Morning Wire XX
[0] Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is reportedly stepping down.
[1] How would Breyer's resignation affect the balance of the court, and should we brace for yet another contentious confirmation process?
[2] I'm Georgia Howe with Daily Wire, Editor -in -Chief John Bickley.
[3] It's Thursday, January 27th, and this is Morning Wire.
[4] As nations around the world impose stringent COVID -19 restrictions and vaccine mandates, human rights organizations are raising red flags.
[5] We'll take a look at this largely unreported story.
[6] And is affirmative action at universities on the way out.
[7] The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases relating to race -based preferences at Harvard and UNC.
[8] We'll talk to a legal expert on what this could mean for the college admissions process.
[9] Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire.
[10] Stay tuned.
[11] We have the news you need to know.
[12] This show is sponsored by Dwell.
[13] As we move into 2022, don't forget to carve out space and time for your spiritual life.
[14] The Dwell Bible app makes it fun and easy.
[15] easy to get into the Bible by providing a world -class listening experience of scripture.
[16] Dwell offers all your favorite versions of the Bible recorded by real human voices that are delightful to hear.
[17] Today, you can try Dwell for free by going to Dwellap .io morning wire.
[18] That's Dwellap .io slash morning wire.
[19] In this new year, invest in your spiritual life.
[20] Let God's word be read over you using Dwell.
[21] On Wednesday, it was reported that Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer would be retiring.
[22] Here to explain what this means moving forward is Daily Wires Ian Howarth.
[23] So first off, Ian, how is this announced?
[24] Well, it was first reported by NBC News that Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is going to retire at the end of the current term, which is June of this year.
[25] President Biden commented on the news, saying we should wait for Breyer to make a statement.
[26] There has been no announcement from Justice Breyer, let him make whatever statement he's going to make, and I'll be happy to talk about it later.
[27] Breyer is one of the three remaining liberal justices and his decision to retire after more than two, 27 years on the Supreme Court is now going to hand Biden the opportunity to appoint a successor.
[28] So the past few Supreme Court nominations have resulted in some pretty controversial and heated confirmations.
[29] So should we expect a lot of drama this time around?
[30] Yeah, it's hard to say because the variables are slightly different here.
[31] For example, Justice Brett Kavanaugh replaced Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was often seen as the court's swing vote.
[32] This made his seat crucially important when it comes to the political aspect of the court.
[33] In a similar fashion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett replaced Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, arguably the most left -leaning member of the Supreme Court at the time, and both of these replacements were nominated by a Republican president.
[34] Now, however, a Democratic Party president is going to be replacing a liberal Supreme Court justice, with what we can safely assume will be another liberal justice, so it won't have the potential to change the six -three leaning of the court.
[35] And do we have any idea who the president might choose to replace Breyer?
[36] In all likelihood, this is where the source of any nomination or confirmation drama is going to be.
[37] With a split Senate, Biden could avoid a political firefight by nominating a moderate liberal justice and may receive bipartisan support as a result.
[38] But the issue here is that Biden has already laid the groundwork for identity politics to play a role during his campaign.
[39] I'm looking forward to making sure there's a black woman on the Supreme Court.
[40] And as we all remember, Biden made a similar promise which resulted in the selection of then -Senator Kammer.
[41] Harris as his vice president.
[42] And one rumor swirling around right now is that Harris could be Biden's Supreme Court pick.
[43] This would be surprising and probably won't happen, but it is an indication of the continued friction we've heard about from within the White House.
[44] It's also possible that Biden will continue a shift to the more radical wing of the Democratic Party and nominate a justice who is far from moderate.
[45] Right now, with limited information beyond Breyer's retirement, there are two takeaways we have.
[46] The first is that this is yet another potentially divisive obstacle that the Biden administration now has to deal with during a midterm election year, amidst already low approval numbers, historic rates of inflation, and continued foreign policy challenges.
[47] The second is that the timing of briars retirement is potentially political, given that he's retiring under a Democrat president, but to be fair, he is 83.
[48] Right.
[49] Well, we'll definitely keep an eye on this.
[50] Ian, thanks for reporting.
[51] Of course, thanks for having me. That's Daily Wires, Ian Howarth.
[52] Coming up, human rights groups condemn government's harsh COVID policies.
[53] Need a flavor upgrade?
[54] Tessa Maze is a flavor -forward food company that makes clean -label, organic products with uncompromising quality ingredients.
[55] Their commitment to healthy eating and living is at the core of their mission.
[56] Simplify food to amplify life.
[57] See all of the amazing products they have to offer today at www .tessa Maze .com.
[58] Several nations tightening restrictions against unvaccinated people in the name of fighting COVID -19 have drawn condemnation from human rights organizations.
[59] Human rights watchdogs, including Amnesty International, have opposed forced vaccination and said some COVID policies may stifle freedom of speech and democracy itself.
[60] Here to tell us more is Daily Wire reporter Ben Johnson.
[61] Thanks for joining us, Ben.
[62] It's a pleasure.
[63] So, Ben, the most widely discussed report about human rights concerns comes out of Italy in response to the Italian government's most recent COVID policy.
[64] What did the government there do?
[65] Well, Prime Minister Mario Draghi just made Italy's already restrictive COVID policies much stricter.
[66] He issued a vaccine mandate for everyone over the age of 50.
[67] He's also ordered that from now until June 15th, Italians can't use public transportation and people over 50 can't go to work if they can't prove they've been vaccinated, even if they wear a mask and show a negative COVID test.
[68] Really?
[69] Yeah.
[70] He also denied access to anything but the most basic necessities to people without a super green pass, which means that the individual has had three COVID shots.
[71] So extremely restrictive policy here.
[72] Any mention in the policy of natural immunity?
[73] Well, recovery which gives you natural immunity can give you a green pass.
[74] Okay.
[75] In response, Amnesty International Italia issued a statement raising serious alarm over the move.
[76] While the statement's not perfectly pro -freedom, it upholds the right to limited mandates, it says in general, quote, state should focus on increasing voluntary vaccine adherence, and it calls on the government to let unvaccinated people work or use public transportation, quote, without discrimination.
[77] The statement reads in part, the government must continue to ensure, that the entire population can enjoy its fundamental rights, such as the right to education, work, and medical treatment, they should not be penalized.
[78] It also asks if the government really needs to extend the national emergency beyond March 31st.
[79] The government first declared a six -month emergency in January of 2020.
[80] Amnesty says all temporary orders should really be temporary.
[81] Finally, the group said the government must guarantee the right to peacefully protest against COVID -19 policies without taking any act of unjustified aggression or violence.
[82] Now, Italy isn't the only country facing questions about its policies violating human rights.
[83] Yeah, definitely not.
[84] What are some of the other nations being called out?
[85] Well, the most forceful statement comes in response to Ghana, where the health ministry considered instituting a system of vaccine passports to access public accommodations.
[86] The chapter of the International Human Rights Commission that oversees the country responded, quote, vaccination should be by choice and not by force.
[87] We think it is advisable for the government to allow ordinary Ghanaians to decide, rather than imposing it on them.
[88] Sometimes observers don't criticize the orders so much as their implementation.
[89] For instance, Human Rights Watch condemned Cambodia for requiring everyone from age six up to show proof of vaccination to enter virtually any public or private accommodation, including grocery markets.
[90] But the group says the government didn't educate the public about the rules so people could show up and find themselves arbitrarily cut off from essential services.
[91] Got it.
[92] Eight human rights groups, including Amnesty International, also signed a statement last May accusing the Cambodian.
[93] government of using COVID -19 measures to quash independent journalism.
[94] In one case, the government warned farmers against posting pictures of crops rotting in the field because the markets were closed, claiming it would harm national morale.
[95] And there's also been some criticism focused on the political impact of these policies, right?
[96] That's right.
[97] Some international observers warned that the restrictions can pose a threat to democracy.
[98] Human rights watch condemn the military government of Myanmar, where the military overthrew the democratically elected National League for democracy last year.
[99] It then charged the leader of that party, a 76 -year -old woman named Aung San Suu Kyi, with several infractions, including breaking COVID restrictions during her campaign events.
[100] Well, the way many governments have responded to COVID has certainly opened up potential for all kinds of abuses.
[101] They definitely have.
[102] Thanks for bringing us that report, Ben.
[103] Of course.
[104] Ben Johnson of the Daily Wire.
[105] On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases relating to the use of race preferences and college admissions.
[106] Here to tell us more is Daily Wire's Charlotte Pence Bond.
[107] So Charlotte, what can you tell us about these cases?
[108] So there are two lawsuits here.
[109] One against the University of North Carolina, the other against Harvard.
[110] The group bringing both challenges is students for fair admissions, led by attorney Edward Bloom.
[111] Harvard is being accused of discriminating against Asian American students in admissions, and the group is asking the Supreme Court to also look at whether the school is violating title six of the federal civil.
[112] Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination for places that get federal funding.
[113] The University of North Carolina is being accused of violating the Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law.
[114] The group says the university violates this by taking into account the race of students when admitting them.
[115] Now, Harvard's a private university, whereas UNC is public, so the implications for the rulings could be very wide -ranging.
[116] Keep in mind, lower courts ruled that the schools could consider race in admissions.
[117] Back in 2003, the Supreme Court did rule on a case that involved race and admissions.
[118] The case called Grutter v. Bullinger found that the University of Michigan law school's use of race in its admissions process did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act.
[119] But in the majority opinion, Justice Sandra O 'Connor wrote, quote, the court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.
[120] I spoke with legal analyst Aaron Hawley, an attorney who formerly clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts, and this is what she had to say.
[121] And so what the Supreme Court did in a highly contentious case, a 5 -4 decision, was they upheld the admissions process in the University of Michigan, but they did it in a really narrow way.
[122] They said that the state of Michigan and the University of Michigan did have a compelling interest in sort of a diverse student body.
[123] That case was almost 20 years ago, but there was a similar case decided in 2013, in which the court went the other way.
[124] In Fisher v. University of Texas, a Caucasian female student argued that she was denied admission based on race.
[125] In a solid seven to one majority, the high court sided with the student, saying the university's admission policy did not meet a strict standard in this particular instance.
[126] So in taking up these cases now against Harvard and UNC, the Supreme Court will essentially decide whether or not it should overrule that Grutter decision.
[127] The two liberal justices, Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who participated in that case, have now been replaced by more conservative justices, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney -Barritt.
[128] I think you probably have a majority that's very skeptical of Grutter.
[129] Grutter departed from the original text of the 14th Amendment and its promise of equal protection under the law.
[130] You've got the Chief Justice, again, who said, you know, the best way to stop discriminating on race is to actually stop discriminating based on race and not to consider racial factors.
[131] And has there been any reaction from Harvard or UNC?
[132] Well, on Tuesday, Harvard's president sent out a message to members of the Harvard community, saying, quote, those who challenge our admissions policies would ask us to rely upon a process far more mechanistic a process far more reliant on simple assessments of objective criteria.
[133] The statement said Harvard will continue to defend their admissions policies.
[134] The High Court put both of the cases together for argument, which is expected to take place next term, so we won't likely see a decision until next summer.
[135] Well, we'll definitely be watching to see how this turns out.
[136] Charlotte, thanks for reporting.
[137] Anytime.
[138] That's Daily Wires, Charlotte Pence Bond.
[139] Other stories were tracking this.
[140] week.
[141] A new poll found that a generic Republican candidate would beat President Biden by nearly 10 points in 2024.
[142] The Politico Morning Consult poll found that 46 % said they'd vote for a Republican candidate in 2024, while 37 % said they'd vote for Biden.
[143] However, the matchup becomes a statistical tie when Biden is pitted against either Donald Trump or Mike Pence.
[144] And children in New York must again wear masks in school.
[145] Just one day after a New York court struck down the state's mask mandate, the state announced the rule was back in effect, resulting in mass confusion in schools across the state.
[146] On Tuesday, the state informed schools they must continue to follow the mask rule because the state's appeal of Monday's ruling would, quote, result in an automatic stay and thus keep the rule in place.
[147] If you like this episode and are interested in hearing more, subscribe to Morning Wire on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you're listening, and give us a five -star review.
[148] That's all the time we've got this morning.
[149] Thanks for waking up with us.
[150] We'll be back tomorrow with the news you need to know.
[151] If you like this podcast, subscribe to our Morning Wire newsletter, available exclusively to Daily Wire members.
[152] Get the Morning Wire newsletter delivered straight to your inbox when you join at DailyWire .com slash subscribe.
[153] Use code MorningWire to try a Reader's Pass membership and get your first month for only 99 cents.