1
00:00:03,480 --> 00:00:07,560
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

2
00:00:07,640 --> 00:00:10,440
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:13,440
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more

4
00:00:13,480 --> 00:00:18,040
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

5
00:00:18,320 --> 00:00:22,560
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. President Trump has

6
00:00:22,600 --> 00:00:24,919
Speaker 1: blocked what would have been the largest tech deal in

7
00:00:25,079 --> 00:00:31,360
Speaker 1: US history, Broadcom's one seventeen billion dollar hostel takeover of Qualcom.

8
00:00:31,360 --> 00:00:34,720
Speaker 1: This was just the fifth time since that a US

9
00:00:34,840 --> 00:00:38,120
Speaker 1: president stopped a foreign take over an American firm on

10
00:00:38,280 --> 00:00:42,120
Speaker 1: national security grounds. Trump issued the executive order after a

11
00:00:42,159 --> 00:00:45,400
Speaker 1: recommendation from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US

12
00:00:45,960 --> 00:00:49,479
Speaker 1: Joining me from our Bloomberg San Francisco Studios is Matt Lawson,

13
00:00:49,520 --> 00:00:54,600
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Intelligence litigation analyst Matt. In his executive order, Trump said,

14
00:00:54,640 --> 00:00:58,520
Speaker 1: there's credible evidence that leads me to believe that Broadcom,

15
00:00:58,560 --> 00:01:02,440
Speaker 1: by acquiring called Welcome, might take action that threatens to

16
00:01:02,480 --> 00:01:06,400
Speaker 1: impair the national security of the United States. What is

17
00:01:06,440 --> 00:01:10,399
Speaker 1: that evidence? You know. The one of the problems with

18
00:01:10,760 --> 00:01:14,920
Speaker 1: with these investigations, the CIFIUS Investigations Committee Foreign Investment in

19
00:01:14,959 --> 00:01:16,360
Speaker 1: the U S is there's not a whole lot of

20
00:01:16,400 --> 00:01:20,360
Speaker 1: transparency as to what they're looking at. Specifically, it's largely

21
00:01:20,480 --> 00:01:23,160
Speaker 1: it looks to be largely directed to the development of

22
00:01:23,319 --> 00:01:28,000
Speaker 1: five G and next generation wireless communication devices. UM. There's

23
00:01:28,000 --> 00:01:30,760
Speaker 1: a lot of concern about who is leading the way

24
00:01:30,800 --> 00:01:34,679
Speaker 1: and developing this these technologies, what it could mean for UM,

25
00:01:34,920 --> 00:01:38,800
Speaker 1: for data privacy, for security, for espionage, etcetera. And so

26
00:01:38,880 --> 00:01:42,000
Speaker 1: I think that there's there's large concern that consolidation among

27
00:01:42,480 --> 00:01:45,440
Speaker 1: either businesses that do of a lot of work in

28
00:01:45,560 --> 00:01:48,760
Speaker 1: China or Chinese own businesses. Not that Broadcom is a

29
00:01:48,880 --> 00:01:51,960
Speaker 1: Chinese own business, but there's a concern that UM that

30
00:01:52,080 --> 00:01:57,480
Speaker 1: movements of those technologies abroad would compromise US interests. So

31
00:01:57,960 --> 00:02:00,680
Speaker 1: this does come in the wake of Trump's announced of

32
00:02:00,800 --> 00:02:03,520
Speaker 1: tariffs on steel and aluminum. But are you saying that

33
00:02:03,560 --> 00:02:06,720
Speaker 1: blocking the Broadcom takeover has less to do with his

34
00:02:06,840 --> 00:02:10,880
Speaker 1: general protectionist stance and is more focused on technology or

35
00:02:10,919 --> 00:02:13,359
Speaker 1: on China. I would say it's a little bit of both.

36
00:02:13,400 --> 00:02:17,400
Speaker 1: I mean, there's certainly a protectionist flavor to it. You know,

37
00:02:17,520 --> 00:02:21,239
Speaker 1: Qualcom is you know US company. They have a very

38
00:02:21,280 --> 00:02:24,840
Speaker 1: strong foothold in the development of five G and next

39
00:02:24,880 --> 00:02:29,120
Speaker 1: generation technologies. They are UM the leader in developing the

40
00:02:29,200 --> 00:02:32,560
Speaker 1: chip sets that will drive next generation devices, and so

41
00:02:32,960 --> 00:02:36,880
Speaker 1: given the Trump administration's focus on developing infrastructure and leading

42
00:02:36,919 --> 00:02:38,840
Speaker 1: the way in five G in the US, it makes

43
00:02:38,840 --> 00:02:44,480
Speaker 1: sense to to keep those businesses isolated from from foreign interests.

44
00:02:44,560 --> 00:02:46,079
Speaker 1: So it has a little bit to do with the

45
00:02:46,160 --> 00:02:47,520
Speaker 1: tech and it also has a little bit to do

46
00:02:47,600 --> 00:02:51,240
Speaker 1: with the with the overall economic goals of the administration

47
00:02:51,280 --> 00:02:53,000
Speaker 1: to be a little bit more protectionist and a little

48
00:02:53,000 --> 00:02:57,680
Speaker 1: bit more US focused. This move by a president to

49
00:02:57,760 --> 00:03:01,440
Speaker 1: stop a hostile bid for a company was unprecedented in

50
00:03:01,480 --> 00:03:04,919
Speaker 1: that Ciffius intervened in the middle of a proxy fight

51
00:03:05,160 --> 00:03:09,240
Speaker 1: rather than waiting for a formal purchase agreement. Are there

52
00:03:09,280 --> 00:03:13,200
Speaker 1: any concerns that could set a precedent for future deals? Yeah,

53
00:03:13,200 --> 00:03:16,040
Speaker 1: I think that's That's largely everyone's concern right now. Is

54
00:03:17,040 --> 00:03:19,679
Speaker 1: you know, the president jumped the gun a little bit.

55
00:03:19,720 --> 00:03:22,320
Speaker 1: I think is is kind of how people are viewing this. Typically,

56
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:27,200
Speaker 1: CIFIUS will review, they'll issue UM a ruling or suggested

57
00:03:27,240 --> 00:03:31,359
Speaker 1: remedial order. Sometimes companies can can siphon off business segments

58
00:03:31,400 --> 00:03:36,480
Speaker 1: to UH to address any national security concerns. But here

59
00:03:36,560 --> 00:03:38,760
Speaker 1: you kind of had the president hop in and just

60
00:03:38,800 --> 00:03:42,800
Speaker 1: put an end to the deal before a complete Siffius,

61
00:03:43,240 --> 00:03:45,920
Speaker 1: before the the CIFIUS process could run its run its course.

62
00:03:45,960 --> 00:03:48,800
Speaker 1: And so as you're looking at future M and A activity,

63
00:03:49,360 --> 00:03:52,840
Speaker 1: future joint ventures, etcetera, I think, you know, tech companies

64
00:03:52,880 --> 00:03:54,920
Speaker 1: are going to be scratching their heads a little bit

65
00:03:55,040 --> 00:03:58,080
Speaker 1: and and being overly cautious before they enter into these

66
00:03:58,160 --> 00:04:00,440
Speaker 1: kind of deals for fear that the president or or

67
00:04:00,480 --> 00:04:03,480
Speaker 1: SIPHIUS may take a more aggressive stance on blocking the deals.

68
00:04:04,000 --> 00:04:06,920
Speaker 1: At least a half dozen tech deals have collapsed during

69
00:04:06,920 --> 00:04:11,120
Speaker 1: the Trump administration in the face of concerns raised by CIPHIUS.

70
00:04:11,560 --> 00:04:14,160
Speaker 1: So do you expect that any deal that could give

71
00:04:14,280 --> 00:04:18,320
Speaker 1: China and edge in critical technology will be blocked in

72
00:04:18,360 --> 00:04:21,440
Speaker 1: the name of national security? You know, certainly as we're

73
00:04:21,480 --> 00:04:25,080
Speaker 1: looking at developments in five G, there's been a lot

74
00:04:25,120 --> 00:04:30,000
Speaker 1: of skepticism looking at you know, Chinese handset makers and

75
00:04:30,000 --> 00:04:34,440
Speaker 1: ship makers and network infrastructure companies like Huawei Zte have

76
00:04:34,560 --> 00:04:40,440
Speaker 1: been explicitly called out by by lawmakers, UM and government officials.

77
00:04:40,520 --> 00:04:44,479
Speaker 1: So it's it's going to be a touchy subject moving forward, UM.

78
00:04:44,560 --> 00:04:46,440
Speaker 1: You know, especially if there's a lot of development in

79
00:04:46,520 --> 00:04:49,880
Speaker 1: next generation wireless, both in UH in a pack and

80
00:04:49,880 --> 00:04:51,839
Speaker 1: and in the US kind of moving in parallel. Will

81
00:04:51,880 --> 00:04:55,040
Speaker 1: be interesting to see how policymakers decide to to approach

82
00:04:55,080 --> 00:04:58,119
Speaker 1: this moving forward. And is there a move by policymakers

83
00:04:58,200 --> 00:05:03,640
Speaker 1: to actually expand the reach of Scythius There is, there's

84
00:05:03,680 --> 00:05:08,080
Speaker 1: there's discussion about expanding UM the scope and a little

85
00:05:08,080 --> 00:05:11,160
Speaker 1: bit of the authority of Scifius moving forward. UM. You know,

86
00:05:11,200 --> 00:05:15,960
Speaker 1: Cifius already has pretty broad jurisdiction UM when it comes

87
00:05:16,000 --> 00:05:20,719
Speaker 1: to looking at foreign investments and potential control over US

88
00:05:20,800 --> 00:05:24,719
Speaker 1: interests UM. And so lawmakers are you know, have considered

89
00:05:24,720 --> 00:05:29,640
Speaker 1: expanding that, especially as there are growing concerns over different

90
00:05:29,640 --> 00:05:34,440
Speaker 1: types of data security technology, access to information kind of

91
00:05:34,480 --> 00:05:39,080
Speaker 1: who can UM influence the tech on on both sides,

92
00:05:39,120 --> 00:05:42,000
Speaker 1: both the developments and then also the utilization. So lawmakers

93
00:05:42,000 --> 00:05:46,200
Speaker 1: are certainly looking at expanding their their grip on controlling

94
00:05:46,240 --> 00:05:49,719
Speaker 1: those types of technologies and investments moving forward. So, Matt,

95
00:05:49,800 --> 00:05:52,760
Speaker 1: what's next for Qualcom? Yeah, So with the with the

96
00:05:52,800 --> 00:05:56,440
Speaker 1: broad Calm drama out of the way, UM qual calms shareholders,

97
00:05:56,480 --> 00:05:59,359
Speaker 1: I think we'll start focusing back on the licensing business.

98
00:05:59,680 --> 00:06:03,000
Speaker 1: Qual Com has been in a global licensing dispute with

99
00:06:03,120 --> 00:06:08,440
Speaker 1: Apple over appropriate royalty rates. About a third of Qualcom's

100
00:06:08,480 --> 00:06:11,240
Speaker 1: revenue and two thirds of its profitability prior to this

101
00:06:11,320 --> 00:06:15,320
Speaker 1: dispute came from patent licensing. Apple says Qualcom is charging

102
00:06:15,440 --> 00:06:18,080
Speaker 1: rates that are too high on these assets, and as

103
00:06:18,080 --> 00:06:21,400
Speaker 1: a result, Qualcom is being bled out by about four

104
00:06:21,480 --> 00:06:24,560
Speaker 1: billion a year in unpaid royalties from Apple and Apples

105
00:06:24,560 --> 00:06:28,880
Speaker 1: contract manufacturers. So the focus is now on this dispute.

106
00:06:28,880 --> 00:06:31,480
Speaker 1: Can Qualcom turn the corner? Can they do a deal

107
00:06:31,520 --> 00:06:35,800
Speaker 1: with Apple and resolve this widespread litigation um and kind

108
00:06:35,800 --> 00:06:37,360
Speaker 1: of move the company forward. I think that's what a

109
00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:39,080
Speaker 1: lot of people are gonna be focusing on for you

110
00:06:39,080 --> 00:06:41,200
Speaker 1: have a very tough job. You have a very tough

111
00:06:41,279 --> 00:06:45,560
Speaker 1: job keeping track of technology litigation today because there's so

112
00:06:45,720 --> 00:06:49,920
Speaker 1: much of it. Just in in about forty five seconds,

113
00:06:50,000 --> 00:06:53,479
Speaker 1: when could we see progress in the Apple lawsuits? Yeah?

114
00:06:53,480 --> 00:06:56,560
Speaker 1: So overall their forty four Apple lawsuits, there maybe a

115
00:06:56,600 --> 00:06:59,240
Speaker 1: couple more that I'm that I'm missing across eight different countries.

116
00:06:59,279 --> 00:07:03,440
Speaker 1: We're looking at trials and some initial decisions either at

117
00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:05,159
Speaker 1: the end of the second quarter and probably in the

118
00:07:05,240 --> 00:07:08,080
Speaker 1: second half of the year. From We're looking at Germany, China,

119
00:07:08,160 --> 00:07:10,559
Speaker 1: and there should be a US International Trade Commission trial

120
00:07:10,600 --> 00:07:13,440
Speaker 1: in June. So those are the next catalyst coming up.

121
00:07:13,760 --> 00:07:17,040
Speaker 1: Sure to keep you busy and me busy as well.

122
00:07:17,240 --> 00:07:19,520
Speaker 1: Thanks so much, Matt, Always a pleasure to have you on.

123
00:07:19,640 --> 00:07:23,400
Speaker 1: That's Matt Larsenit's Bloomberg Intelligence Litigation Analyst. For more of

124
00:07:23,480 --> 00:07:25,880
Speaker 1: his analysis, you can go to d I go on

125
00:07:25,960 --> 00:07:34,000
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg terminal. Polls are open in Pennsylvania's eighteen district

126
00:07:34,040 --> 00:07:37,600
Speaker 1: as a national political spotlight, Shaun's on a special election

127
00:07:38,000 --> 00:07:41,040
Speaker 1: in a district that may not exist soon. The first

128
00:07:41,040 --> 00:07:43,960
Speaker 1: special House election of the year pits Democrat Connor Lamb

129
00:07:43,960 --> 00:07:47,120
Speaker 1: against Republican ricks A Cone in a district that President

130
00:07:47,120 --> 00:07:49,960
Speaker 1: Trump won by twenty points, but the race is too

131
00:07:49,960 --> 00:07:52,720
Speaker 1: close to call. The special election was triggered by the

132
00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:57,520
Speaker 1: resignation of Republican Congressman Tim Murphy following allegations he asked

133
00:07:57,520 --> 00:08:00,600
Speaker 1: a woman to end her pregnancy. Joining me as its fault.

134
00:08:00,640 --> 00:08:04,040
Speaker 1: Professor at Columbia Law School and an expert in election law,

135
00:08:04,600 --> 00:08:07,679
Speaker 1: rich This is a district where the Democrats didn't even

136
00:08:07,920 --> 00:08:11,440
Speaker 1: field a candidate in the last two congressional elections. If

137
00:08:11,560 --> 00:08:16,800
Speaker 1: Lamb wins or even comes close, what does that indicate well,

138
00:08:16,840 --> 00:08:21,240
Speaker 1: it indicates uh, he continuing trend in a number of

139
00:08:21,280 --> 00:08:23,520
Speaker 1: the special elections we've seen over the last year or so.

140
00:08:24,000 --> 00:08:28,240
Speaker 1: Gewargia Democrats, all the Democrats in general have They haven't

141
00:08:28,240 --> 00:08:32,440
Speaker 1: always won, but they have almost consistently outperformed their prior

142
00:08:32,480 --> 00:08:35,280
Speaker 1: records and almost all the special elections that have been held,

143
00:08:35,800 --> 00:08:39,240
Speaker 1: uh in since the middle of last year. This is

144
00:08:39,960 --> 00:08:43,600
Speaker 1: a district that Republicans have won for I don't know

145
00:08:43,600 --> 00:08:48,320
Speaker 1: about twenty years. And Trump went down there and over

146
00:08:48,360 --> 00:08:53,120
Speaker 1: the weekend and really did some heavy campaigning for the candidate.

147
00:08:53,640 --> 00:08:56,240
Speaker 1: So he really does he really have a lot at

148
00:08:56,240 --> 00:08:59,120
Speaker 1: stake here. Well, it would be a big embarrassment to

149
00:08:59,160 --> 00:09:02,480
Speaker 1: lose this district. As you point out, the district has

150
00:09:02,480 --> 00:09:05,680
Speaker 1: been in Republican hands for about twenty years. Uh. Last

151
00:09:05,720 --> 00:09:09,760
Speaker 1: time in the Democrats didn't even put up a nominee. Uh.

152
00:09:09,760 --> 00:09:12,280
Speaker 1: Trump took the district by twenty points. Romney took it

153
00:09:12,360 --> 00:09:16,200
Speaker 1: by about the same in twelve UM. It is on

154
00:09:16,280 --> 00:09:19,600
Speaker 1: average about more Republican than the country as a whole,

155
00:09:20,040 --> 00:09:23,280
Speaker 1: So to lose it would be quite embarrassing. Now people

156
00:09:23,320 --> 00:09:26,640
Speaker 1: are talking about this and other elections as an indicator

157
00:09:26,679 --> 00:09:29,120
Speaker 1: for the mid terms, but the mid terms are still

158
00:09:29,200 --> 00:09:32,680
Speaker 1: eight months away and a lot can happen between them.

159
00:09:32,679 --> 00:09:36,360
Speaker 1: And now do you look at these elections as indicators.

160
00:09:37,240 --> 00:09:40,560
Speaker 1: It's premature. I mean, um, I mean they tell us

161
00:09:40,600 --> 00:09:42,439
Speaker 1: what they tell us. They tell us that as these

162
00:09:42,480 --> 00:09:45,040
Speaker 1: other elections have shown this that in the recent months

163
00:09:45,040 --> 00:09:47,120
Speaker 1: there are the Republicans are not as popular as they

164
00:09:47,160 --> 00:09:50,560
Speaker 1: once were, and the president may be pulling things down again.

165
00:09:50,600 --> 00:09:53,120
Speaker 1: They've they've won a lot of their special elections, but

166
00:09:53,160 --> 00:09:55,080
Speaker 1: they've simply won them by an hour of margins than

167
00:09:55,120 --> 00:09:56,880
Speaker 1: in the past. And of course they say this, they

168
00:09:56,920 --> 00:10:01,240
Speaker 1: lost the Alabama seat. Now, unless there's last minute reversal

169
00:10:01,320 --> 00:10:04,400
Speaker 1: by the courts, the eighteenth district will soon cease to

170
00:10:04,440 --> 00:10:09,840
Speaker 1: exist in its current form. Explain what's happened there? Sure so, um,

171
00:10:09,880 --> 00:10:12,840
Speaker 1: there was a lawsuit was brought challenging the Pennsylvania Congressional

172
00:10:12,920 --> 00:10:17,560
Speaker 1: district plan as heavily gerrymander in favor of the Republicans. Uh.

173
00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:19,760
Speaker 1: Since the plan was adopted back in the beginning of

174
00:10:19,760 --> 00:10:23,960
Speaker 1: this decade, Republicans of the state has eighteen districts. Republicans

175
00:10:23,960 --> 00:10:27,840
Speaker 1: have consistently won thirteen, leaving the Democrats five. This is

176
00:10:27,880 --> 00:10:29,719
Speaker 1: a state which is pretty much a swing state and

177
00:10:29,800 --> 00:10:32,720
Speaker 1: when Democratics for president the less several elections until the

178
00:10:32,760 --> 00:10:36,079
Speaker 1: most recently until sixteen when Trump took it. It currently

179
00:10:36,080 --> 00:10:40,400
Speaker 1: has a Democratic governor. It has one Democratic senator. Pennsylvania

180
00:10:40,520 --> 00:10:44,920
Speaker 1: is a classic swing state, but it's congressional delegation has

181
00:10:44,960 --> 00:10:48,320
Speaker 1: been heavily weighted Republican, largely due to the nature of

182
00:10:48,360 --> 00:10:51,560
Speaker 1: the map and so the Pennsylvania courts. The Pennsylvania this

183
00:10:51,640 --> 00:10:54,440
Speaker 1: was litigated in the Pennsylvania state courts under their their

184
00:10:54,440 --> 00:10:58,240
Speaker 1: state constitutions guarantees of free speech and equal protection. That

185
00:10:58,360 --> 00:11:03,480
Speaker 1: court concluded that this district was impermissively unconstitutionally gerrymandered and

186
00:11:03,800 --> 00:11:07,160
Speaker 1: ordered a new plan to be developed. The legislature didn't

187
00:11:07,200 --> 00:11:10,080
Speaker 1: do that. They pointed a special master. He came up

188
00:11:10,080 --> 00:11:12,920
Speaker 1: with a plan which they reproved, which would, as you say,

189
00:11:12,920 --> 00:11:16,439
Speaker 1: it's basically eliminate this district in its current form, in

190
00:11:16,520 --> 00:11:20,080
Speaker 1: effect dividing it amongst so splitting it uh in two

191
00:11:20,080 --> 00:11:22,319
Speaker 1: different ways. The district which is kind of a hybrid

192
00:11:22,679 --> 00:11:26,280
Speaker 1: suburban and rural district, and the suburban part would become

193
00:11:26,320 --> 00:11:29,680
Speaker 1: more more suburban, the rural part become more rural. Now,

194
00:11:30,200 --> 00:11:34,960
Speaker 1: is there any likelihood that that Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision

195
00:11:35,120 --> 00:11:39,440
Speaker 1: would be reversed. It's possible. Republicans have been challenging the

196
00:11:39,440 --> 00:11:41,440
Speaker 1: Pennsylanian Supreme Court is of course the highest court in

197
00:11:41,480 --> 00:11:44,679
Speaker 1: the state, so no state court can reverse it. Reublicans

198
00:11:44,720 --> 00:11:46,439
Speaker 1: have tried to get the U. S. Supreme Court to

199
00:11:46,480 --> 00:11:49,040
Speaker 1: take on the case. So far the court has declined.

200
00:11:49,040 --> 00:11:52,360
Speaker 1: The Court declined to enter it by issuing a temporary

201
00:11:52,520 --> 00:11:57,720
Speaker 1: restraining order blocking the thus the Pennsylvania Court to add decision. Uh,

202
00:11:57,760 --> 00:12:01,880
Speaker 1: there's now another appeal pending. It would be unusual to

203
00:12:01,960 --> 00:12:06,560
Speaker 1: step in, but you know it's not out of the question. Um.

204
00:12:06,640 --> 00:12:09,640
Speaker 1: The new map that you've been talking about will slit,

205
00:12:09,760 --> 00:12:12,360
Speaker 1: as you said, most of the current eighteenth district into

206
00:12:12,400 --> 00:12:16,240
Speaker 1: the four and the seventeenth district. If Scone wins, he

207
00:12:16,360 --> 00:12:20,040
Speaker 1: said he would seek re election in the fourteenth district.

208
00:12:20,200 --> 00:12:22,760
Speaker 1: Is that a good choice for him? That I believe

209
00:12:22,920 --> 00:12:25,400
Speaker 1: is the more rural one as the rural part of

210
00:12:25,440 --> 00:12:27,680
Speaker 1: the districts. I understand that the district has a is

211
00:12:27,720 --> 00:12:32,640
Speaker 1: about in a suburban area and about in a rural area.

212
00:12:32,640 --> 00:12:35,840
Speaker 1: And I think, um, and this is how Republicans because

213
00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:39,000
Speaker 1: it's kind of uh, sort of deluded the suburban vote,

214
00:12:39,040 --> 00:12:42,480
Speaker 1: which is pretty evenly balanced between Republicans and Democrats, by

215
00:12:42,559 --> 00:12:45,920
Speaker 1: combining with a much more Republican area. So most yes,

216
00:12:45,960 --> 00:12:48,520
Speaker 1: he would most likely one in the rural district, uh,

217
00:12:48,640 --> 00:12:52,560
Speaker 1: leaving um and and in effect r probably become better

218
00:12:52,640 --> 00:12:55,120
Speaker 1: for him. Uh if if he, if he wins and

219
00:12:55,160 --> 00:12:58,480
Speaker 1: then become and runs in the new fourteen, we should

220
00:12:58,520 --> 00:13:00,920
Speaker 1: say that the winner will still have to run again

221
00:13:00,960 --> 00:13:04,480
Speaker 1: in November. That's right, right? Whoever will take office? I

222
00:13:04,480 --> 00:13:08,000
Speaker 1: guess Wednesday. Maybe he says, how quickly they concertify the results,

223
00:13:08,040 --> 00:13:09,920
Speaker 1: Maybe it's like a little longer than that will only

224
00:13:09,960 --> 00:13:11,840
Speaker 1: serve until the end of this year. They will the

225
00:13:11,880 --> 00:13:16,000
Speaker 1: regularly scheduled election in November will be held in this

226
00:13:16,040 --> 00:13:17,800
Speaker 1: person will only serve until the end of the year,

227
00:13:18,040 --> 00:13:21,720
Speaker 1: So Lamb. Though he hasn't said anything, some election experts

228
00:13:21,720 --> 00:13:25,000
Speaker 1: say he's likely to run in the sevente district, where

229
00:13:25,040 --> 00:13:28,800
Speaker 1: there is an incumbent Republicans. Will that be a tough

230
00:13:28,840 --> 00:13:33,120
Speaker 1: battle for him, probably, but that district will become more

231
00:13:33,160 --> 00:13:36,200
Speaker 1: democratic entities now and he will be able to take

232
00:13:36,280 --> 00:13:39,920
Speaker 1: with him part of the current district. So in other words,

233
00:13:39,960 --> 00:13:43,600
Speaker 1: that that all the districts will have the same names

234
00:13:43,600 --> 00:13:47,880
Speaker 1: but different contents. So the seventeenth district that will that

235
00:13:47,960 --> 00:13:51,160
Speaker 1: will be whether be an election in November, will not

236
00:13:51,200 --> 00:13:53,600
Speaker 1: be today's seventeenth district. And there is a belief that

237
00:13:54,320 --> 00:13:57,280
Speaker 1: once UH, if the districts go forward as under the

238
00:13:57,280 --> 00:14:00,280
Speaker 1: new plan, that district will be a lot more democt,

239
00:14:00,440 --> 00:14:02,679
Speaker 1: a lot more balance than maybe more pro democratic than

240
00:14:02,720 --> 00:14:07,640
Speaker 1: it is now. Rich Just UH, briefly, what cases are

241
00:14:07,840 --> 00:14:12,080
Speaker 1: involving voting are we waiting for Supreme Court decisions in Well,

242
00:14:12,120 --> 00:14:15,080
Speaker 1: basically there are two cases that the Supreme Court has taken.

243
00:14:15,120 --> 00:14:18,200
Speaker 1: One of the Wisconsin case, the Guild case, which was

244
00:14:18,320 --> 00:14:21,720
Speaker 1: a challenge to the entire map of the state legislative

245
00:14:21,720 --> 00:14:25,080
Speaker 1: map in Wisconsin and brings the most comprehensive UH proposal

246
00:14:25,160 --> 00:14:27,520
Speaker 1: for the Supreme Court to get into the reviewing of

247
00:14:27,560 --> 00:14:31,360
Speaker 1: partisan gerrymandering. There's also a challenge to a specific district

248
00:14:31,360 --> 00:14:35,400
Speaker 1: in Maryland. So the district in Wisconsin was a Republican gerrymanager,

249
00:14:35,640 --> 00:14:37,600
Speaker 1: the one in Maryland was a democratic one in which

250
00:14:37,600 --> 00:14:41,720
Speaker 1: a previously Republican congressional district was reconfigured to allow Democrats

251
00:14:41,720 --> 00:14:45,400
Speaker 1: to win. That that case has a different theory targeting

252
00:14:45,440 --> 00:14:48,680
Speaker 1: just a specific district Uh, and focuses on the district

253
00:14:48,720 --> 00:14:51,360
Speaker 1: lines and on the stated intent. And then there is

254
00:14:51,400 --> 00:14:54,960
Speaker 1: the possibility that they might take on this reviewing the

255
00:14:54,960 --> 00:14:58,880
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania decision with going to the Pennsylvania a congressional plan,

256
00:14:59,160 --> 00:15:02,560
Speaker 1: which would make things even more complicated. Uh, if they

257
00:15:02,600 --> 00:15:05,120
Speaker 1: had to, if they took it on, how could they

258
00:15:05,120 --> 00:15:08,520
Speaker 1: really take it on and uh make it make it

259
00:15:08,920 --> 00:15:12,120
Speaker 1: work before they could do it now? In other words,

260
00:15:12,360 --> 00:15:15,000
Speaker 1: the most likely they would is that they would block

261
00:15:15,080 --> 00:15:18,560
Speaker 1: the court decision, let the district continue on its current lines,

262
00:15:18,600 --> 00:15:21,280
Speaker 1: and probably hear it next Hall. It's hard to imagine

263
00:15:21,280 --> 00:15:24,200
Speaker 1: that they could actually have a full blown hearing on

264
00:15:24,320 --> 00:15:27,400
Speaker 1: at this point. So again, you never know. We we'll

265
00:15:27,480 --> 00:15:31,320
Speaker 1: talk again soon. Thank you, rich that's Richard for Fault, Professor,

266
00:15:31,400 --> 00:15:35,239
Speaker 1: Columbia Law School. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast.

267
00:15:35,560 --> 00:15:39,640
Speaker 1: You can subscribe and listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

268
00:15:39,720 --> 00:15:43,600
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso.

269
00:15:44,080 --> 00:15:47,960
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg yea