--:-- [Upbeat music fades out, followed by the sound of a news anchor]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: In what would be the most significant ruling in decades, a leaked draft of a Supreme Court majority opinion overturns Roe v. Wade. This is a very big deal if it is, in fact, a legitimate first draft opinion on probably the biggest case the Supreme Court has considered in 50 years. We talked to legal experts about the significance of the leaked ruling and what it could mean for abortion laws in the country.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news ticker or a news theme]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: I'm Georgia Howe with Daily Wire editor-in-chief John Bickley. It's Tuesday, May 3rd, and this is Morning Wire.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: The newly announced Disinformation Governance Board comes under intense scrutiny as the Homeland Security Secretary defends its mission and its controversial leader. Will American citizens be monitored? No. Guarantee that. So what we do, we in the Department of Homeland Security don't monitor American citizens. You don't, but will this board change that? No, no, no. Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire. Stay tuned. We have the news you need to know.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: This show is brought to you by The Pearl Source. One of the best gifts you can get for mom this Mother's Day is beautiful pearl jewelry from The Pearl Source. They cut out the middlemen and sell directly to customers at up to 70% off of retail prices. The Pearl Source offers free two-day shipping and a 60-day money-back guarantee, so it's risk-free. For a limited time, Morning Wire listeners can take 20% off with promo code MORNINGWIRE at thepearlsource.com. If you want fine pearl jewelry at the best prices online, then go straight to the source, the Pearl Source.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: According to a Politico report published Monday, a leaked draft of the Supreme Court's upcoming opinion on an abortion rights case is set to overturn Roe v. Wade. The outlet describes the draft as a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision on abortion. Daily Wire culture reporter Megan Basham joins us to give the latest details about Politico's story and how experts are reacting.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Megan Basham: So, Megan, it goes without saying that this is a seismic development. If it's true, maybe the biggest legal news out of the past 50 years.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Yeah, it would be. And I think for that reason, it's hard to imagine Politico going out on a limb to report it if they didn't have that story nailed down.
--:-- Megan Basham: So according to the report, Alito authored this draft of a majority opinion in February. And according to Politico, he writes, Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: So as to the question of authenticity, the document is 98 pages and has a 31-page appendix that extensively cites case law, books, and other legal experts that would be consistent with previous SCOTUS opinions. It also contains 118 footnotes. So in Politico's words here, the, quote, appearances and timing of this draft are consistent with court practice. The document is labeled the opinion of the court.
--:-- Megan Basham: So what do we know so far about the opinion? So Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett voted with Alito after oral arguments in December. And Politico says their anonymous source is telling them that those four justices haven't changed their views since then and are indeed going to go ahead and vote with Alito.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: So I think the big question we have is why someone at the court would leak it early. Now, that's an absolutely shocking development and unheard of for SCOTUS. Even in huge landmark cases like Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized gay marriage, we did not know that opinion before it was handed down.
--:-- Megan Basham: And already, experts are pointing out that if this story is accurate, that's a big if, one reason to leak it might be because it is still a draft and pressure could be brought to bear on justices through negative media coverage. Now, given how unprecedented a leak like this would be, that does lend a little more credence to this theory perhaps suggesting that someone hopes to change the outcome by leaking the draft of the opinion.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: As Politico points out in the report SCOTUS deliberations are fluid and justices have been known to change their minds while those drafts are still being circulated among them. And this was based on the Mississippi case that banned abortion after 15 weeks, correct?
--:-- Megan Basham: Correct. So that case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Mississippi first passed that law in 2018. And within a day, the only licensed abortion provider in the state sued. The first district court to hear the case ruled in favor of the clinic and placed an injunction on the state to stop them from enforcing the law. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that ruling. At that point, Mississippi appealed to the Supreme Court.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: So what will this mean for abortion in America? Well, contrary to what a lot of people believe, this would not ban abortion. However, it would free up states to make their own laws about abortion through the legislative process, and those laws could be restrictive. Now, right now, there are more than 20 states with laws on the books banning abortion, either partially or fully. Those laws were previously blocked under Roe, but this decision could free the states to enforce those laws.
--:-- Megan Basham: On the other hand, states also remain free to keep abortion legal, which presumably many of them would continue to do.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: All right. Well, Megan, thanks so much for giving us this context, and we'll have you back on when we find out more.
--:-- Megan Basham: Absolutely. Thanks so much, Georgia.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: That's Daily Wire culture reporter Megan Basham. Coming up, we speak to legal experts about the leaked document and what it means for the country.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: This show is sponsored by Indeed. Indeed is the hiring platform where you can attract, interview, and hire all in one place. Start now with a $75 sponsored job credit to upgrade your job post at Indeed.com slash wire. Offer good for a limited time. Indeed.com slash wire. Terms and conditions apply. Pay per qualified applicant not available for all users. Need to hire? You need Indeed.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Following the leak of the draft Supreme Court opinion, we reached out to multiple experts about the ruling and what it can mean both legally and politically. One expert we reached out to is Carrie Severino, lawyer and president of the Judicial Crisis Network.
--:-- Carrie Severino: So, Carrie, what is the precedent for this? Have SCOTUS opinions been leaked in the past?
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Well, I can think of no example, certainly in modern history, I don't know ever of a leak like this. Look, when I was clerking at the court, this would have been seen as just the unpardonable sin to, even after you left the court, leak internal information about even details like which case you work on people don't talk about, let alone the inside internal details, like an opinion itself. When I was working there, you couldn't even bring home opinions like on a flash drive or something. It was so highly guarded.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: So to see this, it just floored me. And I think anyone else who had clerked at the Supreme Court or almost any other court probably has the same response.
--:-- Carrie Severino: Now, given that, it sounds like someone really went out on a limb, risking their professional reputation to do this. Who has access to this information?
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Well, I think everyone's assumption is this probably was from one of the clerks of the liberal justices. You know, the people who would have had this information is a very tight circle. It probably is just the justices themselves, the clerks, I suppose the administrative staff in the office. But really, I think the most likely thing is this was a liberal clerk kind of who thought that this was worth risking an attack on the real breach of trust, an attack on the only institution in D.C. that everyone thinks is at least trustworthy and not going to leak. It's a desperation move. And I think it's part of a pattern of bullying and intimidation of the justices that unfortunately has been increasing.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: I think they were hoping maybe this would have an effect and flip some justices' votes or put pressure on the court from the outside.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Another expert we spoke to, Sarah Perry, is a legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
--:-- Sarah Perry: So Sarah, if this indeed ends up being an authentic ruling of the court when it released this summer how will this change abortion laws in the U.S.?
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Significantly. And the answer there is that we are seeing some excellent initial statements from Justice Alito who looks to have been the author of this draft opinion. But it will significantly change abortion law. And under the Tenth Amendment, it is considerably a states' rights issue. This will go back to the states under the Constitution as that particular type of issue left to the states to regulate and legislate upon at the local level where a representative government can work closest to the individuals whose interests they represent.
--:-- Sarah Perry: But Alito brings up a great point in this opinion, which is to say that Roe and Casey, Planned Parenthood versus Casey, have done nothing to settle the debate, but in fact have actually deepened the abortion divide. And rather than finding a right to constitutional abortion that was plucked very nearly out of thin air by Justice Blackmun in 1973, this instead makes those decisions. It sends those important debates and discussions back to the statehouses where they always, particularly as Justice Scalia once wrote and Casey, always should have been.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: So ultimately, we're going to see a two-tiered approach. Most likely, both the GOP and the Dems will achieve or pursue a federal legislative initiative. They will try to pass laws at the federal level using Congress's enumerated powers in the Constitution. But we're likely to see an even greater level of activity within the states. In fact, over 120 abortion laws were passed in 2021 alone. So we have been seeing an uptick in state laws, specifically in anticipation of Roe overturning.
--:-- Sarah Perry: So it will be a twofold approach, but it's likely to be a very active election season.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Well, Georgia, as they both made quite clear, if this ends up being the final ruling, the landscape for abortion laws in America is going to change dramatically.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Right. And there's no getting around it. This is going to have a serious impact on the way Americans view the Supreme Court. Over the weekend, the Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas defended the decision to launch a new disinformation board.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Here to give us the details on the fallout from the announcement of the disinformation board is Daily Wire's Charlotte Pence Bond.
--:-- Charlotte Pence Bond: All right, Charlotte, the DHS secretary made the media rounds. What did we hear from him and how are folks responding?
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Well, Mayorkas was already under fire for his decisions pertaining to the border, but he made headlines again this weekend when he talked about the new controversial disinformation governance board, which critics have deemed the ministry of truth, a reference to the famous book 1984.
--:-- Charlotte Pence Bond: On Fox News Sunday, the secretary admitted that the board wasn't rolled out perfectly and went on to claim that it would focus on disinformation from hostile countries. We address disinformation that presents a security threat to the homeland. Disinformation from Russia, from China, from Iran, from the cartels.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: But the main question that a lot of people have, of course, is not the international threat as much as how this might impact American citizens. Mayorkas was pressed on CNN about this and was pretty vague about what the group will actually do.
--:-- Charlotte Pence Bond: But he did insist that they won't monitor American citizens. He also claimed the board would make sure civil liberties and free speech are not infringed upon. But again, it was difficult to narrow down just how the board would actually function.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: What it does is it works to ensure that the way in which we address threats, the connectivity between threats and acts of violence are addressed without infringing on free speech, protecting civil rights and civil liberties, the right of privacy. And the board this working group internal working group will draw from best practices and communicate those best practices to the operators because the board does not have operational authority.
--:-- Charlotte Pence Bond: So Mayorkas said the board doesn't have operational capability but apparently it will provide guidance to the people that do. Apparently so.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: A particularly concerning statement from Mayorkas came when he specifically mentioned the 2022 midterm elections in a hearing last week. He said that the board would be specifically focused on the spread of disinformation in minority communities ahead of the 2022 midterm elections.
--:-- Charlotte Pence Bond: So the focus is on the midterms. That doesn't sound like foreign threats. Right. And that's turned a lot of heads.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Morning Wire spoke with Laura Reese, former acting deputy chief of staff at Homeland Security and senior research fellow for Homeland Security at Heritage.
--:-- Laura Reese: The Constitution clearly states there should be no law abridging free speech of Americans. And while this is in Congress standing this up, it's the executive branch. Americans should be very worried about what this means after living through 2020. Specific misinformation, disinformation regarding COVID, the 2020 election, so many things that bore out as true. This has nothing to do with the mission of Homeland Security.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: And the woman that they've tapped to lead this, Nina Jankiewicz, has a consistent and seemingly intentional record of being wrong on what she has labeled as disinformation.
--:-- Charlotte Pence Bond: Remind us about the controversy around her.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Right. So not only did Jankiewicz say that the Hunter Biden laptop story was disinformation, a story that's now been verified, but some videos just seem a little off to many, and they show her being less than professional. For example, there's a TikTok video of her singing about disinformation to a song from Mary Poppins. They're laundering disinfo and we really should take note and not support their lies with our wallet voice or vote.
--:-- Laura Reese: Even more to the point, though, is what she recently said on NPR about free speech. I shudder to think about if free speech absolutists were taking over more platforms what that would look like for the marginalized communities all around the world, which are already shouldering so much of this abuse.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Well, the federal government being involved in policing misinformation and disinformation certainly raises a lot of questions and concerns.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: It does. Charlotte, thanks.
--:-- Charlotte Pence Bond: That was Daily Wire's Charlotte Pence Bond.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Other stories we're tracking this week. A mother in Florida is suing public school officials for guiding her young daughter through a gender transition at school without parental consent. School officials allegedly provided the girl, who was just 13 at the time, with a transgender support plan specifying that her parents were not to be notified.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: The mother, a mental health professional, told Fox News this week. This is happening all over the nation. This same protocol is in place in many, many schools across districts everywhere. And even the guides being used to dictate these transgender support plans that cut parents out even have the same language.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Similar cases are pending in California, Massachusetts, Texas, and Wisconsin. A new poll by NPR found that parents of kids under the age of 18 are twice as likely to vote for Republicans over Democrats. When the parents were asked which party they'd vote for if the election for Congress was held today, 60 percent said Republicans, while 32 percent chose Democrats.
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: Thanks for listening to Morning Wire. We created this show to bring more balance to the national conversation. If you love our show and you stand with our mission, consider subscribing, leaving us a five-star rating, and most importantly, sharing our podcast with a friend.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme continues]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: That's all the time we've got this morning. Thanks for waking up with us. We'll be back tomorrow with the news you need to know.
--:-- [Sound effects: A news theme fades out]
--:-- Host: Georgia Howe: If you like this podcast, subscribe to our Morning Wire newsletter, available exclusively to Daily Wire members. Get the Morning Wire newsletter delivered straight to your inbox when you join at dailywire.com slash subscribe. Use code MORNINGWIRE to try a Reader's Pass membership and get your first month for only 99 cents.
