Episode 446, The Andrew Parker Show - Does the Rule of Law Matter? The Bluster of Public Policy Elites

In Episode 446 of The Andrew Parker Show, Andrew Parker asks a fundamental question: Does the rule of law still matter?

This episode examines a public letter issued by faculty affiliated with the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs criticizing immigration enforcement—and what that letter reveals about the mindset of modern public policy elites. Drawing on his personal experience as a graduate of both the Humphrey School and the Mondale School of Law, Parker explores what the letter says, what it omits, and why selective outrage erodes public trust, safety, and democratic accountability.

The discussion addresses immigration, enforcement of existing law, large-scale fraud, public safety, and the dangers of academic echo chambers that prioritize ideology over consequences. Parker also connects these issues to broader constitutional concerns, including the boundaries of the First Amendment, institutional responsibility, and the real-world cost of abandoning law and order.

A candid and timely episode on immigration, public policy, and why a society that stops enforcing its laws places itself at risk.

Transcript

Episode 446, The Andrew Parker Show

Andrew Parker (00:03)
Welcome once again to the Andrew Parker show I appreciate very much you joining us on this episode of The show go to the Andrew Parker show comm learn more about the show the background the history nearly nine years 400 and we're approaching 450 now episodes As we talk politics Israel and the law

We are going to have on Constitutional Law Professor Elon Warman from the University of Minnesota, my alma mater, the University of Minnesota Walter F Mondale School of Law here in the Twin Cities as Professor Warman will be joining us.

willing down the trail here in just a few weeks early in 2026. And we will talk about the law. We will talk about some of the important constitutional law decisions that have come down over the last year and maybe go back even further than that. Very important. Talk a little First Amendment law as well. What are the boundaries of the First Amendment?

Globalized the Intifada people are killed murdered Resulting from such protests and chance. I don't know is it beyond the First Amendment, right? What about members the KKK marching in black neighborhoods that okay? Burning ⁓ crosses in the street well that never happened. What are you? What are you talking about Parker? Well

No, but marching with globalized the Intifada and ⁓ Israel commits genocide and...

such other statements. How about gas the Jews is that's that's okay. Who would have thought in 2025 2026 soon that we would be talking about such issues today and on this episode I would like to talk about a letter I'm going to tie it relates to immigration.

And it was a letter put out by various faculty and related of the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs.

a master's program at the University of Minnesota. It's one I know well, as I am a graduate of the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, as well as a graduate of the Walter F. Mondale School of Law, just across Washington Avenue from one another. I know those buildings well, as my father was the architect

for both of those buildings, the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute and the Walter F. Mondale School of Law. Great buildings both. I enjoyed my years studying at both and ultimately receiving degrees there. ⁓ The Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs has become

quite a liberal master's program, not surprisingly, most of them are in these ⁓ masters of public affairs type schools, public policy type schools.

They have programs now, Masters of Human Rights, Masters of Public Policy. ⁓ And I want to talk a little about the Humphrey School.

because I saw a letter that was put out, I saw it on LinkedIn, by Professor Eric Schwartz. And Eric and I know each other a little bit. I was on the board of the Jewish Community Relations Council, which ⁓ is called colloquially the voice of the Jewish people in the Twin Cities, Minnesota and the Dakotas.

Eric Schwartz was for a few years on the board while and we overlapped while while I was on the board and One of the issues that arose back in 2015 about ten years ago now as you're all aware It was during the time when Barack Obama was pushing hard very hard for approval of

the Iran nuclear deal.

What the Iran nuclear deal did, as far as I was concerned, was it guaranteed a nuclear weapon to the government of Iran, the sadistic killers, murderers, terrorists, the largest government sponsor of terrorism anywhere in the world, as recognized by the United States.

And it provided them with a guide path to nuclear weapons. But it would take a lot longer than what existed in 2015, which was a breakout capacity of ⁓ several months rather than years. And so Obama thought it was a good idea to give them this glide path. In addition,

The deal provided $100 to $150 billion of released assets, money.

to the government of Iran after it was on its back from an economic perspective due to the sanctions put on it by the George W. Bush administration.

⁓

and

This allowed the Iranian regime, the mullahs, who, you know, their economy was falling apart, the people were rising up, as you recall. This allowed the regime to bounce back.

⁓ in spades they bounced that and and became a much bigger power than they had been or than The sanctions the United States brought upon them caused and that was a much weaker regime They cemented their place in leadership in Iran

much more so because of this release of all this money and I would argue that what happened on October 7th is result of this kind of policy and the money used for terrorist activities throughout the Middle East including much of on October 7th came from Obama's push and plan. Well

The Jewish Community Relations Council was going to take a position on the plan, the Obama plan, and held a vote as to whether they should oppose it or support it. And Eric Schwartz led the fight, the argument, in support of Barack Obama. And he brought in, ⁓ not physically, but in ⁓ writings, ⁓ some of his State Department friends.

to convince the members of the JCRC that we should be supporting Obama and this great Iran deal, I argued the other side, and it ended up being a 17 to 17 tie. A tie vote. So we did not take a position, even though we are the voice of the Jewish community and the Jewish community in Israel, for example, right, left, and center.

Opposed the Obama Iran deal 85 % vehemently vigorously

In addition, the government opposed it.

But the Jewish Community Relations Council, in large part because of Eric. Eric, you know, nice job making his arguments.

was able to ⁓ get that singular ⁓ vote to keep us from raising our voice in opposition. Now, would it have made a difference? Probably not. Amy Klobuchar voted in support of the Iran deal.

I was disappointed, expressed that to her. She appreciated and came and met with us about her vote in that regard. I think in retrospect, ⁓ it has been seen what needs to happen to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and that is blowing up their nuclear reactors and facilities. That's what it takes.

They're not going to do it otherwise. And they add a glide path to it with the deal.

So who is Eric Schwartz? He is now the chair of the Humphrey School's Global Policy Area.

⁓ He was the Dean of the Humphrey Institute when we were on this board together.

⁓

Between, that was 2011 to 2017, he served as the dean.

⁓ Prior to his arrival at the Humphrey Institute, he served as U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration.

He was nominated by President Obama and confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2009. He worked with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He served as the Department of State's principal humanitarian official. He managed a $1.8 billion budget.

and various policy and programs for U.S. refugee admissions and U.S. international assistance worldwide.

I'm not sure, but maybe related to USAID.

From 06 to 09, 09 is when he took over as US Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration. And prior to that, he directed the ConnectUS Fund, an NGO.

multi-foundational NGO collaborative.

From 05 to 07, he served as the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan's Deputy Special Envoy for Tsunami Recovery. You remember Kofi Annan? Annan? Yeah.

So.

Eric Schwartz, think these Bonifides ⁓ make him quite impressive in certain circles. ⁓ Dean and now professor and chair at the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs and US Assistant Secretary of State. So he worked in the State Department.

My attitude about the State Department probably is far different than Eric Schwartz. Eric Schwartz's ⁓ view is probably much more popular and common. That, my gosh, if you have a job in the State Department, you must really know what you're talking about when it comes to world affairs. After all, the United States has done so wonderfully in world affairs over the many decades with

a State Department philosophy far different than Marco Rubio's ⁓ where, you know, we...

these international affairs graduates from the John F. Kennedy School, the Lyndon Johnson School, ⁓ know, one upon the next upon the next of these highly educated master's program or PhD program graduates ⁓ come in and they see, they can get, you know, an assignment

in an Arab country, one of 50, let's say, Muslim countries, or they can take a position in the one Jewish country? I think they're going to side with the

much more lucrative, shall we say, for them. that's cynical. You shouldn't say such things. Maybe. But the State Department has been, ⁓ in large respect, other than the political appointments when pro-Israel presidents are elected in the United States, are anti-Israel.

fairly consistently.

and oftentimes say things that in my judgment they really don't know what they're talking about. In this case, and I'm not saying that about Eric Schwartz, but I would say that the reason I bring up Eric is that he developed, prepared a letter and got several others like him who are

academics, professors in public affairs, frankly very liberal, worked at the State Department and so all of these credentials means, they must know what they're talking about and they all signed on to this letter which at this particular time and they found this moment to be so very important. ⁓

they thought important to pen this and put it out publicly.

So the letter says, to members of immigrant communities at the Humphrey School at the University of Minnesota, and in the state of Minnesota, we say the following. We are members of the graduate faculty and faculty emeriti at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, writing in our individual capacities. So they wanna make sure they're not speaking for

the Humphrey Institute, my alma mater, ⁓ they are speaking separate from that. ⁓

I don't know. mean, I don't know that I could sign on here. wasn't with or in the faculty at the Hubert Humphrey Institute. And I don't think they'd ever put me on the faculty at the Humphrey Institute. I mean, I did quite well when I was there, when I received my masters. ⁓ Quite well. ⁓ But I don't think I'm kind of

the face of the school really, or even a part of the group. ⁓ Even when I was there, at that time I was quite liberal, I had worked for Ted Kennedy on his presidential campaign. ⁓

It struck me that it was this echo chamber of liberal thought. They didn't find a program that they didn't love. And the more it cost, the better it was. ⁓ And so I started to raise questions on the other side because, again, it was such an echo chamber that it was a little disturbing for me sitting in the classroom saying, is there no other view of this subject?

⁓

And so I would start to raise questions about whether the program really met what it was intended to meet, whatever program it was, or whether it had unintended consequences and what those consequences are, whether there's government failure that occurs when the public sector tries to take on all of these responsibilities. ⁓ The cost of the program and who's going to

pay for it and what does it mean when you take money out of the hands of people who have earned it? ⁓ Do they have an incentive to continue to ⁓ earn, build, create, innovate like they maybe once did? ⁓ So.

It was a school where those that signed on to this letter I am not particularly ⁓ surprised by. Again, they are graduate faculty and faculty emeriti at the Humphrey School. But it's a nice letter. I'll continue here. ⁓ We are united in conveying our outrage

at the unjustified and bigoted statements from the President of United States about Somali immigrants, as well as similar statements by the President about Latin American immigrants and immigrants of color, generally. We also wish to convey our support for the well-being of immigrant communities in Minneapolis and beyond.

Okay, I don't have a problem with that and there are some things that the president has said that I wish he didn't say and I don't agree with and they aren't becoming of the president or the office. Now having said that, the timing of this letter as it relates to many Somali immigrants who have defrauded Minnesota and Minnesotans

⁓ Maybe it's not a big deal to these faculty ⁓ taking a billion dollars out of the hands of Minnesotans who need them, but ⁓ It's a big deal to a lot of people and You know there are Somali immigrant issues as it relates to this that doesn't make me a bigot or a racist

Somalia if you go on grok and you do a search for the most corrupt countries in the world Graded on a series of criteria across the board Somalia ranks last out of a hundred and eighty

Last or second to last? Now does that mean every Somalian is a fraudster or a bad person? No.

But, you know, maybe there would be a letter about how did we let this happen or what is going on in the Somali community.

No. The letter goes on to say, faculty members at a school of public affairs, we know well the contributions of the Somali Americans to Minnesota. Well, there they're painting with a broad brush Somali Americans.

But you can't paint with a broad brush when you're talking about Somali Americans defrauding Minnesotans. That's who did this. In large part.

And by the way, it is one of the biggest recruitment grounds for terrorism overseas of anywhere in the United States.

as well.

The letter goes on, faculty and members of public affairs, we know well the contributions of Somali Americans to Minnesota. We are also aware of the critical role that immigrants must play if Minnesota is to continue to be a leader in economic development and social welfare in the future. No word, no comment, no mention of the open borders that allowed millions, tens of millions of immigrants with no process to come into the country.

No care about the fact that that is a violation of American law. No care about that.

You may agree with the policy of letting in tens of millions of immigrants, but it is a violation of democratically enacted law. And these faculty of public affairs don't even mention it.

Instead they say it's a critical role That these immigrants play it's great That they're here illegally with no vetting. No, nobody knows who they are taking all taking up Resources scary scarce resources in this country in terms of programs

the people who are here illegally or legally and went through the process oftentimes lose out on.

goes on this letter to say, we have been deeply disturbed by the profiling of immigrant communities and the targeting of law-abiding immigrants. The targeting of law-abiding, if there's a law-abiding immigrant that gets taken in by ICE, the judicial system in this country will deal with that.

If there was wrongdoing by an ICE officer, they will be dealt with. If there is wrongdoing by someone in ICE in violation of the law, they will be dealt with.

We have that system.

law abiding immigrants. What are the examples of this who are being targeted? They're here illegally. They're not law abiding by the way.

And this isn't just theoretical. America's been killed, murdered by those who shouldn't have even been here.

if you were that person's husband or wife.

or that person's child or parent or brother or sister, aunt or uncle, you might care a lot more than just seeing it on the news.

So law-abiding immigrants being targeted and taken from their family members in recent months. This is this argument against enforcing the law. When we stop enforcing the law, it is the beginning of the end of our society, whether you like it or not. And I'm talking about fundamental basic laws.

At a time of the year in which we celebrate the values of peace and community, we express our warmest wishes to you and our support for your well-being. Speaking to the immigrants here, this letter says, we will continue our advocacy and our research in support of your basic human rights.

Well, the ones that are committing crimes, many of them.

They need to be deported and our justice system needs to deal with them. The ones that are here illegally, this problem that was created by the Biden administration by allowing them openly to create a crisis at our border and now across our country.

How many Islamic radicals are here and we don't know?

And what is that going to mean? Are they the ones who are on campus?

to globalize the Intifada.

The incidents that arise across the world, really.

They arise because.

Law and order is not maintained. Law is not enforced. And our principles and values are ignored and go down the tubes.

While being kind to your neighbor is a watchword of this show, as you know, because I close each show with it.

It causes me to support a letter like this, but with no comment about the dangers and the illegal conduct that exists that needs to be.

defended against because of what occurred during the last several years in the invasion of people into this country who we know not of who they are.

We need to protect.

And that means illegal immigrants who have violated the law.

need to be removed only to come back, as is the policy, through a process.

that allows for some order.

And this letter doesn't recognize that at all.

All it says is let's continue down the path that we're on.

and it appears to be a bit of a tin ear in terms of its timing.

That's it for this episode. Await the next to drop as well. Coming soon. Until then, thank you for listening to the Andrew Parker Show. And be kind to your neighbor.