Share This Episode
Sekulow Radio Show Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow Logo

2021 Victories and 2022 Battles

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
December 31, 2021 12:00 pm

2021 Victories and 2022 Battles

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1020 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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


YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

Today on Sekulow, the ACLJ's work for you. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. We want to hear from you.

Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow everybody. If you are a regular listener to this broadcast, you know the expertise we have legally here in the United States on so many different topics and around the world. Of course, sometimes we dive into foreign policy, sometimes we're diving into legislation, sometimes we're diving into cases that we're working on like the life cases across the country. Whether it's informed consent case out of South Dakota where we represent Governor Noem in the state, or whether it's the case out of Mississippi before the US Supreme Court that we're awaiting the opinion on early this summer, our legal team is engaged all across the country.

And the world. And I think it's important to do for you as well, and our government affairs team as well, but it's to kind of show you that scope. And that's something we're trying to do as the end of the year approaches. Because I know if you're like me, you're not able to tune in every single day to the broadcast that you enjoy or the radio broadcast.

And so you might miss a couple of days because of something that comes up or your routine has changed. So we wanted to kind of give you a sense of what the kind of work that we're doing at the ACLJ.org, what our lawyers are doing all across the country as they're fighting for the constitutional rights of individuals, the constitutional rights of states, sometimes we're suing states, sometimes we're representing states, other times it's the federal government that we are taking action against. Even in those cases, though, sometimes when we're taking action against the federal government, we're representing members of Congress at the ACLJ. Of course, we asked you to sign these petitions, so we're able to do all this work. Because of your support at the ACLJ of the Americans for Law and Justice, we can do all this work.

We don't charge these clients. So whether it's a state or an individual, you can go to ACLJ.org forward slash help if you believe that you need legal assistance. An actual ACLJ attorney is going to respond to you. And if it's a case that we would handle as the ACLJ, we will do that.

And we take those steps. We've talked about it before how the first step is sometimes these individual cases where your constitutional rights may have been infringed by a school or a state entity or local entity or federal entity. And you start off with an information letter and see if they backed out. If not a demand letter, then ultimately working with a client, decide if they want to file a lawsuit.

But none of that costs the client a dime. So they're able to protect their constitutional rights, but also all of our constitutional rights because they take a stand. So your support of the Americans for Law and Justice at ACLJ.org during this critical month. This is the most important month of our year is December. Because again, we're working through it. You know with the case involving the vaccine mandate for employers, we know we're going to be working through the very end of the year because the briefing from the Department of Justice in defense of the mandate is not due to the Supreme Court until December 30th.

So after Christmas and right before New Year's. So your support of the ACLJ right now, I mean it is going to work that is happening right now at the American Center for Law and Justice. So go to ACLJ.org and support our work.

Again, double the impact of your donation there. You're going to hear today about our pro-life work, the rights of students, the rights of employees like we just talked about, the rights of citizens as well. So I just encourage you, as you listen today about all the different legal work we're focusing it on, we wanted to do this so that you're up to date if you miss broadcasts.

Because again, I know everybody, you want to tune in every day, but you're not able to do so for a full hour always. So this show is going to give you an opportunity to get a scope of where we are legally. And I think it will encourage you to support the work if you're able to financially at ACLJ.org. Right now, through the month of December, we have our matching challenge. And what does that mean? A group of donors who can match each donation that comes through at ACLJ.org.

So if you donate $20, that is like $40 because it initiates that match of a $20 donation to a $20 donation. So you see why this is such a critical time if you're able to support our work, do so at ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org.

We'll be right back on Secular. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. I'm covering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress. The ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support.

Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected 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 to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases. How we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists. The ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later. Play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry. And what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. Welcome back to Secular.

We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110 as we're getting those ready and our team is here. Let me go right to CeCe Howell, a senior counselor with the ACLJ because CeCe, I want to focus, yes, we've got these big dates. November 1st, Monday, just a week from today, the court will be hearing oral arguments on this Texas law.

It's a novel approach. When we all looked at this to not, again, to have this enforcement of the six-week abortion ban be done by, not state, but by private actors and private rights of action. So it's caused a lot of issues for the abortion industry, CeCe, and also even the Department of Justice about whether or not the court has jurisdiction here.

If there's federal jurisdiction, if that's even ripe at this moment, or would it ever be? And then a second, of course, is the issue that this will be another case that puts Roe versus Wade and Planned Parenthood versus Casey in its crosshairs. So now we're having both on November 1st, oral arguments on the case that's doing that, and then again, December 1st, the case out of Mississippi. Yeah, so it's an interesting time for the abortion question in our country, for sure, because like you said, we have an oral argument in the Texas to both of those cases, the one that came from the DOJ and the one that came from abortion providers will be heard next Monday. And then the Dobbs case will be heard December 1st. So we are engaged in both of those cases. We are supporting, with the Texas case, we are filing an amicus brief supporting Texas, stating that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and pointing out that these cases are not properly before the Supreme Court to decide at this time. You know, I want to go right to Harry Hutchinson.

We'll get to some phone calls, Logan. Harry, when we look at the specific to the Texas case, we've got to file our brief Wednesday. Our team has just, I've gotten snippets of it already, of kind of our core, but there's a lot, I don't want to overdo it for people because they are going to put Roe versus Wade at issue. So there's the always, but in this case uniquely, there's a big procedural question about whether the court should even be hearing this case. And the Supreme Court takes those questions very seriously. A lot of their cases get decided on procedural grounds.

I think you're precisely correct. And so if you look at the abortion issue, if you look at the background, there have been a number of dissenting statements by justices of the Supreme Court who argue that we have crafted a special rule with respect to abortion cases in providing plaintiffs with standing, for instance, to bring their cases in federal courts. I would argue, and I think that will be consistent with the brief that we will file with the Supreme Court, that federal courts lack jurisdiction to hear pre-enforcement challenges to privately enforceable laws. So keep in mind, in the Texas case, the law is enforceable by private plaintiffs. It's not enforceable by the state.

It's not enforceable by a prosecutor. And so what the plaintiffs are doing here, that is basically the abortion providers, they're claiming the right to bring a lawsuit on behalf of women, let's say, third party beneficiaries of the litigation in Texas before any abortions have been blocked. And I think the Supreme Court should reject this creative effort by the abortion providers in Texas, number one.

Number two, the Supreme Court should restore sanity to this entire abortion arena and basically re-establish jurisdictional and standing requirements as a predicate to bringing such litigation in the future. You know, Logan, a lot of phone calls, 1-800-684-3110, if you want to talk to us on air, let's get to one of those calls. Yeah, let's get to the phone calls.

And if you are calling, no, you have some patience and let them get to your call, because you may ring for a while. Just give it a minute there, 1-800-684-3110, because so many of you have been calling. Let's go to Jerry, who's calling online, too.

Jerry in Illinois, you're on the air. Hi, Pro-Life still resonates with me. I've gone to every Pro-Life March, I mean every March for Life in D.C. The first one I went to was in 1983, and I haven't missed one since.

That's amazing. Our office right there on Capitol Hill, it's at 2nd and Maryland right there, that's where a lot of the March for Life, you know, every year. We're usually on the broadcast, so we participate in a lot of events for the March for Life organizers, because it's a multi-day event that culminates in the March.

But that's the commitment, Logan. And people like Jerry that are out there who have been leading on this before anyone wanted to talk about abortion, before your church wanted to say anything about it, unless you're Catholic, you probably didn't talk about this in church in 1983 when he started going. Late 80s, early 90s, when it became a big issue. And that's why I thought it was important to take his call as well, to show people this isn't a new issue, a lot of people have been born.

And that's why I even pose the question of, is it still important to you? Because it's also disheartening when you've had 30 years now, plus 30, 40 years of back and forth, but really not a whole lot of movement in terms of, there's been a lot of movement on science and technology, and a lot of hearts and minds have been changed. But legally, this is really the first time in a very long time there's been something substantial.

That's right. I mean, Andy, that's the whole point here is that we have a five-week period of time where it's going to be fresh on those justices' minds. It's not twice, both cases, which I think is huge, by the way, both cases are challenging the constitutionality of Roe versus Wade and whether or not the court got their reasoning wrong. So, Andy, people on the left who support abortion have said for years that the actual reasoning behind the case was inaccurate.

Well, you're absolutely correct, Jordan. This is a very important time in the judicial history of the United States right now and in the history of what's going to happen to the abortion industry. And I emphasize an industry because that's what it is. It's just an industry, and the Supreme Court of the United States now has two cases before it, and the next five weeks are going to be incredibly important times for us in the United States right now in terms of the issue of life. And the question, I think, that ultimately is going to be decided one way or the other, whether it comes out of the Mississippi case or whether it comes out of the Texas case, I think in the crosshairs of the Supreme Court is going to be the continued viability of Roe versus Wade that was decided in 1973, a case in which the Supreme Court made up out of whole cloth that doesn't exist a federal constitutional right to an abortion. I defy anybody to show me in the Constitution where there is a federal constitutional right to abortion.

The answer is there is not. These are matters that are left to the states, and I think we are at that point with the composition of the court as it is right now, with the issues that are being raised both by the Texas case and by the case out of Mississippi, that Roe v. Wade is going to be, I hope, on the chopping block, and that's what I pray for. You know, CC, this is the key, is that both of these cases, they decided in Texas, I know we're doing our brief as well, not to give too much of that away, not a surprise, but we're going to see two direct challenges that the courts agreed to here. There have been people trying to challenge Roe versus Wade and Planned Parenthood versus Casey, the follow-up case, for over 30 years to get a merits case there that the court has to consider, and now we have two within exactly one month of each other. Yeah, so, you know, that makes me hopeful that this abortion issue and the judicially fabricated law that was created in Roe v. Wade giving a judicially fabricated right to abortion, that that will finally be attacked, and hopefully we will have a Supreme Court that follows the Constitution and states that there is no constitutional right to abortion, just like Andy said.

You cannot find that in the Constitution, and the Supreme Court needs to correct the wrong decision in Roe v. Wade and make it clear that there is no constitutional right to abortion. When we come back, we're going to continue to take more of your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. I encourage you to share this broadcast with your friends and family because this may have gotten missed by a lot of people on Friday. It happened, I think, in our last segment of the show, maybe the segment before it, that the court, one, scheduled briefing and then scheduled oral arguments. So I just want to underscore for everybody out there, this is why the ACLJ, the size of the ACLJ, the resources available to us, when we got an order like that Friday, it wasn't like, oh, we've got to panic and figure out who's going to do what. We put the team in place. They are ready to go to file briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court in five days, and we're able to do that because of your support for the ACLJ, those who support us financially.

When you share our broadcast, when more people see what we're doing, all of that is important. When you call in to be part of the broadcast at 1-800-684-3110, when you sign a petition, it's important for us at the ACLJ. So I encourage you to go to ACLJ.org.

That's ACLJ.org. Stay up to speed on everything that we're doing. Keep calling as well. Next time, we'll take more of your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110 to talk to us on the air. And again, we are going to shift to some other topics in the second half hour, but I want to spend time here because this is an important time in history. It's an important moment to have these two cases. We don't know how they will be decided, but to have these two cases both coming up within one month exactly of each other, and the justice is focused on this issue.

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 to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. I'm covering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress. The ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support.

Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org.

Welcome back to Sekulow. Before we get to our next topic, I just want to encourage you, just a reminder, about contacting the ACLJ through ACLJ.org forward slash help, just like that student did in Wyoming. It doesn't have to be because you want to go full scale legal war against your employer or school you go to, but you need some legal backing. You need some legal assistance. You go to ACLJ.org forward slash help.

And I will tell you, that's how we work through it. We start off with informational letters, then the next is potentially a demand letter if you're comfortable with that, and then ultimately a lawsuit if that's where you want to go. But it's to protect your rights, whether you're a college student, whether you're an employee or employer or state or city worker who's confused about the laws, especially when it gets time around the holidays. So I encourage you, go to ACLJ.org forward slash help.

That's ACLJ.org forward slash help. Now we're going to switch into Taylor Force here. Now you know, folks, we talked about this a lot on the broadcast. In March of 2016, a Palestinian terrorist murdered a U.S. Army veteran, Taylor Force, in Israel. He was an Army veteran, but he was there on a Vanderbilt Business School study abroad program. So he was not in fatigues.

He was there just as a student. He was stabbed and killed. That person who carried out the terrorist attack then receives money from the Palestinian Authority in what's called a pay-for-slay program. After a couple years of legislative work signed by President Trump, the Taylor Force Act, which prevented U.S. dollars from going to the Palestinian Authority that could then be utilized for these pay-for-slay slush funds to go to these martyrs' families. But as you know, over time, these groups, they try to find loopholes.

The Palestinian Authority has tried to find loopholes with this fungible cash that still goes over as humanitarian aid. U.S. Senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee is joining us now on the broadcast. Senator Hagerty, first, let me thank you for being here. And second, the Taylor Force Act was a great piece of legislation, but your colleagues and your co-sponsor of this believe that it can be strengthened. Well, that's absolutely right, Jordan. It's great to be on with you, too, as you are one of the strongest conservative voices we have in the nation.

So it's always an honor to be with you. With respect to Taylor Force and the Taylor Force Act, you did a wonderful job summarizing the tragedy that occurs with these pay-for-slay payments. The fact is that Taylor was a veteran but also a student at Vanderbilt Business School, and so it certainly rings close to home when we find out these martyr payments are being made by the Palestinian Authority. The original intent of the bill that was signed by President Trump was to stop U.S. humanitarian aid going to the Palestinian Authority as long as they were doing these pay-to-slay programs. The problem with that is that money is fungible, and as you said, they figured ways to get around this. So what we want to do is make it considerably stronger, and what we're going to do is focus on the banking system. And this provides additional authority to designate foreign banks who are involved in money laundering and forbid them from holding or using any type of correspondent accounts in the United States.

If they're involved with martyr payments to terrorists or if they knowingly provide financial services to Hamas, which is, as you know, a proxy group for Iran. So this is going to be a much stronger, much tighter way to address, again, using the financial system, cutting off the payment system to these guys so that they can no longer abuse this and continue to conduct this awful pay-to-slay program where they pay people who are murderers if they martyr themselves. You know, Senator Hagerty, back in 2018, this had bipartisan support. What's the feel like on Capitol Hill right now, which is a pretty partisan environment with Build Back Better and all these other programs, but with something like this, it's common sense that it feels like we should all be able to unite around you. Do you think it can get there again to strengthen the Taylor Force Act? Jordan, I certainly hope so.

I would say this, though. Since we've seen this Congress come in, we've heard extreme voices coming from the left. These voices seem as though they actually support terrorist groups. They support BDS. They support Hamas. After the 11-day war in Israel, I actually flew to Israel to let them know that, broadly, America does not support this. Whether you're Democrat, Independent, or Republican, we stand with Israel.

What's happened here in Washington is that we have these extreme voices coming out. I think it's a minority group in the Democrat Party, but they are basically given the image that they support this terror that's being conducted by the Palestinian Authority, and the media are amplifying that. The truth of the matter is that I cannot imagine my Democrat colleagues, for the most part, condone this, and I hope we'll get to a bipartisan place again, but the noise and the rhetoric has gotten to a fever pitch, and the Biden Administration seems to want to push in that direction, again, in the direction of supporting the Palestinian Authority as they conduct terrorist activities. You may also have seen this, but the Biden Administration were going to open a consulate to deal with Palestinians there in Jerusalem, to basically divide Jerusalem again, after we took major steps to unify Jerusalem and recognize it as the one and only capital of Israel. I was able to take significant steps to block that effort, and frankly got the State Department to admit, under testimony to me, that it was not within their authority to do that, and that provided the headroom for our colleagues on the Israeli side of this relationship to step up and really push back on the State Department. So I don't think we're going to see that type of diplomatic engagement with the Palestinian Authority that this State Department had hoped to initiate.

And they certainly haven't earned it by their actions. I mean, in fact, there is an embassy, it's in Jerusalem, it's not far away, I mean, they're talking blocks, and as you've been there, Senator Hagerty, as you said, that can be utilized, but that this special consulate, which was really for, it was like, the way I've had it described as State Department officials who were pro-Palestinian, who would work inside that consulate, formerly when the embassy was in Tel Aviv, that would be the people who would work more with Israel directly, and again, it divides the Jewish state of Israel and the city of Jerusalem into two places, which is what we are trying to solve and have fixed through putting our embassy there and finally recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Wes? Yeah, Senator Hagerty, Wesley Smith. Yeah, you know, this should shock the conscience and I think raise the indignation level of every American. This terrorist that killed Taylor Force was killed by Israeli police, but then was hailed as a national hero and given a huge funeral.

His family to this day still receives payments. And like you said, you wonder, there's a fine line between supporting Palestinians in peace and supporting terrorism. And I was disappointed when President Biden reopened the PLO mission in Washington, D.C. But going forward with this, do you think you'll have bipartisan support on this bill? Well, I think what is required is someone like me who can step up and basically make clear to the American public what's really happening here. The Biden administration is really relying on their ability to deflect, their ability to get their message, their quote, narrative carried along in the mainstream media. But what I've been able to do and several of my colleagues is go on air, explain exactly what's happening. Once that is explained, once I'm able to get a State Department official opposite me in a committee hearing and get them on the record stating that indeed they don't have the authority to do what the Biden administration is proposing, then our colleagues, our allies in Israel hear that.

That sends a very different message than what they're getting through the mainstream media. That is emboldening our allies there to realize that we will be here much longer than the Biden administration, that the Senate is going to stand firm with Israel, and they just need to realize that we are on the long-term basis the strongest allies that Israel will ever have. Senator Harry, we've only got about a minute left, but I know you wanted to address, we're Tennesseans. We all experienced a scary Friday night, but so did our neighbors in Kentucky, much scarier there. I know your office has been really laser focused on that.

I wanted to give you just some time to address the country on it. No, it's been a real tragedy. It hit Arkansas less than Tennessee. It hit Tennessee significantly. We had 11 tornadoes touchdown in West Tennessee and Middle Tennessee. If you think about where the hardest hit was, was in West Tennessee. We had four fatalities there. We had two fatalities in Lake County, one in O'Brien County, and one in Shelby County. There's still about 10 people hurt.

One person's still missing there. Governor Lee has applied for an emergency declaration. He did that on Monday, and then we've supported that.

I wrote immediately to get that supported. President Biden has stepped up and given us that emergency declaration. So I'm pleased we're moving forward, but again, my heart goes out to the people that are suffering in Tennessee. Thank you so much for all the work you're doing, Senator.

We'll be right back on Secular. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Secular.

And now your host, Jordan Secular. You know, if you're a regular listener to this broadcast, you know the expertise we have legally here in the United States on so many different topics and around the world. Of course, sometimes we dive into foreign policy, sometimes we're diving into legislation, sometimes we're diving into cases that we're working on, like the life cases across the country. Whether it's an informed consent case out of South Dakota where we represent Governor Noem in the state, or whether it's the case out of Mississippi before the U.S. Supreme Court that we're awaiting the opinion on early this summer, our legal team is engaged all across the country and the world. And I think important to do for you as well, and our government affairs team as well, but it's to kind of show you that scope. And that's something we're trying to do as the end of the year approaches, because I know if you're like me, you're not able to tune in every single day to the broadcast that you enjoy or the radio broadcast.

And so you might miss a couple of days because if something comes up or your routine has changed. So we wanted to kind of give you a sense of what the kind of work that we're doing at the ACLJ.org, what our lawyers are doing all across the country as they're fighting for the constitutional rights of individuals, the constitutional rights of states. Sometimes we're suing states, sometimes we're representing states, other times it's the federal government that we are taking action against.

Even in those cases, though, sometimes when we're taking action against the federal government, we're representing members of Congress at the ACLJ. Of course, we asked you to sign these petitions, so we're able to do all this work. Because of your support at the ACLJ, of the Americans for Law and Justice, we can do all this work. We don't charge these clients.

So whether it's a state or an individual, you can go to ACLJ.org forward slash help if you believe that you need legal assistance. I want to take a few minutes here, Jordan, to thank our members around the country. We sat down and had our board meeting last week, and we do this end of the year board meeting because it gives you a good sense of where you are. And we've had an incredible year, and we've been able to accomplish a lot. Our Now More Than Ever campaign included the hiring of Rick Grenell, the former director of national intelligence, member of the cabinet, President Trump. The former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, also a member of the cabinet for the previous administration.

And they're part of the ACLJ's International team. We're going to announce in the months ahead some big moves internationally that will impact the United States as well. So we've got some really big plans for 2022. I mean, significant expansion.

It's like doubling down on Now More Than Ever. But I have to say this to our members. None of this happens without you. And I will tell you, we're not like a lot of organizations in that we don't have, you know, we get some, and we're appreciative of everything. We don't get regularly $10 million grants and million-dollar grants.

That's very rare for us. I mean, you could look at those over the course of our 20 years. I mean, our building in Washington was a large donation from a foundation. We'll never forget that.

That's been 20 years already. But it's because of people like you. Lots of people like you that make a difference. That was what we decided to do 35 or 40 years ago when we started.

That it was going to be more of a, we now call grassroots model, but it was really going to be supported by everyday citizens, the people that wanted to protect religious freedom, religious liberty, and protect our freedom and liberty as American citizens. And we have been blessed beyond anything we could imagine. We have facilities that we can't even, when I'm wearing these facilities, I still can't believe we're in these facilities. But that doesn't happen without you. But I just wanted to stop and say thank you from all of us. There's just me and Jordan on the set today, but there's a lot of people working behind the scenes, as you know. And we don't have a camera back there. We should really get one.

And around this entire office and our offices around the globe. Thank you. Without your support, it doesn't happen. And as we said, we're in a matching challenge campaign. We're in the last days of the month. Jordan's going to let you know how to do it.

It makes a big difference on how we can proceed ahead. It's very easy to do. You go to ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org. Right on the home page there, you can do it on your phone, you can do it on your tablet, you can do it on your computer.

Very quick, though. I mean, by the time we come back from this break, you could have easily made the donation. And you'll see matching challenge or donate. Either one of those will take you to the right page. Put in your info, choose the amount you want to donate. You can also choose if you want to make a recurring monthly donation. That will still be part of the match.

People ask that all the time. And that will be part of the match. So you go to ACLJ.org. This is a great time to support our work. As you said, we're grassroots. You know, a $25 donation is a big deal for the ACLJ. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith, uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy, and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support.

Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected 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 to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. Welcome back to Secula. We are taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110.

Again, 1-800-684-3110. Dad, we are joined by special guest Skip Ash, senior counsel here at the ACLJ. He has a new blog on ACLJ.org called Attempting to Bring the International Criminal Court into Compliance with International Law.

It's some of the incredible content that we post on our website continually. Yes, so I'm glad Skip's with us because this is something that is interesting. Skip's got this article up, and I love when you read the title, that we're attempting to bring the International Criminal Court into compliance with international law. Skip Ash is a senior counsel at the ACLJ in charge of international law.

And Skip, on that point, I think it's worth going right into it. We don't think they are in compliance with their own jurisdictions and mandates. No, they're not. The treaty that created the International Criminal Court is called the Rome Statute, and the Rome Statute contains some provisions that clearly violate customary international law, and every state is bound by customary international law. So what we're attempting to do is to go in to point that out to them one more time, but we've done this multiple times before, but to point out one more time with an in-depth analysis of why it violates international law and then try to encourage them to make those changes that are required to bring the treaty into compliance with international law, which would free up all the criticism from third states, from non-party states of the treaty, that have objections to what the court is doing and is trying to do. So, Skip, we have been battling the ICC in various ways and have also participated with the ICC in other ways over decades now.

You know, we've done it with Israel. We did it in U.S. interests regarding Afghanistan. Now, fortunately there, even though we went to court and the court said, yes, that the prosecutor could have jurisdiction, the new prosecutor came in and said, we got other things we got to deal with in Afghanistan, not the United States.

So perseverance does work here. Absolutely. The court came into operation in 2002, so we're coming up on the 20th anniversary of the court. And you, as you said, we've been over there to meet prosecutors a couple of times.

We have submitted documents, and you have argued both at the appellate level and we have submitted documents at the pretrial level. And so we are actively pursuing cases in the International Criminal Court as an NGO, as a non-governmental organization. And because we are a non-governmental organization, the European Center for Law and Justice, we have the ability to do such things and they receive what we submit. Now, we're pushing in areas that a lot of the countries aren't pushing, but we're trying to make this court actually a court that would be effective.

I mean, its goals are wonderful. A court that would be effective and a court that would operate within lawful jurisdictional limits, which it does not do now because of the very points we're making. That's exactly why the United States, Wes, is not a member of the International Criminal Court. And I think as a former soldier, both you and Skip, serving the United States Army with distinction, the thought of being part of that court would be scary.

Oh, absolutely. And the battles that we are fighting to make the point that we are not subject to them because we're not part of that Rome Statute is very, very important. And like so many bureaucracies that are a part of the larger United Nations, it tends to be biased. It's not always fair and objective, especially when it comes, for example, to Israel. And Skip's article points out some great points of why we're not a part of this court and not part of the Rome Statute.

One of the things I go back to, Skip, and that is when we did this when we were over there in December of 2019, when we actually appeared before the Appellate Chamber. You know, it's not the system we're used to. Is that a fair way to put it? Yeah, it is.

It's a very different system. They claim it's not politicized, but you can clearly tell it is. There were people there who were taking aim at the United States government, all sorts of things that were sort of ancillary to the issues being argued.

You know, you were there, you were right on point. And yet many of the other attorneys that were presenting were talking about all sorts of things they would like to see. It should be this way, it should be that way, not what the law is. And courts normally, of course you should be, deciding and interpreting what the law says and then applying it. And what's happening here is that most of the people involved in the International Criminal Court want to stretch this law as far as possible to make it universally applicable, which it currently is not one third of the nations of the world, representing two thirds of the population of the world, are not members of the Rome Statute. And that includes three permanent members of the Security Council. So, this court has a long way to go before it's considered legitimate by a good part of the world. So, Harry, you've done international law, you've studied international law, and of course you've worked on international law projects with us. Your view of the court exceeding its jurisdiction and lack of, I would say, understanding priorities, although I think it's getting a little bit better.

Well, I think that is certainly a huge, huge problem. It is clear beyond question that the United States is a non-party state to this particular treaty. So, if this were a law school exam and someone tried to suggest that the ICC has jurisdiction on the United States, that answer would deserve a failing grade. And yet, the ICC itself continues to fail elementary logic and procedure. So, they have no jurisdiction.

They will not have any jurisdiction unless we join. But I think at the end of the day, this is another example of elites who believe that they know best. Many elites, for instance, they want to abolish something called borders, international law that protects sovereignty. They basically are pushing us further and further down a road toward a one-world government, and they are smart to start with so-called Western democracies because if they can gain control over Western democracies, either through the UN or the ICC, then the rest of the world will be compelled to follow.

So, I think this is a long-term goal, a long-term strategy by the ICC, but I also believe that we do not have an administration that is prepared to resist these trends strongly. Hey, Skip, one of the things, and I want to make sure I'm not doing this with overstatement, but I would say that as an organization, we are one of the most active NGOs, non-governmental organizations, at the International Criminal Court. We're definitely one of the most active with respect to trying to ensure that the court stays within its lawful limits. There are a lot of them over there that are bringing up all sorts of issues. I mean, there are some, especially some of these human rights organizations, that everything they see is a crime.

Every wrong is a crime, but we are the ones there. In fact, we're one of the few that have pushed back. We were one of the first ones to submit an amicus brief to the court, and in this last situation, when we were dealing with the whole situation of Palestine, whether Palestine was a state, when the Palestinians, after we'd submitted everything, came out with other statements that contradicted their previous statements, we submitted another amicus brief to point that out to the court. Now, the court shot us down. They didn't want to hear it, and they wouldn't let it be entered, although it's still up on their website, by the way.

You know, Skip, I know that. I mean, we said that. I remember you and I had talked about that when we filed it. We said, you know, they may not take action on it, but they're going to read it, and you know that's exactly what happened, and they kept it up there.

I thought that was really interesting. Yeah, it really is, and what we're trying to do now is, you know, we've contacted now 19 foreign ministers of countries that are member states of the ICC, of the Rome Statute, and what we were asking in the letter that's part of the blog, what we're asking is that they consider intervening to help us to get this Rome Statute back where it should be so that it's lawful under international law, and we can't do it ourselves. We're, as a nongovernmental organization, we can't make these suggestions directly, but we can encourage states to do so, and that's what we've done. We've identified people that we consider to be friendly foreign ministers, and we've asked them to make these arguments.

Whether they do or not remains to be seen because the meeting doesn't occur until December, but we're in there trying to encourage them and to answer any questions they may have. Yeah, and I appreciate, Skip, I appreciate the way you lead our team on all of that because it's really important to what we do and who we are, and I need to also say a thank you to all the people that Skip works with, and by the way, as we get ready to go to a break, we're going to take calls in the last segment. I want to say thank you to all of our members because everything you see and don't see is because of you, whether it's our production teams, our video teams, our people in social media, writers, lawyers, public affairs people, people like Van Bennett running our government affairs team up in Washington, our offices in Strasbourg, France, and around the world because of your support of the ACLJ, and I just want to say thank you from all of us.

We're not in a matching challenge month. I just want to say thank you. We couldn't do it without you, so thank you. We have another segment coming up, and we're going to take as many calls as we can.

A few phone lines are open, just a couple. If you want to call in, this is the time to do it, 1-800-684-3110. If you're watching on social media, make sure you continually stay updated by liking, subscribing, doing whatever you need to do on whatever platform you're on. If you're on YouTube, subscribe, hit that thumbs up. If you're on Facebook, make sure you like the page, subscribe to the page, and share this content. Then not only do you get it each and every day, but it gets seen by your friends, and we can expand the ACLJ with that.

We appreciate that support as well. This is called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith, uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy, and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support. Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family.

Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Welcome back to Secula. We are going to take your phone calls to China. Probably most of those are coming through right now. We've got a couple lines open. Get your calls in.

1-800-684-3110. We'll start taking a lot of those calls. We come back the next half hour of the broadcast, but I'll give you time to get your call ready so that we can take it, which is that how big of a threat do you believe that this administration, which is this bungling issue after issue, summit after summit, virtual summits they can't get right. Remember the conversation with Putin.

Couldn't get the button pushed right. The imagery there looked horrible. I mean, it's just embarrassing. It isn't to be an American. It's embarrassing to be the leading democracy of the world and treat another democracy like Taiwan, who is so reliant on the United States like that because we bow down to China, but not the U.S. bows down to no one. But it's clear the Biden administration taking kind of similar to President Obama who loved to bend down and kiss the ring. That's not what the Trump administration did when it came to the Saudis. We were treated as equals. Our elected leaders were treated as equals to their king. That's how you act when you're the superpower. You don't bow down. And you don't edit your ally. And this is bowing down just virtually.

Yeah, but they were editing. We're going to get to the pro-life situation in Pennsylvania, but just to follow up on that. We are bowing down. We're inviting the Taiwanese government in. We invited them to the summit. And then when we have them there and they are ranked as an open and free society, we let them get edited because the National Security Council is, oh, the Chinese are going to get upset. Like, we shouldn't be a little upset with the Chinese government over a couple of things, like a pandemic.

I mean, this is what's so absurd about the – when you don't have America first as a policy, this is what you end up with. But let's go to Pennsylvania. Jeff Surtees is joining us right now. And we just filed a brief, Jeff, in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Tell us what the case is about.

Absolutely, Jay. Yeah, we're filing an amicus brief with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on behalf of members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in defense of an important Pennsylvania law that bars state funding of abortion through its medical assistance program, which, by the way, was upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 1985. Well, the challengers of this law, Planned Parenthood and a group of abortion providers, they're arguing that this abortion funding ban violates not the U.S. Constitution but the Pennsylvania State Constitution, which they claim provides greater protection to Pennsylvania citizens than the U.S. Constitution does. Well, we make two arguments in this brief. First, that the abortion providers, they don't have legal standing to press their challenge here because the only women allegedly harmed here are a subclass of pregnant women. It's not the abortionists.

They are not harmed by this law. The second point we make in this brief, Jay, is that because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held, repeatedly so, that it looks to the U.S. Supreme Court for interpretive guidance on how it understands its state constitution, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court should reject this challenge by Planned Parenthood and the abortion providers on its marriage, just as the United States Supreme Court has done so when those have challenged federal Medicaid restrictions on abortion funding. So, yeah, it's a great brief. It's an important case, and this case reflects what if the Supreme Court, United States Supreme Court, sends these issues back, sends the abortion issue back to the states, we're going to see all this fighting, and not just in the legislatures, but in the state judiciaries as well.

So that's exactly what I wanted to get to, Jeff, and I'm glad you brought that up. We are ahead of this because you've had the Dobbs case has now been argued. I think it's pretty clear that the Mississippi law is going to be held constitutional.

You never go by an oral argument. Whether there's five votes for Roe versus Wade to be overturned is hard to say, but I think this will do a significant rollback to the states to give them authority. But in that decision on the order that came out on Friday from the Supreme Court, John Roberts clearly siding with the liberals not wanting to overturn Roe, I think is, Jeff, how I read it. But the other five seem to me, I think it may be a 5-4 decision coming in Mississippi. I think we are going to get a 5-4 decision coming in Mississippi, and there's a chance we actually might even get Chief Justice Roberts giving us six votes there.

On the Mississippi law, yes. On the rollback of Roe, I don't know if he will go there. I don't know if he's going to go back there either, but you know what, if he wants to preserve the institution of the Supreme Court, better for a decision reversing Casey and Roe to be by a supermajority instead of a 5-4 majority. What I wanted to say was we are taking it to the next level already by dealing with it at the state level.

Jeff, that's what's important here. That's exactly right, because if the abortion fight goes back to the states, it's not just going to go back to state legislatures. It's going to go to state judiciaries as well. Will state Supreme Courts hold that according to their state constitution there is a fundamental right to abortion? So it's going to be a fight not just in the legislatures by a majority vote and by a governor signing a bill. It's also going to be fought in the courts, whether or not state constitutions provide a greater protection of privacy than the United States Constitution.

Jeff, one thing we've been talking about to our audience is that we always prepare for every option, but in the best case scenario with Dobbs, which would either mean, to me I think there's two good scenarios. One that's great would be the overturning of Roe and Casey and the law in Mississippi standing, which gives some clear guidance to states, but also if the Mississippi law stands and somehow Roe is basically gutted but it's still on the books, it will allow the ACLJ, and we're already doing this work defensively, but to offensively send our experts, people like you, Jeff, on the life issue and others, to go into state legislatures and work on the correct law. So we're not just defending, we're not just advising, and we're going to be launching some new initiatives with the ACLJ that will allow us to do it at the federal level and the state level to get right in there, so that we're not just brought in to defend laws or just some advice, but we can actually be helping legislators at the federal and state level draft them.

You know, I was just going to ask that to Than because the truth of the matter is, as we've seen, we have worked tirelessly on the life issue for really 40 years. I mean, think about Pat Monahan, who's been involved in this issue since the 70s. But, you know, Than, on the federal level too, the ACLJ has been fully engaged, so as Jeff was saying, returning it to the states doesn't mean you ignore the federal side of this either.

Well, we've seen this day coming, Jay. I mean, we've been proactively engaged in the states. I mean, I think just recently about Oklahoma, South Dakota, Maryland, sending people to testify in front of the legislators, actually drafting some of the bills that they've considered, and then, as Jeff mentioned, also helping them defend measures in court.

Jay, you mentioned that federal nexus, though. I'm telling you, here's what's going to happen if we get a good ruling in Dobbs. As states begin to do what we've been asking them to do over the past several decades, there's going to be a move on the federal level. It's already underway. The House of Representatives has already passed it to actually codify Roe and, Jay, eviscerate all state restrictions on abortion. So we're going to have to double team this on both the federal level.

We're going to have to hold that restriction back. And then on the state level, we're going to have to continue the work that we've been doing for decades now, helping states push those restrictions forward. Yeah, I mean, this, again, it will open up an entire new area of work for the ACLJ, again, so that if you have to defend them, which we've been doing at the state level forever, that's not the new part, but it's going in there. And sometimes states do ask us for advice, but it's going there drafting word for word. We're representing South Dakota right now at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, a state approach to informed consent on abortion, a novel approach, I think totally constitutional.

I think in light of Dobbs, it will be even more so. So we're already at the appellate level there. And, Jeff, like you said, we're at the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania on this one, correct? Yes, we are, absolutely correct, Jay, and we're hoping for a victory in this decision.

There you go. So Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Supreme Court of the United States, Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in South Dakota, ACLJ front and center. Yeah, on these life issues and preparing for the future and what we may be able to do. So support our work at ACLJ Matching Challenge throughout the month of December, which is our most important month of the year when it comes to fundraising and getting prepared. ACLJ.org, donate today, double the impact year donation with our Matching Challenge. That's ACLJ.org.

At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20. A $50 gift becomes $100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms, that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-07-02 21:06:19 / 2023-07-02 21:30:35 / 24

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