The following is a transcript from the Pro America Report with Ryan Hite.
Welcome, welcome, welcome to the Pro America Report this Ryan Hite filling in here today, sitting in for Mr. Ed Martin. I’m glad to be with you. And boy, do we have a lot of things to talk about today. There have been a ton of Supreme Court decisions coming down. We have the debate last night between President Joe Biden. And President Donald Trump and Ohh man, have we just had an exciting 24 hours. And I tell you what, we’ve got even more coming. We’re still waiting for a decision on the immunity case, and that’s not come down yet. But I’m getting ahead of myself. I’m getting ahead of myself. Let me pause and go back for a moment and say,
Go to proamericareport.com. That’s where you’re going to find the substack for Ed and all of the things he’s doing. You’ll find a link to the archives of this program, the podcasts and stand alone segments, guests, links, notes, resources. You will also be able to sign up there for the e-mail that will get you the WYNK e-mail that comes in a few times a week to your inbox telling you what you need to know. Stuff that is happening and and why it’s happening, it’s going to break it down for you, I promise. You wanna go and be involved in that? Go over to proamericareport.com. Don’t miss out.
It’s hard to know where to start today with the things that have gone on and what you need to know, what’s happening. And. And I want to talk about the debate. I do. We’re going to get there. I think that there’s a lot more consequence around it than just wow. Joe Biden did terribly, and Donald Trump did actually very, very well. There’s, there’s a lot more consequence to it than that. But before we get into that, let me back up. Let me back up and let’s talk about today.
Let’s talk about the Supreme Court. I think that this is what you need to know because this is huge. This reaches back into history a few years and shows us why something so incredibly important was as important as it was. And it reaches into the future and it’s going to change a lot of the course Of what we do in America, how we do it. Also it’s going to change the course of a lot of lives. I am quite confident from one of these decisions, but here it is. Let’s let’s bundle this all up into one thing and then we’ll dive into each section.
Specifically what you need to know is, the Supreme Court is delivering justice again.
You got that. The Supreme Court is delivering justice again. Now that comes in two parts.
The first part, they are essentially. Well, not dismantling, but the Supreme Court has greenlit the dismantling of the administrative state. That is the first part that you need to know. That’s the first piece of this we’ve had a couple of major decisions. In fact, there were five or six big decisions. I think 5, I think it was, that really had to do with the size and scope and power of government. And we got one of them today, a big one today. And that big one, in tandem with another is absolutely shockingly important. So two biggies that came down today. Three, really.
Let me actually let me before we get into that. Let me digress. Just say we had one decision today. City of Grants Pass vs. Johnson. The enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property, i.e., homeless encampments on public property. Getting rid of homeless encampments, encampments like one city and state wanted to do, does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, which is prohibited by the 8th Amendment. The Supreme Court settled that one for us, and for that I am grateful. Now the three leftist judges on the court are definitely unhappy about that. Not not happy at all. Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson are are very upset at this decision, but it was a sound one. Six to three. Yeah. Sorry. Homeless encampments are not a right. And it does not violate cruel and unusual punishment clause or amendment in the Constitution to boot your homeless encampment off that, that one’s gone.
But here’s what came down today on on one front, Loper Bright Enterprises vs. Raimondo. This is an incredible overturn of a 40 year. A 40 year Supreme Court precedent, Chevron USA incorporated vs. Natural Resources Defense Council, this has stood. The Chevron deference is what it’s referred to for 40 years, essentially. What that did was it allowed a deference to the agency interpretation of the law, the administrative executive agencies interpretation of a law. We defer to the. At simply because a statute that Congress passed is kind of ambiguous. So if it comes into question, someone is suing about it, or we have a problem with this, we’re going to defer to the agency. And and if they say no, we think this should be included or no, we should go this way. We’re we’re going to defer to them.
That’s the Chevron deference principle that we have employed. Is precedent for over 40 years, I believe in America, I say over 40, I believe I forget if it’s 40 exactly or if it’s just over 40. But for 40 years this has, we’ve shown great deference in court decisions and proceedings to the executive agency when it comes to a rather ambiguous congressional law or statute that Passed today that was knocked down. Today, the Supreme Court said no. No, that is not how it works. The Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority. And courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because the statute is ambiguous.
Chevron is overruled. That is a big one. A huge Supreme Court precedent that’s been overturned and a piece of precedent, a piece of legislation, not legislation, and and a court, a court opinion. That has long been used to defer and give power and preference to the executive agencies. No way. Not anymore. This is a huge, huge delivery of justice in fighting the administrative state, a big blow. And actually, when you combine this with an earlier case, we had, which I believe this was last, was it? No, it was yesterday. Pardon me. SEC versus Jarkesy. The Security and Exchange Commission, SEC vs. Jarkesy was basically saying when the SEC seeks civil penalties against a defendant for securities fraud, the 7th Amendment entitles the defendant to a jury trial.
It seems obvious to state that we have to have a jury trial. This is important yet well. Yeah. And yet that is actually in contention. We we’ve had a problem with this as far as the administrative state is concerned, skipping that process just moving straight to it, the the denial of due process, yeah, that’s going on, that’s been happening.
So yesterday and SEC vs. Jarkesy, the Supreme Court reinforced, yes. Even when it’s an executive agency coming against you, the 7th Amendment entitles you to a jury trial. Will you combine that today with the decision the the overturned the overrule of Chevron. Essentially what’s happening?
In in these two combined, the court isn’t really just empowering courts to make more decisions. Instead of letting the administrative state-run amok, they’re really actually empowering citizens to fight with federal agencies. This is a big deal.
This really is a huge part of the dismantling of the administrative state.
Now it it doesn’t get rid of the administrative state, but it certainly gives the clearance that is needed to go forth and then destroy it. It’s very, very good.
This is incredible because, you know, liberals and and leftists will run out and talk about how Chevron is so important. This has become a part, in fact. That’s what I believe the some of the, the the the dissenting opinion from the three leftist judges talked about how Chevron has become a part of our modern government.
Well, guess what? It’s only 40 years. Built this nation existed long before Chevron deference, and it will continue to exist much longer and better without it. This is big. This is huge. There were several cases pending against the administrative state and this 1-2 punch is an incredible uplift and empowerment of courts and people against executive agencies run amok, and if there is one thing I think you and I can agree upon, it is that executive agencies, the rise of the administrative state, weaponized executive branch is one of the primary enemies. The primary tools of the deep state against we the people. Thank you to the Supreme Court for delivering a correct and constitutional judgment today that I believe is an incredibly good move, overruling Chevron. But. That’s not all.
There was another one we were waiting for very hotly contested. This is the Fischer case, you’ll see.
Fischer vs. United States. This is a January 6th defendant. And it’s a whole long story in and of itself. Essentially, this is one of the J6 defendants who petitioned the Supreme Court over the application of a US code 1512C2 charge. This is the trumping up Charge that the federal government used over obstruction of an official proceeding. Now there there were a lot of charges that got pushed around, but this one was used to come back and bludgeon several hundred of the January 6 defendants with a terrible felony that they have applied all sorts of pressure on one judge at the very bottom process said no, it was taken up along the line. A lot of the other judges were perfectly fine With the government’s prosecution over of this 1512 obstruction charge while the Supreme Court today came back after a January 6 defendant had petitioned them and said no.
Basically you you are overextending and over broadening a Congressional Law, the congressional code that was never used in this way. You’re misinterpreting it. Period. Stop that. This doesn’t. This doesn’t count. So this is a huge victory. In fact, I’m gonna come back and talk about this. We’re about to run out of time in this segment. We’re going to come back and talk about this is a huge victory for January 6th defendants, a huge victory for January 6 defendants. But come on back.
We’re gonna get to a couple of good interviews here with Mr. Ed Martin. I’ll be back to wrap up the show. Don’t miss out on it until then. Go to proamericareport.com. Come on back after the break. We’ll be right back.
