Latest / Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News / America’s obsession with courts and the cost of lawsuits

Transcript

America’s obsession with courts and the cost of lawsuits · Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News

• 0:11
  Helping to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
• 0:15
  This is the Constitution Study on the America Out Loud Network with your host, Paul Engel.
• 0:31
  I've said it before, but the United States is a very litigious society.
• 0:37
  Because of that, many of our most important debates are not decided by we the people or even the laws made in our name, but by the oligarchs in black robes who oversee our courtrooms.
• 0:50
  Hello there, everyday Americans, Paul Engel here with the Constitution Study, where we read and study the Constitution, teacherizing generation be free.
• 0:57
  I am glad you could join me today.
• 0:59
  And you know, a lot of stuff gets answered in court.
• 1:02
  And of course, there are a lot of misconceptions about courts.
• 1:05
  There's a lot of misconceptions about what courts can actually do.
• 1:07
  I deal with that a lot here, right?
• 1:09
  We often hear about court rulings, except courts do not rule.
• 1:13
  Um they make decisions.
• 1:15
  Uh the Supreme Court offers opinions.
• 1:17
  Um, they do sometimes issue orders, some of which are illegal and unconstitutional, but they do not rule.
• 1:24
  But we act like they do, which probably helps explain why so many people look to the courts for a reduce of grievance, even when the grievances against their very own uh um representatives who are supposed to be protecting their rights.
• 1:40
  So I want to take a look.
• 1:41
  I got a bunch of them lined up here today.
• 1:43
  We're gonna start with the idea of geofense warrants.
• 1:46
  Now, the Supreme Court has agreed to consider a case about whether a search warrants to collect a location history of cell phone users near a crime are constitutional.
• 1:57
  These are called geofense warrants.
• 1:59
  Uh the the court is has granted petition to uh, I think it's uh Chattery versus United States, and um uh no judges is dissented in in this conference, but uh it's very interesting.
• 2:14
  So the idea is let's say there's a crime, and as part of as part of the investigation of this crime, a a law enforcement agency may ask for what again, it's called a geofense warrant.
• 2:27
  And it basically says, starting at this point and at a distance of so many, so much so far, we want to know all the cell phones that were inside that area.
• 2:39
  Now, this is important for a couple of reasons, because in order for your cell phone to work, it must broadcast its location, it must broadcast to the cell towers so that the cell towers know how to route any calls to it, right?
• 2:53
  It's not just sitting there waiting when someone makes a call to your phone, it's not broadcast over all the cell towers because your phone is constantly pinging off of the cell tower that's that is nearest to it.
• 3:07
  Um the phone company knows how to route to that tower to send your phone the call.
• 3:12
  Um, and by the way, if you are close enough to be picked up by two towers, well, now they can narrow down where you are.
• 3:19
  And then back if they get three towers, they can tell exactly where you are.
• 3:23
  Not to mention there are a lot of services that require the phone to transmit its exact location to different service providers.
• 3:32
  So if you have one of those things where, you know, uh uh say you have a reminder that's supposed to go off when you get to a certain location, the phone needs to keep telling the search, hey, this is where I am, so that I can set up the warning.
• 3:45
  Or if you want to get uh you know alerted about uh oh gas prices in your area, basically your your phone to get some of the services with is constantly transmitting it's a tracking device, it's constantly transmitting its position, its exact location using GPS to the different service providers.
• 4:05
  By the way, this is also required by by federal law, so that 911, if you have to use it, knows where to send help.
• 4:15
  Now, like so many others, this actually came out uh an incident on January 6th, 2021.
• 4:21
  Um, the the breach of the U.S.
• 4:23
  Capitol.
• 4:23
  Part of the investigation, uh, officers sought uh location data from wireless service providers that led them to actually filing charges against some of the people involved.
• 4:35
  Interesting, in these cases, some justices allowed the warrant, others ruled that they violated the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure.
• 4:45
  Why?
• 4:46
  Because the problem you have is how do you establish probable cause?
• 4:49
  You've got a bit of a chicken and egg scenario, right?
• 4:54
  But they don't have probable cause that a person is they don't have the probable cause necessarily to get a warrant until they know if they're in the area, but they can't get the they can't find out if they're in the area, or I should say an easy way to find out if they're in the area is to simply use a geofense warrant and track their cell phones.
• 5:12
  But we get back to that question of reasonableness.
• 5:15
  Now, the case that the court's looking at, uh it comes out of a uh, I think it was a 2019 bank robbery, where uh law enforcement approached a state court to get a geofense warrant uh for every device within 150 meters of the bank robbery within one hour of the robbery.
• 5:35
  Now, the data is is anonymized, it's supposed to be anonymized.
• 5:39
  Now they're not supposed to have your personal information.
• 5:42
  Um, but they're still searching for people.
• 5:48
  Now, this request, once they got the warrant went to Google, who provided the the list of of data, but then without seeking a new warrant, law enforcement sought information about where certain devices were over a longer two-hour period of time.
• 6:05
  Again, this is important because you have to remember you you have no expectation of privacy when you're in public.
• 6:12
  So the question really comes when the geofense does it cover private property or not, but that's that's another issue.
• 6:18
  But again, Google said, okay, you have a warrant, and we provided you this anonymized data, but then they they law enforcement asked for more data over a longer period of time, and Google complied.
• 6:33
  And they did so without a warrant, which they are required.
• 6:37
  They also asked for de-anonymized data for three devices, again without seeking a warrant.
• 6:48
  And uh, this, by the way, is the I believe the issue behind the case going to um to the Supreme Court.
• 6:59
  You see, the the petitioner, uh Okello uh Chattery uh said that he was eventually convicted of armed robbery based on the data obtained under the geofense warrant.
• 7:12
  But a they the again, the law enforcer and Google went far beyond the limits of the warrant to provide the data.
• 7:20
  Now, Mr.
• 7:20
  Chattery's attorneys are arguing that the geofense warrant violated the Fourth Amendment because it allowed investigators to gather location data of people who were near the bank where the robbery took place, even though there was no evidence of any connection to the robbery.
• 7:37
  However, prosecutors say that, well, Mr.
• 7:40
  Chattery had no expectation of privacy because he opted into Google's location history service of his own free will.
• 7:48
  Now, it seems the district court concluded that the warrant did violate the Fourth Amendment because it didn't have any semblance of particular lies probable cause to search every one of the 19 users swept up in the geofense.
• 8:03
  The district courts also found that the subsequent requests for information were not supported by the warrant and were improperly provided law enforcement and Google with unbridled discretion to decide which accounts will be subject to further intrusion, and thus failed to satisfy the particular requirements that um uh are required or the requirements of the warrant.
• 8:25
  Again, one reason why I dislike Google is here.
• 8:28
  You have a perfect example.
• 8:30
  They simply provided information without a valid warrant.
• 8:33
  They they not again, there's I do I have Apple devices, but there are whenever you're dealing with these companies, you have to assume they're not gonna protect your rights.
• 8:44
  They are in possession of the data.
• 8:46
  The Supreme Court has also said that you know, once you hand your data over to a third party, you no longer have the Fourth Amendment protections if that third party provides that data to government.
• 8:56
  So there's an issue there that I'm curious to see how they deal with this.
• 9:00
  But again, you have a the question, what was the probable cause to issue the geofense warrant in the first place, because you were searching people without even knowing who you were searching?
• 9:10
  But what about the subsequent searches that were not supported by a warrant?
• 9:14
  Interesting case.
• 9:15
  I'm gonna keep an eye on it as it goes through the process.
• 9:18
  Like I said, it was just picked up by the court.
• 9:20
  We'll have to wait and see uh when it gets uh oral arguments.
• 9:25
  Now, there's another case that court, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear that I'm gonna keep an eye on.
• 9:29
  It's uh Wolford v.
• 9:31
  Lopez.
• 9:32
  And it's a challenge to Hawaii law that says a concealed carry permit holder cannot bring handguns to private property that is open to the public.
• 9:44
  Um that's prehemp, uh it's automatically prohibited.
• 9:48
  I think was it?
• 9:49
  There's another state that was looking at that, I think that was looking at similar law, but that's the question.
• 9:54
  In other words, if uh if you go to um a store, right?
• 9:59
  If you go uh
• 10:00
  Uh better yeah, they say, let's say you go to a beach or a bar or a restaurant, um, and um uh you your licensed carry holder and you carry your your firearm.
• 10:12
  The state of Hawaii says, unless you get express permission from the owner, you can't take that firearm onto property, private property that's open to the public.
• 10:22
  By the way, this is the reverse of the way most states do it, including my home state of Tennessee, where if the if the property owner doesn't want you to bring firearms, they put a sign out that says no firearms in Tennessee.
• 10:35
  There's a specific format it must be, and it is a crime for you to carry a firearm beyond that point.
• 10:43
  Right?
• 10:44
  So I it's the interesting thing is is Hawaii saying um you don't have the right to carry and unless they say so.
• 10:51
  It's a presumption that the person doesn't want you on their property armed, which to me is a pretty big leap.
• 10:59
  I mean, uh I I disagree with Tennessee as well.
• 11:02
  I don't think it should be criminal unless you know they should be able to trespass you for that.
• 11:06
  And if you don't leave, then it's criminal trespass.
• 11:09
  That's the way some states do it.
• 11:10
  I think that makes more sense.
• 11:12
  But this case is going to be interesting because again, it deals with the question of can a state uh give you uh uh a uh proactively prohibit you from private property.
• 11:24
  Um, whether it's open to the public or not, would be an interesting question.
• 11:28
  So again, this is another one.
• 11:29
  It's on my list, and I'm I'm keeping an eye on it because uh when well, once oral arguments hit, it should be interesting.
• 11:38
  Now, one actually was in oral arguments, and I've actually written an article is a Supreme Court uh took up two cases about whether or not a state can prohibit um men from being from participating in women's sports or boys from participating in women's sports.
• 11:56
  Again, there was all arguments in both these cases, but I combine them into one uh as I'm working on the article.
• 12:03
  Now, um it's still being edited, so it's probably gonna be a couple weeks before it it hits.
• 12:09
  But again, this was to me was an interesting question because of uh well, a because it you know everything transgender seems to go crazy.
• 12:18
  It's like people lose their mind uh once you mention sex and things go nuts.
• 12:23
  But it's it's a really simple question.
• 12:25
  Does Title IX, when it says sex, what do they mean?
• 12:28
  Do they mean sex or do they mean uh gender identity?
• 12:31
  And some of the arguments, wow.
• 12:34
  You know, it's it's like uh uh the the justices seem to think that a boy becomes a girl when they think they do.
• 12:42
  You know, I I'm reminded of a t-shirt my wife gave me.
• 12:45
  It says uh uh your inability to understand science is not a valid argument against it.
• 12:50
  And that's kind of what we were seeing.
• 12:52
  So uh uh it's it's it's an interesting case.
• 12:55
  Again, it's already been through all arguments.
• 12:57
  I've already written an article on them.
• 12:59
  It's being edited and being worked on.
• 13:01
  Um, so like I said, probably gonna be a week or two before it's available.
• 13:06
  But uh it it's to me, it's an interesting discussion because again, you have the basic idea.
• 13:12
  Can we tell the difference between men and boys?
• 13:14
  And remember that Title Nine was written specifically so that women could have their own sports that they could compete in fairly.
• 13:24
  In other words, you you know, you didn't have if you had a girls softball team.
• 13:28
  You couldn't have a guy come in and play because he has a physical advantage by being born male.
• 13:35
  Um, and they so they wouldn't have a chance.
• 13:37
  So that's why Title I was set up.
• 13:39
  Yet now we have people who say, well, when it says sex, um, then uh uh, you know.
• 13:46
  Well, that's that that includes transgender belief, as opposed to, you know, not your physical sex, the the mental disorder that you can't tell what your sex is.
• 13:56
  Again, it was an interesting case, and I I think you'll like the conclusions I come up to, but you're gonna have to wait to get into the details.
• 14:03
  But it is an interesting case.
• 14:04
  And again, think about how many states out there.
• 14:08
  Uh, I think there are 26 or seven.
• 14:12
  There's a bunch of states, roughly half the states allow boys to play on girls' team.
• 14:16
  Roughly half the states prohibit boys from playing on girls' team.
• 14:20
  So this is gonna have a pretty significant impact in the long run.
• 14:24
  So again, keep an eye out.
• 14:26
  Uh, I I think it's gonna be a big deal.
• 14:29
  Certainly a case I'm keeping an eye on, uh, as I expect a decision on this case later this year, probably around May or June.
• 14:37
  It's kind of the way these these big cases go.
• 14:40
  Although there is a uh rumors that the court is going to release a decision on the Trump tariff case.
• 14:46
  Another article I wrote on uh uh on the oral arguments.
• 14:50
  Well, they'll have to see what the uh what the the court decides uh as as they publish it, which may be coming if it hasn't come out and may be coming out soon.
• 15:00
  Now, with that, um I do have a break coming up, and uh they get really cranky if I don't take these breaks.
• 15:06
  So before I go, I want to remind you, you know, I we keep talking about COVID.
• 15:12
  I keep hearing people, you know, COVID and vaccine injury and and shedding and long COVID.
• 15:17
  And uh it's a concern.
• 15:19
  I I I knew a guy on the board of a not-for-profit that uh um well they uh uh they had an employee that had to leave because of uh I don't know if it was long COVID or a vaccine injury or whatnot.
• 15:35
  Before he did, I pointed him to spike support from our friends at the wellness company.
• 15:41
  Now, it's specifically designed to block and dissolve the spike protein, the the inflammatory and toxic portion of COVID-19.
• 15:52
  Now it's backed by documented research.
• 15:55
  It includes things that are designed again to block and dissolve the spike protein.
• 15:59
  It's even vetted by the medical board, the chief medical board of the wellness company.
• 16:04
  Now you can take it to prevent the effects of the spike protein or to help mitigate those effects.
• 16:10
  Want to find out more?
• 16:11
  Go to America Outloud.shop and look up the spike support panel.
• 16:16
  And then do your own research.
• 16:18
  I want us to be informed consumers.
• 16:20
  Look at the ingredients, look at the testimonial, look at what people are saying about it.
• 16:24
  When you're ready to give it a try, use the code out loud at checkout to get 20% off of your order.
• 16:30
  So please go to America Outloud.shop, check out spike support, look at the details, look what's included, do your own research.
• 16:39
  And when you're ready to purchase, well, use that code out loud, and you'll get 20% off of your order.
• 16:46
  Now, I have plenty of more cases to get to with some really interesting questions.
• 16:50
  At least they're interesting to me.
• 16:52
  I hope they're interesting to you.
• 16:53
  But I gotta get like I said, I have a break coming up, and I gotta get to them after we take this break.
• 17:08
  We're calling all patriots to Nashville, Tennessee, July 2nd, 3rd, and 4th for a powerful celebration of faith, freedom, and the American spirit.
• 17:19
  America Out Loud, the Wellness Company, and Clear, invite you to join us for the 25010 Nashville event.
• 17:27
  You'll experience best in class speakers, extraordinary voices from across America, bring an inspiring messages you won't forget.
• 17:35
  And on July 4th, get ready for the most spectacular buy work show in the country.
• 17:41
  Lighten up the Nashville sky.
• 17:43
  250 years of liberty in America and 10 years of America Out Loud News.
• 17:49
  Stand in strong for truth, justice, and the nation we all love.
• 17:54
  You can save now with Early Bird Prison at America Outloud dot news.
• 17:59
  Forward slash Nashville.
• 18:01
  July 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.
• 18:03
  America Out Loud News.
• 18:05
  25010 Nashville.
• 18:08
  Are you eating like your health depends on it?
• 18:10
  Because it does.
• 18:11
  Most of the beef and grocery stores today come from industrial feedlots where animals are pumped with hormones, vaccines, and now even experimental MRNA technology.
• 18:18
  You won't see it on the label, but it's there.
• 18:21
  Wellness farms, eat like your health depends on it.
• 18:23
  100% grass-fed, grass-finished beef from regenerative American family farms.
• 18:28
  Our cattle roam on wide open pastures, eating only natural grasses, never touched by mRNA shots, never given growth hormones, and never injected with unnecessary vaccines.
• 18:37
  Just clean, nutrient-dense beef, the way nature intended.
• 18:41
  Every cut is hand-selected, processed by trusted butchers and shipped directly from the farm to your door.
• 18:47
  No middlemen.
• 18:48
  Order now at TWC.com forward slash out loud, get the daily V stack, protect yourself, boost your immune system, and save 20% on your first order.
• 19:31
  Have you been looking for a healthy snack for on the go?
• 19:33
  But all the energy and protein bars are just too sweet and full of sugar preservatives and mystery ingredients.
• 19:38
  Well, not all energy bars are soft and sugary.
• 19:40
  Bear bars are a crunchy savory bar made from just six simple natural ingredients made with veggies, nuts, and seeds.
• 19:47
  Bear bars are plant-based, organic, gluten-free, contain six grams of protein, and are low-temp drive for a unique crunch.
• 19:54
  To learn more, just visit bearbar.com forward slash out loud and get the exclusive discount just for American.
• 20:00
  America out loud listeners.
• 20:01
  That's B E A R B A R dot com forward slash out loud.
• 20:11
  Welcome back, everyday Americans join the Constitution study.
• 20:15
  And well, today we're looking at courts, courts, courts.
• 20:18
  Everything that's going on in the court, not everything, but some of the bigger issues, bigger cases.
• 20:22
  We looked a lot at what was going on at the Supreme Court, cases that were coming to the Supreme Court.
• 20:28
  One case that's already been heard of the Supreme Court.
• 20:31
  Let's take a look at a case that's actually been decided.
• 20:33
  Now, I covered this case not so much for what actually was decided, but for the way it's been reported.
• 20:42
  Now, member of the House of Representatives from Illinois, Michael Bost is suing the state, the Illinois State Board of Elections because they allow ballots to be counted up to two weeks after election day, as long as they were postmarked by election day.
• 21:00
  Right.
• 21:00
  So the idea is if you're doing a mail-in ballot, right?
• 21:02
  You've got two, you can mail it on election day, and there's still two weeks for it to be counted.
• 21:09
  Now, uh, according to Mr.
• 21:12
  Boss, this creates uh a lot of havoc.
• 21:15
  Um and I've I've seen people talk about and I've seen social media talk about uh, you know, well, you know, the court decided that you know you you can't extend the the well, that's not exactly what the case is about.
• 21:29
  The case really was does the congressman have standing to file the case in federal court.
• 21:37
  Again, interesting question.
• 21:39
  The court didn't decide whether or not Mr.
• 21:41
  Boss was correct, but it did decide that he has a right to sue.
• 21:46
  He has standing to sue.
• 21:48
  Now, standing is this idea, it's an attempt to prevent frivolous lawsuits.
• 21:53
  And it does it by saying, well, you have to have actual an actual articulable harm.
• 21:59
  You can't sue because you don't like something.
• 22:01
  You actually have to have a harm.
• 22:04
  And um, well, during uh uh arguments, uh his attorney pointed out says, yeah, uh the Mr.
• 22:12
  Boss says is harmed.
• 22:13
  Uh there's more opportunity for fraud that could cause them the election.
• 22:17
  If these, you know, there's an actual election day and uh ballots that are returned after election day shouldn't count.
• 22:25
  Um, that there's harm in that this may change his outcome.
• 22:29
  It may cost him the election, it may change his margin of victory.
• 22:33
  Besides, that means for two weeks, Mr.
• 22:35
  Boss must keep his campaign, he must keep paying his campaign workers because there's still counting going on, and there still may be things, legal actions have to be taken.
• 22:46
  So the court heard oral arguments and they decided yes, Mr.
• 22:51
  Boss has standing to sue.
• 22:54
  They, you know, there was probably a lot of discussion.
• 22:57
  I didn't go through the oral arguments on this one, but about you know, whether or not he it was real and whether or not there was problems.
• 23:03
  But the court did come down and say, yes, uh, Mr.
• 23:06
  Boss can sue the state of Illinois, claiming that counting ballots after election day um violate federal law.
• 23:13
  We'll have to see um what happens next.
• 23:16
  Because again, all they did was say um he can sue.
• 23:20
  The case, the the details of the case have not been heard yet.
• 23:24
  Uh here's another case.
• 23:25
  This now we're gonna go down to a district court, and um a district court judge issued an interesting order about the LAPD's use of uh foam projectiles, these these less than lethal weapons and using them against uh protesters.
• 23:44
  Remember, we were talking yesterday about the the protesters in Minneapolis, New York City's ramping up.
• 23:52
  We expect them to be in in uh uh LA wouldn't surprise me.
• 23:56
  But this actually goes back to a case uh dealing with black lives matters back in 2020.
• 24:02
  Uh specifically uh this judge, this judge marshall uh said that the LAPD officers fired at protesters who did not pose an immediate threat, failed to issue warnings before firing, and struck protesters in restricted areas of the body.
• 24:18
  Now, the order he issued included a list of examples of misuse of these weapons, including one officer who fired had a man at a man who had his hands up at a protest, then shot the same man in the face, causing uh a jaw injury that required surgery.
• 24:34
  Another officer shot a woman in the head with the weapon while she was seated and holding a sign.
• 24:41
  A third officer shot a man in the groin, then shot a lawyer in the groin when the lawyer asked the officer for his name.
• 24:49
  Now, again, I haven't gone to the details of the case.
• 24:52
  I haven't read the order.
• 24:53
  This is reporting that I'm hearing.
• 24:55
  And again, it's interesting because a former LA sheriff uh said these less than lethal affirmations are used correctly, provide a means or mechanism the police or law enforcement can intervene at a distance and hopefully not cause death or serious injury.
• 25:12
  And that's really the the question.
• 25:14
  That's the conundrum here.
• 25:16
  Uh they're less than lethal.
• 25:18
  It doesn't mean they can't be lethal.
• 25:20
  It means they're less likely to be lethal.
• 25:22
  There's a better description.
• 25:24
  Uh, you're talking, you're not, you're not basically talking about you know a toy a kid's toy.
• 25:28
  These things hurt and they hurt for a reason.
• 25:31
  Now, again, used properly, hit in the chest or in the the abdomen.
• 25:36
  They're designed to cause pain and stop someone from taking an action without routinely, without yeah, in endangering their life.
• 25:45
  Now, apparently, and again, I'm not sure where uh this judge got the the um imminent threat doctrine.
• 25:55
  Uh, because uh I'm not sure, right?
• 25:58
  Because if they're less than lethal, does it fall under the lethal weapons doctrine?
• 26:02
  I'm I'm I'm not entirely sure.
• 26:04
  But again, it's it to me it's it's interesting because are you taking a tool away?
• 26:10
  Or is it a awards?
• 26:15
  I really want to see the order, because did they say no, you cannot use these, which to me is dangerous because now you you you have such a gap between what the officers are allowed to do, uh less than lethal and the jump to lethal.
• 26:33
  So, you know, if the you you remove that that wrong, it's like you know, climbing a ladder, and you've got, you know, we can use shields, we can use uh physical restraint, we can use less than lethal, maybe these foam uh bullets, and then you get to the real ammunition.
• 26:50
  You take that that gap away, that would open some, it would be concerns for me.
• 26:55
  But again, I think it's worth looking at and getting into more detail about um is it that they're officers used them incorrectly, and that was what was being banned, or is it the um the their use whatsoever, which to me would be an overreach.
• 27:12
  While we're at uh out in California, there's actually good news.
• 27:17
  A federal judge back on January 15th dismissed a DOJ attempt to access California's voter registration database.
• 27:27
  Now, again, remember the the Department of Justice has ordered states to hand over not just the details of their voter roles, including uh if memory serves personally identifiable information.
• 27:40
  Now, from the decision, uh Judge Carter said that the DOJ cannot use civil rights legislation as a tool to forsake the privacy rights of millions of Americans.
• 27:51
  Uh he also noted that that authority rests solely with Congress.
• 27:55
  Um problem with that, uh no, it doesn't rest with Congress.
• 27:58
  You have a right to be free from unreasonable searches.
• 28:01
  And that includes data.
• 28:03
  To me, that should include data about you.
• 28:05
  Especially the fact that um the federal government has no legal reason to be involved in voter registration.
• 28:14
  Again, Congress can set up rules for the time, place, and manner of elections for House and Senate, but that's it.
• 28:21
  Doesn't say anything about registration, doesn't say anything about the about that.
• 28:25
  So the federal government has no legal authority to be involved.
• 28:28
  And can Congress cannot invent an authority as they claim to do uh under so uh so often, in this case, I believe, under the voter rights act and um the voter register, there's a voter registration act that they passed.
• 28:41
  Now, again, the judge said that the centralization of this information by the federal government would have a chilling effect on voter registration would inevitably lead to decreased voter turnout as voters feared that their information could be used for some inappropriate or lawful use.
• 28:54
  Um how about the fact that the federal government doesn't have legal authority to demand this information?
• 28:59
  It's none of their business.
• 29:02
  The 10th Amendment clearly states that a power not delegated to the federal government belongs to the states of the people.
• 29:08
  They don't the power to control to register voters is not a power delegated to the federal government.
• 29:14
  They have no authority there.
• 29:15
  Furthermore, the necessary and proper clause says that Congress has the power to make all laws necessary and proper to put into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States.
• 29:26
  Well, guess what?
• 29:27
  Um, the Constitution didn't vest the power to regulate registration in the government of the United States.
• 29:34
  So Congress didn't have the legal authority to even pass this national voter registration law or any of the laws that are related to it.
• 29:42
  So as I so often say, we get the right answer, just I believe for the wrong or maybe an incomplete reason.
• 29:49
  Uh all right, let's head over to Missouri.
• 29:51
  The show me state, the uh Supreme Court of Missouri unanimously upheld a Missouri law prohibiting transgender.
• 30:00
  Procedures for minors and prohibiting the use of Medicaid for transgender procedures.
• 30:07
  Now, this case was this uh decision was an affirmation of a 2024 decision by the Cole County Circuit Court that sided with the state on all counts.
• 30:18
  Now, the the decision in this, I believe Supreme Court Justice uh uh Branick wrote that uh there is no fundamental right to seek care, the legislature uh seek care the legislator is prohibited because a law does not infringe on a fundamental right, rational basis review is appropriate.
• 30:34
  Now, again, we get into these levels of review.
• 30:37
  It's this idea that um it's really a court made up standard of how hard a government has to work to infringe on your rights, right?
• 30:49
  Rational basis is a simple, you know.
• 30:52
  Do we have a rational basis for this thing?
• 30:54
  It doesn't make if it violates the constitution, that's okay.
• 30:57
  You got a rational basis for doing it.
• 30:59
  That's kind of the logic behind it.
• 31:01
  Uh, of course, we're more often dealing with uh uh strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny, but rational basis is the lowest level of this attempt to infringe on your rights.
• 31:12
  But even without that, the question is um does Missouri have a reason to prohibit the the is a safety and harm to the miners the reason for the the limit on minors, and when it comes to Medicaid, well, does the state have a have a requirement to fund these this cosmetic surgery or you know, the the this uh hormone treatment to deal with a a mental issue.
• 31:44
  And that's really where this course, you know, the ACLU of Missouri and Lambda Legal, they weren't thrilled with this decision.
• 31:54
  But as judge uh noted, that the law classifies only based on medical use and age, which aligns with the Supreme Court decision in Scrimetti, the Tennessee transgender case.
• 32:07
  So the Supreme Court of Missouri is kind of following the Supreme Court of the United States in a case from the state of Tennessee.
• 32:15
  Um, I guess this is just all around good news.
• 32:20
  Now, uh so far, uh, the ACLU of Missouri and Lambda Legal have not said for sure whether or not they plan to appeal uh the uh decision.
• 32:31
  However, one Lambda legal attorney said uh they will continue to explore every legal avenue to protect the rights of transgender people in Missouri, apparently at the expense of the rights of everyone else in Missouri.
• 32:45
  But again, this it's an attorney, right?
• 32:47
  Their job is to get the best outcome possible for their client.
• 32:52
  See, I have to remember an attorney, and I'm gonna talk more about attorneys at the end of the next segment.
• 32:57
  But attorneys, um they're not seeking justice.
• 33:01
  They are employed, they are engaged to get the best outcome possible for their client.
• 33:08
  So, yeah, if you, you know, if you're lambda legal and um, you know, you're trying to get uh more and more um that I don't use the word protection.
• 33:18
  They call protections, they call it rights.
• 33:20
  Uh, I call if you're trying to get more and more for your client, yeah, you're gonna explore every avenue.
• 33:26
  And I kind of want to make a point at this case, because I don't begrudge people seeking a redress of grievance.
• 33:34
  Uh some of the grievances to me are ridiculous.
• 33:37
  It's really sad that, you know, as a society, we've fallen to the point where people are ready to medically harm, neuter, and in some cases mutilate children, uh, all for this mental disorder that they can't seem to get their heads around.
• 33:53
  Um the idea of the that the government money has to pay for whatever you want.
• 33:58
  Again, this is not medically necessary treatments.
• 34:02
  This is effectively, you know, cosmetic surgery and and uh again, not medical necessary treatment.
• 34:08
  So even this illegal and unconstitutional Medicaid program, uh, which is a direct violation of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, uh, and the necessary improper clause, even that cannot be used because again, you don't have a right to other people's money.
• 34:24
  We collect taxes to do certain things, and the federal government collects taxes to do certain things.
• 34:29
  And of course, they turned around and said the states, you got to pay money to do certain things as well, because we said so, even though it's completely illegal, unconstitutional, invalid, and void.
• 34:40
  Not my words.
• 34:41
  The words of our founding fathers, the words of several previous Supreme Court cases.
• 34:46
  Now, of course, sometimes I wonder, you know, where's the ACLU of Missouri?
• 34:50
  Where are Lambda League?
• 34:51
  Where are they getting their funding?
• 34:53
  I don't regrudge them getting their legal funding, getting their funding legally, but I asked to wonder where it comes from.
• 34:59
  Because there are a lot of companies I don't do business with anymore because they sort support organizations like Lambda Legal and uh ACLU.
• 35:09
  That again, ACL started with such a wonderful goal, and it's been so corrupted by well, by politics and and and sexual nonsense.
• 35:20
  Now, again, they're legal entities.
• 35:22
  I don't begrudge them gaining money, but I don't want to give them my money.
• 35:26
  That's why I don't do business with several companies anymore, because they support these organizations.
• 35:31
  Now, I want to buy from companies that believe what I believe, hopefully what you believe as well.
• 35:37
  Now, one of those companies is Patriot Mobile.
• 35:40
  Now, I didn't join paper mobile patron mobile years ago because they're America's only Christian conservative wireless provider.
• 35:46
  I like the fact that they have, but it's not why I joined them.
• 35:49
  I didn't join them because of their 4G and 5G coverage nationwide.
• 35:54
  I like that, but it's not why I joined them.
• 35:56
  I didn't even join them because their customer support is 100% U.S.
• 36:01
  based.
• 36:01
  It's nice to pick up a phone and talk to someone who actually speaks English.
• 36:05
  But that's not why I joined them.
• 36:08
  I joined them because they share my values.
• 36:11
  They take a portion of every dollar to support organizations fighting for my rights and for your rights as well.
• 36:17
  Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, free to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures.
• 36:22
  They also support the sanctity of life, our veterans and our first responders.
• 36:26
  That's why I joined them.
• 36:28
  And that's why I became an affiliate.
• 36:31
  Because now, if you switch to Patriot Mobile, you can not only can you get your line activated absolutely free with the offer code constitution, but if you go to Padre Mobile.comslash constitution, find a plan that works for you and sign up.
• 36:46
  Every time you pay your phone bill, you're also supporting the constitution study.
• 36:51
  It's as easy as carrying your phone around and then paying your bill.
• 36:54
  And oh, by the way, don't forget, use that code constitution at checkout to get your new line activated absolutely free.
• 37:01
  Not only that, there are discounts available.
• 37:04
  Everybody from veterans and first responders to families with multiple lines are eligible for a discount.
• 37:09
  So please head to Patriot Mobile.com/slash constitution today, find a plan that works for you, see if you're eligible for a discount.
• 37:16
  Don't forget, use that code constitution at checkout to get your new line activated absolutely free and support the constitution study and your freedom and rights with your cell phone.
• 37:28
  I also hope to head to AmericaOut Loud.news.
• 37:31
  I go there each and every day for news and information.
• 37:34
  Why?
• 37:34
  Because corporate media has been lying to us.
• 37:37
  That's why I go, but it's also why I share, and it's important that you do as well, that you take the stories, the articles, the podcast, you share them.
• 37:46
  Find out how often you share this news, and people go, I never heard of that.
• 37:50
  I didn't know that was going on.
• 37:52
  That's not something I heard.
• 37:54
  That's why you have to share it.
• 37:55
  Because by sharing this information, you're helping to share the blessings of liberty for all of us.
• 38:04
  The smartest food on the planet doesn't come from a lab or in a package.
• 38:09
  It grows in a glass jar.
• 38:12
  I'm Doug Evans, author of the national bestseller, The Spout Book.
• 38:16
  Sprouts deliver up to a hundred times the antioxidants of mature vegetables.
• 38:22
  They grow in just three to five days for under a dollar serving.
• 38:26
  Get your sprouting kit at the spouting company.com slash out loud.
• 38:32
  Use the code out loud for an exclusive offer.
• 38:35
  Grow smarter.
• 38:36
  Feeling off lately, bloated brain fog low energy.
• 38:39
  It could be parasites.
• 38:41
  The sound invaders that weaken your gut immune system and mental clarity.
• 38:44
  That's why Dr.
• 38:45
  Peter McCullough and the doctors at the wellness company formulated ivermectin and mabendazol cleanse, a medical grade solution designed to help eliminate parasites and restore balance.
• 38:54
  No gimmicks, just real medicine trusted by top doctors.
• 38:57
  Go to TWC.
• 39:02
  For 20% off your first order.
• 39:04
  Take control of your health today.
• 39:07
  Never before has our American cultural, economics, virtual, and political fabric than more threatening.
• 39:15
  Well, the America most of us have grown up with.
• 39:25
  And Marxism.
• 39:26
  America outlaw.news is the antidote to these poison is America outloud.news is that place to awaken your heart, soul, and mind to the outlook truth.
• 39:49
  Welcome back, everyday American jury join the Constitution study.
• 39:52
  Today we've been talking courts, courts, courts, courts, courts.
• 39:55
  We've been dealing with federal courts mostly, although we did deal with the Supreme Court of Missouri.
• 40:00
  But I got a couple more stories that are more state-oriented.
• 40:05
  One not only comes from my own adopted home state of Tennessee, but actually not that far from where I live.
• 40:13
  See, back in 2022, uh the Tullahoma Tennessee high school summoned a student uh to question them about memes he had produced uh on his Instagram account during the previous summer vacation.
• 40:29
  Now, these memes were humorous images of the principal, a gentleman by the name of Jason Quick, and uh, well, I guess they're described as cartoonish and satirical.
• 40:41
  Uh, however, apparently the uh the school didn't uh think that was such a great idea.
• 40:47
  And after questioning him, they suspended the student for three days, citing a policy that prohibits online content that embarrasses or discredits school staff and speech to meet deemed unbecoming of a wildcat, which I'm assuming is the the school mascot.
• 41:05
  Now, the student maintained that the posts were intended as a lighthearted satire and does not did not cause any disruption on campus.
• 41:12
  Now, our friends at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression or FIRE, they filed a lawsuit back in July of 23, claim stating that the uh the the would that it was a violation of the First Amendment, that public schools can may not regulate students' off campus speech unless it causes or threatens a substantial disruption to school operations.
• 41:34
  Okay, problem number one, it cannot violate the First Amendment of the Constitution.
• 41:40
  Why?
• 41:41
  Because the first first five words of the First Amendment are Congress shall make no law.
• 41:48
  This was not done under any law of Congress in any way, shape, or form.
• 41:54
  It is, however, a violation of the Constitution of Tennessee.
• 41:57
  Under Article 1, Section 19, we read the free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the most in one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, write or print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.
• 42:14
  So are you telling me that uh creating a humorous meme of a principal is is abusing the right of free freedom of expression?
• 42:26
  No, again, I understand fire's point, right?
• 42:28
  Because the Supreme Court has erroneously claimed that somehow the First Amendment was rewritten by the fifth 14th Amendment to apply to the states, although it doesn't actually say that, and there's no amendment to the constitution that changes that language.
• 42:41
  But I also find it interesting is they is it also means that they ignored the um uh the fifth, the fifth and fourteenth amendment, specifically the 14th amendment that says you cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
• 42:55
  So here this person was deprived of the liberty of attending a publicly funded institution, i.e.
• 43:01
  public schools, for three days without being found guilty of any actual right or violation of an actual law, just a school policy, in violation, by the way, of the constitution of Tennessee.
• 43:16
  Now the the a jury found the that um they found for the student, and I'm glad to hear that.
• 43:23
  In fact, they found unanimously uh for the student, I believe.
• 43:26
  But um I also want to point out the the problems in our continued ignoring of the language of the Constitution, uh, simply because a judge or an attorney says so.
• 43:40
  Because as I've said before, uh law schools do not teach the constitution.
• 43:45
  In fact, I've asked lawyers this question, I can't tell you how many times, it's so often.
• 43:50
  It's simple.
• 43:51
  When you were in law school, did you study the language, the constitution, did you study constitutional law or the actual language of the constitution?
• 43:58
  And in the years I've been asking this question, I've had one and only one person claim they studied the constitution in law school.
• 44:05
  I don't know if they had a professor or maybe they studied it, but I don't know if it's part of the curriculum, I don't know.
• 44:12
  But the vast majority of people, and by the way, I've also talked to uh uh sheriffs and sheriff's candidates and other law enforcement, they don't teach it in police academies and law enforcement academies either.
• 44:24
  So I'm not really surprised that attorneys for fire who went to a law school where they were not taught the constitution, they were taught judges' opinions about the constitution and pretended they were law.
• 44:37
  I'm not surprised they went that way.
• 44:39
  However, I am glad that uh uh this student has uh was um uh successful in permanently invalidating the school's policy and confirming that the student's suspension was unlawful, and apparently they got some monetary damages as well.
• 44:57
  Hopefully, I'm guessing it's covering uh legal costs so that fire can be reimbursed for their work.
• 45:03
  And while I'm not happy with the logic behind it, I am again I'm happy that they were they noted that it what it was was unconstitutional.
• 45:11
  Not that it violated the First Amendment, that was wrong.
• 45:13
  Violated the Constitution of Tennessee, it violated the 14th Amendment, violated the Fifth Amendment by depriving people of the liberty of a of their public education, even if for a period of time without due process of law.
• 45:27
  And I I want to come back to this idea that that attorneys and therefore judges, well, they are required to go to law school.
• 45:38
  Uh, and they're the the law schools are generally accredited by the American Bar Association.
• 45:45
  They they truly have a monopoly on law school accreditation in, well, apparently now 48 out of the 50 states, meaning that if you want to become a lawyer, if you want to become an attorney, you have to go to a law school that is chosen that is certified as accredited by a private organization that is the only entity allowed to accredit in law schools in again, 48 of the 50 states, and there you will be taught not the law, but as one person described to me, uh you don't go to law school to learn the law, you go to law school to learn to think like a lawyer.
• 46:23
  I say 48 of the 50 states because recently Florida broke the monopoly the American Bar Association has on law school accreditation accreditation in the state.
• 46:36
  Now, how did this happen?
• 46:37
  Was this an act of the legislature?
• 46:40
  No.
• 46:41
  Was this an act of the governor?
• 46:44
  No.
• 46:45
  It actually was an act of the Florida Supreme Court, which, under Florida law, sets the standard for admission to the bar.
• 46:53
  Now, the it's funny, we call it the bar.
• 46:56
  The bar is that little, if you ever look at a courtroom, there's that bar that separates the gallery from the actual court.
• 47:02
  That's the where the bar association gets his name.
• 47:06
  And uh the court said that uh the state should move away from a system in which students cannot take the bar exam, which is necessary to practice law, unless they graduate from an ABA accredited law school.
• 47:20
  Now, it's not all good news, it's not all sunshine and lollipops.
• 47:23
  The court specifically said that in addition to the ABA, it will recognize accreditations accrediting agencies approved by the U.S.
• 47:31
  Department of Education for legal education.
• 47:34
  So that's kind of out of the frying pan into the fire.
• 47:38
  We're gonna take one uh private organization, a guild of their own, and uh well, they're gonna add the those accredited by an illegal department of the federal government.
• 47:50
  Yeah, all right.
• 47:51
  I guess you can take a small one better than no one at all.
• 47:55
  But throughout the rest of the nation, and in fact, federal federal law only recognizes the American Bar Association to accredit people for law degrees, meaning this monopoly on the lies that are part of our law, um, is being perpetuated, again, not simply by the ABA, but supported by the federal government.
• 48:16
  Because the only place you truly have a monopoly is when government sets the rules and says, we're only going to accept this.
• 48:26
  And tell me, why is the American Bar Association the only accredited uh group accreditation group recognized by the federal government for law degrees?
• 48:37
  Oh, I'm sure there's some lobbying involved.
• 48:39
  I'm sure there's some backslapping involved.
• 48:41
  I'm sure there's a lot of things involved.
• 48:43
  What isn't involved is justice, the constitution, the rule of law.
• 48:48
  No, what we have is a system designed to limit access and to control education.
• 48:58
  By the way, the other state that has done this, Texas.
• 49:02
  Texas uh uh made a similar decision earlier in January, but their approach was different.
• 49:08
  Rather than going to the Department of Education, um, they decided they would be the primary accreditors of law schools in the Lone Star State.
• 49:19
  So Texas did even better than Florida, in my opinion.
• 49:23
  And again, you know, it's it's this monopoly that's created by the government, in this case by the federal government to control the education of attorneys, which leads to the education of judges and leads to some of these really crazy, stupid decisions, like in the state of Tennessee, where they still think that the that a state can violate the First Amendment, when the First Amendment clearly states otherwise.
• 49:48
  So see how these two work together by being a litigious society, by by making everything a matter of you know, law and and um.
• 50:00
  Bringing everything to the courts, even the Supreme Court.
• 50:03
  We end up taking away our own rights.
• 50:05
  Because the people who are we've put our trust in are not educated in the Constitution.
• 50:11
  It's why I keep saying you need to be educated in the Constitution.
• 50:14
  So I keep quoting John Jay.
• 50:16
  Every member of the state are diligently to read and study the Constitution of his country.
• 50:20
  Teach the rising generation be free.
• 50:22
  Why?
• 50:23
  They will soon because they will sooner perceive when the rights are violated and be the better prepared to defend and assert them.
• 50:29
  Because attorneys aren't.
• 50:32
  They may work for you.
• 50:33
  They may even be honestly trying to work for you.
• 50:36
  But if they don't know the law, they don't know the constitution.
• 50:40
  Now, I've I've talked, you know, yeah, I talked to several attorneys, and it's one question I frequently bring up.
• 50:46
  We often talk about suing people under you know 42 USC 1983.
• 50:52
  Uh, you know, the federal lawsuits for acts that that are committed as violations of the Constitution.
• 50:58
  I never hear someone uh try to pursue uh 18 USC 242 criminal uh charge for deprivation of rights under color of law.
• 51:08
  See, 1983 is a civil case, it's a civil charge.
• 51:12
  242 is a criminal charge.
• 51:15
  But we don't look at those that way because, well, one, criminal charges are harder to win, cases are hard to win.
• 51:21
  They have to be prosecuted by the state, but it's usually the state prosecutor who's an attorney who went to law school and learned not what the constitution actually says, but what judges think the constitution or what judges want the constitution to say.
• 51:37
  You see the problem.
• 51:39
  If you want to be able to defend and cert your rights, you need to be able to advise your counsel.
• 51:44
  An attorney is your counsel.
• 51:45
  They're your employee, they're there to help.
• 51:48
  They're not there to do the case for you.
• 51:51
  Too often we let them handle it.
• 51:52
  We'd say, well, let the experts handle it.
• 51:54
  We should be smart enough to know how to assist our council in defending our rights.
• 52:02
  I don't see the United States walking away from uh being such a litigious society anytime in the near future.
• 52:08
  And I don't want to give up our right to seek a redress of grievance.
• 52:12
  Um, but we need to be willing to participate.
• 52:17
  Again, so read and study the constitution.
• 52:21
  I would even suggest take a look at these these reports you hear in these cases, think them through.
• 52:27
  What would you do?
• 52:28
  What is your position on those things?
• 52:30
  I mean, it's one of the things I do here, and having done this for a while, it really helps me.
• 52:37
  Again, one, it helps me help other people, which I really like doing.
• 52:41
  Uh, you know, I appreciate when I can help somebody, maybe advise them something they hadn't thought of.
• 52:47
  Maybe, you know, give them something that they can take to their attorney for for more assists.
• 52:52
  I'm not an attorney, I don't play one on TV, I've never been to law school, I've never even tried to take the bar exam, but I have read and study the constitution.
• 53:01
  I've known enough law to be really, really dangerous.
• 53:04
  And I want more people to be that involved.
• 53:07
  It's one of the reasons why I created the Patriots program.
• 53:10
  It's not another patriot group.
• 53:12
  It's not, you know, this or others.
• 53:14
  It's really designed to help patriots and patriot groups do a better job, to give them tools that they never thought they could have had.
• 53:24
  It consists of three things.
• 53:25
  It's it's the education phase where we're reading and studying the constitution, where we're looking at cases and how to build and argue, not just know what the laws, how do you make a best argument in this particular situation?
• 53:38
  Then we've got the communication aspect where I want patriot groups, people and patriot to be able to communicate what's going on over there.
• 53:46
  Can is there something I can help with over there?
• 53:48
  Is there something maybe you could help me with?
• 53:50
  Hey, there's this event going on.
• 53:51
  Maybe we should go and support it.
• 53:53
  Maybe there's a press conference, maybe there's a uh a committee meeting that we can participate in and help each other, not replace the groups, help the groups help each other.
• 54:05
  And then my favorite part is the activity, the the minute men, where we're ready at a moment's notice to come to the aid of others to protect their rights.
• 54:17
  As I said, I have already have a deal with my with my sheriff, with my my uh county commissioners and and uh even the county mayor.
• 54:25
  I said, if you need constitutional advice, I'll give you whatever I can.
• 54:28
  That's my unique skill.
• 54:30
  If it means going to a press conference, if it means going to a committee hearing, I will do it.
• 54:36
  I will I again I had a uh a uh count county commissioner approach me last year and asked me about uh some uh a proposal before the county commission.
• 54:47
  I gave my advice and I actually got activated and helped defeat the resolution.
• 54:53
  But this only works if we are prepared.
• 54:56
  Now, to become a constitution study patriot is not a simple thing.
• 55:00
  It's invitation only.
• 55:02
  First, you have to go through a boot camp.
• 55:04
  Go to Constitution Study.com slash patriots.
• 55:07
  You can learn more about the pages program, you can learn more about the boot camp.
• 55:10
  You can sign up and take the boot camp.
• 55:13
  It's uh it's a one-hour um uh it's it's it's a one-hour video.
• 55:18
  Uh although if you'd love to, if you'd like me to bring the course to you, I'd love to do that as well.
• 55:24
  That once you pass the test and uh um sign the oath, basically the oath's not to create said I'm gonna use these to help people.
• 55:34
  That I'm gonna call B B A someone can call me to defend my rights and the rights in our county and state, and yes, even federal government.
• 55:42
  And once you do that, you can get your invitation, you can join us to the patriots.
• 55:46
  But again, it's not for everybody.
• 55:48
  It's for people who are really serious about being able to defend their rights, their families' rights, and their neighbors' rights.
• 55:54
  So again, go to Constitution Study.com/slash patriots, read up about it, see if it's something you're interested.
• 55:59
  If you'd like to give it a try, take the boot camp and see if you can get the invitation.
• 56:04
  If you can pass the test at the end of the boot camp, you'll get that invitation.
• 56:09
  Now, I also hope you come back and well, listen to the show.
• 56:12
  You can listen to the constitution study every weekday, 4 p.m.
• 56:15
  Eastern time on America Out Loud Talk Radio heard on the iHeart Radio Network.
• 56:20
  Now you can listen on our media player on the website.
• 56:23
  We also have apps for Apple, Android, and Alexa.
• 56:26
  But if you can't listen, then all of the episodes go to podcasts.
• 56:30
  Generally, it takes a day or two for an episode to go from talk radio to podcast, but you get to listen in your favorite podcast app.
• 56:37
  But do me a favor, subscribe to the show.
• 56:41
  Leave us ratings, especially on Apple Podcasts.
• 56:43
  It helps the algorithm show us to more people who are more likely to click the link and join us here at the Constitution Study.
• 56:51
  Speaking of links, you can find all the links you need at the homepage of America Outloud.news.
• 56:57
  But please share those links.
• 56:59
  Share this information, share this program on our episodes.
• 57:03
  By doing so, you're helping to share the blessings of liberty to everyone who calls this great nation home.