Share This Episode
Jay Sekulow LIVE! Jay Sekulow Logo

BREAKING: Massive Blow to Radical Left’s Agenda

Jay Sekulow LIVE! / Jay Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
October 15, 2021 1:00 pm

BREAKING: Massive Blow to Radical Left’s Agenda

Jay Sekulow LIVE! / Jay Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 427 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


October 15, 2021 1:00 pm

Biden's court packing commission has delivered a clear message that the radical left did not want to hear. Those who want to pack the Supreme Court have taken a major blow. Jay, Jordan, and the rest of the Sekulow team break down the commission's report. This and more today on Sekulow .

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Family Policy Matters
NC Family Policy
Janet Mefferd Today
Janet Mefferd
The Steve Noble Show
Steve Noble

Secular Wayne massive blow to the radical left's agenda. Now this permission from the very beginning as ever by Joe Biden as Bartlett was already criticizing, because I do want all Americans want to hear from you, call one 800 684110 underlines try to change the composition just because you don't want cases that is now your site. There is a Presidential commission on the supreme court of United States Navy issued a 200 page draft that the final draft report of their findings. Let me read you report that I think it's unlike what most liberals are going to want to hear, especially the far left.

The Prudential question audit court expansion is more difficult and commissioners are divided on whether court expansion would be wise that meatpacking Supreme Court. We also explain the counter arguments that the court expansion absent other reforms to our system of government presents considerable drawbacks as other commissioners conclude, including commissioners who are critics of many of the court's recent decisions and support other reforms court expansion is likely to undermine rather than enhance the Supreme Court's legitimacy and its role in the constitutional system and there are significant reasons to be skeptical expansion would serve Democratic values.

We also raise tentative concerns about how expansion of the Supreme Court might be received really the broader domestic and international community. They talk about how it could be perceived as highly partisan.

So, that right there off the bat. Get this big commission they would they have issued their first draft of their first draft is packing the Supreme Court as we all know does nothing good is not good for the country. It is ducted for the court. It will make them look hyper partisan because it is no great shock of it with me read out reality here. The next ministration comes in and they may add two more justices so they have their majority, so that the court racking doesn't go anywhere but there has to be a concern that there's going be changes, possibly jurisdiction that can be done legislatively this talk about removing a lifetime appointment. I personally think the lifetime appointment are very important and necessary, but are talking about an 18 year term that would take a constitutional amendment that take place right to not so easy that you can address us is by legislation to change the jurisdiction what they are able to hear and not hear. I legislation what you cannot change it by legislation is a lifetime appointment.

That's in the Constitution. So you have to have a constitutional limit that process is a heavy lift heavy lift in a divided country and give your answer is this especially a heavy lift for when you tell you that the term would be able 20 years was like a lifetime appointment to be obscene or justices that serve double that length of time, but that's still a significant amount of time whether not be willing to go through a constitutional limit process to to go to a 20 year term limit.

I think that would be a very tough sell to American people. The cost of that kind of process, but I do want to point out what is clear here is that they are not shying away from the idea that this would be hyper partisan and it would create a hyper partisan Supreme Court is what I was talking about that each time the legislature change the White House changed at a couple justices and the cords keep getting bigger and bigger which would serve no purpose at all. It's exactly what they figured out if we do this exercise go to do this next presents can want to do this to so that will add to the lid at five and suddenly this is not going to be working very well for anybody. This is still not their final report is just a draft were to get that morbid coming up next Sec. Pompeo he could discuss his new piece up in ACLJ a.org part of the Senior advisor for global affairs. The ACLJ it's all tie wanted why the US support is so critical to review to Sec. Pompeo right we get back for this break back into the court packing questions wealth would take your calls on that what hundred 64, 31 to start giving them. It now's idea packing the Supreme Court challenges facing Americans is a time when our Valley freedom sword constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice for decades. ACLJ on the frontlines checking your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. Here's the bottom line we could not do our work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms and then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side.

You are already a member.

Thank you.

Well, this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.where you can learn more about our life changing, member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable in voice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn, called like it will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications. 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the history and what Obama care means many ways your membership is empowering the right question for mission life today online/secular try to connect with our senior counsel for global affairs Mike Pompeo.

Until we do, let me get back this court idea this one of these ideas that was to have each President gets to fix, but I look at court.

You pick someone who's in their 40s. You have 100 to prescribing you. I just it seems to be like we would be at 20 Supreme Court justices very quickly and it would just be this revolving door. It hyper partisan. Who's to say that the civets can approve those pics and so this whole idea of that. It's purely an executive branch function is wrong as well. So I think that again we have to focus it on that really continue to focus on that later in the broadcast Sec. Pompeo shortest our senior counsel for global affairs Sec. Pompeo things you notice, you got a new article up on ACLJ.or people could check it out. Scott US support for Taiwan is crucial. China's aggression deserves more strongly worded press release. China's bid flights flexing its muscles in the unprecedented way towards Taiwan. We've all see that we see the military aircraft. They said Taiwan's way sit, especially since present by just taking off. It's what you think the Chinese in game is here. Let me what that incredibly important United States of America. The Chinese emperor. Very clear. We don't have to guess being that leader, the general secretary of the Chinese, started he wants to bring the people of Taiwan inside totalitarian communist regime heated the word reunite the court that the real history.

Taiwan has never been part of China. He wants to dominate them.

He wants to control this enormous economic power. He wants to take away this democracy. That is just offshore from China is intent on doing it week. We cannot allow the Chinese government party to take the file away from these people who were Democrats, who are freedom loving people, and to provide an important security component for the region like this is J people.

I'm sure that I watch the broadcast right now are saying this well you know we know China's betraying part of the United States.

Why should we be is American so concerned about what China and dusted Taiwan. What does. How does that impact United States and alive its concern over the fact that we do significant trading with China and you just an important amount wasn't God months ago when it was I get back about for the American people are watching this broadcast trainer thinking what is the reason that we should care as Americans of what happens between China and Taiwan. Thanks for the simplest and that the crudest business is an important trading partner for the United States of America. Everyone who has a cell phone everyone you have a laptop computer, almost certainly has a component that comes from Taiwan and the Chinese Congress party.

Note that if a company called TSMC the largest producer of high-end semiconductors in the world.

China would dearly love to control that so they can continue to expand and dominate artificial intelligence and high-end computing and the tenant 20 years ahead of us that we have an important economic element to making sure the Taiwan remains free and democratic. Second states has always supported freedom loving peoples around the world. We should do that here and it is not the case that we have to go to .20 or 50 or hundred thousand American soldiers there to do it. We just need to establish the minds of teaching pain might be thinking that were prepared to defend these folks. The third one is that we made a commitment. We have a set of understandings with Taiwan J is a you and I talked about which we will walked away from the state of Israel when Iranians launch rockets out of the got strep. We did nothing but issue a statement when the Taliban pushed us in Afghanistan. We walked away from this commitment, the world is watching American weakness, and so it is very important that the United States demonstrate resolve on things that matter to the American people that results Sec. Pompeo.

I unfortunately worked for the United States because he saw the door sweep to pipeline with Russia Taliban in Afghanistan. Iranian recent account of their their proposals to the two to go back to nuclear talks and also just the way they're behaving other world powers you say you know what that they're not even the not paid attention. They're not asserting that leadership let's go grab what we want, we can get it that world leaders notice what happens in other places. I'll never forget when Pres. Trump authorized the strike that we took against capital money via radio equipped sports leader when he was plotting to kill more American it mattered in Iran. The leader there noticed for sure, but in the Middle East leaders took notice Jeremy given the terrific notice she thinking her potent in Russia took notice what they understand when American leaders are prepared to enter were strained but serious realistic weight defend the things that matter.

Those leaders notice around will not, and will be allowed to live the way we want to and with the religious freedom we wanted home and all the things that matter to every American piece up@aclj.org and I would read a quote from Emily gets a comment you like a China's testing are metal, they want to know how far they can go before America responds something other than strongly worded press releases. If this aggression is an opening salvo were testable resolve. How far do you think the CCP is willing to go, which is the question how far is the CCP willing to go get it, is the question. And we we know a good part of the answer. We know the last 25 years partisan Republican President Democrat President and Congress is like we just turn the other cheek for so long. Pres. Trump and our administration was the first one to acknowledge the death of the Soviet Union want to undermine our Republic, the Chinese Congress party now sits in that same place they have enormous capacity, enormous strength that will push until they find deal. We need to demonstrate that not just not just militarily, we need to make sure that we have the capacity to defend ourselves militarily, but this is an economic war that the Chinese have been engaged in for decades now. It allowed them to take millions of great drops of United States of America transfer them to China and we did not Pres. Trump was serious about fixing that mismatch that asymmetry. I hope this administration will be serious about a slide not seen that the people he put in place delete the China policy.

Yet that we will appease the Chinese Communist Party until the day that the Lord looks very different from the one that implied us to live in prosperity for the past 240 years so that is appease it because it first strategy for the buying team when it comes to the Chinese aggression and you talk about appeasement you China press releases. That's all I see happy there might be.

Is it exactly that we don't see but it doesn't say that were taking the strong approach it sometimes it feels like to just not even they don't even care about this issue. We all been working on a field gay-rights this project about another couple for about religious freedom. John Kerry actually said you know about the million people. Maybe it's 2 million held in Western China whether conducting genocide against the Uighurs.

He said you know it's a tough world out there. We just need to make sure that they built a couple left coal-fired power plants.

This is nave is leaving the Chinese Communist Party that isn't about to live up to its promises on climate or anything else in the administration has demonstrated that they are confused and weak and unwilling to do the things that will preserve our weblike stakes, no place just guessing your tweet which which I liked was when America leads restricts the world a safer place by default are be less safe right now. BJ feels that way for people who are paying attention. It feels that way. If you're if you don't even look at from partisan view just kinda see the standing of our country around the world. It it it feels like were not as safe as we as we work with in Israel for four days over the weekend and I just meet with people from all across the region.

They kept asking the same question is America prepared to do the things that it is traditionally done to not only ensure the safety and security. The live up to the promises made for all these years and the data set.

The evidence in place.

The first nine months of the administration has really cast doubt on American credibility across the world like trust in any relationship, it's possible to get back but you have to demonstrate that you're compared to do hard things to do difficult things with no light for American wall is asking his administration up to the task.

I hope and pray that they are sick. As always, I think. I spent some time with assessing accounts for global affairs. I encourage everyone to go to ACLJ.org and read and share this new piece by Sec. Pompeo US support for Taiwan is crucial. China's aggression deserves more than strongly worded press release that is up in ACLJ.org is always Sec. Pompeo. I appreciate you being on earth. They had been to Washington because they had where it talks about reconciliation.

The budget that's been looked at by the Republican study committee's international issues, though it seems like they are just getting pushed to the side when it comes to Washington DC and also Capitol Hill's involvement in a question about adorning the thing I picked up from that conversation you just had to Sec. Pompeo. Obviously this administration. Jordan sees foreign-policy a dynamite metrically different than the last administration does mature, and there are still things even inside that worldview that this administration is gotta be focused on. We've got a stay competitive with China.

We can't let that type technology gaps are closed too much and we can't let China passes. There are things that we can't wait for another election to get corrected. Sec. Pompeo's on this and we gotta be as well come back from this a break. Read more into the court packing issue. I will ask you this question you believe there should be term limits of the US Supreme Court you believe there should be more justices added to the US Supreme Court is not really right or wrong answers will have their different opinions.

I like to get your thoughts are that you care about this issue, one 800 684 31 to talk to us on the air. That's one 800 684 31 to his shift back to the court packing issue later.

The broadcast second. It is this what is in this $3 trillion reconciliation.

One thing is the IRS that everyone only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice. Is there any hope for that culture to survive.

And that's exactly what you are saying the American Center for Law and Justice, defend the rights of life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold mission will show you how you personally. Publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in what Obama care means to discover many ways your membership is empowering the right question mission in life today online/challenges facing Americans is time and are now sort constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines projecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do our work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ secular, so it was shipped back to the court packing. I did ask the question for you.

Call us what hundred 6430 would agree that there should be justices added to the Supreme Court.

You believe that there should be term limits that this committee daddy focus it out. It may be an 18 year term limit where they run into a problem there is that is not something the legislature can do this would require a constitutional amendment. This is a 200 page report or even they admit that if they did what they were put there to do it would be so hyper partisan that the country would lose faith that the whole judicial system, the United States went by way of exactly what Breyer said about all this. He notably I think courageously said that the problem with me that if in fact we have a situation where they start adding justices just because they want to get verified that the majority that control space in the court and the next ministration will just fix that by adding more and I think this commission so you end up with 30 judges in 30 years and so I don't sound like there's not real support for this. Now I am in favor of lifetime appointments. I think the founders actually got it right and my concern. Jordan is you start putting 18 year term limits on it fair justice, but there was a reason the founders of lifetime once it was to keep it out of the political system and any that has served the country well I know it's there's a lot of people going back and forth on that but I really I really think the lifetime appointment for Scrimgeour justices and apologizes in federal court really has served our country well OJ, I agree with you entirely. The Constitution says that federal judges, including justices of the Supreme Court shall serve during good behavior. That's the language that's you that have been interpreted to mean that as a lifetime appointment and what that does is it raises them above the political world. It raises their awareness of the legal implications of their decisions and not tainted by political considerations because they know that they're there for life. And that is that appeals, yes, of course, to their conscience. It appeals to their sense of what is right in appeal for their interpretation of the Constitution, but it raises them above the political fray. It raises Supreme Court justices as well as the inferior justices of the United States above politics.

They don't have to worry about getting elected or getting reappointed on the system like that. They know that their decisions are not tainted by political considerations.

The founders of the Constitution thought about this. They knew what it meant to have lifetime appointments. They thought it through. It was a good idea in the 18th century, and I submit to you that it's a good idea in the 21st century leave that lifetime. During good behavior appointment alone and go metal with it. Justice Stephen Breyer said about this exact issue in this is a little member of the Supreme Court for many times he not get along well. Jordan knows and let me disagree on judicial philosophy and whatnot but the really smart answer here, take a listen rule of law has weathered many threats, but it remains 30. I hope and expect that the court will retain its authority but that authority like the rule of law depends on trust and trust.

The court is God by legal principle, not politics, structural alteration motivated by the perception of political influence can only be that matter. Perception the committee figure that out to anything agree with Judge S right was this is from there on page 14 of the draft, but the risk of court expansion are considerable, including that it could undermine the very goal I read this is from the Bible.

White House undermine the very goal of some of its proponents of restoring the court's legitimacy, recent polls think about that. They go right to politics to polling that is not where the rule of law should be shabby base of Paul's Chevy based off how people feel that moment set a system of law is that how you and how you are governed by the rule of law that's polling but anyways the polls suggest that we believe a majority of the public does not support court expansion and even some supporters of court expansion doing knowledge is often the airport during the commission's public hearings. Therefore, at least if it were ever done of the near term and all at once would be perceived by many as a partisan maneuver every debt because it is and would be certainly if it was done right now by this administration, it would be a partisan maneuver because maneuver because right now the Supreme Court leads to the right. They want to make a political statement out of this, which I might mean who knows amendment but but that they can join to use the decision if it comes out where Roe versus Wade is no longer that of the framework for the issue of abortion and returns the state for some similar situation there. Any use that whatever plans they think they could better palatable.

That's what this commission is set up to basically respond to what I will call the inevitable.

That's what I think really going on here, and that this is the prelude. Many go back to commission of the commission said all this would happen.

So were to take action.

I think that's a large part of if they try to try to toss the student to the legislative branch or states for a constitutional amendment. This is, this would be that counterproposal to to put term limits on the court dead in the water right with Congress. Yeah, I think it would be anything we need in the water with the states as well Jordan but you know, one of the things I think we really have to stress is the President and Congress certainly aren't bound by this commission and I remember just back a couple months conversation that you and I had, I think we had it on air. Actually, that you know maybe one of the things we've got anywhere.

He is either the commission comes out and says what it looks like they're about to say that adding seats and packing the court would undermine the legitimacy of the court or maybe even Pres. Biden would say that, but then they would use that Jordan is sort of a a guys to look reasonable by instituting other reforms that would do similar harming your data Artie talked about term limits.

There's also a conversation, even in this initial draft about a jurisdictional limits. You don't know, maybe there's a legitimate debate around that door and I think we gotta be very careful at what this report ultimately says and then you know, look what the political branches do with that report. They might throw it out altogether and still put forward some harm, some some recommendations or some efforts that would harm the court during all of its gonna come back to these two points in order for the Supreme Court to do the job that was set out to be. It has to maintain its legitimacy has to maintain its authority and here's the one that's I think the most important.

Jordan has to retain the confidence of the American people. If were adding justices every time there's a new President every time there's a new comp Congress you think the American people can have confidence that court I sure don't Say that we take your calls you back for second half.

I will take your calls on this really get into the Republican study committee they report on the reconciliation Roundup as they call it policies to wreck America was that were very concerned about is this idea that the IRS would have access to every single person in the country's bank account without having to go to court no more necessary. No showing of probable cause they would because any transaction over $600 right now that numbers $10,000 over $600 will be monitored by the IRS. It doesn't matter where you are economically on the scale. There are times each year reinvested $600 and once you spent that the IRS would have full access to your bank accounts that going to court. See a problem there. This is another one of those again stuck in, with thousands of pages in a budget reconciliation. Wait for how much staff they would add the iris habits, providing what to give the IRS talk that that we come back with the PACU. Should we come back as well.

One 800 684 30. What did your doctor say let's get severe thoughts on the IRS getting access to your bank account because you spent $600 love your thoughts on that call one 800 684 31 wrongdoing.

There supersedes anything else. ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ keeping you informed and now is Jordan secular back to the show we are to get into the budget reconciliation of the IRS issue as well, but I do so about where we are on this says Scotus can be issued by the White House because there draft that they have released unit to go further. It just found out how negative it would be to expand the court. I think there's other issues we brought the bopper to wait for the final report.

Like if they try to change jurisdiction that can be done legislatively if they try to do get term limits that would take a constitutional amendment.

Justices are removed justices by that, I think that removing has to be more difficult, even by by law, but it certainly they can add by legislation, but they don't have the numbers in Congress right now to do that here they go. This is page 14 report, there are other reasons to believe expansion of the court efforts might have negative effects on the Supreme Court's long-term legitimacy or otherwise undermine its role in our legal system court expansion today could lead to a continuous cycle of future expansions.

Dad, this is what we all do. I don't know why it took 25 law professors who came up with the actual formal document out yet that's coming in November to figure out what the average person who follows politics for grabs at this would be a never ending cycle metal. It would be a never-ending cycle look at that look at the parameters it would set for the rest of the country.

I just think about that for a moment that working to have the judiciary now controlled at the whim of the executive is a reason we had separation of powers and the beast, law professor, I know this of the sending messages I want to be clear that that's important to realize 25 law professors, academics, what not work tinkering with something that has served our country very very well for a very long time since our founding, when you start messing with this you are messing with the way we balance our constitutional power and that is very, very dangerous as a Harvard law professor said the bases this because it's not that we could talk you you not to be a Harvard law professor to make the statement tightly teed may be in a polarized situation in which there is no possible form that would improve every body stays in the Supreme Court.

Shocking you shocking thing is it Washington can't take action without getting you know universal approval law professors limit their bubbles. Politicians limit their bubbles were out late with the American people and the American people say yeah does it take a Harvard law professor figure that one out makes a chuckle. Jordan sort of in a painful way. I mean I just want people to think back to delicious go back to Justice nomination process is think about a breakout Cavanaugh's process. Think about it, or any County Barrett's nomination process. There is clearly Jordan, I mean clearly already plenty of politics inside the Supreme Court. Every effort that we make now needs to be to actually mitigate to limit the amount of political influence on the court.

If you're going to turn this over to a completely political process. Those nomination processes door 90 that those does a look kind those all looks simple, doesn't look almost collegial compared to what can happen if we can dramatically expand the court each and every time there's an election cycle. So look yet this is that this is that you do you really think statement but it but I think that's just the beginning of the process it'll get dramatically worse if they looked at justices every time there's an election.

Yeah, I think I get from speak about the break will take your phone calls report to the reconciliation as well. One 800 684 31 to 2 questions rescue one. This idea of of packing the Supreme Court or term limiting the Supreme Court. What are your thoughts on that. What 800-684-3110 and the idea that the IRS had the power to go to your bank account because you spent $600 award. The probable cause to go to court to do it right now that special by the way through others $2000, much higher threshold but $600 you talking iris access every single American is if you have a bank account the likely threat to your spending at least four times $600.

What time is it full access dangers.

There dangers lurk inside the strike reconciliation as the weekly due date states about the budget that you like about targeting Americans getting into their bank accounts and they try to find out if they've done something wrong. We see the IRS and how parts that can come right back on secular challenges facing Americans as women are now free to sort constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines checking your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public and exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms then remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.where you can learn more about her life changing, member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice.

Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally publication includes a look at all major ACLJ were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in your motion imagery and what Obama care means to the many ways your membership powering the right to question your free copy mission life today online/certainties of what hundred 6430 went to first on Supreme Court commission and the White House that will get into this iris issue as well. Would to be California online would hate to welcome the secular euro, the year all I care very much, what happens with spring court court packing is allowed to happen to get too much power to the left seems absurd to visit, though both sides would have the ability to do this I when I look at the makeup of politics. It's the left there with that I think is encouraged to do it and here's why they do with a picket Justice, 99.9% of the time. I know exactly how to get a vote on every single issue we don't have that kind of judicial philosophy. The conservative world is not as predictable but there's our so it's hyper it is sits.

They know if they can add two more three more they know what they're getting, that that's the difference years.

I don't think that the wife has of this push of the right to say, all while the court was out of whack and we thought it was to the left.

We want to add justices because that was it a solution for conservatives. You don't just add justices and know how they got about rather than become obvious and obvious about it. But also I think it's important to point out unlikeliest stated by Rivera Ginsberg play Justice Breyer minors Ruth Bader Ginsburg met Andy to comment but going with quite well. He mentioned before appearing body segment of anything would make the client. Punishing it would be that one sign saying when, where, and how listening to a nice and then potentially selling more people lately to sell and not alone in favor vaccination. So any to bring the standard because we would bring before the Spring Ct., River store nearly a lot and you look at this and not reported. Justice Breyer I now Justice Ginsburg, probably the two most liberal members of the court and they don't like this either playing with the system.

I know that's true J. Justice Ginsburg also said, I think that nine is an appropriate number in terms of how many justices should be on the Supreme Court, including the Chief Justice and that when you hear by Justices Breyer and the light.

Justice Ginsburg ideologically, both of which are completely opposed to any ideological of the thinking that I entertain or that is in the Constitution. In my opinion. Nonetheless, I respect them in their persistence in saying that we need to leave the court not to be a political instrument and not to be one that is swayed by political opinion is that changes in the kinds of politics mutate through the years, and Justice Ginsburg said that very clearly, and Justice Breyer said it even more clearly leave that alone knife the justices on the left by Ginsburg, and Breyer take those positions and I think that that should make left us, and Democrats realized that that is in it and a very astute position. A very good position and a position that should be adopted by them, whether they will do that or not.

I do not know but I agree with those two justices entirely back to the phones 100 684 31 to the 2064 3110 Kathleen and Marilyn online. Three. He carefully hurled that ran the bungling trying on. These problems were having a country that people serve their own interests. Think that's all that concerned about saying that since Mark surrounds the Supreme Court and trying to change change for the click that link. now that i wish they would give the term limits on congress to congress because that is something chicago say it's off to see the run on the limiting themselves to come up with a reason why well i can actually apply that to myself, nana, sub sub follow that the difference though between congress. then of course it in the court's, the court has the lifetime appointments congress there up for reelection every six for the senate, or every two years the house of people do have a say in whether not they want to send a member of congress back. yeah, that's the key difference your name and luckily you're right when you can. a politician runs on it.

they almost never adhere to it like i'm one i'll just be very transparent on one that thinks the term limits for congress is probably something that on its merits, is not a great idea because it takes power away from the people but maybe it's time has come.

jordan, i mean i think what i think there would be a congress would benefit from fresh blood. after a while, the look is the distinction that you point out, can't be lost on the caller anyone listening here. the american people in every single district in every single state. even without term limits gets a regular chance to decide if there sitting member of congress should be returned to congress or replace. that's not true with the justice and met but by the way, jordan, that i actually think that is one of the strongest reasons against packing the court any a lot is made about the merrick garland situation where the united states senate chose not to seat justice garland will why did they do that jordan. they did that because in the midterm elections in the last term of pres. obama's term the american people. the voters went to the polling place and said you know what we want, a check on this President. we don't want him to be able to seat additional justices during a few changes that would take the power away from the american people and that is by the way, that's what made it different from the present trunk/turn present trumps last term. the american people. voters went to the ballot box and they said we want to affirm the current President and enter a lectern united states senate. that is from the same party. jordan, no matter which way that cuts i don't want to take that authority away from the american people.

i want them to have a midterm opportunity go to the ballot box in either affirm the sitting President of either party or put a check on the President yeah i want to go to chris's call from ohio online. 51 800 684 31 to if you want to talk to on the air, shifting a little bit here to the reconciliations should packages a lot to talk about in there. the republican study committee is found in over 40 issues that concerned about the one of those horses. the irs access to your bank account. chris, welcome to secular you're on the air banquet and requirements. we let you fill out a report at $10,000 or more.

my question is this change that you're eking out.

will that be only for cash or will that be any kind of transaction transaction so it states to see transactions i'll read to the provision. so to do this by the way the irs would need $80 billion because they would need to hire 87,000 new irs agents imagine that the 87,000 irs agent rb of agents as the republican study committee because it this is what they'll be able to do review every account, not transaction, every account that has either a $600 balance. she got $600 aboard your checking account they can review that $600.

the entire account because at six dollars and four if you spent $600 over the year in a transaction that would take any kind of for whether to check check card, debit card, if it's coming through that bank account anyway. that transaction so at $600 sitting there or spending $600 that this is one of the biggest power grab by the irs, and of course it's coming from the left, they they are selling is a way that all this people cheating on their taxes. there are other ways to figure out had to do that they had to create an irs agent army of 87,000 new agents to go after every single american.

without probable cause without having to go to court without breathing case they would literally have access to everybody's bank account. that number is no mistake with the agent with the agents authorizing this suspicious activity report whatever might be in the bank holder, the owner of the money you will be everybody's listening there was that a $600 transactions would not even know this is going on.

so when you said it's it's interesting to know probable cause, so any what god is an ability for the government to engage at a level threshold level now that affects every single american. 10,000 document taxes may not affect everybody at $600 of $600. definitely well is the congresswoman from what wyoming said whether i might buy a couch or a cow. i'm going to be spending $600 and that's going to be subject to scrutiny by the irs look when i have a contract on account of the bank.

i've got a contract with the bank and me to handle my transactions.

okay that's my business and that's between me and the bank. the irs has no business scrutinizing without probable cause, without any indication of specific suspicious activity. what i do in my bank account. we've seen what the irs is done with tax-exempt organizations. we want to now create an militant irs looking at us for $600. i hope not you believe is 86 away to read militarized since the irs which has been so weak. his case anyway actually bring the or power actually get more ages 87,000 new eight 7000 wastes of everybody's bank worry about big tech worry about the government to others what you can put you in jail is behind bars bring legal action to get you and follow your every move we come back to gloria calls your comments secular only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. and that's exactly what you are saying when the american center for law and justice, defendant the right to life.

we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the aclj's battle for the unborn, called mission will show you how you are personally publication includes all major aclj were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists ramifications.

40 years later planned parenthood's role in your motion imagery and what obama care means to serve the many ways your membership is powering the right question mission life today online/challenges facing americans is a time when our constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the american center for law and justice on the frontlines projecting your freedoms defending your rights and courts in congress and in the public arena and exceptional track record of success. but here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms that remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. the american center for law and justice is on your side, you're already a member. well, this is the perfect time to stand with us. aclj.org where you can learn more about our life changing become a member today ACLJ secular to hear nancy pelosi. she gets asked about that people are concerned about this transactions greater than $600. the new irs rb of 87,000 new agents and $80 billion to pay for this new program, which by the way they say will get the taxes back because they'll be a going after americans in mass, more americans take us a pelosi bite 700 with all due respect, the plural of anecdote is not data.

i said that before here. yes, there are concerns that some people that if people are breaking the law and not paying their taxes when wage tracking is set to the bank. imagine i think 600 negotiation that will go on as to what the amount is about. yes, we saw this is because people ask is it what transaction the way it reads so if you princes were donated to your church hundred dollars a month six months and you hit that threshold for the $600 to yeah she just refresh my memory. jordan read the read the section of the statute during the break. sit in section 130 8402 and jordan get this. it's on page 2284 of the bill.

that's a big bill is page 2284 publisher right away. it reads as any third party that settles a transaction to the same payee over a calendar year and that exceeds $600 in the year it would trigger this provision, sojourn and justice to simplify that down into very layman's terms you pay your cable bill every month. maybe it's 100 or hundred and $50 that would trigger this in just a few months maybe you pay a bad bill on your home security system.

maybe it's 50 bucks a month over over the calendar year jordan that would trigger this provision it's any amount to the same payee over a calendar year. the triggers that exceed $600 over a calendar year, so you look you think about it that way. jordan it's hard to think about a a middle-class or even well polo medical just about every american. jordan is can be caught up in this provision. if it passes as it's written now, having said that, this is where just had a touching on the problems with the reconciliation of iq to what was particularly concerned about because we know what the irs is capable of doing. targeting people she could see that religious donations political donations. the list goes on and on.

this change in the largest drop in the pretzel number but that, and i know doing all this reconciliation issue, but in this transit talking about letting the government be involved in every aspect now of your life mission political donations religious donations that is your church.

all of that would be known by the government and as i said earlier to andy and i'll say it again.

andy what in the world is the basis upon which the government has the authority to do this. there is a suspicious activity report for $10,000 is been on the books because the $10,000 cash withdrawals which are really antiquated were deemed triggers back in the 1960s and here we are in 2021, what it is is a democratic power grab via the internal revenue service, which has been the use as a vehicle for democrats to grab power in an unprincipled fashion by intervening and interfering in the lives of american citizens. we saw what the irs did with tax-exempt organizations thing him on buffalo lists checking out their names and see if it's 9/11 are patriots and we call them out on that now the coming in through the back door and they're saying with a look at your transactions which are they aggregating your bank account $600. you have got a be reported by banks so that uncle sam through the reckoned mechanism of the internal revenue service and snoop over your shoulder look into what you're spending.

we are giving money to what the source of your caches and so forth. i submit to you that that's not the government's business. the government's business is to protect us from bombardment from a bargain from our enemies and to deliver the mail.

that's it, but found stephen a dnr online to ac welcome to secular euros a year dollars total politician does a lot what was that everybody would be subject to it.

i don't think there's any exclusions for politicians.

sometimes congress does do that. but then i don't cite i think that i get. this is a way the democrats idea is that they committed go after more americans for for back taxes. the is the way that they're selling it, but i really do believe it's power, it's the it's the ultimate power to be able to get into anyone's bank account uses number 600 but that is an aggregate and aggregate of 600 so basically everyone i'm talking to right now. if you have a bank account. you would meet this threshold over the year you need and that means they would get full access to your account because the reporting without needing to go to court, whether it applies to congress or not. i think it would apply to congress and congressional staff. it is, it is this is a very partisan move because we know the irs can be used, to try to bully people. yet the power grab it centralizing power in washington dc. jordan and i would say the caller is correct. to be on the lookout for carveouts and we don't have the final legislation yet so you know those kind of things tucked in a dirt that absolutely happens. you have to watch out for that. but i would just tell the caller this ii think in addition to being a power grab. the reason that speaker pelosi is so wedded to this idea and she really got pushed on, and she said no, that absolutely has to stay in their jordan it's because there really committed to to convincing the american people that this is what they call revenue neutral that there are pay floors in the bill. now i will get all the way into the weeds. those things never work. but here's the bottom line jordan. they need this provision in there because it's expected to raise a lot of revenue. let me translate that for you it means.

if that provision is in there. they are going to get billions and billions of dollars from the american taxpayers that they can then can spend on what they're calling human infrastructure.

we haven't even gotten into all of the things that are in this bill the jordan. they need to spend $3.5 trillion over 10 years when they got to find somewhere to pay for it.

under this bill and this is one of the provisions that generates the most revenue for the name take money from the american people and spend it on things like climate policy ultimately arose for you to read this ridiculous most people's rate is over $600 a week.

this number andy it is right in the number where it it's an aggregate number, so this would include all of us includes all of us from whether you are working class to the very wealthy everybody that's got a bank account will basically meet this number that's exactly right. jordan that's the intent of it that they intend evidence to sweep within its purview. every single american citizen who doesn't have a transaction in a checking account that is 100 that is not at least $600 in the year. everybody does. so you're talking about tens and tens and tens of millions of american citizens will be swept up in the current. i think it's an absolute abhorrent thing and it really needs to be purged from this bill to be on top of this luxury watch that reconciliation very closely and tag you in all these topics that the supreme court issue i watching closely to see get a commission.

right now they are admitting to what we all do, which is today at justices right out of his first partisan.

discussed the likes of the outcome of the cases. that's not really why we should be acting this way.

some people have less faith in us less faith in the judicial branch that states of the highest court in the land and surprise surprise, they were honest that this be the by the restrictions to follow in the $600 irs move review.

watch this with very very closely.

do we can't strip that reconciliation bill will talk to next week on the frontlines of protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in congress and in the public arena. the american center for law and justice is on your side. if you're already a member. thank you. if you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, aclj.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ

INTERESTING ARTICLES

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime