Today’s episode dives deep into pressing national issues from tensions between federal immigration enforcements and state leaders in Minnesota, to significant courtroom battles over the display of the Ten Commandments in public spaces. We unpack how state powers are addressing protests and legal challenges as well as delve into a proposed Virginia amendment potentially transforming abortion rights. Alongside these, concerns over sanctuary cities and their funding add layers to these unfolding dynamics.
SPEAKER 02 :
from the heart of our nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., bringing compelling interviews, insightful analysis, taking you beyond the headlines and soundbites into conversations with our nation’s leaders and newsmakers, all from a biblical worldview. Washington Watch with Tony Perkins starts now.
SPEAKER 06 :
As Churchill taught us, the strongest alliances are between kindred countries of kindred principles. what has always set us apart from the rest of the world, our commitment to liberty, our pursuit of excellence, our desire to put faith and family at the center of our lives, these are things that distinguish their free world from regimes that trample on the most basic principles of democracy and human dignity.
SPEAKER 05 :
That’s House Speaker Mike Johnson earlier today addressing the British Parliament. Welcome to this January 20th edition of Washington Watch. I’m your host Jody Heiss filling in today for Tony Perkins. Thank you so much for joining us. All right, coming up, the Justice Department is issuing grand jury subpoenas to Minnesota leaders, including the governor, attorney general, and mayor. All this after protests disrupted in a church service in St. Paul. Congressman Mark Harris, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, will be joining us to break all of that down. Plus, the state of Louisiana is asking the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to protect its right to display the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. Tony Perkins, he attended that hearing, and he will join us later in the program to share his insights. Okay, the Justice Department has escalated a federal investigation in Minnesota, issuing now grand jury subpoenas to five government offices, including the governor, the attorney general, and the mayor of Minneapolis. Prosecutors are examining whether state and local leaders improperly interfered with federal immigration enforcement during ICE operations. And joining me now is Washington stand reporter Casey Harper, who’s been tracking all of today’s stories. Casey, welcome. Glad to have you. Let’s start with these investigations. What are they looking for and how serious do you think these investigations are?
SPEAKER 13 :
Well, they’re pretty serious, Jody, and they’re ratcheting up of the increasing tensions we’ve seen in Minnesota. So in this case, the DOJ is investigating whether Minnesota officials conspired to obstruct federal immigration enforcement during these ICE operations. Now, after the news broke, President Trump held a press conference, really took over the White House press briefing, where he recapped the first year of his second term. Of course, today is the one-year anniversary of his inauguration. He said he plans to cut federal funding to sanctuary cities. And in this clip, we’ll play that included Minneapolis.
SPEAKER 04 :
You got to get rid of your sanctuary cities. And I hope our people know that we’re not going to pay sanctuary cities. We’re not going to pay them anymore. They are sanctuary for criminals. They hold criminals. We’re not going to pay. They can sue us and maybe they’ll win. But we’re not giving money to sanctuary cities anymore as of the beginning of the month.
SPEAKER 13 :
Now, subpoenas were served to offices tied to Governor Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frye, who have all been very critical of the administration. Prosecutors are reportedly examining potential violations of a federal conspiracy statute used in major criminal cases. Now, state leaders, they have not yet been charged, and the DOJ is declining any public comment as this investigation and the probe continues, Jody.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, we will certainly be keeping an eye on that. I’m sure you will as well. And moving to Virginia, Casey, Democrats there have approved a proposed constitutional amendment that many are saying would allow virtually unlimited abortion. And that issue is going to be going to voters this fall. Of course, pro-life leaders are warning the measure removes key protections for the unborn population. Casey, what does this amendment actually do, and why do you think it’s drawing such strong opposition?
SPEAKER 13 :
Yeah, Jody, it’s really hard to overstate how important this amendment is, and I’m glad that you’re digging into it. So the amendment, it would add broad rights to abortion access to Virginia’s Constitution via a constitutional amendment, and it really limits the state’s ability to restrict abortion in the future. Now, as you said, pro-life advocates, they say this allows abortion at any stage of pregnancy, including even late-term abortions, because it has such expansive health exceptions.
SPEAKER 05 :
many groups like virginia’s catholic bishops are urging voters to reject what they call an extreme amendment when it appears on the ballot this fall jody and then if i can one more item for you casey on the international front i played it to enter into the program today but house speaker mike johnson spoke earlier today before the british parliament and he was expressing confidence that the u.s and britain will overcome tensions over Greenland there, while at the same time emphasizing our shared democratic values and historic ties and so forth. But what are some of the key highlights, Casey, that were included in his remarks today that we need to be aware of?
SPEAKER 13 :
Well, Speaker Johnson says that in his speech that in the U.S.-U.K. relations, as you said, they’re rooted in our shared principles of liberty, democracy, and human dignity that outweigh, in his mind, these current disputes with Greenland being really the elephant in the room. Speaker Johnson, he framed American independence, of which this is the 250th anniversary this year, he called it a continuation, not a rejection, of Britain’s best political traditions. Take a look at this clip.
SPEAKER 06 :
As Chesterton observed, America was founded on a creed that was set forth, he said, with dogmatic and theological lucidity in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. Endowed by their creator were certain inalienable rights that among these are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That profound acknowledgement of obvious and undeniable truth shook the foundations of Western democracy and with it the course of human history.
SPEAKER 13 :
So Jody, these comments are well-timed as the president is doubling and tripling down on wanting to take Greenland, which is just further ratcheting up tensions, not just with the UK, but with all the EU.
SPEAKER 05 :
Outstanding comments. I’ve not seen the speech in its entirety, but just clips of it, and I’ve heard it was a powerful speech. Casey, as always, thank you so much for keeping us up to speed on what’s taking place. I want to go back now to the fallout over the protests that disrupted a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota over the weekend. And joining me now to discuss this is Congressman Mark Harris. He serves on several committees, including the Judiciary Committee, and he’s also a pastor. So he would understand very closely what happened over the weekend. And he represents the 8th Congressional District of the great state of North Carolina. Congressman Harris, welcome back to Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 11 :
Thank you, Jody. It’s great to be with you. Thank you for having me.
SPEAKER 05 :
Always great to have you. Okay, those on the left have been insisting, Congressman, that there was nothing wrong with protesting inside a church. And that even includes, it’s coming from some who ought to know better, individuals who are supposed to be well-versed in the law. Here’s what Minnesota Attorney General said on a YouTube show with former CNN anchor Don Lemon. Play clip five for me, please.
SPEAKER 19 :
FACE Act, by the way, is designed to protect the rights of people seeking their reproductive rights to be protected. And so that people, for a religious reason, you know, cannot just use religion to break into women’s reproductive health centers. Right? So how they are stretching either of these laws to apply to people who protested in a church over the behavior or the perceived behavior of a religious leader is beyond me.
SPEAKER 05 :
That’s stunning to me. I mean, here’s the AG, the Attorney General. He ought to know better. Although, you know, you don’t have to dig much, Congressman, into the FACE Act to find out the list of things that are prohibited. I have a graphic here. I just want to quote. It says that whoever by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or or attempts to intimidate or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment rights of religious freedom at a religious place of worship. I mean, this is very clear. So what do you think’s really going on here?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, Jody, I think you’re exactly right. It is perfectly clear that to disrupt a morning worship service or any worship service of a church is not activism. It’s bigotry, and it violates federal law. And I think you’ve made that perfectly clear here this evening. And there’s all kind of things that have taken place by this action that happened at the city’s church in St. Paul, Minnesota, that has just caused all the American people to almost just take a gasp. And then on top of it, to have the state’s attorney general to seemingly be so ignorant of the law and so biased in the approach that he’s taking, that in and of itself really is stunning. I don’t know. I don’t know how these people think. I don’t know if you truly think that you’re going to win the hearts and minds of the American people by going in and disrupting worship services, but I think it shows how tone deaf they are. I think it shows how biased they are and frankly, how desperate they are. And when I say desperate, I mean, when you look at the waste, fraud and abuse that is being uncovered, you see these subpoenas that have gone to Governor Walz’s office and all of these folks. There’s so many things that are happening right now in the state of Minnesota from all of the things that happen with the daycare centers and all of that. to now what’s happening to impeding the work that ICE is trying to do. There’s a lot of answering that’s going to have to start coming forth from leadership in that state.
SPEAKER 05 :
Absolutely. And they’re claiming this was an anti-ICE protest, but happening in the church, this makes it anti-Christian as well. It’s just amazing what’s happening, and I agree with you. The American people are seeing through this. But the Justice Department is issuing now grand jury subpoenas to Minnesota leaders, including the governor, the attorney general who we just saw, and a mayor. Your thoughts on that?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, again, I think it’s important to note that we’re at a place where they’re going to have to answer for what they’re doing in impeding the work of these federal law enforcement that are there. Ice agents that are on the ground doing what they were sent there to do. Again, this is just the epitome of the left at work. And again, when you’ve got the cover-ups that were obviously taking place during all the things with these daycare centers and things we mentioned earlier, and then you add to it what’s happening right now with the protests that are taking place, there’s a lot of things that it’s going to be nice to see these leaders being subpoenaed and beginning to have to give some answers.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, it really is. I’m glad this investigation is going forward. I know City’s Church issued a statement of their own today talking about how their members had been accosted and how they were frightened, intimidated and so forth. What would happen, do you think, Congressman, if this type of protest took place in an abortion clinic, for example? I mean, the left would go nuts, wouldn’t they?
SPEAKER 11 :
Absolutely. I mean, look, when folks show up outside of an abortion clinic to simply pray for them, they pitch, I mean, absolute fits about that. I mean, imagine if they burst in and just took over the service and began to disrupt it and yell and scream and make videos. And there’s Don Lemon, of all people, former CNN ambassador. anchor that is in the middle of it, taping it and everything. And then everybody starts stepping back and walking back and trying to say, well, everything we were doing was right within the First Amendment rights. And that, listen, they knew they had screwed up, I think. And I think that it’s an embarrassment. And I think that we’ve got to keep telling the story and we’ve got to help people see it. Listen, I’m grateful, but for the grace of God, that the people there did not respond. I hate to think if they had come into my church, what kind of response they might have gotten.
SPEAKER 05 :
I agree with you. Thank you so much, North Carolina Congressman Mark Harris. Always great to have you. Thanks for your input. All right, friends, coming up, we’ll talk about Greenland. We’ll talk about the Trump administration’s terror fight with Europe. So don’t go away. We’ve got a very interesting discussion coming your way right after the break.
SPEAKER 09 :
We have state leaders that want to keep the deadly drugs out of their states. Maybe if these abortion pills were coming by boat, the administration would change its tactics. It’s time to respect the rights of the states, and it’s time to end death by mail.
SPEAKER 01 :
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, alongside Senator Lindsey Graham, led a press conference on Capitol Hill urging the Trump administration to end the Biden-era policies that have allowed dangerous abortion drugs to be shipped across state lines. They were joined by state attorneys general, pro-life advocates, and multiple Republican congressmen.
SPEAKER 07 :
There are more abortions today in the United States than when Roe versus Wade was the law of the land. And why is that? It’s because of the chemical abortion drug, Mifeprestone. Nearly 70% of the abortions that are committed in the United States today are committed because of Mifeprestone.
SPEAKER 03 :
The federal government is allowing a chemical abortion pill to be sent through the mail that wipes out every state unborn protection law in the land.
SPEAKER 10 :
It’s harder to ship alcohol in this country than it is to ship the abortion pill.
SPEAKER 08 :
And that should never be the case. This is a drug that takes the life of every child. So there is always a death that’s involved in this drug, but is also incredibly dangerous for the mom as well. We think that we should require a doctor to be able to get access to this drug.
SPEAKER 14 :
As a doctor, I think it’s essential that there be human contact before the pill is prescribed.
SPEAKER 16 :
It’s not about a national abortion ban. It’s about validating Dobbs and preventing other states from nullifying the legislative policy choices that have been made by our states and facilitating the illegal, unethical, and dangerous drug trafficking of abortion pills into our states without any medical oversight whatsoever.
SPEAKER 03 :
We can simply fix this if we have the courage to do it. So what are all of us telling the administration? You’ve been a great pro-life president, Mr. President. It’s now time to deal with this issue.
SPEAKER 07 :
We want to protect life, and we want to give voice to the American people and their right to protect life state by state, city by city, and yes, here in the United States Congress. That’s what this fight is about.
SPEAKER 01 :
Let your voice be heard. Text LIFE to 67742. Sign the petition. Tell the Trump administration to act.
SPEAKER 15 :
Looking for a trusted source of news that shares your Christian values? Turn to The Washington Stand, your ultimate destination for informed, faith-centered reporting. Our dedicated team goes beyond the headlines, delivering stories that matter most to believers. From breaking events to cultural insights, we provide clear, compassionate coverage through a biblical lens. Discover news you can trust at the Washington Stand, where faith and facts meet every day.
SPEAKER 05 :
You’re tuned in to Washington Watch. Welcome back. Thank you so much for joining us. I’m Jody Heiss filling in today for Tony Perkins, who himself will be joining me for a very special segment a little bit later in the program. All right. This week, corporate and government leaders are gathering in the Swiss Alpine town of Davos. for the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, and President Trump says he’ll discuss the issue of Greenland while he’s there, posting on social media that he agreed to a meeting of various parties in Davos, Switzerland. Now, this comes as the president has escalated his campaign to acquire Greenland, threatening several European nations with a 10% tariff starting February 1st and rising to 25% in June. So what can we make of the president’s latest moves? And what kind of impact could this have, not only here in the United States, but beyond? Well, here now to discuss this is David Bonson, founding managing partner and chief investment officer of the Bonson Group, one of the top financial advisors in the country. David, welcome back to Washington Watch. It’s great to have you.
SPEAKER 18 :
Wonderful to be with you as always.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay, let’s start with President Trump here. He’s willing to go into a trade war over this issue. What kind of impact could that have?
SPEAKER 18 :
I don’t think he is willing to go into a trade war. He’s willing to threaten it and to try to leverage it. And he’s done this quite a bit. Going back to the first term and the second term, the one thing he has never allowed to happen is a trade war. But there’s been a lot of talk. And as we saw last year, there are certainly implementation of higher tariffs. My own view is that the particular tariffs that you’re alluding to, to an additional 10 percent that goes up to 25 on top of other tariffs already in place, that would result in ripping up all the deals that have already been cut with different European bloc countries. I would be utterly shocked if any of that were to happen. But this is a pretty familiar play for the president to at least try to use it in his negotiating.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right. Totally, totally get what you’re saying there. So how do you see all of this playing out? What do you think is going to happen?
SPEAKER 18 :
I have a few things I know to be true and a few things I don’t know. One of the things I know is that the president cares a great deal about something called market discipline, that he will push things until the market disciplines him away from it, whether it be bond markets, bond yields moving, or even the stock market itself. And there’s a certain threshold of pain But the people that I’m extremely close with in the Trump 1.0 administration have all indicated to me how significant of a factor a report card on his presidency he believes financial markets to be. And I don’t think that’s a big secret. He talks about it publicly all the time. So the question is what markets are going to do. I do not think Europe is going to give in on this one. I think they see this as a point that goes beyond just negotiating over what the price of shipping wine or chocolate is going to be. And I also believe that the president has less leverage than he’s had in the past. This is a midterm election year. We’re dealing with a major affordability issue here. The president already indicated that he recognizes the impact tariffs have on prices by having to reverse course on tariffs on coffee, sugar, fruit, a lot of grocery items. One of the things that they’re supposedly talking about doing in their housing affordability plan is giving relief to tariffs on construction inputs and building products. So I think the last thing the president wants is to see this escalate. So that’s the part I know how he gets off of it or what he gets out of it in his negotiating. He has a mind of his own on that stuff.
SPEAKER 05 :
Do you have, with your expertise, any most likely scenario that you think would potentially happen?
SPEAKER 18 :
I wish that I had expertise on the mind and activity of President Trump. I take the compliment that I have some expertise in financial markets. But what we’re really talking about right now is just sort of how the president is going to tweet and announce things and the speech that he’s going to give at Davos tomorrow. We’ve been spending the last week, week and a half expecting that he was going to go use Davos to give a speech on his American affordability agenda. Now it sounds like he’s going to only be talking about Greenland and European Union cooperation and trade ramifications. So, yeah, I’m not trying to dodge because if I had an answer to give you, I would. But I really don’t know. And I just want to be honest. I don’t know.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, I don’t either. That’s why I was kind of throwing it in your direction to see if you would have a guess. We’ll all be waiting to see what happens tomorrow and beyond. And in the midst of all of that, we’re still waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the president’s use of emergency law to impose sweeping tariffs. What are the different outcomes here and the potential impact, do you think?
SPEAKER 18 :
That’s probably the most disappointing thing that happened today was that the Supreme Court did not rule and said basically it’s going to be the end of February. It’s frustrating for me as a constitutionalist because it’s just so painfully obvious to me that the Supreme Court should be ruling in favor of the appeals court here. that the particular rationale of the Emergency Economic Powers Act does not give the executive branch authority to tax. And then from there, we’d see the administration pivot to what they were going to do with either 232 or 301 rationale, which is national security. Like for example, the steel and aluminum tariffs right now are under a different rationale than a lot of these other tariffs that he implemented. And I’ve been expecting for some time the prediction markets have been expecting for some time the Supreme Court’s going to rule on what is a reasonably, I think, simple ruling of the case constitutionally. But now what they’ve done by saying it’s going to be late February is it leaves five more weeks. of uncertainty. And I think that’s difficult for the economy and for companies too. Companies can’t make buying and selling decisions when they don’t know what to expect. So I really think it would have been better for everybody to get this done sooner than later.
SPEAKER 05 :
Less than a minute before we have a break, but what are you and others going to be keeping your eye on in Davos as this unfolds?
SPEAKER 18 :
Indications from the president of de-escalation. And it doesn’t mean he comes out. President Trump is, you know, all of us know his personality enough to know he’s not going to come in and wave a white flag. But is he going to talk in a way that suggests a little more sober-minded judiciousness? Or is he going to escalate? Is he looking for a brawl on this thing? The tenor of his talks in Davos are going to be interesting for financial markets.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, thank you so much, Financial Advisor David Bonson. Always great to have you. Appreciate and welcome your input very much. All right, friends, coming up, Virginia could become the 11th state to enshrine a so-called right to abortion in their Constitution. Well, Democrat lawmakers in the state are moving the Commonwealth in that direction. And we’ll have that discussion coming up next. So stay with us.
SPEAKER 09 :
For over 4,000 years, the Jewish people have had legal, historical, and biblical ties to the land of Israel, especially the heartland of Israel, Judea and Samaria, which much of the world still calls the West Bank. To Israelis, Judea and Samaria is far more than a name. It’s the center of their ancestral homeland where nearly 80% of the Bible’s events took place. Abraham purchased property in Hebron, Jacob in Shechem, Joshua made an altar on Mount Ebal and led the Israelites into a covenant before God. On Mount Gerizim, overlooking Shechem, Jesus talked to the Samaritan woman at the well about worshiping neither on Mount Gerizim nor in Jerusalem, but in spirit and in truth. Judea and Samaria is nearly a quarter of Israel’s current land mass, not a small strip of land on the Jordan River, but a vital and strategic part of the nation’s identity. The October 7th massacre, launched from Gaza, shattered the illusion that giving away territory brings peace. Gaza, which was once seen as the cornerstone of a two-state solution, became a launch pad for terror. Today, only 21% of Israelis support a Palestinian state. Trust in a two-state solution has all but collapsed. The Middle East is changing. Iran’s grip is weakening. New alliances are forming. But Western countries and some U.S. officials still chase the mirage of a two-state solution. History speaks clearly. The 2005 Gaza withdrawal, backed by the U.S., led not to peace, but to a terrorist regime. Judea and Samaria are 24 times larger than Gaza, deeply woven into Israel’s geographic and spiritual fabric. To surrender them would not bring peace. It would invite conflict and existential danger. Family Research Council stands with Israel’s rightful claim to sovereignty. It’s time for America to do the same for history, for justice, and for lasting security in the Middle East.
SPEAKER 05 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. I’m Jody Heiss filling in today for Tony. Thank you so much for tuning in. You may know by now that this month is the Sanctity of Human Life Month. But in spite of that, the left continues to trample on the right to life in exchange for so-called rights to sexual liberties. And last week, the Democratic-controlled Virginia General Assembly advanced a ballot proposal that would amend their state’s constitution to enumerate a fundamental right to abortion. That means this November, Virginia voters will decide whether their state will allow for virtually unlimited abortion at any stage of pregnancy. But given the misleading messaging from the left, will pro-lifers in the state realize what’s really at stake? Joining me now to discuss this and more is Virginia Cobb, president of the Family Foundation of Virginia, which is the family policy council in Virginia that, frankly, accomplishes at the state level what we here at FRC do at the national level. Virginia, welcome back to Washington Watch. An honor to have you.
SPEAKER 17 :
Thanks so much for having me.
SPEAKER 05 :
OK, we often hear from Democrats about how they want to restore the Supreme Court’s infamous Roe decision as the law of the land. But this particular proposal in Virginia goes far, far beyond that, doesn’t it?
SPEAKER 17 :
Oh yeah, there’s no question what you will hear when they pump the millions of dollars into our Commonwealth to put up radio ads is that all we’re doing is solidifying Roe versus Wade. That’s going to be the selling point, and they’re going to say that this is the alternative is that there would be a full ban on abortion in Virginia. While you or I might be pro-life and might wish that there were no abortion in Virginia, we are an incredibly permissive state for abortion as it is right now. This amendment would just make it worse. So for example, where we currently have at least a sense that when a young girl considers an abortion that her parent would have to be involved, parental consent for abortion, this amendment would essentially override that. Same thing with late-term abortion. When we right now in Virginia have already a situation where someone can get a late-term abortion, But it has to be three doctors that sign off that, in fact, this is either the child is non-viable or, as they might say, there’s a need. We wouldn’t say that exists, but for a woman’s health. That’s how it can happen today. But after this amendment passes, you’ll have a situation where the only person making that decision about whether an abortion is allowed at the very latest moments is the abortionist, the one who profits from the procedure. Wow.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, Victoria, it’s you know, it’s not from my understanding. And I want you you started this. I’d like for you to go a little bit further. It’s not just the unborn who will be affected. This goes beyond that. I mean, we’re talking women, of course, parents, health care providers and taxpayers. It just seems to go on and on. Can you kind of go over that with us?
SPEAKER 17 :
Yeah, there’s no question this impacts far more than the unborn. I mean, the unborn are already in a very vulnerable state in Virginia, and that will continue to be the case when this amendment passes. But yeah, parental rights. We mentioned that one already. I think it’s important to understand that women will not be able to count on any kind of safety standards around their abortion. So if a woman goes to make a decision that you or I might not make, we still don’t want to have the possibility of losing two lives when she walks into that abortion facility. But this would eliminate the possibility of having any kind of reasonable safety standards for that woman because they would be viewed as impeding on her right to an abortion. There’s a safety measure that’s a concern. There’s also this idea planted into our amendment that doctors, providers, people who engage in helping a woman receive an abortion would basically have no prosecution from the Commonwealth. There’d be basically no way to ever hold them accountable if something goes wrong. And so we’re deeply concerned about the sort of protection that it’s putting around the industry. This is an industry written bill. There’s no question. The only people that benefit from this bill, it’s not unborn. It’s not the women. It’s actually, you know, Planned Parenthood and big pharma that distribute the chemical abortion pills.
SPEAKER 05 :
Right. Well, I remember vividly the time when the Democrats at least said that they wanted abortions to be safe, legal, and rare. But that certainly is no longer the case. And those of you there in Virginia, unfortunately, you’ve got a new governor, Abigail Spanberger, who just took office. But she’s certainly no friend of the unborn. And it looks to me like you and the Family Foundation of Virginia, you’ve got your hands full with this.
SPEAKER 17 :
Yeah, there’s no question we have a hostile government and that’s where we’re getting this amendment. This amendment isn’t being brought by the people. You know, in some states, their petition efforts and that’s how these things move forward. This is a bunch of politicians who are funded by the industry and they’re bringing it forward to increase volume and to reduce any kind of cost that would be around safety for women. I mean, that’s the ultimate situation here. So even people who aren’t pro-life have 100 reasons to vote against this amendment when it gets to the ballot box. It isn’t going to benefit anyone other than the industry itself. And it does damage in other states where we have situations, as you know, where doctors are mailing chemical abortions into pro-life states like Louisiana and Texas and other places. And what this would do is actually protect those doctors that are Virginia or pharmacists that are Virginians from any kind of prosecution by the other state. No extradition from the governor. So these are situations that are real time happening already, where, for example, Louisiana’s attorney general is trying to go after doctors from other states that are intervening and actually going against their own state policy. So our amendment is actually of national interest. Every pro-life state ought to care that we block this amendment because we’re harming other states. And of course, they’ve held up Virginia as being the place where the entire South can come to get an abortion because South states, states south of us are doing a better job protecting life.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, I want to encourage all of our viewers and listeners right now to be in prayer for you and everyone there in Virginia. Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation, thank you for joining us. All right, friends coming up, I’ve got a very, very special guest. Tony Perkins will join me to discuss an important issue in Louisiana. Stay with us.
SPEAKER 10 :
Should a Christian support Israel? That question has become one of the most emotionally charged issues of our time, both in the world and within the church. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins offers a clear biblical and prophetic answer. In his latest book, he examines Israel’s past, present, and future through the lens of scripture, revealing why support for Israel is not rooted in politics, partisanship, or cultural sentiment, but in the unchanging promises of God. Drawing from Genesis to Revelation, Tony Perkins demonstrates that the ultimate rationale for a Christian’s support for Israel is spiritual. Should a Christian support Israel invites believers to see beyond headlines and ideologies, returning to the foundation of God’s Word to understand His heart for His chosen people and the blessings that flow when we stand with what He has established forever. Text the word Israel to 67742 for more information.
SPEAKER 12 :
What is God’s role in government? What does the separation of church and state really mean? And how does morality shape a nation? President John Adams said our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Join Family Research Council for God and Government, a powerful series that explores the connection between biblical principles and the American government, equipping you with truth to engage in today’s most pressing debates. We’ll uncover the foundations of our nation’s history and why it’s relevant for today. Join us to defend God’s plan for government because faith and freedom were never meant to be separate. You can view the course at prayvotestand.org slash godandgovernment or on the Stand Firm app.
SPEAKER 10 :
The book of Hebrews says that the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Stand on the Word is Family Research Council’s journey through the living and active Word of God. Follow the plan with us. Spend 10 to 15 minutes a day reading God’s Word, and over the course of two years, discover that the Bible is one big story, a story of many words, pointing to the Word, the one who is the same yesterday, today, and forever. because the Word is alive and His name is Jesus. Find our Bible reading plan and daily devotionals from Tony Perkins at frc.org slash Bible. Join us as we stand on the Word.
SPEAKER 05 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. I am Jody Heiss filling in today for Tony Perkins. Thank you so much for tuning in. All right, before we get into this final segment, I’ve got two quick items that I want to make sure are on your radar. First of all, in about two weeks, we will have our national gathering for prayer and repentance. Friends, this is one of the most important spiritual events that will take place in our nation. It’ll occur on February 4th at the Museum of the Bible here in Washington, D.C. And this event, I mean, we’ll have members of Congress, state leaders, evangelical leaders, and intercessors from all across the country. We want you and encourage you to come join us live, or to join us online for this event. And either way, we urge you to pray about what’s about to take place. You can get more information at ngpr.org. That stands for National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance, ngpr.org. And then also, you may think it’s a little bit early, but our Pray, Vote, Stand Summit will be taking place in September of this coming year just outside of Washington, D.C. at Cornerstone Chapel in Leesburg. Registration will be opening soon, so go ahead and start getting information. Go check out PrayVoteStand.org for that. Okay, earlier today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit heard arguments in a case concerning a new Louisiana law that requires state public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments. And a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit ruled last year that that law was unconstitutional, but this time the full court agreed to hear that case. So, how did it go? And what’s on the line here? Well, joining me now to discuss this is our very own Tony Perkins, president of FRC, and your normal, usual host of Washington Watch. He attended today’s oral argument, and of course, he is also a former member of the Louisiana legislature. Tony, thanks for joining me. Always an honor to have you. I wish we could switch seats, but you’re a long ways from here.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, you’re doing a great job, Jody, and I’m what’s on the line right now. I’m on the Washington Watch hotline. As you mentioned, I was in New Orleans for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the en banc, the entire court, hearing the oral arguments. from Louisiana and from the opponents. Now, there was two cases merged in this because Louisiana and Texas both, who are in the Fifth Circuit, have passed laws. Their legislatures have passed laws that would require the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. There’s a little bit of a difference between the two statutes passed by the two different states, but At their heart, similar. Although the Louisiana statute applies to universities as well. But the opposition against both was based on this idea that this is somehow coercion. And it was quite interesting to watch the arguments. The Solicitor General of Louisiana, Ben Arriaga, I thought did an exceptional job. And you can sometimes, Jody, you can tell how it goes based upon the justices and their questioning. Ben drew a few questions, mostly from a couple of the liberals on the court. But the attorney, the counsel for the opponents of this, was peppered with questions. So I would say, and it was all over this whole issue of coercion. uh that somehow posting the ten commandments in the classroom and this was his words that if you this is the the council for the opponents of the statute i said that if you’re posting the ten commandments in a public school classroom you are turning that school into a church that’s what he said and there were quite a few of the justices that really jumped on that assertion and began to pepper him with a lot of questions
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, so what would you be turning the school into with the rainbow flag and that type of stuff? I mean, I want to go with you, Tony, with all this coercion stuff. I think this is at such the heart of this whole issue. But are you saying overall that you felt good with what appeared to take place today? You’re feeling positive?
SPEAKER 09 :
I did. I was there at the invitation of the governor and the attorney general and spoke with both of them before and after the hearing. They were both very positive. I spoke with the solicitor general, who, by the way, on this issue of coercion, the Family Research Council filed a friend of the court brief in this case. That was our focus. Our focus was on coercion, and the Solicitor General actually made reference to our brief saying to the court, he said, I asked you to read that brief, and I’m paraphrasing to a degree, but he did say that our brief annihilates the argument of the other side saying that this is coercion. So he encouraged the justices to read that as they entered into their argumentation debate over the outcome of this case.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, I think that is the heart of this. Of course, the ACLU filed the lawsuit here, and they’re claiming, as you have said, that somehow the Ten Commandments being displayed would harm students, would force them, coerce them into some sort of religious doctrine or whatever. But Tony, how in the world are kids possibly harmed by being encouraged to not steal, not kill, and the other things that are in the Ten Commandments?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, what the counselor for the ACLU focused on was that, well, he stepped over all of that and said, well, the 10th Amendment said there is one God, and I am the Lord God. And he said, you know, how does a, in fact, one of the liberal justices made reference to this. What if your religion is polytheistic? How does your children deal with that? The point here, Jody, as you well know, is that this is an issue of, as we’re going into the 250th anniversary of our country, this is an organic document. This is a document upon which our legal system is built. When I was in the state legislature here in Louisiana, I authored the American History Preservation Act that allows any document that was referenced in any of our founding documents or anything in the congressional record that that could be posted in a public school classroom and it’s protected. No one could take it out. The Ten Commandments play such a key role in the founding of our nation. So, again, I think the questioning really leans toward faith. being favorable toward the state of Louisiana. And back to the assertion by the council for the ACLU that, you know, by posting the 10 commandments in a school classroom, you turn it into a church. And I was thinking, I looked up on the wall, you know, you’ve got these maximum seating size, maximum seating for a room from the fire marshal. I guess this turns, you know, if you have that in a church, You could argue that that turns it into a state building by putting the fire marshal, allowing him to limit the number of people. You say, well, that’s for public safety. True, but what’s more important, you know, public safety or the preservation of our country with an understanding of the basic values? And it was interesting, some of the… questioning from the liberal justices to the council for the ACLU, kind of setting them up with some softball questions. Point of fact, well, there may be kids who have never heard of what, you know, maid servant, male servant, or have never heard about the Ten Commandments, and they’re going to be asking questions, and so what’s the teacher going to say? And I said, you know, that’s exactly why we need them in the classroom, so that they could see them, and then on their own, explore, ask questions, Because they are so fundamental to who we are as a people. And that was one of the points the governor made at a press conference after the hearing today is that, look, it’s fundamental to our Judeo-Christian foundation. And we cannot back away from these. In fact, we need to double down so that we can… teach the next generation what it is that made America exceptional. And all this talk about America being great. America will never be great until it’s good. This is the source of America’s greatness. It is an alignment with these principles, these transcendent truths that our founders recognized and built this country upon.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, absolutely. You cannot have limited government, which our Constitution grants us, without people who are able of self-governing their own lives with right and wrong. And that in itself is a spiritual issue grounded in the Ten Commandments. You just referenced this, Tony, and I want to expand on this, all within the context of coercion. But you said that the kids may actually ask questions on their own. And that is what would be the ideal. So what were the ACLU attorneys and so forth, their counsel, arguing the religious exercise that kids might be forced to participate in? Where were they going with that argument?
SPEAKER 09 :
It’s just the exposure. It’s the—it’s not—they— Their argument, Jody, was that just by having these in the classroom, if they’re in the classroom from kindergarten up through high school, that they’re going to have to look at them at some point in time. And they’re going to be exposed to them. And that’s coercion. Just the fact that they’re hanging on the wall. Of course, the Solicitor General made the point that that’s passive. They’re just hanging. So if they look at them, what harm is going to be done by them saying, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery? Again… This is why, of course, one of the arguments that was being made is the new standard has been set with the Joe Kennedy case, the Kennedy case with the freedom of religion. They were going back to some older cases, and they’re trying to carve out, the counsel for the ACLU, trying to carve out a special area for schools. And this has long been the case that… Children are treated differently. And there’s a reason for that. We know that. And in fact, it was very interesting, Jodi, you made reference earlier in the program this morning to the speakers, Mike Johnson’s message before the parliament in the UK. I was doing a Fox interview early this morning, very early this morning. And so I watched the speaker giving his speech and was texting with him after his speech. I thought it was a fantastic speech, but he made this point in his speech. He quoted Abraham Lincoln. about the philosophy in the classroom will be the governing ideology of the government in the next generation. And that’s exactly what we see happening here. This is why they’ve done so much to try to keep prayer, Bible, religion out of our public schools is because this is how they shape the worldview. you know we know from our work with george barna that a world view is shaped from the age of 15 months to 13 years the very time that the the left wants to sanitize every public institution that our children might be engaged with from religion from the christian religion in particular that’s why that should tell us why it’s so important that we continue from both a religious but a secular standpoint. This has a fundamental secular importance as it does religious importance. Our nation only works, as John Adams said, for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. That’s why we see the fraying of the fabric of our nation is because we have removed that basic understanding.
SPEAKER 05 :
Absolutely. I know this battle came up while I was a pastor in Georgia. There’s one of the issues that began the process of leading me to Congress. But for our viewers and listeners, some of them are going to have family and friends and so forth who may not be Christians. But as you were just saying, the Ten Commandments are of extreme historical significance in our nation. And in the classroom, in that kind of environment and setting, we’re
SPEAKER 09 :
children are being taught that in itself is something they ought to be familiar with so that’s another powerful argument let me let me ask you real quickly tony okay let me put in a quick plug for our god and government course when we talk about that fundamental element of the of of the ten commandments and these organic documents in the shaping of our country
SPEAKER 05 :
Absolutely. And it’s undeniable. And they’re everywhere in the nation’s capital in D.C. Let me let you explain the Establishment Clause. What does it do? What does it not do? And how is the left confusing the Establishment Clause of our First Amendment?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, the establishment clause says there’s really two parts to our First Amendment when it comes to religion. One is the government cannot establish a religion. All right. That clearly and everybody agrees with that. We agree with that. But it also cannot prohibit individuals from expressing their faith now. Again, going back to this Ten Commandments display is that it’s not, yes, it’s a religious document, but it has a secular purpose. This is organic to our judicial system, to our laws. It is foundational to those laws. You really cannot understand America, our system of government, without having some idea of biblical principles and these basic tenets of civility, of what we find in the Ten Commandments. Look, the ability of our country to continue is based upon people being able to govern themselves. And that’s what the Ten Commandments is about, being able to govern ourselves under God. And if we can’t do that, we will not have a government big enough to do that. We have to govern ourselves. That’s what the Ten Commandments are about.
SPEAKER 05 :
Amen and amen. Tony, we got less than a minute. What do you think our viewers and listeners should take away from this case in Louisiana and perhaps others like it? What’s the big takeaway for them?
SPEAKER 09 :
Number one is I think the tide is turning. People are realizing that, you know, we cannot be in retreat in terms of our faith. It’s fundamental to who we are as a people. And it’s time as Christians we pray, all right? We pray. We pray for our country. We pray for our leaders. Pray for the courts. We vote. We vote for those who align with biblical truth. And then we have to commit to stand for that biblical truth. And sometimes that means we’re going to draw opposition, but we have to stand nonetheless.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, Tony Perkins, president of FRC and host of Washington Watch. I want to thank you. I know it’s been an incredibly long and busy day for you. Thank you for taking time to pull over and join us today. And I know people look forward to having you back in the chair tomorrow. But an extremely important case. Thank you for joining us and breaking it down for us.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thank you, Jody. Always appreciate you sitting in the chair for me.
SPEAKER 05 :
My honor. All right, friends, that wraps up this edition of Washington Watch. Hope you have a fantastic rest of your evening. And as I just said, Tony will be back tomorrow on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 02 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council. To support our efforts to advance faith, family, and freedom, please text GIVE to 67742. That’s GIVE to 67742. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information, please visit TonyPerkins.com.
