WEBVTT - Rosenstein Announces Charges for 12 Russian Officials

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.960
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com Slash podcasts. Special Counsel Robert

0:00:23.000 --> 0:00:26.360
<v Speaker 1>Mueller has indicted twelve Russian intelligence officers for hacking the

0:00:26.360 --> 0:00:30.760
<v Speaker 1>Democratic National Committee, the Clinton presidential campaign, and the Democratic

0:00:30.800 --> 0:00:35.639
<v Speaker 1>Congressional Committee. Deputy Attorney General Ron Rosenstein announced the indictment

0:00:35.720 --> 0:00:39.519
<v Speaker 1>this afternoon. One of those defendants and a twelve Russian

0:00:39.560 --> 0:00:44.680
<v Speaker 1>military officer are charged with conspiring to infiltrate computers of

0:00:44.840 --> 0:00:49.360
<v Speaker 1>organizations involved in administering elections, including state boards of election,

0:00:50.000 --> 0:00:54.840
<v Speaker 1>secretaries of state, and companies that supply software used to

0:00:54.880 --> 0:00:59.760
<v Speaker 1>administer elections. The Russian officers were also charged with stealing

0:00:59.800 --> 0:01:03.360
<v Speaker 1>the information of about five hundred thousand voters. Joining is

0:01:03.640 --> 0:01:06.959
<v Speaker 1>joining me is Ellie Hannig of Rutgers University. He's a

0:01:07.000 --> 0:01:11.520
<v Speaker 1>former federal prosecutor. Ellie. Today's indictments did not include the

0:01:11.560 --> 0:01:16.640
<v Speaker 1>allegation that Russian efforts succeeded in influencing the election results

0:01:16.640 --> 0:01:22.000
<v Speaker 1>of the election how important are they? Uh, yeah, I

0:01:22.040 --> 0:01:24.080
<v Speaker 1>don't know that that conclusion really means much. I mean,

0:01:24.080 --> 0:01:26.600
<v Speaker 1>it's it's really unknowable if you think about. What we

0:01:26.680 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 1>do know is that these emails were leaked. They were

0:01:29.760 --> 0:01:31.760
<v Speaker 1>leaked in the months running up to the election, and

0:01:31.800 --> 0:01:35.280
<v Speaker 1>that millions or tens of millions of United States voters

0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:39.759
<v Speaker 1>saw those emails, and I think unquestionably they hurt the Democrats. Now,

0:01:39.800 --> 0:01:43.520
<v Speaker 1>can you know how many people change their mind because

0:01:43.520 --> 0:01:46.000
<v Speaker 1>of these emails? No, that's impossible to know. It's unknowable.

0:01:46.000 --> 0:01:47.600
<v Speaker 1>I don't I don't think anyone would ever be able

0:01:47.640 --> 0:01:50.280
<v Speaker 1>to look at anything and say that flipped the election.

0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:52.680
<v Speaker 1>But this had an impact. There's there's no question this

0:01:52.840 --> 0:01:56.480
<v Speaker 1>impacted people, and it was it was a factor. Rosenstein

0:01:56.720 --> 0:01:59.680
<v Speaker 1>brushed aside a question about the timing. But it seems

0:01:59.680 --> 0:02:02.400
<v Speaker 1>glare drying that it comes two days before Trump's meeting

0:02:02.440 --> 0:02:06.600
<v Speaker 1>with Russian President Vladimir Putin and the day after Congressional

0:02:06.640 --> 0:02:10.800
<v Speaker 1>Republicans attacked the Special Counsel's investigation as biased during the

0:02:10.840 --> 0:02:14.360
<v Speaker 1>testimony of the FBI agent Peter Struck. Is that timing

0:02:14.480 --> 0:02:17.960
<v Speaker 1>just coincidence? Yeah, I mean that that is what Rosenstein

0:02:17.960 --> 0:02:20.320
<v Speaker 1>said today, Not not coincidence. You just said, Look, this

0:02:20.400 --> 0:02:22.760
<v Speaker 1>is when we've concluded our factual investigation and when the

0:02:22.800 --> 0:02:25.240
<v Speaker 1>grand juries come back with an indictment. But of course

0:02:25.280 --> 0:02:28.840
<v Speaker 1>the timing matters, whether by design or not. Um. You know,

0:02:29.440 --> 0:02:31.600
<v Speaker 1>Rosensight did say that he had briefed the president a

0:02:31.600 --> 0:02:33.760
<v Speaker 1>few days ago. Um, you know, you could sort of

0:02:33.800 --> 0:02:35.400
<v Speaker 1>look at that both ways. You could look at it

0:02:35.480 --> 0:02:38.040
<v Speaker 1>as uh, you know, him sending a message to the president,

0:02:38.080 --> 0:02:41.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, don't get too cozy with Putin. Um, you

0:02:41.000 --> 0:02:43.720
<v Speaker 1>could look at it as you know, an assurance that

0:02:43.800 --> 0:02:46.680
<v Speaker 1>the president won't go in and declare that well, Prutin

0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:48.320
<v Speaker 1>told me they had nothing to do with it, and

0:02:48.400 --> 0:02:51.000
<v Speaker 1>then two days later the indictment comes out. But I

0:02:51.040 --> 0:02:52.920
<v Speaker 1>do take Rosenstein at his word that this was just

0:02:53.040 --> 0:02:55.280
<v Speaker 1>when the work got wrapped up. I mean, things happened

0:02:55.320 --> 0:02:58.120
<v Speaker 1>so rapidly in this case that any day is going

0:02:58.200 --> 0:03:01.400
<v Speaker 1>to be near some other day. So he did say that.

0:03:01.520 --> 0:03:04.400
<v Speaker 1>When asked about how he informed the president, he said,

0:03:04.760 --> 0:03:08.200
<v Speaker 1>he needs to understand what information we've uncovered because he

0:03:08.240 --> 0:03:10.840
<v Speaker 1>has to make very important decisions for the country, so

0:03:10.919 --> 0:03:13.880
<v Speaker 1>he needs to understand what evidence we have a foreign

0:03:13.880 --> 0:03:18.080
<v Speaker 1>election interference. He also said that this is about the

0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:20.520
<v Speaker 1>corruption of elections. It's important to not see it as

0:03:20.600 --> 0:03:24.240
<v Speaker 1>republicans or Democrats. So he seemed to be sending some

0:03:24.320 --> 0:03:28.200
<v Speaker 1>kind of message there. Yeah, I think Rosen science right.

0:03:28.200 --> 0:03:29.880
<v Speaker 1>I mean, you know, it would be it would be

0:03:29.919 --> 0:03:33.360
<v Speaker 1>really harmful to our democracy if the president when Anne

0:03:33.360 --> 0:03:35.600
<v Speaker 1>had this meeting with Putin and and sort of cleared

0:03:35.640 --> 0:03:37.120
<v Speaker 1>him and said that he said he didn't do it.

0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:40.160
<v Speaker 1>I believe him, and then shortly after this came out. UM.

0:03:40.200 --> 0:03:42.120
<v Speaker 1>And I think it's important to inform the way the

0:03:42.120 --> 0:03:45.880
<v Speaker 1>president interacts with Putin and interacts with Russians. UM that

0:03:45.960 --> 0:03:48.160
<v Speaker 1>we know now for sure who did this. We didn't

0:03:48.160 --> 0:03:50.280
<v Speaker 1>know who did this before today's insignment. We now know

0:03:50.640 --> 0:03:53.600
<v Speaker 1>who did it, and it was not just Russians generally,

0:03:53.640 --> 0:03:57.120
<v Speaker 1>it was Russian state actors, these intel officers from the

0:03:57.200 --> 0:04:00.200
<v Speaker 1>g r U UM. So that's that's very important, and

0:04:00.240 --> 0:04:02.400
<v Speaker 1>I think it's something that the president and our entire

0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:05.560
<v Speaker 1>government needs to know in dealing with Russia moving forward.

0:04:06.280 --> 0:04:09.040
<v Speaker 1>There was something that I'm curious about. It could it

0:04:09.040 --> 0:04:11.760
<v Speaker 1>could be nothing, but he said at one point that

0:04:11.920 --> 0:04:16.120
<v Speaker 1>these uh the information was transferred to another organization not

0:04:16.360 --> 0:04:20.760
<v Speaker 1>named in the indictment and time for release. Does that

0:04:21.400 --> 0:04:25.040
<v Speaker 1>Does that indicate that another another indictment is coming about

0:04:25.080 --> 0:04:27.680
<v Speaker 1>that organization or they said they used it as a

0:04:27.760 --> 0:04:31.919
<v Speaker 1>pass through to release the documents. Yeah, there absolutely could be.

0:04:31.920 --> 0:04:33.919
<v Speaker 1>And there's a number of indications in this indictment of

0:04:33.920 --> 0:04:37.040
<v Speaker 1>places where there could be further further indictments. I think

0:04:37.080 --> 0:04:39.760
<v Speaker 1>I think that organization appears to be Wiki leaks. Um.

0:04:39.839 --> 0:04:42.920
<v Speaker 1>That's just sort of informed speculation. But you know, the

0:04:42.960 --> 0:04:45.920
<v Speaker 1>White House, if you've seen, has already announced a statement

0:04:45.960 --> 0:04:49.560
<v Speaker 1>saying well, nobody, no, you, No Americans have been indicted

0:04:49.600 --> 0:04:52.760
<v Speaker 1>and there's no connection to anything relating to the Trump campaign.

0:04:52.760 --> 0:04:55.480
<v Speaker 1>But if you look at this indictment, you can see areas,

0:04:55.520 --> 0:04:58.440
<v Speaker 1>including the one you decided, where there could be American actors,

0:04:58.440 --> 0:05:02.240
<v Speaker 1>American individuals, and American based companies or corporate entities that

0:05:02.520 --> 0:05:05.080
<v Speaker 1>could be the next shoes to drop. You know, Ellie,

0:05:05.160 --> 0:05:08.679
<v Speaker 1>what you said before sort of rings rings true because

0:05:09.240 --> 0:05:13.279
<v Speaker 1>are we looking for too much from Robert Mueller's investigation?

0:05:13.320 --> 0:05:16.920
<v Speaker 1>Are we looking for like a direct connection to some

0:05:17.040 --> 0:05:21.039
<v Speaker 1>influence in the election or to someone and are we

0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:24.479
<v Speaker 1>perhaps not going to get that? Yeah, I mean, I

0:05:24.520 --> 0:05:26.560
<v Speaker 1>think what Robert Muller is doing is what all good

0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:30.279
<v Speaker 1>investigators doing. It's building a case blocked by block, piece

0:05:30.320 --> 0:05:33.000
<v Speaker 1>by piece, and if you if you look at it inftality,

0:05:33.040 --> 0:05:34.960
<v Speaker 1>and you know, we've seen the numbers. We now have

0:05:35.000 --> 0:05:38.279
<v Speaker 1>over thirty indictments, five convictions. But you know this is

0:05:38.279 --> 0:05:41.480
<v Speaker 1>another important block. And now this establishes there were two

0:05:41.880 --> 0:05:45.159
<v Speaker 1>main ways the Russians tried to and did infiltrate our election.

0:05:45.160 --> 0:05:47.279
<v Speaker 1>The first one we already knew about from the MANI

0:05:47.320 --> 0:05:50.400
<v Speaker 1>for uh and Papadopoulos and Flint indictments, which is they

0:05:50.400 --> 0:05:55.360
<v Speaker 1>try to provide or sell their Hillary Clinton to directly

0:05:55.440 --> 0:05:58.479
<v Speaker 1>to the Trump campaign. This is now the second way,

0:05:58.520 --> 0:06:01.160
<v Speaker 1>This is the hacking into the DNC and this sort

0:06:01.160 --> 0:06:05.560
<v Speaker 1>of slow release of emails in a drip uh by

0:06:05.720 --> 0:06:08.080
<v Speaker 1>DC leaks and gucha for in the days leading up

0:06:08.080 --> 0:06:11.080
<v Speaker 1>to the election. So uh so you know it's it's

0:06:11.160 --> 0:06:13.680
<v Speaker 1>it's piece by piece, And I do think you're right.

0:06:13.960 --> 0:06:17.000
<v Speaker 1>I don't think we're ever going to see one specific

0:06:17.080 --> 0:06:20.479
<v Speaker 1>document that says here's everything that ties everything alltogether. But

0:06:20.560 --> 0:06:23.120
<v Speaker 1>he's building, and you can see him building. We keep

0:06:23.120 --> 0:06:26.680
<v Speaker 1>on waiting for that though, any event, because these all

0:06:26.720 --> 0:06:28.960
<v Speaker 1>seem you know, as you said, it's a dripped here

0:06:29.000 --> 0:06:32.840
<v Speaker 1>or dripped there, and there's no response to allegations that

0:06:32.880 --> 0:06:35.760
<v Speaker 1>come out in the public. Yeah, well, what where? I

0:06:35.800 --> 0:06:37.720
<v Speaker 1>think we may see it all tied together as if

0:06:37.720 --> 0:06:41.080
<v Speaker 1>in Windfeller uh files a report with the House of Representatives,

0:06:41.120 --> 0:06:43.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, whether it's recommending and teachment or not. But

0:06:43.880 --> 0:06:46.760
<v Speaker 1>I think that's going to be the ultimate sort of uh,

0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:49.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, opus that ties it all together. Well, thanks,

0:06:49.440 --> 0:06:51.800
<v Speaker 1>thanks so much for being here. Ellie. That's Ellie home

0:06:52.120 --> 0:06:59.640
<v Speaker 1>of Rutgers University. He's a former federal prosecutor. Kentucky Republican

0:06:59.680 --> 0:07:03.880
<v Speaker 1>Senator Rand Paul has frequently voiced his firm views on privacy.

0:07:04.120 --> 0:07:06.720
<v Speaker 1>He spoke about the issue in a lengthy Senate speech

0:07:06.760 --> 0:07:13.520
<v Speaker 1>in the bulk collection of all Americans phone records all

0:07:13.560 --> 0:07:17.560
<v Speaker 1>of the time is a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment.

0:07:18.400 --> 0:07:22.480
<v Speaker 1>So could Paul's firm views on privacy present a seemingly

0:07:22.560 --> 0:07:26.480
<v Speaker 1>overlooked obstacle to Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court.

0:07:27.000 --> 0:07:29.800
<v Speaker 1>Joining me is Corey Bret Schneider, a political science professor

0:07:29.840 --> 0:07:34.760
<v Speaker 1>at Brown University. Corey, how different our Kavanaugh's views on

0:07:34.840 --> 0:07:37.760
<v Speaker 1>privacy from Paul's? Are? Are they different enough to cause

0:07:37.800 --> 0:07:42.720
<v Speaker 1>a problem? We need to know. I mean, he's as

0:07:42.720 --> 0:07:46.000
<v Speaker 1>a lower court judge said, uh, not that much. He

0:07:46.040 --> 0:07:49.320
<v Speaker 1>has a dissent uh in a case about abortion, for instance,

0:07:49.320 --> 0:07:52.400
<v Speaker 1>which is based on a broad right to privacy that

0:07:52.480 --> 0:07:56.440
<v Speaker 1>the court's right into the Constitution, um, into a number

0:07:56.440 --> 0:07:59.960
<v Speaker 1>of its provisions, including the Fourth Amendment. But we don't

0:08:00.000 --> 0:08:02.440
<v Speaker 1>know what he would do as a Supreme Court judge

0:08:02.560 --> 0:08:05.000
<v Speaker 1>or justice. Sorry, And so that's why it's so important

0:08:05.040 --> 0:08:08.240
<v Speaker 1>to ask him questions. Unlike lower court judges, uh, Supreme

0:08:08.280 --> 0:08:13.960
<v Speaker 1>Court justices can overturn even longstanding precedent. So that's one

0:08:14.000 --> 0:08:16.320
<v Speaker 1>of the central questions for him is what he thinks

0:08:16.320 --> 0:08:19.120
<v Speaker 1>of the broad right to privacy in the Constitution, not

0:08:19.200 --> 0:08:22.080
<v Speaker 1>just in the Fourth Amendment, but in the idea uh

0:08:22.200 --> 0:08:24.880
<v Speaker 1>in Griswold versus Connecticut that there's a broad right of

0:08:24.920 --> 0:08:29.240
<v Speaker 1>privacy in matters like choice and abortion. Uh, in the

0:08:29.360 --> 0:08:32.200
<v Speaker 1>use of contraception. Uh. And so we just need to

0:08:32.200 --> 0:08:35.440
<v Speaker 1>know a lot more about that. In my reading, I

0:08:35.480 --> 0:08:39.000
<v Speaker 1>came across some some literature that said that his past

0:08:39.160 --> 0:08:43.280
<v Speaker 1>rulings backed the build up and intelligence gathering on Americans

0:08:43.360 --> 0:08:48.480
<v Speaker 1>after the September e leventh attacks. Um, that's what I

0:08:48.520 --> 0:08:52.600
<v Speaker 1>haven't come across enough to give you a definitive answer

0:08:52.640 --> 0:08:55.000
<v Speaker 1>on that. I mean, the areas that we're starting to

0:08:55.080 --> 0:08:58.280
<v Speaker 1>see are there's this descent in the abortion case. A

0:08:58.320 --> 0:09:00.880
<v Speaker 1>lot of scrutiny has been paid to his his work

0:09:00.960 --> 0:09:05.040
<v Speaker 1>for um ken Starr uh. And originally he seemed to

0:09:05.080 --> 0:09:08.880
<v Speaker 1>favor pretty broad terms of impeachment for a president and

0:09:09.040 --> 0:09:12.040
<v Speaker 1>even indictment, and then more more and more he's favored

0:09:12.360 --> 0:09:16.199
<v Speaker 1>increasing executive power. Uh. Now that could have implications for

0:09:16.400 --> 0:09:18.959
<v Speaker 1>the issue that you raise. He also has, in an

0:09:18.960 --> 0:09:21.800
<v Speaker 1>OpEd that's just been uncovered, seems to suggest that a

0:09:21.840 --> 0:09:25.400
<v Speaker 1>president is actually immune from indictment. So that would grant,

0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:29.280
<v Speaker 1>if that's right, huge leeway to the executive in in

0:09:29.320 --> 0:09:33.720
<v Speaker 1>all sorts of places, including possibly uh, immunity, even in

0:09:33.760 --> 0:09:37.880
<v Speaker 1>the use of criminal uh criminal use of information or

0:09:37.960 --> 0:09:43.160
<v Speaker 1>information gathering. How much can the senators press him on that? Uh,

0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:48.320
<v Speaker 1>it's a myth that they can't after the board curings Uh. There,

0:09:48.480 --> 0:09:51.280
<v Speaker 1>the Heritage Foundation others suggested that there was a thing

0:09:51.320 --> 0:09:53.680
<v Speaker 1>called the Ginsburg rule, which was supposed to be the

0:09:53.720 --> 0:09:56.880
<v Speaker 1>idea that that UM nominees are not supposed to talk

0:09:56.920 --> 0:09:59.559
<v Speaker 1>about their views about past cases. But if you look

0:09:59.559 --> 0:10:03.120
<v Speaker 1>at Whatsbury actually did. She very was very forthcoming on

0:10:03.160 --> 0:10:05.520
<v Speaker 1>her views on abortion. So this is kind of a

0:10:05.559 --> 0:10:08.920
<v Speaker 1>made up thing. Under Article one, UH, the Senate is

0:10:08.960 --> 0:10:11.920
<v Speaker 1>supposed to be an equal partner with the President in

0:10:12.000 --> 0:10:15.040
<v Speaker 1>vetting nominees on their constitutional views. So I think they

0:10:15.080 --> 0:10:18.480
<v Speaker 1>not only can, but are obligated to directly ask about

0:10:18.480 --> 0:10:21.440
<v Speaker 1>things like the right to privacy, the right to abortion,

0:10:21.960 --> 0:10:25.880
<v Speaker 1>UH and UH Row versus Wade in particular. But they

0:10:25.920 --> 0:10:29.160
<v Speaker 1>cannot ask for a binding commitment for future cases or

0:10:29.200 --> 0:10:32.760
<v Speaker 1>ask about pending cases, specific cases before the court. That's

0:10:32.760 --> 0:10:35.599
<v Speaker 1>a distinction if you look at the last justice to

0:10:35.679 --> 0:10:40.040
<v Speaker 1>be confirmed and to go to these hearings. Gorse he

0:10:40.120 --> 0:10:42.640
<v Speaker 1>got He got by saying he wasn't going to give

0:10:42.679 --> 0:10:46.800
<v Speaker 1>opinions on a variety host of topics, and they just

0:10:46.880 --> 0:10:48.880
<v Speaker 1>refused to give. You know, he said, I can't give

0:10:48.880 --> 0:10:51.040
<v Speaker 1>my opinion on what's going to be coming up, and

0:10:51.080 --> 0:10:53.480
<v Speaker 1>I'll follow precedent. But you know, you didn't really hear

0:10:53.600 --> 0:10:56.080
<v Speaker 1>what his what his opinions were. They seem to be

0:10:56.120 --> 0:10:59.360
<v Speaker 1>able to slide. I think that was one of the

0:10:59.440 --> 0:11:04.760
<v Speaker 1>worst travesties that hearing, and instance of the Senate's dysfunction. UH.

0:11:04.920 --> 0:11:06.480
<v Speaker 1>The fact that they let him get away with that.

0:11:06.840 --> 0:11:09.319
<v Speaker 1>In fact, he didn't say that he would follow precedent

0:11:09.360 --> 0:11:12.240
<v Speaker 1>when he was repeatedly asked to give his opinion about

0:11:12.280 --> 0:11:15.439
<v Speaker 1>precedents like the one that I just mentioned, Grizzwold versus Connecticut,

0:11:15.440 --> 0:11:18.400
<v Speaker 1>which how that broad right to privacy gave individuals the

0:11:18.480 --> 0:11:21.800
<v Speaker 1>right to use contraception, including in their own bedrooms with

0:11:21.880 --> 0:11:25.440
<v Speaker 1>their spouses. Uh. Do you agree with that precedent? Would

0:11:25.440 --> 0:11:28.840
<v Speaker 1>you uphold it? What he repeatedly said was Griswold versus

0:11:28.840 --> 0:11:32.600
<v Speaker 1>Connecticut or other cases are precedents or is a precedent.

0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:35.160
<v Speaker 1>He never said anything about whether he would or wouldn't

0:11:35.240 --> 0:11:38.640
<v Speaker 1>uphold particular precedents. So it's very important to not allow

0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:43.080
<v Speaker 1>this sort of very easy, UH legal trick to to

0:11:43.480 --> 0:11:47.440
<v Speaker 1>UH suffice as an answer to fundamental questions before us.

0:11:47.800 --> 0:11:50.240
<v Speaker 1>This is the swing vote, likely on cases like ro

0:11:50.400 --> 0:11:54.880
<v Speaker 1>versus Weight, UH, possibly on gay rights cases. Justice Kennedy

0:11:54.920 --> 0:11:57.600
<v Speaker 1>was often the swing vote, sometimes voted with the liberals,

0:11:57.640 --> 0:12:00.679
<v Speaker 1>sometimes with conservatives. So it's essential this time time, UH

0:12:00.679 --> 0:12:03.720
<v Speaker 1>to not let him get away with non answers. What

0:12:03.800 --> 0:12:10.880
<v Speaker 1>other areas do you see sharp differences between Kavanaugh and Kennedy? Uh?

0:12:10.960 --> 0:12:14.480
<v Speaker 1>Justice Kennedy. Uh is goes down in history because he

0:12:14.559 --> 0:12:18.000
<v Speaker 1>really led the court in recognizing a variety of gay rights.

0:12:18.000 --> 0:12:21.400
<v Speaker 1>In a case called Romer. Uh, he said that legislation

0:12:21.440 --> 0:12:27.080
<v Speaker 1>based on animus courts UH towards gay individuals was unconstitutional.

0:12:27.120 --> 0:12:29.880
<v Speaker 1>In that instance, it was a plebiscite that provoked many

0:12:29.960 --> 0:12:33.840
<v Speaker 1>civil rights for gay gay people. Uh. He of course

0:12:33.840 --> 0:12:36.480
<v Speaker 1>wrote the opinion about the right to gay marriage. Now

0:12:36.880 --> 0:12:40.520
<v Speaker 1>that's based on what I think Judge Van Kavanaugh has said,

0:12:40.720 --> 0:12:44.160
<v Speaker 1>or is a conception of unenumerated rights which is skeptical of,

0:12:44.760 --> 0:12:47.360
<v Speaker 1>and he's sympathetic to Justice Scully and others who were

0:12:47.440 --> 0:12:50.920
<v Speaker 1>very critical of that jurisprudence. And so I don't know

0:12:51.120 --> 0:12:53.720
<v Speaker 1>that he would respect these precedents. I think he probably

0:12:53.760 --> 0:12:56.719
<v Speaker 1>thinks they're wrongly decided. And I think that there's a

0:12:56.800 --> 0:12:59.480
<v Speaker 1>chance that we could see some retrenchment in the area

0:12:59.480 --> 0:13:02.200
<v Speaker 1>of gay right. It's abortion, of course, and then that

0:13:02.320 --> 0:13:06.120
<v Speaker 1>executive power issue that I raised is fundamental. UH. This

0:13:06.559 --> 0:13:08.920
<v Speaker 1>court might decide the question of whether or not a

0:13:09.000 --> 0:13:12.680
<v Speaker 1>president can or cannot be indicted by the special prosecutor,

0:13:12.800 --> 0:13:16.120
<v Speaker 1>or more radically, whether, as some have suggested, UH, the

0:13:16.200 --> 0:13:20.160
<v Speaker 1>investigation is unconstitutional itself, because the president can't be subject

0:13:20.240 --> 0:13:23.480
<v Speaker 1>to investigation by his own subordinate sets the theory that's

0:13:23.480 --> 0:13:27.600
<v Speaker 1>currently been floated, and this nominee might decide that, So

0:13:27.720 --> 0:13:30.439
<v Speaker 1>we need to know what he thinks about it. And um,

0:13:30.640 --> 0:13:34.160
<v Speaker 1>so what's facing the Democrats who want to stop this

0:13:35.000 --> 0:13:38.800
<v Speaker 1>are not only the Republican votes, but also they have

0:13:39.240 --> 0:13:43.560
<v Speaker 1>three Democratic senators running in red states that Trump won

0:13:44.080 --> 0:13:47.480
<v Speaker 1>in sixteen and they have to hold those senators. And

0:13:47.480 --> 0:13:49.480
<v Speaker 1>I've been looked at some of their voting patterns and

0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:54.520
<v Speaker 1>they vote the Republicans on a lot of these important issues. Uh. Yeah,

0:13:54.640 --> 0:13:57.360
<v Speaker 1>I mean I think, you know, this shouldn't be a

0:13:57.400 --> 0:14:01.000
<v Speaker 1>partisan issue when it comes to the most fundamental rights

0:14:01.080 --> 0:14:04.800
<v Speaker 1>under our constitution, which include privacy, include the idea I

0:14:04.840 --> 0:14:06.800
<v Speaker 1>think that a president is not above the law and

0:14:06.880 --> 0:14:11.120
<v Speaker 1>can't get away with criminal activity. Uh. That was to

0:14:11.240 --> 0:14:15.240
<v Speaker 1>me a principle at least, if not the specific question

0:14:15.320 --> 0:14:19.240
<v Speaker 1>that the principle was established and during the Nixon administration. Uh.

0:14:19.240 --> 0:14:21.640
<v Speaker 1>And gay rights are such a part of the fabric

0:14:21.680 --> 0:14:24.600
<v Speaker 1>of constitutional law now too, that I would think that

0:14:24.720 --> 0:14:28.560
<v Speaker 1>really any not just party, but any senator that claims

0:14:28.600 --> 0:14:32.440
<v Speaker 1>to believe in the Constitution needs to uh. Insist that

0:14:32.560 --> 0:14:36.040
<v Speaker 1>this nominee answer questions about his views on these precedents,

0:14:36.040 --> 0:14:40.000
<v Speaker 1>and that would include Democrats, Republicans, certainly people like Susan Collins,

0:14:40.440 --> 0:14:43.040
<v Speaker 1>uh and Ran Paul. If he's serious about the Constitution,

0:14:43.080 --> 0:14:44.720
<v Speaker 1>I think i'd like to see him take a lead

0:14:44.800 --> 0:14:47.840
<v Speaker 1>role in in questioning this nominee. We'll look forward to

0:14:47.880 --> 0:14:51.200
<v Speaker 1>the questioning. Thanks so much, Corey. That's Corey bretch Schneider.

0:14:51.240 --> 0:14:54.600
<v Speaker 1>He's a political science professor at Brown University. Thanks for

0:14:54.680 --> 0:14:57.920
<v Speaker 1>listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and

0:14:58.000 --> 0:15:01.080
<v Speaker 1>listen to the show on Apple podcast US, SoundCloud, and

0:15:01.160 --> 0:15:05.600
<v Speaker 1>on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Grosso. This

0:15:05.960 --> 0:15:12.560
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg. M mhm