Hour 1: SCOTUS decisions

The Mike Broomhead show begins now. Wow, we may need add a few hours to this, to the show and to the day. What a day for information, Supreme Court dropping some major decisions today. Birthright citizenship, transgender athletes in girls' sports. The campaign finance, all of it dropped today. We have got a big conversation about all of it. Coming up at 8.30, we are going to speak to Barry Markson, Barry Marks, and as our legal analyst here at KTAR News. We're going to ask him, of course, about birthright citizenship. But the implications of all of these rulings. At 9.30 this morning, we are going to speak with Superintendent of Public Schools, Tom Horn, about the implications in Arizona public schools with this ruling when it comes to Title IX. And so I want to start there briefly before we get into the birthright citizenship. When it comes to Title IX, it's something that I think is very important for us to consider because all people have to be considered, not just one group of people have to be considered when we're talking about what the law says. Title IX protected girls in women's sports, girls and girls sports. That was the idea of Title IX to give girls an opportunity that the boys were having in sports. And so now to misinterpret Title IX. by saying it pertains to biological males that claim that they are girls, live your life any way you want, but you can't infringe upon the needs of others. And this goes much deeper than just the sports itself. What about sharing a locker room? What about all of those other implications? And we can have this conversation without being rude to each other, without being hateful to each other. It's possible and it's what we should have. I would say this. When it comes to using the restroom, when it comes to the locker rooms, it's about comfort. And you would talk to someone, and I'm trying to be as fair as I can. If there is a biological male that is living his life slash her life as a female and says, I don't feel comfortable in the boy's bathroom, I don't feel comfortable in the boy's locker room. I don't feel comfortable playing on the boys team. I feel like I belong with the women. That's a feeling. And... The girls, and you think about the development of young people anyway, body image and everything else. It's weird enough. All of us remember our days when we had PE class from middle school on and you had to change clothes in front of each other. It was weird enough as it was adjusting to that whole time period of maturity. Now you're going to put into the mix a biological male in a locker room or a bathroom full of girls. And it makes them uncomfortable. Why is it okay for one group of people to say, I'm uncomfortable with this? But it's not okay for the other group to say, no, no, no, you're making us uncomfortable. You're trying to change what we've done forever. And we're telling you we don't like it. There was a case that went back. By the way, good morning, Patricia. I'm going to say good morning to you much earlier today.

Hello, Mike. I kind of figured you were, so I was trying to hurry. That's okay. No, no, I understand we got to do the big switcheroo in that room. You haven't been here long enough, but I don't know if you've heard me tell this story, and you're not old enough to remember this place. There was a bar in Old Town Scottsdale that was very iconic. It was called Anderson's Fifth Estate. It was kind of an iconic place. It had been in old town forever. And there was a transgender woman that worked, or she was a volunteer, but she had a position with the city of Scottsdale. Her name is Michelle Dela Frenier. And I just remember the story. Well, Michelle was, this goes back now a while before this transgender subject became so controversial. But Michelle and other friends, other transgender friends, apparently were at Anderson's fifth estate enjoying a drink. So a woman. A biological woman came out of the restroom and complained to the management that there were men dressed as women lingering in the ladies' room. So the management asked the transgender women not to do that. And they said, well, we don't feel comfortable in the men's room. And the response, of course, was, well, the women don't feel comfortable with you in the ladies' room. Now, I'm not trying to be too crass, but imagine, Patricia, you're the women on the staff. Imagine you go into the women's restroom and your feet are pointed one way while you're sitting down and you look under the stall next to you. And there's a different pair of feet pointed standing up at the toilet next to you. I would definitely feel very uncomfortable. Okay. So get this. So there was this huge uproar about this and how it was transphobic and all of the, it just, it was a ridiculous comment. We're talking about comfort, not safety. We're talking about comfort. Whose comfort wins out. That was my question then. That's my question now. Should you have a right to say, I don't feel comfortable whether you live your life as a woman if you want to. You're biologically a man. I don't feel comfortable, nor would I feel comfortable bringing my young daughter in here with biological men in the ladies room. And they say, well, we don't really feel comfortable dressed like we are, living our lives the way we are. We don't feel comfortable in the men's room. Whose comfort wins? Then go to another. establishment with the restroom for everybody. I don't know. But again, this is what the conversation has always been about. You want to hear the punchline of the story? What is it? The punchline of the story is, and I don't know the circumstances of how this happened, but very, very quickly after that happened, Anderson's fifth estate closed down and reopened as a gay bar. Interesting. Yeah. So there's just an odd little. Yeah, it didn't even matter. Yeah. But the, and there is, and again, I'm not dumb. I know there's a difference between transgender and in homosexual. I get that. My point is it ended up being different than the fight started. Right, right, right. But.

Dancing around the issue. We're talking about comfort, not safety. But when you talk about Title IX and women in boys' sports, how many state championships have been taken away? How many national championships have been taken away? Because biological boys, especially when to get to the high school level, by and large, are much stronger than girls. That's why you have co-ed sports, probably through middle school. And then when you get to the junior high or the high school level for sure, you've got girls softball and boys baseball. Both fast pitch, both great competitions, just not on the same field. Rarely do you see a girl on the football team. And if you do, generally speaking, she's a kicker. Right. There's just a biological difference. And then the whole locker room set up. I mean, your daughter decides to play softball and she's in high school playing softball and then a biological boy is on the bus and in the locker room and changing and showering. That would be, yeah, a little much. So that's where this decision came from. All right, Arizona's largest blood drive Sunday, July 5th, Vitalant, Saving Arizona, Tempe Center for the Arts, 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. being one of 700 donors that saves lives. Go to the contest page at KTAR.com for details. Coming up in just a moment, Barry Markson joins us. Our legal analyst to talk about all of these big decisions today. We're going to wrap them all up next.

All right, thanks for being here this morning. Big Supreme Court decisions dropped as expected today, birthright citizenship, campaign finance, Title IX, which is biological males and girls' sports. To talk about this, what it means and the repercussions, I guess, Barry Marks and our legal analyst, very good to talk to you again. Good morning, Mike. Hey, let's start with birthright citizenship. This was the expectation that this was going to be the ruling. Six to three, not a big surprise. The conservative justices, Thomas Samuel Alito and Gorsuch, the dissenting votes. Are you surprised at all that Amy Coney Barrett and Chief John Roberts sided with the liberal justices on this case? I'm really not, Mike. This has been the law here for well over 100 years. The Supreme Court interpreted this amendment back in 1898 in the Wong case. This has been going, this has been how this country has viewed this law and this constitutional. amendment for quite some time. So I'm frankly a little more surprised that three justices and even Brett Kavanaugh, who concurred in part and opposed in part, four of them said that the Constitution was being interpreted wrong by the court over all those years. So I actually found that to be a little more surprising than anything else. But the decision is that the law will remain the way it's been interpreted for over 100 years here in the United States. If you're born in the United States on the United States soil, you will be a United States citizen. Although Brett Kavanaugh pointed out that he thinks there's a way for Congress to pass a law that may change that, whether that's even possible to get through these days. I don't know. But that's a different way to look at it as well. But it was a very interesting decision, especially after oral argument, where it seemed like. even the conservative justices were skeptical of the of the government's arguments uh i was i was all surprised to see it be as close as it was so when so on the topic of this we understand the part of the reason why people wanted to see a different interpretation has to do with birth tourism and some of the other things i'm not a lawyer you are does this mean that if states or if the nation wants to have a law that outlaws that kind of birth tourism, I don't know what else to call it. Is that something that can be done if they can address certain issues or is this just a done deal across the board? I think there could be a law that says if you're, if you come to the United States with the intent to have a baby here and make a citizen, I suppose there could be a law that would block somehow, you know, your visa or block how you would come to the United States for that purpose. So, okay. In other words, if you're going to get a, if you're, if you're, but if you're just coming on vacation, if you're not going to, I'm, there's always a way to do that. And we've seen that with the, this president, especially with other presidents using executive orders, Mike. So they're.

say we can't we don't want the repercussions of the retribution because somehow if they know who we are and we're donating certain causes that that part of the of the lawsuit moves forward that there can't be political backlash and that's one of the they're arguing for privacy in that regard does this play any role in those things you're in the state or is it completely separate I think it's really separate, although it does allow, and it does say that from the Supreme Court's perspective, campaign donations are speech and therefore to be allowed and to be less regulated, I guess is how I might look at it. So with the Arizona Supreme Court. We lost him. See, that's a tease. Now we've got to try to get him back. There he is. Now you're back. All right. Sorry. That's okay. The question really becomes for the Arizona Supreme Court, it's not a question of whether or not you can make the political donations, but do you have a duty and obligation to disclose who's made those donations if it's to a pact? That I don't think is in violation of what the Supreme Court, the U.S. Supreme Court said. I think it's almost consistent with it. Make the donations do what you want, but you're not going to be able to hide that you're making the donations. That really is free speech, right? Mike, if you want to say it's free speech for me to donate to a candidate, okay, but I should say I'm the one donating to the candidate. It's me, not hiding the money. That's the difference. Yeah, and so as far as, and I know I'm shifting gears a little bit, but your expertise in this area, when it comes to the Supreme Court of Arizona and what they said, the other part of that lawsuit can proceed, as far as the backlash goes for, you know, we know that that happens sometimes. If you donate to a cause, we're going to boycott you. Where do you think that heads? Where does that go? Well, that's going to be difficult to enforce. I'm curious to see how, and I'm going to read that again, but I'm curious to see how that will play out in the lower courts now. But they're basically saying we don't want the punishment for it. It's almost like if you do something with your employer, then they retaliate against you. So it sounds like a thing where you can try to regulate the retaliation aspect of it. We'll see how that plays out with how the laws would work in doing that. I think that's going to be difficult. How do they keep me from? personally from boycotting something because they gave a business gave money to a candidate. Now I know about it. So those are things that I think are going to be difficult in the pragmatic part of how do we actually do that in the real world. Very always appreciate it. You know, the time I know you're getting pulled everywhere. I imagine this is not the last show today you're going to be on, but I appreciate your time. Thanks, Mike. Great to see it. All right. That's Barry Marks and spending a few moments with us coming up. It's Gatos and the Big Q poll question of the day. We will get to it momentarily. The Gato's Big Q poll question. Brought to by your Valley Toyota dealers. Hey, good morning, Gatos. Good morning. How's it going there, Mike? Good, good, busy. Very crazy morning. The Supreme Court, yes. Last few days is always crazy. So, you know, yesterday with the voting doesn't affect Arizona, what they came down with. And we got the birthright citizenship that came down. I think a lot like most of us thought it may. So we'll see how it all pans out. Then you had the transgender thing.

That seems like. Campaign finance. Campaign finance. Yeah, I don't know about that. I'm not sure about the campaign. That's all up here to me. Is that a big one or no? I think it's going to be a big deal because it gives a lot of power to the political parties and it may weaken the super PACs a little bit. We said Marxon talking about it. And so if it's, we'll see. Anytime you're talking about money in campaigns, I think it's a big issue because Americans pay a close attention to that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'll look into that. I was more into the... Me too. I wanted to know how the transgender thing would come down. That's common sense to me. Yep. And birthright citizenship. Yeah, so we'll hit that today. You know with the 4th of July coming up, this is an interesting poll that's out. They've come out with words that describe the United States, people who are saying, here's the one word that describes the U.S. So I put four of them. I guess too good and too bad. Yep. Which one word would you use to describe the U.S.? So these four words were in the poll. Powerful? Yep. Free. Those are the good ones. Yep. Divided and lost. Yeah. Those were kind of the four biggest ones. Yeah. So I decided to put that in the poll. I think we are divided. I don't think we're necessarily lost. I think we're divided. But I also think free, if you were to ask me, what's the number one thing? I would say free, freedom. Can I tell you? Can I tell you where the poll is? Because I took the poll before you got on. I don't normally do that, but I did. Yes. Can I tell you where we are? It's only been up for 10 minutes. Yeah. Okay. But just based on where it's at right now, divided is number one by a long shot, by a long margin. Second is lost. Then powerful and free came in last at 13%. Wow. I actually, I voted powerful. Oh, okay. So I think we've been nicked by the Iran war. Yeah. I don't feel as powerful. But again, wow, I'm, I'm kind of, I'm kind of taken aback that the first two ones that are on the negative territory are at the top, especially as close. Especially the fourth. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Great question. All right. Listen, I'll be listening today and I'll talk to you tomorrow. Okay, man. See you. Thanks, Gatos. That's Gatos, the big Q poll question brought to you by your Valley Toyota dealers. Coming up, we are going to talk elections in Maricopa County with a supervisor. Mark Stewart joins us next.