All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “SPLC Was PAYING the KKK — DOJ Drops Bombshell Indictment”
YouTube: https://youtube.com/live/Xzya7MLiwdU
Locals: XXX

The Supreme Court just handed down DC v. R.W., reversing a DC Court of Appeals ruling that said a police officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop a driver who was slowly backing out of a parking lot at 2 AM — after two of his companions bolted on foot when a cop arrived. The Court ruled 7-2 that the officer's "totality of the circumstances" analysis was textbook Fourth Amendment law.

The decision is straightforward, well-reasoned, and consistent with decades of precedent. What's not straightforward is Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's solo dissent — a performance so disconnected from the legal mainstream that even Justice Sotomayor refused to join it. Jackson accused her colleagues of "wordsmithing" the lower court, and argued that two people fleeing a parked car at 2 AM raise no suspicion whatsoever.

I'll break down exactly what the Court held, why it's correct, and why Jackson's dissent reads like just another petulant diatribe. This is SCOTUS doing its job well — and one justice doing hers poorly.

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1299.