WEBVTT - Inside ICE Detention & Trump Tariffs at SCOTUS 0:00:02.880 --> 0:00:07.080 This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:08.400 --> 0:00:13.160 They're calling it Operation Midway Blitz. President Donald Trump has 0:00:13.240 --> 0:00:17.960 started his immigration cracked down in Chicago, with agents flooding 0:00:18.000 --> 0:00:21.160 the city as it becomes the latest flashpoint in a 0:00:21.280 --> 0:00:25.400 national struggle over how far the federal government can push 0:00:25.640 --> 0:00:31.000 local authorities in sanctuary cities to cooperate with its immigration agenda. 0:00:31.440 --> 0:00:34.959 Though the administration has said the operation will target the 0:00:35.000 --> 0:00:37.559 worst of the worst criminals who are not in the 0:00:37.600 --> 0:00:42.440 country legally, Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker says the operation 0:00:42.600 --> 0:00:47.599 is making many law abiding immigrants, even those who are citizens, fearful. 0:00:47.920 --> 0:00:50.120 They're afraid to go shopping, They're afraid to take their 0:00:50.120 --> 0:00:51.240 own children. 0:00:51.280 --> 0:00:55.360 To school because they have mixed status households. 0:00:56.200 --> 0:00:59.880 Immigration advocates say that ICE agents also appear to be 0:01:00.080 --> 0:01:03.840 stopping and arresting people on the street. So how will 0:01:03.880 --> 0:01:07.360 the Supreme Court's ruling this week that lifted the ban 0:01:07.520 --> 0:01:12.400 on ICE agents in LA stopping and detaining people solely 0:01:12.440 --> 0:01:17.800 based on their race, language, occupation, or location affect the 0:01:18.000 --> 0:01:22.880 ICE operations in Chicago. My guest is Laura Muokerjee, a 0:01:22.959 --> 0:01:26.120 professor at Columbia Law School, and director of the school's 0:01:26.200 --> 0:01:29.800 immigrants Rights clinic, Laura, how do you think the Supreme 0:01:29.840 --> 0:01:34.960 Court's ruling this week will affect these immigration stops? 0:01:35.640 --> 0:01:41.040 The Supreme Court issued a devastating opinion on Monday. It's 0:01:41.080 --> 0:01:45.160 first worth noting that the full Court issued a decision 0:01:45.240 --> 0:01:49.240 that was only one paragraph long, and it was accompanied 0:01:49.320 --> 0:01:53.680 by a concurring opinion by Justice Kavanaugh and a dissenting 0:01:53.720 --> 0:01:58.840 opinion that was joined by this three liberal progressive justices, 0:01:59.120 --> 0:02:04.720 Justice Mayor, Justice Kagan, and Justice Jackson. And the question 0:02:05.080 --> 0:02:10.320 in the case is whether a federal district court's decision 0:02:10.680 --> 0:02:14.400 should stand. And the federal district court had found that 0:02:14.760 --> 0:02:18.480 raids were part of a pattern of conduct by the 0:02:18.520 --> 0:02:22.359 government that likely violated the Fourth Amendment. And the district 0:02:22.360 --> 0:02:26.320 court found that the government was stopping individuals based solely 0:02:26.360 --> 0:02:30.839 on four factors. They're apparent race or ethnicity, whether they 0:02:30.880 --> 0:02:34.440 spoke Spanish or English with an accent, the type of 0:02:34.480 --> 0:02:37.200 location where they were found, such as a car wash 0:02:37.280 --> 0:02:39.600 or a bus stop, and the type of job that 0:02:39.680 --> 0:02:43.640 they appeared to work at. And the district court found 0:02:43.680 --> 0:02:49.320 that these four factors, taken alone, that's not sufficient to 0:02:49.440 --> 0:02:55.000 satisfy the Fourth amendments requirement of reasonable suspicion, and the 0:02:55.040 --> 0:02:59.639 District Court enjoined the federal government immigration officers from using 0:02:59.680 --> 0:03:04.240 those four factors alone in carrying out immigration enforcement. The 0:03:04.520 --> 0:03:09.520 Executive brand then appealed that case to the Ninth Circuit, 0:03:09.720 --> 0:03:12.640 and the Ninth Circuit said, while the case is pending, 0:03:12.680 --> 0:03:16.640 we're going to let the lower court decision stand. And 0:03:16.680 --> 0:03:20.800 then the Executive Branch further appealed that to the US 0:03:20.840 --> 0:03:25.600 Supreme Court, and in monday's one paragraph decision, the Court said, 0:03:25.919 --> 0:03:30.959 we are vacating, we are ending the lower court decision. 0:03:31.520 --> 0:03:35.360 What this means in practice is that immigration officers, as 0:03:35.400 --> 0:03:40.040 well as other law enforcement officers now practically have an 0:03:40.080 --> 0:03:44.040 invitation to engage in racial profiling when they are carrying 0:03:44.080 --> 0:03:49.400 out stops. As the concurrence by Justice Kavanaugh suggests, race 0:03:49.640 --> 0:03:54.600 ethnicity can now be used as a factor in establishing 0:03:55.040 --> 0:03:58.160 reasonable suspicion about whether or not a person is in 0:03:58.160 --> 0:04:01.880 the United States illegally without documentation. 0:04:02.960 --> 0:04:07.880 Justice Kavanaugh really downplayed what these stops are like, saying, 0:04:08.200 --> 0:04:11.720 you know, it's typically brief. You can go free after 0:04:11.760 --> 0:04:14.440 you show you're a citizen or that you're here illegally. 0:04:15.120 --> 0:04:17.000 Does that comport with reality. 0:04:17.520 --> 0:04:17.799 Justice. 0:04:17.880 --> 0:04:23.400 Kavanagh's concurrence minimizes the violence that is used in these 0:04:23.440 --> 0:04:28.640 stops and minimizes the harm to individuals, families, and communities 0:04:28.720 --> 0:04:32.520 from racial profiling. One of the plaintiffs in this very 0:04:32.600 --> 0:04:37.960 case is Jason Gavidia, a Latino US citizen who was 0:04:38.720 --> 0:04:43.840 ordered to stop by masked agents and they asked him 0:04:43.920 --> 0:04:47.720 questions then used violence against him, even though he had 0:04:47.800 --> 0:04:51.440 repeated at least three times that he's an American citizen. 0:04:52.000 --> 0:04:55.040 They took his phone, they pushed him up against the 0:04:55.160 --> 0:04:58.400 metal gated fence, They put his hands behind his back, 0:04:58.440 --> 0:05:01.719 they twisted his arms, and they never gave him his 0:05:01.839 --> 0:05:09.200 ID back. Another US citizen, Jorge Viramontes, was repeatedly questioned 0:05:09.240 --> 0:05:12.240 when he was at his place of work between June 0:05:12.320 --> 0:05:15.560 ninth and June nineteenth of this year. Every time he 0:05:15.720 --> 0:05:18.400 was asked if he was a US citizen, he had 0:05:18.440 --> 0:05:22.400 to show his ID. And the effect of this decision 0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:27.200 is that America has become a show me your papers 0:05:27.279 --> 0:05:32.159 country for the overwhelming majority of people of color. While 0:05:32.200 --> 0:05:37.800 this decision specifically focuses on people who are Latino in LA, 0:05:38.279 --> 0:05:43.600 the implications of this decision invite racial profiling nationwide. 0:05:44.160 --> 0:05:46.040 I said they were going to flood the zone. This 0:05:46.120 --> 0:05:50.040 gives them now the authority to go full speed ahead. 0:05:50.520 --> 0:05:55.480 What does that mean for cities like Los Angeles and Chicago. 0:05:56.080 --> 0:05:59.240 With the passage of the so called Big Beautiful Bill, 0:05:59.640 --> 0:06:04.600 there are now billions more dollars allocated to ICE and 0:06:04.760 --> 0:06:10.479 immigration enforcement and immigration detention. What this opens up is 0:06:10.520 --> 0:06:16.360 the possibility for immigration officers and federal law enforcement officers 0:06:17.040 --> 0:06:22.039 on the streets of many major cities in the United States. Now. 0:06:22.080 --> 0:06:25.719 I hope we never get to that point, and we 0:06:25.760 --> 0:06:30.599 are seeing the people and elected officials of Chicago resisting 0:06:30.960 --> 0:06:35.279 there so that what happened in LA isn't replicated in Chicago. 0:06:36.040 --> 0:06:38.880 And in terms of what happens next, it will be 0:06:39.600 --> 0:06:43.400 up to the American people and the extent to which 0:06:43.640 --> 0:06:46.880 we can resist the worst abuses of the executive brand. 0:06:47.120 --> 0:06:50.800 So I know you represent some families that are in 0:06:51.120 --> 0:06:55.120 ICED attention. How difficult is it to represent someone who's 0:06:55.200 --> 0:06:56.200 being held by ICE? 0:06:57.080 --> 0:07:02.359 It is extraordinarily difficult to represent people in ICE custody. 0:07:02.880 --> 0:07:06.480 Right now, the youngest person I'm representing in ICE custody 0:07:06.560 --> 0:07:11.040 is only two years old. Immigration detention centers are often 0:07:11.120 --> 0:07:15.840 located in areas that are hard to access in geographically 0:07:15.880 --> 0:07:19.800 remote areas of the country. For example, the Family Detention 0:07:19.960 --> 0:07:24.360 Center in Dilley, Texas is more than an hour outside 0:07:24.360 --> 0:07:29.400 of San Antonio, and it can be difficult to have 0:07:29.920 --> 0:07:37.080 reliable access to your clients and to prepare court hearings. Increasingly, 0:07:37.480 --> 0:07:41.760 immigration court hearings for asylum seekers who are detained or 0:07:41.800 --> 0:07:46.520 being scheduled on a very fast turnaround time because the 0:07:46.600 --> 0:07:51.320 administration is trying to push forward deportations as quickly as 0:07:51.520 --> 0:07:57.280 possible without sufficient time and sufficient due process for many 0:07:57.320 --> 0:08:01.040 immigrants to prepare. It's also very difficult for many immigrants 0:08:01.320 --> 0:08:05.880 to access counsel while they are in detention because it's 0:08:05.920 --> 0:08:09.440 so much harder to contact a lawyer and get someone 0:08:09.480 --> 0:08:11.000 to work with you while you're detained. 0:08:12.040 --> 0:08:15.120 I mean, what's life like in an iced atention facility. 0:08:15.880 --> 0:08:23.280 It's very difficult for many immigrants in immigration custody. Overwhelmingly, 0:08:23.600 --> 0:08:31.200 immigration detention centers are overcrowded and unsanitary. Often people don't 0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:36.880 have access to high quality or sufficient food. At the 0:08:36.920 --> 0:08:41.599 Family Detention Center in Dilly, children have submitted swarn testimony 0:08:41.640 --> 0:08:46.240 to federal court explaining that there is not adequate clean 0:08:46.559 --> 0:08:50.960 water putable water and that adults at times have pushed 0:08:51.080 --> 0:08:54.120 children out of the way in an effort to get 0:08:54.160 --> 0:08:59.240 access to the water. There are questions about the quality 0:08:59.360 --> 0:09:05.080 of metaw care in immigration detention centers, and immigration detention 0:09:05.360 --> 0:09:10.880 is simply not an appropriate place for children who are 0:09:10.920 --> 0:09:14.560 seeking asylum. One of the cases I worked on the 0:09:14.640 --> 0:09:19.839 summer involved a six year old child with a leukemia 0:09:19.960 --> 0:09:24.640 diagnosis who was arrested when he and his family showed 0:09:24.800 --> 0:09:29.000 up to their immigration court hearing in LA and then 0:09:29.080 --> 0:09:33.520 they were detained for over a month. During that time, 0:09:33.559 --> 0:09:37.560 I begged DHS to release the six year old boy 0:09:37.600 --> 0:09:41.560 and his family, and it took filing a federal habeas petition, 0:09:42.080 --> 0:09:46.480 so a petition in federal court for DHS to realize 0:09:46.480 --> 0:09:48.439 that this family should not be detained. 0:09:49.240 --> 0:09:51.840 Aren't there special protections for children? 0:09:52.720 --> 0:09:59.000 For decades, immigrant children has received protections under an agreement 0:09:59.120 --> 0:10:02.720 a settlement agreed known as the Flora's Settlement Agreement, which 0:10:02.840 --> 0:10:08.400 requires the federal government to provide basic minimum protections for 0:10:08.520 --> 0:10:12.040 children in federal care, both in terms of conditions of 0:10:12.080 --> 0:10:17.720 custody and prioritizing children for release. Because nearly everyone recognizes 0:10:17.800 --> 0:10:21.840 that children shouldn't be in federal immigration custody federal detention 0:10:22.040 --> 0:10:26.600 centers for long periods of time. Very Unfortunately, the Trump 0:10:26.679 --> 0:10:32.320 administration has moved to terminate, meaning end, the protections in 0:10:32.360 --> 0:10:37.640 the Flora's Settlement Agreement, and if the Trump administration prevails 0:10:37.760 --> 0:10:42.080 in court, children in federal immigration custody will be left 0:10:42.240 --> 0:10:46.400 with virtually no means of protection. 0:10:47.360 --> 0:10:51.560 As far as the asylum hearings themselves, are the standards 0:10:51.679 --> 0:10:55.239 what they should be, or are they imposing tougher standards 0:10:55.280 --> 0:10:56.080 for asylum? 0:10:56.880 --> 0:11:00.920 Increasingly it's harder to win asylum in the US United States. 0:11:01.400 --> 0:11:04.880 In recent days, the Board of Immigration Appeals has issued 0:11:04.960 --> 0:11:10.760 multiple opinions that rescind protections for categories of asylum seekers, 0:11:11.120 --> 0:11:14.560 such as asylum seekers who've been persecuted based on their 0:11:14.559 --> 0:11:19.000 membership in a particular family or based on their gender 0:11:19.040 --> 0:11:24.280 and nationality, for example, for survivors of domestic violence. In addition, 0:11:24.520 --> 0:11:29.280 there have been myriad changes on the immigration judge bench. 0:11:29.640 --> 0:11:33.120 Since January of twenty twenty five. It appears that more 0:11:33.160 --> 0:11:37.920 than one hundred immigration judges has been fired, and the 0:11:37.960 --> 0:11:43.680 Trump administration is trying to replace those seasoned immigration judges 0:11:43.800 --> 0:11:48.720 with judges from the military jag officers who Instead of 0:11:48.800 --> 0:11:52.119 being trained for months, which has historically been the standard 0:11:52.440 --> 0:11:56.760 for immigration judges, will receive two weeks of training before 0:11:57.240 --> 0:12:00.840 dealing with cases on a daily basis where people's lives 0:12:00.960 --> 0:12:04.800 are literally at risk. These are life or death decisions 0:12:04.840 --> 0:12:08.240 for many of the individuals who appear before immigration court. 0:12:08.800 --> 0:12:11.440 Laura, thanks so much for giving us a little bit 0:12:11.440 --> 0:12:15.439 of an inside look at iced attention. That's Professor Laura 0:12:15.480 --> 0:12:19.960 Mukherjee of Columbia Law School. Coming up next, the Supreme 0:12:20.040 --> 0:12:23.640 Court is taking on Trump's tariffs. This is bloomberg. 0:12:24.440 --> 0:12:28.240 If you took away tariffs, we could end up being 0:12:28.280 --> 0:12:29.480 a third world country. 0:12:30.080 --> 0:12:34.920 President Trump warned of dire consequences after the US Court 0:12:34.920 --> 0:12:37.880 of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that he had 0:12:37.920 --> 0:12:42.160 exceeded his authority by invoking an emergency law to hit 0:12:42.320 --> 0:12:47.600 nations across the globe with steep tariffs. The administration rushed 0:12:47.600 --> 0:12:51.079 to the Supreme Court to appeal, asking for a quick 0:12:51.160 --> 0:12:54.960 resolution concerning his signature economic policy. 0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:59.480 If that ruling everyone against US, I guess would have 0:12:59.480 --> 0:13:03.680 to give back hundreds of billions. We would have to 0:13:03.720 --> 0:13:08.360 give trillions and trillions of dollars back to countries that 0:13:08.400 --> 0:13:11.480 have been ripping us off for the last thirty five years, 0:13:12.080 --> 0:13:15.760 and I can't imagine it happening on a legal basis. 0:13:15.800 --> 0:13:19.280 They have no legal basis whatsoever. But on a common 0:13:19.320 --> 0:13:21.240 sense basis, it would destroy America. 0:13:21.960 --> 0:13:26.840 The Supreme Court accommodated Trump, as the conservative majority has 0:13:26.840 --> 0:13:31.199 in almost all of the emergency cases filed since January. 0:13:31.840 --> 0:13:35.640 It's set a lightning fast timetable by the Court standards 0:13:35.800 --> 0:13:40.040 with arguments in November. The appeal will test the conservative 0:13:40.160 --> 0:13:43.680 controlled court. It will be the first time during Trump's 0:13:43.720 --> 0:13:48.480 second term that the justices will actually hear arguments, get 0:13:48.559 --> 0:13:53.120 full briefings, and then weigh the underlying legal merits of 0:13:53.120 --> 0:13:57.560 an administration policy. Joining me is David Townshend, a partner 0:13:57.600 --> 0:14:01.360 in Dorsey and Whitney's international trade group. Dave, the Court 0:14:01.400 --> 0:14:06.280 has set an unusually aggressive schedule for the court. When 0:14:06.320 --> 0:14:07.720 do you think we'll get a decision? 0:14:08.280 --> 0:14:11.240 Hard to know. The Supreme Court, you can move at 0:14:11.280 --> 0:14:16.400 its own case. The schedule that was agreed to had 0:14:16.440 --> 0:14:21.160 been proposed by the United States and its appeal from 0:14:21.200 --> 0:14:25.000 the Federal Circuit decision, and was not opposed and actually 0:14:25.000 --> 0:14:28.440 supported by the plaintiffs in the case. Who are US 0:14:28.560 --> 0:14:32.760 importers and alleged that the tariffs are unlawful in terms 0:14:32.800 --> 0:14:37.360 of schedule. I suppose because they did establish expedited briefing. 0:14:38.080 --> 0:14:41.160 We have the hearing in November. If the Supreme Court 0:14:41.240 --> 0:14:43.880 wanted to move very quickly, it could issue something before 0:14:43.920 --> 0:14:46.520 the end of the year. It's also possible that this 0:14:46.560 --> 0:14:49.840 will go well into twenty twenty six before we actually 0:14:49.920 --> 0:14:50.640 have an opinion. 0:14:51.280 --> 0:14:55.200 The Federal Circuit ruled seven to four that AIPA, the 0:14:55.400 --> 0:15:00.760 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, doesn't authorize the these tariffs. 0:15:01.040 --> 0:15:05.040 Explain how the Federal Circuit came to that conclusion. 0:15:05.520 --> 0:15:09.080 Yeah, the Federal Circuit had said that the case is 0:15:09.160 --> 0:15:12.720 really a statutory interpretation case, at least in terms of 0:15:12.720 --> 0:15:15.120 the opinion issued by the Federal Circuit. Federal Circuit was 0:15:15.200 --> 0:15:19.440 looking at whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Actor AIPA 0:15:20.280 --> 0:15:24.560 authorizes the teriffs that the Trump administration has imposed on 0:15:24.680 --> 0:15:29.160 global sources, including for trade deficits as well as fentanyl 0:15:29.280 --> 0:15:34.560 related tariffs under a EPA, and the Federal Circuit said 0:15:34.800 --> 0:15:39.440 that it didn't think AEPA did authorize the teriffs that 0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:42.960 the Trump administration imposed and held them all awful. The 0:15:43.000 --> 0:15:45.280 Federal story it looked to a couple different sources to 0:15:45.360 --> 0:15:49.560 support its conclusion. There's quite a bit of discussion in 0:15:49.600 --> 0:15:54.280 the opinion about other areas of US trade law, areas 0:15:54.320 --> 0:15:59.360 where Congress had used words explicitly allowing the imposition or 0:15:59.400 --> 0:16:03.200 adjustment of tariffs or duties. When the Federal cirgut noted 0:16:03.240 --> 0:16:06.240 that AEPA doesn't use the word duties or tariffs in 0:16:06.320 --> 0:16:11.760 it it allows the regulation of importation into the United States. 0:16:12.120 --> 0:16:15.160 But in light of the absence of the words tariffs 0:16:15.240 --> 0:16:18.160 or duties, but all sergu found that they did not 0:16:18.280 --> 0:16:22.720 think Congress intended that AEPA allowed the imposition of global 0:16:22.720 --> 0:16:25.440 tariffs in the way the Trump administration had done. They 0:16:25.480 --> 0:16:29.520 also pointed out that as a constitutional matter, the power 0:16:29.680 --> 0:16:34.000 to impose duties under Article one resides with Congress, and 0:16:34.080 --> 0:16:38.240 they use that as a way to interpret AEPA as 0:16:38.320 --> 0:16:42.240 inconsistent with what the Trump administration had done. And they 0:16:42.280 --> 0:16:46.120 also noted that no prior president had used AIPA to 0:16:46.160 --> 0:16:47.120 impose tariffs. 0:16:47.960 --> 0:16:51.880 So it sounds like the majority sort of took the 0:16:51.960 --> 0:16:57.040 safe route, the conservative route in their analysis, although there 0:16:57.080 --> 0:16:58.400 were dissenting judges. 0:16:59.240 --> 0:17:03.000 Yeah, I mean, the federal circuit fractured seven to four. 0:17:03.080 --> 0:17:05.879 As you said, there were some of the judges on 0:17:05.920 --> 0:17:09.479 the Federal Circuit who said that ap but never allows tariffs. 0:17:09.600 --> 0:17:12.720 The majority opinion didn't quite go that far, and then 0:17:12.760 --> 0:17:16.720 the descent said that they do think AIPA is intended 0:17:16.720 --> 0:17:19.719 to allow the president to impose the kind of tarifs 0:17:19.760 --> 0:17:22.400 and adjust the tariffs in the way the Trump administration has. 0:17:23.240 --> 0:17:26.159 I mean, I think that the majority opinion really sticks 0:17:26.200 --> 0:17:29.359 to this as a statutory interpretation question at its core, 0:17:30.160 --> 0:17:34.520 rather than looking to the constitutional issues such as a 0:17:34.560 --> 0:17:36.840 non delegation doctrine that decide the case. 0:17:37.760 --> 0:17:43.119 What's the key argument that the Trump administration is making here? 0:17:43.600 --> 0:17:47.160 Does it focus on that provision in AEPA that says 0:17:47.400 --> 0:17:51.199 that the president can regulate the importation of property to 0:17:51.280 --> 0:17:52.560 address an emergency? 0:17:53.280 --> 0:17:56.960 Yeah? Right. The AYEPA text allows the president to take 0:17:57.000 --> 0:18:00.960 action to regulate the importation of items into the United States. 0:18:01.160 --> 0:18:05.920 And the Trump administration's core argument is that the power 0:18:05.960 --> 0:18:09.840 to regulate encompasses the power to impose taxes and duties 0:18:10.280 --> 0:18:13.119 such as they've done here. And as support for that, 0:18:13.440 --> 0:18:18.200 they note that the AEPA statute itself allows a variety 0:18:18.240 --> 0:18:22.080 of actions. It allows broad discretion to the president to 0:18:22.560 --> 0:18:27.320 prohibit importation of items into the United States. It allows 0:18:27.440 --> 0:18:32.199 the president to prohibit transactions with certain countries. There are 0:18:32.240 --> 0:18:36.439 certain persons in non US locations, and so if it 0:18:36.520 --> 0:18:41.159 allows the prohibition of transactions or the prohibition of imports, 0:18:41.240 --> 0:18:45.200 and also allows the regulation of imports, then, according to 0:18:45.200 --> 0:18:47.960 the Trump administration, follows that they can impose taxes or 0:18:48.040 --> 0:18:52.600 duties or something short of such prohibitions, including the terrorf 0:18:52.640 --> 0:18:57.080 regime that the Trump administration is currently administering under AEPA 0:18:57.160 --> 0:19:01.200 and using as a basis to negotiate trade agreements with 0:19:02.160 --> 0:19:02.880 other countries. 0:19:03.640 --> 0:19:07.040 Of course, no one knows how the Supreme Court will rule, 0:19:07.520 --> 0:19:11.120 but Bloomberg Intelligence has determined there is a sixty percent 0:19:11.320 --> 0:19:16.200 chance that the justices will agree that the reciprocal tariffs 0:19:16.560 --> 0:19:20.720 are illegal because the trade deficit isn't an emergency. But 0:19:20.840 --> 0:19:25.199 we'll find that the fentanyl tariffs are lawful and reinstate them. 0:19:25.760 --> 0:19:29.560 What do you think, Yeah, it's possible that the Supreme 0:19:29.560 --> 0:19:33.000 Court could do something like that, And certainly the ultimate 0:19:33.040 --> 0:19:36.880 outcome in terms of what the Supreme Court issues as 0:19:36.920 --> 0:19:40.080 any remedy should it find the IPA terrifs or unlawful, 0:19:40.160 --> 0:19:44.000 is wide open and difficult to predict. I think that 0:19:44.440 --> 0:19:48.040 the initial statutory question, does AEPA allow the imposition of 0:19:48.119 --> 0:19:51.720 tariffs is one question, and the Supreme Court could say 0:19:51.760 --> 0:19:56.879 something like, yes, we think APA can permit tariffs. And 0:19:56.920 --> 0:19:59.600 in fact, there's a lengthy discussion in the Federal Circuit 0:19:59.600 --> 0:20:03.280 opinion about a prior court case called Yoshida, where an 0:20:03.280 --> 0:20:06.040 appellate court had looked at exactly that issue under the 0:20:06.080 --> 0:20:09.400 APA predecessor statute called the Trading with the Enemy Act. 0:20:09.880 --> 0:20:12.280 So there's the question, does APO out tariffs? They could 0:20:12.280 --> 0:20:15.000 answer that yes, it does, but they could also say 0:20:15.040 --> 0:20:18.639 something to the effect of the executive orders issued here 0:20:18.680 --> 0:20:21.399 in some manner go beyond what we think AYIPA was 0:20:21.440 --> 0:20:25.959 intended to permit, especially if the Supreme Court thinks that's 0:20:26.160 --> 0:20:30.160 wide open into discretionary and how the administration is adjusting 0:20:30.200 --> 0:20:32.560 the tariffs. I'm not sure I would say that I 0:20:32.600 --> 0:20:34.959 think that outcome is likely, but it does show you 0:20:35.040 --> 0:20:38.520 that there are various steps of the analysis that the 0:20:38.520 --> 0:20:43.240 Supreme Court could use to ultimately reach the outcoming conclusion 0:20:43.320 --> 0:20:43.800 in the case. 0:20:44.320 --> 0:20:48.880 No present before has tried to use AIPA to impose tariffs, 0:20:48.880 --> 0:20:52.879 but has the Court addressed anything similar in the past. 0:20:53.520 --> 0:20:57.600 Yeah, the Supreme Court has looked at AIPA before. For example, 0:20:57.800 --> 0:21:02.879 there was a prior case involved the Iranian hostages that 0:21:02.920 --> 0:21:05.919 were taken during the Iranian Revolution. The United States citizens 0:21:05.960 --> 0:21:10.840 who were held hostage in Iran, and the President had 0:21:10.920 --> 0:21:15.359 used AIPA as a basis to negotiate a process for 0:21:15.400 --> 0:21:18.719 the hostages to be released, but also for the resolution 0:21:18.800 --> 0:21:22.560 of claims against Iran that arose out of the revolution, 0:21:22.760 --> 0:21:26.719 where's people's property had been seized or taken. And so 0:21:26.760 --> 0:21:29.600 the Supreme Court was forced in that case to look 0:21:29.640 --> 0:21:35.159 at whether AEPA allowed the president to essentially nullify court 0:21:35.240 --> 0:21:38.479 cases that were ongoing and property that had been sees 0:21:38.600 --> 0:21:41.879 pursued to those court cases. And in that case, the 0:21:41.880 --> 0:21:47.080 Supreme Court said that AIPA is a broad grant of power. 0:21:47.200 --> 0:21:50.399 It is designed to allow the president to negotiate and 0:21:50.440 --> 0:21:54.399 thus would allow the president to freeze or exterminate claims 0:21:54.400 --> 0:21:58.600 in US courts relating to the Iranian Revolution. I mean, 0:21:58.720 --> 0:22:01.320 you know, whether that has a bearing on the issue 0:22:01.320 --> 0:22:04.480 before the Court now relating to tariffs and the Trump 0:22:04.520 --> 0:22:07.919 administration executive order is sort of unclear. It's it's not 0:22:08.080 --> 0:22:12.240 hard to distinguish between the situation the Supreme Court looked 0:22:12.240 --> 0:22:14.639 at there and the one before the Court today. 0:22:15.240 --> 0:22:19.240 Could the Major Questions doctrine come into play because that 0:22:19.480 --> 0:22:23.600 stopped Biden from his student loan program. 0:22:24.440 --> 0:22:29.600 The Federal Circuit said, yes, that the Major Questions doctrine 0:22:29.680 --> 0:22:33.320 is relevant here. They noted the vast what they called 0:22:33.400 --> 0:22:37.720 economics and political significance of the case, and the Federal 0:22:37.720 --> 0:22:40.359 Circuit found that countfuls for a narrower view of what 0:22:40.440 --> 0:22:46.120 Congress intended in enacting AEPA, especially given that the President 0:22:46.160 --> 0:22:49.960 had never previously used AIPA as a basis for the 0:22:50.000 --> 0:22:55.080 imposition of tariff. Whether that is the path that the 0:22:55.119 --> 0:22:58.960 Supreme Court ultimately uses to resolve the case very difficult 0:22:58.960 --> 0:23:02.199 to predict. And at the Federal turget it did not 0:23:02.359 --> 0:23:06.639 think the Major Questions doctrine prohibited the executive orders and 0:23:06.680 --> 0:23:10.240 the imposition of tariffs here, both the reciprocal and the 0:23:10.560 --> 0:23:14.760 fentanyl related tariffs. So you know, you can dig both sides. 0:23:14.880 --> 0:23:18.880 Whether the Supreme Court will be persuaded that that doctrine 0:23:19.240 --> 0:23:21.200 applies is unclear. 0:23:22.400 --> 0:23:25.040 Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, I'll continue 0:23:25.080 --> 0:23:29.560 this conversation with Dave Townsend. How is all this uncertainty 0:23:29.600 --> 0:23:34.080 about the tariffs affecting companies? I'm June Grasso, and you're 0:23:34.119 --> 0:23:35.520 listening to Bloomberg. 0:23:38.440 --> 0:23:42.280 But some whack job put in a lawsuit. It went 0:23:42.320 --> 0:23:46.080 before a very liberal court, and the liberal court ruled 0:23:46.320 --> 0:23:51.160 who was eleven? They ruled seven to four, with one 0:23:51.200 --> 0:23:53.639 of the most liberal of them all voting in our favor. 0:23:53.720 --> 0:23:57.480 Because they're patriots. I think I give tremendous credit to 0:23:57.560 --> 0:23:59.920 that judge. And now it's going to the Supreme Court. 0:24:00.119 --> 0:24:04.440 We're going to be asking for early admittance. But some 0:24:04.800 --> 0:24:08.359 whack job put in a lawsuit. It went before a 0:24:08.600 --> 0:24:12.600 very liberal court, and the liberal court ruled was eleven. 0:24:13.440 --> 0:24:17.240 They've ruled seven to four, with one of the most 0:24:17.359 --> 0:24:20.480 liberal of them all voting in our favor because they're patriots. 0:24:20.760 --> 0:24:24.159 I think I give tremendous credit to that judge. And 0:24:24.200 --> 0:24:25.879 now it's going to the Supreme Court. 0:24:26.040 --> 0:24:28.480 The Supreme Court has agreed to take up an appeal 0:24:28.520 --> 0:24:32.639 from the Trump administration after lower courts found most of 0:24:32.680 --> 0:24:37.520 his tariffs illegal. The case involves two sets of import taxes, 0:24:37.840 --> 0:24:41.920 both of which Trump justified by declaring a national emergency. 0:24:42.440 --> 0:24:47.520 The challenged taxes include Trump's April second Liberation Day tariffs, 0:24:47.880 --> 0:24:51.320 which impose levies of ten to fifty percent on most 0:24:51.520 --> 0:24:55.479 US imports, depending on the country they come from, and 0:24:55.600 --> 0:25:00.399 also tariff's Trump imposed on Canada, Mexico, and China in 0:25:00.440 --> 0:25:04.679 the name of addressing fentanyl trafficking. The cases were brought 0:25:04.720 --> 0:25:08.439 by Democratic led states and a group of small businesses. 0:25:08.920 --> 0:25:12.639 The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled 0:25:12.640 --> 0:25:16.920 that Trump exceeded his authority by invoking an emergency law 0:25:17.080 --> 0:25:21.359 AIPA to hit nations across the globe with steep tariffs, 0:25:21.880 --> 0:25:25.600 upholding an earlier ruling by the Court of International Trade. 0:25:25.840 --> 0:25:29.760 I've been talking to Dave Townshend of Dorsey and Whitney. Dave, 0:25:29.840 --> 0:25:33.119 let's say that the Supreme Court rules against the tariffs 0:25:33.240 --> 0:25:36.479 across the board. I mean, what happens then the government 0:25:36.560 --> 0:25:38.520 has to refund money? How would it work? 0:25:39.080 --> 0:25:43.520 There are several different avenues of relief that could come 0:25:43.560 --> 0:25:46.760 out of the Supreme Court case here, and obviously we 0:25:46.760 --> 0:25:50.359 don't know until the Supreme Court actually rules on it. 0:25:50.520 --> 0:25:53.439 The Court of International Trade, the lower court at originally 0:25:53.760 --> 0:25:56.159 issued relief at the all importers that had said if 0:25:56.160 --> 0:25:59.120 it's illegal, as to the plaintiffs, that's the illegal as 0:25:59.119 --> 0:26:02.119 to all and if directed the government to cease collecting 0:26:02.680 --> 0:26:08.120 the reciprocal and sentinel related tariff under APA. The Federal 0:26:08.160 --> 0:26:11.040 Circuit stepped in and paused the effect of that part 0:26:11.119 --> 0:26:15.080 of this cit ruling, and in its August twenty ninth rolling, 0:26:15.160 --> 0:26:18.720 the Federal Circuit agreed largely with the Court of International 0:26:18.720 --> 0:26:20.840 Trade out of the outcome of the case, that is, 0:26:20.880 --> 0:26:24.600 the IPA terriffs were held unlawful, but it again stayed 0:26:24.640 --> 0:26:28.960 its decision and impact pending appeals at the Supreme Court. 0:26:29.920 --> 0:26:33.760 So that's just a long way of saying the original 0:26:33.800 --> 0:26:36.040 look at this from the Court of International Trades that 0:26:36.720 --> 0:26:39.760 the relief should apply to everybody, should apply to all importers. 0:26:40.119 --> 0:26:43.679 The Federal Circuit did note that this Court of International 0:26:43.680 --> 0:26:47.960 Trades failed to look at whether such a nationwide remedy 0:26:48.040 --> 0:26:51.440 was appropriate in light of a Supreme Court case recently issued. 0:26:52.119 --> 0:26:57.480 That case was dealing with birthright citizenship. So the Federal 0:26:57.480 --> 0:27:00.520 Circuit was saying to the Court of International Trade, you 0:27:00.560 --> 0:27:03.160 have to look at this intervening case to see whether 0:27:03.200 --> 0:27:07.440 it would be appropriate for a nationwide revenue. There are 0:27:08.119 --> 0:27:12.480 under trade other avenues for relief here for companies looking 0:27:12.520 --> 0:27:14.960 to recoup the revenue. One would be to bring their 0:27:14.960 --> 0:27:18.760 own court case. Another would be to pursue protests against 0:27:18.800 --> 0:27:22.240 the US Customs in due course as the import entries 0:27:22.720 --> 0:27:26.680 go through the normal process of review, liquidation, and finalization 0:27:26.840 --> 0:27:29.919