1 00:00:03,200 --> 00:00:07,960 Speaker 1: This is Bloombird Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio. 2 00:00:09,160 --> 00:00:13,560 Speaker 1: A Louisiana federal judge has made it official Title forty two. 3 00:00:13,760 --> 00:00:17,240 Speaker 1: The policy allowing asylum seekers to be turned away at 4 00:00:17,239 --> 00:00:20,840 Speaker 1: the border will remain in place until the legal actions 5 00:00:20,920 --> 00:00:24,520 Speaker 1: play out, and that's likely to drag well into next year. 6 00:00:24,840 --> 00:00:28,520 Speaker 1: The Mayor of Yuma, Arizona, Douglas Nichols, says the judge 7 00:00:28,560 --> 00:00:31,720 Speaker 1: made the right decision because the federal government is not 8 00:00:31,880 --> 00:00:34,840 Speaker 1: ready to handle a surge at the border. Title forty 9 00:00:34,880 --> 00:00:37,559 Speaker 1: two doesn't need to go away. Um, we just need 10 00:00:37,600 --> 00:00:39,600 Speaker 1: to be prepared for it. And I asked nine months 11 00:00:39,640 --> 00:00:43,120 Speaker 1: ago from d HS, hey, what are we doing? What's 12 00:00:43,159 --> 00:00:45,800 Speaker 1: the plan because we all know what's going away. Joining 13 00:00:45,840 --> 00:00:48,880 Speaker 1: me is Leon Fresco, a partner at Hollanden Night Lenn 14 00:00:48,960 --> 00:00:53,400 Speaker 1: explain why the judge said the Biden administration can't resind 15 00:00:53,560 --> 00:00:57,600 Speaker 1: Title forty two. Well, the ud had a few babies 16 00:00:57,880 --> 00:01:02,520 Speaker 1: for saying that the Title forty two recision could not 17 00:01:02,680 --> 00:01:05,880 Speaker 1: be put in place, and basically the first and the 18 00:01:05,920 --> 00:01:09,800 Speaker 1: main rationals that the judge said that the CDC needed 19 00:01:09,840 --> 00:01:13,440 Speaker 1: to use the a p A Notice and comment process 20 00:01:13,520 --> 00:01:17,360 Speaker 1: in order to revoke Title forty two, which is interesting 21 00:01:17,520 --> 00:01:21,480 Speaker 1: because you didn't need to actually use the notice and 22 00:01:21,560 --> 00:01:25,520 Speaker 1: common process to implement Title forty two. So it's a 23 00:01:25,680 --> 00:01:28,880 Speaker 1: strange sort of logic that would say you would need 24 00:01:29,400 --> 00:01:34,200 Speaker 1: to actually use notice and comments to resent Title forty two, 25 00:01:34,880 --> 00:01:38,480 Speaker 1: But that's one sort of logic. And then secondly, the 26 00:01:38,560 --> 00:01:43,440 Speaker 1: judge said that the CDCNS rationale is overbroad in that 27 00:01:43,640 --> 00:01:47,600 Speaker 1: it would apply to every rule issued under Title forty two, 28 00:01:47,920 --> 00:01:51,360 Speaker 1: regardless of the circumstances, and that that shouldn't be happening 29 00:01:51,960 --> 00:01:55,440 Speaker 1: and it needed to be a much more carefully narrowly 30 00:01:55,560 --> 00:01:59,040 Speaker 1: tailored rule in the way it is resent the Title 31 00:01:59,120 --> 00:02:03,080 Speaker 1: forty two so that it would keep certain threats that 32 00:02:03,280 --> 00:02:07,200 Speaker 1: are based on COVID nineteens from coming into the United States. 33 00:02:07,200 --> 00:02:10,440 Speaker 1: And then it also says that an agency to responds 34 00:02:10,520 --> 00:02:15,600 Speaker 1: to a dangerous and largely unknown disease may justify emergency actions. 35 00:02:15,840 --> 00:02:19,720 Speaker 1: The dispense with the rulemaking process, but they haven't explained 36 00:02:19,919 --> 00:02:24,720 Speaker 1: how now the princess circumstances prevented from now that things 37 00:02:24,760 --> 00:02:28,239 Speaker 1: are calmer, using the required dotors and comment process to 38 00:02:28,360 --> 00:02:32,400 Speaker 1: resent it rules. So basically it's mostly about notice and 39 00:02:32,480 --> 00:02:36,880 Speaker 1: comments here, that is the main reason why the decision 40 00:02:37,120 --> 00:02:40,040 Speaker 1: was to keep tital forty to what he placed. The 41 00:02:40,080 --> 00:02:42,919 Speaker 1: White House says it's going to comply with the court's order, 42 00:02:43,000 --> 00:02:46,320 Speaker 1: but it's going to appeal the decision. Does this indicate 43 00:02:46,520 --> 00:02:50,120 Speaker 1: a prolonged legal battle that will most likely end up 44 00:02:50,120 --> 00:02:53,720 Speaker 1: at the Supreme Court? Well, yes. And what's very interesting 45 00:02:53,800 --> 00:02:58,160 Speaker 1: about what's occurred, sort of the unreported nugget for whatever 46 00:02:58,200 --> 00:03:00,280 Speaker 1: reason out of all of this is that even though 47 00:03:00,320 --> 00:03:03,480 Speaker 1: the Biden administration has appealed, they appear not to have 48 00:03:03,560 --> 00:03:07,440 Speaker 1: asked for us say, of the District Court's ruling. And 49 00:03:07,560 --> 00:03:10,440 Speaker 1: for what that means is they're not taking the fast 50 00:03:10,520 --> 00:03:14,440 Speaker 1: track on a field, they're taking the slow track on appeal, 51 00:03:14,919 --> 00:03:19,760 Speaker 1: which means that theoretically speaking, Title forty two could be 52 00:03:19,760 --> 00:03:23,760 Speaker 1: in place until well into three, maybe the middle of 53 00:03:25,280 --> 00:03:27,880 Speaker 1: or at least at the bare minimum, until a notice 54 00:03:27,880 --> 00:03:32,080 Speaker 1: and comments rulemaking can take place, or perhaps the COVID 55 00:03:32,160 --> 00:03:35,720 Speaker 1: National Emergency is rescinded as a whole, to which point, 56 00:03:35,760 --> 00:03:39,720 Speaker 1: then if the entire COVID National Emergency is resented, perhaps 57 00:03:39,720 --> 00:03:43,080 Speaker 1: it's easier to then move forward. But the Biden administration 58 00:03:43,160 --> 00:03:47,080 Speaker 1: hasn't said that they are committed to removing the COVID 59 00:03:47,160 --> 00:03:51,560 Speaker 1: National Emergency Declaration any time in the foreseeable future. Well, 60 00:03:51,640 --> 00:03:54,440 Speaker 1: this brings me to a question I believe I've asked 61 00:03:54,480 --> 00:03:59,800 Speaker 1: you before. Is the Biden administration secretly happy or relieved 62 00:04:00,360 --> 00:04:04,360 Speaker 1: that this judge save Title forty two. Well, the only 63 00:04:04,520 --> 00:04:07,720 Speaker 1: implications that one can draw from the fact that they're 64 00:04:07,760 --> 00:04:12,119 Speaker 1: not moving for a stay of the District judge disorder 65 00:04:12,320 --> 00:04:15,200 Speaker 1: is that they want Title forty two to remain in plight. 66 00:04:15,400 --> 00:04:19,479 Speaker 1: And I'm surprised they're not getting more pushback from the 67 00:04:19,520 --> 00:04:23,240 Speaker 1: immigration right side because the community on this side, because 68 00:04:23,360 --> 00:04:26,039 Speaker 1: at the end of the day, if you were really 69 00:04:26,080 --> 00:04:29,480 Speaker 1: intent on eliminating Title forty two as a policy, you'd 70 00:04:29,480 --> 00:04:33,239 Speaker 1: be pushing for a stay of this. But apparently there's 71 00:04:33,320 --> 00:04:36,120 Speaker 1: just no desire to to boot for a stay, which 72 00:04:36,160 --> 00:04:39,320 Speaker 1: means you'd go through the normal Fifth Circuit process, which 73 00:04:39,360 --> 00:04:42,400 Speaker 1: could take six months to a year, and then the 74 00:04:42,440 --> 00:04:45,160 Speaker 1: Supreme Court process, which could take another six months to 75 00:04:45,279 --> 00:04:48,760 Speaker 1: a year. And so maybe if you expedite in those cases, 76 00:04:48,800 --> 00:04:52,240 Speaker 1: and you ask for expedited briefing at the court, granted it, 77 00:04:52,520 --> 00:04:57,040 Speaker 1: you could get this into early. But we are talking 78 00:04:57,080 --> 00:05:00,799 Speaker 1: now about three time frame for the decision of side 79 00:05:00,800 --> 00:05:04,000 Speaker 1: of forty two when it gets to the Supreme Court, 80 00:05:04,000 --> 00:05:07,560 Speaker 1: when not if is there any indication how the justices 81 00:05:08,040 --> 00:05:12,280 Speaker 1: would rule based on prior rulings. Well, I think it's 82 00:05:12,320 --> 00:05:16,480 Speaker 1: going to be very interesting whether the judges think at 83 00:05:16,520 --> 00:05:19,240 Speaker 1: the end of the day that this c d C 84 00:05:20,160 --> 00:05:22,839 Speaker 1: declaration as to who can come across the border is 85 00:05:22,960 --> 00:05:26,039 Speaker 1: reviewable by the courts. And I don't think in the 86 00:05:26,120 --> 00:05:29,520 Speaker 1: end they will find that it's reviewable. But I think 87 00:05:29,520 --> 00:05:31,479 Speaker 1: it's going to be a long time until they get there. 88 00:05:31,480 --> 00:05:34,080 Speaker 1: And the question is will this be mooted out by 89 00:05:34,120 --> 00:05:36,320 Speaker 1: the time of decision is going to happen on side 90 00:05:36,320 --> 00:05:38,880 Speaker 1: of forty two? And I think that's what we don't know. 91 00:05:39,000 --> 00:05:40,599 Speaker 1: We don't know what the world is going to look 92 00:05:40,640 --> 00:05:42,760 Speaker 1: like by the time the Supreme Court would get to 93 00:05:42,800 --> 00:05:45,880 Speaker 1: a decision, and could this end up becoming moose. But 94 00:05:46,000 --> 00:05:48,960 Speaker 1: I don't think that the Supreme Court is going to 95 00:05:49,160 --> 00:05:52,000 Speaker 1: want to have a decision in place saying that it 96 00:05:52,200 --> 00:05:56,200 Speaker 1: can overrule the Director of the CDC with regards to 97 00:05:56,279 --> 00:06:01,200 Speaker 1: declarations on when do these require frictions on the border 98 00:06:01,560 --> 00:06:05,080 Speaker 1: and when they don't. But you know, I've been surprised 99 00:06:05,200 --> 00:06:10,000 Speaker 1: before Leon there are three things the Biden administration is 100 00:06:10,080 --> 00:06:14,440 Speaker 1: doing or saying that seemed to conflict with each other. So, 101 00:06:14,680 --> 00:06:19,640 Speaker 1: first of all, on Tuesday, the Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro 102 00:06:19,720 --> 00:06:24,000 Speaker 1: Majorchis said will be increasing the number of criminal prosecutions 103 00:06:24,040 --> 00:06:26,760 Speaker 1: to meet the challenge because the fact of the matter 104 00:06:26,920 --> 00:06:30,680 Speaker 1: is there are more cases that warn't criminal prosecution than 105 00:06:30,800 --> 00:06:35,040 Speaker 1: cases that are being brought. Yet, an ICE memo last 106 00:06:35,120 --> 00:06:39,920 Speaker 1: month encouraged its prosecutors to use their discretion to focus 107 00:06:39,960 --> 00:06:43,719 Speaker 1: on deporting migrants who pose a public safety or national 108 00:06:43,800 --> 00:06:48,560 Speaker 1: security threat while not initiating, we're dismissing cases against those 109 00:06:48,600 --> 00:06:52,560 Speaker 1: who are not. And third, a new rule breaks away 110 00:06:52,560 --> 00:06:57,600 Speaker 1: from the framework governing the credible fear screening process with 111 00:06:57,680 --> 00:07:01,320 Speaker 1: a lower bar for asylum seekers to eire. Those things 112 00:07:01,360 --> 00:07:06,760 Speaker 1: seem to contradict his statement. What actually is happening? What 113 00:07:06,800 --> 00:07:10,520 Speaker 1: are they doing? So here's the basic issue, and I'll 114 00:07:10,520 --> 00:07:13,960 Speaker 1: take you through the sets to explain what is meant 115 00:07:14,000 --> 00:07:18,000 Speaker 1: by all of it. Right now, if a person arrives 116 00:07:18,080 --> 00:07:20,840 Speaker 1: at the border and they are a single adults and 117 00:07:20,920 --> 00:07:24,200 Speaker 1: that's still to this day people talk about all these 118 00:07:24,240 --> 00:07:29,920 Speaker 1: things Cubans, Ukrainians, the families, minors, but still to this 119 00:07:30,040 --> 00:07:33,240 Speaker 1: day something continues to hold true that has held true 120 00:07:33,280 --> 00:07:36,200 Speaker 1: for many, many years, which is that the majority of 121 00:07:36,400 --> 00:07:40,400 Speaker 1: people who try to come across the suther border remains 122 00:07:40,440 --> 00:07:44,400 Speaker 1: that continues to remain single adults from Mexico. So the 123 00:07:44,520 --> 00:07:49,120 Speaker 1: question is, when single adults from Mexico try to cross 124 00:07:49,200 --> 00:07:53,640 Speaker 1: the southern border into the United States, what Secretary Majorkis 125 00:07:53,720 --> 00:07:58,000 Speaker 1: is saying is that right now they're being excluded under 126 00:07:58,040 --> 00:08:00,680 Speaker 1: Title forty two for the most part and sent back 127 00:08:00,680 --> 00:08:04,160 Speaker 1: to Mexico. So they're not being allowed to make their claim. 128 00:08:04,280 --> 00:08:07,400 Speaker 1: But what's happening is you do that, but people continue 129 00:08:07,480 --> 00:08:11,280 Speaker 1: to try crossing a second time, a third time before siding, 130 00:08:11,360 --> 00:08:14,960 Speaker 1: et cetera. And so that cycle is going to continue 131 00:08:15,320 --> 00:08:18,880 Speaker 1: unless you actually start to prosecute of individuals. But say, 132 00:08:19,000 --> 00:08:22,240 Speaker 1: if you're going to cross the border multiple time, there's 133 00:08:22,280 --> 00:08:26,880 Speaker 1: gonna be jail time associated with this, which serves two purposes. 134 00:08:27,000 --> 00:08:29,680 Speaker 1: One can imagine. The first purpose is well, if a 135 00:08:29,760 --> 00:08:33,480 Speaker 1: person is in jail, then they can't continue crossing of 136 00:08:33,520 --> 00:08:37,800 Speaker 1: their bodies in the jail. That's number one obviously, But second, conceivably, 137 00:08:37,840 --> 00:08:40,720 Speaker 1: it also serves as the surrence for other people who 138 00:08:40,720 --> 00:08:43,400 Speaker 1: would do this if they find out that people who 139 00:08:43,400 --> 00:08:46,160 Speaker 1: have tried this recently are now in jail for six 140 00:08:46,200 --> 00:08:48,400 Speaker 1: months or a year or a year and a half 141 00:08:48,480 --> 00:08:51,719 Speaker 1: or whatever. I mean. Technically, the penalty for illegal re 142 00:08:51,960 --> 00:08:54,760 Speaker 1: entry a second time can be up to ten years 143 00:08:54,760 --> 00:08:57,520 Speaker 1: in prison. So this is serious prison time you could 144 00:08:57,520 --> 00:08:59,520 Speaker 1: actually spend. I don't know that judge is ever going 145 00:08:59,559 --> 00:09:02,520 Speaker 1: to get some weeks been years in prison, but theoretically 146 00:09:02,600 --> 00:09:06,640 Speaker 1: that's the possible presence. And so if you do that, 147 00:09:06,720 --> 00:09:09,480 Speaker 1: people were getting ten years at prison, for instance, for 148 00:09:09,720 --> 00:09:13,120 Speaker 1: coming over a second or a third time, then that 149 00:09:13,160 --> 00:09:16,080 Speaker 1: would certainly serve this ard for people from doing that. 150 00:09:16,080 --> 00:09:19,920 Speaker 1: That is a different issue than what's done as prosecutorial 151 00:09:20,000 --> 00:09:23,320 Speaker 1: discretion in the removal context, which is what do you 152 00:09:23,360 --> 00:09:26,520 Speaker 1: do with people already year who've been here with some 153 00:09:27,200 --> 00:09:30,240 Speaker 1: amount of time already invested in the United States. But 154 00:09:30,280 --> 00:09:32,560 Speaker 1: the question is what do you consider that a year, 155 00:09:32,679 --> 00:09:35,960 Speaker 1: two years, three years, four years, five years, and year. 156 00:09:36,080 --> 00:09:39,319 Speaker 1: Is where the Secretary is saying to the ice attorneys 157 00:09:39,440 --> 00:09:45,080 Speaker 1: used prosecutorial discretion to only remove those people who've been 158 00:09:45,720 --> 00:09:48,760 Speaker 1: now in the United States for a while if they 159 00:09:48,800 --> 00:09:53,239 Speaker 1: are people with criminal issues or some other public faithy 160 00:09:53,360 --> 00:09:56,760 Speaker 1: or dangerousness or something like that, or some violation of 161 00:09:56,800 --> 00:10:00,720 Speaker 1: the inseegrity of the immigration system. That that's what those 162 00:10:00,760 --> 00:10:04,920 Speaker 1: memos talk about, so that even though they're called prosecutorial discretion, 163 00:10:05,320 --> 00:10:08,280 Speaker 1: what they mean is who gets tacked to be put 164 00:10:08,280 --> 00:10:12,160 Speaker 1: into deportation proceedings as opposed to this first issue, as 165 00:10:12,480 --> 00:10:15,440 Speaker 1: is who's getting picked to actually be thrown in jail 166 00:10:16,040 --> 00:10:20,400 Speaker 1: for breaking criminal laws regarding crossing the border illegally. So 167 00:10:20,559 --> 00:10:22,800 Speaker 1: that's the person of the second thing. And then the 168 00:10:22,920 --> 00:10:26,040 Speaker 1: third thing has to do with if you're not just 169 00:10:26,240 --> 00:10:28,800 Speaker 1: a border cross or who's trying to cross the border, 170 00:10:29,280 --> 00:10:33,480 Speaker 1: but you're actually someone who's trying to seek asylum and 171 00:10:33,720 --> 00:10:38,160 Speaker 1: it's actually credibly coming forward with some asylum claims that 172 00:10:38,320 --> 00:10:43,880 Speaker 1: could be reasonably understood in the law that's cognizable, then 173 00:10:44,600 --> 00:10:48,200 Speaker 1: what the administration is trying to do is to streamline 174 00:10:48,240 --> 00:10:53,280 Speaker 1: that process to get as many narritorious cases out of 175 00:10:53,320 --> 00:10:57,480 Speaker 1: the pool as possible so that the immigration courts can 176 00:10:57,520 --> 00:11:01,640 Speaker 1: focus on the questionable cases and try to get those 177 00:11:01,720 --> 00:11:04,800 Speaker 1: that judicated much more quickly, because now there's a four 178 00:11:04,920 --> 00:11:08,040 Speaker 1: or five year backlog on those cases, and the people 179 00:11:08,080 --> 00:11:11,720 Speaker 1: who are ultimately going to lose are either in America 180 00:11:12,000 --> 00:11:14,040 Speaker 1: for four or five years before they lose, which is 181 00:11:14,120 --> 00:11:17,960 Speaker 1: not ideal, or they never even show up the court 182 00:11:18,120 --> 00:11:20,440 Speaker 1: and then we never find out if they win or lose. 183 00:11:20,960 --> 00:11:23,800 Speaker 1: But that's that's also how the system is supposed to work. 184 00:11:23,880 --> 00:11:27,800 Speaker 1: So the idea is, if you could identify very quickly 185 00:11:28,000 --> 00:11:32,600 Speaker 1: up front, hey, this person is, for instance, someone fleeing 186 00:11:32,840 --> 00:11:38,200 Speaker 1: from the Ukraine who has you know, basically already been 187 00:11:38,720 --> 00:11:41,560 Speaker 1: injured by Russian soldiers and have been told we're gonna 188 00:11:41,640 --> 00:11:44,920 Speaker 1: kill you if you come back, etcetera. That might be 189 00:11:45,080 --> 00:11:47,560 Speaker 1: someone who's case is so simple that you can just 190 00:11:47,600 --> 00:11:50,360 Speaker 1: give them asylum. That up very quickly, and you don't 191 00:11:50,360 --> 00:11:52,720 Speaker 1: have to put that person in the five year two, 192 00:11:53,040 --> 00:11:56,880 Speaker 1: which makes the line shorter for these more difficult cases. 193 00:11:56,960 --> 00:12:01,040 Speaker 1: So that's the three questions you're talking about, how they 194 00:12:01,080 --> 00:12:06,480 Speaker 1: work in tandem. So then in fact the government is 195 00:12:07,000 --> 00:12:12,600 Speaker 1: lowering the standard though to significant possibility in the credible 196 00:12:12,640 --> 00:12:16,920 Speaker 1: fear process, well that has always been the standard needing. 197 00:12:16,960 --> 00:12:20,319 Speaker 1: What happens is if you show up to the border 198 00:12:20,559 --> 00:12:22,360 Speaker 1: and you don't have a viva, you don't have any 199 00:12:22,400 --> 00:12:24,760 Speaker 1: predisitions to be here, You're just showing up on your own, 200 00:12:25,320 --> 00:12:27,920 Speaker 1: and the government then said why are you here, and 201 00:12:27,960 --> 00:12:30,800 Speaker 1: you say I'm here because I'm afraid of going back 202 00:12:30,840 --> 00:12:33,760 Speaker 1: to my country. I'm going to be persecuted. Then the 203 00:12:33,840 --> 00:12:36,320 Speaker 1: government does the three to the process. The first step 204 00:12:36,360 --> 00:12:38,800 Speaker 1: of the process is they say, well, that's fine, but 205 00:12:38,880 --> 00:12:43,080 Speaker 1: we're gonna put you in removal proceedings. So that's that's 206 00:12:43,120 --> 00:12:47,079 Speaker 1: called expedited removal, meaning the government says you don't get 207 00:12:47,160 --> 00:12:49,640 Speaker 1: to be here, you're out. But then there's a defense 208 00:12:49,640 --> 00:12:52,520 Speaker 1: sex pedit a removal, which is, hey, don't do this 209 00:12:52,600 --> 00:12:55,240 Speaker 1: because I'm gonna be persecuted. So then how do you 210 00:12:55,320 --> 00:12:58,480 Speaker 1: put that defense forward. You have to make your claim 211 00:12:58,600 --> 00:13:01,040 Speaker 1: and you have to prove that of a credible fear 212 00:13:01,080 --> 00:13:04,000 Speaker 1: of persecution. And so the question then is, well, what 213 00:13:04,160 --> 00:13:07,880 Speaker 1: is the standard for determining whether one has a credible fear? 214 00:13:08,240 --> 00:13:12,640 Speaker 1: And that standard is this significant possibility of removal. The 215 00:13:12,760 --> 00:13:17,640 Speaker 1: Trump administration had tried significant possibility of persecution in your 216 00:13:17,640 --> 00:13:20,840 Speaker 1: own country on the basis of one of the protected grounds, 217 00:13:20,880 --> 00:13:26,000 Speaker 1: which is ray religion, national origin, social group, or political opinion. 218 00:13:26,640 --> 00:13:31,120 Speaker 1: And so the Trump administration tried to increase that. But 219 00:13:31,280 --> 00:13:35,600 Speaker 1: really this idea that that standard has been increased or 220 00:13:35,720 --> 00:13:39,280 Speaker 1: decrease isn't true. It's always been this significant possibility standard, 221 00:13:39,600 --> 00:13:44,000 Speaker 1: because that's what the standard was, is the regulation. But 222 00:13:44,600 --> 00:13:47,559 Speaker 1: what the Trump administration I tried to do is to 223 00:13:47,600 --> 00:13:53,200 Speaker 1: basically keep issuing memos repeatedly think, hey, this significant possibility 224 00:13:53,320 --> 00:13:58,720 Speaker 1: standard doesn't mean this, it means this, and basically tried 225 00:13:58,720 --> 00:14:02,160 Speaker 1: by sort of implo occasion to raise the standard, which 226 00:14:02,200 --> 00:14:05,760 Speaker 1: did work in the sense that many more cases were 227 00:14:05,840 --> 00:14:09,640 Speaker 1: denied at that front stage. But the point is, if 228 00:14:09,640 --> 00:14:12,839 Speaker 1: at the front stage you get a credible fear determination, 229 00:14:13,520 --> 00:14:17,040 Speaker 1: then what that means is you get a hearing that's 230 00:14:17,040 --> 00:14:19,440 Speaker 1: supposed to decide whether you get to say or not. 231 00:14:19,640 --> 00:14:22,560 Speaker 1: And that is a difference sagre ull do you have 232 00:14:22,640 --> 00:14:25,880 Speaker 1: a well founded fear of persecution in the future in 233 00:14:25,960 --> 00:14:28,960 Speaker 1: your own country on the basis of a protective ground? 234 00:14:29,520 --> 00:14:32,720 Speaker 1: And so what the Biden administration is changing here is 235 00:14:32,720 --> 00:14:36,800 Speaker 1: they're saying, you don't start an immigration court anymore. You 236 00:14:36,880 --> 00:14:40,120 Speaker 1: start with a NAAD for serial interview, and if your 237 00:14:40,160 --> 00:14:43,920 Speaker 1: case is territorious enough to win in this non adversarial interview, 238 00:14:44,240 --> 00:14:46,360 Speaker 1: that we're gonna take you out of the backlog of 239 00:14:46,360 --> 00:14:49,520 Speaker 1: the immigration court and you're just gonna win up front. 240 00:14:50,040 --> 00:14:53,280 Speaker 1: Whereas if your case isn't strong enough to win up front, 241 00:14:53,640 --> 00:14:56,520 Speaker 1: then you will go like normal to the immigration court. 242 00:14:57,000 --> 00:15:01,280 Speaker 1: So that's what's changing in the current viire. Is it 243 00:15:01,400 --> 00:15:05,360 Speaker 1: the case that almost all migrants who come to this 244 00:15:05,440 --> 00:15:10,520 Speaker 1: country claim credible fears? Something involved ninety percent of people 245 00:15:10,560 --> 00:15:13,200 Speaker 1: when they get apprehended. I think that they have a 246 00:15:13,200 --> 00:15:16,760 Speaker 1: credible fear. But is it all? It's not all nine percent? 247 00:15:17,400 --> 00:15:23,040 Speaker 1: Rather than rather than saying that the number is end 248 00:15:23,080 --> 00:15:28,280 Speaker 1: by the way, by I of non Mexican crossers, some 249 00:15:28,560 --> 00:15:32,240 Speaker 1: decent number of Mexican crossers don't end up asserting a 250 00:15:32,560 --> 00:15:35,040 Speaker 1: credible fear. I haven't seen the sets on this most 251 00:15:35,040 --> 00:15:39,040 Speaker 1: recent crops of Mexican crossers. But the people not from Mexico, 252 00:15:39,440 --> 00:15:43,400 Speaker 1: it is over that actually claims that they are going 253 00:15:43,400 --> 00:15:46,080 Speaker 1: to be persecuted in their home country because what other 254 00:15:46,160 --> 00:15:49,200 Speaker 1: reasons can they give that would allow them to stay. No, 255 00:15:49,360 --> 00:15:51,840 Speaker 1: there are no other reasons. Unless you come with a visa, 256 00:15:52,160 --> 00:15:54,720 Speaker 1: you're going to be deported unless you complain you have 257 00:15:54,760 --> 00:15:57,920 Speaker 1: a credible fear of being persecuted in your whole country. 258 00:15:58,320 --> 00:16:02,240 Speaker 1: Sexis file the motion on one day asking a federal 259 00:16:02,280 --> 00:16:07,840 Speaker 1: court to stop the Biden administration from implementing this latest 260 00:16:07,960 --> 00:16:11,160 Speaker 1: rule at the border. So what do they want to happen. 261 00:16:11,800 --> 00:16:15,080 Speaker 1: So the Biden administration is implementing this rule by the 262 00:16:15,160 --> 00:16:19,520 Speaker 1: end of the month. That would then change the adjudication 263 00:16:19,640 --> 00:16:24,840 Speaker 1: from an immigration court judge to an immigration asylum officer, 264 00:16:25,320 --> 00:16:27,760 Speaker 1: and they could move it from an adversarial to a 265 00:16:27,800 --> 00:16:31,920 Speaker 1: non adversarial process. And basically the State of Texas saying 266 00:16:32,040 --> 00:16:34,640 Speaker 1: don't do that because that's going to lead to many 267 00:16:34,640 --> 00:16:38,200 Speaker 1: more asylum cases getting granted, and that's gonna put a 268 00:16:38,320 --> 00:16:41,680 Speaker 1: strain on the State of Texas. And the toughest part 269 00:16:41,720 --> 00:16:44,760 Speaker 1: about the State of Texas and plaim is well, why 270 00:16:44,920 --> 00:16:47,800 Speaker 1: is that a problem? And more asylum cases get granted 271 00:16:48,320 --> 00:16:51,840 Speaker 1: as long as they actually meet the standard of asylum. 272 00:16:51,920 --> 00:16:56,240 Speaker 1: I think they're current why that these asylum officers won't 273 00:16:56,280 --> 00:17:00,640 Speaker 1: actually do a good job of setting and a island playing. 274 00:17:00,720 --> 00:17:04,440 Speaker 1: But that seeks very strained because these asylum officers already 275 00:17:04,480 --> 00:17:07,679 Speaker 1: do this every day. The only difference is their current 276 00:17:07,760 --> 00:17:11,760 Speaker 1: role is to adjudicate asylum playing for people who entered legally. 277 00:17:12,240 --> 00:17:15,520 Speaker 1: Thanks so much, Leon, that's Leon Fresco of Holland and Knight. 278 00:17:16,800 --> 00:17:21,560 Speaker 1: Cryptocurrencies have been suffering through some challenging times, but one 279 00:17:21,640 --> 00:17:27,639 Speaker 1: area is continuing to surge. Cryptocurrency litigation is soaring up 280 00:17:27,680 --> 00:17:31,679 Speaker 1: more than fifty since the start of Joining me is 281 00:17:31,680 --> 00:17:34,880 Speaker 1: Sam Skolnick of Bloomberg Law who has written about this 282 00:17:35,640 --> 00:17:40,120 Speaker 1: start by telling us about the number of lawsuits over 283 00:17:40,200 --> 00:17:46,440 Speaker 1: crypto Yeah. So, currently there are roughly four hundred actions, 284 00:17:46,520 --> 00:17:50,520 Speaker 1: be they private lawsuits government suits, that are are current 285 00:17:50,600 --> 00:17:54,400 Speaker 1: in this space. Um that number has grown consistently over 286 00:17:54,440 --> 00:17:57,879 Speaker 1: the years, according to at least one guy at a 287 00:17:57,880 --> 00:18:00,639 Speaker 1: firm called Morrison and Cohen and size firm in New 288 00:18:00,720 --> 00:18:05,040 Speaker 1: York that keeps track of these lawsuits regarding crypto companies, 289 00:18:05,520 --> 00:18:07,879 Speaker 1: about half of the four hundred, though he said that 290 00:18:07,920 --> 00:18:10,800 Speaker 1: there's been a real explosion in one portion of this 291 00:18:11,119 --> 00:18:15,000 Speaker 1: that has to do with class action lawsuits, other private litigation. 292 00:18:15,560 --> 00:18:18,760 Speaker 1: About half of that four hundred numbers roughly two hundred. 293 00:18:19,280 --> 00:18:24,000 Speaker 1: That number has grown exponentially over just the last few years, 294 00:18:24,080 --> 00:18:28,320 Speaker 1: and interestingly, June, just a quick search of this litigation, 295 00:18:28,359 --> 00:18:31,800 Speaker 1: of this private litigation shows some pretty big names attached 296 00:18:31,840 --> 00:18:33,840 Speaker 1: to some of these suits, and you don't have to 297 00:18:33,920 --> 00:18:36,520 Speaker 1: follow legal news specifically to know some of these names. 298 00:18:36,560 --> 00:18:41,280 Speaker 1: For example, in January, there was a class action I 299 00:18:41,359 --> 00:18:45,119 Speaker 1: think it's still awaiting certification, but a putative class action 300 00:18:45,200 --> 00:18:50,720 Speaker 1: against Kim Kardashian, the celebutante, as well as former boxing 301 00:18:50,800 --> 00:18:54,840 Speaker 1: champ of Floyd Mayweather Jr. And others. And what that 302 00:18:55,000 --> 00:18:59,080 Speaker 1: suit alleged is that the defendants had made misleading statements 303 00:18:59,119 --> 00:19:03,080 Speaker 1: in Twitter and other social media posts. Two investors of 304 00:19:03,200 --> 00:19:08,920 Speaker 1: one specific cryptocurrency token called Ethereum Max. And then there 305 00:19:08,920 --> 00:19:11,720 Speaker 1: have been lots of other big companies including I'm not 306 00:19:11,760 --> 00:19:15,320 Speaker 1: sure from pronouncing this right, but the fancy French scarf 307 00:19:15,320 --> 00:19:19,359 Speaker 1: and bag maker air Mess International. They also have been 308 00:19:19,400 --> 00:19:22,640 Speaker 1: involved in litigation of a different type, where a patent 309 00:19:23,119 --> 00:19:27,359 Speaker 1: trademark infringement litigation. Also, I believe in January they sued 310 00:19:27,359 --> 00:19:30,520 Speaker 1: a company called Mason Rothschild in the Federal court in 311 00:19:30,560 --> 00:19:35,760 Speaker 1: Manhattan basically claiming that that this other company had sold 312 00:19:36,119 --> 00:19:41,720 Speaker 1: a non fungible token these are non replicable digital collectible items, 313 00:19:42,040 --> 00:19:44,680 Speaker 1: and that they were doing so illegal that they were 314 00:19:44,800 --> 00:19:48,800 Speaker 1: infringing one trademark from this French fashion house. The lawsuits 315 00:19:48,840 --> 00:19:54,240 Speaker 1: really run the gamut. Is the litigation growing because of cryptocurrency, 316 00:19:54,640 --> 00:19:58,480 Speaker 1: you know, people investing in it because it's a confusing area, 317 00:19:58,680 --> 00:20:02,000 Speaker 1: or because it's a tomor truous time for crypto or 318 00:20:02,320 --> 00:20:04,960 Speaker 1: all three, you know, it really is all the above. 319 00:20:05,080 --> 00:20:08,040 Speaker 1: June and at one common refrain that I heard to 320 00:20:08,119 --> 00:20:11,840 Speaker 1: this question was much of this stems from new regulation, 321 00:20:12,040 --> 00:20:15,200 Speaker 1: and for example, the SEC just within the last few 322 00:20:15,240 --> 00:20:19,600 Speaker 1: months announced new regulations to try to protect crypto investors. 323 00:20:19,640 --> 00:20:22,879 Speaker 1: That's going to be happening more and more as both 324 00:20:22,920 --> 00:20:29,040 Speaker 1: the SEC and the CFTC Commodity Futures Trading Commission sort 325 00:20:29,040 --> 00:20:33,199 Speaker 1: of squabble as to which agency has primacy over this 326 00:20:33,280 --> 00:20:36,119 Speaker 1: space or whether they should share in both set up 327 00:20:36,160 --> 00:20:41,040 Speaker 1: different regulatory structures and schemes. But what happens is once 328 00:20:41,160 --> 00:20:44,560 Speaker 1: these new regulations come into play, then all sorts of 329 00:20:44,960 --> 00:20:49,520 Speaker 1: different types of legal issues lawsuits can stem off of them. 330 00:20:50,160 --> 00:20:54,080 Speaker 1: For example, companies themselves can be targeted by these agencies. 331 00:20:54,119 --> 00:20:57,480 Speaker 1: So that's one formably glad, but then often there are 332 00:20:57,520 --> 00:21:00,800 Speaker 1: these private suits where the parties are flipped and you 333 00:21:00,880 --> 00:21:04,399 Speaker 1: have sort of startup crypto companies that are taking issue 334 00:21:04,400 --> 00:21:08,240 Speaker 1: with the regulations and saying we're being unfairly targeted um, 335 00:21:08,280 --> 00:21:12,040 Speaker 1: and our investors are doing just fine, and we need 336 00:21:12,080 --> 00:21:14,399 Speaker 1: to have more free reign as to how we go 337 00:21:14,440 --> 00:21:17,639 Speaker 1: about our business. UM. So that also comprises some of 338 00:21:17,640 --> 00:21:21,360 Speaker 1: these suits and then you have private matters where one 339 00:21:21,400 --> 00:21:26,400 Speaker 1: business is suing another over alleged crypto related types of violations, 340 00:21:26,400 --> 00:21:31,400 Speaker 1: whether it has to do payments or using crypto coins 341 00:21:32,040 --> 00:21:36,640 Speaker 1: or other related issues. The rules for crypto are they 342 00:21:36,720 --> 00:21:42,080 Speaker 1: fairly clear? Are they fuzzy? They're They're fuzzy. And that's 343 00:21:42,119 --> 00:21:47,120 Speaker 1: why lawyers, also especially in the regulatory and litigation portions 344 00:21:47,160 --> 00:21:50,840 Speaker 1: of their law firms, are especially looking forward frankly to 345 00:21:50,920 --> 00:21:53,680 Speaker 1: the next several years when a lot of these new 346 00:21:53,720 --> 00:21:55,920 Speaker 1: regulations are going to be hashed out, and a lot 347 00:21:55,960 --> 00:21:58,480 Speaker 1: of these firms, including some of the biggest in the 348 00:21:58,520 --> 00:22:01,520 Speaker 1: country by gross revenue, on behalf of their clients, they're 349 00:22:01,560 --> 00:22:05,040 Speaker 1: going to be doing things like writing letters to agencies, 350 00:22:05,480 --> 00:22:10,159 Speaker 1: attending here public hearings, and really inserting themselves in the 351 00:22:10,200 --> 00:22:14,920 Speaker 1: process to try to make these regulations basically as client friendly, 352 00:22:15,160 --> 00:22:18,720 Speaker 1: meaning as company incorporation friendly as they can get them. 353 00:22:18,880 --> 00:22:21,800 Speaker 1: I will say at the same time June, one interesting 354 00:22:21,840 --> 00:22:26,399 Speaker 1: thing is that I had several attorneys who are in 355 00:22:26,480 --> 00:22:29,800 Speaker 1: this space, some at prompting by me, but others sort 356 00:22:29,840 --> 00:22:33,600 Speaker 1: of unbidden brought up the notion that what they're trying 357 00:22:33,640 --> 00:22:37,000 Speaker 1: to do with a lot of these companies that because 358 00:22:37,000 --> 00:22:39,840 Speaker 1: it's kind of like this wild West atmosphere out there, 359 00:22:40,200 --> 00:22:44,879 Speaker 1: and because it's relatively unregulated space is there pushing these 360 00:22:44,880 --> 00:22:47,640 Speaker 1: companies to try to be the good guys. I mean 361 00:22:47,680 --> 00:22:50,000 Speaker 1: that That was an exact quote from one of these 362 00:22:50,040 --> 00:22:53,320 Speaker 1: attorneys who heads up a practice at camale Gates. She said, 363 00:22:53,359 --> 00:22:55,000 Speaker 1: you know, she's telling them, you want to be the 364 00:22:55,119 --> 00:22:57,399 Speaker 1: good guy in this and what that means is she 365 00:22:57,480 --> 00:22:59,800 Speaker 1: gave me a couple of examples pushing them to make 366 00:22:59,800 --> 00:23:02,040 Speaker 1: sure or for example, on their websites they have very 367 00:23:02,119 --> 00:23:05,520 Speaker 1: lengthy question and answer pages, in other words, to make 368 00:23:05,560 --> 00:23:09,960 Speaker 1: it very customer or investor friendly. Also for those who 369 00:23:10,000 --> 00:23:12,520 Speaker 1: have investments or who those who are some sort of 370 00:23:12,520 --> 00:23:15,400 Speaker 1: subscriber service who are looking to get out, to make 371 00:23:15,400 --> 00:23:18,760 Speaker 1: it easy for them to do so. A lot of companies, 372 00:23:18,760 --> 00:23:21,000 Speaker 1: and frankly we all know this as consumers in this 373 00:23:21,080 --> 00:23:24,120 Speaker 1: day and age the Internet and internet commerce, it's often 374 00:23:24,200 --> 00:23:27,320 Speaker 1: very difficult to end these kinds of business relationships companies 375 00:23:27,359 --> 00:23:30,320 Speaker 1: to make it intentionally so, but they're advising in the 376 00:23:30,320 --> 00:23:34,080 Speaker 1: crypto spaces. They're saying, look, regulations are coming down the pipe. 377 00:23:34,359 --> 00:23:37,640 Speaker 1: It's possible you might be targeted. Let's avoid it and 378 00:23:37,720 --> 00:23:39,960 Speaker 1: let's be on the better side of it now, even 379 00:23:40,000 --> 00:23:42,520 Speaker 1: if it means you make slightly less profit in the 380 00:23:42,640 --> 00:23:44,719 Speaker 1: in the shorter term, it's going to be a much 381 00:23:44,760 --> 00:23:48,520 Speaker 1: healthier strategy and much fairer to those enlist as clients 382 00:23:48,520 --> 00:23:52,320 Speaker 1: in the longer term. How many law firms are bolstering 383 00:23:52,960 --> 00:23:57,280 Speaker 1: their crypto practices, So it's a great question. I've had 384 00:23:57,320 --> 00:24:01,560 Speaker 1: other asking this in the core of my reporting. It's 385 00:24:01,560 --> 00:24:05,879 Speaker 1: difficult to know without without doing an account by looking 386 00:24:05,920 --> 00:24:08,400 Speaker 1: at each web page from each stay of the top 387 00:24:10,160 --> 00:24:13,719 Speaker 1: law firms by revenues, But I do believe that it's 388 00:24:13,760 --> 00:24:17,560 Speaker 1: the majority for sure are in the space because what's 389 00:24:17,560 --> 00:24:20,800 Speaker 1: happening June is more and more clients are asking their 390 00:24:20,920 --> 00:24:24,679 Speaker 1: firms be they not traditional. They don't necessarily need to 391 00:24:24,720 --> 00:24:28,640 Speaker 1: be like startup crypto focused companies. They could be banks, 392 00:24:28,760 --> 00:24:33,000 Speaker 1: they could be other institutions that much more traditional institutions 393 00:24:33,040 --> 00:24:36,760 Speaker 1: that for the first time are themselves getting questions from 394 00:24:36,800 --> 00:24:40,320 Speaker 1: their own customers as to how can we incorporate crypto 395 00:24:40,359 --> 00:24:43,080 Speaker 1: into it? Can we make payments for various goods or 396 00:24:43,080 --> 00:24:45,760 Speaker 1: services through the use of crypto? And other not just 397 00:24:45,840 --> 00:24:49,240 Speaker 1: crypto but blockchain related questions come up, and so a 398 00:24:49,240 --> 00:24:52,080 Speaker 1: lot of these clients are asking their firms so more 399 00:24:52,240 --> 00:24:54,720 Speaker 1: that the answer is, I don't have a solid number, 400 00:24:55,200 --> 00:24:57,320 Speaker 1: but I do know that more and more law firms 401 00:24:57,640 --> 00:25:01,240 Speaker 1: are getting involved, number one. And the second portion of 402 00:25:01,240 --> 00:25:04,120 Speaker 1: it is is those that have already been involved are 403 00:25:04,160 --> 00:25:07,320 Speaker 1: sort of trying to are bulking up their practices what 404 00:25:07,359 --> 00:25:11,600 Speaker 1: they call interdisciplinary practices, where they hold like weekly or 405 00:25:11,600 --> 00:25:14,760 Speaker 1: monthly calls just to try to simply get a handle 406 00:25:14,840 --> 00:25:18,159 Speaker 1: of the workflow that's coming in. One lawyer told you, 407 00:25:18,200 --> 00:25:22,679 Speaker 1: we have content coming out of our ears. Yeah, he was. 408 00:25:22,760 --> 00:25:24,719 Speaker 1: He was kind of blunt, and I loved it. I mean, 409 00:25:24,760 --> 00:25:29,600 Speaker 1: obviously his story and he was a very friendly lawyer, 410 00:25:29,760 --> 00:25:31,879 Speaker 1: and and and so he described a little bit about 411 00:25:32,240 --> 00:25:35,320 Speaker 1: this is Joe Cutler from Prinkin's Cooey talking about how 412 00:25:35,440 --> 00:25:38,320 Speaker 1: they have weekly calls and they have folks from all 413 00:25:38,440 --> 00:25:42,000 Speaker 1: different types of traditional practice groups that are involved in 414 00:25:42,040 --> 00:25:43,920 Speaker 1: them to try to get a handle them in types 415 00:25:43,920 --> 00:25:47,120 Speaker 1: of work, to sign it out if necessary, to try 416 00:25:47,200 --> 00:25:50,159 Speaker 1: to gin up new work in other types of fields 417 00:25:50,160 --> 00:25:53,280 Speaker 1: at that's in question. And then I didn't get into 418 00:25:53,280 --> 00:25:56,200 Speaker 1: work with him about you know, if ethics issues related 419 00:25:56,240 --> 00:25:59,320 Speaker 1: issues come up on those calls specifically, But he was 420 00:25:59,359 --> 00:26:02,000 Speaker 1: one of several that that pointed out that you know, 421 00:26:02,440 --> 00:26:04,919 Speaker 1: a part of how to go about this and dealing 422 00:26:05,040 --> 00:26:09,399 Speaker 1: crypto clients is to try to be a vuncular in 423 00:26:09,440 --> 00:26:14,040 Speaker 1: the best possible sense, to give the wisest advice, especially 424 00:26:14,119 --> 00:26:17,560 Speaker 1: for younger startup type companies or those that are new 425 00:26:17,560 --> 00:26:21,399 Speaker 1: in this space, generally that it behooves them to act 426 00:26:21,440 --> 00:26:24,679 Speaker 1: as leased, more and responsible as possible, especially when you 427 00:26:24,760 --> 00:26:28,720 Speaker 1: see you know, different types of charges come down that 428 00:26:28,840 --> 00:26:30,840 Speaker 1: it makes the news all the time that you've seen 429 00:26:30,920 --> 00:26:34,840 Speaker 1: I've seen regarding how crypto is sometimes used to defraud 430 00:26:34,840 --> 00:26:40,520 Speaker 1: people or money laundering schemes or the like. And that's why, 431 00:26:40,640 --> 00:26:42,560 Speaker 1: for example, I might be a little off point with 432 00:26:42,640 --> 00:26:45,960 Speaker 1: what you were just asking, but the Justice Department and 433 00:26:46,000 --> 00:26:50,680 Speaker 1: the essence recently bulked up their respective units to target 434 00:26:50,960 --> 00:26:54,000 Speaker 1: crypto related fraud and to try to protect investors in 435 00:26:54,000 --> 00:26:58,040 Speaker 1: the space. That means more lawyers working in the private 436 00:26:58,080 --> 00:27:02,200 Speaker 1: from the crypt to practices. Do they draw from other 437 00:27:02,240 --> 00:27:05,080 Speaker 1: departments and do those lawyers then become part of the 438 00:27:05,160 --> 00:27:09,120 Speaker 1: crypto practice for example, a tax lawyer, does that tax 439 00:27:09,200 --> 00:27:13,040 Speaker 1: lawyer just then work in crypto And this goes to 440 00:27:13,119 --> 00:27:16,480 Speaker 1: the notion of these firms setting up these um kind 441 00:27:16,520 --> 00:27:20,760 Speaker 1: of hybrid interdisciplinary shops or practice or groups. I think 442 00:27:20,800 --> 00:27:24,160 Speaker 1: they call them as supposed to dedicated practices, but you 443 00:27:24,160 --> 00:27:27,480 Speaker 1: you hit it on the head um basically. So you 444 00:27:27,600 --> 00:27:32,320 Speaker 1: have tax lawyers who have patent and intellectual property lawyers, 445 00:27:32,440 --> 00:27:37,400 Speaker 1: and those are from very traditional, longstanding revenue generating practice 446 00:27:37,400 --> 00:27:41,560 Speaker 1: groups at big law firms who stay within their fields, 447 00:27:41,600 --> 00:27:46,600 Speaker 1: but who also then simultaneously become part of these crypto 448 00:27:46,640 --> 00:27:49,679 Speaker 1: groups within the firms because they have lost to contribute 449 00:27:49,760 --> 00:27:52,480 Speaker 1: and work is coming into them. They need to know 450 00:27:52,520 --> 00:27:55,680 Speaker 1: how to play it, um, what best practices are, what 451 00:27:55,840 --> 00:27:58,399 Speaker 1: the safest and best ways to go batter or etcetera. 452 00:27:58,920 --> 00:28:01,119 Speaker 1: So you know, that's why when I spoke to folks 453 00:28:01,119 --> 00:28:04,680 Speaker 1: that these firms like you know, Gates Link Laters, Perkins, 454 00:28:04,720 --> 00:28:08,560 Speaker 1: Coolly and Poliss goes on Latham with Watkins, etcetera, that 455 00:28:08,640 --> 00:28:12,240 Speaker 1: they're forming these in interdisciplinary groups that they can involve 456 00:28:12,600 --> 00:28:15,800 Speaker 1: folks from almost virtually every branch of the firm, every 457 00:28:15,800 --> 00:28:19,320 Speaker 1: practice within it prom is now becoming involved in your story. 458 00:28:19,359 --> 00:28:22,560 Speaker 1: You talk about how it's it's a buyer's market for 459 00:28:22,640 --> 00:28:27,040 Speaker 1: these lawyers at this point. Besides law firms, where are 460 00:28:27,040 --> 00:28:29,680 Speaker 1: they getting offers from? I had one lawyer a joke 461 00:28:29,760 --> 00:28:31,680 Speaker 1: with me. She said, you know, well, we all get 462 00:28:31,720 --> 00:28:35,080 Speaker 1: calls from head hunters, don't And you know she laughed 463 00:28:35,080 --> 00:28:38,840 Speaker 1: at her own job. And what that means is For example, 464 00:28:38,880 --> 00:28:41,160 Speaker 1: the Wall Street Journal came out with a good story 465 00:28:41,600 --> 00:28:44,400 Speaker 1: about I don't Know three four weeks ago, which sort 466 00:28:44,400 --> 00:28:48,400 Speaker 1: of detailed the specific phenomenon which I mentioned in my story. 467 00:28:48,440 --> 00:28:51,320 Speaker 1: Also which has to do with the notion that some 468 00:28:51,400 --> 00:28:56,360 Speaker 1: of these smaller and mid sized cryptocurrency companies and exchanges, 469 00:28:56,920 --> 00:28:58,960 Speaker 1: they're trying trying to figure out, where can you find 470 00:28:58,960 --> 00:29:03,560 Speaker 1: the best we don't tell, And oftentimes that means poaching folks, 471 00:29:03,760 --> 00:29:06,400 Speaker 1: star players, and they don't necessarily need to be at 472 00:29:06,400 --> 00:29:09,920 Speaker 1: the partner level from some outside firms. Sometimes that means 473 00:29:10,040 --> 00:29:12,840 Speaker 1: from their own outside law firm, which can present a 474 00:29:12,880 --> 00:29:15,280 Speaker 1: bit of a sticky ethical situation, but it happens a 475 00:29:15,320 --> 00:29:19,880 Speaker 1: whole time, or they find other law firm attorneys sometimes 476 00:29:19,880 --> 00:29:23,960 Speaker 1: star associates, um younger lawyers and in their thirties day 477 00:29:24,120 --> 00:29:27,560 Speaker 1: or possibly even younger than that, but who are really 478 00:29:27,920 --> 00:29:31,920 Speaker 1: known from developing a strong expertise in the legal side 479 00:29:31,920 --> 00:29:35,160 Speaker 1: of crypto and who really want to branch out. And 480 00:29:35,400 --> 00:29:37,600 Speaker 1: there's also the profit motive not to be you know, 481 00:29:37,680 --> 00:29:43,600 Speaker 1: skeptical or cynical. But it's lawyers making money. Oh how 482 00:29:43,640 --> 00:29:47,200 Speaker 1: could you think that? Right? And and look, many of 483 00:29:47,240 --> 00:29:51,440 Speaker 1: them have very happy you know, financial should they stayed 484 00:29:51,440 --> 00:29:53,719 Speaker 1: at the firm, If they make if and when they 485 00:29:53,760 --> 00:29:56,120 Speaker 1: make equity partner, they make a whole lot of money. 486 00:29:56,640 --> 00:30:01,520 Speaker 1: But that said, it's not of the same level oftentimes 487 00:30:01,560 --> 00:30:05,720 Speaker 1: as the top general council can make, especially if these 488 00:30:05,800 --> 00:30:08,640 Speaker 1: if they make the right choice in other ways, if 489 00:30:08,640 --> 00:30:11,080 Speaker 1: they pick the right company to move to to to 490 00:30:11,200 --> 00:30:14,440 Speaker 1: go to an in house job, become general counsel, to 491 00:30:14,560 --> 00:30:18,280 Speaker 1: lead their own team. Sometimes these product companies and definitely 492 00:30:18,320 --> 00:30:20,800 Speaker 1: not always others go bust some of the company, but 493 00:30:21,640 --> 00:30:24,880 Speaker 1: those that really succeed over the long haul can find 494 00:30:24,960 --> 00:30:28,600 Speaker 1: enough investors in support. But they eventually go public and 495 00:30:28,640 --> 00:30:31,560 Speaker 1: then folks who are in them the beginning um often 496 00:30:31,720 --> 00:30:34,200 Speaker 1: become you know, they kind of strike it rich. While 497 00:30:34,600 --> 00:30:37,280 Speaker 1: has happened. When this happens, I mean, it's not like 498 00:30:37,320 --> 00:30:40,040 Speaker 1: the old days where once you went to a corporation 499 00:30:40,160 --> 00:30:42,280 Speaker 1: that was it. Now you know, you can go back 500 00:30:42,320 --> 00:30:44,320 Speaker 1: and forth, You can go back to a law firm. 501 00:30:44,440 --> 00:30:47,600 Speaker 1: In fact, you know, you have certain expertise that law 502 00:30:47,640 --> 00:30:52,200 Speaker 1: firm partners don't have. Absolutely. Now, you touched on a 503 00:30:52,240 --> 00:30:55,440 Speaker 1: great point, and it happens. I think in peach Sheet, 504 00:30:55,440 --> 00:30:57,720 Speaker 1: where I am right at Washington, it's known as the 505 00:30:57,840 --> 00:31:01,840 Speaker 1: revolving door, and a usually involves the sort of revolving 506 00:31:01,880 --> 00:31:05,640 Speaker 1: door between private law firms and government jobs. And a 507 00:31:05,640 --> 00:31:08,840 Speaker 1: lot of folks move into government, especially if they're more 508 00:31:08,880 --> 00:31:12,360 Speaker 1: comfortable with the administration that's in power, and sometimes they 509 00:31:12,400 --> 00:31:15,960 Speaker 1: get asked to read to join or even rejoin the 510 00:31:16,000 --> 00:31:19,760 Speaker 1: government in different agency capacities legal jobs. But you're right 511 00:31:19,880 --> 00:31:22,960 Speaker 1: in the in the notion that it sometimes jumps sometimes 512 00:31:22,960 --> 00:31:26,120 Speaker 1: to involve folks going from private law firms to general 513 00:31:26,160 --> 00:31:29,400 Speaker 1: council operations and then back to firms. I will say 514 00:31:29,440 --> 00:31:31,920 Speaker 1: I haven't heard of that happening as often, but I 515 00:31:32,200 --> 00:31:36,080 Speaker 1: do believe it definitely is a phenomenon. Yeah, we folks 516 00:31:36,080 --> 00:31:39,880 Speaker 1: trying to position themselves. Crypto is young yet, um, we'll see. 517 00:31:39,920 --> 00:31:44,160 Speaker 1: But considering the recent downturning Crypto, are any law firms 518 00:31:44,240 --> 00:31:48,520 Speaker 1: rethinking how many attorneys they have dedicated to this? So 519 00:31:49,040 --> 00:31:52,200 Speaker 1: I appreciate the question, especially given the most recent news. 520 00:31:52,240 --> 00:31:55,000 Speaker 1: I mean, I will say I started reporting my story 521 00:31:55,640 --> 00:31:59,360 Speaker 1: just before this recent mass somewhat massive downturn in the 522 00:31:59,400 --> 00:32:03,960 Speaker 1: crypto space days where like Bitcoin lost half its value 523 00:32:04,200 --> 00:32:09,280 Speaker 1: and um lots of other cryptocurrency coins or exchanges really 524 00:32:09,320 --> 00:32:11,560 Speaker 1: lost a ton of what they were worth in very 525 00:32:11,880 --> 00:32:15,400 Speaker 1: speedy fashion. I started talking to folks even before that happened, 526 00:32:15,400 --> 00:32:18,520 Speaker 1: but I talked to simple after and now if anything, 527 00:32:18,560 --> 00:32:22,320 Speaker 1: they're doubling down. They They're strong sense is that it 528 00:32:22,480 --> 00:32:25,560 Speaker 1: is becoming more and more enmeshed in the way that 529 00:32:25,760 --> 00:32:29,880 Speaker 1: finances conducted, the way that goods and services are purchased, 530 00:32:30,080 --> 00:32:33,400 Speaker 1: et cetera, through the use of the blockchain, and that 531 00:32:33,880 --> 00:32:38,080 Speaker 1: these it behooves them to stay strong in this space. Plus, 532 00:32:38,160 --> 00:32:42,400 Speaker 1: there's an historical precedent for this back and like I 533 00:32:42,440 --> 00:32:46,360 Speaker 1: believe it was late two eighteen early two nineteen was 534 00:32:46,480 --> 00:32:51,120 Speaker 1: when this crypto so called bubble first the first time, 535 00:32:51,440 --> 00:32:53,479 Speaker 1: and that's when prices that have been going up, up up, 536 00:32:53,640 --> 00:32:56,880 Speaker 1: crashed very suddenly. I talked to attorneys for a story 537 00:32:56,920 --> 00:32:58,560 Speaker 1: I did, and they said the same thing that I'm 538 00:32:58,600 --> 00:33:00,960 Speaker 1: hearing now, which is, no, see, this is a long 539 00:33:01,080 --> 00:33:03,160 Speaker 1: term play. And if you look at the long term 540 00:33:03,200 --> 00:33:07,480 Speaker 1: trajectory of these prices, they're correctly rising and you know 541 00:33:07,520 --> 00:33:11,120 Speaker 1: regulators take a polly different view, and but that said, um, 542 00:33:11,160 --> 00:33:14,680 Speaker 1: in terms of the firms and their long term business prospects, 543 00:33:14,760 --> 00:33:16,600 Speaker 1: I think they're all in. That will be a whole 544 00:33:16,600 --> 00:33:20,080 Speaker 1: another story if and when's who major firms really decided 545 00:33:20,120 --> 00:33:22,720 Speaker 1: to sort of try to even quietly exit out of this, 546 00:33:22,960 --> 00:33:25,800 Speaker 1: But I don't see that happening on anytime soon. Thanks Sam. 547 00:33:25,840 --> 00:33:29,120 Speaker 1: That's Sam Skolnick of Bloomberg Law, and that's it for 548 00:33:29,160 --> 00:33:31,800 Speaker 1: this edition of the Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can 549 00:33:31,800 --> 00:33:35,040 Speaker 1: always get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. 550 00:33:35,360 --> 00:33:38,360 Speaker 1: You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at 551 00:33:38,520 --> 00:33:43,640 Speaker 1: www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, Slash Law. I'm 552 00:33:43,720 --> 00:33:46,160 Speaker 1: June Grosso, and you're listening to Bloomberg