1
00:00:03,000 --> 00:00:08,200
Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg Law with June Grusso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:08,880 --> 00:00:12,640
Speaker 1: Donald Trump was arraigned on a New York Supreme Court

3
00:00:12,680 --> 00:00:17,079
Speaker 1: indictment for turn by a Manhattan grand jury on thirty

4
00:00:17,079 --> 00:00:21,720
Speaker 1: four felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree.

5
00:00:21,920 --> 00:00:24,920
Speaker 2: With a typical indictment, the next moves would be by

6
00:00:24,960 --> 00:00:28,440
Speaker 2: the district attorney and the defendant. But this was anything

7
00:00:28,520 --> 00:00:32,640
Speaker 2: but typical, and so Republican Representative Jim Jordan and the

8
00:00:32,680 --> 00:00:37,879
Speaker 2: House Judiciary Committee started their own investigation into the investigation

9
00:00:38,280 --> 00:00:41,839
Speaker 2: and subpoenaed Mark Pomerantz, a former prosecutor in the Manhattan

10
00:00:41,920 --> 00:00:46,160
Speaker 2: DA's office. In a bold move, DA Alvin Bragg sued

11
00:00:46,240 --> 00:00:49,560
Speaker 2: Jordan and his committee for interfering in his criminal case

12
00:00:49,600 --> 00:00:53,120
Speaker 2: against former President Donald Trump, calling it a brazen and

13
00:00:53,320 --> 00:00:58,200
Speaker 2: unconstitutional attack on a local prosecution. But Jordan told Fox

14
00:00:58,280 --> 00:01:01,360
Speaker 2: News that it was Bragg who interfering.

15
00:01:01,160 --> 00:01:04,600
Speaker 3: And now we have Alvin Bragg interfering and obstructing our

16
00:01:04,720 --> 00:01:09,319
Speaker 3: investigation into election interference. Election interference, and the most important

17
00:01:09,360 --> 00:01:11,600
Speaker 3: election we have, which is the election of who's going

18
00:01:11,640 --> 00:01:13,120
Speaker 3: to be President of the United States.

19
00:01:13,280 --> 00:01:16,400
Speaker 2: Joining me is Victoria Norris a professor at Georgetown Law

20
00:01:16,400 --> 00:01:19,760
Speaker 2: School and an expert on Congress and separation of powers.

21
00:01:20,080 --> 00:01:24,080
Speaker 2: Bragg says that Jordan lacks the authority under the Constitution

22
00:01:24,560 --> 00:01:26,679
Speaker 2: to oversee state criminal matters.

23
00:01:26,959 --> 00:01:30,759
Speaker 4: During the conduct of a criminal investigation, no one really

24
00:01:31,160 --> 00:01:34,160
Speaker 4: has the power to intervene in that unless you appeal

25
00:01:34,280 --> 00:01:37,600
Speaker 4: through that system. So Trump can appeal the validity of

26
00:01:37,640 --> 00:01:39,480
Speaker 4: the indictment. He has to take it up to the

27
00:01:39,520 --> 00:01:42,360
Speaker 4: New York courts, right, he can't go to Congress, which

28
00:01:42,400 --> 00:01:46,039
Speaker 4: is a political branch, because Congress can't try cases. They

29
00:01:46,040 --> 00:01:49,080
Speaker 4: can investigate for the purpose of legislating, and they have

30
00:01:49,280 --> 00:01:52,440
Speaker 4: very broad power. But Trump's own case, there's just been

31
00:01:52,560 --> 00:01:55,800
Speaker 4: a case on this, Mazars versus Trump. The Supreme Court

32
00:01:55,960 --> 00:02:00,000
Speaker 4: said that Congress cannot investigate for the purposes of proscution,

33
00:02:00,000 --> 00:02:03,040
Speaker 4: shooting or embarrassing someone or something like that, because they

34
00:02:03,080 --> 00:02:05,560
Speaker 4: don't have that power. And this came up during McCarthy.

35
00:02:05,600 --> 00:02:08,360
Speaker 4: The first case is on this when Senator McCarthy was

36
00:02:08,440 --> 00:02:12,040
Speaker 4: using the congressional process to essentially be saying people as

37
00:02:12,040 --> 00:02:14,679
Speaker 4: being members of the Communist Party, and the court set

38
00:02:14,680 --> 00:02:16,959
Speaker 4: some limits at that point. But basically there are a

39
00:02:17,000 --> 00:02:19,720
Speaker 4: couple of reasons if you read the fifty page complaint,

40
00:02:19,880 --> 00:02:22,400
Speaker 4: by the way, it's full of threats against South and

41
00:02:22,480 --> 00:02:25,359
Speaker 4: Bragg on social media and elsewhere, and it's really kind

42
00:02:25,360 --> 00:02:27,920
Speaker 4: of disturbing. And you know that's not how our justice

43
00:02:27,919 --> 00:02:30,959
Speaker 4: system is supposed to work, right. We don't use violent

44
00:02:31,160 --> 00:02:34,360
Speaker 4: we use the rules well. And the lawsuit is just

45
00:02:34,400 --> 00:02:37,080
Speaker 4: to try to stop the subpoena of mister Pomerant. Mister

46
00:02:37,120 --> 00:02:40,359
Speaker 4: Pomarants have worked for him, Mister palmerinence is known. This

47
00:02:40,480 --> 00:02:43,880
Speaker 4: is just an aside as a tremendously skilled prosecutor in

48
00:02:43,960 --> 00:02:45,880
Speaker 4: New York. He was known that even when I, you know,

49
00:02:45,919 --> 00:02:48,320
Speaker 4: twenty five years ago, was a clerk in the Southern

50
00:02:48,320 --> 00:02:51,320
Speaker 4: District of New York. And so the food is really

51
00:02:51,400 --> 00:02:53,760
Speaker 4: just to stop the subpoena. Now Trump did the same thing.

52
00:02:53,919 --> 00:02:56,480
Speaker 4: So he didn't want to be subpoenaed by Congress, and

53
00:02:56,560 --> 00:02:59,560
Speaker 4: so he sued. And what happened was that was litigated

54
00:02:59,560 --> 00:03:01,640
Speaker 4: in decent run up to the DC Circuit, run up

55
00:03:01,639 --> 00:03:03,560
Speaker 4: to the Supreme Court, and they decided it in Mazar

56
00:03:03,919 --> 00:03:06,120
Speaker 4: and they said that the court had not applied the

57
00:03:06,120 --> 00:03:09,440
Speaker 4: proper standard because when it's a president, he gets more leeway,

58
00:03:09,560 --> 00:03:11,480
Speaker 4: all right. They've never held that before because no one

59
00:03:11,520 --> 00:03:14,920
Speaker 4: had ever done that before. Now Bragg is using that

60
00:03:14,960 --> 00:03:18,280
Speaker 4: same case to say, look, Congress, you're viling those rules.

61
00:03:18,360 --> 00:03:21,799
Speaker 4: You don't have a proper legislative purpose. And Jordan is

62
00:03:21,840 --> 00:03:24,520
Speaker 4: saying he does have a proper legislative purpose. But this

63
00:03:24,639 --> 00:03:28,080
Speaker 4: suit will now be about whether the subpoena goes forward

64
00:03:28,200 --> 00:03:31,600
Speaker 4: and is enforced. All that Bragg is asking is for

65
00:03:31,639 --> 00:03:35,640
Speaker 4: the subpoena to be stayed during the pendency of his

66
00:03:35,800 --> 00:03:39,920
Speaker 4: criminal prosecution of Trump. So have you ever.

67
00:03:39,720 --> 00:03:43,360
Speaker 2: Heard of an instance before where a congressman tried to

68
00:03:43,440 --> 00:03:47,320
Speaker 2: interfere in a local criminal case.

69
00:03:48,240 --> 00:03:50,640
Speaker 4: I don't know of any. I think they'd raised their argument.

70
00:03:50,720 --> 00:03:52,760
Speaker 4: So let's let me give a recent example of this.

71
00:03:52,920 --> 00:03:55,680
Speaker 4: So they're all lawyers, right, I mean, these members are lawyers.

72
00:03:55,720 --> 00:03:57,160
Speaker 4: And one of the things you first know is that

73
00:03:57,200 --> 00:03:59,720
Speaker 4: a defendant gets the most right but any person in

74
00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:01,800
Speaker 4: court because they're about to be sent to jail. And

75
00:04:01,840 --> 00:04:04,400
Speaker 4: the first thing you can't have it be politicized. If

76
00:04:04,400 --> 00:04:07,280
Speaker 4: you politicize the criminal trial, you end up having a

77
00:04:07,280 --> 00:04:09,160
Speaker 4: banana republic. So this is one of these things that

78
00:04:09,320 --> 00:04:12,320
Speaker 4: is just drummed into you when you learn the criminal law.

79
00:04:12,480 --> 00:04:16,040
Speaker 4: In criminal procedure, which is the constitutional part of criminal law. Recently,

80
00:04:16,080 --> 00:04:19,520
Speaker 4: there was talk of the Senator from South Carolina having

81
00:04:19,560 --> 00:04:22,719
Speaker 4: made a phone call regarding the election to an election

82
00:04:22,760 --> 00:04:26,039
Speaker 4: official in Georgia. And there is a case proceeding about

83
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:30,599
Speaker 4: claims supposedly asking officials in Georgia to change the vote

84
00:04:30,600 --> 00:04:34,680
Speaker 4: counts for the presidential election, and the Senator didn't, you know,

85
00:04:35,640 --> 00:04:38,520
Speaker 4: there was no investigation. Even when he was chair of

86
00:04:38,560 --> 00:04:42,360
Speaker 4: the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Graham didn't hold an investigation.

87
00:04:42,839 --> 00:04:45,240
Speaker 4: He knows he can't do that. He did try to

88
00:04:45,240 --> 00:04:48,440
Speaker 4: stop his own testimony by arguing it was privileged. He

89
00:04:48,520 --> 00:04:51,200
Speaker 4: made the arguments in the case. You see that this

90
00:04:51,279 --> 00:04:53,560
Speaker 4: is like collateral to the case. It's from a whole

91
00:04:53,600 --> 00:04:55,440
Speaker 4: other body that's not supposed to intervene.

92
00:04:56,200 --> 00:04:59,640
Speaker 2: Does it make any difference that Pomerant is no longer

93
00:04:59,680 --> 00:05:02,840
Speaker 2: in Bragg's office and had nothing to do as far

94
00:05:02,880 --> 00:05:05,159
Speaker 2: as we know with this with the current indictment.

95
00:05:06,080 --> 00:05:09,000
Speaker 4: No, for a couple reasons. He's written a book about

96
00:05:09,000 --> 00:05:11,359
Speaker 4: his participation. I have not read the book. We know

97
00:05:11,440 --> 00:05:14,080
Speaker 4: he participated in the thought processes for things that were

98
00:05:14,080 --> 00:05:16,560
Speaker 4: presented to the grand jury and grand juries. Your secret

99
00:05:16,880 --> 00:05:19,680
Speaker 4: they cannot ask him anything about that on the record, one,

100
00:05:19,839 --> 00:05:23,159
Speaker 4: because that's just the rule. Two, this comes down to

101
00:05:23,200 --> 00:05:26,800
Speaker 4: actually Donald Trump's due process right Oddly, this is why

102
00:05:26,800 --> 00:05:29,000
Speaker 4: you don't want to open up the criminal prosecution to

103
00:05:29,080 --> 00:05:32,240
Speaker 4: some third party asking about what's going on inside it.

104
00:05:32,360 --> 00:05:34,880
Speaker 4: That you can appeal within that case. But you don't

105
00:05:34,920 --> 00:05:39,000
Speaker 4: want like the Attorney General of Kansas or the legislature

106
00:05:39,040 --> 00:05:42,560
Speaker 4: of Alabama to intervene in any pending case during the

107
00:05:42,600 --> 00:05:45,560
Speaker 4: pendency of the case, because it will interfere with the

108
00:05:45,640 --> 00:05:49,279
Speaker 4: defendant's due process rights, because it will try the case

109
00:05:49,320 --> 00:05:51,960
Speaker 4: in another court, or in the press, or in a

110
00:05:52,000 --> 00:05:54,800
Speaker 4: political body like the Congress. And so it's one of

111
00:05:54,839 --> 00:05:57,159
Speaker 4: these things that's so basic to a lawyer. It's like,

112
00:05:57,320 --> 00:05:59,320
Speaker 4: you've got to be kidding me. You know, this is

113
00:05:59,360 --> 00:06:02,880
Speaker 4: because of political party wants to use the indictment for

114
00:06:03,000 --> 00:06:06,920
Speaker 4: its own political advantage, including raising money, and they've already

115
00:06:06,920 --> 00:06:10,440
Speaker 4: done that. But it's also because I think Bragg wants

116
00:06:10,480 --> 00:06:13,320
Speaker 4: people to know it's a fifty page You know, you

117
00:06:13,320 --> 00:06:16,280
Speaker 4: could write a paragraph complaint saying I want to enjoin

118
00:06:16,480 --> 00:06:19,640
Speaker 4: the subpoena because Congress doesn't have a proper purpose end

119
00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:24,080
Speaker 4: of case. But he added incredible detail in the complaint,

120
00:06:24,279 --> 00:06:27,120
Speaker 4: and there are pictures on social media that appear to

121
00:06:27,200 --> 00:06:31,279
Speaker 4: threaten mister Bragg with a baseball bat by the former president.

122
00:06:31,680 --> 00:06:35,680
Speaker 4: There are things like slurs, racial slurs that have been used,

123
00:06:36,040 --> 00:06:39,120
Speaker 4: and a lot of violent threats against the DA's office

124
00:06:39,160 --> 00:06:41,839
Speaker 4: in New York. So I think he was wise to

125
00:06:41,839 --> 00:06:43,640
Speaker 4: do this for a number of reasons, which is, this

126
00:06:43,680 --> 00:06:46,040
Speaker 4: is a threat to the justice system and the orderly

127
00:06:46,240 --> 00:06:50,120
Speaker 4: progress of justice. Ultimately, because it's the defendant's due process right,

128
00:06:50,360 --> 00:06:53,080
Speaker 4: I think that no court's going to say you can

129
00:06:53,120 --> 00:06:57,159
Speaker 4: have this testimony now during the pendency of the case.

130
00:06:57,160 --> 00:07:00,200
Speaker 4: Because there's an easy remedy for Jim Jordan. He can

131
00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:03,960
Speaker 4: get this Promeranci's testimony after the case is done.

132
00:07:04,240 --> 00:07:08,120
Speaker 2: Jordan tweeted, first they indict a president for no crime,

133
00:07:08,600 --> 00:07:11,680
Speaker 2: then they sue a block congressional oversight. When we ask

134
00:07:11,840 --> 00:07:14,920
Speaker 2: questions about the federal funds, they say they use to

135
00:07:15,000 --> 00:07:18,560
Speaker 2: do it, and apparently the District Attorney's office did respond

136
00:07:18,600 --> 00:07:22,520
Speaker 2: to them about where they used the five thousand dollars

137
00:07:22,520 --> 00:07:26,440
Speaker 2: in federal funds in the court battle with Trump over

138
00:07:26,520 --> 00:07:30,080
Speaker 2: access to his tax returns. So is that as far

139
00:07:30,360 --> 00:07:34,920
Speaker 2: as Jordan can go to talk about federal funds being used.

140
00:07:35,920 --> 00:07:37,520
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, as far as I know, I don't

141
00:07:37,560 --> 00:07:40,480
Speaker 4: know any more facts than what you just repeeded. Every

142
00:07:40,600 --> 00:07:44,000
Speaker 4: state gets money from the federal government for police and

143
00:07:44,040 --> 00:07:46,560
Speaker 4: prosecutors to aid in that effort, because of course criminals

144
00:07:46,600 --> 00:07:49,000
Speaker 4: cross state line, all right, So there are backstop The

145
00:07:49,000 --> 00:07:51,119
Speaker 4: state spends most of the money, you know, the vast

146
00:07:51,120 --> 00:07:53,080
Speaker 4: majority of the money is the taxes you pay for

147
00:07:53,160 --> 00:07:55,840
Speaker 4: your state. That's the first place they get criminal justice.

148
00:07:55,920 --> 00:08:00,040
Speaker 4: But there is backstop money from the federal government, and

149
00:08:00,120 --> 00:08:03,720
Speaker 4: that is the claimed the legislative purpose of the investigation.

150
00:08:03,800 --> 00:08:07,200
Speaker 4: You have to have a valid legislative purpose after this

151
00:08:07,280 --> 00:08:11,000
Speaker 4: Trump versus Massar's case. And if the purpose is simply

152
00:08:11,520 --> 00:08:15,480
Speaker 4: to humiliate or to intimidate, it can't go forward. If

153
00:08:15,520 --> 00:08:18,080
Speaker 4: the purpose is to prosecute, it can't go forward. No

154
00:08:18,080 --> 00:08:20,880
Speaker 4: one thinks Congress can prosecute people. No one. The way

155
00:08:20,920 --> 00:08:23,080
Speaker 4: the Constitution says this is it says you can't have

156
00:08:23,120 --> 00:08:24,680
Speaker 4: a bill of a changer. No one knows what that

157
00:08:24,760 --> 00:08:28,920
Speaker 4: means ancient language, but in Mary Old England, the parliament

158
00:08:29,000 --> 00:08:31,680
Speaker 4: used to send people to the tower because King Henry

159
00:08:31,720 --> 00:08:34,679
Speaker 4: the fifth would say, go to the tower and We

160
00:08:34,800 --> 00:08:37,840
Speaker 4: learned when we had our revolutions that we didn't really

161
00:08:37,920 --> 00:08:43,920
Speaker 4: want parliaments or legislatures to criminalize people because there you

162
00:08:43,960 --> 00:08:46,960
Speaker 4: would always democracy couldn't survive. This is a much bigger

163
00:08:47,000 --> 00:08:50,760
Speaker 4: principle because if the legislature can put people in jail,

164
00:08:51,400 --> 00:08:54,600
Speaker 4: then they put their political enemies in jail. This is

165
00:08:54,640 --> 00:08:58,800
Speaker 4: what happens in Banana Republic. Okay. Now the Trump people

166
00:08:58,800 --> 00:09:01,240
Speaker 4: are saying, well, that's what happening in this case, but

167
00:09:01,280 --> 00:09:04,920
Speaker 4: there's no evidence that that's true. I mean, we don't know.

168
00:09:04,960 --> 00:09:08,400
Speaker 4: Maybe they'll they'll find evidence, but let's see what happens

169
00:09:08,400 --> 00:09:12,240
Speaker 4: when he appeals inside the New York court. That's his

170
00:09:12,760 --> 00:09:16,880
Speaker 4: proper avenue of Redress. Congress shouldn't be involved in this,

171
00:09:17,000 --> 00:09:19,280
Speaker 4: in my view, and I don't think judges will think

172
00:09:19,320 --> 00:09:20,520
Speaker 4: that they should be involved either.

173
00:09:21,000 --> 00:09:24,960
Speaker 2: So they went before a judge who's a Trump appoint d,

174
00:09:25,520 --> 00:09:29,200
Speaker 2: and she denied Bragg's request for a temporary restraining order

175
00:09:29,320 --> 00:09:32,960
Speaker 2: prohibiting enforcement of a subpoena to palmerants instead of hearing

176
00:09:33,000 --> 00:09:36,600
Speaker 2: for April nineteen. Do you think her refusal of the

177
00:09:36,679 --> 00:09:40,199
Speaker 2: temporary restraining order forecast what she's going to do?

178
00:09:40,840 --> 00:09:43,240
Speaker 4: No, no judge would want to rule on something like

179
00:09:43,280 --> 00:09:45,880
Speaker 4: that very quickly. Just involves a former occupant of the

180
00:09:45,880 --> 00:09:48,439
Speaker 4: White House. No judge, whether they're federal court or a

181
00:09:48,440 --> 00:09:52,120
Speaker 4: state court or whatever, wants to be hurried and determining

182
00:09:52,360 --> 00:09:55,000
Speaker 4: the precise rules here because they also know that the

183
00:09:55,040 --> 00:09:58,280
Speaker 4: Congress will push back, there'll be appeals, et cetera. Judges

184
00:09:58,280 --> 00:10:00,560
Speaker 4: don't like to be embarrassed they get the law wrong.

185
00:10:00,679 --> 00:10:02,920
Speaker 4: Remember that with a woman in Florida who got everything

186
00:10:02,920 --> 00:10:06,240
Speaker 4: all wrong with aspective documents in tomor A Lago. Judges

187
00:10:06,280 --> 00:10:08,959
Speaker 4: really don't like them because they get embarrassed and pressed

188
00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:11,000
Speaker 4: from then they're embarrassed and from their colleagues and its

189
00:10:11,080 --> 00:10:13,240
Speaker 4: elite opinion that they care about. So I don't think

190
00:10:13,280 --> 00:10:15,600
Speaker 4: it says much of anything. You wouldn't decide this case

191
00:10:15,640 --> 00:10:19,960
Speaker 4: instantaneously because it's unusual people don't do this. As I said,

192
00:10:20,280 --> 00:10:23,600
Speaker 4: the Alabama legislature is not going to intervene in Alabama

193
00:10:23,679 --> 00:10:26,920
Speaker 4: prosecutions and not going to intervene in another jurisdiction. You know,

194
00:10:27,080 --> 00:10:29,559
Speaker 4: miss is the beast prosecutions. I mean, this is a

195
00:10:29,640 --> 00:10:32,560
Speaker 4: core power of a state, and most of criminal law

196
00:10:32,679 --> 00:10:35,280
Speaker 4: resides in the state. The number of people prosecuted by

197
00:10:35,360 --> 00:10:37,439
Speaker 4: it says it's very minor compared to the number of

198
00:10:37,480 --> 00:10:40,040
Speaker 4: people prosecuted by the States, and so this is one

199
00:10:40,080 --> 00:10:42,880
Speaker 4: of the core principles. And this court, which is a

200
00:10:42,920 --> 00:10:46,079
Speaker 4: conservative court, believes this. They don't think you should be

201
00:10:46,080 --> 00:10:49,840
Speaker 4: able to interfere in state criminal law at a general level.

202
00:10:50,280 --> 00:10:52,960
Speaker 4: And most judges would say, of course, you can't interfere

203
00:10:53,120 --> 00:10:57,120
Speaker 4: in this particular prosecution if you are not the defendant.

204
00:10:57,280 --> 00:10:59,200
Speaker 4: If Trump has arguments to make, you can make them

205
00:10:59,200 --> 00:11:01,600
Speaker 4: all in the case. Right, He doesn't need Jim Jordan,

206
00:11:01,800 --> 00:11:04,720
Speaker 4: a politician, to do it for him. Due process requires

207
00:11:04,760 --> 00:11:07,280
Speaker 4: Trump to make those arguments in his case, and it

208
00:11:07,360 --> 00:11:09,320
Speaker 4: might be thrown off for all we know. We don't

209
00:11:09,360 --> 00:11:11,959
Speaker 4: know quite what the argument is on behalf of Bragg

210
00:11:12,000 --> 00:11:15,079
Speaker 4: because there's a missing piece. So that will be litigated

211
00:11:15,320 --> 00:11:17,680
Speaker 4: in the New York courts as to whether this indictment

212
00:11:17,760 --> 00:11:20,200
Speaker 4: is good on the law. So if you get a

213
00:11:20,240 --> 00:11:23,440
Speaker 4: political person to start making these judgments, it will bias

214
00:11:23,679 --> 00:11:25,520
Speaker 4: that decision one way or another.

215
00:11:26,440 --> 00:11:29,720
Speaker 2: The Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee are holding a

216
00:11:29,760 --> 00:11:33,600
Speaker 2: field hearing in Manhattan to examine how Bragg's quote pro

217
00:11:33,720 --> 00:11:36,920
Speaker 2: crime anti victim policies have led to an increase in

218
00:11:37,040 --> 00:11:40,520
Speaker 2: violent crime and a dangerous community for New York City residents.

219
00:11:40,840 --> 00:11:42,120
Speaker 2: Is that within their purview.

220
00:11:42,600 --> 00:11:45,400
Speaker 4: The House Judiciary Committee can have a field hearing anywhere,

221
00:11:45,640 --> 00:11:47,719
Speaker 4: so can the Senate Judiciary Committee. They want to have

222
00:11:47,760 --> 00:11:51,120
Speaker 4: a field hearing, and they can ask about local crime

223
00:11:51,240 --> 00:11:53,680
Speaker 4: that they want. Now, it so happens that their data

224
00:11:53,760 --> 00:11:56,079
Speaker 4: is wrong. According to Alvin Bragg, I know I has

225
00:11:56,080 --> 00:11:59,360
Speaker 4: gone down. Bragg put that in his document as well,

226
00:12:00,280 --> 00:12:02,160
Speaker 4: is that they should probably go to Miami if they're

227
00:12:02,160 --> 00:12:03,280
Speaker 4: looking for high crime rates.

228
00:12:03,440 --> 00:12:07,520
Speaker 2: For Columbus. A Brag spokesman said that murder rates in

229
00:12:07,559 --> 00:12:10,840
Speaker 2: New York City are three times lower than the murder

230
00:12:10,920 --> 00:12:15,280
Speaker 2: rate in Columbus, Ohio. Jordan of course, being from Ohio.

231
00:12:15,760 --> 00:12:19,000
Speaker 4: Yeah, so you know, they can have a hearing, and

232
00:12:19,120 --> 00:12:22,719
Speaker 4: hearings are often about legislation, and sometimes the legislation is controversial,

233
00:12:22,760 --> 00:12:25,240
Speaker 4: and crime is always an issue that he gets people

234
00:12:25,360 --> 00:12:28,880
Speaker 4: very worked up. Now. I have worked on various crime issues,

235
00:12:29,120 --> 00:12:32,480
Speaker 4: and I am here to tell you that people manipulate

236
00:12:32,520 --> 00:12:35,880
Speaker 4: the data. And you know, people have to judge whether

237
00:12:35,920 --> 00:12:39,000
Speaker 4: that hearing's really about New York or is it about

238
00:12:39,040 --> 00:12:42,600
Speaker 4: Alvin Bragg. And they have the power to go to

239
00:12:42,640 --> 00:12:45,559
Speaker 4: any city. Say, you know, San Francisco apportantly has a

240
00:12:45,559 --> 00:12:48,920
Speaker 4: homeless problem. Okay, San Francisco, let's invest in it. They

241
00:12:48,960 --> 00:12:52,280
Speaker 4: can do that because legitimately they could legislate on homelessness.

242
00:12:52,400 --> 00:12:55,280
Speaker 4: They legislate on crime all the time, in the sense

243
00:12:55,320 --> 00:12:59,120
Speaker 4: of new federal crimes or filling in gaps or the

244
00:12:59,120 --> 00:13:02,480
Speaker 4: way we count crimes is very difficult to complex. You

245
00:13:02,520 --> 00:13:05,840
Speaker 4: know that is actually a proper hearing. I would defend

246
00:13:05,880 --> 00:13:07,600
Speaker 4: them from that, even though I would think, you know,

247
00:13:07,679 --> 00:13:09,840
Speaker 4: in my mind, I bet the pretext here is to

248
00:13:09,840 --> 00:13:11,400
Speaker 4: say something bad about Alvin Brigg.

249
00:13:11,480 --> 00:13:13,440
Speaker 2: I don't think they're making too much of a pretext

250
00:13:13,440 --> 00:13:16,240
Speaker 2: of it. They say it in their announcement of the hearing,

251
00:13:16,760 --> 00:13:19,439
Speaker 2: and Jordan did go to law school. They know.

252
00:13:19,679 --> 00:13:22,360
Speaker 4: See. That's what makes it worse for me, because they

253
00:13:22,360 --> 00:13:25,240
Speaker 4: do know. Because this is not rocket science.

254
00:13:25,360 --> 00:13:29,439
Speaker 2: Thanks so much, Victoria. That's Professor Victoria Nors of Georgetown

255
00:13:29,520 --> 00:13:34,800
Speaker 2: Law School. Clarence Thomas's Supreme Court nomination hearings were among

256
00:13:34,840 --> 00:13:39,840
Speaker 2: the most controversial, as he denied accusations of sexually harassing

257
00:13:39,880 --> 00:13:40,679
Speaker 2: Anita Hill.

258
00:13:41,679 --> 00:13:45,280
Speaker 1: I have been racking my brains and eating my insides

259
00:13:45,320 --> 00:13:49,199
Speaker 1: out trying to think of what I could have said

260
00:13:49,360 --> 00:13:52,760
Speaker 1: or done to Anita Hill to lead her to allege

261
00:13:53,640 --> 00:13:56,240
Speaker 1: that I was interested in her in more than a

262
00:13:56,280 --> 00:13:57,120
Speaker 1: professional way.

263
00:13:57,760 --> 00:14:00,760
Speaker 2: More than thirty years later, his ethics came to question

264
00:14:00,880 --> 00:14:04,000
Speaker 2: again when he declined to recuse himself from a case

265
00:14:04,320 --> 00:14:08,559
Speaker 2: involving the release of White House records concerning January sixth,

266
00:14:09,000 --> 00:14:11,760
Speaker 2: even after it was learned that his wife, right wing

267
00:14:11,840 --> 00:14:16,040
Speaker 2: activist Ginny Thomas, lobbied former President Donald Trump's chief of

268
00:14:16,120 --> 00:14:19,040
Speaker 2: staff to work to overturn the results of the twenty

269
00:14:19,120 --> 00:14:22,400
Speaker 2: twenty election. And now Thomas is again in the spotlight

270
00:14:22,800 --> 00:14:26,360
Speaker 2: after a pro public A report which detailed the Thomas's

271
00:14:26,520 --> 00:14:30,720
Speaker 2: lavish trips around the world, including private yachts and jets

272
00:14:30,720 --> 00:14:35,400
Speaker 2: and luxury accommodations for more than two decades, trips funded

273
00:14:35,440 --> 00:14:40,320
Speaker 2: by billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crowe, including a twenty nineteen

274
00:14:40,560 --> 00:14:44,440
Speaker 2: island hopping vacation with costs that could have exceeded half

275
00:14:44,480 --> 00:14:48,840
Speaker 2: a million dollars, along with travel to California's Bohemian Grove

276
00:14:48,920 --> 00:14:53,120
Speaker 2: Retreat for Men and Crow's East Texas ranch. Thomas never

277
00:14:53,200 --> 00:14:58,040
Speaker 2: reported the gifts. Thomas defended himself against allegations that he

278
00:14:58,120 --> 00:15:01,680
Speaker 2: may have violated the law by noth reporting those vacations,

279
00:15:02,360 --> 00:15:05,440
Speaker 2: saying he'd been told he didn't have to. In a

280
00:15:05,480 --> 00:15:10,040
Speaker 2: one paragraph statement, Thomas said he'd sought guidance from colleagues

281
00:15:10,120 --> 00:15:13,360
Speaker 2: and others in the judiciary early in his tenure as

282
00:15:13,360 --> 00:15:16,920
Speaker 2: a Supreme Court justice and was quote advised that this

283
00:15:17,000 --> 00:15:21,480
Speaker 2: sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends who did

284
00:15:21,480 --> 00:15:25,600
Speaker 2: not have business before the court was not reportable. Joining

285
00:15:25,600 --> 00:15:29,720
Speaker 2: me is Stephen Lubett, a judicial ethics expert at Northwestern

286
00:15:29,800 --> 00:15:34,840
Speaker 2: University's Pritzker School of Law. So the justices file annual

287
00:15:34,920 --> 00:15:40,160
Speaker 2: financial disclosures, and Thomas did disclose a twenty fifteen gift

288
00:15:40,200 --> 00:15:45,000
Speaker 2: from Crow, a bronze bust of abolitionist Frederick Douglass, valued

289
00:15:45,040 --> 00:15:48,400
Speaker 2: at six four hundred and eighty four dollars, And in

290
00:15:48,440 --> 00:15:51,840
Speaker 2: twenty nineteen he disclosed five trips that were paid for

291
00:15:52,000 --> 00:15:55,760
Speaker 2: by someone else, a series of teaching and speaking engagements

292
00:15:55,760 --> 00:15:59,240
Speaker 2: at US law schools and colleges, but not that nine

293
00:15:59,360 --> 00:16:03,760
Speaker 2: day vacation to Indonesia. Does this failure to report the

294
00:16:03,880 --> 00:16:06,240
Speaker 2: travel violate federal law?

295
00:16:08,480 --> 00:16:11,720
Speaker 5: Yeah. The failure to report certain gifts is contrary to

296
00:16:11,760 --> 00:16:14,840
Speaker 5: the Ethics and Government Act, and its contrary to the

297
00:16:14,920 --> 00:16:19,040
Speaker 5: regulations adopted by the Judicial Conference following the Ethics and

298
00:16:19,120 --> 00:16:22,360
Speaker 5: Government Act. It's not a crime, there's no particular penalty

299
00:16:22,440 --> 00:16:24,640
Speaker 5: for it, but it is contrary to the law.

300
00:16:25,440 --> 00:16:25,600
Speaker 4: I know.

301
00:16:25,720 --> 00:16:28,400
Speaker 2: The Supreme Court justices aren't subject to the same ethics

302
00:16:28,400 --> 00:16:33,440
Speaker 2: codes that federal judges are. Are Supreme Court justices subject

303
00:16:33,480 --> 00:16:34,080
Speaker 2: to that law?

304
00:16:34,920 --> 00:16:38,640
Speaker 5: Well? Gift reporting is covered by the Ethics and Government Act,

305
00:16:38,680 --> 00:16:41,840
Speaker 5: which is a statute passed by Congress, signed by the President,

306
00:16:42,360 --> 00:16:47,880
Speaker 5: and specifically applicable to the US Supreme Court. Two Chief Justices,

307
00:16:48,480 --> 00:16:54,200
Speaker 5: Justice John Roberts and before him, Chief Justice Renquists both

308
00:16:54,240 --> 00:16:57,720
Speaker 5: said that they would not concede that Congress had the

309
00:16:57,800 --> 00:17:01,680
Speaker 5: right to impose these vironments on the Supreme Court, but

310
00:17:01,760 --> 00:17:03,280
Speaker 5: they would follow them anyhow.

311
00:17:04,040 --> 00:17:07,440
Speaker 2: Justice Thomas said he'd sought guidance from colleagues and others

312
00:17:07,520 --> 00:17:10,399
Speaker 2: in the judiciary early in his tenure, and he was

313
00:17:10,440 --> 00:17:15,120
Speaker 2: advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal

314
00:17:15,240 --> 00:17:18,480
Speaker 2: friends who did not have business before the Court was

315
00:17:18,560 --> 00:17:22,400
Speaker 2: not reportable. Is that in fact true? Is it not reportable?

316
00:17:22,560 --> 00:17:23,840
Speaker 2: What's the exception here?

317
00:17:24,640 --> 00:17:27,600
Speaker 5: Well, Justice Thomas is putting an awful lot of weight

318
00:17:27,840 --> 00:17:33,119
Speaker 5: on the words this sort of hospitality. When he joined

319
00:17:33,119 --> 00:17:37,040
Speaker 5: the Court in nineteen ninety one. I don't think anybody

320
00:17:37,080 --> 00:17:41,199
Speaker 5: imagined that a Justice of the Supreme Court would be

321
00:17:41,640 --> 00:17:44,800
Speaker 5: shuttled all around the country on a private jet by

322
00:17:44,840 --> 00:17:50,040
Speaker 5: a wealthy political donor. So I have to question whether,

323
00:17:50,119 --> 00:17:54,080
Speaker 5: whatever it is, anybody told him it's actlutely applicable to

324
00:17:54,200 --> 00:17:56,879
Speaker 5: the gifts that he has ultimately accepted.

325
00:17:57,600 --> 00:18:00,399
Speaker 2: All the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have called

326
00:18:00,400 --> 00:18:05,280
Speaker 2: on Chief Justice John Roberts to investigate these trips. Do

327
00:18:05,280 --> 00:18:07,800
Speaker 2: you think that the Chief Justice would actually do that?

328
00:18:08,600 --> 00:18:12,600
Speaker 5: I will say that the Court has been, I think

329
00:18:12,720 --> 00:18:19,000
Speaker 5: unfortunately protective of the prerogatives of the individual members. For example,

330
00:18:19,000 --> 00:18:24,040
Speaker 5: they follow a procedure for disqualification for recusal in which

331
00:18:24,080 --> 00:18:28,520
Speaker 5: each justice decides it individually for themselves, with no review

332
00:18:28,560 --> 00:18:32,000
Speaker 5: by the whole Court. I think that's unfortunate. I think

333
00:18:32,040 --> 00:18:35,640
Speaker 5: the Court should act as a court on ethics issues

334
00:18:35,960 --> 00:18:40,560
Speaker 5: and not leave things up to individuals. The Constitution establishes

335
00:18:41,080 --> 00:18:45,639
Speaker 5: one Supreme Court, not nine Supreme Justices.

336
00:18:46,240 --> 00:18:48,439
Speaker 2: Can you tell us about some of the legislation that

337
00:18:48,520 --> 00:18:53,359
Speaker 2: has been pending in Congress to impose an ethics code

338
00:18:53,359 --> 00:18:54,320
Speaker 2: on the Supreme Court.

339
00:18:55,840 --> 00:19:01,280
Speaker 5: The legislation pending in Congress would not impose any particular

340
00:19:01,320 --> 00:19:04,720
Speaker 5: ethics code on the Supreme Court. It would require the

341
00:19:04,760 --> 00:19:08,840
Speaker 5: Supreme Court to adoptor code of their own devising. I

342
00:19:08,880 --> 00:19:13,040
Speaker 5: think that's a very minimal request and quite an appropriate one.

343
00:19:13,320 --> 00:19:16,719
Speaker 5: If the Justices think there are special provisions that need

344
00:19:16,800 --> 00:19:19,640
Speaker 5: to be included or omitted from the code, they could

345
00:19:19,720 --> 00:19:20,760
Speaker 5: just go ahead and do that.

346
00:19:21,400 --> 00:19:25,760
Speaker 2: Chief Justice Roberts said in his twenty eleven year end report.

347
00:19:26,119 --> 00:19:29,440
Speaker 2: The Court has never addressed whether Congress may impose those

348
00:19:29,520 --> 00:19:34,439
Speaker 2: requirements on the Supreme Court ethics requirements. That is, is

349
00:19:34,480 --> 00:19:36,760
Speaker 2: there a chance that the Justices might say, no, we're

350
00:19:36,760 --> 00:19:38,440
Speaker 2: not doing that. I mean, can they say.

351
00:19:38,240 --> 00:19:42,320
Speaker 5: That, Well, well, they're the Supreme Court. They can say

352
00:19:42,359 --> 00:19:44,600
Speaker 5: whatever they want to say. The question is whether they

353
00:19:44,600 --> 00:19:48,240
Speaker 5: will have sufficient respect for the public to adopt the

354
00:19:48,359 --> 00:19:51,920
Speaker 5: code when there is overwhelming a public opinion in favor

355
00:19:51,960 --> 00:19:53,640
Speaker 5: of so.

356
00:19:53,800 --> 00:19:58,080
Speaker 2: Explain the reason why it's a good idea for these

357
00:19:58,119 --> 00:20:00,000
Speaker 2: gifts and trips to be disclosed.

358
00:20:00,000 --> 00:20:07,440
Speaker 5: Host it's an issue of transparency. Congress, in a bipartisan statute,

359
00:20:07,960 --> 00:20:11,920
Speaker 5: determined that it is important for public respect and understanding

360
00:20:12,359 --> 00:20:15,159
Speaker 5: to know what sort of gifts are being given, not

361
00:20:15,240 --> 00:20:18,160
Speaker 5: only to the justices of the Supreme Court, but also

362
00:20:18,440 --> 00:20:24,479
Speaker 5: to senior officials in the executive branch. Everybody complies with it,

363
00:20:25,560 --> 00:20:30,080
Speaker 5: but the Supreme Court, for reasons of its own has

364
00:20:30,119 --> 00:20:35,920
Speaker 5: withheld acceptance of it as a requirement. They do, they do,

365
00:20:36,440 --> 00:20:39,679
Speaker 5: I should say, the Justices of the Supreme Court do

366
00:20:39,920 --> 00:20:44,399
Speaker 5: file report in accordance with the ethics and government. Chief

367
00:20:44,520 --> 00:20:48,400
Speaker 5: Justice Roberts just said that it is discretionary. They don't

368
00:20:48,440 --> 00:20:50,120
Speaker 5: have to do it, but they all do it.

369
00:20:50,480 --> 00:20:53,960
Speaker 2: Thanks for being on the show. That's Stephen Lubett, a

370
00:20:54,040 --> 00:20:58,520
Speaker 2: professor at Northwestern University's Printzker School of Law. And that's

371
00:20:58,560 --> 00:21:01,159
Speaker 2: it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember

372
00:21:01,200 --> 00:21:03,280
Speaker 2: you can always get the latest legal news on our

373
00:21:03,320 --> 00:21:07,480
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Law podcasts. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

374
00:21:07,640 --> 00:21:12,680
Speaker 2: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law,

375
00:21:13,080 --> 00:21:15,679
Speaker 2: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every

376
00:21:15,720 --> 00:21:19,640
Speaker 2: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso

377
00:21:19,760 --> 00:21:21,359
Speaker 2: and you're listening to Bloomberg