Bill Meyer Show Podcast - Sponsored by Clouser Drilling www.ClouserDrilling.com - 06-06-25_FRIDAY_6AM

Episode Date: June 6, 2025

06-06-25_FRIDAY_6AM

The Bill Meyer Show podcast is sponsored by Clauser Drilling. They've been leading the way in southern Oregon well drilling for over 50 years. Find out more about them at Clauser Drilling dot com. Here's Bill Meyer. Welcome to Find Your Phone Friday. 7705633770K, my email is Bill at Bill Meyer Show dot com. Read them all. Respond to as many as I can. I am the staff of one after all. But hey, appreciate you listening

wherever you happen to be. 1063 in Jackson County, 1067 South Jackson County, 1059 Grants Pass, Rogue River, and also during the morning show 6 to 9, 993 KBXG in Grants Pass out through Greater Josephine County. Appreciate you being here this morning. And got a lot going on. Mike O'Neill is going to join me from landmark Legal Foundation and we're going to be talking a bit about the Supreme Court decisions there were actually some great Supreme Court decisions yesterday including it's like, you know You're an LGBTQ boss and then you decide to hire another LGBTQ person and then over a straight person because they're

LGBTQ and then the straight person sues and yes a straight person because they're LGBTQ and then the straight person sues and yes, the straight person won. And the Supreme Court actually saying discrimination is discrimination. So this could be interesting. We'll talk about that in a bunch of other decisions that ended up coming out yesterday which were overshadowed by the two big dogs peeing on each other on social media. Yeah, we'll have to have a little talk about that too. But also, Mr.

Outdoors is here, Toasty Report, no doubt for this weekend, the Outdoors Report. And we're also going to talk with Greg Rabideau, who has taught at Harvard off and on over the years. And the question being, there's a big Trump administration attack on Harvard wanting to get them in line. And one of the questions that he poses is if Harvard, his alma mater is actually still much into truth. Yeah.

So we'll have a conversation about that. We'll also talk to people involved in the catwalk. Yeah, there's going to be a homeless catwalk and that's going to be happening in Rogue River. We'll talk to the people behind this one. I'm a big fan of cats. I can't help it. It's one thing. Dogs are more loved, I think, in our culture than cats.

I just tend to like cats for a pet more because a cat must be reasoned with. Dogs will just unconditionally love you. God bless them. Plus, they're very useful for defense and things like that. But I like cats, I'm kind of like Rush, I like cats. Remember Rush had a pumpkin back in the day? I can still remember one of my favorite pictures of Rush Limbaugh, the late Rush Limbaugh, was when a pumpkin crawled up on top of his head and there's a picture of pumpkin, his cat, licking his head, you

know, his bald head and kind of like trying to groom him. Just had to love them. Speaking of cats though, I just wanted to mention, and this is just a little side note, I've had problems with Charlie. We've talked about Charlie. Chester died about a year ago and then we ended up getting this shelter cat, Charlie, and Charlie had been up getting this shelter cat, Charlie. And Charlie had been dropped off at the shelter, Humane Society I think is what it was, out on Table Rock. And remember when I told you how right from the very beginning he acted like he had never been fed? We put down food for him and he would do, he was purring and doing the biscuits on the bowl. He kind of looked at us like, is this... is this all... it's all mine? I can eat this? And that's fine. We had the feeling that he

probably wasn't fed too much before he ended up coming to us, or there was always a fight for food, we don't know. The problem is that Charlie has gotten pretty big. He's overweight and we're just sitting, what are we going to do about this? Because we have two cats. We have Matt, who is very lean and is very disciplined. He just grazes out of the food bowl and he's fine and he's the main coon and he's just big and lean. Always has been. All of our cats always have been this way.

Charlie has just continued to, you know, blimp up. And we had lean cat food anyway in the first place, what we were using. So we've been scratching our heads trying to figure out what is going on with him and how to take care of it. And then we may have stumbled on it because we've been taking away the food dish. We would put the food bowl down a little bit and there'd be the kibble, and Matt would eat, and then Charlie would eat, but then Charlie would just continue to eat if you left it there.

So he would take it up, and we'd pick it up then, saying, okay, we're gonna try to take a pound or two off of him. And he just seemed to be getting more anxious, more anxious all the time, and just freaking out. You'd put the food down and he would eat as much as he could at a setting. And then Linda had a great idea the other day saying, hey, you know, remember when he first came here and he acted like he had never

been fed or was always having to fight for food? And I said, yeah, I remember that. And could he have been imprinted like this right from the very beginning? That this is anxiety. So, and the way we found out is that when we went on vacation a couple of days to the coast, we ended up having to put out a big bowl of food so Matt and Charlie could have something to eat while we were gone out of the coast. And so we came back and the food was not nearly eaten down as much as we thought he would given his anxiety over food. And so we came to the conclusion that if the food's out there, now that he's an adult cat, he'll start self-modulating a little

bit. And it seems to be working out that way and I never would have thought about it but it's like he would go back there all the time and if the bowl is empty, man, he's freaking out and meowing and just doing all this stuff but if the bowl had food in it, he would go out there, eat a few kernels and come back and play in the living room or do something else. It's just kind of funny. You try to psychoanalyze an animal trying to figure out what's driving it, but yeah, he seemed to be getting anxious.

I don't know if you ever had any experience like that before, but taking the food away made him even more anxious about food, giving him more interest in it. But yeah, we got that taken care of. So we're going to be talking with people who are involved in homeless cats, unlike Charlie. Well, Charlie would have been homeless if we hadn't picked him up then. He's a weird cat Weird weird cat. I want to do a rap song with him and take that don't touch me Did it and did it did it you can touch him if you on his terms on his terms only and Maddie is just a big

gush Okay. Now we're gonna switch to other animals this morning and the animals we're gonna be talking about two big alpha dogs Washington DC peeing all over each other yesterday what did you think about that how the Trump Musk feud and it it all came about the big beautiful bill Elon well just kind of break it down the basics of it that Elon Musk I guess fired first by calling it a big ugly bill the big abominable bill was another one and the thing is though is that he's right. He's right. We've talked about this before. You can have a big beautiful bill. No, you can't have a big beautiful bill. You can have a big bill. You can have a beautiful bill in Congress if it's

coming out of the cloaca of Washington DC and it's big, it's going to be ugly. That's just the way it is to get, well, just barely past 215 to 214 votes. You had to have the pork in there. Yes, the deficit is going to go up. No, things are not really being cut except, yeah, we're going to be kicking off some bum, kicking some bums off of Medicaid and tightening up requirements on SNAP benefits and we're increasing the military spending. That's kind of the bottom line of what the big, beautiful bill is going up. Oh, oh yeah, and we're going to not touch AI for 10 years. No problem with that, but I'll set that aside.

So Musk says, big ugly bill. Trump ends up firing back that the easiest way to save money in our budget, billions and billions of dollars is to terminate Elon's governmental subsidies and contracts. Ouch. And he also adds that he was always surprised that President Joe Biden didn't do it. All right. Then a little bit later on, Elon puts out another post saying that SpaceX will start decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft immediately. This in response to Donald's statement. Dragoncraft used to transport cargo and crew to the space station. Now as far as the subsidies, Musk's companies

include Tesla, SpaceX, have received billions in government subsidies. No doubt about that. And Washington Post reporting that about 38 billion in government funding stretching back nearly 20, has been given to Musk's companies. And then Musk says subsidies don't make up, they make up only a small portion of Tesla's revenue and that SpaceX doesn't get any. Well that may be true about SpaceX. But the subsidies for the electric cars, yeah, that's not the major part of Tesla's revenue. But you know what is the major part of Tesla? The cafe rules. The cafe rules and the carbon rules

and all the rest of it that made buying Tesla such a politically favored sort of thing. In other words, if you wanted to buy a gas-powered vehicle, Chevrolet, GM, Ram, they'd all have to pay and buy carbon credits from Elon Musk. That's really where he made his money in that grift, in the carbon scam grift. That's it. So that's not technically a subsidy, but it is a mandate that, well, you know, you're supposed to, if you want to, you know, buy a car that people actually want, you're going to have to pay Elon Musk

for the privilege. That's exactly how that ended up going. That part kind of gets soft-pedaled a little bit. As for Tesla, Epoch Times reporting, take a minute to read our public filings. You'll see that EV incentives represent a minor part of our revenue. Yeah, but the Cafe Standard grift and the carbon credit scam, that's a major part of it, Elon. And that was the part I always had with him butting up to Trump in the first place. Well, listen, this is the guy that still hasn't

repudiated the carbon credit scam. You know, it's a big part of it. Then there was another comment, and you know, I think this is what probably got Donald Trump more angry than anything. He said, without me, Trump would have lost the election. Dems would control the House and Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. That was a post on X yesterday too. Such ingratitude is what he ended up attacking. To me, I think that's the, in Donald Trump's world, that's probably the biggest sin because you've got a couple of big egos. Donald Trump thinks that he won because of him and Elon thinks that...

But the other thing is though, I have a feeling that Elon may have kind of pushed him over the edge a little bit, a little over the top. And he brought in some tech bros that otherwise probably weren't looking real favorably on the Trump administration. So... And remember, Musk poured tens of millions, tens of millions into that presidential race. He was a huge donor to the Trump campaign. And Trump's suggesting that the criticism based on EV credits, and it adds a whole lot of anything.

So I just file this under, can this marriage be saved? No, probably not. Is this something it will probably blow over? Could be. As far as the market, you know when all this started happening, the biggest loser on this was not President Trump, the biggest loser, Elon Musk. Value of Tesla stock went down 152.4 billion dollars yesterday. 14% of the company's value evaporated just with the two big dogs peeing on each other. I don't know if they even comment on this one but I hope it was worth it, Elon. And yet at the same time, Elon's right about that. Elon's right about the big abominable bill is how he terms it.

But a big abominable bill is all you were ever going to be able to do. And it's, well, it's probably necessary to pass this big ugly bill, as he calls it. That's all you were ever going to get out of this particular political process. Because, I mean, even even then as big and as abominable as it was it still only got 215 votes now we don't know how it's gonna look coming out of the Senate but there you go that is the so we talked cats and we talked big dogs peeing all over each other this morning who has who has stuck it more I don't know. Who do you think is winning that one?

Ultimately, I think President Trump ends up winning out on this one. But the one thing which is on the downside though, now that these two have parted ways, and you knew it was always going to be this way, didn't you always know that at some point we were going to have a brilliant billionaire who is somewhat on the spectrum. I don't think you can make any doubt about that. At some point he was going to go this way, because he's looking at the way he... Hey, I'm giving you all these cuts. You haven't cut them.

You haven't really done it. What do they do all this work for? What did I set my company on fire for? What did I put up with Communist keying my vehicles for? What did I set my company on fire for? What did I put up with with a communist keying my vehicles for? What did I do this for? So he's all hot and bothered about it. And Donald Trump, of course, wants just total loyalty. Don't question me.

And whatever you do, oh, don't say that the only way that I won is because of you. Although I think there was certainly some truth to this. There's truth on both sides. Is it about the subsidies? Yeah, probably. Yeah, there's so much going on there. So much to unpack. We could talk about it if you wish. Bill Myers Show, 770-5633. This is KMAD. So I've been thinking about how nimble and responsive Fontana Roofing is. And? Okay, humor me.

Close your eyes. Okay. Picture, if you will, an unassuming but charming home pending for sale. Suddenly, the delicate boundary between buyer and seller is a paper-thin, worn membrane of composite material. Beyond lies a harmonious transaction in ruin. Ladies and gentlemen, you make a tenuous phone call and enter the wondrous dimension of customer satisfaction.

Next stop, the re-roof zone. The re-roof zone? Why don't we just say that Fontana Roofing, thanks to their long employee retention, have experienced teams of expert efficient roofers that are often able to react to our customers' unique situations and turn their jobs around fast without sacrificing quality. Okay, but I kind of wanted to work in how we have the ability to bend the fabric of

space and time. Let's just let our customers assume that. Fair enough. If time is of the essence, visit MontanaRoofingServices.com. I've been running my business over 30 years, built on word of mouth, handshakes, and hard work. But now, everyone talks social media. Truth is, I didn't know where to begin.

Then I found the team at KMED. They kept it simple. Smart digital tools that actually made sense. Website help, social media, email marketing, no fluff, just results. Get started at KMED.com. Click the Advertise Marketing tab. Hi, this is Paul at Valley View Nursery. Thank you for 46 awesome years. We love plants and we love sharing them with you. Don't miss our 46th anniversary celebration.

25% off, nursery-wide, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday Sunday June 6th through the 8th. Ice cream, ice cream, we all scream for free ice cream. For more info go to ValleyVe Nursery.com. Google map ValleyVe Nursery and find us closer than you think. Hi I'm Deb with Father and Son Jury and I'm on KMED. 27 minutes after 6, we'll go to the phones here. They comment on the big beautiful dust-up. I don't know. The relationship appears to be over between the two big dogs in D.C. That is for sure here.

Hey, before I do that, just wanted to mention, I did enjoy, I shouldn't say enjoy, but reading that Vicki Aldo story in the Daily Courier from yesterday, Grants Pass City Council forming pay raise task force. And we're talking about the need to raise taxes or not to raise pay. In fact, the city manager is on deck for a $45,000 a year raise. And I'm sort of astounded and my jaw drops when I see the size of many other raises, $10,000 per year. Everything that's not happening in the private sector around here, plus you have PERS on top of this and I don't know, are we getting to this point that

in Oregon every city manager, every county administrator, everybody's going to be at least a quarter million dollar a year employee and multi-millionaire when it comes to the PERS pension. I've just shaken my head, just stop it, stop it. Well, you know, the average for a city manager is $148,000. Or no, what was it? Oh no, no, this was a,

yeah, something else they were talking about. Oh, it was the HR director. So we have small cities like Grants Pass. The human resources director earns $112,000. Oh, poor baby, $112,000 a year plus PERS. You're underpaid, right? You're just scraping at it compared to average pay of $148,000.

What, you're trying to tell me that an average around this state, HR getting involved in crossing the I's and dotting the T's and no, crossing the T's and dotting the I's, there we go. See, I couldn't make an HR manager, I couldn't do that. And talking about all the things you can't say to one another to avoid lawsuits, that's a minimum of $150,000 a year now. Really?

Plus PERS? Plus all the days off? Yeah, I'm just, anyway. Oh, by the way, guess the the consultant that they hired to do this $250 an hour I could have done that consulting for a hundred bucks an hour maybe even $50 an hour just say Grand Spass City Council you'll know when the pay is low when everybody starts quitting that's kind of the way it works in the private sector instead of, okay, who's overpaid over in Clackamas County or who's overpaid out on the coast?

Well, it's probably nobody overpaid out on the coast. Coast is pretty rough right now, but you kind of know where I'm getting at. All the cities are this way though. It just irritates me. Hi, let's go to Francine. Francine, don't irritate me. I'm not in the mood, okay? All the cities are this way though, it just irritates me. Hi, let's go to Francine. Francine, don't irritate me, I'm not in the mood, okay?

No, that irritated me. You think they would try to do something like offer tax relief to the people of Grants Pass instead of sucking up more taxes to make these people rich. But you see, I've kind of had it up to here with us. We're engaging in public service. We are serving the public here. Yeah, yeah, you're kind of serving the public all right in many ways and I feel I could swear it's like as the as the bull services the cow if you get my drift. Okay, you know, they say Stalin was trying to make things better for everybody too, right? Now you're gonna make me spit

my coffee out. Okay, now where are you gonna go on the big dogs peeing on each other? Okay, well I was listening in the car the other day, I think it was yesterday, to Barclay Van Kamp and Robbins, and I have to say, by the way, that I really get a kick out of them sometimes. They make me laugh. I can't pick them quite as seriously as I can you, but they're pretty funny on occasion. I agree, They're very funny. They're a nice palate cleanser for sure. They are and I actually enjoy them better than Hugh Hannity in the one before you. Okay. All right. Well anyway.

Anyways, anyways, so they made a comment about they're not they're kind of tossing back and forth whether this big feud is real or contrived, you know, because like Musk is trying to rebuild his image again because everybody hates him now, you know, that kind of thing. And that was an interesting thought, you know, because who knows what these people do. I don't know if I want to go down the IQ and on and everyone's playing fourth and fifth dimensional chess there, do you? Well, I just don't know because, you know, Bill, I mean, I can't never really be truly

surprised by the games these people play. Okay. You know, they are in such a different stratosphere, their brains live in a different stratosphere than ours. They do not think like us, they do not relate to what we think and say. It doesn't mean anything. Yeah, I know, but you know, you go out there and you call for Trump's impeachment, which is what he did. What he did yesterday.

I don't know. I think that's more real than a WWE fake job. Yeah. Well, I missed that. So yeah, you're probably right. I didn't catch that one. Yeah, that was later in the dogs peeing on each peeing on each other suggesting the impeachment here. So anyway interesting

Sure, okay. So yesterday I was at the dog park and there's this lady I've met and talked to a few times, you know She's got these two wonderful dogs and she's really nice and she has this t-shirt. She wears a lot of times It's a it's a little great t-shirt with an upside down American flag that says, we are in trouble. And so I made the assumption that she was probably a little bit conservative at least. And we started talking. I said, you know, I really like your t-shirt. I want one.

And she says, you know, I think she assumed she's actually more liberal and she I think she assumed I was and she starts telling me about this great big demonstration. I can't remember if she said it was today or this weekend, you know. I think there is a demonstration in front of the VAs. The VA centers is where that's going, and they're, you know, the left and the indivisible types are hoping to get everybody stirred up there. Right, right. And she said it was nationwide, apparently.

I don't know. But anyways, and you know, she said, you ought to go. And I said, well, to be honest with you, I lean a little bit in the other direction. But it was what was really, the reason I'm mentioning this is because she and I were able to talk about what's going on a little bit. We didn't get too crazy, but we had a good conversation, an intelligent short conversation, and she wasn't one of these total whacked out, you know, meh, meh, meh. Well, maybe that's how we should have all those conversations.

Take your pets, and you have your pets with each other, and it's kind of a calming, soothing influence on interface. What do you think? You know, the shared love and adoration of our animals and dogs and cats and so forth is a soother You're right. It is it is a binder in a way. Yeah. All right. Hey, thanks for the story though I like that really enjoy Yeah, we can talk as long as we have our dogs or our cats or other pets with us. All right, or our grandkids Maybe our grandkids. Maybe that's what you can do, too. Hi. Good morning. Who's this? Welcome. Hi Bill

This is Vicki from the Apple gate. Hey Vicki, give me a quick one here. Huh? What do you think? Okay. Well, first of all, I think Elon Musk had like a lot of the big dogs, um, kind of a, uh, his own agenda backing Trump. Um, cause obviously now they're like spitting on each other and saying a bunch of bad stuff to each other and about each other. Yeah, very transactional. I think there were some transactions involved. Sure. Right. And as far as it really pisses me off that Elon Musk is saying Trump won because of him.

No, Trump won because of the people. The people got him in there, not his millions of dollars. He just totally, it's almost like he just totally discredited all the people that voted for him. The only reason he got in was money. Well, that's, well, in a sense, that's kind of true. Well, yeah, I think though that, I think Elon Musk brought a percent or two along that might not have, that might have avoided MAGA.

So I'm not convinced that he's wrong. Well I think he definitely had a part. Yeah, but you don't talk about it, all right? It's like you don't talk about, you know, when you're in election fight club, you don't talk about election fight club that way, right? Well, right. It's such a difference between 2020 and 2024. And I think a lot of people didn't want to stand up for what they believed in in 2020, plus I think it got stolen. But anyways, and this year, I mean, it was overwhelming. So unless Elon Musk went out and paid everybody $1,000 to vote for Trump, it's almost like

that's what he's saying. Yeah. Well, I think that what we have to consider... In fact, I'm going to talk with a guest Monday. I'm not exactly sure when. I think his name... Oh, Kerry Lutz. Kerry Lutz from the Financial Survival Network.

It's an interesting piece out there I was reading that I thought was thought provoking, which he's talking about the algorithms, the algorithms, the algorithms that weaponized a lot of the news and social media that actually really helped out the Republicans. And I think that was also one of the reasons why Trump was more than happy to have Elon along

for that ride because of the algorithms and the changing around of social media. So yeah, we could both be a little bit right on this one, all right? Vicki, thanks for the call, all right? We're gonna be digging and breaking down some Supreme Court decisions here in just a moment, which was actually good news. I mean, the dogs were peeing on each other, but the Supreme Court were actually helping things out. Tell you more next. Great to see you. Come on in. Hi, thanks for letting me stay in your guest room. see you. Come on in.

Hi. Thanks for letting me stay in your guest room. Our pleasure. Right through here. The door sticks a bit. Just turn, lift up a little, and give it a good shove. Okay. Thanks.

Oh, and if it gets a bit warm in here, crack the window. It just needs a little elbow grease too sometimes. Stubborn doors or windows? Call Millette Construction for a no pressure, thorough inspection of your home's foundation and a no obligation estimate. Visit MilletteConstruction.com. If you really want to enjoy your open air spaces,

talk to American Industrial Door. They're an authorized dealer for tier screen systems. From porches, patios and gazebos to restaurant seating areas to warehouses, these custom made motorized screens and vinyl panels are a permanent solution to keep best wind and rain out so you can enjoy outdoor environments in peace. Go see all the possibilities DuraScreen systems have to offer at American Industrial Door with showrooms on Union

Avenue and Grants Pass and Crater Lake Avenue north of Vilas Road. From the KMED News Center here's what's going on. Republicans in the Oregon House lost an effort to move a bill out of committee that would require school athletes to compete based on their original gender. Republican Representative Ed Diehl says it isn't fair for transgender women to compete in women's sports. Those girls, those women, want fairness and they want justice and that's what we're trying to do. Democrats disagree. They're allowing the bill to die in committee without a public hearing. Republicans want a hearing on the bill.

Hot weather's on the way with weekend temperatures expected to hit right around 100 degrees Saturday through Monday with a slight chance of a thunderstorm Monday. Fire danger in the Oregon Department of Forestry's Southwest Oregon District is going to rise to moderate tomorrow on 1.8 million acres across Jackson and Josephine counties. If you're headed to the woods, check for restrictions. According to the latest numbers, home sales increased 5.7% of the first quarter and the median price for a new home around the Medford area, $412,000 Bill London KMED. Just how clean is your water? Here's a note from Grants Pass Water Lab.

The best and the only way to know your water is clear bacteria is to have a professional water lab run an E. coli test. E. coli is famous for making people really sick, but it's also an indicator of other bacteria, protozoa and viruses. So ask Grants Pass Water Lab to test your water for E. coli. Find locally owned independent Grants Pass Water Lab online at gpwaterlab.com. Hi this is Bill Meyer and I'm with Cherise from No Wires Now, your DISH Premier local retailer. It's time to switch to DISH. If you have DirecTV or CableTV call me today to see how I can save you money. Plus I'll lower your internet and cell phone bills. And those offers in the mail from Dish, you can go through No

Wires Now for those. Call me at 541-680-5875. Call Cherise like I did or visit their showroom off Biddle Road in Metford. NoWiresNow.com. Restrictions apply. Call for details. Internet and cell phone service not provided by Dish. You are here in the Bill Meyers show on 1063 KMED. Kind of overshadowed in all of the relationship fallout, real or manufactured there between President Trump and Elon Musk, there's a bunch of decisions coming out from the Supreme Court. And what happened with the Supreme Court? Largely pretty good from what I understand. Michael O'Neill is here, Landmark Legal Foundation, Landmark Legal, by the way, it's Landmark

Legal Foundation, the Ronald Reagan Legal Center. So some good work being done there. Mike, great to have you back on. Morning, sir. Oh, it's great to be with you, Bill. It's always a pleasure. Yeah, I know. We set aside some of the drama, the soap drama that's occurring in Washington, D.C. right

now and focus on some important cases that have come down the pike that are probably I know we set aside some of the soap drama that's occurring in Washington, DC right now and focus on some important cases that have come down the pike that are probably going to matter in the years to come. Hopefully the drama will resolve itself, but we can talk about some of the Supreme Court cases. Important decisions that have come down the past week. Exactly. And by the way, when does the last decision usually drop? Is there a time schedule for that? What are we looking at right now? Yeah, generally it's towards the end of June. Occasionally bleeds over into July, but generally by July 4th it's pretty much over. But what's interesting, Bill, this isn't necessarily about the opinions, the merits-based

opinions that came out yesterday or have come out previously or points to come out the next couple weeks, is it's going to be interesting to see how the Supreme Court grapples with all these emergency inj emergency junctions emergency petitions that are coming before it with all of these judges that are issuing the junction bird equitable relief at all you speak this record that are issuing regarding the executive orders that president trump has issued traditionally the supreme court as we all know

uh... edit session normally by the last by the by the beginning of j, July 1, and is out of session until the first week of October. What's going to happen over the preceding months this summer when they're out of session is going to be interesting to see how they handle with all these emergency positions, all the petitions that come from the court. So I really don't know. It's a great question to ask, and I really don't know how they're going to grapple with

all of these issues that invariably are going to arise on an expedited emergency basis. Has there ever been more emergency cases being brought to the Supreme Court than maybe right with all of these issues that invariably are going to arise on an expedited emergency basis. What? What? Has there ever been more emergency cases being brought to the Supreme Court than maybe right now with the Trump administration? No, never. I mean, the emergency, it's called, lawyers use the term shadow docket, emergency docket, however you can want to talk about. These are cases that arise on an expedited basis, non-merits-based cases, and to the extent to which they're coming up in front of the court, the level at which they're being presented in front of the court is unprecedented.

I mean, and again, keep in mind, the universal injunctions that have been issued by the courts, by district courts and affirmed to a large part by some circuit courts, that's a new phenomenon. I mean, this isn't something that was really occurring with any kind of regularity previous administration so you're really being built a lot of real activist judges and again i'll talk to you that the other judges that are pointed by a bomb i'd buy both parts they're seeking to really kind of hijack or or derail the implementation trump agenda particularly

you're talking about personnel issues of the ability of the president determinate employees within the executive branch. Immigration cases, of course, you see a lot of these alien enemy back cases, deportation cases. You're seeing a lot of really, when you get down into the nitty gritty of it, you're seeing these district courts in a lot of instances trying to micromanage the affairs of the executive branch. And I have this working theory, I don't think that they have, that the framers clearly never envisioned this kind of micromanaging authority for

judges to get into the nuances of how the Department of Homeland Security conducts itself, or whether the Department of Treasury allows DOJ people to come in and look at the records when they're trying to identify waste, crime, and abuse. You're seeing this micromanaging of judges that I don't think the framers or our constitutional structure ever envisioned. I'd agree with you, Ahmed Michael. One thing which I will be really interested to see is what happens with, well, you know, we had the alleged terrorist that attacked the flamethrower deal in Boulder, Colorado last weekend, and how a federal judge then stopped the deportation proceedings for the family, and yet it's pretty clear that everyone overstayed visas, no one had real legal authority to

be here, and it would seem to me that you go in front of a judge and do you have a visa here? You don't? Okay, well then we can deport you back to Egypt. Now this is very sad for maybe kids that had nothing to do with this, but to have judges come out and just smack it down or pause it right now, what is the definition of due process? And it seems to me that if you're in front of the judge and do you have authority to be here? Well, no. Isn't that...

Are you identification and then determination of whether you're here legally or not? Yeah. Incidentally, there's an even bigger question in that case is the judge, the federal, a court has to ask itself whether it has jurisdiction. That's the first question. And those cases, that case should never have been brought in front of a district court judge. There's immigration judges that have jurisdiction to afford the due process

and determine exactly what I said. If you're here, are you who you say you are? Are you who the government claims you are? Yes. We've confirmed identity and then confirm you're here absent any kind of authority. You don't have your visa. It isn't legitimate. It is valid. You don't have a legitimate visa. Yeah. Your papers aren't in order. Your papers aren't in order. I'm very sorry, but you've got to go back. That's your due process. That's a great example. That's a perfect example of you're seeing this activist judges. I think that it's doing damage to the judiciary as a whole.

When people, when everyday Americans, wait a minute, your father or your husband was engaging in terrorist activity. Okay, you're here illegally. You're going to get kicked out of the country. You don't have a right to be here when you're here illegally, and you are here illegally. That's been determined by a proponents of evidence. I mean, not even beyond the reasonable doubt, but definitively determined. Okay, boom, you're done. And the whole of the individuals here, of course, is judicial activism at its worst.

From a PR perspective, it really is bad. From normal people, everyday Americans, to see this and they're like, what the heck? I can't believe it. Why do we give asylum? Why do we give aid and comfort to families of terrorists, for heaven's sake? It doesn't make sense. And I was mentioning on social media the other day that it feels like we're living through a Babylon B parody headline and they put

one out yesterday before that judge ended up doing it that said Democrats warned deporting illegal terrorist family could be slippery slope to deporting other illegal terrorist families. It's like it's serious. Well, the real headlines are more of a parody. It's just bizarre. Yeah, exactly. And this is why it's, I mean, either the Supreme Court in a couple of upcoming opinions reigns in these authorities or Congress. I mean, I've come to the point where I think when you're talking about these egregious rulings, and again, I don't enter this lightly because I'm a practitioner, and Congress has remedies, impeachment. I mean, these are some that they can consider. Legislation limiting the judge's authority.. I mean, these are some that they can consider.

Legislation limiting the judge's authority. Keep in mind, these are inferior courts under our constitutional structure. So while they're Article III courts, the Congress has statutory authority to limit their authority, statutory power to limit their authority, constitutional power to limit their authority. So that is certainly necessary. Just real quick, I know we're going to run out of time, but just touch on some of these cases. Yeah, well, the one that really grabbed me here is Ames v. Ohio versus Ohio Department of Youth Services. And this was when we had essentially an LGBTQ boss passing over a straight person for a job

and giving it to an LGBTQ person because they were an LGBTQ person. Isn't that essentially what happened there? And the courts didn't like that. Yeah, exactly. And interestingly, this case was written by Justice Jackson. So I know we drag a lot of the more, quote unquote, liberal justices over the calls here, but when push comes to shove in some of these cases, you even have positive opinions out

of Justice Jackson, Justice Sotomayor, or Justice Kagan. This case, interestingly, again, was important to say that just so that we all don't quite ... and all this hullabaloo that we're talking about, let's not completely lose face in the system. Sometimes it works out as appropriate. But yeah, this is a case... essentially what this does is it removes the burden on majority people. Okay, so the term here is you have protected classes and

then you have majority classes. Okay, so if you're a white person, for example, a heterosexual person, a male, a white male heterosexual, you know, that's the majority person where a white female heterosexual. Those people, if you were going to make claims of discrimination, you had to bear additional burdens to satisfy those claims of discrimination that somebody in a minority class didn't necessarily have to make. So there was a higher burden placed on majority plaintiffs than non-majority plaintiffs. Yeah, the straight person had to had to try to provide more like a higher bar

of a proof of discrimination and the court then said that's not true. That's not supposed to happen. Exactly, exactly. The Civil Rights Act applies to any individual. So discrimination on the basis of race, sex, gender, etc. applies to any individual. And that's the actual text of the statute. And that's, of course, what should always be controlling is when you want to look at the law, you want to make, you want to read the law and see what does the law say? Well, the law provides any individual. It doesn't say any individual of color or any individual of female. It says any individual. And therefore, there really is no wiggle room for a court to say, well, wait a minute, we have to impose additional burden on individuals simply because they're white or heterosexual or male. That means we can't discriminate on the basis of race. This. This is good. This is a good news. You can't have, you can't place additional burdens based on people. If I'm going to discriminate on the basis of race because you're white and I'm going to promote somebody because they're simply because they're African-American, I can't do that under the Civil Rights Act.

Okay. This is a common-sense ruling. It's a good ruling. I mean for everybody, it's like, well, why hasn't this happened before? Well, it did happen finally. So do you think we're going to be in the ending era? I mean I'll tell you it was about 30 years ago that I applied for a job at a radio station in a major market and I had worked there before and it had been quite successful and I was actually told by the people running the place we can't hire you because you're a white male. They literally told me that and he said, you know, I don't want you to get your hopes up and I said, fine, you know, and I went elsewhere

and got another job. But it was all about kind of the quota thing. Is this breaking down the quota, the unspoken quota that's been going on in a lot of hiring practices, you think? Formally, yes. I think you're going to have to be a leery of efforts to circumvent these clear lines. So you'll see what some universities are saying now. They consider a whole person. And so they'll try to circumvent these creative means to increase again. It's not diversity of thought.

It's superficial diversity, of course, right? So when you have liberal institutions, left-leaning institutions, institutions that are committed to discriminating on the basis of race, like in your organization you were talking about before you were referring, I think you're going to have to guard against creative work arounds that these organizations and institutions are always going to be fighting. It's probably one of those never-ending battles until you change the culture that, hey, discrimination on the basis of race is inappropriate in every instance. So, or discrimination...

Yeah, not just in some. Not just in some. All right. So, that was an interesting, I thought that was a big case. The Catholic Charities case, I think was also very interesting. It had to do with, now, wasn't this the state of Wisconsin saying that what what the Catholic charities were doing wasn't really religious in nature? Wasn't that it, basically? Right, exactly. And this is a good case. Again, this is interesting. This is Justice Sotomayor, so let's give credit where credit is due in this case, Justice Sotomayor. a a a ending kind of practice of the supreme court that they don't want court meddling into what constitutes a valid religious practice person what constitutes an invalid just practice but what was the problem here the problem here with with cotton with denied catholic charities this

exemption specific tax action because they could well you don't you know through your working catholic charity you don't try to convert people to catholic and that was the positive or that will further for the state of wisconsin so we're saying well just because you you don't profit i think people you don't try to convert people to Catholicism. And that was dispositive for the state of Wisconsin. So we were saying, well, just because you don't proselytize to people, you don't try to convert them to Catholicism when they come into Catholic charities to receive any kind of services, that means you're not sufficiently religious for us.

Oh, so no deduction or exemption for you, right? That's what they would do. Exactly. You don't get the benefit of a specific exemption, of a tax exemption, because even though you are a charitable organization... You're not being a good charitable organization in the eyes of the state. Okay. All right. So what the court said very forcefully, and again, this is consistent with a long-running pattern, is they say, look, we don't want state entities deciding what a religion should do or should not do. And because you you're making the decision you're simply saying

well some religions proselytize and try to convert people when they come in to receive services that shouldn't be a dispositive test for determining whether you meet the test of a religious organization because again part of the the the and this is what the the Catholic Charities established the record it was indisputable is that is part of the religion of Catholicism is you don't you don't try to part of the religion of policies that is you don't

you don't try to pro you you you talk about catholicism but you don't try to actively to work members who come in the key services for catholic charity you know deals or whatever into catholicism it's just part of the nature of what of what the faith was doing it by in time so and it's really quick look we don't we don't get into norc Nor courts or state entities shouldn't get into what is and what is not a valid religious practice. It is religious, it's a legitimate religion, it qualifies for the exemption, you discriminate it on the basis of religion.

So that was a pretty well-deserved smackdown then and a pretty good court decision. Smith and Wesson versus the United, well, Mexico, essentially. Basically it was the gun the gun industry against the Mexican government. Boy and that was a smackdown too wasn't it? Yeah this is the one where they were trying, where the state of Mexico, where the country of Mexico was trying to find liability. Okay well where can we find some money here? Well we have a lot of gun violence in our country and we're going to sue the gun manufacturers.

And there's a law in place that says, look, you can't hold gun manufacturers of guns liable for the actions of people who commit crimes with those guns. And again, it's liable here. Who's the actor? Who's the bad actor here? It's not the manufacturer of the guns. It's the individuals who commit the crimes with the guns. But of course, Mexico was looking for some deep pockets here, and that's oftentimes what

motivates a lot of these lawsuits. And they were trying to creatively sue civilly and hold liable civilly again for monetary damages the gun manufacturers. And they said, look, this is too attenuated. You can't hold the manufacturers. It's like saying, okay, I'm going to hold Ford liable for somebody who runs through a crowd and kills 100 people, a terrorist who runs through a crowd and kills 50 people with a Ford pickup truck, for example. No, the liability, there has to be some sort of a, you have to have some sort of limitations

of liability. And if you don't, then of course it opens up, again, I'm leery of using slippery snow carbonate arguments, but you don't want to open up manufacturers of products to liability that far down the line. That far down the line. Great. And I think that was a unanimous decision, wasn't it? Yeah, that was Justice Kagan. Again, here we go. We had Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson writing each one of these respective opinions. And again, unanimous opinions. We talk about fractured courts, we talk about conservatives and liberals. Sometimes, again, you know, I'm willing to criticize the court when they do stuff that's off kilter or off the rails. But again, sometimes

the system works. So we can't lose complete faith in this. These are three cases, very important precedental merit-based cases that are now on the books. And you had unanimous decisions, nine-hour decisions in each one of them. Great conversation here. Mike O'Neill once again, Landmark Legal Center and it's landmarklegal.org. By the way, this is kind of off the beaten path of what was coming out of these sort of decisions, but do you think they're going to see a bunch of Brunner court cases when it comes to the Second Amendment because here in the state of Oregon and many other liberal states, it doesn't appear to matter that the Supreme Court said, hey, you can't ban stuff in common

use, you can't do this, Second Amendment right is a primary right, it's not a secondary right, I mean all these things and the courts just seem to be in the liberal states just doing everything that they want anyway. Do you see that changing over time? Probably take time, I guess. Well, I certainly think that there is a very strong legal advocacy for Second Amendment rights in this country. And I would, my guess, again, I don't practice in that specific area, but I know that they are well represented. And I would think efforts with states enact laws that are invited that run countered Brunner decision that there would be lawsuits that would be initiated and we be prosecuted in those

respective states I can't imagine it not being again we talked about I think we've talked about this before bill it's like the Second Amendment I think it's a short shrift right here but the second you just as valuable protection as your rights under the first amendment we're talking about religious liberty etc are your rights under the First Amendment, we're talking about religious liberty, etc. Are your rights under the Second Amendment? Just because it's the Second Amendment doesn't mean it takes a backseat to those rights that are trying to protect it in the First Amendment. So I would think, and again, this was affirmed in the Berner decision, so I would think that the well-heeled, experienced attorneys who represent protections for Second Amendment rights would be willing to bring these cases where appropriate. I can't imagine them not being. I hope you're right about this and I hope they do it before all the gun stores close in the United States, in places that aren't so friendly to it.

Michael, great talk as always. We will have you back. Appreciate your work over at Landmark Legal Foundation and please support the group, folks, you could and it takes people like Michael doing this kind of work, alright? Be well, thanks again. Take care Bill, have a great day. You bet. It's a couple minutes before 7, KMED, KMED, HD1, Eagle Point, Medford, KBXG, Grants Pass. The Outdoor Report is every Friday morning just past 7 a.m. on The Bill Meyer Show. The Outdoor Report on KMED and the jukebox 993 covers recreational opportunities and is powered by Oregon Truck and Auto Authority your Department of Adventure of Vilas Road on Airway Drive.

Rob Gardner says don't be in a hurry to do winter cleanup. Wait for the cleanup until the possibility that insects, beneficial insects have overwintered in your yard. And one of the things that was so hard for me to do initially was like with my day lilies to leave those stems there. Talk to the Road Gardener live Saturdays 10 to noon, a Sunday morning encore at nine on KMED, sponsored by Grange Co-op.

Young music talent is everywhere, but opportunity isn't. That's where the Use Your Gift Foundation makes a real difference, right here in Southern Oregon. We believe every young musician deserves a real shot to develop their skills, discover their voice, and take meaningful steps toward their dream.

At Use Your Gift, we provide one-on-one mentoring, access to a professional recording studio, and opportunities to grow through live performances and real-world experience. Every lesson learned, every session recorded, every stage they step on brings them closer to the future they imagine, and that's where you come in. Your support helps open doors that talent alone can't always reach. Together we can give the next generation of musicians the tools they need to shine. Learn more, get involved, and be inspired.

Visit UseYourGift.org and find out how you can be part of music's future. That's UseYourGift.org, helping dreams take center stage. 7 o'clock, we're going to check news here in just a moment with Town Hall handing the helping dreams take center stage. Palate cleanser, you know, that sort of thing. Dad Jokes of the Day, sponsored by Two Dogs Fabricating on Bryan Way off Sage Road in Medford. You can submit your dad joke on twodogsfab.com. By the way, Two Dogs Fabricating can do any kind of hitch or tongue repair for this camping season. RVs, trailers, they build custom diamond plate battery boxes that a lot of people really get into.

Today's Dad Joke, I asked my dog what two plus two is he said nothing insane yeah I said nothing that's a that's it and go ahead you submit your joke if you want okay Joel here from mother Ford and