You’ve heard of the Avengers. And the Incredibles. We at the 3WHH consider ourselves The Uncensorables. (Only because Justice League is taken.) In any case, just when you thought it was safe to pass by the courthouse and law library because the Supreme Court term has finished, along comes a bracing district court opinion slapping the Biden Administration hard for its collaborating with social media companies to censor COVID dissenters who turned out to be right about nearly everything.

We also work through the aftermath of the Harvard/UNC decision, which is forcing the left to transfer their hated for Citizens United to this case. And what’s up with the left’s complaint that the 303 Creative case was a phony case? What’s phony is the left’s argument, which John Yoo (this week’s show host) dispatches with ease, while Steve reminds us that the left has been contriving phony cases for decades.

Finally, since it was Fourth of July week, we reflect on the holiday this year, Steve gives a foerboding prediction for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration in 2026, and we offer up recommendations for the best books about the Declaration for our slowly developing reading list of essential whisky-wisdom pairings.

Subscribe to Power Line in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

There are 12 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Noell Colin the gadfly Coolidge
    Noell Colin the gadfly
    @Apeirokalia

    On A5. Utterly useless discussion. 
    I and most likely even John, would come to the table in good faith, the leftists will not. An example is how both sides, especially the left, uses “rules” in committee hearings. Oh this person cant say this, this has to be struck, or censured or whatever. Before the convention even starts, there will be terms and it will be slanted to protect progressivism, protect the federal reserve, and protect the status quo. 
    Here is that procedural nonsense in action against MGT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLt21qv4NqI 
    Never mind the substances of MGT’s grandstanding, this is what the A5 convention will most likely look like. An utter clown show. 

    And now for my segment – Jabs at John:
    John’s squeamishness about a revolution is most likely rooted in the fear of “legal issues” relating to potential war crimes committed under the Bush administration. That is, if the side that values natural rights were to win. Best to hedge your bet with the current State that, while hostile, is happy to overlook those “legal issues”.
    My unwanted advice is for him to repent and go through a @lucretia struggle session where the outcome is to just parrot whatever she says :) 

    • #1
  2. WilliamWarford Coolidge
    WilliamWarford
    @WilliamWarford

    Lucretia is right about Ketanji. I read her dissent. Holy cow! My students could have written better, more accurate, arguments. So could the first 400 names in the Boston phone book. 

    I think John has a point about the founders wanting to test their intellectual ideas being a, if not the, motivating factor behind the revolution. Yes, they had legit grievances, but compared to many parts of the world, then and now, it was not that bad. 

    I hope Steve is wrong, but fear he is right, about slave ships in the harbor in ’26. Unless John is right about Harvard case being the highpoint (lowpoint?) of race-obsessed wokeism. I fear it is with us for a long time, though, because the young people are so indoctrinated, and they will be the teachers, politicians, judges of tomorrow. Who, exactly, will influence enough people to turn it around?

    Lastly, (in my best Lucretia scolding voice), “Where’s the ID on the exit music, Steve?!” 

    • #2
  3. Noell Colin the gadfly Coolidge
    Noell Colin the gadfly
    @Apeirokalia

    WilliamWarford (View Comment):

    I think John has a point about the founders wanting to test their intellectual ideas being a, if not the, motivating factor behind the revolution. Yes, they had legit grievances, but compared to many parts of the world, then and now, it was not that bad.

    John says things are worse now than back then. If things are worse now, then things were better then when we kicked the Brithish out. Continuing the logic, it would seem then that John knows what is bad/wrong and what is good/right. BUT  he also got very uncomfortable when it seemed like another revolution might be necessary. 
    1) In what circumstances would John advocate for a revolution? What is the line? 
    2) Seems like John would be more of a William Franklin than Ben. 

    • #3
  4. Steven Hayward Member
    Steven Hayward
    @StevenHayward

    WilliamWarford (View Comment):

    Lucretia is right about Ketanji. I read her dissent. Holy cow! My students could have written better, more accurate, arguments. So could the first 400 names in the Boston phone book.

    I think John has a point about the founders wanting to test their intellectual ideas being a, if not the, motivating factor behind the revolution. Yes, they had legit grievances, but compared to many parts of the world, then and now, it was not that bad.

    I hope Steve is wrong, but fear he is right, about slave ships in the harbor in ’26. Unless John is right about Harvard case being the highpoint (lowpoint?) of race-obsessed wokeism. I fear it is with us for a long time, though, because the young people are so indoctrinated, and they will be the teachers, politicians, judges of tomorrow. Who, exactly, will influence enough people to turn it around?

    Lastly, (in my best Lucretia scolding voice), “Where’s the ID on the exit music, Steve?!”

    Sorry! The exit tune, “Censorship” (pretty topical, no?), is by some British crooner who goes by Eleanor Rigby, back in 1994.

    • #4
  5. Steven Hayward Member
    Steven Hayward
    @StevenHayward

    Noell Colin the gadfly (View Comment):

    On A5. Utterly useless discussion.
    I and most likely even John, would come to the table in good faith, the leftists will not. An example is how both sides, especially the left, uses “rules” in committee hearings. Oh this person cant say this, this has to be struck, or censured or whatever. Before the convention even starts, there will be terms and it will be slanted to protect progressivism, protect the federal reserve, and protect the status quo.
    Here is that procedural nonsense in action against MGT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLt21qv4NqI
    Never mind the substances of MGT’s grandstanding, this is what the A5 convention will most likely look like. An utter clown show.

    And now for my segment – Jabs at John:
    John’s squeamishness about a revolution is most likely rooted in the fear of “legal issues” relating to potential war crimes committed under the Bush administration. That is, if the side that values natural rights were to win. Best to hedge your bet with the current State that, while hostile, is happy to overlook those “legal issues”.
    My unwanted advice is for him to repent and go through a @ lucretia struggle session where the outcome is to just parrot whatever she says :)

    What few listeners seem to realize—with good reason; they’ve never seen John in the classroom with mostly liberal law students—is that provocations about “wasn’t the American Revolution a mistake?” are meant to stimulate discussion and make the defenders extend themselves. I can assure you he doesn’t for a moment actually think that.

    • #5
  6. Noell Colin the gadfly Coolidge
    Noell Colin the gadfly
    @Apeirokalia

    Steven Hayward (View Comment):

    Noell Colin the gadfly (View Comment):

    And now for my segment – Jabs at John:
    John’s squeamishness about a revolution……………………………………………………………………

    What few listeners seem to realize—with good reason; they’ve never seen John in the classroom with mostly liberal law students—is that provocations about “wasn’t the American Revolution a mistake?” are meant to stimulate discussion and make the defenders extend themselves. I can assure you he doesn’t for a moment actually think that.

    I could only imagine him in a class full of liberal, nay leftists. Undoubtedly he is a better representative than I at UCB. Furthermore I think John has a superb personality, no matter what Harvard thinks. As I have said in the past, I value his knowledge about the law and scotus.

    I also 100% took it the way you explain. As a stimulating discussion. It was just at the end when he made comments and Lucretia qualified/backed down from saying we need a civil war or something. I’d have to relisten to bring up the particular verbiage.

    My John origin story: The only liberal thing that rubbed off on me while in college was something about John. My polysci-101 class, taught by a Jerry Brown type Democrat, had us write a paper on a book off a reading list. One was Obama’s dreams from my father, which I was not going to read… (lies about my father, would be a better title). I landed on Jane Mayer’s The Dark Side. At the time I regarded torture as a necessary evil. BUT after reading that book, I came away not in favor of torture. The whole “weapons of mass destruction” lie and the wild goose chase that ensued with faulty torture related intel was wholly unjust. I want to like John, I just cant get over the torture memos and how he was a core figure in the Bush admin justifying bad things… I apologize if he has addressed it since, I haven’t come across it. But with some of his other comments it doesn’t seem like he is totally morally sound on the matter.

    I don’t want to “purity spiral”, but I take issue with neocon leanings, squishy philosophy, and general deference to the state. As in “let me write justifications so our political overlords can do whatever they want”…
    MAYBE! Just thought of this, could there be a “what John’s believes” episode? I’ve listened to him for years on law talk maybe he could clearly define his ideology. We already more or less know yours and Lucretia’s. It would make good conversation.

    • #6
  7. Dr.Guido Member
    Dr.Guido
    @DrGuido

    At the beginning of this podcast you were speaking of Italian Counts and Barons ,etc.

    A close friend, whom I’ll call Claudio, comes from a Roman family whose lineage he can trace back for well over 25 generations. (In fact his family lives in a large building that overlooks the site where it’s believed where Julius Caesar was assassinated, the Piazza Argentina).  When he introduced me to his wife he said she was the “Contessa M… N….” Then he pulled me aside and told me ‘Remember Dottore…every Italian woman thinks she’s a Contessa!”

    • #7
  8. GlennAmurgis Coolidge
    GlennAmurgis
    @GlennAmurgis

    Things are much worse now – the federal bureaucracy is way more intrusive than the Brits were having an ocean and month of travel away. I wish we had an ocean separating the citizen from the FBI/IRS

    • #8
  9. Noell Colin the gadfly Coolidge
    Noell Colin the gadfly
    @Apeirokalia

    GlennAmurgis (View Comment):

    Things are much worse now – the federal bureaucracy is way more intrusive than the Brits were having an ocean and month of travel away. I wish we had an ocean separating the citizen from the FBI/IRS

    Add administrative state, federal reserve and participation in the UN. 

    • #9
  10. Quickz Member
    Quickz
    @Quickz

    WilliamWarford (View Comment):

    Lucretia is right about Ketanji. I read her dissent. Holy cow! My students could have written better, more accurate, arguments. So could the first 400 names in the Boston phone book.

    I think John has a point about the founders wanting to test their intellectual ideas being a, if not the, motivating factor behind the revolution. Yes, they had legit grievances, but compared to many parts of the world, then and now, it was not that bad.

    I hope Steve is wrong, but fear he is right, about slave ships in the harbor in ’26. Unless John is right about Harvard case being the highpoint (lowpoint?) of race-obsessed wokeism. I fear it is with us for a long time, though, because the young people are so indoctrinated, and they will be the teachers, politicians, judges of tomorrow. Who, exactly, will influence enough people to turn it around?

    Lastly, (in my best Lucretia scolding voice), “Where’s the ID on the exit music, Steve?!”

    Oh no, please do the slave ships – and have celebrations against 7/4 please, please do such a think NY! You will disgust so many of your state citizens as they celebrate correctly in their home towns and neighborhoods. Just more logs on the fire as far as pushing forward change in a Blue state, you gotta get them to show themselves like they did this “pride” month – people are getting sick of it, and that’s a good thing!

    • #10
  11. Quickz Member
    Quickz
    @Quickz

    GREAT PODCAST! I think I need to make a separate thread to house and update with all the recommended books

    On “revolution” – big difference between today and 1776 is today we have a system that the people can actually act through to change things. Systemically we have far more ability to act. Compare this to 1776 where there was no chance the colonists could change their position as subservient lessers as far as governance was concerned. They couldn’t all vote to change it, although I guess they did with the DofI. It just took guns to seal the deal. I don’t think we need guns, we just need folks to understand what needs a-changin’.

    Love that @stevenhayward Becker’s quote walking his 20s Progressive Utopian views back is great, and highlights why we need ceremonial-type rereading and re-presenting the underlying myth/philosophy that is so key to what @lucretia Lincoln quote points at, which is “a rebuke of a stumbling block” – this kind of repeated civic education is sorely needed.

    @lucretia – damn straight Magna Carta is small ball compared to what happened in DofI.

    How many podcasts have had book recommendations? I’ll pull together a list and repost here.

    • #11
  12. LibertyDefender Member
    LibertyDefender
    @LibertyDefender

    Regarding SFFA v. Harvard, home of the worst dissent ever written: my brother – the now-retired “Jaime Escalante of the Houston, Texas area,” proposes a proactive strategy in response to Harvard’s efforts to continue discriminating based on race.

    The plan is based on Harvard’s announced admissions policy:

    For the College Classes of 2027-2030, students may apply for admission without standardized test scores.

    Since Harvard is not requiring any standardized test scores, every school district in America should require that every black student with a mediocre-or-better grade point average apply to Harvard, without disclosing any standardized test scores. Heck, the school districts ought to pay the application fees.

    Let’s see what happens then.

    • #12
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.