Seven thirty fifty five KCV talk station, Happy Wednesday. We're in here from the High Stake School of Communications, Hillary Schulman after the top of the hour of News at eight oh five. Study shows a predicting vote choice depends on the wording of ballot language. For more low information voters. The crazier the wording, the more difficult it is, the less likely it is to pass. I have a feeling issue. One will come up here at eight h five. Judgment
Polaitano in one hour. In the meantime, I am police. Welcome to the fifty five KRC Morning Show. Joseph Ashbrook. He's president of the Cincinni Lawyer's Chapter of the Federalist Society, which promotes the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, separation of government, powers of central art Constitution, and is the province of duty the judiciary to say what the
law is, not what it should be. Amen Ashbrook, the editor in chief of the Virginia Law Review, currently practices of the law firm Ashbrook, Burn and kresgy LLC, which is a booptique firm seeking to level the playing field for those pursuing the American dream. They provide outside general counselgation services to entrepreneurs, local governments and closely held businesses, and he engages in public interest litigation. He is going to be doing in Apower Youth Seminar which has taking place.
What is that tomorrow night, Thursday, beginning at seven pm. You can log in online right there or show up in person at two twenty five North and Boulevard. Welcome to the program. It's a pleasure to have you on this morning. Joseph athbro Ashbrook Brian, thanks for having me.
Great to be with you.
I was a member of the Federal Society when I was in law school. I believe in the principles of the Federalist Society. I believe in the perception of what the court's role is again to say what the law is, interpret whatever is in front of them, within the confines of what has been passed into law, not rewrite the law to the extent it's been found to be unconstitutional, but then send it back to Congress where it should be fixed, or to your legislative brandchs where it should
be fixed. Judicial activists just take it upon themselves to write whatever the hell they want.
Yea exactly right. It goes back, Brian to one of our first principles of the country. It's easy to overlook, and it's the first three words of the Constitution, We the people. The first principle being that ultimately the people decide and not unelected judges who make the decisions that govern the people's lives. So it's them from that originally stems from that first principle that governs everything we do, or should govern everything we do as a country.
Well, and you know Roe v. Wade obviously making it big in the news since the Dobb's decision, But the Dobb's decision pointed out what the folks in Roe v. Wade should have known, which is the federal Constitution doesn't address the issue. It is an issue that is reserved to the states. The federal government has limited enumerated powers, and the Tenth Amendment says those not specifically covered by the Constitution belong to the state. It's not a difficult concept to understand, is it.
No, you're one hundred percent right, and fundamentally, you know, maybe in some level our politics are too sophisticated for our own good today. So there's a lot of dueling narratives that are out there, and the never ending brinksmanship of conquest. But fundamentally, where we are right now from what consistent with what you just said, is we're on a path of real progress. It's kind of amazing America. If you're an American out there listening, it's pretty darn
cool being an American. And the scope of human history, the formation of our government in our country is the exception, not the rule. And what the Founders did was change the course of human history for people in other countries all over the world, and yet still in our country it's really hard, has been really hard to live up to our founding principle that the people decide. And so if you look at a case like Dobbs, I think Dobs stand for the proposition the way I do it.
Dob stands for the proposition that the court recognized that the Court was also out and by the Constitution, the Constitution created the court. So how can the court then look to the Constitution and say today you are this or today you are that. So Dobbs to me is the Court being faithful to its role, which is a form of judicial humility and recognizing our institution does not have the power to write the law. The people have the power to write the law, and so Roe v.
Way needs to be overturned well, and of course that leaves the decision making to the states. And we all know what the outcome of the various states who brought this up has been. Some states, it's gone one way and st the other, and that's the will of the people. Let's talk with something specific. We have laws that are written, but we have a careless and lazy legislative branch who gives all the rulemaking and regulation writing power to unnamed,
unelected individuals behind the scenes. Now, we've had some really wonderful developments out of the Supreme Court, which I presume we'd be talking about in your seven Arch tomorrow, But the West Virginia versus EPA case always comes to mind with me because listen, you know you can't go too
far afield. It has to be specifically identified whatever you're regulating, and know a tablespoon of water on private property is not navigable, nor was it ever intended to be deemed navigable, and that you have regulators behind the scenes saying, oh no, no, it is because water ultimately flows downhill and ends up in a navigable waterway. That's an abuse of the regulatory power. And finally Supreme Court spanked them down. But that's just one of many cases lately where they've done just that.
Yeah, Brian, you're exactly right. One of the cases we're going to talk about tomorrow night a recent decision Low or Bright without getting over the technical, but the court struck down a doctrine called Chevron difference. Yes, and it relates to the exact it relates to the exact species of issues that you're talking about, and it basically means that the courts are no longer going to defer to
an agency interpretation of its own. So, Congress, if the agency creates a rule that said, in this particular case, it was fishermen who the agency created a rule that said commercial fishermen had to pay approximately eight hundred the costs about eight hundred bucks a day for an environmental monitor on their fishing expeditions, and they challenged that in the agency to challenge that the agency didn't have authority to force that on them, and then the agency says, well, yes,
we do. So then the question becomes under the statute authorizing the agency, did the agency actually have that authority.
The Chevron deference doctrine told courts to defer to the interpretation of the agency, and so when the court struck that down, what that's going to do is, it's fundamentally, as a practical matter, it's going to require if Congress, if the federal government wants to exercise power over people's private rights, then Congress is going to have to be clear about it, because the agencies are not going to be able to just quote interpret their way into the
exercise of power. And so then if Congress is clear about it, whether it happens or not, then the people can choose to vote the people who wrote the law in or out of office. So that back to the first principle, who decide, the people decide. It forces the government to run in such a way that the people are ultimately deciding because they're voting the decision makers into that office.
Well, Joseph Ashbrook, who is going to be doing the seminar tomorrow night and talking about all these issues, it could be that the control seeking to be exercised over the people in and of itself may be unconstitutional. And you can't make something constitutional really because you're silent on the matter and leading it up to a regulatory agency, you might be able to challenge the actual law itself on its face for intruding into our personal rights and liberties.
One hundred percent. And the court you mentioned the term judicial activism. I think one of the interesting intellectual developments that's going on right now in law is the idea of using the terms and what they mean. So one of the ways the current Supreme Court is getting attacked by folks on the left is by saying they're an activist court and striking down Gods is an activist decision, but it's not, And that misunderstands the idea of activism.
When court, a court is doing its role. If to your point, there's a private right in another constitution of provision that the law itself is unconstitutional. If a court is faced with the case of controversy where that's presented and the court does not strike down the law, then
that is activism. If the court it's not just the exercise of power, not exercising the power, it's the court doing its proper role, which in our government is enforcing the written law, the limits of the law, and protecting protecting individual rights from that and keeping the government itself within its limited swim length and that structural that structural dynamic protects liberty and freedom for all of us.
Just fastbook. We're speaking tomorrow night. Empower you America dot org. You log in from home or show have a two twenty five North and Boulevard. He is a president of since Hey Lawyer's chapter of the Federalist Society. Real quick here before we part company this morning, Joseph, and this is going to be of just a fascinating seminar. Any upcoming Supreme Court cases that you want to mention before we part company.
I think that everyone should nothing in particular other than we live in consequential times that there's a lot going on and there's such an opportunity go out vote, vote, vote, vote vote. Who we choose to be our leaders has such consequence to it, and we have a real opportunity now to continue the project that the founder started, which is the people Decide. We look forward to everybody that comes out. Brian, thanks for doing what you do and appreciate you having the office one Joseph Astbrook.
It has been a distinct pleasure having you on the program and everyday be tuning in tomorrow night at the beginning at seven pm. Just make sure you register empower You America. You're either attending in person or registering to attend virtually empower you America dot org. Thanks Joseph, keep up the great work. My friend seven forty one at fifty five care CD talk station and get in touch with Suseette Lows Camp. You want to buy a house, do what my daughter did. Listen to her dad at the outset.
She didn't. She went right out and started working with a bank. And they're dragging her feet and was taking a while, and she said, we want to get this house. We want to get this out. I said, call Susette Low's Camp. Okay, she did. A couple of days later, they got financing, they own their house, they're happy, they're well, they got a mortgage. Anyway, that's what it's all about. She's got thirty five plus years in a business of
experiencing the mortgage business. She is with Cross Country Mortgage, Meaning if you can hear my voice and you are a resident of the United States of America or Puerto Rico, she can get your mortgage or she can help you refinance what you've got. Get some equity out of your home. If you like the idea of reverse mortgages personally, don't she can do those. She's got great experience, best possible person in the business in terms of customer service. She's
as sweet as she can be. You'll like working with her and you'll like how quickly the process will uh will go from start to finish. Never a junk fee, never an application fee. With Suzette Low's Camp, it's always great rates at a low cost. Or a bunch of programs out there, she can tell you all about them if you qualify, So just get in touch with her anytime. She'll be quick about getting back with you, even if you call her outside of business hours. Just wait around.
It will be that long. She'll call you right back that number five one three three one three fifty one seventy six five one three three one three fifty one seventy six or send her an email at Suzett dot lows camp. That's l O s E KA MP Suzette dot lows Camp at CCM.
Dot com fifty five KRC man.
If you're suffering from a rectile