1
00:00:01,960 --> 00:00:04,960
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Show. I'm June Grosso. Ahead

2
00:00:04,960 --> 00:00:08,520
Speaker 1: in this hour, the Supreme Court signals it's done with

3
00:00:08,600 --> 00:00:13,119
Speaker 1: affirmative action, at least for now. In vitro, fertilization is

4
00:00:13,160 --> 00:00:18,480
Speaker 1: in jeopardy after an unprecedented Alabama Supreme Court ruling that

5
00:00:18,640 --> 00:00:22,599
Speaker 1: embryos are children and a cash crunch for Trump with

6
00:00:22,720 --> 00:00:25,520
Speaker 1: those huge legal bills and massive finds.

7
00:00:30,280 --> 00:00:33,800
Speaker 2: What I'm really concerned about, though, is could we legally

8
00:00:33,840 --> 00:00:40,040
Speaker 2: retrieve our embryos. There's mostly concern, there's worry, there's some

9
00:00:40,200 --> 00:00:44,280
Speaker 2: anger as patients and physicians want to be able to

10
00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:47,880
Speaker 2: make these decisions together, collaboratively and not have these decisions

11
00:00:47,920 --> 00:00:48,640
Speaker 2: made for us.

12
00:00:48,800 --> 00:00:53,280
Speaker 1: Doctors and IV patients are experiencing a range of emotions

13
00:00:53,320 --> 00:00:57,320
Speaker 1: and a lot of confusion after the Alabama Supreme Court's

14
00:00:57,480 --> 00:01:02,640
Speaker 1: unprecedented decision that frozen embryos are children. The decision means

15
00:01:02,720 --> 00:01:06,679
Speaker 1: doctors like Mamy McLean could now face criminal charges or

16
00:01:06,720 --> 00:01:12,320
Speaker 1: punitive damages if they discard unused frozen embryos from IV treatments,

17
00:01:12,680 --> 00:01:14,720
Speaker 1: and that's a normal part of the process.

18
00:01:15,120 --> 00:01:17,760
Speaker 2: This ruling is so incomplete, and it leaves those of

19
00:01:17,840 --> 00:01:20,480
Speaker 2: us who are sitting face to face with patients, just

20
00:01:20,560 --> 00:01:22,959
Speaker 2: with the inability to comment on what is safe and

21
00:01:23,000 --> 00:01:24,040
Speaker 2: what is legal for them.

22
00:01:24,120 --> 00:01:28,959
Speaker 1: Right now, Alabama's largest hospital and several fertility clinics are

23
00:01:29,000 --> 00:01:33,880
Speaker 1: pausing in vitro fertilization treatments because of legal concerns, and

24
00:01:34,040 --> 00:01:37,040
Speaker 1: patients like Matt Clary and his wife are in limbo.

25
00:01:37,560 --> 00:01:40,760
Speaker 1: They'd plan to go through another round of IVF this summer,

26
00:01:41,040 --> 00:01:43,760
Speaker 1: but are now unsure whether it will be available.

27
00:01:44,200 --> 00:01:47,960
Speaker 3: Nobody has the answers of how do you navigate this?

28
00:01:48,560 --> 00:01:52,960
Speaker 1: Joining me is healthcare attorney Harry Nelson of Nelson Hardiman Harry.

29
00:01:53,000 --> 00:01:56,840
Speaker 1: The Alabama Supreme Court in this eight to one decision,

30
00:01:57,120 --> 00:02:01,680
Speaker 1: cited the state's constitution and an eighty seventy two statute

31
00:02:01,720 --> 00:02:04,960
Speaker 1: in its ruling, and religion played a role as well.

32
00:02:05,280 --> 00:02:09,160
Speaker 1: For example, the court wrote, human life cannot be wrongfully

33
00:02:09,160 --> 00:02:13,080
Speaker 1: destroyed without incurring the wrangth of a holy God, and

34
00:02:13,160 --> 00:02:15,480
Speaker 1: the facts in this case were quite odd.

35
00:02:16,160 --> 00:02:19,880
Speaker 3: It appears that this decision was the result of a

36
00:02:20,000 --> 00:02:23,600
Speaker 3: very calculated case. The case involved two families who had

37
00:02:23,639 --> 00:02:27,240
Speaker 3: had children through a fertility center and had additional embryos

38
00:02:27,400 --> 00:02:31,720
Speaker 3: stored at the center. Those embryos were destroyed in a

39
00:02:31,800 --> 00:02:36,320
Speaker 3: bizarre incident where another patient apparently walked into an unauthorized area,

40
00:02:36,440 --> 00:02:39,639
Speaker 3: opened a freezer, pulled out the storage container with the embryos,

41
00:02:39,840 --> 00:02:44,360
Speaker 3: suffered immediate freezer burn, and dropped the container, resulting in

42
00:02:44,400 --> 00:02:47,680
Speaker 3: the destruction. And so it doesn't seem obvious, at least

43
00:02:47,680 --> 00:02:51,320
Speaker 3: to me that the natural response of someone who had

44
00:02:51,400 --> 00:02:54,600
Speaker 3: hoped to use an embryo for a future in vitro

45
00:02:54,639 --> 00:02:59,400
Speaker 3: fertilization would be to sue for wrongful death of a minor. Right, certainly,

46
00:02:59,440 --> 00:03:01,480
Speaker 3: people would be a grief, but it certainly seems there's

47
00:03:01,480 --> 00:03:05,160
Speaker 3: a calculated decision to bring a case under this law

48
00:03:05,480 --> 00:03:09,240
Speaker 3: and challenge the destruction, to use this incident to test

49
00:03:09,360 --> 00:03:13,639
Speaker 3: whether an embryo could be the legal equivalent of the

50
00:03:13,760 --> 00:03:17,680
Speaker 3: fully born child. The Alabama Supreme Court surprised most people

51
00:03:18,200 --> 00:03:21,760
Speaker 3: by agreeing with the theory that the parents who lost

52
00:03:21,800 --> 00:03:25,520
Speaker 3: these embryos alleged, which was that the accidental destruction of

53
00:03:25,560 --> 00:03:29,680
Speaker 3: the embryos in an embryo lab was the legal equivalent

54
00:03:29,919 --> 00:03:33,800
Speaker 3: of killing their children. You know, it's an extreme position

55
00:03:34,320 --> 00:03:37,200
Speaker 3: and it raises all kinds of troubling implications for anybody

56
00:03:37,360 --> 00:03:41,800
Speaker 3: who is involved at all in the process of extracting, storing,

57
00:03:42,120 --> 00:03:46,160
Speaker 3: implanting embryos, handling them in any way. The simple meaning

58
00:03:46,160 --> 00:03:48,360
Speaker 3: of this case is that you are potentially, if anything

59
00:03:48,400 --> 00:03:52,160
Speaker 3: happens to these embryos, you are effectively committing the equivalent

60
00:03:52,160 --> 00:03:54,240
Speaker 3: of a homicide or a manslaughter of a child.

61
00:03:55,000 --> 00:04:00,120
Speaker 1: The common practice with a patient undergoing IVF, multiple embryo

62
00:04:00,280 --> 00:04:03,440
Speaker 1: are created so that the patient can try again if

63
00:04:03,480 --> 00:04:07,720
Speaker 1: an attempt at pregnancy fail. So what kind of problem

64
00:04:07,800 --> 00:04:09,600
Speaker 1: does a decision like this create.

65
00:04:10,240 --> 00:04:12,680
Speaker 3: You know, it's a difficult procedure in which there's no

66
00:04:12,800 --> 00:04:16,520
Speaker 3: certainty that a single embryo will implant. In fact, if

67
00:04:16,520 --> 00:04:18,839
Speaker 3: you go back just twenty years ago, prior to the

68
00:04:18,880 --> 00:04:23,040
Speaker 3: octomom case, it was common practice for many fertility doctors

69
00:04:23,160 --> 00:04:26,839
Speaker 3: to implant the significantly larger numbers of embryos to see

70
00:04:26,839 --> 00:04:29,880
Speaker 3: which ones would succeed. And it's still a common practice

71
00:04:30,000 --> 00:04:33,240
Speaker 3: to implant smaller numbers of multiple embryos, which is one

72
00:04:33,240 --> 00:04:35,560
Speaker 3: of the reasons we see a lot more twins resulting

73
00:04:35,680 --> 00:04:39,040
Speaker 3: from IVF. The problem now is that, based on this case,

74
00:04:39,240 --> 00:04:43,000
Speaker 3: the handling of those embryos is effectively the handling of

75
00:04:43,360 --> 00:04:46,160
Speaker 3: live children. I don't know, between the age of one

76
00:04:46,240 --> 00:04:49,960
Speaker 3: day old newborns to seventeen year olds. Those embryos have

77
00:04:50,080 --> 00:04:53,120
Speaker 3: the same legal status as those children. And these are

78
00:04:53,240 --> 00:04:57,160
Speaker 3: embryos that are in the hands of lab doctors, hospitals,

79
00:04:57,360 --> 00:05:01,480
Speaker 3: surgery centers, and really a world the new questions of

80
00:05:01,480 --> 00:05:05,080
Speaker 3: what their responsibilities are, like, what happens if the power

81
00:05:05,120 --> 00:05:07,640
Speaker 3: goes off and there's a destruction that way? What happens

82
00:05:07,680 --> 00:05:10,320
Speaker 3: if they aren't used and they're simply sitting there is

83
00:05:10,320 --> 00:05:13,680
Speaker 3: there any consequence if they're no longer usable, What happens

84
00:05:13,760 --> 00:05:16,360
Speaker 3: if there's a dispute between the parents? What is their status?

85
00:05:16,400 --> 00:05:19,080
Speaker 3: They are no longer property, They are alive, right, So

86
00:05:19,200 --> 00:05:22,440
Speaker 3: this is a radical new legal world that we've entered

87
00:05:22,480 --> 00:05:23,240
Speaker 3: with this decision.

88
00:05:23,760 --> 00:05:27,960
Speaker 1: Usually the parents have the right to decide what happens

89
00:05:28,400 --> 00:05:31,480
Speaker 1: to embryos that are not used.

90
00:05:31,839 --> 00:05:35,400
Speaker 3: Correct until now and in every other state, embryos are

91
00:05:35,800 --> 00:05:40,719
Speaker 3: effectively property. The parents have full discretion over what to

92
00:05:40,760 --> 00:05:43,800
Speaker 3: do with them. Parents can decide if they don't want

93
00:05:43,839 --> 00:05:47,240
Speaker 3: to pursue further privs and there were remaining embryos, they

94
00:05:47,240 --> 00:05:50,440
Speaker 3: could simply demand that they be destroyed, and they would

95
00:05:50,480 --> 00:05:53,440
Speaker 3: be destroyed like any other kind of tissue in a lab,

96
00:05:53,680 --> 00:05:56,240
Speaker 3: and they would not be facing the dire consequences of

97
00:05:56,440 --> 00:06:00,320
Speaker 3: having essentially taken a life, So all kinds of really

98
00:06:00,440 --> 00:06:03,440
Speaker 3: scary implications about what this new status means.

99
00:06:03,720 --> 00:06:07,280
Speaker 1: Also, can you do genetic testing on embryos?

100
00:06:07,320 --> 00:06:09,839
Speaker 3: Then, whether you can do genetic testing or what you

101
00:06:09,839 --> 00:06:12,680
Speaker 3: can do to these embryos short of destroying them is

102
00:06:12,720 --> 00:06:15,960
Speaker 3: a really interesting question. There's nothing in this decision that

103
00:06:16,000 --> 00:06:20,240
Speaker 3: suggests that you couldn't do genetic testing. However, anytime that

104
00:06:20,320 --> 00:06:24,320
Speaker 3: you have any kind of contact with, you know, embryonic tissue,

105
00:06:24,440 --> 00:06:27,080
Speaker 3: you are potentially taking a risk. Right, there is a

106
00:06:27,240 --> 00:06:30,919
Speaker 3: risk that the extraction, even though it's often done safely.

107
00:06:31,000 --> 00:06:33,040
Speaker 3: I think doctors rul routinely tell patience there is a

108
00:06:33,120 --> 00:06:36,080
Speaker 3: chance that this will result in destruction. So I think

109
00:06:36,160 --> 00:06:39,720
Speaker 3: genetic testing in this context just became basically off limits

110
00:06:39,720 --> 00:06:43,039
Speaker 3: in Alabama because it could result in the destruction of

111
00:06:43,080 --> 00:06:45,080
Speaker 3: the tissue and therefore essentially a killing.

112
00:06:45,600 --> 00:06:48,640
Speaker 1: And this is a decision where the Cord hands down

113
00:06:48,720 --> 00:06:54,280
Speaker 1: this radical decision and then just says, Okay, we're done,

114
00:06:54,320 --> 00:06:58,360
Speaker 1: and the implications are left to I don't know, the

115
00:06:58,400 --> 00:07:03,640
Speaker 1: medical profession, patients, the legislature, who.

116
00:07:03,440 --> 00:07:06,520
Speaker 3: Decides, yeah, you know, this decision in many ways reminds

117
00:07:06,520 --> 00:07:09,480
Speaker 3: me it sort of parallels the decision itself, which repealed

118
00:07:09,520 --> 00:07:12,240
Speaker 3: Roe v. Wade, in the sense that the Supreme Court said,

119
00:07:12,600 --> 00:07:15,920
Speaker 3: we'reishing this proclamation that Rowan too far, and we're kicking

120
00:07:15,960 --> 00:07:18,160
Speaker 3: it back to the states to decide. And there was

121
00:07:18,200 --> 00:07:20,880
Speaker 3: this almost like assumption that the problem would just sort

122
00:07:20,880 --> 00:07:23,160
Speaker 3: itself out at the state level, and in fact we've

123
00:07:23,160 --> 00:07:26,800
Speaker 3: gotten a result of national chaos over the last nearly

124
00:07:26,800 --> 00:07:29,960
Speaker 3: two years. And this decision does exactly the same thing

125
00:07:30,240 --> 00:07:34,600
Speaker 3: in this smaller context of IVF and Alabama and embryos,

126
00:07:34,640 --> 00:07:37,480
Speaker 3: because it's created a world of chaos where all these

127
00:07:37,600 --> 00:07:41,920
Speaker 3: different actors, parents who are considering IVF and fertility treatment,

128
00:07:42,080 --> 00:07:47,400
Speaker 3: fertility doctors, hospitals, health systems, medical school training programs, storage companies,

129
00:07:47,440 --> 00:07:51,040
Speaker 3: everybody's got to make these new decisions, and there will

130
00:07:51,080 --> 00:07:54,760
Speaker 3: certainly be new regulations, but there's a lot of personal

131
00:07:54,880 --> 00:07:59,400
Speaker 3: decisions to sort of avoid this whole uncertain, chaotic environment

132
00:07:59,640 --> 00:08:02,080
Speaker 3: in face of going to states where this is totally

133
00:08:02,160 --> 00:08:03,960
Speaker 3: uncontroversial territory.

134
00:08:03,960 --> 00:08:07,200
Speaker 1: Harry, Some doctors are saying that patients because of this

135
00:08:07,240 --> 00:08:11,440
Speaker 1: could have to endure longer and more costly treatments to

136
00:08:11,560 --> 00:08:14,680
Speaker 1: try to achieve a pregnancy if they're only allowed to

137
00:08:14,760 --> 00:08:19,200
Speaker 1: create one embryo per cycle, and one cycle of IVF

138
00:08:19,520 --> 00:08:23,760
Speaker 1: now costs about fifteen to twenty five thousand dollars. Tell

139
00:08:23,840 --> 00:08:25,720
Speaker 1: us a little about the process.

140
00:08:25,920 --> 00:08:28,120
Speaker 3: The process, if you speak to any woman who's had it,

141
00:08:28,200 --> 00:08:29,920
Speaker 3: or couples that have gone through it, is it's quite

142
00:08:29,920 --> 00:08:33,600
Speaker 3: an intensive process to prepare for it, for the extraction

143
00:08:33,679 --> 00:08:36,360
Speaker 3: of the eggs and then essentially the fertilization of the

144
00:08:36,360 --> 00:08:39,040
Speaker 3: sperm and egg happened in the lab, and then once

145
00:08:39,080 --> 00:08:42,720
Speaker 3: there's confirmed fertilization and just a little bit of growth

146
00:08:42,800 --> 00:08:45,360
Speaker 3: of the embryo, it is then implanted, and you know,

147
00:08:45,400 --> 00:08:48,640
Speaker 3: there's a question of whether the women's uterusm will accept

148
00:08:48,640 --> 00:08:51,880
Speaker 3: the tissue and whether it will attach appropriately, and then

149
00:08:52,000 --> 00:08:55,280
Speaker 3: there continue to be questions and a risk of unsuccessful

150
00:08:55,320 --> 00:08:59,760
Speaker 3: implantation or miscarriage is a very significant risk. This is

151
00:08:59,760 --> 00:09:04,880
Speaker 3: an amazing miracle of reproductive health technology that's advanced fertility

152
00:09:04,880 --> 00:09:07,160
Speaker 3: and in recent decades that's made this a possibility. But

153
00:09:07,240 --> 00:09:09,840
Speaker 3: I'd personally know multiple couples that have had to go

154
00:09:09,920 --> 00:09:12,840
Speaker 3: through round after round of this procedure, and that was

155
00:09:12,920 --> 00:09:18,040
Speaker 3: with implanting multiple embryos just to get to successful pregnancy,

156
00:09:18,080 --> 00:09:22,040
Speaker 3: and so basically this has eliminated the possibility of more

157
00:09:22,080 --> 00:09:25,080
Speaker 3: than one embryo being implanted, and it means that the

158
00:09:25,080 --> 00:09:28,760
Speaker 3: odds of each IVF attempt are now reduced. If you

159
00:09:28,840 --> 00:09:31,040
Speaker 3: do it in Alabama, where you certainly can't do more

160
00:09:31,080 --> 00:09:33,680
Speaker 3: than one embryo, and it's become higher risk. I suppose

161
00:09:33,760 --> 00:09:36,720
Speaker 3: most fertility doctors would probably do two and allow for

162
00:09:36,760 --> 00:09:39,640
Speaker 3: the possibility of twins if that's acceptable to the mother.

163
00:09:39,880 --> 00:09:43,120
Speaker 3: But you're really still narrowing the chances of a successful

164
00:09:43,280 --> 00:09:47,000
Speaker 3: implantation and a successful pregnancy delivered to terms. So it's

165
00:09:47,080 --> 00:09:48,760
Speaker 3: very likely that women will have to do this more

166
00:09:48,840 --> 00:09:50,960
Speaker 3: and that also is compounded by the fact that, in

167
00:09:50,960 --> 00:09:54,800
Speaker 3: addition to being difficult and emotionally stressful, it's extremely expensive

168
00:09:55,040 --> 00:09:58,200
Speaker 3: and very few people have the resources to repeat this

169
00:09:58,280 --> 00:10:02,240
Speaker 3: process over and over again with out significant financial backing.

170
00:10:02,720 --> 00:10:06,080
Speaker 1: As we said, the ruling is only valid in Alabama,

171
00:10:06,200 --> 00:10:10,280
Speaker 1: but at least eleven states have broadly defined personhood is

172
00:10:10,440 --> 00:10:14,560
Speaker 1: beginning at fertilization in their state laws. So can we

173
00:10:14,720 --> 00:10:19,880
Speaker 1: expect the anti abortion movement to start pushing decisions like

174
00:10:19,920 --> 00:10:21,800
Speaker 1: this in other states? Yeah?

175
00:10:21,840 --> 00:10:26,080
Speaker 3: Absolutely. The logic of the decision here is something that

176
00:10:26,240 --> 00:10:29,240
Speaker 3: the right to life movement is supportive of, which is

177
00:10:29,400 --> 00:10:32,080
Speaker 3: sort of treating embryos with more sanctity in all of

178
00:10:32,080 --> 00:10:35,560
Speaker 3: these states and eliminating practices that have bothered them for

179
00:10:35,559 --> 00:10:36,080
Speaker 3: a long time.

180
00:10:36,160 --> 00:10:36,280
Speaker 4: Right.

181
00:10:36,480 --> 00:10:38,760
Speaker 3: Like I said, already, in the last fifteen years, certain

182
00:10:38,800 --> 00:10:42,640
Speaker 3: practices in fertility have already gone away under pressure, including

183
00:10:42,679 --> 00:10:45,559
Speaker 3: the practice of implanting multiple embryos and then doing a

184
00:10:45,600 --> 00:10:48,480
Speaker 3: reduction to remove embryos to get to the right number.

185
00:10:48,679 --> 00:10:50,400
Speaker 3: It would not be surprising to see the law in

186
00:10:50,440 --> 00:10:52,760
Speaker 3: all of these states, and it is a logical implication

187
00:10:53,000 --> 00:10:55,480
Speaker 3: of saying that life begins a conception. So I think

188
00:10:55,559 --> 00:10:58,319
Speaker 3: this position is going to be supported by the pro

189
00:10:58,360 --> 00:11:00,120
Speaker 3: life community, and I think the rest of us are

190
00:11:00,160 --> 00:11:02,280
Speaker 3: going to have to figure out how to deal with it.

191
00:11:02,640 --> 00:11:05,200
Speaker 1: Would you say this is a new chapter in the

192
00:11:05,440 --> 00:11:08,480
Speaker 1: continuing fight over women's reproductive rights.

193
00:11:09,040 --> 00:11:10,719
Speaker 3: Yeah, I do think this is in the sense of

194
00:11:10,760 --> 00:11:13,160
Speaker 3: new chapter. I don't think people should be surprised. We've

195
00:11:13,160 --> 00:11:15,679
Speaker 3: seen the implications already pose the repeal of Roe v.

196
00:11:15,800 --> 00:11:18,480
Speaker 3: Wade with regard to not just abortion, but with regards

197
00:11:18,520 --> 00:11:22,080
Speaker 3: to miscarriage treatment, and seeing it extended into fertility. This

198
00:11:22,120 --> 00:11:25,240
Speaker 3: is something that was absolutely predicted right after the repeal,

199
00:11:25,480 --> 00:11:28,800
Speaker 3: people should not be surprised to see contraception be the

200
00:11:28,840 --> 00:11:33,160
Speaker 3: next battlefield. And these questions all are really going to

201
00:11:33,200 --> 00:11:35,680
Speaker 3: push at what most of us have accepted as the

202
00:11:35,720 --> 00:11:39,840
Speaker 3: traditional you know, right round reproduction, reproductive health access that

203
00:11:39,880 --> 00:11:41,679
Speaker 3: women had and that all of us that none of

204
00:11:41,679 --> 00:11:44,680
Speaker 3: it should surprise anybody who was thinking through the implications

205
00:11:44,800 --> 00:11:45,920
Speaker 3: when this repeal happened.

206
00:11:46,040 --> 00:11:48,440
Speaker 1: And we're certain to see more of these ripple effects

207
00:11:48,440 --> 00:11:53,000
Speaker 1: from the Supreme Court's decision to overturn ROW. Thanks so much, Harry.

208
00:11:53,200 --> 00:11:56,200
Speaker 1: That's Harry Nelson of Nelson Hardiman coming up next on

209
00:11:56,200 --> 00:11:59,880
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Law Show. The Supreme Court signals it's done

210
00:12:00,040 --> 00:12:03,600
Speaker 1: with affirmative action, at least for now. Remember you can

211
00:12:03,640 --> 00:12:06,000
Speaker 1: always get the latest legal news by listening to our

212
00:12:06,000 --> 00:12:09,839
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Lawn podcast wherever you get your favorite podcasts. I'm

213
00:12:09,920 --> 00:12:11,840
Speaker 1: June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg.

214
00:12:12,880 --> 00:12:13,600
Speaker 5: I'm very rich.

215
00:12:13,760 --> 00:12:15,400
Speaker 6: I built an unbelievable company.

216
00:12:16,160 --> 00:12:17,679
Speaker 1: All my life I made money.

217
00:12:17,760 --> 00:12:18,280
Speaker 4: I made money.

218
00:12:18,320 --> 00:12:19,600
Speaker 5: I've always been good making money.

219
00:12:20,160 --> 00:12:24,840
Speaker 2: I have made billions of dollars in business making deals.

220
00:12:25,320 --> 00:12:29,080
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has never been shy about how much money

221
00:12:29,080 --> 00:12:33,679
Speaker 1: he has, even though his actual finances are notoriously opaque.

222
00:12:33,760 --> 00:12:37,360
Speaker 1: But when it comes to his staggering legal expenses, it's

223
00:12:37,440 --> 00:12:41,439
Speaker 1: not Trump who's footing the bill. It's political action committees

224
00:12:41,480 --> 00:12:45,280
Speaker 1: and allied groups paying. The former president spend fifty one

225
00:12:45,320 --> 00:12:48,440
Speaker 1: point two million dollars to pay his lawyers last year,

226
00:12:48,840 --> 00:12:51,240
Speaker 1: and he has more than twenty three million he can

227
00:12:51,320 --> 00:12:55,000
Speaker 1: still tap, but as his four criminal cases ramp up,

228
00:12:55,240 --> 00:12:58,720
Speaker 1: those funds are expected to run out around July, just

229
00:12:58,840 --> 00:13:02,920
Speaker 1: as his presidential campaign ramps up spending for an expected

230
00:13:03,000 --> 00:13:06,200
Speaker 1: rematch with President Joe Biden. And then there are the

231
00:13:06,280 --> 00:13:09,720
Speaker 1: judgments against him, which so far exceed a half a

232
00:13:09,760 --> 00:13:13,080
Speaker 1: billion dollars, and those can't be paid by packs.

233
00:13:13,360 --> 00:13:16,200
Speaker 5: If he does not have funds to pay off the judgment,

234
00:13:17,040 --> 00:13:21,720
Speaker 5: then we will seek, you know, judgment enforcement mechanisms in court,

235
00:13:22,400 --> 00:13:25,440
Speaker 5: and we will ask the judge to seize his assets.

236
00:13:26,000 --> 00:13:29,600
Speaker 1: New York Attorney General Letitia James says, if Trump doesn't

237
00:13:29,600 --> 00:13:32,360
Speaker 1: come up with the nearly four hundred and fifty million

238
00:13:32,400 --> 00:13:36,719
Speaker 1: dollar penalty in the civil fraud case, she'll seize his assets,

239
00:13:37,160 --> 00:13:40,080
Speaker 1: including his skyscraper near her office.

240
00:13:40,920 --> 00:13:43,880
Speaker 5: We are prepared to make sure that the judgment is

241
00:13:43,960 --> 00:13:47,079
Speaker 5: paid to New Yorkers, And yes, I look at forty

242
00:13:47,080 --> 00:13:48,440
Speaker 5: Wall Street each and every day.

243
00:13:48,720 --> 00:13:53,120
Speaker 1: Joining me is Bill Allison, Bloomberg's campaign finance reporter. Trump

244
00:13:53,160 --> 00:13:56,240
Speaker 1: has a reputation for not paying his lawyers. Do all

245
00:13:56,280 --> 00:13:58,600
Speaker 1: these legal fees mean he's paying his.

246
00:13:58,640 --> 00:14:02,440
Speaker 6: Lawyers now definite only seeing payments from his political committees,

247
00:14:02,480 --> 00:14:04,960
Speaker 6: which have to report the money that they spend to

248
00:14:05,000 --> 00:14:07,440
Speaker 6: the federal Election Commission. So yes, he is paying his

249
00:14:07,520 --> 00:14:09,840
Speaker 6: legal bills this time around. And you know, do some

250
00:14:09,880 --> 00:14:11,960
Speaker 6: of these fees go to help you know, aids and

251
00:14:12,080 --> 00:14:13,680
Speaker 6: others who are kind of caught up in some of

252
00:14:13,720 --> 00:14:15,240
Speaker 6: these cases that involved the president.

253
00:14:15,440 --> 00:14:19,440
Speaker 1: So how much did he spend on legal expenses last

254
00:14:19,520 --> 00:14:20,400
Speaker 1: year and.

255
00:14:20,240 --> 00:14:23,920
Speaker 6: What does that leave Trump spent more than fifty one

256
00:14:24,160 --> 00:14:26,600
Speaker 6: million dollars on legal expenses last year. And this is

257
00:14:26,640 --> 00:14:29,640
Speaker 6: all through one leadership pack called Save America, which was

258
00:14:29,720 --> 00:14:32,880
Speaker 6: kind of his political vehicle set up after his presidency

259
00:14:33,080 --> 00:14:35,640
Speaker 6: and before he was a candidate to raise and spend money.

260
00:14:35,880 --> 00:14:38,880
Speaker 6: Right now, Trump has about twenty three point five million

261
00:14:38,920 --> 00:14:41,560
Speaker 6: dollars that he can tap for his legal defense. That

262
00:14:41,640 --> 00:14:45,720
Speaker 6: includes a little less than eighteen million dollars that's currently

263
00:14:45,800 --> 00:14:48,520
Speaker 6: held by a super pack. That super pack which is

264
00:14:48,560 --> 00:14:51,480
Speaker 6: the principal one backing his campaign, has been slowly refunding

265
00:14:51,520 --> 00:14:53,880
Speaker 6: money to his Leadership Pack, which can then use the

266
00:14:53,880 --> 00:14:56,440
Speaker 6: money to spend on legal fees. So he has that

267
00:14:56,600 --> 00:14:59,080
Speaker 6: eighteen million dollars left. That's all it's left from a

268
00:14:59,120 --> 00:15:03,040
Speaker 6: contribution of sixty million dollars that this Leadership Pack made

269
00:15:03,040 --> 00:15:05,560
Speaker 6: to the super Pac in twenty twenty two is kind

270
00:15:05,560 --> 00:15:08,040
Speaker 6: of its initial seed capital. And so now what Trump

271
00:15:08,080 --> 00:15:10,840
Speaker 6: is essentially doing is he's raising money from big donors

272
00:15:10,840 --> 00:15:13,480
Speaker 6: for his superpack and using that money to refund it

273
00:15:13,520 --> 00:15:15,640
Speaker 6: to his leadership pack to pay his legal fee. There's

274
00:15:15,640 --> 00:15:18,360
Speaker 6: a very kind of complicated transaction, but this is Donald

275
00:15:18,360 --> 00:15:19,320
Speaker 6: Trump we're talking about.

276
00:15:19,560 --> 00:15:22,840
Speaker 1: I confess I don't know very much about packs. Why

277
00:15:22,920 --> 00:15:26,320
Speaker 1: all this transferring of money, It sounds a little shady.

278
00:15:26,680 --> 00:15:29,720
Speaker 6: So the reason he transferred this money to the super

279
00:15:29,720 --> 00:15:32,160
Speaker 6: Pac and twenty twenty two is is that a leadership

280
00:15:32,200 --> 00:15:35,880
Speaker 6: pack could only spend five thousand dollars on Trump's own campaign,

281
00:15:36,120 --> 00:15:38,280
Speaker 6: and he had tens of millions of dollars left in

282
00:15:38,320 --> 00:15:40,760
Speaker 6: Save America at the end of twenty twenty two, so

283
00:15:40,800 --> 00:15:43,160
Speaker 6: he couldn't give that money to his campaign. He couldn't

284
00:15:43,200 --> 00:15:45,400
Speaker 6: spend it on his campaign. What he could do was

285
00:15:45,520 --> 00:15:48,640
Speaker 6: donate it to an allied superpack. Now there are campaign

286
00:15:48,640 --> 00:15:51,920
Speaker 6: finance lawyers who believe that this is very problematic and

287
00:15:52,000 --> 00:15:55,000
Speaker 6: probably violates the law. There are others who say, know

288
00:15:55,080 --> 00:15:58,360
Speaker 6: that this is like a legitimate contribution because the super

289
00:15:58,400 --> 00:16:02,040
Speaker 6: pac didn't initially support Trump supported Senate candidates and House

290
00:16:02,040 --> 00:16:05,080
Speaker 6: candidates that Heat endorsed. What's fairly clear, though, is is that,

291
00:16:05,120 --> 00:16:07,120
Speaker 6: you know, if these super PACs are really supposed to

292
00:16:07,120 --> 00:16:09,640
Speaker 6: be independent, it's a little odd that it would be

293
00:16:09,720 --> 00:16:12,600
Speaker 6: giving back so far about forty three million dollars to

294
00:16:12,680 --> 00:16:15,280
Speaker 6: a single donor. You know, super packs generally are not

295
00:16:15,320 --> 00:16:17,960
Speaker 6: in the business of making refunds out of that large.

296
00:16:17,720 --> 00:16:21,200
Speaker 1: So I take it that it is legal to use

297
00:16:21,280 --> 00:16:24,200
Speaker 1: money from super packs for your legal expenses.

298
00:16:24,680 --> 00:16:26,520
Speaker 6: See, actually it's not, And this is kind of why

299
00:16:26,560 --> 00:16:29,160
Speaker 6: he's going to pickle. It is legal for the super

300
00:16:29,200 --> 00:16:32,240
Speaker 6: pac to refund money to a donor. In this case,

301
00:16:32,280 --> 00:16:35,280
Speaker 6: it's Save America. His leadership pack is paying his legal fees.

302
00:16:35,440 --> 00:16:39,080
Speaker 6: But once the super pack has refunded all the money

303
00:16:39,200 --> 00:16:43,000
Speaker 6: that was initially donated by the leadership Pack, he can't

304
00:16:43,000 --> 00:16:45,960
Speaker 6: tap that money anymore. So that's why we're coming up

305
00:16:45,960 --> 00:16:47,720
Speaker 6: with a figure that you know, roughly he is about

306
00:16:47,720 --> 00:16:49,680
Speaker 6: twenty three and a half million dollars left. Part of

307
00:16:49,680 --> 00:16:51,680
Speaker 6: that is what is in his leadership pack, and part

308
00:16:51,680 --> 00:16:53,480
Speaker 6: of it is what he's yet to refund from the

309
00:16:53,520 --> 00:16:55,040
Speaker 6: super pac to the leadership pack.

310
00:16:55,680 --> 00:17:00,600
Speaker 1: Very confusing. Is anyone actually paying attention to what happens

311
00:17:00,600 --> 00:17:01,560
Speaker 1: with these packs?

312
00:17:01,840 --> 00:17:04,480
Speaker 6: You know, I'm really sort of surprised because usually you

313
00:17:04,480 --> 00:17:06,679
Speaker 6: would see like a lot of complaints filed by the

314
00:17:06,720 --> 00:17:09,760
Speaker 6: different campaign finance watchdog groups. I mean, there's been a few,

315
00:17:09,840 --> 00:17:12,160
Speaker 6: but there's been sort of quiet, and we haven't seen

316
00:17:12,200 --> 00:17:14,720
Speaker 6: like sort of the you know, every transaction and every

317
00:17:15,040 --> 00:17:19,480
Speaker 6: questionable transfer being challenged by some group that has a

318
00:17:19,560 --> 00:17:22,720
Speaker 6: very literal view of campaign finance regulations. I think part

319
00:17:22,760 --> 00:17:25,199
Speaker 6: of that maybe because you know, the system is so

320
00:17:25,280 --> 00:17:28,760
Speaker 6: awash in money and both sides are drowning in political

321
00:17:28,800 --> 00:17:32,520
Speaker 6: money that there may be less incentive for Democrats and

322
00:17:32,560 --> 00:17:34,879
Speaker 6: the Federal Election Commission, which is made up, let's face it,

323
00:17:34,920 --> 00:17:38,000
Speaker 6: of Republicans and Democrats to police the system as vigorously

324
00:17:38,000 --> 00:17:40,280
Speaker 6: as they once did, which was not very vigorouspect in

325
00:17:40,320 --> 00:17:42,280
Speaker 6: the day. But yeah, I mean it's been strange that

326
00:17:42,359 --> 00:17:44,800
Speaker 6: this has really kind of been under the raidar that

327
00:17:44,840 --> 00:17:47,200
Speaker 6: a lot of this has happened without getting called out

328
00:17:47,240 --> 00:17:50,760
Speaker 6: by some of the groups that are concerned about campaign

329
00:17:50,840 --> 00:17:52,120
Speaker 6: finance laws being enforced.

330
00:17:52,680 --> 00:17:55,080
Speaker 1: Now, is there any estimate of how much he might

331
00:17:55,160 --> 00:17:58,040
Speaker 1: have to spend in legal fees over the next year.

332
00:17:58,640 --> 00:18:01,119
Speaker 6: I don't know that there's a science estimate. There are

333
00:18:01,160 --> 00:18:03,359
Speaker 6: some people who say that, you know, he may end

334
00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:06,399
Speaker 6: up spending double what he spent last year, but you know,

335
00:18:06,400 --> 00:18:08,400
Speaker 6: we really don't know. I mean, you know, cases can

336
00:18:08,400 --> 00:18:10,560
Speaker 6: be dismissed, the cases can be thrown out of court,

337
00:18:10,680 --> 00:18:13,680
Speaker 6: and conversely, cases can drag on. You can have appeals,

338
00:18:13,720 --> 00:18:16,760
Speaker 6: you can have lengthy pre trial proceedings before you even

339
00:18:16,840 --> 00:18:19,320
Speaker 6: get to a trial date. So it's going to be

340
00:18:19,359 --> 00:18:21,000
Speaker 6: a lot of money. I mean, that's that's the one

341
00:18:21,000 --> 00:18:22,399
Speaker 6: thing that everybody agrees on.

342
00:18:22,760 --> 00:18:25,640
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think those legal fees are going to skyrocket.

343
00:18:25,880 --> 00:18:29,080
Speaker 1: In January alone, a Trump a line pack spent two

344
00:18:29,160 --> 00:18:31,960
Speaker 1: point nine million dollars on legal fees, and he has

345
00:18:31,960 --> 00:18:35,560
Speaker 1: the hush money payments trial coming up next month, possibly

346
00:18:35,600 --> 00:18:39,480
Speaker 1: the DC election interference trial after that, and then the

347
00:18:39,520 --> 00:18:43,120
Speaker 1: fact that he appeals almost every decision and some go

348
00:18:43,200 --> 00:18:45,600
Speaker 1: all the way to the Supreme Court exactly.

349
00:18:45,640 --> 00:18:48,080
Speaker 6: And those delays actually cost a lot of money because

350
00:18:48,119 --> 00:18:51,280
Speaker 6: what you're paying is lawyers to you know, research court

351
00:18:51,320 --> 00:18:54,880
Speaker 6: cases and come up with reasons to delay or throw

352
00:18:54,920 --> 00:18:57,920
Speaker 6: out or otherwise hinder these cases against him.

353
00:18:58,280 --> 00:19:01,400
Speaker 1: So he's still getting online content where he puts ten

354
00:19:01,440 --> 00:19:05,080
Speaker 1: percent to legal expenses. So what does he do when

355
00:19:05,240 --> 00:19:07,800
Speaker 1: the money for the legal expenses runs out? Where does

356
00:19:07,800 --> 00:19:08,120
Speaker 1: he go?

357
00:19:08,400 --> 00:19:10,199
Speaker 6: Well, there's a couple of different things he could do.

358
00:19:10,280 --> 00:19:12,679
Speaker 6: I mean, assuming that he's the party's nominee and it

359
00:19:12,720 --> 00:19:15,240
Speaker 6: looks like he will be, the Republican National Committee could

360
00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:18,320
Speaker 6: pay his legal bills, and you know, there's a dedicated

361
00:19:18,359 --> 00:19:21,760
Speaker 6: account that the Republican Party raises money for to pay

362
00:19:21,800 --> 00:19:25,199
Speaker 6: for legal expenses. The maximum donation, if you count the

363
00:19:25,240 --> 00:19:27,200
Speaker 6: hard money, is more than one hundred and sixty five

364
00:19:27,240 --> 00:19:29,760
Speaker 6: thousand dollars that an individual donor could give. When you

365
00:19:29,760 --> 00:19:31,760
Speaker 6: get like, you know, one hundred or one thousand donors

366
00:19:31,800 --> 00:19:34,119
Speaker 6: giving that much, it starts to be some real money.

367
00:19:34,240 --> 00:19:36,960
Speaker 6: So that's one option. Another option is to increase the

368
00:19:37,000 --> 00:19:40,199
Speaker 6: percentage he's getting from small dollar donors and other donors,

369
00:19:40,440 --> 00:19:42,840
Speaker 6: both giving up to thirty three hundred dollars to his

370
00:19:42,960 --> 00:19:45,480
Speaker 6: campaign and you know, diverting more of that to save

371
00:19:45,560 --> 00:19:48,679
Speaker 6: America once he's the nominee, and you know, once we

372
00:19:48,720 --> 00:19:50,639
Speaker 6: get towards the general election, I mean, the closer the

373
00:19:50,680 --> 00:19:53,880
Speaker 6: election gets, the bigger the monthly totals get for campaigns.

374
00:19:54,160 --> 00:19:56,880
Speaker 6: It's possible that you know, diverting ten percent, he might

375
00:19:56,920 --> 00:19:59,000
Speaker 6: have enough money, you know, depending on how big the

376
00:19:59,080 --> 00:20:01,119
Speaker 6: legal bills are, to pay those legal bills out of

377
00:20:01,119 --> 00:20:03,760
Speaker 6: the leadership pack. But at that point probably I mean,

378
00:20:03,840 --> 00:20:06,919
Speaker 6: the most precious money in a political campaign, you know,

379
00:20:07,080 --> 00:20:10,199
Speaker 6: an election campaign is what your campaign committee raises. You

380
00:20:10,320 --> 00:20:12,040
Speaker 6: have the most freedom to use it. You can use

381
00:20:12,040 --> 00:20:13,520
Speaker 6: it in the most ways. You don't have all the

382
00:20:13,520 --> 00:20:16,680
Speaker 6: restrictions the party, your super pack or other money has.

383
00:20:16,840 --> 00:20:19,520
Speaker 6: And so siphoning some of that money off I'm sure

384
00:20:19,600 --> 00:20:22,280
Speaker 6: is not an attractive prospect for you know, his campaign

385
00:20:22,320 --> 00:20:23,840
Speaker 6: strategists and for the president.

386
00:20:24,119 --> 00:20:27,280
Speaker 1: You left out bill he could pay the legal expenses

387
00:20:27,520 --> 00:20:29,000
Speaker 1: himself from his own money.

388
00:20:30,280 --> 00:20:31,960
Speaker 6: Well if that is true too, But this is I

389
00:20:32,000 --> 00:20:33,760
Speaker 6: think another problem for him is that, you know, he

390
00:20:33,880 --> 00:20:35,960
Speaker 6: just had this three hundred and sixty four million dollar

391
00:20:36,040 --> 00:20:38,359
Speaker 6: judgment in the civil case in New York about the

392
00:20:38,560 --> 00:20:41,639
Speaker 6: fraud alleged and his accounting practices and the valuation of

393
00:20:41,680 --> 00:20:43,800
Speaker 6: his assets. That obviously there's tens of millions of dollars

394
00:20:43,840 --> 00:20:45,680
Speaker 6: of interest that could be levied on top of that

395
00:20:45,760 --> 00:20:49,280
Speaker 6: since that figure was originally determined. So if he appeals

396
00:20:49,320 --> 00:20:51,080
Speaker 6: that case, he might have to put up a bond

397
00:20:51,160 --> 00:20:54,320
Speaker 6: that would tap his available cash. You know, Bloomberg's wealth

398
00:20:54,359 --> 00:20:57,280
Speaker 6: team estimates he's worth three point one billion dollars. The

399
00:20:57,359 --> 00:20:59,680
Speaker 6: thinking is he had about six hundred million dollars and

400
00:21:00,119 --> 00:21:03,800
Speaker 6: with cash. Although Trump's you know, finances are famously opaque,

401
00:21:04,400 --> 00:21:06,840
Speaker 6: he could certainly raise money. He could sell buildings and

402
00:21:06,880 --> 00:21:09,280
Speaker 6: things like that, but you know, it's questionable whether he'd

403
00:21:09,280 --> 00:21:11,120
Speaker 6: be willing to do that, and especially if he has

404
00:21:11,160 --> 00:21:14,199
Speaker 6: other options, like, you know, using the political system to

405
00:21:14,320 --> 00:21:15,520
Speaker 6: raise the money that way.

406
00:21:15,800 --> 00:21:18,400
Speaker 1: So that New York fraud verdict has ballooned to four

407
00:21:18,480 --> 00:21:22,359
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty four million dollars with interest, and on Thursday,

408
00:21:22,480 --> 00:21:27,320
Speaker 1: the judge rejected Trump's request to delay enforcing the judgments

409
00:21:27,359 --> 00:21:30,560
Speaker 1: for thirty days. And that fine is on top of

410
00:21:30,600 --> 00:21:34,639
Speaker 1: the eighty three point three million dollars verdict in the

411
00:21:34,640 --> 00:21:38,480
Speaker 1: e Gen Carrol defamation trial. So just with those two.

412
00:21:38,520 --> 00:21:42,520
Speaker 1: We're looking at five hundred and thirty seven point three

413
00:21:42,520 --> 00:21:47,679
Speaker 1: million dollars. So we talked about Trump using campaign funds

414
00:21:47,720 --> 00:21:51,679
Speaker 1: for his legal expenses. Can he use campaign funds to

415
00:21:51,800 --> 00:21:54,600
Speaker 1: pay these personal judgments against him?

416
00:21:55,000 --> 00:21:57,200
Speaker 6: You cannot pay the fines on the funds. So that's

417
00:21:57,240 --> 00:21:59,679
Speaker 6: the one thing he couldn't do, and the legal expense

418
00:21:59,760 --> 00:22:02,800
Speaker 6: is he can only pay because his argument is, and

419
00:22:02,840 --> 00:22:05,439
Speaker 6: I don't think it's necessarily a crazy argument, is that

420
00:22:05,560 --> 00:22:07,919
Speaker 6: had he not become a political figure, had he not

421
00:22:08,000 --> 00:22:10,200
Speaker 6: run for president, that all of the stems from him

422
00:22:10,200 --> 00:22:12,919
Speaker 6: becoming a candidate. Now, obviously the New York case, you know,

423
00:22:12,960 --> 00:22:15,359
Speaker 6: you could say that, well that was just real estate dealings.

424
00:22:15,400 --> 00:22:17,680
Speaker 6: But you know, he would argue that nobody went after

425
00:22:17,760 --> 00:22:19,760
Speaker 6: him before he ran for president, and you know, this

426
00:22:19,920 --> 00:22:23,679
Speaker 6: case was put together by an attorney general of partisan Democrats.

427
00:22:23,720 --> 00:22:26,480
Speaker 6: He would say, who's going after him? Because he's the

428
00:22:26,560 --> 00:22:29,359
Speaker 6: leader of the Republican Party. And it's offully hard to

429
00:22:29,400 --> 00:22:32,320
Speaker 6: prove motive. And obviously you can testify back and forth,

430
00:22:32,359 --> 00:22:34,840
Speaker 6: but I don't think the Federal Election Commission is likely

431
00:22:34,880 --> 00:22:37,080
Speaker 6: to challenge that contention at this later date.

432
00:22:37,600 --> 00:22:39,200
Speaker 1: But the finds a definite no.

433
00:22:39,600 --> 00:22:41,560
Speaker 6: The fines are a definite no yet. But the legal

434
00:22:41,560 --> 00:22:44,200
Speaker 6: expense is you know, it's the equivalent of a jail

435
00:22:44,280 --> 00:22:47,000
Speaker 6: sentence and in a sense of the judgment. And you

436
00:22:47,000 --> 00:22:49,120
Speaker 6: can't get it to the jail sentence by saying, well,

437
00:22:49,240 --> 00:22:51,600
Speaker 6: I was paying for it with money raised the election.

438
00:22:51,680 --> 00:22:54,840
Speaker 6: So the fine is like, that's his personal actions that

439
00:22:55,280 --> 00:22:57,840
Speaker 6: led to the finder, his company's actions, and you know,

440
00:22:57,840 --> 00:22:59,720
Speaker 6: you can't blame that on the political system.

441
00:23:00,000 --> 00:23:03,880
Speaker 1: You know, his campaign and groups spent more than they

442
00:23:04,000 --> 00:23:05,000
Speaker 1: raised last.

443
00:23:04,800 --> 00:23:07,879
Speaker 6: Year, right, and that was because you may remember that

444
00:23:08,000 --> 00:23:11,159
Speaker 6: after the twenty twenty election, he went on a fundraising

445
00:23:11,240 --> 00:23:13,640
Speaker 6: tear and I think he raised like two hundred million

446
00:23:13,680 --> 00:23:16,480
Speaker 6: dollars following the election, which is just you know, an

447
00:23:16,480 --> 00:23:18,800
Speaker 6: insane amount of money, and a right up till January sixth,

448
00:23:18,880 --> 00:23:21,120
Speaker 6: was raising money. He took a hiatus for a little

449
00:23:21,119 --> 00:23:23,440
Speaker 6: while after January sixth, but then was back by the

450
00:23:23,560 --> 00:23:26,359
Speaker 6: end of February raising money again. And he built up

451
00:23:26,400 --> 00:23:28,639
Speaker 6: this huge stockpile of money in twenty twenty one and

452
00:23:28,680 --> 00:23:31,800
Speaker 6: twenty twenty two. This is where the sixty million dollars

453
00:23:31,840 --> 00:23:35,159
Speaker 6: going to the superPAC came from. And anyway, so he

454
00:23:35,240 --> 00:23:38,000
Speaker 6: had money in the bank for both his campaign, although

455
00:23:38,040 --> 00:23:39,959
Speaker 6: it wasn't allowed. It was about three million dollars at

456
00:23:40,000 --> 00:23:42,119
Speaker 6: the beginning of twenty twenty three. But he also had

457
00:23:42,160 --> 00:23:44,199
Speaker 6: all of this money in the super Pac account, and

458
00:23:44,240 --> 00:23:46,359
Speaker 6: the leadership pack still had a lot of money left too.

459
00:23:46,960 --> 00:23:47,240
Speaker 3: Well.

460
00:23:47,359 --> 00:23:50,000
Speaker 1: The clock has started ticking for Trump. He says he's

461
00:23:50,040 --> 00:23:52,800
Speaker 1: going to appeal both the New York Civil fraud verdict

462
00:23:52,880 --> 00:23:55,960
Speaker 1: as well as the Egene Carol verdict, and he only

463
00:23:56,000 --> 00:23:59,200
Speaker 1: has thirty days from the date the judgments are finalized

464
00:23:59,200 --> 00:24:01,720
Speaker 1: to appeal. So that's the amount of time he has

465
00:24:01,760 --> 00:24:04,760
Speaker 1: to come up with the cash plus interest or get

466
00:24:04,760 --> 00:24:08,959
Speaker 1: a bond. Now. In the first five million dollar Egene

467
00:24:09,000 --> 00:24:13,200
Speaker 1: Carol verdict against him last year for sexual abuse and defamation,

468
00:24:13,880 --> 00:24:17,919
Speaker 1: he deposited five point five million dollars into a court fund.

469
00:24:18,320 --> 00:24:20,639
Speaker 1: So Bill will know in less than thirty days what

470
00:24:20,720 --> 00:24:23,159
Speaker 1: he decides to do. Thanks so much for being on

471
00:24:23,200 --> 00:24:27,440
Speaker 1: the show. That's Bill, Allison Bloomberg, campaign finance reporter.

472
00:24:28,600 --> 00:24:31,840
Speaker 4: I've heard the word diversity quite a few times and

473
00:24:31,880 --> 00:24:35,560
Speaker 4: I don't have a clue what it means. It seems

474
00:24:35,600 --> 00:24:37,840
Speaker 4: to mean everything for everyone.

475
00:24:38,240 --> 00:24:41,959
Speaker 1: That was Justice Clarence Thomas during oral arguments before the

476
00:24:42,000 --> 00:24:47,560
Speaker 1: Supreme Court's conservative justices barred colleges and universities from using

477
00:24:47,640 --> 00:24:51,000
Speaker 1: race and admissions for the sake of diversity last year.

478
00:24:51,359 --> 00:24:55,960
Speaker 1: But President Joe Biden understands diversity, and he encouraged schools

479
00:24:56,000 --> 00:24:59,480
Speaker 1: to continue to seek a diverse student body despite the

480
00:24:59,520 --> 00:25:02,919
Speaker 1: Supreme Court's decision they should not abandon their commitment to

481
00:25:03,000 --> 00:25:08,040
Speaker 1: ensure student bodies of diverse backgrounds and experience reflect all

482
00:25:08,119 --> 00:25:12,800
Speaker 1: of America. The decision left open questions about policies that

483
00:25:12,920 --> 00:25:18,240
Speaker 1: don't explicitly consider race but nonetheless affect a school's racial composition,

484
00:25:18,880 --> 00:25:22,119
Speaker 1: and schools across the country have been rethinking how to

485
00:25:22,200 --> 00:25:26,680
Speaker 1: attract a diverse student body using race neutral tools. At

486
00:25:26,680 --> 00:25:30,280
Speaker 1: the same time, racial preference opponents are bringing cases to

487
00:25:30,320 --> 00:25:34,040
Speaker 1: get the Court to expand its affirmative Action decision. But

488
00:25:34,160 --> 00:25:38,120
Speaker 1: on Tuesday, the Supreme Court decided not to step into

489
00:25:38,119 --> 00:25:41,880
Speaker 1: the fray again. The justices refused to review a Virginia

490
00:25:41,960 --> 00:25:46,360
Speaker 1: public high school's use of socioeconomic factors to diversify its

491
00:25:46,400 --> 00:25:52,280
Speaker 1: student body, with Justice's Thomas and Samuel Alito dissenting. Joining

492
00:25:52,280 --> 00:25:55,440
Speaker 1: me is Audrey Anderson, head of the higher education practice

493
00:25:55,680 --> 00:26:00,080
Speaker 1: at Bessbarian Simms. So the high school here claimed that

494
00:26:00,160 --> 00:26:04,840
Speaker 1: its admission standards were race neutral. Explain the policy change

495
00:26:04,880 --> 00:26:06,439
Speaker 1: that led to this lawsuit.

496
00:26:06,840 --> 00:26:08,960
Speaker 4: Yeah, Jan, there was really no question but that the

497
00:26:09,000 --> 00:26:12,600
Speaker 4: policy that the high school Thomas Jefferson are called TJ

498
00:26:13,440 --> 00:26:16,760
Speaker 4: was using before the change and after the change was

499
00:26:16,960 --> 00:26:21,200
Speaker 4: race neutral all the time. But the change that happened

500
00:26:21,240 --> 00:26:24,600
Speaker 4: was that for many years TJ had used a series

501
00:26:24,680 --> 00:26:28,920
Speaker 4: of entrance tests, which were the major way that they

502
00:26:29,040 --> 00:26:32,800
Speaker 4: chose students for admission to the high school. The students

503
00:26:32,840 --> 00:26:36,120
Speaker 4: had to take something like four different tests, and the

504
00:26:36,280 --> 00:26:40,000
Speaker 4: school board was looking at data and saw that the

505
00:26:40,400 --> 00:26:45,600
Speaker 4: students who were selected for TJ were not racially diverse.

506
00:26:45,840 --> 00:26:49,679
Speaker 4: There were not many black or Hispanic students. But also,

507
00:26:49,800 --> 00:26:53,520
Speaker 4: in fact, more importantly probably for the district, they came

508
00:26:53,600 --> 00:26:57,680
Speaker 4: primarily from only eight of the twenty six middle schools

509
00:26:58,040 --> 00:27:03,520
Speaker 4: that TJ served. Also, a TJ population did not have

510
00:27:03,720 --> 00:27:07,479
Speaker 4: very many low income students, so the district was something

511
00:27:07,600 --> 00:27:10,920
Speaker 4: like twenty three percent students who qualified for free introduced

512
00:27:11,000 --> 00:27:14,480
Speaker 4: price meals, and at TJ was something like one percent.

513
00:27:14,720 --> 00:27:17,119
Speaker 4: So the board wanted to be what they could do

514
00:27:17,240 --> 00:27:21,160
Speaker 4: in order to make the population at TJ more diverse

515
00:27:21,359 --> 00:27:27,080
Speaker 4: in a lot of different ways geographically, racially, socioeconomically, and

516
00:27:27,119 --> 00:27:30,959
Speaker 4: then also students who speak English as a second language.

517
00:27:31,119 --> 00:27:34,280
Speaker 4: So the policy they put in place got rid of

518
00:27:34,320 --> 00:27:38,280
Speaker 4: the entrance exams. There was still one problem solving exercise

519
00:27:38,320 --> 00:27:42,160
Speaker 4: students had to do, but the main change was that

520
00:27:42,560 --> 00:27:46,840
Speaker 4: they allocated seats by middle school, so every middle school

521
00:27:46,920 --> 00:27:50,280
Speaker 4: got a certain number of seats at TJ. And then

522
00:27:50,320 --> 00:27:53,639
Speaker 4: after those seats were allocated, there were some seats left

523
00:27:53,680 --> 00:27:56,760
Speaker 4: over for all applicants who had not gotten in through

524
00:27:56,800 --> 00:28:00,959
Speaker 4: their middle school process. They also looked at some factors,

525
00:28:01,280 --> 00:28:04,760
Speaker 4: you know, teacher recommendations, great point average, and they actually

526
00:28:04,840 --> 00:28:07,840
Speaker 4: raised the grade point average that was necessary from a

527
00:28:07,920 --> 00:28:10,119
Speaker 4: three to zero to a three point five. And then

528
00:28:10,160 --> 00:28:13,640
Speaker 4: they also looked at what they called experiential factor which

529
00:28:13,680 --> 00:28:17,520
Speaker 4: were socioeconomic status, whether the student came from a family

530
00:28:17,600 --> 00:28:21,160
Speaker 4: that spoke English as their first language, and whether their

531
00:28:21,200 --> 00:28:24,439
Speaker 4: school was a school that had traditionally not sent a

532
00:28:24,480 --> 00:28:26,040
Speaker 4: lot of students to TJ.

533
00:28:26,760 --> 00:28:29,640
Speaker 1: So the changes did seem to though have an effect

534
00:28:29,680 --> 00:28:33,199
Speaker 1: on the racial composition of the student body. After they

535
00:28:33,240 --> 00:28:37,000
Speaker 1: went into effect, the percentage of Asian American students offered

536
00:28:37,040 --> 00:28:40,480
Speaker 1: admissions dropped from seventy three percent to fifty four percent.

537
00:28:40,840 --> 00:28:44,040
Speaker 1: The percentage of black students grew from no more than

538
00:28:44,080 --> 00:28:47,480
Speaker 1: two percent to eight percent, the percentage of Hispanic students

539
00:28:47,520 --> 00:28:50,760
Speaker 1: grew from three percent to eleven percent, and the percentage

540
00:28:50,800 --> 00:28:54,400
Speaker 1: of white students from eighteen percent to twenty two percent.

541
00:28:54,840 --> 00:28:58,880
Speaker 4: Yes, and that can be expected. We know generally in

542
00:28:58,920 --> 00:29:02,640
Speaker 4: the United States there's a lot of residential segregation. People

543
00:29:02,720 --> 00:29:06,680
Speaker 4: tend to live in neighborhoods by race. So anytime that

544
00:29:06,800 --> 00:29:13,960
Speaker 4: you choose admissions policy that's going to equalize opportunity across

545
00:29:14,040 --> 00:29:18,120
Speaker 4: a whole school district, you're likely to get more racial

546
00:29:18,160 --> 00:29:21,320
Speaker 4: diversity than if you're only getting it from some parts

547
00:29:21,320 --> 00:29:25,760
Speaker 4: of the district. So by adopting a policy that said, hey,

548
00:29:25,760 --> 00:29:28,480
Speaker 4: look what we're getting now is students only from these

549
00:29:28,640 --> 00:29:31,920
Speaker 4: eight middle schools. Let's do something so that we get

550
00:29:31,960 --> 00:29:35,200
Speaker 4: them from all the middle schools in the county. Anyone

551
00:29:35,200 --> 00:29:39,120
Speaker 4: would expect that that would give you greater racial diversity.

552
00:29:39,720 --> 00:29:44,160
Speaker 1: The appeals court narrowly divided decide that the parents suing

553
00:29:44,400 --> 00:29:48,520
Speaker 1: over the changes to the school's admission requirements hadn't established

554
00:29:48,520 --> 00:29:52,360
Speaker 1: that the board adopted its race neutral policy with any

555
00:29:52,400 --> 00:29:55,560
Speaker 1: discriminatory intent. Is that the right standard?

556
00:29:56,080 --> 00:29:59,960
Speaker 4: Yes, I think that everybody agrees that the right legal

557
00:30:00,200 --> 00:30:04,160
Speaker 4: standard was used. I think that where the disagreement is

558
00:30:04,160 --> 00:30:08,959
Speaker 4: is in how they applied and looked at that standard.

559
00:30:09,320 --> 00:30:12,760
Speaker 4: So the biggest question, and the thing that Justice Alito

560
00:30:13,120 --> 00:30:16,360
Speaker 4: took issue with, is when you're trying to figure out

561
00:30:16,440 --> 00:30:19,640
Speaker 4: whether a policy that is race neutral on its base,

562
00:30:20,160 --> 00:30:23,480
Speaker 4: does it nonetheless violate the equal Protection clause because it's

563
00:30:23,560 --> 00:30:26,880
Speaker 4: racially discriminatory. One of the things you look at is

564
00:30:27,360 --> 00:30:32,360
Speaker 4: did the policy have a disproportionate impact on one race

565
00:30:32,800 --> 00:30:36,080
Speaker 4: rather than another? Because if it did, that's one piece

566
00:30:36,120 --> 00:30:38,760
Speaker 4: of evidence that would show that there might have been

567
00:30:39,200 --> 00:30:43,600
Speaker 4: racially discriminatory intent. You can't show that violates the equal

568
00:30:43,640 --> 00:30:47,280
Speaker 4: Protection clause just based on that, but that's one important

569
00:30:47,320 --> 00:30:50,520
Speaker 4: piece of evidence. So the question, though, is how do

570
00:30:50,520 --> 00:30:56,200
Speaker 4: you determine whether a policy has a racially disproportionate effect.

571
00:30:56,560 --> 00:30:59,080
Speaker 4: What Justice Alito says you have to do is you

572
00:30:59,160 --> 00:31:01,440
Speaker 4: have to look at how did that racial group faire

573
00:31:01,600 --> 00:31:04,760
Speaker 4: under the old policy, and now how do they fare

574
00:31:04,880 --> 00:31:08,200
Speaker 4: under the new policy. What the Fourth Circuit said and

575
00:31:08,240 --> 00:31:11,040
Speaker 4: what the school district says is that's the wrong way

576
00:31:11,040 --> 00:31:13,000
Speaker 4: to look at it. What you have to look at

577
00:31:13,160 --> 00:31:16,600
Speaker 4: is when you've got two different policies that are both

578
00:31:16,680 --> 00:31:18,680
Speaker 4: race neutral. You have to just look at the new

579
00:31:18,760 --> 00:31:24,640
Speaker 4: policy and say, how do different racial groups fare under

580
00:31:24,720 --> 00:31:30,440
Speaker 4: this new policy. Does this new policy put any barriers

581
00:31:30,480 --> 00:31:35,280
Speaker 4: based on race? And the Court of Appeal said it doesn't,

582
00:31:35,520 --> 00:31:39,960
Speaker 4: because even though the percentages of Asians went down under

583
00:31:40,000 --> 00:31:44,800
Speaker 4: the new policy, Asians as a group, their applications were

584
00:31:45,080 --> 00:31:48,440
Speaker 4: forty five percent of the application pool and they got

585
00:31:48,520 --> 00:31:53,520
Speaker 4: fifty four percent of the offers to attend TJ. So

586
00:31:53,600 --> 00:31:57,760
Speaker 4: that would show that they're not being disproportionately affected based

587
00:31:57,840 --> 00:32:01,240
Speaker 4: on their race under this new post policy. That's the

588
00:32:01,280 --> 00:32:04,000
Speaker 4: biggest thing that Justice Alito is upset about.

589
00:32:04,360 --> 00:32:08,000
Speaker 1: And Justice Thomas and Justice Thomas not a surprise because

590
00:32:08,040 --> 00:32:13,600
Speaker 1: these two are justices who have been consistently anti affirmative action.

591
00:32:13,880 --> 00:32:16,520
Speaker 4: Right, And I think what's also underlying this and it

592
00:32:16,600 --> 00:32:18,960
Speaker 4: comes out in the end of Justice Alito's opinion. And

593
00:32:19,000 --> 00:32:21,480
Speaker 4: if you look at the district court opinion, here the

594
00:32:21,560 --> 00:32:25,880
Speaker 4: trial court judge who found that the policy was unconstitutional,

595
00:32:26,160 --> 00:32:30,360
Speaker 4: he was very concerned that the school board was talking

596
00:32:30,560 --> 00:32:34,640
Speaker 4: about racial diversity at all. There is no evidence in

597
00:32:34,680 --> 00:32:38,200
Speaker 4: the record that any school board member wanted to hurt

598
00:32:38,320 --> 00:32:41,920
Speaker 4: Asian Americans with the new policy that they had a

599
00:32:42,120 --> 00:32:46,280
Speaker 4: goal of lessening the percentage of Asian Americans in the

600
00:32:46,320 --> 00:32:49,960
Speaker 4: school There's in fact evidence saying that they were concerned

601
00:32:50,320 --> 00:32:52,760
Speaker 4: that would look like or that they would be hurting

602
00:32:52,800 --> 00:32:56,360
Speaker 4: Asian Americans, But there's lots of evidence saying that they

603
00:32:56,440 --> 00:33:00,520
Speaker 4: wanted to increase the diversity. So I'm including the diversity

604
00:33:00,640 --> 00:33:04,480
Speaker 4: by race. But Judge Hilton, the district court judge, said

605
00:33:04,520 --> 00:33:08,680
Speaker 4: that just the discussion that they wanted to increase diversity

606
00:33:08,760 --> 00:33:12,640
Speaker 4: by race infected the whole process, and he used that

607
00:33:12,760 --> 00:33:17,400
Speaker 4: word infected, and Justice Alito uses the same kind of

608
00:33:17,600 --> 00:33:21,719
Speaker 4: language that it infects things. So the question that some

609
00:33:21,760 --> 00:33:24,560
Speaker 4: of us were really concerned about with this case is

610
00:33:25,120 --> 00:33:32,160
Speaker 4: can a governmental body even consider racial diversity? What the

611
00:33:32,240 --> 00:33:37,360
Speaker 4: outcome will be of a racially neutral policy on the

612
00:33:37,400 --> 00:33:41,400
Speaker 4: demographics of something. Is it okay if the school board

613
00:33:41,440 --> 00:33:45,080
Speaker 4: is saying, if we adopt this policy which is racially neutral,

614
00:33:45,480 --> 00:33:49,360
Speaker 4: it's going to affect the demographics of our schools in

615
00:33:49,440 --> 00:33:52,480
Speaker 4: this way? Can they do that now? At TJ As

616
00:33:52,520 --> 00:33:56,400
Speaker 4: it turns out, actually for the policy that they adopted,

617
00:33:56,720 --> 00:34:00,480
Speaker 4: they ran no racial statistics. They did not run a

618
00:34:00,520 --> 00:34:05,280
Speaker 4: simulation of if we adopt this policy policy it adopted,

619
00:34:05,560 --> 00:34:08,840
Speaker 4: what will the racial demographics of TJ look like? Their

620
00:34:08,960 --> 00:34:12,719
Speaker 4: folks told them they could not run that simulation, So

621
00:34:12,840 --> 00:34:15,640
Speaker 4: the choice that was actually made by the school board

622
00:34:15,760 --> 00:34:19,560
Speaker 4: was made without looking at what the racial demographics would be.

623
00:34:19,920 --> 00:34:24,560
Speaker 4: Choices they voted down. There were racial simulations run for,

624
00:34:25,040 --> 00:34:27,760
Speaker 4: but the choice they voted for it approved. No racial

625
00:34:27,760 --> 00:34:30,719
Speaker 4: simulation was done, which is also part of the evidence

626
00:34:30,719 --> 00:34:33,360
Speaker 4: here that I think might have made some on the

627
00:34:33,360 --> 00:34:36,120
Speaker 4: Supreme Court say, you know, even if we were interested

628
00:34:36,160 --> 00:34:38,120
Speaker 4: in this, this is not really the right case for.

629
00:34:38,160 --> 00:34:40,960
Speaker 1: Us to take. What does it tell you that the

630
00:34:41,000 --> 00:34:44,760
Speaker 1: Supreme Court turned this case away and at the beginning

631
00:34:44,960 --> 00:34:48,360
Speaker 1: of the month the Court decided to allow West Point

632
00:34:48,520 --> 00:34:51,440
Speaker 1: to continue using race as an admissions factor.

633
00:34:51,960 --> 00:34:54,040
Speaker 4: I think that the decisions made by the Court are

634
00:34:54,120 --> 00:34:57,760
Speaker 4: actually quite different. What they turned away at West Point

635
00:34:57,840 --> 00:35:04,120
Speaker 4: was emergency rel on a completely undeveloped record. I think

636
00:35:04,120 --> 00:35:06,520
Speaker 4: that the Court will still be very interested in the

637
00:35:06,520 --> 00:35:09,480
Speaker 4: West Point case after it makes its way through the

638
00:35:09,520 --> 00:35:12,839
Speaker 4: whole system. This case, they've turned it away and now

639
00:35:12,880 --> 00:35:15,839
Speaker 4: they will have no chance to review it. It is done,

640
00:35:16,000 --> 00:35:18,640
Speaker 4: it is on the books. I think that they're turning

641
00:35:18,680 --> 00:35:22,520
Speaker 4: it away says that they're just not interested in taking

642
00:35:22,560 --> 00:35:26,759
Speaker 4: it up so quickly after students for fair admissions, and

643
00:35:26,800 --> 00:35:29,880
Speaker 4: they do want to allow this area of the law

644
00:35:30,000 --> 00:35:33,799
Speaker 4: to what we say, percolate a little bit. We know

645
00:35:33,920 --> 00:35:36,920
Speaker 4: that Alito and Thomas are interested in this question. If

646
00:35:36,920 --> 00:35:39,280
Speaker 4: there are others who are interested in it on the court.

647
00:35:39,360 --> 00:35:42,320
Speaker 4: This case I think does not have a great record

648
00:35:42,440 --> 00:35:47,400
Speaker 4: for it because the policy actually adopted by the school district,

649
00:35:47,600 --> 00:35:51,120
Speaker 4: they did not run any racial simulations for and because

650
00:35:51,480 --> 00:35:56,720
Speaker 4: it is not only race neutral, it's completely race blind.

651
00:35:57,360 --> 00:36:02,879
Speaker 1: So anti affirmative action groups are testing these restrictions. Are

652
00:36:02,880 --> 00:36:06,759
Speaker 1: they making progress in any particular area or is it

653
00:36:06,800 --> 00:36:07,359
Speaker 1: too soon?

654
00:36:07,960 --> 00:36:10,720
Speaker 4: You know? We know they had the early cases against

655
00:36:10,800 --> 00:36:15,120
Speaker 4: some law firms for internship programs that were limited to

656
00:36:15,239 --> 00:36:19,000
Speaker 4: applicants based on their race, and law firms change those

657
00:36:19,040 --> 00:36:22,480
Speaker 4: programs to open them up to people of all races.

658
00:36:22,640 --> 00:36:25,960
Speaker 4: Those are some victories, and I think that by just

659
00:36:26,400 --> 00:36:31,080
Speaker 4: bringing those kinds of lawsuits it has made institutions in

660
00:36:31,200 --> 00:36:34,720
Speaker 4: all kinds of fields take a look at their programs

661
00:36:34,760 --> 00:36:40,919
Speaker 4: to say, are our programs really open to everyone regardless

662
00:36:40,960 --> 00:36:43,560
Speaker 4: of their race. We need to make sure that regardless

663
00:36:43,560 --> 00:36:46,879
Speaker 4: of what the goals are of our programs. Everybody has

664
00:36:46,960 --> 00:36:50,440
Speaker 4: to be able to have a place in them, and

665
00:36:50,719 --> 00:36:53,480
Speaker 4: so I think that even if they haven't had a

666
00:36:53,520 --> 00:36:56,440
Speaker 4: lot of legal victories yet, they have already made a

667
00:36:56,480 --> 00:36:57,280
Speaker 4: lot of change.

668
00:36:57,440 --> 00:37:01,080
Speaker 1: In Coming up next is Trump facing a cash crunch.

669
00:37:01,360 --> 00:37:04,040
Speaker 1: I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. And that's

670
00:37:04,080 --> 00:37:07,040
Speaker 1: it for this edition of the Bloomberg Law Podcast. Remember

671
00:37:07,080 --> 00:37:09,799
Speaker 1: you can always get the latest legal news by subscribing

672
00:37:09,840 --> 00:37:13,279
Speaker 1: and listening to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and

673
00:37:13,400 --> 00:37:17,880
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg dot com, Slash podcast, Slash Law. I'm June Grosso,

674
00:37:18,080 --> 00:37:19,560
Speaker 1: and this is Bloomberg