WEBVTT - Nick Akerman Reacts to SCOTUS Decision on USAID

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:09.640
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News. There is an exceptionally

0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:12.960
<v Speaker 1>important Supreme Court decision this morning, and we are so

0:00:13.160 --> 0:00:16.880
<v Speaker 1>honored to bring you Nick Ackerman. I can't say enough

0:00:16.880 --> 0:00:21.040
<v Speaker 1>about his public service to the nation. He's been around

0:00:21.040 --> 0:00:25.680
<v Speaker 1>the block, like public service to the nation during Watergate,

0:00:26.120 --> 0:00:31.200
<v Speaker 1>and of course is many years in prosecution and law

0:00:31.320 --> 0:00:34.440
<v Speaker 1>with department from Harvard. I should say along the way, Nick,

0:00:34.479 --> 0:00:37.800
<v Speaker 1>we are honored you're with us today. The President must

0:00:37.840 --> 0:00:42.400
<v Speaker 1>be upset at this Supreme Court decision where they reject

0:00:42.600 --> 0:00:48.080
<v Speaker 1>President Trump on US aid foreign aid freeze. And what's

0:00:48.120 --> 0:00:53.400
<v Speaker 1>important here in a close vote is John Roberts and

0:00:53.520 --> 0:00:59.160
<v Speaker 1>Amy Cony Barrett joined the liberals against Alito, Thomas Gorsach

0:00:59.240 --> 0:01:04.440
<v Speaker 1>and Kevanaugh. Did you expect this partition of Trump conservatives

0:01:04.560 --> 0:01:05.560
<v Speaker 1>on the Court.

0:01:06.440 --> 0:01:09.319
<v Speaker 2>I'm kind of been expecting it. I mean, Amy Conan

0:01:09.319 --> 0:01:12.600
<v Speaker 2>Barrett and John Roberts have gone off on their own

0:01:12.720 --> 0:01:16.600
<v Speaker 2>on several items. I would have thought that Kavanaugh would

0:01:16.600 --> 0:01:19.240
<v Speaker 2>have gone along with this too. I mean, he does

0:01:19.360 --> 0:01:21.480
<v Speaker 2>have an opinion from the days he was on the

0:01:21.560 --> 0:01:25.440
<v Speaker 2>DC Circuit making it pretty clear that when you get

0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:29.240
<v Speaker 2>down to Article I powers, that is the power of

0:01:29.280 --> 0:01:33.759
<v Speaker 2>the purse that Congress has to disperse money separate from

0:01:33.840 --> 0:01:38.680
<v Speaker 2>the executive branch, which is a section two of the Constitution,

0:01:39.280 --> 0:01:43.959
<v Speaker 2>who has to carry out those orders from the Congress.

0:01:45.120 --> 0:01:50.280
<v Speaker 2>And this was a pretty significant decision because there are

0:01:50.320 --> 0:01:55.080
<v Speaker 2>a lot of decisions court cases out there now contesting

0:01:55.280 --> 0:01:59.160
<v Speaker 2>the idea that the Trump administration can simply not pay

0:01:59.560 --> 0:02:03.920
<v Speaker 2>certain monies, doesn't have to disburse the funds. But keep

0:02:03.960 --> 0:02:07.640
<v Speaker 2>in mind that this one really related to monies that

0:02:07.680 --> 0:02:12.480
<v Speaker 2>were already owed on certain contracts that have already been performed.

0:02:13.400 --> 0:02:16.280
<v Speaker 2>So the question is, how is this going to relate

0:02:16.360 --> 0:02:20.919
<v Speaker 2>to other situations where the contracts have not yet been

0:02:20.960 --> 0:02:24.200
<v Speaker 2>performed and they're holding back money. I kind of think

0:02:24.240 --> 0:02:27.359
<v Speaker 2>the principle is the same, but we'll have to see.

0:02:27.360 --> 0:02:30.200
<v Speaker 1>Greg Store at Bloomberg expert on this would go to

0:02:30.280 --> 0:02:34.040
<v Speaker 1>the complexities with you, I'll keep it simple. There seems

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:38.600
<v Speaker 1>to be, whatever anybody's politics, a statement that the legislative

0:02:38.639 --> 0:02:41.360
<v Speaker 1>branch of the United States of America.

0:02:40.800 --> 0:02:42.000
<v Speaker 2>Is missing an action.

0:02:42.919 --> 0:02:45.959
<v Speaker 1>Is this the kind of court case that could be

0:02:46.160 --> 0:02:51.520
<v Speaker 1>a clarion call to Capitol Hill to get their act together?

0:02:53.040 --> 0:02:56.720
<v Speaker 2>Absolutely? I mean this ought to make them realize that

0:02:56.760 --> 0:03:00.120
<v Speaker 2>they are just giving up their powers. They're seating their

0:03:00.120 --> 0:03:04.560
<v Speaker 2>powers to Donald Trump. They might as well not even

0:03:04.800 --> 0:03:08.320
<v Speaker 2>show up for work. What's the point if what they

0:03:08.440 --> 0:03:12.400
<v Speaker 2>wind up appropriating and what they wind up passing can

0:03:12.480 --> 0:03:15.720
<v Speaker 2>just be ignored by the president? Makes no sense? Yeah,

0:03:15.800 --> 0:03:18.079
<v Speaker 2>I think this ought to get some people off their duffs.

0:03:18.880 --> 0:03:21.320
<v Speaker 3>Does this essentially clear the way for lower courts to

0:03:21.360 --> 0:03:23.000
<v Speaker 3>continue proceedings in the dispute?

0:03:24.280 --> 0:03:27.240
<v Speaker 2>Sure? I mean this is the lower court will continue,

0:03:28.120 --> 0:03:31.200
<v Speaker 2>They'll be looking at other situations like this. I think

0:03:31.320 --> 0:03:35.920
<v Speaker 2>the litigans there will be bringing up other situations where

0:03:35.920 --> 0:03:39.840
<v Speaker 2>money is being withheld. But I think this kind of

0:03:39.880 --> 0:03:43.600
<v Speaker 2>gives the green light to the district courts all across

0:03:43.640 --> 0:03:47.000
<v Speaker 2>the country that are considering other aspects of this same

0:03:47.080 --> 0:03:48.920
<v Speaker 2>issue how to come out on this.

0:03:49.680 --> 0:03:51.960
<v Speaker 3>So what do you think next is in the timeline

0:03:52.000 --> 0:03:53.120
<v Speaker 3>as all of this unfolds.

0:03:54.280 --> 0:03:56.200
<v Speaker 2>Well, I got to tell you, it's very hard to

0:03:56.200 --> 0:04:00.200
<v Speaker 2>be able to predict that there are now over ninety

0:04:00.200 --> 0:04:03.680
<v Speaker 2>five cases lawsuits that have been filed across the United

0:04:03.680 --> 0:04:07.800
<v Speaker 2>States that relate to the firings of government employees that

0:04:07.880 --> 0:04:13.080
<v Speaker 2>relate to monies being withheld. It is very hard without

0:04:13.120 --> 0:04:16.880
<v Speaker 2>a giant scorecard and to know exactly where every case

0:04:17.000 --> 0:04:20.640
<v Speaker 2>is at any particular time to know what's going to

0:04:20.680 --> 0:04:24.880
<v Speaker 2>be next. All I can say is buckle your seat belts.

0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:28.080
<v Speaker 2>Things are going to be happening, and they're going to

0:04:28.080 --> 0:04:30.479
<v Speaker 2>be happening more quickly over the next couple of weeks.

0:04:30.600 --> 0:04:33.440
<v Speaker 1>I brought Wizard White up the other day, the wonderful

0:04:33.480 --> 0:04:37.640
<v Speaker 1>gentleman from Colorado, acclaimed athlete, and he was supposed to

0:04:37.640 --> 0:04:40.600
<v Speaker 1>be this kind of judge and he wasn't. And then

0:04:40.640 --> 0:04:42.720
<v Speaker 1>there's third grade Marshall, who I think we could all

0:04:42.760 --> 0:04:46.120
<v Speaker 1>say was predicted to be a certain kind of judge

0:04:46.240 --> 0:04:49.160
<v Speaker 1>and he was. And then Nick Eckermann. It gets a

0:04:49.200 --> 0:04:53.719
<v Speaker 1>little confusing. John Paul Stevens, maybe there's a mystery there

0:04:53.800 --> 0:04:57.839
<v Speaker 1>as well. Certainly the great Moderate Anthony Kennedy. Can you

0:04:58.000 --> 0:05:04.040
<v Speaker 1>identify the the complexities of this nine seat Supreme Court?

0:05:04.680 --> 0:05:05.000
<v Speaker 2>Can you?

0:05:05.080 --> 0:05:08.280
<v Speaker 1>Can you do that? Or is it as stark as

0:05:08.320 --> 0:05:09.440
<v Speaker 1>the media makes it.

0:05:10.520 --> 0:05:12.760
<v Speaker 2>I don't think it's as stark as the media makes it.

0:05:12.800 --> 0:05:16.280
<v Speaker 2>First of all, you've got John Roberts, who is a traditionalist,

0:05:17.279 --> 0:05:19.960
<v Speaker 2>and I think if there's anybody who's going to stand

0:05:20.080 --> 0:05:23.560
<v Speaker 2>up for the difference between Article one and Article two

0:05:23.600 --> 0:05:26.480
<v Speaker 2>in the US Constitution. He's the guy to do it,

0:05:27.480 --> 0:05:32.720
<v Speaker 2>Amy Conan Barrett. Turns out she is a very thoughtful

0:05:32.920 --> 0:05:37.240
<v Speaker 2>independent justice. She is not going the way of the

0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:42.560
<v Speaker 2>others on many issues. I thought on some things. For example,

0:05:43.520 --> 0:05:46.720
<v Speaker 2>that issue that came up during the summer, well this

0:05:46.960 --> 0:05:51.520
<v Speaker 2>couple issues. One on on the immunity decision, she took

0:05:51.560 --> 0:05:54.960
<v Speaker 2>a different tact in terms of holding she would have

0:05:55.000 --> 0:05:59.480
<v Speaker 2>held that certain evidence would be admissible even if the

0:05:59.520 --> 0:06:03.680
<v Speaker 2>president had immunity in certain situations, which would have contradicted

0:06:04.160 --> 0:06:08.400
<v Speaker 2>on a good part of the Roberts opinion. She also

0:06:08.520 --> 0:06:13.159
<v Speaker 2>came out on that obstruction charge that was used with

0:06:13.279 --> 0:06:16.600
<v Speaker 2>the January sixth defendants, and was one of the few

0:06:16.600 --> 0:06:19.880
<v Speaker 2>people on that court, including even the liberals, that recognize

0:06:20.279 --> 0:06:23.359
<v Speaker 2>that obstruction has been around for a long time. It

0:06:23.440 --> 0:06:27.479
<v Speaker 2>started out with the courts, but this was something long

0:06:27.560 --> 0:06:32.560
<v Speaker 2>in the coming able to actually broaden it to include Congress.

0:06:32.600 --> 0:06:36.120
<v Speaker 2>So she's an independent thinker. I think she's one of

0:06:36.200 --> 0:06:38.520
<v Speaker 2>those people that will stand up for the Constitution.

0:06:39.040 --> 0:06:41.239
<v Speaker 1>I think this needs to be said just meant because

0:06:41.240 --> 0:06:45.480
<v Speaker 1>we lose track Chief Justice John Roberts nineteen and a

0:06:45.520 --> 0:06:50.640
<v Speaker 1>half years and the Supreme Court Alito, the conservative nineteen

0:06:50.760 --> 0:06:54.200
<v Speaker 1>years and the Supreme Court. I'd stunded at the statistic

0:06:54.480 --> 0:07:00.000
<v Speaker 1>Soda Mayor and Kagan already fifteen years and fourteen years.

0:06:59.720 --> 0:07:01.080
<v Speaker 2>Time flies by right.

0:07:01.120 --> 0:07:05.760
<v Speaker 3>Alido and Robert's both appointed by former President George W. Bush. There,

0:07:06.120 --> 0:07:08.360
<v Speaker 3>I was actually going through looking at this brief that

0:07:08.440 --> 0:07:10.760
<v Speaker 3>was filed on Friday from the Supreme Court, and they

0:07:10.760 --> 0:07:12.680
<v Speaker 3>were talking about it even if the government won. The

0:07:12.720 --> 0:07:15.160
<v Speaker 3>brief said the administration would not be able to proceed

0:07:15.240 --> 0:07:18.200
<v Speaker 3>with the funding freeze. Why would that be, Well.

0:07:18.120 --> 0:07:21.360
<v Speaker 2>There's no good reason for that. They can unfreeze that.

0:07:21.560 --> 0:07:24.400
<v Speaker 2>Of course they can do that. It may take a

0:07:24.400 --> 0:07:27.920
<v Speaker 2>couple of days more than may be some bureaucratic loopholes

0:07:27.960 --> 0:07:30.840
<v Speaker 2>to jump through, but no, they can do that a

0:07:30.840 --> 0:07:34.480
<v Speaker 2>couple of phone calls. I mean that is absolutely insane.

0:07:34.640 --> 0:07:37.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I look, Nick, and to get one more questionnaire,

0:07:37.400 --> 0:07:39.400
<v Speaker 1>we've got to go back to the markets as well.

0:07:39.800 --> 0:07:44.080
<v Speaker 1>What's in store like every legal action that we report

0:07:44.200 --> 0:07:47.600
<v Speaker 1>that Emery Harder and Joe Matthew and Katie Lanes talk about.

0:07:47.840 --> 0:07:49.520
<v Speaker 1>Do you just assume they're all going to end up

0:07:49.520 --> 0:07:50.880
<v Speaker 1>in the Supreme Court?

0:07:51.880 --> 0:07:54.760
<v Speaker 2>Well, I think the big items will this is this

0:07:54.840 --> 0:07:59.680
<v Speaker 2>is a huge prince constitutional principle about who has the

0:07:59.720 --> 0:08:03.520
<v Speaker 2>power of the purse and what the executive's job is

0:08:03.760 --> 0:08:08.120
<v Speaker 2>is basically to faithfully execute the laws that Congress passes.

0:08:08.760 --> 0:08:11.000
<v Speaker 2>So yes, I mean, I think you're going to find

0:08:11.440 --> 0:08:14.400
<v Speaker 2>certain matters going to the Supreme Court like this that

0:08:14.560 --> 0:08:18.800
<v Speaker 2>will give some clarity and push back. But I think

0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:21.640
<v Speaker 2>there's going to be a real tendency here with so

0:08:21.840 --> 0:08:25.760
<v Speaker 2>many lawsuits out there and sit back, let the lower

0:08:25.760 --> 0:08:27.080
<v Speaker 2>courts deal with these issues.

0:08:27.200 --> 0:08:29.960
<v Speaker 1>Nick Eckerman, thank you so much for giving us perspective today,

0:08:30.040 --> 0:08:33.080
<v Speaker 1>Nick Eckerman, they're in a Supreme Court decision of five

0:08:33.120 --> 0:08:36.480
<v Speaker 1>to four against the President of the United States.