Supreme Court Limits Judge Shopping, Michael Dimino on the Left’s Push to Dismantle the Constitution, Gov. Newsom Sues Fox News, & Celebrities Oppose Trump's SNAP Regulations
41:45 Share

Hey, Bill O'Reilly here. Welcome to the No Spin News for Monday, June 30th, 2025. Stand up for your country, especially this week, 4th of July. Coming up on Friday, and I wrote a column yesterday, Sunday, and I do that every week on BillOReilly.com, saying, what does the government owe you? Government owes you stuff, and me.

I'm included in the universal you. It does not owe you a living, by the way. By the way, I'm sorry I saw that. That's a cliche. It does not owe you a living. Anyway, I hope you read the column. It's a good 4th of July column. President Trump has some momentum building.

And that is going to cause a lot of angst for the Trump haters on this 4th. It's also the subject of this evening's Talking Points memo. Now, on Friday, the Supreme Court ruled against judge shopping. What is this?

So when Donald Trump got into office, and this is the message of the day on BillOReilly.com, which is different from the column, okay? Donald Trump got into office. He wrote a bunch of executive orders trying to overturn the Biden executive orders of four years ago.

When Biden opened the border and did all that, Republicans did not challenge a lot of that in federal court. They groused about it and complained about it, but they didn't go around and try to undermine executive orders en masse. That's not what they did. Democrats did. So the Democrats would go to Washington State or Massachusetts or California or one of those, find a judge.

they knew would rule in a liberal way against Trump. And then they'd slap on a national injunction. So some pinhead judge in Sacramento could stop an entire executive order for the entire country. Now, I knew this was insane. And so did you. I'm sure you did. Here's what I said on June 4th. Go.

So the founding fathers said, we're going to give the president the power to issue executive orders to protect the people and the people's treasury, not to abuse the people. That's what executive orders are supposed to be. Now, they are subject to review from the judiciary. But now that's being abused to the highest level in our history. And the Supreme Court has to rule on it. And I assume they will as judges.

month because after the end of June they take three months off. I assume that they're going to rule and knock this crazy stuff out to some extent. Hello, Nostradamus, that's me. But it wasn't a hard prediction. Okay, but everything I said came true on Friday. 6-3 ruling.

Okay, the justices had limited the use of nationwide injunctions. Okay, they said that if you're a judge and somebody comes and files a petition, you can hear that case, the single case, if the person's in your jurisdiction, but you can't issue a national pause or anything else. So the left went crazy.

And the three liberal judges, and look, I'm not going to disparage the liberal judges because there are conservative judges and they vote ideology sometimes too, but the liberal judges had no constitutional basis. So here's what Amy Comey Barrett, Supreme Court Justice who ruled the majority opinion, wrote the majority opinion, I should say. Here's what she said, quote,

We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this. Justice Jackson decries an imperial executive while embracing an imperial judiciary.

All right. So Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed by Biden, is probably more liberal than Sotomayor, definitely more than Kagan. And she would say, OK, you can't stop this and all that. And the six other judges said, this is crazy. That's not what the founders had in mind. It certainly isn't. All right. But Judge Jackson doesn't care because she views her job as

as advancing a cause, a liberal cause. But again, some conservatives feel that way too, in my opinion, my humble opinion. All right, this is an ongoing battle over the Constitution being used for political purposes, but there's no doubt it was in this case. Now on cable TV, which has sunk into the morass, I don't think it'll ever come out of it, it was predictable. Go.

I was trying to sort out my feelings on this matter and I came up with a quote from a very smart lawyer. And I just wanna quote because I think she was right when she said it. It just can't be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks. Justice Elena Kagan in 2022 said that of course when we had a Democratic president. Now she voted against the decision on Friday just goes to show you that some of these folks really are hacks. What the Supreme Court

is done and again stacked largely by these Trump appointees is ceding their power under the Constitution, in fact, their responsibility as a judicial branch. They're ceding that to Donald Trump, who is a lawless president.

What a bunch of bull that is. Now, the original executive order that sparked all this was President Trump's intention to say no more birthright. OK, so if you are born here, you are not automatically a citizen. That's what President Trump wanted to do. Now, the Supreme Court did not rule on that. And I don't think they're going to rule in Trump's favor.

Okay, it's clear in the Constitution that those words are there. If a person is born in the United States, that person is a citizen. It doesn't matter how they got here. There's no footnotes. So Senator Van Hollen, who's about as far left as you get, he's going to be proved wrong because I don't think the Supreme Court is going to knock that out of the Constitution. It may be possible they might attach a few things for review of it

But anyway, that has been paused for 30 days. And since the court doesn't come back till late September, I think the pause will be extended.

And that's a memo. Another ruling on Friday, Montgomery County, Maryland, parents sued in federal court saying, look, if the schools in Montgomery County are going to teach about gay stuff and they're going to promote LBGTQ stuff, then we want our kids to be out of the classroom because we don't believe that on religious grounds. OK. And again, the justices ruled 6-3.

Same thing that, yeah, if you're a religious person who does not believe that the gay lifestyle is accepted by your religion, your kid doesn't have to listen to that. Common sense, right? I believe. So they're not banning the lesson. They're giving the parents a right to take the kid out when that happens. Okay, so the left, of course, went nuts. Go.

Right now, this looks like it affects only books with LGBTQ+ characters, but it very well might extend to science and evolution and all the other things that for some reason are up for debate in this day and age that are rooted in science and understanding, but it very well might upend what we think of as public education. Yeah, I'm not worried.

Okay, I don't think they're going to be imposing evolution on the kids in that classroom. Both should be discussed, though. You know, why not? Why not discuss the biblical point of view? Say, look, there are some fundamentalist religious people who believe Adam and Eve were there. And they wish, you know, the snake was chasing them around. There's nothing wrong with that. Okay, you don't say it's fact.

I mean, but you know how it is. What this is all about, this ruling is all about, is there are many states, Maryland at the top of the list, that want to impose liberal doctrine on the students. And do they want? Okay. I guess there are some states that want to impose conservative doctrine, maybe Louisiana because they had the Ten Commandments thing. But the liberal states are real active in this group.

Hey, Bill O'Reilly here. In my career, I have interviewed seven presidents, covered every major story of the last few decades. But I've never seen an opportunity like this one. President Trump's second term could mirror the economic boom of the 1920s, a time when unemployment hit 1.8%.

Stock soared 265%. And ordinary Americans had their shot at real prosperity. That's why I've recorded a special presentation with renowned investment expert Alexander Green called "The Rebirth of the American Dream." Alex will reveal how President Trump plans to slash regulations, cut taxes, bring manufacturing back to America, and unlock the AI-driven tech boom.

Plus, you will get details on six specific stocks that could soar during Trump's presidency. Please visit TrumpsAmericanDream.com to watch our presentation now. All right, let's bring in a guy who's smarter than I am and he can tell me if I'm going wrong here. His name is Michael DiMeno and he teaches at Widener University Law School, which is in Pennsylvania.

First question, Professor, about the judge shopping. It just seems to me that no matter what ideology you are, let's face it, the U.S. economy is under stress. National debt rising, trade war shaking the markets. And meanwhile, China is dumping the dollar and stockpiling gold. That's why I protected my savings with physical gold and silver.

through the only dealer I trust, American Hartford Gold. And you can do this, get precious metals delivered to your door or place in a tax advantage gold IRA. They'll even help you roll over your existing IRA or 401k, tax and penalty free.

With billions in precious metals delivered, thousands of five-star reviews, and an A-plus from the Better Business Bureau, you can trust American Hartford Gold as I do. Please call 866-326-5576 or text BILL to 998899. Again, that's 866-326-5576 or text BILL to 998899.

Anyone can deliver you headlines. Only the New York Post can deliver the headlines you need and the stories you want. From the iconic newsroom that pulls no punches comes the New York Post cast. Every weekday morning, I'll break down a headline impacting your world with sharp insight, context,

and in-depth reporting. Plus, I'll have the Post's signature mix of stories that people are actually talking about, from politics to business to pop culture and everything in between. This isn't just another news podcast. It's a look at what matters and a peek at what's too interesting to ignore, keeping you informed and entertained.

I'm Caitlin Becker. Listen and subscribe to the New York Postcast every weekday morning on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your podcast. That you would know one judge just stopping the whole apparatus of executive orders is just blowing up the Constitution. Am I wrong?

Oh, you're absolutely right. Thank you very much for having me on, Bill. It's a pleasure to be here. But you're absolutely right in your description of the problem that having one district judge with the power to issue a universal nationwide injunction prevents other judges from getting involved in issuing opinions on the same issue. And usually the way that you get ultimate resolution of these issues is to

to have a bunch of cases in the lower courts, each focused on particular plaintiffs. And if there's a disagreement with those lower courts, then the appellate courts can sort out the disagreement. But we don't just pick one district judge as part of some kind of policymaking strategy and let that judge impose an injunction on the entire country unless the Supreme Court gets involved

on some kind of emergency basis. Okay, but the three liberal judges on the Supreme Court surely are intelligent enough to recognize the anarchy and chaos that would come if every party could judge shop on every presidential decision, right? They're not stupid. That is certainly true.

Yes, and in fact, as your clip before me points out,

pointed out, Justice Kagan has already pointed out that problem during the Biden administration. Yeah, she contradicted herself. So the only conclusion that fair-minded people can come to is that at least three members of the Supreme Court don't care about the Constitution at all. They want to use their power at the nation's highest court to advance their liberal ideology. That's the only conclusion you can come to.

I think what you have is a fundamental disagreement about judicial power, that what the liberal justices see as the role of the federal courts is solving injustice or declaring what the law is. They see the courts as this kind of institution just to get involved and stop illegality whenever they see it.

That's not the way the federal courts are supposed to work. And the six justices in the majority correctly pointed out Justice Jackson's flawed understanding of the Constitution in that way. Federal courts are supposed to resolve disputes between parties who are affected by the litigation.

It turns out that the plaintiff is right and what the government is doing is illegal or unconstitutional. Then the district court should enter a remedy that solves that plaintiff's problem. Right. I mean, the ruling was right. But what disturbs me are these three justices. That's what disturbed me. They want to dismantle the Constitution. They want to dismantle it. And let's be honest about it.

They know the anarchy and chaos that would be caused by judge shopping on every single presidential executive order. They understand that. They don't care. They're almost subversive when it comes to the Constitution of the United States. Last word. I think Justice Barrett had it exactly right when she said that Justice Jackson would impose an imperial judiciary.

That's the, and I think that's what you're referring to when you're saying subvert the Constitution. You say judges are up here and everybody else has to follow what the judges say. That's not the original understanding of the Constitution. But I carry it further than that. These judges, justices, are in business to advance a liberal ideology. They're using their position for politics, not

to really analyze what the founding fathers had in mind. That's my point of view. Do you concur with that? I agree. I think that being an activist or what we call a result-oriented judge is just about the worst thing that you can be on the court. Right, and they got three of them. Yeah, it seems to me that that's what was motivating them. Well, Sotomayor, I know this for a fact, Sotomayor wants out.

She's tired. She doesn't feel well. But she's hanging on because she doesn't want Trump to appoint the next judge. So we'll see how that evolves. Professor, thanks very much. Happy Fourth of July. We appreciate the help. All right. Governor Gavin Newsom suing Fox News. This is just bogus and I'll just explain why. So the governor is going to run for president in 2028. There's no doubt about it. And Kamala Harris will run for governor.

in two years, 26, those things will happen. So Newsom is trying to get, rally all of the Democrats behind him. And he knows that many of them, perhaps most, probably most, hate Fox News. So there was a phone call made, I guess Newsom called Trump.

But I don't even know because I haven't seen a transcript or anything like that about the National Guard in L.A. This happened around June 6th. And Jesse Waters got the timeline wrong about the phone call, according to Newsom.

no i don't know i haven't seen the transcripts i don't like that and then john roberts another fox news guy um he uh called newsome a liar or something like where waters called him a liar and they called them names and they disparage him so uh newsom said he was defamed number one he's a public figure so

That's not going to fly anywhere. Number two, he's suing for $787 million in damages. All right, that's the exact number Dominion won against Fox. This is just ridiculous. So what's going to happen is it'll either be thrown out in summary judgment or Newsom will withdraw it. Now, I'd like to know who's paying for this. OK, and I'm going to work on that this week to find out who's paying for

The legal bills for this, for Newsom. And I bet you it's a political action committee. You know, one of these Soros type places, maybe not Soros, but you know how it is. But this is just a publicity stunt. OK, not a stunt is the House oversight probe into Joe Biden's mental acuity. That's advancing and it's fairly serious.

So the committee has issued two subpoenas. Dr. Kevin O'Connor, who said, hey, Biden's fine mentally and physically. And now we know Biden has prostate cancer. OK, doctor, good luck. And Anthony Bernal, who is a senior advisor to First Lady Jill Biden.

Those two men have been subpoenaed. They have to testify before the committee or they'll be found in contempt of Congress. Now, they were asked to do so voluntarily. They refused. Others that are going to be asked to testify are Corinne Jean-Pierre, Anita Dunn, Ron Klain, Jeff Zents, Andrew Bates, Ian Sams, all the big shots.

And they want to get them under oath, the Republican congresspeople on the oversight committee, and say, hey, you know, because they could trap them. That's what they're trying to do with these people. Now, there's no doubt in my mind, and I wrote this fairly clearly in confronting the presidents, that Joe Biden was infirmed while he was president.

Hey, it's Sean Spicer from the Sean Spicer Show podcast, reminding you to tune into my show every day to get your daily dose inside the world of politics. President Trump and his team are shaking up Washington like never before, and we're here to cover it from all sides.

especially on the topics the mainstream media won't. So if you're a political junkie on a late lunch or getting ready for the drive home, new episodes of the Sean Spicer Show podcast drop at 2 p.m. East Coast every day. Make sure you tune in. You can find us at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

power, politics and the people behind the headlines. I'm Miranda Devine, New York Post columnist and the host of the brand new podcast, Podforce One. Every week, I'll sit down for candid conversations with Washington's most powerful disruptors, lawmakers, newsmakers and even the president of

I am 100% convinced of that based on the facts, based on what happened. And more things are going to come out.

But you should be aware that those things are early July. O'Connor is supposed to be up July 9th. So right after the 4th of July, we're going to have all of this testimony. Okay, there is a group feeding America, left-wing group.

But they're do-gooders. I mean, I don't object to them. They want to get food into the hands of poor Americans. They're pretty noble. I give money to food charities on Long Island. Anyway, they issued a letter, okay, objecting to any cuts whatsoever for supplemental nutrition assistance. Snap. What snap? Food stamps.

Now, as everybody knows, the United States owes $36 trillion and it's going up at an astronomical rate every day. So the Trump administration is trying to get more stringent qualifications to get food stamps, to get Medicaid. That's what they're trying to do, trying to imply oversight. It's a good thing.

because we can't keep wild spending like this. There are millions of layabouts who are gaming the system, getting free this, free that, and they could work, but why should I? I'm a heroin addict. I don't care. I don't want to work. All right, now, three very high-profile entertainers, Matt Damon, Scarlett Johansson, Sheryl Crow, signed on to this letter. Okay, I don't hold anything against these people,

Here is the statement, all right, from that. Quote,

And 7.2, seniors rely on programs like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Medicaid to make ends meet. These programs make it possible for them to live more healthily and with dignity, in turn, helping communities across America to thrive. This is the Feeding America statement that the movie stars and singers signed on to. That's not true. Okay, now, you could debate it, but I live in Nassau County. I don't know anybody starving here.

Nola County, and I have a house in Suffolk County. I don't know anybody starving there because every Catholic church on Long Island has free food. I think every one. And there are food banks all over the place. And if you qualify, you can get the government subsidy. But if you aren't looking for work, if you don't care to get a job and pay your own way, they're going to boot you. And that's okay with me.

If you have dependent children, they're not going to boot you. Okay? So these movie stars, they live in a world, not in a real world. They don't live in a real world. Are their people hungry? Are their kids hungry? Yeah, because their parents are irresponsible. Parents are taking all the money and all the stuff they get to buy drugs or alcohol, whatever they're doing. But if you need food, you can get it. We're the most generous people on earth. Okay. And all these new bill wants to do is,

is put work requirements onto SNAP and Medicaid. And then they're telling the states, you cannot tax Medicaid, North Carolina, at the highest level anymore. You have to drop it to 3.5% because the federal government has to reimburse the states when they tax Medicaid services. Do you understand that?

So the Trump administration goes, "We're capping it at 3.5." They're not cutting it. They don't want to be paying these astronomical reimbursements to the states. This is just logic. But the left runs with it and says, "Oh, they're cutting Medicaid. People won't have help. People won't have food." Because the Democratic Party does not want to cut one cent out of the budget.

They want to increase it. Did you know that in modern times, when a Democrat is president, federal spending is twice what it is when a Republican is president? Did you know that? And this big bill that Trump has, no Democrat's going to vote for it. Now, one, because they don't want any oversight. They want to keep adding and adding and adding to the cost. And that's what socialism is.

That's what it is. Now, does Matt Damon and Scarlett Johansson understand any of this? I don't know. They signed the letter. They have a perfect right to sign the letter. If I ran into them, I would be very polite and respectful. I might ask them, hey, what's your objection to the federal government saying to the state you can't game the system by charging all this tax that we have to reimburse you for? Can't do that.

And I can guarantee you they wouldn't know what I was talking about. All right, update on the bill. Passed in the Senate a procedural vote, 51-49. Rand Paul, forget it, he's not going to vote for it. Tom Tillis, North Carolina, he doesn't like the tax cut that I just told you about. So Trump hammered him. Tillis knows he's going to lose in 26. So Tillis said, I surrender, I surrender. Tillis will probably vote for that bill.

and I'm out running again. So Lara Trump's going to win that seat. Trump's daughter-in-law, right? Yeah. She'll win. You watch. I got it on tape. She'll run. She's a North Carolinian and she'll win. Until I see you. A couple of other Republicans, but Trump will devastate them. Except for Rand Paul, who's, you know, he's

a different cat as Dennis Miller used to say in Kentucky and they like that independent kind of um he's not really a Republican Paul he's an isolation you know you know what he is smart life now just hits home my father at age 62 died from melanoma all right he was a Sun worshiper now his son me I don't like the sun I was out on the beach uh and it was cloudy I'm happy

So when you go to Ireland and you go to the beach, it's usually cloudy. That's a DNA thing. My father was in the sun all the time, loved it. And he died, you know, and he got nailed. When I was a teenager, I was a lifeguard water safety instructor for the town of Babylon in Suffolk County, Long Island. And I was in the sun all the time because back then there wasn't any sun thing. There wasn't any warning. There wasn't any anything.

And you had nitwits, remember this with the aluminum foil, trying to reflect more sun into their face?

Hey, podcast listeners, Eric Bolling here, inviting you to check out my podcast, Bolling. The mainstream media wants you to believe every lying word out of their mouths. Americans are being brainwashed and lied to every single day. I stand for the truth and give you my daily totally uncensored takes unapologetically on Bolling. Subscribe today so you can listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

and the darker you could get uh remember those copper tone as the dog and the little kid now you gotta really be careful so smart life with a hundred thousand diagnosed with melanova this year alone that's the estimate from the american cancer society all right and it's far more than that but people don't know they have it now every day i have this cream i have to put this cream all over me

And my dermatologist, the best in the business, I can't tell you who he is, but the guy is really brilliant. I mean, he's taking stuff off me every three months. And you have to, especially if you have blue eyes and fair skin. You have to. So that's smart life. You got to look at yourself and see if you got anything there that doesn't look good and go to the dermatologist, check it out. You should do that, you know, once you get over the age of 50.

every year. We don't want you to do what happened to my father should never have happened. Thailand, no more pot. So in 2022, Thailand, which is a libertine society, I said, okay, pot, fine. Not so fine because all the kids are smoking pot. So if you go to Bangkok, I don't recommend it. Bangkok, fascinating to me. I was there on assignment

stated the best hotel in the world, the Oriental Hotel on the river there. What an unbelievable hotel that is. But Bangkok? Vice. That's what they're selling there. Drugs, you know, you name it, they're selling it there. So, and then if you go to the beach, the Ataman Sea, Phuket and all that, there is too. I like Thailand. I like the people, but boy, that society is rough.

Anyway, the government of Thailand, which is a military dictatorship now, said no more pot because the kids, the Thai kids, are smoking it all over the place. It's happening here too. The media suppresses that story. Stay in history. June 30th, 1882, Charles J. Gouteau, hanged by the neck until dead. What did he do? 143 years ago, he killed, shot,

President James Garfield. Boy. And confronting the president has, I think, got the best reportage on this. And Garfield hung on for a long time. Okay. And he finally died a gruesome death. And Chester Arthur, the immortal Chester Arthur, took over. Garfield was a Civil War hero. He's a good guy. And this guy, Gouteau, was a nut, as all these assassins are. He was mentally ill.

So he supported Garfield, and he thought that Garfield should give him an ambassadorship in return for Gouteau's support. Okay? And then when he didn't get it, he stalked Garfield, who didn't have Secret Service protection to any extent at all. Where do you see it? That's why you should read that book. And he shot him, and they hung him. That happened 143 years ago today. All right. I'm back with a final thought, something that...

Snuck up on me, AI, in a moment. All right, here is a final thought of the day. So if you have ever ordered food from a restaurant, okay, you know how agonizing it can be. Now, I am loud. I speak clearly. And when I order anything, I speak doubly clearly. And I have the person read the order back to me.

because they get it wrong so much. I was on the phone with some lady at a seafood place in eastern Long Island. I had to say, "Madam, I just can't do it anymore. I mean, I've given you the order three times. You can't write it down." And literally, the woman could not write it down. Okay. So, on Friday, I called to renew some prescriptions.

and I didn't get a person. I got AI. I got AI. First time. And I'm going, "Ooh." Now, it wasn't complicated. I had the renewal number. I know my name, and I know where I live. Okay? So I got prompted by the AI. It was a woman's voice, and I gave the information fairly slowly, but not ridiculous. First take.

Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. And then I wanted to pick it up today and it was there. So my conclusion is, and this is going to be everywhere, but this is the first time for me. But in a year from now, you're not going to have human beings answer the phone. You're going to have AI. But it worked. And that's all I care about. Okay. Now, are people going to lose jobs? Yes. And if you know someone who's marginal, they need to get a skill.

They need to start to bear down because if you're working for an hourly wage and you're doing work like taking orders or whatever, that's going. OK, you got to look ahead. You got to know. And is it a good thing? It's a good thing for efficiency. Certainly it was a good thing for me to get this prescription so I didn't have to read it 18 times. But is it bad for efficiency?

marginal employees and that includes kids trying to you know move it on up but you gotta learn how to make a living period can't be dependent on the government okay so that was a worthwhile Monday program and we appreciate your uh attention very much on our 300 radio stations and television all over the world thank you I will be here tomorrow and we'll see you then