Janet pess wants to know, can Texas put up the fence on land? Yes. As I understand it, yes. It’s a complicated situation. It is very frustrating, I will be blunt, because you had four conservative justices willing to give Texas its due, remember? So the bottom line is this, when trying to prevent illegal migrants from entering Texas from a foreign country, who has jurisdiction? Texas governor Greg Abbot formally invoked article one, section ten, right of the US Constitution.

We’ve talked about that in a number of videos. It’s a very fascinating law, constitutional law, that gives the right to every state to declare actual war if they want. They can actually declare war if they’re invaded or in imminent danger. This is a state. A state has the right to do that, and we’ve had that historically. Our founding fathers, James Madison, explicitly stated that article one, section ten, can be invoked against smugglers.

Madison specifically cited Virginia using its militia to stop smugglers from coming into its state, into its borders as an example of a valid exercise of state invasion powers. It’s simply a principle of federalism and state sovereignty. The sovereignty of a state is violated. The state has a right to clear war on an individual basis without congressional approval. And so Greg Abbot is saying, we are not defending the US border.

I won’t say never, but you will hardly ever hear Greg Abbott say, we’re defending the US border. We are not defending the US. We are defending Texas’s border. We have a constitutional duty, article one, section ten, to defend Texas’s border from invasion. It’s not just a right, it’s a duty. It’s an obligation. The Biden administration arguing, no, that is a federal border, and it is the federal government that’s in charge of dealing with illegal immigration.

And they’re not. That’s the problem. They’re not. They’re feigning competence. In the end, there is a deliberate opening up of our borders, and thereby they are abdicating their law enforcement responsibilities for whatever freaking reason. Judge Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett joined together with the three Libs and sided with Biden. Now, the reason why they did it is because the jurisdiction issue of who gets to make this decision of how to deal when you’re dealing with specifically these razor wire fencing.

The question is who has jurisdiction over these razor wiring that is going through the court system right now. That is going through an appellate process. And so what Roberts, Barrett and the three Libs basically said was that as long as it’s going through an appellate process, the feds have the right to cut the razor wires as originally decided. If I recall. So the first judge, when it was challenged in the court, the first judge said, yep, you could cut the razor wires.

And then Abbott in Texas brought it to the appeals. And now it’s going through this appeals process. And in the process of that, they’ve been setting up more razor wires. And basically Amy Coney Barrett and Judge John Roberts, along with the three Libs, said, you can’t do that. You have to wait until the appellate process plays itself out, which could take months. And of course, the border ends up bringing in millions upon millions of illegals in the process.

So that’s the nuance of what’s actually happening. A lot of people, pundits are coming out and saying, greg Abbot has a lot of room to play with here. There’s a lot of ways he can massage this. He could put up other barriers. Doesn’t have to be razor wires. The decision was to get rid of the razor. Fine, we’ll put up these other barriers instead. Right. Some kind of makeshift wall, for example, like you said, can he put it on Texas land, particularly on private property? That’s what a lot of people are doing right now.

So I understand that the answer is, yes, he can do that. The point is that the Biden administration would have to go through a whole nother round of appellate challenges for. So basically, addict can do with the southern border what New York libs do with gun control. Their gun control measures get shot down, pun intended, left and right all the time from the Supreme Court. That doesn’t stop them from passing more gun control, just harassing gun owners.

That’s their job. Their job is if you’re a gun owner, they want to push you out of New York. They don’t want you there, so they’re going to harass you. The Supreme Court will shoot down with it, but it’s going to take months, it might take years. So until then, ha ha, you got to abide by what we say. And I think Abbot can play by the same rules.

Abbot can say, fine, Supreme Court’s going to put a stay on this. Fine, I’ll find something else. To put a barrier in obstruction and actually fulfill what the Biden administration is supposed to be doing with regard to illegal immigration. But first, gang, I gotta tell you, I was utterly shocked when I was recently shown just how easy it is to access the deed to my house. And not just access it, but change it.

I mean, if you don’t know the deed to your home is the only document that proves you own it. But the problem is that the deeds to all our homes are now online and criminals are free to find our deeds, forge our signatures, refile as the new owner of our homes, take out tons of loans using our home’s equity and then stick us with the debt. And by the way, if you think homeowners insurance is going to bail you out, you got another thing coming.

But that’s where our good friends over at home title lock come in gang. They’re absolutely amazing. Home title lock gives you the peace of mind that the deed to your home is absolutely and completely protected. Click on that link below right now and use promo code Turley talks and all you have to do is enter your address for your no obligation home title scan to see if you’ve already been a victim of deed theft.

I mean, that’s $100 value. Absolutely and totally free if you use my promo code Turley talks gang don’t wait for the worst to happen, only to regret that you didn’t do something about it when you could have. Click on that link below right now and secure your home today. In the meantime, big picture I think we’re so disappointed here in many respects because it shows that liberals are in this to win this.

Liberals recognize that they believe we are living in a post american order where Washington DC runs the world as the apex of globalism. We’re therefore more concerned about borders in Israel and Ukraine than we are in Texas. We’re more concerned about what’s happening in North Korea or Iran or China than we are in what’s happening in the swamp of DC. And they are using their political power to further and further erode any semblance of Americana, any semblance of America first nationalism, populism, traditionalism, in order to bring about this post american reality.

Our conservative, so called conservative judges like Roberts and Barrett, they are still living in this ideological bubble that unfortunately, I think infests too many in the federalist society, which I used to be a big advocate of and I don’t know if I am anymore. They still buy this notion that law is supposed to be above the american system of justice, is supposed to be above nation and culture and custom and tradition and border and the like.

We’re supposed to be above these things. We transcend these things because we’re about oblying justice and fairness and so forth, when more and more conservative voices are saying no, the law is supposed to protect culture, custom, tradition, nation and the like. It doesn’t transcend it. It’s not this platonic idealism, what’s literally called legalism. Law has a history. It has a tradition that has a culture, dare I say it? It has a religion behind it.

And if the law is not there to protect those things, then that law has become an end in and of itself. So when all said and done, big picture liberal justices rule to show how liberal they are post America right, liberating our people from a truly american identity and be instead a globalist citizen. Liberal justices rule to show how liberal they are. Conservative justices rule to show how fair they are.

And we can’t win this war as long as we have justices doing that. And I think a lot of us conservatives have had it. Us trad conservative. We’ve had it with that nonsense. Law does not transcend nation, culture, custom, and tradition. It is there to protect those very things. So our conservative justices, ironically, are not conservative, or they’re conservative of a particular ideology of law that I think has seen its day and is now waning.

They think law is some ideal that is supposed to be completely new rule on all of these issues, and we’re just going to go by the letter of the law and more of us are saying no. The purpose of the law is to protect that which is good, to protect our nation, our culture, our customs, our traditions, not to play legal minutiae appellate games. So there you go.

That’s my two and a half cents. Throw in some yen in there, I’m going to start calling myself a tradservative conservative trad served. That’s right. I hope you enjoyed that clip of my Monday night Insiders club livestream. Join us live next week by clicking on the link in the description below and joining the coalition of Patriots worldwide, building a parallel economy to return to our roots of faith, family, and freedom.

Click below right now close. .

See more of Dr. Steve Turley on their Public Channel and the MPN Dr. Steve Turley channel.