1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,279 Speaker 1: Well, now it's time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief, 2 00:00:02,320 --> 00:00:04,720 Speaker 1: exploring legal issues in the news, and the Law Brief 3 00:00:04,800 --> 00:00:08,879 Speaker 1: is brought to you by American Arbitration Association, International Trade 4 00:00:08,960 --> 00:00:12,119 Speaker 1: or Business Dispute Resolve Faster with the International Center for 5 00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:15,720 Speaker 1: Dispute Resolution, the leader in alternative dispute resolution around the 6 00:00:15,760 --> 00:00:19,360 Speaker 1: world i c d R dot org. Today Bloomberg, Laho, 7 00:00:19,400 --> 00:00:22,200 Speaker 1: stun Grosso and Greg's Store discussed an announcement by the 8 00:00:22,280 --> 00:00:25,479 Speaker 1: Justice Department that it's dropping a crucial objection to a 9 00:00:25,560 --> 00:00:28,319 Speaker 1: Texas voter i D Law. They speak with Rick hass And, 10 00:00:28,360 --> 00:00:31,560 Speaker 1: a professor at University at California Irvine School of Law 11 00:00:31,840 --> 00:00:34,600 Speaker 1: and founder of the Election Law Blog, and Richard Riffal, 12 00:00:34,720 --> 00:00:38,760 Speaker 1: a professor at Columbia University Law School. Rick did this 13 00:00:38,840 --> 00:00:42,920 Speaker 1: reversal by the Justice Department and withdrawal of the claim 14 00:00:43,000 --> 00:00:48,199 Speaker 1: that Texas enacted this law with discriminatory intent surprise you. 15 00:00:48,600 --> 00:00:51,000 Speaker 1: It didn't surprise me. I think that we know that 16 00:00:51,320 --> 00:00:55,160 Speaker 1: both um Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump have different views 17 00:00:55,200 --> 00:00:57,600 Speaker 1: on voting rights and the potential for voter fraud than 18 00:00:58,080 --> 00:01:00,920 Speaker 1: a Barack Obama and Loretta Lynch did. This was actually 19 00:01:00,960 --> 00:01:03,680 Speaker 1: just the first step. It was just the Department of 20 00:01:03,720 --> 00:01:08,840 Speaker 1: Justice withdrawing from one little piece of the case. Uh. 21 00:01:08,880 --> 00:01:11,520 Speaker 1: And there's still more to come, and I expect that 22 00:01:11,560 --> 00:01:13,559 Speaker 1: we're going to see more reversals not only in this case, 23 00:01:13,560 --> 00:01:16,399 Speaker 1: but in other cases like it going forward. Richard, what's 24 00:01:16,440 --> 00:01:23,319 Speaker 1: the the significance of the the discriminary discriminatory intent part 25 00:01:23,360 --> 00:01:26,200 Speaker 1: of this case? That there's still the discriminatory effect part 26 00:01:26,240 --> 00:01:29,520 Speaker 1: of this case that the Justice Department is still involved in. Sure, 27 00:01:29,880 --> 00:01:32,560 Speaker 1: it may have got more towards remedies on. One consequence 28 00:01:32,680 --> 00:01:36,320 Speaker 1: of finding a discriminatory intent is that a court to 29 00:01:36,400 --> 00:01:39,600 Speaker 1: throw the entire statute, the entire Texas law that ian 30 00:01:39,640 --> 00:01:42,600 Speaker 1: post various new requirements in order to vote, as opposed 31 00:01:42,600 --> 00:01:45,440 Speaker 1: to just knocking out the particular piece that was determined 32 00:01:45,440 --> 00:01:48,400 Speaker 1: to have a discriminatory effect. If you see discriminatory intent, 33 00:01:48,560 --> 00:01:53,560 Speaker 1: the entire statute is painted. Rick. The Texas legislature did 34 00:01:53,640 --> 00:01:57,440 Speaker 1: introduce a new voter I D Bill. Does that solve 35 00:01:57,440 --> 00:02:01,200 Speaker 1: any of the problems of the former bill? Well, this 36 00:02:01,280 --> 00:02:03,440 Speaker 1: was one of the reasons that the Department of Justice 37 00:02:03,640 --> 00:02:07,919 Speaker 1: first tried to delay the hearing to give the state 38 00:02:07,960 --> 00:02:10,360 Speaker 1: a chance to fix the problems. Now it's not clear 39 00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:13,120 Speaker 1: how passing a new law would fix any problem with 40 00:02:13,200 --> 00:02:16,640 Speaker 1: past discriminatory intent, but it could fix the problem with 41 00:02:16,680 --> 00:02:19,880 Speaker 1: discriminatory effect, that is, if all the court ends up 42 00:02:19,919 --> 00:02:24,040 Speaker 1: saying is that the law had a racially discriminatory impact 43 00:02:24,160 --> 00:02:27,079 Speaker 1: on protect a minority voters. And in terms of the remedy, 44 00:02:27,440 --> 00:02:29,600 Speaker 1: the Fifth Circuit said, well, maybe you should listen to 45 00:02:29,600 --> 00:02:31,960 Speaker 1: what the state thinks is the best way to remedy things. 46 00:02:32,000 --> 00:02:35,040 Speaker 1: So it could have relevance going forward. It's not clear 47 00:02:35,080 --> 00:02:38,639 Speaker 1: if anything is actually going to happen in the Texas legislature. 48 00:02:38,840 --> 00:02:40,360 Speaker 1: I think a lot is going to depend on what 49 00:02:40,400 --> 00:02:44,520 Speaker 1: happens on the discrimatory intent. As Rick Hassion, a professor 50 00:02:44,560 --> 00:02:48,120 Speaker 1: at University of California Irvine School of Law, and Richard Brufalti, 51 00:02:48,200 --> 00:02:51,760 Speaker 1: professor at Columbia University Law School, speaking with Bloomberg Law 52 00:02:51,800 --> 00:02:54,640 Speaker 1: hosting Grosso and Greg Sture. You can listen to Bloomberg 53 00:02:54,720 --> 00:02:57,480 Speaker 1: Law weekdays at one pm Wall Street Time here on 54 00:02:57,560 --> 00:03:00,359 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Radio. And that's this morning's Bloomberg Law Brief. You 55 00:03:00,400 --> 00:03:02,640 Speaker 1: can find more legal news at Bloomberg Law dot com 56 00:03:02,680 --> 00:03:06,200 Speaker 1: and Bloomberg Bna dot com. Attorneys will find exceptional legal 57 00:03:06,200 --> 00:03:09,239 Speaker 1: research and business development tools there as well. Visit Bloomberg 58 00:03:09,320 --> 00:03:13,320 Speaker 1: Law dot com and Bloomberg BNA dot com for more information.