Latest / Conversations: Special Guests with Preston Scott / What Is Up With The Supreme Court?

Transcript

What Is Up With The Supreme Court? · Conversations: Special Guests with Preston Scott

• 0:11
  We have no time to waste. It is the third hour, Thursday edition
• 0:16
  of The Morning Show with Preston Scott Show fivey eighty two. That's Grant Allen.
• 0:22
  It is Thursday, January twenty fifth, and it is day eleven hundred
• 0:27
  of America held hostage. Not made any better this week and joining us to
• 0:33
  talk about a lot of constitutional issues that are in the news is our go
• 0:39
  to. He is Hans von Spakowski with the Heritage Foundation. His wheelhouse is
• 0:45
  constitutional law and Hans, Happy New Year. Hope you had a merry Christmas,
• 0:49
  and welcome back to the show. How are you? That's I'm doing
• 0:53
  just fine and thanks for having me back. I have been waiting to talk
• 0:57
  to you since I saw the decision by the Supreme Court about Texas. Explain
• 1:03
  what you can explain about this. I just got an email from somebody saying,
• 1:06
  look, there are no notes on this because it wasn't really a constitutional
• 1:10
  ruling. They just stayed a lower court ruling. But Texas is saying,
• 1:15
  forget that, we're putting wire up anyway. Help us make sense of this
• 1:19
  from a constitutional perspective. Yeah, this was not a decision on the merits.
• 1:25
  You know what happened was Texas put up twenty nine miles of concertina or
• 1:30
  barbed wire along one of the most heavily trafficked areas, Eagle Pass in Texas,
• 1:37
  and when the boarder patrol started going in and cutting holes in the fence
• 1:42
  in order to allow illegal aliens into the country. There's video showing them doing
• 1:48
  that. Texas actually sued the Biden administration for stealing property and conversion. The
• 2:00
  barbed wire was put on state property, state property or private property where the
• 2:06
  owners had said, sure, put this up. There was an injunction issued
• 2:13
  by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals telling the Biden administration that they couldn't destroy
• 2:19
  this wire while the case was on appeal, and the Biden administration filed an
• 2:25
  emergency request with the US Supreme Court to dissolve that injunction. The Supreme Court
• 2:31
  said, yeah, there won't be an injunction in place while it's on appeal
• 2:37
  to two sentence order. So yeah, the Bide administration may have won this
• 2:42
  round, but the battle is still going on and that's in the lower court.
• 2:46
  Now here's the most intriguing thing Preston about this. All that meant was
• 2:53
  that there's no order in place preventing the Biden administration from cutting holes in the
• 3:02
  fencing or removing it. But there was no order put in place preventing the
• 3:08
  state of Texas from continuing to put down the wire. So all these people
• 3:14
  who say that Texas, who Texas Governor Greg Abbett is going to be violating
• 3:21
  the law if he continues to put down wire, They're just wrong. Now
• 3:25
  he can put up as much wire as he wants. It's going to be
• 3:29
  a race between Texas putting up the wire and the Biden administration going in and
• 3:35
  removing it. But he's not violating any court order by doing that. Help
• 3:39
  me understand under what authority the federal government has to regulate any kind of fencing
• 3:49
  that goes on a private landowner's property. Well, I don't think they do.
• 3:54
  But what the Supreme Court basically said was, we're not going to make
• 3:58
  this decision. Now, We're let the lower courts make this decision. And
• 4:04
  I think the lower courts are going to decide in favor of Texas. I
• 4:09
  think Texas is actually going to win this losses. How can we best understand
• 4:15
  the decision by John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett to side with the activist judges.
• 4:24
  The way you have to think about this is that they don't like getting
• 4:30
  into cases in the preliminary stages. And remember, all of this was simply
• 4:34
  over a preliminary injunction, right, And a preliminary injunction is an injunction that
• 4:42
  is in place while the case is being argued on the merits. The Supreme
• 4:46
  Court doesn't like to get into that issue. They want the lower courts to
• 4:53
  hear all the facts and the evidence in the case and make a decision before
• 4:57
  it gets to them, and they consider it. I think this is such
• 5:00
  an look. Don't get me wrong, don't think that I am defending what
• 5:05
  they did. I think it's in line with their procedures. But I think
• 5:10
  this is an extraordinary circumstance, one in which they should have allowed the injunction
• 5:15
  to remain in place while the case is on appeal, because without it in
• 5:19
  place, the Biden administration has made it clear they are doing everything they can
• 5:26
  to make sure as many illegal aliens as possible get across the border. President,
• 5:32
  let me just tell you one thing about this incident. Texas had video
• 5:39
  not only showing border patrol agents cutting holes in the barbed wire, but then
• 5:46
  putting out a rope ladder, a rope ladder through the hole to help the
• 5:54
  illegal aliens climb up the bank and into text this and there's video of a
• 6:01
  border patrol boat out in the middle of the river where all this is going
• 6:08
  on. And are they doing anything to prevent the aliens from getting across.
• 6:13
  No, they're just sitting there passively watching these aliens come through. And once
• 6:17
  they're through the hole. Do you think the border patrol agents escort them to
• 6:23
  a processing center? Why? No, they just stay here head down the
• 6:29
  road. You should stop at this processing center, and they just let them
• 6:31
  go. Use traffic, weather, sports, entertainment and the Truth The Morning
• 6:38
  Show with Preston Scott on News Radio one hundred point seven WFLA. All right,
• 6:45
  we have a little better understanding of the legal landscape of what's going on
• 6:53
  in Texas as it relates to the border. But Hans that led to,
• 6:58
  first of all, I feel like the just this is had a responsibility to
• 7:02
  give us a little more of an explanation on what they were doing and why
• 7:05
  they were doing it. There thinking in this we might have been spared a
• 7:10
  little bit of heartache, But it led to a discussion that Grant and I
• 7:13
  had, and that I know that many people across the country are having.
• 7:17
  The Left has been trying to quote delegitimize the Supreme Court and basically ignoredge rulings
• 7:24
  and say, yeah, whatever, we don't care what the Supreme Court says.
• 7:29
  We're close to seeing that on the other side of the aisle with rulings
• 7:32
  like this, aren't we Well maybe, although again I want to emphasize that
• 7:38
  the critics out there who are saying that Greg Abbott is not complying with the
• 7:45
  Supreme Court's order by putting up more fencing are simply wrong. I understood,
• 7:50
  So they're wrong about that, and so far, so far, Look,
• 7:55
  there hasn't been a single instance that I know of, Exis or any other
• 8:01
  state disobeying any court order on these issues. The Biden administration does that all
• 8:07
  the time, like the President just announcing that he's going to forgive even more
• 8:15
  billions in student loans after the Supreme Court told him you don't have the power
• 8:18
  to do that. That's what I'm driving at is, I feel like we're
• 8:26
  at a very dangerous point here when you've got Justice Roberts who flip flops between
• 8:31
  being an originalist and being an activist. I think he's got pride issues and
• 8:37
  I think he likes to be the center of attention. That's just my analysis
• 8:39
  of it. But you know, it's a dangerous place to be where a
• 8:45
  percentage of the population just says about a Supreme Court ruling whatever, we'll ignore
• 8:50
  it. Oh, I listen, I agree. But we're having this breakdown
• 8:56
  of our entire justice system. Then, frankly, it's caused by the left.
• 9:01
  It's caused by bad decisions by ideologically driven judges, and it's driven by
• 9:09
  the way the Biden administration has weaponized the Justice Department in the FBI. You
• 9:16
  know, the law enforcement is now being used to target the political opponents of
• 9:24
  the political party that controls the White House. That's that really hasn't happened in
• 9:28
  our history that I know of, And that's just another reason why we're in
• 9:35
  a situation we are. People see that there is now a two tiered justice
• 9:41
  system and whether or not you're prosecuted depends on which political party you're at.
• 9:48
  On your phone with the iHeart radio app and on hundreds of devices like Alexa,
• 9:52
  Google Home, Xbox and Sono and Ihearts radio station back twenty one minutes
• 10:03
  past the hour. Hans von Spakowski with a Heritage Foundation. He's a constitutional
• 10:07
  expert, and we're talking about constitutional issues here on the morning show. Hans
• 10:16
  speaking of Texas State Attorney General, the state suing the federal government because the
• 10:22
  Consolidated Appropriations Act of twenty twenty three, a huge omnibus bill was brought about
• 10:31
  without a quorum, which is apparently a violation of the Constitution. What do
• 10:35
  you know about this lawsuit? B Wait, I'll tell you what an intriguing
• 10:39
  case. This issue has never been raised in a lost entire history of the
• 10:43
  US. People need to remember that during COVID, Nancy Pelosi instituted proxy voting,
• 10:52
  and again it had never happened in the entire history of the US,
• 10:56
  so that absent members of the USA House could just give somebody who was going
• 11:03
  to be there there proxy and they could vote for them. What Paxton is
• 11:09
  saying is that, look, there's the Constitution says that if you don't have
• 11:13
  a quorum in the House of Representatives, you can't conduct business. All you
• 11:18
  can do is either adjourned from day to day or and this is the language
• 11:22
  in the Constitution compel the attendance of absent members. Paxton is saying, the
• 11:30
  word attendance means physical presence, therefore proxy voting, it doesn't fit within the
• 11:37
  constitutional requirement. And because there was no quorum actually physically present in the House
• 11:46
  when they voted on that omnibus spending bill, it was never actually passed and
• 11:52
  isn't actually and shouldn't be in effect. I said, that is a very
• 11:58
  intriguing consol soutional question and something that the Supreme Court has never faced before.
• 12:05
  So a district judge is going to get this assuming he sides with the simple
• 12:09
  language of the Constitution on this, I don't see it as being overly complicated.
• 12:15
  Then what what happens to mediate appeal? And then how quickly does this
• 12:18
  get to the Supreme Court? Media appeal, media appeal that this this case
• 12:24
  almost one hundred percent certain it'll end up in the US Supreme Court. What's
• 12:28
  your prediction there? I think the only I think Paxton, on the plain
• 12:33
  text of the Constitution has a solid case. The only the only thing that
• 12:39
  might prevent the Supreme Court from issuing a decision is they might say this is
• 12:45
  a political question. The House of Representatives is the sole judge on its internal
• 12:56
  parliamentary rules, and therefore we are not going to make a decision about this.
• 13:01
  It's up to the House that that could be their excuse for not making
• 13:03
  this decision. Wow, speaking of politics and court cases, what are what's
• 13:09
  your best guess on what the end result will be with all the litigation that
• 13:15
  former President Trump is facing and his likelihood of being the GOP nominee. Well,
• 13:20
  look, I mean all the polling, the results so far seemed to
• 13:24
  indicate that he's going to be the Republican nominee, although we still have a
• 13:30
  lot of primaries ahead of us, and so far Nicky Haley is is still
• 13:33
  in the race. So you know, I'm not really a political analyst,
• 13:37
  but I think everybody is reading the tea leaves that way. What what's going
• 13:43
  on with these legal cases is that boy, they're proceeding down all these all
• 13:48
  these different paths. Uh. There's a huge fight going on in the federal
• 13:52
  courts in the District of Columbia where Jack Smith has filed his prosecutions. The
• 13:58
  President has raised all kinds of issues, everything from presidential immunity to questioning the
• 14:07
  legal authority of Merrick Garland the attorney general who have appointed Jack Smith in the
• 14:13
  first place, And in fact, on that very issue, he's got three
• 14:16
  former attorney generals in the United States saying that Garland didn't have the power to
• 14:22
  appoint Jack Smith. If that's true, if the Supreme Court agrees with that,
• 14:26
  then the entire indictment would fall away that Jack Smith has filed. And
• 14:31
  as you know, in Georgia, boy, there are all kinds of allegations
• 14:37
  against the local DA there. There's going to be a hearing on that conducted
• 14:43
  by the judge on February fifteenth. That also could sink per prosecution. But
• 14:50
  then he's got these cases in New York where you have a vindictive state attorney
• 14:56
  general who is basically willing to do anything to get Donald Trump, and that
• 15:01
  case I could result in the confiscation of all of their wealth in the state
• 15:09
  of New York, which is unbelievable. That's the kind of thing happens in
• 15:11
  third world countries, not in the United States. Well, I have a
• 15:16
  feeling we're going to be talking about this stuff some more. Hans, thanks
• 15:18
  so much as always for making time for us, and we greatly appreciate it.
• 15:22
  Sure thing any time. Thank you, Sir Hans von Spakowski with us
• 15:26
  from the Heritage Foundation, our guest. We try to understand all this stuff
• 15:31
  the best we can. He certainly helped me understand what's going on in Texas
• 15:35
  a little bit better, a little more clarity on that, and he basically
• 15:39
  locked in on exactly what an emailer shared with us earlier in the show that
• 15:43
  we shared with you. So thanks very much. Come back with the Big
• 15:48
  Stories in the press box next to the Morning Show with Prestin Scott