Jeff Utsch on the latest SCOTUS decisions and what changes will be impacted across the country.

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

You are listening to the conservative circus. I am your ringmaster James. T Harris, we had to supreme court. Give a couple of decisions. Is Funny because you. We didn't hear a whole lot from the media on these decisions. Usually, if something that benefits to laugh, we hear a lot of it, but that doesn't necessarily mean we should be cheering. Here. We are once again late. June early July waiting for these folks in the black robes. Tell us how we're supposed to be living our lives. They help us understand what the Supreme Court is doing in the ring. We Have Jeff let's. He is an instructor at the leadership and freedom. Center in Gettysburg Pennsylvania. He's also my partner with the constitutional conversation, a podcast that you can download from the iheartradio APP and Jeff. What did you think about the decisions from the High Court yesterday? Well, this comes under the title James T of even a blind squirrel can find an egg corn every so often. I. You know I'll give you an example of this you know the faithless voter case, which basically is can electoral college electees in the state, so for president, the states and we have an election of the states in four forty, seven of the fifty states We have so many electoral college per state. You know the number of congressmen and senators and and We get that number of electoral college. Then we as a whole take that and vote for the candidate. For President instead of directly from the people and do these electoral college representatives have the ability to vote for somebody else other than they've pledged to vote war. And if they do that, is there a penalty? So this case had become ten a state. Impose a penalty because we had three electoral college members in Washington the State of Washington vote, they pledged to vote the Democratic ticket and they didn't vote for Hillary Clinton. They voted for somebody else. The state wanted to impose a penalty and the Supreme Court took this up because there was some arguments in the lower courts, but let me go to article two. This is very simple because in our Constitution James, P. States have a lot of power to decide how voting takes place in their own states as long as it doesn't. A break the Fourteenth Amendment or the twenty four th amendment in other words, the twenty fourth amendment was passed to say you can't have poll taxes anymore. You can't have these tests for people that want to come in and vote in the fourteenth amendment can't break people's equal protection clause, but in the first section of article two regarding the powers of the president it it basically says it does basically says it does say each state shall appoint in such manner as the legislature there of May direct. It's talking about electors for the Electoral College. So, in my opinion, this could have been very simple. They could have referred to article two section one which they do, and then case over, but of course we have a thirty three page opinion written by Associated Justice Kagan, by the way I thought it was Santa my your. There was a ping. It was Kagan. Yes. So you can kind of see that this is a fairly simple one in my opinion, and should have been easy to see and white had to go to this point James T it is a win, but it's more like a touchback or field goal rather than a touchdown, because this one is really simple, but it was not I, think there was one justice that recused herself, or maybe Kagan are sodomy or one just right, recuse herself. Guess. Maybe she knew somebody who was litigating, but yeah, it was unanimous outside of that, but I think words important, Jeff. Which is that I? Mean I remember the Hollywood set? To president trump was elected. The Hollywood said there was a huge campaign for the. To go in there and vote with the popular vote, instead of know following the state guidelines, and you had a couple of people who did the fact, so it's a shamed that this had to find his way our way to the supreme. Court, but it is kind of encouraging is an odd that you had a unanimous decision on on upholding the Toro College and the Constitution. It is, it is a good thing. James T. we have to take the victories when we can get them to simplify especially because of the recent rulings in the past few weeks on the civil, rights act right Daca with completely crazy won't do some podcasts on those. I do Kinda understand you're coming from. This was a touch. This was a field on the one yard line where we still had a couple of dowse got. This. This shouldn't have been questioned. They also yesterday. had a ruling out on these Robo calls is you know? Basically that case James T. Capital wrote the majority opinion. It was a six to three opinion and Kansas government. You know because nobody wants. Robo calls to their cell phones. That's pretty universal is at law constitutional, and can the government carve out? No Robo calls except it's A. It's a an agency trying to collect a government debt. and. What happened was these other amputees mostly, he had the American, Association of Political Consultants joined with some other saying. Hey, hey got to carve out. We want to have the ability to do this to. This isn't fair. And so they sued saying it's unconstitutional, but in the end. What happened is Capital wrote in the majority. Yes, you can't single out just. The government has a right to do this. Just throwing everybody else out. There's a lot of other technical arguments in there, but instead of just being left alone where the government can do robocalls now nobody is supposed to. This yeah, there was some dissenting votes. Gorsuch in there said you know he's got some opinions. He agreed and disagreed at the same time. saying you know this. Is All unconstitutional but Culture matters and he didn't say this. In my opinion, culture matters if all those people wanted then, that's probably what's going to happen.

Coming up next