or another may, uh, also involve privacy.
00:42:05.660
And protection against self-concrimination, for example, what happened is that in 1965, the
00:42:13.220
Supreme court of the United States in a case called Griswold versus Connecticut, uh, concluded
00:42:18.500
that when you add all these things together, when you add up things like the fourth amendment
00:42:23.940
and the fifth amendment and the ninth and 10th amendments, those things themselves overlap
00:42:33.200
to form emanations and penumbras, which are themselves broad enough to encompass, uh, a,
00:42:43.720
The court then used that to conclude that States may not restrict access to con contraception
00:42:51.660
A few years later, the Supreme court applied that same reasoning to say it doesn't just
00:42:56.140
apply to married couples, but States can't restrict access to contraception generally.
00:43:01.460
And then it was that same reasoning that the Supreme court relied on in 1973, concluded
00:43:06.900
that this abstract right to privacy imposed initially on the federal government by operation
00:43:12.300
of the amendments that I described and made applicable to the States through the due process
00:43:17.540
clause of the 14th amendment, prohibit the States from unduly restricting a woman's access
00:43:24.440
So it required inference upon inference and it required a lot of, uh, legal verbal constitutional
00:43:31.960
At the end of the day, there was still nothing there.
00:43:35.620
Now look, there's not a state in America today that would or should ever even consider, uh,
00:43:44.120
And so there are those who are going to try to attack this opinion by saying, Oh, this
00:43:48.540
is going to undermine access to the country's contraception.
00:43:55.060
And it specifically says in here that this is only about abortion.
00:44:06.260
And that's, that's the way the Supreme court works.
00:44:07.960
It deals with the facts before it rather than some other case.
00:44:11.740
So that's the point is they try to dress it up in language that, you know, kind of appeals
00:44:18.800
to people's general sense that they have a right to privacy.
00:44:21.800
There are privacy interests protected by the constitution.
00:44:24.240
That does not mean there's anything in the constitution saying that a state has no authority
00:44:29.300
to protect unborn human life, which is what they've been doing since 1973.
00:44:33.440
So Mike, are they going to finalize this faster and get it out to end this, you know, this,
00:44:46.320
You know, so it's not my, my place to tell them what to do as a lawmaker.
00:44:54.680
I'll tell you what I think I would do in that circumstance.
00:44:57.600
That's what I, what seems to make the most sense to me.
00:45:01.160
I think they ought to issue a decision immediately because look, the whole point of this, I fear,
00:45:09.760
I still don't know who leaked it or what their motives were.
00:45:12.640
One could surmise that perhaps following, uh, the model from 2012 is maybe they wanted to leak it
00:45:20.040
so as to make it difficult for those justices of planning on signing it to threaten, intimidate, and harass them.
00:45:28.620
And one could conclude that the best way for the court to deal with that and make sure that this doesn't happen again
00:45:34.520
or something is leaked for purposes like that is to say, we're just going to issue this opinion right now.
00:45:40.900
So that there's, there's no time for pressure to build.
00:45:43.980
So they could do that in a couple of different ways.
00:45:46.860
The chief justice could just say, okay, everybody sign on to either the majority opinion or a dissent
00:45:52.580
or a concurring opinion of your choosing, uh, by no later than close the business Thursday or Friday.
00:45:58.280
Uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, and then they could issue it then another approach they could do is issue an order today,
00:46:03.740
a per curiam unsigned order of the court announcing the results in this case and saying that an opinion would follow
00:46:14.700
Either way, I think it would be good for the court to signal that this doesn't work.
00:46:23.820
Um, Mike, are you, how concerned are you about, cause I,
00:46:27.840
I think this really is, uh, less about abortion and more about packing the court and the filibuster.
00:46:36.840
How concerned are you with your Senate colleagues on those two things?
00:46:42.360
Well, I'm, I'm scared to death about both of them.
00:46:45.760
Ending the filibuster would destroy the Senate as we know it.
00:46:48.840
And I believe that they might consider doing it here as a means toward the end of packing the Supreme Court.
00:46:56.140
As I've written in my forthcoming book called Saving Nine comes out on, on June 7th and Saving Nine.
00:47:01.560
I explain why court backing is a terrible idea.
00:47:04.480
It's inimical to the very foundation of our constitution.
00:47:08.560
It, it threatens the independence and the integrity of our courts.
00:47:12.980
It's designed to turn the courts basically into a political body.
00:47:16.160
Now, the last time they tried this, the Democrats tried this in 1937, it failed legislatively.
00:47:22.480
But as I explained in, in Saving Nine, it still left an indelible scar.
00:47:28.800
One that I think has caused problems for us ever since then.
00:47:32.580
Uh, that is it, it influenced the way individual Supreme Court justices were voting.
00:47:37.360
And, uh, the, the result has been a government that knows no boundaries around its authority, uh, that regulates every aspect of human existence and has accumulated $30 trillion in debt.
00:47:49.780
Those are all, I believe, outgrowths in one way or another of FDR's court packing plan in 1937.
00:47:56.380
The one that failed, but still scared Supreme Court justices into submission.
00:48:00.280
How soon do you think we're going to see them trying to move on these things?
00:48:05.560
I, I, I think you will see, uh, as soon as this opinion becomes final, it will not surprise me at all to see, uh, Democrats trying to get action on this immediately.
00:48:15.480
I think you'll start hearing messaging as soon as this week from some Democrats in the House and in the Senate calling for this action.
00:48:23.280
Because in their view, somehow, uh, the ends justify the means, and this is so drastic, so grave an insult that this has to be done.
00:48:31.880
But let's remember what this is and what it isn't, Glenn.
00:48:35.860
This is just, the justices reaching the conclusion, the Constitution doesn't deal with this.
00:48:43.040
And consequently, this is not an issue to be decided by federal judges.
00:48:46.940
This is an issue to be decided by elected lawmakers.
00:48:50.140
It's just, it's given the, uh, the House and the Senate and our, our state legislatures more power.
00:49:02.020
And for some reason they think that's draconian.
00:49:10.800
We pray for all of you in Washington on all sides of the aisle and all nine of our justices.
00:49:17.300
Uh, they, I, I believe this puts them in, in grave danger.
00:49:25.680
Mike Lee, you can find him, uh, and follow him at, uh, Mike Lee.
00:49:31.220
I believe it's Mike Lee for Utah or Mike Lee for Senate.