1
00:00:03,480 --> 00:00:07,560
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

2
00:00:07,640 --> 00:00:10,440
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight an analysis into the most

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:13,399
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more

4
00:00:13,480 --> 00:00:18,040
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

5
00:00:18,320 --> 00:00:22,400
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. It's a decades

6
00:00:22,480 --> 00:00:25,880
Speaker 1: long legal saga that hasn't ended yet. Today, the Supreme

7
00:00:25,920 --> 00:00:29,240
Speaker 1: Court throughout the death sentence of a Mississippi man convicted

8
00:00:29,280 --> 00:00:32,640
Speaker 1: at his sixth trial for a quadruple murder after the

9
00:00:32,680 --> 00:00:37,040
Speaker 1: prosecutor repeatedly excluded black people from the jury, but he

10
00:00:37,120 --> 00:00:40,440
Speaker 1: can be tried again for a seventh time. Joining me

11
00:00:40,479 --> 00:00:43,880
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg New Supreme Court reporter Greg stop So. Greg

12
00:00:44,080 --> 00:00:48,120
Speaker 1: this involved what's called peremptory challenges to a jury, so

13
00:00:48,280 --> 00:00:52,600
Speaker 1: lawyers can strike jurors without stating a reason explain what

14
00:00:52,680 --> 00:00:57,480
Speaker 1: happened here. So what happened here is that the man,

15
00:00:57,800 --> 00:01:02,240
Speaker 1: Curtis Flowers, was try six different times for the same

16
00:01:02,960 --> 00:01:10,319
Speaker 1: uh crimes the murders from and prosecutors in those six

17
00:01:10,440 --> 00:01:15,479
Speaker 1: trials actually the same prosecutor, District Attorney Doug Evans, used

18
00:01:15,520 --> 00:01:20,280
Speaker 1: peremptory challenges to strike forty one out of forty two

19
00:01:20,520 --> 00:01:25,319
Speaker 1: prospective black jurors from those UH jury panels, and the

20
00:01:25,360 --> 00:01:28,520
Speaker 1: Supreme Court looked at this case and said, you know,

21
00:01:28,560 --> 00:01:32,400
Speaker 1: if you look at the history of it, um, it's

22
00:01:32,400 --> 00:01:36,120
Speaker 1: clear that that he has used race intentionally, and so

23
00:01:36,200 --> 00:01:41,960
Speaker 1: we're going to throw out his latest conviction. Now, the

24
00:01:41,959 --> 00:01:47,440
Speaker 1: the in the dissent were Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorcich.

25
00:01:47,520 --> 00:01:51,200
Speaker 1: And this was a case where Justice Thomas actually asked

26
00:01:51,200 --> 00:01:57,320
Speaker 1: a question. He did. Yes, this was Justice Thomas almost

27
00:01:57,360 --> 00:01:59,920
Speaker 1: never asked questions. In this one. At the very end

28
00:02:00,080 --> 00:02:03,880
Speaker 1: of the argument, he asked whether he asked Mr Flowers's

29
00:02:03,960 --> 00:02:10,360
Speaker 1: attorney whether his lawyer at trial had exercised perempty peremptory

30
00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:13,799
Speaker 1: challenges as well to strike white jerors from the panel. Now,

31
00:02:13,840 --> 00:02:16,880
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court has has said that the problem, uh

32
00:02:17,040 --> 00:02:20,360
Speaker 1: is not that defendants are using peremptory challenges in a

33
00:02:20,400 --> 00:02:23,880
Speaker 1: discriminatory manner. The thing we're worried about here is prosecutors

34
00:02:23,919 --> 00:02:26,639
Speaker 1: doing that, because that would mean a criminal defendant may

35
00:02:26,680 --> 00:02:30,720
Speaker 1: not be getting a fair trial. UM. This came up

36
00:02:31,080 --> 00:02:36,880
Speaker 1: in his Justice Thomas's descent UH to a small degree um. Uh.

37
00:02:37,360 --> 00:02:41,000
Speaker 1: He is a very strongly worded descent um, in which

38
00:02:41,000 --> 00:02:45,400
Speaker 1: he ended by saying that, Um, the Court's opinion might

39
00:02:45,480 --> 00:02:49,160
Speaker 1: boost it self esteem, but it needlessly prolongs the suffering

40
00:02:49,160 --> 00:02:52,160
Speaker 1: of the four victims families. He said, the only redeeming

41
00:02:52,240 --> 00:02:56,040
Speaker 1: quality of the opinion was that Mississippi can prosecute flowers again,

42
00:02:56,320 --> 00:02:59,320
Speaker 1: which it can, and UH, we'll wait to find out

43
00:02:59,400 --> 00:03:03,000
Speaker 1: whether or not it will do so now. In another case,

44
00:03:03,200 --> 00:03:06,680
Speaker 1: in a five to four decision along ideological lines, the

45
00:03:06,720 --> 00:03:10,080
Speaker 1: Court overturned to more than thirty year old precedent and

46
00:03:10,200 --> 00:03:13,519
Speaker 1: made it easier for landowners to sue for compensation when

47
00:03:13,520 --> 00:03:18,680
Speaker 1: a government regulation reduces the value of their property. What

48
00:03:18,840 --> 00:03:23,240
Speaker 1: happened here, So this has to do with the Constitution's

49
00:03:23,320 --> 00:03:26,840
Speaker 1: taking clause, which says that, UM, the government can't take

50
00:03:26,880 --> 00:03:31,200
Speaker 1: your property without giving you just compensation. Um. And the

51
00:03:31,280 --> 00:03:34,160
Speaker 1: Supreme Court in the past had said, UM, if you're

52
00:03:34,160 --> 00:03:36,720
Speaker 1: trying to vindicate your rights under that, you first have

53
00:03:36,840 --> 00:03:40,240
Speaker 1: to deal with the state court system. And sometimes a

54
00:03:40,280 --> 00:03:42,200
Speaker 1: property owner thinks that he or she doesn't get as

55
00:03:42,200 --> 00:03:44,880
Speaker 1: good as a shake in the state court system. Uh.

56
00:03:44,920 --> 00:03:47,280
Speaker 1: This was the case involving a woman who owns some

57
00:03:47,400 --> 00:03:51,880
Speaker 1: rural property in Pennsylvania. There's a local ordinance that UM

58
00:03:52,360 --> 00:03:56,560
Speaker 1: and her property apparently has a very old cemetery on it,

59
00:03:56,640 --> 00:03:59,600
Speaker 1: and there's a local ordinance that now says that she

60
00:03:59,680 --> 00:04:02,600
Speaker 1: has to provide open access to that for people who

61
00:04:02,600 --> 00:04:05,680
Speaker 1: want to visit the cemetery. And the question for the

62
00:04:05,720 --> 00:04:07,760
Speaker 1: court was, did she have to go through the state

63
00:04:07,800 --> 00:04:11,560
Speaker 1: court system to attempt to get compensation for what you

64
00:04:11,600 --> 00:04:14,400
Speaker 1: said is a decrease in the value of her property?

65
00:04:14,560 --> 00:04:16,960
Speaker 1: Or can't she go straight to the federal court? In

66
00:04:16,960 --> 00:04:20,520
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court throwing out a precedent, said she can

67
00:04:20,560 --> 00:04:24,800
Speaker 1: go straight to federal court. Now. Justice Elena Kagan wrote

68
00:04:24,839 --> 00:04:29,720
Speaker 1: in a sharply worded dissent for the UH for justices

69
00:04:29,800 --> 00:04:33,440
Speaker 1: that the decision smashes a hundred years Excuse me, the

70
00:04:33,480 --> 00:04:36,840
Speaker 1: decision smashes a hundred plus years of legal rulings to

71
00:04:37,000 --> 00:04:42,600
Speaker 1: smithereens Why were the liberal justices lined up in the

72
00:04:42,600 --> 00:04:47,640
Speaker 1: minority in this case? Well, so, there are several things

73
00:04:47,680 --> 00:04:51,600
Speaker 1: going on here. Uh. First, these claims, these takings claims

74
00:04:51,600 --> 00:04:56,240
Speaker 1: and seeking just compensation are are a type that conservatives

75
00:04:56,240 --> 00:05:00,240
Speaker 1: have traditionally been more sympathetic towards UM. But the the

76
00:05:00,320 --> 00:05:03,520
Speaker 1: liberals on the court Supreme Court these days are clearly

77
00:05:03,640 --> 00:05:07,599
Speaker 1: quite worried about where things are headed. The Court UH

78
00:05:07,720 --> 00:05:11,560
Speaker 1: several weeks ago overturned the precedent involving sovereign immunity. That

79
00:05:11,640 --> 00:05:15,680
Speaker 1: was the one that left Justice Stephen Bryer Um saying

80
00:05:15,760 --> 00:05:18,159
Speaker 1: today's decision can only cause one to wonder which cases

81
00:05:18,200 --> 00:05:21,680
Speaker 1: the Court will overrule next. And Justice Kagan, in her

82
00:05:21,680 --> 00:05:25,680
Speaker 1: descent today um invoked that statement and said, well, that

83
00:05:25,760 --> 00:05:29,159
Speaker 1: didn't take long. Now one may wonder yet again. So

84
00:05:29,560 --> 00:05:32,520
Speaker 1: the liberals are worried that the conservative block on the

85
00:05:32,560 --> 00:05:36,039
Speaker 1: Court is going to move very quickly ahead to overturn precedents,

86
00:05:36,040 --> 00:05:41,200
Speaker 1: potentially even getting into the precedents involving abortion. And yet

87
00:05:41,279 --> 00:05:44,719
Speaker 1: during Supreme Court confirmation hearing is the one refrain that

88
00:05:44,760 --> 00:05:47,960
Speaker 1: you always hear, is I am going to respect to precedent.

89
00:05:49,320 --> 00:05:51,919
Speaker 1: It was. It was something that that Brett Kavanaugh talked

90
00:05:51,920 --> 00:05:54,560
Speaker 1: an awful lot about. There is one more case that

91
00:05:55,240 --> 00:05:58,000
Speaker 1: the Course gonna be deciding next week involving an important precedent.

92
00:05:58,440 --> 00:06:01,760
Speaker 1: Um So far, just as Kavan haven't written anything separately

93
00:06:01,839 --> 00:06:04,520
Speaker 1: to to really spell out his views about what he

94
00:06:04,560 --> 00:06:07,760
Speaker 1: thinks about precedent in a Supreme Court opinion, and maybe

95
00:06:07,760 --> 00:06:11,480
Speaker 1: we'll get it then one more week as you say. Now,

96
00:06:11,520 --> 00:06:15,159
Speaker 1: also the court decided to hear a case that could

97
00:06:15,279 --> 00:06:19,479
Speaker 1: upend the work of the oversight board that's tasks with

98
00:06:19,520 --> 00:06:22,839
Speaker 1: pulling Puerto Rico out of its bankruptcy. Yes, this is

99
00:06:22,839 --> 00:06:25,839
Speaker 1: something that happened yesterday. UM. This is a case where

100
00:06:25,880 --> 00:06:27,880
Speaker 1: actually both sides wine the court to take it and

101
00:06:27,920 --> 00:06:30,400
Speaker 1: decided fairly quickly. Uh. So the court is going to

102
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:33,400
Speaker 1: hear it in in October. What this is about, this

103
00:06:33,440 --> 00:06:36,479
Speaker 1: is the board that is basically, UM doing all the

104
00:06:36,520 --> 00:06:40,600
Speaker 1: work of of of trying to manage the bankruptcy proceedings

105
00:06:40,800 --> 00:06:44,760
Speaker 1: in Puerto Rico, UH get the island back on sound

106
00:06:44,800 --> 00:06:49,720
Speaker 1: financial footing. And the members of the board were appointed

107
00:06:50,760 --> 00:06:54,080
Speaker 1: under provisions in a statute Congress passed a couple of

108
00:06:54,120 --> 00:06:58,960
Speaker 1: years ago where UH President Obama picked the members for

109
00:06:59,000 --> 00:07:04,239
Speaker 1: this board off a list submitted by lawmakers and bond

110
00:07:04,279 --> 00:07:07,680
Speaker 1: holders who UH don't like what the board is doing,

111
00:07:07,760 --> 00:07:11,840
Speaker 1: think they're not getting a big enough uh return on

112
00:07:11,840 --> 00:07:14,920
Speaker 1: on the bonds that they hold. Sued to challenge the

113
00:07:14,960 --> 00:07:17,560
Speaker 1: way the members were appointed. They said it violates the

114
00:07:17,600 --> 00:07:22,080
Speaker 1: Constitution's Appointments clauset. In particular, they they say the Senate

115
00:07:22,120 --> 00:07:27,400
Speaker 1: has to confirm these people. Um, a lower court said, yes, indeed,

116
00:07:27,440 --> 00:07:31,320
Speaker 1: this does violate the appointments clause, but we're not going

117
00:07:31,360 --> 00:07:34,080
Speaker 1: to invalidate all the stuff that the Board has done

118
00:07:34,200 --> 00:07:37,120
Speaker 1: in the past. So now both sides are appealing that

119
00:07:37,560 --> 00:07:41,080
Speaker 1: that the the Board and the Trump administration are asking

120
00:07:41,120 --> 00:07:44,120
Speaker 1: the court to reinstate to say that the members were

121
00:07:44,120 --> 00:07:47,440
Speaker 1: properly appointed, and the bond holders are asking the Supreme

122
00:07:47,480 --> 00:07:50,520
Speaker 1: Court to say that we need to wipe out at

123
00:07:50,600 --> 00:07:53,360
Speaker 1: least some of the decisions the Board has made in

124
00:07:53,400 --> 00:07:55,760
Speaker 1: the past. All right, thanks so much, Greg, rest up

125
00:07:55,800 --> 00:07:59,560
Speaker 1: this weekend because next week we have twelve cases, including

126
00:08:00,000 --> 00:08:05,440
Speaker 1: the census question and part is in gerrymandering. Thanks for

127
00:08:05,560 --> 00:08:08,800
Speaker 1: listening to the Bloomberg Law podcast. You can subscribe and

128
00:08:08,880 --> 00:08:12,120
Speaker 1: listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on

129
00:08:12,200 --> 00:08:16,920
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is

130
00:08:16,960 --> 00:08:17,560
Speaker 1: Bloomberg