1
00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:08,760 --> 00:00:13,280
Speaker 2: As President Donald Trump's agenda faces growing pushback from the

3
00:00:13,320 --> 00:00:19,160
Speaker 2: federal courts, top administration officials are openly questioning the judiciary's

4
00:00:19,200 --> 00:00:22,560
Speaker 2: authority to serve as a check on the president. After

5
00:00:22,600 --> 00:00:27,319
Speaker 2: a Manhattan federal judge blocked Elon Musk's efficiency team from

6
00:00:27,480 --> 00:00:32,839
Speaker 2: accessing Treasury Department information, must call for impeaching the judge

7
00:00:33,200 --> 00:00:37,519
Speaker 2: and Vice President JD. Vance, a graduate of Yale Law School,

8
00:00:37,840 --> 00:00:41,640
Speaker 2: wrote on x that judges aren't allowed to control the

9
00:00:41,720 --> 00:00:46,120
Speaker 2: executive's legitimate power. Trump didn't back away from that.

10
00:00:46,640 --> 00:00:47,880
Speaker 3: Well, we're going to see what happens.

11
00:00:47,880 --> 00:00:51,120
Speaker 4: We have a long way to go, and we're talking

12
00:00:51,159 --> 00:00:55,880
Speaker 4: about fraud, waste, abuse, and when a president can't look

13
00:00:55,920 --> 00:00:57,800
Speaker 4: for fraud and waste and abuse, we don't have a

14
00:00:57,840 --> 00:01:01,600
Speaker 4: country anymore. So we're very disappointed, but with the judges

15
00:01:01,640 --> 00:01:03,880
Speaker 4: that would make such a ruling, But we have a

16
00:01:03,920 --> 00:01:05,600
Speaker 4: long way to go. We have to look, we have

17
00:01:05,680 --> 00:01:07,960
Speaker 4: to find all of the fraud that's going on. We

18
00:01:08,040 --> 00:01:14,280
Speaker 4: have tremendous fraud, tremendous waste, and tremendous abuse and theft.

19
00:01:14,400 --> 00:01:17,040
Speaker 4: By the way, and today you're not allowed to look

20
00:01:17,040 --> 00:01:20,440
Speaker 4: for theft and fraud, etc. Then we don't have much

21
00:01:20,480 --> 00:01:24,440
Speaker 4: of a country. So no judge should be No judge

22
00:01:24,440 --> 00:01:26,520
Speaker 4: should frankly be allowed to make that kind of a

23
00:01:26,560 --> 00:01:27,959
Speaker 4: decision as a disgrace.

24
00:01:28,520 --> 00:01:32,080
Speaker 2: Joining me is constitutional law. Professor David Souper of Georgetown

25
00:01:32,160 --> 00:01:36,399
Speaker 2: Law JD. Vance said judges aren't allowed to control the

26
00:01:36,480 --> 00:01:41,440
Speaker 2: executive's legitimate power fair enough, but he's often argued that

27
00:01:41,520 --> 00:01:46,480
Speaker 2: presidents can and should ignore court orders they say infringe

28
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:51,320
Speaker 2: on their rightful executive powers, quoting Andrew Jackson, who said

29
00:01:51,640 --> 00:01:54,760
Speaker 2: the Chief Justice has made his ruling, now let him

30
00:01:54,840 --> 00:01:58,040
Speaker 2: enforce it. I mean when the vice president and a

31
00:01:58,400 --> 00:02:02,120
Speaker 2: Yell educated lawyer says that, is it concerning.

32
00:02:03,160 --> 00:02:08,280
Speaker 3: It certainly is worrying. And presidents and other high officials

33
00:02:08,480 --> 00:02:12,359
Speaker 3: who have been engaged in illegal conduct have been saying

34
00:02:12,400 --> 00:02:16,520
Speaker 3: that for over two hundred years. But it's no less

35
00:02:16,520 --> 00:02:21,680
Speaker 3: disturbing when it happened. Of course, courts can't issue illegitimate orders,

36
00:02:21,720 --> 00:02:25,040
Speaker 3: but the solution when they do that is to appeal them.

37
00:02:25,160 --> 00:02:28,839
Speaker 2: Trump has been stopped at least temporarily by about eight

38
00:02:28,919 --> 00:02:32,639
Speaker 2: judges nine judges, and the theory is, well, he's testing

39
00:02:32,680 --> 00:02:34,959
Speaker 2: the limits, so that this will go to the Supreme

40
00:02:35,040 --> 00:02:38,519
Speaker 2: Court and expand his presidential authority. I mean, do you

41
00:02:38,560 --> 00:02:41,079
Speaker 2: think it goes that far or it's just he's doing

42
00:02:41,120 --> 00:02:41,760
Speaker 2: what he wants?

43
00:02:42,240 --> 00:02:44,440
Speaker 3: Oh, I think it does go that far. There's a

44
00:02:44,480 --> 00:02:48,560
Speaker 3: few of these issues that are arguably separate, such as

45
00:02:48,560 --> 00:02:52,480
Speaker 3: the birthright citizenship, where he's violating not a statute but

46
00:02:52,560 --> 00:02:57,480
Speaker 3: the Constitution itself. But for the most part, he's going

47
00:02:57,560 --> 00:03:01,919
Speaker 3: out of his way to violate statue that say how

48
00:03:01,960 --> 00:03:06,360
Speaker 3: the federal government should operate, and in doing that, he's

49
00:03:06,400 --> 00:03:08,880
Speaker 3: setting out the test case about whether any of these

50
00:03:08,919 --> 00:03:11,320
Speaker 3: statutes find him at all. Some of the things he's

51
00:03:11,360 --> 00:03:13,280
Speaker 3: trying to do, they are legal ways to do it,

52
00:03:13,320 --> 00:03:16,200
Speaker 3: and he hasn't tried to do it legally. He's deliberately

53
00:03:16,280 --> 00:03:18,240
Speaker 3: violated the statue to set up a fight.

54
00:03:18,560 --> 00:03:20,600
Speaker 2: What are some of the things he's done or one

55
00:03:20,639 --> 00:03:22,680
Speaker 2: of the things he's done that he could have done legally.

56
00:03:23,160 --> 00:03:27,800
Speaker 3: He could have done a buyout under existing BIOT authority

57
00:03:28,280 --> 00:03:33,080
Speaker 3: that requires an agency specific examination of how many people

58
00:03:33,280 --> 00:03:37,200
Speaker 3: they want to leave and in what positions, but he

59
00:03:37,240 --> 00:03:40,400
Speaker 3: didn't bother to use that authority. He did something completely

60
00:03:40,400 --> 00:03:44,520
Speaker 3: illegal with this mass email that's likely to cause us

61
00:03:44,560 --> 00:03:47,560
Speaker 3: to lose. Precisely, the federal workers we can't afford to lose.

62
00:03:48,000 --> 00:03:52,720
Speaker 2: So, turning to Attorney General Pam Bondi, she issued fourteen

63
00:03:53,120 --> 00:03:57,320
Speaker 2: first day directives. So a new memo warns the Justice

64
00:03:57,320 --> 00:04:01,360
Speaker 2: Department attorneys against refusing to advance it's legal arguments they

65
00:04:01,400 --> 00:04:02,160
Speaker 2: disagree with.

66
00:04:02,480 --> 00:04:03,200
Speaker 5: Is this the way the.

67
00:04:03,160 --> 00:04:06,280
Speaker 2: Justice Department normally works, you know, you get an assignment

68
00:04:06,360 --> 00:04:10,320
Speaker 2: and you argue the side that the Justice Department takes,

69
00:04:10,600 --> 00:04:12,600
Speaker 2: or is this something different?

70
00:04:13,400 --> 00:04:18,039
Speaker 3: Well, lawyers are always required to act in the best

71
00:04:18,080 --> 00:04:21,120
Speaker 3: interests that they're client, to the extent permitted by law

72
00:04:21,160 --> 00:04:25,000
Speaker 3: and legal ethics, so it's not surprising that a lawyer

73
00:04:25,680 --> 00:04:28,359
Speaker 3: might make an argument that if they were a judge

74
00:04:28,440 --> 00:04:33,560
Speaker 3: they would rule against. That's ordinary. But the implication here

75
00:04:34,160 --> 00:04:37,800
Speaker 3: is that lawyers might be required to make arguments that

76
00:04:37,880 --> 00:04:41,960
Speaker 3: they regard as frivolous, and that is generally not allowed.

77
00:04:42,200 --> 00:04:46,039
Speaker 3: In legal ethics. We expect lawyers to make good faith

78
00:04:46,160 --> 00:04:49,840
Speaker 3: arguments to courts, not silly ones, and this could be

79
00:04:49,920 --> 00:04:51,520
Speaker 3: read as requiring the latter.

80
00:04:51,920 --> 00:04:55,800
Speaker 2: The Justice Department is supposed to be independent from the

81
00:04:55,839 --> 00:04:56,520
Speaker 2: White House.

82
00:04:56,839 --> 00:04:58,080
Speaker 5: Is that always the case?

83
00:04:58,160 --> 00:05:00,880
Speaker 2: Though? Are there times when the Justice Department and the

84
00:05:00,880 --> 00:05:03,080
Speaker 2: White House work closely together.

85
00:05:03,600 --> 00:05:03,800
Speaker 6: Well.

86
00:05:03,880 --> 00:05:07,200
Speaker 3: The Justice Department is part of the executive branch, and

87
00:05:07,600 --> 00:05:11,720
Speaker 3: it is supposed to serve the nation's interests under the

88
00:05:11,760 --> 00:05:15,679
Speaker 3: general guidance of the President. But it's always been understood

89
00:05:16,120 --> 00:05:19,960
Speaker 3: that because they're dealing with law, and because the role

90
00:05:20,200 --> 00:05:24,559
Speaker 3: of lawyers, particularly government lawyers, is very sensitive, the Justice

91
00:05:24,600 --> 00:05:28,280
Speaker 3: Department has to be free to honor the law and

92
00:05:28,520 --> 00:05:33,239
Speaker 3: to honor its obligations to only make legitimate arguments in court.

93
00:05:34,360 --> 00:05:36,880
Speaker 2: And I think it's already been happening in some of

94
00:05:36,920 --> 00:05:41,720
Speaker 2: these cases where judges see the Justice Department's arguments as

95
00:05:42,640 --> 00:05:46,040
Speaker 2: just frivolous. For example, in the cases over you mentioned

96
00:05:46,160 --> 00:05:49,880
Speaker 2: birthright citizenship, where it seems to be pretty clear cut

97
00:05:50,400 --> 00:05:53,520
Speaker 2: that Trump can't do that. So does the Justice Department

98
00:05:53,720 --> 00:05:56,920
Speaker 2: risk losing credibility with the judiciary?

99
00:05:58,080 --> 00:06:00,640
Speaker 3: Yes, and I think that's already starting to have. Some

100
00:06:00,720 --> 00:06:02,920
Speaker 3: of the arguments that have been put forward, not just

101
00:06:02,960 --> 00:06:07,440
Speaker 3: in the birthright citizenship case, but in the funding freeze

102
00:06:07,480 --> 00:06:12,040
Speaker 3: cases have been very strange, and the judges have commented

103
00:06:12,080 --> 00:06:14,880
Speaker 3: on them. A judge in one of the funding freeze

104
00:06:14,960 --> 00:06:20,359
Speaker 3: cases said that the government lawyers were claiming that the

105
00:06:20,680 --> 00:06:25,880
Speaker 3: executive agencies must follow the president's priorities. There's no executive

106
00:06:25,880 --> 00:06:29,200
Speaker 3: agencies must follow the law because even the president is

107
00:06:29,279 --> 00:06:33,560
Speaker 3: consciously required to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

108
00:06:34,240 --> 00:06:36,760
Speaker 2: In one of the memos on the first day, Bondi

109
00:06:36,880 --> 00:06:41,480
Speaker 2: created a Weaponization Working Group, which strikes me as an

110
00:06:41,480 --> 00:06:45,920
Speaker 2: ironic name to say the least she's targeting for investigation.

111
00:06:46,120 --> 00:06:50,679
Speaker 2: There special counsel Jack Smith, New York ag Letitia James,

112
00:06:50,680 --> 00:06:55,279
Speaker 2: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Justice Department personnel who worked

113
00:06:55,320 --> 00:07:01,000
Speaker 2: on January sixth, etc. Accusing them of improper investing, gative tactics,

114
00:07:01,120 --> 00:07:06,920
Speaker 2: and unethical behavior going after an elected DA in Manhattan?

115
00:07:07,000 --> 00:07:09,680
Speaker 2: Is that really the Justice Department's purview?

116
00:07:09,800 --> 00:07:16,280
Speaker 3: In principle, there can be violations taken by district attorneys.

117
00:07:16,680 --> 00:07:20,520
Speaker 3: Some of the actions in the Civil Rights era were

118
00:07:20,640 --> 00:07:27,200
Speaker 3: against people using government powers to perpetuate illegal racist subjugations.

119
00:07:27,360 --> 00:07:31,160
Speaker 3: So the fact that someone is a state attorney general

120
00:07:31,440 --> 00:07:36,920
Speaker 3: or a district attorney doesn't make them waterproof. But in

121
00:07:36,960 --> 00:07:40,200
Speaker 3: this case, the strong implication is is that this is

122
00:07:40,280 --> 00:07:46,480
Speaker 3: payback or prosecuting or investigating per boss President Trump. And

123
00:07:46,800 --> 00:07:51,200
Speaker 3: if the Justice Department is seen as making decisions based

124
00:07:51,280 --> 00:07:56,160
Speaker 3: on the personal interests of officials. Mister Bragg normally prosecuted

125
00:07:56,200 --> 00:07:59,120
Speaker 3: mister Trump, but persuaded that a jury of his peers

126
00:07:59,240 --> 00:08:03,320
Speaker 3: to convict them counts. Then the Justice Department becomes the

127
00:08:03,360 --> 00:08:06,000
Speaker 3: political tool and will have very littlepact.

128
00:08:06,720 --> 00:08:10,240
Speaker 2: We've talked about this with reference to Supreme Court justices.

129
00:08:10,320 --> 00:08:13,480
Speaker 2: But at her confirmation hearing, she said there will never

130
00:08:13,560 --> 00:08:17,320
Speaker 2: be an enemies list within the Department of Justice. Here's

131
00:08:17,360 --> 00:08:22,240
Speaker 2: Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat, questioning her, and

132
00:08:22,280 --> 00:08:25,320
Speaker 2: I'm questioning you right about whether you will enforce an

133
00:08:25,400 --> 00:08:27,880
Speaker 2: enemy's list that he announced publicly on television.

134
00:08:28,000 --> 00:08:29,040
Speaker 5: Oh, Senator, I'm sorry.

135
00:08:29,120 --> 00:08:31,640
Speaker 6: There will never be an enemies list within the Department

136
00:08:31,680 --> 00:08:32,400
Speaker 6: of Justice.

137
00:08:32,920 --> 00:08:37,000
Speaker 2: And here she's on day one. She's targeting the people

138
00:08:37,040 --> 00:08:39,960
Speaker 2: who are and have been on Trump's enemies list. So

139
00:08:40,160 --> 00:08:43,920
Speaker 2: I wonder what is the point of those confirmation hearings.

140
00:08:44,679 --> 00:08:48,679
Speaker 3: The point is what you've just demonstrated, to have the

141
00:08:48,800 --> 00:08:53,720
Speaker 3: acknowledge the illegitimacy of this action. There's nothing that Congress

142
00:08:53,760 --> 00:08:57,040
Speaker 3: can do any hearing to stop someone who's determined to

143
00:08:57,120 --> 00:09:00,599
Speaker 3: violate the law to do so, but they can have

144
00:09:00,840 --> 00:09:05,199
Speaker 3: them acknowledge up the front that what they're on a

145
00:09:05,280 --> 00:09:06,960
Speaker 3: plating doing it is impompable.

146
00:09:07,000 --> 00:09:07,559
Speaker 5: I think it's a.

147
00:09:07,480 --> 00:09:11,040
Speaker 2: Couple of dozen prosecutors who worked on January sixth cases

148
00:09:11,080 --> 00:09:14,679
Speaker 2: have already been fired. Is there any recourse for them

149
00:09:14,840 --> 00:09:17,480
Speaker 2: if they think that their firing was based on the

150
00:09:17,520 --> 00:09:20,960
Speaker 2: position that they took the assignment they were given.

151
00:09:21,559 --> 00:09:25,520
Speaker 3: Certainly there's a strong principle of due process if the

152
00:09:25,760 --> 00:09:29,840
Speaker 3: the Preme Court is articulated many times that one must

153
00:09:29,880 --> 00:09:32,200
Speaker 3: be told what the law is and given a chance

154
00:09:32,280 --> 00:09:37,480
Speaker 3: to conform one's behavior. Applying while retroactively is inherently improper.

155
00:09:38,200 --> 00:09:42,000
Speaker 3: These are people who were given assignments by their lawfully

156
00:09:42,040 --> 00:09:48,559
Speaker 3: designated bosses to conduct investigations, and they're now being criticized

157
00:09:48,559 --> 00:09:51,080
Speaker 3: for doing something that's perfectly legal when they did it.

158
00:09:51,520 --> 00:09:56,400
Speaker 3: That kind of retroactivity is obviously due process violation. It

159
00:09:56,440 --> 00:10:00,440
Speaker 3: may be a violation of federal laws designed to keep

160
00:10:00,760 --> 00:10:03,600
Speaker 3: government employment from being dis for patronage purposes.

161
00:10:04,080 --> 00:10:06,280
Speaker 2: President Trump has outright said he's going to fire the

162
00:10:06,320 --> 00:10:09,320
Speaker 2: FBI agents who are involved, so I guess they have

163
00:10:09,600 --> 00:10:13,520
Speaker 2: some evidence there of his intent. So the Department of

164
00:10:13,720 --> 00:10:18,960
Speaker 2: Justice has signaled that it's going to use criminal investigations

165
00:10:19,920 --> 00:10:23,319
Speaker 2: to root out DEI practices in the private sector.

166
00:10:23,520 --> 00:10:24,880
Speaker 5: That's according to one of the.

167
00:10:24,800 --> 00:10:28,600
Speaker 2: Executive orders that Trump issued, and then the DOJ memo

168
00:10:28,800 --> 00:10:33,240
Speaker 2: calls for specific steps to take within weeks.

169
00:10:33,559 --> 00:10:34,800
Speaker 5: I don't even know what to say about that.

170
00:10:35,000 --> 00:10:38,840
Speaker 2: I mean, criminal investigations for DEI policies.

171
00:10:39,840 --> 00:10:43,000
Speaker 3: Well, it's quite remarkable. I can see why they keep

172
00:10:43,160 --> 00:10:47,280
Speaker 3: using the initials, because that's saying, we're criminally investing in

173
00:10:47,320 --> 00:10:52,920
Speaker 3: you for inclusion. We're criminally investing in you for equity.

174
00:10:53,240 --> 00:10:55,520
Speaker 3: Inclusion and equity tend to be the things that the

175
00:10:55,600 --> 00:11:02,680
Speaker 3: law supports, So they're using DEI as a cartoon villain

176
00:11:03,280 --> 00:11:06,440
Speaker 3: rather than looking at what's actually involved in EI programs

177
00:11:06,440 --> 00:11:12,240
Speaker 3: are enormously varied, and it's hard to imagine many of

178
00:11:12,280 --> 00:11:16,080
Speaker 3: them engaging in any criminal activity any more than any

179
00:11:16,120 --> 00:11:19,079
Speaker 3: other program to do that. The notion that they're going

180
00:11:19,160 --> 00:11:23,719
Speaker 3: to bring these cases suggest that they're contemplating using the

181
00:11:23,800 --> 00:11:24,800
Speaker 3: law for harassment.

182
00:11:25,440 --> 00:11:29,600
Speaker 2: Whenever you're charged or complaint is filed against you, it's

183
00:11:29,600 --> 00:11:33,800
Speaker 2: a hassle, it's expensive, et cetera. But does this seem

184
00:11:33,840 --> 00:11:36,880
Speaker 2: like something that a judge would dismiss, you know, on

185
00:11:36,880 --> 00:11:39,560
Speaker 2: a summary judgment motion or even before.

186
00:11:39,640 --> 00:11:43,240
Speaker 3: Judges generally like to give the prosecution a chance to

187
00:11:43,280 --> 00:11:47,480
Speaker 3: be heard, but in a situation like this, when there's

188
00:11:47,520 --> 00:11:51,000
Speaker 3: so much evidence that the criminal law will be misused,

189
00:11:51,640 --> 00:11:57,560
Speaker 3: the President and other senior officials essentially admitting that I

190
00:11:57,600 --> 00:12:00,920
Speaker 3: think judges may feel that the fairest thing to do

191
00:12:01,000 --> 00:12:05,320
Speaker 3: is dismiss these cases immediately and not force people who

192
00:12:05,320 --> 00:12:08,760
Speaker 3: are following legitimate workers to go through the sort of burden.

193
00:12:09,280 --> 00:12:11,840
Speaker 2: Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, more on

194
00:12:11,880 --> 00:12:15,440
Speaker 2: those Bondy memos and the attack on sanctuary cities.

195
00:12:16,040 --> 00:12:18,319
Speaker 5: I'm June Grosse. When you're listening to Bloomberg.

196
00:12:20,760 --> 00:12:24,240
Speaker 2: New Attorney General Pam Bondi has unveiled a series of

197
00:12:24,280 --> 00:12:29,400
Speaker 2: directives designed to overhaul a justice department President Trump claims

198
00:12:29,520 --> 00:12:34,880
Speaker 2: is biased against conservatives. The directives roll back by deministration

199
00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:38,800
Speaker 2: policies and align the Justice Department with the priorities of

200
00:12:38,840 --> 00:12:42,800
Speaker 2: a White House determined to exert control over federal law

201
00:12:42,840 --> 00:12:48,559
Speaker 2: enforcement and purge agencies of career employees it views as disloyal.

202
00:12:49,160 --> 00:12:53,520
Speaker 2: I've been talking to Georgetown law professor David super Bondi

203
00:12:53,600 --> 00:12:57,200
Speaker 2: has also ordered the defunding of jurisdictions that refuse to

204
00:12:57,280 --> 00:13:02,359
Speaker 2: cooperate with federal immigration authority. So the defunding of sanctuary

205
00:13:02,559 --> 00:13:07,920
Speaker 2: cities and states that was tried before with Jeff Sessions, right.

206
00:13:08,720 --> 00:13:14,480
Speaker 3: Well, that's very remarkable irony that they would think about

207
00:13:14,520 --> 00:13:19,559
Speaker 3: doing this because conservative justices on the Supreme Court held

208
00:13:19,600 --> 00:13:23,760
Speaker 3: that the federal government has no right through dragoons stayed

209
00:13:23,800 --> 00:13:30,000
Speaker 3: in local governments, into carrying out its policies. That's a

210
00:13:30,160 --> 00:13:36,439
Speaker 3: fundamental tenant of federalism, and mister Trump and other conservatives

211
00:13:36,520 --> 00:13:40,080
Speaker 3: have championed federalism, and this is suggesting that state and

212
00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:43,960
Speaker 3: local governments are just sidekicks of the federal government. That's

213
00:13:44,000 --> 00:13:44,920
Speaker 3: not constitutional.

214
00:13:45,320 --> 00:13:48,600
Speaker 2: She's reinstating the death penalty, that's been done before.

215
00:13:48,880 --> 00:13:50,640
Speaker 5: There's nothing illegal about.

216
00:13:50,320 --> 00:13:51,720
Speaker 3: That right now.

217
00:13:51,960 --> 00:13:56,560
Speaker 2: So she's also calling for an October seventh task force

218
00:13:57,160 --> 00:14:01,400
Speaker 2: seeking justice for victims of the attacking. The ongoing threat

219
00:14:01,480 --> 00:14:04,600
Speaker 2: posed by HAMAS and its affiliates is that in the

220
00:14:04,640 --> 00:14:08,359
Speaker 2: purview of the Attorney General, it sounds like it's foreign affairs.

221
00:14:09,160 --> 00:14:12,600
Speaker 3: It sounds like foreign affairs to me. On some matters.

222
00:14:13,200 --> 00:14:19,200
Speaker 3: There can be cooperation between Justice and state Justice and defense,

223
00:14:19,560 --> 00:14:24,160
Speaker 3: Justice and CIA. So it's certainly that there could be

224
00:14:24,200 --> 00:14:28,920
Speaker 3: something to investigate there. I'm not privy to what intelligence

225
00:14:28,960 --> 00:14:31,760
Speaker 3: they might have. If they don't have more than is

226
00:14:31,840 --> 00:14:35,000
Speaker 3: publicly known, i'd be worried about a fishing trip, but

227
00:14:35,080 --> 00:14:36,120
Speaker 3: maybe they do have more.

228
00:14:36,440 --> 00:14:38,040
Speaker 5: What they're doing is they're moving.

229
00:14:38,120 --> 00:14:45,160
Speaker 2: They're reassigning attorneys within the Justice Department to immigration. So

230
00:14:45,320 --> 00:14:51,000
Speaker 2: for example, they're reassigning environmental lawyers and antitrust lawyers to

231
00:14:51,040 --> 00:14:56,480
Speaker 2: this sanctuary cities working group. Well, pulling resources from other

232
00:14:56,640 --> 00:15:01,720
Speaker 2: areas and concentrating on immigration come at the expense of

233
00:15:01,760 --> 00:15:07,680
Speaker 2: the department's other priorities like terrorism and white collar crime. Oh, certainly.

234
00:15:07,720 --> 00:15:14,280
Speaker 3: And lawyers develop specialties, develop expertise in my areas of expertise.

235
00:15:14,360 --> 00:15:16,120
Speaker 3: I like to think I'm a good lawyer, but I

236
00:15:16,120 --> 00:15:19,200
Speaker 3: can name you twenty areas where I would be completely incompetent.

237
00:15:19,280 --> 00:15:22,160
Speaker 3: I don't practice in those areas. That's true of any lawyer.

238
00:15:22,440 --> 00:15:27,960
Speaker 3: So this is a good way of wasting valuable resources

239
00:15:28,080 --> 00:15:34,960
Speaker 3: and letting important laws go ignored while pursuing cases that

240
00:15:35,480 --> 00:15:40,320
Speaker 3: likely have no merit. Based on what we're publicly aware.

241
00:15:40,040 --> 00:15:42,640
Speaker 2: Of of the things that she's planning or at least

242
00:15:42,680 --> 00:15:46,200
Speaker 2: she's written memos about. Is there one area that you

243
00:15:46,280 --> 00:15:48,920
Speaker 2: think that is most concerning.

244
00:15:48,920 --> 00:15:52,400
Speaker 3: Well, it's the theme. The theme is politicizing the Justice

245
00:15:52,440 --> 00:15:58,200
Speaker 3: Department to pursue a particular political agenda. Once we do that,

246
00:15:59,000 --> 00:16:02,080
Speaker 3: then the Justice Department is going to lose something permanently.

247
00:16:02,400 --> 00:16:05,960
Speaker 3: Whoever the next president is will not have a Justice

248
00:16:05,960 --> 00:16:08,760
Speaker 3: Department that is trusted by the courts the way it's

249
00:16:08,800 --> 00:16:09,720
Speaker 3: tradiginally has been.

250
00:16:10,680 --> 00:16:13,160
Speaker 2: Some of these orders that he's handed down, let's use

251
00:16:13,160 --> 00:16:17,840
Speaker 2: birthright citizenship, because that's so obviously a problem illegal. Whatever

252
00:16:18,240 --> 00:16:21,680
Speaker 2: is he getting legal advice on these from the White

253
00:16:21,680 --> 00:16:24,360
Speaker 2: House Counsel's Office.

254
00:16:24,040 --> 00:16:25,880
Speaker 5: Or Justice Department.

255
00:16:26,400 --> 00:16:29,480
Speaker 2: It seems like they're so disconnected some of them from

256
00:16:29,760 --> 00:16:32,040
Speaker 2: basic legal concepts.

257
00:16:32,560 --> 00:16:35,760
Speaker 3: I think piece are written by the people behind Project

258
00:16:35,800 --> 00:16:41,040
Speaker 3: twenty twenty five, and those people have an extremely ambitious,

259
00:16:41,160 --> 00:16:46,080
Speaker 3: radical agenda of overturning the separation of powers and the

260
00:16:46,120 --> 00:16:50,040
Speaker 3: system of checks and balances has guided this country since

261
00:16:50,080 --> 00:16:53,920
Speaker 3: its founding. That's the legal advice is behind all of this.

262
00:16:54,680 --> 00:16:58,440
Speaker 3: The rest of what they're doing is hard to take seriously.

263
00:16:58,760 --> 00:17:02,680
Speaker 3: You read references to cases in their memos. You go

264
00:17:02,800 --> 00:17:04,960
Speaker 3: look up to the case and it says the opposite.

265
00:17:05,600 --> 00:17:09,359
Speaker 3: So I don't think this is a serious effort to

266
00:17:09,440 --> 00:17:12,560
Speaker 3: think about what the law is. This is a radical

267
00:17:12,600 --> 00:17:13,639
Speaker 3: effort to change.

268
00:17:13,400 --> 00:17:16,240
Speaker 2: With the law is do you think that the Supreme

269
00:17:16,320 --> 00:17:20,320
Speaker 2: Court will be receptive to Trump's efforts?

270
00:17:20,640 --> 00:17:21,080
Speaker 1: I don't.

271
00:17:22,200 --> 00:17:25,520
Speaker 3: The implication of this is that he's not governed by

272
00:17:25,560 --> 00:17:29,120
Speaker 3: the law and that the courts have no power over him.

273
00:17:29,560 --> 00:17:38,840
Speaker 3: That turns Supreme Court justice into a very modest, relatively

274
00:17:38,880 --> 00:17:44,080
Speaker 3: insignificant figure. And I don't think that these justices are

275
00:17:44,119 --> 00:17:50,600
Speaker 3: willing to give up their constitutional role and become figureheads.

276
00:17:51,040 --> 00:17:53,480
Speaker 3: I think they want to decide cases based on the

277
00:17:53,600 --> 00:17:58,320
Speaker 3: law and president the Trump's theories here are so radical

278
00:17:58,440 --> 00:18:01,320
Speaker 3: that they would great we limit the rule of law

279
00:18:01,320 --> 00:18:02,120
Speaker 3: of this country.

280
00:18:02,320 --> 00:18:05,560
Speaker 2: Thank you so much, David. I always enjoy our conversations.

281
00:18:06,040 --> 00:18:10,119
Speaker 2: That's Professor David super of Georgetown Law. Turning down to immigration.

282
00:18:10,640 --> 00:18:13,720
Speaker 2: The Justice Department is suing the State of Illinois and

283
00:18:13,800 --> 00:18:18,159
Speaker 2: the City of Chicago over their sanctuary city policies. The

284
00:18:18,280 --> 00:18:22,479
Speaker 2: lawsuit accuses them of obstructing the enforcement of immigration laws

285
00:18:22,800 --> 00:18:26,359
Speaker 2: as ice and federal agents are ramping up their search

286
00:18:26,520 --> 00:18:31,439
Speaker 2: for undocumented immigrants to be deported. Here's borders our Tom Homan.

287
00:18:32,280 --> 00:18:33,840
Speaker 7: I would love to rest a bad guy in the

288
00:18:34,400 --> 00:18:36,960
Speaker 7: city or county jail, but in sanaturist cities. We don't

289
00:18:36,960 --> 00:18:39,240
Speaker 7: have access, so they're going to release a public safety

290
00:18:39,280 --> 00:18:41,320
Speaker 7: threat back into the community, which I think is foolish.

291
00:18:41,840 --> 00:18:44,120
Speaker 7: Puts a community at risk, puts our officers at risk,

292
00:18:44,160 --> 00:18:45,200
Speaker 7: and puts the alien at risk.

293
00:18:45,680 --> 00:18:48,920
Speaker 2: But Legal Learned, the deputy director of the Immigrant Rights

294
00:18:48,960 --> 00:18:52,840
Speaker 2: Project for the American Civil Liberties Union, says only federal

295
00:18:52,880 --> 00:18:54,920
Speaker 2: authorities can enforce these raids.

296
00:18:55,640 --> 00:18:58,400
Speaker 5: I think the states will have very very strong arguments

297
00:18:58,480 --> 00:18:59,879
Speaker 5: that they don't need to cooperate.

298
00:19:00,160 --> 00:19:03,240
Speaker 3: They can obstruct, but they don't need to cooperate it.

299
00:19:03,680 --> 00:19:07,080
Speaker 2: Joining me is a Laura Mukherjee, a professor at Columbia

300
00:19:07,160 --> 00:19:11,399
Speaker 2: Law School and director of the school's Immigrants Rights Clinic ILERA.

301
00:19:11,480 --> 00:19:15,040
Speaker 2: Will you start by explaining what a sanctuary city or

302
00:19:15,160 --> 00:19:15,879
Speaker 2: state is.

303
00:19:16,480 --> 00:19:21,399
Speaker 1: A sanctuary city or a sanctuary state isn't defined in

304
00:19:21,520 --> 00:19:24,720
Speaker 1: the law in any way. It just means that a

305
00:19:24,880 --> 00:19:30,560
Speaker 1: jurisdiction may have some policies that restrict a degree of

306
00:19:30,640 --> 00:19:36,040
Speaker 1: cooperation between local law enforcement officers and the federal government.

307
00:19:36,240 --> 00:19:40,760
Speaker 1: Ice there is a broad range of policies that different

308
00:19:40,800 --> 00:19:44,560
Speaker 1: sanctuary jurisdictions have, so it's not a uniform term.

309
00:19:45,160 --> 00:19:49,840
Speaker 2: Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the Justice Department to identify

310
00:19:49,920 --> 00:19:54,479
Speaker 2: local governments with policies that impede immigration enforcement, and to

311
00:19:54,520 --> 00:19:58,600
Speaker 2: take action where appropriate. The first lawsuit filed by the

312
00:19:58,760 --> 00:20:04,440
Speaker 2: Justice Department is against Illinois and Chicago and elected officials there,

313
00:20:04,440 --> 00:20:08,400
Speaker 2: including the governor and mayor. Tell us what the administration's

314
00:20:08,480 --> 00:20:09,480
Speaker 2: allegations are.

315
00:20:10,119 --> 00:20:14,400
Speaker 1: The Trump administration is alleging violations of the supremacy Clause.

316
00:20:14,840 --> 00:20:19,800
Speaker 1: They're saying that local Chicago laws, a Cook County ordinance,

317
00:20:19,880 --> 00:20:25,040
Speaker 1: and an Illinois state law preempt federal law. They also

318
00:20:25,320 --> 00:20:29,880
Speaker 1: the Trump administration also alleges unlawful discrimination against the federal

319
00:20:29,920 --> 00:20:34,280
Speaker 1: government and the unlawful regulation of the federal government and

320
00:20:34,400 --> 00:20:39,440
Speaker 1: violation of the supremacy Clause. The Trump Department of Justice

321
00:20:39,600 --> 00:20:44,080
Speaker 1: is seeking declarations from a federal district court in Chicago

322
00:20:44,600 --> 00:20:48,120
Speaker 1: that the state laws and the county and city ordinances

323
00:20:48,600 --> 00:20:51,959
Speaker 1: violate the supremacy Clause and are therefore invalid.

324
00:20:52,680 --> 00:20:56,199
Speaker 2: So this state law was first passed in twenty seventeen,

325
00:20:56,920 --> 00:20:58,560
Speaker 2: have there been a tax on it before?

326
00:20:59,280 --> 00:21:04,720
Speaker 1: In the first Trump administration, the Trump administration signed an

327
00:21:04,760 --> 00:21:09,159
Speaker 1: executive order that is virtually identical to the one that

328
00:21:09,320 --> 00:21:14,000
Speaker 1: is currently at issue now that the president signed in

329
00:21:14,080 --> 00:21:19,000
Speaker 1: his first days in office and in the first Trump administration,

330
00:21:19,280 --> 00:21:24,159
Speaker 1: multiple federal courts deemed that the executive order from that

331
00:21:24,320 --> 00:21:31,879
Speaker 1: time was unconstitutionally broad, unconstitutionally coercive against local jurisdictions, and

332
00:21:31,960 --> 00:21:35,240
Speaker 1: that was en joined, meaning blocked by the federal courts

333
00:21:35,280 --> 00:21:36,280
Speaker 1: from taking effect.

334
00:21:37,040 --> 00:21:40,359
Speaker 2: Does it seem likely that the same thing will happen

335
00:21:40,520 --> 00:21:45,119
Speaker 2: with this or have they added anything to their lawsuit

336
00:21:45,160 --> 00:21:45,920
Speaker 2: to their argument?

337
00:21:47,040 --> 00:21:51,440
Speaker 1: I anticipate that the Trump Department of Justice will not

338
00:21:51,680 --> 00:21:56,639
Speaker 1: be successful in their litigation in Chicago. It's also worth

339
00:21:56,760 --> 00:22:01,320
Speaker 1: noting that on February seventh, San Francisco, Santa Clara, King

340
00:22:01,440 --> 00:22:06,520
Speaker 1: County in Washington, Portland, and New Haven also filed a

341
00:22:06,680 --> 00:22:10,960
Speaker 1: lawsuit in the Northern District of California Federal District Court

342
00:22:11,040 --> 00:22:17,400
Speaker 1: there alleging that the Sanctuary Jurisdiction executive Order, which would

343
00:22:17,400 --> 00:22:21,760
Speaker 1: block sanctuary jurisdictions from receiving billions of dollars in federal funding,

344
00:22:22,400 --> 00:22:29,280
Speaker 1: is illegal and unconstitutional. These localities argue that the president's

345
00:22:29,400 --> 00:22:34,959
Speaker 1: executive order violates the Tenth Amendment, violates separation of powers

346
00:22:35,000 --> 00:22:39,480
Speaker 1: and the spending Clause of the Constitution. These localities further

347
00:22:39,720 --> 00:22:44,320
Speaker 1: argue that Trump's new executive orders violates the due process

348
00:22:44,320 --> 00:22:48,439
Speaker 1: clause of the US Constitution and a statute called the

349
00:22:48,480 --> 00:22:54,159
Speaker 1: Administrative Procedures Act. I anticipate that these localities will be

350
00:22:54,280 --> 00:22:57,359
Speaker 1: successful in blocking that executive order.

351
00:22:57,960 --> 00:23:01,200
Speaker 2: On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signs

352
00:23:01,240 --> 00:23:04,720
Speaker 2: an executive order calling for federal funds to be cut

353
00:23:04,760 --> 00:23:09,040
Speaker 2: off for any local government with sanctuary policies, and Attorney

354
00:23:09,040 --> 00:23:12,119
Speaker 2: General Pam Bondi issued a memo calling for the Justice

355
00:23:12,160 --> 00:23:16,320
Speaker 2: Department to start enforcing the order. Ellra tell us about

356
00:23:16,400 --> 00:23:16,879
Speaker 2: that memo.

357
00:23:17,400 --> 00:23:22,359
Speaker 1: That memo is in tandem with the executive order, and

358
00:23:22,400 --> 00:23:27,840
Speaker 1: these localities have sued to stop that executive order and

359
00:23:28,119 --> 00:23:32,879
Speaker 1: that February fifth Department of Justice memo from going into effect.

360
00:23:33,040 --> 00:23:36,480
Speaker 1: It's notable that the February fifth Department of Justice memo

361
00:23:37,000 --> 00:23:42,320
Speaker 1: threatens the termination of funding to local jurisdictions and threatens

362
00:23:42,400 --> 00:23:48,320
Speaker 1: both civil and criminal prosecution for law enforcement officers and

363
00:23:48,920 --> 00:23:51,840
Speaker 1: other officials in the sanctuary jurisdiction.

364
00:23:52,119 --> 00:23:55,080
Speaker 2: It depends on the city, but are we talking hundreds

365
00:23:55,119 --> 00:23:57,840
Speaker 2: of millions or billions of dollars in federal aid to

366
00:23:57,880 --> 00:23:58,520
Speaker 2: these cities?

367
00:23:59,359 --> 00:24:02,640
Speaker 1: Collectively billions of dollars in federal aid to these cities.

368
00:24:03,440 --> 00:24:08,320
Speaker 2: So they've also in Trump's executive order vowed to go

369
00:24:08,440 --> 00:24:15,040
Speaker 2: after local law enforcement officials who don't cooperate with federal

370
00:24:15,320 --> 00:24:19,040
Speaker 2: immigration enforcement. Did they do that in the last administration.

371
00:24:20,040 --> 00:24:24,720
Speaker 1: This threat to pursue both civil and criminal prosecution of

372
00:24:24,920 --> 00:24:28,960
Speaker 1: local law enforcement agents and local officials who do not

373
00:24:29,119 --> 00:24:33,879
Speaker 1: cooperate with the federal government on immigration enforcement is new.

374
00:24:34,280 --> 00:24:39,080
Speaker 1: It is also unconstitutional. It clearly violates the Tenth Amendment

375
00:24:39,520 --> 00:24:43,760
Speaker 1: and violates a longstanding principle of constitutional law, which is

376
00:24:43,800 --> 00:24:49,399
Speaker 1: called anti commandeering. The federal government cannot commandeer cannot force

377
00:24:49,880 --> 00:24:53,440
Speaker 1: localities and states to carry out federal priorities.

378
00:24:54,240 --> 00:24:58,119
Speaker 2: There was a memo allowing ICE to go into sensitive

379
00:24:58,240 --> 00:25:01,440
Speaker 2: locations like churches and schools and hospitals.

380
00:25:01,920 --> 00:25:06,440
Speaker 1: Has I stillne that ICE has rescinded the sensitive Locations memo,

381
00:25:06,480 --> 00:25:11,200
Speaker 1: which previously stopped ICE from carrying out immigration enforcement in

382
00:25:11,280 --> 00:25:15,959
Speaker 1: locations such as schools, hospitals, places of worship, and public demonstrations.

383
00:25:16,560 --> 00:25:19,760
Speaker 1: As far as we know at this time, there have

384
00:25:19,920 --> 00:25:27,439
Speaker 1: been no immigration enforcement operations in schools nationwide, and in

385
00:25:27,480 --> 00:25:31,879
Speaker 1: the first Trump administration there was very limited immigration enforcement

386
00:25:31,960 --> 00:25:37,040
Speaker 1: taking place in the medical care context. We haven't heard

387
00:25:37,040 --> 00:25:42,080
Speaker 1: of widespread ICE enforcement in the immigration context or in

388
00:25:42,480 --> 00:25:44,840
Speaker 1: houses of worship in this administration.

389
00:25:45,600 --> 00:25:49,840
Speaker 2: New York City, because of possible ice raids at schools,

390
00:25:49,880 --> 00:25:53,800
Speaker 2: some immigrant families are keeping their kids at home, and

391
00:25:53,920 --> 00:25:57,760
Speaker 2: the schools chancellor came out and said that the policy

392
00:25:57,800 --> 00:26:01,359
Speaker 2: at city public schools hasn't changed and basically that a

393
00:26:01,400 --> 00:26:05,720
Speaker 2: warrant is needed. Quote, we unequivocally stand with all children

394
00:26:05,720 --> 00:26:10,240
Speaker 2: in our city, regardless of immigration status. But it seems

395
00:26:10,320 --> 00:26:14,439
Speaker 2: like there's fear no matter what the government says.

396
00:26:15,440 --> 00:26:20,160
Speaker 1: The Trump administration has created a pervasive sense of fear

397
00:26:20,280 --> 00:26:25,119
Speaker 1: among immigrant communities nationwide. It is not surprising that after

398
00:26:25,240 --> 00:26:28,800
Speaker 1: the recision of the Sensitive Locations memo, the number of

399
00:26:28,920 --> 00:26:33,800
Speaker 1: children attending our public schools has gone down. And it's

400
00:26:33,880 --> 00:26:37,840
Speaker 1: important to reiterate that there have been to date no

401
00:26:38,080 --> 00:26:43,320
Speaker 1: immigration enforcement actions carried out in public schools, and families

402
00:26:43,359 --> 00:26:46,320
Speaker 1: should continue to send their children to school.

403
00:26:47,280 --> 00:26:51,080
Speaker 2: There's a dispute in New York City about New York

404
00:26:51,080 --> 00:26:56,479
Speaker 2: City sanctuary status because of the actions of the mayor,

405
00:26:56,720 --> 00:27:01,199
Speaker 2: Eric Adams. He wrote a memo to general councils for

406
00:27:01,320 --> 00:27:03,640
Speaker 2: all agencies directing employees.

407
00:27:03,200 --> 00:27:05,440
Speaker 5: To ask officers ICE officers.

408
00:27:05,000 --> 00:27:07,639
Speaker 2: For their name and badge number. A warrant or subpoena

409
00:27:07,960 --> 00:27:11,639
Speaker 2: and call their agencies. Council quote, but if you reasonably

410
00:27:11,680 --> 00:27:14,160
Speaker 2: feel threatened or feel for your safety, you should give

411
00:27:14,200 --> 00:27:17,320
Speaker 2: the officer the information they've asked for or let them

412
00:27:17,440 --> 00:27:21,000
Speaker 2: enter the site. And critics say that's a violation of

413
00:27:21,080 --> 00:27:23,000
Speaker 2: New York sanctuary law.

414
00:27:23,960 --> 00:27:27,239
Speaker 1: Yes, the wording of that memo is problematic, and it

415
00:27:27,280 --> 00:27:32,960
Speaker 1: has left city officials without clearer guidance on how to proceed.

416
00:27:33,240 --> 00:27:37,080
Speaker 2: About the ICE raids. How are they proceeding? Some of

417
00:27:37,119 --> 00:27:39,640
Speaker 2: them have been highly publicized. The one in New York

418
00:27:39,640 --> 00:27:43,240
Speaker 2: where they arrested just one hundred I think people, was

419
00:27:43,480 --> 00:27:48,680
Speaker 2: highly publicized because the new Secretary of Homeland Security went

420
00:27:48,720 --> 00:27:52,040
Speaker 2: on the raid. How are they carrying them out across

421
00:27:52,080 --> 00:27:53,800
Speaker 2: the country? Is it by the book?

422
00:27:54,440 --> 00:27:58,440
Speaker 1: It is unclear how these ICE raids are being carried out.

423
00:27:58,800 --> 00:28:01,679
Speaker 1: In the first weeks of the Trump administration, ICE was

424
00:28:01,720 --> 00:28:06,240
Speaker 1: releasing data on how many individuals were being arrested in

425
00:28:06,359 --> 00:28:10,360
Speaker 1: ICE rays. It appears that about half of those individuals

426
00:28:10,400 --> 00:28:15,440
Speaker 1: who were arrested did not have criminal convictions and were

427
00:28:15,480 --> 00:28:20,479
Speaker 1: so called collateral damage in the arrests. Now, it seems

428
00:28:20,520 --> 00:28:23,720
Speaker 1: that ICE is not releasing data on how many arrests

429
00:28:23,800 --> 00:28:26,840
Speaker 1: they are carrying out nationwide, so it is hard to

430
00:28:26,920 --> 00:28:30,200
Speaker 1: know who is being arrested and whether or not those

431
00:28:30,240 --> 00:28:34,040
Speaker 1: individuals actually pose a danger to public safety as the

432
00:28:34,119 --> 00:28:35,560
Speaker 1: administration claims.

433
00:28:36,160 --> 00:28:41,480
Speaker 2: On Sunday, a judge issued a temporary restraining order against

434
00:28:41,680 --> 00:28:45,800
Speaker 2: three Venezuelans being sent to Guantanamo. Do you think that's

435
00:28:45,840 --> 00:28:49,760
Speaker 2: sending migrants to Guantanamo is going to be upheld by

436
00:28:49,800 --> 00:28:50,360
Speaker 2: the courts.

437
00:28:51,160 --> 00:28:57,280
Speaker 1: There are serious legal questions about whether the Trump administration

438
00:28:57,480 --> 00:29:02,680
Speaker 1: has the authority to send individuals to Guantanamo Bay. What

439
00:29:02,920 --> 00:29:06,520
Speaker 1: is clear is that the Trump administration is trying to

440
00:29:06,600 --> 00:29:12,560
Speaker 1: instill fear in immigrant communities nationwide and let people know

441
00:29:12,720 --> 00:29:17,440
Speaker 1: that the United States of America is no longer a

442
00:29:17,480 --> 00:29:22,000
Speaker 1: safe haven for immigrants, for migrants, for asylum seekers and others.

443
00:29:22,280 --> 00:29:24,840
Speaker 1: And that message is being broadcast around the world.

444
00:29:25,080 --> 00:29:27,760
Speaker 2: And what is the situation right now at the southern border.

445
00:29:28,200 --> 00:29:34,600
Speaker 1: So the Trump administration has issued executive orders that purport

446
00:29:34,720 --> 00:29:39,360
Speaker 1: to close the southern border completely to asylum seekers and

447
00:29:39,520 --> 00:29:43,680
Speaker 1: other migrants by declaring that there is an invasion at

448
00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:47,720
Speaker 1: the border, although if you look at the data crossing

449
00:29:47,800 --> 00:29:51,880
Speaker 1: there a four year low, so the data doesn't support

450
00:29:51,920 --> 00:29:56,320
Speaker 1: that there is an invasion, and earlier this month, a

451
00:29:56,440 --> 00:30:01,120
Speaker 1: number of immigrants rights organizations filed a lawsuit challenging the

452
00:30:01,200 --> 00:30:06,080
Speaker 1: constitutionality and the legality of those executive orders, saying that

453
00:30:06,160 --> 00:30:09,959
Speaker 1: the President, with the stroke of a pen can't supersede

454
00:30:10,320 --> 00:30:16,080
Speaker 1: laws passed by Congress which guarantee a right for people

455
00:30:16,160 --> 00:30:19,520
Speaker 1: to seek asylum regardless of how they enter the United States.

456
00:30:19,720 --> 00:30:20,920
Speaker 1: So that case is pending.

457
00:30:21,760 --> 00:30:23,920
Speaker 5: Thanks so much for joining me today. E Laura.

458
00:30:24,760 --> 00:30:28,200
Speaker 2: That's Laura Muokerjee, a professor at Columbia Law School and

459
00:30:28,240 --> 00:30:32,479
Speaker 2: director of the school's Immigrant Rights Clinic. In other legal news, today,

460
00:30:32,800 --> 00:30:37,080
Speaker 2: a federal judge in Boston temporarily blocked enforcement of a

461
00:30:37,120 --> 00:30:41,120
Speaker 2: federal employee buy at offer by President Trump's Department of

462
00:30:41,200 --> 00:30:46,000
Speaker 2: Government Efficiency. Federal Judge Georgie O'Toole Junior says the order

463
00:30:46,040 --> 00:30:49,840
Speaker 2: will remain in effect until he issues a ruling. Attorney

464
00:30:49,840 --> 00:30:53,320
Speaker 2: Elena Goldstein with the Democracy Forward Foundation argued for the

465
00:30:53,360 --> 00:30:54,520
Speaker 2: plaintiffs in the case.

466
00:30:55,160 --> 00:30:58,000
Speaker 6: We are pleased that today at the court continued his

467
00:30:58,160 --> 00:31:03,240
Speaker 6: injunction from last week, continuing to enjoin OPM and defendants

468
00:31:03,480 --> 00:31:07,800
Speaker 6: from implementing the fork in the Road directive. The so called.

469
00:31:07,560 --> 00:31:13,160
Speaker 2: Buyout the deferred resignation program has been spearheaded by Elon Musk,

470
00:31:13,400 --> 00:31:17,360
Speaker 2: who's serving as Trump's top advisor for reducing federal spending.

471
00:31:17,880 --> 00:31:21,040
Speaker 2: Under the plan, employees can stop working and get paid

472
00:31:21,200 --> 00:31:25,280
Speaker 2: until September thirtieth. Democrats and union leaders have said workers

473
00:31:25,320 --> 00:31:29,680
Speaker 2: shouldn't accept the deferred resignation program because it wasn't authorized

474
00:31:29,680 --> 00:31:32,880
Speaker 2: by Congress, raising the risk that they won't get paid.

475
00:31:33,360 --> 00:31:35,720
Speaker 2: And that's it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show.

476
00:31:36,040 --> 00:31:38,360
Speaker 2: Remember you can always get the latest legal news on

477
00:31:38,440 --> 00:31:42,720
Speaker 2: our Bloomberg Law podcasts. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

478
00:31:42,880 --> 00:31:47,920
Speaker 2: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law,

479
00:31:48,320 --> 00:31:50,920
Speaker 2: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every

480
00:31:50,960 --> 00:31:54,880
Speaker 2: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso

481
00:31:55,000 --> 00:31:56,600
Speaker 2: and you're listening to Bloomberg