0:00

It's 2021. People could acquire self-driving cars, eat burgers made out of plants, even fly to space and rocket ships if they have the money for it.

0:07

So if you could do all this futuristic stuff today, the very least your phone could do is download entertainment in a flash for that you should get 80 and T 5g, 80 and T 5g is fast, reliable, secure, and nationwide.

0:21

Want to make sure your phone service keeps up with what you need from it.

0:25

Get 80 and T 5g.

0:26

It's not complicated.

0:28

5g requires compatible plan or device 5g may not be available in your area.

0:32

[email protected] slash 5g for you for details.

0:38

Today, we're going to talk about the conservatives on the Supreme court, preparing to gut Roe V Wade and the Democrats messaging surrounding that case and midterms more broadly.

0:45

I interviewed Pennsylvania's democratic candidate for the us Senate, John Fetterman about Dr.

0:50

Oz jumping into the race for Republicans and the need to eliminate the filibuster before it's too late.

0:54

And I'm joined by Michigan law school, professor Leah Litman, who answers all of our legal questions running the case of Mississippi's 15 week abortion ban at the Supreme court.

1:01

I'm Brian, Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to no lie.

1:04

So

1:04

I

1:04

was

1:04

going

1:04

to

1:04

use

1:04

this

1:04

time

1:04

to

1:04

talk

1:04

about

1:04

the

1:04

implications

1:04

of

1:04

the

1:04

latest

1:04

Supreme

1:04

court

1:11

argument. And what's at stake with Roe, but I think that if you listen to this podcast, you understand that a woman deserves bodily autonomy.

1:18

You understand that the government is not our church and that our elected officials are not our priests.

1:22

And we are not here to be proselytized by politicians who don't understand that their job isn't to shove their religious beliefs down the throats of people who don't share those religious bleeds.

1:31

You understand all of that.

1:32

I don't think anyone's coming here with a, a half-baked opinion on abortion.

1:36

I think that if there's one thing I could probably take to the bank is that you've probably made up your minds about that.

1:42

Plus I've got an amazing guest coming up who will talk about that issue far more eloquently and intelligently than I would.

1:48

So instead, I want to talk about what we are doing about it and what we should be doing about it and what the Democrats are doing right now.

1:55

Isn't much the DSCC the democratic senatorial campaign committee, which is responsible for electing Democrats to the Senate tweeted elect Democrats to protect abortion rights.

2:06

Dick Durbin, the chair of the Senate judiciary committee tweeted abortion is a constitutionally protected, right?

2:11

And the court should uphold this constitutionally protected, right?

2:13

Retweet if you agree, and the list goes on and on.

2:17

But I mean, just with those two examples alone, from a messaging perspective, this ain't, it, those tweets rightfully made people really angry because look, yes, the Supreme court should uphold our rights, but retweet, if you agree that judges who should do something, but won't, isn't going to do anything beyond give Dick Durbin a tweet with some retweets like the Supreme court, isn't going to be like, ah, well, look at that number of retweets, dammit, Kevin, we have no choice.

2:42

And as far as telling people to elect Democrats, we did, we turned out in record numbers in 2018, flip the house, turned out in record numbers again in 2020, and flip the Senate and the white house to what you can't do is tell people that the onus is only on them to do the thing that just did.

2:59

And look on a basic level.

3:01

The most basic level, the DSCC is right.

3:03

Electing more Democrats is the solution.

3:05

Practically speaking to pass anything, we need 60 votes in the Senate to overcome the filibuster, or we need 50 centers willing to eliminate the filibuster.

3:12

We don't have 60 senators to pass legislation outright and we don't have 50 to eliminate the filibuster we have, I don't know, 48.

3:19

So yeah, if we elect two more democratic senators and we hold onto the house, then yes, we can enact the rest of our agenda.

3:26

We can protect women's reproductive rights.

3:28

We can pass the women's health protection act and codify row and expand the court that would likely try to strike it down.

3:33

But without that being clear, just telling people to do the thing that they just did, isn't going to cut it.

3:40

And so first and foremost, we need a plan, a cogent plan, as far as messaging is concerned because throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks with 11 months to midterms and zero voting rights legislation on the horizon is a really shitty plan.

3:54

So whatever that message is needs to be clear and concise and coordinated, just like the Republicans do and granted their messaging isn't bound by facts or decency or any semblance of reality, but I'll tell you what, they can sell it.

4:07

They can sell, build the wall.

4:09

They can sell, make America great. Again, they can sell high gas prices and they do so first off, make it clear to people what the issue is.

4:17

Yes, we have a 50 50 Senate, but the filibuster means that we need 60 votes to pass anything.

4:21

We've got about 48 senators willing to eliminate the filibuster.

4:25

We get two more and then we'll codify row.

4:27

We'll expand the courts, make sure they can't undo that law will pass.

4:30

Universal background checks will enact climate change.

4:33

Legislation will pass a $15 minimum wage help elect a couple more Democrats.

4:37

And we can finish the work that we started.

4:39

We're doing everything we can right now to pass the bills that you want passed from vaccines to climate, to paid, leave to universal pre-K to drug prices.

4:48

But we're limited with what we can do right now.

4:50

Let's finish the job and do the rest of what you sent us to Washington to do at least explain that as a rationale to eliminate the filibuster, instead of just patronizing people about a lighting more Democrats, while we're sitting here staring at democratic majorities in the house, the Senate and the white house.

5:04

And second of all, use it to turn up the pressure on the people on our side, who were actually blocking that progress.

5:10

Like I'm sorry, but we don't need to unilaterally run cover for Joe Manchin and Kiersten cinema.

5:14

We don't need 96% of Senate Democrats to be apologists for 4% of Senate Democrats.

5:19

If Democrats in Washington are feeling a lot of pressure right now focus that pressure where it belongs.

5:24

And that is with the holdouts, the moderates who seem to be more beholden to arcane Senate procedural tools than their own constituents.

5:32

And look, will it work maybe, maybe not.

5:36

Honestly. I couldn't tell you what would happen if there was actually a full court press on Joe mansion and Kiersten cinema, maybe mansion laughs it off because let's face it.

5:43

He is a Democrat and a plus 40 red state.

5:45

But if Biden fought like hell, if Schumer, folic, hell if Pelosi their colleagues, their constituents, then who knows, but we won't know if we just skip that part.

5:54

And it said bark at people that we should be doing more.

5:57

You do more first because all of us seeing that you're willing to fight, even if we don't win.

6:01

But seeing that you're willing to fight is going to have a bigger impact than just hoping that we show up to elect more people who think that retweet.

6:09

If you agree is a strategy to protect women from an assault on their bodily autonomy.

6:13

The fact is that this is a fight worth having it is a righteous fight in a popular fight and a necessary fight, but we have to share the responsibilities.

6:21

We're willing to go to bat here, but we want to know that we're not the only ones.

6:25

Next

6:25

step

6:25

is

6:25

my

6:25

interview

6:25

with

6:25

Pennsylvania's

6:25

John

6:25

Fetterman,

6:31

no lies brought to you by I trust capital by now.

6:34

You've probably heard all about cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin.

6:36

You might even already be investing in them, but did you know, you can invest in cryptocurrencies through your retirement account with trust capital.

6:43

You can buy and sell cryptocurrencies from a crypto IRA and get all the same tax advantages as a traditional IRA.

6:50

I just capital allows you to invest in over two dozen of the most popular cryptocurrencies.

6:54

And unlike the stock market, you can buy and sell 24 hours a day.

6:58

The I trust capital platform is easy to use, and it only takes a few minutes to create your account.

7:03

Setting up an IRA is free and I trust these are low it's time to start taking control of your financial future.

7:08

With I trust capital, you can get all the tax benefits of a retirement account while investing in crypto visit.

7:14

I trust capital.com to start investing today.

7:17

That's I trust capital.com taxes and conditions may apply.

7:20

Fees apply. Cryptocurrencies are a speculative investment with risk of loss.

7:24

I chose capital Inc does not provide legal investment or tax advice consult with a qualified legal investment or tax professional.

7:30

No lies brought to you by Ray Khan, wireless ear buds.

7:32

So the holidays are here and that can only mean one thing.

7:35

Well, two things, the first of which is that the war on Christmas is here, but the second is that you're going to have to start buying gifts.

7:41

Now there's nothing I can do about the war on Christmas.

7:43

Trust me, I've tried, but there is something I can do on the gift front.

7:47

And that's to recommend a gift that everyone will use.

7:49

Ray Khan, wireless earbuds.

7:50

I've been using these earbuds for months.

7:52

They're my go-to is when I'm at the gym, which is especially important for me because that's my downtime.

7:57

And I don't want subpar earbuds to mess that up for me.

7:59

Recon always gives you amazing audio quality, comparable to what you get from other premium brands.

8:04

Only these start at half the price with their latest model.

8:07

You get three sound profiles to make sure everything you're listening to sounds it's best with just the right amount of base.

8:12

There's pure mode for podcasts and blues balanced mode for rock and metal and base mode for hip hop, EDM and so on.

8:18

And maybe the best part, how good they look.

8:21

Ray cons are now available in five colors.

8:23

So you can find the perfect pair for everyone on your list.

8:26

Plus there is free shipping and returns.

8:28

So there's zero hassle for gifting.

8:29

This holiday season, the holidays are coming up faster than you think now is the time to knock out that gift list and avoid the last minute shopping scramble, especially because right now my listeners will get 15% off site-wide with code [email protected] slash no lie.

8:44

Go to buy Ray con.com/ nol-i and use code holiday today to get 15% off your entire econ order by Ray con.com/no lie today.

8:55

We've got the candidate for us Senate in Pennsylvania, John Fetterman.

8:58

Thanks so much for coming back on. Always A

9:00

pleasure. Thanks for having me back on.

9:02

So a lot's happened in the last few weeks, as far as the Pennsylvania Senate races concerned on the right, the Trump endorsed candidate, Sean Parnell dropped out and then Dr.

9:11

Oz threw his hat into the ring as we just continue to descend deeper into lunacy.

9:16

But actually, you know, with that said in light of the fact that a reality TV star went on to win in 2016, how seriously are you taking Dr.

9:24

Ross's candidacy?

9:26

You really have to take it very seriously.

9:28

I mean, he has a lot of resources and his high name ID, and of course, I mean, people know who he is and everything like that.

9:38

So it's, it's a strange development.

9:41

I, you know, to use the, that meme, you know, that wasn't on anyone's bingo card a few months ago that, you know, a celebrity, a TV doctor was going to jump into the race, but American politics these days has, in my opinion, and increasingly larger element of that to it.

9:58

And so here, you know, here we are, I don't think, I don't think anyone's bingo card had had that, but, but that's, that's, what's happened In

10:06

Dr. Oz's Senate announcement beyond mentioning that he was running for the Pennsylvania Senate seat.

10:12

He never actually mentioned the state of Pennsylvania once.

10:15

And that issue is exacerbated by the fact that the guy doesn't even live in Pennsylvania.

10:19

He lives in New Jersey and he works in New York now without shitting on New Jersey because you and I have our differences of opinion, as far as the great state of New Jersey, I

10:30

would never, I mean, my only issue with Jersey was their official account.

10:34

They were trying to steal our cheese steak, and then, and then that started a whole different thing there, the endure nj.gov to try to come for the cheese steak.

10:44

And I was like, I had to defend my state's honor here at that point.

10:48

It's it's, it's understandable.

10:48

Well, you know, in light of that, that he doesn't live in Pennsylvania, that he works in New York, that he lives in New Jersey.

10:56

What are your thoughts on the fact that Republicans are offering up candidates to represent a state that they literally have nothing to do?

11:03

Yeah, no one on our team has done a deep dive on his, his like specific residency or, or the statutorial requirements of, of what he made or meats or anything like that.

11:12

You know, it's like his announcement was his announcement and ultimately it's going to be up to the primary voters of, for the Republicans to decide if, if Dr.

11:21

Oz is, is their standard bear and what have you, it, it, I think it just speaks to the surreal nature of, of where we are in this moment in time in American politics.

11:31

I, I guess, and I think, you know, Pennsylvania is going to ultimately decide what it's looking for in their next, their next United States Senator, because this is obviously a crucial race, but it's, it's just such a strange development one that no one would've ever foreseen or, or taking notice of.

11:51

But yeah, I mean, I don't know what his roots are in Pennsylvania or how extensive they are, but, but nevertheless, he's in, and I don't know what that'll bring in terms of what the Republican electorate's going to think of him.

12:04

And it's, it's, it's interesting.

12:06

I know. Well, you know, obviously Dr.

12:09

Oz has kind of failed up on the right, given that as a doctor who's willing to promote, right, when talking points he's proved useful for Republicans.

12:16

And so they've propped him up as he's advocated for disproven COVID treatments and reopening schools.

12:21

Even if that meant we would lose two or 3% of people, and those are his words, what do you think that says about the danger of allowing the Senate or the house or the white house for that matter to fall into Republican hands at this moment in particular?

12:35

I mean, it's, it's a crucial race for that, that very simple fact.

12:37

And I pride myself on believing in science, all of our children.

12:40

We have a seven year old, we have a 10 year old and we have 11 year old, they're all vaccinated, you know, you know, Joel and I are fully faxed and, you know, we're, we're both gonna get, get our booster.

12:50

So we, we firmly believe in science and we firmly believe in, in, you know, the reality of what we need to do in, in, in COVID.

12:57

And, and I was surprised or disappointed though, that some of the things that, that Dr.

13:04

Oz has promoted with this with respects to COVID, it's not something I would have expected that a trained surgeon and doctor that, that he is, would, it would have said.

13:13

And, you know, I haven't really focused much on what Dr.

13:16

Oz has said in terms of COVID treatments.

13:19

I focused on what we know is the general consensus is that it works and, and vaccines have been incredibly effective and we need to be vigilant and we need to make sure we're taking the appropriate steps.

13:31

And I don't think there's, there should be much room for some strange interpretation of, of the reality here, because, you know, when we stopped agreeing on what should be agreed upon, and, and the effectiveness of vaccinations has marked the upward surge of public health and child welfare and the welfare of all of us with vaccines that we've all received as children.

13:56

I don't understand why, you know, in a world that we live in today, that this was ever a debate to begin with, quite frankly.

14:06

Yeah. I mean, it's just another instance of the right turning things into cultural, where issues that don't deserve to be turned into culture, war issues.

14:14

I think the American people are getting tired of having to square up over everything.

14:17

You know, I mean, it it's just like we all wanted our schools back open.

14:21

And, and part of that until vaccines were readily available for children was, was masking.

14:26

And, you know, in, in January, you know, our masking a requirement and here in Pennsylvania, only speaking of Pennsylvania is going to become, you know, selective based on what the school district and the local leaders ultimately decided.

14:38

And for sure there are going to be some school districts across Pennsylvania that are going to decline to, to make masking mandatory.

14:44

But as long as the vaccinations are an option for children, and we continue to push for the solution, I mean, you know, I don't understand why that's controversial and I never have.

14:56

And, you know, aren't, you know, whether it's my campaign or whether it's my role as Lieutenant governor it's vaccines, vaccines, vaccines, no one wants to go ever, you know, no more lockdowns, no more any of these kinds of extremes.

15:07

And we have an idea of what we're looking at with COVID.

15:10

But this past Thanksgiving, there were nearly 800,000 empty chairs, you know, across our tables.

15:16

And this Thanksgiving was so much better than last Thanksgiving because we could all get together.

15:21

And I just wish people would remember that.

15:23

And that is because of the vaccines.

15:25

And that is because our country is on the right path and we are able to see COVID for what it is.

15:33

It's something that we need to address and take seriously.

15:35

And now that we have a vaccine that has proven to be incredibly effective, we shouldn't have anybody on either side.

15:42

It's not a political issue, it's a medical issue.

15:44

And I would say, especially coming from a lifetime doctor, a professional like that, I, I think it's, it's very irresponsible.

15:53

We know now we're nearing the end of Biden's first year in office, and basically the beginning of the campaign for midterms.

15:59

Now, at the same time, we've seen no movement from the Senate on voting rights legislation.

16:04

What's your message to those senators, paying more deference to the filibuster and American's rights to fair representation.

16:12

I mean, that, that's a great question. And, and, you know, I, I've always said that the Republicans are setting the table in anticipation for 2024 that's that's their end game.

16:20

That is a second term of president Trump.

16:23

And you look at states, whether it's mine or whether it's Arizona or Georgia, especially Georgia, Wisconsin, and these other states that the right to vote is being suppressed.

16:35

It's being curtailed, curtailed, it's being shaved off in my own state.

16:39

They are going to pass a attempt to pass a constitutional amendment, making sure that universal voting ID for every time you vote, not just when you sign up to vote, but every time you vote, because they understand that at any given time, there's tens of thousands of Pennsylvania who typically typically are on the, or on the poorer side and, and or people of color that are less likely to have their ID at any one given time, they understand that that could shave up to anywhere between 70 to 90,000 votes based on the statistics that were calculated in 2012, the last time they wanted to make universal voting ID.

17:16

So, you know, and if you look at how small the margins were in 2020, my state who was 80,000 votes, Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, all 45,000 votes between those three states, it's at a very insidious and effective strategy that they're employing.

17:33

And more than just, you know, the voting right suppression legislation.

17:36

They're also replacing the elected officials and the secretaries of state that stood their ground, you know, on the Republican side that said, look, I voted for president Trump, I believe in him, but he didn't win this state parents where there was no voter fraud.

17:51

In fact, the, the hero Republican commissioner in Philadelphia, you know, who got death threats and all these, this horrible outcome for telling the truth in Philadelphia, he's leaving his post and he's taking on a different job.

18:04

So a lot of the guardrails really got mangled in 2020.

18:08

I mean, he had a front front seat to that and, and we need to replace them.

18:13

And in the absence of those guard rails being removed by this legislation, or by removing these elected officials, that's removing the filibuster for the Senate is critical because it's, nothing's more fundamental than, you know, free access to the right to vote.

18:31

And that is being strategically curtailed and suppressed on the, in these states that are crucial to either side, if they want to eat, to win the presidency and, and getting rid of that filibuster should be the priority and getting these things done.

18:46

Because if not now, when given the fact, when are we going to have the presidency, the house and the Senate all under Carson, w you know, one thing that two things that the Republicans have going for them, they are United and they are ruthless.

19:01

And, you know, I always ask folks in, in campaign events, who's, who's Merrick Garland, and people are like, well, he's our attorney general.

19:09

And I'm like, well, who should he be?

19:10

He should be on the Supreme court.

19:12

And, and that demonstrates and reminds people that just how ruthless they can be.

19:16

And don't think for a second, if they were ever in a position to run the table, 1, 2, 3 president on down that they won't get rid of the filibuster, and they'll make all kinds of changes as, as RO now is become in front of like this.

19:30

This is, you know, it's all, it's all falling into place for them.

19:32

And right now, like, I, like I've said, if not now, when yeah.

19:37

I mean, we, we keep treating this, like, they're just playing chicken.

19:39

But the fact is that when they have the opportunity to do these things that we would assume are just too insidious for them to even do well, look, I mean, Rowe is right on the verge of being gutted right now.

19:48

And There is no, there is no bottom.

19:50

There is no bottom. And I've said, it's like, you know, Democrats need to be, need to be United and ruthless for, for working people for reproductive rights, for voting rights, for basic economic development.

20:03

And for now, like all these things that none of this is radical.

20:06

None of this is anything other than what the overwhelming majority of Americans want.

20:10

You know, whatever the democratic will of my state is.

20:14

I want that to be true.

20:15

And right now in my state, the Republicans are still going ahead with this bizarre database to audit the vote, even though it has nothing to do with anything.

20:24

And we had five cases of voter fraud here in Pennsylvania that were all charged, arrested, convicted.

20:30

They're all on probation. We've, we've dealt with all of that.

20:33

The, the plank has become the platform.

20:35

Whereas if you don't subscribe to the big lie, 2020, you are no longer considered a viable member of the Republican party from an electoral standpoint.

20:45

And we in the democratic party need to make sure we appeal to that segment of the electorate saying, look, you know, you may not agree with us on every issue politically, but we believe in democracy in America, you know, you didn't see the Democrats in Washington in Virginia say, oh, it was rigged.

21:02

It was rigged. You know, you know, a young kid cheated, like, no, that's, that's a hallmark of, of us.

21:07

We're, we're going to tell the truth, whether we liked the result or not, but the other side isn't there.

21:12

And I don't think they're ever going to come back.

21:15

Yeah, Well, no, you've been on the campaign trail for a long time.

21:19

You threw your hat into the ring a long time ago.

21:21

So you have the benefit of being able to hone your message while the rest of us have kind of just been running around like chickens with their heads, cut off figuring how to correctly approach 20, 22.

21:30

But we can take lessons from the voters of Pennsylvania, especially given how important that state is.

21:36

So what issue is most salient with Pennsylvania that you've spoken to Most

21:41

Pennsylvanians want a sense of stability normalcy, and, and we don't want to return to the chaos.

21:48

I think that's what the majority of, of voters actually want.

21:52

I really do. I hear some of the understandable concerns about, you know, inflation and things like that are going up, but, but I also want to remind everybody where we were a year ago for Thanksgiving.

22:02

Let's say we didn't know if the vaccine was going to be effective.

22:05

We didn't know how it was going to be distributed in time.

22:08

You know, last Thanksgiving. I know I didn't, I hadn't, I hadn't seen my parents all year and, you know, think about how much better Thanksgiving is this year than it was last year.

22:18

When we, you couldn't get together with your loved ones without risking giving them a deadly violent virus.

22:24

The economy is on the upswing.

22:26

You know, Joe Biden has brought a sense of normalcy and competence to everyday life that was lacking during the pandemic.

22:34

And the, the message that, that, that we're promoting, whether it's Lieutenant, governor, or as a candidate, is that the democratic party has always had working families, the working parties, Americans best interests at heart.

22:50

And if you enjoyed the chaos and you enjoyed the noise, then I don't know how anybody could want to return to, to a time like that.

23:00

And as far as policies go, you know, whether it's build back better, whether it's the infrastructure plan, you know, all of these great investments.

23:07

I mean, the Biden presidency is going to be transformative, certainly through the remainder of his first term, second term, it's going to reverberate for quite a while because, you know, they, they have been able to get some important legislation passed, but nevertheless, there's still a lot that should get done in the Senate.

23:25

And we need to, in the United States, Senate Democrats should vote like Democrats, and we should all realize, look, these are unique times in American politics.

23:34

And if we don't do this, now we are going to be complicit in the kind of changes the Republicans are going to to make that, or we'll make it that much more difficult to, to win in both 22 and in 24, because we all know that's where the Republicans end game.

23:52

Yeah, that's exactly right now. I know one of your biggest issues is weed legalization.

23:56

If this administration doesn't move to reschedule marijuana as a schedule, one drug, do you think that opens the door for Republicans to pounce on what is an easy populist issue?

24:08

Yeah, I mean, I w I wouldn't say it was one of my biggest issue, but it's one thing I care about.

24:11

I mean, it, it's, it's an, it's an enormous economic leverage, a force multiplier.

24:16

It has an enormous criminal justice ramifications, you know, in my state and in states now that we know it's overwhelmingly impacts communities and people of color, and it just creates a lot of jobs.

24:28

I mean, it's, it's a win-win, you know, back in 2020, I said that whichever party picks up that mantle of legalizing marijuana, that's an enormous, powerful weapon that, that could have enormous electoral ramifications.

24:42

And I think I was proven, right.

24:44

You know, all these states, and then there's other states like Wyoming even is they're working to get a ballot on, you know, I think Democrats need to just realize that this would be a huge thing.

24:53

And you're right. You know, in my state, they went from turning, you know, calling me a liar and it's like, oh, he's, he's a stoner.

24:59

And for the first time ever a couple of months ago, for the first time in Pennsylvania history, a state Senator introduced a former us Marshall, I might add I'm the most conservative members of the caucus, his own bill to legalize marijuana in Pennsylvania recreationally.

25:13

And he called it inevitable, inevitable.

25:17

So the Republicans are quickly re know, wising up saying, Hey, this is an issue that a majority of our constituents want, you know, why not leverage it?

25:27

And, and your point is, is right on, like, you know, it's going to be there for the taken for one of the parties.

25:31

And let me tell you in an air of increasingly divided, govern government and partisanship legal weed is one of the great uniter.

25:40

And I hear that from people, you know, Trumpers approached me and they like, when, when are you going to end this bullshit and, and make it legal?

25:47

And I'm like, well, you know, it's, you know, Republicans have traditionally stopped.

25:51

It, it's a strategic issue for, for whichever party picks it up.

25:55

And, and to your point, it certainly creates an opportunity for Republicans to embrace it and overtake it.

26:02

And in some of these areas, Well,

26:04

let's, let's finish with this. What are you, what are you getting yourself for Christmas?

26:09

I, I don't know, but, you know, th th the kids, I dunno, it's like, we're in that place where, where we ha we only have one, who's an absolute Santa, you know, a true believer.

26:20

And, and I had to warn our oldest.

26:23

It's like, you know, like we gotta, you know, so, so August is, is carefully, you know, getting his letter together and everything like that, you know, I don't, I'm not sure what I'm going to get yourself, but, you know, for me, this will be a, you know, a special SA Christmas because you know, our, you know, August is still all in, on team Santa.

26:41

Whereas our older two, you know, not so much, but yeah, it's, it's, it's nice.

26:45

And we just were, we did a big Christmas parade in homestead, which is a town close by where we live.

26:50

So, Yeah, well, well, you know, enjoy the holidays and keep kicking ass in the campaign trail here, John Fetterman.

26:56

Thanks so much for coming back on.

26:58

Hey, thanks for having me on No

27:02

lies brought to you by fields. So I've been pretty outspoken about how important it is to take steps to de-stress.

27:06

If you're a yoga person or a meditation person, that's great.

27:10

If you're like me and the thought of sitting quietly for an extended period of time actually brings you anxiety.

27:14

Then you should use CBD.

27:16

And the brand I use is fields F E a L S.

27:19

Now first off CBD is safe.

27:20

Obviously reduces anxiety helps with pain, muscle aches, sleeplessness, and it's natural.

27:25

So won't leave you feeling groggy or hung over like other sleep aids.

27:28

And it's super easy to use you just place a few drops of feels under your tongue, hold it there for a few seconds and adjust a few minutes.

27:34

You'll already start to feel the difference.

27:36

There's an easy to use chart. So you know your dosage, and if you're still unsure, it feels also offers a free CBD hotline to help you out.

27:43

So if it's your first time, you're not on your own, there's someone there to help you.

27:46

It feels also offers a monthly membership, so you can save money and it's delivered right to your door consistently, and you can cancel or pause any time.

27:53

So you're not locked into anything.

27:54

Now, if you go to fields.com/no line and become a member, you'll get 50% off your first order, plus free shipping again, that's F E a L s.com/no lie to become a member and get 50% automatically taken off your first order.

28:07

Plus free shipping deals.com/no lie.

28:11

No lie is brought to you by a different podcast. The Jordan harbinger show, which is unlike any other podcast, you've listened to each episode is a conversation with a different guest.

28:19

And these are some of the most interesting people you could possibly find like this brand new two-parter about a north Korean defector, Jordan dives, into everything from what it's like to be on the north Korean regimes official kill list to discussing how certain words and concepts don't even exist in that country, really compelling stuff.

28:35

The show is aimed at making you a better informed, more critical thinkers.

28:38

You can get a better sense of the world, and it definitely delivers.

28:41

And apparently even apple agreed.

28:43

Abaleen did one of its best shows in 2018.

28:45

So give the show a listen, go check out Jordan harbinger.com/start for some episode recommendations or search for the Jordan harbinger show.

28:54

That's H a R B as in boy, I N as in Nancy, G E R on apple podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

29:04

Thanks again to John Fetterman. Now we've got Michigan law school professor and co-host of the strict scrutiny podcast.

29:08

Leah Litman. Thanks so much for coming on.

29:11

Thanks so much for having me. So this is all on the heels of the Supreme court hearing Mississippi's case on the 15 week abortion ban.

29:18

Could you give a quick overview of the case and the difference between the two questions at play here, which are the legality of a 15 week abortion ban and the constitutionality of RO more broadly?

29:30

Sure. So the case involves a challenge to Mississippi statute, the law that prohibits abortions more than 15 weeks after a person's last period.

29:38

And I think if the court, as people expected to do a, this statute, there is no way in which the court won't be sticking a dagger through the heart of Roe versus Wade, because when the Supreme court reaffirmed Roe vs Wade in the 1992 decision planned parenthood versus Casey, it emphasized that the central holding of Roe, the core of the right, that it announced was the ability of the woman to decide before viability to have an abortion Mississippi statute.

30:06

Conceitedly prohibits women from deciding to have abortions before viability, before the point at which a fetus becomes viable outside the womb, which roughly occurs sometime around 22 to 24 weeks of pregnancy.

30:19

And so no matter whether the Supreme court issues, the words Roe vs.

30:24

Wade is overruled, upholding this statute will dramatically reduce the constitutional protections for abortion rights and be in a lot of ways, practically overruling Rowe Is

30:38

there, is there a planet in which they can say, okay, that, okay, we've upheld a 15 week abortion, but trying to spin it as if RO hasn't been effectively gutted to try to salvage something politically.

30:50

So if that's what they end up doing, I have no doubt that they will try to Gaslight their way into favorable press coverage.

30:56

That would say, you know, Supreme court does not overrule RO or reaffirms the protections of Roe.

31:02

But the reality is is that the Supreme court isn't going to say, well, states can only prohibit abortions at 15 weeks after a person's last period.

31:12

And no earlier once the court erases the viability line, because that has been the clear bright line rule that has prevented states from prohibiting abortions at 15 weeks or earlier, then it will immediately provoke the question of, well, how much earlier, before viability can states prohibit abortions states across the United States have attempted to prohibit abortions at 12 weeks after a person's last period, 10 weeks, eight weeks, six weeks in the case of the notorious Texas SBA.

31:45

And so once the Supreme court says, well, you can prohibit abortions at some points before viability.

31:52

Then the constitutionality of all those laws are immediately going to be on the table.

31:57

Now, during the arguments, Kavanaugh kind of showed his hand in terms of his interest in cutting row entirely.

32:02

And that was when he brought up the argument that other past cases also have an adhere to precedent like Oberg fell like brown V board of ed Miranda.

32:12

But what he conveniently left out is that none of those cases restrict an already existing, right.

32:17

They enhance them. Has there ever been a time where a constitutional right that we've already had, has gone on to be eliminated?

32:24

So in her opening remarks, solicitor general, Elizabeth pre-launch said the Supreme court has never revoked a right.

32:31

That is so fundamental to so many Americans, so central to their ability to participate fully and equally in society.

32:40

And she told the court, you know, you shouldn't overrule the central component of women's Liberty.

32:46

Some people might say, well, maybe there is a previous case suggesting that states cannot regulate, let's say economic conditions or contracts.

33:00

And by subsequently allowing states to more freely regulate economic welfare or contracts, you know, the court was resending a right.

33:09

It had previously recognized, but that would just be a deeply false equivalence.

33:15

There is no parallel between the centrality of Roe and the ability to decide whether to have to undergo a full term of pregnancy, an unwanted childbirth, and any previous case that the Supreme court might have.

33:32

Overruled. And of the examples that, you know, justice Kavanaugh listed almost all of them involve cases where the Supreme court subsequently granted a right, that it had previously failed to recognize.

33:45

And so there just isn't any similarity between those two things at all.

33:50

There have been retorts to the implications of conferring, personhood to a fetus, like, okay, if legally we're going to treat a fetus as a person for the purposes of abortion, then what about child support?

34:01

What about insurance? What about Medicaid child tax credit, prenatal benefits are those valid questions?

34:08

Like, is that not the natural progression of this?

34:11

And are the people who say no undermining their own arguments about personhood?

34:16

Well, I think they have undermined their own arguments and about a million ways to Sunday.

34:21

I mean, they have shown so little care for the health and safety of pregnant people.

34:26

Mississippi is a state that doesn't provide any paid family leave.

34:30

It is a state that sought to limit the temporary assistance to needy family benefits for poor women who want to have children.

34:37

So they have already shown their hand and their cards that they don't actually value the choices and lives of pregnant people or their children.

34:49

And it is quite galling when you line it all up, you know, yes, they're not going to be consistent at all.

34:55

When they say fetuses are people, they are just going to use that argument to try to further eviscerate abortion rights.

35:02

Right. And I mean, you can extrapolate it further, right?

35:05

Like the whole pro-life argument is also undermined by the fact that this is the same party simultaneously arguing against vaccine mandates that we know are going to keep people safe against vaccines themselves, which we know protect you entirely from Corona virus and, you know, guns.

35:19

And the list goes on and on It's

35:21

the same Supreme court that has with brutal efficiency, allowed states to execute people, even when there might be colorable claims of innocence or colorable claims that their convictions or sentences are illegal.

35:32

This is, this is the Supreme court that allowed the Trump administration to execute federal prisoners and bring back the federal death penalty and the waning days of the Trump administration, even after Joe Biden was elected and promise to end the federal death penalty.

35:45

So there is very little consistency or even efforts at consistency here.

35:51

Yeah. Okay. So right now there are calls within Congress to codify Roe based on the arguments that we've heard thus far from these justices.

35:58

Is it fair to imagine a world in which they would also strike down the women's health protection act if that was to pass?

36:06

Yes, absolutely. And it wouldn't necessarily be on the ground that fetuses are people.

36:11

I think the conservative justices could find any number of ways to strike down federal statutes that seek to protect women's access to abortion and reproductive justice.

36:21

They could say Congress lacks the authority under section five of the 14th amendment to protect rights that the Supreme court has said don't exist as a matter of constitutional law.

36:31

Or it could say, you know, that statute exceeds the scope of Congress's powers under the commerce clause.

36:36

It could find the statute violates the first amendment.

36:38

I mean, this court has shown no hesitation to be aggressive and exceedingly creative in the legal arguments.

36:45

It is willing to accept in order to undermine democratic initiatives.

36:49

I do want to bring up the idea of court expansion in this, in this instance, because if this court is going to brazenly and overtly act as partisans, like if they'll refuse to respect any modicum of basic precedent, if they'll say, okay, like we'll confer personhood to non-viable fetuses.

37:07

And the instance when it's convenient for us, but not in the instances when it's not convenient for us, which are, you know, the, the, the examples that I, that I mentioned earlier, why constrain ourselves by pretending that there is no recourse when we could expand it, like why say the court can do whatever it wants, but the rest of us have to continue to abide by a different set of rules and just allow ourselves to, to be screwed.

37:30

Basically. I don't think we should force ourselves to act in accordance with a set of rules or norms that don't actually exist.

37:35

There's nothing in the constitution that says the number of justices on the Supreme court has to be nine.

37:41

In fact, the constitution gives Congress an extremely significant and substantial amount of power over the size of the Supreme court, and also over the kinds of cases that the Supreme court hears.

37:54

And so there are many different things that a motivated Congress could try to do in order to address the threat that the Supreme court poses, not only to reproductive rights and justice, but also to constitutional democracy more broadly.

38:06

And I don't think, you know, a failure to do so would be because we falsely think we are bound by a set of rules.

38:13

Those, those rules don't exist. There's nothing in the constitution that says Congress can't adjust the size of the Supreme court.

38:20

Something Congress has done previously.

38:22

And before there's nothing in the constitution that says Congress can't adjust the set of cases that the Supreme court can hear.

38:29

That's also something Congress has done repeatedly.

38:31

And so there's just, there, isn't a set of rules that we are bound by.

38:35

And so we shouldn't pretend that to be the case when it is really just frankly, a lack of political will and backbone that is leading to this course of action or inaction.

38:47

Yeah. That seems to be the preeminent theme of our political ecosystem right now, where we're just kind of abide by these rules that we've set for ourselves.

38:54

The same thing with the filibuster, we just say, well, that's there.

38:56

And so by virtue of that, just being there, that's the thing that we have to abide by.

39:00

Even if it, even if it goes against the very reason for all of us being here, which is passing legislation.

39:05

So we'll pretend that we can't pass any legislation because of this imaginary thing that, that we've decided is more important than the legislation itself.

39:13

Yeah, definitely an analog to the filibuster.

39:16

Do you think that the court has undermined its own legitimacy?

39:20

Yes, but I don't think that overruling row or eviscerating row would be kind of the lone example of this.

39:25

This has been a long steady March and a continuous progression toward this.

39:31

This is the Supreme court that invalidated the central crown jewel of the voting rights act.

39:37

The pre-clearance regime that required Southern states with particularly egregious histories of racial discrimination to obtain permission before altering their voting laws or procedures in ways that might disproportionately negatively affect racial minorities.

39:52

This is the same Supreme court last term who then eviscerated and largely nullified the remaining protection of the voting rights act, section two, that prohibited laws or policies that disproportionately disadvantaged racial minorities.

40:06

This is the same Supreme court that has invalidated public health measure after public health measure designed to reduce the transmission of the Corona virus saying that they violate religious Liberty and free exercise, even though existing precedent was very clear that they did not.

40:21

So the Supreme court has been quite aggressive and I think they have been quite aggressive because they know they have nothing to fear from the political process, which has shown no willingness whatsoever to even try to constrain them With

40:34

that said like, if Roe is gutted, what are the broader implications of an entire branch of government or multiple branches handing down dictates like this that are opposed by the vast majority of Americans like polling shows that row was supported by what 70% of Americans, including the majority of Catholics, like is that a tenable position for a government to take?

40:56

I think we need to understand the attack on Roe as part of a larger trend of Republicans trying to entrench minority hereon rule.

41:07

And it would be, I think, foolish to try to separate what they are doing with RO and reproductive rights and justice, from what they are doing with voting rights or say partisan gerrymandering.

41:17

They have created a system that allows them to pursue deeply unpopular and reactionary policies without actually having to answer for those policies in elections, because they have insulated themselves from popular will, by drawing legislative districts that are so heavily gerrymandered.

41:35

You know, you can get state legislatures that are elected with less than a majority of the vote and end up holding something like over two thirds of the seats in state legislatures.

41:45

And so that is how we should understand their ability to pursue these extreme and aggressive policies.

41:53

I think if we addressed the underlying defects in our constitutional democracy that have enabled minority Marion rule and the Supreme court has certainly had a part in that from eviscerating voting rights protections to green-lighting partisan gerrymandering, then that would allow us to address these very unpopular and harmful policies.

42:12

Yeah, I think that's perfectly put, couldn't have said it any better.

42:15

Now, if either the 15 week abortion ban is upheld or row is gutted entirely or some semblance of the two, I mean, they kind of, they're not mutually exclusive.

42:25

How much of an animating issue do you think that this will be in 2022?

42:29

I think it's hard to say. And I say it's hard to say for a few reasons.

42:35

One is yes.

42:37

On one hand, people have wondered about the backlash that would come from the Supreme court, formally overruling Rowe or eviscerating it.

42:46

But I think people need to balance against that.

42:49

What we were just talking about, namely how difficult it is for a popular majority to win political power right now because of how state legislatures have acted and how the Supreme court has acted.

43:02

People also need to balance against that.

43:04

The reality that the longer and longer democratic representatives do nothing about the Supreme court, the less incentive people will have to try and elect that.

43:16

Because right now you are seeing fundraising emails and ads saying, elect Democrats to protect row.

43:23

We have a majority in Congress, we control the presidency and still row remains in jeopardy.

43:31

So if you're not going to do anything about it, then you can't run on it.

43:35

You can't say we will protect row and then allow the Supreme court to eliminate it.

43:40

And so the combination of all of those factors, I think makes it very unclear what type of political costs or consequences there will be from overruling Rowe.

43:52

Yeah. And that's actually exactly what the monologue that, that proceeds this interview is about.

43:57

So with that said, Leah Litman, thank you so much.

44:00

And again, for anybody listening, check out the strict scrutiny podcast, it is excellent.

44:04

This previous episode talks all about this case.

44:07

It was super interesting to listen to.

44:08

So thank you again for your time. I really appreciate it.

44:11

Thanks so much for having me. Thanks again to Aliyah.

44:14

One quick note, I'm still raising money for voter registration to the, don't be a Mitch fund.

44:18

We've already raised over $660,000.

44:21

And we're closing in on our goal of 750 K by the time 2021 is over.

44:25

So if you want to help the people doing a work on the ground right now, if you want to help replicate the strategy that worked in Georgia in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and North Carolina and Arizona, and Florida then donate just a few bucks because I promise it will make a difference if we do the work.

44:40

Now, we'll see the benefits in November of 2022.

44:43

Okay. That's it for this episode, talk to you next week.

44:47

You've been listening to no lie with Brian Tyler Cohen produced by Sam Graber music by Welsy interviews captured and edited for YouTube and Facebook by Nicholas Nica, Tara and recorded in Los Angeles, California.

44:58

If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app.

45:01

Feel free to leave a five-star rating and review and check out Brian Tyler, cowen.com for links to all of my other channels.

45:07

It's 2021. People could acquire self-driving cars, eat burgers made out of plants, even fly to space and rocket ships if they have the money for it. So if you could do all this futuristic stuff today, the very least your phone could do is download entertainment in a flash for that you should get 80 and T 5g, 80 and T 5g is fast, reliable, secure, and nationwide. Want to make sure your phone service keeps up with what you need from it. Get 80 and T 5g. It's not complicated. 5g requires compatible plan or device 5g may not be available in your area. [email protected] slash 5g for you for details. Today, we're going to talk about the conservatives on the Supreme court, preparing to gut Roe V Wade and the Democrats messaging surrounding that case and midterms more broadly. I interviewed Pennsylvania's democratic candidate for the us Senate, John Fetterman about Dr. Oz jumping into the race for Republicans and the need to eliminate the filibuster before it's too late. And I'm joined by Michigan law school, professor Leah Litman, who answers all of our legal questions running the case of Mississippi's 15 week abortion ban at the Supreme court. I'm Brian, Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to no lie. So I was going to use this time to talk about the implications of the latest Supreme court argument. And what's at stake with Roe, but I think that if you listen to this podcast, you understand that a woman deserves bodily autonomy. You understand that the government is not our church and that our elected officials are not our priests. And we are not here to be proselytized by politicians who don't understand that their job isn't to shove their religious beliefs down the throats of people who don't share those religious bleeds. You understand all of that. I don't think anyone's coming here with a, a half-baked opinion on abortion. I think that if there's one thing I could probably take to the bank is that you've probably made up your minds about that. Plus I've got an amazing guest coming up who will talk about that issue far more eloquently and intelligently than I would. So instead, I want to talk about what we are doing about it and what we should be doing about it and what the Democrats are doing right now. Isn't much the DSCC the democratic senatorial campaign committee, which is responsible for electing Democrats to the Senate tweeted elect Democrats to protect abortion rights. Dick Durbin, the chair of the Senate judiciary committee tweeted abortion is a constitutionally protected, right? And the court should uphold this constitutionally protected, right? Retweet if you agree, and the list goes on and on. But I mean, just with those two examples alone, from a messaging perspective, this ain't, it, those tweets rightfully made people really angry because look, yes, the Supreme court should uphold our rights, but retweet, if you agree that judges who should do something, but won't, isn't going to do anything beyond give Dick Durbin a tweet with some retweets like the Supreme court, isn't going to be like, ah, well, look at that number of retweets, dammit, Kevin, we have no choice. And as far as telling people to elect Democrats, we did, we turned out in record numbers in 2018, flip the house, turned out in record numbers again in 2020, and flip the Senate and the white house to what you can't do is tell people that the onus is only on them to do the thing that just did. And look on a basic level. The most basic level, the DSCC is right. Electing more Democrats is the solution. Practically speaking to pass anything, we need 60 votes in the Senate to overcome the filibuster, or we need 50 centers willing to eliminate the filibuster. We don't have 60 senators to pass legislation outright and we don't have 50 to eliminate the filibuster we have, I don't know, 48. So yeah, if we elect two more democratic senators and we hold onto the house, then yes, we can enact the rest of our agenda. We can protect women's reproductive rights. We can pass the women's health protection act and codify row and expand the court that would likely try to strike it down. But without that being clear, just telling people to do the thing that they just did, isn't going to cut it. And so first and foremost, we need a plan, a cogent plan, as far as messaging is concerned because throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks with 11 months to midterms and zero voting rights legislation on the horizon is a really shitty plan. So whatever that message is needs to be clear and concise and coordinated, just like the Republicans do and granted their messaging isn't bound by facts or decency or any semblance of reality, but I'll tell you what, they can sell it. They can sell, build the wall. They can sell, make America great. Again, they can sell high gas prices and they do so first off, make it clear to people what the issue is. Yes, we have a 50 50 Senate, but the filibuster means that we need 60 votes to pass anything. We've got about 48 senators willing to eliminate the filibuster. We get two more and then we'll codify row. We'll expand the courts, make sure they can't undo that law will pass. Universal background checks will enact climate change. Legislation will pass a $15 minimum wage help elect a couple more Democrats. And we can finish the work that we started. We're doing everything we can right now to pass the bills that you want passed from vaccines to climate, to paid, leave to universal pre-K to drug prices. But we're limited with what we can do right now. Let's finish the job and do the rest of what you sent us to Washington to do at least explain that as a rationale to eliminate the filibuster, instead of just patronizing people about a lighting more Democrats, while we're sitting here staring at democratic majorities in the house, the Senate and the white house. And second of all, use it to turn up the pressure on the people on our side, who were actually blocking that progress. Like I'm sorry, but we don't need to unilaterally run cover for Joe Manchin and Kiersten cinema. We don't need 96% of Senate Democrats to be apologists for 4% of Senate Democrats. If Democrats in Washington are feeling a lot of pressure right now focus that pressure where it belongs. And that is with the holdouts, the moderates who seem to be more beholden to arcane Senate procedural tools than their own constituents. And look, will it work maybe, maybe not. Honestly. I couldn't tell you what would happen if there was actually a full court press on Joe mansion and Kiersten cinema, maybe mansion laughs it off because let's face it. He is a Democrat and a plus 40 red state. But if Biden fought like hell, if Schumer, folic, hell if Pelosi their colleagues, their constituents, then who knows, but we won't know if we just skip that part. And it said bark at people that we should be doing more. You do more first because all of us seeing that you're willing to fight, even if we don't win. But seeing that you're willing to fight is going to have a bigger impact than just hoping that we show up to elect more people who think that retweet. If you agree is a strategy to protect women from an assault on their bodily autonomy. The fact is that this is a fight worth having it is a righteous fight in a popular fight and a necessary fight, but we have to share the responsibilities. We're willing to go to bat here, but we want to know that we're not the only ones. Next step is my interview with Pennsylvania's John Fetterman, no lies brought to you by I trust capital by now. You've probably heard all about cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. You might even already be investing in them, but did you know, you can invest in cryptocurrencies through your retirement account with trust capital. You can buy and sell cryptocurrencies from a crypto IRA and get all the same tax advantages as a traditional IRA. I just capital allows you to invest in over two dozen of the most popular cryptocurrencies. And unlike the stock market, you can buy and sell 24 hours a day. The I trust capital platform is easy to use, and it only takes a few minutes to create your account. Setting up an IRA is free and I trust these are low it's time to start taking control of your financial future. With I trust capital, you can get all the tax benefits of a retirement account while investing in crypto visit. I trust capital.com to start investing today. That's I trust capital.com taxes and conditions may apply. Fees apply. Cryptocurrencies are a speculative investment with risk of loss. I chose capital Inc does not provide legal investment or tax advice consult with a qualified legal investment or tax professional. No lies brought to you by Ray Khan, wireless ear buds. So the holidays are here and that can only mean one thing. Well, two things, the first of which is that the war on Christmas is here, but the second is that you're going to have to start buying gifts. Now there's nothing I can do about the war on Christmas. Trust me, I've tried, but there is something I can do on the gift front. And that's to recommend a gift that everyone will use. Ray Khan, wireless earbuds. I've been using these earbuds for months. They're my go-to is when I'm at the gym, which is especially important for me because that's my downtime. And I don't want subpar earbuds to mess that up for me. Recon always gives you amazing audio quality, comparable to what you get from other premium brands. Only these start at half the price with their latest model. You get three sound profiles to make sure everything you're listening to sounds it's best with just the right amount of base. There's pure mode for podcasts and blues balanced mode for rock and metal and base mode for hip hop, EDM and so on. And maybe the best part, how good they look. Ray cons are now available in five colors. So you can find the perfect pair for everyone on your list. Plus there is free shipping and returns. So there's zero hassle for gifting. This holiday season, the holidays are coming up faster than you think now is the time to knock out that gift list and avoid the last minute shopping scramble, especially because right now my listeners will get 15% off site-wide with code [email protected] slash no lie. Go to buy Ray con.com/ nol-i and use code holiday today to get 15% off your entire econ order by Ray con.com/no lie today. We've got the candidate for us Senate in Pennsylvania, John Fetterman. Thanks so much for coming back on. Always A pleasure. Thanks for having me back on. So a lot's happened in the last few weeks, as far as the Pennsylvania Senate races concerned on the right, the Trump endorsed candidate, Sean Parnell dropped out and then Dr. Oz threw his hat into the ring as we just continue to descend deeper into lunacy. But actually, you know, with that said in light of the fact that a reality TV star went on to win in 2016, how seriously are you taking Dr. Ross's candidacy? You really have to take it very seriously. I mean, he has a lot of resources and his high name ID, and of course, I mean, people know who he is and everything like that. So it's, it's a strange development. I, you know, to use the, that meme, you know, that wasn't on anyone's bingo card a few months ago that, you know, a celebrity, a TV doctor was going to jump into the race, but American politics these days has, in my opinion, and increasingly larger element of that to it. And so here, you know, here we are, I don't think, I don't think anyone's bingo card had had that, but, but that's, that's, what's happened In Dr. Oz's Senate announcement beyond mentioning that he was running for the Pennsylvania Senate seat. He never actually mentioned the state of Pennsylvania once. And that issue is exacerbated by the fact that the guy doesn't even live in Pennsylvania. He lives in New Jersey and he works in New York now without shitting on New Jersey because you and I have our differences of opinion, as far as the great state of New Jersey, I would never, I mean, my only issue with Jersey was their official account. They were trying to steal our cheese steak, and then, and then that started a whole different thing there, the endure nj.gov to try to come for the cheese steak. And I was like, I had to defend my state's honor here at that point. It's it's, it's understandable. Well, you know, in light of that, that he doesn't live in Pennsylvania, that he works in New York, that he lives in New Jersey. What are your thoughts on the fact that Republicans are offering up candidates to represent a state that they literally have nothing to do? Yeah, no one on our team has done a deep dive on his, his like specific residency or, or the statutorial requirements of, of what he made or meats or anything like that. You know, it's like his announcement was his announcement and ultimately it's going to be up to the primary voters of, for the Republicans to decide if, if Dr. Oz is, is their standard bear and what have you, it, it, I think it just speaks to the surreal nature of, of where we are in this moment in time in American politics. I, I guess, and I think, you know, Pennsylvania is going to ultimately decide what it's looking for in their next, their next United States Senator, because this is obviously a crucial race, but it's, it's just such a strange development one that no one would've ever foreseen or, or taking notice of. But yeah, I mean, I don't know what his roots are in Pennsylvania or how extensive they are, but, but nevertheless, he's in, and I don't know what that'll bring in terms of what the Republican electorate's going to think of him. And it's, it's, it's interesting. I know. Well, you know, obviously Dr. Oz has kind of failed up on the right, given that as a doctor who's willing to promote, right, when talking points he's proved useful for Republicans. And so they've propped him up as he's advocated for disproven COVID treatments and reopening schools. Even if that meant we would lose two or 3% of people, and those are his words, what do you think that says about the danger of allowing the Senate or the house or the white house for that matter to fall into Republican hands at this moment in particular? I mean, it's, it's a crucial race for that, that very simple fact. And I pride myself on believing in science, all of our children. We have a seven year old, we have a 10 year old and we have 11 year old, they're all vaccinated, you know, you know, Joel and I are fully faxed and, you know, we're, we're both gonna get, get our booster. So we, we firmly believe in science and we firmly believe in, in, you know, the reality of what we need to do in, in, in COVID. And, and I was surprised or disappointed though, that some of the things that, that Dr. Oz has promoted with this with respects to COVID, it's not something I would have expected that a trained surgeon and doctor that, that he is, would, it would have said. And, you know, I haven't really focused much on what Dr. Oz has said in terms of COVID treatments. I focused on what we know is the general consensus is that it works and, and vaccines have been incredibly effective and we need to be vigilant and we need to make sure we're taking the appropriate steps. And I don't think there's, there should be much room for some strange interpretation of, of the reality here, because, you know, when we stopped agreeing on what should be agreed upon, and, and the effectiveness of vaccinations has marked the upward surge of public health and child welfare and the welfare of all of us with vaccines that we've all received as children. I don't understand why, you know, in a world that we live in today, that this was ever a debate to begin with, quite frankly. Yeah. I mean, it's just another instance of the right turning things into cultural, where issues that don't deserve to be turned into culture, war issues. I think the American people are getting tired of having to square up over everything. You know, I mean, it it's just like we all wanted our schools back open. And, and part of that until vaccines were readily available for children was, was masking. And, you know, in, in January, you know, our masking a requirement and here in Pennsylvania, only speaking of Pennsylvania is going to become, you know, selective based on what the school district and the local leaders ultimately decided. And for sure there are going to be some school districts across Pennsylvania that are going to decline to, to make masking mandatory. But as long as the vaccinations are an option for children, and we continue to push for the solution, I mean, you know, I don't understand why that's controversial and I never have. And, you know, aren't, you know, whether it's my campaign or whether it's my role as Lieutenant governor it's vaccines, vaccines, vaccines, no one wants to go ever, you know, no more lockdowns, no more any of these kinds of extremes. And we have an idea of what we're looking at with COVID. But this past Thanksgiving, there were nearly 800,000 empty chairs, you know, across our tables. And this Thanksgiving was so much better than last Thanksgiving because we could all get together. And I just wish people would remember that. And that is because of the vaccines. And that is because our country is on the right path and we are able to see COVID for what it is. It's something that we need to address and take seriously. And now that we have a vaccine that has proven to be incredibly effective, we shouldn't have anybody on either side. It's not a political issue, it's a medical issue. And I would say, especially coming from a lifetime doctor, a professional like that, I, I think it's, it's very irresponsible. We know now we're nearing the end of Biden's first year in office, and basically the beginning of the campaign for midterms. Now, at the same time, we've seen no movement from the Senate on voting rights legislation. What's your message to those senators, paying more deference to the filibuster and American's rights to fair representation. I mean, that, that's a great question. And, and, you know, I, I've always said that the Republicans are setting the table in anticipation for 2024 that's that's their end game. That is a second term of president Trump. And you look at states, whether it's mine or whether it's Arizona or Georgia, especially Georgia, Wisconsin, and these other states that the right to vote is being suppressed. It's being curtailed, curtailed, it's being shaved off in my own state. They are going to pass a attempt to pass a constitutional amendment, making sure that universal voting ID for every time you vote, not just when you sign up to vote, but every time you vote, because they understand that at any given time, there's tens of thousands of Pennsylvania who typically typically are on the, or on the poorer side and, and or people of color that are less likely to have their ID at any one given time, they understand that that could shave up to anywhere between 70 to 90,000 votes based on the statistics that were calculated in 2012, the last time they wanted to make universal voting ID. So, you know, and if you look at how small the margins were in 2020, my state who was 80,000 votes, Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, all 45,000 votes between those three states, it's at a very insidious and effective strategy that they're employing. And more than just, you know, the voting right suppression legislation. They're also replacing the elected officials and the secretaries of state that stood their ground, you know, on the Republican side that said, look, I voted for president Trump, I believe in him, but he didn't win this state parents where there was no voter fraud. In fact, the, the hero Republican commissioner in Philadelphia, you know, who got death threats and all these, this horrible outcome for telling the truth in Philadelphia, he's leaving his post and he's taking on a different job. So a lot of the guardrails really got mangled in 2020. I mean, he had a front front seat to that and, and we need to replace them. And in the absence of those guard rails being removed by this legislation, or by removing these elected officials, that's removing the filibuster for the Senate is critical because it's, nothing's more fundamental than, you know, free access to the right to vote. And that is being strategically curtailed and suppressed on the, in these states that are crucial to either side, if they want to eat, to win the presidency and, and getting rid of that filibuster should be the priority and getting these things done. Because if not now, when given the fact, when are we going to have the presidency, the house and the Senate all under Carson, w you know, one thing that two things that the Republicans have going for them, they are United and they are ruthless. And, you know, I always ask folks in, in campaign events, who's, who's Merrick Garland, and people are like, well, he's our attorney general. And I'm like, well, who should he be? He should be on the Supreme court. And, and that demonstrates and reminds people that just how ruthless they can be. And don't think for a second, if they were ever in a position to run the table, 1, 2, 3 president on down that they won't get rid of the filibuster, and they'll make all kinds of changes as, as RO now is become in front of like this. This is, you know, it's all, it's all falling into place for them. And right now, like, I, like I've said, if not now, when yeah. I mean, we, we keep treating this, like, they're just playing chicken. But the fact is that when they have the opportunity to do these things that we would assume are just too insidious for them to even do well, look, I mean, Rowe is right on the verge of being gutted right now. And There is no, there is no bottom. There is no bottom. And I've said, it's like, you know, Democrats need to be, need to be United and ruthless for, for working people for reproductive rights, for voting rights, for basic economic development. And for now, like all these things that none of this is radical. None of this is anything other than what the overwhelming majority of Americans want. You know, whatever the democratic will of my state is. I want that to be true. And right now in my state, the Republicans are still going ahead with this bizarre database to audit the vote, even though it has nothing to do with anything. And we had five cases of voter fraud here in Pennsylvania that were all charged, arrested, convicted. They're all on probation. We've, we've dealt with all of that. The, the plank has become the platform. Whereas if you don't subscribe to the big lie, 2020, you are no longer considered a viable member of the Republican party from an electoral standpoint. And we in the democratic party need to make sure we appeal to that segment of the electorate saying, look, you know, you may not agree with us on every issue politically, but we believe in democracy in America, you know, you didn't see the Democrats in Washington in Virginia say, oh, it was rigged. It was rigged. You know, you know, a young kid cheated, like, no, that's, that's a hallmark of, of us. We're, we're going to tell the truth, whether we liked the result or not, but the other side isn't there. And I don't think they're ever going to come back. Yeah, Well, no, you've been on the campaign trail for a long time. You threw your hat into the ring a long time ago. So you have the benefit of being able to hone your message while the rest of us have kind of just been running around like chickens with their heads, cut off figuring how to correctly approach 20, 22. But we can take lessons from the voters of Pennsylvania, especially given how important that state is. So what issue is most salient with Pennsylvania that you've spoken to Most Pennsylvanians want a sense of stability normalcy, and, and we don't want to return to the chaos. I think that's what the majority of, of voters actually want. I really do. I hear some of the understandable concerns about, you know, inflation and things like that are going up, but, but I also want to remind everybody where we were a year ago for Thanksgiving. Let's say we didn't know if the vaccine was going to be effective. We didn't know how it was going to be distributed in time. You know, last Thanksgiving. I know I didn't, I hadn't, I hadn't seen my parents all year and, you know, think about how much better Thanksgiving is this year than it was last year. When we, you couldn't get together with your loved ones without risking giving them a deadly violent virus. The economy is on the upswing. You know, Joe Biden has brought a sense of normalcy and competence to everyday life that was lacking during the pandemic. And the, the message that, that, that we're promoting, whether it's Lieutenant, governor, or as a candidate, is that the democratic party has always had working families, the working parties, Americans best interests at heart. And if you enjoyed the chaos and you enjoyed the noise, then I don't know how anybody could want to return to, to a time like that. And as far as policies go, you know, whether it's build back better, whether it's the infrastructure plan, you know, all of these great investments. I mean, the Biden presidency is going to be transformative, certainly through the remainder of his first term, second term, it's going to reverberate for quite a while because, you know, they, they have been able to get some important legislation passed, but nevertheless, there's still a lot that should get done in the Senate. And we need to, in the United States, Senate Democrats should vote like Democrats, and we should all realize, look, these are unique times in American politics. And if we don't do this, now we are going to be complicit in the kind of changes the Republicans are going to to make that, or we'll make it that much more difficult to, to win in both 22 and in 24, because we all know that's where the Republicans end game. Yeah, that's exactly right now. I know one of your biggest issues is weed legalization. If this administration doesn't move to reschedule marijuana as a schedule, one drug, do you think that opens the door for Republicans to pounce on what is an easy populist issue? Yeah, I mean, I w I wouldn't say it was one of my biggest issue, but it's one thing I care about. I mean, it, it's, it's an, it's an enormous economic leverage, a force multiplier. It has an enormous criminal justice ramifications, you know, in my state and in states now that we know it's overwhelmingly impacts communities and people of color, and it just creates a lot of jobs. I mean, it's, it's a win-win, you know, back in 2020, I said that whichever party picks up that mantle of legalizing marijuana, that's an enormous, powerful weapon that, that could have enormous electoral ramifications. And I think I was proven, right. You know, all these states, and then there's other states like Wyoming even is they're working to get a ballot on, you know, I think Democrats need to just realize that this would be a huge thing. And you're right. You know, in my state, they went from turning, you know, calling me a liar and it's like, oh, he's, he's a stoner. And for the first time ever a couple of months ago, for the first time in Pennsylvania history, a state Senator introduced a former us Marshall, I might add I'm the most conservative members of the caucus, his own bill to legalize marijuana in Pennsylvania recreationally. And he called it inevitable, inevitable. So the Republicans are quickly re know, wising up saying, Hey, this is an issue that a majority of our constituents want, you know, why not leverage it? And, and your point is, is right on, like, you know, it's going to be there for the taken for one of the parties. And let me tell you in an air of increasingly divided, govern government and partisanship legal weed is one of the great uniter. And I hear that from people, you know, Trumpers approached me and they like, when, when are you going to end this bullshit and, and make it legal? And I'm like, well, you know, it's, you know, Republicans have traditionally stopped. It, it's a strategic issue for, for whichever party picks it up. And, and to your point, it certainly creates an opportunity for Republicans to embrace it and overtake it. And in some of these areas, Well, let's, let's finish with this. What are you, what are you getting yourself for Christmas? I, I don't know, but, you know, th th the kids, I dunno, it's like, we're in that place where, where we ha we only have one, who's an absolute Santa, you know, a true believer. And, and I had to warn our oldest. It's like, you know, like we gotta, you know, so, so August is, is carefully, you know, getting his letter together and everything like that, you know, I don't, I'm not sure what I'm going to get yourself, but, you know, for me, this will be a, you know, a special SA Christmas because you know, our, you know, August is still all in, on team Santa. Whereas our older two, you know, not so much, but yeah, it's, it's, it's nice. And we just were, we did a big Christmas parade in homestead, which is a town close by where we live. So, Yeah, well, well, you know, enjoy the holidays and keep kicking ass in the campaign trail here, John Fetterman. Thanks so much for coming back on. Hey, thanks for having me on No lies brought to you by fields. So I've been pretty outspoken about how important it is to take steps to de-stress. If you're a yoga person or a meditation person, that's great. If you're like me and the thought of sitting quietly for an extended period of time actually brings you anxiety. Then you should use CBD. And the brand I use is fields F E a L S. Now first off CBD is safe. Obviously reduces anxiety helps with pain, muscle aches, sleeplessness, and it's natural. So won't leave you feeling groggy or hung over like other sleep aids. And it's super easy to use you just place a few drops of feels under your tongue, hold it there for a few seconds and adjust a few minutes. You'll already start to feel the difference. There's an easy to use chart. So you know your dosage, and if you're still unsure, it feels also offers a free CBD hotline to help you out. So if it's your first time, you're not on your own, there's someone there to help you. It feels also offers a monthly membership, so you can save money and it's delivered right to your door consistently, and you can cancel or pause any time. So you're not locked into anything. Now, if you go to fields.com/no line and become a member, you'll get 50% off your first order, plus free shipping again, that's F E a L s.com/no lie to become a member and get 50% automatically taken off your first order. Plus free shipping deals.com/no lie. No lie is brought to you by a different podcast. The Jordan harbinger show, which is unlike any other podcast, you've listened to each episode is a conversation with a different guest. And these are some of the most interesting people you could possibly find like this brand new two-parter about a north Korean defector, Jordan dives, into everything from what it's like to be on the north Korean regimes official kill list to discussing how certain words and concepts don't even exist in that country, really compelling stuff. The show is aimed at making you a better informed, more critical thinkers. You can get a better sense of the world, and it definitely delivers. And apparently even apple agreed. Abaleen did one of its best shows in 2018. So give the show a listen, go check out Jordan harbinger.com/start for some episode recommendations or search for the Jordan harbinger show. That's H a R B as in boy, I N as in Nancy, G E R on apple podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks again to John Fetterman. Now we've got Michigan law school professor and co-host of the strict scrutiny podcast. Leah Litman. Thanks so much for coming on. Thanks so much for having me. So this is all on the heels of the Supreme court hearing Mississippi's case on the 15 week abortion ban. Could you give a quick overview of the case and the difference between the two questions at play here, which are the legality of a 15 week abortion ban and the constitutionality of RO more broadly? Sure. So the case involves a challenge to Mississippi statute, the law that prohibits abortions more than 15 weeks after a person's last period. And I think if the court, as people expected to do a, this statute, there is no way in which the court won't be sticking a dagger through the heart of Roe versus Wade, because when the Supreme court reaffirmed Roe vs Wade in the 1992 decision planned parenthood versus Casey, it emphasized that the central holding of Roe, the core of the right, that it announced was the ability of the woman to decide before viability to have an abortion Mississippi statute. Conceitedly prohibits women from deciding to have abortions before viability, before the point at which a fetus becomes viable outside the womb, which roughly occurs sometime around 22 to 24 weeks of pregnancy. And so no matter whether the Supreme court issues, the words Roe vs. Wade is overruled, upholding this statute will dramatically reduce the constitutional protections for abortion rights and be in a lot of ways, practically overruling Rowe Is there, is there a planet in which they can say, okay, that, okay, we've upheld a 15 week abortion, but trying to spin it as if RO hasn't been effectively gutted to try to salvage something politically. So if that's what they end up doing, I have no doubt that they will try to Gaslight their way into favorable press coverage. That would say, you know, Supreme court does not overrule RO or reaffirms the protections of Roe. But the reality is is that the Supreme court isn't going to say, well, states can only prohibit abortions at 15 weeks after a person's last period. And no earlier once the court erases the viability line, because that has been the clear bright line rule that has prevented states from prohibiting abortions at 15 weeks or earlier, then it will immediately provoke the question of, well, how much earlier, before viability can states prohibit abortions states across the United States have attempted to prohibit abortions at 12 weeks after a person's last period, 10 weeks, eight weeks, six weeks in the case of the notorious Texas SBA. And so once the Supreme court says, well, you can prohibit abortions at some points before viability. Then the constitutionality of all those laws are immediately going to be on the table. Now, during the arguments, Kavanaugh kind of showed his hand in terms of his interest in cutting row entirely. And that was when he brought up the argument that other past cases also have an adhere to precedent like Oberg fell like brown V board of ed Miranda. But what he conveniently left out is that none of those cases restrict an already existing, right. They enhance them. Has there ever been a time where a constitutional right that we've already had, has gone on to be eliminated? So in her opening remarks, solicitor general, Elizabeth pre-launch said the Supreme court has never revoked a right. That is so fundamental to so many Americans, so central to their ability to participate fully and equally in society. And she told the court, you know, you shouldn't overrule the central component of women's Liberty. Some people might say, well, maybe there is a previous case suggesting that states cannot regulate, let's say economic conditions or contracts. And by subsequently allowing states to more freely regulate economic welfare or contracts, you know, the court was resending a right. It had previously recognized, but that would just be a deeply false equivalence. There is no parallel between the centrality of Roe and the ability to decide whether to have to undergo a full term of pregnancy, an unwanted childbirth, and any previous case that the Supreme court might have. Overruled. And of the examples that, you know, justice Kavanaugh listed almost all of them involve cases where the Supreme court subsequently granted a right, that it had previously failed to recognize. And so there just isn't any similarity between those two things at all. There have been retorts to the implications of conferring, personhood to a fetus, like, okay, if legally we're going to treat a fetus as a person for the purposes of abortion, then what about child support? What about insurance? What about Medicaid child tax credit, prenatal benefits are those valid questions? Like, is that not the natural progression of this? And are the people who say no undermining their own arguments about personhood? Well, I think they have undermined their own arguments and about a million ways to Sunday. I mean, they have shown so little care for the health and safety of pregnant people. Mississippi is a state that doesn't provide any paid family leave. It is a state that sought to limit the temporary assistance to needy family benefits for poor women who want to have children. So they have already shown their hand and their cards that they don't actually value the choices and lives of pregnant people or their children. And it is quite galling when you line it all up, you know, yes, they're not going to be consistent at all. When they say fetuses are people, they are just going to use that argument to try to further eviscerate abortion rights. Right. And I mean, you can extrapolate it further, right? Like the whole pro-life argument is also undermined by the fact that this is the same party simultaneously arguing against vaccine mandates that we know are going to keep people safe against vaccines themselves, which we know protect you entirely from Corona virus and, you know, guns. And the list goes on and on It's the same Supreme court that has with brutal efficiency, allowed states to execute people, even when there might be colorable claims of innocence or colorable claims that their convictions or sentences are illegal. This is, this is the Supreme court that allowed the Trump administration to execute federal prisoners and bring back the federal death penalty and the waning days of the Trump administration, even after Joe Biden was elected and promise to end the federal death penalty. So there is very little consistency or even efforts at consistency here. Yeah. Okay. So right now there are calls within Congress to codify Roe based on the arguments that we've heard thus far from these justices. Is it fair to imagine a world in which they would also strike down the women's health protection act if that was to pass? Yes, absolutely. And it wouldn't necessarily be on the ground that fetuses are people. I think the conservative justices could find any number of ways to strike down federal statutes that seek to protect women's access to abortion and reproductive justice. They could say Congress lacks the authority under section five of the 14th amendment to protect rights that the Supreme court has said don't exist as a matter of constitutional law. Or it could say, you know, that statute exceeds the scope of Congress's powers under the commerce clause. It could find the statute violates the first amendment. I mean, this court has shown no hesitation to be aggressive and exceedingly creative in the legal arguments. It is willing to accept in order to undermine democratic initiatives. I do want to bring up the idea of court expansion in this, in this instance, because if this court is going to brazenly and overtly act as partisans, like if they'll refuse to respect any modicum of basic precedent, if they'll say, okay, like we'll confer personhood to non-viable fetuses. And the instance when it's convenient for us, but not in the instances when it's not convenient for us, which are, you know, the, the, the examples that I, that I mentioned earlier, why constrain ourselves by pretending that there is no recourse when we could expand it, like why say the court can do whatever it wants, but the rest of us have to continue to abide by a different set of rules and just allow ourselves to, to be screwed. Basically. I don't think we should force ourselves to act in accordance with a set of rules or norms that don't actually exist. There's nothing in the constitution that says the number of justices on the Supreme court has to be nine. In fact, the constitution gives Congress an extremely significant and substantial amount of power over the size of the Supreme court, and also over the kinds of cases that the Supreme court hears. And so there are many different things that a motivated Congress could try to do in order to address the threat that the Supreme court poses, not only to reproductive rights and justice, but also to constitutional democracy more broadly. And I don't think, you know, a failure to do so would be because we falsely think we are bound by a set of rules. Those, those rules don't exist. There's nothing in the constitution that says Congress can't adjust the size of the Supreme court. Something Congress has done previously. And before there's nothing in the constitution that says Congress can't adjust the set of cases that the Supreme court can hear. That's also something Congress has done repeatedly. And so there's just, there, isn't a set of rules that we are bound by. And so we shouldn't pretend that to be the case when it is really just frankly, a lack of political will and backbone that is leading to this course of action or inaction. Yeah. That seems to be the preeminent theme of our political ecosystem right now, where we're just kind of abide by these rules that we've set for ourselves. The same thing with the filibuster, we just say, well, that's there. And so by virtue of that, just being there, that's the thing that we have to abide by. Even if it, even if it goes against the very reason for all of us being here, which is passing legislation. So we'll pretend that we can't pass any legislation because of this imaginary thing that, that we've decided is more important than the legislation itself. Yeah, definitely an analog to the filibuster. Do you think that the court has undermined its own legitimacy? Yes, but I don't think that overruling row or eviscerating row would be kind of the lone example of this. This has been a long steady March and a continuous progression toward this. This is the Supreme court that invalidated the central crown jewel of the voting rights act. The pre-clearance regime that required Southern states with particularly egregious histories of racial discrimination to obtain permission before altering their voting laws or procedures in ways that might disproportionately negatively affect racial minorities. This is the same Supreme court last term who then eviscerated and largely nullified the remaining protection of the voting rights act, section two, that prohibited laws or policies that disproportionately disadvantaged racial minorities. This is the same Supreme court that has invalidated public health measure after public health measure designed to reduce the transmission of the Corona virus saying that they violate religious Liberty and free exercise, even though existing precedent was very clear that they did not. So the Supreme court has been quite aggressive and I think they have been quite aggressive because they know they have nothing to fear from the political process, which has shown no willingness whatsoever to even try to constrain them With that said like, if Roe is gutted, what are the broader implications of an entire branch of government or multiple branches handing down dictates like this that are opposed by the vast majority of Americans like polling shows that row was supported by what 70% of Americans, including the majority of Catholics, like is that a tenable position for a government to take? I think we need to understand the attack on Roe as part of a larger trend of Republicans trying to entrench minority hereon rule. And it would be, I think, foolish to try to separate what they are doing with RO and reproductive rights and justice, from what they are doing with voting rights or say partisan gerrymandering. They have created a system that allows them to pursue deeply unpopular and reactionary policies without actually having to answer for those policies in elections, because they have insulated themselves from popular will, by drawing legislative districts that are so heavily gerrymandered. You know, you can get state legislatures that are elected with less than a majority of the vote and end up holding something like over two thirds of the seats in state legislatures. And so that is how we should understand their ability to pursue these extreme and aggressive policies. I think if we addressed the underlying defects in our constitutional democracy that have enabled minority Marion rule and the Supreme court has certainly had a part in that from eviscerating voting rights protections to green-lighting partisan gerrymandering, then that would allow us to address these very unpopular and harmful policies. Yeah, I think that's perfectly put, couldn't have said it any better. Now, if either the 15 week abortion ban is upheld or row is gutted entirely or some semblance of the two, I mean, they kind of, they're not mutually exclusive. How much of an animating issue do you think that this will be in 2022? I think it's hard to say. And I say it's hard to say for a few reasons. One is yes. On one hand, people have wondered about the backlash that would come from the Supreme court, formally overruling Rowe or eviscerating it. But I think people need to balance against that. What we were just talking about, namely how difficult it is for a popular majority to win political power right now because of how state legislatures have acted and how the Supreme court has acted. People also need to balance against that. The reality that the longer and longer democratic representatives do nothing about the Supreme court, the less incentive people will have to try and elect that. Because right now you are seeing fundraising emails and ads saying, elect Democrats to protect row. We have a majority in Congress, we control the presidency and still row remains in jeopardy. So if you're not going to do anything about it, then you can't run on it. You can't say we will protect row and then allow the Supreme court to eliminate it. And so the combination of all of those factors, I think makes it very unclear what type of political costs or consequences there will be from overruling Rowe. Yeah. And that's actually exactly what the monologue that, that proceeds this interview is about. So with that said, Leah Litman, thank you so much. And again, for anybody listening, check out the strict scrutiny podcast, it is excellent. This previous episode talks all about this case. It was super interesting to listen to. So thank you again for your time. I really appreciate it. Thanks so much for having me. Thanks again to Aliyah. One quick note, I'm still raising money for voter registration to the, don't be a Mitch fund. We've already raised over $660,000. And we're closing in on our goal of 750 K by the time 2021 is over. So if you want to help the people doing a work on the ground right now, if you want to help replicate the strategy that worked in Georgia in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and North Carolina and Arizona, and Florida then donate just a few bucks because I promise it will make a difference if we do the work. Now, we'll see the benefits in November of 2022. Okay. That's it for this episode, talk to you next week. You've been listening to no lie with Brian Tyler Cohen produced by Sam Graber music by Welsy interviews captured and edited for YouTube and Facebook by Nicholas Nica, Tara and recorded in Los Angeles, California. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app. Feel free to leave a five-star rating and review and check out Brian Tyler, cowen.com for links to all of my other channels.