WEBVTT - Mandatory Union Fees Struck Down at Supreme Court

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.479
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash Podcasts. Another five to

0:00:22.520 --> 0:00:25.919
<v Speaker 1>four decision down ideological lines from the Supreme Court in

0:00:25.960 --> 0:00:28.920
<v Speaker 1>its final day of the term. Labor unions lost and

0:00:28.960 --> 0:00:31.920
<v Speaker 1>the Trump administration one, as the Court ruled that government

0:00:31.960 --> 0:00:35.240
<v Speaker 1>employees have a constitutional right not to pay union fees,

0:00:35.320 --> 0:00:38.680
<v Speaker 1>overturning forty years of precedent. Joining me is Bloomberg New

0:00:38.720 --> 0:00:43.640
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court reporter Greg's store. Greg tell us about the opinion, Hi, Junior,

0:00:43.880 --> 0:00:46.320
<v Speaker 1>as you said? Five to four. Justice Samilader wrote the

0:00:46.320 --> 0:00:50.240
<v Speaker 1>majority opinion, excuse me for the conservative um. He said

0:00:50.320 --> 0:00:56.160
<v Speaker 1>that when unions take positions in collective bargaining, they are

0:00:56.200 --> 0:00:59.800
<v Speaker 1>taking positions on matter of public concern, and for that reason,

0:01:00.080 --> 0:01:03.560
<v Speaker 1>workers have a First Amendment right not to contribute to

0:01:03.720 --> 0:01:06.360
<v Speaker 1>that work of the union, even though the union is

0:01:06.400 --> 0:01:10.280
<v Speaker 1>doing things that might also benefit the workers. Justice Elena

0:01:10.360 --> 0:01:13.640
<v Speaker 1>Kagan wrote for the minority in opinion with some fervor.

0:01:13.760 --> 0:01:17.080
<v Speaker 1>She said there's no sugarcoat in today's opinion. The majority

0:01:17.200 --> 0:01:20.560
<v Speaker 1>overthrows a decision entrenched in this nation's law and its

0:01:20.600 --> 0:01:25.160
<v Speaker 1>economic life for over forty years. Tell us about what

0:01:25.360 --> 0:01:28.399
<v Speaker 1>she talked about that overthrowing of the about decision. Yeah,

0:01:28.400 --> 0:01:32.040
<v Speaker 1>the Aboud decision in nineteen seventy seven ruling that said

0:01:32.080 --> 0:01:34.960
<v Speaker 1>that public sector unions could collect one are known as

0:01:34.959 --> 0:01:39.600
<v Speaker 1>the agency thieves UH from non members, from employees who say,

0:01:39.680 --> 0:01:41.600
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to belong to the union, but the

0:01:41.720 --> 0:01:44.319
<v Speaker 1>union could still require them to pay for the cost

0:01:44.440 --> 0:01:48.000
<v Speaker 1>of collective bargaining. That seven ruling did put some limits,

0:01:48.000 --> 0:01:51.560
<v Speaker 1>said that workers don't have to fund ideological or political activities.

0:01:51.920 --> 0:01:55.080
<v Speaker 1>And the Supreme Court today said that was a bad decision.

0:01:55.120 --> 0:01:58.760
<v Speaker 1>We are throwing it out. And Injustice Kagan's dissent, she said,

0:01:59.000 --> 0:02:01.800
<v Speaker 1>this is going to have the dramatic consequences for the

0:02:01.800 --> 0:02:07.920
<v Speaker 1>ability of governments to manage their workplaces. Um, they might,

0:02:08.040 --> 0:02:11.560
<v Speaker 1>she said, lose the ability to have a single union

0:02:12.240 --> 0:02:15.680
<v Speaker 1>that they know represents all the all the workers in

0:02:15.720 --> 0:02:18.440
<v Speaker 1>the in the workforce. Um. And there could be all

0:02:18.440 --> 0:02:21.560
<v Speaker 1>sorts of consequences that that we're going to have to

0:02:21.639 --> 0:02:25.680
<v Speaker 1>learn about down the road. Gregg This really really wasn't

0:02:25.680 --> 0:02:28.640
<v Speaker 1>a surprise. It wasn't like the travel ban because of

0:02:28.720 --> 0:02:32.560
<v Speaker 1>the history of this case. Tell us about that history. Yeah,

0:02:32.600 --> 0:02:35.640
<v Speaker 1>this was This was how the most expected decision of

0:02:35.639 --> 0:02:37.480
<v Speaker 1>the term. Aldo. It took a while to get it out.

0:02:37.880 --> 0:02:40.440
<v Speaker 1>The Court had been considering this issue a couple of

0:02:40.480 --> 0:02:43.240
<v Speaker 1>years ago when Justice Scalia was on the court, and

0:02:43.280 --> 0:02:45.200
<v Speaker 1>it looked like they were poised to issue a decision

0:02:45.280 --> 0:02:47.600
<v Speaker 1>much like this, a five four decision that would have

0:02:47.880 --> 0:02:50.160
<v Speaker 1>overturned the boot and said workers have every speech right

0:02:50.240 --> 0:02:53.240
<v Speaker 1>not to pay these fees. Uh. And then Scalia died

0:02:53.680 --> 0:02:57.280
<v Speaker 1>and the Court ended up splitting evenly four to four

0:02:57.360 --> 0:03:01.040
<v Speaker 1>in that case. So once uh, Donald Trump was able

0:03:01.080 --> 0:03:04.320
<v Speaker 1>to fill that vacancy with with Justice Neil Gorsage, the

0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:07.280
<v Speaker 1>Conservatives had their fifth vote. The Court agreed this term

0:03:07.320 --> 0:03:11.120
<v Speaker 1>to take up this case, and uh, you know, the

0:03:11.200 --> 0:03:13.720
<v Speaker 1>only hope for for the liberals seemed to be winning

0:03:13.720 --> 0:03:16.880
<v Speaker 1>over Justice Coursers, who of course is a rather conservative

0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:20.600
<v Speaker 1>conservative justice. And uh indeed he did what was expected

0:03:20.639 --> 0:03:24.639
<v Speaker 1>and join the Conservatives to overturn the about decision. There

0:03:24.639 --> 0:03:28.120
<v Speaker 1>are a series of five to four victories for Conservatives

0:03:28.240 --> 0:03:32.320
<v Speaker 1>this term, and several controversial cases like yesterday's travel Band.

0:03:32.880 --> 0:03:36.160
<v Speaker 1>You wrote a story analyzing this entitled when it comes

0:03:36.200 --> 0:03:39.040
<v Speaker 1>to Donald Trump, The U. S. Supreme Court apparently is

0:03:39.080 --> 0:03:41.800
<v Speaker 1>as divided as the rest of the country. Tell me

0:03:41.840 --> 0:03:45.000
<v Speaker 1>about the analysis you went through there. Yeah, well so

0:03:45.120 --> 0:03:48.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm still looking into this today. Obviously, the Trump travel

0:03:48.600 --> 0:03:50.560
<v Speaker 1>band decision divides the court five to four. You have

0:03:50.640 --> 0:03:54.080
<v Speaker 1>the five Republican appointed justices on one side, the four

0:03:54.560 --> 0:03:58.520
<v Speaker 1>UH Democratic appointed justices on the other time. And uh,

0:03:58.560 --> 0:04:03.000
<v Speaker 1>this is a pattern that has dominated this this term. Um,

0:04:03.760 --> 0:04:06.160
<v Speaker 1>we haven't had any of those cases where just as

0:04:06.160 --> 0:04:08.480
<v Speaker 1>Anthony Kennedy joins the Liberals in a in a five

0:04:08.560 --> 0:04:12.720
<v Speaker 1>for UH majority. So on the travel ban, on the

0:04:12.920 --> 0:04:16.200
<v Speaker 1>Union fees, UH, the the American Express an I trust case,

0:04:16.279 --> 0:04:20.880
<v Speaker 1>the the other day UH Texas Voting District UH jurymandering

0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:25.000
<v Speaker 1>case the court decided earlier this week, the case involving

0:04:25.000 --> 0:04:27.680
<v Speaker 1>in an abortion pregnancy centers. I mean, the list goes

0:04:27.720 --> 0:04:32.320
<v Speaker 1>on and on, the very important cases that were decided

0:04:32.360 --> 0:04:36.440
<v Speaker 1>by that that single vote. Greg you mentioned Justice Kennedy,

0:04:36.480 --> 0:04:38.520
<v Speaker 1>who was this, you know, the swing vote and seen

0:04:38.560 --> 0:04:42.120
<v Speaker 1>as the swing vote. And he's everyone says he might

0:04:42.160 --> 0:04:44.480
<v Speaker 1>be retiring. We don't know if you you will or not.

0:04:44.560 --> 0:04:48.680
<v Speaker 1>Probably not right today, but as of now know okay,

0:04:48.760 --> 0:04:52.960
<v Speaker 1>So is he getting more conservative in his thinking or

0:04:53.040 --> 0:04:55.360
<v Speaker 1>is it just the kinds of cases that are facing

0:04:55.400 --> 0:04:57.479
<v Speaker 1>the court. A big part of it was the kind

0:04:57.520 --> 0:05:00.599
<v Speaker 1>of cases so um uh you know, one, if I

0:05:00.680 --> 0:05:05.360
<v Speaker 1>didn't mention the case involving arbitration agreements signed by employees,

0:05:05.720 --> 0:05:08.920
<v Speaker 1>Justice Kennedy joined the majority to say that companies can

0:05:09.040 --> 0:05:13.280
<v Speaker 1>enforce those arbitration agreements and prevent workers from from uh

0:05:13.360 --> 0:05:15.960
<v Speaker 1>filing class action lawsuits. Well, that's that's the kind of

0:05:16.040 --> 0:05:18.680
<v Speaker 1>issue that the Court is dealt with repeatedly. We know

0:05:18.800 --> 0:05:21.640
<v Speaker 1>that Justice Kennedy is with the conservatives on that. Um.

0:05:21.680 --> 0:05:24.720
<v Speaker 1>The biggest surprise this term from Justice Kennedy, I think

0:05:25.480 --> 0:05:28.640
<v Speaker 1>was that in some of those cases where liberals sometimes

0:05:28.720 --> 0:05:32.400
<v Speaker 1>can can get him on their side, uh, the case

0:05:32.480 --> 0:05:37.480
<v Speaker 1>involving the baker who uh didn't want to make cakes

0:05:37.520 --> 0:05:42.040
<v Speaker 1>for same sex weddings, uh, the cases involving partisan jerrymandry,

0:05:42.360 --> 0:05:45.960
<v Speaker 1>those seem like at least opportunities for the liberals to

0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:50.360
<v Speaker 1>to to uh, to persuade Justice Kennedy to be on

0:05:50.480 --> 0:05:54.039
<v Speaker 1>their side, and those could have been significant victories for

0:05:54.120 --> 0:05:58.400
<v Speaker 1>the left. Both of those issues that the Court essentially punted,

0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:02.279
<v Speaker 1>didn't come out with anything big on the in the

0:06:02.320 --> 0:06:04.680
<v Speaker 1>cases that mattered. It was. It was the cases where

0:06:04.720 --> 0:06:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Kennedy was with the Conservatives where the Court had ended

0:06:07.120 --> 0:06:09.839
<v Speaker 1>up doing something big. All right, Greg, a much deserve

0:06:10.000 --> 0:06:13.240
<v Speaker 1>vacation coming up for you. Thank you so much for

0:06:13.279 --> 0:06:16.279
<v Speaker 1>all your reporting this term. That's Bloomberg News Supreme Court

0:06:16.279 --> 0:06:24.359
<v Speaker 1>report at Greg's store. Attorney General Jeff Sessions held firm

0:06:24.440 --> 0:06:28.240
<v Speaker 1>over the Trump administration zero tolerance immigration policy at a

0:06:28.320 --> 0:06:32.839
<v Speaker 1>law enforcement conference in Nevada on Monday. The President has

0:06:32.880 --> 0:06:36.520
<v Speaker 1>made this clear. We're going to continue to prosecute those

0:06:36.560 --> 0:06:40.720
<v Speaker 1>adults who in a here illegally. We are going to

0:06:40.800 --> 0:06:45.400
<v Speaker 1>do everything in our power, however, to avoid separating families.

0:06:46.320 --> 0:06:48.960
<v Speaker 1>Sessions now has no choice whether he feels it's in

0:06:49.040 --> 0:06:51.839
<v Speaker 1>his power or not. A California federal judge has given

0:06:51.880 --> 0:06:55.560
<v Speaker 1>the Trump administration two weeks to reunite immigrant children under

0:06:55.560 --> 0:06:57.880
<v Speaker 1>the age of five who were separated from their families

0:06:57.920 --> 0:07:01.160
<v Speaker 1>at border crossings, and thirty days is to reunite children

0:07:01.200 --> 0:07:04.680
<v Speaker 1>five and older. Judge Danis Abra has also ordered the

0:07:04.720 --> 0:07:08.520
<v Speaker 1>administration to stop detaining parents without their children and to

0:07:08.600 --> 0:07:11.720
<v Speaker 1>stop deporting parents who have been separated from their children,

0:07:12.320 --> 0:07:14.640
<v Speaker 1>joining me as Lorie Nessel, director of the Center for

0:07:14.720 --> 0:07:18.960
<v Speaker 1>Social Justice at Seton Hall University School of Law. Laurie.

0:07:19.120 --> 0:07:22.880
<v Speaker 1>The judge blamed the Trump administration. Tell us how he

0:07:23.040 --> 0:07:28.800
<v Speaker 1>described what he called the chaotic circumstance. Sure, I mean

0:07:29.360 --> 0:07:32.240
<v Speaker 1>the situation, um, you know, which has gotten a lot

0:07:32.360 --> 0:07:37.320
<v Speaker 1>of coverage, is that children were being torn away from

0:07:37.360 --> 0:07:40.200
<v Speaker 1>their parents at the border. And um, you know, as

0:07:40.360 --> 0:07:44.520
<v Speaker 1>as also has been made publicly available, is that children

0:07:44.560 --> 0:07:47.760
<v Speaker 1>have gotten lost by a margin the system. It was

0:07:48.040 --> 0:07:51.960
<v Speaker 1>a you know, an attempt to criminalize all immigrants, asylum

0:07:52.000 --> 0:07:56.120
<v Speaker 1>seekers at the southern border, take their children away as

0:07:56.240 --> 0:07:58.720
<v Speaker 1>a means of trying to deter people and send a

0:07:58.760 --> 0:08:01.080
<v Speaker 1>message that they shouldn't be coming to this country, even

0:08:01.080 --> 0:08:03.360
<v Speaker 1>if they fear for their lives. And it was done

0:08:03.400 --> 0:08:07.360
<v Speaker 1>in such a way that there's been incredible anguish and

0:08:07.480 --> 0:08:11.440
<v Speaker 1>trauma and and thousands of children, many of whom are

0:08:11.600 --> 0:08:15.600
<v Speaker 1>unaccounted for. And the judge also said that the government

0:08:15.680 --> 0:08:18.920
<v Speaker 1>hasn't as an affirmative duty to reunite parents with their children.

0:08:18.960 --> 0:08:22.240
<v Speaker 1>But he also pointed out that the government takes account

0:08:22.240 --> 0:08:26.440
<v Speaker 1>of property all the time of defendants and cases and

0:08:26.640 --> 0:08:30.840
<v Speaker 1>never loses the property. How did they lose the children? Right? Well? Well,

0:08:30.840 --> 0:08:33.880
<v Speaker 1>and what this really raises is that, I mean, these

0:08:33.920 --> 0:08:36.719
<v Speaker 1>are human beings, right, and they're coming to our country

0:08:37.080 --> 0:08:40.560
<v Speaker 1>largely to seek protection from an incredibly dangerous conditions in

0:08:40.600 --> 0:08:43.839
<v Speaker 1>their home country, and we do the government has an obligation,

0:08:43.880 --> 0:08:46.800
<v Speaker 1>both under international law and under our immigration laws to

0:08:46.920 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 1>treat people with dignity and to provide them in a

0:08:50.240 --> 0:08:52.760
<v Speaker 1>humane way with the chance to seek protection. They don't

0:08:52.800 --> 0:08:55.280
<v Speaker 1>have to be granted protection, but they have to be

0:08:55.320 --> 0:08:59.080
<v Speaker 1>allowed to seek protection. And so by um doing away

0:08:59.240 --> 0:09:03.920
<v Speaker 1>with any form of discretion and completely criminalizing this population,

0:09:04.800 --> 0:09:08.080
<v Speaker 1>what's happened is that it just you know, we've seen

0:09:08.080 --> 0:09:11.360
<v Speaker 1>this in so many other instances with this administration. Things

0:09:11.360 --> 0:09:14.640
<v Speaker 1>are not thought out or or planned. It's just an

0:09:14.640 --> 0:09:18.240
<v Speaker 1>announcement that's made and then there there. It wasn't done

0:09:18.280 --> 0:09:21.960
<v Speaker 1>with the proper agencies, and it wasn't clear what was

0:09:22.040 --> 0:09:24.880
<v Speaker 1>happening to these children where they were being sent, who

0:09:24.920 --> 0:09:30.480
<v Speaker 1>was ultimately responsible. Um, you know, it's it's an incredible, incredible, um,

0:09:30.520 --> 0:09:33.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, crisis and really dark moment in our history

0:09:33.960 --> 0:09:36.680
<v Speaker 1>that that this has happened, and it's happening. So what

0:09:36.840 --> 0:09:39.040
<v Speaker 1>happens now that the judge and the judge said he

0:09:39.080 --> 0:09:42.000
<v Speaker 1>felt that he needed to issue an order. Now he

0:09:42.040 --> 0:09:44.560
<v Speaker 1>has this order which is pretty stark as to what

0:09:44.640 --> 0:09:47.680
<v Speaker 1>has to happen. But will the government be able to

0:09:47.800 --> 0:09:51.120
<v Speaker 1>do that? Well, that that's a good question. I mean,

0:09:51.160 --> 0:09:53.320
<v Speaker 1>so there is now, like you say, there's an order,

0:09:53.320 --> 0:09:56.080
<v Speaker 1>there's a very set amount of time in order to

0:09:56.160 --> 0:10:00.680
<v Speaker 1>reunify these traumatized children with their traumatized parents. UM. But yeah,

0:10:00.720 --> 0:10:03.200
<v Speaker 1>it's going to take some work in terms of tracking

0:10:03.200 --> 0:10:06.240
<v Speaker 1>them down. I know that um lots of the not

0:10:06.400 --> 0:10:10.840
<v Speaker 1>for profit organizations around the country are UM really pitching

0:10:10.880 --> 0:10:14.240
<v Speaker 1>in in terms of trying to get information and interview

0:10:14.360 --> 0:10:17.320
<v Speaker 1>kids and locate and um, you know, making efforts to

0:10:17.400 --> 0:10:20.760
<v Speaker 1>try to make sure that families can be reunited. The

0:10:20.840 --> 0:10:24.760
<v Speaker 1>judge was very specific in his order. He said that

0:10:24.840 --> 0:10:27.560
<v Speaker 1>in his decision as well. He said that it's not

0:10:27.720 --> 0:10:32.000
<v Speaker 1>enough that the government gives out eight hundred numbers that

0:10:32.040 --> 0:10:35.680
<v Speaker 1>don't answer. They have to make an affirmative They have

0:10:35.679 --> 0:10:39.320
<v Speaker 1>an affirmative duty to actually reunite the families. And that's

0:10:39.360 --> 0:10:42.479
<v Speaker 1>more than the government has accepted in the past. Exactly,

0:10:42.600 --> 0:10:45.760
<v Speaker 1>and and and I mean what that points to is that,

0:10:46.080 --> 0:10:50.400
<v Speaker 1>I mean, this is the family separation is um, you know,

0:10:50.520 --> 0:10:53.559
<v Speaker 1>is horrific, but it comes on top of a system

0:10:53.600 --> 0:10:57.240
<v Speaker 1>that already has so many problems and where there's just

0:10:57.320 --> 0:11:00.440
<v Speaker 1>a lack of basic fairness throughout. So, for example, a

0:11:00.480 --> 0:11:03.000
<v Speaker 1>big part of the problem is that there's no right

0:11:03.080 --> 0:11:05.200
<v Speaker 1>to have a lawyer if you can't afford one in

0:11:05.200 --> 0:11:09.080
<v Speaker 1>these proceedings. And as we know, the President has recently said, well,

0:11:09.160 --> 0:11:11.440
<v Speaker 1>let's not even give them any due process, Let's not

0:11:11.520 --> 0:11:14.440
<v Speaker 1>have people even go before a judge before they're deported.

0:11:14.720 --> 0:11:17.520
<v Speaker 1>And so it all really comes together to make this

0:11:17.640 --> 0:11:21.920
<v Speaker 1>incredibly chaotic situation. Because if there were an orderly process,

0:11:21.960 --> 0:11:24.680
<v Speaker 1>if there were more immigration judges, another thing that the

0:11:24.720 --> 0:11:28.840
<v Speaker 1>administration has been against doing, increasing the number of immigration judges,

0:11:29.160 --> 0:11:32.439
<v Speaker 1>if there was a right to have a lawyer presence

0:11:32.520 --> 0:11:35.040
<v Speaker 1>so that these people, both the adults and their children

0:11:35.040 --> 0:11:38.240
<v Speaker 1>could understand what's at sake, UM, then there would be

0:11:38.320 --> 0:11:41.840
<v Speaker 1>much easier to reunite, much easier to do things in

0:11:41.880 --> 0:11:45.280
<v Speaker 1>the proper way. But the problem now is that all

0:11:45.320 --> 0:11:49.600
<v Speaker 1>of those pieces come together and create this storm where

0:11:49.640 --> 0:11:53.640
<v Speaker 1>we have this this humanitarian crisis of lost children. So

0:11:54.040 --> 0:11:57.920
<v Speaker 1>Lorie in light of the judge's order, can the Trump

0:11:58.000 --> 0:12:02.360
<v Speaker 1>administration continue with the zero tolerance policy or does the

0:12:02.480 --> 0:12:08.920
<v Speaker 1>judges order actually circumvent that well, So so there there

0:12:08.920 --> 0:12:12.000
<v Speaker 1>there are a couple of different pieces of litigation. The

0:12:12.280 --> 0:12:17.080
<v Speaker 1>the injunction that was issued today UM is specific to

0:12:17.400 --> 0:12:22.120
<v Speaker 1>saying that the UM that the governments can't detain parents

0:12:22.440 --> 0:12:26.319
<v Speaker 1>without their children unless there's a finding that the parents

0:12:26.360 --> 0:12:29.080
<v Speaker 1>are unfit or opposed danger. And then as you mentioned,

0:12:29.120 --> 0:12:33.000
<v Speaker 1>there's the specific time frames for the need to reunify. However,

0:12:33.440 --> 0:12:36.280
<v Speaker 1>the injunction and again it's just the injunction, the case

0:12:36.280 --> 0:12:40.080
<v Speaker 1>will go forward, UM, doesn't doesn't go as far as

0:12:40.160 --> 0:12:43.520
<v Speaker 1>to say that the entire process has to sub or

0:12:43.640 --> 0:12:47.959
<v Speaker 1>that families can't be detained. Now, there is other litigation. UM.

0:12:48.000 --> 0:12:51.280
<v Speaker 1>There is a lawsuit UM the eighteen different states across

0:12:51.320 --> 0:12:54.880
<v Speaker 1>the country joined in that was filed yesterday UM, and

0:12:54.960 --> 0:12:57.559
<v Speaker 1>we'll have to see what happens with with that litigation.

0:12:57.600 --> 0:13:01.600
<v Speaker 1>Because that UM that request auto release in terms of

0:13:02.000 --> 0:13:08.240
<v Speaker 1>really asking for UM, the whole criminalization and denying asylum

0:13:08.280 --> 0:13:13.600
<v Speaker 1>secrets a chance to seek protection being joined a minute here,

0:13:14.640 --> 0:13:18.160
<v Speaker 1>President Trump has made the distinction at times between families

0:13:18.200 --> 0:13:22.200
<v Speaker 1>crossing into the US illegally between checkpoints and those who

0:13:22.240 --> 0:13:26.280
<v Speaker 1>are requesting asylum at the border crossings. But the judge

0:13:26.320 --> 0:13:30.240
<v Speaker 1>didn't make that distinction. What do you what's your reaction

0:13:30.280 --> 0:13:34.679
<v Speaker 1>to that right? Because the and and that it's a

0:13:34.720 --> 0:13:38.160
<v Speaker 1>problem that that what should happen is that again, under

0:13:38.360 --> 0:13:41.480
<v Speaker 1>under our law, domestic law as well as international law,

0:13:41.840 --> 0:13:44.400
<v Speaker 1>anyone that's seeking protection should be given that right to

0:13:44.440 --> 0:13:49.520
<v Speaker 1>seek protection. But because the administration has been completely undermining

0:13:49.679 --> 0:13:54.280
<v Speaker 1>that legal right, it's impossible to tell then who's in

0:13:54.320 --> 0:13:57.520
<v Speaker 1>need of protection, who's coming for economic reasons or some

0:13:57.679 --> 0:14:01.280
<v Speaker 1>mix um. But the issue is that you know that

0:14:01.800 --> 0:14:06.240
<v Speaker 1>according to this injunction, everyone who wants to seek protection,

0:14:06.280 --> 0:14:09.040
<v Speaker 1>who came here because our lives in danger, should be

0:14:09.120 --> 0:14:11.400
<v Speaker 1>given the opportunity to do that. Well, then, Laurie, we'll

0:14:11.440 --> 0:14:13.640
<v Speaker 1>have to leave it there. There's so much to discuss

0:14:13.679 --> 0:14:15.559
<v Speaker 1>on this topic because there is a lot of confusion.

0:14:15.600 --> 0:14:18.800
<v Speaker 1>That's Lori Nestle. She's directed the Center for Social Justice

0:14:18.840 --> 0:14:22.280
<v Speaker 1>at Seton Hall University School of Law. Thanks for listening

0:14:22.280 --> 0:14:25.560
<v Speaker 1>to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen

0:14:25.600 --> 0:14:29.200
<v Speaker 1>to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on Bloomberg

0:14:29.240 --> 0:14:33.960
<v Speaker 1>dot com. Slash Podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is Bloomberg