Um, what would you say are some Kansas examples of the harm that ChatGPT has caused?

Well, the most egregious cases, uh, were not in, not from Kansas.

But, you know, the other thing about this is probably we only see the tip of the iceberg.

We don't see all of the other cases where, um, a, a minor was encouraged to do something that resulted in self-harm, and they didn't report it to authorities, or, uh, was, was told to take some medication, uh, that was completely inappropriate, and they didn't report it to authorities.

So my guess is it's happening all over the country.

And in many instances, because no one was hospitalized or, or died, uh, you don't have reports of it.

But we all know that anyone who's witnessed what OpenAI and, and, and ChatGPT can do is that you have these sycophantic, um, chatbots that build trust, and most adults, we hope, are, are able to realize when they're, when, when, when the app is, you know, essentially giving them so much compliments, so much praise that, that something is up.

Why the timing of this lawsuit? Do you think that there is an aspect here where it gives momentum one way or the other in, uh, into the midterms or in, in terms of politics, or is it strictly independent of that?

How do you, Chris Kobach, as attorney general and a constitutional expert and immigration expert, how is the nation supposed to work through that, sir?

Well, we have to have the rule of law intact, and there has been since 1996 a statute in the federal books that says that sanctuary cities are illegal.

You can define sanctuary cities and sanctuary jurisdictions, not just cities, in different ways.

This one is a fairly narrow definition, but it still catches New York, catches California, catches all of the big ones around the country.

And they're just violating the federal law.

And you have to have an ability to enforce that law.

The U.S. Justice Department is now under Trump's second term, especially going after some of these jurisdictions.

So make it make sense for us of where we are in this decision when you talk about the rule of law and something basic like somebody born in the country, are they a citizen or not, sir?

How do you, Chris Kobach, as attorney general and a constitutional expert and immigration expert, how is the nation supposed to work through that, sir?

Well, we have to have the rule of law intact.

And there has been since 1996 a statute in the federal books that says that sanctuary cities are illegal.

You can define sanctuary cities and sanctuary jurisdictions, not just cities, in different ways.

This one is a fairly narrow definition, but it still catches New York, catches California, catches Florida.

All of the big ones around the country.

And they're just violating the federal law.

So make it make sense for us of where we are in this decision when you talk about the rule of law and something basic like somebody born in the country, are they a citizen or not, sir? Yeah.

So w- what's the thing to watch tomorrow, and what's the best end result for parents as they're listening right now?

A- actually, Pete, uh, Kansas' lawsuit does start tomorrow as well.

There's several going on simultaneously.

Uh, the one tomorrow in California with 33 states does include Kansas, and obviously the majority of the states in the country.

There's one in Oklahoma that also starts, uh, this week, and there are a couple of others.

There's actually a multi-state, the one I mentioned in California w- that Kansas is part of, which is 33 states.

And then there are eight other states, plus the District of Columbia, that have individual s- uh, suits going in their own states for state court- state law-based claims.

What is this about?

Lend some normalcy here, some sanity back to this

conversation.

Well, what you've got are non-lawyer progressive politicians either ignorant or just willfully lying to the public about what the Supreme Court did.

What the Supreme Court did is stand up for the 14th Amendment notion, principle, that all people should be treated equally and should not be treated according to their race.

And so no one is being denied the right to vote at all.

What this has to do with is how districts are drawn.

And for years...

Nowadays, a country concert comes to Wichita, it's exorbitant fees.

Good morning.

Yeah, well, Apple's iCloud platform has become the leading platform in the distribution and dissemination of child sexual abuse materials.

This is a huge problem.

And Apple has in the past shown a more serious commitment to doing something about it.

Between 2021 and 2022, they actually had a detection tool that they were using to protect the public and especially to protect children from exposure to these, typically we're talking about photographs here, or other images and they took that tool down so they know how to protect the public protect kids against child sexual abuse materials and more broadly to protect all of us against uh to protect the the country uh against the exploitation of children because So often, the perpetrators are doing this so that they can produce these photographs and share these photographs.

It's just a sick, sick thing.

But at any rate, Apple has abandoned its tool, claiming it's a tool that it can use.

What's going on there?

Can you explain to us what went on, Chris?

Yeah, I It's a long saga, but I'll give you the Reader's Digest version.

In 2023, the Kansas legislature passed a bill saying you can't change your sex to something other than your biological sex on your driver's license or your birth certificate.

There was litigation over that where we have a Democrat governor in Kansas, and she directed her administration not to interpret the law the way it was obviously written.

And so I had to sue the governor.

And we prevailed in district court, but then a very liberal Court of Appeals panel went the wrong way and said, oh, maybe the statute isn't as clear.

And so then the Kansas legislature, this just this past session within the last few months, amended the bill to make it crystal clear so that no judge could possibly mistake that this is intended to stop individuals from changing their sex on their driver's license to something other than biological sex.

Why is that?

How does he expect that he's not going to get caught?

You know, that's that's very interesting.

And as the case moves to trial, you know, those those some of that information may come out as to, you know, how he held himself out, whether it was as a citizen or non-citizen.

But the bottom line is when signing documents for election purposes, you have to be truthful and you have to if you are not a U.S. citizen, you cannot claim to be a U.S. citizen.

But as a policy matter, you asked the question, how big is this problem? It's very big.

Kansas, we tried when I was Secretary of State, I drafted a law that would have required proof of citizenship when a person registers to vote.

Because at that point, you can actually do something.

Your thoughts?