WEBVTT - Supreme Court's Seismic 2022 Docket 0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:07.960 This is Bloomberg Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:09.200 --> 0:00:11.960 Just Saturday, former President Trump and ounce he's had gotten 0:00:11.960 --> 0:00:14.920 his booster shot. Maybe one of the few things he 0:00:14.960 --> 0:00:18.400 and I agree on. Though President Joe Biden and former 0:00:18.440 --> 0:00:22.079 President Donald Trump may agree on the need for vaccines, 0:00:22.520 --> 0:00:25.439 it will be the Supreme Court that decides whether to 0:00:25.520 --> 0:00:30.400 allow two federal vaccine mandates to take effect nationwide in 0:00:30.440 --> 0:00:34.680 the first argued cases of a year that will be 0:00:34.800 --> 0:00:38.559 consequential at the Court, with cases involving a range of 0:00:38.600 --> 0:00:43.320 controversial social issues, from abortion and climate change to gun 0:00:43.400 --> 0:00:47.000 rights in religion. Joining me is Bloomberg Law. Supreme Court 0:00:47.080 --> 0:00:52.440 reporter Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson Kimberly. David Cole, the National Legal 0:00:52.440 --> 0:00:56.080 director of the American Civil Liberties Union, told you that 0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:59.880 this is going to be the most important term in decade. 0:01:00.680 --> 0:01:04.480 Explain why, Well, even with the cases that the justices 0:01:04.560 --> 0:01:08.000 have already heard in this is going to be a 0:01:08.000 --> 0:01:12.400 blockbuster term. So I'm thinking about cases on abortion, gun rights, 0:01:12.480 --> 0:01:15.919 and religious freedom. These are all cases that have already 0:01:15.920 --> 0:01:18.520 been argued, many of which are waiting an opinion in 0:01:18.560 --> 0:01:23.160 two and would really set the term apart. From really 0:01:23.200 --> 0:01:26.880 what's been a series of blockbuster terms. But the justices 0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:30.679 do have a small window to add new cases to 0:01:30.840 --> 0:01:35.160 that explosive docket. We've already recently seen them as the 0:01:35.280 --> 0:01:37.720 vaccine mandates, which is the first thing they're going to 0:01:37.840 --> 0:01:40.840 tackle when they return to the courtroom in January. But 0:01:40.920 --> 0:01:43.960 there are a lot of other cases are on schedule 0:01:44.040 --> 0:01:46.360 to meet this mid January cut off to add new 0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:49.520 cases to the term, and many of those really show 0:01:49.560 --> 0:01:53.000 how the courts cases are increasingly intersecting with some of 0:01:53.000 --> 0:01:56.120 the biggest social debates and a really stealing questions about 0:01:56.120 --> 0:02:00.280 the Court's legitimacy. The Court is fast tracking, I do 0:02:00.400 --> 0:02:05.400 mean fast two cases on Biden's vaccine mandates. The two 0:02:05.440 --> 0:02:07.480 cases are going to be the first thing the justices 0:02:07.560 --> 0:02:11.000 tackle on January seven, and as you said, they are 0:02:11.080 --> 0:02:16.240 really two separate mandates. One involved the Occupational Safety and 0:02:16.320 --> 0:02:20.680 Health Administrations Mandate more frequently known as OSHA, and the 0:02:20.760 --> 0:02:24.840 question there is whether OSHA has the authority to adopt 0:02:24.880 --> 0:02:28.760 the so called shot or tests mandate for certain large employers, 0:02:28.880 --> 0:02:32.840 or whether it really overstepped is congressional mandate to develop 0:02:32.960 --> 0:02:36.519 standards that you know typically are tended to ensure safe 0:02:36.560 --> 0:02:39.960 and healthy workplaces, you know, think of things like falls, 0:02:40.080 --> 0:02:45.079 or hazardous materials or dangerous machines. Now OSHA has been 0:02:45.120 --> 0:02:47.560 asked by the Biden administration to expand that to the 0:02:47.639 --> 0:02:51.480 vaccine mandates. And then the second challenge is one involving 0:02:51.480 --> 0:02:55.400 the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services or CMS. We 0:02:55.440 --> 0:02:57.400 always have to have a bunch of alphabet soup in 0:02:57.400 --> 0:03:01.400 these cases, and these applied to health care facilities that 0:03:01.680 --> 0:03:05.480 accepted these federal funds. And it's really the same issue 0:03:05.520 --> 0:03:08.840 there whether or not CMS went too far in adopting 0:03:08.880 --> 0:03:11.880 these sweeping rules, and whether or not Congress have to 0:03:11.919 --> 0:03:15.120 say more before they can and act such a mandate 0:03:15.160 --> 0:03:18.200 like this. So I looked at the calendar. You know, 0:03:18.320 --> 0:03:22.320 usually the court has arguments on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and 0:03:22.360 --> 0:03:25.480 I saw that this was on a Friday. That's so unusual, 0:03:25.600 --> 0:03:28.600 isn't it. It is really unusual, And I think to 0:03:28.680 --> 0:03:31.800 understand why it's scheduled on a Friday, we have to 0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:34.320 talk a little bit about what's called the shadow docket 0:03:34.440 --> 0:03:38.320 or the courts emergency docket. This procedure is really a 0:03:38.480 --> 0:03:41.320 kind of special way for the justices to consider things 0:03:41.360 --> 0:03:44.760 that come up outside of the normal course of its 0:03:44.840 --> 0:03:47.920 regular decision making process. But think of things like a 0:03:48.000 --> 0:03:51.000 month law breaking arguments and then a really considered opinion 0:03:51.080 --> 0:03:54.160 that could go for dozens of pages. Instead, in these 0:03:54.160 --> 0:03:57.080 shadow doctor cases, we tend to get a one sentence ruling, 0:03:57.440 --> 0:04:00.760 you know, very expedited, and you know that's at particular 0:04:00.800 --> 0:04:04.240 process caught a lot of criticism after the Court required 0:04:04.280 --> 0:04:08.440 the Biden administration to keep a Trump era immigration policy 0:04:08.480 --> 0:04:11.560 in place, and then that's six weeks Abortion Man out 0:04:11.600 --> 0:04:14.640 of Texas as the Court allowed to go forward. And 0:04:14.720 --> 0:04:17.480 so even though we've seen some pushback from the justices 0:04:17.680 --> 0:04:22.360 about that criticism, they have taken the extraordinary step of taking, 0:04:22.720 --> 0:04:26.159 you know, these vaccine cases, that Texas case, off of 0:04:26.200 --> 0:04:28.800 the shadow docket, setting them in an argument more in 0:04:28.839 --> 0:04:31.640 line with how they traditionally do things. And that's why 0:04:31.680 --> 0:04:35.000 we see such a rapid schedule for these vaccine cases. 0:04:35.560 --> 0:04:40.080 So the environment comes into focus on February twenty in 0:04:40.240 --> 0:04:44.640 three cases. They're all from the DC Circuit Court, that's right, 0:04:44.680 --> 0:04:48.159 And these cases concerning the environment are really similar to 0:04:48.200 --> 0:04:51.240 these vaccine mandate cases, and that they go to the 0:04:51.279 --> 0:04:56.040 ability of administrative agencies past sweeping rules that could potentially 0:04:56.040 --> 0:04:59.000 cost US us as billions of dollars. And it really 0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:03.400 shows the overt court's interest in administrative laws. And before 0:05:03.440 --> 0:05:06.480 listeners start to tune out, you know, it can be 0:05:06.560 --> 0:05:08.440 a very technical area of the law, but they have 0:05:08.880 --> 0:05:12.479 enormous impact. And so here the Justice will consider whether 0:05:12.560 --> 0:05:15.839 the e p A has the authority to regulate greenhouse 0:05:15.880 --> 0:05:19.080 gas emissions from coal plants and an attempts to really 0:05:19.440 --> 0:05:23.200 rein in climate change. And you know the fact that 0:05:23.240 --> 0:05:26.400 the Justices took this case is concerning for those who 0:05:26.480 --> 0:05:30.359 want really broad and sweeping reactions to climate change because 0:05:30.400 --> 0:05:32.719 they didn't have to take it. This is one of 0:05:32.720 --> 0:05:36.880 those cases where this particular program that cleaned power plant 0:05:37.040 --> 0:05:39.520 is not in effect, and so the Biden administrations but 0:05:39.720 --> 0:05:41.440 just hold on, let us figure out what we're going 0:05:41.480 --> 0:05:43.880 to do with it. But of course that didn't happen, 0:05:43.960 --> 0:05:46.440 suggesting that you know, there may be support on the 0:05:46.480 --> 0:05:49.279 Court for saying the administration has just gone too far. 0:05:49.880 --> 0:05:52.520 And you know, this is really an area where Congress 0:05:52.520 --> 0:05:56.520 has at another case the Court didn't have to take 0:05:56.800 --> 0:06:01.760 also involves a Trump administration rule on the public charge doctrine. 0:06:02.240 --> 0:06:06.520 The Biden administration and the challengers agree to dismiss the case. 0:06:07.279 --> 0:06:10.080 So it's a little confusing as to why the court 0:06:10.240 --> 0:06:14.960 decided to take the case. It is confusing, and you know, again, 0:06:15.440 --> 0:06:17.919 this is one of those cases where it seems like 0:06:17.960 --> 0:06:21.120 the justices are reaching out to decide this case when 0:06:21.120 --> 0:06:23.920 they really don't have to. The rule it issue here 0:06:24.120 --> 0:06:27.919 requires the government to consider whether a non citizen is 0:06:27.920 --> 0:06:30.960 going to pull on public benefits when considering whether to 0:06:31.000 --> 0:06:33.839 grant them release, like admission into the country. And you know, 0:06:33.920 --> 0:06:36.039 like the Clean Power Plan is not a rule that's 0:06:36.080 --> 0:06:39.159 an effect right now. But the question here is for 0:06:39.360 --> 0:06:42.719 the justices a procedural one. Again. You know, we see 0:06:42.760 --> 0:06:45.400 them tackling so many of these really big issue cases 0:06:45.400 --> 0:06:48.160 on procedural grounds rather than on the merits. And it's 0:06:48.240 --> 0:06:51.200 whether or not these gop led states can really pick 0:06:51.320 --> 0:06:54.840 up where the Biden administration left off and go ahead 0:06:54.880 --> 0:06:58.120 and defend the legality of this rule, as the Biden 0:06:58.120 --> 0:07:01.120 administration says it no longer wants to do at federal court. 0:07:01.600 --> 0:07:05.159 Several of these cases seemed to be sort of caught 0:07:05.279 --> 0:07:10.560 between two administrations. The Biden administration is also asking the 0:07:10.600 --> 0:07:14.600 court to consider whether it has to continue the Trump 0:07:14.600 --> 0:07:18.400 remained in Mexico policy. Yeah, we have really seen over 0:07:18.440 --> 0:07:21.280 the last five years, given that there's such a break 0:07:21.320 --> 0:07:25.760 between the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations, this issue of 0:07:25.960 --> 0:07:29.480 changing administrations really cropping up in the Supreme Court. So 0:07:29.640 --> 0:07:32.320 in the past, there will be maybe a handful of 0:07:32.400 --> 0:07:35.880 cases where this would happen, where a new administration would 0:07:35.880 --> 0:07:37.520 come in and just say we're going to take a 0:07:37.520 --> 0:07:40.960 whole new approach to this particular law. But by and large, 0:07:41.160 --> 0:07:44.560 administrations have continued to have kind of the same general 0:07:44.600 --> 0:07:47.600 interests and that's just not the case today. And it 0:07:47.640 --> 0:07:50.560 will be really interesting to see when the next administration 0:07:50.600 --> 0:07:53.040 takes over. Is this a trend that's going to continue 0:07:53.120 --> 0:07:55.560 or is it something unique to Trump and to Biden. 0:07:55.920 --> 0:07:59.840 Coming up, I'll continue this conversation with Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson 0:08:00.320 --> 0:08:03.560 and we'll talk about some controversial cases that could make 0:08:03.600 --> 0:08:08.560 the docket. The House committee investigating the January sixth attack 0:08:08.600 --> 0:08:12.480 on the Capitol is considering the involvement of former President 0:08:12.520 --> 0:08:16.200 Donald Trump and wants documents from the Trump White House 0:08:16.240 --> 0:08:19.320 being held by the National Archives. Here are the committee 0:08:19.400 --> 0:08:23.360 chairman Benny Thompson and Vice chair Liz Cheney, the White 0:08:23.360 --> 0:08:27.080 House knew exactly what was happening here at the Capitol. 0:08:28.840 --> 0:08:32.480 We are getting a clearer picture of what happened, who 0:08:32.520 --> 0:08:35.160 was involved, and who paid for it, and where the 0:08:35.200 --> 0:08:38.840 money went. And now Trump is using an interview Thompson 0:08:38.880 --> 0:08:41.840 gave to the Washington Post to try to get the 0:08:41.880 --> 0:08:45.640 Supreme Court to block the National Archives from turning over 0:08:45.679 --> 0:08:49.360 his documents. I've been talking to Bloomberg Law Supreme Court 0:08:49.440 --> 0:08:53.600 reporter Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson. So, Kimberly, this is one of 0:08:53.600 --> 0:08:57.080 the cases the Court could put on its argument calendar for. 0:08:58.520 --> 0:09:00.760 So this was a recent it that came to the 0:09:00.880 --> 0:09:03.320 Court just in the past week. And it's really the 0:09:03.440 --> 0:09:06.359 first time that the Court has been asked to consider 0:09:06.840 --> 0:09:10.760 the legal ramifications of that January six attack on the Capitol, 0:09:11.160 --> 0:09:14.120 and it deals with the House Select committees attempt to 0:09:14.160 --> 0:09:17.720 get documents from the White House involving then President Trump's 0:09:17.760 --> 0:09:20.880 actions on that day. Now, it's important to note that 0:09:20.960 --> 0:09:24.280 there was a similar battle listeners may remember over documents 0:09:24.360 --> 0:09:27.800 that recently reached the Court, the battle over President trump 0:09:28.000 --> 0:09:31.760 tax returns, and they're the Streme quote said that, you know, 0:09:31.880 --> 0:09:34.800 Chris should really stay out of these disputes, that the 0:09:34.840 --> 0:09:38.000 political branches, Congress and the President have been able to 0:09:38.040 --> 0:09:40.440 work these disputes out in the past, and you know 0:09:40.520 --> 0:09:43.400 it should be hands off for the judiciary. Of course, 0:09:43.600 --> 0:09:47.920 the twist here is that this involves the Biden administration 0:09:48.160 --> 0:09:52.520 agreeing with Congress to turn over certain documents by waiving 0:09:52.679 --> 0:09:57.760 executive privilege for documents that came up under a different administration. 0:09:57.840 --> 0:10:00.760 And so we're gonna see if that make a difference 0:10:00.880 --> 0:10:04.120 for the Court and whether or not they say that 0:10:04.400 --> 0:10:07.480 Congress and the American people really have a great interest 0:10:07.640 --> 0:10:09.920 in these cases that they should go ahead and be 0:10:10.000 --> 0:10:13.600 turned over. But importantly, as you mentioned, the Justices have 0:10:13.800 --> 0:10:16.360 not agreed yet to take up this case. The House 0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:18.840 has asked the Justices to expedite this case so that 0:10:18.880 --> 0:10:21.000 they can hear at this term. And I think what's 0:10:21.000 --> 0:10:23.240 really behind that is that you know, the House is 0:10:23.240 --> 0:10:26.240 working on this informal deadline of the midterm elections, because 0:10:26.559 --> 0:10:29.320 of course, a GOP takeover of the House could undo 0:10:29.360 --> 0:10:33.680 the whole commission. And on Wednesday, Trump's lawyers filed a 0:10:33.760 --> 0:10:39.120 supplemental brief asking the Justices to look at Thompson's statements 0:10:39.120 --> 0:10:44.000 that the committee was considering making a criminal referral against Trump, 0:10:44.320 --> 0:10:48.120 arguing that it's outside the committee's purpose. Another case the 0:10:48.200 --> 0:10:51.440 court is being asked to take, and this is unusual 0:10:51.720 --> 0:10:56.640 in there was a landmark ruling about the sovereignty of 0:10:56.880 --> 0:11:02.000 Indian tribes and now Oklahoma is asking the justices to 0:11:02.160 --> 0:11:06.480 reverse that ruling they just handed down. That's exactly right, dude, 0:11:06.480 --> 0:11:08.640 And I think that's why this is one of those 0:11:08.679 --> 0:11:11.760 cases that court watchers are really keeping an eye off. 0:11:12.000 --> 0:11:14.679 As you mentioned, this case was a very recent case 0:11:14.800 --> 0:11:18.040 that came down five to four in favor of the tribe, 0:11:18.240 --> 0:11:22.000 and Oklahoma is now citing what it does is chaos 0:11:22.040 --> 0:11:24.560 following the ruling, and the state has asked the court 0:11:24.600 --> 0:11:28.200 outright just the over rule that brand new case. And 0:11:28.400 --> 0:11:31.040 it's a pretty significant ask given that, you know, the 0:11:31.080 --> 0:11:33.839 state really made the same arguments in the first case, 0:11:33.920 --> 0:11:35.960 but they didn't win the day. And I think the 0:11:36.080 --> 0:11:38.760 ruling flipping the decision the other way. It's really cannot 0:11:38.800 --> 0:11:41.240 be seen by many as an example of how the 0:11:41.320 --> 0:11:44.440 court is really just another political actor and they're not 0:11:44.520 --> 0:11:47.720 deciding these cases based on the law, but instead, you know, 0:11:47.760 --> 0:11:50.840 based on their personal preferences, and that really anything is 0:11:51.000 --> 0:11:53.800 up for grabs based on the makeup of the Court 0:11:53.840 --> 0:11:56.640 at that time. So I will be watching how the 0:11:56.720 --> 0:11:59.360 Justice is response to that. You know, we know if 0:11:59.360 --> 0:12:01.000 this for the first time they were hearing the case, 0:12:01.040 --> 0:12:03.240 it's likely that it would come down five to four 0:12:03.280 --> 0:12:05.559 the other way. But are they going to consider the 0:12:05.640 --> 0:12:09.720 potential questions about their legitimacy when deciding that the only 0:12:09.800 --> 0:12:13.520 thing that's really changed is Justice Sammy Coney Barrett being 0:12:13.559 --> 0:12:17.080 on the court, that's right. And so that's why I 0:12:17.120 --> 0:12:20.240 think this is, like many indicates on the court stocket, 0:12:20.679 --> 0:12:23.120 one of those cases that it's going to have implications 0:12:23.120 --> 0:12:26.680 beyond just the merits, but really implications for the way 0:12:26.679 --> 0:12:29.920 that the Court of operates and it's legitimacy going forward. 0:12:30.559 --> 0:12:34.880 There are a pair of challenges involving affirmative action programs 0:12:34.920 --> 0:12:38.840 at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina. The 0:12:38.920 --> 0:12:43.000 schools wanted trial. Will the Court want to add more 0:12:43.120 --> 0:12:47.960 controversy to its donket by taking these cases? If we're 0:12:48.000 --> 0:12:50.360 just looking at what the justices have said in the past, 0:12:50.520 --> 0:12:53.640 this does seem like a case that a majority of 0:12:53.679 --> 0:12:55.600 the Court would like to take on and would like 0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:59.240 to say something about affirmative action and maybe pull it 0:12:59.240 --> 0:13:01.840 back a little bit again. You know, as we've been 0:13:01.840 --> 0:13:04.240 talking about this whole time, this is just such a 0:13:04.280 --> 0:13:07.600 blockbuster case that the Justices might want to wait on 0:13:07.720 --> 0:13:09.760 that case until they can kind of get the lay 0:13:09.760 --> 0:13:13.839 of the landscape after these bombshell rulings come down on 0:13:13.880 --> 0:13:16.000 the flip side. You know, if they're already doing all 0:13:16.000 --> 0:13:18.240 these other things and it seems like they're going to 0:13:18.360 --> 0:13:21.720 have implications for the midterm elections, why not just go 0:13:21.760 --> 0:13:24.920 ahead and all and lets the American electorate, you know, 0:13:25.160 --> 0:13:27.680 go from there. But I don't really have a sense 0:13:27.679 --> 0:13:30.160 of which way that's playing on the justices. But for 0:13:30.280 --> 0:13:33.679 sure affirmative action is going to be a strategic grant 0:13:33.720 --> 0:13:37.080 for the justices. But which way strategically it goes, I 0:13:37.160 --> 0:13:40.080 don't now. One thing that is sure is you're going 0:13:40.120 --> 0:13:45.000 to be very busy this year. Thanks so much, Kimberly. 0:13:45.400 --> 0:13:51.480 That's Bloomberg Law. Supreme Court reporter Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson. Former 0:13:51.520 --> 0:13:55.080 President Donald Trump's too eldest children have been subpoenaed by 0:13:55.120 --> 0:13:58.760 the New York Attorney General, who is investigating whether Trump's 0:13:58.840 --> 0:14:02.720 real estate business manipulated the value of key assets for 0:14:02.840 --> 0:14:07.080 tax and insurance purposes. Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr. 0:14:07.360 --> 0:14:10.000 Filed a joint motion in New York State Court to 0:14:10.080 --> 0:14:14.360 block the subpoenas, accusing New York Attorney General Letitia James 0:14:14.360 --> 0:14:18.320 of making an unconstitutional attempt to get testimony from the 0:14:18.360 --> 0:14:22.400 family members while they still face a separate criminal investigation. 0:14:23.000 --> 0:14:26.800 Joining me as former federal prosecutor Michael Zelden, Michael tell 0:14:26.880 --> 0:14:31.080 us a little bit about the age's investigation. So, beginning 0:14:31.120 --> 0:14:36.080 in two thousand and nineteen, the Attorney General of the 0:14:36.120 --> 0:14:40.160 State of New York has had a civil inquiry focused 0:14:40.160 --> 0:14:46.520 on whether the Trump organization fraudulently inflated the value of 0:14:46.520 --> 0:14:50.800 its assets to secure bank loans while at the same 0:14:50.840 --> 0:14:55.040 time understating them when he had to pay taxes on 0:14:55.120 --> 0:14:59.680 the same property. So her office now has this investigation 0:14:59.720 --> 0:15:05.480 about whether this dual valuation is part of a civil 0:15:06.160 --> 0:15:09.920 fraudulent scheme to deny New York. It's a tax revenue. 0:15:10.680 --> 0:15:14.440 Why has it taken so long? It seems like something 0:15:14.520 --> 0:15:18.720 like that. You know, you need the papers involved, and 0:15:18.760 --> 0:15:22.640 then you could do the calculations. Well, if you have 0:15:22.760 --> 0:15:26.080 the papers and if you have the testimony of witnesses 0:15:26.120 --> 0:15:30.360 to explain to you what those papers represent, then this 0:15:30.440 --> 0:15:35.480 case could have moved quicker. But the Trump organization has 0:15:35.600 --> 0:15:40.600 not cooperated. They've fought every subpoena and every effort to 0:15:40.640 --> 0:15:46.080 obtain the information to make the evaluation. And therefore we 0:15:46.200 --> 0:15:49.400 now are in year two of this case. So do 0:15:49.440 --> 0:15:54.240 you know why she's subpoenaing Don Junior and Ivanka Trump. Well, 0:15:54.320 --> 0:15:58.840 Don Junior and Ivanka Trump have been executives in the 0:15:58.920 --> 0:16:03.520 Trump organised nation. When Donald Trump became president in the 0:16:03.560 --> 0:16:08.800 United States, he turned over the business to his two children, 0:16:09.640 --> 0:16:13.320 his three children, actually Eric as well, and each of 0:16:13.320 --> 0:16:18.520 them therefore has knowledge of the company's operations and how 0:16:18.560 --> 0:16:23.080 they valued things, and therefore their testimony is relevant to 0:16:23.880 --> 0:16:26.720 the Attorney general's determination of whether or not this was 0:16:27.520 --> 0:16:33.080 a fraud or this was appropriate business conduct. So now 0:16:33.160 --> 0:16:39.760 they already deposed Eric Trump in October. There are reason 0:16:39.800 --> 0:16:44.120 why he was deposed first or subpoenaed first. I don't know. 0:16:44.800 --> 0:16:49.640 Eric has had a large role in the operation of 0:16:49.720 --> 0:16:53.760 these companies, and uh, it may just simply be that 0:16:54.200 --> 0:16:56.560 he was the first one that they wanted to speak to. 0:16:56.800 --> 0:17:00.720 But I don't know why they chose the do they chose? 0:17:00.800 --> 0:17:03.360 I know, though, that they believe that all three of 0:17:03.400 --> 0:17:06.680 them have relevant testimony to answer the question of whether 0:17:06.720 --> 0:17:08.840 this was a fraud or whether this was not a fraud. 0:17:09.600 --> 0:17:13.240 The Trump's Don Junior Ivanka are asking a New York 0:17:13.320 --> 0:17:17.560 State judge to block the subpoenas. What are their grounds 0:17:17.600 --> 0:17:22.480 for doing that? What they say is that Miss James, 0:17:22.560 --> 0:17:27.840 who is conducting a civil investigation, is improperly trying to 0:17:28.640 --> 0:17:31.840 sidestep the grand jury process that would apply in a 0:17:31.840 --> 0:17:35.480 criminal case. Meaning in a criminal case, if you brought 0:17:35.520 --> 0:17:38.600 either Trump into the grand jury to take their testimony 0:17:38.680 --> 0:17:42.920 under New York law, they would be immunized from prosecution 0:17:43.119 --> 0:17:46.240 for their testimony, not so in a civil case. And 0:17:46.480 --> 0:17:49.439 so what they're arguing is that really what she's trying 0:17:49.480 --> 0:17:53.040 to do is making an in run around the limits 0:17:53.160 --> 0:17:56.520 that the criminal investigators have because she's working with the 0:17:56.560 --> 0:18:00.320 Manhattan District Attorney's Office, who has a parallel criminal test agation. 0:18:00.400 --> 0:18:03.119 So what they're saying is essentially she's trying to with 0:18:03.280 --> 0:18:07.480 bad motive bypass the restrictions of criminal investigations in order 0:18:07.520 --> 0:18:10.119 to get the information through the civil process, which he 0:18:10.200 --> 0:18:13.440 then will turn over to the Manhattan District Attorney's office 0:18:13.440 --> 0:18:15.920 and they will use it with the criminal prosecution. So 0:18:16.160 --> 0:18:18.879 do they have a point? If there's a criminal investigation 0:18:18.960 --> 0:18:23.679 going on, wouldn't they be foolish to testify in a 0:18:23.760 --> 0:18:28.240 civil deposition? Well, yes, possibly, depending on what they have 0:18:28.320 --> 0:18:32.080 to say. But in orders them to prevail in this case, 0:18:32.920 --> 0:18:35.800 what they'll have to do is prove that she is 0:18:35.840 --> 0:18:41.320 in fact abusing the civil process to gather evidence for 0:18:41.480 --> 0:18:43.560 a criminal case. They'll have to have a basis to 0:18:43.960 --> 0:18:46.359 prove the truth of that proposition, not just the bold 0:18:46.760 --> 0:18:49.639 statement of their belief that this is the case. Because 0:18:49.880 --> 0:18:52.760 the Supreme Court, in a case called US versus Cordell, 0:18:53.280 --> 0:18:58.480 has held that evidence obtained through civil discovery can be 0:18:58.600 --> 0:19:03.439 used in a parallel criminal prosecution. There is there's notion 0:19:03.480 --> 0:19:07.400 of parallel proceedings in the law where things which used 0:19:07.400 --> 0:19:11.479 to be only civil or administrative are now both civil 0:19:11.520 --> 0:19:14.720 and administrative and also criminal. And so the screaming Court 0:19:14.840 --> 0:19:18.960 was asked to figure out whether or not this is appropriate, 0:19:19.080 --> 0:19:21.720 and the Court held in Cordell and followed up with 0:19:21.960 --> 0:19:26.080 other cases where they basically said, parallel proceedings are okay. 0:19:26.240 --> 0:19:28.879 You just have to make sure that things are done properly, 0:19:29.200 --> 0:19:32.679 and you have to measure the full sort of civil 0:19:32.720 --> 0:19:37.520 discovery rights and civil discovery, the rule is full disclosure. 0:19:37.880 --> 0:19:40.399 Everyone gets to know what everyone else is doing, no surprises. 0:19:40.760 --> 0:19:43.440 In criminal it's much more restrictive. And so the course 0:19:43.480 --> 0:19:45.159 that as long as you're not, you know, making this 0:19:45.720 --> 0:19:50.639 improper end around, it's perfectly normal, uh for this to occur. 0:19:50.920 --> 0:19:53.639 So they have to prove that it's it's an end around, 0:19:54.160 --> 0:19:56.320 and then they have to figure out what they want 0:19:56.359 --> 0:19:58.359 to do if they have these subpoenas, and they can 0:19:58.400 --> 0:20:00.960 simply say, you know what, we're a ticket the Amendment 0:20:01.000 --> 0:20:04.439 because this may jeopardize us in the criminal case, and 0:20:04.480 --> 0:20:08.600 that's they're they're right, but they can't necessarily bring it 0:20:08.720 --> 0:20:12.800 to a complete close. Do you know if Eric Trump 0:20:12.960 --> 0:20:15.600 for his subpoena as well, do you know if he 0:20:15.760 --> 0:20:20.359 used the same grounds. I don't know that he specifically 0:20:20.480 --> 0:20:23.560 argued the end around theory that we've been discussing, but 0:20:23.640 --> 0:20:28.879 he too fought the subpoena. Usually they fight these things 0:20:28.920 --> 0:20:33.600 on them being overbroad and unnecessary. But in the end 0:20:33.680 --> 0:20:36.520 he lost his case. And I think that in the end, 0:20:37.320 --> 0:20:41.840 Ivanka and Donald Jr. Should lose their case. Not because 0:20:41.840 --> 0:20:43.959 I have a political mode for saying should, but they 0:20:43.960 --> 0:20:47.720 should on the basis of the law that governs parallel 0:20:47.960 --> 0:20:53.160 proceedings and due process. Courts have generally ruled in parallel 0:20:53.320 --> 0:20:58.360 suits that there isn't a due process violation and they 0:20:58.520 --> 0:21:03.840 don't apply double jeopard um, but they do sometimes allow 0:21:03.960 --> 0:21:08.199 for various remedies, such as a stay in the civil 0:21:08.320 --> 0:21:12.240 proceeding or protective order in the civil proceeding until the 0:21:12.280 --> 0:21:15.960 completion of the criminal case. So the Trumps may say 0:21:16.000 --> 0:21:21.040 to the court, look, court, please stay the civil action 0:21:21.359 --> 0:21:24.360 until the completion of the criminal action, and that might 0:21:24.480 --> 0:21:27.640 be in a winning argument for them, or the court 0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:31.879 might say, no, these things can run in parallel to 0:21:31.880 --> 0:21:35.239 one another. We'll just make sure that the evidence is 0:21:35.359 --> 0:21:38.439 used properly as it is supposed to be used in 0:21:38.800 --> 0:21:41.920 the civil versus a criminal case. And if they were 0:21:42.280 --> 0:21:47.680 witnesses before the grand jury, they would get transactional immunity. Correct. 0:21:48.160 --> 0:21:50.840 That's their big argument. They're saying, Look, if you want 0:21:50.880 --> 0:21:54.560 to hear from us about this, bring us into the 0:21:54.560 --> 0:21:59.560 grand jury, give us immunity and we'll talk. But you 0:21:59.600 --> 0:22:03.560 can't force us to talk in the civil case and 0:22:03.560 --> 0:22:06.480 then use that evidence against us in a criminal case. 0:22:07.280 --> 0:22:11.040 The Spreme court has said you can, um, but with 0:22:11.720 --> 0:22:16.159 you know, qualifications to make sure that there isn't a 0:22:16.320 --> 0:22:21.240 improper process that's in place, um, some subch refuge that 0:22:21.440 --> 0:22:24.119 the government is using to obtain evidence that they couldn't 0:22:24.160 --> 0:22:29.440 otherwise properly obtain. So they attached to their papers tweets 0:22:29.520 --> 0:22:33.000 that the New York A g Letitia James has made 0:22:33.080 --> 0:22:38.320 in public statements to support their claim that she's operating 0:22:38.359 --> 0:22:42.720 in a dual role. Here is that convincing at all? No, 0:22:42.920 --> 0:22:46.879 because she is permitted to engage in a dual participate 0:22:46.960 --> 0:22:50.359 in the dual process. What they're arguing, in some sense 0:22:50.720 --> 0:22:55.359 is her motives are impure, that this case is a 0:22:55.520 --> 0:22:59.520 political witch hunt, and therefore it should be brought to 0:22:59.640 --> 0:23:03.000 a those So I think that they're really impugning her, 0:23:03.440 --> 0:23:07.280 you know, sort of integrity, her intentions in this case 0:23:08.600 --> 0:23:10.720 more than they are saying that you can't do these 0:23:10.760 --> 0:23:13.479 things side by side. But they're saying she's They call 0:23:13.520 --> 0:23:16.960 her all sorts of names, corrupt, attorney general and the 0:23:17.040 --> 0:23:20.480 like because they say that this is all a witch hunt, 0:23:21.080 --> 0:23:24.840 phrases that we've heard them use in other contexts. And 0:23:25.280 --> 0:23:29.080 former President Trump had sued her last month along the 0:23:29.119 --> 0:23:34.000 same lines exactly. Trump is trying to bring it in 0:23:34.119 --> 0:23:38.159 to these this litigation by saying, essentially, this is a 0:23:38.160 --> 0:23:42.600 political witch hunt, and um, it should be called to 0:23:42.760 --> 0:23:45.240 an end, and courts, I think are going to be 0:23:45.960 --> 0:23:50.439 very reluctant to do that. To impune the the integrity 0:23:50.480 --> 0:23:53.560 of the government in such a way as to cause 0:23:53.640 --> 0:23:57.320 the case to be brought to a end is I 0:23:57.359 --> 0:24:01.520 think a very unlikely outcome. Yeah, So that's the question 0:24:01.560 --> 0:24:05.280 I have because you know, as you talk about former 0:24:05.320 --> 0:24:09.720 President Trump trying to delay other cases, for example, to 0:24:09.760 --> 0:24:14.119 delay the January six Committee from getting his records. The 0:24:14.200 --> 0:24:17.720 aim there is to delay it until the mid terms, 0:24:17.840 --> 0:24:20.760 when likely the House will be turned over the Republicans 0:24:20.800 --> 0:24:25.240 and the investigation will be terminated. But here there's there's 0:24:25.280 --> 0:24:28.560 nothing like that. Any Attorney General New York is going 0:24:28.600 --> 0:24:32.920 to continue this investigation. So how do the delay tactics 0:24:32.960 --> 0:24:36.240 really help him in the end. They don't, and they shouldn't. 0:24:36.800 --> 0:24:41.879 But that's still his method of operation. When anyone accuses 0:24:41.960 --> 0:24:45.560 him in a in a legal case, what he does 0:24:46.040 --> 0:24:53.480