7/3/26 - Supreme Court Activism on Birthright Citizenship Will Reshape the Nation - The Best Of Mark Levin

Hey folks, Mark Levin here. Before we dive into today's episode, I want to talk about my go-to gold and silver company. Monetary gold is over 25 years helping Americans understand physical gold and silver with an education-first, no-pressure approach, and support for IRA-eligible options. Monetary gold has a complementary guide. It's free to help you understand precious metals. Call them right now, 877 now gold, or visit mark lovesgold.com and request the free guide. Make sure to ask for details that... That's 877 now gold or visit mark lovesgold.com. Performance may vary. You should always consult your financial and tax consultant. Now let's get to the show. He's here. He's here. Now broadcasting from the underground command post. Deep in the bowels of a hidden bunker somewhere under the brick and steel of a non-district building. We've once again made contact with our leader, Mark Levin. Thank you.

This is the best of the Mark Levin show. Happy Independence Day. I'm not going to be as generous. My friend Hugh Hewitt, or some of my other friends who've been on TV and radio. Some sang what a swell job the Supreme Court did, and Robert's decision was absolutely brilliant. I spent a lot of time today going through them very, very carefully and not quickly. I will be on Sean Hannity tonight, and I wanted to wait without appearing here and there this afternoon, so I could consume it all and break it all down. A lot of people say, well, now we go to the constitutional system, the amendment process. When's the last time the Constitution has actually been amended? It's been a long time, hasn't it? Go ahead and Google that, Mr. producer. You'll be surprised. When is the last time? Now. Well, go ahead and Google it. You're about to find out. It's not recently. I'll tell you that. You see, ladies and gentlemen, in order to have a constitutional amendment, and then I'll circle back, as you know from listening to this program, there are two methods. Number one, the only methods ever actually been used. You need two-thirds of both houses of Congress. to adopt language for an amendment. They both have to agree on it. Then it goes to the states where the legislatures of the conventions thereof require 38 states to approve. Three-fourths of the states. Now, how many of you think that you're even going to get anything close to two-thirds of the House or Senate to change birthright citizenship? None of you, I assume, because it's never going to happen. Then we have convention of states, which is really a fantastic organization. I'm strongly behind it. The problem is we don't have 34 states that have signed on yet. I think we've 20 or 22, which is remarkable under the circumstances, slow but sure. But that process isn't ready either. And then on top of that, look how everything is switched. The court just went ahead and constitutionalized something that's not in the Constitution, has never been in the Constitution. And now it's up to you and me to undo it by getting a constitutional amendment passed. So you're going to have a lot of these senators, these Don Quixote types who are basically fraudulent. I introduced an amendment to the Constitution to do this or that. And unfortunately, it's not going to go anywhere. What we need to do is that there are vacancies on the court, put constitutionalists on the court. And that's how Roe was reversed. That's what's going to have to happen. I'm not talking about packing the court. We don't do that. I want to briefly go through some of the points that I made online as I went through this. I try to put it in very plain English and very concisely on this birthright citizenship issue. But there's something fundamentally shocking. Let's start. Chief John Roberts begins his opinion, arguing that the states and their framers relied on English common law in writing the 14th Amendment. But that isn't the whole story. They used it as a guide, but rejected it when they felt it conflicted with our constitutional system. Certainly is not a sound argument to use it as a basis for the 14th Amendment of the Civil Rights Act that preceded it.

They were addressing specifically the problem of some formerly Confederate states after the Civil War to recognize freed black slaves and their children as citizens with the full and equal rights enjoyed by all other citizens. Now, what am I talking about there? Early on in the opinion is the foundational basis for his approach to the language in the 14th Amendment. And he returns to it later in his opinion as well. He emphasizes English common law from the 1600s. Now, English common law, he argues, incorrectly, when you were born in the sovereign territory of the king of the monarchy, you were automatically a citizen for most situations, okay? A citizen of what? A citizen to the sovereign. That is, a citizen to the king. That was your sovereign. And so, of course, the king viewed anybody born in my kingdom has allegiance to me, the king. Now, what's the problem with that? That's not what the founders of our country, the framers of the Constitution said. Obviously, English common law from time to time, as I've wrote here, had a guiding impact on what they might do, but they abandoned it often. And they certainly didn't adopt this viewpoint when constructing the 14th Amendment. in 1868 or the Civil Rights Act of 1866 that preceded it. That's not how they viewed things. And so the entirety of this opinion that John Roberts puts out that the majority is signed on to is based on a false premise. And yet he needs to do this because what the hell else is he going to base it on? I'll explain it. Let me go on. Now, he references, interestingly, Thomas Payne and some of the others, and I say, I'm a huge fan of Thomas Payne, but his powers of persuasion during the Revolutionary War had little than nothing to do with the formulation of the 14th Amendment. John Roberts creates a hodgepodge of references to make what is basically an argument looking for founding principles. He must, for the truth is this case was so straightforward, and the facts in history so clear, the majority had to do what lawyers do when the facts in the history are against them, create contrivances. Now, this part of Robert's opinion is especially absurd, the abominable Dred Scott decision, the abominable Dred Scott decision. had nothing to do with immigration, let alone illegal immigration. It held that freed blacks and black slaves were not citizens, and Congress could not even ban slavery in federal territories, thereby upending the Missouri compromise. This would lead in great part to the Civil War, which also had nothing to do with immigration, let alone illegal immigration.

And I write as I continue reading the John Roberts opinion, that is the court's decision. It does a grave injustice to the purpose of all constitutional, legal, political, and ultimately military conflict aimed at dealing with and then ending the enslavement of black people. Instead, it attempts to create more generalized policy and legal arguments that are simply deceiving. The terrible wrong was the enslavement of black people, not some immigration policy. That's what was that issue. The only purpose of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was to use the power of the federal government to confer on all former black slaves and their progeny the same rights that applied to all other citizens because of continuing a resistance in the former Confederate states. That's why it was called a Civil Rights Act, not an immigration act. When President Andrew Johnson vetoed it, it was clear to the Republicans that they needed to enshrine it into the Constitution. Thus was born the 14th Amendment. As John Roberts continues moving through his decision, he again appeals to English common law. as the basis for the 14th Amendment. But notice what's missing. Where are all these stirring speeches by members of Congress and the state ratifiers supporting Robert's proposition? Keep something in mind. Listen, this is important. Two-thirds of both houses of Congress must propose amendments to the states. In turn, three-fourths must ratify amendments. That means despite all the debates and speeches that occurred around this amendment, John Roberts and the proponents could not find support for their position. You get my point, Mr. Producer? If he is taking the position that the framers embraced English common law, that this is how they viewed jurisdiction, that once born in the sovereign of the king, than you were a citizen to the king, that that applied to our country when it surely did not. Where all the great talkers, all the great speech makers, all the great declarations from members of Congress, Senate in the House, from legislators where some of the greatest orators existed, where were they standing up and saying, this was their position? On birthright citizenship, there's not one. There's none. They don't exist. Because the focus was the terrible problems that arose in the South after the Civil War, the rise of the clan, the horrendous violence and the lynchings against blacks, the overall difficulty with reconstruction. Congress and their states were not thinking about birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens. They weren't glued to the ideas of English common law. The 13th, 14th, and 50th amendments were about creating the constitutional protections for freed, black slaves throughout the nation, not citizens of other countries who hadn't even arrived on our shores legally or illegally.

The extent to which John Roberts and the majority have to rewrite our history to reach the decision is an ugly business. Now we come back to this word jurisdiction, where John Roberts makes the same argument as those who've always supported birthright citizenship make. That is, jurisdiction means physical jurisdiction. If a pregnant mother is in our country illegally and has her baby in our country, the baby is granted immediate citizenship, according to this argument, because he goes back to 1600s English common law, where if you're born... in the land of the monarchy, then you are a servant, a citizen, an automatic citizen to the monarchy. Now, think about this as a matter of logic. Does it make sense to you? Does it make sense to you? that a pregnant woman comes into our country and confer jurisdiction on her baby simply on her own? Does that make any sense? Do you think that's what the framers had in mind? Moreover, the country from where the parent comes continues to treat that baby as a citizen of their country. So that's not exactly allegiance to our country, and how can the baby have an allegiance to anything? Because the baby doesn't even know what's going on. And why are these exceptions for babies born of... of diplomats and so forth. Does the 14th Amendment, if it's interpreted as Robert insists, create exceptions of any kind? Now, we're going to continue. I happen to think the Robert's opinion is absurd. Very result-oriented, very activist. But he gets that fundamental issue wrong as I posted, what, an hour or two ago? That is, excuse me, English common law is a guide, sure. But they didn't abide by it like it's the Bible, and they rejected aspects of it like this one. I'll be right back.

If you missed out on gold in 2020, if you missed the rally in 2025, it's not too late. Right now, gold is sitting about 20% off its all-time high earlier this year, so you could buy it at a discount. The fundamentals that drove gold over $5,000 an ounce, they're still strong. It's a limited commodity. You can't just print more of it. Gold often remains your hedge in times of inflation war and political uncertainty. So get diversified and add gold with monetary gold. For 26 years, monetary gold has helped Americans own gold and silver in a tax-sheltered retirement account like an IRA or a 401K. Five stars on the Better Business Bureau and Consumer Affairs. Visit mark lovesgold.com or call 877 now gold for a one-on-one consultation. That's 877669. 4653. Plus, get a free guide to owning gold. At mark lovesgold.com or call 877 Now Gold. Performance from Avery, consult your tax and financial professional. You're listening to The Best of the Mark Levin show. Happy Independence Day. Welcome back, America. Shall we continue? I think we shall.

Now, this language is important. Jurisdiction. We go back to this word jurisdiction thereof. Listen to me. I'm walking you through it. Come back to the word jurisdiction where John Roberts makes the same argument as those who've always supported birthright citizens make. That is, jurisdiction means physical jurisdiction. You're here? That's it. So if a pregnant mother... is in our country illegally and has her baby in our country. The baby is granted immediate citizenship according to this argument for two reasons. Number one, under British common law, the subjects born in the king's kingdom are subjects. Well, that's ridiculous. That's not what the framers believe, but that's that. Number two, it's the plain language. It says jurisdiction. What else could it possibly mean? Now, as I said, does that make sense to anybody? So a foreigner can unilaterally confer jurisdiction on herself illegally, I guess, by conferring then jurisdiction on her soon-to-be-born baby by coming into the United States illegally. That defies simple logic. So is that what the framers of the 14th Amendment meant? Of course not, and they never said that. And meanwhile, the country from where the parent comes continues to treat the baby as a citizen of their country. China does this now. The language states the following in the amendment. All persons born are naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens. Notice, the authors did not leave it at all persons born or naturalized in the United States. Our citizens. They didn't say that. They added language. That would have been enough. So why did they add superfluous language? Superfluous language. Because the rest of the sentence is key to what they intended. Subject to the jurisdiction thereof. So all persons born are naturalized to the United States. They didn't say our citizens. They said subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It means subject to the political allegiance to our country and no other. A fundamental duty of loyalty to our country, patriotism, part of the civil society, illegal bonds, societal ties, in exchange for which you receive the legal rights and protections afforded all citizens. Somebody who just walks into the country, none of that applies.

If you missed out on gold in 2020, if you missed the rally in 2025, it's not too late. Right now, gold is sitting about 20% off its all-time high earlier this year, so you could buy it at a discount. The fundamentals that drove gold over $5,000 an ounce, they're still strong. It's a limited commodity. You can't just print more of it. Gold often remains your hedge in times of inflation war and political uncertainty. So get diversified and add gold with monetary gold. For 26 years, monetary gold has helped Americans own gold and silver in a tax-sheltered retirement account like an IRA or a 401K. Five stars on the Better Business Bureau and Consumer Affairs. Visit mark lovesgold.com or call 877 now gold for a one-on-one consultation. That's 877669-4653. Plus, get a free guide to owning gold. At mark lovesgold.com or call 877 now gold. Performance from a very consult your tax and financial professional. This is Mark Levin wishing you a happy 4th of July. Now back to the best of me. Pretty shocking. Pretty shocking. I think. Basically what John Roberts has done is rewritten American history. That's what he's done. Let me go on. Now, they point to this 1898 case, Supreme Court case, United States versus Wong Kim Ark. That case is totally irrelevant. It has nothing to do with babies of illegal aliens. That case involved the birth of a baby from lawful, permanent residence. Hello, lawful, permanent residence. Not the baby of an illegal alien. But the language in that opinion was so broad and so over the top that John Roberts used it. As do others in the birthright legal world, by the way, to apply to babies born of illegal aliens. But that has no relevance. So you can see... that John Roberts and the court majority were looking for an outcome and dressing it up as a constitutional decision. And in doing so, they've taken judicial activism to New Heights. The decision will have enormously detrimental cultural, societal, legal, economic, and national security consequences. And now we are told that we, you and me, we must amend the Constitution if we wish to change what a rogue Chief Justice in court majority did in abusing our Constitution, knowing full well that two-thirds of members of Congress will never vote to send any amendment to the states that alters what half of Congress intentionally did to our country, and that there are not enough states, even with a convention of states, to ratify an amendment 38 states. when and if we get to the magic number of 34 states supporting a convention in time to stop the ongoing damage. So you and I are supposed to have a discussion with each other on how to fix this. The way we fix it is more serious constitutional conservatives on the court. John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett severely undermined us.

I know I have a friend out there online who tells us all the wonderful things Amy Coney Barrett has voted for and so forth and so on. That doesn't fix this. It doesn't change this. There are some decisions that are of much more importance than others. This is a huge deal. This is a big, big deal. To constitutionalize something that's not in the Constitution, the claim that it is, to rewrite American history as a Republican-appointed Chief Justice is appalling. Appalling. We use British common law as a guide from time to time, but have never been wedded to it. Never. We're a constitutional republic. That's what we are. Now. John Roberts and his majority twisted the history of the 14th Amendment and just constitutionalized birthright citizenship knowing full well that our nation, like Europe, is facing this grave threat from within. Now, Clarence Thomas's dissent is long and absolutely brilliant. And he gets into this issue of jurisdiction. He says, wait a minute. Let me tell you what jurisdiction means in America. And page after page after page, excuse me, he points out in American history, jurisdiction means domicile. Where are you domiciled? Even today. I'm in this state. I'm in that state. Great. Where are you domiciled? Where are you domiciled? Where you domiciled, you get the vote. Where you domiciled, you pay your taxes? Where you domiciled, the law applies to you? Where are you domiciled?

That's how Americans view jurisdiction, he points out. Where are you domiciled? And he does more than that. Step by step, history and constitutional, that brilliantly, methodically unravels every aspect of Robert's argument. Samuel Alito, the same thing, another brilliant dissent, a brutal takedown of John Roberts and the majority. And he hits, too, at this constant reframe about British common law being the basis of our understanding of citizenship. No, it's not. We're not talking about allegiance to a king. Even Britain abandoned that. And yet that's the entire basis for jurisdiction, pretty much. And in the Thomas decision, which is also cited the dissent by the leader, quote after quote after quote of the authors of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 as well as the 1868 14th Amendment to the Constitution. But everything I've just told you hasn't been told to you by a single lawyer on television, by a single legal reporter on television. None. Because this is what I've done all my life. Take court decisions, especially these important court decisions, and break them down. And break them down. In 1866, they weren't trying to preserve English common law. They were dealing with a real problem. In 1868.

1866, they still had rebel states. They refused to acknowledge or recognize the legitimacy of black citizens. And the clan was started. The lynchings were horrendous, the beatings, just disgusting. Horrendous. And they needed to deal with it. They weren't thinking about immigration, for God's sakes, let alone aliens. and illegal aliens and their children. If I'm wrong, prove it. Show me where. Show me anywhere. A constitutional amendment, that's not a little thing. Super majority of the House and the Senate. Super duper majority of the state legislatures. They're all debating. They're all talking. They're giving speeches. Their newspaper reports. Show me. Show me. They can't show us. So they rewrite American history. That's what they did. They rewrite American history. Now let me tell you something else that bothers me about all this. By trying to expand what took place in 1866 and 1868, by trying to expand on that whole notion that this was directed specifically at getting square, getting it right, getting it straight with our fellow black human beings to make sure that their lives could be free and equal and participate in this country. We're talking about illegal aliens now, and the children of illegal aliens. That was one of the purposes of the 14th Amendment. In other words, we're dumbing down. We're dumbing down the purpose of all these actions that took place. It had nothing to do with British common law. It had nothing to do with immigration. It had nothing to do with the children of illegal aliens. We were trying to get square with... Slaves, former slaves and their children. The 13th Amendment abolishes slavery officially. The 14th Amendment, equal rights due process. That freed black slaves and their progeny were to be treated as other Americans. And then the 15th Amendment, the right to vote. And nothing to do with the children of illegal aliens.

Then you read these comments online. You read these comments online. Well, what did you expect? We have 150 years of this. What are we going to do? Reverse it right away. You know, it's interesting about that comment. Brett Kavanaugh wrote something in his decision, which was very technical. He voted that the executive order violated a federal statute. He didn't really take a big position on the Constitution. So people are saying it was a 5-4 decision. It was a 6-3 decision. No, it was a 6-3 decision because he voted down the executive order for whatever the reason. It doesn't matter. He voted it down. But not on constitutional grounds. But he said. Along the lines of the compromise that I was even thinking they might do, which is we're not going to constitutionalize birthright citizenship. It's not in the 14th Amendment. I don't care if they've been practicing it for 150 years or not. And by the way, that's not correct for 40 years after the 14th Amendment. My view, the president's view, and the view of other solid constitutional conservatives. Our view was the view that was upheld and followed for 40 years after the adoption of the 14th Amendment. So it wasn't 150 years. That said, what Congress could do is the following. The 14th Amendment does not say, that just because you're born in America of illegal aliens, you're a citizen. But Congress, but the 14th Amendment does not say Congress can't grandfather in all those people who are already treated as if they were birthright citizens. So in other words, you have somebody here who's 83 years old, okay? They've been here since they were 14 years old. And so what he's saying is, Congress can still pass a statute and say, look, we're cutting off birthright citizenship on this date, anything forward, no good. Which is the point I made. I thought the Supreme Court might actually do that. But no. Bridge too far. Am I making sense? You understand my point, Rich? If not, I want to repeat it. So there is a fix, quote, unquote. if Congress wanted to do that kind of a fix. It doesn't have to apply to everybody going back, God knows how long, but that's said. What this court did was... You want to open the floodgates, Democrats? You want to break existing immigration law? Democrats? You want to fail to uphold the law, which, by the way, is a violation of the Constitution. Democrats, well, you're going to be rewarded. Your party's going to be rewarded. The illegal alien's going to be rewarded. Everybody's going to be rewarded no matter who's coming in. So if you have a terrorist, a female terrorist who comes into the United States,

Now, broadcasting from the underground command post. Deep in the bowels of a hidden bunker, somewhere under the brick and steel of a non-district building, we've once again made contact with our leader, Mark Levin. This is the best of the Mark Levin. Happy Independence Day. I'm watching something that's very important. More and more TV hosts, radio hosts, good podcasters, are talking about this fusion of Marxism and Islamism and how this is a cancer on society. The president's talking about the communists. And what's interesting is we've been talking about this a very long time, you and I. Now, this book I wrote American Marxism came out. I'm trying to remember. I think it was during COVID. It came out 2021. It's not that long ago. What, five years ago? Sold 1.3 million copies, which means many of you bought it and read it. And yet most of the people talking to us today on TV and radio and podcasts have not. They act like there was no warning ever given. Even talk about things that are straight out of the book. That everything the Democrats do is about power. Where have you heard that before? Power. They want power. My God, we spent months and months on that in an entire book on that. In fact, I think I called it On Power. And that book came out just a couple of years ago, early last year, or mid-last year. If you read American Marxism and On Power, you will know everything that's going on. You will understand everything that's going on, more so than the people who are talking to you about it today.

Now, I've spent a lot of time on the Internet over the last. I guess it's been six months, right, Mr. producer, would you say? That's going to slow down. I don't think there's as much benefit in that, but I wanted to explore it. I don't find that there's a whole lot of profundity, substance. There's a lot of bickering. A lot of child's play. There is some good information there with some good people. But it's the exception, not the rule. I'm not putting anybody down. I'm just explaining it. And so you only have so much time in the day, and I'm spending 20 hours a day on these things. working harder than I ever have and I want to. But it has to be time well spent. It has to be time well spent. And I think my best time spent is right here on radio, on my TV show, and in my books. But it troubles me immensely that individuals who are talking about current events are not that well. schooled and I don't mean by teachers I mean by themselves they don't spend a lot of time really digging on on the subject and so now we're talking about the red green green red alliance I don't like that because it confuses people why don't we be blunt about it the Marxist Islamist alliance And they talk about the woke Reich. It's the woke R-E-I-C-H. I coined that phrase. People say they did it. We know what we do here. Because it is a quasi, if not full-blown, neo-fascist movement that was gaining a foothold in the Republican Party. I took it on. You were with me every step of the way. About 14 months ago. That whole element now has been exposed. Now they want to create a third party or a opposition party to the conservative Republicans. And so their goal now is to defeat us and to elect radical Marxist Islamist Democrats. Because these alliances are about power. That's what they're about. And if they can't find power in one place, they'll look in another place. Now, I think it's important that we actually dig into this. You know, a good friend of mine, Jeffrey Lord, has been a friend of mine a very long time from Pennsylvania as well. When American Marxism came out, he wrote about it. Almost a year ago to the day, July 8, 2021, excuse me, 2021, not a year ago, five years ago to the day. He says, as usual, Mark Levin pulls no punches. His very first chapter in his new book, American Marxism, It's Here, opens with a seriously precise description of the challenge America faces. Levin writes, the counter-revolution to the American Revolution is in full force.

You can no longer be dismissed or ignored, for it's devouring our society and culture, swelling around our everyday lives, and ubiquitous in our politics, schools, media, and entertainment. Once a mostly unrelatable fringe and subterranean movement, it is here, and it is everywhere. The counter-revolution movement of which he speaks is Marxism. He says it's Marx. Communist Manifesto, recall, that famously divided the world into oppressor and oppressed. Levin astutely notes that the use of this formula in today's America by the left means that either you are part of the righteous revolution for liberation and transformation or you are not. This explains but only in part the cowardice of corporatists, I wrote, professional athletes, broadcasters, artists, actors, writers, journalists who in the face of such tumult buckle under the pressure, seek to avoid the mob's notice through various forms of appeasement and capitulation. and in some cases participate in their own transfiguration and even disembowlment. Lord writes, no more prescient description could be made of an event that occurred before American Marxism's released its official published date is next week, and he goes into what happened in Atlanta, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, and all that. He says this was a vivid example of Levin's description of corporations buckling under the pressure to avoid the mob's notice. Discussing the role of the mob, Mark zeroes in on Marxist anarchist ideology of Antifa and Black Lives Matter. In fact, well after Black Lives Matter's popularity had surged in 2020, a 2015 video surface. They revealed the BLM co-founder Patrice Collier's describing herself and her fellow BLM organizers as, quote, trained Marxist, unquote. Truth counts, mass movements, Mark also notes. relies significantly on indoctrination and brainwashing, which is exactly the case with BLM and Antifa. Now we can add this so-called democratic socialist movement. American Marxism and its entire chapter devoted to Hate America, Inc. And in it, Mark explains the long history of those who have openly pushed the Marxist agenda in America's colleges and universities. Levin writes that progressive intellectuals of the late 1800s were hostile toward capitalism and constitutional Republican systems that established barriers against tyrannies of various kinds, including that which is born from the mob or centralized autocracy, and of course, that would become known as progressivism. On the eve of American Marxism publication, America had just passed through the traditional July 4 holiday. Mark's description of the results generated by Hate America, Inc. was on vivid display. The headline on July 6th, New York Post, was nothing, if not confirmation of Mark's point. It read, red, white, and woke. July 4th weekend became liberal bash fest of America. The New York Post reported liberal politicians and commentators took special joy in celebrating July 4th by denouncing America. statute of liberty was not a symbol of freedom but a symbol of hypocrisy the flag was polarizing the national anthem doesn't speak for everyone or anyone among the remarks by these hate america marxists was this jewel of a tweet from democrat congressman Cori Bush of missouri she said when they say that the fourth of july is about american freedom remember this the freedom they're referring to is for white people this land is stolen land and black people still aren't free

And then it goes on. American Marxism also lasers in on critical race theory, correctly calling it what so many outraged parents and throughout the land have seen, is it is taught to their school-age children. Mark writes in short, CRT is an insidious and racist Marxist ideology, spreading throughout our culture and society. He cites George Lanoe, research professor of public policy and political science at the University of Maryland, Baltimore. He writes, the two best-selling proponents of CRT, Robin DiAngelo, and Ibrahim X. Kendi, CRT begins with the presumption that race is the primary way to identify and analyze people, and consequently posits a racial hierarchy that supposedly exists with whites on top, blacks on bottom. Individual behavior is insignificant because everyone in America functions within the society of systemic racism, structural racism, institutional racism. Not only is this correct, writes Lord, but in fact, DiAngelo and Kendi and CRT itself are nothing more than recycled George Wallaceisms. Wallace, for those who came in late, was the 1960s-era Democrat Governor Alabama, who proudly proclaimed he supported segregation today, tomorrow, and forever. In other words, Wallace, as with CRT proponents, believe that race is the primary way to identify, and it goes on. Now, the important part of American Marxism, As I was laying out in this book, the revolution and the transformation that was taking place, much of it right before our eyes, but much of it under the radar. In our classrooms, I pointed out the Marxist books that were being used to teach history, that were being teach to use political science, and how American Marxism. was an Americanized form, a customized, a tailored form of Marxism applicable to the United States, where they were using race, not just wealth and anti-capitalism, but race and ethnicity. You can see it now, the so-called Palestinian cause. These are key to who they are and what they are. And that's why there's a marriage between the Islamists and the Marxists in the United States. And I watched our friend Will Kane just to an interview on Fox of the leader, the Democratic Socialists of America. And he was asked flat out, are you a communist? He said, look, they're not like in Russia and so forth. And so he said, no, no, no, no. The Soviet Union's dead and so forth and so forth and so on. But the follow-up was that was a head fake. He's an American Marxist, an American communist. That, again, they are customizing and tailoring the Marxist ideology for the American culture and the American society. This is what's been going on for more than 20 years, but it really came to a height five years ago. And, of course, is in full display right now. The reason why October 7th and the slaughter of Jews on October 7, 2023, for many people seem like, wow, automatically and unbelievably, these revolutionary movements came to the fore isn't because they were, you know, doing so out of nowhere, they were planned. They're systemic.

The Palestinian cause, on October 8th, even before the Israelis responded, they were talking about genocide in Gaza. They were ready to go. Funded, again, by foreign governments as well. Qatar, among others. Iran. Funded in our country. By billions and billions flowing into our schools. There's a reason why Qatar is the number one. Funder of terrorism and terror front groups and ideology in America. And communist China's number two. Because they have the same objective. American Marxism. Now, what does that have to do with on power? Stick with me. We'll be right back. Mark Levin. Consumer reports just did a massive survey of all the wireless brands in America. Only one company received five out of five stars in every single category, and it should be a surprise that the honor goes to Pure Talk. Coverage five stars, support five stars, value five stars, data five stars. Need one more reason? Right now through the end of July, Pure Talk is matching donations dollar for dollar until they hit a quarter of a million dollars for America's warrior partnership. That is on the front lines of supporting our veterans. Go to puretalk.com slash Levine. Switch to the only wireless company awarded five stars in every single category by Consumer Reports. That's Pure Talk. No service contract, no cancellation fees, just phenomenal U.S. customer service on the 5G network that powers America. Again, that's Pure Talk.com slash L-E-V-I-N. Make the switch to Pure Talk, a wireless company that actually lives up to your expectations. This is Mark Levin wishing you a happy 4th of July. Now, back to the best of me. No, no, a lot of you may not read. Maybe you want to listen to an audio version. I don't even know if they're available. I checked Amazon. These books are all heavily discounted because Amazon is about moving as many products as they can. I am not pushing this to make money. It's not about making money. I'm not going to make a lot of money off this. It's about you being the spokesman, the activist, the person at the dinner table, the breakfast table, a church or synagogue, or wherever you are. explaining things to people. Explaining things to people. Now, it's a very short segment now, and I want to extend this obviously well beyond the bottom of the hour, but now the book on Power, which is the last book I wrote, which came out about this time last year, about 11 months ago, give or take. I want to get into this with you, too, because... Those of you who are really, really smart and been with me a long time, you understand each one of these books really is a chapter, a chapter, a chapter, a chapter in a series of books. These ten books, these ten books, starting with the Supreme Court book, men in black, all the way up to on power.

I suspect most of this will be viewed as, wow, this is good stuff when I'm dead and gone, and that's fine, but I'm worried about the here and now and what's going on in our country. So stick with me. It's all very important. We'll be right back. Consumer reports just did a massive survey of all the wireless brands in America. Only one company received five out of five stars in every single category, and it should be a surprise that the honor goes to Pure Talk. Coverage five stars, support five stars, value five stars, data five stars. Need one more reason? Right now through the end of July, Pure Talk is matching donations dollar for dollar until they hit a quarter of a million dollars for America's warrior partnership. That is on the front lines of supporting our veterans. Go to puretalk.com slash Levin. Switch to the only wireless company awarded five stars in every single category by Consumer Reports. That's Pure Talk. No service contract, no cancellation fees, just phenomenal U.S. customer service on the 5G network that powers America. Again, that's puretalk.com slash L-E-V-I-N. Make the switch to Pure Talk, a wireless company that actually lives up to your expectations. You're listening to The Best of the Mark Levin show. Happy Independence Day. What about this power issue? You know, when I write a book, as you know, I spend four, five, six months explaining it on TV, on radio, in person to a number of people. Because I think it's very important. On power begins, many have written about and debated the issue of power, including the ancients and modern philosophers, scholars, and statesmen alike. Stick with me, this is important. Why? Because power determines your social arrangements, quality of life, and more to the point of this book. whether you are free or enslaved or some degree of either. In short, it determines your personal fate, the fate of your community, and the fate of a nation. Yep. There are infinite ways to view power, innumerable contexts and circumstances in which to apply it. There's truly no simple, concise, all-purpose definition for what is meant by power. Clearly, however, it's more than a mere word. To spend time thinking, talking, or writing about it is not a mere abstraction, a useless amorphism or an elitist esoterrorism. Power is a term meant to describe some kind of force or energy that surrounds us all the time. It's both ubiquitous in your life, into the life of an entire society, and is consequential in every way. Power is a core reality and characteristic of human existence, yet without more to go on. such as context and circumstance it can be ambiguous and elusive. In all human pursuits, including personal pursuits and life events, power matters. In a macro level, power shapes economies, politics and governments. Moreover, there are many variations, implied powers, necessary powers, assumed powers, granted powers, defined powers, and on and on. For most people, these are unstated and often unnoticed or obscure kinds of power, but they exist and they matter. Indeed, power is inextricably linked to liberty, although it's not to be confused with liberty itself. Power determines if there's too much liberty, like anarchy, or too little, like tyranny, depending on how power is exercised, who exercises it, and if it is bound by human rights?

the american revolution is an important and obvious example of power properly pursued and exercised the point of which does promote individual and societal liberty including by means of representative limited divided government that is ordered liberty conversely autocrats of every stripe and in all ages have exploited liberty to empower themselves at the expense of the liberty of others in fact one's use of liberty this way to expand one's own power to diminish if not denou the liberty of others is in a real sense of paradox and it is a cancer that apparently metastasizes over time within democracies Of course, there are democracies that have lasted several centuries, but in the end, they have all succumbed to the steady increase in the centralization of power and a decline in individual and societal liberty. Sadly, this appears to be the nature of things, right now, too. To be clear, then, even the most widely conceived nation states, mindful of man's abuses of power and established with the intent of curbing and restraining that power, seem to fail in the end. Gone are Athens, Rome, and numerous lesser societies. Democracy struggle against the centralization of power almost from the moment they're established. Keep in mind, the first book, American Marxism. I go into incredible, comprehensive detail about what is happening in our culture, in our society, in our educational system, in school boards, to parenting, in our culture. And what is Marxism? What is it? It's obviously a defective form of a philosophy and ideology, but it is tyranny, dressed up as humane, fairness. In a word, it's emotional. When you listen to the Marxist speak, it's all about emotion. You deserve this, and you should get that, but let's go on with power. Because they're related in a big damn way. History is replete with examples of tyrants grabbing power in the name of liberty. Prime example exists in Marxist regimes, liberation through revolution, class warfare, were the masses, the so-called oppressed. I said to revolt against the powerful few, the so-called oppressors, and the promise of liberty through community and collectivism, results in hellish genocidal police states, ruling over the people in their name, but without their consent. and with an iron fist. Again, this is not only a phenomenon of tyrannies, as I noted in my first book, I mean, liberty and tyranny, not my first book, but an early book, liberty and tyranny. In her own country, President Abraham Lincoln observed that slave owners and abolitionists all claim to stand for liberty. Like liberty in the context of power, democracy. Is another word that is used by the power of hungry to deceive and disarm, you know, like the Democratic Socialists of America? Democracy. That's right. Democracy is often alluded to by those who reject it as they reject universal individual liberty and where democracies exist would destroy them.

In his book, Politics in the English Language, George Orwell writes about the perversion of political words used in a consciously dishonest way. I'm quoting him. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows us here to think he means something quite different. It's almost universally felt, writes Orwell, that when we call a country democratic, we are praising it consequently. The defenders of every kind of regime claim that it's a democracy and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to anyone meeting. Now, me, the word democracy, like the word liberty, is frequently used as a rhetorical weapon to deceive the true intentions and conceal the real nature of the abusers. Again, these behaviors and tactics are not exclusive to tyrants and autocracies. It's a real and growing threat in Western societies as they increasingly centralized power in the name of unlimited egalitarian and so-called righteous causes. Environmental justice, economic justice, social justice, equity, reparations, nationalized health care, the existential threat of climate change and so forth, which require and in fact demand the centralization of power to supposedly ameliorate the perceived claimed and in some cases manufactured societal maladies, the final resolutions of which are not only impossible but are not necessarily intended to be solvable. The agitations, demands, and related propaganda are sledgehammers with which to pummel the limited and divided institutional barriers to centralized power in democratic governments. It's exactly what's going on right now. So when you read American Marxism, you will understand the forces behind that. Some of them are ethnic. Some of them are race related. Some of them are economic related. Some of them are sex and gender related. Some of them are all of them. And the use and pursuit. of power. Let us narrow the focus. I start with the observation, which I believe is historically indisputable, yet potentially controversial, which you can infer from what I have already written, that over the millennia, mankind has generally suffered more from the abuse of power and the concomitant diminution of liberty than from its humane and righteous application. They're important exceptions, of course, the individuals' everyday life and society generally, but narrowing the focus even further in the long history of mankind, and even in modern times, the most pervasive form of governance under which most human beings live and have lived is authoritarian. Today, one need look only at the membership of the United Nations to prove the point. Some 70% of the world's population currently lives under brutal autocratic regimes. This race is an unpleasant question. Is this the natural state of mankind, at least in the communal sense, even if individuals themselves wish for and seek liberty? I term this negative power. So I'm creating a new philosophical framework here. I term this negative power. And I discuss that more fully in a later chapter called negative power.

That said, in a democratic negative power, in a democracy, negative power typically takes the form of a steadily increasing centralization of authority that starts slowly but eventually spreads more quickly to cover all corners of the nation, moving closer toward a quasi-autocratic model. It occurs primarily in three general ways, the imposition by the few, for example, the judiciary. The peaceful vote of the many were the people willingly vote for their own demise or the slow institutionalization of an acquiescence to, as Thomas Hobbes characterized it, a leviathan, that is a dominating and domineering army of non-representative bureaucrats. Of course, there are degrees to which centralization develops and occurs, some more aggressive and ominous than others. This is happening right now. That's why I'm taking the time to go through this. It's happening right in front of your eyes. Centralization, in moderation, which is intended to secure liberty that does not exist or undergird existing liberty, that is threatened or diminished by factionalism, mob rule. Our anarchy is of a different character than power secured for power's sake or with a tyrannical mindset or purpose. And again, looking at our own history in the early days of our republic, the Articles of Confederation were abandoned because the national government lacked the power to do much. And it's explained by the National Archives just a few years after the Revolutionary War. Madison, Hamilton, and Washington feared their young country was on the brink of financial collapse. America's first constitution, the Articles of Confederation, gave the Confederate Congress the power to make rules and request funds from the states, but it had no power to enforce them. I'm going to go on. That's not the point right now. I just was explaining the point of negative power. Obviously, human beings are imperfect. This is not much of a revelation. Yet it seems downplayed or ignored by too many in democracies who acquiesced to or even cheer for governmental centralization, when wrapped in promises of larger welfare state, ethnic, racial, economic empowerment, are godlike fixes to natural disasters and climate events. But the idea that the centralization of power, which necessarily concentrates authority in the hands of fewer imperfect individuals and whose base of knowledge is naturally narrow, It's a receipt for societal improvement, progress, stability, and well-being is not only counterintuitive, but contrary to everyday human experience in mankind's history. Indeed, what makes the individuals more perfect as decision-makers, more moral as people, or more informed, wise, or prudential than anyone else? Nothing. Auditrats are not known to possess such qualities or demonstrate them when exercising power. Most excel at acquiring power, but not much else. Indeed, those who achieve such a station exhibit a greater affinity for the darker side of human behavior, including corruption and dishonesty, immorality, and hubris, anger, vain glory, egomaniacal, and so forth and so on.

Although a rare good or perceived benefit may come from this wielding of power, such as the claim that the Italian fascist Benito Mussolini made the trains run on time. By the way, it's a myth. It's a farcical and awfully deadly delusion. Is this interesting to you, Mr. Medusa? Keep going, I will. Moreover, where is the evidence that concentrated power in the hands of administrative state? Where the bureaucrats consists of specially trained experts and societal organizers who know what is best for the people and know how best to achieve those ends, supposedly. Where has this ever existed anywhere? Certainly not in America, as will be discussed later. Contrarily from Aristotle and Cicero to John Locke and Montesquieu and numerous others, philosophers and scholars have argued for the wisdom of diversified, dispersed, mixed power within governments, that is, where power checks and balances power, which provides a greater likelihood of enlightened leadership and administration, greater respect and appreciation for the civil society and non-governmental parts of society, and more protection of individual sovereignty and free will, in essence. A positive power, a positive power structure attempts to contain and control the dark side of the human character and experience. And emphasizes the capacity for a civilized in just society. I'm just going to read a little bit more, but you can see I spend a lot of time digging into this issue. And there's very few footnotes in this book, or end notes, I guess they call them, because these are my own thoughts. Excuse me. They're my own thoughts. Think about this. I think we better take a break, actually. And then I want to get back to this because there's just a few more paragraphs I'm going to read to you, and then we will sum up. Because a lot of people are anxious right now, including me, worried about what's happening to the country. You see the enemy within. You see the Supreme Court ruling yesterday. You're very, very concerned about these elections. You see what's happening to the Democrat Party. What a Republican is going to do? What if the Democrats take over? There's a lot of tumult going on. It's all intentional. We are, in fact, under attack by the enemy within. More of the reason to understand what I'm trying to portray. We'll be right back.

Consumer reports just did a massive survey of all the wireless brands in America. Only one company received five out of five stars in every single category, and it should be a surprise that the honor goes to... Pure Talk, coverage five stars, support five stars, value five stars, data five stars. Need one more reason? Right now through the end of July, Pure Talk is matching donations dollar for dollar until they hit a quarter of a million dollars for America's warrior partnership. That is on the front lines of supporting our veterans. Go to puretalk.com slash Levine. Switch to the only wireless company awarded five stars in every single category by Consumer Reports. That's Pure Talk, no service contract, no cancellation fees, just phenomenal U.S. customer service on the 5G network that powers America. Again, that's PureTalk.com slash L-E-V-I-N. Make the switch to Pure Talk, a wireless company that actually lives up to your expectations. This is Mark Levin wishing you a happy 4th of July. Now, back to the best of me. There's a whole lot more stick with me. I want to put a bow on this point about power as it relates to Marxism and then get into this Islamism aspect. I hope I'm not going too far, too fast, but this is the way it works. We'll be right back. With Donald Trump back in office, one of his biggest adversaries, top Democrat Dick Durbin of Chicago is leading the charge to derail President Trump's agenda at every turn. And now Dick Durbin has a new scheme. A government takeover of your credit card. Right now, Americans have thousands of credit card options, all with equal, strong security. But Senator Dick Durbin's plan could result in less security. That means more risk for your credit, your identity, and your financial future. Dick Durbin's bill isn't about helping consumers. It's a giveaway to corporate megastores, which could shift costs onto you while putting your rewards and fraud protections in jeopardy. We've seen Dick Durbin's fail policies before. His last big banking regulation backfired. to higher costs than fewer benefits for American families. Tell Republican senators stop Dick Durbin's government takeover of your credit card before it's too late. Learn more at guardyourcar.com. That's guardyourcar.com. Paid for it by the Electronic Payments Coalition. He's here. He's here. Now, broadcasting them from the underground command post. Deep in the bowels of a hidden bunker, somewhere under the brick and steel of a non-district building, we've once again made contact with our leader, Mark Levin. This is the best of the Mark Levin show. Happy Independence Day. I wanted to get through a little bit more, highlight a few things. on this on power issue. I hope you're enjoying it. Look, I'm here, you're out there. I can't be certain. But I think it's certainly important to give it a shot, right? First thing I have to do, Mr. Perducos, I found out where I left off here. It's not essential. But one of the things I've found I start to talk about here is this issue of virtue, because you can hear...

The left. The left wants you to believe that what therefore is virtuous. Here we are. That's very dangerous. Montesquieu, one of the great Enlightenment philosophers who certainly influenced our constitutional period, separation of powers, was most lively read and cited philosopher during America's constitutional period. He's referred to directly in the Federalist papers multiple times. And it is really quite incredible book, The Spirit of the Laws. Monteshoe explained that democracy and aristocracy are not free states by their nature. Political liberty is found only in moderate governments. But it is not always in moderate states. It is present only when power is not abused. But it has eternally been observed that any man who has power is led to abuse it. He continues until he finds limits. Ready? Who would have thought it? He writes, even virtue has need of limits. So that one cannot abuse power, power must be checked. Let me repeat that. So one does not abuse power. Power must check power by the arrangement of things. Power must check power by the arrangement of things. That one sentence explains your Constitution. That's why it's not a democracy. That's why it's not an autocracy. It is a representative constitutional republic. He said a constitution could be such that no one will be constrained to do the things the law does not oblige him to do or be kept from doing the things the law permits him to do. Now, hundreds of years later, British Christian theologian and scholar, brilliant man, author C.S. Lewis underscored Montesquieu's point about the abuse of power disguised as virtue. Lewis famously wrote the following. Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercise for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under the robber barons than under omnipotent moral busy bodies. The robber barons, their cruelty may sometimes sleep, their cubidity may at some point be satiated. But those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do it, they do it so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to heaven, yet at the same time likelyer to make a hell on earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be cured, quote-unquote, against one's will, and cured of states. which we may not regard as disease, is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason, or those who never will, to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals. Does that not define, does C.S. Lewis not define, Zohran Mamdani, and all these other Kami Pinkos? And Montescu further warn that...

Should the distinct nature of these various branches of government dissolve one into the other, you will not have anything but tyranny any longer. So much in life orbits around this word, this idea, this belief of power. Most of the discussion to the extent it exists at all in an honest or coherent fashion. is in the form of generality sloganeering demagoguery and the like used by politicians media ideologues and academicians to manipulate confound and deceive which case power is used to control thought and discussion and language What I'm seeking to provoke is a better comprehension of what is meant by power, its impact on the individual and mankind generally, to stimulate a broader examination and dialogue about its applications. I hope you'll read the book. Again, I'm not out here pawning books. These are so far discounted. It's pennies on the dollar. But if you take the time to read American Marxism and on power, Doesn't matter which order you read them in. American Marxism is the second longest book I've ever written. On Power is the shortest book I've ever written. And both are power-packed, I think, with knowledge and I hope wisdom. You will have a comprehension of what is swirling around you right now in this country like you've never had before. Like you've never had before. Far beyond surface level. Far beyond surface level. I'm going to get into something else that's a little heavy. I've been wanting to do this for a while. It's been on my desk. If you saw my house, we don't even have enough bookshelves. And I, you know, we go into home goods and buy some of these bookshelf things. I mean, I got books stacked everywhere. And before I got married and I had a wife that set me straight. She does. She's something else. Very lucky. Used to spread my books out on the dinner table. Remember that, Mr. Producer? Packed, stacked up on the floor and so that's how I do my research. Now I have basically two offices, one on what I call the basement. She calls the den and then on the first floor. And I go between them when I'm writing a book because there's books in both places just stacked up. And I gather more information, but I gather mostly from original writings. I'm not really interested in other sorts of things. It's why I have the Ayatollah Khomeini's Mankhamph right here on the desk, Islamic government. And I'll read some of this to you one day soon. But I wanted to tell you why historically.

The Persian people and the Jewish people have a bond of sorts. I want to tell you why. And you don't have to be Persian or Jewish or anything. I think to find this interesting because this is ancient history. From 559 to 529 BC. It's a long time ago. And in the most influential figures of ancient history from the National Geographic, it was actually quite a wonderful magazine, this particular one. Like many ancient rulers, the Persian conqueror Cyrus the Great. Cyrus the Great, and he was the emperor the Emperor. from 590 to 529. So a fairly long period of time, almost 40 years. He's also known as Cyrus II. He was born of royalty. The death of his father, Cyrus ruled the Achaemenian dynasty and expanded his ancestral realm into a mighty empire. He triumphed not just through conquest, but also by showing singular tolerance and mercy to those he defeated. This was a very, very unique warrior. A brilliant military strategist, Cyrus vanquished the king of the Medes, then integrated all the Iranian tribes whose skill at fighting on horseback gave his army great mobility. His triumph over Lydia and Asia Minor, near the Aegean Sea, filled his treasury with that country's tremendous wealth. After conquering those lands, then the land surrounding Mesopotamia, Cyrus closed it on Babylon. they scrundled over imposed forced labor and the demotion of their city's patron deity marduk babylonians turned against their king and saw no reason to oppose cyrus no cyrus was known to spare those who yielded to him In 1539 BC, they opened their Bill Gates to the Persians who entered the city in peace amidst joy and jubilation according to an inscription touting Cyrus's triumph. The belabulent nature of Cyrus's reign took many forms. He placated the formerly powerful Medes by involving them in government. He adopted habits of dress and ornamentation from the Elamites. Across his conquered lands, he returned images of gods that had been seized in battle and hoarded in Babylon. And in Babylon itself, he publicly worshipped the city's revered Marduk. Cyrus's most renowned act of mercy, ready for this? Was to free the captive Jews. When Nebuchadnezzar had forced into exile in Babylon, Cyrus allowed them to return to their promised land. The Jerusalem, after the Babylonians destroyed the first temple and forced them out. The Jews praised the Persian Emperor in Scripture as a savior to whom God gave power over other kingdoms.

so that he would restore them to Jerusalem and allow them to rebuild their temple. Cyrus the Great died around 529 BC while campaigning against defiant nomadic tribes around the Caspian Sea. But one measure of his greatness was the esteem in which he was held in later years by the Greeks, despite the bitter wars they waged against the Persian successors. More than 150 years after Cyrus's death, the Greek author Xenophon memorialized the ruler in his work. He said he honored his subjects and cared for them as if they were his own children. He wrote, and they on their part revered Cyrus as a father. Those words served as an inspiration for at least one of America's founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson. Oh, not one, but two copies. of this book. Equally high braves for Cyrus's legacy is found in modern times at the United Nations headquarters and so forth. But he not only helped the Jews and free them to return to their homeland, the Holy Land, but he assisted them in the early days of...

beginning the building of the Second Temple. Cyrus the Great was truly a great emperor, a Persian emperor. And this is one of the reasons that there is this bond and this connection. And you can see it as Persians all over the world and particularly... Those who are stuck in the concentration camp, thanks to the Iranian Nazi Islamist regime, they talk about Benjamin Netanyahu, the great Jew. That's what they call them. Benjamin Netanyahu, the great Jew. And Benjamin Netanyahu has an affinity for these people, too. And now you know more than I bet you ever knew before, Mr. Producer. Isn't that amazing? I'll be right back. Mark Levin.

Folks, Mark Levin here with a new episode of On the Frontlines, my original podcast series and partnership with the great international fellowship of Christians and Jews. This week's episode, Nations Under God, comes at a remarkable moment. America's 250th anniversary and a decades-long friendship with the state of Israel that remains as vital as ever. Joining me is Yalel Eckstein, the great president and CEO of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. as we explore how this alliance was built. From Truman's recognition of Israel to the leaders and moments that shaped the partnership rooted not just in strategy but in shared faith and values. We'll look at how that bond is endured through the decades, why it still matters in a time of global uncertainty, and what's at stake if the next generation forgets the history and principles behind it? On the front lines isn't about looking back, it's about understanding what must be carried forward. Find the latest episode of On the Frontlines on the Mark Levin show podcast feed wherever you get your podcast. Subscribe now and join us on the front lines of freedom, faith, and fellowship. This is Mark Levin wishing you a happy 4th of July. Now back to the best of me. Islam is the only of the major face. that combine faith with governance in Sharia law you won't find that in the Torah you won't find it in the Bible generally the New Testament many have noticed that many When you're familiar with Alexis de Tocqueville in his two books, really two volumes, one book on democracy in America, he points out how Islam is wholly unfit for the American system or most democratic systems because it's obviously the imposition of a fundamentalist religious ideology onto a political system.

Now, in his book, I won't read a whole lot to you because we're giving you a lot so far today, and we'll do this another day. Islamic government, which has been called the Ayatollah's Mein Kampf, he was a big adherent of Hitler and Lenin and Mao, excuse me, and Marx. And in this, he explains in terms of... Islam, Sharia, and politics. Need for executive agencies, methods of great profit, need for continued implementation of laws, truth of Islamic laws, in finance and defense, blood money, penalties for blood money. the how to form a government and hadith distinction from other political systems that the rulers must be immersed in Islamic law talks about what jurisprudence is about subjective law nascent rules sublime goals qualities of a ruler the rule of jurisprudence

It's very intimate, very, very exacting. It's also blood-curdling when I'll get into this another day. It goes on in exquisite detail. Purging religious centers, that is, those who are non-conformists, reforming those who. who claim holiness but don't really embrace it. Eliminating traces of intellectual and moral colonialist aggression. This is where his brutality really kicks in. Long-range resistance and much, much more. Extraordinary detail. The difference between Christianity in this form of Islam and Judaism and this. is that our laws and our beliefs do not provide comprehensive and detailed governing principles. What would you do if your online store converted 36% more shoppers? You could take 36% more vacation. Another pinocleada? Yes, please. Open a new retail location. With 36% more square feet. Fantastic. Hire 36% more help. You're hired and you're hired. Shopify has the world's best converting checkout, up to 36% better than other e-commerce platforms. What you do with those extra sales is up to you. Switch to Shopify today at Shopify.com slash listen and get a $1 trial, Shopify.com slash listen. You're listening to the best of the Mark Levin show. Happy Independence Day. Let's keep going, shall we? Birthright citizenship. You know more about that than anybody on the face of the earth. But let's hear what the Speaker of the House had to say about this, Mike Johnson. He's a good man. By the way, he's also a constitutional lawyer who was a lawyer and litigator in the conservative legal community for many years. Cut one, go. I do think that this has been grossly abused in recent years, okay? And that is the case that was being made by the plaintiffs in the case. And we're very sympathetic to that because it is a serious problem. We have, you know, it's become a tourism, birthing tourism, they call it, you know, a trend where people will just come and you just come onto the soil and have your child and then they're... They're able to avail themselves of the welfare state and everything else. It's been abused. It's one of those things that was intended to serve a noble, important purpose, and has been thwarted and overused and abused. And so I'm sure that we'll continue to look at that. I mean, I'm sure the conclusion from this opinion is going to be that you've got to have a... You've got to amend the Constitution to fix that. As we all know, it's a big challenge to amend the Constitution. It's only happened 27 times in our whole nation's history. And the reason is, because you've got to have two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and three-fourths of the states to ratify. It's usually at least a many-year-long process and very complicated. We'll see. I'm sure there's going to be lots of discussion about that. I will say I'm very disappointed in that outcome. I think it subjects the country to serious challenges going forward, and we'll have to deal with it as a Congress.

It'd be difficult to deal with. I can tell you that right now. They constitutionalize this. You hear people making stupid comments. Let's amend the Constitution. Okay. As long as you have Democrats in the House and Senate, you're not going to get two-thirds votes of the House or the Senate, plus the Rhino Republicans, to do anything. As for a statute, the statute can't change the core fact now that this has been constitutionalized. Statutes don't change the Constitution, as you well know. So we'll see what... what can be done on the periphery, on the fringe, but the heart of it is the heart of it. Hasan Piker is a low life. He's a Jew hater. He is a terror supporter. He is a supporter of these Islamist Marxist movements. He was born in the United States. He is a birthright baby or was. Brought to Turkey where he was radicalized and then brought back to the United States. He's just a little example of what's going to happen and is happening to our country with this nonsense. And here he is on this issue as well. Cut five go. This is such an insane and fundamentally un-American concept. I really get sick and tired of Islamist commies who tell us what is un-American. Don't you? They hate America. They hate our Constitution. This is what I always talk about. And now they're going to wave around the 14th Amendment, the ruling by John Roberts and his ilk on the court, wave it around as some great victory when, in fact, their whole goal is to burn down the entire constitutional construct of the country. Go ahead. I cannot begin to explain this to you, okay? Ellis Island. Shut up. I don't even want to hear your stupid voice. You make me sick to my stomach. Mm-hmm. I don't know. By now, you probably saw this hearing. Mike Lawler. I like Mike Lawler a lot. You don't have to agree with him on everything, but I agree with him on a lot. He's just a good guy. He's in a marginally blue Democrat district. We have to carry districts like his in New York and other places, or we can't win. But he's a smart guy. He's a principal guy. He's a fighter. And there he is. They're on this committee.

The Goran family, Gorman family there, among others, and you have this low life, Jayapaw. This is our fourth hearing on the subject of these families and what took place here. We could be focused on other things like, you know, health care and food. And there's the poor woman sitting there, and you probably saw this on Fox and elsewhere. They lost their beautiful daughter. She was shot in the head. ran for 40 feet while this animal chased her and executed her. And she's saying, what could she have said in the 40 feet? Calling out to her mommy, calling out to her daddy, calling out for help, knowing that she was going to be gunned down. Can you imagine, ladies and gentlemen, can you imagine this happening to your family? Can you imagine going through this nightmare every damn second of every day without your baby anymore? The inhumanity of the Democrats. They don't want to talk about it. It's the fourth time. We're not going to talk about this. And by the way, one of the things that's never been said about this birthright crap and these open borders, the inhumanity that that has involved in all these years, with hundreds of thousands of missing children and women sold into sex slavery. Cut seven, go, Mike Lawler. So while some of my colleagues may not want to hear the truth, the same outrage you feel about Renee Good and Alex Preddy, you should feel about Sheridan Gorman's and Lexington. So stop right here. So this is Pramila Jayapal trying to shut him down. She's the head of the commie wing of the Democrat, but they call themselves Progressive. That's commie. You hear progressive, it's commie. And then Jamie Raskin, whose father was a big-time Stalinist. and started the Institute for Policy Studies. Go ahead and Google it. Go ahead and Google it. These are two big-time commies. Two big-time commies. Go ahead. Every angel family in this country. I do feel that outrage. You do not. Because if you did, you would not support sanctuary. Do you feel the outrage about Alex Reddy and Renee Good? You should be ashamed to yourself. You should be ashamed to yourself. You don't go on this committee. You should get the hell out of you. You don't understand the rules of the committee. You don't understand the Constitution. You're a disgrace. You're a full of it. Mr. Jamie Raskin. Mr. Jamie Raskin. Say one word about it. Say one word about Alex Freddie and I did. I wrote a whole New York Times not bet about it. You should be. Absolutely ashamed of your committee. The chairman opposing sanctuary policies that resulted in their daughter's death. The committee will be in order. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say we will not. Shut up. Shut up you jackass. Mm-hmm. You have victims' family members testifying on sanctuary policies. She's whining about, this is the fourth hearing. Go ahead on that one. Cut eight, please go. Unfortunately, this hearing is, it's the fourth time in this committee that we've had a hearing on Sanctuary Cities, the fourth time.

And there's many other things that we could be doing other than this. I would have loved to have had some hearings on the unconstitutionality of the president's executive order on eliminating birthright citizenship. This is something that the Supreme Court just ruled today in a six-three majority. So why would you need a hearing, genius? Go ahead. And yet this is- Understand, Jessica Gorman, the mom of Sheridan Gorman, who was executed by this animal. is sitting there with her husband and her other daughter, her younger daughter, as are other individuals whose children were murdered due to sanctuary city policies in blue cities and states. And she's listening to this woman complaining. This is our fourth hearing. Go ahead. ...that caused so much fear and trauma across the country. We could have been discussing that. Well, here's the response. From Jessica Gorman, this poor mother is going through an imaginable hell. Cut nine, go. And in what world does the child who spent her life making sure no one was lonely die terrified and alone on a peer in Chicago? In what world does the girl who saw everyone become invisible to the people in power responsible for protecting her? This cannot be explained away and it cannot be buried beneath a list of unrelated issues that you all paraded before us. Thanks for telling me without telling me that, you know, you're here, but you don't want to be. This is the fourth. This is the fourth time you had angel families. Thanks for telling me you don't care. This cannot be buried under your slogans, your statistics or excuses, and this just can't stand. You feel the agony, you share it, don't you? You tear up just listening to this poor mother. This family's been destroyed. All over the country this takes place. All over the country. And the Democrats are nominating and electing in their primaries. Communists, Islamists with ties to Hamas. Individuals who are talking about destroying the state of Israel? Individuals who are talking about 9-11 is a good thing? Our country?

The Democrat Party is nominating these people. They're going to be serving in your United States Congress. We have got to inform ourselves. That's why I spent an hour and a half at the beginning of this program. We've got to be the beacons here. We've got to help talk to our family and friends and acquaintances. If we don't push back, it's over. This is our country. We can't rely on other people to do all of our... are talking and battling on these things we have to do it now you and i right here we help strengthen and give birth to the tea party movement you and i right here help give birth to with mark meckler and the folks the convention of states movement you and i right here After the early primers in 2016, we all pulled together when we got behind our president now, Donald Trump, and we fought for him. We fought against the lawfare they were using and the impeachments they were using to try and destroy him. And you and I, and certainly he and others, we were involved in his re-election. And we're going to have to defend him again because they're coming after him and we'll do what we have to do. But you and I are uniquely positioned. Not the internet, not the podcasters. They can pat themselves on their ass all they want. Right here, conservative talk radio. You and I are the ones who are a position to do something about this. And by God we will. I'll be right back. Mark Levin.

Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Now, I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of Unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills. But it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Up front payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for $12 per month, equivalent. Taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only, greater than 50 gigabytes, may slow when network is busy. See Terms. This is the best of the Mark Levin show. Happy Independence Day. We go to America every Friday in honor of you. Here we go. Gentlemen, the week is officially over the week and begins now. We salute our armed forces, police officers, firefighters, emergency personnel on ice, and our truckers. We salute the men and women in Ukraine, the men and women in Persia, the men and women in Israel, and you, the American people, thank God for you. Good night, Spritey and Griffey and Pepsi and Smoky. Good night, Zelda and Gigi and Indian Patton and Rory. Good night Marty and Little Barney. good night dad good night mom good night leo good night joe good night big eric good night teddy and good night loo and all the other patriots who've gone before us i won't be here next week and with god's blessing i will be here the following week does i have a wonderful weekend don't forget to watch me on fox tomorrow night 8 p.m eastern sunday night 8 p.m eastern And I'll see you when I return. Have a wonderful weekend.