1
00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:08,640 --> 00:00:13,360
Speaker 2: As the Trump administration asserts its control over Venezuelan oil

3
00:00:13,720 --> 00:00:18,560
Speaker 2: following the stunning capture of ousted President Nicholas Maduro, President

4
00:00:18,640 --> 00:00:23,640
Speaker 2: Trump has set his sights elsewhere on Greenland, a strategic

5
00:00:23,840 --> 00:00:27,560
Speaker 2: Arctic island that is a self governing territory of Denmark.

6
00:00:27,760 --> 00:00:32,760
Speaker 3: We need Greenland from a national security to situation. It's

7
00:00:32,760 --> 00:00:38,360
Speaker 3: so strategic. Right now, Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese.

8
00:00:37,960 --> 00:00:39,120
Speaker 4: Ships all over the place.

9
00:00:39,600 --> 00:00:43,960
Speaker 3: We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and

10
00:00:44,120 --> 00:00:45,800
Speaker 3: Denmark is not going to be able.

11
00:00:45,560 --> 00:00:45,919
Speaker 5: To do it.

12
00:00:46,280 --> 00:00:51,000
Speaker 2: Trump has been talking about acquiring Greenland since its first term,

13
00:00:51,320 --> 00:00:54,560
Speaker 2: but this time it may be more than just rhetoric.

14
00:00:54,960 --> 00:00:57,880
Speaker 2: The White House has said that all options are on

15
00:00:57,920 --> 00:01:02,480
Speaker 2: the table, including using the military, Although Secretary of State

16
00:01:02,640 --> 00:01:05,959
Speaker 2: Marco Rubio told a group of lawmakers that it was

17
00:01:05,959 --> 00:01:11,880
Speaker 2: the administration's intention to eventually buy Greenland. European leaders have

18
00:01:12,000 --> 00:01:16,920
Speaker 2: expressed concerns about a possible takeover. Back In April, Danish

19
00:01:17,000 --> 00:01:21,040
Speaker 2: Prime Minister Meta Frederickson said that Greenland is not for

20
00:01:21,120 --> 00:01:25,760
Speaker 2: sale and the US needs to respect its borders and sovereignty.

21
00:01:26,560 --> 00:01:32,520
Speaker 4: You cannot annex another country, not even with an argument

22
00:01:32,760 --> 00:01:35,160
Speaker 4: about international security.

23
00:01:35,520 --> 00:01:39,840
Speaker 2: Joining me is an expert in international law. Monica Hakimi

24
00:01:40,040 --> 00:01:43,200
Speaker 2: a professor at Columbia Law School. She was formerly an

25
00:01:43,240 --> 00:01:45,920
Speaker 2: attorney in the Office of the Legal Advisor in the

26
00:01:46,040 --> 00:01:50,560
Speaker 2: US State Department. Monica, the capture of Maduro has sort

27
00:01:50,600 --> 00:01:55,120
Speaker 2: of set the stage for the latest talk by Trump

28
00:01:55,520 --> 00:01:59,560
Speaker 2: about acquiring Greenland. So let's start with Maduro and tell

29
00:01:59,600 --> 00:02:02,600
Speaker 2: us whether has capture violated international law.

30
00:02:03,280 --> 00:02:05,520
Speaker 5: As a matter of international law, I think there's really

31
00:02:05,600 --> 00:02:09,000
Speaker 5: no question that the capture of Maduro was unlawful, and

32
00:02:09,040 --> 00:02:13,800
Speaker 5: that's because it involves the enforcement powers of the United

33
00:02:13,800 --> 00:02:16,320
Speaker 5: States in the territory of another state, Venezuela.

34
00:02:16,400 --> 00:02:21,160
Speaker 6: In this case. International law does provide limited circumstances in

35
00:02:21,200 --> 00:02:23,840
Speaker 6: which such exercises of power are lawful, but none of

36
00:02:23,840 --> 00:02:25,680
Speaker 6: them applies in this case.

37
00:02:26,400 --> 00:02:31,359
Speaker 2: The Trump administration is indicating that it's going to run Venezuela.

38
00:02:31,960 --> 00:02:33,600
Speaker 2: I don't know if that is even going to happen,

39
00:02:33,639 --> 00:02:37,440
Speaker 2: because it seems like the vice president is in control

40
00:02:37,520 --> 00:02:40,400
Speaker 2: right now. I mean, is this about a regime change.

41
00:02:40,639 --> 00:02:44,280
Speaker 5: It's really hard to know what the administration intends to

42
00:02:44,320 --> 00:02:47,400
Speaker 5: do or in what way. I'm not sure regime changes

43
00:02:47,440 --> 00:02:50,160
Speaker 5: exactly the right way to describe what's happening, because, as

44
00:02:50,200 --> 00:02:53,280
Speaker 5: you say, a member of the regime is still now

45
00:02:53,560 --> 00:02:56,800
Speaker 5: running the country, and the regime itself is largely in place,

46
00:02:56,880 --> 00:03:00,840
Speaker 5: even if the singular leader has been removed. But in

47
00:03:00,880 --> 00:03:05,360
Speaker 5: any event, it would be again unlawful for the United

48
00:03:05,400 --> 00:03:10,840
Speaker 5: States to assert its authority or coercive power in Venezuela

49
00:03:10,919 --> 00:03:13,320
Speaker 5: to tell that state how to run its own country.

50
00:03:14,160 --> 00:03:19,000
Speaker 2: Talking about the broader questions here, it seems that the

51
00:03:19,040 --> 00:03:23,800
Speaker 2: Trump administration and President Trump don't want to stop at Venezuela.

52
00:03:24,320 --> 00:03:29,720
Speaker 2: On Saturday he was talking about problems with Colombia and Cuba,

53
00:03:29,760 --> 00:03:34,840
Speaker 2: and now the administration is being completely open about wanting

54
00:03:34,880 --> 00:03:37,800
Speaker 2: to acquire Greenland. How concerning is.

55
00:03:37,760 --> 00:03:43,600
Speaker 5: That this claim on Greenland in particular is especially disturbing

56
00:03:43,720 --> 00:03:46,720
Speaker 5: because it is part of an increasing trend in which

57
00:03:47,080 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 5: states that have the raw power to take the territory

58
00:03:50,640 --> 00:03:53,160
Speaker 5: of another state are claiming that they will do so.

59
00:03:53,240 --> 00:03:55,160
Speaker 7: Of course, this is exactly.

60
00:03:55,040 --> 00:03:59,760
Speaker 5: What President Putin of Russia did in Ukraine. It's also

61
00:04:00,440 --> 00:04:04,280
Speaker 5: embedded in the conflict between Iran and its proxy groups

62
00:04:04,320 --> 00:04:07,840
Speaker 5: on the one hand, and Israel and the Palestinians on

63
00:04:07,880 --> 00:04:13,120
Speaker 5: the other hand, and so it's a deeply, deeply corrosive move.

64
00:04:13,920 --> 00:04:18,560
Speaker 5: It is likely to trigger further actions to this effect.

65
00:04:18,680 --> 00:04:21,239
Speaker 5: It's not just the United States in Russia and states

66
00:04:21,240 --> 00:04:23,000
Speaker 5: in the Middle East or entities in the Middle East

67
00:04:23,040 --> 00:04:25,360
Speaker 5: that want to eliminate other states off the.

68
00:04:25,560 --> 00:04:27,880
Speaker 6: Map or acquired territory from other states.

69
00:04:28,160 --> 00:04:31,680
Speaker 5: So we've seen China increasingly being assertive with its neighbors

70
00:04:32,000 --> 00:04:34,240
Speaker 5: in the East and South China Sea, and in the Himalayas,

71
00:04:34,680 --> 00:04:38,760
Speaker 5: we're seeing Morocco increasingly a certain control over Western Sahara,

72
00:04:38,760 --> 00:04:40,440
Speaker 5: which is a portion of the territory that does not

73
00:04:40,480 --> 00:04:44,919
Speaker 5: technically belong to it. And these claims for territorial aggression

74
00:04:45,160 --> 00:04:50,640
Speaker 5: and annexation really undercut the fundamental principle of the international

75
00:04:50,720 --> 00:04:53,840
Speaker 5: legal and political order since World War Two, which is

76
00:04:54,160 --> 00:04:57,360
Speaker 5: that each state is entitled to establish its authority in

77
00:04:57,400 --> 00:05:00,920
Speaker 5: its own borders as defined by international law, territorial and

78
00:05:00,960 --> 00:05:04,200
Speaker 5: maritime borders, and that it ought to be given priority

79
00:05:04,680 --> 00:05:05,520
Speaker 5: in those spaces.

80
00:05:06,040 --> 00:05:09,080
Speaker 2: The White House says it's considering a range of options

81
00:05:09,160 --> 00:05:13,039
Speaker 2: for acquiring Greenland. What are the legal ways that it

82
00:05:13,080 --> 00:05:13,640
Speaker 2: could do that.

83
00:05:15,000 --> 00:05:18,320
Speaker 5: The possibility exists for one state to enter into an

84
00:05:18,360 --> 00:05:23,760
Speaker 5: agreement with another not subject to coercion, where there's a

85
00:05:23,800 --> 00:05:27,760
Speaker 5: consentual arrangement for the transfer of territory. There's no indication

86
00:05:27,880 --> 00:05:30,560
Speaker 5: at all that any of these entities, which are being

87
00:05:30,640 --> 00:05:34,279
Speaker 5: subjected to coercion by more powerful states, is interested in

88
00:05:34,320 --> 00:05:37,040
Speaker 5: selling part of its territorial and maritime space.

89
00:05:37,839 --> 00:05:42,520
Speaker 2: President Trump has said, we need greenland for our national security.

90
00:05:42,800 --> 00:05:45,800
Speaker 2: But if you look at what's happening in Venezuela, it's

91
00:05:45,839 --> 00:05:49,240
Speaker 2: not about drugs coming into the United States from that country.

92
00:05:49,600 --> 00:05:53,320
Speaker 2: It's all about the oil in Venezuela, and in Ukraine,

93
00:05:53,440 --> 00:05:56,480
Speaker 2: the US signed a deal after it got access to

94
00:05:56,560 --> 00:06:01,760
Speaker 2: that country's mineral resources, and Lynn has what's been called

95
00:06:02,000 --> 00:06:07,760
Speaker 2: a treasure trove of untapped raw materials. So I wonder

96
00:06:07,800 --> 00:06:12,839
Speaker 2: if the goal is really national security or it's about

97
00:06:12,880 --> 00:06:16,920
Speaker 2: getting access to their oil and gas reserves and their

98
00:06:16,960 --> 00:06:18,919
Speaker 2: mineral deposits and the like.

99
00:06:19,440 --> 00:06:20,200
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think.

100
00:06:20,040 --> 00:06:23,719
Speaker 5: There's been an increasing move and this is not to

101
00:06:23,760 --> 00:06:26,839
Speaker 5: be honest, entirely specific to the Trump administration, but there's

102
00:06:26,839 --> 00:06:30,560
Speaker 5: been an increasing move in the United States and elsewhere

103
00:06:30,640 --> 00:06:38,400
Speaker 5: to tie together economic security with national security, with maritime

104
00:06:38,640 --> 00:06:42,640
Speaker 5: security and channels for the movement of goods and people

105
00:06:42,640 --> 00:06:46,279
Speaker 5: and services across the globe. And I think what we're seeing,

106
00:06:46,839 --> 00:06:50,360
Speaker 5: and this would connect the actions in South America with

107
00:06:50,400 --> 00:06:52,400
Speaker 5: the claims on Greenland, and you might remember there were

108
00:06:52,400 --> 00:06:56,000
Speaker 5: earlier claims about acquiring Canada as well. It's an effort

109
00:06:56,040 --> 00:06:58,000
Speaker 5: to say, like this is our zone. We are going

110
00:06:58,080 --> 00:07:03,320
Speaker 5: to control this entire space, including the resources in this space.

111
00:07:03,680 --> 00:07:06,880
Speaker 5: And you China might be able to take Asia and Russia,

112
00:07:06,880 --> 00:07:08,960
Speaker 5: you might be able to take Europe or at least

113
00:07:09,080 --> 00:07:12,200
Speaker 5: part of Europe, but we are defining the space over

114
00:07:12,240 --> 00:07:14,600
Speaker 5: which we are going to have dominance. And that, it

115
00:07:14,600 --> 00:07:18,280
Speaker 5: seems to me, is a way of explaining the Trump

116
00:07:18,320 --> 00:07:22,080
Speaker 5: administration's actions in a number of different theaters, as well

117
00:07:22,120 --> 00:07:24,120
Speaker 5: as the actions of China and Russia.

118
00:07:24,680 --> 00:07:28,320
Speaker 2: You mentioned Canada and Trump saying he wanted to make

119
00:07:28,400 --> 00:07:32,280
Speaker 2: it the fifty first state. He's also threatened to attack

120
00:07:32,360 --> 00:07:36,600
Speaker 2: Panama to supposedly keep China from exerting influence over the

121
00:07:36,600 --> 00:07:41,400
Speaker 2: Panama Canal, and on Saturday, he even warned that we

122
00:07:41,480 --> 00:07:45,800
Speaker 2: have to do something about Mexico because the president is

123
00:07:46,160 --> 00:07:50,000
Speaker 2: unable to clamp down on the drug Card tells so

124
00:07:50,280 --> 00:07:54,960
Speaker 2: now Trump appears to be targeting even historic allies of

125
00:07:55,000 --> 00:07:56,360
Speaker 2: the United States.

126
00:07:57,000 --> 00:08:01,080
Speaker 5: Yes, I think the United States is we're fundamentally to

127
00:08:01,160 --> 00:08:05,160
Speaker 5: transform the terms based on which states interact and relate

128
00:08:05,200 --> 00:08:07,000
Speaker 5: to one another on the world stage.

129
00:08:07,480 --> 00:08:09,960
Speaker 7: And again it's not just the United States that is

130
00:08:10,040 --> 00:08:10,520
Speaker 7: doing this.

131
00:08:10,720 --> 00:08:13,920
Speaker 5: So I think Russia's invasion of Ukraine was an action

132
00:08:14,200 --> 00:08:16,960
Speaker 5: to say, look, we're no longer going to recognize Ukraine

133
00:08:16,960 --> 00:08:20,080
Speaker 5: as an independent state, and we are going to change

134
00:08:20,080 --> 00:08:22,640
Speaker 5: the terms based on which we interact with our near neighbors.

135
00:08:22,640 --> 00:08:25,400
Speaker 5: And I think that's also what China is doing. But

136
00:08:26,280 --> 00:08:30,720
Speaker 5: because the United States has a long history of trying

137
00:08:30,760 --> 00:08:34,400
Speaker 5: to sustain this international legal and political order that is

138
00:08:34,600 --> 00:08:39,439
Speaker 5: structured around separate and semi independent states or interdependent states,

139
00:08:39,840 --> 00:08:42,680
Speaker 5: the moves by the United States basically to say, now

140
00:08:43,040 --> 00:08:45,560
Speaker 5: we're also participating in this game, and we are just

141
00:08:45,640 --> 00:08:49,040
Speaker 5: going to exert our raw power wherever we can, and

142
00:08:49,160 --> 00:08:53,480
Speaker 5: especially in our defined space, to demand that others do

143
00:08:53,600 --> 00:08:55,680
Speaker 5: as we tell them without regard for what they might

144
00:08:55,720 --> 00:08:59,000
Speaker 5: insist on doing themselves. That is a massive shift, in

145
00:08:59,040 --> 00:09:01,760
Speaker 5: my view, relative to where we were, I don't know,

146
00:09:02,080 --> 00:09:04,319
Speaker 5: five ten years ago, Monica.

147
00:09:04,360 --> 00:09:08,400
Speaker 2: Can you put this into context historically? Is this similar

148
00:09:08,520 --> 00:09:12,559
Speaker 2: to other actions the US has taken or different.

149
00:09:12,760 --> 00:09:15,480
Speaker 5: Well, there is a relatively long history of the United

150
00:09:15,520 --> 00:09:18,760
Speaker 5: States intervening in various ways in the affairs of Latin

151
00:09:18,800 --> 00:09:21,520
Speaker 5: American countries as well as countries and other parts of

152
00:09:21,520 --> 00:09:25,680
Speaker 5: the world. But what is significant and I think unique

153
00:09:25,679 --> 00:09:29,800
Speaker 5: about the current moment is that it's openly claiming the

154
00:09:29,920 --> 00:09:36,080
Speaker 5: right to displace the state authorities basically across the globe

155
00:09:36,160 --> 00:09:39,400
Speaker 5: or wherever it's not pleased with how the governments are

156
00:09:39,480 --> 00:09:44,280
Speaker 5: running their own countries and not at all claiming to

157
00:09:44,320 --> 00:09:48,439
Speaker 5: do so in the service of or through the mechanisms

158
00:09:48,640 --> 00:09:53,240
Speaker 5: of international law, which is collectively made and which is

159
00:09:53,800 --> 00:09:57,000
Speaker 5: sort of applied through collective processes that at the very

160
00:09:57,080 --> 00:10:01,000
Speaker 5: least provide some transparency about what has happened, some reason

161
00:10:01,040 --> 00:10:04,360
Speaker 5: giving about what is happening, the opportunity for others to

162
00:10:04,400 --> 00:10:06,720
Speaker 5: express their voice and their agency about.

163
00:10:06,520 --> 00:10:08,000
Speaker 6: What they want in the exchange.

164
00:10:08,320 --> 00:10:11,160
Speaker 5: And so we're just seeing a fundamental shift away from

165
00:10:11,320 --> 00:10:15,959
Speaker 5: let's say, legalized international relations toward a much more power based,

166
00:10:16,160 --> 00:10:17,960
Speaker 5: coercive set of interactions.

167
00:10:18,400 --> 00:10:22,079
Speaker 2: Secretary of State Marco Rubio has the firm that the

168
00:10:22,120 --> 00:10:26,040
Speaker 2: move was sort of a revised play on the nineteenth

169
00:10:26,080 --> 00:10:29,600
Speaker 2: century Monroe doctrine do you agree with that and what

170
00:10:29,679 --> 00:10:32,040
Speaker 2: are the implications.

171
00:10:31,360 --> 00:10:32,000
Speaker 7: It seems to be?

172
00:10:32,280 --> 00:10:36,120
Speaker 5: And I think that we've seen this administration say repeatedly

173
00:10:36,600 --> 00:10:39,880
Speaker 5: in various ways that it's trying to revive some kind

174
00:10:39,880 --> 00:10:43,240
Speaker 5: of Monroe doctrine, and I think the implications are exactly

175
00:10:43,240 --> 00:10:46,000
Speaker 5: as I described, which are that the United States will

176
00:10:46,040 --> 00:10:51,160
Speaker 5: increasingly just use its coercive power to dominate those around it,

177
00:10:51,200 --> 00:10:52,040
Speaker 5: particularly in the.

178
00:10:51,960 --> 00:10:54,959
Speaker 6: Western hemisphere, or what it defines is its space.

179
00:10:55,360 --> 00:10:57,840
Speaker 2: Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, I'll continue

180
00:10:57,880 --> 00:11:03,080
Speaker 2: this conversation with Columbia Laws professor Monica Hakimi. Are these

181
00:11:03,120 --> 00:11:07,480
Speaker 2: moves by the Trump administration a complete repudiation of the

182
00:11:07,520 --> 00:11:11,960
Speaker 2: world order that has defined US foreign policy since the

183
00:11:12,000 --> 00:11:15,640
Speaker 2: Cold War? I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg.

184
00:11:18,679 --> 00:11:22,240
Speaker 2: President Trump and his advisors are discussing a range of

185
00:11:22,320 --> 00:11:27,520
Speaker 2: options to acquire Greenland, a self governing territory of Denmark.

186
00:11:27,960 --> 00:11:33,720
Speaker 2: Those options include military action. In response, European nations released

187
00:11:33,720 --> 00:11:37,720
Speaker 2: a joint statement saying security in the Arctic must be

188
00:11:37,760 --> 00:11:43,520
Speaker 2: achieved collectively with NATO allies, including the United States. Secretary

189
00:11:43,559 --> 00:11:46,440
Speaker 2: of State Marco Rubio says he plans to meet with

190
00:11:46,600 --> 00:11:51,480
Speaker 2: Danish officials next week to discuss the US interest in Greenland.

191
00:11:51,520 --> 00:11:54,960
Speaker 2: But will Denmark's answer be any different from that of

192
00:11:55,000 --> 00:11:59,440
Speaker 2: the Danish Prime Minister Metefredericson in April, when a US

193
00:11:59,559 --> 00:12:04,760
Speaker 2: delegates that included Vice President JD. Vance visited Greenland and

194
00:12:04,800 --> 00:12:06,439
Speaker 2: got a frosty reception.

195
00:12:07,520 --> 00:12:10,320
Speaker 4: When you demand to take over a part of the

196
00:12:10,440 --> 00:12:15,400
Speaker 4: Kingdoms of Denmark territory, When we are met by pressure

197
00:12:16,360 --> 00:12:21,160
Speaker 4: and by threats from our closest ally, what are we

198
00:12:21,320 --> 00:12:24,760
Speaker 4: to believe in about the country that we have admired

199
00:12:25,200 --> 00:12:32,720
Speaker 4: for so many years. National borders, sovereignty of states, and

200
00:12:32,800 --> 00:12:38,040
Speaker 4: our integrity. These are all principle rooted in international law.

201
00:12:38,840 --> 00:12:43,880
Speaker 4: These are fundamental principles formed after the Second World War

202
00:12:44,440 --> 00:12:48,240
Speaker 4: so that small countries don't have to fear big ones.

203
00:12:49,200 --> 00:12:52,240
Speaker 2: But is that world order changing and how much can

204
00:12:52,320 --> 00:12:56,160
Speaker 2: international law play a part today? I've been talking to

205
00:12:56,240 --> 00:13:00,839
Speaker 2: an expert in international law, Monica Hakimi, a professor at

206
00:13:00,840 --> 00:13:05,800
Speaker 2: Columbia Law School. Monica. President Trump has attacked seven countries

207
00:13:05,840 --> 00:13:13,800
Speaker 2: since returning to office. There were strikes in Somalia, Nigeria, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen,

208
00:13:14,480 --> 00:13:18,360
Speaker 2: and now in Venezuela, as well as in international waters.

209
00:13:19,160 --> 00:13:22,400
Speaker 2: There was nothing done in Congress, and there was nothing

210
00:13:22,440 --> 00:13:27,040
Speaker 2: done internationally. I mean, Stephen Miller, a top aid to

211
00:13:27,160 --> 00:13:33,280
Speaker 2: President Trump, actually said on CNN yesterday that Greenland rightfully

212
00:13:33,320 --> 00:13:37,400
Speaker 2: belongs to the United States and quote, nobody's going to

213
00:13:37,400 --> 00:13:41,559
Speaker 2: fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.

214
00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:44,440
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think that's an open question.

215
00:13:44,520 --> 00:13:48,760
Speaker 5: You know. One of the common criticisms of international law

216
00:13:49,040 --> 00:13:53,720
Speaker 5: is that it's not enforceable or not easily enforceable against

217
00:13:53,840 --> 00:13:57,360
Speaker 5: powerful states and in this case, the United States, and

218
00:13:57,720 --> 00:14:00,600
Speaker 5: that it doesn't therefore constrain powerful state in the same

219
00:14:00,600 --> 00:14:02,960
Speaker 5: way that it constrains weaker states. I think there's no

220
00:14:03,040 --> 00:14:06,240
Speaker 5: way to know actually to what extent the United States

221
00:14:06,240 --> 00:14:09,440
Speaker 5: has historically been constrained by international law and to what

222
00:14:09,480 --> 00:14:13,599
Speaker 5: extent it's just chosen a path that has been more consistent.

223
00:14:13,240 --> 00:14:16,559
Speaker 7: With international law. But in any event, I think.

224
00:14:16,440 --> 00:14:20,640
Speaker 5: The real change now is not so much that international

225
00:14:20,760 --> 00:14:25,440
Speaker 5: law has become has suddenly become unenforceable against the United States, but.

226
00:14:25,520 --> 00:14:27,800
Speaker 7: Rather that the United States.

227
00:14:27,520 --> 00:14:32,760
Speaker 5: Is no longer itself committed to upholding the international legal system.

228
00:14:33,160 --> 00:14:36,280
Speaker 5: And that is a significant shift, because the United States

229
00:14:36,320 --> 00:14:39,400
Speaker 5: has actually, even as it has historically acted in various

230
00:14:39,440 --> 00:14:44,120
Speaker 5: ways that have undermined specific norms in international law. It

231
00:14:44,160 --> 00:14:47,200
Speaker 5: has also historically done an enormous amount to try to

232
00:14:47,280 --> 00:14:51,480
Speaker 5: bolster this entire system, and with that retreat from its

233
00:14:51,480 --> 00:14:54,360
Speaker 5: own commitment to the legal system, the question is, is

234
00:14:54,400 --> 00:14:56,440
Speaker 5: anyone capable of filling that gap?

235
00:14:57,040 --> 00:14:59,560
Speaker 7: And if so, who, in out what terms?

236
00:14:59,640 --> 00:15:03,280
Speaker 5: Is that alternative party going to be exercising its power

237
00:15:03,440 --> 00:15:06,240
Speaker 5: with or without international law? And if not, we're just

238
00:15:06,280 --> 00:15:09,480
Speaker 5: going to live in a world in which it's much

239
00:15:09,520 --> 00:15:13,160
Speaker 5: harder to understand what those who exercise power are doing

240
00:15:13,200 --> 00:15:15,720
Speaker 5: and why. Because one of the things that international law does,

241
00:15:15,760 --> 00:15:18,840
Speaker 5: no matter what else it does, is clarify the terms

242
00:15:18,880 --> 00:15:21,680
Speaker 5: based on which states and other actors interact on the

243
00:15:21,680 --> 00:15:23,080
Speaker 5: world stage.

244
00:15:23,560 --> 00:15:26,320
Speaker 2: Let's talk for a moment about NATO, and you know

245
00:15:26,640 --> 00:15:29,920
Speaker 2: what the power or lack of power is there. Chomp

246
00:15:29,920 --> 00:15:33,960
Speaker 2: has been pulling back from NATO, and today he criticized

247
00:15:34,000 --> 00:15:37,880
Speaker 2: it again. Does NATO have any role to play here?

248
00:15:38,720 --> 00:15:43,280
Speaker 5: The action against Greenland is in many ways causing a

249
00:15:43,320 --> 00:15:45,040
Speaker 5: deep fissure within NATO.

250
00:15:45,240 --> 00:15:47,200
Speaker 7: And I say that because, of course Denmark is a

251
00:15:47,280 --> 00:15:47,720
Speaker 7: NATO state.

252
00:15:47,800 --> 00:15:50,520
Speaker 5: It's historically been a very strong military ally of the

253
00:15:50,600 --> 00:15:55,560
Speaker 5: United States, and so one NATO country directly attacking another

254
00:15:55,640 --> 00:16:00,160
Speaker 5: NATO country just undermines the entire arrangement, which is that

255
00:16:00,200 --> 00:16:04,040
Speaker 5: these countries are supposed to act collectively in their mutual

256
00:16:04,080 --> 00:16:08,080
Speaker 5: defense and cooperatively in their mutual defense. Now, to answer

257
00:16:08,120 --> 00:16:11,400
Speaker 5: your question more specifically, if the United States were to

258
00:16:11,480 --> 00:16:16,120
Speaker 5: attack and try to acquire Greenland, other NATO countries could

259
00:16:16,160 --> 00:16:20,280
Speaker 5: come to Denmark's defense against the United States, that would

260
00:16:20,280 --> 00:16:23,560
Speaker 5: be a deep, deep fissure again within NATO, and it

261
00:16:23,600 --> 00:16:27,080
Speaker 5: would raise again the question that you asked earlier about

262
00:16:27,160 --> 00:16:32,000
Speaker 5: whether any other state could actually enforce Denmark's rights against

263
00:16:32,000 --> 00:16:34,960
Speaker 5: the United States given the overwhelming military power of the

264
00:16:35,040 --> 00:16:35,760
Speaker 5: United States.

265
00:16:36,080 --> 00:16:38,960
Speaker 2: I mean, do you think that NATO's days are numbered.

266
00:16:39,680 --> 00:16:44,400
Speaker 5: I've been worried for some time actually that NATO's days are,

267
00:16:44,760 --> 00:16:46,840
Speaker 5: if not numbered, that NATO is going to have to

268
00:16:46,920 --> 00:16:52,040
Speaker 5: transform itself to preserve its relevance and its saliens and quick. Frankly,

269
00:16:52,400 --> 00:16:55,280
Speaker 5: it's been the position of the United States for well

270
00:16:55,320 --> 00:16:58,800
Speaker 5: over a decade, nearing two decades, that the United States

271
00:16:58,880 --> 00:17:03,560
Speaker 5: cannot continue to to provide the bulk of support for

272
00:17:03,800 --> 00:17:06,880
Speaker 5: NATO's operations. That European states had to do more. Now

273
00:17:06,880 --> 00:17:10,080
Speaker 5: that has become increasingly obvious over the course of the

274
00:17:10,080 --> 00:17:14,439
Speaker 5: second Trump administration, and the question I guess is whether

275
00:17:14,800 --> 00:17:18,960
Speaker 5: NATO states can collectively figure out how to reconstitute themselves

276
00:17:19,040 --> 00:17:22,960
Speaker 5: in a way that is responsive to the Trump administration's

277
00:17:23,480 --> 00:17:27,320
Speaker 5: new moves, but still protective of the entire group of

278
00:17:27,359 --> 00:17:29,280
Speaker 5: states that currently comprise it.

279
00:17:29,960 --> 00:17:34,320
Speaker 2: The United Nations Security Council held an emergency meeting on Monday.

280
00:17:34,840 --> 00:17:37,280
Speaker 2: Because of the way the Security Council is set up,

281
00:17:37,400 --> 00:17:41,439
Speaker 2: with the members having veto power, it seems unlikely that

282
00:17:41,520 --> 00:17:45,440
Speaker 2: anything useful is going to come out of the Security Council.

283
00:17:45,920 --> 00:17:49,080
Speaker 2: I mean, what's the point of the United Nations today.

284
00:17:49,800 --> 00:17:53,240
Speaker 5: One of the essential components of the United Nations Security

285
00:17:53,240 --> 00:17:57,080
Speaker 5: Council is that it is comprised of the five victors

286
00:17:57,119 --> 00:17:59,080
Speaker 5: of World War Two as well as others. But those

287
00:17:59,119 --> 00:18:02,720
Speaker 5: five members of veto power, as you say, and during

288
00:18:02,720 --> 00:18:06,240
Speaker 5: the Cold War, the Security Council was largely stalled out

289
00:18:06,359 --> 00:18:09,199
Speaker 5: because the United States and the Soviet Union could not

290
00:18:09,280 --> 00:18:13,600
Speaker 5: agree to make decisions really through the Security Council. Nevertheless,

291
00:18:13,600 --> 00:18:16,800
Speaker 5: I think some would say that the Security Council provided

292
00:18:17,280 --> 00:18:21,160
Speaker 5: a useful venue for these two great powers who were very,

293
00:18:21,240 --> 00:18:24,119
Speaker 5: very severely in odds with one another to figure out

294
00:18:24,160 --> 00:18:27,560
Speaker 5: what the other was doing, and at least to talk

295
00:18:27,640 --> 00:18:31,080
Speaker 5: to one another on terms that were sort of detached

296
00:18:31,200 --> 00:18:34,399
Speaker 5: from the conflicts that were playing out on the ground,

297
00:18:34,440 --> 00:18:37,160
Speaker 5: whether hot or cold. After the end of the Cold War,

298
00:18:37,200 --> 00:18:39,639
Speaker 5: the Security Council was sort of revitalized and it became

299
00:18:39,800 --> 00:18:44,080
Speaker 5: a really important mechanism for dealing with security threats around

300
00:18:44,119 --> 00:18:46,560
Speaker 5: the world. Now again, we're going to a position where

301
00:18:46,960 --> 00:18:50,040
Speaker 5: making decisions through the Security Council will be very, very

302
00:18:50,040 --> 00:18:53,880
Speaker 5: difficult because of the geopolitical dynamics. Still, it might be

303
00:18:53,960 --> 00:18:57,960
Speaker 5: a useful venue for those who want to understand what

304
00:18:58,119 --> 00:19:01,159
Speaker 5: is happening or to express their own voice about what

305
00:19:01,320 --> 00:19:04,520
Speaker 5: is happening, to do so and at least for those

306
00:19:04,680 --> 00:19:07,960
Speaker 5: views to be aired and in that way serve as

307
00:19:08,000 --> 00:19:11,560
Speaker 5: some kind of accountability mechanism or at least transparency about

308
00:19:11,760 --> 00:19:12,840
Speaker 5: what their positions are.

309
00:19:13,640 --> 00:19:18,560
Speaker 2: As you mentioned, Russia invaded Ukraine. China might use this

310
00:19:18,800 --> 00:19:23,640
Speaker 2: as a template to eventually go after Taiwan. I mean,

311
00:19:24,200 --> 00:19:27,760
Speaker 2: during the Trump administration the next three years, are we

312
00:19:27,840 --> 00:19:30,560
Speaker 2: looking at a changing world order?

313
00:19:31,160 --> 00:19:32,040
Speaker 7: I think absolutely.

314
00:19:32,359 --> 00:19:36,040
Speaker 5: I think I'm on record as having said that the

315
00:19:36,080 --> 00:19:40,199
Speaker 5: old world order, however one defined it is really no

316
00:19:40,280 --> 00:19:43,800
Speaker 5: longer available to us, and it's not just the United

317
00:19:43,840 --> 00:19:46,399
Speaker 5: States that's making that decision. The United States is of

318
00:19:46,400 --> 00:19:50,000
Speaker 5: course responding to a broader set of global trends, including

319
00:19:50,080 --> 00:19:53,560
Speaker 5: the limits of its own security umbrella, as was evidenced

320
00:19:53,600 --> 00:19:57,280
Speaker 5: by you know, Russia's in China's actions that predated the

321
00:19:57,280 --> 00:20:00,760
Speaker 5: second Trump administration, as well as Iraq. So I do

322
00:20:00,800 --> 00:20:05,120
Speaker 5: think we are moving toward an entirely different world order,

323
00:20:05,160 --> 00:20:07,240
Speaker 5: and that part of what's happening right now in these

324
00:20:07,280 --> 00:20:12,480
Speaker 5: conflicts is that states are and other entities are basically

325
00:20:12,520 --> 00:20:15,880
Speaker 5: defining the terms based on which any future order would

326
00:20:15,880 --> 00:20:19,200
Speaker 5: have to be created. And there's a question about how

327
00:20:19,240 --> 00:20:21,600
Speaker 5: different the next world order, if there is going to

328
00:20:21,640 --> 00:20:24,000
Speaker 5: be some world order, will be relative to the one

329
00:20:24,000 --> 00:20:25,000
Speaker 5: that we're leaving behind.

330
00:20:25,440 --> 00:20:26,840
Speaker 2: How different do you think it'll be.

331
00:20:27,440 --> 00:20:29,480
Speaker 5: I think it's going to be dramatically different, and I

332
00:20:29,480 --> 00:20:31,480
Speaker 5: think it's going to be different in ways that are

333
00:20:32,280 --> 00:20:36,439
Speaker 5: far worse for a greater number of people around the world.

334
00:20:36,960 --> 00:20:39,879
Speaker 5: I think if one pays attention to the legal and

335
00:20:39,920 --> 00:20:42,600
Speaker 5: political trends over the past couple of years, one sees

336
00:20:42,640 --> 00:20:45,919
Speaker 5: a few things. The first is a reduction in the

337
00:20:45,920 --> 00:20:50,000
Speaker 5: commitment to states as states, so we've seen that again

338
00:20:50,320 --> 00:20:53,160
Speaker 5: with the denial of the authority of states in many

339
00:20:53,160 --> 00:20:57,919
Speaker 5: parts of the world Ukraine, Venezuela, Denmark over Greenland. The

340
00:20:57,960 --> 00:21:03,440
Speaker 5: second is backlash against the humanitarian impulses of international law.

341
00:21:03,560 --> 00:21:06,160
Speaker 5: So we're seeing in many conflicts around the world an

342
00:21:06,160 --> 00:21:11,679
Speaker 5: increased disregard for protecting civilians for humanity, as well as,

343
00:21:12,160 --> 00:21:15,399
Speaker 5: in more limited ways, a backlash from human rights law

344
00:21:15,480 --> 00:21:17,720
Speaker 5: more generally, as it applies even in peace time, not

345
00:21:17,760 --> 00:21:21,000
Speaker 5: only in conflicts. The third, I would say, is a

346
00:21:21,080 --> 00:21:24,080
Speaker 5: retreat in the legalization of international affairs. Again, I think

347
00:21:24,160 --> 00:21:31,959
Speaker 5: legalization is extremely important for reasons of transparency, accountability, basic coordination,

348
00:21:32,440 --> 00:21:36,399
Speaker 5: and understanding of what is happening around us, no matter

349
00:21:36,440 --> 00:21:40,199
Speaker 5: to what extent it constrains or empowers particular entities. And

350
00:21:40,240 --> 00:21:44,000
Speaker 5: then finally, we're seeing an increased resort to force in

351
00:21:44,040 --> 00:21:47,640
Speaker 5: other forms of coercion to structure international affairs. These are

352
00:21:48,240 --> 00:21:51,919
Speaker 5: trends that again predated the Trump administration, but they are

353
00:21:51,960 --> 00:21:56,560
Speaker 5: trends that are being accelerated by the Trump administration. And

354
00:21:56,600 --> 00:22:01,280
Speaker 5: they're all trends that, in my view, reflect a retreat

355
00:22:01,480 --> 00:22:06,719
Speaker 5: from humanity and from basic ideas about governance and the

356
00:22:06,760 --> 00:22:08,879
Speaker 5: service of the general good.

357
00:22:09,800 --> 00:22:14,720
Speaker 2: Former President Joe Biden embraced NATO. Now we have President

358
00:22:14,800 --> 00:22:19,879
Speaker 2: Trump with an anti NATO stance. If the next president

359
00:22:20,560 --> 00:22:25,280
Speaker 2: wants to embrace NATO, will that change anything? Considering the

360
00:22:25,359 --> 00:22:28,320
Speaker 2: new world order that you just described.

361
00:22:28,960 --> 00:22:32,760
Speaker 5: I don't think the option is available to go back

362
00:22:32,880 --> 00:22:37,200
Speaker 5: to what existed before. And actually, I myself was quite

363
00:22:37,200 --> 00:22:41,560
Speaker 5: critical of the Biden administration for not seeing the writing

364
00:22:41,600 --> 00:22:44,960
Speaker 5: on the wall and trying to put the world in

365
00:22:45,040 --> 00:22:49,520
Speaker 5: a better position than it was when he left office,

366
00:22:50,200 --> 00:22:54,479
Speaker 5: for what was inevitably going to be continued resistance to

367
00:22:54,960 --> 00:22:59,359
Speaker 5: the US power structure that existed in the post Cold

368
00:22:59,359 --> 00:23:02,679
Speaker 5: War period. And so, you know, I don't think a

369
00:23:02,760 --> 00:23:06,359
Speaker 5: new administration could try to revive NATO and create the

370
00:23:06,400 --> 00:23:10,680
Speaker 5: security that once existed through NATO. I think any new

371
00:23:10,680 --> 00:23:14,000
Speaker 5: administration would have to deal with the hand that will

372
00:23:14,000 --> 00:23:17,160
Speaker 5: have been created over the next three, if not more years.

373
00:23:17,560 --> 00:23:20,720
Speaker 2: This has been a really fascinating conversation. Thanks so much,

374
00:23:20,800 --> 00:23:24,800
Speaker 2: Monica for sharing your insights with us. That's Professor Monica

375
00:23:24,840 --> 00:23:27,879
Speaker 2: Hakemi of Columbia Law School coming up next on the

376
00:23:27,920 --> 00:23:31,359
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Law Show. It's the state that sued the Trump

377
00:23:31,440 --> 00:23:35,080
Speaker 2: administration more than any other. Get ready for the twenty

378
00:23:35,119 --> 00:23:39,680
Speaker 2: twenty six court battles between California and Trump. I'm June

379
00:23:39,680 --> 00:23:45,639
Speaker 2: Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. California's response to the

380
00:23:45,640 --> 00:23:50,480
Speaker 2: Trump administration has prompted a flood of litigation, with several

381
00:23:50,600 --> 00:23:54,119
Speaker 2: major hearings over the line between state law and federal

382
00:23:54,160 --> 00:23:58,560
Speaker 2: authority teed up for hearings early this year. At stake

383
00:23:58,640 --> 00:24:02,040
Speaker 2: are hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funds and

384
00:24:02,080 --> 00:24:07,880
Speaker 2: the state's ability to steer policy in key areas including education, health,

385
00:24:07,920 --> 00:24:13,280
Speaker 2: and infrastructure. Joining me is Bloomberg Law's correspondent for Los Angeles,

386
00:24:14,080 --> 00:24:18,920
Speaker 2: Mayaespodo California in the first Trump administration and in this

387
00:24:19,040 --> 00:24:24,119
Speaker 2: Trump administration has a sort of history of bringing lawsuits

388
00:24:24,320 --> 00:24:30,399
Speaker 2: against the administration, and California's Attorney General Rob Banta often

389
00:24:30,440 --> 00:24:34,639
Speaker 2: seems to be leading the charge in states suing the

390
00:24:34,640 --> 00:24:35,600
Speaker 2: Trump administration.

391
00:24:36,200 --> 00:24:40,880
Speaker 1: Right, It's true. During the start of President Trump's second presidency,

392
00:24:41,119 --> 00:24:46,680
Speaker 1: the California Legislature convened and pumped twenty five million dollars

393
00:24:46,760 --> 00:24:50,560
Speaker 1: into Bonton's office, readying for another round of those fights.

394
00:24:50,560 --> 00:24:51,840
Speaker 1: From the first time.

395
00:24:52,680 --> 00:24:56,199
Speaker 2: The court battles that gained a lot of attention in

396
00:24:56,320 --> 00:25:01,200
Speaker 2: twenty twenty five, were centered on Trump's sending troops into

397
00:25:01,480 --> 00:25:04,199
Speaker 2: LA and federal funding cuts.

398
00:25:04,760 --> 00:25:06,240
Speaker 7: Are those suits still.

399
00:25:06,000 --> 00:25:08,440
Speaker 2: Going on or have they been settled?

400
00:25:09,160 --> 00:25:13,920
Speaker 1: Many of the federal funding related lawsuits are still working

401
00:25:14,000 --> 00:25:18,000
Speaker 1: out on appeal or going into their merit stages now,

402
00:25:18,040 --> 00:25:22,879
Speaker 1: meaning that a lot of the wins that Bonta and

403
00:25:22,960 --> 00:25:27,280
Speaker 1: Governor Gavin Newsom were discussing as of August they cited

404
00:25:27,320 --> 00:25:29,920
Speaker 1: a number of one hundred and sixty eight billion dollars

405
00:25:29,960 --> 00:25:33,720
Speaker 1: in federal funding being restored came from these early court

406
00:25:33,800 --> 00:25:37,280
Speaker 1: rulings that were weighing which side was likely to prevail.

407
00:25:38,520 --> 00:25:42,080
Speaker 2: So we'll have to see if those victories are preserved

408
00:25:42,320 --> 00:25:46,960
Speaker 2: during the appellate process. Let's turn now to several cases

409
00:25:47,480 --> 00:25:51,639
Speaker 2: brought by the Trump administration in response to laws passed

410
00:25:51,640 --> 00:25:56,399
Speaker 2: by California. Tell us about the legal challenge over the

411
00:25:56,520 --> 00:26:00,280
Speaker 2: No Secret Police Act and the No Vigilantes Act.

412
00:26:00,960 --> 00:26:05,240
Speaker 1: So, in response to these reports of federal immigration agents

413
00:26:05,359 --> 00:26:09,960
Speaker 1: in California wearing masks and being unidentifiable, the state lawmakers

414
00:26:10,119 --> 00:26:13,560
Speaker 1: passed a set of laws requiring them to show their

415
00:26:13,600 --> 00:26:18,800
Speaker 1: faces and wear id The Trump administration sued, saying that

416
00:26:18,880 --> 00:26:23,120
Speaker 1: the laws violate the supremacy clause, which allows federal law

417
00:26:23,240 --> 00:26:29,399
Speaker 1: to take priority over conflicting state laws. And that case

418
00:26:29,560 --> 00:26:35,120
Speaker 1: is tied up for a preliminary injunction hearing next week.

419
00:26:35,320 --> 00:26:38,400
Speaker 2: So we'll find out soon after next week probably whether

420
00:26:38,440 --> 00:26:43,440
Speaker 2: they'll issue a preliminary injunction. Now, the next lawsuit strikes

421
00:26:43,480 --> 00:26:47,600
Speaker 2: me as a little unusual. The Trump administration is suing

422
00:26:47,600 --> 00:26:53,800
Speaker 2: California over its laws banning tight cage confinement for egg

423
00:26:53,920 --> 00:26:54,680
Speaker 2: laying hens.

424
00:26:55,400 --> 00:27:01,120
Speaker 1: They did say that California's requirements for agri culture were

425
00:27:01,160 --> 00:27:06,240
Speaker 1: causing the price of eggs to go up, and California

426
00:27:06,359 --> 00:27:09,600
Speaker 1: has said in court filings that actually, the first Trump

427
00:27:09,640 --> 00:27:14,640
Speaker 1: administration previously agreed that the federal law the current administration

428
00:27:14,920 --> 00:27:18,639
Speaker 1: is citing does not supersede the state's cage free law.

429
00:27:19,240 --> 00:27:21,160
Speaker 1: So that's what they are arguing, and.

430
00:27:21,119 --> 00:27:24,719
Speaker 2: The cage free laws about humane treatment of the hens.

431
00:27:25,680 --> 00:27:28,400
Speaker 1: It governs the amount of space that hens have.

432
00:27:29,080 --> 00:27:32,280
Speaker 2: California is going to try to get that case dismissed.

433
00:27:32,560 --> 00:27:36,080
Speaker 2: It's filed a motion to dismiss and to some rejudgment motion.

434
00:27:37,080 --> 00:27:40,760
Speaker 1: This is one where California's odds seem pretty high.

435
00:27:41,240 --> 00:27:47,280
Speaker 2: Now, let's talk about challenges by California based litigants to

436
00:27:47,600 --> 00:27:52,600
Speaker 2: administrative actions of the Trump administration. The first one, which

437
00:27:52,640 --> 00:27:56,080
Speaker 2: sounds familiar, maybe because it's similar to a federal case,

438
00:27:56,200 --> 00:28:00,840
Speaker 2: is about ICE agents stopping people to arrest them without

439
00:28:00,880 --> 00:28:04,120
Speaker 2: reasonable suspicion. So tell us what's happening there.

440
00:28:04,480 --> 00:28:07,520
Speaker 1: Right, So this case came out of that set of

441
00:28:07,560 --> 00:28:11,800
Speaker 1: immigration raids early in the Trump administration in twenty twenty

442
00:28:11,840 --> 00:28:17,760
Speaker 1: five in central parts of California, particularly Bakersfield, and it

443
00:28:17,840 --> 00:28:21,800
Speaker 1: led to one of the first court orders from a

444
00:28:21,800 --> 00:28:26,959
Speaker 1: federal judge requiring ICE agents not to stop these folks

445
00:28:27,000 --> 00:28:31,120
Speaker 1: without reasonable suspicion that they were in the country unlawfully.

446
00:28:32,240 --> 00:28:37,520
Speaker 1: This case is decently similar to the one that unfolded

447
00:28:37,640 --> 00:28:40,520
Speaker 1: a few months later in Los Angeles Federal court that

448
00:28:41,200 --> 00:28:44,520
Speaker 1: also got a court order from the district court, but

449
00:28:44,840 --> 00:28:47,320
Speaker 1: was paused by the US Supreme Court this fall.

450
00:28:47,960 --> 00:28:52,720
Speaker 2: So in September, the Supreme Court backed the Trump administration's

451
00:28:52,760 --> 00:28:58,200
Speaker 2: aggressive immigration enforcement efforts, allowing federal immigration agents in Los

452
00:28:58,240 --> 00:29:03,640
Speaker 2: Angeles to resume tect that critics say amount to racial profiling,

453
00:29:04,440 --> 00:29:07,640
Speaker 2: and the court's order put on hold the district court

454
00:29:07,760 --> 00:29:12,080
Speaker 2: order that barred ICE agents from questioning and detaining people

455
00:29:12,560 --> 00:29:17,240
Speaker 2: based solely on their ethnicity, language, occupation, or presence at

456
00:29:17,240 --> 00:29:20,800
Speaker 2: a particular location. And in the case we're discussing, the

457
00:29:20,800 --> 00:29:25,000
Speaker 2: Trump administration is arguing that there's no standing, is that

458
00:29:25,040 --> 00:29:28,480
Speaker 2: the plaintiffs don't have a stake in the fight, right.

459
00:29:28,760 --> 00:29:34,280
Speaker 1: They are citing Justice Brett Kavanaugh's concurrence in the Los

460
00:29:34,320 --> 00:29:35,240
Speaker 1: Angeles case.

461
00:29:35,960 --> 00:29:40,080
Speaker 2: Interestingly, the plaintiffs are also saying that the emergency docket

462
00:29:40,360 --> 00:29:44,960
Speaker 2: order isn't binding and that the federal agents have violated

463
00:29:45,000 --> 00:29:46,400
Speaker 2: the preliminary injunction.

464
00:29:47,040 --> 00:29:49,680
Speaker 1: You know, it's part of this broader question that we're

465
00:29:49,720 --> 00:29:54,600
Speaker 1: dealing with across cases, particularly concerning the Trump administration, which

466
00:29:54,640 --> 00:30:00,320
Speaker 1: is how should federal courts weigh the thoughts of the

467
00:30:00,440 --> 00:30:05,080
Speaker 1: US Supreme Court justices that are made on an emergency basis.

468
00:30:05,880 --> 00:30:08,600
Speaker 2: Now a Ninth Circuit panel is going to hear arguments

469
00:30:08,640 --> 00:30:13,840
Speaker 2: in a challenge to the use of Trump administration executive

470
00:30:14,000 --> 00:30:17,200
Speaker 2: orders on gender identity and diversity initiatives.

471
00:30:17,960 --> 00:30:21,760
Speaker 1: Right, So, there is an upcoming argument before the Ninth

472
00:30:21,800 --> 00:30:26,440
Speaker 1: Circuit concerning a challenge brought by nonprofits based in Northern

473
00:30:26,480 --> 00:30:32,040
Speaker 1: California that support LGBTQ plus clients. They are fighting to

474
00:30:32,360 --> 00:30:37,480
Speaker 1: reinstate funds that were pulled after the Trump administration's executive

475
00:30:37,680 --> 00:30:43,440
Speaker 1: order related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and gender identity.

476
00:30:44,160 --> 00:30:48,520
Speaker 2: There are a couple of cases related to elections, and

477
00:30:48,920 --> 00:30:53,440
Speaker 2: one is over the California redistricting Who is suing over that.

478
00:30:53,760 --> 00:30:58,400
Speaker 1: The California redistricting lawsuit was brought by a Republican state

479
00:30:58,440 --> 00:31:04,200
Speaker 1: assembly member and the Republican Party in California alleging that

480
00:31:04,640 --> 00:31:08,360
Speaker 1: California's new congressional map, which was drawn in response to

481
00:31:08,960 --> 00:31:12,959
Speaker 1: the redistricting in Texas, is an unlawful racial jerry mander,

482
00:31:13,680 --> 00:31:19,440
Speaker 1: and those parties argued before a panel of judges in December.

483
00:31:20,360 --> 00:31:24,880
Speaker 1: The judges are still considering what to rule, but the

484
00:31:24,960 --> 00:31:29,800
Speaker 1: US Supreme Court did uphold Texas's new map for the midterms.

485
00:31:30,240 --> 00:31:34,880
Speaker 2: It seems hard to argue that this wasn't politically motivated

486
00:31:34,920 --> 00:31:38,080
Speaker 2: when you had the governor saying, let's do this to

487
00:31:38,160 --> 00:31:40,800
Speaker 2: match Texas. So but we'll see, you never know where

488
00:31:40,800 --> 00:31:41,800
Speaker 2: the court what happens.

489
00:31:42,120 --> 00:31:45,240
Speaker 1: That's what the state argued, and the judges two of

490
00:31:45,320 --> 00:31:49,200
Speaker 1: three certainly seemed to seize on that political argument.

491
00:31:49,720 --> 00:31:56,160
Speaker 2: And the Trump administration wants California to turnover voter information right.

492
00:31:56,200 --> 00:32:01,160
Speaker 1: The Trump administration wants California to turn over its VOTs,

493
00:32:01,200 --> 00:32:06,440
Speaker 1: including personal information like registered voter strivers, licenses, and social

494
00:32:06,520 --> 00:32:10,800
Speaker 1: Security numbers, and California is saying that state privacy laws

495
00:32:10,920 --> 00:32:14,800
Speaker 1: keep that data safe. And so the judges in that

496
00:32:14,920 --> 00:32:16,760
Speaker 1: case still considering what to do.

497
00:32:17,480 --> 00:32:20,040
Speaker 2: Thanks so much. Maya will check back and see how

498
00:32:20,080 --> 00:32:26,280
Speaker 2: these cases develop. That's Bloomberg Law LA correspondent Mayaspodo, and

499
00:32:26,320 --> 00:32:28,480
Speaker 2: that's it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show.

500
00:32:28,800 --> 00:32:31,160
Speaker 2: Remember you can always get the latest legal news on

501
00:32:31,200 --> 00:32:35,480
Speaker 2: our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

502
00:32:35,680 --> 00:32:40,720
Speaker 2: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law,

503
00:32:41,120 --> 00:32:43,720
Speaker 2: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every

504
00:32:43,760 --> 00:32:47,640
Speaker 2: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso

505
00:32:47,800 --> 00:32:49,400
Speaker 2: and you're listening to Bloomberg