Preborn provides ultrasound equipment to abortion clinics to save unborn babies
>> Walker Wildmon: In many ways, abortion was on the ballot this past election and there's reason for concern. There are many counties, cities and states who have radicalized abortion. And thousands of tiny babies will continue to lose their lives every day. Which is why the ministry of preborn is on the front lines for at risk babies and mothers with unplanned pregnancies. Preborn sponsors clinics positioned in the highest abortion areas in the country. By providing them with resources that they need to rescue babies, PreBorn continues to expand their life affirming care. Their end of year goal is to equip 10 more clinics with ultrasound machines. These life saving machines cost $15,000 each, more than most clinics can afford. When a woman meets her baby on ultrasound, she is twice as likely to choose life. And when she comes to a preborn clinic, she will also be embraced with God's love. $28 sponsors one ultrasound. And now through a match, your gift is doubled. How many babies can you save? Please donate. Just dial pound 250 and say the keyword baby. That's pound 250 and say the keyword. Baby dot or you can go to. Preborn.Com afr that's preborn.com afr all gifts are tax deductible and PreBorn has a four star charity rating.
>> Walker Wildmon: We inform religious freedom is about people of faith being able to live out their faith, live out their convictions. No matter where they are.
>> Rick Green: We equip sacred honor is the courage to speak truth to live out your free speech.
>> Bro Don Wildmon: We also rejoice in our sufferings because. We know that suffering produces perseverance, perseverance, character and character hope.
>> Jeff Chamblee: This is At the Core on American Family Radio.
Walker and Lexie celebrated their 10th anniversary this past Friday
>> Walker Wildmon: Welcome, to the corps here on American Family Radio. Glad to have you with us on today's edition, live edition of the program, brand new edition here on American Family Radio. It's mid December and we're not too far from Christmas and Merry Christmas. we're in John chapter six. Before we move into our passage for the week, I have to note that my wife Lexie and I just celebrated our 10th anniversary this past Friday.
>> Price is Right Congrats Clip: Bam. Just like that. Very good, Bobby. Just in time. 10th anniversary this past Friday and we went on a little beach trip. First time in 10 years leaving North Mississippi without a child, Bobby, which was a milestone. And so we, she and I.
>> Bobby Roza: Did you talk to each other?
>> Walker Wildmon: We did a little bit. Did you know what to do a little bit? Yeah, it was, it was eerily quiet. we weren't chasing kids around and you know, refereeing them. so we. We sat in silence, and it was. It was okay. Sometimes silence is okay. Silence is golden, eh? Yeah. Yeah. So, ten years to my bride Lexie. And, five children later. Ten years and five children later. We had a good time. So happy anniversary. Good trip? Yes. Happy anniversary to my wife. And, yeah, we had a good time. All right.
Hannah's Heart is focusing on couples going through infertility or miscarriage
John, chapter six is where we will be this week. This is a lot going on here in this passage. In this chapter, Jesus feeds the 5,000. Very familiar passage for anyone who reads the scripture. Jesus walks on the water. Also a very familiar passage for anyone who reads the scripture. And what I love about going to Israel is that you go. When you go with us to the Holy Land, or any group, when you travel to Israel, you get to walk where Jesus walked. These are the places where Jesus walked, where he performed miracles. And so when I'm reading this, for example, about Jesus walking on the Sea of Galilee, also known at the time the Sea of Tiberias, we go there. We actually ride on the Sea of Galilee. And, the hillsides around there where Jesus fed the 5,000, we go there. But this passage I'm reading from today is looking at verse 26. So this is after the feeding of the 5,000, after Jesus walks on the water. The, disciples and others are looking for Jesus. And they find him. And, Jesus says to them, most assuredly, I say to you, you seek me not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of man will give you. Because God the Father has set his seal on him. Talking about. Obviously, Jesus is talking in third person about himself. But the point here is that Jesus obviously knows the intents of the heart. He knows the mind. He knows what's going on in man's heart. And he realizes that the disciples are looking for Jesus. But they're not looking for Jesus because they want him to perform another miracle or they want to be around the Son of God. He says, they're looking for me. You guys are looking for me because I fed you. I, met your physical needs. And he quickly pivots to the fact that we should desire Jesus. We should desire God. Not just for our physical needs to be met, but more importantly, we should desire Jesus so that our eternal spiritual needs will be met. And so that's the lesson from John 6, 26, 27. here, in the book of John Hannah's Heart is a ministry of American Family Radio. It's a weekend program here and a podcast here on American Family Radio that you can hear each weekend. And they're having their first ever conference here in Tupelo Mississippi at the end of January. January 30th and 31st are the dates and they're going to have a guest speaker, Jane Johnson, author of Mercy Like Morning. She'll be sharing. Jane Johnson will be sharing a powerful faith filled message for women walking through difficult seasons. we'll have a worship leader, Phil King will be leading in worship and it's going to be a great time of fellowship. Once again Hannah's Heart is aimed at ministering to couples who have gone through infertility or miscarriage. So that's what their program is really centered at and targeted towards on American Family Radio that you can hear each Saturday and Sunday. And so they're going to have a weekend of prayer, worship, encouragement and honest conversations about infertility, loss, life's valleys and trusting God through every season. Those dates are January 30th and 31st coming up here next month. And if you would love to come to that, if you would like to come to that, if you want more information on it you can Simply go to afr.netforward/hhc2026 we'll share this link on the show notes as well. Afr.net hhc2026 we'll make sure we have that up. Okay, it's [email protected] on the homepage. Just to keep it simple, afr.net there on the homepage. But if you want to come to Hannah's Heart conference in late January of 2026 we would love to have you just go over to afr.net right there on the homepage. They are offering a 50 percent off going on now through December 19th. So the rest of this week 50% off Christmas sale using the code Hope50, Hope50. All right, we'll be talking about that the rest of this week as well. If you missed it, just call into our headquarters here and our receptionist will be glad to fix you up, get you all that information.
The terror attack in Australia is eerily similar to America's immigration system
The terror attack in Australia is what I want to talk about this segment when we have the time left because there are so many pieces of this of this tragedy that are eerily familiar, are eerily similar to how America's immigration system has been set up and operated. These two Individuals that are of Pakistani origin, meaning the father immigrated from Pakistan. The son, who also participated in the terror attack, was born in Australia, but obviously his father immigrated from Pakistan. This was a tragedy, an Islamic terror attack on Jews there in Australia, at Bondi Beach. And, this really highlights. There's a couple things I want us to draw from this, but it highlights a couple. Couple things. The first thing that stood out to me when I began looking into this and the details around it is. This. Took place, and this atrocity was committed by a Pakistani national. The father is a Pakistani national, immigrated to Australia in 1998, and the son, obviously, was born in Australia from a father of Pakistani origin. So as we're talking about immigration, as we're talking about Afghan nationals that have been brought over here under Biden and other nationalities, as well as. This is very fitting. It's a very fitting conversation about who we let in our country. And it's really to the point where we ought to be asking ourselves, why do we let anyone into our country? I mean, what is the national advantage to letting people enter our country? And now's where you hear all of the arguments for immigration, for even we're talking here, legal immigration. And maybe you can convince me of a few valid reasons why we should let people immigrate into America. All right? Whether it's work skills or, educational skills, trades, we have. Obviously, we've had a refugee program for a long, long time. So we've let people into our country through various refugee programs. But our immigration system, our legal immigration system has been very liberal over the years. Very liberal. Over a million legal immigrants every single year. Add that up over time, over the course of decades, you're talking tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of legal immigrants over the decades permitted into the country. And this raises particular concern of those that are immigrating legally into America through various. There's all kinds of programs out there. We can't cover them all. But those that are legally immigrating into America from nations, from Muslim majority nations, that teach death to America, that teach hatred of America, hatred of America's ideals, hatred of America's founding fathers, why would you let people in from those countries, and especially people where there's no indication of them disavowing Islam, disavowing Sharia, and this is what has been commonly called now, at this point, suicidal empathy. And this is where you cover up your eyes, you really cover up your ears. You don't want to hear any truth out there, and you just make these emotional Appeals that we should let everybody in. We should be the place where everybody comes. And this is what leads to Biden's open border. This is what leads to plane loads of Afghan nationals into America completely unvetted. And you tug at people's heartstrings and they go, okay, okay, we should let them in. And then things like this happen and it's too late. And in this case Australia, the second thing. So first thing is immigration is to blame here. All right, Pakistani national led into Australia, now he and his native born son have murdered over a dozen Jews. Second thing, this was done in a nation that has some of the most strictest, strictest, gun laws in any developed nation. Australia. All right. So Australia has very stringent gun laws and you can go through the dozen plus regulations that they have, including waiting periods, certain people who are prohibited, including mental health orders, you can't claim self defense. So you can't just buy us firearm in the name of self defense. That's illegal in Australia. You have to have quote, genuine reason according to the government. and there's licensing for every single firearm purchase. There's licensing, very strict gun laws. they regularly participate in buybacks, federal gun buybacks where they buy guns from private owners. And lastly these guns that were used were bolt action rifles, which is pretty rare actually in these mass shootings. Here's why, because Australia, if not a total ban, which I've got to do a little more research on this, if not a total ban on semiautomatic rifles, very stringent controls on semi automatic rifles. So this father, son, ah, terrorist duo, were using bolt action rifles. And the only reason I bring that up is because every time a semi automatic gun, specifically a semi automatic rifle, which the left notoriously calls an assault rifle, even though that's, that's a made up term, that's not even a really viable term for a firearm, a semi automatic rifle, especially with these high capacity magazines, 10, 20, 30 rounds. The, the gun control crowd always says, oh, we need to ban quote assault rifles. And what they're talking about is banning semi automatic guns, which is actually the vast majority of guns that are owned in America. But here we have in Australia, the Islamic terrorists use bolt action rifles and killed over a dozen, killed over 10 Jews in Australia using a bolt action rifle. And when you watch the videos, very horrific. I, would warn against watching it. But they were, they were just, they, they, it was clear that they were trained on this. But my point in that is that quote Banning assault rifles or banning semi automatic guns isn't going to, to solve America's problems. Australia is exhibit A of that. We'll be back in a few.
>> Jeff Chamblee: At the Core podcasts are [email protected] now back to At the Core on American Family Radio.
Most Islamic terror attacks occur where suspects are not native born
>> Walker Wildmon: Welcome, back to the Core here on American Family Radio. One last note on this. This Islamic terror attack in, Australia is very, the vast majority of these instances of Islamic terror, occur where the suspects are not native born. They are, they are, they are foreign born, meaning they're born in an Islamic majority country. Then they are let in to these various Western countries through various programs. Now, the son here is an outlier, is an exception to the rule. The son was actually born in Australia, but the father nonetheless is from Pakistan. Born in Pakistan. And, the Afghan national that, murdered one of the national guardsmen in D.C. and the other one's in critical condition, still recovering. he was obviously born in Afghanistan. And so this isn't, my point is this is not native, born Westerners that are converting to Islam and then becoming radical jihadis. the vast majority of instances are people that we are importing into our country, we're inviting into the country and they're already radicalized, or they become radicalized when they get in the west and then they go on these rampages and kill people. And so the mass migration is the problem.
Russ Nobile is senior counsel at Judicial Watch focusing on election integrity
All right, let's, jump to our next guest from Judicial Watch. Russ Noble is with us. He's senior counsel over at Judicial Watch, and, he's with us now to talk about some election cases and election law. Ah, Russ Noble, welcome to the program.
>> Russ Nobile: Yeah, thank you for having me.
>> Walker Wildmon: Well, Russ, very familiar with the work and very, familiar with Tom Fitton. And, tell us, before we jump into the specific Supreme Court case that's waiting, an opinion, towards the end of this term. Tell us about Judicial Watch and some of the work you guys do.
>> Russ Nobile: So Judicial Watch has been around about 35 years. We are a conservative educational foundation that does a lot of advocacy through litigation. And sort of our, you know, our bread and butter, of course, is government transparency, where we sue, various state and federal governments to force disclosure of government records so that people can decide for themselves what the government's up to. in the last 10 or 15 years, they stood up and internally a, election integrity practice group. And I'm one of the three lawyers in there, along with Bob Popper and Eric Lee. And so, you know, we do some governmental transparency, but we largely focus on election integrity and anything related to voting. and so what I often tell people about Judicial Watch, like, you know, different groups have core missions, like economic conservatives or educational conservatism and a variety of things, but we just sort of look at the newspaper and find out what makes us mad that morning and sort of go after it. And so we're sort of not tethered to one specific policy objective. But, in my group, we focus almost exclusively on election integrity work and something we've been doing either personally or within Judicial watch for almost 20 years. 25 years between, well, each of us have been doing it about 20, 25 years. We were at DOJ beforehand. Then we went into private practice and joined Judicial Watch.
>> Walker Wildmon: You know, if there's one thing, if there's one word that describes you guys, it would be transparency. Because in all of the different areas you're talking about that you guys kind of focus in on, and it depends on what's going on each year. transparency is a common theme because you guys get, get all kinds of stuff disclosed through FOIA request, that we otherwise wouldn't know about. So we appreciate your work on transparency.
A number of states are extending ballot receipt deadlines past election Day
Russ, tell us, about this case at the Supreme Court on election Day and mail in ballots.
>> Russ Nobile: So, if everyone recalls, back in 2020, there was a big, dispute about late arriving ballots and post, Covid, or during COVID a lot of states were extending their ballot receipt deadlines past election Day. it's something that states have tinkered with off and on for 15, 20 years, but really got a lot of steam in Covid. And it's really a new phenomenon that up until about 20, excuse me, 2004, almost every state mandated ballots to be due by election day. Which makes sense, right? I mean, the election's over. You may not have a final tally, but you at least need to know what the denominator is, right? What the total vote is, and then you can count the ballots. And, the issue came up in 2020, largely went nowhere. It was basically abandoned. and when we monitor the 2020 election and our litigation and everyone else's litigation, we looked at ways we could sort of improve election integrity. And this practice of allowing elections to go on days and weeks past election Day and just drags it out for frankly, is corrosive, right? It undermines the entire electoral process. And even, even if it's candidates I don't want to win, it still undermines them, right? And so, we had Some clients reach out to us, and we had some ideas. And so about three or four years ago, we filed our first of three suits. The first one in Illinois. We filed in Mississippi, and we filed in, now in California. the Mississippi and the Illinois cases are both going to the Supreme Court right now. the Illinois case went up, last month on a different issue. but the Mississippi case is the merits case. That's the case involving finally get the federal, the Supreme Court to explain why states can allow this practice of extending ballot, receipt past election day. we lost the trial court here in, Gulfport. we, won at the 5th Circuit in NewSong Orleans. And the defendants, have filed for a sought, to have the Supreme Court to review it. They announced last month they will. we are in the briefing stage right now, and we expect the court to hear oral arguments probably in late March. and so we'll probably have an answer by the end of June as to why ballots can come in days and weeks after election day.
>> Walker Wildmon: Wow. Yeah, Covid. I mean, don't get me wrong, there was some of this stuff going on before. COVID probably wasn't on our radar. but nonetheless, Covid really brought it all to light because virtually every state adopted these type practices, most of them. And what's interesting is they didn't all roll them back. I mean, Even during the 2024 election, they were pulling some of these shenanigans. I call them, you know, the mass mail in ballot balloting, if you will, for lack of a better word, seems to be the common denominator here. I mean, it's one thing to offer absentee mail in ballots for people with medical conditions, or who are homebound for various reasons, or who are, in the military, serving overseas. But just this mass mail in ballot option just seems like a bad idea all the way around. correct me if I'm wrong, but what are you guys seeing on this? I mean, is there anything good that comes from allowing anyone and everyone to request a ballot and mail it in, and in this instance, mail it in late?
>> Russ Nobile: No. I mean, you're 100% right. I mean, you have a confluence of two things going on, right? You have this effort to roll out state by state, all mail balloting, right? California has it. Washington, state has it. Variety of other states have implemented it. And so you've got this large volume of ballots now just being mass mailed out there. And, you know, probably the best election integrity provision in the history of election integrity is actually just making people show up at a poll site. Right. And there's been this effort for 20 years to DE. Emphasize poll sites. Right. And it came right after Bush v. Gore. There's been, you know, there's obviously research papers out there talk to you. They've been, you know, they being sort of, you know, leftist organizations have been going by legislator by legislator to get them to implement these all mail balloting. And so, you know, it used to be that, I think in 1920, absentee ballots were less than a half a percentage point. right now it's the plurality methodology for voting, meaning it's not the real majority, but it's more than, more than any other type of. And m. You know, I mean if you have inaccurate voter registration lists, it just compounds it. Right, because you have four ballots going to someone with some variation of my name. Russ. No Bill, you know, Russell, no Bill or whatever. And they're not keeping accurate voter lists and they've got a real problem. And so, you know, and so what happened is they've rolled out all mail balloting and so, and then they've said, okay, well we're going to extend receipt deadlines. And it really is just a toxic, approach to conducting elections because in any competition you have to have a firm deadline. Right?
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah.
>> Russ Nobile: And so, you know, it just, it just is a, it almost seems like it's designed to undermine the electoral process. whether, you know, whether that's intentional or not, I'm not smart enough to say. But that's certainly the outcome.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah. Yeah.
Supreme Court ruling on election day ballot recipe could affect various state laws before midterm election
Let me ask you about this ruling here because let's say the Supreme Court rules on the side of you guys basically saying that election day is election day. And we're not counting stuff that comes in late, which I think is a no brainer. not just from a common sense perspective, from a legal perspective as well. Otherwise don't call it election day, call it election month or election season, with an indefinite period at which we stop counting. would, could this affect various state laws around the country before the midterm election?
>> Russ Nobile: Yeah, it should put a hard stop to it, to the practice nationwide. Now, you know, the ruling will come out in June. In theory, you've got to sue in all 50 states, to enforce it. some states will agree to it immediately, some states won't. but the writing will be pretty plain that it stomps it out in all states. And you know, I mean there's obviously a need for you know, one of the big criticisms of the case is military votes. Obviously, we take that very seriously. you know, states are mandated to distribute military ballots to servicemen 45 days before the election. that's more than enough time for the DOD to get their mail, their ballots back.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah.
>> Russ Nobile: if the state fails to do that, there are. You can go to court and we're not saying that, you know, and this is all in our papers, but, you know, we've argued this publicly. we're not saying that, you know, if a state violates their obligations to send out ballots timely, you can't get a court ordered extension. Right. I mean, that's always been the case. And so, but that's on a case by case basis. Not this thing where, you know, the entire country is waiting on Maricopa County, Arizona or Philadelphia to tell us what their outcomes are. I mean, like, the country's elections can't be run by the lowest common denominator, incompetence. And frankly, I think people have just sort of accepted this terrible, structure, this terrible process. And it doesn't have to be this way. It's really not complicated because when Congress first enacted the federal election day in 1845, they wanted to put a hard stop on it all. And you know, people think, well, you know, when you mark your ballot, you cast it, but frankly, you don't cast your ballot until it's received by a government official. Right, that's, that's because you can always change your ballot until you turn it in. Right. You can mark an absentee ballot, put it on the kitchen table, you can lose it, it can destroy. You can show up and vote in person or whatever. You can always, you can almost always change your vote until it's received by the government official. And that's the part of changing a ballot into a vote. And so, that's what we pointed out in our suit. That's the way it historically was. you know, and when they first rolled out absentee voting, sort of broadly and during the Civil War, they would not allow people to just vote willy nilly. They literally deput the state and county officials, literally deputized militiamen to go out into the field to act as government, act county and government, state actors to receive the ballots on the spot, regardless of their federal, you know, official nature. They had to be, they were treated as county officials. So, this has a long history. This is not really anything new. it's just, been tolerated too Long. And so it's time for the court to give us all an answer.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah, I think best case scenario, based on your timeline, I mean, this is fully a win here on the part of you guys and common sense. And Election day is, is fully implemented during the next presidential cycle, which is 2028. So I don't think, I mean, even if you guys get a win in June from the Supreme Court, to your point, you guys are going to have to pull teeth with these states to get them. And then you've got primaries already taking place, you got ballots already being printed. so I think you could get some states that, that fall in order pretty quickly. But as far as the full effect of a win here at the Supreme Court and Election Day being Election Day, I think the full implications will probably be next election cycle, in some instances.
>> Russ Nobile: Well, we're certainly going to try. And you know, I should note that we're not actually the party here. We're the lawyers for the party. We're actually working with the Libertarian Party of Mississippi. The, RNC filed a companion case, by nature of how things work, they got listed first, but it's been us and really our client, who's allowed us to go in and represent them, the Libertarian Party. But, you know, we'll go aggressively nationwide. You know, we won't sue all 50 states, but really we're only talking five and 10 states. That'll be difficult. And there are locals there that can take the ball and run with it. Right. You know, at that point, you know, it's. It's a gold rush for whoever wants to follow suit. And, you know, the states want to put up a fight. It's pretty much a slam dunk. And they're just going to be paying lawyers fees to conservative lawyers trying to enforce it.
>> Walker Wildmon: So you think you can get compliance sooner rather than later if the parties, if the RNC and then your clients win?
>> Russ Nobile: we're certainly going to try. Yeah. I mean, it's hard to guarantee anything, but I can't see anything in the world, any normal course of events where the, Supreme Court announces in June, that ballots are due by, the day of the general election, and Maricopa county lets it go on another 10 days. Now, to be clear that we're only addressing the statute that deals with Federal Election Day, so there's still, primaries and all that stuff, but really it's the Federal Election Day that matters most. and states want to run terrible electoral, processes for their own state elections, and so be it, I guess. But, I think that'll bring some normalcy back to the national structure.
>> Walker Wildmon: Absolutely. Russ Nobles, who we've been talking to, senior counsel with Judicial Watch. So, Russ, putting it, putting it plainly for our audience here, correct me if I'm wrong, a win at the Supreme Court on this topic, states that, ballots received, after election day are not counted. Correct?
>> Russ Nobile: Correct.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yep. Absolutely. Thanks, Russ. Appreciate you coming on, brother.
>> Russ Nobile: Yeah, thanks for having me.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yep. Absolutely. Russ Noble, senior counsel at Judicial Watch, part of this, case with other, other parties as well at the Supreme Court, really discussing election day and what do you do with ballots that are received after election day is over? And, the common sense position is they're not counted because they didn't come in by election day. Just like, if you don't show up and vote on election day or by election day, then you can't just show up a couple days later and said, oops, forgot to show up. so this is really putting, as Russ said, some sanity back into our election code. We'll track this case, see where it goes.
>> Jeff Chamblee: The Hannah's Heart Conference 2026 is January 30th and 31st at Hope Church in Tupelo, Mississippi. Women struggling through the pain and loneliness of a miscarriage or infertility are invited to experience God's love through the teaching of Jane Johnson and the worship led by Phil King. December 12th through the 19th. You can get a 50% early bird discount when you register at afr.net hhc2026afr.net hhc 2026 this is At the Core on American Family Radio with your host, Walker Wildmon.
Supreme Court to hear case regarding election day and mail in ballots
>> Walker Wildmon: Welcome back to the program. Walker Wildmon here in this third segment of today's edition of, At the Core here on American Family Radio. In the last segment, we were talking to Russ Noble with, Judicial Watch. Russ is senior counsel there. And we had a good discussion about the case before the Supreme Court. Now, that will be heard via oral arguments in March and will be ruled on hopefully by the end of June, asking the question, can a state allow ballots to be counted for federal elections after election day, even if they're postmarked by election day, can you still count them if they are received after election day for federal elections? That's the central question before the Supreme Court that they are going to hear in March via oral arguments. And so that's a very important, question, and will have pretty broad implications depending on how the court rules, but could have pretty broad implications on federal elections and mail in ballots for future elections and could be a very encouraging ruling, hopefully. So regarding election day and mail in ballot, so we'll keep tracking that. We appreciate Judicial Watch and Russ for coming on to discuss that.
Bonnie Wallace is legislative liaison for Recover America
All right. On the phone, we have with us Bonnie Wallace. Bonnie is legislative liaison for Recover America and has been doing a lot of work regarding, school and public libraries and protecting young people. Bonnie Wallace is on with us now. Hey, Bonnie. Welcome to the program.
>> Bonnie Wallace: Well, thank you so much. It's an honor to be on.
Bonnie says Recover America teaches pastors to engage in biblical worldview
>> Walker Wildmon: Well, Bonnie, before we talk about, some of the specific instances you've been working on, with libraries and public schools, tell us a little bit about Recover America.
>> Bonnie Wallace: Well, Recover America is Dr. Rick Scarborough's brainchild. It's an organization that goes around the country, and m basically teaches pastors to engage because believe it or not, if pastors were really aware of what's going on and really engaged and had a biblical worldview, we wouldn't have half the problems that we have right now in our society and in our schools, in our libraries, etc. he invited me to join. He's been speaking at school board meetings with me all across Texas. I've personally been to over 163 school boards. And, just opening eyes, you know, this is a spiritual battle, and we need all Christians. And I say that word lightly. I don't call myself a Christian anymore. I call myself a disciple of Jesus. Because Christians have kind of given themselves a bad name, you know, saying they praise and worship for one hour on Sunday, and then they kind of say, bye, God. I'll see you next week. Never thinking or seeking him during the week. And so, yes, it's a great organization, and there's a good website. You guys can go on. Your listeners can go on and engage because it's going to take all of us linking arms to fight, the spiritual battle. Fight Satan. And so we welcome you.
>> Walker Wildmon: Amen.
Bonnie Wallace was involved with Llano county library lawsuit since its inception
Hey, Bonnie, once again, we're talking to Bonnie Wallace, legislative liaison, for Recover America. Bonnie, tell us, for those who haven't heard of this case, haven't read up on it, obviously you know this very intimately, being involved with it from its inception. But tell us about this Llano county, lawsuit, this library case.
>> Bonnie Wallace: So in the summer of 2021, I was approached by a couple of friends, and they said, hey, we've got harmful content in the public library here in our very rural, very conservative county. And I Give a lot of people grace because they have not engaged yet. I did not engage immediately either. I didn't understand what harmful content looked like or sounded like. And so it took me a while. But In November of 21, I saw the first picture in a children's book, and it blew my mind. My hair started on fire, and it has never stopped burning. I run around and my job is to open eyes, and so that's what I try to do. I was appointed to the library advisory board for our county, which is just like it sounds. It's an advisory board. We don't make any rules, policies, regulations concerning the library. But because I was appointed and was really spearheading the common sense protocols that we need to put in place to have book boundaries for children. This is not about book banning or book burning. We get accused of that. This is about book boundaries for children. And so In April of 2022, seven Llano county residents sued the county and sued me personally, named me in that lawsuit, for, they said, violating their first amendment right by removing books from the children's section. There were 17 books, and they were placed about 30ft away in the adult section of the library. So the books were not burned in the backyard. You know, we didn't put them in a barrel and burn them or ban them in any way. And by the way, we're always accused of book banning, but, you know, banning a book, all of these books, if they're not in your public library or in their school library, a parent or guardian or whomever can purchase them with their own money, Tax dollars should not be spent to stock a school library shelf or a public library shelf with harmful content that violates God's morals. And so, we were sued, and of course, we lost in the federal district court in Austin. You know, when these lawsuits come down, the plaintiffs always shop around for the most receptive judge. And so the outcome at the federal district level is virtually guaranteed to them. And, we lost. He required us to return those 17 books back to the shelves immediately in the kids section. We did that. and I say we it wasn't we, because I'm not a Llano county public official. The judge and the commissioners did that because we follow the rules, we follow the law. But we appealed it immediately. And the fifth circuit heard us twice. The first time just with a panel of three with a very discombobulated ruling that nobody could interpret. And we appealed that decision to an en banc hearing, which means before the full court and the Fifth Circuit hears three cases a year en banc, and ours was the third in 2024. And so they heard us, and they came up with a fantastic ruling in May of 2025, May of this year. Which, basically, my favorite quote from that ruling is, take a deep breath, everyone. No one is banning or burning books. If a disappointed patron cannot find a book in the library, he can always order it online, buy it from a bookstore, or borrow it from a friend, which is exactly right. just last Monday, a week ago today, the seven people who are suing Llano county, they appealed to the Supreme Court for the Supreme Court to hear this case. And I prayed fervently for the Supreme Court to hear the case. But in fact, Monday of last week, they sent down just a notice that they were not hearing the case. I am not an attorney, but I have been told by our attorney that what that generally means is they are not opposed to the lower court's ruling. It's not so egregious that they need to hear it right away. And so at this point, libraries in Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana, which are the three states that are, controlled by the fifth Circuit, they have authority to remove any book they want for any reason they want, at any time they want, essentially. And so that's a great victory. Very proud of that.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah, absolutely. And we appreciate your work from m. Early on, as you mentioned, you got involved a little bit after this whole issue arose, but nonetheless, you've been working on this for multiple years.
Bonnie Wallace: Supreme Court refused to hear Llano County library lawsuit
once again, we're taking talking to Bonnie Wallace, who's legislative liaison for Recover America, about this Llano County Library lawsuit that has worked its way from the federal district court in which, there was a bad ruling there. The 5th Circuit had a pretty good ruling, on behalf of Bonney and the others, that have been working on this. And then, the Supreme Court refused to hear it, which we can speculate why they didn't hear it. But to your point, Bonnie, the fact that you guys had a favorable ruling at the fifth Circuit, I'm not really upset necessarily that the Supreme Court didn't pick this up, primarily because now the benefit to the Supreme Court picking this up is if you got a favorable ruling at the Supreme Court, then you're talking about national implications for this library policy, and protecting children and protecting their eyes and their minds, and their souls, ultimately. but the fact that your latest ruling at the 5th Circuit is a good one leaves, you in a good position, at least for the time Being. And correct me if I'm wrong, Bonnie, this could be picked up at a later date by the Supreme Court.
>> Bonnie Wallace: That's correct. And, it's very important to understand that the Llano county books, although they outraged me at the time, I was a novice at looking at children's books and, interpreting what was in there. And they were all inappropriate and needed to be removed. But they are very. I consider them now very benign compared to what I have found. So I have found books in school all over America, not just Texas. I've been to eight other states, to speak to groups, but also mainly in Texas. We have books about having sex with animals. We have books about having sex with dead bodies. We have books about having sex with Jesus. If this does not outrage people, then your moral compass needs to be reset. We have a book. I recently found this one. It's called how it's called. Called, What? I can't even think of the name. and it's about how to kill your diabetic parents in an undetectable manner to get away with murder. And the girl does in the book. These books are targeted to 12 year olds and up. and so I ask people, like, what in the world are we doing? I've got one book that has 75 QR codes. Those kids go to places outside of that book, and the QR codes take them to sex shops to buy sex toys, to the nearest orgy. I mean, places where it's shocking. And the publishers, not all of them know everything, I'm sure, but they put disclaimers. That book with the QR codes has a disclaimer in the front of it that says that the publisher is not responsible for websites out of their control. But yet they're letting kids be directed to these websites.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah, but they put the QR codes in there.
>> Bonnie Wallace: Exactly. But they're not responsible for any other website. So, listen to me. We need engagement. And I've been into over 2000 libraries online. I have not found one clean library. Not even one. Not even. Okay, get this. Not even Hillsdale College. My husband and I are president club donors at Hillsdale College. And we have brought to their attention, like, the very worst bad book I've ever found. They have it now, understandably. They are a university. Their students are adults. They're not minors. But yet I tell everyone I talk to, if you're a kindergarten student or a college student, you have that thought. That anything you find in the school library is approved by the school. And so we have to Be careful what kind of demonic thoughts we are allowing to enter our students minds, even if those students are not minors. It's crazy. It's very widespread. We are behind the curve because we weren't paying attention and now we're having to work twice as hard to catch up.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah, to your point, Bonnie, about this false narrative about book banning, and book burning, that's just blatantly a, straw man argument. It's just not happening. And what they compare it to is what actually happens in Iran and in Turkey and in Saudi Arabia and in these other Islamic majority countries where they actually do burn books, they actually do ban books. The government does it, as a matter of fact. and they're not even commercially available for adults either. They're outlawed altogether because they don't fall in line with Sharia law. But what we're talking about here is not allowing children, or in some instances even college students to access these obscene, immoral and degrading books. There's no compelling educational purpose to view this filth. And to your point, if an adult wants to go on Amazon and buy a dirty book, then have at it. But kids and taxpayers ought not be footing the bill and viewing these obscene and immoral books. That's just a matter of fact. And that's kind of the bare minimum, minimum standard, if you will. and we could, we could talk further about how pornography even shouldn't be legal under any circumstance and isn't covered by the First Amendment. but at a minimum, we ought to be protecting the children. And that's what you've been working on here. Hey, Bonnie Wallace, thanks so much for coming on the program.
>> Bonnie Wallace: Thank you. Have a blessed day.
>> Walker Wildmon: Thanks so much.
Bonnie Wallace: We've got to protect the children first and foremost
That's Bonnie Wallace, legislative liaison with Recover America. We got a long way to go and, we've got to protect the children first and foremost. That's our moral obligation as adults to protect the innocence of children. And, and we also, at the same time, need to be talking about how this junk is not good for adults either. It's not good for anyone to view this type material. Hi, folks. Walker Wildmon At the Core American Family Radio. As a reminder, we would love for you to subscribe to the podcast wherever you listen to podcasts. We'll see you next time.
>> Jeff Chamblee: The views and opinions expressed in this broadcast may not necessarily reflect those of the American Family association or American Family Radio.
