November 23, 2025 • 44 mins
What is the job of a County Clerk? In Ulster County, it can mean managing DMV processes, preserving 300-year-old land records, and keeping the legal paper trail of everyday life in order. But earlier this year, that job landed one local official, Taylor Bruck, inside a national constitutional standoff.
Only a few months into his role as Acting County Clerk, Taylor received something unusual: a legal judgment from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, asking him to accept and process it in New York. The judgment involved a New York doctor, telemedicine, abortion medication, and a question that reaches beyond healthcare: Can one state make another enforce its laws?
In this episode, I visit Taylor in his Kingston office to talk about how a routine administrative role quickly became a test case for New York’s brand-new shield law. We talk about constitutional boundaries, state identity, what it means to uphold local law in a national dispute, and how it felt to go from archivist to defendant in a case that could one day reach the Supreme Court.
"The Jiffy Audio Newsletter Podcast" is an audio documentary zine – the official podcast of The Jiffy – exploring the odd histories, cozy mysteries, and surprising characters of upstate New York. Each episode is a small adventure, told with curiosity, humor, and the occasional text message from a stranger.
New episodes drop every other week. Subscribe, share, and take the scenic route with us.
Follow James on Instagram: @jamescave
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
James Cave (00:02):
Hello and welcome to the Jiffy, a podcast about
upstate New York that reallytakes you places.
And today, we're in the officeof the county clerk for Ulster
County.
But that's not because I'm introuble.
It's because I wanted to meetwith Taylor Brooke.
I first heard about Taylor frommy friend Dan Torres.
Dan and Taylor co-founded theKingston Guards vintage baseball
team, which I featured in aprevious episode.
It's a really fun episode.
(00:24):
Well, Taylor is Kingston's cityhistorian, and as of this
month, he's now officially theUlster County clerk elect after
winning his election.
And what caught my attentionwasn't just Taylor's winning the
election or his devotion tolocal history.
It was the situation heunexpectedly found himself in
earlier this year.
Okay, here's a little context.
(00:44):
In 2024, a new polls-baseddoctor, Dr.
Margaret Carpenter, prescribedabortion medication through
telehealth to a patient inCollin County, Texas.
It's fully legal here, but it'sillegal under Texas law now.
And so a Texas court entered adefault judgment against Dr.
Carpenter, ordering her to paymore than $100,000 in penalties.
And Texas Attorney General KenPaxson's office then tried to
(01:07):
have that judgment filed in NewYork through the Ulster County
clerk in an effort to make itenforceable here.
And this is where Taylor comesin, because before any of that,
he was Ulster County'sarchivist, caring for
300-year-old documents atRevolutionary War Records and
other things, and his supervisorretired due to health concerns.
So now Taylor is acting countyclerk, and it was just months
(01:27):
into this new role as actingcounty clerk, still learning the
system, still thinking the DMVmight be his biggest project,
when Taylor's office received anotable filing from Paxton
asking the Ulster County Clerkto accept and file the Texas
judgment to be the first steptoward making it valid here in
New York.
And that put Taylor in, in myview, a really interesting
position, although he'd probablycall it a stressful one,
(01:50):
because suddenly he wasn't thecounty clerk, the public-facing
keeper of records.
He was the person who now hadto make a pretty important
decision.
Do you accept a judgment fromthe Texas Attorney General,
knowing that filing it is how aTexas judgment can start to
carry legal weight here in NewYork?
Or do you refuse, puttingyourself in direct conflict with
another state's attorneygeneral?
And layered into that is NewYork's new Shield Law.
(02:13):
This passed after the SupremeCourt overturned Roe vs.
Wade.
The Shield Law protects NewYork doctors from being targeted
under other states' abortionlaws.
So now we've got a local countyclerk, newly elected, standing
at the crossroads between twostates with opposing laws,
navigating a question that isn'tjust administrative, it's
constitutional, because itraises questions about can
(02:36):
states force another state toenforce its laws?
And it's a question that couldeventually make its way to the
Supreme Court.
Now, I grew up in Texas, andwhen I was a kid, there was this
slogan everywhere, don't messwith Texas.
It started as an anti-litteringcampaign, but it quickly became
something else.
A kind of a cultural symbol ofstate swagger and pride.
(02:57):
And so for Taylor's case, youknow, I wanted to know what it
feels like when Texas messeswith you and how do you handle
that?
So I visited him at his officein Kingston to find out.
So we're here.
Thank you for being here.
And I say thank you for beinghere, but we're in your office,
actually, right in the city ofKingston.
Absolutely.
244 Fair Street.
(03:19):
Describe this place.
Like what is what does thisoffice look like to you and and
uh describe how you're using it.
Taylor Bruck (03:25):
It looks it looks a little bit like a fishbowl,
covered in windows.
We've got some hotel curtains,but it's it's a nice corner
office.
Um, first time I've had windowsin an office before.
Uh all the furniture that'shere came with the office.
Most of everything you see inthis office has been here for
like almost a hundred years,just passed down from clerk to
(03:47):
clerk.
So it's it's very vintage, Iwould say.
A lot of old dusty papers, someknickknacks, and maybe close to
a thousand elephants.
Um, all of the past countyclerks for 97 years have been
Republican and they've beencollecting elephants.
James Cave (04:03):
So we have all those here with us, too.
See, this elephant near you hasa busted leg.
Is that have anything?
Did you have anything to dowith that?
Taylor Bruck (04:10):
Uh inadvertently, maybe.
Yeah.
This is like our literalelephant in the room.
It's a white elephant.
James Cave (04:17):
I've started my donkey collection.
Yeah, that's good though.
Those are those aregood-looking donkeys.
Very uh eclectic collection ofdonkeys.
Okay, so let's talk about thisthing that happened to you.
Because something I'm thinkingabout looks like I grew up in
Texas, and when I was growingup, I don't haven't been to
Texas in a long time, so I don'tknow if it's still part of the
marketing motto, but it's like,don't mess with Texas.
(04:38):
It's like the whole slogan.
And in this case, it sort offelt like Texas messes with you.
So take me, so you are what isyour role before you need to
become the acting county clerk?
What was your job title likeand what were you doing at that
point?
Taylor Bruck (04:52):
So I started as the county archivist, um, doing
all of the historic managementof the papers and our museum.
We're the only clerk's officewith a museum.
So I started just doing all thehistory stuff, and then I moved
up to deputy county clerk forrecords management and just
managed all of the county'srecords.
We have a separate facilitywith no windows with like 40,000
(05:17):
cubic feet of records that Imanaged.
And um, I was basically secondin line of succession.
So when my predecessor NinaPoschepak had to resign for
health reasons, I was next inline and sort of randomly became
acting county clerk in August2024.
James Cave (05:36):
So what did you think that your job was mostly
gonna be like?
Like you know, stepping intothis role, obviously you
couldn't have foreseen thatsomething else would have
happened.
Taylor Bruck (05:45):
You know, I knew it was going to be more
public-facing records andarchives, you know, you tend to
just hide in the corner andorganize things.
But the county clerk runs DMV,so you deal with essentially
everybody in the county at somepoint.
So knew it was gonna be a lotmore interaction with the
public, um, a lot moremanagement of staff.
(06:07):
You know, you go from managinga staff of about 15 people to
like almost 60.
So knew it was gonna be a biglift, but that the the team here
was really strong.
So it was like, you know, wecan kind of ease our way into
it.
I had been working for theclerk's office for eight years.
Like I pretty much knew whathad to be done, just had to
learn all the technical stuff,and it was exciting, you know.
(06:30):
It was like you gotta learn alot of new laws and all these
new forms, but pretty much themost boring parts of government,
time to study, you know.
That was the plan.
Does clerking uh run in yourfamily?
It it does.
Uh in fact, my what is he?
My great-grand uh nogreat-granduncle?
(06:53):
So my great-grandfather'syoungest brother was county
clerk, Al Spada.
He's actually like the longestserving county clerk.
He was the county clerksometime in the 70s, late 70s,
like until 2002 or something.
But so are some of theseelephants may be of his.
A lot of them are his.
(07:14):
Yeah, we we know that for afact.
But you know, I always justkind of knew like Uncle Al as
the clerk.
Like we weren't like superclose growing up, like never had
holidays or anything.
I just always thought it wascool that like everyone knows
Uncle Al and like he helps allthese people.
So it's like part of the reasonI wanted to work in the clerk's
office was like it's a coolthing that no one really knows
(07:35):
what they do, but like I kind ofdid, just because it does run
in my family.
James Cave (07:39):
So yeah, it does.
And then so this is August, andthen how how much time wasn't
much time that passed by beforeyou get this notification?
Or like what what what is itthat how does how are these
things communicated?
And what was that day like?
Taylor Bruck (07:54):
It can't it was less than six months, I think
five months in, it came camethrough in March.
Um, so like right when we'restarting to get settled.
Um, a lot of our legaldocuments are filed e-filing
now.
So they they come throughelectronically.
I'm not the one that looks atthem all because like we get
hundreds of hundreds a day.
But this this one was verystrange.
(08:16):
So Melinda, who you just walkedby when you came in here, she's
our judgment clerk.
And it's rare to get a judgmentfrom a different state
regarding something likeabortion medication, like it
just doesn't happen.
And so she came in, she'dprinted it out, and was like,
hey, we just got this weirdjudgment in.
(08:36):
Um, do you want me to file it?
And we immediately my chiefdeputy Andrew and I were like, I
don't know.
Give us some time.
Let's let's see.
This does seem like out of theordinary, and then you know, we
immediately start googlingthings, looking into it.
(08:57):
Like, do we have to file this?
Like that that's the firstquestion we asked.
James Cave (09:00):
Was there anything that about it that felt like
what about it felt so likesending off your senses and be
and like raising your flags forthem?
Taylor Bruck (09:08):
For a normal judgment, if you're filing it,
if you're like a municipality ora state filing a judgment, you
don't have to really say whatit's for.
That's like a separate legalfiling.
You can just say, like, thisperson needs to pay us $100,000.
They said exactly what it wasfor in great detail.
And so that was like red flag,like why.
And it it almost seemed to melike they like they wanted us to
(09:31):
know what it was about, and sothat immediately like triggered
something to look into it.
And like it being Texas, um,you know, they don't do a lot of
business in New York, theydon't often like file lawsuits
against like constituents ofours, pretty rare.
So it stood out immediately,and then when we saw who was
(09:52):
against the doctor, Dr.
Carpenter, we knew instantlybecause like this had been a
case in Texas maybe two yearsprior.
So like it was in the news.
Like as soon as we saw Dr.
Carpenter's name, we were like,Jesus, they're like coming
after her, like at home now.
Like they they went after herin Texas, and now they're trying
to file something here in NewYork.
So immediately we were like,okay, messed up.
(10:15):
Um, but do we legally have tofile this?
Because, you know, like as anelected official, you have to
follow the laws.
I mean, you should, right?
So I was vaguely familiar atthe time with the Shield Law.
Like I remember that it it wasa thing, but didn't really know
no one really knew what itencompassed because it had never
(10:37):
been tested before.
So we just read the law, and itwas it was really vague.
It just said no governmentemployee shall comply with an
out-of-state proceeding, civilor criminal, for a
healthcare-related servicerendered that is legal in New
York State.
So we just went down the list.
(10:57):
We were like, well, we aregovernment employees, the
healthcare service that wasrendered is legal in New York
State, and the judgment is partof a civil filing.
So I'm not an attorney, butwhen I read that, I was like,
okay, seems like we shouldn'tfile this.
And then we started reachingout to attorneys, like, for
opinions, and couldn't get one.
(11:18):
Um really.
Really?
Were they just not answeringthe call or they were like, we
don't want to touch this?
They were like, they wereeither like, we don't know,
because like it's again, it'snever been tested, like there's
no precedent, there's nothing wecan point to and say, like,
yeah, no, this'll cover it.
Um, we contacted like theattorney general's office.
We were like, hey, heads up, wejust got this in.
(11:38):
And they were straight up like,you're an independent office,
you make the decision, whateveryou feel is right, and uh like
we're prepared to defend theshield law if necessary, but
like we can't give you advice onthis.
And yeah, pretty much everyattorney we talked to said that
same thing.
They were like, we can't giveyou legal advice on this because
(11:59):
there's no precedent.
James Cave (12:02):
So you you read that shield law, just you weren't
using any notes, you justrecited it from memory.
You must have read that overhow many times.
Taylor Bruck (12:11):
No, I read it like for a week straight, like
almost so like when we receivedit, we received the judgment,
say on a Wednesday, like wedidn't reject it until the next
Wednesday.
And just like fine-tooth comb,just like read it over and over,
and we're like, Are we missingsomething?
Like, are we are like it's sobroad but so clear in this
instance that it should apply.
(12:31):
Um, but it just felt weird,like when you talk to like
attorneys and stuff, and they'relike, We don't know.
And we're like, Well, did youread it?
Like, it's just says Ishouldn't comply.
Like, that's how I read it, andthey were like, It could be
read that way, but you like younever know.
So, like, yeah, I read it alot.
And um, yeah, it actually madeit easier, like not having any
any outside recommendation oranything.
(12:53):
Everyone just said, do what youfeel is right.
I was like, Okay, easy enough.
Rejected.
We'll figure it out later,right?
James Cave (13:00):
Did they talk to you at all about what might happen?
Should you make one decision orthe other?
Like, would there be supportfor you from from them?
Taylor Bruck (13:08):
Like, I mean, knowing that they at least the
attorney general's office wasprepared to defend the shield
law, because like that wassomething I was really concerned
about.
Was like, I don't want to putthe state in a bad position that
could then have precedent forshield laws nationwide.
Like, I don't want to destroylike abortion rights for people
in red states nationwide bymaking like a stupid rash
(13:30):
decision here.
So just having them tell me,like, we're good to defend the
shield law if it gets to thatconstitutionality question, it
was like, say no more.
Great, we'll take care of itfrom our end.
And knowing that like theywould have our back if necessary
was really important.
The things that could happen,that's really all the attorney
general's office said.
But other attorneys were like,you will probably get sued by
(13:53):
Texas.
And then my question wasalways, well, if I accept this,
could I be sued by Dr.
Carpenter's attorneys for notadhering to the SHIELD law?
Because if I was her attorneys,I would sue me for sure.
I would say, look, re- I when Iread the law, this clerk should
not have filed this.
And you know, no one was reallyable to answer that.
They were like, I guess theycould, but I don't know that
(14:15):
they would.
And I'm like, well, I'm notwilling to take that risk.
Uh like I'm not gonna throw myconstituent under the bus and
hope that like she doesn't sueme to make Texas happy.
Like those were my decisions.
Like, potentially get sued bymy constituent or almost
certainly get sued by Texas.
And like that's not a harddecision for me to make.
So at the end of the day, itwas easy.
(14:36):
Did you think about all thepeople that might be mad about
what you're gonna do, like whatyou were about to do?
Yeah, like the death threatsconcerned me for sure.
It was it was at around thesame time where like some
lawmakers, was it in Wisconsinthat were killed by like a
pro-lifer?
And yeah, immediately it waslike you you are probably
(14:59):
upsetting like some of like themore unhinged people nationwide.
Like that scares me a lot.
Like my wife was pregnant, likewe're about to have our first
like kid.
So it was like, do I I mean itwas never a question like do I
still want to do it?
It was just like we we shouldprepare for that.
Did you talk to your wife aboutit at home?
(15:21):
Like, how did you guys go aboutthose discussions?
No, I definitely talked to herabout it.
I was like, hey, heads up, thisthis thing came through.
I think it might be kind of abig deal.
But you know, my wife is great.
She was like, Oh, well, don'tfile that.
She's like, Yeah, whatever,like we'll deal with it.
I was like, Well, you w mywife's a blackmail, she's like,
All right, you know, let themcome, right?
(15:43):
She's yeah.
So like it was funny.
We we laughed about it and justkind of crossed our fingers and
was like, all right, I hope Ihope people understand that at
the end of the day the decisionwas a decision based on a
statute that like we're we areliterally following the law, you
know.
As Ken Paxton said, called me aradical abortionist trying to
kill as many babies as possible.
(16:03):
Like that's insane.
Like, we are really justfollowing the law in this case.
Like, fortunate that the lawexisted.
Um, but we we still still tothis day just hope that like you
know no one takes any very rashdecisions about what we did.
James Cave (16:21):
Okay, so take us to that moment, right?
You've decided this is now aweek has gone by, it's the
following Wednesday, and you'vegot to send a response.
What does that moment feel liketo you?
And also what how does itwhat's the process for doing
that?
Like, how do you what is theeven the you said it's e-filing?
Like, how do you even do that?
Taylor Bruck (16:36):
It's so boring.
Uh like when it comes through,there's there's two buttons
except or reject.
You just hit the reject buttonand then you have to put a
reason in.
So we we put in pursuant to theshield law and just hit the
button, and then kind of satback and looked around.
We're like, okay.
Uh and then like Texas calledus immediately, and they were
(16:57):
like, Well, why was thisrejected?
We're like, Well, it's on therejection paperwork, it says it
right there.
It's like because of the shieldlaw.
And they were like, What'sthat?
And like, I still don't know ifI believe them with that
question.
I'm like, You didn't know thatthis existed, but maybe just the
staffer that called didn'tknow.
But yeah, then we just kind ofsat back, we had a press release
ready to go.
We were like, We're gonna sendthe press release out at the
(17:19):
same time.
Um, we kind of talked to ourlocal elected officials to just
give them a heads up, like, hey,you're probably gonna get a
phone call about this.
So just be prepared.
And then, like, within 15minutes, the phone just starts
blowing up with press calls andemails and like AP, New York
Times, like everyone justreaches out for for more
(17:39):
information.
Yeah, so we just kind of tooktook phone calls the rest of
that day.
James Cave (17:44):
When that when when like the deluge of attention
started coming in, that musthave felt overwhelming.
I mean, did were you ready andprepared to talk to so many
media outlets and come up with Iguess what are you coming up
with?
Sound bites?
Are you sort of learning on thefly?
Like, what is that like foryou?
Taylor Bruck (17:59):
Yeah, I mean, I've never had media training or
anything.
Um I th I would say we wereprepared.
Like we were intentionallyprepared.
We were like, we know we'regonna get these calls, like we
know that this is a big deal, solike we're gonna have the press
release ready.
Um, but it almost felt like alot of the journalists that we
talked to like didn't believe mebecause there was like there's
no precedent on this.
(18:19):
So when they're asking thesecertain things, and I'm like, I
don't know.
They're like, really?
Like, what what did theattorney general's office say?
And I'm like, they told me dowhatever.
They're like, there's no way.
I'm like, I swear to god, likeI'm not making it up.
Like, that is I'm I'm not lyingto you.
This is literally whathappened.
There's just there was not verymuch information to give out.
It was like, look, they it camein, we rejected it based on the
(18:41):
shield law, and we'll see whereit goes from here.
Like, I there's not much elseto to say.
And like, because I'm probablygoing to be an active litigant,
like, like, you know, I can'tsay all the political things
about how abortion should be aright and this and that.
Like, I can't say any of that.
So there wasn't much to say tothem.
(19:02):
Like, I almost felt bad aboutit.
I was like, I feel like youwanted to give them something
more.
I mean, maybe not wanted to,but like, yeah, you you could
tell that like they wanted more,and it was like there's just
not more.
Like, there will be more asthat things proceed, and we'll
see what the judge says.
But as of right now, like thisis the precedent-setting thing.
(19:24):
How is it gonna turn out?
I don't know.
James Cave (19:27):
We'll see.
Yeah, that wasn't quite the endof the story, was it?
I mean, Paxton gave you achance to change your mind, come
back around, right?
What what did he what was theresponse?
Taylor Bruck (19:38):
It was very nice of him.
Um well, I I guess it wasn'tvery nice of him.
They they basically sentanother they sent like an email
like two months later orsomething, just demanding that
we file it.
Which I didn't react very wellto, frankly, in hindsight.
Like, I don't like when peopledemand that I do things,
especially in like other states.
(19:59):
I'm like, you have nojurisdiction here.
Like you can't you can askpolitely, and then I can deny
politely.
But if you demand, likeabsolutely not.
So we we rejected it again andlike a little more sternly this
time, told him, like, you know,you've been told once, I don't
know how it works in Texas, buthere, like, it was denied, it's
(20:20):
always gonna be denied.
You can send it a hundredtimes, we're not accepting it.
And then we and then weexpected the lawsuit after that.
But it that was strange, likewe don't get that with other
filings where we reject them andthen someone comes back and
says, No, we demand that you do.
Like, that's not how any ofthis works.
Imagine if you could do that,just bully elected officials,
(20:41):
and I guess sometimes you can,but yeah, no, not here.
That was frustrating.
James Cave (20:46):
Okay, so where where does that leave us in this
story, right?
Because you've rejected himtwice, uh, the lawsuit is on its
way.
What is New York doing withyou?
Like, I'm thinking of in termsof like governmental support or
encouragement or what'shappening on the back end for
you there.
Taylor Bruck (21:06):
I will say, like, right after we rejected it,
there was like a huge outpouringof support.
Like Tish James and thegovernor, Hokel, like released
statements immediately insupport of what we did.
All of our congressmen,assembly people, like they all
released um statements to thepress when the press reached out
that were super supportive.
And that's kind of where itled.
(21:28):
Like, in terms of like legalsupport or anything, it was more
just like wait and see untilthe the lawsuit came in.
So, like where that leaves usoff, eventually the lawsuit
comes in.
Um eventually like we getserved, like Brook v Texas, and
you know, it it lists that Ididn't do my job essentially,
(21:50):
that you know, this came throughin a regular filing format.
It met all the criteria, and Ishould have filed it.
And that that's when like westarted really the the legal
fight.
I guess it started a couplemonths before that.
I I had retained an attorney,uh Andy Chelley, who's been
great, and he had everythingjust ready to go.
(22:10):
He was like, I'm prettyconfident I know um what they're
gonna try to do.
It's called an article 78.
They're gonna say that like youjust didn't adhere to like your
oath and your jobresponsibilities, and we just
cite the shield law and say,nope, the shield law says here
that you're not supposed to fileit, and uh we let the judge
(22:31):
figure it out from there.
So like our attorneys wereready to go as soon as the the
court case came in, and um yeah,then then they kind of just
went back and forth in legalfilings for a couple weeks,
which is weird because all thelegal filings come through my
office.
James Cave (22:49):
So like my staff has is like pulling them in.
I mean it's interesting thatthe argument would be that you
are weren't doing your job, likea dereliction of your duty,
which which is to uh representyour constituents, which I think
in this case I would say youyou did that for sure.
When when another recentexample, um I was doing like
trying to think, has somethinglike this happened in the county
(23:11):
clerk universe where a stateyou know, where a county clerk
is up against some sort ofconstitutional question.
And it and I was I guess I wassurprised to realize that Kim
Davis was a county clerk as wellin Kentucky.
But this is an example whereshe was acting, refusing to do
her job based on her personalbeliefs, right?
So to me the the argument wouldapply to her rather than you in
(23:34):
this case.
But do you want to can you talka little bit about the Kim
Davis thing as it as you see it?
Because I'm really curious tohear what you think about that.
Taylor Bruck (23:41):
Yeah.
So uh I mean if I'm rememberingcorrectly, Kim Davis was a
county cleric, like in Kentucky,who refused to file the
same-sex marriage licenses andwas sued for like, you know,
civil rights infringement of acouple that had a legal right to
be married.
So like in her case, she waslike intentionally breaking the
(24:03):
law because of her personalreligious beliefs.
She even said that, like, thatwas her argument.
Like, no, my religion.
Where like in my case, I feellike I was just following the
law as was written.
Like, if the shield law didn'texist, then like me and Kim
Davis would kind of be likethese rogue clerks that like
decided not to do things.
But like it's just insane.
Like, I we we get everycriminal and civil filing in the
(24:28):
county through our office.
Like, imagine if I was like,Oh, well, I think drunk
driving's cool, like I'm notfiling any of those.
Like, you just can't decide todo that.
There are things that if theymeet the legal like
requirements, if they have thecorrect names and dates and
everything, you just have tofile them.
Even if you know that like thecase itself is BS, like that's
not our job.
And that that was somethingthat was complicated about this
(24:50):
case.
And you know, other countyclerks statewide were like, I
don't know, is this reallysomething that the clerks are
supposed to do?
Like, we don't generally readthe content of a case and then
make a decision based on thecontent.
Like, we make sure that all thetechnical details are correct.
And I was like, Well, then theshield law needs to be more
(25:11):
clear about that, because asit's written right now, it just
says we are not to comply withit if it's about this thing.
We happen to read it, welearned it was about this thing.
And so that's an argument thatwe can make to like the state
legislature down the road, butright now it does not seem like
um I'm breaking the law byrefusing to do this.
(25:31):
And so that was our that wasour take.
But it did, you know, it wouldthere's certainly county clerks
statewide that did not agreewith that.
James Cave (25:40):
I mean, it brings up the question that I also would
love to explore with you aboutthis history of like federal
oversight, federal involvementin states' affairs, and this
question of states' rights andthe the sort of shifting meaning
behind that.
That's a very heavy phrase inUS history, right?
I mean, you're also historian.
(26:00):
You are you still the cityhistorian of things?
Yeah, I am.
So t tell me about states'rights as you see it, I think
now, because I don't know if youhave a different view on the
whole thing, now having gonethrough this process.
Taylor Bruck (26:13):
I think there like my views on states' rights are
just constantly evolving nowmore than ever.
But it's ironic to be makingthe states' rights argument
against the state of Texas,right?
Because the the federalgovernment throughout this whole
thing is largely just likestayed out of it.
So, like at the very beginning,when Texas filed the judgment
against us, there was like aMifepristone that the abortion
(26:34):
drug.
There was a Miphipristone casethat was about to go in front of
the Supreme Court to see likewhether or not this should be
banned federally.
During this case with me inTexas, like the Trump
administration said, drop it.
Like, we're not fighting thisat the federal level.
So it's legal federally, andlike that's where it became a
state's rights thing, wheregenerally I am a proponent of a
(26:59):
strong central government.
I think a strong centralgovernment avoids things exactly
like this, especially in thedigital era where you have
things like telehealth.
Like if you have states withcontradictory laws and people
can just still communicate likeinstantly between you're you're
bound to have contradictions.
So, like if you want somethingto be banned, especially like a
(27:22):
medication or something, do itat the federal level.
If it's not banned at thefederal level, to me, it's a
little wild for states to justbe able to ban the it doesn't
work.
New York tried this withfireworks.
It's like, okay, everyone'sjust gonna go to Pennsylvania
and get their fireworks and comeback.
Like it doesn't really work.
It's really easy to just getthings from other states if if
(27:44):
you want this.
James Cave (27:46):
Well, it goes back to like states' rights being
used by basically southernstates to protect the
institution of slavery, too.
So that's why I feel like thisquestion is so interesting in in
the way that uh I guess is itan ideology?
Is it a theory about a states'rights can shift based on any
number of factors?
(28:06):
It is a little morecomplicated.
Taylor Bruck (28:08):
And you can see with things like the shield law
now, how like when you have likestates that have laws that like
a huge portion of your statedisagrees with, that like
states' rights are reallyimportant sometimes now because
they can shield you from theseother laws.
There's actually in UlsterCounty, like one of the more
(28:29):
famous maybe slavery-relatedstates' rights cases happened
two blocks away at thecourthouse with Sojourner Truth
and her son, where like at thetime slavery was illegal in New
York State, but legal in otherstates.
And New York had a law thatsaid you cannot you cannot sell
an enslaved person to anotherstate.
(28:49):
And Sojourner Truth's son getssold to someone in Alabama, and
Sojourner Truth knows that thislaw exists, goes to the
courthouse and says, Hey, my sonwas just sold to Alabama.
That's supposed to be illegalbecause he's supposed to be free
when he gets 18.
This was at that weird periodright after they had abolished
slavery, but not really.
They're like slavery isabolished once everyone's 18.
(29:10):
So like her son is still alittle boy, and she knows about
this law, and that that's like ahuge states' rights fight at
the time.
And she wins, like famously,the first enslaved woman to win
a case against a white man.
So like Kingston Ulster Countyhas had states' rights cases
like this before where we feelthere's injustices being done in
(29:32):
other states, and uh thankfullyfor a number of years, the the
laws in New York State have umhave kind of been on the
constituent side.
So we hope that that thatcontinues.
James Cave (29:47):
I have to do a callback to previous episode uh
in the podcast feed because it'sabout the Kingston Guards and
the Ulster Nine and VintageBaseball, of which you're a co
founder.
Now it's a league, right?
You're a co founder.
So you have this history's beena part of your life for like
you you you're really into thehistory thing, right?
Taylor Bruck (30:05):
Oh yeah, for sure.
My mom used to be she used towork at the Senate House State
Historic Site where the firstNew York State Senate met.
So and she was like single mom.
And at the end of school everyday, like I would go to work
with her for two hours and she'dshow me like what she's working
on and what documents she'stranscribing.
And yeah, I've always thoughtthis stuff is so cool.
Um it's just like in my blood.
James Cave (30:26):
So then Dan comes back from seeing vintage
baseball being played, and he'slike, Taylor, I have got this
idea.
Taylor Bruck (30:33):
Yeah, he's like, why don't we start a vintage
baseball team?
And you know, I'm kind of a yesman.
I'm like, sounds great.
Like, let's do it, let's diveright in.
So yeah, we've basicallystudied up on the rules, learned
the rules, got contacts for thewoman who makes the uniform and
the there's like a nationalleague, um, vintage baseball
(30:55):
association, and we just kind ofrandomly started this team.
And it got off to a rockystart, too.
Like, not a good start.
We very much underestimated uhthis whole league.
I'll never forget our firstgame.
The team that we played showedup, they saw our field and they
said, Man, this is Bush League.
And we were like, oh, wethought that this was like below
(31:16):
Bush League, like we thoughtthis was like a novelty, like
jokey thing.
They were like, Man, we playbaseball.
Like, no, we play.
So we were like, oh, we have tolike recalibrate what we were
expecting.
So it's taken a few years, butnow we're like a pretty
competitive team.
Um, and uh we we vibe with theother teams more now, I think.
James Cave (31:35):
So what about baseball?
Specifically, like the historyof baseball in the US and
vintage baseball.
Like, what does it tell youabout things to preserve and and
sort of like what what you doin your in your day-to-day life
here as a as a county clerk, anot a non-acting, an elect,
right?
Taylor Bruck (31:54):
Yeah, it must be said.
County clerk elect now.
Man, I think baseball, sportsin general, but baseball because
it's it goes back so farnationally and the era that we
play, the 1860s, like throughthe Civil War, the baseball was
in a lot of ways like the greatequalizer.
Like there this was a thingthat like, you know, we're we're
(32:15):
fighting over slaverynationally, and like at the end
of like the battle one day, youcan all take the diamond with
black players, confederates,like anybody.
And it quite literally likelevels the playing field and
like it puts everyone on thesame same terms.
That's like the the beauty ofsports, you're all playing by
the same rules.
That's like something you don'tget in any other aspect of
(32:38):
life.
And it's a really beautifulthing, like in this moment of
turmoil and strife throughthroughout the Civil War, and
the soldiers need it too.
It's it's a morale booster, butyou just like hate people less
after like competing againstthem in sports.
I always said, I'm like, if Igo if I went down to Texas and
like played baseball with KenBaxton and like his staff, we'd
(32:59):
all shake hands and grab beer atthe end and be like, Hey, you
know what?
Good fight, you know, keep itup.
When you just like jar in thepress and are just like throwing
nasty words back and forth,like that's when things get out
of hand.
Like rhetoric really drivespeople to insanity, it seems.
It gets really nasty.
And there's just it's likeplaying sports with people and
(33:22):
against people is like breakingbread in a way.
Because you can like take thataggression out in like such a
compact and measured way that atthe end of it you just like
feel better about the otherperson.
Like healthy rivalry is good, Ithink.
And I think this part of thereason it became America's
pastime.
Uh, you get like New Yorkversus Boston and Philadelphia
(33:44):
and these places all trying tonow be the best, not just in
sports, but like be the bestcity, be the best at everything.
And like it's kind of fun.
It's it's I I I lovecompetition.
I think competition is likegenerally good.
So that's part of the reason Ilove sports.
James Cave (34:01):
Okay, now describe this object that you have
sitting in the chair next toyou.
Um, right there.
Taylor Bruck (34:07):
Oh, my baseball?
Yeah.
This is my constitutionbaseball that I got from
Washington, D.C.
It's basically uh it's abaseball with a bit of the
constitution on it.
It's got the big we the people,you know, July 4th, 1776, John
Hancock's nice big signature onit.
And it's kind of like my myfidget toy.
(34:27):
Like my hands always have to bedoing something, like when I'm
checking emails and stuff, so Ijust toss this back and forth.
But I've been, you know, had itfor years, and I never thought
it would be like relevantbecause there is a
constitutionality question tolike the shield law itself that
I think in down the road herewe'll probably get to because
(34:49):
the the constitution does saythat you have to abide by other
states' laws if you're in yourstate, the full faith and credit
clause.
So like I can't go murdersomeone in another state and
then come back to New York andsay, nope, I'm I'm in New York
now, you can't get me.
So whether or not shield lawsare constitutional, that's the
big question in this entirecase.
And that's why it might be abigger deal than just like
(35:12):
protecting our constituent andlike making sure that she
doesn't have to pay a hundredthousand dollar fee.
Like, this may very well end upin the Supreme Court with them
deciding whether or not Shieldlaws can exist nationwide
because it they haven't beentested anywhere.
So we'll see.
James Cave (35:31):
So this baseball is essentially you in all of your
uh all of your aspects.
You've got the baseball, theconstitutional crisis, um, the
history, the archives.
Taylor Bruck (35:43):
I mean, yeah, I mean in in a lot of ways it I
was drawn to it at the time.
And yeah, you saw something.
He probably could like dilutemy entire persona into this one
thing, which is is I've neverthought of it that way.
That's pretty funny.
James Cave (36:00):
What are you looking for it now that you're here,
you got 2026 coming up?
Like, what's on your mind?
Taylor Bruck (36:05):
Man, 250.
Next year's the 250thanniversary of the Revolutionary
War.
And I was made chair of UlsterCounty's Rev 250 committee maybe
like four years ago now, by PatRyan when I was still an
archivist.
So we've been planning it for awhile.
Like, how do you celebrate orcommemorate the past 250 years?
(36:25):
What kind of questions do youlike you want to ask?
Um, and yeah, it's becomingmore and more difficult to
question.
We're getting guidance from thefederal government telling us
things like you can't talk aboutslavery, don't talk about
anything that makes America seembad.
But like that's just not howyou do history, you know?
Like you have to talk about thegood and the bad so that you
(36:48):
don't repeat the bad.
The only reason you would notwant to talk about the bad is if
you're trying to repeat thebad.
So I've got some radical thingsplanned that I'm getting some
pushback on, some, you know,tarring and feathering workshops
or I get tarred and featheredand explain why political
violence is something that hasnever gone away, not something
that we should um we shouldn'tbe striving for it.
(37:10):
But it's not new.
Like what's happening,unfortunately, not new, always
but always been here.
But I'm hopeful, like I have toremain optimistic that next
year, the 250th, will be a goodopportunity to remind folks like
why our founding documents areimportant, why the founding
fathers, flawed as they were,like putting these ideas onto
(37:33):
paper, especially the Bill ofRights, just like really basic
things that like we never evenused to really fight about, like
these rights that we findunalienable, they're now like
very much under attack.
And uh so I'm sort of excited.
It's nice when you havepolitical beliefs and the
(37:54):
history on your side to back itup, and like next year we really
get to show that the historyhas always been on our side and
that we have a long way to go tolike get to where the country
was supposed to be.
We've been going in thatdirection, you know, a couple
steps forward, a couple stepsback.
But next year we're gonnareally hammer home like why
(38:15):
America, if it if you don'tbelieve America is exceptional,
I'm going to try to convince youthat it is.
By tarring and featheringyourself.
Exactly.
And like, and then you get towhy they were doing it, right?
(38:36):
Like why you don't want a king,why being governed by your
peers is good.
Like why having people from allover the world have a place
that they can all go livetogether and govern themselves
is special.
Like that's what makes Americaunique and special is that no
one knew if it would work.
No one knew if you can bringpeople from all different
(38:57):
religions, all differentbackgrounds, and just put them
in one place and say, okay,figure it out, guys.
Govern yourself, vote for whoyou think is the best.
Like that's why New York City'sgreat.
Like, that's why America isAmerica.
And like we're totally goingthis weirdo way where it's like,
no, no, no, we're likeimmigrants are now bad.
What do you want to be?
Like, what do you think Americawas supposed to be?
(39:18):
Like this is America.
The next year's, the next twoyears really are like a huge
opportunity to remind peoplethat that is the American
experiment, for better or worse.
But like in my opinion, it'sbeen like a resounding success
in like so many ways.
But we shouldn't forget abouthow it has not been successful,
too, and we're remind folks ofthat so that we don't repeat it.
(39:42):
But that's what makes historyfun, is like you can always
bring it back to the presentday.
And it's hard to talk abouthistory without looking into the
future.
And that's what we always tryto like teach students too.
You're part of this.
Like you're not just learningabout history, you're using that
as a reference for how you'regoing to go forward now as an
American.
And that's something excitingfor me.
James Cave (40:01):
Okay, before we go, um, I just want to ask, going
back, I want to go back to KinPaxton really quickly because I
stopped doing research because Ididn't want to spoil the
ending.
And I wanted to hear it fromyou directly.
Where are we now?
Like what where what is as oftoday, uh November 12th.
Taylor Bruck (40:18):
What is it?
I don't know.
James Cave (40:19):
November 13th.
Okay, as of November 13th, whatwhere do we stand?
What is happening?
Taylor Bruck (40:24):
As of today, case dismissed, we won.
The the ruling came out onHalloween, and it basically
confirmed what we believed.
The the judge's ruling said I Ido have a responsibility to
file things that meet the filingrequirements, unless
specifically uh stated by lawthat I shouldn't.
(40:48):
And in this case, there is alaw that specifically says I
shouldn't.
So the judge said, Yep, basedon the SHIELD law, he shouldn't
have filed this.
There's nothing that that theclerk did that seemed unlawful.
Case dismissed.
So Texas has 30 days to appeal.
We're now, what, 15 days intothat?
So countdown's on.
(41:08):
We we I'm I'm sort of expectingthem to appeal, but they
haven't yet.
So as of today, we won.
And we'll see where where itgoes from here.
James Cave (41:21):
Now, while I was editing this episode this week,
we had a bit of a late breakingupdate, so I called Taylor up to
see what happened.
Taylor Bruck (41:27):
Hey James, how are you?
James Cave (41:29):
I'm alright.
I'm recording this.
Is that okay?
Absolutely.
I heard that there's an update.
There's been an update.
What happened?
Taylor Bruck (41:37):
There has been an update.
Um Texas predictably appealed.
They they filed a really briefappeal.
They they didn't make anyadditional arguments or
anything.
They just said they areappealing the decision.
And uh so my understanding isnow it goes to appellate court
(41:57):
and they'll decide whether ornot to hear the case at all.
And if they decide to, thenit'll get assigned to a
different appellate court judgeand uh we'll continue the
process.
James Cave (42:09):
Do you know how long this process typically would
take?
Like what are you expectingover there?
Taylor Bruck (42:14):
I have no idea how long this process typically
takes.
Um I I know that for a typicalArticle 78, which is what they
filed against me, there is apretty strict turnaround.
I think it's uh 90 days.
So um, unlike some cases thatcan kind of hang out in court
for years um because they'retrying to compel a government
(42:37):
official to like do their job,um, I think it'll go quicker.
But um probably a couple monthsnow, we we sit back and wait
and see what happens.
I don't know.
I'm learning, James.
James Cave (42:51):
Have you heard have you heard from anyone about like
odds or what people areanticipating, or is this totally
new ground?
Taylor Bruck (42:58):
Well, given that they haven't made a new
argument, um we feel the oddsare the same as they were going
in, you know?
They're the law is pretty clearthat uh there's a law saying
that I should not have compliedwith this.
If they had made theconstitutional argument, then
it's a whole different case, andyou're arguing about whether or
(43:18):
not the Shield law isconstitutional, but they they
still have not made thatargument.
So um I feel my odds are verygood, as good as they were going
into the first hearing.
James Cave (43:28):
Okay, well, thanks for keeping us posted, Taylor.
Taylor Bruck (43:31):
Oh, no problem, James.
I'll I'll let you know when uhwhen it goes on to the next
court.
James Cave (43:36):
Yeah, we'll be following along.
Okay, that does it for thisepisode of the Jaffee.
I want to thank Taylor for histime and Dan Torres for making
the introduction.
If you got something out ofthis episode or thought it was
interesting, I'd be honored ifyou told a friend.
Word of mouth really helps thispodcast grow.
Well, thanks as always forlistening all the way to the
end.
Until next time, I'll see youover on the James Cage Instagram
(43:57):
feed.
Hello and welcome to the Jiffy, a podcast about
upstate New York that reallytakes you places.
And today, we're in the officeof the county clerk for Ulster
County.
But that's not because I'm introuble.
It's because I wanted to meetwith Taylor Brooke.
I first heard about Taylor frommy friend Dan Torres.
Dan and Taylor co-founded theKingston Guards vintage baseball
team, which I featured in aprevious episode.
It's a really fun episode.
(00:24):
Well, Taylor is Kingston's cityhistorian, and as of this
month, he's now officially theUlster County clerk elect after
winning his election.
And what caught my attentionwasn't just Taylor's winning the
election or his devotion tolocal history.
It was the situation heunexpectedly found himself in
earlier this year.
Okay, here's a little context.
(00:44):
In 2024, a new polls-baseddoctor, Dr.
Margaret Carpenter, prescribedabortion medication through
telehealth to a patient inCollin County, Texas.
It's fully legal here, but it'sillegal under Texas law now.
And so a Texas court entered adefault judgment against Dr.
Carpenter, ordering her to paymore than $100,000 in penalties.
And Texas Attorney General KenPaxson's office then tried to
(01:07):
have that judgment filed in NewYork through the Ulster County
clerk in an effort to make itenforceable here.
And this is where Taylor comesin, because before any of that,
he was Ulster County'sarchivist, caring for
300-year-old documents atRevolutionary War Records and
other things, and his supervisorretired due to health concerns.
So now Taylor is acting countyclerk, and it was just months
(01:27):
into this new role as actingcounty clerk, still learning the
system, still thinking the DMVmight be his biggest project,
when Taylor's office received anotable filing from Paxton
asking the Ulster County Clerkto accept and file the Texas
judgment to be the first steptoward making it valid here in
New York.
And that put Taylor in, in myview, a really interesting
position, although he'd probablycall it a stressful one,
(01:50):
because suddenly he wasn't thecounty clerk, the public-facing
keeper of records.
He was the person who now hadto make a pretty important
decision.
Do you accept a judgment fromthe Texas Attorney General,
knowing that filing it is how aTexas judgment can start to
carry legal weight here in NewYork?
Or do you refuse, puttingyourself in direct conflict with
another state's attorneygeneral?
And layered into that is NewYork's new Shield Law.
(02:13):
This passed after the SupremeCourt overturned Roe vs.
Wade.
The Shield Law protects NewYork doctors from being targeted
under other states' abortionlaws.
So now we've got a local countyclerk, newly elected, standing
at the crossroads between twostates with opposing laws,
navigating a question that isn'tjust administrative, it's
constitutional, because itraises questions about can
(02:36):
states force another state toenforce its laws?
And it's a question that couldeventually make its way to the
Supreme Court.
Now, I grew up in Texas, andwhen I was a kid, there was this
slogan everywhere, don't messwith Texas.
It started as an anti-litteringcampaign, but it quickly became
something else.
A kind of a cultural symbol ofstate swagger and pride.
(02:57):
And so for Taylor's case, youknow, I wanted to know what it
feels like when Texas messeswith you and how do you handle
that?
So I visited him at his officein Kingston to find out.
So we're here.
Thank you for being here.
And I say thank you for beinghere, but we're in your office,
actually, right in the city ofKingston.
Absolutely.
244 Fair Street.
(03:19):
Describe this place.
Like what is what does thisoffice look like to you and and
uh describe how you're using it.
Taylor Bruck (03:25):
It looks it looks a little bit like a fishbowl,
covered in windows.
We've got some hotel curtains,but it's it's a nice corner
office.
Um, first time I've had windowsin an office before.
Uh all the furniture that'shere came with the office.
Most of everything you see inthis office has been here for
like almost a hundred years,just passed down from clerk to
(03:47):
clerk.
So it's it's very vintage, Iwould say.
A lot of old dusty papers, someknickknacks, and maybe close to
a thousand elephants.
Um, all of the past countyclerks for 97 years have been
Republican and they've beencollecting elephants.
James Cave (04:03):
So we have all those here with us, too.
See, this elephant near you hasa busted leg.
Is that have anything?
Did you have anything to dowith that?
Taylor Bruck (04:10):
Uh inadvertently, maybe.
Yeah.
This is like our literalelephant in the room.
It's a white elephant.
James Cave (04:17):
I've started my donkey collection.
Yeah, that's good though.
Those are those aregood-looking donkeys.
Very uh eclectic collection ofdonkeys.
Okay, so let's talk about thisthing that happened to you.
Because something I'm thinkingabout looks like I grew up in
Texas, and when I was growingup, I don't haven't been to
Texas in a long time, so I don'tknow if it's still part of the
marketing motto, but it's like,don't mess with Texas.
(04:38):
It's like the whole slogan.
And in this case, it sort offelt like Texas messes with you.
So take me, so you are what isyour role before you need to
become the acting county clerk?
What was your job title likeand what were you doing at that
point?
Taylor Bruck (04:52):
So I started as the county archivist, um, doing
all of the historic managementof the papers and our museum.
We're the only clerk's officewith a museum.
So I started just doing all thehistory stuff, and then I moved
up to deputy county clerk forrecords management and just
managed all of the county'srecords.
We have a separate facilitywith no windows with like 40,000
(05:17):
cubic feet of records that Imanaged.
And um, I was basically secondin line of succession.
So when my predecessor NinaPoschepak had to resign for
health reasons, I was next inline and sort of randomly became
acting county clerk in August2024.
James Cave (05:36):
So what did you think that your job was mostly
gonna be like?
Like you know, stepping intothis role, obviously you
couldn't have foreseen thatsomething else would have
happened.
Taylor Bruck (05:45):
You know, I knew it was going to be more
public-facing records andarchives, you know, you tend to
just hide in the corner andorganize things.
But the county clerk runs DMV,so you deal with essentially
everybody in the county at somepoint.
So knew it was gonna be a lotmore interaction with the
public, um, a lot moremanagement of staff.
(06:07):
You know, you go from managinga staff of about 15 people to
like almost 60.
So knew it was gonna be a biglift, but that the the team here
was really strong.
So it was like, you know, wecan kind of ease our way into
it.
I had been working for theclerk's office for eight years.
Like I pretty much knew whathad to be done, just had to
learn all the technical stuff,and it was exciting, you know.
(06:30):
It was like you gotta learn alot of new laws and all these
new forms, but pretty much themost boring parts of government,
time to study, you know.
That was the plan.
Does clerking uh run in yourfamily?
It it does.
Uh in fact, my what is he?
My great-grand uh nogreat-granduncle?
(06:53):
So my great-grandfather'syoungest brother was county
clerk, Al Spada.
He's actually like the longestserving county clerk.
He was the county clerksometime in the 70s, late 70s,
like until 2002 or something.
But so are some of theseelephants may be of his.
A lot of them are his.
(07:14):
Yeah, we we know that for afact.
But you know, I always justkind of knew like Uncle Al as
the clerk.
Like we weren't like superclose growing up, like never had
holidays or anything.
I just always thought it wascool that like everyone knows
Uncle Al and like he helps allthese people.
So it's like part of the reasonI wanted to work in the clerk's
office was like it's a coolthing that no one really knows
(07:35):
what they do, but like I kind ofdid, just because it does run
in my family.
James Cave (07:39):
So yeah, it does.
And then so this is August, andthen how how much time wasn't
much time that passed by beforeyou get this notification?
Or like what what what is itthat how does how are these
things communicated?
And what was that day like?
Taylor Bruck (07:54):
It can't it was less than six months, I think
five months in, it came camethrough in March.
Um, so like right when we'restarting to get settled.
Um, a lot of our legaldocuments are filed e-filing
now.
So they they come throughelectronically.
I'm not the one that looks atthem all because like we get
hundreds of hundreds a day.
But this this one was verystrange.
(08:16):
So Melinda, who you just walkedby when you came in here, she's
our judgment clerk.
And it's rare to get a judgmentfrom a different state
regarding something likeabortion medication, like it
just doesn't happen.
And so she came in, she'dprinted it out, and was like,
hey, we just got this weirdjudgment in.
(08:36):
Um, do you want me to file it?
And we immediately my chiefdeputy Andrew and I were like, I
don't know.
Give us some time.
Let's let's see.
This does seem like out of theordinary, and then you know, we
immediately start googlingthings, looking into it.
(08:57):
Like, do we have to file this?
Like that that's the firstquestion we asked.
James Cave (09:00):
Was there anything that about it that felt like
what about it felt so likesending off your senses and be
and like raising your flags forthem?
Taylor Bruck (09:08):
For a normal judgment, if you're filing it,
if you're like a municipality ora state filing a judgment, you
don't have to really say whatit's for.
That's like a separate legalfiling.
You can just say, like, thisperson needs to pay us $100,000.
They said exactly what it wasfor in great detail.
And so that was like red flag,like why.
And it it almost seemed to melike they like they wanted us to
(09:31):
know what it was about, and sothat immediately like triggered
something to look into it.
And like it being Texas, um,you know, they don't do a lot of
business in New York, theydon't often like file lawsuits
against like constituents ofours, pretty rare.
So it stood out immediately,and then when we saw who was
(09:52):
against the doctor, Dr.
Carpenter, we knew instantlybecause like this had been a
case in Texas maybe two yearsprior.
So like it was in the news.
Like as soon as we saw Dr.
Carpenter's name, we were like,Jesus, they're like coming
after her, like at home now.
Like they they went after herin Texas, and now they're trying
to file something here in NewYork.
So immediately we were like,okay, messed up.
(10:15):
Um, but do we legally have tofile this?
Because, you know, like as anelected official, you have to
follow the laws.
I mean, you should, right?
So I was vaguely familiar atthe time with the Shield Law.
Like I remember that it it wasa thing, but didn't really know
no one really knew what itencompassed because it had never
(10:37):
been tested before.
So we just read the law, and itwas it was really vague.
It just said no governmentemployee shall comply with an
out-of-state proceeding, civilor criminal, for a
healthcare-related servicerendered that is legal in New
York State.
So we just went down the list.
(10:57):
We were like, well, we aregovernment employees, the
healthcare service that wasrendered is legal in New York
State, and the judgment is partof a civil filing.
So I'm not an attorney, butwhen I read that, I was like,
okay, seems like we shouldn'tfile this.
And then we started reachingout to attorneys, like, for
opinions, and couldn't get one.
(11:18):
Um really.
Really?
Were they just not answeringthe call or they were like, we
don't want to touch this?
They were like, they wereeither like, we don't know,
because like it's again, it'snever been tested, like there's
no precedent, there's nothing wecan point to and say, like,
yeah, no, this'll cover it.
Um, we contacted like theattorney general's office.
We were like, hey, heads up, wejust got this in.
(11:38):
And they were straight up like,you're an independent office,
you make the decision, whateveryou feel is right, and uh like
we're prepared to defend theshield law if necessary, but
like we can't give you advice onthis.
And yeah, pretty much everyattorney we talked to said that
same thing.
They were like, we can't giveyou legal advice on this because
(11:59):
there's no precedent.
James Cave (12:02):
So you you read that shield law, just you weren't
using any notes, you justrecited it from memory.
You must have read that overhow many times.
Taylor Bruck (12:11):
No, I read it like for a week straight, like
almost so like when we receivedit, we received the judgment,
say on a Wednesday, like wedidn't reject it until the next
Wednesday.
And just like fine-tooth comb,just like read it over and over,
and we're like, Are we missingsomething?
Like, are we are like it's sobroad but so clear in this
instance that it should apply.
(12:31):
Um, but it just felt weird,like when you talk to like
attorneys and stuff, and they'relike, We don't know.
And we're like, Well, did youread it?
Like, it's just says Ishouldn't comply.
Like, that's how I read it, andthey were like, It could be
read that way, but you like younever know.
So, like, yeah, I read it alot.
And um, yeah, it actually madeit easier, like not having any
any outside recommendation oranything.
(12:53):
Everyone just said, do what youfeel is right.
I was like, Okay, easy enough.
Rejected.
We'll figure it out later,right?
James Cave (13:00):
Did they talk to you at all about what might happen?
Should you make one decision orthe other?
Like, would there be supportfor you from from them?
Taylor Bruck (13:08):
Like, I mean, knowing that they at least the
attorney general's office wasprepared to defend the shield
law, because like that wassomething I was really concerned
about.
Was like, I don't want to putthe state in a bad position that
could then have precedent forshield laws nationwide.
Like, I don't want to destroylike abortion rights for people
in red states nationwide bymaking like a stupid rash
(13:30):
decision here.
So just having them tell me,like, we're good to defend the
shield law if it gets to thatconstitutionality question, it
was like, say no more.
Great, we'll take care of itfrom our end.
And knowing that like theywould have our back if necessary
was really important.
The things that could happen,that's really all the attorney
general's office said.
But other attorneys were like,you will probably get sued by
(13:53):
Texas.
And then my question wasalways, well, if I accept this,
could I be sued by Dr.
Carpenter's attorneys for notadhering to the SHIELD law?
Because if I was her attorneys,I would sue me for sure.
I would say, look, re- I when Iread the law, this clerk should
not have filed this.
And you know, no one was reallyable to answer that.
They were like, I guess theycould, but I don't know that
(14:15):
they would.
And I'm like, well, I'm notwilling to take that risk.
Uh like I'm not gonna throw myconstituent under the bus and
hope that like she doesn't sueme to make Texas happy.
Like those were my decisions.
Like, potentially get sued bymy constituent or almost
certainly get sued by Texas.
And like that's not a harddecision for me to make.
So at the end of the day, itwas easy.
(14:36):
Did you think about all thepeople that might be mad about
what you're gonna do, like whatyou were about to do?
Yeah, like the death threatsconcerned me for sure.
It was it was at around thesame time where like some
lawmakers, was it in Wisconsinthat were killed by like a
pro-lifer?
And yeah, immediately it waslike you you are probably
(14:59):
upsetting like some of like themore unhinged people nationwide.
Like that scares me a lot.
Like my wife was pregnant, likewe're about to have our first
like kid.
So it was like, do I I mean itwas never a question like do I
still want to do it?
It was just like we we shouldprepare for that.
Did you talk to your wife aboutit at home?
(15:21):
Like, how did you guys go aboutthose discussions?
No, I definitely talked to herabout it.
I was like, hey, heads up, thisthis thing came through.
I think it might be kind of abig deal.
But you know, my wife is great.
She was like, Oh, well, don'tfile that.
She's like, Yeah, whatever,like we'll deal with it.
I was like, Well, you w mywife's a blackmail, she's like,
All right, you know, let themcome, right?
(15:43):
She's yeah.
So like it was funny.
We we laughed about it and justkind of crossed our fingers and
was like, all right, I hope Ihope people understand that at
the end of the day the decisionwas a decision based on a
statute that like we're we areliterally following the law, you
know.
As Ken Paxton said, called me aradical abortionist trying to
kill as many babies as possible.
(16:03):
Like that's insane.
Like, we are really justfollowing the law in this case.
Like, fortunate that the lawexisted.
Um, but we we still still tothis day just hope that like you
know no one takes any very rashdecisions about what we did.
James Cave (16:21):
Okay, so take us to that moment, right?
You've decided this is now aweek has gone by, it's the
following Wednesday, and you'vegot to send a response.
What does that moment feel liketo you?
And also what how does itwhat's the process for doing
that?
Like, how do you what is theeven the you said it's e-filing?
Like, how do you even do that?
Taylor Bruck (16:36):
It's so boring.
Uh like when it comes through,there's there's two buttons
except or reject.
You just hit the reject buttonand then you have to put a
reason in.
So we we put in pursuant to theshield law and just hit the
button, and then kind of satback and looked around.
We're like, okay.
Uh and then like Texas calledus immediately, and they were
(16:57):
like, Well, why was thisrejected?
We're like, Well, it's on therejection paperwork, it says it
right there.
It's like because of the shieldlaw.
And they were like, What'sthat?
And like, I still don't know ifI believe them with that
question.
I'm like, You didn't know thatthis existed, but maybe just the
staffer that called didn'tknow.
But yeah, then we just kind ofsat back, we had a press release
ready to go.
We were like, We're gonna sendthe press release out at the
(17:19):
same time.
Um, we kind of talked to ourlocal elected officials to just
give them a heads up, like, hey,you're probably gonna get a
phone call about this.
So just be prepared.
And then, like, within 15minutes, the phone just starts
blowing up with press calls andemails and like AP, New York
Times, like everyone justreaches out for for more
(17:39):
information.
Yeah, so we just kind of tooktook phone calls the rest of
that day.
James Cave (17:44):
When that when when like the deluge of attention
started coming in, that musthave felt overwhelming.
I mean, did were you ready andprepared to talk to so many
media outlets and come up with Iguess what are you coming up
with?
Sound bites?
Are you sort of learning on thefly?
Like, what is that like foryou?
Taylor Bruck (17:59):
Yeah, I mean, I've never had media training or
anything.
Um I th I would say we wereprepared.
Like we were intentionallyprepared.
We were like, we know we'regonna get these calls, like we
know that this is a big deal, solike we're gonna have the press
release ready.
Um, but it almost felt like alot of the journalists that we
talked to like didn't believe mebecause there was like there's
no precedent on this.
(18:19):
So when they're asking thesecertain things, and I'm like, I
don't know.
They're like, really?
Like, what what did theattorney general's office say?
And I'm like, they told me dowhatever.
They're like, there's no way.
I'm like, I swear to god, likeI'm not making it up.
Like, that is I'm I'm not lyingto you.
This is literally whathappened.
There's just there was not verymuch information to give out.
It was like, look, they it camein, we rejected it based on the
(18:41):
shield law, and we'll see whereit goes from here.
Like, I there's not much elseto to say.
And like, because I'm probablygoing to be an active litigant,
like, like, you know, I can'tsay all the political things
about how abortion should be aright and this and that.
Like, I can't say any of that.
So there wasn't much to say tothem.
(19:02):
Like, I almost felt bad aboutit.
I was like, I feel like youwanted to give them something
more.
I mean, maybe not wanted to,but like, yeah, you you could
tell that like they wanted more,and it was like there's just
not more.
Like, there will be more asthat things proceed, and we'll
see what the judge says.
But as of right now, like thisis the precedent-setting thing.
(19:24):
How is it gonna turn out?
I don't know.
James Cave (19:27):
We'll see.
Yeah, that wasn't quite the endof the story, was it?
I mean, Paxton gave you achance to change your mind, come
back around, right?
What what did he what was theresponse?
Taylor Bruck (19:38):
It was very nice of him.
Um well, I I guess it wasn'tvery nice of him.
They they basically sentanother they sent like an email
like two months later orsomething, just demanding that
we file it.
Which I didn't react very wellto, frankly, in hindsight.
Like, I don't like when peopledemand that I do things,
especially in like other states.
(19:59):
I'm like, you have nojurisdiction here.
Like you can't you can askpolitely, and then I can deny
politely.
But if you demand, likeabsolutely not.
So we we rejected it again andlike a little more sternly this
time, told him, like, you know,you've been told once, I don't
know how it works in Texas, buthere, like, it was denied, it's
(20:20):
always gonna be denied.
You can send it a hundredtimes, we're not accepting it.
And then we and then weexpected the lawsuit after that.
But it that was strange, likewe don't get that with other
filings where we reject them andthen someone comes back and
says, No, we demand that you do.
Like, that's not how any ofthis works.
Imagine if you could do that,just bully elected officials,
(20:41):
and I guess sometimes you can,but yeah, no, not here.
That was frustrating.
James Cave (20:46):
Okay, so where where does that leave us in this
story, right?
Because you've rejected himtwice, uh, the lawsuit is on its
way.
What is New York doing withyou?
Like, I'm thinking of in termsof like governmental support or
encouragement or what'shappening on the back end for
you there.
Taylor Bruck (21:06):
I will say, like, right after we rejected it,
there was like a huge outpouringof support.
Like Tish James and thegovernor, Hokel, like released
statements immediately insupport of what we did.
All of our congressmen,assembly people, like they all
released um statements to thepress when the press reached out
that were super supportive.
And that's kind of where itled.
(21:28):
Like, in terms of like legalsupport or anything, it was more
just like wait and see untilthe the lawsuit came in.
So, like where that leaves usoff, eventually the lawsuit
comes in.
Um eventually like we getserved, like Brook v Texas, and
you know, it it lists that Ididn't do my job essentially,
(21:50):
that you know, this came throughin a regular filing format.
It met all the criteria, and Ishould have filed it.
And that that's when like westarted really the the legal
fight.
I guess it started a couplemonths before that.
I I had retained an attorney,uh Andy Chelley, who's been
great, and he had everythingjust ready to go.
(22:10):
He was like, I'm prettyconfident I know um what they're
gonna try to do.
It's called an article 78.
They're gonna say that like youjust didn't adhere to like your
oath and your jobresponsibilities, and we just
cite the shield law and say,nope, the shield law says here
that you're not supposed to fileit, and uh we let the judge
(22:31):
figure it out from there.
So like our attorneys wereready to go as soon as the the
court case came in, and um yeah,then then they kind of just
went back and forth in legalfilings for a couple weeks,
which is weird because all thelegal filings come through my
office.
James Cave (22:49):
So like my staff has is like pulling them in.
I mean it's interesting thatthe argument would be that you
are weren't doing your job, likea dereliction of your duty,
which which is to uh representyour constituents, which I think
in this case I would say youyou did that for sure.
When when another recentexample, um I was doing like
trying to think, has somethinglike this happened in the county
(23:11):
clerk universe where a stateyou know, where a county clerk
is up against some sort ofconstitutional question.
And it and I was I guess I wassurprised to realize that Kim
Davis was a county clerk as wellin Kentucky.
But this is an example whereshe was acting, refusing to do
her job based on her personalbeliefs, right?
So to me the the argument wouldapply to her rather than you in
(23:34):
this case.
But do you want to can you talka little bit about the Kim
Davis thing as it as you see it?
Because I'm really curious tohear what you think about that.
Taylor Bruck (23:41):
Yeah.
So uh I mean if I'm rememberingcorrectly, Kim Davis was a
county cleric, like in Kentucky,who refused to file the
same-sex marriage licenses andwas sued for like, you know,
civil rights infringement of acouple that had a legal right to
be married.
So like in her case, she waslike intentionally breaking the
(24:03):
law because of her personalreligious beliefs.
She even said that, like, thatwas her argument.
Like, no, my religion.
Where like in my case, I feellike I was just following the
law as was written.
Like, if the shield law didn'texist, then like me and Kim
Davis would kind of be likethese rogue clerks that like
decided not to do things.
But like it's just insane.
Like, I we we get everycriminal and civil filing in the
(24:28):
county through our office.
Like, imagine if I was like,Oh, well, I think drunk
driving's cool, like I'm notfiling any of those.
Like, you just can't decide todo that.
There are things that if theymeet the legal like
requirements, if they have thecorrect names and dates and
everything, you just have tofile them.
Even if you know that like thecase itself is BS, like that's
not our job.
And that that was somethingthat was complicated about this
(24:50):
case.
And you know, other countyclerks statewide were like, I
don't know, is this reallysomething that the clerks are
supposed to do?
Like, we don't generally readthe content of a case and then
make a decision based on thecontent.
Like, we make sure that all thetechnical details are correct.
And I was like, Well, then theshield law needs to be more
(25:11):
clear about that, because asit's written right now, it just
says we are not to comply withit if it's about this thing.
We happen to read it, welearned it was about this thing.
And so that's an argument thatwe can make to like the state
legislature down the road, butright now it does not seem like
um I'm breaking the law byrefusing to do this.
(25:31):
And so that was our that wasour take.
But it did, you know, it wouldthere's certainly county clerks
statewide that did not agreewith that.
James Cave (25:40):
I mean, it brings up the question that I also would
love to explore with you aboutthis history of like federal
oversight, federal involvementin states' affairs, and this
question of states' rights andthe the sort of shifting meaning
behind that.
That's a very heavy phrase inUS history, right?
I mean, you're also historian.
(26:00):
You are you still the cityhistorian of things?
Yeah, I am.
So t tell me about states'rights as you see it, I think
now, because I don't know if youhave a different view on the
whole thing, now having gonethrough this process.
Taylor Bruck (26:13):
I think there like my views on states' rights are
just constantly evolving nowmore than ever.
But it's ironic to be makingthe states' rights argument
against the state of Texas,right?
Because the the federalgovernment throughout this whole
thing is largely just likestayed out of it.
So, like at the very beginning,when Texas filed the judgment
against us, there was like aMifepristone that the abortion
(26:34):
drug.
There was a Miphipristone casethat was about to go in front of
the Supreme Court to see likewhether or not this should be
banned federally.
During this case with me inTexas, like the Trump
administration said, drop it.
Like, we're not fighting thisat the federal level.
So it's legal federally, andlike that's where it became a
state's rights thing, wheregenerally I am a proponent of a
(26:59):
strong central government.
I think a strong centralgovernment avoids things exactly
like this, especially in thedigital era where you have
things like telehealth.
Like if you have states withcontradictory laws and people
can just still communicate likeinstantly between you're you're
bound to have contradictions.
So, like if you want somethingto be banned, especially like a
(27:22):
medication or something, do itat the federal level.
If it's not banned at thefederal level, to me, it's a
little wild for states to justbe able to ban the it doesn't
work.
New York tried this withfireworks.
It's like, okay, everyone'sjust gonna go to Pennsylvania
and get their fireworks and comeback.
Like it doesn't really work.
It's really easy to just getthings from other states if if
(27:44):
you want this.
James Cave (27:46):
Well, it goes back to like states' rights being
used by basically southernstates to protect the
institution of slavery, too.
So that's why I feel like thisquestion is so interesting in in
the way that uh I guess is itan ideology?
Is it a theory about a states'rights can shift based on any
number of factors?
(28:06):
It is a little morecomplicated.
Taylor Bruck (28:08):
And you can see with things like the shield law
now, how like when you have likestates that have laws that like
a huge portion of your statedisagrees with, that like
states' rights are reallyimportant sometimes now because
they can shield you from theseother laws.
There's actually in UlsterCounty, like one of the more
(28:29):
famous maybe slavery-relatedstates' rights cases happened
two blocks away at thecourthouse with Sojourner Truth
and her son, where like at thetime slavery was illegal in New
York State, but legal in otherstates.
And New York had a law thatsaid you cannot you cannot sell
an enslaved person to anotherstate.
(28:49):
And Sojourner Truth's son getssold to someone in Alabama, and
Sojourner Truth knows that thislaw exists, goes to the
courthouse and says, Hey, my sonwas just sold to Alabama.
That's supposed to be illegalbecause he's supposed to be free
when he gets 18.
This was at that weird periodright after they had abolished
slavery, but not really.
They're like slavery isabolished once everyone's 18.
(29:10):
So like her son is still alittle boy, and she knows about
this law, and that that's like ahuge states' rights fight at
the time.
And she wins, like famously,the first enslaved woman to win
a case against a white man.
So like Kingston Ulster Countyhas had states' rights cases
like this before where we feelthere's injustices being done in
(29:32):
other states, and uh thankfullyfor a number of years, the the
laws in New York State have umhave kind of been on the
constituent side.
So we hope that that thatcontinues.
James Cave (29:47):
I have to do a callback to previous episode uh
in the podcast feed because it'sabout the Kingston Guards and
the Ulster Nine and VintageBaseball, of which you're a co
founder.
Now it's a league, right?
You're a co founder.
So you have this history's beena part of your life for like
you you you're really into thehistory thing, right?
Taylor Bruck (30:05):
Oh yeah, for sure.
My mom used to be she used towork at the Senate House State
Historic Site where the firstNew York State Senate met.
So and she was like single mom.
And at the end of school everyday, like I would go to work
with her for two hours and she'dshow me like what she's working
on and what documents she'stranscribing.
And yeah, I've always thoughtthis stuff is so cool.
Um it's just like in my blood.
James Cave (30:26):
So then Dan comes back from seeing vintage
baseball being played, and he'slike, Taylor, I have got this
idea.
Taylor Bruck (30:33):
Yeah, he's like, why don't we start a vintage
baseball team?
And you know, I'm kind of a yesman.
I'm like, sounds great.
Like, let's do it, let's diveright in.
So yeah, we've basicallystudied up on the rules, learned
the rules, got contacts for thewoman who makes the uniform and
the there's like a nationalleague, um, vintage baseball
(30:55):
association, and we just kind ofrandomly started this team.
And it got off to a rockystart, too.
Like, not a good start.
We very much underestimated uhthis whole league.
I'll never forget our firstgame.
The team that we played showedup, they saw our field and they
said, Man, this is Bush League.
And we were like, oh, wethought that this was like below
(31:16):
Bush League, like we thoughtthis was like a novelty, like
jokey thing.
They were like, Man, we playbaseball.
Like, no, we play.
So we were like, oh, we have tolike recalibrate what we were
expecting.
So it's taken a few years, butnow we're like a pretty
competitive team.
Um, and uh we we vibe with theother teams more now, I think.
James Cave (31:35):
So what about baseball?
Specifically, like the historyof baseball in the US and
vintage baseball.
Like, what does it tell youabout things to preserve and and
sort of like what what you doin your in your day-to-day life
here as a as a county clerk, anot a non-acting, an elect,
right?
Taylor Bruck (31:54):
Yeah, it must be said.
County clerk elect now.
Man, I think baseball, sportsin general, but baseball because
it's it goes back so farnationally and the era that we
play, the 1860s, like throughthe Civil War, the baseball was
in a lot of ways like the greatequalizer.
Like there this was a thingthat like, you know, we're we're
(32:15):
fighting over slaverynationally, and like at the end
of like the battle one day, youcan all take the diamond with
black players, confederates,like anybody.
And it quite literally likelevels the playing field and
like it puts everyone on thesame same terms.
That's like the the beauty ofsports, you're all playing by
the same rules.
That's like something you don'tget in any other aspect of
(32:38):
life.
And it's a really beautifulthing, like in this moment of
turmoil and strife throughthroughout the Civil War, and
the soldiers need it too.
It's it's a morale booster, butyou just like hate people less
after like competing againstthem in sports.
I always said, I'm like, if Igo if I went down to Texas and
like played baseball with KenBaxton and like his staff, we'd
(32:59):
all shake hands and grab beer atthe end and be like, Hey, you
know what?
Good fight, you know, keep itup.
When you just like jar in thepress and are just like throwing
nasty words back and forth,like that's when things get out
of hand.
Like rhetoric really drivespeople to insanity, it seems.
It gets really nasty.
And there's just it's likeplaying sports with people and
(33:22):
against people is like breakingbread in a way.
Because you can like take thataggression out in like such a
compact and measured way that atthe end of it you just like
feel better about the otherperson.
Like healthy rivalry is good, Ithink.
And I think this part of thereason it became America's
pastime.
Uh, you get like New Yorkversus Boston and Philadelphia
(33:44):
and these places all trying tonow be the best, not just in
sports, but like be the bestcity, be the best at everything.
And like it's kind of fun.
It's it's I I I lovecompetition.
I think competition is likegenerally good.
So that's part of the reason Ilove sports.
James Cave (34:01):
Okay, now describe this object that you have
sitting in the chair next toyou.
Um, right there.
Taylor Bruck (34:07):
Oh, my baseball?
Yeah.
This is my constitutionbaseball that I got from
Washington, D.C.
It's basically uh it's abaseball with a bit of the
constitution on it.
It's got the big we the people,you know, July 4th, 1776, John
Hancock's nice big signature onit.
And it's kind of like my myfidget toy.
(34:27):
Like my hands always have to bedoing something, like when I'm
checking emails and stuff, so Ijust toss this back and forth.
But I've been, you know, had itfor years, and I never thought
it would be like relevantbecause there is a
constitutionality question tolike the shield law itself that
I think in down the road herewe'll probably get to because
(34:49):
the the constitution does saythat you have to abide by other
states' laws if you're in yourstate, the full faith and credit
clause.
So like I can't go murdersomeone in another state and
then come back to New York andsay, nope, I'm I'm in New York
now, you can't get me.
So whether or not shield lawsare constitutional, that's the
big question in this entirecase.
And that's why it might be abigger deal than just like
(35:12):
protecting our constituent andlike making sure that she
doesn't have to pay a hundredthousand dollar fee.
Like, this may very well end upin the Supreme Court with them
deciding whether or not Shieldlaws can exist nationwide
because it they haven't beentested anywhere.
So we'll see.
James Cave (35:31):
So this baseball is essentially you in all of your
uh all of your aspects.
You've got the baseball, theconstitutional crisis, um, the
history, the archives.
Taylor Bruck (35:43):
I mean, yeah, I mean in in a lot of ways it I
was drawn to it at the time.
And yeah, you saw something.
He probably could like dilutemy entire persona into this one
thing, which is is I've neverthought of it that way.
That's pretty funny.
James Cave (36:00):
What are you looking for it now that you're here,
you got 2026 coming up?
Like, what's on your mind?
Taylor Bruck (36:05):
Man, 250.
Next year's the 250thanniversary of the Revolutionary
War.
And I was made chair of UlsterCounty's Rev 250 committee maybe
like four years ago now, by PatRyan when I was still an
archivist.
So we've been planning it for awhile.
Like, how do you celebrate orcommemorate the past 250 years?
(36:25):
What kind of questions do youlike you want to ask?
Um, and yeah, it's becomingmore and more difficult to
question.
We're getting guidance from thefederal government telling us
things like you can't talk aboutslavery, don't talk about
anything that makes America seembad.
But like that's just not howyou do history, you know?
Like you have to talk about thegood and the bad so that you
(36:48):
don't repeat the bad.
The only reason you would notwant to talk about the bad is if
you're trying to repeat thebad.
So I've got some radical thingsplanned that I'm getting some
pushback on, some, you know,tarring and feathering workshops
or I get tarred and featheredand explain why political
violence is something that hasnever gone away, not something
that we should um we shouldn'tbe striving for it.
(37:10):
But it's not new.
Like what's happening,unfortunately, not new, always
but always been here.
But I'm hopeful, like I have toremain optimistic that next
year, the 250th, will be a goodopportunity to remind folks like
why our founding documents areimportant, why the founding
fathers, flawed as they were,like putting these ideas onto
(37:33):
paper, especially the Bill ofRights, just like really basic
things that like we never evenused to really fight about, like
these rights that we findunalienable, they're now like
very much under attack.
And uh so I'm sort of excited.
It's nice when you havepolitical beliefs and the
(37:54):
history on your side to back itup, and like next year we really
get to show that the historyhas always been on our side and
that we have a long way to go tolike get to where the country
was supposed to be.
We've been going in thatdirection, you know, a couple
steps forward, a couple stepsback.
But next year we're gonnareally hammer home like why
(38:15):
America, if it if you don'tbelieve America is exceptional,
I'm going to try to convince youthat it is.
By tarring and featheringyourself.
Exactly.
And like, and then you get towhy they were doing it, right?
(38:36):
Like why you don't want a king,why being governed by your
peers is good.
Like why having people from allover the world have a place
that they can all go livetogether and govern themselves
is special.
Like that's what makes Americaunique and special is that no
one knew if it would work.
No one knew if you can bringpeople from all different
(38:57):
religions, all differentbackgrounds, and just put them
in one place and say, okay,figure it out, guys.
Govern yourself, vote for whoyou think is the best.
Like that's why New York City'sgreat.
Like, that's why America isAmerica.
And like we're totally goingthis weirdo way where it's like,
no, no, no, we're likeimmigrants are now bad.
What do you want to be?
Like, what do you think Americawas supposed to be?
(39:18):
Like this is America.
The next year's, the next twoyears really are like a huge
opportunity to remind peoplethat that is the American
experiment, for better or worse.
But like in my opinion, it'sbeen like a resounding success
in like so many ways.
But we shouldn't forget abouthow it has not been successful,
too, and we're remind folks ofthat so that we don't repeat it.
(39:42):
But that's what makes historyfun, is like you can always
bring it back to the presentday.
And it's hard to talk abouthistory without looking into the
future.
And that's what we always tryto like teach students too.
You're part of this.
Like you're not just learningabout history, you're using that
as a reference for how you'regoing to go forward now as an
American.
And that's something excitingfor me.
James Cave (40:01):
Okay, before we go, um, I just want to ask, going
back, I want to go back to KinPaxton really quickly because I
stopped doing research because Ididn't want to spoil the
ending.
And I wanted to hear it fromyou directly.
Where are we now?
Like what where what is as oftoday, uh November 12th.
Taylor Bruck (40:18):
What is it?
I don't know.
James Cave (40:19):
November 13th.
Okay, as of November 13th, whatwhere do we stand?
What is happening?
Taylor Bruck (40:24):
As of today, case dismissed, we won.
The the ruling came out onHalloween, and it basically
confirmed what we believed.
The the judge's ruling said I Ido have a responsibility to
file things that meet the filingrequirements, unless
specifically uh stated by lawthat I shouldn't.
(40:48):
And in this case, there is alaw that specifically says I
shouldn't.
So the judge said, Yep, basedon the SHIELD law, he shouldn't
have filed this.
There's nothing that that theclerk did that seemed unlawful.
Case dismissed.
So Texas has 30 days to appeal.
We're now, what, 15 days intothat?
So countdown's on.
(41:08):
We we I'm I'm sort of expectingthem to appeal, but they
haven't yet.
So as of today, we won.
And we'll see where where itgoes from here.
James Cave (41:21):
Now, while I was editing this episode this week,
we had a bit of a late breakingupdate, so I called Taylor up to
see what happened.
Taylor Bruck (41:27):
Hey James, how are you?
James Cave (41:29):
I'm alright.
I'm recording this.
Is that okay?
Absolutely.
I heard that there's an update.
There's been an update.
What happened?
Taylor Bruck (41:37):
There has been an update.
Um Texas predictably appealed.
They they filed a really briefappeal.
They they didn't make anyadditional arguments or
anything.
They just said they areappealing the decision.
And uh so my understanding isnow it goes to appellate court
(41:57):
and they'll decide whether ornot to hear the case at all.
And if they decide to, thenit'll get assigned to a
different appellate court judgeand uh we'll continue the
process.
James Cave (42:09):
Do you know how long this process typically would
take?
Like what are you expectingover there?
Taylor Bruck (42:14):
I have no idea how long this process typically
takes.
Um I I know that for a typicalArticle 78, which is what they
filed against me, there is apretty strict turnaround.
I think it's uh 90 days.
So um, unlike some cases thatcan kind of hang out in court
for years um because they'retrying to compel a government
(42:37):
official to like do their job,um, I think it'll go quicker.
But um probably a couple monthsnow, we we sit back and wait
and see what happens.
I don't know.
I'm learning, James.
James Cave (42:51):
Have you heard have you heard from anyone about like
odds or what people areanticipating, or is this totally
new ground?
Taylor Bruck (42:58):
Well, given that they haven't made a new
argument, um we feel the oddsare the same as they were going
in, you know?
They're the law is pretty clearthat uh there's a law saying
that I should not have compliedwith this.
If they had made theconstitutional argument, then
it's a whole different case, andyou're arguing about whether or
(43:18):
not the Shield law isconstitutional, but they they
still have not made thatargument.
So um I feel my odds are verygood, as good as they were going
into the first hearing.
James Cave (43:28):
Okay, well, thanks for keeping us posted, Taylor.
Taylor Bruck (43:31):
Oh, no problem, James.
I'll I'll let you know when uhwhen it goes on to the next
court.
James Cave (43:36):
Yeah, we'll be following along.
Okay, that does it for thisepisode of the Jaffee.
I want to thank Taylor for histime and Dan Torres for making
the introduction.
If you got something out ofthis episode or thought it was
interesting, I'd be honored ifyou told a friend.
Word of mouth really helps thispodcast grow.
Well, thanks as always forlistening all the way to the
end.
Until next time, I'll see youover on the James Cage Instagram
(43:57):
feed.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
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.