1
00:00:01,960 --> 00:00:05,200
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Boomberg Law Show. I'm June Grosso. A

2
00:00:05,240 --> 00:00:09,200
Speaker 1: third witness from his inner circle who flipped takes the

3
00:00:09,240 --> 00:00:13,400
Speaker 1: stand against Sam Bankman Freed and his attorney's raised questions

4
00:00:13,720 --> 00:00:16,560
Speaker 1: related to his taking the stand in his own defense.

5
00:00:17,320 --> 00:00:22,560
Speaker 1: A top bankruptcy judge resigns amid ethics questions, and a

6
00:00:22,640 --> 00:00:27,280
Speaker 1: black high school student in Texas sues after being suspended

7
00:00:27,480 --> 00:00:32,640
Speaker 1: over his hairstyle. Prosecutors have built their criminal fraud case

8
00:00:32,680 --> 00:00:37,120
Speaker 1: against Sam Bankman Freed by reaching cooperation deals with his

9
00:00:37,200 --> 00:00:40,519
Speaker 1: inner circle, and the third member of that inner circle

10
00:00:40,640 --> 00:00:44,560
Speaker 1: testified against him today in court. Nishad Singh told the

11
00:00:44,600 --> 00:00:48,280
Speaker 1: Manhattan jury that he was in severe emotional distress in

12
00:00:48,320 --> 00:00:51,680
Speaker 1: the days leading up to ftx's failure as he dealt

13
00:00:51,720 --> 00:00:56,840
Speaker 1: with accusations from ftx's former chief regulatory officer and others

14
00:00:57,120 --> 00:00:59,720
Speaker 1: that he was partly to blame for the company's demise.

15
00:01:00,360 --> 00:01:03,160
Speaker 1: Sing claimed he had only learned about the massive eight

16
00:01:03,240 --> 00:01:06,160
Speaker 1: billion dollar hole in the company's balance sheet and the

17
00:01:06,240 --> 00:01:10,759
Speaker 1: misuse of FTX customer funds in September of twenty twenty two,

18
00:01:11,280 --> 00:01:15,000
Speaker 1: about two months before the firm file for bankruptcy. Bankman

19
00:01:15,040 --> 00:01:18,360
Speaker 1: Freed faces decades in prison on charges that he funneled

20
00:01:18,440 --> 00:01:23,280
Speaker 1: FTX customer money into Alimeter Research and affiliated hedge fund

21
00:01:23,680 --> 00:01:28,440
Speaker 1: for risky trades, political donations, and expensive property before both

22
00:01:28,480 --> 00:01:32,280
Speaker 1: companies collapsed into bankruptcy last year. Joining me is Bloomberg

23
00:01:32,360 --> 00:01:36,119
Speaker 1: legal reporter Bob van Voris, who's covering the trial. Okay,

24
00:01:36,200 --> 00:01:38,080
Speaker 1: so tell us about him. Who is he? H?

25
00:01:38,160 --> 00:01:42,039
Speaker 2: Nashat saying is the former director of engineering at FTX.

26
00:01:42,520 --> 00:01:46,880
Speaker 2: He's somebody who was a close friend of SBF's younger

27
00:01:46,880 --> 00:01:50,880
Speaker 2: brother Gabriel and worked initially for Elmet Research and then

28
00:01:50,920 --> 00:01:54,120
Speaker 2: came over to FTX. Obviously he was a tech person,

29
00:01:54,760 --> 00:01:59,320
Speaker 2: and he was somebody who admitted to crimes for conspiring

30
00:01:59,400 --> 00:02:04,280
Speaker 2: with Ellison, Garry Wang and Sam Bankman Freed into frauding

31
00:02:04,320 --> 00:02:06,320
Speaker 2: investors and customers.

32
00:02:06,680 --> 00:02:09,959
Speaker 1: What was the most important part of his testimony.

33
00:02:09,480 --> 00:02:12,079
Speaker 2: Well, certainly the most dramatic part was at the end

34
00:02:12,120 --> 00:02:15,240
Speaker 2: when he was talking about the slide of FTX and

35
00:02:15,280 --> 00:02:18,600
Speaker 2: Alameda into bankruptcy and everything was blown up, and there

36
00:02:18,600 --> 00:02:22,760
Speaker 2: were all kinds of crazy accusations. He testified, and at

37
00:02:22,760 --> 00:02:25,800
Speaker 2: the end he said the accusation that he was getting

38
00:02:26,080 --> 00:02:29,520
Speaker 2: for helping to blow up the firm had him suicidal

39
00:02:29,680 --> 00:02:32,240
Speaker 2: in the final days in the early part of November

40
00:02:32,280 --> 00:02:35,520
Speaker 2: twenty two. He claims he only knew about the fraud

41
00:02:35,760 --> 00:02:40,120
Speaker 2: beginning around September of twenty two, and that he wanted

42
00:02:40,200 --> 00:02:43,640
Speaker 2: Sambakmin Freed to step up and take responsibility for all

43
00:02:43,680 --> 00:02:43,840
Speaker 2: of this.

44
00:02:44,840 --> 00:02:47,280
Speaker 1: What did he admit to that he had done was

45
00:02:47,320 --> 00:02:50,519
Speaker 1: he part of the redesign of the computer code.

46
00:02:50,440 --> 00:02:53,200
Speaker 2: Was a part of basically designing a lot of the

47
00:02:53,240 --> 00:02:58,120
Speaker 2: code that allowed Sambankman Freed to allegedly shift money from

48
00:02:58,360 --> 00:03:01,919
Speaker 2: Alameda Research over to f PX and to steal the money.

49
00:03:02,040 --> 00:03:05,000
Speaker 2: But as I say, he didn't understand that there was

50
00:03:05,639 --> 00:03:10,480
Speaker 2: a multi billion dollar hole in FTX customer accounts until

51
00:03:10,520 --> 00:03:14,519
Speaker 2: September twenty two. According to his testimony, he admitted also

52
00:03:15,200 --> 00:03:18,920
Speaker 2: being used as a straw donor for lots of political donations.

53
00:03:18,960 --> 00:03:22,880
Speaker 2: He told jurors about how he was given blank checks

54
00:03:22,919 --> 00:03:26,560
Speaker 2: to sign and that those would go to Gabriel Bankman Freed,

55
00:03:26,840 --> 00:03:29,919
Speaker 2: who was the head of a pack that Sam Bankman

56
00:03:29,960 --> 00:03:34,480
Speaker 2: Free donated to. The money would go to various Democratic candidates.

57
00:03:34,520 --> 00:03:37,920
Speaker 2: And that's saying it acted basically as a donor to

58
00:03:38,080 --> 00:03:40,640
Speaker 2: lots of center left causes. That he really for the

59
00:03:40,720 --> 00:03:42,000
Speaker 2: most part, had no idea.

60
00:03:42,280 --> 00:03:44,840
Speaker 1: Let me understand this did. He claim that he didn't

61
00:03:44,880 --> 00:03:46,760
Speaker 1: know that anything was wrong until the end.

62
00:03:47,240 --> 00:03:50,400
Speaker 2: He claimed he didn't know about the big hole in

63
00:03:50,440 --> 00:03:54,080
Speaker 2: the FTX customer account until the end. Until you know

64
00:03:54,160 --> 00:03:57,880
Speaker 2: the massive fraud. There were certainly crimes that he admits

65
00:03:57,960 --> 00:04:00,800
Speaker 2: being a part of before then, but that he didn't

66
00:04:00,800 --> 00:04:05,080
Speaker 2: know about the big hole in the FTX account until September.

67
00:04:05,360 --> 00:04:09,280
Speaker 1: He felt embarrassed and ashamed at the investment FTX made

68
00:04:09,320 --> 00:04:12,920
Speaker 1: in a firm K five that had ties to many celebrities.

69
00:04:13,040 --> 00:04:15,280
Speaker 1: Say he was embarrassed and ashamed about the rest of his.

70
00:04:15,280 --> 00:04:18,800
Speaker 2: Actions, certainly at the end. He described a lot of

71
00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:21,160
Speaker 2: the things that were going on it's dishonest, and that

72
00:04:21,240 --> 00:04:25,520
Speaker 2: he tried to sidestep some of them, not to be

73
00:04:25,600 --> 00:04:30,320
Speaker 2: involved in some of the decisions. He considered quitting many times,

74
00:04:30,640 --> 00:04:34,120
Speaker 2: he said, but didn't want to be responsible for helping

75
00:04:34,200 --> 00:04:37,920
Speaker 2: to hasten the final blow up of the firm. He

76
00:04:37,960 --> 00:04:42,400
Speaker 2: wanted to stay, he said, and hopefully figure out a solution.

77
00:04:42,839 --> 00:04:45,400
Speaker 2: As that became more and more remote, he became just

78
00:04:45,440 --> 00:04:46,440
Speaker 2: more and more despondent.

79
00:04:46,760 --> 00:04:50,680
Speaker 1: I understand that Judge Kaplan was pretty active, asking him

80
00:04:50,760 --> 00:04:56,200
Speaker 1: questions about things like venture investing, blockchain, algorithmic failure.

81
00:04:56,640 --> 00:05:00,120
Speaker 2: Well, same spoke very precisely, but often in a very

82
00:05:00,360 --> 00:05:03,560
Speaker 2: technical manner and used a lot of terms that the

83
00:05:03,680 --> 00:05:05,800
Speaker 2: judge I think was afraid we're going to go over

84
00:05:05,920 --> 00:05:10,599
Speaker 2: Dror's head. Prosecutor Nicholas Ruse here really wasn't, you know,

85
00:05:10,720 --> 00:05:13,920
Speaker 2: setting it up in a way that you know, some

86
00:05:14,000 --> 00:05:17,560
Speaker 2: of these things were explainable. Judge Kaplan, Lewis Kaplan was,

87
00:05:17,680 --> 00:05:20,120
Speaker 2: before he was appointed the bench, was a litigator for

88
00:05:20,440 --> 00:05:23,080
Speaker 2: many years, so he kind of knows how Jerry's work

89
00:05:23,200 --> 00:05:26,000
Speaker 2: and I think sense that some of these terms were

90
00:05:26,000 --> 00:05:28,839
Speaker 2: going over their heads, and so he was jumping in

91
00:05:28,960 --> 00:05:32,960
Speaker 2: quite a bit to ask questions of saying directly and

92
00:05:33,080 --> 00:05:35,240
Speaker 2: just ask him to explain, you know, what he was

93
00:05:35,240 --> 00:05:35,799
Speaker 2: talking about.

94
00:05:35,920 --> 00:05:39,440
Speaker 1: Did they come across as believable contrite?

95
00:05:40,640 --> 00:05:43,920
Speaker 2: I think certainly he came across as both. And I

96
00:05:44,080 --> 00:05:47,679
Speaker 2: think you know, he kind of is in a similar

97
00:05:47,720 --> 00:05:51,040
Speaker 2: sense to Caroline Ellison and Gary Wang, the other two

98
00:05:51,400 --> 00:05:56,760
Speaker 2: people who were senior executives and pleaded guilty and have

99
00:05:56,839 --> 00:06:00,240
Speaker 2: cooperated with the government. These are very brilliant young people

100
00:06:00,279 --> 00:06:03,960
Speaker 2: who are very good at expressing themselves. They were pretty

101
00:06:03,960 --> 00:06:07,440
Speaker 2: good on the stand, and certainly Ellison and Wang were

102
00:06:07,480 --> 00:06:10,479
Speaker 2: able to get through cross examination without too many dents.

103
00:06:10,480 --> 00:06:14,440
Speaker 2: We'll see how Sing does tomorrow, but these are kind

104
00:06:14,480 --> 00:06:17,039
Speaker 2: of the big three witnesses against the guy, and the

105
00:06:17,080 --> 00:06:19,200
Speaker 2: defense is certainly going to look to score some points.

106
00:06:19,880 --> 00:06:23,080
Speaker 1: Sam begman Fried's lawyers have brought up the possibility of

107
00:06:23,360 --> 00:06:26,080
Speaker 1: him testifying in his own defense.

108
00:06:26,480 --> 00:06:29,120
Speaker 2: Well, they discussed it in the letter last night. Sam

109
00:06:29,160 --> 00:06:32,200
Speaker 2: Begminfried has been having a problem all along that they've

110
00:06:32,240 --> 00:06:35,640
Speaker 2: been raising with a judge about getting his adderall prescription.

111
00:06:35,880 --> 00:06:40,240
Speaker 2: He gets the prescription for depression and for ADHD. His

112
00:06:40,360 --> 00:06:43,400
Speaker 2: lawyers claim that he's not able to concentrate and to

113
00:06:43,480 --> 00:06:46,800
Speaker 2: focus to the extent that he needs to, and that

114
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:49,040
Speaker 2: if he's not able to sort of work this out,

115
00:06:49,360 --> 00:06:51,880
Speaker 2: that it's going to be a problem with him being

116
00:06:51,920 --> 00:06:55,480
Speaker 2: able to meaningfully participate in his defense. And of course,

117
00:06:55,560 --> 00:06:57,520
Speaker 2: you know that's what he needs to do to have

118
00:06:57,560 --> 00:07:00,800
Speaker 2: a fair trial. So this is some serious that they're raising.

119
00:07:00,960 --> 00:07:03,360
Speaker 2: In a letter late last night to the judge, they

120
00:07:03,440 --> 00:07:05,240
Speaker 2: raised this and they said, you know that this is

121
00:07:05,279 --> 00:07:09,080
Speaker 2: a critical time because we're deciding whether or not Bekmin

122
00:07:09,120 --> 00:07:11,160
Speaker 2: Freed is going to get on the stand and testify

123
00:07:11,160 --> 00:07:11,920
Speaker 2: in his own defense.

124
00:07:12,080 --> 00:07:15,720
Speaker 1: I know they brought this up before, and it's surprising

125
00:07:15,760 --> 00:07:18,640
Speaker 1: to me that if someone's on medication, you know, they

126
00:07:18,680 --> 00:07:21,640
Speaker 1: can't get the medication that they're on because they're in

127
00:07:21,680 --> 00:07:24,880
Speaker 1: prison during their trial. It seems sort of ridiculous.

128
00:07:25,120 --> 00:07:27,960
Speaker 2: It certainly does. And the judge said, well, look, I'm

129
00:07:28,000 --> 00:07:31,320
Speaker 2: not a doctor. I can't prescribe him medication, and that

130
00:07:31,360 --> 00:07:34,240
Speaker 2: he only has limited control over the Bureau of Prison,

131
00:07:34,360 --> 00:07:37,800
Speaker 2: whose doctors are the ones who make decisions. For Bekman

132
00:07:37,880 --> 00:07:40,640
Speaker 2: freed while he's confined at the MDC in Brooklyn, the

133
00:07:40,680 --> 00:07:44,880
Speaker 2: federal lock up in Brooklyn, as people probably know, Kaplan

134
00:07:44,960 --> 00:07:48,320
Speaker 2: ordered them locked up in August after he violated the

135
00:07:48,400 --> 00:07:51,720
Speaker 2: terms of his bail at the time. So this has

136
00:07:51,720 --> 00:07:54,960
Speaker 2: been a problem that just keeps popping up, including well

137
00:07:54,960 --> 00:07:55,640
Speaker 2: into the trial.

138
00:07:55,920 --> 00:08:00,360
Speaker 1: I understand that during cross examination of Ellison, the defense

139
00:08:00,440 --> 00:08:03,080
Speaker 1: wasn't able to ask a lot of questions because, you know,

140
00:08:03,160 --> 00:08:06,400
Speaker 1: there were objections that were almost always sustained as to form,

141
00:08:06,440 --> 00:08:08,840
Speaker 1: et cetera, et cetera. Did you see that too.

142
00:08:09,360 --> 00:08:12,560
Speaker 2: There were definitely a lot of objections that were sustained,

143
00:08:12,600 --> 00:08:16,120
Speaker 2: and the judge had put a number of issues, you know,

144
00:08:16,200 --> 00:08:19,320
Speaker 2: out of reach for the defense, including things like whether

145
00:08:19,480 --> 00:08:22,440
Speaker 2: he was acting on the advice of lawyers. You know,

146
00:08:22,480 --> 00:08:25,440
Speaker 2: anytime the defense tried to get near any of these issues,

147
00:08:25,720 --> 00:08:28,600
Speaker 2: there would be an objection. Often there'd be discussion of

148
00:08:28,760 --> 00:08:30,760
Speaker 2: at the bench. Lawyers tell me, this is the kind

149
00:08:30,800 --> 00:08:33,640
Speaker 2: of thing that really just screws up your rhythm, you know,

150
00:08:33,679 --> 00:08:37,000
Speaker 2: when you're trying to get into a groove and cross examination.

151
00:08:37,559 --> 00:08:41,600
Speaker 1: And I know that pre trial Caplan made several important

152
00:08:41,720 --> 00:08:45,199
Speaker 1: rulings that were detrimental to bankman freed.

153
00:08:46,000 --> 00:08:47,680
Speaker 2: You know, if he's convicted, we're going to see this

154
00:08:47,720 --> 00:08:50,360
Speaker 2: on appeal. Judge Kaplan is definitely a judge who wants

155
00:08:50,360 --> 00:08:53,440
Speaker 2: to move things along. He also, you know, can be

156
00:08:53,480 --> 00:08:57,319
Speaker 2: a little cranky with trial counsel if they're not behaving

157
00:08:57,320 --> 00:08:58,280
Speaker 2: in the way he wants them to.

158
00:08:58,679 --> 00:09:01,920
Speaker 1: Seeing testified that he was a millionaire during his time

159
00:09:01,960 --> 00:09:04,120
Speaker 1: at Alameda, Is he still a millionaire?

160
00:09:04,640 --> 00:09:07,000
Speaker 2: Most of this money just slipped through, you know, just

161
00:09:07,080 --> 00:09:10,400
Speaker 2: vanished into thin air. There's not much left for these people.

162
00:09:10,400 --> 00:09:13,439
Speaker 2: They certainly sing is no longer a billionaire.

163
00:09:13,240 --> 00:09:15,839
Speaker 1: So how much is left In the prosecution's case.

164
00:09:16,280 --> 00:09:18,600
Speaker 2: The government is saying that they're going to basically wrap

165
00:09:18,720 --> 00:09:21,400
Speaker 2: up their case. Oh really by the end of the week,

166
00:09:21,440 --> 00:09:23,520
Speaker 2: with maybe a couple of people who have travel issues

167
00:09:23,559 --> 00:09:25,240
Speaker 2: that they're going to have to put over till next week.

168
00:09:25,280 --> 00:09:28,040
Speaker 2: So you know, this is going to move pretty fast

169
00:09:28,280 --> 00:09:28,800
Speaker 2: for the end.

170
00:09:29,120 --> 00:09:31,800
Speaker 1: So then we'll soon know if bankmin Freed is actually

171
00:09:31,800 --> 00:09:34,200
Speaker 1: going to take the stand. And we'll check back with

172
00:09:34,240 --> 00:09:38,080
Speaker 1: you tomorrow, Bob to see how the cross examination of

173
00:09:38,160 --> 00:09:41,920
Speaker 1: sing when. Thanks so much. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter Bob

174
00:09:42,040 --> 00:09:46,559
Speaker 1: van voris coming up next. A top bankruptcy judge resigns

175
00:09:47,040 --> 00:09:52,720
Speaker 1: amid ethics charges. President Joe Biden has confirmed thirty six

176
00:09:52,880 --> 00:09:56,000
Speaker 1: judges to the federal appellate courts and one hundred and

177
00:09:56,000 --> 00:09:59,320
Speaker 1: eight judges to the district courts. But you can expect

178
00:09:59,320 --> 00:10:03,080
Speaker 1: to slow down in the confirmation process in twenty twenty four,

179
00:10:03,240 --> 00:10:07,640
Speaker 1: a presidential year, and there's also the prospect of Democrats

180
00:10:07,720 --> 00:10:11,800
Speaker 1: losing the Senate. Joining me is judiciary expert Carl Tobias,

181
00:10:11,960 --> 00:10:15,720
Speaker 1: a professor at the University of Richmond Law School. Start

182
00:10:15,760 --> 00:10:18,600
Speaker 1: with the Biden numbers. How are his numbers at this

183
00:10:18,720 --> 00:10:21,520
Speaker 1: point compared to other presidents.

184
00:10:21,920 --> 00:10:25,720
Speaker 3: Well, I think they're still pretty solid compared to many

185
00:10:25,880 --> 00:10:30,520
Speaker 3: other presidents, especially recent ones. I think he doesn't have

186
00:10:30,679 --> 00:10:34,640
Speaker 3: quite as many confirmations as Trump did at this point

187
00:10:34,679 --> 00:10:39,400
Speaker 3: in his presidency, but he's not very far behind, and

188
00:10:39,760 --> 00:10:42,520
Speaker 3: there are a number of nominees on the floor who

189
00:10:42,559 --> 00:10:47,960
Speaker 3: could be confirmed before Thanksgiving, for example, and so I

190
00:10:48,000 --> 00:10:51,200
Speaker 3: think he may well catch Trump by the end of

191
00:10:51,240 --> 00:10:55,479
Speaker 3: the year. Though there need to be more nominees forthcoming

192
00:10:55,480 --> 00:10:56,280
Speaker 3: from the White House.

193
00:10:56,520 --> 00:10:58,400
Speaker 1: So is that what's holding it up? The White House

194
00:10:58,520 --> 00:11:01,199
Speaker 1: is not nominated them fast enough.

195
00:11:01,880 --> 00:11:06,559
Speaker 3: Well, it could nominate them faster. Chair Durbin of the

196
00:11:06,640 --> 00:11:11,320
Speaker 3: Judiciary Committee promised to hold hearings every two weeks that

197
00:11:11,520 --> 00:11:16,280
Speaker 3: the Senate was in session, but that hasn't happened every

198
00:11:16,559 --> 00:11:21,120
Speaker 3: two weeks this year, and so that's unfortunate, and I

199
00:11:21,160 --> 00:11:25,000
Speaker 3: think that could be remedied. But there are problems because

200
00:11:25,160 --> 00:11:28,760
Speaker 3: a number of the present vacancies are in states with

201
00:11:28,800 --> 00:11:33,360
Speaker 3: one or two Republican senators, and especially in the district

202
00:11:33,360 --> 00:11:36,880
Speaker 3: courts where most of the vacancies are, they have the

203
00:11:36,960 --> 00:11:44,560
Speaker 3: blueslip privilege and they can reject White House nominees, and

204
00:11:44,640 --> 00:11:49,200
Speaker 3: so that's a more difficult vacancy to fill. Where you

205
00:11:49,320 --> 00:11:52,600
Speaker 3: have one or two home state senators who are GOP

206
00:11:52,760 --> 00:11:56,400
Speaker 3: members and perhaps unwilling to work with the White House,

207
00:11:56,600 --> 00:12:00,640
Speaker 3: though a number have been, for example in Indiana and

208
00:12:00,720 --> 00:12:01,840
Speaker 3: in other states.

209
00:12:02,679 --> 00:12:05,720
Speaker 1: I mean, once twenty twenty four arrives, it's going to

210
00:12:05,760 --> 00:12:08,640
Speaker 1: be slowed down, right, the process.

211
00:12:08,280 --> 00:12:12,400
Speaker 3: To some extent, Yes, because of a presidential election year,

212
00:12:13,080 --> 00:12:18,200
Speaker 3: and both parties believe that their nominees will win, and

213
00:12:18,280 --> 00:12:21,640
Speaker 3: so they don't want to confirm. Well, at least the

214
00:12:21,640 --> 00:12:26,440
Speaker 3: Republicans won't want to confirm any more Biden nominees than

215
00:12:26,520 --> 00:12:30,000
Speaker 3: they have to. But I think that Democrats are committed

216
00:12:30,520 --> 00:12:37,200
Speaker 3: to confirming as many as possible and will schedule as

217
00:12:37,240 --> 00:12:40,839
Speaker 3: many hearings and committee votes and floor votes as they can,

218
00:12:41,480 --> 00:12:44,960
Speaker 3: even in a lame duck session, as Trump did in

219
00:12:45,040 --> 00:12:48,760
Speaker 3: twenty twenty where he confirmed thirteen district and one circuit

220
00:12:48,800 --> 00:12:52,480
Speaker 3: judge after the election. And so I think that's what

221
00:12:52,520 --> 00:12:54,640
Speaker 3: you're likely to see. So it may not slow down

222
00:12:54,760 --> 00:12:57,800
Speaker 3: that much, but there'll be times, you know, for example

223
00:12:57,800 --> 00:13:02,240
Speaker 3: August recess and then campaigning in the fall, where it'll

224
00:13:02,280 --> 00:13:05,120
Speaker 3: be difficult for the Senate to be in session.

225
00:13:05,360 --> 00:13:09,200
Speaker 1: Let's turn out to some judges who are making news

226
00:13:09,280 --> 00:13:11,240
Speaker 1: or in trouble, whichever way you want to look at it.

227
00:13:11,400 --> 00:13:14,640
Speaker 1: So we talked about Judge Pauline Newman, who was the

228
00:13:14,800 --> 00:13:20,040
Speaker 1: oldest judge in the country and she was suspended from

229
00:13:20,120 --> 00:13:23,040
Speaker 1: new assignments for one year or until she complies with

230
00:13:23,200 --> 00:13:26,240
Speaker 1: orders to submit to medical testing. She was doing an

231
00:13:26,240 --> 00:13:29,480
Speaker 1: interview and she said, I have an open invitation from

232
00:13:29,520 --> 00:13:32,480
Speaker 1: one circuitcause she didn't say which circuit or when that

233
00:13:32,559 --> 00:13:36,600
Speaker 1: invitation came, to preside over a patent trial at the

234
00:13:36,679 --> 00:13:41,200
Speaker 1: district court level. Since she suspended from new assignments on

235
00:13:41,240 --> 00:13:44,440
Speaker 1: the federal circuit, is she allowed to just hear a

236
00:13:44,520 --> 00:13:46,240
Speaker 1: case at the district court level.

237
00:13:46,480 --> 00:13:48,880
Speaker 3: I don't know the precise answer to that. My guess

238
00:13:48,960 --> 00:13:55,320
Speaker 3: is she probably can't. And often judges do entertain those

239
00:13:55,440 --> 00:13:58,839
Speaker 3: kinds of invitations when they have them. Circuit judges may

240
00:13:58,880 --> 00:14:01,720
Speaker 3: do that occasionally have a better sense of what the

241
00:14:01,760 --> 00:14:05,280
Speaker 3: cases look like at the district level if they're competent

242
00:14:05,320 --> 00:14:08,080
Speaker 3: to try them, and she certainly has the expertise in

243
00:14:08,120 --> 00:14:11,000
Speaker 3: the patent area. I don't know that she's tried a

244
00:14:11,040 --> 00:14:14,000
Speaker 3: lot of cases at the trial court level, probably not

245
00:14:14,120 --> 00:14:18,600
Speaker 3: very many, but often you see that happening with appellet judges,

246
00:14:19,200 --> 00:14:22,960
Speaker 3: so we'll see. I don't know maybe it's Delaware, which

247
00:14:22,960 --> 00:14:24,080
Speaker 3: has a lot of patent cases.

248
00:14:24,160 --> 00:14:26,560
Speaker 1: Yeah. No, I was just wondering because she was suspended

249
00:14:26,880 --> 00:14:29,920
Speaker 1: at the Federal Circuit, and does that mean she's suspended

250
00:14:29,960 --> 00:14:32,600
Speaker 1: everywhere because she's a federal Circuit judge.

251
00:14:33,400 --> 00:14:36,400
Speaker 3: I don't know the answer to that, Okay. I think

252
00:14:36,440 --> 00:14:39,800
Speaker 3: that probably she could sit in some other court, but

253
00:14:40,000 --> 00:14:41,560
Speaker 3: not in the federal Circuit.

254
00:14:41,920 --> 00:14:45,240
Speaker 1: Moving on to Texas, one of the nation's top bankruptcy

255
00:14:45,320 --> 00:14:48,920
Speaker 1: judges who's at the center of an ethics storm, said

256
00:14:49,040 --> 00:14:53,080
Speaker 1: yesterday he's resigning after the Fifth Circuit issued a formal

257
00:14:53,360 --> 00:14:57,320
Speaker 1: misconduct complaint against him. David Jones was the chief bankruptcy

258
00:14:57,400 --> 00:15:00,400
Speaker 1: judge for the Southern District of Texas, and he's come

259
00:15:00,480 --> 00:15:04,160
Speaker 1: under fire for failing to disclose that his living girlfriend

260
00:15:04,680 --> 00:15:08,200
Speaker 1: was a bankruptcy attorney at a prominent Texas law firm

261
00:15:08,600 --> 00:15:12,800
Speaker 1: with business before his court. What ethics rules are involved here?

262
00:15:13,920 --> 00:15:18,240
Speaker 3: I think the Ethics Code twenty eight USC. Four fifty

263
00:15:18,280 --> 00:15:23,040
Speaker 3: five is clear as to that kind of situation. If

264
00:15:23,080 --> 00:15:29,520
Speaker 3: you have a conflict in terms of financial benefit that

265
00:15:29,600 --> 00:15:33,160
Speaker 3: may flow when a judge is ruling, then the judge

266
00:15:33,200 --> 00:15:37,000
Speaker 3: is supposed to recuse in that case. And this sounds

267
00:15:37,160 --> 00:15:40,680
Speaker 3: like that because at least the media reports are saying

268
00:15:41,440 --> 00:15:46,080
Speaker 3: that he decided cases where the person with whom he

269
00:15:46,280 --> 00:15:49,480
Speaker 3: shared a home was involved or her firm was involved,

270
00:15:50,040 --> 00:15:53,920
Speaker 3: and probably he should have accused then and has chosen

271
00:15:53,960 --> 00:15:56,960
Speaker 3: to resign, which is probably the best thing that could

272
00:15:57,000 --> 00:15:57,880
Speaker 3: happen right now.

273
00:15:58,200 --> 00:16:01,040
Speaker 1: Yeah, he had previously defended his conduct to the Wall

274
00:16:01,040 --> 00:16:04,800
Speaker 1: Street Journal by arguing that he and the attorney were

275
00:16:04,840 --> 00:16:08,200
Speaker 1: not married, he had no economic interest from her cases,

276
00:16:08,800 --> 00:16:11,400
Speaker 1: and he said he would only have to accuse himself

277
00:16:11,440 --> 00:16:15,200
Speaker 1: if they had been married and had communal property and

278
00:16:15,240 --> 00:16:17,760
Speaker 1: she never personally appeared in his courtroom. Isn't there the

279
00:16:18,360 --> 00:16:22,080
Speaker 1: appearance of impropriety? Or are the strict rules on this

280
00:16:22,520 --> 00:16:24,960
Speaker 1: on having a relationship with an attorney?

281
00:16:25,440 --> 00:16:28,960
Speaker 3: No, I think you're correct. I mean basically that four

282
00:16:29,040 --> 00:16:33,000
Speaker 3: fifty five talks about the appearance of a conflict, and

283
00:16:33,040 --> 00:16:37,960
Speaker 3: that's enough, And there seems to be enough of a

284
00:16:38,040 --> 00:16:43,280
Speaker 3: financial interest there in her former firm when she was

285
00:16:43,600 --> 00:16:48,040
Speaker 3: responsible for some cases that it would look like the

286
00:16:48,080 --> 00:16:52,800
Speaker 3: appearance of a conflict, and so probably should have recused

287
00:16:52,880 --> 00:16:54,800
Speaker 3: himself in any of those cases.

288
00:16:55,320 --> 00:16:59,960
Speaker 1: And this judge has issued rulings in multi billion dollar reorganizations,

289
00:17:00,880 --> 00:17:04,040
Speaker 1: and some legal experts say that both he and his

290
00:17:04,320 --> 00:17:09,520
Speaker 1: girlfriend face the possibility of disbarment and criminal charges. So

291
00:17:09,600 --> 00:17:12,040
Speaker 1: we'll see whether the resignation is the end of this

292
00:17:12,600 --> 00:17:15,359
Speaker 1: or if there's more to come. Thanks so much, Carl.

293
00:17:15,640 --> 00:17:19,240
Speaker 1: That's Professor Carl Tobias of the University of Richmond Law School.

294
00:17:19,560 --> 00:17:23,520
Speaker 1: Coming up next. A black high school student in Texas

295
00:17:23,560 --> 00:17:27,840
Speaker 1: sues after being suspended over his hairstyle. I'm June Grasso,

296
00:17:27,880 --> 00:17:30,919
Speaker 1: and you're listening to Bloomberg. After serving more than a

297
00:17:30,960 --> 00:17:34,879
Speaker 1: month of in school suspension over his hairstyle, a black

298
00:17:34,920 --> 00:17:37,919
Speaker 1: student in Texas was told he'll be removed from his

299
00:17:38,000 --> 00:17:42,440
Speaker 1: high school and sent to a disciplinary alternative education program.

300
00:17:42,960 --> 00:17:46,080
Speaker 1: Eighteen year old Darryl george, a junior at Barber's Hill

301
00:17:46,160 --> 00:17:50,720
Speaker 1: High School, has been suspended since August thirty first. Last month,

302
00:17:50,760 --> 00:17:54,200
Speaker 1: his family filed a formal complaint with the Texas Education

303
00:17:54,359 --> 00:17:58,000
Speaker 1: Agency and a federal civil rights lawsuit against the state's

304
00:17:58,160 --> 00:18:02,000
Speaker 1: governor and attorney General, alleging they fail to enforce a

305
00:18:02,040 --> 00:18:06,560
Speaker 1: new law outlying discrimination based on hair styles. The family

306
00:18:06,600 --> 00:18:12,040
Speaker 1: alleges Georgea's suspension and subsequent discipline violate the state's Crown Act.

307
00:18:12,359 --> 00:18:15,360
Speaker 1: Joining me is Melanie Jordan, a labor and employment attorney

308
00:18:15,359 --> 00:18:18,600
Speaker 1: at Dorsey and Whitney. So, first of all, tell us

309
00:18:18,720 --> 00:18:21,919
Speaker 1: about the Crown Act that was signed into law in

310
00:18:21,960 --> 00:18:22,800
Speaker 1: Texas in May.

311
00:18:23,680 --> 00:18:26,440
Speaker 4: That's right. So the Crown Act actually sits an acronym

312
00:18:26,960 --> 00:18:30,040
Speaker 4: and it means creating a respectful and open world for

313
00:18:30,160 --> 00:18:33,920
Speaker 4: natural hair. Now, this law prohibits discrimination based on race

314
00:18:33,960 --> 00:18:38,359
Speaker 4: based hair styles such as twist, lacks, braves, et cetera.

315
00:18:39,000 --> 00:18:42,399
Speaker 4: And so what the Crown Act does is extends statutory

316
00:18:42,440 --> 00:18:46,240
Speaker 4: protection to hair texture and protective styles. And it does

317
00:18:46,280 --> 00:18:49,119
Speaker 4: so in the workplace and in public schools.

318
00:18:49,280 --> 00:18:51,399
Speaker 1: How many states have this law.

319
00:18:51,480 --> 00:18:54,040
Speaker 4: So the Crown Act is currently law in more than

320
00:18:54,119 --> 00:18:58,359
Speaker 4: forty localities cities like New Orleans, and in twenty four states,

321
00:18:58,400 --> 00:19:02,880
Speaker 4: which includes Texas. Texas. Actually this law went into effect

322
00:19:03,160 --> 00:19:06,480
Speaker 4: in September. September. First, you know the Crown Act. It's

323
00:19:06,560 --> 00:19:09,760
Speaker 4: the brainchild of a coalition led by Dove, you know,

324
00:19:09,800 --> 00:19:14,359
Speaker 4: the maker of soap shampoos. Dove partnered with several organizations

325
00:19:14,359 --> 00:19:17,480
Speaker 4: such as Western Center on Law and Poverty in the

326
00:19:17,560 --> 00:19:21,320
Speaker 4: National Urban League. And what this coalition did was they

327
00:19:21,440 --> 00:19:25,720
Speaker 4: undertook a study and they only corroborated what's been experienced

328
00:19:25,760 --> 00:19:30,280
Speaker 4: by generations of black and brown people, and especially black women,

329
00:19:30,320 --> 00:19:33,520
Speaker 4: and that is that a fairly large percentage, over twenty

330
00:19:33,560 --> 00:19:36,120
Speaker 4: percent of Black women aged twenty five to thirty four

331
00:19:36,119 --> 00:19:38,440
Speaker 4: were sent home from work because of their hair. And

332
00:19:38,680 --> 00:19:40,440
Speaker 4: I would even go as far as to say that,

333
00:19:40,720 --> 00:19:44,000
Speaker 4: you know, as every black woman in the workplace knows,

334
00:19:44,359 --> 00:19:46,840
Speaker 4: this is impactful because it's something that we've dealt with

335
00:19:47,080 --> 00:19:49,879
Speaker 4: for honestly our whole entire life.

336
00:19:50,160 --> 00:19:53,919
Speaker 1: Has there been a lot of litigation around the Crown

337
00:19:53,960 --> 00:19:56,159
Speaker 1: Act in different states or localities.

338
00:19:56,440 --> 00:19:58,680
Speaker 4: You know, a lot of these laws are new, right,

339
00:19:58,680 --> 00:20:02,119
Speaker 4: they're passing on on a monthly basis, and so the

340
00:20:02,160 --> 00:20:04,760
Speaker 4: first one in California that was passed in twenty nineteen,

341
00:20:04,800 --> 00:20:07,399
Speaker 4: and we saw some litigation arising from that. There was

342
00:20:07,440 --> 00:20:09,679
Speaker 4: a case that I think the first one in California

343
00:20:09,720 --> 00:20:12,280
Speaker 4: was in twenty twenty one, as it relates to an

344
00:20:12,320 --> 00:20:15,800
Speaker 4: out of state's job applicant who is intending to move

345
00:20:15,840 --> 00:20:18,720
Speaker 4: to California and take a job, but he was informed,

346
00:20:18,720 --> 00:20:21,920
Speaker 4: you know, allegedly that he needed to cut his hair. Right.

347
00:20:22,240 --> 00:20:25,120
Speaker 4: And so as these laws take shape and they're being

348
00:20:25,119 --> 00:20:27,680
Speaker 4: an act, it will see some litigation coming from them.

349
00:20:28,160 --> 00:20:30,560
Speaker 1: So tell us what happened to this Texas high school

350
00:20:30,640 --> 00:20:33,960
Speaker 1: student Darryl George in Barber's.

351
00:20:33,560 --> 00:20:37,080
Speaker 4: Hill Independent School District or ISIC. We have a student,

352
00:20:37,240 --> 00:20:39,800
Speaker 4: Darryl George. Darryl George, I think he was seventeen and

353
00:20:39,840 --> 00:20:43,120
Speaker 4: now he's eighteen. He attends their high school and he

354
00:20:43,200 --> 00:20:46,600
Speaker 4: wears his hair in locks. I know some people call

355
00:20:46,640 --> 00:20:49,800
Speaker 4: it dreadlocks, but that's actually become more of a pejeorative term.

356
00:20:49,920 --> 00:20:54,640
Speaker 4: So he wears his hair and twisted locks, and he

357
00:20:54,680 --> 00:20:58,240
Speaker 4: typically ties it back with a headband and twisted away

358
00:20:58,280 --> 00:21:00,680
Speaker 4: from his face in order to comply with barbars Hill's

359
00:21:00,720 --> 00:21:04,600
Speaker 4: dress and group policy. Now, this policy only applies to

360
00:21:04,720 --> 00:21:08,640
Speaker 4: male students, and it mandates that male students cannot wear

361
00:21:08,720 --> 00:21:11,920
Speaker 4: their hair at any time below their eyebrows, or below

362
00:21:11,960 --> 00:21:15,000
Speaker 4: their earlobes, or below the top of their T shirt

363
00:21:15,040 --> 00:21:18,119
Speaker 4: collared or it has to be gathered or worn up

364
00:21:18,160 --> 00:21:21,439
Speaker 4: in a style so that it stays above the eyebrows,

365
00:21:21,480 --> 00:21:24,280
Speaker 4: the T shirt collar, or the ear lobes. And so

366
00:21:24,560 --> 00:21:28,560
Speaker 4: obviously when you're wearing locks, they're growing and growing long,

367
00:21:28,920 --> 00:21:33,399
Speaker 4: which is usually the intention. And so Darryl was wearing

368
00:21:33,440 --> 00:21:37,119
Speaker 4: his hair or his locks and they became long. So

369
00:21:37,280 --> 00:21:41,240
Speaker 4: he was suspended not once, but twice just this school

370
00:21:41,320 --> 00:21:43,919
Speaker 4: year alone. He was suspended in August for wearing the

371
00:21:43,920 --> 00:21:46,720
Speaker 4: twisted locks. Then when he returned to school, he was

372
00:21:46,720 --> 00:21:51,480
Speaker 4: suspended immediately again September eighteenth, and now as recently as

373
00:21:51,480 --> 00:21:55,480
Speaker 4: October twelfth, the school placed him in a disciplinary alternative

374
00:21:55,560 --> 00:21:58,600
Speaker 4: education program and he's apparently going to be in this

375
00:21:58,640 --> 00:22:02,399
Speaker 4: program through at least the end of November. And so

376
00:22:02,480 --> 00:22:07,280
Speaker 4: the school district, they're contending that these disciplinary actions are

377
00:22:07,800 --> 00:22:14,920
Speaker 4: fine essentially, and they argue that Darryl has violated many

378
00:22:15,040 --> 00:22:17,760
Speaker 4: campus and classroom rules. For example, they alleged that he's

379
00:22:17,800 --> 00:22:22,600
Speaker 4: disrupted the iss classroom in school suspension classroom. They contend

380
00:22:22,640 --> 00:22:25,560
Speaker 4: that he's failed to comply with directives from their staff.

381
00:22:25,640 --> 00:22:29,240
Speaker 4: He's been tardy, and he's violated the dress and ruling policy.

382
00:22:30,240 --> 00:22:34,639
Speaker 4: And so now we're faced with the situation where the

383
00:22:34,640 --> 00:22:39,000
Speaker 4: school district is administering the same hair and ruling policy

384
00:22:40,240 --> 00:22:43,720
Speaker 4: against the same hairstyle for an issue that they faced,

385
00:22:43,880 --> 00:22:46,280
Speaker 4: I guess just three years ago at this point, with

386
00:22:46,400 --> 00:22:49,680
Speaker 4: other black students wearing dreadlocks as well or locks as well.

387
00:22:50,600 --> 00:22:53,120
Speaker 1: And I believe in twenty twenty, a federal judge rule

388
00:22:53,280 --> 00:22:57,920
Speaker 1: that the district's hair policy was discriminatory as far as

389
00:22:57,960 --> 00:23:03,360
Speaker 1: the school's rules, does George's hair comply with those rules,

390
00:23:03,920 --> 00:23:05,680
Speaker 1: you know above the collar, et cetera.

391
00:23:06,400 --> 00:23:10,320
Speaker 4: So, no, his hair is quite long, and he wears

392
00:23:10,359 --> 00:23:14,560
Speaker 4: it tied back, but his hair does extend past, of

393
00:23:14,640 --> 00:23:17,639
Speaker 4: course his t shirt collars. He has very long dread locks,

394
00:23:18,080 --> 00:23:21,080
Speaker 4: and his family contends that this is an expression of

395
00:23:21,080 --> 00:23:24,640
Speaker 4: his culture, of his racial heritage. Many of the male

396
00:23:24,720 --> 00:23:27,600
Speaker 4: family members also have worn their hair in locks, and

397
00:23:27,640 --> 00:23:32,879
Speaker 4: so the family now has recently brought a lawsuit contending

398
00:23:33,040 --> 00:23:36,920
Speaker 4: that this hair and growing policy is violated not only

399
00:23:36,960 --> 00:23:40,960
Speaker 4: the Crown Act, but the plessora of other state and federal.

400
00:23:40,720 --> 00:23:41,360
Speaker 3: Laws as well.

401
00:23:42,119 --> 00:23:44,520
Speaker 1: So I take it the school district is going to

402
00:23:44,760 --> 00:23:47,640
Speaker 1: come back or has come back and said that this

403
00:23:47,840 --> 00:23:50,439
Speaker 1: applies to all male students.

404
00:23:51,400 --> 00:23:54,959
Speaker 4: That's right. So the school district, they're contending that this

405
00:23:55,119 --> 00:23:59,520
Speaker 4: policy is defensible because it applies to all male students

406
00:23:59,520 --> 00:24:03,119
Speaker 4: and has nothing to do with their race or your

407
00:24:03,320 --> 00:24:06,320
Speaker 4: hair style, but simply length. And this is the same

408
00:24:06,440 --> 00:24:09,640
Speaker 4: argument that they advanced back in twenty twenty when they

409
00:24:09,680 --> 00:24:13,600
Speaker 4: were food by two other black male students who were

410
00:24:13,640 --> 00:24:16,000
Speaker 4: wearing their hair and loss as well. And in that

411
00:24:16,160 --> 00:24:19,000
Speaker 4: case it's still ongoing, but the court did issue a

412
00:24:19,040 --> 00:24:24,399
Speaker 4: preliminary injunction against Barber still is sc which allowed those

413
00:24:24,440 --> 00:24:27,119
Speaker 4: students at least one student because the other graduated, but

414
00:24:27,200 --> 00:24:30,120
Speaker 4: one student to return to the classroom and to participate

415
00:24:30,160 --> 00:24:33,600
Speaker 4: in extracurricular activities. And that case is still ongoing. But

416
00:24:33,640 --> 00:24:36,040
Speaker 4: I think it would have been instructive at least in

417
00:24:36,080 --> 00:24:40,680
Speaker 4: this circumstance for barbers Hill ISD in terms of maybe

418
00:24:40,680 --> 00:24:44,960
Speaker 4: taking a step back and reevaluating its policy. But as

419
00:24:44,960 --> 00:24:48,000
Speaker 4: of now, it's advancing the same argument that it's not

420
00:24:48,119 --> 00:24:51,280
Speaker 4: about the race, it's not about the hairstyle, it's about

421
00:24:51,320 --> 00:24:55,399
Speaker 4: the lane. And you know this argument, I guess others

422
00:24:55,400 --> 00:24:58,000
Speaker 4: have contended that it kind of exploits the loophole within

423
00:24:58,080 --> 00:24:59,040
Speaker 4: the Crown Act.

424
00:24:59,359 --> 00:25:02,240
Speaker 1: Do you think this win? Then if it's using a

425
00:25:02,280 --> 00:25:05,320
Speaker 1: loophole in the Act itself, you.

426
00:25:05,200 --> 00:25:08,520
Speaker 4: Know, it's hard to say. The Crown Act at least

427
00:25:08,520 --> 00:25:11,280
Speaker 4: in Texas and amended the Texas Labor Code in Texas

428
00:25:11,400 --> 00:25:15,680
Speaker 4: Education Code and the Education Code was amended and when

429
00:25:15,720 --> 00:25:19,439
Speaker 4: it was amended, it lists specific hair styles, but it

430
00:25:19,560 --> 00:25:23,160
Speaker 4: is silent on length and when you look at even

431
00:25:23,200 --> 00:25:26,159
Speaker 4: the legislative history of the Act in Texas, there's no

432
00:25:26,440 --> 00:25:29,879
Speaker 4: discussion about length as well. I don't think that the

433
00:25:29,920 --> 00:25:33,440
Speaker 4: school will actually succeed, maybe as it relates to the

434
00:25:33,440 --> 00:25:36,760
Speaker 4: pleasor of other claims that it could face, because, again

435
00:25:36,880 --> 00:25:40,280
Speaker 4: referring back to that twenty twenty case, same school district,

436
00:25:40,760 --> 00:25:45,439
Speaker 4: same hairstyle, the preliminary injunction was issued against them in

437
00:25:45,520 --> 00:25:49,119
Speaker 4: part because the court looked at that record and found

438
00:25:49,160 --> 00:25:52,120
Speaker 4: that there was a Native American student who wore his

439
00:25:52,200 --> 00:25:55,280
Speaker 4: hair long, and the school was able to make an

440
00:25:55,320 --> 00:25:58,640
Speaker 4: exception for him and allowed him to wear his hair

441
00:25:59,560 --> 00:26:04,679
Speaker 4: passed the policy's mandated length. And so now when faced

442
00:26:04,720 --> 00:26:08,160
Speaker 4: with that same question about lanes here, I don't think

443
00:26:08,160 --> 00:26:11,399
Speaker 4: the school will succeed again on the record that was

444
00:26:11,480 --> 00:26:12,440
Speaker 4: established before.

445
00:26:12,880 --> 00:26:14,560
Speaker 1: Explain why it's so important for him to have his

446
00:26:14,640 --> 00:26:19,280
Speaker 1: hair long if he can have the locks but shorter

447
00:26:19,680 --> 00:26:20,360
Speaker 1: or tied up.

448
00:26:20,760 --> 00:26:23,600
Speaker 4: Well, this is a great question because it speaks to

449
00:26:23,800 --> 00:26:27,400
Speaker 4: the point of black culture and heritage. Right when you're

450
00:26:27,400 --> 00:26:31,159
Speaker 4: wearing dreadlock or wearing locks, it's not just about the

451
00:26:31,200 --> 00:26:34,280
Speaker 4: actual locking of the hair, but the locks are intended

452
00:26:34,359 --> 00:26:37,320
Speaker 4: generally to grow long and you don't necessarily cut your

453
00:26:37,359 --> 00:26:40,240
Speaker 4: locks to make them short, because then you would unravel

454
00:26:40,359 --> 00:26:44,760
Speaker 4: and essentially undo sometimes the years long process of cultivating

455
00:26:44,800 --> 00:26:48,760
Speaker 4: the locking process. And you know, when you're wearing your

456
00:26:48,760 --> 00:26:52,320
Speaker 4: hair and locks, it's long been regarded as an expression

457
00:26:52,480 --> 00:26:56,680
Speaker 4: of black heritage, of African American heritage, of West Indian

458
00:26:56,760 --> 00:26:59,720
Speaker 4: identity as well. And so when it's an expression of

459
00:26:59,760 --> 00:27:04,320
Speaker 4: your racial identity and it's been routinely associated with, you know,

460
00:27:04,480 --> 00:27:07,720
Speaker 4: black and brown people, it's important to note that it's

461
00:27:07,760 --> 00:27:10,679
Speaker 4: not just about the locks itself, but length should be

462
00:27:10,720 --> 00:27:13,879
Speaker 4: included in that assessment because the length of the locks

463
00:27:13,880 --> 00:27:17,359
Speaker 4: demonstrates how long you've been invested in wearing that hair.

464
00:27:18,520 --> 00:27:21,879
Speaker 1: Are they now enforcing this for all male students. I

465
00:27:21,920 --> 00:27:24,720
Speaker 1: know you mentioned before they had made an exception for

466
00:27:24,760 --> 00:27:26,200
Speaker 1: a Native American student.

467
00:27:26,800 --> 00:27:29,600
Speaker 4: So the argument has been that they have not enforced

468
00:27:29,600 --> 00:27:33,560
Speaker 4: it equally across the board. There's been selective enforcement. In fact,

469
00:27:33,640 --> 00:27:37,919
Speaker 4: the policy has been amended numerous times my understanding and

470
00:27:38,080 --> 00:27:42,560
Speaker 4: barbershel isd to make it more narrowly drawn so that

471
00:27:42,600 --> 00:27:45,200
Speaker 4: it clearly is targeting those students who are wearing their

472
00:27:45,200 --> 00:27:48,240
Speaker 4: hair in a protective hairstyle like locks. So, for example,

473
00:27:48,280 --> 00:27:49,840
Speaker 4: it used to be just you know, it couldn't be

474
00:27:49,840 --> 00:27:52,440
Speaker 4: a certain length, and now they're saying, well, you can't

475
00:27:52,480 --> 00:27:56,040
Speaker 4: circumvent the policy by simply tying your hair back. We're

476
00:27:56,080 --> 00:27:58,359
Speaker 4: saying you can't have it at length at all. But

477
00:27:58,440 --> 00:28:01,280
Speaker 4: then you look around and you're saying, Okay, this policy

478
00:28:01,320 --> 00:28:04,120
Speaker 4: is not being enforced against those of white male students,

479
00:28:04,119 --> 00:28:07,320
Speaker 4: for example, who are wearing their hair longer than their

480
00:28:07,359 --> 00:28:09,920
Speaker 4: T shirt collar. And yet you had students such as

481
00:28:10,320 --> 00:28:13,399
Speaker 4: dear old mister George the other plaintiffs in the twenty

482
00:28:13,440 --> 00:28:18,440
Speaker 4: twenty case, they were being heavily disciplined for wearing their

483
00:28:18,520 --> 00:28:21,240
Speaker 4: hair longer than what the policy permitted.

484
00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:25,000
Speaker 1: Unequal enforcement seems like a good argument. Do you give

485
00:28:25,040 --> 00:28:28,120
Speaker 1: us some context? Is this school in a conservative area

486
00:28:28,280 --> 00:28:28,920
Speaker 1: of Texas?

487
00:28:29,760 --> 00:28:32,760
Speaker 4: Yes, so this school district is in Mount Belvioe, Texas,

488
00:28:32,920 --> 00:28:35,119
Speaker 4: the southern part of Texas, and of course you know

489
00:28:35,720 --> 00:28:39,280
Speaker 4: Texas in general has a very conservative culture. And so

490
00:28:39,920 --> 00:28:42,960
Speaker 4: it's interesting that you raise that as a question because

491
00:28:43,160 --> 00:28:47,160
Speaker 4: I understanding the superintendent has argued that this is the

492
00:28:47,160 --> 00:28:49,720
Speaker 4: same policy that we've had for the last thirty years.

493
00:28:49,800 --> 00:28:52,720
Speaker 4: Nothing was wrong with it then, nothing's wrong with it now.

494
00:28:52,960 --> 00:28:55,480
Speaker 4: But I think that's the issue that they're going to

495
00:28:55,600 --> 00:28:58,760
Speaker 4: face is the policy hasn't been changed in thirty years,

496
00:28:58,800 --> 00:29:02,160
Speaker 4: and it's only enforced against male students, and it narrowly

497
00:29:02,280 --> 00:29:07,800
Speaker 4: targets those hairstyles that disproportionately impact your black and brown students.

498
00:29:07,920 --> 00:29:10,080
Speaker 4: Maybe it is time for it to be revised.

499
00:29:10,760 --> 00:29:13,240
Speaker 1: Well, certainly this case is getting a lot of attention,

500
00:29:13,880 --> 00:29:17,320
Speaker 1: so there may be changes ahead, either voluntary or perhaps

501
00:29:17,400 --> 00:29:19,959
Speaker 1: court ordered. Thanks so much for being on the show.

502
00:29:20,200 --> 00:29:23,640
Speaker 1: That's Melanie Jordan, a labor and employment attorney at Dorsey

503
00:29:23,720 --> 00:29:25,960
Speaker 1: and Whitney. And that's it for this edition of The

504
00:29:26,000 --> 00:29:28,960
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get the latest

505
00:29:29,000 --> 00:29:32,120
Speaker 1: legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find

506
00:29:32,120 --> 00:29:36,720
Speaker 1: them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www dot bloomberg

507
00:29:36,760 --> 00:29:40,560
Speaker 1: dot com, slash podcast, slash Law, and remember to tune

508
00:29:40,560 --> 00:29:43,800
Speaker 1: into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at ten pm

509
00:29:43,880 --> 00:29:47,440
Speaker 1: Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso and you're listening to

510
00:29:47,480 --> 00:29:48,000
Speaker 1: Bloomberg