Legal AF Full Episode - 10/1/2025

19:52Michael Popok:And then they're going to treat it the same way and let him fire anybody that he wants. So he put them in a little bit of a dilemma there. Now, having said that, after full briefing, and they also pushed it out far. They don't see this as an emergency. See, every day she's in her chair, I've said in a recent hot take, it strengthens the hand of Lisa Cook factually and legally. Because their argument is she's disobedient. She's insubordinate. She shouldn't even be the Board of Governors. We fired her and she refused to take fired for an answer. Well, the Supreme Court doesn't seem to be concerned about that because they're letting her participate in the next four or five interest rate setting meetings between now and October, sort of baking that cake, right, as it relates to her employment status.

20:38Michael Popok:So I think that time is on her side and the fact that they didn't think they needed to take her out because whenever they want to take out a federal, an agent or an officer of the executive branch, they're always like, oh, and to have the president have to have somebody he doesn't want to work with is irreparable harm. They must be immediately taken out in the back and shot. But they didn't do that with this. They were like, all right, we'll let her participate in a few more meetings. We'll come back, not even in October when the term opens, first Monday in October. We'll see you in January. Do some briefing.

21:14Michael Popok:It's not a great concern to them. And I could be completely wrong. We'll have on your friend, and we'll debate it after the oral argument. We'll know more when the oral argument is – we'll have it up live on Legal AF YouTube. But that's what I think.

21:31KFA:Yeah, I think it's pretty smart. I think I agree with you. I just, what I don't understand is, yeah, they say the Federal Reserve is different. Where are they getting that from? All of these, they're making it up. Right, exactly. And that's the very thing they criticize, the MAGA 6 criticize judges for doing, right? And everyone criticizes on the right. They criticize judicial activism, right? They just, you should just interpret the law. You know, you should just, originalism and textualism and interpret the law. Well, that's all you're doing. Then all of these agencies that Congress has have made to be special, right, where you can't just fire someone, you have to have cause.

22:10KFA:Right. All of them should be treated this way. But time and time again, we've been talking about this for weeks. They keep letting Trump fire these employees or these people who are on these special boards, if you will, letting them fire them, even though there's this case Humphreys Executor that we keep talking about that they're chipping away at, that they're going to end up probably overturning. but they have decided, however, no, this isn't like the Federal Trade Commission. This isn't like the NLRB. This isn't like all the other agencies that they're allowing Trump to fire the people who are supposed to be non-political, who are supposed to be there across different presidents, who are supposed to be bipartisan.

22:56KFA:They've just decided on their own that the Federal Reserve is different. But it doesn't say that anywhere. Congress has made these laws and they're just making it up. I mean, I'm glad, I'm glad they left Lisa Cook there, but I think they should have left all the ones that Congress has basically said, you have to fire for cause. You can't just do it for political reasons like Trump is doing.

23:17Michael Popok:See, Karen, this is, I think people come here also for the disagreements. I don't think you're being fair because the founder of this particular congressionally made thing, the Federal Reserve and the predecessor had a Broadway show made about it. But, and I, I think that's the major difference. Hamilton was a big hit and I think that's it.

23:38KFA:Well, you know what? I got your Hamilton reference earlier when you said, talk less, smile more. Yes. Well, I got that one. It wasn't lost on me.

23:48Michael Popok:Yeah. So yeah. How many times have you and I've said, and we will continue to say that, that the interpretive tools that the Supreme court uses are effing made up, that they're not. Originalism sounds like something that was handed down to us from like Mount Sinai on a tablet, but it was effing made up in the late 1980s by people like Robert Bork moving forward, handed off to Antonin Scalia. And now we've got the six that believe that we have to divine from our founding fathers and framers what we're, we have to go find a dictionary from 1787 to go figure out what a word means and trap the Constitution in amber instead of it's a living, like weren't you taught it was a living, breathing document?

24:37KFA:Yeah, well, of course.

24:38Michael Popok:Right.

24:39KFA:I mean, you know, as we always used to say, you know, when the Fourth Amendment was created, you know, which protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures, we always said, you know, the computers didn't exist back then. But today you need a search warrant to be able to go into someone's computer, right? You're not, you can't just go in without it, but you have to evolve. You have to move with the times. What did they mean when they passed the Fourth Amendment and they said, you know, protecting us against unreasonable searches and seizures where you need a search warrant to go into our home, to open our file cabinet, to basically take our property, you know, to search us, right?

25:24KFA:It extends to things that didn't exist back then, like a computer.

25:29Michael Popok:Even Amy Coney Barrett said there's a limit to historical antecedents and what you can do with them. But, you know, you have the late Antonin Scalia, who is one of the geniuses, if that's the right word, for the right wing and the quote-unquote conservatives. He famously said in a speech in the 1990s, the Constitution is not a living, breathing document. It's dead, dead, dead. And that's how they operate. But these things like originalism, textualism, you know, then they don't have one. So, oh, we got to do, we're too close to an election. We got to do the Purcell Doctrine. Where the fuck did that come from?

26:09Michael Popok:That just came from reverse engineering. They didn't want something to happen. So they created a roadblock for themselves and another tool in their tool bag. It must be nice to create your own tools in your tool bag, right?

26:20KFA:Yeah, exactly. When they suit you.

26:21Michael Popok:when they suit you. So when we come back, we're going to talk about how lower courts, led by senior status judges, are firing back at the United States Supreme Court while they dismantle limb from limb the Trump administration on things like First Amendment, mainly on First Amendment. We have two decisions that I think will go down in the annals of history, especially Judge Young's, as being something, you know, your grandson and my daughter will be taught in law school, heaven help us, one day will be Judge Young's decision about the First Amendment and Donald Trump's attempts to weaponize immigration law to chill the First Amendment rights and speech of those he disagrees with that are on college campuses.

27:06Michael Popok:And Judge Royce Lampert, another Republican, both of these are Republicans, who dismantled Carrie Lake using her own words against her, but also took on the United States Supreme Court and their shadow docket use. Then Judge McElroy, as long as we're in that region of Massachusetts with Judge Young, we'll go up to Rhode Island. It's always the original 13 colonies to help us out at the end. Judge McElroy and a case about FEMA funding for 12 different states. And then, you know, whatever else pops into our head. But now's the time to support now more than ever, let's be frank, we're under attack as independent media and commentary.

27:48Michael Popok:I mean, it's something that's near and dear to me. My law firm website was literally hacked by bad people, which I will not name, who just want to like screw with us and shut us up and shut us down. But we're not going to be silenced. And our audience is not going to allow us to be silenced. The bigger we are, the more your voice is heard. And there's ways to become what I now call a card carrying member of the Legal AF community, right? One of them is you're here already. Hit the subscribe button for Midas Touch, slide over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel, and become a subscriber there. No paywall, no outside investors, no corporate parents telling us what to say.

28:26Michael Popok:We don't have to worry about, for now, regulation. We just have to tell the truth, which is what we do without blowing smoke or sunshine. Become a member there. Set your reminders. And then it's interesting, people, friends of mine have recently written me, Karen, maybe you get the same thing. How do we invest in Legal AF? I mean, like literally, and I said, well, we don't, we're not taking investments. We're not, we're not going public. But if you really want to support the show, the way to do it is to go over the last leg of the stool is Legal AF, the sub stack, where we're doing amazing, you know, some of the commentators are doing some amazing writing over there.

29:03Michael Popok:Karen, you're a great writer. I'd love to get you over on Legal AF Substack and live reports that I do a couple times a day when my voice will hold. And that's a place where you can become a paid member and you'll get certain benefits for doing that. But you'll also know that you're supporting some amazing content that is Legal AF branded. So we appreciate all of that. And then keep, you know, the hummingbird theory, every little bit helps the podcast. Stay where it's at, which is sort of in the top half of the top 100 podcasts in news and in the top half of the top podcast on YouTube of any genre.

29:40Michael Popok:And that's all a testament to our audience. And then we've got sponsors, some of which have been with us for the last five years that are handpicked by Jordy, one of the brothers. And we then take a look at them and they're with us and they know what our point of view is. They don't know what we're going to say and they don't tell us what to say, but we really appreciate them being here. And so here's a word from our sponsors. You know that nostalgic feeling of sitting at the breakfast table as a kid and pouring a giant bowl of cereal that just tasted amazing? Well, Magic Spoon has reinvented that feeling with cereal and treats that bring back the flavors you love, but in a way that actually fuels your day.

30:18Michael Popok:Every serving of Magic Spoon's high-protein cereal packs 13 grams of protein, zero sugar, and 4 grams of net carbs. And the flavors, straight out of your childhood, fruity, cocoa, and frosted. And then there are the Magic Spoon treats. Crispy, crunchy, airy, and ridiculously satisfying with 12 grams of protein in every bar. They come in mouth-watering flavors like marshmallow, chocolate peanut butter, and dark chocolate. Perfect on-the-go, pre - or post-workout, or even as late-night snack. Here's how you try them. Get$5 off your next order at magicspoon.com slash legal AF, or look for Magic Spoon on Amazon or in your nearest grocery store.

30:57Michael Popok:That's magicspoon.com slash legal AF for$5 off. You know, we live in an environment our biology was never designed for. EMFs, artificial light, seed oils, microplastics, endocrine disruptors, chronic stress. These modern assaults disrupt cellular signaling, negatively impacting gut health and accelerating aging. That's why I've been using Armra Colostrum. Armra colostrum revives cellular signaling, bolstering our health from within to defend against everyday threats. Colostrum is nature's first whole food with over 400 bioactive nutrients that work at the cellular level to reactivate your body's innate capacity to regenerate and thrive.

31:39Michael Popok:And since I started taking Armra, I've noticed a real difference. My gut feels stronger and less bloated. My energy and metabolism are better than ever. And even my skin looks more radiant. Plus, Armra helps strengthen immune health without just boosting it. It balances and strengthens your immune barriers across your mouth, sinuses, lungs, gut, and more. Ready to reclaim your health? We've worked out a special offer for my audience. Receive 15 % off your first order. Go to tryarmra.com slash legal AF or enter legal AF to get 15 % off your first order. That's T-R-Y-A-R-M-R-A dot com slash Legal AF.

32:18Michael Popok:Arboric Colostrum. It's pure, potent, natural, and clean. Not a supplement, but a bioactive whole food. I highly recommend giving it a try. Welcome back to Legal AF at the midweek. And for those that observe Lashana Tova, Ah, as we're in the days of awe. Okay. And speaking of being awed and awestruck, Judge Young, who is a senior status judge up in Massachusetts, a Reagan appointee, who we've talked about before, Karen, on Legal AF, because he kind of got into it inadvertently with the United States Supreme Court on another case. He was dealing with a case about funding and a government department.

33:00meant he blocked the Trump administration trying to cut off the funding and the Supreme Court got all hot and bothered and a case involving the National Institute of Health of all things

33:15Michael Popok:and Gorsuch took time out and spilled some tea and some ink against Judge Young of all people and said open defiance by the lower courts will not be tolerated like what are you even talking about right now. And then you read, and his version of open defiance was that Judge Young didn't apply a shadow docket, one paragraph ruling in which they cut off, they allowed the cutoff of funding from the Department of Education, and that Judge Young was supposed to know that's precedent that needs to be followed, as opposed to a preliminary, temporary, procedural, non-substantive, which is what we've always been told, ruling, it's like precedent.

33:59Michael Popok:And if it's precedent, what's the guide? Where's the internal legal logic? Where's the radio decedendi? Where's the gravamen? Where's the facts? Where's anything that helps and guides a lower court? Nowhere. But they chastised Young. And Young actually, according to reporting, was so, this guy's like 80 years old, was so upset about it that he was at another hearing and he talked about how he would never, never openly defy the United States Supreme Court. Well, if they thought that was open defiance, wait till they see what Judge Young has done now. He spent 160 pages dismantling every last stitch of the Trump administration's effort through the State Department and Homeland Security to crush dissent on college campuses by making non-resident or non-natural-born professors and students feel uncomfortable enough that they would stop talking about things that made the Trump administration uncomfortable, like, I don't know, the non-Israel side of the Israel Hamas debate, I guess.

35:08Michael Popok:And so under the false flag of rooting out anti-Semitism, They started deporting and arresting through ICE professors and students who were here legally. And until Judge Young got a hold of it. Now, Judge Young decided that he was going to frame this. I guess this was his rhetorical device. The entire opinion as a response to a postcard that was sent to his office. And he says it's still on display if you'd like to see it. And leave it up there for a minute. So on June 19th, he got on, again, this whole thing is snarky. June 19th, of course, is Juneteenth. So it says 19 slave 2025. Trump has pardons and tanks.

35:52Michael Popok:What do you have? Dear Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous, alone, I have nothing but my sense of duty. Together, we, the people of the United States, you and me, have our magnificent Constitution. Constitution. Here's how that works out in a specific case. Dot, dot, dot, like see below. And then he spent the next 160 pages, Karen, dismantling the Trump administration. But then he had like, I'll turn it over to you now. He had like five or six pages at the end, which is just like an after forward. You know, the First Amendment in the time of Donald Trump, where using his own, I mean, the judge's own wife's comment about Donald Trump, he then went through and talked about how Donald Trump is going after and trying to bulldoze the First Amendment and how we have to stop it.

36:43Michael Popok:And then at the end, he ended it with another message to the postcard sender. Have you ever seen anything like this in your life?

36:49KFA:I was just going to say, as a lawyer who's been practicing for 30 plus years, and I went to law school. I've read thousands of decisions, thousands. It's all I do all day, every day for a living. I have never seen anything like this in my career. At the same time, it gave me chills. I loved it. It gave me goosebumps. I mean, it is a decision that is going to be criticized by legal scholars for being gratuitous, over the top, unusual to say the least. And it's going to be studied in law school classes and read by more people than almost any other decision because it is that good. It is that important.

37:36KFA:And frankly, it's that accessible to everyday people. I hate reading. I hate when I have to read a decision that I barely understand because half of it is in legalese and in Latin language and citing cases that I have to now go look up the case and try to figure out what they're talking about. This was written, I think, for the ages. This is something, I think entire law school classes are gonna be just centered around this particular decision. That's how incredible I think it is and how accessible I think it is. And how I frankly, I think everyone should read it. But I also know that there are a lot of legal scholars who are going to criticize it and because it's very unusual how he did it.

38:17KFA:But he's 85 years old. He's clearly about to retire or soon retire. And he's just basically like, fuck it. This is what I'm doing. You know, hang out. Exactly. And I was like, you know what? It's probably my favorite decision that I've ever read. I just loved. I enjoyed every single second of it. And what he basically was doing here is he was talking about what is the First Amendment. Right. That's what this was about, is this was all about people who, this case boils down to the Trump administration trying to use your political views and free speech, people who protest, etc., to determine your immigration status, to determine if you're here legally but not a citizen, but you hold viewpoints that I don't like, frankly, then I'm going to deport you or change your citizenship status.

39:08KFA:What he basically said was the First Amendment says Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. No law means no law. That means no law, not for anybody. And that's what the First Amendment means. And that's the bottom line of this case. And so, no, you can't do it. But the way he got there, just even framing it with that beautiful postcard, it just, what I loved about it is it reminds everyone that judges and public servants, anyone who works for the government, work for everyone. It's not just judges don't just work for other judges and lawyers in this, you know, rarefied ivory tower that we all live in and, you know, these fancy schools that we went to.

39:52KFA:they all represent judges represent the people regular people including the guy who anonymously or a woman who anonymously wrote this postcard about Donald Trump having you know tanks and and whatever and you have nothing yeah and yeah and and he basically wrote it for for them and I thought that was genius brilliant and frankly I think more judges should be uh should should speak that way and be more clear and also just be, I would love more of these types of decisions than frankly, the types that we're used to.

40:28Michael Popok:Hearing you talk about it, I've decided I'm going to have these two pages, the first and the last page framed side by side, because I think it's the reason I got into the law. Certainly the reason I joined you here on Legal This is how he ended it. I mean, yes, there was 160 pages of legal analysis. Pardon me. Yes, there was 160 pages of legal analysis as to all the instances in which the Trump administration violated the Constitution and the First Amendment, which he reminded everybody, is carved into the New Hampshire granite on the side of the Massachusetts courthouse that he sits in, the First Amendment.

41:09Michael Popok:He went through methodically after having sat through the trials and having all the testimony and looking at all the video evidence and other evidence and made his decision. He did not make his decision as to what the remedy is going to be for having found this. He's working on that part of the decision. We'll get another beautifully written decision about that. He then said, this is what's going to go into my thought process about how to create what we call redressability. How do I fix an injury in the land of Trump? And here's the problems I have that he goes through. All the institutions that would normally be the bulwark to protect the First Amendment, the firewalls of the First Amendment, Donald Trump has destabilized from law firms who have been here.

41:55Michael Popok:This is what he lists. Law firms that have bent the knee, corporate media that has bent the knee, higher education. We have new reporting, you know, that Donald Trump keeps bragging that we're going to have the Harvard School of Plumbing soon after they settle their five hundred million dollar case. And all the money goes into trade schools, apparently. So with that and the other thing here, before I get to the conclusion, he writes this, Judge Young. it's 161 pages he's been working on it for a minute he has been working on it I am sure since Charlie Kirk's death and what I call the martyrdom of Jimmy Kimmel by Donald Trump so that is ringing in his ears when you're writing a major first amendment decision he's a human being of course he's going to be influenced by how Donald Trump has attacked fellow Americans more than 60 % of which do not agree with Donald Trump based on recent, you know, a dozen recent polls.

42:54So that sort of animates how he writes.

42:58Michael Popok:Here's how he ended. There's two things I loved about it. One was the quote from his wife, which I'll talk about. But here's how he ends it. Again, writing to the anonymous postcard writer. He signs it, William G. Young, judge of the United States. But then under it, he types, I hope you found this helpful, meaning the 161 pages of his analysis. Thanks for writing. It shows you care. You should. Sincerely and respectfully, Bill Young, P.S. The next time you're in Boston, the postcard on the card is from the Philadelphia area, stop in at the courthouse and watch your fellow citizens, sitting as jurors, reach out for justice.

43:42Michael Popok:It is here and in courthouses just like this one, both state and federal, spread throughout our land, that our Constitution is most vibrantly alive, for it is well said that, quote, where a jury sits, there burns the lamp of liberty, close quote. And that is one of his major concerns. This is a guy that was appointed by Ronald Reagan. So he also quotes from Reagan, and I did this the other day on The Intersection, in talking about the remedies, Karen, he quotes all in bold, freedom is a fragile thing. and it's never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance.

44:26Michael Popok:It must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation for it comes only once to a people. That was Ronald Reagan in 1967 when he was governor. And apparently, this is interesting, he says that he first heard those words back in 2007 when his son, the judge's son, quoted them in a Law Day celebration speech, because I think his son's a judge as well. And then he ends with, I fear that President Trump believes that the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values, so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected.

45:14Michael Popok:Is he correct? That's how Young ends his decision. And I don't believe that Trump is correct. I believe from what I've seen from this audience, from the growth of the Midas Touch Network, from Legal AF, from our involvement here, that freedom fighters are alive and well and are supporting if they can't be in the courtrooms like the ACLU's and democracy forwards and attorneys generals of the world. that they can't be there with them. They're there in spirit and they're there in support in a community like the one we've built here on Legal AF. I'm definitely framing at least four of these pages from this decision.

45:55KFA:Yeah, I want you to send me which ones you're going to do. I'll have matching ones framed. Okay.

46:00Michael Popok:All right. No, no, I'll send it to you. I'll make you one. Really?

46:03KFA:Yeah. I absolutely love it.

46:06Michael Popok:I mean, I see it now. I see the four that I want. But look, just as I said, you have to renew your own tree of liberty, your own way, especially when you're in the field that you and I are in and are supporters. For me, it was when my wife was eight months pregnant and still able to drive somewhere. We took a weekend trip to Washington, D.C. while Biden was still in office. We got a White House tour, but then we went and saw in person the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution under glass and with other people, including from other countries. And it was a meaningful and important moment for renewal, especially when we, you know, if you're just following our system of government and constitutional republic by social media posts, it can be very disheartening and maddening.

47:02Michael Popok:Sometimes you have to go back to the touchstones of what makes this country great. Remind yourself that one day this too shall pass, and I mean the Trump administration. It will still be standing. It will still be here. Right? It's true.

47:15KFA:It's absolutely true.

47:17Michael Popok:It's the best we can do. Your grandson and my daughter will only read about Donald Trump in a history book. And history will judge him as opposed to knowing what's going on. That's the one thing I got going for me. My 15-month-old daughter, and how old is your grandson?

47:35KFA:He's two. He just turned two.

47:36Michael Popok:Turned two. They're not going to know Donald. They're going to say, who's that crazy Halloween mask guy over there? I know. Exactly. At best. At best. The bad spray tan. So let's let's when we come back from our next commercial break, let's talk about another senior status judge, Royce Lampert, who I think was also a Reagan appointee. I'll double check that at the break. There he is. Who ripped into the Trump administration, also took time out and ripped into the Supreme Court and Carrie Lake for good measure. And then we've got some rulings up in Rhode Island about immigration, sanctuary state status or city status and FEMA funds and what a judge has done about all of that.

48:20Michael Popok:But let's, again, off of Judge Young's eloquent words, now more than ever, we need your support. Go over to the podcast, leave a five-star review and comment, which we read. If you listen to us on audio, on Spotify or Apple, that kind of thing, watch us on YouTube. Some people don't even know we're on YouTube. Some people don't even know we're on audio. Do both. That helps. It's like the hummingbird theory. You don't know what exactly helps in the algorithm, but it all helps. And then if you want to continue and become like really the great supporter of Legal AF that you are and fly our flag, come over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel, become a subscriber there.

49:00Michael Popok:It's for free. 10 new videos a day. Karen's got a great one up now with an interview she just did of Ellie Honig about a new book that he wrote about when you come for the king. I know what that's in reference to, about the Department of Justice over the years going after presidents and what happens. And that was a great interview. Thank you for doing that. And I know our audience appreciated it. And then we've got Legal AF, the Substack, which is a unique, it's different than YouTube. YouTube, it's sort of, you got the video, you leave comments, and there you are, and some podcasting. And then on Substack, we can kind of get together as a group.

49:39Michael Popok:We do lives with chat and back and forth. We've got a written commentary that goes beyond what we're doing in the video. It's just a great new community. We welcome you to come join us there on Legal AF, the Substack as well. And then we've got our sponsors, and here's another word from them. Delete Me makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable. As someone with an active online presence, privacy is really important to me. I've seen how easy it is for my personal information like address, phone number, or even family members' names to end up online.

50:21Michael Popok:And that can have real-world consequences. Have you ever been a victim of identity theft? I have. Harassment or doxing? If you haven't, you probably know someone who has. That's why I use DeleteMe. With DeleteMe, you can protect your personal privacy or even the privacy of your business from doxing attacks before sensitive information can be exploited. The New York Times Wirecutter has even named DeleteMe their top pick for data removal services. Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for DeleteMe. Now at a special discount for our listeners. Get 20 % off your Delete Me plan when you go to joindeliteme.com slash Legal AF and use promo code Legal AF at checkout.

51:05Michael Popok:The only way to get 20 % off is to go to joindeliteme.com slash Legal AF and enter code Legal AF at checkout. One more time, that's joindeliteme.com slash Legal AF, code Legal AF. Welcome back. We're in the homestretch of the midweek edition of Legal AF. Royce Lampert is no friend of this administration, even though he's a Republican. He's often found himself on the other side of the administration, including during Jan 6th. And he's been, I think, exceedingly patient, Karen, about how the Trump administration has been dismembering piece by piece the voice of America. Voice of America, you know, a radio-free Europe, radio-free China.

51:50Michael Popok:Congress set a requirement that our brand of democracy and freedom be exported to the rest of the world, especially in places which don't have democracy, like Russia and China and North Korea and other places like in South America. and that is the mandate of Congress. The executive branch is not supposed to, until the Supreme Court recently said it was okay, is not supposed to cut off funding, pocket rescission, like, nope, I don't want to give that money out. Nope, I don't like that agency. And just cut off and choke it to death. Voice of America, I'll give you an example. Voice of America used to have 24 hours of programming in multiple countries and regions around the world because Congress had funding for that.

52:42Michael Popok:Right now, right now, Voice of America consists of two 15-minute segments a day in Arab dialects, and that's it. I mean, that's it. There's nothing in South America, North Korea, China, Russia, nothing on the internet, radio, whatever, shortwave, and that's it. And that has not sat with Judge Lampert, who blocked and had his block affirmed, blocked the current defunding of and personnel firing of Voice of America. Carrie Lake gave a deposition. They had a full trial. And Carrie Lake was an idiot. She was dripping with indifference, as the judge called it. When they asked Carrie Lake, do you consider Africa to be a country of interest, a material interest, as that term is used in the statute, creating the voice of America?

53:45Michael Popok:She said, I've never given it any thought. That did not sit well. And he then spent a considerable amount of time telling off the Trump administration and inviting a contempt motion. Why don't you take it from there for what you found in that order?

54:00KFA:Yeah, I mean, he basically found that she violated his April order and that she was obfuscating the court's requests for information. She wasted judicial time and resources. And he essentially basically said, you know, what you've done readily supports a contempt proceeding. However, Voice of America only asked to reinstate their 500 plus employees. They didn't ask for contempt. Reading between the lines, I think he would have easily held her in contempt. But this decision also is completely contemptuous of Carrie Lake and what she's doing. And he basically said, don't mistake the fact that I'm not holding her in contempt for lenience.

54:43KFA:This is her behavior is egregious. I'm just not doing it because nobody asked for it. I mean, that's very sharply, strongly worded, really what he was saying. But, you know, you can't just have a court tell you what to do and then turn around and basically give the court a middle finger, lay off 500 people. And the judge says you have to reinstate them. I mean, which makes all the sense in the world. You can't just lie to the court and do whatever you want. I mean, the Trump administration doesn't seem to care. And they just are going to do whatever they want and then just be, you know, hope that a few slip through.

55:16KFA:and they just don't care about their reputation. They don't care about honesty. And this is just another example of that. So I'm really happy that this court is holding the line here.

55:25Michael Popok:Yeah, the part that I liked as well is when he took on the United States Supreme Court again, yet another joining a long list of federal judges, trial court or appellate, that are telling the Supreme Court, you want to rule by emergency docket and give us one paragraph and call it precedent? We don't see it that way. And you're not giving us any guidance and we don't know how to apply it. And what he pointed out was a good thing, was a good point. Lampreth pointed out where the Trump administration says, you can't block our firing because there's a long or funding because there's a long line of cases, including the Department of Education, where the Supreme Court on the shadow docket has ruled a certain way.

56:08Michael Popok:And what Lampreth said is, I don't care what the Supreme Court says. It's not precedent. I can't apply it. You don't give me the radio. You don't give me the internal logic. You don't give me the Gravaman. You don't give me the way to apply it to my facts. And you're filling in the blanks on a one paragraph to your advantage. And I reject that. Now, that's going to get him in trouble again because Gorsuch, as I said at the top of the show, already excoriated Judge Young when Judge Young in Massachusetts said, I'm going to block you cutting off funding for the National Institute of Health. And they said, what?

56:50Michael Popok:Of course, it said, what? There's precedent, even though you may not like it, even though it may be one paragraph, it may be a provisional ruling. It is precedent of our court and you are to apply it. And the guy's like, you mean that one paragraph about the Department of Education? You wanted me to apply that to the National Institute of Health? Like, what are we supposed to do? I thought we're supposed to apply facts to law as judges. So there's a battle brewing among and a rebellion, if you will.

57:18KFA:Putting this into context for people who didn't go to law school.

57:24Michael Popok:99 % of our audience? Yeah, exactly.

57:26KFA:I mean, I just want to put this into context. The Supreme Court serves as the supreme legal body, right? And so when they write decisions, they are very long, very thoughtful, and they are written in a way to give guidance to the courts below, okay? So that the middle level courts and the district courts who are the first level of courts that hear a case, right, they need to know what is the law. And so the Supreme Court always, and same thing with the appellate courts, their decisions are always long and thoughtful and give a lot of guidance so that the judges know exactly what it means. What Popak is talking about that's going on, this mutiny with some of the judges, understandably, is the Trump administration uses the Supreme Court as a small claims court, essentially, for all of his little, you know, he's just, he takes everything on an emergency basis to the Supreme Court.

58:29KFA:and is like, you know, he uses the Supreme Court like it's his own personal court. And I guess it kind of is because he's the president. But normally, cases don't go to the Supreme Court on an emergency basis on routine things like whether or not you fire someone, etc. But here, what Trump is doing is so unprecedented that these cases are going to the Supreme Court on these emergency bases, and the court then isn't fully briefing them and writing a whole decision. The court is just basically saying yes or no. You know, yes, you can do this. No, you can't. And gives like a line or two and maybe a paragraph.

59:08KFA:And so just that's what's going on here with these other courts. And so what a lot of litigants are doing is they're taking that one or two line or paragraph decision saying, see, this is the law. And what the federal district court judges are saying, no, that's not the law. That was a decision in one case. The Supreme Court did not see fit to give us guidance and tell us what the law actually is. They just made a decision in that one case, and therefore it doesn't apply here.

59:35Michael Popok:Which I totally agree with, except Gorsuch doesn't agree with it. Because when he chastised Young, he said, it may be a paragraph, it may be procedural, it may be temporary, but it is the precedent of the United States Supreme James Corden, you are to follow it, except when they don't even follow their own precedent. I ran a clip last night on The Intersection, my other podcast, of Clarence Thomas caught at Catholic University. I guess he thought he was in like a cozy, comfy setting and nobody would listen to him. Which he said is, I don't consider precedent to be gospel that I need to follow.

1:00:08Michael Popok:Well, there it is, folks. We always thought they were just judicial activists who were just making law without reference to the record, the case, or even precedent. There he is. He said it out loud.

1:00:20KFA:You know how, like, it's always like, you know, that old adage, like if someone's accusing you of something, it means they're doing it themselves. Right. You know, right?

1:00:29Michael Popok:Somebody comes out against pedophilia. Yeah.

1:00:32KFA:Or like, you know, I know you're cheating on me. Whatever, you know, like all that kind of stuff. But usually when someone's whatever. So I feel like that's what the MAGA 6 have been doing all these years, have been accusing judges of judicial activism. When you're just like, it's not a judicial activism. Guess what? That's what they are.

1:00:52Michael Popok:Absolutely. Very, very good point. Well, then if the Supreme Court didn't like that, they're not going to like what's going out in Rhode Island. Last week, you got Judge Smith who says in and rules against the Trump administration in terms of on a major immigration case. Right. And and then because they lost there and lost in their ability to, you know, to deport, remove and things related to that. But there's a sort of a related case in front of Judge McElroy, and she's got a hearing about whether FEMA funds, of all things, you know, that old adage, that old saying, the government is my enemy until I need a friend.

1:01:37Michael Popok:And usually people need a friend when they're holding by their fingertips on top of their houses because a hurricane or flood or something has or fire or mudslide, something terrible, tragic has happened. and but no if you live in a blue state all your FEMA money was going to be reallocated by the Trump administration as punishment because his his those states were not willing to play ball and become deputized apparently as federal agents to implement Donald Trump's immigration policy that was the Judge Smith decision Judge Smith's decision the week earlier was no, you can't force a state. They have state's rights.

1:02:20Michael Popok:You can't force them to become federal agents and assist, they can't obstruct you. They can't interfere with you, but you can't conscript them into working with you or for you to chase after other human beings in immigration policy. That's a federal policy. You use your federal agents for that. You can't make the state do it. Well, Trump didn't like that. Then it's like, well, F you. I'm taking away your FEMA funds. And what happened with Judge McElroy?

1:02:46KFA:Yeah, I mean, he basically said, you know, I mean, first of all, the way you describe it, it sounds like extortion. You know, that's exactly what Trump is trying to do. He's trying to extort the states. And the judge essentially said, you can't do that, right? You can't do it. And he, and McElroy, who was a Trump appointee, by the way, and he said, you can't do it, especially right before the end of the fiscal year. It's illegal. And so the funds remain available. and, you know, the states can continue to claim them. I mean, it's just absurd how Trump is trying to do this and really withhold funding from the blue states.

1:03:23KFA:You know, and he said at a hearing, he said, you know, it's yet another case where the administration is saying, I'm going to do what I want to do and not what the law says and make the court make me. I mean, that was said out loud by Judge McElroy.

1:03:36Michael Popok:Only one thing I need to leave it in the pot. It's a woman. It's Mary McElroy. Sorry. That's all right. That's all right. It happens. But everything else you said is exactly right about about the judge there. Just leave it in. It doesn't matter. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, she said unintentionally. No, she said, you know, I'm tired and frustrated of the court saying of the Trump administration saying I'm going to break every law until you till you make me stop till you make me. And, you know, I just thought it was interesting that, you know, judges are mindful and aware of how the Trump administration is acting in various courts.

1:04:14Michael Popok:We just saw Judge Young spend many pages in the decision that we talked at length about at the top of this podcast talk about Trump in other contexts about the First Amendment around the country. I'm not saying they got a newsletter, but trust me, something circulates and they have eyes and ears and they know when major decisions are being made around the country. And then they'll get their law clerks to go find that decision. Go find me, Judge McElroy's decision. Go find me, Judge. I'm sure Judge Young's decision is now sitting at every law clerk's desk, at least in the federal courts, to have their bosses read them.

1:04:49Michael Popok:But but they don't they don't exist in a vacuum. They have bosses at the Supreme Court. They have to be aware of precedent in their own jurisdiction, but they also have to know about persuasive analysis that's being rendered by other federal judges around the country on similar issues and similar topics. And only then can a judge like McElroy say, I know what's going on here.

1:05:10KFA:You know, Popak, one thing that I find really interesting is Trump is clearly going to war against the blue states, right? And this is what he's doing. And he's sending the military in. he's threatening to withhold funding when you look at the blue states and what they're responsible for from federal tax i mean so so much like california and new york for example pay way more in federal taxes than some of the red states like let's just i'm not going to name any but if they start playing games with these blue states i wonder if the blue states are going to start having to self-fund, frankly. It's a situation that I realized you're not supposed to do it, and you can't do it, but they're going to be left no choice if Trump is going to do these illegal, unlawful moves to try to withhold funding that they're entitled to.

1:06:03Michael Popok:Yeah. Agreed. The point I was trying to make when I got caught, a frog got caught in my throat, is that judges like Judge McElroy are fully aware of what's going on around the country, And she knows that this action by the Trump administration to try to reallocate money so that it wouldn't be there for the future litigation, the billions of dollars in FEMA funding, it was a response in retaliation because they lost the case in front of Judge Smith. And she's fully aware of that. That's why, as I was saying, she blocked those particular funds. So I think we've reached the end of not only my voice, but also of another.

1:06:43KFA:That's why I jumped in, by the way, because you needed a second to reclaim your voice.

1:06:48Michael Popok:I know you did. I appreciate that. So we've reached the end of another edition of Legal AF at the midweek with Karen Freeman-Nicdifolo and Michael Popok Saturday. Back with Ben Micellis. And, of course, we've got hot takes on the Midas Touch Network and Legal AF YouTube channel. Legal AF, the sub stack. All great ways to become part and enduring part of the Legal AF community. Uh, and, uh, thank you again for joining us, Karen. What do you got? Last word.

1:07:18KFA:I hope you, you're, you're fast that you do for the next 24 hours is easy and, um, not too difficult.

1:07:28Michael Popok:Thank you. And to our audience as well. Happy new year. So until our next report, shout out to the Midas Mighty and the Legal AFers.

1:07:43Michael Popok:Hi, Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Are you looking for a beach read this summer? May I suggest your big wireless bill? It's got suspense, mystery, a slightly flat emotional arc, and a shocking twist where you realize you've been overpaying the entire time. Fortunately, though, Mint's story is better. Every plan,$15 a month, even unlimited. That's it. Happy ending. Zero tears. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Upfront payment of$45 for three months,$90 for six months, or$180 for 12-month plan required. $15 per month equivalent. Taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy.

1:08:12Michael Popok:C-Terms.