1 00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg Radio. 2 00:00:08,880 --> 00:00:11,600 Speaker 1: Your parents signs you up for a program to fix you. 3 00:00:11,960 --> 00:00:14,440 Speaker 2: Welcome to the refuge program. 4 00:00:14,120 --> 00:00:14,319 Speaker 3: Film. 5 00:00:14,480 --> 00:00:17,040 Speaker 2: You cannot be born or home sexual This is a lie. 6 00:00:17,160 --> 00:00:19,960 Speaker 2: It's a choice. Come take it till you make it 7 00:00:20,040 --> 00:00:20,720 Speaker 2: a come to man. 8 00:00:20,800 --> 00:00:25,160 Speaker 3: You are not save yourself, Jared. God will not love 9 00:00:25,280 --> 00:00:26,640 Speaker 3: you the way that you are. 10 00:00:27,520 --> 00:00:28,480 Speaker 1: Is this what you want? 11 00:00:28,720 --> 00:00:30,360 Speaker 2: Who's going to strike this demon down? 12 00:00:30,560 --> 00:00:33,760 Speaker 1: The movie boy Erased is about the gay son of 13 00:00:34,040 --> 00:00:38,600 Speaker 1: ultra religious parents who sent to conversion therapy to change 14 00:00:38,640 --> 00:00:42,880 Speaker 1: his sexual identity, which conflicts with his parents Christian beliefs. 15 00:00:43,280 --> 00:00:47,040 Speaker 1: It's based on the memoir by Garret Conley that exposes 16 00:00:47,080 --> 00:00:51,479 Speaker 1: the abuses of conversion therapy. Twenty eight states fully or 17 00:00:51,600 --> 00:00:56,080 Speaker 1: partially banned conversion therapy, which the major medical and mental 18 00:00:56,080 --> 00:01:00,440 Speaker 1: health organizations in the US have condemned for decades as 19 00:01:00,560 --> 00:01:06,440 Speaker 1: unscientific and potentially dangerous for teenagers, increasing the risk of depression, 20 00:01:06,680 --> 00:01:10,960 Speaker 1: substance abuse, and suicide. And now the Supreme Court has 21 00:01:11,000 --> 00:01:15,280 Speaker 1: decided to take up a First Amendment challenge to Colorado's 22 00:01:15,360 --> 00:01:19,679 Speaker 1: ban on conversion therapy. A licensed counselor who views her 23 00:01:19,720 --> 00:01:22,920 Speaker 1: work as an outgrowth of her Christian faith, says the 24 00:01:23,000 --> 00:01:27,000 Speaker 1: band violates her First Amendment free speech rights. My guest 25 00:01:27,080 --> 00:01:30,800 Speaker 1: is First Amendment law expert Caroline Malick Corbin, a professor 26 00:01:30,840 --> 00:01:34,080 Speaker 1: at the University of Miami Law School. Caroline tell us 27 00:01:34,080 --> 00:01:34,919 Speaker 1: about this case. 28 00:01:35,840 --> 00:01:41,199 Speaker 3: So, the Supreme Court has granted thirt meaning it will 29 00:01:41,319 --> 00:01:46,240 Speaker 3: hear a case involving a law that bans what is 30 00:01:46,360 --> 00:01:51,840 Speaker 3: known as conversion therapy. Its more official designation is sexual 31 00:01:51,880 --> 00:01:57,920 Speaker 3: orientation change efforts, and this is basically an attempt to 32 00:01:58,160 --> 00:02:04,600 Speaker 3: make gay kids straight. That's their historical origins. More specifically, 33 00:02:05,360 --> 00:02:10,400 Speaker 3: the law says that licensed counselors, so it's limited to 34 00:02:10,520 --> 00:02:17,840 Speaker 3: licensed counselors, cannot practice conversion therapy on minors. So if 35 00:02:17,880 --> 00:02:23,120 Speaker 3: you want to undergo this so called counseling as an adult, 36 00:02:23,639 --> 00:02:30,760 Speaker 3: you are allowed to, but practitioners of mental health cannot 37 00:02:30,919 --> 00:02:35,600 Speaker 3: practice conversion therapy on minors. I also note that there 38 00:02:35,639 --> 00:02:39,520 Speaker 3: is an exemption for therapists engaged in the practice of 39 00:02:39,560 --> 00:02:45,280 Speaker 3: religious ministry. So the reason why the law has banned 40 00:02:45,680 --> 00:02:52,640 Speaker 3: conversion therapy is that it is unscientific, harmful, and futile. 41 00:02:53,240 --> 00:03:01,560 Speaker 3: So all the reputable medical associations have come out against 42 00:03:01,560 --> 00:03:07,840 Speaker 3: it for two reasons. One, you can't change someone's sexual orientation, 43 00:03:08,280 --> 00:03:13,240 Speaker 3: and second, studies show that it actually hurts kids. So, 44 00:03:13,440 --> 00:03:20,679 Speaker 3: for example, one study found that even holding constant other valuables, 45 00:03:21,400 --> 00:03:26,239 Speaker 3: the children who have been subjected to this therapy or 46 00:03:26,520 --> 00:03:30,600 Speaker 3: twice as likely to think about suicide and at least 47 00:03:30,639 --> 00:03:35,520 Speaker 3: twice as likely to try suicide. So, states who have 48 00:03:35,600 --> 00:03:39,400 Speaker 3: a long history of regulating the medical profession and ensuring 49 00:03:39,560 --> 00:03:45,760 Speaker 3: that practices conform with standards of care decided this is 50 00:03:45,800 --> 00:03:48,400 Speaker 3: not a practice we should allow in our states, and 51 00:03:48,600 --> 00:03:53,440 Speaker 3: Colorado is one of about twenty states that therefore have 52 00:03:54,400 --> 00:04:01,840 Speaker 3: forbidden this practice four licensed medical professions as applied kids minors, 53 00:04:02,280 --> 00:04:07,720 Speaker 3: children under eighteen. So that's the law that's being challenged. Now. 54 00:04:08,120 --> 00:04:14,720 Speaker 1: This licensed professional counselor, Kaylie Chiles is challenging it, saying 55 00:04:14,720 --> 00:04:18,000 Speaker 1: it violates her rights to free speech. I mean, she 56 00:04:18,080 --> 00:04:20,760 Speaker 1: did a free exercise of religion. Lame I think below, 57 00:04:20,960 --> 00:04:23,720 Speaker 1: But this at the Supreme Court is just about violating 58 00:04:23,760 --> 00:04:24,839 Speaker 1: her free speech rights. 59 00:04:25,279 --> 00:04:29,120 Speaker 3: Correct. She brought two claims below. But the only question 60 00:04:29,240 --> 00:04:33,479 Speaker 3: that is going before the Supreme Court is whether a 61 00:04:33,600 --> 00:04:40,640 Speaker 3: law banning a particular counseling practice violates the free speech. 62 00:04:40,320 --> 00:04:44,320 Speaker 1: Clause, how does the counselor say it violates her free 63 00:04:44,320 --> 00:04:45,160 Speaker 1: speech rights. 64 00:04:46,160 --> 00:04:52,400 Speaker 3: The legal question turns on whether you think of counseling 65 00:04:53,080 --> 00:04:57,440 Speaker 3: as a conduct, the practice of medicine, or you think 66 00:04:57,480 --> 00:05:02,160 Speaker 3: of counseling as pure speech. And this matters because the 67 00:05:02,200 --> 00:05:07,359 Speaker 3: government has a lot more leeway to regulate the practice 68 00:05:07,360 --> 00:05:11,880 Speaker 3: of medicine even if it incidentally affects speech, then it 69 00:05:11,960 --> 00:05:17,920 Speaker 3: does regulating speech. Generally, the presumption is that if the 70 00:05:18,000 --> 00:05:24,560 Speaker 3: government is regulating speech because of its content or viewpoint, 71 00:05:24,760 --> 00:05:27,200 Speaker 3: if it's trying to tell people what they are allowed 72 00:05:27,320 --> 00:05:31,920 Speaker 3: or not allowed to say, that kind of content regulation 73 00:05:32,200 --> 00:05:37,840 Speaker 3: is presumptively unconstitutional. Generally, we don't want the government deciding 74 00:05:38,360 --> 00:05:41,240 Speaker 3: what we're allowed to say or what we're allowed to hear. 75 00:05:41,839 --> 00:05:46,960 Speaker 3: So if this is considered a regulation of speech, then 76 00:05:47,160 --> 00:05:50,520 Speaker 3: it is problematic under the free speech clause. It's not 77 00:05:50,640 --> 00:05:57,520 Speaker 3: automatically unconstitutional, it's presumptively unconstitutional. On the other hand, if 78 00:05:57,560 --> 00:06:02,279 Speaker 3: it is viewed as in regulation of medical practice the 79 00:06:02,360 --> 00:06:06,360 Speaker 3: regulation of conduct, then the state is going to have 80 00:06:06,400 --> 00:06:10,680 Speaker 3: a much easier time of showing this is just ensuring 81 00:06:11,000 --> 00:06:15,039 Speaker 3: that people who are licensed by the state are meeting 82 00:06:15,240 --> 00:06:18,159 Speaker 3: standards of care. In the medical practice. And this is 83 00:06:18,160 --> 00:06:22,760 Speaker 3: something the states have always done right regulate what doctors 84 00:06:22,800 --> 00:06:26,400 Speaker 3: can and can't do, and including folding into that what 85 00:06:26,480 --> 00:06:29,400 Speaker 3: they can and can't say as part of their practice 86 00:06:29,400 --> 00:06:30,160 Speaker 3: of medicine. 87 00:06:30,360 --> 00:06:34,799 Speaker 1: The tense Circuit Court of Appeals, in a divided opinion 88 00:06:35,360 --> 00:06:38,680 Speaker 1: sided with Colorado, explain what their reasoning was. 89 00:06:39,560 --> 00:06:44,120 Speaker 3: Okay, here's the thing. This is not the first time 90 00:06:44,440 --> 00:06:49,039 Speaker 3: court has ever encountered the question of how should we 91 00:06:49,080 --> 00:06:53,920 Speaker 3: think about regulation of medicine even if it involves speech. 92 00:06:55,360 --> 00:06:59,680 Speaker 3: And the backdrop to this case is the Supreme Court's 93 00:06:59,800 --> 00:07:04,679 Speaker 3: ruling about abortion counseling. So this case is about mental 94 00:07:04,720 --> 00:07:10,960 Speaker 3: health counseling. There is precedence on abortion counseling. By abortion counseling, 95 00:07:11,640 --> 00:07:16,880 Speaker 3: I mean the laws in many states that require doctors 96 00:07:17,080 --> 00:07:21,080 Speaker 3: before they provide an abortion to a woman requires the 97 00:07:21,200 --> 00:07:26,960 Speaker 3: doctors to read, often a state dictated script about the 98 00:07:27,080 --> 00:07:32,080 Speaker 3: dangers and perils of abortion and about the alternatives to abortion. 99 00:07:32,680 --> 00:07:38,640 Speaker 3: So just about every state requires that abortion providers say 100 00:07:39,200 --> 00:07:44,000 Speaker 3: this script or provide this information to women before they 101 00:07:44,000 --> 00:07:48,840 Speaker 3: are allowed to have an abortion, and doctors challenge those 102 00:07:48,960 --> 00:07:53,040 Speaker 3: regulations as violating their free speech. They said, you are 103 00:07:53,600 --> 00:07:57,720 Speaker 3: compelling us to say things that aren't necessarily accurate and 104 00:07:57,800 --> 00:08:00,560 Speaker 3: certainly not what we would normally say on under our 105 00:08:00,840 --> 00:08:05,480 Speaker 3: normal practice of medicine. And the Supreme Court upheld the 106 00:08:05,520 --> 00:08:10,600 Speaker 3: abortion counseling on the grounds that it was not a 107 00:08:10,720 --> 00:08:15,880 Speaker 3: direct regulation of speech, but a regulation of the medical 108 00:08:15,920 --> 00:08:23,920 Speaker 3: profession that happened to affect speech. So basically, the precedent 109 00:08:24,080 --> 00:08:28,720 Speaker 3: that the Tenth Circuit relied on was precedent the Supreme 110 00:08:28,800 --> 00:08:34,320 Speaker 3: Court had created when ruling about abortion counseling. And so 111 00:08:34,440 --> 00:08:38,600 Speaker 3: the Tenth Circuit to just said, listen, if the state 112 00:08:38,720 --> 00:08:42,440 Speaker 3: telling the doctors what they must say to women before 113 00:08:42,440 --> 00:08:46,120 Speaker 3: they have an abortion, if abortion counseling is merely the 114 00:08:46,160 --> 00:08:52,840 Speaker 3: regulation of the medical profession, then surely the regulation of 115 00:08:52,960 --> 00:08:57,520 Speaker 3: a kind of therapy in mental health counseling is also 116 00:08:58,200 --> 00:09:04,520 Speaker 3: the regulation of medicine that incidentally affects speech. That was 117 00:09:04,559 --> 00:09:08,720 Speaker 3: the argument that the Tenth Circuit and probably the District 118 00:09:08,720 --> 00:09:14,040 Speaker 3: Court below made to support their claims that this is 119 00:09:14,120 --> 00:09:18,920 Speaker 3: not a direct attack on speech, it's a regulation of medicine. 120 00:09:19,320 --> 00:09:22,400 Speaker 1: In twenty twenty three, the Court refused to take a 121 00:09:22,600 --> 00:09:27,080 Speaker 1: challenge to a similar ban in Washington State that was 122 00:09:27,160 --> 00:09:32,840 Speaker 1: over the dessense of three justices Conservatives Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, 123 00:09:32,880 --> 00:09:35,960 Speaker 1: and Brett Cavanaugh. So that means that they've gotten at 124 00:09:36,040 --> 00:09:39,480 Speaker 1: least one other justice on their side, because they need 125 00:09:39,520 --> 00:09:41,480 Speaker 1: four votes to take a case. 126 00:09:42,000 --> 00:09:46,800 Speaker 3: Exactly right. So generally one of the major reasons that 127 00:09:46,880 --> 00:09:50,480 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court will decide to hear a case is 128 00:09:50,480 --> 00:09:53,000 Speaker 3: if there's a circuit split. And there is a circuit 129 00:09:53,040 --> 00:09:56,800 Speaker 3: split on this issue. So the Eleventh Circuit has held 130 00:09:56,880 --> 00:10:00,920 Speaker 3: that these bans violate free speech claw us, and the 131 00:10:01,000 --> 00:10:05,679 Speaker 3: ninth and tenth have held no, they are perfectly constitutional, 132 00:10:06,559 --> 00:10:09,880 Speaker 3: And there was a split even a couple of years ago. 133 00:10:10,080 --> 00:10:14,600 Speaker 3: But as you explain, the Supreme Court doesn't hear every 134 00:10:14,640 --> 00:10:17,840 Speaker 3: appeal that goes before it. They only hear an appeal 135 00:10:17,880 --> 00:10:21,480 Speaker 3: that at least four justices want to hear, and in 136 00:10:21,559 --> 00:10:24,880 Speaker 3: twenty twenty three there were not four, but this year 137 00:10:25,120 --> 00:10:29,960 Speaker 3: there are four, so that's enough to hear the case. 138 00:10:30,679 --> 00:10:34,200 Speaker 3: We don't know who the fourth is because they don't 139 00:10:34,200 --> 00:10:36,560 Speaker 3: announce who they are. I mean, we can guess that 140 00:10:36,640 --> 00:10:39,680 Speaker 3: the dissenters are three of them, but we don't know 141 00:10:39,720 --> 00:10:40,480 Speaker 3: who the fourth is. 142 00:10:40,960 --> 00:10:43,200 Speaker 1: Now I can't give one hundred percent guarantee on this, 143 00:10:43,320 --> 00:10:46,560 Speaker 1: but it's most likely that the fourth vote is one 144 00:10:46,640 --> 00:10:49,959 Speaker 1: of the other Conservative justices. Does the fact that it's 145 00:10:50,000 --> 00:10:53,280 Speaker 1: the Conservatives that want to take this case up tell 146 00:10:53,320 --> 00:10:56,360 Speaker 1: you that they're looking to reverse the Tenth Circuit, in 147 00:10:56,400 --> 00:10:59,600 Speaker 1: other words, strike down the ban on conversion therapy. 148 00:11:00,280 --> 00:11:05,520 Speaker 3: Personally, I am always nervous when the Supreme Court grants 149 00:11:05,559 --> 00:11:10,679 Speaker 3: cert in a case involving a Conservative Christian who wants 150 00:11:10,720 --> 00:11:15,319 Speaker 3: to inflict some kind of harm on a vulnerable community 151 00:11:15,480 --> 00:11:19,080 Speaker 3: like the LGBT community, because I think the Supreme Court 152 00:11:19,280 --> 00:11:25,079 Speaker 3: is exceptionally receptive to the claims of conservative Christians, and 153 00:11:25,240 --> 00:11:30,960 Speaker 3: I think they are especially willing or they really don't 154 00:11:31,000 --> 00:11:36,920 Speaker 3: show much care about the consequences of the religious practices 155 00:11:36,960 --> 00:11:40,199 Speaker 3: of conservative Christians and how they harm those in the 156 00:11:40,320 --> 00:11:44,640 Speaker 3: LGBT community. So I'm worried. On the other hand, at 157 00:11:44,679 --> 00:11:48,400 Speaker 3: this point, we know there are four votes, but we 158 00:11:48,520 --> 00:11:52,400 Speaker 3: don't yet know if there are five votes. Though that 159 00:11:53,080 --> 00:11:57,480 Speaker 3: is not all of that reassuring, but at least it's 160 00:11:57,559 --> 00:12:00,280 Speaker 3: not a completely foregone conclusion. 161 00:12:00,080 --> 00:12:03,000 Speaker 1: Coming up the culture war classes at the Supreme Court. 162 00:12:03,200 --> 00:12:07,560 Speaker 1: This is bloomberg. The Supreme Court has agreed to consider 163 00:12:07,840 --> 00:12:11,800 Speaker 1: whether scores of state and local governments are violating the 164 00:12:11,840 --> 00:12:17,160 Speaker 1: Constitution by banning conversion therapy. The Justices we'll hear a 165 00:12:17,280 --> 00:12:21,520 Speaker 1: challenge to Colorado's ban from a licensed to Christian counselor 166 00:12:21,800 --> 00:12:25,560 Speaker 1: who says the twenty nineteen law violates her free speech rights. 167 00:12:25,840 --> 00:12:28,760 Speaker 1: I've been talking to Professor Caroline mal Corbin at the 168 00:12:28,880 --> 00:12:33,400 Speaker 1: University of Miami Law School. Caroline, the licensed counselor who's 169 00:12:33,520 --> 00:12:38,400 Speaker 1: challenging the ban is being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, 170 00:12:38,440 --> 00:12:42,320 Speaker 1: which is a conservative Christian law firm and advocacy group 171 00:12:42,800 --> 00:12:45,400 Speaker 1: that has one case is at the Supreme Court before 172 00:12:45,440 --> 00:12:48,960 Speaker 1: in Colorado involving the baker who didn't want to bake 173 00:12:49,080 --> 00:12:53,280 Speaker 1: cakes for gay weddings and the web designer who didn't 174 00:12:53,320 --> 00:12:57,040 Speaker 1: want to design websites for gay weddings, even though no 175 00:12:57,040 --> 00:12:59,960 Speaker 1: one had asked her to design a website for gay weddings. 176 00:13:00,440 --> 00:13:03,000 Speaker 3: Yes, the group that's bringing this is a group that 177 00:13:03,200 --> 00:13:08,960 Speaker 3: regularly brings challenges to anti discrimination laws on behalf of 178 00:13:09,080 --> 00:13:13,839 Speaker 3: conservative Christians, and this is yet another one, and they've 179 00:13:13,880 --> 00:13:17,240 Speaker 3: had incredible success before the Supreme Court. I think they 180 00:13:17,240 --> 00:13:24,840 Speaker 3: were also the group that challenged California's attempts to require 181 00:13:25,559 --> 00:13:30,240 Speaker 3: crisis pregnancy centers, which often pretend to be comprehensive medical 182 00:13:30,280 --> 00:13:34,080 Speaker 3: centers when they're not. They're just anti abortion places that 183 00:13:34,200 --> 00:13:38,360 Speaker 3: try in lure women into their doors and then they 184 00:13:38,480 --> 00:13:42,480 Speaker 3: lie to women about the availability of abortion to try 185 00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:46,040 Speaker 3: and prevent them from having an abortion. Anyhow, California tried 186 00:13:46,080 --> 00:13:50,920 Speaker 3: to deal with this practice by requiring crisis pregnancy centers 187 00:13:51,360 --> 00:13:54,480 Speaker 3: to let people know that they were not, in fact 188 00:13:54,640 --> 00:13:58,960 Speaker 3: a licensed medical provider, even though they often pretended to 189 00:13:59,000 --> 00:14:02,840 Speaker 3: be one. And the Supreme Court, howd that violated the 190 00:14:02,960 --> 00:14:06,839 Speaker 3: crisis pregnancy center's pre speech rights as well. And again 191 00:14:06,880 --> 00:14:09,520 Speaker 3: I think that Alliance Defending Freedom Miner brought that case 192 00:14:09,559 --> 00:14:15,040 Speaker 3: as well. So there is definitely a pattern of cases 193 00:14:15,520 --> 00:14:21,040 Speaker 3: brought claiming free speech violations of regulations that are designed 194 00:14:21,080 --> 00:14:27,520 Speaker 3: to protect from harm and to protect from discrimination, and 195 00:14:27,640 --> 00:14:31,480 Speaker 3: these are getting struck down in the name of pre speech. 196 00:14:32,160 --> 00:14:35,440 Speaker 1: The Supreme Court seems to be, you know, with zest 197 00:14:35,560 --> 00:14:42,960 Speaker 1: picking up these cases involving transgender youth or LGBTQ friendly books. 198 00:14:43,000 --> 00:14:47,239 Speaker 1: I mean, we already heard the oral arguments over Tennessee's 199 00:14:47,320 --> 00:14:52,080 Speaker 1: ban on gender affirming treatments for minors, and those arguments 200 00:14:52,080 --> 00:14:56,280 Speaker 1: suggested that the conservative justices are likely to uphold that ban. 201 00:14:56,800 --> 00:15:01,000 Speaker 1: And in April we're going to hear apparent challenging LGBTQ 202 00:15:01,400 --> 00:15:04,880 Speaker 1: friendly books in the classroom. I mean, why is a 203 00:15:04,960 --> 00:15:09,240 Speaker 1: court that's near the lowest levels of public approval in 204 00:15:09,280 --> 00:15:13,440 Speaker 1: its history diving into all these culture war issues. 205 00:15:14,440 --> 00:15:17,640 Speaker 3: I cannot speak for the justices, but it may be 206 00:15:18,040 --> 00:15:21,760 Speaker 3: that they have the power to remake the law to 207 00:15:21,920 --> 00:15:26,160 Speaker 3: further their own views, and they're grabbing that power and 208 00:15:26,280 --> 00:15:26,680 Speaker 3: using it. 209 00:15:27,920 --> 00:15:32,680 Speaker 1: And how did a case about LGBTQ friendly books in 210 00:15:32,720 --> 00:15:36,400 Speaker 1: the Maryland school system where a federal appeals court said 211 00:15:36,440 --> 00:15:39,160 Speaker 1: it wasn't even clear yet how the books would be 212 00:15:39,280 --> 00:15:42,720 Speaker 1: used in the classroom, how does that get Supreme Court review? 213 00:15:43,320 --> 00:15:46,360 Speaker 1: By the way, the books include one about a puppy 214 00:15:46,440 --> 00:15:50,880 Speaker 1: that gets lost at an LGBTQ pride parade and a 215 00:15:50,920 --> 00:15:55,920 Speaker 1: young child whose gender identity doesn't match his birth assigned sex. 216 00:15:57,240 --> 00:16:03,440 Speaker 3: So in that case, they're is a parent who objects 217 00:16:03,520 --> 00:16:10,600 Speaker 3: to their child reading books with lgbt characters, and they 218 00:16:10,920 --> 00:16:14,800 Speaker 3: make a claim based on parental rights that they have 219 00:16:14,960 --> 00:16:20,120 Speaker 3: the right to opt their children out of reading books 220 00:16:20,160 --> 00:16:23,320 Speaker 3: on the set curriculum in the name of religion. So 221 00:16:23,400 --> 00:16:27,560 Speaker 3: they argument is our religion does not approve of this. 222 00:16:27,960 --> 00:16:31,200 Speaker 3: It violates our religion if our apparently, if our child 223 00:16:31,360 --> 00:16:35,200 Speaker 3: knows gay people exist, and therefore our child in public 224 00:16:35,240 --> 00:16:37,640 Speaker 3: schools doesn't have to read this book, and we have 225 00:16:37,680 --> 00:16:41,200 Speaker 3: a religious right to take our child who exempt our 226 00:16:41,320 --> 00:16:44,800 Speaker 3: child from the curriculum. So that is another case before 227 00:16:44,840 --> 00:16:48,320 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court. Again, when you have a conflict between 228 00:16:48,760 --> 00:16:55,280 Speaker 3: conservative religion and LGBT rights, generally, with this particular Supreme Court, 229 00:16:55,600 --> 00:17:00,000 Speaker 3: conservative religion wins. It almost doesn't matter what the doctrine is. 230 00:17:01,160 --> 00:17:04,680 Speaker 1: I'm still stunned by their ruling in twenty twenty two 231 00:17:04,760 --> 00:17:10,200 Speaker 1: where they allowed a Christian football coach to pray at 232 00:17:10,240 --> 00:17:14,439 Speaker 1: the fifty yard line right after games, surrounded by his 233 00:17:14,600 --> 00:17:18,000 Speaker 1: high school players. And it seems like behind all these 234 00:17:18,280 --> 00:17:23,600 Speaker 1: cases involving LGBTQ rights, it's really about religion. 235 00:17:24,359 --> 00:17:27,440 Speaker 3: I do think a lot of this is driven by religion, 236 00:17:27,600 --> 00:17:32,320 Speaker 3: but often it's easier to make a speech claim rather 237 00:17:32,400 --> 00:17:35,040 Speaker 3: than a religion claim, although not all of them or 238 00:17:35,160 --> 00:17:39,440 Speaker 3: speech claims. One we're talking about now is the challenge 239 00:17:39,520 --> 00:17:43,760 Speaker 3: to the conversion therapy ban is before the court a 240 00:17:43,800 --> 00:17:47,200 Speaker 3: free speech claim, which again it's sort of speech is 241 00:17:47,280 --> 00:17:52,000 Speaker 3: being used to attack regulations that people used to never 242 00:17:52,240 --> 00:17:56,520 Speaker 3: think twice about, and so there is definitely a strand 243 00:17:56,840 --> 00:18:01,760 Speaker 3: of people exploiting speech. At the same time, speech is 244 00:18:01,800 --> 00:18:05,840 Speaker 3: crucial in a democracy, but we've always understood there were 245 00:18:05,880 --> 00:18:06,440 Speaker 3: limits to. 246 00:18:06,400 --> 00:18:11,040 Speaker 1: It, Caroline. Also coming up in April is the effort 247 00:18:11,160 --> 00:18:15,000 Speaker 1: to create the country's first religious public charter school. And 248 00:18:15,040 --> 00:18:17,280 Speaker 1: they're heading in that direction too, aren't they. 249 00:18:17,640 --> 00:18:22,159 Speaker 3: Yeah, So in that case, the Supreme Court has decided 250 00:18:22,200 --> 00:18:26,720 Speaker 3: a series of cases where it has held that if 251 00:18:27,000 --> 00:18:31,720 Speaker 3: a state decides to provide some state funding for private 252 00:18:32,240 --> 00:18:37,000 Speaker 3: non religious schools, it also has to provide funding to 253 00:18:37,160 --> 00:18:42,280 Speaker 3: private religious schools. That to refuse to fund religious schools 254 00:18:42,320 --> 00:18:48,040 Speaker 3: when it's funding secular schools is discrimination against religion. Of course, 255 00:18:48,160 --> 00:18:51,439 Speaker 3: the problem with these rulings is to completely ignores that 256 00:18:51,480 --> 00:18:56,320 Speaker 3: they're actually two religion clauses in the First Amendment, one 257 00:18:56,320 --> 00:19:01,119 Speaker 3: of which is the Establishment Clause, which was long understood 258 00:19:01,119 --> 00:19:05,200 Speaker 3: to prohibit direct government funding of religion. So that's the backdrop, 259 00:19:05,240 --> 00:19:08,760 Speaker 3: and the case you're talking about is now there is 260 00:19:08,800 --> 00:19:11,960 Speaker 3: an argument that not only does it discriminate against religion 261 00:19:12,320 --> 00:19:17,280 Speaker 3: not to fund private religious schools, but it might discriminate 262 00:19:17,520 --> 00:19:21,600 Speaker 3: against religion not to fund charter schools which are not 263 00:19:21,840 --> 00:19:25,520 Speaker 3: entirely private, and so we may yet see a ruling 264 00:19:25,600 --> 00:19:30,800 Speaker 3: where the Supreme Court says the free exercise clause requires 265 00:19:30,920 --> 00:19:36,480 Speaker 3: the government to fund a public Christian school, which is 266 00:19:36,920 --> 00:19:41,199 Speaker 3: again really turning the religion clauses on their head and 267 00:19:41,480 --> 00:19:45,159 Speaker 3: completely ignoring the establishment clause. 268 00:19:46,040 --> 00:19:49,399 Speaker 1: What has happened to the principle of separation of church 269 00:19:49,520 --> 00:19:52,200 Speaker 1: and state. It seems to have vanished. 270 00:19:52,280 --> 00:19:56,600 Speaker 3: Conservative Christians, particularly the Christian nationalists. They love that the 271 00:19:56,760 --> 00:20:01,000 Speaker 3: United States is when it comes to in these days, 272 00:20:01,119 --> 00:20:06,280 Speaker 3: I think what matters more than your particular denomination is 273 00:20:06,320 --> 00:20:10,080 Speaker 3: whether you're conservative or not conservative. Some people might even 274 00:20:10,240 --> 00:20:13,880 Speaker 3: argue that the real distinction are those who support Christian 275 00:20:13,960 --> 00:20:17,760 Speaker 3: nationalism and those who don't. Probably people have heard of 276 00:20:17,800 --> 00:20:21,679 Speaker 3: this term Christian nationalism. That's the idea. It's sort of 277 00:20:21,680 --> 00:20:25,320 Speaker 3: the opposite of separation of church and state. It believes 278 00:20:25,400 --> 00:20:28,480 Speaker 3: that the church and state should be one and that 279 00:20:28,560 --> 00:20:33,600 Speaker 3: one should be espousing conservative Christian views and values. And 280 00:20:33,680 --> 00:20:36,439 Speaker 3: I think we're seeing a lot of Supreme Court decisions 281 00:20:36,440 --> 00:20:40,720 Speaker 3: that really facilitate the growth of Christian nationalism in the 282 00:20:40,800 --> 00:20:41,520 Speaker 3: United States. 283 00:20:42,119 --> 00:20:46,520 Speaker 1: The arguments over whether states with public charter schools are 284 00:20:46,720 --> 00:20:51,639 Speaker 1: constitutionally required to approve and fund religious institutions. Will be 285 00:20:51,680 --> 00:20:54,879 Speaker 1: heard on the final day of oral Arguments this term 286 00:20:54,960 --> 00:20:58,040 Speaker 1: the last day of April, and it may be illuminating 287 00:20:58,119 --> 00:21:02,760 Speaker 1: about the conservative justice is take on the separation between 288 00:21:03,080 --> 00:21:06,240 Speaker 1: church and state, or maybe not. We shall see. Thanks 289 00:21:06,280 --> 00:21:10,520 Speaker 1: so much, Caroline. That's Professor Caroline Malacorbin of the University 290 00:21:10,560 --> 00:21:13,640 Speaker 1: of Miami Law School. Coming up next on the Bloomberg 291 00:21:13,720 --> 00:21:17,320 Speaker 1: Law Show. The Trump administration clips the wings of the 292 00:21:17,440 --> 00:21:22,480 Speaker 1: Migratory Bird Treaty Act, one of the nation's oldest environmental laws. 293 00:21:23,000 --> 00:21:27,440 Speaker 1: I'm June Grosso when you're listening to Bloomberg. The Interior 294 00:21:27,480 --> 00:21:33,920 Speaker 1: Department has suspended all Biden administration Interior Solicitor's memorandum opinions 295 00:21:34,200 --> 00:21:37,800 Speaker 1: related to the environment to allow for the Trump administration 296 00:21:38,160 --> 00:21:42,400 Speaker 1: to review them because they may conflict with Trump's political agenda. 297 00:21:43,240 --> 00:21:48,440 Speaker 1: The suspensions include interiors interpretation of the Migratory Bird Treaty 298 00:21:48,480 --> 00:21:53,520 Speaker 1: Act of nineteen eighteen, one of the country's oldest environmental laws, 299 00:21:53,920 --> 00:21:58,280 Speaker 1: limits on offshore oil and gas leasing, the revocation of 300 00:21:58,359 --> 00:22:03,399 Speaker 1: mineral leases for proposed coppermine, and Native American rights questions, 301 00:22:03,520 --> 00:22:07,000 Speaker 1: among other issues. Joining me is Michael Gerard, a professor 302 00:22:07,000 --> 00:22:10,400 Speaker 1: at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director 303 00:22:10,440 --> 00:22:14,000 Speaker 1: of the Saban Center for Climate Change Law. Can you 304 00:22:14,119 --> 00:22:17,800 Speaker 1: explain the significance of these memo opinions? 305 00:22:18,480 --> 00:22:21,040 Speaker 2: Well, they're not legally binding, but they are the directions 306 00:22:21,119 --> 00:22:25,080 Speaker 2: to the lawyers and personnel of the Interior Department how 307 00:22:25,160 --> 00:22:29,760 Speaker 2: they should interpret various laws and regulations, So they're very significant. 308 00:22:30,520 --> 00:22:34,760 Speaker 1: So the Interior Department's acting chief lawyer has suspended every 309 00:22:34,960 --> 00:22:41,400 Speaker 1: legal opinion issued by his Biden administration predecessor, some twenty 310 00:22:41,800 --> 00:22:45,880 Speaker 1: legal opinions. He said that this is a routine process. 311 00:22:46,200 --> 00:22:49,399 Speaker 1: Are blanket suspensions like this a routine process. 312 00:22:49,920 --> 00:22:53,200 Speaker 2: No, that won't usually revoke them or suspend them all 313 00:22:53,240 --> 00:22:56,880 Speaker 2: at once. They usually take a more careful, deliberative process 314 00:22:56,960 --> 00:22:59,600 Speaker 2: to do that. This was sort of a blanket suspension 315 00:22:59,600 --> 00:23:01,879 Speaker 2: of all of memosk And are they doing. 316 00:23:01,640 --> 00:23:07,919 Speaker 1: It because the Biden administration policy on environment is so 317 00:23:08,040 --> 00:23:10,679 Speaker 1: different from the Trump administration's policy. 318 00:23:11,080 --> 00:23:12,680 Speaker 2: Yes, I think that's a lot of it. That Trump 319 00:23:12,720 --> 00:23:16,040 Speaker 2: administration has made it clear, as the President has said, 320 00:23:16,119 --> 00:23:19,439 Speaker 2: drill baby, drill is their objective and they're trying to 321 00:23:19,520 --> 00:23:21,520 Speaker 2: clear away anything that gets in the way of that. 322 00:23:21,680 --> 00:23:21,840 Speaker 3: Yeah. 323 00:23:21,840 --> 00:23:23,800 Speaker 1: I want to talk about some of the suspended opinions. 324 00:23:24,000 --> 00:23:29,080 Speaker 1: One is the Biden administration's interpretation of the Migratory Bird 325 00:23:29,119 --> 00:23:34,600 Speaker 1: Treaty Act, which is one of the nation's oldest environmental laws. 326 00:23:35,400 --> 00:23:38,160 Speaker 2: This was a law that was passed by Congress around 327 00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:44,480 Speaker 2: nineteen oh eight and it prohibits the killing of migratory 328 00:23:44,480 --> 00:23:48,280 Speaker 2: birds basically. So traditionally, I mean, for a long time, 329 00:23:48,600 --> 00:23:51,960 Speaker 2: it was a strict liability law that if you killed 330 00:23:51,960 --> 00:23:55,399 Speaker 2: a migratory bird, whether you intended to or not, you 331 00:23:55,480 --> 00:23:59,879 Speaker 2: were liable, potentially criminally liable. But the first Trump administration 332 00:24:00,400 --> 00:24:04,160 Speaker 2: changed that to intentionally killing. That was struck down in court, 333 00:24:04,440 --> 00:24:07,520 Speaker 2: that was reversed by Biden, and now the Trump administration 334 00:24:07,680 --> 00:24:10,520 Speaker 2: is to move it back to say again that you're 335 00:24:10,560 --> 00:24:13,240 Speaker 2: only liable if you intentionally kill a migratory bird. 336 00:24:14,040 --> 00:24:17,080 Speaker 1: How much of an impact could that have on the 337 00:24:17,119 --> 00:24:19,040 Speaker 1: migratory bird population. 338 00:24:19,800 --> 00:24:23,680 Speaker 2: Well, the oil industry hates the rule because major oil 339 00:24:23,720 --> 00:24:25,560 Speaker 2: spills kill a lot of birds and lead to a 340 00:24:25,600 --> 00:24:30,040 Speaker 2: lot of liability. So after the Exxon Valdis disaster in 341 00:24:30,080 --> 00:24:34,119 Speaker 2: Alaska and after the Deeporter Horizon spill in the Gulf 342 00:24:34,160 --> 00:24:39,200 Speaker 2: of Mexico, those companies Exxon and BP were assessed fines 343 00:24:39,240 --> 00:24:42,760 Speaker 2: of millions of dollars, and that industry has been trying 344 00:24:42,800 --> 00:24:45,560 Speaker 2: to cut this out for a long time, and once 345 00:24:45,600 --> 00:24:48,040 Speaker 2: again they're succeeding, at least for a while under the 346 00:24:48,040 --> 00:24:48,960 Speaker 2: Trump administration. 347 00:24:49,400 --> 00:24:52,800 Speaker 1: What are some of the other legal opinions that were 348 00:24:52,840 --> 00:24:55,639 Speaker 1: suspended that you think are important. 349 00:24:55,920 --> 00:24:59,359 Speaker 2: They're trying to revoke some of the limits on offshore 350 00:24:59,440 --> 00:25:04,439 Speaker 2: oil gas trilling. They're modifying water rights at a Colorado 351 00:25:04,960 --> 00:25:09,479 Speaker 2: National Park. They're changing various Native American rights questions. So 352 00:25:09,520 --> 00:25:11,320 Speaker 2: it's a whole host of things. Some of them are 353 00:25:11,359 --> 00:25:14,480 Speaker 2: fairly technical and innocuous, but others are really designed to 354 00:25:14,480 --> 00:25:17,120 Speaker 2: make it easier to engage in fossil fuel extraction. 355 00:25:17,920 --> 00:25:23,359 Speaker 1: With the development of alternative energy sources wind, solar, et cetera. 356 00:25:23,920 --> 00:25:27,800 Speaker 1: How much can the oil and gas industry increase its output? 357 00:25:28,280 --> 00:25:29,720 Speaker 2: Well, there are a couple of factors. One is what 358 00:25:29,840 --> 00:25:33,000 Speaker 2: is the price of oil and gas. Most of the 359 00:25:33,040 --> 00:25:35,280 Speaker 2: oil and gas extraction we have in the United States 360 00:25:35,280 --> 00:25:38,679 Speaker 2: today is through fracking, and tracking is only economical if 361 00:25:38,760 --> 00:25:42,399 Speaker 2: the price is high enough. The President has pledged to 362 00:25:42,560 --> 00:25:45,800 Speaker 2: slash energy prices. It's not clear how he could do that, 363 00:25:45,920 --> 00:25:50,440 Speaker 2: but if he did, it would render most fracking uneconomical. 364 00:25:50,640 --> 00:25:54,359 Speaker 2: But what Trump is doing is to try to discourage 365 00:25:54,359 --> 00:25:58,840 Speaker 2: renewable energy, especially wind. There's a real irony here because 366 00:25:58,880 --> 00:26:02,199 Speaker 2: one of the major reas since Trump says that he 367 00:26:02,359 --> 00:26:07,240 Speaker 2: wants to discourage wind turbance is because they can kill birds. 368 00:26:07,520 --> 00:26:09,399 Speaker 2: But at the same time they're taking action to make 369 00:26:09,440 --> 00:26:13,440 Speaker 2: it easier to kill birds through this modification to interpretation 370 00:26:13,560 --> 00:26:15,520 Speaker 2: of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 371 00:26:16,119 --> 00:26:20,280 Speaker 1: Are the birds killed mostly when there are environmental disasters 372 00:26:20,400 --> 00:26:22,440 Speaker 1: or is it a daily thing. 373 00:26:23,280 --> 00:26:26,520 Speaker 2: The worst incidents are when you have environmental disasters, but 374 00:26:26,600 --> 00:26:30,800 Speaker 2: sometimes you have just an uncovered oil pond or oil 375 00:26:30,880 --> 00:26:33,000 Speaker 2: tank and they land in it thinking its water and 376 00:26:33,040 --> 00:26:36,639 Speaker 2: it's not and they die in the oil. So it 377 00:26:36,720 --> 00:26:39,240 Speaker 2: happens on an ongoing basis, but just a whole lot 378 00:26:39,280 --> 00:26:41,440 Speaker 2: worse when there's a huge oil spill. 379 00:26:41,920 --> 00:26:45,000 Speaker 1: What's the goal of the Trump EPA. 380 00:26:46,080 --> 00:26:48,720 Speaker 2: Well, they're talking about slashing the staff of the EPA, 381 00:26:49,200 --> 00:26:52,480 Speaker 2: which would make it impossible to implement many of the 382 00:26:52,520 --> 00:26:55,640 Speaker 2: programs that Congress has told it to implement, and make 383 00:26:55,680 --> 00:26:58,960 Speaker 2: it impossible to enforce many of the laws that Congress 384 00:26:58,680 --> 00:27:03,359 Speaker 2: has enacted. Their general view is that regulations are all 385 00:27:03,560 --> 00:27:06,800 Speaker 2: cost and no benefit. That regulations get in the way 386 00:27:06,920 --> 00:27:09,960 Speaker 2: of economic growth, and they want to do away with 387 00:27:10,440 --> 00:27:13,280 Speaker 2: as many of them as possible. That's their view of EPA, 388 00:27:13,400 --> 00:27:15,520 Speaker 2: and it seems to be their view in lots of 389 00:27:15,520 --> 00:27:17,639 Speaker 2: different agencies Along those lines. 390 00:27:17,680 --> 00:27:22,240 Speaker 1: The Trump administration has ended twenty billion dollars in funding 391 00:27:22,320 --> 00:27:28,159 Speaker 1: for greenhouse gas reduction projects. Advocacy groups are suing because 392 00:27:28,760 --> 00:27:31,080 Speaker 1: they said that those funds have to be used in 393 00:27:31,119 --> 00:27:33,440 Speaker 1: the way that Congress set out. 394 00:27:33,680 --> 00:27:36,480 Speaker 2: Well, just about everything that the Trump administration is doing 395 00:27:36,520 --> 00:27:40,080 Speaker 2: these days is being challenged in court, and so far 396 00:27:40,760 --> 00:27:43,399 Speaker 2: many of the federal judges have ruled what they're doing 397 00:27:43,640 --> 00:27:47,760 Speaker 2: is illegal. I'm sure that the litigation campaign is going 398 00:27:47,800 --> 00:27:51,600 Speaker 2: to continue during Trump one point zero. The Trump administration 399 00:27:52,440 --> 00:27:55,840 Speaker 2: one only about thirty one percent of the laws, is 400 00:27:55,960 --> 00:27:59,760 Speaker 2: challenging its major deregulatory actions. We'll see what happens this time. 401 00:28:00,400 --> 00:28:03,720 Speaker 1: By the time this suit winds its way through the courts, 402 00:28:03,960 --> 00:28:04,720 Speaker 1: it could be years. 403 00:28:04,800 --> 00:28:07,760 Speaker 2: Right, it could be. And the question then is, while 404 00:28:07,840 --> 00:28:10,720 Speaker 2: the case is winding its way through the courts, is 405 00:28:10,800 --> 00:28:14,600 Speaker 2: the court directing the money be released or will it 406 00:28:14,720 --> 00:28:17,520 Speaker 2: continue to be stuck during the litigation? And I think 407 00:28:17,520 --> 00:28:20,320 Speaker 2: some cases will go one direction, one cases will go 408 00:28:20,560 --> 00:28:22,720 Speaker 2: the other direction. But one thing that is certain is 409 00:28:22,720 --> 00:28:27,119 Speaker 2: it's leading to enormous uncertainty. It's impossible to plan, it's 410 00:28:27,560 --> 00:28:31,000 Speaker 2: impossible to hire people, very difficult to keep people on staff. 411 00:28:31,280 --> 00:28:34,680 Speaker 2: It's leading all kinds of disruptions, and not just the 412 00:28:34,800 --> 00:28:38,280 Speaker 2: twenty billion dollars, but lots of programs all throughout the economy. 413 00:28:38,920 --> 00:28:42,080 Speaker 1: Some courts have said that they have to unfreeze funds, etc. 414 00:28:42,480 --> 00:28:45,040 Speaker 1: But I don't know if they're really unfreezing the funds 415 00:28:45,080 --> 00:28:46,000 Speaker 1: that they're supposed to. 416 00:28:46,560 --> 00:28:48,960 Speaker 2: Well, that's one of the big fights. Even when a 417 00:28:49,000 --> 00:28:52,840 Speaker 2: court says unfreeze it now, the government is sometimes taking 418 00:28:52,840 --> 00:28:55,200 Speaker 2: its time, so a lot of action before the court's 419 00:28:55,320 --> 00:28:56,160 Speaker 2: happening out all of this. 420 00:28:56,640 --> 00:29:01,960 Speaker 1: As far as environmental justice initiatives, are those all dead 421 00:29:02,200 --> 00:29:03,640 Speaker 1: under the Trump administration. 422 00:29:04,160 --> 00:29:08,560 Speaker 2: Yeah. They are systematically closing down anything that has anything 423 00:29:08,600 --> 00:29:12,640 Speaker 2: to do with environmental justice or with diversity, equity and inclusion. 424 00:29:12,840 --> 00:29:17,120 Speaker 2: They are striking many of those words from documents. They've 425 00:29:17,120 --> 00:29:19,360 Speaker 2: made it very clear that they don't want to do 426 00:29:19,400 --> 00:29:22,880 Speaker 2: anything on either of those subjects. Some of the states 427 00:29:23,080 --> 00:29:27,240 Speaker 2: still have important environmental justice programs and diversity equity and 428 00:29:27,240 --> 00:29:30,800 Speaker 2: inclusion programs. Some of the states also have environmental programs 429 00:29:30,800 --> 00:29:32,640 Speaker 2: that are very important that are continuing, But at a 430 00:29:32,680 --> 00:29:35,680 Speaker 2: federal level, they're really trying to shut down a broad 431 00:29:35,760 --> 00:29:39,400 Speaker 2: swath of what has been done under Biden administration, the 432 00:29:39,400 --> 00:29:41,560 Speaker 2: Obama administration, even then earlier. 433 00:29:42,080 --> 00:29:44,880 Speaker 1: Are you surprised at how fast they seem to be 434 00:29:45,480 --> 00:29:46,400 Speaker 1: doing these things? 435 00:29:46,760 --> 00:29:51,040 Speaker 2: Yes, they're proceeding even more aggressively than people have thought. 436 00:29:51,240 --> 00:29:54,960 Speaker 2: It's clear that the Project twenty twenty five report, which 437 00:29:55,040 --> 00:29:59,000 Speaker 2: during the campaign Trump disowned, is really the guidepost, and 438 00:29:59,080 --> 00:30:01,960 Speaker 2: if you look at what they're do, it's almost entirely 439 00:30:02,000 --> 00:30:05,680 Speaker 2: consistent with Project twenty twenty five. So when I'm teaching 440 00:30:05,680 --> 00:30:08,760 Speaker 2: my environmental law classes, I say, Okay, we're going to 441 00:30:08,760 --> 00:30:10,760 Speaker 2: talk about such and such statute. The first thing to 442 00:30:10,800 --> 00:30:12,960 Speaker 2: do is look at Project twenty twenty five to see 443 00:30:12,960 --> 00:30:16,080 Speaker 2: what it says about that. Really, yeah, you know, it's 444 00:30:16,080 --> 00:30:19,640 Speaker 2: a massive document. The head of the Office of Management 445 00:30:19,640 --> 00:30:23,080 Speaker 2: and Budget, which really has its finger on every agency, 446 00:30:23,240 --> 00:30:25,000 Speaker 2: the new head of it, was one of the co 447 00:30:25,160 --> 00:30:28,120 Speaker 2: authors of Project twenty twenty five. It was designed to 448 00:30:28,200 --> 00:30:31,320 Speaker 2: be the guidebook, and that's how it's turning out. 449 00:30:31,720 --> 00:30:34,920 Speaker 1: Going back to the first Trump administration, it seemed like 450 00:30:35,000 --> 00:30:39,240 Speaker 1: Biden was able to sort of undo what Trump had 451 00:30:39,280 --> 00:30:39,960 Speaker 1: done in his. 452 00:30:39,960 --> 00:30:43,200 Speaker 2: Four years, many of the things. Yes now, of course, 453 00:30:43,240 --> 00:30:46,760 Speaker 2: he was not able to undo the massive amount of 454 00:30:46,760 --> 00:30:49,400 Speaker 2: greenhouse gases that went into the atmosphere as a result 455 00:30:49,480 --> 00:30:51,600 Speaker 2: of Trump's actions, and that will stay there for a 456 00:30:51,680 --> 00:30:55,640 Speaker 2: century or more. But Biden did undo most of the 457 00:30:55,720 --> 00:30:59,320 Speaker 2: deregulatory actions. So on the day that Trump was first 458 00:30:59,320 --> 00:31:04,000 Speaker 2: inaugurated in twenty seventeen, the Saving Center which I launched 459 00:31:04,040 --> 00:31:09,800 Speaker 2: the Climate Deregulation Tracker. On the day that Biden was inaugurated, 460 00:31:09,920 --> 00:31:14,040 Speaker 2: we rebranded the Climate Reregulation Tracker, And on the day 461 00:31:14,040 --> 00:31:17,840 Speaker 2: of the second Trump inauguration, we launched the Climate Backtracker. 462 00:31:18,040 --> 00:31:20,520 Speaker 2: And it's a lot of work to keep it updated. 463 00:31:21,280 --> 00:31:23,680 Speaker 1: I'll bet it's hard just keeping up with the cases 464 00:31:24,520 --> 00:31:28,720 Speaker 1: across the country over his executive orders. Let's say that 465 00:31:28,840 --> 00:31:32,600 Speaker 1: after four more years of Trump, a president is elected 466 00:31:32,600 --> 00:31:35,960 Speaker 1: who cares about the environment. Can what Trump is doing 467 00:31:36,000 --> 00:31:38,760 Speaker 1: now be undone easily? 468 00:31:38,840 --> 00:31:43,760 Speaker 2: Not easily. There's a tremendous brain drain from the federal government, 469 00:31:44,040 --> 00:31:47,840 Speaker 2: and bright young people graduating from college to graduate school 470 00:31:47,920 --> 00:31:50,320 Speaker 2: are reluctant to go to work. For the federal government now, 471 00:31:50,520 --> 00:31:54,040 Speaker 2: so it will be possible to undo the changes to 472 00:31:54,440 --> 00:31:58,959 Speaker 2: the regulations. Staffing up and resuming the momentum is going 473 00:31:59,040 --> 00:32:01,960 Speaker 2: to be very tough, So a lot of damage is 474 00:32:02,000 --> 00:32:05,960 Speaker 2: being done. It's not damage forever, they'll go back to it, 475 00:32:06,000 --> 00:32:09,320 Speaker 2: but meanwhile we'll be even further away from meeting our 476 00:32:09,480 --> 00:32:11,160 Speaker 2: climate goals and many other things. 477 00:32:11,520 --> 00:32:16,120 Speaker 1: I wonder if one advantage to the cutback in federal 478 00:32:16,200 --> 00:32:21,920 Speaker 1: workers and attorneys leaving the departments is that when the 479 00:32:21,960 --> 00:32:25,440 Speaker 1: government goes to court now, the lawyers that are representing 480 00:32:25,480 --> 00:32:28,080 Speaker 1: the government are not as experienced. 481 00:32:28,920 --> 00:32:31,200 Speaker 2: Yes, there is something to that. And another factor is 482 00:32:31,200 --> 00:32:35,400 Speaker 2: that if you want to repeal a regulation under the 483 00:32:36,200 --> 00:32:39,800 Speaker 2: administrative procedure, actually need to write a new regulation, and 484 00:32:39,880 --> 00:32:45,800 Speaker 2: writing regulations requires staff. An administration can't just reverse itself 485 00:32:45,880 --> 00:32:48,360 Speaker 2: on lots of things by saying we reverse it. They 486 00:32:48,400 --> 00:32:51,800 Speaker 2: have to come up with a detailed explanation of why 487 00:32:51,840 --> 00:32:56,080 Speaker 2: they're changing their policy, and that requires staff. And so 488 00:32:56,160 --> 00:32:58,760 Speaker 2: if you've lost most of your staff, and if the 489 00:32:58,800 --> 00:33:01,880 Speaker 2: people who are remaining are demoralized, it's going to be 490 00:33:01,920 --> 00:33:05,360 Speaker 2: difficult to come up with the explanations for the reversal 491 00:33:05,400 --> 00:33:09,120 Speaker 2: and policy that will convince federal judges that this was 492 00:33:09,200 --> 00:33:10,800 Speaker 2: a lawful thing to do. 493 00:33:11,280 --> 00:33:14,640 Speaker 1: Before you go, tell us what's happening with electric vehicles. 494 00:33:15,360 --> 00:33:18,720 Speaker 2: So, electric vehicles are the principal threat to the demand 495 00:33:18,800 --> 00:33:21,760 Speaker 2: for oil, and so the oil industry hates them, and 496 00:33:21,840 --> 00:33:25,520 Speaker 2: therefore the Trump administration is trying to discourage them as 497 00:33:25,600 --> 00:33:27,960 Speaker 2: much as possible. So they are cutting back on the 498 00:33:28,000 --> 00:33:31,840 Speaker 2: programs to build electric vehicle charging stations. They're trying to 499 00:33:32,560 --> 00:33:37,360 Speaker 2: amend the Inflation Reduction Act to take away the subsidies. 500 00:33:37,560 --> 00:33:41,600 Speaker 2: They're doing whatever they can to discourage electric vehicles and 501 00:33:41,800 --> 00:33:45,160 Speaker 2: keep internal combustion engines running as long as possible. 502 00:33:45,640 --> 00:33:49,920 Speaker 1: Musk is one of Trump's top advisors. Wouldn't that hurt Tesla? 503 00:33:50,480 --> 00:33:53,280 Speaker 2: Well, Tesla managed to build up a dominant market share 504 00:33:53,320 --> 00:33:56,960 Speaker 2: without these federal subsidies. What the subsidies are doing are 505 00:33:56,960 --> 00:34:00,680 Speaker 2: also allowing its the competitors like Ford Generals to build 506 00:34:00,720 --> 00:34:03,840 Speaker 2: up their market share. So there's a sense that Tesla 507 00:34:03,960 --> 00:34:08,600 Speaker 2: actually will do fine without the subsidies, and their competitors 508 00:34:08,600 --> 00:34:09,719 Speaker 2: will do worse. 509 00:34:10,280 --> 00:34:12,440 Speaker 1: As I said, a lot to keep up with. Thanks 510 00:34:12,440 --> 00:34:15,200 Speaker 1: so much for being on the show. That's Professor Michael 511 00:34:15,239 --> 00:34:18,880 Speaker 1: Gerard of Columbia Law School. He's the founder and faculty 512 00:34:18,880 --> 00:34:22,200 Speaker 1: director of the Sabans Center for Climate Change Law. And 513 00:34:22,239 --> 00:34:24,400 Speaker 1: that's it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. 514 00:34:24,719 --> 00:34:27,080 Speaker 1: Remember you can always get the latest legal news on 515 00:34:27,120 --> 00:34:31,400 Speaker 1: our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, 516 00:34:31,600 --> 00:34:36,640 Speaker 1: and at www dot bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, Slash Law, 517 00:34:37,040 --> 00:34:39,640 Speaker 1: And remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every 518 00:34:39,680 --> 00:34:43,600 Speaker 1: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso 519 00:34:43,719 --> 00:34:45,320 Speaker 1: and you're listening to Bloomberg