Morning Wire XX
[0] As Texas, Mississippi, and other states pass laws that limit access to abortion, California is taking steps to protect legal abortion.
[1] Today, California stands as a proud reproductive freedom state, where we're committed to not just protecting the constitutional right to abortion, but to expanding access to reproductive care.
[2] We have details on the slate of bills that will turn California into an abortion sanctuary state.
[3] I'm Georgia Howe with Daily Wire editor -in -chief John Bickley.
[4] It's April 2nd, and this is your Saturday, edition of Morning Wire.
[5] Police blame a nationwide wave of crime tourism on international gangs, who they say are exploiting a loophole in U .S. immigration law.
[6] And billionaire Elon Musk says social media platforms have a free speech problem, and he wants to solve it.
[7] We talk to an expert about the state of free speech online.
[8] Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire.
[9] Stay tuned.
[10] We have the news you need to know.
[11] This show is sponsored by Birch Gold Group.
[12] The market's slow decline has now worsened.
[13] and you need to make sure that your savings are protected with alternative investments.
[14] Hedge your savings today before it's too late with Birch Gold.
[15] Text the word wire to 9 -8 -9 -8 -98 to claim a free info kit on physical gold and silver today.
[16] California is already known as a progressive state, but now it's pushing to lead the nation in abortion access.
[17] Here to tell us more about California's new abortion laws is Charlotte Pence -Bond.
[18] So, Charlotte, we've reported extensively in the past about some of the more conservative abortion laws being passed in red states.
[19] states, but other states are now moving in the opposite direction.
[20] So tell us about California.
[21] Yes, California is one state that is clearly moving to expand access to abortion.
[22] Over the past year, California has passed several bills and proposed ideas that either expand access to abortion or protect the procedure in some way.
[23] Just last week, Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom signed the Abortion Accessibility Act, which gets rid of out -of -pocket expenses from insurers and health plans for abortion and related services.
[24] So women in California, in most cases, can now get an abortion for free.
[25] Yeah, that's correct.
[26] In terms of timing, Newsom was also pretty direct in a statement about the legislation.
[27] He called out other states that have recently moved to limit access to abortion.
[28] Earlier this year, on the 49th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Newsom and his wife put out a video discussing abortion in the state.
[29] Today, we are here to say we won't go back.
[30] Oh, that's right.
[31] We're doubling down on our commitment in improving access to essential services, including supporting reproductive health care providers and workers and removing billing requirements.
[32] So this was the most recent legislation, but it's part of a larger movement in the state, correct?
[33] Yeah, this has been a priority for a while.
[34] Last year, Newsom announced that California was going to be a sanctuary for abortion, relating to women who would likely come to California seeking abortions if it's made illegal in other states.
[35] In the fall, the governor signed a few other related bills designed to create protections around abortion.
[36] For example, a new privacy law puts restrictions on recording or taking photos near a reproductive health care clinic.
[37] Newsom also announced that his administration would participate in the California Future of Abortion Council, which is a coalition of pro -abortion groups seeking to influence policymakers and others on abortion.
[38] Last year, the council released a blueprint with 45 policy recommendations.
[39] and a lot of legislative proposals seem to mirror their priorities.
[40] This is seen specifically at the state legislature level.
[41] The California Legislative Women's Caucus has pushed multiple pro -abortion actions, including a bill that would protect clinicians who provide abortions to patients who traveled from states with abortion restrictions.
[42] It would also protect people who assist in facilitating those out -of -state abortions.
[43] So it sounds like a range of laws with the common purpose of making abortion more broadly, available and generally just easier and cheaper to access.
[44] Right.
[45] And I want to note the timing of this push is not coincidental.
[46] As John said, this is all coming as the Supreme Court is due to hear at least one case that could strike down Rovers as Wade.
[47] And California was already a national leader when it comes to the number of abortions.
[48] In 2017, there were more than about 862 ,000 abortions in the United States.
[49] More than 132 ,000.
[50] of those were performed in California, which was the most of any state.
[51] Right.
[52] Well, we'll certainly be watching to see how these policies play out.
[53] Charlotte, thanks for reporting.
[54] Thanks for having me on.
[55] That's DailyWire's Charlotte Pence Bond.
[56] Coming up, criminal tourists are stealing millions from wealthy U .S. suburbs.
[57] You can get this show and all of the content you love wherever you are, all on the Daily Wire app.
[58] Even if you're not a Daily Wire member, you'll be first to know what's trending with mobile notifications for the latest news, and you'll get content from all your favorite DailyWire shows.
[59] Download the DailyWire app and keep up with the facts no matter where your day takes you.
[60] Criminal gangs are exploiting a provision in U .S. immigration law to commit hundreds of crimes, according to police officials nationwide.
[61] This so -called crime tourism has cost Americans untold millions of dollars.
[62] Here to explain where these gangs originate and how they operate as Daily Wire reporter, Ben Johnson.
[63] Thanks for joining us, Ben.
[64] Thanks for the invitation.
[65] Now, Ben, you've talked with us a number of times about the rising violent crime rate in the U .S. But now police are warning about an international theft ring.
[66] What can you tell us about that?
[67] That's right.
[68] Police from California to New York are warning about the rise of what they call South American theft gangs or SATGs.
[69] These criminal enterprises recruit burglars in South America who enter the United States and join up in cells of two to eight people to commit major theft.
[70] They target wealthy suburbs.
[71] They usually rent expensive vehicles so they can blend in.
[72] They'll case the area and learn the homeowner's patterns.
[73] Then they break in through second floor windows because they know most security systems only cover the ground floor.
[74] They take jewelry, credit cards.
[75] They've even removed a whole safe and carried it out of the home to open up privately.
[76] They regularly make off with $20 ,000 to $100 ,000 per crime, and they're committing hundreds of crimes.
[77] Commander Eric Boschow of the Ventura County, California Sheriff's Office, said the gangs usually strike when the house is empty, and they're not known to be violent, but they're a national criminal menace just the same.
[78] This is crime tourism.
[79] They're coming here for the purpose of targeting neighborhoods, specifically vehicles, homes, not violent crimes, but they're going after the big bucks.
[80] They may commit dozens of crimes before they return to Chile, and they're replaced.
[81] by new visa holders who start the process all over again.
[82] Do they target any particular part of the country?
[83] No, they're active nationwide.
[84] Police in the D .C. suburbs of Northern Virginia found one SATG that was responsible for 100 robberies in Fairfax and Montgomery counties, with thefts totaling $3 .6 million.
[85] They say the gang members they arrested came there from Texas.
[86] Police said that SATG cell alone had perpetrated hundreds of robberies nationwide.
[87] Police in San Diego County say SATGs committed more than 60 burglaries in less than eight months.
[88] These gangs have also been active in the San Francisco Bay Area, in Cleveland, Indianapolis, in the Detroit suburb of Grosse Point, in Henrico County, Virginia, which is the Richmond, Virginia area.
[89] They're active wherever affluent Americans live.
[90] Really?
[91] So all over the country.
[92] How did they get into the country?
[93] SATGs are exploiting a government immigration plan called the Electronic System for Travel Authorization.
[94] which allows citizens in 40 different countries to travel to the United States without a visa.
[95] They can stay for up to 90 days.
[96] It costs less than $20 to apply, and the program exempts people who qualify from scrutiny from immigration authorities when they enter the country.
[97] The U .S. government added the only South American country, Chile, to the program in 2014, and police say that's when SATGs began to surge.
[98] Prior to that time, South American theft gangs were mostly made up of illegal immigrants from Colombia.
[99] Some police believe these South American theft gangs target areas with sanctuary city status or weak immigration laws, and they target cities with low bail or no bail release for criminals so they can skip the country afterwards.
[100] Some members overstay their visa, which is the most common kind of immigration violation, so they can stay in the U .S. Others obtain fake IDs saying they're Puerto Ricans so they can pass themselves off as U .S. citizens and prolong their crime spree.
[101] Do police recommend anything to avoid being a target?
[102] Vigilance.
[103] All right, well, we'll maintain that.
[104] Thanks, Ben.
[105] Thanks, John.
[106] That's Daily Wire reporter, Ben Johnson.
[107] Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk turned heads recently when he signaled that he may start his own social media platform.
[108] The comment came in response to the Tesla and SpaceX founder, finding that a vast majority of his followers believe Twitter does not vigorously adhere to free speech principles.
[109] joining us to discuss the state of free speech on social media platforms is Kara Frederick Research Fellow in the Center for Technology Policy at the Heritage Foundation.
[110] Kara, thanks so much for joining us.
[111] Thanks for having me. So Kara Musk has suggested Twitter is violating free speech principles.
[112] First, is he right?
[113] Oh, absolutely.
[114] And I think fundamentally, he recognizes three different things.
[115] In his tweet, when he basically said that given Twitter serves as the de facto public town Square, failing to adhere to free speech principles fundamentally undermines our democracy.
[116] Unpacking that in three ways, I think, is crucial to our understanding of how we communicate as Americans.
[117] So the first thing is he recognizes that we use these big tech platforms as the town square, right, to exchange ideas, to debate, to refine our thinking, and that these tech platforms, they wield tremendous power over the individual right to expression, and that they also, thirdly, can have a chilling effect on the culture of free speech in the United States.
[118] Okay, so the argument here is that these platforms are suppressing free speech through censorship and labeling things misinformation if they don't fit a certain narrative.
[119] The counter argument is that these are private companies and they have the ability to restrict people however they want.
[120] What's the answer to that?
[121] Absolutely.
[122] I think we need to think about the culture of free speech.
[123] America's culture of free speech is that issue when private companies wield this power and use it to, frankly, abuse the freedom of expression of individual Americans.
[124] And I really think that the practices of these tech companies engender a form of self -censorship that really imperils a foundational norm within our culture.
[125] And that is the disposition to speak freely.
[126] And especially the idea that when you speak freely, you're not going to be materially punished for it.
[127] Everybody really understands that, yes, these are private companies.
[128] And the First Amendment says no Congress should make a law to impinge upon free speech.
[129] Yet tech companies can impinge upon these God -given rights as well.
[130] All right, so you're stating that company policies should align with this based on principle, not really law.
[131] The law that's in effect here that does protect these platforms is Section 230.
[132] Can you unpack that for us?
[133] Yeah, in a nutshell, as briefly as possible, this is the statute of the Communications Decency Law of 1996, which effectively grants immunity from civil liabilities for the content that companies host on their platforms.
[134] So what these companies have done is really taken the statute and used one of the clauses, otherwise objectionable content, to kick off and suppress certain types of speech on these platforms.
[135] The yes, it was originally intended to really help these companies that were young in the 1990s flourish and grow without the spectrum.
[136] of litigation hanging over them and stifling their growth, great.
[137] But now I'd argue it's served its purpose.
[138] I think focused reforms of Section 230 are necessary because these tech companies are using it.
[139] They were given an inch and they've taken a mile.
[140] And now we all see what the vestiges of their censorship policies have done to free speech in America.
[141] Now, Musk is floating the idea of actually just starting his own platform, a competitive platform, is that the solution, or is there a way that people can really affect the culture of these companies, as you put it?
[142] I think that's one of the solutions.
[143] Give them more competition, right?
[144] But these new potential companies and alternative platforms, they need to catch up.
[145] They need time.
[146] They need time to sort of accrue those network effects, the fact that when all of your friends are on these platforms, you want to be on them.
[147] You don't want to be on this tiny little platform that not everyone else is on.
[148] Then where's the fun in that?
[149] They also, need time to catch up to the technical advantages that these companies have accrued, like gathering a high variety and volume of data, really under the protection of these Section 230 immunity from civil liabilities since the 90s.
[150] So I think that, yes, I'm heartened by examples we see now.
[151] I think billionaire founders are going to really help these new entrants succeed, frankly.
[152] But when other companies like Amazon, like Google, like Facebook, like Twitter, when they control you know, vast market shares and show that they're willing to wield their consolidated power against thinking they don't like, then I think the answer is competition, but also the answer can take place in the states and in Washington, D .C. as well, with Congress that's willing to be brave and reform this legislation that's very outdated.
[153] Well, Kara, thank you so much for talking with us today and providing us your insights.
[154] Of course.
[155] Thanks for having me, John.
[156] That was Heritage Foundation's Kara Frederick.
[157] Thanks for listening to Morningwire.
[158] We created this show to bring more balance to the national conversation.
[159] If you love our show and you stand with our mission, please consider subscribing, leaving us a five -star rating, and most importantly, sharing our podcast with a friend.
[160] That's all the time we've got this morning.
[161] Thanks for waking up with us.
[162] We'll be back tomorrow with the news you need to know.
[163] If you like this podcast, subscribe to our Morning Wire newsletter available exclusively to Daily Wire members.
[164] Use code MorningWire to try a reader's past membership and get your first month for only 99 cents.