asylum. neil: even now, title 42, you re going to adjudicate this on the mexican side. a case like this where someone has come in, it s all on our side of the border. correct. so a lot of them are just getting released. the title 42 that you were able to send some individuals back, a lot of the people from mexico coming across were being sent back especially if they were single adults. but you know, they learned how the game the system. what happens is you ll have a couple. they cross with one child. another will cross with another child and claim asylum and go through the process of being released in the united states. even the bigger factor, this administration has caused that magnet. some of these children are being rented out by these organizations so people can use that as a loop hole to come in to the united states and get released. then the child goes back and it gets recycled. the criminals are the ones that are making a way like bandits. they re filling their pockets with
it s part of the founding of this country. you would have to amend the constitution in order to get rid of the electoral college. i don t think that s realistically in play. however, i do think one of the si silver linings of this situation is we ve now passed legislation to sort of safeguard the way that we actually count up the votes, to make clear the vice president is only in a ceremonial role, can t just throw out votes, and to make it harder for individual members of the senate or house to object to certain states count. so that was a bipartisan measure and i think it s something we can all agree is necessary and an important job of plugging up a loop hole. eli honig, thank you very much. just ahead, we ll go live to beijing as china battles an unprecedented surge right now in covid cases as it dismantles its called zero covid restrictions.
ago:ey obamacare taxes. medicare taxes. so they pro protected 95% of their income that went through the loop hole, i the s -corp. millions of dollars protected from payroll tax, that is a half million in taxes they otherwise would have paid. here is the problem. they said the s-corps
must be offered to all. you can t define your service so you exclude and entire category of people. that s what is at issue here. if there were to be a loop hole of the kind discussed, people with disabilities, arms, jews, muslims, others could find themselves without access to the marketplace. that s what this case is about. the nine justices listened to arguments for 2 1/2 hours getting to the core of the free speech issue. what is the speech that is required of your client that would violate the first amendment? she believes that same-sex weddings contradict scripture and she s announcing a concept of marriage that she believes to be false. the 6-3 conservative majority seem to favor the arguments from kristin wagoner that will join you in just a moment. the justices will again delve in
government. all speech takes place online. there s direct connections with the government. if you censor twitter, you re eliminating my right to speak freely as an american, which a constitutional problem. so why can t someone take action against this? tucker, i think you re right. what basically has happened here is that the government has find a loop hole in the first amendment. the first amendment stated it only a plays from government to congress. if the government can get big tech to do its censorship for it, they can claim it was done by private actors. the problem is that the town square has been privatized. the problem here though is that these big tech companies are not just acting on their own. they re acting at the behest of the government in washington. you know, whether it s the biden administration or various senators on the judiciary