The Daily Signal - TOP NEWS | SCOTUS Leaker Unknown, Debt Ceiling Debate, Alec Baldwin Charged | Jan. 19

Episode Date: January 19, 2023

On today’s Daily Signal Top News, we break down: The Supreme Court says it still does not know who leaked the draft opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. America hit its deb...t ceiling.  South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem takes a stand on a bill protecting minors from transgender treatments.  Republican Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signs an executive order to improve education.  Alec Baldwin faces involuntary manslaughter charges.  House Speaker Kevin McCarthy ends proxy voting. Relevant Links Listen to other podcasts from The Daily Signal: https://www.dailysignal.com/podcasts/ Get daily conservative news you can trust from our Morning Bell newsletter: DailySignal.com/morningbellsubscription   Listen to more Heritage podcasts: https://www.heritage.org/podcasts Sign up for The Agenda newsletter — the lowdown on top issues conservatives need to know about each week: https://www.heritage.org/agenda Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Transcript
Discussion (0)
Starting point is 00:00:00 I'm Virginia Allen. I'm Samantha Sherris. And this is the Daily Signal Top News for Thursday, January 19th. Here are today's headlines. The Supreme Court says it still doesn't know who leaked the draft opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The High Court released a report this afternoon saying that the identity of the leaker remains unknown. Investigators conducted 126 interviews of 97 employees and all are reported. reported to have denied leaking the document. Here with us to explain more is Heritage Foundation Senior Legal Fellow and host of the SCOTUS 101 podcast, John Carlo Canaparo. John Carl, thanks for being
Starting point is 00:00:52 here. Thanks for having me. So does this strike you as strange that after their initial investigation, the Supreme Court still says they have no idea who leaked this document? Well, let me correct you slightly. What they say is we don't know by a preponderance of the evidence who did it. Which could mean a couple of things. It could mean that they have one or a few suspects in mind, but they just really can't or don't want to, you know, ruin somebody's career or end somebody's career without really being sure. It could also mean that they just feel like they're never going to get there and they just want this done so they're ending it. But the sense I get is that it's over and we're not going to know.
Starting point is 00:01:35 Really? So will there be further investigation? Are they pledging to keep looking into this? Are they essentially putting this to bed? It seems to me like they're putting it to bed. Okay. Wow. So what do we know about how this investigation was conducted and they say that they did 126 interviews?
Starting point is 00:01:54 What was the format of those interviews? What do we know? Well, we don't know a whole lot except what's reported in this statement. But you'll probably recall that the Supreme Court faced some criticism early on because its investigation was going to be handled by its marshal. Service. Now, the Supreme Court's Marshal Service is first and foremost, a security staff for the justices. They are not law enforcement in the way that they have any expertise investigating crimes or conducting any sorts of investigations. The head of their
Starting point is 00:02:27 Marshal Service has no experience doing that. And it does not appear that the Supreme Court attempted to bring in outside law enforcement with, say, subpoena power, which would have been really essential here. They did, it seems, bring in a private law firm or private consulting group to help run the investigation. But again, a private consulting group has no sort of subpoena law enforcement powers. They brought people in for voluntary interviews. According to the statement, the Supreme Court released, people were forthcoming when the Supreme Court requested that certain personnel turn over their messaging and call logs and things like that. They did that and nothing was, nothing suspicious was found there.
Starting point is 00:03:13 But again, we just don't know how detailed this was. We don't know to what extent, well, it looks like there was no sort of legal compulsion to turn over things. So it seems to me like not, this is not, to put it frankly, this sort of investigation that a law enforcement agency like the FBI would have run. Now, when it comes to the journalist involved at Politico who leaked the story, is there any sort of option there to try and find out from them who their contact was and who they're working with? Or is that really something that because of journalistic integrity and sources being kept private, that that just isn't even an option on the table? Yeah, it's not an option, I think, for a couple of reasons. Number one, journalistic integrity is a pretty serious bar to that sort of thing, but also, and I think more fundamentally, if the court was interested in trying to overcome journalistic privilege, it would have to sue the journalist and fight out in court. And, of course, the Supreme Court is not going to do that.
Starting point is 00:04:21 That would be a really strange and somewhat fraught political or constitutional question in itself if the court was a litigant in the court. Well, Jean-Carlo, I think the question that I have is, does this make the integrity of the Supreme Court maybe a little weaker moving forward if there is no accountability for the individual that leaked this document? Could this now happen again, maybe more easily if we're not holding the individual accountable who did this? Well, you bring a couple points. The first is that I think this is a black mark on Chief Justice. Justice Roberts's tenure. The first, I mean, nothing like this, to this degree at least, had ever happened before under any other Chief's watch. And as to future leaks, I mean, the incentive is always going to be there. We don't really know what the incentive here was.
Starting point is 00:05:15 It may have been that a clerk hoped a justice would change his mind. It may have been that a clerk hoped a justice wouldn't change his mind. Or it may have simply been that a clerk wanted to just attack the judiciary where it was weakest or was most vulnerable in its. It's the privacy and integrity of its process, especially if that was the reason. It was just bitterness and anger. That incentive is always going to be there. And that incentive is going to be there unless there are consequences. And there are no consequences, it seems.
Starting point is 00:05:46 John Carlo Canaparo of the Heritage Foundation and host of the SCOTUS 101 podcast. John Carlo, thanks for your time today. Any time. America hit its debt ceiling today. America's debt limit is $31.4 trillion. Now the Treasury Department is taking special measures to be able to continue to pay on that debt so we don't default. Congress is facing a debate. Democrats are advocating the debt ceiling to be raised, while Republicans say they won't negotiate over raising the debt ceiling unless Democrats agree to start cutting spending. But the White House does not appear interested in spending cuts.
Starting point is 00:06:26 White House Press Secretary Karin Jean-Pierre told reporters this week, that raising the debt ceiling is something that should be done without conditions. And she added that we are not going to be negotiating over the debt ceiling. Florida Republican Representative Byron Donald's joined Fox Business to discuss the fight over raising the debt ceiling, saying America will not default on its debt. No, I fully believe we're going to have a debt ceiling deal. Fully believe that. But I will also say that the White House strategy of, oh, we're not going to have any negotiations
Starting point is 00:06:59 is insane. There must be spending restraints. There must be other things that go along with it. Just extending the credit card to continue spending recklessly is not in the interest of the American people. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen wrote to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy today and told him that the special measures the Treasury Department has put in place will prevent America from defaulting on its debt until June 5th. So for lawmakers, the clock is ticking to strike a deal and prevent default. The Daily Signal broke the news Wednesday that South Dakota Republican Governor Christy Noem has announced she will support a bill in her state that protects kids from gender treatments. The bill prohibits controversial transgender medical interventions such as hormones and surgeries for minors. Specifically, the bill bars health care professionals from performing certain acts on minors for the purpose of attempting to alter the appearance of or to valid.
Starting point is 00:07:59 a minor's perception of their sex if it is inconsistent with their biological sex. Noam previously came under criticism in 2021 when she refused to sign a bill protecting women's sports. In 2022, Noam did sign a bill preventing students from participating on sports teams that differ from their biological sex. When it comes to this new bill aimed at prohibiting gender treatments on minors, Governor Noam's office told the daily signal that the South Dakota governor will be watching the bill as it moves through the state legislature. There is some positive news for education out of Arkansas today. Republican Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders has signed an executive order to limit government overreach
Starting point is 00:08:43 and reduce red tape in education. The Daily Signal was the first to break this news and learned from Sanders that she is placing the issue of education as a top priority in her administration. Sanders became the 47th governor of Arkansas earlier this month. Sanders told the daily signal that already in my first week in office, I've signed three executive orders helping to improve education. Sanders explained that the order she signed today will streamline applications and create a unified system for local school districts to apply for federal and state fundings. The governor says that no longer in the state of Arkansas will we let a burdensome fractures. fragmented and inefficient government system full of red tape,
Starting point is 00:09:28 prevent our kids' needs from being met. Actor Alec Baldwin has been charged with involuntary manslaughter. As you all will remember, Baldwin was on set filming a western called Rust in 2021 when the gun he was holding accidentally discharged and killed cinematographer Halena Hutchins. Santa Fe, New Mexico district attorney Mary Carmack Altwise, said in a statement, today that after a thorough review of the evidence and the laws of the state of New Mexico, I have determined that there is sufficient evidence to file criminal charges against Alec Baldwin and other members of the Rust film crew. The armorer on set Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is
Starting point is 00:10:12 also being charged with involuntary manslaughter. Both Baldwin and Gutierrez-Reed could face a sentence of multiple years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Speaker of the House, Evan McCarthy ended proxy voting today, tweeting, tweeting, no more proxy voting. Effective immediately, members of Congress have to show up to work if they want their vote to count. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi created proxy voting in May of 2020 to allow for Congress to continue working under the COVID-19 pandemic protocols, Fox News reports. The move to end proxy voting was one of McCarthy's goals ahead of the new Congress. Last month, McCarthy said the Senate has managed to maintain in-person floor voting for the entirety of the past two years, with a much older population and a 50-50 makeup, no less. From the get-go, we warned that proxy voting would be misuse as a means of convenience rather than as a precaution for health, and it has been by members of both parties.
Starting point is 00:11:18 And that'll do it for today's episode. Thanks so much for joining us on today's edition of the Daily Signal Top News. If you haven't gotten a chance, be sure to check out our morning show right here in this podcast feed, where we interview lawmakers, experts, and leading conservative voices. Join us tomorrow morning for the Daily Signal interview edition. I will be sitting down with Reverend Dean Nelson to discuss the March for Life, which of course is happening tomorrow right here in Washington, D.C. We will be covering the March extensively, so make sure you check out our Instagram,
Starting point is 00:11:50 page, our Twitter feed, and also our website for articles relating to the March. Also, make sure to take just a moment to subscribe to The Daily Signal wherever you like to listen to your podcast. We love hearing your feedback, seeing those reviews come in. It really helps us to know what you're enjoying, what you want to see more of, and also just to spread the word to more listeners. Thanks again for listening. Have a great night.
Starting point is 00:12:15 And we'll be back with you all tomorrow morning. The Daily Signal podcast is brought to you by more than that. half a million members of the Heritage Foundation. Executive producers are Rob Luey and Kate Trinko. Producers are Virginia Allen and Samantha Asheras. Sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geinney, and John Pop. To learn more, please visit DailySignal.com.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.