Highlight: Responding to Lawmaker

Apologia Studios

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

00:00

There you go, and there's more. Must be ignored, must be enjoined. You just can't do that.

00:06

I mean, that's not a power that the legislature has. We can't grant ourselves the power to order a court to rule a future act unconstitutional.

00:16

We just can't do that. It is very problematic. And look, I think Roe versus Wade is one of the worst decisions that's ever come out of the

00:23

U .S. Supreme Court, ever. I mean, up there with Dred Scott and a couple of others. It is one. It is an abomination.

00:30

So not just unconstitutional, not just unconstitutional. So so what he's saying, what what Representative Seaball is saying there is that Roe versus Wade is an abomination.

00:41

And we must submit to it. Are there any lawful abominations? That's kind of those all lawless.

00:47

That's cowardice and compromise. That's not principled, courageous leadership. When you say before the public in the public square here in this place, you say this decision is an abomination.

01:00

And please, everybody, submit. Follow it. Follow it. Now, notice you also heard him bring up Dred Scott.

01:07

It's an abomination like Dred Scott. Quick little history lesson here, brothers and sisters and Seaball, you know this.

01:15

When the Dred Scott versus Sanford ruling happened, the challenge was about these slaves that had come from southern states and were in northern states, and they needed to be returned to their southern masters.

01:28

And the Supreme Court, disgraceful as they were with the abominable opinion they gave, they said a black person is not a person.

01:37

It's property. So they must be returned to their masters. Now, thank God the legislatures and the leaders in the states in the north,

01:47

New York as one of them said, go pound sand, Supreme Court. No, we will not yield to that abominable opinion.

01:57

And so what's amazing here is think about it. He says that Roe versus Wade is an abomination, he says, but you need to submit to it.

02:04

But it's an abomination like Dred Scott was. And then everyone starts flipping through their history books and they go,

02:10

Dred Scott, Dred Scott, Dred Scott. Oh, Dred Scott, terrible opinion. Oh, the states resisted it. Yeah.

02:15

You're literally bringing up the case where the states resisted the ruling of the

02:23

Supreme Court. So you, Representative Sebaugh, respectfully, have refuted yourself.

02:30

And you did it on the floor and you did it, you were pontificating as though you knew what you were talking about.

02:36

And you clearly don't. Because what you shouldn't have done in this moment is you shouldn't have brought up Dred Scott.

02:42

You're arguing to legislators. You can't resist the Supreme Court's ruling like Dred Scott.

02:51

He's urging his constituents and the other legislators to be lawless.

02:58

Yeah. To follow what he calls is an abomination. I wonder, would you have that advice for them during the time of slavery?

03:08

Would you have that advice? Question, if you were in the North when

03:14

Dred Scott came down, would you have told the states, no, stop resisting the court, return those guys to their masses?

03:24

Would you have said that? I wonder, Representative Sebaugh, if we took your arguments and we placed them back then, where would you have stood?

03:33

Because if you had stood, if you stood then where you're standing now, it seems like you would have told those states to return them to their masses, wouldn't you have?

03:43

Because here you're clearly arguing that the legislature can't do anything to provide equal protection to these human beings because the

03:51

Supreme Court has ruled from on high. They've given us this abominable decree and we must therefore submit.

03:58

So Northern states, return those slaves. Would you have? I, you know,

04:03

I think you'd probably like to tell yourself, I never would have. I would have told him to resist that opinion. Right. Which is what you should have done here.

04:11

And look, we're a nation of laws. I've heard a lot. There's a guy wearing shirt outside and I have several people tell me, why don't we just ignore

04:18

Roe? Wouldn't that be fun if we could just ignore the Supreme Court? Look, we're a nation of laws.

04:23

We can't do that. Then why'd you do it two hours earlier for a medicinal flower?

04:34

Good question. I think it's right to ask it. This hearing took place.

04:39

I can't remember what time it was. Maybe it was five o 'clock, somewhere around there. And before that, you had, you had vote taking place regarding a medicinal flower, marijuana, federal law against marijuana and court cases against marijuana.

04:55

And you seem to be completely settled and have solace about the fact that you can resist the federal government courts and laws when it comes to a medicinal flower.

05:05

And now you're making arguments that we're not allowed to do that. You had literally just done it. You just did it.

05:12

And now you're saying we can't do it. We can do it for a flower, but we can't do it for these children. That's an inconsistency you're going to have to answer for, sir.