The DeVory Darkins Show - SCOTUS hands Trump MAJOR LEGAL WIN Bondi DUMBFOUNDED by Epstein questions

Episode Date: July 10, 2025

BREAKING NEWS SCOTUS just handed President Trump a MAJOR LEGAL WIN. Pam Bondi left DUMBFOUND after the media continues to press her for answer about Epstein Client list. And Democrats continue to condemn the violence against ICE officers.EPISODE SPONSOR:For FREE, unbiased Medicare guidance, Contact our sponsor Chapter https://askchapter.org/devory or call [phone]. FOLLOW ME:https://www.twitter.com/devorydarkinshttps://www.instagram.com/devorydarkinshttps://www.rumble.com/c/devorydarkinshttps://devory.wtf.tvBUY ME A COFFEE:https://buymeacoffee.com/devorydarkinsSHOP OUR MERCH STORE:https://store.devorydarkins.comBUSINESS INQUIRIES:[e-mail]

So in breaking news, the Supreme Court just handed President Trump another major legal win as they struck down another lower court judge's injunction. Also, the Jeffrey Epstein debacle is continuing to accelerate. You've got to see what Pam Bonnie had to say about that today. And more violence against ICE agents, we have an update for you. We're going to show you what both sides are saying and then give you the bottom line. In breaking moments ago, the Supreme Court with the decision. that will allow the Trump administration to move ahead with their plans to cut the federal workforce, at least for now.

This right now is a order from the Supreme Court essentially saying that a San Francisco judge who put a stop to the Trump administration from cutting several federal agencies. They're saying that the Trump administration, in fact, right now can continue forward as the case plays out on its merits. So essentially back in May, several different agencies sued. They said that the Trump administration wanted to make cuts at the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, HUD, Justice, Labor, State Treasury, and Transportation, pretty much all of them. Now the Supreme Court is giving the Trump administration victory some almost six months into the president's second term here, saying that they can go forward with these reductions in forces. You may remember that this was part of the Doge effort when Elon Musk was still hanging out around the White House.

But President Trump today, Martha, during the cabinet meeting, said that some of those Doge moves made sense were important. And this was a campaign promise and a promise really of this presidency to cut some of these federal agencies. And now this administration can feel vindicated from the Supreme Court as they move forward and make some of these cuts, Martha. So the story is not necessarily that the Supreme Court has ruled. in favor President Trump once again, and of course, they're doubling down on the recent ruling of universal injunctions, which is what this lower court's ruling was all about. The story is what Charlie Kirk and others have already pointed out, was another rebuke of Justice Jackson, and this time it didn't come from a conservative justice.

It came from Justice Sotomayor. Pay attention to what she writes here. She says, I agree with Justice Jackson that the president cannot restructure federal agencies in a matter inconsistent with congressional mandates. However, in this ruling, the relevant executive order directs agencies to plan we organizations and reductions in force consistent with applicable law. In other words, what? Due to the fact that this was an eight to one ruling, the one being Justice Jackson, she is pointing out to her colleague, to the person she is aligned with from a political point of view, that she doesn't even know what she's talking about.

Just a couple of quick questions for you with regard to whether or not this comes from the Supreme Court's decision that one judge can not overrule a presidential agenda item. And secondly, what is the impact on whether or not the executive branch, the President of the United States, can cut funding that Congress has approved for these agencies prior? So I'm going to take the first one first because I know the answer to that much better. The Supreme Court did come down, as you mentioned, with an opinion recently before they did break for their summer recess, albeit they're still working, and said that nationwide injunctions, which were these nationwide pauses, those no longer can go to the level where they did before were a judge in San Francisco can change a policy for someone that's living in Boston, Massachusetts. So likely this is something that plays into that because this was a federal judge in San Francisco that said that the Trump administration cannot, fulfill this executive order, which affected people that worked at all these

federal, different federal agencies. Okay, so let's just circle back to be thorough and make sure you guys have the full picture here. So President Trump issues an executive order and directs his federal agencies to plan to reorganize and reduce their workforce and to make sure they do it in accordance with applicable law that clearly was legislated by who? Congress. So Justice Jackson issuing her dissent in saying, well, I don't agree with this because the president is not allowed to restructure federal agencies in a matter inconsistent with congressional mandates.

But that's not what he did. And the fact that her colleague has to remind her of that, I mean, it just shows you that Justice Jackson is not really doing a good job of proving that she deserves to be there. It's not for me or you or anybody to say that she's not qualified and she doesn't deserve to be there. We know why she's there. And the best way to judge her is on results. The best way to judge her is to look at the opinions that she delivers, her dissents, her record. Judge her on that. And that will tell the story historically and whether or not she really deserve to be a justice.

The second part, I don't want to give the wrong answer. I'm not 100% sure. I'm still reading through this Supreme Court opinion. We didn't expect this to come out today or I should call it a. Supreme Court order, rather. But certainly, Martha, this is something that the Trump administration is going to tout. They've been looking to make cuts in these agencies. And really, things have been on pause for this Justice Department and this administration in many ways because they've been tied up with these lower courts, with the district courts, with the circuit courts,

and then the Supreme Court delivered them that gift just a couple of weeks ago and said that these nationwide injunctions in many cases must not go forward. Yeah. Now, for the people who watch my show, it is so important to pay attention to what's happening in our country from a legal point of view. Remember, it was just a week ago that the Justice Department announced $15 billion worth of fraud that is taking place in Medicare. This is why we are partnered with today's sponsor, Chapter. We're talking about unbiased, independent Medicare advisors that only has one mission in life to help you find the right plan that fits your needs. So it doesn't matter. whether it's your parents or grandparents or you are the person who's seeking to get on Medicare. It's no question that is complicated and confusing. And then when you hear an announcement like this from the Justice Department, it can almost leave you feeling defeated. So all you have to do is call them at 323, 431, 5200, or hit the link in the description below.

I'm telling you this is a call that is worth your time. You deserve it. You've been paying into this program and it could save you thousands of dollars. Bottom line, the Supreme Court is on vacation, and they felt the need to issue this order. That's number one. Number two, they doubled down on the fact that they are not going to allow universal injunctions to continue to happen. And that leads us to number three, which is our next story. As soon as President Trump signed the one big, beautiful bill, what did a lower court judge do?

Issued a universal injunction blocking the administration from defunding Planned Parenthood. Take a listen. A federal judge temporarily blocked the one-year funding freeze, which came down as a provision in President Trump's spending package. Planned Parenthood called the provision a backdoor abortion ban, warning that the loss of funds could force 200 clinics nationwide to close. The law doesn't name Planned Parenthood specifically, but it does ban federal funding for health clinics that also provide abortions. Okay, so I'm sure you guys have heard this statement, by their fruits, you shall know them. What does that mean? It's what I always say in almost every single episode.

Just look at the results. Judge people based on their results. And when it comes to these lower court judges, the results continue to show that they're not issuing these rulings because they really believe in the Constitution. They're issuing these rulings from a political point of view. And they're doing it by getting wrapped up in this tribalism that is continuing to plague our country. Because what's happening is people are blinded from common sense. thinking. Now, if this judge bothered to read the Supreme Court's ruling recently and bothered to hear

from the government themselves, there would have been no reason to issue this type of injunction. What's going on here? I wish I knew on what grounds, but I have to get to the end of the story. Okay. The end of the story is that she will be summarily reversed today by the judge. The judge by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. This federal judge in Boston, without hearing from the government, without giving the government even an opportunity to file documents, entered an order restraining Bobby Kennedy and the Department of Health and Human Services

from the cutbacks ordered by Congress, and she didn't give any reasons for it. So she clearly will be reversed by the appellate court. Shouldn't even state any reasons why she was, why she was doing it. It's really a head scratcher. Yeah, absolutely it's a head scratcher. But good news for President Trump, he got another

major legal win from the Supreme Court today, and the appeals court in regards to Planned Parenthood who'll get another win. And if, for whatever reason, the appeals court wants to act funny, we already know how the Supreme Court is going to rule. But I guess we shouldn't factor in Justice Jackson

because she'll find some off-the-wall reason in order to issue her dissent. Now, let's go to our next story, which is also a head scratcher. We're still talking about Jeffrey Epstein and the infamous Epstein client list. And at this point, who cares about the list? Okay, I told you guys, my concern is more of the victims. But the problem here and the real story is when you overpromise and you underdeliver

and you go on Fox News a thousand times and you act as if, hey, this Epstein client list is a bombshell and you don't deliver, yeah, the story is not going to go away. So, of course, during the cabinet meeting today that President Trump hosted, the media couldn't help themselves. They had to ask, and President Trump didn't like it. Take a look. Your memo and release yesterday in Jeffrey Epstein, it left some lingering mysteries. One of the biggest ones is whether he ever worked for a American or foreign intelligence agency, the former Labor Secretary who was Miami U.S. attorney Alex Costa. He allegedly said that he did work for intelligence agency.

agency. So could you resolve whether or not he did? And also, could you say why there was a minute missing from the jailhouse tape on the name of the Senate? Yeah, sure. If I can, could I just enter a for a little second? Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy's been talked about for years. You're asking, we have Texas, we have this, we have all of the things. And are people still talking about this guy, this creep? That is unbelievable. Do you want to waste the time and do you feel like answer i i don't mind answering i mean i can't believe you're asking a question on epstein at a time like this where we're having some of the greatest success and and also tragedy with what happened in texas it just seems uh like a desecration but you go ahead sure all right now before we move even

further if you guys have been getting value from our channel please like share and subscribe if you want to support us further go to the link in the description below buy us a cup of coffee or shop our merch store. We got multiple new shirt designs. We got I support ice. We got MAGA pack. And we also have alligator alcatraz. And all of them, you can get with a matching coffee mug as well. And don't forget to follow us on Spotify and Apple podcast. All right. So let's just pause here. President Trump is frustrated. And I can understand his point of view on why. You have to understand what he's accomplished over the past few weeks, right? Just think about all of the accomplishments here. And now we're talking about Jeffrey Epstein, but he shouldn't be mad at the

media. He should be mad at Pam Bondi. She could have nipped this story in the butt on day one and told the media straight up, hey, we have nothing to release when it comes to Epstein. We don't even know if there's anything to release. But they set the expectation that there was going to be information to release. Alina Haba made it sound like there was going to be a huge bombshell. So when they get in there, like I said yesterday, and they say there is nothing, people are not just going to walk away from that. And that's the reality. And I said it on X. You can't fight existing reality. But here's what she had to say. Take a listen. First, to back up on that, in February, I did an interview on Fox, and it's been getting a lot of attention because I said, I was asked a question about the client

list. And my response was, it's sitting on my desk to be reviewed, meaning the file along with the JFK, MLK files as well. That's what I meant by that. Also, to the tens of thousands of video, they turned out to be child porn downloaded by that disgusting Jeffrey Epstein. Child porn is what they were. Never going to be released, never going to see the lighted day. To him being an agent, I have no knowledge about that. We can get back to you on that. And the minute missing from the video, we release the video showing definitively, The video was not conclusive, but the evidence prior to it was showing he committed suicide. And what was on that, there was a minute that was off the counter.

And what we learned from Bureau of Prisons was every year, every night. They redo that video. It's old from like 1999. So every night the video is reset, and every night should have the same minute missing. So we're looking for that video to release that as well, showing that a minute is made. missing every night. And that's it on Epstein. Okay. So, I mean, she thinks people are stupid, right? I mean, not in a millionaire is what I ever buy that explanation about the minute disappearing from the videotape. If a minute is going to be missing from the videotape, then why release the videotape,

knowing that people are already skeptical? What purpose will that actually serve? In fact, it will just do more damage to your credibility. Why not just release the minute? What are you having to clean up in the minute. Here's another question. Let's say we go with what they're saying. There's nothing there. The case is closed. There is no additional criminals, whatever. Then why is his wife still in prison? That's number one. And then number two, you have Elon Musk saying this. Bannon is in the Epstein files. Now, I have a question for Elon Musk, too. Have you seen the files yourself? Because if you're going to continue to make claims like that on X, but you haven't seen the files, then why would you say that if you don't really know? So there's a lot of noise around the files, and the only person we should be pointing fingers at in blaming is Pam Bondi.

She's the Department of Justice. She is the Attorney General, and she had an opportunity to nip this in the butt as soon as she was sworn in, and she didn't do it. I think we're looking at this client list is joining the very long, the very long litany of infamous lists in American politics that people aren't willing to show, right? Look, I think the Epstein thing is the Swiss Army knife of conspiracy theories. You can use it for anything you want. Trump used it to kind of generate to energize the base. Patel, Bondi, and Bongino used it to kind of get their current jobs. And now Musk is seeking to turn it back on all of them in his quest for vengeance.

So, I mean, I don't think the Epstein conspiracy case. Cultural phenomenon is going anywhere because, frankly, too many people benefit from it being around. Okay. So here is the brutal reality for the right. Unfortunately, the Epstein case is a debacle. It's an explosion that is definitely going to split the party in some regard. That doesn't mean President Trump is over. It doesn't mean we're going to lose the midterms. In fact, this is not on people's priority list, right? Paying bills, surviving, trying to make sure they're living in a community that's safer, they're kids, that's at the top of the list. I know that. But politically, this is not good. This is poison. And the problem is the people who are currently in charge, they did spend time acknowledging that

there was a cover-up, that there was more to this story. And when it comes to people on the right, unlike people on the left, you can't just feed us this story and not deliver and think we're not going to say anything. That is the reality. And that takes us to our next story. which is also reality, and that as Democrats continue to call for violence against ICE agents. You heard me correctly. It is being reported out of San Antonio, Texas, a city council candidate went on to social media and basically encouraged someone to take out ICE agents in Los Angeles. And I want to show you this.

This was in San Antonio, Texas, where a challenger for a district one council called for the killing of ice agents in Los Angeles. You won't even believe this. This is Matthew Guana. and he posted the comment here on X in response to DHS agents arresting illegals in L.A. He says, and they will get shot by the Los Angeles public. I want to see a few dead ICE agents, Los Angeles. Don't let me down. Can you believe that?

So Assistant Secretary of Department of Homeland Security, Trisha McLaughlin, reposted the comment here on X side, writing this. San Antonio City Council candidate calls for the killing of ICE law enforcement officers in Los Angeles. Depraved. We'll see you soon. There he is right there. Meantime, Axios is reporting that town halls and one-on-one meetings, constituents, they want lawmakers to break the law.

They want them to get tough. They want them to fight dirty and not be afraid to get hurt. In fact, they want them to get shot for the anti-Trump resistance. They want blood, is what they're saying. Now, imagine the words that are continuing to be used as the media reports on these stories, the language that's being used on social media, the leaders themselves, how they refuse to condemn it, it's only a matter of time. And this is almost like video games.

If you go back 20 years ago, we were sounding the alarm on the violence inside video games. Now imagine the video games today. Okay? I mean, we can go on with the analogies. It's like, go back to the year 2000 when it came to music videos. Oh, she's showing too much. Oh, that's nothing compared to today. Right.

So if we don't nip this in the butt now, it will continue to escalate, especially when you have people in charge of major cities like this guy saying things like this. Take a look. You know, again, it's unconscionable at a time in which so many working people and poor people need government to show up for them that this administration, the Trump administration, has caused so much consternation and division. Look, we are welcoming city ordinance. Our local police department will not ever. cooperate with ice yeah so this is another example what democrats usually do when they disagree with something either they move for censorship against you right they look to get you banned or

canceled number two they gaslight you and act like what you're saying has no credibility whatsoever it doesn't matter or three they disengage entirely and they ghost you and pretty much this mayor's committing malpractice we already know his approval rating is terrible it's in the low digits right? Single digits. But he's basically saying that if an illegal alien commits a crime and their police officers find that person and convict them, they're not going to hand them over to I. So you want this convicted criminal illegal alien to stay in your city and to continue to cause havoc to your citizens, the black people you say you care about since he wants to make everything about race. He has a funny way of proving that. I've been consistent on this for sanctuary

cities, which I do think serve a useful purpose, they need to cooperate with ICE to hand over people who have been convicted of something. I'm not talking about crossing the border as something that is convictable. I'm saying that if you commit a crime once you are on U.S. soil, you should be turned over to ICE. And I think that's an easy exchange. And that's what people voted for in November. And you would have a much stronger case against the overreach that we're seeing in terms of what ICE is doing now that is not commensurate with what the American public wants. They didn't vote for people to show up at home depots. They didn't vote for people to show up at immigration courts. They didn't vote for the fact that there's new data out from Cato that 65% of the people that

ICE has taken into custody have had no convictions. Yeah, so Jessica, she misses out on two important points that just shows me she's blinded from the truth. Number one, the continuous encouragement of violence against ICE officials. She has nothing to say about that because it's sanctuary city policies that is also encouraging the behavior, which also leads me to point. number two that she misses. The root cause of our issues is not that ICE is showing up at Home Depot and deporting people. Who happened to be here unlawfully, might I add? The issue is that Sanctuary City policies prevent local law enforcement from working with ICE officials. So they got to do something. They got to go somewhere. They got to deport some people. So if you're going to make it

hard for ICE to do their job, don't be mad when they shift their priorities. That's what I have to say about that. Do you have any Democratic colleagues? I know that's a House Democrat that said that, but anyone in the Senate pushing back and saying this is not the way to go, guys? I would hope that that is just a false story that Axios is putting out there, that there was actually not an elected leader that would actually say that. Unfortunately, I believe it probably is true. And no, I have not heard one person condemning that. That enough, Dana, should scare the living daylight This is why the American people chose to go with President Trump and the Republican Party because they're tired of this lawlessness. They're tired of this criminal activity that's continuing to take place.

They're tired of the pandering to illegals to criminal activities that the Democrat Party is leaning into. This woke DEI, you know, do what feels right, forget about law and order, defund the police mentality that the Democrat Party has fed into their base. The American people want a country that they can walk down the streets and feel safe. that's what President Trump is delivering for the American people. And yet the Democrat Party is pushing back on it. And these are the same people they allowed to come across our southern border. What did they think was going to happen? They own this.

This is their fault. This is their responsibility. Senator, thank you for your time. And just to be clear, I just want to be clear. I mean, Axios put that out there yesterday. There was no other pushback. And we had it on the five as well. So they're not making it up.

No, I know. But I would hope they are, but I believe they're right. It just is sickening that any Democrat leader would ever say that. But in this current political climate, even if they did say it, what is Congress really going to do at this point? Because they have shown an inability to hold their members accountable. In fact, majority of the crimes that are happening in the government happen in Congress and they go without getting convicted, as we know it's all a cover-up. And that's why people believe it's a uniparty. I mean, that's just a reality.

Now, here is an update on the 10 suspects who tried to attack a detention facility yesterday. today in Texas and the fact that the DOJ has already announced charges against them. Take a look. Hey, Bill, let's get first to the ambush in Alvaredo, Texas, which appears to be the most coordinated of all the recent attacks on ICE and Border Patrol agents and facilities. That attack began with at least 10 people, all dressed in what investigators describe as black military-style clothing, shooting fireworks at the Prairie Detention Center. Around 10 minutes later, one or two of them broke up. off from the main group and began spray painting the facility and vehicles parked there with

words like traitor and other slogans. A police officer arrived responding to a 911 call and at that point one of the group who apparently hidden in trees near the facility opened fire hitting the officer in the neck while another attacker also across the street fired dozens of rounds at officers from the facility. and ambush with the intent to kill ICE corrections officers. Make no mistake, this was not a so-called peaceful protest. It was indeed an ambush. Ten people have now been charged with attempted murder.

As well as weapons and body armor, police also discovered anarchist literature and flyers in one of the vehicles used by the attackers and a Faraday bag, a type of bag that blocks phone signals, which is commonly used by criminals to prevent law enforcement tracking their locations. Needless to say, these are amateurs, but they have elite equipment that it's allowed them to carry out these attacks against federal authorities. And why? It's because they're being fed propaganda all day long from not only the mainstream media, but their elected leaders. And for some reason,

the left and mainstream media continues to refuse to condemn this type of behavior. And that, in my opinion is the disgusting part about all this. You're always going to have criminals. You're always going to have people who think they're above the law and they're going to get away with doing stuff like this. But there's no excuse on why from a political standpoint, from a humanity standpoint, from an American citizen standpoint, that are elected leaders on both sides of the aisle from the top down are not unanimously condemning this type of behavior. That just shows you how far gone we are politically, how divided we are. And this is only heading to more destruction.

It really is. And people are going to get hurt. So let's get your guys' opinion and thoughts in the comments section below to multitude of these stories. The Supreme Court handing President Trump another win. He's allowed to proceed with laying off federal workers. Also, what did you think of Pam Bondi's response in the way the administration's been handling? The Jeffrey Epstein debacle. and then the violence that's continuing to increase against ICE officials, why won't Democrats just condemn it?

Let me know your thoughts about everything we discussed in this video in the comment section below. Now, even though I said in this video that Elon Musk is trying to capitalize on the Jeffrey Epstein debacle, he still has issues because CNN published a poll yesterday about his America party and it's not good. So if you miss out on that and more stories from yesterday, all you have to do is click on that video because it's coming up right now. You know,