WEBVTT - Chocolate Merger, SCOTUS & Texas Takes on Delaware

0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.000
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:09.440 --> 0:00:13.080
<v Speaker 1>Will the FTC try to stop the largest packaged food

0:00:13.160 --> 0:00:17.239
<v Speaker 1>deal in years? Mars, known for its candy like m

0:00:17.239 --> 0:00:20.520
<v Speaker 1>and Ms, Milky Ways, Skittles, Twigs and on and on,

0:00:20.840 --> 0:00:24.680
<v Speaker 1>wants to buy cheese at maker Kelenova for nearly thirty

0:00:24.720 --> 0:00:29.480
<v Speaker 1>six billion dollars. But will FTC chair Lena Kahn's views

0:00:29.520 --> 0:00:34.040
<v Speaker 1>about a chocolate oligopoly lead to a challenge to the deal?

0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:38.560
<v Speaker 1>Joining me is Bloomberg Anti trust reporter Leon Nylan Leah

0:00:38.600 --> 0:00:41.320
<v Speaker 1>tell us how Lena Kahan had a problem with the

0:00:41.440 --> 0:00:44.879
<v Speaker 1>chocolate oligopoly about a decade.

0:00:44.560 --> 0:00:48.000
<v Speaker 2>Ago before she became FTC chair and con worked for

0:00:48.360 --> 0:00:51.280
<v Speaker 2>an advocacy group that focuses on anti chask to open markets,

0:00:51.320 --> 0:00:54.120
<v Speaker 2>and she did a lot of research and writing sort

0:00:54.120 --> 0:00:57.760
<v Speaker 2>of about consolidation within various industries and one of those

0:00:57.800 --> 0:01:01.120
<v Speaker 2>a scud So. About ten years ago she wrote a

0:01:01.120 --> 0:01:04.120
<v Speaker 2>story about how there had been a significant con coolidation

0:01:04.240 --> 0:01:08.640
<v Speaker 2>within the candy industry, particularly chocolate candies, and how today

0:01:08.800 --> 0:01:13.720
<v Speaker 2>there are only about three major chocolate companies That's Nestleie

0:01:14.280 --> 0:01:16.760
<v Speaker 2>Mars and her Shee's. You know you have a couple

0:01:16.840 --> 0:01:20.800
<v Speaker 2>other ones like Baro Rocho, which is an Italian company,

0:01:20.840 --> 0:01:23.640
<v Speaker 2>but those are the big free So even though when

0:01:23.680 --> 0:01:26.640
<v Speaker 2>you go to the bircery store you see like what

0:01:26.720 --> 0:01:30.399
<v Speaker 2>looks like, you know, dozens of different brands, really most

0:01:30.400 --> 0:01:32.320
<v Speaker 2>of those are owned by one of these free companies.

0:01:32.600 --> 0:01:35.040
<v Speaker 2>And so she was lamenting a little bit. How when

0:01:35.080 --> 0:01:37.000
<v Speaker 2>there is this kind of confolidation, there ends up being

0:01:37.040 --> 0:01:39.160
<v Speaker 2>a little bit less innovation in market.

0:01:39.600 --> 0:01:42.959
<v Speaker 1>See, now I would wish there was less innovation in

0:01:43.160 --> 0:01:47.520
<v Speaker 1>candy so that I would not be so tempted. I

0:01:47.640 --> 0:01:51.200
<v Speaker 1>never noticed that there was a lack of diversity in candy.

0:01:52.920 --> 0:01:56.600
<v Speaker 1>So tell us about this proposed or possible Mars deal.

0:01:57.200 --> 0:02:00.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so Mars, which is primarily a candy company, is

0:02:00.240 --> 0:02:04.120
<v Speaker 2>looking at buying Kelenova. Keelenova is a company that was

0:02:04.160 --> 0:02:07.840
<v Speaker 2>spun out of Keellog to Kellogg, the cereal company decided

0:02:07.880 --> 0:02:11.200
<v Speaker 2>to split up its business in between Kellogg the traditional

0:02:11.240 --> 0:02:14.119
<v Speaker 2>cereal and like everything else it did, And so Keelenova

0:02:14.280 --> 0:02:17.160
<v Speaker 2>is sort of the everything else. So it has pop tarts,

0:02:17.360 --> 0:02:20.520
<v Speaker 2>it has cheese, it it has nutri grain bars, it

0:02:20.560 --> 0:02:22.799
<v Speaker 2>has all of these other sort of like snack food

0:02:23.080 --> 0:02:27.400
<v Speaker 2>and frozen items in packaged food, and so Mars would

0:02:27.440 --> 0:02:29.360
<v Speaker 2>like to buy it because, as I said, primarily it

0:02:29.480 --> 0:02:32.200
<v Speaker 2>is a candy company, but it would like to sort

0:02:32.200 --> 0:02:34.440
<v Speaker 2>of get a little bit more into snack food. So

0:02:34.600 --> 0:02:37.080
<v Speaker 2>they are looking at doing a thirty six billion dollars

0:02:37.120 --> 0:02:39.799
<v Speaker 2>deal and it's really going to put Mars into one

0:02:39.840 --> 0:02:43.640
<v Speaker 2>of the top packaged food companies in the world. So

0:02:43.760 --> 0:02:47.240
<v Speaker 2>right now the top ones are Unilever, PepsiCo, and Nestlie

0:02:47.400 --> 0:02:50.120
<v Speaker 2>and this would make Mars the number four, right behind

0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:52.960
<v Speaker 2>those three. So the FTC is going to take a

0:02:53.000 --> 0:02:55.840
<v Speaker 2>look at the dial because there's a lot of interest

0:02:55.919 --> 0:02:59.160
<v Speaker 2>in food right now, particularly with all the inflation that's

0:02:59.200 --> 0:03:03.160
<v Speaker 2>been going on. There's been some suggestions that the reason

0:03:03.200 --> 0:03:05.720
<v Speaker 2>that food prices haven't come down as much is because

0:03:05.760 --> 0:03:08.320
<v Speaker 2>there is so much consolidation in the industry that a

0:03:08.320 --> 0:03:10.880
<v Speaker 2>lot of the food companies can sort of keep their

0:03:10.880 --> 0:03:13.640
<v Speaker 2>prices high in a way that they would otherwise not

0:03:13.680 --> 0:03:15.320
<v Speaker 2>be able to if there was more competition.

0:03:16.040 --> 0:03:20.360
<v Speaker 1>They do compete in snack bars. Is the analysis going

0:03:20.400 --> 0:03:24.640
<v Speaker 1>to depend on how they compete in snack bars or

0:03:24.680 --> 0:03:27.560
<v Speaker 1>is it going to focus on their becoming then the

0:03:27.680 --> 0:03:31.639
<v Speaker 1>fourth largest packaged food dealer. I mean, it really doesn't

0:03:31.639 --> 0:03:35.840
<v Speaker 1>seem like there's a lot of overlap in what Mars

0:03:36.080 --> 0:03:37.280
<v Speaker 1>and Kelenova do.

0:03:38.280 --> 0:03:41.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, the biggest overlap is that you said in snack bars.

0:03:41.600 --> 0:03:44.280
<v Speaker 2>So one of them owns Utri Grain and the other

0:03:44.320 --> 0:03:46.720
<v Speaker 2>owns Matro's Bakery, And if you ever had those items,

0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:48.800
<v Speaker 2>they're very similarly. You know, they have the fruit in

0:03:48.840 --> 0:03:51.040
<v Speaker 2>the middle and then there's the grains on the outside.

0:03:51.440 --> 0:03:54.680
<v Speaker 2>One of them also owns Hind Bars, you know, all

0:03:54.720 --> 0:03:57.800
<v Speaker 2>those like nut and chocolate ones, and the other owns

0:03:57.880 --> 0:04:00.760
<v Speaker 2>are expires, which they often have like fruit and that's

0:04:00.840 --> 0:04:03.560
<v Speaker 2>mixed together into sort of a bar. But these are

0:04:03.600 --> 0:04:08.080
<v Speaker 2>all sort of like the slightly healthier nack and or

0:04:08.160 --> 0:04:10.600
<v Speaker 2>the real replacement type things that you might you know,

0:04:10.680 --> 0:04:13.760
<v Speaker 2>grab when you're hungry. And so the FTC is definitely

0:04:13.760 --> 0:04:15.880
<v Speaker 2>going to take a look at that. And you know,

0:04:15.960 --> 0:04:19.320
<v Speaker 2>the traditional way that this would be resolved is that

0:04:19.360 --> 0:04:21.200
<v Speaker 2>they would try and sell off one of these brands.

0:04:21.240 --> 0:04:22.920
<v Speaker 2>They would keep one and they could sell off the other.

0:04:23.600 --> 0:04:27.240
<v Speaker 2>This FTC has been a lot more reluctant to accept

0:04:27.400 --> 0:04:29.640
<v Speaker 2>that kind of a deal. I mean, I am here

0:04:29.680 --> 0:04:32.280
<v Speaker 2>in Portland because of the Kroger Albertson steal and that's

0:04:32.320 --> 0:04:34.800
<v Speaker 2>exactly where they're challenging at Kroger and Auversons are saying,

0:04:34.800 --> 0:04:37.279
<v Speaker 2>you know, we'll sell us some supermarkets, everything will be fine,

0:04:37.520 --> 0:04:39.839
<v Speaker 2>and the FTC is like, eh, we're not really sure.

0:04:40.800 --> 0:04:43.719
<v Speaker 2>So that may be a little bit harder in this case.

0:04:44.240 --> 0:04:47.520
<v Speaker 1>How long does the FTC have before they have to

0:04:47.520 --> 0:04:49.720
<v Speaker 1>make a decision in the Mars case.

0:04:50.000 --> 0:04:52.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so Mars and Kelenova just announced the steal a

0:04:52.680 --> 0:04:55.640
<v Speaker 2>couple of weeks ago. They will file their initial paperwork

0:04:55.680 --> 0:04:59.040
<v Speaker 2>pretty soon, and then the FEC will have thirty days

0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:01.479
<v Speaker 2>to decide if it wants to do an in depth

0:05:01.600 --> 0:05:03.719
<v Speaker 2>review that we call a second request. A lot of

0:05:03.720 --> 0:05:06.559
<v Speaker 2>those people I spoke to said they believe that FPC

0:05:06.680 --> 0:05:09.000
<v Speaker 2>is definitely going to do a second request here. Once

0:05:09.040 --> 0:05:11.279
<v Speaker 2>it goes into the second request phase, that can take

0:05:11.360 --> 0:05:13.640
<v Speaker 2>several months or maybe even up to a year for

0:05:13.720 --> 0:05:15.520
<v Speaker 2>them to sort of make a decision about what they're

0:05:15.520 --> 0:05:16.360
<v Speaker 2>going to do with the deal.

0:05:16.520 --> 0:05:21.400
<v Speaker 1>So, speaking of Kroger Albertson's, I understand that the surgeon

0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:26.360
<v Speaker 1>grocery prices played a big part in the opening statements

0:05:26.920 --> 0:05:27.680
<v Speaker 1>at the trial.

0:05:28.279 --> 0:05:30.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, you know, this is a merger between what the

0:05:30.480 --> 0:05:35.120
<v Speaker 2>US calls the two largest traditional grocery stores, Kroger and Robertsons,

0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:38.279
<v Speaker 2>and you know there's sort of one stop shop places

0:05:38.279 --> 0:05:40.040
<v Speaker 2>where you go and you can get sort of all

0:05:40.040 --> 0:05:41.599
<v Speaker 2>of the food you might need for a week. And

0:05:41.640 --> 0:05:44.160
<v Speaker 2>they have alleged that both Kroger and Robertsons spend a

0:05:44.160 --> 0:05:47.520
<v Speaker 2>lot of time thinking about how the other one prices,

0:05:47.520 --> 0:05:50.480
<v Speaker 2>particularly on what they consider it to be consumer stables,

0:05:50.560 --> 0:05:54.159
<v Speaker 2>which are things like milk, eggs, bananas, things along those

0:05:54.200 --> 0:05:57.400
<v Speaker 2>lines that Americans purchased a lot, probably even weakly. So

0:05:57.560 --> 0:05:59.839
<v Speaker 2>we have heard a lot about egg pricing in particular.

0:06:00.040 --> 0:06:02.000
<v Speaker 2>You know, there's been a lot of up and down

0:06:02.040 --> 0:06:05.400
<v Speaker 2>in egg pricing since the pandemic, in part because there's

0:06:05.440 --> 0:06:08.240
<v Speaker 2>been a couple like bird flu outbreaks here in the US.

0:06:08.279 --> 0:06:12.600
<v Speaker 2>But there has been some testimony that Albertson's and Kroger

0:06:12.600 --> 0:06:15.000
<v Speaker 2>look to each other very significantly on how to price

0:06:15.040 --> 0:06:19.120
<v Speaker 2>their eggs. They do weekly reports on what the other

0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:22.360
<v Speaker 2>one is charging in the market, and they oftentimes, yeah,

0:06:22.520 --> 0:06:25.440
<v Speaker 2>like adjust their pricing based on what either you know,

0:06:25.520 --> 0:06:28.680
<v Speaker 2>Kroger or Albertson's just charging. The companies have argued that

0:06:28.720 --> 0:06:31.719
<v Speaker 2>they don't compete with each other as much as the

0:06:31.760 --> 0:06:36.280
<v Speaker 2>FTC claims that really their biggest competitors Walmart. Walmart obviously

0:06:36.400 --> 0:06:39.720
<v Speaker 2>is one of the biggest food sellers in the United States.

0:06:39.760 --> 0:06:42.719
<v Speaker 2>But you know, we've seen at this point dozens of

0:06:42.760 --> 0:06:45.839
<v Speaker 2>documents in which Kroger and Albertsons refer to each other

0:06:45.920 --> 0:06:49.880
<v Speaker 2>as either their primary competitor or their biggest competitor. And

0:06:49.920 --> 0:06:52.240
<v Speaker 2>while they do look at Walmart for some pricing, it's

0:06:52.279 --> 0:06:55.359
<v Speaker 2>pretty clear that they are very, very focused on the

0:06:55.440 --> 0:06:57.000
<v Speaker 2>other traditional supermarkets.

0:06:57.600 --> 0:07:01.320
<v Speaker 1>There was testimony at the trial about the company that

0:07:01.440 --> 0:07:06.279
<v Speaker 1>would buy almost six hundred of the divested stores from

0:07:06.360 --> 0:07:09.960
<v Speaker 1>Kroger and Albertson's CNS Grocery Wholesale.

0:07:10.080 --> 0:07:12.640
<v Speaker 2>So in order to get the deal through, the companies

0:07:12.720 --> 0:07:15.400
<v Speaker 2>knew that they competed directly in a lot of areas,

0:07:15.720 --> 0:07:18.679
<v Speaker 2>and so they offered to sell five hundred and seventy

0:07:18.800 --> 0:07:21.800
<v Speaker 2>nine stores to a company called CNS Grocery Coolesalers. So

0:07:21.880 --> 0:07:26.480
<v Speaker 2>CNS is primarily a grocery holesaler. That means that they

0:07:26.840 --> 0:07:31.720
<v Speaker 2>fiber products from the consumer packaged goods or from the farmers.

0:07:31.840 --> 0:07:33.560
<v Speaker 2>They keep them in the warehouse, and then when the

0:07:33.600 --> 0:07:36.600
<v Speaker 2>supermarket needs to stocket shelves, it orders from them and

0:07:36.640 --> 0:07:39.720
<v Speaker 2>they send a truck to the serper market with all

0:07:39.720 --> 0:07:42.720
<v Speaker 2>of the goods. So a lot of the bigger supermarkets

0:07:42.720 --> 0:07:45.640
<v Speaker 2>like Kroger and Overritson sort of do this warehousing and

0:07:45.680 --> 0:07:50.280
<v Speaker 2>distribution themselves, with smaller grocery chains to use wholesalers like CNS. So,

0:07:50.440 --> 0:07:53.280
<v Speaker 2>as I said, CNS is primarily a wholesaler. It does

0:07:53.400 --> 0:07:57.680
<v Speaker 2>operate twenty three grocery stores in upstate New York and Wisconsin,

0:07:57.920 --> 0:08:01.640
<v Speaker 2>so buying five hundred and seventy nine stores would be

0:08:01.680 --> 0:08:05.680
<v Speaker 2>like quite a significant change for this company, and they

0:08:05.800 --> 0:08:09.320
<v Speaker 2>argue that they are really excited about this possibility, that

0:08:09.360 --> 0:08:12.000
<v Speaker 2>they would really like to sort of diversify their company

0:08:12.000 --> 0:08:14.520
<v Speaker 2>beyond just being a whole baler, and that it sort

0:08:14.520 --> 0:08:17.240
<v Speaker 2>of makes sense for them, since they are so involved

0:08:17.240 --> 0:08:19.840
<v Speaker 2>in groceries, to pick up grocery retailing. But the FEC

0:08:20.080 --> 0:08:22.240
<v Speaker 2>argues that this is putting a lot of the risk

0:08:22.360 --> 0:08:26.280
<v Speaker 2>onto consumers because if this divestiture package were to fail

0:08:26.560 --> 0:08:28.720
<v Speaker 2>all of a sudden, there's not going to be as

0:08:28.760 --> 0:08:31.960
<v Speaker 2>much grocery competition and a lot of places around the country,

0:08:32.080 --> 0:08:35.120
<v Speaker 2>consumers would only have the option of the combined Kroger

0:08:35.120 --> 0:08:35.800
<v Speaker 2>and Operts them.

0:08:36.240 --> 0:08:40.280
<v Speaker 1>And CNS doesn't have a great record of keeping supermarkets

0:08:40.320 --> 0:08:40.959
<v Speaker 1>that they buy.

0:08:41.520 --> 0:08:46.000
<v Speaker 2>Yes, so historically, as I mentioned, CNS has played a

0:08:46.000 --> 0:08:48.760
<v Speaker 2>little bit in the retail business. But what they would

0:08:48.800 --> 0:08:51.960
<v Speaker 2>do is they would buy a couple grocery stores, primarily

0:08:51.960 --> 0:08:56.040
<v Speaker 2>from other companies that were already their customers, and then

0:08:56.040 --> 0:08:57.960
<v Speaker 2>they would keep them for a while and then sort

0:08:57.960 --> 0:09:00.640
<v Speaker 2>of sell them off or sell them back to somebody else.

0:09:01.040 --> 0:09:04.040
<v Speaker 2>So there was a period in time in the early

0:09:04.400 --> 0:09:07.200
<v Speaker 2>mid two thousands when they had a couple hundred stores,

0:09:07.360 --> 0:09:10.520
<v Speaker 2>but by twenty twelve they had completely exited the retail

0:09:10.520 --> 0:09:13.440
<v Speaker 2>grocery industry. So for a long time they operated no

0:09:13.520 --> 0:09:16.960
<v Speaker 2>grocery stores whatsoever. In about twenty twenty one, they sort

0:09:16.960 --> 0:09:19.320
<v Speaker 2>of decided to get back into the retail business, and

0:09:19.360 --> 0:09:22.040
<v Speaker 2>that's when they started acquiring a couple more stores, And

0:09:22.080 --> 0:09:24.400
<v Speaker 2>as I said, they now operate just twenty three of

0:09:24.440 --> 0:09:27.040
<v Speaker 2>them only in these two places in the country. Even

0:09:27.040 --> 0:09:30.640
<v Speaker 2>though they are a big distributor, they also don't have

0:09:31.240 --> 0:09:34.480
<v Speaker 2>any even of their distribution business in some areas of

0:09:34.520 --> 0:09:36.920
<v Speaker 2>the country where they would be buying stores, So they

0:09:36.960 --> 0:09:39.960
<v Speaker 2>don't do a lot of work right now in southern California,

0:09:40.080 --> 0:09:43.080
<v Speaker 2>where they would be buying something like ninety something stores,

0:09:43.520 --> 0:09:46.680
<v Speaker 2>and they don't do any real business in Colorado right now,

0:09:46.760 --> 0:09:49.480
<v Speaker 2>where again they would be buying ninety something stores and

0:09:49.600 --> 0:09:53.400
<v Speaker 2>taking over sort of the Safe Way brand in Colorado only.

0:09:54.080 --> 0:09:57.560
<v Speaker 1>And this hearing is just to allow a judge to

0:09:57.679 --> 0:10:01.920
<v Speaker 1>decide whether or not to issue a preliminary injunction against

0:10:02.000 --> 0:10:02.400
<v Speaker 1>the deal.

0:10:03.320 --> 0:10:06.679
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so technically this is a preliminary injunction hearing. The

0:10:06.800 --> 0:10:09.520
<v Speaker 2>judge is going to decide whether it's to block the

0:10:09.679 --> 0:10:12.960
<v Speaker 2>deal from going through while the FTC move forward with

0:10:13.000 --> 0:10:15.599
<v Speaker 2>a proceeding in it's in house court. The companies have

0:10:15.640 --> 0:10:18.440
<v Speaker 2>already said that if the judge blocks the deal here,

0:10:18.480 --> 0:10:21.160
<v Speaker 2>they're probably going to abandon because the deal has already

0:10:21.160 --> 0:10:24.040
<v Speaker 2>now been pending for two years and they can't really

0:10:24.120 --> 0:10:26.600
<v Speaker 2>keep waiting given all of the financing and things that

0:10:26.640 --> 0:10:28.839
<v Speaker 2>are up in the air with this merger. So if

0:10:28.880 --> 0:10:31.880
<v Speaker 2>she ends up ruling against them, they'll abandon the deal

0:10:31.920 --> 0:10:34.280
<v Speaker 2>and sort of move forward with a new strategy.

0:10:34.679 --> 0:10:37.360
<v Speaker 1>Do you know what other kinds of witnesses are going

0:10:37.400 --> 0:10:38.119
<v Speaker 1>to testify?

0:10:38.640 --> 0:10:41.240
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, we are almost done with the FTC's case, So

0:10:41.280 --> 0:10:44.400
<v Speaker 2>we've heard from a lot of Koger and Albertson's sort

0:10:44.440 --> 0:10:47.480
<v Speaker 2>of mid level managers in the various regions. We've heard

0:10:47.520 --> 0:10:51.360
<v Speaker 2>actually a lot from various union officials because one of

0:10:51.360 --> 0:10:53.880
<v Speaker 2>the interesting things about this case is the FTC has

0:10:54.040 --> 0:10:58.480
<v Speaker 2>argued that it would produce competition for unionized labor because

0:10:58.520 --> 0:11:01.679
<v Speaker 2>both Kroger and Albertsons have arge unionized work courses all

0:11:01.720 --> 0:11:04.959
<v Speaker 2>of the people who work in the stores, and they

0:11:05.080 --> 0:11:08.400
<v Speaker 2>argue that eliminating the competition between Kroger and Albertson's would

0:11:08.440 --> 0:11:11.360
<v Speaker 2>lead to lower wages for their workers. The SEC is

0:11:11.400 --> 0:11:14.560
<v Speaker 2>expected to finish up probably tomorrow morning, and then we're

0:11:14.559 --> 0:11:18.760
<v Speaker 2>going to hear from the Kroger CEO and the Robertson CEO,

0:11:19.120 --> 0:11:20.720
<v Speaker 2>who are going to talk a lot about, you know,

0:11:20.760 --> 0:11:22.400
<v Speaker 2>why they want to steal some forward.

0:11:23.360 --> 0:11:27.920
<v Speaker 1>It's very interesting because you have two of the issues

0:11:28.400 --> 0:11:32.480
<v Speaker 1>in the presidential campaign, inflation and union jobs.

0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:35.679
<v Speaker 2>The Harris campaign has already said that they oppose this merger,

0:11:35.880 --> 0:11:37.800
<v Speaker 2>So we will see what happens.

0:11:38.280 --> 0:11:42.240
<v Speaker 1>Thanks so much, Leah. That's Bloomberg Ante Trust reporter Leah Nylen.

0:11:42.720 --> 0:11:45.720
<v Speaker 1>Coming up next on the Bloomberg Launch Show. Texas is

0:11:45.760 --> 0:11:48.920
<v Speaker 1>making a long shot bid to become a business law

0:11:49.040 --> 0:11:53.120
<v Speaker 1>center with a little help from Elon Musk i'm June Grosso.

0:11:53.120 --> 0:11:56.720
<v Speaker 1>When you're listening to Bloomberg, there's no doubt that in

0:11:56.760 --> 0:12:00.199
<v Speaker 1>the tiny state of Delaware is the world's per i'm

0:12:00.200 --> 0:12:04.679
<v Speaker 1>ain in business court. The Delaware Court of Chancery, Delaware

0:12:04.760 --> 0:12:08.439
<v Speaker 1>is the legal address for nearly three hundred thousand businesses

0:12:08.760 --> 0:12:12.720
<v Speaker 1>like GM, Walmart and Goldman Sachs, and in a two

0:12:12.840 --> 0:12:18.239
<v Speaker 1>century old commercial court, sits one chancellor, six vice chancellors,

0:12:18.320 --> 0:12:22.960
<v Speaker 1>and three magistrates, considered the best judges in the business

0:12:22.960 --> 0:12:27.600
<v Speaker 1>of judging business cases. Now into this picture comes an

0:12:27.800 --> 0:12:32.959
<v Speaker 1>unlikely challenge from Texas. It's launching its own version of

0:12:33.000 --> 0:12:39.040
<v Speaker 1>a business court without a designated courthouse or even designated courtrooms.

0:12:39.559 --> 0:12:43.720
<v Speaker 1>Joining me is Bloomberg Texas legal reporter Madelin Meckelberg, who's

0:12:43.800 --> 0:12:48.880
<v Speaker 1>investigated Texas's bid to become a business court hub. Madelin

0:12:49.000 --> 0:12:52.280
<v Speaker 1>start by telling us about the Delaware Chancery Court.

0:12:52.920 --> 0:12:55.800
<v Speaker 3>I think there is no question that the Chancery court

0:12:55.920 --> 0:12:59.640
<v Speaker 3>is the pre eminent business court. And although it's the

0:13:00.520 --> 0:13:05.600
<v Speaker 3>state and a small state court, it has global implications

0:13:05.679 --> 0:13:10.640
<v Speaker 3>because so many businesses are incorporated in Delaware and have

0:13:10.760 --> 0:13:14.559
<v Speaker 3>it set up so that litigation like shareholder actions go

0:13:14.679 --> 0:13:18.600
<v Speaker 3>through the Chancery Court. There are decades and decades of

0:13:18.760 --> 0:13:22.720
<v Speaker 3>precedent out of that court on really crucial business law cases,

0:13:23.280 --> 0:13:26.200
<v Speaker 3>and those decisions, given the stature of this court, those

0:13:26.240 --> 0:13:30.240
<v Speaker 3>decisions have impact felt across the whole country. I was

0:13:30.280 --> 0:13:33.080
<v Speaker 3>speaking to a law professor at the University of Texas

0:13:33.120 --> 0:13:35.720
<v Speaker 3>for this story, and he told me, is you're taking

0:13:35.720 --> 0:13:39.400
<v Speaker 3>corporate law classes anywhere in the country. You're learning about

0:13:39.440 --> 0:13:42.600
<v Speaker 3>Delaware law, whether you plan to practice in that court

0:13:42.760 --> 0:13:45.760
<v Speaker 3>or not, because of the significance of the decisions that

0:13:45.800 --> 0:13:48.040
<v Speaker 3>are coming out of the Chancery Court there, and.

0:13:48.160 --> 0:13:52.800
<v Speaker 1>Also the court's ten officials. You know, the judges are

0:13:53.400 --> 0:13:55.640
<v Speaker 1>experts in business law.

0:13:55.880 --> 0:13:59.480
<v Speaker 3>That's exactly right. The idea is that these are people

0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:04.080
<v Speaker 3>who come from really high profile corporate litigation practices already,

0:14:04.120 --> 0:14:07.120
<v Speaker 3>they have a ton of experience and knowledge in this space,

0:14:07.760 --> 0:14:11.160
<v Speaker 3>and they're appointed to serve twelve year terms in the court,

0:14:11.320 --> 0:14:15.040
<v Speaker 3>and so they're really steeped in current issues of the day,

0:14:15.559 --> 0:14:17.920
<v Speaker 3>and they have a reputation of being some of the

0:14:18.000 --> 0:14:19.720
<v Speaker 3>top legal minds in the country.

0:14:20.280 --> 0:14:24.680
<v Speaker 1>Now, Texas has made a concerted effort to attract businesses.

0:14:24.960 --> 0:14:28.280
<v Speaker 1>Abbot is promoting the Texas miracle. What is that.

0:14:29.280 --> 0:14:30.200
<v Speaker 2>That's a great question.

0:14:30.760 --> 0:14:33.240
<v Speaker 3>Definitely, Texas has been working for a long time now

0:14:33.280 --> 0:14:37.040
<v Speaker 3>to cementous reputation as a really business friendly state. I

0:14:37.040 --> 0:14:40.720
<v Speaker 3>think the number changes, but there's something like fifty fortune

0:14:40.760 --> 0:14:44.520
<v Speaker 3>five hundred companies that are headquartered here. But what Texas

0:14:44.520 --> 0:14:47.400
<v Speaker 3>and Governor Abbott is talking about there is this idea

0:14:47.520 --> 0:14:51.760
<v Speaker 3>that businesses can come to Texas and experience lower taxes,

0:14:51.840 --> 0:14:56.000
<v Speaker 3>they can experience a really robust workforce. There's tons of

0:14:56.000 --> 0:14:59.360
<v Speaker 3>physical space. Texas is a gin normalis state. So if

0:14:59.360 --> 0:15:01.720
<v Speaker 3>you're looking for somewhere to set up a business, set

0:15:01.760 --> 0:15:04.600
<v Speaker 3>up an operation, chances are we've got the land for

0:15:04.720 --> 0:15:07.800
<v Speaker 3>you here. I think we're also have a reputation of

0:15:07.880 --> 0:15:11.480
<v Speaker 3>having business friendly lawmakers who really are attuned to the

0:15:11.560 --> 0:15:14.720
<v Speaker 3>issues of businesses and have shown a willingness to listen

0:15:14.720 --> 0:15:17.600
<v Speaker 3>to what they're looking for when it comes to crafting

0:15:17.680 --> 0:15:20.680
<v Speaker 3>regulations for the state. And so Abbott has been looking

0:15:20.720 --> 0:15:25.040
<v Speaker 3>for ways to kind of expand on this reputation, add

0:15:25.120 --> 0:15:27.880
<v Speaker 3>more to the arsenal things that Texas uses when it's

0:15:27.920 --> 0:15:30.680
<v Speaker 3>trying to recruit companies to come to the states. And

0:15:30.720 --> 0:15:33.200
<v Speaker 3>that's why we're chatting today. The latest development in that

0:15:33.240 --> 0:15:37.320
<v Speaker 3>effort is the establishment of dedicated business courts here in Texas.

0:15:37.560 --> 0:15:41.000
<v Speaker 1>Are they trying to become the next Delaware? Are they

0:15:41.040 --> 0:15:43.160
<v Speaker 1>trying to directly compete with Delaware?

0:15:43.520 --> 0:15:47.440
<v Speaker 3>So not necessarily, Texas is not the first state to

0:15:47.800 --> 0:15:51.320
<v Speaker 3>attempt to create business courts. There's maybe twenty two other

0:15:51.400 --> 0:15:55.480
<v Speaker 3>states that have some former fashion of specialty courts, and

0:15:55.560 --> 0:15:59.520
<v Speaker 3>so on paper, the reason to pursue these courts is

0:15:59.560 --> 0:16:03.240
<v Speaker 3>to set orate business cases from the regular docket, because

0:16:03.360 --> 0:16:07.720
<v Speaker 3>right now a really complicated contract dispute or shareholder lawsuit

0:16:07.840 --> 0:16:11.440
<v Speaker 3>is going to be decided alongside personal injury cases and

0:16:11.520 --> 0:16:15.240
<v Speaker 3>family law disputes in state courts across Texas. And so

0:16:15.560 --> 0:16:17.840
<v Speaker 3>what they're trying to do here is to create a

0:16:17.840 --> 0:16:21.160
<v Speaker 3>similar system to Delaware, where you have specialty judges who

0:16:21.160 --> 0:16:24.200
<v Speaker 3>have experience in business and corporate litigation who can help

0:16:24.280 --> 0:16:27.160
<v Speaker 3>speed resolution of some of these cases that can tend

0:16:27.200 --> 0:16:29.840
<v Speaker 3>to get stuck in the dockets. But I think, for

0:16:29.960 --> 0:16:32.400
<v Speaker 3>reasons I'm sure we're going to talk about more, I

0:16:32.400 --> 0:16:36.360
<v Speaker 3>think Texas's reputation just as a business friendly state, some

0:16:36.400 --> 0:16:39.680
<v Speaker 3>of our more famous business residents here, it kind of

0:16:39.720 --> 0:16:43.280
<v Speaker 3>gives Texas a bigger opportunity to go against Delaware, and

0:16:43.320 --> 0:16:45.640
<v Speaker 3>so whether they're trying to or not, the way that

0:16:45.680 --> 0:16:48.400
<v Speaker 3>the situation is playing out right now is that everyone's

0:16:48.440 --> 0:16:52.120
<v Speaker 3>looking at Texas as maybe not a direct challenger to Delaware,

0:16:52.160 --> 0:16:56.520
<v Speaker 3>but certainly an alternative to Delaware that could eventually kind

0:16:56.520 --> 0:16:59.440
<v Speaker 3>of develop a similar reputation as a place to bring

0:16:59.440 --> 0:16:59.840
<v Speaker 3>these kinds of.

0:17:00.600 --> 0:17:04.840
<v Speaker 1>I think you are referencing perhaps Elon Musk, who I'm

0:17:04.880 --> 0:17:08.040
<v Speaker 1>sure feels he's had a terrible time in the Delaware

0:17:08.160 --> 0:17:11.800
<v Speaker 1>Chancery court and has been promoting Texas.

0:17:12.240 --> 0:17:15.880
<v Speaker 3>That's exactly right. Elon Musk decided to shift the incorporation

0:17:16.160 --> 0:17:20.159
<v Speaker 3>of Tesla and SpaceX to Texas. I think the final

0:17:20.200 --> 0:17:22.840
<v Speaker 3>straw for him was when a judge in Delaware's Chancery

0:17:22.880 --> 0:17:26.800
<v Speaker 3>court struck down his massive, massive fifty six billion dollar

0:17:26.960 --> 0:17:31.560
<v Speaker 3>pay package that was approved by Tesla shareholders, and he said, guys,

0:17:31.600 --> 0:17:34.040
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to Texas. He has a long history here

0:17:34.200 --> 0:17:38.199
<v Speaker 3>of having his physical headquarters and office spaces here, but

0:17:38.280 --> 0:17:41.560
<v Speaker 3>by moving the legal home of these companies here, he's

0:17:41.640 --> 0:17:45.520
<v Speaker 3>kind of ensuring that these future spats involving shareholders and

0:17:45.600 --> 0:17:48.119
<v Speaker 3>specifics of the business are going to be resolved in

0:17:48.200 --> 0:17:51.240
<v Speaker 3>courts in Texas. Now, he hasn't said that he was

0:17:51.280 --> 0:17:55.200
<v Speaker 3>coming here to specifically experience the business courts that we're

0:17:55.240 --> 0:17:58.040
<v Speaker 3>setting up, but it's just the timing of it. He

0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:00.800
<v Speaker 3>announced the decisions a few months ago, and Texas business

0:18:00.800 --> 0:18:05.080
<v Speaker 3>courts just started operating this past weekend. So whether he

0:18:05.160 --> 0:18:06.879
<v Speaker 3>wants to or not, I think he's going to be

0:18:06.920 --> 0:18:09.600
<v Speaker 3>one of the early and most high profile cases that

0:18:09.640 --> 0:18:11.160
<v Speaker 3>those courts see.

0:18:11.400 --> 0:18:15.760
<v Speaker 1>So Chevron moved from California after one hundred and forty

0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:20.960
<v Speaker 1>five years, you know, it was having problems with California's

0:18:21.080 --> 0:18:27.200
<v Speaker 1>environmental policies and regulations. Are a lot of the corporations

0:18:27.240 --> 0:18:31.399
<v Speaker 1>moving there trying to escape from states that are not

0:18:31.560 --> 0:18:34.679
<v Speaker 1>as business friendly and going to Texas, which seems to

0:18:34.720 --> 0:18:36.520
<v Speaker 1>have open arms out for business.

0:18:37.040 --> 0:18:39.679
<v Speaker 3>I think that's certainly a factor for a lot of

0:18:39.720 --> 0:18:42.640
<v Speaker 3>businesses that decide to come here. It's hard to imagine

0:18:42.640 --> 0:18:44.919
<v Speaker 3>that being the only factor that they would make that

0:18:45.000 --> 0:18:48.040
<v Speaker 3>decision based on, but certainly I think that's part of

0:18:48.080 --> 0:18:51.239
<v Speaker 3>the idea of this Texas miracle, and part of the

0:18:51.440 --> 0:18:54.879
<v Speaker 3>arsenal tools that Abbott uses to recruit businesses is this

0:18:55.040 --> 0:18:58.879
<v Speaker 3>idea that yes, we are business friendly, we have business

0:18:58.960 --> 0:19:03.159
<v Speaker 3>friendly judges here, and we have regulations that are friendly

0:19:03.160 --> 0:19:05.560
<v Speaker 3>to business. Kind of all of the above, and I

0:19:05.640 --> 0:19:07.920
<v Speaker 3>think that we're going to see a similar dynamic play

0:19:07.920 --> 0:19:10.960
<v Speaker 3>out with these business courts where the judges in Texas

0:19:11.000 --> 0:19:14.920
<v Speaker 3>are appointed by Abbot. I think a lot of people assume,

0:19:15.160 --> 0:19:19.000
<v Speaker 3>probably correctly, that the judges share his similar ideology when

0:19:19.000 --> 0:19:21.160
<v Speaker 3>it comes to business and when it comes to applying

0:19:21.240 --> 0:19:24.600
<v Speaker 3>law in a maybe more conservative fashion. And so I

0:19:24.680 --> 0:19:28.120
<v Speaker 3>think these courts will be an extension of what we've

0:19:28.119 --> 0:19:31.320
<v Speaker 3>seen when it comes to presenting Texas as an alternative

0:19:31.440 --> 0:19:34.520
<v Speaker 3>to some of these areas like California that are known

0:19:34.600 --> 0:19:36.520
<v Speaker 3>for their more liberal policies.

0:19:36.600 --> 0:19:40.640
<v Speaker 1>Let's say Governor Abbot said the judges have a litany

0:19:40.680 --> 0:19:45.480
<v Speaker 1>of experience in streamlining resolutions of business disputes. Do they?

0:19:45.600 --> 0:19:47.720
<v Speaker 1>I mean, it doesn't seem like you can really compare

0:19:48.040 --> 0:19:52.200
<v Speaker 1>the judges in Texas to the judges in Delaware.

0:19:52.720 --> 0:19:56.760
<v Speaker 3>Definitely not. I mean Delaware's judges. This court has decades

0:19:56.760 --> 0:19:59.880
<v Speaker 3>and decades of precedent. They serve for twelve year terms.

0:20:00.240 --> 0:20:03.720
<v Speaker 3>This Business Court is, as we're speaking today, about two

0:20:03.760 --> 0:20:06.880
<v Speaker 3>to three days old. So I think it really remains

0:20:06.880 --> 0:20:09.720
<v Speaker 3>to be seen how they're going to handle these cases.

0:20:10.119 --> 0:20:13.760
<v Speaker 3>Judges yappoints were required to have ten years of experience

0:20:13.880 --> 0:20:18.040
<v Speaker 3>in either complex corporate litigation or as a judge in Texas,

0:20:18.119 --> 0:20:22.119
<v Speaker 3>So they definitely do have experience in this space, but

0:20:22.359 --> 0:20:24.840
<v Speaker 3>none of them, as far as I'm aware, have experience

0:20:25.000 --> 0:20:28.160
<v Speaker 3>as a judge in this kind of setting of handling

0:20:28.160 --> 0:20:30.639
<v Speaker 3>these specific disputes in a business court setting. So I

0:20:30.720 --> 0:20:32.520
<v Speaker 3>think it's going to be one of the things people

0:20:32.560 --> 0:20:35.080
<v Speaker 3>are watching for is how quickly they can take a

0:20:35.119 --> 0:20:37.520
<v Speaker 3>case from filing to resolution.

0:20:38.320 --> 0:20:41.639
<v Speaker 1>And also Texas courts in a lot of instances are

0:20:41.640 --> 0:20:43.879
<v Speaker 1>going to have to follow Delaware law because that's the

0:20:43.920 --> 0:20:46.119
<v Speaker 1>only law on some of these issues.

0:20:46.440 --> 0:20:48.720
<v Speaker 3>That's right. I mean, these are state courts, and so

0:20:49.080 --> 0:20:52.399
<v Speaker 3>they're going to be referring to Texas corporate law in

0:20:52.440 --> 0:20:55.640
<v Speaker 3>a lot of fashions. And so we do have precedent

0:20:55.800 --> 0:20:58.480
<v Speaker 3>in terms of how corporate law has been applied in

0:20:58.520 --> 0:21:00.600
<v Speaker 3>cases in the past, just in a re Daduller's state

0:21:00.640 --> 0:21:03.359
<v Speaker 3>court room. But a lot of those applications we've seen

0:21:03.400 --> 0:21:06.119
<v Speaker 3>previously are based on Delaware case law. That's kind of

0:21:06.119 --> 0:21:08.680
<v Speaker 3>what I was saying earlier, this idea that the power

0:21:08.680 --> 0:21:12.240
<v Speaker 3>of Delaware chancery court is these huge decisions that have

0:21:12.320 --> 0:21:15.760
<v Speaker 3>significance that are being applied in other cases, and I

0:21:15.760 --> 0:21:18.240
<v Speaker 3>don't think that's an exception here. I think what's different

0:21:18.320 --> 0:21:22.400
<v Speaker 3>is perhaps how these judges might apply or interpret those

0:21:22.400 --> 0:21:25.080
<v Speaker 3>statutes when it comes to specific cases. I think that's

0:21:25.119 --> 0:21:28.160
<v Speaker 3>another thing that remains to be seen, is how far

0:21:28.240 --> 0:21:31.760
<v Speaker 3>they'll be willing to deviate from what's kind of standard

0:21:31.800 --> 0:21:33.479
<v Speaker 3>and expected in this space.

0:21:34.160 --> 0:21:38.639
<v Speaker 1>Madlin, As you pointed out in your story, the terms

0:21:38.640 --> 0:21:41.800
<v Speaker 1>are only for two years the judges terms, so that

0:21:41.920 --> 0:21:44.879
<v Speaker 1>means that they may be leaving in the middle of

0:21:44.920 --> 0:21:47.520
<v Speaker 1>a case. I mean, we all know how long legal

0:21:47.560 --> 0:21:50.400
<v Speaker 1>cases take, yes.

0:21:50.280 --> 0:21:52.960
<v Speaker 3>And basically all the lawyers I spoke to for this

0:21:53.080 --> 0:21:55.160
<v Speaker 3>story said that would be amazing to have a case

0:21:55.200 --> 0:21:57.840
<v Speaker 3>that wraps up in two years or less. But I

0:21:57.840 --> 0:22:00.240
<v Speaker 3>think that's another thing that is Again, a lot of

0:22:00.520 --> 0:22:03.000
<v Speaker 3>the conversation right now is a wait and see. It's

0:22:03.040 --> 0:22:05.800
<v Speaker 3>hard to really understand how these courts are going to

0:22:05.800 --> 0:22:09.480
<v Speaker 3>work until we see them start taking cases and start

0:22:09.480 --> 0:22:12.520
<v Speaker 3>getting to that period where there might be turnover. Because

0:22:12.880 --> 0:22:14.920
<v Speaker 3>the way that they've been set up under state law

0:22:15.080 --> 0:22:18.679
<v Speaker 3>is that the judges can be reappointed to terms following this,

0:22:18.840 --> 0:22:21.640
<v Speaker 3>so it's possible that the judges we have now their

0:22:21.680 --> 0:22:24.320
<v Speaker 3>two years are up, how it renews them asks them

0:22:24.359 --> 0:22:26.520
<v Speaker 3>to come back for two more years. But we just

0:22:26.560 --> 0:22:29.000
<v Speaker 3>really don't know how it's going to work at best point,

0:22:29.040 --> 0:22:31.639
<v Speaker 3>if that's something that's going to be understood to come

0:22:31.720 --> 0:22:34.560
<v Speaker 3>for these judges or what. But as it stands right now,

0:22:34.600 --> 0:22:36.960
<v Speaker 3>two years is definitely a short term. I think I

0:22:37.040 --> 0:22:40.560
<v Speaker 3>mentioned Delaware judges serve for twelve years, and so that's

0:22:40.600 --> 0:22:43.520
<v Speaker 3>one of the big differences between our system here and

0:22:43.560 --> 0:22:44.960
<v Speaker 3>what they have in the Chancery Court.

0:22:45.240 --> 0:22:49.280
<v Speaker 1>So they've been planning for more than a year. Are

0:22:49.320 --> 0:22:54.320
<v Speaker 1>the courts located in one central building like in Delaware.

0:22:53.680 --> 0:22:56.880
<v Speaker 3>No, that's another thing. Texas is a huge state and

0:22:57.480 --> 0:23:01.840
<v Speaker 3>they're technically are I believe, eleven divisions that they hope

0:23:01.920 --> 0:23:04.800
<v Speaker 3>someday will exist for the business Court. But what they've

0:23:04.800 --> 0:23:07.760
<v Speaker 3>decided to do is start small. So they're opening five

0:23:07.880 --> 0:23:12.600
<v Speaker 3>divisions over the biggest cities in the state, and that's Austin, Dallas,

0:23:12.680 --> 0:23:16.960
<v Speaker 3>Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio. And that was one

0:23:17.000 --> 0:23:19.840
<v Speaker 3>of the things we've been watching as this September first

0:23:19.960 --> 0:23:22.840
<v Speaker 3>deadline for the courts to start operating has snuck up

0:23:23.040 --> 0:23:25.480
<v Speaker 3>is where are these courts going to be located, how

0:23:25.520 --> 0:23:27.639
<v Speaker 3>are they going to handle filings? Is it going to

0:23:27.640 --> 0:23:30.600
<v Speaker 3>be electronic? A lot of those questions were unanswered, and

0:23:30.800 --> 0:23:33.199
<v Speaker 3>even up until a few weeks before the courts were

0:23:33.240 --> 0:23:35.960
<v Speaker 3>supposed to open, we were told they were still looking

0:23:36.000 --> 0:23:40.040
<v Speaker 3>for leases for courtrooms within those different divisions, but they

0:23:40.080 --> 0:23:43.159
<v Speaker 3>decided to kind of abandon that effort for now to

0:23:43.200 --> 0:23:47.760
<v Speaker 3>find permanent physical space and judges will have offices within

0:23:47.840 --> 0:23:50.680
<v Speaker 3>their division, but when they need a courtroom, the plan

0:23:50.760 --> 0:23:54.440
<v Speaker 3>right now is to use available existing infrastructure from other

0:23:54.560 --> 0:23:55.320
<v Speaker 3>state courts.

0:23:55.600 --> 0:24:00.200
<v Speaker 1>What's the timeframe for determining whether or not this is

0:24:00.240 --> 0:24:03.080
<v Speaker 1>a success. I mean it feels like they're opening without

0:24:03.119 --> 0:24:04.800
<v Speaker 1>even having everything in place.

0:24:05.400 --> 0:24:07.439
<v Speaker 3>It's brand new. I think it's going to be a

0:24:07.440 --> 0:24:10.560
<v Speaker 3>few years before we really understand whether this was a

0:24:10.600 --> 0:24:14.560
<v Speaker 3>successful experiment. I think an early first test is going

0:24:14.600 --> 0:24:17.359
<v Speaker 3>to be, you know, can they take a case from

0:24:17.400 --> 0:24:20.000
<v Speaker 3>start to finish? I think that sounds like a really

0:24:20.040 --> 0:24:24.040
<v Speaker 3>low bar, but creating a completely new court system, almost

0:24:24.040 --> 0:24:27.680
<v Speaker 3>from scratch, is a huge undertaking. The court themselves kind

0:24:27.680 --> 0:24:30.480
<v Speaker 3>of told us that just because September first came on

0:24:30.520 --> 0:24:33.480
<v Speaker 3>the calendar doesn't mean no preparations are finished, there's still

0:24:33.520 --> 0:24:36.320
<v Speaker 3>a lot of work to do. They're still hiring staff,

0:24:36.600 --> 0:24:38.679
<v Speaker 3>so it's not like what we're seeing today is what

0:24:38.720 --> 0:24:40.640
<v Speaker 3>the courts are going to be looking like one year

0:24:40.640 --> 0:24:44.080
<v Speaker 3>from now. They're still building up their internal infrastructure.

0:24:44.359 --> 0:24:46.200
<v Speaker 2>So I think it's going to take at least two

0:24:46.280 --> 0:24:46.880
<v Speaker 2>years for.

0:24:46.880 --> 0:24:50.240
<v Speaker 3>A full judge's term to really understand kind of what

0:24:50.280 --> 0:24:53.240
<v Speaker 3>the potential is for these courts. And then I think

0:24:53.320 --> 0:24:56.920
<v Speaker 3>another big question is going to be whether Texas leaders

0:24:57.080 --> 0:25:00.000
<v Speaker 3>see this as a worthwhile investment to continue put in

0:25:00.200 --> 0:25:03.560
<v Speaker 3>money and resources towards growing these courts and supporting the

0:25:03.640 --> 0:25:04.840
<v Speaker 3>existing courts they have.

0:25:06.080 --> 0:25:11.240
<v Speaker 1>This is certainly an ambitious project that Texas is taking on,

0:25:11.640 --> 0:25:14.880
<v Speaker 1>and I know you'll keep following and let us know

0:25:14.960 --> 0:25:19.000
<v Speaker 1>how it's going. Thanks so much, Madeline. That's Madeline Meckelberg,

0:25:19.040 --> 0:25:22.840
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Texas Legal Reporter, coming up next on the Bloomberg

0:25:22.920 --> 0:25:26.000
<v Speaker 1>Launch Show. It was a busy summer for the Supreme

0:25:26.080 --> 0:25:29.560
<v Speaker 1>Court as the justices had to handle what could be

0:25:29.640 --> 0:25:34.400
<v Speaker 1>a record number of summer emergency applications. I'm Jim Grosso

0:25:34.560 --> 0:25:38.080
<v Speaker 1>and you're listening to Bloomberg. In just about a month,

0:25:38.160 --> 0:25:41.439
<v Speaker 1>the Supreme Court Justices will begin their new term on

0:25:41.520 --> 0:25:44.680
<v Speaker 1>the first Monday in October. They left the Supreme Court

0:25:44.720 --> 0:25:48.080
<v Speaker 1>for their summer vacation on July first, but the summer

0:25:48.080 --> 0:25:52.600
<v Speaker 1>has been relatively busy for them. They've decided eleven emergency

0:25:52.680 --> 0:25:56.480
<v Speaker 1>applications and they're on track to perhaps triple that before

0:25:56.520 --> 0:26:00.119
<v Speaker 1>the new term starts. Why all these summer emergencies the

0:26:00.160 --> 0:26:04.400
<v Speaker 1>applications here to explain is Bloomberg Law. Supreme Court reporter

0:26:04.640 --> 0:26:08.000
<v Speaker 1>Lydia Wheeler. We used to hear about the emergency docket,

0:26:08.040 --> 0:26:12.480
<v Speaker 1>the shadow docket in reference to death penalty cases. What

0:26:12.600 --> 0:26:14.639
<v Speaker 1>kinds of cases are we seeing now?

0:26:15.200 --> 0:26:18.600
<v Speaker 4>You're completely right. So the emergency docket, or what legal

0:26:18.600 --> 0:26:22.399
<v Speaker 4>scholars are calling the shadow docket, was once primarily used

0:26:22.440 --> 0:26:25.200
<v Speaker 4>for these last minute day requests and death penalty cases.

0:26:25.200 --> 0:26:28.040
<v Speaker 4>As you mentioned, you know, basically death row inmates were

0:26:28.080 --> 0:26:30.840
<v Speaker 4>coming to the court and saying, hey, stop my execution

0:26:31.000 --> 0:26:34.080
<v Speaker 4>while I fight for a new sentence in court. Now

0:26:34.200 --> 0:26:37.800
<v Speaker 4>the requests cover a much broader scope of issues I'm

0:26:37.840 --> 0:26:41.480
<v Speaker 4>talking about. Now we're seeing often hot button issues like abortion,

0:26:42.119 --> 0:26:45.240
<v Speaker 4>voting rights, even the power of federal regulators, you know,

0:26:45.359 --> 0:26:48.640
<v Speaker 4>issues that are really dividing the nation. Politically, those are

0:26:48.680 --> 0:26:51.960
<v Speaker 4>what's coming to the court on this emergency docket.

0:26:52.600 --> 0:26:57.080
<v Speaker 1>Explain how the shadow docket is different from the merits

0:26:57.119 --> 0:27:00.560
<v Speaker 1>docket in other words, you know, the truncated pers for

0:27:00.800 --> 0:27:02.119
<v Speaker 1>filing briefs, et cetera.

0:27:02.440 --> 0:27:05.440
<v Speaker 4>Right, So, the shadow docket is the name that legal

0:27:05.480 --> 0:27:09.240
<v Speaker 4>scholars use when referring to the emergency docket, and they

0:27:09.280 --> 0:27:13.160
<v Speaker 4>call it that because the court decides these requests through

0:27:13.240 --> 0:27:17.879
<v Speaker 4>a truncated process without full briefing or oral arguments. The

0:27:17.920 --> 0:27:22.359
<v Speaker 4>decisions are orders that are usually only a sentence long,

0:27:22.880 --> 0:27:25.480
<v Speaker 4>and we never know kind of when they're going to

0:27:25.520 --> 0:27:27.800
<v Speaker 4>come out. It's not like on a specific decision day.

0:27:28.040 --> 0:27:30.320
<v Speaker 4>So there's that right now. They're happening over the summer

0:27:30.320 --> 0:27:33.119
<v Speaker 4>when the court isn't even in its normal session, and

0:27:33.320 --> 0:27:37.959
<v Speaker 4>unless there's a notable concurrence or a dissent, there's usually

0:27:38.080 --> 0:27:41.840
<v Speaker 4>very little insight into the court's reasoning for why they're

0:27:41.880 --> 0:27:45.919
<v Speaker 4>either blocking something or letting something take effect. We don't

0:27:45.920 --> 0:27:48.760
<v Speaker 4>know what the vote count is. Usually you know which

0:27:48.960 --> 0:27:52.440
<v Speaker 4>justices decided, you know for which side, So there's very

0:27:52.480 --> 0:27:55.520
<v Speaker 4>little information, which is why you know, one legal scholar

0:27:55.600 --> 0:27:57.920
<v Speaker 4>kind of coins the name shadow docket and why that

0:27:58.040 --> 0:27:58.840
<v Speaker 4>term has kind of.

0:27:58.760 --> 0:28:01.199
<v Speaker 1>Taken off, So now tell us about some of the

0:28:01.280 --> 0:28:04.879
<v Speaker 1>decisions on the shadow doget that the Court has made

0:28:05.000 --> 0:28:05.680
<v Speaker 1>this summer.

0:28:06.119 --> 0:28:10.120
<v Speaker 4>Right, So, the Court recently rejected the Biden administration's requests

0:28:10.400 --> 0:28:15.120
<v Speaker 4>to reinstate the Education Department's new rules that protect transgender

0:28:15.200 --> 0:28:19.439
<v Speaker 4>students from discrimination in school nationwide. That was actually a

0:28:19.560 --> 0:28:24.359
<v Speaker 4>rare one where we saw a partial dissent from four justices. Actually,

0:28:24.400 --> 0:28:28.440
<v Speaker 4>Conservative Justice Neil Gorsitch joined the liberals, which is Justice

0:28:28.440 --> 0:28:31.880
<v Speaker 4>so to Mayor Justice Pagan and Justice Jackson in saying

0:28:31.920 --> 0:28:35.560
<v Speaker 4>that they would have let those rules take effects. Last week,

0:28:35.800 --> 0:28:39.960
<v Speaker 4>we also saw the justices allow Arizona to enforce part

0:28:40.040 --> 0:28:43.320
<v Speaker 4>of a state election law that will require voters to

0:28:43.400 --> 0:28:47.360
<v Speaker 4>show proof of citizenship to vote. And it's unclear if

0:28:47.440 --> 0:28:49.760
<v Speaker 4>that will again be blocked or if that will be

0:28:49.800 --> 0:28:54.360
<v Speaker 4>a requirement likely during the twenty twenty four presidential elections.

0:28:55.000 --> 0:28:59.560
<v Speaker 1>Lydia, we're watching to see whether the Court is going

0:28:59.600 --> 0:29:02.000
<v Speaker 1>town decision or when the Court is going to hand

0:29:02.040 --> 0:29:05.760
<v Speaker 1>down decisions in several different cases. Tell us the ones

0:29:05.800 --> 0:29:06.880
<v Speaker 1>that we're waiting for.

0:29:07.520 --> 0:29:10.959
<v Speaker 4>They still have more than a dozen applications still pending.

0:29:11.360 --> 0:29:13.400
<v Speaker 4>I think at this point we're up to fifteen or

0:29:13.440 --> 0:29:16.240
<v Speaker 4>sixteen now. You know, legal scholars told me they're really

0:29:16.280 --> 0:29:19.360
<v Speaker 4>on track to triple the number of cases that they

0:29:19.400 --> 0:29:22.520
<v Speaker 4>decide on the shadow dock at fifth summer. I'm personally

0:29:22.600 --> 0:29:25.120
<v Speaker 4>waiting for one right now that has to do with

0:29:25.240 --> 0:29:30.280
<v Speaker 4>family planning funding in Oklahoma. These are dollars that AHHS

0:29:30.320 --> 0:29:33.880
<v Speaker 4>stripped from the state of Oklahoma because the state wouldn't

0:29:33.880 --> 0:29:37.840
<v Speaker 4>agree to force its healthcare providers to offer abortion referrals.

0:29:38.040 --> 0:29:40.400
<v Speaker 4>They said that that is a violation of their new

0:29:40.440 --> 0:29:44.160
<v Speaker 4>abortion van well, a near total abortion ban that took

0:29:44.200 --> 0:29:47.840
<v Speaker 4>effect after the Supreme Court two terms ago in twenty

0:29:47.880 --> 0:29:52.160
<v Speaker 4>twenty two overturned the constitutional right to abortion and left

0:29:52.280 --> 0:29:55.360
<v Speaker 4>that up to the state beside. You know, Georgetown law

0:29:55.360 --> 0:29:59.160
<v Speaker 4>professor Steve Vladdock, he has been tracking these requests and

0:29:59.200 --> 0:30:01.520
<v Speaker 4>he actually shared his data with us. You know, he

0:30:01.640 --> 0:30:04.800
<v Speaker 4>said that the Court is on track to blow previous

0:30:04.800 --> 0:30:07.160
<v Speaker 4>summers out of the water when it comes to the

0:30:07.240 --> 0:30:10.480
<v Speaker 4>number of emergency actions that it's taking. You know, he

0:30:10.520 --> 0:30:13.600
<v Speaker 4>said that that even includes the first summer of the

0:30:13.600 --> 0:30:18.120
<v Speaker 4>COVID nineteen pandemic, when there were actual true emergencies that

0:30:18.200 --> 0:30:20.000
<v Speaker 4>the Court was being asked to act on.

0:30:20.720 --> 0:30:24.360
<v Speaker 1>You can understand why during COVID there was an optic

0:30:24.440 --> 0:30:29.440
<v Speaker 1>in these applications, but why so many more emergency applications

0:30:29.480 --> 0:30:30.160
<v Speaker 1>these days?

0:30:30.560 --> 0:30:33.560
<v Speaker 4>Right, So this is actually something that the justices themselves

0:30:33.680 --> 0:30:37.480
<v Speaker 4>have spoken to, and Justice Elena Kagan is really someone

0:30:37.520 --> 0:30:40.520
<v Speaker 4>who kind of gave us the first understanding of why

0:30:40.640 --> 0:30:44.040
<v Speaker 4>this is happening. You know, she said that, you know,

0:30:44.160 --> 0:30:47.640
<v Speaker 4>in granting a number of these emergency requests that were

0:30:47.640 --> 0:30:50.200
<v Speaker 4>brought to the Court during the Trump administration years ago,

0:30:50.480 --> 0:30:53.360
<v Speaker 4>she said that the Court really encouraged people to kind

0:30:53.400 --> 0:30:57.080
<v Speaker 4>of keep bringing these kinds of petitions for emergency relief.

0:30:57.400 --> 0:31:00.960
<v Speaker 4>And so the Court basically kind of sent the signal like, hey,

0:31:01.200 --> 0:31:04.600
<v Speaker 4>we're now open to these kind of requests. And now

0:31:04.680 --> 0:31:06.680
<v Speaker 4>what we're seeing is we're really seeing a lot of

0:31:06.720 --> 0:31:11.600
<v Speaker 4>these requests come from Republican led states and also industry

0:31:11.600 --> 0:31:16.080
<v Speaker 4>groups that are looking to block Biden administration policies. Now,

0:31:16.280 --> 0:31:19.600
<v Speaker 4>the concern here is that the Court, in acting so

0:31:19.680 --> 0:31:23.200
<v Speaker 4>many times on these requests, that they're changing kind of

0:31:23.240 --> 0:31:27.600
<v Speaker 4>what's considered a true emergency, and legal scholars that I

0:31:27.640 --> 0:31:31.440
<v Speaker 4>spoke to actually so that that further undermines the Court's credibility.

0:31:31.600 --> 0:31:33.880
<v Speaker 4>And you know, we know that the Court right now

0:31:33.920 --> 0:31:37.640
<v Speaker 4>has very low public approval ratings due to their ongoing

0:31:38.200 --> 0:31:43.440
<v Speaker 4>ethics issues and controversies, and also that of controversial decisions

0:31:43.720 --> 0:31:46.479
<v Speaker 4>that the Court keeps releasing that are really split along

0:31:46.600 --> 0:31:50.360
<v Speaker 4>ideological lines. You know, I'm thinking about last term the

0:31:50.440 --> 0:31:54.200
<v Speaker 4>Court's decision on presidential immunity and also their decision to

0:31:54.240 --> 0:31:57.160
<v Speaker 4>overturn the federal ban on bump stocks, which are those

0:31:57.200 --> 0:32:00.560
<v Speaker 4>devices that allow guns to fire like machine gun.

0:32:00.880 --> 0:32:03.520
<v Speaker 1>Are the justices complaining because they have to work during

0:32:03.560 --> 0:32:06.720
<v Speaker 1>the summer more now, or are they complaining for other reasons?

0:32:07.080 --> 0:32:09.360
<v Speaker 4>You know, they actually, oh, several of them have come

0:32:09.400 --> 0:32:11.920
<v Speaker 4>out in public appearances and like lavent it that like,

0:32:12.000 --> 0:32:15.200
<v Speaker 4>oh my gosh, this is way busier, you know. Justice

0:32:15.200 --> 0:32:18.160
<v Speaker 4>Soda Mayor recently said, like I'm tired. You know, We're

0:32:18.160 --> 0:32:20.959
<v Speaker 4>not used to working around the clock like this. And

0:32:21.120 --> 0:32:23.720
<v Speaker 4>the number of requests that they're getting is a lot,

0:32:24.040 --> 0:32:28.080
<v Speaker 4>you know. Justice Kavanaugh also said that it's challenging, you know,

0:32:28.160 --> 0:32:31.600
<v Speaker 4>because the number of emergency applications that they're getting takes

0:32:31.640 --> 0:32:34.960
<v Speaker 4>time away from the Court's merits docket. And now the

0:32:35.040 --> 0:32:37.960
<v Speaker 4>merits docket is actually what they refer to as the

0:32:38.080 --> 0:32:41.360
<v Speaker 4>normal process for the court, you know, hearing a case

0:32:41.400 --> 0:32:44.320
<v Speaker 4>and deciding it. That happens during the course of their

0:32:44.400 --> 0:32:48.240
<v Speaker 4>normal term, which begins the first Monday in October and

0:32:48.320 --> 0:32:51.120
<v Speaker 4>traditionally runs until the end of June. Now they can

0:32:51.240 --> 0:32:53.600
<v Speaker 4>go a little longer than that. We saw that unusually

0:32:53.680 --> 0:32:56.840
<v Speaker 4>happy this summer where they ran into the first.

0:32:56.600 --> 0:32:57.200
<v Speaker 2>Day of July.

0:32:57.480 --> 0:33:00.680
<v Speaker 4>But usually they like to wrap everything up Spanda June

0:33:00.680 --> 0:33:02.520
<v Speaker 4>and then they get a couple of months break with

0:33:02.560 --> 0:33:05.480
<v Speaker 4>the occasional emergency request. But now they're just it seems

0:33:05.520 --> 0:33:09.560
<v Speaker 4>like there's this flurry of activity, you know. Justice Clarence

0:33:09.640 --> 0:33:13.560
<v Speaker 4>Thomas also commented on this. He said that the emergency

0:33:13.600 --> 0:33:18.280
<v Speaker 4>process really short circuits the court's normal process for hearing disputes,

0:33:18.400 --> 0:33:21.240
<v Speaker 4>and he said that it's not a quote thorough way

0:33:21.360 --> 0:33:24.400
<v Speaker 4>of dealing with these issues. But Justice Kavanaugh and Justice

0:33:24.440 --> 0:33:27.320
<v Speaker 4>Thomas really didn't offer any sort of solution. At least,

0:33:27.400 --> 0:33:29.800
<v Speaker 4>nothing publicly was said about what the Court should be doing.

0:33:29.920 --> 0:33:32.720
<v Speaker 4>As I mentioned, you know, Justice Kagan was really the

0:33:32.720 --> 0:33:35.080
<v Speaker 4>only one who came kind of closest to that when

0:33:35.080 --> 0:33:37.920
<v Speaker 4>she said, you know, hey, this phenomenon is kind of

0:33:37.960 --> 0:33:41.640
<v Speaker 4>caused by us. We're granting these opinions and we're sending

0:33:41.720 --> 0:33:44.720
<v Speaker 4>the signal that we're open to this kind of decision

0:33:44.760 --> 0:33:47.400
<v Speaker 4>making and hey, send your stuff our way. So that

0:33:47.520 --> 0:33:49.680
<v Speaker 4>seems to signal to me that like, one way that

0:33:49.720 --> 0:33:52.200
<v Speaker 4>the Court could kind of avoid doing this, which we

0:33:52.280 --> 0:33:54.600
<v Speaker 4>saw them do in past terms, is to take cases

0:33:54.600 --> 0:33:57.760
<v Speaker 4>that come in on the emergency docket and move them

0:33:57.800 --> 0:34:00.440
<v Speaker 4>over to the merits docket. The Court definitely has the

0:34:00.480 --> 0:34:01.120
<v Speaker 4>power to do that.

0:34:01.440 --> 0:34:05.640
<v Speaker 1>Yes, Justice Kagan is definitely the most outspoken or it

0:34:05.720 --> 0:34:08.960
<v Speaker 1>reveals the most of the justices, it seems. And also

0:34:09.440 --> 0:34:12.239
<v Speaker 1>she talked about, and you know, the Supreme Court has

0:34:12.640 --> 0:34:15.920
<v Speaker 1>during oral arguments talked about how lower courts it's a

0:34:15.920 --> 0:34:18.960
<v Speaker 1>problem that they're issuing these nationwide injunctions, but no one

0:34:18.960 --> 0:34:22.680
<v Speaker 1>has done anything about this. So she said that they

0:34:22.719 --> 0:34:24.640
<v Speaker 1>have to intervene then, right.

0:34:24.560 --> 0:34:26.799
<v Speaker 4>That's so she said, sometimes like where we have to

0:34:26.840 --> 0:34:29.560
<v Speaker 4>step in because as you mentioned, right, lower courts are

0:34:29.960 --> 0:34:31.839
<v Speaker 4>you know, they'll get a dispute that comes to them.

0:34:31.920 --> 0:34:36.080
<v Speaker 4>Instead of just blocking some sort of policy that impacts

0:34:36.080 --> 0:34:39.320
<v Speaker 4>the party that's before them, these courts are taking it

0:34:39.400 --> 0:34:42.439
<v Speaker 4>upon themselves to block a policy for the entire nation,

0:34:42.719 --> 0:34:45.160
<v Speaker 4>to make it so that no one has to follow,

0:34:45.320 --> 0:34:46.960
<v Speaker 4>you know, the new policy or new rules that the

0:34:46.960 --> 0:34:50.040
<v Speaker 4>fide administration has put in place, or an administration has

0:34:50.040 --> 0:34:51.960
<v Speaker 4>put in place. You know, this is not just a

0:34:52.000 --> 0:34:54.759
<v Speaker 4>Republican tactic, I should say, you know that this has

0:34:54.800 --> 0:34:59.680
<v Speaker 4>also been something that democratic state attorneys general have also pursued,

0:34:59.800 --> 0:35:04.000
<v Speaker 4>you know, bringing these challenges against the administration and challenging

0:35:04.040 --> 0:35:07.480
<v Speaker 4>those So not necessarily just something that red states are doing,

0:35:07.480 --> 0:35:09.160
<v Speaker 4>but off the blue states have done in the past

0:35:09.200 --> 0:35:11.520
<v Speaker 4>as well. But yeah, she said that, you know, sometimes

0:35:11.560 --> 0:35:14.280
<v Speaker 4>we have to step in like there's no other choice.

0:35:14.640 --> 0:35:18.040
<v Speaker 1>Are they expecting or are legal scholars expecting to see

0:35:18.080 --> 0:35:21.120
<v Speaker 1>election cases on the shadow docket?

0:35:21.719 --> 0:35:24.600
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, that's definitely something that could come as we get

0:35:24.600 --> 0:35:27.560
<v Speaker 4>closer to the election, to see more of these disputes.

0:35:27.920 --> 0:35:30.800
<v Speaker 4>That's something we're expecting to see that I would expect

0:35:30.840 --> 0:35:33.440
<v Speaker 4>over the next several weeks maybe to see those coming

0:35:33.480 --> 0:35:35.759
<v Speaker 4>to the court and definitely, you know, as they start

0:35:35.760 --> 0:35:38.080
<v Speaker 4>at the beginning of their term, it's going to be

0:35:38.320 --> 0:35:41.000
<v Speaker 4>very busy, lots to watch out for. So yeah, I guess,

0:35:41.080 --> 0:35:43.279
<v Speaker 4>you know, stay tuned because there's definitely more to come

0:35:43.280 --> 0:35:45.680
<v Speaker 4>in the shadow docket. This isn't an area where they

0:35:45.680 --> 0:35:48.400
<v Speaker 4>are slowing, you know, the number of requests that are

0:35:48.440 --> 0:35:51.240
<v Speaker 4>coming to them. They seem to be popping into my inbox,

0:35:51.880 --> 0:35:54.279
<v Speaker 4>you know, from the Court's press office almost every day.

0:35:54.440 --> 0:35:55.760
<v Speaker 4>So a lot of activity.

0:35:55.960 --> 0:35:59.440
<v Speaker 1>And it was interesting. You talked to University of Virginia

0:35:59.520 --> 0:36:04.600
<v Speaker 1>law prefer Yes who said that increasingly state attorneys and

0:36:04.760 --> 0:36:09.960
<v Speaker 1>state solicitor generals are challenging federal laws in the courts.

0:36:10.560 --> 0:36:12.640
<v Speaker 4>They are, Yeah, this is in kind of a new tactic.

0:36:12.680 --> 0:36:15.560
<v Speaker 4>I talked with legal scholars who said that state attorneys

0:36:15.560 --> 0:36:18.920
<v Speaker 4>generals and solicitor generals those are the attorneys that represent

0:36:19.080 --> 0:36:21.400
<v Speaker 4>the states and their challenge before the Supreme Court. That

0:36:21.440 --> 0:36:25.080
<v Speaker 4>they are really kind of acting like normal litigans now

0:36:25.160 --> 0:36:27.640
<v Speaker 4>more so than ever, and that they're bringing these big

0:36:27.680 --> 0:36:31.280
<v Speaker 4>actions and challenging the administration. You know. And what's interesting

0:36:31.320 --> 0:36:33.520
<v Speaker 4>is I've done reporting in the past where you kind

0:36:33.520 --> 0:36:35.400
<v Speaker 4>of do a lot of venue shopping, a lot of

0:36:35.440 --> 0:36:39.719
<v Speaker 4>forum shopping, where they seek out particular parties they all

0:36:39.800 --> 0:36:43.319
<v Speaker 4>kind of ban together in multi state litigation sometimes and

0:36:43.360 --> 0:36:46.800
<v Speaker 4>they seek out their preferred court to file these challenges

0:36:46.840 --> 0:36:48.919
<v Speaker 4>and to try to get a judge that will most

0:36:49.000 --> 0:36:53.000
<v Speaker 4>likely rule in their favor. And sometimes there'll be different

0:36:53.000 --> 0:36:55.040
<v Speaker 4>groups of states. You know, a couple of states will

0:36:55.040 --> 0:36:57.719
<v Speaker 4>file in like Oklahoma, and a couple of states will

0:36:57.719 --> 0:37:01.000
<v Speaker 4>file somewhere else. So it's like multiple challenges. We often

0:37:01.120 --> 0:37:05.640
<v Speaker 4>see with these cases of national importance and challenges to

0:37:06.200 --> 0:37:09.640
<v Speaker 4>administration policies. You'll see a tactic is to kind of

0:37:09.840 --> 0:37:12.520
<v Speaker 4>the states try their hands in different courts and so

0:37:12.600 --> 0:37:17.400
<v Speaker 4>you'll get competing rulings, and that often will make an

0:37:17.440 --> 0:37:20.400
<v Speaker 4>issue more enticing for the Supreme Court. When lower courts

0:37:20.600 --> 0:37:23.200
<v Speaker 4>have ruled in different ways on the same issue, and

0:37:23.280 --> 0:37:26.680
<v Speaker 4>you have a split in the decision, meaning one court

0:37:26.719 --> 0:37:29.000
<v Speaker 4>rules one way and another court rules another way, it

0:37:29.040 --> 0:37:31.239
<v Speaker 4>almost forces the Supreme Court to kind of be the

0:37:31.360 --> 0:37:33.120
<v Speaker 4>decider and step in and settle it.

0:37:33.480 --> 0:37:37.160
<v Speaker 1>And that filing in two different jurisdictions and getting two

0:37:37.239 --> 0:37:41.880
<v Speaker 1>different results is what Republican ags did in attacking Joe

0:37:41.880 --> 0:37:45.960
<v Speaker 1>Biden's latest push to reduce student loan bills. And just

0:37:46.040 --> 0:37:49.920
<v Speaker 1>last week, the Supreme Court turned down the Biden administration's

0:37:49.960 --> 0:37:53.520
<v Speaker 1>request to lift a pause that one of the federal

0:37:53.520 --> 0:37:57.320
<v Speaker 1>appeals courts imposed on the program. So that's a perfect

0:37:57.360 --> 0:38:00.000
<v Speaker 1>example of what you were saying, Lydia, Thanks so much,

0:38:00.000 --> 0:38:03.920
<v Speaker 1>so much. That's Bloomberg law. Supreme court reporter Lydia Wheeler.

0:38:04.120 --> 0:38:06.759
<v Speaker 1>And that's it for this edition of the Bloomberg Law Podcast.

0:38:07.120 --> 0:38:09.480
<v Speaker 1>Remember you can always get the latest legal news by

0:38:09.520 --> 0:38:13.359
<v Speaker 1>subscribing and listening to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

0:38:13.640 --> 0:38:17.480
<v Speaker 1>and at Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, slash Law. I'm

0:38:17.560 --> 0:38:20.000
<v Speaker 1>June Grosso, and this is Bloomberg