1
00:00:00,560 --> 00:00:05,360
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grassoe from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:06,559 --> 00:00:09,640
Speaker 1: The Trump campaign has seen a revolving cast of lawyers

3
00:00:09,680 --> 00:00:14,480
Speaker 1: pursuing its lawsuits challenging the election results, particularly in Pennsylvania,

4
00:00:14,560 --> 00:00:18,560
Speaker 1: where the lawsuits have been concentrated. The law firm Porter Wright,

5
00:00:18,760 --> 00:00:22,680
Speaker 1: Morris and Arthur withdrew from representing the campaign on Friday,

6
00:00:22,760 --> 00:00:25,560
Speaker 1: and the lawyer who took over the case, Linda Currents,

7
00:00:25,720 --> 00:00:29,240
Speaker 1: moved to withdraw on Monday. The Lincoln Project, group of

8
00:00:29,280 --> 00:00:33,280
Speaker 1: Republicans who opposed President Trump, had started a media campaign

9
00:00:33,320 --> 00:00:36,760
Speaker 1: against the law firms helping the Trump administration to contest

10
00:00:36,880 --> 00:00:41,400
Speaker 1: Joe Biden's victory, specifically naming Porter Wright and Jones Day,

11
00:00:41,640 --> 00:00:46,080
Speaker 1: the nation's tenth largest law firm. Trump's communications director Tim

12
00:00:46,120 --> 00:00:50,040
Speaker 1: Murtas said leftist mobs descended upon some of the lawyers

13
00:00:50,080 --> 00:00:54,320
Speaker 1: representing the president's campaign and they buckled. The President's team

14
00:00:54,360 --> 00:00:57,680
Speaker 1: is undeterred and will move forward with rock solid attorneys

15
00:00:57,720 --> 00:01:01,680
Speaker 1: to ensure free and fair elections for all Americans. Trump

16
00:01:01,720 --> 00:01:04,800
Speaker 1: has picked Rudy Giuliani, his personal attorney, to lead his

17
00:01:04,840 --> 00:01:09,039
Speaker 1: post election legal battles, and Giuliani filed an application to

18
00:01:09,240 --> 00:01:12,560
Speaker 1: join the case in Pennsylvania, which the other lawyers had

19
00:01:12,640 --> 00:01:15,920
Speaker 1: left just hours before a hearing was set to start.

20
00:01:16,440 --> 00:01:19,320
Speaker 1: Joining me is Christopher for Bloomberg Law Team leader for

21
00:01:19,360 --> 00:01:23,480
Speaker 1: the Business of Law. So Chris tell us about jones Day. Sure,

22
00:01:23,560 --> 00:01:27,399
Speaker 1: Jay is one of these just massive law firms. It's

23
00:01:27,440 --> 00:01:31,360
Speaker 1: the tenth largest firm in the country with more than

24
00:01:31,400 --> 00:01:35,320
Speaker 1: a billion dollars with a b in gross revenue per year.

25
00:01:35,880 --> 00:01:38,360
Speaker 1: I think they've got more than a thousand attorneys across

26
00:01:38,440 --> 00:01:43,560
Speaker 1: the country. Based originally founded in Cleveland, Ohio, but has

27
00:01:43,600 --> 00:01:46,200
Speaker 1: been come to be known as one of these white

28
00:01:46,200 --> 00:01:49,920
Speaker 1: shoe Washington d C firms. UM. That's really been a

29
00:01:49,960 --> 00:01:54,600
Speaker 1: revolving door with sending attorney into high ranking positions in

30
00:01:54,640 --> 00:01:59,120
Speaker 1: the federal government throughout the years, but certainly in during

31
00:01:59,120 --> 00:02:02,640
Speaker 1: the Trump administer ration. Jones Day has been the law

32
00:02:02,680 --> 00:02:07,400
Speaker 1: firm most closely associated by many people with the Trump administration.

33
00:02:07,520 --> 00:02:12,040
Speaker 1: The firm itself UM advise the Trump's campaign back for

34
00:02:12,080 --> 00:02:17,040
Speaker 1: the election, continued to advise the campaign UH and the

35
00:02:17,200 --> 00:02:20,920
Speaker 1: RNC throughout the next four years leading up to the

36
00:02:20,919 --> 00:02:24,520
Speaker 1: most recent election. UM and has continued to be involved

37
00:02:24,520 --> 00:02:29,120
Speaker 1: in lawsuits related to the election. UM since election Day,

38
00:02:29,160 --> 00:02:33,480
Speaker 1: just a few weeks ago, and so during Trump's administration

39
00:02:33,600 --> 00:02:37,480
Speaker 1: we saw several notable jones Day lawyers bill top roles

40
00:02:37,680 --> 00:02:40,800
Speaker 1: within the government. The one that most people are familiar with,

41
00:02:40,880 --> 00:02:44,040
Speaker 1: of course, is Don McGann, who was formerly White House

42
00:02:44,080 --> 00:02:49,560
Speaker 1: Council before returning to Jones Day last year. Another lawyer

43
00:02:49,639 --> 00:02:54,720
Speaker 1: named Noel Francisco was Solicitor General, which is essentially the

44
00:02:54,760 --> 00:02:58,800
Speaker 1: fate of the Trump administration in the Supreme Court, arguing

45
00:02:58,840 --> 00:03:01,160
Speaker 1: any cases on behalf of government in the High Court.

46
00:03:01,720 --> 00:03:05,200
Speaker 1: He was there for most of President Trump's first term

47
00:03:05,280 --> 00:03:09,480
Speaker 1: before returning to jones Day last year. The Lincoln Project

48
00:03:10,080 --> 00:03:14,600
Speaker 1: started a social media campaign about Jones Day. What was

49
00:03:14,639 --> 00:03:19,079
Speaker 1: the message of that campaign and how successful was it? Well,

50
00:03:19,080 --> 00:03:22,639
Speaker 1: the message was really that the Jones Day attorneys and

51
00:03:22,720 --> 00:03:24,560
Speaker 1: the firm itself, in the eyes of the folks, that

52
00:03:24,600 --> 00:03:27,920
Speaker 1: the Lincoln Project should be ashamed of themselves for participating

53
00:03:27,960 --> 00:03:32,160
Speaker 1: in these post election lawsuits um which at least according

54
00:03:32,200 --> 00:03:35,280
Speaker 1: to the folks that at the Lincoln Projects are nothing

55
00:03:35,280 --> 00:03:40,240
Speaker 1: more than an assault on American democracy, baseless attempt to

56
00:03:40,880 --> 00:03:45,760
Speaker 1: undo the the results of the fair and free election.

57
00:03:46,280 --> 00:03:48,280
Speaker 1: And so it was too prong number one. They were

58
00:03:48,320 --> 00:03:52,880
Speaker 1: building and sort of a online public sense of outrage

59
00:03:52,880 --> 00:03:55,520
Speaker 1: against the firm itself, and then they were attempting to

60
00:03:56,120 --> 00:04:00,880
Speaker 1: pressure major Jones Day clients, including companies like General Motors,

61
00:04:00,920 --> 00:04:04,280
Speaker 1: to stop doing business with the firm over this issue.

62
00:04:05,080 --> 00:04:08,480
Speaker 1: Did it work? What kind of repercussions did Jones Day

63
00:04:08,520 --> 00:04:12,680
Speaker 1: have from this media campaign? Well, it certainly had some impact.

64
00:04:13,000 --> 00:04:16,480
Speaker 1: Um so that the same campaign was also aimed at

65
00:04:16,480 --> 00:04:19,440
Speaker 1: a smalller law firm called Supporter Right, which was involved

66
00:04:19,480 --> 00:04:23,040
Speaker 1: in some of the other cases involving the Trump administration,

67
00:04:23,120 --> 00:04:26,440
Speaker 1: and that firm has been pretty quickly backed away and

68
00:04:26,800 --> 00:04:30,920
Speaker 1: withdrawn from participating in those studs. Jones Days involved in

69
00:04:31,040 --> 00:04:34,400
Speaker 1: one single suit right now, and they're actually representing the

70
00:04:34,480 --> 00:04:38,120
Speaker 1: Republican Party of Pennsylvania rather than the Trump campaign itself.

71
00:04:38,800 --> 00:04:42,719
Speaker 1: But it's one of those lawsuits that aimed it challenging

72
00:04:42,800 --> 00:04:45,840
Speaker 1: the results of the election in Pennsylvania overall, and and

73
00:04:46,080 --> 00:04:49,320
Speaker 1: and certainly is affiliated with the Trump administration and the

74
00:04:49,400 --> 00:04:54,080
Speaker 1: campaign efforts there. And so they have not sacked and

75
00:04:54,200 --> 00:04:57,280
Speaker 1: it seems unlikely that they will back away given the

76
00:04:57,360 --> 00:05:01,000
Speaker 1: firm's history and leadership just not the type of folks

77
00:05:01,040 --> 00:05:05,400
Speaker 1: who will to this sort of public pressure. But um

78
00:05:05,560 --> 00:05:08,840
Speaker 1: it has caused quite a stir within UM the halls

79
00:05:08,880 --> 00:05:12,440
Speaker 1: of Jones Staying, particularly at his Washington, d C. Office.

80
00:05:12,920 --> 00:05:16,720
Speaker 1: We reported that late last week a large group of

81
00:05:16,760 --> 00:05:21,160
Speaker 1: attorneys there at jones Days CC office, in a series

82
00:05:21,200 --> 00:05:24,159
Speaker 1: of meetings with the head of the DC office, raised

83
00:05:24,200 --> 00:05:29,440
Speaker 1: some um a number of concerns regarding the firms involvement

84
00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:34,000
Speaker 1: in the case. That meeting was described as very tense

85
00:05:34,240 --> 00:05:36,520
Speaker 1: by some of the people who were there. Basically, the

86
00:05:36,600 --> 00:05:40,280
Speaker 1: attorneys were saying that the firm is risking it's good name,

87
00:05:40,480 --> 00:05:45,640
Speaker 1: it's sort of professional names in in getting involved in

88
00:05:45,760 --> 00:05:49,160
Speaker 1: something like this. So Chris Jones Day said, it's not

89
00:05:49,360 --> 00:05:53,960
Speaker 1: representing any entity in any litigation challenging or contesting the

90
00:05:54,080 --> 00:05:58,920
Speaker 1: results of the general election in light of that Pennsylvania case.

91
00:05:59,120 --> 00:06:04,120
Speaker 1: Is that strict true? That is incorrect, UM. And so

92
00:06:04,320 --> 00:06:06,600
Speaker 1: John Stay has has made a big deal of not

93
00:06:06,960 --> 00:06:10,760
Speaker 1: representing the Trump campaign or the RNC itself in much

94
00:06:10,800 --> 00:06:13,480
Speaker 1: of the ongoing litigation. And it is true that the

95
00:06:13,560 --> 00:06:16,560
Speaker 1: firm is not involved in many of the cases UH

96
00:06:16,800 --> 00:06:19,320
Speaker 1: that have already been thrown in out the court, both

97
00:06:19,360 --> 00:06:23,440
Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania and Michigan, Arizona and elsewhere. But the case

98
00:06:23,520 --> 00:06:28,120
Speaker 1: that the firm is involved in is representing the Republican

99
00:06:28,160 --> 00:06:33,520
Speaker 1: Party of Pennsylvania. Essentially, they're challenging UM Pennsylvania's mail in

100
00:06:33,760 --> 00:06:38,080
Speaker 1: ballot system. They say that the state has created this

101
00:06:38,160 --> 00:06:41,000
Speaker 1: two tier system where people who sent their ballots in

102
00:06:41,160 --> 00:06:44,039
Speaker 1: via mail did not have to jump through the various

103
00:06:44,120 --> 00:06:47,800
Speaker 1: hoops uh to prove that they are who they say

104
00:06:47,839 --> 00:06:50,840
Speaker 1: they are, that folks who voted in person had to

105
00:06:50,920 --> 00:06:55,200
Speaker 1: do things like uh, signatures, UM, just sort of all

106
00:06:55,279 --> 00:06:58,800
Speaker 1: the id requirements that you face when you go into

107
00:06:58,920 --> 00:07:02,239
Speaker 1: vote in person. And a say, the jones Day lawyers

108
00:07:02,320 --> 00:07:06,000
Speaker 1: say that this is created in a constitutional two tier

109
00:07:06,080 --> 00:07:10,920
Speaker 1: system where the restrictions and the requirements for voting depend

110
00:07:11,000 --> 00:07:13,040
Speaker 1: on whether or not you do it in by mail

111
00:07:14,040 --> 00:07:16,880
Speaker 1: or in person. And so, while that may not be

112
00:07:17,800 --> 00:07:21,440
Speaker 1: UM directly aligned with the Trump campaign, if the court

113
00:07:21,480 --> 00:07:25,000
Speaker 1: were to rule in favor of jones Day certainly would

114
00:07:25,080 --> 00:07:29,360
Speaker 1: be helpful to the Trump campaign's effort to disrupt the

115
00:07:30,080 --> 00:07:36,160
Speaker 1: election force recounts, UM and just generally so some uncertainty

116
00:07:36,320 --> 00:07:40,480
Speaker 1: into the entire election process. So jones Day is might

117
00:07:40,520 --> 00:07:44,360
Speaker 1: be feeling pressure tell us about it's a leadership structure.

118
00:07:44,840 --> 00:07:47,080
Speaker 1: Whether or not it pulls out of these suits, is

119
00:07:47,120 --> 00:07:50,560
Speaker 1: that dependent on the managing partner certainly seems that way.

120
00:07:50,640 --> 00:07:53,400
Speaker 1: The managing partner, Steve Brogan, who's been there for quite

121
00:07:53,400 --> 00:07:57,800
Speaker 1: a while, is a hard nose leader that some say

122
00:07:57,800 --> 00:08:00,400
Speaker 1: are very much in the mold of the Donald Trumps

123
00:08:00,400 --> 00:08:04,200
Speaker 1: and that the buck stops with him. He's making UM

124
00:08:04,720 --> 00:08:07,520
Speaker 1: a lot of these decisions, and certainly in such a

125
00:08:07,960 --> 00:08:11,480
Speaker 1: high profile case like this one, a decision to remain

126
00:08:11,560 --> 00:08:14,480
Speaker 1: on the case sort of withdrawal certainly wouldn't wouldn't happen

127
00:08:14,600 --> 00:08:19,760
Speaker 1: without Brogan's UM uh input for sure. And you know,

128
00:08:19,920 --> 00:08:22,320
Speaker 1: by by all accounts, he's just not the title guy

129
00:08:22,360 --> 00:08:26,200
Speaker 1: who's going to UM decide not to do something simply

130
00:08:26,280 --> 00:08:29,960
Speaker 1: because of the public pressure. What's interesting is that Brogan,

131
00:08:30,000 --> 00:08:34,600
Speaker 1: of course comes from UM sort of a Republican leaning background.

132
00:08:34,720 --> 00:08:38,959
Speaker 1: He's a Notre Dame law school guy UM and some

133
00:08:39,120 --> 00:08:42,400
Speaker 1: of the most high profile Jones State attorneys in DC

134
00:08:42,559 --> 00:08:46,280
Speaker 1: are also Republican background, including some of the folks who

135
00:08:46,320 --> 00:08:48,960
Speaker 1: works for the Trump administration. But when we went back

136
00:08:49,000 --> 00:08:52,760
Speaker 1: and look at the Federal Election Commission records, we found

137
00:08:52,800 --> 00:08:58,240
Speaker 1: that eighty percent of donations UM for political candidates in

138
00:08:58,320 --> 00:09:02,400
Speaker 1: the last cycle from Jones State turneath individually of those

139
00:09:02,440 --> 00:09:05,320
Speaker 1: went to Democratic candidates, And what we've heard from people

140
00:09:05,400 --> 00:09:08,599
Speaker 1: inside the building is that they've always thought of it

141
00:09:08,720 --> 00:09:12,200
Speaker 1: as an largely a political place. And while there may

142
00:09:12,360 --> 00:09:16,880
Speaker 1: be some um grumbling about Jones Day's work on behalf

143
00:09:16,920 --> 00:09:20,439
Speaker 1: of the Trump administration, it wasn't until recently with these

144
00:09:20,480 --> 00:09:24,040
Speaker 1: election cases where folks really thought this is different, this

145
00:09:24,200 --> 00:09:29,400
Speaker 1: is something where we're actively working to potentially undo a

146
00:09:29,559 --> 00:09:33,520
Speaker 1: free and fair elections. Jones Days of October nineteenth had

147
00:09:33,559 --> 00:09:36,280
Speaker 1: received two point nine million dollars in legal fees from

148
00:09:36,320 --> 00:09:40,240
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee. But that's

149
00:09:40,280 --> 00:09:42,679
Speaker 1: just a drop in the bucket to Jones Day, isn't it.

150
00:09:43,120 --> 00:09:46,120
Speaker 1: It sure is. Yeah, we're talking about a firm that

151
00:09:46,559 --> 00:09:49,640
Speaker 1: um clock more than a billion dollars in gross revenue

152
00:09:50,320 --> 00:09:54,959
Speaker 1: every year and so certainly not doing it for the money, UM,

153
00:09:55,320 --> 00:09:58,559
Speaker 1: although you could say that, um, they're developing a client

154
00:09:58,640 --> 00:10:02,680
Speaker 1: relationship and certainly making clear here that they're not going

155
00:10:02,840 --> 00:10:08,079
Speaker 1: to stand down when they're representing their clients. UM. But

156
00:10:08,240 --> 00:10:10,559
Speaker 1: you know, one of the arguments that the firm has

157
00:10:10,640 --> 00:10:13,880
Speaker 1: been making, including in response to some of the concerns

158
00:10:13,920 --> 00:10:16,360
Speaker 1: that were raised by his own attorneys about their involvement

159
00:10:16,400 --> 00:10:20,760
Speaker 1: in this particular Pennsylvania case is that they're fighting for

160
00:10:20,840 --> 00:10:23,760
Speaker 1: the rule of law. And so their argument is that

161
00:10:24,320 --> 00:10:27,280
Speaker 1: we filed this case long before the election because we

162
00:10:27,360 --> 00:10:31,480
Speaker 1: thought that there was a problem with Pennsylvania's um election system.

163
00:10:31,559 --> 00:10:34,560
Speaker 1: We did not know at the time um, at least

164
00:10:34,559 --> 00:10:37,000
Speaker 1: according to Jones, say that this was going to become

165
00:10:37,080 --> 00:10:41,480
Speaker 1: this uh closely uh tightly contested election and that all

166
00:10:41,559 --> 00:10:44,360
Speaker 1: of these other lawsuits were going to follow. The firm

167
00:10:44,440 --> 00:10:47,559
Speaker 1: is simply telling their their attorneys that we're fighting for

168
00:10:47,640 --> 00:10:49,400
Speaker 1: the rule of law here. We want to make sure

169
00:10:49,480 --> 00:10:54,199
Speaker 1: that the Pennsylvania election system is constitutional um, whether that

170
00:10:54,840 --> 00:10:59,040
Speaker 1: favorite Democrats or Republicans. The other law firm you mentioned

171
00:10:59,160 --> 00:11:03,640
Speaker 1: port to right, they withdrew from the Pennsylvania case and

172
00:11:03,720 --> 00:11:06,640
Speaker 1: that they no longer represent the Trump campaign and didn't

173
00:11:06,679 --> 00:11:12,920
Speaker 1: say why. And the Trump communications director said leftist mobs

174
00:11:12,960 --> 00:11:16,560
Speaker 1: descended upon some of the lawyers representing the president's campaign

175
00:11:16,720 --> 00:11:21,120
Speaker 1: and they buckled. Any hints as to why report or

176
00:11:21,160 --> 00:11:24,319
Speaker 1: write Withdrew Well, we can say for sure that it

177
00:11:24,440 --> 00:11:26,760
Speaker 1: came after some of the same pressure, much of the

178
00:11:26,800 --> 00:11:30,360
Speaker 1: same pressure really that that Jones stay was facing both

179
00:11:30,559 --> 00:11:34,600
Speaker 1: externally and internally. Reportedly there were similar meanings to quarter right,

180
00:11:34,720 --> 00:11:38,400
Speaker 1: where associates at the firm we're raising very similar concerns

181
00:11:39,040 --> 00:11:42,880
Speaker 1: UM and reportedly at least one lawyer resigned as a

182
00:11:42,960 --> 00:11:45,760
Speaker 1: result of those concerns. But at the same time, I

183
00:11:45,800 --> 00:11:48,439
Speaker 1: think it's interesting to keep an eye on the dockets

184
00:11:48,520 --> 00:11:52,120
Speaker 1: and what happens in these cases because myself and some

185
00:11:52,200 --> 00:11:55,240
Speaker 1: of my reporters have been talking to legal ethics experts

186
00:11:55,280 --> 00:11:58,200
Speaker 1: who have said, you really want to watch and see

187
00:11:58,240 --> 00:12:00,840
Speaker 1: how long some of these lawyers stay on these cases

188
00:12:00,880 --> 00:12:06,160
Speaker 1: because of the potential ethics concerns and potential penalty, sanctions, etcetera.

189
00:12:06,760 --> 00:12:12,120
Speaker 1: For pushing baseless cases. Um, anybody can do any one

190
00:12:12,280 --> 00:12:15,840
Speaker 1: else for just about anything. But as the legal process

191
00:12:15,880 --> 00:12:17,719
Speaker 1: goes on, at some point you have to present some

192
00:12:17,840 --> 00:12:21,000
Speaker 1: evidence to back up what you're claiming. And if you

193
00:12:21,080 --> 00:12:23,680
Speaker 1: don't have that evidence and it becomes clear that these

194
00:12:24,600 --> 00:12:26,839
Speaker 1: cases are nothing more than trying to clog up the

195
00:12:26,920 --> 00:12:31,440
Speaker 1: system or slow down election counts, uh, those attorneys may

196
00:12:31,480 --> 00:12:34,439
Speaker 1: be facing some sort of sanctions or penalty. And so

197
00:12:35,240 --> 00:12:37,400
Speaker 1: the ethics folks that we spoke to said, if you

198
00:12:37,440 --> 00:12:39,800
Speaker 1: see them start dropping out, that may be very well

199
00:12:39,840 --> 00:12:45,160
Speaker 1: a recognition that there towing up against those ethical lines,

200
00:12:45,679 --> 00:12:48,880
Speaker 1: and their professional integrity is on the line. So do

201
00:12:48,960 --> 00:12:50,559
Speaker 1: you see that as a concern to some of the

202
00:12:50,720 --> 00:12:54,840
Speaker 1: lawyers within these firms that the integrity of the whole

203
00:12:54,920 --> 00:12:59,160
Speaker 1: firm gets tarnished because of these cases. I think so.

204
00:12:59,360 --> 00:13:02,600
Speaker 1: And you you've particularly see that from attorneys at these

205
00:13:02,720 --> 00:13:06,319
Speaker 1: huge firms. Remember we're talking about Jones Day is a

206
00:13:06,440 --> 00:13:08,840
Speaker 1: firm with more than a thousand attorney, So there are

207
00:13:09,440 --> 00:13:12,600
Speaker 1: just tons and tons of attorneys who are jones Day

208
00:13:12,600 --> 00:13:16,199
Speaker 1: attorneys who have absolutely no involvement in this case whatsoever.

209
00:13:16,880 --> 00:13:20,400
Speaker 1: And you can see that they're saying, you know, we're

210
00:13:20,440 --> 00:13:23,880
Speaker 1: being tarnished because of the jones Day name, despite having

211
00:13:23,960 --> 00:13:27,240
Speaker 1: no involvement in the case. What seems like a clear

212
00:13:27,400 --> 00:13:32,960
Speaker 1: example of the pressure is a lawyer for Trump's campaign

213
00:13:33,520 --> 00:13:37,920
Speaker 1: yesterday said they're dropping out of the Pennsylvania lawsuit challenging

214
00:13:38,160 --> 00:13:42,239
Speaker 1: the election results. And this is a day after complaining

215
00:13:42,280 --> 00:13:45,920
Speaker 1: about being harassed for her work, including by an attorney

216
00:13:46,000 --> 00:13:50,079
Speaker 1: from a firm representing the state of Pennsylvania. Absolutely so,

217
00:13:50,280 --> 00:13:54,280
Speaker 1: Linda Tarns, who is a solo practitioner there in Pennsylvania.

218
00:13:54,520 --> 00:13:58,880
Speaker 1: She actually became the lead attorney on that state after reporter,

219
00:13:59,000 --> 00:14:04,800
Speaker 1: Wright dropped out in the face of pretty significant public pressure. Uh.

220
00:14:04,920 --> 00:14:07,439
Speaker 1: And then shortly after that, she told the court that

221
00:14:07,600 --> 00:14:11,720
Speaker 1: she had received a threatening phone call from an attorney

222
00:14:11,720 --> 00:14:14,320
Speaker 1: at Kirklin and Ellis, which is one of the firms

223
00:14:14,360 --> 00:14:17,680
Speaker 1: on the opposite side of that litigation representing the state

224
00:14:17,720 --> 00:14:21,240
Speaker 1: of Pennsylvania. Um and and she told the court straight

225
00:14:21,320 --> 00:14:24,160
Speaker 1: up that she was bowing out because of some of

226
00:14:24,240 --> 00:14:29,360
Speaker 1: these attacks. Interestingly enough, the attorney who is now the

227
00:14:29,520 --> 00:14:33,960
Speaker 1: lead Trump campaign attorney in that case, some some eagle

228
00:14:34,040 --> 00:14:37,880
Speaker 1: eyed reporters noticed that on his firm's website, they're already

229
00:14:38,000 --> 00:14:43,160
Speaker 1: calling President elect Joe Biden the president elect. Um and

230
00:14:43,320 --> 00:14:47,000
Speaker 1: so there's some question there about how the campaign will

231
00:14:47,040 --> 00:14:51,400
Speaker 1: feel about that. Interesting. So, Chris, you study law firms.

232
00:14:51,920 --> 00:14:54,760
Speaker 1: Have we seen law firms before? Law firms are sort

233
00:14:54,800 --> 00:14:58,840
Speaker 1: of viewed in a different light than companies, at least

234
00:14:58,880 --> 00:15:02,440
Speaker 1: to my mind, because they don't necessarily they aren't necessarily

235
00:15:02,640 --> 00:15:06,560
Speaker 1: endorsing the views of the people that they represent. You know,

236
00:15:07,240 --> 00:15:10,600
Speaker 1: everyone's entitled to a lawyer. So is this attack on

237
00:15:10,840 --> 00:15:13,960
Speaker 1: lawyers for whom they represent a change or has it

238
00:15:14,040 --> 00:15:16,760
Speaker 1: been going on for a while. I think you're you're

239
00:15:16,920 --> 00:15:23,480
Speaker 1: hearing voices opposing and criticizing law firms work on behalf

240
00:15:23,520 --> 00:15:29,560
Speaker 1: of certain clients. Uh. Louder and growing certainly over time,

241
00:15:30,320 --> 00:15:34,400
Speaker 1: you know, going back decades. Particularly firms that work in

242
00:15:34,480 --> 00:15:38,040
Speaker 1: criminal defense are often get a hard time and get

243
00:15:38,160 --> 00:15:43,040
Speaker 1: a significant amount of public criticism for representing people or

244
00:15:43,160 --> 00:15:46,880
Speaker 1: companies that have been accused of these just really heinous things.

245
00:15:47,680 --> 00:15:50,520
Speaker 1: But but there has always been this idea that lawyers

246
00:15:50,600 --> 00:15:53,440
Speaker 1: represent clients and the and the fact that a lawyer

247
00:15:53,560 --> 00:15:56,960
Speaker 1: is representing a client doesn't necessarily mean that the lawyer

248
00:15:57,680 --> 00:16:01,600
Speaker 1: um supports the client, agrees with the client, thinks that

249
00:16:01,680 --> 00:16:06,280
Speaker 1: what they did was right or what they're arguing is correct, um.

250
00:16:06,480 --> 00:16:08,920
Speaker 1: But that everyone gets their day in court, and everyone's

251
00:16:09,040 --> 00:16:11,480
Speaker 1: entitled to a lawyer. What we'll be looking to see

252
00:16:11,560 --> 00:16:15,360
Speaker 1: is that if any of the sticks and what happened next. Uh.

253
00:16:15,640 --> 00:16:18,560
Speaker 1: Just because Porter Wright dropped out of these particular cases,

254
00:16:18,640 --> 00:16:20,600
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean that the firms are going to stop

255
00:16:20,680 --> 00:16:25,200
Speaker 1: representing either the Trump campaign or the RNC going forwards. Uh.

256
00:16:25,280 --> 00:16:27,880
Speaker 1: And just because Jones States getting some heat here over

257
00:16:27,960 --> 00:16:30,920
Speaker 1: this one case, I don't expect that to stop the

258
00:16:31,000 --> 00:16:34,240
Speaker 1: firm from continuing to work in this space. Thanks for

259
00:16:34,320 --> 00:16:38,040
Speaker 1: being the Bloomberg Law Show Chris. That's Chris Offer, Bloomberg

260
00:16:38,120 --> 00:16:42,360
Speaker 1: Law Team leader for the Business of Law. President Trump

261
00:16:42,440 --> 00:16:46,200
Speaker 1: has resumed with one of his most successful priorities as president,

262
00:16:46,600 --> 00:16:49,720
Speaker 1: the appointment of federal judges, to make the judiciary more

263
00:16:49,800 --> 00:16:53,280
Speaker 1: conservative and set a majority. Leader Mitch McConnell is poised

264
00:16:53,320 --> 00:16:57,120
Speaker 1: to continue pushing the confirmations to the lifetime appointments through

265
00:16:57,520 --> 00:17:00,920
Speaker 1: until Trump's term is over. The Fair confirmed more than

266
00:17:01,000 --> 00:17:05,600
Speaker 1: two lifetime judicial appointees to the federal courts, including three

267
00:17:05,680 --> 00:17:09,359
Speaker 1: Supreme Court justices. Joining me is Professor Carl Tobias of

268
00:17:09,440 --> 00:17:12,800
Speaker 1: the University of Richmond School of Law. Carl, So far,

269
00:17:12,880 --> 00:17:17,680
Speaker 1: have any judges been confirmed during the lame duck session, Yes,

270
00:17:17,840 --> 00:17:22,639
Speaker 1: they have. Two were confirmed last week for the district bench,

271
00:17:23,240 --> 00:17:27,480
Speaker 1: and this week five are scheduled. One was just confirmed

272
00:17:27,520 --> 00:17:31,359
Speaker 1: this morning and the other four will be confirmed this week,

273
00:17:31,880 --> 00:17:35,280
Speaker 1: a second one today and then the others by Thursday,

274
00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:38,920
Speaker 1: and so the seven will have been confirmed in the

275
00:17:39,040 --> 00:17:42,120
Speaker 1: lame ducks so far for the district courts. Are these

276
00:17:42,600 --> 00:17:46,280
Speaker 1: openings that have been in place for a while? Did

277
00:17:46,359 --> 00:17:49,720
Speaker 1: they just come up? Most of them have existed for

278
00:17:49,920 --> 00:17:52,920
Speaker 1: some time, and of course, as someone's confirmed this week,

279
00:17:53,000 --> 00:17:56,840
Speaker 1: it means they've been through the process. They've been nominated

280
00:17:57,280 --> 00:18:01,399
Speaker 1: and had committee hearings, approval votes in the committee, and

281
00:18:01,520 --> 00:18:05,840
Speaker 1: then up for debate, and then a vote on the floor.

282
00:18:06,400 --> 00:18:10,480
Speaker 1: So they are not new, virtually all of them. So

283
00:18:11,040 --> 00:18:16,320
Speaker 1: there are a few that are. And so for example,

284
00:18:16,480 --> 00:18:20,879
Speaker 1: there is a UH circuit they can see that was

285
00:18:21,080 --> 00:18:25,399
Speaker 1: just created when one Torriella died who served on the

286
00:18:25,480 --> 00:18:29,280
Speaker 1: first circuit, and someone was just recently nominated for that

287
00:18:29,480 --> 00:18:33,640
Speaker 1: position after the election. Let's concentrate on the district court

288
00:18:33,760 --> 00:18:37,200
Speaker 1: nominations for a moment. Are these going through on party

289
00:18:37,280 --> 00:18:40,840
Speaker 1: line votes as we've seen with most of the circuit

290
00:18:40,880 --> 00:18:45,640
Speaker 1: court nominations, or are these different? Well, some are. For example,

291
00:18:45,760 --> 00:18:48,560
Speaker 1: the one this morning nominee for the Southern District of

292
00:18:48,640 --> 00:18:54,800
Speaker 1: Mississippi was relatively close to forty three UH. And so

293
00:18:56,200 --> 00:19:00,680
Speaker 1: we may see that with some of these nominees, especially

294
00:19:00,760 --> 00:19:04,480
Speaker 1: if there's some controversy. And there's also the feeling I

295
00:19:04,560 --> 00:19:09,280
Speaker 1: think among some Democrats that Mitch McConnell is jamming through

296
00:19:09,440 --> 00:19:15,000
Speaker 1: people at the last minute after the voters have spoken

297
00:19:15,560 --> 00:19:20,120
Speaker 1: UH in terms of who they want to be nominating judges.

298
00:19:20,720 --> 00:19:26,320
Speaker 1: Has this happened before. Yes, Um, you know, in recent administrations,

299
00:19:26,400 --> 00:19:32,760
Speaker 1: at the end of Obama's time the Senate, when McConnell

300
00:19:33,040 --> 00:19:37,840
Speaker 1: was in the majority, Republican Senate confirmed no one after July.

301
00:19:40,000 --> 00:19:44,120
Speaker 1: So that gives you a sense of discrepancy between then

302
00:19:44,359 --> 00:19:47,720
Speaker 1: and now. On the other hand, at the end of

303
00:19:47,800 --> 00:19:52,280
Speaker 1: Bush in two seven two eight, uh, Democrats were in

304
00:19:52,320 --> 00:19:55,680
Speaker 1: the majority and they confirmed fifty eight district judges and

305
00:19:55,880 --> 00:20:02,080
Speaker 1: ten circuit judges, as opposed to Republican majority in two thousand,

306
00:20:02,359 --> 00:20:10,400
Speaker 1: fifteen sixteen confirmed only two circuit judges and eighteen district judges.

307
00:20:11,080 --> 00:20:15,440
Speaker 1: And so there have been disparities depending on who's in

308
00:20:15,480 --> 00:20:18,760
Speaker 1: the White House and who is in the control of

309
00:20:18,840 --> 00:20:23,640
Speaker 1: the Senate. Just explain once again the difference between these

310
00:20:23,840 --> 00:20:26,600
Speaker 1: district court judges, who are sort of like the trial

311
00:20:26,760 --> 00:20:30,399
Speaker 1: judges in the federal system, and what we normally concentrate on,

312
00:20:30,520 --> 00:20:35,439
Speaker 1: which is the circuit court judges. Well, Um, this administration,

313
00:20:35,600 --> 00:20:38,840
Speaker 1: the Trump administration, has focused like a laser on the

314
00:20:38,920 --> 00:20:41,600
Speaker 1: appeals courts, and so there are only three vacancies now

315
00:20:42,320 --> 00:20:46,359
Speaker 1: and there were no vacancies for a short period, which

316
00:20:46,440 --> 00:20:50,040
Speaker 1: is the fewest since Ronald Reagan was president. Um, but

317
00:20:50,359 --> 00:20:55,040
Speaker 1: has neglected to some extent the district vacancies and emergency vacancies.

318
00:20:55,880 --> 00:21:00,520
Speaker 1: But the difference is at the appellate level, the rulings

319
00:21:00,760 --> 00:21:04,560
Speaker 1: cover all of the states in a particular circuit, as

320
00:21:04,600 --> 00:21:09,560
Speaker 1: opposed to a district judge who really only can't even

321
00:21:09,640 --> 00:21:14,520
Speaker 1: buying people in the judge's own courthouse. And so essentially

322
00:21:14,640 --> 00:21:22,480
Speaker 1: the appellate judges make more policy and of cases. The

323
00:21:22,600 --> 00:21:27,200
Speaker 1: court of last resort is the appellate court that decides

324
00:21:27,560 --> 00:21:30,600
Speaker 1: because of Supreme Court here so few cases and so

325
00:21:30,760 --> 00:21:34,200
Speaker 1: that's why the administration has tried to keep all of

326
00:21:34,280 --> 00:21:38,320
Speaker 1: those seats filled and may fill all three vacancies. Now

327
00:21:39,520 --> 00:21:44,560
Speaker 1: I think tomorrow will have just this Amy Cony Barrett's replacement,

328
00:21:45,640 --> 00:21:50,639
Speaker 1: who's been nominated before Judiciary for hearing, and then the

329
00:21:50,800 --> 00:21:53,800
Speaker 1: idea is to confirm him to her seventh Circuit vacancy.

330
00:21:54,200 --> 00:21:57,280
Speaker 1: So what do we know about Thomas Kirsch who has

331
00:21:57,320 --> 00:22:02,560
Speaker 1: been nominated Phil Coney Barrett's seat. He is presently the

332
00:22:03,000 --> 00:22:06,600
Speaker 1: U S Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana and

333
00:22:07,040 --> 00:22:11,359
Speaker 1: has experience in private practice with Winston Strawn, I believe

334
00:22:11,400 --> 00:22:14,960
Speaker 1: in Chicago from and hasn't served in and out of

335
00:22:15,080 --> 00:22:18,119
Speaker 1: the Justice Department. You have attorney's office in Northern District

336
00:22:18,160 --> 00:22:22,359
Speaker 1: of Indiana in his career, and I think is well regarded.

337
00:22:22,520 --> 00:22:25,320
Speaker 1: But he looks like a number of other nominees of

338
00:22:25,480 --> 00:22:29,080
Speaker 1: President Trump, I think, but we'll see, has some strong

339
00:22:29,160 --> 00:22:32,280
Speaker 1: support from the home state senators in Indiana. So tell

340
00:22:32,359 --> 00:22:36,080
Speaker 1: us about Judge roll Arius Mark Squatt, who was nominated

341
00:22:36,119 --> 00:22:39,160
Speaker 1: to fill the vacancy on the First Circuit Court of Appeals.

342
00:22:39,960 --> 00:22:43,480
Speaker 1: And he is a district judge whom Trump appointed to

343
00:22:43,640 --> 00:22:47,119
Speaker 1: the District of Puerto Rico and has served for eighteen

344
00:22:47,240 --> 00:22:51,399
Speaker 1: months in that capacity, and so he's a nominee for

345
00:22:51,480 --> 00:22:54,760
Speaker 1: the First Circuit, and I think they will try to

346
00:22:54,880 --> 00:22:58,200
Speaker 1: move his nomination as well. There's a third vacancy on

347
00:22:58,280 --> 00:23:03,200
Speaker 1: the seventh Circuit. Judge Blom assumed senior status on November

348
00:23:03,920 --> 00:23:07,399
Speaker 1: and the Republicans may try to feel that they can

349
00:23:07,440 --> 00:23:12,359
Speaker 1: see as well. And so I think it was a

350
00:23:12,480 --> 00:23:15,440
Speaker 1: smart or choice on the part of the administration to

351
00:23:15,560 --> 00:23:19,200
Speaker 1: try to elevate someone who was already on the district

352
00:23:19,280 --> 00:23:23,119
Speaker 1: bench and someone from Puerto Rico, because there's a bit

353
00:23:23,160 --> 00:23:28,000
Speaker 1: of a tradition there um to have someone from Puerto

354
00:23:28,080 --> 00:23:34,040
Speaker 1: Rico on the first Circuit um. And so the administration

355
00:23:34,560 --> 00:23:38,800
Speaker 1: as someone Uh, they've already sent through the process, and

356
00:23:40,200 --> 00:23:43,640
Speaker 1: the Puerto Rico District judge was confirmed on a nineties

357
00:23:44,160 --> 00:23:48,520
Speaker 1: three vote. Um, and I had a very smooth nomination

358
00:23:48,640 --> 00:23:52,240
Speaker 1: confirmation process. Uh. And so I think the hope is

359
00:23:52,359 --> 00:23:57,119
Speaker 1: that he would be as smoothly confirmed h in this situation.

360
00:23:57,320 --> 00:24:00,440
Speaker 1: So again, it's after the election when he was mainated

361
00:24:00,760 --> 00:24:04,200
Speaker 1: and would be confirmed if that happens. Is there enough

362
00:24:04,320 --> 00:24:11,520
Speaker 1: time to get all the confirmations for the seventh Circuit done? Well?

363
00:24:12,160 --> 00:24:14,600
Speaker 1: Maybe I think the one that's already been made and

364
00:24:14,680 --> 00:24:18,200
Speaker 1: has the hearing tomorrow the courage. I think that could

365
00:24:18,280 --> 00:24:21,880
Speaker 1: be done because then he would just need a committee vote,

366
00:24:21,960 --> 00:24:24,480
Speaker 1: which could happen in December, and then a final vote,

367
00:24:24,840 --> 00:24:28,280
Speaker 1: which could happen in December. The others are more difficult.

368
00:24:28,359 --> 00:24:31,920
Speaker 1: It depends on when the first circuit nominee has a hearing,

369
00:24:32,480 --> 00:24:36,760
Speaker 1: and then there's no nominee yet for Judge Blaumbsy. So

370
00:24:36,960 --> 00:24:39,920
Speaker 1: that could be tight because they only have a small

371
00:24:40,040 --> 00:24:43,160
Speaker 1: number of working days after Thanksgiving when they come back,

372
00:24:44,000 --> 00:24:47,879
Speaker 1: and then the Senate turns over I believe on the

373
00:24:48,119 --> 00:24:53,159
Speaker 1: fifth or so of January. And so um, it's just

374
00:24:53,280 --> 00:24:56,480
Speaker 1: not clear that there are enough, you know, legislative days

375
00:24:57,160 --> 00:25:02,399
Speaker 1: two approve all three of the of circuited judges, and

376
00:25:02,560 --> 00:25:07,320
Speaker 1: then the questions also about district judges. There are five

377
00:25:07,720 --> 00:25:12,840
Speaker 1: others who um are on the floor and so they've

378
00:25:13,000 --> 00:25:18,119
Speaker 1: had hearings and committee votes, and those five could easily

379
00:25:18,160 --> 00:25:23,440
Speaker 1: be confirmed in December. But there are twenty more who

380
00:25:24,119 --> 00:25:26,879
Speaker 1: have been nominated by the President but not even had

381
00:25:26,920 --> 00:25:29,480
Speaker 1: a hearing yet. And I think there's a big question

382
00:25:29,600 --> 00:25:32,640
Speaker 1: mark as to those we'll know. We don't know yet

383
00:25:32,720 --> 00:25:35,440
Speaker 1: who's gonna be on the hearing tomorrow. Besides Kurse, it

384
00:25:35,520 --> 00:25:39,399
Speaker 1: could be some district nominees, but that's not clear, and

385
00:25:39,720 --> 00:25:42,200
Speaker 1: so it's not at all clear that any of those

386
00:25:42,280 --> 00:25:45,160
Speaker 1: twenty would be able to get through the process if

387
00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:49,520
Speaker 1: the earrings are not held till December. That's a very

388
00:25:49,640 --> 00:25:53,080
Speaker 1: tight time frame given what has to happen in that period.

389
00:25:53,680 --> 00:25:57,680
Speaker 1: So look back and on the four years of judicial

390
00:25:57,800 --> 00:26:00,840
Speaker 1: nominations and tell us what is it in Trump and

391
00:26:01,000 --> 00:26:06,440
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell have accomplished well. They've named three extremely conservatives

392
00:26:07,320 --> 00:26:12,440
Speaker 1: and confirmed three extremely conservatives Supreme Court justices fifty three

393
00:26:12,880 --> 00:26:17,600
Speaker 1: so far and counting similar Appellate Court judges and one

394
00:26:18,040 --> 00:26:22,639
Speaker 1: and sixty nine district judges after this week, which is

395
00:26:23,320 --> 00:26:28,159
Speaker 1: relatively strong record, especially at the appellate level. So, for example,

396
00:26:28,320 --> 00:26:33,040
Speaker 1: President Obama in two terms was able to confirm fifty

397
00:26:33,240 --> 00:26:38,840
Speaker 1: five appellate judges, so if only two more are confirmed

398
00:26:38,920 --> 00:26:42,560
Speaker 1: in President Trump would have matched that. And if he

399
00:26:42,720 --> 00:26:46,760
Speaker 1: has all three confirmed, that would mean he named more

400
00:26:46,920 --> 00:26:51,080
Speaker 1: in one term than Obama did in two. Since Mitch

401
00:26:51,200 --> 00:26:55,720
Speaker 1: McConnell has filled and looks likely to fill every single opening,

402
00:26:56,080 --> 00:27:00,760
Speaker 1: what are the prospects for Joe Biden to appoint judges? Well,

403
00:27:01,119 --> 00:27:04,480
Speaker 1: there are some because, as I said, there are twenty

404
00:27:04,600 --> 00:27:07,960
Speaker 1: two vacancies at the district level where there are no

405
00:27:08,200 --> 00:27:13,520
Speaker 1: nominees yet, so he's likely to inherit those. And then

406
00:27:13,600 --> 00:27:18,919
Speaker 1: there's twenty more who have been nominated for vacancies they

407
00:27:18,960 --> 00:27:21,280
Speaker 1: haven't had a hering yet, so that would come to

408
00:27:21,440 --> 00:27:26,360
Speaker 1: forty two even if everybody else were confirmed by McConnell um.

409
00:27:26,560 --> 00:27:30,639
Speaker 1: And then there'll be uh more people who assume senior

410
00:27:30,800 --> 00:27:36,240
Speaker 1: status uh and retire in the next year. So he

411
00:27:36,400 --> 00:27:40,240
Speaker 1: may have a fair number of vacancies that he can feel,

412
00:27:40,359 --> 00:27:43,040
Speaker 1: but mostly at the district level, not very many at

413
00:27:43,040 --> 00:27:48,520
Speaker 1: the appellate level, unless judges presently sitting Assudan senior status,

414
00:27:48,840 --> 00:27:50,760
Speaker 1: and there are a number of appellate judges who are

415
00:27:50,800 --> 00:27:53,639
Speaker 1: eligible under the rule of our sixty five and have

416
00:27:53,800 --> 00:27:57,160
Speaker 1: fifteen years of service. Uh, and so some of them

417
00:27:57,720 --> 00:28:04,480
Speaker 1: may well assume senior status. So then Biden would to

418
00:28:04,560 --> 00:28:08,800
Speaker 1: put it, in colloquial terms, take back the nominations of

419
00:28:08,960 --> 00:28:13,280
Speaker 1: those who haven't been confirmed yet. They would expire when

420
00:28:13,320 --> 00:28:17,879
Speaker 1: the new Senate and President Trump of course could renominate

421
00:28:18,000 --> 00:28:22,359
Speaker 1: them in that period right between the new Senate coming

422
00:28:22,400 --> 00:28:28,560
Speaker 1: in and inauguration day. But I don't think that much

423
00:28:28,760 --> 00:28:30,639
Speaker 1: is going to happen in that period. The Senate is

424
00:28:30,640 --> 00:28:34,960
Speaker 1: getting organized, inaugurations being planned, the Senate may not even

425
00:28:35,000 --> 00:28:38,440
Speaker 1: be in session much of that early part of January,

426
00:28:39,360 --> 00:28:44,120
Speaker 1: so that's probably not realistic. Uh, that much would happened

427
00:28:44,400 --> 00:28:48,080
Speaker 1: by way of confirmations in that period of time. President

428
00:28:48,160 --> 00:28:52,320
Speaker 1: Trump has been able to nominate and get confirmed some

429
00:28:53,280 --> 00:28:59,400
Speaker 1: very conservative judges. As we've discussed, what will happen when

430
00:29:00,040 --> 00:29:04,719
Speaker 1: a President Biden nominates a very liberal judge. Are they

431
00:29:04,880 --> 00:29:09,840
Speaker 1: likely to get through if the Senate remains in Republican hands. Well,

432
00:29:10,240 --> 00:29:12,640
Speaker 1: A lot depends on what happens in the two Georgia

433
00:29:12,760 --> 00:29:17,520
Speaker 1: races that will be decided on January six. Uh. If

434
00:29:17,640 --> 00:29:20,800
Speaker 1: Democrats were able to win both of those, then they

435
00:29:20,880 --> 00:29:25,720
Speaker 1: would have a Senate majority because the tiebreaking vote would

436
00:29:25,760 --> 00:29:29,840
Speaker 1: be the vice president. Uh. There is that possibility. Um.

437
00:29:30,320 --> 00:29:33,000
Speaker 1: If not, then McConnell, I think, would be the leader

438
00:29:33,320 --> 00:29:37,640
Speaker 1: and there would be a very thin majority in the Senate.

439
00:29:38,600 --> 00:29:41,600
Speaker 1: And I think it will be a matter of negotiation

440
00:29:41,840 --> 00:29:47,800
Speaker 1: between the White House and McConnell and Biden may to

441
00:29:48,000 --> 00:29:52,400
Speaker 1: some extent have to moderate the type of people he chooses.

442
00:29:53,240 --> 00:29:55,720
Speaker 1: I think he has a good relationship with Mitch McConnell

443
00:29:56,160 --> 00:29:59,080
Speaker 1: and with many other senators with whom he served, and

444
00:29:59,400 --> 00:30:03,719
Speaker 1: so he knows the process very well. Chaired the Judiciary

445
00:30:04,040 --> 00:30:07,280
Speaker 1: Committee and was honored for three decades or more, and

446
00:30:07,480 --> 00:30:10,680
Speaker 1: has very good people around him to help with judicial selection.

447
00:30:11,080 --> 00:30:14,560
Speaker 1: Cautiously optimistic that that will go smoothly. That's Carl Tobias

448
00:30:14,560 --> 00:30:17,240
Speaker 1: at the University of Richmond Law School. And that's it

449
00:30:17,360 --> 00:30:19,960
Speaker 1: for the edition of the Bloomberg Laws Show. I'm June Grasso.

450
00:30:20,120 --> 00:30:22,120
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for listening, and remember to tune to

451
00:30:22,120 --> 00:30:24,840
Speaker 1: The Bloomberg Glass Show every weeknight at ten pm Eastern

452
00:30:25,200 --> 00:30:26,480
Speaker 1: right here on Bloomberg Radio,