Hour 2 of the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show focuses heavily on the controversy surrounding the so-called Cornell Seven, New York Attorney General Letitia James, campus sexual-assault allegations, prosecutorial discretion and due process, before shifting to Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, the historic leak of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization draft opinion, the attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and the importance of Senate control in determining the future composition of the Supreme Court. Clay and Buck also take listener calls weighing in on the Cornell case, possible criminal charges and the political makeup of a potential Ithaca jury pool.
The central discussion in Hour 2 concerns the Cornell Seven investigation and New York Attorney General Letitia James' appointment to review allegations involving seven Cornell students after prosecutors previously declined to bring criminal charges. Clay and Buck examine reports that two students were expelled and others received significant university discipline, while arguing that the existing investigative record, including statements and text messages attributed to the woman involved, supported the original prosecutor's decision not to file criminal charges. They also discuss an argument raised in a Wall Street Journal editorial that James' prior public comments about the case could create a conflict under professional-conduct rules. The hosts predict that at least some of the seven students will ultimately face charges and contend that James' selection by New York Governor Kathy Hochul has politicized what should be an impartial legal review. They emphasize the difference between behavior that people may consider immoral or irresponsible and conduct that actually meets the legal standard for a crime.
Clay and Buck debate the possible outcomes if Letitia James remains in charge, steps aside, files charges that produce acquittals, or obtains convictions. Buck argues that New York Democratic officials could frame virtually every outcome as evidence that they pursued the allegations, while Clay maintains that replacing James would not necessarily alleviate his broader concerns about political pressure surrounding the case. They discuss the implications for due process, prosecutorial independence, presumption of innocence and political influence over the criminal justice system, particularly after the students had already undergone a lengthy investigation. The hosts compare the controversy with other highly publicized sexual-assault cases and allegations, including the Duke lacrosse case and the Tawana Brawley case, as part of a broader discussion about media narratives and public judgment before criminal guilt has been established.
The conversation expands into college culture, sexual consent and personal responsibility. Clay and Buck react to commentary attributing the Cornell controversy to a broader cultural climate associated with President Donald Trump, rejecting that argument and noting that the underlying events occurred during the Biden presidency. The hosts discuss what they regard as contradictions in modern campus culture, arguing that universities have become increasingly permissive toward adult sexual behavior while simultaneously creating complicated disciplinary systems for adjudicating subsequent disputes over consent. Buck recalls sexual-health programs from his own college experience, and both hosts use the Cornell controversy as a springboard for questioning whether elite universities continue to hold the same value as indicators of intellectual merit and academic achievement. They argue that changes in admissions practices, including DEI considerations, have weakened the traditional prestige and signaling power associated with elite college degrees.
Hour 2 of Clay and Buck then turns to the U.S. Supreme Court and Justice Samuel Alito, who said he had considered retirement but concluded that he still had more work to do. Clay emphasizes the political significance of Alito's age and the possibility of future Supreme Court vacancies, framing control of the U.S. Senate as a major issue because senators confirm Supreme Court nominees. The discussion highlights how an unexpected vacancy could dramatically alter the ideological balance of the Court, with Clay invoking the experience of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as an example of why justices cannot necessarily control the timing of their eventual replacements. The hosts connect the issue directly to the stakes surrounding upcoming Senate elections and the future of the Supreme Court.
Alito's comments also launch an extended discussion of the still-unidentified source who leaked the draft Dobbs opinion overturning Roe v. Wade. Alito says he has an opinion about the identity of the leaker but believes the available evidence is insufficient to publicly identify anyone. He describes the leak as a severe breach of institutional trust and connects the episode to threats against the five justices in the Dobbs majority, including the subsequent attempt against Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Clay and Buck debate who could have been responsible: Buck speculates that the leaker may have been a Supreme Court justice, while explicitly acknowledging that he has no proof, whereas Clay argues that a law clerk is the more plausible possibility. They examine the potential professional, legal and reputational consequences that could explain why a hypothetical clerk might never publicly confess, along with the damage a leak by a justice could do to trust and future coalition-building inside the Court.
Listener calls round out much of Hour 2. A caller who says she previously worked at a rape crisis center argues that false sexual-assault allegations can damage genuine victims by undermining public trust in legitimate claims. Another caller from Syracuse challenges Clay's initial assumption that the Cornell students might receive a more politically balanced jury than defendants would in New York City, pointing to Ithaca's heavily liberal political culture and suggesting that the composition of a prospective jury pool could become a significant issue if criminal charges are filed. A New Jersey caller offers an alternative theory that Letitia James might ultimately decline to prosecute in an effort to demonstrate impartiality, but Clay rejects that prediction and reiterates his belief that James was selected because charges are expected.
Make sure you never miss a second of the show by subscribing to the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton show podcast wherever you get your podcasts! ihr.fm/3InlkL8
For the latest updates from Clay & Buck, visit our website https://www.clayandbuck.com/
Connect with Clay Travis and Buck Sexton:
FB - https://www.facebook.com/ClayandBuck/
IG - https://www.instagram.com/clayandbuck/
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
Rumble - https://rumble.com/c/ClayandBuck
TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@clayandbuck
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.