Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Roe is no more. In one of the greatest moments in American history, the Supreme Court decision which codified the right to murder babies has been finally and officially overturned. I’ll have a lot to say about that today. Also, the Left continues to panic over the other great Supreme Court decision decided yesterday, this one affirming our right to carry firearms. Many very bad arguments have been made against that decision. We’ll review some of them today. Meanwhile, Eric Adams in New York says that he will ignore the Supreme Court’s decision and work to “undo” it. Is this an insurrection? Plus, Joe Biden accidentally shows off a note from his staff that shows just how bad his dementia has gotten.
Become a Daily Wire member to watch summer blockbuster “Terror on the Prairie”, the most talked about documentary in America “What Is A Woman”, and so much more. Use code WALSH for 25% off your new membership: https://utm.io/ueHMh
—
Today’s Sponsors:
40 Days for Life is one of the largest pro-life grassroots organizations in the world. Get their book "What to Say When: The Complete New Guide to Discussing Abortion."
https://40daysforlifegear.com/collections/books/products/what-to-say-when
Beam is one of the world's most innovative functional wellness brands, with unique products for everything from Sleep to Focus. LIMITED TIME OFFER: Up to 35% OFF at beamorganics.com/WALSH
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In one of the greatest moments in American history, the Supreme Court decision which codified the right to murder babies has been finally and officially overturned.
I'll have a lot to say about that today, as you can imagine.
Also, the left continues to panic over the other great Supreme Court decision decided yesterday, this one affirming our right to carry firearms.
Many very bad arguments have been made against that decision.
We'll review some of them today.
Meanwhile, Eric Adams in New York says that he will ignore the Supreme Court's decision and work to undo it.
Is this an insurrection we're dealing with?
Plus, Joe Biden accidentally shows off a note from his staff that shows just how bad his dementia has gotten.
And Kamala Harris humiliates herself while trying to play basketball.
All of that and much more today on The Matt Wall Show.
And it's so good that I'm not dressed like a slob for the first time on the air.
That's how important today is.
It's been nearly 50 years since Roe v. Wade was decided.
For half a century, We've lived under its tyranny.
Those of us who were lucky enough to live at all, that is, actually, you know, because 60 million of us did not live.
Over 60 million human children have been wiped off the face of the earth during that time.
Executed one by one, systematically, for profit.
All because nine guys in robes pulled out their decoder rings from their Cracker Jack boxes and found the right to abortion written in invisible ink somewhere in the document.
And that was enough justification to legalize the destruction of innocent human life all across the country for almost half a century.
It's impossible to know what our society deprived itself of, what it sacrificed, aside from its soul.
Could one of the babies we killed have come up with a cure for cancer?
Could there have been great leaders and artists and thinkers and humanitarians somewhere in that pile of bodies?
Almost certainly there were.
How many inventors and pioneers were thrown into the mass grave before they even had a chance to speak, to plead for themselves, to tell their side of the story?
We'll never know for sure, because Roe robbed us of that, just as it robbed 60 million children of their lives and of their potential.
Until today.
As expected for the last month and prayed for and fought for and worked towards for the last five decades by pro-lifers, Roe was officially overturned by the Supreme Court decision today.
A decision originally leaked a few weeks ago in a desperate bid to intimidate at least one of the justices into changing their minds.
The gambit did not Indeed, it probably backfired as Chief Justice Roberts joined the majority decision overturning Roe, something he almost certainly was not planning to do until the decision leaked.
And so it stands.
It stands even stronger, arguably, than it did in its leaked form.
And the result is that Roe is no more.
Praise God.
This is truly, I mean truly, one of the greatest days in American history.
Future generations will look back on this day.
You are living in a day right now.
You are experiencing a day.
That will be in the history books, and that future generations will look back on.
And they will look back on it the way that we now look back on the abolition of slavery, or the defeat of the Germans in World War II, the liberation of the concentration camps.
They will look back on it in the exact same way.
Because there's a lot of gray area in life, there's many occasions where the good guys aren't very distinguishable from the bad guys.
But this, this belongs to the other category of events.
This is the category where the line between good and evil could not be more clear.
One side has fought to protect babies from extermination.
And they have fought this and fought for this for the sake of those babies, of those children.
You know, we pro-lifers, we stand to gain nothing personally from the end of row.
We don't profit off of it in any way at all.
There's nothing self-serving about it.
We fight for those who cannot fight for themselves.
And this is really hard for the left to understand because they never do this.
Everything they fight for, it's always for themselves.
Always.
If they cannot directly profit from it, in some kind of way, they do not fight for it and they do not care.
Which is why they could never understand us.
They never understood us as pro-lifers.
They're always looking for, what's really going on here?
What's going on below the surface?
What's the nefarious plan?
They're trying to control women's bodies.
They have a secret conspiracy.
It's none of that.
We just don't think you should kill babies.
Simple as that.
We care about those babies.
The other side, they fight to destroy innocent life.
And they fight for it for their own sake, for their own convenience, for their own precious lifestyle and comfort.
They're the bad guys.
History will see them as the bad guys.
We'll see them that way.
We'll look back on them with scorn.
And you should know that also, if you're on the left and today you're very upset and you're screaming and crying about it, that all of history will look back at you with scorn and mockery and derision.
As well they should.
Because you lose.
You lose big today.
You lose historically.
And look, they're going to explode in demonic rage.
They're going to protest and riot.
They will destroy and probably kill to satiate their bloodlust, but none of that will change anything, and all of it will be worth it in the end.
Let these psychopaths burn every city to the ground.
I will still thank God that Roe is no more.
I don't think they're actually going to follow through on a lot of this stuff.
I think a lot of it is just big talk.
I think that the pro-abortion militants are hoping and praying to Satan That we'll have, you know, the BLM riots of 2020 all over again.
That we'll have months and months of chaos and rioting in the street.
That's what they're hoping for, that's what they're trying to organize.
I don't think it's actually gonna happen.
Because I don't think that there are enough people, and maybe I'll be proven wrong about this, I don't think there are enough people who care that much about killing babies to generate the kind of mass nationwide chaos that the left is hoping for here.
We'll see.
Now, this does not end the scourge of abortion.
We should note that.
It may come as a shock to many of the pro-abortion demons convulsing in the street and vomiting all over themselves, like Linda Blair in The Exorcist.
But in fact, abortion will remain legal in many U.S.
states, including our most populous states.
In fact, nearly every pro-abortion militant now promising a night of rage as revenge actually lives in a place where their so-called right to abortion, quote-unquote, will remain intact.
Actually, I expect that the remaining abortion states will double and triple down, consoling themselves by making abortion even more accessible, even more legal, even more easy to obtain.
I'm putting my marker down right here.
I don't think this year will come to a close before at least one state officially legalizes infanticide, expanding abortion rights into the first several months of a child's life outside the womb.
That's on the way.
And yet, even so, this decision today will nonetheless directly save millions of lives.
There is no question about that.
It is not every day that something like this happens, that there's an event in history that happens and we live through it.
And because of that event, millions of people will live who otherwise would have died.
I mean, the course of history has been changed in ways that we cannot possibly tabulate or quantify.
We never will be able to.
It's important also to note something else.
That this decision made by the court is not just morally right, though it is, of course, morally right, manifestly and self-evidently so, it's also the right legal decision.
Because even if somehow you have no moral qualms with the dismemberment of children, you must, if you're honest and understand the way the law is supposed to work, You must agree that Roe was bad law, bad precedent, a bad decision built on a foundation so flimsy that to call it merely flimsy probably does it a favor.
I want to read a little bit from the decision itself today.
It says, quote, Without any grounding in the constitutional text, history, or precedent, Roe imposed on the entire country a detailed set of rules for pregnancy divided into trimesters, much like those that one might expect to find in a statute or regulation.
Roe's failure even to note the overwhelming consensus of state laws in effect in 1868 is striking.
And what it said about the common law was simply wrong.
Then, after surveying history, the opinion spent many paragraphs conducting the sort of fact-finding that might be undertaken by a legislative committee, and did not explain why the sources on which it relies shed light on the meaning of the Constitution.
As to precedent, citing a broad array of cases, the court found support for a constitutional right of personal privacy, but Roe conflated the right to shield information from disclosure and the right to make and implement personal decisions without governmental interference.
None of these decisions involved what is distinctive about abortion, its effect on what Roe termed potential life.
When the Court summarized the basis for the scheme it imposed on the country, it asserted that its rules were consistent with, among other things, the relative weight of the respective interests involved in the demands of the profound problems of the present day.
These are precisely the sort of considerations that legislative bodies often take into account when they draw lines that accommodate competing interests.
The scheme produced looked like legislation, and the Court provided the sort of explanation that might be expected from a legislative body.
Okay, now, the entire decision is very much worth reading, but that passage alone summarizes, I think, a central element of the majority's decision.
Basically, to translate, the decision to affirm a constitutional right to abortion, quote-unquote, was not grounded in the text of the Constitution, because it's not in the text of the Constitution.
It wasn't even grounded in precedent or historical tradition.
It had no grounding at all, aside from the claims and preferences of the justices who decided it.
What they came up with then was not a legal decision rigorously argued, but a kind of pseudo-legislation that looks and sounds and functions like something that a legislative committee might come up with.
And that's reason enough to overturn it, no matter how you feel about abortion.
And you can really see the contrast between Roe itself, that decision, and the decision abolishing it today.
The latter, the decision abolishing it, is thorough, logical, deeply argued, While the former was, now we say, shallow, often absurd, full of subjective assertions, and it danced around and avoided the fundamental question, which, of course, is what we always find on the left.
They can never take any issue head-on.
They can never talk about it directly.
Everything is covered in euphemism.
Everything is just a game of beating around the bush.
Because here is the most fundamental question that all pro-abortion people everywhere avoid.
It's the question that the rioters in the street tonight, while they're looting and burning, will have no answer to and probably haven't even thought about, and that is this.
What is a person?
We know they can't tell us what a woman is, which won't stop them from claiming that today represents a grave assault on women's rights, but that confusion is not surprising since they long before gave up on the definition of the word person.
I mean, before they gave up on the definition of the word woman, they'd given up on the definition of the word person, which means that we had already become these kinds of sort of vague, hazy, ambiguous, undefinable, undefined lumps of matter.
You know, that's what a person is now.
It's like nothing at all.
And of course, if that's the case, then any other label you put on the person also doesn't really make any sense, because we don't know anything about the underlying person.
For 50 years, they claimed that the question is irrelevant.
They said, well, nobody knows what a person is, it's impossible to say, so let's just keep killing these babies just in case.
But any morally sane person realizes that it should go the other way.
If you can't tell me what a person is, then you can't say for certain that the child in the womb is not one, which means even by your own logic, you should refrain from killing him.
If you point a gun at somebody, not knowing if it's loaded or not, and you pull the trigger, you're still legally liable if it turns out there was a bullet in the chamber after all.
Unless your name is Alec Baldwin, of course.
The same goes for abortion.
By the Pro Board's own telling, they exterminated 60 million human children who might have been people for all they know.
That's not any better than exterminating 60 million human children who you know are people.
Especially in this case.
Because in fact, everyone knows that babies are people.
Even if they pretend to be confused about it.
Everyone knows it.
A person is a human being.
The child in the womb cannot be anything other than a member of the human species, which means he cannot be anything other than a person.
These are people.
They have been killing people.
Millions of them.
And they know it.
And they'll answer to God for what they've done.
But today, we celebrate their defeat.
There's a lot of work yet to be done.
The battle is just beginning in many ways.
But I think it's very important to celebrate the victories when they come.
And this is a victory.
I mean, this is a major one.
This is one of the greatest victories for human rights in the history of the world.
I think I would even say perhaps the greatest victory for human rights in the history of the world.
And it's one that I thought I would never live to see.
In summation, what a great way to end Pride Month.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
I say the other great thing about this, there's so many great things, I'm just elated by it.
But who do we have to thank for this today, for the results?
Um...
Well, we thank the six members of the Supreme Court who decided correctly on this.
Well, Roberts was kind of, you know, he tried to thread a needle From what I saw in his opinion on this, he tried to thread a needle where he would still, you know, preserve Roe, while at the same time, you know, it's just this kind of compromise that makes no sense.
But who do we have to thank?
The members of the Supreme Court who made this heroic decision.
It truly is heroic.
I mean, keep in mind, Brett Kavanaugh, and I don't like everything Brett Kavanaugh has done and all the decisions that he's made since he was confirmed and sworn into the Supreme Court, but this is an act of real courage.
Because keep in mind, Brett Kavanaugh, there was a nutcase at his house with a gun and like zip ties ready to kidnap and murder him.
And he knows they're not gonna stop after this.
So they have put their lives on the line.
These are real heroes.
And no matter what else happens, and I'm sure in the future there'll be plenty of other decisions where I disagree with where some of these people fall.
Clarence Thomas, probably not.
I don't think I've ever disagreed with any decision he's made.
But because of this moment right here, they are heroes forever.
They have secured that for themselves for all time.
So we have them to thank.
We have Donald Trump to thank for nominating these three justices in the first place.
That's the fact of the matter.
If Donald Trump had not won in 2016, if Hillary Clinton had won, then Roe v. Wade would be affirmed, obviously.
The Second Amendment would be gone.
It would just be gone by now, and so much else.
So if anything, not just not just Donald Trump, by the way, also Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans.
Who, for one thing, held the line, refused to confirm Merrick Garland.
And even though I don't like Mitch McConnell, and he did just sell us out on the gun control issue.
Still, you have them to thank as well.
But even before that, most of all, the pro-lifers who have been in the trenches on this thing, fighting for this for decades, I mean, have given their lives to this.
And I have had the pleasure of knowing many pro-lifers like that, having been in the movement myself, and I can tell you, there are people that have just For the last 50 years, there are people that were around when this happened, when this decision was made, and they said to themselves then, I'm giving my life to this fight.
This is my life, and they gave their life to it, and they primarily are the ones who achieved this victory.
But then also, I think we also have to give an honorable mention, maybe even better, more than an honorable mention, to Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself, RBG.
If it was not for RBG's hubris, her narcissistic decision, To not retire.
I mean, clinging on to her, to the honorific, clinging on to the position and the power for as long as she could until she passed away.
If she hadn't done that, you know, if she had been a little bit less narcissistic, a little bit, had less hubris, less arrogance, then she would have retired, and her replacement would have been appointed by a Democrat.
But she didn't, and so really we have, in many ways, she's one of the people who we can thank for this.
Thank you, RBG.
All right, now we move on to some of the reaction from the left.
And there's going to be a lot more over the weekend.
And as I said, they're promising their night of rage, and they're rioting and looting.
We'll see how much of that they actually get.
We'll see how it goes.
We'll start with Nancy Pelosi, who mere minutes after this decision came down, she was in front of the press.
And she is very, very upset about this.
And let's go through and just watch some of these clips.
Go ahead.
There's no point in saying good morning, because it certainly is not one.
This morning, the radical Supreme Court is eviscerating Americans' rights and endangering their health and safety.
But the Congress will continue to act to overcome this extremism and protect the American people.
Today, the Republican-controlled Supreme Court has achieved their dark, extreme goal of ripping away women's Right to make their own reproductive health decisions.
Because of Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, and the Republican party, their super majority in the Supreme Court, American women today have less freedom than their mothers.
Um, well, uh, I mean, where do you, where do you even begin there?
She says that Americans have, uh, or girls have less freedoms than their mothers.
Well, that's, that's, um, you know, here's a freedom that many Americans have, which they did not have before this morning.
And that is the freedom to be born, to live in the first place.
Because your so-called reproductive rights, you cannot enjoy those if you don't live in the first place.
And here's the good news, Nancy Pelosi, your reproductive freedom and your reproductive rights are still intact.
You still have those absolutely 100%.
And as I've said many times, I am, when it comes to protecting reproductive rights, I am right there with you.
I mean, I absolutely believe That people should be free to reproduce when and how they so they choose.
Okay.
Nobody should be forced to reproduce.
Absolutely.
The good thing is that, um, we all agree on that.
You know, there's 330 million people in America with 300 million people, 330 million people who agree.
Unanimous agreement.
Supreme court agrees.
Nobody should be forced to reproduce.
The issue, as I'm constantly having to remind the left, is that when a baby is aborted, that's not a matter of preventing reproduction, because the reproduction has already happened.
Okay?
The baby has been produced.
If the baby had not been produced, then there'd be no need for an abortion.
Once conception occurs, that is reproduction right there.
That is the reproductive act.
That is reproduction right there.
A distinct separate entity, a distinct separate being, with its own DNA, with its own identity, has come into formation in that moment, and that's when reproduction happens.
So, the right to your reproductive rights, that really comes down to you deciding When and how you will and with whom you will engage in the reproductive act.
And as far as that goes, we all agree.
The reproductive act being not giving birth, that's not the reproductive act.
The reproductive act is the sexual act.
It's having sex.
That's the reproductive act.
So, Nancy Pelosi is very, very distraught and upset.
This is an old woman Near the end of her days, more than likely, statistically, she's in her 80s, and here she is practically weeping over the thought that more babies will be allowed to live.
And I can never get over that, especially with these old, crusty, feminist, grandmother-aged, like every grandmother I've ever known, they love babies.
The idea of a grandmother, my own grandmother, weeping because babies will not be killed, it's difficult to make sense of that.
It's hard to make it all compute.
But this is what we're dealing with.
From there, Pelosi starts talking about the sinister and dastardly Republican agenda.
Let's listen to that.
In the Congress, be aware of this, the Republicans are plotting a nationwide abortion ban.
They cannot be allowed to have a majority in the Congress to do that.
But that's their goal.
And if you read, and again we're all studying all this, but if you read what is very clear, one of the justices had his own statement.
It's about contraception, in vitro fertilization, family planning.
That is all what will spring from their decision that they made today.
Did her glass eye just fall out of her hand at the end of that?
I don't know what that was.
That was an unexpected treat at the end there.
Oh, that was her earring that fell out.
Okay, we'll just go with glass eye.
I think that was her glass eye.
Nancy Pelosi is physically falling apart.
It's like the Wicked Witch, right?
She's melted.
Someone should throw some water on her and she would just melt right there on stage.
This old, disgusting witch.
Now, what she's referring to is, and I haven't read the entire thing myself,
but a concurrent decision or opinion by Clarence Thomas where he talks about some of the Supreme Court decisions
related to contraception and gay marriage and how we have to take a look at
the basis of those decisions.
And that's, and if they are decided,
if those were decided on a faulty basis, then yeah, that's something that the court should rectify.
(silence)
(scribbling)
But what we're talking about today is very, very fundamentally just the right to life.
And that's all that this decision affects.
It doesn't go beyond that.
Next, I want to play just one more clip from her.
She starts talking about a point that she can't make anymore, but these people keep making it anyway.
She says that this is an insult and an attack on women.
Go ahead.
What this means to women is such an insult.
It's a slap in the face to women about using their own judgment to make their own decisions about their reproductive freedom.
And again, it goes well.
I always have said the termination of a pregnancy is just their opening act.
It's just their front game.
But behind it, and for years, I have seen in this Congress opposition to any family planning, domestic or global, when we have had those discussions and those debates and those votes on the floor of the House.
This is deadly serious.
But we are not going to let this pass.
A woman's right to choose, reproductive freedom, is on the ballot in November.
Okay, at least she got her eyeball back in her head.
It's an insult to women.
Now, obviously, that's a point you can't make because you don't know what a woman is in the first place, so how can you say that it's insulting a group of people that you cannot define?
But also, I can talk about it.
See, that's the advantage that I have, and that people on the pro-life side, that's the advantage that we have, is that we know what women are, so we can actually talk about them, and so what I can say Is that it's an insult to women to say that it's an insult to women when we simply protect the lives of children and say that you can't kill children.
The idea that it's crucial to a woman's life, it's crucial to her existence, to her success and happiness, that she be able to kill her children?
I can't think of anything more insulting and degrading to women than that idea.
That is what insults women.
And we're going to hear a lot of this too, by the way.
We're going to hear a lot about how women, you know, they're not going to be able to be successful anymore.
They're not going to have the happiness and fulfillment in life anymore.
Because that's how the left views women.
That's how many women on the left view themselves.
As sick as that is.
That a woman's, the way they see it, that a woman's happiness and fulfillment and very existence hinges on destruction.
It hinges on the right to destroy.
And not just destroy anybody, but destroy her own children.
Now we as pro-lifers know that it's the exact opposite is the case.
That happiness and fulfillment can be found for a woman in that relationship with her child.
This is a fulfilling relationship, just as it is for a man with his child.
Stacey Abrams also had a little bit of something to say here.
I haven't watched this video yet, but she's, of course, chiming in right away and is quite upset about all this.
And for some reason, we care what Stacey Abrams has to say.
So let's play a little bit of this.
Today, the United States Supreme Court, the seat of justice charged with protecting our liberties, struck down reproductive rights.
In 1973, the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade safeguarded the right to choose for millions of women across Georgia and around our nation.
Rather than uphold the wisdom of nearly 50 years, women today lost the right to make our own health care decisions and the right to shape our own futures.
As a woman, I am appalled.
Stacey.
No, you can absolutely make your own.
That's the great thing, is that you can absolutely make your own health care decisions.
Not that these people actually care about being able to make your own health care decisions.
Or they just decided that they cared about that again right now, but for the last two years, of course, they've been demanding that whether you want to or not, here's a needle, inject it into your body, inject this, you know, here's a substance you need to inject into your body.
And then come back and do it again and again and again, but you don't have it right there.
So there's a healthcare decision that's not about you.
You just have to do it because we're telling you to do it.
But the great thing is that this has nothing to do with the healthcare decisions by women because an abortion is not a healthcare decision.
It's got nothing to do with health and it's certainly got nothing to do with care.
Abortion is the intentional direct destruction of human life, which is, that's not just not healthcare, that's the opposite of healthcare.
Meanwhile, AOC, she made her way right outside the Supreme Court and is now looking to stage her own insurrection.
So here she is, we'll play this.
She's outside with some protesters chanting that this Roe v. Wade decision is illegitimate and she's calling for people to go into the streets.
So let's play that.
Illegitimate!
that there's people now calling for the Supreme Court to be, I think it was Keith Olbermann
yesterday I believe, or someone just as stupid as him, calling for the Supreme Court to be
They want to get rid of it entirely.
And now she's saying that the decision is illegitimate.
So she's calling into question this decision made by the Supreme Court, which to me seems an awful lot like an insurrection.
She's calling it into question.
She is eroding, intentionally trying to erode the faith that people have in our system.
By saying that how is it illegitimate?
I know you don't like the decision.
I know you disagree with it.
But in order for it to be illegitimate, there would have to be something You know what would have been illegitimate?
What would have been illegitimate is if the person who leaked the decision had gotten their way and their plan had worked, and through intimidation, through violent intimidation and harassment, had convinced some of the justices not to sign on to this majority opinion after all.
That would be illegitimate.
But when you have justices who are looking at the case And making a decision based on what seems right to them, according to how they interpret the Constitution, that's a legitimate decision.
You might not like it, it's legitimate.
But on the left, something is illegitimate if they don't like it, and institutions are broken.
The moment the institution fails to do the bidding of the left.
That's what they mean when they say that something is broken.
So the Supreme Court is broken now because it failed to do exactly what they wanted to do.
And now she's calling for them to go into the street, knowing what that means, right?
I mean, knowing that we've got pro-abortion militant groups that have openly, very clearly been not just threatening, but promising to commit violent acts against churches and pregnancy centers.
Which, by the way, I mean, how much of a demon do you have to be to attack pregnancy centers in the first place?
Churches and pregnancy centers?
You might as well go after orphanages next, which maybe they will.
A pregnancy center, all they do is they help women who need help, who are pregnant and need help.
That's what they do.
That's their sinister plot.
And we've got pro-abortion militants Uh, threatening to, and have already attempted to in many cases, burn these facilities to the ground.
And, uh, now AOC is saying, uh, go into the streets.
So she knows that she's encouraging that and she's doing it quite intentionally.
All right.
Before we move on here, I want to, there was a, there's another great Supreme Court decision yesterday.
This has just been, this has been a fantastic week.
This has been a great, this has been my favorite Pride Month by far.
Uh, it's just, this is one that's going to live forever in my, in my heart personally, Pride Month of 2022.
So yesterday the Supreme Court, Upheld the Second Amendment and thus overturned a law in New York requiring that law-abiding citizens get special permission to conceal, carry a firearm.
And of course, the left has already been panicking over that.
Now we're going to add this into the mix and it's just going to be a whole explosion.
But I want to play a couple of the reactions, especially from Democrat leaders of the state.
So we'll start with Kathy Hochul, who says that, you know, this isn't, this is, the Second Amendment really just refers to muskets and that's all it refers to.
That's what she claims here.
They were supposed to go back to what was in place since 1788 when the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified.
And I would like to point out to the Supreme Court justices that the only weapons at the time were muskets.
I'm prepared to go back to muskets.
Oh, yeah, the only weapons were muskets at the time.
And so obviously, when our founding fathers said that the right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed, they only meant the arms, the type of firearms that existed in that moment in time.
Because they didn't know that technology changes and that they weren't aware of that.
And so they figured that the type of firearms that existed back then, that that's all there would ever be.
Man, if only they had known that technology would continue to improve and advance, then they would have said, forget this whole Second Amendment deal.
I mean, that's what she's claiming.
Yeah, you're right, Cathy, that the Founders didn't have modern guns.
You know what else they didn't have?
Abortion clinics.
Those didn't exist.
They didn't have gay marriage.
They didn't have transgenderism.
So, I mean, none of those rights exist either, according to you.
Meanwhile, Eric Adams, for his part, is pledging to, I'm not even sure exactly what this means or if he knows what it means, but he's pledging to, as mayor of the city, undo the ruling.
Listen.
The opinion claims to be based on nation historical past, but does not account for the reality of today.
It ignores the present and it endangers our future.
While nothing changes today, and we want to be clear on that, nothing changes today.
We have been preparing for this decision and will continue to do everything possible to work with our federal, state, and local partners to protect our city.
We will collaborate with other mayors, municipality leaders, and governors, and will leave no unturned stone.
As we seek to undo and mitigate the damage that we are witnessing today.
Undo and mitigate the damage, and by that he means a Supreme Court ruling, so he wants to undo and mitigate.
He's openly saying that he's not going to abide by it, this is the law, he's not going to abide by it, and he's going to try to undo it.
So another example of this is actual insurrection being carried out by the mayor of New York City.
One other thing on guns, this is a, as usual, a smart take from Jill Falopovich, who's a writer, feminist writer, and she, and we're seeing a lot of this kind of thing, she says, the kind of people who desperately want to carry concealed weapons in public based on a generalized interest in self-defense are precisely the kind of paranoid, insecure, violence-fetishizing people who should not be able to carry concealed weapons in public in the first place.
Now, the great thing about this claim from her is that it could not be more wrong.
Once again, it's the opposite of the truth.
Concealed carry permit holders commit almost none of the violent crime.
A very, very small percentage of the violence committed in this country every day is done at the hands of concealed carry permit holders.
And it's so small that on the left, when they try to tabulate the statistics to tell us how much gun violence is actually committed by people who have legal concealed carry firearms, oftentimes they're going to throw things like suicide into the mix there, which is tragic and terrible, but that's not exactly what you usually have in mind when you talk about gun violence.
But when you look at it more honestly, what you find is that, again, a very, very small percentage, less than 1%, something like 0.7% of gun violence is carried out by people with legal concealed carry firearms.
And that doesn't even take into account all the lives that they save.
So this is just totally false.
The statistics show you that the more people who are legally carrying firearms in your town where you live, the safer you are.
That's what the statistics clearly show us.
All right, we gotta move on.
I'm just having so much fun with all this.
I don't know, it's just a great day.
Here's one thing, on a little bit of a lighter note.
So we go back to the Biden administration.
First of all, Biden had a meeting with union and private sector leaders at the White House yesterday.
Maybe you've seen this.
I have to mention anyway, he inadvertently flashed a card to the camera showing very specific instructions that the staff had given him.
And you can kind of see when you zoom in, you can see what the instructions are.
So they say, you enter the Roosevelt Room and say hello to participants.
You take your seat.
And I love how it's capitalizing, you and your.
So like take your seat, not anybody else's.
Don't take somebody else's seat.
Don't like take another person's seat and throw it out the window.
Just take your seat.
Press enters.
You give brief comments.
Minutes.
As opposed to hours.
Press departs.
You ask Liz Schuler, AFL-CIO president, a question.
Note, Liz is joining virtually.
You thank participants.
You depart.
Apparently it should have also said, you don't show this card to the camera.
Maybe they should have added that note in there too.
Here's the thing, I have an assistant and she makes itineraries for me and they can be pretty specific sometimes.
So I know a little bit about this, but they're not this specific, okay?
Because an itinerary is like, okay, you go to this place at this time, then you go to this place, and you're given a speech for X amount of minutes or whatever.
But my itinerary never says, you put one foot in front of the other, propelling yourself across the floor in a manner known as walking.
You breathe in and out repeatedly so as not to be rendered unconscious.
These are the kind of instructions that Biden gets because he's senile.
I just wish, here's what I, here's the tragedy as far as I can tell.
I wish that they had given him one of these cheat sheets when he was in Rome.
You know, something that might have said, uh, you don't shit your pants in front of the Pope.
I think he really needed that on a sheet of paper and it wasn't there.
So that's really on his, it's his aides fault for not keeping in mind, not keeping that in mind and not mentioning it.
Alright, let's get now to the comment section.
Well with Roe v. Wade coming to an end finally, you may think that this means the fight is
also coming to an end for abortion, against abortion.
But abortion legislation returning to the states means that the real battle is only
just beginning and there is no group in America better positioned than 40 Days for Life to
40 Days for Life has one million volunteers throughout the country holding peaceful vigils outside abortion facilities.
You may be surprised to hear that their largest presence is actually in the country's bluest
states, with California being their biggest state.
That's where they're going to be needed the most now, with Roe v. Wade gone.
Their vigils have closed many abortion facilities in America, and nearly half of those facilities
were in liberal states, where abortion will continue to remain legal after the fall of
Roe.
From San Francisco to Chicago to Seattle, hardly pro-life areas, of course, volunteers
have guided abortion workers to have a change of heart and quit their jobs also.
So, as this issue gets out of D.C.
finally, 40 Days for Life is effectively changing hearts and minds in the grassroots of the pro-abortion movement.
Check out their locations, podcasts, and new book, What to Say When, the complete new guide to discussing abortion, at 40daysforlife.com.
Alright, a little bit of something different for the comment section.
Instead of comments left by the Sweet Baby Gang, we're going to do a little bit of a Roe v. Wade themed comment section, because I'm not quite done gloating.
And celebrating, as we all should be.
So here are some tweets, not comments.
None of these people left comments under my YouTube video, as much as I would love it if they did.
We're going to go through some tweets from prominent Democrats reacting to the Roe v. Wade news.
We'll just cycle through them.
I don't know.
I haven't even seen these yet.
But here's Barack Obama says, today the Supreme Court not only reversed nearly 50 years of precedent, it relegated the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues attacking the essential freedoms Of millions of Americans.
And as always, when they talk about the essential freedoms of millions of Americans, they are not talking, they are excluding all the Americans in the womb.
And you would think, if you want to talk about essential freedom, in the dictionary definition sense of the term, essential, the most essential freedom is the freedom to live.
But Barack Obama has no problem with throwing that out the window.
Hillary Clinton is very upset.
She says, Most Americans believe the decision to have a child is one of the most sacred decisions there is, and that such decisions should remain between patients and their doctors.
Today's Supreme Court opinion will live in infamy as a step backwards for women's rights and human rights.
No, actually, the decision to have a child is not really one that you have with a doctor, Okay, unless you're having sex with your doctor and conceiving a child with him, but usually by the time you go to the doctor, the child already exists once again.
The child is already there.
So the decision to have a child, that's already out the window, okay?
That window has closed by the time the child exists.
You already have the child.
In a very literal sense, like the woman has the child, in every sense of the term, has the child inside her, in her body, which is a miraculous and beautiful thing, unless you're on the left.
Nancy Pelosi once again says, today the Republican-controlled Supreme Court has achieved the GOP's dark and extreme goal of ripping away women's rights to make their own reproductive health decisions.
Okay, we've already heard from Nancy Pelosi.
We got anybody else chiming in?
Eric Swalwell.
Okay, good.
We have to include him here.
He says, extreme right-wing judges on the Supreme Court just issued a death warrant to women in America.
They've decided that a piece of metal designed to end life is more valuable than the health and safety of women in America.
If this doesn't motivate you to vote, nothing will.
A death warrant?
How so?
How do we get from Roe v. Wade's overturned, which means that the decision about making abortion legal or illegal, falls to the states.
So that's step one.
Step two.
And then step three, I'm not sure, it's left blank.
Step four, women die.
Death warrant.
And by the way, if you read the decision, and I read a little bit of it to you, but I would really recommend that you go and read it.
And if you read it with an honest mind, there is nothing remotely extreme happening in the decision.
It is very logical.
It explains itself point by point.
And once again, the decision does not mean that abortion is now illegal across the entire country.
Although, that has to be the next step.
And that's the other thing for pro-lifers is that, and I don't think I have to tell pro-lifers this because they've been in this fight for 50 years, but the fight's not over.
And in fact, we should celebrate this and be happy for this great humanitarian victory, this great victory for human rights, but we should not be satisfied.
Like celebrate today, pop the champagne, but then tomorrow it's back to work.
Because although abortion now falls to the states, it's still going to be legal in many of those states.
And the babies who are still going to die in California and Oregon and Vermont and Maryland and New York, those babies' lives matter.
So we're still fighting for them.
And the ultimate goal, yes, is to make abortion illegal across the entire country.
A federal ban on abortion.
A personhood amendment to the Bill of Rights.
That's the ultimate goal.
That's what we're fighting for.
Well, did you know that poor sleep can cause weight gain, mood issues, poor mental health, and also lower productivity?
There's a few things more important to your health than just getting a good night's sleep.
There are some reports that say sleeping less than six to seven hours per night is linked to reduced white blood cell count.
White blood cells protect our body against illness and disease, fighting viruses, bacteria, and more.
Not many people realize this, but having a consistent nighttime routine is incredibly important.
A better tomorrow starts then tonight, including Introducing Beam Dream.
Beam is one of the world's most innovative functional wellness brands with unique products for everything from sleep to focus.
And today, my listeners get a special discount available for Beam's sleep product, Dream Powder.
It's their best-selling hot cocoa.
It contains premium ingredients, triple lab-tested, and you wake up refreshed.
98% of people surveyed fall asleep faster when taking Beam Dream.
And 99% of people experience better sleep quality.
Just mix Beam Dream into hot water or milk, stir, and then you enjoy before bedtime.
It's as simple as that.
Also, Beam just launched a brand new delicious new summer flavor of Dream Powder Sea Salt Caramel.
Sea Salt Caramel Dream Powder tastes just like the caramel drizzle on your summer ice cream cone, but with only 15 calories.
Better sleep has never tasted better or been healthier and better for you.
Don't love it?
Get your money back guaranteed, but I think you will love it.
For a limited time, get up to 35% off when you go to beamorganics.com slash Walsh and use code Walsh to check out.
That's B-E-A-M organics.com slash Walsh and use code Walsh for up to 35% off.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Well, this daily cancellation ends up working out pretty well, because given the news of the day, it's all about babies and why babies are good and why you should have them.
But it begins with, not with Roe v. Wade, but with a writer for The Atlantic.
As we know, writers for The Atlantic are not the most perceptive or insightful bunch, as a rule.
And that rule seems to hold true for Atlantic writer Olga Kazan, who tweeted recently, quote, I'm still curious how women are supposed to have kids
before they're 35 if they make $40,000 a year before they're 35 and child care is $40,000.
Now the tweet has resonated enough to earn nearly 80,000 likes with lots of people in the comments
chiming in to agree that it's essentially impossible for a woman to have kids under
the age of 35 unless she earns substantially more than the average income for that age bracket.
And yet, shockingly, it turns out that many women have done exactly this.
In fact, through history, literally billions of women have.
This is one of the curious features of modern American life, that people are constantly proclaiming it impossible to do the things which billions of other people have already done and are currently doing.
So we can look around and see billions of people doing something and then say, bah, it's not possible.
That's impossible.
No one can do it, except for these 10 billion people.
This is because most of the time, when we say that we cannot do something, the sentence is incomplete.
We haven't really finished the thought.
What we meant to say is that we cannot do said thing while still maintaining the comfort and luxury that we've come to expect and demand.
We cannot do it easily.
We cannot do it without effort.
We cannot do it while staying true to our undying principle that we should never have to make any personal sacrifices of any kind.
We cannot do it without getting off the couch, etc.
One of these caveats, or similar to it, usually silently accompanies our declarations about what we cannot do.
And that's certainly the case here.
But Olga is not alone, far from it.
As people put off having children more and more, putting it off so long that eventually it becomes a physical impossibility in reality to have kids, at least without the help of a petri dish and a science lab, the reason often given by people who put it off is that it's not financially feasible to have kids.
And this fear is encouraged by random fake statistics pulled out of thin air, like the statistic that childcare costs 40 grand a year.
Putting your kid in childcare, in daycare, says Olga, is as expensive as a really expensive private school.
Now fortunately, this is not remotely true.
In fact, the most expensive state for daycare is Massachusetts on average, and there it costs an average of $20,000 a year to get daycare, which is absurdly high, but it's half of Olga's estimate.
But if you live in most other states, you're paying under $15,000.
In many states, the average is under $10,000 a year.
In a state like Mississippi, it's half that.
Now, there are, of course, many other fictional horror stories about the cost of having children, many of them coming from alleged authority figures more prominent than Olga on Twitter.
The USDA, for example, put out a report last year claiming that the average child costs $15,000 a year.
And this means that a family of three, if you do the math, is forking over 45 grand a year just to keep their kids alive.
I'm supposedly spending $60,000 a year just on my kids.
That works out to about $270,000 per child to get them from age zero to age 18.
And if you have four kids, four or five of them, you know, like I do, then you're in the hole for a million plus.
I mean, you gotta be a millionaire to have kids.
Now, admittedly, with Biden's inflation, it's starting to actually feel like you need to be a millionaire to afford groceries and gasoline, even just for yourself.
But on average, assuming that hopefully the current trends don't hold for the next 18 years, these figures are nonsense.
It is certainly possible, possible, to spend 15 grand in a year on one child.
I mean, you could do that.
You could spend triple that if you wanted to.
Yet there's no law of nature requiring that kind of financial investment.
If there was, then billions of people who have kids now, and who've had them in the past, would not have been able to survive.
And yet they did, and they do.
The consequence of this way of thinking, believing that you need to have massive amounts of money in the bank just to afford even one kid, is that, as mentioned, people put off starting families later and later.
You know, we think that we should get through young adulthood, establish ourselves, build a life of some sort, and then finally begin the process of finding spouses and becoming parents once we're safely ensconced in the protective cocoon of middle age.
That's what we think.
Speaking of finding a spouse, notice how Olga never accounts for marriage at all.
It would cost a woman $40,000 a year for childcare, she says.
But if you're doing it right, the cost, which definitely will not be $40,000, is shared by a woman and a man together in the bond of marriage.
We've been conditioned to see these things on an individualized basis.
We think that, you know, a man should make a life for himself all alone and then inject a wife and kids into this thing that's already been constructed without them.
Like, set it all up and then introduce the family.
And this strategy leads to a lot of its own problems.
The man will often begin to resent his family because they're intruding.
This is not their life, it's his.
He can't look to his wife and kids and say, well, they were here with me when I had nothing.
We were together from the beginning.
We climbed to this point together.
Rather, he looks at them and says, I built this on my own.
I did all this by myself.
I climbed without them.
This is mine.
They don't know anything about it, the freeloaders.
I think this is probably one of the reasons why people who get married in their 30s have higher divorce rates.
Because they've already established their own things and get very possessive of their own thing, their own life that they've made for themselves.
Walking the bumpiest parts of the road together, struggling, sacrificing, suffering, going without, together.
This is what brings a family together.
That's why, as I've always said, I think it's better to see marriage and family as the cornerstone of adult life rather than the capstone.
In modern times, we tend to favor the capstone model.
We say that a young adult should live through young adulthood by himself, save money, get all of his affairs in order, and then as the culmination, at the conclusion of this process, as he enters middle age, then he should commence with getting married and having kids.
That way he'll be able to, quote-unquote, afford it.
But the cornerstone approach, on the other hand, says that it's better to start your family at the beginning of the process, not at the end.
Build your adult life with your spouse and children.
Have them there at the foundation of it all.
Bring them in on the ground floor, so to speak.
This is how nearly every culture in the world has approached this issue, until ours.
We've flipped this well-worn, battle-tested model on its head and tried it the reverse way, and it really doesn't seem to be working.
The result has been higher divorce rates, lower marriage rates, people are less satisfied in life, not as happy, populations are declining.
And to top it all off, the people who hold off on having families for financial reasons very often discover, as mentioned, that they never reach a point where they feel financially ready.
Not at 25, not at 30, not at 35.
They sit around waiting for the dollars and cents to add up while their biological clocks tick away.
Until finally it'll cost them like $20,000 in an IVF clinic simply to conceive a child when they could have done it for free.
And in a way that's a lot more fun, by the way.
Just a few years before that.
This is supposed to be the financially conscious approach, which really doesn't make a lot of sense when you think about it.
And that's why Olga at The Atlantic is today cancelled.
But even more than Olga at The Atlantic, as you might have already heard, Roe is cancelled today too.
As the Supreme Court, I think, has issued the greatest daily cancellation of all time.
And we thank God for that.
Enjoy your weekend.
Enjoy the celebration.
We'll leave it there for today.
Talk to you on Monday.
Stay safe.
Godspeed.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Also, tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
We're there.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, Michael Knowles Show, The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, production manager Pavel Vodovsky, Our associate producer is McKenna Waters.
The show is edited by Robbie Dantzler.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
And hair and makeup is done by Cherokee Heart.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2022.
Hey everybody, this is Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
You know, some people are depressed because the republic is collapsing, the end of days is approaching, and the moon's turned to blood.
But on The Andrew Klavan Show, that's where the fun just gets started.
