Ted Cruz (3:09)

Ted Cruz is brought to you by Matt Walsh's new film, the new Daily Wire documentary, what is a Woman? I've been waiting for this film since the day Matt announced it, and it does not disappoint. Radical gender ideology is corrupting our nation right now. It's seeping into our children's classrooms as young as kindergarten and preschool. It's even poisoned corporate culture. We see Disney and their queerness agenda that they're inserting into their children's programming. This has become a cultural phenomenon that is assaulting women, that is trying to erase biological women. And so Matt Walsh is fighting this fight. He goes on a global, on a world tour asking a very simple question, what is a woman? And fortunately, he took a film crew with him. So we all get to come on this journey with him. And you will be shocked to hear how many people can't answer what you would think is a very simple question or they have a very warped, twisted idea of what a woman is. The leftists in this film actually admit to Matt Walsh what their ulterior motive is, what their underlying agenda is. You will laugh, you will cry, you will scream probably all at once. I highly recommend this film. It's available for Daily Wire subscribers only. Go to whatisawoman.com whatisawoman.com and join Matt on this cultural battle.

Michael Knowles (4:21)

Whatisawoman.com not just one, but two senators in this episode. Not just one guy who's written a book about the Supreme Court, but two guys who have written a book about the Supreme Court. And both guys really, really don't think that the Democrats should pack it. Senator Cruz, as always, thank, thank you for being on your own show. And Senator Lee, thank you so much for being here. Senator from Utah, Mike Lee, an expert on the Supreme Court and the author of a wonderful new book on how we can save the nine justices and not destroy one of the branches of our government.

Mike Lee (4:55)

I will tell you, Michael, two interesting bits of trivia that have to do with our guest on the pod today. Number one, he is the first Supreme Court clerk in the history of the United States to become a United States Senator. There have been clerks for many, many years. No clerk had ever become a senator until Mike was elected. They're now four. So Mike got elected the same year as Richard Blumenthal, who was a clerk for Harry Blackmun. So they were together the first two. I was the third, and then Josh Hawley's the fourth. But prior to 2010, when Mike got elected, no clerk had ever gone to the Senate. But secondly. And I want Mike to amplify on that in a second. But secondly, he is also the only person I know, and certainly the only senator I know, whom Harry Reid has locked in a garage.

Mike Lee (5:46)

Harry Reid's son Josh became my best friend when I was in the sixth grade. This was while my dad was serving as Solicitor General. And there was this new congressman elected from Nevada, elected to the House named Harry Reid. And his son Josh became my friend and I got to know him well. One day, for no particular reason, Harry, who liked to play practical jokes, figured out a way to lock us into the garage. We couldn't get it out of it, either in through the house or out the garage door. So we just rode bikes and skateboards in there for a few hours. It was a lot of fun. Harry was an eccentric guy and he had a wonderful sense of humor. He was always very nice to me. You know, we disagreed on almost everything politically, but until the moment he left the Senate, he would bring me into his office periodically just to ask how my family was doing and check in on me. He was a wonderful person in many respects, Michael. This is reflective of the relationships that exist within the Senate and also within the Supreme Court. Relationships that transcend party affiliation and political ideology of every kind. It actually is a place where the relationships are much better than they appear on tv.

Michael Knowles (7:01)

That is good to hear, though, Senator Lee, I don't want to just skip over Reid left you in the garage for hours. This wasn't a 15 minute practical joke. That man, he has real chutzpah and stamina. Or certainly he did. That's a great story.

Mike Lee (7:15)

Yeah. My wife used to joke that maybe Harry had accidentally sparked the creation of the Tea Party movement by doing so. I may have been overstating it, but.

Michael Knowles (7:24)

It'S a good observation, Senator Cruz. I guess I'll have you lead it off because I know basically nothing about the Supreme Court beyond what I learned from the bill up on Capitol Hill in Schoolhouse Rock. But I do know from reading the news that the Supreme Court appears to be in greater peril than at any time in my life. Support for the court trust in the court seems to be dropping. You have this major decision that could be coming out after the leaked opinion, which itself seemed unprecedented. And now you've got major calls to upend the whole institution.

Mike Lee (8:01)

Well, look, that's exactly right. The left is launching unprecedented attacks at the Supreme Court, at the rule of law, at the Constitution. They're trying to politicize the court. They're trying to intimidate and bully the justices. They're trying to directly threaten their families. They're sending angry protesters to their homes to threaten their families. And all of this is a naked desire attempt to destroy one of the foundational institutions that protects our fundamental liberties. You know, I have to say I'm really glad that Mike is joining us again on Verdict. So Mike is now the first and only repeat guest on this podcast. He was an early guest and he's now the first recidivist to be back. And he's back with a brand new book. Mike, tell us about your brand new book. What's the title? Where can they get it, and why is it essential that they rush out and buy it right now?

Mike Lee (9:00)

The name of the book is Saving Nine. I wrote Saving Nine because a little over a year ago, I started seeing all the warning signs that the left was getting ready to pack the Supreme Court, something they haven't tried since 1937. As soon as I realized that they might actually be serious, I started thinking about it and I realized, oh my gosh, nobody's comprehensively written, at least in modern times, a book explaining how you defeat this and why it needs to be defeated. But I had long been of the belief that one of the worst things that happened in American constitutional history was in 1937. It's my belief. And that belief is borne out in Saving Nine, where I tell the story of Associate Justice Owen Roberts flipping his vote in a seminal case called NLRB v. Jones and Laughlin Steele. That case was decided on April 12, 1937, two years from the date that the Supreme Court had moved into its new marble Palace. First time in history it had had its own courthouse. Associate Justice Owen Roberts flipped his vote in that case and effectively redefined the commerce clause. He amended the Constitution, as it were. Had it been a constitutional amendment, this would have been among the most impactful constitutional amendments ever adopted into the Constitution because it changed the nature of the federal government. It turned it from a limited purpose federal government into a general purpose national government. All of this because Owen Roberts was afraid of FDR's threats. It worked. Even though FDR's court packing plan failed legislatively, it succeeded and left an ugly, indelible mark. One that's costing the American people dearly to this day.

Michael Knowles (10:39)

So you're pointing out that even though by the numbers FDR's plan did not work, the political pressure that came about because of that really did transform the court. So is there something about the number nine? I don't want to diminish your book sales by having you give away the answer to the main question of the book, but what is it about this number nine that is so important? The number has changed over the course of the Court, though it hasn't changed in recent memory for the not just for Republicans or Democrats or conservatives or liberals, but for the functioning of our Republic. Why is 9 the right number to keep?

Mike Lee (11:17)

So, as I explained in chapter two of Saving nine, there's nothing magical about the number nine. It's not foreordained by the Constitution. It's not anything that. It's not the inexorable result of common sense. It is rather a compromise that was reached. It was a number that we arrived at as a country in 1869. So for more than a century and a half, it's worked. And we've stuck with it because it works. The Court isn't understaffed. There's no need from a human resources standpoint to add justices to spread the work around. No, it's not that at all. It's just that Joe Biden, well, number one, he views himself as the modern reincarnation of Franklin D. Roosevelt, something that's very scary in and of itself. Number two, he wants to pack the court so he can change the court, so he can remake it in its own image so that the Court can be brought to heel to do his will and make sure that whatever he wants goes on the court.

Mike Lee (12:16)

Well, you know, if Joe Biden were here, Mike, I think he'd say, mike, I knew fdr, FDR was a friend of mine, and I think he probably thinks he's talking to Eleanor Roosevelt now.

Michael Knowles (12:29)

Well, this was one of my favorite observations in the book, actually, is I didn't realize. Senator Lee, I knew that. Both of you gentlemen have a long history with the court. Senator Cruz, you clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist, you've argued cases before the court. Senator Lee, you clerked for Justice Alito, and also your father was the Solicitor General of the United States under Ronald Reagan. So you've got this chapter in the book where you talk about going to the Supreme Court as a kid. And I loved your description of walking up the steps of the Supreme Court. And even though obviously the court's right there in Washington, D.C. you describe it as feeling as though you're leaving the petty swamp of Washington and going into a place with a little more dignity that might be a little bit above the usual fray of politics.

Mike Lee (13:20)

That's right. It was different than any proceeding I had ever been a part of. It was different than other government offices that I had ever seen. There was a reverence for the court, and there was a careful deliberation that I saw in there. You know, at the age of 10, when I started watching Supreme Court arguments for fun, I didn't understand everything that was going on. I didn't understand most of it. It felt like church in a foreign language. You had to hold still. You had to be really quiet and pay close attention. But over time, I started figuring out the rhythm of the place, and I developed a great respect for it. My late father taught me that, you know, even when you disagree with the Court's ruling, you've got to respect the court. Because our entire system depends on the integrity and the independence of the Court. And that this is. This is not a tribunal. This is not a court that sometimes does good things and is mostly bad. It's quite the opposite. It's a good court. It's the best of its kind, I believe, anywhere in the world, Warts and all. It is a court that is basically good, that sometimes makes mistakes because it's run by mortals. But what Joe Biden and the Democrats are trying to do, they're trying to demonize and delegitimize the Court. They're trying to isolate those justices who dare to actually interpret the Constitution based on what it says, and they want to remake it in their own image in order to achieve a different policy outcome. The minute you do that, you rip off that band aid, bad things will happen. And it's not limited to abortion. This will extend into all sorts of other things, and it will end up reflecting the political will of power incumbents, principally presidents of the United States.

Mike Lee (14:58)

So let me take a digression here, Michael. You and I have talked about how Mike is my closest friend in the Senate by far. I love this man. Both his staff and my staff get frightened when we get together. It is not over booze, because Mike is a teeter. Although being Cuban, Irish and Italian, I am not, as Mr. Knowles can attest, since between Scotch and cigars, we have killed a few liver cells together. But when Mike and I get together, we geek out as law geeks in a way that really scares our staff. And they're actually like, okay, enough of this. But I gotta say, I wanna take a digression for something you two were talking about a second ago, which is Mike's dad. So I never had the privilege of knowing Mike's dad, but he is legendary. So listen, the position of Solicitor General of the United States is a unique position in our nation's history. It is the only position in all of government that is required by statute. It is written into statute that the Solicitor General must be learned in the law. That is a requirement of the job. And there have been legendary Solicitors General. There have been legendary Solicitors General who were among the finest advocates ever to be in those marbled halls. And I say with no exaggeration that universally Mike's dad is considered one of the finest Solicitors General to have ever served. He is considered to be simply an extraordinary Supreme Court advocate. And Mike as a kid. One of the reasons I love hanging out with Mike is he literally grew up watching arguments and around the dinner table debating bills of attainder and debating obscure aspects of the Constitution.

Mike Lee (16:57)

On one occasion, he was arguing a case on behalf of the corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. And there was a question in there about a janitor who had not obeyed the teachings of the Church. Justice Scalia asked him a question. Okay, so this janitor, if he were a good member of the church, he would neither drink nor smoke. My dad said something to the effect of, yes, Justice Scalia. And that's a lot more than I can say for some of the Catholics I know. Apparently, the courtroom went entirely quiet. You could hear a pin drop because everybody was nervous about what was gonna happen. Fortunately for my dad, Justice Scalia belted out laughing, and the rest of the court joined him. But he developed this kind of fluidity, this kind of comfort with the court. It was not impertinence, it was respect, but a degree of familiarity that helped them trust him.

Michael Knowles (17:50)

We have this sense right now that things used to be more cordial. They used to be more professional. The court used to function a little bit better, and now it's not functioning well, and you're Getting leaked draft opinions, for goodness sakes. And you're getting really petty fights, especially between the other branches of government. Chuck Schumer saying, we're coming for you, Brett Kavanaugh, I mean, direct threats to the justices. What is your historical sense here? Are conditions at the court really at some relative low right now, or is nostalgia just history after a few drinks? And have things really always been just about this bad?

Mike Lee (18:30)

Well, first of all, I don't think we should confuse a lack of decorum and cordiality and civility among and between the justices within the Court itself. I think it's in pretty good shape. I mean, we're certainly better off than we were in other prior eras, like with Associate Justice James McReynolds, who was openly contemptuous of a number of his colleagues. He was bigoted, he was mean, he was rude. And that sort of thing happened in previous eras of the Court. You don't have that today. I think you actually have a pretty healthy degree of respect and civility among and between the justices. But this one is different. What you're getting at, Michael, is a very significant thing. We have never, ever had a draft opinion of the Court leaked like this. For reasons I don't entirely understand, or maybe I do. The mainstream media keeps trying to downplay this leak by saying, oh, leaks have happened, leaks make. It's not that big of a deal. Happens all the time. Well, yeah. So once or twice in a decade, somebody will leak a rumor about which way a case is going to be decided. It's like betting on the roulette table. Red or black, you've got a 50, 50 shot at being right. And so sometimes those predictions would turn out to be correct. None of them were anything like this, where somebody took a draft majority opinion and leaked it. This is horrendous. So this speaks not ill of the justices themselves, I believe, but of everyone around the court. The way others treat the Court has changed. And what you were pointing out a moment ago, Michael, is very significant. Chuck Schumer going to the steps of the Supreme Court talking about unleashing the whirlwind. I mean, what's up with that? The fact that you would have, I suspect, a law clerk with the temerity to go out and violate everything we know about an attorney's duty of confidentiality and about an attorney's duty to safeguard property and material that's not his or her own and leak it to the press. There's something terribly wrong with that, especially because I suspect what we will find is whoever did it. Knew that they would likely be disbarred and will never practice law again, but also knew that they'd probably get a tenured track faculty position at Yale for it and an anchor position at MSNBC paying millions of dollars a year. That's what's new. And that's frightening.

Mike Lee (21:04)

When Mike and I were both clerks at the court, the two justices who were the closest friends were Justice Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And they hung out. They went to operas together. They're very different. It was almost like the odd couple. Like, you know, Felix and Oscar. He was the ebullient, loud Italian conservative. She was the librarian. Ish, prim and proper. But they got along beautifully.

Michael Knowles (21:33)

I remember sending her a beautiful photo of them. I believe they went to India or something together, or Egypt, I don't know. They were somewhere riding an elephant. And some feminists were angry with Justice Ginsburg because she allowed Justice Scalia to sit in front of her on the elephant. But she did point out that the issue was less one of patriarchy and more one of sheer weight. So, fair enough.

Mike Lee (22:00)

You know, it's good that the institution works. And I'll actually say, even on the political side, in the Senate, most senators get along in the House, that's not true. There is some genuine nastiness and unpleasantness on the House, but in the Senate, out of 100 senators, I'd say there are at most maybe five who are unpleasant. And it's unusual enough that it's an outlier. And most. Most senators, even though they have strong disagreements, get along well. I just wrote a remembrance in a book for Harry Reid's family for his passing. And I wrote a story to his family about one time when I was a brand new senator and Harry Reid was on the Senate floor and was lambasting me, lighting into me. And then when he finished, he started to walk off the floor. He turned to me and winked with a grin. And it was kind of. I laughed out loud. It was pretty funny. So, Mike, you mentioned that your book talks about the fundamental reasons why packing the cord is bad. And the listeners and viewers of this podcast are smart, educated, informed. They care about substance. They care about understanding what's going on. And so if you're a verdict viewer and you're standing at the water cooler tomorrow and somehow the topic of packing the court comes up, what are the best reasons why that is a really, really, really bad idea?

Mike Lee (23:36)

Okay. The very best reasons why it's a bad idea is because in a constitutional republic like ours, we aspire to live under the rule of law, the rule of law, as opposed to the rule of individual men and women. And because we aspire to live under the rule of law, we need an independent branch to resolve disputes about what the law means. We've got three branches of government. It's essentially two pens and a sword. You got the legislative pen that writes the law, decides what the policy should be. You've got the executive branch that wields the sword and enforces the law. But then from time to time, people will disagree about what the law passed by the legislative branch means. You've got to have somebody who can resolve that. You want that somebody, that something to be independent and immune from the political winds that can change from time to time. That's why you need an independent judiciary. The reason I wrote Saving nine and the reason Court packing is so bad, is because if you pack the Court in order to achieve a preferred political outcome, you will have destroyed the independence of the judiciary and we will no longer live under the rule of law. Without the rule of law, the Constitution itself crumbles and the greatest civilization the world has ever known, which has been facilitated by the US Constitution, will exist no more. It is that simple. And it is that easy to do. And this is the irony of this. One of the things that I describe in Saving 9 is the fact that it's funny. It's curious that something so fundamentally counter Constitutional anti. Constitutional is itself not unconstitutional. It should be. And that's why I support Ted's constitutional amendment that he's proposed to lock this in through the Constitution. But it's not unconstitutional. But this is a way in which you could really destroy the Constitution without ever having to amend it. We can't let that happen.

Michael Knowles (25:37)

Now, Senators, before I let you both go, we've been speaking from your positions of expertise on the Court and your legal careers and all your experience up there in that great marbled hall. But now I want to hear about your political guts, because you are both United States Senators and you have a pretty good sense of which way the winds are blowing. So we know that we shouldn't go past nine justices on the Court. But will we, Senator Lee?

Mike Lee (26:03)

I believe we will not. I believe in something that's a statement attributed to Winston Churchill, that the American people can always be counted on to do the right thing after they've exhausted every other alternative. And because I believe in the American people, I don't believe we'll do that. I think the American people will stop it. But you know that Part remains unwritten. It's up to us to decide that. But I want the American people to be armed with this. So whether they buy the book or not is less important to me than that. People, read this. I want all of your readers to be able to read this. So if you want to just buy one copy and loan it thousands of times, that's fine, too. But read this book. Read Saving 9 for a couple reasons. Number one.

Michael Knowles (26:44)

Senator, first, I just have to interrupt you very quickly before, you know, you are just such a kind, polite, nice man, but absolutely, you should not be sharing this book with your friends. Go buy the book. Put your money on the line, folks. Absolutely, you're gonna want your own copy. Sorry, digression over. You were saying.

Mike Lee (27:00)

And they do sell it on Amazon. Thank you, Michael. But, yeah, so buy your copy of Saving 9 and read it. Because when you read it, you're going to be armed with the facts. You're going to be armed with the arguments that you'll need to make. In fact, once you read Saving Nine, you will never lose another political argument again in your life. It's not just about the Supreme Court. This is about the fundamental relationship between the three branches of our government and the relationship between the federal government and the states. In the end, it's also about the relationship between the individual and. And society. The individual and government in general. And so this book is a first of its kind. It synthesizes all of these points and will allow the American people to stand up to this form of attempted tyranny. But we have to be able to recognize it as such, and we need to be armed with the facts in order to be able to stop it.

Mike Lee (27:54)

You asked a minute ago, politically, what is the likelihood of the left succeeding in packing the court? And I agree with Mike. I think it's not gonna happen. But I also think we are unbelievably close to it happening. So my last book was one vote away in the Senate on this. I think we're two votes away. We are two votes away. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are the only two Democrats who are refusing to end the filibuster. There are 50 Democrats in the Senate. 48 of them are ready to do so. We're two votes away. If those two votes flip, they'll end the filibuster. And I think if they end the filibuster, they will pack the cord. You know, the way you open the pod, Michael, the pressure from the left lighting their hair on fire. If and when the Dobbs decision comes down and overturns Roe. We've already seen crazy left wing activists rowing up in kayaks to yell at Manchin and his houseboat and chasing Kyrsten Sinema into the ladies room. That's how bad it's been. And to use a spinal tap reference, I think they'll take it to 11. So I hope and believe Joe and Kirsten will withstand that pressure, but understand how unbelievably close we are to this happening and why it matters to engage and not to wake up one day a week after the Supreme Court decision and go, oh, crap, we now have a 13 justice court.

Michael Knowles (29:31)

That is the key. The urgency here is the key. The best time to have figured this out and fight back against it is yesterday. The second best time is today. And Senator Lee, I think your book is a wonderful contribution to that fight.

Mike Lee (29:45)

Thank you. I certainly think so too. And I want to emphasize what Ted is saying here. The pressure that those two are under is immense. When you couple that with the amount of emotional intensity that's likely to flow from a Dobbs ruling, one that reflects the draft opinion of Justice Alito. And by the way, regardless of how you think you stand on Roe vs Wade, everyone should read Justice Alito's masterpiece of a draft majority opinion in that case. It's phenomenal. It makes the case abundantly clear as to why this is an issue to be decided by lawmakers rather than judges. But the pressure that they're going to feel is going to be intense. The bad things that happen in government, they're always due to what's going to be an emergency or an exception. And the pressure that will be brought to bear on Manchin and cinema will focus on the fact that, look, this time it's different. They got rid of Roe. That's, you know, that's a sacrament on the left. And so this one could flip. And that's why we've got to be ready. The only way we can be ready is if people, not just lawmakers, but Americans generally, if we're educated on the facts, if we understand what happens, what happens when you even threaten to pack the court, then we can stop it. Otherwise it's going to be an uphill slog, one that we might eventually lose.

Michael Knowles (31:09)

That is why people, right now, the show's over. There's no more to listen to. You now have the opportunity to go order the book.

Mike Lee (31:16)

By the way, Michael, I gotta say, just there, I loved that you channeled Ferris Bueller at the end of the movie Go Home. The movie's over. It's done. Go home.

Michael Knowles (31:26)

It's done. The podcast is done. Well, you know, also, I don't wanna leave without saying, one, congratulations on the book, Senator Lee. Two, congratulations on being our only repeat guest. We're going to have to make it a three peat very soon. Thank you for coming. Best of luck with the book. I know it's going to be a big hit. Everyone should go buy it. Senator Cruz, thank you as always for being on your own show. I'm Michael Knowles. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.

Ted Cruz (31:58)

This episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and Security pac, a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations, candidates across the country. In 2022, jobs, freedom and Security PAC plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.