WEBVTT - Weekend Law: Prosecuting ICE, Social Media Addiction & Kid Rock Testifies 0:00:02.759 --> 0:00:13.440 This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:14.080 --> 0:00:18.520 Temperatures dipped into negative numbers Friday morning in Minneapolis, but 0:00:18.640 --> 0:00:22.160 crowds of demonstrators still turned out at the Federal Building 0:00:22.320 --> 0:00:25.599 to protest ICE operations in the state that led to 0:00:25.640 --> 0:00:29.880 the killing of two US citizens by federal immigration agents. 0:00:30.240 --> 0:00:34.720 Also on Friday, in a significant reversal, Deputy Attorney General 0:00:34.840 --> 0:00:38.640 Todd Blanche announced that the Justice Department has opened a 0:00:38.680 --> 0:00:42.639 civil rights investigation into the shooting of alex Pretty by 0:00:42.680 --> 0:00:44.440 two Border patrol agents. 0:00:44.880 --> 0:00:48.320 We're looking at everything that would get shed light on 0:00:48.440 --> 0:00:51.160 what happened that day and in the days and weeks 0:00:51.240 --> 0:00:54.880 leading up to what happened. And that's like any investigation 0:00:55.080 --> 0:00:58.200 that the Department of Justice and the FBI does every day. 0:00:58.280 --> 0:01:03.040 It means we're looking at videos, talking to witnesses, trying 0:01:03.080 --> 0:01:06.720 to understand what happened. I mean, you're talking about an 0:01:06.720 --> 0:01:09.000 incredibly tragic morning. 0:01:09.560 --> 0:01:15.880 Previously, ICE's Homeland Security Investigations Branch had been leading the investigation, 0:01:16.360 --> 0:01:21.160 and investigating law enforcement shootings is not something they're usually 0:01:21.280 --> 0:01:24.479 tasked with. Joining me is former Palm Beach County State 0:01:24.520 --> 0:01:26.160 Attorney Dave Ehrenberg. 0:01:26.600 --> 0:01:26.759 Dave. 0:01:26.880 --> 0:01:30.360 Let's look at the potential legal repercussions for the agents 0:01:30.400 --> 0:01:34.520 involved in these shootings. So the federal government could prosecute 0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:37.560 these agents, but under what circumstances. 0:01:38.200 --> 0:01:41.720 Yes, the federal government has the power to prosecute those 0:01:41.920 --> 0:01:45.399 who act unreasonably in the circumstances if they were reckless 0:01:45.680 --> 0:01:49.640 in discharging their duties. Yes, but the federal government has 0:01:49.680 --> 0:01:52.040 said that they will not even investigate. 0:01:52.200 --> 0:01:53.680 They were in a good shooting. 0:01:53.720 --> 0:01:56.800 Now, when it comes to the Alex Pretty shooting, President 0:01:56.800 --> 0:02:00.480 Trump said that they will have an investigation. So it's 0:02:00.520 --> 0:02:03.680 unsure at this point whether they would move ahead for 0:02:03.960 --> 0:02:06.120 the Pretty shooting, which, by the way, I think has 0:02:06.160 --> 0:02:08.959 a stronger case of a prosecution there. I think that 0:02:09.040 --> 0:02:13.440 the agent's actions there multiple agents are more likely to 0:02:13.560 --> 0:02:16.760 be open to criminal liability than the shooting death of 0:02:16.760 --> 0:02:17.400 Renee Good. 0:02:17.639 --> 0:02:20.920 Explain why the Pretty case is stronger. 0:02:20.600 --> 0:02:24.359 The Renee Good shooting. You had an agent who could 0:02:24.520 --> 0:02:26.920 argue he was in reasonable fear of his life because 0:02:26.960 --> 0:02:29.880 the card did lurch towards him, even though it was 0:02:29.880 --> 0:02:32.240 clear that she was trying to avoid the agent. She 0:02:32.360 --> 0:02:34.400 was pulling her card to the right, the steering wheel 0:02:34.400 --> 0:02:36.320 to the right. But the card did lurch forward. You 0:02:36.360 --> 0:02:39.560 could hear him say WHOA. And because of that, I 0:02:39.560 --> 0:02:42.880 can see how a jury would say, yeah, he was 0:02:42.919 --> 0:02:45.240 in reasonable fear of his life and that's why he shot. Now, 0:02:45.240 --> 0:02:47.079 the problem in that case is that he shot a 0:02:47.120 --> 0:02:50.160 second and third time when he was not in any danger. 0:02:50.200 --> 0:02:53.160 But oftentimes they will look at all the shots together, 0:02:53.280 --> 0:02:55.160 like if you can shoot once, they'll say you can 0:02:55.240 --> 0:02:58.440 continue shooting until the threat is neutralized. Prosecutors in that 0:02:58.480 --> 0:03:01.560 case will slow down the video to make each shot 0:03:01.680 --> 0:03:05.400 unique on its own, as opposed to one quick decision. Now, 0:03:05.440 --> 0:03:08.519 when it comes to Alex Preddy, you had situation where 0:03:08.560 --> 0:03:12.160 he was not engaging in any criminal behavior. He was 0:03:12.160 --> 0:03:14.280 trying to help a woman who had been pushed down 0:03:14.360 --> 0:03:17.080 by an over aggressive border control agent. And then he 0:03:17.120 --> 0:03:19.480 got pepper spray for his troubles, and then he was 0:03:19.520 --> 0:03:22.519 thrown to the ground, and then he had seven different 0:03:22.560 --> 0:03:25.160 agents on top of him. They saw him with a 0:03:25.200 --> 0:03:28.400 phone the entire time, and the gun he had was 0:03:28.440 --> 0:03:30.840 concealed and he had a permit for it, and then 0:03:30.919 --> 0:03:33.160 it was taken away. And after it was taken away, 0:03:33.639 --> 0:03:37.440 then someone yelled that gun and perhaps that gun went off. 0:03:37.480 --> 0:03:40.280 The one that was taken away and ten shots rang 0:03:40.320 --> 0:03:42.040 out in five seconds. He was shot ten times at 0:03:42.080 --> 0:03:44.680 five seconds, so I think that one is going to 0:03:44.760 --> 0:03:45.840 be tougher to defend. 0:03:45.880 --> 0:03:46.720 They may say was a. 0:03:46.680 --> 0:03:50.400 Mistake of fact where they thought that the gun went off, 0:03:50.440 --> 0:03:53.680 but I don't think it's reasonable, based on the videos 0:03:53.760 --> 0:03:56.200 for them to believe that he had a gun in 0:03:56.280 --> 0:03:59.080 his hand that was going off against them. 0:03:59.400 --> 0:04:04.600 The top blow prosecutor in Minneapolis has opened homicide investigations 0:04:04.640 --> 0:04:10.160 into both shootings, but federal officers are generally immune from 0:04:10.240 --> 0:04:14.760 state prosecutions. Explain how the officers would raise that, how 0:04:14.800 --> 0:04:15.440 it would work. 0:04:16.160 --> 0:04:19.200 What's going to happen is that the federal government is 0:04:19.279 --> 0:04:21.919 unlikely to prosecute the cases, and so the state of 0:04:21.920 --> 0:04:26.719 Minnesota will seek a criminal indictment. They can undergo a separate, 0:04:26.720 --> 0:04:29.520 independent investigation, which I think has already begun, and then 0:04:29.560 --> 0:04:31.600 they can seek a grand jury indictment, which I think 0:04:31.640 --> 0:04:36.280 they will. And when that happens, the federal agent, because 0:04:36.279 --> 0:04:39.039 he's a federal agent, will ask to remove the case 0:04:39.080 --> 0:04:41.680 of federal court. Now the case will still be a 0:04:41.839 --> 0:04:45.359 state prosecution. You'll have state prosecutors, you'll have state law 0:04:45.839 --> 0:04:49.360 enforce but the case would be in federal court with 0:04:49.440 --> 0:04:51.919 a federal judge and a federal jury, which means that 0:04:51.960 --> 0:04:56.120 the jury pool will consist of residents of Minnesota from 0:04:56.120 --> 0:04:58.520 all over the state, so advantage to the defendant. But 0:04:58.839 --> 0:05:01.480 when it comes to im unity, the federal judge would 0:05:01.520 --> 0:05:04.719 make that call, and the question is did the agent 0:05:04.839 --> 0:05:08.560 or agents act in furtherance of the duties in a 0:05:08.560 --> 0:05:12.080 way that was necessary and proper to carry out their duties? 0:05:12.200 --> 0:05:14.920 And if the answer is yes, then he gets immunity 0:05:15.120 --> 0:05:17.480 and it's game over. There will be no prosecution. If 0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:20.240 he says no, it'll be appealed, but then it'd be 0:05:20.240 --> 0:05:23.360 game on for a state prosecution in front of that 0:05:23.400 --> 0:05:24.120 federal jury. 0:05:24.560 --> 0:05:28.440 The state's at a disadvantage here in its investigation because 0:05:28.520 --> 0:05:33.160 the federal government is refusing to share the evidence that 0:05:33.240 --> 0:05:34.120 it's collected. 0:05:34.440 --> 0:05:37.000 This case is so unusual because when I was state 0:05:37.040 --> 0:05:39.160 attorney in Palm Beach County for twelve years, we worked 0:05:39.160 --> 0:05:41.880 with the Feds. The Feds would come in and sometimes 0:05:41.920 --> 0:05:43.320 they would say they want to take the case, and 0:05:43.360 --> 0:05:46.839 we would stand down. Normally, if the Feds say we're 0:05:46.880 --> 0:05:49.159 not giving you the evidence, it's because they want to 0:05:49.160 --> 0:05:51.560 preserve the integrity of the evidence so they can do 0:05:51.640 --> 0:05:55.160 their own prosecution, not to prevent a suspect from ever 0:05:55.240 --> 0:05:58.440 being prosecuted. So this is uncharted territory. So this is 0:05:58.440 --> 0:06:00.240 what I think will happen. I think the state is 0:06:00.279 --> 0:06:04.119 going to file a lawsuit in federal court to get 0:06:04.200 --> 0:06:06.680 the federal government to turn over the evidence. I think 0:06:06.720 --> 0:06:09.240 the state is going to ask a federal judge to 0:06:09.279 --> 0:06:11.960 require the federal government to turn over the evidence they have. 0:06:12.240 --> 0:06:14.000 And I think I'll have a good claim here because 0:06:14.000 --> 0:06:16.800 the federal governments may clear that they're not going to 0:06:16.800 --> 0:06:20.039 even investigate they were in a good shooting. And I 0:06:20.080 --> 0:06:22.960 think the federal judge, whoever it is in this case, 0:06:23.080 --> 0:06:26.600 will say, you can't conceal the evidence from state authorities 0:06:26.760 --> 0:06:29.680 for the purpose of protecting a suspect. Only if you 0:06:29.800 --> 0:06:33.240 really have a good faith basis for investigating yourself and 0:06:33.320 --> 0:06:36.839 prosking the case yourself, can you withhold evidence from the state. 0:06:37.040 --> 0:06:39.479 So I think that the federal judge will grant the 0:06:39.480 --> 0:06:41.919 state's motion. But even if they don't, even if the 0:06:42.000 --> 0:06:45.039 state does not get the evidence from the Feds, the 0:06:45.080 --> 0:06:49.919 state prosecutors already started a web portal where they're seeking 0:06:50.000 --> 0:06:55.200 and obtaining videos and witness testimony and other evidence pertain 0:06:55.240 --> 0:06:57.760 to the case, and you could file charges. In this case, 0:06:57.760 --> 0:07:00.640 you can get indictment based on the videos. Al you 0:07:00.720 --> 0:07:03.559 don't need necessarily to have the car because the Feds 0:07:03.600 --> 0:07:06.960 have the car when it comes to Rene Good and 0:07:07.080 --> 0:07:09.400 that would be helpful, but the state doesn't need it 0:07:09.480 --> 0:07:12.560 to seek charges because remember, when you get indictment, you 0:07:12.600 --> 0:07:15.800 just need problem cause once someone's indicted, then discovery begins 0:07:15.800 --> 0:07:18.000 and then you'll get more information and it doesn't do 0:07:18.160 --> 0:07:21.000 the it would be defendants in this case. The agents 0:07:21.200 --> 0:07:24.120 doesn't do them any favors by withholding the evidence from 0:07:24.120 --> 0:07:27.360 the state because the evidence that the federal government has 0:07:27.600 --> 0:07:30.760 can also be exculpatory, meaning it could be to the 0:07:30.760 --> 0:07:34.760 defendant's benefit, especially because the FEDS are a favorable agency 0:07:35.200 --> 0:07:39.000 for these ice and Border control agents. So that's why 0:07:39.080 --> 0:07:42.360 I would think as defendants, they would want the federal 0:07:42.400 --> 0:07:44.520 government to turn over all evidence they have to the 0:07:44.560 --> 0:07:46.120 state or else the state is going to do their 0:07:46.160 --> 0:07:49.080 own investigation, and I think it will result in an indictment. 0:07:49.640 --> 0:07:54.000 And besides the immunity defense, what other defenses could the 0:07:54.160 --> 0:07:57.160 agents raise if they are prosecuted. 0:07:56.720 --> 0:07:59.440 Well, immunity is not even raised a trial. Immunity comes 0:07:59.480 --> 0:08:02.440 before and now would shut it down. That prevents a 0:08:02.520 --> 0:08:05.400 trial to happen in the first place. So if it 0:08:05.440 --> 0:08:08.760 does go to trial, they would say that we acted 0:08:08.800 --> 0:08:13.000 reasonably under the circumstances that their lives were at risk, 0:08:13.200 --> 0:08:16.320 where they had an imminent threat against their lives, and 0:08:16.360 --> 0:08:18.920 the imminent threat in the first case would be the 0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:23.040 car lurching towards the ice agent. In the second case, 0:08:23.080 --> 0:08:27.119 Alex Pretty, they would say mistake of fact, that they 0:08:27.320 --> 0:08:29.360 were in reasonable fear of their life, even though it 0:08:29.400 --> 0:08:31.920 was a mistake, but that mistake was reasonable because this 0:08:32.040 --> 0:08:34.120 guy had a gun and they didn't know it was 0:08:34.200 --> 0:08:36.840 taken away. It was all happening so quickly. And this 0:08:36.880 --> 0:08:38.960 is their defense. I'm putting myself in their shoes. And 0:08:39.000 --> 0:08:42.680 they would say that when someone yelled out gun and 0:08:42.720 --> 0:08:45.079 then they heard a gun shot, they reacted the way 0:08:45.080 --> 0:08:46.800 they were taught to neutralize the threat. 0:08:46.880 --> 0:08:48.760 Now they'll say that whether it's. 0:08:48.600 --> 0:08:50.959 One shot or ten, you shoot to kill, you shoot 0:08:50.960 --> 0:08:53.200 to neutralize the threat. So that's going to be their defense. 0:08:53.280 --> 0:08:55.960 I think it's a tougher defense in the Pretty case 0:08:56.000 --> 0:08:57.040 and in the Renee Good case. 0:08:57.559 --> 0:08:59.960 Does the defense have an advantage if the case is 0:09:00.160 --> 0:09:03.520 tried in federal court even under state law. 0:09:03.920 --> 0:09:06.920 The defendants will certainly remove the case of federal court 0:09:06.960 --> 0:09:10.200 to get a jury pool from the entire state of Minnesota, 0:09:10.200 --> 0:09:14.120 because in federal court, there's one judicial district, and that's 0:09:14.160 --> 0:09:18.160 the entire state. Residents of Minnesota from all over the state, conservative, liberal, 0:09:18.240 --> 0:09:21.040 not just from blue Hennepin County. So instead of getting 0:09:21.360 --> 0:09:23.920 people who are angry about what's happening in Hennepin County, 0:09:23.920 --> 0:09:26.720 you'll get a cross section of the entire state, including Republicans. 0:09:26.720 --> 0:09:29.480 And that's why, even if this does go to trial 0:09:29.480 --> 0:09:32.560 and immunity is rejected, it is still an uphill battle 0:09:32.720 --> 0:09:36.720 for prosecutors because you've got to prove beyond a reasonable 0:09:36.760 --> 0:09:40.080 doubt in front of a unanimous jury that these agents 0:09:40.120 --> 0:09:43.040 committed crimes. And you have a natural inclination of people 0:09:43.120 --> 0:09:45.559 to believe law enforcement, to trust law enforcement, to give 0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:48.120 them the benefit of the doubt. And you have politics 0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:50.360 at play where people can see the same video and 0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:52.959 it's like a warshock test where they interpret it differently, 0:09:53.160 --> 0:09:54.880 And so how are you going to get twelve jurors 0:09:54.960 --> 0:09:59.040 to all agree one way? That's the challenge that prosecutors face, Dave. 0:09:59.080 --> 0:10:02.240 There are so many video already of the pretty shooting 0:10:02.360 --> 0:10:05.800 from different angles. Does that make it easier for the 0:10:05.880 --> 0:10:09.240 prosecutors or perhaps not just more confusing. 0:10:09.640 --> 0:10:13.000 I think the more videos the better, the more transparency, 0:10:13.080 --> 0:10:16.720 the more angles the better, because if you don't have 0:10:16.960 --> 0:10:20.520 the full picture, you're gonna have reasonable doubt. 0:10:20.640 --> 0:10:21.319 So there you go. 0:10:21.400 --> 0:10:24.400 If you're the government, you want to have enough proof 0:10:24.440 --> 0:10:26.960 that you can prove the unreasonable doubt that these officers 0:10:27.360 --> 0:10:30.199 were not in imminent danger and it was not reasonable 0:10:30.240 --> 0:10:31.640 for them to think. 0:10:31.480 --> 0:10:32.839 That their lives were at risk. 0:10:32.920 --> 0:10:37.280 But that's what good lawyering is about, is about deciding 0:10:37.520 --> 0:10:39.959 how to present the videos. For example, in the Rodney 0:10:40.040 --> 0:10:44.400 King case, you remember that the prosecution showed the video 0:10:44.400 --> 0:10:46.480 and I was appalling a horrific video, but the defense 0:10:46.559 --> 0:10:50.240 slowed it down, frame by frame and they showed see 0:10:50.720 --> 0:10:54.640 the officer reacted here because Rodney King was resisting, and 0:10:55.160 --> 0:10:57.480 they showed that in slow motion and he was acquitted 0:10:57.520 --> 0:11:00.240 at the state level. Well, in this case, they're going 0:11:00.320 --> 0:11:04.200 to slow the video down to try to convict the officers. 0:11:04.240 --> 0:11:06.240 It's like the opposite, it's like the reverse Rodney King 0:11:06.280 --> 0:11:08.560 where the government is going to say slow it down, 0:11:08.840 --> 0:11:11.040 and you see that there are a good shooting shots 0:11:11.040 --> 0:11:14.400 two and three were inappropriate, unreasonable, and also they're going 0:11:14.480 --> 0:11:15.160 to slow it down. 0:11:15.480 --> 0:11:16.880 In the Alex Peretty cases. 0:11:16.920 --> 0:11:20.160 See look the gun was removed, it was walked away, 0:11:20.520 --> 0:11:23.240 and then the shots began, even though it happened really quickly. 0:11:23.760 --> 0:11:26.439 A long way to go and many many motions ahead 0:11:26.559 --> 0:11:30.000 before any trial. Thanks so much, Dave. That's Dave Ehrenberg, 0:11:30.240 --> 0:11:33.520 former Palm Beach County State Attorney. Coming up next on 0:11:33.520 --> 0:11:37.360 the Bloomberg Laws Show. A landmark trial on social media 0:11:37.400 --> 0:11:41.560 addiction starts in Los Angeles. I'm June Grosso. When you're 0:11:41.600 --> 0:11:43.440 listening to Bloomberg. 0:11:45.080 --> 0:11:48.680 Mister Zuckerberg, you and the companies before us, I know 0:11:48.760 --> 0:11:50.960 you don't mean it to be so, but you have 0:11:51.000 --> 0:11:55.960 blood on your hands. You have a product, you have 0:11:56.000 --> 0:11:59.080 a product that's killing people. 0:11:59.360 --> 0:12:02.600 That was book and Senator Lindsey Graham during a Senate 0:12:02.679 --> 0:12:07.040 Judiciary Committee hearing two years ago, a rare instance where 0:12:07.080 --> 0:12:12.080 Democrats and Republicans were united in their criticism of social 0:12:12.120 --> 0:12:16.960 media CEOs like Mark Zuckerberg for not protecting kids online. 0:12:17.480 --> 0:12:21.679 The Meta ceo pushed back on some studies that suggested 0:12:21.880 --> 0:12:25.160 social media use is a detriment to the mental health 0:12:25.200 --> 0:12:26.080 of teenagers. 0:12:26.679 --> 0:12:29.960 Mental health is a complex issue, and the existing body 0:12:29.960 --> 0:12:33.000 of scientific work has not shown a cause a link 0:12:33.040 --> 0:12:36.199 between using social media and young people having worse mental 0:12:36.200 --> 0:12:36.920 health outcomes. 0:12:37.280 --> 0:12:41.160 Zuckerberg may make that same claim when he testifies to 0:12:41.280 --> 0:12:44.679 a jury in a landmark trial over claims that the 0:12:44.679 --> 0:12:49.680 top social media companies have deliberately gotten teenagers addicted through 0:12:49.720 --> 0:12:53.320 their design choices. On trial are Meta, the owner of 0:12:53.360 --> 0:12:57.800 Facebook and Instagram, and Google, the owner of YouTube. They 0:12:57.840 --> 0:13:02.040 dispute the claims that their platforms deliberately harmed children and 0:13:02.120 --> 0:13:06.120 cite the safeguards they've added over the years. Snap settled 0:13:06.120 --> 0:13:09.559 the case last week and TikTok settled on the eve 0:13:09.600 --> 0:13:13.200 of trial. Joining me is an expert in cybersecurity and 0:13:13.320 --> 0:13:17.880 data privacy, Colin Walkee, a partner at Holestel. Colin, the 0:13:17.880 --> 0:13:20.640 plaintiff in this case is a California woman who is 0:13:20.720 --> 0:13:23.880 now twenty years old. Tell us about our allegations in 0:13:23.920 --> 0:13:24.719 this lawsuit. 0:13:25.320 --> 0:13:27.520 This is really the first one that's going to trial. 0:13:27.720 --> 0:13:31.240 There are dozens, if not hundreds, of similar lawsuits out there, 0:13:31.320 --> 0:13:33.400 and the basic allegation in this case, in all of 0:13:33.400 --> 0:13:37.160 the cases, is that the algorithms that have been put 0:13:37.200 --> 0:13:39.840 out there by the social media companies, as well as 0:13:39.920 --> 0:13:42.199 all the bells and whistles they put on their social 0:13:42.240 --> 0:13:46.760 media platforms, have made their products addictive. So this is 0:13:46.920 --> 0:13:50.960 very much akin to the tobacco litigation in the nineteen nineties. 0:13:51.360 --> 0:13:53.280 One is it addictive? And then two are there harms 0:13:53.320 --> 0:13:55.160 that flow from it? The jury is ultimately going to 0:13:55.160 --> 0:13:55.839 decide that in this. 0:13:55.880 --> 0:13:59.439 Case, and the plaintiff's theory is a novel one that 0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:03.239 compares social media sites to defective products. 0:14:03.920 --> 0:14:05.960 Yes, and in fact, some of the claims even relate 0:14:06.040 --> 0:14:09.120 back to like a nuisance type claim. But long story 0:14:09.160 --> 0:14:12.199 short is that the way these algorithms operate is they 0:14:12.240 --> 0:14:16.199 get you addicted through casino style techniques. So casinos know, 0:14:16.280 --> 0:14:18.320 for example, that every time that you put a quarter 0:14:18.360 --> 0:14:20.240 in you shouldn't get a reward because then you won't 0:14:20.240 --> 0:14:23.000 come back. So it's the timing with which you see 0:14:23.000 --> 0:14:25.760 and the content that you see it in and then 0:14:25.840 --> 0:14:28.400 what are the consequences that flow from that, So for example, 0:14:28.840 --> 0:14:31.720 mental health harms as a result of that. You could 0:14:31.720 --> 0:14:34.640 think about children in school and the distractions that's some 0:14:34.720 --> 0:14:37.000 of the allegations that have come out in these cases is, 0:14:37.520 --> 0:14:40.920 you know, Instagram started losing teenagers and they were sitting 0:14:40.960 --> 0:14:43.200 there going how do we get back more teenagers? Well, 0:14:43.280 --> 0:14:45.960 let's figure out a way to get our platforms in schools, right, 0:14:46.360 --> 0:14:48.680 And so the harms that flow from this are unique 0:14:48.720 --> 0:14:51.240 to each individual, but you can see how they compound. 0:14:51.520 --> 0:14:53.560 So they're going to try to show that the social 0:14:53.640 --> 0:14:58.840 media companies deliberately made these addictive design choices. 0:14:58.920 --> 0:15:02.280 Correct that that they have done this. And I think 0:15:02.320 --> 0:15:04.880 that there's plenty of testimony out there that probably supports 0:15:04.920 --> 0:15:09.680 the goal of making individuals remain on platforms as long 0:15:09.720 --> 0:15:12.440 as possible, keeping their attention there so that they can 0:15:12.520 --> 0:15:15.480 increase the number of viewers and thereby increase the number 0:15:15.560 --> 0:15:18.600 of advertisements. So I don't think there's really anything new 0:15:18.640 --> 0:15:21.640 about that. But the tech companies are coming in and saying, whoa, whoa. 0:15:22.160 --> 0:15:24.800 We already know based off of the Spring Courts ruling 0:15:24.800 --> 0:15:30.040 on section two thirty that the algorithms themselves are protected speech. 0:15:30.400 --> 0:15:33.240 And so the unique claim in this particular case is, yes, 0:15:33.280 --> 0:15:36.520 that may be speech, but the other bells and whistles 0:15:36.520 --> 0:15:38.640 that you're putting onto this and what you're doing within 0:15:38.720 --> 0:15:41.680 it is not speech, and rather it's conduct that it's 0:15:41.720 --> 0:15:43.880 getting us addicted to your platform. 0:15:44.000 --> 0:15:47.520 The tech companies are also arguing that they're not legally 0:15:47.600 --> 0:15:51.560 responsible for the effect of the content made by users, 0:15:51.600 --> 0:15:53.640 So explain what they're out is here what they're trying 0:15:53.640 --> 0:15:54.320 to get. 0:15:54.120 --> 0:15:56.880 To, right, So, in short, the fact that you're being 0:15:57.000 --> 0:16:00.160 shown what you want to see is your own choice. 0:16:00.360 --> 0:16:03.600 You could choose to see and view different things based 0:16:03.640 --> 0:16:06.240 off of the likes, and you're viewing habits and all 0:16:06.240 --> 0:16:08.680 of that. So they're essentially saying, all we're doing is 0:16:08.680 --> 0:16:11.360 giving you what you want. We're not doing anything to 0:16:11.400 --> 0:16:14.120 make it more enticing than it already is. And you know, 0:16:14.280 --> 0:16:17.240 part of the argument too is how much is your 0:16:17.320 --> 0:16:22.840 cell phone itself addictive versus the platforms themselves. Right, So 0:16:23.000 --> 0:16:25.640 every time you get an iPhone update, for example, it 0:16:25.680 --> 0:16:28.960 becomes a little bit brighter. Why the brighter the screen, 0:16:29.000 --> 0:16:31.320 the more dopamine in the brain. The more dopamine the brain, 0:16:31.360 --> 0:16:33.000 the more you want to look on your screen. That's 0:16:33.000 --> 0:16:35.080 why it's hard for you to figure out without going 0:16:35.080 --> 0:16:37.040 to Google how to set your screen to black and white. 0:16:37.080 --> 0:16:38.760 They don't want you to know that, so part of 0:16:38.800 --> 0:16:41.240 their argument here, too, is is how do you distinguish 0:16:41.280 --> 0:16:43.240 which component of this is addictive. 0:16:43.480 --> 0:16:46.200 The plaintiff in the case, a twenty year old woman 0:16:46.240 --> 0:16:50.800 identified only by the initials KGM, claims that more than 0:16:50.840 --> 0:16:55.160 a decade of social media use left her addicted and depressed. 0:16:55.520 --> 0:17:00.560 The defendants are challenging that narrative, saying she experienced difficult 0:17:00.560 --> 0:17:05.480 family relationships, abuse in bullying at school and that played 0:17:05.480 --> 0:17:08.440 a role in her mental health struggles. I mean, how 0:17:08.480 --> 0:17:12.159 difficult is causation going to be here for her to 0:17:12.280 --> 0:17:16.080 prove that, you know, it was her addiction to the 0:17:16.119 --> 0:17:19.840 platform rather than all the other things happening in her life. 0:17:20.160 --> 0:17:21.879 Well, it's one of the sayings that we have in 0:17:21.880 --> 0:17:24.640 personal injury cases, which is you find your planiffs as 0:17:24.680 --> 0:17:27.600 they are. And so in this particular case, yes, they 0:17:27.600 --> 0:17:30.440 have some pretty good arguments that the mental health harms 0:17:30.480 --> 0:17:33.359 are a result of her history. But the question then 0:17:33.400 --> 0:17:38.840 becomes were they exacerbated by virtue of the negligent conduct? 0:17:39.160 --> 0:17:42.000 And if that's the case, then the approximate cause is 0:17:42.040 --> 0:17:45.159 in fact the social media platform and not the historical 0:17:45.200 --> 0:17:47.879 trauma that she experienced. It is going to be an 0:17:47.880 --> 0:17:50.560 issue for the jury to determine about the mental health harms, 0:17:50.640 --> 0:17:53.440 what was the ultimate cause, what are those damages? And 0:17:53.560 --> 0:17:55.359 on top of that, are punitive damage is something that. 0:17:55.359 --> 0:17:56.040 Could be afforded. 0:17:56.520 --> 0:17:59.920 There is a debate within the mental health field about 0:18:00.160 --> 0:18:05.960 the connection between social media and increasing teenage rates of depression, anxiety, 0:18:06.280 --> 0:18:10.000 suicide ideation. Is that debate going to enter the courtroom 0:18:10.000 --> 0:18:12.960 where we're going to see experts on both sides of 0:18:13.000 --> 0:18:13.600 the issue. 0:18:14.119 --> 0:18:17.200 Absolutely, you will, just like you saw with its Abacko litigation. 0:18:17.320 --> 0:18:19.760 I mean, that's the reality is you're going to find 0:18:19.800 --> 0:18:22.280 experts on both sides of this issue. But at the 0:18:22.359 --> 0:18:24.240 end of the day, the reason why the jury trial 0:18:24.280 --> 0:18:27.159 system is so good here in the United States is 0:18:27.200 --> 0:18:31.320 because our jurors really are good at detecting bs, and 0:18:31.400 --> 0:18:34.280 so they'll be able to figure out pretty quickly not 0:18:34.359 --> 0:18:37.080 just from what the testimony is, but from their own 0:18:37.240 --> 0:18:41.080 personal experiences. I don't think that anyone can ultimately hear 0:18:41.080 --> 0:18:45.280 the testimony of these executives and former executives and decide 0:18:45.280 --> 0:18:48.520 that they didn't at least try to make it more addictive. 0:18:48.720 --> 0:18:51.359 Whether they accomplish that goal maybe a different story, but 0:18:51.400 --> 0:18:54.200 it's pretty clear they at least tried explain. 0:18:53.840 --> 0:18:57.399 What a Bellweather trial is and is this a Bellweather trial. 0:18:58.000 --> 0:19:01.040 This is absolutely a Bellweather trial. It's very similar. Recently, 0:19:01.080 --> 0:19:03.600 for example, you saw a Tesla I actually went to 0:19:03.640 --> 0:19:06.360 trial and won on one of the cases where they're 0:19:06.359 --> 0:19:10.560 automatic driving vehicle injured somebody, and so that is going 0:19:10.600 --> 0:19:13.439 to embolden Tesla into the future. So if you imagine 0:19:13.440 --> 0:19:16.119 a scenario in which the social media companies do win 0:19:16.200 --> 0:19:19.000 this case, they're going to feel emboldened to continue to 0:19:19.000 --> 0:19:21.080 pursue it. On the flip side of that coin, if 0:19:21.119 --> 0:19:22.960 the plaintiffs win this case, then at the end of 0:19:22.960 --> 0:19:25.120 the day, you're going to start seeing a lot more settlements. 0:19:25.640 --> 0:19:30.800 And speaking of settlements, the fact that Snap and TikTok 0:19:31.040 --> 0:19:35.840 settled TikTok on the eve of trial, both for undisclosed sums, 0:19:36.200 --> 0:19:38.560 what does that tell you about how the social media 0:19:38.640 --> 0:19:42.679 companies are evaluating the risk of going to trial. 0:19:43.200 --> 0:19:46.040 I think what most people don't realize is that lawyer's 0:19:46.119 --> 0:19:48.439 jobs are to manage risk. We are risk managers, that 0:19:48.560 --> 0:19:51.200 is it. And so for the plaintiffs in this case, 0:19:51.680 --> 0:19:53.960 if they settled, the reason why is because they know 0:19:54.000 --> 0:19:55.040 that this is going to be taken all the way 0:19:55.040 --> 0:19:56.639 to the Supreme Court, and that's going to take another 0:19:56.680 --> 0:19:59.480 five years, whereas they can get some money today and 0:19:59.520 --> 0:20:01.840 avoid that risk. Right, So there's an incentive for the 0:20:01.840 --> 0:20:04.680 plaintiffs to settle from that regard, and there's an incentive 0:20:04.720 --> 0:20:07.040 for the defendant to settle because they don't want this 0:20:07.119 --> 0:20:09.639 information to get out there in the real world about 0:20:09.680 --> 0:20:12.280 how much you know your privacy is being pilfered for profit. 0:20:12.359 --> 0:20:14.639 They don't want their dirty laundry aired. And so this 0:20:14.760 --> 0:20:17.920 is why settlements happen, is because both sides are incentivized 0:20:18.240 --> 0:20:21.159 to not continue on with the case whether they're right 0:20:21.240 --> 0:20:21.560 or wrong. 0:20:22.160 --> 0:20:25.960 Zuckerberg is expected to be among the first witnesses called. 0:20:26.400 --> 0:20:30.679 He has testified before Congress, But explain how different it 0:20:30.800 --> 0:20:34.720 is to be testifying in a courtroom before a jury 0:20:35.000 --> 0:20:36.960 where you're subject to cross examination. 0:20:37.840 --> 0:20:40.680 Well, it's wildly different, because if you remember back when 0:20:40.680 --> 0:20:43.880 Mark Zuckerberg came and testified in front of Congress, one 0:20:43.920 --> 0:20:47.000