1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,040 Speaker 1: And now it's time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief, 2 00:00:03,080 --> 00:00:06,560 Speaker 1: exploring legal issues in the news. Today, Bloomberg Law host 3 00:00:06,640 --> 00:00:09,920 Speaker 1: Un Grosso and Greg Sture discussed the Supreme Court taking 4 00:00:10,000 --> 00:00:14,480 Speaker 1: up a case on partisan jerrymandering in the American electoral system. 5 00:00:14,520 --> 00:00:17,720 Speaker 1: They speak to Rick Hessen, founder of the Election Law 6 00:00:17,760 --> 00:00:21,320 Speaker 1: Blog and professor at U c Irvine, and Josh Douglas, 7 00:00:21,320 --> 00:00:24,720 Speaker 1: a professor at the University of Kentucky Law School. Rick, 8 00:00:24,760 --> 00:00:27,800 Speaker 1: will you start by describing the case from Wisconsin that 9 00:00:27,880 --> 00:00:30,520 Speaker 1: the justices will be considering. This is one of a 10 00:00:30,640 --> 00:00:35,920 Speaker 1: number of cases involving partisan jerrymandering that has been working 11 00:00:35,960 --> 00:00:38,040 Speaker 1: his way up the courts. The claim here is that 12 00:00:39,120 --> 00:00:42,920 Speaker 1: Wisconsin is basically a fifty fifty state between Democrats and Republicans, 13 00:00:43,280 --> 00:00:45,879 Speaker 1: but the Republican state legislature drew the lines for their 14 00:00:45,920 --> 00:00:48,760 Speaker 1: General Assembly in such a skewed way to help Republicans 15 00:00:48,800 --> 00:00:52,280 Speaker 1: that Republicans are able to capture many more seats than 16 00:00:52,880 --> 00:00:56,600 Speaker 1: would be done if it were a fairly drawn district. Josh, 17 00:00:56,720 --> 00:00:59,000 Speaker 1: the last time the Supreme Court really dealt with this 18 00:00:59,040 --> 00:01:02,680 Speaker 1: issue was back in twenty four. Can you describe where 19 00:01:02,680 --> 00:01:05,959 Speaker 1: the court left us after that case? Yeah? Well, the 20 00:01:06,000 --> 00:01:10,960 Speaker 1: Court didn't answer questions as much as provided more of them. Uh. 21 00:01:11,080 --> 00:01:15,520 Speaker 1: For justices UH said that there was no standard by 22 00:01:15,520 --> 00:01:19,000 Speaker 1: which to test a partisan jymander. That is, courts basically 23 00:01:19,000 --> 00:01:22,039 Speaker 1: shouldn't be involved in resolving these kinds of cases because 24 00:01:22,080 --> 00:01:24,520 Speaker 1: it was not of a judicial nature and esteat as 25 00:01:24,560 --> 00:01:28,440 Speaker 1: a political question. The four other justices, the four so 26 00:01:28,560 --> 00:01:31,640 Speaker 1: called liberal justice each came up with a standard. Uh. 27 00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:33,960 Speaker 1: They said, here's a good standard for courts to use, 28 00:01:34,000 --> 00:01:36,480 Speaker 1: and we think it's susceptible. And Justice Kennedy was in 29 00:01:36,560 --> 00:01:39,560 Speaker 1: the middle, and he said, I don't like any of 30 00:01:39,560 --> 00:01:43,039 Speaker 1: the standards that anyone has proposed so far, but I'm 31 00:01:43,080 --> 00:01:45,360 Speaker 1: not going to close the door to any future standard emerging. 32 00:01:45,440 --> 00:01:47,240 Speaker 1: So you had with kind of a four one four 33 00:01:47,319 --> 00:01:51,840 Speaker 1: decision in which Justice Kennedy holds all the keys to power. 34 00:01:51,880 --> 00:01:54,160 Speaker 1: If he likes the standards, then maybe we'll have the 35 00:01:54,240 --> 00:01:57,240 Speaker 1: ability to police partisan darrymandering. If he doesn't, then there'll 36 00:01:57,280 --> 00:01:59,920 Speaker 1: be no way for course to do so. So Rick, 37 00:02:00,240 --> 00:02:03,600 Speaker 1: the Court has been reluctant to take up partisan jerrymandering 38 00:02:03,720 --> 00:02:07,120 Speaker 1: since that case. Why did they take up this case? 39 00:02:07,680 --> 00:02:11,760 Speaker 1: This case came up directly from a three judge appeals Court. 40 00:02:12,080 --> 00:02:15,000 Speaker 1: I'm sorry, three judge district court directly on appeal to 41 00:02:15,040 --> 00:02:17,240 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court. And when cases come up in this 42 00:02:17,320 --> 00:02:20,440 Speaker 1: unusual way, when the Supreme Court decides not to hear 43 00:02:20,480 --> 00:02:23,880 Speaker 1: that case, it means the lower court got the ruling right. 44 00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:26,440 Speaker 1: And so this was a rare case where a lower 45 00:02:26,440 --> 00:02:29,280 Speaker 1: court said, yes, this is a partisan gerrymander. And so 46 00:02:29,320 --> 00:02:31,840 Speaker 1: if the court decided not to hear that case, it 47 00:02:31,880 --> 00:02:34,760 Speaker 1: would have sent the signal that yes, courts are in 48 00:02:34,760 --> 00:02:36,720 Speaker 1: the business of policing these things, but we're not going 49 00:02:36,800 --> 00:02:40,040 Speaker 1: to tell you what the standard is. And that is 50 00:02:40,240 --> 00:02:43,720 Speaker 1: Rick Hessen, a professor at u c Irvine, and Josh Douglas, 51 00:02:43,760 --> 00:02:46,640 Speaker 1: a professor at the University of Kentucky Law School, speaking 52 00:02:46,720 --> 00:02:49,960 Speaker 1: to Bloomberg Law host June Grosso and Greg Store. You 53 00:02:49,960 --> 00:02:53,200 Speaker 1: can listen to Bloomberg Law weekdays at one pm while 54 00:02:53,240 --> 00:02:56,959 Speaker 1: Street time here on Bloomberg Radio and in Germany, Adidas 55 00:02:57,120 --> 00:03:00,720 Speaker 1: or if you prefer the European pronunciation, Audied Us has 56 00:03:00,800 --> 00:03:03,360 Speaker 1: dodged a legal threat to one of its best selling 57 00:03:03,360 --> 00:03:07,720 Speaker 1: tennis shoes. The company's longtime nemesis, Puma, has pulled off 58 00:03:07,760 --> 00:03:10,080 Speaker 1: a lawsuit seeking a ban on the sale of a 59 00:03:10,080 --> 00:03:13,400 Speaker 1: new version of the Stan Smith tennis shoe. Puma had 60 00:03:13,440 --> 00:03:16,239 Speaker 1: contended the shoe violated one of its patents for the 61 00:03:16,280 --> 00:03:19,840 Speaker 1: company backed off after judges indicated that the Audi Das 62 00:03:19,960 --> 00:03:23,320 Speaker 1: shoe differs from the Puma design and that is This 63 00:03:23,360 --> 00:03:25,560 Speaker 1: morning is Bloomberg Lawbrary. If you can find more legal 64 00:03:25,600 --> 00:03:29,160 Speaker 1: news at Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg BNA dot com. 65 00:03:29,240 --> 00:03:33,239 Speaker 1: Attorneys will find exceptional legal research and business development tools 66 00:03:33,240 --> 00:03:36,800 Speaker 1: there as well. Visit Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg 67 00:03:36,920 --> 00:03:39,200 Speaker 1: BNA dot com for more information.