1 00:00:02,520 --> 00:00:07,000 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. 2 00:00:08,039 --> 00:00:09,760 Speaker 2: This is Bloomberg Law. 3 00:00:09,840 --> 00:00:12,959 Speaker 1: Employers frequently exploit the weaknesses. 4 00:00:12,360 --> 00:00:12,760 Speaker 3: In the law. 5 00:00:12,800 --> 00:00:15,120 Speaker 4: Of course, are going to be asking questions about separation 6 00:00:15,200 --> 00:00:15,880 Speaker 4: of powers. 7 00:00:15,960 --> 00:00:18,920 Speaker 1: One by one, Google settled with all of these other plaintiffs. 8 00:00:18,920 --> 00:00:22,240 Speaker 2: Interviews with prominent attorneys and Bloomberg Legal experts. 9 00:00:22,280 --> 00:00:25,720 Speaker 4: Joining me is immigration law expertly on Fresco, First Amendment 10 00:00:25,800 --> 00:00:27,720 Speaker 4: law expert Caroline Malick. 11 00:00:27,440 --> 00:00:32,000 Speaker 2: Corbin's and analysis of important legal issues, cases and headlines. 12 00:00:31,560 --> 00:00:34,360 Speaker 5: That Trilie Judge may well want to hold a hearing. 13 00:00:34,520 --> 00:00:36,959 Speaker 3: They have never said this case should never have been 14 00:00:36,960 --> 00:00:38,080 Speaker 3: brought in the first place. 15 00:00:38,159 --> 00:00:42,599 Speaker 2: Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. 16 00:00:45,880 --> 00:00:48,840 Speaker 1: Welcome to the weekend edition of Bloomberg Law. I'm Amy 17 00:00:48,920 --> 00:00:52,200 Speaker 1: Morris and for June Grosso. June's off this week ahead. 18 00:00:52,200 --> 00:00:54,920 Speaker 1: In this hour, we'll look at a fresh legal challenge 19 00:00:54,920 --> 00:00:58,120 Speaker 1: for Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Junior, 20 00:00:58,480 --> 00:01:02,080 Speaker 1: Fifteen states are pushing back against his revamp of vaccine 21 00:01:02,120 --> 00:01:05,920 Speaker 1: policy for children. Plus the latest in the high profile 22 00:01:06,080 --> 00:01:09,520 Speaker 1: social media addiction trial and how that could signal a 23 00:01:09,560 --> 00:01:12,160 Speaker 1: shift in how the legal system is used to rain 24 00:01:12,200 --> 00:01:15,480 Speaker 1: in big tech. But first we begin with the Supreme 25 00:01:15,560 --> 00:01:19,479 Speaker 1: Court and big oil. Exeon Mobile and suncoret Energy are 26 00:01:19,520 --> 00:01:22,520 Speaker 1: asking the High Court to review a lower court ruling 27 00:01:22,560 --> 00:01:26,000 Speaker 1: that would allow them to be sued over climate change 28 00:01:26,400 --> 00:01:28,960 Speaker 1: and joining us now to discuss how this could all 29 00:01:28,959 --> 00:01:32,760 Speaker 1: play out. Bloomberg Supreme Court reporter Greg's store. Greg, thank 30 00:01:32,760 --> 00:01:34,559 Speaker 1: you so much for taking the time with us today. 31 00:01:34,720 --> 00:01:37,800 Speaker 1: Let's first just talk about the case itself, involving city 32 00:01:37,840 --> 00:01:42,160 Speaker 1: and state lawsuits blaming oil companies for climate change. Have 33 00:01:42,280 --> 00:01:45,119 Speaker 1: I made that a little too simple? Not really. 34 00:01:45,600 --> 00:01:48,000 Speaker 4: It blames them for climate change, and it blames them 35 00:01:48,000 --> 00:01:51,320 Speaker 4: for misleading consumers about climate change. That's what the suit 36 00:01:51,600 --> 00:01:55,080 Speaker 4: by the city and the County of Boulder, Colorado is saying. 37 00:01:55,160 --> 00:01:58,520 Speaker 4: And the question for the Supreme Court is basically whether 38 00:01:58,560 --> 00:01:59,960 Speaker 4: those claims can get in the door. 39 00:02:00,120 --> 00:02:02,200 Speaker 1: So that's a pretty simple question. But this is a 40 00:02:02,240 --> 00:02:03,480 Speaker 1: really complicated topic. 41 00:02:03,720 --> 00:02:07,440 Speaker 4: Yeah, it's super complicated. It's about this notion of preemption, 42 00:02:07,680 --> 00:02:12,040 Speaker 4: which generally means when federal law sort of displaces state 43 00:02:12,160 --> 00:02:14,400 Speaker 4: law and means that state law doesn't apply. 44 00:02:15,160 --> 00:02:18,359 Speaker 1: Oh, so it goes way beyond just climate change. And 45 00:02:18,480 --> 00:02:21,160 Speaker 1: did you mislead us about what this is about? State 46 00:02:21,280 --> 00:02:21,840 Speaker 1: versus FED. 47 00:02:22,040 --> 00:02:24,440 Speaker 4: It is very much state versus FED. It's a dynamic 48 00:02:24,520 --> 00:02:27,280 Speaker 4: we actually see a lot at the Supreme Court. It's 49 00:02:27,600 --> 00:02:30,720 Speaker 4: kind of similar to the dynamic in that Monsanto case 50 00:02:30,720 --> 00:02:33,839 Speaker 4: involving Roundup, where the question is whether a federal law 51 00:02:33,880 --> 00:02:35,960 Speaker 4: means you can't sue under state law. 52 00:02:36,360 --> 00:02:39,200 Speaker 1: Okay, so what is the oil company's argument? 53 00:02:39,320 --> 00:02:39,519 Speaker 6: Then? 54 00:02:39,600 --> 00:02:42,160 Speaker 1: They don't want this case to be heard at all. 55 00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:45,160 Speaker 4: They don't want this case or similar cases being heard 56 00:02:45,200 --> 00:02:49,840 Speaker 4: at all. They say that the matter of climate change 57 00:02:49,880 --> 00:02:53,280 Speaker 4: is entirely a federal matter. It is not something states 58 00:02:53,320 --> 00:02:58,080 Speaker 4: can or cities can sue using their own state laws 59 00:02:58,120 --> 00:03:01,560 Speaker 4: to get damages, which is what Boulder is trying to 60 00:03:01,639 --> 00:03:04,400 Speaker 4: get in this case. They say, sort of a combination 61 00:03:04,680 --> 00:03:08,120 Speaker 4: of the Clean Air Act, something known as federal common law, 62 00:03:08,240 --> 00:03:11,960 Speaker 4: and the Constitution all basically out the state from having 63 00:03:12,040 --> 00:03:12,760 Speaker 4: any role here. 64 00:03:12,919 --> 00:03:16,120 Speaker 1: I see. So because there are laws that come under 65 00:03:16,160 --> 00:03:19,920 Speaker 1: the federal heading, they say, states and cities really don't 66 00:03:19,919 --> 00:03:24,040 Speaker 1: have jurisdiction here, even though we all experience climate. 67 00:03:24,120 --> 00:03:26,720 Speaker 4: Yeah, that's right. And you know, basically the core of 68 00:03:26,760 --> 00:03:30,200 Speaker 4: the argument is that climate change is a matter of 69 00:03:30,480 --> 00:03:34,760 Speaker 4: interstate pollution. It's not just within a state, and it's 70 00:03:34,800 --> 00:03:39,120 Speaker 4: a matter of foreign affairs, because obviously, you know, what 71 00:03:39,240 --> 00:03:42,360 Speaker 4: happens in other countries effects the United States and states 72 00:03:42,360 --> 00:03:45,760 Speaker 4: and vice versa, and so they say this is especially 73 00:03:45,760 --> 00:03:47,760 Speaker 4: a case where the States shouldn't be involved. 74 00:03:47,840 --> 00:03:50,920 Speaker 1: Okay, now, I've read what you wrote on the Bloomberg terminal, 75 00:03:50,920 --> 00:03:53,240 Speaker 1: and one of the things you wrote was that they 76 00:03:53,320 --> 00:03:56,160 Speaker 1: have argued that the stakes in this couldn't be higher. 77 00:03:56,200 --> 00:03:59,600 Speaker 1: That's the oil companies arguing that what's the stakes for them? 78 00:04:00,120 --> 00:04:02,560 Speaker 4: Well, part of it, well, it's certainly billions and billions 79 00:04:02,560 --> 00:04:04,680 Speaker 4: of dollars, and that's in part because there are dozens 80 00:04:04,720 --> 00:04:08,280 Speaker 4: of these suits out there, and there have been several 81 00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:11,040 Speaker 4: times in the past where the Supreme Court has refused 82 00:04:11,040 --> 00:04:14,640 Speaker 4: to hear appeals on various issues. And so what the 83 00:04:14,680 --> 00:04:17,600 Speaker 4: oil companies are really hoping is that the Supreme Court 84 00:04:17,760 --> 00:04:20,360 Speaker 4: will deal a big blow here and knock out most 85 00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:22,280 Speaker 4: or all of those state court suits. 86 00:04:22,680 --> 00:04:26,960 Speaker 1: Is imposing untold damages on energy companies, which is one 87 00:04:26,960 --> 00:04:29,440 Speaker 1: of the things they're arguing. Is that a defense. I mean, 88 00:04:29,480 --> 00:04:31,440 Speaker 1: can they just argue that, well, if they do this, 89 00:04:31,440 --> 00:04:33,360 Speaker 1: they're going to wreckord industry, so they can't do it. 90 00:04:33,680 --> 00:04:36,840 Speaker 4: That's probably less a defense to the lawsuit than it 91 00:04:36,960 --> 00:04:39,679 Speaker 4: is a reason for the Supreme Court to get involved. 92 00:04:39,720 --> 00:04:41,600 Speaker 4: So the briefs we're looking at now are where the 93 00:04:41,640 --> 00:04:44,200 Speaker 4: oil companies are saying, Hey, Supreme Court, it's really really 94 00:04:44,240 --> 00:04:48,080 Speaker 4: important that you get involved, and the City Boulder was saying, actually, 95 00:04:48,120 --> 00:04:51,560 Speaker 4: this is not that important at least the issues that 96 00:04:51,640 --> 00:04:53,080 Speaker 4: the oil companies are asking. 97 00:04:52,839 --> 00:04:53,200 Speaker 2: You to hear. 98 00:04:53,720 --> 00:04:58,480 Speaker 1: Is this at all similar to say, suing the tobacco industry. 99 00:04:58,720 --> 00:05:02,880 Speaker 4: It bears some similarity in that, you know, there's a 100 00:05:03,600 --> 00:05:06,880 Speaker 4: big set of companies, there's a great harm that's done, 101 00:05:07,160 --> 00:05:10,480 Speaker 4: there are arguments about how much those companies are to blame, 102 00:05:10,720 --> 00:05:14,200 Speaker 4: and people who have been been hurt by it or 103 00:05:14,240 --> 00:05:16,360 Speaker 4: say they have been hurt by it, are looking for 104 00:05:16,880 --> 00:05:19,440 Speaker 4: legal theories ways they can get into court and make 105 00:05:19,440 --> 00:05:21,720 Speaker 4: the big companies pay for some of the damage they 106 00:05:21,720 --> 00:05:22,520 Speaker 4: say they've caused. 107 00:05:22,960 --> 00:05:25,200 Speaker 1: This can't be the first time that we've seen something 108 00:05:25,240 --> 00:05:27,880 Speaker 1: like this with oil companies, though. Is it just becoming 109 00:05:28,000 --> 00:05:31,599 Speaker 1: more frequent and it feels new, or is this something 110 00:05:31,600 --> 00:05:33,840 Speaker 1: that's been building. Tell me about the history of this. 111 00:05:34,200 --> 00:05:37,600 Speaker 4: It has been building over a matter of years. As 112 00:05:37,640 --> 00:05:40,320 Speaker 4: I said, there had been dozens of suits and the 113 00:05:40,400 --> 00:05:44,240 Speaker 4: litigation use the word complicated at the beginning, very complicated. 114 00:05:44,279 --> 00:05:49,320 Speaker 4: So there were fights over whether these lawsuits belong in 115 00:05:49,360 --> 00:05:52,039 Speaker 4: state court or federal court. The companies preferred them in 116 00:05:52,080 --> 00:05:55,800 Speaker 4: federal court because that's where the corporate defendants tend to 117 00:05:55,839 --> 00:05:58,880 Speaker 4: fare a little bit better. The Supreme Court a while 118 00:05:58,960 --> 00:06:01,719 Speaker 4: back said no, we're not going to hear oil company 119 00:06:01,800 --> 00:06:04,520 Speaker 4: arguments to try to shift these suits from state to 120 00:06:04,600 --> 00:06:08,279 Speaker 4: federal court. So there's an awful lot of kind of 121 00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:11,440 Speaker 4: preliminary issues like that before we even get to the 122 00:06:11,520 --> 00:06:13,599 Speaker 4: question of whether oil companies are actually to blame. 123 00:06:13,800 --> 00:06:16,479 Speaker 1: Oh wow. So they have to first go through basically 124 00:06:16,560 --> 00:06:18,800 Speaker 1: the housekeeping, which is who can sue them? 125 00:06:19,279 --> 00:06:23,320 Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, who can sue them? What law applies is 126 00:06:22,680 --> 00:06:25,520 Speaker 4: going to kick in at some point, whether it's the 127 00:06:25,560 --> 00:06:29,560 Speaker 4: law of Colorado or some other state or some other jurisdiction. 128 00:06:30,440 --> 00:06:35,400 Speaker 4: There are very very complicated litigation as I as they say, 129 00:06:35,520 --> 00:06:37,960 Speaker 4: and all those things have to get sorted out. Right now, 130 00:06:37,960 --> 00:06:40,680 Speaker 4: though this is really about whether the suit can go 131 00:06:40,800 --> 00:06:41,520 Speaker 4: forward at all. 132 00:06:41,839 --> 00:06:45,680 Speaker 1: Let's talk a bit more about what the states and 133 00:06:46,000 --> 00:06:49,240 Speaker 1: cities are suing them for, like what's the crux of 134 00:06:49,279 --> 00:06:50,000 Speaker 1: their argument. 135 00:06:50,520 --> 00:06:53,800 Speaker 4: So they have a variety of I'll use some lawyer 136 00:06:53,880 --> 00:06:58,440 Speaker 4: league terms here, kind of state law claims, like something 137 00:06:58,480 --> 00:07:01,520 Speaker 4: called nuisance, which is basically what you might do if 138 00:07:01,560 --> 00:07:03,720 Speaker 4: you had a big power plant next to you and 139 00:07:03,760 --> 00:07:06,480 Speaker 4: smoke from that power plant came into your property, you 140 00:07:06,560 --> 00:07:13,520 Speaker 4: might sue under state nuisance law. There's theories like unjust enrichment. 141 00:07:14,000 --> 00:07:18,520 Speaker 4: I believe they're certainly claiming that the oil companies misled 142 00:07:18,600 --> 00:07:21,320 Speaker 4: consumers cause them to do things they wouldn't have done otherwise, 143 00:07:21,400 --> 00:07:25,080 Speaker 4: because they sort of downplate the impact of climate change, 144 00:07:25,080 --> 00:07:27,520 Speaker 4: and those are all things that if this were just 145 00:07:27,560 --> 00:07:31,440 Speaker 4: a matter of stuff going on within a state, there'd 146 00:07:31,440 --> 00:07:33,840 Speaker 4: be no question the claims could go forward. Whether they're 147 00:07:33,880 --> 00:07:37,240 Speaker 4: true or not's now the matter. But because climate change 148 00:07:37,400 --> 00:07:41,760 Speaker 4: is different, because the people in Colorado aren't just affected 149 00:07:41,760 --> 00:07:44,760 Speaker 4: by pollution in Colorado, they're affected by pollution in other 150 00:07:44,800 --> 00:07:48,560 Speaker 4: states and outside the country. That's why we have all 151 00:07:48,600 --> 00:07:52,120 Speaker 4: these questions about state versus federal and whether the suits 152 00:07:52,160 --> 00:07:53,560 Speaker 4: can go forward under state law. 153 00:07:53,960 --> 00:07:57,440 Speaker 1: So is there any precedent or any other appeals that 154 00:07:57,520 --> 00:08:00,360 Speaker 1: might give us a peek into where this is editor 155 00:08:00,360 --> 00:08:03,160 Speaker 1: how it's getting there, or is this so unique because 156 00:08:03,240 --> 00:08:06,960 Speaker 1: of the difference between the disconnect between the federal and 157 00:08:07,000 --> 00:08:07,360 Speaker 1: the state. 158 00:08:07,880 --> 00:08:09,760 Speaker 4: So it depends on which side you ask. Okay, the 159 00:08:09,840 --> 00:08:12,400 Speaker 4: oil companies will tell you that, hey, there are some 160 00:08:12,440 --> 00:08:15,960 Speaker 4: Supreme Court precedents involving say the interpretation of the Clean 161 00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:18,840 Speaker 4: Air Act, where the Supreme Court said, no, you can't 162 00:08:19,000 --> 00:08:21,840 Speaker 4: sue for that sort of thing, you can't sue under 163 00:08:21,840 --> 00:08:25,200 Speaker 4: your own law, or a discharge out of state that 164 00:08:25,360 --> 00:08:28,280 Speaker 4: made its way into your state, say, you know, in 165 00:08:28,320 --> 00:08:33,520 Speaker 4: the air or something like that. And the Boulder says, actually, 166 00:08:33,559 --> 00:08:38,000 Speaker 4: that's not applicable here. This is very different, and in fact, 167 00:08:38,040 --> 00:08:40,280 Speaker 4: what the oil companies are asking you to do Supreme 168 00:08:40,320 --> 00:08:45,320 Speaker 4: Court is basically unprecedented. So the Bowlder's contention is that 169 00:08:45,760 --> 00:08:51,079 Speaker 4: this notion that the Constitution preempts something because this is 170 00:08:51,160 --> 00:08:56,679 Speaker 4: like inherently this is an inherently federal matter climate change. 171 00:08:57,040 --> 00:09:00,640 Speaker 4: The Boulder says, that is a legal theory that the 172 00:09:00,679 --> 00:09:03,880 Speaker 4: Supreme Court has never endorsed. So depending on which side 173 00:09:03,920 --> 00:09:07,199 Speaker 4: you ask, is that's kind of the lens you look 174 00:09:07,200 --> 00:09:09,800 Speaker 4: at it through in terms of whether this is unprecedented 175 00:09:09,920 --> 00:09:12,440 Speaker 4: or just you know, something the Supreme Court has seen before. 176 00:09:12,559 --> 00:09:15,720 Speaker 1: So depending on what the Supreme Court says, what impact 177 00:09:15,760 --> 00:09:19,400 Speaker 1: could that have? Could it quash future lawsuits. Could it 178 00:09:19,480 --> 00:09:22,040 Speaker 1: give a shield to big oil? 179 00:09:22,520 --> 00:09:25,120 Speaker 4: It could certainly give a shield to big oil, and 180 00:09:25,160 --> 00:09:28,040 Speaker 4: it could be a very significant shield. Now with dozens 181 00:09:28,040 --> 00:09:30,080 Speaker 4: of suits out there, there might be other kind of 182 00:09:30,120 --> 00:09:34,319 Speaker 4: legal approaches that could go forward. Even the oil companies 183 00:09:34,400 --> 00:09:38,240 Speaker 4: are saying that Colorado could still press a very very 184 00:09:38,400 --> 00:09:42,760 Speaker 4: narrow claim about pollution that happened within Colorado affecting people 185 00:09:42,760 --> 00:09:47,520 Speaker 4: in Colorado, but the Boulders trying to do much much 186 00:09:47,559 --> 00:09:53,839 Speaker 4: more than that. It again, just the complications of all 187 00:09:53,840 --> 00:09:57,120 Speaker 4: this litigation means that there probably will still be some 188 00:09:57,240 --> 00:10:00,760 Speaker 4: avenues even if the oil companies win here for claims 189 00:10:00,760 --> 00:10:04,680 Speaker 4: to go forward. There's always the potential that, you know, say, 190 00:10:04,760 --> 00:10:07,319 Speaker 4: a new administration could come in in a few years 191 00:10:07,400 --> 00:10:10,480 Speaker 4: and you know, make some changes that allow suit to 192 00:10:10,480 --> 00:10:13,559 Speaker 4: go forward, and new legislation could be passed. So it 193 00:10:13,679 --> 00:10:17,280 Speaker 4: wouldn't necessarily cut it off for all times, but it 194 00:10:17,280 --> 00:10:20,520 Speaker 4: would certainly be a significant shield for oil companies. If 195 00:10:20,720 --> 00:10:22,520 Speaker 4: the Supreme Court says Boulder can't sue. 196 00:10:22,640 --> 00:10:24,319 Speaker 1: Yeah, I was going to ask, that would add another 197 00:10:24,400 --> 00:10:28,120 Speaker 1: layer of, let's say it again, complication to this particular case. 198 00:10:28,280 --> 00:10:30,520 Speaker 1: If a new administration were to come in and start 199 00:10:30,600 --> 00:10:33,559 Speaker 1: changing rules to allow or disallow things to happen. 200 00:10:33,920 --> 00:10:36,840 Speaker 4: Yeah, I don't think there's any questions. So one of 201 00:10:36,880 --> 00:10:39,840 Speaker 4: the kind of sub issues in this case is what 202 00:10:39,920 --> 00:10:46,520 Speaker 4: the Clean Air Act says about allowing lawsuits. And you know, 203 00:10:46,679 --> 00:10:50,480 Speaker 4: certainly a new Congress could come in and say we 204 00:10:50,559 --> 00:10:53,640 Speaker 4: want to make the Clean Air Act much more specific 205 00:10:53,720 --> 00:10:57,200 Speaker 4: about climate change, both to empower the EPA to do 206 00:10:57,320 --> 00:11:04,080 Speaker 4: things and to explicitly say states can file lawsuits. That's 207 00:11:04,120 --> 00:11:06,600 Speaker 4: at least, you know, pretty likely that that could be done. 208 00:11:06,600 --> 00:11:09,160 Speaker 4: Whether it actually happens as a matter of politics, and 209 00:11:10,160 --> 00:11:11,880 Speaker 4: you know, priorities is another question. 210 00:11:12,520 --> 00:11:15,800 Speaker 1: Where do things stand now? And what are you watching 211 00:11:15,840 --> 00:11:17,479 Speaker 1: for in the next few weeks. 212 00:11:17,920 --> 00:11:20,360 Speaker 4: So the Supreme Court's going to hear arguments, The arguments 213 00:11:20,360 --> 00:11:22,760 Speaker 4: are not going to be until next term, so probably 214 00:11:22,800 --> 00:11:26,400 Speaker 4: October or November, briefs will be filed. That's sort of 215 00:11:26,400 --> 00:11:28,920 Speaker 4: the next thing that will be happening over the next 216 00:11:28,920 --> 00:11:29,520 Speaker 4: few weeks. 217 00:11:30,640 --> 00:11:31,360 Speaker 2: And one thing. 218 00:11:31,440 --> 00:11:35,280 Speaker 4: I'll be looking for I didn't even sort of give you. 219 00:11:35,320 --> 00:11:37,520 Speaker 4: One of the complicating factors here is that when the 220 00:11:37,520 --> 00:11:41,720 Speaker 4: Supreme Court agreed to hear this case, they said we 221 00:11:41,840 --> 00:11:47,679 Speaker 4: want briefing on yet another tricky question, which is whether 222 00:11:47,720 --> 00:11:50,080 Speaker 4: we the Supreme Court have any business in this case 223 00:11:50,120 --> 00:11:52,720 Speaker 4: at all right now. So up until now, this has 224 00:11:52,720 --> 00:11:56,160 Speaker 4: been handled through the Colorado courts, and the Colorado Supreme 225 00:11:56,160 --> 00:12:00,959 Speaker 4: Court said the lawsuit could go forward. And argument that 226 00:12:01,360 --> 00:12:04,880 Speaker 4: Boulder is making is that normally the US Supreme Court 227 00:12:05,040 --> 00:12:08,240 Speaker 4: can't jump into a state court lawsuit until there's a 228 00:12:08,320 --> 00:12:11,200 Speaker 4: final judgment, and we don't have a final judgment in 229 00:12:11,240 --> 00:12:15,839 Speaker 4: this case, and so that those arguments haven't really been 230 00:12:15,880 --> 00:12:17,959 Speaker 4: developed in the briefing all that much yet. But the 231 00:12:18,000 --> 00:12:20,240 Speaker 4: Supreme Court said we want to hear more about that. 232 00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:23,360 Speaker 4: So the question will be, is there a chance the 233 00:12:23,360 --> 00:12:27,400 Speaker 4: Supreme Court will basically say, you know what, we can't 234 00:12:27,400 --> 00:12:30,280 Speaker 4: decide this issue right now. We don't have jurisdiction until 235 00:12:30,280 --> 00:12:34,560 Speaker 4: it plays out more in the Colorado courts. Therefore, this 236 00:12:34,600 --> 00:12:36,880 Speaker 4: big fight we've been talking about, this potential shield for 237 00:12:36,920 --> 00:12:39,160 Speaker 4: the oil industry, that's going to have to wait for 238 00:12:39,559 --> 00:12:42,280 Speaker 4: another case or further down the road in this one. 239 00:12:42,679 --> 00:12:46,319 Speaker 1: All right, thanks so much, Bloomberg. Supreme Court reporter Greg Store, 240 00:12:46,520 --> 00:12:48,400 Speaker 1: thank you for taking the time of boiling it down 241 00:12:48,440 --> 00:12:51,200 Speaker 1: for us. Appreciate it, my pleasure. Coming up, we turned 242 00:12:51,200 --> 00:12:55,560 Speaker 1: to the legal challenges facing OURFK Junior's overhaul of vaccine policy. 243 00:12:55,760 --> 00:12:58,480 Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg Law. I'm Amy Morris and for 244 00:12:58,559 --> 00:13:01,080 Speaker 1: June Grosso and this Bloomberg. 245 00:13:07,200 --> 00:13:11,760 Speaker 2: You're listening to Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. 246 00:13:13,120 --> 00:13:15,960 Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to the weekend edition of Bloomberg Law. 247 00:13:16,080 --> 00:13:19,400 Speaker 1: I Namy Morris in for June Grosso. Over this past year, 248 00:13:19,559 --> 00:13:22,560 Speaker 1: RFK Junior has made his mark as Secretary of Health 249 00:13:22,559 --> 00:13:26,360 Speaker 1: and Human Services in the Trump administration, especially when it 250 00:13:26,400 --> 00:13:30,240 Speaker 1: comes to vaccine policy. He's reshaped a key advisory panel 251 00:13:30,559 --> 00:13:33,560 Speaker 1: and made some big changes to the national vaccine schedule 252 00:13:33,640 --> 00:13:38,199 Speaker 1: for children. Those moves are facing pushback now from fifteen states, 253 00:13:38,280 --> 00:13:42,080 Speaker 1: led by Arizona in California. Joining us now Bloomberg News 254 00:13:42,080 --> 00:13:44,640 Speaker 1: health reporter Jessica Nix. She's going to fill us in 255 00:13:44,679 --> 00:13:47,560 Speaker 1: on the latest with this. Now, Jessica, first of all, 256 00:13:47,640 --> 00:13:50,320 Speaker 1: let's talk about the challenge to the overhaul. Where's this 257 00:13:50,520 --> 00:13:52,160 Speaker 1: challenge coming from. What's it based on? 258 00:13:52,559 --> 00:13:55,320 Speaker 5: Absolutely? Thank you so much for having me. This is 259 00:13:55,360 --> 00:13:59,880 Speaker 5: really based on something that RFK Junior did. On January fifth, 260 00:14:00,280 --> 00:14:04,320 Speaker 5: his administration at Health and Human Services issued this new 261 00:14:04,920 --> 00:14:09,160 Speaker 5: CDC Immunization schedule. They called it the Decision Memo. What 262 00:14:09,280 --> 00:14:12,920 Speaker 5: basically they did is they took the existing childhood immunization 263 00:14:13,040 --> 00:14:16,920 Speaker 5: schedule and part it down to a list of eleven diseases, 264 00:14:17,200 --> 00:14:20,880 Speaker 5: down from seventeen. So now we have shots covering just 265 00:14:20,960 --> 00:14:24,160 Speaker 5: eleven diseases, no longer the seventeen that we saw before. 266 00:14:24,200 --> 00:14:25,960 Speaker 5: Some of the shots that were on the chopping block 267 00:14:26,000 --> 00:14:32,440 Speaker 5: included long standing recommendations for RSV, for influenza, for COVID, 268 00:14:32,520 --> 00:14:36,320 Speaker 5: even including it. New macaccle disease was on there as well, 269 00:14:36,440 --> 00:14:41,320 Speaker 5: hepatitis B, hepatitis A. So it was a drastic change 270 00:14:41,360 --> 00:14:44,720 Speaker 5: from what we have seen in the US for the 271 00:14:44,800 --> 00:14:47,720 Speaker 5: national schedule. So that happened on January fifth. 272 00:14:48,200 --> 00:14:51,440 Speaker 1: So is that the full extent of the overhaul just 273 00:14:51,480 --> 00:14:55,040 Speaker 1: basically changing the schedules, changing what the vaccines are that 274 00:14:55,120 --> 00:14:58,640 Speaker 1: kids are going to be getting, and really, how is 275 00:14:58,680 --> 00:15:02,520 Speaker 1: that going to impact then the states, the families, the kids. 276 00:15:03,040 --> 00:15:05,880 Speaker 1: Are they calling this an overreach? They are? 277 00:15:06,120 --> 00:15:10,760 Speaker 5: I think when you think about Rfk's time at HHS, 278 00:15:10,800 --> 00:15:14,880 Speaker 5: it's been this crusade against vaccination policy. Before coming in, 279 00:15:14,920 --> 00:15:17,680 Speaker 5: he was really criticized as being somebody who was skeptical 280 00:15:17,680 --> 00:15:21,240 Speaker 5: of vaccines, an anti vaxer. Even he was called, He's 281 00:15:21,280 --> 00:15:23,160 Speaker 5: constantly pushed back and said, you know, I'm not an 282 00:15:23,200 --> 00:15:26,800 Speaker 5: anti vaxer. I'm pro safety, I'm pro looking at vaccinations. 283 00:15:27,080 --> 00:15:29,960 Speaker 5: So there was this worry when he came into office 284 00:15:30,240 --> 00:15:32,960 Speaker 5: that he was going to overhaul the vaccine schedule. The 285 00:15:32,960 --> 00:15:35,680 Speaker 5: first thing he started to do last year in the 286 00:15:35,720 --> 00:15:39,480 Speaker 5: spring was overhaul the recommendations for COVID shots for healthy 287 00:15:39,560 --> 00:15:42,760 Speaker 5: kids and pregnant women. A few weeks after that, in June, 288 00:15:43,200 --> 00:15:46,800 Speaker 5: he fired the entire panel of this group called the 289 00:15:46,800 --> 00:15:50,600 Speaker 5: Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices out of the CDC. It's 290 00:15:50,600 --> 00:15:54,320 Speaker 5: an advisory panel of experts who always meet a few 291 00:15:54,360 --> 00:15:57,400 Speaker 5: times a year to discuss recommendations for vaccines. They're really 292 00:15:57,440 --> 00:16:00,880 Speaker 5: influential and that they talk about vaccinations and what can 293 00:16:00,920 --> 00:16:03,120 Speaker 5: be added to the schedule, changed for schedules, whether it's 294 00:16:03,160 --> 00:16:06,640 Speaker 5: for children or for adults. But they also decide insurance 295 00:16:06,640 --> 00:16:09,640 Speaker 5: coverage for vaccines and whether federal insurance is going to 296 00:16:09,640 --> 00:16:12,280 Speaker 5: be covering those vaccines or if they're offered for free 297 00:16:12,360 --> 00:16:15,840 Speaker 5: under this program called the Vaccines for Children Program. That 298 00:16:15,920 --> 00:16:20,360 Speaker 5: program offers free vaccinations to over half of America's Kids. 299 00:16:20,760 --> 00:16:23,920 Speaker 5: So in June of last year, RFK fired the entire 300 00:16:24,000 --> 00:16:27,520 Speaker 5: seventeen member panel and then he replaced them with people 301 00:16:27,520 --> 00:16:31,160 Speaker 5: who were largely seen as vaccine skeptics or people with 302 00:16:31,240 --> 00:16:35,480 Speaker 5: conflicts of interest to vaccinations into some vaccine makers. There 303 00:16:35,480 --> 00:16:39,560 Speaker 5: were notably two people he put on who testified against 304 00:16:39,760 --> 00:16:44,280 Speaker 5: MRK on their vaccine called guard as Self for HPV. 305 00:16:45,400 --> 00:16:49,520 Speaker 5: So that panel started meeting last year. Meetings were filled 306 00:16:49,520 --> 00:16:52,880 Speaker 5: with misinformation. A lot of times members didn't know the 307 00:16:53,240 --> 00:16:56,200 Speaker 5: consequences of their votes or what they were actually voting on. 308 00:16:56,520 --> 00:16:59,560 Speaker 5: So these meetings were taking up a lot of headlines. 309 00:16:59,560 --> 00:17:01,760 Speaker 5: They were gets a lot of traction in the public 310 00:17:01,800 --> 00:17:06,879 Speaker 5: health world. And then by December, the most drastic action 311 00:17:07,000 --> 00:17:09,840 Speaker 5: that committee took is that they removed the hepatitis B 312 00:17:10,040 --> 00:17:14,760 Speaker 5: recommendation for all newborns. Previously, all newborns were required to 313 00:17:14,800 --> 00:17:18,119 Speaker 5: get the hepatitis B dose within twenty four hours of 314 00:17:18,160 --> 00:17:20,360 Speaker 5: birth to be able to protect them from a severe 315 00:17:20,400 --> 00:17:23,560 Speaker 5: liver infection that can also lead to death later in 316 00:17:23,600 --> 00:17:26,280 Speaker 5: life if they caught it. So the committee walked that 317 00:17:26,359 --> 00:17:29,560 Speaker 5: back and rolled it back in December. A month after 318 00:17:29,600 --> 00:17:32,119 Speaker 5: that is when we saw RFK Junior come out with 319 00:17:32,119 --> 00:17:37,800 Speaker 5: the Decision memo where he revamped the entire childhood vaccine schedule. 320 00:17:37,880 --> 00:17:39,919 Speaker 5: So that's really what's an issue here. It's all of 321 00:17:39,960 --> 00:17:42,600 Speaker 5: these steps that he's taken to be able to reach 322 00:17:42,640 --> 00:17:46,240 Speaker 5: this point of redoing the childhood vaccination schedule, which a 323 00:17:46,240 --> 00:17:48,920 Speaker 5: lot of public health experts have said, this new schedule 324 00:17:48,960 --> 00:17:52,480 Speaker 5: is incredibly dangerous. It's not looking at the entire US 325 00:17:52,520 --> 00:17:55,280 Speaker 5: healthcare system to be able to say, these are the 326 00:17:55,400 --> 00:17:57,440 Speaker 5: vaccinations that we need to make sure that we're covering 327 00:17:57,880 --> 00:18:00,720 Speaker 5: our kids who may be exposed to different diseases, who 328 00:18:00,720 --> 00:18:03,880 Speaker 5: may not have access to health insurance or health care, 329 00:18:04,119 --> 00:18:07,040 Speaker 5: or access to a hospital nearby if they do get sick. 330 00:18:07,680 --> 00:18:10,200 Speaker 1: All right, let's break that down. Let's talk about what 331 00:18:10,320 --> 00:18:13,680 Speaker 1: this does and does not allow parents to do. If 332 00:18:13,720 --> 00:18:15,959 Speaker 1: you are a concerned parent, you can still get your 333 00:18:16,000 --> 00:18:20,040 Speaker 1: child vaccinated, like the vaccines still exist, right, the schedule 334 00:18:20,119 --> 00:18:20,879 Speaker 1: is what's changed. 335 00:18:21,119 --> 00:18:23,720 Speaker 5: Absolutely, you as a parent could still walk into your 336 00:18:23,760 --> 00:18:28,240 Speaker 5: pediatrician's office and ask for those vaccines if you want them. 337 00:18:28,520 --> 00:18:30,639 Speaker 5: What they did on the schedule is they moved the 338 00:18:30,760 --> 00:18:34,320 Speaker 5: vaccines from what's called recommended to something called shared clinical 339 00:18:34,400 --> 00:18:37,760 Speaker 5: decision making. It's just a term that really talks about 340 00:18:37,880 --> 00:18:40,159 Speaker 5: whether insurance is going to cover a vaccine or not. 341 00:18:40,240 --> 00:18:42,800 Speaker 5: Now insurance companies have said they are still going to 342 00:18:42,880 --> 00:18:45,520 Speaker 5: cover these vaccines, but as a parent, you can still 343 00:18:45,560 --> 00:18:48,280 Speaker 5: get them if you want them. It's just adding to 344 00:18:48,320 --> 00:18:50,720 Speaker 5: this layer of confusion around vaccines. 345 00:18:51,119 --> 00:18:55,280 Speaker 1: Also, schools still have requirements for vaccinations, right, so if 346 00:18:55,320 --> 00:18:58,880 Speaker 1: these aren't as readily available or as easily available, they 347 00:18:58,880 --> 00:19:00,360 Speaker 1: still have to be done right. 348 00:19:01,480 --> 00:19:04,239 Speaker 5: Yes, schools still have their own schedules, but again those 349 00:19:04,240 --> 00:19:06,200 Speaker 5: are going to be public schools that have those schedules. 350 00:19:06,200 --> 00:19:08,000 Speaker 5: Private schools are going to do something a little bit different, 351 00:19:08,080 --> 00:19:12,680 Speaker 5: or homeschools. So public schools will still be recommending these 352 00:19:12,720 --> 00:19:14,439 Speaker 5: shots and making sure that you are up to date 353 00:19:14,480 --> 00:19:17,560 Speaker 5: on immunizations. But there's another thing that's happening here. That's 354 00:19:17,600 --> 00:19:22,280 Speaker 5: the national schedule that they overhauled last year. States still 355 00:19:22,320 --> 00:19:25,640 Speaker 5: have their own vaccine schedules. Last year, when RFK started 356 00:19:25,680 --> 00:19:31,080 Speaker 5: revamping the Advisory Committee, some Democratic states started banding together 357 00:19:31,160 --> 00:19:34,080 Speaker 5: to create their own public health coalitions to start creating 358 00:19:34,119 --> 00:19:38,000 Speaker 5: their own vaccine schedules and codifying their vaccine schedules to 359 00:19:38,119 --> 00:19:41,320 Speaker 5: no longer be tied to the CDC one. So now 360 00:19:41,320 --> 00:19:44,720 Speaker 5: we're seeing this piecemeal vaccine policy between blue states and 361 00:19:44,840 --> 00:19:47,879 Speaker 5: red states across the US. And so if you're in 362 00:19:47,880 --> 00:19:51,480 Speaker 5: New York, for instance, your vaccine schedule for your kid 363 00:19:51,480 --> 00:19:53,199 Speaker 5: who's going to be in public school is going to 364 00:19:53,200 --> 00:19:55,679 Speaker 5: be just the same as it was last year. If 365 00:19:55,720 --> 00:19:58,080 Speaker 5: you're in another state, that's going to be up for question. 366 00:19:58,760 --> 00:20:01,280 Speaker 1: You said something earlier in the interview. I want to 367 00:20:01,320 --> 00:20:03,720 Speaker 1: be clear that I understood what you were saying. You're 368 00:20:03,760 --> 00:20:07,360 Speaker 1: talking about the new panel, the new board that the 369 00:20:07,440 --> 00:20:10,920 Speaker 1: Secretary of Health has put into place, and you talked 370 00:20:10,920 --> 00:20:13,400 Speaker 1: a little bit about the misinformation that they were receiving. 371 00:20:14,200 --> 00:20:15,679 Speaker 1: One of the things you said was is that some 372 00:20:15,720 --> 00:20:18,080 Speaker 1: of the members of the board don't even realize what 373 00:20:18,400 --> 00:20:20,840 Speaker 1: they are voting for in some circumstances. What do you 374 00:20:20,840 --> 00:20:21,280 Speaker 1: mean by that. 375 00:20:22,080 --> 00:20:24,760 Speaker 5: We really saw that play out in September in a 376 00:20:24,800 --> 00:20:30,400 Speaker 5: meeting where they were discussing the Hepatitis BE vaccine. As 377 00:20:30,440 --> 00:20:34,840 Speaker 5: they were discussing it, members didn't really understand what the 378 00:20:34,920 --> 00:20:38,760 Speaker 5: voting questions were. And this is the typical cadence of 379 00:20:38,800 --> 00:20:42,560 Speaker 5: these meetings that we see where members will discuss a vaccine. 380 00:20:43,520 --> 00:20:46,040 Speaker 5: Companies are able to come with their own comment about 381 00:20:46,080 --> 00:20:49,159 Speaker 5: the vaccine and about the data that's being presented. Medical 382 00:20:49,200 --> 00:20:51,919 Speaker 5: groups are able to comment. There's a public comment period, 383 00:20:51,960 --> 00:20:54,520 Speaker 5: and at the end the members then decide on a 384 00:20:54,640 --> 00:20:56,480 Speaker 5: vote of whether to add something to the schedule, to 385 00:20:56,520 --> 00:20:59,680 Speaker 5: change the schedule, to change their recommendation on the dosage, 386 00:20:59,760 --> 00:21:00,800 Speaker 5: or whatever have you. 387 00:21:00,920 --> 00:21:01,720 Speaker 1: Is the issue. 388 00:21:02,760 --> 00:21:06,479 Speaker 5: Back in September, we saw members didn't really understand what 389 00:21:06,520 --> 00:21:09,320 Speaker 5: was going on with the Hepatitis BE voting language. Some 390 00:21:09,359 --> 00:21:11,960 Speaker 5: of the language even on COVID shots was being amended, 391 00:21:12,040 --> 00:21:15,800 Speaker 5: like in real time. They ended up punting the Hepatitis 392 00:21:15,840 --> 00:21:21,520 Speaker 5: BE discussion to another day. It's incredibly complicated and obviously 393 00:21:21,560 --> 00:21:24,960 Speaker 5: these members were confused on what they were voting on 394 00:21:24,960 --> 00:21:29,359 Speaker 5: the voting language, the implications of their votes too, and 395 00:21:29,400 --> 00:21:31,800 Speaker 5: how this would play out for insurance coverage. 396 00:21:31,960 --> 00:21:35,640 Speaker 1: Okay, so now there are lawsuits in place, pushed back 397 00:21:35,640 --> 00:21:38,760 Speaker 1: from fifteen states. Are there fifteen different lawsuits? Is it 398 00:21:38,800 --> 00:21:40,960 Speaker 1: all one big lawsuit? How is that working out? 399 00:21:41,119 --> 00:21:44,639 Speaker 5: It's one big lawsuit. It's being led by the attorneys 400 00:21:44,680 --> 00:21:48,760 Speaker 5: in Arizona and in California. It's mostly Democratic states that 401 00:21:48,800 --> 00:21:52,480 Speaker 5: we're seeing. It's fourteen different attorneys general. We're also seeing 402 00:21:52,560 --> 00:21:55,439 Speaker 5: the governor of Pennsylvania has added his name to the 403 00:21:55,480 --> 00:21:58,760 Speaker 5: suit as well, So they're all pushing back against this 404 00:21:58,880 --> 00:22:03,120 Speaker 5: vaccine schedule. Is important to remember these are different states 405 00:22:03,200 --> 00:22:05,919 Speaker 5: that have joined these public health coalitions and come up 406 00:22:05,960 --> 00:22:09,040 Speaker 5: with their own vaccine schedules that are different from that 407 00:22:09,240 --> 00:22:14,200 Speaker 5: national schedule that RFK revamped RFK Junior revamped. However, they're 408 00:22:14,320 --> 00:22:17,640 Speaker 5: arguing that even though their schedules may be different, they're 409 00:22:17,640 --> 00:22:20,280 Speaker 5: still having to deal with the economic fallout and the 410 00:22:20,320 --> 00:22:25,719 Speaker 5: misinformation that comes with this revamp that has been pushed 411 00:22:25,760 --> 00:22:27,040 Speaker 5: by the administration. 412 00:22:27,440 --> 00:22:29,199 Speaker 1: So what are they asking for? Are they asking for 413 00:22:29,280 --> 00:22:32,480 Speaker 1: him to withdraw the revamp or to exempt their what 414 00:22:32,520 --> 00:22:32,960 Speaker 1: do they want? 415 00:22:33,720 --> 00:22:37,919 Speaker 5: They want two things. They want the childhood immunization schedule 416 00:22:37,960 --> 00:22:41,400 Speaker 5: to be reversed to April of twenty twenty five, which 417 00:22:41,400 --> 00:22:44,560 Speaker 5: would be before RFK Junior came in and redid the 418 00:22:44,720 --> 00:22:48,320 Speaker 5: entire advisory committee at the CDC, And they're arguing that 419 00:22:48,359 --> 00:22:55,400 Speaker 5: the CDC's advisory committee was illegally constituted. They're saying that 420 00:22:55,400 --> 00:22:58,720 Speaker 5: that committee has to be a membership that is fairly balanced, 421 00:22:59,440 --> 00:23:01,480 Speaker 5: and there are is that these new members were not 422 00:23:01,560 --> 00:23:05,480 Speaker 5: fairly balanced. They did not follow the right federal guidelines 423 00:23:05,840 --> 00:23:08,480 Speaker 5: to be able to put these members into place after 424 00:23:08,520 --> 00:23:11,600 Speaker 5: that seventeen member panel was fired, and so they want 425 00:23:11,920 --> 00:23:17,080 Speaker 5: the panel to be disbanded as its current makeup, and 426 00:23:17,119 --> 00:23:20,119 Speaker 5: they want the childhood immunization schedule to be reversed to 427 00:23:20,320 --> 00:23:23,320 Speaker 5: before that decision memo came out on January fifth. 428 00:23:23,960 --> 00:23:28,000 Speaker 1: How unusual is this lawsuit? Is there any historical precedent 429 00:23:28,040 --> 00:23:30,760 Speaker 1: that could give us an inkling about which direction this 430 00:23:30,800 --> 00:23:31,280 Speaker 1: is going to go? 431 00:23:32,359 --> 00:23:36,360 Speaker 5: This is pretty unprecedented. We've never seen an HHS secretary 432 00:23:37,160 --> 00:23:41,560 Speaker 5: revamp the entire childhood immunization schedule and really go on 433 00:23:41,560 --> 00:23:45,520 Speaker 5: a crusade against vaccines like we've seen out of this administration. 434 00:23:46,000 --> 00:23:49,800 Speaker 5: There is one other lawsuit that is very very similar 435 00:23:49,920 --> 00:23:52,560 Speaker 5: to the one that was filed by these fifteen states 436 00:23:52,600 --> 00:23:56,320 Speaker 5: that's currently playing out in Massachusetts, that was filed last summer, 437 00:23:56,640 --> 00:23:59,320 Speaker 5: led by the American Academy of Pediatrics and other top 438 00:23:59,359 --> 00:24:02,720 Speaker 5: medical groups. So they originally filed a lawsuit over the 439 00:24:02,800 --> 00:24:06,639 Speaker 5: changes to that vaccine Advisory Committee. They've then amended that 440 00:24:06,720 --> 00:24:09,119 Speaker 5: lawsuit based off of the changes to the Hepatitis B 441 00:24:09,240 --> 00:24:13,440 Speaker 5: vaccine and also to the changes to the childhood immunization 442 00:24:13,520 --> 00:24:16,840 Speaker 5: schedule from January so the first hearing for that was 443 00:24:16,880 --> 00:24:21,200 Speaker 5: earlier in February. They were also arguing for this vaccine 444 00:24:21,200 --> 00:24:24,800 Speaker 5: committee to not take place in February where they were 445 00:24:24,800 --> 00:24:28,400 Speaker 5: originally supposed to meet. That meeting has now been delayed 446 00:24:28,480 --> 00:24:32,040 Speaker 5: to the middle of March. There's another hearing for that 447 00:24:32,119 --> 00:24:35,280 Speaker 5: lawsuit in early March. But they are asking the same 448 00:24:35,320 --> 00:24:38,760 Speaker 5: thing as these fifteen states, for that vaccine panel to 449 00:24:38,800 --> 00:24:42,880 Speaker 5: be disbanded and for the childed immunization schedule to be reversed. 450 00:24:43,840 --> 00:24:45,720 Speaker 1: Oh wow, so it could take months for this to 451 00:24:45,800 --> 00:24:47,520 Speaker 1: actually make its way through the court system. 452 00:24:47,720 --> 00:24:49,680 Speaker 5: Absolutely, Yeah, well this is in for the long call. 453 00:24:50,119 --> 00:24:51,760 Speaker 1: So then what are you going to be watching for 454 00:24:51,840 --> 00:24:52,960 Speaker 1: over the next few months. 455 00:24:53,520 --> 00:24:56,440 Speaker 5: Well, we're watching, especially this Vaccine Advisory Panel to see 456 00:24:56,440 --> 00:24:59,879 Speaker 5: how much more they could do to the childhood immunization's 457 00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:03,080 Speaker 5: schedule and even to the adult immunization schedule and which 458 00:25:03,160 --> 00:25:05,600 Speaker 5: vaccines are going to be next on the chopping block. 459 00:25:05,640 --> 00:25:08,560 Speaker 5: So they've already gone after hepatitis be enrolled back that 460 00:25:08,600 --> 00:25:12,040 Speaker 5: first recommendation. But we've heard from members of that committee 461 00:25:12,119 --> 00:25:14,480 Speaker 5: who've said that any vaccine is going to be on 462 00:25:14,520 --> 00:25:17,119 Speaker 5: the table, that they want to look at everything in 463 00:25:17,200 --> 00:25:21,240 Speaker 5: terms of safety, in terms of efficacy and decide which 464 00:25:21,400 --> 00:25:25,199 Speaker 5: vaccines should really stay on those schedules or be changed 465 00:25:25,200 --> 00:25:30,919 Speaker 5: around for recommendations, for ages, for whether something should be 466 00:25:30,960 --> 00:25:35,120 Speaker 5: still considered a recommended vaccine versus that shared clinical decision 467 00:25:35,160 --> 00:25:36,920 Speaker 5: making language. 468 00:25:37,119 --> 00:25:39,040 Speaker 1: All right, Jessica, thank you so much for taking the 469 00:25:39,080 --> 00:25:40,800 Speaker 1: time with us today. We do appreciate it. 470 00:25:40,960 --> 00:25:41,840 Speaker 5: Thank you for having me. 471 00:25:42,240 --> 00:25:45,480 Speaker 1: Jessica Nix is a health reporter for Bloomberg News, and 472 00:25:45,640 --> 00:25:48,720 Speaker 1: just ahead, we'll talk about the social media addiction trial 473 00:25:48,760 --> 00:25:51,280 Speaker 1: and how jury trials like this one could be used 474 00:25:51,560 --> 00:25:54,520 Speaker 1: to keep big tech in check. I'm Amy Morris and 475 00:25:54,600 --> 00:25:56,400 Speaker 1: for June Grosso. This is Bloomberg. 476 00:26:04,280 --> 00:26:08,879 Speaker 2: You're listening to Bloomberg Law with June grosseol from Bloomberg Radio. 477 00:26:09,800 --> 00:26:12,640 Speaker 1: You're listening to the weekend edition of Bloomberg Law. I'm 478 00:26:12,640 --> 00:26:15,520 Speaker 1: Amy Morris filling in for June Grosso. June's office week. 479 00:26:15,800 --> 00:26:19,080 Speaker 1: Two of the world's biggest social media platforms are on 480 00:26:19,200 --> 00:26:23,639 Speaker 1: trial over allegations that they intentionally make their products addictive 481 00:26:23,720 --> 00:26:26,679 Speaker 1: to young people. A twenty year old woman says Meta's 482 00:26:26,760 --> 00:26:30,840 Speaker 1: Instagram and Google's YouTube caused her to suffer anxiety, depression, 483 00:26:30,880 --> 00:26:34,520 Speaker 1: and body dysmorphia. This is the first case of its kind, 484 00:26:34,600 --> 00:26:37,880 Speaker 1: but probably not the last. Let's look at the latest 485 00:26:37,880 --> 00:26:40,440 Speaker 1: in this high profile trial and how this could change 486 00:26:40,440 --> 00:26:44,040 Speaker 1: the way lawyers handle cases involving big tech. Justin Daniels 487 00:26:44,080 --> 00:26:47,320 Speaker 1: is a shareholder at Baker Donaldson, a corporate and technology 488 00:26:47,320 --> 00:26:50,720 Speaker 1: transaction lawyer. He recently wrote about this for Bloomberg Law 489 00:26:50,920 --> 00:26:53,200 Speaker 1: and he joins us now, Justin, thank you so much 490 00:26:53,240 --> 00:26:54,440 Speaker 1: for joining us today. 491 00:26:54,960 --> 00:26:55,680 Speaker 6: My pleasure. 492 00:26:56,400 --> 00:26:59,160 Speaker 1: First, let's just go over the parameters of this case. 493 00:26:59,280 --> 00:27:01,320 Speaker 1: On the face of it, it does seem pretty simple. 494 00:27:01,440 --> 00:27:06,480 Speaker 1: The social media platforms facing allegations of purposefully creating an 495 00:27:06,520 --> 00:27:09,920 Speaker 1: addictive product. It sort of made me think of cigarettes 496 00:27:10,000 --> 00:27:11,440 Speaker 1: or tobacco. Is that about right? 497 00:27:12,320 --> 00:27:14,840 Speaker 3: I think that's a great analogy, and I would include 498 00:27:14,960 --> 00:27:15,800 Speaker 3: firearms as well. 499 00:27:16,600 --> 00:27:19,400 Speaker 1: So if it's so simple, why is it so groundbreaking? 500 00:27:20,280 --> 00:27:25,480 Speaker 3: I think it's groundbreaking because let's step back and look 501 00:27:25,480 --> 00:27:30,720 Speaker 3: at the regulatory environment. So we have a situation where 502 00:27:31,560 --> 00:27:34,760 Speaker 3: we don't have any kind of federal law of really 503 00:27:34,800 --> 00:27:42,280 Speaker 3: governing privacy cybersecurity, and we're dealing with the big tech companies, 504 00:27:43,000 --> 00:27:47,040 Speaker 3: and regulation around social media platforms, as you know, in 505 00:27:47,080 --> 00:27:52,199 Speaker 3: some respects is politically constrained or just vague. So in 506 00:27:52,240 --> 00:27:56,760 Speaker 3: an environment like that and you're dealing with really important 507 00:27:56,800 --> 00:28:00,280 Speaker 3: issues around addiction, and if we get younger, protect did 508 00:28:00,280 --> 00:28:03,239 Speaker 3: class of people which are children. When you don't have 509 00:28:03,280 --> 00:28:07,800 Speaker 3: that regulatory guidance, by default, we're going to go to 510 00:28:07,840 --> 00:28:10,760 Speaker 3: the tort system and ultimately a jury may step in 511 00:28:10,800 --> 00:28:12,280 Speaker 3: and be your defected regulator. 512 00:28:13,040 --> 00:28:16,880 Speaker 1: So then this would create a new role for juries. 513 00:28:17,040 --> 00:28:19,760 Speaker 1: Is that new or is this just becoming more popular. 514 00:28:19,800 --> 00:28:21,240 Speaker 1: It's sort of growing in this way. 515 00:28:22,440 --> 00:28:23,880 Speaker 6: I don't think it's a new role. 516 00:28:24,119 --> 00:28:27,920 Speaker 3: It's just understanding that when you are in a regulatory 517 00:28:28,119 --> 00:28:32,560 Speaker 3: environment that is uncertain, where there aren't guardrails, you have 518 00:28:32,600 --> 00:28:34,479 Speaker 3: a lot of money at stake when it comes to 519 00:28:34,640 --> 00:28:37,320 Speaker 3: the big tech companies and their competition with each other 520 00:28:37,400 --> 00:28:42,000 Speaker 3: for users, and there are concerns out there about harms 521 00:28:42,040 --> 00:28:45,400 Speaker 3: such as the ones that you've described. In an environment 522 00:28:45,600 --> 00:28:49,760 Speaker 3: like that with no regulatory guidance, it shifts to bringing 523 00:28:49,840 --> 00:28:53,800 Speaker 3: cases under the tort laws and getting in front of 524 00:28:53,880 --> 00:28:56,360 Speaker 3: jurys and seeing what they're going to decide. So I 525 00:28:56,360 --> 00:28:58,520 Speaker 3: don't think it's anything new, but I do think it 526 00:28:58,600 --> 00:29:03,600 Speaker 3: really impacts how in house attorneys have to think about 527 00:29:03,640 --> 00:29:06,440 Speaker 3: being part of the design team when companies are developing 528 00:29:06,440 --> 00:29:10,080 Speaker 3: these products because design trade offs that get made could 529 00:29:10,200 --> 00:29:13,160 Speaker 3: end up being exhibits in depositions or at trial. 530 00:29:14,040 --> 00:29:17,040 Speaker 1: Okay, let's talk about that for a second. Just this week, 531 00:29:17,120 --> 00:29:19,760 Speaker 1: Anthropic was talking about how it was going to drop 532 00:29:19,800 --> 00:29:22,880 Speaker 1: its safety pledge. It's a hallmark safety pledge that Anthropic 533 00:29:22,960 --> 00:29:25,120 Speaker 1: has had. They say they're going to drop it because 534 00:29:25,120 --> 00:29:29,240 Speaker 1: the policy environment, and I think that's key shifted toward 535 00:29:29,400 --> 00:29:34,240 Speaker 1: prioritizing the competitiveness and the economic growth within AI. While 536 00:29:34,280 --> 00:29:38,400 Speaker 1: those safety oriented discussions that you just referred to, I 537 00:29:38,440 --> 00:29:41,840 Speaker 1: haven't really gotten any traction, especially on the federal level. Again, 538 00:29:41,880 --> 00:29:44,000 Speaker 1: that sounds like a jury would have to step in 539 00:29:44,040 --> 00:29:47,960 Speaker 1: if somebody were to decide to sue over some sort 540 00:29:47,960 --> 00:29:51,160 Speaker 1: of safety issue. There is that what we are seeing 541 00:29:51,320 --> 00:29:54,080 Speaker 1: within the big tech community is that it is so 542 00:29:54,240 --> 00:29:56,760 Speaker 1: important to be more competitive and to have that economic 543 00:29:56,800 --> 00:30:00,640 Speaker 1: growth and to show those numbers that those to take 544 00:30:00,680 --> 00:30:05,440 Speaker 1: the time to meet those safety parameters would take too long, 545 00:30:05,560 --> 00:30:08,040 Speaker 1: and then they're going to mess up their economic growth, 546 00:30:08,120 --> 00:30:09,920 Speaker 1: and then that's where the jury step in. 547 00:30:10,240 --> 00:30:12,320 Speaker 3: I think the answer to your question is just look 548 00:30:12,360 --> 00:30:14,120 Speaker 3: at the actions of the different companies. 549 00:30:14,560 --> 00:30:16,720 Speaker 6: Go back to the run up to. 550 00:30:16,680 --> 00:30:18,960 Speaker 3: The elections in twenty twenty four, Remember how all the 551 00:30:19,000 --> 00:30:21,560 Speaker 3: AI companies were talking about, hey, we need to be regulated. 552 00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:25,000 Speaker 3: We recognize we need to be regulated. The election happens, 553 00:30:25,240 --> 00:30:29,920 Speaker 3: Trump wins. Now you're into an environment where he's very 554 00:30:29,920 --> 00:30:31,720 Speaker 3: supportive of those tech companies. 555 00:30:31,800 --> 00:30:33,160 Speaker 6: We don't have a lot of regulation. 556 00:30:34,200 --> 00:30:37,400 Speaker 3: And as I wrote about in the article, if you 557 00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:40,520 Speaker 3: decide for safety reasons you're not going to have a 558 00:30:40,520 --> 00:30:43,640 Speaker 3: design feature, but your competition decides to do it, you 559 00:30:43,680 --> 00:30:44,880 Speaker 3: can quickly go from. 560 00:30:44,720 --> 00:30:47,320 Speaker 6: Market dominance to an also ran. I mean think. 561 00:30:47,160 --> 00:30:50,680 Speaker 3: About at one point it was chat GPT has the 562 00:30:50,720 --> 00:30:53,000 Speaker 3: best day I then they were saying no, Gemini has 563 00:30:53,040 --> 00:30:55,680 Speaker 3: gone past it, and more recently with Claude and Cowork, 564 00:30:56,000 --> 00:30:59,400 Speaker 3: now Claudes got the advantage. So you've got this race 565 00:30:59,520 --> 00:31:02,960 Speaker 3: for market share and the companies are focused on that. 566 00:31:04,000 --> 00:31:06,200 Speaker 3: What are some of the collateral consequences of that when 567 00:31:06,200 --> 00:31:09,800 Speaker 3: we start having these conversations around safety. With what you 568 00:31:09,840 --> 00:31:13,400 Speaker 3: said about Anthropic being the latest example of that. 569 00:31:13,760 --> 00:31:16,400 Speaker 1: Something else you wrote on the Bloomberg terminal that if 570 00:31:16,440 --> 00:31:19,520 Speaker 1: AI can predict a user's of no ulnerability, the legal 571 00:31:19,640 --> 00:31:22,200 Speaker 1: argument is no longer we didn't know, but we built 572 00:31:22,200 --> 00:31:24,840 Speaker 1: this system designed to know, but we failed to intervene. 573 00:31:25,240 --> 00:31:26,600 Speaker 1: Is that the crux of all of this. 574 00:31:27,400 --> 00:31:29,640 Speaker 3: I mean when I look at it from my vantage 575 00:31:29,640 --> 00:31:32,280 Speaker 3: point as an attorney, and I look at what could 576 00:31:32,360 --> 00:31:37,320 Speaker 3: be potential claims in the current regulatory environment, we're talking 577 00:31:37,440 --> 00:31:40,680 Speaker 3: product liability, and then you get into what was foreseeable 578 00:31:40,840 --> 00:31:44,840 Speaker 3: from a legal standard standpoint, and if you built something 579 00:31:44,880 --> 00:31:47,800 Speaker 3: that you know is intended to predict, how do you 580 00:31:47,880 --> 00:31:50,280 Speaker 3: sit there and then say, well, we didn't know what 581 00:31:50,360 --> 00:31:53,920 Speaker 3: it was going to do and you didn't intervene from 582 00:31:53,920 --> 00:31:56,280 Speaker 3: a legal perspective, how would that play with a jury 583 00:31:56,280 --> 00:31:58,920 Speaker 3: in a court case. That's to me the question in 584 00:31:59,000 --> 00:32:02,160 Speaker 3: house attorneys need to be asking and why I put 585 00:32:02,240 --> 00:32:04,680 Speaker 3: in that piece that they need to be part of 586 00:32:04,720 --> 00:32:07,480 Speaker 3: the design team, not a patch that comes later when 587 00:32:07,520 --> 00:32:09,400 Speaker 3: these trade offs have already been documented. 588 00:32:09,840 --> 00:32:13,520 Speaker 1: That actually anticipates my next question. Those company attorneys, those 589 00:32:13,560 --> 00:32:16,800 Speaker 1: in house attorneys need to be part of this conversation. 590 00:32:17,280 --> 00:32:20,240 Speaker 1: But you know what that costs time and money? Is 591 00:32:20,280 --> 00:32:20,920 Speaker 1: that worth it? 592 00:32:21,440 --> 00:32:25,600 Speaker 3: Well, in the current regulatory environment, these cases are going 593 00:32:25,640 --> 00:32:28,200 Speaker 3: to start to put parameters around what that cost might 594 00:32:28,200 --> 00:32:28,640 Speaker 3: look like. 595 00:32:29,280 --> 00:32:31,080 Speaker 1: So you see more cases down the road. 596 00:32:31,720 --> 00:32:33,680 Speaker 3: I think you're going to continue to see that until 597 00:32:33,680 --> 00:32:36,480 Speaker 3: we start to get some type of regulatory guardrails, and 598 00:32:36,520 --> 00:32:40,880 Speaker 3: when you look at the overall regulatory environment, nothing's really 599 00:32:40,880 --> 00:32:42,000 Speaker 3: happening at a federal level. 600 00:32:42,080 --> 00:32:43,640 Speaker 6: So states are trying to step in. 601 00:32:43,800 --> 00:32:46,640 Speaker 3: You probably saw a few months back with Trump's executive 602 00:32:46,720 --> 00:32:48,880 Speaker 3: order trying to say, hey, States, get out of the 603 00:32:48,960 --> 00:32:52,520 Speaker 3: job of regulating AI. You're stopping innovation, while states are saying, no, 604 00:32:52,640 --> 00:32:55,280 Speaker 3: we have some real potential harms to our residents that 605 00:32:55,720 --> 00:33:01,120 Speaker 3: we're not willing to step back and not intervene to 606 00:33:01,240 --> 00:33:04,480 Speaker 3: protect the health and welfare of the citizens of our states. 607 00:33:04,640 --> 00:33:06,000 Speaker 6: That's the tension that you're. 608 00:33:05,880 --> 00:33:09,160 Speaker 3: Seeing when you peel back from these two particular cases 609 00:33:09,200 --> 00:33:13,080 Speaker 3: and kind of look at the landscape that's underlying it. 610 00:33:13,720 --> 00:33:16,280 Speaker 1: Finding a happy medium or finding a release of the 611 00:33:16,360 --> 00:33:21,760 Speaker 1: tension between the safety and the innovation is not new. Certainly, 612 00:33:21,760 --> 00:33:25,080 Speaker 1: it can't possibly be new. We've been going through this 613 00:33:25,160 --> 00:33:29,120 Speaker 1: for hundreds of years as far as innovation versus safety. However, 614 00:33:29,320 --> 00:33:32,000 Speaker 1: it feels different this time. Why does it feel different 615 00:33:32,120 --> 00:33:32,680 Speaker 1: this time? 616 00:33:33,120 --> 00:33:35,320 Speaker 3: Well, I'm going to take off my lawyer hat. I'm 617 00:33:35,320 --> 00:33:38,960 Speaker 3: going to speak to you from justin the dad personal hat. 618 00:33:39,080 --> 00:33:44,960 Speaker 3: All right, I think it feels different. Because society is 619 00:33:45,360 --> 00:33:53,880 Speaker 3: being so shaped now by digital technology, particularly social media, Instagram, Facebook, 620 00:33:55,480 --> 00:33:59,160 Speaker 3: also AI, and you can see some of the collateral 621 00:33:59,240 --> 00:34:02,720 Speaker 3: consequences of that are happening in our society, with tribalism, 622 00:34:02,760 --> 00:34:08,240 Speaker 3: people going to echo chambers people Perversely, these are designed 623 00:34:08,239 --> 00:34:12,359 Speaker 3: to create communities, but they're fracturing communities, and so in 624 00:34:12,400 --> 00:34:15,120 Speaker 3: my mind, from my personal perspective, particularly when I watch 625 00:34:15,200 --> 00:34:20,279 Speaker 3: my children interact with technology, I think that's why it 626 00:34:20,440 --> 00:34:23,640 Speaker 3: just feels different, because it feels like it's ever present, 627 00:34:23,719 --> 00:34:27,000 Speaker 3: it's everywhere, and it's influencing things. And the part that's 628 00:34:27,040 --> 00:34:31,120 Speaker 3: so interesting about it is it's not like tobacco where. 629 00:34:30,960 --> 00:34:33,400 Speaker 6: You could see the cigarette or you could see. 630 00:34:33,440 --> 00:34:36,000 Speaker 3: A firearm or what would happen here. It kind of 631 00:34:36,040 --> 00:34:43,040 Speaker 3: happens in this opaque, unclear fashion, but the consequences seem 632 00:34:43,080 --> 00:34:43,640 Speaker 3: to be real. 633 00:34:44,800 --> 00:34:47,400 Speaker 1: For most of this interview, we've been talking in general 634 00:34:47,480 --> 00:34:50,040 Speaker 1: about big tech. You just boiled it down to what 635 00:34:50,080 --> 00:34:53,880 Speaker 1: this case is about, which is social media and kids 636 00:34:53,920 --> 00:34:56,160 Speaker 1: being involved in social media, and the case of course 637 00:34:56,239 --> 00:35:00,680 Speaker 1: being about the addiction that kids might experience on social media, 638 00:35:00,760 --> 00:35:03,960 Speaker 1: different types of social media specifically. I believe Instagram was 639 00:35:04,320 --> 00:35:08,760 Speaker 1: named in the case. Do you see this having ramifications 640 00:35:08,800 --> 00:35:12,000 Speaker 1: for the future of how we as the public interact 641 00:35:12,080 --> 00:35:17,560 Speaker 1: with social media or how social media platforms present themselves 642 00:35:17,840 --> 00:35:19,840 Speaker 1: to the public from here on out. 643 00:35:20,200 --> 00:35:25,000 Speaker 3: I think how people engage with social media will not 644 00:35:25,200 --> 00:35:29,920 Speaker 3: change until people really understand how it works. And what 645 00:35:29,960 --> 00:35:36,160 Speaker 3: I mean by that is it's all works based on engagement. 646 00:35:36,600 --> 00:35:37,800 Speaker 6: They want you to engage. 647 00:35:37,840 --> 00:35:40,400 Speaker 3: They don't care why you engage, how you engage, but 648 00:35:40,400 --> 00:35:42,919 Speaker 3: they want people to engage on the platform, so they're 649 00:35:43,000 --> 00:35:44,080 Speaker 3: there a longer time. 650 00:35:44,400 --> 00:35:44,759 Speaker 6: And so. 651 00:35:46,239 --> 00:35:48,879 Speaker 3: You know, you can look at advertisement. But the thing 652 00:35:49,000 --> 00:35:53,200 Speaker 3: is what typically engages people. We know that's been documented 653 00:35:53,200 --> 00:35:57,400 Speaker 3: in research. It's things that get that draw an emotional 654 00:35:57,440 --> 00:35:59,959 Speaker 3: response to people, and a lot of that time that's 655 00:36:00,040 --> 00:36:02,839 Speaker 3: saying inflammatory things, saying the kinds of things that if 656 00:36:02,840 --> 00:36:04,480 Speaker 3: you and I are in the room together, I would 657 00:36:04,480 --> 00:36:07,040 Speaker 3: never say to you face to face, But when you're online, 658 00:36:08,000 --> 00:36:10,200 Speaker 3: people seem to feel differently about what they're willing to 659 00:36:10,239 --> 00:36:11,160 Speaker 3: say and not say. 660 00:36:11,600 --> 00:36:13,560 Speaker 6: So that to me is what has to change. 661 00:36:14,320 --> 00:36:17,879 Speaker 3: And then from a company standpoint, I don't know that 662 00:36:17,920 --> 00:36:21,799 Speaker 3: things are going to change until there's more regulations or 663 00:36:21,840 --> 00:36:25,640 Speaker 3: requirements in place, because it's a race for market share 664 00:36:25,960 --> 00:36:30,200 Speaker 3: and from what we're seeing from a decision standpoint, and 665 00:36:30,320 --> 00:36:33,640 Speaker 3: the public is when it comes to safety versus market share. 666 00:36:33,920 --> 00:36:36,480 Speaker 3: To your point, which one has been winning out consistently 667 00:36:36,600 --> 00:36:38,600 Speaker 3: with the decisions that companies are making. 668 00:36:39,960 --> 00:36:41,080 Speaker 1: Enter the juries. 669 00:36:42,840 --> 00:36:45,880 Speaker 3: When you have a lack of a regulatory clarity, you 670 00:36:46,000 --> 00:36:48,400 Speaker 3: have a harm. And we're dealing with a protected class 671 00:36:48,400 --> 00:36:49,520 Speaker 3: of people i e. 672 00:36:49,719 --> 00:36:55,080 Speaker 6: Kids. Where are you going? The torch system and the jury? 673 00:36:55,120 --> 00:37:00,560 Speaker 1: But golly, social media, big tech, it's all so huge, AI. 674 00:37:00,680 --> 00:37:05,240 Speaker 1: It feels like such a juggernaut. It feels a little insurmountable, 675 00:37:05,320 --> 00:37:07,520 Speaker 1: doesn't it. 676 00:37:07,520 --> 00:37:10,680 Speaker 3: It can because we're talking about some of the richest, 677 00:37:10,880 --> 00:37:16,520 Speaker 3: well the richest companies in human history, and so who 678 00:37:16,560 --> 00:37:20,600 Speaker 3: steps in and who can step in? I don't know 679 00:37:20,640 --> 00:37:25,279 Speaker 3: what you do besides regulation, because asking the companies to 680 00:37:25,400 --> 00:37:28,839 Speaker 3: just regulate themselves does that seem to be working. 681 00:37:31,040 --> 00:37:31,239 Speaker 6: Well? 682 00:37:31,239 --> 00:37:33,359 Speaker 1: At the beginning of this interview, you did mention how 683 00:37:33,400 --> 00:37:36,520 Speaker 1: the companies did come forward and say, hey, we need 684 00:37:36,560 --> 00:37:40,160 Speaker 1: to be regulated. Where is that at this point? How 685 00:37:40,200 --> 00:37:41,000 Speaker 1: is that working out? 686 00:37:43,080 --> 00:37:43,279 Speaker 6: Yes? 687 00:37:43,880 --> 00:37:46,360 Speaker 3: The answer to that is the consequences of the twenty 688 00:37:46,400 --> 00:37:50,200 Speaker 3: twenty four election and how that is played out. Because 689 00:37:50,920 --> 00:37:53,879 Speaker 3: the current administration seems to be taking it pretty hands off, 690 00:37:56,280 --> 00:37:58,320 Speaker 3: hands off attitude towards regulation. 691 00:37:58,880 --> 00:38:01,160 Speaker 1: It appears that there would be now new roles for 692 00:38:01,200 --> 00:38:05,279 Speaker 1: the juries, the courts, the in house attorneys, entirely new 693 00:38:05,360 --> 00:38:09,560 Speaker 1: landscape now until there is some sort of comprehensive regulation 694 00:38:09,640 --> 00:38:10,080 Speaker 1: in place. 695 00:38:11,480 --> 00:38:13,680 Speaker 3: I guess what I would say is absent regulation, and 696 00:38:13,719 --> 00:38:18,080 Speaker 3: given the potential harms to protected classes such as children, 697 00:38:18,600 --> 00:38:24,120 Speaker 3: we're shifting the responsibility from regulation to the courtroom and 698 00:38:24,160 --> 00:38:24,879 Speaker 3: the jury, is. 699 00:38:24,840 --> 00:38:25,560 Speaker 6: What I would say. 700 00:38:25,640 --> 00:38:27,360 Speaker 1: All Right, we're going to leave it there. Justin, it 701 00:38:27,400 --> 00:38:29,640 Speaker 1: has been a pleasure. Thank you so much for enlightening 702 00:38:29,680 --> 00:38:32,880 Speaker 1: us on this issue. Our thanks to Justin Daniels for 703 00:38:33,000 --> 00:38:36,120 Speaker 1: joining us a shareholder at Baker Donaldson. And that does 704 00:38:36,120 --> 00:38:38,640 Speaker 1: it for this edition of Bloomberg Law. Subscribe to the 705 00:38:38,640 --> 00:38:42,279 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law podcast on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get 706 00:38:42,280 --> 00:38:45,120 Speaker 1: your podcasts so you never miss an episode. I'm Amy 707 00:38:45,160 --> 00:38:47,880 Speaker 1: Morris in for June Grosso, and this is Bloomberg