1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:03,640
Speaker 1: President Trump does not like rules and regulations. He's made

2
00:00:03,640 --> 00:00:05,640
Speaker 1: it his mission to get rid of as many federal

3
00:00:05,680 --> 00:00:09,200
Speaker 1: regulations as he can. Remember when he issued the two

4
00:00:09,200 --> 00:00:13,000
Speaker 1: old rules for one new rule executive order in February.

5
00:00:13,280 --> 00:00:17,680
Speaker 1: If you have a regulation you want number one, we're

6
00:00:17,680 --> 00:00:19,720
Speaker 1: not going to approve it because it's already been approved,

7
00:00:19,720 --> 00:00:22,840
Speaker 1: probably in seventeen different forms. But if we do, the

8
00:00:22,880 --> 00:00:24,480
Speaker 1: only way you have a chance is we have to

9
00:00:24,560 --> 00:00:29,440
Speaker 1: knock out two regulations for every new regulations. And in

10
00:00:29,520 --> 00:00:33,440
Speaker 1: his breast conference yesterday with French President Emmanuel McCrone, he

11
00:00:33,600 --> 00:00:37,760
Speaker 1: chose this to praise. I apployed President mccron on his

12
00:00:37,800 --> 00:00:42,400
Speaker 1: courageous call for that less bureaucracy. It's a good chance

13
00:00:42,840 --> 00:00:46,559
Speaker 1: less bureaucracy. We can use it too. But Trump is

14
00:00:46,560 --> 00:00:49,440
Speaker 1: now testing the limits of the law with a shortcut

15
00:00:49,520 --> 00:00:53,120
Speaker 1: to killing Obama era rules he dislikes. He's putting them

16
00:00:53,159 --> 00:00:57,680
Speaker 1: on hold, long term hold, from protections for student borrowers

17
00:00:57,720 --> 00:01:00,840
Speaker 1: to standards for East cigarettes. Trump had stall more than

18
00:01:00,920 --> 00:01:05,760
Speaker 1: two dozen rules, sidestepping the Cumberson rulemaking process. Here to

19
00:01:05,800 --> 00:01:09,480
Speaker 1: talk rules and regulations are William Busby, professor at Georgetown

20
00:01:09,560 --> 00:01:13,360
Speaker 1: Law School, and Emily Hammond, Professor at George Washington University

21
00:01:13,440 --> 00:01:18,160
Speaker 1: Law School. Bill presents from both parties routinely pause their

22
00:01:18,240 --> 00:01:25,520
Speaker 1: predecessors rules. What is Trump doing differently and what's the impact? Um?

23
00:01:25,560 --> 00:01:28,520
Speaker 1: The idea that the president and its agencies could do

24
00:01:28,680 --> 00:01:31,640
Speaker 1: a short term delay while they look at something that's

25
00:01:31,720 --> 00:01:36,160
Speaker 1: quite common. Their difference here is that in has dozens

26
00:01:36,160 --> 00:01:41,280
Speaker 1: of settings, agencies and also their lawyers have started with

27
00:01:41,400 --> 00:01:44,280
Speaker 1: a short delay and then have talked about a much

28
00:01:44,400 --> 00:01:49,320
Speaker 1: longer stay of implementation or a commitment not to enforce

29
00:01:49,400 --> 00:01:54,240
Speaker 1: the law. So they're really rendering a nullity regulations of

30
00:01:54,280 --> 00:01:58,880
Speaker 1: the agency had already said should be the law. Well, Emily,

31
00:01:59,080 --> 00:02:02,240
Speaker 1: there there are laws and procedures that are supposed to

32
00:02:02,280 --> 00:02:07,240
Speaker 1: be followed um, specifically the Administrative Procedures Act when agencies

33
00:02:07,760 --> 00:02:14,359
Speaker 1: do rulemaking. How does the Administrative Procedures Act work? Well,

34
00:02:14,400 --> 00:02:16,880
Speaker 1: it does a few things. One of the first things

35
00:02:16,880 --> 00:02:21,040
Speaker 1: it does is ensure that when agencies take actions um

36
00:02:21,160 --> 00:02:26,000
Speaker 1: changing policies implementing the policies of new presidential administrations, that

37
00:02:26,080 --> 00:02:30,160
Speaker 1: they do it following certain procedures. And those procedures are

38
00:02:30,200 --> 00:02:35,560
Speaker 1: meant to ensure that the public, that stakeholders, that lawmakers

39
00:02:35,600 --> 00:02:40,440
Speaker 1: are able to see what the agencies are doing, participates

40
00:02:40,520 --> 00:02:45,520
Speaker 1: in their consideration of issues UM, and have transparency and

41
00:02:45,600 --> 00:02:49,799
Speaker 1: oversights for those agencies. UM. What the agencies are doing

42
00:02:49,919 --> 00:02:52,880
Speaker 1: right now UM is not just a shortcut. It's an

43
00:02:52,960 --> 00:02:57,280
Speaker 1: unlawful short circuiting of the procedures that are set forth

44
00:02:57,280 --> 00:03:00,600
Speaker 1: in the A p A, which is really meant UH.

45
00:03:00,680 --> 00:03:04,680
Speaker 1: In addition, the ap has meant to provide certainty for

46
00:03:04,840 --> 00:03:08,760
Speaker 1: regulated entities in the public as well. And this approach

47
00:03:08,880 --> 00:03:12,679
Speaker 1: that the Trump administration is taking really turns that promise

48
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:16,960
Speaker 1: of regulatory certainty on its head UM and puts instead

49
00:03:17,520 --> 00:03:20,959
Speaker 1: the fate of many of these regulations up in the air.

50
00:03:21,400 --> 00:03:26,600
Speaker 1: That creates uncertainty, not reliable lawful standards. Bill, how would

51
00:03:26,600 --> 00:03:29,560
Speaker 1: you answer the supporters of Trump's approach? You say, the

52
00:03:29,639 --> 00:03:33,679
Speaker 1: president is just doing what he campaigned to do and

53
00:03:33,760 --> 00:03:39,080
Speaker 1: he's promised to take on these over zealous regulations. Well,

54
00:03:39,720 --> 00:03:42,440
Speaker 1: the president certainly can try to push the law in

55
00:03:42,480 --> 00:03:45,800
Speaker 1: the direction he favors. But a president is under the

56
00:03:45,880 --> 00:03:50,920
Speaker 1: constitution obligated to oversee agencies and faithfully execute the law.

57
00:03:51,520 --> 00:03:55,200
Speaker 1: That's the constitutional language, and the law that a president

58
00:03:55,280 --> 00:03:59,080
Speaker 1: has to implement an enforce is the statutes and also

59
00:03:59,280 --> 00:04:04,120
Speaker 1: the agency regulations INTEL agencies have changed them and as

60
00:04:04,280 --> 00:04:07,720
Speaker 1: Pressor Hammond was saying, agencies have to go through a

61
00:04:07,880 --> 00:04:11,960
Speaker 1: set process if they want to change regulations. These are

62
00:04:11,960 --> 00:04:16,400
Speaker 1: not issued overnight. Regulations often take years to issue and

63
00:04:16,520 --> 00:04:20,719
Speaker 1: involve thousands and sometimes millions of commenters. And so for

64
00:04:21,040 --> 00:04:25,680
Speaker 1: agencies following the president who up end the process and

65
00:04:25,760 --> 00:04:30,480
Speaker 1: to step away from a regulatory commitment without doing a

66
00:04:30,520 --> 00:04:36,280
Speaker 1: new regulatory process is illegal. Well, Emily, what kinds of

67
00:04:36,360 --> 00:04:41,000
Speaker 1: laws and what kinds of rules is the Trump administration delaying?

68
00:04:42,839 --> 00:04:46,400
Speaker 1: You know, they span all kinds of subject matter areas.

69
00:04:46,480 --> 00:04:52,080
Speaker 1: And I think that's another challenge, UM for being observer

70
00:04:52,160 --> 00:04:55,240
Speaker 1: of administrative law, and also a challenge for the transparency

71
00:04:55,240 --> 00:04:59,040
Speaker 1: that we should expect from our agencies. UM. Everything from

72
00:04:59,040 --> 00:05:02,080
Speaker 1: the Department of trans Rotation to e p A, to

73
00:05:02,480 --> 00:05:05,520
Speaker 1: OSHA to the f d A UM to the Department

74
00:05:05,520 --> 00:05:09,039
Speaker 1: of Labor and Department of Education, UM, all over a

75
00:05:09,200 --> 00:05:13,480
Speaker 1: number of agencies. We're seeing, UM a variety of different

76
00:05:13,480 --> 00:05:18,800
Speaker 1: approaches meant to as Professor Buzby said, short circle law

77
00:05:18,880 --> 00:05:22,640
Speaker 1: or not follow the law UM. And they're delaying rules

78
00:05:23,000 --> 00:05:27,520
Speaker 1: having everything to do with environmental protections UM. Protections for workers,

79
00:05:27,600 --> 00:05:32,200
Speaker 1: protections for disabled people who fly on airlines, UM, protections

80
00:05:32,360 --> 00:05:36,240
Speaker 1: UH from from the harmful effects of pesticides. UM. These

81
00:05:36,240 --> 00:05:39,920
Speaker 1: are the types of things that we're seeing delayed, and

82
00:05:40,080 --> 00:05:45,160
Speaker 1: the agencies are doing that without offering explanations for the delays.

83
00:05:45,160 --> 00:05:48,280
Speaker 1: They're not meeting the legal requirements that they would need

84
00:05:48,320 --> 00:05:52,839
Speaker 1: to meet in order to lawfully delay these regulations. Billing

85
00:05:52,880 --> 00:05:56,960
Speaker 1: about a minute. One of the indefinite delays is of

86
00:05:57,000 --> 00:06:01,599
Speaker 1: a congressionally ordered update of penalties for automakers that failed

87
00:06:01,600 --> 00:06:04,880
Speaker 1: to meet fuel economy standards. How do you get away

88
00:06:04,920 --> 00:06:10,920
Speaker 1: with delaying a congressional update in order by congress? Um?

89
00:06:10,960 --> 00:06:14,240
Speaker 1: If Congress actually sets a date and orders an agency

90
00:06:14,360 --> 00:06:18,279
Speaker 1: to do a particular task, an agency has no such power.

91
00:06:18,440 --> 00:06:22,080
Speaker 1: There's there are dozens of cases saying just that if

92
00:06:22,120 --> 00:06:25,159
Speaker 1: Congress orders an agency to do a task and sets

93
00:06:25,160 --> 00:06:28,680
Speaker 1: a date, that's it, and the agency cannot sidestep that

94
00:06:28,800 --> 00:06:32,640
Speaker 1: legal obligation. We're talking about the Trump administration putting rules

95
00:06:32,680 --> 00:06:36,440
Speaker 1: from controlling methane emissions to protections for student borrowers on

96
00:06:36,760 --> 00:06:39,560
Speaker 1: long term hold and how that test the limits of

97
00:06:39,600 --> 00:06:42,960
Speaker 1: the law. With William Busby, professor at Georgetown Law School

98
00:06:42,960 --> 00:06:48,160
Speaker 1: and Emily Hammond, professor at George Washington University Law School. Bill.

99
00:06:48,279 --> 00:06:51,240
Speaker 1: Earlier this month, the US Federal Court of Appeals in

100
00:06:51,320 --> 00:06:54,360
Speaker 1: d C rebuked the e p A for suspending a

101
00:06:54,480 --> 00:06:59,800
Speaker 1: regulation requiring oil and gas companies to pair emissions of methane.

102
00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:04,760
Speaker 1: Tell us what the judges ruled in the effect um,

103
00:07:04,839 --> 00:07:08,560
Speaker 1: the Court was confronted with this proposal of e p

104
00:07:08,680 --> 00:07:12,560
Speaker 1: A that it could at first delay and then impose

105
00:07:12,640 --> 00:07:17,080
Speaker 1: a long stay of this previously finalized regulation, and the

106
00:07:17,160 --> 00:07:22,120
Speaker 1: Court basically completely rejected this effort. They said the agency

107
00:07:22,320 --> 00:07:26,680
Speaker 1: was obligated to act consistent with its own previous regulations.

108
00:07:27,160 --> 00:07:30,280
Speaker 1: If the agency wanted to change its regulations, it had

109
00:07:30,320 --> 00:07:33,280
Speaker 1: to go through the full process to do so. And

110
00:07:33,400 --> 00:07:36,480
Speaker 1: it then looked at the Clean Air Act, irrelevant Statute

111
00:07:36,600 --> 00:07:40,720
Speaker 1: and long standing administrative law and said the agency had flunked,

112
00:07:40,840 --> 00:07:43,760
Speaker 1: that it had not come up with an adequate basis

113
00:07:43,800 --> 00:07:47,000
Speaker 1: for the delay, and if basically sent it back to

114
00:07:47,040 --> 00:07:50,120
Speaker 1: the agency saying, maybe you can change this regulation. Maybe

115
00:07:50,160 --> 00:07:52,880
Speaker 1: there's legal room, but if you're going to do so,

116
00:07:53,000 --> 00:07:57,120
Speaker 1: you have to go through the required legal process. Emily,

117
00:07:57,280 --> 00:07:59,880
Speaker 1: it seems like quite a rebuke to the kinds of

118
00:08:00,160 --> 00:08:02,080
Speaker 1: z p A and other agencies are doing in the

119
00:08:02,080 --> 00:08:06,400
Speaker 1: Trump administration. But how much impact will this ruling have

120
00:08:06,760 --> 00:08:12,040
Speaker 1: on their course of action in regard to rules. Well,

121
00:08:12,120 --> 00:08:16,760
Speaker 1: we can hope that this case demonstrates that the courts

122
00:08:16,800 --> 00:08:21,800
Speaker 1: are watching. Um. Although this particular decision from the Court

123
00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:26,000
Speaker 1: of Appeals did focus primarily on a single provision of

124
00:08:26,000 --> 00:08:29,640
Speaker 1: the Clean Air Act, the principles for which it stands

125
00:08:29,760 --> 00:08:34,199
Speaker 1: are um far reaching and really do seep into every

126
00:08:34,240 --> 00:08:38,280
Speaker 1: area of administrative law. And UM. That really does go

127
00:08:38,559 --> 00:08:43,840
Speaker 1: to the expectation and the legal requirements that agencies certainly

128
00:08:44,040 --> 00:08:48,560
Speaker 1: are permitted to change their policies along with new presidential administrations.

129
00:08:48,559 --> 00:08:51,640
Speaker 1: But if they do so, they have to offer reasoning.

130
00:08:52,040 --> 00:08:54,720
Speaker 1: And here the DC Circuits said, your reasoning is flimsy

131
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:57,600
Speaker 1: at best. Um. If we look at some of these

132
00:08:57,640 --> 00:09:01,800
Speaker 1: other rules, um that are at shoe sometimes it's not

133
00:09:01,840 --> 00:09:05,040
Speaker 1: even that there's flimsy reasoning, it's that there is no reasoning.

134
00:09:05,400 --> 00:09:08,000
Speaker 1: So the d C Circuit really did send a signal

135
00:09:08,080 --> 00:09:11,520
Speaker 1: here that it will continue just as it always has,

136
00:09:11,760 --> 00:09:15,319
Speaker 1: to look closely at what agencies are doing and build

137
00:09:15,400 --> 00:09:18,560
Speaker 1: most of the challenges to delays will go before this

138
00:09:18,720 --> 00:09:23,160
Speaker 1: same court, and so face the same problem. Yes, that's

139
00:09:23,200 --> 00:09:27,559
Speaker 1: absolutely correct that UM. Many statutes say that challenges to

140
00:09:27,640 --> 00:09:30,520
Speaker 1: regulations go to the d C Circuit, the Court of

141
00:09:30,559 --> 00:09:33,920
Speaker 1: Appeals for the federal government here in Washington, and so

142
00:09:34,280 --> 00:09:36,600
Speaker 1: a case like this is a precedent that will be

143
00:09:36,640 --> 00:09:40,520
Speaker 1: applicable to all such challenges when they go before the

144
00:09:40,559 --> 00:09:44,520
Speaker 1: same court. So, Emily, can we now expect you know,

145
00:09:44,679 --> 00:09:48,600
Speaker 1: lawsuit after lawsuit in regard to these regulations, and you

146
00:09:48,640 --> 00:09:51,720
Speaker 1: know how and is that likely to be a successful

147
00:09:51,760 --> 00:09:55,880
Speaker 1: strategy if that's what happens? Well, I do think we

148
00:09:55,960 --> 00:09:59,480
Speaker 1: are seeing several lawsuits. Um. I think I counted four

149
00:09:59,600 --> 00:10:04,319
Speaker 1: or five, although there are UM many of these rules

150
00:10:04,400 --> 00:10:07,920
Speaker 1: that have been delayed. So UM, I think we can

151
00:10:08,040 --> 00:10:11,679
Speaker 1: also expect to see similar scrutiny no matter what panel

152
00:10:12,200 --> 00:10:15,360
Speaker 1: UM at the d C Circuits might be assigned to

153
00:10:15,559 --> 00:10:20,120
Speaker 1: these cases, particularly when an agency completely fails to provide

154
00:10:20,160 --> 00:10:23,319
Speaker 1: an explanation for its actions that has done in several

155
00:10:23,880 --> 00:10:29,920
Speaker 1: of these challenged extensions or delays. UM courts are very

156
00:10:30,040 --> 00:10:33,160
Speaker 1: very skeptical um when they see no reasoning, and so

157
00:10:33,200 --> 00:10:35,720
Speaker 1: there UM I do think that we will continue to

158
00:10:35,840 --> 00:10:40,880
Speaker 1: see these types of decisions being issued with a caveat

159
00:10:40,960 --> 00:10:44,960
Speaker 1: and the caveat is in many circumstances. These agencies have

160
00:10:45,240 --> 00:10:48,920
Speaker 1: also announced that they are undertaking new rulemakings, so they

161
00:10:49,000 --> 00:10:52,040
Speaker 1: are planning it sometime in the future to follow the

162
00:10:52,120 --> 00:10:57,359
Speaker 1: proper procedures. It's possible that at least for some agencies,

163
00:10:57,720 --> 00:11:03,280
Speaker 1: they might undertake a parallel proceeding complete those rulemakings that

164
00:11:03,320 --> 00:11:06,559
Speaker 1: they should be completing and moot some of these challenges.

165
00:11:06,960 --> 00:11:09,040
Speaker 1: So there is a bit of a timing game going

166
00:11:09,080 --> 00:11:11,960
Speaker 1: on here as well. So Bill, with this timing game,

167
00:11:12,240 --> 00:11:16,680
Speaker 1: it seems like the agencies have forever or a long

168
00:11:16,760 --> 00:11:19,040
Speaker 1: time at least until the end of the Trump administration,

169
00:11:19,679 --> 00:11:23,320
Speaker 1: and the people who are bringing the cases are, you know,

170
00:11:23,360 --> 00:11:28,320
Speaker 1: have time and money to think about Yes? Well, I

171
00:11:28,320 --> 00:11:32,880
Speaker 1: mean first that, as Custer Hammond said, challenges will be brought,

172
00:11:32,920 --> 00:11:37,440
Speaker 1: but bringing a challenge to a major regulatory action UM

173
00:11:37,640 --> 00:11:40,560
Speaker 1: is costly and sometimes there aren't the groups with the

174
00:11:40,600 --> 00:11:44,000
Speaker 1: resources and time to do so. So UM, there will

175
00:11:44,040 --> 00:11:48,559
Speaker 1: be challenges, but probably some of these actions will UM.

176
00:11:48,679 --> 00:11:51,640
Speaker 1: Essentially the delay will succeed because no one will be

177
00:11:51,679 --> 00:11:54,360
Speaker 1: there to bring a challenge. But when it's when the

178
00:11:54,440 --> 00:11:58,920
Speaker 1: challenges are brought, I think they will often meet with failure. UM.

179
00:11:58,960 --> 00:12:02,720
Speaker 1: And basically I think in time, the administration will probably

180
00:12:02,800 --> 00:12:05,840
Speaker 1: learn what other administrations have learned, which is you have

181
00:12:06,000 --> 00:12:10,080
Speaker 1: to go through the sometimes lengthy process of fixing a

182
00:12:10,160 --> 00:12:14,000
Speaker 1: regulation by trying to go through the process and justify

183
00:12:14,080 --> 00:12:17,440
Speaker 1: a change bill. Just to follow up, and we have

184
00:12:17,520 --> 00:12:21,120
Speaker 1: about a minute here the d on the d C

185
00:12:21,640 --> 00:12:25,920
Speaker 1: circuit case. The third judge, who was a Republican appointed judge,

186
00:12:26,280 --> 00:12:30,160
Speaker 1: didn't agree with the majority in the case. She saw

187
00:12:30,160 --> 00:12:34,280
Speaker 1: it differently, So there's a possibility that judges will not

188
00:12:34,320 --> 00:12:39,319
Speaker 1: see it that way. Yes, although the opinion you're referring

189
00:12:39,360 --> 00:12:44,480
Speaker 1: to jud Judge brown Um, she mainly questioned if the

190
00:12:44,559 --> 00:12:49,599
Speaker 1: agency delay was a sufficiently final action. That that's a

191
00:12:49,720 --> 00:12:53,760
Speaker 1: basic rule. You can only challenge final agency actions having

192
00:12:53,800 --> 00:12:57,560
Speaker 1: effects on people, And she questioned if the action was

193
00:12:57,920 --> 00:13:01,480
Speaker 1: adequately final. But I think on that front she lost.

194
00:13:01,559 --> 00:13:05,440
Speaker 1: And if you look at longstanding law and agency that

195
00:13:05,679 --> 00:13:09,680
Speaker 1: tries to basically put on the back burner and render

196
00:13:09,840 --> 00:13:13,800
Speaker 1: an nullogy and already existing regulation that courts have found

197
00:13:13,840 --> 00:13:16,080
Speaker 1: that to be final, and that has to go through

198
00:13:16,240 --> 00:13:19,440
Speaker 1: a rulemaking process. All right, I want to thank you both.

199
00:13:19,520 --> 00:13:23,200
Speaker 1: That's William Busby, professor at Georgetown Law School, and Emily Hammond,

200
00:13:23,200 --> 00:13:26,280
Speaker 1: professor at George Washington University Law School, coming up on

201
00:13:26,320 --> 00:13:30,480
Speaker 1: Bloomberg law. Brazil's former president sentenced to nearly ten years

202
00:13:30,520 --> 00:13:33,760
Speaker 1: in prison for corruption and money laundering. He intends to

203
00:13:33,840 --> 00:13:38,359
Speaker 1: appeal political tensions in the country. This is Bloomberg