The Truth with Lisa Boothe: From DOGE to the Supreme Court: Navigating the Legal Landscape of Executive Authority

Summary

Summary of "The Truth with Lisa Boothe: From DOGE to the Supreme Court: Navigating the Legal Landscape of Executive Authority"

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show hosted a profound and insightful episode featuring Ilya Shapiro, a renowned legal scholar and Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, to discuss the intricate dynamics of executive authority within the United States government. Released on March 4, 2025, this episode delves deep into the evolution of executive power, the legal challenges faced by administrations, and the broader implications for American institutions.

---

1. Introduction to Ilya Shapiro and Episode Overview

The episode begins with Clay Travis introducing Ilya Shapiro, highlighting his extensive background, including his role as Director of Constitutional Studies and his prolific contributions to legal discourse. Shapiro is commended for his authorship of Lawless: The Miseducation of America's Elites and his significant involvement in filing over 500 Supreme Court briefs. Travis sets the stage for a comprehensive discussion on executive authority, legal battles, and the transformation of governmental institutions.

---

2. The Evolution of DOGE: From US Digital Service to Department of Government Efficiency

[02:04] Shapiro provides a historical perspective on DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency), explaining its origins:

"DOGE was originally created under Obama as the US Digital Service to help federal agencies with their websites and other adaptations to big tech to the Internet age." [04:10]

He elaborates on the transition during the Trump administration:

"Trump renamed the US Digital Service, changing the 'D' from digital to DOGE, and set up the Department of Government Efficiency." [04:10]

Shapiro clarifies DOGE's mission to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse within government operations, emphasizing its legal authority and the structured approach to enhancing governmental efficiency.

---

3. Legal Challenges and Judicial Rulings Faced by DOGE

Shapiro discusses the numerous lawsuits DOGE has encountered, particularly concerning access to government databases and other operational boundaries:

"DOGE has been winning a series of judicial rulings. Initially, judges were issuing temporary restraining orders, but they soon recognized DOGE's actions as within executive authority." [05:57]

He explains that while DOGE's mission is legally grounded, specific actions like firing protected civil servants could face legal obstacles. Overall, DOGE operates within the executive branch's prerogatives, similar to previous governmental reforms such as President Clinton's Reinventing Government project.

---

4. The Empowerment Control Act: Constitutionality and Implications

The conversation shifts to the Empowerment Control Act, a 1974 law scrutinized by the Trump administration:

"Congress appropriates money, and the question is whether the executive branch can redirect those funds for other purposes." [08:49]

Shapiro analyzes the act's constitutionality, stating:

"The president is supposed to enforce the laws that Congress passes. He can interpret existing laws but not create new ones." [09:30]

He posits that while the executive can reorganize functions within agencies, outright refusal to spend appropriated funds without congressional approval would likely be deemed unconstitutional.

---

5. Sanctuary Cities and Federal-State Dynamics

Addressing sanctuary cities, Shapiro examines the tension between federal mandates and state autonomy:

"If the federal government withholds funds because state law enforcement doesn't cooperate with ICE, there could be constitutional battles over federal overreach." [18:34]

He emphasizes that states cannot be compelled to enforce federal laws, citing precedents where courts have upheld the rights of states to maintain sanctuary policies. Shapiro anticipates significant litigation in this arena, potentially escalating to the Supreme Court.

---

6. Removal of Federal Employees and the Humphrey’s Executor Case

Shapiro delves into the complexities surrounding the removal of federal employees, particularly from independent agencies:

"The Humphrey's Executor case carved out exceptions for independent agencies, granting them certain protections that may now be challenged." [20:02]

He predicts that the current Supreme Court, with justices like Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh, might reconsider these protections to enhance executive accountability. This shift could redefine the balance of power between the executive branch and independent regulatory bodies.

---

7. Impact on Higher Education and the DEI Movement

A significant portion of the discussion revolves around Shapiro’s book and his critique of higher education’s shift towards Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives:

"Law schools are experiencing an unhealthy culture as DEI bureaucracies overshadow academic rigor and respect for the rule of law." [25:20]

Shapiro recounts his personal experience at Georgetown Law, where a tweet he posted led to an extensive investigation, highlighting the suppression of dissenting viewpoints and the rise of ideological conformity. He argues that the proliferation of DEI offices has diverted resources from academic missions, fostering an environment where bureaucratic agendas dictate institutional priorities.

---

8. Shifts in Academia and Conservative Responses

Addressing the broader societal impact, Shapiro discusses the decline of DEI initiatives and the conservative resurgence in academia:

"There’s been a 'vibe shift' post the November election, with institutions like Harvard reassessing their DEI commitments due to alumni pressure and judicial scrutiny." [35:04]

He notes the emergence of alternative institutions, such as the University of Austin, which aim to provide platforms for free speech and academic excellence outside traditional frameworks. Shapiro remains cautiously optimistic about the potential for reform and the restoration of academic integrity.

---

9. Legislative and Executive Actions Against DEI

Shapiro outlines the Trump administration's efforts to curb DEI initiatives through federal funding restrictions:

"The Education Department has launched investigations into schools for anti-Semitism and free speech violations, leveraging federal funds to enforce compliance." [36:47]

He underscores the importance of legislative support to sustain these efforts, advocating for a multifaceted approach involving state legislators, private employers, and alumni activism to dismantle entrenched DEI bureaucracies.

---

10. Ilya Shapiro’s "Lawless: The Miseducation of America's Elites"

In discussing his book, Shapiro articulates the critical failures within higher education that have led to ideological bias and the erosion of legal and academic standards:

"The book explores how critical theory and bureaucratic overreach have undermined the legitimacy of American legal institutions." [25:20]

He criticizes law schools for breeding gatekeepers sympathetic to leftist ideologies, which he contends jeopardize the foundational principles of American law and governance.

---

11. Conclusion and Future Outlook

As the episode draws to a close, Shapiro reflects on the ongoing battle between progressive ideologies and efforts to reclaim institutional integrity:

"It will take concerted efforts from legislators, private sectors, and alumni to effect meaningful change in higher education and beyond." [40:32]

He anticipates continued legal challenges, especially concerning birthright citizenship and executive authority, projecting significant Supreme Court involvement. Shapiro remains hopeful that increased awareness and strategic actions will counteract the current trajectories in government and education.

---

Notable Quotes:

• "DOGE, in terms, stands for Department of Government Efficiency and hired a bunch of people led by Elon Musk as Special government employees." – Ilya Shapiro [04:10]

• "The president is supposed to enforce the laws that Congress passes. He's not supposed to create new law." – Ilya Shapiro [09:30]

• "Law schools are experiencing an unhealthy culture as DEI bureaucracies overshadow academic rigor and respect for the rule of law." – Ilya Shapiro [25:20]

• "It’s going to take an all of the above push. State legislators and governors can and are in some cases acting to abolish DEI bureaucracies." – Ilya Shapiro [40:32]

---

Key Takeaways:

• DOGE’s Role and Authority: DOGE, evolved from the US Digital Service, operates within the executive branch to streamline government operations, facing legal challenges primarily on procedural grounds.

• Empowerment Control Act: The legality of redirecting federal funds by the executive is under scrutiny, with significant implications for executive-legislative relations.

• Sanctuary Cities: Ongoing legal battles will define the extent of federal authority over state policies, particularly in immigration enforcement.

• Higher Education’s DEI Crisis: Shapiro highlights the detrimental impact of DEI initiatives on academic integrity and legal education, urging a return to foundational principles.

• Legal and Institutional Reformation: The Supreme Court is poised to play a pivotal role in resolving conflicts over executive authority and institutional reforms, with long-term effects on governance and education.

This episode offers a comprehensive exploration of the evolving legal landscape, executive power, and the intersection of politics and education, providing listeners with a nuanced understanding of the challenges and potential reforms shaping America's future.

Transcript

[Lenovo Representative]

When it comes to playtime, never let your squad down. Unlock elite gaming [e-mail] Push your gameplay beyond performance with 13th gen Intel Core processors. Upgrade to smooth, high quality streaming with Intel Wi Fi 6e and maximize game performance with enhanced overclocking. Win the tech search and head to.

[Amica Insurance Representative]

Lenovo.Com lenovo lenovo@ameca Insurance, we know it's more than just a car. It's the two door coupe that was there for your first drive, the hatchback that took you cross country and back, and the minivan that tackles the weekly carpool for the cars you couldn't live without. Trust Ameca Auto Insurance Amica Empathy is our best policy.

[Lisa Mattress Representative]

Tired of restless nights at lisa? They know good sleep is essential for mental, physical and emotional health. From memory foam mattresses to hybrids that keep you cool all night long, Lisa's mattresses offer exceptional comfort and support with free delivery and 100 nights to try out your mattress in the comfort of your home. Go to Lisa.com today and get 20% off all mattresses. That's L-E-E-S-A.com and use code IHEART for an extra $50 off your purchase. Remember, no matter who you are, there's a Lisa just for you.

[Greenlight Representative]

This message comes from Greenlight. Ready to start talking to your kids about financial literacy? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app that teaches kids and teens how to earn, save, spend wisely and invest with your guardrails in place. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores, automate allowance, and keep an eye on what your kids are spending with real time notifications. Join millions of parents and kids building healthy financial habits together on Greenlight. Get started risk [e-mail] iheart did you.

[Ilya Shapiro]

Know that Doge was originally created under Obama as the US digital service? So how did it become today's Doge? Ask that question to our next guest. Also, the Trump administration is facing something like over 80 lawsuits ranging from issues like refugees to birthright citizenships to Doge's access to government databases. Will the left be able to hold up his agenda in the courts? Also, what's the Empowerment Control Act? I'm gonna ask all these questions to our next guest who is a brilliant legal mind. He is also the author of Lawless the Miseducation of America's Elites. And he knows something about it because when he was at Georgetown Law, he faced a four month investigation over a tweet. So what was that tweet and what was that investigation like. And what did he learn about the miseducation of America's elites during that time? His name is Ilya Shapiro. You've probably heard him. You've seen him on tv, You've read something that he's written, because he has written a lot. He's a brilliant legal mind and currently the Senior Fellow Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and Director of Constitutional Studies. You have read his work, You've seen him on tv. The guy is brilliant. He's also done something like filed more than 500 front of the court briefs in the Supreme Court. So he knows a thing or two about the law. It's a fascinating conversation with a fascinating guy. So stay tuned for Ilya Shapiro. Ilya Shapiro, I really appreciate you making the time. Obviously, there are a lot of lawsuits that the administration's facing and a lot, a lot of legal issues to get into. So I'm looking forward to having you break this all down for us. So I really appreciate you making the time.

My pleasure.

So you say something that surprised me, that DOGE was originally created under Obama as the US Digital Service. So explain that. You know, why was it created then and then? How is it being being used today as doge?

Yeah, indeed, it was created under Obama as the US Digital Service to help federal agencies with their websites and other adaptations to big tech to the Internet age. And it was an agency within an office, within the Executive office of the President, just like the White House Counsel's office or the Council of Economic Advisers or the there's an office on Science and Technology. All of these things that are not Senate confirmed, they're just appointed by the president as staffers, aides, assistants on various issues. And what Trump did was rename the US Digital Service, change the D from digital to doge. And DOGE in terms, stands for Department of Government Efficiency and hired a bunch of people led by Elon Musk as Special government employees. That's a technical legal term from the relevant statute, which means they're duly appointed to help with all sorts of digital stuff and to look at data from different agencies. And they're charged with cutting out waste, fraud, and abuse. So they are fully, legally authorized. This is not just, you know, Elon gave a bunch of money to Trump and therefore now gets to be some shadowy, I don't know, Rasputin figure with, with no legal authority. It's, you know, certain things that DOGE might be trying to do, such as firing workers who have civil service protections might run into legal heat. But for the most part, the mission the structure, the authority of Doge is not contestable.

You know, and we have seen that legal heat, I guess. What limitations does Doge face? You know, there have been lawsuits, particularly with access to certain databases, certain government databases. So are there limitations here or kind of walk us through the legal angles of all of that?

Yeah. And most recently, Doge has been winning a series of, of judicial rulings. I think in the early stages, it was just so new that judges didn't know what to do with it. So they were issuing temporary restraining orders for 10 or 14 days. And then they realized that it was improper to stop, say, the Department of the Treasury Secretary, the Senate confirmed Treasury Secretary or his agents from looking at payroll processing systems and things like that, that what Trump was doing was wholly within what Mosque was doing was wholly within the executive branch. And it is up to the executive to reorganize itself. You know, there's some questions about, you know, are they not fulfilling what Congress legislated? Congress appropriated X million for, you know, usaid. How can they not spend that? That's called impoundment, and it's illegal. Well, I mean, there was a pause and Congress didn't specify which specific contracts had to be funded. You know, the $20,000 for a transgender opera in Peru or something like that. They don't, Congress doesn't micromanage like that. And so as long as the administration ends up spending the appropriated money by the end of the fiscal year, they'd be okay. But simply say, moving some functions of aid into, into the State Department, closing some contracts. This is all within kind of normal or management of the executive branch. In fact, President Clinton probably comes closest to what this might be with his Reinventing Government project. You might recall 30 years ago, Al Gore was tasked with reinventing government. Part of that was offering buyouts to federal employees, just like Doge has done, apparently netting 75,000 early retirement, something like that. Part of it is streamlining agencies. So, you know, there's very little new under the sun, even if Elon Musk's kind of larger than life figure and excitable character makes this look like something unusual. And by the way, Lisa, I think I'm still flabbergasted that Doge has become the lightning rod for the resistance or the opposition to Trump this time around, in light of the seemingly more politically controversial issues that the various other executive orders have touched.

So you'd mentioned empowerment, and we're already hearing a lot about it. We're going to be hearing a lot about the Empowerment control Act. A 1974 law in the coming or, you know, throughout the Trump administration, rather, Trump believes that it's unconstitutional. You know, essentially for the audience, Congress appropriates money. And what's in question about the Empowerment Control act is can the executive branch and the president say, you know what, maybe I'm not going to give all this money over here or maybe use it for other purposes. So that's sort of that issue. You'd be able to explain the legal angles of it, obviously more in depth than I just did. Is it unconstitutional? You know, sort of. What's your analysis of the Empowerment Control Act?

Well, the president is supposed to enforce the laws that Congress passes. He's not supposed to create new law, but he can interpret existing law, as presidents always do, to say, well, this part is unconstitutional, I can't enforce it that way, or we're going to interpret this in light of this other statute. And then there are lawsuits about whether he's right in that interpretation and things like that. The Impoundment act, it was a post Watergate reform in the 70s. And it's always had some controversy about whether, you know, if the president, in his judgment, doesn't want to spend certain money that he can accomplish the goal that Congress laid out in, in, in a particular federal program, you know, why should he just spend money for no particular reason? If, if, you know, the, the congressional, the legislation has been fulfilled, but it's never been litigated that, you know, we could be set for that again, it's not, it's not ripe, as lawyers say right now, because you can't, you can't challenge a pause or you shouldn't be able to because that's not a final action. And the President does have until the end of the fiscal year in September to spend the money that Congress has appropriated. That's when a, an Empowerment act challenge, if he decides not to spend it all, when that could be had. And it's an interesting point. You, I guess courts will be looking at. Has the president fulfilled his duty under the take Care clause, the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed? You know, does that mean he has to spend all the money that Congress has appropriated if, if the laws are being faithfully executed? So that's fleshing out a little bit where, where the debate might be if it comes to it.

Now, do you think this would make its way to the Supreme Court? I mean, we're going to see, you know, probably a lot of lawsuits. You know, New York City has filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration for $80 million that they say FEMA funding should be going to them, that is not going to them. You know, does the city have standing in that? Like, where do you think this all.

That's a different sort of there.

Yeah.

Eric Adams, the mayor, and we can get into his particular foibles in a moment, but he is in alignment with the Trump administration in that they're trying to stop or claw back monies that were going to migrant asylum programs and housing and things like that under the Biden administration and arguing that this is an improper use of FEMA funds. And I think they're probably right. They have a very strong case about what natural disaster funds are supposed to be going to. But that's a separate sort of issue, I think would be recipients of contracts that all of a sudden are rescinded may have some sort of right. If they have Reliance costs, they were assured that they got this contract and so they went ahead and built out some infrastructure, what have you.

And then.

And then that all got canceled. Potentially, at least American recipients might have some sort of standing there. We're not talking about international development work. But beyond that, states have to be harmed as states. They can't be suing on behalf of their. On behalf of their citizens. Generally, courts, courts frown on that. So if there are grants going to states in some way that are now being stopped, some states might want to sue over those. There are separate lawsuits that certainly will put the federal and state governments against each other in court over sanctuary cities, for example, whether state and local officials have to cooperate and to what extent with ice, they're not allowed to interfere with ice, at least even if they're not required to cooperate affirmatively. But what does interfere mean? So those sorts of suits are certainly headed our way. The Supreme Court, inevitably, every presidential term, decides some conflicts about how or challenges to how the executive branch implements the law. I think the issue that's on the fastest track to the Supreme Court is probably birthright citizenship. Not this term, but I can imagine next term. So by the summer of 2026 will have a ruling as to whether the Trump administration's executive order that restricts citizenship to only to kids of citizens and permanent residents, whether that is lawful. And here's a little preview of something that I've been thinking in this vein. It could be that the median justices, Chief Justice Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh, might say, well, the Constitution isn't clear here and none of our precedents provide a rule for decision, which is true. But to change so many decades of established practice, it would require an act of Congress rather than a mere executive action. That could be the middle way. They decide that we've got more with.

Ilya in just a moment. But first, after more than a year of war, terror and pain in Israel, all of Israel is brokenhearted after learning of the tragic deaths of the Biba's children who were held hostage in Gaza. And so many are still hurting throughout the Holy Land, where the need for aid continues to grow. The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews has supported and continues to support the families of hostages and other victims of the October 7 terror attacks with your help. IFCJ has provided financial and emotional help to hostages and their families and to those healing and rebuilding their broken homes and broken bodies. But the real work is just beginning. Your gift will help provide critically needed support to families in Israel whose lives continue to be destroyed by terror and uncertainty as Israel remains surrounded by enemies. Give a gift to bless Israel and her people by visiting supportifcj.org that's one word supportifcj.org or call 888.488. IFCJ. That's 888.488 ifcj during tax season, your.

[LifeLock Representative]

Sensitive info does a lot of traveling to places you can't control, stopping off at payroll, your accountant or tax preparer and countless other data centers on its way to the irs. Any of them can expose you to identity theft because they all have the info on your W2. Just the ticket for criminals to steal your identity. No wonder the IRS reported tax fraud due to identity theft went up 20% last year. You need Lifelock. They monitor millions of data points per second and alert you to threats you could miss if your identity is stolen. LifeLock's US based restoration specialists will fix it, backed by the million dollar protection package and restoration is guaranteed or your money back. Don't let identity thieves take you for a ride. Get Lifelock protection for tax season and beyond. Join now and save up to 40% your first year. Call 1-800-LIFELOCK and use promo code iheart or go to lifelock.com iheart for 40%. Terms apply.

[Lenovo Representative]

Stop hitting snooze on new tech. Upgrade the whole [e-mail] Unlock AI experiences with the ThinkPad X1 Carbon powered by Intel Core Ultra processors so you can work, create and boost productivity all on one device. Win the tech search for business [e-mail] Lenovo Lenovo.

[Amica Insurance Representative]

Every day our world gets a little more connected, but a little further apart. But then there are Moments that remind us to be more human.

[Ilya Shapiro]

Thank you for calling Amica Insurance.

Hey, I was just in an accident.

Don't worry, we'll get you taken care of.

[Amica Insurance Representative]

At Amica, we understand that looking out for each other isn't new, new or groundbreaking. It's human. Amica empathy is our best policy.

[Lisa Mattress Representative]

Tired of restless nights? At Lisa, they know good sleep is essential for mental, physical and emotional health. From memory foam mattresses to hybrids that keep you cool all night long, Lisa's mattresses offer exceptional comfort and support with free delivery and 100 nights. To try out your mattress in the comfort of your home, go to Lisa.com today and get 20% off all mattresses. That's L E-E-S A.com and use code IHEART for an extra 50 off your purchase. Remember, no matter who you are, there's a Lisa just for you.

[Ilya Shapiro]

Regarding the sanctuary cities, I guess who is standing in that? You know, where does that go? You know, what are your thoughts on that?

If the federal government tries to hold back or not award, say, law enforcement funds because state law enforcement isn't cooperating with ice, there will be a lawsuit over whether that restriction is germane, whether it's constitutional. Have you already agreed to it? If existing funds, existing contracts or grants are in jeopardy, then there's a question of whether that's the federal government commandeering state officials. That is, under our Constitution, federal authorities can't tell state authorities what to do. They can't even tell them to enforce federal law. But they, the state authorities can't interfere with federal enforcement of federal law. So whether that's with respect to marijuana, which is still illegal at the federal level but legal in many, many states, whether it's with immigration enforcement, that's where the clash is. The courts have held that states can have sanctuary policies, but at what point does non cooperation become interference, you know.

And of course, you know, lawsuits over firing federal employees. There are a lot of protections there. In some instances. I know President Trump has done things before like, you know, Schedule F reclassifying.

Federal workers between personnel. Yeah, there's a difference between civil servant personnel changes, where schedule F comes in trying to designate more people as political appointees or having responsibility for policy setting, in which case they have to be, goes the argument, they have to be more accountable to the president, removable, replaceable, et cetera. Whether certain civil service protections or public sector union contracts are unconstitutional because they hamstrung the executive and the executive branch can't fulfill its duties and exercise its constitutional authority, these are open questions. And then at the higher levels with say the head of the National Labor Relations Board or the Federal Election Commission, all of these Alphabet so called independent agencies, removal authority over, over those Senate confirmed officials, that is an issue that's definitely going to go to the Supreme Court as well. The acting Solicitor General, the government's head lawyer before the Supreme Court, has notified the Senate, for example, that it will no longer be defending the constitutionality of or the removal protections for those officers and is questioning a 90 year old Supreme Court precedent called Humphreys Executor, which carved out from the normal rule that the President can replace officers of the United States because that's how constitutional accountability in the executive branch worked. So that case, Humphrey's executor said, well, certain officers exercise sometimes quasi legislative, quasi judicial functions. So the Federal Trade Commission adjudicates disputes of certain kinds or it promulgates regulations, which is kind of like a legislative function. That's why its leaders have certain protections. The court found in that case. I think the Humphreys executor is ripe for reconsideration and I think a majority of the current membership of the Supreme Court is likely to side with the Trump administration in enforcing more accountability. You can see that from a handful of cases that have been decided in the last last 10, 15 years.

I mean, I do think the one, one big benefit of President Trump is we've all learned a lot more about how government works. It's all kind of a lot more attention than it has in, you know, administrations prior. When it comes to reforming government, we're certainly seeing a more muscular government from President Trump than, you know, maybe some Republicans in the past. When it comes to reforming government, what can President Trump do on his own unilaterally? And then what does he need Congress to do?

The executive can't close the Department of Education, say, or usaid. They were created by Congress. It would take an act of Congress to shut them down. The executive could reorganize certain functions, like it could say, okay, the Office of Civil Rights at Education. That's duplicative of what the Justice Department is or should be doing. So we'll move all of those functions into doj, Student loan administration. That's not an educational function. That's, you know, economic financial piece. We're going to send that to the Treasury Department to operate things like that. Or, you know, we're going to cancel certain kinds of contracts that violate that implement dei because we consider DEI to be unconstitutional. Violation of civil rights, equal protection, things like that, but it can't shut the entire structure down and just send the funds back as block grants to the states. That would take an act of Congress.

But could you roll USAID into the State Department, for instance?

I think most of its functions could be, yes. And I think that's what they're trying to do.

And would that be constitutional then?

I think so. I think so. You know, there's very, you know, Congress created the agency and it specified certain things. So I haven't looked at USAID's organic statute, but, you know, whatever Congress specified has to be, has to be done. And, and back to the Impoundment act, what, you know, what, what money it appropriated to implement certain programs, that money, you know, if you take those functions into the, that money would go there and then have to be spent. Or again, you have this fight over whether the, the, the law is being executed more cheaply or, or what have you. So it's, you know, there's, there's certainly a gray area. It's. Sometimes it's hard to draw the line between reorganization within the executive branch and dissolving or, or disabling an agency that, that Congress created and wants to exist. But that's the general outline. Yeah.

And I know the Clinton administration also considered doing that as well, rolling USAID into State Department. I want to get to your book because that's really interesting as well, your book, Lawless the Miseducation of America's Elites. You talk about how in the past, you know, Columbia Law School, for instance, produced leaders like Franklin Roosevelt or Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Now it produces window smashing activists. How did that happen? Yeah, how did that happen?

Yeah. So the book's called Lawless the Miseducation of America's Elites. It came out about a month ago, just over a month ago, from Harper Collins broadside imprint. And it builds on my so called lived experience at Georgetown Law three years ago where I was investigated for a tweet and kind of.

A tweet, no less. A tweet? Yeah, a tweet, Yeah.

I got to see the kind of, the dirty underbelly of the failures of ideology, bureaucracy and leadership. To wit, when I was in Law School 20 years ago, we had debates between liberals and conservatives, left and right, originalism, living constitutionalism, what have you. But we took the, the law or the legitimacy of American institutions as a given. Now there were these theories that considered legal institutions to be illegitimate because hopelessly imbued with racism, sexism, heteronormativity, all of these different things. They have to be torn down and rebuilt according to a different privilege hierarchy. Your rights and freedoms depend on whether you're part of a class deemed oppressor or oppressed, etc. Critical theory, critical legal studies. We had thought that that was something from the 80s and early 90s and had been relegated to some, you know, dusty corner of the philosophy or sociology department or something. But the crits came roaring back in the last, in the last decade. And there's a lot of that kind of undermining of respect for the rule of law taught by law schools themselves, which is a big problem. Then you have the bureaucracy, which might even be a bigger problem than the shift in the faculty from education to that kind of activism that I described. And it's remarkable how much non teaching staff or administrators have grown relative to faculty, relative to student bodies. All schools now have more non teaching staff than faculty. And that's part of why tuition has skyrocketed. It's also part of why we've had, especially in the last decade, especially in the last five years, the growth of dei. Because bureaucrats, incentive always, whether in the public sector, private sector, nonprofit, what have you, is to justify and grow their authority and budget. So once you started having these offices that were looking to inculcate students in a culture of viewing issues through lenses of race and sex and identity and what have you, they needed to manufacture outrage and have things to investigate and adjudicate and punish. And away we went. So oftentimes, the bureaucracy, and especially now the DEI bureaucracy, is the tail that wags the dog of the whole educational project because this gets to the third major failure. Deans and presidents and provosts are not themselves woke radicals, but they're spineless cowards. And they kowtow toward this illiberal mob, whether coming from the students buttressed by the, the structures and dynamics put in place by the, by the non teaching staff, the bureaucrats and, you know, their careers bureaucrats, and they're trying to climb the greasy pole and they, they facilitate the, the takeover, this illiberal takeover. And I want to be clear, and I'll end with this and let you ask the next thing, that this is not just the latest conservative lament about decades of faculty bias or the hippies taking over the faculty lounge. In fact, those hippies, the Berkeley free Speech movement of the 1960s, would now be considered retrograde white supremacists by these woke radicals. So all of these failures combined is what's led to a very unhealthy culture in higher education generally. In Law schools specifically. And I focus on law schools not just because I'm a lawyer, but because regardless of what happens in English or sociology departments, that's unfortunate when they go crazy. Law schools graduate our next generation of gatekeepers of our political and legal institutions, literally the foundations on which American prosperity and liberty rests. So it's, it's worrisome if that goes all a kilter.

Well, and we've already seen how some of that has played out with, you know, some of the, what Trump was facing in the courts, particularly in D.C. and in, in Georgia, and also, you know, what a lot of these January Sixers faced and sort of the unfair treatment that they received in the courts as well. So, I mean, it is scary that these are the people that are going to be shaping the law for, you know, for, you know, years and years and years to come. Decades to come. So what was the tweet that was subject to this four month investigation?

So I had been at Cato, the Cato institute for nearly 15 years and got an opportunity to take my career in a different direction, to become the executive director of Georgetown center for the Constitution. And a few days before I was due to start that job was when Justice Breyer's retirement announcement came. And so I was doing a lot of media that day in January of 2022, because my previous book, Supreme Disorder, Judicial Nomin nations in the Politics of America's Highest Court, was right on point. And I was getting more and more upset with Joe Biden hewing to his campaign promise from 2020 to appoint a black woman to the Supreme Court. Nothing wrong with appointing a black woman, of course, but I wouldn't restrict my candidate pool, whether for janitor, let alone justice by race and sexual. And so I late at night, after doom scrolling Twitter, not a best practice, I've done it, offered up, I offered up the hot take that if I were Biden or if I were a Democratic president, I would pick the chief Judge of the D.C. circuit, the second most powerful court in the land. A man by the name of Sri Srinivasan happens to also be an Indian American immigrant. So check some demographic boxes, but alas, not the right ones under what I call today's privilege hierarchy or hierarchy of intersectionality. And so, given Twitter's character limitation, I said, if Biden maintains his promise, we will end up with a, quote, lesser black woman. And it's those three words in artfully phrased, I clearly meant less qualified than the candidate that I was proposing as the best pick that got me in trouble. Over. I hit send on that, went to bed, and overnight my ideological enemies went for my head. And that, that led to what I call four days of hell, as it wasn't clear whether I'd be fired right there. Then four months of purgatory as I was onboarded but immediately suspended pending investigation into whether I'd violated harassment and anti discrimination policies. And the longer that so called investigation went, the more it seemed like it was a farce. And when I finally was reinstated on the technicality that I wasn't yet an employee when I tweeted so the policies didn't apply, this little jurisdictional niche that some high powered lawyer found once the students were off campus so they couldn't protest. But then I got the fine print, this report from the Office of Institutional Equity Diversity and Affirmative Action idea. And that made clear that the next time that I offended someone or otherwise transgressed progressive orthodoxy, I'd be creating a hostile educational environment. And I realized I could not do the job I was hired to do. So I had to quit. And I did what lawyers call a noisy exit, publishing my resignation letter in the Wall Street Journal, as one does, and then announcing my move to the Manhattan Institute on Fox News. And away we went after that. And I've been trying to use this platform that I've been given to shine a light on the rot in academia.

Well, I respect the noisy exit in that regard. You know, we're seeing DEI die to a certain degree. We've seen a lot of companies jump ship in recent months, you know, particularly after President Trump's reelection, as well as the actions that he has taken with his administration. Are we seeing that on some of these campuses? And, you know, what do you think that impact will be at, you know, higher education and at some of these universities across the country, in society more broadly?

I'm optimistic. There's definitely been, you know, what people call talk about a vibe shift, which was instantiated in the November election. But just more broadly, whether in, in, in private enterprise, in the culture, it feels like a, like a fever has broken in academia. I'm not quite sure the jury is still out. There's not quite the same feedback mechanism. There isn't a critical mass to push back on the excesses of this left wing illiberalism. And there are so many vested stakeholders, you know, the national association of Higher Education Diversity Officers, if you can believe that's an organization, has 10,000 members. They're not going to be like, okay, well, I guess I'll learn to code now. You know, they're going to, they're going to resist. And just like Brown v. Board didn't overnight mean desegregation in the Jim Crow south, there is massive resistance both to the Supreme Court's order not to use racial preferences in admissions and to Trump's DEI orders. We'll see if the Education and Justice departments keep their foot on the gas in these investigations, threatening to withhold federal funding, research funding and otherwise from recalcitrant schools. There's, there's quite a battle that, that's being set up. So it's, you know, I'm less pessimistic than, than I was when I left Georgetown nearly three years ago, but the, the battle has been joined.

What can, can the Trump administration do anything to address this miseducation?

You know, they're trying, they're trying.

I mean they're, what would you, yeah. Get into that.

Existing, there are existing strings on federal funds, which is why the Education Department two weeks ago launched investigations of half a dozen schools for anti Semitism and free speech violations and all these things like that. So yeah, if you take federal money, there's, there's strings attached to everything from accounting standards to non discrimination rules to free speech protections. And so hopefully something comes of it because the Biden administration was kind of shamed into opening some investigations after October 7, but then they quickly closed them with less than a slap on the wrist at the end of the Biden term. So hopefully there is going to be teeth, investigatory oversight teeth for these executive actions. But of course, you live by the executive action, you die by the executive action and hopefully some of this will get codified as legislation.

We've got to take a quick commercial break. More with Ilya on the other side.

[Lenovo Representative]

Stop hitting snooze on new tech. Upgrade the whole [e-mail] Unlock AI experiences with the ThinkPad X1 carbon. Powered by Intel Core Ultra processors so you can work, create and boost productivity all on one device. Win the tech search for business [e-mail] Lenovo Lenovo.

[Amica Insurance Representative]

At AMECA Insurance, we know it's more than just a car. It's the two door coupe that was there for your first drive. The hatchback that took you cross country and back and the minivan that tackles the weekly carpool for the cars you couldn't live without. Trust Ameca Auto Insurance. Ameca Empathy is our best policy.

[Lisa Mattress Representative]

Tired of restless nights at Lisa? They know good sleep is essential for mental, physical and emotional health. From memory foam mattresses to hybrids that keep you Cool all night long. Lisa's mattresses offer exceptional comfort and support with free delivery and a hundred nights. To try out your mattress in the comfort of your home, go to leesa.com today and get 20% off all mattresses. That's leesa.com and use code iheart for an extra $50 off your purchase. Remember, no matter who you are, there's a Lisa just for you.

[Ilya Shapiro]

Mom, I need to lay low for a few days.

Lay low.

What's going on?

[Greenlight Representative]

I only paid for this.

[Ilya Shapiro]

Hyundai Tucson. Christopher Allen Lynch. Deal's so right, it almost feels wrong. Get the car or SUV you want at the Hyundai Getaway sales event right now. Get 2.99% APR for 72 months on the Hyundai Santa Fe Tucson or Elantra. Visit your local Hyundai dealer today. Offers end March 31. Call 562-314-4603 for details.

Well, we also saw, you know, alumni of some of these universities, particularly when we saw the anti Semitism happening across the country, you know, say, hey, look, we're not going to give you X amount, you know, like these really, really rich people being like, oh, we're going to withhold funds. And so that led to, you know, some turnover with these university presidents. Is that sort of, you know, another plan of action that, you know, people should start taking more and kind of, you know, threatening their own personal funding of some of these universities?

Absolutely. Look, it's going to take an all of the above push. State legislators and governors can and are in some cases acting to abolish DEI bureaucracies, get rid of diversity statement litmus tests for hiring, other kinds of preferences for admissions. It's going to take private employers to say that, look, we can't hire from your school because there's no guarantee of quality there. And the kids show up entitled and, you know, we don't want to deal with that, let alone the, you know, being a Hamas supporter or yelling at federal judges, we hope your daughters get raped. And, and things like this that has happened in the last few years. It takes donors and trustees and alumni and universities, even rich ones like Harvard with a $60 billion endowment, notices when there's a 5% decline either in overall amount of giving or in the rate of giving, the percentage of alumni that donate. That's a, that's a warning bell for them. And so it's not. You don't have to be a multimillionaire donor to get the attention of your alma mater, you know, get together with a bunch of friends and there's there's free speech coalitions, there's all sorts of kind of alumni groups that are, have been created in various schools, especially at the so called elite ones where these sorts of problems are the most acute. And so you can, you can have an impact that way. And alternate institutions. The University of Austin, for example, just opened its doors to students this year. Their first cohort of I think 90 freshmen. I spoke there about a month ago. It's a great example of a kind of parallel institution. Some centers and institutes are being created within existing schools. Arizona State, unc, University of Florida, Florida State. Lots of different schools now have centers for excellence or civics or, or classics, all of these kinds of teachings. That's supposed to be the liberal arts mission of the broader university, but has been forced into these college within a college sort of thing. So yeah, we're in a time of flux and some institutions no doubt will fail or lose influence and even more public confidence, some might be righted.

And we've seen judges too, you know, say, hey, look like Judge James Ho saying I'm not going to hire, you know, law students from Yale due to some of this woke stuff and you know, some judges stepping up and kind of.

And that's gotten Yale's attention. The, the dean there recognizes that Yale has gotten some black eyes and purely out of personal self interest because she, Heather Gerkin, wants to be the president of an Ivy League school at some point and she realizes that if her reign, her tenure at Yale Law is seen as dysfunctional, that's not going to happen. So yes, she's. The boycott, the publicity from these various scandals, she's reassigned bureaucrats. She's hired a senior professor, Keith Whittington from Princeton and given him a bunch of money to do civil discourse stuff, hired a junior professor who had clerked for Alito. So some of more savvy educational leaders I think can get the message from a combination of alumni giving bad publicity. Yeah, Judicial employer pressure, all these different things.

Is there anything else you'd like to get across about the book before we go?

I published for the first time anywhere that report that I got from Georgetown's DEI office. And it's funny, the publisher, my publisher, you know, you go through a legal review, of course, and they had no problem with, you know, my, the choice words that I had for Georgetown and its dean and administrators and what have you. But they said, look, that report, technically Georgetown might have a copyright on it. And so we need to transform the work from an intellectual property perspective. So they had me put in some snide comments every couple of paragraphs. So anyway, I'll leave that to your listeners to buy it on Kindle or Audible or the hardcover book itself.

That's a good tease. Always good to leave everyone with the tease. Ilia Shapiro, really appreciate your time. Really interesting conversation. I appreciate it so much. So thank you.

Thank you. And Lisa, this administration, the Trump too is so much better lawyered than the last one was. So all of these things and you know, the, the shock and awe and they really use their, their transition time well and, and the lawyers are ready. So I think most of this stuff that, you know, it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff sometimes, but most of this stuff I think will get upheld in court.

Well, I'm actually glad you mentioned that because that is one of the questions I was going to ask you that I forgot to. So you're, you're helping me cover all the ground that I wanted to cover. So I wanted to ask you about how his legal team is doing. So I'm glad you got that in there. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it.

My pleasure, Lisa. Take care.

Azilia Shapiro, appreciate him for taking the time. Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday. But of course you can listen throughout the week. Until next time.

[Lisa Mattress Representative]

Tired of restless nights at Lisa. They know good sleep is essential for mental, physical and emotional health. From memory foam mattresses to hybrids that keep you cool all night long, Lisa's mattresses offer exceptional comfort and support with free delivery and a hundred nights to try out your mattress in the comfort of your home. Go to leesa.com today and get 20% off all mattresses. That's leesa.com and use code iheart for an extra 50 off your purchase. Remember, no matter who you are, there's a Lisa just for you.

[Lenovo Legion Representative]

The battlefield is set, the stakes are high. The only thing standing between you and victory. Nothing. Ascend to the pinnacle of gaming greatness with Lenovo Legion laptops, towers and the new award winning Legion Go, the world's first officially licensed handheld. Powered by SteamOS. Legion relentlessly pushes gaming technology forward with towers built for raw untamed power. Laptops with best in class AI tuning that sharpen your reflexes and the Legion Go, a handheld for serious gaming on the go. Stay ahead with lightning fast responsiveness on a stunning 16 inch PureSight display. Keep your cool with cold front thermal technology engineered for marathon sessions and with all day battery life. The game never stops until you say so. So check out lenovo.com legion Lenovo Lenovo Empowering creators everywhere.

[Greenlight Representative]

This message comes from Greenlight. Ready to start talking to your kids about financial literacy? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app that teaches kids and teens how to earn, save, spend wisely and invest with your guardrails in place. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores, automate allowance and keep an eye on what your kids are spending with real time notifications. Join millions of parents and kids building healthy financial habits together on Greenlight. Get started risk [e-mail] iheart@ David's Bridal.

[Lenovo Legion Representative]

Love is in every stitch from the initial sketch to the final details. Each style is designed with exquisite craftsmanship. Every wedding gown, bridesmaid look, prom dress and special occasion style in between features handcrafted details filled with love. Come see the magic in person. Book an appointment and sign up for diamond loyalty to save 15% on your first purchase. Earn points towards special rewards and [e-mail].