WEBVTT - NYC Mayor Off the Hook & Noncitizen Voting 0:00:02.759 --> 0:00:07.120 This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg. 0:00:06.680 --> 0:00:10.600 Radio City Elections. 0:00:12.520 --> 0:00:17.520 My fellow New Yorkists, as you may have heard, the 0:00:17.560 --> 0:00:21.799 Department of Justice has directed that the case against me 0:00:22.720 --> 0:00:29.159 be dismissed, finally ending a month's long saga that put me, 0:00:29.800 --> 0:00:33.760 my family, and the city to an unnecessary ordeal. 0:00:34.600 --> 0:00:39.000 In a stunning memo, Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Beauvey 0:00:39.440 --> 0:00:43.800 told federal prosecutors in Manhattan to dismiss the criminal corruption 0:00:43.960 --> 0:00:48.360 case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Even more 0:00:48.440 --> 0:00:52.400 stunning are the political reasons given for dropping the case. 0:00:52.840 --> 0:00:56.319 The merits of the bribery charges against Adams were not 0:00:56.360 --> 0:01:01.760 even considered. Adams is accused of accepting illegal campaign contributions 0:01:01.800 --> 0:01:05.679 and lavish travel perks worth more than one hundred thousand dollars. 0:01:05.959 --> 0:01:08.560 He spoke today as if he'd been vindicated. 0:01:09.080 --> 0:01:13.319 So I thank the Justice Department for its honesty. Now 0:01:13.920 --> 0:01:17.560 we can put this cruel episode behind us and focus 0:01:17.720 --> 0:01:20.000 entirely on the future about city. 0:01:20.560 --> 0:01:23.760 Adams may want to put the episode behind him, but 0:01:24.000 --> 0:01:27.039 under the terms laid out in the memo, the charges 0:01:27.080 --> 0:01:31.160 against him could still be refiled after the November mayoral election. 0:01:31.920 --> 0:01:35.240 My guest is former federal prosecutor Robert Mintz, a partner 0:01:35.280 --> 0:01:38.520 maccarter in English, Bob, I want to put this dismissal 0:01:38.560 --> 0:01:42.759 of the case against Adams in context. According to the memo, 0:01:43.240 --> 0:01:48.120 the decision was made without considering the evidence against Adams 0:01:48.560 --> 0:01:51.600 or the theory of the case against him. The decision 0:01:51.720 --> 0:01:56.400 was made for a string of political reasons, including that 0:01:56.480 --> 0:02:01.360 the prosecution has impeded Adam's ability to asston. Trump's crackdown 0:02:01.400 --> 0:02:05.800 on immigration and crime, interfered with Adam's re election campaign, 0:02:06.120 --> 0:02:09.480 and the case has been tainted by pre trial publicity. 0:02:09.560 --> 0:02:14.280 So how unusual is it to have Main Justice tell 0:02:14.560 --> 0:02:18.600 a US Attorney's office to drop a case for these reasons. 0:02:19.240 --> 0:02:22.440 Well, this decision by the Department of Justice, it directs 0:02:22.480 --> 0:02:25.760 the Southern District to drop this case, as highly unusual 0:02:25.840 --> 0:02:28.639 for a number of reasons. First of all, it's highly 0:02:28.680 --> 0:02:31.919 unusual because it's a pending case. It's not a question 0:02:32.000 --> 0:02:34.880 about whether or not to bring the charges in the 0:02:34.960 --> 0:02:39.000 first place. It's asking the US Attorney's office to drop 0:02:39.040 --> 0:02:41.680 the case in the middle of the prosecution. And there 0:02:41.680 --> 0:02:44.720 were two other reasons that were cited in the memo, 0:02:44.960 --> 0:02:48.760 by the acting Deputy Attorney General as the reason to 0:02:48.840 --> 0:02:52.280 dismiss the case. One of them was that they said 0:02:52.280 --> 0:02:55.000 that the case was brought too close to the election. 0:02:55.120 --> 0:02:59.000 It was brought about nine months before the mayoral primary 0:02:59.080 --> 0:03:02.240 in New York, and the argument was that by doing 0:03:02.320 --> 0:03:06.800 that it interfered with the election, interfered with the primary, 0:03:06.840 --> 0:03:10.360 and of course those charges are still pending as Mayor 0:03:10.440 --> 0:03:14.080 Eric Adams is running for reelection. That's something that the 0:03:14.120 --> 0:03:17.239 Department of Justice has paid attention to in the past. 0:03:17.280 --> 0:03:20.440 There's always been a directive not to bring cases close 0:03:20.480 --> 0:03:23.880 to an election so as to impact the election without 0:03:24.000 --> 0:03:28.000 having voters know the result of the prosecution. But pushing 0:03:28.040 --> 0:03:32.600 it out nine months before a primary is really pushing 0:03:32.639 --> 0:03:35.400 it out far beyond what had been done in the past. 0:03:35.400 --> 0:03:38.760 The usual rule had been not to bring into indictment, 0:03:39.040 --> 0:03:42.560 not to bring charges, not to take investigative steps in 0:03:42.600 --> 0:03:46.240 an overt way within about sixty days of an election, 0:03:46.480 --> 0:03:49.480 So that made it unusual by pushing it out as 0:03:49.520 --> 0:03:52.080 far as nine months. But the other reason was even 0:03:52.120 --> 0:03:54.920 more unusual, which is to say that by indicting a 0:03:54.960 --> 0:03:59.000 sitting politician, it interfederate their ability to perform their job. 0:03:59.280 --> 0:04:01.560 I mean that would be the case in any political 0:04:01.600 --> 0:04:06.080 corruption case. Any sitting senator, any sitting governor, any elected 0:04:06.080 --> 0:04:09.600 official who was indicted for corruption obviously is going to 0:04:09.640 --> 0:04:13.240 be distracted in defending themselves from those charges and will 0:04:13.280 --> 0:04:16.120 not be able to fully devote their attentions to their 0:04:16.120 --> 0:04:20.960 political position. So that seemed like an extremely strange reason, 0:04:21.000 --> 0:04:23.919 and certainly the Department of Justice has never before to 0:04:24.040 --> 0:04:28.040 my knowledge, used that as a basis not to prosecute 0:04:28.040 --> 0:04:30.120 a case, or in this case, to ask that the 0:04:30.160 --> 0:04:34.839 case be dismissed at this time. What is absolutely significant here, 0:04:34.880 --> 0:04:38.520 as you mentioned June, is that clearly the Department of 0:04:38.680 --> 0:04:42.039 Justice has not made this decision based on the merits 0:04:42.080 --> 0:04:44.359 of the case, So they have never said that this 0:04:44.520 --> 0:04:46.760 case should never have been brought in the first place. 0:04:47.080 --> 0:04:49.200 In fact, the Department of Justice went out of its 0:04:49.240 --> 0:04:53.040 way to say that the prosecutors who brought this case 0:04:53.480 --> 0:04:55.880 did not do anything wrong, They did not question the 0:04:55.880 --> 0:04:59.000 integrity of the prosecutors bringing the case, and they said 0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:02.599 that the case would be reevaluate it after the election. 0:05:02.960 --> 0:05:07.120 So this was, according to the Department of Justice main justice, 0:05:07.400 --> 0:05:09.960 not a decision based on the merits of the case 0:05:10.120 --> 0:05:13.680 or the legal theory upon which this prostitution was brought. 0:05:14.000 --> 0:05:17.000 The decision was made to sophistic case at this time 0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:20.000 because of the fact that it would interfere with the 0:05:20.040 --> 0:05:23.920 election and that it would in some way impede the 0:05:23.920 --> 0:05:27.400 mayor's ability to continue to act as mayor while he's 0:05:27.400 --> 0:05:28.760 fighting these charges. 0:05:29.080 --> 0:05:32.520 Also unusual. Under the terms of the memo, Adams will 0:05:32.560 --> 0:05:36.640 have to agree in writing that prosecutors are legally allowed 0:05:36.680 --> 0:05:40.960 to bring the charges again if they decide to after 0:05:41.279 --> 0:05:46.440 the mayoral election, so the charges would be dismissed without prejudice. 0:05:47.240 --> 0:05:47.480 Well. 0:05:47.520 --> 0:05:50.880 In order to effectuate this directive, a couple things have 0:05:50.960 --> 0:05:54.560 to happen. First of all, the acting US Attorney in 0:05:54.600 --> 0:05:58.600 the Southern District will have to agree to direct her 0:05:58.640 --> 0:06:01.520 staff to go to court and to dismiss the case. 0:06:01.560 --> 0:06:04.880 And it's a dismissal, as you say, without prejudice, which 0:06:04.920 --> 0:06:08.159 means that the government does have the ability to bring 0:06:08.200 --> 0:06:10.640 the case again if they want to at some point 0:06:10.680 --> 0:06:13.599 in the future, and that the defense here would have 0:06:13.680 --> 0:06:16.400 to agree that it's a dismissal without prejudice, which they 0:06:16.440 --> 0:06:19.880 clearly will, because a dismissal even without prejudice is better 0:06:19.920 --> 0:06:23.000 than having the case proceed So the next thing that 0:06:23.040 --> 0:06:26.479 will have to happen, even after the prosecutors take the 0:06:26.480 --> 0:06:29.560 case to court and request the dismissal without prejudice, is 0:06:29.600 --> 0:06:32.080 that it has to go before the judge and the disrecord. 0:06:32.160 --> 0:06:36.839 Judge has to agree to the basis for this dismissal. Now, 0:06:37.000 --> 0:06:40.120 the judge could in fact even hold a hearing and 0:06:40.200 --> 0:06:43.839 make prosecutors put on the records the reason for taking 0:06:43.839 --> 0:06:47.400 this unusual step and dismissing this case without prejudice at 0:06:47.400 --> 0:06:51.320 this time and in theory, the judge could reject the 0:06:51.360 --> 0:06:55.440 motion by the prosecution to dismiss the case without prejudice. 0:06:55.480 --> 0:06:58.520 But as a practical matter, the judge really can't stop 0:06:58.560 --> 0:07:01.640 the dismissal from proceeding because of the Department of Justice. 0:07:01.640 --> 0:07:04.720 Says judge, We're not going to pursue this case this time. 0:07:04.880 --> 0:07:06.920 There's no one to prosecute the case. Even if the 0:07:07.000 --> 0:07:09.880 judge believes that the dismissal is ill advised. 0:07:10.160 --> 0:07:13.160 The task of carrying out the order will fall to 0:07:13.400 --> 0:07:17.760 Danielle Sassoon, who's the acting US Attorney for the Southern District. 0:07:18.160 --> 0:07:21.720 She's been at the US Attorney's Office since twenty sixteen 0:07:21.880 --> 0:07:24.200 as an Assistant US Attorney. She was part of the 0:07:24.200 --> 0:07:28.960 team that prosecuted Sam Bankman freed, and she'll have to 0:07:28.960 --> 0:07:32.840 make this decision whether or not to drop the charges, 0:07:33.320 --> 0:07:37.680 despite the fact that in early January prosecutors had told 0:07:37.760 --> 0:07:42.320 the court that additional charges would be coming and that 0:07:42.480 --> 0:07:47.920 investigators had continued to uncover additional criminal conduct by the mayor. 0:07:48.240 --> 0:07:52.040 But I assume she either drops the charges or she's fired. 0:07:52.480 --> 0:07:55.600 Well, she's put it in a difficult position, but ultimately 0:07:55.600 --> 0:07:59.200 I think she has to follow the directive from Nain Justice, 0:07:59.480 --> 0:08:03.040 from the Acting Deputy Attorney General to dismiss the case 0:08:03.080 --> 0:08:06.080 because if she doesn't do it, then somebody else will. 0:08:06.360 --> 0:08:09.680 So ultimately its case is going to be dismissed because 0:08:09.720 --> 0:08:12.880 that's the directive coming from Washington. The other thing that 0:08:12.920 --> 0:08:15.600 the memo said in directing the Southern Distric to drop 0:08:15.640 --> 0:08:17.720 the case was to say that not only are you 0:08:17.760 --> 0:08:20.960 dismissing the case without prejudice, but also that the Southern 0:08:21.000 --> 0:08:24.520 District was to take no additional investigative steps at this 0:08:24.720 --> 0:08:29.239 time again until after the election. So what's interesting here 0:08:29.360 --> 0:08:29.840 is this. 0:08:29.720 --> 0:08:34.680 Is not a merit based decision. The Acting Deputy Attorney 0:08:34.720 --> 0:08:38.160 General made clear that the decision to ask that this 0:08:38.240 --> 0:08:40.800 case be dismissed at this time has nothing to do 0:08:41.080 --> 0:08:43.560 with the merits of the case, with the wisdom of 0:08:43.600 --> 0:08:46.319 bringing it in the first place, with the legal basis 0:08:46.400 --> 0:08:51.520 upon which these charges are brought. It was being done because, 0:08:51.840 --> 0:08:55.600 according to the Department of Justice, it was interfering with 0:08:55.640 --> 0:08:58.800 the election. It was brought nine months before the primary, 0:08:58.840 --> 0:09:02.480 which is a significant amount of time before the primary. 0:09:02.720 --> 0:09:05.040 But the case, of course, has extended not only through 0:09:05.080 --> 0:09:08.439 the primary season but now into the mayoral election itself 0:09:08.880 --> 0:09:13.440 and will no doubt have some impact on the election. Ironically, 0:09:13.800 --> 0:09:16.360 the dismissal of this case may also have an impact 0:09:16.400 --> 0:09:19.040 on the election, because I think we will see and 0:09:19.080 --> 0:09:22.160 have already begun to see, that those who are challenging 0:09:22.160 --> 0:09:25.560 Mayor Adams are using this dismissal as a way of 0:09:25.720 --> 0:09:29.040 arguing that he is now beholding to the Trump administration, 0:09:29.520 --> 0:09:31.760 and some of them have actually called for him to 0:09:31.840 --> 0:09:36.560 resign under the circumstances. So ironically, a decision that was 0:09:36.600 --> 0:09:40.959 made in order to try to remove political influence from 0:09:41.000 --> 0:09:44.480 the election is at the same time also injecting an 0:09:44.520 --> 0:09:48.520 air of political influence into the election by dismissing the 0:09:48.520 --> 0:09:49.520 case at this time. 0:09:50.040 --> 0:09:54.160 For months, Adams has been making overtures to Trump, including 0:09:54.520 --> 0:09:58.400 flying down tomorrow lago going to his inauguration, and he 0:09:58.520 --> 0:10:01.439 told top officials this week that they shouldn't criticize the 0:10:01.480 --> 0:10:07.240 Trump administration or interfere with federal immigration authorities arrests on 0:10:07.400 --> 0:10:11.000 city property, that's according to the city. And now this 0:10:11.320 --> 0:10:16.720 threat of renewed prosecution is going to hang over him. 0:10:17.040 --> 0:10:19.840 Well, certainly that's going to be the argument that's raised 0:10:19.880 --> 0:10:23.440 by those who are challenging him for the mayor's office 0:10:23.480 --> 0:10:26.760 in this election. So we will continue to see this 0:10:26.920 --> 0:10:30.640 issue as something that has an impact on the election, 0:10:31.080 --> 0:10:34.320 whether the case is dismissed or not, and ultimately it 0:10:34.360 --> 0:10:37.000 will be up to the voters to decide whether to 0:10:37.080 --> 0:10:40.800 return may Or Adam's office or not. And after the election, 0:10:40.960 --> 0:10:43.680 it will be interesting to see whether the Department of 0:10:43.880 --> 0:10:48.080 Justice ultimately decide to reinstate this case, as they have 0:10:48.160 --> 0:10:51.320 the ability to do, to file a new indictment and 0:10:51.400 --> 0:10:53.160 perhaps even bring additional charges. 0:10:53.200 --> 0:10:57.160 Here the Southern District, it's one of the most prestigious 0:10:57.360 --> 0:11:01.160 US Attorney's offices in the country, has a reputation for 0:11:01.360 --> 0:11:06.520 independence from Maine Justice, sometimes referred to as the sovereign 0:11:06.600 --> 0:11:10.480 district and a history of bringing public corruption cases. What 0:11:10.679 --> 0:11:15.280 does this memo say about the future of that office 0:11:15.400 --> 0:11:16.040 under Trump. 0:11:16.559 --> 0:11:20.480 Well, it's really hard to say exactly where this is headed, 0:11:20.559 --> 0:11:24.679 and if we will see other instances of Main Justice 0:11:24.800 --> 0:11:29.600 trying to influence and in fact directing US Attorney's office 0:11:30.000 --> 0:11:33.320 on whether or not to bring political corruption cases, and 0:11:33.440 --> 0:11:36.880 after they brought them, whether those cases should be dismissed. 0:11:37.120 --> 0:11:39.600 As you say, the Southern District of New York has 0:11:39.600 --> 0:11:44.120 a history of being fiercely independent, even more so than 0:11:44.200 --> 0:11:47.200 other US Attorney's offices around the country. But as a 0:11:47.280 --> 0:11:51.200 general rule throughout the years, the Department of Justice has 0:11:51.240 --> 0:11:54.320 allowed the US Attorneys in the various districts around the 0:11:54.320 --> 0:11:58.400 country to be fairly independent in making decisions about which 0:11:58.520 --> 0:12:01.960 cases to bring, an even when it comes to political 0:12:02.000 --> 0:12:07.040 corruption cases, although those have always historically been elevated to 0:12:07.280 --> 0:12:10.880 Washington to take a look at those cases before they're brought. 0:12:11.160 --> 0:12:13.960 It'll be interesting to see what the judge says here. 0:12:14.120 --> 0:12:17.280 Thanks so much, Bob. That's Robert Mints of maccarter and 0:12:17.320 --> 0:12:21.120 English coming up next. Will non citizens be able to 0:12:21.200 --> 0:12:24.199 vote in New York City elections? This is Bloomberg. 0:12:25.679 --> 0:12:30.120 There is something exceptional about this particular law, right. I mean, 0:12:30.160 --> 0:12:31.720 this is the argument in the briefs that this is 0:12:31.760 --> 0:12:34.400 going to expand on both sides. This is going to 0:12:34.480 --> 0:12:38.479 expand the franchise to a very large number of individuals, 0:12:38.480 --> 0:12:44.520 may indeed change the political representation in particular districts. Yes, 0:12:44.600 --> 0:12:46.560 this is not like some other little process. 0:12:47.080 --> 0:12:50.280 And that exceptional law made New York City the first 0:12:50.400 --> 0:12:54.000 major US city to grant non citizens the right to 0:12:54.120 --> 0:12:58.200 vote in municipal elections in January of twenty twenty two. 0:12:58.880 --> 0:13:01.560 But the law, which was approved by the Democratic led 0:13:01.640 --> 0:13:06.040 City Council, has never been implemented due to court challenges 0:13:06.080 --> 0:13:09.640 by Republicans, and both a trial judge and a state 0:13:09.640 --> 0:13:13.760 depellate court ruled that the law violated the state constitution 0:13:14.240 --> 0:13:17.360 and a legal requirement to hold a public referendum on 0:13:17.400 --> 0:13:21.160 the proposal. Today, the seven judges on New York's highest 0:13:21.200 --> 0:13:24.840 court heard arguments about whether to uphold the law. The 0:13:25.040 --> 0:13:30.480 arguments focused on how to interpret specific constitutional language and 0:13:30.520 --> 0:13:32.560 how to define words like citizen. 0:13:32.760 --> 0:13:36.800 How do you define citizen under the constitutionistics? 0:13:36.880 --> 0:13:39.920 Now, could the state allow my thirteen year old daughter 0:13:39.960 --> 0:13:42.000 and other thirteen year olds to vote for governor in 0:13:42.040 --> 0:13:43.040 the next election. Yes. 0:13:43.440 --> 0:13:46.720 Joining me is immigration law expert Leon Fresco, a partner 0:13:46.760 --> 0:13:48.680 at Holland and Knight. He was the head of the 0:13:48.720 --> 0:13:53.240 Office of Immigration Litigation in the Obama administration. Lee and 0:13:53.240 --> 0:13:56.280 I just want to start with some basics because we 0:13:56.320 --> 0:13:59.319 heard Trump claim over and over and over again that 0:13:59.760 --> 0:14:04.679 not citizens we're voting in elections. So it is clearly 0:14:04.760 --> 0:14:08.640 illegal for non citizens to vote in federal elections. 0:14:09.280 --> 0:14:12.080 The rule is that in federal elections, it is illegal 0:14:12.160 --> 0:14:14.400 for a non citizen to vote. And not only is 0:14:14.400 --> 0:14:17.480 that a crime and a crime that gets prosecuted every 0:14:17.520 --> 0:14:19.880 now and then, but it's also a ground for deportation. 0:14:20.520 --> 0:14:24.080 It's a question that's asked in every immigration form and 0:14:24.160 --> 0:14:28.360 in every immigration interview that somebody has for an immigration benefit, 0:14:28.440 --> 0:14:31.840 have you ever unlawfully voted in a federal election. So 0:14:31.880 --> 0:14:35.080 it's actually quite a serious thing that a person who's 0:14:35.120 --> 0:14:37.560 not a citizen cannot vote in a federal election. 0:14:38.120 --> 0:14:42.880 But cities and municipalities can allow non citizens to vote 0:14:43.000 --> 0:14:47.880 in local elections. More than a dozen communities across the country, 0:14:48.400 --> 0:14:52.880 including eleven towns in Maryland and Vermont, have allowed non 0:14:52.920 --> 0:14:56.720 citizens to cast ballots in local elections, they. 0:14:56.600 --> 0:15:01.200 Have theoretically the authority because elections are a state run 0:15:01.480 --> 0:15:06.240 thing other than for federal election purposes, and so a 0:15:06.280 --> 0:15:09.440 state or a locality, if a locality is permitted to 0:15:09.480 --> 0:15:14.200 do so by a state, can theoretically allow a person 0:15:14.240 --> 0:15:17.440 who is here who is not a US citizen to 0:15:17.560 --> 0:15:20.960 vote in their election, and it would just be up 0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:23.840 to that state or that locality to do so. 0:15:23.840 --> 0:15:25.880 Se Leon tell us about this New York City law 0:15:25.920 --> 0:15:28.560 that was passed back in twenty twenty two but never 0:15:28.600 --> 0:15:30.080 went into effect. 0:15:30.400 --> 0:15:33.400 So the New York City law that actually came into 0:15:33.400 --> 0:15:38.320 account says that if you are a lawful permanent resident 0:15:38.480 --> 0:15:41.440 or even someone with a lawful ability to work in 0:15:41.480 --> 0:15:44.440 the United States, meaning that you actually have a work 0:15:44.520 --> 0:15:48.880 permit from US Citizenship and Immigration Services, which is interesting 0:15:48.920 --> 0:15:52.560 because there are some statuses which are very sort of 0:15:52.680 --> 0:15:58.800 tenuous statuses like deferred action and temporary protected status, and 0:15:58.880 --> 0:16:02.160 even you can actually have an order of removal that 0:16:02.360 --> 0:16:06.240 just can't be executed at the moment because the country 0:16:06.280 --> 0:16:09.280 that they want to remove you to won't actually accept you. 0:16:09.720 --> 0:16:12.480 And even those individuals are allowed to get work permits, 0:16:12.960 --> 0:16:15.400 and so the idea of the new York law is 0:16:15.480 --> 0:16:18.400 any of those people with work permits, even with such 0:16:18.480 --> 0:16:22.080 tenuous statuses, would be allowed to vote. Now, a purely 0:16:22.680 --> 0:16:26.480 undocumented person that is here illegally and has no right 0:16:26.520 --> 0:16:29.240 to work of any kind would not be allowed to 0:16:29.320 --> 0:16:30.360 vote under that law. 0:16:30.880 --> 0:16:33.400 And you just have to be a lawful, permanent resident 0:16:33.920 --> 0:16:37.360 of the city for thirty days. So Republicans filed the 0:16:37.440 --> 0:16:41.240 lawsuit to stop the law from going into effect. What 0:16:41.320 --> 0:16:43.120 are their arguments against the law. 0:16:43.680 --> 0:16:47.040 So essentially, what they're trying to say is that there 0:16:47.080 --> 0:16:49.280 are a few problems with the law. First, that the 0:16:49.360 --> 0:16:54.760 law violates the New York State Constitution, which actually says 0:16:54.920 --> 0:16:59.360 that citizens are the individuals who are permitted to vote 0:16:59.360 --> 0:17:01.720 in election. Now, there's fights and we can get into 0:17:01.760 --> 0:17:04.840 this about whether that meant New York citizens or US 0:17:04.920 --> 0:17:08.119 citizens and whether that's a floor or a ceiling. But 0:17:08.200 --> 0:17:10.479 their argument is that if you look at the New 0:17:10.560 --> 0:17:14.760 York State Constitution, that meant that only US citizens are 0:17:14.800 --> 0:17:17.640 allowed to vote and nobody else. That's their first argument, 0:17:18.000 --> 0:17:23.280 and then their second argument is that the actual voting, 0:17:23.480 --> 0:17:27.000 allowing eight hundred thousand potential more people to vote in 0:17:27.040 --> 0:17:30.240 the New York City election would actually dilute the right 0:17:30.320 --> 0:17:33.960 to vote that the US citizens have in New York, 0:17:34.400 --> 0:17:38.240 which would then violate the municipal home rule laws in 0:17:38.320 --> 0:17:39.159 New York City. 0:17:39.480 --> 0:17:42.320 I just want to note the specific language in the 0:17:42.359 --> 0:17:46.080 state constitution that a lot of the Republican arguments are 0:17:46.119 --> 0:17:50.399 focused on. It says, quote, every citizen shall be entitled 0:17:50.480 --> 0:17:54.600 to vote at every election for all officers elected by 0:17:54.600 --> 0:17:58.520 the people, and upon all questions submitted to the vote 0:17:58.560 --> 0:18:02.320 of the people. Seems pretty clear every citizen. 0:18:02.920 --> 0:18:06.440 Right the question that they say. So, there's a couple 0:18:06.480 --> 0:18:10.359 of areas where the dispute is tried to be created. Here. 0:18:10.600 --> 0:18:14.879 The first argument is that is a floor of rights, 0:18:14.920 --> 0:18:20.840 meaning that what the Constitution is saying is, hey, state legislator, 0:18:21.000 --> 0:18:24.960 hey local legislators, you are not allowed to do anything 0:18:25.480 --> 0:18:29.520 to diminish the right of a citizen to vote in 0:18:29.600 --> 0:18:32.800 an election. But that that's not a ceiling, meaning that 0:18:32.840 --> 0:18:36.520 you can add other people to this from that perspective, 0:18:36.560 --> 0:18:40.000 so you could add non citizens to this. That's one argument. 0:18:40.680 --> 0:18:44.359 And so the court in this oral argument was really 0:18:44.400 --> 0:18:47.320 trying to ask the lawyers, hey, does that mean a 0:18:47.400 --> 0:18:49.920 twelve year old or a thirteen year old can vote here? 0:18:50.200 --> 0:18:52.480 Where does this thing, go, I mean, does this really 0:18:52.520 --> 0:18:56.480 mean what you're saying it means? And the Council for 0:18:56.520 --> 0:18:59.159 New York City I had to say yes because they 0:18:59.160 --> 0:19:01.800 wouldn't have had any to say anything else, Which is, 0:19:01.800 --> 0:19:04.280 if you're arguing that this is a floor, then that 0:19:04.320 --> 0:19:08.080 means that for a local election, the localities can add 0:19:08.119 --> 0:19:11.080 people and there's no limit basically to what they could 0:19:11.080 --> 0:19:14.399 add in that situation. So that's one side. Now the 0:19:14.600 --> 0:19:18.040 argument for the people opposing that is to say no, no, 0:19:18.040 --> 0:19:20.680 no, no no. If they wanted other kinds of people to vote, 0:19:20.720 --> 0:19:24.000 they would have added them within this protection. So this 0:19:24.160 --> 0:19:26.600 is not a floor. This is actually both the floor 0:19:26.640 --> 0:19:29.879 and the ceiling, because it's just enumerating the people who 0:19:29.960 --> 0:19:34.240 can vote. The other argument is because it says citizens 0:19:34.600 --> 0:19:39.199 and not United States citizens, that this basically refers to 0:19:39.240 --> 0:19:42.960 a amorphous set of New York citizens who would basically 0:19:43.040 --> 0:19:45.040 be people who are just in New York for the 0:19:45.160 --> 0:19:47.840 last thirty days. But I don't think the court was 0:19:47.880 --> 0:19:51.560 willing to accept that argument, and a very strong argument 0:19:51.760 --> 0:19:56.040 in favor of not accepting that argument was made by 0:19:56.160 --> 0:19:58.960 the opponents of this New York law, which said, look, 0:19:59.240 --> 0:20:03.480 if this really meant New York citizens and not US citizens. 0:20:03.520 --> 0:20:06.160 And for the last one hundred or so years, there's 0:20:06.200 --> 0:20:09.120 been people who have been disenfranchised who we've not allowed 0:20:09.119 --> 0:20:13.280 to vote, who were constitutionally permitted to vote and protected 0:20:13.359 --> 0:20:16.560 to vote, because we've only been letting US citizens vote 0:20:16.600 --> 0:20:18.959 this whole time. But if this had really meant New 0:20:19.040 --> 0:20:21.840 York citizens, then anybody who'd been in New York for 0:20:21.880 --> 0:20:24.240 a certain period of time would have been allowed to 0:20:24.320 --> 0:20:26.960 vote too, And we didn't know this, so it can't 0:20:27.040 --> 0:20:27.600 have meant that. 0:20:28.320 --> 0:20:32.879 There were also several questions about why isn't this a 0:20:33.000 --> 0:20:36.359 method that requires a referendum? 0:20:36.800 --> 0:20:39.119 Well, I think the issue is if you're going to 0:20:39.800 --> 0:20:43.280 say if this was a problem that the people defending 0:20:43.320 --> 0:20:45.600 the New York City law were having in this argument 0:20:45.880 --> 0:20:48.879 was they kept saying, who gets to decide what the 0:20:48.920 --> 0:20:53.480 word citizen means? And they were saying that either the 0:20:53.520 --> 0:20:56.879 state legislature could decide it or the city could decide it, 0:20:56.920 --> 0:20:59.800 And the court was saying, well, can't we decided and 0:21:00.200 --> 0:21:02.240 aren't we the one who are supposed to make the 0:21:02.280 --> 0:21:05.240 actual decision about what the words of the constitution mean? 0:21:05.720 --> 0:21:08.000 And so then there was this debate about, well, maybe 0:21:08.000 --> 0:21:10.480 you should be put up for the voters. But I 0:21:10.520 --> 0:21:13.400 think where the court is going to decide here is look, 0:21:13.840 --> 0:21:17.400 unless the Constitution is amended, which it can always be amended, 0:21:18.040 --> 0:21:21.400 we are going to decide what the constitution means. And 0:21:21.640 --> 0:21:25.439 while it is unclear whether they will decide that the 0:21:25.480 --> 0:21:29.439 constitution sets a floor or whether they will decide that 0:21:29.480 --> 0:21:33.240 the constitution actually sets a floor and a ceiling, meaning 0:21:33.280 --> 0:21:36.800 that only the people listed in the constitution are the 0:21:36.800 --> 0:21:41.280 ones that can vote, meaning citizens, meaning US citizens, which 0:21:41.320 --> 0:21:45.640 I think seems like it's slightly where they're headed. Nevertheless, 0:21:45.760 --> 0:21:47.679 I think they are headed there, and they're not going 0:21:47.760 --> 0:21:51.000 to say that this needs to be decided by a referendum, 0:21:51.040 --> 0:21:53.400 except to the extent that what they are saying is, look, 0:21:53.640 --> 0:21:56.640 if you want to change our ruling, have a referendum 0:21:56.680 --> 0:21:59.880 and decide this, and decide to change the constitution, bea 0:22:00.119 --> 0:22:00.959 be a referendum. 0:22:01.280 --> 0:22:01.440 Yeah. 0:22:01.480 --> 0:22:05.040 I just want to play that interchange because it was 0:22:05.200 --> 0:22:08.440 kind of amusing where the judges were saying, but that's 0:22:08.480 --> 0:22:09.440 our role, isn't it. 0:22:09.800 --> 0:22:12.840 What definition would you ask this court to give? I 0:22:12.880 --> 0:22:15.040 would say that the legislature is in the best position 0:22:15.080 --> 0:22:17.960 to define a citizen because it is ambiguous and The 0:22:18.000 --> 0:22:19.600 reasons why are because. 0:22:19.640 --> 0:22:22.920 The state how can the legislation legislature do that? 0:22:22.960 --> 0:22:24.400 This is a constitutional provision. 0:22:24.960 --> 0:22:27.760 So there's a constitutional provision with an ambiguous term and 0:22:27.760 --> 0:22:30.520 there's not enough evidence before this court to support a 0:22:30.560 --> 0:22:32.160 more restrictive or a broader reading. 0:22:32.320 --> 0:22:35.560 Isn't that our role to determine what this language. 0:22:35.200 --> 0:22:37.680 Is where there is sufficient evidence to support one reading 0:22:37.720 --> 0:22:38.600 and otherwise it. 0:22:38.560 --> 0:22:40.880 Just goes to the legislature to determine what the state 0:22:40.920 --> 0:22:41.919 constitution means. 0:22:42.600 --> 0:22:45.480 Well, when the provision is ambiguous and there's not enough evidence, 0:22:45.600 --> 0:22:45.840 we have. 0:22:45.880 --> 0:22:48.760 Ever said that because the New York lawyer was saying 0:22:49.119 --> 0:22:51.480 that it is not up to the court to define 0:22:51.480 --> 0:22:54.159 what the constitution meant and the court that isn't that 0:22:54.240 --> 0:22:56.840 our role? Well, I asked, are we here other than 0:22:56.880 --> 0:23:00.720 to decide what the constitution means? So yes, the like 0:23:00.800 --> 0:23:02.240 or rather odd argument to make. 0:23:02.520 --> 0:23:05.720 You don't want to be telling judges their role is superfluous. 0:23:06.359 --> 0:23:06.879 Stay with me. 0:23:07.000 --> 0:23:07.280 Leon. 0:23:07.600 --> 0:23:09.840 Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, I'll continue 0:23:09.880 --> 0:23:14.760 this conversation with immigration law expert Leon Fresco. Though it 0:23:14.800 --> 0:23:17.960