1
00:00:00,480 --> 00:00:05,720
Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg Law with June Grasso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:06,559 --> 00:00:09,280
Speaker 1: It's a dispute over one of the most famous collections

3
00:00:09,280 --> 00:00:13,160
Speaker 1: of medieval religious art, worth about two fifty million dollars.

4
00:00:13,480 --> 00:00:16,440
Speaker 1: The heirs of Jewish art dealers say the Nazi government

5
00:00:16,600 --> 00:00:19,119
Speaker 1: forced the dealers to sell the collection for about a

6
00:00:19,160 --> 00:00:21,840
Speaker 1: third of its value, and they want to sue Germany

7
00:00:21,920 --> 00:00:24,639
Speaker 1: in a US court to get it back. But the

8
00:00:24,680 --> 00:00:28,720
Speaker 1: Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Germany's favor. In the opinion,

9
00:00:28,800 --> 00:00:31,479
Speaker 1: Chief Justice John Roberts said the Court looks to the

10
00:00:31,560 --> 00:00:34,400
Speaker 1: law of property, not to the law of genocide in

11
00:00:34,479 --> 00:00:38,680
Speaker 1: deciding jurisdiction, echoing the oral arguments. Well, I guess my

12
00:00:38,800 --> 00:00:41,080
Speaker 1: question is why that is if it is part of

13
00:00:41,080 --> 00:00:45,199
Speaker 1: a campaign of genocide, that doesn't alter the fact that

14
00:00:45,320 --> 00:00:49,159
Speaker 1: it's simply taking property. The justices were also concerned that

15
00:00:49,200 --> 00:00:52,520
Speaker 1: allowing a suit against Germany in a US court might

16
00:00:52,520 --> 00:00:54,840
Speaker 1: open the US up to a similar suit in a

17
00:00:54,920 --> 00:00:59,680
Speaker 1: German court, a concern expressed by Justice Stephen Bryer. I mean,

18
00:00:59,760 --> 00:01:02,960
Speaker 1: those list goes on and on of what biolates international law,

19
00:01:03,520 --> 00:01:06,360
Speaker 1: and many of them involved property. And if we can

20
00:01:06,400 --> 00:01:10,040
Speaker 1: bring these kinds of actions here, well, so can these

21
00:01:10,040 --> 00:01:12,880
Speaker 1: other countries do the same and accuse us? I mean,

22
00:01:12,920 --> 00:01:16,160
Speaker 1: what about Japanese internment which involved thirty thousand people in

23
00:01:16,200 --> 00:01:19,600
Speaker 1: World War Two who were not American citizens. But the

24
00:01:19,680 --> 00:01:22,840
Speaker 1: case isn't over for the heirs joining me is mc

25
00:01:23,000 --> 00:01:25,720
Speaker 1: sun Gala, chair of the Appellate Practice at buck Alter

26
00:01:26,560 --> 00:01:29,800
Speaker 1: m C. Foreign countries are generally immune from being dragged

27
00:01:29,800 --> 00:01:33,640
Speaker 1: into US courts, but the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act provides

28
00:01:33,680 --> 00:01:38,560
Speaker 1: an exception for property taken in violation of international law.

29
00:01:39,120 --> 00:01:44,160
Speaker 1: Tell us about that expropriations exception here? The question was

30
00:01:44,480 --> 00:01:51,640
Speaker 1: does that expropriation exception apply to property taken from nationals

31
00:01:51,640 --> 00:01:54,639
Speaker 1: of the country who's being sued, or is it only

32
00:01:55,000 --> 00:01:59,000
Speaker 1: foreigners who are not citizens of that country? And the

33
00:01:59,080 --> 00:02:03,320
Speaker 1: court said, if it's basically a dispute between someone who

34
00:02:03,320 --> 00:02:05,800
Speaker 1: had their property taken who was a citizen of Germany

35
00:02:05,840 --> 00:02:08,880
Speaker 1: at the time and the lawsuits against Germany, and the

36
00:02:08,960 --> 00:02:13,040
Speaker 1: expropriation exceptions does not apply because you're talking about really

37
00:02:13,280 --> 00:02:17,320
Speaker 1: a domestic dispute in their view, within the boundaries of Germany.

38
00:02:17,600 --> 00:02:21,040
Speaker 1: What was behind the chief's conclusion that the court would

39
00:02:21,040 --> 00:02:23,880
Speaker 1: look to the law of property, not the law of

40
00:02:23,960 --> 00:02:29,160
Speaker 1: genocide in determining jurisdiction here. So one of the arguments

41
00:02:29,200 --> 00:02:32,480
Speaker 1: that the heirs made was said, well, look, this is

42
00:02:32,680 --> 00:02:35,960
Speaker 1: not just garden variety taking of property. This is in

43
00:02:36,000 --> 00:02:38,639
Speaker 1: the context of a genocide, and there should be some

44
00:02:38,760 --> 00:02:41,760
Speaker 1: ability to intervene when that happens and to be able

45
00:02:41,800 --> 00:02:45,840
Speaker 1: to sue in the US court. And so that is

46
00:02:46,160 --> 00:02:49,520
Speaker 1: why the Chief Justice said, first of all, you don't

47
00:02:49,520 --> 00:02:51,640
Speaker 1: look for the law of genocide to decide whether you

48
00:02:51,680 --> 00:02:55,120
Speaker 1: can have a claim. You look to the language of

49
00:02:55,160 --> 00:02:57,800
Speaker 1: the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and the law as it

50
00:02:57,960 --> 00:03:01,720
Speaker 1: was when the Act was a stopted and that law

51
00:03:02,200 --> 00:03:06,000
Speaker 1: really talked about property, and they could have had an

52
00:03:06,040 --> 00:03:09,600
Speaker 1: express exception for genocide and it did not. How much

53
00:03:09,680 --> 00:03:12,600
Speaker 1: is this the court not wanting to get involved in

54
00:03:13,040 --> 00:03:18,880
Speaker 1: determining issues involving genocide. I think that the larger takeaway

55
00:03:18,919 --> 00:03:21,480
Speaker 1: here is really I mean, it's tightened with the courts

56
00:03:21,639 --> 00:03:25,079
Speaker 1: used of the alien towards statute cases that it will

57
00:03:25,120 --> 00:03:28,680
Speaker 1: be again deciding later this term, but also it's previous

58
00:03:28,720 --> 00:03:33,519
Speaker 1: decisions there. The Chief Justice quoted from the Cabal decision saying,

59
00:03:33,760 --> 00:03:37,320
Speaker 1: we have recognized that US law governed domestically, but does

60
00:03:37,400 --> 00:03:40,320
Speaker 1: not rule the world. And so I think in a

61
00:03:40,480 --> 00:03:43,360
Speaker 1: moral way, we might watch the Court to do that.

62
00:03:43,480 --> 00:03:47,120
Speaker 1: But the Court is saying, as a legal matter, we

63
00:03:47,240 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 1: have decided that we are not going to take on

64
00:03:51,360 --> 00:03:54,480
Speaker 1: human rights concerns of the world. We are not going

65
00:03:54,520 --> 00:03:56,960
Speaker 1: to be the place where all of those things should

66
00:03:56,960 --> 00:04:01,480
Speaker 1: be brought. We are going to deal in our wheelhouse

67
00:04:01,480 --> 00:04:04,360
Speaker 1: what we think is appropriate for our courts to handle.

68
00:04:04,840 --> 00:04:08,400
Speaker 1: And when Congress has explicitly told us that this is

69
00:04:08,440 --> 00:04:11,120
Speaker 1: something that can be handled here, then we will handle it.

70
00:04:11,400 --> 00:04:15,720
Speaker 1: If not, then we leave it to the other countries themselves,

71
00:04:15,760 --> 00:04:18,480
Speaker 1: for example, go to a German court to decide that

72
00:04:18,640 --> 00:04:21,920
Speaker 1: for human rights courts, and we are going to stay

73
00:04:21,960 --> 00:04:23,680
Speaker 1: out of that because we are not going to be

74
00:04:23,720 --> 00:04:27,680
Speaker 1: the police courts of the world. And that is on

75
00:04:27,760 --> 00:04:31,280
Speaker 1: the one hand concerning because the US has long had

76
00:04:31,320 --> 00:04:33,960
Speaker 1: the perception of being the moral authority in the world,

77
00:04:34,000 --> 00:04:36,560
Speaker 1: if not the legal authority in some ways because of

78
00:04:36,600 --> 00:04:39,599
Speaker 1: the strong rule of LOBS. So on the one hand,

79
00:04:39,640 --> 00:04:42,600
Speaker 1: you see would say, well, this is disappointing because we

80
00:04:42,720 --> 00:04:46,159
Speaker 1: can be perceived, as you know, us moral authority on

81
00:04:46,200 --> 00:04:49,479
Speaker 1: the international stage being weakened. But on the other hand,

82
00:04:49,560 --> 00:04:52,520
Speaker 1: this kind of approach is consistent with what the United

83
00:04:52,560 --> 00:04:56,560
Speaker 1: States took immediately after World War Two with regards to

84
00:04:56,600 --> 00:05:00,159
Speaker 1: the Holocaust. It returned the art that it's found the

85
00:05:00,160 --> 00:05:04,080
Speaker 1: individual countries and told those countries to figure out how

86
00:05:04,120 --> 00:05:06,760
Speaker 1: to divide that up and who it belonged to. So

87
00:05:06,839 --> 00:05:09,960
Speaker 1: it stepped out of that role in the very beginning

88
00:05:10,000 --> 00:05:13,360
Speaker 1: in many ways in terms of setting up those tribunals,

89
00:05:13,400 --> 00:05:18,080
Speaker 1: and each country do that. During the ural arguments, several

90
00:05:18,120 --> 00:05:22,480
Speaker 1: of the justices were concerned about, you know, turnabouts, fair play,

91
00:05:22,760 --> 00:05:26,719
Speaker 1: and if we let Germany be sued over this in

92
00:05:26,920 --> 00:05:30,359
Speaker 1: our courts, then who's to say that Germany is not

93
00:05:30,520 --> 00:05:33,600
Speaker 1: going to let the US be sued in its courts

94
00:05:33,800 --> 00:05:38,200
Speaker 1: for human rights violations. You know, in every decision there

95
00:05:38,200 --> 00:05:41,400
Speaker 1: are the explicit factors, in the implicit factors, and just

96
00:05:41,600 --> 00:05:44,120
Speaker 1: other factors that the Court is concerned with and making

97
00:05:44,120 --> 00:05:47,640
Speaker 1: the decision. And that that point that you mentioned showed

98
00:05:47,720 --> 00:05:51,640
Speaker 1: up in the descent in the DC Circuit opinion, and

99
00:05:51,760 --> 00:05:56,440
Speaker 1: it was repeated at oral argument, and obviously it played

100
00:05:56,760 --> 00:05:59,039
Speaker 1: a significant role in how the Court viewed the case.

101
00:05:59,560 --> 00:06:01,280
Speaker 1: It did not want to go out on what if

102
00:06:01,279 --> 00:06:04,760
Speaker 1: that was a limb in terms of finding jurisdiction here

103
00:06:04,960 --> 00:06:08,400
Speaker 1: out of concern that what you said turnabout is fair

104
00:06:08,440 --> 00:06:13,040
Speaker 1: play and we could be inadvertently opposing the US to

105
00:06:13,360 --> 00:06:17,679
Speaker 1: some unexpected lawsuits in the other courts, and we don't

106
00:06:17,720 --> 00:06:20,120
Speaker 1: want to be the ones to do that. On the

107
00:06:20,160 --> 00:06:24,640
Speaker 1: other hand, there are potentially some avenues for the Airs

108
00:06:24,640 --> 00:06:29,560
Speaker 1: to potentially navigate right. The court remanded down in the

109
00:06:29,600 --> 00:06:36,440
Speaker 1: Germany case to assess whether perhaps maybe the Air's ancestors

110
00:06:36,480 --> 00:06:39,520
Speaker 1: were not actually German citizens at the point in time,

111
00:06:39,600 --> 00:06:41,880
Speaker 1: but the property was taken, and if that is true,

112
00:06:41,920 --> 00:06:45,680
Speaker 1: then that's a narrow path to tread in order to

113
00:06:45,720 --> 00:06:49,360
Speaker 1: sign jurisdiction here. That issue was raised at the Oral

114
00:06:49,520 --> 00:06:52,080
Speaker 1: arguments and Justice Neil Gorse, which even brought up the

115
00:06:52,120 --> 00:06:55,359
Speaker 1: possibility of remanding the case back to the lower courts.

116
00:06:55,960 --> 00:06:58,600
Speaker 1: I'd like to return to the question of what do

117
00:06:58,640 --> 00:07:01,440
Speaker 1: we do about a stateless peak supposed that they were

118
00:07:01,440 --> 00:07:04,719
Speaker 1: in fact stripped to their citizenship before the taking, but

119
00:07:04,839 --> 00:07:07,440
Speaker 1: that you said that doesn't matter because there's still nationals

120
00:07:07,960 --> 00:07:10,520
Speaker 1: And I'm asking will, in what relevance sense does that

121
00:07:10,600 --> 00:07:12,520
Speaker 1: make a difference if we were to have found in

122
00:07:12,520 --> 00:07:14,040
Speaker 1: your favorite here, should they'd be given a shot to

123
00:07:14,640 --> 00:07:18,640
Speaker 1: make this argument on remand the Planets had said there

124
00:07:18,680 --> 00:07:22,280
Speaker 1: was a point in time when Jews were not citizens.

125
00:07:22,320 --> 00:07:25,520
Speaker 1: They were stripped of their citizens in plights in Germany,

126
00:07:25,960 --> 00:07:29,200
Speaker 1: and if that was true at the time that these

127
00:07:29,200 --> 00:07:34,080
Speaker 1: transfers occurred, then it's really hard to call them true

128
00:07:34,200 --> 00:07:37,640
Speaker 1: citizens and we should look at that differently, and that's

129
00:07:37,680 --> 00:07:40,920
Speaker 1: what they're arguing. But Germany seem to be saying, well, yeah,

130
00:07:41,400 --> 00:07:44,880
Speaker 1: we might not have treated our Jewish citizens well, but

131
00:07:45,040 --> 00:07:48,160
Speaker 1: the timing at which we did that did not perceive

132
00:07:48,240 --> 00:07:50,640
Speaker 1: the transfer. So at the time of the transfer, they

133
00:07:50,640 --> 00:07:53,520
Speaker 1: were in fact still citizens. And so it sounds like

134
00:07:53,560 --> 00:07:56,800
Speaker 1: you need to work out factually what was true at

135
00:07:56,800 --> 00:07:59,800
Speaker 1: that point in time and what the Planets can establish

136
00:08:00,000 --> 00:08:04,280
Speaker 1: in terms of functional citizenship at the time of the transforms.

137
00:08:04,320 --> 00:08:06,840
Speaker 1: So that's why I was sent back for a factual development.

138
00:08:07,360 --> 00:08:10,160
Speaker 1: So it is possible that the Airs could prove that

139
00:08:10,640 --> 00:08:13,520
Speaker 1: and keep their lawsuit going. Do you think it's likely

140
00:08:13,600 --> 00:08:16,400
Speaker 1: or just possible. I think it's just possible. It really

141
00:08:16,400 --> 00:08:19,080
Speaker 1: comes down to the factual question of what they can

142
00:08:19,120 --> 00:08:21,800
Speaker 1: show and what they can prove at that point in time.

143
00:08:22,080 --> 00:08:24,520
Speaker 1: And that's really why the Supreme Court remanded it because

144
00:08:24,560 --> 00:08:27,520
Speaker 1: it said, well, it looks like there might be something here, basically,

145
00:08:27,560 --> 00:08:29,920
Speaker 1: but we don't decide facts, so we're going to send

146
00:08:29,920 --> 00:08:32,880
Speaker 1: it back. I think also that Germany had argued that

147
00:08:33,400 --> 00:08:37,440
Speaker 1: they really hadn't urged that argument early enough, and so

148
00:08:37,559 --> 00:08:39,839
Speaker 1: perhaps they had waived that argument as well. So that

149
00:08:39,880 --> 00:08:42,320
Speaker 1: would be another question which would be a factual question

150
00:08:42,400 --> 00:08:44,360
Speaker 1: for the lower court to this up. So is it

151
00:08:44,440 --> 00:08:47,840
Speaker 1: a path, yes, is it really likely? It seems like

152
00:08:47,880 --> 00:08:50,920
Speaker 1: a very treacherous path and a very narrow path, So

153
00:08:51,400 --> 00:08:53,520
Speaker 1: you know, on the likelihood scale, I would say it's

154
00:08:53,559 --> 00:08:57,280
Speaker 1: probably unlikely, But my heart wants to say, you know,

155
00:08:57,320 --> 00:09:01,280
Speaker 1: at least as pop is the long and winding road

156
00:09:01,520 --> 00:09:06,280
Speaker 1: of this lawsuit, similar to other cases involving the recovery

157
00:09:06,400 --> 00:09:09,319
Speaker 1: of Nazi looted art. So in some ways it does

158
00:09:09,440 --> 00:09:13,000
Speaker 1: kind of echo what the US did after World War Two,

159
00:09:13,000 --> 00:09:16,840
Speaker 1: and it's consistent with that in this context, and the

160
00:09:16,960 --> 00:09:21,520
Speaker 1: story of Holocaust recovery is particularly art recovery in the

161
00:09:21,640 --> 00:09:25,079
Speaker 1: US and U S courts is not encouraging. I mean,

162
00:09:25,120 --> 00:09:28,240
Speaker 1: it's just a series of procedural hurdles. Whether you're talking

163
00:09:28,280 --> 00:09:31,719
Speaker 1: about suing a foreign government that has the property or

164
00:09:31,800 --> 00:09:36,000
Speaker 1: took the property or whether you're talking about doing private

165
00:09:36,160 --> 00:09:39,640
Speaker 1: companies and individuals, it's a gauntlet to get through there

166
00:09:39,760 --> 00:09:42,920
Speaker 1: and to have an individual claim go forward on the merits.

167
00:09:42,960 --> 00:09:45,160
Speaker 1: Are there a lot more of these types of cases

168
00:09:45,280 --> 00:09:50,280
Speaker 1: out there. Well, it's all intertwined. So if it were

169
00:09:51,040 --> 00:09:55,960
Speaker 1: easier to get past procedural hurdles and even jurisdictional hurdles,

170
00:09:56,160 --> 00:09:59,360
Speaker 1: you might have even more art claims than you have now.

171
00:09:59,440 --> 00:10:02,600
Speaker 1: Because about one third to one fifth of your art

172
00:10:02,679 --> 00:10:05,960
Speaker 1: holdings changed hands during the Holocaust, and so there's a

173
00:10:05,960 --> 00:10:09,400
Speaker 1: lot of art with some you know, potentially stinky pedigree

174
00:10:09,480 --> 00:10:12,680
Speaker 1: there that are in people's hands, and so there's a

175
00:10:12,720 --> 00:10:16,000
Speaker 1: lot of art that could be subjects to claim. Whether

176
00:10:16,080 --> 00:10:18,360
Speaker 1: people decide to bring those claims or not, they might

177
00:10:18,400 --> 00:10:21,439
Speaker 1: be discouraged from doing that when they see the many

178
00:10:21,600 --> 00:10:25,200
Speaker 1: procedural hurdles. And if you had less procedural hurdles, not

179
00:10:25,280 --> 00:10:29,000
Speaker 1: only would more claims come forward, but you'd have leverage

180
00:10:29,080 --> 00:10:32,880
Speaker 1: to negotiate some kind of middle grounds between the museums

181
00:10:32,960 --> 00:10:37,000
Speaker 1: or institutions or countries that hold this property and the families.

182
00:10:37,240 --> 00:10:41,720
Speaker 1: So it's really disappointing and sad circumstances overall because you'd

183
00:10:41,720 --> 00:10:45,600
Speaker 1: like to think not only could International Court on War

184
00:10:45,679 --> 00:10:49,480
Speaker 1: Crimes and Genocides be able to provide some kind of

185
00:10:50,000 --> 00:10:53,960
Speaker 1: larger societal answers and restorative justice to things, but what

186
00:10:54,080 --> 00:10:57,720
Speaker 1: happens to the families, the people who are impacted by this?

187
00:10:57,960 --> 00:11:02,120
Speaker 1: Do they have any individual justice anywhere? And as the

188
00:11:02,160 --> 00:11:06,960
Speaker 1: avenue's narrow for the kind of individual claims, that leads

189
00:11:07,000 --> 00:11:09,720
Speaker 1: you to the sense that maybe they don't and not

190
00:11:10,040 --> 00:11:13,720
Speaker 1: that's a shame. Thanks m c. That's mc sung Guila,

191
00:11:13,880 --> 00:11:18,120
Speaker 1: Chair of the appellate practice at buck Alter. The supply

192
00:11:18,200 --> 00:11:22,079
Speaker 1: of vaccines against COVID nineteen is limited and distribution has

193
00:11:22,120 --> 00:11:25,840
Speaker 1: been chaotic. Federal health officials have stress the second dose

194
00:11:25,920 --> 00:11:28,760
Speaker 1: of the vaccine must be administered at the correct interval

195
00:11:29,000 --> 00:11:32,040
Speaker 1: to get the highest level of protection from COVID, but

196
00:11:32,160 --> 00:11:36,040
Speaker 1: distribution sites, which are operated by both public and private entities,

197
00:11:36,240 --> 00:11:39,640
Speaker 1: have taken different approaches to second doses, and that's left

198
00:11:39,679 --> 00:11:42,200
Speaker 1: many people concerned they won't be able to get their

199
00:11:42,240 --> 00:11:45,160
Speaker 1: second dose of the vaccine in the recommended time frame.

200
00:11:45,440 --> 00:11:48,480
Speaker 1: Joining me is Lydia Wheeler, senior legal reporter for Bloomberg

201
00:11:48,520 --> 00:11:52,160
Speaker 1: Law covering healthcare. Lydia tell us about Peter Myers. So,

202
00:11:52,360 --> 00:11:56,080
Speaker 1: Peter Myers is an emeritus professor at George Washington University

203
00:11:56,160 --> 00:11:59,800
Speaker 1: Law School. He's actually the former director of its Vaccine

204
00:11:59,800 --> 00:12:03,920
Speaker 1: in Relitigation Clinic UM. And he is seventy four years old.

205
00:12:04,120 --> 00:12:06,400
Speaker 1: He lives in Washington, d C. And he went and

206
00:12:06,400 --> 00:12:08,440
Speaker 1: he was able to get his first dose of the

207
00:12:08,559 --> 00:12:13,439
Speaker 1: Maderna coronavirus vaxine on January fourteenth. But he doesn't know

208
00:12:13,640 --> 00:12:15,800
Speaker 1: when he's going to be able to go back and

209
00:12:15,840 --> 00:12:18,640
Speaker 1: get his second dose. UM. He didn't get an appointment

210
00:12:18,720 --> 00:12:22,280
Speaker 1: time from the Washington Senior Wellness Center UM, and so

211
00:12:22,360 --> 00:12:25,080
Speaker 1: he doesn't know if he's going to be able to

212
00:12:25,120 --> 00:12:28,360
Speaker 1: get it in the twenty eight day time frame UM

213
00:12:28,400 --> 00:12:31,360
Speaker 1: that you're supposed to get it within. So he's a

214
00:12:31,360 --> 00:12:33,160
Speaker 1: little out of luck at the moment. And I take

215
00:12:33,240 --> 00:12:35,400
Speaker 1: it that he knows, you know, the lay of the land,

216
00:12:35,440 --> 00:12:37,880
Speaker 1: since he worked in this area, he would know what

217
00:12:38,000 --> 00:12:41,320
Speaker 1: to do absolutely, you know, he was saying that, you know,

218
00:12:41,360 --> 00:12:43,920
Speaker 1: there's not a lot that he can do about it.

219
00:12:43,960 --> 00:12:46,320
Speaker 1: He just kind of has to wait and see and

220
00:12:46,400 --> 00:12:49,160
Speaker 1: be patient and hope that he can go back online

221
00:12:49,559 --> 00:12:52,760
Speaker 1: and get it and secure another appointment time UM, which

222
00:12:52,880 --> 00:12:55,959
Speaker 1: he said was a very frustrating process the first time around.

223
00:12:56,000 --> 00:12:58,120
Speaker 1: You know, many people are you know, once they're in

224
00:12:58,200 --> 00:13:00,960
Speaker 1: a phase where they're eligible, they have to go online

225
00:13:01,000 --> 00:13:03,480
Speaker 1: and still out of forearms and try to secure one

226
00:13:03,520 --> 00:13:06,319
Speaker 1: of the few spots that are available. UM. So he's

227
00:13:06,360 --> 00:13:08,640
Speaker 1: a little bit worried that UM, that process is going

228
00:13:08,679 --> 00:13:10,120
Speaker 1: to be the same again, and that he's going to

229
00:13:10,200 --> 00:13:13,440
Speaker 1: be competing UM with other people who are either trying

230
00:13:13,440 --> 00:13:16,640
Speaker 1: to get their second dose or UM or possibly people

231
00:13:16,640 --> 00:13:19,760
Speaker 1: who are trying to get their first dose again. UM.

232
00:13:19,800 --> 00:13:23,079
Speaker 1: But what's interesting here is that, you know, for people

233
00:13:23,120 --> 00:13:26,600
Speaker 1: like Peter, there's really no recourse for them if they

234
00:13:26,679 --> 00:13:31,520
Speaker 1: don't get their second dose of the coronavirus vacine in time. Also,

235
00:13:31,600 --> 00:13:34,360
Speaker 1: just to go back to the scheduling, I've heard that

236
00:13:34,480 --> 00:13:38,079
Speaker 1: it's really haphazard, that spots can open up, you know,

237
00:13:38,120 --> 00:13:40,040
Speaker 1: in the middle of the night, and then you go

238
00:13:40,080 --> 00:13:42,320
Speaker 1: in the next morning there are no spots. Doesn't seem

239
00:13:42,360 --> 00:13:46,040
Speaker 1: like there are very many places where it's logically thought

240
00:13:46,080 --> 00:13:49,040
Speaker 1: through and that's right, and every state is doing it

241
00:13:49,040 --> 00:13:51,120
Speaker 1: a little bit differently, and it all depends on the

242
00:13:51,200 --> 00:13:54,240
Speaker 1: supply that they're getting in UM. You know, Peter told

243
00:13:54,240 --> 00:13:56,280
Speaker 1: me that he's heard from some of his friends that

244
00:13:56,559 --> 00:13:58,920
Speaker 1: people have shown up for an appointment time and then

245
00:13:58,960 --> 00:14:01,400
Speaker 1: been so sorry, we don't have any more of this vaccine.

246
00:14:01,880 --> 00:14:03,200
Speaker 1: You have to come back or you have to go

247
00:14:03,240 --> 00:14:05,680
Speaker 1: back online and try to secure another appointment time. So

248
00:14:05,720 --> 00:14:08,360
Speaker 1: it's really frustrating for people, Um, who are you know,

249
00:14:08,720 --> 00:14:11,720
Speaker 1: really wanting this vaccine so that they can get some

250
00:14:11,800 --> 00:14:14,560
Speaker 1: sort of um, you know, a level of immunity from

251
00:14:14,600 --> 00:14:18,120
Speaker 1: the coronavirus vaccine, especially people who are more at risk

252
00:14:18,160 --> 00:14:21,160
Speaker 1: and in these populations where we know that COVID nineteen

253
00:14:21,200 --> 00:14:25,080
Speaker 1: affects them at higher rate. So some places do give

254
00:14:25,120 --> 00:14:28,080
Speaker 1: you an appointment for the second shot after you get

255
00:14:28,120 --> 00:14:30,280
Speaker 1: the first shot. What are the other places do just

256
00:14:30,320 --> 00:14:34,080
Speaker 1: say come back whenever? Right, So, some places, when you

257
00:14:34,120 --> 00:14:35,760
Speaker 1: go in for your first dose, just like you said,

258
00:14:35,800 --> 00:14:37,960
Speaker 1: they actually hand you a slipper paper that says, you know,

259
00:14:38,000 --> 00:14:40,120
Speaker 1: here's your appointment for your second dose, here's the time,

260
00:14:40,160 --> 00:14:43,600
Speaker 1: here's the date we'll see you back. UM. In other places, um,

261
00:14:43,760 --> 00:14:46,160
Speaker 1: you know, people are saying, you know, the clinics are saying,

262
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:48,680
Speaker 1: we will reach out to you at some point in

263
00:14:48,720 --> 00:14:51,080
Speaker 1: the future to allow you to come back in our

264
00:14:51,320 --> 00:14:54,120
Speaker 1: into our system to schedule for a second toast UM,

265
00:14:54,160 --> 00:14:57,680
Speaker 1: which seems to suggest that second stations aren't will not

266
00:14:57,880 --> 00:15:00,680
Speaker 1: be competing UM in the same pool as people who

267
00:15:00,680 --> 00:15:03,520
Speaker 1: are seeking their first dose UM. But some people weren't

268
00:15:03,520 --> 00:15:06,120
Speaker 1: even told that. Some people just came in and like

269
00:15:06,160 --> 00:15:08,600
Speaker 1: Peter Meyer's got his first dose and then was kind

270
00:15:08,600 --> 00:15:10,480
Speaker 1: of sent on his way and now he has kind

271
00:15:10,480 --> 00:15:13,760
Speaker 1: of no UM, no knowledge of when you know second

272
00:15:13,760 --> 00:15:18,080
Speaker 1: dose could be administered. There is a federal compensation program

273
00:15:18,160 --> 00:15:21,480
Speaker 1: to help people harm by a vaccine. There's a federal

274
00:15:21,480 --> 00:15:24,160
Speaker 1: program that's set up, but it's only eligible to people

275
00:15:24,200 --> 00:15:27,560
Speaker 1: who are actually injured by a vaccine. It wasn't actually

276
00:15:27,600 --> 00:15:31,080
Speaker 1: created to address this type of a problem where you know,

277
00:15:31,160 --> 00:15:33,440
Speaker 1: you could maybe not get your second dose of a

278
00:15:33,520 --> 00:15:36,320
Speaker 1: vaccine in time. This is a program that's meant for

279
00:15:36,400 --> 00:15:40,000
Speaker 1: people who have kind of medical issues or medical injury

280
00:15:40,080 --> 00:15:43,040
Speaker 1: resulting from the vaccine. So if you've got the COVID

281
00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:46,920
Speaker 1: vaccine and you had some medical illness as a result,

282
00:15:47,200 --> 00:15:50,600
Speaker 1: this could possibly be a program that would provide you

283
00:15:50,680 --> 00:15:54,040
Speaker 1: compensation for your injuries and your medical dose. But this

284
00:15:54,080 --> 00:15:57,360
Speaker 1: sort of a system wouldn't cover you just because you

285
00:15:57,360 --> 00:15:59,720
Speaker 1: didn't get your second dose of the vaccine in time.

286
00:16:00,160 --> 00:16:02,840
Speaker 1: And you know what's interesting is that the nation's legal

287
00:16:02,880 --> 00:16:06,840
Speaker 1: system really isn't set up to hold anyone legally liable

288
00:16:07,000 --> 00:16:10,360
Speaker 1: for this type of a distribution failure either. I've understand

289
00:16:10,400 --> 00:16:14,320
Speaker 1: that the Biden administration is telling states or cities to

290
00:16:14,400 --> 00:16:17,920
Speaker 1: get people vaccinated the first time. Don't worry that holding

291
00:16:17,960 --> 00:16:20,920
Speaker 1: back on second doses will give you the second dose,

292
00:16:21,680 --> 00:16:25,000
Speaker 1: that's right. So the Biden administration recently announced plans to

293
00:16:25,040 --> 00:16:28,680
Speaker 1: purchase a hundred million more doses of both Affiser and

294
00:16:28,840 --> 00:16:33,160
Speaker 1: the Maderna vaccines UM. But you know, senior administration officials

295
00:16:33,240 --> 00:16:36,200
Speaker 1: have have told reporters and that the federal government does

296
00:16:36,240 --> 00:16:39,880
Speaker 1: not have a significant inventory of shots on hand. So

297
00:16:39,960 --> 00:16:41,960
Speaker 1: that means that some people are going to have to

298
00:16:42,000 --> 00:16:46,200
Speaker 1: try to win the lottery for vaccine appointment all over again. Now,

299
00:16:46,360 --> 00:16:50,880
Speaker 1: the CDC recently stretched the timeline UM. They said that

300
00:16:50,960 --> 00:16:53,760
Speaker 1: you could wait up to six weeks to get your

301
00:16:53,800 --> 00:16:56,200
Speaker 1: second dose UM. And they said that they did that

302
00:16:56,240 --> 00:16:58,600
Speaker 1: in case it's not feasible to get your second dose

303
00:16:58,680 --> 00:17:01,600
Speaker 1: in the one or twenty day time frame. UM. You know,

304
00:17:01,680 --> 00:17:04,320
Speaker 1: Fiser is recommending that you get your STUFC in DOST

305
00:17:04,400 --> 00:17:06,960
Speaker 1: within twenty one days if you get the Maderna vaccine.

306
00:17:07,000 --> 00:17:10,280
Speaker 1: You haven't still twenty eight days. So the CDC recently

307
00:17:10,280 --> 00:17:12,560
Speaker 1: released guidance has said, Okay, you can wake up to

308
00:17:12,640 --> 00:17:15,960
Speaker 1: forty two days. Um, you know, because and that seemed

309
00:17:16,000 --> 00:17:18,600
Speaker 1: to suggest that they were doing that because they understand that,

310
00:17:18,720 --> 00:17:21,199
Speaker 1: you know, we don't have to supply on hand, and

311
00:17:21,240 --> 00:17:24,560
Speaker 1: that there might be people like Peter Myers or or

312
00:17:24,600 --> 00:17:27,560
Speaker 1: others who you know, may not get their second dose

313
00:17:27,640 --> 00:17:32,280
Speaker 1: in time. Like everything else with COVID nineteen, there's conflicting

314
00:17:32,400 --> 00:17:35,320
Speaker 1: guidance out there because the day to CDC came out

315
00:17:35,359 --> 00:17:38,720
Speaker 1: with that. I remember seeing Dr Fauci on some show

316
00:17:39,240 --> 00:17:41,760
Speaker 1: and he said that you should get it within the

317
00:17:41,800 --> 00:17:46,399
Speaker 1: time frame. So that's right. It's confusing, right, So you

318
00:17:46,520 --> 00:17:48,800
Speaker 1: you're you're a hundred percent right, UM. You know Dr

319
00:17:48,840 --> 00:17:52,360
Speaker 1: Anthony Fauci, he's director of the National Institute of Allergy

320
00:17:52,359 --> 00:17:55,840
Speaker 1: and Infectious Diseases. He actually warned UM shortly after the

321
00:17:55,880 --> 00:17:59,640
Speaker 1: CDC released that guidance. UM. He warned that deviating from

322
00:17:59,680 --> 00:18:02,639
Speaker 1: the scene schedule could create a risk ber in section

323
00:18:03,200 --> 00:18:05,359
Speaker 1: given that we have these new COVID variants that are

324
00:18:05,359 --> 00:18:08,639
Speaker 1: more contagious. UM. I reached the CDC on that and

325
00:18:08,680 --> 00:18:12,000
Speaker 1: ask them to kind of respond to that, and they said, um,

326
00:18:12,040 --> 00:18:14,919
Speaker 1: that the CDC still recommends that people get their second

327
00:18:14,920 --> 00:18:18,480
Speaker 1: dose of the vaccine as close to the recommended interval

328
00:18:18,560 --> 00:18:22,520
Speaker 1: as possible. Um. Again that's three weeks for Fiser, a

329
00:18:22,600 --> 00:18:25,760
Speaker 1: month for Maderna. Um. You know, CDC said that they

330
00:18:25,760 --> 00:18:28,080
Speaker 1: were just trying to create a little bit more flexibility

331
00:18:28,119 --> 00:18:30,960
Speaker 1: by stretching it to the six weeks. Um. You know

332
00:18:31,080 --> 00:18:33,680
Speaker 1: that they said that we're not recommending this as a

333
00:18:33,720 --> 00:18:36,560
Speaker 1: strategy to allow more people to get their first dose,

334
00:18:36,840 --> 00:18:40,280
Speaker 1: but rather to address these ability issues. UM. Now that

335
00:18:40,359 --> 00:18:42,520
Speaker 1: being said, you know, they did say you could wait

336
00:18:42,600 --> 00:18:45,280
Speaker 1: six weeks, but they also didn't say they said that

337
00:18:45,359 --> 00:18:49,040
Speaker 1: there's limited data on what the efficacy of the vaccines

338
00:18:49,080 --> 00:18:51,720
Speaker 1: are if you go outside of that you know, four

339
00:18:51,800 --> 00:18:55,439
Speaker 1: weeks or six week window. Um. But then I asked,

340
00:18:55,480 --> 00:18:58,280
Speaker 1: you know what happens if you missed the four weeks,

341
00:18:58,880 --> 00:19:01,000
Speaker 1: missed the six weeks, what happened? Do you have to

342
00:19:01,040 --> 00:19:03,560
Speaker 1: start the regiment all over again? In CDC is saying no,

343
00:19:03,760 --> 00:19:05,960
Speaker 1: as long as you get your second does you don't

344
00:19:06,040 --> 00:19:07,880
Speaker 1: have to start and go back and get your first

345
00:19:07,920 --> 00:19:11,399
Speaker 1: dose again. This is the problem, the confusion of messages.

346
00:19:11,640 --> 00:19:15,560
Speaker 1: And it seems like after what happened with the CDC

347
00:19:15,800 --> 00:19:19,720
Speaker 1: during the Trump administration, that more people trust in Dr

348
00:19:19,760 --> 00:19:24,439
Speaker 1: Fauci then the CDC. Yeah, that might very well be

349
00:19:24,480 --> 00:19:26,520
Speaker 1: the case. You know, there are mixed messages and that's

350
00:19:26,520 --> 00:19:29,919
Speaker 1: what's made this vaccine rollout so frustrating for people. Um,

351
00:19:29,960 --> 00:19:33,720
Speaker 1: you know, there's a limited supply and distribution has been chaotic,

352
00:19:33,800 --> 00:19:35,399
Speaker 1: and we've been less you know, it's been less to

353
00:19:35,440 --> 00:19:37,719
Speaker 1: the states to design kind of how they're going to

354
00:19:37,760 --> 00:19:40,760
Speaker 1: administer with vaccines and roll this out in phases. Um.

355
00:19:40,840 --> 00:19:43,159
Speaker 1: You know, some states are opening you know has already

356
00:19:43,160 --> 00:19:46,920
Speaker 1: opened it up to you know, those under UM sixty five.

357
00:19:47,040 --> 00:19:49,320
Speaker 1: You know New York State where my family is. UM.

358
00:19:49,359 --> 00:19:51,080
Speaker 1: You know, I know my parents are are you know,

359
00:19:51,160 --> 00:19:53,439
Speaker 1: between the ages of sixty and sixty five, and you

360
00:19:53,480 --> 00:19:56,440
Speaker 1: know they can't get it yet. UM. So yeah, it's

361
00:19:56,119 --> 00:19:59,040
Speaker 1: a it's an extremely frustrating process. But you know, even

362
00:19:59,080 --> 00:20:02,040
Speaker 1: people like Peter Fires who was able to get his

363
00:20:02,080 --> 00:20:04,159
Speaker 1: first dose and you know he doesn't know when he's

364
00:20:04,160 --> 00:20:06,360
Speaker 1: going to get his second dose, he's still not deterred,

365
00:20:06,440 --> 00:20:08,639
Speaker 1: you know, because he says that it's so important that

366
00:20:08,680 --> 00:20:11,359
Speaker 1: you get the vaccine that he's going to keep trying

367
00:20:11,359 --> 00:20:13,680
Speaker 1: and trying and trying over and over and over again

368
00:20:13,960 --> 00:20:16,720
Speaker 1: until he secures another time spot so he can get

369
00:20:16,720 --> 00:20:19,240
Speaker 1: his second dose. And you know that's his recommendation that

370
00:20:19,280 --> 00:20:22,280
Speaker 1: people just try to be as patient as possible. We've

371
00:20:22,320 --> 00:20:24,840
Speaker 1: never had anything in this country, you know, we haven't

372
00:20:24,880 --> 00:20:28,520
Speaker 1: seen anything like this, UM, you know before even with

373
00:20:28,720 --> 00:20:30,920
Speaker 1: you know, the nineteen eighteen Spanish blue to have a

374
00:20:31,000 --> 00:20:35,320
Speaker 1: vaccine roll out this quickly, UM, you know, everybody is

375
00:20:35,400 --> 00:20:40,480
Speaker 1: still learning. So can state or federal governments be sued

376
00:20:40,880 --> 00:20:45,440
Speaker 1: over the failure to provide the second shot? Unfortunately, now,

377
00:20:45,520 --> 00:20:47,760
Speaker 1: you know, state and federal governments have what they call

378
00:20:47,840 --> 00:20:51,480
Speaker 1: sovereign Immunity UM, which protects them from this UM, from

379
00:20:51,520 --> 00:20:54,560
Speaker 1: from lawsuits and being held liable. UM. You know, Congress

380
00:20:54,600 --> 00:20:59,080
Speaker 1: also passed UM the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness back

381
00:20:59,680 --> 00:21:04,440
Speaker 1: UM MATT shields anyone who manufactures, distributes, administers the vaccine

382
00:21:04,640 --> 00:21:07,480
Speaker 1: from being sued as well. UM. But even if those

383
00:21:07,520 --> 00:21:10,800
Speaker 1: protections weren't in place, it would be almost impassible to

384
00:21:10,800 --> 00:21:13,679
Speaker 1: bring a personal injury lawsuit against the pharmacy or a

385
00:21:13,680 --> 00:21:17,000
Speaker 1: health clinic that UM administers this type of a vaccine

386
00:21:17,480 --> 00:21:20,720
Speaker 1: explain why UM. So for there to be you know,

387
00:21:20,840 --> 00:21:24,199
Speaker 1: personal injury liability there, there has to have been an

388
00:21:24,240 --> 00:21:28,200
Speaker 1: injury UM that was caused by either wrongful conduct UM

389
00:21:28,280 --> 00:21:32,680
Speaker 1: that was either negligent or intentional. So, you know, attorneys say, well,

390
00:21:32,840 --> 00:21:35,160
Speaker 1: the first problem is, how do you prove that you're

391
00:21:35,200 --> 00:21:38,520
Speaker 1: injured because you didn't get your second dose of the

392
00:21:38,560 --> 00:21:41,560
Speaker 1: COVID vaccine and time? Like, how do you prove that

393
00:21:41,600 --> 00:21:44,440
Speaker 1: you wouldn't have gotten COVID, you know, if you had

394
00:21:44,440 --> 00:21:47,399
Speaker 1: gotten you know, the first shot in the second shot

395
00:21:47,440 --> 00:21:50,359
Speaker 1: in the allotted time brain um. So there's a problem there.

396
00:21:50,480 --> 00:21:54,159
Speaker 1: And then secondly, attorneys tell me that no one is

397
00:21:54,200 --> 00:21:58,360
Speaker 1: at fault um, either negligently or intentionally by not being

398
00:21:58,359 --> 00:22:01,400
Speaker 1: able to get you this second dough because we have,

399
00:22:01,840 --> 00:22:05,120
Speaker 1: you know, a shortage of supply and you know we're

400
00:22:05,600 --> 00:22:08,480
Speaker 1: our federal officials have not rolled out like you know,

401
00:22:08,520 --> 00:22:11,760
Speaker 1: there wasn't a distribution plan in place, so you know,

402
00:22:11,840 --> 00:22:15,320
Speaker 1: your local pharmacy, your health clinic, wherever you're getting a vaccine,

403
00:22:15,520 --> 00:22:18,040
Speaker 1: it's really not their fault that you can't get your

404
00:22:18,040 --> 00:22:21,800
Speaker 1: second dose in time if that happens. So the lawyers

405
00:22:21,800 --> 00:22:23,760
Speaker 1: are even saying that in order to sue you'd have

406
00:22:23,840 --> 00:22:28,120
Speaker 1: to get COVID in order to prove injury. Yeah, you'd

407
00:22:28,160 --> 00:22:31,280
Speaker 1: have to get COVID between shot one and shot two. UM.

408
00:22:31,359 --> 00:22:33,399
Speaker 1: And then how do you prove that you wouldn't have

409
00:22:33,440 --> 00:22:35,879
Speaker 1: gotten COVID if you had gotten the shot in times?

410
00:22:36,040 --> 00:22:38,520
Speaker 1: You know, because the first dose, as we know, doesn't

411
00:22:38,560 --> 00:22:42,080
Speaker 1: provide you a pent with immunity. UM. The COVID vaccine

412
00:22:42,280 --> 00:22:44,680
Speaker 1: isn't a hundred percent you know, doesn't provide a hundred

413
00:22:44,680 --> 00:22:48,000
Speaker 1: percent immunity to begin with. UM. It does provide data

414
00:22:48,080 --> 00:22:50,840
Speaker 1: is showing that the vaccine, once you get your second dose,

415
00:22:51,200 --> 00:22:53,399
Speaker 1: will keep you out of the hospital and keep you

416
00:22:53,440 --> 00:22:56,560
Speaker 1: from getting a severe case of COVID nineteen. But it

417
00:22:56,600 --> 00:22:59,560
Speaker 1: won't won't necessarily stop you from getting the virus. So

418
00:22:59,640 --> 00:23:02,320
Speaker 1: how do you prove in court that you, you know,

419
00:23:02,480 --> 00:23:06,000
Speaker 1: weren't already maybe one of those five percent or fifteen

420
00:23:06,040 --> 00:23:08,160
Speaker 1: percent that would have gotten it anyway? You know, That's

421
00:23:08,200 --> 00:23:11,160
Speaker 1: what attorneys are saying. It's hard to prove UM. Now,

422
00:23:11,480 --> 00:23:13,919
Speaker 1: a person might have a claim if there was some

423
00:23:14,000 --> 00:23:18,200
Speaker 1: sort of outrageous conduct that's the lead your second toes UM.

424
00:23:18,240 --> 00:23:20,240
Speaker 1: You know that that may be a way that you

425
00:23:20,240 --> 00:23:22,960
Speaker 1: could say that you were injured. UM, But that conduct

426
00:23:23,000 --> 00:23:26,480
Speaker 1: would have to be like you know, crazy, UM. There

427
00:23:26,480 --> 00:23:29,160
Speaker 1: would have to be issues with management. Say you had

428
00:23:29,200 --> 00:23:31,719
Speaker 1: a pharmacist that was kind of like you know, shoving

429
00:23:31,720 --> 00:23:34,520
Speaker 1: it vaccines out the back door with your friends and family,

430
00:23:34,640 --> 00:23:37,199
Speaker 1: you know, and and that was allowed to happen, that

431
00:23:37,400 --> 00:23:40,520
Speaker 1: that could be possibly a cause for a colaim. So

432
00:23:40,600 --> 00:23:44,520
Speaker 1: what's the best advice that attorneys are giving people. Attorneys

433
00:23:44,520 --> 00:23:46,600
Speaker 1: say that, you know, it's so important that people still

434
00:23:46,640 --> 00:23:49,000
Speaker 1: try to go and get their vaccine. And you know,

435
00:23:49,119 --> 00:23:52,480
Speaker 1: just because you can't hold anybody legally liable if you

436
00:23:52,480 --> 00:23:55,240
Speaker 1: don't get it in time, doesn't mean that that should

437
00:23:55,280 --> 00:23:57,600
Speaker 1: be a deterrent for you to getting the vaccine at all.

438
00:23:57,680 --> 00:24:01,600
Speaker 1: You know, even though we're a really litigeous um, you know, society.

439
00:24:01,680 --> 00:24:04,160
Speaker 1: Just because you can't see anybody doesn't mean you shouldn't

440
00:24:04,200 --> 00:24:06,720
Speaker 1: go get your COVID vaccine. I mean, are there any

441
00:24:06,800 --> 00:24:11,119
Speaker 1: additional plans in place in in certain states to fix

442
00:24:11,200 --> 00:24:14,320
Speaker 1: this problem of the second vaccine? You know? I think

443
00:24:14,440 --> 00:24:17,280
Speaker 1: on states are are hoping that the supplies will come

444
00:24:17,359 --> 00:24:20,080
Speaker 1: in time and that they'll be able to um, you know,

445
00:24:20,119 --> 00:24:22,640
Speaker 1: give out the second doses UM to the people who

446
00:24:22,640 --> 00:24:25,440
Speaker 1: have already received first shots. Um so it kind of

447
00:24:25,720 --> 00:24:27,720
Speaker 1: if weren't a wait and see pattern right now about

448
00:24:27,760 --> 00:24:29,840
Speaker 1: how all this plays out. Thanks so much for being

449
00:24:29,920 --> 00:24:33,280
Speaker 1: on the show, Lydia. That's Lydia Wheeler, senior legal reporter

450
00:24:33,320 --> 00:24:36,760
Speaker 1: for Bloomberg Law covering healthcare. And that's it for the

451
00:24:36,920 --> 00:24:40,160
Speaker 1: edition of the Bloomberg Lawn Podcast. I'm June Grasso. Thanks

452
00:24:40,160 --> 00:24:42,800
Speaker 1: so much for listening, and remember you can always get

453
00:24:42,840 --> 00:24:45,919
Speaker 1: the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Lawn podcast. You

454
00:24:45,920 --> 00:24:49,359
Speaker 1: can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever you

455
00:24:49,440 --> 00:24:58,320
Speaker 1: get your favorite podcasts. You're listening to Bloomberg. Thank ye