WEBVTT - Weekend Law: Abortion, Hunter Biden & Famous Defendants Cross Paths 0:00:03.120 --> 0:00:08.320 You're listening to Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:10.640 --> 0:00:14.800 In its first abortion decision since overturning Roe v. Wade, 0:00:14.920 --> 0:00:19.599 the Supreme Court unanimously preserved full access to MIFA pristone, 0:00:20.000 --> 0:00:22.920 the pill used in nearly two thirds of all abortions 0:00:22.920 --> 0:00:26.520 in the country last year. But the justices took a 0:00:26.640 --> 0:00:29.840 sort of off ramp, deciding the case based on a 0:00:29.880 --> 0:00:34.559 procedural issue called standing ruling that the anti abortion doctors 0:00:34.640 --> 0:00:38.520 suing couldn't show they were injured by the FDA's expanding 0:00:38.640 --> 0:00:42.120 access to MIFA pristone. It was the same concern we 0:00:42.200 --> 0:00:46.640 heard voiced by justices across the ideological spectrum during the 0:00:46.760 --> 0:00:52.240 oral arguments, from liberal Katanji Brown Jackson to conservative Brett Kavanaugh, 0:00:52.560 --> 0:00:54.280 who wrote the majority opinion. 0:00:54.680 --> 0:00:57.440 I mean, it makes perfect sense for the individual doctors 0:00:57.600 --> 0:01:01.560 to seek an exemption. I understand it. They already had that, 0:01:02.760 --> 0:01:05.440 and so what they're asking for here is that in 0:01:05.560 --> 0:01:10.200 order to prevent them from possibly ever having to do 0:01:10.280 --> 0:01:14.280 these kinds of procedures, everyone else should be prevented from 0:01:14.319 --> 0:01:16.080 getting access to this medication. 0:01:17.840 --> 0:01:22.399 Just to confirm on the standing issue under federal law, 0:01:22.560 --> 0:01:28.640 no doctors can be forced against their consciences to perform 0:01:28.959 --> 0:01:30.560 or assist in an abortion. 0:01:30.840 --> 0:01:34.360 Correct The court didn't address the merits of the case, 0:01:34.760 --> 0:01:39.400 the FDA's loosening of the restrictions on mifipristone, leaving it 0:01:39.480 --> 0:01:43.839 open to similar attacks expected by opponents of abortion. Joining 0:01:43.840 --> 0:01:47.120 me is an expert and reproductive rights Mary Ziegler, a 0:01:47.160 --> 0:01:50.920 professor at UC Davis Law School. Mary, did this decision, 0:01:51.160 --> 0:01:55.560 this unanimous decision come as any surprise after the oral arguments. 0:01:56.000 --> 0:01:57.520 I mean, it was a little bit of a surprise 0:01:57.560 --> 0:01:59.880 that it was unanimous, But I think after oral argument 0:02:00.120 --> 0:02:02.960 was pretty clear that the plaineiffs were in trouble here 0:02:03.000 --> 0:02:05.720 on standing grounds, and their standing arguments were really weak, 0:02:05.760 --> 0:02:08.079 you know, from the outset. So in that sense, it 0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:08.840 wasn't a surprise. 0:02:09.240 --> 0:02:11.520 And tell us how the court came to its decision 0:02:11.680 --> 0:02:13.440 on standing, well. 0:02:13.280 --> 0:02:16.160 The court had three different grounds for deciding the planiffs 0:02:16.200 --> 0:02:20.320 didn't have standing. The planeiffs argued that they had standing 0:02:20.400 --> 0:02:23.440 because they could face conscience based injuries if patients had 0:02:23.480 --> 0:02:26.320 complications from the pristone and ended up in the emergency 0:02:26.360 --> 0:02:29.600 room where they were practicing. They argued that they would 0:02:29.639 --> 0:02:34.760 suffer economic harms potentially if forced to treat patients. And finally, 0:02:34.800 --> 0:02:38.320 they argued that their group their association, suffered harms because 0:02:38.360 --> 0:02:40.560 it was forced to divert resources that could have been 0:02:40.680 --> 0:02:43.000 used for other pro life or anti worsion work to 0:02:43.160 --> 0:02:47.200 oppose MiFi pristone, and the Supreme Court rejected all three 0:02:47.200 --> 0:02:51.640 of those claims. On the conscience point, the justices said, essentially, 0:02:51.840 --> 0:02:54.120 there are lots of federal laws to protect conscience, so 0:02:54.160 --> 0:02:57.360 there's no real threat of injury here. On the claims 0:02:57.400 --> 0:02:59.760 about economic harm, the course of this is just way, 0:02:59.800 --> 0:03:03.119 way too broad, almost to the point of ridiculousness. They said. 0:03:03.120 --> 0:03:06.560 If this was true as a theory of standing, firefighters 0:03:06.560 --> 0:03:09.840 could sue to object to relax building codes, and teachers 0:03:09.880 --> 0:03:13.240 and border states could sue to challenge immigration policies, this 0:03:13.320 --> 0:03:18.280 would be a Pandora's box. And finally, on associational standing right, 0:03:18.360 --> 0:03:23.760 the Court emphasized that this would be essentially allowing organizations 0:03:23.760 --> 0:03:28.160 to manufacture standing by spending money to gather information and 0:03:28.240 --> 0:03:31.600 advocate against an action. So all three of those standing 0:03:31.680 --> 0:03:35.320 claims failed, but they were specific to these parties, so 0:03:35.360 --> 0:03:38.960 it doesn't mean that these claims will necessarily go away forever, 0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:41.680 just that these plaintiffs were unable to bring them. 0:03:42.080 --> 0:03:44.400 Yeah. In fact, on the last page of the opinion, 0:03:44.880 --> 0:03:48.240 just as Kavanaugh wrote, quote, it is not clear that 0:03:48.280 --> 0:03:51.560 no one else would have standing to challenge the FDA's 0:03:51.640 --> 0:03:56.200 relaxed regulation of mifipristone, and the Texas judge below has 0:03:56.240 --> 0:04:00.720 allowed the states of Idaho, Kansas, and Missouri to join 0:04:00.760 --> 0:04:03.560 the case at the district court level to help press 0:04:03.600 --> 0:04:07.280 the same claims against the FDA. So that's still pending. 0:04:07.880 --> 0:04:10.640 Yes, So there are these other plaintiffs in the district 0:04:10.680 --> 0:04:13.720 court who had initially tried to intervene in the Supreme 0:04:13.720 --> 0:04:17.160 Court proceedings and were turned away, but who are proceeding 0:04:17.200 --> 0:04:20.440 through the lower courts arguing that they understanding that these 0:04:20.480 --> 0:04:23.440 plaintiffs lacked. And it's worth emphasizing too, because that isn't 0:04:23.480 --> 0:04:26.839 necessarily the end of it either. There are some local 0:04:27.200 --> 0:04:30.240 counties and cities and what's called the Sanctuary City for 0:04:30.279 --> 0:04:33.840 the Unborn movement that have been mulling bringing suits on 0:04:33.880 --> 0:04:36.599 the same basis and asserting they have standing. So I 0:04:36.640 --> 0:04:40.039 think we're seeing already some plaintiffs in the lower court 0:04:40.080 --> 0:04:42.320 trying to say they can bring these claims and they 0:04:42.360 --> 0:04:43.480 might not be the only. 0:04:43.320 --> 0:04:46.359 Ones, and the Supreme Court can almost get pushed to 0:04:46.480 --> 0:04:49.400 hear these cases. For example, in this case, you have 0:04:49.560 --> 0:04:52.599 the most conservative circuit in the country, the Fifth Circuit, 0:04:52.960 --> 0:04:56.640 pushing the legal envelope and finding that these plaintiffs have 0:04:56.760 --> 0:04:59.440 standing to sue, and then the Supreme Court has to 0:04:59.480 --> 0:05:01.119 respond and pushed back. 0:05:01.520 --> 0:05:04.919 Exactly right. And it doesn't necessarily mean that those plaintiffs 0:05:05.080 --> 0:05:07.520 will succeed either, right, I mean, they might not have 0:05:07.600 --> 0:05:10.080 standing either. But I think all we know today is 0:05:10.120 --> 0:05:12.320 that the Supreme Court is kicking the can down the road. 0:05:12.480 --> 0:05:15.600 They haven't resolved many of these claims permanently, and the. 0:05:15.560 --> 0:05:19.680 Court stop short way short of affirming the FDA's decisions 0:05:19.720 --> 0:05:23.480 to expand access to mifipristone. I mean, they didn't consider 0:05:23.600 --> 0:05:26.359 the merits at all in the opinion. 0:05:26.320 --> 0:05:29.039 Right, I mean, if anything, the Court seems sympathetic to 0:05:29.080 --> 0:05:32.159 the idea that people have conscience based objections to abortion. 0:05:32.400 --> 0:05:35.000 The Court seem to be sympathetic to those and the 0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:38.360 Court didn't at all affirm the logic of the FDA's 0:05:38.360 --> 0:05:41.400 decision making, didn't say anything one way or another about 0:05:41.440 --> 0:05:44.159 the plaintiff's theory that the Comstock Act operated as if 0:05:44.160 --> 0:05:47.000 the facto ban on abortion. So we got really no insight, 0:05:47.160 --> 0:05:49.559 especially no insights that would be reassuring to the Biden 0:05:49.560 --> 0:05:51.960 administration about what the Court thinks about those things. 0:05:52.279 --> 0:05:57.520 Just as Kavanaugh wrote, the plaintiffs have sincere legal, moral, ideological, 0:05:57.600 --> 0:06:01.680 and policy objections to elect of abortion and to the 0:06:01.800 --> 0:06:06.960 FDA's relaxed regulation of mifipristone. That language is a little troubling, 0:06:07.080 --> 0:06:07.440 isn't it. 0:06:07.760 --> 0:06:09.599 I agree, I mean, and I think it signals that 0:06:09.640 --> 0:06:11.680 we haven't seen the end of this by a long. 0:06:11.480 --> 0:06:15.200 Shut And there's some irony in the fact that Kavanaugh 0:06:15.240 --> 0:06:19.159 wrote a concurring opinion in the Dobbs case which overturned 0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:22.200 the constitutional right to abortion, and he said, basically, the 0:06:22.240 --> 0:06:25.320 abortion issue is now up to the states. We're done 0:06:25.320 --> 0:06:25.640 with it. 0:06:25.839 --> 0:06:28.880 I mean, I don't think anybody paying attention really believed that. 0:06:29.120 --> 0:06:32.080 But it's ironic, of course, that the Court has two 0:06:32.160 --> 0:06:34.839 abortion decisions in one term. I mean, this isn't even 0:06:34.880 --> 0:06:38.000 the last we've heard from this particular term on abortion, 0:06:38.080 --> 0:06:40.920 which is extraordinary. So this is not, you know, not 0:06:40.960 --> 0:06:43.120 even the end of what we're hearing from the justices 0:06:43.360 --> 0:06:46.240 right now, much less, you know, for the longer term. 0:06:46.560 --> 0:06:49.279 You mentioned the second abortion case that's yet to be 0:06:49.360 --> 0:06:54.520 decided over Idaho's strict abortion ban. Tell us about that that. 0:06:54.440 --> 0:06:59.320 Case involves emergency access to abortion. The Biden administration has 0:06:59.440 --> 0:07:02.320 argued that at a federal law called the Emergency Medical 0:07:02.320 --> 0:07:05.520 Treatment in Labor Act, Trump's state bands when those bands 0:07:05.560 --> 0:07:09.200 wouldn't allow access to abortion for certain medical emergencies, that 0:07:09.279 --> 0:07:12.240 the federal law would require. Idaho, the state of Biden 0:07:12.240 --> 0:07:15.840 administration took to court, has responded that the MTALA does 0:07:15.920 --> 0:07:19.480 nothing of the sort, and that the question is either 0:07:19.600 --> 0:07:22.120 left to the states or even that AMTALA offers some 0:07:22.240 --> 0:07:25.600 protection for the unborn child, as Idaho puts it, pointing 0:07:25.600 --> 0:07:28.760 to language in the statue, so that ruling remains to 0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:32.280 be seen and could have pretty important effects. 0:07:32.840 --> 0:07:35.120 After the oral arguments in them. If a priss Stone case, 0:07:35.160 --> 0:07:38.480 it seemed pretty clear what the decision would be. Can 0:07:38.520 --> 0:07:42.119 you glean anything from the oral arguments in the Idaho case. 0:07:42.560 --> 0:07:44.840 I mean, it seemed as if the court was likely 0:07:44.880 --> 0:07:47.480 to side with Idaho, although the oral argument was a 0:07:47.480 --> 0:07:50.320 little bit all over the place, So it's not entirely 0:07:50.400 --> 0:07:52.640 clear that that's going to be true. And if it 0:07:52.680 --> 0:07:56.440 is true, it's not entirely clear on what basis they're 0:07:56.480 --> 0:07:59.640 going to side with Idaho. So I think we're expecting 0:07:59.680 --> 0:08:02.560 a whin for Idaho, But on what basis or how 0:08:02.680 --> 0:08:04.760 sweeping a win, I think remains to be seen. 0:08:05.360 --> 0:08:09.760 Speaking about sweeping, about half the states have total bands 0:08:09.760 --> 0:08:14.480 on abortion or laws limiting how MiFi prestone can be prescribed. 0:08:15.040 --> 0:08:18.200 Does this decision change that at all? Or is it 0:08:18.240 --> 0:08:19.679 still illegal in those states? 0:08:20.280 --> 0:08:23.240 It's still illegal. This ruling doesn't change the status quo. 0:08:23.320 --> 0:08:26.640 So if the state has prohibited mifra pristone, it's still 0:08:26.680 --> 0:08:30.000 prohibited in the state. If a state provides access to 0:08:30.040 --> 0:08:33.440 mira pristone, the drug is still available. So it isn't 0:08:33.559 --> 0:08:36.400 underlining any state law one way or another. 0:08:36.800 --> 0:08:39.520 And tell us a little about the lawyers for the 0:08:39.600 --> 0:08:43.240 anti abortion doctors and medical groups here. They're from the 0:08:43.320 --> 0:08:48.800 conservative Christian legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom that's been 0:08:48.880 --> 0:08:51.960 behind a lot of Supreme Court decisions. 0:08:52.000 --> 0:08:55.679 The plaintiffs here are probably less important than the attorneys 0:08:55.720 --> 0:09:00.679 representing them, who are the Alliance Defending Freedom group that 0:09:01.200 --> 0:09:05.000 has really been dominating in some ways the landscape of 0:09:05.240 --> 0:09:10.240 Supreme Court abortion litigation since the Supreme Court overturned re 0:09:10.400 --> 0:09:13.160 viewad So this is part of a much longer game 0:09:13.200 --> 0:09:16.240 for them. They have lots of other cases and strategies 0:09:16.320 --> 0:09:21.080 in the pipeline, including challenges involving abortion pills. So we're 0:09:21.120 --> 0:09:24.559 going to see much more where this came from from them. 0:09:25.080 --> 0:09:29.800 Anti abortion activists have been using different strategies, and we 0:09:29.920 --> 0:09:34.160 see laws passed in some states that target abortion in 0:09:34.160 --> 0:09:39.640 inventive ways. For example, Louisiana has designated abortion bills as 0:09:39.880 --> 0:09:43.840 dangerous control substances that you need a prescription for. Do 0:09:43.840 --> 0:09:46.920 you see one strategy as more effective than another. 0:09:47.480 --> 0:09:49.760 That's absolutely right. So there's very much a kind of 0:09:49.800 --> 0:09:51.680 like throw it at the wall and see what sticks. 0:09:51.720 --> 0:09:54.400 That's going on here. Many of the strategies you mentioned 0:09:54.440 --> 0:09:57.560 June involve abortion pills, so some of them involve making 0:09:57.600 --> 0:10:00.800 it easier to survey and track who's using abortion pills, 0:10:01.040 --> 0:10:04.000 in part because states where abortion is legal have been 0:10:04.240 --> 0:10:07.040 passing shield laws, some of which allow physicians to mail 0:10:07.120 --> 0:10:09.840 pills into banned states. So some states are looking for 0:10:09.920 --> 0:10:16.160 tools to track and ultimately prosecute that usage. We're seeing 0:10:16.240 --> 0:10:21.000 efforts again to limit travel often called abortion trafficking ordinances 0:10:21.080 --> 0:10:27.040 that criminalize assisting people traveling for abortion. We've seen efforts 0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:31.640 to even do strange things like label mythipristone a threat 0:10:31.679 --> 0:10:34.920 to the environment and to the groundwater that're targeting the 0:10:35.160 --> 0:10:38.920 Environmental Protection Agency. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. 0:10:38.960 --> 0:10:42.560 Probably the most salient rely on the strategy that Donald 0:10:42.600 --> 0:10:44.960 Trump will, you know, win the twenty twenty four election, 0:10:45.080 --> 0:10:47.640 and that his Justice Department will be able to enforce 0:10:47.720 --> 0:10:50.240 the Comstock Act as a ban on abortion, and that 0:10:50.240 --> 0:10:53.400 that would of course override not just state laws but 0:10:53.480 --> 0:10:57.200 even ballot initiatives that voters are deciding for themselves when 0:10:57.200 --> 0:10:59.520 it comes to protecting abortion right. So there are a 0:10:59.559 --> 0:11:02.840 lot of play here, and this case is just a 0:11:02.880 --> 0:11:04.640 small piece of a much bigger. 0:11:04.320 --> 0:11:07.360 Puzzle, a puzzle where the pieces don't always seem to 0:11:07.400 --> 0:11:11.000 fit together. Thanks so much, Mary. That's Professor Mary Ziegler 0:11:11.080 --> 0:11:14.760 of UC Davis Law School. In other Supreme Court news, 0:11:14.760 --> 0:11:17.920 this week, a divided court threw out the federal ban 0:11:18.040 --> 0:11:22.080 on bump stocks, saying regulator has exceeded their power by 0:11:22.240 --> 0:11:26.080 outlining the rapid fire devices after they were used in 0:11:26.120 --> 0:11:29.920 the deadliest mass shooting in the country's history. That vote 0:11:29.960 --> 0:11:33.480 was six to three down. Ideological lines with the Liberals 0:11:33.480 --> 0:11:37.040 dissenting coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show. His 0:11:37.160 --> 0:11:40.880 gun trial may be behind him, but hunter Biden faces 0:11:41.080 --> 0:11:45.040 another trial on tax charges in September, as well as 0:11:45.120 --> 0:11:49.240 sentencing most likely in October. I'm June Grosso and you're 0:11:49.280 --> 0:11:54.160 listening to Bloomberg. Hunter Biden is now the first child 0:11:54.200 --> 0:11:58.600 of a sitting president to be convicted of crimes. On Monday, 0:11:58.720 --> 0:12:02.440 after less than three hours of deliberations, a jury found 0:12:02.520 --> 0:12:06.040 him guilty of all three felony charges for lying on 0:12:06.080 --> 0:12:09.480 a mandatory gun purchase form by saying he was not 0:12:09.679 --> 0:12:14.199 illegally using or addicted to drugs. The prosecution had presented 0:12:14.240 --> 0:12:17.160 evidence that hunter Biden was addicted to crack when he 0:12:17.240 --> 0:12:21.640 bought a Revolver in twenty eighteen, with deeply personal testimony 0:12:21.679 --> 0:12:25.720 from his ex wife and former romantic partners, with embarrassing 0:12:25.760 --> 0:12:29.080 evidence such as text messages and photos of him with 0:12:29.160 --> 0:12:33.480 drug paraphernalia or partially clothed, and with his own words 0:12:33.520 --> 0:12:35.800 from the audiobook of his memoir. 0:12:35.880 --> 0:12:38.079 I had no plan beyond the moment to moment demands 0:12:38.120 --> 0:12:42.480 of the crack pipe. I used my superpower finding crack 0:12:42.520 --> 0:12:46.400 anytime anywhere less than a day after landing at LAX 0:12:46.440 --> 0:12:47.880 in the spring of twenty eighteen. 0:12:48.200 --> 0:12:51.560 Special Counsel David Weiss, who brought the case against the 0:12:51.640 --> 0:12:55.680 president's son, defended the prosecution, saying it was about the 0:12:55.800 --> 0:12:56.600 rule of law. 0:12:57.000 --> 0:13:00.880 This case was about the illegal choice's defendant made while 0:13:00.920 --> 0:13:03.760 in the throes of addiction, his choice to lie on 0:13:03.800 --> 0:13:06.760 a government form when he brought a gun, and the 0:13:06.880 --> 0:13:09.000 choice to then possess that gun. 0:13:09.640 --> 0:13:12.200 But several jurors who said they felt they had no 0:13:12.400 --> 0:13:16.079 choice but to find Biden guilty also said they thought 0:13:16.200 --> 0:13:19.079 the case should never have been brought. Joining me is 0:13:19.120 --> 0:13:23.800 former Manhattan prosecutor Duncan Levin of Leven and Associates. Duncan 0:13:23.880 --> 0:13:27.160 the Special Council, said this prosecution was all about the 0:13:27.240 --> 0:13:30.920 rule of law, but not many people in similar situations 0:13:30.960 --> 0:13:33.000 are prosecuted under this law. 0:13:33.480 --> 0:13:35.160 The case that shouldn't have gone to trial in the 0:13:35.160 --> 0:13:38.840 first place. This was supposed to be resolved on upleaded 0:13:39.000 --> 0:13:43.800 two misdemeanor tax charges. He's facing unrelated tax charges that 0:13:43.960 --> 0:13:47.439 are coming up for trial in September in California, basically 0:13:47.679 --> 0:13:50.960 related to a million four in foreign business income, and 0:13:51.000 --> 0:13:54.679 he's facing three felony counts there and six other misdemeanor counts, 0:13:54.720 --> 0:13:57.800 and they're you know, pretty serious charges, their evasion of 0:13:57.840 --> 0:14:01.240 an assessment and filing false returns, not paying his taxes, 0:14:01.280 --> 0:14:03.679 and so this was all supposed to be wrapped up 0:14:03.720 --> 0:14:05.880 with a plea deal that was going to resolve in 0:14:05.960 --> 0:14:10.040 absolutely no jail time. Not plea deal fell apart that 0:14:10.160 --> 0:14:13.160 all being said, I think that if you're going to 0:14:13.200 --> 0:14:16.360 put in a case like this, the witnesses that they 0:14:16.400 --> 0:14:19.160 called were necessary witnesses. They were at the core of 0:14:19.160 --> 0:14:22.760 it trying to prove that he was a user where 0:14:22.800 --> 0:14:25.520 addicted to controlled substance at the time that he filled 0:14:25.520 --> 0:14:29.440 out this form to buy the gun, and they had 0:14:29.440 --> 0:14:32.440 to call witnesses who were going to testify to that. 0:14:33.320 --> 0:14:37.080 But the politics of this case are unmistakable because it 0:14:37.280 --> 0:14:41.880 charges themselves are ones that are rarely, if ever brought. 0:14:42.120 --> 0:14:45.320 Lying to a gun dealer is brought, probably fewer than 0:14:45.360 --> 0:14:48.000 three hundred times a year, and that's out of twenty 0:14:48.040 --> 0:14:51.960 five to thirty million background checks that are conducted around 0:14:52.000 --> 0:14:55.200 the nation every single year. The false claims on a 0:14:55.200 --> 0:14:58.760 federal firearms application is a form called the ETF four 0:14:58.800 --> 0:15:01.680 four seven three. I have never heard of a case 0:15:01.720 --> 0:15:05.120 being brought as a standalone case relying on a federal 0:15:05.120 --> 0:15:09.560 firearms application. Never standalone. It's usually brought in connection with 0:15:10.280 --> 0:15:14.280 another more serious crime, maybe somebody illegally using a gun 0:15:14.800 --> 0:15:17.560 or a felon in possession. This is a gun that 0:15:17.680 --> 0:15:21.520 was never used, it was never loaded, and Hunter Biden 0:15:21.520 --> 0:15:24.480 possessed it for eleven days. Just to put it in perspective. 0:15:25.120 --> 0:15:28.120 The three jurors who spoke and said that they had 0:15:28.160 --> 0:15:31.760 no choice but to find him guilty, but they question 0:15:31.920 --> 0:15:34.360 whether the criminal case should ever have been brought. One 0:15:34.400 --> 0:15:37.080 said the case seem like a waste of taxpayer dollars. 0:15:37.520 --> 0:15:41.280 Aren't those the jurors that the defense was targeting to 0:15:41.440 --> 0:15:45.400 nullify you to say this case isn't worth it. We're 0:15:45.400 --> 0:15:46.600 not going to find him guilty. 0:15:47.080 --> 0:15:50.560 The jury obviously took the case very seriously, and it 0:15:50.680 --> 0:15:53.720 sounds like politics really did not play a role in it, 0:15:53.840 --> 0:15:57.360 and they didn't nullify, and the defense is clearly not 0:15:57.520 --> 0:16:01.120 allowed to argue jury nullification. To them. Remembered, this is 0:16:01.120 --> 0:16:05.280 a defendant who is well known to everybody in Delaware, 0:16:05.320 --> 0:16:10.080 particularly they jurors walked through the lobby of the courthouse 0:16:10.240 --> 0:16:14.200 every day to get to the trial, and the defendant's 0:16:14.280 --> 0:16:17.120 father's photograph is hanging in the lobby. The First Lady 0:16:17.120 --> 0:16:19.600 of the United States is sitting in attendance at the trial. 0:16:20.000 --> 0:16:22.440 And they took their job seriously. They didn't nullify. They 0:16:22.480 --> 0:16:25.040 looked at the evidence and they convicted. The case itself 0:16:25.640 --> 0:16:28.320 was strong, and the defense really just said, at the 0:16:28.360 --> 0:16:32.120 time he filled out this ATS form at the gun dealership, 0:16:32.120 --> 0:16:34.160 he was not at the moment he filled the form 0:16:34.200 --> 0:16:37.600 out addicted to drugs. But there was evidence that you know, 0:16:37.680 --> 0:16:40.440 right before and right after he was, you know, texting 0:16:40.520 --> 0:16:43.360 with a drug dealer, and that he was clearly addicted 0:16:43.360 --> 0:16:46.160 to drugs. You know, this is a case that was 0:16:46.360 --> 0:16:50.080 a waste of taxpayer dollars. On the other hand, the 0:16:50.160 --> 0:16:52.640 you know, government was kind of forced into going a 0:16:52.680 --> 0:16:55.440 trial on it when the plea deal fell apart. So 0:16:55.520 --> 0:16:58.800 everybody's right here, it's the case that was strong. The 0:16:58.880 --> 0:17:01.880 jury did a very thorough job and obviously took the 0:17:01.920 --> 0:17:06.760 evidence very seriously. They didn't nullify because the case it 0:17:06.800 --> 0:17:10.080 self was worthy of a conviction. It's a case where 0:17:10.440 --> 0:17:14.359 interturers looking at it without a political lens and without 0:17:14.600 --> 0:17:17.560 looking through the lens of nullification, would convict because it 0:17:17.600 --> 0:17:20.240 was a strong case. There are a lot of cases 0:17:20.400 --> 0:17:24.280 that you could question the motives behind prosecutors bringing them 0:17:24.320 --> 0:17:27.720 in the first place. This case, I questioned the motives 0:17:27.760 --> 0:17:31.680 of the special prosecutor bringing the charges frankly, because these 0:17:31.760 --> 0:17:34.879 charges are never brought at a standalone case without something 0:17:34.920 --> 0:17:38.000 more serious. So I do question whether the case was 0:17:38.040 --> 0:17:40.800 brought because it was Hunter Biden. But at the end 0:17:40.800 --> 0:17:43.440 of the day, it's unlikely to result in any jail time, 0:17:43.480 --> 0:17:45.960 and I think the more serious charges that he's facing 0:17:46.200 --> 0:17:49.080 are in September. With these tax crimes, he actually has 0:17:49.359 --> 0:17:53.520 some significant exposure to an incarceratory sentence in September if 0:17:53.520 --> 0:17:54.800 he's convicted on those charges. 0:17:54.960 --> 0:17:58.040 Is there anything else the defense could have done to 0:17:58.160 --> 0:17:59.119 change the verdict? 0:18:00.119 --> 0:18:03.320 Judtieka really, I thought went out of her way to 0:18:03.320 --> 0:18:06.720 hobble the defense, and I would ascribe part of it 0:18:06.760 --> 0:18:10.439 to politics, and given the posture of the case, the 0:18:10.440 --> 0:18:13.200 fact that she scuttled the plea deal. There were two 0:18:13.240 --> 0:18:16.080 instances where the defense tried to get very key evidence 0:18:16.200 --> 0:18:19.280 into the trial, one of which is that this ATF 0:18:19.520 --> 0:18:22.240 four four seven three form was altered. It was altered 0:18:22.280 --> 0:18:25.119 by the gun dealer at some point after the fact, 0:18:25.200 --> 0:18:27.920 and that is the cause it is a requirement when 0:18:27.960 --> 0:18:30.840 the gun dealer has this form filled out that they 0:18:30.920 --> 0:18:35.640 get identifications that has the purchaser's address on it. At 0:18:35.640 --> 0:18:38.240 the time that they got the form in the first place, 0:18:38.480 --> 0:18:41.760 they got hunter Biden's passport, which did not have his 0:18:42.240 --> 0:18:46.280 address on it, and later at a point they filled 0:18:46.280 --> 0:18:48.399 out the form again to say that they'd gotten his 0:18:48.480 --> 0:18:52.640 driver's life. The judge barred the defense from introducing evidence 0:18:52.640 --> 0:18:55.359 of the altered form and said that it was a 0:18:55.440 --> 0:18:59.720 quote unquote conspiracy theory and unsupported rhetoric. I find that 0:19:00.000 --> 0:19:03.000 hard to believe and just a ruling that really has 0:19:03.080 --> 0:19:06.120 no merit because this is a case all about who 0:19:06.160 --> 0:19:08.399 filled out the form and when they filled out the form. 0:19:08.440 --> 0:19:11.119 The fact that the form was altered after the fact 0:19:11.280 --> 0:19:14.359 is very key evidence, and frankly, I think is some 0:19:14.480 --> 0:19:17.240 grounds for appeal that that was not allowed to be 0:19:17.320 --> 0:19:20.159 introduced at trial. The other thing is that the defense 0:19:20.200 --> 0:19:23.840 tried to call a Columbia psychiatrist named doctor l Eiun 0:19:23.960 --> 0:19:28.399 to testify at trial about hunter Biden's state of mind 0:19:28.480 --> 0:19:30.480 at the time that he filled out the form. There 0:19:30.520 --> 0:19:33.639 is a knowledge requirement here, and the defense was trying 0:19:33.680 --> 0:19:36.320 to show to the jury that at the time he 0:19:36.359 --> 0:19:38.359 filled out the form, he did not believe himself to 0:19:38.359 --> 0:19:40.199 be an addict, and I think there's some support to 0:19:40.240 --> 0:19:43.200 that in the evidence because Hunter Biden had just finished 0:19:43.320 --> 0:19:46.280 an eleven day rehab program and also was living with 0:19:46.320 --> 0:19:49.439 a sober companion, and so somebody who is sober for 0:19:49.520 --> 0:19:51.960 even one day or two days or eleven days may 0:19:51.960 --> 0:19:54.600 not consider themselves to be an addict. And it's something 0:19:54.640 --> 0:19:56.919 that I think the defense should have been allowed to 0:19:57.040 --> 0:20:00.679 argue and was precluded from arguing, and that really gutted 0:20:00.720 --> 0:20:03.600 the defense case in many ways. So they were really 0:20:03.720 --> 0:20:06.280 left with this very narrow argument that at the time 0:20:06.320 --> 0:20:09.320 of filling out the form he was not addicted to drugs, 0:20:09.320 --> 0:20:11.720 because there's no evidence he was doing drugs that day. 0:20:12.200 --> 0:20:14.600 So I think the judgment really out of her way 0:20:14.680 --> 0:20:18.440 to recap the defense. So they do have some appeals 0:20:18.480 --> 0:20:20.639 here that they can pursue. 0:20:21.040 --> 0:20:23.960 Another appellate issue they may use is one that they 0:20:24.040 --> 0:20:27.400 used to try to get the charges dismissed before trial. 0:20:28.000 --> 0:20:31.760 They argued the gun law was unconstitutional following a ruling 0:20:31.800 --> 0:20:34.320 by the US Supreme Court in twenty twenty two, the 0:20:34.320 --> 0:20:37.240 New York Case that expanded gun rights and the Fifth 0:20:37.280 --> 0:20:41.520 Circuit has struck down the law barring users of illegal 0:20:41.560 --> 0:20:46.440 drugs from possessing firearms, ruling it was unconstitutional. So could 0:20:46.480 --> 0:20:48.000 that be a good appellate argument? 0:20:48.359 --> 0:20:50.960 I think this is a great suppellent argument and we 0:20:51.000 --> 0:20:53.440 can all expect to see it, and frankly, it may 0:20:53.640 --> 0:20:56.280 at some point win. At the point that it wins, however, 0:20:56.680 --> 0:20:59.960 he will have already been branded a felon and done 0:21:00.359 --> 0:21:02.679 time if he does time or served out a sentence, 0:21:02.680 --> 0:21:04.520 because this is unlikely to wind its way through the 0:21:04.560 --> 0:21:08.000 courts anytime soon. But if you look at the statute itself, 0:21:08.119 --> 0:21:11.240 which is nine twenty two G. Three, it basically makes 0:21:11.280 --> 0:21:14.760 it unlawful to possess a gun if you are a 0:21:14.960 --> 0:21:19.359 user or addicted to any controlled substance. And the terms 0:21:19.400 --> 0:21:22.600 are ill defined. And you know, anyone who's gone through 0:21:22.600 --> 0:21:27.240 addiction and is understanding of the challenges facing addicts knows 0:21:27.320 --> 0:21:30.560 that the term addict is one that is very loaded, 0:21:30.600 --> 0:21:33.240 and the term user is one that's very loaded. And 0:21:33.280 --> 0:21:35.439 it's unclear whether it means that you have to be 0:21:35.560 --> 0:21:37.840 a user at the time you're filling out the form, 0:21:38.200 --> 0:21:41.760 or what that even means. If somebody does crack or 0:21:41.800 --> 0:21:44.960 some controlled substance and two days later goes to fill 0:21:44.960 --> 0:21:48.080 out this application. Are they a user? Are they an addict? 0:21:48.480 --> 0:21:50.720 The terms are ill defined, They're very vague, and I 0:21:50.720 --> 0:21:53.200 think as a result of it, the statute is really 0:21:53.200 --> 0:21:56.040 subject to being struck down as unconstitutional. 0:21:56.359 --> 0:22:00.200 Let's turn to what happens next. There's the probation into you, 0:22:00.240 --> 0:22:04.199 the sentencing memos, and biden friends and families sending in 0:22:04.320 --> 0:22:07.399 letter after letters to the judge. Which part of that 0:22:07.800 --> 0:22:09.640 is most important? 0:22:09.800 --> 0:22:14.000 The probation interview is meant to give the judge a 0:22:14.160 --> 0:22:16.680 sense of who he is as a person that may 0:22:16.720 --> 0:22:19.520 not emerge from the trial, and the same thing for 0:22:19.600 --> 0:22:23.640 the sentencing memo. In large measure, it's meant to educate 0:22:23.680 --> 0:22:27.280 the judge on who a defendant is, who their friends are, 0:22:27.840 --> 0:22:32.440