WEBVTT - DA Can't Stop Musk Giveaway & Fired Prosecutors Run for Election 0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.760 This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:10.160 --> 0:00:13.440 The US Supreme Court will take up a new clash 0:00:13.600 --> 0:00:17.160 over the use of race in redistricting, agree to hear 0:00:17.320 --> 0:00:21.520 arguments on a Louisiana congressional map that creates an additional 0:00:21.640 --> 0:00:25.600 majority black voting district. But the Court won't hear arguments 0:00:25.680 --> 0:00:29.200 until early next year, and the twenty twenty four elections 0:00:29.240 --> 0:00:33.720 are proceeding under the challenged map, which could boost Democrats' 0:00:33.840 --> 0:00:38.480 chances of retaking the closely divided House of Representatives. This 0:00:38.560 --> 0:00:41.360 is the latest step in more than two years of 0:00:41.440 --> 0:00:46.440 federal court battles over Louisiana congressional districts. The state has 0:00:46.479 --> 0:00:50.120 had two congressional maps blocked by lower courts, and the 0:00:50.159 --> 0:00:54.320 Supreme Court has intervened twice. Joining me is Bloomberg Supreme 0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:58.040 Court reporter Greg Storr. We've been hearing about this Louisiana 0:00:58.080 --> 0:01:00.760 map for years, So tell us the history here. 0:01:01.000 --> 0:01:05.040 Yeah, it's a convoluted history. The key practical question is 0:01:05.360 --> 0:01:08.880 whether there has to be a second majority black district 0:01:08.959 --> 0:01:13.160 in Louisiana. Louisiana has six congressional districts. About thirty three 0:01:13.200 --> 0:01:15.280 percent of the state is black, and the question is 0:01:15.600 --> 0:01:18.520 when the districts are being drawn, isn't enough just to 0:01:18.560 --> 0:01:21.760 have one majority black district. And so there was a 0:01:21.760 --> 0:01:25.440 Supreme Court decision back in twenty twenty three involving Alabama 0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:29.080 that was very similar, in which the Court essentially said, yeah, 0:01:29.080 --> 0:01:31.759 Alabama has to have a second majority black district under 0:01:31.800 --> 0:01:35.320 the Voting Rights Act, which basically protects minority voters from 0:01:35.440 --> 0:01:39.720 having their voting power diluted by the way districts are drawn. 0:01:40.280 --> 0:01:43.000 And it seemed like Louisiana was going to go the 0:01:43.040 --> 0:01:46.440 same way, but then another group of voters, a group 0:01:46.440 --> 0:01:50.560 of voters opposed to the second majority black district, sued 0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:53.480 and said the way the state drew this up is 0:01:53.560 --> 0:01:59.120 so convoluted, it's so jerrymandered that that violates the US Constitution. 0:01:59.360 --> 0:02:02.320 They used ray too much in doing that. And so 0:02:02.480 --> 0:02:05.440 this case at the Supreme Court is going to sort 0:02:05.440 --> 0:02:08.400 of determine the balance between those two issues. The Voting 0:02:08.440 --> 0:02:12.279 Rights Act that says essentially, you know, create a majority 0:02:12.480 --> 0:02:16.720 minority district when you can, and the Equal Protection Clause, 0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:19.040 which the Supreme Court is interpreted to put limits on 0:02:19.080 --> 0:02:21.520 the ability of mapter ours to use race. 0:02:22.000 --> 0:02:26.160 The disputed map will be used on Tuesday. 0:02:26.520 --> 0:02:28.840 It will be there will be a second majority black 0:02:28.880 --> 0:02:32.680 district on Tuesday in the election, and that will probably 0:02:32.720 --> 0:02:36.880 be a shift another Democratic seat in Congress because of 0:02:36.880 --> 0:02:37.600 that new map. 0:02:38.160 --> 0:02:42.640 And explain how there have been unusual dynamics in this case. 0:02:43.440 --> 0:02:49.359 Yeah. So interestingly, both the Republican controlled states, including the 0:02:49.400 --> 0:02:54.440 Republican Attorney General Liz Murle and the NWCP Legal Defense FUNT, 0:02:54.800 --> 0:02:58.359 ask the Supreme Court to intervene and uphold this map. 0:02:58.480 --> 0:03:02.040 And the state, you look, we're being put in this 0:03:02.600 --> 0:03:06.320 ridiculous bind. On one hand, we had been because of 0:03:06.360 --> 0:03:11.359 another court case ordered to create a second majority black district. 0:03:11.480 --> 0:03:14.640 And on the other hand, this different court comes along 0:03:14.720 --> 0:03:18.280 and tells us, nope, used race too much. And so 0:03:18.960 --> 0:03:21.720 Louisiana argued that even though we didn't agree with the 0:03:21.760 --> 0:03:25.560 original decision requiring a second majority black district, here you're 0:03:25.600 --> 0:03:28.799 basically turning us into the way to live Mura put 0:03:28.840 --> 0:03:31.400 It were like a ball stuck at an endless game 0:03:31.440 --> 0:03:34.440 of King Pok, And she argued, the state's got to 0:03:34.480 --> 0:03:36.440 have a little breathing room to create districts. 0:03:37.200 --> 0:03:39.480 And so while I have you, Greg, just explain what 0:03:39.520 --> 0:03:43.560 the court did or didn't do as far as Pennsylvania 0:03:43.680 --> 0:03:44.520 on Friday. 0:03:45.000 --> 0:03:49.840 Yes, So this was a case where Republicans were asking 0:03:49.880 --> 0:03:53.760 the Supreme Court to intervene and stop some provisional ballots 0:03:53.760 --> 0:03:56.960 from being kind of potentially tens of thousands of provisional ballots. 0:03:57.000 --> 0:04:01.480 And what these are folks who voted by mail and 0:04:01.520 --> 0:04:05.240 there was something wrong with their mail in ballot, like, 0:04:05.280 --> 0:04:08.839 for example, they didn't include the required secrecy envelope. And 0:04:09.000 --> 0:04:13.120 so under a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision, those folks were 0:04:13.160 --> 0:04:15.800 going to be allowed to cast provisional ballot, so that 0:04:16.000 --> 0:04:18.800 the original flawed ballot wasn't going to count, but they 0:04:18.839 --> 0:04:22.839 could go to the polls and vote anyway. And Republicans 0:04:22.880 --> 0:04:25.120 were asking the Supreme Court to intervene and say, no, 0:04:25.240 --> 0:04:28.120 those folks are not allowed to cast provisional ballots. They 0:04:28.200 --> 0:04:32.360 basically lost their chance because they submitted that flawed mail ballot, 0:04:32.400 --> 0:04:36.240 and the Supreme Court said, no, we're not going to intervene. Essentially, 0:04:36.279 --> 0:04:38.800 we're going to let those votes be counted. None of 0:04:38.839 --> 0:04:41.480 the justices dissented. There was a statement by three of 0:04:41.520 --> 0:04:44.279 the conservative justices on some aspects of the case, but 0:04:44.880 --> 0:04:48.919 no disagreement at the Supreme Court about letting those votes count. 0:04:49.000 --> 0:04:52.479 But there was disagreement among the justices earlier in the 0:04:52.480 --> 0:04:57.240 week on Wednesday about Virginia purging voter rolls. That was 0:04:57.279 --> 0:04:58.480 a six to three decision. 0:04:58.920 --> 0:05:02.440 Yeah, well, they're very very different legal issues. The Virginia 0:05:02.480 --> 0:05:05.600 case was all about whether the state could purge its 0:05:05.680 --> 0:05:08.839 voter rules in the run up to the election, just 0:05:08.880 --> 0:05:11.240 before the election, and what it said was an effort 0:05:11.279 --> 0:05:14.320 to remove non citizens from the polls, even though if 0:05:14.320 --> 0:05:17.320 you at least some folks who were citizens were also 0:05:17.360 --> 0:05:21.680 purged from the roles there. The Pennsylvania issue was very, 0:05:21.800 --> 0:05:24.080 very different in that it's the kind of thing we 0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:27.520 might actually see after the election if the election is 0:05:27.560 --> 0:05:31.040 super close. It's a question of how quick will the 0:05:31.160 --> 0:05:34.080 US Supreme Court be to jump in and say, State 0:05:34.120 --> 0:05:38.320 Supreme Court, you misinterpreted your own law and we're going 0:05:38.400 --> 0:05:41.640 to overrule you. And at least this one particular data 0:05:41.640 --> 0:05:45.200 point says at the moment, the US Supreme Court is 0:05:45.240 --> 0:05:48.400 not that interested in telling a state supreme court that 0:05:48.440 --> 0:05:51.479 it's done something wrong and for example, should not have 0:05:51.560 --> 0:05:52.680 counted some votes. 0:05:52.880 --> 0:05:56.239 Thanks so much, Greg, that's Bloomberg. New Supreme Court reporter 0:05:56.400 --> 0:05:59.680 Greg store turning now to the one million dollars a 0:05:59.720 --> 0:06:04.359 day voter giveaway by Elon Musk's pro Trump Superpack that 0:06:04.440 --> 0:06:08.159 the Philadelphia District Attorney is trying to stop as an 0:06:08.279 --> 0:06:13.719 illegal lottery. Here's how Musk has characterized the giveaway. We 0:06:13.760 --> 0:06:20.200 are going to be awarding a million dollars to randomly 0:06:20.320 --> 0:06:22.840 to people who have signed the petition. 0:06:23.960 --> 0:06:28.000 Every day from now until the election. 0:06:28.600 --> 0:06:32.080 But today in court, Musk's lawyer made a surprising admission, 0:06:32.440 --> 0:06:35.440 saying that the winners are not chosen by chance, but 0:06:35.560 --> 0:06:39.239 are selected based on their suitability to be a public 0:06:39.279 --> 0:06:44.520 spokesperson for Musk's political action committee. Bloomberg's Crystal Mesh was 0:06:44.560 --> 0:06:47.440 in the courtroom. Chris tell us about this admission. 0:06:48.040 --> 0:06:50.360 What's clear is that Musk bet on stage, you know, 0:06:50.480 --> 0:06:52.919 these people are being chosen at random, And what's the 0:06:53.040 --> 0:06:55.479 treasurer for the pack that stified today is He said, 0:06:55.480 --> 0:06:59.040 he was a little bit surprised by that because essentially 0:06:59.640 --> 0:07:02.440 what they they are calling it is an employment contract 0:07:02.720 --> 0:07:05.560 that these people are chosen. You know, once they sign 0:07:05.600 --> 0:07:08.360 the position to refer others, they're chosen based on the 0:07:08.440 --> 0:07:12.200 number of people they refer, you know, their social media posts, 0:07:12.240 --> 0:07:15.400 things like that, and it's not because they're just chosen 0:07:15.440 --> 0:07:17.920 their band. They made that pretty clear during the hearing, 0:07:18.360 --> 0:07:20.160 and that's why they say it's not an illegal lottery. 0:07:20.200 --> 0:07:23.080 They're basically say they're employing these people and the work 0:07:23.160 --> 0:07:26.080 that they're doing is making videos, you know, speaking on 0:07:26.160 --> 0:07:27.720 behalf of the pack, that sort of thing. 0:07:28.200 --> 0:07:31.080 I mean, did the people who sign up for this 0:07:31.520 --> 0:07:33.440 know that that's the way they were being chosen? 0:07:34.280 --> 0:07:37.040 Well, it's not clear. I mean, so at least the 0:07:37.080 --> 0:07:40.600 first person was chosen before he was told, he was 0:07:40.600 --> 0:07:42.960 told he was going to appear on stage. He made 0:07:42.960 --> 0:07:45.440 some videos, but he didn't know until that moment when 0:07:45.480 --> 0:07:47.880 he was selected. As to the other winners, it's not 0:07:48.080 --> 0:07:50.800 there how much they knew or what they suspected. But 0:07:50.960 --> 0:07:52.600 they were also told that they were going to appear 0:07:52.640 --> 0:07:55.480 on stage, So the possibility is that they were not 0:07:55.560 --> 0:07:58.240 really in the dark there as to what might be happened. 0:07:58.440 --> 0:08:02.880 Tell us about the testimony of the Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner. 0:08:03.440 --> 0:08:06.480 He said essentially that he've used this as a violation 0:08:06.600 --> 0:08:10.680 of both state's lottery laws and its consumer protection laws, 0:08:10.680 --> 0:08:14.120 mostly because they're taking the individual personal information of the 0:08:14.120 --> 0:08:16.320 people who got the money. He also argues that the 0:08:16.320 --> 0:08:19.160 lottery laws would be violated because they require free things, 0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:21.600 there to be a prize, there to be an element 0:08:21.640 --> 0:08:24.400 of chance, and for there to be compensation, meaning that 0:08:24.440 --> 0:08:26.760 somebody has to pay to get in. He contends that 0:08:26.920 --> 0:08:30.160 to pay that they are giving is their information and 0:08:30.160 --> 0:08:32.400 that it therefore violates the state laws, and the rgues 0:08:32.400 --> 0:08:36.240 they're not protecting their personal information. He said, they're essentially 0:08:36.240 --> 0:08:39.520 trying to buy votes. So it was relatively testy points 0:08:39.559 --> 0:08:42.440 during the cross but it was all in all mostly 0:08:42.480 --> 0:08:43.640 congenialous change. 0:08:44.120 --> 0:08:47.880 What was his reaction to their saying that now this 0:08:48.120 --> 0:08:50.560 is not a lottery, it's not random. 0:08:50.920 --> 0:08:54.040 Well, the Philadelphia DA was incredulous to stay the least. 0:08:54.080 --> 0:08:56.880 He called it one of the more disingenuous arguments he's 0:08:56.920 --> 0:09:00.960 ever heard during his decades of practicing law. He contended 0:09:00.960 --> 0:09:03.840 that it was essentially nonsense. He thought it was outrageous 0:09:03.880 --> 0:09:06.080 to say the legal the most entertaining part of it, 0:09:06.320 --> 0:09:08.520 without a doubt. He was asked to be on to 0:09:08.559 --> 0:09:10.960 testilize and said, he asked you on to twenty sixteen. 0:09:11.440 --> 0:09:13.720 He used to be a mechanic, and he appreciates the vehicle. 0:09:14.120 --> 0:09:16.880 And then he was asked about you know, the political 0:09:17.280 --> 0:09:20.720 accusations that he's doing this simply political point and he said, 0:09:21.440 --> 0:09:24.120 he said Taylor Swift did the same thing. 0:09:24.200 --> 0:09:25.640 He would bring a complain against her. 0:09:26.480 --> 0:09:28.880 Was Elon Musk there, he was supposed to attend, right. 0:09:29.559 --> 0:09:32.800 He did not. And honestly it was kind of interesting 0:09:32.880 --> 0:09:35.480 because you know, the judge said last week was supposed 0:09:35.520 --> 0:09:39.880 to be here, and he clearly was not. He didn't testify. Uh, 0:09:39.920 --> 0:09:43.120 he didn't even There was no real address to that 0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:45.679 other than the DA pointing it out once again. So 0:09:46.080 --> 0:09:48.920 whether the judge, you know, gives that any weight as 0:09:48.960 --> 0:09:51.720 the credibility and that's sort of thing the DA you know, 0:09:51.800 --> 0:09:55.000 implied that, you know, basically they're they're running away from it. 0:09:55.160 --> 0:09:57.640 And the fact that he didn't show up at them not. 0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:01.120 Addressing Thanks so much, Chris, that s Bloomberg Legal reporter 0:10:01.280 --> 0:10:04.840 Chris Domesh. Shortly after the hearing, the judge ruled that 0:10:04.880 --> 0:10:09.720 the million dollar a day sweepstakes can continue through election day. 0:10:10.160 --> 0:10:13.160 He did not give his reasons for that decision, but 0:10:13.280 --> 0:10:17.840 Musk's lawyers in closing arguments had called it core political speech, 0:10:18.240 --> 0:10:22.640 given that participants sign a petition endorsing the US Constitution 0:10:23.280 --> 0:10:26.800 They also said that Krasner's legal bid to shut down 0:10:26.800 --> 0:10:30.920 the sweepstakes under Pennsylvania law was moot because there would 0:10:30.960 --> 0:10:35.840 be no more Pennsylvania winners before the program ends tomorrow. 0:10:36.600 --> 0:10:40.520 The first three winners came from Pennsylvania. Other winners came 0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:46.200 from the battleground states of Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, 0:10:46.280 --> 0:10:50.200 and Michigan. Krasner has said he could still consider criminal 0:10:50.280 --> 0:10:54.120 charges as he's tasked with protecting both lotteries and the 0:10:54.160 --> 0:10:57.680 integrity of elections. Coming up next on the Bloomberg Lane Show, 0:10:58.160 --> 0:11:02.840 two prosecutors fired by Florida Governor Ron de Santis are 0:11:02.880 --> 0:11:06.760 asking voters to reinstate them. And I'm June Grosso and 0:11:06.800 --> 0:11:10.760 this is Bloomberg. Florida Governor Ron de Santis removed two 0:11:10.960 --> 0:11:15.679 elected prosecutors from their jobs, saying they refuse to enforce 0:11:15.800 --> 0:11:20.960 the state's laws. Now, Andrew Warren and Monique Warrel, both Democrats, 0:11:21.320 --> 0:11:26.200 are asking voters to reinstate them as district attorneys. Joining 0:11:26.200 --> 0:11:30.520 me is Alex Ebert, Bloomberg Last senior correspondent, So Alex 0:11:30.520 --> 0:11:33.160 tell us about these two former prosecutors who are running 0:11:33.200 --> 0:11:37.199 for reelection despite being ousted by Ron de Santis. 0:11:37.600 --> 0:11:41.760 So, these two former prosecutors, both progressives and both outspoken 0:11:41.800 --> 0:11:46.079 critics of Governor Ron de Santas, were both terminated by 0:11:46.080 --> 0:11:50.760 the governor, he says, for refusing to follow the state law. 0:11:50.960 --> 0:11:53.720 And they say it was all part of their discretion 0:11:53.960 --> 0:11:56.160 and their ability to pick and choose what crimes they're 0:11:56.160 --> 0:11:57.360 going to tackle, and. 0:11:57.320 --> 0:12:00.240 So tell us about the court battles. 0:12:00.840 --> 0:12:06.000 Absolutely, so the court battles ranged from state and federal, 0:12:06.160 --> 0:12:09.480 and they both didn't go the prosecutor's way on the 0:12:09.520 --> 0:12:13.679 state level. Both Andrew Warren and he's in Tampa, and 0:12:13.760 --> 0:12:17.840 Monique Warrel and she's in Orlando. They assued in the 0:12:17.880 --> 0:12:21.160 state Supreme Court seeking a special writ to get them 0:12:21.240 --> 0:12:24.559 back into office, and the State Supreme Court said that 0:12:24.840 --> 0:12:27.400 Warren he waited too long to sue he started in 0:12:27.440 --> 0:12:32.720 feral court and Warrel she didn't have enough back into 0:12:33.000 --> 0:12:37.000 her complaints. Basically, they ruled that Warren, you were too late, 0:12:37.160 --> 0:12:41.040 too short, and Warrel, what you did is arguably within 0:12:41.120 --> 0:12:43.080 the discretion of the governor to get rid of you for. 0:12:43.720 --> 0:12:47.559 And now they're running for the same seats that they 0:12:47.600 --> 0:12:49.560 were ejected from by the governor. 0:12:49.960 --> 0:12:52.640 That's right. They're running for their old jobs back and 0:12:52.760 --> 0:12:55.720 both of them are in districts the Democrats do pretty well, 0:12:55.760 --> 0:12:59.520 and Worrel won a landslide back in twenty twenty. She 0:12:59.600 --> 0:13:02.600 had like sixty percent of the vote. Warren was around 0:13:02.720 --> 0:13:06.400 the mid fifties with his election. And both of them 0:13:06.440 --> 0:13:09.679 are once again running against prosecutors they think they can 0:13:09.720 --> 0:13:10.000 take on. 0:13:10.320 --> 0:13:13.800 And are they running against the prosecutors that DeSantis put 0:13:13.840 --> 0:13:17.560 in place after he removed Warren and Warrel. 0:13:18.280 --> 0:13:22.400 Indeed, yes, it is like they're running against exes right there. 0:13:22.760 --> 0:13:28.000 So in Tampa, we've got Warren running against State Attorney Lopez, 0:13:28.000 --> 0:13:31.040 who we interviewed with for Our Peace and she touts 0:13:31.120 --> 0:13:34.200 all of her great relationships with local law enforcement. She 0:13:34.320 --> 0:13:36.800 was in the office for over a decade and she 0:13:36.960 --> 0:13:39.840 was tapped to be a local judge before being tapped 0:13:39.840 --> 0:13:42.520 once again by De Santas to take over that state 0:13:42.559 --> 0:13:45.920 attorney's office. You know, she said that she's focusing on 0:13:46.160 --> 0:13:49.920 prosecuting more low level crimes and focusing more on the 0:13:49.960 --> 0:13:53.280 interest of victims than Warren did when he was the 0:13:53.280 --> 0:13:54.160 prosecutor there. 0:13:54.679 --> 0:13:56.719 I mean, have there been polls out to see, you know, 0:13:56.760 --> 0:13:57.840 who's doing better? 0:13:58.160 --> 0:14:01.079 Not to my knowledge I got with the attorneys that 0:14:01.160 --> 0:14:03.880 were running here, and they didn't share with me anything. 0:14:04.440 --> 0:14:07.920 What is well known is how sort of striking the 0:14:08.040 --> 0:14:10.840 voting public is here. You know, you have districts that 0:14:11.000 --> 0:14:14.600 lean Democrat, you know, especially in the Orlando area, and 0:14:14.720 --> 0:14:18.679 even though DeSantis was winning across the state, these individuals 0:14:18.760 --> 0:14:21.880 were able to easily win their offices four years ago. 0:14:22.680 --> 0:14:26.040 The amount of money being poured by conservatives into these 0:14:26.160 --> 0:14:32.560 races is just amazing. Backers of Dessanders's replacement for Warren, 0:14:32.760 --> 0:14:36.800 Susie Lopez, have spent two point one million dollars on 0:14:37.120 --> 0:14:41.320 ads and groups supporting the other desand disappointee Andrew Bain 0:14:42.320 --> 0:14:45.040 has spent two point three million dollars. 0:14:45.600 --> 0:14:48.960 It is iepopping. So the amount of money is involved 0:14:49.040 --> 0:14:53.120 in the ninth district race that's Swirl and the thirteenth 0:14:53.200 --> 0:14:58.800 district race that's Warren together, that is more than four 0:14:58.960 --> 0:15:02.040 times as much as you're seeing spent statewide. 0:15:02.480 --> 0:15:03.360 And in those. 0:15:03.200 --> 0:15:08.080 Specific races, the Republican or conservative sides are vastly outspending 0:15:08.160 --> 0:15:11.560 the Democrats. You see figures as much as ten to 0:15:11.560 --> 0:15:15.560 one spent in these races seeking to have these conservatives 0:15:15.640 --> 0:15:16.840 hold on to their posts. 0:15:17.400 --> 0:15:21.160 If they do win, will DeSantis remove them again? 0:15:22.000 --> 0:15:24.200 This is an open question, and it's one of the 0:15:24.200 --> 0:15:27.480 reasons why this becomes such a flashpoint for this broader 0:15:27.480 --> 0:15:32.440 discussion across the country. We've seen states where progressive prosecutors 0:15:32.480 --> 0:15:36.240 were recalled right or they've paced immense criticism and they 0:15:36.320 --> 0:15:39.080 lost their next election. But this is the first and 0:15:39.240 --> 0:15:43.520 second instance where we've seen a governor literally remove the 0:15:43.560 --> 0:15:48.360 progressive prosecutors just because of a difference in discretion. You 0:15:48.480 --> 0:15:52.800 have Warren who had refused to enforce abortion related crimes, 0:15:53.000 --> 0:15:56.360 and you had World whose policies were to seek more 0:15:56.400 --> 0:16:02.880 diversion and more non bail related pre trial release, and 0:16:03.080 --> 0:16:05.680 because of that, DeSantis said that he could remove them. 0:16:06.080 --> 0:16:09.160 National experts in criminal law and others that follow this 0:16:09.240 --> 0:16:12.360 issue closely say that this could be a template for 0:16:12.560 --> 0:16:17.240 other governors or even a Republican president to seek to 0:16:17.280 --> 0:16:20.280 remove or work around local prosecutors. 0:16:20.480 --> 0:16:23.680 You know, there have been different places where these conflicts 0:16:23.720 --> 0:16:27.960 have arisen. Do they only arise when it's liberal prosecutors 0:16:28.080 --> 0:16:32.760 elected in cities in a state with a conservative governor 0:16:32.880 --> 0:16:34.000 or legislature? 0:16:34.640 --> 0:16:38.280 Experts at the ABA discuss this topic with me. They've 0:16:38.360 --> 0:16:42.960 researched this issue really thoroughly, and what they've come across 0:16:43.120 --> 0:16:47.720 is that you're seeing mostly this occur with progressive local 0:16:47.760 --> 0:16:53.280 prosecutors and Republican governors. However, you've seen for years this 0:16:53.400 --> 0:16:58.560 issue where democratic governors or data attorneys general will seek 0:16:58.640 --> 0:17:02.280 to take issue used off the plate of the local 0:17:02.320 --> 0:17:07.000 prosecutors or seek to bring cases that local prosecutors won't bring. 0:17:07.400 --> 0:17:12.520 You've seen things like that in states like Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan, 0:17:12.880 --> 0:17:16.960 where liberal executives or other state officials will sort of 0:17:17.000 --> 0:17:20.400 work around the local prosecutors and do things they don't want. 0:17:20.640 --> 0:17:23.880 The most high profile version of this was back after 0:17:23.920 --> 0:17:27.919 the jobs decision came down. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel 0:17:28.240 --> 0:17:32.480 came in and she wrestled power from local prosecutors saying 0:17:32.480 --> 0:17:36.000 that no, you can't bring abortion related crimes. She went 0:17:36.040 --> 0:17:39.480 to court to get a declaration from a state court 0:17:39.520 --> 0:17:42.439 saying no, that's the job of the state attorney general 0:17:42.600 --> 0:17:45.159 and our policies that we're not going to prosecute these. 0:17:45.040 --> 0:17:47.639 Has anything like this happened in Texas? 0:17:48.080 --> 0:17:52.080 Indeed, it's an open question in Texas. My colleague Ryan Otulio, 0:17:52.359 --> 0:17:56.040 the Great correspondent, we have in Texas did a great 0:17:56.080 --> 0:17:59.320 story about this last week on this very issue, where 0:17:59.400 --> 0:18:02.879 there's a job that will be considering whether a desearch 0:18:02.920 --> 0:18:07.000 attorney there should be taken out. There's other issues in 0:18:07.040 --> 0:18:11.120 Georgia surrounding the prosecution of Trump and in Tennessee where 0:18:11.160 --> 0:18:15.040 lawmakers there are actually campaigning and possibly taking out a 0:18:15.080 --> 0:18:16.199 progressive prosecutor. 0:18:17.119 --> 0:18:22.320 These progressive prosecutors were probably elected by voters in a 0:18:22.359 --> 0:18:27.240 city or area that is more liberal than the state. 0:18:27.840 --> 0:18:30.000 How does the governor have the right to take away 0:18:30.040 --> 0:18:31.480 their vote? 0:18:31.760 --> 0:18:34.959 So I had pretty in depth conversations with national experts 0:18:35.000 --> 0:18:38.080 for this story over several months, and the bottom line 0:18:38.160 --> 0:18:41.760 is that there's a gray area here. So prosecutors under 0:18:41.760 --> 0:18:45.280 the law, they have unlimited discretion, but at the same time, 0:18:45.600 --> 0:18:49.800 there's court rulings that say, if you're categorically refusing to 0:18:50.000 --> 0:18:53.480 enforce parts of the state law, that might be reason 0:18:53.600 --> 0:18:56.480 to say that you're not actually doing your job. DeSantis 0:18:56.520 --> 0:19:00.280 is leaning on some Florida president in his state that 0:19:00.560 --> 0:19:04.600 says basically exactly that for a prosecutor that refused to 0:19:04.600 --> 0:19:08.600 prosecute gambling issues. So you know, both sides have pretty 0:19:08.640 --> 0:19:12.160 strong legal arguments, and the question is you know, how 0:19:12.200 --> 0:19:15.480 do we balance that need for, you know, the protection 0:19:15.560 --> 0:19:19.359 of local citizens against crime with the ability of prosecutors 0:19:19.400 --> 0:19:23.240 to innovate and to consider what's the most important thing 0:19:23.320 --> 0:19:25.560 for them to do. Because at the end of the day, 0:19:26.119 --> 0:19:29.240 we can't prosecute all the crimes. The question is can 0:19:29.240 --> 0:19:32.440 we look the other way if certain crimes should be prosecuted. 0:19:32.760 --> 0:19:37.800 Do these cases arise only when a prosecutor says I'm 0:19:37.840 --> 0:19:40.760 not going to prosecute abortion related crimes or I'm not 0:19:40.800 --> 0:19:44.720 going to prosecute gambling related crimes, where a prosecutor is 0:19:44.760 --> 0:19:47.040 sort of, you know, drawing a line in the sand, 0:19:47.680 --> 0:19:50.680 or does it happen because they notice that prosecutors are 0:19:50.680 --> 0:19:53.800 not are not going after certain kinds of criminals. 0:19:54.400 --> 0:19:56.560 That's the distinction between Warren and Worl. 0:19:56.720 --> 0:19:56.880 Right. 0:19:57.280 --> 0:20:00.879 So, Warren is one of dozens of prosecut uters whom, 0:20:01.040 --> 0:20:04.600 after the Job's decision, came out and signed a statement 0:20:04.640 --> 0:20:07.399 saying I'm not going to prosecute abortion related crimes. And 0:20:07.560 --> 0:20:10.760 the interesting thing for Warren's perspective is there have been 0:20:10.800 --> 0:20:15.840 no crimes like that committed inside of his district, you know, 0:20:15.920 --> 0:20:19.080 And both Republicans and Democrats will point to that but 0:20:19.160 --> 0:20:22.520 regardless that categoric Cobar got him in trouble with war. 0:20:22.640 --> 0:20:26.399 What's different the Orlando attorney she got in trouble because 0:20:26.400 --> 0:20:31.040 of her policies, which DeSantis said, reduced sentences at jails, 0:20:31.359 --> 0:20:34.679 so there were fewer people being jailed, and because criminals 0:20:34.760 --> 0:20:37.800 that you know, normally would have been locked up prior 0:20:37.840 --> 0:20:40.800 to trial, you know, because of her policies were able 0:20:40.840 --> 0:20:43.840 to be outside of the carstural system at the time 0:20:44.240 --> 0:20:47.160 and had committed crimes. And so he pointed to that 0:20:47.640 --> 0:20:51.080 as a version of incompetence, while she pointed to that 0:20:51.600 --> 0:20:54.000 as something that she was trying to implement with her 0:20:54.040 --> 0:20:57.879 discretion to improve the local criminal justice system. 0:20:58.280 --> 0:21:02.040 Tell us about these legislation in twenty seven states that 0:21:02.200 --> 0:21:03.400 the bills that they filed. 0:21:03.880 --> 0:21:06.320 This was a topic that I hadn't expected to come 0:21:06.400 --> 0:21:08.399 up when I was looking into this. You know, often 0:21:08.560 --> 0:21:13.040 at Blomberg WA we do sidetrack sort of legal and 0:21:13.160 --> 0:21:16.800 legislative analysis to look at this. But a law professor 0:21:16.840 --> 0:21:19.600 brought this up and said, there are twenty seven states 0:21:19.960 --> 0:21:24.760 where legislators are seeking to improve governor's ability to remove 0:21:25.200 --> 0:21:28.199 local prosecutors. You know, many states they're not going to 0:21:28.240 --> 0:21:31.240 have the ability to do that unless there's some sort 0:21:31.280 --> 0:21:36.000 of truly bad ethics issue or competence issue, or, as 0:21:36.040 --> 0:21:39.840 the experts told me, issues revolving around you know, drug 0:21:39.920 --> 0:21:43.680 use or alcoholism in an office. Right, those are instances 0:21:43.680 --> 0:21:46.040 where we've seen these things happen in the past. But 0:21:46.119 --> 0:21:51.360 lawmakers here, typically Republicans, they're looking to empower the governors 0:21:51.400 --> 0:21:54.600 to remove people the same way that Desantist did. And 0:21:54.640 --> 0:21:57.560 that's something that in Project twenty twenty five to see 0:21:57.560 --> 0:22:01.800 the Heritage Foundation encouraging the next president of the United 0:22:01.800 --> 0:22:05.840 States to consider doing as well. Their argument is, you know, 0:22:05.880 --> 0:22:09.200 if you're not enforcing all the laws in a particular jurisdiction, 0:22:09.440 --> 0:22:12.240 they're getting enforced in other parts of the state, that's 0:22:12.320 --> 0:22:16.320 not equal protection under the state constitution or federal constitution, 0:22:16.720 --> 0:22:18.840 because you could be you know, put in jail for 0:22:18.880 --> 0:22:21.800 a crime in one area and not at another. Whereas 0:22:21.920 --> 0:22:24.359 you know, the people that are criticizing these lawmakers, they 0:22:24.400 --> 0:22:29.119 say this is actually undoing the votes of local voters 0:22:29.240 --> 0:22:32.439 who want to have their policies followed and the crimes 0:22:32.480 --> 0:22:35.399 they think most important, you know, be the emphasis of 0:22:35.480 --> 0:22:36.399 their state attorneys. 0:22:36.560 --> 0:22:39.119 And you talk to someone who said there was a 0:22:39.160 --> 0:22:45.159 concern about prosecutors worrying about keeping their jobs instead of 0:22:45.160 --> 0:22:47.000 worrying about the job that they're doing. 0:22:47.960 --> 0:22:52.920 Professor Ellen Yarshevsky over at Hofstra Law School, she's one 0:22:52.920 --> 0:22:56.480 of the co chairs of this American Bar Association Criminal 0:22:56.600 --> 0:23:01.440 Law Section that is studying prosecutorial and what she said 0:23:01.480 --> 0:23:05.640 is the main concern is that instead of sentencing how 0:23:05.680 --> 0:23:08.960 they should based on the local rules and you know, 0:23:09.000 --> 0:23:12.439 what they're seeing at their office or filing charges that 0:23:12.560 --> 0:23:17.920 properly align with their priorities, Prosecutors whether they're Democrats or Republicans, 0:23:18.240 --> 0:23:20.800 now might have to look over their shoulders and think, 0:23:21.160 --> 0:23:24.000 what is the governor going to think about this instead 0:23:24.000 --> 0:23:26.680 of what is the best thing for my local community? 0:23:27.119 --> 0:23:30.639 You know. She said that extends from bail, to sentencing, 0:23:30.760 --> 0:23:34.280 to charging or going to over or under charge instead 0:23:34.359 --> 0:23:37.679 of using their own discretion. She's worried and folks at 0:23:37.720 --> 0:23:40.720 the ABA are also worried that we're going to see 0:23:40.720 --> 0:23:44.040 prosecutors now think first, what would the governor want? 0:23:44.280 --> 0:23:46.760