1 00:00:00,160 --> 00:00:04,400 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grasso, a federal judge 2 00:00:04,440 --> 00:00:08,680 Speaker 1: is questioning a proposed five fifty million dollars settlement of 3 00:00:08,680 --> 00:00:13,080 Speaker 1: a class action privacy lawsuit against Facebook, asking whether that's 4 00:00:13,119 --> 00:00:16,799 Speaker 1: really a lot of money under the circumstances. Facebook proposed 5 00:00:16,840 --> 00:00:19,799 Speaker 1: the deal in January to resolve the lawsuit, in which 6 00:00:19,920 --> 00:00:23,720 Speaker 1: users claim the company illegally gathered biometric data through a 7 00:00:23,760 --> 00:00:27,200 Speaker 1: photo tagging tool. The company needs the judge's approval to 8 00:00:27,360 --> 00:00:30,320 Speaker 1: escape a jury trial that could expose it to billions 9 00:00:30,320 --> 00:00:33,879 Speaker 1: of dollars in damages. My guest is Mark Rifkin, a 10 00:00:33,960 --> 00:00:38,839 Speaker 1: partner Wolf Hallden. Steam start by explaining the lawsuit and 11 00:00:39,040 --> 00:00:41,720 Speaker 1: what was at stake for Facebook. So, this is a 12 00:00:41,760 --> 00:00:45,040 Speaker 1: class action that has been brought by consumers under the 13 00:00:45,120 --> 00:00:51,280 Speaker 1: Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. And the plaintiffs complain that 14 00:00:51,479 --> 00:00:57,360 Speaker 1: Facebook used servers in California that captured biometric information from 15 00:00:57,600 --> 00:01:01,520 Speaker 1: consumers in Illinois without their knowledge or consent. And that's 16 00:01:01,520 --> 00:01:05,479 Speaker 1: a violation of this Illinois statute that imposes pretty substantial 17 00:01:05,520 --> 00:01:09,560 Speaker 1: penalties on companies like Facebook. But do that under this settlement, 18 00:01:09,760 --> 00:01:11,920 Speaker 1: the class members would get a hundred and fifty to 19 00:01:12,000 --> 00:01:17,400 Speaker 1: three hundred dollars or between of a possible recovery. Does 20 00:01:17,440 --> 00:01:19,960 Speaker 1: that sound low to you? Well, I hate to sound 21 00:01:19,959 --> 00:01:22,440 Speaker 1: like a lawyer when I answer that question, but it's 22 00:01:22,440 --> 00:01:26,240 Speaker 1: hard to answer because there are some issues that at 23 00:01:26,319 --> 00:01:29,480 Speaker 1: least the plaintiffs have raised in their brief and support 24 00:01:29,520 --> 00:01:33,840 Speaker 1: of the settlement that raise some questions about how successful 25 00:01:34,400 --> 00:01:37,240 Speaker 1: they might be. And part of that has to do 26 00:01:37,400 --> 00:01:41,200 Speaker 1: with the extent to which Illinois law can be applied 27 00:01:41,400 --> 00:01:45,640 Speaker 1: to a company that operates primarily outside of Illinois. For example, 28 00:01:45,680 --> 00:01:48,720 Speaker 1: this case is pending in the Northern District of California 29 00:01:48,800 --> 00:01:51,720 Speaker 1: because that's where Facebook is and its servers are not 30 00:01:51,800 --> 00:01:55,520 Speaker 1: located in Illinois. So the machines that are capturing the 31 00:01:55,560 --> 00:02:00,200 Speaker 1: biometrics are not located in the state. That makes at 32 00:02:00,280 --> 00:02:04,360 Speaker 1: conduct unlawful. That's one big question. The other question is 33 00:02:04,400 --> 00:02:07,520 Speaker 1: when you have a company as big as Facebook and 34 00:02:07,600 --> 00:02:12,560 Speaker 1: as many consumers are affected as are affected here, the 35 00:02:12,639 --> 00:02:19,640 Speaker 1: statutory penalty under the Illinois Statute becomes so large that 36 00:02:20,040 --> 00:02:23,760 Speaker 1: the court needs to exercise some discretion to keep the 37 00:02:23,880 --> 00:02:28,600 Speaker 1: case proportionate. And so, even though the statute allows for 38 00:02:28,680 --> 00:02:31,760 Speaker 1: a recovery of a thousand dollars for violation or as 39 00:02:31,840 --> 00:02:36,440 Speaker 1: much as five thousand dollars for for knowing and intentional violations. 40 00:02:36,680 --> 00:02:39,320 Speaker 1: It's not clear that that would be the recoverable amount. 41 00:02:39,520 --> 00:02:42,359 Speaker 1: So it's hard to say whether this is an adequate 42 00:02:42,400 --> 00:02:45,639 Speaker 1: settlement or not an adequate settlement because there's just too 43 00:02:45,639 --> 00:02:48,200 Speaker 1: many facts that that you need to know in order 44 00:02:48,200 --> 00:02:51,600 Speaker 1: to be able to make that determination. So the federal 45 00:02:51,720 --> 00:02:55,679 Speaker 1: Judge James Donato said at a hearing last week, that's 46 00:02:55,720 --> 00:02:59,080 Speaker 1: not an issue here. Five million dollars is a lot, 47 00:02:59,240 --> 00:03:03,119 Speaker 1: but the question is is it really a lot? Yeah? 48 00:03:03,200 --> 00:03:05,640 Speaker 1: I think what Judge Denato meant to say was it's 49 00:03:05,680 --> 00:03:08,840 Speaker 1: a lot of money, but is it enough money? And 50 00:03:08,840 --> 00:03:12,520 Speaker 1: and that depends upon how convinced you are that number one, 51 00:03:12,919 --> 00:03:16,200 Speaker 1: Illinois would be able to apply its laws to Facebook 52 00:03:16,880 --> 00:03:20,919 Speaker 1: when Facebook is acting outside of Illinois. And then number two, 53 00:03:21,080 --> 00:03:24,360 Speaker 1: when you aggregate all the damages of all the consumers 54 00:03:24,360 --> 00:03:29,200 Speaker 1: in Illinois who are affected, is the number that would 55 00:03:29,200 --> 00:03:33,320 Speaker 1: be imposed on on Facebook by way of statutory damages? 56 00:03:33,560 --> 00:03:36,840 Speaker 1: Is that just too big a number to be disproportionate? 57 00:03:37,520 --> 00:03:40,320 Speaker 1: And I think that those are questions that really need 58 00:03:40,400 --> 00:03:44,360 Speaker 1: to be explored. The one thing that I think everybody 59 00:03:44,480 --> 00:03:46,640 Speaker 1: is looking at as a sort of a game changer. 60 00:03:46,720 --> 00:03:49,960 Speaker 1: Here is the five billion dollar settlement that Facebook entered 61 00:03:50,000 --> 00:03:54,360 Speaker 1: into the two thousand nineteen with the FTC. And I 62 00:03:54,400 --> 00:03:58,480 Speaker 1: think that has gotten Judge Donato's attention, and he wants 63 00:03:58,520 --> 00:04:04,240 Speaker 1: to compare this settlement with the FTC settlement. The judges 64 00:04:04,360 --> 00:04:08,760 Speaker 1: asking the attorneys to address those concerns of his. But 65 00:04:08,880 --> 00:04:13,000 Speaker 1: weren't the issues different in the FTC case. Well, there 66 00:04:13,040 --> 00:04:17,239 Speaker 1: are different issues, but they're not unrelated issues. Look for years, 67 00:04:17,400 --> 00:04:21,600 Speaker 1: for for almost a decade already, Facebook has been under 68 00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:25,839 Speaker 1: intense scrutiny because of the way it treats consumer data. 69 00:04:26,240 --> 00:04:30,800 Speaker 1: And in two thousand twelve, Facebook entered into a settlement 70 00:04:30,920 --> 00:04:35,320 Speaker 1: order with the FTC that supposedly restricted its right to 71 00:04:36,279 --> 00:04:39,560 Speaker 1: control user data. Facebook has always said that if you 72 00:04:39,640 --> 00:04:42,840 Speaker 1: put something on Facebook, Facebook owns the data, and there's 73 00:04:42,880 --> 00:04:47,359 Speaker 1: been lots of pushback against that. Then in two thousand nineteen, 74 00:04:47,440 --> 00:04:51,719 Speaker 1: the FTC announces this enormous settlement, five billion dollars dwarfs 75 00:04:51,760 --> 00:04:54,840 Speaker 1: any kind of privacy settlement that's ever been ever been 76 00:04:54,880 --> 00:04:58,400 Speaker 1: inteviewed to. And they say, you ignored the restrictions that 77 00:04:58,440 --> 00:05:02,160 Speaker 1: we put on you into thousand twelve, and you've done so, 78 00:05:02,240 --> 00:05:05,320 Speaker 1: not just for users data, but also for the data 79 00:05:05,400 --> 00:05:08,200 Speaker 1: of the frames of users. And and part of this 80 00:05:08,279 --> 00:05:12,320 Speaker 1: is because Facebook creates such a web of connections between users. 81 00:05:13,200 --> 00:05:17,640 Speaker 1: It's it's just a monstrously big problem. And Judge Donato, 82 00:05:17,800 --> 00:05:22,200 Speaker 1: I think rightly said, look, does that conduct take us 83 00:05:22,200 --> 00:05:25,120 Speaker 1: out of the realm of a negligent violation of the 84 00:05:25,160 --> 00:05:29,200 Speaker 1: Illinois Biometric Privacy Statute? Or does it put Facebook in 85 00:05:29,240 --> 00:05:33,080 Speaker 1: the realm of being knowing an intentional and willful violator, 86 00:05:33,560 --> 00:05:38,160 Speaker 1: in which case the potential statutory damages under the Illinois 87 00:05:38,240 --> 00:05:41,799 Speaker 1: statute are not a thousand dollars per violations, but five 88 00:05:41,800 --> 00:05:45,320 Speaker 1: thousand dollars per violation. And that obviously changes the risk 89 00:05:45,480 --> 00:05:48,320 Speaker 1: to Facebook and the size of the case, and all 90 00:05:48,360 --> 00:05:50,800 Speaker 1: of those things I think need to be looked at 91 00:05:50,839 --> 00:05:55,160 Speaker 1: together to understand the way the court will view the 92 00:05:55,279 --> 00:05:58,560 Speaker 1: settlement that is being proposed to it. Do judges just 93 00:05:58,839 --> 00:06:03,000 Speaker 1: often rubber stay settlements like this? Is this unusual for 94 00:06:03,080 --> 00:06:07,040 Speaker 1: a judge or is it typical? Well, it's it's unusual, 95 00:06:07,160 --> 00:06:12,040 Speaker 1: but it's not unprecedented. Sometimes when a settlement is presented 96 00:06:12,040 --> 00:06:14,000 Speaker 1: to the court, the court will look at it and 97 00:06:14,240 --> 00:06:16,960 Speaker 1: realize very quickly that it falls within the range of 98 00:06:17,520 --> 00:06:22,000 Speaker 1: reasonableness and will preliminarily approve a settlement so that the 99 00:06:22,160 --> 00:06:25,000 Speaker 1: class members who are affected by a settlement can be 100 00:06:25,120 --> 00:06:29,000 Speaker 1: told about the proposed settlement and their views are solicited. 101 00:06:29,240 --> 00:06:35,440 Speaker 1: Occasionally a case like this, it looks to a judge like, 102 00:06:35,800 --> 00:06:39,159 Speaker 1: maybe we need some more explanation before I'm even prepared 103 00:06:39,720 --> 00:06:43,760 Speaker 1: to send notice of the proposed settlement to the class members. 104 00:06:43,800 --> 00:06:46,640 Speaker 1: And I think one of the things that changed the 105 00:06:46,680 --> 00:06:49,280 Speaker 1: way Judge Donato has looked at this case is the 106 00:06:49,360 --> 00:06:54,000 Speaker 1: FTC settlement that happened in two thousand nineteen, because it 107 00:06:54,200 --> 00:06:58,080 Speaker 1: stands out as a as a bell weather event, and 108 00:06:58,160 --> 00:07:00,520 Speaker 1: it may have changed the way he looked at the case. 109 00:07:00,560 --> 00:07:02,200 Speaker 1: It may have changed the way he looked at the 110 00:07:02,200 --> 00:07:05,000 Speaker 1: merits of the case, and he said, no, I need 111 00:07:05,080 --> 00:07:09,520 Speaker 1: some information, I need some explanation. Yes, fifty million dollars 112 00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:12,520 Speaker 1: is a big number, but how does it stack up 113 00:07:12,560 --> 00:07:17,040 Speaker 1: against what Facebook's real exposure is in this case? And 114 00:07:17,120 --> 00:07:19,880 Speaker 1: so it happens from time to time that a judge 115 00:07:19,920 --> 00:07:23,800 Speaker 1: will ask those questions. Sometimes the parties proceed with a 116 00:07:23,840 --> 00:07:27,000 Speaker 1: settlement the way it's proposed, and on occasion the parties 117 00:07:27,040 --> 00:07:29,720 Speaker 1: will modify a settlement to reflect what they think the 118 00:07:29,760 --> 00:07:33,400 Speaker 1: court's concerns are. It happens from time to time, not often, 119 00:07:33,440 --> 00:07:36,320 Speaker 1: but it does happen from time to time. So how 120 00:07:36,320 --> 00:07:39,600 Speaker 1: does it play into this that Facebook failed to get 121 00:07:39,640 --> 00:07:44,280 Speaker 1: a federal appeals court to reverse and also failed to 122 00:07:44,280 --> 00:07:47,920 Speaker 1: get us to the Supreme Court to take the case. Well, 123 00:07:47,960 --> 00:07:52,040 Speaker 1: obviously that that takes some of the risk from the 124 00:07:52,040 --> 00:07:56,600 Speaker 1: plaintiffs and puts it onto Facebook. And and that's part 125 00:07:56,680 --> 00:07:58,720 Speaker 1: of the calculus that the parties have to make when 126 00:07:58,720 --> 00:08:01,480 Speaker 1: they when they look at whether to try a case, 127 00:08:01,520 --> 00:08:04,800 Speaker 1: whether to settle a case, whatever it may be, and 128 00:08:04,800 --> 00:08:09,320 Speaker 1: and when when Facebook tried to appeal, when Facebook tried 129 00:08:09,360 --> 00:08:11,760 Speaker 1: to get the Supreme Court to take the appeal and 130 00:08:11,840 --> 00:08:17,040 Speaker 1: lost those those efforts, then now they have to recalculate 131 00:08:17,080 --> 00:08:20,320 Speaker 1: what they think their exposure is. And and obviously that 132 00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:24,640 Speaker 1: changes what they think the the value of the cases 133 00:08:25,480 --> 00:08:28,880 Speaker 1: um for them. And I and I think also again 134 00:08:28,920 --> 00:08:32,160 Speaker 1: I hate to keep coming back to this, but you know, 135 00:08:32,679 --> 00:08:37,520 Speaker 1: Facebook just settled a claim with the FTC for five 136 00:08:37,640 --> 00:08:41,839 Speaker 1: billion dollars. They don't really need any more scrutiny. And 137 00:08:41,880 --> 00:08:45,600 Speaker 1: I think that gives them even more impetus to try 138 00:08:45,600 --> 00:08:48,800 Speaker 1: to settle the case. And Judge Donato is mindful of that, 139 00:08:48,920 --> 00:08:52,000 Speaker 1: and I think he looks at it it says we 140 00:08:52,520 --> 00:08:56,559 Speaker 1: need to take a harder look at this settlement. Is 141 00:08:56,600 --> 00:09:00,960 Speaker 1: it is it fair to the to the individuals who 142 00:09:01,000 --> 00:09:04,720 Speaker 1: have this right under Illinois law that we are asking 143 00:09:04,760 --> 00:09:07,400 Speaker 1: them to take such a discount on what their statutory 144 00:09:07,440 --> 00:09:11,040 Speaker 1: claim might be. And Facebook does have a history of 145 00:09:11,080 --> 00:09:16,280 Speaker 1: settling privacy claims on the cheap, so to speak. They 146 00:09:16,280 --> 00:09:20,880 Speaker 1: make good deals. Well, you know, I think that when 147 00:09:20,880 --> 00:09:23,560 Speaker 1: you're when you're dealing with a company as large as 148 00:09:23,600 --> 00:09:27,600 Speaker 1: Facebook and as many users as Facebook has, the numbers 149 00:09:27,640 --> 00:09:30,400 Speaker 1: get very big, very fast, and so the exposure gets 150 00:09:30,520 --> 00:09:34,079 Speaker 1: very big, very fast. And and Facebook is, if nothing else, 151 00:09:34,160 --> 00:09:39,040 Speaker 1: they are incredibly efficient at analyzing data and calculating risk 152 00:09:39,080 --> 00:09:43,480 Speaker 1: and reward. They've they've settled cases that you know, maybe 153 00:09:43,559 --> 00:09:47,920 Speaker 1: look like their reasonable bargains, but I keep you know 154 00:09:48,000 --> 00:09:51,800 Speaker 1: that that five billion dollar FTC settlement, even for Facebook, 155 00:09:51,880 --> 00:09:55,160 Speaker 1: that's an eye popping number. And and now they have 156 00:09:55,920 --> 00:10:01,200 Speaker 1: this large liability under the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act, and 157 00:10:01,200 --> 00:10:02,680 Speaker 1: and they're going to have to deal with it in 158 00:10:02,720 --> 00:10:05,640 Speaker 1: a way that is going to satisfy not just the court, 159 00:10:06,120 --> 00:10:09,120 Speaker 1: but ultimately the class members who are going to be 160 00:10:09,160 --> 00:10:12,200 Speaker 1: asked whether they support the settlement, and and they're going 161 00:10:12,280 --> 00:10:16,120 Speaker 1: to have to put together a presentation that is going 162 00:10:16,160 --> 00:10:19,000 Speaker 1: to have to make sense to the constituents who are involved. 163 00:10:19,240 --> 00:10:20,880 Speaker 1: So whether they're going to be able to sell this 164 00:10:20,920 --> 00:10:24,600 Speaker 1: case on the cheap or not, I think that their 165 00:10:24,640 --> 00:10:27,120 Speaker 1: ability to do that is probably a little bit less 166 00:10:27,160 --> 00:10:30,080 Speaker 1: today than it was last week, because Judge Donato says, 167 00:10:30,160 --> 00:10:32,560 Speaker 1: not quite yet. Let's take a harder and look at this. 168 00:10:32,760 --> 00:10:36,520 Speaker 1: We'll see what happens. Judge Donato also said a trial 169 00:10:36,679 --> 00:10:39,640 Speaker 1: is not out of the question yet nothing has been approved. 170 00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:44,439 Speaker 1: Would he really force them to trial when a settlement 171 00:10:44,800 --> 00:10:48,040 Speaker 1: is agreed to by the parties, Well, in a case 172 00:10:48,120 --> 00:10:51,600 Speaker 1: like this, where you have tens of thousands, or hundreds 173 00:10:51,600 --> 00:10:54,520 Speaker 1: of thousands, or millions of users in the state of Illinois, 174 00:10:54,840 --> 00:10:58,640 Speaker 1: the answer is the court has a um it has 175 00:10:58,679 --> 00:11:03,280 Speaker 1: a duty to protect the absent class members, and it's 176 00:11:03,280 --> 00:11:06,200 Speaker 1: going to take that duty seriously. And and right now, 177 00:11:06,320 --> 00:11:10,720 Speaker 1: Judge Donato says, I'm not convinced yet that this settlement 178 00:11:11,040 --> 00:11:14,760 Speaker 1: is within the range that I could approve, And and 179 00:11:14,840 --> 00:11:16,600 Speaker 1: so I think it's going to be incumbent on the 180 00:11:16,640 --> 00:11:18,640 Speaker 1: parties to do one or two things. They're either going 181 00:11:18,679 --> 00:11:22,160 Speaker 1: to have to show Judge Donato why this five million 182 00:11:22,200 --> 00:11:25,559 Speaker 1: dollar settlement is worthy of preliminary approval, and they may 183 00:11:25,640 --> 00:11:28,440 Speaker 1: need to do a little bit more work to explain 184 00:11:28,520 --> 00:11:32,160 Speaker 1: why they think the risk justifies the settlement, or they're 185 00:11:32,200 --> 00:11:36,320 Speaker 1: going to have to modify the settlement. I would expect 186 00:11:36,760 --> 00:11:40,480 Speaker 1: that Judge Donato would rather see a settlement than a trial, 187 00:11:41,559 --> 00:11:44,679 Speaker 1: but it has to be a fair settlement. And and 188 00:11:44,840 --> 00:11:48,440 Speaker 1: right now he is at least skeptical based on the 189 00:11:48,480 --> 00:11:52,559 Speaker 1: presentation that has been made to him. And so the 190 00:11:53,040 --> 00:11:55,480 Speaker 1: options that the parties have is either to improve the 191 00:11:55,520 --> 00:11:59,680 Speaker 1: settlement if if that's in the cards, or to make 192 00:11:59,720 --> 00:12:03,880 Speaker 1: a later showing why this settlement and this discount, if 193 00:12:03,880 --> 00:12:08,720 Speaker 1: you will, from the statutory damages that could be recovered 194 00:12:09,160 --> 00:12:13,240 Speaker 1: is warranted. Mark. If the judge refuses, let's just say 195 00:12:13,280 --> 00:12:16,760 Speaker 1: the judge refuses to approve the settlement, can the parties 196 00:12:17,240 --> 00:12:22,000 Speaker 1: appeal that If they would have no right to appeal it, 197 00:12:22,120 --> 00:12:25,440 Speaker 1: they could they could seek permission to appeal it. I 198 00:12:25,480 --> 00:12:28,960 Speaker 1: think it would be unlikely that an appeal would be 199 00:12:29,000 --> 00:12:31,960 Speaker 1: taken by the by the Ninth Circuit, I think here 200 00:12:32,200 --> 00:12:36,800 Speaker 1: it's the decision whether to approve or reject a proposed 201 00:12:36,800 --> 00:12:41,520 Speaker 1: preliminary settlement that falls squarely within the District Court's discretion. 202 00:12:42,440 --> 00:12:47,120 Speaker 1: And and I think Judge donato Is is just simply 203 00:12:47,160 --> 00:12:50,680 Speaker 1: doing what is appropriate for him under these circumstances. He's 204 00:12:50,760 --> 00:12:53,880 Speaker 1: asking questions that need to be answered, and the answer 205 00:12:53,920 --> 00:12:56,679 Speaker 1: has two different paths. It could take. One path is 206 00:12:57,240 --> 00:13:00,040 Speaker 1: we have reasons that we haven't explained for wing to 207 00:13:00,160 --> 00:13:02,600 Speaker 1: why this is a good settlement, and then they choose 208 00:13:02,640 --> 00:13:05,920 Speaker 1: that path. Or the other path is Judge, we've heard you, 209 00:13:05,960 --> 00:13:08,600 Speaker 1: We've gone back, we've taken a harder look at what 210 00:13:08,640 --> 00:13:11,880 Speaker 1: the risks are, and we've decided to raise the settlement 211 00:13:11,920 --> 00:13:15,600 Speaker 1: consideration to X dollars. And either one of those paths 212 00:13:15,640 --> 00:13:19,120 Speaker 1: could lead to a preliminary approval, but I think that 213 00:13:19,240 --> 00:13:23,440 Speaker 1: the path to an appellent review is incredibly steep. Thanks Mark. 214 00:13:23,800 --> 00:13:28,440 Speaker 1: That's Mark riskin a partner We'll call and seen. For months, 215 00:13:28,480 --> 00:13:31,319 Speaker 1: federal courts across the country have been shuttered due to 216 00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:34,559 Speaker 1: the pandemic, but the doors of federal court houses are 217 00:13:34,640 --> 00:13:38,480 Speaker 1: slowly starting to swing open with the convening of socially 218 00:13:38,600 --> 00:13:42,520 Speaker 1: distanced grand juries. These are the jurist task with deciding 219 00:13:42,559 --> 00:13:46,400 Speaker 1: whether to issue criminal indictments, joining me as Madison Alder 220 00:13:46,440 --> 00:13:49,760 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law reporter. So, Maddie, is it just the grand 221 00:13:49,800 --> 00:13:52,480 Speaker 1: juries that are going to be brought back in and 222 00:13:52,679 --> 00:13:55,640 Speaker 1: if so, how many? So it's for now, it's just 223 00:13:55,760 --> 00:13:57,880 Speaker 1: grand juries, and in a few of these places. But 224 00:13:57,960 --> 00:14:02,160 Speaker 1: you know, we've seen dates projected for jury trials in 225 00:14:02,559 --> 00:14:05,839 Speaker 1: courts um all across the nation. I mean, we saw 226 00:14:05,960 --> 00:14:09,840 Speaker 1: that the Northern District of California was projecting jury trials 227 00:14:09,920 --> 00:14:13,000 Speaker 1: to take place in the fall, Western District of Washington 228 00:14:13,120 --> 00:14:16,360 Speaker 1: is protecting that they might take place at the end 229 00:14:16,400 --> 00:14:18,640 Speaker 1: of the year to early next year. And those are 230 00:14:18,679 --> 00:14:21,960 Speaker 1: two extreme examples, but in a lot of areas, grand 231 00:14:22,000 --> 00:14:27,000 Speaker 1: juries or the precursor to jury trials eventually taking place. 232 00:14:27,000 --> 00:14:32,000 Speaker 1: So grand juries are are now can happen in ten 233 00:14:32,640 --> 00:14:35,920 Speaker 1: of the ninety four federal district courts, at least ten 234 00:14:36,080 --> 00:14:39,080 Speaker 1: of the ninety four federal district courts. Uh, And you know, 235 00:14:39,160 --> 00:14:41,760 Speaker 1: I'm sure it'll only go up from there before we 236 00:14:41,920 --> 00:14:46,600 Speaker 1: get into specifics about them coming back explain the role 237 00:14:46,680 --> 00:14:50,600 Speaker 1: of the grand jury in our legal system. So the 238 00:14:50,680 --> 00:14:54,400 Speaker 1: grand jury is typically made up of sixteen to twenty 239 00:14:54,440 --> 00:14:58,120 Speaker 1: three people normal jury is six to twelve repetite jury 240 00:14:58,200 --> 00:15:01,560 Speaker 1: should say, uh. In a grand jury, their role is 241 00:15:01,720 --> 00:15:04,920 Speaker 1: to review the evidence in the case, review the fact 242 00:15:04,920 --> 00:15:07,160 Speaker 1: of the case, uh, and come to a determination on 243 00:15:07,200 --> 00:15:11,000 Speaker 1: an indictment. UM. It is very easy to get an 244 00:15:11,000 --> 00:15:14,560 Speaker 1: indictment through a grand jury. UH. You know, there's there's 245 00:15:14,560 --> 00:15:17,200 Speaker 1: a joke in the legal space that you could indicte 246 00:15:17,240 --> 00:15:21,520 Speaker 1: a ham sandwich. Um. And so it's it's one of 247 00:15:21,520 --> 00:15:25,720 Speaker 1: those things that uh, it often gets I think a 248 00:15:25,760 --> 00:15:29,520 Speaker 1: connotation that it's just another step in the process. UM. 249 00:15:29,520 --> 00:15:31,480 Speaker 1: But you know, I did have sources tell me that 250 00:15:31,600 --> 00:15:35,440 Speaker 1: it is. It is an important part of community involvement 251 00:15:35,520 --> 00:15:37,840 Speaker 1: in these cases, and it is important in cases where 252 00:15:37,840 --> 00:15:42,560 Speaker 1: evidence might be lacking. And speaking of community involvement, how 253 00:15:42,560 --> 00:15:45,280 Speaker 1: do they intend to get a fair cross section of 254 00:15:45,320 --> 00:15:48,920 Speaker 1: the community in these times? So that was one of 255 00:15:48,920 --> 00:15:52,320 Speaker 1: the concerns that defenders brought up to me, criminal defense 256 00:15:52,320 --> 00:15:54,480 Speaker 1: attorneys excuse me, brought up to me when I was 257 00:15:54,520 --> 00:15:57,640 Speaker 1: talking to them. You know, if if you are a 258 00:15:57,640 --> 00:16:01,760 Speaker 1: healthcare worker, or you're in a high risk uh you're 259 00:16:01,880 --> 00:16:05,120 Speaker 1: you're at high risk for the coronavirus um or you 260 00:16:05,160 --> 00:16:07,360 Speaker 1: know a number of different factors, you might be easily 261 00:16:07,360 --> 00:16:10,000 Speaker 1: excused from a grand jury. Uh. And that means that 262 00:16:10,040 --> 00:16:13,800 Speaker 1: you're you're limiting a certain section of the community from 263 00:16:13,800 --> 00:16:17,080 Speaker 1: being involved. So that is a concern for defense attorneys. 264 00:16:17,120 --> 00:16:19,640 Speaker 1: But the courts I talked to you that are doing this, Uh, 265 00:16:19,680 --> 00:16:21,360 Speaker 1: you know, I talked to the Middle District of Georgia. 266 00:16:21,480 --> 00:16:24,000 Speaker 1: I talked to the District of Montana. Both of them 267 00:16:24,640 --> 00:16:28,120 Speaker 1: have reached out to jurors. They've engaged with them, uh, 268 00:16:28,160 --> 00:16:30,520 Speaker 1: and and try to figure out you know, at least 269 00:16:30,520 --> 00:16:32,880 Speaker 1: from Montana's sake, they were trying to get jurors back 270 00:16:33,400 --> 00:16:38,080 Speaker 1: who were entangled before everything happened in March, So they 271 00:16:38,080 --> 00:16:39,520 Speaker 1: were trying to get them back to the court and 272 00:16:39,880 --> 00:16:42,840 Speaker 1: they were you know, contacting them, making sure that that 273 00:16:43,200 --> 00:16:47,680 Speaker 1: the proceedings that they decided on could benefit those those 274 00:16:47,760 --> 00:16:50,320 Speaker 1: jurors when they came back in. So courts are really 275 00:16:50,440 --> 00:16:52,560 Speaker 1: you know, making the effort. But it is definitely a 276 00:16:52,600 --> 00:16:56,480 Speaker 1: concern for defense journeys to So, now, how will the 277 00:16:56,520 --> 00:17:01,320 Speaker 1: grand jurors be seated? How will they listen to the recedings. So, 278 00:17:02,120 --> 00:17:04,800 Speaker 1: like everything with a pandemic, it's different from court to court. 279 00:17:05,359 --> 00:17:08,240 Speaker 1: But some of the creative ways that we're seeing courts 280 00:17:08,240 --> 00:17:11,639 Speaker 1: to do this are splitting up stars into different rooms, 281 00:17:12,119 --> 00:17:14,960 Speaker 1: different courthouses. Even that's what Montana did when they did 282 00:17:14,960 --> 00:17:17,679 Speaker 1: their grand jury at the beginning of May. They split 283 00:17:17,760 --> 00:17:21,800 Speaker 1: up members of this jury into three different courthouses, three 284 00:17:21,800 --> 00:17:25,320 Speaker 1: different cities, and they connected them via video. Now, not 285 00:17:25,440 --> 00:17:28,440 Speaker 1: every courthouse is doing things that are that extreme. Uh. 286 00:17:28,600 --> 00:17:32,359 Speaker 1: Their district Middle District of Georgia, uh is planning to 287 00:17:32,520 --> 00:17:34,880 Speaker 1: just spread people out among different rooms of the same 288 00:17:34,920 --> 00:17:38,960 Speaker 1: courthouse and similarly do that video connection. Um. But you know, 289 00:17:39,040 --> 00:17:42,000 Speaker 1: I've seen other courts mentioned that they're going to be 290 00:17:42,119 --> 00:17:48,640 Speaker 1: using larger rooms, separating people out through a larger ceremonial courtroom. Uh. 291 00:17:48,680 --> 00:17:50,480 Speaker 1: So there are a number of different ways courts are 292 00:17:50,600 --> 00:17:54,000 Speaker 1: approaching this. The over watching element of importance to a 293 00:17:54,040 --> 00:17:56,960 Speaker 1: grand jury is grand jury secrecy. So we hear this 294 00:17:57,040 --> 00:18:01,320 Speaker 1: time and time again. How do they maintain secrecy if 295 00:18:01,400 --> 00:18:03,919 Speaker 1: it's on video or they concerned that there might be 296 00:18:04,119 --> 00:18:07,600 Speaker 1: hacking or someone else might be in a room? That 297 00:18:07,720 --> 00:18:10,960 Speaker 1: is definitely I mean, there are concerns with grand jury's secrecy, 298 00:18:11,040 --> 00:18:15,000 Speaker 1: with some of these procedures that they're they're adopting during 299 00:18:15,000 --> 00:18:17,560 Speaker 1: this time. One of the ones that I've heard from 300 00:18:17,640 --> 00:18:21,439 Speaker 1: defense attorneys, is potentially having a larger room you just have, 301 00:18:22,080 --> 00:18:26,560 Speaker 1: you know, more likelihood that these proceedings might be more 302 00:18:26,600 --> 00:18:29,400 Speaker 1: out front in the courtroom than they'd like. Doom has 303 00:18:29,520 --> 00:18:32,600 Speaker 1: has had issues with its secrecy, so that that could 304 00:18:32,600 --> 00:18:36,040 Speaker 1: definitely be a concern. But I know that at least 305 00:18:36,040 --> 00:18:39,120 Speaker 1: for the Middle District of Georgia, the U S Attorney 306 00:18:39,160 --> 00:18:42,359 Speaker 1: there told me that they're going to be stationing marshals 307 00:18:42,400 --> 00:18:45,240 Speaker 1: outside each one of these individual courtrooms to make sure 308 00:18:45,320 --> 00:18:48,960 Speaker 1: that grandjury secrecy is protected. So, Maddie, are these grand 309 00:18:49,040 --> 00:18:52,000 Speaker 1: jury is going to be able to ask questions and 310 00:18:52,080 --> 00:18:56,520 Speaker 1: deliberate in the way they normally do. So each one 311 00:18:56,800 --> 00:18:59,800 Speaker 1: of these grand juries will have be able to do 312 00:19:00,040 --> 00:19:03,600 Speaker 1: each one of their requirements through through the video proceedings, 313 00:19:03,600 --> 00:19:05,480 Speaker 1: I know in a few of these cases. So that's 314 00:19:05,560 --> 00:19:10,640 Speaker 1: asking questions, that's deliberating, that's coming to a determination in 315 00:19:10,720 --> 00:19:13,560 Speaker 1: the in the case. So um, you know, for the 316 00:19:13,560 --> 00:19:15,760 Speaker 1: courts that are starting these juries back up, they say 317 00:19:15,800 --> 00:19:18,560 Speaker 1: that you can do every single part of grand jury 318 00:19:18,600 --> 00:19:21,880 Speaker 1: remotely that you could when you're you're doing it all 319 00:19:21,960 --> 00:19:25,080 Speaker 1: in person. It may be a substitute for the grand 320 00:19:25,119 --> 00:19:28,560 Speaker 1: jury process, but there might be constraints on some of 321 00:19:28,600 --> 00:19:33,399 Speaker 1: the jurors because they're on video, or some of the 322 00:19:33,440 --> 00:19:36,840 Speaker 1: witnesses because they're on video, and it sounds like there's 323 00:19:36,960 --> 00:19:41,600 Speaker 1: a lot of details that might make it a stilted 324 00:19:41,680 --> 00:19:46,520 Speaker 1: kind of process. That's a concern for defense attorneys for sure. 325 00:19:46,760 --> 00:19:49,520 Speaker 1: I spoke with with one defense attorney who told me 326 00:19:49,600 --> 00:19:53,719 Speaker 1: that just the sheer fact of something being on video 327 00:19:53,920 --> 00:19:56,840 Speaker 1: and a juror potentially not being able to see the 328 00:19:56,920 --> 00:20:01,439 Speaker 1: face of a witness or you know, someone's reaction to 329 00:20:01,480 --> 00:20:05,960 Speaker 1: a question or um, just that disconnect I mean, she says, 330 00:20:05,960 --> 00:20:09,159 Speaker 1: that disconnects you from the gravity of the situation. And 331 00:20:09,800 --> 00:20:12,160 Speaker 1: that's a that's a big concern for defense attorneys, even 332 00:20:12,200 --> 00:20:15,320 Speaker 1: when it comes to potential use of video and jury trials. 333 00:20:15,840 --> 00:20:18,800 Speaker 1: Um that's being talked about, and that's another thing that 334 00:20:18,840 --> 00:20:23,000 Speaker 1: they're concerned about, is having this disconnect of the people 335 00:20:23,040 --> 00:20:26,480 Speaker 1: who are supposed to be, you know, judging the facts 336 00:20:26,480 --> 00:20:30,439 Speaker 1: of the case and coming to their own conclusion, distances 337 00:20:30,520 --> 00:20:33,960 Speaker 1: them from the material that they're listening to. Are any 338 00:20:34,000 --> 00:20:38,280 Speaker 1: of the judges concerned that after a grand jury returns 339 00:20:38,280 --> 00:20:42,960 Speaker 1: an indictment that a defense attorney will challenge because of 340 00:20:43,000 --> 00:20:46,639 Speaker 1: the way the grand jury process was structured. So the 341 00:20:46,640 --> 00:20:49,360 Speaker 1: courts I talked to are not really concerned. But as 342 00:20:49,400 --> 00:20:52,200 Speaker 1: they say that, there's a big amount of flexibility that 343 00:20:52,400 --> 00:20:55,760 Speaker 1: is afforded to grand juries and how they proceed. Uh, 344 00:20:55,880 --> 00:20:59,159 Speaker 1: so they're confident that these procedures are legally found or 345 00:20:59,200 --> 00:21:04,040 Speaker 1: reasonably comp that these procedures are legally sound. Um, you know, 346 00:21:04,119 --> 00:21:07,520 Speaker 1: but that doesn't mean some creative lawyer can come along 347 00:21:07,600 --> 00:21:12,040 Speaker 1: and and and challenge and challenge one of these indictments. UM. 348 00:21:12,080 --> 00:21:15,080 Speaker 1: I haven't heard anything to that effect, but you know, UM, 349 00:21:15,600 --> 00:21:17,800 Speaker 1: I'm sure it's not out of the question. Did any 350 00:21:17,840 --> 00:21:20,440 Speaker 1: of the judges tell you the reason they were starting 351 00:21:20,480 --> 00:21:23,720 Speaker 1: the grand juries up again was a fear that statute 352 00:21:23,720 --> 00:21:26,960 Speaker 1: of limitations would run out. That is a major consideration 353 00:21:27,000 --> 00:21:31,200 Speaker 1: to statutes of limitation, and with the Speedy Trial Act. 354 00:21:31,680 --> 00:21:34,280 Speaker 1: You know, I heard from one federal judge who told 355 00:21:34,320 --> 00:21:37,080 Speaker 1: me that this is not something that they know that 356 00:21:37,160 --> 00:21:40,160 Speaker 1: they they're not sure how long that this could they 357 00:21:40,160 --> 00:21:44,560 Speaker 1: can keep issuing these orders that suspend statutes of limitation 358 00:21:44,680 --> 00:21:47,840 Speaker 1: and to spend the Speedy Trial Act. Um, A lot 359 00:21:47,840 --> 00:21:52,560 Speaker 1: of courts, right after the pandemic happened, started suspensions of 360 00:21:52,600 --> 00:21:55,879 Speaker 1: the Speedy Trial Act, and you know, there's a question 361 00:21:56,400 --> 00:21:58,679 Speaker 1: out there as to whether or not those proceedings are 362 00:21:58,760 --> 00:22:02,280 Speaker 1: legally sound. UH. I talked to a lot professor who 363 00:22:02,359 --> 00:22:05,600 Speaker 1: told me that there is a good chance that those 364 00:22:05,640 --> 00:22:08,560 Speaker 1: could be challenged, those kind of orders that are suspending 365 00:22:08,920 --> 00:22:12,480 Speaker 1: of those really important deadlines. Were all the federal courts 366 00:22:12,640 --> 00:22:17,560 Speaker 1: basically closed for the last few months during the pandemic? 367 00:22:17,600 --> 00:22:20,480 Speaker 1: In other words, were there any grand juries that were 368 00:22:20,480 --> 00:22:24,800 Speaker 1: operating at all? The short answers? It's very hard to tell. Um. 369 00:22:24,840 --> 00:22:27,040 Speaker 1: You know, when we're looking at federal courts, we're looking 370 00:22:27,200 --> 00:22:30,680 Speaker 1: at UH court orders that come out, but grand juries 371 00:22:30,720 --> 00:22:35,600 Speaker 1: are secretive, and if it's not reflected in a general order, UM, 372 00:22:35,640 --> 00:22:38,600 Speaker 1: we might not see it. So from what we know, 373 00:22:39,160 --> 00:22:42,879 Speaker 1: there has been at least one jury trial that that 374 00:22:43,000 --> 00:22:46,560 Speaker 1: happened during the pandemic, and then there was the grand 375 00:22:46,640 --> 00:22:50,359 Speaker 1: jury in Montana that happened at the beginning of May. UM. 376 00:22:50,520 --> 00:22:53,520 Speaker 1: But you know, other than that, it is very hard 377 00:22:53,560 --> 00:22:57,520 Speaker 1: to tell what's happening in in all ninety four federal 378 00:22:57,560 --> 00:23:01,439 Speaker 1: district courts because they are so independent from one another, 379 00:23:01,920 --> 00:23:05,080 Speaker 1: and it is very different when it comes to how 380 00:23:05,200 --> 00:23:09,800 Speaker 1: they update their procedures and what's going on on their calendar, 381 00:23:09,880 --> 00:23:12,760 Speaker 1: on their website. You know, I'm also wondering are they 382 00:23:12,880 --> 00:23:17,719 Speaker 1: fitted to do this video conferencing basically video conferencing, I mean, 383 00:23:17,760 --> 00:23:21,080 Speaker 1: have they had to install equipment? And are some courts 384 00:23:21,119 --> 00:23:23,439 Speaker 1: ahead of other courts on that. Some courts in the 385 00:23:23,440 --> 00:23:28,639 Speaker 1: beginning mentioned adopting new video procedures, and you know, I 386 00:23:28,640 --> 00:23:30,560 Speaker 1: know a lot of courts have mentioned that they're using 387 00:23:30,600 --> 00:23:34,119 Speaker 1: things like Zoom. But I I'm sure that this is 388 00:23:34,119 --> 00:23:36,440 Speaker 1: prompting a lot of courts to take another look at 389 00:23:36,960 --> 00:23:41,879 Speaker 1: their their video equipment and try to to revamp it 390 00:23:42,320 --> 00:23:44,320 Speaker 1: to make sure that they can still do these kind 391 00:23:44,359 --> 00:23:48,359 Speaker 1: of proceedings. This is part of a four phased approach. 392 00:23:48,600 --> 00:23:53,159 Speaker 1: Tell us about that approach. So the Administrative Office of 393 00:23:53,200 --> 00:23:56,360 Speaker 1: the Court, they're released a guidance from the Judicial Conference 394 00:23:57,160 --> 00:24:00,160 Speaker 1: that basically said, you know, here's how you can start 395 00:24:00,200 --> 00:24:03,520 Speaker 1: reopening uh, and that was you know, it's got four 396 00:24:03,600 --> 00:24:07,119 Speaker 1: different phases. In the first two phases, grand juries are 397 00:24:07,160 --> 00:24:10,760 Speaker 1: included in both of those, so courts have the option 398 00:24:10,920 --> 00:24:14,399 Speaker 1: to start grand juries. Um. And and it really is 399 00:24:14,600 --> 00:24:20,600 Speaker 1: each of these phases is uh, it's determinative on what 400 00:24:20,760 --> 00:24:24,640 Speaker 1: the health situation is in the community that that court 401 00:24:24,720 --> 00:24:27,600 Speaker 1: is located in so there's a lot of public health 402 00:24:27,640 --> 00:24:30,920 Speaker 1: factors that come into play when when courts are looking 403 00:24:30,920 --> 00:24:33,399 Speaker 1: at if they're going to enter phase one or two. 404 00:24:34,280 --> 00:24:37,080 Speaker 1: Uh So, I mean it's kind of the way that 405 00:24:37,119 --> 00:24:42,560 Speaker 1: we saw the pandemic effect. The courts really did correlate 406 00:24:42,600 --> 00:24:45,960 Speaker 1: with those, uh those health factors. You know, we saw 407 00:24:46,359 --> 00:24:49,080 Speaker 1: the Western District of Washington was the first court to 408 00:24:49,480 --> 00:24:53,560 Speaker 1: respond to this when they had a large outbreak in 409 00:24:54,040 --> 00:24:58,120 Speaker 1: near Seattle. And then we saw California, New York, West 410 00:24:58,200 --> 00:25:01,240 Speaker 1: Virginia courts where some of last to respond, and that's 411 00:25:01,280 --> 00:25:03,280 Speaker 1: where one of the last states to have their first 412 00:25:03,280 --> 00:25:06,439 Speaker 1: case of coronavirus. But now as as we're reopening, we're seeing, 413 00:25:06,840 --> 00:25:10,240 Speaker 1: you know, areas like Montana, which had among the least 414 00:25:10,240 --> 00:25:15,480 Speaker 1: coronavirus cases in the US, they're starting to to pick 415 00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:19,040 Speaker 1: up back up with some of these in person procedures. 416 00:25:19,080 --> 00:25:22,720 Speaker 1: So I think as we go forward, local health factors 417 00:25:22,720 --> 00:25:25,960 Speaker 1: are going to be a huge, huge indicator of whether 418 00:25:26,080 --> 00:25:28,320 Speaker 1: or not the court in your area, in the photo 419 00:25:28,400 --> 00:25:31,840 Speaker 1: court in your area is starting back up with normal procedures. 420 00:25:31,920 --> 00:25:36,560 Speaker 1: So New York was the hardest hit state, and New 421 00:25:36,640 --> 00:25:41,080 Speaker 1: York has the largest docket among federal courts in the country, 422 00:25:41,480 --> 00:25:45,160 Speaker 1: and I've heard from lawyers that things are really backing 423 00:25:45,280 --> 00:25:48,639 Speaker 1: up and they were behind before. Are they one of 424 00:25:48,680 --> 00:25:52,280 Speaker 1: the courts that are going to start with grand juries. 425 00:25:53,000 --> 00:25:56,280 Speaker 1: They are not courts that we have heard of with 426 00:25:56,359 --> 00:26:00,480 Speaker 1: regards to starting up grand juries. But you know that 427 00:26:00,480 --> 00:26:03,119 Speaker 1: that's probably because of a health situation in their area. 428 00:26:03,720 --> 00:26:05,120 Speaker 1: You know, a lot of the courts that we've seen 429 00:26:05,160 --> 00:26:09,800 Speaker 1: starting gradualis of are in more rural areas where coronavirus 430 00:26:09,880 --> 00:26:14,840 Speaker 1: just has not cred its tentacles. But you know, the 431 00:26:14,920 --> 00:26:18,400 Speaker 1: courts that are still in impacted areas, it doesn't mean 432 00:26:18,400 --> 00:26:21,159 Speaker 1: they're not doing any work. They're still going forward with 433 00:26:21,200 --> 00:26:23,879 Speaker 1: what they can um. There are certain types of remote 434 00:26:23,880 --> 00:26:27,560 Speaker 1: proceedings that were allowed by the Judicial Conference after the 435 00:26:27,600 --> 00:26:30,560 Speaker 1: Cares Act was passed, So there are courts that are 436 00:26:31,480 --> 00:26:35,720 Speaker 1: using those kinds of mechanisms to keep things going. But 437 00:26:36,359 --> 00:26:38,520 Speaker 1: you're you're right, there is a backlogs if it is 438 00:26:38,520 --> 00:26:40,800 Speaker 1: going to come. And you know, I've heard the same 439 00:26:40,920 --> 00:26:44,200 Speaker 1: lawyers are worried about the judges are worried about this. Uh, 440 00:26:44,240 --> 00:26:47,280 Speaker 1: it's it's only a matter of time before that that 441 00:26:47,400 --> 00:26:50,840 Speaker 1: becomes a bit your issue. I imagine that in places 442 00:26:50,920 --> 00:26:54,199 Speaker 1: like New York, they're going to have a lot of people, 443 00:26:54,720 --> 00:26:57,000 Speaker 1: a lot more people than in rural areas who just 444 00:26:57,240 --> 00:26:59,960 Speaker 1: don't want to come in and sit because when you're 445 00:27:00,080 --> 00:27:02,600 Speaker 1: grand jury, it's not just a question of coming in, 446 00:27:02,680 --> 00:27:06,000 Speaker 1: you know, for one trial. Right. Yeah. I think that 447 00:27:06,359 --> 00:27:07,919 Speaker 1: some of the larger cities are going to have a 448 00:27:07,960 --> 00:27:12,000 Speaker 1: tougher time getting these these kinds of getting both grand 449 00:27:12,040 --> 00:27:16,840 Speaker 1: juries and juries restarted, because it's going to be harder 450 00:27:16,880 --> 00:27:19,960 Speaker 1: to convene a group of people who are ready and 451 00:27:20,040 --> 00:27:23,280 Speaker 1: willing to serve in a time of crisis like this. 452 00:27:23,480 --> 00:27:26,320 Speaker 1: You know, and as we've heard with the health guidelines, 453 00:27:26,400 --> 00:27:29,000 Speaker 1: it's not really it's not really your health you're putting 454 00:27:29,000 --> 00:27:30,760 Speaker 1: on the line. It could be your family member's health. 455 00:27:30,800 --> 00:27:33,240 Speaker 1: So maybe you have someone who's you know, at risk 456 00:27:33,280 --> 00:27:36,040 Speaker 1: family member that you're living with. It really does restrict 457 00:27:36,119 --> 00:27:39,639 Speaker 1: the jury pool quite a bit when you're starting to 458 00:27:39,680 --> 00:27:42,760 Speaker 1: get into some of those larger areas. Did any defense 459 00:27:42,840 --> 00:27:46,359 Speaker 1: lawyers just tell you flat out that if they have 460 00:27:46,400 --> 00:27:49,439 Speaker 1: a grand jury who indicts a client of mind and 461 00:27:49,480 --> 00:27:54,880 Speaker 1: these circumstances, I'm going to challenge that indictment. No, I 462 00:27:54,880 --> 00:27:58,359 Speaker 1: I haven't heard that from criminal defense lawyers. But you know, 463 00:27:58,400 --> 00:28:02,200 Speaker 1: I will say that they're they're probably we waiting and watching. Um, 464 00:28:02,240 --> 00:28:07,400 Speaker 1: these are definitely concerning to criminal defense attorneys. Uh. So 465 00:28:08,160 --> 00:28:10,439 Speaker 1: you know, it's not to say it can't happen, but 466 00:28:11,160 --> 00:28:12,880 Speaker 1: you know, I think it is maybe a little too 467 00:28:12,880 --> 00:28:17,359 Speaker 1: early to tell. Finally, are the judges that you spoke to, 468 00:28:17,880 --> 00:28:21,840 Speaker 1: are they basically figuring this out on their own or 469 00:28:22,000 --> 00:28:25,440 Speaker 1: are they having a lot of input from other judges, 470 00:28:25,520 --> 00:28:28,720 Speaker 1: other court systems, from the the administrative branch at the 471 00:28:28,760 --> 00:28:33,119 Speaker 1: federal judiciary or they basically on their own? Uh. Well, 472 00:28:33,400 --> 00:28:35,919 Speaker 1: it's not just the courts that that are deciding when 473 00:28:36,160 --> 00:28:39,080 Speaker 1: especially when it comes to grand juries Schedual prosecutors are 474 00:28:39,080 --> 00:28:42,120 Speaker 1: part of this conversation. So the Middle District of Georgia, 475 00:28:42,160 --> 00:28:44,760 Speaker 1: for example, when I talked to their the US prosecutor, 476 00:28:44,840 --> 00:28:49,320 Speaker 1: there was um, you know, instrumental in shaping this system. 477 00:28:49,400 --> 00:28:52,640 Speaker 1: And you know, due to the decentralized nature of the U. 478 00:28:52,720 --> 00:28:55,600 Speaker 1: S courts, Uh, the U S courts can kind of 479 00:28:55,680 --> 00:28:57,960 Speaker 1: do what they want to do when it comes to 480 00:28:58,680 --> 00:29:01,880 Speaker 1: developing their own response and how they might go about this, 481 00:29:02,040 --> 00:29:04,400 Speaker 1: of course within limitations, but they do have a lot 482 00:29:04,400 --> 00:29:07,080 Speaker 1: of freedom to be able to decide to do these 483 00:29:07,160 --> 00:29:09,520 Speaker 1: kinds of proceedings in the way that they want. So, 484 00:29:09,680 --> 00:29:11,560 Speaker 1: you know, I know that that there are courts that 485 00:29:11,600 --> 00:29:15,280 Speaker 1: are seeking juror's opinions. They're they're trying to figure out 486 00:29:15,520 --> 00:29:18,920 Speaker 1: what would make them feel the most comfortable. But yeah, 487 00:29:19,000 --> 00:29:21,400 Speaker 1: it's it's kind of a collaborative effort. It seems like 488 00:29:21,520 --> 00:29:26,240 Speaker 1: between the court, the photo prosecutor's office, the court staff, 489 00:29:26,400 --> 00:29:28,560 Speaker 1: and then of course with the jurors and put in minds. 490 00:29:28,800 --> 00:29:32,920 Speaker 1: Thanks Maddie, that's Medicine Alder, Bloomberg Law Reporter, and that's 491 00:29:33,000 --> 00:29:35,960 Speaker 1: up for the edition of Bloomberg Law. I'm June Brasso. 492 00:29:36,200 --> 00:29:38,480 Speaker 1: Thanks for listening, and don't forget to tune into the 493 00:29:38,520 --> 00:29:41,680 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law Show weeknights. Attend them east right or on 494 00:29:41,720 --> 00:29:42,560 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Radio.