Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Trump Gets Green Light to Clean House, Mamdani's 'Gloom and Doom' American Vision & Birthright Citizenship Hits a SCOTUS Wall Week In Review

Transcript

Trump Gets Green Light to Clean House, Mamdani's 'Gloom and Doom' American Vision & Birthright Citizenship Hits a SCOTUS Wall Week In Review · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome.
• 0:00
  Speaker 2: It is Verdict with Ted Cruz week in Review. Ben
• 0:03
  Speaker 2: Ferguson with you, and here are the stories that you
• 0:05
  Speaker 2: may have missed that we talked about this week. First up,
• 0:08
  Speaker 2: the Supreme Court gives a major win to President Trump
• 0:11
  Speaker 2: that he actually has the authority to fire whoever he wants.
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: We break that down. Also, there was a fourth of
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: July message from the President that was about hope. And
• 0:19
  Speaker 2: then there was a grim outlook of America from Mundani.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: Why did the Democrats choose him to be their mouthpiece?
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: We explain it. And finally, there's a big fight over
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: birthright citizenship and the Supreme Court gave their ruling. So
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: what did they decide and what does it mean for
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: the future going forward. It's the weekend review and it
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: starts right now. All right, So, Senator, let's talk about
• 0:42
  Speaker 2: some of the victories. And one of them was a
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: very interesting case. It's about the president having the ability
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: to fire people. And this was one of those that
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: maybe wasn't a lot of people's radar screen, but it's
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: a really important case.
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: Well, let's start with two decisions, and this is a
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: big victory, Trump versus Slaughter and Trump versus Cook. And
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: had dealt with the ability of the president to file
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: fire people in his administration. So almost one hundred years ago,
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: the court decided a case called Humphrey's Executor. Humphrey's Executor,
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: which ninety one years ago, the Court concluded that the
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: president cannot fire a commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission,
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: and the Federal Trade Commission was set up as a
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: so called independent agency. It was an agency with three
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: commissioners appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate from
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: the majority party, and two commissioners appointed by the President
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: confirmed by the Senate from that minority party. And the
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: so called independent agencies arose coming out of the Woodrow
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: Wilson era, coming out of the Progressive era, as a
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: way to limit presidential power. And Humphrey's Executor said, the
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: president doesn't have the ability to fire an FTC commissioner
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: without cause. Well, in my view, Humphrey's Executor was wrong
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: the day it was decided ninety one years ago, and
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: it has been wrong every day for nine decades since then.
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: Why because under the Constitution the Constitution, the first three
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: articles of the Constitution, Article one vest all legislative power
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: in the Congress of the United States. Article two vests
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: all executive power in the president of the United States,
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: and Article three vests all judicial power in the judiciary.
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: What Humphrey's executor did is severely limit the president's Article
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: two authority over the executive branch. Anyone in government, you
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: are either in one of those three buckets. You're either
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: a legislative official. I'm a legislative official. I'm elected by
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: the people of Texas to represent them in the Senate legislature.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: I'm an Article one. You could be a judicial official
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: that is appointed by the President confirmed by the Senate.
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: You're a judge with life tenure adjudicating cases. That's an
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: Article three. Everyone else is an Article two. Article two
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: is the executive and under the Constitution, the president has
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: authority over the executive. Humphrey's executor said, no, no, you don't.
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: There could be someone that works for the executive and
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: yet somehow Congresses take it over the ability of the
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: president to control that person. Well, when President Trump came
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: in in the second term, he fired two FTC Directors
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: commissioners rather than one of which was Rebecca Slaughter. Rebecca
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: Slaughter is a Democrat. She was one of the five
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: FTC commissioners, and he fired her. He said, you know what,
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: I just want Republican commissioners. I'm not appointing Democrat commissions. Now.
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: He did that knowing it would prompt a legal challenge,
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: and anticipating that it would be a legal challenge. He
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: was prevailing. I will tell you, I've said publicly multiple
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: times for a long time. Trump was going to prevail.
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: And you know, as I talked to reporters, they said, well,
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: what do you think about this case? They said, Trump's
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: going to win, and he's going to win because Humphrey's
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: executor was wrong. The president has the authority over the
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: executive branch, and I believe the Court is going to
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: overrule Humphrey's executive. Well, this week, that prediction came true.
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: By the way, we talk on this podcast a lot
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: about the predictions we make, and the vast majority of
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: the predictions we make come true, and we hold ourselves accountable.
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: When they come true, we lay them out. When they
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: don't come true, we lay them out. In this instance,
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion. He was joined
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: by Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, Justice Kavanaugh, Justice Barrett, and
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: Justice Thomas. In parts. It was a six to three decision,
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: and the Court court overturned Humphrey's executor said, the president
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: can fire an FTC commission That's a big victory. That's
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: a big victory for presidential authority. That's a big victory
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: for the text of the Constitution. That's a big victory
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: for the original understanding of the Constitution. Now here's kind
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: of a weird wrinkle. There was another case that was
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: Cooked versus Trump. So Lisa Cook was a Federal Reserve
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: governor and Trump also fired Lisa Cook. Now interestingly enough, look,
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: you would think the same principle should apply that if
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: Trump can fire an FTC commissioner, he got to be
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: able to fire a federal Reserve governor. Well you'd be
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: wrong on that. The Court, by a vote of five
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: to four, held that Trump could not fire Lisa Cook.
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: The Federal Reserve was different, and it was a different majority.
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: Chief Justice Roberts wrote both opinions, which did not surprise me.
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: Trump versus Cook was joined Roberts joined by Justice Soda, Mayor,
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: Justice Kagan, Justice Kavanaugh, and Justice Katanji Brown Jackson. So
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: it was five to four. Now, Clarence Thomas descendant he
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: called the ruling incorrect. He pointed out that it was
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: inconsistent with the Slaughter decision. I got to say, this
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: did not surprise me at all. And indeed I had
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: predicted Humphrey's executors would be overturned. But at the same time,
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: the Court would be reluctant to accord the president carte
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: blanche over the Federal Reserve. And in my view, look,
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: Chief Justice Roberts had different distinctions about the statute of
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: the Federal Reserve. I actually think those distinctions did not matter.
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: This was, I believe, in significant respects, a results driven outcome.
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: I think at the end of the day, you did
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: not have five justices that were willing to accede the
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: power to the President to fire a Federal Reserve governor
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: because the role of the Federal Reserve with our currency,
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: with our economy was significant enough that they were reluctant
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: to do it. That doesn't surprise me. The consequence of
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: these two decisions is Trump versus Cook pure and true
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: to the Constitution? Probably not, but it is a fairly
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: narrow exception to the much broader precedent, which is Trump
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: versus Slaughter, which overrules Humphrey's executor and upholds the president's
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: authority to fire executive branch employees at his discretion.
• 7:53
  Speaker 2: That's going to obviously have big impact moving forward, right
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: over the next couple of years for the president as well.
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: Would you agree, Yeah, it's a big deal and it's
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: going to mean is that practical matter going forward? I
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: think there's a real possibility, affected a likelihood, that these
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: so called independent commissions will not have bipartisan commissions. I
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: think going forward you're going to see commissions like the FTC,
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: the FCC, potentially the FEC, the various commissions that are bipartisan.
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: What we've seen with Trump is that he says I'm
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: not going to appoint Democrats to it, and he leaves
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: those seats vacant. My guess is if and when we
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: have another Democrat president. Unfortunately, we will likely have another
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: Democrat president. I'd rather not. I think the Democrats policies
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: are really damaging. But if history is any guide, we
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: will see the Democrats in charge of the White House
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: at some point. And I think it is quite likely
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: that when the Democrats are in charge, they will appoint
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: to the independent commissions three commissioners from the Democrat Party
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: and zero Republican commission And look, I'll say what twenty
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: five years ago, when George W. Bush was elected president,
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: I came in. I was a young campaign staffer. I'd
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: been down in Austin, Texas on the campaign team within
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: Governor Bush. I met Heidi on the Bush campaign. She
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: and I came to join the Bush administration. I spent
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: about six months in the Department of Justice, and then
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: I went over to the Federal Trade Commission, and the
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: FDC is what was the subject of this litigation. My
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: boss at the time was the chairman, Tim Murris. Tim
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: is a brilliant conservative lawyer, economist, and I was the
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: head of policy at the FTC when I was thirty
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: years old. I was a young kid. It was a
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: fascinating job. I did that for a little over two years,
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: very much enjoyed the job. At the time we had
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: three Republican commissioners, two Democrat commissioners, and to be honest,
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: to be a minority commissioner in the Petit Commission. It's
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: kind of a weird job because you don't have the votes,
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: but you can nonetheless express your views. You can sent
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: you write opinions, you press back within the executive branch.
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: I think the consequence of this decision is you're not
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: going to see minority commissioners from the party out of power.
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: You will see the independent agencies operate much like the
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: rest of the executives. So just like in the Department
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: of Labor, you don't have a Republican Secretary of Labor
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: and then a Democrat Secretary of Labor who argues against it. Instead,
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: you just have appointees of the president. I think you
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: will see in the independent agencies the same sort of thing.
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: They will just be appointees of the majority party.
• 10:37
  Speaker 2: Now, if you want to hear the rest of this conversation,
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: you can go back and listen to the full podcast
• 10:42
  Speaker 2: from earlier this week. Now onto story number two, very
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: dark dark fourth of July speech from Mandannie. Whereas by
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: the way, a desk was backwards. If you didn't see that,
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: it's hilarious. But here's Mandanni in his own words.
• 10:56
  Speaker 3: Yes, we see America in a health insurance industry that
• 10:59
  Speaker 3: exploits the sick, but that is not all we see
• 11:02
  Speaker 3: when we look for America. We see it too in
• 11:04
  Speaker 3: the nurse who works a double shift and then stops
• 11:07
  Speaker 3: on our way home to check on an ailing neighbor. Yes,
• 11:10
  Speaker 3: we see America in corporate landlords, for whom negligence is
• 11:13
  Speaker 3: a business model, We see it too. And the father
• 11:16
  Speaker 3: who tucks his children into bed beneath the ceiling stained
• 11:19
  Speaker 3: with leaves, who wakes before dawn to go to work
• 11:22
  Speaker 3: and still believes his country can do better by his family. Yes,
• 11:26
  Speaker 3: we see America when we spend our tax dollars on
• 11:29
  Speaker 3: bombs and bailouts, when we sell our elections for the
• 11:32
  Speaker 3: highest bidder.
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: I mean that. You hear that and it's like, wow,
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: you really genuinely hate this country and it's scary what
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: you want to do with it.
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: Well, and he's contrasting everything about America is bad. But
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: then he says, you know, we care for the nurse,
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: we care for the individual person. And this is the
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: classic lie of the communists, that the communist comes and
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: says where for the little guy? Where for the poor?
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: Where for the down truck? And yet what you have
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: every time you have communism, you get poverty and misery
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: and suffering and death. You get more poor people, you
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: get equality, but you get a quality of misery. And
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: in fact, the only people that are not equal are
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: the rulers. Ironically, you know, Mandami put out a decree.
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: It told told New Yorkers turn your air conditioning up
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: to seventy eight degrees because it's going to be hot
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: this fourth of July, and a watchdog group came and
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: checked on Mandami's offices, and of course they were not
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: up at seventy eight degrees. They were turned down to
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: seventy two because with the Communist decrees. For you, he
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: never lived by his own rules.
• 12:46
  Speaker 2: You know, by the way I was laughing you were
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: on vacation. I didn't send you the clip, but it exploded.
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: I was on at CNN on Abbey Phillips Show on
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: Thursday night when they were celebrating Mandani saying to turn
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: your AC up to seventy eight, and I just asked,
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: are you are you in favor of this? And they
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: tried to, you know, like yeah, well yeah. I was like, well,
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: it's not seventy eight right now in this studio, so
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: let's crank up. I looked on everybody on set. All
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: the liberals are like, all right, let's crank it up
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: in solid area with Mandani, like let's go to seventy
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: eight and sweat. Let's go, if you guys are going
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: to be all in favor this, why is it sixty
• 13:24
  Speaker 2: seven in here right now instead of seventy eight and
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: it goes to the point you're making. They'll go on
• 13:29
  Speaker 2: national TV and say that he's a hero for saying this.
• 13:33
  Speaker 2: But they wouldn't even in New York City. We were
• 13:35
  Speaker 2: in New York City, they would not put the studio
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: at seventy eight degrees because they would never do that
• 13:39
  Speaker 2: and have a sweaty show.
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: Look, Fidel Castro was a billionaire, Buten is a billionaire.
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: Communist leaders aggregate all the money for themselves. They lived
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: like kings, and they use the military with guns as enforcers.
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: I want you to listen to another segment from Coming
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: Bondami's speech.
• 14:00
  Speaker 3: American exceptionalism. American exceptionalism that conventional wisdom tells us makes
• 14:05
  Speaker 3: our freedom a little more free. Is how we dug
• 14:07
  Speaker 3: the Erie Canal and irrigated the West. Is why children
• 14:10
  Speaker 3: in far away lands grow up dreaming of one day
• 14:12
  Speaker 3: moving here. And yet the irony is that the story
• 14:15
  Speaker 3: of America has so often been written by those who
• 14:18
  Speaker 3: were told by others with power and influence and wealth
• 14:21
  Speaker 3: that they were anything but exceptional. For generation after generation,
• 14:25
  Speaker 3: we have been told that when the world has sent
• 14:27
  Speaker 3: its people to our shores, it has not sent its best.
• 14:31
  Speaker 3: It sent Puritans and Sikhs and Quakers and Muslims and
• 14:34
  Speaker 3: Jewish people who were banished for praying the wrong way,
• 14:37
  Speaker 3: worshiping the wrong gods, angering the wrong people. It sent
• 14:41
  Speaker 3: peasants and serfs from slums and chattels who were treated
• 14:44
  Speaker 3: as less because they hardly owned clothes, let alone land.
• 14:47
  Speaker 3: It sent immigrants from whom power was something someone else had.
• 14:52
  Speaker 3: We are told that America is exceptional because we are richer, stronger,
• 14:57
  Speaker 3: more powerful than everyone else. Truth with, my friends, is
• 15:00
  Speaker 3: that America is exceptional because here nothing is fixed into place.
• 15:05
  Speaker 3: The frontier may be closed, we may have walked on
• 15:08
  Speaker 3: the moon, but the work of fulfilling the values first
• 15:11
  Speaker 3: enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. That work endures, and
• 15:16
  Speaker 3: it belongs to us all. It belongs to to our
• 15:18
  Speaker 3: newest Americans, those standing here with me today, all of
• 15:22
  Speaker 3: whom were recently naturalized. Nearly a decade ago, I too
• 15:26
  Speaker 3: felt what you feel, the joy of no longer being
• 15:28
  Speaker 3: just a New Yorker, but an American too. You each
• 15:32
  Speaker 3: hold a special power, the power to determine what America means.
• 15:37
  Speaker 3: The powerful have always known their answer. America, in their view,
• 15:41
  Speaker 3: is an arena of supremacy, where only a select few
• 15:44
  Speaker 3: or allowed freedom, where not all are created equal. America,
• 15:48
  Speaker 3: if you ask them, becomes less the more people it welcomes. America,
• 15:52
  Speaker 3: they will tell you, belongs only to those with the
• 15:55
  Speaker 3: right accent or the right shade of skin. The rest
• 15:57
  Speaker 3: of us, they insist, should be grateful for merely being
• 15:59
  Speaker 3: allowed to visit. How small they are, how weak, how unoriginal.
• 16:05
  Speaker 3: At every moment in our past, those who led through
• 16:09
  Speaker 3: exclusion and isolation have tried to win power and enrich
• 16:12
  Speaker 3: themselves by turning us against one another. Division is the
• 16:16
  Speaker 3: oldest trick in politics and the cheapest. But time and again,
• 16:21
  Speaker 3: including two hundred and fifty years ago, those forces of
• 16:25
  Speaker 3: division have been vanquished by the forces of progress.
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: You listen again.
• 16:31
  Speaker 2: This is a manifesto of why America is bad, Why
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: America should not, apparently, I guess, be celebrated on the
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: fourth of July, why you should tamper down your excitement
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: for the fireworks. And I do believe this is not
• 16:46
  Speaker 2: a one off. As we mentioned earlier, this is the
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: new manifesto of the Democratic Party heading into the midterms.
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: As I listened to him talk, I think, what a
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: small and teddy man, filled with hate, filled with ideology,
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: filled with contempts, not just for you and me and
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: this fellow Americans, but for the very idea of America.
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: You know, his remarks there are profoundly dishonest. One thing
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: he says is, we are told that America is exceptional
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: because we are richer, or stronger, or more powerful. Boloney,
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: who has ever said that. I've never heard any human
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: being articulate that sentence. That's what's known as a straw man.
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: It's erecting a fake argument to then demolish it. He is,
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: in fact inverting the causality. We are not richer and
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: stronger and more powerful. That is not why we are exceptional. Rather,
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: because we are exceptional, that is why we have become
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: richer and stronger and more powerful. He's completely misunderstanding the
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: cause and effect. What is exceptional about America. Number one
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: is that our rights come from God. And you know,
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: nowhere in that speech could Mundami bring himself to say
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: that that God has given the rights. He says, we
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: are told people are not created equals. Well, really, gosh, comrades,
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: what is this holiday we are celebrating on the fourth
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: of July? What was the documents that John Hancock put
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: his signature on. What did Thomas Jefferson write? We hold
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: these crews to be self evident, that all men are
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: the pursuit of happiness. He claims that America was built
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: on the notion that we're not equals, and he is
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: spitting in the face of the Declaration of the Constitution.
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: Of course, he probably doesn't know that. He is counting
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: on the people listening to it definitely not to know that.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: And his notion about the people that came here. Because
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: we are built by immigrants, we must let everyone in
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: with no limits. Listen, my father was an immigrant who
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: came from Cuba. America was a beacon of freedom for
• 19:06
  Speaker 1: my family. But there's a right way to come. You
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: come legally. And the argument that the leftists and the
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: Marxists say it is because we were built by immigrants,
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: we have to open up our borders to every criminal,
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: to every rapist, to every terrorist. That we could have
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: no laws whatsoever and why And I want to answer
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: this question, but I want to ask it first. Why
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: in the speech does Comrade Mandami not reflect on what
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: is it that makes people from every country on earth
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: want to be in America? What do we have here
• 19:40
  Speaker 1: that is different? You don't have other countries people coming
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: to And it is because of the opportunity, the opportunity
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: to a have your rights protected, life, liberty and the
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: pursuit of happiness. And notably, we don't have a right
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: to happiness. We have a right to the pursuit to
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: the journey. None of us are guaranteed happiness. But the
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: American dream is real and alive and it comes from
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: do you know what gives us the American green Capitalism?
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: Not communism. If you want communism, Comrade Mondami, go to Russia.
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: Comrade Mondami, go to Cuba, Comrade Mandami, go to North Korea.
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: Why do all the communist countries have such misery and suffering?
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: And you know what, they all also have zero human
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: rights because those petty little despots, and Mandami is so
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: eager to use that power when they get power. If
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: you disagree, if you dare speak to the contrary, they
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: will lock you up. That is the history, that is
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: the legacy of communism. You know, Ben, It's been a
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: while since since I've told the story that my grandmother
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: told me of what happened in Cuba when Fidel Castro
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: and the Communists took over. So, my grandmother was a
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: sixth grade teacher in Cuba, and then she taught sixth
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: grade for many, many years, and she told me the
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: story that when the Communists took over, soldiers came into
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: the classrooms, and she described to me in particular what
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: they did in a first grade classroom. They came in
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: with machine guns, and they told all of the kids
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: in the classroom, they said close your eyes, close your eyes,
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: and pray to Jesus for candy. And all the kids
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: closed their eyes, they prayed, and there was no candy.
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: They then told the kids close your eyes and pray
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: to Fidel Castro for candy. They closed their eyes, and
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: the soldiers quietly set a piece of candy on the
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: desk of every child. That is communism. It is based
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: on lies, it is based on power, It is based
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: on subjugation.
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: As before, if you want to hear the rest of
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: this conversation on this topic. You can go back and
• 22:04
  Speaker 2: down the podcast from earlier this week to hear the
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: entire thing. I want to get back to the big
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: story number three of the week. You may have missed.
• 22:13
  Speaker 2: All right, center, let's get to the bad cases. There's
• 22:16
  Speaker 2: two of them that I think we need to highlight.
• 22:19
  Speaker 2: One of them and it's one that there's been a
• 22:21
  Speaker 2: lot of discussion over, and that's birthright citizenship case. My
• 22:25
  Speaker 2: take on this was, look, the President wanted there to
• 22:27
  Speaker 2: be a grand debate nationwide on birthright citizenship. I think
• 22:31
  Speaker 2: a lot of people around him knew that if this
• 22:34
  Speaker 2: went to the Supreme Court and this was a fight
• 22:36
  Speaker 2: they were willing to have, that there was a good
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: chance it was not going to be a victory. But
• 22:40
  Speaker 2: it did open up a big conversation nationwide on immigration,
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: immigration status, and birthright citizenship. People coming in birth or
• 22:49
  Speaker 2: tourism is a simple way of putting it, and it
• 22:52
  Speaker 2: certainly did, I think educate people on what's happening in
• 22:56
  Speaker 2: this country. That for me is a victory, but the
• 22:59
  Speaker 2: re is in the Supreme Court. This was a loss.
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: So it was the question is what does birthright citizenship
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: protect and in particular, are children of illegal aliens entitled
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: to become US citizens because they were born on US soil. Now,
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: as a policy matter, birthright citizenship I think is a
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: very foolish policy. It is a policy that encourages illegal immigration.
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: It rewards people for breaking our laws. Most other countries
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: on Earth don't have that policy. If you break in
• 23:34
  Speaker 1: illegally to another country most other countries, if you have
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: a kid there, that kid is not a citizen of
• 23:38
  Speaker 1: that country. It also encourages things, as you noted, like
• 23:43
  Speaker 1: birth tourism, where pregnant women will get on a plane
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: and fly to America on tourist visa simply to have
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: a baby in America so that baby can become a
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: US citizen. That's a foolish policy. Now there's a legal
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: question of how can you change birthright citizenship? And I
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: talked a minute ago about the fourteenth Amendment, and the
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: fourteenth Amendment says, all persons born or naturalized in the
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: This case turned on the phrase and subject to the
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: jurisdiction thereof. What happened there have long been understood, is
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: really two potential ways to change current law and birthright citizenship.
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: The one way that is unquestionably permissible and valid would
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: be a constitutional amendment that changes the Constitution and makes
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: clear that the child of an illegal immigrant born in
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: America is not a US citizen. I strongly support that.
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: I would vote for that. That's good policy. The second,
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: and there's dispute among legal scholars, is could Congress pass
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: a law saying the children of illegal immigrants born in
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: America are not US citizens? That is still a somewhat
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: murky question. Donald Trump explored a third avenue, which is
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: he signed an executive order that said, I am ordering
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: the children of illegal immigrants are not US citizens if
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: they're born in the United States. Now, to be honest,
• 25:28
  Speaker 1: prior to Trump coming into office, I've never heard anyone
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: articulate a legal theory that that could be done by
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: executive order. The Trump administration knew it was pushing the
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: bounds of what's permissible. You are right that we've now
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: had a robust debate on birthright citizenship and what a
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: bad policy it is. Now the Court unfortunately ruled five
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: to four that the executive order is invalid and that
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: the children of illegal immigrants born in the US are
• 26:00
  Speaker 1: US citizens. That is unfortunate. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the opinion.
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: I will say that that did not surprise me. It
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: was clear from the oral argument this was the likely outcome.
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: This was where the votes were headed. I wrote an
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: amicus brief, actually two different amicus briefs in the Court,
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: joined by multiple members of Congress, in which I asked
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: the Supreme Court to restore the original meaning of the
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: birthright citizenship clause. And I would encourage anyone interested in
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: this issue go read the brief that I wrote that
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: laid out the original understanding of what the phrase subject
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: to the jurisdiction thereof meant, and that someone who was
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: unlawfully president in the country did not fall within those parameters.
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: I think that's the right conclusion. I wish the court.
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: I think the dissenters have the better argument. I wish
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: the dissenters instead of having four votes that had five,
• 26:59
  Speaker 1: I wish we had one more. That being said, I
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: was not surprised. Now. I will say this, Justice Thomas
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: wrote a spectacular descent in ninety one pages. It is
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: incredibly effective, and I will say, Justice Thomas's cited my
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: brief twice in that descent. I'm glad that the descent
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: commanded four votes. I wish you had commanded five. Where
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: does that leave us, Well, there's still some ambiguity on
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: whether Congress could pass legislation defining subjects to the jurisdiction
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: thereof to exclude the children born by parents here illegally.
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: The Court did not resolve that question because it wasn't
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: presented with that question. But let me be clear, from
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: my perspective, this is a terrible policy outcome and it's
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: also the wrong legal outcome. And I would support number
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: one at constitutional amendment end birthright citizenship. I would support
• 28:02
  Speaker 1: number two legislation to end birthright citizenship. I hope we
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: go down the road to both of those. Yeah, yeah,
• 28:10
  Speaker 1: I agree with you there.
• 28:11
  Speaker 2: And finally, we've got to deal with the case that
• 28:12
  Speaker 2: deals with mail in ballots.
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: That's right. This is another case that is Watson versus RNC,
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: and Watson versus RNC deals with the laws in Mississippi
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: concerning governing absentee ballots. So the laws in Mississippi say
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: that absentee ballot have to be postmarked by election day,
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: and they can be received up to five days after
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: election day. And in this case, the RNC filed a
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: lawsuit challenging that and saying that under the terms of
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: federal election law, election day is understood to be the
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: actual day of the election. And so the argument you
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: RNC made is that you could not count ballots received
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: up to five days after the election. Unfortunately, by a
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: vote of five to four, the Supreme Court rejected that argument,
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: and Justice Sammy Coney Barrett, joined by Chief Justice Roberts
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: and the three liberals, concluded that election day is understood
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: to mean the day when quote, voting is complete, not
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: when ballots are received. In other words, they upheld Mississippi's
• 29:26
  Speaker 1: law allowing ballots to receive be received up to five
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: days after election day. There were vigorous descents, it was
• 29:35
  Speaker 1: five to four, but at the end of the day,
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: what it means is that the Court has concluded federal
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: law does not limit late received mail in ballots. The
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: consequence of this is it's going to remain state by
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: state red States can put real and meaningful limits, can
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: limit balloting, can limit late received the ballots. Mississippi can
• 29:59
  Speaker 1: change their law. But it also means that blue states
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: states like California can have the atrocity they had in
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: their most recent election, their mayor's election in LA where
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: they have votes coming in days, weeks as much as
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: a month later. Look, this decision is unfortunate, but I'll
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: tell you what it really underscores. It underscores the need
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: to pass the Save America Act. The Save America Act
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: would would protect against illegal voting. I'm an original sponsor
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: to Save America Act. I'm fighting for in the Senate.
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: This decision, unfortunately, was a real loss at the Spring Court.
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: As always, thank you for listening to Verdict with center
• 30:42
  Speaker 2: Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you don't forget to deal
• 30:44
  Speaker 2: with my podcast and you can listen to my podcast
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: every other day you're not listening to Verdict or each
• 30:48
  Speaker 2: day when you listen to Verdict. Afterwards, I'd love to
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: have you as a listener to again the Ben Ferguson podcasts,
• 30:54
  Speaker 2: and we will see you back here on Monday morning.