WEBVTT - Why Trump Is Losing His Lawyers

0:00:00.560 --> 0:00:05.360
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Grassoe from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:06.559 --> 0:00:09.640
<v Speaker 1>The Trump campaign has seen a revolving cast of lawyers

0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:14.480
<v Speaker 1>pursuing its lawsuits challenging the election results, particularly in Pennsylvania,

0:00:14.560 --> 0:00:18.560
<v Speaker 1>where the lawsuits have been concentrated. The law firm Porter Wright,

0:00:18.760 --> 0:00:22.680
<v Speaker 1>Morris and Arthur withdrew from representing the campaign on Friday,

0:00:22.760 --> 0:00:25.560
<v Speaker 1>and the lawyer who took over the case, Linda Currents,

0:00:25.720 --> 0:00:29.240
<v Speaker 1>moved to withdraw on Monday. The Lincoln Project, group of

0:00:29.280 --> 0:00:33.280
<v Speaker 1>Republicans who opposed President Trump, had started a media campaign

0:00:33.320 --> 0:00:36.760
<v Speaker 1>against the law firms helping the Trump administration to contest

0:00:36.880 --> 0:00:41.400
<v Speaker 1>Joe Biden's victory, specifically naming Porter Wright and Jones Day,

0:00:41.640 --> 0:00:46.080
<v Speaker 1>the nation's tenth largest law firm. Trump's communications director Tim

0:00:46.120 --> 0:00:50.040
<v Speaker 1>Murtas said leftist mobs descended upon some of the lawyers

0:00:50.080 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 1>representing the president's campaign and they buckled. The President's team

0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:57.680
<v Speaker 1>is undeterred and will move forward with rock solid attorneys

0:00:57.720 --> 0:01:01.680
<v Speaker 1>to ensure free and fair elections for all Americans. Trump

0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:04.800
<v Speaker 1>has picked Rudy Giuliani, his personal attorney, to lead his

0:01:04.840 --> 0:01:09.039
<v Speaker 1>post election legal battles, and Giuliani filed an application to

0:01:09.240 --> 0:01:12.560
<v Speaker 1>join the case in Pennsylvania, which the other lawyers had

0:01:12.640 --> 0:01:15.920
<v Speaker 1>left just hours before a hearing was set to start.

0:01:16.440 --> 0:01:19.320
<v Speaker 1>Joining me is Christopher for Bloomberg Law Team leader for

0:01:19.360 --> 0:01:23.480
<v Speaker 1>the Business of Law. So Chris tell us about jones Day. Sure,

0:01:23.560 --> 0:01:27.399
<v Speaker 1>Jay is one of these just massive law firms. It's

0:01:27.440 --> 0:01:31.360
<v Speaker 1>the tenth largest firm in the country with more than

0:01:31.400 --> 0:01:35.320
<v Speaker 1>a billion dollars with a b in gross revenue per year.

0:01:35.880 --> 0:01:38.360
<v Speaker 1>I think they've got more than a thousand attorneys across

0:01:38.440 --> 0:01:43.560
<v Speaker 1>the country. Based originally founded in Cleveland, Ohio, but has

0:01:43.600 --> 0:01:46.200
<v Speaker 1>been come to be known as one of these white

0:01:46.200 --> 0:01:49.920
<v Speaker 1>shoe Washington d C firms. UM. That's really been a

0:01:49.960 --> 0:01:54.600
<v Speaker 1>revolving door with sending attorney into high ranking positions in

0:01:54.640 --> 0:01:59.120
<v Speaker 1>the federal government throughout the years, but certainly in during

0:01:59.120 --> 0:02:02.640
<v Speaker 1>the Trump administer ration. Jones Day has been the law

0:02:02.680 --> 0:02:07.400
<v Speaker 1>firm most closely associated by many people with the Trump administration.

0:02:07.520 --> 0:02:12.040
<v Speaker 1>The firm itself UM advise the Trump's campaign back for

0:02:12.080 --> 0:02:17.040
<v Speaker 1>the election, continued to advise the campaign UH and the

0:02:17.200 --> 0:02:20.920
<v Speaker 1>RNC throughout the next four years leading up to the

0:02:20.919 --> 0:02:24.520
<v Speaker 1>most recent election. UM and has continued to be involved

0:02:24.520 --> 0:02:29.120
<v Speaker 1>in lawsuits related to the election. UM since election Day,

0:02:29.160 --> 0:02:33.480
<v Speaker 1>just a few weeks ago, and so during Trump's administration

0:02:33.600 --> 0:02:37.480
<v Speaker 1>we saw several notable jones Day lawyers bill top roles

0:02:37.680 --> 0:02:40.800
<v Speaker 1>within the government. The one that most people are familiar with,

0:02:40.880 --> 0:02:44.040
<v Speaker 1>of course, is Don McGann, who was formerly White House

0:02:44.080 --> 0:02:49.560
<v Speaker 1>Council before returning to Jones Day last year. Another lawyer

0:02:49.639 --> 0:02:54.720
<v Speaker 1>named Noel Francisco was Solicitor General, which is essentially the

0:02:54.760 --> 0:02:58.800
<v Speaker 1>fate of the Trump administration in the Supreme Court, arguing

0:02:58.840 --> 0:03:01.160
<v Speaker 1>any cases on behalf of government in the High Court.

0:03:01.720 --> 0:03:05.200
<v Speaker 1>He was there for most of President Trump's first term

0:03:05.280 --> 0:03:09.480
<v Speaker 1>before returning to jones Day last year. The Lincoln Project

0:03:10.080 --> 0:03:14.600
<v Speaker 1>started a social media campaign about Jones Day. What was

0:03:14.639 --> 0:03:19.079
<v Speaker 1>the message of that campaign and how successful was it? Well,

0:03:19.080 --> 0:03:22.639
<v Speaker 1>the message was really that the Jones Day attorneys and

0:03:22.720 --> 0:03:24.560
<v Speaker 1>the firm itself, in the eyes of the folks, that

0:03:24.600 --> 0:03:27.920
<v Speaker 1>the Lincoln Project should be ashamed of themselves for participating

0:03:27.960 --> 0:03:32.160
<v Speaker 1>in these post election lawsuits um which at least according

0:03:32.200 --> 0:03:35.280
<v Speaker 1>to the folks that at the Lincoln Projects are nothing

0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:40.240
<v Speaker 1>more than an assault on American democracy, baseless attempt to

0:03:40.880 --> 0:03:45.760
<v Speaker 1>undo the the results of the fair and free election.

0:03:46.280 --> 0:03:48.280
<v Speaker 1>And so it was too prong number one. They were

0:03:48.320 --> 0:03:52.880
<v Speaker 1>building and sort of a online public sense of outrage

0:03:52.880 --> 0:03:55.520
<v Speaker 1>against the firm itself, and then they were attempting to

0:03:56.120 --> 0:04:00.880
<v Speaker 1>pressure major Jones Day clients, including companies like General Motors,

0:04:00.920 --> 0:04:04.280
<v Speaker 1>to stop doing business with the firm over this issue.

0:04:05.080 --> 0:04:08.480
<v Speaker 1>Did it work? What kind of repercussions did Jones Day

0:04:08.520 --> 0:04:12.680
<v Speaker 1>have from this media campaign? Well, it certainly had some impact.

0:04:13.000 --> 0:04:16.480
<v Speaker 1>Um so that the same campaign was also aimed at

0:04:16.480 --> 0:04:19.440
<v Speaker 1>a smalller law firm called Supporter Right, which was involved

0:04:19.480 --> 0:04:23.040
<v Speaker 1>in some of the other cases involving the Trump administration,

0:04:23.120 --> 0:04:26.440
<v Speaker 1>and that firm has been pretty quickly backed away and

0:04:26.800 --> 0:04:30.920
<v Speaker 1>withdrawn from participating in those studs. Jones Days involved in

0:04:31.040 --> 0:04:34.400
<v Speaker 1>one single suit right now, and they're actually representing the

0:04:34.480 --> 0:04:38.120
<v Speaker 1>Republican Party of Pennsylvania rather than the Trump campaign itself.

0:04:38.800 --> 0:04:42.719
<v Speaker 1>But it's one of those lawsuits that aimed it challenging

0:04:42.800 --> 0:04:45.840
<v Speaker 1>the results of the election in Pennsylvania overall, and and

0:04:46.080 --> 0:04:49.320
<v Speaker 1>and certainly is affiliated with the Trump administration and the

0:04:49.400 --> 0:04:54.080
<v Speaker 1>campaign efforts there. And so they have not sacked and

0:04:54.200 --> 0:04:57.280
<v Speaker 1>it seems unlikely that they will back away given the

0:04:57.360 --> 0:05:01.000
<v Speaker 1>firm's history and leadership just not the type of folks

0:05:01.040 --> 0:05:05.400
<v Speaker 1>who will to this sort of public pressure. But um

0:05:05.560 --> 0:05:08.840
<v Speaker 1>it has caused quite a stir within UM the halls

0:05:08.880 --> 0:05:12.440
<v Speaker 1>of Jones Staying, particularly at his Washington, d C. Office.

0:05:12.920 --> 0:05:16.720
<v Speaker 1>We reported that late last week a large group of

0:05:16.760 --> 0:05:21.160
<v Speaker 1>attorneys there at jones Days CC office, in a series

0:05:21.200 --> 0:05:24.159
<v Speaker 1>of meetings with the head of the DC office, raised

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:29.440
<v Speaker 1>some um a number of concerns regarding the firms involvement

0:05:29.600 --> 0:05:34.000
<v Speaker 1>in the case. That meeting was described as very tense

0:05:34.240 --> 0:05:36.520
<v Speaker 1>by some of the people who were there. Basically, the

0:05:36.600 --> 0:05:40.280
<v Speaker 1>attorneys were saying that the firm is risking it's good name,

0:05:40.480 --> 0:05:45.640
<v Speaker 1>it's sort of professional names in in getting involved in

0:05:45.760 --> 0:05:49.160
<v Speaker 1>something like this. So Chris Jones Day said, it's not

0:05:49.360 --> 0:05:53.960
<v Speaker 1>representing any entity in any litigation challenging or contesting the

0:05:54.080 --> 0:05:58.920
<v Speaker 1>results of the general election in light of that Pennsylvania case.

0:05:59.120 --> 0:06:04.120
<v Speaker 1>Is that strict true? That is incorrect, UM. And so

0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:06.600
<v Speaker 1>John Stay has has made a big deal of not

0:06:06.960 --> 0:06:10.760
<v Speaker 1>representing the Trump campaign or the RNC itself in much

0:06:10.800 --> 0:06:13.480
<v Speaker 1>of the ongoing litigation. And it is true that the

0:06:13.560 --> 0:06:16.560
<v Speaker 1>firm is not involved in many of the cases UH

0:06:16.800 --> 0:06:19.320
<v Speaker 1>that have already been thrown in out the court, both

0:06:19.360 --> 0:06:23.440
<v Speaker 1>in Pennsylvania and Michigan, Arizona and elsewhere. But the case

0:06:23.520 --> 0:06:28.120
<v Speaker 1>that the firm is involved in is representing the Republican

0:06:28.160 --> 0:06:33.520
<v Speaker 1>Party of Pennsylvania. Essentially, they're challenging UM Pennsylvania's mail in

0:06:33.760 --> 0:06:38.080
<v Speaker 1>ballot system. They say that the state has created this

0:06:38.160 --> 0:06:41.000
<v Speaker 1>two tier system where people who sent their ballots in

0:06:41.160 --> 0:06:44.039
<v Speaker 1>via mail did not have to jump through the various

0:06:44.120 --> 0:06:47.800
<v Speaker 1>hoops uh to prove that they are who they say

0:06:47.839 --> 0:06:50.840
<v Speaker 1>they are, that folks who voted in person had to

0:06:50.920 --> 0:06:55.200
<v Speaker 1>do things like uh, signatures, UM, just sort of all

0:06:55.279 --> 0:06:58.800
<v Speaker 1>the id requirements that you face when you go into

0:06:58.920 --> 0:07:02.239
<v Speaker 1>vote in person. And a say, the jones Day lawyers

0:07:02.320 --> 0:07:06.000
<v Speaker 1>say that this is created in a constitutional two tier

0:07:06.080 --> 0:07:10.920
<v Speaker 1>system where the restrictions and the requirements for voting depend

0:07:11.000 --> 0:07:13.040
<v Speaker 1>on whether or not you do it in by mail

0:07:14.040 --> 0:07:16.880
<v Speaker 1>or in person. And so, while that may not be

0:07:17.800 --> 0:07:21.440
<v Speaker 1>UM directly aligned with the Trump campaign, if the court

0:07:21.480 --> 0:07:25.000
<v Speaker 1>were to rule in favor of jones Day certainly would

0:07:25.080 --> 0:07:29.360
<v Speaker 1>be helpful to the Trump campaign's effort to disrupt the

0:07:30.080 --> 0:07:36.160
<v Speaker 1>election force recounts, UM and just generally so some uncertainty

0:07:36.320 --> 0:07:40.480
<v Speaker 1>into the entire election process. So jones Day is might

0:07:40.520 --> 0:07:44.360
<v Speaker 1>be feeling pressure tell us about it's a leadership structure.

0:07:44.840 --> 0:07:47.080
<v Speaker 1>Whether or not it pulls out of these suits, is

0:07:47.120 --> 0:07:50.560
<v Speaker 1>that dependent on the managing partner certainly seems that way.

0:07:50.640 --> 0:07:53.400
<v Speaker 1>The managing partner, Steve Brogan, who's been there for quite

0:07:53.400 --> 0:07:57.800
<v Speaker 1>a while, is a hard nose leader that some say

0:07:57.800 --> 0:08:00.400
<v Speaker 1>are very much in the mold of the Donald Trumps

0:08:00.400 --> 0:08:04.200
<v Speaker 1>and that the buck stops with him. He's making UM

0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:07.520
<v Speaker 1>a lot of these decisions, and certainly in such a

0:08:07.960 --> 0:08:11.480
<v Speaker 1>high profile case like this one, a decision to remain

0:08:11.560 --> 0:08:14.480
<v Speaker 1>on the case sort of withdrawal certainly wouldn't wouldn't happen

0:08:14.600 --> 0:08:19.760
<v Speaker 1>without Brogan's UM uh input for sure. And you know,

0:08:19.920 --> 0:08:22.320
<v Speaker 1>by by all accounts, he's just not the title guy

0:08:22.360 --> 0:08:26.200
<v Speaker 1>who's going to UM decide not to do something simply

0:08:26.280 --> 0:08:29.960
<v Speaker 1>because of the public pressure. What's interesting is that Brogan,

0:08:30.000 --> 0:08:34.600
<v Speaker 1>of course comes from UM sort of a Republican leaning background.

0:08:34.720 --> 0:08:38.959
<v Speaker 1>He's a Notre Dame law school guy UM and some

0:08:39.120 --> 0:08:42.400
<v Speaker 1>of the most high profile Jones State attorneys in DC

0:08:42.559 --> 0:08:46.280
<v Speaker 1>are also Republican background, including some of the folks who

0:08:46.320 --> 0:08:48.960
<v Speaker 1>works for the Trump administration. But when we went back

0:08:49.000 --> 0:08:52.760
<v Speaker 1>and look at the Federal Election Commission records, we found

0:08:52.800 --> 0:08:58.240
<v Speaker 1>that eighty percent of donations UM for political candidates in

0:08:58.320 --> 0:09:02.400
<v Speaker 1>the last cycle from Jones State turneath individually of those

0:09:02.440 --> 0:09:05.320
<v Speaker 1>went to Democratic candidates, And what we've heard from people

0:09:05.400 --> 0:09:08.599
<v Speaker 1>inside the building is that they've always thought of it

0:09:08.720 --> 0:09:12.200
<v Speaker 1>as an largely a political place. And while there may

0:09:12.360 --> 0:09:16.880
<v Speaker 1>be some um grumbling about Jones Day's work on behalf

0:09:16.920 --> 0:09:20.439
<v Speaker 1>of the Trump administration, it wasn't until recently with these

0:09:20.480 --> 0:09:24.040
<v Speaker 1>election cases where folks really thought this is different, this

0:09:24.200 --> 0:09:29.400
<v Speaker 1>is something where we're actively working to potentially undo a

0:09:29.559 --> 0:09:33.520
<v Speaker 1>free and fair elections. Jones Days of October nineteenth had

0:09:33.559 --> 0:09:36.280
<v Speaker 1>received two point nine million dollars in legal fees from

0:09:36.320 --> 0:09:40.240
<v Speaker 1>the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee. But that's

0:09:40.280 --> 0:09:42.679
<v Speaker 1>just a drop in the bucket to Jones Day, isn't it.

0:09:43.120 --> 0:09:46.120
<v Speaker 1>It sure is. Yeah, we're talking about a firm that

0:09:46.559 --> 0:09:49.640
<v Speaker 1>um clock more than a billion dollars in gross revenue

0:09:50.320 --> 0:09:54.959
<v Speaker 1>every year and so certainly not doing it for the money, UM,

0:09:55.320 --> 0:09:58.559
<v Speaker 1>although you could say that, um, they're developing a client

0:09:58.640 --> 0:10:02.680
<v Speaker 1>relationship and certainly making clear here that they're not going

0:10:02.840 --> 0:10:08.079
<v Speaker 1>to stand down when they're representing their clients. UM. But

0:10:08.240 --> 0:10:10.559
<v Speaker 1>you know, one of the arguments that the firm has

0:10:10.640 --> 0:10:13.880
<v Speaker 1>been making, including in response to some of the concerns

0:10:13.920 --> 0:10:16.360
<v Speaker 1>that were raised by his own attorneys about their involvement

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:20.760
<v Speaker 1>in this particular Pennsylvania case is that they're fighting for

0:10:20.840 --> 0:10:23.760
<v Speaker 1>the rule of law. And so their argument is that

0:10:24.320 --> 0:10:27.280
<v Speaker 1>we filed this case long before the election because we

0:10:27.360 --> 0:10:31.480
<v Speaker 1>thought that there was a problem with Pennsylvania's um election system.

0:10:31.559 --> 0:10:34.560
<v Speaker 1>We did not know at the time um, at least

0:10:34.559 --> 0:10:37.000
<v Speaker 1>according to Jones, say that this was going to become

0:10:37.080 --> 0:10:41.480
<v Speaker 1>this uh closely uh tightly contested election and that all

0:10:41.559 --> 0:10:44.360
<v Speaker 1>of these other lawsuits were going to follow. The firm

0:10:44.440 --> 0:10:47.559
<v Speaker 1>is simply telling their their attorneys that we're fighting for

0:10:47.640 --> 0:10:49.400
<v Speaker 1>the rule of law here. We want to make sure

0:10:49.480 --> 0:10:54.199
<v Speaker 1>that the Pennsylvania election system is constitutional um, whether that

0:10:54.840 --> 0:10:59.040
<v Speaker 1>favorite Democrats or Republicans. The other law firm you mentioned

0:10:59.160 --> 0:11:03.640
<v Speaker 1>port to right, they withdrew from the Pennsylvania case and

0:11:03.720 --> 0:11:06.640
<v Speaker 1>that they no longer represent the Trump campaign and didn't

0:11:06.679 --> 0:11:12.920
<v Speaker 1>say why. And the Trump communications director said leftist mobs

0:11:12.960 --> 0:11:16.560
<v Speaker 1>descended upon some of the lawyers representing the president's campaign

0:11:16.720 --> 0:11:21.120
<v Speaker 1>and they buckled. Any hints as to why report or

0:11:21.160 --> 0:11:24.319
<v Speaker 1>write Withdrew Well, we can say for sure that it

0:11:24.440 --> 0:11:26.760
<v Speaker 1>came after some of the same pressure, much of the

0:11:26.800 --> 0:11:30.360
<v Speaker 1>same pressure really that that Jones stay was facing both

0:11:30.559 --> 0:11:34.600
<v Speaker 1>externally and internally. Reportedly there were similar meanings to quarter right,

0:11:34.720 --> 0:11:38.400
<v Speaker 1>where associates at the firm we're raising very similar concerns

0:11:39.040 --> 0:11:42.880
<v Speaker 1>UM and reportedly at least one lawyer resigned as a

0:11:42.960 --> 0:11:45.760
<v Speaker 1>result of those concerns. But at the same time, I

0:11:45.800 --> 0:11:48.439
<v Speaker 1>think it's interesting to keep an eye on the dockets

0:11:48.520 --> 0:11:52.120
<v Speaker 1>and what happens in these cases because myself and some

0:11:52.200 --> 0:11:55.240
<v Speaker 1>of my reporters have been talking to legal ethics experts

0:11:55.280 --> 0:11:58.200
<v Speaker 1>who have said, you really want to watch and see

0:11:58.240 --> 0:12:00.840
<v Speaker 1>how long some of these lawyers stay on these cases

0:12:00.880 --> 0:12:06.160
<v Speaker 1>because of the potential ethics concerns and potential penalty, sanctions, etcetera.

0:12:06.760 --> 0:12:12.120
<v Speaker 1>For pushing baseless cases. Um, anybody can do any one

0:12:12.280 --> 0:12:15.840
<v Speaker 1>else for just about anything. But as the legal process

0:12:15.880 --> 0:12:17.719
<v Speaker 1>goes on, at some point you have to present some

0:12:17.840 --> 0:12:21.000
<v Speaker 1>evidence to back up what you're claiming. And if you

0:12:21.080 --> 0:12:23.680
<v Speaker 1>don't have that evidence and it becomes clear that these

0:12:24.600 --> 0:12:26.839
<v Speaker 1>cases are nothing more than trying to clog up the

0:12:26.920 --> 0:12:31.440
<v Speaker 1>system or slow down election counts, uh, those attorneys may

0:12:31.480 --> 0:12:34.439
<v Speaker 1>be facing some sort of sanctions or penalty. And so

0:12:35.240 --> 0:12:37.400
<v Speaker 1>the ethics folks that we spoke to said, if you

0:12:37.440 --> 0:12:39.800
<v Speaker 1>see them start dropping out, that may be very well

0:12:39.840 --> 0:12:45.160
<v Speaker 1>a recognition that there towing up against those ethical lines,

0:12:45.679 --> 0:12:48.880
<v Speaker 1>and their professional integrity is on the line. So do

0:12:48.960 --> 0:12:50.559
<v Speaker 1>you see that as a concern to some of the

0:12:50.720 --> 0:12:54.840
<v Speaker 1>lawyers within these firms that the integrity of the whole

0:12:54.920 --> 0:12:59.160
<v Speaker 1>firm gets tarnished because of these cases. I think so.

0:12:59.360 --> 0:13:02.600
<v Speaker 1>And you you've particularly see that from attorneys at these

0:13:02.720 --> 0:13:06.319
<v Speaker 1>huge firms. Remember we're talking about Jones Day is a

0:13:06.440 --> 0:13:08.840
<v Speaker 1>firm with more than a thousand attorney, So there are

0:13:09.440 --> 0:13:12.600
<v Speaker 1>just tons and tons of attorneys who are jones Day

0:13:12.600 --> 0:13:16.199
<v Speaker 1>attorneys who have absolutely no involvement in this case whatsoever.

0:13:16.880 --> 0:13:20.400
<v Speaker 1>And you can see that they're saying, you know, we're

0:13:20.440 --> 0:13:23.880
<v Speaker 1>being tarnished because of the jones Day name, despite having

0:13:23.960 --> 0:13:27.240
<v Speaker 1>no involvement in the case. What seems like a clear

0:13:27.400 --> 0:13:32.960
<v Speaker 1>example of the pressure is a lawyer for Trump's campaign

0:13:33.520 --> 0:13:37.920
<v Speaker 1>yesterday said they're dropping out of the Pennsylvania lawsuit challenging

0:13:38.160 --> 0:13:42.239
<v Speaker 1>the election results. And this is a day after complaining

0:13:42.280 --> 0:13:45.920
<v Speaker 1>about being harassed for her work, including by an attorney

0:13:46.000 --> 0:13:50.079
<v Speaker 1>from a firm representing the state of Pennsylvania. Absolutely so,

0:13:50.280 --> 0:13:54.280
<v Speaker 1>Linda Tarns, who is a solo practitioner there in Pennsylvania.

0:13:54.520 --> 0:13:58.880
<v Speaker 1>She actually became the lead attorney on that state after reporter,

0:13:59.000 --> 0:14:04.800
<v Speaker 1>Wright dropped out in the face of pretty significant public pressure. Uh.

0:14:04.920 --> 0:14:07.439
<v Speaker 1>And then shortly after that, she told the court that

0:14:07.600 --> 0:14:11.720
<v Speaker 1>she had received a threatening phone call from an attorney

0:14:11.720 --> 0:14:14.320
<v Speaker 1>at Kirklin and Ellis, which is one of the firms

0:14:14.360 --> 0:14:17.680
<v Speaker 1>on the opposite side of that litigation representing the state

0:14:17.720 --> 0:14:21.240
<v Speaker 1>of Pennsylvania. Um and and she told the court straight

0:14:21.320 --> 0:14:24.160
<v Speaker 1>up that she was bowing out because of some of

0:14:24.240 --> 0:14:29.360
<v Speaker 1>these attacks. Interestingly enough, the attorney who is now the

0:14:29.520 --> 0:14:33.960
<v Speaker 1>lead Trump campaign attorney in that case, some some eagle

0:14:34.040 --> 0:14:37.880
<v Speaker 1>eyed reporters noticed that on his firm's website, they're already

0:14:38.000 --> 0:14:43.160
<v Speaker 1>calling President elect Joe Biden the president elect. Um and

0:14:43.320 --> 0:14:47.000
<v Speaker 1>so there's some question there about how the campaign will

0:14:47.040 --> 0:14:51.400
<v Speaker 1>feel about that. Interesting. So, Chris, you study law firms.

0:14:51.920 --> 0:14:54.760
<v Speaker 1>Have we seen law firms before? Law firms are sort

0:14:54.800 --> 0:14:58.840
<v Speaker 1>of viewed in a different light than companies, at least

0:14:58.880 --> 0:15:02.440
<v Speaker 1>to my mind, because they don't necessarily they aren't necessarily

0:15:02.640 --> 0:15:06.560
<v Speaker 1>endorsing the views of the people that they represent. You know,

0:15:07.240 --> 0:15:10.600
<v Speaker 1>everyone's entitled to a lawyer. So is this attack on

0:15:10.840 --> 0:15:13.960
<v Speaker 1>lawyers for whom they represent a change or has it

0:15:14.040 --> 0:15:16.760
<v Speaker 1>been going on for a while. I think you're you're

0:15:16.920 --> 0:15:23.480
<v Speaker 1>hearing voices opposing and criticizing law firms work on behalf

0:15:23.520 --> 0:15:29.560
<v Speaker 1>of certain clients. Uh. Louder and growing certainly over time,

0:15:30.320 --> 0:15:34.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, going back decades. Particularly firms that work in

0:15:34.480 --> 0:15:38.040
<v Speaker 1>criminal defense are often get a hard time and get

0:15:38.160 --> 0:15:43.040
<v Speaker 1>a significant amount of public criticism for representing people or

0:15:43.160 --> 0:15:46.880
<v Speaker 1>companies that have been accused of these just really heinous things.

0:15:47.680 --> 0:15:50.520
<v Speaker 1>But but there has always been this idea that lawyers

0:15:50.600 --> 0:15:53.440
<v Speaker 1>represent clients and the and the fact that a lawyer

0:15:53.560 --> 0:15:56.960
<v Speaker 1>is representing a client doesn't necessarily mean that the lawyer

0:15:57.680 --> 0:16:01.600
<v Speaker 1>um supports the client, agrees with the client, thinks that

0:16:01.680 --> 0:16:06.280
<v Speaker 1>what they did was right or what they're arguing is correct, um.

0:16:06.480 --> 0:16:08.920
<v Speaker 1>But that everyone gets their day in court, and everyone's

0:16:09.040 --> 0:16:11.480
<v Speaker 1>entitled to a lawyer. What we'll be looking to see

0:16:11.560 --> 0:16:15.360
<v Speaker 1>is that if any of the sticks and what happened next. Uh.

0:16:15.640 --> 0:16:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Just because Porter Wright dropped out of these particular cases,

0:16:18.640 --> 0:16:20.600
<v Speaker 1>that doesn't mean that the firms are going to stop

0:16:20.680 --> 0:16:25.200
<v Speaker 1>representing either the Trump campaign or the RNC going forwards. Uh.

0:16:25.280 --> 0:16:27.880
<v Speaker 1>And just because Jones States getting some heat here over

0:16:27.960 --> 0:16:30.920
<v Speaker 1>this one case, I don't expect that to stop the

0:16:31.000 --> 0:16:34.240
<v Speaker 1>firm from continuing to work in this space. Thanks for

0:16:34.320 --> 0:16:38.040
<v Speaker 1>being the Bloomberg Law Show Chris. That's Chris Offer, Bloomberg

0:16:38.120 --> 0:16:42.360
<v Speaker 1>Law Team leader for the Business of Law. President Trump

0:16:42.440 --> 0:16:46.200
<v Speaker 1>has resumed with one of his most successful priorities as president,

0:16:46.600 --> 0:16:49.720
<v Speaker 1>the appointment of federal judges, to make the judiciary more

0:16:49.800 --> 0:16:53.280
<v Speaker 1>conservative and set a majority. Leader Mitch McConnell is poised

0:16:53.320 --> 0:16:57.120
<v Speaker 1>to continue pushing the confirmations to the lifetime appointments through

0:16:57.520 --> 0:17:00.920
<v Speaker 1>until Trump's term is over. The Fair confirmed more than

0:17:01.000 --> 0:17:05.600
<v Speaker 1>two lifetime judicial appointees to the federal courts, including three

0:17:05.680 --> 0:17:09.359
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court justices. Joining me is Professor Carl Tobias of

0:17:09.440 --> 0:17:12.800
<v Speaker 1>the University of Richmond School of Law. Carl, So far,

0:17:12.880 --> 0:17:17.680
<v Speaker 1>have any judges been confirmed during the lame duck session, Yes,

0:17:17.840 --> 0:17:22.639
<v Speaker 1>they have. Two were confirmed last week for the district bench,

0:17:23.240 --> 0:17:27.480
<v Speaker 1>and this week five are scheduled. One was just confirmed

0:17:27.520 --> 0:17:31.359
<v Speaker 1>this morning and the other four will be confirmed this week,

0:17:31.880 --> 0:17:35.280
<v Speaker 1>a second one today and then the others by Thursday,

0:17:36.000 --> 0:17:38.920
<v Speaker 1>and so the seven will have been confirmed in the

0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:42.120
<v Speaker 1>lame ducks so far for the district courts. Are these

0:17:42.600 --> 0:17:46.280
<v Speaker 1>openings that have been in place for a while? Did

0:17:46.359 --> 0:17:49.720
<v Speaker 1>they just come up? Most of them have existed for

0:17:49.920 --> 0:17:52.920
<v Speaker 1>some time, and of course, as someone's confirmed this week,

0:17:53.000 --> 0:17:56.840
<v Speaker 1>it means they've been through the process. They've been nominated

0:17:57.280 --> 0:18:01.399
<v Speaker 1>and had committee hearings, approval votes in the committee, and

0:18:01.520 --> 0:18:05.840
<v Speaker 1>then up for debate, and then a vote on the floor.

0:18:06.400 --> 0:18:10.480
<v Speaker 1>So they are not new, virtually all of them. So

0:18:11.040 --> 0:18:16.320
<v Speaker 1>there are a few that are. And so for example,

0:18:16.480 --> 0:18:20.879
<v Speaker 1>there is a UH circuit they can see that was

0:18:21.080 --> 0:18:25.399
<v Speaker 1>just created when one Torriella died who served on the

0:18:25.480 --> 0:18:29.280
<v Speaker 1>first circuit, and someone was just recently nominated for that

0:18:29.480 --> 0:18:33.640
<v Speaker 1>position after the election. Let's concentrate on the district court

0:18:33.760 --> 0:18:37.200
<v Speaker 1>nominations for a moment. Are these going through on party

0:18:37.280 --> 0:18:40.840
<v Speaker 1>line votes as we've seen with most of the circuit

0:18:40.880 --> 0:18:45.640
<v Speaker 1>court nominations, or are these different? Well, some are. For example,

0:18:45.760 --> 0:18:48.560
<v Speaker 1>the one this morning nominee for the Southern District of

0:18:48.640 --> 0:18:54.800
<v Speaker 1>Mississippi was relatively close to forty three UH. And so

0:18:56.200 --> 0:19:00.680
<v Speaker 1>we may see that with some of these nominees, especially

0:19:00.760 --> 0:19:04.480
<v Speaker 1>if there's some controversy. And there's also the feeling I

0:19:04.560 --> 0:19:09.280
<v Speaker 1>think among some Democrats that Mitch McConnell is jamming through

0:19:09.440 --> 0:19:15.000
<v Speaker 1>people at the last minute after the voters have spoken

0:19:15.560 --> 0:19:20.120
<v Speaker 1>UH in terms of who they want to be nominating judges.

0:19:20.720 --> 0:19:26.320
<v Speaker 1>Has this happened before. Yes, Um, you know, in recent administrations,

0:19:26.400 --> 0:19:32.760
<v Speaker 1>at the end of Obama's time the Senate, when McConnell

0:19:33.040 --> 0:19:37.840
<v Speaker 1>was in the majority, Republican Senate confirmed no one after July.

0:19:40.000 --> 0:19:44.120
<v Speaker 1>So that gives you a sense of discrepancy between then

0:19:44.359 --> 0:19:47.720
<v Speaker 1>and now. On the other hand, at the end of

0:19:47.800 --> 0:19:52.280
<v Speaker 1>Bush in two seven two eight, uh, Democrats were in

0:19:52.320 --> 0:19:55.680
<v Speaker 1>the majority and they confirmed fifty eight district judges and

0:19:55.880 --> 0:20:02.080
<v Speaker 1>ten circuit judges, as opposed to Republican majority in two thousand,

0:20:02.359 --> 0:20:10.400
<v Speaker 1>fifteen sixteen confirmed only two circuit judges and eighteen district judges.

0:20:11.080 --> 0:20:15.440
<v Speaker 1>And so there have been disparities depending on who's in

0:20:15.480 --> 0:20:18.760
<v Speaker 1>the White House and who is in the control of

0:20:18.840 --> 0:20:23.640
<v Speaker 1>the Senate. Just explain once again the difference between these

0:20:23.840 --> 0:20:26.600
<v Speaker 1>district court judges, who are sort of like the trial

0:20:26.760 --> 0:20:30.399
<v Speaker 1>judges in the federal system, and what we normally concentrate on,

0:20:30.520 --> 0:20:35.439
<v Speaker 1>which is the circuit court judges. Well, Um, this administration,

0:20:35.600 --> 0:20:38.840
<v Speaker 1>the Trump administration, has focused like a laser on the

0:20:38.920 --> 0:20:41.600
<v Speaker 1>appeals courts, and so there are only three vacancies now

0:20:42.320 --> 0:20:46.359
<v Speaker 1>and there were no vacancies for a short period, which

0:20:46.440 --> 0:20:50.040
<v Speaker 1>is the fewest since Ronald Reagan was president. Um, but

0:20:50.359 --> 0:20:55.040
<v Speaker 1>has neglected to some extent the district vacancies and emergency vacancies.

0:20:55.880 --> 0:21:00.520
<v Speaker 1>But the difference is at the appellate level, the rulings

0:21:00.760 --> 0:21:04.560
<v Speaker 1>cover all of the states in a particular circuit, as

0:21:04.600 --> 0:21:09.560
<v Speaker 1>opposed to a district judge who really only can't even

0:21:09.640 --> 0:21:14.520
<v Speaker 1>buying people in the judge's own courthouse. And so essentially

0:21:14.640 --> 0:21:22.480
<v Speaker 1>the appellate judges make more policy and of cases. The

0:21:22.600 --> 0:21:27.200
<v Speaker 1>court of last resort is the appellate court that decides

0:21:27.560 --> 0:21:30.600
<v Speaker 1>because of Supreme Court here so few cases and so

0:21:30.760 --> 0:21:34.200
<v Speaker 1>that's why the administration has tried to keep all of

0:21:34.280 --> 0:21:38.320
<v Speaker 1>those seats filled and may fill all three vacancies. Now

0:21:39.520 --> 0:21:44.560
<v Speaker 1>I think tomorrow will have just this Amy Cony Barrett's replacement,

0:21:45.640 --> 0:21:50.639
<v Speaker 1>who's been nominated before Judiciary for hearing, and then the

0:21:50.800 --> 0:21:53.800
<v Speaker 1>idea is to confirm him to her seventh Circuit vacancy.

0:21:54.200 --> 0:21:57.280
<v Speaker 1>So what do we know about Thomas Kirsch who has

0:21:57.320 --> 0:22:02.560
<v Speaker 1>been nominated Phil Coney Barrett's seat. He is presently the

0:22:03.000 --> 0:22:06.600
<v Speaker 1>U S Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana and

0:22:07.040 --> 0:22:11.359
<v Speaker 1>has experience in private practice with Winston Strawn, I believe

0:22:11.400 --> 0:22:14.960
<v Speaker 1>in Chicago from and hasn't served in and out of

0:22:15.080 --> 0:22:18.119
<v Speaker 1>the Justice Department. You have attorney's office in Northern District

0:22:18.160 --> 0:22:22.359
<v Speaker 1>of Indiana in his career, and I think is well regarded.

0:22:22.520 --> 0:22:25.320
<v Speaker 1>But he looks like a number of other nominees of

0:22:25.480 --> 0:22:29.080
<v Speaker 1>President Trump, I think, but we'll see, has some strong

0:22:29.160 --> 0:22:32.280
<v Speaker 1>support from the home state senators in Indiana. So tell

0:22:32.359 --> 0:22:36.080
<v Speaker 1>us about Judge roll Arius Mark Squatt, who was nominated

0:22:36.119 --> 0:22:39.160
<v Speaker 1>to fill the vacancy on the First Circuit Court of Appeals.

0:22:39.960 --> 0:22:43.480
<v Speaker 1>And he is a district judge whom Trump appointed to

0:22:43.640 --> 0:22:47.119
<v Speaker 1>the District of Puerto Rico and has served for eighteen

0:22:47.240 --> 0:22:51.399
<v Speaker 1>months in that capacity, and so he's a nominee for

0:22:51.480 --> 0:22:54.760
<v Speaker 1>the First Circuit, and I think they will try to

0:22:54.880 --> 0:22:58.200
<v Speaker 1>move his nomination as well. There's a third vacancy on

0:22:58.280 --> 0:23:03.200
<v Speaker 1>the seventh Circuit. Judge Blom assumed senior status on November

0:23:03.920 --> 0:23:07.399
<v Speaker 1>and the Republicans may try to feel that they can

0:23:07.440 --> 0:23:12.359
<v Speaker 1>see as well. And so I think it was a

0:23:12.480 --> 0:23:15.440
<v Speaker 1>smart or choice on the part of the administration to

0:23:15.560 --> 0:23:19.200
<v Speaker 1>try to elevate someone who was already on the district

0:23:19.280 --> 0:23:23.119
<v Speaker 1>bench and someone from Puerto Rico, because there's a bit

0:23:23.160 --> 0:23:28.000
<v Speaker 1>of a tradition there um to have someone from Puerto

0:23:28.080 --> 0:23:34.040
<v Speaker 1>Rico on the first Circuit um. And so the administration

0:23:34.560 --> 0:23:38.800
<v Speaker 1>as someone Uh, they've already sent through the process, and

0:23:40.200 --> 0:23:43.640
<v Speaker 1>the Puerto Rico District judge was confirmed on a nineties

0:23:44.160 --> 0:23:48.520
<v Speaker 1>three vote. Um, and I had a very smooth nomination

0:23:48.640 --> 0:23:52.240
<v Speaker 1>confirmation process. Uh. And so I think the hope is

0:23:52.359 --> 0:23:57.119
<v Speaker 1>that he would be as smoothly confirmed h in this situation.

0:23:57.320 --> 0:24:00.440
<v Speaker 1>So again, it's after the election when he was mainated

0:24:00.760 --> 0:24:04.200
<v Speaker 1>and would be confirmed if that happens. Is there enough

0:24:04.320 --> 0:24:11.520
<v Speaker 1>time to get all the confirmations for the seventh Circuit done? Well?

0:24:12.160 --> 0:24:14.600
<v Speaker 1>Maybe I think the one that's already been made and

0:24:14.680 --> 0:24:18.200
<v Speaker 1>has the hearing tomorrow the courage. I think that could

0:24:18.280 --> 0:24:21.880
<v Speaker 1>be done because then he would just need a committee vote,

0:24:21.960 --> 0:24:24.480
<v Speaker 1>which could happen in December, and then a final vote,

0:24:24.840 --> 0:24:28.280
<v Speaker 1>which could happen in December. The others are more difficult.

0:24:28.359 --> 0:24:31.920
<v Speaker 1>It depends on when the first circuit nominee has a hearing,

0:24:32.480 --> 0:24:36.760
<v Speaker 1>and then there's no nominee yet for Judge Blaumbsy. So

0:24:36.960 --> 0:24:39.920
<v Speaker 1>that could be tight because they only have a small

0:24:40.040 --> 0:24:43.160
<v Speaker 1>number of working days after Thanksgiving when they come back,

0:24:44.000 --> 0:24:47.879
<v Speaker 1>and then the Senate turns over I believe on the

0:24:48.119 --> 0:24:53.159
<v Speaker 1>fifth or so of January. And so um, it's just

0:24:53.280 --> 0:24:56.480
<v Speaker 1>not clear that there are enough, you know, legislative days

0:24:57.160 --> 0:25:02.399
<v Speaker 1>two approve all three of the of circuited judges, and

0:25:02.560 --> 0:25:07.320
<v Speaker 1>then the questions also about district judges. There are five

0:25:07.720 --> 0:25:12.840
<v Speaker 1>others who um are on the floor and so they've

0:25:13.000 --> 0:25:18.119
<v Speaker 1>had hearings and committee votes, and those five could easily

0:25:18.160 --> 0:25:23.440
<v Speaker 1>be confirmed in December. But there are twenty more who

0:25:24.119 --> 0:25:26.879
<v Speaker 1>have been nominated by the President but not even had

0:25:26.920 --> 0:25:29.480
<v Speaker 1>a hearing yet. And I think there's a big question

0:25:29.600 --> 0:25:32.640
<v Speaker 1>mark as to those we'll know. We don't know yet

0:25:32.720 --> 0:25:35.440
<v Speaker 1>who's gonna be on the hearing tomorrow. Besides Kurse, it

0:25:35.520 --> 0:25:39.399
<v Speaker 1>could be some district nominees, but that's not clear, and

0:25:39.720 --> 0:25:42.200
<v Speaker 1>so it's not at all clear that any of those

0:25:42.280 --> 0:25:45.160
<v Speaker 1>twenty would be able to get through the process if

0:25:46.000 --> 0:25:49.520
<v Speaker 1>the earrings are not held till December. That's a very

0:25:49.640 --> 0:25:53.080
<v Speaker 1>tight time frame given what has to happen in that period.

0:25:53.680 --> 0:25:57.680
<v Speaker 1>So look back and on the four years of judicial

0:25:57.800 --> 0:26:00.840
<v Speaker 1>nominations and tell us what is it in Trump and

0:26:01.000 --> 0:26:06.440
<v Speaker 1>Mitch McConnell have accomplished well. They've named three extremely conservatives

0:26:07.320 --> 0:26:12.440
<v Speaker 1>and confirmed three extremely conservatives Supreme Court justices fifty three

0:26:12.880 --> 0:26:17.600
<v Speaker 1>so far and counting similar Appellate Court judges and one

0:26:18.040 --> 0:26:22.639
<v Speaker 1>and sixty nine district judges after this week, which is

0:26:23.320 --> 0:26:28.159
<v Speaker 1>relatively strong record, especially at the appellate level. So, for example,

0:26:28.320 --> 0:26:33.040
<v Speaker 1>President Obama in two terms was able to confirm fifty

0:26:33.240 --> 0:26:38.840
<v Speaker 1>five appellate judges, so if only two more are confirmed

0:26:38.920 --> 0:26:42.560
<v Speaker 1>in President Trump would have matched that. And if he

0:26:42.720 --> 0:26:46.760
<v Speaker 1>has all three confirmed, that would mean he named more

0:26:46.920 --> 0:26:51.080
<v Speaker 1>in one term than Obama did in two. Since Mitch

0:26:51.200 --> 0:26:55.720
<v Speaker 1>McConnell has filled and looks likely to fill every single opening,

0:26:56.080 --> 0:27:00.760
<v Speaker 1>what are the prospects for Joe Biden to appoint judges? Well,

0:27:01.119 --> 0:27:04.480
<v Speaker 1>there are some because, as I said, there are twenty

0:27:04.600 --> 0:27:07.960
<v Speaker 1>two vacancies at the district level where there are no

0:27:08.200 --> 0:27:13.520
<v Speaker 1>nominees yet, so he's likely to inherit those. And then

0:27:13.600 --> 0:27:18.919
<v Speaker 1>there's twenty more who have been nominated for vacancies they

0:27:18.960 --> 0:27:21.280
<v Speaker 1>haven't had a hering yet, so that would come to

0:27:21.440 --> 0:27:26.360
<v Speaker 1>forty two even if everybody else were confirmed by McConnell um.

0:27:26.560 --> 0:27:30.639
<v Speaker 1>And then there'll be uh more people who assume senior

0:27:30.800 --> 0:27:36.240
<v Speaker 1>status uh and retire in the next year. So he

0:27:36.400 --> 0:27:40.240
<v Speaker 1>may have a fair number of vacancies that he can feel,

0:27:40.359 --> 0:27:43.040
<v Speaker 1>but mostly at the district level, not very many at

0:27:43.040 --> 0:27:48.520
<v Speaker 1>the appellate level, unless judges presently sitting Assudan senior status,

0:27:48.840 --> 0:27:50.760
<v Speaker 1>and there are a number of appellate judges who are

0:27:50.800 --> 0:27:53.639
<v Speaker 1>eligible under the rule of our sixty five and have

0:27:53.800 --> 0:27:57.160
<v Speaker 1>fifteen years of service. Uh, and so some of them

0:27:57.720 --> 0:28:04.480
<v Speaker 1>may well assume senior status. So then Biden would to

0:28:04.560 --> 0:28:08.800
<v Speaker 1>put it, in colloquial terms, take back the nominations of

0:28:08.960 --> 0:28:13.280
<v Speaker 1>those who haven't been confirmed yet. They would expire when

0:28:13.320 --> 0:28:17.879
<v Speaker 1>the new Senate and President Trump of course could renominate

0:28:18.000 --> 0:28:22.359
<v Speaker 1>them in that period right between the new Senate coming

0:28:22.400 --> 0:28:28.560
<v Speaker 1>in and inauguration day. But I don't think that much

0:28:28.760 --> 0:28:30.639
<v Speaker 1>is going to happen in that period. The Senate is

0:28:30.640 --> 0:28:34.960
<v Speaker 1>getting organized, inaugurations being planned, the Senate may not even

0:28:35.000 --> 0:28:38.440
<v Speaker 1>be in session much of that early part of January,

0:28:39.360 --> 0:28:44.120
<v Speaker 1>so that's probably not realistic. Uh, that much would happened

0:28:44.400 --> 0:28:48.080
<v Speaker 1>by way of confirmations in that period of time. President

0:28:48.160 --> 0:28:52.320
<v Speaker 1>Trump has been able to nominate and get confirmed some

0:28:53.280 --> 0:28:59.400
<v Speaker 1>very conservative judges. As we've discussed, what will happen when

0:29:00.040 --> 0:29:04.719
<v Speaker 1>a President Biden nominates a very liberal judge. Are they

0:29:04.880 --> 0:29:09.840
<v Speaker 1>likely to get through if the Senate remains in Republican hands. Well,

0:29:10.240 --> 0:29:12.640
<v Speaker 1>A lot depends on what happens in the two Georgia

0:29:12.760 --> 0:29:17.520
<v Speaker 1>races that will be decided on January six. Uh. If

0:29:17.640 --> 0:29:20.800
<v Speaker 1>Democrats were able to win both of those, then they

0:29:20.880 --> 0:29:25.720
<v Speaker 1>would have a Senate majority because the tiebreaking vote would

0:29:25.760 --> 0:29:29.840
<v Speaker 1>be the vice president. Uh. There is that possibility. Um.

0:29:30.320 --> 0:29:33.000
<v Speaker 1>If not, then McConnell, I think, would be the leader

0:29:33.320 --> 0:29:37.640
<v Speaker 1>and there would be a very thin majority in the Senate.

0:29:38.600 --> 0:29:41.600
<v Speaker 1>And I think it will be a matter of negotiation

0:29:41.840 --> 0:29:47.800
<v Speaker 1>between the White House and McConnell and Biden may to

0:29:48.000 --> 0:29:52.400
<v Speaker 1>some extent have to moderate the type of people he chooses.

0:29:53.240 --> 0:29:55.720
<v Speaker 1>I think he has a good relationship with Mitch McConnell

0:29:56.160 --> 0:29:59.080
<v Speaker 1>and with many other senators with whom he served, and

0:29:59.400 --> 0:30:03.719
<v Speaker 1>so he knows the process very well. Chaired the Judiciary

0:30:04.040 --> 0:30:07.280
<v Speaker 1>Committee and was honored for three decades or more, and

0:30:07.480 --> 0:30:10.680
<v Speaker 1>has very good people around him to help with judicial selection.

0:30:11.080 --> 0:30:14.560
<v Speaker 1>Cautiously optimistic that that will go smoothly. That's Carl Tobias

0:30:14.560 --> 0:30:17.240
<v Speaker 1>at the University of Richmond Law School. And that's it

0:30:17.360 --> 0:30:19.960
<v Speaker 1>for the edition of the Bloomberg Laws Show. I'm June Grasso.

0:30:20.120 --> 0:30:22.120
<v Speaker 1>Thanks so much for listening, and remember to tune to

0:30:22.120 --> 0:30:24.840
<v Speaker 1>The Bloomberg Glass Show every weeknight at ten pm Eastern

0:30:25.200 --> 0:30:26.480
<v Speaker 1>right here on Bloomberg Radio,