I have been listening to people pylon on this issue of January six and whether the Presently United States, my pants had the authority to redirect or the sun back diverse states. Their elector counts the snugness, the we suffer grand iceman of those whose he had no authority whatsoever from former federal prosecutors to reprobates with a computer is really quite remarkable. And so I went to circle back on this question because they are one hundred percent certain. He did not. I'm not advocate

anything, I'm not a special pleader for anything. But we're gonna. Look at this and working to look at it without the blinding hate for Trumpet national Review with the Wall Street Journal or these other places. I think for myself. I study these things myself, the constitution, the Federalist Papers, Madison's notes this a convention, all that I've studied my entire life say nothing about this topic zero. So they point to a statute. There was past than a hundred fifty years ago by Congress. The blaze are a process that is to take place as their authority. When I look at the constitution,

It is my sorry, but before we get there, I have a question for you. It'll all makes sense when I'm dance you gotta stay the whole hour. Is the raise judicial review anywhere in the United States constitution anywhere under article three. When the framers road article three and said very little about the court, they created the Supreme Court other than in the Federalist papers. Hamilton said it would be the police dangerous of the branches of government

Were they promoting this idea of judicial review that the court will have the final say on the interpretation of the constitution? The United States, where is that in the constitution, is to produce nowhere. It is an implied power, and yet, if you define Court- and you heard me said he could be held in contempt of court. The corridors overridden statutes, federal state. did you Congress such overridden. The present word: all this power come from the court assume this power, starting with a case, our very verses matters. Right famous case you may have heard about and spin roundly celebrated.

From the acl you to the Federalist society Years ago, when I wrote my first book men and black eye, I condemn this decision. Thomas Jefferson and alighted Edward Living, one thousand eight, twenty five said this member of the government was first considered is the most harmless and helpless of all its organs, but it is proof that the power clearing what the law is by sapping and Nice, slyly without alarm the foundation to the constitution can do what open force would not dare to attempt. So. How did America reached the point? I wrote with a federal judiciary has amassed more influence over more areas of modern life than any other branch of the government, from which section of the Constitution, where the court's granted the authority to overrule Congress in the present, the answer is

The Supreme Court is simply taken such power for itself. Nowhere in the constitution is the federal judicial Lastly, given the authority to interjected self in every facet of federal state operation, federal courts of it, Related their power under the rubric of judicial review. judicial review involves a cord overturning an act of Congress or the executive branch from the ground at the act in question contravene the federal constitution. It is standard the principle. The courts will be unbiased guardians of the clear meaning of the constitution. At the time of the cow, institutional convention in one thousand, seven hundred and eighty seven. There were only a handful of instances in which state court overrule legislators for violating state constitutions. More of a state courts do not assume Carte Blanche Authority to rule on any subject. The courts A british common law they rolled on criminal law matters of equity between individuals and businesses and other legal matters courts also as

raw regarded the state constitutions is the central legal nervous system of their respective states, because the constitution of a state have been adopted by the people general through a convention and or direct popular vote. It was considered by judges. to be a higher law than an act of the legislature or a state governor, the Virginia constant of seventeen, seventy six even included a statement of principles. They quote all power of suspending laws or the execution. Laws by any authority without consent of the representatives of the people is in June yes to their rights, are not not to be exercised. On quote the West a mechanism in the articles of confederation, the forerunner to the constitution, for the sort of Sweden. judicial authority later as by federal courts. The articles in fact didn't establishing. Federal judiciary, by relied on state courts to resolve disputes most delegates of the constitutional Mention in seventeen eighty seven thirty federal court system was necessary that the first

judiciary should be independent of and not subordinate to the other branches of government that principle are nearly every state constitution and that federal judges should share Boeing good behaviour essentially for life, these state constitution, same the insulate judges from political pressure. But every state constitution explicitly allow judges to be appeased, A check on this behaviour, in other words, judges, were expected to be accountable to the constitution and the people who approved at the first mention of the judiciary in the Virginia plan, what Sir, The initial outline for the constitutional convention was to make it part of it. Council of revision that would examine acts of the national legislature and approve or reject them. The Congress could pass a bill over the council's veto beyond its role in the Council of revision. The region A plan had the federal judiciary consisting of a supreme tribunals and inferior tribunals says

ignited by the legislature. The inferior tribunals will be arbiters of fact, while the Supreme tribunals would be the final court of appeal The jurisdiction for the judiciary was also specific, quote all piracy syn colonies on the high seas captures from an me, cases in which foreigners were citizens of other states applying to such jurisdictions may be interested or which respect the election of the National Revenue impeachment of any national officers and questions which may involve national peace and harmony within days of the constitutional convention. Beginning its work on June for seventeen eighty seven- the delegates took up the question of the court's participation in this council of revision and there was substantial opposition to a few delicate spoken favour. The concept, and there were many questions,

the traditional, maintaining its objectivity. If were involved and gaining legislative acts, the convention had its most focused exchange or the topic of judicial authority, on August fifteen seventeen eighty seven again taking up the issue of judicial veto over acts of Congress. The debate can, with James Madison, quote, move all that all acts before they become law should be submitted. Both The executive and supreme traditionary departments that if I there they should have two thirds of each house. If both of three fourths of each house should be Nessus

play the overrule the objection to give to the act and give the ax the force of LAW Charles Pickney of South Carolina, oppose the inference of the judges in the legislative business. It will involve them and parties and give a previous temperature so their opinions, John Dickinson of Delaware, argued that judges should not be in power to overturn acts of national legislature. Rodger Sherman of Connecticut that would be Dickinson. The Pennsylvania disapprove. Judges, meddling in politics and parties, the framers considered and rejected the inclusion, the judiciary and the review process. They didn't want judges involved in either the legislative process, with all the political, intriguing would entail or reviewing laws. They would eventually have to adjudicate Hugh Williamson. A delicate from North Carolina noted that he preferred to

the power to the present it alone, rather than admitting the judges into the business of legislation. Ultimately, the convention came up with the presidential veto, but, most importantly framers did not attend. Great General Authority, to the judiciary, to rule on the constitution out of legislative acts Madison who, by August twenty seven, had dropped his initial support for the judiciary being involved in a veto. Son. the convention's take on judicial review. We wrote he doubted whether it was now got whether what is not going too far to extend the jurisdiction of the court generally to cases arising under the constitution and whether it ought not be limited to cases of a judiciary nature the right of expanding the cost the in cases not of this nature or not be given to that department the

final analysis. The framers had wanted to empower the judiciary with a legislative veto. They could have done it. They didn't. Instead, the convention crafted a judiciary like many other provisions in the final constitution as a product, a compromise of his opera miles between the interests of the individual states and the need for a federal government. There would be strong enough likes bluff to meet the present and future needs of the nation. The diverse interests was also the clear intention of the framers that no one branch would be submitted. Excuse me, subsumed by the other, and wants the convention pleaded its work. The battle began over the proposed constitution is pouring everyone. You think this. The federalists papers, authored by Hamilton, Madison and J, were among the first and the best Posts revolutionary war examples of american campaign. Literature

Series of eighty five essays that began appearing in the New York newspapers is little more than a month after the constitutional convention ended on September seventeen one, eighty seven written, persuade members of Congress and the states to adopt it. Seventy eight eighty three all written by Hamilton contain the principal discussions of the nature and authority this new judiciary, because there was no federal DE gestures, very existence at the time and the principal concern was protecting the straight from being subsumed by these seemingly more powerful executive and legislative branches. Much of the Bates on creating an independent judiciary rather than in limiting the scope and authority of federal judges. For this reason that so much of Hamilton when in Federalist, seventy eight was dedicated to an explanation of the steps taken by framers of the new constitution to ensure that the federal judges would be independent and free of control from Congress. The president,

The political whims of the day in the very state legislatures. It is surely did not represent a threat. Hamilton wrote quote so long as the judicial. Remains? Truly distinct from both the legislature and executive fry agree that there is no liberty if the power of judging you not separated from the legislative and executive powers. This is exactly what has happened, but in reverse, instead of being subsumed by Congress or the president. You has some substantial authority over the other branches, while other issues guarded most of the attention in the ratification process. There were comedy There's on both sides of the debate who addressed the nature and potential problems that could develop than the federal judiciary. Unquestionably, spokesmen such as Hamilton, medicine and J were very persuasive. His pro constitution voices, but there are also forceful opponents of the constitution, who saw the potential abuses.

Robert Yeats, in art and anti federalism delegate to the convention from New York was an especially articulate opponents of the constitution. and he wrote a series of Russia s face in the near journal, which became notice. The anti federalist papers, and here. under the name Brutus from when we come back. I want you to know what he had to say about this whole issue, the judiciary, in judicial review, and I will get to the point. What does all this happened you were January, sex eminent need every minute. Get through this. But stick with me, Robert Yeats, or Brutus in the anti anti federalist papers. He said the real effect of this system of the judiciary of gold Will therefore be brought home to the feelings of the people through the medium of the judicial power. It is moreover, of great importance to examine what care the nature and extent of the judicial power, because those who are to be vested with it,

be placed in a situation altogether unprecedented in a free country. The art, He rendered totally independent both of the people and the legislature, both with respect to their offices and salaries. No errors they may commit can be corrected by any power. Above if any such power there be, nor can they be removed from office for making ever so many erroneous subdued the only causes for which they can be displaced. His conviction of true And bribery and high crimes at misdemeanours, this part of the plan, is so model as to authorize the court's finally carrying the execution. The parents expert sleep given, but where there are wanting around ambiguity expressed, apply what is wanting by their own decision. I've got more on this The goal here is not to reargue Marbury Bird Madison, but to use it to use it

Stick with me, I know it's a little high rabbits thickly me, I'm gonna pull back the January sick. At the end of the shower okay, folks, on March Eighth, one thousand eight hundred and two just days after Thomas John Johnson Jefferson's followers. The Republicans took control of both houses of Congress, because a Jefferson had won. The presidency. Also. Congress repealed the judiciary, activate you one on April twenty nine eight no to Congress enacted the Judiciary ACT of eighteen o to which, among other things, abolish the sixteen new judge. Ships created by president items and his Federalist Party see Adams try to rush through as fast as I could, because of the delay between the election and Jefferson's inauguration and eighteen are three Marbury versus Madison decision. The Supreme Court determined it had the power

to decide cases about the Constitutionality Treaty congressional executive action and want to deem they violated the constitution, overturn them. The shorthand label given to this court made authorities judicial review. This, quite literally, is the foundation for the runaway power exercised by the federal course to this day, What is far less recognizes that Marbury started out as anything, but the ominous precedent it has become. It was a brilliant. can see political strategy crafted by John Marshall, a master politician marshal. The chief justice of the Supreme Court wrote the disease, and not the Ceta Revolution a precedent, but to deny the new president. Thomas Jefferson is long term. Political rival and opportunity to rebuffing Supreme Court control by Jefferson's federalist opponents. This is Levine's. Take based on my reading of history. Marbury was present.

protected by the election of eighteen hundred, in which Jefferson, the encumbered vice president leader, the Republicans, ran for president against the incumbent as an John Adams leader, the federalists, the federalist, controllable, houses of Congress, but were torn between the followers of atoms and Alexander Hamilton. Hamiltons faction, withheld support for Adams election betting, eighteen hundred and they re send it in an electoral college tie between Jefferson and its vice presidential running made. I remember this is what brought us the twelve amendments by the way Adams came and third, the Elect it was then thrown into the House of Representatives realize You would not, when Reelection Adams moved solidifies parties influence of the federal government. The passage that you did. Reactive, one thousand eight hundred and one Creighton. Sixteen new federal Circuit Judge ships was part of the strategy just prior to leaving office. Adams selected in the Federalist, controlled, lame duck Senate confirm nominees to fill the posts. Adams turn.

out, however, before John Marshall, who was then secretary of state, could actually do what are the commissions of office to some of the designee. Let me stop there, there's no way Marshall should have even been involved in this decision. As I explained in the book later it a conflict of interest, he had a conflict of interest. He was, the Secretary of State would deliver the commission for his president and his party that lost Marshall successor as sectoral Stay, James Madison refused to deliver the commission's as Jeffreys at Jefferson's direct. and William Marbury, among others, filed suit in federal court seeking an order ridden man, Davis directing Madison him his judge ship as justice of the peace. His commission. Marshall long arrival, a Jefferson's Virginia politics was one of the most articulate leaders and the Federalist Party Marshal had served endeavours a new state house, the, U S House of representatives and was

President Adams, representatives to France in seventeen, ninety seven and then, of course, secretary of state. he was nominated to be chief justice by President Adams and assumed the post on February for one thousand, eight hundred and one exactly one month before Adams term ended so is appointed and confirmed quickly after Jefferson at one presidency, with a republican majority elected above houses in Congress. Eight eighteen hundred Marshall realise that Jefferson is Republicans, could denude the Supreme Court of Authority and that he is chief justice, Be impeached and removed from office given away, he was appointed MRS Marks baking Marshall understood that in Marbury case, if he ordered sectaries State Madison to deliver Marbury Commissioner office Jefferson, world order, Madison Door nor the Supreme Court's rate and the Courts authority would be seriously weakened. Marshall is also concerned that he not be seen as protecting it.

The federalists jurists, like Marbury, assumed its position as a justice. Peace and I've been hearing cases in issuing judgments for a year bearing all this mine, Justice marshals decision Marbury, while upsetting the constitution's balance of power in the region Friendship between the federal government and the states was a master political stroke marsh stated that Marbury consistent with legal doctrine at that time had something akin to property right to the end to what she had been nominated and confirmed. Marshall also said the federal judiciary should be able to issue nor directing the appointment of arm of Marbury, but because the constitution did not enumerate such an original right for the Supreme Court, while the court was powerless to do it. The marshal went well beyond the specific issues in the case he could have ended right there, but he said that the court

the responsibility that set aside acts of Congress that violate principles. The numerous in the constitution. I don't have time to read what he said, but it's here Marshals Federalist Party had lost the presidency in Congress, but Marshal was determined to fight back and so the doctrine of Judicial Review, born. Yes, the constitution is indeed the Supreme LAW the land, but now the court by its own Thea, would decide what is or is not constitutional. The constitution structure, including the balance of power between the three branches, was now disturbed, if not broken, although Jefferson is claimed by banner, Damn academic That the Father their political party, he was a leading opponent of judicial activism after Marbury Jefferson became it even more critical when he viewed is the over reach of the judiciary under marshals leadership, the Abigail Adams, John Adams, wife, Jefferson, Road,

year after Marbury Quote the constitution meant that its corny branches should be checks on each other, but the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws or constitutional what Not only for themselves or their own sphere of action for the legislative and the executive, also in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch, and he goes on the constitution- would not have been ratified. It would not have enough votes to ratify nine states if the assumption of judicial review under Marshal had been explicitly stated in the constitution itself. There's no way, though, what does this have to do with January six? The constitution explicitly says at article two sexual on the second part

Graph estate shall appoint in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct a number of electors equal to the whole number senators and representatives to which the state may be entitled and Congress. This was understood by the states to mean that the legislatures would have the authority to make the determination They were selected very rarely in the constitution. Did the framers reach out and specify a branch within the states, but here it did the legislature. I think I better not a state court, not a board of election. The legislature decides.

The United States Supreme Court in twenty twenty with all this judicial review power to reach into every cultural issue in the country. Every classroom in the country, without limit other than its own limitations, that it imposes rarely on itself had thee. requirement to ensure that the the black letter law, the text of the constitution, was upheld. This language is not confusing start confounding; it clears Knighton DEC. And it was clearly violated in the twenty twenty election in ones, after another, purposely by Democrats and the Democratic Party by individuals who they hard hit. Men litigators like

Callias and others who went around the republican state legislatures in the Republicans states, including republican states, with their public and executives who are irrelevant to this process, except under law, which will get to in a moment and defied the constitution. The Supreme Court failed ACT, claiming judicial review in the past. For the last two hundred and some years, but in this case it chose to duck. It sent a manner to the United States Congress to decide and so They do it national review and elsewhere, not just picking on them. They go to the electoral count active one thousand, eight hundred and eighty seven, which is an enormously complex law. In fact, it is a contradicting law. Many respects.

Under the twelve, a member of the constitution, the vice president, who is the president to send it, undertakes the task of opening the electoral certificates. the vice president's role is limited. Now both houses. And over the vice president's decision to include or exclude the vice president's role to include or exclude votes can be overruled by both houses. And if there is a tie say between the house of a state and a Senate of a state, the governors certification Trump card into the statue called into the statue. No decisions have been made by vice

as an and serving as president of the Senate, with respect to the electorate, one thousand nine hundred and sixty one Richard Nixon. He allowed late filed votes to count, even though they were against to in sixty nine Hubert Humphrey ever run for president six day decided he better recuse himself from the count, which is what he did. There been challenges really since the beginning of our country. collections of presidents and vice presidents. I mean why did they pass this one, one thousand eight hundred and eighty seven to begin with, because of the great battle in eighteen? Seventy, six! That's why.

Where does Congress have the authority to pass a law like this? Does not have the authority to pass a law like this setting procedures for the counting? they have the power to exclude the vice president is present in the Senate to have any effective role other than as the Secretariat trader opening hours Lopes, making pronouncements about but he's received what, if you present the Senate, your vice prison, the United States- and you know, there's disputes and states. You know: there's a constitutional dispute in a state like Pennsylvania,.

And you, as the President of the Senate and his vice president, you yourself to uphold the cards. Huge into an you read that second paragraph under article two section, one each state shall appoint and such manner as the legislature thereof, made direct full stop. as the legislature there may direct, You know, as a matter of fact, that that is not only in dispute that that did not occur.

And then you have people arguing, but the electors were selected and sent to the archivist to the United States by the governor, and yet it's the legislature that challenging the governor were told to ban the vice president of the United States does not have any explicit power under the constitution to do anything. In fact, we look at the eighteen. Eighty seven stand in the way. The way interpret it is at his role, is utterly ministerial. You mean, like judicial review. Where's judicial review

when the constitution will somebody has to make the final decision where's the president of the Senate role. If he or she no knows or believes Some of the electors being sent to the archivist and then to the joint session of Congress are in effect, spoiled because there is a dispute between the legislature and the governor, but the governor. Nonetheless,.

Signs, the accreditation so when I read articles like trumps, absurd attack on pence in these guys, of course, they're not going to talk about the constitution. They're, not gonna, talk about past disputes and challenges. They're not going to talk about article two section, one paragraph to their just gonna dismiss Trump, whether by hook or by crook, Trump as a better understanding than they do. Trump has a better understanding than they do either intuitively or otherwise join the mob and telling us and telling us something. That's not true, because you can't demonstrate it under the constitution of the United States, serves no purpose.

But the mislead. The american people insurrection January six there was an insurrection broadly defined. It began well before January. Sixty in the capital bully wasn't storm before January sex during the election course, but the changes to the laws involved in selecting a president, and vice president in many cases, were violation of the federal constitution, its very specific, and it was violated by judges. It was violated by governors. It was violated by bureaucrats. It was violated by billionaires of it was violated by local administrative.

There are going to call an insurrection and the insurrection began long before January six, and this is what the pseudo conservatives, the never trappers the media and the marxist left do not want to discuss the tire sixty six losses. Nobody wanted to hear any, but the judges hurt a lot of assets from the Democrats, in most cases, upheld the changes and laws and of course we have a a brave appellate court in Pennsylvania. The just raw too. So let us not pretend that things were going to be changed or all changed on January. Six. Things were change long before that and I want, public and legislators are trying to fix it. They are accused of acting like Jim Crow, get it folks see how it works. I hope you'll replay this entire, our family and friends