WEBVTT - Obstacles to Menendez Brothers Release From Prison

0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.000
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:10.400 --> 0:00:13.480
<v Speaker 2>I'm gonna shake up the bag, draw the lottery tickets,

0:00:13.520 --> 0:00:16.680
<v Speaker 2>and you'll be called up accordingly. We're gonna line you

0:00:16.800 --> 0:00:19.160
<v Speaker 2>up that's right where this gentleman is standing, and we'll

0:00:19.160 --> 0:00:21.479
<v Speaker 2>bring you into the building. There was a lottery to

0:00:21.520 --> 0:00:24.480
<v Speaker 2>get the hottest ticket in town entry to the Los

0:00:24.520 --> 0:00:29.240
<v Speaker 2>Angeles Courthouse for the Menendez brothers' first court appearance in decades.

0:00:29.600 --> 0:00:32.720
<v Speaker 2>People lined up more than five hours before the hearing

0:00:33.000 --> 0:00:36.400
<v Speaker 2>to get one of the coveted sixteen seats available to

0:00:36.440 --> 0:00:37.000
<v Speaker 2>the public.

0:00:37.320 --> 0:00:42.320
<v Speaker 1>Okay, last four numbers of six nine three two.

0:00:42.880 --> 0:00:45.560
<v Speaker 2>Eric and Lyle Menendez have been in prison since nineteen

0:00:45.600 --> 0:00:49.040
<v Speaker 2>eighty nine, sentenced to life without parole for the murders

0:00:49.040 --> 0:00:52.360
<v Speaker 2>of their parents. The case captivated the country in the

0:00:52.440 --> 0:00:56.640
<v Speaker 2>nineteen nineties and is doing so once again thanks to

0:00:56.720 --> 0:01:00.360
<v Speaker 2>the recent releases of the Netflix dram Up Monsters and

0:01:00.440 --> 0:01:04.640
<v Speaker 2>a documentary Lost the discovery of new evidence which could

0:01:04.680 --> 0:01:08.720
<v Speaker 2>support Eric's claims that he was sexually abused by his father.

0:01:09.200 --> 0:01:13.600
<v Speaker 2>Technical problems prevented the brothers from appearing virtually from prison,

0:01:13.880 --> 0:01:16.959
<v Speaker 2>and the hearing lasted only an hour because The judge

0:01:16.959 --> 0:01:20.959
<v Speaker 2>said he needed time to review seventeen boxes of evidence

0:01:21.120 --> 0:01:24.679
<v Speaker 2>and also wanted to give the newly elected DA time

0:01:24.760 --> 0:01:27.240
<v Speaker 2>to weigh in on the case, but he did allow

0:01:27.319 --> 0:01:30.840
<v Speaker 2>the brothers two elderly aunts to take the stand, and

0:01:30.959 --> 0:01:34.360
<v Speaker 2>they made an impassioned plea for their nephews for lease.

0:01:34.760 --> 0:01:39.319
<v Speaker 2>Ninety three year old Joan Anderson vander Mullen Kiddymanendez. His sister,

0:01:39.680 --> 0:01:46.080
<v Speaker 2>spoke outside the courthouse, Ben said.

0:01:45.480 --> 0:01:53.360
<v Speaker 1>She give situation, what can a kin do when.

0:01:55.080 --> 0:01:55.960
<v Speaker 3>I can't stand it?

0:01:56.680 --> 0:01:59.280
<v Speaker 2>A wrinkle in their case could be the election of

0:01:59.320 --> 0:02:03.640
<v Speaker 2>the new La County District Attorney Nathan Hockman. He's not

0:02:03.760 --> 0:02:08.440
<v Speaker 2>adopting Gascon's recommendation and told ABC News he wants to

0:02:08.480 --> 0:02:11.720
<v Speaker 2>review the case and the law and decide for himself.

0:02:11.960 --> 0:02:15.720
<v Speaker 2>There's a cloud over that credibility. Is it a just

0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:19.200
<v Speaker 2>decision or was it just a political ploy? Joining me

0:02:19.320 --> 0:02:22.920
<v Speaker 2>is Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Ahrenberg Dave. The

0:02:22.960 --> 0:02:27.480
<v Speaker 2>hearing yesterday was over a habeas corpus petition the Menendez

0:02:27.560 --> 0:02:32.480
<v Speaker 2>brothers filed in May of twenty twenty three. That's basically

0:02:32.760 --> 0:02:35.800
<v Speaker 2>a request for the court to consider whether someone is

0:02:35.840 --> 0:02:40.320
<v Speaker 2>being lawfully held tell us about the Menendez brothers Habeas

0:02:40.320 --> 0:02:41.320
<v Speaker 2>corpus petition.

0:02:41.639 --> 0:02:44.760
<v Speaker 3>The Habeas corpus petition will focus on the new evidence

0:02:44.760 --> 0:02:50.040
<v Speaker 3>that came out about sexual abuse from Menendez brother's father. Remember,

0:02:50.120 --> 0:02:55.160
<v Speaker 3>there was evidence that the Menendez brother's father had molested

0:02:55.760 --> 0:02:58.799
<v Speaker 3>a member of the boy band Menudo. And there's also

0:02:58.840 --> 0:03:00.680
<v Speaker 3>a letter that actually written by them. Men and his

0:03:00.720 --> 0:03:03.640
<v Speaker 3>brothers too irrelative about their sexual abuse. None of this

0:03:03.760 --> 0:03:06.399
<v Speaker 3>was admitted into evidence in their second trial, which led

0:03:06.400 --> 0:03:08.959
<v Speaker 3>to a guilty verdict. So they rid of habeas corpuses,

0:03:09.000 --> 0:03:11.560
<v Speaker 3>tried to get a court to consider this new evidence

0:03:12.000 --> 0:03:16.160
<v Speaker 3>and to reverse the conviction or to set them free.

0:03:16.440 --> 0:03:21.519
<v Speaker 2>So this is separate and apart from the resentencing recommendation

0:03:22.000 --> 0:03:25.800
<v Speaker 2>that the then LA District Attorney made last month. The

0:03:25.919 --> 0:03:29.440
<v Speaker 2>judge here will take different factors into consideration.

0:03:30.040 --> 0:03:32.760
<v Speaker 3>Right, there are three channels the men and his brothers

0:03:32.840 --> 0:03:35.840
<v Speaker 3>will pursue to get their release. One is the habeas

0:03:35.880 --> 0:03:39.080
<v Speaker 3>corpus petition. So the number two would be the resentencing.

0:03:39.160 --> 0:03:42.160
<v Speaker 3>That's what the former DA, the one who's outgoing, recommended.

0:03:42.240 --> 0:03:45.080
<v Speaker 3>He wanted them to re sentence because of good behavior

0:03:45.080 --> 0:03:47.720
<v Speaker 3>in prison to fifty years and then based on the

0:03:47.760 --> 0:03:50.440
<v Speaker 3>parole rules at the time, they'd be out already, but

0:03:50.480 --> 0:03:52.119
<v Speaker 3>it's still would have to go to the Parle Board.

0:03:52.200 --> 0:03:54.240
<v Speaker 3>So that's number two. And the third would be clemency

0:03:54.600 --> 0:03:57.000
<v Speaker 3>by the governor, which would still involve the Parole Board,

0:03:57.480 --> 0:04:00.560
<v Speaker 3>but Governor Gavin Newsom has not said web he would

0:04:00.560 --> 0:04:03.520
<v Speaker 3>agree to it. So there are three ways that Menendez

0:04:03.560 --> 0:04:07.000
<v Speaker 3>brothers could be released early, and at this point it's

0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:11.080
<v Speaker 3>hard to say which one they will pursue the most aggressively.

0:04:11.600 --> 0:04:14.640
<v Speaker 3>They would probably have the best chance, I think inclemency

0:04:14.760 --> 0:04:19.080
<v Speaker 3>from the governor because of all the attention that's been paid,

0:04:19.360 --> 0:04:23.440
<v Speaker 3>because the new DA does not seem as keen on

0:04:23.640 --> 0:04:27.559
<v Speaker 3>resentencing or letting them out early as the outgoing DA.

0:04:28.279 --> 0:04:31.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, the new DA said that he's going to review

0:04:31.520 --> 0:04:35.880
<v Speaker 2>the extensive prison records, transcripts of the two trials, and

0:04:36.040 --> 0:04:41.040
<v Speaker 2>voluminous exhibits, as well as consult with prosecutors, law enforcement,

0:04:41.279 --> 0:04:45.599
<v Speaker 2>defense counsel, and victim family members. So at the very least,

0:04:45.640 --> 0:04:49.719
<v Speaker 2>that sounds like a long process. Can he just reverse

0:04:50.080 --> 0:04:52.440
<v Speaker 2>what the former DA recommended?

0:04:53.279 --> 0:04:58.279
<v Speaker 3>Yes, Because the DA that is outgoing Gasson was just

0:04:58.720 --> 0:05:03.400
<v Speaker 3>recommending that there be a resentencing. It's not a binding decision,

0:05:03.400 --> 0:05:05.440
<v Speaker 3>because that's up to the court to make the decision.

0:05:05.800 --> 0:05:08.640
<v Speaker 3>The new DA can come in and say I reject

0:05:08.800 --> 0:05:13.159
<v Speaker 3>that recommendation. We do not support an early release, we

0:05:13.200 --> 0:05:15.960
<v Speaker 3>do not support a new trial, and so that would

0:05:15.960 --> 0:05:18.840
<v Speaker 3>be very powerful because the court takes into account what

0:05:19.000 --> 0:05:23.360
<v Speaker 3>the DA's office thinks. And that's why I think perhaps

0:05:23.400 --> 0:05:27.280
<v Speaker 3>of the three options habeas corpus petition are resentencing by

0:05:27.320 --> 0:05:31.320
<v Speaker 3>way of the DA, and clemency, that it's clemency through

0:05:31.320 --> 0:05:33.960
<v Speaker 3>the governor that may be the best route for the

0:05:33.960 --> 0:05:35.440
<v Speaker 3>Menendez brothers to get out early.

0:05:35.800 --> 0:05:39.360
<v Speaker 2>The Governor apparently is taking a weight and see attitude.

0:05:39.520 --> 0:05:42.279
<v Speaker 2>Here's what he said on his podcast.

0:05:41.880 --> 0:05:45.160
<v Speaker 1>Last week, the Menendez file, which is now a little

0:05:45.160 --> 0:05:48.560
<v Speaker 1>thicker because we did deeper research in the last ten days.

0:05:48.760 --> 0:05:50.760
<v Speaker 1>That's all on my desk. I think it's the right

0:05:50.800 --> 0:05:54.680
<v Speaker 1>thing to do to hear from the new DA before

0:05:54.760 --> 0:05:56.040
<v Speaker 1>I make any decisions.

0:05:56.240 --> 0:05:58.880
<v Speaker 2>That doesn't sound particularly promising either.

0:05:59.320 --> 0:06:01.640
<v Speaker 3>Well, he is giving the right amount of deference to

0:06:01.680 --> 0:06:04.520
<v Speaker 3>the new DA, And if the new DA comes out

0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:07.880
<v Speaker 3>and says I don't support resentencing, the Governor can still

0:06:07.920 --> 0:06:10.560
<v Speaker 3>say I'm going to grant clemency. But it would really

0:06:10.600 --> 0:06:13.279
<v Speaker 3>be big footing the new DA who was just elected

0:06:13.279 --> 0:06:15.640
<v Speaker 3>by the people overwhelmingly to say, it doesn't matter what

0:06:15.720 --> 0:06:17.760
<v Speaker 3>you think, I'm going to let him out through clemency.

0:06:17.839 --> 0:06:20.640
<v Speaker 3>So I think that Governors's doing the right thing in

0:06:20.720 --> 0:06:23.039
<v Speaker 3>saying that no matter what I do, at least I

0:06:23.240 --> 0:06:25.719
<v Speaker 3>owe the new DA and the voters who elected him

0:06:26.000 --> 0:06:28.240
<v Speaker 3>the respect to hear what they say first.

0:06:28.440 --> 0:06:32.080
<v Speaker 2>I mean, the Menandez Brothers case wasn't really one of

0:06:32.120 --> 0:06:33.560
<v Speaker 2>the election issues, was it.

0:06:34.120 --> 0:06:36.320
<v Speaker 3>Well, yeah, well you can't avoid it. It's a high

0:06:36.360 --> 0:06:39.080
<v Speaker 3>profile case. So I think one of the reasons why

0:06:39.320 --> 0:06:41.040
<v Speaker 3>the outgoing DA did what he did was that he

0:06:41.120 --> 0:06:42.720
<v Speaker 3>knew he had an election around the corner. I mean,

0:06:42.760 --> 0:06:45.719
<v Speaker 3>the timing would tell you that that had to be

0:06:45.760 --> 0:06:48.000
<v Speaker 3>a consideration, right. He could have waited until after the

0:06:48.040 --> 0:06:51.080
<v Speaker 3>election to announce the decision, but announced it just shortly

0:06:51.120 --> 0:06:54.440
<v Speaker 3>before the election. And similarly, I think the voters took

0:06:54.480 --> 0:06:57.120
<v Speaker 3>that into consideration. Even though it seems like there's a

0:06:57.160 --> 0:06:59.919
<v Speaker 3>lot of momentum to release the brothers early, I do

0:07:00.120 --> 0:07:02.479
<v Speaker 3>think that this was one of the issues. Now, the

0:07:02.520 --> 0:07:05.680
<v Speaker 3>clear issue though that we're hearing from the voters in

0:07:05.680 --> 0:07:09.240
<v Speaker 3>that area where they were thick of the loose policies

0:07:09.279 --> 0:07:13.080
<v Speaker 3>of the DA were seen that he was favoring defendants

0:07:13.080 --> 0:07:15.960
<v Speaker 3>over victims in many cases, and they wanted a more

0:07:16.240 --> 0:07:18.840
<v Speaker 3>tough on crime district attorney, and they got it.

0:07:19.000 --> 0:07:22.080
<v Speaker 2>Let's return to the habeas corpus petition. The hearing has

0:07:22.080 --> 0:07:27.400
<v Speaker 2>been adjourned until January thirtieth. Dave, you're a prosecutor, does

0:07:27.440 --> 0:07:31.360
<v Speaker 2>it seem as if there is enough evidence new evidence

0:07:31.480 --> 0:07:34.080
<v Speaker 2>for the judge to grant the petition?

0:07:34.880 --> 0:07:38.000
<v Speaker 3>I don't think so. As a prosecutor, I think that

0:07:38.040 --> 0:07:40.360
<v Speaker 3>there may be grounds for a new trial based on

0:07:40.480 --> 0:07:43.640
<v Speaker 3>the new evidence when it comes to the murder of Jose,

0:07:43.760 --> 0:07:46.360
<v Speaker 3>the father, But when it comes to murder of the mother,

0:07:47.080 --> 0:07:52.760
<v Speaker 3>there's nothing that would change that the mother, Kitty was

0:07:53.120 --> 0:07:57.040
<v Speaker 3>not credibly accused at the trial of sexual abuse or

0:07:57.080 --> 0:07:59.560
<v Speaker 3>there's not even evidence that's come out that shows that

0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:03.360
<v Speaker 3>that's what motivate that they were being victimized by both parents.

0:08:03.520 --> 0:08:05.920
<v Speaker 3>And so even if you make the case that Jose

0:08:06.560 --> 0:08:09.480
<v Speaker 3>was a bad guy who molested his children, then how

0:08:09.480 --> 0:08:12.200
<v Speaker 3>do you still explain Kitty. People say, well, she knew

0:08:12.240 --> 0:08:14.320
<v Speaker 3>of the abuse and let it happen. But even that,

0:08:14.560 --> 0:08:16.480
<v Speaker 3>even if you could show that which is not clear,

0:08:17.320 --> 0:08:20.240
<v Speaker 3>then at best. Maybe that warrants a new trial, not

0:08:20.400 --> 0:08:23.160
<v Speaker 3>an early release. You remember, the way they massacred the

0:08:23.200 --> 0:08:25.880
<v Speaker 3>two parents was that they went over their parents' house.

0:08:25.920 --> 0:08:28.600
<v Speaker 3>The parents were sitting with their backs turned watching TV,

0:08:28.720 --> 0:08:31.680
<v Speaker 3>eating ice cream, and the two brothers, who planned this

0:08:31.760 --> 0:08:35.000
<v Speaker 3>extensively blew them away with shotguns. But Kitty did not

0:08:35.120 --> 0:08:38.400
<v Speaker 3>die right away. She was crawling away, trying to get

0:08:38.440 --> 0:08:42.800
<v Speaker 3>away when Lyle went back outside to reload the shotgun

0:08:43.120 --> 0:08:47.160
<v Speaker 3>and then returned to do the final act. And there

0:08:47.240 --> 0:08:49.840
<v Speaker 3>was so much blood, so much violence, that police thought

0:08:49.880 --> 0:08:53.520
<v Speaker 3>it was a mob hit. So I'm not moved on

0:08:54.040 --> 0:08:56.880
<v Speaker 3>getting an early release for these brothers based on what

0:08:56.920 --> 0:09:00.520
<v Speaker 3>they did to Kitty. Maybe a new trial, but nothing

0:09:00.559 --> 0:09:01.040
<v Speaker 3>more than that.

0:09:01.600 --> 0:09:05.680
<v Speaker 2>So the judge handling the havieous petition could order a

0:09:05.679 --> 0:09:06.200
<v Speaker 2>new trial.

0:09:06.400 --> 0:09:09.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, the judge and the habeas could say that the

0:09:09.200 --> 0:09:11.920
<v Speaker 3>tenant's rights were violated. There was evidence that should have

0:09:11.920 --> 0:09:15.199
<v Speaker 3>been introduced that wasn't introduced a trial. Remember, the judge

0:09:15.200 --> 0:09:18.880
<v Speaker 3>at the time refused to introduce this evidence of abuse.

0:09:19.520 --> 0:09:22.120
<v Speaker 3>And now there's new evidence. So the judge couldn't say, yes,

0:09:22.160 --> 0:09:25.160
<v Speaker 3>we're going to reverse the conviction, overturn it and set

0:09:25.240 --> 0:09:27.360
<v Speaker 3>up for a new trial. The judge could actually even

0:09:27.400 --> 0:09:30.240
<v Speaker 3>go further and say he's going to let the brothers out,

0:09:30.880 --> 0:09:33.760
<v Speaker 3>so we'll see what happens. But even if that doesn't work,

0:09:34.080 --> 0:09:36.680
<v Speaker 3>they could go to the other two routes as we mentioned,

0:09:36.679 --> 0:09:40.480
<v Speaker 3>the resentencing by way of the local DA and perhaps

0:09:40.559 --> 0:09:41.880
<v Speaker 3>clemency from the governor.

0:09:42.080 --> 0:09:44.679
<v Speaker 2>The resentencing by way of the local DA. That would

0:09:44.720 --> 0:09:47.680
<v Speaker 2>also have to be approved by a judge, a different

0:09:47.760 --> 0:09:49.400
<v Speaker 2>judge from the court Miss judge.

0:09:49.600 --> 0:09:52.800
<v Speaker 3>It gets a little complicated, so which judge these motions

0:09:52.800 --> 0:09:56.680
<v Speaker 3>are filed in front of, But the resentencing first goes

0:09:56.760 --> 0:10:00.400
<v Speaker 3>through the local DA to make a recommendation, and then

0:10:00.440 --> 0:10:02.320
<v Speaker 3>it's up to the judge. And I'm not sure if

0:10:02.320 --> 0:10:04.600
<v Speaker 3>it is it seem judge or if it a different

0:10:04.679 --> 0:10:08.280
<v Speaker 3>judge that would hear the resentencing requests. But the reason

0:10:08.320 --> 0:10:12.440
<v Speaker 3>why the DA, the outgoing DA, made the decision to

0:10:12.520 --> 0:10:14.960
<v Speaker 3>seek a resentencing was not because of the new evidence

0:10:14.960 --> 0:10:18.600
<v Speaker 3>of sexual abuse, but because the two brothers were model prisoners.

0:10:18.600 --> 0:10:22.160
<v Speaker 3>They were on good behavior, and to me, that's not

0:10:22.400 --> 0:10:26.960
<v Speaker 3>a good enough reason to set aside to life in

0:10:27.120 --> 0:10:30.160
<v Speaker 3>prison sentences. Sentence to life in prison should not get

0:10:30.200 --> 0:10:33.440
<v Speaker 3>set aside because the inmates decided to be in good

0:10:33.440 --> 0:10:36.560
<v Speaker 3>behavior while in prison. That should get them privileges in prison,

0:10:36.600 --> 0:10:37.680
<v Speaker 3>but not early release.

0:10:38.000 --> 0:10:41.600
<v Speaker 2>But what district Attorney George Gascoon was going to do

0:10:42.360 --> 0:10:43.240
<v Speaker 2>is legal.

0:10:42.960 --> 0:10:46.400
<v Speaker 3>Right, Well, the districttorney can recommend anything, but remember this

0:10:46.520 --> 0:10:49.920
<v Speaker 3>district attorney got voted out of office largely because he

0:10:49.960 --> 0:10:52.680
<v Speaker 3>was seen as soft on crime. So when he goes

0:10:52.880 --> 0:10:56.320
<v Speaker 3>in front of a court and says, your honor, let

0:10:56.360 --> 0:11:00.600
<v Speaker 3>these brothers out early because they behaved well in prison,

0:11:01.360 --> 0:11:04.680
<v Speaker 3>I think that is something that a judge will reject,

0:11:05.120 --> 0:11:08.360
<v Speaker 3>especially because the community has let their voice be known

0:11:08.640 --> 0:11:11.360
<v Speaker 3>that they don't want soft on crime prosecutors. They shouldn't

0:11:11.400 --> 0:11:15.600
<v Speaker 3>have people who were sentenced for grizzly murders given life

0:11:16.000 --> 0:11:20.640
<v Speaker 3>sentences to get out years early because they were acting

0:11:20.720 --> 0:11:21.840
<v Speaker 3>nicely while they're in prison.

0:11:22.240 --> 0:11:26.080
<v Speaker 2>Dave, most of the family members of the Menendez brothers

0:11:26.840 --> 0:11:31.160
<v Speaker 2>support their release. Where does that fit into the decisions

0:11:31.200 --> 0:11:35.760
<v Speaker 2>that are being made by judges and state officials about

0:11:35.800 --> 0:11:36.400
<v Speaker 2>their release.

0:11:37.360 --> 0:11:40.280
<v Speaker 3>Well, the victims' families will be heard, and that is

0:11:40.320 --> 0:11:43.600
<v Speaker 3>a consideration. The fact that most family members support the

0:11:43.679 --> 0:11:46.840
<v Speaker 3>brother's release will be a factor in the judge's decision.

0:11:46.880 --> 0:11:50.400
<v Speaker 3>In the DA's recommendation and in the governor's decision on clemency,

0:11:50.800 --> 0:11:54.320
<v Speaker 3>but it's not unanimous. There's at least one family member

0:11:54.679 --> 0:11:57.560
<v Speaker 3>who does not want them released, so it's not unanimous,

0:11:57.600 --> 0:12:01.360
<v Speaker 3>but it is a factor that most do support their release.

0:12:01.600 --> 0:12:04.880
<v Speaker 2>The next hearing before the judge and the Habeas Corpus

0:12:05.360 --> 0:12:10.160
<v Speaker 2>petition will be on January thirtieth and thirty first, and

0:12:10.240 --> 0:12:13.560
<v Speaker 2>their attorney, Mark Garrigo said, we hope that by the

0:12:13.679 --> 0:12:17.520
<v Speaker 2>end of that hearing or sometime sooner, they'll be released.

0:12:18.240 --> 0:12:19.680
<v Speaker 2>Is that too optimistic?

0:12:20.320 --> 0:12:22.240
<v Speaker 3>Yes, They're not going to be released before the Habeas

0:12:22.320 --> 0:12:25.400
<v Speaker 3>Corpus hearing. The only way that could happen is if

0:12:25.400 --> 0:12:28.560
<v Speaker 3>Ditgomery gives clemency and then it goes before the pro bore.

0:12:28.559 --> 0:12:30.320
<v Speaker 3>That's not going to happen. And the fact that we

0:12:30.360 --> 0:12:32.480
<v Speaker 3>have a new DA and we have a delay and

0:12:32.520 --> 0:12:34.960
<v Speaker 3>now it's going to slow things down. So the momentum

0:12:35.040 --> 0:12:38.280
<v Speaker 3>that was there to release the Menandez brothers asap is

0:12:38.360 --> 0:12:42.040
<v Speaker 3>now slowed because of the election of the new DA.

0:12:42.760 --> 0:12:44.800
<v Speaker 3>And I think it's a good thing because before we

0:12:44.920 --> 0:12:48.400
<v Speaker 3>let the passions of the community who's seen movies and

0:12:48.760 --> 0:12:52.080
<v Speaker 3>TikTok videos about these brothers rule the day. Maybe we

0:12:52.160 --> 0:12:54.200
<v Speaker 3>need to take a step back and reassess what they

0:12:54.240 --> 0:12:57.439
<v Speaker 3>actually did and why they did it, and how after

0:12:57.480 --> 0:13:00.280
<v Speaker 3>they did it they went on a shopping spree and

0:13:00.320 --> 0:13:03.640
<v Speaker 3>went to NBA games, sitting in the front row and

0:13:04.000 --> 0:13:07.280
<v Speaker 3>live the life they've always wanted to live. It seemed

0:13:07.280 --> 0:13:09.240
<v Speaker 3>like at the time, and I stand by it, that

0:13:09.360 --> 0:13:12.079
<v Speaker 3>this was more financial crime. They wanted to inherit the wealth.

0:13:12.120 --> 0:13:13.360
<v Speaker 3>They thought they were going to be written out of

0:13:13.400 --> 0:13:15.680
<v Speaker 3>the will. They wanted their money, and they got what

0:13:15.720 --> 0:13:18.920
<v Speaker 3>they wanted and lied about it until they were caught,

0:13:19.520 --> 0:13:21.520
<v Speaker 3>and now they've been in prison ever since.

0:13:21.920 --> 0:13:24.120
<v Speaker 2>So the next thing to happen in the case will

0:13:24.160 --> 0:13:27.840
<v Speaker 2>either be the full hearings on January thirtieth and thirty

0:13:27.880 --> 0:13:32.080
<v Speaker 2>first on the Habeas Corpus petition, or a decision by

0:13:32.120 --> 0:13:34.400
<v Speaker 2>the New DA about how to handle the case and

0:13:34.440 --> 0:13:38.679
<v Speaker 2>whether to recommend resentencing and release. So let's turn out

0:13:38.679 --> 0:13:41.920
<v Speaker 2>to other legal matters. I wanted to get your reaction

0:13:42.400 --> 0:13:49.640
<v Speaker 2>to the Special Council yesterday dropping charges against Donald Trump

0:13:49.840 --> 0:13:54.800
<v Speaker 2>in both the election interference case and the classified documents case.

0:13:55.320 --> 0:13:58.600
<v Speaker 2>I mean, he really had no choice because it was

0:13:58.720 --> 0:14:01.840
<v Speaker 2>going to happen once tru gotten off as anyway, what's

0:14:01.840 --> 0:14:04.679
<v Speaker 2>the downside and what's the upside if any.

0:14:04.920 --> 0:14:07.360
<v Speaker 3>Well, it was inevitable once Trump won the election that

0:14:07.360 --> 0:14:10.719
<v Speaker 3>they would have to dismiss the charges, but the keywords

0:14:10.760 --> 0:14:14.319
<v Speaker 3>in the dismissal were without prejudice. That means you can

0:14:14.360 --> 0:14:18.160
<v Speaker 3>still refile it, and that would take perhaps January twenty

0:14:18.200 --> 0:14:20.960
<v Speaker 3>twenty nine, So who knows what will happen then. But

0:14:21.080 --> 0:14:24.760
<v Speaker 3>even if they do refile it, the former president and

0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:28.480
<v Speaker 3>soon to be president could still try to pardon himself,

0:14:29.160 --> 0:14:32.359
<v Speaker 3>or he could also claim that under the statute of limitations,

0:14:32.720 --> 0:14:35.920
<v Speaker 3>you can't refile the charges this many years later. Then

0:14:35.960 --> 0:14:38.800
<v Speaker 3>the question is whether the course would allow a postponement

0:14:38.800 --> 0:14:41.360
<v Speaker 3>of the charges because of the internal Department of Justice

0:14:41.440 --> 0:14:44.040
<v Speaker 3>rule that says you cannot diet a sitting president. There

0:14:44.080 --> 0:14:46.320
<v Speaker 3>are a lot of moving parts here, but it does

0:14:46.360 --> 0:14:49.240
<v Speaker 3>seem like Trump is above the law to them because

0:14:49.720 --> 0:14:53.720
<v Speaker 3>these cases I think are very unlikely to ever amount anything. Now.

0:14:53.760 --> 0:14:56.440
<v Speaker 3>The only thing left will be his sentencing in New York,

0:14:56.480 --> 0:15:00.120
<v Speaker 3>which will still be set after he leaves office. And

0:15:00.160 --> 0:15:02.400
<v Speaker 3>then there's a Georgia case, which who knows what's going

0:15:02.480 --> 0:15:03.240
<v Speaker 3>to happen there.

0:15:03.520 --> 0:15:06.800
<v Speaker 2>That seems really stuck and who knows if that will

0:15:06.880 --> 0:15:10.160
<v Speaker 2>go forward at all. So there is on record now

0:15:10.400 --> 0:15:15.000
<v Speaker 2>a decision by a federal judge, Eileen Cannon that the

0:15:15.040 --> 0:15:19.600
<v Speaker 2>appointment of the Special Council was unconstitutional, and the Special

0:15:19.640 --> 0:15:23.520
<v Speaker 2>Council is trying to move forward with the appeal of

0:15:23.520 --> 0:15:27.560
<v Speaker 2>that in the case against Trump's two co defendants. Do

0:15:27.640 --> 0:15:31.320
<v Speaker 2>you think that will work because once Trump comes into office,

0:15:31.400 --> 0:15:33.720
<v Speaker 2>I assume he's going to have that case against the

0:15:33.760 --> 0:15:35.160
<v Speaker 2>co defendants dismissed.

0:15:35.520 --> 0:15:38.360
<v Speaker 3>Well, the case against the two co defendants are allowed

0:15:38.400 --> 0:15:41.480
<v Speaker 3>to is allowed to continue because the Department of Justice

0:15:41.480 --> 0:15:44.360
<v Speaker 3>policy just says, you cannot indict a sitting president. You

0:15:44.440 --> 0:15:47.000
<v Speaker 3>can go after the co defendants, and that is a

0:15:47.000 --> 0:15:51.359
<v Speaker 3>way a vehicle for Jack Smith to overturn the egregious

0:15:51.440 --> 0:15:56.000
<v Speaker 3>ruling by Judge Cannon that the Special Council appointment of

0:15:56.040 --> 0:15:58.800
<v Speaker 3>Jack Smith was unconstitutional. I think he will win on

0:15:58.880 --> 0:16:02.360
<v Speaker 3>appeal going after Trump. I don't think it's going to matter. Also,

0:16:02.800 --> 0:16:04.960
<v Speaker 3>the next Attorney General, Pam Bondi, is going to want

0:16:05.000 --> 0:16:08.160
<v Speaker 3>to use special counsels, and so I think she will

0:16:08.240 --> 0:16:12.080
<v Speaker 3>go ahead and just move forward with special counsels like that.

0:16:12.400 --> 0:16:14.760
<v Speaker 3>Judge Canon ruly didn't happen.

0:16:14.840 --> 0:16:19.000
<v Speaker 2>As you mentioned. Trump has nominated Pam Bondi, the former

0:16:19.760 --> 0:16:23.920
<v Speaker 2>Attorney general for Florida, to be the next attorney general.

0:16:24.120 --> 0:16:27.160
<v Speaker 2>And I know you know her, so tell us about her.

0:16:27.600 --> 0:16:29.440
<v Speaker 3>Well. I worked with her first. I ran against her

0:16:29.440 --> 0:16:32.000
<v Speaker 3>in twenty ten for attorney general. She won, I lost.

0:16:32.360 --> 0:16:35.440
<v Speaker 3>She hired me as her drugs Are afterwards, and it

0:16:35.520 --> 0:16:38.360
<v Speaker 3>does tell you about her that she would reach across

0:16:38.360 --> 0:16:41.480
<v Speaker 3>party lines to appoint a Democrat and got a lot

0:16:41.480 --> 0:16:44.240
<v Speaker 3>of criticism from Republican leaders for doing that. I was

0:16:44.240 --> 0:16:46.800
<v Speaker 3>her drugs Are. I went after the opioid epidemic, the

0:16:46.880 --> 0:16:50.320
<v Speaker 3>pill mills, and we were able to shut them down

0:16:50.360 --> 0:16:51.920
<v Speaker 3>and save lives in Florida. So I have a lot

0:16:51.960 --> 0:16:54.480
<v Speaker 3>of respect for her for that. And as far as

0:16:54.480 --> 0:16:56.840
<v Speaker 3>a person, she's very well liked. She's a very likable,

0:16:56.880 --> 0:17:00.480
<v Speaker 3>outgoing person. She will tether her to say, to the

0:17:00.520 --> 0:17:03.320
<v Speaker 3>rule of law. She has no Matt Gates. She's not

0:17:03.400 --> 0:17:06.520
<v Speaker 3>going in there to walk out Anthony Fausti and Adam

0:17:06.560 --> 0:17:09.639
<v Speaker 3>Shift and handcuffs. Although I do think she will start

0:17:09.800 --> 0:17:12.840
<v Speaker 3>investigations into the investigators, but got to be careful when

0:17:12.840 --> 0:17:15.880
<v Speaker 3>you do that. Remember what happened to John Durham. He

0:17:16.000 --> 0:17:19.239
<v Speaker 3>was humiliated when he investigated the investigators, he came up

0:17:19.280 --> 0:17:24.000
<v Speaker 3>with small ball, low level charges and got quick acquittaled

0:17:24.400 --> 0:17:26.720
<v Speaker 3>and embarrassment for it. So that's a lesson learned.

0:17:27.640 --> 0:17:33.119
<v Speaker 2>She has publicly championed Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud,

0:17:33.640 --> 0:17:36.359
<v Speaker 2>that there was voter fraud in a twenty twenty presidential election.

0:17:36.880 --> 0:17:39.919
<v Speaker 2>She said this on Fox News last August because the

0:17:39.960 --> 0:17:42.719
<v Speaker 2>deep state during the last term for President Trump, they

0:17:42.760 --> 0:17:45.080
<v Speaker 2>were hiding in the shadows. But now they have a

0:17:45.160 --> 0:17:48.760
<v Speaker 2>spotlight on them and they can all be investigated. The

0:17:48.840 --> 0:17:52.639
<v Speaker 2>house needs to be cleaned out. That sounds a little

0:17:52.680 --> 0:17:58.640
<v Speaker 2>conspiratorial and perhaps indicates a witch hunt maybe coming up.

0:17:58.960 --> 0:18:02.640
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, that's news rhetoric, that's political rhetoric. But I've seen

0:18:02.640 --> 0:18:05.840
<v Speaker 3>her up close the prosecutor, and there's a difference between

0:18:06.280 --> 0:18:09.280
<v Speaker 3>what you see on Fox News as a political commentator

0:18:09.320 --> 0:18:11.600
<v Speaker 3>in what you see as a lawyer's a prosecutor. She's

0:18:11.600 --> 0:18:15.160
<v Speaker 3>a twenty year prosecutor. She's an eight year attorney general

0:18:15.200 --> 0:18:17.199
<v Speaker 3>in the state of Florida. I do not expect her

0:18:17.240 --> 0:18:19.919
<v Speaker 3>to trump up to use the term charges against the

0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:23.160
<v Speaker 3>president elect's enemies just to please him. I think that

0:18:23.520 --> 0:18:26.679
<v Speaker 3>she will investigate the investigators, which will open up a

0:18:26.680 --> 0:18:29.399
<v Speaker 3>can of worms. She'll do things that will be controversial

0:18:29.440 --> 0:18:31.640
<v Speaker 3>on that front, but overall, I do think she will

0:18:31.680 --> 0:18:33.480
<v Speaker 3>be tethered to the rule of law, and she'll do

0:18:33.520 --> 0:18:36.320
<v Speaker 3>things that are popular, like cracking down on illicted fentanyl

0:18:36.320 --> 0:18:40.680
<v Speaker 3>at the border and going after prohamas supporters on college campuses.

0:18:40.880 --> 0:18:44.040
<v Speaker 3>I think that hopefully she will stay closer to that

0:18:44.240 --> 0:18:47.840
<v Speaker 3>in her role as prosecutor and left into revenge for

0:18:47.920 --> 0:18:50.480
<v Speaker 3>Donald Trump. The person who was going to be Trump's

0:18:50.480 --> 0:18:54.200
<v Speaker 3>restribution is Matt Gates, and he's no longer at the appointee.

0:18:54.720 --> 0:18:59.840
<v Speaker 2>When she was Florida AG, she tried to dismantle Obamacare,

0:19:00.680 --> 0:19:04.720
<v Speaker 2>the provision that's very popular that bans health insurance companies

0:19:04.760 --> 0:19:09.359
<v Speaker 2>from charging more to customers with pre existing conditions. I mean,

0:19:09.359 --> 0:19:13.040
<v Speaker 2>it's hard for me to understand the Republicans continuing efforts

0:19:13.440 --> 0:19:18.480
<v Speaker 2>to dismantle Obamacare, which is so popular, including among their supporters,

0:19:18.760 --> 0:19:20.720
<v Speaker 2>But that is something she could get involved with.

0:19:21.800 --> 0:19:23.800
<v Speaker 3>You know, I don't remember exactly what was done then.

0:19:23.800 --> 0:19:26.680
<v Speaker 3>I think she joined with other attorneys general to try

0:19:26.720 --> 0:19:30.520
<v Speaker 3>to overturn all of Obamacare, and at the time Obamacare

0:19:30.600 --> 0:19:33.840
<v Speaker 3>was not as popular as as today today. If they

0:19:33.880 --> 0:19:37.400
<v Speaker 3>try to do it, it will be a severe backlash. But yes,

0:19:37.720 --> 0:19:40.280
<v Speaker 3>if you're going to try to overturn our system of healthcare,

0:19:40.280 --> 0:19:42.360
<v Speaker 3>you got to have something to replace it with. And

0:19:42.400 --> 0:19:45.160
<v Speaker 3>Trump says he'll have a replacement in two weeks at least.

0:19:45.160 --> 0:19:47.240
<v Speaker 3>He's been saying that for the last eight years.

0:19:47.560 --> 0:19:51.000
<v Speaker 2>The confirmation process sounds like it will be much easier.

0:19:51.320 --> 0:19:53.480
<v Speaker 3>Yeah. I know her, and you know I know what

0:19:53.560 --> 0:19:56.200
<v Speaker 3>kind of person she is. And although we disagree with politics,

0:19:56.200 --> 0:19:59.640
<v Speaker 3>we do we have different ideologies. He's always been fair

0:19:59.680 --> 0:20:02.560
<v Speaker 3>to me. She's always been selling. I have worked well

0:20:02.560 --> 0:20:04.840
<v Speaker 3>with and she's worked well with Democrats. She's never been

0:20:04.880 --> 0:20:07.400
<v Speaker 3>a big partisan. She is loyal to Donald Trump. It's

0:20:07.440 --> 0:20:09.960
<v Speaker 3>clear she is loyal to Donald Trump. I'm not going

0:20:09.960 --> 0:20:12.920
<v Speaker 3>in this with rose colored glasses. But if you're a Democrat,

0:20:13.000 --> 0:20:15.159
<v Speaker 3>Tally Yates is not walking through that door. If you're

0:20:15.200 --> 0:20:17.399
<v Speaker 3>a Democrat, I think this is the best nominee that

0:20:17.440 --> 0:20:19.600
<v Speaker 3>you're going to get from Donald Trump. And if she's

0:20:19.600 --> 0:20:21.960
<v Speaker 3>not the nominee, then yeah, maybe you'll get Rurie Giuliani

0:20:22.080 --> 0:20:23.639
<v Speaker 3>or the MyPillow guy with a law degree.

0:20:23.760 --> 0:20:26.440
<v Speaker 2>You don't want that, No, you don't, Thanks so much.

0:20:26.560 --> 0:20:30.720
<v Speaker 2>Dave always a pleasure. That's bomb Beach County State Attorney

0:20:30.920 --> 0:20:34.240
<v Speaker 2>Dave Ehrenberg coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show.

0:20:34.720 --> 0:20:38.320
<v Speaker 2>Senate Democrats are being criticized for making a deal with

0:20:38.400 --> 0:20:43.760
<v Speaker 2>Republicans to abandon appellate judicial nominees in favor of trial

0:20:43.840 --> 0:20:47.720
<v Speaker 2>court nominees. I'm June gross when you're listening to Bloomberg.

0:20:48.800 --> 0:20:52.399
<v Speaker 2>Senate and Democrats have struck a deal with Republicans to

0:20:52.560 --> 0:20:57.159
<v Speaker 2>abandon four of President Biden's nominees for appellate courts in

0:20:57.240 --> 0:21:01.320
<v Speaker 2>order to advance his nominees for trial courts. The deal

0:21:01.359 --> 0:21:05.879
<v Speaker 2>comes after Republicans had employed stalling tactics this week to

0:21:06.000 --> 0:21:10.240
<v Speaker 2>complicate Democratic efforts to confirm as many of Biden's judicial

0:21:10.240 --> 0:21:14.280
<v Speaker 2>picks as possible before Republicans gained control of the White

0:21:14.320 --> 0:21:18.560
<v Speaker 2>House and Senate in January. Many including progressives and a

0:21:18.640 --> 0:21:22.160
<v Speaker 2>Senator on the Judiciary Committee, are critical of the deal

0:21:22.600 --> 0:21:25.520
<v Speaker 2>because the appellate courts are one step away from the

0:21:25.560 --> 0:21:29.240
<v Speaker 2>Supreme Court and policy decisions are made by them For

0:21:29.440 --> 0:21:34.440
<v Speaker 2>many states. The agreement derails Biden's efforts to place judges

0:21:34.480 --> 0:21:38.760
<v Speaker 2>on four federal circuit courts before President elect Donald Trump

0:21:38.880 --> 0:21:42.120
<v Speaker 2>returns to the White House. Joining me is an expert

0:21:42.160 --> 0:21:45.520
<v Speaker 2>in the federal judiciary. Carl Tobias, a professor at the

0:21:45.600 --> 0:21:49.400
<v Speaker 2>University of Richmond Law School, tell us about this agreement

0:21:49.480 --> 0:21:52.920
<v Speaker 2>that Senate Democrats made with Senate Republicans.

0:21:53.000 --> 0:22:00.200
<v Speaker 4>Carl, Well, it looks like Democrats promised that they would

0:22:00.240 --> 0:22:05.040
<v Speaker 4>not move on the four Appellate Court nominees who are

0:22:05.080 --> 0:22:08.400
<v Speaker 4>out of committee and on the floor and awaiting confirmation

0:22:08.800 --> 0:22:14.639
<v Speaker 4>debates and votes. In return, Republicans agreed not to obstruct

0:22:14.760 --> 0:22:19.760
<v Speaker 4>a number of district nominees. That number looks like at

0:22:19.880 --> 0:22:23.879
<v Speaker 4>least seven, but maybe more like a dozen, and so

0:22:24.080 --> 0:22:27.760
<v Speaker 4>those are the contours of the deal. So that's where

0:22:27.800 --> 0:22:31.680
<v Speaker 4>things stand right now and are not likely to change

0:22:31.960 --> 0:22:35.280
<v Speaker 4>because both sides have agreed to this. But of course

0:22:35.440 --> 0:22:39.560
<v Speaker 4>there's been a lot of criticism from especially the Washington

0:22:39.640 --> 0:22:44.560
<v Speaker 4>DC public interest groups of the deal because people are

0:22:44.600 --> 0:22:48.720
<v Speaker 4>saying that just wasn't a very good deal, and many

0:22:48.760 --> 0:22:54.640
<v Speaker 4>observers believe that the nominees are entitled to, or deserve

0:22:54.840 --> 0:22:57.560
<v Speaker 4>or warrant or merit an up or down vote. So

0:22:57.680 --> 0:23:01.600
<v Speaker 4>we'll see what happens. But most of those four people

0:23:02.119 --> 0:23:08.760
<v Speaker 4>are well qualified and relatively mainstream, and so it seems

0:23:08.800 --> 0:23:11.840
<v Speaker 4>as if at least three of them would have been confirmed,

0:23:11.920 --> 0:23:13.680
<v Speaker 4>and maybe all four of them.

0:23:14.160 --> 0:23:18.359
<v Speaker 2>It doesn't make much sense to me, considering that the

0:23:18.400 --> 0:23:22.080
<v Speaker 2>circuit courts are one step away from the Supreme Court

0:23:22.119 --> 0:23:26.680
<v Speaker 2>and are so much more important than the trial courts.

0:23:27.359 --> 0:23:31.480
<v Speaker 4>That's exactly right. I mean, both sides, Republicans and Democrats,

0:23:32.320 --> 0:23:36.359
<v Speaker 4>act that way, so it must be true because of

0:23:36.400 --> 0:23:40.440
<v Speaker 4>course they cover multiple states, they make more policy, they're

0:23:40.480 --> 0:23:43.760
<v Speaker 4>fewer of those judges, and as you suggest, they're one

0:23:43.840 --> 0:23:48.520
<v Speaker 4>level below the US Supreme Court, and so both sides

0:23:49.200 --> 0:23:52.040
<v Speaker 4>know how critical those are. And we saw that in

0:23:52.080 --> 0:23:55.280
<v Speaker 4>Trump's years with fifty four, which I think was a

0:23:55.320 --> 0:23:59.600
<v Speaker 4>record for one term of a presidency. And then Biden

0:24:00.440 --> 0:24:04.400
<v Speaker 4>has confirmed forty five and was hoping to eclipse Trump,

0:24:04.520 --> 0:24:08.000
<v Speaker 4>but that isn't possible, though he could have come quite

0:24:08.080 --> 0:24:11.240
<v Speaker 4>close with forty nine if the four on the floor

0:24:11.320 --> 0:24:13.000
<v Speaker 4>now had received votes.

0:24:13.760 --> 0:24:18.040
<v Speaker 2>Senator Mazie Herona, who's a Judiciary Committee member, said these

0:24:18.080 --> 0:24:21.439
<v Speaker 2>nominees emerged from hours long hearings where many have faced

0:24:21.680 --> 0:24:26.600
<v Speaker 2>unfounded personal and professional tax from Republicans on the Judiciary Committee.

0:24:26.920 --> 0:24:30.240
<v Speaker 2>The circuit courts are one step removed from the Supreme Court,

0:24:30.600 --> 0:24:34.320
<v Speaker 2>which makes these nominees especially critical. She's a member of

0:24:34.320 --> 0:24:36.960
<v Speaker 2>the Judiciary Committee who makes these deals.

0:24:37.680 --> 0:24:41.000
<v Speaker 4>Well, it sounds like this was a deal made by

0:24:41.359 --> 0:24:47.360
<v Speaker 4>Senator Schumer with Minority Leader to be soon on Thursday,

0:24:47.440 --> 0:24:51.800
<v Speaker 4>I believe after the obstruction by the Republicans of the

0:24:51.840 --> 0:24:56.680
<v Speaker 4>nominee at the district level. I think it was Schumer's decision,

0:24:56.920 --> 0:25:00.960
<v Speaker 4>perhaps in consultation with Senator Durbin the Charity Sherry Committee,

0:25:01.240 --> 0:25:03.880
<v Speaker 4>But that's not entirely clear, and there are not many

0:25:03.960 --> 0:25:07.520
<v Speaker 4>details about it. The most I think telling is a

0:25:07.640 --> 0:25:11.280
<v Speaker 4>quote from a spokesperson for him saying the trade was

0:25:11.320 --> 0:25:15.359
<v Speaker 4>four circuit nominees all lacking the votes to get confirmed,

0:25:15.480 --> 0:25:18.720
<v Speaker 4>which is contested by many for more than triple the

0:25:18.800 --> 0:25:24.280
<v Speaker 4>number of additional district judges moving forward. That summarizes what

0:25:24.680 --> 0:25:29.520
<v Speaker 4>the Shumer staffers and I think Schumern himself thought. But

0:25:29.800 --> 0:25:34.600
<v Speaker 4>many people have criticized that it's unfortunate, especially personally and

0:25:34.640 --> 0:25:39.399
<v Speaker 4>professionally for the nominees who had ruling hearings, and Senator

0:25:39.560 --> 0:25:42.359
<v Speaker 4>Rono is forret when she describes it that way and

0:25:42.400 --> 0:25:46.720
<v Speaker 4>had waited a long time, and the courts need their judges.

0:25:46.880 --> 0:25:48.600
<v Speaker 4>It's very unfortunate. Did that happen.

0:25:49.200 --> 0:25:53.560
<v Speaker 2>I understand that judges James Winn of the Fourth Circuit

0:25:53.720 --> 0:25:58.320
<v Speaker 2>and Jane Brend's letter Stranch of the Sixth Circuit could

0:25:58.359 --> 0:26:02.200
<v Speaker 2>still walk back theirs. I mean they were only going

0:26:02.200 --> 0:26:06.240
<v Speaker 2>to semi retire. They weren't going to stop hearing cases.

0:26:06.720 --> 0:26:12.320
<v Speaker 4>That's correct. They were saying that they would take senior

0:26:12.400 --> 0:26:15.120
<v Speaker 4>status and have probably a half case loads, and they

0:26:15.160 --> 0:26:18.160
<v Speaker 4>satisfied the rule of eighties that they were sixty five

0:26:18.240 --> 0:26:21.639
<v Speaker 4>and had fifteen years of service and were prepared to

0:26:21.720 --> 0:26:24.680
<v Speaker 4>do that upon the appointment of a successor. But as

0:26:24.680 --> 0:26:29.040
<v Speaker 4>you suggest, it is not set in stone until it

0:26:29.200 --> 0:26:32.960
<v Speaker 4>actually happens. And so there is this sort of custom

0:26:33.280 --> 0:26:37.399
<v Speaker 4>among especially appellate judges, which I think goes back to

0:26:38.040 --> 0:26:42.119
<v Speaker 4>about a decade ago when a number of Republican appointees

0:26:42.240 --> 0:26:46.240
<v Speaker 4>started doing that because they didn't want a Democratic president

0:26:46.280 --> 0:26:49.160
<v Speaker 4>to replace them depending on who was going to win

0:26:49.200 --> 0:26:53.359
<v Speaker 4>the election. And so it's come forward and as the

0:26:53.760 --> 0:26:58.240
<v Speaker 4>process has become increasingly partisan to some extent, the judges

0:26:58.680 --> 0:27:02.680
<v Speaker 4>are more sense to that as well. And so we're

0:27:02.680 --> 0:27:08.000
<v Speaker 4>seeing that with Republican appointees or appointings of Republican president

0:27:08.240 --> 0:27:12.440
<v Speaker 4>wanting to be sure that they're replaced by another Republican

0:27:12.480 --> 0:27:16.400
<v Speaker 4>president and pretty much the same for Democrats. And that's

0:27:16.440 --> 0:27:19.040
<v Speaker 4>where we are. And so that's what happened. So I

0:27:19.080 --> 0:27:22.400
<v Speaker 4>don't know what those two judges are likely to do,

0:27:22.520 --> 0:27:25.760
<v Speaker 4>but it's possible. And there's already a district judge in

0:27:25.880 --> 0:27:29.040
<v Speaker 4>Ohio who has done the same thing, But it is

0:27:29.080 --> 0:27:32.960
<v Speaker 4>certainly possible. And the deal then looks, as a number

0:27:32.960 --> 0:27:35.880
<v Speaker 4>of people have said, like a better deal. In fact,

0:27:35.960 --> 0:27:41.160
<v Speaker 4>that was the trade to the main seat for Judge Kayata,

0:27:41.640 --> 0:27:46.040
<v Speaker 4>who originally took senior status, just as the two other judges,

0:27:46.040 --> 0:27:48.879
<v Speaker 4>the six Circuit and Fourth Circuit judges did with a

0:27:48.960 --> 0:27:53.639
<v Speaker 4>to be determined designation but then converted to a current vacancy.

0:27:53.840 --> 0:27:57.800
<v Speaker 4>And then, of course the third Circuit seat was Judge Greenway,

0:27:57.880 --> 0:28:01.240
<v Speaker 4>and his vacancy is a current vacancy and so will

0:28:01.240 --> 0:28:04.240
<v Speaker 4>fall to Trump as well as a Kyata one in Maine,

0:28:04.280 --> 0:28:06.200
<v Speaker 4>the first Circuit, in the third circuit.

0:28:06.480 --> 0:28:09.680
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk about the ones that are definite, the third

0:28:09.800 --> 0:28:13.280
<v Speaker 2>Circuit and the first Circuit. What would that do if

0:28:13.280 --> 0:28:18.240
<v Speaker 2>Trump gets to appoint another judge to those circuits. I mean,

0:28:18.280 --> 0:28:22.720
<v Speaker 2>the first Circuit is basically all Democrat appointed judges right now.

0:28:23.160 --> 0:28:26.800
<v Speaker 4>So will there be any flipping, Well, it certainly won't

0:28:26.840 --> 0:28:29.959
<v Speaker 4>in the first because I think Biden has named just

0:28:30.000 --> 0:28:33.919
<v Speaker 4>about the entire cohort of active judges. Is the smallest

0:28:34.160 --> 0:28:37.200
<v Speaker 4>appeals court in the country. It only has six authorized

0:28:37.240 --> 0:28:40.360
<v Speaker 4>judge ships who are active status, and I believe he's

0:28:40.400 --> 0:28:45.760
<v Speaker 4>appointed five or four that will not flip. The third circuit,

0:28:45.800 --> 0:28:48.520
<v Speaker 4>I believe is closer, and it might be that if

0:28:48.560 --> 0:28:52.680
<v Speaker 4>it's all to Trump to fill Greenway's vacancy, that would

0:28:52.840 --> 0:28:55.560
<v Speaker 4>mean that I think they would be tied. That's an

0:28:55.560 --> 0:28:58.640
<v Speaker 4>important court, of course, and of course the nominee a deal.

0:28:58.720 --> 0:29:04.040
<v Speaker 4>Mungu was extremely well qualified but also belified by Republican

0:29:04.120 --> 0:29:07.320
<v Speaker 4>senators in his hearing, and it took fifteen months to

0:29:07.360 --> 0:29:08.360
<v Speaker 4>get to this point.

0:29:08.520 --> 0:29:11.280
<v Speaker 2>What were their claims against him? Was it that he

0:29:11.360 --> 0:29:12.280
<v Speaker 2>was anti Semitic?

0:29:12.760 --> 0:29:18.760
<v Speaker 4>There were questions about that, questions about whether he celebrated

0:29:19.120 --> 0:29:23.920
<v Speaker 4>nine to eleven in other pretty disgusting questions that were

0:29:23.960 --> 0:29:27.320
<v Speaker 4>asked of him. Also, he sat on a committee that

0:29:27.440 --> 0:29:31.920
<v Speaker 4>advised students at Rutgers Law School, and he said that

0:29:32.000 --> 0:29:34.120
<v Speaker 4>you know, there were hardly any meetings of that group

0:29:34.160 --> 0:29:36.200
<v Speaker 4>and he had very little to do with the group

0:29:36.240 --> 0:29:39.520
<v Speaker 4>he agreed to be a board member. They staged some

0:29:40.000 --> 0:29:44.640
<v Speaker 4>programs that Republicans thought were anti American, if you will,

0:29:44.800 --> 0:29:49.320
<v Speaker 4>but much of that was not really very well validated.

0:29:49.720 --> 0:29:51.520
<v Speaker 4>He did get out of the midtee on a party

0:29:51.560 --> 0:29:55.200
<v Speaker 4>line vote, but never had a four vote, and neither

0:29:55.240 --> 0:29:56.240
<v Speaker 4>did the others.

0:29:56.400 --> 0:30:02.480
<v Speaker 2>Trump made fifty four appellate appointments forty five. How many

0:30:02.520 --> 0:30:05.480
<v Speaker 2>more appellet appointments do you think besides these four that

0:30:05.520 --> 0:30:08.040
<v Speaker 2>we're talking about now, how many more do you think

0:30:08.200 --> 0:30:12.320
<v Speaker 2>can come up in Trump's term that he could flip

0:30:12.560 --> 0:30:13.600
<v Speaker 2>more circuits?

0:30:13.880 --> 0:30:16.040
<v Speaker 4>Well, that's a really good question. The way I see

0:30:16.080 --> 0:30:19.320
<v Speaker 4>it right now, if you're counting the numbers, there is

0:30:19.360 --> 0:30:23.680
<v Speaker 4>a Delaware vacancy that will come open on January fifteen.

0:30:24.320 --> 0:30:28.000
<v Speaker 4>Judge Kent Jordan is retiring, and so there's that, and

0:30:28.040 --> 0:30:31.640
<v Speaker 4>then the four we've been talking about, so right now

0:30:31.720 --> 0:30:34.920
<v Speaker 4>it looks like five. But you should know that there

0:30:34.960 --> 0:30:39.640
<v Speaker 4>are I believe, at least three dozen appointees of Republican

0:30:39.760 --> 0:30:43.120
<v Speaker 4>president on the appeals courts who are eligible for senior

0:30:43.160 --> 0:30:46.160
<v Speaker 4>status and could take it. Some of those go back

0:30:46.240 --> 0:30:49.040
<v Speaker 4>quite a distance, and so it's not clear that they

0:30:49.080 --> 0:30:51.240
<v Speaker 4>will do that. But you know, I would expect some

0:30:51.280 --> 0:30:54.800
<v Speaker 4>of that to happen during Trump's time, but it's hard

0:30:54.840 --> 0:30:57.480
<v Speaker 4>to estimate how many of those three dozen or so

0:30:58.080 --> 0:30:59.440
<v Speaker 4>will actually do.

0:30:59.600 --> 0:31:03.840
<v Speaker 2>So what about district court nominations. How has Biden done?

0:31:04.200 --> 0:31:06.800
<v Speaker 4>He's done very well. I mean, he has one hundred

0:31:06.800 --> 0:31:10.880
<v Speaker 4>and seventy three now on the floor. I think Republicans

0:31:10.920 --> 0:31:13.600
<v Speaker 4>have agreed to seven who will get votes and they

0:31:13.600 --> 0:31:16.840
<v Speaker 4>will be confirmed pretty certain. And then they are five

0:31:17.120 --> 0:31:20.120
<v Speaker 4>more who were voted at a committee just last week

0:31:20.680 --> 0:31:24.240
<v Speaker 4>and they are likely to be confirmed, which would bring

0:31:24.480 --> 0:31:27.640
<v Speaker 4>his total to something like one hundred and eighty five

0:31:27.760 --> 0:31:30.640
<v Speaker 4>at the district level. And then his total number of

0:31:30.640 --> 0:31:34.200
<v Speaker 4>appointees would look something like two thirty or two thirty

0:31:34.240 --> 0:31:36.800
<v Speaker 4>one to thirty two, depending on how you count it.

0:31:37.080 --> 0:31:40.920
<v Speaker 4>And then there are two California nominees who had a

0:31:41.000 --> 0:31:45.640
<v Speaker 4>hearing last Wednesday, and they might come forward and be

0:31:45.760 --> 0:31:51.640
<v Speaker 4>confirmed because their mainstream judges they had a relatively good

0:31:51.680 --> 0:31:54.680
<v Speaker 4>hearing and they're quite moderate. So then I think the

0:31:54.840 --> 0:31:58.120
<v Speaker 4>estimate of the number that Trump will have on the

0:31:58.160 --> 0:32:03.000
<v Speaker 4>district bench when he comes in on twenty is somewhere

0:32:03.160 --> 0:32:05.680
<v Speaker 4>in the thirties. So that's what it looks like.

0:32:06.200 --> 0:32:08.920
<v Speaker 2>Well, this time, Trump won't have the build up of

0:32:09.400 --> 0:32:14.320
<v Speaker 2>vacancies that Mitch McConnell was able to give him by

0:32:14.320 --> 0:32:21.840
<v Speaker 2>withholding confirmations of President Obama's nominees, including his Supreme Court nominee.

0:32:22.000 --> 0:32:24.960
<v Speaker 2>Thanks so much, Carl. That's Professor Carl Tobias of the

0:32:25.040 --> 0:32:28.160
<v Speaker 2>University of Richmond Law School. And that's it for this

0:32:28.280 --> 0:32:31.000
<v Speaker 2>edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always

0:32:31.040 --> 0:32:33.960
<v Speaker 2>get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast.

0:32:34.240 --> 0:32:37.280
<v Speaker 2>You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at

0:32:37.440 --> 0:32:42.440
<v Speaker 2>www dot bloomberg dot com slash podcast Slash Law. I'm

0:32:42.520 --> 0:32:44.960
<v Speaker 2>June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg