1 00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg Radio. 2 00:00:08,840 --> 00:00:13,119 Speaker 2: After just fourteen months, Pam Bondi, a loyal Trump ally, 3 00:00:13,600 --> 00:00:17,440 Speaker 2: is out as Attorney General after failing to deliver criminal 4 00:00:17,520 --> 00:00:23,439 Speaker 2: cases against President Trump's political enemies. Bondy oversaw the unprecedented 5 00:00:23,520 --> 00:00:27,280 Speaker 2: transformation of the Justice Department into an arm of the 6 00:00:27,320 --> 00:00:31,360 Speaker 2: White House and tried to pursue cases against Democrats and 7 00:00:31,440 --> 00:00:37,159 Speaker 2: the President's perceived political enemies. But Wilher's successor fare any better, 8 00:00:37,440 --> 00:00:41,360 Speaker 2: facing the same factual and legal hurdles and a skeptical 9 00:00:41,440 --> 00:00:45,519 Speaker 2: court system. My guest is constitutional law professor Harold Krentt 10 00:00:45,800 --> 00:00:48,760 Speaker 2: of the Chicago Kent College of Law. He'll tell us 11 00:00:48,760 --> 00:00:52,000 Speaker 2: how the Justice Department became an arm of the White 12 00:00:52,080 --> 00:00:55,760 Speaker 2: House under Bondie, something we've never seen before. 13 00:00:55,880 --> 00:00:59,320 Speaker 3: Obviously, the ties between the actions on the ground for 14 00:00:59,400 --> 00:01:02,120 Speaker 3: the Department Justice and the President become closer and closer. 15 00:01:02,320 --> 00:01:04,480 Speaker 3: Obviously that's been a priority of the president to try 16 00:01:04,520 --> 00:01:06,640 Speaker 3: to take everything in his own image and make sure 17 00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:09,840 Speaker 3: that he can direct even very minor issues, but in 18 00:01:09,840 --> 00:01:13,800 Speaker 3: this case very important prosecutorial issues. And the Bondi's reign 19 00:01:13,920 --> 00:01:19,120 Speaker 3: is probably most notable because of the revenge that Trump 20 00:01:19,319 --> 00:01:23,720 Speaker 3: overtly tried to take against his enemies via the Department 21 00:01:23,800 --> 00:01:24,440 Speaker 3: of Justice. 22 00:01:24,640 --> 00:01:28,440 Speaker 2: So apparently one of the reasons that she was fired 23 00:01:28,680 --> 00:01:33,080 Speaker 2: is that Trump wasn't satisfied with her prosecution of his 24 00:01:33,120 --> 00:01:35,840 Speaker 2: political enemies. But she did try. It seemed like the 25 00:01:35,920 --> 00:01:37,760 Speaker 2: legal system stood in her way. 26 00:01:38,200 --> 00:01:40,959 Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean the irony is she did his bidding 27 00:01:41,280 --> 00:01:44,920 Speaker 3: and she tried to you know, politicize, weaponize the Department Justice, 28 00:01:44,920 --> 00:01:48,520 Speaker 3: whichever word you know works with the James Comy prosecution, 29 00:01:49,000 --> 00:01:53,920 Speaker 3: with the prosecution of John Bolton, Letitia James. She's just 30 00:01:53,960 --> 00:01:58,200 Speaker 3: trying to follow President Trump's orders of trying to get 31 00:01:58,240 --> 00:02:01,800 Speaker 3: back at his enemies, and it didn't work. It wasn't 32 00:02:01,840 --> 00:02:05,480 Speaker 3: her fault, probably not. It just wasn't there. And so 33 00:02:05,680 --> 00:02:09,240 Speaker 3: the fact that she's being canned because she couldn't do 34 00:02:09,360 --> 00:02:13,240 Speaker 3: the impossible is really a partial triumph of the justice 35 00:02:13,240 --> 00:02:16,040 Speaker 3: system in the United States, but also an irony as well. 36 00:02:16,600 --> 00:02:19,920 Speaker 2: She did appoint Lindsay Halligan as a US attorney and 37 00:02:20,440 --> 00:02:25,720 Speaker 2: a judge throughout the prosecutions against Komi and James, because 38 00:02:25,720 --> 00:02:28,880 Speaker 2: Halligan was illegally appointed. But I don't know if Halligan 39 00:02:29,000 --> 00:02:31,440 Speaker 2: was Bondi's choice or Trump's choice. 40 00:02:31,800 --> 00:02:34,400 Speaker 3: So if you think about what's gone wrong, there's the 41 00:02:34,840 --> 00:02:38,760 Speaker 3: weaponization of the Department of Justice to go against Trump's enemies. 42 00:02:38,919 --> 00:02:42,919 Speaker 3: Also the chaos that was sown because of these inter appointments, 43 00:02:43,120 --> 00:02:45,480 Speaker 3: and probably the fault doesn't lie with her. It probably 44 00:02:45,480 --> 00:02:47,840 Speaker 3: lies with the president or the President's closer circle. But 45 00:02:47,919 --> 00:02:51,240 Speaker 3: we have the Lindsay Halligan, the Elina Haba, about five 46 00:02:51,360 --> 00:02:54,920 Speaker 3: other prossecutorial offices major proscutory office United States. They are 47 00:02:54,960 --> 00:02:58,560 Speaker 3: just in chaos because the President wasn't able to appoint 48 00:02:58,600 --> 00:03:01,560 Speaker 3: somebody who could be confirmed by the Senate. And then 49 00:03:01,600 --> 00:03:05,160 Speaker 3: the Shenanigan's with trying to get these interim US attorneys 50 00:03:05,200 --> 00:03:08,079 Speaker 3: in place, had just bounced back in his face. And 51 00:03:08,480 --> 00:03:10,920 Speaker 3: maybe he blames that on her, though again it wouldn't 52 00:03:10,919 --> 00:03:11,280 Speaker 3: be fair. 53 00:03:11,600 --> 00:03:16,880 Speaker 2: Hundreds of career employees left the Department during Bondie's tenure. 54 00:03:17,680 --> 00:03:23,079 Speaker 2: She also shut down units investigating public corruption and curtailed 55 00:03:23,120 --> 00:03:28,320 Speaker 2: investigations into corporate and environmental crime. How different is the 56 00:03:28,360 --> 00:03:31,680 Speaker 2: Department now compared to before she took over. 57 00:03:32,040 --> 00:03:34,639 Speaker 3: Well, those such as me who's served in the Department 58 00:03:34,639 --> 00:03:38,200 Speaker 3: of Justice just wonder if after Trump will there be 59 00:03:38,320 --> 00:03:41,280 Speaker 3: respect built up for the Department of Justice, because what 60 00:03:41,320 --> 00:03:43,600 Speaker 3: we've seen is the fact that so many people have 61 00:03:43,640 --> 00:03:46,440 Speaker 3: left so much knowledge, so much experience, that the president's 62 00:03:46,480 --> 00:03:49,080 Speaker 3: having a hard time getting his agenda accepted by judges. 63 00:03:49,400 --> 00:03:52,200 Speaker 3: And that's because people who are there, the attorneys who 64 00:03:52,200 --> 00:03:54,480 Speaker 3: are there, are no longer as respected, and so there 65 00:03:54,480 --> 00:03:57,520 Speaker 3: has been a blowback from judges just both with an 66 00:03:57,520 --> 00:04:00,800 Speaker 3: aptitude and lack of credibility, which is under his ability 67 00:04:00,880 --> 00:04:03,840 Speaker 3: to get convictions. I mean the Jerome Powell is a 68 00:04:03,840 --> 00:04:06,320 Speaker 3: great example of how he tried to get subpoenas and 69 00:04:06,360 --> 00:04:09,520 Speaker 3: tried to move because of crossover runs against the Fed, 70 00:04:09,920 --> 00:04:13,160 Speaker 3: and the judge said, what are you doing? Where's the evidence? 71 00:04:13,600 --> 00:04:16,760 Speaker 3: And the attorneys couldn't even point to anything to show 72 00:04:16,800 --> 00:04:19,360 Speaker 3: why there is a need for the subpoenas against Powell. 73 00:04:19,440 --> 00:04:22,200 Speaker 3: So it's a good example again of the blowback because 74 00:04:22,240 --> 00:04:25,159 Speaker 3: of the lack of competence and care taken by the 75 00:04:25,160 --> 00:04:26,880 Speaker 3: Department of Justice and building these cases. 76 00:04:27,200 --> 00:04:32,400 Speaker 2: Temporarily, he's installed his former personal defense lawyer, Todd Blanche. 77 00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:36,080 Speaker 2: Todd Blanch has been Deputy Attorney General. So do you 78 00:04:36,120 --> 00:04:38,520 Speaker 2: expect to see any changes under. 79 00:04:38,279 --> 00:04:40,560 Speaker 3: His don't And I'm not sure what the president can 80 00:04:40,600 --> 00:04:43,279 Speaker 3: accomplish with this switch because the problem I don't think 81 00:04:43,279 --> 00:04:45,720 Speaker 3: lies with Pam Bondi except for maybe one exception we'll 82 00:04:45,760 --> 00:04:48,640 Speaker 3: get to. But the problem is just the fact that 83 00:04:48,680 --> 00:04:50,800 Speaker 3: there's not a lot of evidence, not a lot of 84 00:04:50,839 --> 00:04:55,080 Speaker 3: experienced attorneys, and so his mission to get the courts 85 00:04:55,080 --> 00:04:57,359 Speaker 3: to agree with what he wants to do is not succeeding. 86 00:04:57,360 --> 00:04:59,679 Speaker 3: And I don't think it's going to succeed under Todd Blanche either. 87 00:05:00,080 --> 00:05:02,880 Speaker 2: And Todd Blanche, I know some former federal judges have 88 00:05:03,000 --> 00:05:08,360 Speaker 2: expressed displeasure. Shall we say that Blanche came out at 89 00:05:08,400 --> 00:05:12,680 Speaker 2: a Federalist Society function and said the Justice Department is 90 00:05:12,720 --> 00:05:17,039 Speaker 2: at war with the judiciary and rogue judges. That's not 91 00:05:17,080 --> 00:05:19,479 Speaker 2: the kind of statement you expect to hear from a 92 00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:20,880 Speaker 2: deputy Attorney general. 93 00:05:21,200 --> 00:05:24,440 Speaker 3: He's been very confrontational, more confrontational in fact than Pam 94 00:05:24,440 --> 00:05:27,560 Speaker 3: Bondi with respect to judges. And I don't think that 95 00:05:27,720 --> 00:05:30,440 Speaker 3: is going to end up with judges rolling over. I 96 00:05:30,440 --> 00:05:33,599 Speaker 3: think we're going to see judges continually to reject much 97 00:05:33,600 --> 00:05:36,320 Speaker 3: of the mission of this administration. I want to just 98 00:05:36,520 --> 00:05:39,480 Speaker 3: mention I'm sure you will too. The one exception is 99 00:05:39,839 --> 00:05:44,279 Speaker 3: Pambondi did not handle the Epstein files well. And obviously 100 00:05:44,480 --> 00:05:46,680 Speaker 3: she was in a terrible situation, and there's all sorts 101 00:05:46,720 --> 00:05:50,440 Speaker 3: of conflicting evidence and difficulties in dealing with the Epstein files. 102 00:05:50,640 --> 00:05:52,520 Speaker 3: But she did make it worse. And she's going to 103 00:05:52,560 --> 00:05:55,840 Speaker 3: testify before Congress, and I'm very curious about whether she's 104 00:05:55,880 --> 00:05:58,480 Speaker 3: going to take the Fifth Amendment and testify or not. 105 00:05:59,120 --> 00:06:01,640 Speaker 3: But she did worse in the present situation. She did 106 00:06:01,680 --> 00:06:04,240 Speaker 3: not protect the president with respect to the Epstein files. 107 00:06:04,600 --> 00:06:07,160 Speaker 2: Is there any difference with her no longer being the 108 00:06:07,400 --> 00:06:10,680 Speaker 2: attorney general, like should Trump have waited until after that deposition? 109 00:06:11,279 --> 00:06:14,560 Speaker 3: I don't think there'll be a material difference. I could 110 00:06:14,560 --> 00:06:17,040 Speaker 3: be wrong, but I think most of the issues could 111 00:06:17,040 --> 00:06:19,719 Speaker 3: be a privilege issue in terms of protecting what the 112 00:06:19,760 --> 00:06:22,800 Speaker 3: President told her. It could be still a privilege issue 113 00:06:22,839 --> 00:06:25,880 Speaker 3: of not trying to undermine ongoing criminal investigations. And there's 114 00:06:25,920 --> 00:06:29,240 Speaker 3: obviously a privilege against self incrimination in case that comes up. 115 00:06:29,520 --> 00:06:33,080 Speaker 3: So I don't think she'll be in material different position. 116 00:06:33,160 --> 00:06:35,800 Speaker 3: But I know Congress wants at her and they want 117 00:06:35,800 --> 00:06:36,599 Speaker 3: her testimony. 118 00:06:36,800 --> 00:06:36,960 Speaker 1: Then. 119 00:06:37,040 --> 00:06:38,840 Speaker 3: The most basic thing was she said she saw a 120 00:06:38,839 --> 00:06:42,640 Speaker 3: client list right of Jeffrey Epstein, and then it disappeared. Well, 121 00:06:42,720 --> 00:06:44,599 Speaker 3: what is she going to say about that? And that 122 00:06:44,640 --> 00:06:48,320 Speaker 3: may not be subject to privilege. And that's why Congress 123 00:06:48,360 --> 00:06:50,520 Speaker 3: has been so adamant that she testify and why she's 124 00:06:50,560 --> 00:06:53,440 Speaker 3: in a very dicey situation should she turn up. 125 00:06:53,920 --> 00:06:57,800 Speaker 2: Might some of the problem be the way she expressed 126 00:06:57,800 --> 00:07:02,720 Speaker 2: herself and frame the issue. Will Todd Blanche have a 127 00:07:02,760 --> 00:07:05,200 Speaker 2: different approach, maybe a softer approach. 128 00:07:05,960 --> 00:07:07,520 Speaker 3: I'm not sure that Blanch is going to do a 129 00:07:07,520 --> 00:07:09,880 Speaker 3: softer approach, you now, I think Blanche has been pretty 130 00:07:09,880 --> 00:07:12,160 Speaker 3: hard edged so far and his dealings with the judiciary, 131 00:07:12,360 --> 00:07:14,960 Speaker 3: I'd be surprised if that changed. I mean, yes, I 132 00:07:14,960 --> 00:07:16,960 Speaker 3: think her judgment with the Epstein files is the one 133 00:07:16,960 --> 00:07:19,360 Speaker 3: area that one can really point to where she did 134 00:07:19,360 --> 00:07:22,040 Speaker 3: not protect the president. But I think Blanche will have 135 00:07:22,080 --> 00:07:24,800 Speaker 3: even more difficulty if trying to get at Jerome Powell, 136 00:07:24,840 --> 00:07:27,360 Speaker 3: trying to get at John Bolton, trying to get hit 137 00:07:27,800 --> 00:07:30,840 Speaker 3: Comy at James and so many others, and you know, 138 00:07:31,000 --> 00:07:33,880 Speaker 3: the chaos in the US Attorney's offices because of the 139 00:07:33,880 --> 00:07:36,240 Speaker 3: apployments isn't her fault. I don't think she was a 140 00:07:36,280 --> 00:07:38,200 Speaker 3: mastermind of that, you know, I think that came from 141 00:07:38,200 --> 00:07:40,680 Speaker 3: somewhere else. So I'm not sure that Blanch can improve 142 00:07:40,680 --> 00:07:41,200 Speaker 3: on that either. 143 00:07:41,520 --> 00:07:44,400 Speaker 2: Yeah, he said on Fox News Thursday. To the extent 144 00:07:44,440 --> 00:07:47,200 Speaker 2: the Epstein files was a part of the past year 145 00:07:47,240 --> 00:07:49,600 Speaker 2: of this Justice Department, it should not be a part 146 00:07:49,640 --> 00:07:52,520 Speaker 2: of anything going forward. That's not going to work. 147 00:07:52,720 --> 00:07:55,480 Speaker 3: No, And again, Blanche may have a different strategy and 148 00:07:55,520 --> 00:07:59,240 Speaker 3: he won't be sort of subpoinied by Congress the way 149 00:07:59,360 --> 00:08:03,240 Speaker 3: Pambondi is, because he hasn't sort of perjured himself or 150 00:08:03,320 --> 00:08:06,920 Speaker 3: made some very difficult to understand claims about the EPSTCEN files. 151 00:08:07,200 --> 00:08:09,240 Speaker 3: But I'm not sure what the right strategy is. Again, 152 00:08:09,440 --> 00:08:11,440 Speaker 3: I think if you stepped back, the president has put 153 00:08:11,480 --> 00:08:15,040 Speaker 3: the Atturngycal in such a difficult position, both with respect 154 00:08:15,040 --> 00:08:18,240 Speaker 3: to the Epstein files, but also with respect to many 155 00:08:18,240 --> 00:08:21,760 Speaker 3: of these prosecutions that I think almost anyone is doomed 156 00:08:21,760 --> 00:08:24,480 Speaker 3: to failure unless they can sort of talk the president down, 157 00:08:24,520 --> 00:08:26,880 Speaker 3: and we haven't seen evidence that many people can talk 158 00:08:26,920 --> 00:08:27,760 Speaker 3: the president down. 159 00:08:27,960 --> 00:08:34,000 Speaker 2: Also, Todd Blanche was responsible for interviewing Glainne Maxwell, and 160 00:08:34,040 --> 00:08:38,760 Speaker 2: then suddenly the next day she gets sent to a 161 00:08:38,760 --> 00:08:41,760 Speaker 2: prison camp. Convicted child offenders are not supposed to be 162 00:08:42,200 --> 00:08:44,760 Speaker 2: allowed in those kind of camps. So the fix was 163 00:08:44,760 --> 00:08:45,640 Speaker 2: in somewhere there. 164 00:08:45,960 --> 00:08:47,880 Speaker 3: Yeah, many people were expecting even to pardon, and we 165 00:08:47,920 --> 00:08:51,760 Speaker 3: haven't seen that. But obviously she's in better quarters than 166 00:08:51,800 --> 00:08:55,600 Speaker 3: she was before. And what kind of cooperation he was 167 00:08:55,640 --> 00:08:59,480 Speaker 3: able to obtain, what kind of information was able to obtain, 168 00:08:59,640 --> 00:09:03,400 Speaker 3: has not been revealed. But he's obviously has some built 169 00:09:03,440 --> 00:09:06,720 Speaker 3: up relationship and maybe the President just wants to rely 170 00:09:06,880 --> 00:09:10,040 Speaker 3: upon that relationship to protect him at least with respect 171 00:09:10,040 --> 00:09:10,920 Speaker 3: to the Epstein files. 172 00:09:11,000 --> 00:09:13,400 Speaker 2: And Blanch can only serve for one hundred and twenty. 173 00:09:13,160 --> 00:09:17,320 Speaker 3: Days, we're expecting that either perhaps Blantch can be appointed 174 00:09:17,760 --> 00:09:20,520 Speaker 3: during that time period, perhaps somebody else will be appointed. 175 00:09:20,920 --> 00:09:23,559 Speaker 3: I'm not certainly not privy to those kinds of discussions, 176 00:09:23,760 --> 00:09:26,240 Speaker 3: but he is knowledgeable about the Department Justice, he's certainly 177 00:09:26,240 --> 00:09:28,480 Speaker 3: knowledgeable about the president. So I think it's a wise 178 00:09:28,559 --> 00:09:30,280 Speaker 3: choice for the President in terms of at least as 179 00:09:30,280 --> 00:09:33,319 Speaker 3: an interim attorney general. But what follows is really critical. 180 00:09:33,440 --> 00:09:36,560 Speaker 2: And so the prediction market is betting on who'll be 181 00:09:36,600 --> 00:09:40,400 Speaker 2: the next attorney general, and Lee Zelden, who's currently the 182 00:09:40,440 --> 00:09:44,080 Speaker 2: EPA chief, is the front runner. Betters are placing a 183 00:09:44,120 --> 00:09:47,880 Speaker 2: forty seven percent probability on him being the next attorney general. 184 00:09:48,520 --> 00:09:52,719 Speaker 2: There Again, he's carried out Trump's mission at the EPA, 185 00:09:53,400 --> 00:09:55,920 Speaker 2: so why would he be any different as attorney general. 186 00:09:56,200 --> 00:09:58,840 Speaker 2: Anyone who gets appointed is going to be subject to 187 00:09:58,880 --> 00:10:01,120 Speaker 2: the same present residential demands. 188 00:10:01,360 --> 00:10:03,400 Speaker 3: It is not a job that I would cherish at 189 00:10:03,440 --> 00:10:06,480 Speaker 3: this moment because it's an impossible job. And again, I 190 00:10:06,520 --> 00:10:08,840 Speaker 3: think Pam Bondi did her best to help the president, 191 00:10:09,160 --> 00:10:12,200 Speaker 3: with the exception of the Epstein fowles. I think she did. 192 00:10:12,720 --> 00:10:15,559 Speaker 3: She was a loyal soldier. But it's an impossible job. 193 00:10:15,640 --> 00:10:18,040 Speaker 3: And unless somebody can sort of talk down the president 194 00:10:18,360 --> 00:10:22,600 Speaker 3: and limit his desire to go after enemies and weaponize 195 00:10:22,640 --> 00:10:25,360 Speaker 3: the Department of Justice, I think the succeeding attorney generals 196 00:10:25,360 --> 00:10:27,920 Speaker 3: that have just as difficult of a time as Pam Bondi. 197 00:10:27,720 --> 00:10:31,120 Speaker 2: Did New York Attorney General Letitia James, where the attempts 198 00:10:31,160 --> 00:10:34,520 Speaker 2: by Bondi to prosecute her failed, So apparently they're still 199 00:10:34,559 --> 00:10:38,320 Speaker 2: trying with a different angle. But at what point does 200 00:10:38,320 --> 00:10:41,960 Speaker 2: it become a slam dunk case of malicious prosecution? 201 00:10:42,520 --> 00:10:42,679 Speaker 1: Right? 202 00:10:42,679 --> 00:10:45,160 Speaker 3: And the same thing is true with James Comey and 203 00:10:45,360 --> 00:10:48,920 Speaker 3: with others. And I think again, the courts are just 204 00:10:48,960 --> 00:10:51,600 Speaker 3: tired of it, and I think that they've seen these 205 00:10:51,720 --> 00:10:56,679 Speaker 3: thinly papered up prosecutions and they're insulted and insulted by 206 00:10:56,679 --> 00:10:58,680 Speaker 3: the competence of the orneys. They're insulted by the preparation 207 00:10:58,800 --> 00:11:01,480 Speaker 3: for the cases, They're insulted by the theories of the prosecutions. 208 00:11:01,880 --> 00:11:04,680 Speaker 3: And I hate to say it, but just wasting taxpayer money. 209 00:11:04,720 --> 00:11:07,120 Speaker 3: And I'm not sure what Trump thinks he will gain 210 00:11:07,160 --> 00:11:09,199 Speaker 3: by this, because you're just losing respect and the ability 211 00:11:09,240 --> 00:11:12,000 Speaker 3: of courts in cases that probably he should care more 212 00:11:12,000 --> 00:11:14,280 Speaker 3: about than they may turn against him in those as well. 213 00:11:14,840 --> 00:11:18,680 Speaker 2: Hell, I've been wondering if you see any strategy in 214 00:11:18,760 --> 00:11:21,960 Speaker 2: the way President Trump is dealing with the Supreme Court. 215 00:11:22,200 --> 00:11:26,000 Speaker 2: After he lost the tariff decision, he was brutally critical 216 00:11:26,200 --> 00:11:29,640 Speaker 2: of the justices who voted against him, and the night 217 00:11:29,640 --> 00:11:35,040 Speaker 2: before the birthright citizenship arguments, he criticized judges and justices 218 00:11:35,440 --> 00:11:39,120 Speaker 2: in a post on social media. He then attended half 219 00:11:39,360 --> 00:11:43,480 Speaker 2: of the oral arguments and afterwards posted about how stupid 220 00:11:43,559 --> 00:11:48,800 Speaker 2: birthright citizenship is. This all seems counterproductive to me now. 221 00:11:48,920 --> 00:11:52,679 Speaker 3: I think at the beginning his factiousness with the Supreme 222 00:11:52,720 --> 00:11:55,720 Speaker 3: Court did serve a purpose, and there is a theory 223 00:11:56,080 --> 00:11:59,200 Speaker 3: that might be sort of borne out by the evidence 224 00:11:59,520 --> 00:12:03,720 Speaker 3: that he to make the court very weary of a confrontation, 225 00:12:04,360 --> 00:12:08,160 Speaker 3: and because of his assertiveness and dismissiveness of the court, 226 00:12:08,480 --> 00:12:11,320 Speaker 3: they didn't want to challenge him. And I think that 227 00:12:11,400 --> 00:12:13,800 Speaker 3: led to particularly use of the shadow dockets, so there 228 00:12:13,800 --> 00:12:15,040 Speaker 3: was not a written opinion. 229 00:12:15,360 --> 00:12:16,360 Speaker 1: It led to. 230 00:12:16,320 --> 00:12:19,200 Speaker 3: All of these cases where they really voted in favor 231 00:12:19,440 --> 00:12:22,480 Speaker 3: of the chump administration. But then with the tariff's case 232 00:12:22,520 --> 00:12:25,839 Speaker 3: and all the gloves coming off and belittling the court 233 00:12:26,120 --> 00:12:28,839 Speaker 3: and making fun of them, you know, even the conservative 234 00:12:29,000 --> 00:12:31,920 Speaker 3: justices that I think have been deeply insulted to the core, 235 00:12:32,200 --> 00:12:36,760 Speaker 3: and I think that's basically just increased their resolve to 236 00:12:37,080 --> 00:12:40,040 Speaker 3: vote against the president in the birthright decisionship case and 237 00:12:40,160 --> 00:12:43,640 Speaker 3: others coming down the lane. So again, it's not good strategy. 238 00:12:43,679 --> 00:12:44,680 Speaker 3: It's just trump Ism. 239 00:12:45,040 --> 00:12:47,920 Speaker 2: And there's a study in Just Security that revealed it 240 00:12:47,960 --> 00:12:50,679 Speaker 2: more than two hundred and ten cases since the start 241 00:12:50,720 --> 00:12:53,679 Speaker 2: of twenty twenty five where the courts have issued strong 242 00:12:53,760 --> 00:12:56,600 Speaker 2: rulings against the administration's conduct. 243 00:12:56,960 --> 00:13:00,760 Speaker 3: Yeah, the lower court judges have been firmly aligned, many 244 00:13:00,800 --> 00:13:04,640 Speaker 3: Republican judges joining Democratic judges in saying this is lawless. 245 00:13:04,920 --> 00:13:06,439 Speaker 3: You have to follow the law. We have a rule 246 00:13:06,480 --> 00:13:09,080 Speaker 3: of law in this country. It's been cherished, it's part 247 00:13:09,080 --> 00:13:11,120 Speaker 3: of our tradition, as part of our future. If we 248 00:13:11,200 --> 00:13:14,959 Speaker 3: hope and that the administration is just going over the line. 249 00:13:15,440 --> 00:13:18,679 Speaker 3: And I don't think his effort to push judges from 250 00:13:18,720 --> 00:13:21,320 Speaker 3: that has succeeded. Maybe again, maybe he did a little 251 00:13:21,320 --> 00:13:22,920 Speaker 3: bit at the beginning, but I think it's only going 252 00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:26,080 Speaker 3: to get worse. And I think he is basically, you know, 253 00:13:26,320 --> 00:13:29,480 Speaker 3: undercut his own position to such an extent, you know, 254 00:13:29,520 --> 00:13:31,679 Speaker 3: bit off his nose. Despite the face, one could say 255 00:13:31,840 --> 00:13:34,360 Speaker 3: that he's going to face more and more losses in 256 00:13:34,400 --> 00:13:36,800 Speaker 3: the courts. It's not going to be a happy situation. 257 00:13:37,440 --> 00:13:41,240 Speaker 2: Is anyone talking yet about a preemptive pardon for Pam Bondy? 258 00:13:42,200 --> 00:13:44,160 Speaker 3: You know, she stepped down, She's been involved in all 259 00:13:44,160 --> 00:13:48,240 Speaker 3: these controversial issues, particularly perhaps lying to Congress with respect 260 00:13:48,280 --> 00:13:54,040 Speaker 3: to the Epstein investigation, And so just as Biden considered 261 00:13:54,040 --> 00:13:58,200 Speaker 3: preemptive pardons, she might want to solicit a farewell president 262 00:13:58,559 --> 00:14:01,040 Speaker 3: from the President in the shape of a barden, just 263 00:14:01,040 --> 00:14:02,480 Speaker 3: as she can go on with her life and not 264 00:14:02,559 --> 00:14:04,600 Speaker 3: worry about possible criminal charges. 265 00:14:04,760 --> 00:14:08,240 Speaker 2: What seemed a little off to me is that Christy Nome, 266 00:14:08,400 --> 00:14:12,120 Speaker 2: who was fired after two US citizens were killed by 267 00:14:12,280 --> 00:14:16,840 Speaker 2: DHSS agents under her watch, she was given another position, 268 00:14:17,360 --> 00:14:21,400 Speaker 2: but Pam Bondy, who was so loyal to Trump, was 269 00:14:21,440 --> 00:14:22,760 Speaker 2: not given another position. 270 00:14:23,280 --> 00:14:27,840 Speaker 3: Well, it's also an interesting signal that loyalty may not 271 00:14:28,200 --> 00:14:31,600 Speaker 3: be enough in terms of surviving the Trump administration. The 272 00:14:31,640 --> 00:14:33,800 Speaker 3: other thing I would mention I've been fascinated about this 273 00:14:33,840 --> 00:14:36,160 Speaker 3: last couple of days is the leaks that are coming 274 00:14:36,160 --> 00:14:38,800 Speaker 3: out from the Trump administration. I think there must be 275 00:14:39,080 --> 00:14:41,280 Speaker 3: a lot of officials, a lot of the rank and 276 00:14:41,360 --> 00:14:46,120 Speaker 3: file are no longer worried about repercussions, and they seem 277 00:14:46,280 --> 00:14:48,840 Speaker 3: very willing to go to the press and to spill 278 00:14:48,880 --> 00:14:53,200 Speaker 3: out all this information, obviously even before the discharge happened, etc. 279 00:14:53,880 --> 00:14:56,760 Speaker 3: So there's signs then that the cracks at the administration 280 00:14:56,800 --> 00:15:00,000 Speaker 3: because it's not rewarding loyalty, so it's not attaining loyalty 281 00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:00,680 Speaker 3: from the troops. 282 00:15:01,240 --> 00:15:03,880 Speaker 2: There's also been a lot of speculation about who in 283 00:15:03,920 --> 00:15:07,920 Speaker 2: the cabinet might be next to be fired. Thanks so 284 00:15:08,000 --> 00:15:11,160 Speaker 2: much for joining me today, Hall. That's Professor Harold Krent 285 00:15:11,400 --> 00:15:14,440 Speaker 2: of the Chicago Kent College of law. So far, there 286 00:15:14,440 --> 00:15:18,800 Speaker 2: are four legal challenges to President Trump's executive order on 287 00:15:18,880 --> 00:15:23,960 Speaker 2: mail in voting. Democratic led States, Democratic congressional leaders, the 288 00:15:24,040 --> 00:15:27,520 Speaker 2: League of Women Voters, and civil rights groups are all 289 00:15:27,600 --> 00:15:31,760 Speaker 2: suing to block the administration from prohibiting mail in voting 290 00:15:32,160 --> 00:15:35,840 Speaker 2: for anyone not on a pre approved list of citizens 291 00:15:36,160 --> 00:15:40,120 Speaker 2: to be compiled by the Department of Homeland Security. For years, 292 00:15:40,160 --> 00:15:44,880 Speaker 2: Trump has claimed, without evidence, that there's widespread fraud, including 293 00:15:45,000 --> 00:15:49,760 Speaker 2: non citizen voting, in US elections. This executive order is 294 00:15:49,800 --> 00:15:53,760 Speaker 2: his latest effort to alter elections since his defeat by 295 00:15:53,920 --> 00:15:57,600 Speaker 2: Joe Biden in the twenty twenty presidential election. Joining me 296 00:15:57,680 --> 00:16:00,640 Speaker 2: is an expert in elections law, Richard broff Fault, a 297 00:16:00,720 --> 00:16:05,000 Speaker 2: professor at Columbia Law School. Rich start by explaining this 298 00:16:05,400 --> 00:16:06,440 Speaker 2: executive order. 299 00:16:06,920 --> 00:16:11,160 Speaker 1: Trump's executive voider requires two lists. One is that the 300 00:16:11,520 --> 00:16:15,800 Speaker 1: Apartment of Homeland Security, in cooperation with the Social Security 301 00:16:15,840 --> 00:16:19,680 Speaker 1: Administration and other governmental athletes, will come up with a 302 00:16:20,360 --> 00:16:23,280 Speaker 1: kind of a state by state voting list, a state 303 00:16:23,320 --> 00:16:28,600 Speaker 1: specific citizenship list of people eligible to vote, and they're 304 00:16:28,640 --> 00:16:32,360 Speaker 1: supposed to transmit that to the states by sixty days 305 00:16:32,360 --> 00:16:36,440 Speaker 1: before the next federal election. The states I skipped a step. 306 00:16:37,000 --> 00:16:39,880 Speaker 1: The states are then supposed to tell by sixty days 307 00:16:40,040 --> 00:16:43,640 Speaker 1: before the election the Postal Service which of their voters 308 00:16:43,680 --> 00:16:47,160 Speaker 1: are expecting to use absent to your mail in ballots. Then, 309 00:16:47,640 --> 00:16:51,800 Speaker 1: also the Postal Service is supposed to create a list 310 00:16:52,240 --> 00:16:57,360 Speaker 1: of people whose mail in ballots will be accepted and 311 00:16:57,480 --> 00:17:01,240 Speaker 1: transmitted by the Postal Service. The service well in the meantime, 312 00:17:01,280 --> 00:17:04,280 Speaker 1: will have developed by a rule that basically says that 313 00:17:04,359 --> 00:17:08,960 Speaker 1: only those voters who are on the federal voting eligible 314 00:17:09,000 --> 00:17:12,800 Speaker 1: list will have their mail in ballots actually transmitted by 315 00:17:12,840 --> 00:17:16,119 Speaker 1: the Postal Service. There's other stuff about also developing a 316 00:17:16,400 --> 00:17:19,760 Speaker 1: unique identification QR codes on each ballot, which I think 317 00:17:19,800 --> 00:17:22,240 Speaker 1: many states have already started to do. But the key 318 00:17:22,280 --> 00:17:25,639 Speaker 1: idea is that there will be a federal voting eligible 319 00:17:25,720 --> 00:17:28,400 Speaker 1: list create with the federal governments as of the states, 320 00:17:28,920 --> 00:17:31,159 Speaker 1: and then the states will send a list to the 321 00:17:31,160 --> 00:17:35,400 Speaker 1: Postal Service, and the Postal Service will only carry absent 322 00:17:35,440 --> 00:17:39,040 Speaker 1: to your mail in ballots that the Postal Service concludes 323 00:17:39,080 --> 00:17:44,359 Speaker 1: are eligible based on the Department of Homeland Securities citizenship list. 324 00:17:45,200 --> 00:17:48,000 Speaker 2: So we're supposed to trust that the Department of Homeland 325 00:17:48,040 --> 00:17:51,639 Speaker 2: Security and conjunction with the Post Office, has given US 326 00:17:51,640 --> 00:17:53,879 Speaker 2: a list that's accurate. It sounds like there would be 327 00:17:54,119 --> 00:17:56,240 Speaker 2: you know, just forget the legalities. It sounds like there 328 00:17:56,240 --> 00:17:57,960 Speaker 2: would be a ton of problems with this. 329 00:17:58,520 --> 00:18:01,560 Speaker 1: Yes, I mean basically allwned Security has only really gotten 330 00:18:01,560 --> 00:18:05,440 Speaker 1: into this fairly recently. They're relying on the Social Security Administration. 331 00:18:05,840 --> 00:18:09,000 Speaker 1: Social Security Administration itself says that it kind of requires 332 00:18:09,000 --> 00:18:12,480 Speaker 1: people to self certify whether they're citizens. Day don't check citizenship, 333 00:18:12,720 --> 00:18:15,879 Speaker 1: and apparently they don't really have any records on citizens 334 00:18:15,880 --> 00:18:18,640 Speaker 1: before about nineteen eighty one. They only began to check 335 00:18:18,680 --> 00:18:22,280 Speaker 1: citizenship in the nineteen eighties, and they really only look 336 00:18:22,280 --> 00:18:25,480 Speaker 1: into citizenship for people who are actually claiming Social Security 337 00:18:25,800 --> 00:18:30,439 Speaker 1: dhs it's citizenship records were mostly based on people becoming 338 00:18:30,480 --> 00:18:35,000 Speaker 1: citizens through naturalization or other processes. There may be other 339 00:18:35,119 --> 00:18:38,600 Speaker 1: federal databases that have this information, but the idea is 340 00:18:38,640 --> 00:18:41,159 Speaker 1: that they're going to draw from all the relevant federal 341 00:18:41,240 --> 00:18:45,640 Speaker 1: databases to come up with a state citizenship list, which 342 00:18:45,640 --> 00:18:49,000 Speaker 1: they will then transmit to the states by sixty days 343 00:18:49,000 --> 00:18:52,800 Speaker 1: before the next federal election. The states are not mandated 344 00:18:52,840 --> 00:18:56,160 Speaker 1: to use this. Actually, it doesn't actually require the states 345 00:18:56,200 --> 00:18:58,399 Speaker 1: to use this list, but the assumption of the states 346 00:18:58,440 --> 00:19:00,959 Speaker 1: will either wail or will be done by it. It 347 00:19:01,040 --> 00:19:04,320 Speaker 1: kicks in more when the states send their absentee voter 348 00:19:04,440 --> 00:19:07,639 Speaker 1: list to the Postal Service, which will have supposed to 349 00:19:07,680 --> 00:19:11,320 Speaker 1: have developed a rule that says they will only handle 350 00:19:11,640 --> 00:19:16,080 Speaker 1: absentee ballots for voters who are on the federal list. 351 00:19:16,359 --> 00:19:18,240 Speaker 1: That's where the federalist has fight. 352 00:19:18,680 --> 00:19:22,200 Speaker 2: So there are several lawsuits. There's one by more than 353 00:19:22,400 --> 00:19:26,679 Speaker 2: twenty Democratic led states, There's another by top Senate and 354 00:19:26,760 --> 00:19:32,360 Speaker 2: House Democratic leaders, one by a coalition of voting rights groups, 355 00:19:32,840 --> 00:19:36,800 Speaker 2: and another by civil rights groups. So the basic contention 356 00:19:37,080 --> 00:19:40,439 Speaker 2: is that Trump doesn't have the authority. The President doesn't 357 00:19:40,440 --> 00:19:45,920 Speaker 2: have the authority to make these changes by executive order. 358 00:19:46,760 --> 00:19:49,160 Speaker 1: Absolutely right. I mean, I guess the president probably has 359 00:19:49,200 --> 00:19:52,199 Speaker 1: the authority to acquire the DHS to develop a list, 360 00:19:52,720 --> 00:19:55,480 Speaker 1: but he has no authority to acquire the states to 361 00:19:55,640 --> 00:19:58,439 Speaker 1: use it. Interestingly, it doesn't actually say they have to 362 00:19:58,520 --> 00:20:02,359 Speaker 1: use it, although there's law of talk about prioritizing the 363 00:20:02,400 --> 00:20:07,280 Speaker 1: Attorney general to go after voter fraud, which they can 364 00:20:07,359 --> 00:20:11,360 Speaker 1: do anyway, and there's also talk about maybe cutting off 365 00:20:11,400 --> 00:20:14,359 Speaker 1: funding for states that don't use the list, although again 366 00:20:14,400 --> 00:20:17,160 Speaker 1: it doesn't say that, and it doesn't actually say funding 367 00:20:17,240 --> 00:20:20,320 Speaker 1: relating to elections, so it can be anything which itself 368 00:20:20,320 --> 00:20:24,119 Speaker 1: would be unconstitutional. The bite is in the directive to 369 00:20:24,160 --> 00:20:27,720 Speaker 1: the Postal Service. He has no power to give directives 370 00:20:27,720 --> 00:20:30,400 Speaker 1: to the Postal Service. The Postal Service is an independent 371 00:20:30,440 --> 00:20:34,040 Speaker 1: corporation with its own board of governors. I mean President 372 00:20:34,080 --> 00:20:36,320 Speaker 1: has some role in this, you know, in making nominations 373 00:20:36,320 --> 00:20:39,120 Speaker 1: for the board of governors, but he cannot direct them 374 00:20:39,119 --> 00:20:43,000 Speaker 1: and he cannot remove them. And they are subject to 375 00:20:43,400 --> 00:20:47,560 Speaker 1: federal statutes basically requiring universal carriage of mail, with specified 376 00:20:47,560 --> 00:20:50,840 Speaker 1: exceptions for mail that can be exhipted. The mail involved 377 00:20:50,840 --> 00:20:53,320 Speaker 1: in crimes, for example, this is not one of them. 378 00:20:53,440 --> 00:20:56,439 Speaker 1: So you can't mandate the Postal Service to do this. 379 00:20:57,200 --> 00:20:59,159 Speaker 1: The Postal Service, in any event, would have to go 380 00:20:59,200 --> 00:21:02,399 Speaker 1: through a rulemaking process which would certainly take some time 381 00:21:03,080 --> 00:21:06,760 Speaker 1: and as hard to believe, would be finished before this election. 382 00:21:07,400 --> 00:21:12,359 Speaker 1: And it seems extremely unlikely, almost certainly illegal, that the 383 00:21:12,400 --> 00:21:18,160 Speaker 1: Postal Service could refuse to carry mail that's not otherwise 384 00:21:18,400 --> 00:21:21,680 Speaker 1: barred from the males by federal statute. Because they get 385 00:21:21,760 --> 00:21:24,480 Speaker 1: back to the beginning of all of this, the President 386 00:21:24,560 --> 00:21:29,480 Speaker 1: has no power to regulate elections period. The Constitution gives 387 00:21:29,960 --> 00:21:33,359 Speaker 1: power to regulate elections to the states, and then also 388 00:21:33,440 --> 00:21:37,480 Speaker 1: says that Congress can regulate the phrase's time, place, or 389 00:21:37,600 --> 00:21:42,000 Speaker 1: manner of federal elections. And so if Congress were to 390 00:21:42,040 --> 00:21:45,480 Speaker 1: pass a statute like this, it might work. There would 391 00:21:45,480 --> 00:21:49,159 Speaker 1: be issues, but at least conceptually, Congress has the power 392 00:21:49,480 --> 00:21:53,640 Speaker 1: to regulate the procedures for federal elections and to regulate 393 00:21:53,960 --> 00:21:57,520 Speaker 1: mail in voting in federal elections, although even Congress can't 394 00:21:57,520 --> 00:22:01,000 Speaker 1: decide who's eligible to vote in federal lass and then 395 00:22:01,080 --> 00:22:04,520 Speaker 1: it's really the states. Congress can regulate time, place, and manner. 396 00:22:05,040 --> 00:22:07,840 Speaker 2: Do we face a problem perhaps because the head of 397 00:22:07,840 --> 00:22:10,840 Speaker 2: the Postal Service right is a Trump appointee. 398 00:22:12,440 --> 00:22:14,840 Speaker 1: I mean, it's possible, but they still would have to 399 00:22:14,840 --> 00:22:17,640 Speaker 1: go through a rule making. Even the Executive Order says 400 00:22:17,680 --> 00:22:20,040 Speaker 1: that that they have to go through a rule making. 401 00:22:20,400 --> 00:22:22,600 Speaker 1: It's hard to imagine a rule making getting done in 402 00:22:22,680 --> 00:22:25,480 Speaker 1: less than six months. That would be a fast rule making. 403 00:22:25,520 --> 00:22:27,480 Speaker 1: They have to write a rule, they have to put 404 00:22:27,480 --> 00:22:30,120 Speaker 1: it out for notice and comment, they have to respond 405 00:22:30,119 --> 00:22:33,119 Speaker 1: to the comments, and now itself would take some time. 406 00:22:33,600 --> 00:22:36,440 Speaker 1: And then there is the problem that the Executive Order 407 00:22:36,480 --> 00:22:40,560 Speaker 1: is asking the Postal Service to refuse to deliver mail 408 00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:43,159 Speaker 1: in a way that such refusal is not authorized by 409 00:22:43,160 --> 00:22:48,440 Speaker 1: any federal law. So they can't adopt rules that decline 410 00:22:48,480 --> 00:22:51,400 Speaker 1: to carry mail other than for the kinds of reasons 411 00:22:51,400 --> 00:22:55,200 Speaker 1: that are in federal law. And until Congress acts, this 412 00:22:55,359 --> 00:22:56,240 Speaker 1: isn't one of them. 413 00:22:56,600 --> 00:22:58,720 Speaker 2: Okay, stay with me, Rich coming up next on the 414 00:22:58,720 --> 00:23:02,960 Speaker 2: Bloomberg Law showptinue this conversation with Columbia Law School professor 415 00:23:03,080 --> 00:23:06,160 Speaker 2: Richard Brofault. How likely are the groups suing the Trump 416 00:23:06,200 --> 00:23:10,840 Speaker 2: administration to get temporary relief. I'm June Grosso, and this 417 00:23:11,200 --> 00:23:17,760 Speaker 2: is Bloomberg. More than twenty Democratic led states, as well 418 00:23:17,800 --> 00:23:21,480 Speaker 2: as top Democrats in the House and Senate, a coalition 419 00:23:21,560 --> 00:23:25,080 Speaker 2: of voting rights groups and civil rights groups, have filed 420 00:23:25,160 --> 00:23:30,320 Speaker 2: lawsuits to block President Trump's latest executive order restricting mail 421 00:23:30,400 --> 00:23:34,920 Speaker 2: in voting. The suits argue that the US Constitution empowers 422 00:23:34,920 --> 00:23:39,120 Speaker 2: states and Congress, not the President, to determine who's eligible 423 00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:42,159 Speaker 2: to vote by mail. I've been talking to Professor Richard 424 00:23:42,160 --> 00:23:46,760 Speaker 2: Brofault of Columbia Law School, an expert in elections law. Rich, 425 00:23:46,840 --> 00:23:49,600 Speaker 2: since the law seems so clear here that the president 426 00:23:49,680 --> 00:23:53,600 Speaker 2: doesn't have the power to outlaw mail in voting by 427 00:23:53,640 --> 00:23:57,080 Speaker 2: executive order. Do you think it's likely that that one 428 00:23:57,160 --> 00:24:00,920 Speaker 2: judge or more than one judge would issue preliminary injunction 429 00:24:01,359 --> 00:24:04,200 Speaker 2: stopping this executive order from going through. 430 00:24:05,119 --> 00:24:06,960 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, part of the funny thing is it's 431 00:24:07,000 --> 00:24:10,840 Speaker 1: not quite clear what this order requires. It's not clear 432 00:24:10,880 --> 00:24:14,800 Speaker 1: to me that court would barred DHS, Barber Homeland Security 433 00:24:14,800 --> 00:24:18,040 Speaker 1: from trying to develop this list. It certainly would get 434 00:24:18,040 --> 00:24:22,240 Speaker 1: an injunction barring any federal action requiring the states to 435 00:24:22,440 --> 00:24:26,320 Speaker 1: use this list, although the executive word it doesn't literally 436 00:24:26,400 --> 00:24:29,679 Speaker 1: require that. It really comes in kind of through the 437 00:24:29,920 --> 00:24:32,800 Speaker 1: side doors of well, we might cut off your funds. 438 00:24:33,040 --> 00:24:35,199 Speaker 1: So that's something I think that could be barred. This 439 00:24:35,320 --> 00:24:38,040 Speaker 1: might be a basis for prosecutions that could be barred. 440 00:24:38,359 --> 00:24:41,000 Speaker 1: And this has got to feed into the to the 441 00:24:41,080 --> 00:24:45,560 Speaker 1: postal services regulation on what nail and ballots they would carry. 442 00:24:45,600 --> 00:24:48,880 Speaker 1: Now again that I can imagine that kind of directive 443 00:24:48,920 --> 00:24:51,800 Speaker 1: to the postal service being barred, except you could argue 444 00:24:51,960 --> 00:24:54,320 Speaker 1: President doesn't have the power to direct the postal service. 445 00:24:54,680 --> 00:24:57,560 Speaker 1: So I would think that if this actually had any bite, 446 00:24:57,600 --> 00:25:00,000 Speaker 1: it could be blocked. Oddly enough, one of the argument 447 00:25:00,240 --> 00:25:04,160 Speaker 1: against an injunction might be this doesn't actually do very much. Nonetheless, 448 00:25:04,480 --> 00:25:06,960 Speaker 1: did the extent that it has any kind of inter 449 00:25:07,119 --> 00:25:10,040 Speaker 1: rorum effect, And surely it does, And there are other 450 00:25:10,119 --> 00:25:13,080 Speaker 1: things in it. There are requirements. For example, I was 451 00:25:13,119 --> 00:25:18,080 Speaker 1: reading for record keeping all poll books, records of absentee 452 00:25:18,119 --> 00:25:21,200 Speaker 1: ballots where kids of people signing in to vote, everything 453 00:25:21,280 --> 00:25:25,240 Speaker 1: relating to federal elections. It says local governments have to 454 00:25:25,320 --> 00:25:28,240 Speaker 1: keep them for five years. Existing federal loss is only 455 00:25:28,280 --> 00:25:32,119 Speaker 1: twenty two months, in other words, from one election day 456 00:25:32,440 --> 00:25:35,119 Speaker 1: until just before the next one. And the assumption that 457 00:25:35,200 --> 00:25:38,520 Speaker 1: in fact states and especially local governments have limited storage 458 00:25:38,560 --> 00:25:40,760 Speaker 1: capacity and they kind of need to clear it out 459 00:25:40,800 --> 00:25:43,040 Speaker 1: to go ready for the next election. Well, this would 460 00:25:43,040 --> 00:25:45,359 Speaker 1: extend that, and I was reading this would be incredibly 461 00:25:45,400 --> 00:25:50,119 Speaker 1: brutensome on state and especially local elections offices, which is 462 00:25:50,160 --> 00:25:53,360 Speaker 1: really where most of elections are regulated. Many of them 463 00:25:53,359 --> 00:25:56,520 Speaker 1: in say rural counties, don't have the capacity. So you 464 00:25:56,520 --> 00:25:59,679 Speaker 1: can imagine that some of that all the stuff that 465 00:26:00,119 --> 00:26:03,720 Speaker 1: hiring the states to send their list of absentee voters 466 00:26:03,960 --> 00:26:06,639 Speaker 1: and nail in voters sixty days before the election. In 467 00:26:06,720 --> 00:26:09,240 Speaker 1: many states, you can request an absently ballot up to 468 00:26:09,320 --> 00:26:11,439 Speaker 1: ten days before an election. So that's the kind of 469 00:26:11,440 --> 00:26:15,200 Speaker 1: thing that again, having this out there could very well 470 00:26:15,320 --> 00:26:19,960 Speaker 1: intimidate some state officials, many local officials, and of course 471 00:26:19,960 --> 00:26:23,439 Speaker 1: many voters who fear that they're out of compliance if 472 00:26:23,480 --> 00:26:26,199 Speaker 1: they applied late. I think, more than anything in this 473 00:26:26,320 --> 00:26:28,720 Speaker 1: I think has been the kind of a hallmark of 474 00:26:28,760 --> 00:26:34,160 Speaker 1: this administration. It just creates chaos and confusion, and that 475 00:26:34,359 --> 00:26:37,480 Speaker 1: just makes it hard for everybody. It makes it hard 476 00:26:37,520 --> 00:26:40,600 Speaker 1: for administrators, it makes it hard for voters, and it may, 477 00:26:40,840 --> 00:26:44,360 Speaker 1: you know, whether intended or not, discourage people from voting 478 00:26:44,680 --> 00:26:47,960 Speaker 1: or just confusion itself is discouraging. And so I do 479 00:26:48,000 --> 00:26:49,920 Speaker 1: think that's part of what's going on here. 480 00:26:50,440 --> 00:26:54,480 Speaker 2: So the Supreme Court heard oral arguments already challenging whether 481 00:26:54,520 --> 00:26:58,359 Speaker 2: a state can continue to count mail in ballots that 482 00:26:58,400 --> 00:27:02,000 Speaker 2: were postmarked by election day received afterward. Do you think 483 00:27:02,040 --> 00:27:04,399 Speaker 2: that Trump administration might try to appeal this on an 484 00:27:04,440 --> 00:27:06,600 Speaker 2: emergency basis to the Supreme Court. 485 00:27:07,080 --> 00:27:09,000 Speaker 1: I think they might try. I mean, again, it's hard 486 00:27:09,040 --> 00:27:11,199 Speaker 1: to say what the emergency is. At least the argument 487 00:27:11,320 --> 00:27:14,040 Speaker 1: in that case is called the Watson case. There is 488 00:27:14,080 --> 00:27:16,640 Speaker 1: a federal statute on the books. There is a federal 489 00:27:16,640 --> 00:27:19,360 Speaker 1: statute that says there shall be a single election day, 490 00:27:19,400 --> 00:27:21,879 Speaker 1: and it is whatever it is November seventh or way 491 00:27:21,920 --> 00:27:24,520 Speaker 1: it varies some year to year. That at least was 492 00:27:24,640 --> 00:27:28,480 Speaker 1: the legal hook for that lawsuit, is that election day 493 00:27:29,040 --> 00:27:31,159 Speaker 1: means that that's the day that all the ballots have 494 00:27:31,240 --> 00:27:34,560 Speaker 1: to be in. You could argue about that, but there 495 00:27:34,640 --> 00:27:39,560 Speaker 1: is a federal congressional statute that's the basis for the claim. Here. 496 00:27:39,560 --> 00:27:42,240 Speaker 1: There's nothing. There's just a kind of an assertion that 497 00:27:42,280 --> 00:27:45,320 Speaker 1: the president's responsible for election integrity. And we have all 498 00:27:45,359 --> 00:27:48,480 Speaker 1: these laws designed to punish election fraud, which is true, 499 00:27:48,640 --> 00:27:51,800 Speaker 1: but none of them come remotely clear to requiring anything 500 00:27:51,880 --> 00:27:54,639 Speaker 1: like this. So now I think that would be a 501 00:27:54,640 --> 00:27:58,720 Speaker 1: hard sell. And indeed, the President's earlier Executive Winter on 502 00:27:58,800 --> 00:28:02,040 Speaker 1: Elections from last year, I think that's been enjoined all 503 00:28:02,040 --> 00:28:04,560 Speaker 1: over the country and they've never taken it up separate before. 504 00:28:04,920 --> 00:28:07,320 Speaker 2: And I just want to note that President Trump again 505 00:28:07,440 --> 00:28:12,439 Speaker 2: voted by mail in a Florida special election in March, 506 00:28:12,520 --> 00:28:17,120 Speaker 2: so you know, it's just a continuation of his complaints 507 00:28:17,160 --> 00:28:21,000 Speaker 2: about mail in voting. So I'll ask you again which 508 00:28:21,000 --> 00:28:23,959 Speaker 2: I've asked you so many times before, to tell us 509 00:28:24,000 --> 00:28:27,119 Speaker 2: whether there's any proof that there is fraud in mail 510 00:28:27,160 --> 00:28:27,679 Speaker 2: in voting. 511 00:28:28,840 --> 00:28:30,960 Speaker 1: Again, I don't want to say there's no proof, because 512 00:28:30,960 --> 00:28:33,000 Speaker 1: with millions of votes being cast all the time, there's 513 00:28:33,000 --> 00:28:35,800 Speaker 1: a bound to be some. There is certainly no proof 514 00:28:35,960 --> 00:28:40,400 Speaker 1: of any significant or more than minuscule amounts of fraud 515 00:28:40,720 --> 00:28:44,840 Speaker 1: in connection with elections. There are so many security mechanisms 516 00:28:45,120 --> 00:28:47,320 Speaker 1: when people register to vote in the first place, when 517 00:28:47,360 --> 00:28:50,120 Speaker 1: they request ballots, and the ballots are sent to them, 518 00:28:50,320 --> 00:28:52,280 Speaker 1: and the ballots are sent back when they're open, and 519 00:28:52,320 --> 00:28:55,720 Speaker 1: they're counted again. Never say there's no fraud, but to 520 00:28:55,760 --> 00:28:59,880 Speaker 1: the extent that there's been any proven fraud is next enough. 521 00:29:00,640 --> 00:29:04,000 Speaker 1: And especially in the last ten years, as all the 522 00:29:04,040 --> 00:29:07,560 Speaker 1: accusations of fraud have mounted, there have been many more 523 00:29:07,680 --> 00:29:11,400 Speaker 1: hunts and searches for fraud, particularly in so called red 524 00:29:11,440 --> 00:29:15,680 Speaker 1: states where there are Republican attorneys general Republican secretaries of 525 00:29:15,680 --> 00:29:17,600 Speaker 1: state who made a big deal out of this and 526 00:29:17,640 --> 00:29:21,320 Speaker 1: have done massive searches, and they will come up with one, two, three, four, 527 00:29:21,360 --> 00:29:24,320 Speaker 1: or five people, not always mail, and sometimes they're in 528 00:29:24,360 --> 00:29:27,880 Speaker 1: person voting. Most commonly it's people who think they're eligible 529 00:29:27,920 --> 00:29:30,560 Speaker 1: to voting, or not think they're citizens but they're only 530 00:29:30,600 --> 00:29:33,560 Speaker 1: have green cards, or people who are convicted of felony 531 00:29:33,960 --> 00:29:36,600 Speaker 1: and think that because they've served their time, that's over with. 532 00:29:36,720 --> 00:29:39,680 Speaker 1: But in fact the ban may be lifetime. And sometimes 533 00:29:39,720 --> 00:29:42,800 Speaker 1: it's been mistakes made by local election officials that say, yeah, 534 00:29:42,840 --> 00:29:47,240 Speaker 1: you're fine, when you know the local election officials mistaken 535 00:29:47,640 --> 00:29:52,200 Speaker 1: This coming election in November, you know, one hundred million 536 00:29:52,200 --> 00:29:54,280 Speaker 1: ballots on hundred and fifty million ballots will be cast 537 00:29:54,640 --> 00:29:57,880 Speaker 1: in multiple elections. I mean typically when people are voting, 538 00:29:57,880 --> 00:30:02,320 Speaker 1: they're voting, we vote for dozens of offices, federal, state, 539 00:30:02,320 --> 00:30:05,960 Speaker 1: and local. They will be improper votes any want to 540 00:30:05,960 --> 00:30:09,240 Speaker 1: call them fraud necessarily because sometimes the person voting doesn't 541 00:30:09,280 --> 00:30:11,760 Speaker 1: realize that he or she is ineligible, and they're not 542 00:30:11,800 --> 00:30:15,360 Speaker 1: intending a fraud, but they are ineligible. So there may 543 00:30:15,520 --> 00:30:18,880 Speaker 1: indeed be ineligible voters, but kind of a very minor level. 544 00:30:20,320 --> 00:30:24,440 Speaker 2: And rich. What are some Republican states trying to do 545 00:30:24,680 --> 00:30:28,240 Speaker 2: as far as requiring proof of citizenship? 546 00:30:28,760 --> 00:30:32,560 Speaker 1: These issues are about what proof do you need to 547 00:30:32,680 --> 00:30:36,680 Speaker 1: bring either when you register for the first time or 548 00:30:36,720 --> 00:30:39,120 Speaker 1: when you come to the polls to vote, and then 549 00:30:39,160 --> 00:30:41,840 Speaker 1: what counts as good proof because in fact, you know, 550 00:30:41,960 --> 00:30:44,640 Speaker 1: in other countries people are required to carry around government 551 00:30:44,640 --> 00:30:48,000 Speaker 1: issued IDs. We don't have that. We do have driver's licenses, 552 00:30:48,280 --> 00:30:50,480 Speaker 1: but in some states they don't have to be a citizen. 553 00:30:50,600 --> 00:30:52,920 Speaker 1: And indeed, the so called real ID which is now 554 00:30:52,960 --> 00:30:56,960 Speaker 1: required for flying that doesn't require PROOFDN citizens should be either. 555 00:30:57,160 --> 00:31:00,920 Speaker 1: I think some states have sort of re confirmed with 556 00:31:01,040 --> 00:31:03,360 Speaker 1: new laws that you have to be a citizen to 557 00:31:03,440 --> 00:31:08,080 Speaker 1: vote and may require some proofs. But the question is 558 00:31:08,120 --> 00:31:11,160 Speaker 1: always there's two or three stages. What do you need 559 00:31:11,200 --> 00:31:13,520 Speaker 1: to do when you register? What do you need to do? 560 00:31:13,560 --> 00:31:16,200 Speaker 1: We neither when you request an absentee valot or send it. 561 00:31:16,240 --> 00:31:19,320 Speaker 1: In some states proposals already have to have a photocopy 562 00:31:19,360 --> 00:31:22,800 Speaker 1: of your passport. Passport is proof of citizenship. A photocopy 563 00:31:22,800 --> 00:31:25,800 Speaker 1: of your passport when you make your request and or 564 00:31:25,840 --> 00:31:28,200 Speaker 1: when you send in the ballot, and then of course 565 00:31:28,240 --> 00:31:30,240 Speaker 1: what you need to do when you actually come to vote. 566 00:31:30,680 --> 00:31:34,720 Speaker 1: Until recently, the battle was over just proof of ID, 567 00:31:35,360 --> 00:31:37,560 Speaker 1: but now increasingly people are trying to have proof of 568 00:31:37,600 --> 00:31:40,760 Speaker 1: citizenship and that just gets hard. You know, people don't 569 00:31:40,800 --> 00:31:44,000 Speaker 1: carry this information around with them. People have often said, well, 570 00:31:44,040 --> 00:31:45,760 Speaker 1: you know what's frong with having proof of ID? You 571 00:31:45,800 --> 00:31:48,200 Speaker 1: need proof ID to fly. You don't need proof of 572 00:31:48,240 --> 00:31:52,480 Speaker 1: citizenship to fly, at least flying domestically. So that's really 573 00:31:52,520 --> 00:31:55,840 Speaker 1: where really all the fighting is. No one denies that 574 00:31:55,880 --> 00:31:58,200 Speaker 1: you need to be a citizen to vote in federal elections, 575 00:31:58,520 --> 00:32:01,400 Speaker 1: and I think in every state election, the question is 576 00:32:01,960 --> 00:32:06,280 Speaker 1: what proof has to be provided on election day? On 577 00:32:06,440 --> 00:32:09,160 Speaker 1: how serious is this issue that we're basically going to 578 00:32:09,200 --> 00:32:11,720 Speaker 1: make people bring their passports given that a big chunk 579 00:32:11,720 --> 00:32:14,080 Speaker 1: of the country doesn't have a passport, or we're going 580 00:32:14,160 --> 00:32:16,160 Speaker 1: to bring and make people bring their driver's license given 581 00:32:16,200 --> 00:32:18,400 Speaker 1: that a lot of people don't have driver's license, and 582 00:32:18,440 --> 00:32:22,480 Speaker 1: even the driver's license isn't necessarily proof. I mean, I 583 00:32:22,520 --> 00:32:25,880 Speaker 1: think people are getting very excited about this, but in fact, 584 00:32:25,960 --> 00:32:30,440 Speaker 1: we don't have the bureaucracy and the documentation requirements of 585 00:32:30,560 --> 00:32:33,400 Speaker 1: proof of citizens at least we have not had that traditionally. 586 00:32:33,520 --> 00:32:34,960 Speaker 1: Until now, this has been a good thing. 587 00:32:35,240 --> 00:32:37,640 Speaker 2: And I understand that some of this would just be 588 00:32:37,880 --> 00:32:39,760 Speaker 2: logistically impossible. 589 00:32:40,640 --> 00:32:43,640 Speaker 1: It would be impossible for the states to use the 590 00:32:43,680 --> 00:32:47,160 Speaker 1: citizenship list if they don't get it until the day 591 00:32:47,200 --> 00:32:49,720 Speaker 1: they have to turn in their absentee voter list to 592 00:32:49,760 --> 00:32:52,400 Speaker 1: the postal service. And there's a lot in this thing that, 593 00:32:52,880 --> 00:32:55,280 Speaker 1: regardless of what it attempts to do, that literally doesn't 594 00:32:55,320 --> 00:32:57,800 Speaker 1: work in addition to you, I mean, it is both 595 00:32:57,880 --> 00:33:01,960 Speaker 1: unconstitutional in many ways, but in many ways it literally 596 00:33:02,000 --> 00:33:05,840 Speaker 1: won't work because of the way the deadlines actually don't 597 00:33:05,880 --> 00:33:08,760 Speaker 1: interface properly, and it ignores the fact. For example, for 598 00:33:08,800 --> 00:33:11,120 Speaker 1: federal elections, we have primaries all the time. I mean, 599 00:33:11,120 --> 00:33:14,120 Speaker 1: at least up until September, there seem to be primaries 600 00:33:14,120 --> 00:33:17,720 Speaker 1: every couple of weeks. And these are for federal offices, 601 00:33:17,760 --> 00:33:19,880 Speaker 1: so the same rule is supposed to apply for those two. 602 00:33:20,800 --> 00:33:23,480 Speaker 1: You'd be setting out that citizenship list all the time. 603 00:33:24,040 --> 00:33:26,360 Speaker 2: You have to wonder how much research was done before 604 00:33:26,400 --> 00:33:30,120 Speaker 2: this executive order was written. Thanks so much, rich for 605 00:33:30,320 --> 00:33:33,440 Speaker 2: joining me on the show. That's Professor Richard Brflt of 606 00:33:33,520 --> 00:33:36,280 Speaker 2: Columbia Law School, and that's it for this edition of 607 00:33:36,280 --> 00:33:38,960 Speaker 2: The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get the 608 00:33:39,000 --> 00:33:42,240 Speaker 2: latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can 609 00:33:42,280 --> 00:33:46,480 Speaker 2: find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www dot 610 00:33:46,520 --> 00:33:50,719 Speaker 2: Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law, And remember to 611 00:33:50,720 --> 00:33:53,800 Speaker 2: tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at ten 612 00:33:53,840 --> 00:33:57,640 Speaker 2: pm Wall Street Time. I'm Junie Grosso and you're listening 613 00:33:57,720 --> 00:33:58,360 Speaker 2: to Bloomberg