1. 🏈 College Sports Crisis & Proposed Legislation Core Argument
- The NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) system
- An unregulated transfer portal
- Escalating player compensation costs
- Financial losses across athletic programs
Key Problems Identified
- Athletes transferring multiple times with little restriction
- Older players (mid-to-late 20s) still competing
- Universities losing millions or tens of millions of dollars
- Non-revenue sports (e.g., tennis, Olympic sports) being cut
- Risk of college sports shrinking to mostly football and basketball
Proposed Solution
A bipartisan bill called the “Protect College Sports Act.”
- Supported by both Republicans and Democrats
- Backed by universities, conferences, and athletic leaders
- Intended to:
- Stabilize college athletics
- Limit financial chaos
- Preserve broad participation across sports
Broader Significance
- Provide education access to hundreds of thousands of students
- Offer life opportunities, especially for low-income athletes
- Serve as a cultural unifier in a divided country
2. ⚖️ Supreme Court Discussion & Justice Samuel Alito Guest Segment
Key Discussion Points A. Justice Alito’s Role
- Portrayed as a major figure (“giant”) on the Supreme Court
- Known for a distinct form of originalism (interpreting the Constitution as originally understood)
- Seen as influential in shaping modern constitutional law
B. Dobbs Decision & Leak Controversy
- The leak investigation was poorly conducted
- The leak damaged trust within the Court
- It may have endangered justices (mentions threats and an assassination attempt)
- The unprecedented nature of the leak
- The political consequences surrounding abortion and the Court
C. Internal Court Dynamics
- Tensions between justices
- Allegations of “slow-walking” decisions for political purposes
- Strategic disagreements between conservative and liberal justices
D. Criticism of the Political Left
- There are organized efforts to undermine the Supreme Court
- Calls to expand (“pack”) the Court are politically motivated
- Media and advocacy groups are targeting conservative justices
Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/
Facebook:
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome in is Verdict with Center Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson
with you, and if you're listening on radio stations across
the country, it's really nice to have you with us.
And a reminder, we do this show as a podcast
three days a week, so make sure you download Verdict
with Tech Cruz wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
In this episode of many of them are also on.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
YouTube as well, so you can subscribe to the YouTube
channel Vertict with Tech Cruse there and you can watch
every single episode Center. We've got a lot to talk about,
including big news for the sports world, and we've got
some Supreme Court news coming up as well in the show.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Well, this week I shared a hearing on college sports
and saving college sports, and we've talked before on Verdict
about how college sports is in crisis right now. It
is chaos. You've got an out of control transfer portal
with athletes transferring three four, five times. You've got people
playing until they're twenty six, twenty seven, twenty eight years old.
You've got people with six seven years of playing time.
(00:53):
You have virtually every athletics program in the country losing
money and losing millions or even tens of millions of
day dollar. Schools are going broke. They're canceling programs every week.
You're seeing women's sports getting canceled. You're seeing Olympic sports
getting canceled. You're seeing your favorite tennis getting canceled. That
happened at Arkansas just a few weeks ago. And it
(01:14):
is if we don't act, we're going to see much
of college sports decimated and destroyed. And so last week
I introduced bipartisan legislation with Maria Cantwell. Maria Cantwell's a
Democrat from Washington State. She is the ranking member, the
senior Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee. I'm the chairman
of the Senate Commerce Committee. This week, we had a
(01:36):
big hearing and we heard testimony from leaders in college
athletics about the urgency of solving the crisis. Now. One
of our witnesses was coach Nick Saban, the legendary coach
of Alabama, and Coach Saban's testimony was was incredibly powerful.
And give a listen to a little bit of Coach
(01:57):
Nick Saban on why Congress needs to pass or protect
College Sports Act.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Yeah, before we get to that, though, I want to
talk to you real quick about a bill you probably
have every month, and you may not realize when you
pay that bill, your money may be going to woke,
hardcore left organizations.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
That's why I want you to know about Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Every day Americans make choices that shape our country's future,
right down to which cell phone provider we support. Here's
what most people don't actually realize. Patriot Mobile isn't just
a wireless provider. They're an activist organization funded by selling
top tier cell service. They've been on the front lines
(02:37):
defending our freedoms long before it was cool, standing up
and the gap when others wouldn't. The best part is
they deliver prioritized premium service on all three major US networks,
giving you the same or even better coverage backed by
one hundred percent US based customer support. You get unlimited data,
(02:58):
mobile hotspots, internet roaming, and so much more. But when
you switch to Patriot Mobile, that's what I love the most.
You'll help grow a movement that fuels the Christian conservative cause.
Every bill you pay helps advance the values of faith, family,
and freedom, and switching is easier than ever. You can
literally activate in minutes, keep your number, keep your phone,
(03:22):
or upgrade so go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict
and you are going to get a free month of
service with a promo code Verdict. Or you can call
them nine to seven to two Patriot. That's nine seven
to two Patriot nine seven to two Patriot. Or call
them and go online at Patriot mobile dot com slash
(03:45):
verdict promo code verdict for a free month of service.
Make the switch and make a difference every time you
pay your bill. All right, let's play for you Nick
Saban part of what he had to say in front
of your committee. Hearing it truly was impressive to hear
him talk about sports es actually in front of Congress.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
Take a listen, Cooba.
Speaker 4 (04:03):
Let me give you the history. My first year, we
had collective at Alabama two point seven million, Next year
seven million, next year ten million. I'll retire next year
of seventeen million, next year twenty four million. Now you
have schools that have close to forty million dollar rosters.
So if we continue to do that, we're gonna lose
Olympic sports, We're gonna lose non revenue sports, We're gonna
(04:25):
lose scholarships. And basically what's going to happen is We're
gonna have football and basketball succeed, and then we'll have club
sports for everything else.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
He's not wrong, by the way, Center, I was in
one of those non money making sports tennis, right, You
had a lot of friends that you that you get
to know that are in those Olympic sports, for example,
that would all disappear. And when you think about having
a college roster at eighty million, if you're a student athlete,
that in theory sounds great, but that's only in two sports.
Really the majority of that eighty you know you're talking
(04:54):
about Alabama. I mean, there's not that much in basketball,
I promise you at Alabama. So unless you pick football,
you're left behind. And that's the reason why you're taking
this action now and why Saban was saying what he
was saying at the time.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Well, and that there's only a handful of powerhouses that
generate and can dominate football, and so what if we
don't act. I think within five years we will see
thirty to fifty colleges that have a football program and
they'll basically be an NFL and the rest of the schools,
their programs will be obliterated. And there are a lot
(05:29):
of reasons that's tragic. One is just sports brings us together.
Sports is so much fun. Look, we're divided on so
many issues today. We scream at each other where we're
like it really is hard to find common ground. And
yet you can go cheer on your alma mater and
you can be there with people of different parties, people
of different races, people have different religions, and you're all
standing together. That's really important. Every bit as critical as
(05:53):
that is. College sports is an amazing avenue for education
for millions of young men and women. And until I
really started diving in to this topic and working to
save college sports, I hadn't really focused on how college
athletics is something that is unique in the United States.
(06:14):
No other country has anything remotely resembling what we have
here with college sports. There are today more than a
half million college athletes right now. Every year. Athletics enables kids,
many kids from low income homes, many minority kids, who
(06:36):
otherwise might not have had a chance to go to college.
It enables them to go to college, to study, to
get a degree, to learn skills, to learn hard work
and discipline and teamwork and sportsmanship.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Accountability, just showing up.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
I can't tell you how much I learned from just
the accountability, which, by the way, made me a better person.
It made be better in business, It made me better
in my job that I did afterwards. There are so
many young men when I was at Old Miss that said,
they literally believe they would either have been dead, they
would have been in a gang if it wasn't for
sports keeping them out of trouble in high school. And
(07:12):
then they said, if it wasn't for college and getting
that college education, they would have immediately been into bad
stuff on the streets. They said that sports actually saved
their life, and not only say their life. A lot
of them they were the first member of their family
to ever go to college, and they went because they
were an incredible athlete. It gave them the opportunity, it
gave them a free education, it seemed unattainable, and it
(07:32):
completely changed their families trajectory in life. I think that's
one of the most important things about college sports that
people don't talk about now.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
That is exactly right, and the status quo is unsustainable.
If Congress doesn't act, we will end up with hundreds
of thousands of those college athletic positions going away and
those kids, many of them having no chance to go
to school, to go to college, to get those skills,
those life skills that set them up for success. And
(08:03):
look the way I approach this, I didn't worry too
much about about the top one percent. I didn't worry
about the Michael Jordan's or Arch mannings. I worried about
the ninety nine percent of college athletes who are never
going to play pro ball. But it's giving them opportunity.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Senator.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Also, we've got a guest coming up in a little bit.
We're gonna be dealing with the Supreme Court, a best
selling book, and Molly Hemingway is going to join us,
So make sure you stick around for that. But before
we get to that, we're talking about this incredible nil bill.
And look, I had a ton of people Centator that
were calling me. I had friends and people I've known
the past come out of that would work because they
knew how important this bill was, they knew how important
(08:40):
it was to you. Asking me questions. There was a
lot of people saying they're just not gonna be able
to get this done. There's no way you'll get by
parsonship here. That seems to not be true, and they said, well,
there's no way even though he'll be able to get
the White House behind it.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
That also doesn't seem to be true either.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
There is a lot of growing bypartson support here to
get this thing done.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
Well, there is, and and I worked for months, Rick
Cantwell and I negotiated. We sat in the conference room
six eight hours a day negotiating provision by provision by provision.
We introduced it with Cantwell and myself a Democrat and Republican,
and also with Eric Schmidt, a Republican from Missouri, and
Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware. So we had two Democrats,
(09:21):
two Republicans on the bill, and we've seen phenomenal support
for it. So the ACC has come out emphatically in
support of it, The Big Twelve has come out emphatically
and support of it. Condoleeza Rice at Stanford has come
out emphatically in support of it. At the hearing. Pete Bavaqua,
the athletic director at Notre Dame, testified strongly in support
(09:43):
of it. Gordon Gee testified at the hearing. Former president
of West Virginia University also Vanderbilt, has been a president
of actually five universities. He testified that this is a
crisis and this bill is the only hope to save
college sports. And we've had already. We've had over one
hundred and thirty signatures from leaders at more than sixty
(10:06):
five universities come out in support of the bill. And importantly,
this week President Donald J. Trump came out strongly in
support of the bill. He's he sent a truth social
that I want to read to you. Here's what he said.
College sports, a great American institution that produces our many athletes, leaders,
and Olympic dominance is a total mess, and everyone is
(10:27):
saying that it must be fixed. After uninny lawsuits and
crazed rulings, there are virtually no limits anymore, and soon
most colleges won't have sports because each and every one
of them will be bankrupt, never to be heard from again.
Women's sports and the Olympics itself are in the most
danger from this catastrophic situation. College sports are turning into
(10:48):
pro sports, except with absolutely no rules, a result no
one wants. University presidents, conference commissioners, student athletes, coaches, and
athletic directors complain to me that it has become a disaster.
After years of no action and that schools were losing
hundreds of millions of dollars a year. They compared it
(11:11):
to a freight train that can't be stopped. That is
why a few months ago I convened a roundtable, bringing
together were a world class team as some of the
best sports executives, student athletes, and political leaders in our country.
The goal was to find a bipartisan solution to fix
the problem. Based on these meetings and the expertise of
(11:31):
the leading authorities, I signed an executive order, but I
always said that the best solution was to get a
bipartisan act through Congress to my desk in order to
save a long and embarrassing road through hell for these institutions.
I'd like to thank Senators Ted Cruz, Eric Schmidt, Maria Cantwell,
(11:52):
and Chris Coons, among others, for introducing the Protect College
Sports Act. This law resolves many of the most urgent
issues challenging our universities and student athletes, stops the chaos,
and most importantly, it may be the last chance to
save college sports and colleges themselves before it's too late.
(12:13):
The House has worked long and hard on this issue
as well, and I'm very grateful to Speaker Mike Johnson
and Leader Steve Scalise for their work to fix this
very major problem. I urge the House and Senate to
come together to pass a final bipartisan law that I
can sign this summer that reflects the views and input
of both chambers and in all caps, we have to
(12:36):
save college sports. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
President Donald J. Trump. The support we're seeing is really significant,
and I think we're going to see I hope and believe,
a big bipartisan vote in the Senate behind this bill.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
What's the timeline now and how much is there going
to be people pushing since now this has become so,
you know, such a big discussion change things the last minute.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
Is that going to be a problem And what does
that look like?
Speaker 4 (13:03):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Look, that is going on. And there are a handful
of people that are criticizing and throwing rocks, But I'll
tell you most people are shocked that we could actually
find a bipartisan compromise and and and and listen, one
of the natures of that that means that that I
had to give quite a bit and and and the
Democrats had to give quite a bit to find a
(13:25):
common ground, because we can't pass this bill unless you
get at least sixty votes in the Senate. That means
you need at least seven Democrats. There are only fifty
three Republicans, and my objective, frankly, is to get a
lot more than sixty votes. I'd like to see a
big bipartisan vote come out of the Senate. The House
has tried several times to fix this problem, and unfortunately,
(13:48):
every time they tried to take up a bill, it's
failed in the House. And and so I think the
Senate has got to step in because the clock is ticking.
And I will say that that there's a real risk
also of the biggest players coming together to form a
super league, and I think that would be disastrous for
everybody else and not good for fans. Let's take my
(14:11):
home state of Texas. Look my home state of Texas.
If Congress does nothing in three to five years, I
am certain that the University of Texas will survive. And
I'm certain A and M will survive. They're so big,
they have such a big donor base and alumni base.
They'll survive no matter what happens. But it's not at
all clear that the other players in Texas survive. It's
(14:33):
not clear that TCU or SMU or University of Houston
or Rice, or Texas Tech or Baylor, all of the
different programs in Texas, they could go under in the
status quote, I think that would be a terrible outcome
if we lose historic programs all over Texas, not just football.
But when you lose football, football pays for all the
(14:54):
other sports. So when you lose football, you end up
losing the entire array of sports. That would be tragic
and we can't let it happen.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
Yeah, you're absolutely right there.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
If people want to get behind this legislation is just
one of those where they talk to their senators and
their congressman.
Speaker 2 (15:09):
Who do they need to contact quickly?
Speaker 3 (15:11):
Look, the first order of business is your senator and
urging your senator, whether your senator is a Republican or Democrat,
urging your senator get behind this bill, the Bipartisan Protect
College Sports Act. There's an urgency. I am hoping to
move quickly on this. I'd like to get a big
vote in the Senate. Once we get it out of
the Senate, then the next up will be the House.
(15:31):
But calling your senator going on social media speaking out
and saying that sports college sports should be saved. That's
really valuable.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
There was obviously a massive victory that happened in this
country with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, But what
it really meant was the issue of abortion would go
back to the States, and that is where the real
fight has actually begun. Now, over the past fifty years,
Americans United for Life has filed more than two hundred
legal briefs and also helped create at least four hundred
(16:03):
pro life bills in over forty states. By writing model legislation,
they are consulting with state legislators and defending their own
laws and other pro life statues in court.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Now.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
Aul's dual front approach of writing and defending legislations proved
an effective one that could become even more impactful as
pro life state legislators move to enact protections for preborn
babies and their mothers. Now that the legality of abortion
has returned to the states, that is where you come in.
(16:38):
You and I have the opportunity to overturn pro abortion
laws and advance pro life legislation that attacks the most
vulnerable in our society from the womb to the tomb. Together,
we can shape the future of our nation through life
affirming legislation in every state. Now, a gift of just
(16:59):
twenty five helps hold abortion providers accountable and helps protect
women and unborn children across this country. And now, through
a match, your gift is doubled. Donate securely at aul
dot org slash verdict. That's a UL dot org slash
(17:22):
Verdict sponsored by Americans United for Life Center. You love
the Supreme Court pretty much more than anybody I know
in my sphere, and any book that comes out about
the Supreme Court, it's like you're a moth to a flame.
We've got a really exciting guest now who's also diving
into the Supreme Court just like you up too. You've
got your new book coming out on Clarence Thomas.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
So you're in DC. Why don't you introduce our guests
for us today.
Speaker 3 (17:45):
Well, sure, we are very glad to welcome to Verdict.
Molly Hemingway. Molly Hemingway is the editor in chief of
the Federalist. She is an award winning journalist. She is
a best selling author, and she has a brand new
book that is a best seller it is called Alito,
the justice who reshaped the Supreme Court and restored the Constitution. Molly,
(18:06):
Welcome to Verdict.
Speaker 5 (18:06):
It's great to be here with you.
Speaker 3 (18:08):
So let's start with this. What caused you to write
a book to tell Justice Alito's story? These are obviously
very consequential times. He's an historic justice. But what caused
you to say that you wanted to do a biography
of Justice Alito?
Speaker 5 (18:21):
Well, there are a few different things. We know so
much about so many of the justices, they've written books
about themselves, there are other books about them. There's nothing
almost nothing about Justice Alito out there, even though his
own colleagues will tell you. Is this giant on the court.
And he has a particular approach to originalism that I
think is interesting for this current moment. We're in that
(18:44):
doctrine about how you interpret the Constitution according to its
original meaning. There are a majority of justices who self
identify as originalists. He's a little different than some of
his colleagues. So I wanted to explore that, And I
also wanted to look into that dops leak and dig
into what happened there and who people thought was involved,
and any more on that, Well, that's a.
Speaker 2 (19:04):
Million dollar question, right, like, what happened there? What did
you find out?
Speaker 5 (19:08):
I did talk to. I interviewed nearly one hundred people
for the book, including former clerks, staff justices, and the
number one thing I took away from this is that
the investigation itself was incredibly poorly done. They waited a
very long period of time to even begin digging into things.
They didn't have a good understanding of how much access
(19:28):
clerks had to the draft decision outside of the court building.
They're truly like a million different ways it could have
been leaked, but the questions weren't hard hitting enough. So
instead of saying, what has been your contact with this
journalist who published this? Or do you or any does
any member of your family or a friend have contact
(19:49):
with this person, they pretty much just said did you
leak it?
Speaker 3 (19:52):
And if they said no, then they want.
Speaker 5 (19:55):
Very much for coming in. There's no way you're going
to find out answers when that's the level of investigation.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
Why do you think the investigation was shoddy?
Speaker 5 (20:04):
It certainly is not something that the Marshal of the
Supreme Court is used to having to do. As you know,
the culture of the of the Court is such that
it's unthinkable that you would leak something like this. And
it's not that it wasn't possible for people to leak
previously a draft decision. They just had the type of
moral character that would prevent them from doing it. And
(20:24):
the Chief, of course, is very adamant when clerks begin
and other staff begin about the importance of the integrity
of the court and not leaking any information whatsoever. So
I think it was just this is not something that
the Marshal had done previously. Was a very sensitive situation.
It was still also somewhat in the aftermath of COVID,
so the new procedures that had been in place weren't
(20:45):
well understood. But ultimately, you know, I think it was
a real failing and probably they would have done things
differently if they had to do it over again.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
Yeah, you know, you use the word unthinkable, and that's
not an exaggeration. I remember when when the Dobbs draft
to Pay and leaked, and I was a dinner when
politicals broke the story, and it was stunning. I just
stared at my phone in shock. Because everything about the
Court is predicated upon trust. It's a quite small institution
(21:16):
you have nine justices. Each justice has four clerks, and
it's a small, little intimate family, and there's a robust
back and forth. Almost all the edits are done via
in writing, going back and forth with the justices communicating
with each other, and it just it. It did permanent
(21:38):
damage to the court in terms of the trust the
justices have for each other. I think changed the court was.
Speaker 5 (21:45):
One justice put it. It's like if there's infidelity in
a marriage, you can keep going, but something has changed
with that marriage. You know, nobody really thought it was
a justice. The justices themselves certainly didn't think it was
a justice, but just knowing that things aren't as trustworthy
as people thought was a big issue.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
But I loved it.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
Sorry, you know, if this ever happens again, what was
your takeaway? Would they do it the same way? Should
there be a different way of there being an investigation?
I'm a pessimist. I think, well, if Democrats want to
leak out a decision the future again that they want
to try to stop and put pressure on justice, they'll
do it again.
Speaker 2 (22:21):
There was no accountability for this leak.
Speaker 1 (22:23):
That was unimaginable, as Santa Cruz has put it, What
would what would be different the next time, if anything
at all, I do.
Speaker 5 (22:31):
I do think that there was something singular about this situation.
Abortion in the court has always been difficult. That's actually
where a lot of the leaks have happened previously as well.
And even the person who did the leak, until he
or she admits it, we probably won't know who did
it again. It was something that could be done very
easily without detection, So I don't think it would be
(22:53):
I don't see it happening again. But this is a
there there is still time actually to think about whether
there's should be a better investigation into this, including whether
there's any role for an outside investigator, law enforcement investigator.
One of the things I think is interesting is that
after the leak of this decision, you had attacks on
the lives of the justices, organized and coordinated protest activity.
(23:17):
You had the fire bombings of the churches and the
pro life pregnancy centers. It is illegal to do this,
do something with the intent to affect the outcome of
a decision, and yet.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
The Biden Justice Department did nothing, refused to follow federal law. Look,
one of the things that the really bombshell facts that
you report in this book is is you report Justice
Kagan screaming at Justice Bryer so loud that the walls
were shaking over Dobbs tell us about that.
Speaker 5 (23:45):
Well, after the league happened again, the lives of the
justices are immediately threatened. You have justices having to be
moved to secure locations, Amy Cony Barrett having to put
on a bulletproof vest in front of her children. We
also had the situation where she recently was the victim
of the swatting attempt where someone tried to get her
house swatted, and you had Justice Kavanaugh, of course, with
(24:05):
an assassin outside of his house. Well, prior to that
happening with Justice Kavanaugh, some of the justices asked the
dissenting justices to please wrap up their dissent so that
the decision could be released. Until a decision is released,
it's not final. So if one of the justices were
to die, that would mean Dobbs was not handed down.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
And let's just underscore that point, because if one of
the justices were to die that this is an area
where passive voice doesn't really capture it. To really underscore it,
that means if one of the justices in the majority
were to be murdered, suddenly Dobbs cannot issue and roe
(24:46):
versus weight is not overturned. And so the assassin who
came with plans to murder Brett Kavanaugh and the other
conservative justices could have changed history. And every day that
there was a delay, there was an added risk that
someone would murder one of those justices.
Speaker 5 (25:03):
So a request was put forth by Alito and also
by Justice Gorsuch, could you wrap this up? Could you
give us a date by which time you'll be done?
And they wouldn't could The liberal justices would not give
a date. But after that conference, Kagan went to Briar's chambers.
Briar is a liberal, but he is a gentleman and
(25:24):
his colleagues. He cared about his colleagues in their lives,
so he seemed most amenable to wrapping things up, and
Kagan did implore him not to accommodate the conservative justices.
They finally say, we'll get something out by June first.
We'll get something done by June first, and they do
in exchange for getting other decisions done later, but they
(25:45):
include this gratuitous footnote that was completely unnecessary for another
decision that really wasn't going to be handed down for
another several weeks, and so during that period of time
before it was finally handed down, I think it was
June twenty third, that was when Kavanaugh actually had the
assassin outside of his home. And this slow walking, which
I report in Alito the book, was also confirmed I
(26:06):
think this year as a tactic that is being used
by the liberal justices. We learned that they were also
slow walking that Calay decision, that Voting Rights Act decision
in the heart if they got it out too late,
then state legislators could not respond to the decision well.
Speaker 3 (26:23):
On Katanji Brown Jackson was quite vocal and wrote about
wanting to delay that decision with a very explicit, I
think objective of preventing state legislatures from acting and redistricting.
And it's one of the most partisan disputes we've ever
seen at the Court. Her effort to have a real
(26:46):
impact on the election in November.
Speaker 5 (26:48):
And I will point out that Justice Alito actually responded
to her by pointing out, this is a case that
we heard in October, and it was not the first
time they heard it. They heard it the previous term
as well, pointing out that every other decision from that
term had already been released, that this slow walking was political. Yeah,
ending down a decision that needs to be handed down
(27:08):
is not political slow walking it, however, is all right.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
I want to take a moment here and I want
to also talk to you about an amazing product that
we've been giving our dog, Birdie.
Speaker 2 (27:17):
It is from Roughgreens.
Speaker 1 (27:19):
I gotta tell you, one of the best days is
when you bring home a brand new puppy. Ours is
name Birdie. The tiny paws, the wagging tail. You know
that excitement that they bring, the energy that just doesn't quit.
And that's why we sprinkle rough Greens, America's number one
dog supplement on Birdie's food every meal. It's packed with
(27:40):
all the live nutrients needed for our puppy to live
a long and healthy life. Now you can join Bertie
and thousands of other dogs and get your free Jumpstart
trial bag today.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
You just cover the shipping.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
Go to Roughgreens dot com and use the discount code verdict.
That's r u FF dot com code verdict. Rough Creams
make any dog food better. This brings up a bigger question.
I wanted to ask you about Molly, and that was
about the idea now that every time a decision comes
down that Democrats don't seem to like they want to
(28:15):
either completely remake the court pack the court. Does that
concern you, especially as you were writing this book, how
much now they're saying, ah, nine, maybe we'll move it
to fifteen or eighteen or whatever the number is they
want next.
Speaker 5 (28:27):
This is a huge threat to the court and rule
of law what we're seeing happening from the left. And
I actually go into this in detail in the book,
showing how coordinated the attacks on the court are, how
well funded they are. To just use one example, Pro Publica,
which is a left wing media outlet, raised fifty three
million dollars with the express purpose of going after Justice
(28:49):
Thomas and Justice Alito, And at the end of the
year they reported on their nine to ninety form what
they'd done with fifty three million dollars. I mean, can
you imagine how many reporters and researchers you can hire.
High level people don't publish that many stories. But the
whole goal was to attack the integrity of Alito and Thomas,
(29:09):
two men who actually have a great deal of integrity.
But this was done as part of the democrat law
fair efforts that are going on to pressure the Court
into agreeing with some of the more extreme lawfair efforts
that they have had in play, whether it's you know,
kicking Trump off the ballot or having uneven prosecutions of
conservatives versus liberals. And you see it with now so
(29:33):
many prominent Democrats calling for the actual packing of the court.
This isn't about, you know, having a thoughtful discussion about
the number of people on the court. If they get power,
they will do this packing for political outcome. And I'll
just point out Conservatives were not in power on the
Court for decades and many bad things happened, and they
never once resorted to undermining the integrity of the court.
(29:53):
They said, we're going to put a lot of effort
into electing senators who will confirm good justices, electing a
president who will nominate good justices, and building up the
network of people who understand what a proper, coherent conservative
judicial philosophy is. And the left doesn't want to do
that work. They just want to.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
They want power and by any means necessary, and they
view the Court as an extension of political power, not
an institution that actually is supposed to follow the Constitution
or follow the law. And in fact, they view the
court as an avenue to end run democracy because many
of their most extreme policies are very unpopular. The voters
(30:33):
don't want them, and so it's much easier to get
a handful of unelected judges just to force it on
the whole country then actually to engage in the difficult
and messy business of democracy of convincing your fellow citizens.
You're right. It strikes me there are a lot of
very similar themes in your book on Justice Alito that
(30:55):
are in my upcoming book on Justice Clarence Thomas. My
book is coming out in August, And like you, I
spent a lot of time interviewing Justice Thomas as you
did with Justice Alito. And you know, one interesting bit
of history is is Justice Thomas and Justice Alito were
both classmates in law school at Edya Law School. They
didn't know each other, but they were classmates. And there's
(31:18):
a funny story Justice Thomas told me when I was
interviewing him for the book, where he said, when he
got when he was at the court, and when Alito
went to the court, he asked me, he said, Sam,
why weren't we friends in law school, and Justice Alita responded, Clarence,
you were scary, and Justice Thomas irrupts in his signature
(31:41):
just belly laugh, which which is, as you know, infectious.
Tell us a little bit about what made sam Alito
into the great Justice Alito, and you mentioned before what
you described as his unique brand of originalism. Elaborate on
that a little bit.
Speaker 4 (31:59):
Well.
Speaker 5 (31:59):
I think one of the things that sticks out is
that he was raised in a middle class family by
a public servant who he really respected. His father. He
goes to Princeton and he's a public school kid, and
he assumes that all of these elite kids are going
to be really smart and give him a run for
his money. When he gets there, he finds out actually
he's doing just fine in the intelligence department. And also,
(32:21):
these elite kids are the ones who end up rioting,
shutting down the campus. He knows that they will go
on and have cushy jobs that their fathers gave them,
whereas he needs the education. And so he even though
he goes to elite institutions Princeton, Yale goes to the
Department of Justice.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
He doesn't do you want me to concede that Yale's
an elite institution. That may be a bridge too far.
Go ahead.
Speaker 5 (32:43):
Sorry, he doesn't seem to want the respect of many
of the people he meets there.
Speaker 3 (32:47):
He just doesn't.
Speaker 5 (32:47):
He's not that impressed with them. And I think that's
you see that come through now. And it's the same
thing with Justice Thomas. He cares so much more about
people were working at the Supreme Court than the people
at the cocktail parties. And speaking of Justice Thomas, he
and Alito work together very well. But whereas Justice Thomas,
as one person put it, is the deployed aircraft carrier
(33:08):
on the court, Alito's chambers are more like the green berets.
They go and they prepare the land. He might agree
with Thomas on where he wants to be, but he's
going to be more tactical about, Okay, well how are
we going to get there? And you even saw that
again in the Clay decision. This Voting Rights Act. What
does Thomas say Section two of the Voting Rights Act
is completely unconstitutional? Alito might agree with that, but he
(33:30):
builds together a six person majority to say it can't
be interpreted that there are these racial jerrymanders, because that
is that cannot be what the law means, given what
the fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution does and explicitly prohibiting such.
Speaker 3 (33:45):
So what do you think Justice Alito's legacy will be
fifty years from now?
Speaker 5 (33:51):
For most justices, I think they will be lucky to
be remembered for one thing, And if it is one thing,
it's definitely going to be the Dobbs decision. But the
reason why people should pay attention now is because of
all these other important decisions, his incremental solid work on
religious liberty speech issues. And I would say the other
thing I find really interesting about him that people should
(34:12):
pay more attention to is how effective he is in
oral argument, Yes, very much so positioning the court where
on what issue they should decide a case on. So
he's quiet, he's humble, but you believe people on the
right should absolutely know more about him and understand what
the left understood long time ago, which is he's a
very important Joe.
Speaker 3 (34:32):
Well look like Chief Justice Roberts, like Elena Kagan. Sam
Alito is a veteran of the Slicer General's Office and
is an experienced Supreme Court advocate And then' that is
a rare skill and you see him displaying it from
the other side of the benches of justice, and you're right,
he's very, very effective at oral argument. Talk a little
(34:53):
about his character. He's an extraordinary man, but share your
thoughts on his character.
Speaker 5 (34:58):
It's just really interesting to find someone in Washington, d c.
With this level of humility. He's a family man. He
very much believes in doing his duty, even the fact
that he's been a public servant his entire career. This
is someone who could be making so much money off
of the court, and he cares about you know. Even
he hires clerks who are people who are going to
(35:19):
be devoted to public service or the academy. And he's
just a very quiet, humble, but also very funny guy
with a very subtle sense of humor.
Speaker 3 (35:30):
He's hysterical art. I want to encourage everyone. Go out
and buy Molly's book. Go buy Alito, the Justice who
reshaped the Supreme Court and restored the Constitution. Go to Amazon,
go to Barnes and Noble. By the way, while you're there,
go buy my book too, on Clarence Thomas. It's coming
out in August, but you can pre order them. Read
them together. The two are great bookends and you know what,
they both would make fabulous graduation gifts, birthday gifts, Christmas gifts.
(35:56):
Go buy Molly's book and Molly, thank you for joining us.
Speaker 5 (35:59):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (36:00):
It's really important. Don't forget.
Speaker 1 (36:01):
We do this show Monday for Wednesday and Friday as
a podcast, So download Verdict with Ted Cruz wherever you
get your podcasts. You can also watch us on YouTube
so you can subscribe the channel there it's always free,
and on Facebook as well. The Senda and I will
see you back here on this radio station as well
next week
Welcome in is Verdict with Center Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson
with you, and if you're listening on radio stations across
the country, it's really nice to have you with us.
And a reminder, we do this show as a podcast
three days a week, so make sure you download Verdict
with Tech Cruz wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
In this episode of many of them are also on.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
YouTube as well, so you can subscribe to the YouTube
channel Vertict with Tech Cruse there and you can watch
every single episode Center. We've got a lot to talk about,
including big news for the sports world, and we've got
some Supreme Court news coming up as well in the show.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Well, this week I shared a hearing on college sports
and saving college sports, and we've talked before on Verdict
about how college sports is in crisis right now. It
is chaos. You've got an out of control transfer portal
with athletes transferring three four, five times. You've got people
playing until they're twenty six, twenty seven, twenty eight years old.
You've got people with six seven years of playing time.
(00:53):
You have virtually every athletics program in the country losing
money and losing millions or even tens of millions of
day dollar. Schools are going broke. They're canceling programs every week.
You're seeing women's sports getting canceled. You're seeing Olympic sports
getting canceled. You're seeing your favorite tennis getting canceled. That
happened at Arkansas just a few weeks ago. And it
(01:14):
is if we don't act, we're going to see much
of college sports decimated and destroyed. And so last week
I introduced bipartisan legislation with Maria Cantwell. Maria Cantwell's a
Democrat from Washington State. She is the ranking member, the
senior Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee. I'm the chairman
of the Senate Commerce Committee. This week, we had a
(01:36):
big hearing and we heard testimony from leaders in college
athletics about the urgency of solving the crisis. Now. One
of our witnesses was coach Nick Saban, the legendary coach
of Alabama, and Coach Saban's testimony was was incredibly powerful.
And give a listen to a little bit of Coach
(01:57):
Nick Saban on why Congress needs to pass or protect
College Sports Act.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Yeah, before we get to that, though, I want to
talk to you real quick about a bill you probably
have every month, and you may not realize when you
pay that bill, your money may be going to woke,
hardcore left organizations.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
That's why I want you to know about Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Every day Americans make choices that shape our country's future,
right down to which cell phone provider we support. Here's
what most people don't actually realize. Patriot Mobile isn't just
a wireless provider. They're an activist organization funded by selling
top tier cell service. They've been on the front lines
(02:37):
defending our freedoms long before it was cool, standing up
and the gap when others wouldn't. The best part is
they deliver prioritized premium service on all three major US networks,
giving you the same or even better coverage backed by
one hundred percent US based customer support. You get unlimited data,
(02:58):
mobile hotspots, internet roaming, and so much more. But when
you switch to Patriot Mobile, that's what I love the most.
You'll help grow a movement that fuels the Christian conservative cause.
Every bill you pay helps advance the values of faith, family,
and freedom, and switching is easier than ever. You can
literally activate in minutes, keep your number, keep your phone,
(03:22):
or upgrade so go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict
and you are going to get a free month of
service with a promo code Verdict. Or you can call
them nine to seven to two Patriot. That's nine seven
to two Patriot nine seven to two Patriot. Or call
them and go online at Patriot mobile dot com slash
(03:45):
verdict promo code verdict for a free month of service.
Make the switch and make a difference every time you
pay your bill. All right, let's play for you Nick
Saban part of what he had to say in front
of your committee. Hearing it truly was impressive to hear
him talk about sports es actually in front of Congress.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
Take a listen, Cooba.
Speaker 4 (04:03):
Let me give you the history. My first year, we
had collective at Alabama two point seven million, Next year
seven million, next year ten million. I'll retire next year
of seventeen million, next year twenty four million. Now you
have schools that have close to forty million dollar rosters.
So if we continue to do that, we're gonna lose
Olympic sports, We're gonna lose non revenue sports, We're gonna
(04:25):
lose scholarships. And basically what's going to happen is We're
gonna have football and basketball succeed, and then we'll have club
sports for everything else.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
He's not wrong, by the way, Center, I was in
one of those non money making sports tennis, right, You
had a lot of friends that you that you get
to know that are in those Olympic sports, for example,
that would all disappear. And when you think about having
a college roster at eighty million, if you're a student athlete,
that in theory sounds great, but that's only in two sports.
Really the majority of that eighty you know you're talking
(04:54):
about Alabama. I mean, there's not that much in basketball,
I promise you at Alabama. So unless you pick football,
you're left behind. And that's the reason why you're taking
this action now and why Saban was saying what he
was saying at the time.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Well, and that there's only a handful of powerhouses that
generate and can dominate football, and so what if we
don't act. I think within five years we will see
thirty to fifty colleges that have a football program and
they'll basically be an NFL and the rest of the schools,
their programs will be obliterated. And there are a lot
(05:29):
of reasons that's tragic. One is just sports brings us together.
Sports is so much fun. Look, we're divided on so
many issues today. We scream at each other where we're
like it really is hard to find common ground. And
yet you can go cheer on your alma mater and
you can be there with people of different parties, people
of different races, people have different religions, and you're all
standing together. That's really important. Every bit as critical as
(05:53):
that is. College sports is an amazing avenue for education
for millions of young men and women. And until I
really started diving in to this topic and working to
save college sports, I hadn't really focused on how college
athletics is something that is unique in the United States.
(06:14):
No other country has anything remotely resembling what we have
here with college sports. There are today more than a
half million college athletes right now. Every year. Athletics enables kids,
many kids from low income homes, many minority kids, who
(06:36):
otherwise might not have had a chance to go to college.
It enables them to go to college, to study, to
get a degree, to learn skills, to learn hard work
and discipline and teamwork and sportsmanship.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Accountability, just showing up.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
I can't tell you how much I learned from just
the accountability, which, by the way, made me a better person.
It made be better in business, It made me better
in my job that I did afterwards. There are so
many young men when I was at Old Miss that said,
they literally believe they would either have been dead, they
would have been in a gang if it wasn't for
sports keeping them out of trouble in high school. And
(07:12):
then they said, if it wasn't for college and getting
that college education, they would have immediately been into bad
stuff on the streets. They said that sports actually saved
their life, and not only say their life. A lot
of them they were the first member of their family
to ever go to college, and they went because they
were an incredible athlete. It gave them the opportunity, it
gave them a free education, it seemed unattainable, and it
(07:32):
completely changed their families trajectory in life. I think that's
one of the most important things about college sports that
people don't talk about now.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
That is exactly right, and the status quo is unsustainable.
If Congress doesn't act, we will end up with hundreds
of thousands of those college athletic positions going away and
those kids, many of them having no chance to go
to school, to go to college, to get those skills,
those life skills that set them up for success. And
(08:03):
look the way I approach this, I didn't worry too
much about about the top one percent. I didn't worry
about the Michael Jordan's or Arch mannings. I worried about
the ninety nine percent of college athletes who are never
going to play pro ball. But it's giving them opportunity.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Senator.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Also, we've got a guest coming up in a little bit.
We're gonna be dealing with the Supreme Court, a best
selling book, and Molly Hemingway is going to join us,
So make sure you stick around for that. But before
we get to that, we're talking about this incredible nil bill.
And look, I had a ton of people Centator that
were calling me. I had friends and people I've known
the past come out of that would work because they
knew how important this bill was, they knew how important
(08:40):
it was to you. Asking me questions. There was a
lot of people saying they're just not gonna be able
to get this done. There's no way you'll get by
parsonship here. That seems to not be true, and they said, well,
there's no way even though he'll be able to get
the White House behind it.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
That also doesn't seem to be true either.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
There is a lot of growing bypartson support here to
get this thing done.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
Well, there is, and and I worked for months, Rick
Cantwell and I negotiated. We sat in the conference room
six eight hours a day negotiating provision by provision by provision.
We introduced it with Cantwell and myself a Democrat and Republican,
and also with Eric Schmidt, a Republican from Missouri, and
Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware. So we had two Democrats,
(09:21):
two Republicans on the bill, and we've seen phenomenal support
for it. So the ACC has come out emphatically in
support of it, The Big Twelve has come out emphatically
and support of it. Condoleeza Rice at Stanford has come
out emphatically in support of it. At the hearing. Pete Bavaqua,
the athletic director at Notre Dame, testified strongly in support
(09:43):
of it. Gordon Gee testified at the hearing. Former president
of West Virginia University also Vanderbilt, has been a president
of actually five universities. He testified that this is a
crisis and this bill is the only hope to save
college sports. And we've had already. We've had over one
hundred and thirty signatures from leaders at more than sixty
(10:06):
five universities come out in support of the bill. And importantly,
this week President Donald J. Trump came out strongly in
support of the bill. He's he sent a truth social
that I want to read to you. Here's what he said.
College sports, a great American institution that produces our many athletes, leaders,
and Olympic dominance is a total mess, and everyone is
(10:27):
saying that it must be fixed. After uninny lawsuits and
crazed rulings, there are virtually no limits anymore, and soon
most colleges won't have sports because each and every one
of them will be bankrupt, never to be heard from again.
Women's sports and the Olympics itself are in the most
danger from this catastrophic situation. College sports are turning into
(10:48):
pro sports, except with absolutely no rules, a result no
one wants. University presidents, conference commissioners, student athletes, coaches, and
athletic directors complain to me that it has become a disaster.
After years of no action and that schools were losing
hundreds of millions of dollars a year. They compared it
(11:11):
to a freight train that can't be stopped. That is
why a few months ago I convened a roundtable, bringing
together were a world class team as some of the
best sports executives, student athletes, and political leaders in our country.
The goal was to find a bipartisan solution to fix
the problem. Based on these meetings and the expertise of
(11:31):
the leading authorities, I signed an executive order, but I
always said that the best solution was to get a
bipartisan act through Congress to my desk in order to
save a long and embarrassing road through hell for these institutions.
I'd like to thank Senators Ted Cruz, Eric Schmidt, Maria Cantwell,
(11:52):
and Chris Coons, among others, for introducing the Protect College
Sports Act. This law resolves many of the most urgent
issues challenging our universities and student athletes, stops the chaos,
and most importantly, it may be the last chance to
save college sports and colleges themselves before it's too late.
(12:13):
The House has worked long and hard on this issue
as well, and I'm very grateful to Speaker Mike Johnson
and Leader Steve Scalise for their work to fix this
very major problem. I urge the House and Senate to
come together to pass a final bipartisan law that I
can sign this summer that reflects the views and input
of both chambers and in all caps, we have to
(12:36):
save college sports. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
President Donald J. Trump. The support we're seeing is really significant,
and I think we're going to see I hope and believe,
a big bipartisan vote in the Senate behind this bill.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
What's the timeline now and how much is there going
to be people pushing since now this has become so,
you know, such a big discussion change things the last minute.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
Is that going to be a problem And what does
that look like?
Speaker 4 (13:03):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Look, that is going on. And there are a handful
of people that are criticizing and throwing rocks, But I'll
tell you most people are shocked that we could actually
find a bipartisan compromise and and and and listen, one
of the natures of that that means that that I
had to give quite a bit and and and the
Democrats had to give quite a bit to find a
(13:25):
common ground, because we can't pass this bill unless you
get at least sixty votes in the Senate. That means
you need at least seven Democrats. There are only fifty
three Republicans, and my objective, frankly, is to get a
lot more than sixty votes. I'd like to see a
big bipartisan vote come out of the Senate. The House
has tried several times to fix this problem, and unfortunately,
(13:48):
every time they tried to take up a bill, it's
failed in the House. And and so I think the
Senate has got to step in because the clock is ticking.
And I will say that that there's a real risk
also of the biggest players coming together to form a
super league, and I think that would be disastrous for
everybody else and not good for fans. Let's take my
(14:11):
home state of Texas. Look my home state of Texas.
If Congress does nothing in three to five years, I
am certain that the University of Texas will survive. And
I'm certain A and M will survive. They're so big,
they have such a big donor base and alumni base.
They'll survive no matter what happens. But it's not at
all clear that the other players in Texas survive. It's
(14:33):
not clear that TCU or SMU or University of Houston
or Rice, or Texas Tech or Baylor, all of the
different programs in Texas, they could go under in the
status quote, I think that would be a terrible outcome
if we lose historic programs all over Texas, not just football.
But when you lose football, football pays for all the
(14:54):
other sports. So when you lose football, you end up
losing the entire array of sports. That would be tragic
and we can't let it happen.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
Yeah, you're absolutely right there.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
If people want to get behind this legislation is just
one of those where they talk to their senators and
their congressman.
Speaker 2 (15:09):
Who do they need to contact quickly?
Speaker 3 (15:11):
Look, the first order of business is your senator and
urging your senator, whether your senator is a Republican or Democrat,
urging your senator get behind this bill, the Bipartisan Protect
College Sports Act. There's an urgency. I am hoping to
move quickly on this. I'd like to get a big
vote in the Senate. Once we get it out of
the Senate, then the next up will be the House.
(15:31):
But calling your senator going on social media speaking out
and saying that sports college sports should be saved. That's
really valuable.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
There was obviously a massive victory that happened in this
country with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, But what
it really meant was the issue of abortion would go
back to the States, and that is where the real
fight has actually begun. Now, over the past fifty years,
Americans United for Life has filed more than two hundred
legal briefs and also helped create at least four hundred
(16:03):
pro life bills in over forty states. By writing model legislation,
they are consulting with state legislators and defending their own
laws and other pro life statues in court.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Now.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
Aul's dual front approach of writing and defending legislations proved
an effective one that could become even more impactful as
pro life state legislators move to enact protections for preborn
babies and their mothers. Now that the legality of abortion
has returned to the states, that is where you come in.
(16:38):
You and I have the opportunity to overturn pro abortion
laws and advance pro life legislation that attacks the most
vulnerable in our society from the womb to the tomb. Together,
we can shape the future of our nation through life
affirming legislation in every state. Now, a gift of just
(16:59):
twenty five helps hold abortion providers accountable and helps protect
women and unborn children across this country. And now, through
a match, your gift is doubled. Donate securely at aul
dot org slash verdict. That's a UL dot org slash
(17:22):
Verdict sponsored by Americans United for Life Center. You love
the Supreme Court pretty much more than anybody I know
in my sphere, and any book that comes out about
the Supreme Court, it's like you're a moth to a flame.
We've got a really exciting guest now who's also diving
into the Supreme Court just like you up too. You've
got your new book coming out on Clarence Thomas.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
So you're in DC. Why don't you introduce our guests
for us today.
Speaker 3 (17:45):
Well, sure, we are very glad to welcome to Verdict.
Molly Hemingway. Molly Hemingway is the editor in chief of
the Federalist. She is an award winning journalist. She is
a best selling author, and she has a brand new
book that is a best seller it is called Alito,
the justice who reshaped the Supreme Court and restored the Constitution. Molly,
(18:06):
Welcome to Verdict.
Speaker 5 (18:06):
It's great to be here with you.
Speaker 3 (18:08):
So let's start with this. What caused you to write
a book to tell Justice Alito's story? These are obviously
very consequential times. He's an historic justice. But what caused
you to say that you wanted to do a biography
of Justice Alito?
Speaker 5 (18:21):
Well, there are a few different things. We know so
much about so many of the justices, they've written books
about themselves, there are other books about them. There's nothing
almost nothing about Justice Alito out there, even though his
own colleagues will tell you. Is this giant on the court.
And he has a particular approach to originalism that I
think is interesting for this current moment. We're in that
(18:44):
doctrine about how you interpret the Constitution according to its
original meaning. There are a majority of justices who self
identify as originalists. He's a little different than some of
his colleagues. So I wanted to explore that, And I
also wanted to look into that dops leak and dig
into what happened there and who people thought was involved,
and any more on that, Well, that's a.
Speaker 2 (19:04):
Million dollar question, right, like, what happened there? What did
you find out?
Speaker 5 (19:08):
I did talk to. I interviewed nearly one hundred people
for the book, including former clerks, staff justices, and the
number one thing I took away from this is that
the investigation itself was incredibly poorly done. They waited a
very long period of time to even begin digging into things.
They didn't have a good understanding of how much access
(19:28):
clerks had to the draft decision outside of the court building.
They're truly like a million different ways it could have
been leaked, but the questions weren't hard hitting enough. So
instead of saying, what has been your contact with this
journalist who published this? Or do you or any does
any member of your family or a friend have contact
(19:49):
with this person, they pretty much just said did you
leak it?
Speaker 3 (19:52):
And if they said no, then they want.
Speaker 5 (19:55):
Very much for coming in. There's no way you're going
to find out answers when that's the level of investigation.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
Why do you think the investigation was shoddy?
Speaker 5 (20:04):
It certainly is not something that the Marshal of the
Supreme Court is used to having to do. As you know,
the culture of the of the Court is such that
it's unthinkable that you would leak something like this. And
it's not that it wasn't possible for people to leak
previously a draft decision. They just had the type of
moral character that would prevent them from doing it. And
(20:24):
the Chief, of course, is very adamant when clerks begin
and other staff begin about the importance of the integrity
of the court and not leaking any information whatsoever. So
I think it was just this is not something that
the Marshal had done previously. Was a very sensitive situation.
It was still also somewhat in the aftermath of COVID,
so the new procedures that had been in place weren't
(20:45):
well understood. But ultimately, you know, I think it was
a real failing and probably they would have done things
differently if they had to do it over again.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
Yeah, you know, you use the word unthinkable, and that's
not an exaggeration. I remember when when the Dobbs draft
to Pay and leaked, and I was a dinner when
politicals broke the story, and it was stunning. I just
stared at my phone in shock. Because everything about the
Court is predicated upon trust. It's a quite small institution
(21:16):
you have nine justices. Each justice has four clerks, and
it's a small, little intimate family, and there's a robust
back and forth. Almost all the edits are done via
in writing, going back and forth with the justices communicating
with each other, and it just it. It did permanent
(21:38):
damage to the court in terms of the trust the
justices have for each other. I think changed the court was.
Speaker 5 (21:45):
One justice put it. It's like if there's infidelity in
a marriage, you can keep going, but something has changed
with that marriage. You know, nobody really thought it was
a justice. The justices themselves certainly didn't think it was
a justice, but just knowing that things aren't as trustworthy
as people thought was a big issue.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
But I loved it.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
Sorry, you know, if this ever happens again, what was
your takeaway? Would they do it the same way? Should
there be a different way of there being an investigation?
I'm a pessimist. I think, well, if Democrats want to
leak out a decision the future again that they want
to try to stop and put pressure on justice, they'll
do it again.
Speaker 2 (22:21):
There was no accountability for this leak.
Speaker 1 (22:23):
That was unimaginable, as Santa Cruz has put it, What
would what would be different the next time, if anything
at all, I do.
Speaker 5 (22:31):
I do think that there was something singular about this situation.
Abortion in the court has always been difficult. That's actually
where a lot of the leaks have happened previously as well.
And even the person who did the leak, until he
or she admits it, we probably won't know who did
it again. It was something that could be done very
easily without detection, So I don't think it would be
(22:53):
I don't see it happening again. But this is a
there there is still time actually to think about whether
there's should be a better investigation into this, including whether
there's any role for an outside investigator, law enforcement investigator.
One of the things I think is interesting is that
after the leak of this decision, you had attacks on
the lives of the justices, organized and coordinated protest activity.
(23:17):
You had the fire bombings of the churches and the
pro life pregnancy centers. It is illegal to do this,
do something with the intent to affect the outcome of
a decision, and yet.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
The Biden Justice Department did nothing, refused to follow federal law. Look,
one of the things that the really bombshell facts that
you report in this book is is you report Justice
Kagan screaming at Justice Bryer so loud that the walls
were shaking over Dobbs tell us about that.
Speaker 5 (23:45):
Well, after the league happened again, the lives of the
justices are immediately threatened. You have justices having to be
moved to secure locations, Amy Cony Barrett having to put
on a bulletproof vest in front of her children. We
also had the situation where she recently was the victim
of the swatting attempt where someone tried to get her
house swatted, and you had Justice Kavanaugh, of course, with
(24:05):
an assassin outside of his house. Well, prior to that
happening with Justice Kavanaugh, some of the justices asked the
dissenting justices to please wrap up their dissent so that
the decision could be released. Until a decision is released,
it's not final. So if one of the justices were
to die, that would mean Dobbs was not handed down.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
And let's just underscore that point, because if one of
the justices were to die that this is an area
where passive voice doesn't really capture it. To really underscore it,
that means if one of the justices in the majority
were to be murdered, suddenly Dobbs cannot issue and roe
(24:46):
versus weight is not overturned. And so the assassin who
came with plans to murder Brett Kavanaugh and the other
conservative justices could have changed history. And every day that
there was a delay, there was an added risk that
someone would murder one of those justices.
Speaker 5 (25:03):
So a request was put forth by Alito and also
by Justice Gorsuch, could you wrap this up? Could you
give us a date by which time you'll be done?
And they wouldn't could The liberal justices would not give
a date. But after that conference, Kagan went to Briar's chambers.
Briar is a liberal, but he is a gentleman and
(25:24):
his colleagues. He cared about his colleagues in their lives,
so he seemed most amenable to wrapping things up, and
Kagan did implore him not to accommodate the conservative justices.
They finally say, we'll get something out by June first.
We'll get something done by June first, and they do
in exchange for getting other decisions done later, but they
(25:45):
include this gratuitous footnote that was completely unnecessary for another
decision that really wasn't going to be handed down for
another several weeks, and so during that period of time
before it was finally handed down, I think it was
June twenty third, that was when Kavanaugh actually had the
assassin outside of his home. And this slow walking, which
I report in Alito the book, was also confirmed I
(26:06):
think this year as a tactic that is being used
by the liberal justices. We learned that they were also
slow walking that Calay decision, that Voting Rights Act decision
in the heart if they got it out too late,
then state legislators could not respond to the decision well.
Speaker 3 (26:23):
On Katanji Brown Jackson was quite vocal and wrote about
wanting to delay that decision with a very explicit, I
think objective of preventing state legislatures from acting and redistricting.
And it's one of the most partisan disputes we've ever
seen at the Court. Her effort to have a real
(26:46):
impact on the election in November.
Speaker 5 (26:48):
And I will point out that Justice Alito actually responded
to her by pointing out, this is a case that
we heard in October, and it was not the first
time they heard it. They heard it the previous term
as well, pointing out that every other decision from that
term had already been released, that this slow walking was political. Yeah,
ending down a decision that needs to be handed down
(27:08):
is not political slow walking it, however, is all right.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
I want to take a moment here and I want
to also talk to you about an amazing product that
we've been giving our dog, Birdie.
Speaker 2 (27:17):
It is from Roughgreens.
Speaker 1 (27:19):
I gotta tell you, one of the best days is
when you bring home a brand new puppy. Ours is
name Birdie. The tiny paws, the wagging tail. You know
that excitement that they bring, the energy that just doesn't quit.
And that's why we sprinkle rough Greens, America's number one
dog supplement on Birdie's food every meal. It's packed with
(27:40):
all the live nutrients needed for our puppy to live
a long and healthy life. Now you can join Bertie
and thousands of other dogs and get your free Jumpstart
trial bag today.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
You just cover the shipping.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
Go to Roughgreens dot com and use the discount code verdict.
That's r u FF dot com code verdict. Rough Creams
make any dog food better. This brings up a bigger question.
I wanted to ask you about Molly, and that was
about the idea now that every time a decision comes
down that Democrats don't seem to like they want to
(28:15):
either completely remake the court pack the court. Does that
concern you, especially as you were writing this book, how
much now they're saying, ah, nine, maybe we'll move it
to fifteen or eighteen or whatever the number is they
want next.
Speaker 5 (28:27):
This is a huge threat to the court and rule
of law what we're seeing happening from the left. And
I actually go into this in detail in the book,
showing how coordinated the attacks on the court are, how
well funded they are. To just use one example, Pro Publica,
which is a left wing media outlet, raised fifty three
million dollars with the express purpose of going after Justice
(28:49):
Thomas and Justice Alito, And at the end of the
year they reported on their nine to ninety form what
they'd done with fifty three million dollars. I mean, can
you imagine how many reporters and researchers you can hire.
High level people don't publish that many stories. But the
whole goal was to attack the integrity of Alito and Thomas,
(29:09):
two men who actually have a great deal of integrity.
But this was done as part of the democrat law
fair efforts that are going on to pressure the Court
into agreeing with some of the more extreme lawfair efforts
that they have had in play, whether it's you know,
kicking Trump off the ballot or having uneven prosecutions of
conservatives versus liberals. And you see it with now so
(29:33):
many prominent Democrats calling for the actual packing of the court.
This isn't about, you know, having a thoughtful discussion about
the number of people on the court. If they get power,
they will do this packing for political outcome. And I'll
just point out Conservatives were not in power on the
Court for decades and many bad things happened, and they
never once resorted to undermining the integrity of the court.
(29:53):
They said, we're going to put a lot of effort
into electing senators who will confirm good justices, electing a
president who will nominate good justices, and building up the
network of people who understand what a proper, coherent conservative
judicial philosophy is. And the left doesn't want to do
that work. They just want to.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
They want power and by any means necessary, and they
view the Court as an extension of political power, not
an institution that actually is supposed to follow the Constitution
or follow the law. And in fact, they view the
court as an avenue to end run democracy because many
of their most extreme policies are very unpopular. The voters
(30:33):
don't want them, and so it's much easier to get
a handful of unelected judges just to force it on
the whole country then actually to engage in the difficult
and messy business of democracy of convincing your fellow citizens.
You're right. It strikes me there are a lot of
very similar themes in your book on Justice Alito that
(30:55):
are in my upcoming book on Justice Clarence Thomas. My
book is coming out in August, And like you, I
spent a lot of time interviewing Justice Thomas as you
did with Justice Alito. And you know, one interesting bit
of history is is Justice Thomas and Justice Alito were
both classmates in law school at Edya Law School. They
didn't know each other, but they were classmates. And there's
(31:18):
a funny story Justice Thomas told me when I was
interviewing him for the book, where he said, when he
got when he was at the court, and when Alito
went to the court, he asked me, he said, Sam,
why weren't we friends in law school, and Justice Alita responded, Clarence,
you were scary, and Justice Thomas irrupts in his signature
(31:41):
just belly laugh, which which is, as you know, infectious.
Tell us a little bit about what made sam Alito
into the great Justice Alito, and you mentioned before what
you described as his unique brand of originalism. Elaborate on
that a little bit.
Speaker 4 (31:59):
Well.
Speaker 5 (31:59):
I think one of the things that sticks out is
that he was raised in a middle class family by
a public servant who he really respected. His father. He
goes to Princeton and he's a public school kid, and
he assumes that all of these elite kids are going
to be really smart and give him a run for
his money. When he gets there, he finds out actually
he's doing just fine in the intelligence department. And also,
(32:21):
these elite kids are the ones who end up rioting,
shutting down the campus. He knows that they will go
on and have cushy jobs that their fathers gave them,
whereas he needs the education. And so he even though
he goes to elite institutions Princeton, Yale goes to the
Department of Justice.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
He doesn't do you want me to concede that Yale's
an elite institution. That may be a bridge too far.
Go ahead.
Speaker 5 (32:43):
Sorry, he doesn't seem to want the respect of many
of the people he meets there.
Speaker 3 (32:47):
He just doesn't.
Speaker 5 (32:47):
He's not that impressed with them. And I think that's
you see that come through now. And it's the same
thing with Justice Thomas. He cares so much more about
people were working at the Supreme Court than the people
at the cocktail parties. And speaking of Justice Thomas, he
and Alito work together very well. But whereas Justice Thomas,
as one person put it, is the deployed aircraft carrier
(33:08):
on the court, Alito's chambers are more like the green berets.
They go and they prepare the land. He might agree
with Thomas on where he wants to be, but he's
going to be more tactical about, Okay, well how are
we going to get there? And you even saw that
again in the Clay decision. This Voting Rights Act. What
does Thomas say Section two of the Voting Rights Act
is completely unconstitutional? Alito might agree with that, but he
(33:30):
builds together a six person majority to say it can't
be interpreted that there are these racial jerrymanders, because that
is that cannot be what the law means, given what
the fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution does and explicitly prohibiting such.
Speaker 3 (33:45):
So what do you think Justice Alito's legacy will be
fifty years from now?
Speaker 5 (33:51):
For most justices, I think they will be lucky to
be remembered for one thing, And if it is one thing,
it's definitely going to be the Dobbs decision. But the
reason why people should pay attention now is because of
all these other important decisions, his incremental solid work on
religious liberty speech issues. And I would say the other
thing I find really interesting about him that people should
(34:12):
pay more attention to is how effective he is in
oral argument, Yes, very much so positioning the court where
on what issue they should decide a case on. So
he's quiet, he's humble, but you believe people on the
right should absolutely know more about him and understand what
the left understood long time ago, which is he's a
very important Joe.
Speaker 3 (34:32):
Well look like Chief Justice Roberts, like Elena Kagan. Sam
Alito is a veteran of the Slicer General's Office and
is an experienced Supreme Court advocate And then' that is
a rare skill and you see him displaying it from
the other side of the benches of justice, and you're right,
he's very, very effective at oral argument. Talk a little
(34:53):
about his character. He's an extraordinary man, but share your
thoughts on his character.
Speaker 5 (34:58):
It's just really interesting to find someone in Washington, d c.
With this level of humility. He's a family man. He
very much believes in doing his duty, even the fact
that he's been a public servant his entire career. This
is someone who could be making so much money off
of the court, and he cares about you know. Even
he hires clerks who are people who are going to
(35:19):
be devoted to public service or the academy. And he's
just a very quiet, humble, but also very funny guy
with a very subtle sense of humor.
Speaker 3 (35:30):
He's hysterical art. I want to encourage everyone. Go out
and buy Molly's book. Go buy Alito, the Justice who
reshaped the Supreme Court and restored the Constitution. Go to Amazon,
go to Barnes and Noble. By the way, while you're there,
go buy my book too, on Clarence Thomas. It's coming
out in August, but you can pre order them. Read
them together. The two are great bookends and you know what,
they both would make fabulous graduation gifts, birthday gifts, Christmas gifts.
(35:56):
Go buy Molly's book and Molly, thank you for joining us.
Speaker 5 (35:59):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (36:00):
It's really important. Don't forget.
Speaker 1 (36:01):
We do this show Monday for Wednesday and Friday as
a podcast, So download Verdict with Ted Cruz wherever you
get your podcasts. You can also watch us on YouTube
so you can subscribe the channel there it's always free,
and on Facebook as well. The Senda and I will
see you back here on this radio station as well
next week
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.