The Glenn Beck Program - Ep 255 | Will Violent Activists Go to Jail? DOJ’s Harmeet Dhillon UNLEASHED | The Glenn Beck Podcast        

Episode Date: April 26, 2025

Is there really a “bloodbath” in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice? Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights at the DOJ, joins Glenn to discuss firebombing at Christian churches, “violence” against free speech, and the fate of the innocent people persecuted under the Biden administration. Harmeet reveals how the FACE Act doesn’t just protect abortion centers but pro-life pregnancy centers as well, says it’s time for violent activists to be prosecuted, and explains why “you don’t have to sue everybody.” Then, she and Glenn break down anti-Semitism on college campuses, her focus on the Second Amendment, and her advice to Congress to prevent a repeat of COVID-19 government tyranny.         GLENN’S SPONSOR      American Financing   American Financing can show you how to put your hard-earned equity to work and get you out of debt. Dial 800-906-2440, or visit https://www.americanfinancing.net.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

And now, a Blaze Media podcast. Hello, America. You know we've been fighting every single day. We push back against the lies, the censorship, the nonsense of the mainstream media that they're trying to feed you. We work tirelessly to bring you the unfiltered truth because you deserve it. But to keep this fight going, we need you. Right now, would you take a moment and rate and review the Glenn Beck podcast? Give us five stars and lead a comment because every single review helps us break through Big Tech's algorithm.

rhythm to reach more Americans who need to hear the truth. This isn't a podcast. This is a movement, and you're part of it, a big part of it. So if you believe in what we're doing, you want more people to wake up. Help us push this podcast to the top. Rate, review, share. Together, we'll make a difference. And thanks for standing with us. Now let's get to work. My next guest, apparently responsible for a bloodbath in the civil rights division of the DOJ. She says not so much. The ACLU says she has a long record of working to restrict voting rights, transgender rights, and abortion access. No. The NWACP calls her a grave threat to democracy.

I don't even know who she is, and I love her already, right? She's the woman who will wrestle back that one piece of the DOJ from the clutches of wokenness and that has the deep state quaking in its boots. Welcome to the nationally recognized civil rights and constitutional law attorney, toughest nails, good friend of the program. The new assisted Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice. If you think the DOJ isn't doing anything yet, let me introduce you to my friend, Harmeet Dillon.

I am thrilled to have you on. You are, you're the perfect person at the DOJ for civil rights because you're a machine. And you have your toughest nails. And I'm thrilled that this is a position. you're in. For anybody who doesn't know, what is the Office of Civil Rights at the DOJ? What is it supposed to do? Well, it's a very important part of the Civil Rights movement in the sense that out of the civil rights movement came this enforcement arm to enforce all of the federal civil rights laws.

So, you know, dating back to desegregation, the Civil Rights Division was in charge of enforcing those laws that desegregated the South and other areas. We're also in charge of making sure that citizens aren't unduly the subject of police brutality or violence or illegal police practices. We protect veterans' rights. We enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act. We enforce the federal civil rights laws relating to housing and employment and anti-discrimination and education. And importantly, we also enforce federal voting statutes, Help America Vote Act, NBRA, and the Voting Rights Act. And so it's a lot. It's a huge portfolio.

And within that, there's so many different emphases in ways that the Department of Justice can make lives better for American citizens or make lives miserable for a few disparate people. So I've heard, since you got on, it was described by an official at the senior attorney said that it was a bloodbath that's happening now at the DOJ. under you. What do they mean by that? Well, I mean, it's a colorful rhetoric, and none of these people had the guts to attach their names to these colorful quotes. But what people in the private sector would call a severance package proposal offered to federal government officials almost throughout the entire federal government, many people in the civil rights division have chosen to take that generous severance package, which pays them for several months while they do nothing.

I mean, I wish someone would pay me several months to do nothing, but I actually have never had that opportunity. No one has been fired by me since I came for, this is like my 15th day on the job, but what we have made very clear last week in memos to each of the 11 sections in the civil rights division is that our priorities under President Trump are going to be somewhat different than they were under President Biden. And we start with the statutory basis because that's where you always start

as a lawyer and the Constitution. And then we tell them, these are the president's priorities. This is what we will be focusing on. You know, govern yourself accordingly. And on mass, dozens and now over 100 attorneys decided that they'd rather not do what their job requires them to do.

And I think that's fine because we don't want people in the federal. government who feel like it's their pet project to go persecute, you know, police departments based on statistical evidence or persecute people praying outside abortion facilities instead of doing violence. That's not the job here. The job here is to enforce the federal civil rights laws, not woke ideology. And so, you know, that's fine. We need to replace those people because I have a very robust affirmative civil rights agenda that I think many Americans will be pleased with. I have to tell you, we saw each other earlier this week, and I, you know, I made it very clear.

I'm very concerned that the Department of Justice and the FBI don't seem to be moving very rapidly on some things where people need to go. If there's evidence, they committed a crime, I don't care what party they're in. They need to be prosecuted, heard by a jury of their peers, and if they're found guilty, go to jail. And I don't see a lot of the fast action. And then you just kind of smiled at me and said, well, I've been on the job for about 15 days. Here's what I did just this week. Let's go through some of the things that you're doing. Let's start with the anti-Christian persecution that you are going after now.

Right. Absolutely. Well, you know, the president signed an executive order targeting anti-Christian bias in federal agencies. And that tallies with some of our civil. rights agenda, which is to protect the rights of people of faith throughout the United States, whether they're in federal agencies or not, and some of the most egregious violations are occurring in the states. Everyone is familiar with what happened during COVID, and our federal government stood by while Christians and everybody of faith, including my faith and others were persecuted and not

allowed to pray. So now what the federal government is doing, and we convened a meeting of all, invited all the cabinet officials, and many of them came and told tales. of persecution happening in the ranks of the federal government. For example, Department of Defense, dismissing thousands of brave soldiers for refusing to take a vaccine shot that was not necessary for them in their opinion and violated their religious principles.

Now, Pete Higgseth has invited those folks back, most of them if they want, I think that's a great step. But the job in this project is to investigate what happened, write it, and make sure it never happens again. and we stop the systematic bias against people of faith, in this case Christians. We're also going after the notorious anti-Semitic violence and discrimination happening throughout the United States, but specifically on American College campuses. The most elite campuses in the United States are the places where the most egregious violations are occurring.

And this is squarely within the purview of the Civil Rights Division to go after. you and I discussed the Face Act, which is a law that was passed many years ago that is supposed to protect people going into abortion facilities from violence. The only violence being done in recent years is to the law and to the rights of speech and a prayer of people of faith who want to pray, which is in their entire First Amendment right outside abortion facilities. those Americans, elderly and young Americans, have been arrested and persecuted by the Biden DOJ. And so one of the first things that was done under the new administration was to dismiss multiple cases. Cases in Tennessee, Pennsylvania, and Ohio have been dismissed. We are not going to be pursuing these FAS Act cases other than in extraordinary circumstances involving death, serious bodily harm, or extreme property damage, and none of the recent cases have any of those fact patterns.

Well, hang on just saying. Instead, the Department of... Can you go, can you use the FACE Act to get the people that are firebombing or doing harm on the other side? Well, I was going to get to that, which is that facilities involving prenatal care are protected by the FACE Act. And so we will be aggressively going after, there were more than 200 incidents in the last few years of those kinds. facilities where people were counseled about their choices, about adoption, about keeping the baby, those facilities have been violently attacked by activists with no action by law enforcement, federal or state. We will be going after those cases because every woman has a right to go into

those facilities and get fair, open, and even, in some cases, religiously inflected advice about their choices with respect to the baby that they are growing in their bodies. I know that church after church after church has been destroyed and firebombed all over the country, and those people never seem to go to jail. Nobody seems to notice a pattern there. That's not true, guys. So, you know, again, we actually have won prosecutions of firebombings of churches in recent weeks in the Civil Rights Division. Our criminal section has done a tremendous job going after that.

And it's right there on our website. And I encourage people. Okay. So it's changing now. But yeah, it's changing now. It is changing now. And I have to be fair, whenever a house of worship in the United States has been attacked, it has generally been the policy of the civil rights division,

even in Democrat administrations, to prosecute that. So that has kind of been a constant. But we promise to put an additional effort on that important. important area. I guess not just Christians. It is all people of faith are under attack here in the United States. If somebody's going into a mosque, I feel exactly the same way. I mean, you don't go after religion here in America. Exactly. Exactly. So that is not even a controversial thing here. We'll be continuing to do that aggressively. But, you know, there's so many ways you can change an emphasis. So for example, yesterday the president signed a very important. Some might find it boring because

it uses statistics. It said we're not going to be using disparate impact analysis anymore in our law enforcement. And what that means for Americans is it is rolling back a very discredited and should be overruled on line of cases that says that a company can be sued or a police department can be sued just for policies that are facially neutral, but allegedly have a disparate impact on people of certain backgrounds. So for example, if there's a police department and there's a neutral test involving math or involving something basic and 2% fewer African Americans pass that test than white Americans lawsuit time by the Civil Rights Division, we're not doing, we're not in that business anymore pursuant to the executive order. Wasn't that, I mean, that was important when,

you know, you had poll taxes or you had tests where, you know, you, an African American back in the 1800s, even the 18 or 1920s would walk into a place down south and they'd have to say, you know, oh, you just have to answer a few questions. How many windows are in the White House on the first floor? That kind of stuff. But when it is given to everyone and it is a requirement, I mean, I think it's insane that we're looking at somebody's background when they're a, when they're in charge of a flight center, you know, we have to have standards. Well, you're absolutely correct. And I mean, this disparate impact analysis is actually much more recent vintage than the egregious examples that you mentioned where we had to have a

civil rights act in this country because we had an industry of discrimination. Let's not sugarcoat it, but it's 2025 today. And the idea that some police department or some big employer can be sued because of statistics which can be manipulated is ludicrous and it is unfurricular. And it is unfurricular. fair. So where an employer or a police department or a fire department actively discriminates against someone on the basis of their race, we'll be taking action on that kind of case, not passive statistical analysis. So when you look at things that have been done where it's not, it's not okay not to be racist. You have to be anti-racist, which flips the entire thing upside down. How prevalent is that in our government?

And what are we doing to solve those things? Well, I mean, I'm new to examining government websites. It's not my favorite topic, but I will tell you that if you call the government sponsored education,

I'll give you one example. I was looking at the UC Berkeley website the other day. To become a graduate applicant in chemistry, you have to list out in your personal statement, five different ways you have exhibited your allyship towards oppressed people. Oh my gosh.

I'm not sure what that has to do with chemistry. I mean, that's a rhetorical question. That's got nothing to do with chemistry. And why should you be compelled to take particular political viewpoints to get a chemistry graduate degree? That is from a government-sponsored entity. That is absurd and unconstitutional, in my opinion, and illegal. and we will be rooting out that kind of discrimination and compelled speech wherever we find it.

You know, everybody is, you know, Biden took great pains to hide it. A lot of agencies, they changed the names of things, went into hiding. I mean, when you have as much time as they have and the resources that they were stealing, you know, you can hide in a million different things. How confident are you that we could in four years? years, God forbid, things go back. You can take some of these things and build systems where they can't be infiltrated again or that we get the bad guys. Right now, the average American is still finding it really difficult to pay expenses every month. In most cases, there's nothing left

over to cover any extras. Most aren't getting a big raise. With expenses being up so high, it can be really hard to manage without grabbing your credit cards. A lot of people are doing that. Listen, if you're a homeowner and you're frustrated with that endless cycle that only produces more debt month after month, take 10 minutes today. Call American financing. If you're constantly carrying a credit card balance each and every month, especially with the interest rates in the 20s or even 30s, American financing can show you how to put your hard-earned equity to work and get out of that debt so you can get out from behind the eight ball. Their salary-based mortgage consultants are saving customers an average of $800 a month. The average in our audience, people that watch me or listen to me,

They're saving about $835 every single month. That could be you. Get started today. You may not have to make next month mortgage payment either. There are no upfront fees. Cost you nothing to find out how much you could be saving every month. Just call American financing at 800-906-2440, 800-906-2440. Americanfinancing.net.

Well, okay, I have currently, you know, some 200-ish attorneys in the Civil Rights Division. There are thousands of institutions of higher learning in the United States, like 6,000 of them. I've sent out letters to the top ones in the United States asking for some information about how they change their practices after the landmark case against Harvard students for fair admissions. And responses are rolling in conversations are happening. But to eradicate it the way that you just described, we need sufficient resources to do that. Because, yes, the people who have been doing it are both very clever and well-funded. And they've also been doing it for a very long time. in scale.

They're very dedicated to it. George Soros and many other liberal and data funders have promulgated hundreds if not thousands of pseudo-nonprofits whose job it has been to borrow into every level. I mean, every pension fund

of a public pension fund in the United States for retirement agencies, for government workers, CalPERS in California, they can't make investments that don't comply with these DEI agenda. So every retiree is subject to

some form of this problem, which in turn affects every company in the United States that's publicly traded, many privately traded as well. And so it's a huge problem, and we can't tackle it without sufficient resources. What are those resources you need? I mean, you need more lawyers, investigators, and commitment to do the work. And you need the people in the United States identifying these things for us. We can only have so many eyes and ears and hours in the day. Every one of my people who's joined me in the Civil Rights Division in the front office. We're working long hours. Every few minutes I'm flagging a project.

Oh, my God, look at this, look at that. What is happening here? Put an attorney working on it. We're going to run out of attorneys to work on these things at some point. So, you know, hopefully we'll solve some of these problems with some big cases. The effort that is going on against the anti-Semitism at some of the Ivy League institutions and other big institutions open investigation at UCLA. These are going to have a big impact.

You don't have to sue everybody. You have to sue and make some cases stick. And for all the people who are impatient, I understand people are impatient, you can't build a bulletproof case against people who have been doing bad for decades in two weeks. It's not going to happen and the case won't stick. So I think, you know, as we talked, you know, I said, what is happening at the DOJ? And you said, a lot of this is happening at DOJ. Nobody's talking about it.

That's why I wanted to make sure that people heard. I don't think it's that you haven't put anybody in jail. And I don't mean you. but, you know, we haven't seen it. It's that people are not aware of what is going on behind the scenes. You know, when the whole thing with Epstein happened with Pam Bondi, I said, wait, let's tap the brakes here. Yeah, that pisses me off that it went out that way.

However, I'm not sure that Pam isn't saying, wait, do you want satisfaction or do you want people to go to jail? Because you can't, you have to be. a case before you lay everything out in front of the American people. And I want people to go to jail. I think what people just want to know is that there is progress being, that they didn't vote for enough of all of this insanity, and then nothing is happening.

That's why I think you're so important. Well, thank you, Glenn. But, you know, all the people working in the government who left their comfortable, successful lives to come here to D.C., my voice is different because I'm suffering from the allergies over here. It's not pleasant. Not my favorite thing. However, we did it because we believe so deeply that this is a maybe last chance in the United States to turn this ship around.

It has been going in the wrong direction. And even prior Republican administrations, unfortunately, I haven't taken an axe to the edifice, weaponizing the government against the people for many years. And now we have a president dedicated to doing it. You see that happening? It is happening. I went over to meet with my good friend, Cash Patel, across the street for me in the FBI building yesterday. We had an excellent conversation about matters of common interest.

And I can tell you that he and his team are working extremely hard. But if people just on social media followed the social media accounts of the Department of Justice, the top officials, the FBI, they're making arrests, they're putting away criminals, they're bringing cases on a daily basis. And so just complaining because you're not seeing it in the format. want is kind of lazy, quite frankly. I think people need to go and find the information we're putting out regularly. So you said that we need resources, but we also need, we also need attorneys. How do you go about finding people who are the real deal and who are moles? and I mean, it's got to be really frustrating on not knowing who to trust.

How are you vetting people? Well, so look, it's an administrative challenge to come into a major agency and change course. The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, speaking very frankly, has been described by many people as, you know, sort of, oh, they'll never change. People spend their whole careers there doing one particular kind of litigation. suing the police, suing the police some more, suing employers. And part of it is their personal passion.

Okay? Well, this isn't the personal passion department here. It is the enforcement of the civil rights laws department. And so I will tell you there are many fine career lawyers at the Department of Justice, civil rights division. They don't have to agree with me. What they have to do is do the job that is assigned. And there are many who are doing that.

And there's some who looked at the memos I sent out saying, this is a new priority. And they're like, we're not doing that. We are doing this other thing, and I said that's not on offer anymore. There's no menu here. This is not McDonald's. You're going to have to do what's on offer here. And so what we now need to do once all the dust settles and people are off the books is we are looking at resumes of lawyers who want to do that work.

I don't care what their politics are. It is not relevant. I do care that they're willing to take direction and zealously enforce the civil rights of the United States. according to the priorities of this president. They're not surprising. They're literally on the internet and executive orders, and the statutes are there as well. And so I don't think it's going to be hard to be honest with those positions.

Aren't they also in the Bill of Rights? I mean, it's not like the president is saying, hey, we're going to ignore these rights. I mean, if your civil rights have been violated, the job of the Justice Department is to investigate it, find out if it's true and prosecute if it's it right doesn't matter who the president is first amendment i mean you know the new project i've got going in the civil rights division to the surprise of many people on both sides is the second amendment who's protecting the second amendment in the

federal government prior republican administrations haven't paid a lot of attention to affirmatively doing that but you know in the wake of clear guidance from the united states supreme court protecting our right to, you know, own and use firearms in most circumstances throughout the United States, city after city, state after state are eviscerating those rights. They're mocking the Supreme Court by passing laws that make it virtually impossible. Colorado just passed a law that is extremely onerous and imposes a financial burden on gun ownership. California is wink, wink, nudge, allowing you to apply for concealed carry in multiple places. And then they don't staff the departments that make the interviews dc i came here to dc i have firearm i'm a firearm's owner i

inquired about the process it's months before i can get an appointment with the chief of police or the police department to even apply to exercise my second amendment rights well i'm exercised about that i'm not happy about that and i might be doing something about that new york as a host of laws that are that are different in in upstate new york and different in new york and different in New York City, and they all violate the Constitution. So we will be working together to make this a focus of the Civil Rights Division, challenging state law that violates fundamental civil rights in the Civil Rights Division. You know, I was doing a story today on Washington State.

Washington State is, they've gone mad. They're insane. And they're doing a new Tesla tax because the Tesla's windfall profits need to be spent for good of the populace. I mean, it's like Marxist 101. But they also passed and signed into law, the governor, an emergency health act, that if there's another pandemic, the governor will consult with, quote, scientific experts and can impose whatever the scientific experts say on the population. And when I saw that, I thought, no, I would move from Washington State. That is, you, you've just lost all of your civil rights.

All of your civil rights. They've already done it once under COVID. Now they're codifying this. How does that fit in with you, what you guys do? Well, Glenn, I think I'm well known to your viewers and many others for the fact that during COVID, I filed more lawsuits than any other lawyer in the United States to challenge COVID restrictions. And I have told Congress, friends in Congress on multiple occasions, there's this one simple

trick that they can use to make sure this never happens again. And that is legislatively overruling a case dating back to the beginning of the 20th century called Jacobson v. Massachusetts. Jacobson versus Massachusetts is a case involving a smallpox vaccine mandate in Massachusetts. And that case has been used in the modern era in the last five years to strip all of us of our civil rights. So when I hear about that decision you just mentioned, the new law, it doesn't matter because federal law and federal judges have already given state and even clowns like L.A. County's health official who isn't even a doctor, the right to force 10 million people to stay in their homes, not get an education, not run their businesses. and not move about freely. That's outrageous, but Congress can fix that, and Congress should fix that.

And we should never again be under the thumb of this law that says that the state has police power to force you to take drugs. I don't think so. Employers are allowed under policy guidance to do that right now, too. We should change that. So are you happy with Congress, because I'm not real happy with Congress? You think their Congress is, I talked to the president on Wednesday, and I said, you know, when are you going to put the law down on Congress the hammer? And he's like, you know, they're doing a great job. Let's give him time. They've got to pass this big, beautiful bill.

And I got the sense he was really still kind of negotiating and, you know, trying to make things work for this big beautiful bill he's talking about. But I think Congress, I think the Republicans in Congress need to be shamed. I think he needs to take a big beautiful hammer to their head and say, get to work. What are you doing? Get to work. Because if they don't codify the things that he's put in, we're just going back to the way we were.

Look, I'm not here to shame anybody. I had a conversation with a member of Congress earlier today providing them with some information, and I think most members of Congress are really well-meaning. Well-meaning is not enough at this point in our time in this trajectory of where we are as a country. But you have to do math, right? I mean, there's a certain number of people there

and what they can get done realistically. I think it's something that's on the heads of our leadership. So are they working long enough hours, you know, are they prioritizing the right things? I'm not a legislator. I never sought to be one at the federal level. So I leave it to them. But any member of Congress can ask me what I think needs to be fixed with our civil rights laws. And I will happily offer my opinion on that as I've been doing for the last 30 plus years.

What's the one thing that you got into office and you were like, oh my gosh, I never thought I'd see this. Is there anything? There's a few. I never thought I'd see 50-year-old consent. decrees involving desegregation still being monitored by the United States Department of Justice. We dismissed one of those cases or filed the paperwork to dismiss the judge is sitting on it. What does that mean? What does that mean?

That means that a court, that that, that a court is monitoring or on paper monitoring desegregation in a southern state where the judge is gone, nobody is committing any discrimination that anybody's complaining about. and someone in the Department of Justice has it on their docket in my department to monitor this. And there's dozens of cases like that. So we're finding all these old cases and dismissing them. There are cases, statistical cases brought against police departments that shouldn't be there. We're dismissing those cases.

There's a 1978 case involving police practices that the Department of Justice is still monitoring. None of the cops are there. None of the supervisors are there. The judge isn't there. We're clinging to this case as part of our caseload. That's absurd. So these things are getting, we're figuring out. Some lawyers, pet project, nobody wanted to be the lawyer who is dismissing a desegregation case or discrimination case.

I'm happy to do it. I don't think it's just for the government to have its boot on the neck of a law-abiding law enforcement agency or school district. I think we should be encouraging good behavior by dissolving and dismissing those unnecessary burdens. What kind of burden was imposed on those people? Reporting, reporting, you know, worrying about running afoul of some requirements, some special restrictions, having to get permission for certain things that you shouldn't have to do. You know, these cases also occur in the voting rights area as well. The Republican National Committee was under a 30-year consent decree preventing them from getting involved in election day operations. For no good reason, the only time that case went away is when the judge passed away and we were able to.

to get another person to do that. So, you know, these, it becomes someone's pet project. And then they cling to it and they don't want to give it up. And that's unjust. That is, our government should be there to, you know, enforce the laws, call the balls and strikes, but not sort of have some weaponized agenda that lasts for decades.

I was shocked at the number of cases that we have against police departments based purely on tiny statistical differentials, 3%, 5%, you're bringing a case against police department because people are passing tests based on their racial characteristics at a 3% or a 5% differential.

I'm sorry, that's junk science. That doesn't barely even meet the margin of error, much less a case you go into court and handle. We have a department in my section that hasn't brought a case in court for years. They send letters to people. and, you know, demand responses. Like, there's no lawsuit there.

We're not doing that anymore in the Civil Rights Division. If there's an investigation, we're going to investigate. We're going to either take action or we're going to close the investigation. We aren't going to let investigations linger on, causing anxiety and stress for law-abiding people for years. It's just unjust to me. That was the thing that the Justice Department, I think, did, is they made the process, the punishment. They just let it linger. I mean, when the Justice Department has you in their sights and you know it, and they say,

we're coming for you. We're just, could you need to produce this and this? And, you know, we'll meet with you soon. Your whole life changes. Your whole life changes. And the process becomes the punishment. It does. It does.

And what government lawyers, I mean, well-meaning, I'm sure, don't understand is when that other person got that letter, they went and hired a lawyer. Yeah. They spent $10,000, $20,000, $50,000. And that lawyer keeps. billing every month as long as that investigation is going. And that's not a fault of the lawyer. That's how the system is. And the system is wrong. So we're going to stop that. You're either, we're going to look into it. If you're doing something wrong, you're going to fix it, or we're

going to stop harassing you. If you're a Christian, if you're a Muslim, if you're a Jew, I particularly think Jews are right in the chopping block and the firing line, especially in universities. What message do you have for them who feel like, uh, nobody's, I mean, this system is just crushing us? This United States Department of Justice has a zero tolerance policy for violence or intimidation against any person of faith in the United States that prevents them from getting an education, worshiping freely, enjoying the right to buy a church, mosque, temple, gurdwara, and use that appropriately within federal law. And we venerate religion in our, country in our Bill of Rights. It is a founding basis of our country, and we're very, very committed to it.

And so I'm personally committed to it. My entire career has been based on protecting religious liberty of all people of faith, wanting three cases of the United States Supreme Court in recent years during COVID on these issues. And so that's a no-brainer. But there's so much more that we need to get done. I know people are chomping at the bit to see what are we going to do on election integrity issues. I don't have a portfolio that allows me as a federal official to go fix every election law problem in America. People have to understand we have a separation of powers. We have a balance of power in federalism. I'm sorry, guys, there's no shortcut. Most of the hard work relating to election laws has to be done in the states. That's how our constitution is set up and that is how our laws are

set up. Yep. You can't just elect one person in the White House and expect him to fix all your problems. What we can do is administer those election laws that we administer. What Congress needs to do is put some teeth into those election laws just yesterday in a case that my team argued a federal judge here in D.C. stopped the federal government from requiring voter ID. Voter ID is contemplated in our federal election laws. And unfortunately, it's not spelled out clearly enough. And what the prior administrations have done is use the fact that it isn't spelled out clearly enough that states can require voter ID as a condition of registration is they said states can't require it because it isn't explicitly required. I've asked Congress, every member of Congress who asked me, hey, Harmeet, what can we fix? Fix this.

Require voter ID explicitly in the statute if you want to stop complaining about it. So they need to go do that. And I've heard some cockamamie reasons why they can't. I won't shame any particular congressman. for Senator about that. You're more than welcome to. That would not be fair. Those were confidential conversations, but I rolled my eyes as I'm describing them.

They can fix it. They need to fix it. And by the way, it is a very popular issue today in America. I think many Democrats are fed up too. It's 80% approval. It's an 80% of issue. Yeah. You know, people are a lot of, I mean, when we see the fallout of the new Act

Blue Executive Order, that's not my department. But when that fallout comes out, some of the things I've seen as an election lawyer in my private life are truly shocking the abuses of the donation system. People are going to want to know that there's some check and balance on the right to vote here. The vote is a precious right, and it shouldn't be given away to people who don't have a right to it. And one way to do that is voter ID. Thank you so much, Hermit. It's always great to see you. You always fill me with hope.

We've talked about some pretty dark things in the years of knowing each other, and you are a champion of light, and I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you for having me. You bet. Just a reminder, I'd love you to rate and subscribe to the podcast and pass this on to a friend so it can be discovered by other people.