BREAKING: No More Masks on Planes

Today on Sekulow, it's breaking news.

No more mask on planes. After a federal judge's ruling, we'll explain what it means for you. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever.

This is Sekulow. U.S. District Judge in Florida, Catherine Kimball-Mizell. She was appointed by President Trump in 2020 and she said this rule, the Federal Transportation Mask Mandate exceeds the CDC's authority. Remember, this was put in place by the Biden Administration February 2021. It was extended multiple times, was to expire on March 18th, then was to expire on April 18th. We want to hear from you.

Share and post your comments. Recall 1-800-684-3110. Just last week, the Biden Administration announced it was going to be extended by two weeks. The new expiration date was May 3rd, 2022, and we now know, thanks to this judge's ruling, that that is no longer the case.

The Federal Transportation Mask Mandate, planes, trains, buses, boats, and in terminals, masks no longer required pending this federal review. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome to Sekulow. Folks, I want to read right from the opinion. This is, again, and it's important because we talk about elections have consequences and some of those consequences last longer than how long someone is in office, especially when it comes to a President of the United States because they make judicial appointments that are lifetime appointments. And this is a district court judge out of Florida, the Tampa area, Katherine Mazzell, who put this ruling into place.

Let me read the conclusion for you. Quote, it's indisputable that the public has a strong interest in combating the spread of COVID-19. In pursuit of that in, the CDC issued the mask mandate. I want to remind everybody right now, the mask mandate on these places of travel was not put in place until January 31st of 2021. So during the beginning of COVID, this was done, masks mandates were decided by individual businesses. And so the airports themselves would decide that the actual airlines would decide.

And this was done in a more localized level. And of course, to this day, you can still decide if you want to wear a mask. Of course you can when you are on an airplane.

No one is forcing you to take your mask off. But what we saw was widespread support from all of the major airlines. People were literally going through the halls of airplanes, the aisle of the airplane last night and taking people's masks to throw away. I mean, this is something the major airlines have asked. They wanted a return to normalcy. They were battered during the first couple of years of COVID when there was so little travel. Now they're coming back and they're saying, listen, this is one of the safest places to be is airlines. It affects more than that, too.

It affects, again, trains, some modes of transportation on water as well. But I want to continue on with the conclusion from this case. So in pursuit of that in, the CDC issued the mask mandate.

But the mandate exceeded the CDC's statutory authority. We'll talk about that a little bit and what this judge found there, which was interesting. Improperly invoked a good cause exception to notice and comment rulemaking. That's, again, the Administrative Procedures Act. And failed to adequately explain its decisions. Because our system does not permit agencies to act unlawfully, even in the pursuit of desirable ends, the court declares unlawful and vacates the mask mandate.

And we saw immediate reaction. I want to get your calls about this. 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. You know, as a parent of young children, that whole idea of having to keep those masks on them, you know, and how to do that, and then you're getting thrown off flights if you can't do it, I mean, there were consequences here. And it was not so, a lot of times that was people or people had medical conditions that shouldn't have been wearing masks in the first place. This whole idea that, again, no one's going to force you not to take a mask. Now, Daniel just wrote on Facebook, is this real? No more mask on airplanes, really?

Yes, it is real. Now, an airline could still come back and say, we're going to require it. That's a private business. But so far, all the major airlines, the big names, they ended the mandate like while the flights were in air. And you've seen maybe the videos of the flight attendants walking down the aisle of the plane, trashing people's masks. So what you also saw was almost universally, except for some liberals crying out online, which again, they can wear their mask they want. Universally, people saying, thank you, off.

I mean, the mask came off. The corporate America was also in line with average America, everyday America, all of us, the normal folks out there. And again, we'll take your calls on it, 1-800-684-3110, the beginning of the end of these mandates. 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. Here the case was titled Health Freedom Defense Fund versus Joseph R. Biden in his official capacity as President of the United States. This vacated the mask mandate immediately, and we saw the reactions to this immediately as well. And I ask this question as well to you, not just about the airlines, not just about travel, but do you believe this is the beginning of the end of these mandates?

Because even when we see these new variants now, and occasionally people get it, it seems like it's much more mild, and that's a good thing. And that we're kind of learning to live with this, and it's time to move on. And I think these kind of steps, for instance, the Biden administration didn't immediately come out and say, we're going to take this emergency appeal to the appellate court. They still could, but we're only the next morning. That's why I think this is still news you've got to cover carefully, because they still could decide we're going to appeal this on an emergency basis.

They could be writing it right now as we speak. But then they get into a mess, because they're also trying to drop the Title 42 protection at the border. You see how this all ties together. We're going to give you some border numbers later in the broadcast.

They are staggering. I want you to share this broadcast with your friends and family so people are informed and they understand what the dropping of this mask mandate means. And the airlines were begging the administration for this, but also it involves the airports themselves and other methods of travel. So, again, places like Amtrak and these other decisions. Now, businesses could still decide they want to have it.

I don't think there's many left that will, outside of the medical world and hospitals and doctors' offices to some extent. But outside of that, you had these industries saying, first of all, they regulated themselves. It was the Biden administration that came in in January of 2021 and forced this guidance on people. And when we say in the opinion where it says that the CDC doesn't have this authority, it really seizes upon this idea that the CDC wanted to expand this authority and needed to explain it.

But even if you gave it deference, it's not there. They're really more about sanitation and keeping property items clean. How do you keep your business place clean?

What kind of filter systems should you use? The mask itself isn't a cleaning device. So that's part of where it rests on. And it also rests on the fact that they tried to do this in an emergency way and then go around the Administrative Procedures Act, which requires certain dates and times and comment periods. And they said they didn't have the authority to do that. So ultimately, they're losing on all accounts.

And the question is, do they fight back? The phone number to talk to us on air is 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Gary on YouTube just asked, is this a political decision? Election year Dems need good things to happen to keep in power. This is not a political decision. This was the judicial branch telling the Biden administration, you don't have the authority to require these masks on the federal, where you've got federal oversight of travel. So that's airlines, some travel on waterways, and also, of course, you know, some of the railways.

It's not everything because some is controlled by your state, like the subway systems and things like that are controlled differently. 1-800-684-3110 if you want to talk to us on air. So let's go to Tim. Let's start taking people's questions from California on Line 1.

Hey, Tim. Thank you for taking my call. I'm so thankful the judge made the right decision because this mask mandate, it's a mandate, it's unconstitutional.

Now, what do I have to do? I ride paratransit and they require I have to wear a mask. It's unconstitutional.

What do I have to do to let them know I'm not going to wear a mask? If that's controlled by a state under the authority of your state or under the authority of like a city or municipality, this ruling does not apply to them. This applies to the CDC and where the federal government had control. So if you're living in a state or a city that is still requiring this, you will not get relief from this. I'm not saying you could not file a lawsuit. There's potential that you could now that you've got some more precedent here. But also the second part to that is remember nothing that this judge did forced Delta Airlines to announce, you know, on its flights, take your mask off. That business could still say we think it's in our best interest to have these masks on. And if you want to travel with us, you need to.

You need to wear it. Here's the limits. Here's the age.

Here's the requirements. So they could have done that. What is astonishing here is that we usually talk about the big corporate world, especially the big public facing companies.

We see a lot of woke culture lately and not on this issue, not on this issue. They were they were ready to go. In fact, I want to take Crystal's call out of Nevada online, too. Hey, Crystal, welcome to Seco. You're on the air. Hello. How's it going?

We're good. So I work at the airport and literally I'm a gate agent and the pilot just he was so ecstatic that he just he said, there's no more masks. And they had all taken him off and the passengers were coming off with no mask.

And it was amazing. I had just heard about it was within half an hour. Yeah. That's why I was saying, Crystal, I mean, I want to talk to you for a second here, because this this happened immediately. I mean, basically as quickly as possible, as soon as it was announced and it was kind of clear that the mask could come off, the mask came off overwhelmingly. Most people said, I don't want this anymore.

And so did the corporations like the company you work for, Crystal. Right. I mean, they're saying and they're saying it's optional in the airport. But yeah, they're just everybody. It's always been optional in the airport. I mean, there are people from other countries where that's more common.

And you see people in the airport pretty regularly, especially airports that get a lot of international travel. People who decide to do that. That's a personal decision. I have no problem with that. If people's are immunocompromised, they need to continue wearing masks. They feel like they do if they feel better. But great.

Go ahead. That's it. Again, give the corporations the flexibility, like if there is some real issue with this down the road or, you know, I don't think, you know, with covid, it seems like these right now, even when there's new variants are not as intense.

But let's say they do get more intense. These companies did the right thing well before Joe Biden was President. And now they're asked to do the right thing here. How could the Biden administration possibly say we want to keep Americans mask while they're traveling? But we're not going to worry about illegal border crossing, which, by the way, the numbers are just they release the numbers.

Get this. At the same time, all the mass mandate info is coming out. So you weren't getting as much coverage on how insane it is in our southern border right now and out of control. These numbers are we're going to get into all those numbers.

We get back in the next segment of the broadcast. We continue to take your phone calls on the mask mandate, also on the immigration issue when we get to that. But I do think it's important that you all understand that the mask mandate specifically, specifically did not come in place under like the Trump administration. It was not so it's been around for three years at this federal level. This is something Biden administration did, which the airlines themselves had started to oppose a couple of months ago and were testifying before Congress. Let me go to Paul in North Carolina online for Hey, Paul.

Hey, how's it going? My whole question is, during the little intro, you were saying that privately owned businesses or companies could go back to enforce a mask mandate, but airlines technically are not private companies because they're publicly traded and they do receive funding from the federal government. So they still they still are not they're not government entities. So they are in a sense, while they are publicly traded, they are companies that get to make the decisions themselves. So there's a difference between the government saying, OK, you don't have to do this anymore. But a company saying, well, we want you to. And that's that is a very big legal difference. So, again, whether the company's publicly traded, whether it's a private company, they get to make decisions on that. So, again, the non government out there is what we're talking about here.

You don't even have to get into those specifics of are they publicly traded or not. It's the company could set rules that it feels are best practice for them. They didn't have to immediately say, everybody, throw your mask away. They said, we got to take some time on this, get some more legal analysis on this and figure out where the Biden administration is going before we start again, asking people do that instead, though, what we saw. And I think it was a good thing for the country we saw in mass.

People say it's time, you know, we're ready to throw the mask away. But it is explaining to everybody hope out there that the balance between where the federal government does have control, where the states and municipalities have control. So like a subway system in New York, this does not affect New York.

This case would not affect New York or the reasoning behind it, because it was about a federal federal act. But it also again, it is not forcing companies to take on or not use a policy. They decided, you know what, we're not going to enforce, we don't want to, we're not going to enforce this anymore. They were, I think to Paul's point, they were doing this on their own.

They didn't have to have the federal government telling them they could do it. They were already doing it. They were saying, you know, part of a requirement to fly on our airline is you got to follow our rules.

Here's one of the rules. They were doing that well before the Biden administration tried to mandate this, if you want to talk to us on air with questions 1-800-684-3110, that's 1-800-684-3110. We're going to get into the immigration issue as well. If you haven't seen these numbers, and most people probably have not yet, because it came out the same time as this mask issue.

They are staggering and putting us on just a very dangerous path at our southern border with drugs, with human trafficking, a migrant crisis, a humanitarian crisis, towns and cities that are being overrun, and we're right on that track. Of course, they don't want you paying attention to that. Support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. Double the impact your donation if you can donate right now, if you're financially able to. ACLJ.org.

Donate today. We're 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, the 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 Secular. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. Let me again read from the judge's opinion before we get to the immigration issue. We'll take your calls on this one, the mass mandate questions. So if you have questions about what this means, give us a call. In most of your hypotheticals right now, I think we can give you a pretty clear answer even though this case just came out last night.

1-800-684-3110. Remember the ACLJ, we were on the front and center representing the Heritage Foundation on the business vaccine mandate. In those cases, remember 100 or more employees and you had to check your employees.

You were going to have to keep a register of each week of all these different employees and who was this and who was that. And that we won in federal court all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. So I mean the idea here, folks, I think you are starting to see a nation turn the tide.

It doesn't mean the rest of the world is going to be with us and it can certainly be different depending on where you live in the country. But that's what federalism is all about. Your state could be very different than my home state.

1-800-684-3110. If you've got questions about what this judicial decision means for mask mandates, 1-800-684-3110. But if you read from the opinion, here's what's clear. The CDC issued a mask mandate because the public has a strong interest in combating the spread of COVID-19. But the mandate exceeded the CDC's statutory authority, improperly evoked the good cause exception to notice and comment rulemaking, that's the Administrative Procedures Act, and failed to adequately explain its decisions. They also went to say that this wasn't some gray area with the CDC.

There's something called Chevron deference. This wasn't just a gray area where then you favor the government's interpretation. That when you really look at what the CDC has authority to do, it's like surface cleaning. You know, if something you touch or what kind of cleaning solutions you need in certain areas or air filtration systems. By the way, airplanes have some of the most, some of the most safest places to be.

It was hard, I think, for people to wrap their head around that, the science there. But because of the air filtration system that are inside airplanes, it was the entire time during this pandemic, one of the safest places to be with a group of people because of the filtration system that's in the system. It goes on to say, because our system does not prevent agencies like the CDC to act unlawfully, even in pursuit of desirable ends, the court declares unlawful and vacates the mask mandate. Let me go to Marie's question in Tennessee on Line 2. Hey, Marie, welcome to Sekulow. You're on the air.

Thank you for taking my call. And this is personal for me, but my family, do you think that this decision is another step in the right direction to finally getting rid of these vaccine mandates, even though the Supreme Court has ruled for businesses over 100 people and we're getting ready to let Title 42 expire, but you still have private businesses in the state of Tennessee who are requiring vaccine mandates. They've dropped everything else. Well, see, that's the difference. You're talking about private businesses, and you see the legal challenges there. They're very different than the challenges at the state level. Now, it's interesting, the Supreme Court, when it comes to the military, they threw out another case yesterday at the U.S. Supreme Court.

They're not going to consider it about a vaccine mandate for people in the military. So that's where it goes kind of federally. Now, when you're talking about private businesses, again, they get to make decisions. Now, most of them have exceptions within.

Almost all of them do. And because they have exceptions for people who either are immunocompromised, can't take a vaccine, or have some religious objection to it, they have procedures in place if they are still going to mandate this. I do think this does, though, through the bigger picture, it does, as a country, it's important mentally how you look at things. As a country, it pushes us forward. We now know we have the technology, we have the medicine, we have the medical capability, we have vaccines. We have all these things to combat COVID, and we can move forward as a nation and get this return to normalcy.

Let me tell you something, folks. Depending on where you live, you've already kind of had a return to normalcy. And it was kind of, maybe when you went to the airport, it was like, oh, I've got to go do this again. But you had a return to normalcy, let's say if you were in red states. If you're in deeply blue states, you still haven't returned there, and the federal courts aren't the ones that are going to force that.

That's going to have to be decisions at the state and local level, and that's the way our government is supposed to work. Let me go to Thad Bennett in Washington, D.C., right away. I mean, Thad, there was an interesting report of our friend Shannon Bremen, Fox News. They were at DCA, which is the airport right inside, right across from the District of Columbia.

It's the closest airport to our nation's capital. It's right there in Virginia. And she said about 90 percent of people there still had masks on.

They weren't being forced to do it, but they did it. And I think that's going to be a lot. You can kind of pick where you are in the country, and it's going to be different based off that. Though I think there's a lot of virtue signaling going on with the Washington, D.C. crowd.

What I'm more interested to see is what happens in places like L.A. and New York and those kind of cities where if most people on those flights and in those airports are tossing it, too. Well, that's perfectly appropriate, right, Jordan? I mean, if you were all about freedom, so if you want to wear a mask in certain situations or you are immunocompromised, absolutely, you should be able to do that same thing with a vaccine. You should be able to take it.

You should be able to not take it. But, Jordan, I will tell you, even in a place like Washington, D.C., where maybe a higher percentage will continue to wear the mask, it was still very interesting to me that the D.C. Transit Authority did almost immediately drop their mandate for mask wearing on the metro, on D.C. buses, really the same as the airlines did. So I think it comes back to the fact that so many of them were actually relying on the CDC, and they had said for so long that the reason they have this mandate in place is because the CDC was requiring it. So when it got thrown out, they really did have to bend to the will of their consumers. Look, consumers may choose to wear it, but even here, Jordan, even in Washington, D.C., consumers were ready for the forced wearing to end, and so that has happened today.

That's interesting, too, because you've got a federal-local mix there in Washington, D.C., but they must have felt like because of that mix, this had a bigger requirement on them than it would like the New York MTA and the Metro Transit Authority there, things like that. But what is important here to note, and what Thanh said, is you're starting to see the shifts. I think we're into immigration in the second half hour. We just didn't have time to get to it in this half hour, but let me just tell you, these numbers are shocking, so we'll keep Thanh with us. I mean, just absolutely shocking.

And, Thanh, I want to tie it to this real quick. I think the toughest thing the Biden administration's got here to explain is they're dropping Title 42, which was the pandemic rule for our border, which allowed quicker expulsions. And it empowered our border patrol agents and ICE agents to get things done quickly. How do you drop that and then also fight to keep Americans' masks on an airline? It's going to be very interesting, isn't it, Jordan, because even at yesterday's press conference, Jen Psaki said that the ruling was disappointing. Well, if it's disappointing, are they going to appeal that? Are they going to appeal that because the pandemic is still raging and so they need this mandate? If they do that, Jordan, how in the world are they going to turn around and say, we're also going to continue to abandon Title 42 because there is no pandemic.

There is no problem. There's just not a consistency in this policy. Jordan, I'll tell you, this is not about the pandemic anymore. This is about a narrative. This is about appealing to certain demographics within their voter base.

It's not based on the science. It's going to have to be both one direction or the other. But right now, Jordan, that's not where they're at. All right, folks, again, what is the Biden administration to do?

I mean, they set themselves up for these disasters. We've said the whole time you can't put these pandemic mandates on people and then drop it for the southern border. We get back from this break when you hear the numbers out of the southern border, which, by the way, they released right when this case started breaking last night, right when the news started coming out about it.

Oh, they released the border numbers. They're constantly trying to bury all of this and the bad news away. But we're getting it out there.

And that is part of what we do through this broadcast is get you the truth, get you the actual information and explain it so that you take away something from these broadcasts. Support our work at 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. I'm talking about freedom. I'm talking about freedom. We will fight for the right to live in freedom. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome back to Sekulow.

We are taking your phone calls, too. If you've got questions about this mass mandate case, listen, when a federal court rules this way, it does open up a lot of questions people have. Now, what we saw, interestingly enough, was TSA and the airlines quickly dropped these mandates. And in some cities, like Thanh was talking about the Washington, D.C. transportation systems there, like the metro and buses and trains. And so there you have one issue. Then you've got what happens in New York with the subway or out in L.A. with any kind of transportation. And this does not directly affect those. They've still, you know, you still have a locality that has control and states that have control. So you have to kind of go and look at each one and see if they might still take a decision like this and say, well, because of this decision, we're not going to do this anymore.

But there are some places where it actually has a requirement to drop and other places where it's just going to, I think, encourage people to drop. Now, what we're also getting into the second half hour of the broadcast, I hope if you're watching the broadcast, share it with your friends and family. You know, whether you're watching on Rumble, on Facebook or YouTube. Again, I encourage you to click that share button because the news on immigration is also just staggering. And Thanh, we're going to get into this more in the next segment of the broadcast. But we're seeing the highest number last month since Joe Biden took office of the actual people encountered at the southern border. That does not include an estimate of how many people got through without being encountered by federal agents. Jordan, this is unbelievable. Listen to these numbers. In the month of March, the Customs and Border Patrol said that they encountered 221,303 migrants. Jordan, that's 28 percent higher than last March.

And get this. This is what I think the most telling comparison is. It's six and a half times what it was in March of 2020, two years ago. So, you know, to say that there is still a record number surging at the border and that there is still a crisis on our border, I think would be an understatement. Jordan, look, it's just going to compound if the track that we're on right now continues, because we touched on this just a bit in the last segment of the broadcast. But the current plan is to walk away from Title 42 removals, which accounted for almost 100,000 over that stretch.

So, Jordan, I mean, you're talking about numbers that we've never, ever seen before. We're talking about intentionally not enforcing, intentionally not removing. And then we're going to layer on top of that, laying down an authority that exists in statute for removals at the border. So we have a mounting crisis and it is heading in only one direction. If anyone thinks that this is going away without a change in policy, these numbers should really concern you. Yeah, I mean, folks, when we go through this, I think you'll be shocked. But also, you know what to expect out of this administration.

But, you know, it's getting to a point. I think Texas, by doing what Texas is doing, is setting up a potential court challenge again to the Supreme Court. And since we had that Arizona case where the Supreme Court decided that, you know, because of the Constitution, based off Article 1 of the Constitution, the legislative powers, immigration and borders control is up to the federal government. States do not play a role unless the federal government really deputizes or brings them in to the process. But we have a different court now and we also have even a longer record of just the crises that this is happening. It's not just a border crisis, but it's a crisis for these states who are taking in the vast majority of these individuals who are coming in through the southern border.

And it's, again, the pandemic, with Title 42, at least our agents were able to act more quickly. Now, by this administration, they've been demonized, hampered. And the last remaining power they had, remember, they've canceled all the other Trump administration policies. We're in court over that, even policies on human trafficking. But they also, they also want to remove Title 42 protections.

They wanted to keep, they were in court fighting to keep U-mask on an airplane while at the same time saying illegal migrants at the southern border should not be, there should not be an expulsion program because of a pandemic in our country and the world. We'll take your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. How's immigration and these issues affecting you and your community?

I'd love to hear those reports so people understand. And support the work of the ACLJ. We're in a matching challenge month. Double the impact of your donation at ACLJ.org. 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, the 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. Alright, getting into the border numbers, and if you want to talk to us here, we've got questions about this 1-800-684-3110. So migrant encounters in March at the southern border topped 221,000. It's the highest number since Joe Biden took office. Just to put these in perspective, Customs and Border Protections, they said in a court filing on Friday that 221,303 migrants were encountered at the southern border in March. So statistically, that's approximately 28% higher than March of 2021, when there were 173,000 migrants encountered. Then you go back to March of 2020. Trump years, 34,000. 34,000.

Now, that's still a lot of encounters, but that's not 221,000. So you see the policies by the Trump administration. The tone. The idea that we are going to send you back, remain in Mexico, Operation Talon, all those issues. Did it stop all illegal migration?

Of course not. That's why the wall was being built to assist in that, to stop more of the illegal immigration. But you can see in the numbers itself how your tone, how your policies, how supporting the Border Patrol and ICE, instead of demonizing them, does turn the numbers around. That's still a very high number, but it's nothing like 221,000.

And that's the people they actually have encountered, that's engaged with. That's not an estimate of how many people got through without being encountered. But the numbers, they get worse than that. It's bigger than any of the numbers last year. So even when you got into the summer months where you see the highest amount of border crossing, illegal border crossing, especially under this administration, it peaked at 213,000. So still, again, this is over. This is kind of the first, one of the first months of the year where it's warm enough, where you start seeing these caravans and the human smugglers, the traffickers, coyotes, actually try to utilize the process.

And so that's what they're doing here, and so you start to see the numbers stick up. So if you're already in March, higher than where you were in July of last year, and you're dropping one of the key protections, Title 42, which I'm going to go to Sam Bennett about because I think there's a lot of questions about is that going to be dropped or not, because there is some serious pushback. Let me go to Sam Bennett right now in Washington, D.C. We talked about that a little bit today.

We talked about it in previous broadcasts. But there is mounting opposition to removing the Title 42 tool that enabled our border agents to more quickly expel people. Yeah, there sure is, Jordan. It's happening on a bipartisan basis in the United States Senate. Look, I have no doubt that the Biden administration is planning to walk away from Title 42 enforcement. I think they will do it unless someone stops them. And how do you stop them, Jordan? You would have to statutorily.

So you'd have to pass a law that says you can't do it. Well, James Lankford and Kyrsten Sinema and a number of others, by the way. Actually, I think it's worth reading this list, Jordan. This is the list of senators who introduced this legislation, and actually they're building on support since then. But here's the list. James Lankford, Kyrsten Sinema, John Cornyn, Mark Kelly.

Of course, he's up for reelection in Arizona. John Thune, Joe Manchin, Shelley Moore Capito, Jon Tester, Rob Portman, Maggie Hassan and Tom Tillis have introduced a piece of legislation, Jordan, that this makes perfect sense, right? It would require that all COVID-19 related national states of emergency be lifted before Title 42 is officially terminated. So this goes back to the conversation that you and I just had about the CDC mask mandate. Jordan, if it makes sense that they are going to appeal that ruling and they say that there should still be a mask mandate on American citizens, then how in the world can they say that there is no pandemic, no emergency at the border, and they're going to walk away from Title 42 enforcement?

And yet that is exactly what they're saying. Now, can this pass, Jordan? I think if it came up in the United States Senate, I do think it would clear the 60 votes needed to pass in the United States Senate. Then, of course, you've got the question of the United States House. I don't think that Speaker Pelosi would schedule a vote. However, if 218 members of the United States House were to sign a discharge petition, she'd have no choice. She would have to put the legislation on the floor of the House.

And Jordan, I think if this piece of legislation actually came to a vote in the United States House, I think it would pass. Yeah, I mean, and this is because in the House, you got everybody's up for reelection. In the Senate, you get about a third of people up for reelection, some open seats mixed in there as well.

Certainly in the House where you've seen about 30 Democrats retire. But I tend to agree with that. I think that there is agreement that this is the wrong time to remove this program without a backstop. That, you know, if we're really truly coming out of the pandemic, and that's what the administration believes, one, stop fighting in court over the mask mandate you put in place a year ago, that airlines were already dealing with and had come to the conclusion and told the federal government, we think this needs to end, Biden administration ignored that. But then on this issue, where they want to remove Title 42, I would say this. If you were someone who said, let's get out of this pandemic mindset, before you'd remove Title 42, you'd have, okay, what are we going to replace this with?

What are we going to do? You know, all the policies, and the Trump administration had the policies in place, like Remain in Mexico and these agreements with other countries. They had policies that empowered our border patrol and our agents. But I just got a letter, Than, from Congressman Jim Jordan to Secretary Mayorkas of Homeland Security.

He's finally agreed to testify before the committee. And this is what they want, basically, is what is the plan here? And what programs are you running to actually protect the border?

And conversely, what programs are you running to make the border more porous? Yeah, he's right on to be asking those questions. That testimony is going to happen on April 28th at the House Judiciary Committee. And look, this is the man that has to have a plan. He's the Secretary of Homeland Security.

He's the one that's got to have it. And look, you know, Title 42, Jordan, as you know, it's a tool. It is a tool available for the Department of Homeland Security to handle a pandemic situation and to remove people crossing at the border. In the month of March, we read this before, but I just want to give people what's at stake here. In the month of March, there were 109,549 removals, expulsions under Title 42. So when Secretary Mayorkas comes before the House Judiciary Committee, Jordan, that is the very first question I would ask him. Okay, you're going to walk away from Title 42 enforcement.

We know by the very numbers that one of your agencies has reported, you're going to have about 110,000 every single month that up until now you were removing under Title 42. Mr. Secretary, what is your plan for handling those 110,000 migrants every single month? Jordan, as of now, we haven't seen a plan for that.

He should answer that question on April 28th. We talked yesterday on the broadcast about the 23 people who were apprehended last year. They were on the terror watch list. They were actually apprehended. So again, with all of these, you have to then ask the question, how many people aren't being apprehended because they're so overwhelmed at the southern border?

I mean, if you get 220,000 people that you're encountering in a month, how many people do you not have the resources to encounter, to put that in quotes, because that can mean a lot of different things. Listen to Peter Doocy ask Jen Psaki about the terror issue and the people who are getting away. We have new reporting that at least 23 people apprehended at the southern border in 2021 are on the terror watch list. Why do you guys think it is that somebody on a terror watch list would want to get into the United States undetected?

Well, I can't make an assessment of that. But what I can tell you is that your data you're citing here means the Border Patrol was doing their job. I mean, they apprehended people at the border. 2,000 illegal immigrants a day got away last month. Are you saying that you can say with certainty none of them are on a terror watch list?

Here's what we're talking about. Encounters we know of suspected terrorists attempting to cross the southern border, they're very uncommon. We're talking about a few dozen annual encounters at most.

And these encounters represent significantly less than the 0.01% of total encounters per fiscal year in recent years. But I'd note these individuals, these 23 people, the Border Patrol, they stopped them. They prevented them from getting into the country. They're keeping our homeland and keeping us safe. That's wonderful talking points, except they don't give them the backing to really do their job. And we've seen that from reports from Border Patrol agents and ICE agents.

But think about that other number, the 2,000 a day fan that just get through. And so, yeah, they're not all terrorists. Most of the people are looking for a better economic situation. But it doesn't mean, again, that they should be cutting people in line who are waiting in line for that purpose. And they're coming from all over the world. We start to see that more and more at the southern border. But when you get 2,000 plus a day who you know, that's their estimate of they're not being encountered, they're not being stopped.

And then she tries to say, I don't know why the terrorists want to get here. You put these two absurd numbers together and you realize we have no idea who's in our country. But we do know there are people in our country who want to do us harm. Well, even that 2,000 number is incredibly low, Jordan, because gotaways mean they were on their radar. Maybe they saw them, they picked them up on surveillance, they pursued them, but they weren't able to catch them. Well, what about the people at the cross that never got on your radar? What if you never picked them up on surveillance?

What if they never crossed the path of a border patrol agent? Jordan, none of those figures are in these numbers. I also think it's incredibly naive, probably intentionally naive, Jordan, to talk about how there aren't any terrorists that evaded these numbers. Jordan, when you're on the terror watch list, you are skilled, proficient, and actually practiced at trying to evade law enforcement. So in the gotaways and in the ones that never make it onto the radars, Jordan, the percentage of those who are going to be on the terror watch list, I virtually guarantee you the percentage of them is going to be higher on that list than on the ones that were detained. Folks, we're fighting on this issue. We're fighting in federal court on this issue to secure our borders, to get the information that you need, why this administration dropped policies that were working. Our sense is that it was really just because, well, they were done on Trump's policies.

They didn't care if they were working or not or if they created a better humanitarian situation. Support the work of the ACLJ. We're in a matching challenge right now. Donate 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. 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. Hi, welcome back to Sekulow. For some folks, we've hit, of course, the mask issue. And to give you an example, too, of what came out of an airport, this is Nashville's airport B&A, and it said the leadership at Nashville.

This came out in the evening yesterday, around 5 o'clock Eastern time. The leadership at Nashville International Airport has monitored developments this morning's federal court ruling, overturning face mask requirements for travelers. B&A understands that the TSA is not currently appealing the court's ruling. Therefore, it's in B&A's understanding that there is no longer a mask requirement.

Check in with your carriers regarding the airline's specific requirements. So there you see the difference between, again, where the federal role is, where the management of the airport's role is, and, of course, then the airline itself's role. So you've got these complicating factors, but what is clear is that the major airlines, the mask came off. So we got into that. We got into these just staggering immigration numbers. I mean, when we talk about it, we're going to talk about an update on what's happened in Ukraine. You think about the Russian invasion there. The amount of people they're encountering at the southern border are more than the Russian soldiers who have been sent into Ukraine.

A month. So think about what our country is just having to deal with people-wise. The strains on your infrastructure, the strains on your justice system, which are already there in the courts, the strains on your policing, your local communities. I mean, this is not a number that just quietly disperses. So, again, when we talk about all these issues, I think it's always important to keep those numbers in perspective as well.

I want to go to Wes Smith. I mean, Wes, first, we continue to see violence in Israel. So we saw a rash of mostly gun attacks that we haven't seen in years there, in a scale of just a matter of a few weeks with, I think, 16 people got killed there. Now we've seen more rocket fire out of the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip and Israel having to respond. These aren't the number one news right now because we've got war in Europe.

Right, yeah. It's still a very volatile part of the world, and Israel remains under threat 24-7, 365. What happened this past weekend, the Jewish celebration of Passover, the Christian celebration of Easter coincided, and the Israeli police were escorting religious tourists into the Temple Mount area when Palestinian youth began throwing stones at the police and at the tourists.

The police responded with rubber bullets and tear gas. Hamas and Islamic Jihad began to issue threats and, of course, fired the rocket into Israeli airspace. Israel responded by attacking some Hamas targets where there were no people just to send a message to knock it off and stop.

But here's the thing. Here's the broader picture. Iran is still a threat to Israel and to peace in the region. They support and train both Hezbollah and Hamas, and on Monday, while all this is going on, Jordan, and this rocket is fired, the Iranian President, President Ebrahim Raisi, said that Iran will strike at the heart of Israel, that's his quote, if Israel does anything to interfere with what's going on in Iran. What is going on in Iran?

They are in negotiations in Vienna. They are really, really moving rapidly towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. President Biden is really considering lifting sanctions on Iran, and meanwhile, Israel has vowed they will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. So this is this volatile background, and what's interesting about this is Israel, under threat, trying to defend itself, Iran trying to get a nuclear weapon, Israel actually has improved relations with all the Arab countries in the region, something the Biden administration ignores, and Iran, they resent the improved relations. It's another one of those situations, because the Trump administration did it, it's like they don't want to capitalize on it.

They could be capitalized. They could be getting their own victories out of those Abraham Accords economically for the U.S. when it came to the oil issue, and they wanted to get the Saudis to pump more. Instead of leveraging that, they put the Saudis in a position where they were saying, no, we're not going to do that. And that's because they don't trust that this administration is going to make good on those Abraham Accords, the security requirements that came with those Accords as well. But what you are seeing is the Gulf states that were part of that and Israel continue to build on those Accords. So they're not waiting for the Biden administration to do something about it.

It's good for their people, so they're doing that. And to turn to the 54th day of the war in Ukraine, most people didn't think we would get to the 54th day if Russia decided to invade it the way they did, but we are there now. What we've talked about and what people keep hearing is that Russia has kind of put their assets, they've kind of reset up to an attack on eastern Ukraine.

They're looking towards a key date in May, their victory day from World War II that they celebrate with the marches down the Red Square in the military. So we appear to be on the edge of seeing a new Russian offensive. Yeah, as a matter of fact, actually yesterday the Russian forces launched a brand new campaign in eastern Ukraine in the Donbas region.

They have moved 76 of what they call their battalion tactical groups into the area. It translates to about 60,000 soldiers that they moved from the northern part of Ukraine into eastern Ukraine. They have launched a new offensive, and what is interesting is that while they're doing this in eastern Ukraine, they have continued to bombard cities all over Ukraine, including cities that are 40 miles from the Polish border in western Ukraine.

It's like a softening up campaign. Russia is trying to deplete Ukraine's air defense systems, and so they are launching attacks all over Ukraine, but meanwhile on the ground in eastern Ukraine, they've launched this brand new offensive. One interesting development about, though, Russia trying to diminish Ukraine's air defenses. It was reported yesterday by our Pentagon that we have started issuing howitzers and training to Ukrainian soldiers, not just regular artillery rounds.

The army has developed what they call a high velocity projectile, HVP. This is a round fired from a traditional cannon, a howitzer, but it can take down cruise missiles, it can take down aircraft, and we are now providing those to Ukraine, trying to give them some air defense systems. So the level of the weaponry that they're starting to receive, because this I think was a big point yesterday, was in we had been kind of putting together for them in these weapons shipments that we were a part of and maybe spending money on, but they were a lot of Soviet air weapons that they were trained on, they knew how to use. So we were going to those former Soviet-bloc countries and saying, you know, we'll fund you this, we'll replenish your weapons supply. Now we've seen, and I'm sure the Kremlin will call it an escalation, and this is going to be an interesting way to see their response to the U.S. because the now weaponry, it's American-made weaponry that is going to be going into Ukraine. Yeah, this is new. It's a new development. We're providing them with U.S. weapons and the training to fire those weapons, and that has not happened thus far until now in our support for Ukraine.

Final question for you on this, Wes. Now that we're in the 54th day, we see Russia repositioning, relaunching attacks yesterday, focusing in on eastern Ukraine, but also we're seeing the missile attacks, like you said, all over in places where they weren't even... It's like every time people say that, they hit somewhere far off, just like Lviv I think it was yesterday, which has been kind of a sanctuary city within Ukraine, and then seven people got killed with a missile attack. So every time you think they're moving to one area, they still remind you they can hit anywhere they want with their air capabilities and their ammunition capabilities, but also they've doubled down. Now, I think by saying, okay, we're going to reorganize and restart this conflict, they're not going anywhere right now.

No, no. The Russian way of war is still to target hospitals, churches, civilian population centers. They are continuing to do that and obviously violating the laws of war, committing war crimes as we speak. That situation, you take all the politics out of it, there should be a lot more being done at the international level to end the conflict. It just seems like internationally, the powers just aren't there.

Either they can't coalesce and come together, and the US is certainly not leading the way under the Biden administration. Support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. Double your impact. Matching challenge month, the entire month of April, that's at ACLJ.org. Donate today. We'll talk to you tomorrow. 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.