WEBVTT - Appeals Court Hears Immigration Order Challenge (Audio)

0:00:00.160 --> 0:00:03.920
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to Bloomberg Law. The legal fight over President

0:00:03.960 --> 0:00:07.320
<v Speaker 1>Trump's proposed travel ban is about to heat is about

0:00:07.360 --> 0:00:10.560
<v Speaker 1>to heat back up. Two federal appeals courts are poised

0:00:10.600 --> 0:00:13.680
<v Speaker 1>to review the executive order, which would temporarily halt entry

0:00:13.720 --> 0:00:16.720
<v Speaker 1>into the US by people from six mostly Muslim nations.

0:00:17.200 --> 0:00:19.360
<v Speaker 1>The first of those arguments takes place in just about

0:00:19.400 --> 0:00:21.960
<v Speaker 1>an hour and a half at the fourth Fourth U. S.

0:00:22.000 --> 0:00:25.239
<v Speaker 1>Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. Bloomberg News reporter

0:00:25.400 --> 0:00:29.600
<v Speaker 1>Andrew Harris is outside the courthouse in Richmond for the argument. Uh,

0:00:29.600 --> 0:00:33.080
<v Speaker 1>and he will. He's here with us to provide a preview. Andy,

0:00:33.159 --> 0:00:38.000
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for taking the time. Um, the president generally has

0:00:38.159 --> 0:00:42.280
<v Speaker 1>very broad power to determine who can come into the country,

0:00:42.600 --> 0:00:46.479
<v Speaker 1>but two federal judges have blocked this policy. Tell us

0:00:46.560 --> 0:00:51.440
<v Speaker 1>what the argument is against this proposed travel ban, well, Gregg.

0:00:51.520 --> 0:00:53.400
<v Speaker 1>The argument goes all the way back to the days

0:00:53.440 --> 0:00:56.200
<v Speaker 1>when Donald Trump was still a candidate for president of

0:00:56.160 --> 0:00:59.360
<v Speaker 1>the United States, and they talked about imposing a full

0:00:59.400 --> 0:01:03.400
<v Speaker 1>on Islam ban uh for a traveler entry into the

0:01:03.480 --> 0:01:06.679
<v Speaker 1>US were he to become president. And he wasn't the

0:01:06.760 --> 0:01:09.880
<v Speaker 1>only one that said something like that. UH, some of

0:01:10.120 --> 0:01:17.679
<v Speaker 1>his UH associates and advisors said similar things, and by

0:01:17.720 --> 0:01:21.279
<v Speaker 1>the time the first executive order was released on Januar

0:01:22.160 --> 0:01:26.680
<v Speaker 1>it was why we perceived as following through on that promise,

0:01:27.120 --> 0:01:31.759
<v Speaker 1>regardless of what it actually said on the printed paper. Well,

0:01:32.000 --> 0:01:34.039
<v Speaker 1>so how is the how are the government lawyers going

0:01:34.080 --> 0:01:36.240
<v Speaker 1>to try to get around this? I mean, the record

0:01:36.319 --> 0:01:38.800
<v Speaker 1>on what the president and his advisor said about this

0:01:38.840 --> 0:01:40.920
<v Speaker 1>is pretty clear, and the judge seemed to rely on

0:01:40.920 --> 0:01:44.479
<v Speaker 1>it pretty heavily below Well, Greg, that's been a real

0:01:44.520 --> 0:01:46.960
<v Speaker 1>problem for the administration. They struck out on the first

0:01:47.000 --> 0:01:50.560
<v Speaker 1>executive order because they could not persuade the US Court

0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:55.120
<v Speaker 1>of Appeals in San Francisco that this wasn't a Muslim ban.

0:01:55.720 --> 0:01:57.720
<v Speaker 1>So they went back to the drawing board and they

0:01:57.760 --> 0:02:00.960
<v Speaker 1>came back with way more robust version where they laid

0:02:00.960 --> 0:02:03.320
<v Speaker 1>out the wise and ware forces to why the people

0:02:03.360 --> 0:02:06.520
<v Speaker 1>that they wanted to keep out growth specific countries needed

0:02:06.560 --> 0:02:09.040
<v Speaker 1>to be kept out for at least ninety days while

0:02:09.080 --> 0:02:11.600
<v Speaker 1>they enhanced their vetting procedures. And the argument they're going

0:02:11.639 --> 0:02:15.560
<v Speaker 1>to make to the court is that that's the reason,

0:02:16.120 --> 0:02:19.000
<v Speaker 1>and that the judges are required to follow woods on

0:02:19.000 --> 0:02:21.680
<v Speaker 1>the printed page and not look behind it at something,

0:02:21.880 --> 0:02:24.640
<v Speaker 1>then candidate Trump said before we took the oath of office.

0:02:25.520 --> 0:02:27.440
<v Speaker 1>Any there's been a lot of talk about the political

0:02:27.480 --> 0:02:30.720
<v Speaker 1>significance of this case, the impact on people who might

0:02:30.760 --> 0:02:33.240
<v Speaker 1>want to be coming into the US, But um, what

0:02:33.320 --> 0:02:36.440
<v Speaker 1>do you see as sort of the broader significance of

0:02:36.480 --> 0:02:40.480
<v Speaker 1>the legal issues that are are coming before the court,

0:02:40.520 --> 0:02:44.760
<v Speaker 1>in particular when it comes to the power of the president. Well,

0:02:44.800 --> 0:02:48.360
<v Speaker 1>that's kind of the irony here, Greg. This Muslim ban

0:02:48.560 --> 0:02:52.080
<v Speaker 1>or whatever the administration wants to call it, was for

0:02:52.120 --> 0:02:54.880
<v Speaker 1>a ninety day duration. There was a longer hundred twenty

0:02:54.919 --> 0:02:58.959
<v Speaker 1>day freeze on refugees entering the country. So this is

0:02:59.000 --> 0:03:01.960
<v Speaker 1>going to be a temporary a measure by its own terms.

0:03:02.320 --> 0:03:04.080
<v Speaker 1>What it's not going to be so temporary is this

0:03:04.240 --> 0:03:07.720
<v Speaker 1>fight over presidential power and the court's ability to look

0:03:07.760 --> 0:03:11.880
<v Speaker 1>behind an executive order to see what the president really

0:03:11.880 --> 0:03:14.400
<v Speaker 1>meant as opposed to what he said. And that's going

0:03:14.480 --> 0:03:16.600
<v Speaker 1>to be with us for a long time. And one

0:03:16.600 --> 0:03:19.839
<v Speaker 1>of the things that's unusual about what we're gonna see

0:03:19.880 --> 0:03:22.320
<v Speaker 1>in court here is it the full circuit is going

0:03:22.360 --> 0:03:25.600
<v Speaker 1>to hear it without having had a panel review at first.

0:03:26.320 --> 0:03:30.680
<v Speaker 1>Do you think that bodes better or worse for the government. UM,

0:03:30.919 --> 0:03:34.760
<v Speaker 1>difficult to say. A couple of Republican judges who would

0:03:34.760 --> 0:03:37.320
<v Speaker 1>have been on the panel if all fifteen active judges

0:03:37.360 --> 0:03:40.880
<v Speaker 1>are hearing this will not be. One of them a

0:03:40.920 --> 0:03:45.440
<v Speaker 1>Reagan appointee j. Harvey Wilkinson, another a bushop pointee Alice

0:03:45.480 --> 0:03:47.760
<v Speaker 1>and Duncan. So the remaining court is made up of

0:03:47.800 --> 0:03:53.119
<v Speaker 1>seven Democratic appointees, three Republican appointees, and three judges who

0:03:53.360 --> 0:03:56.680
<v Speaker 1>in their careers have been appointed direct federal courts position

0:03:56.760 --> 0:04:00.160
<v Speaker 1>by either a Democrat and hell by both Democrat at

0:04:00.200 --> 0:04:06.120
<v Speaker 1>and Republican presidents. So it's skewing Democratic and appointees. But

0:04:06.160 --> 0:04:09.920
<v Speaker 1>that's no guarantee of an outcome. And he would just

0:04:09.960 --> 0:04:11.520
<v Speaker 1>have about a minute left. But can you just sort

0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:13.480
<v Speaker 1>of lay out of maybe a timeline for us or

0:04:13.480 --> 0:04:15.800
<v Speaker 1>at least, you know, sort of discuss what will happen next.

0:04:15.840 --> 0:04:19.400
<v Speaker 1>You have two federal judges who have issued orders blocking

0:04:19.440 --> 0:04:22.360
<v Speaker 1>this UH. Does the Trump administration essentially have to win

0:04:22.839 --> 0:04:25.200
<v Speaker 1>both the cases before both appeals courts in order to

0:04:25.200 --> 0:04:29.800
<v Speaker 1>get this this UH travel ban into effect. Well, as

0:04:29.839 --> 0:04:33.080
<v Speaker 1>you know, Greg, typically a circuit split, winning at least

0:04:33.080 --> 0:04:36.479
<v Speaker 1>one of them would probably ensure US Supreme Court review

0:04:37.120 --> 0:04:40.520
<v Speaker 1>given the gravity of the issues before the courts in

0:04:40.560 --> 0:04:43.960
<v Speaker 1>this case, it is at least theoretically possible, also given

0:04:44.000 --> 0:04:45.960
<v Speaker 1>the composition of the the U. S. Supreme Court, and that

0:04:46.080 --> 0:04:48.880
<v Speaker 1>the court decides to take up the issue, even if

0:04:48.920 --> 0:04:51.880
<v Speaker 1>the administration goes over to here and at the Cuderal

0:04:51.880 --> 0:04:55.640
<v Speaker 1>Appeals Court in San Francisco next Monday. Okay, I think

0:04:55.680 --> 0:04:57.479
<v Speaker 1>I think we're gonna be talking more about this, Andy,

0:04:57.560 --> 0:05:00.720
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much. Andy Harris Bloomberg bloom a news reporter.

0:05:01.000 --> 0:05:04.440
<v Speaker 1>He's outside the Federal Courthouse in Richmond, where at two

0:05:04.440 --> 0:05:07.200
<v Speaker 1>thirty East Coast time today, the Federal Appeals Court is

0:05:07.240 --> 0:05:10.280
<v Speaker 1>going to hear arguments on Donald Trump's proposed travel ban