In this episode, we delve into the growing tension between federal judges and the U.S. Supreme Court. Anonymous judges have voiced their concerns over the Supreme Court’s use of the ‘shadow docket’ and its implications on judicial authority. We explore why these judges feel sidelined and the constitutional framework that supports the Supreme Court’s decisions. Additionally, you’ll hear from our listeners as they engage with this complex issue. We also pivot to the alarming rise in crime across major U.S. cities. As the National Guard is deployed in Chicago to curb escalating violence, we discuss the pros and cons
SPEAKER 08 :
Today in America, judge not lest ye be judged by other judges. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Seculo. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Logan Sekulow.
SPEAKER 07 :
Welcome to Sekulow. We got a show for you today. That’s right. You may have heard the T as well. It’s not what you wrote for me to say. No, it was better.
SPEAKER 06 :
It was better.
SPEAKER 07 :
It took me a few takes to get that one, though, because it was a tongue twister, thanks to our team who was throwing out. Originally, I was just going to be like, judges be judging other judges. And they were like, no, you got to do a lest ye be judged by judges. It was good. And that’s really not true, because we’re talking about the justices. I mean, they are a judge. They don’t like being called that. I understand. I’ve been around them enough to know you don’t call a judge a justice or the other way around. Let’s talk about what this is, because in a rare interview, a bunch of anonymous, I guess you’d say.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 07 :
Judges, of course, you know, that’s how they got to do it because they protect their own butts. A bunch of judges saying, you know what? We don’t like that the Supreme Court is overruling our rulings. How dare they? Right. All of a sudden, our partisan rulings are being overrun by their partisan rulings.
SPEAKER 09 :
You’re seeing 12 federal judges that have given an interview to NBC News so that, you know, they chose a very fair national news organization. And they decided to air their grievances, so to speak, and say that they don’t like what is called the shadow docket of the Supreme Court. That’s the emergency docket when the justices are out of session, when things can still be brought before the court on an emergency basis. And these aren’t merits- briefs these aren’t big decisions these are things that are putting on hold lower court rulings but these 12 judges that decided to go speak anonymously to nbc news are saying hey this is dangerous that the supreme court is doing what they have full constitutional authority to do because it could put our lives in danger this is what i want to know what from these judges is uh versus the justices these are lower court judges that oftentimes uh
SPEAKER 06 :
Never get cases even heard by the Supreme Court that they saw. That’s one thing. The second part is, and of course the Supreme Court can overturn them. But the third part is what Will said. They’re not even overturning or looking at the merits. They’re saying, you know what? You made this decision that’s going to stop a national program from going into effect. How about we have a case first? let’s get the facts why don’t you hear the facts first before you issue a preliminary injunction that could stop like we talked about those nationwide injunctions that those are unconstitutional that those are not correct under the law and so the lower court judges are basically saying you took our power away to act like many supreme court justices sorry district court judges that works we respect your work you do a lot of the the groundwork and the trial work the hard work that goes into the legal profession But this anonymous group is just wannabe Supreme Court justices. That was the end game.
SPEAKER 07 :
There would be no Supreme Court.
SPEAKER 06 :
That’s why they didn’t put their name on it. You know why they didn’t put their name on it? Because if they did, they’d never be a nominee to the higher court. Maybe their district court. Maybe their circuit court. They certainly would never make it to the Supreme Court. They think they know better than the nine justices appointed by the President of the United States. Our system doesn’t work that way. It doesn’t matter what they think. It ultimately matters what the Supreme Court thinks about, usually, should something be allowed to continue or does it have to stop while we have the case? That’s it.
SPEAKER 07 :
Phone lines are open for you. I want to hear from you. 1-800-684-3110. Once again, that’s 1-800-684-3110. Have your voice on the air today. We’re also going to be talking about a few other topics, including the National Guard, whether they’re going to be called in to Chicago, what that’s going to look like. as well as some more here on the Supreme Court. But any topics really up for grabs today, if it’s in the news, we’ll talk about it. Of course, the work of the ACLJ continues. And we’re going to stand by that. Go to ACLJ.org right now. Support the work if you can. Join us in the fight, though, by just signing petitions. You can do that. A lot of great, easy, free way to do it. I know we’ve been telling you for a couple months now about our 35 years celebrating the ACLJ. Well, now we’re just going to say, hey, there’s a lot of great free ways you can get involved. Subscribe on YouTube. become a member of our email list there’s so many things you can do download the app there’s all of our content 100 of our content is available not behind a paywall because of donors and supporters that give and because of that we’re able to offer to you and all of your friends get them involved too all of this incredible free content that’s on aclj.org or your favorite platforms we’ll be right back Welcome back to Sekulow. I didn’t even say this at the beginning. I’m in studio. My brother Jordan Sekulow is in studio. And Will Haynes is joining us in studio as well. So we got a packed show. We’re going to restate because I know a lot of you are just joining us right now. I’m looking at the numbers. A lot of you who are joining us on YouTube just logged in after this first segment. So Will, let’s give a little breakdown of what’s going on when they see… Maybe a headline that says, Breaking Federal Judges Turn on the Supreme Court. What does that mean? Of course, judges have been in the news now for all of the Trump presidency on this term, as we’ve seen rogue judges do their thing. And now those rogue judges are even more upset that they’re being shut down, that they have a Supreme Court that not 100% of the time, but sometimes is ruling against their politics, if you will.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, and this is specifically referring to the emergency docket, what is sometimes called the shadow docket of the Supreme Court. This is when the Supreme Court is not in session. The end of their term happened in July. They don’t come back until October. So during this interim period. people can still take emergency motions to the Supreme court. These aren’t full merits cases. These aren’t getting to the real heart of these issues. It is basically asking for things like a stay on a lower court ruling so that the case can be then flushed out more within the entire court process. And the Supreme court has given president Trump and the administration the some what would be called victories of granting a stay or doing something that is in favor of them. But they still haven’t won the case. The case is nowhere close to being over. A lot of these things have to do with funding issues, whether the big one that was talked about was the Department of Education. There was a block on a lower court ruling that stopped them from shifting what the Department of Education looked like. But this interview is from what they say is a dozen federal judges that have voiced their concern to NBC News. They claim that they were appointed by both Democrat and Republican presidents, and they are serving around the country. And they are concerned that the chief justice could be doing more to defend the integrity of their work. And as well, they are concerned that these rulings that because it’s the emergency docket, There aren’t fully flushed out opinions per se. This isn’t giving a ruling on the merits of a case. They’re saying because sometimes it’s as short as because of the procedural rules here, the stay is granted and that that is giving fuel to the fire of what they’re claiming are threats against them and other issues. Jordan, it’s kind of shocking to hear federal judges run to the media in such a way like this.
SPEAKER 06 :
About procedural law. like ultimately the court could agree they’re not taking off the case by the way when something like this happens so as the case continues and they could ultimately come down with a decision and it moves on maybe we’re talking about appellate court and it moves on to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court ends up siding with one of these 12 judges that has complained about the Supreme Court issuing procedural rulings without explanation and again This is like, should the injunction go into place? Should there be a stay? It has nothing to do with the fact that these judges could ultimately be fully vindicated, probably oftentimes are, by the U.S. Supreme Court. And so what they’re mad about is that the Supreme Court would even consider part of their procedural decision-making as incorrect.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, and Jordan, that’s the other issue. A lot of them are saying, you know, they want more explanation from the Supreme Court, but in some ways that could harm the integrity of the Supreme Court. If they start issuing 30-page opinions about a procedural issue and then go into all this rationale, one, a lot of times, like you said, these aren’t necessarily indicating how the final merits will outcome, then the Supreme Court could find themselves in a bind. During this time when they aren’t in session, write something that could then be contradicted later when they get into the merits of the case, could also set up a situation where it lowers the trust or integrity in that final ruling because of a knee-jerk reaction or something that was written in a longer opinion about a procedural motion, that that wouldn’t be the proper way per se. Now, they have done longer explanations when it’s warranted, but for the vast majority of these, that isn’t how it should be done.
SPEAKER 06 :
No, it’s not how it should be done. And remember, you flip this around, as Will said, these were judges using procedural law to make merits-like decisions that would stop a program under the Trump administration, if it didn’t make it to an emergency docket, which most don’t, that could effectively stop a program for the entire remainder of the Trump administration, because the case might take a few years to get all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. What the court has done has prioritized Cases involving executive power disputes between states and the federal government, and between the separation of powers, of course, as well, inside the federal government. But what we’re seeing is a lot of state versus Trump. And so, of course, those are going to be priority cases because you have to make that decision. First, procedurally, are you going to allow this program to move forward? Do you believe it’s more likely than not that this could be found to be constitutional? And you can differ on that. And then you get to the merits and say, were we right when we thought quickly it might be more likely to be constitutional? Now that we’ve heard all the case, seen all the record, maybe not. Maybe we were wrong. Maybe we did miss something. That’s why the arguments and having the cases put out and all the evidence in the lower courts is so important for the Supreme Court to ultimately make these decisions. But this is just because the court… And President Trump and really the country have kind of knocked down this idea that you as a district court judge get to make decisions for the entire nation.
SPEAKER 07 :
Above the President of the United States. Or above the U.S.
SPEAKER 09 :
Supreme Court.
SPEAKER 07 :
Right.
SPEAKER 09 :
Here’s another angle to this as well. And this is where I kind of want to ding NBC News’ journalism on this because… It seems like they just rushed to print what these judges were saying. But they write this paragraph, lower court judges are handed contentious cases involving the Trump administration. They painstakingly researched the law to reach their rulings. And when they go against Trump, administration officials and allies criticize the judges in harsh terms. The government appeals to the Supreme Court with its 6-3 majority. And then it goes on to say that one judge said, it’s inexcusable they don’t have our backs about the Supreme Court. Where I think NBC News’ journalism needs to be ramped up a little bit is they should have asked every single one of these judges, did you rush to make a statement? Because you’re doing it now, saying that this is putting our lives in danger. Did you rush to make a statement to the media anonymously when Chuck Schumer said this in front of the Supreme Court about Supreme Court justices?
SPEAKER 02 :
I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.
SPEAKER 07 :
Of course, we know what then led after that, which were death threats, people coming up to their homes, people in the streets protesting in front of Supreme Court justices, because all that was to do was about, that was the leaked, right?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, no, that was specifically, I think it was prior to the leak, but it was while the Dobbs case was pending. And the majority leader of the Senate went in front of the Supreme Court of the United States and threatened justices, saying, you won’t know what hit you. And did we hear? And I don’t know. I genuinely don’t know. These are anonymous judges. But did they rush to the media to make a statement and say, this is unacceptable. This is a violation of the separation of powers. They are threatening, putting undue pressure on. And instead, what we do see is them rushing to the media here to say the Supreme Court doing what the Supreme Court is constitutionally able to do is threatening our lives.
SPEAKER 06 :
do this this is my favorite part of it so an anonymous Barack Obama appointed judge said that while the Supreme Court could do more to explain itself and certainly there’s a strong sense in the judiciary among judges ruling on these cases the court is leaving them out to dry they’re partially right to feel that way listen to this there’s a big but here but and this is a Barack Obama appointed judge The whole Trump derangement syndrome is a real issue. As a result, judges are mad at what Trump is doing or the manner he’s going about things, and they’re forgetting to stay in their lane. So surprise, surprise. A judge who actually signed on to this document just admitted that there are too many federal judges who are going outside of their duties because they are obsessed with being opposed to everything that is Donald Trump because they actually have… as this Barack Obama appointed judge said, a case of Trump derangement syndrome. That’s how real it is inside the federal judiciary. We know it was real inside the bureaucracy. Law school, sure, and where do most of these judges come out of? Somewhere between the bureaucracy, government, and law school.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, I think if you had a lot more judges like that who will admit the truth, then at least could say, hey, I disagree with you on that point of view, but here’s the issue we have at hand. Look, I don’t think anyone could look at the cases that have been ruled on the last six months ago. At least most of these were not done for political reasons.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, and I would also say this. Most judges do a great service to their country. They’re unknown. Their names are not known. And sometimes they do have to take on controversial cases that do make their names known. So any kind of violence is always wrong. But this idea that somehow the Supreme Court, by making decisions on temporary restraining orders, is somehow threatening their lives more than a murder case that they handle or drug cartel cases that they handle. Let’s be honest. The judges who, unfortunately, have been targeted, it’s by criminals.
SPEAKER 07 :
That’s right. Phone lines are open for you. We want to hear from you at 1-800-684-3110. The next segment, we’re also going to talk about the National Guard and whether that march into Chicago is coming. Whether that’s a good or a bad thing, we want to hear from you and your thoughts as well. We’ll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. Phone lines are lighting up. We’re going to do our best to get to as many of you as possible. We did want to move this conversation a bit to the crime situations happening in not only Washington, D.C., and what the Trump administration has done. Of course, it’s a little easier to federalize what’s going on in Washington, D.C., since they’re not a state. But, of course, there has been a push saying this is very successful. What if we start moving it into the cities that need it the most? Of course, we’re talking about a lot of our major metropolitan areas who are known for high increased level of crime, whether that would be Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York City. And the first one that seems to be on the list, which I understandably, Memphis, Tennessee, would be Chicago. Chicago, known for crime, known for some of the issues they’ve had over the years. Probably of those major cities, the closest one to the one we’re sitting in right now, and probably the one a lot of us visit the least. And I would say there’s probably a reason for that. As much as Chicago, I love it. By the way, I think it’s a great town. I would love to go more, but I think the overwhelming narrative of it is that it has extreme crime issues. And now comes the conversation. I think, look, our base, I’m sure, is a bit mixed on this, as they probably should be, which is the federalization of police forces and bringing in the National Guard to start doing the work that the police force in Chicago either won’t or can’t.
SPEAKER 06 :
I think there’s two ways to look at it. If you’re looking at temporarily coming in to get a situation to where it is the local police force and the police departments can actually handle the level of crime again on their own, that it hasn’t exploded to the point where the streets are just not safe, there’s not enough officers to do the jobs to protect the people we’re talking about from violent crime primarily. Right. And then once the military or the National Guard has come in and enough crime has been stopped, you then say, OK, we’ve used these new techniques. We’ve gotten these criminals off the streets. We’ve done what we can do. Now, can the local police force take this new start, if you will, and keep the numbers low? I don’t think anyone supports the idea of the military running any of our cities or towns. No one wants to see that. In fact, it’s a failure. that the military’s even having to do this, and the National Guard’s having to do it. But that is not what should be the norm in America. It should be like a shock and awe, get on the streets, shock and awe the criminal community, and then hand it back over to the police force that knows the location better, that knows the locality it serves the best, and try to let them then keep it at a manageable rate. And that’s what we’re seeing in Washington, D.C. Bring down the carjackings, which means bring down the violent crimes and gun crimes. Can they then keep it there once the National Guard moves out? And it’s a good test then to see, do we have the right kind of policing going on? Not martial law. No one wants that in the United States. If it’s ever used, it’s for true emergencies. And even in this situation, it’s being done quickly. And a lot of the people who are saying, oh, no, this is the end, Really, it just seems like people, less crimes are being committed.
SPEAKER 09 :
Doesn’t look like anybody’s civil rights are being violated. And one of the differences that we’re seeing when it comes to Chicago, and Jordan, you and I talked about this on Tuesday after the weekend when you saw how violent of a Labor Day weekend that Chicago had. Over 57 shootings, eight, seven or eight deaths because of those shootings. And that was just one weekend. We talk about the resources it needs.
SPEAKER 07 :
That’s not an uncommon number.
SPEAKER 09 :
Right. But that’s talked about the resources it takes to one, then investigate all of those shootings, which take away police from other areas of policing. But there’s one angle of this that isn’t being talked about a lot. But we here at the ACLJ are very much aware of and fighting against is that in Chicago, you have a problem that we are seeing where when the police also are being used. for things that they shouldn’t be used for. We have a trial one week from today representing two street preachers that were arrested for sharing the gospel on a busy street. exercising their first amendment right they were not louder than the traffic and we are now having to go to court to defend them in their case one week from today we already were able to defend successfully one of their friends who was arrested for the same thing On top of that defense that we have next week, we have a federal lawsuit against the city of Chicago because of their pattern of targeting these street preachers. So we understand that it’s not just they don’t have the resources or their resources are strained. It’s also that the resources they do have, Jordan, are targeting the wrong thing. When you have that many… When you have that many shootings and deaths over Labor Day weekend and we’re having to worry about defending people trying to use their First Amendment rights next week in court, maybe there is a problem in your city.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah. And listen, I think the whole defund the police movement is tied directly to these cities that are having some of the worst crime that they’ve seen in the summertime kind of a crime. And then it’s continuing and it’s so out of control. And when I say out of control, there’s not enough police to do their job, which you have to be very brave to be a police officer in these cities because, you know, you are outnumbered. And that the criminal elements, I mean, you see these videos where these kids, young people, and a police officer pulls up to one of these neighborhoods, they’ll smack them with shoes, they’ll smack them with stuff, and run away. Like, there’s no problem with that. I would be, and I guess that’s just something instilled in you. But I didn’t grow up in chaos, which a lot of these kids did, and young people. But to this day, there is no way you could get me to, I can never even think about attacking a police officer and thinking I would live through it. Right. I mean, live through it. Not even just get arrested, but actually live through it. I thought, you attack a police officer, your life’s in danger.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, seconds later. Right. All right, I think let’s take a call about this. Let’s go to Jan, who’s calling in Oregon. Jan, go ahead.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yes, I was wondering, aren’t there some cities that are after New York that they are happy to have, or Washington, D.C., and things have calmed down, that they’re thinking about this is a good thing to bring in this kind of help with the president? And why not go to some of those that are more amiable and cooperative and then build up that foundation of support? And pretty soon those who are rejecting it will be few.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, and Jan, to your point, yes, President Trump has suggested the National Guard could go into New Orleans. One of the differences there, as you mentioned it, I don’t believe the mayor of New Orleans has requested it, but the governor of a state can request it. We actually used to work while Jeff Landry was in Congress. He would come on this broadcast. He is now the governor of Louisiana and an ally of President Trump’s as one of the red state governor. New Orleans, a very liberal city. when it comes to the leadership, but it would be the governor, Jordan, that could request that.
SPEAKER 06 :
Think about New Orleans, which is a city America loves also. It might not be the size of a New York or Chicago, but its significance in our culture. Tourism. Tourism, huge. Wild. This is from the president of a group, the Metropolitan Crime Commission, which has said, hey, we’ve reduced violent crime since 2022, but it’s still, quote, unacceptably high crime rate. Quote, we are among probably the top five… when it comes to homicides, despite the fact that homicides are down 14% this year and over 50% over the last year, they are still in the top five. So they’ve cut down, they’ve done what they can. They’ve cut violent crime homicides in half. And still, they’re in the top five most dangerous cities, most likely cities to be murdered in.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, I’m interested to see what the numbers are for just petty crime that’s happening in those areas. I don’t even know. I can’t even track it. I mean, my wife had her cell phone stolen off a bench the last time we were in New Orleans. I mean, in plain daylight, it just happened. Stuff happens like that. Still love the city. A beautiful place. She, not as much. These are all places Americans love. Yeah, exactly. That’s where our culture is created.
SPEAKER 06 :
Regardless of the political leadership there.
SPEAKER 07 :
1-800-684-3110 to have your voice heard today. We’ve got a second half hour coming up. If you don’t get us on your local station, find us broadcasting live, aclj.org, or later on podcast. You can find us on all your podcast players. We’re live on YouTube, live on SiriusXM, live on Salem News Channel, and, of course, archived on in eternity at aclj.org.
SPEAKER 08 :
Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Seculo. And now your host, Logan Sekula.
SPEAKER 07 :
Welcome back to Sekula. We got a few lines open for you. 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110. We’re talking about a couple different topics. One was the Supreme Court, how a group of judges went anonymously to the press, to NBC, to share their disappointment with the United States Supreme Court that they have been overturning their overturns. And they have said, how dare… They side with this administration. It feels like the political activist judges are mad about other judges they think are working in politically activist ways. Maybe that means we need to get back to some form of normalcy within our judicial system. That’s another topic for another day. And also, we were talking about the potential for the National Guard to be headed into Chicago. As we know, there’s been a successful rate of crime change in Washington, D.C. What does that look like for the future of the country? What does that look like for the good and bad? of federalizing the police forces somewhat in your area. Because look, I think as true conservatives, You may look at it and go, well, that doesn’t sound great. But as we also know, President Trump’s base, not exactly the most standard conservative. I’ll put that as a capital C conservative or lowercase c conservative based on history. They are a new group of people.
SPEAKER 06 :
This is how it starts. This is how it started in Germany. Except for President Trump’s term comes to an end. And so far, and maybe they want an extension for 30 more days. But let’s look a year from now and see, is this still having to happen? And is it happening because they’re going to new cities? Because more cities want this kind of shock and awe campaign to bring down their crime rates so that the police there then can kind of start anew, like a new bottom line, instead of trying to play catch up to crime rates that they can’t. Think about this in New Orleans again. If you have done it, it would be an amazing job for any policing department and city to come together and cut homicide in half, 50%. That should be a huge victory to be able to do that. The fact that they have done that and they are still in the top five most dangerous cities for homicide. shows you that they’ve kind of done what they can do. They need a little bit more power. And it’s not just hiring more police officers. They need a little bit more help on the streets to scare the bad actors off from these violent crimes that we’re talking about mostly here end in the loss of life. I mean, this is not like people are protesting and we think the protests are getting out of control. This is just random acts of violence, carjacking, drive-by, some gang activity, but a lot of times just involving people who are in the wrong place at the wrong time. And that can’t be the norm.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, and what I think is also interesting is what’s playing out in D.C., because we saw last week the mayor of D.C. one praising how well it has worked and said things of we appreciate the partnership and the federal surge of help here to the city. We also know that the mayor of D.C., Mariel Bowser, extended the basically the invitation saying we want to continue this federal partnership in perpetuity. What appeared to be a way to stop any sort of fight between the president and the city and Congress over D.C. by saying, listen, we can continue a federal district partnership. But today, the attorney general of D.C. is suing the trump administration to halt the national guard deployment so the top law enforcement official in the district is now suing the federal government even though the mayor has been making statements that are like this is working this is good 87 drop in carjackings for the attorney general of dc that should be a good our attorneys aren’t completely stretched thin But instead, he’s suing the federal government.
SPEAKER 07 :
And we got one minute left in this segment. We got phone lines open. I want to hear from you at 1-800-684-3110. Hey, in the comments, if you’re watching right now, there’s a couple thousand of you watching on YouTube alone, more on Rumble and other platforms. Put in where you’re watching from. know where you’re watching from all around the world we have people that watch which is awesome not just in this country we have people from all over the world that watch this show live of course a lot of you watch taped if you’re watching it later on you can still throw a comment in tell me where you’re watching from for those that are live i’ll pick which one the national guard should go into next okay does that sound good well yeah So, Pensacola, Florida. Oh, no.
SPEAKER 05 :
They have a lot of military there. They have the military there already. They have the Blue Angels.
SPEAKER 07 :
I mean, what are you going to do? I picked the wrong one. My brain went to like… That’s where your brain went. My brain went to what’s the most protected city in maybe the country. And it was wrong. I think they’re doing well. But like I said, put it where you’re watching from. I always like to read those during the breaks. We’ll be right back with more on Sekulow. Low lines are jammed. We’re going to take some of those calls here at 1-800-684-3110. Thanks to everyone who put in the comments on YouTube where you’re watching from. I also wouldn’t mind you hitting that thumbs up. I would appreciate that. So you asked where I’m going to send in the National Guard. I think the next one is Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Well, because, you know, the Amish, I love them.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, I see Nova Scotia watching, which could, I mean, it could set up a, it’s a different issue, but I mean, it could be nice. Yeah. I like to say Nova Scotia. 51st. Right. Just the island, not the rest of Canada.
SPEAKER 07 :
Exactly.
SPEAKER 09 :
No, no.
SPEAKER 07 :
I just took Newfoundland.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 07 :
All right.
SPEAKER 09 :
That’s a different one. Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, aren’t they different? No, that’s what I’m saying. You want Newfoundland.
SPEAKER 07 :
I want Newfoundland. Okay. Let’s move on. Let’s take some phone calls. Some of you have been holding for a little bit. Let’s go ahead and take it. Again, a lot of you calling about the judges, so we’ll take some of those, as well as the federalizing of the police and so on, Chicago and all that. Let’s go to Will in Tennessee, but not the one you’re thinking of. That’s not the one sitting next to me. He’s watching on YouTube, which I think Will is probably, too. Whoa, this could be a doppelganger.
SPEAKER 13 :
Will, go ahead. Yes, I was wondering why there is this provision in the Code of Judicial Ethics that says these judges have a lifetime appointment provided they serve during times of good behavior. These judges have to know they’re acting ultra-virus-free. And why can it not at least be tried to get a simple majority and fire them for cause based on that provision? Why have it if it doesn’t have any teeth for enforcement?
SPEAKER 09 :
it derives from in the Code of Judicial Ethics is from Article 3, Section 1, where judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish, the judges both of the Supreme and inferior courts shall hold their offices during good behavior and shall at stated times receive for their services and compensation, which now not be diminished during their continuance in office. So, it’s not the code of judicial ethics jordan that that says that they have a lifetime appointment it’s from article 3 section 1 that says they shall hold their offices during good behavior uh which is obviously in in uh not a phrase that we uh throw around like today unless like be on good behavior kids but
SPEAKER 06 :
We understand the idea here of impeachment and then what is an impeachable offense has kind of been, though it’s been used politically when it would come to a judicial nominee, I think it would be easy to understand what was going on there. And certainly it has when it’s happened to lower court. uh judges in the federal system there have been some impeachments there usually involving criminal activity so you know something you know and and so pretty straightforward the idea here again though why do we have this system the system outs it survives the political party that places them there so this idea that well you know president obama puts you in so As long as if you’re only there for the four years he’s there, you get a five year term. You’re always going to side with Obama and everybody’s going to know that you’re going to be kind of under his control. The thumb is going to be on you. The idea is that they out out. They survive the political process. so that once those political leaders are gone they don’t feel they even they should never feel that pressure but the pressure even goes down more because they are not uh even in the in the idea of the sense beholden to someone for choosing them this for this position so it’s a diff it’s different than political it’s to have consistency and it’s also to allow people to develop that judicial independence from the political system
SPEAKER 07 :
All right, let’s swap over now and talk about the other topic at hand, which, of course, is the issue of crime, police, and how that looks with the National Guard. Let’s go to Tim is calling in California. Watch it on the Salem News Channel, which we’re on live also, by the way, 12 to 1 p.m. Eastern time. You can work your way back from there, but great lineup of people. You can find that on Pluto and a lot of other free, over-the-top services. You can find one of those fast channels. You can find us on a lot of those, the Salem News Channel. Even if you have something like Comcast Xfinity, you can now say it into your remote and And it will open up the app. So it’s there. A great free option. Tim, go ahead.
SPEAKER 04 :
Hey, I just want to say that I drove truck out of Detroit down by Michigan Avenue and Fort Street, which was a really bad written area into Chicago. You want to know about Chicago crime. You talk to truck drivers that won’t stop at truck stops.
SPEAKER 07 :
there i don’t think anything’s changed in 20 years since i’ve been there tim why was it that you felt that why do you feel like this was not a place you could even uh stop in was it just crime you’re unsafe you felt unsafe in these places because i don’t feel like i hear that from a lot of truck drivers who are specifically like yeah we don’t stop i mean we don’t stop in these certain areas i’ve been to some pretty shady truck stops well over my time that’s right but why chicago specifically Because they’ll go into your truck and rob you blind. Okay, that makes sense. I get that, but I was just curious because I think that is something you don’t hear about, and I think that is a good barometer. Like you said, maybe we should be checking with the truck drivers, the ones who carry our goods and services all over the country whenever we need them because— Our country shuts down without people like you, people who work in that industry.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, and the irony here of Chicago is that Chicago has always been known as the mobster city, that there’s been corruption in the government there. There’s been Al Capone and things of that nature. But this is 2025, right? Like, there’s nothing nostalgic about a crime infested city. And yet when JB Pritzker and the mayor are sitting around saying, like, we don’t need your help. We are Chicago. We are strong. It’s like, no, you’re you’re getting more and more dangerous. You should want to. Get beyond the legacy of danger in your city and move on to being a part of one of America’s treasures. You should be one of the places people want to go. And when you’re having the people who handle the logistics of America, like our caller Tim here, that nothing we have, we would be able to go to a store and get. if it weren’t for those people like Tim that transport our goods and services, if they’re afraid to go in your city or stop in your city, maybe you’ve got a problem and you’re not just your own citizens, but you’re doing a disservice to every single person in your state. If the logistics could be disrupted because of the crime in your city.
SPEAKER 07 :
With small impact of that truck stop is now not going to be served. Right. You know, that’s the small, the smallest scale.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, I mean, you think about people that, again, they have to move, they have to work at nights to keep these cities going. They are, you know, the truck drivers who are moving through areas usually, again, 24 hours a day, sometimes a lot of people around, knowing that they’ve got goods on their vehicles and that are valuables in places where it’s unlikely that there’s going to be a police officer just happens to be there to help them. And so, again, anytime… the flow of goods and interstate commerce is being affected by crime rates, it becomes a federal issue. So if you can’t get your goods into the other state and someone’s bought those goods, that’s interstate commerce. That’s in our Constitution as well. It’s a violation and almost a sense of the crime has gotten that bad. It’s like the federal government’s job to go open up waterways. They also have to make sure that our industries are able to deliver their goods where they need to go. I mean, and so all of this, I think, is what was forgotten. by this move i think we we focus in on oh this is like martial law in cities what that were primarily democrat and didn’t like president trump so he’s targeting them it has nothing to do with that if he actually uh thought that way why would he send national guard to help the these cities if he thought it was all about politics he’s going there to help them regardless of their politics because they are americans and it’s his job as president to protect us as best he can with the power that is delegated to him by the u.s constitution and this is one of those powers that you were able to use and again You don’t have to use it all the time and you don’t use it for political purposes. You use it so it’s safe to work in downtown Chicago because it doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or Democrat. If San Francisco falls apart and Chicago falls apart or New York falls apart, we have a serious economic problem in our country. And so, as you said, these are kind of the cities that make what the world knows America for in a positive way. that we were able to build not just one or two major cities in our country, but we have all of these different capitals and states that make up this diverse nation that the whole world can give you, probably name you more cities in the United States than they can in their own country.
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, you said we were spending time in Europe, spending time in the UK over the summer months. Flip on the news. And the news, yes, has to do, we talk, I think, more about what’s going on in the UK than they do right now. What you’re seeing mostly is President Trump. And how President Trump’s impact on what’s going on there could be being exported to the UK right now. Could be being exported to Europe right now. Because they are seeing the bubbling up of what’s happening. Because as you said, where are they seeing? They’re seeing Washington, D.C., New York, Chicago. They’re seeing these cities. They’re watching the same television shows that you’re watching. They’re streaming the same movies. And those movies often take place. in those areas romanticized versions sure but nonetheless true phone lines are open at 1-800-684-3110 two lines are open right now we will get to as many of your calls as we can in the next segment so stay tuned right now we talk about Chicago and you know they won’t let President Trump come in and help but you can get in there involved into what’s going on in Chicago right now because we know that though they may not be wanting that help they are going after street preachers who are being prosecuted, arrested, just for sharing the gospel on the streets. You can get involved in us helping them out right now. You’ve heard us talk about this for weeks, and we are still taking action. It’s going to happen next week. Take action with us. Go to court. Join the fight. ACLJ.org. Sign that petition. Absolutely free. We’ll be right back. Take your calls. Welcome back to Secular. We are going to take your phone calls. We do got two lines open at 1-800-684-3110. But to make sure we get to as many as we can, because we’ve been on hold for close to a half an hour, I want to make sure we kick it off right off the top. Let’s go to Candy in Georgia. Watch it on YouTube. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yes. The federal judges in Schumer are acting like children pulling a tantrum because their parents told them they aren’t allowed to do some, so they’re throwing a fit. I know from experience, because when I was a child, I threw enough of them. And that’s my comment.
SPEAKER 07 :
That’s a fun comment. It does feel like they’re just upset that someone is calling them on their madness. And, Will, we all got kids.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, I think a lot of the irony here, too, is that they are complaining that their rulings aren’t just being taken. for face value when one we know that the supreme court had already tamped down some of their power earlier with that ruling on universal injunctions basically saying hey you need to stay in your lane you’ve uh gone a little bit too far you’ve gotten uh as you would tell your kids like you know you need to to follow the rules and do what you’re supposed to do and here they’re like wait why why Why don’t you just take what we say as the rule of law? And well, it’s because that’s not how the Constitution works. The Supreme Court is established by the Constitution. These inferior courts, as it may be put forward by Congress from time to time as they see fit. But this isn’t something that, you know, the district court for the Eastern District of Tennessee is not established by the Constitution itself.
SPEAKER 06 :
That’s right. So I think that ultimately here, when we’re looking at this idea of the tantrums, we’re going to get killed because of procedural issues. Whoever thought someone’s going to get killed over a preliminary injunction. The truth is that when you look at the difference. President Biden and his administration, they filed 19 applications in this docket. The shadow docket. The shadow docket, right. Which is really, it’s just, it’s a time when the Supreme Court either is not sitting, and it’s procedural matters. Or someone’s, usually, you know, it’s death row. but because the lower courts have gotten more aggressive on trying to stop laws that have been signed by the president going into effect or any kind of executive action. So the Biden administration actually filed 19 of these cases on their own during its four-year term, and the court granted their request 10 times. So, okay, President Trump’s doing a little bit better, but he’s got a whole lot more of them. So he’s being stopped by lower courts a lot more than President Biden was. And when President Biden was stopped by the lower courts and they thought it was wrong, more than half the time, they got what they wanted out of the Supreme Court too, which was probably… and a stopping of a lower court decision from going to effect and affecting their policy so the idea that this is somehow new under president trump it’s just because the left and states are filing more lawsuits to try and stop all of his policies from going into effect so of course the numbers are going to look different but i don’t want anybody you know come for this and say oh this is something president trump even created so just remember When the Biden administration had to do this, they won the majority of the time. They got the Supreme Court sided with them in this shadow docket the majority of cases.
SPEAKER 07 :
All right. Thank you for calling. Let’s keep going. Let’s go to Bill in Wyoming. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 03 :
All right. Thanks for taking my call. I got two things to say. First of all, those nameless judges don’t realize that they’ll get caught anyway because if they do anything to – counter what the Supreme Court says, their names are going to be right out there to begin with. And second of all, as far as the governor of Illinois and the mayor of Chicago, if they think they don’t need Trump, why don’t they take a TV team without any kind of security whatsoever and take the red line all the way through? What I heard about it on the radio yesterday, it’s a real nightmare.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, I think, listen, a lot of public transportation has become a nightmare. And, you know, we’ve had waves in our country where public transportation has been very safe in certain cities and other cities, very dangerous. New York had a huge problem in the 70s and 80s. What did they do? They brought in mayors who focused the majority of their job on making our city safe because if we make our city safe, that will bring in business, bring in tourists, more people decide to live in the city than to commute. It will bring more companies to headquarter here. And so by actually focusing in on violent crime, you’re improving all these other areas of the city. And so it gets back and then it kind of starts to unravel again. People get used to having such a safe big city. I mean, we kind of got used to New York being this really safe place where you didn’t have to really worry much. And if you ask people who grew up there in the 70s or 80s, you’re watching your back everywhere you went.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, I feel like we’ve kind of returned a little bit to that. I feel like New York is starting to move its way back. But this weekend, I spent my weekend in New York. We decided not to stay in the city. For the first time in my life, we did not stay in the city.
SPEAKER 06 :
But still stayed in one of, we’re not going to disclose it, one of the most Logan-looking places. Yeah, it was a little haunted-y. The Christmas decorations were still up, which was a concern.
SPEAKER 09 :
like a wednesday adams uh the first night tim burton may have yeah the first night the kids were concerned they all started huddling up in one room but you know what that’s how i roll you know i’m not gonna discuss it on air one little quick irony to bill’s first comment about the judges though is that their big complaint is that the supreme court justices aren’t explaining themselves enough but yet they are anonymously giving these statements they’re not letting the world know what they really think But yet they’re criticizing the Supreme Court for not letting the world know what they think. Let’s move on.
SPEAKER 07 :
We have two calls that have been on hold. One’s been on hold for over 20 minutes. Let’s try to at least get to that. Steve in Virginia. Go ahead. Still stay on hold. Others will try. Steve, go ahead. Steve.
SPEAKER 11 :
Hi, gentlemen. I’m calling in regard to your defense of the street preachers. It reminds me of a Bible verse in Romans chapter 10 that says, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace and bring glad tidings of good things. And it occurred to me that because you guys are going to defend these preachers in court, the message of the gospel of peace might even get out to an even broader audience than it otherwise would.
SPEAKER 06 :
I appreciate that. I know our attorneys appreciate that as well, because we do this work because we believe in it. When we represent these clients, we believe that what they were doing is right and legal. And we oftentimes agree with their message, though we support free speech generally. That means sometimes you don’t agree with someone’s message. Oftentimes when they’ve come to the ACLJ to be an ACLJ client, you know, we’re with them a hundred percent. And, and so, uh, we’re their advocates so that others can, can be on that street corner. Cause as most as you know, people could say this, people on the street corner screaming at, you’d be surprised by how many people’s lives have been changed by someone who just started, who started up a conversation with them on the street.
SPEAKER 07 :
Absolutely. Let’s go to Andy in Tennessee. Andy, this will probably be the last call of the day. Ronald, I’m sorry. Call back tomorrow. Uh, Andy, go ahead.
SPEAKER 12 :
Hey there. Uh, I have a brother that’s a truck driver that has to go to Memphis to get gas, fuel. And his truck is shot at.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, look, Andy, we’re here in Tennessee, and Memphis, one of my favorite cities, by the way, in our state. I love Memphis, but I was there just a little under a year ago. I have to say, it was a much rougher experience. When you’re there with your kids, it starts changing the way you look at the city.
SPEAKER 09 :
And while Chicago may have more number of murders, Memphis actually has the highest per capita murder rate. So it is the most deadly city in America from the population standpoint.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah. Sad part about Memphis, it’s one of those places where you could go from the nicest of nice to the worst of the worst in two blocks. And those people don’t interact at all. It is like two different worlds in one city. So we need to figure that out as well. That being said, I appreciate you guys all listening today. I know it’s a very different topic, but we’ll be back. again tomorrow on seculo support the work of the aclj if you can aclj.org sign our petitions get involved of course we talked about chicago we’re supporting those street preachers in chicago right now uh we’re going to be in court next week on that and you can be a part of that team as well just go to aclj.org slash sign we will talk to you tomorrow again on seculo
