1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,960
Speaker 1: It's President Trump's second setback in court on major immigration

2
00:00:04,120 --> 00:00:08,280
Speaker 1: policy initiatives. Yesterday, at federal court in San Francisco blocked

3
00:00:08,280 --> 00:00:12,200
Speaker 1: a Trump order to withhold funding to sanctuary cities. Judge

4
00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:15,800
Speaker 1: William Rick agreed with San Francisco and Santa Clara County

5
00:00:15,880 --> 00:00:20,159
Speaker 1: that the president's January order violated the Constitution's fifth and

6
00:00:20,239 --> 00:00:23,800
Speaker 1: tenth Amendments and that Trump was attempting to wield powers

7
00:00:23,840 --> 00:00:28,319
Speaker 1: exclusive to Congress. San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said

8
00:00:28,480 --> 00:00:32,240
Speaker 1: Trump was selling fear. The President sought to bully local

9
00:00:32,280 --> 00:00:37,199
Speaker 1: governments with an unconstitutional executive order threatening all of their funding.

10
00:00:37,600 --> 00:00:40,199
Speaker 1: He sought to commerce local governments into holding people in

11
00:00:40,280 --> 00:00:44,960
Speaker 1: jail beyond their released release date. Trump responded to the

12
00:00:45,080 --> 00:00:48,400
Speaker 1: order as he has before, by criticizing the judge. This morning,

13
00:00:48,400 --> 00:00:51,680
Speaker 1: he tweeted, first the Ninth Circuit rules against the ban,

14
00:00:51,800 --> 00:00:56,360
Speaker 1: and now it hits again on sanctuary cities. Both ridiculous rulings.

15
00:00:56,520 --> 00:00:59,800
Speaker 1: See you in the Supreme Court. Joining us are Dan's

16
00:01:00,000 --> 00:01:03,680
Speaker 1: I'm President of the Federation for American Immigration Reform and

17
00:01:03,800 --> 00:01:08,280
Speaker 1: Joseph Hollenstein of Council at Landau has Simon and Troy

18
00:01:08,560 --> 00:01:13,760
Speaker 1: Joe explain the basis of judge or its ruling. Essentially,

19
00:01:13,760 --> 00:01:17,399
Speaker 1: what the judge was doing with the order was to

20
00:01:17,760 --> 00:01:21,679
Speaker 1: agree with the final position of the government that it

21
00:01:21,840 --> 00:01:26,080
Speaker 1: only changed when it came to make an oral argument

22
00:01:26,400 --> 00:01:30,320
Speaker 1: in his court, and that was that there is a

23
00:01:30,440 --> 00:01:36,080
Speaker 1: very limited number of funds that are directly connected to

24
00:01:36,760 --> 00:01:42,240
Speaker 1: federal immigration, um enforcement. And those are the funds that

25
00:01:43,120 --> 00:01:48,280
Speaker 1: the federal government can tell states or municipalities, well, we're

26
00:01:48,320 --> 00:01:52,920
Speaker 1: controlling these if you have particular immigration policies. All of

27
00:01:52,960 --> 00:01:56,440
Speaker 1: the rest and the and the implication from the and

28
00:01:56,800 --> 00:02:00,800
Speaker 1: the implication and plain language actually of the original executive

29
00:02:00,880 --> 00:02:07,880
Speaker 1: order was so broad that it effectively threatened federal funding throughout, um,

30
00:02:08,400 --> 00:02:12,240
Speaker 1: you know, a local government's budget. And um that's what

31
00:02:12,360 --> 00:02:15,040
Speaker 1: the judge struck down. He said, you can't you can't

32
00:02:15,080 --> 00:02:20,200
Speaker 1: connect an immigration policy to know how many police officers

33
00:02:20,280 --> 00:02:23,079
Speaker 1: federal government is going to help to fund or law

34
00:02:23,160 --> 00:02:28,600
Speaker 1: enforcement funding, or housing funding or education funding. And that's

35
00:02:28,760 --> 00:02:33,400
Speaker 1: really what the executive order was designed to do, was

36
00:02:33,480 --> 00:02:37,520
Speaker 1: to place all federal funding for local municipalities at risk.

37
00:02:38,280 --> 00:02:41,560
Speaker 1: And the judge said, simply can't do that. Now. The

38
00:02:41,639 --> 00:02:45,760
Speaker 1: federal government, the attorney at the oral argument with this

39
00:02:46,680 --> 00:02:50,280
Speaker 1: essentially backed away from that very very broad reading, which

40
00:02:50,400 --> 00:02:56,079
Speaker 1: was what was said throughout the entire um publication process

41
00:02:56,080 --> 00:03:02,440
Speaker 1: around this. This executive order in the Federal attorney said directly, yes,

42
00:03:02,680 --> 00:03:06,360
Speaker 1: this more limited version is is the is the version

43
00:03:06,400 --> 00:03:10,800
Speaker 1: that we need to uphold, and in effect that the

44
00:03:10,800 --> 00:03:13,799
Speaker 1: final ruling of the judge was to say, yeah, you know,

45
00:03:14,040 --> 00:03:17,120
Speaker 1: the most you can do is this limited ruling. Dan.

46
00:03:17,400 --> 00:03:22,399
Speaker 1: The you know, conservatives were very happy with the decision

47
00:03:22,600 --> 00:03:26,359
Speaker 1: in one of the Obamacare cases about the Medicaid expansion

48
00:03:26,360 --> 00:03:28,960
Speaker 1: that said that basically, the you know, the federal government

49
00:03:29,000 --> 00:03:31,640
Speaker 1: can't put a gun to the head over funding you know,

50
00:03:32,320 --> 00:03:35,000
Speaker 1: to the states and put limits on how coercive the

51
00:03:35,000 --> 00:03:38,600
Speaker 1: federal government could be about um conditions on federal funding.

52
00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:41,360
Speaker 1: And it feels a bit like the you know that

53
00:03:41,560 --> 00:03:43,720
Speaker 1: argument has come back to haunt the Trump administration in

54
00:03:43,720 --> 00:03:45,800
Speaker 1: this case. It's kind of ironic, isn't it the judges

55
00:03:46,160 --> 00:03:50,360
Speaker 1: relying on that argument to uh to prevent the Trump

56
00:03:50,360 --> 00:03:54,800
Speaker 1: administration from enforcing this order. Well, of course, it's very

57
00:03:54,800 --> 00:03:58,400
Speaker 1: frustrating to see the quickness with which these judges are

58
00:03:58,400 --> 00:04:01,480
Speaker 1: willing to issue these nationwide and junctions on the strength

59
00:04:01,520 --> 00:04:05,120
Speaker 1: of rhetoric or broad based language which d o J

60
00:04:05,280 --> 00:04:08,040
Speaker 1: attorneys a certain court is not the proper interpretation of

61
00:04:08,080 --> 00:04:11,200
Speaker 1: the executive order. And in this case, of course, there

62
00:04:11,200 --> 00:04:13,520
Speaker 1: really isn't even a case or controversy because d o

63
00:04:13,640 --> 00:04:17,560
Speaker 1: J hasn't actually tried to specifically enforce certainly not the

64
00:04:17,600 --> 00:04:20,479
Speaker 1: executive order in the way that the Santa Clara and

65
00:04:20,480 --> 00:04:22,400
Speaker 1: the other counties were asserting it was going to be.

66
00:04:22,839 --> 00:04:27,000
Speaker 1: But you know, remember Arizona wanted to try to assist

67
00:04:27,120 --> 00:04:31,279
Speaker 1: the federal government in its own enforcement in enforcing immigration laws,

68
00:04:31,360 --> 00:04:34,160
Speaker 1: and that was struck down by federal courts. And now

69
00:04:34,240 --> 00:04:38,040
Speaker 1: you have the federal government exercising a pleanering power, not

70
00:04:38,160 --> 00:04:43,080
Speaker 1: the commandeer state functions, you know, essential sovereign state functions,

71
00:04:43,120 --> 00:04:46,160
Speaker 1: but simply to assist the federal government in accordance with

72
00:04:46,200 --> 00:04:50,440
Speaker 1: federal law in turning over information about an aliens status

73
00:04:50,960 --> 00:04:53,760
Speaker 1: and in certain cases detaining aliens, putting them on civil

74
00:04:53,800 --> 00:04:57,680
Speaker 1: immigration holes until Immigration Customs enforcement can come and pick

75
00:04:57,760 --> 00:05:01,520
Speaker 1: them up. And you know, none of the you know,

76
00:05:02,080 --> 00:05:04,200
Speaker 1: to some extent, the judge just kind of got way

77
00:05:04,240 --> 00:05:06,480
Speaker 1: ahead of himself by saying, Okay, I'm going to enjoy

78
00:05:06,680 --> 00:05:10,000
Speaker 1: something that the Trump administration wasn't even planning to do,

79
00:05:10,560 --> 00:05:13,000
Speaker 1: and and it has enormous political implications because of the

80
00:05:13,000 --> 00:05:16,000
Speaker 1: way the media supported. The way that d o J

81
00:05:16,200 --> 00:05:19,600
Speaker 1: was planning to interpret this was quite narrowly tailored to

82
00:05:19,760 --> 00:05:23,120
Speaker 1: law enforcement related functions that are directly related to the

83
00:05:23,160 --> 00:05:26,880
Speaker 1: process of of holding aliens or verifying status. So you

84
00:05:26,920 --> 00:05:31,760
Speaker 1: can argue it's a draconian, drastically overbroad injunction, completely unsupported

85
00:05:31,800 --> 00:05:34,840
Speaker 1: by the record, and once once again an example of

86
00:05:35,040 --> 00:05:39,120
Speaker 1: political judicial legislating from the bench. We're talking about a

87
00:05:39,120 --> 00:05:42,719
Speaker 1: federal judge in San Francisco blocking a Trump order to

88
00:05:42,760 --> 00:05:47,720
Speaker 1: withhold funding to sanctuary cities yesterday. Also yesterday, a group

89
00:05:47,760 --> 00:05:51,080
Speaker 1: of mayors and major police officers met with A. G.

90
00:05:51,320 --> 00:05:54,520
Speaker 1: Jeff Sessions to talk about the very issue of what

91
00:05:54,760 --> 00:05:58,400
Speaker 1: is a sanctuary city, and they came out with different impressions,

92
00:05:58,720 --> 00:06:01,919
Speaker 1: although many said order would be limited to the law

93
00:06:02,000 --> 00:06:06,080
Speaker 1: on transmitting citizenship information, and that law is one which

94
00:06:06,080 --> 00:06:10,360
Speaker 1: the Obama administration said last July it would require compliance

95
00:06:10,440 --> 00:06:13,320
Speaker 1: with We've been speaking with Dan Stein, president of the

96
00:06:13,360 --> 00:06:18,160
Speaker 1: Federation for American Immigration Reform, and Joseph Hohenstein, a council

97
00:06:18,320 --> 00:06:24,599
Speaker 1: at Landau, Hess Simon and choi Dan. If this order

98
00:06:25,120 --> 00:06:28,719
Speaker 1: is just limited to the order that these cities have

99
00:06:28,839 --> 00:06:34,039
Speaker 1: already been under obligation to follow under the Obama administration,

100
00:06:34,279 --> 00:06:35,920
Speaker 1: what was the point of making the order in the

101
00:06:35,960 --> 00:06:39,080
Speaker 1: first place. That's a really good question because of d

102
00:06:39,240 --> 00:06:42,120
Speaker 1: o J asserts Council asserts in court that this is

103
00:06:42,160 --> 00:06:44,680
Speaker 1: how they're going to enforce it, quite narrowly and consistent

104
00:06:44,760 --> 00:06:48,800
Speaker 1: with jurisdictions that the Obama administration said, we're not providing

105
00:06:48,839 --> 00:06:53,400
Speaker 1: information pursuing to federal law. That's a usc three. Then

106
00:06:53,960 --> 00:06:55,960
Speaker 1: what's the big noise? I mean, what's the big deal?

107
00:06:56,000 --> 00:06:59,920
Speaker 1: Why issue a nationwide injunction to stop the Trump administration

108
00:07:00,040 --> 00:07:02,400
Speaker 1: from doing what it wasn't going to do in the

109
00:07:02,440 --> 00:07:05,120
Speaker 1: first place. And you can't help but believe that there

110
00:07:05,160 --> 00:07:08,239
Speaker 1: was a political element where the judge judge or felt

111
00:07:08,240 --> 00:07:11,480
Speaker 1: that he could invoke a teentiment and constitutional claim, which

112
00:07:11,520 --> 00:07:14,640
Speaker 1: is really quite ridiculous when you think about it, involving

113
00:07:14,840 --> 00:07:18,080
Speaker 1: the provision of federal grants. When you have defendants who

114
00:07:18,120 --> 00:07:21,000
Speaker 1: are asserting, look, we're not trying to interfere with essential

115
00:07:21,040 --> 00:07:24,280
Speaker 1: state functions. We simply want states to assist the federal

116
00:07:24,320 --> 00:07:28,320
Speaker 1: government in verifying an alien status consistent with federal law,

117
00:07:28,440 --> 00:07:31,600
Speaker 1: which has always been something that the supremacy clause under

118
00:07:31,640 --> 00:07:34,880
Speaker 1: federal law has entitled the federal government to do. Now

119
00:07:35,200 --> 00:07:37,200
Speaker 1: that could the judge did say, Congress could go in

120
00:07:37,240 --> 00:07:39,840
Speaker 1: and change the law. The Congress can certainly condition broader

121
00:07:39,840 --> 00:07:42,960
Speaker 1: grants and these narrow grants to a state's willingness to

122
00:07:43,000 --> 00:07:46,240
Speaker 1: assist in enforcing federal law. But the line on what

123
00:07:46,400 --> 00:07:49,440
Speaker 1: becomes commandeering and when you're coercing a state to say

124
00:07:49,520 --> 00:07:52,400
Speaker 1: detained aliens or actually go out and find them, you know,

125
00:07:52,440 --> 00:07:54,640
Speaker 1: it's it's a pretty bright one. But this case really

126
00:07:54,640 --> 00:07:59,520
Speaker 1: didn't address that. Joe, you know, would disagree on that. Yeah,

127
00:07:59,640 --> 00:08:02,040
Speaker 1: so that this department did say that there was you know,

128
00:08:02,200 --> 00:08:04,400
Speaker 1: this was a very narrow thing to really change the law.

129
00:08:04,400 --> 00:08:06,960
Speaker 1: It was really more of a bully pulpit kind of order.

130
00:08:07,640 --> 00:08:10,560
Speaker 1: And the judge found that that that's not the way

131
00:08:10,600 --> 00:08:13,240
Speaker 1: he read the order. Can you explain why did the

132
00:08:13,320 --> 00:08:17,200
Speaker 1: judge read the order more broadly than the Justice Department did? Well?

133
00:08:17,320 --> 00:08:22,040
Speaker 1: For two reasons. One, the order itself is written that broadly,

134
00:08:22,880 --> 00:08:26,720
Speaker 1: and there are specific sections of the order that place

135
00:08:27,400 --> 00:08:32,200
Speaker 1: any federal funds at risk. And second, contrary to the

136
00:08:32,200 --> 00:08:35,000
Speaker 1: position that was taken after the government was sued and

137
00:08:35,040 --> 00:08:39,320
Speaker 1: taken into court. Before they were taken into court, the

138
00:08:39,360 --> 00:08:43,600
Speaker 1: Attorney General and the president and the president's press secretary,

139
00:08:43,720 --> 00:08:47,360
Speaker 1: we're all talking about this is going to make sure

140
00:08:47,400 --> 00:08:51,359
Speaker 1: that we turned the financial screws, which is effectively commandeering

141
00:08:51,960 --> 00:08:58,080
Speaker 1: on the local um the local municipalities, and in in

142
00:08:58,120 --> 00:09:01,640
Speaker 1: this situation, that concept of the bully pulpit. To think

143
00:09:01,679 --> 00:09:04,920
Speaker 1: about the last president who really used the concept of

144
00:09:04,920 --> 00:09:09,440
Speaker 1: bully pulpit, you know, Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy Roosevelt's philosophy was

145
00:09:09,800 --> 00:09:14,959
Speaker 1: speak softly and carry a big stick. What this is

146
00:09:14,960 --> 00:09:20,679
Speaker 1: is speaking loudly but carrying a toothpick. Because what they

147
00:09:20,800 --> 00:09:23,840
Speaker 1: wanted to do when it was finally challenged, when the

148
00:09:23,880 --> 00:09:28,079
Speaker 1: bullies were finally challenged in court, what happened was they

149
00:09:28,120 --> 00:09:30,280
Speaker 1: backed off and is it all We didn't really mean it.

150
00:09:30,840 --> 00:09:34,680
Speaker 1: But that's not what that either the order says, and

151
00:09:34,720 --> 00:09:37,400
Speaker 1: it's not what they were saying before they were challenged.

152
00:09:37,960 --> 00:09:42,120
Speaker 1: And um, the politicization is not coming from the judge here,

153
00:09:42,679 --> 00:09:48,400
Speaker 1: it's coming from the administration itself that issues and sends

154
00:09:48,440 --> 00:09:53,920
Speaker 1: out orders like this that are written extremely poorly, very overbroadly,

155
00:09:54,520 --> 00:09:59,240
Speaker 1: and in ways that are designed to stoke concern and

156
00:09:59,280 --> 00:10:03,240
Speaker 1: worry and fear. It interrupts the planning process. For a

157
00:10:03,320 --> 00:10:09,000
Speaker 1: city like San Francisco that gets of its budget overall

158
00:10:09,320 --> 00:10:12,280
Speaker 1: for things like housing, things like police, and things like

159
00:10:12,360 --> 00:10:17,280
Speaker 1: its schools, all of that funding was at risk with

160
00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:20,640
Speaker 1: the way that the order is written and the way

161
00:10:20,880 --> 00:10:25,000
Speaker 1: that both the president and the president, his Attorney general

162
00:10:25,080 --> 00:10:27,280
Speaker 1: and his Press secretary, we're all saying they were going

163
00:10:27,320 --> 00:10:31,400
Speaker 1: to enforce this. Dan, do you Dan, do you agree

164
00:10:31,480 --> 00:10:35,520
Speaker 1: that President Trump made a great deal of the signing

165
00:10:35,600 --> 00:10:39,760
Speaker 1: of this order and it was televised and he said

166
00:10:39,800 --> 00:10:44,000
Speaker 1: this is going to help with immigration reform, And if

167
00:10:44,040 --> 00:10:46,520
Speaker 1: it's the same as what Obama was doing, why make

168
00:10:46,600 --> 00:10:49,839
Speaker 1: a big deal about it on his part? Well, again,

169
00:10:49,880 --> 00:10:53,360
Speaker 1: that they're you know, there are traditionally rules of construction

170
00:10:53,520 --> 00:10:56,520
Speaker 1: as well as rules regarding standing and rightness for when

171
00:10:56,520 --> 00:11:00,720
Speaker 1: a judge is actually supposed to decide whether the plaintiff

172
00:11:00,760 --> 00:11:03,480
Speaker 1: has injury in fact. And at this point, until you

173
00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:06,199
Speaker 1: actually see how the executive order is going to be enforced,

174
00:11:06,240 --> 00:11:09,920
Speaker 1: until General Sessions actually seeks to withdraw grant money or

175
00:11:09,960 --> 00:11:14,199
Speaker 1: condition spending and specifically seeks to enforce it, it's hard

176
00:11:14,240 --> 00:11:16,800
Speaker 1: to understand why the judge would have even proceeded to

177
00:11:16,840 --> 00:11:19,360
Speaker 1: try to interpret the executive order. And if you allow

178
00:11:19,440 --> 00:11:22,160
Speaker 1: the judge to start taking in to account again, we

179
00:11:22,200 --> 00:11:25,680
Speaker 1: see campaign statements and campaign rhetoric being used by judges

180
00:11:26,200 --> 00:11:28,920
Speaker 1: to go ahead and try to interpret executive orders. However

181
00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:34,240
Speaker 1: you know, imprecisely they may have been drafted. Well, there's

182
00:11:34,280 --> 00:11:37,000
Speaker 1: no end to the kind of pernicious political nature of

183
00:11:37,040 --> 00:11:40,880
Speaker 1: that kind of legal interpretation. Political campaigns are by definition

184
00:11:41,720 --> 00:11:46,760
Speaker 1: raucous uh, you know, loud, imprecise uh debates, and they're not.

185
00:11:47,080 --> 00:11:49,800
Speaker 1: They shouldn't take the place in a courtroom for precise

186
00:11:50,240 --> 00:11:53,600
Speaker 1: statutory construction. The rules of statutory construction as well as

187
00:11:53,679 --> 00:11:56,599
Speaker 1: article free standing. In this case, nobody had tried to

188
00:11:56,640 --> 00:12:00,080
Speaker 1: take any money specifically away from these jurisdictions yet, and

189
00:12:00,120 --> 00:12:03,160
Speaker 1: so even you know, these are preliminary junctions being issued

190
00:12:03,280 --> 00:12:05,679
Speaker 1: even before there's been a full briefing on the marriage.

191
00:12:06,000 --> 00:12:08,439
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have to stop you there, Dan, We're going

192
00:12:08,480 --> 00:12:11,520
Speaker 1: to continue with this conversation at some point. Again, I'm

193
00:12:11,559 --> 00:12:15,160
Speaker 1: sure that's Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American

194
00:12:15,160 --> 00:12:19,400
Speaker 1: Immigration Reform, and Joseph Hohenstein of Council at LANDAU has

195
00:12:19,600 --> 00:12:22,440
Speaker 1: Simon and Choi coming up. We are going to be

196
00:12:22,679 --> 00:12:25,839
Speaker 1: going live to the White House briefing on the tax plan,

197
00:12:26,520 --> 00:12:30,880
Speaker 1: and we're also going to be talking about the oversight

198
00:12:31,000 --> 00:12:34,960
Speaker 1: panel saying that President Donald Trump's former national security advisor,

199
00:12:35,040 --> 00:12:39,320
Speaker 1: Michael Flynn appeared to violate federal law. I'm June Grasso

200
00:12:39,480 --> 00:12:40,960
Speaker 1: with Michael Beast. This is Bloomberg